Connect with us

Editorials

The Snuff of Nightmares – Checking into ‘Vacancy’ 16 Years Later

Published

on

vacancy

Stopping at an isolated, run-down motel for the night does not bode well in a horror film. Audiences expect — even want — something bad to happen. Vacancy more than satisfies those expectations, seeing as how Kate Beckinsale and Luke Wilson’s hapless, anguished characters almost instantly find themselves in peril once they book a room at the Pinewood Motel. Dirty sheets and bad plumbing are the least of their problems when they discover their accommodations come with one additional, not to mention creepy, amenity: secret cameras.

Had things gone differently, Vacancy would have starred Sarah Jessica Parker, and it would have been directed by Simon West. As interesting as it would have been to see Parker fight for her life in a straight-up horror film, plans changed and Kate Beckinsale filled the role of Amy Fox. Luke Wilson, however, was David Fox from the very beginning when the film was first announced in 2006. Mark L. Smith’s script was then eventually handed over to Hungarian director Nimród Antal, who had previously made a splash overseas with his subway thriller Control.

Vacancy is, in some ways, a “home invasion” film. A hotel room is not necessarily considered a home, but it is intended to be a respite from the outside world. A safe space to heal and rest. And for the Foxes, they especially need some reassurance that everything is going to be okay, at least for one night. Not only have they suffered a tremendous personal loss, their marriage is now over. Before they can make the divorce official, though, David and Amy have to survive another of life’s challenges, albeit an unusual one.

vacancy

Image: Screen Gems

By the time Vacancy came out, there had been a rise in vacation horror. On-screen graphic violence and torture experienced abroad were not uncommon to see. This film does not buck the cruelty and suffering trend, yet its story is domestic. Vacancy instead opts for a familiar and nostalgic setting as opposed to a grimy interpretation of a foreign destination. The Pinewood, which was specifically built for the film, evokes memories of those crummy, outdated motels visited during road trips.

After a deceitful mechanic (Ethan Embry) fails to fix their car during the long drive home, David and Amy take a short hike to the Pinewood. This remote motel is a tad charming but also completely out of fashion with its mid-century design. The many open-screen walls alone are a hint at the false sense of security. The Foxes hunker down in the honeymoon suite, of all places, for a mere minute or two before the requisite creepiness starts up. At first it is a series of spectral door knocks from the room next to theirs. In true fashion, the bespectacled front-desk clerk, Mason (Frank Whaley), reports the other room is empty. The audience, of course, knows better.

What Vacancy lacks in exposition it makes up for in prompt panic and stalking. The film runs around 80-minutes long, so the director wastes no time cutting to the chase, so to speak. Once David and Amy realize their predicament — in a clever and horrifying reveal, the couple turns on the TV and gets a glimpse of their imminent future — the film drops the act. Whaley and Embry’s characters continue the scare tactics before closing in for the kill. As to be expected, these Foxes are not so easy to catch.

Beckinsale and Wilson deliver credible performances as the hostile couple grieving their dead son. Their cutting remarks are one too many, yet the blame shifting and animosity make Amy and David feel a great deal more real. And as if their lives cannot get any worse, they end up the victims of snuff peddlers. Then there is Whaley’s Mason, who is very well the star of this film regardless of his lower billing. He wears three hats in the story; first he is the laidback and seemingly nonthreatening motel manager, then the smug ring leader of the snuff club, and finally the wavering last man standing whose whole outfit has come undone. Whaley is a man of many faces here, and each one is more unnerving than the last.

vacancy

Image: Screen Gems

Without seeing the film, someone would be apt to lump Vacancy in with extreme aughts horror, such as Hostel and The Hills Have Eyes. Masked men breaking into motel rooms and murdering the guests is prime slasher material. However, even when taking the snuff element into account, Antal’s film focuses far less on carnage and physical torture and more on sheer thrills. The most graphic scenes are typically limited to the video footage seen on the TVs, whereas Amy and David’s ordeal is light on blood and gore. Anyone bothered by the protagonists’ plot armor would be advised to stick around for the nail-biting if not somewhat rushed third act. 

While viewers can infer just about everything that happens in Vacancy, its prequel lays out the origin of the snuff ring. Returning as the screenwriter in Vacancy 2: The First Cut, Mark L. Smith details how the business started under different ownership and at another motel. The unlucky guests this time are a couple (Agnes Bruckner, Trevor Wright) traveling cross country with the boyfriend’s jealous best friend (Arjay Smith). Director Eric Bross puts less emphasis on style than Antal, but he also does not pull punches. He supplies more violence and a slightly larger universe for the victims to roam around in, and on occasion the film offers a surprise development. As unnecessary as this prequel feels, it should satisfy slasher enthusiasts.

The first Vacancy takes the idea of sinister surveillance and runs with it. In addition, it makes an urban legend like snuff films scary again. The whole concept of motels recording their guests would likely not have the exact same effect today, given how devalued privacy has become. Yet in an era of horror so substantially influenced by its real-world anxieties, paranoia and distrust, the existence of something like Vacancy makes perfect sense.

vacancy

‘Vacancy 2: The First Cut’ – Image: Stage 6 Films

Paul Lê is a Texas-based, Tomato approved critic at Bloody Disgusting, Dread Central, and Tales from the Paulside.

Editorials

What’s Wrong with My Baby!? Larry Cohen’s ‘It’s Alive’ at 50

Published

on

Netflix It's Alive

Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.

Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.

Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.

It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.

At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.

It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.

As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.

Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.

Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.

Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.

I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.

Continue Reading