Ambiguous King: Looking at 10 Obscure Films by the (Sometimes) Master of Horror

Stephen King had a bit of a renaissance in the movies and on TV since 2017, though he never actually disappeared. After quite a pause of King movies since, I think, the terrible mess that was Dreamcatcher (2003) there’s really nothing that stands out after that.

And suddenly several King adaptations popped up.

A remake of the 1990 movie It was released last year, based on his novel. It received a lot of praise, and marketing, and made Pennywise a Halloween sensation overnight. The sequel is already highly anticipated with fans online asking when they’ll get to see the trailer.

It came out just a few months after Dark Tower was released, based on his popular series of the same name. Dark Tower wasn't as well received unfortunately.

The Hulu series 11/22/63, based upon King's novel from 2011, was fantastic.

Gerald’s Game on Netflix was also a well done series (wow - two TV series with King’s name that are actually good! Has that ever happened before?) It seemed like it would be a difficult story to put on film. but it managed to do so pretty well.

The Netflix movie 1922 was enjoyable and entertaining. And the trailer for the upcoming remake Pet Sematary can be seen on YouTube, and it looks pretty King-tastic!

And to top off this mountain of Stephen King goodness was the cherry - an original series based on the fictional town common in King stories called Castle Rock wrapped up its first season with positive reviews. It's like a sort of King-y Sgt. Pepper album with all sorts of famous faces from King films gone by, and King-y Easter Eggs.

And in 2019, King fans got a remake of his darkest story, Pet Sematary - something to tide us over until It: Chapter 2 comes out in September.

The King is back! But, again. he never really went away.

There are so many other movies based off Stephen King novels, novellas, and short stories that have flown under the radar, have been forgotten about, or are just really obscure. So, I’m picking out 10 of those less-remembered movies from the king of horror to see if they deserve to be forgotten. 
Creepshow 2 will not be one of them! Nor will the made-for-TV remake of The Shining- Stephen King's claim to Stanley Kubrick that he can do it better, but somehow didn't. I think they've garnered plenty of attention. Just throwing that out there.

What are some of these hidden King movies? Well, there's a movie based on a story about a possessed laundry press. There's also the movie Graveyard Shift based on the story that King wrote before writing his first published novel Carrie.

Oh, speaking of Carrie, there are actually two - YES TWO - remakes of the 1976 classic film. And the second remake spawned a sequel. Gross, right?

There's a few of these obscurities trying to grab audiences attention by throwing Stephen King's name into the opening credits.

I've read some of the stories these movies are based on. But it really doesn't matter here.

Though I think movies should respect the source material, I'm not taking into consideration just how similar or not they are to their respective stories. For most of the movies, if not all, the screenplays were written by someone other than King. And like snowflakes that gently careen down from the frosty winter skies, no two stories are alike. Each movie title might as well say "as told by" because for any movie based on a book, that's exactly what it is. "J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit, as told by Peter Jackson."

So, here we go... let us dip our feet, or brush our teeth, or wash our hands...or whatever turns you on... in the pool of obscure King cinema! I'll be posting them at least once a month.

1) The Mangler 

2) Riding the Bullet

3) Mercy

4) Dolan's Cadillac

5) Quicksilver Highway

6) The Dark Half

7) Disciples of the Crow & The Boogeyman

8) Segmented Stories

9) Cell

10) Desperation

11) A Christmas Carol Films - Who Scrooges the Scroogiest?

Forward

(Christmas and horror are two genres that modern cinema has glued together several times. Sometimes it works. Most of the time, it's just a novelty. But A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens is a ghost story depicting just how far heaven will go just to change a single person. And it's a story that fits in this blog about obscure horror films as there's ghosts, and some freaky stuff in there. A ghost story is a ghost story, no matter when it was written. With so many movies based on this one novella by Charles Dickens, I wanted to narrow it down to one. And that one movie is an underrated one. - Mike)

Alastair Sim as Ebenezer Scrooge in 1951's A Christmas Carol

The story of Ebenezer Scrooge and his night of ethereal redemption by not one, not two, not three...but four Christmassy apparitions has been told again, and again...and again.
I think if I Google'd how many movie adaptations there are of Charles Dicken's story A Christmas Carol, I wouldn't get an accurate answer. There's probably a new one every minute. 
There's the 1938 version with Reginald Owen. There's the more famous 1951 British film Scrooge with the superb performance by Alastair Sim. Sim also did an animated version for TV in 1971. There's the iconic Mickey Mouse version, which has a 100 percent rating on Rotten Tomatoes. There's the musical version, too, with Albert Finney. Then there's a version with Patrick Stewart. And there's the Muppet version with Michael Caine. And the one with George C. Scott from 1984. 

In 2009, Disney came out with a computer animated story starring Jim Carrey as Scrooge. Oh, I can't forget the Bill Murray comedy movie Scrooged which is Bill Murray-y. That movie takes place in present day, with Murray playing Frank Cross who's basically the same character as Scrooge.
I suppose whatever sort of character Ebenezer Scrooge is outside of Charles Dicken's novel is up to anyone's interpretation. 

And which ever film adaptation of the story is the best is up to the person in the audience.
Every few years during the Holidays, I read the story. Being familiar with Dicken's tale, I've formed my own version of Scrooge in my head.
I've seen most of the movies I've mentioned above. When Scrooge is portrayed, he's played as an angry man shouting at everyone and just blurting out his catchphrase "humbug!" Too many actors seem to smother on the anger.

Scrooge is played out as being just bitter and hatful of Christmas, and then he's redeemed. His dislike for Christmas is important, sure. If he didn't hate Christmas, there'd be no story. He could still be the squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous old sinner. But once he hates on Christmas? Nope! Send in the spirits!
Dicken's describes his character immediately in the story as "hard and sharp as a flint, from which no steal had ever struck out a generous fire, secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster."
He also writes that, "The cold within him froze his old features, nipped his pointed noise, shriveled his cheek, stiffened his gait, made his eyes red, made his thin lips blue, and spoke out shrewdly in his grating voice." 
When it comes the coldness of winter around him, Dickens says "External heat and cold had little influence on Scrooge. No warmth could warm, no wintery weather chill him." 
Scrooge is a proud man, to say the least. He's a man of business. And as the story takes place in mid 1800s England, there was a standard of etiquette and manners even Scrooge wouldn't forego so lightly.
Scrooge is often portrayed as angry, which he was. As the story indicates, it's an anger that stems from childhood experiences, especially in regards to his father.
But, though he carried his anger with him for decades, to portray him as constantly yelling, and turning his bitterness into a caricature all its own, is rather off to me. There's nothing dignified in a English man of prominence of the mid 1800s (as Scrooge was) yelling and carrying on in front of others. People didn't dislike him because he yelled all the time. They stayed away from him because he was uncaring and cold. He didn't have to shout to convey his bitterness. Besides, a man who shouted all the time would probably be deemed a lunatic. When it comes to business, being a staunch, cold, and unmoving is one thing. Being looked upon by others as crazy is something no self-respecting man of business, as Scrooge was, would want. It would be counter productive in his world of business, and it goes without saying Scrooge would have known that. No person would take them as competent enough to perform business with.
Scrooge is a man of dignity and wealth. In his mind, he's right about Christmas being a wasteful time.  He's absolute certain of it. The rest of the world is wrong, and blinded by their own overblown sense of need. He points the finger at them for being greedy. No doubt he sees his own greed in others at Christmas time, and despises what he sees. So, Christmas, therefor, is a "humbug."
"What is Christmas but a time for buying things," Scrooge says.
This over exaggerated sense of importance, especially in regards to his conclusion about Christmas (a time were he sees his ugly greed in others) has Scrooge seeing himself better than the rest. If he just yelled at everyone, then he'd be that crazy old man who yells at everyone...like that one guy you see in the subway station each morning.
I see this portrayal in the 1984 TV movie A Christmas Carol with George C. Scott.

