Quantcast
Connect with us

Editorials

[Exhumed & Exonerated] ‘Disturbing Behavior’ (1998)

Published

on

Every decade has its ups and downs when it comes to cinema, no matter the genre.  Horror fans love to loft on high the output of the ‘30s & ‘40s, the ‘70s & ‘80s, and the more recent decades.  More often than not, however, the 1990s are labeled as the worst decade for the genre.  Not only that, but ‘90s horror tends to be written off as a whole, beyond a handful of undisputed classics.  The purpose of Exhumed & Exonerated: The ‘90s Horror Project, is to refute those accusations by highlighting numerous gems from the decade.  Stone cold classics will be tackled in this column from time to time, but its main purpose will be to seek out lesser-known and/or less-loved titles that I think deserve more attention and respect from fans.  Let the mayhem begin!

Disturbing Behavior

Directed by David Nutter
Screenplay by Scott Rosenberg
Produced by Armyan Bernstein
Starring James Marsden, Katie Holmes, Nick Stahl, Bruce Greenwood, William Sadler, A.J. Buckley, Chad E. Donella, Katharine Isabelle, Ethan Embry, and Steve Railsback
Released on July 24, 1998

The kids are not alright. Steve Clark (James Marsden) is the new high school student in town. In the wake of a tragedy, his family has moved to the quiet community of Cradle Bay, Washington for an attempt at a fresh start. While Steve actually manages to make a few friends fairly quickly, something feels “off” about Cradle Bay. When something sinister lurking beneath the surface of the town’s façade of perfection, Steve must band together with new pals Rae (Katie Holmes), Gavin (Nick Stahl), and U.V. (Chad E. Donella) to put a stop to it before it’s too late.

DisturbingBehavior3

This is a generic synopsis that applies to many a horror tale, mind you, but a sound one. There’s a reason it became a standard genre formula over the years: it works. If you can take such a tried and true blueprint and fill it with compelling characters and put an interesting twist on it all, then you’ve won half the battle already. If you then take the time to fill those roles with capable leads and good characters actors, then you are home free.

Part of the fun of this on-going series is not only revisiting old favorites, but also charting new territory for myself as a viewer. Unlike some of the other films that I have covered in this column so far, Disturbing Behavior is not one that I have been watching for 15+ years. Up until recently, I had never even seen it before. I’d always been aware of it, but had never gotten around to it.

At the time of release, I had initially pegged it as a teen drama along the lines of Cruel Intentions. I blame the poster. While there’s nothing wrong with a Cruel Intentions-esque film, such stories just weren’t up my alley 18 years ago. I was only 14 at the time, so juvenile dismissal of certain genres and subgenres was to be expected.

Disturbing Behavior is a film that absolutely deals with social cliques, youth rebellion, teenage awkwardness and uncertainty, and many other staples of adolescent behavior and development. All of these elements can be found in any number of teen-centric entertainments, from comedies to romances to thrillers. Coming of age can be a chaotic time in one’s life and as a result, there will always be plenty of subject matter to mine from such events, no matter what direction you take your story in.

So what direction did Disturbing Behavior take? It decided to take off jogging down the path previously trod by acclaimed authors Jack Finney (The Body Snatchers) and Ira Levin (The Stepford Wives). Screenwriter Scott Rosenberg (“Tales from the Crypt”, Con Air, Pain & Gain) deftly mixes the personality-changing and identity-finding aspects of teenage life and melds them with the identity-altering science fiction/horror of such tales, creating something here that is both familiar and fresh.

DisturbingBehavior2

Aesthetically, the film should instantly look familiar to anyone who grew up in the ‘90s or has at least caught up with a lot of ‘90s genre properties in the decades since. Shot in British Colombia by director David Nutter, a veteran of both “The X-Files” and “Millennium”, the film very much carries the look of both shows. It also strikes a similar tone in many ways, mixing dark melodrama, black comedy, and classical genre elements. In many ways, it feels like the team behind “The X-Files” went off and shot an AIP-style teen genre picture between seasons. You’ve even got Mark Snow doing the score!

Cast-wise, everyone brings their A-game. James Marsden, always an undervalued actor in my eyes, makes for a great male lead here and Katie Holmes is just as good. They are backed by a showier performance by Nick Stahl, who has always proven to be a reliable character actor. Horror fans will also note an early role by Katharine Isabelle, who plays Marsden’s little sister. On the adult front, it’s hard to not love a film that casts the likes of Bruce Greenwood, William Sadler, and Steve Railsback. Greenwood shines in particular, relishing his sinister role as the architect of the evil goings on in Cradle Bay. It’s a stellar cast and with no one sleepwalking through their parts, they only further elevate already-winning material.

Now is the time where we address the elephant in the room. This film was cut down sizably from the director’s original version upon theatrical release. In its existing form, the film is still very good, but it’s easy to tell that a lot of character work and some necessary exposition have been excised. The short version of the story is simply that the studio took the film away from him after test screenings, ultimately cutting his 115 minute version down to a running time of 83 minutes. That’s over half an hour of film; no small amount of time.

The bad news is that neither the version on DVD nor on the Blu-ray contains a longer cut of the film. Most of the deleted scenes and the original ending are included on both discs, so you can at least get an idea of what is missing. Do you feel a “but” coming on? You should, because there is one.

For whatever reason, the longer cut actually DOES exist in a legally-watchable form. For whatever reason, the version of the film often making the rounds on TV channels such as Syfy and Comet is an alternate third cut. It runs a little over 100 minutes and manages to include all of the deleted scenes from the film’s home video release, with one lone exception. Instead of using Nutter and Rosenberg’s darker original ending, it retains the theatrical version’s final moment. For the record, while the theatrical ending is certainly more typical for a film of this type, I think it works in light of the film’s tone and subgenre.

DisturbingBehavior4

If you are interested in finally seeing Disturbing Behavior for the first time, I’d suggest tracking down this TV version of the film first. Just search your listings regularly and you are sure to come across it, as it still plays regularly. I’d suggest those of you who caught and dismissed the film upon its theatrical or initial home video releases do the same. See this film and judge it as it was (mostly) originally meant to be experienced, not in its truncated form. Then, if you find that you’ve become a fan, scoop up that recent Scream Factory Blu-ray. While it does not include the longer cut (I suspect there were legal hurdles preventing this), it’s still worth owning.

Disturbing Behavior isn’t a genre-defining classic (few films are), but it is a very, very good film. The direction and atmosphere are great, the cast is top-notch, and the writing manages to put a new spin on a finely-tuned classic premise. If you are a fan of films like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Stepford Wives, Strange Behavior, It Came from Outer Space, etc., then I think you’ll find that this one is right up your alley.

Up Next: The Sect (1991)

Previously On…
Species | Mute Witness | Popcorn | Wishmaster | Alien 3 | Cast A Deadly Spell
Disturbing Behavior | The Sect | The Addams Family

13 Comments

Editorials

Neon-Soaked Cult Classic ‘Vamp’ Starring Grace Jones Still Has Bite 40 Years Later

Published

on

Vamp 1986
Grace Jones and Dedee Pfeiffer in Vamp

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. 

vamp

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.

vamp

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.

vamp

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 partnerSqueak, who looks like he wasfed 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. 

vamp

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 acomic nightmare in which just about anything that can go wrong doescome true, and it is very enjoyable.

Continue Reading