Trash or Terror Tuesday: Grave Secrets: The Legacy of Hilltop Drive (1992)

Poster for Grave Secrets: The Legacy of Hilltop Drive (1992) Grave Secrets: The Legacy of Hilltop Drive (1992) by #JohnPatterson

w/ #PattyDuke #DavidSoul #FrancesBay

Residents of new homes experience strange phenomena and find out that their houses are built on a former cemetery.

Based on a #TrueStory !

#Horror
#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

Grave Secrets: The Legacy of Hilltop Drive (1992) is a made-for-TV horror film – but not from the golden era of the ’70s and early ’80s. As one might expect, it’s not as good as many of those older films, but it’s not as bad as some of the junk that’s been pumped out more recently, either.  It was probably very influenced by Poltergeist (1982), and – likewise – it’s nowhere near as good as that, but…

I’m going to keep this short. Grave Secrets: The Legacy of Hilltop Drive (1992) is a mild Terror. Keep your expectations low and you might find it to be an acceptable way to pass and hour and half on some lonely afternoon. But if you’re looking for a top notch ghost story, stick with Poltergeist (1982), or The Changeling (1980).

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: Suburban Nightmare (2004)

Poster for Suburban Nightmare (2004)Suburban Nightmare (2004) by #JonKeeyes
story by #DebbieRochon

w/ #BrandyLittle #TrentHaaga

A married couple take great pleasure in torturing and murdering neighbors in their basement.

“Charles and Deborah would love to HAVE YOU for dinner!”

#Horror
#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

Suburban Nightmare (2004) is an ultra-low budget SOV indie movie. It features good performances (especially from the two leads) and an interesting script which feels like it could have been a play. Unfortunately, it never reaches the heights of excitement that would make for a really good horror film – or a very funny dark comedy. It reminded me a bit of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (circling back to the play comparison again)  – but nowhere near as compelling or effective. 

So what’s the verdict?

Suburban Nightmare (2004) is Trash. Not quite trashy enough to be good Trash. But somewhat interesting for those who are interested in ultra-low-budget filmmaking. There were a few points where the film seemed to be teasing us with the promise of trashy good times, but they never quite happened. And as for Terror… I don’t think so…

Having accepted two dinner invitations from these suburban psychopaths, I think I will be answering the next one with a polite “no”.

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: Staunton Hill (2009)

DVD cover for Staunton Hill (2009)Staunton Hill (2009) by #GeorgeCRomero AKA #CameronRomero

w/#KathyLamkin #CristenCoppen

In 1969 the winds of a change are blowing… But on a farm in the hills of Virginia, a storm of evil has been brewing for years.

“In God’s Name They Prey”

#Horror
#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

Staunton Hill (2009) is another movie made by the son (or daughter) of a famous movie director. There have been a few of those in recent years (Brandon Cronenberg, Jason Reitman, Panos Cosmatos, etc.).

I seem to recall Staunton Hill getting some positive buzz when it first came out, and I bought a copy on DVD. I presume that I enjoyed it well enough to keep it in my library, because there it’s sat for the past 12 years (or so). I didn’t remember too much about it, other than the fact that it surprised me by being a relatively straight forward slasher film. George A. Romero never made one of those, so good for Cameron to not be totally following in his father’s footsteps.

I am a fan of both George A. Romero and slasher films, so Staunton Hill seems like it should be a winning combination. I was surprised, however, to see that it fares horribly on the IMDb, and in many other online reviews. People hate this movie. Since I couldn’t remember it well enough to know how correct they are, I decided that it was time to put it to the #TrashOrTerrorTuesday test.

