Abominable - 2006

 My little marathon kept going this morning with 2006's Abominable, one of many movies with that name.

Where to start...maybe with the first scene.  The scene in which some people go outside because of a noise and find some dead animal on the ground ripped apart and discover Bigfoot tracks in the snow.  The snow that was not there the entire time until now, suddenly is about 3 inches thick on the ground and I repeat WAS NOT in any previous shots.

This is an early indication of what's to come.  Matt McCoy stars as a handicapped guy going with his drunk abusive caregiver to a remote cabin for some R&R.  Once there, a group of women come to the cabin next door for party weekend and the abusive caregiver goes to the town to get drunk.  Alone in the cabin, McCoy start to see and hear bizarre things in the woods.  Could it be the CGI Sasquatch creature we catch a glimpse of?  

This is prime SyFy original movie territory back when that was the place for this sorta trash.  Younger me would'a cracked a Pabst and watched this in a back to back marathon with a few others on a Friday night.  Modern me is amazed that this is only 30 years after those 70s ones I just watched, and wondering where some movie trends started and why and how.  Like the credits in this movie specifically were very much "of the moment" in 2006, but where did that start?  And is it still done, just in places I don't see?

Abominable is paper thin, clearly they did not have enough script of plot for a full movie and a lot of the time you're just watching the main character look at the girls with binoculars because there isn't anything else to fuckin' film, so I guess that's what's happening. The monster looks like total shit and there is not enough nudity or blood and guts to have it be that much fun.  So its just a straight 2.

Curse of Bigfoot - 1975

 Also known in the 90s as Teenagers Battle the Thing.

Who knows, dude.  Its the mood I'm in. That's why this sudden spring of Bigfoot movies.  This one I had at least seen something from or about, because this insane mask I had seen before.

When this is the level of special effect for your Bigfoot creature, the rest of the movie ain't going to be outshining it to a significant degree.  And boy, does this movie feel in a whole different ballpark of budget and capability than previously watched Bigfoot movies.  Sure, 1970s Bigfoot was dark and poorly acted, but this is like comparing that to vacation footage.

It could be this was a Rifftrax and I may have watched that at one point, but the plot of this was not familiar.  Plot wise, a teacher brings in an expert to talk to some students about ancient creatures, lore, and such.  The students embark upon an expedition and find a sealed tomb type area with a seemingly dead ancient creature in it.  The breaking of the seal brings it back to life, and it begins running amok and causing chaos.

This movie is certainly a lot more of the type of thing you would see on Rifftrax.  Its really two bit in nature, with extremely unchoreographed and unpracticed scenes that play out with makeup like what's seen above.  This is a fun trashy movie, its just SO bad dude, and I mean I love it, its just like WOW.

Apparently this was a movie made in 1963 which was expanded into this full length thing, which was released in 1975, and somehow also gets stamped with the years 1976 and 1978.  Its like no year wants to claim it.  But put it on late at night and enjoy the sleeze.  3 stars.

Sasquatch - 1976

 Also known as Sasquatch, the Legend of Bigfoot.

Why not do a double feature, I ask.  I started writing this because the narration says as if its nothing "After 3 months in the forests..." and I'm like.  Fuck.  You lucky fucks.

This movie is both a psuedo-documentary about Bigfoot as well as a love letter to the area in which Bigfoot supposedly lives, the Pacific Northwest.  Filmed outside of Bend Oregon standing in for British Columbia Canada, this talks at length about the beauty and unspoiled nature of the scenery, and you can tell that its earnest in its adoration for the area.

I'm reading a history book about the Pacific Northwest by Carlos Schwantes, which I would recommend to everyone.  The book more of a historical look than this fiction movie obviously- but legend, lore, and the culture that manifested in the area decades later is still interesting in its relevance to that.  This is yet another chapter in the bizarre history of the area, to be filed under a fascinating section of perhaps a different book, one about human psyche and human incongruity with nature.

We follow a rough and tumble group of backwoods explorers on a many months long journey on horseback through the PNW, and their various adventures therein.  Some minor Bigfoot threats aside, its about the nature, the animals, the pioneer feeling of exploring a forest unspoilt by humanity.  Its also set in my favorite part of Canada, the northern British Columbia, where vast miles of forest feel like they have never been set foot in by man, and are perhaps one of the last remaining places like that.

I'm bringing a lot of this to the movie from my own life, but there is a love and honesty present in this film no matter what, and its a more professionally shot, lit and acted than the previous entry Bigfoot.  Which I think elevates this to 4 stars.

Bigfoot - 1970

 Its odd how I specifically remember searching out Bigfoot movies at several points in my life to watch them, yet somehow this one escaped me?  I finally got it though.

Bigfoot had quite a cast, which Ebert even remarked about in his review.  John Carradine as a typical redneck yokel, film legend John Mitchum, Touch of Evil's Joi Lansing, and John Mitchum's son Christopher.  I dunno, must've meant more to Ebert than it does to me.  

Bigfoot is a pretty low budget, pretty damn insane 70s low brow redneck movie.  Bigfoot captures some women for breeding, and they blankly stare as they discuss the fact they're going to be raped by Bigfoot!  They seem to not care at all, unless Bigfoot comes up to them, in which case its screaming screaming screaming, which will have you reaching for the mute button.

Super grainy and awful quality, there is just something about this which is super fucking fun.  Its hackney, its dumb, it has a shiteating grin on its face.  But its something that if you get on its level and watch with extra buttered popcorn and maybe a cocktail or some friends, you'll have a damn blast.  Its not a great movie but it certainly is great to me.

All Through the Night - 1942

 Something in New Zealand made me think about Humphrey Bogart and I mentioned him to my family and it turns out they’re all fans also! We traded favorites and least favorites and it put me in the mood to watch some of his films again.

All Though the Night is described on the back as a proto film noir, and also as a loose satire of the type of films that it itself is. Those would be detective adjacent, mob adjacent films, noir adjacent character stories involving edgy characters, and situations that build to a climactic finish.

Bogart plays a man named Gloves who is a regular at a restaurant where he gets cheesecake every day. One day, the man that makes his cheesecakes is killed, and that brings Bogart into a bizarre situation of exploitation and Nazi presence in his little town. Gloves will have to use his cunning and his connections to solve the case.

The back of the movie box over sold the satire a little bit as well as the meta aspect a little bit. I shouldn’t have gotten my hopes up, but they truly made it sound like a romp and it wasn’t really. At an hour and 45 minutes it’s perhaps 30 minutes a little long, This movie made me miss some of the quick A to B old films that I normally like. 

This isn’t that bad and it certainly is unique among the types of things that was coming out. Maybe they should just rewrite the back of the box. I’ll give it four stars although I do think it’s a little bit too long no matter what.

Tombs of the Blind Dead - 1972

 Also known as. The Night of the Blind Terror and.. Revenge from Planet Ape???  This was apparently trying to cash in on the Planet of the Apes success and it sent me down a research hole trying to find if other movies did that and I couldn't find it and gave up.

The first of this foursome I've always wanted to see prompted a thought in my head.  Could be that one of the reasons these movies remain is that they established a new "type" when it came to zombies.  These are specifically undead templars, who ride horses and wear their cloaks and use swords.  They are specifically blind too, and this puts them in a strange realm between mummy and the skeleton warriors from some of the Ray Harryhausen Sinbad type movies.

Now, I loved Harryhausen as a kid and I love it now, even if these movies are not claymation, the movement and the style is probably directly in homage to those skeletons, and its like someone saw those movies and saw those skeletons and said "lets make a movie just based on these guys."  Lets!

A long preamble has a budding lesbian relationship end when one of the women jumps off a train, escapes to a church way out in the middle of nowhere, and gets killed by the templars who raise from the grave.  The group of friends she had go searching for her and get stalked by the templars themselves.

Again, the atmosphere of this thing is incredible.  This has long scenes of slowly moving skeletal creatures with chanting songs and strange slowed down eeriness and its used often, but does not get old because FUCK does it work!  It kicks ass, every moment you're watching that you're just in and there's no where else you'd rather be, nothing else you'd rather be watching.

Its a good intro to a series which I know gets better, so I'll give this one a 4.

Island of the Fishmen - 1979

 Also known as Island of Mutations, Something Waits in the Dark, and Screamers.

What is this, a Zombie movie?  With these alternative names?  Apparently this movie was slightly edited and shipped around to several different countries, with alternate names, and none of the versions were very successful.  Maybe the apt name should've been something like Lipstick on a Pig.

Fishmen stars Barbara Bach from James Bond, and in one of the versions it had a clunky sounding scene with Cameron Mitchell and Miguel Ferrer edited into the beginning.  I don't remember if my version had that, honestly.  I can't be bothered to check, either.  Okay I did check and yes I watched the US version that had these two in the beginning.

From the director of Torso comes this almost Lovecraft feeling story of a lost isle that has fish human hybrids on it, ala Dagon.  Barbara Bach and some others land there and its shadowy, inept chaos from there on in.

Shot with a negative lighting budget, the real question you'll be asking yourself is what is going on.  Now, this is not the worst thing I've seen by far but yeah its just another example of a truly amateur low budget schlockfest.  No nudity and no real violence either, its another one of these as well where I ask, could this be rated like PG?

Its fun low brow trash, I give it 2.5 stars.

The Demon - 1979

 This movie has more years on its title than almost any I've seen.  1979, 1980 1981, and 1985 are all seemingly valid.  Also known as Midnight Caller.

A evil shadowy figure haunts peoples dreams with claws on his hand...what is this?  A Nightmare on Elm Street?  No, its the other dream-haunting claw hand guy, The Demon.  Cameron Mitchell is this movie's John Saxon, the elder statesman brought in to fight the demonic entity.  He'll protect the leagues of topless women that The Demon is after in this strange flick from South Africa.

Shadow Killer or Shadow Demon could easily have been the title cause holy crap is this movie dark in color.  Shadows fill frames and the killer or main character or anyone are all bathing in darkness in this movie.  The Demon especially, who by the way goes completely unexplained, is only seen somewhat in the light at the end, also wearing a mask.  Not complaining, keep the horror movies dark is my middle name, just sayin'.

A bit slower than its 1984 cousin, this movie is certainly a bit more interminable and plodding.  We don't really have lore or explanation here, which also makes it feel that way.  So I can't really land on good or bad, it was certainly fun though, so I give it 3 stars.

Wake in Fright - 1971

 As soon as I started watching Australian movies, I knew that I would need to rewatch this one, a movie I’ve meant to rewatch for years now and that I finally now got around too.

It’s not just that it stars Donald Pleasense and it’s also not just that it’s a defragmenting story and study of masculinity, it’s also a very interesting dark film that has a lot more themes on a second viewing. There’s a lot I forgot about this and there’s a lot that I love about this movie, a movie that I saw referred to online as the best film ever made in Australia.

Straightlaced school teacher John Grant gets into gambling in a drunken night and loses all his money. His only friendships are a bunch of backwoods kangaroo hunters in this beer soaked sweat soaked underbelly of society study about masculinity in general. 

The strange hazing rituals, the homoerotic parts of masculinity, the ways in which we measure ourselves and each other, the embracing of the old and the new, the mixture of intellectual versus redneck, and certainly the need and want to fit in all are illustrated perfectly in a relatively light on dialogue film. 

Perhaps the only movie to have Donald Pleasense as a sex symbol, he has a bizarre, charismatic appeal, despite never really knowing what he’s talking about.  Thel other characters all sort of float around in a mysterious haze of potential threat or best friend. It is an odd feeling for this movie and one that makes you not really understand what’s happening with the main character or with anyone else, but not in a way which bothers you. Rather in a way that makes you have a certain amount of acceptance - Not necessarily resignation just acceptance. 

Films in general can allow for us as the audience to put ourselves in the shoes of a character, and I think that this is something that is only helped by ambiguity and minimalistic dialogue. I think in a certain way it’s the quietness of older films that helps us attach ourselves to them, it is their mysticism and their innate ambiguity that makes us pair ourselves to the happenings of the film. In that way, this movie feels extremely identifiable without having any amount of things in it that anyone can actually relate to. But feeling like an outsider, feeling social pressure, feeling mixed sexual desires, and feeling lost as major themes, anyone can attach themselves to in this. 

The feeling of this film is the feeling of a moment, those weird ones that you can’t really explain that stick with you despite the fact that nothing happened in them. Things do happen in this film and there are things that would stick with anyone but the same time their meaning and their interpretation is completely up for grabs. In that way it’s a masterpiece of strange evocative motion while being a little thin on explanation and plot, it’s certainly a great vibe film. 5 vibe stars. 

Harlequin - 1980

 Also known as Dark Forces. 

 Dude, never say you’ve seen it all. This is not some strange horror movie about a wizard like the poster shows, but rather a story based on Rasputin? I might have to read more about Rasputin. 

There is a dying child who has a clown come to his birthday party, where they form a connection. The clown turns out to be Gregory Wolfe, a mysterious self proclaimed harlequin, master of illusion and hypnosis. He cures the child and instantly comes under the scrutiny of the family, which includes rich powerful Senator Rast. Not believing in magic, they try to figure out Wolfe’s deal as he grows closer to the child and the family. 

This movie was one of the stranger ones I’ve seen. I’ve seen a bit. It’s just very unlike anything else, and it’s all done very well. The actors are all selling it and the effects are great. The thing also moves at a great pace and while there are times for the dramatic family stuff to be explored it doesn’t feel like we overstay our welcome with a lot of that kinda stuff. 

It all builds to a place where 30, 20 minutes from the end I still don’t know what’s real and what to expect and if you can do that, well you have done a lot is all I’m saying. 

Directed by Simon Wincer who also did Snapshot, these are two excellent and well made, well paced films. I give this a 4.5

Snapshot - 1979

 Another Aus new wave, which I’m going to stay in for a little while now after finishing Zombie. 

I’m going through the filmography of Hugh Keays Byrne, I won’t watch them all but I’ll watch the weird ones or horror or basically what I can find for free online. Such as this strange exploration flick. 

This movie feels either way earlier 70s or possibly even late 60s. 79 seems a little late to be doing a “seedy world being uncovered by a naive young girl” type thing. I’m not slamming this, just yeah. 1979? There’s also a disco like club scene in here. Again, 1979?

Angela is an innocent 20 year old working at a salon dreaming of bigger and brighter when an older, attitude-throwing woman comes in and offers her a job. $1000 for half a day of what ends up being topless modeling. She does the job and soon it sends her entire world is turned upside down and someone is after her. 

Whether it be the lesbian seductress, the weird off kilter ex boyfriend, or the powerful mysterious producers she’s now involved with, it’s a light mystery romp with not too much fat or meat on it’s bones. It’s quick and easy and nothing is really delved into all that much. It’s just simple A to B sorta a thing that won’t leave a sour taste in your mouth or leave you with much at all, for better or worse. 

Good music and tight direction helps, topless scenes hello but there could’ve been more. I dunno man, it’s an example of slightly better than “it’s fine”. It’s a “it’s good” but without a ton of supporting citations. I give it a 3.5