Stuart Gordon

  • Castle Freak (1995)

    Castle Freak (1995)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On Cable TV, April 2021) The story behind Castle Freak is unlikely enough to be amazing: When cult-horror director Stuart (Reanimator) Gordon noticed a “Castle Freak” poster (for an unproduced film) in shlockmaster Charles Band’s office, he quickly negotiated a half-million-dollar budget and an agreement that the final result would contain both a castle and a freak. In return, he got what many filmmakers would kill for: complete creative control within those constraints. The result is, well, low-budget but not completely awful: As an American family moves to a castle they just inherited, they certainly don’t expect the murderous creature lurking in the dungeons. There are added layers of psychological and genealogical complexity in the final script, and while the result doesn’t fly particularly high, it is interesting more in a Stuart Gordon way than a Charles Band way. There’s clearly something there trying to escape the confines of its budget. Gordon stalwart Jeffrey Combs plays the male lead role, perhaps courting cult approval more than the film actually deserves. Castle Freak does have its share of obvious problems, including a far too gory scene that should have been toned down to fit with the rest of the film. There are lulls, needless complications, and a premise that arguably runs out of gas well before the film’s 95 minutes are up. Still, it’s not quite as bad as feared, largely due to Gordon’s attitude at managing even a micro-budget. Fun fact: the castle in which the film was shot was actually owned by Band himself. No, I don’t know how a low-budget horror producer can afford a castle. I suspect that’s another amazing story by itself.

  • Dolls (1987)

    Dolls (1987)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, January 2021) While Dolls is a better-than-average horror film, it can also be useful as a yardstick with which to explain why some horror movies of the 1980s led to long-lasting franchises, and why others didn’t. (Not that there’s any innate nobility to sequels—I’d rather leave most movies alone—but that’s a topic for another time.)  The obvious comparison piece here is 1988’s Child’s Play, a near-contemporary horror film with a very similar possessed doll horror device that led to an eight-film series with an iconic monster. The key difference here is “iconic”: While Dolls is, in most respects, a better film—better story, more interesting characters, grounded morals, toned-down violence, and better mechanical scares—it’s not iconic. It’s a bit messy, and its “lead monster” (Mr. Punch) is not distinctive enough. It’s a better movie with less personality, and that partially explains why a sequel to Child’s Play could be framed around Chucky, while a sequel to Dolls never happened. Still, this comparison aside, let us cover Dolls with some praise: While it misses being a classic by a few notches, it does get most of the way there: the production design of the vast gothic house where the action takes place is well done, the scare sequences are handled decently by director Stuart Gordon, and the script does have a nicely twisted morality that’s missing from many nihilistic horror films (including Child’s Play!)  I was pleasantly surprised by the result, although I’m not sure Dolls makes its way on my list of 1980s horror must-sees. No matter; it’s a nice surprise if you haven’t seen it already—the poster reminds me of the scares I’d get from browsing video store horror sections as a kid.

  • From Beyond (1986)

    From Beyond (1986)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On Cable TV, May 2020) I should like—no, I should love From Beyond. In theory, it’s everything I like best about 1980s horror films—off-the-wall premise, Lovecraftian plot elements, wild use of practical effects and makeup, go-for-broke weirdness, over-the-top melodrama, nudity, a sense of fun bigger than the gore, Stuart Gordon directing, Brian Yuzna writing, Jeffrey Combs starring, multidimensional terror and body horror packaged as one, some comedy, some science fiction. If I had to put together my ideal fictional 1980s horror film, it would look a lot like From Beyond. And yet, the result just isn’t where it should be. The pacing is off, the horror seems almost too restrained, and it doesn’t quite seem funny enough for the material. I mean—I still enjoyed From Beyond (it does get admirably gloopy toward the end, not bloody), it’s just that it didn’t feel as if it made the most out of its ambitions. Still, it’s rather over-the-top fun if that’s your thing—and it is my thing.

    (Second Viewing, In French, On Cable TV, February 2021) It hasn’t been that long since I first saw From Beyond, but my willingness to see it a second time has as much to do with it being caught on my DVR as it has with an underappreciated facet of 1980s horror films. The more I watch some of the wilder horror films of the decade, the more I’m struck by how, even limited by practical effects, those movies weren’t afraid to go for pure inspired madness. In From Beyond, we have a wild concoction of body horror, science-fictional nonsense, slimy gloopy creatures, nudity, gore, mutated horrors, dark comedy and explosions and I have to wonder — Have I been watching the wrong movies, or has this streak of utter madness disappeared from the current horror corpus? Why aren’t we using CGI to have some more of that fun? I’m not generally an advocate for gore, but gore is the least of what made films such as From Beyond (or Reanimator, or Evil Dead, or Braindead, or…) — it’s rather the goofy sense of fun with horror/SF tropes, the generous heaping of nudity and humour, the demented scientists and likable protagonists. I feel as if the latest crop of horror films is either far too serious for its own good, unadventurous in its use of special effects despite near-infinite capabilities, and just plain boring in how it simply goes back to the same sources of inspiration. Maybe those films exist and they’ll re-emerge as cult classics in a few years. But there’s a reason why From Beyond and its close equivalents have aged so well for horror fans: in many ways, they’re simply not making them like that any more.

  • Re-Animator (1985)

    Re-Animator (1985)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On TV, December 2018) There’s a self-acknowledged B-movie quality to Stuart Gordon’s Re-Animator that makes the movie about ten times as much fun than if it had tried to play things dramatically. Working from an H. P. Lovecraft premise, this is a film that has fun with the idea of hideous resurrection, clearly made in the same horror/comedy vein as Evil Dead 2. That doesn’t mean it’s an easy watch for those who aren’t used to the gore or the casual disregard from decency—Re-Animator is clearly destined to a specific hardened public. In between the gallons of blood, practical makeup effects and unbridled imagination, the hospital sequence that makes up most of the third act is wild enough. Jeffrey Combs has some fun as the lead actor playing the epitome of a mad scientist, and this carries through to the entire production. There are a lot of wannabe horror/humour hybrids, but few of them manage the magic combination of elements that Re-Animator stitches and cobbles together. This being said, it’s worth reiterating that this is not for everyone—it’s best watched by seasoned horror fans who have developed the macabre sense of humour that the film is going for.