Two Cents is an original column akin to a book club for films. The Cinapse team will program films and contribute our best, most insightful, or most creative thoughts on each film using a maximum of 200 words each. Guest writers and fan comments are encouraged, as are suggestions for future entries to the column. Join us as we share our two cents on films we love, films we are curious about, and films we believe merit some discussion.
The Pick
The late, great Stan Winston is immortalized in the annals of cinema for his work bringing to life such incredible feats of movie magic as the Terminator, the Predator, the Alien Queen, the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park, Edward Scissorhands, Iron Man, and many more (and to a certain group of genre geeks, Winston will always be beloved for his kick-ass revamps of the classic Universal monsters in The Monster Squad).
Winston only made the jump from special effects wizardry to full-on directing a handful of times. For his debut film, Pumpkinhead, Winston crafted an atmospheric slice of Southern Gothic, in which a nasty demon is invoked to bring bloody retribution against whoever wronged the summoner.
Lance Henriksen stars as a simple man who runs a small country store with his adorable son. This being a horror film, the son is soon struck dead by some noxious teens, and Henriksen is off to see the local witch about conjuring up some retribution.
Pumpkinhead was not successful upon release, and Winston would only direct one other feature (A Gnome Named Norm), but the film has gone on to attract a cult following owing to Henriksen’s performance, the atmospheric, folkloric imagery, and the Pumpkinhead monster itself, which remains impressive even thirty years on.
So come rest with us in this fogbound pumpkin patch, as we decide whether this is one monster that deserves to be brought back again and again, or if maybe some things should be left to lie.
Did you get a chance to watch along with us this week? Want to recommend a great (or not so great) film for the whole gang to cover? Comment below or post on our Facebook or hit us up on Twitter!
Next Week’s Pick:
TRICK OR TREAT!! It’s that time of the year when we roll out a veritable smörgåsbord of spooky Two Cents picks for YOU, dear reader, to feast upon during the month of October.
Featuring 10 stories, Tales of Halloween quickly picked up positive comparisons to Trick R Treat and some definite love from genre fans, but didn’t make much of a mainstream impression. Two years on, we shine a light on this horror anthology. Was this is a great collection of stories that never ignited the way it should have, or just the usual indie effort gone by the wayside? Tales of Halloween is streaming on Netflix.
Would you like to be a guest in next week’s Two Cents column? Simply watch and send your under-200-word review to twocents(at)cinapse.co anytime before midnight Thursday!
Our Guest
Pumpkinhead is far more interesting than it gets credit for. As Stan Winston’s directorial debut it goes without saying that the creature design is top-notch (Winston protege Tom Woodruff Jr is credited as playing the titular character). However, the monster mayhem in the film’s third act is probably the most conventional, uninteresting part of the film. What fascinates me is how the film combines those creature feature conventions with elements of the Southern gothic.
The conflict of the film is essentially regional and economic, with the rural Ed Harley juxtaposed with the more urban group of young campers. It’s in the first half of the film, with the focus on Harley and his son, where the film really shines. Henriksen gives Harley just the right balance of gruff Southern masculinity and loving paternal figure, a combination which makes his turn to revenge both believable and relatable. His performance elevates what would otherwise be a standard by-the-number monster movie to another level, particularly as the film’s morality play narrative takes a turn toward the tragic.
As good as the creature design is, the attack scenes are shot and edited choppily. Also, because we sympathize so much with Harley, viewers are put in the awkward position of cheering for the monster — at least initially. This shifting of sympathies contributes to the unevenness of the third act, although the visuals — especially in the final scenes — help make up for the emotional/narrative inconsistency. Pumpkinhead is far from the best in its genre or time period, but it is by no means a bad movie. (@T_Lawson)
The Team
Lance Henriksen is awesome, point blank. This may not be his best role or even anywhere close to it, but he commands every scene he’s in. The rest of the cast members do their jobs here, as well. Their jobs are simple ones… don’t be too shitty, ham it up when appropriate, act scared, scream a bit, and — in many cases — die. And, to this end, they are more than adequate.
The creature design is not bad and the acting — as noted — is certainly not awful, so why is the final product so middle of the road? I honestly don’t know, but I guess the story and/or script just lack that certain something.
Neither one of the classics of its age nor one of the goofy, cheesy flicks that create that overwhelming joy no matter the film’s actual quality, it seems to be a film that lives and dies on its nostalgia. Had I seen this as a kid, I’d probably have a real fondness of it, but as it stands, I simply do not. (@ThePaintedMan)
Pumpkinhead does not really work, and that makes me sad. For a while it works quite well, as the first half of the film is positively dripping with atmosphere and gorgeous imagery. I’m particularly a fan of one early shot where Henriksen cradles his son’s body in front of some windows that are overwhelming boy and man with golden light. It’s a good use of Henriksen as well, playing the man’s natural warmth and charisma off of his ability to always look like he’s five seconds away from butchering everyone around him. And I’m always a sucker for a good, “just down the backroads” sort of folk tale, where witches linger at the top of every mountain and graveyards are doorways into worlds beyond imagining. Pumpkinhead really gets a good head (natch) of steam building for a while there.
And then Pumpkinhead shows up.
It’s not that the titular monster is bad, per se. The design isn’t exactly to my tastes, but the execution is superb. No, the problem is that Winston shows you Pumpkinhead in full, at once, immediately, and he keeps showing you every inch of this thing throughout the movie, which means that there is virtually no tension to any of the stalking or attack scenes that make up the back half of the film. It doesn’t help that these attack scenes are truly amateurish in how they’re shot and cut, or that these parts of the film concern the teen characters, all of whom suck. They suck as characters and they suck as performances, and every second we spend with them instead of Henriksen, the movie dies a little bit.
Pumpkinhead is not a bad film, but it is very clearly a first film. In a just world, Winston would have gotten many more shots, hopefully with stronger screenplays and with an improving grasp on performance and pacing. As it is, Pumpkinhead is about all we got, and that’s the biggest shame of all. (@TheTrueBrendanF)
While I found this a bit middling overall, there are two things that Pumpkinhead definitely gets right: a cool monster — no surprise given that Stan Winston directs — and Lance Henriksen in the emotionally complex lead role. Like Willem Dafoe or even James Coburn, Henriksen’s haggard, gaunt appearance and solemn voice can project both natural warmth and a sinister edge. Pumpkinhead makes use of both, putting forth the beloved actor as both the morally conflicted hero and villain of the tale.
The film’s scuzzy portrayal of rural poverty lends a ton of atmosphere without being overly exploitative. Viewers might ponder the commentary on the destructive nature of revenge, but that analysis isn’t necessary to enjoy the film as a decent creature feature. (@VforVashaw)
Next week’s pick: