Editorials
A Retrospective of 1997: It Was a Good Year for Horror!
It has been suggested in the comments here at Bloody Disgusting that the 90s were a pretty terrible decade for horror movies. Many of you (whether it be the majority of horror fans in the world or just a vocal minority on this site) think that 1997 is a low point for the genre. I’m not sure where this misconception with the 90s came from, because the 90s were actually pretty fantastic. Our own Daniel Baldwin has gone to great lengths to defend this unjustly maligned decade with an ongoing series about 90s horror in his “Exhumed & Exonerated Series,” but I wanted to put the spotlight on 1997 specifically, because it is hands down one of my favorite years for horror.
Maybe it’s because I was born in 1989, so I was 8 for the majority of 1997. I was young, impressionable and naive. Or maybe it’s just that 1997 was actually host to several fantastic horror films that are still brought up in conversations and debates today. One thing to keep in mind is that even though Scream was released on December 20, 1996, it stayed in the Top 10 through mid-February, making 1997 get off to a strong start for horror.
Let’s start at the beginning, shall we? The first big weekend of the year was January 10th, which saw the release of The Relic, the Peter Hyams-directed adaptation of the Douglas Preston/Lincoln Child novel. While not a box office hit, it open at the number one spot at the box office its opening weekend with just $9 million (it would go on to gross $33.9 million domestically). As a monster movie, The Relic hits all the right notes, and has a nice balance of CGI and practical effects. It’s actually surprising that the film isn’t mentioned more in modern conversations, but maybe it’s due to a lack of star power. It’s not like Penelope Ann Miller and Tom Sizemore are household names, but it’s still a lamentable fact.
1997 wouldn’t see another horror movie hit the big screen until three months later, when Anaconda was released on April 11th. It was so successful, in fact, that it earned the number one spot at the box office for two weekends in a row. Now, when it comes to creature features, you can’t do much better than Anaconda. Sure, it’s cheesy. It’s about several giant killer snakes! Cheesy as it is, it’s got some fantastic kills, nifty special effects (save for some spotty CGI in places) and great cinematography. It also features Jennifer Lopez in one of her early film roles, before she became Jenny Fromdabloc. She’s great in the film. Sue me. Anaconda gets a bad rap but it is one of the better (and more fun) mainstream killer animal movies in existence. Hell, Roger Ebert even gave it three and a half stars!
Horror had another dry spell for a few months, but it came back swinging in August with the one-two punch of Event Horizon on the 15th and Guillermo Del Toro’s Mimic just one week later on the 22nd. Neither film fared very well at the box office, earning $26 million and $25 million respectively.Event Horizon is one of those movies that didn’t make much of an impression upon its initial release but has slowly gained a sizable cult following over the years. Sure, some people still don’t like it, but it is arguably Paul W.S. Anderson’s best film to date (not that there’s much competition there). With Mimic, I’m beginning to see why I love 1997 so much. My affinity for creature features is clearly no coincidence, as 1997 was filled with them. How a movie about giant cockroaches was able to nab a cast that included the likes of Mira Sorvino (then fresh off her Academy Award win for Mighty Aphrodite and her amazing turn as Romy White in Romy and Michele’s High School Reunion, aka one of the best movies of all time), Josh Brolin and Jeremy Northam is a question I’ll never be able to answer, but suffice it to say that Mimic boasts an impressive pedigree both in front of and behind the camera
The only major release in September was the Wes Craven-produced Wishmaster, which Daniel has already covered, so I won’t delve too deeply into the film, but it’s not exactly a good go-to for why 1997 was a good year for horror. The film opened at number 3 with $6 million, behind Frank Oz’s In & Out (a funny movie but definitely a product of its time) and David Fincher’s The Game. While it may not be remembered as a horror classic, it did feature several horror legends together on the big screen (no doubt thanks to the connections of producer Wes Craven and director Robert Kurtzman) and have a certain kind of terrible charm about itself.
October was surprisingly sparse for horror, but that paved the way for I Know What You Did Last Summer to make a killing at the box office when it opened on October 17th. Not only did open in the number one spot with $15 million, it stayed there for three more weeks (the rest of October). Of course it probably helped that the marketing for the film had “From the Writer of Scream” plastered all over it, but the fact that it was the sole horror offering in October of that year didn’t hurt it. I’ve got a soft spot for the film, as many of you may know. It’s one of my favorite horror movies to come out of the 90s, but many people who weren’t children during that time seem to have a special kind of loathing for it. Say what you want about this Scream knockoff (a knockoff in the same way that Friday the 13th was a knockoff of Halloween, a subject that is a particular hot button issue lately), but some people seem to really enjoy it, as evidenced by the box office numbers. Plus, you can’t go wrong with a 10-minute-long chase scene involving Sarah Michelle Gellar.

