The Pit and the Pendulum (1991)

Title: The Pit and the Pendulum (1991)

Director: Stuart Gordon

Cast: Lance Henriksen, Jeffrey Combs, Jonathan Fuller, Rona de Ricci, Mark Margolis, Stephen Lee

The casual movie watcher might not know who Stuart Gordon is, but for those gore hounds out there that enjoy their films gory and filled with nudity, Stuart Gordon is a house hold name, no, Stuart Gordon is a God! Early Stuart Gordon films were a special bunch, they all featured extensive amounts of gore, blood and nudity and a lot of them were based on or inspired by various H.P. Lovecraft stories. Good examples of the kind of gory mayhem that Gordon is capable of in his films are Re-Animator (1985), From Beyond (1986) and Dagon (2001), all three inspired in one form or another by the works of H.P. Lovecraft. Gordon could really go nuts with the gore in his films! Ever wanted to see a deformed human bite a chunk of flesh from a prostitute’s breast? Then you should see Castle Freak (1995), an obscure yet highly dramatic horror film. That’s the thing about those films that Stuart Gordon made with Full Moon Pictures, they were good, but they are so obscure! The reason for them being overlooked is because Full Moon films were made for a niche audience, a small group of people who appreciated them. Fans of Full Moon Pictures are the kind of audience that knows they are watching low brow entertainment, and they love it that way. Unfortunately, a lot of those Full Moon Films don’t enjoy very good distribution nowadays, many of them have kind of gotten lost in the shuffle. Save for getting them through Full Moon Direct, you probably won’t be able to get a hold of some of the more obscure ones, like Gordon’s The Pit and the Pendulum, a film that I had not seen for years, because I could never get a hold of it. I found it in one of those 8 horror film collections that Echo Bridge Entertainment has been releasing, and it was accompanied by 7 other totally unknown horror films; so you could say I found this copy of The Pit and the Pendulum by some sort of miracle. 

I personally always felt that Stuart Gordon was too good for Full Moon; a production company that specialized on making the cheapest kind of films imaginable. Still, even with all the budgetary constraints that accompany a Full Moon production, Gordon managed to make a couple of good films with them, namely Castle Freak (1995) and the film I’ll be reviewing today The Pit and the Pendulum, two of the best films Full Moon ever produced. But no worries, Gordon’s always worked best when handling small budgets and small stories. Sometimes, he’d get too ambitious for the budget he could get and the resulting film would end up being goofy. A good example of this would be RobotJox (1989), a film about giant robots that ended up being extremely goofy for various reasons, but mostly because it required a bigger budget. The Pit and the Pendulum was another one of Gordon’s ambitious projects that didn’t have the budget it required. The story takes place during the days of the Spanish Inquisition, which already means you’re gonna need a decent budget for sets and wardrobe of the era; unfortunately, the film was made with a mere two million dollars! This is probably the reason why some of the sets look completely half assed or unfinished, a disappointing aspect of the film. Roger Corman’s version of this story had better sets! And that was made in 1961! But incredible as it may seem, Gordon actually managed to make an interesting film none the less, goofy yes, aloof and filled with dialog that does not fit the era, but still, highly watchable.

The hero of the story is a bread maker named Antonio; a peaceful man selling bread in his little town, the problem comes when the love of his life, a woman named Maria is accused of being a witch! By orders of the Grand Inquisitor Torquemada, she is to be tortured and put to death. Now, Antonio must infiltrate Torquemada’s castle and save the love of his life from certain death. Can he make it in time to save her from a torturous death and escape the torture chamber alive? Or will he end up facing the horrors of torture himself?

