Ouija

Ouija is a 2014 horror movie about a group of idiot teenagers who unwittingly summon evil spirits just because they mess with a ouija board. I'm going to be completely transparent. In my opinion, this is probably one of the worst horror movies of the past ten years. A couple of performances worked well enough for me, I suppose. But, for the most part, the acting is just bland at best. As far as scares go, this is a film that solely seems to rely on shitty jump scares. Every now and then, there might be one scare that almost works. Almost. Ok, there is one thing that really sinks this movie into being among the absolute dreck of horror. Let's talk about the film's twist ending. Our idiotic heroes make the assumption that for all of their nightmare to end, they have to set the spirit of a young girl free. The twist is: the little girl was the evil spirit all along. The ghost of the girl's mother was trying to prevent this from happening. Here's the problem. The mother's ghost is the actually doing most of the killing. So, when you really break it down and give it any genuine thought, this is a plot twist that actually creates plot holes. Honestly, just watch the prequel, and avoid this piece of dogshit at all costs. 

2 / 10 

Sleepwalkers

image source

Sleepwalkers is an interesting movie. It is most definitely terrible by most conventions. Yet, it is entertainingly insane. The movie is directed by Mick Garris (who has also directed the miniseries adaptations for The Shining and The Stand). and written by Stephen King. The plot is about two incestuous vampire-like creatures that are trying to suck the life force out of a teenage girl, and they have a severe fear and hatred of cats. Even writing the plot of this movie sounds insane to me. But, I have seen Sleepwalkers and it is perhaps one of the most fun experiences I can think of. The cast is interesting to me. The main antagonist of the movie is played by Alice Krige (the borg queen herself). You also have a small supporting role by Ron Perlman. That's not even mentioning the plethora of random cameos littered throughout the movie. I also kind of think a lot of the actors kind of know the type of movie they are in. Alice Krige and Ron Perlman are perhaps the best examples of this. There are so many times where I feel like these two are just hamming it up on screen. Of course, I should also mention Glen Shaddix as this creepy high school teacher. If you don't know, this is the same guy who played Otho in Beetlejuice, Bob in Demolition Man, and the reverend in Heathers. This movie also has one of my favorite death scenes in a horror movie ever because I find it so gloriously stupid. In fact, gloriously stupid feels like just the right description for this movie as a whole. 

7 / 10

Black Christmas (2019)

image source

Black Christmas is the second remake of the classic film from the 1970s. Without going into spoilers, this film really does go in a very different direction than either the original or the first remake. I almost feel bad. The actors in the film are clearly trying. Imogen Poots in the lead particularly feels like her performance deserves to be attached to a much better film than the one I got. Alright, I have a lot to unpack with this movie. For starters, I kind of appreciate that this movie tried to talk about some pretty serious things. By comparison, the original did something similar. However, the original was far more subtle in its intent. This version prefers to take the approach of beating you over the head with its political views. Most of the characters kind of suck. I don’t necessarily mean that they’re shallow. I would typically expect that out of a slasher movie, and this tries to give some depth. Adding on to that point, the writing is genuinely pretty bad. But, my biggest problem with this film (and the thing that actually tempered my initial excitement) is the film’s PG-13 rating, especially because this film apparently was originally shot to be an R. So, the PG-13 move only suggests money to me. Overall, I don’t think there’s that much more for me to say about Black Christmas 2019 other than to say that I really didn’t like it.  

2 / 10 

The Fanatic

image source

The Fanatic is an experience of a movie. I mean this in both the best and worst ways possible. This movie feels like it has the loosest semblance of a plot. The film is written and directed by Fred Durst (yes, lead singer of Limp Bizkit, Fred Durst). Durst’s screenplay is surface-level at best. Perhaps the most fascinating thing is knowing that this is not Fred Durst’s first directorial effort. Yet, watching this movie, you would never know that. I really think this is a movie that will ultimately be placed on the same level as films such as Birdemic, Troll 2, and The Room. The lead performance by John Travolta may just be the ultimate proof of this. I mean the man breaks one of the biggest rules of acting. He “went full retard.” The film never really gives a distinct protagonist and antagonist. Travolta’s character, Moose (yes, that’s his name) is clearly on the Autism Spectrum. Adding on to that, if this film were anything more than just trashy entertainment, I would probably find this more offensive. If you do, I can’t hold it against you.  You also know that his actions are obviously too far over the line. At the same time, Hunter Dunbar (played by Devon Sawa) is just kind of an asshole from the beginning. The dialogue is laughably bad. John Travolta’s first line in the movie is “I can’t talk long. I gotta poo.” I wish I was making that up. Another wonderful line in this film is: “Moose didn’t just cross the line. He fucking nuked it.” The climax (if I can actually call it that) is difficult to put into words. It’s not even that I’m worried about spoiling it. Keep in mind, this only me scratching the surface of this film. It’s more-so that it’s almost indescribable. The Fanatic is a movie in the loosest sense of the word, and is so laughably bad, it’s honestly worth seeking out. 

0 / 10 

Halloween: Resurrection

image source

There's a scene in this movie where Busta Rhymes yells at Michael Myers. At first glance, you assume that Michael is going to kill him. Instead, he turns around and walks away. I am bringing this scene up right now because it is probably the only part of the movie I genuinely enjoy. Halloween: Resurrection is one of the most popular picks from fans for least favorite Halloween film, and for good reason. This is the first movie in this franchise that I actively hate. Let's start with something I touched on a little bit in my review for H20 - that movie's ending. If this movie didn't exist, I would have no complaints with it. The fact that Resurrection does exist makes the ending to H20 feel cheapened, like it doesn't matter. They bring Jamie Lee Curtis back for this film, and kill her off in the first ten minutes. The problem is, I don't feel like this movie earns her death, at all. On top of that, I feel like Jamie Curtis just didn't want to be in this movie at all. The new characters that we are introduced to after this suck. I would have actually been a little more ok with it if they brought Josh Hartnett and Michelle Williams back, but they don't. We have an all new cast of thinly written dead bodies that I couldn't care less about. The acting is pretty poor all-around. Perhaps the worst example of this is Busta Rhymes. I actually enjoy his music, but this movie seems to want to prove that he CANNOT act. The ending is almost laughably bad. Michael Myers, an icon of horror, is defeated by Busta Rhymes doing kung fu. Oh, that's not a joke either. Overall, Halloween: Resurrection only seems to exist because the franchise, and the Michael Myers character make money. This movie is a lazy piece of shit that's only a thing because of money. There is one other movie in this franchise I hate (we'll get to that later). I think I hate this one more because there just seemed to be this attitude of "eh, let's make a Michael Myers movie just because."

1 / 10    

Prom Night (2008)

image source

I kind of feel like this is a review that has been a long time coming for me. While I don't necessarily consider the original Prom Night among my all-time favorite slashers, I still think it's a good flick that's worth a watch for slasher fans. This version of Prom Night is one of the absolute worst horror movies I have ever seen. This is a movie that actually has a good cast-including Brittany Snow, Jonathan Schaech, Linden Ashby (Johnny Cage from Mortal Kombat), and Idris Elba. The problem with this is the script for this thing is so poor that these actors are wasted. I think the waste of Idris Elba is the wasted actor that makes me the most upset, as he is one of my all-time favorite actors. He is so much better than the material that he has been given, but even he doesn't seem fully invested, almost as though he really doesn't want to be here. But, I know what you're thinking. This is a remake of a cult classic slasher film. So, it has to have some creative kills. NO! This remake has a PG-13 rating. I've seen ways that this can be done right. For example, the Happy Death Day movies are PG-13, but I actually think the filmmakers were actually invested in those films. In the case of the Prom Night remake, I see it more as a cash grab. All the producers wanted was to make a profit, essentially robbing this film of a soul. The cult classics of the 1980s were all R-rated, and for very good reason. The characters in this film are awful. I know that slasher movies don't necessarily have the greatest characters. However, if I told you to name characters from some of the classics of the slasher genre, you easily could. I don't remember the name of a single character in this movie, not that I would really want to. I am somebody who tries to look for positives, and this is one of those movies where it is honestly, really difficult for me to do so. Is this the worst slasher movie I have ever seen? No, but it is a close second. I say this as somebody who has seen and reviewed I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer. But, you should still know that I do still think this may be one my most hated films of all time. The remake of Prom Night is nothing more than a soulless cash grab that has no right or purpose to even remotely exist.

