Hello, it's been a while hasn't it? A lot has changed in the time I've been absent from this blog; Prime Ministers, Presidents. A Global pandemic...but the one thing that hasn't changed, is my undying love for trashy films.

Truth be told, I've been entertaining the idea of restarting this blog for about a year now, but life gets in the way and I've never gotten around to it. I can't commit and call this a return. I guess it's a creative outlet and something productive for me to do while the world is on lockdown.
I also found it extremely hard to get back into writing and many times at the start of this piece I 'backspaced' until there was nothing more to 'backspace'. In any event, I hope it's an entertaining read.

I've been on a 'when animals attack' kick lately with The Food of the Gods (1976) and Empire of the Ants (1977) and in keeping with that vibe, I've decided to peel back the carpet and shine a light on Terence H. Winkless' goopy directorial debut, The Nest.

Starring: Robert Lansing, Lisa Langlois, Franc Luz and Terri Treas.

Based on the pulp horror novel of the same title by Eli Cantor/Gregory A. Douglas - I'm not sure which is a pen-name, if it makes any difference I do have another book by Gregory A. Douglas.
The story is a glorious little tale of science gone awry mixed-with out of control insects, set against the rural backdrop of a quaint, coastal slice of Americana.

Enter small town Sheriff Richard Tarbell (Luz). A sensitive kinda guy who's torn between his ongoing relationship with diner owner Lilian (Nancy Morgan) and the surprising return of his high school sweetheart Elizabeth Johnson (Langlois), daughter of the town mayor Elias (Lansing). He's making shady dealings with a scientific research company, INTEC, in an effort to inject cash into the town. Unbeknown to Elias, head scientist Dr. Hubbard (Treas) has been playing god with cockroaches. Her theory is that cockroaches will become immune to pesticides and repellents, in an effort to combat that, she has attempted to create a roach that will eat other roaches. Makes sense right? Right! It appears anyway that a batch has escaped, or were already out to begin with, maybe I missed/forgot that part...anyway they're soon running amok in the small town, devouring beloved pets and wholesome junkyard owners.



Arguably the most memorable character of the bunch is the local 'pest control agent', Homer (Stephen Davies). The film's comic relief character, even as I'm writing this I realise that I'm selling him a little short. Of all the characters I found myself caring about this guy the most, perhaps it's because he hasn't got any self interests; he helps people with pest problems, he turns up to drink and play boardgames with aforementioned junkyard owners, only to find them partially devoured in their bed. When the Sheriff needs him, he's there ready (but perhaps not exactly willing) to lay down his life to save the town. Truthfully, I think there's a lot to be taken away from the kookier characters in genre film. They're quickly overlooked, easily dismissed and/or laughed at, but are more often than not, the most genuinely human characters present.



The first third is spent establishing tone, the characters and providing a little bit of an insight into what INTEC are doing, whilst steadily increasing the roach-activity.
The second third serving as nexus point, with albeit more roach-activity, until the situation is thoroughly out of hand, and the town is about to be lost to a lethal dose of bug spray or a swarm of mutant roaches.

The gruesome climax is where the film comes to life. To me it ranks somewhere between a low budget riff on John Carpenter's The Thing (1984) and Cronenberg's The Fly (1986). I don't know if I'm going out on a limb (pun intended) to call this a body horror film but there are several fantastic scenes involving a cat-roach hybrid and human-roach hybrid. The effects, to be honest, are well handled. Looking nice and nasty, slimy and gooey in all the right places.

The only thing that's a bit irritating is the sound effect used whenever the roaches are present. It became extremely grating, I found myself lowering the volume considerably during a few scenes.
In all, I got a real kick out of it and with a runtime just shy of an hour and a half you'd be foolish to pass it up. I don't deal in half stars here at 42nd Street Cinema, so I'm gonna put my balls on the line and give it a full 4 stars with a gleaming recommendation.

"The First New Horror Creature" - I've always been slightly perplexed by that tag-line, whether it's down to me perceiving it as an example of poor english, or it's actually part of the film's illy constructed horror-parody aspect, I'm still not sure. In any event, I recently re-watched William Sachs' bewildering Sci-Fi Horror-cum-Spoof Comedy, The Incredible Melting Man and wanted to share my thoughts.

Starring: Alex Rebar, Burr DeBenning, Myron Healey, Michael Alldredge and Ann Sweeny.

I can just about remember watching this film for the first time when I was much younger and very new to horror films and after viewing it, I wasn't 100% sure what to make of it, I was left feeling baffled.