Films about the inquisition make me so angry; I just hate the fact that the Inquisition even happened because it shows the extreme steps that the Catholic Church and the governments of the world took in order to spread Catholicism through the world. Basically they forced religion onto people; if you rejected Jesus you were tortured to death! It’s a nauseating idea; it’s something you should think about if you are a catholic! Catholicism is a religious organization with some really dark, evil foundations; it’s a religion that grafted itself and its ideas onto people’s consciousness via violence and death, which of course goes completely against what the bible and Jesus stands for. Back then the church was so powerful that whatever they said was law, and so, no one dared defy them. This type of thing went on in many countries; on this film it happened in Spain, but other films represent the same situations in American and England. This went on in the world until Catholicism became the biggest religion in the world. It is frightening to learn how religious fanatism can go this far; I mean, who the hell wants to be tortured to death by a bunch of religious fanatics? Back in those days, if you didn’t play along you would die. I often times wonder how I would have ended up had I lived in those days; probably tortured and burned at the stake! Other movies dealing with similar subject matter are Mark of the Devil (1970), The Conqueror Worm (1968) and The Crucible (1996). You might also want to check out Roger Corman’s The Pit and the Pendulum (1961) which starred Vincent Price. I mention these other films in case you feel like exploring these themes a little more. It truly is a sad page in human history.

But this is Stuart Gordon’s take on these themes, and well, the more gruesome aspects are not glazed over! These inquisitors were so freaking fanatical that if they discovered you were a heretic after you were dead, they would dig up your corpse and torture your freaking corpse! The Pit and the Pendulum has all the gore and nudity you’d expect from a Gordon film; there’s this whole scenes that’s all about the priests getting off on taking the clothes off a supposed “witch” just to grope and get a look at her body, I gotta say, nudity is kind of gratuitous on this film. And yeah, it has that goofiness that seems to be present in so many Stuart Gordon films. There’s an unevenness in tone, it starts out like a love story, then it’s this graphic film about the inquisition, but sprinkled with what comes off as unintended humor, especially when it comes to the dialog, which is sometimes too modern. So in that sense the film is all over the place. By far the worst part about the film is its leading man; Antonio as played by Jonathan Fuller. The guy looks too goofy to be a leading man, he made the film come off as a comedy at times, I just couldn’t take the guy seriously, he does not look like the hero type at all! Which is a shame because ‘Torquemada’ the inquisitor played by Lance Henriksen comes off as intensely evil; no holds barred the best thing about the movie is Henriksen. If you can believe it, even Oliver Reed shows up in this film for a couple of minutes as a cardinal sending a message from the pope; it’s kind of funny actually, a high caliber actor like Reed on a cheap horror movie like this one!  I guess he is on this one because of his involvement in Ken Russell’s The Devils (1971), yet another film about witches. Actually, Gordon had Peter O Toole in mind to play Torquemada, but I guess that deal never came through.  As for Gordon’s regular gang of actors we get Jeffrey Combs playing one of the Inquisitors henchmen and Gordon’s own wife, Carolyn Purdy Gordon playing a high class lady seeing the corpse of her husband defiled.

The interesting thing about this film is that even though it’s cheap looking and has copious amounts of goofy dialog, it’s still very watchable. It’s interesting to see Gordon take a departure from adapting H.P. Lovecraft stories onto film, which is what he is primarily known for; but with The Pit and the Pendulum he dabbles with Edgar Allan Poe, so in that sense it’s a change of pace for Gordon. Final words on this film here is that it’s not Gordon’s best, but it’s not his worst either. You're gonna see all sorts of torture devices on this one, so be ready for that! The film shows its budgetary limitations at times but keeps you interested because of its gruesome premise; let’s face it, the church torturing and killing people in gruesome ways just so they believe in Jesus is always a shocker, and if you know Gordon, then you know he is all about shock!

Rating: 3 out of 5

Stuart Gordon concocting a morbid scene

Johnny Handsome (1989)

Title: Johnny Handsome (1989)

Director: Walter Hill

Cast: Mickey Rourke, Ellen Barkin, Elizabeth McGovern, Morgan Freeman, Forest Whitaker, Lance Henriksen  

Review:

I did an article a while back called 16 of the Top ‘Revengiest’Revenge Movies; in it I included these films where something awful happens to the main character, but then things turn around and eventually the main character gets his or her revenge, usually in pretty gruesome ways. I didn’t include the film I’ll be reviewing today because I had not seen it in such a long time. When I first saw Johnny Handsome I must’ve been about 13; all I remembered about Johnny Handsome was its basic premise and the fact that I liked the story a lot. There’s something gratifying about revenge tales, they always start out with something awful happening to the good guy of the film, then in the end whamo! That sweet, sweet revenge. The bad guys get what they deserved and the good guy gets his revenge. Though in this sense, Walter Hill’s Johnny Handsome is a bit different than most revenge films, Johnny isn’t your typical good guy, he’s actually a crook.

