Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (9) Shark Horror

Poster art – Shark Bait (2022)

 

 

(9) SHARK HORROR

 

For instant horror, just add sharks!

I’m joking and serious. There’s even a trope for it in TV Tropes – Threatening Shark (or Everything’s Even Worse with Sharks).

Obviously that’s the case in shark horror films – that is, horror films where the source of the horror is a shark or sharks preying on humans.

However, even in films of other genres, adding a shark or sharks usually adds an element of horror – even if only from fear or suspense by the appearance or presence of that shark or those sharks. The James Bond films are fond of their sharks for example, so much so they were parodied by Dr Evil in Austin Powers wanting sharks with “fricking laser beams” attached to their heads.

There’s just something primal about our fear of sharks.

“Want to make a (usually) aquatic situation a dangerous nightmare? One way is sharks.”

But none more so than in shark horror films. In those, the sea’s your limit – or rather it isn’t, since you can have your sharks in almost any water, natural habitat or not. There’s the mutated cave sharks in the sequel to 47 Meters Down – or sharks in a suburban store flooded by a tsunami.

You’re not even necessarily limited to your “(usually) aquatic situation”. The sky’s your limit – literally with the Sharknado films.

For that matter, you’re not limited to normal sharks, often in combination with not being limited to aquatic situations. I’ve mentioned those mutated cave sharks but there’s other strands of evolution – biggest of them all the prehistoric megalodon. And the sky’s the limit for it as well – I’ve seen an excerpt from one megalodon film (Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus), admittedly hilarious, where the mega-shark breached the surface as sharks do, but to literally bring down a jet airliner at commercial flight height.

And you can just get weirder from there – genetically engineered sharks, ghost or demon sharks, and so on.

And yes – one can easily compile a shark horror top ten on the spot, particularly if you’re prepared to get…schlocky about it.

 

In no particular order other than alphabetical (other than Jaws in top spot)

1 – Jaws (indeed, a whole franchise of them)

2 – 47 Meters Down (with at least one sequel – with those mutated cave sharks)

3 – Bait (the one with the tsunami sharks – in Australia!)

4 – Deep Blue Sea (genetically engineered brainy sharks – with a sequel!)

5 – Great White (res ipsa loquitur)

6 – The Meg (megalodon shark horror)

7 – Open Water (based on a true story from Australia – with at least two sequels)

8 – The Reef (another film set in Australia)

9 – The Shallows

10 – Shark Night

(Dis)honorable mention – Sharknado

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (8) Asian Horror

From the promotional art of the Sadako vs Kayako film – I just wanted the two of them together. No, not like that. Okay – maybe just a little

 

 

(8) ASIAN HORROR

 

Yes, yes – I’m sweeping the entire horror film industries of east and south-east Asia into one stringy-haired ghost girl special mention of The Ring vs The Grudge (but not literally the Ring vs the Grudge in that crossover film between them).

That’s because I only have the most superficial knowledge of Asian horror, almost entirely consisting of those stringy-haired ghost girls (or onryo) of Japanese horror film (or J-horror).

Yes – I’m talking the leading ghost girl duo of Sadako (or Samara in the American version) in The Ring and Kayako in The Grudge.

In fairness, those ghost girls are freaky. What makes them even more freaky is that they don’t exactly target their rage at the people who deserve it. Just anyone unlucky enough to cross their path (or play their tape) – they’re just that p*ssed off with anyone that’s not dead like them. And then they come crawling out of your television, or your own hari, or just goddamn anywhere – usually moving in the most unnatural way or making the most unnerving noises.

Anyway, let’s just say they have piqued my interest in Asian horror, which has dipped ever so slightly into Japanese, Korean, and Thai horror films – from which I hope to accumulate enough for an Asian horror top ten.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (7) Folk Horror

Classic film poster art for The Wicker Man

 

 

(7) FOLK HORROR

 

“Who are these coming to the sacrifice?”

Folk horror is a subgenre of horror fiction or film – indeed, arguably a sub-genre of religious horror, except based on elements of folklore, supernatural or otherwise, “to invoke fear and foreboding”.

“Typical elements include a rural setting, isolation, and themes of superstition, folk religion, paganism, sacrifice and the dark aspects of nature”.

The original “unholy trinity” identified as folk horror were three British films in the 1960s-1970s – Witchfinder General (1968), The Blood on Satan’s Claw (1971) and my own personal archetype of folk horror (as well as second favorite horror film of all time), The Wicker Man (1973).

The phrase folk horror was popularized by the BBC documentary A History of Horror in 2010 by director Piers Haggard for his film The Blood on Satan’s Claw in an interview with Mark Gatiss – in which he invoked the unholy trinity.

