Because nobody likes spending an hour reading a movie review, I bring you Quick Horror Movie Reviews, a site offering to the point reviews of horror films from a guy who has seen thousands of them. From the classics to the hidden gems, the slashers to the creatures, the multi-million dollar blockbusters to the direct to video awfulness, it's all here! Read, enjoy, and for the best experience, go old school and view the desktop version!
A group of treasure hunters come across a bunch of Nazi Zombies who are cursed to protect Nazi gold for eternity...or something. This 1982 French movie may remind some of a 1981 French film called Zombie Lake, and there are good reasons for this--aside from both revolving around Nazi zombies and being French, the films shared many of the same crew members, both were brought to us by Eurociné, a company infamous for their movies of questionable merits. Both have zombies that look like they were crafted by middle school children, and "legendary" director Jess Franco was connected to both--he declined the 1981 to direct this one, and was apparently so ashamed of this movie he used an alias for it (A.M. Frank). To put this info perspective, Franco was primarily known for directing "horror" films that were little more than sexploitation flicks before finally just switching to porn films, and then coming back to the horror genre with this "gem" and similar others. If you are familiar with Franco, and you're expecting Lina Romay to be in this movie, I'm sorry to disappoint.
But here's a picture of her to make up for it
There is a huge difference between these French films--while both are technical disasters, Zombie Lake is at least somewhat entertaining--Oasis of the Zombies is an absolute bore. It starts off well enough, with two women coming across the zombies. From there, it falls apart. There's lots of gun fights. Then more gun fights. This is followed up with more gun fights. There's lot of nonsensical dialogue. An occasional zombie or naked chick is thrown in to try to keep your attention. Then more gun fights and talking about nothing important. The zombies are a strange bunch--aside from being Nazis, they are also apparently scared of the sun (part vampire?). The final scene is likely the best part of the film, and manages to build tension for just a few seconds before the zombies...vanish? With so many good zombie movies out there, and even ones that are not as much good as they are watchable, there is no reason to spend time with Oasis of the Zombies.
Oh Joon-woo (Yoo Ah-in) is trapped in his apartment as a deadly virus spreads outside, turning mild-mannered folks into zombies. With no family, minimal contact with the outside world, and little food and water, Oh Joon-woo must figure out how to survive. This 2020 South Korean film mixes plenty of drama with the horror, but it does have the pedal to the metal pretty much right from the start. If you are a fan of zombie movies, you will easily recognize elements of different films from the genre in this one--from Shaun of the Dead to Dawn of the Dead to 28 Days Later to World War Z, it seems writer and director Il Cho took some of the best parts of these films, threw them into a pot, stirred them all up, dumped them out, and #Alive was the result...and the result was actually pretty good! Ah-in makes for a likable lead, and the inevitable woman he comes across (Shin-Hye Park, and don't look at me like that for having a spoiler. We know it's only a matter of time before he comes across a woman/potential love interest) is equally impressive. Then we have the zombies...
Stand down. I'll be nice.
The zombies look cool--they're not as gory as some we have seen in other films, but their look and especially movements make them frightening. Speaking of gore, it is surprisingly minimal here. Instead of seeing intestines thrown about, we are presented with an approach that leaves much of the horror to the viewer's imagination, and while this can be a bore in some movies, the approach absolutely works in this one. If you allow yourself to be wrapped up in this film, you will find some moments to be genuinely scary. Unfortunately, some of the directing and editing decisions will take you right out of the movie. The shots when there is a camera strapped to the actor are brutally bad, there are too many jump cuts, and, worst of all, we get slow motion during a very tense scene. The closing moments deflate the balloon somewhat--you know what is about to happen, but you wonder if it will be a nod to 28 Weeks Later or Back to the Future Part II (I won't spoil this part). Even with these shortcomings, #Alive is a very good zombie movie, and certainly one I recommend checking out.
A woman runs off to a cabin with her secret lover and 8-year-old child. Somebody then kills the adults with a sledgehammer. Ten years later, a group of people party in the same house--I usually say "group of youngsters", or "group of young people", as that is what we have more often than not in these movies, but this group looks to be at least in their late twenties, if not into their thirties; however, they act like teenagers, so I don't know how to accurately describe them. That is just one of the many oddities in this 1983 film that looks like it was shot on a home camcorder--if you were born after the 1980's came to an end and have no idea what I am talking about, here goes...long before everybody carried around cell phones and thought it necessary to take pictures of every aspect of their mundane life and share them with the world, people had home video cameras that were generally only brought out during holidays, birthdays, or other special events, and used largely to not only capture those special moments, but also make people feel very uncomfortable while being recorded--a long way from going to landmarks around the world and instead of capturing the landmark itself, positioning the camera dead center on your own mug and hamming it up while the landmark becomes nothing more than a blur in your backdrop, all in hopes of impressing complete strangers. The cameras were big, bulky, but most importantly, they got the job done.
And they looked like this
I'm not sure why, but I find homemade/no budget movies from decades prior to the 2000's much more bearable than those of more recent years--I theorize it's because they were shot on actual tape instead of digitally. Anyway, this movie is an absolute train wreck of a project. If you have read many of my movie reviews, you will know there is one thing I truly despise in movies...okay, there's a lot I hate about movies, but one thing that really irritates me is the use of slow motion, and practically everything in this movie is in slow motion. There is even one scene that shows two of the characters going for a walk--literally nothing else happens in this scene, but we have to endure it that much longer because the entire scene is in slow motion! Needless to say, if they are going to present this in slow motion, we are also going to receive our action in the same format...and that we do, all the way up to the final battle. There is also an extended scene of a guy playing guitar...nothing else. Just a dude and his guitar. As you would expect in a horror film, there's lots of screaming--this isn't when people are being killed in this movie, however. No no, this is during truly exciting moments such as a guy eating a sandwich, others chugging beer, and an intense food fight. I'm not sure there was actual scripted dialogue during the party scenes, as all the characters talk over each other--not that any of them were likely saying anything important. Then there's the lighting--dear readers, I am going to give you a free lesson in movie making. This lesson is with lighting. When lighting is done right, it's something the viewer doesn't think about or acknowledge consciously. It is often taken for granted, but lighting plays a much more important role in production than most realize. When the audience notices the lighting, you know something went wrong, and in this movie, the lighting sticks out like a sore thumb. We see shadows of not only the characters on screen, but also of those waiting for their cue to enter the shot, and of various crew members and their gear. If you are making a movie and you don't land any other technical aspect upon initial shooting, at least make sure you get the lighting right. Class dismissed.
What are we seeing here?
The fun doesn't end there. We know the kid is the one who killed the adults at the start, but the movie alludes to this maybe not being the case before saying "yeah, okay, he did it"...but then it gets really weird. The kid is now a giant who looks like Franklin from The Texas Chainsaw Massacre wearing one of those cool, clear faces you find at Halloween stores...but he can shape-shift back into his child form, and seems impervious to pain...until he's not. This may have been explained near the end when the child version of our killer speaks, but apparently the director forgot to tell the kid to take the marbles out of his mouth before shooting, as whatever he says is unintelligible. I would say the acting is bad, but I'm sure you assume that already. Unfortunately, all this makes this movie sound much more entertaining than it is--cutting out abut 20 minutes of nothing at all happening would have done wonders for this movie, and may have thrust it into the "So Bad It's Good" hall of fame. What we end up with is a boring, technical disaster that is just entertaining enough to keep you watching until the end.
Paul Dean (Robert Glaudini) created a parasite, but the deadly thing is stuck to his stomach. Now he is trying to figure out a way to kill it while trying to escape from Merchant, a government agency that wants his creation. Not to be confused with the much more critically acclaimed 2019 South Korean movie of the same name, this one was released in 1982, a time that seemed somewhat obsessed with post-apocalyptic stories such as this one. The setting for this, however, was just ten years later, in 1992--being so many years removed from 1992 and seeing a "futuristic" movie set during that time is very strange (thank goodness gas prices in real life weren't what they were in this film). Somewhat surprisingly, the movie was released in 3D...maybe they thought this added to the "futuristic" feel, and I don't know what this movie may have looked like in that presentation, but unlike with many other 3D films, there's not much to distract the viewer when not watching it with those groovy red and blue glasses. If you are looking for star power, there's not much to see here, though Cherie Currie (lead singer of The Runaways and Sara from Twilight Zone: The Movie) pops in, and this is just the second movie Demi Moore ever appeared in, for what that's worth.
You didn't expect her to look different, did you?
The story is a bit of a convoluted mess, but that's not uncommon for this genre. The special effects are delightfully cheesy. The acting, while not unbearable, is bad. None of this really holds the movie down too much, and in fact adds to the enjoyment of it--what does make this film a challenge to get through is the pace. The story just plods along with long stretches of nothing happening to advance it, so be prepared to struggle with focusing on the screen. Still, Parasite is a fun 1980s sci-fi outing.
