monsters

The Head Hunter

head hunter

In Medieval times, monsters roam free. After losing his daughter, a warrior makes it his life’s mission to kill as many monsters as he can. He has killed many monsters, but one still manages to elude him. His quest will not end until he collects the head of the monster who murdered his daughter.

The Head Hunter is a unique film. Director Jordan Downey (ThanksKilling) co-wrote the film with cinematographer Kevin Stewart (ThanksKilling). The collaboration between Downey and Stewart leads to some interesting filmmaking choices. The most unique aspect is the storytelling choices the duo make. The film starts with a bit of exposition through voiceover, revealing the warrior’s daughter was killed by a monster. After that there is virtually no dialogue moving the plot forward. Instead, the filmmakers rely on visual queues to tell the story.

As the film progresses it becomes clear that the warrior has become a literal head hunter. We know this as the audience because we see the warrior sharpen a stake for his wall, ride off ready for battle, and return with a monster head to adorn his wall. It also seems clear that a nearby kingdom is giving him rewards for slaying these creatures. This becomes apparent because every hunt is precipitated by the sound of a horn and when the warrior returns from his hunt he also has what appears to be a medieval “wanted” poster with a drawing of a monster. All of this plot is told with no monologue, dialogue, voiceover, or anything other than simply what the audience sees on the screen. It is a form of storytelling I have not seen in a feature-length film, and it works surprisingly well in The Head Hunter.

While the storytelling method works, for the most part, there are still aspects that feel as though there isn’t enough meat to the film.  As I mentioned before, multiple times the audience is shown the warrior riding off to kill a monster then returning with its head. It seems like an odd choice that we don’t get to see the warrior engaged in battle with these creatures. I can only assume it was due to budgetary constraints, but with how many times he rides off into the distance it becomes more and more apparent that we are missing the battles. There are two battles shown, but they are primarily in darkness so the action isn’t as palpable as it could be. The Head Hunter is already a shorter film clocking in at 1 hour and 12 minutes, but with the storytelling method, lack of dialogue, and minimal action it may have worked better as a short film.

The two most vital aspects of the film are the acting and the visuals. The Head Hunter is almost entirely filmed with one actor, Christopher Rygh, in his first feature film role. While Rygh doesn’t have much dialogue in the film, he still has quite a presence on screen and is able to emote very well. He truly embodies the look of a warrior and expertly conveys a wide range of emotions. On the visual side, the two strongest aspects are the cinematography and the creature designs. The cinematography does a majority of the storytelling and it as absolutely stunning. Each shot is purposefully framed and focused in a certain way to draw the eye. While for the most part we only see creature heads, the designs are varied and very well done. There is every sort of creature one could want and the big bad in the climax of the film is quite memorable.

The Head Hunter is a stunning feat in visual storytelling, yet it feels a bit devoid of the excitement and tension one would expect from this kind of film. I commend the filmmakers for taking on this fascinating style and creating a beautiful film. The performance from Rygh only helps to make the tale of this warrior compelling to watch. Some will likely notice the lack of tension that comes from skipping over a majority of the monster kills. Some will also likely feel the method used to propel the film forward requires more dialogue. While I stand by my statement that the film may have worked better as a short, it is still an accomplishment in filmmaking and beautiful to watch.

OVERALL RATING: 6/10

Book of Monsters

monsters

When Sophie was little she thought she saw her mom get killed by a monster. Now, on the eve of her 18th birthday, Sophie and her friends are throwing a party. Her mom’s old monster book resurfaces only to be used by a mystery woman to conjure up some terrifying monsters to wreak havoc on the party guests. It’s up to Sophie and her friends to stop the monsters before they are unleashed on the world.

This gory monster comedy feels like a love letter to horror films of the 80’s. Written by Paul Butler (Nothing Man, The Creature Below) and directed by Stewart Sparke (The Creature Below), Book of Monsters brings campy fun with what appear to be nods to The Evil Dead films while also delivering an interesting and unique plot. The cold open of this film introduces the audience to a young Sophie as her mom reads her a bedtime story from a rather odd book filled with drawings of strange monsters. Sophie then witnesses a monster kill her mother, but of course no one believes her. This quickly sets the tone for the film while also establishing the main character, Sophie. As a teen she is a bit of an outsider; she has a couple close friends, is shy and quiet, and it quickly becomes apparent that she is interested in girls. Her birthday party is the catalyst for the carnage which ensues on the unsuspecting guests.

On the surface Book of Monsters is simply a splatterfest where people are killed left and right and the monsters are a bit on the cheesy side. There are also some odd choices in terms of character development, such as a mean girl who is a bit over-the-top in her mean ways and Sophie quickly goes from meek to warrior woman at the drop of a hat. While some of these aspects can take away from the film, I believe they ultimately have a purpose. It all goes back to paying homage to horror films of the 80’s. The book filled with monsters and spells is reminiscent of The Evil Dead, the monsters themselves can be a throwback to many older films, the mean girl reminded me of Judy from Sleepaway Camp, and Sophie herself is like most virginal final girls of that time who fight for survival. Even the cast, who are all supposed to be teenagers, look like they are between the age of 25-30 just like in 80’s films. What makes Book of Monsters stand out from other films that honor the films of the past is the mythology it creates. Not only are the monsters unique, but the filmmakers gradually build on Sophie’s connection to them in an interesting way that moves the plot forward while also giving plenty of opportunity to create a sequel (or even a prequel) with this mythology.

The performances are a bit of a mixed bag, some being very good and others being over the top. That being said, I believe the range of performances as a deliberate choice by the filmmakers to stay in-keeping with the 80’s nostalgia. Lyndsey Craine (The Creature Below) stars as Sophie. While her character arc is a bit abrupt, Craine’s performance as Sophie stays true to the character. She starts out very shy and sweet, but when her friends are in danger she turns into a monster killer. Craine is also the most believable as a teenager. Two actors who are not believable as teenagers are Michaela Longden (The Creature Below, Audax) as Mona and Anna Dawson (1921, The Creature Below) as Arya. Mona is one of Sophie’s best friends and a bit of a rebel. What I enjoy most about Longden’s performance is her ability to play multiple characters and the way she injects humor into her performance. Arya is the bully of the film. She is so over the top in how terrible she is to Sophie, and others, that Dawson’s performance also comes across as out there. This seems intentional as many of the bullies of 80’s films act quite similarly to Arya. No matter where the performances fall on a scale of good to not so great, it is still easy to see that the actors had fun making this film.

Between the monsters and the gore, it is impossible to ignore the effects in Book of Monsters. Remembering that this film is meant to be like a campy 80’s horror flick, the practical effects definitely pay homage to that era. The filmmakers wisely avoided using CGI. The heavy use of blood and severed body parts is both disgusting and humorous at the same time. When it comes to the monsters themselves, there are some interesting choices made. A couple of the creature designs rely heavily on cloaks to mask much of the body, allowing the SFX team to focus more on the faces of the monsters and the weapons or body parts they use to kill the teens. It can be a bit unfortunate looking at the monsters and realizing the bodies are mostly ignored in the design process, but it still fits with the low-budget 80’s aesthetic. There is one creature the team clearly took more time and money to create, and the design is very unique. The only creature design I don’t like is for the “djinn.” Instead of having a true monster look, the djinn looks more like a ghost from a J-horror film. This could potentially be another nod or homage to that subgenre of horror film, but it seems out of place with the rest of the 80’s style.

Book of Monsters certainly delivers on the monsters and gore with a classic 80’s aesthetic, while also giving audiences a fun and compelling story. The plot feels reminiscent of other films while still including new elements. The actors may not all deliver the best performances, but there is obviously a lot of heart and fun that went into the film. Book of Monsters certainly isn’t a film for everyone, but if you appreciate classic 80’s horror films with campy practical effects then this is the film for you. It is definitely a love-letter to the misfits and monster lovers.

OVERALL RATING: 6.5/10

Killer Rack

Betty (Jessica Zowlak) has low self esteem. She gets treated poorly at her job and by her boyfriend. The common theme Betty notices in all this is that she gets overlooked because she doesn’t have big boobs. She decides to get breast implants, hoping they make her life better. Little does she know that the plastic surgeon worships H.P. Lovecraft’s elder gods, and this surgeon plans to implant more than silicone into Betty’s breasts.

This film really took my by surprise. I won’t lie, when I first saw the trailer I was not expecting much. What I got was a hilarious satirical film that not only knew how to make fun of itself, but also knew how to make fun of the entire horror genre in the best way possible. There are even several scenes where the filmmakers purposely introduce stereotypes you would commonly find in horror movies. For example, when you first meet the detectives investigating a mysterious string of murders they are introduced as the older cop who is a week away from retirement and the rookie who just got married and is trying to have a baby with his wife. If that isn’t a stereotype setting them up for disaster, I don’t know what is. There is even a “reviewer” that talks about how the events at the climax are a metaphor for a woman taking control of her body and becoming empowered, and he plans on posting their review online. The writing was probably my favorite aspect of this film. The dialogue was witty, humorous, sarcastic, and downright ridiculous all at the same time.

The writing was greatly helped by the acting. Much of the acting was over the top, which is to be expected in this kind of horror comedy. One of the best over-the-top performances came from Debbie Rochon (Axe to Grind) as Dr. Thulu. She pulled off the evil scientist persona so well, and she had me laughing in every scene she was in. Dr. Thulu’s interaction with her nurse, played by the hilarious Robert Bozek (Hope), are some of my favorite scenes that made me laugh the hardest. I was also pleasantly surprised by Jessica Zwolak (Dry Bones). She did a great job portraying poor, self-conscious Betty. What I loved most about her performance is that she managed to appear to be self-conscious and rather mousy, but she did it in a way that wasn’t pathetic or annoying.

Most of the effects in this film were practical effects, which I always love. Without giving too much away, the big reveal for the “killer rack” at the climax of the film will have you laughing out loud, even with all the carnage and bloodshed that ensues. Just when you think things can’t get more ridiculous, they do! I’m really not surprised that the killer rack tied for best monster at the 2015 Fright Night Theatre Film Festival. The only part of the killer rack creature(s) that I didn’t like was when CGI was used**. It is really only used in one scene during the climax, and I understand that logistically what they did with CGI could not be done with practical effects, but the CGI ruined the look a bit for me. Other than that, the only other visual aspect I didn’t enjoy was the set for the office where Betty worked. The other sets were perfectly fine, but the office seemed like it was almost thrown together as an afterthought.

One of the aspect of this film that stood out for me was the music. This film has an original song called “Fun Bags” that plays during a dream sequence. This song is probably one of the funniest songs I have ever heard, and it is incredibly catchy. Since watching the film, I have got in stuck in my head on more than one occasion. The song also earned this film the Best Song award at the 2015 Fright Night Theatre Film Festival.

The entire concept reminded me a bit of “vagina dentata.” It’s the idea that something straight men desire can bring about their ultimate demise. I agree with the “reviewer” from the film that this had a lot to do with female empowerment as well, but not necessarily in the sense he describes. It’s more about Betty learning to be okay with her body and realizing there will always be someone out there who will love you for you. At the same time, this film is also simply about a pair of man-eating boobs that want to take over the world. The beauty of this film is that it can be both, and that is part of why it is so hysterical.

I said it once and I’ll say it again: this film really was a pleasant surprise. Unfortunately, it is only on the film festival circuit right now and not available to rent or buy. Per director Greg Lamberson, the film should be available on DVD in August or September of 2016. So you can either try to catch the film at a festival near you, or wait until the DVD comes out. I will be sure to keep everyone posted on social media when there is a more precise DVD release date. You all should watch it when you get the chance. Killer Rack is a titillating tale about a pair of outrageous monsters that will have you laughing from start to finish.

OVERALL RATING: 7.5/10

** I have been informed since writing this review that the tentacles that I thought were CGI are actually stop-motion. While that makes me appreciate the effort more, I still think the creatures would have more impact without them.