Perversions of Science S1, E5: Given the Heir

Starring:
Yancy Butler as Lisa Gerou
William McNamara as Nick Boyer
David Leisure as William Tilbrook
Paul Williams as Dr. Mueller
Joey Buttafuoco as Frankie Carelli (yes, THAT Joey Buttafuoco)
Mark Folger as Scientist #2
Doug Llewelyn as Calvin Patterson
Dennison Samaroo as Scientist #1
Marc Segal as Bank Guard
Maureen Teefy as Chrome

Written by: Mark Verheiden, based on the "Weird Science" comic books, by William M. Gaines

Directed by: Ramon Menendez

Well, I praised the show’s first episode, “Dream of Doom”, for managing to be effective despite the show’s obviously low budget. I have also berated a couple additional episodes for trying to be too ambitious--the effects work in this entire show is shoddy, at best, and there are very few things that can ruin anything quite like bad special effects. Especially given the fact this show takes place in the future, at a time when technology runs rampant and has progressed beyond our wildest dreams. I thought the episodes that focused more on story and writing would be the better ones.

“Given the Heir” has ruined that idea for me. Here we have an episode that, aside from a couple of quick time travel sequences, have very little in the way of special effects; and yet, it’s an absolutely terrible, interminable bore. I kept sitting back, waiting for some kind of twist ending, only to be left hanging--this just may be the worst episode yet.

Yancy Butler plays Lisa Gerou, a woman who has a thing for a man named Nick Boyer (William McNamara). It is unspecified exactly what Boyer does, but judging from the women that are constantly vying for his attention, he must be famous for something. In order to appease him, she researches his likes and interests, then uses technology to mold herself into the perfect being for him. There’s just one little problem: All this is happening in 2006...as we learn, Nick died ten years ago, way back in 1996. So how can she meet up with him after he’s been dead for so long? Easy: Time travel. It’s still not common technology at this point, but after exchanging some sexual favors with a Nobel Prize-winning scientist, he agrees to build a time machine for her. I guess even distinguished prize winning men are as shallow as the rest of us!

We think there might be some sort of attachment that the two shared at some point, but unless I’m missing something, Lisa is actually just an obsessed fan from the future. In fact, Lisa Gerou isn’t even her real name: she got it from blending his mother’s first name, with his favorite “French-Canadian Scotch Whiskey”. Well that’s kind of creepy. But her attention-to-detail does pay off--armed with her future knowledge, she is able to withdraw $50,000 from his secretive second account, even going so far as to have her fingerprint altered to perfectly match the one that he used to safeguard that bank account.

Needless to say, everything goes terribly wrong for her. Her schemes to get his attention--taking a large sum of money out of someone’s account will do that--work fine for a short while, but after finding her to be inadequate in the sack, he quickly grows tired of her. He thinks she’s scheming with the account manager at his bank, so he has his bodyguard kidnap him. The bank manager, Mr. Tillgood, swears up and down that he had nothing to do with it, but poor Nick doesn’t believe him. So Tillgood steals the bodyguard’s gun and shoots him, the bullet going through the bodyguard and hitting Nick in the neck. Bingo, just like in “real life“, Nick ends up dying in 1996, and not even Lisa’s time travel can stop that. The end.

Based on a little research, the episode of “Weird Comics” that this was based off of had the same title, but focused on a man who had to put off marrying his wife because he’s so poor. After meeting a time traveling relative, he’s convinced that he can come into wealth by having her kill an ancestor, thus passing the money onto him. Even that idea is stupid, so I’m not surprised that, even with the major alterations to the story, this one falls quite flat, as well. There’s nothing really exciting that happens, nor any twist at the end that brings everything around full circle, so “Given the Heir” ends up being irreversibly dull.

EPISODE RATING: 3/10

FULL EPISODE

Body Melt (1993)

Director: Philip Brophy
Writer(s): Philip Brophy and Rod Bishop, based on short stories by Brophy.
Starring: Gerard Kennedy, Andrew Daddo, Ian Smith, and Regina Gaigalas

When I was a teenager obsessed with films and filmmaking as an art form, I immediately fell in love with the early works of Peter Jackson. His devilish filmography featured puppets doing drugs and filming porno movies (Meet the Feebles), a zombie epic with a finale featuring dozens of zombies, a lawnmower, and gallons upon gallons of blood (Dead/Alive, aka Braindead), and his notorious alien film, which shot only on weekends, over the course of four years (Bad Taste). It was obvious even then, amongst the blood-strewn setpieces and over-the-top slapstick gore, that this man had loads of talent, and his gleeful ignorance of the mainstream made me appreciate him even more. This was a guy doing his own thing on his own terms, and so it never really came as a shock to me that he eventually went on to become an A-lister in Hollywood (okay, the level of his success did come as a huge shock).

Obviously, I wasn’t the only one taking notes, because here we have Phillip Brophy’s Body Melt, a film that exists only to blast the viewer with slimy, gooey special effects in the same vein as the master of slapstick grue. Brophy clearly doesn’t have as much talent as Jackson, but he still proves himself able enough to mix some graphic, tongue-in-cheek bloodshed, with enough comical scenes that this manages to be both entertaining and stupid in equal measures.

There really isn’t much plot to speak of, and what there is serves merely as an excuse to throw as many gruesome effects on the screen as possible: Vimuville, a vitamin company, singles out the residents of Pebbles Court, Homesville, to test out their new vitamin powder. Only, it’s not really a vitamin at all, but rather a vicious poison that causes rapid body deterioration. The residents find the packets in their mailbox, and eagerly try it out, unaware of its lethal properties. A man who works for Vimuville has a change of heart and attempts to warn the Pebbles Court residents of the fatal consequences, but he succumbs to the “disease” right before his arrival. As he is the only “good guy” in the entire thing, this leaves the door open for the townsfolk to melt away, one by one!

