The Serpent and the Rainbow

Dir: Wes Craven

1987

****

The one thing I’ll never understand about Wes Craven is why he directed The Hills Have Eyes II but not A Nightmare On Elm Street II. Between the original Freddie film (1984) and The Serpent and the Rainbow (1988), Craven made Chiller, The Hills Have Eyes II and Deadly Friend, as well as a couple of TV shows. He wrote and produced A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors just before directing The Serpent and the Rainbow but didn’t have anything to do with Freddie until he brilliantly re-booted the franchise in 1994 with Wes Craven's New Nightmare. I really admire that he was never tempted to return for more and continued to look for other projects. Not all of them turned out that well but The Serpent and the Rainbow remains one of his overlooked masterpieces. Based on the non-fiction novel by ethnobotanist Wade Davis, it recounts the author’s experiences in Haiti investigating the story of Clairvius Narcisse, who was allegedly poisoned, buried alive, and revived with a herbal brew which produced what we now know as a ‘zombie’. Author Davis agreed to sell the book rights on the condition that Peter Weir direct and Mel Gibson star. This clearly didn’t happen but, as much as a Weir/Gibson film would have been interesting, Craven and actor Bill Pullman produced a great film. The story begins in 1978. A Haitian man named Christophe mysteriously dies in a French missionary clinic, while outside a voodoo parade marches past his window. The next morning, Christophe is buried in a traditional Catholic funeral. A mysterious man dressed in a suit who was outside Christophe's hospital window on the night he died is in attendance. As the coffin is lowered into the ground, Christophe's eyes open and tears roll down his cheeks. Seven years later, Harvard anthropologist Dennis Alan is in the Amazon rainforest studying rare herbs and medicines with a local shaman. He drinks a potion and experiences a hallucination of the same black man from Christophe's funeral, surrounded by corpses in a bottomless pit. Back in Boston, Alan is approached by a pharmaceutical company looking to investigate a drug used in Haitian Vodou to create zombies. The company wants Alan to acquire the drug for use as a "super anesthetic". The corporation provides Alan with funding and sends him to Haiti, which is in the middle of a revolution. Alan's exploration in Haiti, assisted by Doctor Marielle, locates Christophe who is alive after having been buried seven years earlier. Alan is taken into custody, and the commander of the Tonton Macoute, Captain Dargent Peytraud - the same man from Christophe's funeral and Alan's vision in the Amazon - warns Alan to leave Haiti. Continuing his investigation, Alan finds a local man, Mozart, who is reported to have knowledge of the procedure for creating the zombie drug. Alan pays Mozart for a sample, but Mozart sells him rat poison instead. After embarrassing Mozart in public, Alan convinces Mozart to show Alan how to produce the drug for a fee of $1,000. Alan is arrested again by the Tonton Macoutes, tortured, and dumped on a street with the message that he must leave Haiti or be killed. Alan still refuses to leave and meets with Mozart to create the drug. Alan has a nightmare of Peytraud, revealed to be a bokor who turns enemies into zombies and steals their souls. When Alan wakes up, he is lying next to Christophe's sister who has been decapitated. The Tonton Macoutes enter, take photos, and frame Alan for murder. Peytraud tells Alan to leave the country and never return, lest he be convicted of the murder, executed, and then his soul stolen by Peytraud. He puts Alan on a plane, but Mozart sneaks onboard and gives Alan the zombie drug. Mozart asks Alan to tell people about him, so that Mozart can achieve international fame. Alan agrees and returns to Boston with his mission apparently completed. At a celebration dinner, the wife of Alan's employer is possessed by Peytraud, who warns Alan of his own imminent death. Alan returns to Haiti, where his only ally, a houngan named Lucien Celine, is killed by Peytraud and Mozart is beheaded as a sacrifice for Peytraud's power. Alan is then sprayed with the zombie powder and dies; later, Peytraud steals Alan's body from a medical clinic before Alan's death can be reported to the US Embassy. Peytraud takes Alan to a graveyard where, helpless in his coffin, Alan sees that Peytraud has captured Marielle and will sacrifice her. Peytraud shows Alan Celine's soul in a canari. Alan is then buried alive with a tarantula to "keep him company". Waking up in his coffin a few hours later, Alan is rescued by Christophe who was also turned into a zombie by Peytraud. Having escaped Peytraud's trap, Alan returns to the Tonton Macoute headquarters looking for Marielle. There, Alan defeats Peytraud and sends his soul to hell. As the Haitian people celebrate the downfall of Jean-Claude Duvalier, Marielle proclaims "The nightmare is over". During production in Haiti, the local government informed the cast and crew that they could not guarantee their safety for the remainder of the film's shoot because of the political strife and civil turmoil that was occurring during that time and as a result, production was relocated to the Dominican Republic for the remainder of the shoot. Amazingly, the original cut was three hours long but Craven felt that it was too long and talky so it was cut down to 98 minutes. It received a mixed reaction when it was first released and not all was positive. I think it is still overlooked to this day, probably due to the fact that people still see the director as the man being Freddie and the Scream franchise. It was also marketed terribly. The trailer for the film was completely misleading. The clip, which is styled like a hallucination, features a blue computer rendering of the screaming face of Dennis Alan (Bill Pullman) engulfed in liquid, as serpents swarm through and around the top of his head. This isn’t in the final cut of the movie and has very little to do with it. The is horror within the film but it’s not the same as Craven’s previous films, indeed, it is a little more grown up. There is horror within the film but it contains far more mystery and implication, rather than gore and jump scenes. It isn’t perfect but on the whole it is largely original and has a unique dream-like quality about it that I really liked. It’s creepy and it leaves the viewer haunted. I used to be scared of going to sleep after watching A Nightmare on Elm Street for sure, but the implications explored in The Serpent and the Rainbow kept me awake as an adult.

