THE STORY:
It’s a treat to see NCIS’ David McCallum, a fellow Glaswegian, in his younger years. Here he plays a straight shooting biology professor by the name of Harlan, who works as the head of his department in the same university as his ex-girlfriend Caroline, played by Sandra McCabe. With the help of his colleague Michael (George Wyner) he tries to use science to solve the town crisis of killer canines.

Just when you thought it was safe to pet your pooch! Man’s best friend becomes Southern California’s worst enemy. DOGS is looking brand new again as No. 7 from 88 Films’ VAULT series.

Admittedly my knowledge of killer/dangerous dog movies isn’t as extensive as it should be. Mostly because dogs don’t scare me. So I’m afraid I’m limited to Cujo (1983) and The Breed (2006). But don’t think I’ve forgotten those infamous mutts from movies such as Madhouse (1981), Cabin Fever (2002), a certain dog-headed clown from Part 2 of Stephen King’s IT (1990) miniseries, and more recently Green Room (2015) and Don’t Breathe (2016).

DOGS as a whole, is an entertaining ride. The children’s dog show – of all the bloody events to put on at a time like this! – is one of the most enjoyable scenes. It’s also the funniest. Sorry, but watching a load of people running screaming for their lives from animals that so many people adore and regard as their own family members is bound to make the odd person laugh. Me included! I know that’s where the horror is routed, but sometimes it just goes the other way.

The more sceptical characters make one or two poodle jokes, so the film definitely has a decent sense of humour about its own subject matter. And it isn’t hard to spot the smiles on the kids’ faces as their parents carry them to safety. They’re having a great time. And why not? As a film-maker, how else would you play it out? You don’t want to actually scare the shit out of the little troopers!

It isn’t until the movie’s final 10 minutes that it really comes into its own as a serious horror picture. Starting first with the library massacre sequence which breeds true panic and chaos; followed by the sadness of its aftermath and the morning after as the remaining survivors try to flee the town. It’s such a beautiful, sunny day overcast by the quiet of devastation and death.

LAST WORDS:
I don’t know why, but it’s hard to route for humans over dogs, even if they are trying to kill everyone. Perhaps it’s because they are pure creatures that aren’t responsible for how the environment around them conditions their behaviour. With some good laughs and a sound performance by McCallum, DOGS rounds itself off with an unexpectedly unnerving finale. ​

I'm new to the works of Dario Argento, and as a horror fan this may sound like a crazy notion, however something I have been looking to do in this new year of 2018 is widen my horizons abit with some more old school horror titles from yesteryear. The first film to cross my reviewer table actually couldn't have come at a better time as this is being released later this January and is the second film from this legendary Director.

The Cat O'Nine Tails is more of a thriller than a horror that focuses on a blind retired journalist Franco Arno  (Karl Malden - A Street Car Named Desire) and Journalist Carlo Giordani ( James  Franciscus - Beneath The Planet Of The Apes) who are trying to solve a series of murders connected to a pharmaceutical company's experimental, top-secret drug which finds them both becoming targets of the killer.

Cat O'Nine Tails is a perfect starter for anyone looking to get into Italian cinema from the 70's. Masterfully shot in a style we have seen in many slasher horror films which proceeded it, I loved the use of the close up shot of the killer's eye as he is about to strike, The killer in first person view is something that reminded me so much of the first Friday the 13th film (but I am sure has been used in many other films around that time). While it may be slow going at times, The Cat O'Nine Tails does hold the attention for the crime drama fan in me. I couldn't guess who the killer may be, the plot had me intrigued, and for the time the murder scenes quenched my Gore thirst even if they were a little over the top (The Train death anyone?). The dubbing was well put together, however I did struggle with a few of of the scenes that focus more on reading i.e newspaper articles and Milk....I didn't know what the bloody hell was in that pyramid shaped carton the killer tries to murder Giordani with. 

While the acting, at times, is a little dated overall the film holds up well still today. Franciscus and Malden are the stand out performers throughout and the mystery held me till the end. This is an interesting little film, and I personally would love to try more of Argento's work.

THE STORY:
When a group of students realise that the dreams of their friend Alex about a killer at Alcatraz are much more than just dreams, they decide to go to the island itself to look for answers.