The residents are being “watched” by evil Vimuville execs, who are eager to get the product widely released. Now, I don’t know how long a vitamin that causes an agonizing slow death would be able to stay on the market, but that’s an example of something you’re just not supposed to do while watching Body Melt: think. Seriously, everything that happens is so pointless that by just using your brain, you’ve already used more resources than the writers did at any point. But who cares, because it’s all in the name of demented fun! I mean, it’s so stupid that even the executives end up taking Vimuville, in pill form, and melting themselves—what sense does that make? If anyone should know the unlimited evil of Vimuville, you would think it would be the people that they pay to monitor the deaths of unsuspecting test subjects. Buy hey, we get to see a couple more people die, so who cares?

Honestly, I’m surprised at the hate this movie has received, with even fans of bad horror movies chastising it for its terribleness. I mean, the typical “B-movie” stereotypes apply: the acting is pretty bad, the writing is pretty bad, and the threadbare plot is pretty stupid, but I thought the effects were above-average (given the clearly limited budget), and it’s all just so bizarre that it’s impossible to get bored or shut it off. It also knows not to overstay its welcome, clocking in at just under 80 minutes, which is the perfect amount of time for its limited…intelligence. But I have seen far, far worse. Maybe it just caught me in a good mood, but I thought it was competently shot, and given the budgetary limitations, well-made. I am apparently in the minority, but if you like your horror gooey and graphic, and if you don’t mind that it doesn’t even attempt to take itself seriously, then you should at least give this a fair shot.

RECAP: Unfairly maligned by just about everyone, Body Melt is an incredibly stupid horror film with barely any plot to speak of, but it also achieves a level of stupidity that only talent can reach. I thought the gooey special effects were well-done, it was competently shot, and the acting was tolerable for an independent horror feature. Best of all, there’s a freewheeling craziness that I loved—it never takes itself seriously for even a second, and there’s some legitimate humor to be found. If you ever wondered what a David Cronenberg movie would look like if he suddenly lost 100 IQ points, this is it.

RATING: 6/10

TRAILER

Perversions of Science S1, E4: The Exile

Starring:
Jeffrey Combs as 50557
Ron Perlman as 40132
Christopher John Fields as Adolph Hitler
Brian Brophy as Investigator
Jeff Corey as The Judge
David Warner as Dr. Nordhoff
Oscar Dillon as Jailer
Craig Olsen as Lupita
Jae Woo Lee as Coopersmith
Maureen Teefy as Chrome

Written by: David J. Schow, based on the "Weird Science" comic books, by William M. Gaines

Directed by: William Malone

Before I dig in to the specifics of this episode, I must once again express shock at the level of talent that “Perversions of Science” was able to garner, despite being--without question, really--a terribly subpar television series. For example, in “The Exile”, we are treated to Jeffrey Combs, Ron Perlman, and David Warner (you might not recognize the last name, but you will recognize the face the instant you see it--that dude’s been in everything) in the main roles. Granted, Combs is kind of a B-rate actor, known mainly for his work in the Re-Animator series, with a couple of other horror films to his credit, but still, even for a show like this, that’s a pretty solid grab. And Ron Perlman might not have been the mainstream hotshot that he would eventually become (especially after Hellboy), but this show nabbed him during his strong rise--so while the rest of the show was pretty lackluster, credit must be given to casting, who, at least up until now, has been pretty on point.

Anyway, “The Exile” tries to cram a lot of ideas into not a lot of time. It all begins with Jeffrey Combs’ character, who we believe to be a doctor, trying to convince a woman that he has found a way to remove people of their inconsistencies--she’s unfortunately being told this as she’s tied up under one of his heavy machines. Essentially, he “burns away” their physical problems. Well, judging from the police raid that interrupts the discussion he’s having with his poor, defenseless subject, this whole thing isn’t entirely legal. And judging from further discussions that take place later in the episode, he doesn’t actually “cure” his subjects of anything: he merely kills them.

Following the police raid, he is captured and placed into prison, where he is given the prisoner code 50557. That’s where he meets Dr. Nordhoff (Warner), a scientist who seems to be obsessed with “rehabilitating” him, which as we can assume, means “curing” him enough to return to society. You see, murder in the future is a very rare offense, with many of those responsible for carrying out the crimes able to be “treated” and placed back into the normal world. But should rehabilitation fail, the subject is forced to be “exiled”, a punishment that is frequently mentioned, but kept a secret until the end.

As it turns out, 50557 is that rare killer, one that is proud of his accomplishments, and refuses to be “fixed”. Dr. Nordhoff tries electro-shock therapy, but that doesn’t work, and with his hearing with a judge just two days away, he is desperate to find something that works, lest he be “exiled”. Well, of course nothing works, and he is sent before the judge. And as can be expected, his laundry list of prior felonies and crimes, not the least of which is the murder of 41 people, can only be punishable by “exile”.

I won’t reveal what “exile” is, because that’s the whole point of the episode. But needless to say the finish isn’t anywhere near as revelatory as it thinks it is, or tries to be. Along the way, 50557 is coached by prisoner # 40132 (Perlman), a successfully rehabilitated murderer himself, who is waiting to be placed back into a society he is now ready for.

As with many of the episodes, the strengths here lie mainly in its acting: Combs seems only capable of overacting--I mean, he‘s pretty much built his entire career around it--but given this relatively low-grade material, his performance works. Meanwhile, Warner and Perlman are just reliably good. They don’t really go above and beyond in any way, but again, given the fairly-lame premise and writing, and sometimes painfully low budget, it’s better than what the material deserves.

After getting off to a strong start with “Dream of Doom”, it’s quickly becoming apparent why this show failed so quickly: the plots are very straightforward, and none of them really push the envelope the way HBO audiences of the late ‘90s were expecting them to. In other words, there’s very little sex or violence in any of these, with language being the only reason most of these even reached a TV-MA rating. “The Exile” is the perfect example of this, with some foul language, and some random (non-sexual) boobies at the beginning, all captured in an idea that’s only minorly fascinating.

A stray observation: At this point, I’m also starting to think just how stupid the “Chrome” intros are, with her constant barrage of double entendres and clearly-sexual movements. For an episode like “Boxed In”, it makes sense to have her introduce the segment, because that episode itself had a lot to do with sex. In episodes like this, however, she just seems tacked on in a desperate attempt to appeal to the late-night crowds that were watching HBO at the time--which, namely, were pretty much younger guys and creepy old men (and babysitting teenagers like me) who were just looking for something to appeal to their libidos. I get it--that was probably the point--but judging from this show’s mere 10-episode run, it didn’t work. And while it’s far from the only thing wrong with the show--it probably wouldn’t have lasted no matter what--it’s curious to me that they didn’t at least try to get rid of those random intros, or substitute them for something else. I guess they were trying to mold Chrome into the next Cryptkeeper, only to no avail.

