About Me

My name is Lisa and I weirdly like and enjoy watching horror movies. It started when I was a little kid when my dad showed some of the classic monster movies from the 1930’s and then watching scary movies during sleepovers and trying not to pee the bed out of fright. (it happened twice.) Now, every so often my sister and I will Skype one another and watch horror movie together. My obsession with the horror genre died down a little bit until I was in college and needed a topic for my senior thesis. If you haven’t figured it out yet, I chose to write and research my thesis on horror movies, more specifically, 1970’s horror movies. That’s when I found that doing research about the history of the time of these movies made the movies better; my obsession is back. I’m currently in my last semester of school and since I’ve been waiting for fall and October weather to come for months, I felt that I would share my love for history and horror movies by writing a blog. I wanted to challenge myself to research and watch 31 horror movies in 31 days to celebrate my favorite holiday, Halloween. Won’t you join me?

October 18, 2017: Misery (1990)

Two Stephen King novels in a row?! What madness! I do like film adaptations of Mr. Kong’s novels as they are more psychological thrillers than the traditional horror film. And there are so many good ones to chose from! I couldn’t just do one Stephen King movie. Last year, I did both Carrie and The Shining so it seems fitting that I do two this year. Misery is a roller coaster to watch and is up there on the list of classic movies. 

Rob Reiner, the director of this film, is known for comedies like The Princess Bride and This is Spinal Tap. Fun Fact: he plays Michael Stivic in All in the Family (yes, THAT Michael) . Anyways, when approached by Andrew Scheinman about making Misery, he read the novel and really identified with the theme of someone needing a new challenge and who needs to push oneself and grow. Stephen King was hesitant in letting Reiner have the rights to Misery as he felt other directors have not portrayed his novels well in the past. However, King liked what Reiner did for his novel, Stand By Me, and allowed him the rights to Misery. When Reiner invited William Goldman to write the screenplay, he wanted to leave the blood and gore out. He wanted to focus on the chess game between Paul Sheldon and Annie Wilkes. There are bloody scenes but the main gory scene of Annie cutting off one of Sheldon’s feet was changed to breaking his ankle instead. Another Fun Fact: Kathy Bates wasn’t well known at this time so this was one of her first films. She won both an Oscar and an Emmy for her performance as Annie Wilkes.

Kathy Freaking Bates. This is one of the examples I like to use in how horror movies can still be terrifying without the blood and gore. Again, I know that there are bloody scenes in this movie. When compared to movies are coming out today, there’s not nearly as much blood as there could be and you distill a terrifying classic. Kathy Bates really does know how to play a real creepy character. You are constantly on the edge of your seat every time James Caan tries to escape while she is gone and then when she pulls up to the house, your heart beats even faster because you think he’s going to get caught this time. You’re constantly trying to figure out if he’s ever going to get out of there. There’s also a little comic relief between the sheriff and his deputy, who also happens to be his wife, that I happen to enjoy. If you’re really not into the blood and gore that most horror movies have, this is the movie for you. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow when I review the 1940 classic, The Picture of Dorian Gray. Until then, stay spooky, my friends.

October 17, 2017: Gerald’s Game (2017)

I couldn’t do a horror blog without including the master of horror literature, Stephen King. Many of his books have become movies because of the intensity and the insanity that’s within them. The very first Stephen King novel to be adapted to film was Carrie in 1976. It happens to be the first Stephen King movie I watched as a kid and I still get nightmares from watching it. He has this ability of taking something normal, for instance a car, and make it truly terrifying to where you start thinking about your own car. Gerald’s Game is no different. I knew I had to watch this film after seeing the video of people reacting to a particular scene and some of those people were on the verge of puking. So naturally, I felt the need to watch it.

When new movies come out, there’s not a whole lot of information about the production behind the film. What I can tell you is that if you do watch it and you happen to also be a big fan of Stephen King, there is a crap ton of Easter eggs around the entire movie, especially in connection to with his 1992 novel, Dolores Claiborne. If you do watch it and find the Easter eggs, leave it in the comment section below. I’m just curious if you’ll see them or not.

I love a good Stephen King adaptation. I should probably read his books. The only books I’ve read was Thinner and that was under his pen name, Richard Bachman. I think the director did a good job on showing the psychological torment the main character is and has gone through. I won’t give any spoilers here but some messed up stuff happens and it is heart wrenching to watch. The scene I spoke of earlier, featured in the video of audience reactions, was far worse than what I could’ve imagined. The lengths someone will go to break free. It’s kind of symbolic, given the events she has and had gone through. At the end of the movie, she not only freed herself physically, but emotionally and mentally. You can’t go wrong with a strong female lead like Carla Gugino. If you don’t get squeamish easily and want to go salvation story, this is the movie to see.

