...And then there was Psycho III. Part of the appeal of the first two films in the franchise was that there was a fair amount of ambiguity to events. There were murders, but it wasn’t at all clear until the end who had been committing them (of course, a person would have to be living under a rock to not have picked up on Psycho’s twist at some point in their lives). Not so in Psycho III. Norman Bates is doubtlessly the bad guy in this one, so it just remains to be seen how he will get his comeuppance.
Directed by Norman Bates himself, Anthony Perkins, Psycho III takes place shortly after the preceding film. Norman is back to living alone and preparing to reopen the motel. Not far away, a nun who has lost her faith and left the convent, Maureen (Diana Scarwid), meets up with Duke (Jeff Fahey), a young drifter on his way to California. I hate Duke. Have I mentioned in any other reviews how there is no other character in film I despise more than the creepy sexual predator? Not those that are played realistically, mind you, but the sneering, smarmy douchebag that shows up in many bad movies, mostly horror. I hate these characters because they have no redeeming qualities, and they are lazy. It takes no effort from writer, director, or actor to put a one-dimensional ass-hat like Duke to film. Want a quick way to show an audience a character is a bad guy? Have him try to rape a nun in a parked car, then toss her to the curb. That’s Duke. And we as an audience get to spend a significant amount of time with this character. Why? In what way does it make a film, here or in any other, any better to have a supporting character with such despicable traits that have little to nothing to do with the plot? Answer: it doesn’t. Not here, not in Doom, not in Leviathan, not in Rob Zombie’s Halloween II, not in Freddy vs. Jason, nor in any other bad movie I have ever seen. Continue reading “October Horrorshow: Psycho III”
Teleportation is a fascinating subject. Most sci-fi fans have watched the transporters in Star Trek or elsewhere and thought how cool it would be to travel instantly from one place to another. But then science rears its ugly head. Sure, it’s a novel idea, and would change the way we live in ways that are hard to comprehend. For instance, if distance becomes meaningless, so does security and privacy. There’s no point in having locked doors if anyone at anytime can just teleport into your apartment and steal your stuff. There’s no point in living in cities if you can have cheap housing in the boonies and just teleport into midtown for work. Hungry for some Italian food? Forget the quaint little place that just opened in the old downtown, in the spot the shoe store used to be. Go to fucking Italy! Teleportation would be such a revolution in the way we think about distance that it would remake society in ways we can scarcely imagine. But there’s a dark side. 
What a shitty movie. From Troma Entertainment, a production company well-versed in churning out b-movie fare (most famously the Toxic Avenger series of films and its spinoffs), Class of Nuke ‘Em High is self-aware schlock. From the opening scene to the end, the filmmakers never miss a chance to remind the viewer that what they are watching is not meant to be taken seriously. But the way they choose to draw attention to this fact, with overwrought characters and performances, only serves to make the film feel forced. It revels in cheapness, and this would be a good thing, if only they weren’t trying so hard. At every step of the film, Troma seeks to establish its brand, reveling in its ineptness at putting together something that is watchable.
Alien is an artful film. It is frightening and suspenseful, but it also has operatic grace and gritty realism, despite being set mostly aboard a spaceship. It’s hard to imagine Alien spawning a sequel so tonally different yet still so successful, but Aliens does just that. The two films are poles apart, sharing with each other only the alien creatures and Sigourney Weaver, who reprises her role from the first film as Ripley.