Subsequently, there’s been a “folk horror revival” of the subgenre in film in the 2010s and 2020s – while fok horror has consistently been the default genre of horror in Southeast Asian film.

It’s tight (and I have to squint a bit at some films to make them fit) but I can just squeeze out a Folk Horror top ten on the spot – and even a few special mentions.

 

1 – THE WICKER MAN (1973)

 

The archetypal folk horror film, eerie and otherworldly without any supernatural elements. Second place in my Top 10 Horror Films

 

2 – THE RITUAL (2017)

 

Folk horror in Sweden – definitely with a supernatural element. Ninth place in my Top 10 Horror Films, riding on the back of its supernatural antagonist.

 

3 – MIDSOMMAR (2019)

 

Brightly lit Swedish folk horror – replaying many of the same beats of The Wicker Man, similarly with no supernatural element.

 

4 – ROBERT EGGERS – THE WITCH (2015)

 

All of Robert Eggers’ films have had a folk horror vibe so far – but none more so than The Witch, with the most supernatural element. Overlaps with Christian religious horror in Puritan America.

 

5 – GARETH EVANS – THE APOSTLE (2018)

 

A surprising change of direction (heh) to supernatural folk horror by Evans after the martial arts action of The Raid. I’d have ranked it higher if it had included the signature Raid cast.

 

6 – PICNIC AT HANGING ROCK (1975)

 

“Miranda!”

Light on the horror (as opposed to mystery) but the film is cited as eerie and otherworldly Australian folk horror centered around the titular landmark. The mystery at its heart is left unanswered but suggests the supernatural (which turned out to be true according to the answer to the mystery in the final chapter eventually published by the author of the book on which it is based – and a little underwhelming).

Also how has this not had an adult film parody version (well, apart from being too “artsy” and niche a film)? There’s naughty schoolgirls – and the title basically writes itself.

 

7 – DEAD AND BURIED (1981)

 

I featured it in my zombie horror top ten. Perhaps somewhat light on the folk part of its American setting (which is borrowed from folk religion elsewhere) but this film definitely has a folk horror vibe to it – and supernatural to boot

 

8 – CHILDREN OF THE CORN (1984)

 

I featured in my King horror top ten but it’s also American folk horror – with a supernatural element

 

9 – LAIR OF THE WHITE WORM (1988)

 

Featured in my vampire top ten, it’s also folk horror with its surviving pagan Roman cult with its snake god (with a thing for Christian virgins and characteristic psychedelic imagery by director Ken Russell)

 

10 – THE SERPENT AND THE RAINBOW (1988)

 

Featured in my zombie horror top ten – it’s also Haitian folk horror

 

HONORABLE MENTION

 

1 – EVIL DEAD

 

My top horror film – also featured in my zombie top ten. It’s not folk horror as such but could easily be tweaked to be, particularly as a cult to the Necronomicon – and occasionally folk horror elements pop up in the franchise

 

2 – FROM DUSK TILL DAWN

 

Featured in my vampire horror top ten, it’s not folk horror but has some elements suggestive of it, especially in that closing shot panning out from the Aztec pyramid at the back of the strip club – and in elements of the TV series

 

3 – ASIAN HORROR

 

Preempting an upcoming special mention – as noted above, folk horror is the default mode of Southeast Asian horror films, and not too far some most East Asian horror either

 

4 BEN WHEATLEY

 

A director whose films have been a large part of the twenty-first century folk horror revival – I’d probably rank him in my top ten if I could find his films to stream and watch

 

5 – BLAIR WITCH PROJECT

 

Unlike Ben Wheatley, I have seen the Blair Witch Project…but kinda wish I hadn’t. It is American folk horror though

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (1) Worst: Caligula

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome X: The Mad Emperors

 

(1) WORST: CALIGULA –

JULIO-CLAUDIAN DYNASTY

(37-41 AD: 3 YEARS 10 MONTHS 6 DAYS)

 

“Would that the Roman people had but one neck”

Ah – Caligula, dreaming of choking out all Rome, the archetype of legendary cruelty and depravity as well as that of the capricious and insane tyrant, so much so that there is a trope of the Caligula named for him (and we all know the type, depressingly frequent in history and culture).

Cue the gag for Caligula learning his capriciousness from Tiberius in Capri.

As I said for Nero, what can I say? You can’t argue with the Gospel of Suetonius, or the Revelations of Bob Guccione in his 1979 Caligula film. Or with the Gospel of Robert Graves which follows Suetonius, or the Revelations of Judge Dredd with Caligula as its Chief Judge Cal in The Day the Law Died.

Also, as I said for Nero, while there may be some issues with the accuracy of sources, particularly the more lurid details recorded by Suetonius, there’s just too much insane smoke for there to have not been an insane fire.

