I have to make a confession: I’m really enjoying this new brand of horror movie.

The recent genre in the vein of “amateur footage” has a back to basics approach that has potential to be the shot in the arm that indie horror directors have needed for a long time. The approach has a similar grassroots “do it yourself” vibe that movies like Evil Dead, ReAnimator and Texas Chainsaw Massacre once generated; a fresh enthusiasm for a new kind of filmmaking that can reinvigorate genre movies.

In The Blair Witch Project we saw the traditional horror film from the perspective of the hapless victims, in Cloverfield we experienced a giant monster attack at ground zero, in Diary of the Dead we’re trapped in Romero’s zombie apocalypse. In REC, the audience is placed in the shoes of a bystander in the middle of a siege horror film, ala John Carpenter’s The Thing, Evil Dead, Night of the Living Dead or Prince of Darkness.

The story focuses on a young reporter who has been given the job of chronicling a day in the life of a couple of fire fighters. In the middle of the night the alarm goes off and the fire fighters are sent to an apartment building where a woman is said to be trapped in her room. Rushing in to help her, the fire fighters get a lot more then they bargained for, as the woman goes insane and savagely attacks her rescuers. While the attack is going on a full-scale quarantine seals off the exits, trapping the reporter and the audience in the apartment building with a group of very scared people and a mounting threat.

REC (which stands for “RECORD”) is the best of the recent crop of “found footage” films; the mixture of its directing style with the siege-horror archetype is a perfect fit for a solid horror movie.

Horror fans go into this type of movie with all their built in expectations and the baggage of the genre, but with REC they’ll soon realize they are missing all the safety nets. REC has no musical cues to announce when something scary is about to happen, there’s no stylization to hide the violence, there is very little in the way of comedy, the effects are mostly practical staying away from CGI’s lack of realism and the edits are very cleverly hidden. There are times when the scariest thing about REC is the fact that the viewer, doesn’t have peripheral vision. The camera has to make a “turn” to see what’s going on down a hallway, and that can transform any scene into a “jump out of your seat” scare. Which means nothing is safe and by the ending of the film that helps to build a thrilling and suffocating finale.

That brings us to the biggest strength of the movie: the direction of Jaume Balagueró. Jaume’s clever choices in framing and camera movement, not to mention his control over the action both in and out of the shot, displays a masterfully crafted horror film within what is suppose to look like RAW source footage. And he makes it look easy. Balagueró embraces the medium, using outtakes, improvisation and the low-tech approach to help define the characters, tell the story, and break out of the conventional horror film mold. At the same time REC is a love letter to the genre featuring nods of the head to Evil Dead and Evil Dead II, a great cult film atmosphere in the same vein as Argento’s Demons, a mixture of action and paranoia that recalls Carpenter’s The Thing and an internal character dynamic that is an obvious nod to Night of the Living Dead.

Balagueró, much like Álex de la Iglesia and Alejandro Amenábar, has always been a criminally over-looked talent on this side of the pond. Balagueró’s films, while not always strong in plot, have shown an exact and precise sense of composition, making him a director to keep an eye on for fans of genre cinema. Balagueró is also clearly in love with genre films and is unashamed of working in the field; he is equally brave in attempting many different things and respectful towards the roots of horror cinema as well as its fans.

Balagueró’s movies are quickly becoming cult hits in underground cinema and REC is a breakout hit with a hugely positive reaction from fans and critics alike. REC has already won the Sitges Prize of the Public, the Critics Prize, the Best Director Award, the Best Actress Award and the Fantastic’ Arts Jury Prize and it has been picked up for the inevitable North American remake.

The studios in Hollywood took one look at REC, saw dollar signs and wet their panties in joy. Faster than you can say “The Grudge“, they’ve bought up the rights for REC, remade it and are releasing it as “Quarantine.” You can check out the trailer for it online, and you can also check out the mountains of pissed off horror fans ripping the trailer a new one.

Ultimately, it doesn’t matter; remake or not, the cat is out of the bag. REC is one of the best horror films in recent memory and Balagueró has cemented his place as a talented and versatile genre filmmaker worthy of our attention.

Watch the REC Trailer:

Watch the Quarantine Trailer:

With SUCH a complex plot, how will I ever find a way to boil remake Day of the Dead into bite-size chunks? I’ll give it a try…

We find ourselves in Leadville, Colorado, a sleepy little town, a “charming shithole” in the words of one of its residents. Why are we here?

