Wednesday, February 8, 2017

My Grandpa Is a Vampire (1992)

aka Grampire, aka Monnrise

How bad is it? Horror comedy for teens that isn't horror, comedy or for teens.
Should you see it? Sadly, no.


Al Smith, who played "Grampa," a vampire, on the "Munsters" plays a Grampa, a vampire, in this film, though it's not exactly the same character. Over 80 years-old when this was filmed, Lewis had been playing the same type of character in various formats - such as horror movie host - for decades. A boy goes home from the U.S. to New Zealand, only to have his grandfather die. Then the boy and his friend see Grampa seemingly alive again and find out that he's a vampire, but a good vampire. The film has endless corny jokes, none of which really work. The film has a decent look (the director and cinematographer are professional), with a blue tint being used for day-for-night shots, but the story drags and the supposed heartwarming story just doesn't add up to anything.

Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Munchies (1987)

How bad is it? Minor knock-off of Gremlins with problems defining its audience.
Should you see it? Not really.

Roger Corman produced this late knock-off of "Gremlins," coming after Critters, Ghoulies and Hobgoblins (some of which I reviewed earlier) and starring Harvey Korman. A paleontologist wishing to prove that aliens visited Earth actually finds one in an Incan (looks more Mayan) temple. If it gets cut up, it becomes more aliens. The one variation in this from others of its type is that the aliens seem to become bad in imitation of those around them; unfortunately, that means the film is full of schmucks. The munchies are not only mischievous and violent, but spend a lot of time looking up skirts - in fact, that's pictured on the DVD box. The two in-name-only sequels I've already reviewed.

Monday, February 6, 2017

Munchie Strikes Back (1994)

How bad is it? Dreadful and lame.
Should you see it? Only if you liked Munchie and aren't disappointed by sophomore slumps.


The alien Munchie is indeed back in this sequel, but is now voiced by Howard Hesseman, rather than Dom DeLuise. Loni Anderson returns, as do Angus Scrimm, Andrew Stevens and the annoying lead kid actor and the cast now includes Lesley-Anne Down and John Byner. The jokes still aren't aimed at kids, but there are fewer cleavage shots and more jokes about Reaganomics, Donald Trump and the Hillside Strangler. There's a scene in heaven with Elvis, Marilyn Monroe and Col. Sanders. There's footage borrowed from "Death Race 2000" with this film's characters just layered on. The plot still has an alien trying to redeem himself by helping a child whose father died and whose mom loses her job just as she has a mortgage balloon payment (what kid film has balloon payments?!) The end credits suggest a further sequel, Munchie Hangs Ten, which was never made.

Saturday, February 4, 2017

Munchie (1992)

How bad is it? Bad kids film that goes nowhere and then adds adult matter.
Should you see it? I can't believe I'm saying this, but yes - for the cast.


I like Jim Wynorski's early jokey trash films and this fits into that group. Supposedly a sequel to "Munchies," this abandons everything from that film to have a single small monster help a child with his problems, be it bullies or his mom dating someone he doesn't like. The puppet's voiced by Dom DeLuise, the mom is Loni Anderson and there are roles for Arte Johnson, Jennifer Love Hewitt (billed as Love Hewitt), Monique Gabrielle, Fred Olen Ray, George Buck Flower, Angus Scrimm and Brinke Stevens. There's a lot of cleavage shown for a kid film and a lot of double entendres, making it a questionable kid film, but a very typical Wynorski film. The story doesn't add up to much and the special effects are... well, there's a flying pizza. This had a sequel, which I'll also review.

Friday, February 3, 2017

Moving Target (1988)

How bad is it? Very shoddy and confusing, but technically okay.
Should you see it? Only if you're a Linda Blair fan or Ernest Borgnine completist.


This is NOT the Justin Bateman TV film of the same name and same year, but an obscure VHS-only film with Ernest Borgnine, Linda Blair and Stuart Whitman. Motorcyclist is killing people for a key. A blonde girl is topless for no reason throughout the film. There's Borgnine as a detective and a reporter, a tennis pro and a doctor and none of them are Linda Blair, whose role I never really figured out. There's some odd line deliveries, perhaps due to the Italian director, some typically bad 1980's fashions and a plot that's impossible to follow or care about.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

The Might Gorga (1966)

How bad is it? It's one of the worst giant gorilla films, which is a big field.
Should you see it? Sure.


Scott Brady and Anthony Eisley are the biggest names in this extremely poor King Kong wannabe film. There's an extremely long expedition to a plateau with plenty of stock footage and a witch doctor that's embarrassing. There's a bad actress love interest. There's a T-Rex that's sort of a hand puppet just shook in front of the camera. And then there's the monster, seen only from the waist up (I hope this was an attempt to make him look bigger, but I think they only had half a costume) and with mismatched eyes and non-moving mouth.

Wednesday, February 1, 2017

The Man With Two Heads (1972)

aka Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Blood

How bad is it? The worst Jekyll and Hyde film.
Should you see it? No.


I think most people find this looking for either "The Man with Two Brains" or "The Thing with Two Heads." It's yet another Andy Milligan piece of shit. This one was filmed while he was in England and has a somewhat coherent plot, as it follows the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, though in this film he's called Mr. Daniel Blood. R.L. Stevenson's name is misspelled in the credits. This could have been a good film in capable hands, as it explores the sadistic and misogynistic Jack the Ripper-esque side of the character's personality (something Milligan explores in every film). Blood kills his assistant, a prostitute and his fiancee', all with Milligan's unsteady camera, poor montage and cheap makeup. It surprisingly does well in keeping with the time frame of the story, which Milligan usually skip. So, it's one of the most competent of Milligan's film, but also one of the duller ones.