“Clearly influenced by the NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET series” has to be one of the biggest understatements of our current century. Just the first 10 minutes alone could be a low-rent scene for scene rip-off of the first 10 minutes of the original Elm Street. Strangely enough, as the movie draws on, you’ll be grateful for all the mimicry of Slaughterhouse Rock.

In all honesty, I’ve not come across many films that actually wear the influence of Freddy’s movies so unashamedly on their sleeves. Frankly, I’d be happy to see more at this level. I’m not the biggest fan of imitation, but if there’s one thing we as horror fans can be grateful for is how the Elm Street movies have inspired horror films to become more creative with their scares, their special effects and their death scenes.

There are some pretty gruesome scenes as Alex’s dreams get worse. Unfortunately, when the dreams stop halfway through as his unlucky friends make it to Alcatraz, that’s when Slaughterhouse Rock starts to slide downhill with some lazy story-telling, poor dialogue and unnecessary conversations with spirits of the dead.

The blame mostly rests with the bizarre inclusion of Toni Basil. Yes, “Oh Mickey, you’re so fine!” that Tony Basil. Of course, this is the problem with trying to be hip with the times. Enough decades pass by and it just looks like a dumb and dated idea.

As far as the main plot goes, there isn’t an onscreen death until just over an hour into the movie. After which there’s only one intentionally funny moment and one decent death scene, which is cut short by editing.

The female roles seem a bit mixed up here. The final girl – who would typically be Alex’s girl – really doesn’t deserve the title at all. Perhaps because Alex is the final girl. That said, she has little to no screen presence. She doesn’t really do anything except tag along and run around until committing arson in the last few minutes of the movie. Carolyn , Alex’s teacher, is due all the credit, being the strongest and most engaging female role, but the poor bitch gets roasted.

LAST WORDS:
Imitation can be the sincerest form of flattery. It certainly can be… But in this case, it just saves a bad movie from being an absolutely fucking terrible movie.

THE STORY:
…Or Sweet 16 – as IMDb & Legacy of Blood dub it – tells the tale of a murderer who has the habit of offing every male that tries to lay his hands on young Melissa, the new city girl in town. Meanwhile, racial tensions rise in the hunt for the killer. No. 33 in 88 Films’ Slasher Classics Collection.

One of the scariest things about this movie is Melissa’s theme song, imaginatively titled ‘Melissa’s Theme’. The lyrics are both simply horrid and horridly simple. The tune as a whole belongs in the 70s. I don’t think I’ve cringed like this since ‘I Don’t Need Words’ from Madman (1981). By all means, enjoy it when it pops up with the Main Menu.

Pickiness aside, what I found best about Sweet Sixteen is what makes it different from most slasher movies of its time. The adults have a stronger presence with better performances and more screen-time than the teenagers. The story is underscored with social unrest and a racial divide spurred on by the more ignorant population of the townsfolk.

Some have the opinion that Sweet Sixteen is lacking in gore. This is mostly true where the second half is concerned aside from the odd horrific discovery. However, within the first 20 minutes of viewing this little movie I witness the fast and effectively nasty edit of the first murder sequence, which turns out to be more violent and bloody than all the murders in The House on Sorority Row (1983) put together. And that movie featured the odd decapitation and one or two impalements! Don’t get me wrong. We’re hardly dealing with Intruder (1989) or The Burning (1981) here. Not by a long shot!

If anything, I would’ve preferred that Melissa had more screen-time, whilst showing a much darker side. Wanting to drink beer and smoke pot are slasher movie survival No No’s, but they hardly say, ‘killer’. A better actress for the role wouldn’t be too unwelcome either.

LAST WORDS:
A pot with as many strong ingredients as this can, and often does lead to disaster. But I feel that the story-telling and film-making were competent enough to avoid this altogether. The right amount of social conscience rescues the results from being spoiled by the silliness that a slasher plot can descend into.

EXTRAS:
Jim Harper breaks the movie down for us in his Birthday Bloodshed interview, from the acting to the filmmaking to Sweet Sixteen’s inspiration on later, more successful slashers. There is also a review of this movie in his book Legacy of Blood, which happens to be my slasher movie bible. And if you don’t have a copy of Harper’s Comprehensive Guide to Slasher Movies, then I suggest you get one a.s.a.p.!