Leprechaun (1993)

"Try as they will, and try as they might, who steals me gold won't live through the night." - Leprechaun 

Leprechaun (1993) centers on a malevolent and murderous leprechaun referred to as Lubdan, who, when his gold is taken from him, resorts to any means necessary to reclaim it. (Source: Wiki)

I mean this movie is pretty straight forward, it's about a leprechaun who wants his gold back. 

The movie opens with this creature in a cave counting his gold. Then it flashes to an older man, Daniel O'Grady [Shay Duffin], who returns from a trip to Ireland. He finds a Leprechaun's gold, brings it back and guess who follows him to America? Yup the Leprechaun. His wife is killed, and he has a heart attack while the Leprechaun is locked up in a crate with a four leaf clover sitting on the crate. You know that part always sort of annoyed me. Wouldn't the clover have withered away and just died/or crumbled? Would the magic of the clover be gone after like 6 months? 

Anyway, there is a flash forward to 10 years, meaning the Leprechaun was in this crate for a decade. Weird? Wouldn't he have died eventually or is in immortal. IF he is, then a four-leaf clover shouldn't killed him. But I digress. Now after all these years, a father, J.D Reding [John Sanderford], and his daughter Tory Reding (Jennifer Aniston) move into the Grady house. I mean they leave the city and move to the country. Why? It's never really explained. However, the meet up with the house painters, Nathan Murphy [Ken Olandt], Ozzie [Mark Holton] and Alex [Robert Hy Gorman]. Now Ozzie is not the brightest bulb in the box, and he ends up letting the Leprechaun out of the crate. It also doesn't help that this dude ate one of the coins. I still don't get why and what the point of it was. Regardless, they now have to get a four leaf clover and kill him. 

I have a few problems with this movie. 

One, do you have ANY idea how hard it is to find a four-leaf clover? Why couldn't it have been a little easier to find? Like an axe or acid? Also like I've mentioned, this dude is immortal and the thing that takes him out is a four leaf clover? Talk about a clique. 

Second, who sells a house without informing anyone that there is a murderous evil Leprechaun in the basement? I mean they have to tell you if there was a murder in the house. I mean technically, there was and an attempted murder. I'm just saying. Who buys a house site unseen in the middle of nowhere anyways? 

Third, like I already mentioned, Ozzie randomly swallows one of the gold coins? Why? It doesn't make any sense. It doesn't help that this leprechaun is so anal that he needs all 100 of his coins. What a greedy bastard. I just don't get why he put it anywhere near his mouth. I mean it's got to be like 600 years old, which is gross; if you think about it. 

I do have to say one thing about this movie, the make up effects of the Leprechaun are absolutely amazing. Also I think Warwick Davis does a fantastic job portraying the character. He gives the right about the trills and chills. As far as the rest of the effects, there aren't many things to talk about. The way the leprechaun dies after he gets the four leaf clover in the mouth is pretty cool. He is all melted and dissolved. It's so gross. It grossed me out so much as a kid and it still kind of does. 

Here is the video clip of his death; which has the best/worst on liner ever: 

I mean he was terrifying as the Leprechaun, however, I felt they tried to make him too comedic. 

This leads me right into the sequels. I mean I know Freddy got pretty funny towards the end of the franchise, but the Leprechaun started off as a joke. I know it's a challenge to balance the comedy and horror, which I think the original did that just fine; but the sequels, just flat out went for comedy. There were some jumpy moments in the first one, however once you started getting to the sequels, it got worse. 

I made it all the way to Leprechaun 3 before I had enough. It's pretty much the same old gags and the same old jokes. I'd say the only sequel worth watching was Leprechaun Origins; which I've done a short review on already. Personally, I wouldn't call it a sequel, more like a remake. Also it was pretty terrifying as well as has a pretty interesting storyline. The cast of characters is pretty convincing in their perspective roles and the area itself is a pretty interesting character. This one brings them back to Ireland; which I think is a nice change of pace as well as it has a town with a deep dark secret. It does feel like the typical, "don't trust the locals" type movie, but it is done in a really good way. Also it does have the typical horror movie stereotypes, like the dumb blond, the jock boyfriend, the idiot and the final girl. All in all, good movie and good entry into the series. I like that they tried to reinvent the leprechaun rather than make another sequel. 

BUT....

They decided to create another random sequel called Leprechaun Returns which was released on December 11th, 2018 on SyFy. It was awful. It was meant to be a sequel to the original. This is similar to the 2018 requel of Halloween, which is supposed to be a sequel to the original; but at the same time you're supposed to ignore all the other sequels. Literally I feel that SyFy had seen/heard what Blumhouse was planning with the new Halloween film and decided to do the exact same thing. It can't be a coincidence both movies came out within a few months of each other. Halloween was released in October 2018, where this one was released in December. 

