Connect with us

Editorials

Exploring the Exploitation of Rob Zombie’s ’31’ [The Silver Lining]

Published

on

ROB ZOMBIE's 31 | image via Alchemy and Sundance

Watching a bad movie doesn’t necessarily have to be a bad experience. Even the worst films can boast a good idea or two, and that’s why we’re trying to look on the bright side with The Silver Lining, where we shine a light on the best parts of traditionally maligned horror flicks.

This time, we’ll be discussing Rob Zombie’s 2016 throwback, 31.

In the United States, it’s said that more people disappear on Halloween than on any other night of the year. While this isn’t all that surprising when you consider that the holiday encourages children to walk around unsupervised and interact with costumed strangers, this eerie factoid would inspire rocker-turned-filmmaker Rob Zombie to come up with a story about who might be responsible for these mysterious vanishings.

Taking inspiration from grindhouse classics like the Ilsa films and Two Thousand Maniacs!, this retro thriller would also borrow from the deadly game shows of movies like The Running Man in a gory period piece. Simply titled “31”, the finished film depicts a single night of terror as a bizarre secret society abducts a group of carnival workers. Finding themselves in a macabre labyrinth, the ill-fated carnies are forced to compete in a cruel game against a series of costumed psychopaths in the world’s bloodiest Halloween celebration.

With the film shaping up to be a no-holds-barred love letter to the exploitation flicks of yore, and Zombie insisting on working outside the studio system so that the finished movie could be as hardcore as he (and the fans) wanted it to be, horror hounds were ecstatic when the project was first announced.


SO WHAT WENT WRONG?

Rob Zombie's 31

Earning back a little over half of its $1.5 million budget and garnering a measly 35% on Metacritic, it’s clear that 31 wasn’t the underground hit that Zombie had hoped for. Even die-hard fans had difficulty warming up to the low-budget gore-fest, accusing the flick of simply rehashing the director’s favorite tropes on a shoestring budget. Once the dust finally settled, most critics agreed that 31 was the worst entry in Zombie’s filmography, but very few of them discussed the reasons why the film ended up the way it did.

Aiming to avoid studio meddling, Zombie opted to raise a significant part of the film’s budget through crowdfunding websites. This ended up contributing to some of the film’s issues, with the crew almost constantly running on fumes despite two successful online funding campaigns. While the lack of corporate oversight allowed for more freedom during production, the ensuing technical limitations took their toll on the story the filmmaker was trying to tell.

Zombie’s choice of shooting the film guerilla-style also didn’t seem to help, with the director favoring messy handheld shots when chronicling the 12-hour-long murder spree conducted by the psychotic “Heads”. At the end of the day, the grimy production design and lo-fi photography left many audiences thinking that the end result looked cheap when compared to Zombie’s previous work, and some critics even compared the finished product to a rushed music video.

The film’s nihilistic mean streak didn’t win over a lot of fans either, with even dedicated horror hounds complaining about the script’s seemingly excessive brutality and profanity for profanity’s sake. Zombie even had a hard time submitting the completed feature to the MPAA, which insisted on several cuts in order to secure an R rating for a theatrical release. While I personally think that the more vicious elements of the movie are its greatest strengths, especially when it comes to the kills, I understand why mainstream audiences might fail to connect with such a bleak picture.


THE SILVER LINING

31 has grown on me over the years. While it’s not a traditionally good horror flick and I agree that it ranks quite low on Zombie’s filmography, the finished product is still way better than it has any right to be. If you can look past the low production value, shoddy cinematography and familiar script, there are quite a few positive elements that prove beyond a doubt that Rob Zombie is still a skilled auteur even when he stumbles.

For starters, the retro style can actually be quite engaging, with the quick and dirty photography harkening back to Quentin Tarantino’s claim that Rob Zombie is the only living director that’s still making honest-to-God exploitation flicks. Featuring everything from little people in Nazi uniforms to chainsaw-wielding clowns, the manic energy behind this neo-Grindhouse experiment suggests that it would have been right at home in a smoke-filled theater back in the mid-1970s.

Veteran character actor Richard Brake also elevates the film with his powerhouse performance as “Doomhead”. While he’s only in the picture during the very beginning and the very end, Brake steals the show and enhances every single scene he’s in. From his spine-chilling monologues to his genuinely threatening presence, Brake is easily the best part of the movie and it’s a damned shame that the script doesn’t do more with him. With his grisly clown makeup and psychopathic tendencies, it’s also easy to see why a lot of fans believe that the actor would have made for a terrifying Joker.

Ironically, despite being attached to a less-than-stellar motion picture, the film’s kick-ass finale is likely one of Zombie’s best ever. The chilling use of Aerosmith’s Dream On (suggested by Sheri Moon Zombie herself) enhances the nihilistic confrontation between a battered Charly and Doomhead, making for a near-perfect example of the infamous Bolivian Army Ending trope.

It may be far from Zombie’s best work, but I think 31 improves with repeated viewings and will likely live on with a small but dedicated cult following. After all, “in hell, everybody loves popcorn”, and there’s no denying that this is one hell of a popcorn flick.

Born Brazilian, raised Canadian, Luiz is a writer and Film student that spends most of his time watching movies and subsequently complaining about them.

Editorials

‘Amityville Karen’ Is a Weak Update on ‘Serial Mom’ [Amityville IP]

Published

on

Amityville Karen horror

Twice a month Joe Lipsett will dissect a new Amityville Horror film to explore how the “franchise” has evolved in increasingly ludicrous directions. This is “The Amityville IP.”

A bizarre recurring issue with the Amityville “franchise” is that the films tend to be needlessly complicated. Back in the day, the first sequels moved away from the original film’s religious-themed haunted house storyline in favor of streamlined, easily digestible concepts such as “haunted lamp” or “haunted mirror.”

As the budgets plummeted and indie filmmakers capitalized on the brand’s notoriety, it seems the wrong lessons were learned. Runtimes have ballooned past the 90-minute mark and the narratives are often saggy and unfocused.

Both issues are clearly on display in Amityville Karen (2022), a film that starts off rough, but promising, and ends with a confused whimper.

The promise is embodied by the tinge of self-awareness in Julie Anne Prescott (The Amityville Harvest)’s screenplay, namely the nods to John Waters’ classic 1994 satire, Serial Mom. In that film, Beverly Sutphin (an iconic Kathleen Turner) is a bored, white suburban woman who punished individuals who didn’t adhere to her rigid definition of social norms. What is “Karen” but a contemporary equivalent?

In director/actor Shawn C. Phillips’ film, Karen (Lauren Francesca) is perpetually outraged. In her introductory scenes, she makes derogatory comments about immigrants, calls a female neighbor a whore, and nearly runs over a family blocking her driveway. She’s a broad, albeit familiar persona; in many ways, she’s less of a character than a caricature (the living embodiment of the name/meme).

These early scenes also establish a fairly straightforward plot. Karen is a code enforcement officer with plans to shut down a local winery she has deemed disgusting. They’re preparing for a big wine tasting event, which Karen plans to ruin, but when she steals a bottle of cursed Amityville wine, it activates her murderous rage and goes on a killing spree.

Simple enough, right?

Unfortunately, Amityville Karen spins out of control almost immediately. At nearly every opportunity, Prescott’s screenplay eschews narrative cohesion and simplicity in favour of overly complicated developments and extraneous characters.

Take, for example, the wine tasting event. The film spends an entire day at the winery: first during the day as a band plays, then at a beer tasting (???) that night. Neither of these events are the much touted wine-tasting, however; that is actually a private party happening later at server Troy (James Duval)’s house.

Weirdly though, following Troy’s death, the party’s location is inexplicably moved to Karen’s house for the climax of the film, but the whole event plays like an afterthought and features a litany of characters we have never met before.

This is a recurring issue throughout Amityville Karen, which frequently introduces random characters for a scene or two. Karen is typically absent from these scenes, which makes them feel superfluous and unimportant. When the actress is on screen, the film has an anchor and a narrative drive. The scenes without her, on the other hand, feel bloated and directionless (blame editor Will Collazo Jr., who allows these moments to play out interminably).

