Are you emotionally detached, and why?

I forced my mind to become emotionally detached.
Emotions are overrated, and having been raised without siblings, it seemed a perfect fit.
Yes, I gradually forced my mind to detach itself, without turning against itself. So to speak.

Criminally Insane: A Fatsploitation Abomination



I'm sorry, but there are few things in this world that is funnier than a fat person. Not to say they're all funny. Or worth making fun of for that matter. But I think we can all agree that a funny fat person will always be funnier than a funny normal person. It's just the way it is. But for a fat person to intentionally make a successful funny, they first must see the humor in their own girth, and either be okay with it, or do a damn good job pretending. People like John Candy, Chris Farley and Alan from Return To Sleepaway Camp have brought the world many a chuckle with their ability to share their fatness with us. Before those guys came on to the scene, there was a woman named Priscilla Alden who starred in a micro-budget Horror film in the 70's called Criminally Insane. A film that would have ended up quite terrible with her or with out her, but was saved from being completely pointless and probably boring by this wonderful woman who obviously didn't mind being made a spectacle of as long as it made people laugh. And because of her, Criminally Insane is not pointless or boring at all. It's so bad, it's good.

Crazy, fat Ethel done some bad shit, and got put away for a while. She's getting out soon, and is being taken in by her grandmother, but being free, Ethel is not in a good mood. Having to put up with Jew doctors and a normal eating habit has taken its toll on her. And the electro-shock therapy wasn't exactly a picnic either. But now that she's living with her sweet Granny, it's all good. Time to eat! As we watch Ethel eat her breakfast which consists of about 8 eggs, 10 pieces of bacon, and 6 pieces of toast, her grandmother expresses her disapproval. "A woman's gotta watch her figure", says granny. Just a suggestion. Soon thereafter, Ethel is informed that she has no choice but to cool it with the constant eating because there just isn't enough money to maintain her addiction. After trying her best to reason with Ethel, Granny gets stabbed to death by her ornery hog of a granddaughter. Now free to eat anything she wants, Ethel does just that. But soon realizes that her now dead grandmother was on to something about the money thing.

Ethel calls the supermarket and orders some food, with extra ice cream, this time. When delivered, she's informed that it's going to be about 80 bucks. Her reply? "I don't have 80 dollars! I only have $4.50". Much to Ethel's outrage, the delivery boy won't let her keep her precious yum yums without getting paid. So, now that he's dead, Ethel sticks his body up with granny in her room. Seconds later, Ethel's horse-faced whore of a sister shows up, looking for a place to stay, and even offers a little cash for her trouble, even though it's not her house. Rosalie buys the flimsy excuse about Granny being away, and makes herself right at home, bringing around her clients and whatnot. Which doesn't bother Ethel none as long as she has her ice creams, Nilla Wafers and platefuls of baked potatoes to stuff her face with, constantly. Soon, Rosalie's woman beating, wannabe actor boyfriend shows up and joins them, and both soon start complaining about a bad smell coming from granny's room. Ethel refuses to hand over the key so they can go up there and check it out. With no real good excuses coming to mind, the dim-witted whale does the only thing she can do to survive. The rest of the movie consists of Ethel eating, desperately looking for a place to hide the bodies and falling deeper and deeper into the depths of insanity.

Directed by Mick Millard, Criminally Insane is by far the best movie he ever made. I say that only after seeing a small fraction of his filmography, but I stand by my claim. If that wasn't true, I'd probably know it by now. Criminally Insane a movie which was probably never meant to be anything special, as it reeks of deliberate half assness. From the blood that is obviously red paint, to the shitty little score, to the running time that is just under an hour. Milliard didn't even bother sticking any filler in. Criminally Insane gets straight to the point. And for such a movie, that's definitely a good thing. But I'm pretty sure there's also some self aware schlock going on here. which was almost unheard of in 1975. But again, Ethel made this movie what it became. Unlike the boisterous Chris Farley, or the big likeable oaf, John Candy, Ethel's humor is a little more subtle. She's careless and oblivious. A typical fat person with a bad attitude and no will power. she's also pretty delusional on top of it. And not all that bright either. Like a big, overgrown baby who wants her way and knows nothing else, Ethel kills and kills with no thought of the future any time she feels her constant eating is threatened.