If you're expecting Warwick Davis, you'll be disappointed. The Leprechaun was recast and he portrayed by Linden Porco. I feel they tried to hard to recreate the feel of the leprechaun, because it failed. Like Robert Englund is to Freddy, the same goes for the Leprechaun. No one can play him like Davis. Plain and simple. 

In short, a group of sorority sisters unwittingly awaken a depraved leprechaun who decides to teach them a lesson in murder. (Source: Wiki) 

Um yeah. We have Mark Holton reprising his role as Ozzie (wearing the same exact overalls from the first one, weird). One of the Sorority girls, Lila (Taylor Spreitler) is supposed to be the daughter of Aniston's character (Tori Reding). This very vaguely links the two movies, however it does not feel like another sequel. It feels like a messed up remake with very loose connections to the first one. I mean they have could have created something better rather than just creating a requel. Another thing that bothers me about this sequel is that Ozzie still has the gold coin in his stomach from the first movie. Um wouldn't he have digested that or had to have it removed eventually? How did he survive with that in his stomach for over 20 years? I mean eventually it would have passed through his freaking system. 

Anyway, that's pretty much Leprechaun and it's sequels. I liked the OG movie, it is a good one. I would stick to the original and Leprechaun Origins in my opinion, because the sequels were too much (for me), especially the 2018 one for SyFy. I mean there are some people out there who do like the sequels; but for me they were just way too ridiculous. Then again this was seen to be a little ridiculous. It had a budget of $900k and it went on to make $8.6 million upon its release on January 8th, 1993, so not a really financial success. It wasn't a success with the critics or fans either. Most people have called it a joke, or even boring at times. While all that maybe true, it's still a fun movie to watch and one they STILL air on St. Patrick's Day as well as Halloween. 

IMDB: 4.8/10 || Rotten Tomatoes: 21%

Sleep Tight, 

A Nightmare on Movie Night

Leprechaun Origins (2014)

**This is a repost review that I first published in 2015 on another blog, that I decided to post on here.** 

Personally, I am a huge fan of the original Leprechaun movie staring Warwick Davis. I have to say, he was a good choice for the role, because he brought a lot to the character. To me, he was a horror icon like Freddy Krueger. 

Davis did a great job. It gives you a sense that the movie is not supposed to be taken seriously. I mean it's a Leprechaun, who just wants his gold back. Honestly, I felt Leprechaun was trying to be the Freddy Krueger of the 90s; but it didn't work too well. I get why though, it just became too ridiculous. Some people did not enjoy the fact it leaned more on the humor side than horror. Well, honestly I liked the movie for that premise. However, the same old gags were being recycled; which made the movies really boring to watch. 

Since then, no one has attempted to make a really terrifying Leprechaun movie...until 2014. About 11 years after the first Leprechaun movie was released, a new one began to emerge. I just happen to stumble across an article about it, while trying to piece together the order of the original movies. The movie was going to be called Leprechaun Origins. So not a remake and not a sequel. It was a completely different movie. That's good, because if they had done a remake and NOT included Warwick Davis, I would have been pissed. 

Anyway, the movie was done by WWE Studios. Well, I have to admit, that right there shocked me. The Leprechaun in this movie is played by Dylan 'Hornswoggle' Postl. Yeah the wrestler. Again another shocker, but at least you don't have to look for a stuntman. In my opinion, best Leprechaun so far!! He was very convincing and scary as shit!! It's important to note that Davis was prosthetics in the original Leprechaun. However, in this movie, the Leprechaun was pretty much all CG; but it was still awesome looking, though. 

After first, I was a little intrigued. The original Leprechaun movies were more like slapstick comedy than horror and I feel that’s why they never touched upon the subject again until now. This new movie is a whole new ball game. I was a little nervous watching this movie, but I decided to go ahead and watch it. I wanted to see for myself how good or bad it was. 

Now there are few things I’ve noticed different. The setting has been changed. Instead of taking place in a rural house, it takes place in the Irish countryside. Also the characters are different. Instead of being a group of random strangers, there are two young couples backpacking around Ireland. They visit this remote town in the middle of nowhere and gradually, being to discover the town’s chilling secret. It sort of reminded me of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre or even Cabin in the Woods. So yeah especially, if you enjoyed seeing either of those movies, you’ll enjoy this one.

