Digging Up The Dirt with KillDozer and Michael Ballif (The Witching Season, They Live Inside Us)

From time to time we all get lost in the "streaming maze" where every title just starts to melt together in a never ending loop of "what should I watch?!". One night in early October I was trapped in such a maze until one title complete with amazing poster art work stuck out and screamed WATCH ME!!!! I am  happy to say that I did. That title The Witching Season on Amazon Prime. A horror anthology show that was so fun and made with so much love that I had to dig up the dirt on how it came to be. 

KillDozer: What inspired you to bring The Witching Season to life? 

Michael Ballif: It really spawned from my love of anthology shows like Are You Afraid of the Dark? and Goosebumps. Those were my first real introduction to the horror genre when I was a kid and they always stuck with me. I loved the idea of making my own version of something in a similar realm, though targeted more towards adults who grew up with those shows. I also felt like creating a series would be a great opportunity to work with new people. I've been lucky to have made some lasting relationships from it.

KD: The Witching Season is obviously a labor of love. What did it take to get funding and bring it to the screen?

Michael: What little we had to work with was all self-financed, but it was practically a zero budget production. Most everyone who worked on the project did so for the experience, I think. And although the budget was small, we wanted to make sure we didn't cut any corners and made this thing look as good as it possibly could. The series' existence is a testament to the passion and love everyone involved dedicated to make it happen. 

KD: Did you have all the episodes written before you started production? Was this always meant to be a series?

Michael: It was always intended to be a series but I only had the first episode written and ready to go initially. I knew I wanted it to be a variety show of horror, sprawling various sub-genres from one episode to another. I felt like a slasher film would be a good way to start things off, because traditionally they are somewhat straight forward in terms of story and suspense. Of course, "Killer on the Loose" has its own unique Witching Season twist, which we tried to create for every episode. It ended up being a great template to set the tone of what future episodes should look and feel like. 

KD: Was it an obvious choice to place the series during Halloween or did you ever question how you would set the stage for The Witching Season?

Michael: It was the other half the equation, really. When I decided on doing an anthology I knew there needed to be something unique about it. I fell in love with the idea of capturing stories that happen during the "Witching Season", similar to how Tales From The Darkside would tell stories about the darker side of life. I am also fascinated by the Halloween season and (attempting) to capture the aesthetic that comes along with it. 

KD: I've seen the series described as "fueled by nostalgia", do you think this is a fair description? 

Michael: It's definitely intended to be a bit of a "throwback" style series. Something you might have found on TV in the 80's or 90's. Of course that's all the rage now with shows like Stranger Things, but at the time we started making TWS it felt pretty unique. Not that I'm complaining; I love Stranger Things, and I think it's cool that more and more stuff like this is getting made. 

KD: How did you go about choosing writers for the series? Was there anyone you reached out to that was unable to work on The Witching Season?

Michael: Originally my plan was to write and direct every episode. But as post production on the pilot began taking much longer than I had anticipated, I asked James Morris (who plays the "masked killer" character in the first episode) if he would be interested in writing the script for episode two. That way he could be writing while I was finishing up the edit. He took a short story I had written about a killer rabbit and adapted it into a screenplay. When I read the script I genuinely loved it but was so clearly in James' voice that I felt like it made the most sense for him to direct it himself. Fortunately he agreed and ended up writing the screenplay for and directing episodes three and five after that, and I took on the rest. 

KD: Do you have any personal favorites amongst the episodes?

Michael: I ended up doing the cinematography for the entire series, but "Princess" was the first episode that I shot and didn't direct myself. It was also the first project of this scale that I had ever worked on in this way, and I think for that reason it stands out the most. As filmmakers, we tend to get so close to the things we make that we can't really see them the way an audience does anymore. It's the one episode I can look at the most objectively, so I enjoy watching it. Plus I think it came together really well. James and the cast did an excellent job. 

KD: What is casting like on an independent project like this? 

Michael: We shot in our home state of Utah and utilized a number of local Facebook groups to set up auditions. That was one of the best ways to find new people. But we also worked with actors who we had either connected with or worked with in the past. We even had actors reach out to us because they heard about the project and wanted to be a part of what we were doing. There are a lot of talented people in the area that we've been fortunate enough to work with.

KD: As far as special effects go, did you know what you wanted to go with in terms of digital vs. practical? Were you held back by your budget or does a small budget inspire creativity? 

Michael: I think you're absolutely right about that. I find that having a smaller box to work within forces you to be more creative. I tend to think that if you can do an effect practically, in camera, that's usually the best way to go. But sometimes pairing a practical effect with some digital enhancement can yield some fantastic results too. The best example of this is in "Not Alone" where the alien creature appears in the corner of the room. For that effect we simply had our actor wearing a pure black spandex suite. He also wore long paper fingers. You know the kind you'd fold up in elementary school? Like that. But we spray painted them black. The effect of the creature only worked when I went into After Effects and darkened the corner of the room so you could barely see what it was in the corner. If you were to look at the raw footage you would laugh at how ridiculous it looked. 

KD: Has the series opened up the door for future projects? 

Michael: It definitely has. It allowed us to build up a small following of friends, fans, and family who ultimately helped us finance our first low budget feature film, which is in production right now. Just about everyone involved in The Witching Season is creatively involved in the making of the film in some way.

KD: What has been your experience with genre fans watching the show? Have you ever screened anything from The Witching Season in front of a theatre crowd?

Michael: From what I've seen, it seems like most die-hard horror fans understand what we were trying to do with it. It's been really cool to see people react to a project that felt so weirdly personal to me. I honestly didn't know if people would be into it or not, especially the Halloween element. But people seem to enjoy it. 

We submitted every episode to a number of different film festivals around the world and have been fortunate enough to attend a few of those screenings. One of the most notable was the Utah Film Festival in 2018 where "They Live Inside Us" screened for a packed crowd. It was awarded "Best Utah Made Film" at the festival, going up against even some big budget feature films. That was a big moment for me. 

KD:  How were you able to get The Witching Season on Amazon? Are you happy with that decision?

Michael: Amazon launched their Video Direct feature a while back, which allows independent filmmakers to release content to the site directly. It's a pretty amazing resource to have. I compare it to a filmmaker in the 90's having the ability to walk into a video store and place their film on the shelf to be rented to the public. It's pretty unheard of and offers the ability to tap into a huge marketplace filmmakers otherwise would need to jump through many, many hoops to get into. It's been great and has really helped us get the series seen by as many eyeballs as possible. 

KD: What can fans expect next? Where can we go to follow your work and stay up to date?

Michael: I'm wrapping up production on my first feature-film right now, which is called They Live Inside Us. It is an adaptation of the fourth episode of The Witching Season taking the same concept of the short -- about a writer who goes to a notoriously haunted house to find inspiration for his next project -- but expands upon many of the ideas. It takes everything I love about horror and Halloween and compiles it into a movie that I think genre fans are going to love. I am hoping for the film to be released at some point towards the end of the year. I am also planning to do a second season of TWS at some point in the near future, once this feature is complete.

You can stay up to date with progress on that and other projects through my production company Witching Season Films.

Website: witchingseasonfilms.com 

Instagram: instagram.com/witchingseasonfilms

Facebook: facebook.com/witchingseasonfilms

KD: If you could combine The Witching Season universe with any other film universe what would it be and why?

Michael: I'd love to make a Goosebumps film set around Halloween time, but for adults. Any takers?

KD: If you could erase any of the recent horror remakes from history which would it be?

Michael: I don't like to hate on remakes, but I wish the recent IT remake was scarier than it was. I enjoyed many parts about it, but it just wasn't scary and the opportunity was there. 

KD: What films have you seen in the last 2 years that have inspired you?

Michael: Hereditary has been majorly inspiring to me. I love that movie. Also, Justin Seaman's The Barn is amazing.

KD: What is your favorite piece of film memorabilia?  

Michael: I wish I had some cool film memorabilia but I really don't. The holy grail would be to own an original screen-used Haunted Mask from the 90's Goosebumps TV series. That'd be rad.

Check out The Witching Season streaming on Amazon today!

-KillDozer

Listener Sam Reviews: Eli

Before I watched Eli, I went through the cast and crew, and its director, Ciarán Foy, stood out. He has a unique name, but I couldn’t recall quite where I’d seen it. It turns out, he directed a film from 2012 called Citadel that really stuck with me. It’s about a man whose family is repeatedly brutalized by a pack of feral children. It’s an excellent and oft-overlooked film that at its best feels like a feature-film version of Chris Cunningham’s "Come To Daddy" music video, in the best, most terrifying way.

Foy is also responsible for a made-for-TV flick called The Wilding (which I haven’t seen), and 2015’s Sinister 2, which is a lousy follow-up, but not necessarily poorly directed. Both films heavily feature child-based horror. Seeing that Foy had a track record for making films about creepy kids, and knowing the quality job he did on Citadel, I was excited to see what he could do with Eli. 

Eli revolves around the titular character, a kid who’s allergic to everything -- a bubble boy -- who when inside, is relegated to a plastic enclosure, and who has to wear a hazmat suit when outside. His parents take him to a special care facility that promises to cure his illness. While there, he’s haunted by ghosts.

From the get-go, Eli presents itself a strange genre mash-up. It has elements of medical, supernatural, haunted house, and creepy-kid horror combined in a way that made me immediately nervous. “How the hell are they going to make this work?” I thought as I passed through the first act. They introduced so much that it seemed impossible to do so and still make a coherent film. Fortunately, Eli is largely successful in this venture, and while the multifarious plot threads are still messy, it ties them up in a satisfying, if campy, way.

The film, in essence, is a mystery. It presents us and Eli (Charlie Shotwell), the titular protagonist, with the task of unraveling just what his illness is. In doing so, the film presents a number of possibilities, clues, and suspects. 

Eli’s father (Max Martini) seems to have anger issues and frequently low-key accuses his wife (Kelly Reilly) of infidelity. The wife and mother, on the other hand, also seems profoundly off, and leads us to think that Eli could be a victim of Munchausen-by-proxy. The doctor they take him to (Lili Taylor) is almost a caricature of a sadistic doctor. He makes a creepy friend at the facility, who might be up to no good. It’s even ambiguous as to whether the ghosts are trying to help or hurt him…

...And we get that all in the first fifteen-or-so minutes. 

Like I said, it’s a lot.

And yet somehow, they manage to pull it off. I’m inclined to credit the writers for this success. Eli is written by Ian Goldberg & Richard Naing, the writing team behind The Autopsy of Jane Doe, and David Chirchirillo, probably best known for 2013’s Cheap Thrills. They manage to somehow cram a ton of different ideas into a singular vision, which ties up in a clever (and yes, maybe a little ridiculous) way that filled me with horror-lover glee.

Within this plot, we get an interesting take on horror. Eli primarily delivers its scares in the form of brutal medical procedures inflicted on a child. Eli has his bones and brain drilled while fully awake and minimally anesthetized, and these sequences are harrowing and uncomfortable. They reminded me of a joke that an old bitter doctor once told me:

At the procedure’s inception, bone-marrow transplants had an extremely high mortality rate and were extremely painful for the patient. -- The joke: Three patients have leukemia and will die without a bone marrow transplant.

The first patient takes their chances and accepts the procedure but dies in agony as the doctors drill into his bones to extract the marrow.

The second patient, still thinking they have a chance, also opts for a bone marrow transplant. They survive the procedure but die in agony due to complications.

The final patient, having seen how the other patients suffered, opts to die instead.

His doctor said, “Excellent. You’ll die, but first, let’s give you a bone marrow transplant!”

I’m not sure it’s actually funny.

Nevertheless, some of the most affecting moments are when the doctors drill into Eli’s femur to inject him directly in the bone marrow. I found myself gritting my teeth and cringing for the entirety of the sequence. The fact that it was inflicted on a child only helped serve its grotesque purpose.

Unfortunately, there aren’t many other scares. The ghost sequences attempt jump scares, but none of them landed for me, and they never seemed to build enough tension to get a great release. I may have winced once or twice, but I never found myself particularly scared, just momentarily startled. This, however, might be a problem with the medium more than the film itself. Being a direct-to Netflix release, I watched this on my home theater, and though I was watching in the dark on a decently large screen with an adequate sound system, I feel like scares just don’t land as well at home as they would have in a theater.

Anyway, beyond the cleverly crafted plot and the medical trauma, the element of Eli that most impressed me was the overall production design. The facility where the film is set is half haunted mansion and half medical facility. The production design and set decoration make it feel simultaneously sterile and barren, and decrepit and dusty. 

Certain elements, such as the airlock that the characters must use to enter and exit the facility, feel like sci-fi set pieces, and have unique designs that tie cleverly into the film's twisty plot. Other sets, like the dining room and bedrooms, are almost surreal in their sparseness. A table and chairs or a bed, nightstand, and cabinet, with virtually nothing else to accompany them. 

The choices are bold, unique, and help immerse us in the world of Eli. This feels particularly important because the setup, at times, feels downright ridiculous. Even though severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) is a real thing that, once-upon-a-time, created a real need for children to live in a bubble, the idea still seems absurd on screen. Because of this, it would be easy for the film to fall into absurdity and surrealism, and at times it skirts the edges but ultimately manages to stay the course.

The final touch that helps solidify Eli’s tight production design is the slick, interesting palette. The house and medical staff therein are drenched in teal, blue, indigo, and violet. Throughout most of the films, this palette is extremely cohesive, and we see little more than highlights in other colors. This helps gloss over some questionable CGI that at times is noticeable, but never really took me out of the film. In fact, there are some computer-generated crane flies that looked great when they showed up.

With regard to the visuals, I also loved the exteriors at the beginning of the film. It features beautiful drone shots of Louisiana. Lush wastelands of overgrown swamps, untended and barren fields, and marshy wetlands, all devoid of humanity, save for our lead family’s car. There’s even a scene at a grimy motel that, while not particularly plot-relevant, gives us a gorgeous sense of the suburban decay that the characters live in.

Finally, the film has some really unique effects work when dealing with the ghosts. They spend a lot of time communicating via fogged/steamed-over glass and mirrors, and the filmmakers use this to deliver some unique scares. In one scene that really stood out, Eli sees a ghost in the fogged section of a mirror, wipes it, and the ghost vanishes. I also liked how the ghosts move at times, vanishing and appearing extremely suddenly and unpredictably. 

Eli is not without its flaws, however, and the performances in particular really fall flat. Maybe I’m being too harsh a critic, but Hereditary really set a new bar for parental grief performances, and the parents in Eli don’t quite surpass it. A lot of the emotion is flatly delivered, and even though it helps serve the film’s many mysteries, it’s too rigid to feel anything other than surreal. 

The best performance by far comes from Charlie Shotwell as Eli, who shows an impressive range of acting skills, and does an especially convincing job at being furious when no one believes that he’s seeing ghosts. Sadie Sink also does a commendable job as Haley, though her role is small. Combined with her performance in seasons 2 and 3 of Stranger Things, she is proving to be an impressive young actress.

I also alluded to some questionable CG. In particular, the exteriors of the house are downright bad. Most of them are unnecessary and only serve to remind us that the film was probably shot on a sound stage on pre-constructed sets. Now, I could be wrong, and these shots may not be CG, but if I'm right, it’s almost worse and would imply some pretty poor choices as to how the shots were used and color-corrected. 

I don’t want to linger on the ending too much, though I think it bears a bit more mention. It just tickled me pink how bonkers it was, and it manages to tie up a ton of loose ends. There’s almost undoubtedly a few plot holes leftover, but I just don’t care. I watch movies to have fun, and I got some genuine goddamn fun from Eli’s finale. You’ll understand when you see it.

Netflix’s horror line up has had its share of ups and downs. They did a great job with Gerald’s Game, The Ritual, and Apostle, but other films like The Perfection, Velvet Buzzsaw, and The Silence have really fallen short. While not the best they’ve released, Eli falls into the better half of Netflix’s horror releases and is a great addition to this year’s slate of Halloween releases.

Eli is available on Netflix as of October 18th, 2019

-Listener Sam

Listener Sam Reviews: Along Came the Devil 2

In preparation of watching this, I caught the first one, which was a surprisingly ambitious little film about a girl with an abusive past who finds herself tormented and eventually possessed by a demon, culminating in an exorcism. It has some narrative and pacing problems, but I was impressed by the lighting and cinematography, some of the scares are well-delivered, and while the performances are unbalanced, the leads are good enough to carry the film along.

All that said, the lack of budget showed, and the film relied a little too much on exposition to drive the plot. As a writer myself, I understand how this can come about, it’s simply easier and cheaper to shoot conversations than it is to keep scares themselves coming throughout the film. Though it hurts the film, it’s hard for me to fault it too much. 

