The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2015: Horror of Dracula (1958), directed by Terence Fisher

The Trailer

and

The Appropriate Tune: "My Way", by Christopher Lee

R.I.P. Christopher Lee

     In the last Marathon of the Soul, I discussed the influence of vampires in pop culture, most specifically Dracula. Werner Herzog’s adaptation of the Bram Stoker novel had been number 1 after all, and even though the numbered rankings don’t mean much in this context, there really wasn’t any doubt where it should lie. Aside from Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein”, there is no other story that has had as much influence on pop culture and the horror genre as Dracula. For better or worse, depending on your opinions of Anne Rice and Twilight, the notion of vampires in fiction would not be as prevalent nor would their ‘rules’ be as ingrained into the public consciousness if it hadn’t been for Bram Stoker’s novel. Sure, there had been vampires as the subject of stories around that time, Polidori’s “The Vampyre”, Sheridan Le Fanu’s “Carmilla”, but none have had the staying power as the former Vlad Tepes.

     Of course a lot of the reason why Dracula has been so durable over the years is because of its adaptation to film, and as is is the horror genre, it has been firmly run into the ground. Most of how we view Dracula (as well as werewolves, mummies and Frankenstein’s Monster) comes from the Universal horror films of the 30’s and 40s, which of course were so influential because they were the first of their kind, but few outside the horror fandom ever recognize the impact of Hammer Films on the classic monster films. Beginning in 1955 with their adaptation of The Quatermass Xperiment, Hammer produced a series of films in the thriller, horror and science-fiction genres, filling them with all the sex, violence and special effects that 50s B-movies could muster. The Mummy, The Curse of Frankenstein, Doctor Jekyll and Mrs. Hyde, maybe not all of them were film classics, but Hammer was able to forge a look and feel to their films that firmly established who they were and what that they were about.

     But again, none of them were quite as important as Dracula.

     In retrospect, there’s really spectacular storywise about Horror of Dracula, the first of Hammer’s multi-film series about the titular vampire. After all, it’s just retelling an abridged version of the Stoker novel, without much of the creative differences that marked Herzog’s Nosferatu or Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula. However, where this movie shines is the inclusion of Peter Cushing as Dr. Van Helsing and the legendary Christopher Lee as Count Dracula. It is Cushing’s portrayal of the doctor, who was otherwise a relatively minor character in the novel, which I firmly believe established the idea of Van Helsing as a vampire hunter and Dracula’s archnemesis. Lee’s performance of Count Dracula is equally interesting, as much ‘in character’ as Bela Lugosi’s in 1931. Unlike Lugosi’s charming European aristocrat, Lee’s Dracula is a demon in man’s clothing, a demonic figure whose overwhelming force of will is apparent even though Christopher Lee says less than five lines of dialogue throughout the entire film (I believe the story is that he hated all of Dracula’s dialogue so he opted not to say it, because who are you to question Christopher Lee?). Both embody the dark, seductive nature that characterize what Dracula represents, but there’s something dangerous, even bestial about Lee’s Dracula that feels so effective even 40+ years later. He really feels like the stuff of nightmares, more so than Lugosi or Gary Oldman or really anybody else I’ve seen that has played the character. That he manages this completely nonverbally is a testament to how truly great an actor he was.

     There will probably always be some iteration of Dracula or some other vampire story being made at any given point in time, but horror is a genre which respects the classics, and as horror fans we should as well. If you’ve already seen the Universal Dracula, how about taking a trip across the pond and trying out Horror of Dracula? It’s got boobs, blood and elderly British men galore. What more could you want on Halloween?

The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2015: Pacific Rim (2013), directed by Guillermo del Toro

The Trailer

and

The Appropriate Tune: "Giant Robot Birdhead", by The Aquabats!