Compounding the issue is that the majority of the actors are non-professionals and these scenes play like poorly performed improv. The result is long, dull stretches that features bad actors talking over each other, repeating the same dialogue, and generally doing nothing to advance the narrative or develop the characters.

While Karen is one-note and histrionic throughout the film, at least there’s a game willingness to Francesca’s performance. It feels appropriately campy, though as the film progresses, it becomes less and less clear if Amityville Karen is actually in on the joke.

Like Amityville Cop before it, there are legit moments of self-awareness (the Serial Mom references), but it’s never certain how much of this is intentional. Take, for example, Karen’s glaringly obvious wig: it unconvincingly fails to conceal Francesca’s dark hair in the back, but is that on purpose or is it a technical error?

Ultimately there’s very little to recommend about Amityville Karen. Despite the game performance by its lead and the gentle homages to Serial Mom’s prank call and white shoes after Labor Day jokes, the never-ending improv scenes by non-professional actors, the bloated screenplay, and the jittery direction by Phillips doom the production.

Clocking in at an insufferable 100 minutes, Amityville Karen ranks among the worst of the “franchise,” coming in just above Phillips’ other entry, Amityville Hex.

Amityville Karen

The Amityville IP Awards go to…

  • Favorite Subplot: In the afternoon event, there’s a self-proclaimed “hot boy summer” band consisting of burly, bare-chested men who play instruments that don’t make sound (for real, there’s no audio of their music). There’s also a scheming manager who is skimming money off the top, but that’s not as funny.
  • Least Favorite Subplot: For reasons that don’t make any sense, the winery is also hosting a beer tasting which means there are multiple scenes of bartender Alex (Phillips) hoping to bring in women, mistakenly conflating a pint of beer with a “flight,” and goading never before seen characters to chug. One of them describes the beer as such: “It looks like a vampire menstruating in a cup” (it’s a gold-colored IPA for the record, so…no).
  • Amityville Connection: The rationale for Karen’s killing spree is attributed to Amityville wine, whose crop was planted on cursed land. This is explained by vino groupie Annie (Jennifer Nangle) to band groupie Bianca (Lilith Stabs). It’s a lot of nonsense, but it is kind of fun when Annie claims to “taste the damnation in every sip.”
  • Neverending Story: The film ends with an exhaustive FIVE MINUTE montage of Phillips’ friends posing as reporters in front of terrible green screen discussing the “killer Karen” story. My kingdom for Amityville’s regular reporter Peter Sommers (John R. Walker) to return!
  • Best Line 1: Winery owner Dallas (Derek K. Long), describing Karen: “She’s like a walking constipation with a hemorrhoid”
  • Best Line 2: Karen, when a half-naked, bleeding woman emerges from her closet: “Is this a dream? This dream is offensive! Stop being naked!”
  • Best Line 3: Troy, upset that Karen may cancel the wine tasting at his house: “I sanded that deck for days. You don’t just sand a deck for days and then let someone shit on it!”
  • Worst Death: Karen kills a Pool Boy (Dustin Clingan) after pushing his head under water for literally 1 second, then screeches “This is for putting leaves on my plants!”
  • Least Clear Death(s): The bodies of a phone salesman and a barista are seen in Karen’s closet and bathroom, though how she killed them are completely unclear
  • Best Death: Troy is stabbed in the back of the neck with a bottle opener, which Karen proceeds to crank
  • Wannabe Lynch: After drinking the wine, Karen is confronted in her home by Barnaby (Carl Solomon) who makes her sign a crude, hand drawn blood contract and informs her that her belly is “pregnant from the juices of his grapes.” Phillips films Barnaby like a cross between the unhoused man in Mulholland Drive and the Mystery Man in Lost Highway. It’s interesting, even if the character makes absolutely no sense.
  • Single Image Summary: At one point, a random man emerges from the shower in a towel and excitedly poops himself. This sequence perfectly encapsulates the experience of watching Amityville Karen.
  • Pray for Joe: Many of these folks will be back in Amityville Shark House and Amityville Webcam, so we’re not out of the woods yet…

Next time: let’s hope Christmas comes early with 2022’s Amityville Christmas Vacation. It was the winner of Fangoria’s Best Amityville award, after all!

Amityville Karen movie

Continue Reading