Let me tell ya that if it wasn’t for indie horror filmmakers putting out consistently better films than their Hollywood equivalents, well I’d be going on my own killing spree just to see some friggin’ action!!  I mean seriously; the last theatrical horror release was back on April 15th (the disappointing SCREAM 4).  This isn’t to say that all the indie horror films I’ve been watching have been fantastic.  Far from it.  But I’ll always take a less-than-stellar indie film because at least I know it’ll be original!!  Well the other day I watched MY PURE JOY, written, directed, produced, and edited by James Cullen Bressack (who also did the casting, the ADR recording, and served as camera operator).  Oh yeah; did I mention Bressack is 19 years old?

The story is pretty simple, yet effective:  Adam (Alexei Ryan) is a teen with a lot of hidden anger.  As the movie begins we already join Adam in the throes of wallowing in his psychosis.  We learn from flashbacks that Adam’s father (Mark Glasser) used to show him extremely gory and inappropriate films when he was very young and would stand there helplessly listening as his dad taught him lessons from the films.  He would pound into Adam’s head to, basically, not take shit from anyone.  This is pretty much the only motivation we get for Adam’s behavior.  The description on IMDb.com, though, says that Adam’s mind

has been so rotted by trauma from his past and the gory films he watches, that he has blurred the lines between reality and pretend!

Maybe I missed something but I don’t recall any traumatic events from his past.  The closest he got to that was watching those films with his dad.  Hell, I’d have loved it if my old man watched gory flicks with me when I was that old!!  I was already sneaking around watching CANNIBAL FEROX and LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT (yes; the original) when I was 9 years old … I’d have loved the bonding experience with my dad.  But everything I saw in the film suggests that Adam had kind of a normal upbringing.  He has a mom who loves him (even though he’s a complete douchtard to her) and a brother who just got outta rehab but seems to be an okay guy.  So I was a little confused on the motivation.  I certainly hope the message here isn’t that watching endless hours of fucked up, gory horror films causes people to go out and murder people.  I certainly hope that’s not the message here!!  If it is, well I may as well turn myself in before I go on my killing spree.

Adam mainly hangs out with his buddies Steve (JD Fairman), Derron (Phillip Andrew Christopher), and Chris (Christopher Chandler), sitting around and getting stoned to the tits, talking about their favorite gory horror films (Bressack gets huge points for talking about the French films INSIDE and MARTYRS).  In fact after a gory opening where Adam kills an entire family, the watch these four underachievers sit around, get stoned, and talk a lot.  A lot.

The opening scene was tight, people.  Bressack created a ton of suspense and set up some really creepy friggin shots as Adam, wearing a very creepy-ass mask, stalked his way through a house, killing the entire family.  “The Tooth Fairy” himself from RED DRAGON would’ve been proud of him!!  But after this great opening full of gore and suspense, Bressack decides to slow things way down and focuses too much on Adam and his stoner buddies.  It’s a shame too because I know Bressack has a very squishy, gory film inside himself waiting to be unleashed.  We saw parts of this in the opening scene, but the rest of the film fails to live up to the opening.

There’s another scene a little past the half way mark where Adam, again in his creepy mask, slaughters the girl he was gonna ask to the prom and her boyfriend (this comes after a really awkward sex scene).  I’m not sure what happened here, but this scene just didn’t pack the same punch as the opening.  I understand that in the opening scene he was going for more of a stalk-n-slash feel while in the later scene he was going for more of a torture-porn vibe.  It just didn’t work for me.  The f/x weren’t strong enough to effectively pull the scene off (the level of the f/x work, though, was perfect for the opening scene).