     Robots. Ever since mankind first conceived of the world-changing potential that machinery could bring to our lives, and the first time that said conception took the form of mechanical or artificial beings, robots have been firmly rooted in our collective pop culture consciousness. Whether we’re talking about Isaac Asimov’s infamous 3 Laws of Robotics, Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation, C-3PO and R2D2 from Star Wars or even killer machines like Ultron or the Terminator, we love robots. They’re a reflection of ourselves after all, a fledgling race that we created, just as some people believe we were created. We are their God, and whether we treat them like slaves or otherwise, tells us much about how we treat ourselves and the world around. Is it any surprise there are so many stories about killer robots?

     Nowhere else in the world is man’s love of robots more evident than in Japan, where the sci-fi subgenre of mecha (giant robots that are piloted or otherwise controlled by humans) has become synonymous with pop culture in the country. Neon Genesis Evangelion, Gundam, Macross, Voltron, every sentai team (the basis for Power Rangers in the U.S.), Zoids, hell even Spider-Man had a giant robot when he was imported to Japan. They have that shit down on lock, as much as the U.S. does superheroes and Scandinavia barren landscapes. You can’t beat them, they’re the best there is.

     So it was in 2013 when Guillermo del Toro, director of Pan’s Labyrinth, Hellboy and others, decided to craft his love letter to giant creatures of all kinds with his film Pacific Rim. In the not too distant future, an interdimensional breach causes the arrival of giant monsters, or kaiju, which begin to destroy civilization as we know. As military forces reveal themselves woefully inadequate for defense, the governments of the world come together to create a new, more powerful weapon: Jaegers, gigantic robotic death machines that are controlled by teams of pilots sharing a mental link. For a while, the Jaegers are a terrific success, and humanity breathes a sigh of relief that they get to live again. But as the kaiju get stronger, the supply of Jaegers and able pilots gets smaller and smaller. With only four Jaegers left in the world and the strongest monsters yet to come, it’s about time for Earth to take the fight to the kaiju.

     Pacific Rim doesn’t really do anything that we haven’t seen before. All the characters are archetypes (the stern general with a heart of gold, the dick, the female love interest), the story goes through the same beats we’ve all seen hundreds of times, and you could probably guess the ending about 30 minutes. In that regard, the movie is painfully average, and in this film’s two hours I had trouble even remembering the protagonist’s name much less really care about an arc I’ve seen played out before. Even the inclusion of Idris Elba and Charlie Day doesn’t bring that much to the table, just a competently performed version of that type of character.

     What Pacific Rim gets right, and what the latest Godzilla failed to grasp is the action. Del Toro is a very visual director, especially when he has the budget for it, and since he didn’t have to worry about crafting much of a story, it left him plenty of time to focus on the special effects. To this film’s benefit, because this movie looks awesome. The pilot suits, the Jaeger designs, the bizarre Kaijus (not nearly as diverse as Toho’s monster gallery, but serviceable), the comic book style lighting, it all looks and sounds exactly as it should. When they get to the fighting (yes, a giant monster movie with giant monster fights, instead of Bryan Cranston’s wooden plank of a son), the movements of the Jaegers and the Kaiju have just enough weight to make them really seem like beings of immense size without sacrificing speed or the ability to throw bastards 10 football fields away. It’s fun and exciting, and luckily enough del Toro knows enough to give us plenty of it.

     Maybe there’s nothing very horrific about it, but Pacific Rim is a popcorn movie done right, and there are plenty who have gotten it wrong. If you’re taking a break from the scares this Halloween, try this one on for size.

