Wednesday, July 6, 2011

Seeds of Vengence, Sowed in Blood!

Mike: Max, what are we watching for tonight’s edition of Screams from the Balcony?

Max: Well, Mike, tonight, I have something very special in mind.  *cue the giggling, nursery rhyming kids..*  "Keep away from Pumpkinhead unless you're tired of living...his enemies are mostly dead, he's mean and unforgiving."

Mike: So...we're...watching Shelley Duvall's Fairy Tale Theater?

Max: No, Shelley Duvall don't have what you want...all that woman can do is take you straight to Hell.  Pumpkinhead is the movie I'm talking about!  It's one of my favorite movies ever and it's called Pumpkinhead!

Mike: Pumpkinhead?  I kind of got my heart set on Shelly Duvall.  Are you sure we HAVE to watch Pumpkinhead?

Max: Yes.

Mike: Goddamn you, Max.  Goddamn you!

Max: He already has, Mike!  He already has!



Max:  I think what I really like the most about Pumpkinhead is that it is such a deeply allegorical film.  Although this might seem unlikely, given that it's kind of a silly b-movie, Pumpkinhead addresses a theme that's been visited time and time again, even through Shakespeare's plays and the Bible.  The theme is vengeance, and how the hatred which fuels a person to vengeance will ultimately consume that person.  Just think about Batman.  Does his grief for his parents ever lessen, the more he avenges them by fighting villain after villain?  Of course not.  He just falls deeper into his own personal torment.  The same is true of the protagonist in this movie, Ed Harley (Lance Henriksen), a roadside store clerk who loses his young boy Billy when a group of tourists accidentally run him down with a motorcycle.  Harley seeks vengeance by seeking out the help of an old witch named Hagis.  She raises a demon named Pumpkinhead from a cemetery to avenge Billy's death on the group of unsuspecting "city folk".  But what Harley doesn't realize is that this justice that Pumpkinhead brings won't bring him any peace.  On the contrary, he begins to feel one with the demon, in every act of vengeance it brings, and it begins to drive him mad.  Like the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche said, "Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."  This famous quotation, in my opinion, sums up Pumpkinhead pretty well.

Mike: Well put.  Your summation of the film is eloquent, thorough, and intelligent.  However, if I may be so bold, the average Joe is not going to be sitting in a darken room, watching this movie, and going, “You know, this reminds me of that Nietzsche quote about not battling a monster unless you want to become one…or whatever.”  Though, I find the special effects to be stunning and terrifying, I don’t quite think this movie holds up as well as you make it sound like it should. Hahahaha.  Your opening statement makes the movie sound so much better than what I think it really is.

Max: That was bold alright.  So please don't mind my alliteration when I say that you are pooping on Pumpkinhead, which is a perfectly powerful picture in every possible way.   From the very opening frame of the movie, when we see nothing but red flames, there is a consistency in aesthetic here that is unbeatable.  The eerie music score, combined with the deep red camera filter set the tone for the hellish ride that's about to ensue.  Additionally, I don't think you could say that this movie doesn't receive an "A" for atmosphere.  The setting of Harley’ backwoods village (particularly where the opening sequence is concerned) is completely haunting.  I guess I could understand being bored with this film if you are not a fan of awesome visuals (accompanied by a dread-inducing score), but if you are sensitive at all to these more subtle elements, then there is no way that Pumpkinhead doesn't rule.

Mike: Do you see this, Max?  It’s my ass hanging out of my britches, taking a huge poop on Pumpkinhead.  Consistent aesthetics?    You want to talk about the unbeatable title sequence?  *Hmmmmmph*  Here’s a big turd for you:  It’s about a minute to two minutes long of nothing but flames, really?  The movie could have done better by showing panning shots of the super eerie pumpkin patch while the credits faded in and out.  Now, the opening scene is done very well: you have your small farming family rushing to lock things up, and hiding themselves from an unknown terror that’s lurking in the woods.  That was unsettling to the bone, but I don’t think this feeling really carried throughout the entire film.  I would have enjoyed the movie more if it had.

Max: So far as redundant hellfire goes, there can never be enough of that.  I enjoy the monotony.  And I am glad we can at least agree that the beginning carries a very dark and unsettling feeling.  While I do think that the suspense maybe fades in the scene at the house of Ed Harley and Billy, I think it picks right back up at the gas station, and from that point, I would say that the terror escalates very fast, particularly once Ed Harley drives deep into the mountains to the home of Haggis, the witch.

Mike: Haggis is one of the scariest looking witches in cinematic history.  She’s the Hansel and Gretel witch from the Grimm fairy tales, except her house is made out of wood rot instead of candy, and smells of death instead of sweets.  Haggis and the special effects used to create the demon Pumpkinhead make the movie for me.  Without those two elements, I think you have a very dull film that beats you over the head with its message.

Max: Though I absolutely disagree that the film is dull for its rather obvious, yet powerful message (if this were the criteria for "dull", wouldn't films like Dawn of the Dead be considered boring?) I do have similar praises where Haggis is concerned.  I think your Hansel and Gretel witch comparison is right on the money, as this is, essentially, a creepy backwoods fairy tale.  Haggis and the Pumpkinhead demon itself do "make" the film, to an extent.  Without such a hag of a witch and a hellion of a monster, it wouldn't be as fun to watch.  All the same, great characters and special effects will make or break any film, if you ask me.  This in and of itself makes Pumpkinhead a genre classic.  They don't make monsters like they used to anymore, and let's face it, that Pumpkinhead did look like the twisted, nasty, inbred face of vengeance, did it not?

Mike: It did.

Max: I should also note that Haggis is my favorite witch in any movie, ever.

Mike: I would agree with you.

Max: I want to live in her house.  Is that weird?   I can't even imagine what that would be like, waking up in the morning there..

Mike: Well, as long as you ONLY want to live in her house and not bang her like some old, decrepit, sexed-up sugar momma.

Max: You're always reading my mind, Mike.

Mike: However, sorry to put us back on track here, but I think I'm going to have to derail your classification of Pumpkinhead as a “genre classic.”

Max: Ok…go for it, weiner.  But just remember, Pumpkinhead was featured on a cover of Rue Morgue magazine for issue #81.  They don't do that for just every demon.

Mike: So were a lot of horror movies, but that doesn't make them classics.  Wasn’t Rob Zombie featured on the cover of the November/December 2001 issue?  He is NOT a “classic,” director.

Max: I never said Rob Zombie was a classic director.  But Rob Zombie probably likes this movie, because he has good taste...anyway.....you were saying?

Mike: I’m just saying that Rue Morgue doesn’t always reserve its covers for, how you say, “The greats.”  Rob Zombie…didn’t he also like Audition?  THAT was a disappointing movie that we'll have to review at another time.

Max:  I agree, Audition sucks.  Rob's good taste was completely out the window on that one.  Anyway this is an epic sub-tangent.  I thought you were going to de-bunk Pumpkinhead as a genre classic, while still moving us forward in the synopsis/review, eh?

Mike: Yes, but YOU keep distracting me.  ANYWAY, if strong characters are what you need for a horror film to become a classic then the antagonists in this film (the City teenagers), are pure drivel.  Their acting isn't quite Troll 2 terrible, but everything is forced and over the top.  And though, I typically love my character actors like Lance Henriksen, I don't think he can hold up the rest of the lack-luster cast.  Don't get me wrong, this is probably one of my favorite Henriksen movies...below Alien, Aliens, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, The Terminator, Damien: Omen II, Near Dark, but definitely above AVP.  Henriksen's performance, Haggis, and, of course, Pumpkinhead are the only things worth watching this movie for, because all the other supporting characters, and even the death scenes, are just laughable at best.  Pumpkinhead is a terrifying monster who beats you up.  Seriously, that's all he does?

Max: Ok....first of all, who cares about the stupid teenagers in any scary movie?  I feel like the teenagers in most horror movies act poorly (this is not necessarily even the fault of the actors, as they have lame 2 dimensional characters to portray).  Lance Henriksen is a fantastic character actor and I think he completely delivers in this movie.  He handles a wider range of emotion in this film than he had to do in the many others you named. Oh and you forgot that Lance's performance in Pumpkinhead ranks above his performance in "The Horror Show".  The death scenes, while not explicitly violent, portray enough long drawn out torture, I think, to imply that the Pumpkinhead demon is an agent of suffering.  He comes to administer a slow beating, that's true.  But when the slow beating involves a giant demon with an engorged turnip looking skull carving the shape of a cross into your forehead with his claws (or impaling you with a gun), I would say that's rather bad-ass.  It might not be as gruesome as what Jason does, but let's not forget, this is still supernatural horror.  For a fable or "fairytale", this is really rather violent.

Max: And again, let me point out that it's dark.  It's called atmosphere, people.  That’s what's missing from just about every horror movie that's made today.  Pumpkinhead's kill count “or lack thereof” only strengthens the case that it’s an imaginative film.  All the CG-enhanced dismemberings in the world wouldn't account for the scene when Pumpkinhead enters that old church and tears it to shreds.

Mike: Okay, first off, Lance Henriksen's performance in The Horror Show is nearly award worthy (what kind of an award I'll leave to your imagination), and WAY better than in this particular movie.  With that being said, I still think his character Ed Harley is pretty cool.

Mike: In regards to Pumpkinhead’s kills, well, on one hand you are correct: he almost comes off as a more realistic demon that's going to torment and torture you for your sins, rather than kill you quickly and practically painlessly.  On the other hand: watching someone get lifted over the roof of the house and out of the sight of the viewer (where we can't see the demon doing his devious acts) only to then see the results to be nothing more than scrapes and bruises, it's hard to be terrified of a monster who is only going to beat you up.  At some point you have to think, "If that's all Pumpkinhead does, then why doesn’t Ed Harley just beat the living shit out of the kids with a baseball bat or something?"  It would have had the same effect.

Max: There is not much that I have left to say regarding the teen deaths.  This is not a slasher movie, it's super natural.   I think you are overlooking the beauty of the pumpkin patch cemetery, which (though it doesn't appear at the beginning), is a significant example of something that trumps the need for excess gore.  None of the classic monster movies possessed a great amount of violence, so I'm not sure why the Pumpkinhead demon should be held to a different standard.  Moving on...what do you think about the end?

Mike: You're missing my point: Pumpkinhead almost seems unnecessary if, when acting on behalf of the person wanting revenge, all he does is beat up the victims.  Ed Harley could have done that himself, and the film could have been more like the revenge movies of the 1970's instead of this disappointing, gore-less fairy tale (The Grimm tales usually had terrifying bloody violence, so why wouldn't a film that has everything in it to be considered a classic allegorical fairy tale be without?).  Anyway, the ending was interesting, and at the same time, obvious.  If you don't know that Ed Harley and the Pumpkinhead are linked together, then you weren't paying attention and should be slapped.  What I liked about it was the masterful special effects that went into the changing of Pumpkinhead's face to the settle facial changes seen on Harley.  That part was beautiful.   When the witch Haggis takes the Pumpkinhead body (whose face resembles something that of Harley and the demon), to the cemetery to bury him all over again, is a thing of nightmares.  I can't get over the dark magic feel of that pumpkin patch cemetery.  It's truly grotesque and beautiful all at once.  The other side of this is that it was just too...abrupt.  At the end I was thinking to myself, "That's how they kill off the demon, really?"  I wanted more.

Max: Yeah that's interesting because I think I enjoyed the ending for the same reason you disliked it.  In my opinion, concluding battles in horror films are often long and drawn out.  This was short and to the point.  The amazing facial transformation in Henrikson that you mention is enough to show us what's about to happen.  He takes the noble way out by taking his own life.  This is more like the end of a short piece of fiction than a high-action blockbuster.  Ultimately the war was within himself and he had to end it.

Mike: But he doesn't end it himself, he tries, the surviving teenage girl is the one who ultimately finishes the job.  THAT is what I don't like about the ending.  I don't mind that Henriksen has to take his own life; in fact, he has a damn flame thrower.  I mean, why the hell did they bring out the flame thrower if they're not going to use it to kill the monster?  Henriksen even says that he's going to send the demon back to whatever hell it came from, but then fails to do so because he couldn't quite shoot himself in the head right.  The flamethrower tank should have exploded, engulfing Henriksen in flames, and we should have watched both him and Pumpkinhead die in harmonious agony.  I would have enjoyed THAT ending more.

Max: In asking her to kill him, he is still forfeiting power to his victim, and allowing her to turn his own vengeance on him, thus enabling his own death.  It's suicide no matter how you look at it.  His urging her to do it (much in the way that those about to "turn" into werewolves beg their loved ones for absolution), is an admission that the darkness in him has already triumphed.  I like the fable-ish simplicity in his death and I think it fits with the tone of the rest of the film.  On the other hand, I have to admit, your alternate ending sounds pretty frickin' cool.

Mike: I guess we'll agree to disagree on the ending (on much of the film, really), but I see your point.

Mike: Well, this brings us to another thrilling conclusion from the balcony.  I'm going to give Pumpkinhead one bloody nub up (for Haggis, Henriksen, and the Pumpkinhead demon) and one bloody nub down (for everything else).  It's an okay movie to watch if, like me, you just want to watch horror movies all day and this one just happens to be in the stack of DVDs or on your Netflix queue.

Max: And from my end of the balcony, I give Pumpkinhead two enthusiastic bloody nubs up (one for the elements Mike mentioned, and the other for a rich sense of atmosphere and overall aesthetic success).  If you're like me and you enjoy horror movies with a darkly imaginative bent, then this really is a great movie for repeat viewings.

No comments:

Post a Comment