Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (3) Zombie Horror & Zombie Apocalypse Horror

Public domain image from George Romero’s 1968 Night of the Living Dead

 

(3) ZOMBIE HORROR & ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE HORROR

 

“Braaaiinnnns!”

If vampire horror is the blood of horror films, zombie horror is the flesh.

Zombie horror films, tending as they do to involve the trope (or tropes) of zombie apocalypse 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.

One thing that surprised me looking it up was that they originate almost as early as Dracula or vampire films – with the first zombie film often cited as White Zombie in 1932.

That surprised me as one usually associates zombies – at least in their cinematic incarnation as opposed to their origin “in the vodou beliefs of Haiti, referring to a body ‘revived’ and enslaved by a sorcerer” – with George A. Romero’s 1968 film Night of the Living Dead.

That film defined the cinematic incarnation of zombies – “usually portrayed as reanimated corpses or virally infected human beings” and commonly “cannibalistic in nature” (or “ghouls” as Romero preferred to call them in that film). Usually depicted as shambling en masse, invoking metaphors of mobs or proletarian masses.

However, “while Romero is responsible for most of the ‘general’ zombie conventions, the more specific and visible zombie tropes are more often inspired by the later works of John Russo, Night‘s co-writer. Most zombie movies mix-and-match conventions from the Romero and Russo canons. The Russo canon in particular…is the reason most people will respond with “Braaiinnnns” when zombies come up in conversation”.

Zombie horror films have subsequently ramped up the traditional slow zombies with fast ones – “super-fast and super-angry zombies” that make death (or viral infection) look like a positive boon for Olympic-level athletic performance, better than steroids. Not to mention other elite zombies, with other qualities such as intelligence.

 

Similarly to vampire horror, I’ll probably flesh this out but for now this is my zombie horror film top ten on the spot:

 

1 – EVIL DEAD (1981-1992 / 2013-2023)

 

Not really zombie horror as such since the titular evil dead are killed and reanimated by demonic possession…but I can’t not mention my favorite horror film franchise here now, can I? Particularly when there is a large overlap between the two, not least the reanimated corpses

 

2 – DEAD & BURIED (1981)

 

Fourth place in my top ten horror films – like the Evil Dead film franchise, not quite your archetypal cinematic zombies but close enough I have to mention it here

 

3 – SHAUN OF THE DEAD (2004)

 

“Go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for all this to blow over”.

Similar to my third place vampire horror entry Fright Night, Shaun of the Dead is probably my favorite zombie horror film to watch – classic pulp fun, but incredibly layered with easter eggs and shout-outs to zombie apocalypse horror.

Billed as a RomZomCom – or romantic comedy with zombies.

 

4 – 28 DAYS LATER (2002)

 

Arguably the most definitive modern zombie horror film after Romero and Russo – certainly bringing new life (heh) to the fast zombie trope. It helps speed them up that the zombies aren’t actually dead but virally infected. Also like other zombie apocalypse films in general that show the real enemy is not so much the zombies as one’s fellow humans – here it’s animal rights activists (and children in the sequel film 28 Weeks Later). Okay, fine – it’s also mad horny soldiers (and sheer military ineptitude on the same level of having a button marked push for zombies in the sequel).

But seriously, animal rights activists are to blame for the release of the virus in the first place. In fairness, I also blame the scientist for obtusely telling them the laboratory chimpanzees are infected with “rage” rather than a lethally contagious disease that can spread in seconds. It practically begs the skeptical response – “Yeah, I’d be pretty angry too!”

 

5 – LAST TRAIN TO BUSAN (2016)

 

Zombies on a train!

East Asian film and TV – in this case Korean film – have taken to the zombie genre with a vengeance.

 

6 – BRAIN DEAD (1990)

 

Before Peter Jackson did The Lord of the Rings, he did splatterpunk schlock like this – and it’s a hoot.

 

7 – CEMETERY MAN / DELLAMORTE DELLAMORE (1994)

 

Probably the most ”artsy” zombie horror film you’ll see (with Anna Falchi as one of the hottest female characters in a zombie film) – good luck keeping track of the plot.

 

8 – ZOMBIELAND (2009)

 

One of the better known zombie apocalypse films – and one of the most fun to watch.

 

9 – CARGO (2017)

 

Australian zombie horror films are surprisingly prevalent – this is one of the more highbrow (and emotional) ones, starring Martin Freeman

 

10 – ALIVE (2020)

 

Another fun zombie apocalypse horror film from Korea, using its highrise setting to good effect.

 

HONORABLE MENTION

 

(1988) THE SERPENT & THE RAINBOW

 

Stretching the definition of zombie horror film – going back to the origins of the zombie in Haitian vodou belief.

 

(2003-2014) UNDEAD & WYRMWOOD

 

More Australian zombie horror films – if Cargo is the highbrow end of the spectrum, these are more to the lowbrow end (and filmed on shoestring budgets to match). Pulp fun!

 

(2007) PLANET TERROR

 

Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino do for zombies what they did for vampires in From Dusk Till Dawn.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

 

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (3) Worst: Elagabalus

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XIII: The Severan Dynasty

 

(3) WORST: ELAGABALUS –

SEVERAN DYNASTY

(218 – 222 AD: 3 YEARS 9 MONTHS 4 DAYS)

 

With great power comes great degeneracy.

Certainly one of the weirdest emperors, Elagabalus is what happens when you let an omnisexual teenager of dubious mental stability loose with absolute imperial power AND his own cult. It’s like Elagabalus read Suetonius’ The Twelve Caesars with its lurid depictions of imperial depravity and said hold my beer.

And so “Elagabalus developed a reputation among his contemporaries for extreme eccentricity, decadence, zealotry and sexual promiscuity” – “his short reign was notorious for sex scandals and religious controversy”.

It does however make for entertaining reading – indeed one of the most entertaining entries in either my top ten worst (or best) emperors. It’s a pity Suetonius wasn’t around to write the tabloid history of Elagabalus.

Elagabalus was his god name – literally. He was born Sextus Varius Avitus Bessianus, a relative (by marriage) of the Severan dynasty – a family connection which his grandmother (and emperor-maker) Julia Maesa boosted further by spreading the rumor that he was the illegitimate son of the emperor Caracalla. His family held hereditary rights to the priesthood of the syncretized Syrian-Greek-Roman sun of the same name (or variants of it) he adopted, having served as high priest from his early youth.

So naturally he brought his god with him to Rome, in the form of his pet rock – again literally, a black conical meteorite from the temple of the god in Emesa, Syria.

The new god of itself was not so weird, since it was readily assimilated to the Roman sun god Sol – the worship of whom had become increasingly prevalent under the Severan dynasty, becoming known as Sol Invictus or the Unconquered Sun (and which would be redeemed by far superior emperors).

What was weird was Elagabalus installing his god as the chief deity of the Roman pantheon and suborning that pantheon to his god – compounded by equivalent of forcing Roman Senators to go to his church and watch him as he danced around the god’s altar, which was hardly conducive to imperial dignity.

Speaking of the Severan dynasty, it’s something of a running theme in my top ten worst Roman emperors, with Elagabalus as the second entry from that dynasty.

