https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/fan/image?url=https%3A%2F%2F1428elm.com%2Ffiles%2F2017%2F08%2Fpsyc-iii-4.jpg&w=850&h=560&c=sc
Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho is what it is. A legendary Horror-Thriller from a legendary director. One of the five most well-known Horror films of all time. But I've chosen to disclude it from this review, as I'd like to focus on the underrated sequels that would follow many years later. A trilogy of sorts that gives the fans, as well as Norman Bates himself, the closure we never knew we wanted. Psycho is a classic, and a follow up of any kind might not have been completely necessary. Much less three of them. And Hitchcock not being around to over see this revival doesn't do it any favors. But between 1983 and 1990, three different directors gave us three different follow ups with three very different tones. Maybe none of which quite as memorable as the almighty original, but these are three worthy sequels, nonetheless.
Director, Richard Franklin had some mighty big shoes to fill in 1983. A sequel 23 years in the making was to be made and he was the one to make it. For any Psycho fan who hasn't seen this film, the thought of a Psycho II coming out of the 80's may sound a bit off-putting, as this decade is mostly known for cheesy, bad entertainment with little to no point, but truth be told, Psycho II is anything but "One of those 80's Horrors". A film with its own distinct score and somber tone which very much makes it its own movie, and brings back a creepy, yet endearing character by the name of Norman Bates. And without making a total joke of him, I might add. For over 20 years, Norman Bates has been locked away, and today, he has been declared sane.
As we see a judge let Norman out of the nut house, we also notice that Lila Loomis is present, and she's steaming mad. Lila Loomis is the sister of the woman Norman stabbed to death in the now-legendary shower scene. Lila doesn't really care if Norman is cured or not. She wants him locked away forever. And one can't blame her for her biased attitude. But like it or not. Norman is cured, and he's eager to get home. This movie doesn't waste any time showing us examples of things that have changed about society since Norman has been gone., except maybe the the Bates Motel. The slob running the place has turned the family business into a sleazy dump where people come to do drugs and have one night stands. Norman quickly takes care of him the best way he knows how... By firing him, of course. Besides restoring the motel, Norman has also landed a job at a local diner, where he makes friends with a girl named Mary, who needs a place to stay. Norman, being the good Samaritan, offers to let her stay with him in the house. Mary seems to like Norman, and even feels bad for him. But she is caught in the middle of a plot by her mother, Lila Loomis, to drive Norman back to insanity. A carefully planned scheme that could easily backfire if not handled carefully Mary is torn between family loyalty and the right thing. Despite everything Lila says, Mary believes Norman is fully rehabilitated, and deserves a fair shot at getting his life back together. But there is a lot going on that we don't know about. Murders are happening again. We get the idea it might not be Norman, but we're never sure. All of this leads to a twist that very well may change everything forever.
This might not be the most popular opinion in the world, but I happen to prefer Psycho II over all the others, including the original. It might have something to do with the fact that it was the first one I saw as a kid. On top of that, I just have a thing for a part 2 that is actually great. A rarity, in my opinion. But Psycho II is great. And everyone involved did a superb job. Especially Anthony Perkins, whose interpretation of a middle-aged Norman is as interesting as one would hope for. And the older and bitter Lila was a nice touch. I love everything about this movie, and again, feel like no further sequels were needed, as things seemed pretty cool the way they left them. But this IS the 80's, after all. And the 80's demands more sequels! 10/10Again. A Psycho III wasn't necessary. But why not see what happens when Anthony Perkins himself takes a crack at directing one of these. Yes. This is an Anthony Perkins film. And we are now smack dab in the middle of the 80's. And it shows. I wouldn't call this an official slasher, but Psycho III does have that cheesy 80's Slasher vibe to it. This movie doesn't have the original to live up to as much as the previous installment, This one's all about the trashy, bloody fun. So, now, let's see what's been going on with Norman. But first, let's meet our little ray of sunshine, Maureen.
THEEEERE IS NOOOO GOD!!!!!
Those are the first words we hear as this movie begins. Maureen is a nun, and she seems to not be 100% okay with her chosen profession. Maureen is hysterical and about to jump to her death. Not having a god day That's made pretty clear from the beginning. One of her fellow partners in crime falls to her death while trying to help her. Maureen feels like this might be a good time to find a new place to live. So, she hightails it, only to get picked up by a shmuck named Duane. Played by the legendary Jeff Fahey. He tries being friendly, but Maureen's not having it. The classy Duane kicks her out in the rain the second he realizes she wants nothing to do with his penis. Duane is a shady little bastard who probably fancies himself a playboy, and probably thinks he's a far better liar than he is. He stops at a motel up the road, and soon notices there is a job opening. He figures he could use a few bucks, so, he askes the man in charge, and is soon hired. Duane is now assistant manager at the Bates Motel.
Soon, Maureen catches up with Duane, and also catches Norman's eye not long after arriving. Norman now has two visitors. One who obviously can't be trusted. And the other, a damaged ex-nun, just looking for a reason to off herself. Norman doesn't have time for this shit, as he still has his own issues to deal with, considering "Mother" is now back in his life. We never learn much about Maureen, or why she is the way she is, but we know she's confused and vulnerable. Despite an attraction, she freaks Norman out, due to a striking resemblance to Marion Crane. At least in Norman's eyes. Although, Diana Scarwid ain't no Janet Leigh. Meanwhile, Duane, the opportunist, is being coaxed into spying on his new employer, by a reporter, who is getting far too close to the truth. And the truth is, Norman is back to doing his thing: Killing in drag. And at this point, nobody is safe from "Mother".It was a fun, semi-sleazy installment. But not exactly necessary, It could not exist and the series would have ended up no different. Psycho III is Just for fun. And probably Perkins' most entertaining performance as Norman. Duane didn't do it for me, but Maureen made a believable love interest for Norman, as he finally found a soul as lost as his own, only for his demons to threaten it all. A bleak story where the stench of religion seems to linger. Unnecessary or not, I'm glad it exists. 6/10
Or does it exist? According to 1990's Psycho IV, I'm not so sure. In fact, I'm thinking Psycho IV is trying to be the new Psycho II, as it seems to ignore everything that's happened since the original movie. Not cool. But here we have another Psycho sequel. A sequel which serves as prequel, with many a flashback, detailing Norman's younger years, growing up with Mother. But still sequel enough to be a sequel. But definitely not a part 2. It IS called Psycho IV, after all.
https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/psycho/images/8/8c/Husseylarge1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130518175541 I'm not positive if the previous sequels are being disowned, here, but definitely ignored. Either way, Norman is a free man, once again. Living in another house with his wife, although, it isn't clear how long they've been married. Norman seems okay. He's hanging out at the house by himself, tonight, and has decided to call in a radio talk show where the topic of the night is Matricide. He calls in, and under a fake name, gives his two cents on the subject. As ratings rise, Norman is convinced to tell more and more of his story. First, giving details on his first couple murders after Mother's death. And eventually going back further and giving us a glimpse of what it was like growing up Norma Bates' son. The mood swings, the abuse, the sexual feelings she made him feel, only to make him feel like shit about it. Norman loved her, and was as dedicated as a son could possibly be. He didn't mind the abuse because he understood her. But when Norma moves in her new man, Norman's understanding quickly turns to jealousy. Norman puts up with the new beau for a while, but is clearly simmering. The abuse is fine as long as he's the only man in her life. And currently, he is not. The feeling of rejection is what finally did it for Norman. And as for our present day Norman. He's informed our radio host that he has plans to commit one last murder which will put an end to the madness. Atleast in his own mind.
One thing is for sure. Norman is really bad at imitating his mother's voice. I doubt Olivia Hussey will ever sound like that no matter how long she lives. But I like Psycho IV. I definitely do not love it, nor do I favor it over the others. But Mick Garris' Psycho IV gets respect for trying something a little different and it not backfiring. A semi-prequel which explores Norman's background was the way to go for the final installment. Psycho IV, above all, gives plenty of closure to Psycho fans, as well as the character of Norman Bates, which Anthony Perkins played so well. 6/10Again. Not that any sequel was ever needed for Hitchcock's classic, but I think it all went pretty well. Watching all three of these films, recently, I couldn't help but notice that these films are all a good example of how horror movies evolved from the early/mid-80's to early 90's. In my opinion, Psycho II is the stronger of the three. And has a little bit of that leftover quality the 70's enjoyed. Psycho III, while entertaining, is the only expendable. It feels as if the series is just sort of killing time and having some fun between 2 and 4. Psycho III is simply there if you want it. Psycho IV recaptures a little more of the old school Horror feel. And maybe a bit of a TV movie feel at the same time. Or maybe that's just me. Three great sequels which don't seem to piss off very many fans of the original. Something I would have assumed would be an easy thing to do. So, thank you Richard Franklin, Anthony Perkins and Mick Garris for not fucking this up. I think Hitchcock would be proud... On second thought. He probably wouldn't.