EPISODE RATING: 3.5/10

FULL EPISODE

Bled White (2009)

Director: Jose Carlos Gomez
Writer(s): Jose Carlos Gomez
Starring: North Roberts, Matthew E. Prochazka, Colleen Irene Boag, and Bruce Spielbauer

I was perusing through the movie collection on hoopla (basically a Netflix for certain library systems) when the artwork for Bled White caught my eye. There was something about its minimalistic approach that appealed to me, featuring only a person with a bloody face lying in a bed of snow…it was really quite striking. Well, on a late-winter’s eve, I was terminally bored, and randomly picked this out of my “favorites” list to watch.

It doesn’t take long to realize that Bled White wears its inspirations on its sleeve. The most obvious example of this is in the way its story is told—the chronology jumps around, and the story is even broken down into titled vignettes, much in the same vein as Quentin Tarantino's seminal crime-caper Pulp Fiction. The main problem with that is that director Jose Carlos Gomez doesn’t have a hundredth of the talent that Tarantino has, and probably has even less than that fraction of the budget. This means the narratives are only loosely interwoven, and it makes it feel more like a gimmick rather than a necessary story device.

It all takes place in a future world where the dead have overrun the living. I suppose wisely, given the obvious budget restraints, the zombie attacks are few and far between, with Gomez instead filling the film with a countless shots of barren, snowy landscapes that are meant to evoke the mood of a lonely, solitary landscape. I surmise that if these shots were removed, the movie would only end up running somewhere around 60 minutes. Also working to pad the running time out even further are the random zombie attacks, which are usually poorly edited, and feature lots of close-ups of bloodied zombie faces as they move forward for the kill.  There's not much in here that works.

Ed and Matt are two guys who survive by robbing, killing, and looting. They trade some of the canned goods that they find (which seem to be the main currency of this future) for rent in a nearby motel, and survive off the rest. They also donate the lifeless bodies of their victims to Sam and Mary, a couple who still occupy the same house that they lived in with their son, Victor. Mary is desperate to get out of there, but Sam refuses, because their son is still in the house with them, chained in the upstairs attic and kept alive by the corpses Ed and Matt give to them.

At some point, they get into it with the owner of their motel, the wife of whom Matt has a thing for. Matt also keeps a zombie in his bathtub, though I’m pretty sure it’s never explained why, though of course it ends up moving the plot forward by attacking someone at one point. Meanwhile, Ed dreams of leaving the town and looking for Melissa, a woman on an old VHS tape that he just randomly found on a street, something he eventually heads out to do. I think this story marker is trying for irreverence, but it just comes off like a bad, half-baked idea that never goes anywhere, both literally, and figuratively.

There are also some other things that happen, but none of them are really worth getting into, and it all leads up to an overwhelmingly stupid ending that seems to suggest that our surviving heroes are only in for more of the same (a fate that we are gratefully spared). The worst part about it is that it just seems to come out of nowhere—I was expecting the final scene to be a lead-up to some kind of revelation, but it just stops and the credits started rolling.

The experience of watching Bled White is quite a drag—it’s pretty boring, amateurishly shot, and not even remotely shocking or surprising—but I do have to at least give it some credit in that it doesn’t try to be like every other zombie movie. Multiple angles of the zombie outbreak are explored, such as the family who keeps their zombified son in the attic because they don’t want to let him go. Granted, stories like that have been done many times before, but I can at least appreciate that they were trying to do something a little bit different with the overdone zombie subgenre. The makeup effects are what I could consider “standard”—just a lot of extras covered in fake skin and blood and growling up close at the camera—but gorehounds will be very disappointed, as there’s really not a lot of the red stuff.

The acting is fairly decent, for the most part, though I have to confess I was really impressed with North Roberts’ performance as Ed. He successfully walks the line between wannabe tough mob type, and sensitive father figure to Matt, his partner in crime, and does well with the range of emotions he has to display. The rest of the actors are pretty much what you would expect to find in a movie with such a small budget, though none of the performances are terrible.

As I said, I popped in Bled White because I was bored, and while it didn’t alleviate my boredom, it at least managed, for the most part, to take my mind off of how bored I was for about an hour and twenty minutes. And that has to count for something, right?

RECAP: It won’t fool anyone into thinking it’s anything other than a low-budget film, but Bled White does benefit from some good performances, and the ambitions of writer/director Jose Carlos Gomez, no matter how incapable he is of matching them. The film is broken down into several vignettes that jump back and forth in time, making it an ultra-low budget zombie version of Pulp Fiction, but with half the imagination and very little of the (writing) talent. It’s all pretty bland, with shots of a barren, snowy landscape taking up what feels like a quarter of the run-time, but it's also mercifully short, another little detail that works greatly in its favor.

RATING: 4/10

TRAILER

Perversions of Science S1, E3: Boxed In

Starring:
Heather Elizabeth Parkhurst as Emmy
Kevin Pollak as Pilot
Melanie Shatner as Dulcine
William Shatner as Admiral Kornfeld
Brian Phelps as Soldier
Mark Thompson as Soldier
Maureen Teefy as Chrome

Written by: Chris Miller & Kevin Rock, based on the "Weird Science" comic books, by William M. Gaines

Directed by: William Shatner


The first two episodes of “Perversions of Science” have really run the gamut in terms of quality. The first episode played to the show’s miniscule budget, and turned out to be a fantastic episode, while the second one was done in by a finale of bad special effects, and a rather sloppy excuse for a story. So, then, I suppose it’s pretty fitting that we would follow those up with an episode that varies wildly in quality just within its own 25-minute existence.

