The first two Creepshow movies were a lot of fun. They were associated with George Romero and Stephen King, who knew how to handle horror material well. This third movie had been rumored for a long time, and when it happened… everything I read about it was really bad. So I was surprised when I saw it at the local library.
The framing device was a bad sign. The animation was pretty poor, and it seemed to be in bad taste. Some covered-up being is approached on a neighborhood sidewalk by a happy dog. Off camera, the being kills the dog, and puts it on a little wagon. The being is then shown to have opened a hot dog stand, where it is serving the remains of the dog on buns. No humor to it, unless you consider "hot dog" to be a joke.
This leads to the first story, Alice.
Alice is a typically bratty teenage girl, who walks home through her neighborhood, talking on her cell phone, and complaining about stuff. When she gets home, there's some awkward dialogue, while her father futzes around with a new universal remote. As buttons on the remote get pushed, Alice goes through a bunch of variations of her family. First, they're all black except for her. Then they're all speaking Spanish. Then no one seems to be able to hear her. With each iteration, Alice accumulates a variety of strange bloody boils.
I'm leaving out the ending, in the interest of not having spoilers here. This story is bad, and it's bad in a lot of different ways. First, the premise of a remote control that can manipulate reality has been done. It's been done very well, and it's been done really badly, but it's been done often enough that this seems redundant. Second, the acting is bad. Everyone seems to be acting strangely, but it never seems like it was on purpose. And this acting quality seems to permeate the rest of the movie. Third, this was not a horror story. The story seemed to shoehorn some gore into the story in a nonsensical way. Why does she seem to get these strange patches of gore? We never know why. She doesn't even seem to care too much, except for near the end. Fourth, as a character that we're supposed to dislike, she's not bad enough. She's as bad as a stereotypical teen girl, but she doesn't stand out.
The second story, The Radio, was actually a bit better than I expected. A guy buys a radio from a homeless man. The radio starts talking to him, giving him instructions, advising him. This doesn't play as dark as expected. It's kind of funny to hear the radio give him financial advice, as well as instructions on what he should have to eat.
The story plays out kind of predictably. The one thing that bugged me is that the apartment the guy is living in is really strange. It is clearly a different set from the apartment building that he enters from.
At least this story was short.
The fourth story has a professor inviting two of his prize pupils over in advance of his wedding. They meet his bride, and think she has to be a robot. Of course, this leads to the two of them dismembering her, in an effort to find proof.
There are two big problems with this section. First, it's played as a comedy, but there's nothing funny about it. Second, I have a hard time believing that two college graduates would knock someone out, and cut them up (with a hand-held electric drill, no less) in order to prove that they are a robot. Maybe if the segment were funny, I'd be willing to believe that their decision made sense.
The fifth story is really strange. A really bad doctor causes the death of a homeless guy by giving him a hotdog that fell on the ground. The apparition of this homeless guy haunts the doctor for a few days. In the meantime, the doctor continues to be a jerk on the job. He takes a variety of prescription medication, and supplies similar drugs to a party, which is hosted by the vampire from the earlier segment. This story suffers from two other problems. The first is that the guy is actually too much of a jerk. This doesn't happen too often, but he's actually so tastelessly mean and offensive, and he isn't funny. This makes it so the story is more of a chore to watch than it should be. The other problem with this segment has to do with the ghost of the homeless guy. We get to see the ghost produce a hotdog, first by pushing it from his mouth. Later, the ghost has a stab wound (which makes another kind of nonsense) and the ghost pulls a hotdog from that.
The movie does make substantial efforts to feel like there are lots of links between the stories. Unfortunately, none of these links have any meaning. This reminds me of Trick R Treat, which was anthology-like, but linked those stories masterfully. Here, it just seems like they recycle the actors and put them into the background of other stories.
Then the movie ends with a strange capper - the end of the wedding of the professor, and his bride, which he seems to have rebuilt somehow. There are a few lost limb gags. We get to see the rabbit from the first story (which also made an appearance during the professor's story. Of course, that doesn't make any sense, since she wasn't a rabbit yet).
I'm not a picky horror watcher, as you probably know. But I actually feel like this movie hurt itself by using the name Creepshow. By using the name, it implies that this will be similar quality. Or at least that it will have a similar feel. The name raised the expectations. Instead, if this had a different title, an original title, then I wouldn't judge it as harshly. Sadly, this movie is Creepshow 3, and it's going to continue disappointing horror fans for a long time.
No comments:
Post a Comment