In Johnny Handsome we meet John Sedley, moments before he pulls off a diamond heist. John is not just any crook though, he is a mastermind in pulling off robberies. Also, his face is severely disfigured due to an anomaly in his genes. His deformity doesn’t stop him from doing what he has to do. Johnny is pulling off this diamond heist with the help of two individuals. One is a tomboyish lady called Sunny Boyd (Ellen Barkin) and the other a low life called Rafe Garrett (Lance Henriksen).  The three stick up the diamond store, and as we might expect in this kind of movie, things get ugly. The cops are called upon and at the last minute Rafe and Sunny decide to double cross Johnny and shoot him and the owner of the store, their idea is to keep the loot to themselves. Rafe and Sunny leave John for dead, unfortunately for them, John doesn’t die. Instead, he is rescued by the police and taken to a hospital where he is given the opportunity to jumpstart his life. You see, the doctors want to perform a surgery on him that could give him a normal face again. Will he take this opportunity to begin again? Or will he go back to his old ways?

It occurred to me that Johnny Handsome plays out a lot like a ‘Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’ story where the main character has a duality about him. He has his good natured/kind side, and he’s got his evil side, which he is at battle with. Johnny used to be a crook, because his looks led him to become an outcast, ridiculed and made fun of all his life. But what happens when he gets his face back and he no longer looks like a monster?  What kind of battle will be waged with the demons inside of him? This is what is at the center of this story. Johnny is even given a chance to fall in love with a beautiful woman, and lead a normal life, unfortunately, his former life calls him. Revenge calls him. Should he heed its call?

This is a Walter Hill film, so it’s not just any director we’re talking about here. This is the guy behind such action packed 80’s classics as 48 Hours (1982), Extreme Prejudice (1987) and Red Heat (1988). Hill’s a director whose films are very male oriented, he makes films for guys to holler and cheer at, they are about tough dudes, shoot outs, guns and explosions; tough dudes and sexy ladies. This time around things are a bit different though; not that Johnny Handsome doesn’t have its fare share of action and shoot outs, but the story is told in a more film noir style. It’s darker, grittier, more character driven. The film starts with a shootout and ends with a shootout, the middle of the film is the whole process of Johnny going from looking like a monster, to looking like Mickey Rourke before he turned to boxing. Funny how in real life, Rourke know looks like Johnny before the operation, oh the irony of life!

Hill invests a good amount of time getting you to know Johnny, getting you to feel for him. Rourke does a good job here, he plays the tormented soul, you feel like he’s the Frankenstein monster or something; a misunderstood creature who’s just looking for some love. At first, when we first meet Johnny he looks like a deformed monster, similar to the character that Eric Stoltz played in Peter Bogdanovich’s The Mask (1985), someone deformed because of genetic defects.  The character of Johnny also reminded me of Marv, another beat up character that Rourke played in Robert Rodriguez’s Sin City (2005). During the first half of the film, Rourke plays his character through heavy amounts of makeup. But half way through the film, after the operation, he transforms, and then we get the real Mickey Rourke, the mind boggles at how much Rourke has changed through the years! The rest of the film is populated by an excellent cast of supporting characters. Ellen Barkin has always been great at playing these rough, tom boyish ladies, on this show she plays a woman with no moral values whatsoever, she hangs out in bars, being a whore, stealing, killing and double crossing. She hangs out with low lives like Henriksen’s Rafe Garrett. Henriksen has always been great at playing villains, here he plays the main baddy, not much of a stretch acting wise, but he gets the job done. Rounding things up are Morgan Freeman as a cop who knows Johnny’s true nature, and Forest Whitaker as the doctor who operates on Johnny. Whitaker plays the guy who wants to give Johnny that second chance to improve himself, the guy with hopes that we can all change.