November was actually a pretty decent month for horror. The first weekend of the month saw Paul Verhoeven’s Starship Troopers get released (more of a sci-fi than a horror but c’mon, it’s about giant killer bugs) and Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s controversial sequel Alien: Resurrection. Starship Troopers is another one of those movies that had a fairly polarizing reception upon its release but has gained a rather sizable cult following over the years thanks to its biting satire and wit. When it comes to Alien: Resurrection, I won’t defend it. Don’t get me wrong, I do think it’s a highly entertaining film. It’s a messy and entertaining film that nearly destroyed the Alien franchise, but it’s entertaining nonetheless. While many fans now consider it to be an atrocious film, it actually didn’t have as negative of a reception at the time of its release. Maybe that was just people trying to convince themselves that the fourth Alien film was good though, as people are wont to do with middling entries in respectable franchises.
Finally, the world saw the release of one of the greatest horror sequels of all time: Scream 2. In a rather brilliant bit of counter-programming, Scream 2 opened on December 12 (less than a year after the original’s release) against Amistad, For Richer or Poorer and Home Alone 3. Needless to say, it snagged the number 1 box office spot easily with $32.9 million (it was knocked down 2 pegs the following week by Titanic and Tomorrow Never Dies). Between Scream 2 and I Know What You Did Last Summer, it was a good year to be Kevin Williamson. Does 1997 really need to be defended any more? My feelings toward Scream 2 are made apparent in nearly every article I write for Bloody Disgusting, but if you need more convincing, consider some of the data: it has better reviews than the original and it has one of the best audience scores out of any horror sequel ever made. All of this despite numerous script re-writes after multiple versions were leaked on the internet.
Let’s not forget about the foreign horror that came out in 1997 either. That year also saw the releases of the Vincenzo Natali’s Cube and Michael Haneke’s Funny Games. While they weren’t given wide theatrical releases in America, they still left their mark on the year in the best way possible. What are your thoughts on 1997 in terms of horror quality? Do you still believe that it was a terrible year for horror? Or have you crossed over to the dark side and begun to understand my reasoning? Let me know in the comments below or shoot me a Tweet. 1997 horror is something I’ll never get tired of discussing so fire away!
Editorials
Neon-Soaked Cult Classic ‘Vamp’ Starring Grace Jones Still Has Bite 40 Years Later
College kids, strippers and vampires—those were Donald P. Borchers’ only requirements when he approached Richard Wenk about writing and directing a movie for New World Pictures. As requested, Wenk cooked up Vamp (1986), a tailor-made blend of the decade’s teen movie craze as well as its horror boom.
Grim and earnest stories were still very much a part of the ’80s horror landscape, yet Vamp is something of a comedy. One difference between it and, say, Saturday the 14th, though, is the former avoids using schtick. Wenk’s movie proves that horror comedies also don’t have to subtract thrills from their recipes. Of course, it takes a minute before reaching that point; college antics and culture shocks preface this one macabre misadventure.
Vamp‘s initial setup is apt for a typical college-set, sex-driven comedy; to bribe their way into a fraternity house, two pledges (Chris Makepeace, Robert Rusler) go looking for some adult entertainment. Without wasting time on any further exposition, the characters embark on an all-in-one-night trip that quickly detours into terror.
To procure their elusive MacGuffin—a stripper willing to gyrate for some frat boys—Keith (Makepeace) and AJ (Rusler), plus a third wheel named Duncan (Gedee Watanabe), trade the safety of their remote college campus for the seediness of some unnamed city. The setting is recognizably L.A. by day, but as soon as night falls, downtown, along with the characters, slips into a kind of surreal universe. Director of photography Elliot Davis gave this early entry on his prolific résumé an unusual yet distinctive look; that Mario Bava-esque, magenta-green lighting is omnipresent, so much so that it’s almost its own character.

Chris Makepeace and Robert Rusler in Vamp
The faint comparisons to Martin Scorsese’s After Hours are merited, although not just because of Vamp’s distinguishing nighttime aesthetic. Save for the primary characters, the supporting roles in Wenk’s movie are also quite colorful and transactional in their behavior. The difference here, though, is the additional urge to ruin Keith and his friends at every turn. Some of that harm is humorous and tolerable enough, whereas the moment Vamp dishes out its first fatality, it’s abundantly clear how this movie qualifies as horror.
Vamp falls into that category of horror movie that reveals its genre with a scream rather than a series of whispers. The opening scene can function as a hint of what lies ahead—things are not at all what they appear to be—but otherwise, Wenk is more than happy to hold off on the horror. When that time does come, though, it catches the viewer off guard. In addition to the pure shock value is that sudden decision to upend the movie’s foremost feature. Or so it would seem.
If afraid of major spoilage, those new to Vamp would be wise to stop reading here. There’s just no skirting around the fact that the central fellowship in this buddy movie hits a serious snag when AJ is killed. That development causes the story to become more of a “long, bad night” journey for Keith and his romantic interest. So while Wenk scores points for subverting expectations, there is also a touch of sadness in his decision. Because if Vamp does anything well, it’s making the characters likable.
Something that comes easily to Vamp—and other teen horror movies from this same era—is its ability to invent young characters worth caring about, or at the very least, are interesting and not so immediately off-putting. More impressive is how Wenk did all this without actually fleshing out those characters. Still and all, Keith and his kind are a grade above cookie-cutter, and in some cases, aren’t completely devoid of growth.

