New-to-Me in 2023
I have a confession to make.
Despite a deep love of the genre, I have gaps in my horror movie resume. Serious gaps. Gaps that are better labelled as Blind Spots. Capital B. Capital S.
The true BS is reconciling these oversights when you consider what I have seen.
This year I started a spreadsheet (the default means of processing thoughts in my old, data life) to capture a watchlist and a ‘as-yet-to-watch’ list. Reflected back at me are natural omissions based on my subgenre preferences, yet also, some top-tier egotistical gaffes.
I’ve dismissed movies outright based on the flimsiest of excuses. Feeling that I knew enough about them to not waste my precious time. Or, frankly, a sense of I’ve seen this done before, what can this film possibly offer me? I type this with a straight face knowing I’ve never seen Romero’s Dawn of the Dead (nor Day of the Dead) yet I suffered through all 82 minutes of The Collingswood Story.
Why not make light of the situation and my ridiculous decisions by sharing my reaction to a handful of prior releases that were new-to-me in 2023.
Starting with a huge blind spot.
Friday the 13th (Parts 1 and 2)
Yes, seriously.
My challenge with the Friday the 13th films is threefold. Born in the ‘70s meant coming of age in the ‘80s. The omnipresence of Jason that decade cannot be overstated.
With eight releases, just in that decade, the legacy of Camp Crystal Lake was everywhere.
Newspapers perpetually advertised the next film. The franchise’s VHS tapes overran the section for horror rentals. Jason Voorhees is so associated with my early life I wouldn’t be surprised to find he’d signed my yearbook. In my case, that familiarity did not translate into interest.
A man with serious mommy issues.
Second, I’m not a fan of the slasher subgenre. We like what we like. I enjoy solving mysteries and puzzles - that is my draw for horror movies. Rarely is there a genuine mystery within slashers as the audience already knows who the killer is and the victims often serve as irrelevant fodder.
This is why I focused on the first two entries of the franchise. Even if you’ve never seen the film, genre fans know Jason is not the killer in the first movie. (RIP Casey Becker) And the depiction of Jason in the second film is genuinely scary compared to the hockey-masked villain in subsequent releases.
Third, slasher franchise fatigue is real. No surprise, considering I already have a mental hurdle to overcome with the subgenre itself. I love Halloween and to a lesser extent, the sequel. I know I saw part four, and along the line I gave Rob Zombie’s first remake a try, but that’s it. And I actually am interested in the Michael Myers character. Same goes for A Nightmare on Elm Street, of which, I somehow saw 5 of 9 films. Scream? Loved it! Stopped after the third entry.
For contrast, I saw every single Paranormal Activity film (at home) and I don’t even think they are good! At least not until the very last film, Next of Kin. So, if you are a slasher or slasher/franchise fan, understand I’m not dissing your taste in films.
Am I glad I crossed Part One and Two off my list?
Yes. It is an inexcusable omission.
The first movie in particular has effectively chilling sequences thanks to the killer’s POV camera work, demonstrating the filmmaker’s inspiration from Halloween. My affection for practical effects gave me lots to appreciate in both films. Nostalgia takes me the rest of the way, though must be utterly confounding to younger audiences. Payphones? Hitchhiking? The absence of light pollution? No internet? That might be the scariest part for anyone born after 2000.
Conclusion: The first two movies are lots of fun. Will I continue with the series? The only possible way I can imagine I this happening is if I do a watch-along marathon, capturing my thoughts in the moment. History tells me my thoughts will be unkind and potentially humorous so I am not ruling it out entirely, though the time investment is daunting for a lark.
Jeepers Creepers (2001)
It took 22 years for me to see this gem. A year longer and the creeper himself could resurface.
I mentioned ego earlier as one element that prevents me from seeing some movies. The early aughts is when I skipped most of the teenager/college kid-centric horror movies. Having just left that world behind and starting my first career post-graduation, made me want to move beyond those storylines. Then came all the remakes of ‘70s/’80s horror classics, and I was a hard ‘no’ on all of it.
When I chose to watch Jeepers Creepers this year, I skipped the trailer and, should you have never seen this film, I suggest you skip the trailer as well.
*You should also stop reading this part if you’ve never seen Jeepers Creepers because sharing my enjoyment of the film means spoiling a key twist*
I knew I was in good hands with the patience and care given to the opening sequence. No opening jump scare! I love movies that can sustain and build the tension slowly, and this opener delivers the goods. The manner in which the truck is introduced through the rear window is a chef’s kiss to solid storytelling that trusts its audience.
Now, keep in mind that I knew little about the film, I had the pleasure of watching a series of effective reveals unfold. From the truck to the scenic backroads and the creepy church buildings, nearly everything is filmed on location. Thanks to Justin Long’s faithful horror-movie character history of making the worst choice possible in any given situation, we get to see a lot of locations.
The discovery of what has been happening in the space below the churchyard, the sheer scope and creative vulgarity on display had me nervous; worried the ambition of the story would fall flat in the third act. Were my worries warranted? No, because to escape the next fight scene, the wounded Creeper takes to the frickin skies.
Did NOT see that coming.
A scene that is clearly in the trailer. See how much this first watch benefitted from my lack of knowledge? I had no idea there was a supernatural element to the tale and that discovery was pure delight.
Conclusion: Start to finish, the threads are tied off, the sibling dynamic is believable and the third act does not disappoint. Cannot believe it took me two decades to see this.
They Live (1988)
I skipped right by this one when it first came out. No idea why. And, despite my affection for John Carpenter films, I never had an inclination to make amends. They Live was included in a JC 4K collection I purchased earlier this year so I popped it in with low expectations.
Los Angeles. Has a filmmaker ever used that city so effectively time and again as John Carpenter?
The film captures the dichotomy in the ‘80s between the excessive, consumer lifestyle being pushed on us and the reality of a growing population of homeless and underserved communities. All set against actual locations in L.A. It was a blast to see Roddy Piper outside of the WWF (as it was known then). Keith David is the heart of the film for me, I never tire of seeing him on screen. And, for those of you not lucky enough to grow up in the ‘80s, may we just take a moment to reflect on Meg Foster’s eyes? Forget the visuals promoted on Cable 54, we had an actress with eyes so mesmerizing we could be hypnotized just looking at her.
Conclusion: I had a blast with this film and will certainly rewatch it. It did hit me with an uncomfortable insight: I now understand what it must feel like for people today who watch Big Trouble in Little China for the first time. I grew up loving that film, as hokey as it is. Seeing that same esthetic, and knowing it is a conscious choice from the same man who filmed Halloween and Prince of Darkness, well, I just need to accept it will be a hurdle for many potential viewers.
The Innkeepers (2011)
Before X, I hadn’t watched a Ti West film. I made up for it over the past year and a half by devouring any of his films as they became available. Locating them can be a challenge in Canada. As I’ve already devoted space to The Sacrament in an earlier piece, I want to shine a spotlight on The Innkeepers. It may surprise you to learn that this film is a slow burn. Unless, of course, you have ever seen a film by Ti West. (I once heard him on a podcast describing his film style as “nothing happens for an hour and then all hell breaks loose”.) The film’s location is fantastic. The use of the hotel gives us a sense of space as the characters move throughout. Sara Paxton leads a solid cast (blink-and-you’ll-miss Lena Dunham as the barista) which includes Kelly McGillis, to add a dose of nostalgia for us Xers. The challenge for all ghost stories is act three and I felt West delivered with The Innkeepers.
Conclusion: I found this a really enjoyable, quiet film. Slow burn pacing is out-of-vogue in the industry, so if you often find yourself antsy during slower films, this won’t be for you. Personally, I love the contained nature of hotel, the limited cast and stillness required for the story to unfold. I’m also adamant that the story is self-fulfilling, with a very clear cause and effect sequence of events, even though not everyone I’ve spoken to believes that to be the case.
Hell Fest (2018)
There are so many movies about the haunted house/frightful experiences industry. Talk about a gift to the horror industry! First, they make scary films. Then, they charge people to participate in a simulated experience based on those scary films. Finally, they make movies about people participating in said experiences. Serious kudos to everyone involved in figuring out this nesting doll scheme to part us from our money.
Back to Hell Fest. In the horror genre, there are moments that make a film. Those moments where even a middling film suddenly grabs you by the throat and refuses to let go. Hell Fest has one of these moments. Unfortunately, it is the very last shot of the film. Reaching that point isn’t painful. I wasn’t bored by the film, but I cannot say I was terribly invested. Until the end. Then I was more than a little frustrated.
Conclusion: For me, Hell Fest was a satisfactory blend of slasher and seasonal teen scream themes, one which may become an October rewatch over time. My biggest disappointment was casting Tony Todd (the main reason I pressed play) for a great role with barely any screen time. I fear the ending will be my undoing after a second watch though. Horror movies are notorious for their shite third acts. We are used to accepting a crappy ending to an otherwise perfectly entertaining film. Hell Fest is the exact opposite.
It is perfectly adequate film with a killer ending that leaves me desperate to watch the incredible film it could have been.
Notable entries in the new-to-me list this year include: Warning: Do Not Play (2019), and Veronica (2017). Both of which are included in upcoming posts on our very human behaviour of not leaving well enough alone.
Do you instinctively feel the need to touch the dish when a waiter says “be careful, this plate is very hot”? That’s what I’m talking about, and I’ll explore that ill-fated tendency in January.
Do you have a glaring omission on your horror-movie resumé? Share the horror film(s) you know you should have seen by now in our judgement-free comments section.
Enjoyed this story? Support my writing here, share with your network or subscribe below to receive your weekly update directly to your inbox.