Speaking of Suetonius, if you only read one chapter from Suetonius’ The Twelve Caesars (and it is available free online), then that should be his chapter on Caligula. It’s a hoot! Although I say that from the safe distance of two millennia as well as from Rome itself, because I wouldn’t put it past his ghost or ghoul to get me.

Caligula of course wasn’t his name, but his nickname – uncannily similar to Caracalla subsequently, for an item of clothing worn by each while cosplaying as a soldier, although in Caligula’s case it was his mother cosplaying him as a child in army camps and for his boots rather than a cloak. That’s right – his nickname translates as “Little Boots” or “Bootsy”, which is adorable until he grows up to become emperor.

And you don’t want to make Caligula emperor – you wouldn’t like him when he’s emperor.

Although the sources suggest that people initially did like him as emperor, because among other things, he seems to have ruled well for the first six months until falling sick – “upon recovering, Caligula had permanently lost his hair and apparently his mind”. Or as he perceived it, he had become a divine being. And who’s to say? I can well imagine that’s exactly how a divine being might act when trapped in a mortal form – particularly the divine beings from classical mythology, as it’s how they act a lot of the time. After all, only a god could be that crazy and get away with it.

Anyway, all this sadly suggests that he might have been decent but for sickness making him insane. Or not, I have my doubts – and I note the Gospel of Robert Graves, a.k.a I, Claudius, has him as somewhat psychopathic from the outset.

It’s all there in the sources, particularly Suetonius, which “focus upon his cruelty, sadism, extravagance, and sexual perversion” – “committing incest with his sisters, sending his army against the sea after declaring war on the ocean god Neptune and having them stab the waves and collect shells as booty, marrying a woman who was 9 months pregnant so he wouldn’t have to wait for an heir (whether or not it was his is unclear), using a tax hike upon the birth of his daughter to provide gold for him to roll around in, and wanting to make his favorite horse a consul”.

Also arbitrarily confiscating property in increasingly outrageous for his own spending, punishing citizens for being handsome or having more hair than him, and opening up his palace as a brothel. Actually, I’m with him on that last one.

Indeed, Caligula was so over the top insane that it sometimes seems to be parody or epic trolling – Caligula would rock it on X-Twitter.

I can’t resist quoting The Caligula trope on TV Tropes, given how well it encapsulates, well, THE Caligula:

“The Caligula will be wildly irrational, violently moody, extremely debauched, will never tolerate being told anything they don’t want to hear, and are probably afflicted with a god complex. In short, they will be a Psychopathic Manchild with the power of life or death over everyone whom they can reach. They may be a sexual deviant, or they might take pleasure in the pain and suffering they cause. They may indulge in renaming cities or even the entire country after themself or throwing out increasingly ridiculous decrees with brutal punishments in store for anyone who breaks them. Whatever form the madness takes, one thing is certain: to do anything the Caligula finds displeasing is to inevitably be dragged off to a grisly death or worse. Of course, any number of things might trigger their rage, and they might even decide on a whim to punish those who have not done anything at all”.

 

EMPIRE DEBAUCHER

 

The, ah, debauchiest? Well, either him or Elagabalus.

 

MAXIMUS

 

Well unless you count Neptune. Caligula should have had a triumph with all the shells

 

DAMNED

 

No formal damnatio memoriae but history has damned him

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

The most tongue-in-cheek – and funniest – of  Dovahhatty’s mock chad emperors, outright portraying Caligula as the divine chad he saw himself to be, including literally sparring with Neptune. Although again Dovahhatty’s Elagabalus gives his Caligula a run for his denarii – really, they’re the twin peaks of ‘divine’ mad Roman emperors.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (WORST-TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (6) Religious Horror

One of the most iconic images of religious horror – Damien – from one of the two most iconic religious horror films – The Omen

 

 

(6) RELIGIOUS HORROR

 

The original horror, preceding horror in film and indeed as old as dirt – horror in religion, with the source of the horror as the antagonistic supernatural beings of that religion.

Of course, in Western popular culture, that religion is Christianity – usually defaulting to Catholicism, as tacit acknowledgement that it is the one branch of Christianity that can go toe for toe with the forces of evil and look good doing it. I’m joking and serious – serious about that last part, due to the visually iconic nature of Catholicism. There’s even a trope named for it – Christianity is Catholic. That is, when Christianity is depicted onscreen, it will tend to be Catholic.

Hence the supernatural beings will usually be the Devil, demons or other forces of Hell – with exorcism and possession often featuring prominently as the opposing sides of the battlefield.

It’s also the original horror for me personally, thanks to being raised in a religion in childhood, although I wouldn’t say it was religious as such – more just the usual background tribal culture in which people grow up. However, by my childhood logic, I figured that everything else bad could be traced to the Big Bad itself, so my biggest childhood fear was the Devil.

I grew out of it but The Exorcist and The Omen – which for me will always be the two leading religious horror films – still invoke something of that childhood fear to scare me sh*tless, even with a few drinks to soften them up.

Yes – there’s other religious horror films, enough for their own top ten, but those two are the biggest, perhaps with Rosemary’s Baby as a distant third for the unholy trinity of religious horror.

And yes – even now there’s enough of that residual childhood fear for me to know better than to talk about the details of those films, just as I also know better than to much around with ouija boards (with one playing a prominent role in The Exorcist).

Okay, okay – here’s my Religious Horror top ten on the spot

 

1 – THE OMEN (1976)

 

Damien!

Antichrist horror.

And yes – it spawned a franchise. The first two sequels were okay enough but none equalled the first film. 2024 saw The First Omen as a decent prequel.

 

2 – THE EXORCIST (1973)

 

Another franchise – the title gives you the basic premise.

 

3 – ROSEMARY’S BABY (1968)

 

More Antichrist horror

 

4 – AMITYVILLE HORROR (1979)

 

Iconic haunted house horror – or rather, possessed house horror. Also spawned a franchise.

 

5 – THE CONJURING (2013)

 

More haunted or possessed house horror. Yet another franchise – I’m also counting the Annabelle and Nun spinoffs, the latter being even more religious horror than the Conjuring

 

6 – ANGEL HEART (1986)

 

Seemingly starts off as film noir, ends up as religious horror. Nice turn by Robert De Niro as (spoiler alert) the Devil – going by the transparent moniker Louis Cypher.

 

7 – THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE (2005)

 

More exorcism horror

 

8 – PARANORMAL ACTIVITY (2007)

 

More haunted house horror – or rather, haunted family horror. Also spawned a franchise.

 

9 – HEREDITARY (2018)

 

More haunted family horror

 

10 – LATE NIGHT WITH THE DEVIL (2023)

 

Sadly not Satan hosting a late night TV show but that’s close enough to the premise for the film

 

 

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Emperors (1) Best: Augustus

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome IX: Augustus

 

(1) BEST: AUGUSTUS

JULIO-CLAUDIAN DYNASTY

(27 BC – 14 AD: 40 YEARS 7 MONTHS 3 DAYS)

 

THE Roman emperor – the first and best emperor, the definitive and archetypal emperor.

The most august emperor. Dare I say it, the most Augustus of emperors, or rather, Augustus of Augustuses, since all emperors were titled Augustus for his title (not to mention the eighth month of the year) or Caesar for his adoptive family name.

Augustus is commonly nominated as the best or top emperor and I’m not about to dissent from that. It’s a common nomination for a reason. The Roman Senate themselves routinely invoked him as the first of their two benchmarks or gold standards when inaugurating new emperors. I’ve already referred to the second part of this invocation in reference to Trajan, but of course the full phrase also invoked Augustus – felicior Augusto, melior Traiano, may you be “luckier than Augustus and better than Trajan”. Luckier or more fortunate that is, with the connotation of divine fortune that favored Augustus. And since the Senate deified Augustus, consistent with the imperial cult he cultivated (heh), he made his own divine fortune.

Caesar Augustus – born Gaius Octavius and also known as Octavian – instituted the Roman Empire itself, characterized by the imperial peace, the Pax Romana or Pax Augusta. The grandnephew of Julius Caesar and named in Caesar’s will as his adopted son and heir, he inherited Caesar’s name, estate, and the loyalty of Caesar’s legions.

He formed the Second Triumvirate with Mark Antony and some other guy no one remembers (Lepidus) to defeat the assassins of Caesar. The Triumvirate effectively divided the Republic between them as a duumvirate of Octavian and Antony, with the former in control of its western provinces and the latter its eastern provinces. Octavian then famously fought and defeated Antony in the latter’s alliance (and romance) with Cleopatra, taking Egypt from de facto Roman client state to province.

With Octavian as sole ruler of the Republic, he adopted the title by which he has thereafter been known (and used to honour his imperial successors) – Augustus. And also Princeps or First Citizen (Princeps Civitas), which has come to denominate the Principate, the system of imperial rule instituted by him and which endured for two centuries until Diocletian’s Dominate. That system essentially involved Augustus maintaining the façade or formal appearance of the Republic over the reality of imperial authority and institutions of empire, hence the modesty of the Princeps title.

