Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer: Welcome to Sociopath Country

As I make my way through the last few movies I have yet to see before I can generate my very own "Most Disturbing" list, I'm starting to get the feeling that my soul has been stolen. Not in that Mortal Kombat--lost for all eternity, Emperor Shao Kahn ripping my soul out for his collection way though. Maybe more like Dementor's have slowly sucked my soul out and it hovers above me waving gleefully back kind of thing. I guess I just keep reading these accounts where people watch these disturbing films and end up feeling faint, and distraught, and I never feel that way. I can understand of course how one might feel that way, but ultimately I press the stop button and go to sleep soundly. I suppose in the grand scheme of things, I have seen so many of these films that I am in a way becoming desensitized. I'm like a garbage man who just isn't affected by the horrible stench of filth anymore because I'm so used to it. I still hold out for that one garbage bag that will be unavoidably stinky (I'm guessing that it's August Underground's Mordum or Necromantik) but until then, it's just another day of work.

So that brings us to Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. A film that many before me have dubbed as being one of the most disturbing films they've seen--complete with a hand held camera murder that we get to watch more than once. While I wasn't particularly uncomfortable during this scene, and found a similar scene from A Clockwork Orange to be a tad more disturbing, I did find that there is a brutal realism to Henry that is seldom seen in film. I'm not talking Paranormal Activity real--but more like, Henry:Portrait of a Serial Killer seems less like a movie and more like I'm watching someone's actual home videos.

I don't mean just during that scene, where the presence and use of the video camera is obvious. I mean that the entirety of the film is so brutally realistic, that at no point do I become aware of anything that remotely resembles a story line, motive, character development for the sake of moving the film forward etc. Henry is not made in a conventional way that most movies are. The difference between most disturbing movies and Henry is that Henry never feels like a movie at all. Nothing happens that feels intentionally shocking and nothing happens that feels like it is being manipulated for the sake of true shock.

One of the most interesting stories I have found concerning Henry, is that after a screening, a man approached the director and exclaimed that he couldn't do that. He couldn't make such a horrible character who simply gets away in the end, and is released out into the world without the slightest hint of comeuppance. The director shrugged and simply said--we just did. That I think is one of the most telling aspects about the film. It's not a film in that sense, because it plays by no rules. It isn't a movie for the audience, it isn't a conflict of morality, it is simply as its title so aptly claims, a portrait.

Henry has no motive, Henry has no personality really--he is simply the most real, and honest depiction of a sociopath anyone has ever seen on film. When Henry kills people he just does it. He doesn't waste time pretending to be some suave, handsome man, or some oddly intelligent scholar. He isn't presented to us in a way that makes us feel like we need to glorify him. He's just a serial killer with no soul whatsoever. Everything he does is relentlessly and unapologetically without feeling. That my friends is the true definition of a sociopath, and to see it actually represented before our eyes IS what makes the film so disturbing.

Every time Henry approaches a potential victim, it's like we hold our breath. Personally I was praying that he wouldn't kill anyone, which again says something about the true nature of this film. We aren't rooting for the bad guy--or I hope no one is. We aren't praying for more depictions of gore, and violence because we are afraid of Henry. I can't think of too many other films that keep us from wanting to see the violence and gore unfold. Can you? Each shot of a dead body that we see, and every sound clip of what went down there--is just as off putting as the next.

We don't exclaim about how cool something is, because the fact of the matter is that Henry is dispatching people abnormally fast and it's creepy--it really is. The man is capable of killing anyone, anytime and he never gives it much thought.

So that in fact is why I did not think this film initially "disturbed" me. It's disturbing in a much different way than we are used to, and is definitely something that didn't click with me right away. I will say that I was enormously disturbed by the incestuous rape that happens though late in the film. Again, just another depiction of cold, brutal realism that is never built up or even anticipated. It was shocking, horrific and just made you feel....yucky.

I guess what it comes down to, is just how terrifying Henry is. Even when we see him being protective of Becky, everything he does--we tend to keep our distance. That first conversation he has with Becky where he keeps changing how he killed his mom? Jesus. If that doesn't make you physically keep your distance even from your TV set as you are watching this, then you might have a problem. Poor Becky. Hopefully I'm not the only one who tried to send telepathic messages to her throughout the duration of her flirtation.

