Quantcast
Connect with us

Editorials

PSA: Horror Movies Don’t Have to Be Scary to Be Good

Published

on

Greetings fellow horror fans! I wanted to talk about something that has been bugging me for some time now. Too many times I see the argument of “It wasn’t scary” being used when judging the merit of a genre flick on every comment thread. It’s pretty much every time. But here’s my question: When was the last time a horror movie you really liked scared you? I don’t just mean jump scares, as those can actually be ineffective, but I mean actually scared you into leaving lights on and left you thinking about it for days after?

If you’re like me and countless others, you probably have a hard time really letting movies get under your skin. It happens! When we first discover horror, we immerse ourselves totally and never truly come back out again. You sought out the grisliest, disturbed things you could just to see how much you could stand. And then eventually you had seen the “big ones”, like Cannibal Holocaust, Faces of Death, Last House on the Left, I Spit on Your Grave, etc… The more you watch, the less frightening everything becomes and a more complex motive for watching evolves.

Why watch horror movies if they don’t scare you? This is a question I’ve gotten from non-horror friends. Fair question but I have an answer. I continue to watch, read, live and breath horror because it’s a never ending quest. I will never, ever run out of horror movies to watch, especially with things like streaming and online shopping, not to mention TV. Not only do I have a pre-existing catalog from around the world, but hundreds of new horror movies come out a year. Is all of it good? Absolutely fucking not. Which brings me to my main point.

Not every horror movie is great, obviously. But not enjoying something because “it wasn’t scary” is always something that irks me. For me, there are many elements that make a movie good and they all apply to any movie no matter the genre. Is the production quality as good as it should be? Is the story well evolved? Are the characters bearable? You get the picture. All of those elements stay in my brain when I’m thinking critically of a movie. And yes, if the movie does happen to scare me once or twice or, in a much rarer occurrence, actually stays with me for a day or so, then I consider that a bonus.

I know that I’m jaded when it comes to scares, more than the standard movie goer. But writing off an entire movie because it didn’t scare you when you are a seasoned viewer seems incredibly backward. We don’t go into the next movie with the same fresh eyes as the first time we saw our first horror movie. It sucks, but we don’t. I used to be guilty of this when I first started to think I’d seen it all but then I started looking at film in a more mentally stimulating level and I realized I could appreciate a cavalcade of thrills.

What do you guys think?

Jess is a Northeast Ohio native who has loved all things horror and fringe since birth. She has a tendency to run at the mouth about it and decided writing was the only way not to scare everyone away. If you make a hobby into a career it becomes less creepy. Unless that hobby is collecting baby dolls. Nothing makes that less creepy.

24 Comments

Editorials

‘Bloodlust: Subspecies III’ Remains One of Full Moon’s Greatest Achievements

Published

on

Bloodlust: Subspecies III

The problem with filming sequels back-to-back is that, unless you can afford expensive reshoots, there’s no easy way to adjust course in between movies if fans react badly to where the story is headed. That’s why it’s important to have a complete narrative thought out well in advance lest you accidentally kill a budding franchise.

However, this isn’t always the case. Every once in a while, it seems like the cinema gods smile upon certain chaotic productions and gift moviegoers with complete franchises that feel like more than the sum of their hastily produced parts. Ted Nicolaou’s Bloodlust: Subspecies III is precisely one of these miraculous pictures, with the raw talents of the artists involved (as well as the continued support from Romania) turning the feature into an effective conclusion for a series that kind of made things up as the filmmakers went along.

That’s why I’d like to invite my fellow readers to join me on this third part of our journey through the Subspecies franchise as we look into Bloodlust and talk about how it remains a surprisingly satisfying finale to the original trilogy.

A Trilogy Planned on the Fly

Released only a year after Bloodstone found plenty of success in rental stores and mail-in VHS catalogues worldwide, 1994’s Bloodlust was produced at the same time as its predecessor in (mostly) the same locations and with the same team. This means that the movie benefited from all the same upgrades as Bloodstone, with the crew now being more experienced with the ins and outs of surviving a low-budget Romanian production and the cast really settling into their characters.