0 / 10 

The Haunting of Sharon Tate

image source

The Haunting of Sharon Tate stars Hilary Duff as the murdered actress. The movie is about the nightmares she had in regards to her untimely death. I can see why this film was released direct to on-demand. From the very first shot, the film just had this cheap look to it. The film’s poor acting certainly didn’t help matters either. To be fair to the actors in this film, most of the blame need placed on writer-director Daniel Farrands. The dialogue in this film is so atrocious that any actors would struggle to make it work or sound natural. “In movie speak…” This is how an actual line in the film starts. It’s honestly so bad, I think I legitimately blocked the rest of it from my memory. The writing in this film is so bad, it makes George Lucas look like Quentin Tarantino by comparison. Think about that. Aside from that, the movie throws in themes of fate and destiny. Because this film is horribly written, it comes off as incredibly forced. Going even further into the sins of the film’s writing, the screenplay feels largely padded. The film is 90 minutes long, and nothing of note really happens until the half-hour mark. of course, when it actually looks like something is going to happen, the film falls back on the lazy, forced, tired dream sequence cliche. I almost wish that I had more to say about this movie simply because I hated it that much. The problem is that when a film that is bad meanders this much doesn’t really leave me with that much to say. The last thing I really think I can say about this piece of shit is that it is the worst movie I have seen so far this year. It is a film with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and I feel bad just for potentially drawing attention to it. 

0 / 10 

Leprechaun: Origins

image source

Four American friends (played by Stephanie Bennett, Andrew Dunbar, Melissa Roxburgh, and Brendan Fletcher) are touring Ireland for the summer. They stop in a village, and end up staying in a cabin in the woods after talking to a local man named Hamish (played by Garry Chalk). It doesn't take too long before they end up being terrorized by the titular leprechaun (played by WWE's Hornswoggle). I went into Leprechaun: Origins with a sense of dread. I haven't really heard anything good about this movie (even from Leprechaun fans). From the moment this thing started, I realized I should have heeded every warning about how awful this film was. It certainly didn't help my case that I had decided to review all of the Leprechaun movies this month. Before really delving into what didn't work for me about this movie, I should start by talking about the things I actually did like (however few there are). This is one of the better acted films in the franchise, even if that really isn't saying much. Brendan Fletcher is clearly the best part of the movie. He performs circles around many of his co-stars just through sheer charisma. I also like the film's concept (which might just make the final product that much more infuriating). The village got greedy and stole the leprechaun's gold, so they now have to sacrifice outsiders to stave off the creature's wrath. This is actually premise with potential. OK, I'm done being nice. One of this film's biggest detriments is a lack of Warwick Davis. The leprechaun is nothing more than a creature. This is a thing that has no real personality or character. The effects on this thing (I don't dare call it a leprechaun). are unimpressive, to put it nicely. The actual creature looks bad. It also sees in a Predator-style gold vision. The film is poorly written and poorly directed. Any character development feels out of nowhere and unjustified. The exposition is clunky at best. While the acting is halfway decent, some of these characters are some of the most thoroughly unlikable characters I have ever seen in one of these movies. The pacing is horrible. It's a slow, plodding slog. Some of the performances work. A couple of kills are kind of cool. Everything else is horrendous. Is Leprechaun: Origins the absolute worst movie I've ever seen? No. However, it is still a piece of shit, and the worst film of the Leprechaun franchise.

2 / 10 

Leprechaun 4: In Space

Add caption

How do I describe Leprechaun 4: In Space? By all accounts, this really is an awful movie. There is very little about the film that works on a legitimate level. The effects in this film are probably the absolute worst in the Leprechaun franchise. The CGI in the film has even been called awful by those who worked on it. The writing in this film is probably the cheesiest writing of the franchise. There is next to nothing in terms of actual character development. The main protagonist of the film is supposedly a scientist. I say supposedly because I don't really buy it for a second. She's the stereotypical hot blonde who is forced to strip down to her underwear by the end of the film. The actress (her name is Jessica Collins) doesn't really show the acting chops necessary to make me believe her performance in absolutely any respect. Yet, I still enjoy this movie. A lot. As usual, Warwick Davis has the time of his life playing the leprechaun. I think director Brian Trenchard-Smith (who also directed Leprechaun 3) and writer Dennis Pratt kind of knew the movie was ridiculous. I mean, the leprechaun is in space. Another example that sells me on this: one of the characters in the movie is an outer space nazi robot doctor. All of those words together should tell you everything you could possibly need to know about what this film is going to give you. This movie also has one of the most ridiculous, stupid, and amazing deaths I may have ever witnessed in a slasher movie. The leprechaun literally kills somebody by exploding out of their genitals. I couldn't make that up if I tried. The movie also features on my personal favorite genre actors, Miguel A. Nunez, Jr. This man's horror credentials speak for themselves (Friday the 13th: A New Beginning and Return of the Living Dead). I almost feel as though Leprechaun 4: In Space plays out more like an old school exploitation B-movie than anything else. This clearly isn't the best movie in the Leprechaun franchise, but it honestly might be the one I have the most fun with. In a series chock full of guilty pleasures, this one may just be the absolute guiltiest. If you've read this review, then by now you'll know whether you're interested in this movie or not. I feel as though I have described this wonderful piece of trash to the best of my ability.