And having transformed the Republic into an empire, he dramatically enlarged the empire – annexing Egypt of course in his defeat of Anthony and Cleopatra, but also conquering northern Hispania (modern Spain and Portugal), the Alpine regions of Raetia and Noricum (modern Switzerland, Bavaria, Austria, Slovenia), and Illyricum and Pannonia (modern Albania, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia). He also extended the borders of the province of Africa (the former territory of Carthage), peacefully converted the client state of Galatia (part of modern Turkey but with Gauls!) into a Roman province, and added Judea to the province of Syria as a recurring source of unforeseen Roman imperial woes, not to mention Christianity.

In other words, he sealed up the Mediterranean under Roman supremacy (not to mention Italy’s alpine buffer), making the Mediterranean their b*tch – or mare nostrum as they called it. Not so much Germany though, with Augustine famously mourning the defeat and loss of three legions under their commander Varus in the Battle of Teutoberg Forest – “Quintili Vare, legiones redde! “(“Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions!”).

Oh well – even the greatest can’t win them all. However, it is a convenient segue to a comparison between Augustus and Julius Caesar. Caesar may well have been more charismatic than Augustus and definitely was a greater military leader, but I would say that Augustus obviously had greater political acumen than Caesar – given that the latter’s ambitions provoked his own assassination while the former’s created the empire. And fortunately Augustus could rely on the skill of his military commanders to compensate for his lack of skill – foremost among them Marcus Agrippa, who can lay claim to being among the best Roman military leaders.

After that comparison to Julius Caesar, I can’t resist quoting Dovahhatty’s comparison of Augustus to Alexander the Great (upon him visiting the latter’s tomb, where Dovahhatty has Augustus scoff “Pfft – what a loser!”):

“For when Alexander became king, he was twenty. When Octavian was adopted by Caesar, he was nineteen. When Alexander took thirteen years to conquer the sh*thole of the East, Octavian took the same time to subdue the entire Mediterranean. And while Alexander’s empire disintegrated the nanosecond after he died, Octavian would lay the foundations for the greatest empire in human history”.

Beyond the frontiers of his empire, Augustus “secured the empire with a buffer region of client states and made peace with the Parthian Empire through diplomacy”. Within them, “he reformed the Roman system of taxation, developed networks of roads with an official courier system, established a standing army, established the Praetorian Guard as well as official police and fire-fighting services for Rome, and rebuilt much of the city during his reign”. As he famously said, he found Rome a city of brick and left it a city of marble.

Finally, the longevity of Augustus’s reign and its legacy to the Roman world should not be overlooked as a key factor in the success of the Roman Empire, if only because as Tacitus observed, the younger generation at his death in 14 AD (after his reign of over 40 years!) had never known anything else than his Principate.

But it wasn’t just that – “Augustus’s own experience, his patience, his tact, and his political acumen also played their parts. He directed the future of the empire down many lasting paths, from the existence of a standing professional army stationed at or near the frontiers, to the dynastic principle so often employed in the imperial succession, to the embellishment of the capital at the emperor’s expense. Augustus’s ultimate legacy was the peace and prosperity the Empire enjoyed for the next two centuries under the system he initiated. His memory was enshrined in the political ethos of the Imperial age as a paradigm of the good emperor. Every emperor of Rome adopted his name, Caesar Augustus, which gradually lost its character as a name and eventually became a title. The Augustan era poets Virgil and Horace praised Augustus as a defender of Rome, an upholder of moral justice, and an individual who bore the brunt of responsibility in maintaining the empire”

 

EMPIRE-MAKER

 

The greatest of them all – THE empire maker (and emperor maker).

 

MAXIMUS

 

Augustus didn’t claim any formal victory titles that I could find, but did hold three triumphs – for his conquest of Pannonia, for the naval victory against Cleopatra and Antony at Actium, and for the conquest of Egypt

 

DEIFICATION

 

Divine Augustus! One of the few emperors worthy of worship – I’d sign up for the cult of Augustus.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

The chaddest of them all – did you not see my Dovahhatty quote comparing Augustus to Alexander the Great, much to the detriment of the latter?

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD-TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (5) King Horror

“Here’s Johnny!” – the iconic scene from The Shining

 

(5) KING HORROR

 

King horror – Stephen King horror, that is, for the cinematic adaptations from one of the most iconic and prolific horror writers of our time. Images, lines and scenes from his work reverberate throughout popular culture, particularly driven by their cinematic or screen adaptations.

There’s something of a trope that goes around that his work makes for bad cinematic adaptations. This trope seems wrong to me – the more correct statement would be that the cinematic adaptations are mixed. A number of films from his work are good or well regarded – hence this special mention – “while many others are not”.

Of course much depends on the director but one rule of thumb I have is that the better movies are based on his shorter or tighter works. Like most screen adaptations of literary works, the longer the book the messier the adaptation gets. Not too short though – short stories can have too little substance to them for a feature length film.