Swamp Thing

Dir: Wes Craven

1982

***

DC's Swamp Thing and Marvel's Man-Thing are pretty much the same comic-book character, developed by two friends and roommates who clearly went in different directions with the same idea, but it was DC's Swamp Thing who got to the big screen first. Although only based on Len Wein and Bernie Wrightson's idea, Wes Craven's story isn't too far from the origins of the original character. This was a shame for Man-Thing, as he could have had a much brighter future within a bigger comic-book universe and Swamp Thing really isn't that great. However, there are a few elements about it that I loved. Firstly, it's a cheesy action/monster b-movie, my favourite. Secondly, there is something quite unique about Swamp Thing himself. His relationship with Adrienne Barbeau's Alice Cable, a combination of two characters from the original comic, feels quite genuine and rather touching. There is a dreamlike quality about the film that can be said in many of Wes Craven's films that would come post-Nightmare on Elm Street. It is obvious that Swamp Thing was an exercise in proving Craven's worth to the film studios, showing that he could do action, drama and romance as well as horror and deliver a film on budget and on time, something he was very proud of. The film wasn't a hit but it has become something of a cult favourite among fans, a highly regarded failure from the studios perspective. If anything, 1982's Swamp Thing made DC and Marvel up their game somewhat when it came to the comics, as when Swampy failed, the great Alan Moore was allowed full creative control of the character and he created one of the comic world's greatest runs. Now an adaptation of Alan Moore's Swamp Thing would be something wonderful. 1982's Swamp Thing isn't perfect but it's still a lot of b-movie fun, the monsters are rubbish but lovable and it does star cult favourite David Hess, which is always a bonus.

