Teeth

2007 / R

Director: Mitchell Lichtenstein

Writer: Mitchell Lichtenstein

Stars: Jess Weixler, John Hensley, Lenny von Dohlen

Since we don’t know each other very well, here’s a little tidbit of info about me: I’m sort of weird about teeth. I’ve had countless number of dreams about my teeth either breaking, shattering, crumbling, or just simply falling out. I have since learned these dreams are common and are typically associated with stress or anxiety. Whatever the meaning, I don’t really care – they’re horrible and we hates them. Suffice it to say, my frequent teeth-related dreams result in my discomfort during movie scenes involving similar imagery. Blood? Guts? Decapitations? You name it, I can watch it without a problem. Teeth, however? I’ll audibly voice my disgust and horror.

So with that out of the way…Teeth. You may be thinking, “but, Jamie, if you’re so grossed out by teeth stuff, why would you decide to watch a movie called Teeth?” That’s a great question and I thank you for asking. Part of being a lover of horror movies and all things horror means there’s a sick part of my psyche that enjoys being made to feel uncomfortable or grossed out. That’s just part of who I am. Plus, the synopsis of this movie intrigued me enough to want to watch it. I mean…really, a pro-abstinence, teenage girl learns she has been gifted with vagina dentata, allowing her to immediately and severely punish any uninvited peens or fingers?? What about that description doesn’t make one think this could be a clever and enjoyable satire?

That is not a sausage in the dog's mouth...

As it turns out, I was mostly wrong and this was not really that clever and enjoyable of a movie, though it wasn't horrible. For those who are unawares, vagina dentata (Latin for “toothed vagina”) is a folk tale theme found in a handful of cultures. In Teeth, the main character, Dawn (played by Jess Weixler), is a happy teenager, committed to staying chaste until marriage (she’s even the leader of her school’s abstinence group). Like most of her teenage classmates, she is trying to cope with her newfound sexuality and uncooperative hormones. Unlike most of her teenage classmates, however, Dawn has razor-sharp teeth hidden within her lady-business. She eventually learns she is able to control her “adaptation”, but not until she renders at least one classmate (and attempted rapist) peenless. The rest of the movie follows Dawn on her road to sexual self-discovery, which, inevitably, means more severed wangs.

I can’t honestly say this movie was wholly terrible. Its one shining “pro” for me was the acting by Jess Weixler. I thought she was great as the lead, really exemplifying the cute yet complicated virgin that all the boys want. She had to work with a pretty uncomplicated character while basically pulling off being the focus of the entire movie and I think she did a bang-up job. Actually, I rather liked the entire cast. Jess’ dad, Bill, is played by Lenny von Dohlen (Harold Smith from Twin Peaks), and her repulsive step-brother, Brad, is played by John Hensley (Matt McNamara from Nip/Tuck). This movie seemed to have a few things going really well for it, but it just didn’t successfully pull it all together for me. Ultimately, it’s a neat concept, I just really wish they’d have done more to explore it or at least make it more interesting. It won’t satisfy if you’re looking for real horror; there’s no suspense or feeling of dread. But if you’re in the market for a dull, semi-campy, fairly gory satire about teenagers, abstinence, sex, and vagina teeth, then this should be the next movie you watch.

---

Three random, disgusting facts having to do with teeth:

• In very rare instances, teeth may actually grow in a vagina. They’re called Dermoid Cysts. The cells that make up these cysts are able to mature into teeth, bones, or hair.

• In 2014, Ashik Gavai of Mumbai, had 232 denticles (abnormal, teeth-like growths) removed from his mouth. They were caused by a benign dental tumor.

• Also in 2014, another kid in India had 200 of these denticles removed from her mouth.

Lyle

2014 / NR

Director: Stewart Thorndike

Writer: Stewart Thorndike

Stars: Gaby Hoffman, Kim Allen, Ashlie Atkinson
 

---

*This review contains some mild spoilers throughout.

Lyle has been described by its director, Stewart Thorndike (born Megan Stewart Thorndike), as “Rosemary’s Baby with lesbians.” The comparison is apt – the film follows many of the same beats as the Polanski classic, compressed to a taut 65 minutes – but the perspective is its own, and a wholly modern one at that. Shot in a mere five days on a shoestring budget, the film takes a stylish, bare bones approach to exposing both the horror and power of motherhood.

The film opens with Leah (the always impressive Gaby Hoffmann) and June (Ingrid Jungermann) walking through a spacious townhouse with the landlady, Karen (Rebecca Street). Leah can’t seem to believe their luck – the house is far better than what she thought they could afford – and in her happiness she admits to Karen that she’s pregnant for her second time with another girl (the first being the titular daughter Lyle), something she hadn’t even divulged yet to June. Strangely, June absorbs the news stone faced, and grimly says they’ll take the house.

Soon after moving in, Leah Skypes with a friend and laments her feelings that June seems to be growing distant from her and Lyle. While Leah is talking, Lyle wanders off screen, and so we only hear the tragic, guttural cries as Leah discovers that the toddler has fallen from an open window to her death. The scene is just the first example of Thorndike’s restrained, unsettling brand of horror, and a glimpse of things to come.

From there, the film follows a narrative deceptively similar to Rosemary’s Baby – as Leah’s second pregnancy progresses, she grows increasingly paranoid that someone is trying to harm her baby, though she can’t explain why. The person she suspects of being behind the nebulous plot is the peculiar landlady (reminiscent of Rosemary’s odd, busybody neighbors), an older woman obsessed with babies, who inexplicably claims to be pregnant during Leah’s time in the building.

What makes Lyle most interesting, though, is the often-subtle ways it deviates from its source material. Although June is aggravatingly similar to Rosemary’s husband in her apathy regarding Leah’s concerns – she’s too busy with her blossoming career to worry about Leah’s spiraling mental health – the playing field is a bit more level this time around. Evidence of Leah’s autonomy abounds, including the setup of a birth pool in the couple’s living room. The couple sees a therapist together in order to handle their grief over losing Lyle, and when the therapist suggests that Leah take medication to alleviate her anxiety, the couple presents a united front in declining. Furthermore, that refusal is accepted and taken in stride by the (also female) therapist, who is willing to explore other options.

This all stands in stark contrast to the paternalistic way everyone in Rosemary’s life treated her, from her husband to her doctor. When Rosemary complained of pain during pregnancy – to a doctor her husband insisted she see, against her own wishes – the doctor waved it off, without bothering to provide an explanation or care. When Rosemary finally voiced her fears to another doctor, he called her husband and threatened to put her in a mental institution, the specter of “hysteria” looming tall over all diagnoses of women’s ailments. Although things have not changed entirely, Leah’s worries are not so readily brushed off (except by June, whose motives are clear from the beginning). Other people in her life are at least willing to listen and discuss Leah’s fears, a habit totally absent from Rosemary’s world.

Most notably, though, Hoffmann’s Leah is an entirely different character than Farrow’s Rosemary: while Rosemary was meek and fragile (traits largely forced upon her and encouraged by society), Leah is a much more independent force to be reckoned with. Unfortunately for her, she still has to deal with a gaslighting partner intent on making her doubt herself, but Leah’s instincts are strong, and she is strong enough to follow them to the brink. The climactic scene is breathtaking in both its force and terror.

Lyle is perhaps a bit too short to delve as fully or satisfyingly into these themes as it could, but it is a delightfully dark, smart film nonetheless. In the end, it is revealed that June’s pact with the devil deviates from the one in Rosemary’s Baby on one important point – in lieu of a male child, June is forced to give up two female children in exchange for success. Seems like there’s a barb in there somewhere about women and equality, doesn’t it?

Claire Holland is a freelance writer and author of Razor Apple, a blog devoted to horror movies and horror culture with a feminist bent. You can follow her on twitter @ClaireCWrites.

Exit Humanity

2011 / NR

Director: John Geddes

Writer: John Geddes

Stars: Brian Cox, Mark Gibson, Dee Wallace

---

First off, Exit Humanity is not the greatest "horror" movie to hit the streets in more recent years. Nor is the time period of any real importance - not to mention, yes, it is just another zombie flick added to the already enormous dung pile. So why bother watching it (other than because the title is pretty damn attractive)? I'll tell you why...

Some years after the U.S. Civil War has ended, a veteran/father/husband has one last act of humanity to accomplish while in the midst of a "sickness" outbreak. An act which is driving him increasingly towards a deep, dark depression that will soon consume him entirely. That is, until he meets a man of the living who happens to need an extra set of hands for an important task brought on by the all-too-common small group of assholes led by a general we viewers would think of as lacking proper "hardcore" essence.