And for the worst Stephen King cinematic adaptation ever – The Lawnmower Man – they didn’t even use what little substance they had from the titular story for a feature film, choosing instead to go off on their own weird jaunt based on a single (misplaced) line. The film became notorious for King suing it to remove his name from it.

Anyway, here’s my King horror cinematic top ten on the spot:

 

1 – THE SHINING (1980)

 

“Here’s Johnny!”

Probably THE King horror film adaptation that everyone loves – ironically as King himself is not a fan given the different direction (heh) in which Stanley Kubrick took the film.

 

2 – CARRIE (1976)

 

It’s not nice to make fun of Carrie…it’s not safe either.

That’s the tagline I recall for the film. With a strong cast including Sissy Spacek in the titular role and taut direction by Brian De Palma, the film is consistently ranked a high place among King adaptations – even more so because it was the adaptation that allowed King to become a full time writer.

 

3 – CUJO (1983)

 

Who’s a good boy? Well, he was until…

 

4 – CHRISTINE (1983)

 

Probably the most famous possessed car in popular culture.

Well hello again, Mr Carpenter – although King himself wasn’t a fan of the film.

 

5 – CHILDREN OF THE CORN (1984)

 

He Who Walks Behind The Rows.

The first film was a cracker, based on the short story by King. The sequels or franchise? Not so much.

 

6 – PET SEMATARY (1989)

 

“No fair”

A monkey’s paw of a movie – in that sometimes getting what you wish for is the worst thing you can get.

They came back wrong. Classic pulp horror but that line and scene gets me each time – because evil Gage is telling the truth. Everything about his death, resurrection and, ah, re-death wasn’t fair.

 

7 – MISERY (1990)

 

“I’m your number one fan!”

Arguably the best and tightest of King’s cinematic adaptations, due to the dynamite duo performance of Kathy Bates and James Caan – Bates got an Oscar for her performance, making the film the only King adaptation to win one.

 

8 – THE MIST (2007)

 

One of the biggest wham endings of any horror film – which Stephen King liked so much he preferred it to his own ending.

 

9 – IT (2017-2019)

 

Ah – Pennywise!

One of the best known of King’s cinematic adaptations, due to the visually iconic depiction of the titular antagonist and all its creepy extensions of itself

 

10 – IN THE TALL GRASS (2019)

 

Where’s a mower when you need one?

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (2) Worst: Nero

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XII: The Mad Emperors

 

(2) WORST: NERO –

JULIO-CLAUDIAN DYNASTY

(54-68 AD: 13 YEARS 7 MONTHS 27 DAYS)

 

What can I say? You just can’t argue with the Gospel of Suetonius. Or the Book of Apocalypse, with Nero literally as the Beast of the Apocalypse – or as I like to quip, that sixy beast, given that the Number of the Beast was alphanumeric code for Nero Caesar.

Well, Nero or some weird revenant superpowered uber-Nero, with one of the heads of the beast having healed from a fatal wound, matching the so-called Nero Redivivus Legend, or the widespread belief that Nero was either not dead after his apparent suicide or somehow would return.

I mean, you can’t argue with legendary cruelty and depravity that is so legendary as to give rise to the further legend of coming back from the dead to keep doing it. After his death, at least three leaders of short-lived, failed rebellions presented themselves as “Nero reborn” – Pseudo-Nero, or is that pseudo-uber Nero?

In other words, you just can’t argue with the legend – legend that lends him notoriety as one of Rome’s two archetypes of evil emperor, even if that notoriety exceeds the historical reality and is likely exaggerated, by the Roman elites who hated him and wrote his histories, as well as the Christian writers who saw him as “one of their earliest and most infamous villains”.

I am inclined to accept that his legendary cruelty and depravity was exaggerated, particularly in its most lurid details. However, I just can’t go past that name recognition or iconic status…and I’m also inclined to accept that “he was really off his rocker”, albeit probably later in his reign.

Dare I say it – there’s just a little too much smoke for there not to have been fire (heh). Just perhaps not the Great Fire as it was attributed to him as arsonist – or that he fiddled while Rome burned as the saying goes, or that he sang or played the lyre as the legend went. However, it does seem plausible that he was tone deaf (heh) to placing too much priority on lavish palaces for himself in the reconstruction or used it as an opportunity to scapegoat Christians.

“Most Roman sources offer overwhelmingly negative assessments of his personality and reign. Most contemporary sources describe him as tyrannical, self-indulgent, and debauched”. Or as Suetonius wrote, in his chapter on Nero that is the second most entertaining chapter in The Twelve Caesars – “his acts of wantonness, lust, extravagance, avarice and cruelty”.