This was the only episode that I remembered bits of from my initial viewing, as a horny teenager in the late '90s babysitting some kids (yes, the children were long in bed by the time this came on). It's not that it's an overly memorable episode on its own, but I always liked it for its sheer stupidity; the way it blended late-night cable sexuality, with a completely over-the-top plotline (and some pretty awful effects) is what made it appeal to me back then.  Watching it now wasn't quite the fun experience it was the first time, but it's still an entertaining episode.

“Boxed In” starts off in space in what I would assume to be the faraway future, where Kevin Pollack is piloting a rickety spaceship in a war that he has been fighting for over two years. Traveling alone in the outer reaches of the galaxy with no one to talk to would be enough to drive any man insane, but thankfully Kevin (who has no name in the show, and is referred to only as “pilot” by his superior, and “dunglelips” by his girlfriend) has a helper: “Emmy”, an advanced sex-bot that he won in a card game. Conveniently, she’s also handy with tools (see the world they create, in which everything can be turned into a double-entendre?) and spends most of her time repairing the many things that Mr. Pollack is unable to.

She may only be a robot, but apparently even robots have needs; Emmy spends most of her time trying to seduce the pilot. But he’s an honest man of good integrity: he has a girlfriend back home who goes by the name Dulcine (a perfectly annoying Melanie Shatner), and he swore to her father (William Shatner, reprising his real-life role), who also happens to be his superior, that he would remain faithful (I guess even sleeping with robots counts as infidelity in the future). After two years of no booty, you can imagine how tough things get, but just when it seems like Emmy might finally break him, he receives word from the admiral that the war is over, and he can return home.

Home, in this case, is a bland futuristic set in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. All he can think about is consummating his relationship with Dulcine, but after the admiral drops her off, Pilot Pollack learns that she has been fitted with an electronic chastity belt that sends an electronic shock to any unauthorized personnel that happens to touch it--and the pilot learns the hard way that, until they get married, he’s one of the unauthorized ones. Frustrated with the situation herself, Dulcine leaves--and the pilot decides that it’s time to put together a little friend that he happened to bring home with him…

That's right, it's Emmy, and she has not lost her hots for the pilot!  A few minutes into their passionate lovemaking, he receives a video call (remember, it’s the future!) from a horny Dulcine, who successfully found a way to remove the belt without killing herself; she announces that she will be returning to his house in ten minutes for some intimate time. The abrupt stop angers Emmy, who shuts herself down--conveniently fastening herself to him and refusing to get off. Will he manage to free himself from the rejected sexbot, or will he be discovered by the love of his life?

What works in this episode is that the show never takes itself too seriously--it knows this idea is fully ridiculous, but commits to it, giving it an overall lighthearted feel with some genuine chuckles thrown in for good measure. It doesn’t work all the time, but this is “Perversions of Science” at its most playful, proving that it can still be entertaining even when its frustratingly non-existent budget rears its ugly head--the scenes of the pilot desperately struggling with a robot torso attached to his crotch manages to be humorous, even though the robot is obviously a dummy. Much like the last one we saw, though, and like many others that await us, it all builds up to a terrible conclusion that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense and feels tacked-on.

The area that “Perversions” hasn’t quite let me down in are the performances, and this one continues that streak. Kevin Pollack is just fine as the pilot, while Melanie Shatner plays the idiotic Dulcine with a level of ease that seems a little alarming. William Shatner is good as the admiral, but it’s because he’s in on the joke, the kind of role that he tends to excel in. Unfortunately, the production, with its pretty bland and unconvincing sets, as well as the finale, mar what still manages to be an above-average episode that blends laughs with sex the way late cable TV shows were always attempting to do, to appeal to teenagers always trying to sneak viewings of late night cable TV shows, as I was always attempting to do.

EPISODE RATING: 5.5/10

FULL EPISODE

Jeepers Creepers (2001), and the Undeniable State of Child Sex Abuse in Hollywood

Director: Victor Salva
Writer(s): Salva
Starring: Gina Philips, Justin Long, Jonathan Breck, and Patricia Belcher

Jeepers Creepers is the simple story of Trish and Darry (pronounced just like the food group), a brother and sister who catch sight of a mysterious creature dumping something down a tunnel while on a deserted roadway. Rather than keep driving, what do they decide to do? Go back to the site of the tunnel and snoop around. Would it surprise you in the slightest if I told you what a terrible idea this turns out to be? Darry ends up inside the tunnel, where he sees some things he cannot unsee; he emerges in shock, unable to talk about the hidden horrors of the tunnel.

Trish gets behind the wheel and they try to move on and forget about what they saw; it's not easy when an aluminum (or metal) truck belonging to “The Creeper” starts to follow them. The Creeper is a tall, black demon-looking thing, with long old-man hair, and sharp teeth. He is also one of the least convincing monsters in movie history. He is not scary, he is not menacing; just by showing him, which they do later on and then many times after that, the filmmakers ruin any chance they had of anyone taking their movie seriously.

It's the kind of movie that relies solely on the stupidity of its characters (and by extension, its target audience) for its “scares” to work, but most of them are only of the “jump” variety...sustained tension would require some kind of intelligence behind the camera. Countless, countless times Darry and Trish have ample time to make an escape, but instead sit and stare at “The Creeper”, waiting until it starts coming after them to run away, then throwing in some kind of typical horror contrivance to make the getaway more “intense”. For example, Trish frequently stalls the car because she seems unfamiliar with the idea of a stick shift. This would be a legitimate problem, if it wasn't established earlier on that the car they are using for the trip belongs to her.

Anyway, the characters and plot continue to throw common sense out the window in desperate attempts to terrify the audience. It's so desperate for something to work that it even throws a psychic character in there, who Trish refuses to take seriously, even after she recites, with complete and utter accuracy, things that have happened to them in the past. The characters are too stupid to cheer for, and the plot too flimsy and familiar to get lost in. It's a joke of a film, and really, the less said about it, the better.

The entire mess was directed by Victor Salva, a man who was convicted of sexually abusing a 12-year-old star on the set of his first movie, Clownhouse, which he directed in 1989. Allegedly, he videotaped at least one of the encounters, in which he forced the young child to give and receive oral sex. The young star finally told his parents about the abuse, the case went to trial, and Salva was found guilty, and sentenced to three years, of which he served 15 months. (Curiously, according to IMDb, he directed the same youngster three years earlier, in his debut short Something in the Basement; wonder if he was “fine” on the set then, in order to gain the youngster's trust.)