George C. Scott as Scrooge.

My dad found a copy of this movie on VHS several years ago. At first, I wasn't impressed by Scott as Scrooge. He didn't seem angry enough. That is, he was more collected, yet proud of himself in his dislike for Christmas. But the more I thought about it, the more I came to the conclusion that Scott's Scrooge is a bulls-eye.
His portrayal is just as I described. Rather than yell and scream, and shout "humbug" randomly at each beggar, or each child singing carols on the street corner, his attitude is more like "I'm the only one who sees Christmas time for what it is...and it's a humbug because greed and waste!"
When it comes to really showing anger, it's the ghost of Christmas Present who does it best as seen in the movie.
Christmas Present is a jolly ghost immersed in the spirit of the moment- that moment being Christmas. So, to see him raise his voice in anger at Scrooge is a scene that stayed in my memory. I have yet to see that in other versions of the story.
Scrooge's humanity was always inside him, buried beneath his anger and frustrations. It just needed to resurface again.
There's one moment in the Scott version that stands out to me. When Scrooge goes to his nephew Fred's house to accept an invitation to Christmas dinner, Fred's wife tells Scrooge he's made them happy. And Scrooge's response is "Have I?" It's a quick scene. Still, when was the last time someone told Scrooge they've made them happy? He clearly hasn't heard a compliment like that in... who knows how long? He can still bring joy to others, and it didn't take much to do so at that particular moment.
There's also a scene where Scrooge sees his father during his visit to the past. The look Scott gives as he (playing Scrooge) sees his harsh and strict father is an indicator all on its own to show where Scrooge's anger stems from. No words are needed to be said in that scene. Scrooge's look said what the audience needed to know. It's small instances like those in Scott's performance that make him the best Scrooge that I've seen.
I haven't yet seen Scrooge's dad show up in other movies. He's been referred to, and talked about, in other movies. But he wasn't seen.
The 1951 Alastair Sim film A Christmas Carol is a version I watch each year. Sim's performance has a lot of passion in it. His Scrooge has an underlying tone of pitifulness, but he still captures the pride and pretentiousness of Scrooge. However, his laughing and silliness at the end, when he realizes he hadn't missed Christmas after all, is over the top when compared to Scott's performance. I get it, however. He throws his dignified manner out the window, and lives for the moment just as Christmas Present taught him to.
As for the worst Scrooge portrayal I've seen - Michael Caine's in the Muppet version. I enjoyed the movie overall. The songs are memorable. The jokes are funny. I saw this movie when it was released in theaters. And it was a tradition to watch this movie the night before flying home for Christmas break during my high school years. There's some personal nostalgia with the The Muppet's Christmas Carol.
But Caine just phones his performance in. His Scrooge is bland. He's just about being bad because that's what audience expects. When his Scrooge becomes good, Caine is unconvincing. He tells the audience in so many words that he's a good now, does some ridiculous dancing, and then - the end. Caine is a great actor, but his role in The Muppet's Christmas Carol has a lot of room for improvement.
And by the way-one last question. Why did it take so long for heaven to send down three spirits to turn old Scrooge around? In fact, why did heaven even bother at all? I think it has to do with one simple act of kindness Scrooge performs even after he takes a few more verbal shots at Christmas, calling it a poor excuse to pick a man's pocket every twenty-fifth of December. Scrooge, nevertheless, lets his employee, Bob Cratchit, take the day off despite his own views. One small spark of kindness was all it took. After Dickens went on and on about how cold and tight fisted, etc., Scrooge was, and he gives Bob a day off for a holiday he despises! Sure, it could be argued that closing his business up on Christmas like all other businesses would saved him money. But Scrooge indicates he doesn't see it that way.

"I suppose you must have the whole day," Scrooge tells Cratchit just after telling him an entire day off is not convenient, and not fair. Regardless, Bob gets his request from his grasping, covetous sinner of a boss. In the Alistair Sim version, we see a Christmas Eve in the past where Cratchit again asks for the whole day, and Scrooge refuses, giving a little emphasis on just how unselfish the act we saw in the beginning of the story was.
I'm sure other portrayals of Scrooge get one thing or another right. They're obviously not all bad. George C. Scott's version is one that's underrated, and really stands out to me. If it's not on your list of Christmas movies to watch each year, it's absolutely worth giving it a view.


And according to Google, there's 20 film versions of A Christmas Carol. 

UPDATE: 9/29/2021
As I approach my 100th review, looking back I realized I skipped an 11th review. And I thought I was keep things consistent all this time. 
So, rather than go back through all my posts and re-number them, leaving my 96th review really my 95th, I'm numbering this post as my 11th review. And rather than review any given film adaptation of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, I'll use my review card to pass judgement on the best Ebenezer Scrooge. 

10) The Gate (1987)

"Demons aren't going to ring the doorbell!"

Director
Tibor Takacs

Cast
Stephen Dorff - Glen
Christa Denton - Al
Louis Tripp - Terry Chandler

The Gate - a story about a young boy named Glen and his best friend, Terry, who  accidentally open a gate to hell releasing a horde of demons upon Glen's house. It sounds like a cookie-cutter horror film, but the visuals really make up for the simplistic story line. It's a scary movie for sure.
This movie was actor Stephen Dorff's first role. Dorff later went on to star in Blade, and in 2003's Cold Creek Manor among other roles.
The tree in Glen's backyard is a favorite of his. But he has a dream where it's struck by lightening and collapses. He wakes up to find his nightmare come true. As a result, workers are hired to uproot the tree revealing some kind of geode in the hole left in the ground.
Glen calls Terry over to check it out. In the meantime, Glen accidentally cuts his finger spilling a little blood onto the crystal.
Meanwhile, Glen's parents head out of town for a few days, and his sister, Al, is left to watch him.
Al throws...like...a totally rad party as most 80s movie teens often do when mom and dad are off screen. During the party, Terry and Glen go to study the geode some more.

Louis Tripp and Stephen Dorff

They decide to break it open.
It also happens that some words are left by the rock which the kids innocently speak.
This is when the film gets really dark, and visually freaky.
That night, Glen starts seeing his bedroom walls stretching. And Terry, who is sleeping over that night, hears his mom, who previously passed away, calling him from down stairs.
In a scene that doesn't hold back, he follows the call and sees his mom in the front entrance. Terry runs to her and embraces her, but realizes it's actually Glen's dog who falls dead in his arms.
The next day, Terry turns to the only logical place to go for an explanation on paranormal, demonic encounters - a heavy metal album.
The album, which is based on something called "The Dark Book", leads them to the conclusion that they indeed opened a gate to hell in Glen's backyard. Bummer!
The design of the demons is really underrated among the rogues gallery of movie monsters. They should be as memorable with other iconic 80s monsters. In fact, I think the entire movie is underrated.
The stop-motion is great and well done for its time. The Gate might lack in story, but its intention is to scare, and leave something in the audience's memory. It doesn't fail in that regard.

If I had seen this movie when I was a kid, I know it would have made a huge impression and kept me up a few nights in the process.
The character, Terry, does get annoying as he acts as the narrative constantly explaining everything to Glen.
Being a movie that depends so much on its visuals, it should have maintained the "Show! Don't tell" aspect of story-telling.
Otherwise, if movies like Evil Dead and Child's Play can remain at the surface among mainstream audiences, this movie deserves to be at that same level, too. It's a fun film for "horror night."

9) Horror High (1974)

"You've got your killer. I've got my classes to attend."

Director
Larry N. Stouffer

Cast
Pat Cardi - Vernon Potts
Austin Stoker - Lt. Bozeman
Rosie Holotik - Robin Jones
Joye Hash - Miss. Grindstaff
John Niland - Coach McCall

A white and nerdy push-over high school student taking on a small rogues gallery of stereotypical, unreasonable and intolerant high school authority figures and bullies makes for a quintessential drive-in style popcorn slasher flick.
Horror High (aka Kiss the Teacher...Goodbye) is that kind of film. It seems very loosely based on Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. It's almost a poor man's Toxic Avenger, which came out ten years later.
Horror High is as campy as the title suggests. And it's just as predictable. The weird angles, the light and dark scenes, and the right amount of cringe moments makes it satisfying horror movie. The acting and cutaways make the movie come across as a high school or college freshman film project. And the music is as good as a low budget movie from the 1970s can be. The best way I can describe it is spooky rock. It's something a teenage Alice Cooper cover band would play in a garage.
Horror High can easily be looked at as an anti-authoritarian movie, but somewhere among the slashing and fear is a scene of generational differences. The David Bowie quote as seen in the beginning of The Breakfast Club comes to mind.
"...And these children that you spit on, as they try to change their worlds are immune to your consultations. They are quite aware what they're going through." (I'm probably reading way too much into this) Still, that's more or less the case with this movie's protagonist, Vernon Potts (Pat Cardi).
Pott's is not a bad student nor a bad kid. He's really too good. He's actually too good to be true, even for a social outcast which is what he is.
Potts takes his studies seriously. He's not anti-authority. I mean, the kid is every teachers fantasy come true. His ambition is in his biology class.
Nevertheless, teachers push him in unreasonable ways. His literature teacher, Miss. Grindstaff rips apart his biology report simply because Potts accidentally turned it in to her instead of his report on Robert Louis Stevenson. Potts has been preoccupied in trying to develop a chemical proving people can change physically and not just mentally, at a rapid pace. He's been experimenting on a guinea pig he dubbed "Mr. Mumps". For some reason, educators find that problematic. Pursuing a goal and utilizing your education while in school, Potts? How dare you!
So, Potts simply handed her the literature report by accident, but to "teach him a lesson" that literature is just as important as biology, she tears up his biology assignment right in front of him. Then she gives his other report an "F" even though he finished it.
Later, Mr. Griggs, the janitor, threatens to kill him because Potts scared Grigg's cat which was roaming around the biology lab and getting too close to Mr. Mumps.
His bullish P.E. teacher laughs in his face when Potts requests to skip P.E. to work on his project in the biology lab. And the bullies in the school call him "Creeper" which evidently people found insulting in the 70s.

Amidst all the torment, his classmate, Robin Jones (Rosie Holotik) feels bad for him because she's really into him. Aside from her love interest, she doesn't serve much of a purpose. He confides in her, but her interest in him doesn't change anything.
Potts decides to consume the chemical he's been brewing, and it turns him into a violent maniac seeking revenge on the teachers and bullies that made his school life hell. The moment he takes his anger out on his lit teacher is pretty freaky, though over the top.
After the first kill, the police waste no time investigating.And the murders continue on under their nose.
Lt. Bozeman (Austin Stoker) is heading the investigation. His intro to the audience is accompanied by music probably found in most 1970s black exploitation (blaxspotation) movies. I mean, c'mon. It shouldn't be that funny when it plays! But his scenes and music don't match.
It's not the first time Stoker and Cardi were in a movie together. They also acted together in Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973).
Bozeman laughably tells Potts a lot of information about the case. He's not initially a suspect in the murders. So, it doesn't make much sense why Bozeman would confide so much in this one white and nerdy student.
The ending is just a quick tie-up to a movie that really did try to some extent to tell a tragic, yet simple horror story.
It was over all entertaining. Entertain is what it pretty much set out to do in the end. It's funny in some instances, and a couple times not where it was supposed to be. At other times, it delivers in horror as best it could with its simple budget.

8) The People Under the Stairs (1991)

"Sometimes in is out"

Director
Wes Craven

Cast
Brandon Adams - Fool
Everett McGill - Father
Wendy Robie - Mother
A.J. Langer - Alice
Ving Rhames - Leroy


When I wrote that I'd be posting about "obscure" horror movies on this blog, I meant obscure in general - not necessarily among other horror film fans. I mean, what horror movie would be obscure among horror movie enthusiasts?
Perhaps, The People Under the Stairs isn't as obscure as other movies I've written about, or will write about. It's a movie I really wanted to talk about when the idea for this blog was just a young, fledgling thought in the ankle-deep pool of other...things...I have in my head.
I get a strange enjoyment for movies that take place in run-down unsettling homes set up like a giant maze. Other movies such as the Nothing But Trouble (which happened to come out the same year as this movie) and The Boy come to mind. What's inside the walls? What's behind all those doors? It's an imagination's playground. The People Under the Stairs brought that affinity on for me.
This is a underrated gem of a Wes Craven movie that deserves a little more attention. And like his more well known A Nightmare on Elm Street, this movie is based on true events.
Back in the 1970s, Craven read a news article about two burglars who broke into a Los Angeles home and stumbled upon two children who had been locked up by their parents.
The story of something or someone(s) scary or even just unsettling, that didn't belong in a home, sucking up all the comfort a home brings, and living in an unlivable part of that house like underneath the stairs drew me in. I could relate as the home I grew up in had a stair case that went to the garage. The basement was underneath the stairs. There was a hole in the wall at the bottom of the stair case that looked into the dirt area adjacent to the basement. My boyhood imagination often pictured someone peering through that hole.
I didn't get to see this movie until years after its release. I recall the desire (forbidden pleasure or morbid curiosity?) to get inside a theater and see what these people under the stairs were all about, and more importantly, what they looked like.
Incidentally, speaking of Wes Craven, A Nightmare on Elm Street 6 - Freddy's Dead; The Final Nightmare also came out in 1991, and happens to be the first horror movie I saw in a theater. I was 10 years old then. And even back then, I knew I reached a milestone that day, getting to watch an actual horror movie inside a theater rather then sneaking out to watch it with some of my brothers while my parents were in bed. And what was even better, it was a Freddy Kreuger movie! I mean, why swim on the shallow end when I can just dive off the board into the deep end.
Incidentally, part six was terrible, but I didn't care at the time. To its credit, it does have one of the best lines in horror movie history, "The map says we're fucked!" Yes...it did!

Everett McGill and Brandon Adams in The People Under the Stairs.

In The People Under the Stairs, former child actor Brandon Adams plays Poindexter Williams, nicknamed "Fool," who lives with his mother and sister, Ruby, in a ramshackle complex in the middle L.A's ghetto. As they're two days late paying the rent, their landlord raises the rent, or they have to move out the next day. His mother is bedridden with cancer, and none of them can afford medication or hospital visits.
Ruby's boyfriend, Leroy (Ving Rhames), tells them their landlords are getting rich off the poverty of their tenants. Those landlords, the Robesons, are an unsavory pair, and not just because of their greed. Plus, Fool and his family are the last tenants in the apartment, and the landlords want them out so they can build larger, more expensive apartments.
They own several properties including a building that has a liquor store. After the store gets robbed, Leroy learns that the Robesons have gold coins in their possession somewhere in their home. And as they're rich, and the ghetto is poor, he devises a plan to break into their home, find those coins, and give the money back to the ghetto (or so he says.)
Leroy gets his friend, Spencer, in on the plan, along with Fool, to scope out Robeson's huge house with padlocks on the outside of the windows.
Once they get inside, they can't get out. Eventually, it all comes down to Fool who finds himself alone. He discovers people caged in the basement underneath the staircase. He also finds a young girl wandering around the house named Alice (A.J. Langer.) She's the Robeson's daughter, and tries to save Fool all while enduring her parents abuse and torment in fear and constant trepidation. They also get help from Roach (Sean Whalen) - one of the boys who was trapped in the basement, but escaped into the walls. He has a small but crucial role in helping Fool achieve what he came to do.
The only thing that's saving them is Mr. Robeson's fear of going inside the walls because he doesn't know what's in there. So, he has a Rottweiler named Prince to do that for him.
The appearance and behavior of the guys in the basement shows that they haven't seen the light of day in who knows how long? They've been reduced to cannibalism, and the audience really doesn't know what their demeanor is. Are they good? Or are they evil?
As Fool tries to escape, running through the walls of the house while Mr. Robeson tries to hunt him down, he learns more and more about what has been going on inside.
There's certainly a satirical tone in the movie. The rich versus the poor. The rich of course being immersed in the sludge of their own desires which leads to absolute, sadistic insanity. The audience is seeing it from the outside looking in. We catch them at the point were they're so far gone, with their minds so rancid, that we discover who the Robersons really are. That moment is just cringe-worthy to say the least.
Adams is not annoying as most other child actors tend to be. He's perhaps best known for playing a young Michael Jackson in the "Badder" segment seen in the movie Moonwalker. Instead, Adams seems sincere, relateable and taking his role seriously. He's not trying to pull off more than he is by not letting the fact that he's a motion picture go to his head - a vibe I sometimes get from other child actors.
And what's more, he plays off the main antagonists, played by Everett McGill and Wendy Robie, really well.

Wendy Robie and Everett McGill as the Robesons.

McGill and Robie both starred together in Twin Peaks. With the three being the most unlikely kind of people to face off against each other, they do it fantastically.
And speaking of McGill, he has such a menacing on-screen presence that lingers from beginning to end. He portrays a man with no compassion, no mercy, nor even the slightest bit of sympathy. The audience just has to look at the dead look in his eyes to see a character so far immersed in his own greed and desires. And the ending with just him and young Fool, who's only threat to Mr. Robeson is exposing him and his deeds for all to see, is played with such tension and intrigue, it makes the movie a real gem of a horror film.
Wendy Robie isn't necessarily bad, but she's a bit over the top as she portrays her part of the sick couple. It's not necessarily a distraction, but it is at times a little too ridiculous. Then again, it is considered a horror-comedy, so it certainly fits.
On top of that, the visuals in this movie are memorable. I say "unsettling" a lot, but that's exactly what it is. The People Under the Stairs offers a story that pulls the audience in, scares them and keeps them locked inside, and finally lets them go on a satisfying and "what's next" ending.

7) Demons (1985)

"We got to stop the movie!"

Director
Lamberto Bava

Cast
Urbano Barberini - George
Natasha Hovey - Cheryl
Karl Zinny - Ken
Fiore Argento - Hannah

Turning into a frothing, vomiting, juicy demon during a night out to the movies is just an icky thing. That's pretty much what happens to a group composed of the most unimaginative 80s personas only seen in movies, and too often mimicked by real 80s people.
Demoni, (aka Demons) delivers in the horror. As a story, it has some aspects of originality, but doesn't seem to try too hard in telling a story. Its budget clearly went towards effects, and decided audiences would be diverting their eyes and holding their stomachs too much to notice some missing plot points.
This Italian horror/action film was directed by Lamberto Bava, and produced by Dario Argento. I'll add here that I had previously watched Bava's 1972 film Baron Blood before watching this, and had planned on reviewing it as the seventh film on this blog. However, after three attempts to watch the Baron, and dozing off each time before finally forcing myself to stay awake just to finish it, I couldn't review it. I'm not saying it was a bore. I just couldn't stay awake. So, I didn't want to write an unjust review for a movie I had trouble paying attention all the way through. I do plan to try at least one more time to watch Baron Blood - and stand the whole time just to stay awake if I have to.
Anyways, though an Italian film, the version of Demoni I saw was spoken in English. I searched for an Italian version online to see if it exists, but didn't find one.
The movie opens with college student, Cheryl, riding on a Berlin train. She looks just as lost as the audience will 40 minutes into the picture.
When she gets off the train, and finds herself alone in the large station, Cheryl actually isn't alone. Pretty soon, she's pursued by a man wearing half a silvery mask, and a slick (now ridiculous) 80s outfit.
She tries to flee. But he, of course, gets ahead of her somehow at the top of a flight of stairs. Rather than attack her, which is what the audience is expecting, he does something else - something no one would guess. He gives her movie tickets. She tries talking to him, but he doesn't say much, and starts handing out tickets to other travelers who've suddenly emerged out of nowhere.
The tickets are a for a movie playing at the nearby newly renovated Metropol.
With two free tickets, Cheryl convinces her friend, Kathy into skipping school and going to catch the free movie. Neither of them know what's playing.
So, they go. While they're hanging out in the lobby, we see a wide array of people show up. There's a blind guy and his sight-seeing daughter. There's a young couple, clearly in love. We also see a pimp and two of his prostitutes. And there's also two preppy boys, Ken and George, who immediately take an interest in Cheryl and Kathy. It's a complete 80s feast of has-beens! One character we see is a mysterious red headed woman who's taking tickets, and acting like she has a plan in her head. She makes a few appearances throughout the movie, and doesn't say very much. Keep this character in mind because I'll talk about her later.
Meanwhile, there are movie props displayed in the lobby. Among them is a silver mask that looks like a demon. One of the prostitutes named Rosemary starts playing around (that's not a euphemism) with the mask, and accidently cuts herself on the cheek.
The movie starts, and it's a horror film about demons. Surprise! The movie within the movie involves four token teenagers who find an old grave, dig it up, and discover it's the tomb of the 16th Century prophet, Nostradamus. I wonder if the real Nostradamus predicted his role in Demoni? I'm guessing he did because when the teens open the tomb, all they find is an old book and a mask similar to the one that scratched Rosemary.
One of the teens in the movie's movie puts the mask on because...why not...and he gets scratched, too. A little later he turns evil and kills his friends with a knife.
Meanwhile, Rosemary doesn't feel so hot, and rushes to the ladies room.

Geretta Geretta as Rosemary in Demoni.

The scratch on her face continues to bleed, then blister, then bloat, and finally pops, spewing out a huge amount of pus and nastiness.
Her pimp starts to worry about her (using the term "worry" very loosely) and the other prostitute, Carmen, goes to look for her.
She finds Rosemary in one of the bathroom stalls. She developed sharp teeth and claws, and has green stuff billowing out of her mouth. She attacks Carmen, tearing out a huge chunk of her neck. Rosemary is now on the loose inside the theater.
A terrified Carmen rips through the back of the movie screen and transforms into a demon right there on stage in front of everyone in the theater. It's a pretty awesome scene. Anyways, there's no secrets now. Rosemary is still on the loose. Carmen is on the loose. And the audience is completely panicked.
They struggle towards the entrance only to find out they've been walled up inside the theater with no way out. By whom? We don't know. Why? Again, we don't know. I guess some things just are. And other things are not.
And that red hair lady I mentioned earlier? Well it seems she has something to do with everything going on, but she never lets on. Oh, heck...I'll just get her out of the way before I continue. Red-haired lady can't get out either, and she later becomes a demon. That's it. The end. Goodbye, red-haired lady...whoever you were. We thought you had an important role to play, but...oh, well.
All the theater goers are now trapped in a theater with ravenous demon people. The gore scenes are pretty narly. There's so much happening in this one theater, but yet, not really.
The suspense lies in that aspect - people trapped in a demon-infested theater. The horror movie fun factor is in the gore, scares, and death scenes. But the story line is lacking. It's like having a novelty bottle of hot sauce, with some crazy name like "Satan's Spit" or "Flammin' Hot Butt Blaster Sauce." It's just hot for hot sake, and has a catchy name, but the sauce completely lacks any flavor or savor.
The actors clearly had fun making it. And it's not terribly predictable. Demoni definitely delivers in the gore and scares. It's laid on rather heavily.

 The scenario also gives the movie originality. But it lacks explanation. Why is this happening? Who's responsible? What's the real significance of the mask that turns people into demons?
I senses there's an underlying commentary in which a movie audience turns into demons. There's a sin of some kind the victims took part in. And the characters we see are from all walks of life. Perhaps, the sins of the characters made them vulnerable to suffer demonic attacks, bringing out their real inner ugliness to the surface. The heroes of the film - the ones who get away - haven't necessarily given in to the temptations clearly apparent between them. There actions determined their fate. It's a theory, and an element common in horror movies, especially in the seventies and eighties.
I discovered there's a Demons 2, as well as a made-for-TV unofficial third sequel called The Ogre. Maybe they'll provide an answer. I'll find and review those one of these days.
The iconic scene in the picture is the character George's motorcycle run through the ransacked theater as demons are attacking him from both sides. It then leads to his escape with Cheryl via a grappling hook through a hole in the roof where a helicopter crashed through. Yeah! A helicopter crashed into the roof. That happened. The budget not used for horror effects must have gone into that helicopter.
Demoni is purely a Friday night popcorn movie. It's fun, with some over the top acting, grotesqueries, outfits and attitudes only the 1980s can conjure up.

6) Frogs (1972)

"Today, the pond. Tomorrow, the world."

Director
George McCowan

Cast
Sam Elliott - Pickett Smith
Ray Milland - Jason Crockett
Joan Van Ark - Karen Crockett
Adam Roarke - Clint Crocket

(Spoilers ahead)Long before actor Sam Elliott was popping up on internet memes to remind people how dumb their way of thinking is, he was in the movie Frogs.
The absolute best word to describe Frogs is "misleading." The title is "Frogs." There's a frog on the poster with a hand sticking out of its mouth advertising this is a movie about killer frogs. I mean, anyone just seeing that image on the poster, and knowing nothing else, would be absolutely correct to think this movie is about killer frogs.
No frogs in this movie kill anyone. (Spoiler...sorry.) However, a variety of reptiles do. Scenes of "frogs" are littered between other scenes reminding the audience their watching a movie about frogs. There's just one mistake, though. Either the director, George McCowan, didn't know the difference between frogs and toads, or just didn't care enough. Maybe he thought audiences would be too stupid or scared...or stupid...to figure out the difference. To add insult to injury, sounds of croaking frogs are dubbed over in those shots. Like I said - misleading!
George McCowan has worked on some classic television series such as The Mod Squad, The Streets of San Francisco, Fantasy Island, and Hart to Hart. I wish I could go back in time, catch him after the release of Frogs and ask him, "what were you trying to do, George?"
Frogs is another movie among many other deadly nature type movies. Killer sharks. Killer grizzly bears (that's a movie coming up on my blog. Stay tuned for that.) Killer- killer bees. Killer bats. Killer rabbits. Killer trees (sigh, M. Knight Shyamalan.) 
This movie does have a decent cast such as Ray Milland, who won an Academy Award in 1945 for The Lost Weekend and also starred in the Alfred Hitchcock movie Dial 'M' For Murder. He's no stranger to the thriller genre.
Upon its release, it had to be double-billed with Godzilla in Godzilla vs. The Smog Monster just to gain an audience.
Sam Elliott (sans the gorgeous mustache) plays environmental photographer, Pickett Smith.
The beginning of the movie shows Pickett shooting pictures of the wildlife, and the pollution thereof, in a secluded swamp near an island where the mansion of the wealthy Crockett family.
While floating in his canoe with his camera, he gets knocked over by Clint, one of the Crockett family members, who's speeding in his motorboat and chugging beer.
Clint's wife, Karen, feels bad and invites Pickett back to the mansion to dry off, and meet the rest of the family.
There, he meets the wheel chair-bound, cantankerous grandfather, Jason, played by Milland.
The next day is July 4, and Jason's birthday, so he's making sure the festivities are set. Part of the preparations includes Jason sending out someone named Grover to go spray pesticide to get rid of all the frogs that are intruding on the property. However, Grover doesn't come back.
Pickett later discovers his dead body covered in snake bites.
Jason doesn't seem to care enough to cancel the party.
Forty minutes in, and that was our first death scene.
The next is by far the strangest, funniest, and most over-the-top death scene in this flick. Somehow, the phone lines are down. That's as cliche' as it gets. We don't know why they're down. Maybe the frogs cut the lines? It's never explained.
Anyhow, a guest at the house named Michael Martindale goes to check on the phone lines out in the surrounding brush. This is were it gets ridiculous.
He drives out to a telephone pole, turns around and looks at it. It appears to be fine. So, he gets out with a shot gun and starts to walk through the trees and marsh land looking for...I have no idea what.
Then he accidentally shoots himself in the leg, collapses, and can't get back up.
(Oh, it gets better!)
As he's screaming and struggling for help, moss starts falling from the trees and covering him. Yes! Moss is trying to kill him. And on top of that, tarantulas are starting to surround him, and shooting web over his entire body. Now, I understand that this is just a movie. But if we're to believe a man is unable to lift himself up because of a gunshot wound, then make it realistic! This guy, though injured, could have easily gotten back up rather than roll around on the ground screaming as strands and bundles of moss gently cascade down from the trees.

Death by moss!

Still, this is death number two, and frogs were again not involved.
Meanwhile, back at the estate, death number three is about to occur. And though it's not as silly as death-by-moss, it's much more avoidable than that moron's we just saw who brought a shotgun to check on the phone lines.
Jason's sister, Iris, sends her son, Kenneth, to the greenhouse to collect flowers for the July 4 centerpiece. While he's in there looking stupid and confused, lizards start intentionally knocking over jars of chemicals and poisons onto the floor. They shatter and begin letting off fumes in the form of smoke. Rather than leave, or even open doors and windows, Kenneth (I'm not exaggerating) goes over to inspect the visible fumes which waft in his face in there. I mean he stands right over those deadly plumes of gas like a starving student getting in on a bag lunch. The smoke even hides his face. Obviously, this kills him. As he's laying there, lizards (immune from the deadly gasses) start climbing on him. I assume they do this so as to remind the audience that Kenneth didn't really kill himself by sticking his bare face in toxic fumes. Nope! The lizards actually killed him.
After a few more ridiculous death scenes, Jason still wants his party despite the fact that his family members and guests HAVE FRIGGIN' DIED on his property.
People eventually decide to leave despite Jason's anger at the nerve his family would die on his July 4 birthday party extravaganza.
Jason's long time butler and cook, Maybelle and Charles, end up leaving the island, along with Kenneth's fiancé, Bella, and Clint. Clint takes them across the water in a speedboat to a nearby grocery store. As they start walking, a flock of birds suddenly and momentarily appear. The group runs behind the store and...that's it. We have no idea what becomes of them. We do see an open suitcase a little later. That's the only clue we have that, perhaps, someone died. But who knows.
It just gets ridiculous as the last act of the movie plays out. One lady gets stuck in mud and gets killed by a snapping turtle. Yawn.
Karen and Pickett finally decide to leave despite Jason's continuous protests. They take Clint and Jenny's children with them, and they all make it to shore. They find a road where they get picked up by a mom and her son. The mom says they're heading to Jefferson City, noting they haven't seen a single person or car on the road. Meanwhile, her son shows them a toad he captured during summer camp.

We cut back to Jason, all alone in his big house. An army of frogs...er...toads have made their way into the dark room with him. And Jason dies of a heart attack. Just to make sure the movie's namesake makes some remote bit of sense, the toads and whatever else begin climbing and hoping over his dead body as if to indicate they made his heart stop.
All the lights turn out in the mansion. Then, the end. Roll credits!
At the end of the credits, we're treated to an animated image of a frog swallowing a human hand. Why? Is it because the director of this movie completely forgot to film frogs killing people? Who even cares by this point?
I just can't find anything redeemable about this. Ok, I can think of one thing, and that's how unintentionally funny some of the death scenes are. They clearly weren't meant to be funny. But, they were. Otherwise, this flick doesn't even live up to its simple title.
The only thing amphibians actually ruin in this movie is the July 4 cake at the picnic.
The producers had Academy Award winning actor Ray Milland, and that must have worn them out because everything else is sloppy, disappointing, deceitful, and just plain boring.
I wasn't expecting a serious thriller. I was expecting a fun, perhaps over-the-top popcorn movie about killer frogs. I was robbed of even that. What were you thinking, George McCowan?

5) Duel (1971)

"I'd like to report a truck driver who's been endangering my life."