Perhaps the most entertaining part of this emperor’s history are the lurid tales of his sexuality. However, “the question of Elagabalus’s sexual orientation and gender identity is confused” due to the salaciousness of the sources, which includes accounts of him asserting and adorning himself as a female, to the point of reputedly seeking out sex changing surgery (and offering half the empire to anyone who could pull it off). Hence some have asserted or claimed him or her as the transsexual Roman emperor.

I am not sure that one should want to claim Elagabalus as one’s poster boy or girl, but moreover, I am not sure that these accounts are accurate to that extent, smacking as they do of Roman hyperbole to characterize someone of, ah, unmanly conduct – un-Romanly conduct that is. However, I do think that the historical sources are clear enough to say that Elagabalus swung every which way, hence my omnisexual quip.

Which has gone down a treat with historical writers. As per Edward Gibbon – Elagabalus “abandoned himself to the grossest pleasures with ungoverned fury” – and Barthold Georg Niebuhr – “the name Elagabalus is branded in history above all others” because of his “unspeakably disgusting life”.

Even Sir James George Frazer, author of The Golden Bough, got in on the act – “The dainty priest of the Sun [was] the most abandoned reprobate who ever sat upon a throne … It was the intention of this eminently religious but crack-brained despot to supersede the worship of all the gods, not only at Rome but throughout the world”.

A more neutrally stated modern assessment is by Adrian Goldsworthy -“Elagabalus was not a tyrant, but he was an incompetent, probably the least able emperor Rome had ever had.”

Interestingly, some have sought to reclaim his reputation. It’s a running theme throughout my top ten worst emperors that almost every entry – or at least almost every entry of major significance – has some advocate for them, as indeed it is for my top ten best emperors to the converse of people querying their legacy or reputation, arising as it does for figures that lack the comprehensive documentation of their contemporary counterparts.

In particular, modern historian Warwick Ball has picked up the Elagabalus ball (heh) and run with it, describing him as “a tragic enigma lost behind centuries of prejudice” – and one whose religious syncretism was ultimately successful in the long term, “in the sense that his deity would be welcomed by Rome in its Sol Invictus form 50 years later” and “came to influence the monotheist Christian beliefs of Constantine, asserting that this influence remains in Christianity to this day”.

 

EMPIRE DEBAUCHER

 

No surprise there, surely?

 

MAXIMUS:

 

No victory titles as such but he did claim the title of Pontifex Maximus as high priest of his god – and did have something of a regular annual triumph for his god, parading his pet rock about the city.

 

DEIFIED AND DAMNED:

 

It was a fine line between the divinity he claimed for his god and that for himself. When marrying a Vestal Virgin – outraging Rome yet again – he claimed the marriage would produce god-like children. And of course after the usual assassination by the Praetorian Guard, the Senate rolled out a damnatio memoriae on him.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

Dovahhatty had one of his (funniest) tongue-in-cheek portrayals of Elagabalus as a chad in drag.

“Why is it that divine emperors only rule for a couple of years, I wonder?”

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (FAIL TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (2) Vampire Horror

Screenshot of Christopher Lee as Dracula in the 1958 film (public domain image from Internet Archive)

 

 

(2) VAMPIRE HORROR

 

Vampire horror films originate among the first horror films – and indeed in the dawn of the film industry itself.

My pet theory is that this is the product of happy coincidence between the publication (and popularity) of Bram Stoker’s Dracula in 1897 and the origins of the film entertainment industry, particularly in Hollywood.

Dracula was theatrical in its very conception – not surprisingly given Stoker’s background in theatre – and hence readily cinematic for adaptation. Dracula often reads like a play – and indeed Stoker himself adapted it as one in its first year of publication.

After that, you have the 1922 film Nosferatu directed by F.W. Murnau, infamous as essentially a version of Dracula with the serial numbers filed off, before the iconic cinematic incarnation of Dracula with Bela Lugosi in the title role in 1931.

From there, the rest is vampire horror film history – whether featuring Dracula himself (including Christopher Lee being as iconic in the role as Lugosi) or any number of vampires drawn from an almost infinite variety of vampire folklore, including the folklore attached to Dracula in the novel or its adaptations.

As with my SF horror special mention, I’ll probably flesh this out but for now my vampire horror film top ten on the spot:

 

1 – LET ME IN (2010)

 

Presently sixth place in my Top 10 Horror Films – you can read more about it (and vampire horror films in general) there

 

2 – THE HUNGER (1983)

 

One of the more ‘artsy’ vampire horror films out there – with a cast of beautiful people (Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie and Susan Sarandon). Based (loosely) on a novel by Whitley Streiber, it features a love triangle between a doctor specialising in ageing research and a vampire couple.

 

3 – THE KEEP (1983)

 

Vampires and Nazis – what more do you want? How about Gandalf vs Dracula? (Well, before Gandalf facing off with Dracula actor Christopher Lee as Saruman in the Jackson Lord of the Ring films).

Okay – technically it’s not a vampire (or Dracula) but something posing as one, adapted from the novel by F. Scott Wilson. Still, I’m counting it as another of the more ‘artsy’ vampire horror films out there, albeit somewhat lacking in coherence for anything but cult following. Some big names among its actors – including Ian McKellan obviously for my Gandalf vs Dracula joke.

 

4 – FRIGHT NIGHT (1985)

 

Probably my favorite vampire film to watch – classic pulp fun! What do you do when a vampire becomes your next door neighbor? Call on the celebrity film vampire hunter turned late night horror TV host, of course.

 

5 – THE LOST BOYS (1987)

 

Classic 80s vampire film, albeit trying a little too much too be cool for my taste and not as fun as Fright Night, that other classic 1980s vampire film.

 

6 – LAIR OF THE WHITE WORM (1988)

 

Stoker strikes again! A film adapted from his 1911 novel – I suspect very loosely, borrowing from his more famous novel to feature snake-vampires in a pagan cult to a snake-god. Snakes for the snake-god! Slither in!

 

Directed by Ken Russell in his characteristic controversial flamboyant or psychedelic style – not to mention kinky, hence coiling itself deep in my psyche

 

7 – BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA (1992)

 

Apocalypse Now in Transylvania!

(Amusingly, Kim Newman did a short story doing just that inspired by the film).

Yes – that’s a quip based on the same director, Francis Ford Coppola, but captures the same cinematic visual style he brought to both. Also – it wouldn’t take too much to rewrite it as Apocalypse Now, except going upriver in Transylvania to take out Dracula.

That said – it’s still my favorite cinematic adaptation of Dracula, albeit playing somewhat loose with the novel at times, and Gary Oldham assumes a place close to Lugosi and Lee as iconic depictions of Dracula.

 

8 – FROM DUSK TILL DAWN (1996)

 

A vampire horror film by Robert Rodriguez (and Tarantino) so iconic that it has spawned a whole franchise – mostly lacklustre film sequels but I liked the TV series adaptation.

Gangster criminals on the run in Mexico vs stripper vampires? What more could you want? Well, apart from Salma Hayek’s Santanico Pandemonium, whose snake dance will be hot-branded in my psyche forever.

 

9 – 30 DAYS OF NIGHT (2007)

 

Technically this should be in my comic book films as it is based on a comic series of the same name but it’s one of my favorite vampire horror films to watch so I’m ranking it here instead.

The title says the plot and premise – vampire congregate on the Alaskan town of Barrow for an all you can eat buffet opportunity of the titular thirty days of night in the depths of winter.

 

10 – ABIGAL (2024)

 

My present wildcard tenth place entry in my Top 10 Horror Films as best horror film of 2024 – you can read about it there.

 

HONORABLE MENTION

 

(2000) SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE

 

Speaking of F.W. Murnau’s Nosferatu, the premise of this film is that it got a lot more real than you’d think. Willem Dafoe shines as usual, as does John Malkovich.

 

(2021) BLOOD RED SKY

 

Putting the red into red-eye flight when hijackers take a plane with a surprise among the passengers.

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (3) Best: Aurelian

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome: Crisis of the Third Century

 

 

(3) BEST: AURELIAN –

NON-DYNASTIC / CRISIS OF THE THIRD CENTURY

(270 – 275 AD: 5 YEARS 3 MONTHS)

 

Restitutor Orbis and Sol Invictus, the Restorer of the World and the Unconquered Sun.

 

“Flash

Ah-ah

Saviour of the universe

Flash

Ah-ah

He’ll save every one of us

Flash

Ah-ah

He’s a miracle

Flash

Ah-ah

King of the impossible”.

 

Really, I could just continue with the lyrics of Queen’s Flash Gordon theme song for the rest of this entry…and I will!

 

“He’s for every one of us

Stand for every one of us

He’ll save with a mighty hand

Every man, every woman, every child with a mighty Flash.

 

Flash

A-ah!

Flash

A-ah!

He’ll save every one of us.

 

Just a man, with a man’s courage

He knows nothing but a man

But he can never fail

No one but the pure in heart may find the golden grail

Oh-oh-oh

Oh-oh-oh-oh”

 

Aurelian, Aurelian, we love you

But we only have five years to save the Roman Empire!

 

It was the darkest depths of the Crisis of the Third Century, the Roman Empire was on the brink of doom as Germanic barbarians and Sassanid Persians rampaged deep within it, while the empire itself had broken into three parts, the western and eastern parts all but seceding as or conquered by the Gallic Empire and Palmyrene Empire respectively.

And then Aurelian became emperor.

“As emperor, he won an unprecedented series of military victories which reunited the Roman Empire after it had nearly disintegrated under the pressure of barbarian invasions and internal revolts…During his reign, he defeated the Alamanni after a devastating war. He also defeated the Goths, Vandals, Juthungi, Sarmatians, and Carpi. Aurelian restored the Empire’s eastern provinces after his conquest of the Palmyrene Empire in 273. The following year he conquered the Gallic Empire in the west, reuniting the Empire in its entirety.”

Or in the characteristic eloquence of Edward Gibbon, “every instant of that short period was filled by some memorable achievement. He put an end to the Gothic war, chastised the Germans who invaded Italy, recovered Gaul, Spain, and Britain out of the hands of Tetricus, and destroyed the proud monarchy which Zenobia had erected in the East on the ruins of the afflicted empire”.

All under the guise and wearing the mask of Sol Invictus, the divine Unconquered Sun. Yeah – that’s right, the same deity of Emperor Elagabalus, but cool and badass in battle from one end of the empire to the other rather than dirty dancing around an altar.

I can’t resist quoting Dovahhatty on Aurelian, as he transcends mere Youtube and becomes art:

“The empire was now at the mercy of evil and chaos, enemies within and abroad, tearing it apart. And in these darkest of times, the greatest of all men arose…Aurelian. At the start of the crisis, he enlisted in the legions to serve Rome when she needed him most. Battle after battle, he defeated Rome’s enemies with talent and skill never seen before. Emperor after emperor he served, killing barbarians and traitors alike, always loyal and victorious.”

The preceding emperor chose Aurelian to be his successor on his deathbed – “With tears in his eyes, Claudius begged Aurelian to save Rome as its emperor with his last dying breath. For God and Empire, he put on the mask, marching on Italy and deposing the usurper Quintillus. When the Vandals dared invade his home, he marched back and slaughtered every last one of them. And as the Germans invaded Italy itself, he crushed their hordes against the ocean, denying them any mercy”.

“Once in Rome, he restored the economy from decadence, cleansing the city of all corrupt senators. To make Rome eternal, he ordered built the Aurelian walls, so that it would stand a thousand years more. After decades of terrorizing the Danube, Aurelian crushed the Goths and delivering justice to Cniva. For the empire’s sake, he evacuated the citizens of Dacia, strengthening the Danube against invasion”.

“Sailing east, Aurelian gathered his cavalrymen and slaughtered Zenobia’s army, making her flee away. Palymyra was then destroyed for all time, Zenobia captured before fleeing to the Sassanids”

“Returning west, he defeated Tetricus’ legions of traitors, making him bow again to the light of Rome. Restoring the empire from the brink of collapse, Aurelian was acclaimed Restitutor Orbis, the Restorer of the World…In only five glorious years, Aurelian had made Rome one empire with one emperor under one god”.

Sadly however, we come to Dovahhatty’s postscript – “Setting sail for the east, Aurelian engaged in one final campaign, seeking to destroy all of Rome’s enemies. But just as his unrivalled accomplishments made him a hero, so did it fill others with envy and resentment. As Aurelian built a world of good and order, their evil and chaos grew more and more threatened. Through lies they convinced themselves, a perfect man could not be allowed to exist. In the darkest of nights, the Praetorians gave in to their evil and committed their worst crime…the world is stilled”

Alas, that’s right – his reign was only for a “short period”, as he was betrayed and assassinated while on his final campaign to settle scores with the Sassanid Empire. But for the short duration of his reign – only five years, cut short by his untimely assassination – he might well be top entry.

Even so, but for Aurelian, the empire may well have fallen in the third century, instead of falling in the fifth as it did, with its eastern half enduring for a millennium beyond that. His reign may not have quite ended the crisis, but it saved the empire and came close enough to give his successors the opportunity to end it.

 

EMPIRE-SAVER – THE GREATEST OF THEM ALL

 

MAXIMUS

 

Gothicus Maximus, Germanicus Maximus, Parthicus Maximus. Hell – Maximum Maximus, Restitutor Orbis. Okay – that last one is mine.

 

DEIFIED

 

Of course!

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

Given that I quoted the script from Dovahhatty’s video for Aurelian, Dovahhatty did indeed do right by Aurelian – as a chad so glorious you can’t ever see his face above his chin (not unlike Judge Dredd) and other historical figures have visions of him. However, I don’t quite so far as Dovahhatty, who ranks him as luckier than Augustus and greater than Trajan.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER – OR IS THAT SOL INVICTUS TIER?)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Special Mention) (1) SF Horror (Body Horror & Cosmic Horror)

Poster art for the 1979 Alien film with one of the most iconic SF horror film taglines – “In space no one can hear you scream.”

 

(1) SF HORROR (BODY HORROR & COSMIC HORROR)

 

My preferred horror films tend to be supernatural or SF horror, but I tend to rank the latter as SF rather than horror.