With that in mind, the director, Jason DeVan, showed a lot of potential and it left me interested in seeing what he could deliver with more experience and resources. Thus, I was excited to see what his followup had in store.

Along Came the Devil 2 (ACTD2, from now on) immediately shows improvement over the first, kicking off with a solid, The Changeling-inspired scare sequence. The quality of filmmaking is clearly higher than the first, due in part to more interesting cinematography from cinematographer Jay Ruggieri. The increase in camera movement and the higher-quality daytime exteriors really show, and the nighttime shots help deliver better scares.

ACTD2 also features a fantastic lead performance from Laura Wiggins (Rings, Nancy Drew and the Hidden Staircase) as Jordan and excellent follow-up performances by Oscar-nominee Bruce Davison (X-Men, X2, Itsy Bitsy) as Reverend Michael and Mark Ashworth (The Magnificent Seven, Assassinaut) as Mark. It also features a fantastic performance from Cassius DeVan who is at his best as a creepy kid. Overall, these performances kick the film up a notch and help smooth out some rough patches that I’ll discuss in a little bit.

ACTD2 picks up where Along Came the Devil left off, as Jordan, the sister of Ashley (the predecessor’s lead), is called back to her dreary home town because of a mysterious phone call about the degrading mental state of her sister. 

When she arrives in town, however, her sister is nowhere to be found, but her estranged, abusive-but-now-reformed father is in town, and the Reverand knows something she doesn’t. We, of course, having just watched the original Along Came the Devil, know that her sister is possessed by a demon and locked up beneath the church.

This premise is both where ACTD2 succeeds over its predecessor, but also where it falters. The plot itself is far more interesting than the first. While the antagonist in the first is “The Devil” and his along-coming to do devilish things, ACTD2 has a much more human element, which is significantly more engaging. The main conflict, as best as I can tell, is Jordan’s struggle to figure out what happened to her sister.

Unfortunately, in many ways, ACTD2 suffers from the first movie. Knowing what happened to Ashley means that any potential sense of mystery is diminished, and we, the audience, view the film waiting for the protagonist to catch up with what we already know. In addition, Jordan never actually finds much out about her missing sister. This causes the second act to drag heavily. While she runs into plenty of dead ends in her search, Jordan never seems to find meaningful success, which makes it difficult to stay engaged, despite the quality of Wiggin’s aforementioned performance.

During the second act, I ended up having a lot of questions about the nature of the film itself. As it drags, it also follows Reverend Michael and Mark (Jordan’s Dad) as they go about their day-to-day.

During this time, it becomes unclear quite what this film is trying to say. Maybe I missed it, but I couldn’t find a theme other than “The devil is bad, folks” which isn’t quite serviceable in modern cinema. It was around this point where I started to wonder, “is this a faith film?”. There’s nothing wrong with that, but I began to ponder whether being a faith film makes it okay to have such a simplistic plot.

Obviously, in a faith-based horror film, the battle between good and evil almost always needs to be present to some degree. The Exorcist is the classic example, and this movie knows it and reminds us through constant references. The Conjuring and the rest of the Waniverse also fit the bill. In both cases, however, the battle of good versus evil is manifested in a few tangible, worldly forms, and lets us explore the human elements of horror. God and the Devil take a back seat to fear that all audiences can relate to.

For example, The Exorcist is really about a man’s faith being tested in the face of pure evil. Similarly, The Conjuring is about evil testing the bonds of a family. In both these examples, evil manifests as something other than the divine. In The Exorcist, it’s Regan and in The Conjuring, it’s a house. In ACTD2, throughout the second act, there is no human element to ground this struggle, and as there’s also no mystery, there’s just not much to it. I found myself waiting for how Jordan would fight the devil other than in the form of a futile search.

Around minute fifty, I found myself losing interest. We had no tangible devil, little-to-no conflict, and a protagonist that had seemingly nothing to do.

Then the third act started…

(Obligatory spoiler warning)

Here’s an excerpt from my notes, around minute 60 (excuse the handwriting):

At this point, I was really hoping something would emerge to introduce conflict, and holy crap did it deliver in spades. 

Until the third act kicks off, Jordan’s father had existed within the movie but hadn’t really done much other than act as a vessel for exposition. Just as the movie starts to flounder, Satan himself grants us a little miracle, when he possesses Mark and turns him into an awesome, despicable villain, effectively saving the film.

Let me lay it out beat-by-beat.

First, Mark starts drinking again, despite having gone sober following the dissolution of his family.

Second, Mark’s wife climbs into bed with him, unaware of his demonic eyes, razor-sharp teeth, and the knife clutched in his hand.

Third, Mark stabs his wife in the belly, killing her.

Fourth, Jordan walks in on Mark RAPING HIS DEAD WIFE’S CORPSE!

What the fuck is this movie?

Every preconceived notion I had about this film was instantly dispelled. I went from pondering the nature of faith films to wondering if faith films are allowed to depict necrophilia.

Jesus H. Christ.

What follows is an amazingly tense third act as Mark goes full Jack Torrance and chases Jordan and Xavier (who until now had been little but a creepy kid to help facilitate scares) around with an axe.

The remaining twenty-or-so minutes are tense and blood-drenched, shockingly so, given what had been depicted prior. It ends on an extremely exciting note, setting up for a sequel that I can only imagine would be completely bonkers.

Now, I’m not necessarily the kind of discerning viewer who needs an injection of necrophilia to make for a good horror movie. In fact, I tend to dislike movies that are overly cruel or mean-spirited. In ACTD2, however, it evokes such pure shock that I can’t help but respect it. The extreme twist this film takes really turns the film on its head and brings it from a mediocre-average demonic-possession flick to something truly special.