Not the greatest plot or description of one, right? That doesn't matter. This movie is recommended by me, not for the lack of enough blood-spilling, not for the mediocre story involved, but because it is so abstractly well put together; unlike any other independent horror film out there. Right off the bat you have Brian Cox narrating, for Christ sake! Short, animated scenes are edited in throughout its entirety; filming locations are incredibly eye-pleasing; the acting is a little above decent; the score is professional as hell; and the directing? The directing is fantastic. John Geddes is involved in almost everything with this one (he wasn't involved with the soundtrack/score). It's incredible!

Truth be told, I had absolutely no intention of ever pressing play when stumbling upon Exit Humanity's trailer, but I'm glad I did. That being stated, if you're more inclined to give a film a chance due to its artistic vision, watch this one. However, the flip side of the coin, I probably wouldn't consider giving it a look if being somewhat frightened and/or gore is what you crave in horrors. If given a bigger budget, they definitely could have come up with a gem.

My ranking: 3 out of 5 stars

by Frank Frederico, Jr. (@frankjfrederico)

ABC's of Death 2

NR / 2014

Directors: Multiple (all directors are listed next to the title of each segment in the below reviews)

Writers: Multiple

---

If you've seen the first ABC's of Death, you know full well that the segments can range from "terrible" to "pretty great." The overall concept of ABC's of Death is an exciting one; "let's get some horror shorts from some of the genre's unknown filmmakers." By watching 26 different horror movies, you get exposure to new directors/writers that you, otherwise, may not have heard of. An exciting idea for any horror fan! 

ABC's of Death 2 was a significant improvement over the first. While I, by no means, loved all of the shorts, there definitely seemed to be an improvement in overall quality from those in the first installment. I also particularly loved the title sequence/cards for each segment - they had a creepy, Victorian-type feel to them. With this second installment feeling like a much more polished and put-together collection, as a whole, I can only hope that the third (should they decide to make one) will be even better.

Call me crazy, but I am usually interested in seeing reviews of each individual segment so that's what I decided to do here. Since I give my thoughts on each segment, consider yourself warned that there be spoilers ahead. I'm really just curious if everyone was as confused as I was by the letter "P" segment in this movie, or if I maybe missed something. Scroll down and enjoy!

---

~ Jamie (@jamiestamp)

Entity

2012 / NR

Director: Steve Stone

Writer: Steve Stone

Stars: Dervla Kirwan, Charlotte Riley, Branko Tomovic

 

---

Let it be known that this movie is not to be confused with The Entity, the "true" story of a woman who is sexually assaulted by a poltergeist. Entity  is far less interesting. Let's begin, shall we?

Entity centers around a small, British TV crew from the fictional show "Darkest Secrets" and their coverage of an event which took place in 1998, when 34 unidentified bodies were found in shallow graves in a remote Siberian forest (never a good sign, btw). There is little to no information surrounding the circumstances of these deaths and the Russian authorities refuse to give any insight. The "Darkest Secrets" crew is made up of two camera/sound guys, a psychic medium, and a local who is acting as their guide. It's one of those "this is our last contact with the crew and they were never heard from again" movies.

It's a pretty vague plot and could lead to either an interesting movie or a total dud. I'm sad to say this movie was definitely the latter for me. They try to build upon the the plot a bit by making vague references to experiments that were conducted on the "special" people who were kept in the weird asylum they eventually come across, but it all seems very labored. We do learn, at some point, that they (the Russians?) kept people who had psychic powers locked up so they could run tests on them. I was very uninterested in the story because the story is very uninteresting.

This movie couldn't be saved by the acting, either. The cast was mostly made up of names I wasn't familiar with - with the exception of Charlotte Riley. I know her due to her fairly recent marriage to Tom Hardy (le sigh). I've actually seen her in a few things and she wasn't half bad so I'm blaming the material. There was also a lot of unnecessary cutting and camera-work that made some of the more "intense" scenes too busy and almost difficult to watch.

TL;DR It wasn't great and actually took a lot for me to resist turning it off.

Would I recommend it? Нет (that's a "no" in Russian) 

Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death

2014 / PG-13

Director: Tom Harper

Writers: Jon Croker (screenplay), Susan Hill (story) - Susan also wrote for the first Woman in Black.

Stars: Helen McCroy, Jeremy Irvine, Phoebe Fox

---

I didn't particularly want to watch this movie in the first place - I mean, no Daniel Radcliffe?! What's the point? Plus, I rather enjoyed the first one; It was a decent, visually appealing "haunted house" movie. Eel Marsh House, where all the spooky events take place, is beautiful despite it's decrepit state and its ghostly inhabitants. The long road, which drives from the mainland, through the marshes and to the large house, is the perfect place to make scary things happen. It's an expansive stretch of land so your eye is jumping all over the place, and the area is almost always covered in dense fog. Despite a seemingly perfect setting, this movie relies too much on jump scares and suffers from an uninteresting plot.