6 / 10 

Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2

image source

I’m just going start this off by saying that I’m not exactly the biggest fan of the Blair Witch franchise to begin with. I think the first one is overrated, and not deserving of the hype that was built around it. I did think the third (and most recent one) was pretty solid, despite it’s flaws. That brings us to Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2, the movie in the franchise I hadn’t seen up until this point. The film follows a tour group after the success of the original Blair Witch Project film. Along the way, something starts messing with their heads. I guess the best place to start would be looking at the film’s direction. It’s not very good, though that may not necessarily be director Joe Berlinger’s fault. The man went on record to say that his original vision for the film was supposed to comment on mass hysteria and deal with a more meta tone. Glimpses of the original idea seem to be there, but far less well thought out. Now, I can’t speak to exactly how true this actually is, but I thought it was worth noting, especially because of just how much the movie jumps around, making this incredibly confusing when you watch the film. It also wouldn’t surprise me if it was true—especially thinking about the final product that we were given, but I’ll speak on that later. At this point, I think it would be  important to discuss the film’s editing, especially as it heavily ties into the film’s direction, and feels like the logical next step. As I said, the film really moves around, and is incredibly confusing. The film jumps around in its timeline a lot. I’m not criticizing the film for being nonlinear (The Usual Suspects, Pulp Fiction, and Memento are some of my favorite movies). It just feels more like the filmmakers didn’t know what should be left to the imagination, and what should be spelled out. Every time the movie tries shifting around in the timeline, it feels jarring. Remember how I said I wanted to touch on the film’s backstory more. Well, it’s the film’s story (and overall writing) that makes me wonder if Berlinger’s side of the story actually has some truth to it. The script makes little to no sense, and feels incredibly hackneyed. This also feels true of the film’s editing. The film tries to throw twists and turns in there, but they never feel earned (mostly because the film just sucks). If there is one thing about this movie I don’t utterly hate, it’s honestly the acting. OK, it’s not exactly going to win any awards, but it isn’t horrible. Unfortunately, the actual characters themselves fucking suck. They have little to no development, and leave absolutely no impact. There were legitimately points where I would forget who they after they disappeared for five minutes. Yeah, think about that. But, this film’s biggest sin is that it isn’t even remotely scary. The whole thing is dull and plodding. I reached a moment where I shook my head because I though I was further into the movie, but I was only 20 minutes in. I honestly don’t even know if the film was trying to be scary ( if it was, it really did a bang up job at it). Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 has built up a reputation over the years as one of the worst horror movies—and sequels of all time. Having seen the film for myself, I can easily see why. There’s little to nothing about Book of Shadows that actually works. It tries throwing everything at the screen (expect the book of shadows) and hardly any of it sticks. 

0 / 10  

Birdemic: Shock and Terror

image source

As of this moment, I feel as though I am presented with a nearly impossible task. I have to try and describe a movie like Birdemic: Shock and Terror. I guess I should start with my own personal history with the movie. I couldn't tell you exactly how I found about the movie's existence, but I have known it was a thing for a while. I have seen bits and pieces of it here and there. But, it wasn't until last night that I finally saw the movie from beginning to end. It was everything I wanted it to be and so much more. Everything about this movie is just kind of wrong. However, I feel as though this is a movie where everything about this movie is just right. Yep, it's that kind of movie. This is one of those films where I don't really know whether there is a lot for me to say, or if there is just a small amount for me to say. The effects in the film are atrocious (there's really no other word to describe them). I don't even know if it's possible to say that the birds look like they are obviously photoshopped into the movie-mostly because I think photoshop effects would probably look like a major improvement. It's quite clear from the very first shot that director James Nguyen probably had no idea what he was doing. But, he had a vision, and he got this movie made. He seemed to be inspired by The Birds (even to the point where a TV showing a movie with Tippi Hedren in it-a film called Julie and Jack that Nguyen himself had apparently directed. I should also note that I had no idea that the man had actually directed anything before Birdemic, mostly because this film comes off as incredibly amateur. The acting is horrendous-and that's probably putting it nicely. Most of the time, they feel like they are just people shoved in front of the camera-and they have no idea what they're doing or why. It doesn't help that the film's writing is incredibly awkward and clunky, which really doesn't help with the film's performances at all. The characters never really act like legitimate human beings. If you do watch this film, watch it how I watched it. Get a group of friends together and make fun of it Mystery Science Theater style. This is another case of a movie that I simply just won't give a rating to. It's awful for all the same reasons that it's amazing. Just know that Birdemic comes highly recommended to fans of so-bad-they're-good movies from a fan of so-bad-they're-good movies.      