Director
Steven Spielberg

Cast
Dennis Weaver - David Mann
Jacqueline Scott - Mrs. Mann
Eddie Firestone - Café owner


I'm really using the term "obscure" loosely for Steven Spielberg's TV movie, Duel. It's just that I seldom come across someone, even cinema-smart individuals, who haven't heard of this gem of a movie. According to his filmography, this was Spielberg's sixth movie, released after his short film Amblin (surely that title rings a bell). It was also released before Jaws. 
Duel definitely deserves much more attention and recognition. It's sad this movie doesn't seem to reach the pinnacle other Spielberg movies have reached such as E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial, Jaws, Jurassic Park etc.  
The two biggest things this film has going for it, other than it being directed by Spielberg and based on a story written by Richard Matheson, is that it's incredibly entertaining and all too real. After that, it's thrilling in the truest meaning of the expression.
Matheson was a prolific horror/thriller writer with titles that have become very well known - I Am Legend, The Legend of Hell House, The Shrinking Man, as well as three short stories that another popular (and personal favorite) made-for-TV movie, Trilogy of Terror, was based on.
The scare lies in the fact that such a scenario could really happen to anyone, and no doubt probably has millions of times.
Dennis Weaver (aka Sam McCloud from the TV series McCloud) plays David Mann, an everyday salesman driving his red Plymouth Valiant across lonely California canyon roads on his way to someplace important for business. When he reaches the Mojave Desert, he passes an old (even by early 1970s standards) beat up Peterbilt tanker truck. The word "flammable" is labeled across the back in large bold letters. The truck ends up passing him on the road, blowing its horn and claiming its dominance over the dusty freeway. This is where it gets good. Not to be out-smarted, Mann is able to pass him up again, and gives him a taste of the road dirt.
Mann, smiling in his road victory, pulls into a gas station. But who should pull in after him? The same truck!

Meanwhile, the gas station attendant tells him he needs a new radiator hose. Mann doesn't have time to wait, and decides to get back on the road without a new hose. Of course, with any movie, any time the word "need" is used in the first act, you know it's important for something later on.
Before he leaves the station, he catches a glimpse of the truck driver's boots.
Back on the road, beads of sweat begin to run on the salesman's forehead as he sees the truck start approaching his tail. It passes his car and blows his horn to antagonize him. Then he purposely slows down, signals for Mann to go ahead and pass, and then swerves to keep the Plymouth behind him. Rather than swallow his pride, and just let the truck go, Mann decides he's going to pass this asshole (pardon my road language) one way or another. And he does by using a gravel turnout next to the freeway.
We don't see the truck driver's reactions at all. However, we do see the truck come right up to Mann's bumper, tailgating him and tapping him hard enough to have Mann nearly lose control of the car. It eventually becomes severe enough were he does lose control, and crashes into a fence by a diner.
We see the truck speed down the road. And a shaken Mann is left to pull himself together. All he can do now is mellow out inside the restaurant.
He orders some food, and decides to use the restroom. When he comes out, he sees the truck parked outside. That means, the unseen driver is there somewhere with him mixed among the line of other truck drivers in their cowboy hats, jeans...and boots, sitting at the lunch counter. He thinks he recognizes the boots, and confronts the wearer.
The events get more and more intense until it all boils down to how far will both drivers allow their rage to take them in their attempts to prove...what? Is it all about the principle of the matter? Either way, this is an entertaining, and captivating movie. Since the bottom line of any movie is fun, this is simply it.
What driver out there hasn't had a run-in with a magnanimous prick while out on the road whether that driver doesn't believe the speed limit is meant for them, or their tailing you because you're not going fast enough to get to the red light. We've all shared the road with these people, wondering where the highway patrol is when you need them.
There's little dialogue in this movie outside of Mann talking to himself as probably every driver on a long road trip does, especially when driving solo.
Above all, the identity of the driver in the truck is anonymous. The audience isn't treated to the displeasure of seeing who's behind the wheel. The anonymity is a touch that makes it much more frightening. 

Normally in films (horror, and otherwise) the audience is given the privilege of being in on what's happening to the protagonist when the protagonist themselves are unaware. We might get an idea of what the monster is going to do. That's not the case here. Like Mann, we know the truck ins't going to leave him alone. We can feel what he's feeling. We only know what he knows. It was the same decision Spielberg made in
The scene in the restaurant has a portion where we can hear Mann's thoughts about what has been going down, and who the driver might be sitting in there with him. And we see him take a close look at everyone's boots. The dialogue there seems awkward to me, but I get it. The process makes complete sense, and those thoughts of his are crucial to the story. Show, don't tell. Since he's alone, he doesn't have anyone to vent to. He's going to talk to himself so he can calm down. I think the scene could play out without having to hear what he's thinking. After dealing with an overly aggressive truck, and crashing into a fence, his body language made his thoughts pretty clear. You can easily imagine what he must be thinking.
In Duel, the sinister looking junked-up rusty truck is the monster, snorting engine and all. Seeing the driver would spoil the fear factor after we just got a look at that truck.
Duel comes down to its suspense, and excitement. That's all it needs, and it pulls it off fantastically. It's a joy ride for sure - entertaining!

Highlights from Crypticon 2018 Horror Convention in St. Joseph, Mo.

 

 

Actress Linda Blair (The Exorcist) takes a   photo with actor Spencer Wilding

4) Bride of the Gorilla (1951)

"White people shouldn't live too long in the jungle. Brings out their bad side, their jealousies and impatience."

Director
Curt Siodmak

Cast
Barbara Payton - Dina VanGelder
Lon Chaney, Jr. - Commissioner Taro
Raymond Burr - Barney Chavez
Tom Conway - Dr. Viet

Who hasn't asked themselves what would happen if a movie stuck horror icon Lon Chaney, Jr., (The Wolfman) and TV's Raymond Burr (Perry Mason himself) in a movie together? If you're a person who's asked themselves that,  the answer is Burr would turn into a gorilla, Chaney wouldn't know what to do about it, and viewers like me would be completely disappointed with all of it.
If you've never asked yourself that, the answer still stands.
That answer can be seen in the 1951 movie Bride of the Gorilla.
Aside from casting two well known actors of Hollywood's golden age, this movie has nothing going for it. Not even the gorilla. (Spoiler warning) We don't see the gorilla... ever... until the very end of the movie. And I mean, the very end! I admit I did doze off for a bit while I watched this so I might have missed a quick gorilla scene, but I'm willing to bet I didn't miss a thing.
Bride of the Gorilla takes place in the South American jungle where rubber plantation owner, Barney Chavez, murders his old employer just so he can be with his gorgeous wife, Dina. I had to Google this plot point because I just couldn't fully grasp the purpose of the murder.
His crime doesn't go unnoticed. An old witch named Al Long, who roams South American jungles, witnesses the murder. She's also mad because her granddaughter (I think she's referring to her granddaughter. That relationship seemed vague to me) is upset Chavez rejected her love. Evidently, Al the witch isn't very reasonable. Rather than report to the police what she witnessed, she has to cast a spell on Chavez that'll turn him into a rampaging gorilla each night. I guess when you're a witch with magical powers, why bother with the police?
Meanwhile, a superstitious police commissioner named Taro (played by Chaney) is investigating the death, along with strange mutilations of animals around the jungle. I can't blame Taro for being superstitious when witches wander around the jungle.
On top of all that, Dina is getting weirded out as Chavez is losing interest in her, and taking a lot more interest in roaming the jungle at night. She finally decides to follow him, and that's when she sees the truth. He turns into a gorilla at night.
This storyline is mixed with a bunch of stalk footage of jungle animals, tons of dialogue, and the rest is left up to the audiences imagination.