The dividing line is partly my idiosyncratic opinion that the science fiction elements predominate in SF, such as where the sources of horror are aliens or time-travelling killer robots, but is also partly to preserve the SF entries in my Top 10 Fantasy and SF Films.

Alien, The Terminator, and The Thing are my holy trinity of SF horror but since they are all entries in my Top 10 Fantasy & SF Films I won’t feature them again here.

Well, except to note that Alien was essentially haunted house horror IN SPACE, with a spaceship for a haunted house (neatly solving the so-called haunted house problem of why the protagonists simply don’t leave the house) and the titular xenomorph for the ghost. In a sense the whole franchise is this in one way or another.

The Thing is also another alien haunted house horror story, except with an Antarctic base as haunted house – with the haunted house problem posed by the onset of winter as well as by seeking to avoid the Thing infecting the outside world.

Alien and The Thing also illustrate the subgenres of body horror and cosmic horror that recur with SF horror.

The Terminator was essentially robot slasher horror – okay, technically cyborg slasher horror.

 

I’ll probably flesh this out (heh) but for now my SF horror top ten on the spot (consisting of entries not featured in my Top 10 Fantasy & SF Horror Films):

 

 

1 JOHN CARPENTER – THEY LIVE (1988)

 

Of course, John Carpenter’s SF horror magnum opus is The Thing (featured in my Top 10 Fantasy & SF Films) but I had to feature him here with this entry as one of my two leading SF horror directors.

 

Which brings me to my next entry…

 

2 DAVID CRONENBERG – THE FLY (1986)

 

Yes, it’s a remake – but what an entry! Also representative of David Cronenberg, the other of my two leading SF horror directors – and whose work embodies (heh) body horror, so much so that Rick and Morty referenced it (as Cronenberging their world when they turn Earth into a population of body horror monstrosities).

 

3 – INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS (1978)

 

Yes – the original was in 1956 (based on the 1954 novel by Jack Finney and symbolic of Cold War paranoia) but this is my favorite of the “franchise”, particularly for its downer ending (with that shriek).

 

4 – PREDATOR (1987)

 

Probably more people think of this film and its subsequent franchise as SF action, but the Predator is essentially an alien slasher stalking humans for prey – not unlike the franchise with its audience at this point.

 

5 – TREMORS (1990)

 

Like the previous entry, probably more people think of this film (and its franchise) as comedic SF action but there’s enough of a horror element for me to count it.

 

6 – THE FACULTY (1998)

 

Fun spin on The Thing in a high school – including a fun spin on that blood sample test for the Thing.

 

7 – SLITHER (2006)

 

James Gunn does an SF horror alien invasion – with doses of body and cosmic horror.

 

8 – CLOVERFIELD / 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE (2008-2016)

 

I’m counting these as the same franchise for production rather than plot – the first is upated alien kaiju horror, the second is survival horror with one hell of a twist at the end.

 

9 – LIFE (2017)

 

Ah, Calvin – you rubbery rascal. Essentially another alien haunted house horror story IN SPACE.

 

10 – A QUIET PLACE (2018-2024)

 

Shhh – essentially alien slasher horror stalking by sound.

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

One of the most iconic silhouettes in horror film history – Count Orlok from the 1922 German film Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror directed by F.W. Murnau, essentially a version of Dracula

 

“Horror is a genre of fiction that exploits the primal fears of viewers” – “that seeks to elicit fear or disgust in its audience for entertainment purposes”.

It’s also a genre in which I watch a lot of films, so I don’t just have a Top 10 Horror Films – I also have my usual twenty special mentions for my top tens, including sub-genre or thematic entries as about half (or more) of my special mentions.

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (4) Worst: Honorius

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XVIII: Barbarians at the Gates

 

(4) WORST: HONORIUS –

THEODOSIAN DYNASTY

(395 – 423 AD AD: 28 YEARS 6 MONTHS 29 DAYS)

 

Chicken boy.

Dovahhatty summed him up best – “Honorius continued on living as he always had, laying around, babbling like an idiot as the world around him fell apart, but for one exception. One day Honorius turned it all around and decided, for once, to do the best possible thing he could do for the empire and died, after ruling Rome for a godawful thirty years.”

Getting up there as candidate for the worst Roman emperor ever, although you could easily shuffle him with Valentinian III – a.k.a Honorius II – for that spot, as they are so uncannily similar as to be interchangeable. I know I said it before for Valentinian III but it’s worth saying again for Honorius – each was a model of supine inactivity as the empire crumbled, except for betraying the loyal subordinate who was the one holding things together and stabbing that man in the back, as well as each with one of the two notorious sacks of Rome following shortly afterwards. Between the two of them and their inexplicably long reigns, almost 60 years in combination, they broke the western Roman empire and presided over its fall. It’s like the Roman Empire cloned its crappiest emperor, just so it could have him reign twice to ensure its own fall.

Now I have ranked Honorius as worse than Valentinian III as Honorius came first and you know how it is for the diminishing returns of sequels – Valentinian III hit all the same beats and even tried to have some new twists but it just wasn’t up to the original. Less flippantly, Valentinian III inherited the wreckage of the western empire from Honorius – in particular, the barbarians firmly ensconced within the empire as they had not been before Honorius. Not that Valentinian III would do or was ever going to do anything but wreck it further.

In the case of Honorius, the loyal subordinate was his general Stilicho, who had also been his regent and was his father-in-law. Now I have argued that Valentinian’s betrayal of Aetius was worse, but that is more a matter of his direct personal involvement – killing Aetius himself – being more despicable. The betrayal by Honorius of Stilicho was more destructive for the empire.

Firstly, at least Valentinian III waited until the threat of Attila and his Huns had receded from Italy (and the empire itself as it turned out) before his betrayal of Aetius. Honorius betrayed Stilicho when the threat of Alaric and his Visigoths to Italy and Rome was still very much dire. Secondly – and worse – Honorius’ betrayal of Stilicho strengthened that threat, both by removing Stilicho as the effective deterrent to it and with the defection of Stilicho’s foederati troops en masse to Alaric following Honorius’ massacre of their families as Stilicho’s camp followers.Thirdly, at least Valentinian’s betrayal of Alaric had the prompt consequence of Valentinian’s own assassination, where Honorius continued to burden the empire with his reign for another fifteen years.

Although Honorius didn’t have to wait that long for the sack of Rome which followed as a consequence of his betrayal of Stilicho. That betrayal led in a direct line to the sack of Rome by Alaric and the Visigoths in 410, which again was arguably worse than the corresponding sack of Rome by the Vandals in 455.

Firstly, the sack of Rome by Alaric in 410 was a profound shock to the empire, the first such sack for eight centuries. While the sack of Rome by the Vandals was more destructive – such that the Vandals lent their name as a synonym for destruction ever since – it lacked that same sense of shock given the recent occurrence of the first sack. Secondly, at least Valentinian wasn’t still alive to injure Rome further with his continued existence for its sack in 455 AD. Thirdly, Honorius added insult to injury with his initial alarm that Rome had “perished” was a reference to his favorite pet chicken he had named Roma, where he was relieved to find out it was only in reference to the actual city. That story has been identified to be likely an apocryphal one, but it’s just too true to his character and symbolic with respect to it involving a chicken that I accept it anyway.

The only distinction between Honorius and Valentinian III that led to the former reigning fifteen more years after his betrayal of Stilicho was that Honorius was fortunate enough to have a capable general (and briefly co-emperor) in Constantius III to substitute for Stilicho propping up him and the empire. All Valentinian III had after Aetius was Petronius Maximus and we’ve seen how well that went – his own assassination and the sack of Rome.

Also, Honorius was literally the creepy uncle to Valentinian, albeit more to Valentinian’s mother (and his half sister), so I blame Honorius somewhat for how Valentinian turned out.

As usual, Edward Gibbon had the best snark about Honorius, which I can’t resist quoting in all its glory –

“His feeble and languid disposition was alike incapable of discharging the duties of his rank…the amusement of feeding poultry became the serious and daily care of the monarch of the West, who resigned the reins of empire to the firm and skilful hand of his guardian Stilicho…The predecessors of Honorius were accustomed to animate by their example, or at least by their presence, the valour of the legions; and the dates of their laws attest the perpetual activity of their motions through the provinces of the Roman world. But the son of Theodosius passed the slumber of his life a captive in his palace, a stranger in his country, and the patient, almost the indifferent, spectator of the ruin of the Western empire, which was repeatedly attacked, and finally subverted, by the arms of the barbarians. In the eventful history of a reign of twenty-eight years, it will seldom be necessary to mention the name of the emperor Honorius”.

 

EMPIRE BREAKER

 

Arguably the emperor who broke the empire more than anyone else.

I’m not going to even bother with imperial victory titles or deification – he had none and deserved less. I’m not sure the Senate was doing damnatio memoriae by then.

 

DID DOVAHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

Probably the virgin emperor Dovahhatty did best – and said it best, as evidenced by the quote I featured at the outset.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (FAIL TIER)

 

 

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (4) Best: Hadrian

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

 

 

(4) BEST: HADRIAN –

NERVA-ANTONINE DYNASTY / FIVE GOOD EMPERORS

(117 – 138 AD: 20 YEARS 10 MONTHS 29 DAYS)

 

The definitive Roman emperor, exceeded as such only by my top two entries.

That’s notable in that he did not add any conquests to the empire, but instead withdrew from the conquests of his predecessor, particularly in Mesopotamia but to some extent in Dacia as well. Although the Romans themselves tended to esteem expansionism, Hadrian focused on the consolidation of the empire – “Hadrian preferred to invest in the development of stable, defensible borders and the unification of the empire’s disparate peoples”.

It is hard not to see that as the correct focus, as Hadrian presided over an empire at its peak strength and stability, without any adversary of real substance let alone rival or threat to it. Otherwise, it might have become overstretched (or more so) – and it’s possible that even his predecessor who had conquered Mesopotamia (from Persia) “may have thought his gains in Mesopotamia indefensible and abandoned them shortly before his death”.

As such, unlike other emperors in this top ten Hadrian did not even have to engage in any robust military action in defense of the empire – with one notable exception where he was very robust indeed with the one substantial adversary that revolted against the empire during his reign, which we’ll get to shortly.

However, Hadrian didn’t just sit on the empire’s laurels. He “also developed permanent fortifications and military posts along the empire’s border (limites, sl. limes) to support his policy of stability, peace and preparedness”, including the wall in Britain that famously bore his name. “Hadrian’s policy was peace through strength”, emphasised by discipline – “troops practised intensive, regular drill routines” and historian Cassius Dio “praised Hadrian’s emphasis on spit and polish as cause for the generally peaceful character of his reign”.

Fortifications weren’t all he built or rebuilt – Hadrian was famed for his building projects throughout the empire. To that end, Hadrian “travelled almost constantly throughout the empire” and “was to spend more than half his reign outside Italy”.

Hadrian was notoriously fond of Greece and the Greeks – the Historia Augusta opined he may have been “a little too much Greek” – and fond of a Greek in particular, the youth Antinous.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that but I would say that Hadrian deifying Antinous after the latter’s untimely death as a gay god was a step too far. Some men will literally apotheosize their dead catamite instead going to therapy.

The other notorious aspect of Hadrian’s regime was wiping Jerusalem and Judaea off the map in response to the Jewish Bar Kokhba Revolt. The Caledonian chieftain Calgacus as quoted (or concocted) by Tacitus had seen nothing yet when he said the Romans make a desert and call it peace – Hadrian showed how it was really done.

Hadrian was also initiated into in the Greek Eleusinian Mysteries – which I’d like to think of as the classical equivalent of the Illuminati, or perhaps just the actual Illuminati as who knows how far back that secret society and their conspiracies go…?

 

EMPIRE BASER:

 

Arguably the most based of them all.

 

MAXIMUS:

 

I don’t think he claimed any – putting down revolts isn’t quite the same thing

 

DEIFICATION:

 

O yes – although his successor had to insist on it to the Senate

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT?

 

Yes – as another one of the five good chad emperors, aptly depicted in my feature image with the Wall from the Game of Thrones TV series – itself influenced by Hadrian’s eponymous wall in Britain.

I particularly like Dovahhatty’s joke about Hadrian being infra-gay – at the opposite end of the spectrum to Elagabalus being ultra-gay. Indeed, as I understand it, that joke reflects the dichotomy the Romans themselves drew for sexuality – between the active, dominant or masculine role and the passive, submissive or feminine role. Or to put it bluntly, between the giving and receiving roles. Men could engage in the former “without a perceived loss of masculinity or social status” – hence infra-gay rather than ultra-gay – although deifying your dead ultra-gay lover was probably pushing the boundaries of Roman social acceptability.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

Top Tens – Film: Top 10 Horror Films (Complete Top 10)

Janet Leigh in the 1960 film Psycho by Alfred Hitchcock – one of the most iconic scenes in film, and yes, it’s horror

 

 

“Horror is a genre of fiction that exploits the primal fears of viewers” – “that seeks to elicit fear or disgust in its audience for entertainment purposes”.

That always prompts for me the parallel with Greek tragedy and its quality of catharsis proposed by Aristotle through the pity and fear experienced by the audience – a quality that would apply equally to Shakespearean tragedy.

It seems ironic that I compare the high art of Greek or Shakespearean tragedy with the notoriously low art of horror films – sometimes I quip that there’s no such thing as a bad B-grade horror film, speaking to my fandom of the latter. Of course, that quip becomes less funny when I add that there’s no such thing as an A-grade horror film either. That’s an overstatement but perhaps not by too much.

However jarring it may be, I stand by that comparison between Greek or Shakespearean tragedy and horror films, at least as holding up in similar qualities of catharsis. And it wouldn’t take too much to tweak most Greek or Shakespearean tragedies into horror films – now there’s an idea for stark ravings or a top ten.

Back to that quip there’s no such thing as an A-grade horror film, while the horror film genre may be mostly cheap and exploitative (something of a virtue for studios seeking high returns on low costs or budding directors seeking to start careers), it does have surprising depth to it that is top ten-worthy of itself – not least in its various sub-genres or different national styles of horror.

