Reviews
[REVIEW] Henry: A (Badly Painted) Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)
While Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer succeeds as a film, it completely fails at shedding any light on the true horrific story beneath the fiction. For a film that was post-release deemed X-rated, it is rather tame. With this film’s notoriety, I was expecting something more historically authentic and truthful. The final product is nothing more than two writers’ picking and choosing of history. I know that not every bit of detail can go into a film and some things need to be left out. It’s just confounding as to what was left out and which inauthentic aspects were added.
When thinking of the theme for January, “based on a true story”, many films came to mind. Many films boldly claim to be “based on a true story” and so many of them get it all wrong. If you think a real story is great enough to be adapted into a film, then why do filmmakers find the need to change myriad aspects of what made the story appealing? The first film I wanted to look at that was “based on a true story” is one I’ve scrolled past many times, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. True crime stories fascinate me, as they do many, and this story is one I always thought was interesting.
Henry Lee Lucas was nicknamed the Confession Killer due to his confessions of over one thousand murders. Why was he allowed to confess to so many crimes that he obviously didn’t commit? It comes down to his addiction to nicotine and police laziness. Before we try to analyze whether or not this is a faithful adaptation (it’s not), let’s take a look at the film proper.
Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer follows nomad serial killer Henry (Michael Rooker) who is currently shacking up with his prison friend Otis (Tom Towles). The two men are eventually joined by Becky (Tracy Arnold), Otis’s sister who comes to town after escaping a particularly bad relationship. As Henry and Otis slip further into depravity, Henry finds himself getting closer to the off-limits Becky. Will Becky cast a wedge between Henry and Otis? Can she drive him out of the devil’s grips?
As a film, Henry succeeds. It depicts a fascinating delve into the mind of a serial killer. While Henry Lee Lucas probably killed four to five people, this film paints him in a much more questionable light. (I’m not saying he was a good person by any means, but we’ll get to that later.) Co-writer/director John McNaughton sets the scene with a seedy salaciousness. You can feel the dirt, grime, and blood pulsing from the screen. Henry was McNaughton’s directorial debut and oozed controversy; it’s an impressive debut.
Unfortunately, this film is little more than flashy. It’s controversy, for controversy’s sake. The most frustrating aspect about Henry is why it was even made. McNaughton could have easily written a slasher film about a degenerate serial killer and called it a day. Instead, he spits in the face of the people Lucas actually did kill. It should be noted that Michael Rooker and Tom Towles (rest in peace) give exceptionally authentic performances. There’s just no need to set their performances against the backdrop of supposedly real crimes.
A frequent criticism of true crime adaptations comes from the families involved. Recently, the mother of Tony Hughes (one of Jeffrey Dahmer’s victims), came out against the the Netflix series Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story. Did McNaughton specifically pick Henry Lee Lucas because the victims were considered “the less dead”? It’s easy to spit in the face of the victims if their families don’t care about them/know they’re dead.
So what’s the point of trying to tell the Henry Lee Lucas story when you can’t even tell the basic information correctly? Lucas was missing an eye, which caused him many problems growing up. Do you think this was addressed in the film? Nope. Otis’s name in real life was Ottis (pronounced ah-tis). Why change his name? Becky was Ottis’s 11-year-old niece and not his 18-year-old sister. If you’re trying to tell a story about a serial killer that the audience ISN’T supposed to like, then why sugarcoat things?
McNaughton finds it necessary to show kills that Henry Lee Lucas definitely did not commit, yet he finds the need to whitewash the relationship between Henry and Becky. Becky had developmental issues in real life. So why don’t you show the true awful side of Henry? Instead, they decide to show us a consenting relationship between Henry and Becky. It’s truly distasteful. The number of times they try to find ways to make you sympathize with Henry rather than beg for police intervention is astounding.
While Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer succeeds as a film, it completely fails at shedding any light on the true horrific story beneath the fiction. For a film that was post-release deemed X-rated, it is rather tame. With this film’s notoriety, I was expecting something more historically authentic and truthful. The final product is nothing more than two writers’ picking and choosing of history. I know that not every bit of detail can go into a film and some things need to be left out. It’s just confounding as to what was left out and which inauthentic aspects were added.
Reviews
[REVIEW] The People Vs. ‘The Exorcism of Emily Rose’
The Exorcism of Emily Rose is a unique take on exorcism films. The film follows Erin Brunner (Laura Linney), a high-profile defense lawyer. Brunner is fresh off a murder case where her client was cleared of all charges–only for that client to turn around and commit another set of murders. In the hopes of becoming a partner at her law firm, Brunner is talked into taking the defense for Father Richard Moore (Tom Wilkinson). Father Moore finds himself in the hot seat after a series of exorcisms resulted in the death of Emma Rose (Jennifer Carpenter). The twist? Erin Brunner is agnostic! OooOOoooOh.
The second film I wanted to cover, that’s “based on a true story”, is one that utterly fascinates me…and not for the right reasons. After Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, I felt let down. I am by no means a Henry Lee Lucas expert, but even with someone having the bare knowledge of the case, I couldn’t believe they dared to refer to it as having anything to do with the Confession Killer. Could The Exorcism of Emily Rose pull me out of this pit of despair? Can it get some basic information right? Ugh.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose is a unique take on exorcism films. The film follows Erin Brunner (Laura Linney), a high-profile defense lawyer. Brunner is fresh off a murder case where her client was cleared of all charges–only for that client to turn around and commit another set of murders. In the hopes of becoming a partner at her law firm, Brunner is talked into taking the defense for Father Richard Moore (Tom Wilkinson). Father Moore finds himself in the hot seat after a series of exorcisms resulted in the death of Emma Rose (Jennifer Carpenter). The twist? Erin Brunner is agnostic! OooOOoooOh.
This film brings us the dramatized events of Emily’s tragic final days through the setting of a courtroom drama. There’s something fun about this idea. It’s surprising this idea hasn’t been reused. Laura Linney and Tom Wilkinson are an excellent duo, they play off each other very well. If only the real-life lawyers were as likable as Erin Brunner (we’ll get there later). The real star of the show is Jennifer Carpenter. Tasked with doing justice to the real Emily Rose (Anneliese Michel), Carpenter handles her performance with class.
The story jumps back and forth between the courtroom and Emily’s experiences. There is great information for the film to base its script on, and it doesn’t do it interestingly. One of the most notorious pieces of evidence in this case is the leaked audio of the 67 exorcisms performed on Michel. The Catholic church did not release this audio until around 2011, but Carpenter does a great job of channeling the pain you can hear in the audio.
An interesting angle of the real Anneliese Michel story is how the lawyers were really trying to put the devil on trial. Unlike the film, Michel’s parents were also put on trial, as well as the two priests who initiated the exorcisms. Rather than the film’s dramatic guilty plea with time served as a sentence, the German justice department thought the parents had suffered enough and that the priests should just get fined. In reality, both the parents and the priests deserved to go to jail. The complete neglect of Anneliese’s ailments was thought nothing more than the dirty hands of the devil. Anneliese’s parents and the priests were the cause of her death. Their extreme beliefs in a bearded man in the sky trumped the reality of what was actually happening with their extremely sick daughter.
The film plays off Brunner as someone who needs to see the light. Brunner is put on this case to help rectify her previous case (the one where she got the murderer off without charges). God put her in Father Moore’s hands. So, by this logic, co-writer/director Scott Derrickson thinks that for one person to receive redemption, another must die. The Exorcism of Emily Rose is nothing more than religious propaganda. “What if god is real,” Erin Brunner asks the jury. Even if god is real, a young woman is dead! God isn’t on the chopping block, Father Moore is. This latter half of this film plays strictly to the Bible Belt.
Also, Erin Brunner is written as someone who can be redeemed and will be redeemed, a tragic character who has accepted greed over truth. Do you want to know who defended the Michels in real life? Lawyers who defended Nazis in the Nurenberg trials. Scott Derrickson can fuck right off.
Everything about this film feels like nothing more than Catholic-funded propaganda. Rather than owning up to their mistakes and accepting the punishment they deserved, the Michels and priests never had to answer for their true crimes. They left a young woman to die a truly horrible death and all got off with a slap on the wrist.
All of this went down around the same time as Vatican 2. The Catholics who were against Vatican 2 were hoping that they could find a way to prove that Anneliese was possessed because god wasn’t happy with the Vatican II overhaul. If they could prove god’s anger, they could use that as fuel to ensure Vatican II didn’t happen. Anneliese’s mother gaslit her into refusing the idea that her neurological issues could be the cause of all this. See, Anneliese wanted to be a teacher, but her mother forced her to believe that no one would hire her as a teacher if she had all of these issues. People won’t hire a crazy teacher.
Failed by those around her, Anneliese was posthumously deprived of any justice. If there is a god, I can only hope the Michels and the two priests do not meet him. Instead of breaking down all of these fascinating aspects of the case of Anneliese Michel, Scott Derrickson crafted a shell of a film. His lack of care for the source material is beyond disrespectful to Anneliese’s pain in her short time on earth. Scott Derrickson’s classless and [seemingly] Catholic-funded sophomore feature film is nothing more than a film that has a few solid scares that rely on you taking him at his word. For a film that starts with the title card “based on a true story,” there is not a lick of truth in this nearly two-hour film.
Reviews
[REVIEW] ‘Dreadstone: The Beginning’ Is a Gold Rush of Terror
We continue to start our year by looking at short films that either ran their festival circuit in 2024 or will soon be running the festival circuit. Western horror is a subgenre that’s often overlooked, usually because it offensively centers around Native Americans attacking groups of white people who have taken over their land. Bone Tomahawk and The Burrowers are unfortunate examples of painting Natives in a negative light for the plight of the whites. Who knew all it would take for a well-done Western horror is an Italian director at the helm?
Dreadstone: The Beginning follows Jeb (Grid Margraf), a tired and weathered man who is left in charge of his non-verbal autistic daughter Adeline (Alexandra Boulas). Jeb finds himself in possession of a purple-glowing gem that may be more nefarious than meets the eye. The two traverse across harsh lands in search of the source of the gem. But things turn south when they find out what they were looking for may have answers to questions they never intended on asking.
Written by Avery Peck and Riccardo Suriano, and directed by Riccardo Suriano, Dreadstone: The Beginning is a fascinating start to a tale as old as time. Peck’s cinematography beautifully brings their words to life and effortlessly blends cosmic horror with the overwhelming fruitless nature of greed and the human condition. Cosmic and Western horror aren’t typically put together, but they work incredibly well with the ideas behind Dreadstone and its themes. Jeb’s gem is a practical MacGuffin and is a great stand-in for the concept of greed; this opulent-looking rock in a no-tech world. It’s a simple object that’s incredibly effective.
The frontier setting of Dreadstone works to create an isolating setting. This large setting singularly frames these two characters and makes them feel like the only people in the world. It isn’t until the film’s final shot that we realize they are definitely not the only people around. Dreadstone: The Beginning is a drastic change from Suriano’s previous film, Along Came Ruby. Besides the obvious time difference between these two films, Ruby sets itself as a Last of Us-like post-apocalyptic film, whereas Dreadstone: The Beginning sets itself to possibly be a pre-apocalyptic film. These two films also differ in tone, but both films prove that Suriano is confident with his overall voice and vision.
Alexandra Boulas stars in both Along Came Ruby and Dreadstone: The Beginning. Boulas excels in both films but gives a more reserved and confident performance in Dreadstone. With the exception of a few moments, Boulas’ performance is silent…but commanding. Watching Ruby shows that Boulas can easily deliver lines, while Dreadstone proves there’s more to her acting than line delivery. Fingers crossed we see her in more films in the near future, I think she has a promising career ahead of her.
Dreadstone: The Beginning is a unique take on Western horror that forgoes the [racist] Native Americans against white people trope that the subgenre is fraught with. A touch of cosmic horror, a hint of coming-of-age, and a heaping spoonful of good ole greed make Dreadstone: The Beginning a short film that will stick with you long after the credits roll. I’ll tell you what…this made me look forward to Dreadstone: The Aftermath!