I watched it purely because it was on the Vipco label. For those of you that aren't in the know, Vipco was a UK video label founded by Mike Lee in the late 70s and I suppose it became notable partly for being one of the main video labels caught up in the whole 1980s 'Video Nasty' furore in Great Britain.



Though I must admit, I'm no authority on any of this, given that I was still in the stages of pre-life at the time. To cut a long story short, if you're growing-up in England and become interested in horror movies, chances are you will encounter the Vipco label at some point or another and it's because of that association that I ended up first learning about and watching The Incredible Melting Man.

Apart from my initial confusion there wasn't much else I could recall about the movie for many years afterwards and that's mainly what put me off re-watching it...until now, and the fact that Arrow Video/Films came along and released a new beefed up, widescreen transfer had nothing to do with it. I'm kidding, it actually had a lot to do with it, if you've ever watched a Vipco release then you'll know firsthand how poor the quality is. You'll also know the same 4 trailers included on every disc off by heart, haha.
I believe my confusion was born out of not really knowing what the film was all about. In my juvenile mindset I must have expected a gory, gross-out B-movie and while the film offers slimy melt scenes, it's actually not much of a bonafide 'gore-fest'.



Before watching this a second time I did a little bit of poking around on the internet and I read that during it's inception The Incredible Melting Man was initially penned as a parody of horror films. This kind of explains the befuddling tagline, which has always struck a nerve with me, and it also explains some of the seemingly out-of-place oddball humour present within the film. According to what I read, a lot of the comedic scenes were edited out during production, in favour for shooting the picture as a straight horror film.

The plot is simple; a team of astronauts go up into space and are hit by excessive blasts of radiation, it's actually made unclear whether this is because the astronauts pass through the Rings of Saturn or simply because they look at the Sun through them. Needless to say most of the team die leaving only Steve West (Rebar) alive although seriously injured, and by seriously injured, I mean he's beginning to melt... Upon waking in a hospital and discovering his partially gelatinous state, Steve embarks on a murderous rampage throughout the countryside. Feasting upon human flesh in an attempt to restore his rapidly decaying cells.



The Incredible Melting Man is one of those rare and genuine cases of 'so bad it's good' cinema. It's a schlocky ride from start to finish; with a wafer thin plot and dubious performances from the cast. Yet with all this working against it, it still manages to keep you engaged and entertained.
"It's secret", you ask?
Well...I believe you can safely pin the 'success' of this movie on Rick Baker's special effects. They're nothing short of brilliant and I kinda of like to think of this film as a showreel for Baker's talents. Each and every time the narrative switches back to the Melting Man you're just waiting to catch a glimpse to see what stage of decomposition he's reached.

In short, "...come prepared!" don't expect too much, in fact don't expect anything... not a barrel of laughs or a radioactive bloodbath. Just take it for what it is, a cheap, cheesy B-movie with a titular melting antagonist.




Follow my blog with Bloglovin

"Bastard...Bastard...BASTARD!!"

You would think that a blog dedicated to showing exploitation films some love would have covered this title sooner, sorry to disappoint y'all. So at long last, I am going to talk a little bit about Juan Piquer Simón's giallo/slasher Pieces.

Starring: Christopher George, Lynda  Day George, Paul Smith, Frank Braña and Edmund Purdom

Pieces is a difficult film to pigeonhole into either one of the giallo or slasher sub-genres, as it lifts themes from both the Italian and American sides of 'stalk and slash' cinema.

The usual gialli tropes are evident; mysterious villain, complete with a black fedora, black gloves and you guessed it; a black raincoat. As are the usual slasher staples: shots from the killer's POV, complete with heavy, throaty breathing. His motivation for killing linking back to a deep-rooted, childhood-related psychosis and of course; the main plot is very slasher-centric: college girls being slaughtered in and around the campus.
Luckily these borrowings don't serve as a detraction and it all comes together in a unique way to form a very stylish, not to mention very gory, exploitation flick.

IF there had to be a detraction, I would be pushed to say the only major downfall of this movie is the silly dialogue. Now, whether that is due to poor dubbing or it is literally down to the script, I can't be sure, but it gets to the point where it becomes laughable, even farcical. There's also a handful of admissible goofs along the way, but like I previously mentioned they don't really subtract any quality away from the movie. I suppose, in an odd way it make all the more acceptable.

The gratuitous ending lets it down, it's got one of those silly 'out-of-nowhere' endings, it reminded me bit of Lamberto Bava's Macabre (1980).



The moment the film opens, you can tell it's Euro-horror, it just has that aesthetic. You know what I'm talking about, that lovable look. You can see it in the film grain, in the colours and in the camera work. I know that I'm beginning to spiral into down into the dark pit of a 'spouting fanboy', but when it comes to these Spanish, Italian and French films, I just can't help myself.

The plot is such a simple set-up, that it can be explained in one sentence. A spate of grisly murders are being committed on a college campus. That's it, that's all you need to know. Sure, it has a bunch of twists and turns along the way; but essentially that is it. I shouldn't forget to mention Paul Smith's role as the titular Willard either; who's probably the biggest and most obvious red herring character in the history of cinema.



What I've always liked about Pieces is how it essentially takes the well established giallo villain and replaces his knife with a chainsaw. Now, I know what you're thinking; a chainsaw isn't easy to conceal, but somehow the killer in Pieces manages to do it. It's silly, yes I can't deny it and the scene in the elevator is a prime example of this. But let's face it, it's all about how that scene is shot. How it looks and for all the gorehounds amongst us, it's all about the girl getting her arm lopped off.

On the topic of beautiful murder sequences, J.P. Simón must have ripped a page straight from Argento's book for a scene involving a stabbing on a water bed. The set up, his use of camera angles; close-ups of a glinting, bloodied knife and slow-motion is perfect. Words honestly don't do the scene justice and it's these moments that make Pieces really standout.

This would make a great double bill with Ramano Scavolini's Nightmare/Nightmares in a Damaged Brain (1981). It's also one of those movies that I wish that I could have experienced upon it's initial release, I would love to have sat down and had my mind blown by this without any prior knowledge of it. Honestly, if you've not checked it out for yourself, or have heard of it and have been putting it off, do yourself a favour and watch it the next chance you get.

Once again, fellow freaks, fiends, monsters and mutants I'm still attempting to return to the blogosphere. My life has taken a lot of twists and turns in the past 18 months. I feel it needless for any further explanation or procrastination, since I generally like to try and keep my personal life out of my blog. I feel that because I made this talk about movies I love, hate or love to hate I shouldn't use it to talk about personal problems, or life in general.

With that BS out of the way, I'm going to be talking about Marvin Kren's second feature Blood Glacier. Also known as, Blutgletscher and The Station.

Starring: Gerhard Liebmann, Edita Malovcic, Brigitte Kren, Hille Beseler and Peter Knaack.

Now, I'm going to assume most of you reading this are somewhat familiar with Kren and his first outing, the zombie film Rammbock (2010). I watched Rammbock some years ago and can actually recall very little of it. I do however remember it as having quite an intense and brooding atmosphere and being one of the 'stand out' zombie films of more recent times. In the UK it's known as Siege of the Dead, undoubtably a cash-in attempt on the many 'of the dead' films currently circulating. Yet, in the States it's known as Berlin Undead - I prefer this title, as I think it's much simpler and entirely more effective. Let me explain why (yes a rant is steadily approaching)...

I feel that in much recent years the zombie film has become stagnant, parodied and raped. Now, don't get me wrong, I love zombie films...I would say that at least 80% of the reason I'm even interested in horror is because of the Romero trilogy and later the more obscure and metaphoric, Fulci epics.  But, the sheer multitude of zombie films that have been released in the last 10 years is astounding and out of them, only a few are actually worth any attention. Maybe (a big maybe) I have become jaded, but truthfully I just feel sorely disappointed. If we take a step back and look at all the zombie films of generations past, they all have some merit, some worth, a reason to watch them.
Now, I step into my local HMV to browse the horror section and I immediately see dozens upon dozens of budget horror films...granted there are always the godawful possession / ghost movies, that require little or no special effects, but what else do I see? the beloved zombie film. Why? I don't know, I don't have a specific answer. I just feel as though a lot of these poor quality flicks demean horror. Enough to suggest that horror can't be intelligent, classy or have a sense of finesse and that's really quite sad.
By the way, I have already had the assumption that I could be alone in thinking this.

With that out of the way, perhaps I can begin to talk in droves about the topic at hand. Marvin Kren's Blood Glacier. Before viewing this I did read a little bit about it online and what I had gleaned was that it's very much in the vein of John Carpenter's The Thing (1982), which of course, only served to excite me further.



The plot has a fairly straight forward set up. A team of environmental scientists working in the Austrian alps discover a glacier leaking a red liquid that, unbeknownst to them, is affecting the local wildlife.

As I previously mentioned, yes it is very much like The Thing, but I'm sure any creature feature set in a snowy environment will always be compared to such. But, on other levels it is very akin to Carpenter's work. The one thing that struck me instantly was the music, there are a few string notes and melodies that sound as if they have been directly lifted from the 1982 Morricone/Carpenter score. Not to say that's a bad thing, by any means, for me it really set the tone.

Tonally the film is dark and oppressive. One of the films most memorable sequences involves Janek (Liebmann), struggling to find a way to deal with his ailing dog. The dog stands for more than just a pet, it's seemingly all he has left from a failed relationship with Tanja (Malovcic). For those who have ever been in a situation with a dying pet can surely understand the grief and moral confusion that goes hand-in-hand when dealing with it. Given this psychological aspect too, it is also quite comparable to The Thing. In as much as, the character's pent-up anger and resentment towards one another only serves to exacerbate the situation. Combined with the impending isolation and immediate threat.



In direct contrast to those touching and harrowing sequences, there are some genuine and (I believe) intentionally funny scenes present in Blood Glacier. One of which sees Janek attempting to convince the local wildlife Minister not to visit because of the recent 'outbreak', claiming there is a rabid fox on the loose.

On the whole, Blood Glacier is really enjoyable flick with great looking monsters. Taking the more traditional approach to effects, rather than utilising CGI. Fans of sci-fi horror, will definitely get a kick out of this for sure. For me, the only downside is that besides the clunky pacing, I just wish Kren had spent a little more time exploring the whole genetic workings of the organism and it's origins. We get a rough idea how it lives and forms 'new' creatures through a host body. But, I'm just left with a feeling of wanting more.

If memory serves correct, Rammbock also ended in a similar fashion. Perhaps Kren has a taste for ambiguity or he hasn't yet refined how to wrap up a story.

"Send...more...paramedics" Greetings fiends, at last I have returned to the horror blogosphere. Choosing an aptly titled film to discuss, Dan O'Bannon's classic The Return of the Living Dead. I'm hoping there are people who occasionally check my little corner of the net and are still interested in reading my reviews.

Starring: Clu Gulager, James Karen, Don Calfa, Thom Mathews, Jewel Shepard and Linnea Quigley.

Zombies - everybody loves them. The Return of the Living Dead along with Night of the Creeps (1986) and Night of the Comet (1984) are 3 exemplary examples of the more 'fun-filled' zombie flicks knocking around from that mid-80s period.

At the time of writing this review I discovered that although penned and directed by Dan O'Bannon, Return of the Living Dead was originally a book, written in 1977 by John Russo - the co-writer of Romero's seminal undead film Night of the Living Dead (1968). I haven't read the book but according to what I've looked at online, Russo's story wasn't followed and the film is a separate entity.

The plot outline is pretty straight-forward; two bumbling medical supply warehouse workers accidentally crack open a military canister containing a 'frozen' zombie and a chemical known as Trioxin. Located just across from the warehouse is a cemetery, needless to say the chemical makes it into the atmosphere and is rained down onto the nearby graves. The dead begin to rise and an unfortunate group of punk kids find themselves caught up in the ensuing madness.



In all honesty, it's unsurprising that this film gained such a cult following over the years. There are so many unforgettable scenes, hilarious characters and a killer punk-rock soundtrack to boot. I still remember watching this for the very first time when I was much younger and I never quite liked it as much as the Romero set of 'dead' films. However, after a repeated viewing it steadily grew on me and has become a favourite. Though it easily could have been Quigley's notorious graveyard strip scene that eventually swayed me.

I do think my initial dislike was down to the 'speed' of the zombies, petty, I know. It was probably my first exposure to 'fast' zombies and in retrospect, I think my younger self overlooked or simply misunderstood the 'splatstick' humour and just took ROTLD for a 'cheesy old movie'. Not realising how self-aware and tongue-in-cheek it actually is. Unlike the Romero canon, you cannot take this seriously and in all fairness to O'Bannon, he obviously wanted to distance himself from the former's work.

The level of comedic detail maintains the film's overall light-tone; ranging from obvious puns, such as the names given to both the medical supply warehouse 'Uneeda' and local cemetery 'Resurrection Cemetery', to the more subtle in-jokes hidden in the background. One of which can be seen while Frank and Freddy are in the warehouse office, if you look closely in the background there is a sight-test poster which reads "Burt is a slave driver and a cheap son of a bitch who is going bald too haha".

In contrast to this lighthearted tone, there are a handful dark and spooky scenes. One that has remained embedded in my memory is just after the paramedics have evaluated Frank and Freddy's condition, one of the medics climbs into the front of their ambulance, switches on the headlights and illuminates a horde of the living dead. The camera then sharply cuts to a side-view of the cab and before the paramedic has time to think, the passenger door is wrenched open and a zombie leaps in. This scene always manages to get under my skin. I'm not sure why, but it just gives me chills the moment the door is yanked open.



Another scene I picked up on after re-watching is when Ernie (Calfa) and Freddy's girlfriend Tina (Beverly Randolph) are hiding in the crawlspace above the mortuary from *SPOILERS SPOILERS* a now zombified Freddy. Calfa's character pulls out his gun and slowly aims it towards her head. His facial expression speaks volumes of fear, dread and disgust at what he is considering. Ultimately, the ending is considerably bleak too and not to mention a bit of an anticlimax.

I always quite liked the explanation Frank gives to Freddy about the origin of the canisters, notably the reference to NOTLD. As unlike films of today, which can make irritating references to other horror films simply for the sake of name dropping, à la Dead Snow/Død snø (2009), ROTLD manages to get away with linking itself to the Romero classic, without following any of it's traits - i.e. To kill the undead should be removing the head or destroying the brain, however that doesn't work here as the zombies in O'Bannon's picture are virtually unstoppable.

The Return of the Living Dead is a blast, with fantastic and memorable performances from each and every member of the cast. I think if I had to take my pick at who is my favourite character, it would be the short lived character of Suicide (Mark Venturini). His line to Trash (Quigley), "You think this is a fuckin' costume? This is a way of life." cracks me up every single time. His exaggerated line of "What the fuck?", upon discovering the zombie 'tarman' trying to break into a storage closet is an instant classic too and I'm quite surprised it hasn't been turned into an internet meme.

It would make a fantastic Halloween double-bill with Fred Dekker's Night of the Creeps or even something like the Stephen King / Romero collaboration Creepshow (1982).

Hi guys, quick update regarding a new blog to hit the internet recently, run by long time friend and frequent collaborator, Nigel (Italian Film Review). His new blog is called Pickled Cinema, since exhausting the best of Italian cinema has to offer, Nigel is now writing about films from all over the planet, including Euro-cult, Asian and American horror/exploitation.

Revisiting the comfort of 70s Euro horror, I've chosen to talk a little bit about Jean Rollin's The Grapes of Death/Les Raisins de la Mort.

Starring: Marie-Georges Pascal, Félix Marten, Serge Marquand, Mirella Rancelot and Brigitte Lahaie.

The Grapes of Death sits somewhere in between Romero's The Crazies (1973) and Jorge Grau's Let Sleeping Corpses Lie (1974), in as much as...The 'zombies' in Rollin's picture are more akin to the infected citizens of The Crazies, when compared to other shuffling-undead movies.
Grapes also shares a similar social commentary based narrative, found in both of the aforementioned films, although given the pesticide contagion, is a tad closer to Grau's work.

The dreary autumnal landscape and scenery is also reminiscent to that found in Dawn of the Dead (1978) or Fulci's The House by the Cemetery (1981). Personally, I quite like the change in seasons being used to reflect death in horror cinema, visually conveying a greater sense of sadness or depression and acting as a cold reminder that death, is quite literally surrounding the surviving group of protagonists.

The story is centred around Elisabeth (Pascal), a young lady who is traveling by train to see her fiancé. However, on her way there, her friend is murdered by a madman, who's face is covered with pus-spewing abscesses. In a blind panic, Elisabeth flees the train for the countryside, to try and find her way home, unfortunately for her, she discovers that the countryside has become overrun with people baring facial sores and homicidal tendencies.

Grapes' narrative possesses a dreamlike quality, a trait prominently found in 70s Euro horror, mainly due to the the randomness in which the events unfold. From the moment Elisabeth is first attacked on the train and escapes into the sprawling French countryside, the events that follow are unravelled in such a fashion that it borders on sheer insanity.



Rollin effectively creates an intense and oppressive atmosphere throughout The Grapes of Death, as Elisabeth and her 2 male cohorts are relentlessly and mercilessly pursued by hordes of the infected and to be honest, there is a lot to love about this film. What it lacks in the dialogue department is vastly made up in the visuals, it is a beautifully shot film that is home to many memorable and fiendishly twisted scenes. Including the cruel fate of poor blind Lucie (Rancelot) at the hands of her once loving carer.

In my opinion this is what Euro-horror is all about.