Grace Jones in Vamp
Vamp appeals with an assorted cast of characters. No two are the same, nor are they operating on the same wavelength. The cinematically extroverted AJ, whose actor conveyed charm and vulnerability in near equal amounts, comes alive when he’s at his most undead. Makepeace then makes the chronically cautious Keith a sympathetic fellow, even as he’s more and more affected by the night’s bizarre events. Meanwhile, Duncan is indeed the designated loser of the whole bunch, but Watanabe still manages to humanize him. As a bonus, the role didn’t require him to pull a Long Duk Dong.
As for Dedee Pfeiffer, she is plain adorable as the mysterious After Dark server nicknamed “Amaretto”. She spends all night fixing her dress strap while at the same time trying to get Keith to remember how he knows her. As their offbeat romance grows, it becomes another highlight of this movie. Whether or not Pfeiffer’s character is really a vampire also creates some welcome tension in the story.
Like a lot of its contemporaries, Vamp went on to become a bit of a cult classic. That current status is determined by several factors, but without a doubt, the casting of Grace Jones is the most considerable. The image of her writhing on that unique-looking chair, a Keith Haring original, springs to mind whenever this movie is brought up.

Chris Makepeace, Billy Drago and Paunita Nichols in Vamp
Prior to that first display of unequivocal horror, local vampire queen Katrina (Jones) took to the stage and delivered a strip show like no other. One would expect nothing less from that renowned model and performance artist. By now reports of Jones’ tardiness on set are no secret, yet it’s also hard to deny her commitment to the part of Katrina. It was, in fact, Jones who took charge of her character’s appearance—on top of Haring painting her body and that now-iconic chair, she had Andy Warhol handle her costuming. And not too many actors could seize a room’s attention without saying a single line of dialogue.
In 2022, Vamp received a retrospective novelization from Encyclopocalypse. This literary union of preexisting source material—Wenk’s original screenplay—and new ideas from author Christian Francis amounts to a more comprehensive visit to the After Dark Club. The basic story there is no different than what’s shown on screen; however, Francis gets creative with the characters’ origins and designs, and he enhances a number of key scenes.
The novelization expands on the urban and social decay of the main setting, and supplies a background for the After Dark Club. Sandy Baron’s character, Katrina’s emcee and familiar, is given ample motivation for sticking around; up until the fiery end, he is loyal to his friend and former business partner “Squeak”, who looks like he was “fed through a combine harvester, and left as nothing more than a heap of mangled remains”. Then there is Billy Drago’s character Snow, the leader of a street gang called The Dragons. His reason for menacing Keith and AJ is more altruistic than in the movie; he and his peers act tough to scare off any potential food for the vampires.

Lisa Lyon in Vamp
If not for all the backstories, Francis’ Vamp would be a hell of a lot shorter. Instead, this tie-in read dives into how AJ met Keith—the orphaned Anthony Joseph hailed from a broken home back in Brooklyn—and how their friendship flourished over the years. Keith’s archership is no longer just an assumed part of his entire being; it’s a confidence-building extracurricular for a boy who got picked on before coming into the protection of the new kid in town. These supplemental, in-depth looks at the protagonists, plus their close connection, are maybe unnecessary. The movie already did a fair and concise job of addressing their platonic intimacy without the need for flashbacks and insights, specifically in that scene where AJ lays it all out as he sacrifices himself.
Where the novelization gets off course is its approach to the minor characters. Intermittently backstorying the likes of Katrina’s indentured servants, Seko (Leila Hee Olsen) and Vlad (Brad Logan), ends up disturbing the flow of the writing. Was it absolutely essential that readers know Vlad was the Grand Duke of the House of Romanov, or how Snow’s accomplice Maven (Paunita Nichols) became so dentally challenged? No, not really. However, one’s mileage with these random biographies may vary.
The novelization is a more substantial experience, but for a movie like Vamp, less is more. And as plentiful as they are, it never simply coasts on its campy charms, either. The character work sits comfortably in that realm between cursory and meticulous, the script is sharper than first realized, and Greg Cannom’s vampire makeup is straightforward yet effective. Most of all, the movie didn’t squander its out-of-the-box concept. Richard Wenk made his vision of a “comic nightmare in which just about anything that can go wrong does” come true, and it is very enjoyable.

You must be logged in to post a comment.