At this point, everything from location scouting to the makeup process had been streamlined, with Wayne Toth and Norman Cabrera, the main duo behind special effects, even switching out time-consuming prosthetics for latex gloves in order to speed up Anders Hove’s monstrous transformation. The titular “subspecies” demons were also once again relegated to a mere cameo appearance due to the laborious puppetry required to bring them to life.

The only real hiccup came from the fact that actress Denice Duff had replaced the first film’s Michelle (Laura Mae Tate) and was immediately expected to portray the character as both an innocent victim in part II and as a secondary villain in part III. According to behind-the-scenes interviews, the hectic production schedule that blended two different movies meant that Duff would often find herself having to alternate between two incredibly different versions of Michelle during the same shooting day – though it’s obvious that she’s having more fun with Bloodlust’s more traditionally vampiric version of her character.

In the finished film, we pick things up immediately where the previous entry left off as Rebecca (Melanie Shatner) is forced to leave her vampire sister Michelle (Duff) behind in the dungeons of Castle Vladislav due to the rising sun. This allows Mummy (Pamela Gordon) to use Michelle’s blood to revive the vicious Radu (Hove) so that he may continue his quest for the coveted Bloodstone – a magical artifact that perpetually drips the Blood of Saints.

Meanwhile, the dreamy US embassy agent Mel (Kevin Blair) agrees to help Rebecca plan a rescue mission, though they’re unaware that Radu has become infatuated with Michelle during his attempts to guide her growing bloodlust. This all culminates in a climactic confrontation meant to tie up all of the series’ loose ends in one of Full Moon Pictures’ most ambitious productions.

The Evolution of Radu

Like its predecessor, Bloodlust: Subspecies III was also warmly received by fans who argued that the series was an even bigger success than Full Moon’s other major horror franchise, Puppet Master. This praise wasn’t unanimous, however, as 1994 had seen the rise of a more modern breed of sexy vampire popularized by Anne Rice, with old-school Nosferatu like Radu being viewed as obsolete when compared to the likes of Lestat and Gary Oldman’s take on Dracula.

In a way, one might argue that Nicolaou’s film is something of a swan song for the classic vampire story, as Bloodlust combines all of the traditional elements we tend to associate with these tales into a single tragic yarn that ties a neat little bow on Radu’s story as well as the old-fashioned monster movies that he represents. The finale remains shocking despite the fact that this is the third time we see Radu get brutally killed onscreen, with the brief tease that he may one day return feeling more like a nod towards the nature of evil rather than sequel bait.

The film dabbles a bit in gothic romance and even explores the inherent power fantasy behind transforming into an immortal creature of the night, but the filmmakers never lose sight of Radu as a demonic force even when he’s willing to betray his beloved Mummy for Michelle’s sake. In fact, his twisted “love” for his fledgling makes him even creepier as we get the feeling that his passion comes from a dark and disturbing place.

Anders Hove is at his absolute best in this film, with the effects department boosting his moments of what the younger generation would call “aura farming” whenever Radu emerges from shadows like a 90s version of Count Orlok. There are even a couple of surprisingly effective jump-scares here, which is why I’d argue that Bloodlust cements Radu as one of the most memorable cinematic vampires of all time despite his humble origins.

Subspecies Saves Its Best For Last

Nicolaou and Vlad Panescu also saved the best for “last” (more on that in a bit) regarding the film’s visuals, with the cinematography and overall atmosphere of Bloodlust absolutely surpassing what we saw in the previous films. Everything feels appropriately climactic this time around (including the wonderful soundtrack that was co-composed alongside an authentic Romanian orchestra), and I appreciate how this is the fastest-paced entry in the trilogy since the film doesn’t need to waste time setting anything up.

Bloodlust still suffers from some of the same low-budget blemishes as its predecessors, but there’s so much creative passion here that no amount of wonky effects work or stilted dialogue can get in the way of appreciating the flick’s gothic grandeur. That’s why it’s not surprising that the movie’s definitive(-ish) ending would later be retconned as fans begged for more Radu.

Of course, the next entry in this series would be a different kind of vampiric endeavor altogether, with the filmmakers attempting to engage with the same trends that ultimately killed Radu and his antiquated kin. That, however, is a story for another time. For now, I’ll merely insist that Bloodlust: Subspecies III remains a highlight of Full Moon’s expansive catalogue and is definitely worth seeking out today.

Continue Reading