Filmmaker James Cullen Bressack

Am I surprised that a 19 year old made an entertaining albeit uneven first full-length feature film (he’s also made 6 short films)?  No.  The dialogue when Adam was with his stoner buddies may be considered authentic … maybe too authentic.  But it got a little tiresome after a while (pointless conversation with lots of cursing).  Do I recommend MY PURE JOY.  Yeah, I do.  There’s a lot of fun to be had, and it’s obvious that Bressack loves the horror genre; he’s not using the genre solely to get his foot in the door (<cough><cough>Spielberg<cough><cough>).  Bressack genuinely loves horror and it shows in every frame and you can feel it in every kill.  The film isn’t 100% successful in what it sets out to do, but my money’s on Bressack continuing to grow and mature as he gets more experience under his belt.  He’s a talented dude, and there’s fun to be had in MY PURE JOY; but there’s also a lot of “eye-rolling” moments.  My recommendation (take it for what it’s worth) is to hit the editing room again and shave 10-15 more minutes off the finished product to tighten it up.  But regardless, MY PURE JOY is fun and Bressack is an indie horror filmmaker to keep your eye on.

My Summary:

Director:  James Cullen Bressack (& writer, producer, editor, etc …)

Plot:  2.5 out of 5 stars

Gore:  6.5 out of 10 skulls (great opening scene but the f/x get weaker later on in the film)

Zombie Mayhem:  0 out of 5 brains

Reviewed by Scott Shoyer

J.T. Petty.  Readers of anythinghorror.com will, no doubt, know who this is.  Petty came on the scene in 2001 with the amazing SOFT FOR DIGGING.  Now I hate using this description, but SOFT FOR DIGGING is an experimental horror film.  The basic story is that an older man, living a hermit’s life in the woods, goes searching for his missing cat when he witnesses the murder of a young girl.  What makes this so amazing is that there’s barely a line of dialogue in the entire 74 minutes film.  SOFT plays out more like a narrative poem, and Petty pulls it off beautifully.

He then made the horribly slow and boring MIMIC: SENTINEL (2003) and I was more than a little depressed.  I was hoping Petty wasn’t a “one hit wonder,” but his entry in the MIMIC franchise sucked out loud.  But Petty came back with guns blazing, with THE BURROWERS (2008) and my faith was restored.  This one takes place in the Old West and is essentially a serious version of TREMORS.  Petty does a great job building suspense and proves, once again, that he’s a talent to be reckoned with.  But between MIMIC: SENTINEL and THE BURROWERS, Petty very quietly made a film called S&MAN (read as “sandman”).  I finally caught this one streaming on Netflix the other night.  My initial response was anger.  I was pissed it took me so long to catch this one.  S&MAN is an incredible film that blurs the lines between fiction/non-fiction and keeps the viewer continuously on their toes.

S&MAN is a documentary (kind of) in which Petty sets out to examine the lines between voyeurism and the horror genre.  Petty tells us, the viewer, that the idea for this documentary began with a story from his childhood about a neighbor who was peeping into people’s windows at night, videotaping what he saw.  He originally set out to do a documentary on this man, but he refused to be interviewed on camera, and since he already “spent a lot of HDNet Films’ money,” he decided to explore the topic of voyeurism and how it, if it does at all, relates to the horror industry.

Petty decides to narrow the scope of his documentary to the more underground horror filmmakers and their films.  We get real interviews with hardcore horror filmmakers Bill Zebub and (my favorite) Fred Vogel (from ToeTag Pictures, maker of the AUGUST UNDERGROUND trilogy).  We get some excellent insight from these filmmakers, especially Vogel, as Petty explores and examines what it is that people find “attractive” in their films.  We also get interviews with real life “underground” actress Debbie D, and a scholar’s insight into the appeal of and the role these kinds of extreme genre films play in society from Carol J. Clover (a professor of film and rhetoric at the University of California).  As a straight up documentary Petty gives is a ton of fascinating  interviews and insight into the minds of the people behind and in front of the camera.

But then Petty does something unique and original.  He blurs the lines between reality and fiction; between documentary and narrative filmmaking.

And it totally works!!