Upon his release from prison, he laid low for a while, working as a telemarketer while writing scripts on the side. Eventually, one of them caught the eye of Disney, who agreed to produce it, with Salva set to direct from his own script. That film was Powder, and Salva's dream seemed to be coming true. But a month before release, several national publications ran stories detailing Salva's history as a sex offender, and the victim himself even spoke out against Salva and his film, urging theatergoers to boycott it. Instead, the opposite happened, resulting in a $77 million take at the box office (in a film that was shot for just $10 million.) Nevertheless, after the news broke, Disney distanced itself from the director and project, swore they had no idea, and, to their credit, have never partnered with him since.

You could base an argument on the standard claim that he “served his time” and should be allowed to go back to work like anyone else. Technically, it's true that, in the eyes of the law, he did serve his time. But let's also not forget the consistent failures of our own justice system, who felt that fifteen months (out of a three-year sentence) was enough time for him to be completely “cured” and returned back to society. But while he has supposedly apologized to the victim, and paid his restitution, he has vehemently denied that he needs help, or that he has a problem; when faced with the comments of experts that pedophilia is an addiction that can be helped with ongoing therapy, he dismisses it by claiming he doesn't believe in clinical studies that liken pedophiles to alcoholics, by insinuating without proper guidance, he is always just one moment away from a possible relapse. In his mind, he is cured, and that's good enough for him. Does that sound like a man who's serious about “fixing” himself?

The other main argument I keep seeing is that his films “entertain millions of people”, as if that should excuse his disgusting behavior. Face it, he was an adult at the time, and was clearly old enough to know the potential ramifications of his actions. The problem was that he did not think about that when he gave in to temptation, and now seems legitimately irked that people still talk about it. Others justify it by pointing out all the other stars that have gotten into trouble with the law before they were stars, yet whose prior offenses have been forgotten. The problem with these comparisons are that very few of them were for sexual behavior (some of the more common mentions: Will Smith, who beat a man to “near blindness”; Tim Allen for cocaine possession and drunk driving; Mark Wahlberg for “attempted murder” for beating two Vietnamese men; and a variety of others for drug and/or weapons charges), and none of them involved intentionally abusing adolescents.

Our culture seems to focus too much on the perpetrator of violent crimes and not the victim. Often, they have to live with severe emotional and psychological, if not outright physical, traumas for the rest of their lives. For them, there are no limits to their sentence, no early time off for “good behavior”; there's is only a constant barrage of fear and terror that can sometimes be controlled, but that also leaves the lingering question: does it ever go away? But let's forget about Salva for a minute, and look at the reasons why someone like him is allowed to thrive in Hollywood.

As with almost every major company within the United States (and probably the world), movie studios are all owned by large corporations (Warner Bros. by Time Warner, Universal by NBC Universal, Paramount Pictures by Viacom, etc.) But the media industry, in case you weren't aware, is massively huge, with billions upon billions of dollars pouring in from music and movies. You know how your favorite movie stars and artists have the red carpet laid out for them wherever they go, are treated like royalty, and are constantly bombarded by millions of loyal fans? Well just imagine all of the perks and wiles they are treated to in order to “reward” them for earning the studio money: we've all heard the “tame” stories about sex parties, drugs, and alcohol, but for some these get old. They bore of legal things and turn to sex with underage prostitutes, many of whom are trafficked in against their will and forced to perform for famous clientele.

Think this is far-fetched or outside the realm of possibility? There was a documentary about teenagers being abused in the film industry that was produced in 2014. It's called An Open Secret. It played at Cannes, in an out-of-festival screening to appeal to international buyers. No major studios picked up on it, and it screened at only a handful of U.S. theaters. It has never been released to DVD, and remains a hard-to-find video. Who made it? Only Amy Berg, the Academy Award-nominated director of Deliver Us From Evil, which, somewhat ironically, focused on molestation and sexual assault at the hands of Catholic priests. This presents a weird bit of irony: Hollywood seems just fine with outing molestation and sex abuse in other industries, releasing films like Spotlight to the masses and widespread acclaim, yet when it comes time to stare at themselves in the mirror, they refuse to look, and instead scramble to suppress it.  And if this isn't a tactic to cover for their own, why else would a well-received documentary, from an Oscar-nominated director, suddenly disappear from the public eye with no explanation? (In the interest of full disclosure, many articles “blame” the film's failure on its focus on Michael Egan, who filed molestation lawsuits against several executives within the industry, including X-Men director Bryan Singer, which were thrown out when his story kept changing. The accusations against most others were dropped, with his attorneys issuing apologies to the affected parties.  Rather bizarrely, however, the accusations against Singer were dismissed “without prejudice”, meaning that Egan can refile against him in the future, and Singer was exempt from his attorney's "apology list". Also lost in the shuffle was that Egan turned down a settlement of $100,000 from Singer's camp, because he wanted a conviction instead of monetary compensation. (Though in a huge irony, it was Egan himself who went to prison, for a completely-unrelated charge.) Once the filmmakers were made aware of the outcome of this lawsuit, they edited out most of Egan's role in the movie, though this “backtracking” has made many outsiders point out that it makes the allegations leveled by the other subjects--who have no ties to Egan whatsoever, and whose stories have not been discredited--questionable; a convenient way for an entire industry to try and “discredit” the entire idea through the actions of one.)

Even more recently, earlier this year to be more precise, child actors Corey Feldman and Elijah Wood both spoke out against pedophilia in Hollywood; Feldman experienced it personally, while Wood only knew of it through firsthand accounts. Both times, the statements made major news outlets for a day or two...then promptly disappeared, thus dropping out of the public's collective mind. Wood even issued a less-pointed "clarification" a day later, saying he based all of his statements on a single viewing of An Open Secret, thus watering down his claims that he personally knew of it.  Where were the follow-up stories? Why aren’t we still hearing about this? Why hasn’t anyone, but for a select few, been identified by name? Where are all the hard-hitting exposes from investigative journalists? Why are those that speak out against it, always quick to backtrack, or "clarify" these statements?  The ensuing media hush after those claims speaks wonders, and it is within that silence that I have found the answer to many of my questions.

