Aug 2019
Oh man. I forgot how bad this was.
Ouch.
But, I feel like there could almost be some way to sort of enjoy it. If you just approach it as a sequel to Salem's Lot, then...... you're totally screwed. It's impossible to enjoy it that way, it's just a terrible sequel. The acting is worse, the whole plot has way too many problems, and it just generally looks like they didn't care enough to even try.
BUT. Maybe... maaayyybeee.... if you have recently watched The Stuff, House (1985), Phantasm 2, Return of the Living Dead 2, or some of the Children of the Corn sequels, it MIGHT be barely possible to watch this and not be too bummed out that you spent a precious hour and a half of your life watching it. It just sort of fits in with the general ambiance of mid to late 80s cheap horror movies, and horror comedies. Sadly, I'm pretty sure this was not intended to be a horror comedy, it just makes me think of horror comedies. As I said earlier: Ouch.
Katja Crosby, who plays Michael Moriarty's love interest, reminded me a little of the main girl in Phantasm 2. (It might just be that they had comparable hairdos).
The Stuff could put you in the mood to watch this, just because it has Michael M as the hero, and they're both Larry Cohen movies. (Not Larry Clark, I always have to correct myself).
House could put you in the right frame of mind, maaayyybeee, just because it's about a guy inheriting a house from an aunt, and finding paranormal shit going down in the area. Also, you can just tell it's from the same period, the way people dress, etc are very similar.
Return of the Living Dead 2 came our around the same time, and it just has a similar vibe sometimes. RotLD2 is funnier and better, though.
All the scenes with the children kept reminding me of Children of the Corn. Not for any cosmic reason, it's just an obvious comparison. Some of the sequels are more like Return to S.L. than the original, I think... it's hard for me to say which ones, they all run together in my brain. Speaking of the children, there's a marriage scene between two vampire kids that is kind of interesting. I don't think they really explained it in much detail, unless I dozed off and missed it, but I imagine that the vampire "kids" were suposed to be many decades or centuries old, and had had their growth halted... there are plenty of movies that feature this type of situation, of course.
What else, what else... Serpent and the Rainbow came out not too long before this, I think. That may have had some influence on the director's idea of having the main character be an anthropologist coming straight from studying cultures south of the US. No wait, the dude in SatR was an ethno-botanist... well, you know what I mean.
So anyway... why did I even make this post. I don't know. It's just not a great movie, and I don't recommend watching it if you haven't sat through it already. But, if you've already seen it, it is possible that thinking about it in the context of the other movies I mentioned here might make you want to vomit a little less. That is all. Kirk out.
Ouch.
But, I feel like there could almost be some way to sort of enjoy it. If you just approach it as a sequel to Salem's Lot, then...... you're totally screwed. It's impossible to enjoy it that way, it's just a terrible sequel. The acting is worse, the whole plot has way too many problems, and it just generally looks like they didn't care enough to even try.
BUT. Maybe... maaayyybeee.... if you have recently watched The Stuff, House (1985), Phantasm 2, Return of the Living Dead 2, or some of the Children of the Corn sequels, it MIGHT be barely possible to watch this and not be too bummed out that you spent a precious hour and a half of your life watching it. It just sort of fits in with the general ambiance of mid to late 80s cheap horror movies, and horror comedies. Sadly, I'm pretty sure this was not intended to be a horror comedy, it just makes me think of horror comedies. As I said earlier: Ouch.
Katja Crosby, who plays Michael Moriarty's love interest, reminded me a little of the main girl in Phantasm 2. (It might just be that they had comparable hairdos).
The Stuff could put you in the mood to watch this, just because it has Michael M as the hero, and they're both Larry Cohen movies. (Not Larry Clark, I always have to correct myself).
House could put you in the right frame of mind, maaayyybeee, just because it's about a guy inheriting a house from an aunt, and finding paranormal shit going down in the area. Also, you can just tell it's from the same period, the way people dress, etc are very similar.
Return of the Living Dead 2 came our around the same time, and it just has a similar vibe sometimes. RotLD2 is funnier and better, though.
All the scenes with the children kept reminding me of Children of the Corn. Not for any cosmic reason, it's just an obvious comparison. Some of the sequels are more like Return to S.L. than the original, I think... it's hard for me to say which ones, they all run together in my brain. Speaking of the children, there's a marriage scene between two vampire kids that is kind of interesting. I don't think they really explained it in much detail, unless I dozed off and missed it, but I imagine that the vampire "kids" were suposed to be many decades or centuries old, and had had their growth halted... there are plenty of movies that feature this type of situation, of course.
What else, what else... Serpent and the Rainbow came out not too long before this, I think. That may have had some influence on the director's idea of having the main character be an anthropologist coming straight from studying cultures south of the US. No wait, the dude in SatR was an ethno-botanist... well, you know what I mean.
So anyway... why did I even make this post. I don't know. It's just not a great movie, and I don't recommend watching it if you haven't sat through it already. But, if you've already seen it, it is possible that thinking about it in the context of the other movies I mentioned here might make you want to vomit a little less. That is all. Kirk out.