#Slasher
Alan is a ridiculous sack of fat shit with serious anger issues and an apparent fear of bathing, or changing clothes. A whiny spaz who allegedly has mental problems, and milks this for all it's worth to get sympathy. He gets picked on mercilessly by his peers to the point that you might feel sorry for him. But then he turns around and does the same to the smaller kids. And is a complete dick to the authority figures who could otherwise be on his side. But nobody cares about Alan's fat ass. And within the first minute of watching him in action, you can't really blame them. As unhappy as he is at camp Manabe, Alan is stuck here for the Summer. He seems to take great pleasure in tormenting those smaller than him, yet, one could easily picture him going on a killing spree once the tables are turned. That's what this movie mainly is. Just one teaser after the other. Is Alan insane or simply misunderstood? Does it even matter? No, it does not. We are treated to a few inventive murders between Alan's tantrums. So, there is a killer amongst all this stupidity, which doesn't seem to have anything to do with anything. It's painfully obvious who is doing this, but then we keep on going back to the fat kid. Insane or misunderstood? Again. Doesn't matter.
I'm sure most people find the Alan character a confusing one. And most likely, an infuriating one. Especially if you were hoping for a sequel where Felissa Rose is the main attraction. I'll admit, it does take alot of nerve to pull something like this after making fans wait decades for the real sequel. Like it or not, this one's it. But I think I get what Robert Hilzik was going for with this kid. Alan is a parody of the idea that the kid that gets picked on could one day snap and kill everybody. It's all just done in a completely outlandish manner. And while I think it was a great idea that was done very well, at times, Hilzik seemed to neglect every other aspect of the story. and the movie, as a whole, turned out pretty bad. At times, It seemed as though Hilzik put no thought into what Sleepaway Camp fans might want to see, and just got high and lost track of everything after coming up with this weird plot that should have been more of a comical sub-plot. At some point, he should have realized this approach would kill the movie's chances of ever gaining a fanbase. But he just never did.
Killing Spree is 80's camp at its finest. A movie up there with the likes of Return Of The Living Dead, as far as fun 80's Horror goes. Good enough to be taken seriously, but really stupid at the same time. In all the best ways, of course. One thing I've always said about Tim Ritter is that the man is way too talented to limit himself to such low-budget movies. Especially the micro-budget stuff that was to come. It works out great for me, because low-budget movies is what I love. But it's still a shame the man never had much money to throw around, because even the lower budgeted ones he did are all really damn good. But no money, no noteriey. That's just the way it goes in the movie biz. The highlight of course, is the now legendary Asbestos Felt. With his hysterical performance as a jealous husband on a rampage. A performance seemingly taken less and less seriously as the movie goes on. And I have no idea how true this is, but when listening to the Sub Rosa dvd commentary for this, Asbestos Felt did confess to co-star, Joel D. Wynkoop, that he was pretty drunk in just about every scene he appeared in. So, keep that little tidbit in
The day Blood Lake was made, the slasher genre bottomed out. I'm pretty sure it never got any worse than this. The storyline is a big reason why. We got two fun loving teenage couples and a tag-a-long pre-teen couple, heading down to the lake house of one of the girlfriends. Everyone's got thick Oklahoma accents, the guys got their short shorts, and everybody is ready for some sweet 80's partying. One character, which is usually the first thing someone mentions about this movie, is li'l Tony. A loud mouth little blonde cocksucker who constantly tries to impress the big kids by bragging about how hard he's going to stick it to his little friend. An obnoxious pre-teen that would no doubt make things a tad awkward if this were real life. But this is definitely not real life. Everyone laughs off the little virgin's attempt at coolness, as we witness some very incoherent dialogue between the characters, which come off very improvised. Atleast I hope it is. The first 20 minutes is mostly mumbled banter and horsing around between the teens, until we get to the good shit. Water skiing! Gosh, that looks like fun!