Among all the interviews with real people (Vogel, Bezub, Debbie D …) he inserts interviews with an indie underground filmmaker he met at Chiller Theater (a convention for underground genre films).  At the convention, Petty comes across a series of films called S&MAN (“sandman”) in which the filmmaker, Eric Rost (Erik Marcisak) follows around girls, without them knowing, and then eventually kills them.  Its all very realistic and catches Petty’s eye because it fits perfectly into this documentary about “voyeurism and horror films.”  Little by little he gets to know Rost more and more, and the more he delves into Rost’s films, the more he starts to question “what’s real and what’s fantasy”.

I don’t wanna overstate things here people, but S&MAN is a brilliant fucking film from a truly talented filmmaker.  He never loses the focus of his film and it stays as more of a ‘documentary’ and never completely slides into a fictional narrative.  This was no easy task and really points to the absolute focus of Petty and how strong a filmmaker he truly is.  I don’t wanna give away anymore of this film (trust me, you’re in for a helluva ride), but at the next chance you get, stream this from Netflix.  I’ve had some pretty harsh things to say about Netflix lately (via my Twitter account), but the fact they’re streaming S&MAN helps Netflix atone for (some of) their recent sins.

Filmmaker extraordinaire J.T. Petty

S&MAN, for me, cements J.T. Petty as a brilliant, daring, and extremely talented filmmaker.  You may also find it interesting that Petty’s written a ton of video games as well … ones you’ve probably played:  BATMAN: VENGEANCE (2001), SPLINTER CELL (2002), SPLINTER CELL: PANDORA TOMORROW (2004), SPLINTER CELL: CHAOS THEORY (2005), and BATMAN BEGINS (2005) are among his credits!!  This is a hugely talented man and S&MAN is one you do not wanna miss.  Can ya tell I loved this one?

My Summary:

Director: J.T. Petty (& writer)

Plot:  5 out of 5 stars

Gore:  7 out of 10 skulls (mainly from clips of other films)

Zombie Mayhem:  0 out of 5 brains

Reviewed by Scott Shoyer

Here’s the latest zombie mash up, set in the Old West and complete with bounty hunters, horribly stereo-typed Indians that will make you feel guilty for watching, and of course, zombies.  THE DEAD AND THE DAMNED, also titled COWBOYS AND ZOMBIES in the UK, tries hard (really hard), but we all know that good intentions pave the road to that really hot place, don’t we?!!??

The film opens with a long gun fight that overstays it’s welcome by about 4-5 minutes as our anti-hero/bounty hunter Mortimer (David A. Lockhart) is rounding up some cowpokes wanted by the law (obviously they were wanted dead or alive).  We soon find out that the cold-hearted Mortimer is trying to make a lot of money so he can take care of the woman he loves back in the big city of San Francisco.  Yup; our lead character is a killer with a heart of gold.  He ends up on the trail of Brother Wolf (Rick Mora), an Apache Indian accused of raping and killing a white girl (who was also supposedly a virgin).  He goes after Brother Wolf because he has the highest bounty on his head.  So Mortimer (sorry, but I love typing the name ‘Mortimer’) does what any anti-hero would do … he buys a cute blonde, Rhiannon (Camille Montgomery), from the local scumbag whore-monger, ties her up to a stake in the wilderness, and uses her as bait to draw Brother Wolf out of hiding.  Go ahead and read that last sentence again … I’ll wait.

Our heroes.

You’re back?  Okay.  Meanwhile a couple of idiotic prospectors digging for gold in the hills come across a meteorite that casts a bright green glow (“I bet it’s emeralds”) and brings it to town.  After they crack it open it releases a bunch of green spores that all the towns people breath in, thereby turning them into zombies … zombies with green blood.  The two seemingly separate story lines of course converge as the zombie’s attack and it’s up to Mortimer, Brother Wolf, and Rhiannon to save the day.

And here we are … again.  We have a pretty familiar set-up with lots of stock characters doing a lot of standard things.  What should’ve been a fun, fast-paced flick full of gore and zombie violence turns out to be a rather slow-paced flick with not enough zombie violence and not nearly enough gore.  Most of the gore is CGI (I hate CGI blood) and the zombie make up is very standard and very “meh.”  Writer-director Rene Perez decided, for some reason, to focus more on developing a story that anyone reading this review could’ve written.  The set up is just too damn slow considering we all know where it’s going with the sub-plots.  If you can’t foresee Mortimer and Brother Wolf teaming up and becoming buddies, and Rhiannon becoming an ass-kicker, well then you just aren’t trying!!