“This is a very broad genre, it can go from tasteful and timeless tales of psychological suspense (a trademark of people like Alfred Hitchcock) to gross out horror (which tends to become campy). It often employs the supernatural but “normal” people are more than sufficient to scare audiences when used properly”.

I’ll be frank – my own tastes in horror lean towards dark fantasy or supernatural horror. I don’t tend to like more, well, mundane sources of horror, albeit with quite a few exceptions. I do like films that might be called SF horror – Alien, Terminator, The Thing – but I like them so much more as SF that I tend to rank them in my top Fantasy & SF Films. I will have a closer look at SF horror as a sub-genre in my special mentions, both here and for my Fantasy & SF Films.

And “despite being the subject of social and legal controversy due to their subject matter, some horror films and franchises have seen major commercial success, influenced society and spawned several popular culture icons.”

Anyway, these are my Top 10 Horror Films.

 

 

 

(10) ABIGAIL (2024)

 

As usual, my wildcard tenth place entry is my pick for best horror film of the present year – so best horror film of 2024

And yes – Abigail was the most fun I had in a horror film in 2024, even if it was cheesy as hell and not actually that scary because it tended to telegraph its punches, including the film’s central twist in its trailer.

But what can I say? I love a fun vampire film and this one was apparently loosely based – very loosely based – on the 1936 film Dracula’s Daughter.

Part of the fun was the ensemble cast. Giancarlo Esposito, who seems to be the go-to guy to add smooth badass vocal charm to film or animated series. Dan Stevens – who is always fun in horror film roles and should be in more of them. Melissa Barrera further establishing herself as horror film scream queen (although she’ll never eclipse the high queen Jenna Ortega).

It’s a film that was in quite a few top ten horror film lists for 2024. In the words of critic, BJ Colangelo from Slashfilm – “With a pitch-perfect ensemble cast, exquisitely timed laugh-out-loud moments of humor, a barrage of twists (or should I say pirouettes?), an unbelievable amount of blood, killer action set pieces…Abigail sets the bar as the most fun you can have with a horror movie of the year. In other words, Abigail is horror on pointe”.

Yes, those ballet references are on point – or should I say are on pointe.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

X-TIER (WILD-TIER)

 

 

 

(9) THE RITUAL (2017)

 

What can I say? Despite mixed reviews, I’m a fan of this British supernatural folk horror film’s “monster”, which still has one of the most strikingly innovative designs I’ve seen in horror film, and with literal mindbending effect on its prey – or sacrificial victims – to match.

Not to mention the sense of forested claustrophobia and creeping doom for its British hiker protagonist and friends taking the worst shortcut ever through the weird woods of Sweden.

Ah yes, it’s that old fantasy or horror trope – don’t go into the woods. Or Sweden.

Apparently it’s (loosely) based on a novel of the same name by Adam Nevill – “and is best described as the love child of The Blair Witch Project and The Wicker Man”, except far better than the former, not least for seeing the horror stalking the protagonist hikers.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

 

 

 

(8) THE BABADOOK (2014)

 

“Why can’t you just be normal?”

Well, I guess there’s no hope of that – the kid’s Australian. As is the rest of this psychological or supernatural horror film.

I say psychological or supernatural because the titular monster that haunts the widow protagonist – or is that antagonist? – struggling to raise the son she admonishes as lacking normalcy works on both levels, perhaps literally.

And that’s pretty much all one can say of this film’s premise and plot without spoiling it, except of course for the ultimate moral of the story that pop-up books are evil. And the meme that the Babadook is apparently gay because Netflix categorized him that way.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

 

The scene from the film for my feature quote in which the basic premise is explained to the heroine

 

(7) IT FOLLOWS (2014)

 

“It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity or remorse or fear. And it absolutely will not stop…ever, until you are dead!”

No, wait – that’s the Terminator but it’s essentially the same as the “It” in It Follows. Think the Terminator as sex demon – and not in a good way, the way that would involve my fever dreams of Kristanna Loken’s T-X.

As in the shapeshifting demonic stalker, invisible to all but whom It is stalking, as STD allegory kind of way.

“You’re not going to believe me. But I need you to remember what I’m saying. Okay? This thing…it’s going to follow you. Somebody gave it to me, and I passed it to you, back in the car. It could look like someone you know, or it could be a stranger in a crowd. Whatever helps it to get close to you. It could look like anyone…but there is only one of it. And sometimes…sometimes I think it looks like people you love. Just to hurt you. […] You get rid of it, okay? Just sleep with someone as soon as you can. Just pass it along. If it kills you, it’ll come after me. Do you understand?”

That quote from the cowardly cad Hugh who infects the female protagonist with it pretty much sums up the film’s plot and premise. Otherwise the mythos of It – where It came from or anything meaningful about It other than Its relentless pursuit of Its prey, albeit at leisurely walking pace – remains tantalizingly unknown, adding to the creepiness.

The film received critical acclaim and grossed many times more than its shoestring budget – which is something of the appeal of horror films for studios – prompting a sequel presently in development, They Follows.

It has also achieved, dare I say it, a cult following “with many calling it a modern horror classic and one of the best horror films of the 2010s” – “smart, original and, above all, terrifying, It Follows is the rare modern horror film that works on multiple levels – and leaves a lingering sting.”

Part of those levels or that sting is the deeper thematic interpretations with respect to the source and symbolism of It – of which the most obvious is that STD allegory but which extends to other meanings.

As per its director – “I’m not personally that interested in where ‘it’ comes from. To me, it’s dream logic in the sense that they’re in a nightmare, and when you’re in a nightmare there’s no solving the nightmare. Even if you try to solve it…We’re all here for a limited amount of time and we can’t escape our mortality… but love and sex are two ways in which we can at least temporarily push death away.”

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

 

Poster art for the film

 

 

(6) LET ME IN (2010)

 

It wouldn’t be a top ten list of horror films without at least one vampire film.

Although is it just me or are there very few vampire films that are genuine horror (as in genuinely scary)? Is it just that we’re too familiar with vampires (or that they’re too played out) for them to be a true source of horror? Sure, there are many vampire films, but they seem to me to be effectively films in (or at least combining) other genres. (And don’t get me started on the abomination that is Twilight).

Don’t get me wrong – I’m a fan of quite a few vampire films, which I rank in my special mentions (and indeed stake my top ten vampire films), but they tend to not quite cross my threshold of genuine horror.

And again, don’t get me wrong – I have been genuinely scared (in that I had actual nightmares – my horror litmus test!) by vampire novels, including the big daddy of them all, Dracula. (Although it probably helps if you read it in your childhood with a fever). Not to mention Stephen King’s Dracula in Maine, also known as Salem’s Lot.

However, it takes a return to the depiction of vampires as alien predatory entities to humanity to invoke horror on the screen for me – the shark-like predators of 30 Days of Night, or the Lovecraftian parasites in the TV series The Strain.