Hollywood will not cannibalize their own, and will not allow their ways to be changed. And they have the power to prevent insiders from ruining them, while at the same time being given a blank check to ruin anyone they want that is less powerful than they are. This is the culture of the film industry, just as it is probably the culture of the music industry, as well. It is the kind of dangerous, reprehensible atmosphere that breeds Victor Salva's, and allow them to thrive while quieting the victims with threats, and acts of violence. It's the kind of place where not even the media dares to tread, a story too big to tell; a “boys club” where men can have whatever they want, whenever they want it, no matter the cost. Victor Salva has been outed, and in my eyes will forever remain a worthless piece of shit no matter how many times he accepts responsibility, or claims that he has apologized to the family, or assures us that he has magically changed without therapy or rehab, or begs people to move on from the past. Just as anyone has the right to forgive him, I have the right not to.

But at the same time, it's equally important to remember that Hollywood is full of similar cretins who have never been outed; those who are allowed to do as they please simply because they are good with a video camera and make all the right people a lot of money. It's impossible to tell how widespread the abuse actually is, but from the sudden backtracking of the few who dare speak out against it, and the silence from all the major “news” outlets and publications, it's an epidemic that will only continue to get worse the longer it's allowed to fester in the darkness.

MOVIE RATING: 1.5/10

Perversions of Science S1, E2: Anatomy Lesson

Starring:
Jeremy London as Billy Rabe
Jeff Fahey as Bearded Man
Joanna Gleason as Mrs. Rabe
Jim Metzler as Stan Rabe
Devon Odessa as Linda
Justin Chapman as Little Billy Rabe
Gary Grossman as Sheriff
Ace Mask as Science Teacher
Maureen Teefy as Chrome

Written by: Kevin Rock, based on the "Weird Science" comic books, by William M. Gaines

Directed by: Gilbert Adler

Whereas the first episode, “Dream of Doom”, played to the strengths of its low budget, it is episodes like “Anatomy Lesson” that helped to kill this series before it ever had a chance to shine. The focus on special effects, which somehow manage to be every bit as terrible now as they were back when they first aired, takes the viewer right out of the story, while the twisty finale twisted itself right out of my interest level, lingering on an implausible finish that makes very little sense. Part of its failure stems from its short run-time: this feels like a 50- or 60-minute episode cut in half, which doesn’t allow much time to build up the required amount of character development to make any of this work.

“Anatomy Lesson” focuses on little Billy Rabe. He’s the son of the town’s coroner, and looks forward to sneaking into the basement while his father performs autopsies. He seems to be getting to do that more and more frequently lately, because there’s a serial killer loose in the town, dispatching child molesters and other unwanted scourges of society. (Maybe an inspiration for "Dexter"? Haha, just kidding...that would have required author Jeff Lindsay to watch a series that no one even knows ever existed.) But there’s something much more sinister within Billy than just morbid curiosity--he frequently gets the urge to kill. Our first clue to this behavior is after his father (Jim Metzler, in a great performance) catches Billy snooping in the basement; he is banished to his room, where we discover he stole one of his dad’s scalpels. Then, a nearby cat “meows”. A grinning Billy closes in, scalpel extended and ready to cut. He comes down on the window sill--only to have the cat jump into the arms of a bearded man, who tells him to go to bed. Terrified, Billy obliges.

Flash-forward to the present. Little Billy Rabe is growing up so fast--he’s a teenager already, and is now played by Jeremy London. But his urges haven’t subsided…in fact, if anything they seem to have gotten stronger. So when a hot, stereotypical high school slut named Linda (Devon Odessa) comes on to him, his first thoughts aren’t of making out with her, or taking things even further--no, he just wants to kill her.

That night, as things are getting hot and heavy in her car, he pulls her hair back. She thinks he’s just getting into it, so she leans her head back, going along with his aggression.  But Billy grabs a knife instead, and goes to plunge it into her unprotected neck--but a hand gets in the way, absorbing the weapon. That hand belongs to the same bearded man that appeared to him when he was a younger child! Linda is terrified, unaware of just how close to death she was; Billy is only angry that he didn’t get to finish the job. He tosses the keys to Linda, and tells her to leave, while he exits the car to track down the bearded man (Jeff Fahey), who ran away after saving her life.

After catching up to him, the bearded man informs him that he’s intervened because a killer needs a good reason to kill, like offing sex offenders and other murderers. Billy, in the heat of the moment, goes to kill the bearded man…only to discover that he’s not all that he appears to be. Then a bunch of even more stupid shit happens, and what starts off as a fascinating episode goes from 60 to zero in record time.

I don’t want to reveal the ending, but that is where all the cheesy effects come in, and they range from just plain bad, to astonishingly embarrassing. I will say that the acting is pretty solid here--I can’t remember if that’s the case with all of them, but they seem to get some pretty talented people for such a low budget. I guess that’s probably the main plus to having a production crew consisting of Robert Zemeckis and Walter Hill and Joel Silver (to name just three of many), which probably helped with landing them some solid B-list stars.

In the end, there’s just very little here to recommend. The buildup is rather intriguing, and it’s pretty neat to see some small shards of “Dexter” in here, what with the serial killer offing murderers and other lowlifes and all (though such plot points have probably been around for years, so I’m in no way insinuating this was an influence). But for an installment that relies pretty heavily on its ending, to have such a terrible finish pretty much blows any air out of the momentum balloon, making it all come crashing down.

EPISODE RATING: 4/10

FULL EPISODE

Unfriended (2014)

Director: Levan Gabriadze
Writer(s): Nelson Greaves
Starring: Heather Sossaman, Matthew Bohrer, Courtney Halverson, and Shelley Hennig

Unfriended is a film that’s terrible on so many levels, it’s a wonder it was ever made at all, let alone released.  The fact that it actually made it to theaters is enough to toss a towel in on humanity. The sad thing is, there’s probably enough material to make a decent movie in here somewhere—the main theme of cyberbullying and how one viral video in our technology-obsessed culture can lead a person to suicide—is as timely as ever. But an idea does not make a film; nor does a central gimmick that hinders, more than complements, the narrative.