The cover of the UK DVD boasts, “Great effects, outlandish zombies, and a boat load of gore.”  Maybe the UK has a different edit of THE DEAD AND THE DAMNED, and if they do, good for them.  The U.S version is pretty underwhelming, slow-paced, and has some gore, but is nowhere near a “boat load of gore.”

THE DEAD AND THE DAMNED might be an okay film to check out if it ever has a cable run.  What the hell; you’re already paying for HBO or Showtime or whichever station; ya might as well watch it.  But I definitely wouldn’t go out and buy this one.  The U.S DVD cover looks pretty tight with a couple zombie cowboys holding guns and riding zombie horses.  And when you read the back of the DVD case it promises “Undead flesh-eating gunfighters roam the wild West.”  But guess what?  There’s no zombie cowboys, there’s certainly no zombie cowboys holding guns, and there definitely aren’t any zombie horses in this one.  Skip it.

My Summary:

Director:  Rene Perez (& writer)

Plot:  1.5 out of 5 stars

Gore:  6 out of 10 skulls

Zombie Mayhem:  2 out of 5 brains

Reviewed by Scott Shoyer

Here’s a quirky little film I read about late last year and came on the scene under the radar.  LITTLE DEATHS is an anthology film, but not like you’re thinking.  We get three short films from three writer-directors, but they aren’t connected by a common “wrap-around” story.  They’re connected only in theme alone.  What’s the theme?  I’m glad you asked.  These three stories, we’re promised, are “unified by the twin themes of sex and death.”  Of the three short films, one hits it outta the ball park, one hits an in-field double, and one strikes out.

The first story, “House and Home,” is written and directed by Sean Hogan (who wrote the screenplay SUMMER’S MOON; see my review here).  The story focuses on a rich and religious couple Richard and Victoria (Luke de Lacey and Siubhan Harrison respectively) who appear as do-gooders but actually have very different plans in store for their charity cases.  They pick up young and sexy homeless girls (because we all know there’s plenty of them laying around), bring them back to their flat and ply them with drugged wine.  But their latest victim Sorrow (Holly Lucas) isn’t as innocent as she at first seems.

“House and Home” is the in-field double of the batch.  The acting is pretty good all around and it moves along at a brisk pace.  The twist near the end won’t be all that surprising to horror fans, but it works … kind of.  The biggest problem I had with this one was the writing.  It’s not bad, but Hogan really missed a great opportunity to elevate this short above the usual like-minded themes films.  There was a definite metaphor that was completely ignored here.  There was a sharp divide here between the rich, kinky, religious do-gooders (who were in the upper echelons of society) and the filthy, “no good” homeless “dregs of society” (who the rich couple looked down on).  There’s a metaphor here for the way the various classes treat each other that was completely ignored.  But what this lacked in story it made up for with pretty decent gore.

The second entry, “Mutant Tool,” has the best title by far.  Written and directed by Andrew Parkinson (who wrote-directed I, ZOMBIE and DEAD CREATURES), “Mutant Tool” takes the kitchen sink approach to storytelling.  We get a mysterious subject who is bound up in a basement being force fed a diet of liquid human kidney’s which somehow gives him super sperm which a crazy doctor, Dr. Reece (Brendan Gregory), is harvesting to make some kind of pill to sell on the black market that not even he knows what it does.  Oh yeah; did I mention that this procedure was based on Nazi experiments?  Yeah, this one is all over the place.

We then follow around Jen (Jodie Jameson), an ex-junkie and whore, who’s trying to stay clean and find a normal job.  She’s living with her boy friend/ex-pimp Frank (Daniel Brocklebank) who is using her to still sell drugs.  Jen goes to Dr. Reece and tells him that her urges to go back on drugs is still really strong.  So he gives her the pills made out of the super sperm (hey why not?  It might be good for curbing urges).  The pills don’t work, they make Jen really horny so she goes back to whoring (as well as doing coke), and then there’s a really confusing and ridiculous twist.

Real simple; “Mutant Tool” just doesn’t work.  The story is a muddled and confusing mess and the story really doesn’t fit the theme of LITTLE DEATHS.  Sure there’s a sex scene of Jen as she’s whoring, but it feels very tagged on, like Parkinson added it in at the last minute to try and get some sex into the story and make it eligible for LITTLE DEATHS.  “Mutant Tool” is definitely the weakest story of the three.

So I wasn’t feeling too positive going into the last story, “Bitch.”  I’m glad I stuck in there.  Written and directed by Simon Rumley, who wrote and directed the pretty impressive THE LIVING AND THE DEAD.  “Bitch” begins with a peak into the (a-hem) domestic bliss of couple Pete (Tom Sawyer) and Claire.(Kate Braithwaite).  Their relationship is, you could say, strained and is one based on power and domination.  You’d think the title was referring to Claire, but then in a shocking scene we see that Pete is living in a big doghouse in the living room and eats out of a dog dish and even has a doggie mask for those “special” times they have together.

As the story unfolds Pete finally grows to have enough of Claire’s bullshit and he devises a plan to take back the power in their relationship … and boy does he!!  That’s all I’m gonna say about this one.  “BItch,” you’ll realize soon after it begins, is the most mature of the three stories in both writing and directing.  Rumley really tells a compelling story that has you guessing and trying to figure out what Pete is up too.  Once we see his plan to regain the dominant role in the relationship, you’ll be speechless and dumbfounded.  It’s a fantastic ending that will shock the shit outta you!!  “Bitch” makes watching LITTLE DEATHS completely worthwhile.

LITTLE DEATHS is overall enjoyable.  The first story will entertain you even if it is a little predictable.  Just skip the second story all together (trust me), and then be prepared to be blown away by the third entry.  LITTLE DEATHS is a fun anthology film marked by a weak second act but more than makes up for it in the final story.  Check it out.

My Summary:

Directors:  Sean Hogan, Andrew Parkinson, & Simon Rumley (each also wrote their own films)

Plot:  3 out of 5 stars for #1; 1 out of 5 for #2; 4 out of 5 for #3

Gore:  7 out of 10 skulls for #1; 4.5 out of 10 for #2; 0 out of 10 for #3

Zombie Mayhem:  0 out of 5 brains for all three stories

Reviewed by Scott Shoyer

I was excited when I found out YELLOWBRICKROAD (yes, it’s spelled as one word here) was playing at my local AMC theater.  Sure the theater’s not that convenient to my house (about a 30 minute drive), but I heard great things about this one and wanted to support AMC’s new program of screening indie genre films.  Damn I really wanted to like this one!!  It has a great premise, but in the end it just couldn’t deliver the goods.  What happened here?

The story has a great set up.  This is what we’re told at the beginning of the film (from words on the screen):

One morning in 1940, the entire population of Friar, NH, walked north up an unmarked trail into the wilderness.

Some were later found frozen to death. Others were mysteriously slaughtered. Most, however, were never found.

Interesting set up, right?  I couldn’t help but be reminded of the interesting set up to the very disappointing VANISHING ON 7TH STREET (unfortunately the comparison doesn’t end here).

So now a group of twenty-somethings gather in the town to conduct their own investigation as to what happened back on that day in 1940 and try to get to the bottom of why over 300 people just up and walked (willingly it seems) to their own deaths.  We get a standard cast of characters and no one in particular stands out.  In fact I had trouble keeping all the various cast members straight.  They really all just kinda blended together.  The acting was decent from everyone involved, but there just weren’t any performances that really stood out.