So that is why I found Let Me In a refreshingly revamped horror film – revamped also from its origin in the Swedish novel and film Let The Right One In. For one thing, there is just something inherently unsettling about child vampires – in this case, the vampire girl played by Chloe Grace Moritz. For another, the horror was not so much from any scares in it, but again more conceptual or existential – particularly in the relationship between the vampire girl and an alienated and bullied boy. In the words of TV Tropes, the film “is most notable for being simultaneously heartwarming and horrifying. Although it has few outright scares, it can be a deeply disturbing movie, as the main characters’ relationship invokes both young love and a temptation into darkness”.

You know it’s a good horror film, when Stephen King raves about it – “Let Me In is a genre-busting triumph. Not just a horror film, but the best American horror film in the last 20 years.”

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP-TIER)

 

 

 

(5) THE HITCHER (1986)

 

Things are about to get a whole lot…schlockier (and more idiosyncratic) in my top five horror films. But as I like to say, there’s no such thing as a bad B-grade horror film. (Although I’m not entirely sure that there’s such a thing as an A-grade horror film either).

 

It’s not exactly high art – indeed, it’s mostly exploitative – but there’s just something about The Hitcher, a “road action-horror” film with Rutger Hauer in the title role (or Sean Bean if you saw the remake but you really should have watched the original).

The plot is simple enough – a young man driving across the United States narrowly escapes death at the hands of the titular hitcher, a travelling serial killer, but then finds himself in a weirdly co-dependent cat-and-mouse game with the killer. Like many slasher films, the killer (who goes by the name of John Ryder), is not supernatural, but seemingly comes close in his invulnerability and his ability to shadow the protagonist.

Or in this case, Hauer seems to be replicating his replicant role from Blade Runner (and as usual, Hauer is awesome in this). As I have argued with a friend who insists upon classifying every SF film as action – if you want to see a non-SF action The Terminator, see The Hitcher. (My usual sarcastic line when he states The Terminator is action not SF – “Really? The film with its entire premise as a cyborg travelling in time back from a future Robot War isn’t SF?!)

As a bonus (at least according to TV Tropes), the film was inspired by The Doors’ song Riders on the Storm – “There’s a killer on the road / His brain is squirming like a toad / Take a long holiday / Let the children play / If you give this man a ride / Sweet family will die”. Even more so as the film opens on the road in a storm and the Hitcher gives his name as John Ryder.

 

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

Film poster art

 

(4) DEAD & BURIED (1981)

 

And now for one of my true guilty pleasures, as things continue along the schlockier and more idiosyncratic vein of my fifth place entry – but hot damn, I have a soft spot for this film, ever since I stumbled upon it. Yes, it’s somewhat obscure and off the beaten cinematic track. It had a decent enough scriptwriting pedigree – written by the writers of Alien – but it didn’t perform well at the box office and was even initially banned as a “video nasty” in the United Kingdom, yet acquired something of a cult following.

It’s a zombie film with a bit of a difference – and a hell of a few twists, particularly a “twist ending that would give M. Night Shyamalan a run for his money”. Grisly mob lynchings start being committed against tourists passing through the small, sleepy peaceful New England town of Potter’s Bluff, only for the victims to then appear again in the town – while the sheriff investigates, drawn from one level of existential horror to another.

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

The iconic film poster art

 

 

(3) JAWS (1975)

 

DA-DUM

 

The original and still the best shark horror movie – as well as the source of my enduring fandom of shark movies. And yet I still go swimming at the beach most days in summer and warm days in winter. Of course, there’s not too many giant great white sharks at my beach. I hope.

Based on the best-selling novel by Peter Benchley, it is one of those rare examples where the movie exceeds the book – because the film skipped all the small-town drama (Matt Hooper has an affair with Sheriff Brody’s wife?!) which one skipped over for the shark attacks when reading the book anyway.

It was fortuitous that the mechanical sharks, nicknamed Bruce, malfunctioned more often than not, as they were not terribly realistic (I’ve seen the one at the Hollywood Universal Studios tour), but more importantly, they forced director Steven Spielberg to substitute effects designed at suggesting the shark’s presence – including the now iconic ominous and minimalist orchestral theme by composer John Williams. These effects tend to be more tense (and haunting) than the actual appearance of the shark.

The plot – including effects, images and lines from the film – is ingrained into popular culture, revolving around the film’s antagonist, the giant great white shark preying on people in the waters of Amity Island. (Although the town’s mayor becomes something of a secondary antagonist, as he doesn’t seem to mind the shark chowing down on tourists so long as they’ve spent those delicious tourist dollars in the town first). A trio famously formed to hunt the shark – police sheriff Brody, marine biologist Hooper and everyone’s favorite insane professional shark hunter Ahab Quint.

“Now considered one of the greatest films ever made, Jaws was the prototypical summer blockbuster, with its release regarded as a watershed moment in motion picture history. Jaws became the highest-grossing film of all time until the release of Star Wars”.

Not bad for a simple shark horror movie.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

 

(2) THE WICKER MAN (1973)

 

No – not the one with the bees, Robin Hardy’s original cult classic “creep-fest starring Edward Woodward and Christopher Lee – with a final reel that’s become an intrinsic piece of horror iconography”.

Of course, it’s slow-burn horror more in the sense of classical tragedy of creeping doom a la Euripides’ The Bacchae (and a stealth sequel to Caesar’s The Gallic Wars). Also a classic in the subgenre of folk horror – horror based on old folklore or old folkloric rituals, typically the pagan faiths of yore as here. While it was most common in Britain in the 1960s and 1970s, it’s surprisingly prevalent, particularly in the so-called folk horror revival in the 2010s – The Wicker Man is predecessor to 2019’s Midsommar.

A Variety article summed it up nicely – “It’s a film set on an island in the Scottish Hebrides, full of gnarly blokes in pubs, that turns out to be a secret sect of Celtic pagan worship. There are dances around the maypole and nymphs leaping through fire, and there is Christopher Lee, sinister in a benevolent sherry-club way, as if he were presiding over a kinky episode of “Fantasy Island,” as the commune’s lord and master. There’s period kitsch in “The Wicker Man,” yet the movie taps into something memorable: a death cult that wears a gleaming smile, as if it were the missing link between Charles Manson’s followers and the Jonestown horde. In spirit, the film takes off from the last scene of “Rosemary’s Baby,” with all those devil worshippers gathered for a party in the Castavets’ apartment — a terrifying vision of middle-class evil. Yet “The Wicker Man” lands, if anything, in an even more unruly place. Watching it, you can’t see the devil, but you can see the scary power of mass belief”.

Also – naked Britt Ekland (and Britt Ekland’s body double) with that infamous wall-slapping seductive dancing and singing.

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

Evil Dead poster art that I’d argue has transcended film iconography and become part of the Jungian collective unconscious

 

 

(1) EVIL DEAD (1981-1992 / 2013-2023)

 

Hail to the king, baby!

What else? The Evil Dead, the film and the following franchise, are not high art but they embody (in virtually every sense of that word) the archetypal B-grade horror movie in all its fun and glory, with tongue ever more firmly in cheek.

