Ernest Saves Christmas

Dir: John R. Cherry III

1988

****

There are nine Ernest films in total (sadly there were six in development before the untimely death of the great Jim Varney) and Ernest Saves Christmas is easily the best - maybe alongside Ernest Goes to Camp. The Ernest films were always shown on British TV during the summer holidays and I remember watching Ernest Saves Christmas for the first time during a particularly hot August morning. It really didn't matter to me that it wasn't Christmas, that's how much I enjoyed it. The thing is, it's not really that great a film. It's not great at all but for some reason I absolutely love it. The fact that Ernest is a lovable character aside, it is a great story. Christmas film stories are very samey and there is nothing original about helping Santa but somehow Ernest Saves Christmas feels a little different. It's an 80's classic and I'm under no illusion that I'm not being washed with waves of nostalgia here but there is something a little bit special about this film that I can't quite put my finger on. I think it has a lot to do with the film playing for laughs a lot more than most and that it isn't too schmaltzy and doesn't try too hard to teach the kids an important moral lesson. It's was never seen as a classic and it never will be but give me Ernest over Will Ferrel's Elf or Tim Allen's Santa Clause any day of the week. Another highlight that makes the film stand out over many of the others is that Douglas Seale makes a brilliant Santa Claus. The story is mad-cap and original and Jim Varney is great in every scene. The Ernest films took a severe nose-dive over the following years and I've often thought it a shame that they only made one Christmas film. He could have made a new one each year and made a brilliant series around it (and made a lot of money I shouldn't wonder too). I'm in the minority but Ernest Saves Christmas is on my essential Christmas film list and has been since 1988. Surely I can't be alone on this?

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Dir: Gareth Edwards

2016

*****

I'm a nerd. I grew up on Sci-fi and like many other millions of people, Star Wars (along with Star Trek) was everything to me. Like the rest of the world, I wanted to see what happened beyond Return of the Jedi and I like everybody else, was slightly disappointed with what George Lucas gave us in the remastering and in the origin stories. We still never knew what had happened to Luke, Han and Leia though, so there was always hope. Then, in 2015 what we all thought would never happen, happened. I then wished it had never happened and began to appreciate episodes I-III, such was my disappointment. Disney bought Star Wars, their stores moved the Mickey Mouse displays to one side and soon enough you could buy all the toys and merchandise you wanted thirty years ago. When they announced that they would be making several one-off Star Wars stories' and origin tales', I thought it would be more of the same and an extension of the cash-in - fair enough given the amount of money they had spent, I was now over it, let the kids have it, I was done. Then the trailer for Rogue One came out. I noticed it had a good few of my favourite actors in it and it looked.....authentic. After now watching Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, I can confirm that if I only had one word to describe it... it would be "authentic". If I had two... it would be "very happy". If I had six they would be "I'm so happy I could cry". Gareth Edwards achieved something here that neither George Lucas or JJ Abrams could in either Star Wars: Episode III -Revenge of the Sith or The Force Awakens. He has given us something new and has brought back all of the warm nostalgia of the originals. I liked pretty much all of the new elements of The Force Awakens but I think the film stumbles when handling older subjects and characters. Revenge of he Sith gets really exciting towards the end of the film but it doesn't quite make up for the two and half films that come before it. Edwards has clearly gone back to A New Hope and has looked at every tiny detail to get it right in this film. There are many people credited with the story but it was special effects supervisor John Knoll who stood up and said the concept stories being circulated early on were not of Star Wars standards before developing his own idea. It seems that the real Star Wars fans in the industry, or at least the ones that understood what made the originals so loved, were finally given the chance to create. The attention to detail is superb. If you're a casual Star Wars viewer then you should be satisfied but if you are a Star Wars nerd you will be in heaven. The references to the other films and characters are often slight, relatively subtle but always effective. It has everything you'd expect from a Star Wars film but just that little more refined. I loved the BB-8 droid from The Force Awakens but Rouge One's K-2SO is something a little different from him, or R2D2 and C3PO. Instead of playing it easy and going for cute, they looked at what worked best within the story. The story itself isn't something new either, it already existed in a way and events take place just days before where A New Hope begins and believably so. There are some very nice surprises along the way and just when you think you've seen them all, a few new ones pop up, each fitting the story perfectly and serving a purpose, rather than simply serving as nostalgic titillation. I imagine fans of the books, animated series and video games will be rather happy too. The cast is near perfect. Felicity Jones is great in the lead role and Diego Luna supports her well in what is the main male lead. Alan Tudyk ticks many boxes in voicing the film's droid and what film isn't made better by the presence of the mighty Donnie Yen? Forest Whitaker and Mads Mikkelsen fill in the big supporting roles nicely and the brilliant Ben Mendelsohn proves once again that he is the go-to guy if you want a villain played right. It's was great to see personal favorites Riz Ahmed and Daniel Mays too, they've come a long way from Shifty and their success is well earned. Jimmy Smits and Genevieve O'Reilly were very welcome additions to the story, both bridging the gaps between episodes I-III and A New Hope perfectly. Rouge One is very much a Star Wars film without trying too hard to be so. There is no 'waterfall' introduction (this is the waterfall story in a way) and each scene isn't cut by another sweeping in from the side. This is Edwards' film, something new and something the franchise desperately needed. The film does things it's own way while staying true to the Star Wars universe, which is ultimately the Star Wars way. There was a worry that this wouldn't quite feel like a real Star Wars film but I would argue that Rouge One is the most Star Wars film since The Empire Strike Back. I loved it. Seriously, by the end, I could have cried!

A Christmas Horror Story

Dir: Steve Hoban, Grant Harvey, Brett Sullivan

2015

****

Steve Hoban, Grant Harvey and Brett Sullivan Christmas horror opus is a huge welcome addition to the sub-genre. Christmas horror are either about killer Santas, Krampus or are barely Christmas related at all, and even though the same can be said about A Christmas Horror Story, it incorporates all these ideas and really runs with them while adding more to the mix. Split into four separate stories (or chapters), each tale is linked thanks to the inspired addition of a radio DJ (played by the brilliant William Shatner) who gets more and more drunk as he plays festive tunes and reports on the news. Horror fans will have noted that all these events take place at Bailey Town, the very location that the Ginger Snaps films take place. There are four stories in total and while two of them aren't that great, the other two more than make up for it. The first one sees three friends sneak into their school (which used to be a convent) to investigate two murders that happened there the previous year. It's a fairly boring story if I'm being honest, with a predictable ending and fairly bad acting. There is nothing that links this story of the others or indeed Christmas and the film could probably done with it being cut and the other stories extended. The second story is slightly better and involves the abduction of a child by changelings. One of the changelings decides to impersonate the young boy and after he begins eating strangely and murders his father, his mother becomes suspicious and set about finding her real son. It's not the best but it does have a pretty decent conclusion. The third story starts off fairly slowly and I worried it would be as uninspiring as the first two but once Krampus shows up it gets really good. This is one of my favourite versions of Krampus so far and the conclusion of the story is unexpected and utterly brilliant. Krampus also turns up in the final story, as he takes on Santa who is fresh from killing all his own Elves after they rather tragically fall foul of a zombie infection. This is what Christmas horror is all about. Lapland looks ace and George Buza makes a brilliant Santa - he looks the part, is kind and sincere but can also roll up his sleeves and kick butt when he needs to. If the final battle wasn't climactic enough, the twist of all movie twists comes out of nowhere and the whole film comes together fantastically. From rather average beginnings comes one of the best endings to a film ever. Most Christmas horror films are a bit cheap and rubbish and only get watched thanks to great cover artwork. A Christmas Horror Story had a fairly rubbish poster in the scheme of things but my goodness it doesn't disappoint. One of the very best in the sub-genre.

