The Strangeness

The Strangeness (1985)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

A group of people hear various legends about a certain cave they are about to enter. They decide to go ahead with their journey and it doesn't take long for them to get trapped in the cave with a giant monster who wants to kill them.

If you're read Stephen Thrower's NIGHTMARE USA book then you'll recognize this title and the various stories that went along with it. This film was shot for $25,000.00, which was an incredibly low amount for the 1950s let along when this movie was made. One should keep that in mind when they're watching THE STRANGENESS because the film doesn't have too much in it. It's one of those films that you can tell didn't have much money to spend and obviously there's not too much to see.

I give the filmmakers a lot of credit for trying to pull the film off but sadly it didn't work. I thought the story was actually something that could have worked, although parts of it did remind me of THE BOOGINS. The cave location should have been put to much better use but sadly the cinematography is just so dark that many times it's hard to see what is going on. Another problem is that the budget didn't allow for a monster so we get a really awful looking bit of stop-motion that is more laughable than anything else.

Trying to pass off a stop-motion monster just didn't work and it's too bad that there wasn't some sort of physical monster here. The performances range from bad to decent but there's not one that would hard or damage the film. You don't have many other special effects in terms of the violence or gore. The majority of the running time has the characters walking and talking and then walking and talking some more. There's no question that the film just doesn't have much happening because they couldn't afford it.

THE STRANGENESS certainly isn't going to win any major awards over its final product but considering what the filmmakers had to work with, buying them a beer if you ever meet them would be a nice gesture.

A geological expedition of an abandoned mine becomes a living nightmare when its members find themselves trapped underground with a hulking, tentacled vagina monster. The interesting looking beast is brought to life via stop-motion animation(with marginal success). This creature, of origins which are never conclusively deduced, appears to digest its victims externally by covering them with a thick, enzymatic slime.

This unjustly overlooked monster movie was clearly produced on breadcrumb rations, but well-maintained suspense and a dark, foreboding atmosphere make up heartily for its bush-league deficiencies. Not a classic, perhaps, but certainly deserving of a more prominent placement within the annals of horror cinema.

6/10... Recommended.

A group of 7 gold prospectors head into a mine that was recently opened back up after an earthquake. Of course, they don't pay attention to local legend that something is down there and killing people. This low budget ($25,000) horror flick has a slight cult following and I'm not exactly sure why (unless it is because it is so obscure). I'll admit the last half hour is pretty entertaining, but the hour getting there is pure torture. Lots of walking and talking and our titular strangeness doesn't appear until 45 minutes in. Even in the extras co-writer Chris Huntley admits it commits the unforgivable sin of being boring. I would forgive them if they were strict amateurs, but this group graduated from USC so I would hope they know an exploitation film should be exploitive. Anyway, like I said, the last half hour is cool as three survivors battle the stop motion monster and there is a cool John Carpenter-like score. I wanted to see more of the monster, but it is literally on screen for 45 seconds.

Even if the movie isn't the best, Code Red DVD has given this great attention. You have interviews and an audio commentary by director Melanie Anne Phillips, producer/actor Mark Sawicki and co-writer Huntley. The tales about how the film was made are pretty fascinating and inspiring (like a cave set being built in a backyard). Even more interesting are Sawicki and Huntley's USC student shorts, which are actually all better than the feature production. Huntley was a pretty talented artist and it is a shame he didn't go on to anything else. Sawicki has worked steadily in Hollywood as a visual effects and camera guy. The film's VHS is kind of legendary for how dark it was and I'm sure this is much better. However, you still get scenes where the only image are five helmet lights bouncing around in the blackness. Safe to say, the original MY BLOODY VALENTINE is still "horror film set in a mine" champ.

There are nostalgic reasons to like this now, back in the good old days the mid 1980's when low budget still meant you shot the thing on film and went outside of your neighborhood to shoot it. But I saw this in the 80's before the nostalgia kicked in and it was fun and it holds up for the most part now, rewatching a well battered VHS.

This is in the Lovecraft zone for sure and the story is good. The execution varies, it would be great to see a DVD release of this with some background info as this is an Indie production and therefore its origins would be interesting. A DVD might show the cave sets to be sets, but would probably also show the image more cleanly in good ways too. I think it's pretty well photographed,but in some instances video transfers just couldn't handle the contrast ratios like this. In one scene, for instance, a flash camera is used to light the way and each flash makes the whole video image jump and ruins a cool reveal shot of the creature.

(A pretty nice DVD of this was released in August of 2009 and is well worth getting)

The monster is creepy looking, even if you're not afraid of vaginas and part of it certainly does look like one. The DVD reveals two things that have to be mentioned in light of this. The director is now a women (though still married to his/her wife that he had kids with?!?) How much of a woman then is he/she? And the designer of the creature is now openly gay though at the time says he was not "out" yet. So think, or don't think, about this too deeply while watching the movie. They also show the puppet, battered but still looking very, well vaginal or as the designer says, it looks like a penis with a vagina on the end of it. Does all this make the monster sound scary enough for you?

Performers vary but several of them engage your interest enough to care about their fate and one of them, who deserves to die, does indeed have a very good death scene. Yes 1980's film fans, the lead large-possibly-not-real-breasted actress, seemingly the only veteran actor of the bunch, wears a tight white semi tube top,and even tighter jeans, and yes they eventually get her wet. But the thing that it deserves credit for is you can always tell which character is which, which, if you pardon the repeated word, is more than THE DESCENT managed to do.

The enjoyable John Carpenter rip off score is probably the most dated element and it actually dates it in a good way, the whole story with a cave monster gives it a old fashioned feel in a good way too. It's a good old fashioned monster story.

Other films in this ballpark are of course the recent THE DESCENT, and WHAT WAITS BELOW, and THE BOOGENS, but this film is not exactly like any of those and though not as good as those in many ways still has its share of creepy moments amid a couple of "we didn't really shoot this action scene well enough for it to all make sense sequences." The mine setting is well enough done to build interest and it moves pretty well to the end. Bring on a DVD version someone. Some of the well done animation is by Ernest D Farino who has for many years worked at Industrial Light and Magic doing work on Star Wars films and several James Cameron title sequences.

My boss at the time and showed it to us at a Halloween party at our office. He is the Chris Huntley that co-wrote and acted in it. He knows it's bad, we know it's bad and we all agree that the monster looks WAY too much like a vagina to be coincidence. Maybe it was from a gynocological experiment gone wrong.

It was a VERY low budget and the actors were all friends so what you have here is a case of "hey gang, lets' put on a show".

Nobody got hurt and it was a first attempt. Nothing wrong with that. It gave us all a good laugh and it's a great film to watch with friends and make fun of. :-)