Johnny Handsome is a very underrated Walter Hill film. The film didn’t hit it big in theaters, in fact, it was a downright flop. It cost 20 million to make but only raked in 7.2 at the box office. I guess the film really didn’t connect with audiences for some reason. A pity because the film is a good revenge tale, and it has an excellent cast, this is the kind of film that makes you wonder why exactly did it slip through the cracks? Maybe it was due to the fact that it had some hefty competition at the box office. Upon it’s release it went up against Ridley Scott’s Black Rain (1989), which by the way was the #1 film that week, and it also went up against Sea of Love (1989) which starred Al Pacino. Also a bunch of successful family comedies like Uncle Buck (1989) and Parenthood (1989), so I guess a dark, brooding film about a deformed dude wasn’t at the top of anybodies list that weekend. But whatever, those that know, know; and on my book, this is a solid revenge tale with good performances and a dark, grimy look. If you’re ever in the mood for something like that, then this is the film for you.

Rating: 4 out of 5

The Quick and the Dead (1995)

Title: The Quick and the Dead (1995)

Director: Sam Raimi

Cast: Sharon Stone, Gene Hackman, Russell Crowe, Leonardo DiCaprio, Lance Henriksen, Keith David, Tobin Bell, Gary Sinise

Review:

The Quick and the Dead isn’t one of those films that purely emerged from the mind and imagination of director Sam Raimi. It wasn’t like Evil Dead (1981) or Darkman (1990) both of which were films born and bred in Sam Raimi’s brain. Nope, on The Quick and the Dead Sam Raimi was a director for hire. He was personally chosen by Sharon Stone herself for this film because she loved what he did on Army of Darkness (1993). So here was Sam Raimi, coming out of the moderate success of Army of Darkness, doing his first “director for hire” picture. How did it go?

An awesome cast makes this an awesome western!

The Quick and the Dead centers around a shoot out contest that takes place in the Western town of Redemption. This contest attracts a varied group of gunmen from all over the Old West. The twist comes when we find out that one of these gunmen is actually a gun woman who goes by the name of ‘Lady’. She signs up for the contest but doesn’t reveal the true nature of her plans: exacting sweet revenge on the man who was responsible for the death of her father! It just so happens that this man is the towns mayor; an abusive politician named Herod who squeezes tons of tax money from peoples pockets and lives a life of luxury at their expense. Will she ever muster up the courage needed to go up against Herod and his men? Will she ever get the revenge that she came for?

One of the things that makes The Quick and the Dead special is the fact that it has a female lead in the role; normally western films have a male lead in them. I figure studios think females don’t really give a damn about cowboy movies so why make one with a female lead? But this one was just a little different. It has an ass kicking female playing the lead character in the form of Sharon Stone, who's one tough cookie on this movie. Though many of the men in Redemption enlists in the contest, somebody protests saying that ladies shouldn’t be allowed to enter. Herod, the towns mayor played by a scene stealing Gene Hackman says “we don’t have nothing against ladies entering the contest, it’s just that ladies can’t shoot for shit!” All the men in the room laugh when he says this. It's right then and there that , and Lady proceeds to show them what she’s made off by shooting her gun faster and quicker then all of them thought she could. So this movie is different that way. Sharon Stone carries the whole film on her shoulders. She’s the ‘Blondie’ of this film. She smokes a thin cigar, says very little and answers almost everything in two syllables. To her credit I will say that she was appropriately bad ass in this film, equal parts sexy and tough.

Sadly, this film was a complete bomb at the box office and an abysmal failure for Sam Raimi who started to doubt his abilities as a director. “I felt like I was a dinasour. That I couldn’t change with each film” But Im guessing that wasn’t the case. Raimi remains a great stylist in my book, he’s kind of lost touch with that in his recent films (Spider Man 3 and Drag Me to Hell) but Im hopeful that he still has a couple of great films in him. The failure of this film can be attributed to a common ailment in action films: having a female in the lead in a genre whose target audience is mostly males. I don’t get this because, shouldn’t guys be happy to get a western with an incredibly beautiful actress in the lead role? But whatever, films like Supergirl (1984), Red Sonja (1985), Barb Wire (1996), Elektra (2005), Aeon Flux (2005), Catwoman (2004) and Ultraviolet (2006), with very rare exceptions, continue to bomb at the box office. But of course, this could have to do something with the fact that these movies are pretty bad to begin with. I guess the real question would be why doesn’t Hollywood make better films with female heroes in them? You make a good action film, with a female lead and it will be a hit just as much as the ones with male leads in them. Look at Salt (2010) and Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001), two examples of successful action films with a female playing the lead.

Sam Raimis stylish direction remains a major asset of this film

But forget that noise; Sharon Stone in The Quick and the Dead was bad ass. This film not finding its audience was a real tragedy because, not only is this film a great western, it’s also one of Sam Raimi’s best films. At least in my book it is. When Sharon Stone (one of the films producers) chose Raimi as the director for this project, she thought that Raimi showed promise in Army of Darkness and that The Quick and the Dead was going to be the film where he could really come full circle and fine tune his directorial skills, which he achieved wonderfully as far as Im concerned. The film is filled with many signature Sam Raimi camera moves. The lightning flash zoom in, quick camera moves and odd angles make this one a stylish western. Raimi gives it his own distinctive style by placing the camera in extremely interesting places. Like for example when characters load their guns, the camera is actually on the gun itself! In one scene a gunsman shoots his gun and the camera becomes the bullet…little things like that let you know that yes, you are watching a Sam Raimi film. That, plus it’s got the word ‘Dead’ in the title.

Aside from Raimi’s camera play, we also get memorable heroes and villains and a great story to go with them. The contests attracts all sorts of gunslingers to Redemption, each one of them a unique character. For example, Lance Henriksen plays a gunslinger named Ace, because he is renowned for being so great. He likes to do tricks with his pack of cards, which are all aces. We get another gunslinger who’s a gun for hire, another one is a ruthless ex-con, another one is a young kid, and so forth. Behind the characters lays a story of connected lives. They all live under the oppressive reign of Herod, the films villain played by the one and only Gene Hackman who eats up the screen whenever he appears. There’s this awesome scene in wich Sharon Stone is planning on shooting Herod down, but she is so intimidated by the words he speaks that she doesn’t even dare pull the trigger! Now that’s what I call a villain! On top of this, every other character on this film is played by a recognizable actor before they got famous. Russell Crowe is here playing a Priest who’s looking for redemption. He had an ugly past as a gunslinger and is looking to make his peace with God by becoming a priest. Leo DiCaprio plays ‘The Kid’ who also happens to be the son of Herod, the villain. Even Jigsaw himself is here playing a gunslinger who’s looking to kill ‘Lady’. All in all, this film has a solid cast! So much so, that if this film had been made today, with the exact same cast, it would have cost a hell of a lot more money then what it cost back in those days when a lot of these actors were virtual unknowns.

So let’s see, the cinematography is excellent, the music is top notch, the whole cast really makes the whole thing worthwhile, what’s not to like in this picture? Nothing! It is a great homage to Sergio Leone films and westerns in general. We have the lead without a name; we get the revenge that drives the plot of the film. We even get the helpless towns folk who can’t fight for themselves, so they end up looking for the right gunslinger to save them from the oppressive villain. And we got the showdowns at noon. Basically, everything and anything you could ever want to see in a western. This is a highly underrated Sam Raimi film in desperate need of some love and attention!

Rating: 5 out of 5

Pumpkinhead (1988)

Title: Pumpkinhead (1988)

Director: Stan Winston

Cast: Lance Henriksen

Review:

Stan Winston was a master of make up effects, through his body of work on many memorable genre pictures (and non genre pictures I might add) he cemented himself as a force to be reckoned with in the monster making business. Amongst his most recognized creations we can mention the alien creatures in such iconic classics as Predator (1987), Aliens (1986) and The Thing (1982). He is the guy behind The Terminator, and the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park. He was nominated for an Oscar for his work in Neil Jordan’s Interview with a Vampire (1994). The guy definitely left his mark in the film world; his passing was a sad day in film land. He also took a stab at directing. He made a film called A Gnome Named Gnorm (1990) Stan Winston’s attempt at a children’s film which didn’t go very far for some reason. I think it was plagued with distribution woes. He also directed a short film for Michael Jackson entitled Ghosts (1997) which was Michael Jackson attempt at recovering that old ‘Thriller’ magic. Unfortunately that short film wasn’t that well received either because by that time, Michael Jackson’s career was on the slopes. My point is that Stan Winston did some legendary make up effects work, he was a part of some truly memorable creations, but as far as his directorial career went, Winston’s films weren’t that well received. Except for Pumpkinhead that is! While Pumpkinhead didn’t make kajillions at the box office and was received with luke warm reviews by critics, the film has gathered a cult following across the years. It is still alive and kicking to this day.

Stan Winston, proudly standing next to his creation

Pumpkinhead tells the story of Harley (Lance Henriksen) and his son. They both live the happiest lives together. They have an enviable father son relationship. But, darkness descends upon their lives one day when a group of rowdy teenagers come to their town looking to have some fun with their dirt bikes. I know what you are saying, there’s nothing wrong with wanting to have fun right? But the problem comes when they accidentally run over Harley’s son and decide to run away, afraid to take the blame for what they have done. Harley refuses to accept his sons death quietly, and so he finds a way to summon Pumpkinhead the demon of revenge!

I recently mentioned this one on my Demonic Cinema 20 Demon Movies to Keep You Up All Night blog post, and for good reason, Pumpkinhead is a great demon movie that has many good things going for it, but above all the best of them is the creature itself. The look and design that make up this demon of revenge is awesome, as is to be expected from a film that comes to us from a master make up effects man like Winston. I do love how the creature snarls, I love those long bony hands, and that grimace. I’ve always thought that Pumpkinhead looks like a demonic old man, that aspect makes it all the creepier. Those blank eyes, the devilish tail, the overgrown head that is literally shaped like a deformed pumpkin…everything about this creature screams monster. My only complaint with Pumpkinhead is how slow it moves. Though conceptually and visually the creature looks amazing, it gives the impression that the man in the suit had lots of trouble moving inside of it. The mobility and performance of the actor behind the suit is hindered which is why in the end, Pumpkinhead comes off as a slow moving creature that you could easily out run. Good thing for Pumpkinhead that all his victims do when they see him is scream and stare at him, otherwise they would all be outrunning him.

This is not a very complicated film; it is essentially a revenge tale through and through. It reminded me a lot of films like The Crow (1994) and Ghost Rider (2007). A terrible wrong has been commited, and the ones who did it must pay! And the one who will make them pay has supernatural powers and origins. Nothing more to it then that. But you know what they say: “it’s not what you say, but HOW you say it that matters” and this holds true with this film as well. This movie is very eerie, very atmospheric. Many scenes are lit by the moon light, characters run around woods filled with dead trees, the wind is blowing constantly…in Pumpkinhead, we have all the right elements for a great horror film. I loved that there is a witch involved in the whole thing, in this way, augmenting the films supernatural roots. The witch serves as the character who knows all about the myth of Pumpkinhead, and the rules of the game. There is this scene where the witch is burying Pumpkinhead in a pumpkin patch, awesome scene! It’s scenes like those and the heavy atmosphere that let us know that Winston was paying homage to his favorite old school horror films. He was out to make the quintessential monster movie.

It’s been said that this film was based on a poem by a guy called Ed Justin. Who the hell is this Ed Justin guy? What other poems did he write? No one truly knows the origins of this poem, or its writer. And apparently it still hasn’t been clarafied, but the fact remains that this film is partially based on the mysterious poem which goes something like this:

Keep Away from Pumpkinhead

Unless you’re tired of living

His enemies are mostly dead

He’s mean and unforgiving

Laugh at him and you’re undone

But in some dreadful fashion

Vengeance he considers fun

And plans it with a passion

Time will not erase or blot

A plot that he was brewing

It’s when you think that he’s forgot

He’ll conjure your undoing

Bolted doors and windows barred

Guard dogs prowling in the yard

Won’t protect you in your bed

Nothing will, from Pumpkinhead

On the rotten side of the pumpkin patch, I found that some of the characters reacted unrealistically to some of the situations presented on the film. I mean, when Ed Harley first finds his sons dead body, he finds him with one of the teenagers watching over the dead kid. Does he ask the teenager what happened? Does he want to make him responsible? Does he call the police? Does he take the kid to the hospital? Nobody thinks about these things in the film. When the teens run over the kid, they could have saved his life had they taken him to the hospital, but no, they all decide to run away and leave the kid there. Even the teens who don’t agree with running away, the “good teens” don’t do the right thing! And then Ed Harley decides to take his dead son to a witch, that whole part of the film just didn’t ring true to me. A real father would have at least attempted to take his son to the hospital; a real father would have ripped the teenager he found with his dead son a new asshole. But none of this happens. Harley picks up his kid and it’s off to the witches’ cabin! But whatever, this is a minor problem for me with this movie. I just wish they had pulled that whole part of the film more convincingly. Maybe they could have given the father a background on witchcraft or on his beliefs?

This film ended up being quite influential. The Misfits wrote a song based on the film where the practically retell the whole story of the film through the song. It spawned a couple of comics, and was followed by various sequels. Pumpkinhead II: Blood Wings (1994), Pumpkinhead: Ashes to Ashes (2006) and Pumpkinhead: Blood Feud (2007), but none of them were as good as the original one directed by Stan Winston. R.I.P. Stan Winston, your vivid imagination and genuine artistry will be sorely missed!

Rating: 4 out of 5

Stone Cold (1991)

Title: Stone Cold (1991)

Director: Craig R. Baxley

Cast: Brian Bosworth, Lance Henriksen, William Forsythe

Review:

I put Stone Cold, under the same category as Sylvester Stallone’s Cobra (1986), you know, balls to the wall action with a testosterone levels that are off the charts. Right from this movies opening sequence, you can tell the director was using Cobra as a blue print. It starts out with some ass kicking in a supermarket, just like Cobra did. Brian Bosworth is dressed pretty much the same way Stallone was in Cobra, with long black trench coat, black cowboy boots and blue jeans. This film comes to us from director Craig R. Baxley who gave us Action Jackson (1988) and  I Come in Peace (1990), both of which aren’t bad action films at all. Having directed these two action films is probably what got him the job to direct this one. It’s a macho movie every step of the way. A guys film. It’s got giant motorcycles, naked chicks left and right, explosions, fights, guns, dudes kicking the hell out of each other, a biker gang. I don’t think a movie could be more 'macho' then this one.

A motorcycle gang is terrorizing the streets. The kind of gang that you don’t want to mess with. The kind of gang that if you mess with one of them, you mess with the whole lot of them. Kind of like the way the Hell’s Angels grew in the United States back in the 70’s, to the point where they had chapters everywhere. Basically, they are a bunch of red neck, hillbilly, rebels who don’t want to work 9-5. They’d rather, party 24-7, be hammered 24-7 and party like its 1999. You know, the kind of biker gang that don’t like to bathe, shave or do anything proper. They want to go against the rules! They want to smash your face! You piss them off and they answer with a sucker punch right to your balls! So basically, in Stone Cold, this motorcycle gang is pissed at some politician because he wants to make the death penalty a must in his state. The bikers don’t like that, so they want to wipe him out.

So wow, where do I start? Well, I guess the best place to start would be by talking about the films star: Brian Bosworth. He was a football player for the Seattle Seahawks back in the 80s. You know, the guy that got run over by Bo Jackson. So anyways, after a lackluster career in Football, the guy decides he is going to be movie star, making action films for Hollywood. His first stab at filmmaking wasn’t all that bad. Stone Cold, with all its cheesiness and 80s mentality is actually a decent action flick.

It’s got all the right ingredients for a good action flick. The idea behind this movie is, Bosworth goes undercover and becomes a member of the biker gang, to try and stop the assassination attempt. Its basic plotline is very similar to that of Kathryn Bigelow’s Point Break, which was released on the same year. If you remember correctly, Keanu has to try and infiltrate the gang of surfers who are holding up banks left and right. He kind of becomes friends with them and then it becomes difficult to distinguish between his real life as a cop and life with the surfer gang. Well, Stone Cold is basically that same movie. Just switch surfer gang for biker gang and replace Keanu with The Boz. This movie also made me think of Hunter S. Thompson’s book “Hell’s Angels” where Hunter S. Thompson actually lived amongst the Hells Angels for about a year, after which they kicked his ass for using them to write his book. But that doesn’t happen with The Boz on this movie. The Boz infiltrates the gang, and actually earns their respect from the get go because he starts off by kicking some ass, after he's had his egg-orange juice-banana energy shake of course!

So now comes the part of my review where I analyze the laugh inducing moments of this film, cause hey, this movie was made in the 90s, but its still got a little bit of left over 80s mentality within it; so laugh inducing moments are practically mandatory. Its an 80s action flick every step of the way. Heavy Metal was taking over back in the late 80s early 90s. This was way before Nirvana came along and screwed things up for hair bands everywhere. As a result, this films soundtrack is very heavy metal, as well as its attitude, the guys on this movie all listen to metal, they all wear skulls, rings, leather jackets. There’s only one problem, amongst all these dirty, unshaven, smelly heavy metal loving biker dudes, one person stands out like a sore thumb, and who is it? The Boz! Brian Bosworth who calls himself John Stone in the film, does not look like a biker at all. Number one, he actually wears neon colors while riding a bike. There’s this one scene where he’s wearing this neon green bandana on his head, and I’m like: Okay, its obvious, your NOT a fucking biker dude! Give it up! Another thing is: who the hell chose Bosworth’s wardrobe for this movie? Was it himself? Cause it sucks! He wears these gigantic leather jackets! They make him look like a Highlander on wheels or something! There’s no doubt about it, Bosworth was a fashion victim on this film. But hey, its great for a laugh. Don’t get me started on that mullet!

Then there is this scene in which The Boz appears in his underwear, that’s so obviously unnecessary, its like “look at me, I’m fucking hot! Bask in the awesomeness of my built body!” It was funny, and I was thinking, okay, this is a guy’s film because everything in the movie is aimed at guys, so why was that scene in there if this movie is made 100% for guys? I didn’t get it! I guess the director wanted to give something for the one or two ladies in the audience that were dragged by their boyfriends to see this action flick. I practically heard the girls screaming when that scene came on! Good thing is that the film quickly compensates by immediately placing a naked chick on the dudes bed. And speaking of nudity, there’s lots of it on this one. It has the obligatory “lets talk things out in a titty bar, with naked chicks on the background” scene. Hell, girls play pool topless on this film! So if you like some naked chicks with your action film, you’ll be more then pleased with Stone Cold.

So what else does this film have to offer other then nudity, action and The Boz? Well, Lance Henriksen playing the leader of the biker gang that’s what this film has to offer! And he plays it great. He wasn’t all that old just yet, actually, Lance Henriksen was ripped for this role! He runs the gang as if it was some sort of religion. He says “this is my cross, my church, my religion” and to top things off, when he wants to infiltrate a building, he dresses up like a preacher so they let him walk right by! He’s great in this movie. We also get William Forsythe, back in his early days. On this one he plays second fiddle to Lance Henriksen. The henchman who doesn’t trust The Boz. Not one bit! The rest of the cast is composed of real life bikers! Which adds a bit more credibility to the proceedings. Theres this one scene where all the bikers are shooting their guns, and watching these two guys kicking each others asses like some Gladiator show or something, good scene, everyone is crazy, going out of control, gotta give kudos to this movie for making these scenes genuine by using real bikers.

And then there’s the stunts! Bikes crashing out windows and exploding on helicopters! Chase sequences where bad guys smash their bikes onto oncoming traffic! When somebody is fighting in this movie and they hurl somebody, they really freaking throw them! I mean people fly! These biker dudes entertain themselves by shooting bear cans off of their shoulders! With machine guns! 

A fun action film! Its over the top, and crazy. Everybody is in “fuck you!” mode! Everything blows up, everybody runs on choppers, and The Boz kicks ass like he was The Terminator, which is really what they were trying to do here. Make Brian Bosworth the next Arnold or Stallone. Though in truth, he looked more like the next Dolph Lungdren, actually a great many scenes remind me of Dolph Lungdren. At times, The Boz actually talks like Lungdren! Anyhows, not a bad action film, actually a pretty cool one from the 90s! Right up there with Stallones Cobra. Good for a laugh, good for some fun.

Rating: 3 1/2 out of 5

This foreign poster for the film actually makes it look like a Terminator film!