Red Eye

Dir: Wes Craven

2005

**

Wes Craven's 2005 Red Eye was a woeful departure from greatness. Craven hadn't had much success over the last few years as a director, with 1997's Scream 2 being the last hit he'd had. It seems he was happier being an executive producer, much to the disappointment of horror fans. 2005 saw Craven release two films as director, the disappointing Cursed and Red Eye. Cursed was a major flop witch left fans of the director in unhappy bemusement. Red Eye however clearly had a bigger budget and had a fair bit of publicity. It was hyped as being a return to form for the director and his first intense action crime/thriller. Sadly, it ended up being a predictable mess. Red Eyes sees the most convoluted crime plot ever to have been committed to celluloid. To be completely fair, Wes Craven did not write the film, it was written by Carl 'Remake' Ellsworth, one of Hollywood's least talented, but that said, Craven's direction was very average. Rachel McAdams and Cillian Murphy are both quite good in their roles and do well with what they'd been given but not even an Oscar-worthy performance could have distracted from the fact that the story was not just implausible, but down-right ridiculous. I like ridiculous at the best of times, it can lend itself quite well to a comedy, romance or sci-fi but when you want to make a thriller full of suspense and intrigue it is best to leave ridiculous well alone. I'm guessing the story took place in an airplane because of its limitations, plus it could play with people’s fear of flying and claustrophobia. None of these elements are used in an effective way and it looks like everyone is sitting on a giant prop, which of course they were. When writing a story about a particular situation you have to use the unique surroundings to the advantage of your plot but the screenplay for Red Eye makes me wonder if Carl Ellsworth has actually ever been on an airplane in his life.

The Last House on the Left

Dir: Wes Craven

1972

*/*****

The Last House on the Left was a pioneer for independent film and pushed the boundaries of cinema and censorship, for that it should be congratulated and remembered. Wes Craven wanted to make a point about how violence was depicted on screen and in this respect The Last House on the Left is one of the most important films in modern history. Craven wrote the film in 1971. The original script was intended to be a graphic hardcore film, with all actors and crew being committed to filming it as such. However, after shooting began, the decision was made to edit the script into a much softer film. This script, written under the title Night of Vengeance, has never been released; only a brief glimpse is visible in the featurette Celluloid Crime of the Century (a 2003 documentary on the making of the film). The crux of the plot is based on the Swedish ballad "Töres döttrar i Wänge,” which itself was the basis of Ingmar Bergman's The Virgin Spring, of which Craven was an admirer. Craven envisioned a film in which the violence would be shown in detail onscreen as he felt that many popular films of the era, such as Westerns, glamorized violence and the "vigilante hero," and gave the public a misleading representation of death in the wake of Vietnam War. This was the young director’s wake up call to society, a slap in the face of the older generation. I can see where he was coming from and really, someone had to do it but from a viewing perspective it is a sick and horrible little film with very few redeeming features. Thestory begins as Mari Collingwood plans to attend a concert with her friend, Phyllis Stone, for her seventeenth birthday. Her parents, Estelle and John, express their concern about the band and her friendship with Phyllis, but let her go and give her a peace symbol necklace as a present before she leaves. Phyllis and Mari head into the city for the concert. On the way, they hear a news report on the car radio of a recent prison escape involving criminals Krug Stillo (David A. Hess – in a role he would play several times in his career – Craven later used the name "Krug" in A Nightmare on Elm Street for the film's villain, "Freddy KRUEGer." In both films the name is used for teenage murderers), a sadistic rapist and serial killer; his heroin-addicted son, Junior; Sadie, a promiscuous psychopath and sadist; and Fred "Weasel" Podowski, a child molester, peeping Tom, and murderer. Before the concert, Mari and Phyllis encounter Junior when trying to buy marijuana. He leads them to an apartment where they are trapped by the criminals. Phyllis tries to escape and tries to reason with them, but she fails and is gang-raped by Krug, Weasel and Sadie. Meanwhile, Mari's unsuspecting parents prepare a surprise party for her. The next morning, Mari and Phyllis are bound, gagged and put in the trunk of their car and transported to the woods by the criminals. Mari recognizes that the road is near her. Mari and Phyllis are forced to perform sexual acts on each other and Sadie attempts to perform oral sex on a weeping Mari. Phyllis distracts the kidnappers to give Mari an opportunity to escape but is chased by Sadie and Weasel, while Junior stays behind to guard Mari. Mari tries gaining Junior's trust by giving him her necklace and instead names him "Willow". Phyllis stumbles across a cemetery in the woods where she is cornered by Krug with a machete and stabbed in the back by Weasel. After they take turns kicking her, she crawls to a nearby tree and is stabbed by Weasel and Sadie multiple times. As she dies, Sadie digs her hand into the center of her belly where her belly button is and pulls out her intestines. Mari convinces Junior to let her go, but her escape is halted by Krug. Sadie and Weasel present Phyllis's severed hand as Mari screams in horror. Krug carves his name into her chest, then rapes her. She vomits, quietly says a prayer and walks into a nearby lake to clean herself, but Krug fatally shoots her, leaving her body floating in the lake. Krug, Sadie and Weasel clean up and change out of their bloody clothes. In their new attire, the gang goes to the Collingwoods' home, masquerading as travelling salesmen. Mari's parents let them stay overnight, but Junior exposes their identity and orders them to leave. The gang finds photos of Mari and discovers that it is Mari's home. Later that night Junior, in the midst of a heroin withdrawal, is heaving in the bathroom; Estelle enters to check on him. She gasps as she sees that he is wearing Mari's peace symbol necklace. She eavesdrops while the gang is spending the night in Mari's bedroom and finds blood-soaked clothing in their luggage. She overhears about the death of her daughter and disposal of the corpse in nearby lake. She and her husband rush into the woods where they find Mari's body on the bank of the lake. They carry Mari's body back to the house and exact revenge against the crooks. Estelle seduces Weasel and performs fellatio on him that turns deadly when she bites off his penis and leaves him to bleed to death. Mari's father John takes his shotgun into the room where two of the criminals are asleep and shoots at them. Krug escapes into the living room and overpowers John, before being confronted by Junior, brandishing a revolver and threatening to kill him. Krug manipulates Junior into committing suicide by shooting himself. Using this distraction to his advantage, John runs into the basement to fetch a chainsaw. Krug attempts to shoot him with the shotgun but finds it is empty. Krug attempts to flee but is incapacitated by an electrocution booby-trap set earlier by John. Sadie rushes outside where she is tackled by Estelle, but she escapes and falls into the backyard swimming pool where Estelle slits her throat with a knife. The sheriff arrives just as John kills Krug with the chainsaw. The deputy then brings Estelle into the living room before removing the chainsaw from John's hands. Sean S. Cunningham made his directorial debut with the film The Art of Marriage. His film grossed $100,000 and attracted the company Hallmark Releasing. Cunningham made the film Together as a "better version" of film. Wes Craven, who had no money at the time, was put on the job of synchronizing dailies for Cunningham's re-shoot. He soon began editing the film with Cunningham and they became good friends. Hallmark Releasing bought the film for $10,000 and it was considered a "hit." Hallmark Releasing wanted them to do another film with a bigger budget and gave them $90,000 to shoot a horror film. Cunningham served as producer and Craven served as writer and director on the project. The majority of the cast of The Last House on the Left were inexperienced or first-time actors. Cunningham and Craven held casting calls for the film at Cunningham's office in late 1971. Craven sought a documentary style appearance for the film, marked by close-up shots and single-cut takes to give the film terrifying realism. Cunningham later described the film shoot as being guerrilla-style with the crew spontaneously filming at locations and being forced to leave due to lack of permits. In retrospect, he admitted that nobody knew what they were doing. Much of the special effects in the film were achieved practically, for example, the sequence in which Phyllis is disemboweled, they made fake intestines with condoms filled with fake blood and sand. For the murder sequence of Sadie in the swimming pool, Rain had a pouch full of fake blood attached underneath her shirt as well as blood capsules in her mouth, which she manually punctured. Lucy Grantham recalled during the scene in which Hess's character tells her to "piss her pants," that she in fact urinated in her jeans. Due to its graphic content, the film sparked protests from the public throughout autumn of 1972 who called for its removal from local theaters. The Paris Cinema, a movie theater in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, issued an open letter to these criticisms in September 1972, in which it was noted: After carefully considering all the circumstances, management has decided to continue to show the movie. This difficult decision was predicated on the following considerations: The film relates to a problem that practically every teen-age girl and parent can identify with, yet does not pander to the subject matter. The story does not glorify violence, nor does it glorify the degenerates who perpetrate the violence ... we feel the movie is morally redeeming and does deliver an important social message. Newspaper advertisements featured lengthy statements issued by the film's producers defending it against claims that it sensationalized violence, one of which noted: "You will hate the people who perpetrate these outrages - and you should! But if a movie - and it is only a movie - can arouse you to such extreme emotion then the film director has succeeded ... The movie makes a plea for an end to all the senseless violence and inhuman cruelty that has become so much a part of the times in which we live.” It was quite bold and correct of course, although when actually watching the film none of it feels justified. Promotional material capitalised on the film's graphic content and divisive reception, featuring the now infamous tagline: "To avoid fainting, keep repeating 'It's only a movie' ...". Anecdotes as to where the advertising campaign originated vary somewhat. Cunningham claims that marketing specialist who devised the 'It's only a movie' title was watching a cut of the film with his wife, who continually covered her eyes, prompting him to tell her that it was "only a movie". but it had been used twice before: first for H.G. Lewis's 1964 splatter film Color Me Blood Red and then for William Castle's Strait-Jacket the following year. However, it is always remembered for Last House On the Left and it was so successful that many other exploitation films later used it, often with their own spin. It is genuinely an important film, although I really don’t like intellectualizing it too much as I really don’t like it. It is a necessary evil, not entertainment.