Also disturbing is reading up on the real serial killer Henry was based on, Henry Lee Lucas. Apparently "Becky" was actually the 11 year old niece of Ottis whom Henry began a relationship with with! Even though in the film Henry was often depicted as being completely angered by blatant sexual acts of any kind, the real Henry was a rapist and pedophile. Isn't that lovely?

So all in all, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is quite an experience. While nothing ever makes me feel ill, or question my sanity in wanting to watch it--the film just consistently verges on too real and brutal for it to actually be a movie. It's a curious kind of film that feels completely untampered with and like something straight from some serial killer's pile of home movies. It's a grueling, realistic portrayal of what a serial killer's life would actually be like--and believe me, there's nothing glamorous about it. To be honest I get a little sick when I see people equating serial killers with something like celebrities. Something feels entirely wrong when I see someone putting up a Charles Manson poster in their bedroom. It's creepy. So you should stop doing that. Okay thanks.

Irreversible: Irreversible Indeed.

I'm not sure why we as horror fans, find it necessary to seek out the movies often deemed as "most shocking" or "most disturbing". Why do we need to be disturbed? Why do we need to sit ourselves down and force ourselves to watch something so unbelievably disgusting that we find it difficult to erase the thoughts from our minds? I suppose in a way we are like sadomasochists, submitting to the pain because deep down, somehow, it gives us satisfaction. Not that I'm satisfied right now, but the force that drives us to seek out these movies almost always accomplishes what it sets out to do, and that says something.

For me, seeking out these movies is more like a test of my strength as a film goer. I find that seeing films from the most disturbing list offers a sort of protection against everything else. Whenever I am forced to watch some brutally gory film I can always say to myself--at least you aren't watching someone eat a giant plate of steaming poop or--at least you aren't watching a real turtle get killed.

Alright fine if I must be honest, I suppose the true reason I seek out these films is my curiosity. We need to know for ourselves if they are really as disturbing as the rest of the world has made them out to be. Their notorious scenes of rape and seemingly realistic snuff film portrayals would be nothing if someone didn't have the urge to kill a baby after viewing them.

But being "disturbed" is such a heavy kind of word. I mean--to really cause someone to be disturbed is a serious description of the mind. In mental illness terms, defining someone as disturbed is saying that the individual is impaired in the mind. A disturbed individual's impairment drastically interferes with major life activities. I'm talking about eating, sleeping, bathing or the ability to function in social, familial or educational contexts. We're talking MAJOR effects here people. But we have in a much more minor way been disturbed by these movies. I do actually find it hard to function in a social context when all I can think about is how horrifying a 15 minute butt rape was.

Irreversible is on that list of disturbing movies because it does feature a 15 minute ass raping scene. It is however also on that list because it also shows the bleak inner workings of a gay S&M club called The Rectum. Pure terror is not seen until you witness a man violently fisting himself.....believe me. Something that sets Irreversible apart from some of the other more disturbing movies however, is that I find it to be entirely thought provoking and even extremely artistic. It's a film that works on so many levels that you need to hold your head to keep it from spinning. I find that I have a hard time with people that write movies off because they contain brutal rape scenes. Yes, some movies don't have a point to a rape scene--it's sole purpose being merely to shock its viewers. Irreversible does however have a point and the rape in the film is an integral part of the story.

The film is one of those confusing backwards films. Beginning with presumably the end of the film, and ending at the beginning--Irreversible weaves a twisted tale of revenge. After Marcus finds his girlfriend to be raped and beaten into coma status, he goes on a mad search to find the man that did it. That's pretty much the plot, but the film turns it into this gigantic maze of chaos. We begin with two men on a bed in their underwear discussing a disgusting past sex crime. One of these men happens to be "The Butcher" from the director's previous film I Stand Alone. After that we are shown Marcus bloody and on a stretcher, while another man is led out of the club wearing handcuffs. Next we are led through the gay sex club while Marcus relentlessly searches for a man named le Tenia (The Tapeworm.... ew). This search ends in one of the most violent and difficult to watch face bashing scenes I have ever witnessed. I was in complete and utter shock and was convinced for at least 5 minutes that he was actually hitting that man in the face with a fire extinguisher.