The film opens with a shot of a jungle, with Chaney as the narrator telling the audience, "this is jungle." Thanks, Chaney, for trusting the intelligence of the audience. (End sarcasm.) Anyhow, we then see the shattered remains of an abandoned mansion that's barely standing.
The ending is one big hodgepodge of unclarity. It tries to resolve the story, but just fails.
It's worth mentioning this movie supposedly took ten days to shoot.  Also, the name "Barney Chavez" sounds like it should be a side character on the Simpsons.
This flick tries to play up the suspense, but fails because there's no payoff. The main concern among the characters is how they are going to deal with the looming threat of a beast roaming among their part of the jungle. They talk about it too much,
What made me laugh were the scenes with Barbara Peyton firing a gun. She'd hear a noise, and starting firing round after round blondly...I mean, blindly. There's an argument for gun control if there ever was one. She would just start shooting without knowing what made the noise in the first place. And in good ol' 1950s American fashion, no one seemed to care much.
All this movie led up to was disappointment. Raymond Burr looks angry and confused during most of the movie. Lon Chaney, Jr., seems to be the only actor taking the role seriously despite also looking worried and confused. It wouldn't surprise me if he wished he could have been the monster in this film as he would have done a much better performance than Burr, who belongs in an attorney role anyways.

#KeepGunsOutOfBarbaraPaytonsHands

3) Hell Night (1981)

"Pray for day!"

Director
Tom DeSimone

Cast
Linda Blair - Marti
Vincent Van Patten - Seth
Peter Barton - Jeff
Kevin Brophy - Peter
Suki Goodwin - Denise


Hell Night. It's the perfect title. It's the slasher flick anyone would think of when they hear "slasher"; young college kids filled with booze and hormones being hazed by having to spend the night alone in a spooky abandoned house with large beds (wink, wink). This is quintessentially the horror hack and slash flick.
I see a little Friday the 13th in this movie, sprinkled with a few elements from The Shining.
It wouldn't surprise me if this movie helped set some horror stereotypes - useless cops, naïve kids, illicit sex, gore, and the maniac lurking in the shadow that the audience knows is going to kill someone. Just wait for it.
This flick isn't too obscure, but it's obscure enough to make it on this blog. Its biggest claim to fame has to be Linda Blair as its star. She's no stranger to hell and all that goes with it. Blair played the possessed Regan MacNeil in The Exorcist (1973). And she has since received a Razzie Award for worst actress in this movie. Blair certainly was no stranger to bad movies at this time. She previously starred in Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977) - a movie much, much worse than Hell Night. It's a movie that has to be among the top five worst sequels ever made. 
It's safe to say that by 1981, Blair had a lot of hell going for her.
In Hell Night, Blair plays sorority pledge,Marti Gaines who, along with three other Alpha Sigma Rho pledges, takes part in an initiation.
She, along with rich kid Jeff (Peter Barton), gorgeous blonde Denise (Suki Goodwin), and surfer dude Seth (Vincent Van Patten), is prompted to spend the night in a haunted mansion called Garth Manor.
There's an entire caravan of giggling college girls, buff college guys, nerds, and lots of beer taking the new pledges to the house. During this time, Alpha Sigma Rho President, Peter, tells the ever-so-standard tale of how the home's former owner, Raymond Garth, killed his three deformed children and his wife. Garth also ended his own life by hanging. On top of that Shining-esque macabre story, Peter mentions that the youngest of the children, Andrew, was never found. Que the predictability!
So, finally the parade of dorks and other useless people arrive at the house. While the new pledges are settling in, their fellow students are outside rigging up scares and pranks to get them on edge and see how long they'll last.
Little do they know that Seth and Denise hopped into the sack pretty damn quick. And Marti and Jeff are...just getting acquainted. Everyone in the house is aware of the pranks and tricks, so they adjust to it fairly quickly.
All the while, one by one, those outside are getting slaughtered. Heads are getting chopped off. Girls are getting taken. Blood and guts are spilling! And the horror lurks inside as well. Denise gets her head cut off, too. It's hell!
Did I mention, to add to the disorientation going on outside, there's a hedge maze. Where have we seen that before?
We slowly began to see that the murderer is a towering, deformed man.
The pledges inside struggle all they can to get out of the house. And it all comes down to the one 

Linda Blair in Hell Night

pledge that's left.
The ending was suspenseful and played out really well.
Hell Night has its fun moments. It carries out the suspense nicely.
I mean, the audience knows what's going to happen. But when? And how? Let's see it! The intrigue certainly lasts.
It's such the archetypal horror movie. There's just no other way to put it.
One scene (among many) that make it the perfect image of a horror movie is when Seth makes it out of the house, runs to a police station, frantically tells the cops people are getting murdered, and then gets reprimanded by the police as they think he's playing a joke. "As useless as a cop in a horror movie" the old saying goes.
Seth's reaction is fantastic after he leaves the station. He steals a rifle from the police department (quite easily, I'll add), climbs through a window and hi-jacks a car. It's hilarious, though not meant to be.
Hell Night definitely has one thing going for it. It's entertaining, and that's the whole point of a movie like this to begin with.
Being that quintessential 80s horror flick does the trick. It may be predictable. It may be campy at times. But it's exactly the kind of movie to quench that Friday night thirst for a "bad, but good" popcorn movie.
Chuck Russell is the executive producer. He must have learned something during production because he later directed A Nightmare on Elm Street III; The Dream Warriors (1987) - the only best Elm Street sequel hands down!
Blair's rooftop chase in the movie (inspired by Jamie Lee Curtis's chase scene in Terror Train) was a splendid sequence definitely unworthy of the Razzie she won.
And despite its reputation of schlockiness, though still excellent as popcorn entertainment, Hell Night was a career move for Frank Darabont who served as production assistant. Darabont later directed The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, and The Mist - all based on Stephen King stories.
He was also the executive producer for The Walking Dead season 1 and some of season 2. Oh, and like Chuck Russell, he worked on A Nightmare on Elm Street 3 - Darabont was a screen writer. I could go further into that, but I don't want to digress.

Hell Night needs resurfacing as its been buried deep in the recesses of pop culture.