The “central gimmick” is that all of Unfriended takes place on a computer screen over the course of one night, a ploy that’s every bit as exciting as it sounds. Half the movie is spent waiting for files to load, or watching characters connect to Skype, or running anti-virus software—it seems odd that in a time when just about everyone has some kind of internet-ready device, that they would make a movie that forces us to watch people using said device. It works more as a “computer sim” than it does an actual horror movie; the whole idea is the equivalent of going into a restaurant, and merely being shown a video of people eating instead of being served actual food.

With the big-studio budget this was no doubt given, couldn’t they have made a computer (or even smartphone) program that would have put us in the main role? I mean, it probably couldn’t be exactly personalized—not everyone has Skype, or Facebook accounts—but it could have been a hell of a lot more interactive and scary if we were the ones clicking on links and following “clues”, rather than watching teenaged stereotypes try to fumble their way through an awfully boring series of predictable events.  I was reminded of the "Take This Lollipop" "movie" that went viral on Facebook several years ago, which took pictures and geographical information from your own Facebook profile, and blended it with live action videos of a man that wanted to kill you.  It was short, and unless you could trick someone into going into it with absolutely no knowledge of it beforehand, obviously just a programmed video, but it was still chilling seeing a killer with your information in his hands (it is also a sobering reminder of the ease at which our own government can spy on us, in much the same way this program works).  If the producers went about it in this way, putting us in the action, and forcing us to watch the murders of online "friends", it could have been way more engaging than the bland garbage that we get.

The entire movie is viewed from the laptop of a high schooler named Blair; as it begins, she logs onto the website LiveLeak, where she watches a terribly-choreographed suicide video (that is to say, "terribly-choreographed" in our real-life, but meant to be “authentic” in the film’s world) featuring a high schooler named Laura Barns. After watching this, she connects with her boyfriend Mitch via Skype, a popular video chat program, where he tries to get her to show him some of her “goods”. She teases him, and tells him that she wants to lose her virginity to him during prom. Then four of their friends also connect to the service, interrupting Mitch’s attempts to draw nudes from his girlfriend.

Anyway, on this night, there is a mysterious seventh intruder that has entered their way into the friends’ chat room. They all disconnect and reconnect a couple of times (which we see pretty much in tedious real-time) trying to get rid of the unidentified user, but he or she keeps appearing. They decide that it’s probably just a glitch, and try to ignore the mystery intruder. But then Mitch gets a weird message from someone with the username “billie227”. Then the rest of them do…it quickly becomes obvious that this isn’t some internet troll or glitch, but someone who’s hell-bent on avenging Laura’s death. Could it be Laura herself, returning from the afterlife simply to even things out?

Needless to say, the characters are picked off one by one as Laura seems to exact her vengeance from beyond the grave. The kill scenes, which are shown in fragmented quick sequences that make full use of video effects that simulate online video “lag”, range from laughably atrocious, to simply atrocious. It’s clear they’re going for what’s “shocking” to the audience, but I’m sorry that I don’t find someone using a consumer-grade blender to grind themselves to bits as startling as I find it unintentionally hilarious. No one stopped to think that there's no way such a blender could hack through bone?

Then comes the final scene…oh God, that final scene. The scene that somehow manages to further ruin a film that had nothing going for it in the first place. In this scene, we are treated to one final jump scare that removes every little shred of mystery from the proceedings. In one of the very few moments of intelligence displayed by the filmmakers, we are kept in the dark about what exactly is “stalking” this group of friends. Is it a friend of the deceased, looking for vengeance? Is it Laura herself, stalking her prey from beyond this Earthly realm? Wisely, we are never shown what it is…until a final sequence that reveals everything, at the expense of ruining the only bit of engaging mystery that was remaining. By eliminating the only shred of intrigue in an otherwise formulaic romp, the ending gives its audience one less reason to sit through it, thus bringing the total number down to "zero".

I suppose some credit must be given to the overall feel of the dialogue: most of what unfolds has the genuine feel of a high school chat session, in all its awkward, cringe-inducing glory. The problem with this is just that—most of this just simply doesn’t appeal to anyone outside of high school. There is absolutely no maintained tension, as the atmosphere merely consists of a series of infrequent, and completely ineffective, jump scares.

For their parts, the actors do an overall decent job of making the most of their cardboard characters; while none of them deliver outstanding performances, they all go way above and beyond what the material deserves. On a technical level, the Skype interfaces (which were apparently programmed specially for the movie, to avoid actual lag and buffering issues) are convincing, and well done; so too, I guess, are the “loading” screens that seem to take up most of its running time.

But for anyone with an IQ higher than that of the filmmakers, which is pretty much anyone over the age of 16, Unfriended is a terrible, godawful film that’s partially undone by its severely-limiting gimmick, and then undone the rest of the way from a filmmaking crew that couldn’t wring an ounce of tension from what is presumably their own goddamned idea. There are bad, bland Hollywood horror films—which are sadly a dime-a-dozen--and then there’s Unfriended, which seems to insist on being worse than just about all of them.

RECAP: The cast makes the most of this lose-lose scenario, but Unfriended is a failure from the outset, relying on a central gimmick that is both well-done (from a technical standpoint), yet entirely tedious and unnecessary. If watching files download, or antivirus software run through a scan cycle are your ideas of terrifying, and the sound of mouse clicks send you running for the exits, then Unfriended will provide plenty of scares for you. If, however, you require something of actual substance, then you will be sadly left wanting. Undiscerning teens may find something to like here, mainly as an excuse simply to cuddle up with their girlfriends, but for anyone without ulterior motives, stay as far away from this uninspired snoozefest as you possibly can.