Scream 4
Dir: Wes Craven
2011
*
For a film that continues to discuss other horror films and the horror genre in general, it beggars belief that it adds absolutely nothing to said genre! It points out stereotypes in the genre, overused structures and cliches and then shows us nothing we haven't already seen before, in the Scream franchise no less. It's unbelievably dumb, the regular actors look tired and embarrassed to be part of it and so they should.

Scream 3
Dir: Wes Craven
2000
*
If you copy something, then copy the copy and then copy it again, the quality is going to certainly suffer. In the third installment they sort of seem to know this and try to compensate by spoofing the original somewhat and by going all 'post-modern'. It was a really stupid decision but what else would you expect from people who describe the Scream films as 'Neo-slasher'. It was straight to video quality with a cinema release. You won't scream in terror, nor will you scream in laughter, you'll scream at the screen due to the lack of quality. At this stage there wasn't much difference between this franchise and the Scary Movie franchise, the original becomes the laughingstock.

Scream 2
Dir: Wes Craven
1997
***
Scream 2 is my favourite of the series as I found it to be the most original and the only one where I didn't guess who Ghostface was before the end. The Scream films constantly remind us that 'In the sequel, no one is safe' and it actually delivers by killing off people you expect to survive. They seem to forget this in later films and the series suffers as a result. If I had it my way they would have all died at the end of this installment and that would have been the end of it.

Scream
Dir: Wes Craven
1996
**
Scream made a huge impact on its release back in 1996. One thing it did was make horror films mainstream, something that seemed like a good thing at first but time has since suggested otherwise. Ghostface is as good as any masked knife wielding villein but in trying to create an almost satirical and deconstructed horror icon, Wes Craven just made an average character, a non-identity that deserves none of its success. The musings on horror cliches is fairly annoying too as they get many of the cliches wrong and Craven himself is guilty of the rest. Scream spawned not only a series of horrible sequels but a bunch of samey, boring, sub-standard horror films that have damaged the genre so much that all new horror is pretty much the same and as a reaction all the other horror films are sensationalist and are more concerned with shock then genuine scare or any of the creativity that come with it.