Anyways, here’s what I watched in sequential order. Orange means worth your time, Red means essential viewing.

Rashomon (1950) d. Akira Kurosawa: This movie is brilliant. I don’t even need to comment on it. If you haven’t seen it, then you’re not a fan of film yet.

4D Man (1959) d. Irvin S. Yeaworth Jr.: Yeaworth’s directorial follow up to the seminal The Blob, this one is far less interesting. A scientist figures out the key to penetrating the hardest steel…by entering the 4^th dimension and passing through it! This is a decent flick but not all that special. Long and bloated, but with the standard 50’s non explicit sexual tension standard in most sci-fi films of the time.

Mark of the Vampire (1935) d. Tod Browning: A sound remake of Browning’s own silent film, London After Midnight. This is a stagey drama castrated by the newly implemented Hayes Code.  Bela Lugosi returns as a vampire with his vampiress daughter Luna. The film has an ending that even Lugosi hated. Interesting historically, but not as an entertaining film.

The Mask of Fu Manchu (1932) d. Charles Brabin: Karloff wants to kill all white men and rape their women. Myrna Loy plays his sex crazed sadist of a daughter. It’s got torture, sex, and violence. Everything you’d come to expect in a pre-code film. Worth viewing.

Death Becomes Her (1992) d. Robert Zemeckis: I love this movie. It’s just a glorified Tales from the Crypt episode but Meryl Streep, Goldie Hawn, and Bruce Willis are great in it. About two women who take a potion that reverses the ageing process only to find themselves fighting over Willis. Oh, and I can’t get enough of Louise Brook’s style bobbed cut. Short hair is where it’s at, ladies.

Nightmare (1964) d. Freddie Francis: Excellent film about a rich heiress being driven insane after witnessing her mother kill her father. The black and white photography is stellar and Francis proves again that he is one of the great underrated horror directors (note: be sure to check out his previous film, Paranoiac, starring Oliver Reed, which is one of my all-time faves). Jimmy Sangster, writer of most of the great Hammer films, delivers another special script that totally switches gears half-way through. Excellent stuff.

The Phantom of the Opera (1962) d. Terence Fisher: I’m not a big fan of the PotO movies, but I really like this one. It’s quickly paced and the acting is terrific. Michael Gough (Alfred from Burton’s Batman films, for you kids) is brilliant as the asshole Lord Ambrose D’Arcy. I also like how the Phantom is not motivated by love but rather pure revenge and hatred for what D’Arcy did to him. Absolutely worth a look.

Child’s Play 3 (1991) d. Jack Bender: I’m not going to apologize for liking this movie. No movie should ever be described as a “guilty pleasure” (Because if it pleases you, why feel guilty?) and I’ll say it again, I like this film. Chucky goes to the most incompetent military school in the country to find Andy and proceeds to murder everyone he sees. Bizarrely, the finale takes place at a carnival, but I like carnivals so suck it.

Doctor X (1932) d. Michael Curtiz: Four words: Fay. Wray. In. Color. This film is about a group of professors attempting to figure out which one is the Moon Killer, a cannibal that is murdering and eating people throughout the city. The direction is stodgy and staged like the play the film is based upon (Curtiz would later go on to make Casablanca) but the pre-code elements and the color make it worth a look even if it is a bit stilted. Plus, Fay Wray gets a hand buzzer to the crotch at the end of the film, and she likes it.

Red-Headed Woman (1932) d. Jack Conway: You’ve probably figured out by now that I’m really interested in pre-code Hollywood cinema. This one’s about Jean Harlow sleeping her way around town in an attempt to gain social status. Of course, this was socially unacceptable at the time but that didn’t stop pre-code cinema from tackling such issues. There’s a famous scene here where Harlow gets smacked in the face by her lover only to come back and beg for more because she likes it. Worth a look.

Werewolf of London (1935) d. Stuart Walker:  Notable for being the first Hollywood werewolf flick. Jack Pierce’s first attempt at a werewolf makeup looks really good and properly beastlike. There is a magical scene where the camera tracks along with Hull as he transforms into the werewolf that is a must see. If you are a student of horror, then you sort of have to see this.

Waterloo Bridge (1931) d. James Whale: Whale made this right before Frankenstein. Mae Clarke stars as a prostitute who falls for a young military officer from a wealthy family. She refuses his advances because of her profession (which he doesn’t know about). The love story culminates in a climax on the Waterloo Bridge during an air raid by German zeppelins and a famous ending. Excellent movie.

Bad Biology (2008) d. Frank Henenlotter: I had high hopes for this but they were all dashed upon viewing. About a girl with seven clits who finds a guy with a two foot donkey dick with a mind of its own. It’s not funny or sexy.

Pandorum (2009) d. Christian Alvart: This was marketed as a new Event Horizon. It’s not. A couple dudes come out of hyper sleep to find a spaceship nearly empty with the exception of the cannibalistic monsters running around. Boring, slightly confusing, and visually uninteresting. Pass.

The Ox-Bow Incident (1943) d. William A. Wellman: “Wild Bill” Wellman is my third favorite director of all-time and I was in the mood for a great western. This is a can’t miss film starring Henry Fonda; about a posse that comes across three men who they suspect in the killing of a respected town citizen. The men claim they are innocent but the evidence points to the contrary. Meanwhile, the law is nowhere to be found. A brutally honest movie about man’s obsession with revenge and the lengths he’ll go to satiate it. Currently on Netflix instant.

My Best Fiend: Klaus Kinski (1999) d. Werner Herzog: This doc is Herzog narrating his experiences with the famous crazy German actor Klaus Kinski. He interviews various cast members and included clips from their collaborations to support Kinski’s genius. I liked it, but be warned that the only parts in English are when Herzog is talking or interviewing. All of the clips with Kinski, including a long 5 minute rant that opens the film, have no subtitles. Lots of funny anecdotes, though, including how a tribal chief came to Herzog offering to kill Kinski during a shoot. And Herzog admitting that, at the time, he regretted not taking the chieftain up on his offer.

Tank Girl (1995) d. Rachel Talalay: Had never seen this but always heard Deejay and Brady talking about it. It was on HBO and thought I’d give it a chance. I hated everything about it.

Frankenstein Unbound (1990) d. Roger Corman: Corman’s final film as director (as of now, anyway), this is a weird mashup of science fiction and horror. The premise: a scientist has created a new super weapon that has the nasty side effect of creating time slips. He’s sent into the past and must stop Frankenstein from creating a bride for his monster. This is pretty shitty. The monster looks terrible, the characters go nowhere, and the message of the film is muddled. Raul Julia, John Hurt, Bridget Fonda, and Michael Hutchence.

Penny Dreadful (2006) d. Richard Brandes: Caught this on IFC. It’s terrible. Absolutely terrible.

The Public Enemy (1931) d. William A. Wellman: A brilliant film. Cagney gives one of the great screen performances of all-time.

Gold Diggers of 1933 (1933) d. Mervyn LeRoy: Warren William is my favorite actor of all-time and he is on fire in this film about a group of chorus girls (including my crush, Joan Blondell) trying to put on a new show during the depression and the rich men they get involved with. Brilliant musical numbers and choreography by Busby Berkeley.

Altered States (1980) d. Ken Russell: Really enjoyed this. Full comments on Splattercast 169

The Incredible Hulk (2008) d. Louis Leterrier: Surprisingly fun sequel to Ang Lee’s 2003 misfire. Performances are better, the FX is better, and it’s just generally more exciting. Thought Abomination looked cool.

7 Faces of Dr. Lao (1964) d. George Pal: A really fun film about a carnival, run by Dr. Lao, and his merry band of historical and mythological attractions as they try to intervene and persuade the local townspeople to save their town from a baron who wants to buy it for a profit without telling them that the railroad is coming through in a year. It’s not incredibly funny, but it’s got a lot of charm to it and Tony Randall is great in all of the roles. Plus, stop motion Loch Ness Monster. Aces.

Bedlam (1946) d. Mark Robson: Brilliant. I rewatched this to get the Pete Walker taste out of my  mouth. Lewton flick that deals with much of the same subject matter that Walker did, only from the opposite perspective. Karloff plays the sadistic head of an insane asylum. Required viewing.

Saboteur (1942) d. Alfred Hitchcock: Hitch’s famous flick about homegrown terrorism. It’s a film that makes conservatives moist. It also happens to be great. I’ll meet you in Soda City.

Stacy (2001) d. Naoyuki Tomomatsu: Another stupid zombie movie. Watched this because I was interested in other stuff by Tomomatsu.

Dead End Drive-In (1986) d. Brian Trenchard-Smith: Really fun Aussie flick about a group of people stuck in a drive-in which is really a government run prison for rebellious youth. You come to the drive-in to get laid or see a movie, but you can’t ever leave. Fun, fun film. Recommended.

The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) d. Anthony Mann: I don’t know what I was thinking, but I went on an Anthony Mann binge. The first of two back-to-back 3 hour sword and sandal epics. It takes a certain kind of person to sit through these kind of films. I’m one of them, and I still feel kicked in the balls after I’m through. Only recommended to S&S fiends, like myself.

El Cid (1961) d. Anthony Mann: Same thing. 3 hours of Charleton Heston. Only this time, instead of the interesting world of Rome, we have the totally uninteresting world of Spain. Mann makes the terrible mistake of casting Sophia Loren in both films. Let’s just say, she’s not known for her acting ability, yet she remains covered head to toe in each film. Maybe some cleavage would have livened things up. This film does have a spectacular ending, though. Getting there is a grind, however.

Sleepwalkers (1992) d. Mick Garris: No. Just, no.

Cat’s Eye (1985) d. Lewis Teague: Like this one a lot. A fun flick in the vein of EC Comics. Talked about Sleepwalkers and this on Splattercast #170

The Wolfman (2010) d. Joe Johnston (Theater): I’m a big supporter of this movie. It has character development problems, to be sure, but this delivered a really fun time with a really great movie monster. Apparently, I hate everything according to many of our listeners, but I don’t hate this movie. Go see it before it leaves the theaters. You’ll want to see it on a big screen.

Don’t Bother to Knock (1952) d. Roy Ward Baker: Marilyn Monroe stars as a batshit crazy babysitter. This was the film that was made to prove that she could “act”; that she was more than just a pair of great boobs with a bubbly personality. Does she succeed? Eh, she’s a little stiff in the role but she’s got moments of brilliance like the scene when she is about to push the little girl out of the window. She pulls off crazy very well. Roy Ward Baker should be known to all horror fans. He would go on to direct stuff like Quatermass and the Pit , The Vampire Lovers, and Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires.

The Crazies (1973) d. George Romero: An interesting failure. This is one of those films that has interesting concepts and ideas, but the execution is both flawed and it never lives up to its potential. It’s a film that could be done wonders with a good remake. Which is why I’m excited to see the new version.

Lo (2009) d. Travis Betz: Explodey Jo made me aware of this film a few months back with a post here on DL. It’s on Netflix Instant right now. It’s really good. About a dude who conjures a demon named Lo to find his girlfriend who has been dragged to hell by other demons. It has a unique presentation (for example, the “flashbacks” are done on a theater stage and acted very melodramatically). The main problem is that the twist is obvious from the very beginning, which makes all the talk of finding the girlfriend a bit anticlimactic. Still, worth a look for sure.

The Masque of the Red Death (1964) d. Roger Corman: This movie is, literally, perfect. The pinnacle of Corman’s Poe work. There is nothing I don’t like about this. Vincent Price gives, what I think, is his greatest performance. The final 20 minutes of this film are some of the finest you’ll ever see in the horror genre. If there is one film on this list that you have to see, it’s this one. I rewatch this at least three or four times a year. It’s that good.

Premature Burial (1962) d. Roger Corman: This is included on a great MGM Midnight Movie double bill DVD. Go buy it. This is not quite as good as Masque but is still rad as hell. Ray Milland plays a guy with a phobia of being buried alive. And he goes to great lengths to prevent that from happening. Great directing, great sets, and a bleak ending add up to an excellent experience.

The Maltese Falcon (1941) d. John Huston: Often cited as one of the greatest remakes of all-time. Bogart is such an electrifying screen presence. Obviously a must see for any film buff. I love noir.

Touch of Evil (1958) d. Orson Welles: As you can probably tell, I go through specific movie binges all the time. It happened to be noir during this phase of the month. This is a movie I just like to watch. It’s just so interestingly put together. The editing and lighting is so uniquely bizarre. I’m much less interested in the story aspect, which involves Welles framing an innocent man (and woman) and Heston’s drive to uncover the truth. If you like how movies are made, and that’s what interests you, you have to watch this.

I Wake Up Screaming (1941) d. H. Bruce Humberstone: I’d never seen this, but it happened to be on Netflix Instant and had a lot of things going for it. First, it was a noir. Second, it starred Vic Mature who is great. Thirdly, and totally coincidentally, the always wonderful Elisha Cook, Jr. has a main role (I didn’t plan this, but he seemed to appear in tons of movies I watched this month). Fourthly, Carole Landis. Yowza. As with most noirs, the plot is way too convoluted to try and explain, but I loved this flick.

House of Frankenstein (1944) d. Erle C. Kenton: An outstanding film is hampered by a totally unnecessary 20 minute sequence early on in the film involving Dracula. It feels totally forced (which it was by decree of Universal) and bogs down an otherwise quickly paced film. Karloff plays a mad scientist who enlists the services of The Wolfman to help him recreate and perfect the experiments of Dr. Frankenstein. Required viewing.

Starman (1984) d. John Carpenter: One of the greatest traits of John Carpenter is his ability to do great work in totally different genres. That’s a rare gift that I don’t think he gets enough credit for. This is a really good movie with a great performance by Jeff Bridges. And Karen Allen is cute as a button in this flick.

First Man Into Space (1959) d. Robert Day: A hot shot flyboy disobeys orders and pilots his spacecraft into space. He comes back as a disfigured monster that feeds on human blood. Robert Day also did the great Corridors of Blood. This one is billed as sci-fi but is really more horror. The monster fx look really great. Reminded me of something that would have come out of Seth Brundle’s telepods. It’s a little slow in the middle, but once the monster finally appears, it’s highly entertaining. Criterion has released this.

Orphan (2009) d. Jaume Collet-Serra: Isabelle Fuhrman puts in a great performance. Other than that, no. Just couldn’t get past the fact that every character was completely unlikeable and that the husband was the most retarded person on planet earth. Oh, and this movie could have been ten minutes long if the equally retarded kids had just said “Hey, she threatened to kill me and cut off my hairless pecker!”. Avoid.

Invaders of the Lost Gold (1982) d. Alan Birkinshaw: I don’t know why. Stop looking at me like that. I know I shouldn’t have watched it. It just happens sometimes, you know?

Crash (1996) d. David Cronenberg: I don’t think this is one of Cronenberg’s great films, but it’s certainly interesting and weird and a tad uncomfortable. I’ve heard the book is a lot more graphic than this and in reality, the film isn’t very graphic at all. Of course it stars James Spader. I bet James Spader has the most mundane sex life of anybody on the planet. He’s always in these weird kinky sexual deviant sort of flicks. You gotta watch this if you’re a Cronenberg completist.

Vampires in Havana (1985) d. Juan Padron: Very interesting. It’s an animated film out of Cuba about a vampire doctor who has created “Vampisun”, a drug that allows vampires to walk around during the day. He wants to give it away to all vampires but that doesn’t sit well with the capitalist vamps from American and Europe who don’t believe in giving anything away for free when a profit could be made. Some raunchy stuff here, including cartoon boobies and sex. It’s strange and worth a look since it’s not often you see an animated horror comedy from Cuba.

Red Sands (2009) d. Alex Turner: Alex Turner did Dead Birds, which I really liked. 5 years later, he returns to directing only to fall flat on his face. Red Sands is a really stupid commentary on the war in Afghanistan. About a group of soldiers who start getting picked off by the lamest Djinn you’ve ever seen. The moral of this story is: Djinn’s don’t like America, therefore they will body hop in order to get on a plane to America so that they can destroy it for its imperialistic designs. Fuck this movie.

Overnight (2003) d. Tony Montana and Mark Brian Smith: This is the documentary about Troy Duffy and all the problems he had with making Boondock Saints (which is a barometer movie for me, if you like BS, then well…i better just stop before I get into trouble). This documentary makes Duffy look like the biggest douche in the world. I couldn’t believe some of the stuff he said to these important people who gave him millions of dollars to make his film. And it’s all coming from his own mouth, so it’s hard to use the “bias” argument. His sense of entitlement is crazy. Funny, if you like to revel in the misery of others.

The Searchers (1956) d. John Ford: One of the great things about the ever expanding Netflix Instant library is that I can immediately watch a film that I don’t own on DVD and haven’t seen in a long time. This is one of them. Beautiful color western about John Wayne on a search to save a young girl who has been kidnapped by Indians. I have issues with the ending. One of the great westerns. Required viewing.

Hellblock 13 (1999) d. Paul Talbot: Very surprising anthology. Debbie Rochon plays a death row inmate who tells Gunnar Hansen stories that she’s written and wants published. It’s a Troma flick, but they actually take the material seriously. It’s hampered by a really low budget and the stories themselves aren’t original or interesting, but I was pleasantly surprised by what I saw. I can’t honestly recommend you run out and watch this, but if you really like anthologies, if that’s your thing, then maybe check this out some lazy Saturday afternoon.

Feast (2005) d. John Gulager: Re-watched this via IFC. Better than I remembered. It’s a fun monster flick. Disappointing that the sequels totally ruined what was potentially a really awesome property.

My Darling Clementine (1946) d. John Ford: Wyatt Earp (Henry Fonda) and his brothers head to Tombstone where they find Doc Holliday (played by the fucking awesome Vic Mature) and their ultimate confrontation with the Clanton’s at the famous O.K. Coral. Just a fantastic film. What really sets this apart is that it really focuses more on Holliday and you get many of the events from his perspective. For my money, the best adaptation of the famous events and battle in Tombstone.

Ran (1985) d. Akira Kurosawa: Breathtakingly epic. You can’t die without seeing Ran. It’s filmmaking as art in every sense of the word.

High Noon (1952) d. Fred Zinneman: Highly entertaining western that is more about people than it is gunfights. Gary Cooper plays a recently retired sheriff who comes back when he finds out that a notorious criminal is coming to town at high noon to kill him. The townspeople abandon him for various reasons, mainly out of fear, so it is up to Cooper to take on four gunmen. Lon Chaney, Jr. and Lloyd Bridges appear in cool roles. Grace Kelley is the gorgeous love interest. I don’t particularly like Cooper as an actor, but I really enjoy this story and how the film sets up the climactic finale.

Man of a Thousand Faces (1957) d. Joseph Pevney: Biography of Lon Chaney, Sr. starring James Cagney in the title role. It’s okay. Cagney gives a good performance and you get to see recreations of Chaney’s life including his Hunchback and Phantom roles. Like most Hollywood biographies, Chaney comes out looking great, as a devoted husband and father, when there is a lot of evidence that he was actually a total asshole who didn’t really care about Creighton and fully reveled in the perks that came with being a famous Hollywood actor. Worth a look, though with caution.

Dead Snow (2009) d. Tommy Wirkola: Yet another stupid zombie movie.

Notorious (2009) d. George Tillman Jr.: Biggie Smalls was a great guy. His only real sin was the occasional adulterous dalliance. 2Pac was a total dickhead who deserved it. That’s what I got out of this biography. Solid on the filmmaking aspect and buoyed by actual recordings of 2pac and the Notorious B.I.G. It’s just way too kind in its portrayal of Christopher Wallace. You can tell the family had “final cut” so to speak. But that chick who plays Lil’ Kim? Hot!

Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation (1994) d. Kim Henkel: I’d actually never seen this. It’s now in my top 10 of worst films ever made. This thing is just hideous. According to Vaughn at Motion Picture Massacre, there is an extended 10 minute cut that is the director’s preferred vision. 10 minutes of Scarlett Johansson having lesbian sex with Jessica Biel could not make this movie any better. An absolute travesty of a film.

January’s Watchlist

One of my favorite film sites is Senses of Cinema. It’s one of the only places on the internet where you can find real, interesting critical theory of films from really intelligent and knowledgeable people (there’s an article on Antichrist up right now). The writers and contributors to the site recently released their “World Poll” of the top films of 2009. Two of my film professors submitted their list and it’s always fun to find out the preferences of the people instructing you on film (unfortunately, the professor I’m most interested in just didn’t submit this year). So here you go:

Gwendolyn Foster’s picks

Wheeler Winston Dixon’s picks

Husband and wife unite in their dismissive attitudes towards Inglourious Basterds

A little background context. Foster’s specialization, at least when I took her class, is Pre-Code Hollywood cinema. Roughly everything from the years 1930-34. She’s without a doubt the least interesting and engaging Film prof at UNL. She selects great films to screen, but isn’t a great instructor.

Wheeler Winston Dixon is an interesting cat. His focus is on the history of film. He’s got a ridiculous amount of information stored up about every single person who worked on any movie you can think of. He can answer the most obscure shit you can think of. He’s also one of these guys who lived a charmed life. Not only did he begin a proto-punk band in New York, but he hung out with Andy Warhol and babysat Robert Downey, Jr. back in the day. The guy’s just interesting all around. The good thing about Dixon is that he always makes class a learning experience and he’s written a ton of books about b-horror and sci-fi and really goes against the grain by preaching how great these films are. He’s the dude horror fans should consider the opinion of. He’s got a book chronicling the history of horror coming out later this year and you can rest assured that much love will be showered upon the less acclaimed films.

Unfortunately, my focus was Film Theory, so the majority of my classes were spent humping commies and socialists and understanding the fundamental workings of cinema; how it operates on a systemic level rather than on an entertainment or social level. There was a running joke at UNL that the only real film students were the theorists because both Foster and Dixon didn’t require any learning or understanding in their classes. For example, you could write a paper on Clouzot’s The Wages of Fear (One of my absolute favorite films of all time and currently showing on Netflix Instant. Seriously, if you haven’t seen this, skip work and do so) an hour before class and as long as you mentioned the most basic crap, you’d get an A (or in the case of Dixon, an A+++++++!!!!!). In other words, as long as you don’t fall asleep, you can’t fail the class.

It’s nice to see that Dixon shows love to Paranormal Activity. I doubt that would be a film most academics would attach their names to in a publication. Even Zombieland gets a mention, albeit negatively. But there must be something good going on with that film if Dixon even thought to mention it in the first place. They are both spot on about Avatar. The film is an unoriginal mess. It’s certainly a well made film on a technical level, but if it didn’t have groundbreaking fx work going for it, I’d imagine that the reception to it would be much cooler. I inherently just don’t trust CG films. First of all, within 2 years, Avatar‘s fx work will be passed. Just like when Revenge of the Sith came out and everyone was like “This is the greatest CG ever!!!!”, now it looks archaic in comparison to what’s out now. People get really caught up in the hot CG of the moment and that’s a bad thing to do when you are using that barometer to gauge the quality of the film itself. I figured Basterds wouldn’t be a “Foster Film”, but I was a little bit surprised that Dixon didn’t show it some more love since it is so rich and seeped in film history.

A long time ago, in an internet far far away, Deadlantern used to be known as The Keyhole. That site was generally more “anything goes” rather than horror-centric, but we (meaning myself) used to do interviews with all sorts of horror celebrities and have odd features like the one which was a photo essay documenting myself as I dug for the treasure inside those gravel pyramids you can get at museums. Our interviews followed a basic template: half the questions would be “serious” and half would be random nonsensical stuff that most interviews never asked.

Alas, all of those interviews and features disappeared when Jeff built Deadlantern. However, as I was cleaning out my harddrive, I found one. Our interview with Debbie Rochon. This is probably a good 3-5 years old, so a lot of the info ain’t informative, but I present it here in its entirety.

There was a pretty emphatic “No” from the listeners when we inquired a while back about doing interviews on the Splattercast. I get that. But perhaps we might be able to revive these e-mail interviews that we used to do. Might be a good way for us to keep connected to the horror elites without having to change the Splattercast in a way that would upset many of the listeners. You’d kinda get the best of both worlds, I suppose. So anyway, here’s the interview with Debbie Rochon. It’s a blast from the past and a probably a new window into the world that we were inhabiting before DeadLantern came about. Leave a comment if you like it, hate it, good idea, bad idea, or  just tell us how good your mom’s muffins are.

DL:  First, could you tell our readers a little bit about yourself? What do you like about movies, why did you get into the movie biz, and how do you feel the business has affected you?

Well, I love movies. There’s nothing that I enjoy more than watching a good film. I was introduced to the film business at a very young age when I worked for 3 months as a featured extra on LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: THE FABULOUS STAINS! It’s been my first love ever since. It’s affected me in a good way for the most part. I have learned a lot about myself because of the trials and tribulations that naturally occur. I have been able to express myself a lot and learn discipline and craft which is very satisfying. I have also learned about people, good things and bad.

Could you talk a little about your upcoming projects such as The Demons 5 and the various other films you have coming out (plug it all!)?

I have a few films coming out pretty soon. APOCOLYPSE AND THE BEAUTY QUEEN which Gunnar Hansen is also in should be out this year. It’s an amazing looking flick. RAPTURIOUS directed by ex-Jerky Boy Kamal Ahmed is in its final stages of editing. This film will also be really amazing. It’s kind of like 8 MILE meets ROSEMARY’S BABY. Some of the cool cast includes Joe Bob Briggs AKA John Bloom, William Smith and Robert Opal just to mention a few. I have done cameo appearances in the films ZEPPO and DARK SIDE OF THE LIGHT. I just finished a short called MEAT MARKET and will reprise my role as crazy gym teacher Ms. Johnson in BIKINI BLOOD BATH 2. I have a special BEST OF DEBBIE ROCHON IN TROMAVILLE disk coming out through Troma. Of course it won’t be titled that. It will feature all the highlights of the work I have done with Troma over the past almost 15 years as well as some new material, including one episode of TRAILER PARK a series I star in for Fangoria Entertainment. DEMONS 5 is still in pre-production phase so I don’t have shooting dates as of yet.

Explain the weirdest, funniest, and worst experiences you have had on a film set.

The funniest was shooting the cell phone scene in DR. HORROR’S EROTIC HOUSE OF IDIOTS you MUST see it to know why. The weirdest experience was shooting a scene with Lloyd Kaufman who had already shot his side of the conversation which he totally improvised. I had to watch him on a video tape and just respond with my own improvised lines! That was weird! That is in the movie DEATH PLOTS. The worst was in a movie I do not name but the experience is referred to later in this interview (suspenseful huh?).

You are well known by many horror fans as a “scream queen”, how do you feel about being labeled as a scream queen? Is it a blessing, curse, or an annoyance?

I honestly am so over that. I think people need to use handles and identifiers so that’s cool. But anything that’s limiting I don’t care for. I thought it was fine for most of my career and I still do I guess. But it’s boring at this point. I do comedy, drama, horror and I produce and write and do a million things. I don’t know what the current definition of a Scream Queen is but I don’t think I qualify really. I’m now a renaissance woman!

You have built up a well deserved fan base amongst horror fans for your various roles, what do you feel sets you apart from other actresses that makes so many horror fans interested in your projects?

I am not the best looking person working in this business but I am one of the few that really take the movies seriously. Most women just do the low budget horror movies just to get some attention. I really love the genre and work very hard on every role I get. Even if I fail and suck in a movie it was never from a lack of trying. I think a lot of women think this is an easier road than having to study and work hard to be a good actress. Certainly looks can and will get you a long ways. But to be really remembered I think you have to deliver in the acting department as well. I always do my best to do that.

When I hear or see “Debbie Rochon”, it is almost always in the same sentence as “Troma”. Could you explain how you got involved with Troma and how being a part of that group of artists has impacted your career?

I have known and worked with Lloyd since 1992. I did a lot of TV specials with Troma and worked with them on a number of feature films. I first met Lloyd Kaufman when I was interviewing him for a magazine. He suggested I pose for some of the poster art they were doing and I have been working with him ever since. He’s a great friend and a fantastic filmmaker. I have learned a LOT working with him over the years. I have been extremely fortunate to have a lot of the Troma fans become my fans too and I appreciate that! Lloyd and I now are at the point where we get each other film work. I always get a chuckle out of that.

What would you consider the high point of your career? How about the low point?

The high point hasn’t happened yet but probably will within the next couple of years. The low point was having my four fingers on my right hand almost completely cut off while shooting a film a couple years back. The people making the movie were extremely negligent and handed me a LIVE machete which should have been a prop or filed down which is what you expect working on a movie. NOT THE REAL THING! What kind of dummies would do that? I cut all the tendons and nerves in all four of my fingers and will be permanently disabled for the rest of my life because of that. It took thousands of dollars and two operations to just get my hand to the point where I could use it at all. I was really depressed for a couple of years after that and didn’t want to look at a film set.

Where do you see yourself in 10 years? Do you still want to focus mainly on acting or would you like to put a greater emphasis on writing or perhaps directing?

My first love is acting so I will always want to do that. I see myself in 10 years with more money than I have now; the accident really wiped me out financially. I see myself working on TV and in features. I love writing, so maybe more scripts are in my future. I would love to direct but not till the time is right. It’s not something that’s pulling at me right now so I reserve comment on that!

What is the best advice you have to upcoming filmmakers without saying the generic line of “just go out and do it!”? Be creative.

As much as the self help books DO say just go out and do it I would never personally say that. I would say EVERYONE needs to study. If not at a school for film then UNDER a director that you RESPECT. It’s not something you can just do without experience and a ton of thought. I tell actors and directors the same thing. STUDY! Do shorts before you do features! Go slow and learn! Learning should be part of the process and the process should be enjoyable! It should not just be about having your name under the director credit. There’s an actual craft to the whole thing.

and now for the lighter side…

Name your top 5 favorite 50′s science fiction movies in ascending order:

WAR OF THE WORLDS
PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE
TARANTULA
THE BLOB
THEM

If you could switch places with any famous Scream Queen, which film/role would you choose and why?

I would love to have had Marilyn Burns’ role in TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE because it really looked like she went through a huge experience making that movie and it turned out to be a cult classic. It took a lot of really hard work and she completely delivered. I love those types of roles. Where you really have to put yourself in the situation and live there for a long time, during the whole shoot. It must have been exhausting but in a good way. Actors LOVE those types of roles!

If you found a treasure map that led to the secret hiding place of the Ark of the Covenant, what would be the first thing you did with the Ark?

I would get Tom Savini to sign it and put it on eBay.

What is your favorite flavor of ice cream? You cannot say Vanilla or Chocolate.

Why can’t I say that? I wouldn’t have chose either anyway but now I feel very edited dammit! LOL. I love Pralines and Cream.

Snake Plisken and Jack Burton get in a battle royale. Describe how the fight goes down and which Kurt Russell character would prevail.

Snake would win. There would be no fight. He would just say “I’m Snake Plisken” and Jack would piss his pants and run away. No one wins against Snake. Only Mad Max would. What a silly question!

Finish this sentence: “I creeped down the claustrophobic hallway, taking in deep breaths of stale air and suddenly, right behind me I saw a….”

Broken de-humidifier.

Name one film you have made that you wish people would forget about and why.

Only one? The films I don’t care for are so obscure I bet no one has seen them anyway! Probably SANDY HOOK LINGERIE PARTY MASSACRE not because of any person involved. I liked the director and girls I worked with. But I don’t think there’s a movie there. LOL.

You have barricaded yourself in a high rise skyscraper to keep away from the zombie hordes trying to get to you. There is no electricity, no phone, no chance for escape. What do you do with the rest of your life?

Laugh at the irony. Laugh at the fact that I never paid my last AMEX bill on time.

What is the weirdest quirk you have that nobody would ever expect?

I get really mad when friends turn on me. Call me weird but I really hate it when people try and play you or use you then stab you in the back (or thigh or arm). It’s alarming how often that happens in this business! You have to keep very ZEN about it though and just remember it’s all for the good of the big picture. That usually bides you time till you can see them hang themselves at a future point.

Name your top 5 favorite video games of all time:

I do not play them BUT at work (Fangoria Entertainment) there is a GREAT South Park pinball machine I play and have mucho fun!

So the Chuck Norrisisms are sweeping the web (example: Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits). Make one Debbie Rochonism.

Debbie Rochon doesn’t get mad. She doesn’t have to get anything she already is.

I finished Bioshock (Xbox 360 version) last night. The game came out in August of 2007 and was a big hit. You’ve probably already played it.

The game is amazing and I wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone who, like me, missed it when it first hit the scene. It’s a highbrow first-person-shooter with a heaping helping of horror trappings. Dead bodies everywhere and weirdos wearing bunny masks. Good stuff.

Since it was such a popular game, I couldn’t help but hear other people talking about it before I got my own chance to play it. One of the things I kept hearing was that the ending portion of the game was a big disappointment, both in terms of the final boss battle and the cinematic ending scene.

I was satsified by the endgame. There was a boss fight, complete with a little boss fight gimmick, and the ending cinematic was touching (I got the “good guy” ending). The ending was somewhat abrupt, but I don’t think it was bad in any way. The only thing I would have changed would be to maybe let the player walk around the game world after defeating the final boss instead of cutting directly to a cinematic ending scene.

Maybe this is just me, but I’ve often resented the final bosses that get crammed into some first-person-shooters. I don’t need some silly room-sized monster like that ridiculous crap at the end of Doom 2. I want something that fits with the rest of the game, that doesn’t feel like a gameplay non sequitur. Bioshock‘s final boss was ok by me.

GameSpot has a good interview with Bioshock developer Ken Levine that makes for a good read after finishing the game.

GS: Considering that the plot inhabits the gray areas of morality and you’ve included general condemnation of taking things to extremes, why give the player two endings that are on ridiculously opposite ends of the spectrum?

KL: I think that’s a fair question and honestly, it was never my intention to do two endings for the game. It sort of came very late and it was something that was requested by somebody up the food chain from me. It was a reasonable request because I think people want to just have a sense of the different consequences from doing that path.

But you notice, whenever I do my interviews about the game, I never want to talk about the good and the evil choice. When we were developing the game, originally the icons about harvest and save had a neat little angel and a little devil, and I cut that out because I didn’t want that to be clear to the player when he did it in the sequence where Atlas and Tenenbaum are telling the player very different but equally compelling things. And it wasn’t clear what the morally right thing to do was.

I wanted to leave it more ambiguous. But I’m not sure if that would have been the right thing. At the end of the day, there are [aspects of games] that you collaborate on and agree upon.

One of the reasons I was opposed to multiple endings is I never want to do things that have multiple digital outcomes, versus analog outcomes. I want to do it like the weapons system in the combat in BioShock. There are a million different things you can do in every combat; you can play it a million different ways. Looking into the future for the franchise, that’s something I want to [figure out], that by the time you get to the ending of that choice path, you have a sense of your impact on the world through lots of little permutations rather than like a giant ending piece, if you follow my meaning.

And I think we did a reasonably good job with [the endings], but there are just two of them. And this is not a game about A and B. This is a game about one through 1 million, and all those permutations of choice. And as I think about the future of the franchise, that’s where I want to take that.

I finally finished reading Mark Z. Danielewski’s House of Leaves today. I’d been hearing about this book for years. I picked it up a while ago but only cracked it open recently. It took me a long time to get through. I’ve never been able to sit down and tear through a book in one sitting, much less something like this that ties your eyeballs up in knots.

But, anyway… Wow, this book is incredible. I cannot recommend it highly enough. I’d read a couple chapters and then be – it sounds silly – but I’d be scared to walk down the hallways of my own house in the dark. The premise is unlike anything I’ve ever read, and it’s just so damned creepy.

From critic Ted Gioia,

For someone like me, who doesn’t skim or speed read fiction, the only thing scarier than reading House of Leaves is the idea of re-reading it. Yet I am tempted to do so, if only to consider some of the alternative angles to this text. You could read this book as a savage commentary on literary and artistic criticism. You could read it as a verbal equivalent of a labyrinth, or as some sort of a Borgesian nightmare brought to life. You might look at the genre-oriented aspects of the story, and classify it as a horror tale or a romance or a Philip-K-Dick-sian exploration of a universe gone crazy. There are many doors into House of Leaves, although I am still unsure about the exits. Put simply, in an age that has a fetish over deconstructing the text, this is one text that will keep you busy for a long, long time.

Connoisseurs of “serious fiction” have mostly given this book the cold shoulder, but I think they might just be afraid. Who can blame them? House of Leaves runs counter to almost everything praised or promoted in the current literary environment, where even the most daring writers seem happy to follow the rules, stick to the established norms of narrative fiction. Danielewski has brought a unicorn to the dog show, and all the other pet owners are scowling.

From the wiki page,

Danielewski expands on this point in an interview: “I had one woman come up to me in a bookstore and say, ‘You know, everyone told me it was a horror book, but when I finished it, I realized that it was a love story.’ And she’s absolutely right. In some ways, genre is a marketing tool.”

Mat was challenging us on notions of “genre” in a conversation the other day. You want to see a real genre-bender? Try House of Leaves. It’s in a league of its own.

I had yesterday off for Columbus Day (way to go, Chris!) and I chose to watch, of all things, Resident Evil: Extinction. I’ve always thought the first RE movie was above average, and I didn’t hate RE2 (maybe a faulty memory? I only watched it once, at the theater).

This third entry, though… woof. It should have been titled Resident Evil: Nothing Happens. Not even Ms. Jovovich’s considerable sauce levels can save this train wreck. Her character somehow has telekinetic powers which she uses… to fight birds.

Ali Larter does less than nothing, and Ashanti does even less than that. There are no interesting or likable characters, there’s no action, no real gore. There’s just no fun at all.

Man, this is like my second bitchy post today… what’s going on with me?

I finally watched Feast tonight, a movie that I’ve had sitting around for a long time. Steve reviewed it back in 2006, and Mat also posted some positive comments on Steve’s review. I liked it a lot, maybe a bit less than Steve but probably more than Mat.

If Feast passed you by, like it did me, you may want to go back and give it a look. I think it’s a very cool modern horror flick.