The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2015: The Exorcist (1973), directed by William Friedkin

The Trailer

and

The Appropriate Tune: "Tubular Bells", by Mike Oldfield

     I’ve already spoken about how horror and science fiction could be considered ‘easy’ genres of film to do, because the standards for what constitute a good film in that case usually end up being how many buckets of blood can be thrown at a screaming woman. Not that there’s anything wrong with ‘easy’ films in a sense, it’s a good way for up-and-coming directors (Peter Jackson, David Cronenberg) to cut their teeth in the industry, but that convenience seems to come at the cost of quality control. Generally it seems that the cream of the crop is afforded the respect they deserve, your Alien/Aliens, your Blade Runners, etc. but other films that might be considered classics of horror are seemingly far from classics in the eyes of the cinema intelligentsia. Would the psychologically disturbing themes and iconography of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Halloween be more accepted in film circles if the deluge of bargain-bin crap that spawned from it didn’t exist? Maybe, maybe not.

     One of the most successful exceptions to this rule is 1973’s The Exorcist, directed by William Friedkin (Sorcerer, The French Connection), Much like Richard Donner’s infamous The Omen, Friedkin took an obscure, goofy bit of Catholicism, in this case the incredibly shady practice of exorcism, and expand it into a movie. At the time it was incredibly unique, and definitely not a film that could have been shown before the 1970s, when directorial freedom and special effects started to become prevalent. . Showing a child in this grotesque position, bloody, pockmarked face, spouting obscenities, and making the protagonist a priest who in the beginning of the movie has lost,The Exorcist touches not only upon us the cynical realist attitude born of Vietnam/race riot/political assassination era America but also of an overall maturation of cinema and the mainstream audiences. We could explore themes and show stories that we were unable to in the past, whether by technology or social morays, and not only that but really lay the groundwork for what was to be arguably more than any other time in film history. Much as Jaws and Star Wars established the foundations of the blockbuster, The Exorcist showed what this new decade meant for the horror genre, and the new avenues for where that genre could push itself in the future, whether it was through special effects or cinematography or what have you. It’s a good movie as well as an influential one, and that’s often not the case.

     Much like The Omen, Exorcist is a slow burn. The movie is about 2 hours long, and Friedkin really uses that time to build us up to that moment. A little less ambiguous than The Omen, where the events could be chalked up to Damien’s satanic influence or freak accidents, which Richard Donner (and I) consider one of the strengths of that film. When the girl starts looking like a Garbage Pail Kid and punching out grown men it does strain suspension of disbelief a bit, especially when they seem to go through every single medical exam they can think of, because a brain lesion can totally give a 12 year old girl a man’s voice. However the characters are very strong, very ‘real’ in my opinion, and I think that the feeling of tension and helplessness that arises from seeing a loved one lose control of themselves, whether through demonic possession or not, is a universal one and comes through very well. Great drama, horror classic, if you haven’t seen it already, make it a priority this Halloween.

The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2015: Drop Dead Fred (1991), directed by Ate de Jong

The Trailer

and

The Appropriate Tune: "Living Doll", by Cliff Richard & The Young Ones

     Here’s yet another film that was originally on the docket for last year’s Marathon of the Soul, Drop Dead Fred. At the time, I was at the height of what you might call my British Comedy phase: Monty Python, Fawlty Towers, Blackadder, Red Dwarf, QI, A Bit of Fry & Laurie, Jeeves & Wooster, old school Who’s Line Is It Anyway? and of course The Comic Strip Presents…,The Young Ones and Bottom. I consumed them all, wholly and voraciously, and in so doing I decided to reflect that in my choice of films. Terry Gilliam’s Time Bandits made an appearance, but at the last minute I decided to go with Guest House Paradiso instead, starring Bottom stars Rik Mayall and Ade Edmondson (pretty fun comedy, by the way). Since this list seems to be headed towards a retrospective direction, I’ve decided to bite the bullet and toss it in. See what happens, you know?

     The story to Drop Dead Fred is something we’ve probably all seen before: A schmuck who is currently at the bottom of shit valley has their life turned upside by a wacky character who by the end of the film manages to give the schmuck the confidence to succeed and so everyone lives happily ever after (except for those dickhole antagonists). The schmuck in this case is Elizabeth (Phoebe Cates), a girl so cowed by her domineering mother and her scumbag ex-husband that she seems one stapler away from being Stephen Root’s character in Office Space, and the wacky character is her manic imaginary friend Drop Dead Fred (Rik Mayall playing virtually the same character he played in almost every role he’s had, except with bizarre costumes and cartoon physics). Encino Man, My Favorite Martian, Mallrats, it’s a tried and true formula for comedy films, as much as ‘silly foreigners’ and ‘two people of opposing beliefs and personalities must work together to accomplish a shared goal’.

     This is a weird one, though. From the surface you expect it to be some kind of goofy, Halloweentown style Disney original movie, but then it turns out to be closer to an early Tim Burton joint. But it isn’t quite like Burton either, because that high level of whimsy isn’t there.to compliment that faux-goth darkness. If I had to put a term to it, it’d be ‘try-hard’. Phoebe doesn’t seem like a Potter-esque figure to pity as she does a co-dependent masochist, quietly mumbling about her stapler as the Bill Lumbergs of the movie move her ass to the basement. Fred is the same frenzied petulant twat that Rik Mayall perfected over the years, which works out for a bratty child like character, but he doesn’t seem like an actual friend either. The moments where we touch upon Fred and Lizzie’s friendship seem few and far between, and 90% of the time Fred comes off as some violently schizophrenic asshole, compelled to insult and assault the person he exists to befriend. Every other major character seems like some sort of exaggerated caricature, generally dickish, and I’m pretty sure that Mickey has a collection of human heads in his basement. I’m not the most social man in the world, but I’m pretty sure this isn’t how humans are meant to act, even if they exist in a black comedy universe.

     However I really do enjoy Rik Mayall as an actor, which is probably what saves this movie honestly, as he provides the lion’s share of the comedy and sentiment. I also quite like design aesthetic, the costumes, the effects etc., a slightly unhinged vision of how a child might view the world. Plus seeing Carrie Fisher is always pretty cool. So if Halloween comes around and you’re looking for something with your significant other (maybe not with the kids ironically, as there is a bit of language you might not appreciate), I think Drop Dead Fred might be a good, relatively inoffensive choice. It won’t even matter that she’s imaginary this time.

The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2015: Hellraiser (1987), directed by Clive Barker

The Trailer
and
The Appropriate Tune: "Hellraiser", by Krokus

     Stephen King. Love him, hate him, or totally indifferent to him, the man has firmly established his legacy in the annals of horror. I mean 200 short stories, 54 novels and 7 novellas, and around 80% of those have probably been adapted into TV shows, comics and movies over his 30+ year literary career. Hell, some of those movies (The Shining, Misery, Carrie, Stand By Me, etc.) have even been good, while some (The Langoliers) are shitty enough to be funny. The man is basically the Charles Schulz of alcoholics in Maine, a writer prolific enough to be a genre unto himself. There are those that came before, and there are those who are better, but Stephen King is the Starbucks of suspense fiction. He’s fucking everywhere.

     In the halcyon days of the mid 1980s however, there came a new writer to stake his claim in the ‘books that your mom reads’ market. His name? Clive Barker, a young maverick that, for a time, was considered the hot new thing in horror literature. While he may not have had the name reognition of King, he made up for it with post-punk artiness. You wanted horrible murder? You go for Clive Barker. You want graphic depictions of deviant sexuality? You go for Clive Barker. You want a movie that combines horrible murder and graphic depictions of deviant sexuality with a horror fantasy twist? You go for Hellraiser.

     So by this point I think everyone knows the story of Hellraiser, timeless tale that it is. Man finds glowing box which kills him, Man’s brother and frigid wife (who was apparently brainwashed by the Man’s dick, from the way she carries on) move into his house, Man partially regenerates due to spilled blood, Man compels frigid wife to murder guys to satiate his bloodlust, S&M monsters show up, there’s a bone dragon somewhere, yadda yadda yadda. Which is more than I could say about any of King’s books, far as I know, not a single bone dragon in sight. No incredibly marketable bondage demons with bizarre puzzle boxes either, though that might be for the best. We don’t really need a bondage demon arms race.

     Ridiculous plot aside, where this movie truly excels, more so than any Stephen King adaptation I can think of, is in the special effects and art design. Seeing Frank’s skeleton pull itself off of the floor, as his brain and internal organs reform is perhaps one of the best effects I’ve ever see in a horror film, and his ‘incomplete’ form is exactly what I think a man without skin would look like. Pinhead and the Cenobite Gang are likewise pretty damn interesting to look at, and it’s a shame that apparently only Pinhead returns in future installments of the franchise, considering he’s the least visually interesting monster in the movie in my opinion. Of course I imagine that ‘least visually interesting’ means ‘less expensive’, which is why he gets to be on all the posters.

     Hellraiser seems like a movie that makes more sense as a book, and Clive Barker doesn’t seem to have had enough film work (he had only directed two films before this, the last one being almost a decade prior) to prevent it from feeling too obtuse. However, the special effects and Barker’s distinct fetishes really manage to turn this movie from being yet another King-like thriller into an worthwhile horror film, especially if you’re an 80s gorehound like myself. If you are a fan of the ‘weird’ kind of horror movies, The Thing, From Beyond, Re-Animator for example, then you’ll find something to enjoy here, at least on a surface level. But remember, the safe word is ‘Halloween’.

The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2015: Phantasm (1979), directed by Don Coscarelli

The Trailer

and

The Appropriate Tune: "Phantasm", by Flying Lotus feat. Laura Darlington

     I feel like the reason that sci-fi and horror films, especially the older ones, aren’t generally respected by the film community is because they’re easy. Although there have been some films of the genre that have achieved some level of critical praise, The Thing, Terminator 2, Alien, generally that isn’t the case. A strong plot, well-developed characters, these aren’t necessary when it comes to these genre films. All that’s really required is a couple violent deaths, a bit of special effects, some tits and a monster. No thought required, no real attempt at establishing something new and interesting, just have Michael Myers stab a some chick you don’t remember the name of and have Freddy Kreuger spout off a couple puns. You can complain about Hollywood’s obsession with biopics and romantic-comedies, but it’s not like horror films are any less formulaic than that. In fact, seeing as how seemingly every horror franchise seems to have at least half a dozen movies to their credit, all of which are just the same fucking movie repeating itself, I’d say they’re even more formulaic.

    Such is the case with Phantasm. Horrible androgynous teens, subpar acting, boring protagonists, music that sounds like the bargain-bin version of Halloween, and questionable cinematic decisions that occasionally left me wondering what the fuck is happening when I could bother to pay attention to the plot. But all of that doesn’t really matter when it comes to the horror genre, right? All that really matters, the only thing that people will remember and the one thing that will be run into the ground is the villain, in this case The Tall Man. Who could have potentially been an interesting movie monster, if he actually killed people and didn’t just walk slowly from place to place. You could tell they were relying heavily on the ‘mystery’ of the Tall Man, his motivations, his technology, his biology even, but there is so much mystery and so little substance that by the end I couldn’t scrounge up a fuck to give. Especially when it drudged up an Elm St./Friday the 13th twist ending that would have managed to ruin the entire buildup leading up to it, if the film wasn’t already ruined enough already.

     So why is it on this list? I don’t know. Maybe because in a way Phantasm isn’t that much different than other horror films from the era, and if you enjoyed those you’d probably enjoy this, so I featured it. Maybe because I already watched it and wrote this article, and I don’t feel like doing extra work. Whatever it is, if you’re digging into the scary movies this Halloween, you’re probably looking for something to get drunk and eat popcorn to, not something you have to worry about expending thought towards. So go fucking nuts.