Is Along Came the Devil 2 a great movie? Not really. It still suffers its budget, and it’s hard to deny the dragging second act. That said, it’s definitely worth a watch. Jason DeVan is a talented filmmaker, and I suspect he’s a solid writer as well (don’t get me started on what low budget productions do to great screenplays). I’d love to see what he can do with a budget and maybe a little bit of producer oversight.

This is also a great vehicle for Laura Wiggins. I’d only been briefly introduced to the actress via Rakefet Abergel’s excellent short “Boo” (which is currently making the festival circuit. Keep an eye out for it and her future projects). As you’ll see in this film, she’s got a ton of talent and really helps carry the film with her passionate, convincing performance. Thankfully, if IMDb is correct, She’s lined up to feature in an impressive slate of films in the next few years.

If I had to make one suggestion before watching this, it’s to avoid the first. This film may be a tad more confusing because of it, but I think that by dodging it, you’ll be able to re-introduce some of the mystery into the second act. Then, you can check it out, as it functions well on its own.

Regardless, ACTD2 is an entertaining, surprising, and shocking film that’s definitely worth your time.

Along Came the Devil 2 will be available in select theatres and on VOD Friday October 11th.

-Listener Sam

Digging Up The Dirt with KillDozer and Kitty Nasarow, Founder of The Vampire Tour of San Francisco

A lot has changed in the city of San Francisco over the years but one thing you can be sure of is that some people are still trying to keep it weird and interesting. Mina Harker (aka- Kitty Nasarow) is one such person. She's a creature of the night who loves to expose groups of thrill-seekers to one of a kind dark experience that takes them into the world of vampires. The Vampire Tour of San Francisco have been happening since 2001 and I was lucky enough to meet vampire tour guide Mina Harker and dig up some dirt at this year's Creatures Con.

KillDozer: Let's start with introductions. Who are you and what is it you do for SF Vampire tours?

Kitty Nasarow: I conduct the tour as Mina Harker from Dracula, but my mortal name is Kitty Nasarow. I started the business and wrote the script, and have been conducting the tour since June 1, 2001.

KD: How did the the idea for a Vampire tour begin?

Kitty: I was working for the pharmaceutical company, Roche, and went to New Orleans for a training session.  My boss asked me to find some fun things for the group to do at night, and I noticed that there were a lot of walking tours in the French Quarter.  Some of them were vampire tours.  I couldn’t imagine what a vampire tour could be like, so of course, that’s what I booked.  About 15 of us went on the tour.  While we were walking and listening to the guide, I kept thinking to myself, “Why isn’t anybody doing this in San Francisco?”  Then I thought, “Why don’t I do it?”  I knew that my tour would be nothing like the one in New Orleans because theirs is very horrifying and scary.  I don’t want to scare anyone.  I write comedies, so the tour had to be just that.  The script is about 85% true San Francisco history with fun vampire lore and humor mixed in.  Even little children have come on the tour and enjoyed it without being frightened.

KD: How did you go about deciding what content the tour should have?

Kitty: I wanted the tour to be mostly true history, so I went through about 4 months of research, mostly. In old books about the City.  I first wrote the script as just the history.  I wanted to include the kind of history that is true, but you most likely won’t hear it on other tours.  I took some of the tours around the City to see what they contained, so I would know what not to include in mine.  After I wrote the historical part of the script, I went through it, and where I thought it fit, I added in the vampire lore and humor.

KD: Are you a believer when it comes to the existence of vampires or is this pure entertainment and dark history?

Kitty: No, I don’t believe in blood sucking vampires.  The tour is purely entertainment and is suitable for all ages.

KD: How does someone go about booking a tour with you?

Kitty: There are companies online that sell tickets to the tour, i.e. Goldstar Events, Viator, Eventbrite and Purplepass.  You can also just come to the tour and pay cash for your ticket before the tour.

KD: Do you find that you are busiest around Halloween?

Kitty: Yes, definitely.  This has always been the case.  I get a lot of requests for private tours, and the regularly scheduled tours are very busy as Halloween gets closer.  As always, large groups attend on Halloween night, which includes a costume contest.

KD: What are your tour groups like? Do you have a lot of diversity amongst those who come for the vampire tour?

Kitty: Yes, it’s always been a very diverse group, and that makes it especially fun for me.  I have had people from all over the world, and of all ages.  I’ve also had celebrities attend, some without notice, and we have run into celebrities on Nob Hill during the tour as well.

KD: Do you visit film locations as well? Or is it purely historical?

Kitty: We do visit some film locations because they are a part of the history of Nob Hill.  Some examples are: Grace Cathedral, the Pacific-Union Club and the Fairmont Hotel.  There are sites on Nob Hill that are included in the tour that were featured in major movies.  There have also been movies and TV shows being filmed on Nob Hill during a tour.

KD: What is your main inspiration for doing the tours?

Kitty: The audience.  I have met the most fabulous people doing the tour!  For the first 10 ½ years, I kept a diary of every tour conducted.  I wanted to be able to look back and read about all the people I have met on the tour.

KD: Where can we go to follow you on social media?

Kitty: I have a Facebook page for The Vampire Tour of San Francisco. My website is at: SFVampireTour.com.

KD: Do you tour all year long or is there a season specific to doing Vampire tours?

Kitty: For the first 10 ½ years, when I lived on the Peninsula, I conducted the tour every Friday and Saturday night, all year around, and on Halloween and New Year’s Eve. I now live 3 hours from San Francisco, so I only conduct the tour on the first Saturday of the month, from May through October, and on Halloween.  I also still conduct private tours for groups of 10 or more, any day of the year, depending on my availability.

