Random '80s Horror Throwdown - The Slumber Party Massacre vs. Hell Night

When life gives you lemons...well, life probably gave you '80s slasher movies.  Although, that might not be fair to say, '80s horror movies seem to be the place where live gives you melons.  (Get it? THEY HAZ BOOBS IN EM.)  Anyway, this '80s Horror Month edition of the Random Horror Throwdown features two films that try to make their mark by being exceedingly top heavy.  One has that girl from The Exorcist in a corset, one has about 37 twenty-nine-year-old teenagers....both have much silliness and lack that little thing I like to call GOOD.  But hey, it's random selection....and one of these movies is about to be selected for destruction.

The Movies:
The Slumber Party Massacre (1982, Dir. by Amy Holden Jones.)
Starring: Michelle Michaels, Robin Stille, Michael Villella.
IMDB Synopsis: "An eighteen-year-old high school girl is left at home by her parents and she decides to have a slumber party. There is friction between some of the invited guests and the new girl, who is better at basketball than they, so the new girl decides to stay at home (which is conveniently across the street from the host's house). Meanwhile, a murderer of five people with a propensity for power tools has escaped and is at large, and eventually makes his way to the party, where the guests begin experiencing an attrition problem, with only the new girl to help them." (Note from The Mike: Damn, this is a far more epic movie than I expected.  Well done, IMDB Synopsis writer Ed Sutton!)

Hell Night (1981, Dir. by Tom DeSimone.)
Starring: Linda Blair, Vincent Van Patten, Peter Barton.
IMDB Synopsis: "Four college pledges are forced to spend the night in a deserted old mansion where they get killed off one by one by the monstrous surviving members of a family massacre years earlier for trespassing on their living grounds." (Note from The Mike: Man, that's the kind of set-up that always equals a great flick.  Or....an episode of Scooby Doo.)

The Directors:
OK, let's get this out of the way now - because I can't say I've ever heard of either of these directors brought up in a conversation.  Upon further investigation, I can tell that a) SPM director Amy Holden Jones is in fact a woman, and b) Hell Night director Tom DeSimone appears to have directed a lot of gay porn in the '70s.  So basically, no matter who I pick, I'm being discriminatory.  Sometime's it's hard being a straight white male.  (Not really, it's pretty easy.  Except that I'm fat, so people discriminate against me based on that.  Were only I a straight white skinny male, I'd have it made.)

Hey, qualifications!  That's how I'll pick.  DeSimone also directed Sybil Danning in Reform School Girls and some episodes of the Swamp Thing TV series, Jones directed The Rich Man's Wife with Halle Berry and wrote Beethoven.  Remember that time I said Swamp Thing? I do, and thus Hell Night gets a point. (1-0, Hell Night leads.)

The Casts:
Hey, more people I don't know much about!  Wow, this post is dripping with knowledge! OK, I lied - I kind of know about Linda Blair.  Just a little bit.  Wasn't she the kid in The Omen?

I know, my jokes aren't funny either.  So let's cut to the chase here.  Linda Blair is one of those rare horror icons who's actually an icon.  Maybe she doesn't show up in as many bad, cheap, horror movies as someone like SPM co-star Brinke Stevens - but she was in THE freakin' EXORCIST.  Sure, she's slumming it at this point, and wasn't quite to the high point of Savage Streets that would come in 1984.  But she's Linda Blair, she was Reagan McNeil, she don't take crap from nobody.  Somebody give Hell Night another point. (2-0, Hell Night leads.)

The Plots:
I know I already expressed my happiness at how Hell Night's set up reminds me of everything from The Legend of Hell House to The Real Ghostbusters (Remember when they were cartoons? Oh, it was such a fantastic and simple time!), and rightfully so.  The "spend the night in a haunted house" plot is so effing perfect.  I always wanted to see a movie where people are told they have to spend the night in a haunted house, but nothing happens.  Like, you're all expecting House on Haunted Hill, but instead you get The Breakfast Club in dark corridors with bell towers.  Seriously, that movie would rule.

Speaking of spending the night, you know what else rules? SLUMBER PARTIES! Sure, you had some bad Slumber Party experiences when you were a kid - but you also got to stay up all night watching flicks like Deliverance and Clownhouse and got yelled at by your friends' parents for being too loud but didn't care.  Slumber parties were like the pre-teen version of Animal House, if only for a night, and all the problems were totally worth it.  And if you add a killer with a giant phallic drill to the equation, You've won a piece of Mike's heart. Let's throw Slumber Party Massacre a point, shall we? (2-1, Hell Night leads.)

Did You Know That The Slumber Party Massacre was both written and directed by women?
No?  Well, it is.  How weird is that?  I'm sure there's a lot of mumbo jumbo that's been written about how meaningful that is, I just think it's really cool.  Both of the SPM sequels were directed by women too.  In a subgenre that's all about degrading women, it's nice to see them in control for once.  So let's give Slumber Party Massacre another point!  (2-2.)

This Choice is Like:

Everybody's gotta sleep somewhere, man.  Whether it's a haunted mansion or a teenage slumber party with a loosed maniac, it's gonna happen eventually.  And if I have to choose which one of these films I have to sleep in....well, the choice is pretty obvious.

Look, I know it sounds like I'm picking the film that's sleazier because I would rather spend the night with a bunch of young ladies who have trouble keeping their shirts on, but that's not the case.  Truth of the matter is that Hell Night...well, it's kind of a snoozer.  102 minutes of nothing but silliness and Linda Blair's exploited cleavage.   Man, at least Slumber Party Massacre would be a fun film to die in.  Let's give it the final point and the win! (3-2, Slumber Party Massacre wins!)

Random Horror Throwdown - Leviathan vs. Lifeforce

Up until this weekend, I could never tell the difference between these two movies.  I know that seems weird - especially if you've seen them - but allow me to make three points on the topic to explain myself.

1) They both start with L and have long one-word titles.
2) The DVD/VHS covers of each are similarly blue.
3) I hadn't seen either film.

I knew that someone told me one of these two movies was good, but I could not, under any circumstance, remember which.  And the more I researched, the more I found both movies getting some praise.  So, I did what any rational me would do - and watched them both.  Now, they get thrown into a throwdown!  (BTW, if you're too new to FMWL to remember the Random Horror Throwdown - click up in here (up in here) to go re-live its past glory!)