After this the plot only gets more chaotic, yet it starts to iron out some of the larger questions that we form in our heads. Before long we arrive at the infamous rape sequence and while it is incredibly horrific the weight of it all is heavier due to everything we have witnessed prior to this. Because we know what the end result is--the film gets that much more shocking, especially if you take note of who is getting beat with the fire extinguisher and who is close by watching.

Irreversible is one of the more interesting movie watching experiences that I've had. I began feeling marginally annoyed and bothered by the seemingly loud and flashy style of filming. Much of the beginning, up until after the rape scene is filmed on what feels like a home video camera, shakes, quakes and all. Not that I wanted to see the gay sex club in clear, and steady pictures--but not feeling like I wanted to puke could have been a plus.

Then, as things progressed my ears kind of started to perk up. The film was getting quieter and quieter as it moved along. Things began gently unfolding instead of getting yanked apart. This goes on till we are left with one of the most moving and unusual final scenes I have ever seen. It is in these final moments that the entire film begins to make sense. It's like the world suddenly becomes clearer, and we get it.

It's really a genius piece of film making if I may so. Sure, I may get accused of finding rape genius--but hopefully things won't come to that. This is what is genius: the story is structured by the very theme that keeps it running. How many films do you know that do that? Here is a theme; the irreversibility of our actions. The film plays the events in reverse almost as a way to reverse them. These events however are---irreversible. No matter what, what happened to that woman in the tunnel will never be erased. Just like no matter what we do we cannot reverse the fact that we watched this and that we saw a she-male's penis up close and personal. It's all so frickin mind boggling that it hurts! I don't want to talk about it too much more because I think it's a film that must be seen before it is talked about.

If you know you can handle a truly gruesome and relentlessly heavy and at times damaging to your eyes film--give Irreversible a shot. I will maintain till my dying day that the film has something to say, and that the way in which it says it is purely genius. I don't care who decides to hate me. See it for yourself and talk to me later.

The Devils: Naked Nuns Everywhere

My tiring quest to watch The Devils began when I was researching Bravo's 100 Scariest Movie Moments. The film is not on the list, but it is talked about on AMC's Scariest Movie Moments and Scenes list, which is a site I used more frequently to generate my must see list. Upon coming up on the little paragraph about The Devils, I was floored by the picture of naked nuns in a complete frenzy.

Reading the little synopsis on why it made the list drove my interest home.

In this sadomasochistic story adapted from Aldous Huxley's "The Devils of Loudon", there were numerous scenes of orgiastic and crazed, nude, head-shaved nuns, including the exorcism of the wicked, sexually-repressed, and deformed (hunch-backed) Sister Jeanne des Anges (Vanessa Redgrave); also the frenzied scene of the climactic torture / burning at the stake of the promiscuous rebel priest Father Grandier (Oliver Reed) as the crazed, self-righteous priests shouted out: "Confess. Beg forgiveness" to which Grandier responded: "I am about to meet the God who is my witness. And I have spoken the truth"; as his pyre was lit, the hysterical priest cried: "May your body be consumed by eternal fire" - as his body was licked by flames without the benefit of being strangled first.

Orgiastic nuns? Yes please. It's not that I had a sexual drive to watch nuns strip and frolic and rape a statue of Jesus, it's just that...watching nuns strip and frolic and rape a statue of Jesus is not something you see everyday--and certainly not something you see in a 1971 film that isn't porn. The film is also regarded as one of the most controversial films of all time. When people offend religion...serious shit goes down. I had it in my mind that watching The Devils would be like watching 20 nuns being exorcised at the same time while in a crazy naked frenzy. Luckily that is pretty much the case, but the story is so much more interesting than all this naked nun business would have you believe.

In the small French town of Loudon, the women are entranced by Father Grandier, a priest who seems to pay little attention to that whole no sex thing. Apparently the women thinks he's the sexiest thing since sliced bread--I mean they're right,

right? Well that's debatable at least. Anyways. Deformed hunchback Sister Jeanne, (Vanessa Redgrave!) who is the head of the local convent, makes it very clear that she is secretly obsessed with Grandier. While watching him pass by, she hides in a tiny room and quietly writhes and sweats as he passes. She masturbates in a fevered frenzy, and fantasizes about doing the nasty with him. When word reaches the convent that Grandier has married a woman, she becomes livid and inadvertently accuses Grandier of seducing her with the devil's charms.

It is not long before the town and a "professional" witch-hunter becomes involved, and they try to exorcise her demons. The other nuns join in to protect themselves and Sister Jeanne from being excommunicated causing the church to be run amok with naked nuns exclaiming about devils. Grandier is put on trial as the town gets wrapped up deeper and deeper in its mess.

There is a whole other element of course, dealing with the political and religious ratifications as implemented by Cardinal Richelieu's influence over Louis XIII. This is important after all, as Loudon remains the only town unwilling to have their city destroyed in favor of eliminating all Protestant threats. Bringing down Grandier is their #1 priority, and convicting him of consorting with the devil is a fine plan indeed.

The thing I was most surprised about is how watchable the movie actually is. With a movie like this, I expected the only enthralling thing to be the famous nun orgy, but I was quite wrong. The performances are pretty outstanding in this, and even though Oliver Reed creeps me out as Father Grandier, you cannot deny the strange allure he seems to possess. Vanessa Redgrave however easily steals the show. There are few things I have seen that have resonated more with me, than seeing Vanessa Redgrave appear through the door with her back hunched and her head tilted to the side in some kind of grotesque beautiful way.

Her hateful vengeance as acted out on the other sisters and then seeing her enter the secret little closet and masturbate as Father Grandier approaches, practically made my head explode.

Everything that leads up to the famous orgiastic scenes creates anticipation, but what we see along the way is still captivating. This is perhaps what makes me feel saddest about this film is that because of the harsh censor ships, barely anyone has even seen it--and it is a great film. I should have mentioned this earlier but one of the reasons I had such a hard time fulfilling my desire to see this film has to do with how difficult it was to track down a decent copy. The only way it seemed possible was by ordering some bootleg copy from London. Still fuzzy on how that whole bootleg/ being arrested and fined a million dollars for pirating works, I decided it was best to wait. When the film was originally released it was edited down so much that entire chunks of the film were missing. I didn't want to risk getting a copy without all the good stuff, so my worry and anticipation increased even more. About a week ago I discovered a $5 copy of the film on Amazon, which promised the original 111 minute version, restored and containing interviews with the director and actors. Clearly my wishes had been granted. The quality isn't very good, but who really cares when the possibility of seeing naked nuns frolic on a church altar is imminent!?

One thing I was not expecting was how beautiful and breathtaking the set pieces and some images would be. There are moments in The Devils that just cry out my name.

Towering crosses, suggesting Gothic influences and inklings of the devil in a setting where the devil is least wanted. It once again just boggles my mind. I love this film, I love all the shouting, and the head shaved nuns, and the naked nuns literally swinging from the chandeliers.

It's like I wanted posters of the entire process plastered all over my room and I don't care how many judgmental looks and stares I receive.

Now brace yourselves because the part when I talk about the nun frenzy has arrived. Was it everything I had imagined it would be? Hardly. And by that I mean that I could never have guessed how utterly ridiculous it would be. Forced enemas, naked bodies grinding all over a Jesus, no matter how well I describe it you won't believe what it happening until you see it for yourself. Aside from the nun debauchery, there is also all sorts of other ridiculous happening as well! From Louis XIII's opening dance number,

to his shooting Protestants game,

to the town's crazy ways of celebrating executions....it is really all too marvelous.

The films climax is powerful and surprisingly brutal. Who know the true way to destroy Father Grandier was by taking away from him the only thing that made him appealing?

Overall, The Devils is a delight of a movie. Not for everyone I'm sure, but it's worth watching at least for the infamous nun debauchery, which earned its status of one of the most edited films of all time (Is that true? I half made that up. But probably true). And if your interest surpasses nun debauchery, you'll find intrigue in the films compelling story. An interesting combination of historical account, and complete artistic freedom. I urge you to seek it out, and uncover a piece of cinematic history that's slowly making it's way back to the light.