The plot takes place during WWII, about 40 years after the events of the first movie, and it centers around a group of orphaned kids who, along with their Head Mistress and a couple other adults, take up residence in Eel March House. It isn't long before the evil, undead inhabitants start popping up at quiet times (a la jump scares) and raising all sorts of hell in and around the house. It's not a very strong plot and there were a couple too many sub plots that seemed to detract from the main story line. 
          
The acting isn't terrible. In fact, I recognized two other actors from Harry Potter; Helen McCrory (Narcissa Malfoy) and Adrian Rowlins (James Potter in the Deathly Hallow movies). Even the child actors did a fine job, in this movie. But I don't think decent acting is enough to save this movie. The amount of cheap jump scares really took away from this for me. It's really easy to start being able to predict them, after a while. Where the director could have easily used the house, the woods, the marsh - really any part of the setting - to set the tone of unease and build tension to a quality, well thought-out scare, he instead would create a loud noise and have a shadowy figure pop onto the screen. It wasn't very satisfying to this seasoned horror watcher.

As far a sequels go, it's not the worst one that I've seen but it is very far from the best. They would've been better off just leaving the original on it's own and without a follow-up. There wasn't a lot of interesting stuff going on. So....back to some Harry Potter connections, the screenplay writer, Jon Croker, was also a writer on Goblet of Fire and Prisoner of Azkaban. 

Would I recommend this movie?: Yes. It's crap, to be sure, but if you're looking for a horror movie to watch with your friends that will make you jump, this is definitely a good one for that.

Would You Rather?

2012 / Rated NR 

Director: David Guy Levy

Writers: Steffen Schlachtenhaufen (his last name means "battle pile" in german)

Stars: Brittany Snow, June Squibb, Jeffrey Combs

---

Would you rather chop off your arm or watch this movie from start to finish? My answer? I might seriously consider the chopping (and then immediately choose to watch the movie because ouch!). Ok so it's probably not that bad - definitely not the worst I've seen - but it is bad.

Brittany Snow is adorable, as per usual, in her portrayal of a sister willing to do whatever it takes to pay for her brother's cancer treatment. "Whatever it takes", in this case, means agreeing to attend an unfortunate dinner party, hosted by some wealthy guy. She becomes one of six participants in a sadistic game of "would you rather." The winner of the game will receive enough money from the host to essentially set them up for life. How could this not be a great idea??

The "game" escalates quickly from a simple "would you rather remain a vegetarian, with your convictions in tact, or eat an entire cow liver for $50,000" to "would you rather electrocute yourself or the person sitting next to you?" Nice, huh? This movie is a representation of torture porn gone terribly wrong. Even as someone who is often a fan of movies from the torture porn genre, I find this to be a pathetic attempt to capitalize on the success of the Saw and Hostel movies (though, to be fair, the third Hostel was embarrassing).

Where this movie seems to stray from the path that Hostel so nicely laid out is really in its overall plot and character development. Now, I'm not trying to say that torture porn films need to make a point to focus on character development, because they generally do not - but what a movie like Hostel may lack in plot and characters, it makes up for tenfold in its brutal and realistic gore. Would You Rather does not do this. Its weak story is coupled with scenes of gore that are almost equally as weak, especially for this genre (with the exception of maybe one scene involving an eyeball and a razor blade...). As for the plot, it's just boring. It wasn't an interesting story and, with nothing else to fall back on, it's easy to find yourself checking out, mentally.

Would I recommend this movie? No. No, I would not.

Sinister

Now it's Karen's turn...We've recently talked about watching Sinister 2 for the podcast and so, being the only one who hadn't seen the first one, it seemed like a good opportunity to take a crack at writing a review.

First of all, I love Ethan Hawke. I know it defies logic, but I've loved him since I saw Before Sunrise. I was really worried we were going to get into a "Dermot Mulroney in Insidious Chapter 3" situation. Luckily, that was not the case. 

Ethan Hawke plays a true crime writer who moves his family into a home where the previous tenants were hung from a tree in the backyard. Conveniently, this is the subject of his new book. Creepy things start to happen around the house and he finds a box of films in the attic that document the previous family's murder.

This movie is a nice combination of found footage and jump scares. It has a perfectly reasonable explanation for why the footage exists and the videos themselves are the best part. I know I'm the wimp of the group, but I had to pause the movie at certain points because I was getting too amped up. 

I'm usually pretty oblivious when it comes to movie plots, but even I could tell how this movie would end. That really didn't take away from it because the exciting part was waiting to see how it would happen. 

Bottom line: Check it out! Then watch Sinister 2 with us.

The Nameless

1999 / Rated R

Director: Jaume Balagueró

Writers: Jaume Balagueró, Ramsey Campbell (story)

Stars: Emma Vilarasau, Karra Elejalde, Tristán Ulloa

Look guys, I'm gonna be honest with you - I don't really care for writing anymore. I used to do a fair amount of it, but it was never an easy process for me. If there's such a thing as pathologically indecisive, I'm that, in spades. Example: coloring books upset me as a child, because I couldn't commit to making the dog house red if the kid's shirt was also gonna be red, or what have you. I'd just sit there staring back and forth between the page and my box of crayons and give myself an ulcer. And so it is when I sit in front of an open blog post. By the time I figure out the exact perfect wording I've totally forgotten my point. 

Which is why I like doing the podcast. Why spend hours fretting over a paragraph when you can just drink beer and run your mouth and record it? But Jamie says "site traffic" this and "Google Analytics" that and blah blah blah, and here I am. So, this movie.

This is the first feature from the fella who made [Rec], but you wouldn't really know it. That movie was fast-paced and stylish, and this one is awkward and clunky. Either he improved a ton by 2007 when [Rec] came out or the found-footage style really helps to mask his flaws as a director. Then again, he also directed all the [Rec] sequels, so maybe the original was just a fluke.

Here's the trailer, but the version I watched was subtitled, not dubbed. It was those nice big yellow ones, too. Thanks for that, Netflix.

Plot: A woman gets a phone call from her daughter, which is awful sweet of her, except she's been dead for four years. This is a pretty standard murder mystery involving a creepy cult, with some horror-style imagery and editing thrown in. Oh, and they say 'eeeevil' a bunch of times.

You know how usually American remakes are the worst idea? I might be interested in seeing this one. The idea is promising (yes please to evil cults), but the execution ain't. Maybe somebody could take the seed of the idea and make a better movie out of it. Heck, Mr. Balaguero himself could probably do a much better job with the material nowadays.

Bottom Line: Meh. I've definitely made worse impulse Netflix choices, but don't make this one a priority.

Anybody else out there seen this one? What'd you think? Any others questions/comments/concerns? Care to venture a guess how long it took me to write this teeny tiny review? Let me know!

-AP

Zombeavers

Title: Zombeavers
Released: 2014
Director: Jordan Rubin
Writers: Al Kaplan, Jordan Rubin, and Jon Kaplan
Stars: Rachel Melvin, Cortney Palm, Lexi Atkins

---

Old-school monster movies have never really been my bag. I've always found them cheesy and laughable, and not really in a good way. So when a movie manages to take the general idea of the old monster movies and make it actually funny, I become a fan. SyFy tries its best with movies like Sharknado and Sharktopus, but they just don't seem to cut it. Zombeavers, however, managed to gross me out with its gore and make me LOL more than a few times. 

It seems to have almost all the right parts to be a great spoof movie - the acting is spot on for exactly this kind of movie, there are hilariously terrible beaver puppets, and the deaths are more than over-the-top with the gore. Not to mention, there are funny cameos by Bill Burr and John Mayer. The whole thing was just a pleasant surprise.

Don't watch this if you're looking for a serious "creature-feature" movie, you will quickly find yourself to be disappointed. Do watch this if you are of that certain state of mind where you want to watch something corny and funny. You will be pleased.

Would I recommend it? Yes. It's never going to win "Movie of the Year" but it is funny enough for multiple viewings.

 

The Woman

Title: The Woman
Released: 2011
Director: Lucky McKee
Writers: Jack Ketchum, Lucky McKee
Stars: Pollyanna McIntosh, Sean Bridgers, Lauren Ashley Carter

---

I watched The Woman not too long ago (whenever it came to Netflix) and then, recently, decided to read the novel by Jack Ketchum as it had been sitting on my "to read" list for quite a while. It actually wasn't until I sat down to write this review that I noticed Mr. Ketchum wrote both the book and the movie, which makes perfect sense because the dialogue was basically pulled directly from the book. Verbatim, almost. Even the story line was essentially the exact same - save for a handful of small changes. But nothing like the changes you see in other adaptations. It was strange. Book purists would love it, I'm sure. 
The story itself wasn't terrible - I've always been oddly fascinated by stories of feral humans and The Woman gave an interesting take on that. A feral woman is trapped and held captive by Chris Cleek, a misogynistic sociopath who wants to teach her to become civilized.  Not all members of the Cleek family are excited about this new "project", however - though, the son is an obvious chip off the old block - and this split eventually leads to the book and movie's final, bloody conclusion.

The movie soundtrack was odd and ill-fitting. I'd go so far as to say it was my least favorite part of the movie. Soundtracks are supposed to help the audience know how they're supposed to feel during particular scenes. Sometimes a movie's soundtrack can even save it should it find that it suffers from a weak plot or poor acting. That is not the case in The Woman. Honestly, this movie had some pretty heavy scenes and to set them to indie-pop type music just served to negate the seriousness. All of the music is by one artist, Sean Spillane, who also did the soundtrack for Jug Face, which also stars Lauren Ashley Carter. However, I don't remember the music in that movie being as off-putting. 

I'm confused what this book/movie intended to say about women. Obviously, it's a topic that the writer intended to explore - he did entitle it, The Woman. Yet, almost all of the women are savagely brutalized, at some point, by the father and son and, other than the final outcome, I never got the sense that any of the female characters had the upper hand over the men. It didn't feel well thought-out, over all. I mean...the writers should know that feral women wouldn't have shaved legs and armpits. 

Despite having a pretty interesting story to build from, this movie was a poor adaptation of the novel. It suffered from a confusing message and even more confusing soundtrack.  

Would I recommend it? The book, sure. The movie, no. I just can't, in good conscience, recommend it with that soundtrack...

What would I rate each? The book: 3  | The movie: 2

Clown

Title: Clown
Released: November 2014
Director: John Watts 
Writers: Christopher D. Ford (screenplay), John Watts (screenplay)
Stars: Peter Stormare, Eli Roth, and Laura Allen
Synopsis: A little boy's birthday party is ruined when the clown his mother hired as party entertainment cancels. His father finds an old, completely suspicious-looking, clown suit and decides to try his hand at entertaining the bday kids. However, there's something weird about this suit; it comes with a complementary curse which renders it impossible to take off. Now the father has to figure out how to get rid of the curse before his new-found hunger for the flesh of children takes over. 

---

Coulrophobia is the fear of clowns. If you suffer from this particular phobia, it'd probably be in your best interest to go ahead and skip this movie. Clowns have never really bothered me but I've always found them to be appropriate villains for horror movies (when done well - a la Pennywise). Clown isn't the greatest clown-themed horror movie that I've seen, by far. I figured, with Eli Roth's name attached to the movie, there would be plenty of blood and guts - turns out, he's only listed as a producer and actor (because, of course...he always is). However, there were more than enough graphic murder scenes to satisfy one's blood-lust.  

We start off with the main character, the dad/clown, scrambling to find an appropriate substitute for the clown who canceled on his son's birthday. How lucky that the house he's working in just happens to have a creepy, locked box containing an even creepier clown suit. If there's one lesson to take away from this movie it's, don't try on strange clown costumes. Especially when they look as if they're made with human skin...

Once the dad gets the suit on and saves the day at the birthday party, he soon realizes the entire costume (including wig and make-up) is stuck on him. Not only does he now have to wear a clown suit everywhere he goes, but the longer he wears it, the more he is taken over by the evil, child-eating demon. At least, I'm pretty sure that's what was behind the whole thing. The entire movie basically consists of the dad/clown running around eating kids, while his wife and a costume salesman try to stop him. 

As you can imagine, what this movie lacks in plot, story-telling, etc., it makes up for in child-eating, gore, and some rather unsettling imagery. Is it a great movie? No, it's not. In fact, I would be hesitant to call it "scary", even. However, it is entertaining enough to sit through at least once. I've definitely sat through worse. The story-line and plot are pretty weak - It's easy to get tired of the "solve the mystery and learn a life lesson" types of movies and this, for some reason, is one of those. Aside from some good effects, the rest of the movie felt sort of generic.
 

Would I recommend it? No, I don't think I would recommend this to most people. Similar to Eat, this is a movie for someone who has the patience for gore over plot & storytelling. 
What would I rate it? 2 stars