I should point out the sequel for anyone who sees this and absolutely must have more Ethel. A little over a decade later, Nick Millard made Criminally Insane 2. A far worse movie in an era where far worse movies were being made in abundance. This sequel was not only shot on video, and not only featured a far slimmer Ethel, but nearly half the movie consisted of flashbacks from the original. Yeah. Real nice. And as for the Death Nurse movies... Well, never mind. Okay, so, we should probably forget about the sequel and pretty much everything else Milliard has ever done, I take it. But as for the original Criminally Insane, it really is a glorious bad movie to behold. And is made far better than it needs to be by a scary looking fat lady who asked one very important question when approached to do a Horror movie in the mid 70's, which solidified her as one of the icons of bad cinema. And that questions is "Why the hell not". 7/10



#Review

What's a strange thing on your bucketlist?

I've always wanted to tear a picture of the pope, much like Sinead did in the 90's.

I grew up a Catholic, and I've always seen it as a way of "defying the emperor", per se.

Poltergeist 2



Haven't had a damn nightmare since I was a kid.
But thanks to Julian Beck here as Kane last night I did. Lol

RIP Julian Beck

Can spiders be killed on cell phone?

I used to be able to kill the screen bugs on my phone but i cant anymore.

August Underground Trilogy

Warning the following post contains images that might be deemed offensive. If you are easily offended, seriously, why are you here?

By this point, everyone has heard fo the infamous August Underground Trilogy. A decade ago, they were infamous and notorious, easily deranking the equally notorious Guinea Pig Series as the most fucked up pseudo snuff series to ever grace our depraved eyes. Now days, depraved and disturbing cinema can be found quite easily, especially because the internet is only a click away. Still, the effects of AU still hold up today, and even rewatches still get me cringing and squirming. I will never forget that it took me mutliple viewing to finally complete the series. There are some who view AU as boring and overhypered crap. And there are some that view is as real and utter horror. I'm in the latter camp.



Lets begin with number one. August Underground (2001). The one that started it all. Also imo, probably the most effective of the three. Filmed with shaky cam, this is as gritty and dark as they come. We follow two killers, one played by Fred Vogel (creator of the AU series, who might I add, is apparently an incredibly nice guy in real life), and an unknown peep who is holding the camera. I believe he was played by Allen Peters, (who also co wrote the movie.) Basically we watch these two go about their daily routine....and do horrible things to people. And that's it. You can imagine why people find it boring, cos watching a bunch of loud and obnoxious people going to a concert and bickering isn't stella entertainment. But I really struggled watching this, and here's why. It feels real. Really real. You know how everyone gave Charlie Sheen slack for thinking Flowers of Flesh and Blood was real? Well can you imagine if he saw this?! He would have damn shit himself! There is a reoccuring scene featuring a girl that's tired in the basement. If that doesn't get you moving around uncomfortably, I don't know what will. This movie feels like you've actually stumbled upon a killers home diary. It is as interesting as it is horrifying. And although the shaky cam is bad enough to give you a headache, the sheer effects (which are brilliant!) will make you feel sick to your stomache.



Right, so on to the sequel, August Undergound Mordum (2003). Where the first one was extreme, this one takes it up a notch, and fucks it bloody. You'll often see this on top disturbing lists, and it's there for a reason. While not as gritty and nihlistic as number one, it's like the makers brainstormed the most disturbing and taboo things they could do, and they put it all on camera. Everything from dead child rape, to castration, to incest. Peters is no longer a part of production, but he is replaced by Cristie Whiles and Michael Todd Schneider, who plays a part called Maggot. The style of film making is exactly the same, shaky cam, bad audio etc. Only now that Fred Vogel now has plenty of friends to join in the depravity, there is lots more arguing and screaming. It's quite nauseating. Still, props go to them for the effects (which are again, brilliant) and for making something even more fucked up then number one, and believe me, i didn't think that was possible. Though this one ended very abrutly, it's still a highly effective fake snuff movie.



Finally, number three, August Underground Penance (2007). This is often cited as the worst of the trilogy. I actually find that there is something in this one that the previous two lack. The characters are no longer one dimensional, sick killers. We almost see into their minds. You can see in the killers treatment of their victims, and hearing their monolgues, a possible key why they are doing this. I found this very interesting. Have a listen to Fred talking to the guy with the hammer. You'll see what I mean. Also look at how Fred and Cristy talk to each other, there is lots of keys to their mental mind, and why they are so evil.
Anyway, out of the three, this one looks the most polished, cos they finally upgraded their shaky cam to a more high tech one. It still looks realistic, but no longer as dark and gritty, which takes away the feel the first two had. Also, not much more can be done that hadn't already been donw already, so they were reaching for fucked up scenes. Still, there is a Christmas Invasion scene that is right up there with the most disturbing scenes you could see. And of course, the effects, again are amazing. I have nothing but praise when it comes to the effects of these movies. It's partly why they feel so real. They are just amazing. But of course, you also have lots of pointless scenes where the killers just walk around and be normal people. People only wanting to see fucked up stuff will be bored for certain portions of all these movies. To me it just feel all the more real. Oh and animal lovers stay away from part 3, you won't like it. Just saying.



All in all, these movies, while not fun to watch, are amazing pieces of cinema, and deserved to be seen by any extreme horror fanatic. Fred Vogel and his team of friends have created something truly memorable and as a horror fan, I salute him, and look forward to his future endervors. Thankyou.



#Extreme

Lorna The Exorcist (1974)

Ahh Jess Franco. Everyone's favourite spanish pervert. Well, everyone's favourite right after Penelope Cruz. Not that she's a perv or anything, perhaps that's just wishful thinking on my behalf. But Franco, yeah he's a MAJOR perv. Don't believe me? Then you need to watch this movie. Cos quite frankly, it's the best soft core, porno, horror I have ever seen! But wait, there's something else, this movie is actually...good. Like really good. Like fucking amaze-balls good. Yeah that's how good. And it's something you could easily subsitute for a porno during your nightly passion sessions, if you're into that sorta thing. Then again, you might just appreciate it for it's value as just a damn good movie. Either way, it's a win-win. Let me elaborate. 😉

Linda, played by the very young and incredibly beautiful Lina Romay, is about to turn 18. Everything is going to plan to celebrate her birthday, until her father Patrick gets an unsettling phone call from a mysterious woman called Lorna. Lorna wants Linda, and she'll stop at nothing to get her. Now she is appearing in Linda's dreams, and Patrick must do everything he can to save his only daughter from this mysterious woman, who appears to be capable of possessing others. But is he too late?...



There is something so beautiful about this movie. The score is just so beautiful, and goes so well with our beautiful stars, who are not shy to show their perfect bodies. Nor is the camera shy to get close enough for graphic details. Fans of the female form can rejoice as this movie focuses on beauty and perfection, especially private areas. Same might call this movie sleazy, and while it's one of the most explicit I have seen, there is something so hynotising about it, you just can't look away. It's like a dream that slowly descends into a nightmare. I don't think this movie is sleazy, I think it's amazing. I gotta find it interesting that this movie can be simultaneously arousing and disturbing at the same time. I don't think I have ever seen a movie quite like this before. At times beautiful and at others, downright horrifying. This combination works so well with this, and I give full credit to Franco for making such a thing possible.



The performances were fantastic, some even emotional. One of the most touching moments for me was when Jacqueline Laurent, playing the wife stands by her husband because nothing can destroy their love, even in times of trial. You'll pick it instantly when you watch it, it really was such an emotional and beautiful scene. I loved it.
Pamela Stanford is just hypnotic as the seductress Lorna. Her bright green eye shadow giving her such a menacing look with the stare that would freeze you up. Guy Delorme as Patrick also gives a strong performance as the tired and stressed father, doing everything he can to save his daughter, but the real star of this movie is the stunning Lina Romay. She played this part bravely as the innocent Linda, ready to be corrupted by the seductress Lorna. Her natural beauty highlighting her innocent nature. Her performance at the end is absolutely terrifying and bound to stay with you for a while. I do have to wonder if the makers of Sleepaway Camp saw this movie. Those who have seen the ending will know why. 😉



The reason I am posting this is the extreme section is because there are at least a couple of scenes that will have you raising your eyebrows. I had no idea things would get so explicit. And by explicit, I mean pornographic. You'll know the female anatomy better than most females by the end of this movie. And while some ... um....love scenes.... are more than a little raunchy, some are intense and frightening! There is something so disturbing and horrifying about a couple of scenes. Those who have seen this movie probably know which scenes I am referring to, but I won't spoil them here. No doubt this movie caused some controversy.

https://somecamerunning.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5523026f58834014e8643f054970d-pi

With the focus on female sexual awakening, I wonder if this movie is really about possession? Perhaps it's Franco's take on the sexual repression of women. Polanski did the same with Repulsion, perhaps Franco takes it that step further. A teenager becoming a woman, opening up new feelings and emotions, letting her darker side take control? But then again maybe I am reading too much into it. 😄

My only complaint is this movie does drag a little in certain parts. At 99 mins, some scenes needn't be as long as they were. Still, it kept my attention and even caused my jaw to drop (multiple times) so I have to take my hat off to Mr Franco. This truly is such an amazing and awe struck film. One I believe I will be watching again.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072019/reference

Thoughts/opinions?

Thankyou for reading.



#Extreme

A short slasher musical comedy



Holy shlamoly. That girl is hilarious, she has done some good videos about global warming too.

I am the locker room guy.



People who come to this board from countries other my native, wonderful, planet-annihilating USA won't even know what the hell these people are talking about, but this video clip is really popular today, where I live. In New England, Deflategate has been a HUGE topic of conversation this year. Even more than global warming, global warmongering, or any of the other things we could be talking about. The University of New Hampshere is even offering a course where all they talk about is Deflategate. I'm not kidding.

Anyway, all these guys have roots around Boston, and they do a really good job with the accent. You hear people talking like that all the time around here.

Henry 2: Portrait Of A Serial Killer (1996)

https://ib2.huluim.com/show_key_art/15861?size=1600x600&ion=US

Sequels will never be taken all that seriously due to the assumption by most that they're almost always unoriginal and only exist to milk money out of the fans of the original. Some of them aren't so bad, but alot of them seem quite unnecessary, mainly because they are. I've never been one to shun a part 2 just because it's a part 2. These movies are of course preferred by most when the original director returns, as well as atleast an original cast member or two. But even if it's not in the cards, and the film is greenlit, that doesn't automatically mean it's going to suck. It really all depends on the original story, as well as how they go about the sequel. Some sequels, as soon as you hear the title, you just know it's a cash grab and nothing else. The film which we're going to talk about sounds very much like one of the many soulless, unoriginal cash grabs which have reared their ugly heads over the years. But never judge a movie by its title. Because you might be missing out on something good.

Ten years after Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer, director, Chuck Parello took a chance and made a sequel to the legendary 80's chiller. And the result would be a bit surprising. Here's the deal. We begin at some point after the original. I'm guessing a couple years, give or take. Henry is still at it. He's nearly a foot shorter, but he's still Henry, kinda. Henry has nothing. Henry is homeless, and is staying in a shelter. He eventually gets work cleaning out porta-potties, and makes friends with a co-worker and his wife, who let him stay with them for a while, just until he gets back on his feet. Kai and Cricket are a normal married couple. A bit on the white trash side, but nice people, going by how they're treating this stranger. Henry seems grateful, and doesn't seem like he's into starting any shit at the moment, but things get complicated once Henry finds out how Kai makes a little extra cash on the side. As it would turn out, it's a little more than a a little. But Kai gets paid to burn down buildings for various reasons. Henry is offered a cut for his help, and gladly accepts. Eventually, they're accidentally caught by a couple tresspassers, and Henry knows exactly what to do. He kills one of them, and makes Kai kill the other.

Kai is now a killer, and takes a little time to get used to the idea, but starts liking it when he realizes it's a great stress reliever. The two have a great time lighting fires and killing innocent people. All is good until Cricket tires of Henry's influence over Kai, and starts nagging her husband to get rid of him. Meanwhile, Cricket's emotionally disturbed niece takes a liking to Henry, and makes things far more awkward than they need to be. Henry almost seems to have taken a bit of a liking to her, too. Or maybe it's just pity, or him being careful not to set her off, which might complicate things. This chick is hanging by a thread, and all she wants is for Henry to love her. Sorry. Not gonna happen!

"Henry 2" does not have a nice ring to it. Nor does the unfortunate fact that it's directed by someone else, and even stars a different actor portraying Henry. And a midget, no less. Sounds pretty pointless, at first. Pointless enough to just pass on it with without even reading about. I get it. We've been burned enough times by these sequels with different actors playing the same role, while taking place in space and shit. But if you go into it without comparing it to the original, it's not so bad. It's actually better if looked at as a stand along film. Henry 2 could even pass as a reboot, as the story is different enough, yet similar enough.

This film is nowhere near as entertaining or creepy as the original, and lacks the dark humor we all love. Kai is a poor substitute for Otis, and Neil Giuntoli is just not Michael Rooker, although he did a good job, and has that "cold as ice" look down pretty good. Just not perfected like Rooker. The only thing this movie has over the original is Louisa, the suicidal niece of cricket, who desperately, and stupidly clings to Henry, only to be let down. A major improvement over the annoying Becky (and her stupid hair) from the original. Just my opinion. But my overall opinion of the movie is a positive one. Not as a sequel, but rather a Horror movie which easily held my interest, and had some genuinely creepy moments. A Horror movie which is quite underseen and misunderstood. The flaws are obvious. You can overlook them or not, but one thing is for sure. You couldn't possibly expect a 90's sequel to Henry, which has a different director and a different Henry, to be better than this. 6/10



#Review