Adventures in B-Movie Horror 2024: Coast to Coast

This year’s Adventure in B-Movies was a tale of two cities.

The three movies watched for the 2024 edition took place in the nation’s largest metros on both coasts, New York City and Los Angeles. Yes, terror and mayhem take the Big Apple and the City of Angels by storm this year, to varying degrees.

The first two films have an Empire State of mind, while the third shows some California love. So, let’s dive in.

The New York Ripper (1982)

After a two-year absence, Giallo cinema makes a comeback to our Halloween Adventures in B-Movie Horror. For those new to the term, Giallo films are Italian-made horror films that often have slasher and mystery elements cross paths.

That’s just what happens in “The New York Ripper,” as a murderer is on the loose in the city that never sleeps, and an NYPD detective has to partner with a university professor who has studied psychopathic behavior to take them down. Unfortunately, their suspect is quite elusive.

So, just imagine your typical crime procedural, and then pile on a ton of blood and sleaze. That’s what Lucio Fulci brings to the table in this feature. The movie is unapologetic in how grimy, erotic, gory and dirty it is.

And it works. It’s an exploitation film that captures the state of New York during that era and uses the slasher concept to create horror around the notion of a serial killer, which had risen in the 70s and 80s. It’s an absolutely wild ride, and it’s only made more so by the oddities that come with Giallo movies.

Likely the most notable one is the fact that the killer at the center of the movie speaks in a Donald Duck voice. It’s such a strange choice, but it shows Fulci’s dedication to keeping everything off-kilter. The movie also has some great moments of style thanks to the use of color and lighting. A noticeable standout is a set-piece where the scene is bathed in a dark green.

It’s not necessarily scary, but it’s entertaining as hell, and the mystery actually has some intrigue because of a red herring. It’s a bizarre, brutal flick that’s worth a watch.

3 out of 3 quacky kills.

Frankenhooker (1990)

Technically, “Frankenhooker” doesn’t take place entirely in New York City, as a portion of it is set across the state border in New Jersey where a twisted laboratory is set up. Directed by Frank Henenlotter, who also helmed the “Basket Case” films, “Frankenhooker” is actually more of a horror comedy than a straightforward fear fest.

Similar to 1988’s “Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama,” which I reviewed in the 2020 edition of Adventures, “Frankenhooker” is extremely self-aware. The characters speak in exaggerated accents, the deaths are all over-the-top and every serious moment feels tongue-in-cheek.

The dedication to infusing the movie with humor and absurdity by Henenlotter and co-writer Robert Martin makes this a fun experience. It’s such a wacky story of a supposedly brilliant young man who wants to bring his dead girlfriend back to life with new body parts from hookers he explodes with “super crack.”

It’s absolutely bonkers, and it only gets more-so when the titular woman does come back to life and, in Frankenstein fashion, causes mayhem. Patty Mullen is hilarious as the Frankenhooker who is driven to work the streets because the experiment went haywire.

Interestingly enough, this movie is reminiscent of another film I reviewed for the 2021 Adventures. “The Body Shop” was a picture from 1972 where a man loses his wife and goes into killing mode to get body parts so he can resurrect his lost love with new pieces. Of course the difference is that movie is a sincere horror while this movie is more or less meant to be laughed at.

With that in mind, the fact that it clocks in at simply 85 minutes and because of a gnarly sequence with some puppetry work near the end, “Frankenhooker” is worth checking out. It’s a messed-up premise but the execution is so campy that it becomes weirdly watchable for laughs. 2.5 out of 3 super crack rocks.

Hellroller (1992)

Ah, saving the worst for last. For the final movie in this year’s Adventure, we go out to the West Coast for a film that really doesn’t have many redeeming qualities, other than maybe it’s poster.

“Hellroller” is a shot-on video, or SOV film. There were quite a lot of these in the 80s and 90s filmed with basic camcorders and low budgets, allowing another avenue for aspiring filmmakers to get in the industry.

I’ve reviewed a few of these films, notably “Blood Cult,” “Fatal Images” and “Addicted to Murder,” with varying results. The quality is usually poor across the board but some do better than others at trying to be an actual feature film. Then there’s this, which makes that aforementioned trio look like a well-made line-up.

The premise for the film isn’t bad, a maniac in a wheelchair takes revenge on society for his condition and homeless state by way of becoming a serial killer. Fair enough for a grindhouse-like slasher. Unfortunately, that’s not really what the audience is treated to.

In fact, it’s like the filmmakers here didn’t even know what they wanted to do. In the first act, the central character Eugene wants to take out his revenge by hiring another homeless man to do his killing for him. Then in the second act he kills that guy and begins doing murders himself. But for the final act, he visits a mad scientist(?) who creates a serum that Eugene uses to dumb people down so they also become homeless like he is(?!?).

What the hell? How about a movie where a dude has a knife and makes some slasher carnage in Los Angeles. One could maybe theorize that writer and director Gary J. Levinson wanted to capture an individual’s full mental spiral, but I really doubt it. Why?

Well, in this 70-minute production, there is a pair of long sequences of nudity with two different women. The fact that there’s this much sleazy filler just makes it seem like Levinson was throwing mud at the wall to see what sticks. The whole film is someone just scrounging up whatever genre tropes they can find to put on screen..

It doesn’t help that the production isn’t good. There’s low budget, and then there’s this, to the point where I think the only microphone they had was the one attached to the camera.

It also isn’t a positive when the actors don’t really care. There is a scene in the third act where the guy who plays Eugene, Ron Litman, looks at the screen and knowingly says “I’ll Be Back” before a fade to black.

I felt at that moment like the film was a practical joke being played on me. This dude throws in a “Termainator” line, and the director just keeps it in? Keep in mind, the film had some humor to this point, but the tone wasn’t exactly tongue in cheek like the previous movie.

But you know what, I could maybe forgive that. The low production quality, the poor acting, the ridiculous progression of the story, it could possibly be slightly overlooked if the kills were good. Not the case here.

This is a horror film where 90 percent of the kills aren’t even shown. It’s straight up lazy. Here’s how it usually plays out: the death is about to happen, there’s a cutaway, and then the camera goes back to the victim to reveal they’re dead with some fake blood. At least make an attempt for some low grade gore.

If I don’t even get creative kills in my low budget schlock, then why bother? Straight up, this may be the worst movie I’ve watched in my Adventures in B-Movies, and that’s saying something. 0.5 out of 3 killer twitches.

Anyways, to make sure this doesn’t end on a down note, I hope everyone has a Happy Halloween!