Black Christmas

After the shock caused by the utter trash, labeled as the 2nd remake of Black Christmas, i recently rewatched the 2006 one and it holds up surprisingly well. The characters aren't memorable or reletable, but the typical 2000s slasher tropes work very well, the gore is more then sattisfying the twist is okayish.

Its very well worth a watvch, if you know what to expect.

Black Christmas (2006) uncut U.S. version

*** (out of 4)

Incredibly violent and rather trashy remake of Bob Clark's 1974 classic does what any remake should do; it offers us something new. The basic storyline is still in place but this remake goes for a totally different approach to the subject matter and with all the insane violence in this film it's really no wonder there was so much protest when this was released last Christmas. The story is pretty simply as a group of college girls are in their house and are eventually picked off one by one. There's no doubt that the 1974 version is a better made movie that features better director and better acting but style is not what this remake went for. Instead of style and atmosphere this remake gives us non-stop violence, which is so gory and over the top that you can help enjoy it on that level. Yes, there are many plot holes here as new characters are introduced by for a slasher film this pretty much delivers all the goods. The one interesting change to this film is that we see flashbacks of what happened to the killer when he was a child. At first I didn't know what these scenes were trying to do but they add to a few plot twists that make them worth watching. There are several references to the first film including the rocking chair and the attic as well as references to various other early slashers. The film also takes a very strong hatred feel towards religion and Christmas as there are several scenes talking bad about the two and other scenes where statues of Jesus are shown falling and various other things. I'm not sure how much of the violence made it into the theatrical version but this uncut version is pretty damn brutal with some incredibly graphic violence (including some to kids) and a sexual situation that I won't spoil since it's part of a plot change. Again, if you want a classy horror film then stick with the original. If you just want an old fashioned slasher with a pinch of a Euro giallo then this film is right up your alley.

Many years ago, a mistreated boy named Billy Lenz slaughtered his family in a one-house killing spree. Not surprisingly, this had him committed to an asylum. Since then, his house has been converted into a sorority house. And this Christmas, Billy wants to be home with his family to celebrate.

Let me say a few nice things before I start venting. First, I have to say I must have been a very good boy this year because I can't recall such an attractive cast in the recent past. Three of my all-time favorite young ladies show up here: Michelle Trachtenberg ("Eurotrip"), Lacey Chabert ("Pleasure Drivers"), and Mary Elizabeth Winstead (numerous recent horror films, including "Final Destination 3"). It was quite the visual feast!

I also enjoyed the inclusion of Andrea Martin as Ms. MacHenry, the house mother. Martin was one of the college girls from the original film and I think it's important to pay some sort of tribute like this (as well as the use of "Clark Sanitarium"). She was a good pick, better than Margot Kidder.

And the use of incest and cannibalism is always a plus (both of which were absent in the original)... and the gore was decent (though not great) with the constant eye-gouging thanks to a glass unicorn. I do love unicorns, as my embroidered unicorn pillow might suggest. While I do not think it was intentional, I appreciate how the unicorn reminded me of another great classic, "The Abominable Dr. Phibes".

But let's start the ripping: Glen Morgan was probably the wrong guy to direct this. He brought along cast members from his prior films (again, such as "Final Destination 3") which was fine, but seemed to put very little thought into any of this. And his films have more of a teenager quality to them, making even the gore, incest and cannibalism seem very youth-oriented, if that makes any sense. R-Rated or not, this was meant for teens to watch. He could have really stepped it up a dozen notches.

The girls get little or no personalities. I don't think I learned half of their names and had difficulty keeping them straight. Maybe reduce the number by one or two so we could at least see them for ten minutes? On the flip side, the film focused almost entirely on Billy Lenz, providing his entire back story. The original never touched on this at all, which made him creepier and more mysterious. Here, there's nothing strange about him (besides the yellow skin and eyes, which play no importance). Obviously, Morgan never learned the secret of good horror: don't show the killer.

Furthermore, they wasted the character of the boyfriend Kyle (who was named Peter in the original). Here, he is briefly thought by the girls to be the killer, but the audience knows the whole time that he's not. In the original, you never know whether or not Peter is the killer (in fact, many people who watched all the way to the end still aren't sure). If Kyle isn't a red herring, and his only purpose is to bring up some sex tape which was not important to the story (despite being shown again and again), then what the hell was he doing in the movie at all?

Other great elements from the original were toned down: the police station scenes, the drunk girl (who now passes out right away). And a shower scene was added, but no explicit nudity, making it almost a complete waste of time.

I'll stop before I start frothing at the mouth. Because, seriously, I was let down. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed this movie, but it was clearly the teen remake (not unlike the newer "When A Stranger Calls"). If you need a fix of girls getting strangled with a plastic bag and stabbed in the eye (and that's really all you'll see), check this out. Otherwise, you'll find plenty of great slashers out there on the video shelf. And, of course, you simply cannot beat the original "Black Christmas", one of the best horror films ever made.

If Black Christmas gets anything right, it's the colorful Christmas inspired lighting and photography. It's hard not to feel a little festive as the camera moves in and around the hallways of this sorority house covered with all sorts of colored lights as jaunty Christmas music plays in the distant background. It's only a shame this well crafted atmosphere isn't in service of a better movie.

Black Christmas is a remake of the 1974 film of the same name that involves a psychotic killer sneaking into the attic of a sorority house over Christmas break and tormenting the inhabitants with obscene and terrifying phone calls before killing them one by one. This is, more or less, the same set up for this film except, where the original featured a cast of interesting and well developed (certainly by slasher standards) characters, this film features an attractive group of young women who mostly look so much alike that you can't remember who's dead and who's not.

The killer, Billy, is unwisely brought out of the shadows and given a full sob story about an abusive mother who loved his sister more than she loved him, which caused him to go on a homicidal rampage many years prior. For some reason, he has a thing for plastic bags and ripping eyes out so, if you're into that, you're in luck - that's how he dispatches of pretty much every character in the film except for one death where a stray shard of ice does the dirty work for him.

It's hard to figure out what the creators of this film had in mind. It's long been rumored to have had serious studio interference, but the tone is all over the place. Is this supposed to be quite so campy? In the end, it doesn't work as a slice of slasher cheese, a full blown comedy, or a serious horror film.

Some movies are very confident in their ability to do many things right, thus ensuring an intriguing experience. A movie like "Black Christmas," however, is mostly confident in its ability to do many things wrong, yet still remain watchable on some bizarre level. Needless to say, it's an overhaul of the seminal 1974 slasher of the same name, in which a lonely sorority house is besieged by a killer making obscene phone-calls from the attic over the holidays. The 2006 version takes this premise and attempts to build a backstory around murderer Billy Lentz, who remained a shadowy specter throughout Bob Clark's film. I have to give writer-director Glen Morgan credit: while this bit of character development is wildly uneven (including giving Billy a sister-in-madness), it is consistent with the wildly inconsistent rest of the film. Morgan brought a strong sense of macabre humor and visual style (I dare call it "Burtonesuqe") to his exceptional remake of "Willard" (helped by Crispin Glover's delightfully wacky performance), but his stylistic leanings are simply the wrong match for a "Black Christmas" remake. There is not a single suspenseful scene to be found, and the violence is so exaggerated that it defuses any horrific effect (seriously, a killer who eats eyeballs?); additionally, the characters are so ill-defined that it's hard to keep track of who's who (had the number of girls been whittled down the point where they had actual personalities, we might have actually given a damn about them). And, for a slasher film coming in the wake of "Scream" and its kindred, "Black Christmas" just shows a general lack of common sense when an obvious threat is lurking (can you really feel sorry for a security guard who lingers in a maniac's room long enough to get knocked off?). But in an odd way, "Black Christmas" avoids the oblivion of crappy horror remakes due to Morgan's impassioned, assured sense of visual style–that being said, it's nowhere near as good as its predecessor.

4.5 out of 10