North

image source

North is one of those movies that I feel almost at a loss to review. Released in 1994, the film follows a young boy named North (played by Elijah Wood) who divorces his parents and travels the world searching for new ones. This movie is a lot of things. It's bizarre, surreal, and stupid. The one thing I can definitely say it isn't is funny. You know what, saying this movie is unfunny might be too nice. Let me be more blunt. North is a barren wasteland of comedy. If you think I'm being too harsh on this movie, then know this: it is unbelievably easy to make me laugh. So, naturally I will be harder on this movie than most others. It probably doesn't help that North couldn't even manage to get a smirk out of me. To give an example of what this movie's sense of humor is like, there's a scene of dialogue following North's decision to divorce his parents. A random parent says "They won't take this lying down." The film then smash cuts to North's parents (played by Jason Alexander and Julia Louise-Dreyfuss) fainting. Ha. Ha. Ha. I know that this movie is from the mid 90s, but I still find it a little problematic that they cast Kathy Bates as a Native American (and spray paint her tan to do so). I would actually have a lot less of an issue with just keeping Kathy Bates white. I'll give Elijah Wood some credit. He is the only actor who seems like he's trying to give a decent performance. Everyone else is clearly phoning it in. The most obvious example of proving to have an "I don't give a shit" performance is Bruce Willis. Alright, I've talked about the movie's awful humor and half-assed acting. At this point, I need to talk about what might one of the worst parts of this movie, the ending. I could say spoilers, but this movie is 25 years old, and isn't worth seeking out. At all. They went for the "it was all a dream plot twist." The reason this doesn't work isn't because it's one of the most tired cliches ever (even if that really doesn't help). It doesn't work because it actually makes most of the movie pointless. Plot developments feel like they just kind of happen as the movie goes on. They don't come off as happening organically. It feels more like they come up as the script is being written instead. I think this might actually be one of the worst movies I've ever seen. North is one of those movies that I actually hate more the more I think about it. 

1 / 10 

Ax 'Em

This movie is something special. Before I get into this film, I have to give my background with it. I didn't actually know it existed until a couple of months ago. I got this book for Christmas called The Bad Movie Bible. I stumbled upon this and realized I had to seek the film out in whatever way I possibly could. The movie opens with a hilariously awful opening text.

image source

I don't think words can actually describe the poor grammar on display here. As soon as I read this, I burst out laughing. To be somewhat fair, I don't necessarily want to be overly hard this because it was an independent film made by a group of college kids. Or, that's how it comes across at the very least. Every single transition used in this movie is a fade to black. I wish I was making that up, but I'm not. The opening credits are baffling. They are done over a hip hop dance sequence, and it was obvious that they were put together using a computer software.

image source

Yeah. Normally, the next step would be to meet the cardboard cutouts passing themselves off as characters. I don't think I'm going to do that because I still didn't know their names by the time we got to 20 minutes. I mean, these barely count as "characters," even by slasher movie standards. The music is hard to explain. Most of the time, it drowns out the dialogue. Also, most of the time, it feels thoroughly out of place. Plus (and I think this goes without saying) the acting is atrocious. And yes, I know that slasher movies aren't known for being stellar, Oscar-worthy material. But, this is bad by slasher movie standards.

image source

This particular image is the moment that leads in to the film's first kill (which is both badly acted and done off-screen). The rest of the deaths are done incredibly quickly, and with obviously fake blood poured on the actors. The story is surprisingly hard to follow, mostly because you never actually know who the characters are. The initial goal for this review was to break the movie down by its entire plot. I had to abandon this idea by the time I got to about 25 minutes, mostly because I'm not exactly convinced there actually was a plot.

I'd also like to admit here and now that this movie was only 70 minutes long. It was about 45 minutes in before I learned that the first victim of the movie was the grandfather of one of the college kids staying out in the woods. If that doesn't show how nothing the characters are, I don't know what does.  

Am I going to give this movie a rating? No. Does it really matter if this movie has a numbered rating attached to it? I'm not convinced that it does. I can tell you two things in the end. One: this movie is a complete and utter failure as a horror movie. Two: this is one of the most unintentionally funny movies I have ever seen.