Not all that fun watching these tools do it in a movie for ten minutes at a time, when it's clearly meant for filler. But in real life, sure. The gang make friends with a couple of guys and invites them over that night for some beers and countless games of quarters. After leaving late at night, they are slaughtered by a prowler, which leads to what is by far the most incoherent and mindblowing scene in the movie. The next day, a deputy stops by and has one of the guys come outside with him, where he shows him the bodies of the victims, and asks if he has any information about what happened. And you would think they were talking about what they had for breakfast, going by their mannerisms. Plus, the music was just loud enough that you could barely hear alot they were saying. A portion of the conversation could very well have been about breakfast for all we know. Yet, they were pointing at corpses. so, that's probably it.
I get that he didn't know his new friends very well, but Christ! Atleast one of you try and appear as though you're looking at something bad. I get no indication that the bad acting in this is anything but unintentional, which to this day, is amazing to me. The brutal murders which couldn't be seen due to no lighting has surprisingly put very little damper on the weekend festivities. It's not even clear who knows about this tragedy and who doesn't. Instead of leaving immediately, everyone continues with their beer drinking, fucking and kidding around with li'l Tony, until one of the couples randomly goes for a wallk late at night, and of course gets it. I forgot which couple it was. Like I said. Terrible lighting in this movie. I hope their deaths were gory. I like gore.
It wasn't until the late 90's when I rented Redneck Zombies that I would finally watch my second shot-on-video Horror. That of course was a more enjoyable experience, so, I finally warmed up to the idea that there might be something to these awful little home movies. But it wasn't until 2010, when I bought Cannibal Campout on dvd, that I knew I had to get every single one of these. So, I started with the first one I ever saw. About 17 years had passed since I had seen it, and couldn't really remember what it was about it that I hated so much. So, I bought a rather pricey vhs tape off Amazon, and as it would turn out, the very qualities I once despised were the same qualities which would finally win me over as an adult. Though, I'm not sure what that says about my own mental development.
And of course, the next one I buy would be Mulva. Yeah. I totally had that one coming. That's a story better left for another day. Anyway, still excited about my discovery of this hilarious POS, I go on an Amazon shopping spree for any Chris Seaver films I can find. Not long after that, I owned about 15 LBP films. All awesome, all pretty bad. All ridiculous, but mostly in a good way. Some lower budgeted than others, depending on how old they were, but none quite as amazing as Blood Fart Lake. And years later, after seeing countless more of these, I still stand by that. But let me tell you about Terror At Blood Fart Lake.
The ridiculous group is joined by who may be the funniest character in film history. An odd, feminine young man with an afro and abnormally large calves, named Caspian, forces his company on everyone and assures them he can be trusted since he "taught Hambone everything he knows", which is good enough for the gang. Besides the occasional killing by a masked scarecrow, not much happens to further the plot. Just Caspian and pals partying, talking about Ernest, and spouting some of the most ridiculous lines ever put to a script. Meanwhile, Thunder Ambrosia, a badass bitch with vengeance on her mind, is heading towards the cabin and hitches a ride from dumbass redneck, Leo DeChamp. These two bicker, flirt, say alot of stupid shit, and eventually take a fuck break where Thunder gets tons of fake-looking jizz sprayed all over her in what is one of the most pointless scenes in the movie, believe it or not. It's all pretty much pointless. But so much fun. The actors who portray Caspian and the gang continue to make asses of themselves, and clearly having a ball doing it. Hats off to the eccentric Josh Suire, who portrayed both Caspian and Leo. He really carried this movie, and made it far more entertaining than it should be. But considering there were no real actors in this movie (besides Ambrosia and Hambone), these guys actually did a really good job. At being funny more so than the acting. Which is far more important, anyway.
So I watched this movie again the other night. But it felt like for the first because Scorpion released it to Blu-ray restored. Before it was dark and I could hardly make anything out. To All a Goodnight(1980) is a typical Christmas slasher. It's directed by David Hess of all people, but there isn't any rape scenes in this slasher.
All three series are linked by Jason Goes To Hell. This film includes the Necronomicon and the Kandarian dagger from the Evil Dead films, as well as Freddy's glove pulling Jason's mask into hell. This was due to New Line (who owns the rights to the Elm Street series) obtaining the rights to the Friday the 13th series at the time. Furthermore, New Line previously had distribution rights to The Evil Dead, though the props were most likely used simply as easter eggs, yet it leads to an almost canon fan speculation of the connections of each series, and ultimately spawned the un-used film treatment for "Freddy vs. Jason vs. Ash", which resulted in a comic.