Connect with us

Editorials

‘Amityville Clownhouse’ Needs More Bozo Action [The Amityville IP]

Published

on

Amityville Clownhouse

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.”

It was with a mix of trepidation and intrigue that I hit play on Dustin Ferguson’s Amityville Clownhouse (2020). The film, first released in 2017 under the title Amityville: Evil Never Dies, is a direct sequel to Amityville Toybox (aka Amityville Terror), the very low budget film about a father who kills his entire family after being gifted a toy monkey for his fiftieth birthday.

Toybox was emphatically not a good film, but it did feature a 10 minute coda that was a) the best part of the film, and b) teased a promising new narrative about a team of paranormal investigators.

Disappointingly this storytelling avenue goes unexplored in Clownhouse, though the sequel does feature a strong opening. First Senator Ty Pangborn (Dan Mauro) dresses in what is later described as “full bozo regalia” before killing his wife and two adult children. Then a trio of thieves, Sarah, Drake, and Guy (Sarah Reed, Evan Clinton, and Anthony Gaudette), break into the crime scene to hunt for a clown portrait they can sell on the Dark Web. They, too, are immediately murdered (seemingly by the ghost of Pangborn?) While the quality of acting is broad, there’s an energy in these two opening sequences that kicks off Clownhouse will a sense of campy ridiculousness.

Alas it’s all downhill from there as the action shifts to Ben (Ben Gothier) and Michelle (Michelle Muir-Lewis), a married couple who stumble on the haunted Jolly Chimp in Jesse’s Junk Drawer. They pay Mark Patton’s Antique Owner a hefty $50 and immediately invite the usual Amityville nonsense into their lives, which includes a few nightmares before Ben becomes an abusive rapist – both of Michelle, as well as a sex worker (Helene Udy) – and tries to sacrifice his wife to Beelzebub.

It’s a bland and forgettable plot, with virtually no rising action, climax or resolution, though the unformed narrative is hardly the film’s biggest issue.

Amityville Clownhouse mark patton

The biggest sin here is that Amityville Clownhouse is barely a feature. Much like Toybox, which only scrapes by the one-hour mark thanks to its ten minute sequel tease, Ferguson’s new film simply doesn’t have enough content. Not only does Clownhouse recycle nearly 10 minutes (!) of footage from Toybox, there is a full four minute Skinamarink-esque grainy home video segment detailing the toy chimp, as well as a nearly seven minute sequence in which Michelle walks through a park and draws a picture of the infamous Amityville window.

Not only does this mean very little happens in the film, but the pacing is nearly glacial. Combined with bad acting and technical issues, there’s not much in Amityville Clownhouse to recommend, which is a shame because it starts off promisingly. In that respect, it’s kind of the inverse of Ferguson’s first Amityville film.

He’ll pop up once more with 2022’s <gulp> Amityville in the Hood, so perhaps the third time will be the charm.

Amityville Clownhouse movie

The Amityville IP Awards go to…

  • Senator Opening: The acting of Pangborn’s family, including his wife (Sheri Lee), son James (Daniel Martens) and daughter Kelly (Casey Wright) is pretty bad, but it does include a lot of mean-spirited, hilarious dialogue? The kids hate their mom and call her a “moron” and Mrs. Pangborn reciprocates when she reminds James he was a “fat baby”.
  • Thieves Opening: This segment features the “best” acting in the film (which isn’t saying much); it works because at least they’re having fun. At one point cinematographer Guy White lingers on Drake’s ass and, after squeezing it, Sarah explains “When I see an ass that shapely, I just have to grab a handful.” It’s dumb and it’s fun, something that the film could have used more of.
  • Rats in the Attic: Throughout the film, Michelle regularly hears a loud recurring thumping which she blames on the chimp. When she brings it up to Ben, he bizarrely explains it’s “Probably rats. That time of year.” What…does that even mean?
  • Sound Issues: The only copy available to screen in Canada was a YouTube video, so it’s possible it was an upload issue, but the film’s audio is wildly disproportionate. So much so, that at times the dialogue is barely audible over stock sounds like the neighbour’s dog barking or the Muzak in the shop.
  • Most Bizarre Scene:  Michelle watches a heated cable news exchange that ends with a priest (Tony Clarke) yelling at a retired Detective (Matthew Hickinbottom) that the Jansen family murders from Toybox  wasn’t drug-related. “It winds me up so much!” he says, stomping off the set. (None of this has any bearing on the plot).
  • Worst Plot Development: The film’s use of sexual assault as a shorthand for Ben’s possession is frustrating not just because the toybox causes him to forget his actions and also because it happens twice. It’s a gross, lazy plot contrivance and Ferguson handles it badly.
  • Toybox Connection: Speaking of Ferguson’s prior outing, Julia Farrell returns as that film’s lone survivor. It’s basically a glorified Dr. Loomis gig: she spouts lines like “evil never dies” and “the toybox must be destroyed”. This would be more excusable if the character’s return weren’t just an excuse to introduce Toybox’s ten minute clip package which comprises 1/7th of the film’s runtime.
  • Franchise Ties: Despite its many flaws, there is something fun about Clownhouse‘s willingness to acknowledge the other cursed DeFeo family “Estate Auction” objects, including the lamp, the mirror, and the clock.

Next Time: We’re checking out Amityville Exorcism, which marks the return of Amityville Death House director Mark Polonia.

Joe is a TV addict with a background in Film Studies. He co-created TV/Film Fest blog QueerHorrorMovies and writes for Bloody Disgusting, Anatomy of a Scream, That Shelf, The Spool and Grim Magazine. He enjoys graphic novels, dark beer and plays multiple sports (adequately, never exceptionally). While he loves all horror, if given a choice, Joe always opts for slashers and creature features.

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