RATING: 1.5/10

TRAILER

(completely fitting this film would be tied to MTV somehow)

Perversions of Science S1, E1: Dream of Doom

Starring:
Keith Carradine as Arthur Bristol
Lolita Davidovich as Doctor/Arthur's Wife/Arthur's Daughter/Hooker
Gretchen Palmer as Receptionist/Arthur's Wife/Student/Stripper
Adam Arkin as Paul Danko
Peter Jason as Priest
Lin Shaye as Nurse
Maureen Teefy as Chrome

Written by: David S. Goyer, based on the comic book "Weird Science" by William M. Gaines

Directed by: Walter Hill

Keith Carradine plays Arthur Bristol, a man who has quite the problem: he cannot wake up from his dreams. Any time he “wakes up”, he is caught inside another one, and so on and so forth, indefinitely. We are immediately thrust in to his situation, as he sits in a doctor’s waiting room, desperate to get help. A little while later, a black woman enters, and informs him that the doctor is ready to see him. He goes into the doctor’s office, and is met by a red-haired doctor (Lolita Davidovich), who runs through his life’s milestones before asking him what is wrong. He is a 40 year old professor, married with no children, and once divorced.

He tells her his problem, only to “awaken” again, inside the same waiting room. The same black woman notifies him that the doctor is ready to see him. He enters into the doctor’s office again, and this time goes into a little more detail: he entered a government-funded sleep study out of pure boredom. The government was attempting to create a drug that could put its subjects into an immediate state of lucid dreaming. The doctor informs Arthur that studies have proven long-term states of dreaming can induce psychosis, and then proceeds to stand up, and put a gun to her head, squeezing the trigger.

Arthur wakes up again, this time next to his wife, who is also played by Lolita Davidovich. He informs her that he had a bad dream, and she tries to soothe him, falling asleep in the process. Arthur goes to check the time, only to discover his clock is running backwards, one of the traits of a dream his doctor described to him. When he “wakes” up again, he comes home to his wife in the shower. But now, his wife isn‘t Lolita Davidovich, but the same black woman (Gretchen Palmer) from his doctor‘s office! And so the story goes on, with the same characters cutting in and out of his dreams, playing different parts.

Somewhere in all of this, Arthur has a heart attack. Could this have something to do with his constant state of dreaming…perhaps he is in a coma, and all of his dreams are merely his brain fighting to stay alive? Interestingly, none of this is explored; everything is kept as mysterious and as ambiguous as possible, until a final reveal that simultaneously sent chills down my spine, while ultimately revealing nothing.

This is actually the perfect start to the series, one that avoids all the pitfalls that later episodes would fall into; namely that this series has literally zero budget, and many future episodes seemed to rely on ideas and effects that the budget simply couldn’t match. “Dream of Doom” features no outlandish special effects, yet makes up for it with a very simple, yet intriguing, premise. Keith Carradine, as Arthur, is solid in the role, as a man who’s legitimately confused about his situation, and desperately trying to come to grips with it, before it's too late.  The "what's-real-what's-not?" atmosphere makes for an engrossing experience that sucks you in, while also providing a real dose of legitimate unpredictability.

“Perversions of Science” was always wildly uneven, but the most frustrating thing about all of it was that it occasionally (read: very rarely) showed flashes of brilliance. This episode is one of them, and, in a bit of unfortunate foreshadowing, the closest example of near-perfection it was ever able to obtain.

EPISODE RATING: 8/10.

FULL EPISODE

TV Tuesdays: Perversions of Science (1997)

In our sporadic feature, known as TV Tuesdays, we take a long look at short-lived television shows. Some may have been forgotten for good reason, while others just might have been prematurely killed by impatient networks. Every week, we will review an episode of said show, in chronological order, from beginning to end.  At the end of the series, we'll summarize our thoughts on the show as a whole, giving it a final score.  Without further adieu, let's get started with the intro for our next televised failure.

I stumbled across “Perversions of Science” as a horny, teenaged boy way back when the series first aired. As a kid, I never had access to cable at home, because my mom never wanted to pay for it (looking back, she probably couldn't afford to).  But then I got a babysitting job watching two neighbors down the street, who happened to have HBO. Thankfully, by the time these episodes aired, in the wee hours of the morning, the kids would always be asleep--unfortunately, in most cases, so would I. Nevertheless, I always tried to stay up to watch it every night that I knew it was on.

To put it bluntly, “Perversions of Science” was a pretty bad show, at least, from what I remember. Even my fifteen-year-old self remembers the general cheesiness of the costumes and prosthetic effects, not to mention the ‘90s era CGI which looks awful when compared to the computer effects of today (which still look completely unconvincing, though in a much different way). I almost always ended up disappointed at the utter lack of violence and/or nudity across most episodes, which always struck me as kind of odd; it's a show, made for a network known for pushing the boundaries, that absolutely refused to push any of its own. I wasn't shocked when it came to an end after only one ten-episode season, and, like most everyone else who had seen it (a number that could probably fit into one city bus), had blocked out its very existence from my mind by the time I hit my twenties.

Despite my personal, teenaged memories that I have of the show, I must confess that I'm still rather shocked that this series has never had an official DVD release. In the age of the Internet, where everything is available at the push of a button, I'm also kind of surprised that “Perversions of Science” has still been relegated to cable television obscurity. Could a show that was produced by the likes of Walter Hill, Robert Zemeckis, Joel Silver, and Richard Donner really be all that bad? Tobe Hooper and Walter Hill even direct episodes, for goodness sakes!  What about a show with the acting talents of Ron Perlman, Jeffrey Combs, Keith Carradine, and Jason Lee? (Seriously, this show will probably set a record for the number of times you'll exclaim, “Where have I seen that guy/girl before?”)  I would think HBO could make some money selling units (and rentals) just by putting all the famous people involved with it on the front cover; it really reads as a who's-who of horror and cult films.

I guess I'm about to find out the answers to all of these questions, and more.  I must admit that this little journey will be my second attempt: I burnt them to a few DVDs a while back after downloading them online (remember, this has still never been officially released to DVD), and after watching two of the episodes, I was disinterested and my wife was bored out of her mind, so we just kind of let them fall by the wayside. This time, I've learned my lesson and am going through the entire series by myself, to prevent problems like that from cropping up again.

Almost twenty years after it originally aired, is the world finally ready for “Perversions of Science”? Or is the series' lack of an official release merely HBO's attempt at covering up a catastrophic failure? Let's dive in and see for ourselves...