The most surprising thing (once again) about Staunton Hill is that it’s not really much like a George A. Romero film. It’s more like a Tobe Hooper film; The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) to be exact. I love The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but this is not necessarily a good thing. There have been so many ripoffs and lame attempts to copy The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, that when I recognize that this is what a movie is doing, I tend to roll my eyes and say “not another one of these.” I wrote about a few of these on other #TrashOrTerrorTuesdays not too long ago…

Staunton Hill is set in 1969, but it’s never really convincing in that. I found myself forgetting and thinking that it was sometime in the 1990s. Not sure what the point of that was anyway, except to be able to make reference to Night Of The Living Dead (1968) as if it was a recent movie.

There are some good actors in it, most of them not recognizable. There’s some decent gore. The story flatlines pretty quickly after the characters find themselves stranded on an isolated farm. Not sure why they continue to hang around there, when the owners are pretty darn creepy and not to be trusted. Why don’t they just walk to the main highway (which we’ve been told is not that far away). But then the movie would end without a bunch of dumb-asses getting killed, wouldn’t it?

So what’s the verdict?

Staunton Hill (2009) is mostly Trash, with a small side of mild Terror. Yes, there are some effective moments of horror and suspense. But, as many critics point out, it takes a long time to get to them. And the story is not all that compelling or believable. It’s even convoluted and confusing at times – which is quite a feat for something that is basically really straight-forward. It’s not as bad as many people seem to say. It’s really just okay. Worth a watch if you’re curious to see what George A. Romero’s son is like as a filmmaker. But, as always, you’re much better off watching The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) – or anything by George A. Romero.

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: Bloody Mary (2006)

Poster for Bloody Mary (2006)Bloody Mary (2006) by #RichardValentine

w/#KimTyler #MattBorlenghi #CoryMonteith

A group of psychiatric nurses invoke the spirit of #BloodyMary and the slaughter begins.

“To Release The Greatest Evil On Earth All You Have To Do Is Say Her Name.”

#Horror

#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is#Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

Bloody Mary (2006) is about a group of psychiatric nurses – but after watching the opening sequence you would probably be utterly convinced (as I was) that they are a group of high school girls, or maybe sorority sisters. They seem to be playing a fairly typical hazing prank on one of their friends. “Hey, take off all of your clothes and go down into this dark sub-basement alone and say “I believe in Bloody Mary” three times into a mirror.  Some fraternity asshole – wait a minute, he’s another employee of the psychiatric hospital (but we don’t know this yet)… this jerk is supposed to be waiting down in the hole to give the naked girl a good scare. However…

SPOILER ALERT (although this is the first five minutes of the movie). He’s late and some honest to goodness spirit or monster shows up and kills the poor girl (I mean, full grown psychiatric nurse).

Her sorority sisters (I mean professional nurses who work in a hospital) simply close up the hatch and don’t tell anyone what happened. In fact they lie about it. Because that’s what full grown, medical professionals do, right?

Did I mention that they are all young and hot? This may be part of what confused me. Having spent a fair bit of time on a psychiatric ward of a hospital (as a visitor), I can tell you that not all of the nurses who work there are young… or hot.. or women. And during the hundreds of hours that I was there, not one of them was playing pranks on their co-workers – or covering up a mysterious death in the basement. At least not that I ever saw…

But the nurses in Bloody Mary (2006), it turns out, are part of some kind of Bloody Mary worshipping cult. “We’re so close,” their leader says, as she warns them not to fuck things up by telling the truth or anything. Close to what, I have no idea. The movie never explains what exactly these idiots are hoping to gain from their relationship with the deadly spirit. Is it power of some sort? Money? Fame? I don’t know – and I predict that you won’t either if you watch this film.

I could go on and on about all of things that don’t make sense in this movie. Put simply, the script is bad. The movie contains some okay moments of horror action, a little but of gore, and a surprising amount of nudity. You could almost be fooled into thinking that you were having a good time if it wasn’t for the annoying STORY – or should  I say, lack of story? It’s hard to know.

So what’s the verdict?

Bloody Mary (2006) is Trash. It does have a decent amount of sleaze which almost elevates it to the level of fun, trashy Trash – but it doesn’t quite get there. You will have a much better time watching a movie like The Vineyard (1989), which is a downright Trashterpiece. I highly recommend it.