Okay for a movie with the word "Origins" in the title, I didn't feel like they gave away too much of the origin of the Leprechaun. I was expecting flashbacks; similar to Rob Zombie’s remake of Halloween. I mean yes they do give you a little bit of a backstory; but I would have liked them to go further in and given us the entire backstory. However, I think they were just trying to leave it up to your imagination, and for that I give them credit. There aren’t many movies today that leave up to the audience to figure out for themselves.

That's really my only complaint with this movie. The acting is really good. It was a bit predictable and sort of cheesy, but hey it's a horror movie. No one knows how one's going to act in that type of situation. I mean I felt Brendan Fletcher did an amazing job; but there might be someone out there who disagrees with me. Go right ahead!! I think he’s a fantastic actor!!

Okay that’s it. Yeah I don’t want to give too much away of this movie, as I know a lot of people probably have never see or heard of it yet.

Let's just say, it's worth a watch. If you're looking for a decent thriller, I'd go with Leprechaun Origins. I liked it. It was a good movie. Since watching videos on Cinemassacre, I've learned to look at movies in a whole new way, and that's the approach I took with this movie. I viewed as an independent film someone made to entertain people. I'm glad someone had the balls to make another Leprechaun movie. Also make it serious and scary. Let's just hope they don't get ridiculous and end up putting the poor guy in space.

Sleep Tight, 

A Nightmare on Movie Night

Psycho (1960)

"A boy's best friend is his mother." Norman Bates 

Psycho (1960) is about a Phoenix secretary Marion Crane (Janet Leigh), on the lam after stealing $40,000 from her employer in order to run away with her boyfriend, Sam Loomis (John Gavin), is overcome by exhaustion during a heavy rainstorm. Traveling on the back roads to avoid the police, she stops for the night at the ramshackle Bates Motel and meets the polite but highly strung proprietor Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins), a young man with an interest in taxidermy and a difficult relationship with his mother. (Source: Wiki)

This is probably one of the favorite Hitchcock films. It has the right amount of pacing and scenery. This movie truly keeps you on the edge of your seat. 

I'm going to start talking about the setting. The Bates Motel is a deserted motel in the middle of this highway stripe and its the only hotel. It has the creep old house in the back. The way Marion (Leigh) drives up to the motel, it almost just appears out of no where. It's like a ghost hotel. Hitchcock really had a way of creating a scene with just the minimal amount. 

Next we're going to talk about our leading lady, Marion, which is played really well by Janet Leigh (mother of Jamie Lee Curtis). She does a great job, until of course she dies. She is sort of like a red herring, making you think that she is going to be the survivor. 

This is the infamous shower scene, which has been parodied numerous times in countless moves and tv shows, so this really isn't a spoiler. HOWEVER, this is a total SHOCK. It is completely unexpected and comes out of no where. She is innocently taking a shower and then gets stabbed to death by some unknown figure. I read in various facts, that Hitchcock wouldn't allow late entries into the theater, because they would be spending the entire movie wondering where Janet Leigh was. I also enjoy the fact that the blood was actually chocolate syrup, which is pretty clever, mainly because of the way it flows down the drain. 

Lastly, I want to talk about Norman Bates who was played amazingly by Anthony Perkins. Like his performance is over the top and insane. I don't want to spoil the ending, but I feel like it's already been spoiled by so many movies and tv shows. Anyway, at the end you find Norman's mother dead in a chair and he was the killer all along. He was taking orders from his mother to murder. I honestly believe he murdered her himself. Norman Bates was based on serial killer Ed Gain (which is similar to LeatherFace in Texas Chainsaw Massacre). 

Psycho was released on September 8th 1960 to wide critical acclaim and amazing box office numbers. It had a budget of $806, 947 and went on to make $50 million. They did go on to create three sequels to this movie, and I've heard Psycho II is regarded as one of the best sequels ever made. Also there was a remake in 1998, to which I heard did not do so well. Either that or it's just me. I am not a huge fan of remakes, especially when they recreate every scene. Another adaptation was Bates Motel (which is available on Netflix) and it was met with raving critic reviews as well as ratings. It's really nice to see Alfred Hitchcock

Anyway, I highly recommend checking out this amazing classic horror film. 