Salo or The 120 Days of Sodom: Butt Sex and a Giant Buffet of Poop. Hooray.

When I first saw Cannibal Holocaust, all the online forums often had this poll question; "What is more disturbing- Cannibal Holocaust or Salo?" And I always wondered...what is this Salo business eh? Personally I'd be fine if I had never heard of Salo and hey I might even feel less like gouging my eyes out but the movie does unfortunately have a point- and that above all else is something worth enduring. Unless of course you have a bad gag reflex when watching people eat poop- then I'd suggest skipping it.

Salo is based on a work by the Maquis de Sade whom I know best from Waxwork. 4 douche bags in a facist Italy kidnap 8 boys and girls with the help of some burly young men. Their plan is to bring the victims to a palace where 4 prostitutes take turn telling tales of their past encounters. These stories form the basis for the men's torture of the kidnapped victims and also can just do whatever the hell they want at any given time- but what they usually want to do is just have butt sex.

Forgive me for using immature phrases like butt sex and poop but I find that I have to talk about it in those terms or else I'll jump out the window. If you don't like staring at uncircumcised penis's or any other naked body part, probably skip this as well as the kidnapped victims are naked 97% of the time. The brutality is quite evident the moment we understand just what the victims have been brought to the palace for. In the midst of someone giving a speech or even just dinner chat a male douche head will grab a young boy at random and start having butt sex without missing a beat. The prostitutes stories however may be one of the most disturbing things out of the whole movie. These stories recount tales of first having sexual encounters with men when they were 7, being asked to pee on people sick shit like that. And these women dress up like these grotesque Hollywood starlets and it's really just.....blagh.

Then the most horrible and utterly vomit inducing scene is of course the poop eating. This brings me back to my unfortunate experience of being forced to watch "Two Girls One Cup" in which I could not get those images unburned from my brain for probably a year. Seeing poop on film is something I will probably never get used to. And frankly I don't know who can. Then to add insult to injury this movie literally cooks up the poop and serves it in a giant buffet style meal. You've honestly never experienced horror until you see a giant tray of steaming poo.

Ok enough about poop. Discovering and deciphering what this movie's point is- is almost worth watching this movie. It focuses on the absolute brutality of people against people. Once again a common theme in horror movies ala zombie films is the fear we have of each other and the horrible and violent tendencies that only humans can evoke on one another. The 4 men in this movie stand for money and power. By having this money and power they are able to get literally everything they could ever want and hope for. They have these sick and terrible fantasies that can get acted out for them within seconds. The level of the humiliation and the violence- especially in the last 10 minutes or so is so brutal and unbelievable it seems almost impossible that it's not real.

There are plenty of interesting things about this movie- for instance, how the 4 men take turns viewing the final torture and killings through binoculars- the constant distancing paired with the switching of who actually gets to do the killing is astounding. What can be said about men who get off both doing the killing and acting as voyeurs? Then there's also the very last scene. The desensitized youth- two boy guards who have just seen all the terrible events take place and what are they doing while the teens are being slaughtered? Enjoying a lovely and slow waltz- while chit chatting about their personal lives. It's such an interesting commentary on Nazi youth and just any other kind of situation in which the participants are kind of just there and not really taking in what they are doing. What kind of soul can shut down like that so easily that you are immune to the fact that everyone around you is literally eating shit?

This film raises so many provocative questions while at the same time being one of the most disgusting films I have ever seen. You definitely need a very very strong heart to watch this and not want to curl up in a ball and die after. It's no surprise that it's banned in practically every country in the world. In terms of being more or less disturbing than Cannibal Holocaust however.....I'm not sure. Cannibal Holocaust felt so much more real and brutal to me- whereas with Salo I felt removed and just repulsed. They both however have a lot to say on the brutality of human beings and what we are truly capable of doing to one another. Cannibal Holocaust also is responsible for killing a turtle though so....yeah tough call.

I'm passing on the trailer because if I see poop one more time I might die.

I Spit on Your Grave/Day of the Woman: Damn Those Backwoods People and Their Lack of Manners.