Silent Night, Bloody Night: The Homecoming

Dir: James Plumb

2013

*

Theodore Gershuny's original 1972 Silent Night, Bloody Night became infamous and eventually reached cult status, largely thanks to the involvement of Lloyd Kaufman, John Carradine and the almost full set of Andy Warhol superstars. It's a fairly awful watch but it has become hugely influential and a hero to all independent horror films made ever since. James Plumb's sequel/remake is clearly made out of love and admiration for the original and isn't just cashing in on the now famous name but I'm afraid that is pretty much the only praise I can give him and his film. The title 'The Homecoming' sounded pretty American to me, I wondered how they would continue the story and had images of school dorms and graduation balls but no, The Homecoming is a puzzling and odd title that has very little to do with anything. The biggest surprise to me was that the film, a remake rather than sequel, was set in Wales. Nothing wrong with that, not until it becomes clear that this is one of the most amateur productions ever to have been submitted to DVD. I like independent horror films and quite often a low-budget can be overcome by originality and creativity but Silent Night, Bloody Night: The Homecoming suffers everything that makes a low-budget horror film bad. Most of what makes it so terrible is made worse by the fact that the first five minutes of the film features some truly brilliant old-school composition. For those first few minutes it really did feel like this was going to be a heartfelt and authentic tribute to independent horror but it was as if someone flicked the quality switch from on to off and the circuits broke, the wires came loose, burst into flames and the house burnt down with everyone inside. I have many gripes with amateur independent films but I think the most irritating is the self-congratulation usually seen towards the film's finale. I get it, I've worked on many low-budget films and admit I've made the same mistake but by sticking in personal jokes and over-doing the gag reel, you only end up ostracizing the audience even more than you did by making a low quality film. Horror film makers and heavy metal rock music often go hand in hand also and I'm sure many of the fans enjoy both but I'm not sure why they feel the need to make their lead characters - who certainly don't come across as rock fans - secret rockers. I also understand that many of the cast were probably friends of or indeed the film makers themselves but the problem is that they really look like horror film makers and thus ruin the illusion. There is often a fine line between a tribute and woeful imitation and I'm afraid cinema doesn't get any more woeful than this.

Silent Night, Bloody Night

Dir: Theodore Gershuny

1972

**

Theodore Gershuny's low-budget seasonal horror has become infamous since its eventual cinema release in 1972 - two years after its completion. It actually disappeared into obscurity for quite some time until Elvira and her Movie Macabre television show featured it one Christmas and decided to air it every year thereafter during the festive season. Reputation goes a long way and I can see why it became a must see movie. Firstly, it has a great title and Christmas horror films were few back then. Since its release, its co-producer Lloyd Kaufman has become a legendary horror film maker (Troma) and most of the cast were made up of members of Andy Warhol's Factory including the likes of Mary Woronov, Ondine, Candy Darling, Kristen Steen, Tally Brown, Lewis Love, Jack Smith and Susan Rothenberg. If that weren't enough to get the interest of weirdos and cinephiles, it also stared cult legend John Carradine in a supporting role. It's something of an early triumph for independent film and the indie horror genre but as much as I like a low budget horror - particularly an independent Christmas themed low-budget horror, Silent Night, Bloody Night is almost unwatchable. There are some interesting elements to it that I admire which held my interest but overall it’s not great viewing at all. To its biggest credit, it showed the way for many young film makers and the horror film industry, for better or for worse, was given an important boost. It is a clear precursor to the slasher, its 'Insane Asylum' story line is now hugely influential and it re-wrote the book when it came to the 'Haunted House' sub-genre. I can't help but admire it, even though I was bored to tears. It does have a notable eeriness to it that is impressive but overall it’s like watching a game-show where a contestant nearly gets the right answer but gets an important word wrong. The next contestant that buzzes in gets the answer right, thanks to the nearly right answer of the first contestant, who ends up losing the show and going home early. Close, with credit but generally quite bad.

