Author: unkle lancifer

I have another LANCE HENRIKSEN log to throw on the blogothon fire. Truth be told, this movie involves more of a supporting role for HENRIKSEN but I can't let the chance of speaking about MIMIC 3: SENTINEL pass me by. I know what you're thinking, the world of straight-to-DVD sequels, particularly those dispensed by DIMENSION FILMS, is a treacherous one. Why would anyone give this film a chance when even the first film in the series was hobbled by massive studio interference? I don't know how this happened but somebody actually allowed director/writer J.T. PETTY (SOFT FOR DIGGING, THE BURROWERS) to do his own thing and retain his own voice and the result is a film with strong enough legs to crawl on its own. Many MIMIC fans apparently disagree. The knee jerk desire for "bigger, stronger, faster!" is just too strong to break. For myself though, I can only admire this micro-budgeted, limited setting, psychological thriller with a purposeful pace. It's as if FRANZ KAFKA did a rewrite of REAR WINDOW.

Obvious action elements are buried in the dust from the start when we are introduced to the sickly and paranoid Marvin Montrose. He's as twitchy as a bug and actor KARL GEARY's offbeat idiosyncratic performance may even bring to mind JEFF GOLDBLUM's work in THE FLY. Marvin is a survivor of the disease mentioned in the first film and it has left him allergic to nearly everything in his environment. Homebound due to his condition, he connects to the outside world through photography, snapping shots at the slices of life he spies from his window. The city hums like a hive all around him but Marvin is trapped in amber, his only consistent contacts being his Mother (AMANDA PLUMMER…score!) and his scamp of a younger sister (ALEXIS DZIENA, have I ever mentioned how much I enjoy 05's HAVOC?) From his perch, Martin begins to observe suspicious activity in the urban arena that involves giant looming insectoid creatures chomping on passersby and a mysterious "garbage man" portrayed by our man HENRIKSEN. The police are as much as help as ever and Marvin is is forced to confront the beasties with his very limited powers and resources.

SENTINEL takes its time and perhaps I'm a dying breed, but I welcome that. Much like PETTY's later flick THE BURROWERS, the film holds back on the firework show until the viewer has been properly initiated. When things go down, they go down hard and the aggressiveness is all the more shocking thanks to its previous scarcity. There are a slew of interesting ideas scattering about concerning the act of "seeing" in general. We understand Marvin's outlook on the world through his photography. Much of what we observe is through his camera and eventually the line between viewer and subject blurs. When Marvin does finally put his camera down, we suddenly find ourselves watching him from afar through a lens as he once watched others. Trust me, there's more infesting this movie than giant mutant bugs. As much as Martin attempts to look past his situation it seems the shadows from his childhood (the roach/man personifications of his disease) keep knocking at the front door of his shoebox home.

As I said before HENRIKSEN's role is relatively brief, but he does make a strong impression as usual. Like PLUMMER, it's always good to see him in anything. As they say, there's no such thing as a small part…unless of course you count the part of that kid who gets ripped to shreds in the first three minutes of this movie. If you're looking for spectacle, than feel free to watch one of those cars that turn into robots movies instead. Tell that bumble bee-thingy I said, "Hi." MIMIC 3: SENTINEL goes against the grain in a way that is refreshing, taking an expansive story and bringing it home and personalizing it. PETTY smartly stays within his means, focuses on characters and setting and presents a story much more insular and involved than anyone would suspect. I mentioned that this film is small but the miraculous thing is that as you watch it keeps getting smaller and smaller until finally the action is taking place in about 3 feet of space. The final confrontation with the menace that takes place from within a refrigerator still makes me flinch and jump and its flashes of absolute blackness allow the mind to reel. Talk about mimicry, this movie is an absolute keeper running around in the shell of a throwaway. Don't fall for the Camouflage.

NOTE: This post is part of the LANCE HENRIKSEN BLOGATHON! Jump on over to JOHN KENNETH MUIR's REFLECTIONS ON FILM AND TELEVISION for lots more HERE!

If I'm such a big fan of LANCE HENRIKSEN why is it that I always seem to dread or avoid watching PUMKINHEAD? A big heavy stone sinks slowly down the well of my stomach just thinking about it. I've always assumed that because the plot of the film springboards off of the heartbreaking death of a child that I considered it too emotionally taxing for a casual view. That would make sense but that never stopped me from throwing PET SEMETARY on multiple times over the years. The little boy in PUMPKINHEAD's motorbike mishap is no more tragic than Gage Creed's Mack Truck flattening and I think I know which vehicle I'd rather be smashed by. Sitting myself down and forcing a revisit with PUMPKINHEAD recently made it all suddenly so clear to me. The fact is, this movie conjures up an emotion that I find much more difficult to deal with than fear or sorrow, it conjures up (quite literally even) anger. It's about nothing, if not anger.

The role of Ed Harley fits HENRIKSEN like a well-worn, workman's glove. Ed runs a small back road store. A humble sign declares "Harley's Groceries" and it's all kinds of charming when you notice the sign has been personally updated by hand to include "And Son." Ed is raising his young child Billy (MATTHEW HURLEY) on his own and, in a handful of brief scenes, it is made clear that the two have an exceptionally close bond. In fact, we get the idea that ALL they have is each other and it suites them both just fine. Billy is not your typical movie kid either, meaning he's not obnoxious; rather he comes across as sweet, humbly happy and a bit self conscious about the fact that he has to wear glasses. He dotes on his beloved dog in the same manner his dad dotes on him.

Enter the douchebags and I'm already starting to feel my blood boil; a group of arrogant, self-entitled twentysomething "city folk" roll on to the scene like they own the place bringing with them their loud stupid asshole motorbikes. They have a ringleader who's meant to be the biggest dick in the bunch but I seriously hate them all. This is actually the one weakness of the film for me, as it would really help the "horror" element if there were a single person in this group who I did not want to see mercilessly torn to shreds.

When Ed leaves Billy in the store to run an errand (Ed would NEVER do that but whatever) Billy gets smooshed by a moron's bike while chasing after his pooch. Ed returns to find his son splayed out in the grass and then, as he carries his broken body back towards the store, the lone remaining dumbass asks if he can help. It is at this point that LANCE HENRIKSEN throws a glare that is the absolute highlight of the movie for me. This guy can act. I can feel the vibrations of that laser beam hate stare as I write this now. Forget the titular creature, HENRIKSEN can dispatch an army of vengeance demons out of his peepers whenever he desires.

Filled with fury Ed tracks down a local witch to aid him in his revenge against the callus cretins who robbed him of his world. He has grown up hearing stories of a demon that can be summoned to balance the scales and has no trouble believing them as he once witnessed the creature bitch slapping a luckless victim as a child. Once activated, the demon operates like a speeding freight train of ruthless retaliation and cannot be stopped. The witch advises that one must simply wait for it to "run its course."

Unlike me, Ed eventually begins to have second thoughts about his choice of actions. He realizes as the line between himself and the monster blur that he is losing himself little by little to the manifestation of his anger. One of the film's poster taglines read "A grim fairy tale." And that sums up PUMPKINHEAD rather nicely. Although the opening is very much grounded in the real world once night falls we're strolling on the pages of a storybook. This is a morality tale about the price paid when we allow ourselves to be taken over by hate. I get that I really do but all things considered I still say sign me up.

PUMPKINHEAD is an impressive directorial debut from the late STAN WINSTON, one of the most talented men ever to work in the field of make-up and special effects. Cinematographer BOJAN BAZELLI would go on to help craft another visually stunning horror tale, 2002's THE RING. Although it wasn't a huge success upon original release, PUMPKINHEAD's reputation has solidified over the years and it's easy to identify it now as one the stronger and more original (not to mention atmospheric) horror films of its decade. If you ever find yourself cozying up to CGI, I would suggest checking out PUMKINHEAD again to remind yourself just what is being lost. The effect of Pumpkinhead himself is a joy to behold and it's obvious that WINSTON knew exactly how to present the beast to his best advantage.

No special effect however, can outshine LANCE HENRIKSEN's performance. It's absolutely impossible not to be moved by the pain he expresses on screen and this role gives him a chance to expose an earthy nurturing side that apparently comes naturally to the guy. I stand pleased now that I figured out exactly why I have been quietly keeping my distance from this movie for years. I hate to see HENRIKSEN suffer to this extreme. It really pisses me off.

NOTE: This post is part of the LANCE HENRIKSEN BLOGATHON! Jump on over to JOHN KENNETH MUIR's REFLECTIONS ON FILM AND TELEVISION for lots more HERE!