Stay tuned for tomorrow when I review another Stephen King classic, Misery. Until then, stay spooky, my friends. 

October 16, 2017: The Blackwell Ghost (2017)

Since the release of the 1999 horror film, The Blair Witch Project, the sub-genre of found footage has evolved. It’s no longer shaking cameras and extremely close up to the cameraman face. Filmmakers are putting a lot work into making their film look real. Back in 1969, George A. Romero chose to make his film, Night of the Living Dead, in black and white because even though there was color television by that time, the news was broadcasted in black and white. By filming in black and white helped create a sense of realism and people were terrified. No matter how scary the movie is, people can remind themselves that it all fake so it’s not as scary. However, when the movie is so realistic that people start to question if it’s real or not, that’s when the film is truly terrifying.

It is usually at this point in the blog post where I talk about the behind-the-scenes of the movie. The Blackwell Ghost is one of the most mysterious films I have seen in a long time. There is no information about the film or the director himself. Amazon is advertising this film as an documentary. There is a lot of debate surrounding this film on whether not it is actually a documentary or a really well thought out found footage film. The director and his wife are the main subjects of the film The director had it in his head that instead of the shooting zombie films, he would shoot a documentary on ghosts. The first YouTube video he found he contacted the guy and thought he was going to get an interview. When this person stopped returning his phone calls, the director gave up on the documentary for three years. Another video resurfaces from a homeowner claiming that his house is haunted. Wanting to start up his documentary again, the director flies himself and his wife to this house and stay for three nights. Chaos ensues from the beginning of night one. 

Now, I know what you’re thinking. Do I really think that this is a documentary? I am not afraid to admit that I believe in ghosts and spirits and things that we cannot see. However, I do think this is a very well-planned found footage film. The main reason that I think that it is a found footage type film is that this is the same pattern that the most famous found footage film franchise, Paranormal Activity, did in the beginning. There were no end credits. Both the Blackwell Ghost and the Paranormal Activity movies wanted to give the illusion that what we had just seen really happened. What the Blackwell ghost did better than the paranormal activity movies was to draw out assistance. The director wasn’t necessarily going for jump scares but to literally make the audience tense up and sit on the edge of their seats waiting to see what will happen. People can handle jump scares; they can’t handle the eeriness of the basement door being open when we just saw the director close it. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow when I review another brand new horror movie, Gerald’s Game. Until then, stay spooky, my friends!

October 14, 2017: Curse of Bigfoot (1976)

Is Bigfoot real? There are several different shows about Bigfoot experts trying to find this elusive creature in the Appalachians mountains or the Sierra Nevadas. Some people claim to have found evidence of its existence and even some have claim to see it. This 1976 monster flick, Curse of Bigfoot, is telling of one professor’s experience with this creature and his efforts to convince the students that Bigfoot is real.

There’s not much information on this film. What I do know is that this is a TV film and it is an extended version of a 1963 unreleased film, Teenagers Battle the Thing. The original film didn’t even mention the word Bigfoot; that part was added in. How this film was chosen to be included in the 100 Greatest Terror Classics movie collection that I own, we may never known. This film was like those re-enactment scenes you see on medical shows, like Untold Stories of the E.R. or 100 Ways to Die, mixed with classic 70’s commercials. It was utterly hokey and boring. Bigfoot reminded me of a deformed Leatherface mask on an ape. This was the weirdest movie I’ve seen in a long time. It was like watching a snuff film trying to be a 1950’s creature feature. It was just….odd.

Come back tomorrow for my review of the 1990 classic Stephen King novel adaptation of It. Until then, stay spooky, my friends!

October 13, 2017: Friday the 13th (1980)

When an opportunity like this arises, you have to commemorate it appropriately. So when I saw that October 13th was a Friday, I knew I had to watch and review the 1980’s teen slasher, Friday the 13th. Director and Producer, Sean Cunningham, wanted to cash in on the Halloween franchise money and created his own villain, Jason Voorhees. Friday the 13th would help establish the genre, teen slasher flicks, and many of the iconic tropes. Plus, it features a young Kevin Bacon so you know it will be good. 

The music for this film was very intentional. Harry Manfredini decided to only have music playing when the killer was present. If you pay attention to the music, you will notice that there is never any music playing in the non-killing scenes. Manfredini used the lack of music to create bigger scares. Manfredini also was inspired by John Williams’ score of the iconic 1975 film, Jaws. He liked the idea of the music representing the killer without the audience actually seeing the killer. The shark in Jaws had the iconic menacing tones and so does Jason. Fun Fact: It is not “Ch-Ch-Ch-Ah-Ah-Ah”. It is written as “Ki-Ki-Ki-Ma-Ma-Ma” Manfredini wrote that after the final reel when Jason’s Mom is saying “Kill her, mommy.”

This is a classic 80’s horror flick. A psychotic killer is out and about killing horny teenagers. What’s not to love about this? This film was in the beginning of the teen slasher flick and it just rings with nostalgia. This movie is always connected to the iconic Jason Voorhees mask which doesn’t make an appearance until Part 3 comes out in 1982. Part 2 shows grown Jason with a bag over his head, along with red hair and a beard. In the first film, Jason is seen as the victim, not the killer and there’s a reverse “Psycho” happening. What I mean by that is that it is Jason’s mother who has Jason as a split personality whereas in the original Hitchcock film, “Psycho”, it was the son who had the spilt personality of his mother. This movie pays homage to many classic films like Psycho, Jaws and especially Halloween. Throughout scenes of this film, we are seeing the teenagers from the killer’s point of view, just like Halloween. Cunningham took the best qualities of these films and made Friday the 13th. It is a nice tribute. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow when I review the 1978 monster film, Curse of Bigfoot. Until then, stay spooky, my friends!

October 12, 2017: The Birds (1963)

You can’t write a horror movie blog without talking about Alfred Hitchcock, the Master of Suspense. Suspense and horror go hand in hand. You can have suspense without horror but not vice versa.  Suspense is an integral part of a good horror movie. It’s what sends you to the edge of your seat, makes your heart race, bite your nails, trying to figure out what’s behind the door. Hitchcock knew how to grab people’s attention with slight camera tricks. This is no different with his 1963 classic, The Birds, starring Tippi Hedren.

Picture it: August 18, 1961 in Capitola, CA. A little town in the Bay Area wakes up like it is any other day only to hear and see a scene that would shock anyone. Birds were slamming onto people’s rooftops and dead birds covered the streets. The news reports that it was due to domoic poisioning (shellfish poisioning). This incident caught the eye of Hitchcock, who requested the newspaper article about this phenomenon. Combine this real life story with the novella by Daphne du Maurier called The Birds and you have a classic horror film! This film was shot in Bodega Bay, CA and some of the iconic buildings like the schoolhouse are still standing.

This film is the reason why I have an irrational fear of birds and I think for a good reason! I first saw this film while visiting my grandma in Bodega Bay and my parents thought it was a good idea to watch the film while in the town it was shot in. Ever since then, I avoid all birds of all sizes. I definitely think the black and white version of this film is scarier than the color version when it came to the birds attacking the townspeople. However, blood and gore are always scarier in color. It’s in the moments of silence and stillness when Hitchcock does his suspenseful magic and it still gets to me to this day. There’s a reason he has been called the Master of Suspense and this film really showcases this mastery. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow where I review the 1980 teen slasher classic, Friday the 13th (it just seemed fitting, you know?)Until then, stay spooky, my friends.  

October 11, 2017: Crimson Peak (2015)

I must admit that I haven’t seen a Guillermo Del Toro film before this gothic romance, Crimson Peak. I remember seeing trailers and clips of his other horror film, Pan’s Labyrinth and thinking that it was stunningly horrific, just from the trailers! He has had his fingers as a producer  in other films I have seen like Puss in Boots and Kung Fu Panda 2 but nothing that del Toro has directed. Crimson Peak caught my eye because, let’s face it, I’m a sucker for a good gothic romance story and this one was right up my alley. 

Guillermo del Toro wanted this film to be a throwback. He noticed that there was lots of B rated and found footage films coming out during this time, a few years ago, and wanted to pay homage to the classic haunted house type of film. Not only did he want to create a throwback piece but he also wanted to add a bit of modern flair to it as well. This film received mostly positive reviews due to the stunning cinematography and the ode to the gothic genre.

This was a great film to watch right after Suspiria because it is another visually stunning film. Both films used stark contrast of colors to convey a certain feeling. For Suspiria, it was trying to convey fear by emphasizing the color red whereas Crimson Peak was trying to convey the feeling of dread by emphasizing the color black. The storyline is also what grabbed my attention. The classic storyline of a mysterious man comes in town and marries the prettiest and smartest girl in town, who happens to be rich. It’s the old “marry and murder” scheme and add ghosts to that storyline and it’s a recipe for a good haunted house tale. If you couldn’t tell, I thoroughly enjoyed this film but I do have a soft spot for good gothic romances.

Stay tuned for tomorrow when I review the 1961 classic, The Pit and the Pendulum. Weekly Video review is coming soon so keep your eyes open for that! Until then, stay spooky, my friends.

October 10, 2017: Suspiria (1977)

Anyone who knows me knows that I love 1970’s horror movies. I did my whole senior thesis on that topic. What I love about 70’s is that it really was an age of uncertainty. Early in the decade, there was a gas shortage and the Vietnam War was still happening. Then later in the decade, there was the Watergate scandal and the decision of Roe v Wade. Things were changing and that scared people. This culture of uncertainty allowed directors, specifically horror film directors, license to experiment. Dario Argento’s Suspiria captures that uncertain feeling of the decade.

This film received critical acclaim for his vibrant colors, its stylistic and visual flair, it’s soundtrack, done by Italian progressive rock band, Goblin. The design and cinematography really emphasized the primary colors, same techniques used in The Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind, to create a nightmarish environment, unlike the two previously mentioned films. This is actually the first of a trilogy; the second film is Inferno (1980) and the last is The Mother of Tears (2007). 

This film is what I call an art film. It is something I can see being a featured film in a Film in Literature class, which was a class I took in college. It is visually stunning and beautifully graphic. The stark contrast between the vivid reds with the blackest black is extremely haunting. The death scenes were pretty graphic, which is the sign of the times. I would say that this is a haunting tale and a must see. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow when I review the 2015 Guillermo Del Toro film, Crimson Peak. Until then, stay spooky, my friends. 

October 9, 2017: Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992)

You can’t really go wrong with a Francis Ford Coppola film. His directing style really creates a cinematic experience that gets you invested in the characters. I mean, who doesn’t love The Godfather, one of Coppola’s first films. Coppola is a fan of getting into the back stories and family history of his characters so the audience can fully understand the trials and tribulations they are going through. I honestly did not know Coppola filmed the 1992 version of Bram Stoker’s Dracula but now it kind of makes sense.

It was actually Winona Ryder who brought this script to Coppola, hoping to make mends. Ryder caused some issues with Coppola’s last installment of The Godfather trilogy by backing out last minute, causing delays and wasting production time. Coppola spent the most money on the costumes alone as he thought they would be the “jewels” of the film. He took an extreme amount of time to show his designers what he was visioning for this film including making an animated films with his original story board and cut in scene from Jean Cocteau’s Beauty and the Beast. This film received mixed reviews at the time, thought most reviews were good. Many thought that Coppola restored the iconic character to the his original gothic state, instead of a campy character. 

I have mixed feelings about this film. I thought that the gothic theme and the costumes really made the film. It remains us that Dracula is a creature to be feared, which some films choose to down play that feature. The costumes were outlandishly wonderful and a spectacle to see. This movie is a bit sensual. Nothing wrong with sensual; I just wasn’t expecting it. I haven’t read the novel but I’m not sure if any sort of sex was involved and it seems that this film revolves around the idea that vampires are sexual creatures. I felt that some of the sensual scenes were unnecessary to the storyline. Overall, this was a fantastic film, very dark and creepy. And Keanu, you tried and that’s what counts.

Stay tuned for tomorrow when I tackle the 1977 witch film, Suspiria. Keep your eyes peeled because the weekly video review coming! Until then, stay spooky, my friends.

October 8, 2017: House of Wax (1953)

Another Vincent Price movie up to bat today. I have already called him a horror film legend so of course I would watch a couple of films with him in them. Many of us would remember the 2005 version of this movie starring Paris Hilton. I had my reservations going into this movie because of the 2005 film. Nevertheless, I put my bias aside and soaked in the marvel that is this 1953 classic, House of Wax.

This was the very first color 3-D feature from a major American studio and was directed by Andre de Toth. The funny thing about Andre de Toth was that fact that he was blind in one eye. He couldn’t feel the full effect of the 3-D feature but relied on his producers and audience to make sure it was good. This film would also revitalize Vincent Price’s career and he found his archetype, the villain. This would also jump start Carolyn Green’s career and she would go on to do other horror films and even landed the role of Morticia Addams in the 1960’s sitcom, The Addams Family.

I did not know going into this film that it was 3-D. It makes sense now but it shock me when a weapon came flying towards the camera and actually hits the camera in the very first scene when the original museum was being burned down. This film is just creepy scary. Taking real human bodies and encasing them in wax to display them as historical figures in their death scenes can be a bit off putting. Vincent Price is the villain that all other villains look at for inspiration. His cool and carefully picked words send chills down your spine and you can’t if he is being genuine or not. Perhaps that’s why they call him the Prince of Darkness. I’m not sure if they call him that but it does seem awfully fitting. 

Stay tuned on Wednesday for another weekly review video on my YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/schockmein90). Come back tomorrow for my review of the 1992 version of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. Until then, stay spooky, my friends.