I Spit On Your Grave is a revenge film at it's finest and also a powerful take on feminism. While many people find it hard to look past the brutality of the rape scenes- they are failing to realize the overall outcome of the film. So what if Roger Ebert called it the "worst film ever made", he also gave two thumbs up to Speed 2: Cruise Control. Clearly the man is not to be trusted.

Jennifer is a writer working on her first novel in her rented summer home in some woodsy area. She meets a few nice townsfolk who seem pretty normal and really not all that backwoods-like. They aren't even close to those in Deliverance which is probably what makes the rape scenes so unbelievably gruesome. Anyways- Jennifer settles into her summer home and one day while sunning in a canoe, two of the boys round her up with a motor boat and pull her canoe to the far off side of the lake. Here she is pulled from her boat and stripped and beaten then raped by the lead guy. After this she runs away- only to be met again by all the men who once again rape her. After getting away a 2nd time she tries to call for help once she reaches her home but is interrupted by-you guessed the men once more. Oooh and raped. Again.

After barely escaping with her life, Jennifer rebounds faster than any rape victim in the history of rape victims, and plots her revenge.

As I said before, what makes the rape scenes truly unsettling is that all the men appear to be quite normal. They aren't toothless hicks who force grown men to oink like a pig before sticking it in their butt. They just truly believe that what they are doing is 100% A-OK. Even their conversation the night before while fishing never really spells out that they are going to rape someone.
What is even more unsettling is the fact that they let her go 3 times. After the first rape I kind of thought, "that's it?" But then bam rape number two, and bam bam rape number three. And also the actress who plays Jennifer is extremely extremely convincing. You could truly feel her anguish and her screams almost ripped through your body.

Now the revenge sequences I thought were pretty damn good. Although I kind of questioned her decision to kill Matthew, but I suppose in the end it had to be done. He still did it and even though he was egged on, he did jump in on the fun a bit suddenly...so yeah I don't trust him.

The best revenge and probably the best scene of the movie is the bathtub scene. The red of the blood mixed with all those bubbles is pretty impressive and almost gives Argento's blood a run for his money- but not really because that would just be preposterous. Then the way Jennifer calmly locks the door and settles down in the chair to enjoy some nice classical music, with the guy screaming in the background...I just really thought that was well done.

My only real complaint about the film was how quickly she bounced back. And how she just took a bath afterwards and laid down in her bed. There is no way she could have known she was suppose to have been killed and that those men wouldn't be back. It doesn't entirely make sense that she wouldn't jump in her car right away and go to the cops immediately. The scenes after that- her taking a stroll in the meadow, and her continuing to write her novel are kind of like....ummmmm hello? You got raped? A lot. But I suppose it's speaking to her strong character as a woman and her abitlity to move on with her life and not let what happened to her destroy her as a person and all that. It still makes me raise a "I don't think this makes any sense" eyebrow.

The great thing about this movie is that you are always always on Jennifer's side. Even when you see that the gas station guy has kids and a wife you never for once feel sorry for him. You might feel a little sorry for Matthew- but when Jennifer has had her last word you truly feel empowered as well. The revenge sequences weren't some cheap way to get people to watch a horror movie and go wild over violence and blood. They were necessary to the film and it's overall impact is a strong one. Jennifer comes away from the movie as someone who has literally whacked her rapists in the balls. Yes, she uses her sexuality to appeal to the men in the end but that is what they deserve- because nothing is worse than getting a boner and then having it cut off. Or so I'm told.

Buy I Spit on Your Grave at Horror Movie Empire!

Freaks: That'll Teach You To Marry Midgets!

Freaks ranks among one of the most controversial films to date because of the usage of real circus "freaks" in the film. At the time, parading around people with deformities next to "normal" people and then subjecting the public to view it on film was a horrendous act-more horrendous than calling people with deformities freaks I guess. Sad though it is, the final scene in this movie landed it at #15 on Bravo's scariest movie moments list.

The film is short- just about an hour long and tells the story of a band of circus freaks, who unite to seek revenge on a woman who had plotted to kill the leader of the performers and take his money. Cleopatra is a trapeze artist, cleverly nicknamed the flying peacock. She is courted by a sideshow midget named Hans and soon learn he has a large fortune. Plotting with her lover Hercules, Cleo marries Hans then tries to poison him. When the other performers learn of her plans they confront her and chase after her one stormy and rainy night. We soon learn that the freaks have turned her into a human "chicken" and now she is on display as a sideshow exhibit, looking like this.

The scene that Bravo highlights is pretty creepy and so wrong. The array of sideshow exhibits in this movie is startling and just knowing that these aren't special effects is pretty amazing. Perhaps the most mind boggling is the human torso, a man with no arms or legs that can role his own cigarettes,


.
I guess what made this scary to most people were the freaks, but now nothing really can shock us anymore so the film is a bit dated. I still think the last scene is pretty darn good though, and call me crazy but seeing a bunch of legless and armless people, pinheads, and human torsos runing after you with knives is a bit scary.

Buy Freaks at Horror Movie Empire

The Last House on the Left: Wes Craven's First Nightmare.

This was Wes Craven's very first film, and it still stands today as a shocking and brutal look at murder and revenge. A lot of people have a severe discomfort when they watch this film and I would say that I can agree (although it doesn't make me as uncomfortable as Cannibal Holocaust). The innocence of the main character paired with the proximity of her house to the crime, and what happens afterwards is pretty unbelievable and extremely unnerving.

Mari plans to go with her friend Phyllis to a concert for her 17th birthday. Her parents are concerned but let her go anyways. Roaming the streets of the city after the concert, Mari and Phyllis decide to find someone who will sell them marijuana and run into Junior. Unbeknownst to the girls junior is the son of one of the escaped convicts the girls heard of earlier in the day on the radio. Junior leads them to an apartment where they are ambushed by the three escaped criminals. Phllyis is promptly raped, and the scene is juxtaposed to Mari's parents planning a surprise party for her.

The girls are shoved into the trunk of a car and taken into the country for further humiliation and violence. As luck has it their car breaks down right outside Mari's house. The criminals take the girls into the woods and force Phllyis to pee her pants. Then they make the girls perform sexual acts when soon after, Phyllis escapes trying to make a distraction so that Mari can escape. The criminals hunt her down, stab and disembowel her. Mari is later shot in a pond and killed.

The criminals decide to knock on Mari's home, and play the perfect role of broken down travelers that are lost. It is not too long before the parents realize that these people have killed their daughter, and the revenge begins...

So obviously what people find most horrific as with most controversial movies, is the rape scenes. Even the peeing in the pants scene. It's all so realistic and choppy in this movie it just gives you this overall bad feeling, kind of like a snuff film. The girls are only 17, and to have all this happened to them only minutes away from one of their houses is heartbreaking. It reminds me of Scream when Casey is stabbed and her parents are arriving. She tries to call out to them but her vocal chords have been stabbed, it's the same kind of heart break. And what do you know Wes Craven is responsible for both of them! Perhaps Scream was a homage to this...hmmm

The disembowelment scene is pretty gruesome, especially for a film made in the early 70s. The criminals are so brutal and so disgusting that what they receive at the end is nothing short of satisfaction. The scene that a lot of people mention over and over again in this segment, is when Mari's mother gives one of them criminals a blow job and then bites off his penis. That is a crime of passion at it's finest. The mother truly wanted the man to suffer and I imagine if I had a penis it would be a terrible way to go.

So if you haven't seen this, I'd say it's worth a try. I say "try" because a lot of people can't get through it. It is very difficult to watch but it's groundbreaking in what it does for horror cinema and it's Wes Craven's debut-so it is rather historic.

Buy The Last House on the Left at Horror Movie Empire!

Peeping Tom: Two Ginger's in One Movie? That's Just Crazy Man.

Peeping Tom in it's time was one of the most controversial films to date. Now it seems almost funny when we have things like Cannibal Holocaust to compare it to. It is an amazing film however and it keeps you thinking about it long after you watch it, which in my opinion is the mark of a truly great thriller.

