DVD: "The Burrowers" digs another hole

What is it about the old west that so hard to make scary? I mean, it's kinda creepy in its own right really, so what's the problem? You've got rampant and very visual sicknesses like small pox, open forests full of wild creatures, low lighting, "wild" Natives who chant and portray borderline magical practices amid superstitious settlers. If you can't find horror potential in that, you might want to give up writing and try underwater basket weaving.

And yet new-to-DVD flick The Burrowers proves that this is a horror formula that just isn't working for dammit all in Hollywood.

The concept is intriguing enough: a settler family goes missing, and despite Natives being blamed, it's some older, darker beings who travel underground that are snatching people and burying them alive. The acting is quite good, despite a few botched accents here and there. The camera work and music are decent as well, and yet I'm not so much scared as I am bored.

I can't necessarily tell you what it takes to make a good western/horror, but films such as The Cellar, The Missing, and now The Burrowers can surely show you how not to make it work. Maybe it's having "the" before the title that flags it for failure, since the movie that blended the genres best is titled Ghost Town from back in 1988.

So while Burrowers isn't a good western/horror, it's not a bad film. If you have nothing better to do some lazy afternoon, it has enough entertainment value to make it worth a cheap rental - just don't get your hopes up for being scared or finding the storyline even a little disturbing.

In a comic book, I could see the plot working, but apparently such stories just don't translate well to the big screen.

Day of the 'Dog: "Population 436"

There is a kind of sad joy in watching bad horror flicks, which - if I had to guess - comes from a desire to mollify the horror by being able to chuckle at the campy effects or guffaw at the poor acting. This is what I expected when I happened upon today's 'dog Population 436.

To my delight, however, it stands out from the typical horror fare right away, with an opening scene full of foreshadowing amid a perfectly timed sequence of events. I have to admit, I've grown partial to Jeremy Sisto after seeing him in horror flick Wrong Turn and Six Feet Under.

Why it deserves 'dog status. Well, it's not a truly terrifying concept nor amazing acting that sets Population apart. It's really the creative movement of the camera to give Sisto's character a constant and tacit feeling of isolation and distance, as well as subtle visual clues and spot-on timing that make this movie unique and worth your time.

Picture The Wicker Man except not sucky. Particularly if you're into mysterious settings with a collective, hidden agenda, his film will have you steeped in the paranoia and asking yourself what you would do in the same situation.

IMDb's 5.9 rating is a little low, in my opinion, but the fact that only 3,600 people have voted speaks to how little play Population has really gotten. So forget seeing the latest horror fiasco at the theaters (they all look good in the previews) and give Population 436 a try.

Throwback Thursday: "Tourist Trap"

Tourist Trap is not a film that I haven't seen and decided to watch for the first time, as most of my Throwbacks are, but rather one that has been tormenting me since I first saw it during a shut-in at the YMCA in little Greeneville, Tennessee.

Granted, it didn't take too much to scare me back then, but having seen the movie once more a few days ago, I can honestly say that it is a genuinely scary and innovative film that I am surprised doesn't have a more significant following.

Today's horror movies avail themselves of a few modern elements that I think actually hurt the genre, if indeed the purpose of a horror flick is to scare the viewer.

1. Jump scares. These occur when the creepy hand comes out from under the bed and grabs the all-too-inquisitive protagonist, often accompanied by a harsh violin noise. This is nothing new, but the ability to make it loud and solicit more "jumps" is, due to THX sound and home theaters. Hence, however, you have film after film of no real substance, but just one jump scare set up after another. There's just no meat there.

2. CGI. Two words: Van Helsing. There isn't a damn thing about that movie that is remotely scary or disturbing, and CGI is the sole culprit in this. A cartoon wolf - no matter how large, muscular, or agile - is still a cartoon wolf.

3. More CGI. This time, I'm talking about CGI gore. Humans are not easily fooled when it comes to what we see, particularly in regards to other humans. So when someone gets cut and a bunch of CGI blood flies out, there's a very subconscious part of our brain that cries "BS!" Thus, anything that would have been disturbing is now cartoonish and maybe even funny.

Trap has none of the following modern techniques, and it - like so many others - is all the better for it. The fear comes not from hands that shoot out of nowhere or wayward cats leaping from the closet, but from tense, prolonged scenes of horror as the mannequins are brought to life - they laugh, fool, and otherwise torment the teens about to meet their doom. Cacophonous music echoes and builds to a crescendo that ends with the inevitable demise of the victims, with cuts to the various mannequins building the fear factor and making it stick in the head.

In contrast to cartoon wolves of no consequence to the viewer, something as blatantly illogical as a moving mannequin adds a disturbing undertone to the film, so you're not asked to fear some hillbilly hanging on to the dregs of a dying tourist attraction, but rather his animated minions and his masked alter-ego (again, a time when something unnaturally fake is disturbing, not laughable).

Just ask yourself: what was the scariest thing about Poltergeist? The clown, right? Trap taps into that same base revulsion of the doll brought to life.

So pass up gag-worthy modern horrors when you're in the mood for a good scare and give Tourist Trap a try. It represents the type of horror flick now high on the endangered list - the kind which stays with you after it's over.

Throwback Thursday: "The Burning"

Let's go ahead and tackle the obvious here: The Burning is pretty much Friday the 13th. If you're okay with that concept, you might just find something you like in this campy '80s slasher flick.

The setting is a summer camp full of various-aged kids: maybe 8 to 18. It's a given that there's got to be some gratuitous teen sex, so the storyline surrounds the upper-aged teens most of all, plus it's the teens who are responsible for setting the murdering rampage of the antagonist in motion.

Like in many films before and since, such as U-Turn and Sunshine, being horribly disfigured mysteriously acts as a permanent boost to the bad guy's speed, strength, and stamina. He stalks with the catlike prowess of a panther, though the viewer is alerted to his presence by a cacophonous blare as if the music composer fell asleep lying on a church pipe organ.

The actual deaths are pretty clever, with excellent gore and splatter effects. The madman groundskeeper doesn't quite have the arsenal of Jason, but he gets pretty crafty considering his weapon of choice is an impossibly sharp set of garden sheers.

The cast has some pretty big names, such as Jason Anderson and that nerdy kid from Fast Times at Ridgemont High (who plays a nerdy kid in Burning, as well).

While the plot has the depth of a kiddie pool, the film tries to communicate the horror of what caused the massacre through flashbacks and build-up scenes that are quite well done, though again smacking of the early Friday films.

So if you enjoyed the Friday films and don't mind a little gratuitous gore with your butchered teenagers, check out The Burning. With decent acting, good effects, and a well-portrayed (if cloned) plot line, it's sure to please slasher-film fans who missed this one from the camping horror lineup.