IMDB: 8.5/10 || Rotten Tomatoes: 96%

Sleep Tight,

A Nightmare on Movie Night

Ernest Scared Stupid (1991)

"How about a bumper sandwich, Boogerlips!" - Ernest

Ernest Scared Stupid (1991) is about Ernest P. Worrell (Jim Varney) who works as a garbage collector in a small Missouri town. Despite the warnings of superstitious local Old Lady Hackmore (Eartha Kitt), he accidentally unleashes devious troll Trantor (Jonas Moscartolo), a slimy creature confined under a tree for 200 years. Trantor changes some kids into wooden dolls and turns Ernest's dog, Rimshot, into a log. Ernest then teams up with Old Lady Hackmore to get rid of the beast and bring the victims back to life. (Source: WIKI) 

I absolutely love this movie. It is for sure cult halloween classic. Jim Varney was a fantastic character actor and this movie was a true test of that. He had multiple personalities, which made him even crazier. 

One thing that sort of put me off is that the kids did not find it weird at all when Ernest would switch to his multiple personalities. For me, I'd stay away from this guy with a split personality, but thats me. 

Anyway, Ernest attempts to help the kids find a tree to have the most epic treehouse in the woods, because let's face it, it's the 90s and that's just normal. They stumble across a really old tree that happens to house a 200 year old Troll. Now thinking about it, the ending is a little iffy, but we will get there. 

Now one of the other main actress in this is the legendary Eartha Kitt, who plays the crazy junkyard lady. She might be remembered mostly as playing Catwoman in the Batman TV series. 

She is very convincing in her perspective roll. She finds out that the kids built a tree house in the same tree that houses this troll. She gets very upset and leaves. Then when Ernest goes to talk to her about it.  she tells him the spell to bring the Troll back to life. Like why? I have a theory. This goes along with the ending. So, at the end of the movie, the troll is defeated and all the kids that were turned to stone are revived. Magic am I right? Anyway, a few kids from the 1800s (so 200 years previous) are revived and a few of them call Lady Hackmore sister? Does that mean she is 200 years old? Is she immortal? I'm lost now. 

Now to my theory, what if she told him the spell and how to say it, so it would wake up the troll so she could get the kids (including her family) from their frozen state, because she is see putting them back by the tree. Also she knew how to kill the troll. My whole thing, is if she knew that before, she could have saved everyone. 

So, that is what Ernest was the entire time, her scapegoat, because it was his great grandfather who actually buried the troll with the tree. I mean this movie isn't perfect in any sense. There are some plot wholes and cheesy moments. One scene in particular, is when there is a mother and daughter fighting in a parking lot. They argue and then like 3 seconds later they love each other. It it just out of place and really random. I mean it makes Lady Hackmore realize that it's "Milk" that kills the trolls, but I mean that's written in her book; so personally it wasn't needed in the movie. 

Meanwhile, Ernest thinks it's Miak, which is also something that I didn't know was a thing. Although, I did look it up and no it's not a real thing. This is actually one of the greatest bits in the movie, because first it's not even a real thing, yet he still manages to find some. Anyway, I'm surprised the troll didn't burst out laughing when he showed up with this little ancient bottle of miak. 

Speaking of the troll, the special effects make-up is absolutely amazing. He always looks like he's always dripping with snot and it's so gross. I think this was the first "killer" troll movie and it was terrifying as a kid. I think I know why. 

The troll masks were recycled from 1988s Killer Klowns from Outer Space. That is freaking clever!! This isn't the only connection that the two movies have in common. Another connection is how they die. For the clowns they got shot in the nose, they spin in a sparkling light show and then blow up. For the trolls, when they are hit with milk, they exhibit the same death sequence. It was something that I didn't even consider until I read another review on this movie. 

So, with that being said, it is pretty cool that these two movies mirror each other and they are also sort of parodies for other movies. Honestly, I'd like the believe this movie is a parody for all the Troll movies that came out in the 80s. 

One last thing I wanted to talk about is the beginning credits. I like how they spliced in old horror movies from the 40s and 50s as Ernest looks around scared. This started my love for horror movies and I was so ready to see some of those movies. Since then I have seen a few of them and I absolutely fell in love with horror movies.

Now this movie did not well in the theaters during its initial release, but has become a cult movie. It drives me crazy that it does not get played during Halloween nor is it available on any of the streaming services. Come on, it's not that bad of a movie. It's actually really good. Like I've mentioned, this movie is not perfect in by any means, but it is still a good and it's a great comedy from the 90s. It had a budget of $9.6 million and made $14.1 million in the box office. Yeah it failed completely with both critics and box office numbers. I still think this movie is a great movie and a great addition to the horror comedy genre. 

I highly recommend this movie to any horror/Jim Varney fan. It is widely available for rental on all the streaming services like iTunes, Amazon, YouTube and GooglePlay. 

IMDB: 5.8/10 || Rotten Tomatoes: 17%

Sleep Tight, 

A Nightmare on Movie Night