Because this town has a cold. There’s coughing, there’s sneezing, there’s a little bit of a nosebleed situation and the military in its vastly finite wisdom decides to quarantine the whole town to in order to get the world’s largest supply of Wet-naps in order to sanitize Leadville in its lemony fresh scent.

I’m lying about that Wet-Nap part.

We follow Corporal Cross (perennial kewpie doll Mena Suvari), Salazar (Nick “Fully Loaded” Cannon, and the ever hardass Captain Rhodes (Ving “Will Act for Food” Rhames, taking “selling out” to new depths) as they endeavor to contain the coughs and the sniffles.

But since this is a horror film we know nothing will work out as planned. And wouldn’t you know it, the sickness turns everyone infected into fast-moving zombies, and all they want to do is eat flesh. It’s nice to have a purpose isn’t it?

How will our heroes and heroine fare? Well, you’re just going to have to see the movie aren’t you? And make sure to take some Echinacea and Vitamin C…just in case YOU begin coughing…

Before we get to the usual what works/what doesn’t work gobbledygook, I’ll just say that Day of the Dead is a BAD movie. But it’s an entertainingly bad one, and for that I’m grateful. I reviewed Land of the Dead (read review) a couple of weeks ago, and I still need atropine to my heart every time I think about that pretentious windbag of a movie, so things could have been worse all things considered.

What works in Day of the Dead:

1.) It’s got Christa Campbell in it. ‘Nuff said. I don’t care how shitty the movie is, if she’s in it, it’s in this section of the review.

2.) I feed the NEED…the NEED…to FEED- it’s got gore by the truckload. Sure it gets a little repetitive, but it’s there for you to feast on…with your eyes of course…

3.) Ving Rhames barking in a ventilator shaft.

4.) Hard Hitting Social Commentary exploring race relations in tense situations- Nick Cannon (who is black if you didn’t know) asks some tough questions that make us think. Like “A black man holding a sharp stick and you immediately think it’s a spear?” or “Why do white people always want to split up?” Tough questions all, but at least they were asked. Cannon also says “By the power of Grayskull!!” which invokes the time honored ritual of…gray…skulls.

I’m not sure about that last sentence.

5.) Bud the Vegetarian zombie checkin’ out Mena’s ass.

6.) Matricide by Humvee.

7.) Initially I thought casting Mena Suvari (who is as white as cocaine if you didn’t know) as a soldier would be akin to Celine Dion covering songs by NWA. But I’ll admit, she grew on me as the film went on.

8.) Actors in this movie have real-life names Stark Sands and Matt Rippy. I just mention this because these names were in the running for my porn star name back in ’05. Those bastards stole my porn star name!!!

What doesn’t work:

1.) The zombie attacks get tre monotonous simply because there’s no variation to them. That gets boring after minute 15 of a 90 minute movie. Yet it keeps going…

2.) Ving Rhames- He’s worked with such directors as Brian De Palma, Martin Scorsese, Steven Soderbergh, John Woo and Quentin Tarantino. But in director Steve Miner’s Day of the Dead, Ving Rhames makes me squirm because he does nothing but elicit my pity. Seriously, I want to write him a check for $80 because it looks like he’s desperate for work.

3.) A ridiculous climax that saps most of the idiotic fun of the movie.

4.) It’s not all that scary. I was actually more frightened for Ving Rhames career than by watching anything on screen. I DID tell you it was bad before I began all this, didn’t I?

So, if you’re in the mood for BAD, then rent Day of the Dead. You won’t like it, but you’ll feel better afterwards than when you saw the Prom Night remake. I won’t tell anyone you watched this, I promise.

Watch the Day of the Dead Trailer:

The only thing consistent with the Prom Night series is how inconsistent the films are. The first film, with its standard slasher storyline and horrendous disco music is nonetheless still a fun film to watch. Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II (read review) completely discarded the first Prom Night’s (read review) story and introduced us to Mary Lou Maloney, a malevolent ghost that comes back to claim her prom queen crown. The third installment, Prom Night III: The Last Kiss (read review), continued with a new Mary Lou story, but Prom Night IV: Deliver Us From Evil yet again ditches the previous storylines.

Prom Night IV: Deliver Us From Evil is about Father Jonas, a possessed, homicidal priest that kills two horny teenagers on prom night in 1957 (the same night Mary Lou was accidentally killed at the prom). The Catholic Church locks him in the basement of a church and keeps him sedated so he can do no more harm. In 1991 a new, young priest is put in charge of Jonas. Thinking he can help the homicidal maniac, he stops administering his meds and even gives him a nice, close shave. Jonas wakes up and busts outta the church, looking for more promiscuous teens to kill and “save.”