As the group treks deeper into the unmarked wilderness, they one day hear faint music coming from the distance.  They’re able to narrow down that its coming from in front of them so they decide to move forward to investigate further.  As they get closer to the music they slowly start acting more and more oddly.  Various personalities start clashing and they all seem easily agitated.  Then out of nowhere one of the guys snaps, chases one of the females, and tears her apart.  Whoa whoa whoa; what just happened?  The dude dismembered the chick at mid-thigh using … what?  He didn’t so much as have a knife on him.  How the fuck did he cut through that thick-ass femur bone?  This is the point where the film goes steadily down hill and you realize you aren’t gonna get any kind of satisfying explanation.

We’re to assume that the music is slowly driving them all mad, not unlike how the motel in THE SHINING drove good old Jack crazy.  But remember my comparison above to VANISHING ON 7TH STREET?  Unfortunately this one leaves you rather angry as well.  Maybe writing and executing a script about mass amounts of people just disappearing is hard to pull off?  Maybe we just got some lazy writing?  I don’t know, I’m just saying.  The one thing this film has going for it is a kick ass, creepy atmosphere.  Unfortunately nothing interesting was done with it.  Then throw in a terrible soundtrack where I could barely hear the characters talking to each other, and it’s just one more frustrating element.  The strange music is never explained; the pulsating lights in the sky are never explained; and the ending is so maddeningly archaic that I was really pissed off.  Seriously; the ending of YELLOWBRICKROAD made the ending of LOST seem lucid.

YELLOWBRICKROAD isn’t a horrible movie, but there’s definitely not enough in this one to recommend it.  A solid premise knee-capped by terrible execution and a muddled script make this one very forgettable.  People might tell you, “This is a slow burn,” but do’t listen to ‘em.  This is one to pass on.

My Summary:

Directors:  Jesse Holland & Andy Mitton (& writers)

Plot:  2 out of 5 stars

Gore:  0 out of 10 skulls

Zombie Mayhem:  0 out of 5 brains

Reviewed by Scott Shoyer

Here’s a rare miss from Vicious Circle Films!!  STRIGOI: THE UNDEAD has a really good synopsis, but the actual film is nothing like you want it to be.  This film basically ‘walks the walk’ but can’t ‘talk the talk.’

There’s a lot of positive and enjoyable things going on in STRIGOI.  The dialogue is refreshingly original and feels “real,” the acting is strong, and the cinematography is beautiful at times.  But still … Here’s the basic story:  Vlad (Catalin Paraschiv) was in a medical school in Italy but was forced to return home.  He essentially fell flat on his face in Italy and moves back to Romania.  Right before he moves back, we witness a rather bizarre death.  Constatin (Constantin Barbulescu) was killed by other villagers and after Vlad returns home he finds himself drawn to the murder, trying to figure out what really happened.  His “investigation” brings him to the Tirescus, a couple who owns a lot of land in the area (they’re also ex-Communists).  Then before you can ask, “Is anything gonna happen,” you’ll find that you already lost interest in this one.

The main problem is that STRIGOI plays more like a drama/dark comedy, and in this genre it’s pretty good and works.  But I was expecting a horror film with blood-suckers, not scene-suckers, in it.  STRIGOI has been around since 2009 until Vicious Circle Films picked it up.  I’m guessing that Vicious Circle Films added the extra “The Undead” moniker to it to try and market it more as a horror film.  Even the “horror elements” in STRIGOI aren’t really that horrifying.  Vlad slowly realizes that the Tirescus may be vampires, but that’s about it.  If you’re looking for a solid drama with good acting and some beautiful scenery, then you’ll enjoy STRIGOI.  But if you’re looking for a good vampire/horror flick, you’re gonna be bored and very disappointed.  Trust me, I was.

My Summary:

Director:  Faye Jackson

Plot:  2 out of 5 stars

Gore:  0 out of 10 skulls

Zombie Mayhem:  0 out of 5 brains

Reviewed by Scott Shoyer

Check out the two movie posters.  I’m assuming that the one on the left is the original poster and the one on the right was made to make it look more like a horror film.  Don’t be fooled; there’s nothing coming out of the ground in this one!!