Unlike the empire breakers in this top ten, he did have some basic competence as emperor, notably with respect to wars and revolts, even if that was more his generals (and there was little that could realistically challenge an empire then at the top of its game) – the general Corbulo who fought the Roman–Parthian War of 58–63 and the general Suetonius Paulinus who quashed the famous revolt in Britain led by queen Boudica (even if he went so beserk on the Britons afterwards that Nero had to recall him). During his reign, the client Bosporan Kingdom was also annexed to the empire, and the First Jewish–Roman War began (albeit finished by the Flavian dynastic duo, Vespasian and Titus, that fought it for Nero).

But we are talking about someone who killed his own mother, even if that mother was the infamous Agrippina and she was scheming against him (as she had originally schemed for him and against his predecessor Claudius). It took him a few attempts too, which I like to think of as the original source of that legend of Nero being hard to kill permanently. Like mother, like son.

His early reign was decent enough – it seems modern scholars follow Roman historians in seeing his mother’s death as the point he lost the plot. Which is where those lurid details come in – “he started to become more preoccupied with leading a decadent life…drank and ate a lot, and immersed himself in perverted sexual behaviour, both with men and women”.

My favorite is the reference in Suetonius that forever burnt itself into my adolescent mind when I read it – that he “devised a kind of game, in which, covered with the skin of some wild animal, he was let loose from a cage and attacked the private parts of men and women, who were bound to stakes, and when he had sated his mad lust, was dispatched”.

And there was his infamous persecution of the Christians, swallowing up even Saints Peter and Paul – including that he “had many of them tied up on poles next the road, then covered in tar and set on fire, so they could function as street lighting during parties.

He also “fancied himself a wonderful poet, singer and lyricist” – hence the last words attributed to him, “what an artist the world is losing!”.

Those last words came after the Senate had Nero declared a public enemy and condemned to death in absentia – his death at his own hand sparking Rome’s first succession crisis, which might be dubbed the crisis of the first century but for the empire being too stable and secure at that time, as well as a brief civil war between rival claimants known as the Year of the Four Emperors.

 

EMPIRE-DEBAUCHER

 

One of the most debauched

 

MAXIMUS

 

No victory titles as far as I’m aware.

 

DAMNED

 

Not a formal damnatio memoriae but he was declared public enemy by the Senate.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

One of the two mad emperors for which he named the episode in which they appear, it’s another tongue-in-cheek depiction by Dovahhatty as divine chad emperor, no doubt as Nero would have seen himself.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (FAIL TIER – OR IS THAT BEAST TIER?)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (4) Slasher Horror

2010 film poster

 

(4) SLASHER HORROR

 

“Here, we can see a slasher movie killer in their natural habitat, stalking the final girl.”

I tend to prefer other sub-genres of horror to slasher horror but the latter is so iconic of the horror film genre in general that I have to rank it in my S-tier or god-tier special mentions, particularly with the iconic visual design of their slashers.

Also, like zombie horror films, they have become so prolific as to define their own film genre, one worthy of their own top ten list many times over just for their themes, tropes and types, as well as by iconic slasher.

Interestingly, on the subject of type, according to Wikipedia “the slasher canon can be divided into three eras: the classical (1974–1993), the self-referential (1994–2000) and the neoslasher cycle (2000–2013)”.

Given my preference for supernatural (or SF) horror, I tend to prefer the more supernatural slashers. More overtly supernatural slashers that is, as all slashers tend towards supernatural – at least in terms of their superhuman ability to, well, slash, stalk, and all other ancillary abilities associated with them.

It’s like the film Taken – slashers tend to have a very particular set of skills. Hmm…now there’s a story idea concept, Taken as slasher film (or vice versa from the slasher’s perspective).

“The killers, mostly driven by revenge, are also typically somewhat made of iron, at a minimum, and frequently implacable to boot. Slashers prefer melee weapons that let them get up close and personal with their victims and almost never use firearms. Many are borderline (or explicitly) supernatural, having the ability to appear and disappear as if by magic. The corpses of their victims tend to be equally elusive; a slasher killer can whisk away a fully-grown adult’s body in seconds, leaving not a single drop of blood behind, or swiftly arrange all their victims into an elaborate tableau, without ever being seen lugging the dead bodies around”.

Anyway, here’s my Top 10 Slasher Films (and their iconic slashers) on the spot.

 

1 – WES CRAVEN – NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (FREDDY KRUEGER)

 

My favorite slasher film franchise – the combination of slasher horror with supernatural dream-haunting demon is hard to beat. Wes Craven has also proved one of the more capable directors as creators of slasher horror (and horror in general)

While iconic, Freddy is not the most iconic slasher – that title has to go to the duo of my next two entries

 

2 – JOHN CARPENTER – HALLOWEEN (MICHAEL MYERS)

 

That iconic William Shatner mask. And hello again, Mr Carpenter.