KD: What do you hope your tour groups get out of the Vampire tour experience that they won't get anywhere else?

Kitty: I want them to hear about the humorous and unique aspects of San Francisco’s history, and to be entertained as they are being educated.  I want them to have a very fun experience.

KD: What is the strangest thing to ever happen during one of your tours?

Kitty: We have experienced some ghostly activity at the Pacific-Union Club several times.  In fact, on the tour on July 6th, we saw definite activity, and the audience was amazed!

KD: Is this tour for monster kids or will anyone have a good time on the SF Vampire tour?

Kitty: I have had people of all ages and backgrounds come on the tour and thoroughly enjoy it. I’ve even had history teachers and professors bring their students on the tour because there is so much true history in the script.

KD: If you could have any vampire in film history give you a tour who would it be and where would they take you?

Kitty: Being a woman, I would have to say Frank Langella.  He was the most gorgeous Dracula there has been.  He could take me anywhere he wanted.

KD: What is your favorite vampire film?

Kitty: That’s a tough one.  Of course, the original Dracula is superb, and so is Bram Stoker’s Dracula.  I also love Shadow of the Vampire and last, but definitely not least, Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein!

KD: What would you miss most if you actually became a vampire? For me it's garlic ha ha!

Kitty: I would have to agree with you on that, but I would also say food in general!

Visit SFVampireTour.com to get all the information you need.
And follow The Vampire Tour of San Francisco on Facebook!

-KillDozer

Masked Mutilator Enters the Ring Straight Out of 1994

Masked Mutilator (2019, 1994)

76 Minutes

Directed by: Brick Bronsky (aka Jeff Beltzner)

Written by: Ed Polgardy and Dale Schneck

Starring: Brick Bronsky, Jeff Sabbich, Doug “Flex” Yasinsky

Available from Severin/InterVision Films DVD/Blu-Ray

At a glance, Masked Mutilator doesn’t look like it has a lot going for it. The cast barely exists on IMDB, it released to DVD/Blu-ray with little fanfare, and the film itself looks grainy and outdated. Shit, they barely got the name right — doesn’t “The Masked Mutilator” sound better? 

Despite the stacked odds, Masked Mutilator not only punches, but also dropkicks, body slams, suplexes, headlocks, lariats, and piledrives way above its weight class. This film serves as a bizarre window into the world of 1994 Pennsylvania and its independent pro-wrestling community. 

When you watch Masked Mutilator, you’ll immediately realize that something is off. A few scenes, depicting an interview for a podcast, are crisp, digital, and high res. The majority of the movie, however, is shot in grainy 16mm — genuine 16mm, not an effect or filter. That’s because the majority of the film was shot in 1994 then sat largely forgotten in the producer’s basement for the next 25 years.

Stories about this film’s failed production seem nigh infinite, but here’s a brief summary of what happened, to the best of my understanding. Following his roles in Sgt. Kabukiman N.Y.P.D. and Class of Nuke ‘Em High Part II: Subhumanoid Meltdown (and possibly Nuke ‘Em High Part III), Troma wanted to give actor and pro-wrestler Brick Bronsky (aka Jeff Beltzner) the reigns to direct and feature in his own movie. 

In 1994, on the promise of funding, the cast and crew started shooting in an abandoned funeral home in Eastern Pennsylvania. They worked on deferred pay and managed to film a good deal of Masked Mutilator. 

The shoot was grueling. The funeral home they shot in lacked air conditioning, the craft services consisted solely of pizza, and many of the stunts ended in injury. As filming progressed, there was a disagreement on the ending, funding seemed to dry up, and the movie was shelved. 

Members of the production got back together in 1996 and started filling in the film’s blanks. But for reasons unclear to me, it again was shelved, not to be seen until 2019, when InterVision (the archival branch of Severin Films) somehow scrounged up the footage. They filmed a few present-day scenes with one of the original actors, threw in Jim “Tank” Dorsey, and miraculously brought Masked Mutilator back to life. 

At a lean 76 minutes, Masked Mutilator doesn’t have a particularly dense plot, but I’ll go into that later. For now, what you need to know is that it’s about a former pro wrestler, The Masked Mutilator (aka Vic Mangiano, played by human freight-train Jeff Sibbach) who retires after he accidentally kills his opponent in the ring. After some time, he comes to run a group home for wayward teens. One day, however, someone dons his Masked Mutilator persona and begins killing those teens.

As you may have already guessed, the plot isn’t necessarily Masked Mutilator’s biggest strength, although it’s absolutely serviceable. That said, as I started writing, I struggled to express precisely what did make me enjoy this film so much. After some thought, I realized that Masked Mutilator is great because it has charm. In 1994, a bunch of amateur pro-wrestlers went all-out making a goofy little slasher. There’s a lot of heart in this movie, and while there are elements that are rough around the edges, the charm smoothes it out. 

It takes the style of an 80's slasher and mixes it with 90's aesthetics. One character (aptly named Rocker) is an over-the-top punk rocker. Doug “Flex” Yasinsky dresses like a musclebound Kurt Cobain. There’s heaps of flannel, just as much denim, and an overabundance sleeveless shirts that show off the bulging muscles of the wrestlers that star. Of course, they’re still meant to be teenagers in a group home, which makes the hulking biceps and tree-trunk necks ridiculous, but it’s all part of the movie’s charm.

Now, because many of the characters are played by amateur actors, the performances are mixed, but because they’ve come straight from the squared circle, there’s no shortage of theatrics. These become center stage in the film's fight scenes, where characters fight with headlocks and dropkicks. This is heightened by the film’s surprisingly good practical blood and gore effects, supplied by effects artists Paul Sutt and Glenn Hetrick, who both co-star, and who both went on to have impressive careers.