If you are really curious about Bloody Mary (2006), go ahead and give it a shot. You may find a few moments of entertainment in there. But I, having seen in twice (?!) in my life, will be steering clear from now on. 

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: Memory (2006)

Poster for Memory (2006)Memory (2006) by #BennettDavlin

w/ #BillyZane #TriciaHelfer #DennisHopper #AnnMargret

A doctor is exposed to a hallucinogenic drug and ends up haunted by strange memories & visions of a series of gruesome murders.

“Sometimes memories can kill”

#Horror
#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

I had no memory of Memory (2006) when I pulled it down from my shelf last Tuesday. And so, I thought, what better movie to put to the #TrashOrTerrorTuesday test?

Memory (2006) is a slickly made movie with a very strong cast. It looks great, and for a while it seems to work pretty well. There are a lot of hard to believe plot turns, however, and by the end I found myself shaking my head and saying “Well, I’m not buying that!”

It’s written and directed by , and based on his own novel. Perhaps the book is better – or at least clearer – but that’s rather beside the point. It’s an interesting idea (involving genetically stored memories), but it doesn’t really play out in a satisfying or believable way.

So what’s the verdict?

Memory (2006) is Trash. And it’s not trashy enough to be fun Trash. To be fair, t’s not completely horrible – and it will help to pass the time if you’ve got nothing better to watch. It just doesn’t add up to much in the end. It seems like it should be better, based on the cast and the first 20 to 30 minutes or so. But gradually it just disappears down a dark drain of contrivances that manage to suck the life out of it. 

It’s only been a week, but already I can feel the memory of  Memory fading…

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: The Caretaker (2012)

Dvd cover for The Caretaker (2012)The Caretaker (2012) by #TomConyers
w/ #AnnaBurgess #ClintDowdell #LeeMason

As a wave of vampirism sweeps the world, a small but discordant group make a deal with a vampire and holes up in a country mansion in Victoria, Australia.
#Horror #Vampires

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday
…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror – or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection…

The Caretaker (2012) is a low budget indie movie from Down Under. It has a few fresh ideas about vampires, and their relationship to humans. It also borrows a few ideas from older, better movies. The characters are, for the most part, not particularly likeable – but they’re not the kind of raging assholes that one finds in many modern horror films. You feel sympathy for some of them. And one or two manage to go on a personal journey that earns them more sympathy by the end. 

So what’s the verdict?

The Caretaker is a mild Terror. It has moments of genuine suspense, and some fairly creepy scenes. It lacks something that would make it a truly great movie, but it’s an acceptable time passer. it’s not particularly Trashy. It doesn’t contain much nudity, sex, or gore. It takes itself a little bit too seriously for that, and as a consequence, is never really much fun.

It’s a bit like watching a play at a respectable theatre. Lot’s of dialogue in a fairly claustrophobic setting. Good performances, but nothing too exciting ever happens. This one, however, happens to be about vampires  – which makes it more interesting than many of the mediocre plays I’ve sat through in the past 20 years (before the pandemic finished off the art form that was already pretty much in its death throes). 

Having watched The Caretaker (2012) twice in the past 10 years or so, I’m doubtful that I will ever feel pumped about doing it again. It’s not quite good enough for that. But those with an appreciation for ultra low budget horror could find it worth their while to check it out at least once.

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: Monster Makers (2003)

Dvd cover for Monster Makers (2003)Monster Makers (2003) by #DavidSCassSr.

w/#LindaBlair #AdamBaldwin #GeorgeKennedy

A boy, his girl friend, and a fictional movie hero try to round up three celluloid creatures that escaped from reels of film and into the world.

“They’re Off The Screen, They’re On The Loose, And They’re Coming Your Way.”

#Horror #SciFi #Fantasy

#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

Monster Makers (2003) is a Hallmark movie. As such, it’s pretty slickly made and has a decent cast. I picked up a copy (years back) because I’m a huge fan of Linda Blair. I recall thinking it was pretty cute back then, but I somehow have never had the urge to watch it again.

So, I decided to put it to the #TrashOrTerrorTuesday test.

Monster Makers (2003) is neither Trash nor Terror. It’s not even remotely scary. There’s not really any suspense. It’s basically just a family friendly silly movie. It plays for laughs more than anything, and it even gets a few here and there. And I’ve certainly seen much worse movies. But I can’t call it even a mild Terror.

It also lacks any sort of Trash components that might make entertaining in a different way. It’s a Hallmark movie, so it’s very tame. No sleaze.  No violence. No gore. I don’t think a single person gets killed.

It’s not a terrible movie, but it’s not the kind of monster movie spoof that will excite many hardcore horror fans. I suppose it’s kind of going for The Monster Squad (1987) meets The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985). But it not as good as either of those films. And The Monster Squad is far edgier and more satisfying for monster fans. Even Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948) has more scares in it than this movie.

So what’s the verdict?

Monster Makers (2003) is only for Linda Blair completists. Or Adam Baldwin completists. Or maybe hardcore Hallmark horror fans (if there is such a thing). I don’t think that I will need to see it a third time in my life. Twice was more than enough.

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: Unrest (2006)

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

Cover art for Unrest (2006)Unrest (2006) by #JasonToddIpson

W/ #CorriEnglish #MarisaPetroro #BenLivingston

A young pathology med student suspects that the spirit of a dead cadaver in the hospital morgue where she works is killing off all those who handle or desecrate the body.

Don’t Scream. You’ll Wake the Dead.

#Horror #Thriller

#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

I guess it’s getting to be 15 plus years since the After Dark HorrorFest appeared on video store shelves with their 8 Films To Die For series. I saw most of the films back then. Some I rented, but others I purchased (when I found them for a reasonable price). I found most of them to be at least worth a watch. Some I found downright good, and put them into my permanent collection.

A while back I took a second look at one of those films that made the cut 15 years ago – a film called Dark Ride (2006) – and I found it to be somewhat closer to Trash than Terror after all these years. This got me to thinking that maybe I should take a look at some of the other films in the After Dark HorrorFest to see if they are also aging poorly (in my opinion). With that in mind, last Tuesday I took a look at Unrest (2006).

The good news is that I rather enjoyed this one. I found it to be legitimately scary and suspenseful at times. And it had characters that I actually cared about.

No, it isn’t a perfect film. It’s fairly claustrophobic in that it mostly takes place in the hospital morgue where pathology students are learning to dissect corpses. There are a few other settings in the hospital, but I don’t think we ever leave the building (or only very briefly if we do). So it takes place in a very small world. It mostly gets away with it, but I couldn’t help but feel that it was missing something that would have made it a great movie.

Still, it kept me entertained for 90 minutes, and that’s all it really needed to do.

So what’s the verdict?

Unrest (2006) is a mild to moderate Terror. Don’t expect The Exorcist (1973) or Rosemary’s Baby (1968), but as far as low budget supernatural horror films go, this one is not bad at all. Definitely worth a look, in my opinion. And I will be putting it back on shelf, because I can imagine watching it again someday. 

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: Satan’s Playground (2006)

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

DVD cover for Satan's Playground (2006)Satan’s Playground (2006) by #DanteTomaselli

w/ #FelissaRose #DannyLopes #EllenSandweiss #EdwinNeal

A family gets lost in the Pine Barrens and becomes the prey of the Jersey Devil. Not to mention some crazy backwoods family with a creepy door knocker…

“Enter If You Dare”

#Horror
#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

Satan’s Playground (2006) is one of those curious movies that I could remember watching some years back – and I could remember a fair bit of detail about it – but I simply never felt like watching again. So why had a kept it in my collection? I must have, at the time, felt like I would want to watch it again in the future. But even since starting this #TrashOrTerrorTuesday thing, I keep looking at it and thinking “not this week.” 

So, I guess that’s reason enough to put it to the #TrashOrTerrorTuesday test.

The first thing that a person might notice about Satan’s Playground is that it’s got an interesting cast. It stars Felissa Rose, who rose to fame as Angela in Sleepaway Camp (1983). She only appeared in a handful of things over the next 20 years, but starting in 2003 she’s amassed almost 150 credits in ultra low budget horror films. 

Ellen Sandweiss plays Felissa’s sister in Satan’s Playground. Her name is not as well known, but she played Cheryl in The Evil Dead (1981). Satan’s Playground was apparently her first movie appearance after that. 

Edwin Neal, who plays a member of a crazy backwoods family in Satan’s Playground, is best known for playing a member of a crazy backwoods family in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974). He’s also in another one of my favourites, Future-Kill (1985) – not to mention over 70 other movies, TV shows, and video games.

It becomes clear when watching Satan’s Playground, that writer/director Dante Tomaselli is hugely influenced by both The Evil Dead and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. There are stylistic flourishes that seem to evoke Sam Raimi, like a POV camera racing through the woods and a loud, rhythmic banging sound as the characters approach a decrepit looking house in the woods. 

The crazy backwoods family terrorizing (and killing) people seems like a definite nod to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but like I said in one of my recent #TrashOrTerrorTuesday posts, there are so many ripoffs of that movie out there that it’s almost pointless to mention it. In this case, however, the casting of Edwin Neal seems to make it particularly obvious.

Perhaps the weirdest thing about Satan’s Playground is that if feels like two different ideas fused together. On the one hand, it’s a monster movie about The Jersey Devil attacking people in the woods. This is actually the more underdeveloped side, as we don’t spend a lot of time on it – but it is introduced first. The second idea is, of course, the victims running afoul of the crazy backwoods family in the woods. There is also some nonsense about Satan worshipping cult members in robes, but we only get a few glimpses of them. It may be that they are worshipping The Jersey Devil, in fact. 

So what’s the verdict?

Satan’s Playground is Trash – with a dash of mild Terror on the side. It does actually feature some good cinematography and some creepy atmosphere. There are a few decent moments of horror and gore. However, like many other movies, the problem is the script. Characters make bone-headed decisions, and very little that happens in the movie makes sense. For example…

A family’s car gets stuck on a deserted country road. The father says that he will go and get help. He wanders off into the woods (rather than following the road) in broad daylight. The rest of his family waits in the car until it is pitch dark. I’m guessing that it must be hours later, and the father has not returned. So, his wife decides to go looking for him (or for help), and she wanders into the same woods. Next we see the father arrive at the decrepit house in the woods. Minutes later, the wife arrives at the same house. Huh? How did she manage to catch up with him? Or, how did it take him so long to get there?

This could have been fixed in editing by showing the father arrive at the house first, then cutting to the car hours later. We would just assume that much time has passed. By showing him arrive at the house, and then immediately showing the wife arriving at the house, we are convinced that very little time has passed (although the filmmakers might want us to think otherwise, I’m not sure).

There are many other WTF moments in Satan’s Playground. And even though it does have some decent qualities, I don’t think I need to watch it more than twice in this lifetime. Much like other movies I’ve put to the #TrashOrTerrorTuesday test, I’d rather watch the films that influenced it, than this one. 

Trash Or Terror Tuesday: FleshEater (1988)

It’s time for #TrashOrTerrorTuesday

…when I examine a film that’s been languishing in my personal library to determine if it is #Trash or #Terror

– or more importantly, if it deserves to stay in my collection.

And so, out from the dusty shelves of #VHS tapes & DVDs comes…

DVD cover for FleshEater (1988)FleshEater (1988) by #SWilliamHinzman AKA #BillHinzman

College students on an overnight hayride (is that a thing?) come across a group of man-eating zombies and must fight for their lives while trying to escape.

“He lived, he died, he’s back, and he’s hungry!”

#Horror #Zombie
#NightOfTheLivingDead offshoot (or should I say ripoff?)
#TrashOrTerrorTuesday

For those who don’t know, Bill Hinzman was the first zombie seen in the very first modern zombie movie  – George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead (1968). He’s the one who attacks Barbara and Johnny in the graveyard at the very beginning of the film. Hinzman worked with Romero on many of his earliest films, including industrial films and the recently rediscovered The Amusement Park (1975). Hinzman usually worked as a cinematographer, photographer, grip, and other behind the scenes jobs. But he also acted in a number of different films, usually in tiny roles such as “Drunk Guy in Bar” or “Mustachioed Archer in Tree”.

Apparently, Hintzman went to a science fiction convention sometime in the 1980s to visit a couple of friends who were appearing there. As he walked through the crowded room he discovered that people were recognizing him from his famous Night of the Living Dead appearance. They were excited to meet him, and perhaps even wanted his autograph. This made Hinzman think “Hmmm, maybe I should do something about this…”

So, Hinzman decided to more or less reprise his role as a zombie in a new movie called FleshEater (1988). He looks pretty much the same as he did in Night of the Living Dead, but a bit older. Oddly enough, he always seemed older than he really must have been in Night of the Living Dead  – perhaps in an attempt to be a more credible dead guy. In FleshEater he is finally the right age for the part.

FleshEater (1988) is clearly an offshoot (or should I say ripoff) of Night of the Living Dead. There are scenes and moments that are virtually remakes of the original film. Normally this would be a major turnoff, but because it’s Bill Hinzman doing it, he kind of gets a pass.

The acting is pretty amateurish in FleshEater, and most of the performers never did anything before or since. Vincent D. Survinski seems to reprise his role as Vince, a Posse Gunman from the original Night of the Living Dead. A few others had appeared in previous Romero, Hinzman, or John A. Russo films.

The script is pretty bad, and lacks a clear story or any kind of character development. In fact, there aren’t really any main characters, as the films drifts from one unlikely scenario to the next. A couple of the characters recur throughout the film, but we don’t really focus on them.

What FleshEater does have going for it is some pretty fun and imaginative low budget gore effects – and some surprisingly over-the-top sleaze, including a full frontal shower scene that leads to a fully naked zombie. This could be a throwback to the naked zombie in Night of the Living Dead, although that was more tasteful and implied. One can’t help but wonder if it was an attempt to recreate the magic of Linnea Quigley’s turn as Trash in The Return of the Living Dead (1985), which had made a major splash just a couple of years before Hinzman started making FleshEater

So what’s the verdict?

FleshEater (1988) is Trash – but it’s the fun kind of Trash. It’s no The Return of the Living Dead, which is a masterpiece of campy comedy and a clever satire of zombie movies. Hinzman’s style seems a tad closer to Al Adamson than George Romero or Dan O’Bannon – but those who know me, know that I love Al Adamson. 

Put another way. I can’t call FleshEater Terror, because I can’t imagine anyone ever being the least bit scared by it. It generates more laughter than suspense – and probably only for those with a taste for the trashier side of cinema. Viewers looking for a serious descendent of Night of the Living Dead will undoubtedly be disappointed. Those looking a slick and hilarious good time like The Return of the Living Dead will probably also be disappointed. Those, however, who can appreciate flawed oddities like Al Adamson’s The Fiend with the Electronic Brain (1967) or Ted V. Mikels’ The Astro-Zombies (1968), might find some undiscovered treasure in Bill Hinzman’s film. I, for one, was completely won over by the end (the first 20 minutes were a bit touch and go, however).

Incidentally, the Shriek Show DVD that I have includes some nice extras, which somehow seems to elevate to entire experience. Needless to say, I will be keeping FleshEater (1988) in my permanent collection.