The Movies:


Leviathan (1989, Dir. by George P. Cosmatos.)
Starring: Peter Weller, Richard Crenna, Amanda Pays, Ernie Hudson.
IMDB Synopsis: Underwater deep-sea miners encounter a Soviet wreck and bring back a dangerous cargo to their base on the ocean floor with horrifying results... (Note from The Mike: Let's see.  Soviet wreck? Dangerous cargo?  You mean to tell me those two things might lead to horrifying results? I DON'T BELIEVE IT!)

Lifeforce (1985, Dir. by Tobe Hooper.)
Starring: Steve Railsback, Peter Firth, Mathilda May, Patrick Stewart.
IMDB Synopsis: A space shuttle mission investigating Halley's Comet brings back a malevolent race of space vampires who transform most of London's population into zombies. The only survivor of the expedition and British authorities attempt to capture a mysterious but beautiful alien woman who appears responsible.  (Note from The Mike: Space + vampires + zombies + alien woman.  Just so we're clear, THAT is how scattered Lifeforce is.  More on that later.

The Casts:
This is a topic of hot debate for me.  The leads couldn't be more different, with the monotonous and controlled Peter Weller (Robocop) headlining Leviathan as the unhinged and potentially psychotic Steve Railsback (The Stunt Man) leads Lifeforce.  Neither actor could possibly function in the opposite role, as the switch would kind of been like asking Isaac Hayes to do Diamonds are Forever while Shirley Bassey does the theme to Shaft.  (Read as: It just doesn't work.)  I'm certainly a bit more Weller, personally, but I do admire Railsback's manic style in the right setting - and this is the right setting for him.

If we're calling the leads a wash, I guess the next step is the ladies.  Lifeforce's Mathilda May racks up some points with her impressive physical presence, while Leviathan's Amanda Pays (who was also the attractive British lady in The Flash) is a fine example of a survivor girl who can hold her own.  I'm calling that a wash too.

Here's where the switch happens. Lifeforce's next most notable name is Patrick Stewart. I know Patrick Stewart is a big name to some, due to his Next Generation duties and his X-Men stuffiness - but I don't care that much about Patrick Stewart. I'm not a Trekkie or an X-kie. You know what I do care about? A freakin' Ghostbuster like Ernie Hudson.  Or Colonel Trautman like Richard Crenna.  Or that blond lady who hung out with Axel Foley.  Or Daniel Stern of C.H.U.D. fame.  Yeah, that's what I care about.  And Leviathan even throws in Hector Elizondo!  But none of that really matters....Ernie Hudson was the knockout punch for this category.  (1-0, Leviathan leads.)

The Directors:
Tobe Hooper and George P. Cosmatos both have made some fantastic films.  Cosmatos is one of the more underrated directors of the '80s, I think.  Sure, he did make Cobra - which might be held against him by some - but he also made Rambo: First Blood Part II, the underseen former Midnight Movie of the Week Of Unknown Origin (also starring Weller) and, eventually, Tombstone (though it took the rallying of the great Kurt Russell to get him aboard that film).

But, Hooper made The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, and its first sequel, and is credited as the director of Poltergeist (no matter what anyone says!).  So he wins the point for Lifeforce. (1-1.)

(By the way, I've also got a soft spot for Hooper's remake of The Toolbox Murders, a deeply flawed slasher that survives thanks to Angela Bettis and a heaping helping of atmosphere. Just gotta throw that in here, proceed as usual.)

The Plots:
Leviathan borrows much of its spirit from classics like Alien and The Thing, which is not in any way a bad thing.  There were a slew of undersea genre flicks in 1989 - including the big budget The Abyss and the less popular Deep Star Six - and Leviathan's sense of underwater doom fits alongside some of my favorite sci-fi horrors.  That doesn't necessarily mean Leviathan is near as well-made as those films - its got some pretty severe pacing issues and stalls out at times - but the ideas behind the plot at least make me smile a bunch.

Lifeforce, on the other hand, is just kind of crazy and all over the place.  It's like Mario Bava's Planet of the Vampires had a three way with The Hidden and The Return of the Living Dead and traveled back in time to make Lifeforce.  Or maybe it's, just that Dan O'Bannon - who wrote The Return of the Living Dead - wrote Lifeforce.  You decide.  Either way, I'm going to give Lifeforce - which is truly a one of a kind sci-fi horror (just because it reminds me of other movies doesn't make it unoriginal) - a point for its ability to mix genre staples with a big 'ol pair of naked breasts that appear to be relevant to the plot.  (2-1, Lifeforce leads.)

My Experience with the Films:
Well, as I stated in my intro, my experience with these films is basically nonexistent.  I hadn't seen either until this weekend.

Am I more likely to show one of my friends one of these films than the other? I'm not sure.  Lifeforce is a unique bit of '80s awesome, to be sure, while Leviathan offers a more restrained bit of fun with some cool effects and a wonderfully silly ending.  I guess if I had to give a point here....I really don't know yet.  So, instead of making a choice, let's go to a LIGHTNING ROUND!!!!!!!!

THE LIGHTNING ROUND!

• Which film would benefit more from the use of Barbara Hershey? - I say Leviathan.  Heck, make her the Captain instead of Weller and I'd love that movie to death.
• Which film is most apocalyptic? - Easily Lifeforce.  Some of the late film shots of a ravaged London are kinda fantastic.
• Which film could be most easily remade into an entertaining modern fare? - Definitely Leviathan. It's simple in plot, the cast could be filled with rich modern character actors, and the effects could be improved upon.
• Which film probably could never be remade? - Lifeforce, as the talents of Railsback and May are pretty integral to the film's success.
• Which film doesn't leave me scratching my head and wondering if it's amazing or silly? - Leviathan.  It is what it shows you, while Lifeforce is all over the place.

This Choice is Like: 

You guys all know how much FMWL loves Barbara Hershey, right?  Well, it does.  She's basically FMWL's girlfriend (in an imaginary realm).  In the absence of clarity, and in a time when two films The Mike once couldn't tell apart are battling in their extraordinarily different ways to win his affection, The Mike often has to turn to irrational forms of decision making.

And if I think Leviathan fits the talents of Ms. Hershey the best - because I'd rather see her as a brave undersea mining captain who can be a strong and respected woman than a topless space vampire - then I gotta give the love to Leviathan this time around.  It's up my alley, and would be even more fun with some of that delicious Hershey-ness.  So let's throw a whopping TWO points at Leviathan! (3-2, Leviathan wins!)

Besides, how cute would it be to see Hershey and Amanda Pays having an undersea mining base slumber party?  Sorry Lifeforce, you lost today.  That doesn't mean you have to like it!

What say you, Midnight Warriors? I can't be the only one who's ever mixed up these movies, can I? And, perhaps more importantly, how many times in this post did I post the wrong title because I'm STILL getting them mixed up?  I'm totally not checking...

Random Horror Throwdown - Videodrome vs. The Stepfather

OH HAI Random Horror Throwdown.  Long time no see!  Yeah, I know, we used to hang out like every week.  Yeah, I remember that time when I made you go away and then brought you back a couple of months later then stopped hangin' with you again.  Well...I guess I missed you.

So you're back, and you've brought two of the '80s more sadistic films with you?  Oh, OK.  Let's see what happens when James Woods and Videodrome go head to head with the recently remade The Stepfather.....

Vs.

The Movies: 

Videodrome (1983, Dir. by David Cronenberg.)
Starring: James Woods, Deborah Harry, Sonja Smits.
IMDB Synopsis: A sleazy cable-TV programmer begins to see his life and the future of media spin out of control in a very unusual fashion when he acquires a new kind of programming for his station.  (Note from The Mike: I'm glad SOMEONE understood this movie!)

The Stepfather (1987, Dir. by Joseph Ruben.)
Starring: Terry O'Quinn, Jill Schoelen, Shelley Hack.
IMDB Synopsis: A family-values man named Jerry Blake marries widows and divorcées with children in search of the perfect family. As soon as his new family members show signs of being human and not robots who will march unquestioningly to his tune, his dreams of domestic bliss begin to crumble, and he kills them. (Note from The Mike: Way to survive this movie = Walk slowly and repeatedly say (in monotone) "I'm a robot. I'm talkin' like a robot. I'm a robot."  It just might save your life.)

The Directors:
Let's talk about Joseph Ruben for a minute.  The guy seems to be a jack of all trades when it comes to middle of the road genre cinema.  He's got that weird Dreamscape flick with Dennis Quaid, he's got the entirely memorable The Good Son, he's got Woody and Wesley's Money Train, and he randomly popped up in 2004 with The Forgotten.  Man, I kind of dug The Forgotten.  Yeah, I know, it's got a ridiculous, ridiculous, ridiculous twist....but there are a couple of moments that are golden.  And I do so love Julianne Moore.

Then there's David Cronenberg.  I've had an off and on relationship with Cronie's films, but I totally love A History of Violence and Eastern Promises.  I'm still catching up with some of his early stuff (I've never really gotten over how awful that lead actor in Scanners was, and have thus delayed seeing some of his work), but I'm willing to give his filmography and its weird twists and turns the edge over Ruben's random yet unmemorable filmography.  On the bright, I'd say these are the two best films from each director (though I might argue for Violence on some days), so at least we've got their peaks to talk about.  Chalk one up for Videodrome. (1-0, Videodrome leads.)

The Plots: 
That synopsis of Videodrome really does do the film a bit of justice, although any attempts to sum up what it's saying are surely missing 8,593 possible variables that one could glean from Cronenberg's film.  Saying that I think Videodrome has a lot of hidden messages is like saying The Mike has a lot of favorite movies....it's the most true thing one could say on the topic.

The Stepfather, on the other hand, has a distinct plot that not only makes perfect sense to me, but is perfectly creepy.  What if some dude was not only entering your life as a new father, but doing so with the intention of killing you if you didn't meet their standards?  Isn't that freaky to think about?  It's like Hitler without a Reich.

So, while I know there's a lot more to Videodrome than I'm letting on, I'm gonna go ahead and throw a point in the direction of The Stepfather for providing a SIMPLE but effective scare with its premise.  (1-1.)

My Experience With the Films:
The Stepfather spent a long time on my "To Do" List.  I remember reading about it when I started studying up on cinema as a teen, but by that point the VHS was out of print and newfangled means of acquisition weren't here yet.  So I knew it was out there, and it got built up as this elephant in the middle of the horror room that I couldn't deal with.  It was wicked sad.  Then it finally hit DVD and I was vindicated.  It was wicked glorious, and the film didn't let me down.  In fact, it was a little more brutal than I'd imagined it would be.

On the other hand, I was too young - at least mentally, I was probably 17-18 in human years - when I saw Videodrome.  I thought something like "Whoa, that was weird, but at least I saw Debbie Harry's boobs" and wrote it off as a mindscrew that was trying to be more than it is.  I'm still not convinced that this opinion isn't right, but over the years the film randomly popped up in my brain to say hello.  I never invited it, but it just showed up.  It's like the Cosmo Kramer of the horror part of my brain, just barging in and asking weird questions that I don't understand.  And I would ignore it, but I would also kind of start to like having it around.  And then I'd revisit it.  And revisit it again.  And again, and each time more frequently.  And then I realized that Videodrome and I were homeboys.

This is a tough category to handicap, but the fact that I compared Videodrome to Kramer means something.  Give it a point. (2-1, Videodrome leads.)

What's the deal with The Stepfather's remake?
Well, the deal is that it's not good.  Not good at all.  It manages to offer the same message as the original, holding on to that "if you don't meet the criteria you meet your end" thing, but it goes mega vanilla with Dylan Walsh and whoever the dude that played the suspicious son was.  It's a great excuse to show Amber Heard in 27 different bikinis, true, but it's a pretty bad horror movie by even the standards of the late '90s, let alone the decade in which horror has gotten some of its balls back.

What does the remake have to do with scoring this battle?  Well, nothing really.  But it's worth considering.  Is it better to be a film that inspires others to copy your idea, or is it better to be a film that's so unique and incomprehensible that no one dares try?  I'd argue The (original) Stepfather does the former, and it offers its idea so well that some could say it's worth repeating.  On the other hand, I'd argue that Videodrome does the latter, and that's a good thing too.  So....I don't know.  I'm not answering this question.  You ponder it and let me know what you think.

The Casts:
Man, I do so love John Locke.  I mean, Terry O'Quinn.  I've only seen like 7 episodes of Lost, and even before I had seen any of them, I still only knew him as John Locke.  People be talkin', y'know.  Anyway, Locke/O'Quinn is as good as anyone can be in The Stepfather.  Plus, the flick's got horror heroine extraordinaire Jill Schoelen, and Shelley Hack.  Not too bad.

Videodrome's got James Woods, who's no slouch either.  But really, it mostly makes me want to talk about how much I love Deborah Harry and Blondie.  Has there ever been a better female rock star than Debbie Harry?  I say no way Jose.  I just adore her.  And though it's a bit weird to see her in this overerotic role now that I adore her music so much more than I did as a silly teen, I still love the fact that she's here in this weird movie chillin' with James Woods and being a party to the invention of the stomach VCR.  Sooo...I'm giving this point to Videodrome.  And I don't care that it's solely because I love Blondie. (3-1, Videodrome leads.)

This Choice is Like:

There's a sport (which is pictured above) called Jai Alai.  I have no idea what the hell it is.  But seriously...look at that image.  Don't you want to love that?  Isn't it epic?  Doesn't it inspire such thought in you?

If you answered yes to those questions, you're with me.  And that reaction also sums up my feelings about Videodrome.  I can watch it and watch it and watch it, and even if I never find out what it really is....I still can't stop trying to love it.

I feel like this matchup should have been closer - The Stepfather is one heck of a real world horror film - but once you've seen Videodrome...much like the show that is the subject of Videodrome....you can't really shake the mental infection it provides.  I will forever think of it as the Cosmo Kramer of cult cinema.  (3-1, Videodrome wins!)

Random Horror Throwdown - Dead Alive vs. Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon

Prime time's back again!  Yeah, it seems like the Random Horror Throwdown and I have been fickle mistresses over the last few months.  Everything was going well, then there was a break, then there was another break, then Hammer Films Month happened...and now here we are.  So, it's entirely possible that you're relatively new to the site and don't know the Random Horror Throwdown yet.  The easy solution to that?  Click here and check out the history of said Throwdown!

Now, on to our current matchup, in which Peter Jackson's gorefest Dead Alive takes on the indie slasher hit Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon!      

  

VS.

The Movies:

Dead Alive (1992, Dir. by Peter Jackson.)

Starring: Timothy Balme, Diana Penalver, Elizabeth Moody.
IMDB Synopsis: A young man's mother is bitten by a Sumatran rat-monkey. She gets sick and dies, at which time she comes back to life, killing and eating dogs, nurses, friends, and neighbors.  (Note from The Mike: This sounds kind of like Lord of the Rings, doesn't it?  I mean, just replace Sumatran rat-monkey with Gollum and....well....nope, I've got nothin'.  Just filling space, I guess.)

Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon (2006, Dir. by Scott Glosserman.)
Starring: Nathan Baesel, Angela Goethals, Robert Englund.
IMDB Synopsis: The next great psycho horror slasher has given a documentary crew exclusive access to his life as he plans his reign of terror over the sleepy town of Glen Echo, all the while deconstructing the conventions and archetypes of the horror genre for them. (Note from The Mike: This synopsis, though posted on IMDB, is actually from a press release about the film.  Boo to you IMDB, your synopsi are actually intelligent tonight.  You're losing your touch!)

The Plots:
Dead Alive's plot (or lack thereof) is pretty well explained in the synopsis above.  There's a monkey, then there are zombies, then there is carnage.  Normally I'm strongly in favor of zombies over slashers.  But you know what I do love?  Breaking down the tendencies of the slasher film.  And that's where Behind the Mask succeeds.  The idea of the slashers we've come to love being real, and a fellow training himself to become one of them is a pretty brilliant idea, and Behind the Mask makes it even better than it sounds.  That's totally a point for Behind the Mask. (1-0, Behind the Mask leads.)

The Gore:
I feel like I have to bring this up, because it is what Dead Alive is.  There's some solid gore in Behind the Mask - that apple juicing thing is pretty sweet - but nothing that comes even close to Jackson's film's wackiness.  The lawnmower bit alone is worth a point for Dead Alive. (1-1.)

The Directors: 
I don't really know anything about Scott Glosserman aside from Behind the Mask.  I know he did a fantastic job on it, but that's about it.  On the other hand, there's Peter Jackson.  Even if I'm not a big fan of the last 37 hours of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Seriously, once he killed Sean Bean I lost interest.), I have to give the man credit for making something that most people think is wicked awesome and cool and stuff.  Plus I love The Frighteners and his take on King Kong is breathtaking.  So he wins a point for Dead Alive, which is nothing if not inventive. (2-1, Dead Alive leads.)

The Casts:
I'm gonna be up front with you here.  Behind the Mask will win this point, and it's not because of any of the horror "icons" like Robert Englund, Kane Hodder, or Zelda Rubenstein that are in it.  It's not because veteran cool dude Scott Wilson pops in and is memorable, either.  It's because Nathan Baesel, as Leslie Vernon, is a freaking rock star.  He makes us want to love him, even though we know - because he tells us - that he's gonna murder a bunch of people just for tits and giggles.  How can it be?  Because he's just that suave, I guess.  One point, Behind the Mask. (2-2.)

My Experience With The Films:
I've powered through the first four points, because this where I'm gonna cause some drama.  It should be pretty obvious by now that I really dig what Behind the Mask has to offer.  I've seen it at least 5 times in the last two and a half years, and it always goes down easy.  In modern horror, there aren't many films that are a sure thing with me, but this is one of 'em.

And then there's Dead Alive.  I admire what was done in Dead Alive, I like the gore, I like the quick pace that fills most of the movie....but I don't really like it as a whole.  There, I said it.  It's gore for the sake of gore at times, and that ain't what I'm in horror for.  If I've got the choice between a horror comedy that makes me laugh with its characters and plot and a horror comedy that is based upon gross gags and gore...I'm probably gonna lead toward the former.

This Choice is Like:
(Note from The Mike: OK, I hate using football stories in these things, but it's what I know.  And I only have like three good personal football stories from my day, and this is one of them, and...well, I'm using it to explain my reasoning here.  Sorry.)

When I was in high school and played football, there was one game that I still remember clearly.  I played tackle, and we were dominating the defensive front pretty much all game.  In the third quarter, the coach sent in a play that called for our back to run off tackle behind me as I sealed a defensive tackle inside and the fullback led the way to the corner.  It gained a bunch of yards.  Next play, he called the same thing and it worked again.  Third time, same result.  On the fourth play, the back who ran in with the play call looked at us and said "Same play, and we're running it until we score."  So, we ran the same play over and over again, and went on an easy ten play scoring drive to put the game away.  (For those who don't understand football, the short version of this story is that something came easy to us, so we exploited it and repeated it until we achieved a positive result.)

Why did our coach do this, when there were more sophisticated things he could have done?  There are two reasons, but I think the primary reason was that he recognized that this was our niche.  We were comfortable running this play, so we didn't need a change up.  The play seemed like it was designed specifically for that situation, because it lined up perfectly against their defense based on the talent level of our players.

(And, if you're curious as to the second reason why our coach did this, it's pretty simple.  He was my father.)

Behind the Mask is one of those films to me.  I know Dead Alive is a beloved zombie splatterfest to most, but I'm fine running with Behind the Mask repeatedly because it fits my niche as a horror fan who loves a good laugh and a bit of psychological deconstruction.  So I'm giving it the final point and the win. (3-2, Behind the Mask wins!)

(Note from The Mike: OK, I'm a little rusty.  But next Random Horror Throwdown will be better, I swear.  And also, if you read where I said football and think of soccer....dude.  Not cool.)

Random Horror Throwdown - Tales from the Crypt vs. Sleepy Hollow

There's no doubting that I look for order when looking at randomness. Case in point: When I have a chance to pit a movie that occurred long before the most famous version of its namesake (1972's much forgotten anthology Tales from the Crypt, which is dwarfed by the famed HBO series) against a movie that occurred long after the most famous version of its namesake (Sleepy Hollow, a far removed child of Washington Irving's Ichabod Crane tale), I take it. Can the Johnny Depp blockbuster hold off one of my unsung favorites? Let's go to the matchup!

VS.

The Movies: Tales from the Crypt (1972, Dir. by Freddie Francis.)
Starring: Joan Collins, Peter Cushing, Ralph Richardson.
IMDB Synopsis: Five people get lost in a crypt and meet up with a strange crypt keeper who tells them stories of how they died. (Note from The Mike: If you ever find yourself in this situation, remember to drink from the cup of a carpenter. Wait, what? Wrong genre? Oh, ok. My bad.)

Sleepy Hollow (1999, Dir. by Tim Burton.)
Starring: Johnny Depp, Christina Ricci, Christopher Walken, Christopher Lee.
IMDB Synopsis: Ichabod Crane is sent to Sleepy Hollow to investigate the decapitations of 3 people with the culprit being the legendary apparition, the Headless Horseman. (Note from The Mike: Total bonus points for use of the word "apparition", IMDB dude!)

The Casts:
Tales from the Crypt utilizes some of the best talents Amicus had available at the time, when Hammer films was starting to lose their grip on the stars that had made the studio king for almost two decades. We've got Peter Cushing, Ian Hendry, and Roy Dotrice, alongside Joan Collins (in the famous "And All Through The House..." tale) and Ralph Richardson as the growly cryptkeeper.

Sleepy Hollow, on the other hand, has Johnny Depp. I don't care about Johnny Depp like others do, so I'm close to giving the point to Tales. But then, I remember that Christopher Walken AND Christopher Lee show up. Yes, the two greatest people to have Christ in their name since JC are in this movie. Even in small doses, I gotta give Sleepy Hollow a point for that. (1-0, Sleepy Hollow leads.)

The Directors:
This is another tough call. Tales from the Crypt is directed by veteran cinematographer turned director Freddie Francis, who worked for Hammer for a long time, shot the best looking black-and-white horror film of all-time (that would be The Innocents), and directed a few other unsung horror hits like Paranoiac (the first Hammer film on Blu-Ray!), The Creeping Flesh, and Trog. (Ok, maybe Trog's not good...but I love me some Trog.) I've always found his name on a project of this era to be quite soothing.

But then there's Tim Burton. As much as I dislike his recent output, the man has made some amazing flicks. Based on Big Fish and Ed Wood alone, I have to give Sleepy Hollow another point. (2-0, Sleepy Hollow leads.)

The Plots:
OK, this is getting out of hand, but here's where Tales takes a stand. I freakin' love anthology horrors. Heck, I love them like most people love Shark Week. With five tales at its disposal, Francis' Tales from the Crypt plays like one of those scary story books I used to read as a kid. And Sleepy Hollow plays like a souped up version of the Disney version that terrified me as a kid (seriously, that headless horseman was AMAZING). So Tales from the Crypt gets a point here. (2-1, Sleepy Hollow leads.)

That Second Segment in Tales from the Crypt is REALLY Ahead of its Time:
Not really a question here, but I just have to take a moment to talk about this one. In the flick's second segment, entitled Reflection of Death, a fellow played by Ian Hendry decides to walk out on his wife and kids to run away with a wide-eyed mistress. On their car ride out of town, he has a horrible nightmare right before the car crashes and burns. From that point on, we get him shambling around in first person view, with people recoiling at the site of him. It's entirely on par with what we'd see later in the likes of Black Christmas and Halloween, and the payoff - though slightly cheesy - totally works for me. I kinda love this segment hardcore, and thus I'm giving Tales from the Crypt another point. (2-2)

My Experience with the Films:
Both of these films and I met during my first year at college. The newer film came out that fall, and I saw it twice theatrically; once with my high school friends over Thanksgiving break and later with my roommate and his girlfriend. To date, the latter viewing is one of my favorite experiences, as I may have elbowed said roommate in correlation with the film's biggest jumpscare, causing him to jump out of his seat.

As for Tales from the Crypt, it was one of the first movies I ever found at what would become my favorite video store for the next decade. I had never heard of the flick, and remember being completely excited by the concept, rushing home (via bus, that is) and popping it in immediately. I was between roommates at the time, and had the place to myself with no disruptions, and devoured the whole thing. And loved it. In fact, I'm pretty sure this was my first exposure to Amicus OR Hammer films...thus, it kinda opened one of the most awesome doors that's ever opened in my cinematic life.

This Choice is Like: Is it better to fade before a star or to ride the star's coattails? Sleepy Hollow took an established quantity and rehashed it, while Tales - while also based on stuff - seems to blaze a new trail for the series that would later become the biggest genre TV hit since Serling...yet nobody seems to remember it.

Doesn't really matter though, because somehow I've convinced myself that Tales from the Crypt is MINE. Everyone saw Sleepy Hollow that fall, and everyone's seen it since. Tales was probably relatively successful in its day, but my experiences with the film are solely personal. And...I kinda love it for that.

Sleepy Hollow is probably the better film, and I've revisited it plenty. And I don't even have a good analogy for why I'm doing this, but I'm giving the final point to Tales from the Crypt. (3-2, Tales from the Crypt wins!)

(Note from The Mike: Not to mention, the tagline for TftC is "Death Lives!" How forking cool is that? Honestly, this contest was over the second that oxymoron happened.)

Random Horror Throwdown: Black Sunday vs. Village of the Damned

Welcome, Midnight Warriors, to 1960...the year of the STARE. In one corner is Italian maestro Mario Bava with what most consider his "masterpiece" - Black Sunday. In the other, Director Wolf Rilla teams with George Sanders and a pack of creepy albinos for Village of the Damned. It's entirely worth mentioning that this throwdown could have been between the 1977 blimp-versus-Super Bowl thriller Black Sunday and the 1995 John Carpenter helmed remake of Village of the Damned. In that case, this matchup would have sucked.

Vs.














(OK, Stop staring. You'll go blind.)

The Movies: Black Sunday (1960, Dir. by Mario Bava.)
Starring: Barbara Steele, John Richardson, Andrea Checchi.
IMDB Synopsis: A vengeful witch and her fiendish servant return from the grave and begin a bloody campaign to possess the body of the witch's beautiful look-alike descendant. Only the girl's brother and a handsome doctor stand in her way. (Note from The Mike: I LOVE when actresses play dual roles as evil and good. Bava made a mistake in his Erik the Conqueror, because he cast real twins as twins. Why pay twice for something that's the same?)

Village of the Damned (1960, Dir. by Wolf Rilla.)
Starring: George Sanders, Barbara Shelley, Martin Stephens.
IMDB Synopsis: In the small English village of Midwich everybody and everything falls into a deep, mysterious sleep for several hours in the middle of the day. Some months later every woman capable of child-bearing is pregnant and the children that are born out of these pregnancies seem to grow very fast and they all have the same blond hair and strange, penetrating eyes that make people do things they don't want to do. (Note from The Mike: My parents let me watch too much of the Playboy Channel as a teen. Thus, I'll never not find the phrase "penetrating eyes" (or any use of the penetrating word) funny.)

The Plots:
Witches are a blast, man. Especially in a Barbara Steele manner. Now, I love The Wizard of Oz with a passion, and that Wicked Witch is pretty ridiculously awesome....but in this case, the witch is fantastically scary. And, since it's Barbara Steele...kinda hot. But, like Suspiria later, this is one of those horror films that is really a style-over-substance thing. Village of the Damned is a plot I love. Possible extra-terrestrial involvement from the start, creepy kids, commentary on human nature....just a blast of cool ideas. I have to give it the point. (1-0, Village of the Damned leads.)

The Directors:
This one's a windmill, tongue-out, slam dunk. I don't know anything about Wolf Rilla. I keep misspelling his name as Wolf Rolla, probably because I think he's like that Rock'n'rolla movie mixed with werebeasts. To put his career in perspective, this film has over 4,300 votes on IMDB. Rilla's next most popular film, Cairo (apparently a remake of The Asphalt Jungle?) has 88 votes.

Mario Bava...is kind of a king. I mean, he kinda invented Italian horror. Argento may be the subgenre's poster child, but Bava INVENTED it. (Well, at least according to us Americans who like to revise other countries' histories as they're relevant to us, that is. And can we really call Italian horror a subgenre? Is it a racegenre? A geogrogenre, maybe?)

Whatever. Bava and Black Sunday get the point. (1-1.)

The Casts:
If you were ever to walk up to me, or perhaps comment on my blog, and ask "Hey The Mike, who's the most amazing actor of all-time that no one ever seems to talk about?", my answer would DEFINITELY be George Sanders. He's absolutely, positively, one of the best character actors of all-time. Just go rent All About Eve and The Ghost and Mrs. Muir and Rebecca and Man Hunt (ahhhhh, especially Man Hunt, he's so freakin' a good Nazi!), and then come back here and tell me he's not awesome. I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU!

I love Barbara Steele too, but Sanders is too awesome. And, Village of the Damned features Martin Stephens as his evil son, who would go on to be ubercreepy in The Innocents and win the "All-Time Creepy Child" Championship. So I HAVE to give the point to Village of the Damned. (2-1, Village of the Damned leads.)

(By the way, here Sanders plays Gordon Zellaby. Best character name ever?)

The Moods:
This, to me, is where Village of the Damned slips. Those kids are creepy, it's true. But then the whole "think of a brick wall" thing happens and...for whatever reason, it seems a little silly to me. Sanders has a few moments of being over the top while dealing with the silly aspects of the plot (but is still totally awesome), and the film seems to get a little off-track despite its short runtime.

Black Sunday, though about 10 minutes longer than Village of the Damned, seems to be a tighter flick. Its haunting stares, particularly from Ms. Steele, are completely penetrating (teehee!), and definitely creepy. And the music! Oh, it's gorgeous. I have to give the moodiness points to Black Sunday (2-2.)

My History With The Films:
This is an incredibly tough category to call. I've never really called either of these films a "favorite" horror film, but I definitely have always respected them both greatly. Normally, when I start one of these Throwdowns, I have an idea as to which film will come out a winner, based entirely on a gut feeling. Right now, my gut seems a little confused.

John Carpenter has long been my favorite director not named Hitchcock, and I will absolutely admit that I saw his version of Village of the Damned (a remake that looked fantastic to 14-year-old The Mike) long before the original film hit DVD and became available to me. So I've always had trouble getting past that crappy remake when thinking about the original film. In fact, I'm starting to wonder if the silliness I attribute to the plot is because of how silly the remake was.

On the other hand, Bava's Black Sunday was long a "must find" movie for me. It wasn't until my sister graduated from college in Connecticut (while I was stuck via plane in Chicago during a storm and missed the festivities and following trip to NYC), that my parents kindly brought a DVD of it (and a Leatherface bobblehead doll which totally still watches me as I sleep) home to me. I must admit that I was not initially infatuated with the film - hype was cruel to it - but have grown to dig it greatly with time.

This Decision is Like:
I'm completely rambling. Because, when I started this Throwdown, I had absolutely no idea which of these films I would pick. I kind of felt like I wanted to pick Village of the Damned, just because it's less talked about and I love George Sanders, but at the same time I couldn't imagine not honoring the tradition of Bava and Steele and the technical mastery shown in Black Sunday.
Isn't there an REO Speedwagon song about this? Do I follow my head, or follow my heart? I quite think there is.....

Is 90% George Sanders enough to overcome 100% Bava? Gah...no, it isn't. Were this any of the George Sanders flicks I mentioned earlier, I'd give it the win. But Black Sunday eeks out the final point. (3-2, Black Sunday wins.)

(Note from The Mike: I hate tooting my own horn, but...as difficult as this was...I had a blast writing it. Hope it makes some kind of sense to you!)

Random Horror Throwdown - Weird Al Yankovic Triple Threat Match Edition!

(Note from The Mike: Before our main event for the evening, I need to cover a few housekeeping issues. First up, I must point you all toward ZforZombies.com, where Zach S. has a killer blogathon going down. He asked yours truly to participate, and I was honored to do so. So, head on over and read about a horror film that broke my heart. It's a sad story, true, but when you come back here you'll smile and know that it ended well.

Secondly, a thank you must go out to Sarah of The Spooky Vegan, who bestowed The Versatile Blogger award on FMWL today. Though I've just recently found this blog, I've long been a fan of the other site Sarah runs, Fatally-Yours.com. A big thank you goes out to her!)

Now, let's party....
I think it'd be safe to wager that there aren't many people under 30 who haven't spent a bit of time listening to "Weird Al" Yankovic. I owe a large amount of my love for the master writer of sung spoofs to my old friend Trav (to whom I currently owe a review of the demented comedy The Road to Wellville....more on that some day). Last fall, on a road trip that ended horribly for me (because his Bengals beat my Packers), the two of us covered what was basically Weird Al's entire discography in the 15 hours we spent on the road. It was glorious.

And today, when Enbrethliel over at Shredded Cheddar (one of my favorite bloggers, it's true) started her own "Weird Al" Yankovic Song Smackdown, she gave me a gigantic dose of inspiration. Thus, I'm forgoing the normal Random Horror Throwdown procedure - with apologies to Flickchart - so I can pit three of my favorite Horror/Sci-Fi based Weird Al songs against each other in one brutally hilarious menage a trois. No points, less categories, one winner to rule them all.

The Competitors:
Nature Trail to Hell (in 3-D) (from the album "Weird Al Yankovic In 3-D", 1984)

VS.

Christmas at Ground Zero (from the album "Polka Party", 1986)

VS.

The Night Santa Went Crazy (from the album "Bad Hair Day", 1996)


The Plots:
If you took the time to listen to all three of these songs, and have any doubts that they belong on this site, consider this: Each song, despite being released on three different albums in three different decades, was the final track of said album. Like the midnight movies I love, these were the songs that only the late night crowd could really love.

Nature Trail to Hell in 3-D immortalizes the slasher craze of the early '80s perfectly. It's darn near impossible for me to hear it and not think of Jason Voorhees. In fact, I'd say it IS impossible, so disregard that sentence. The fictional flick even sounds a little more brutal than anything that ever went on at Camp Crystal Lake, as Al promises that the killer "hacks up two or three (Cub Scouts) in EVERY scene". Somewhere, Rob Zombie is drooling on his horrible actress/hot wife.

Christmas at Ground Zero is a far more jolly tale....or at least it sounds like it. Actually it's about living in a nuked winter wonderland. Like the great apocalypse tales - you know, like Panic in Year Zero! - Al's song focuses on what normal folks can do in case of the end of the world; and the song's light-hearted nature also reminds of Kubrick and Dr. Strangelove.

Then there's The Night Santa Went Crazy, which plays like a child of both of these songs. It's got a bit of Rambo, and even a reference to Freddy Kreuger, but it sounds more like a hardcore holiday version of the awesome (if only in idea) Michael Douglas flick Falling Down.

The Most Horror-tastic Lines:
These are no doubt among Al's most sadistic songs, and it shows through. Christmas at Ground Zero reminds us that "if someone's climbing down your chimney, you better grab your gun and shoot to kill"; while The Night Santa Went Crazy tells us that a militant Santa "picked up a flamethrower and he barbecued Blitzen. And he took a big bite and said 'It tastes just like chicken!'" Nature Trail ensures that you'll "see severed heads that almost fall right in your lap" and "see that bloody hatchet coming right at you". But my favorite bit in that one might be Al's promise that "If you like the 6 O'Clock News then you'll love.......Nature Trail to Hell!" This category is way too close.

The Subversive Bits:
A gibberish segment in the middle of Nature Trail to Hell states that "Satan eats Cheese Whiz" when played backward. And neither Christmas song was well received by the masses, as Christmas at Ground Zero was banned from radio play. The Night Santa went Crazy was released as a single in an "Extra Gory Version" (which is the one I've linked above) which features Santa viciously facing his demise.

This Choice is Like:
Y'know what movie I love, and what movie you should love too? ALL ABOUT EVE. I know....The Mike just went with a 1950 movie about dueling high society actresses on this site. The thing is, All About Eve is as brutal as movies get when portraying feuds between humans...brutal enough that it almost resembles the horror blogosphere. It was so brutal in portraying the rivalry between Bette Davis and Anne Baxter that when both actresses got nominated for the Oscar...they both lost because they split the votes that Eve lovers had to give. Someone I don't even remember won that Oscar, because these two ladies were so good at doing the same thing. Really, they were so good that Marilyn Monroe could barely get a word in. Marilyn. Monroe.
And that's what's happening to me here. I love both Christmas songs, but I can't really say one is that much better than the other. Nature Trail to Hell in 3-D does its own thing, does it awesomely with spot-on spoofing and the awesome Cheese Whiz gag. So, since the Christmas songs are splitting one part of my brain, I'm declaring it the winner. And really, out of these three, who doesn't want to see that movie happen? Make it so, Lords of Horror!!!!!

Random Horror Throwdown - Pieces vs. Halloween II (2009)

I'm just gonna say this up front: I can't think of a movie in recent memory I've hated as much as Rob Zombie's Halloween II. As a Halloween series fanatic, it took everything in my power to accept Zombie's version of Halloween for what it was, and then when the sequel happened I felt like I was starring in an episode of 'Ow! My Balls!'. But, since I'm promising "random" in my Random Horror Throwdowns, its number came up and I'm gonna talk about it. But I'm not going to like it.

Halloween II 2009's opponent? Pieces, a film which can be described and defended as either a masterpiece or a piece of something else. So, this should be fun.

VS.

The Movies:
Pieces (1982, Dir. by Juan Piquer-Simon.)
Starring: Christopher George, Linda Day (George), Edmund Purdom, Ian Sera.
IMDB Synopsis: Young co-eds are being cut up by a chainsaw killer on a college campus. The killer is attempting to put together a human jigsaw puzzle made from body parts. (Note from The Mike: Simple and effective. It's exactly what you think it is.)

Halloween II (2009, Dir. by Rob Zombie.)
Starring: Malcolm McDowell, Scout Taylor-Compton, Brad Dourif.
IMDB Synopsis: Laurie Strode struggles to come to terms with her brother Michael's deadly return to Haddonfield, Illinois; meanwhile, Michael prepares for another reunion with his sister. (Note from The Mike: I could spend the rest of the night dissecting this statement, due to my frustrations with Mr. Zombie, but instead I will just sigh and move on. *sigh*)

The Directors:
The other films I know of by JP Simon are Mystery on Monster Island, which I failed to finish despite the presence of Terence Stamp and Peter Cushing, and Slugs: The Movie, which I remember laughing at as a child. He's definitely not a top-shelf director by any means, but Pieces manages to stay afloat despite being a generally awful film from a technical standpoint because he offers what an audience that would be looking for a film like this wants.

Zombie's films show a technical proficiency, and I - like many other horror fans - have often lamented that he has all the tools to make a great horror film. I don't think he ever has, and each day I'm less convinced that he ever will. Zombie has had a lot of things given to him on a silver platter as a filmmaker - name one other director who could make The Devil's Rejects and get a wide summer release - but has continued to frustrate. In the case of Halloween II he did more than frustrate me, he enraged me. Don't care who he is musically, I'm giving the point to Pieces. (1-0, Pieces leads.)

The Plots:
Pieces continues to live up to its tagline by being exactly what you think it is, a simple seedy slasher whose killer carries a chainsaw and cuts up naked women. There's actually a lot of time spent on the side story of the police investigation, which allows us to get Linda Day's famous scene into the film. Halloween II follows up the original remake of Halloween by giving us some incomprehensible crap about Michael's ghost stripper mother and a unicorn making him come back to kill his sister who's now smoking pot and gettin' with dudes because she's so broken up over Michael happening, all while Dr. Loomis, who spent 15 years with Michael has turned into a jackass media whore. So, Pieces gets another point. (2-0, Pieces leads.)

The Casts:
Y'know, I actually kind of like Scout Taylor-Compton as Laurie Strode. Casting her may have been the best thing Zombie did in his two Halloween films (it's just sad that he never understood what the character was supposed to be). Malcolm McDowell has always been great, and sightings of Brad Dourif, Danielle Harris, Margot Kidder, Howard Hesseman, and Bill "Dauber" Fagerbakke are all welcome.

Pieces has the Georges, Edmund Purdom being goofy, the impressively hairy and bald Paul Smith, and the over-the-top awful Ian Sera. But it doesn't have Sheri Moon Zombie, who's both awful and shouldn't belong in this movie because the subplot she's involved in is stupid, so I'm giving another point to Pieces. (3-0, Pieces leads.)

OK, The Mike...we know how much you hate Halloween II, and that you aren't going to give it any points. Why even write this?:
Really great point. The title of the blog is From Midnight, With Love, and this is most certainly (except maybe when I saw Larry Clark's Teenage Caveman) the most unloving thing I've written. But Zombie's Halloween II just pushes all the wrong buttons with me. With Zombie's Halloween, I could at least look at it and say "OK, this would be a good movie if they didn't pretend to be a Halloween movie, but since that was how they could make money with it, that's what they did. I can accept that...I don't necessarily like it, but I accept it. And I knew going into Halloween II that Zombie's version of Michael Myers was not John Carpenter's version of Michael Myers. This was not the boogeyman, this was not just a shape, this was a disturbed redneck kid that turned bad based on the world he's in. Yes, it's more real, but it's not what Halloween was.

But when Zombie turned Laurie Strode into an anti-survivor girl, and turned Loomis the crusader into Loomis the snake; all while adding a ridiculous supernatural back story that both cheapens Myers further and serves primarily as an excuse to get his hot wife who can't act into the film, I lost it. Am I being that guy who craps on details of remakes and sounds like an old man on a bench complaining about those young whippersnappers? Yes, absolutely. But Halloween freaking matters to me, and the fact that I have to distinguish it against Zombie's "reimagining" for the rest of my life makes me sick. I can not let this go unsaid, because my love of Carpenter's film and what it stood for (plus my respect for the sequel he wrote for what it was) is the driving force in my effort to point out why I feel Zombie's Halloween films are offensive.

I blacked out a little while typing that all, but I'm giving a point to Pieces here. (4-0, Pieces leads.)

So, what makes Pieces - a cinematic travesty that's best played for laughs - any better, The Mike?
Funny story: About 8 or 9 years ago, my sister got me a cheap DVD of Pieces - which I'd never heard of before - as a Christmas gift, because back then she used to always get me a random cheap horror DVD with my Christmas presents. At the time, when I was a more discriminating filmgoer, I dismissed it entirely and thought it to be one of the worst films I had in my young DVD collection. When I got to the next point where I needed to sell some DVDs to pay for Christmas presents for my family, it was one of the first DVDs to go.

But time, viewings of other flicks, and memories were - for a reason I can't explain - kind to Pieces. The more bad slashers I saw, the more I looked back thinking "Y'know, that thing was kinda fantastic for what it was!" It didn't take itself seriously, it heaped on what viewers wanted from it, and featured some insanely over the top moments that lived in my mind in infamy. It wasn't a film that deserved my disdain, because - going back to the tagline again - it was exactly what you would think it would be. So, when a remastered version came around and I thought that I should revisit it; on to the Amazon wishlist it went. When my birthday came around, you can probably guess who got it for me as a gift. Yep, my sister. Rob Zombie had one thing right - Family is Forever. So Pieces gets a point. (5-0, Pieces leads.)
This Choice is Like:
Y'know what people love? Diners. You go eat at a diner like the one pictured above, or the one in The Blob, or the one in Superman 2, and you know exactly what you're getting when you order a burger. The food isn't anything special - probably isn't even good for you at all - but it's got that down home charm and you just want to guzzle it down, even if it does seem a bit greasy and the fries are too stiff.

Y'know what people don't love? McDonald's. It sure makes its money, and I admit I'm there more than I should be, but deep down we all know it's just wrong. Doesn't stop it, as it's got name recognition, but it doesn't have any of the charm that diner has.

From what I've been typing, you can tell which flick I think is the diner and which flick I think is McDonalds. Mercifully, the first shut-out in the history of the Random Horror Throwdown is ending, and I swear that it will be a long time before I ever mention Halloween II here again. Rob Zombie, if you're reading this, please go away and leave my Blob alone.

(Note from The Mike: 858 is way too low. This is one fine greasy diner.)