The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2015: The Lost Boys (1987), directed by Joel Shumacher

The Trailer
and
The Appropriate Tune: "Good Times", by INXS and Jimmy Barnes

     Vampires. Even though they’ve been part of humanity’s collected folklore for hundreds of years, it seems like in the past 70 years or so we’ve really ran the concept into the ground. Ever since the publication Bram Stoker’s ‘Dracula’ in 1897, and perhaps more importantly Universal’s film adaptation with Bela Lugosi in 1931, pop culture and the horror genre in general have been obsessed with the idea of vampires. Alien vampires, cheerleader vampires, Mexican stripper vampires, and all manner of vampire hunters, slayers, and otherwise killers. There’s been interviews with vampires, Gary Oldman vampires, Eddie Murphy vampires, and it was a vampire (Blade, played by the inestimable Wesley Snipes) that gave a poor Disney-less Marvel the hope that one day they could sell out their IP’s and make billions selling bland action movies to Hollywood. In fact, there are so many damn vampires nowadays that I’m fucking sick of them. If I never saw another vampire for the next decade, I think I could enjoy a healthy and productive life with no trouble.

     So of course we’re talking about a vampire movie now.

     We’re not unfamiliar with vampires on the Marathon of the Soul. Last year, in fact, where I tried to be as eclectic as possible with my choices we still ended up with two movies with vampires in it (Monster Squad and Nosferatu). There were even more when I was originally compiling the list for potential films; From Dusk Till Dawn, the Universal Dracula films, the Hammer Dracula films, etc., etc. The Lost Boys was always in the running for placement, but it ended up getting lost in the shuffle during that slipshod show I was running at the time. So it’s in this time around, nuff said.

     Directed by Joel Schumacher, the man behind Batman & Robin (infamously known as the worst Batman movie until Chris Nolan shat out The Dark Knight Rises), and produced by Richard Donner, the man behind Superman, The Omen and The Goonies, The Lost Boys takes the classic tale of seduction and the undead prevalent in most vampire and transplants it to a California beach community. Rather than the young virginal maiden falling prey to the devilishly handsome creature of the night, we have the young virginal Mike falling prey to the mysterious and alluring, though possibly not legal Star, a member of a gang of murderous vampires (featuring a pre-Excellent Adventure Bill S. Preston) led by the evil David, played by Kiefer Sutherland. When Mike ends up accidentally becoming the undead, it’s up to his nerdy little brother, played by Corey Haim, and his nerdy little brother’s friends, one of which is played by Corey Feldman to kill the head vampire and save the day. Why the head vampire? Who cares, it’s magic.

     If it seems like I’m a bit flippant about the movie, I guess I am. It’s not a bad movie by any means, because it’s on the list. There’s some comedy here, and the artistic design is actually quite interesting at times (which is one of the high-points of B&R), but it’s so ‘of it’s time’ that I find it hard to really get into it. Haim & Feldman, Kiefer Sutherland with a mullet, the softcore sex scene with a glow filter and ballad in the background, the poster of a half-naked dude on Haim’s closet, that crap that they tried to call music...If I were a teenager in 1987, if I were a teenager in general, I’d probably watch The Lost Boys and think it was the coolest shit ever, because it has everything a disaffected youth like me would find interesting: Sex, functional immortality, comic books, taxidermy jokes, the works. I still like a lot of those things, but I feel like I’ve either finally become a man (doubtful), or I’m just not the demographic this film was marketed towards, and this film’s foundation is so rooted in that late 80s demographic that it’s unable to attain the level of timelessness that other kid-adventure style movies achieve despite the time period. Could be both, could be either.

     If you’ve already seen The Goonies and The Monster Squad, and you’re looking for a similar type of movie with a bit harder edge, then check out The Lost Boys. Once you get past the vampires dressed like Axl Rose and the Echo & the Bunnymen posters on the wall, it actually ends up being pretty fun by the second half. Perfect fare for a Halloween movie night I’d say. Might even inspire a few ideas for your next costume party, if you’re so inclined. Tis the season, after all.