 

3 – FRIDAY THE 13TH (JASON VORHEES)

 

That iconic hockey mask

 

4 – TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (LEATHERFACE)

 

Title says it all really – as does the slasher’s nom de slash.

 

5 – WES CRAVEN – SCREAM (GHOSTFACE)

 

Hello again, Mr Craven. Yeah – we’re very much in the self-referential phase of slasher canon here, with Scream as its definitive franchise

 

6 – CHILD’S PLAY (CHUCKY)

 

If a dream-demon like Freddy Kreuger can be a slasher, why not a possessed doll. Well, apart from the size thing, which makes Chucky a little hard to take seriously – hence why he’s not in the top iconic slashers

 

7 – WES CRAVEN – THE HILLS HAVE EYES

 

Hello again, Mr Craven. I’ll rank this here – namely because of the lack of a similarly iconic slasher among its hillbilly mutant cannibal tribe (and also because said tribe strays somewhat from the archetypal slasher film)

 

8 – I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER

 

A distant second to the Scream franchise as representative of the self-referential phase of slasher canon – also that hook guy just doesn’t have the same iconic status or visual design as the top slashers

 

9 – SAW

 

Yes – less slasher and more torture p0rn but I’m still ranking it here as close enough, if only for the iconic puppet used by the killer.

 

10 – WOLF CREEK

 

Australian slasher horror!

 

HONORABLE MENTION

 

PSYCHO

 

Precursor and inspiration for slasher horror – it also gives us an iconic horror figure with Norman Bates

 

THE HITCHER

 

As I rank it in my Top 10 Horror Films and it definitely overlaps with slasher horror, I have to give it a shout out here.

 

SILENCE OF THE LAMBS & AMERICAN PSYCHO

Two of the most (in)famous serial killers in cinema – Hannibal Lecter and Patrick Bateman – influenced and an influence on slasher horror films, although they obviously depart from the slasher archetype in a number of ways.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (2) Best: Trajan

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XII: The Five Good Emperors

 

(2) BEST: TRAJAN –

NERVA-ANTONINE DYNASTY / FIVE GOOD EMPERORS

(98 -117 AD: 19 YEARS 6 MONTHS 10/14 DAYS)

 

The Optimus Prime of Roman emperors. No, really, as in the Senate gave him the title of Optimus or Optimus Princeps, “the best” or “the best emperor”, one of the two benchmarks or gold standards invoked by the Senate for every new emperor thereafter, wishing them to be better than Trajan…but none were (with the possible exception of Aurelian). A little like Jedi wishing may the Force be with you.

Everybody loved Trajan. The army, with whom he was popular as he had distinguished himself in military campaigns against the Germanic tribes. The Praetorian Guard, whose revolt had forced his predecessor Nerva to adopt him as heir and successor. The people. The Senate, who deified him after his death, and as I said, invoked him thereafter for new emperors.

“As an emperor, Trajan’s reputation has endured – he is one of the few rulers whose reputation has survived 19 centuries.”

“Even Christian historians saw him as a virtuous pagan, among other things for not persecuting them too hard during his reign (Catholic tradition holds that Pope Gregory I briefly raised Trajan from the dead in order to convert him). He is immortalized in Heaven in The Divine Comedy”.

He was a successful soldier-emperor, who took the Roman Empire to its greatest territorial extent by the time of his death – a greater area is argued on occasion for Septimus Severus, although that is not clear and just extended worthlessly further into the Saharan desert at most.

Famously, he extended the empire by the conquest of Dacia in his wars against it, and by his annexation of Mesopotamia, Armenia and Assyria as Roman provinces in his war against the Parthian Empire. Less famously, he seems to have quickly and quietly annexed the Arabian client kingdom of Nabataea, possibly because they were just signed up from his pure awesomeness because little else is recorded of it.

And his general Quietus suppressed a widespread revolt by the Jews in the eastern provinces that henceforth bore an adaptation of the name Quietus – the Kitos War, yet another of those recurring revolts by the Jews against the empire before Hadrian wiped Judaea and Jerusalem from the map.

It wasn’t just all conquest or war – he was also a philanthropic ruler, albeit at some cost in debasing the currency. He oversaw prolific building projects and social welfare policies.

May Trojan’s force be with you, indeed.

 

EMPIRE-MAKER

 

Making the Roman Empire to its greatest extent.

 

MAXIMUS

 

Germanicus, Dacicus, Parthicus – and of course, Optimus or best

 

DEIFIED

 

By the gods and divine Trajan, yes!

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

The chad-est of the five chad emperors – and as Dovahhatty laments, “it’s all downhill from here”.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)