So meet Mark, a photographer with a scarring childhood who gets a real kick out of filming his victims while killing them. An early form of snuff films perhaps? Mark appears normal on the outside albeit a bit strange and nervous when he interacts with other people, especially those who make him nervous. Case in point his downstairs neighbor Helen who is the creepiest ginger I've ever seen.. Mark shows Helen some home video footage of his father filming him as a child in various states of terror. In one instance his father throws a lizard on his bed and films while Mark screams and tries to get away. Mark reveals that his father was a psychologist who focused on fear and the nervous system. He kept Mark on constant surveillance even wiring his room so that he could always be watched and used for his experiments, even going so far as to film Mark saying goodbye to his dying mother and attending her funeral.

Female victims of Mark's start popping up and it's not long before the police make a connection. Each woman has the look of pure terror on their face and are stabbed in the throat. We find out soon enough that Mark kills the women with the pointed end of his tripod while filming them at the same time. He also has attached a mirror to the camera so his victims can watch their own deaths.

I don't want to reveal too much of the ending because I found it pretty breathtaking. But the most curious part about the film is the symbolism of being watched, and watching yourself. I read that the film is an allegory for a horror movie director. The director watches his victims or characters being killed in order to gain a reaction from the audience. Mark in turn tries to gain a reaction from his victims which then of course gains a reaction from the audience. It can be a bit confusing but when you think about the voyeurism involved in a camera it really is quite fascinating.

Mark and Norman Bates are often connected in this way. Both enjoy "watching" their victims to some extent. Both have some pretty messed up and frightening childhoods, and both have a hint of a double personality well a hint more in Mark's case, with poor Norman it is pretty clear there are two sides.

The strangeness of Mark's father is extremely interesting, and how Mark's adulthood was created due to his father's experiments. There are also a lot of really really great scenes and pictures in this; the juxtaposition of the mother's pointed walking stick, to Mark's pointed tripod, Helen's mothers blindness and how she still feels fear even though she cannot see Mark, the funny bits about the scene being changed from trunks to hats, and Mark's general creepiness.

I feel pretty confident I could go on and on about everything in this movie so I will spare you. If you haven't seen this you must check it out. It could easily make my favorites list with a few more viewings. Watch the scene below for a good idea of Mark's character.

Cannibal Holocaust: Not a Good One to Watch While Eating Rat Kabobs.

In the horror movie world there is one film that is mentioned time and time again as the most disturbing film out there. After seeing it I can whole heartedly agree. Cannibal Holocaust was the first generation Blair Witch Project, in that it tricked a lot of people into thinking it was actually a real documentary where people were actually killed. In fact, the director, Ruggero Deodato actually had to go on trial to prove that the killings were in fact not real. He actually had to bring in the actors and actresses, and prove it in front of a judge. If that doesn't get you interested I don't know what will.

I wouldn't recommend this film for the faint of heart. Even I, who have no problem with blood and guts had to look away at times. There is a rape scene in this movie that is the most horrible thing I have ever seen, and yes I'm counting Last House on the Left. People that were offended by that movie should never ever EVER see this.

The movie follows the travels and documentary footage of filmmakers who set out into South America to film a cannibalistic tribe. They of course do not return and a famous anthropoligist ventures out to find out what happened. Obviously they are dead, but he does recover the lost footage and we get to watch it with him. What he finds is a horrible display of human nature. What we find is that the americans are just as savage if not more savage then the cannibals they are filming.

The film is also banned in 6 countries, because of its gross depictions, AND the actual slaughtering of real animals on film. There is one scene with a turtle that is very upsetting and I had to fast forward. I usually draw the line at the killing of animals. So anyways most peoples main problem is that yes they did actually kill the animals which is awful.

This is another movie that I never want to see again but yet still return to it for unknown reasons... perhaps because it's banned, or maybe just because Deodato does something extremely groundbreaking and terrifying. The trailer doesn't come close to doing it justice so here is the famous picture of the scene that makes people think this woman's death was real.

The director actually made this woman show the judge how they accomplished this. The illusion is made by having the actress sit on a bicycle seat and then hold the top part of the stake in her mouth. Illusion or not it's still terrifying.

Other gross out moments include; woman getting raped by a rock, woman getting raped by filmmakers, filmmaker getting raped by tribe, heads and penis's cut off, etc etc.. Like I said nothing tops this movie. Nothing.

Buy Cannibal Holocaust at Horror Movie Empire