As stated by TV Tropes – “in 1979, a bunch of college dropouts got together in a cabin in Tennessee and made a film with a standard B-Movie plot; this film was The Evil Dead. The film, which was directed by Sam Raimi and starred (the chin himself) Bruce Campbell, succeeded through elaborate gore effects, slick cinematography, and sheer audacity to make enough money to warrant two sequels and get into the public consciousness”.

It is remarkable that a movie made by college dropouts on a shoestring budget – and effects that resemble claymation or plasticine at times – should have any impact upon public consciousness, let alone the enduring impact it and its sequels had upon mine.

“Join us, Ashleeeeey!”

You know you’re in a for a gory horror ride in the first movie, as the classic group of teenagers heads to the classic cabin in the woods. There they unfortunately locate the demonic Book of the Dead or Necronomicon (borrowing from Lovecraft) which was studied by the cabin’s previous occupant – and even more unfortunately play the tape of the recitation invoking the Sumerian demons (although something seems to have been stalking the cabin and woods even prior to that recitation). Those demons possess each of them in turn, turning them into the titular evil dead which then attack the others, until ultimately only one of them, Ashley, is left to fend off the demons (including his girlfriend). This first film works quite effectively as horror, particularly as Ashley or Ash becomes the lone survivor fending off the evil dead in the seemingly eldritch architecture of the cabin. I mean, it’s probably the frantic cinematography but how many rooms does that cabin have? It’s like the Tardis in there. And you know it’s going to get bloody (and oh boy does it ever) when a further playing of the tape reveals that the only way to destroy the evil dead is…bodily dismemberment! Ewww!

The second film (Evil Dead 2), a partial remake and partial sequel, was made with more money but lacks the pure horror of the first, as embracing the absurdity of the premise, it moved from horror to comedy (and Ash became more invulnerable to the demonic threat).

The third film (Army of Darkness) fully embraced all its cheesy goodness and rule of cool as it almost entirely abandoned horror altogether for dark fantasy comedy, yet utterly glorious as a result (while Ash completed his transition into a virtually indestructible superhero). It follows from the second film, which saw Ash magically transported through time to the Middle Ages (yeah, it’s like that), in medieval Europe or perhaps the Latin kingdoms of the Crusades, where he soon has to face off against an undead army. It had the biggest budget of the original trilogy, as well as being the most well-known and quoted, with its memetic one-liners.

The franchise saw a remake of the original film with the Evil Dead film of 2013 – decent enough but somewhat forgettable as lacking the same pulpy fun and tongue-in-cheek humor of the original. That changed dramatically with the fifth entry into the franchise, Evil Dead Rise in 2023, which returned to the spirit and style of the original trilogy (and Evil Dead mythos) but with its own fun twists – and also perhaps the only Deadite that’s strangely…arousing. Whose your mummy?

The franchise has also seen a TV series, comics adaptations, video games…and a theatre musical?

Groovy!

 

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD-TIER)

FILM – HORROR: TOP 10 (TIER LIST)

S-TIER (GOD-TIER)

(1) EVIL DEAD

(2) THE WICKER MAN

(3) JAWS

If Evil Dead is my Old Testament of horror films, then The Wicker Man and Jaws are my New Testament. I know that reverses the chronology of the actual films, but The Evil Dead does travel in time. Alternatively, it’s my Necronomicon of horror films.

A-TIER (TOP-TIER)

(4) DEAD & BURIED

(5) THE HITCHER

(6) LET ME IN

B-TIER (HIGH-TIER)

(7) IT FOLLOWS

(8) THE BABADOOK

(9) THE RITUAL

X-TIER (WILD TIER) – for best entry from 2024

(10) ABIGAIL

Top Tens – History (Rome): Top 10 Best & Worst Roman Emperors (5) Worst: Valentinian III

Dovahhatty – Unbiased History of Rome XIX: The Fall of Rome

 

(5) WORST: VALENTINIAN III –

THEODOSIAN DYNASTY

(425 – 455 AD: 29 YEARS 4 MONTHS 21 DAYS)

 

Getting up there as the worst Roman emperor ever, although you could easily shuffle him and his predecessor Honorius for that spot, as they are so uncannily similar as to be interchangeable.

Each was a model of supine inactivity as the empire crumbled, except for betraying the loyal subordinate who was the one holding things together and stabbing that man in the back, with each having one of the two notorious sacks of Rome following shortly afterwards. Between the two of them and their inexplicably long reigns – of similar length of 30 years each – they broke the western Roman empire and presided over its fall. It’s like the Roman Empire cloned its crappiest emperor, just so it could have him reign twice over to ensure its own fall.

In the case of Valentinian III, that loyal subordinate was his general Aetius – who defeated Attila the Hun’s invasion of Gaul. One could argue that his betrayal of Aetius was even worse than the corresponding betrayal of Stilicho by Honorius. Firstly, because he waited until Aetius had defeated the Huns and felt secure enough that he no longer needed Aetius. Secondly because the creep did it himself, the only time he ever drew a sword, striking down the unarmed Aetius and with a pack to back him up no less. And thirdly, he had the sheer hubris to boast that he had done well to dispose of Aetius in such a way, prompting a counsellor’s famous reply “Whether well or not, I do not know. But know that you have cut off your right hand with your left”.

Edward Gibbon summed it up best with this acid observation in his characteristic prose – “But the emperor of the West, the feeble and dissolute Valentinian, who had reached his thirty-fifth year without attaining the age of reason or courage, abused this apparent security to undermine the foundations of his own throne by the murder of the patrician Aetius. From the instinct of a base and jealous mind, he hated the man who was universally celebrated as the terror of the barbarians and the support of the republic.”

And in the case of Valentinian III, the notorious sack of Rome following shortly afterwards was the Sack of Rome by the Vandals in 455 AD – although he wasn’t alive to see it as fortunately karma had kicked in and he had been killed by two of Aetius’ loyal followers, orchestrated by Petronius Maximus.

A disgrace to the proud name of Valentinian the Great, although Valentinian III hailed from that worst of classical Roman dynasties, the Theodosian dynasty.

“Valentinian’s reign is marked by the dismemberment” – DISMEMBERMENT! – “of the Western Empire; by the time of his death, virtually all of North Africa, all of western Spain, and the majority of Gaul had passed out of Roman hands. He is described as spoiled, pleasure-loving, and heavily influenced by sorcerers and astrologers and devoted to religion”. That’s right – Valentinian III, resorting to sorcery and astrology in the ghost dance of the Roman Empire.

That devotion to religion, of course being Christianity – somewhat inconsistent with the influence “by sorcerers and astrologers” – at least contributed to him giving greater authority to the Papacy, which might explain his only good decision, using Pope Leo as an envoy to Attila the Hun in the latter’s invasion of Italy, which succeeded (among other things) in persuading Attila to leave Italy without sacking Rome, never to return to attack Italy or the empire as it turned out.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (FAIL TIER)

 

EMPIRE BREAKER

 

THE empire breaker, along with his predecessor Honorius

 

MAXIMUS

 

No, just no.

 

DAMNED

 

He should have been – I’ll take his assassination as damnatio memoriae.

 

DID DOVAHHATTY DO RIGHT ?

 

Dovahhatty ranks him aptly as virgin emperor in the heartbreaking final episode of the series on classical empire, The Fall of Rome.