Despite being a 1994 production with a 2019 release, Masked Mutilator feels like a better fit in the pantheon of 80's slashers. 1994 gave us films like Wes Craven’s New Nightmare and In the Mouth of Madness alongside Interview with a Vampire and The Crow. Meta-horror was in, and everything else was driven by pure angst. By the time this was being filmed, the traditional slasher was long dead, and wouldn’t be back until Scream kicked off years of lame knockoffs.

With that in mind, I spent some time thinking about where Masked Mutilator would fit into that 80's pantheon. Final Exam (1981) was the first movie I thought of, due to its bare-bones plot and inconsistent tone, but Masked Mutilator is definitely a step up from it. As far as quality (or at least enjoyability) I’d put it way above Madman but a little below Blood Rage and The Mutilator. It’s got a lot of the same goofiness of the latter films but doesn’t manage to match their over-the-top gore. 

Plot-wise, Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning might be the closest comparison, as they share the home for troubled youth setting, and both have vague mystery elements. Personally, I’m a fan of Friday 5, but it catches a lot of flack for not having Jason. Don’t let that deter you, Masked Mutilator is really a thing all its own. Had it been released in 1985 as a completed production, I could imagine it being a cult classic.

Hopefully, at this point, you’re sold on Masked Mutilator. If not, feel free to tap out. Otherwise, I’m about to go into spoilers, so if you’re worried, watch it first, but even then, it’s got such a threadbare plot, that I don’t think you’ll find anything earthshattering.

Masked Mutilator begins with opening credits that don’t quite feel deserved, but get over with quickly enough. You might notice here that the film has a fairly impressive score, supplied by Fabrizio Bondi, who, at a glance, seems to have done a fair bit of work in Italy. The credits fade and we move to the present day, as Brian (played both past and present by Steve Taylor) and his girlfriend come in for an interview on a podcast about neglect in youth homes.

We soon jump to some time prior to 1994, as the Mutilator dons his mask. A dead-eyed announcer announces his match, and the fight begins. Very quickly, The Masked Mutilator kicks his opponent in the chest, clotheslines him, then puts him in a headlock. As the ref checks for a pulse, the Mutilator snaps his opponent’s neck, killing him. The performances of the announcer and the ring girl are baffling, perhaps to the point of being distracting, but the scene itself provides a great hook, and really sells the movie’s tone.

It then jumps to 1994, in the home for troubled youth run by Vic Mangino, the wrestler formerly known as The Masked Mutilator, where we meet the teens and watch as Rocker (Glenn Hetrick), an over-the-top, leather-clad punk, threatens to “slice a pretty boy” with a can opener, as recompense for touching his records. Vic quickly breaks up the fight, and throws Rocker in “The Cell.” A basement room meant for solitary confinement. 

For whatever reason, Vic makes a phone call, while Marcy (Amanda Kupchinsky) tries to flirt with him, but he’s on the phone with a naked woman, who herself is gyrating on top of a fully clothed man. As far as I know, none of this serves any purpose plot-wise, except maybe as a red-herring when the murders start. It seems, however, like this may be the remnant of a subplot that never got filmed. Vic calls this mysterious woman a bitch and hangs up, and we move on.

We jump to breakfast. There’s lousy food, big muscles, and an unidentifiable juice — Vic’s, in particular, contains a fingernail. During the meal, a social worker brings in Steve Carson (Brick Bronsky), Vic’s new intern. Brick is fantastic in this, his acting is spot on, and his wardrobe really helps sell the film’s campy vibe. He’s frequently clad in oversized blazers, which look absurd on his massive frame, other times he’s dressed in preppy combinations of chino shorts and polo shirts, and his overacting is some of the film’s best.

Shortly after, we meet the 1994-Brian, who’s been sent to the home because his hair was too long. Vic forces him to get a haircut and drags him back to the group home. He replaces Rocker in one of the bedrooms and asserts his authority by showing how much of a badass he is with nunchucks. If that doesn’t sound like the most 90's thing you’ve ever heard, it’s only because I failed to mention that he does this while wearing a pink denim vest. It is glorious.

As the film progresses, the intern questions Vic’s methods and releases Rocker so he can lift weights. As Rocker works out, someone dressed as The Masked Mutilator kills him, dismembers him with a hacksaw, and tosses him in the building’s surprisingly large furnace.

Through the rest of the film more teens die, there’s a vague mystery over who the killer is (is it Vic? Is it the intern? Is it Carl the Cook?). Eventually, the real killer is discovered, there’s a great fight scene, and the day is saved. 

Like I said, the plot is thin. 

Trust me though, it remains thoroughly amusing throughout. One of the major perks of having a cast of wrestlers is that the fight choreography is great. The punches and kicks feel impactful (according to the commentary, it’s because some of them did impact). The kills also make impressive use of wrestling holds, which is a fun gimmick. Altogether, it makes the performances feel surprisingly genuine, even given the cast’s inexperience. While it’s goofy at times, nothing ever took me out, and even when it’s ridiculous, it’s engrossing.

At this point, I’ve written more about this film than I thought I had in me, but I’ll end with a note on the special features. I mentioned them a few times already, and I’m no authority on Blu-Ray extras, but they include an audio commentary, a bunch of interviews, and some old audition tapes which are pure gold. It seems like a pretty meaty selection given the film’s history, and really shows that a lot of love went into making this, even if it took 25 years. The commentary, in particular, gives some great details on the film’s troubled production but approaches it with constant positivity. Just another bit of the movie’s charm.

If at the beginning of 2019, you had asked me to predict my top 10 horror movies of the year, some choices would’ve been immediately apparent. Us, Midsommar, The Lighthouse, and Brightburn all would have seemed obvious. There’d be some welcome surprises and other disappointments, but I feel like I could have gotten close to nailing 8 out of 10.

While this predictability can be boring, it only serves to make it even more delightful when an outlier emerges. Each year, a film or two comes out of nowhere and smashes me in the face with something strange and wonderful. Revenge, The Evil Within, and Cat Sick Blues have been some from the last few years, and it looks like Masked Mutilator will be this year’s outlier. 

So if you’re also a fan of 80's slashers, campy horror, and cult oddities, Masked Mutilator is definitely worth your time.

Move your stack of bootleg WWE tapes, put your feet up, crack open a Yuengling, and enjoy. 

-Listener Sam

The Overlook Theatre Reviews: Depraved, Larry Fessenden's

A disillusioned field surgeon suffering from PTSD makes a man out of body parts and brings him to life in a Brooklyn loft.

7 of 8 viewers "Liked" "Depraved" (2019, USA)

Creature reviews have been minimally altered in an attempt to maintain their voice:

Lord Battle: Modern retellings of the Universal Monsters do not interest me in the least. I have no need to see the Creature from the Black Lagoon run around Florida in a leather jacket... Okay, I take that back, but I'm not joking about "Modern" retellings being guilty of just dressing up the same old characters in whatever is currently popular. Depraved, however, stands out for not only updating Frankenstein's Monster's look (the SFX are amazing!) but also all of Mary Shelley's themes. Mad scientists testing pharmaceuticals on cadavers conjured up all of my hatred for Purdue Pharma and with all the unethical treatment they've had with the living. I wouldn't put it past them to make some awful deal with the minorly less corrupt VA to make this nightmare a reality... Larry Fessenden has managed to drag some strong emotions out of me here and I was completely caught off guard. Those of you who consider yourselves casual film fans need to stick through the first act, it's a little slow but the payoff is well worth the wait." - 4 Stars

TroubleShoot: "A modern microcosm of Frankenstein doused in a heavy blanket of PTSD, this one displays a wonderfully physical and melancholy performance. But despite some interesting ideas it doesn't quite sustain its runtime. Some of the editing choices were jarring and strange with superimpositions of chemical reactions and synaptic firings working about half the time. Though he didn't have the budget he needed, Larry Fessenden continues to prove himself as the Godfather of Indie Horror with shaky chaos complimented by flat stillness and a strong current of extreme sadness and depression. It would have benefited from more focus on the father/son dynamic instead of corporate shenanigans. Simpler may have been better." - 3 Stars

The Impostor: "Depraved is an intriguing film that kept me engaged from beginning to end. I went into it blind and with the name like "Depraved", I didn't know what to expect. With a story that has been told over and over, Depraved tops my list. The acting in this film was so good, especially from the main character Adam, that I believed this was really something that happened. Overall, a solid Franken flick that I can't wait to own in the near future." - 4 Stars

Huntress: "I wasn't a big Frankenstein fan going into Depraved, but this retelling made it easy to sympathize with the heartbreak and rage that Adam (Alex Breaux) goes through. The film's deliberate pace through his recovery and re-education, amplified by the subtle reduction of scarring and eye discoloration really makes it feel like we're watching him come to life. When he starts rebelling against creators, it's very satisfying. If Larry Fessenden hadn't already established a reputation for amazing low budget movies I would have never suspected that Depraved was, in fact, low budget. And the more I think about it, the more I enjoy Frankenstein in a big city setting." - 4 Stars

KillDozer: "A beautiful retelling of a classic cautionary tale. The horrors of loss, love, parenthood, and the human condition. This is a refreshing vision of a monster kid classic." - 4 Stars

Speed Demon: "No matter what good intentions you have, playing God never works out. An Emotional Modern Frankenstein." - 3.5 Stars

Math Mage: "Rules for the care & feeding of your creation:

1. Read Mary Shelly's Frankenstein
2. Don't make him super strong on purpose
3. Don't make him out of people you personally kill
4. Do study both early child development and rehabilitation techniques
5. Do respect the wishes of your creation. Take it seriously as an adult
6. Don't give your Frankenstein cocaine!
7. Accept that it may kill you, despite your best efforts." - 5 Stars

Wondering Panda: *Fell Asleep* - 2 Stars (Default)

The Overlook Theatre Final Rating*

(Below is for after you've seen the film)

Appropriately, Frankenstein has had many faces and the story has seen many renditions spanning decades and genres. It's a unique story that has many different levels that an audience can relate to, be it with the creature who is alone and didn't ask for any of this, or with his creator(s) who are quickly realizing they are in way over their head. That being said, I was still extremely nervous during the Overlook screening of Depraved. 

I'm a big fan of Larry Fessenden, who wrote and directed this nearly two hour long movie, which like I mentioned in my review takes its time building up. And this particular screening was being attended by a new reviewer. It has become an unintentional tradition that when someone new enters the Overlook Theatre, their first screening becomes a real endurance test. Some have not returned. I got into my head about the audience being quiet, the movie being too atmospheric, and horror coming too late... and that was all wrong. 

To an extent, Adam is the movie. The special effects that give his scars life make everything he does visually engrossing. The body horror aspect of his recovery doesn't need any additional distractions; it's our bonding period with him. We bare witness to his isolation and hunger for human contact, to the situation he was thrown into due to greed, corporate irresponsibility, and a veteran's desire to eradicate death after seeing too much of it. And all of these scenes make the end of this movie more than worth sticking around for.

-Huntress

The Overlook Theatre materialized in a Residence for a screening on 7/25/2019
*Based on the star ratings turned in by character reviewers, others viewed and got to "Dislike" or "Like" but that does not affect the rating.