Treevenge

Dir: Jason Eisener

2008

****

Jason Eisener's short seasonal horror film, seen through the eyes of a Christmas tree, is a joy from start to finish. It would almost certainly loose something if it had been stretched out into a feature film, it's fifteen minute run time means it's fast paced, punchy and full of only the best the story can give. What is so clever about it, as opposed to killer Santas and murderous Snowmen, is that there really is something quite barbaric about growing a tree for such a long time, only to hack it down to live in your living room for three weeks. The Christmas trees in Jason Eisener's film are given squeaky chipmunk-like voices and have subtitles for great comic effect. That said, the initial 'tree holocaust' is quite horrific, especially when you see the little trees looking for their parents and asking 'Why is this happening?". You then see the trees clamped and stuck in the corner of the room and humiliated with tinsel and baubles and you will think twice about getting a real tree instead of a plastic one next year. When the trees finally decide to fight back with brute force, you can't help but cheers them on. Lumberjacks are wood-chipped, Mum is strangled with the Christmas lights and Dad gets a branch through the eye-socket and sweet revenge is had. It's glorious. That is until the film's one big flaw. It crosses a line and goes too far in a two second scene that should have been cut in my opinion. We see the baby Christmas trees get squashed early in the film and it is very sad but in response to this, a human baby is seen to have its face stamped in by a Christmas tree's roots. It's gory and unpleasant and my enjoyment of the film dropped like a lead balloon. I'm overlooking it somewhat in my star rating, it is a brilliant short comedy horror film, the best I've seen for a very long time and I'm not going to dismiss it for one little mistake. Truly great horrors are the ones that explore the grey area between reality and fantasy, between truism and utter nonsense. It's got everything you could ask for from inventive deaths and excellent gore, genuine comedy and a truly original idea.

Creature Designers - The Frankenstein Complex

Dir: Gilles Penso, Alexandre Poncet

2015

****

Gilles Penso and Alexandre Poncet's Creature Designers - The Frankenstein Complex, is possibly 2015's most engrossing, enthralling and comprehensive documentary. While the title may suggest the film is an analysis of the mind-set of those who create monsters, and it is to some extent, it is really about the complex development and realization of all things monster in the world of cinema. Giles Penso directed the brilliant Ray Harryhausen: Special Effects Titan, an excellent and again comprehensive documentary covering the life and work of the SFX icon. It worked, so the format hasn't been tampered with, Creature Designers - The Frankenstein Complex is the documentary that horror/sci-fi/action film fans have been waiting for. Is it a nerd film? Most certainly but not at all exclusively. A wider audience will also enjoy, with mainstream films featured as well as obscure b-movies and alike. It actually bridges the gaps between mainstream and low-budget quite beautifully, showing early examples of the current best in the business and the big-budget masterpieces they now work on. It almost feels like a sequel to Ray Harryhausen: Special Effects Titan, Harryhausen started it and this film picks off where he left off. It features the very best of the best in the world of special effects including Rick Baker (An American Werewolf in London), Greg Nicotero (Army of Darkness), Phil Tippett (Star Wars) and Chris Walas (Gremlins) as well as directors such as Joe Dante (The Howling), Kevin Smith (Tusk), John Landis (Twilight Zone: The Movie) and Guillermo del Toro (Crimson Peak) plus many more. I think my only gripe was the absence of Rob Bottin (which was his choice) although he is mentioned often, and personal favourite Screaming Mad George (Society). The film does ask big questions, the biggest being what the future holds for special effects craftsmen given the advances in computer technology. There are some emotional responses, many have adopted CGI and have found the right balance while others reject it and have had troublesome times because of it. My favourite part of the movie was the discussion between Joe Dante and John Landis regarding the special effects on both An American Werewolf in London and The Howling. Rick Baker explains that while working on the effects for one film, he then jumped ship and used the exact same effects on the other, finally answering (for me anyway) why they are both so similar. From giant mechanical creatures to very simple puppetry, the art and the vision are explored, explained and compared. It's a must for nerds and cinephiles alike but also those who appreciate real craftsmanship. An absolute joy.