Reviews

The first half hour of this flick is so intense and well-done that you can't help but feel letdown when it quickly degenerates into Z-grade, Mad Max post apocalyptic nonsense. And it just continues to get worse and worse until the rather abrupt ending.

Three astronauts orbiting Earth watch helplessly as World War III erupts. After making an emergency crash landing, one of the astronauts in rendered unconscious while another is dragged from the ship and eaten by savages. Howe, our hero, escapes and finds that Earth has become a wasteland inhabited by post apocalyptic cretins ruled over by a snot nosed rich kid named Gideon.

If the film had maintained the tension and drama of the first half hour, this movie would have been a classic. But as it stands, it's just another Mad Max wannabe. Skip it.

I've been looking forward to this film for quite some time what with all the hype surrounding it. Everyone kept calling atmospheric, and the previews surely hinted at that, so I was expecting THE PASSION OF THE Christ through the eyes of Dario Argento. Boy was I disappointed. Much like THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT from a few years back, this film made millions on hype alone.

First off, there's no real story. And I guess that's because the story has been done countless times. So we're left with Jesus's final 24 hours where he's beat and tortured repeatedly. That would be fine and dandy if the movie was oozing atmosphere. But this thing looks like a Made-for-TV film loaded with buckets of blood and gore.

Secondly, I found the film quite boring. Maybe there's only so much torture I can take before my mind begins to wander. Again, this film would have benefited from the directorial style of Dario Argento. Oh well.

So, in my opinion, no one really needs to watch this film. Anyone not familiar with the bible will learn nothing other than that Jesus had the crapola beaten out of him over and over and over again. Maybe I'm missing the point? Whatever....dull and lifeless. Skip it!!

I've been wanting to see this movie for nearly a decade, my mind awash with the creepy premise: Fashion models and their photographers trapped in an egyptian tomb with the titular creature and his zombie minions. Yummy!!

Unfortunately, a decent premise is all this film has to offer. A pair of tomb raiders open the mummy's crypt looking for gold, but their plans are thwarted when a group of models and photographers show up and decide to use the tomb as a backdrop for their pictures. This nonsense eats up most of the running time, while we wait and wait and wait for a mummy to show up and start wreaking havoc.

About midway through the mummy reanimates along with some of his zombie minions, but then they spend some more of the running time hiding in the shadows while members of the cast go skinny dipping (nothing's shown...) and head to the bazaar to smoke hookahs and shop for jewelry.

Finally we arrive at the much touted finale, where the mummy and the zombies attack a wedding party. The action picks up and there are some nifty gore shots, but it's too little too late. The mummy (probably the least menacing movie mummy of all time) is destroyed and the heroes celebrate. But as usual we're offered one final scene which leaves the scene open for a sequel...Day of the mummy? Let's hope not.

Ah yes. Crazy fat Ethel is back...and she's still hungry. But did the world really need this sequel? Don't get me wrong, there's a soft spot in my heart for the original slice of movie cheese. How could you go wrong with a premise so...well...delicious. A fat woman dispenses with anyone who gets in the way of her and a refrigerator. And the movie will forever be on our guilty pleasure list of 70's drive-in sleaze that we must go back and view every couple of years.

But along comes this sequel, shot entirely on camcorder with no music, no real edits, and no real point. Crazy fat Ethel (now minus a few pounds) is released from the mental ward into a halfway house where she begins killing anyone who gets in the way of her eating. Old habits die hard, I guess.

However, all of that only takes up about ten minutes of screen time. The rest of the running time is padded with flashback footage from the original film. So we'll get new scenes of Ethel taking a nap, the camcorder zooms in to her face, and we cut to old scenes from part one. Repeated ad nauseum. So much footage from part one is used that, if you've never seen the original, you'll see it all here. And it looks like a masterpiece compared to the new footage.

We get ridiculously long scenes of a character eating an entire candy bar, Ethel eating an entire bowl of pudding, Ethel dancing around out back with a bloody knife, etc. And since it's filmed on camcorder, there's crummy picture and sound to back it all up. Seeing this with the original footage only made me appreciate the original that much more.

So, skip this and stick with the original.

Ah yes, who could forget this little gem from the director who brought us such greats as NIGHT OF 1000 CATS and TINTORERA!! Birds are banding together into an unstoppable army to wipe out mankind. It's up to a news reporter (played by the gorgeous Michelle Johnson) and her cameraman boyfriend to stop them. But can they be stopped? Ridiculous and absurd from beginning to end and some scenes are stolen right from THE BIRDS, such as the birthday party scene. But it moves along at a clip and it's over before you really have a chance to hate it. What amazed me were the attack scenes. I wonder how they trained the birds to attack so viciously without harming the actors. As usual with a Rene Cardona, Jr. flick the plot is incoherent, the acting putrid, and the dialogue inane. But dig those attack scenes. And dig watching the beautiful Michelle Johnson, who's been absent from the big screen for awhile. Where are you, Michelle?

Everyone who gave this movie a bad review is fired from EVER reviewing a b-horror movie again. There are two kinds of horror movies...There are the ones such as THE EXORCIST and HALLOWEEN which, for whatever reason, have mass appeal. And then there're the ones like BEYOND THE DOOR 3, obscure low budget oddities which suddenly appear on video store new release walls with a no-name cast and crew and really nothing to recommend them other than a really neat cover box. They're usually made on a shoestring budget with plots recycled from other movies. But they have only one goal and that is to entertain. And BEYOND THE DOOR 3 certainly succeeds in that area. I've seen this little gem of a flick more than a dozen times and I'm thoroughly entertained each time. To hell with characterizations and plodding plot devices, this little flick wants to entertain and scare you, and it does! When you rent a movie like BEYOND THE DOOR 3 you should have some idea of what's in store for you. Especially since it's a part 3 so you're renting it having probably seen the first two installments. So you shouldn't be disappointed because it's too cheesy or flatly directed, etc. That's what fans of these types of movies want. So shame on everyone who watched this movie and was disappointed. Go watch MATLOCK with Grandma, you sissies.

The absolute best nature runs amok flick to come out of the 70's, this little gem of a flick starts out rather slowly but builds up to an incredible tarantula invasion that has yet to be equaled, and boasts one of the greatest endings to any movie I have ever seen. I actually had the chance to meet director Bud Cardos on a movie I recently worked on. Apart from being a really nice guy he also filled me in on a little secret: There's a sequel in the works!!!!! Without Shatner who, surprisingly enough, actually gave a pretty good performance in this. So take my advice and skip the kiddie-oriented ARACHNOPHOBIA and check out KINGDOM OF THE SPIDERS. You'll never look at a tarantula the same way again.

First off, let me say that I'm glad there are some intelligent moviegoers out there, people who looked deeper into this movie and saw that it was more than just another sequel. In fact, I believe this movie would have done substantially better had it lost the EXORCIST title and just been called LEGION. But, alas, it received dismal reviews upon its initial release by people who were expecting another pea soup fest. The same people who think ARMAGEDDON is a good movie. But after reading the other user comments I see that this remarkable film has quite a few fans who realized what writer/director William Peter Blatty was actually trying to do. Blatty is one of the few horror directors who actually knows how to make a scary movie. With a deliberately slow pace he draws the audience into the mystery as it is slowly unraveled, building and building up to a crescendo with eerie sound effects, creepy lighting, and some truly unsettling imagery. Hollywood needs to take note that it doesn't take blood and guts and braindead teenage characters to make a scary movie. We need to do away with all these SCREAM clones and start making some real horror movies again. Is it better than the original? It truly is. The original to me seems a little dated now, and a tad campy. Certainly not unworthy of it's status as one of the most influential horror movies of all time, but it is surpassed by this sequel. Also, for the intelligent viewers who liked this movie, be sure to check out THE CHANGELING which also stars George C. Scott.