Lucky for Jonas, it is prom night! Two couples are getting ready for the big night (complete with a funny lesbian interlude), but instead of going to prom they decide to ditch it and spend the weekend at one of their parent’s weekend getaway houses. Problem is, the house used to be Father Jonas’ seminary home and he’s on his way back there also! Can the four horny teens survive the Father’s wrath?

Prom Night IV: Deliver Us From Evil isn’t a slasher masterpiece, but I was surprised at how much I actually enjoyed it. The acting was alright, the characters didn’t get on my nerves and the villain was fun to watch! Of course, there wasn’t that much gore to speak of, there were more than a few inconsistencies and plot holes as well. For example, if it was prom, why was it snowing?? And, of course, there was the problem of Father Jonas not aging a day since he was imprisoned by the Church. Maybe years of solitary confinement are the solution for younger looking skin!

The characters were all very fun to watch. The innocent Meagan (Nikki de Boer) played well against the “experienced” Laura (Joy Tanner). The male characters weren’t as developed, but they did okay as well. It was surprising that there were no annoying characters to root for to die, which I thought was a nice change from your standard slasher fare. The villain of Father Jonas (James Carver) wasn’t necessarily scary, but he was very intense and did well in his role.

The kills really weren’t that interesting or memorable, but I did enjoy how slowly and methodically Father Jonas stalked the characters. On the downside, the film took about 45 minutes before the teens started getting knocked off. There are a few kills beforehand, but by the time the first teen “disappeared,” I was getting antsy. With just four people in an isolated house to kill, things did get a little slow.

Despite its problems, though, Prom Night IV: Deliver Us From Evil is a decidedly fun, underrated slasher film. I’m not sure why the filmmakers decided to affiliate it with the Prom Night series because it would have done much better as a stand-alone film. Nonetheless, you shouldn’t let dreaded “sequel-itis” stop you from checking out Prom Night IV.

Watch the Prom Night IV: Deliver Us From Evil Trailer:

In this third installment of the inconsistent Prom Night series (hardly any of the movies follow the same mythology), everyone’s favorite prom queen, Mary Lou, returns! Prom Night III: The Last Kiss finds Mary Lou back from the dead and falling for a hunky high school student. While Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II (read review) and Prom Night III have no resemblance to the original Prom Night (read review) or Prom Night IV: Deliver Us From Evil (read review), they are by far the cheekiest and most fun in the series.

Meet your average Joe, high school student Alex Grey. Alex gets average grades, is an average football player, has an average shoe size (hardy-har!) and is fed up with being ordinary. One night, he has a “close” (by close I mean sexy) encounter with the high school’s resident ghost, Mary Lou Mahoney, who was burned to death on prom night many years ago. Mary Lou has somehow been freed from Hell and once again is stalking the halls of Hamilton High.

Mary Lou falls head over heels for Alex and soon has him under her sultry spell. She helps him ace tests and become a star football player, killing anyone who gets in her or his way. She wants Alex to be with her forever and ever, but Alex’s girlfriend Sarah isn’t gonna take this news lying down.

Can Alex and Sarah get rid of Mary Lou before she kills any more people and drags Alex home with her…to Hell?!

Prom Night III: The Last Kiss works quite well because of its razor-sharp wit, penned by Ron Oliver, who returns from writing duties on Prom Night II and also helps co-direct the third installment. Prom Night III is infused with bitingly black humor that makes the film both extremely fun and very self-aware. There are quite a few self-referential jokes throughout the film that should tickle horror fans’ funny bones. Oliver’s script makes the film, because without its flair the film would just be another mediocre supernatural slasher movie.

The acting is also above average, with Courtney Taylor filling Lisa Schrage’s (from Prom Night II) high-heeled shoes as Mary Lou. Tim Conlon does a great job as the popularity-hungry Alex, though I felt his girlfriend Sarah, played by Cynthia Preston, was a bit bland.

The kills were all pretty cool, though a little odd at times (human ice cream sundae anyone?). My favorite was probably the “makeover” scene, in which the guidance counselor is placed under a salon hair dryer only to have acid dumped all over her! Yes, there are some pretty nifty and funny death scenes throughout the movie, as well as some hilarious lines (“Don’t worry – it’s only a guidance counselor”).

My only complaint with the film was the ending, which seemed to stretch on forever. They even brought out the undead to draaaaaaag it out. What had started as a tongue-in-cheek supernatural slasher quickly devolved into something a bit long-in-the-tooth. If the whole “Hell” scene had been avoided or edited a little shorter, I think this would have been a much more enjoyable film.

Nonetheless, Prom Night III: The Last Kiss is a very enjoyable film that is equally witty and gory to satisfy a horror fan on a lazy weekend.

Pucker up and enjoy!

Watch the Prom Night III: The Last Kiss Trailer:

Brooke Lewis has been announced as the lead girl “Joan” in the film. She will also be producing Bind with her production company Philly Chick Pictures.

Jim Pacitti has also joined the cast and will assist with production duties as well.

Other actors set to appear in the film include Devon Sawa, Tony Todd, Ken Foree, Dan Ellis and Julie Krystina.

Bind also has an IMDB page now up. The film is currently in-production, with the release date slated for March 2009.

The story:

For years the wooded mountains have been the setting for many myths, horror and ghost stories, told one generation to the next on camping trips. Only, what no one ever thought to consider was, what if there was someone in those woods worse than any myth imaginable…a grisly forest-stalker opus in the ’80s tradition…

Visit Bind on Myspace

Watch the Bind trailer:

Director Paul von Stoetzel’s documentary, Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera, explores the controversy of the “snuff” film and if these “murdered for profit” films really do exist. Snuff, as defined in the film, is a film that features a murder onscreen, usually preceded by sex, made explicitly for profit. Snuff isn’t made for pleasure nor is it death that just happens to be caught on film. In snuff, a person dies on camera for the sole purpose of making money off that scene.

Many people have questioned if snuff really exists and the FBI still vehemently denies it’s out there. Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera presents filmmakers, cinephiles and even FBI profilers with their thoughts on snuff films.

The official synopsis from Killing Joke Films describes it as:

“… a feature film examining the existence of films in which people are murdered on camera and the culture surrounding them. Through interviews with former FBI Profilers, Cultural Academics, and Film Historians the documentary delves into the disturbing history and myth of Snuff Films. The FBI claims there is no evidence to prove the existence of Snuff and, therefore, Snuff Films are a myth. This documentary analyzes the relationships between war, cult films, serial killers and pornography to prove whether or not this pervasive myth is, in fact, reality.”

Through these interviews and graphic scenes of torture, bloodshed and murder from controversial horror films as well as real scenes of death, filmmaker von Stoetzel examines the validity of snuff films and if they are truly real or not. The result is an emotional, powerful and troubling look into a society that views REAL torture and death as entertainment.

This amazingly comprehensive documentary is a real eye-opener to the ugly, twisted side of entertainment. While we would rather not believe human beings would pay to see real people get killed, this does happen, all in the name of entertainment. There are many segments that are hard to watch, especially one about a child pornography ring whose leaders were arrested after causing the death of at least one child. Outrageously, the leaders of the ring were released from Russian jail due to overcrowding and the head of the ring was only sentenced for 11 years for the atrocities they committed. Another particularly difficult segment to sit through was a discussion of war snuff, specifically the infamous execution by beheading of an American. The scary thing is that this video isn’t even considered “snuff” and is readily available to anyone for free on the Internet.

The film also features some surprisingly emotional scenes, specifically two in which Texas Chain Saw Massacre producer Mark L. Rosen talks about the previously mentioned child exploitation and another in which he describes watching a real snuff film. Both are powerful scenes, but Rosen becomes most visibly shaken when discussing the snuff film. He was approached by an investor who wanted him to distribute an “adult” film and invited to watch it in his hotel room. While two beefy bodyguards guarded the door of that hotel room, Rosen viewed the film that featured violent sex and, at the end, a woman’s throat being cut on screen. He goes on to tearfully say that there’s no way special effects were involved. His recollection of the event is touching and really makes you think about the atrocities being committed out in the world that most know nothing about. Rosen still doesn’t know what became of that snuff film and doesn’t care to.

Despite the horrors the film exposes, its execution (no pun intended) is equally well done. Von Stoetzel has done an excellent job assembling interviewees that have differing opinions and letting them all express their thoughts. The production values are equally high and I liked how the shocking clips from movies, the news and other sources were played in between the interviews. It also made you think about our current YouTube generation, where real and brutal acts of violence caught on video end up on the Internet for everyone to see. Snuff collectors might not be willing to pay exorbitant prices for snuff films if they can just watch them for free on the Internet. It also raises the question if people (including kids and teens) who watch these real death videos, which are so prevalent these days, are becoming desensitized.

The filmmaker isn’t kidding when a warning message is flashed across the screen at the beginning of the film, warning it isn’t for the faint of heart or spirit. I had plenty of trouble sitting through its disturbing elements, including the infamous video of an American being beheaded in the Iraq War. There were many shocking moments in the film, whether from controversial films like the Faces of Death series (though now we know many of these were fake), Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, alleged snuff films, news and/or war footage as well as some footage shot by two serial killers that show them torturing a family. I can handle all the fake gore a movie can throw at me, but I get very shaken up over real-life torture, dismemberment and death. And, let me tell you, Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera, definitely left me shaken up.

Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera, is an excellent, although horrifying, documentary on the notorious “snuff” film. It never seeks to exploit its subject, but treats it with a reverence and respect to get the truth out. Filmmaker Paul Von Stoetzel has created a moving and thoroughly engaging look at the myth surrounding snuff films. If you can handle the disturbing elements of “real-life” horrors this documentary portrays, then it comes highly recommended.

Visit Killing Joke Films and Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera’s Official Site

Watch the trailer for Snuff: A Documentary About Killing on Camera:

I’m always a bit reluctant to review movie screeners sent to me by teenage directors. Partly, because, I remember full well being 19 and thinking that everything I created was absolutely genius. That I was a brilliant rebel punk artist and the world simply did not appreciate the “message” I was screaming from the rooftops. It’s probably a very good thing that I did not have access to a video camera back then or I quite possibly would have started making films of my own and, being as brazen as I was, mailing them out to review sites thinking I would be “discovered” as the next great American filmmaker. It’s a good thing, because, much like the DVD’s I often receive from young filmmakers, I would probably had my work, along with my heart, ripped to shreds and handed back to me in a plastic trash bag. Thus, I am usually very hesitant to write a brutally honest review of such a young team of filmmakers’ first endeavor. Then again, I always say, if you don’t want to hear the truth, don’t go looking for it. Director Cameron Munson has come looking for the truth, so I will do my best to give it to him, bloodied trash bag and all.

Contrary to popular belief, one of the hardest film styles to successfully pull of is the slasher film. It astounds me to no end the vast number of people who seem to think that if they’ve seen a few slice-and-dice classics then they have a firm understanding of what it takes to create a cult hit. But let me reassure you, just because you happened to scrounge your pennies to buy enough fake blood to wash your car with and you have a couple of girlfriends willing to take their tops off in a few scenes, it does NOT mean you have the vaguest grasp on the world of the classic slasher film. You still have to have an original idea at the core of the film and the ability to actually scare people. I know, I know, it’s a novel idea and one that I just don’t know if the world is truly ready for: a horror film that scares people! Slasher films usually also have a dark humor to them, and as I have stated time and time again, dark humor is extremely hard to pull off successfully, but when done correctly, it can leave the audience chuckling uncomfortably and squirming in their seats. Another pet peeve of mine, because I LOVE a good slasher film, is the topic of special effects. I realize that not everyone has a multimillion dollar budget to hire Greg Nicotero, but my gods, take the time to hone your skills so that it doesn’t look like you ran over to the Halloween Superstore on your lunch break for a few discount props! Some of the best special effects I’ve seen were done on a shoe-string budget so its no excuse. And if you don’t have the budget OR the skill to pull off a good effect, you MUST rely on the terror of what you cannot see. You don’t have to show someone’s guts literally being ripped out of their stomach to make the audience BELIEVE it’s happening. But, that takes directorial skill and a few good actors…Well, what can I say? Sometimes it’s just a no-win situation. Which brings me to the latest movie review of Stalked by director Cameron Munson…

In Munson’s latest cinematic venture, Stalked, he takes the audience on a twenty-six minute ride through the corn fields (hardy-har) of a small rural town called Foliage, a town being terrorized by a legendary cannibalistic farmer named, you guessed it, Farmer Bill. Four teenage friends decide to have a little fun on “Mischief Night” in Bill’s territory only to wind up becoming old Bill’s next carving project…

Considering this film is only twenty-six minutes long, I was astounded when I reached the fifteen-minute mark and simply couldn’t bear watching the rest of the film. I’ve watched more than a few hundred bad films in my time and only a handful have made me groan to the point of turning the DVD off or walking out of the theater midway through. Unfortunately, I can now add Stalked to this limited list. Not only is the whole corn-field-psycho-farmer-legend so completely passé, watching badly directed chop-shop scenes of pot-smoking blasé teenagers is just Sunday-afternoon-on-the-couch snooze material for me. It’s been done…and done…and done…and done again! Unless you’re going to blow my socks off with a really sick and demented twist to the plot or an original take on the folkloric legend, it’s just a waste of time. I’m a hardcore horror fan and, I’m both saddened and pleased to say, it takes A LOT to scare me. I just don’t understand why a director would waste the tremendous amount of blood, sweat and tears that goes into the creation, production and promotion of a movie that has all of the creative substance of a bag of Lay’s potato chips? Stop before you rush into a project, stand back and truly take a look at it. Just because it’s completed, burned to a DVD and has a label slapped on the front cover, doesn’t mean it’s something you want the world to judge you by. It’s never worth putting out half-baked ideas. Take the time to create something memorable, something truly unique so that it isn’t simply relegated to the far corners of someone’s desk drawer to be forgotten.

All of this ranting and raving aside, Cameron Munson is a young director and I am sure that Stalked will not be the last film we see from him. If he tries his hand again at horror I hope he will take the time to watch more good horror films, read more classic horror literature and study what differentiates the cult hits from the forgettable masses. He obviously has the dedication needed to complete a project. I just would like to be able to watch his next DVD from beginning to the end.

Apologies, Munson, for the trash bag full of blood and guts…

Visit Stalked on Myspace

Watch a teaser for Stalked:

Some believe that when you die, you come back to life in another human form or an animal/insect. If it is true, how exactly does the process take place. Are we just dead one minute and alive as something else the next? Or is there a learning process in the transition from human to say, a spider? It’s these very questions that Circulation dares to try and answer.

Ana is a beautiful young woman living in a small Mexican town. One day she decides to take a drive to visit her boyfriend but on the way there her car overheats on a lonely, desert highway. As she gets out of the car, an old beat up truck pulls up next to her with three men inside offering her a ride. Through a series of flashbacks we see that one of the men is her physically abusive ex husband. Becoming very nervous with him being there, she declines their offer but very quickly the men overcome her and kidnap her. While still struggling with her captors, the truck they are in wrecks off the side of the road. A little banged up but still alive, Ana survives the crash and before any of the others have a chance to wake up, she takes off and is soon picked up by a guy in another truck named Gene whom we see at the very beginning of the movie explaining how he has been dead since 1989 and has been roaming this lonely highway ever since. He talks of having dreams of being a poisonous spider and is apparently living in some strange alternate reality where human souls transition into a reincarnated animals or insects.

Gene agrees to take Ana home, but as they journey on through the desert, Ana starts to quickly become aware that something is not quite right. Through multiple revelations, Ana realizes that everything she once knew is somehow different after the wreck and not only that, but her ex husband survived the wreck too and is hot on her heels. She then begins to have terrifying dreams of being a caterpillar and the taste of fresh leaves becomes enticing to her. As her and Gene drive on, Ana must learn a new way of being in this bizarre tale of reincarnation.

Circulation was directed by Ryan Harper and is a very bizarre, yet extremely original movie that is more of an experience to behold than anything. The movie is very quiet for the most part as you take in the gorgeous Mexican landscape of mountainous terrain and a pristine coastline that Mr. Harper wonderfully puts on display. For a noticeably small budget, this film has a far better look to it that most at this level do but the Mexican scenery isn’t only part of the visual charm of this film because the trippy dream sequences of Gene and Ana are just as breathtaking. Ana’s dreams are filled with hallucinogenic shots of caterpillars and butterflies while Gene’s dreams show different types of spiders walking around, spinning webs and placing their prey in cocoons. It kind of sounds like I’m describing a nature show, but when these sequences happen, they are eye candy indeed.

Yvonne DeLaRosa was really good in her role of Ana. As a woman not knowing what has become of herself and trying to make sense of the crazy things she is going through, Yvonne was very believable in her portrayal that she put on the screen. Sherman Koltz, as the easily agitated Gene, was equally if not more so impressive. The scenes with Ana and Gene work extremely well, Ana doesn’t speak English and Gene doesn’t speak Spanish so the two of them have to find compromises in their communication. Ana is a distraught woman full of apprehension and tears, while Gene doesn’t seem to really care and gets angry with her a lot, but still keeps her by his side for whatever reason. The interactions between these two characters works well and brings life to the story.

Through a mostly calm and subdued plot, the story unravels as Ana becomes aware of her new surroundings. The movie never even really alludes to her being dead, but you know that she is once she gets in the truck with Gene who we already know is dead himself. The two of them soon find themselves at the home of Ana’s dead brother Miguel. To tell you of this movies bizarre nature, in this scene Ana and Gene arrive at Miguel’s house and there is a dead guy on the floor with two bite marks on his neck. Miguel doesn’t seem to mind the dead guy being there when all the sudden another man comes into the picture and begins vomiting on the dead guy over and over, much like a fly would do when preparing it’s meal. Gene shoots the guy and then wraps him head to toe in a rope, much like a spider would wrap it’s prey into a cocoon of webbing, and takes him out to the truck. We learn that the bite marks came from Miguel who is himself in the process of reincarnating. This scene is appealing in it’s suddenness and distinctiveness which serves to set this film apart. It’s not easy to see where the scene is going at first and then it hits you quickly, leaving you to ask yourself what exactly you just saw

The downside to the film is the slow rate at which things unfold, sometimes moving along at a snail’s pace. There isn’t a lot going on in this movie most of the time and there’s just an overall feeling of something missing. Although the scenes are beautiful, the acting is above average and the direction is sufficient, there’s still something amiss with the script that I couldn’t quite put my finger on with only one viewing. While watching it, I couldn’t help but think if it only had that extra “oomph” to the story it would have been great instead of only good. Even still, Circulation is the type of film that will have its audience once word of mouth spreads and it becomes more available.

I don’t know of a movie that has a plot like this and kudos to Mr. Harper for bringing us something completely new to chew on, this was a welcome relief from all of the garbage that passes as “cinema” these days, despite it‘s flaws. If your into seeing something completely different compared to what’s out there and like your films a little on the strange side, then this is for you. Check it out!

Visit Circulation’s Official Site

Watch the Circulation Trailer:

Our own Dhampir had the pleasure of interviewing filmmaker Robert Luke about his film Man in the Garage and other projects very recently - check out the review here.

You can find more information on The Man in the Garage on the official Myspace page.

More on Ship to Shore Distribution can be found on their official website.

Congratulations to Mr. Luke and the cast and crew of Man in the Garage for their accomplishment!

The Dhampir: First off I would like to thank you for sitting down to talk with us here at Fatally-Yours.

Steve Polites: No problem. Thanks for having me.

The Dhampir: So you’ve acted in The Murder Game, GhostWatcher 2 and just finished Crystal Fog a little while ago. Tell us a bit about yourself?

Steve Polites: I graduated from Towson University, MD with a theatre degree. The last production I was a part of was, Macbeth, through the Baltimore Shakespeare Festival. I recently moved out to California to continue acting out here.

The Dhampir: I talked recently with TMG writer/director Robert Harari (read interview), he said you were a great guy to work with and he’d like to work with you again in the future. How did you get involved with The Murder Game?

Steve Polites: I was a student at Towson University and they had notices up around the department about upcoming auditions for The Murder Game. I had just started acting and this seemed like a great opportunity. I read for the part of Eric and ended up getting the role.

The Dhampir: Eric is the “Ring Leader” popular guy that everyone went to school with, were you able to pull from personal experience for the role, or was it new to you?

Steve Polites: I certainly wasn’t the popular guy in school, but it was easy to base some aspects of the character on people I have known, especially from high school.

The Dhampir: What was the rest of the cast like, on screen you all seemed to gel well, was this the case after the cameras stopped rolling too?

Steve Polites: Absolutely. It was a great group of people all around. We all got along and that carried over to in front of the camera. Which really helped.

The Dhampir: How awkward was the “Sex scene”?

Steve Polites: Haha. Pretty awkward. Rob, the director did a great job in keeping it a closed set and having the atmosphere relaxed and as comfortable as possible. It’s funny, the orgasm you hear as the other characters walk down the hall had to be done through ADR. So, Rob gave me a stop watch, put me in front of the microphone and said, “Orgasm for 30 seconds and be sure to climax at the end”. Vocally of course. It was a trip.

The Dhampir: That is funny! Tell us, what was the shooting schedule like? Early mornings, late nights, how did things go?

Steve Polites: The shooting schedule was very fast paced. Most of the film is all of us in the self-storage unit. We could only film there over night since it was a running business during the day. So, we shot there every night for two weeks. Rob had things organized, so it went well.

The Dhampir: In the opening of the film, you’re playing “The Game”, it seemed somewhat physical, was the physicality of the role ever an issue?

Steve Polites: No. It was actually a lot of fun. In the opening, the audience is not sure what’s going on and who’s who. So, those opening sequences I got to be almost a different character so you think she really is in danger. Then you find out it’s just a game

The Dhampir: Have you ever played, or considered playing The Murder Game in real life?

Steve Polites: I used to play a game called “Murder” when I was younger. Where there was a Cop, The Murderer, Witness, and Victims. I suppose that was kind of like The Murder Game. That was awhile ago though.

The Dhampir: Throughout the film there is always tension between your character and Collin (Samuel Klein), was it difficult to create considering that you all got along well off-screen?

Steve Polites: Haha. Sam’s probably one of the nicest guys you’ll ever meet. We got along great, but once the camera started rolling we just has fun with it. Well, I had fun with it, he gets most of the abuse throughout the story.

The Dhampir: Which culminated in a fight between your characters near the climax. How did that go?

Steve Polites: It was fun. Actually, Rob was needed elsewhere on the set. He had to deal with some special effects they were rigging up. So, Rob asked if we could come up with something, where Eric just beats the hell out of Collin. He left us alone, we came up with a fight sequence and showed it to Rob when he came back. He ended up liking it, then we filmed it.

The Dhampir: After all of this goes down, and we [the audience] find out who the killer is and your character is “offed.” Talk about that a little.

Steve Polites: That was interesting. I get the ‘ol pole through the neck. Actually when they were rigging it up it was during [the killer’s] monologue up the stairs. So, the body you see laying at the bottom of the stairs is actually Vince Eustace in a command performance as Eric’s corpse. It’s funny. They had to go in during post and recolor the latex around my throat that was holding the pole up. Because I was making that gurgling death sound and as a result my face was getting all red. So, you could see the color difference. It’s fun to have a death scene in a horror movie though.

The Dhampir: That seems to be the part most new actors in horror remember the most, their deaths. Lets shift gears a little and tell me about Ghostwatcher 2, what’s it about and what was your role in that?

Steve Polites: We actually had to break from filming The Murder Game to film Ghostwatcher 2, which was directed by David A. Cross, due to a deadline Dave had. Rob and Dave are close friends and they helped out on each other’s films. Ghostwatcher 2 is about a woman. Laura Cove, who helps others deal with hauntings and supernatural activities that put them in danger. In the film I play Glen, who is Laura’s boyfriend and fellow Ghosthunter. After Ghostwatcher 2 was wrapped we went back and filmed all of the exteriors for The Murder Game.

The Dhampir: So kind of a “one thing leads to another”?

Steve Polites: Yes. I actually got the role of Glen as a result of Dave being on the set and seeing me work on The Murder Game.

The Dhampir: Now let’s go into Crystal Fog it’s not a horror film, it’s more of a…Well why don’t you describe it?

Steve Polites: Well, after doing two horror movies back-to-back, I wanted to do something different. I wanted a chance to tackle a more complex role. Crystal Fog directed by Steve Yeager, is a drama, surrounding three characters. In the story I play Darren. Darren has a girlfriend but then begins to question is sexuality as he falls in love with a drag queen. Ensuing is a very unique story.

The Dhampir: Not to get too deeply into it, but was it a difficult role for you considering some of the subject matter?

Steve Polites: Yes, it was. It is far from my comfort zone and that’s why I had to do it. If as an actor, you are not willing to take those kind of risks, then you are only cheating yourself. The project came at a good time because I had just finished playing Joe Pitt, in, Angels in America: Perestroika, on stage, so it was a good segue for me.

The Dhampir: So what else can we expect to see in the future from you? More horror, more drama? What are your plans?

Steve Polites: Not sure. At this point, I don’t really have the clout to pick and choose which projects I would like to take part in. I just want to be a part of great storytelling, whether that be on Film or Theatre.

The Dhampir: I must say, that there is terribly little about you on the internet. You’re a difficult man to research, where new actors, even in indie films, promote themselves everywhere. Why haven’t you promoted yourself more?

Steve Polites: I’m in the process of doing that. I just put my actor’s reel on YouTube. So, that’s a first step, I suppose, in promoting myself.

The Dhampir: Well, I’d like to thank you once again for taking the time to do this interview, any parting thoughts, shout outs or the like?

Steve Polites: Just like to thank you again for having me!

Steve Polites Acting Reel: