BASED ON A TRUE STORY: THE AMITYVILLE HORROR

October 22, 2018 Jazz Blackwell 0 Comments

Last week, I made a post that delved into the supposedly true story upon which my favourite horror film The Exorcism of Emily Rose claims to be based. It seems only fitting, then that this week I should make one looking at the events behind the horror movie that fights Emily Rose for the top spot - demonic-thriller classic The Amityville Horror. 

The Amityville Horror (1979)

For those of you who don't know, The Amityville Horror is a 1979 horror film based on a book of the same name published only two years prior. It follows the young Lutz family - George and Kathy, and Kathy's children from a previous marriage - who purchase a house in Amityville, New York a year after the previous occupants, the DeFeo family, were murdered by one of their own; the family's eldest son, Ronald Jr. The Lutzes last only 28 days living in the house before they're driven out by powerful paranormal forces which seem set on causing only harm. 

The Amityville Horror is probably one of the most iconic films of the 'based on a true story' persuasion. And that's because... well, it is. Or, at least it seems to be on the surface. Certainly, the Lutz family exist and they did move into the now iconic home at 112 Ocean Avenue, Amityville, where they stayed for only 28 days. And, tragically, the murders that preceded their move-in by a year were all too real. 

Ronald DeFeo Jr's mugshot
Ronald Joseph DeFeo Jr - known to friends and family as 'Butch' - was just 23 years old on 13th November 1974 when, at approximately 6:30PM, he stumbled into Henry's Bar in Amityville, New York. Seemingly distressed, DeFeo made an unsettling plea the patrons the bar that evening: "You gotta help me! I think my mother and father are shot!" 

A small party of people accompanied DeFeo back to his family home at 112 Ocean Drive, where his suspicions were confirmed - his parents, Ronald Sr (44) and Louise (42) were shot dead in their bed. Upon arrival of police, however, an even more sickening discovery was made - the rest of the DeFeo family were also murdered. Dawn (18), Allison (13), Marc (12) and John-Matthew (9) had all suffered a single fatal gun shot, whereas Ronald Sr and Louise were each shot twice. Each victim lay face-down in their own bed, and evidence suggested that Louise and Allison had each been awake at the time of their murders, and that all of them had taken place at around 3AM that morning. 

DeFeo was originally taken into police custody for his own protection, as he stated that he believed his family had been the victims of professional hitman Louis Falini. However, after inconsistencies began to appear in DeFeo's story and Falini provided an alibi which proved beyond all reasonable doubt that he wasn't even in New York state at the time of the murders, police grew suspicious. The next day, DeFeo confessed to murders, claiming that he did so after he heard their voices plotting against him. He plead not guilty by way of insanity, however the prosecution claimed that DeFeo was lucid at the time of the murders, though they believed he suffered from Antisocial Personality Disorder. On 17th November 1975, DeFeo was convicted of six counts of second-degree murder and sentenced to twenty five years to life in prison for each murder. He is currently imprisoned at the Sullivan Correctional Facility in Fallsburg, New York and every appeal he has made to the parole board thus far has been denied. He is now sixty seven years old. 

The Lutz family, whose patriarch, George, was noted to bear a
strong resemblance to Butch DeFeo
Just a month after DeFeo's conviction, thirteen months after the murders, George and Kathy Lutz purchased  the 5 bed, 3.5 bath home at 112 Ocean Drive for just $80,000 (approx. $375,000 today). The price was reduced due to the murders - of which the Lutzes were made aware. They would move out just a month later, each taking with them only three changes of clothing. 

Almost from the moment of moving into the house, the Lutzes - particularly George - reported feeling strong, negative paranormal forces at play. They claimed to hear strange sounds - including George reporting a phantom brass band that would march through the house - and that locked doors and windows would swing open and closed, as if by a pair of invisible hands. They called in a priest - Father Ralph Pecararo - to bless the house, only for him to be commanded by a disembodied voice to "get out", and develop stigmatic blisters on his hands.  

George Lutz claimed he would wake up at 3:15AM every day -
the same approximate time the murders are believed to have occurred.
The family also reported strange, unpleasant smells, for which there was no conceivable source, swarms of flies despite the frigid winter weather and green slime oozing from the walls. George purportedly woke at 3:15AM every one of the 28 days the family lived in the house - the same approximate time that DeFeo is believed to have carried out the murders. It was also noted by many, including George himself, that he bore a strong resemblance to Butch DeFeo and he even inadvertently began drinking in The Witch's Brew, a bar at which DeFeo had once been a regular patron. Kathy claimed to have vivid nightmares about the murders, including the order in which they took place - a fact she did not know prior to moving into the house. Perhaps most chilling of all the apparently paranormal activity in the house is the presence of 'Jodie', an entity with the head of a pig whose eyes glowed red, and Melissa - Kathy's young daughter - befriended. George claims to have seen Jodie standing behind Melissa in her bedroom window whilst in the yard one evening, and Kathy reportedly saw a pair of glowing red eyes in the darkness when she closed Melissa's window (which Melissa claimed Jodie had climbed out of) one night. 

Eventually in January of 1976, only one month after moving into what was supposed to be their dream home, the Lutz family fled in the middle of the night, taking only three changes of clothes each. Their leaving shortly followed a second failed attempt at blessing the house, though the exact events of their final night remain a mystery. Regardless, their ordeal had garnered them international attention; by 1977, author Jay Anson had published The Amityville Horror, a book apparently depicting the events they endured, which would go on to be a huge commercial success. The case even drew the attention of Ed and Lorraine Warren, world-famous demonologists, who conducted a seance and paranormal investigation at the home on New York's Channel 5 in February of 1976. It was during this investigation that the now-famous 'Demon Boy' photo was taken depicting a small child (who is said to closely resemble John-Matthew DeFeo) peering around a door frame in the empty house. 

The infamous 'Demon Boy' picture was taken by Ed Warren, who claimed
the house was empty and no child was present at the time of the photograph's capture.
So it seems like that should be case closed, right? A family was tormented by the evil spirits that pushed a young man to murder his entire family and were driven out of their home by it. Classic demonic haunting case, right? 

Now, what if I were to tell you it may have been a hoax? 

Since the publication of Anson's book and the release of some sixteen movies about the ordeal, many have called into question the validity of George Lutz's story, with some - including his own stepson - outright claiming that he grossly exaggerated the events that occurred in the house, perhaps even lying about the whole thing, in a shameless attempt to capitalise on the tragic story of a family's murder. 

Allegations of George Lutz being less-than-truthful actually go back to DeFeo; though he initially claimed to have heard voices telling him to commit the murders, he has since changed his story several times over the years. At times he has even gone so far as to revert back to denying his guilt completely, claiming he was in New Jersey at the time of the killings. In short, DeFeo is, at best, unreliable and whether or not he heard the voices Lutz claimed to also hear is questionable. 

Further, several people who were allegedly involved in the ordeal either claim the events didn't happen as Lutz recalls them, or deny them completely. Notably, Father Pecararo, the priest who the Lutzes called in to bless the house initially, claimed to have experienced no paranormal activity whatsoever in the home - no disembodied voice and certainly no stigmatic blistering. Even Christopher Quaratino, Kathy Lutz's son and George's stepson, claims that the events in Anson's book were exaggerated, with some being made up completely. In a 2005 interview with the Seattle Times, Quaratino denied that the haunting was altogether a hoax, claiming he remembers seeing shadowy figures and hearing locked windows open and close, but denies that the walls oozed slime or that there was any pig-like entity in the home. He referred to his stepfather as a 'professional showman' who had dabbled in the occult and brought the haunting upon himself. 

Perhaps the most damning evidence for the haunting being, at best, hyperbolised for monetary gain and, at worst, an outright hoax is the confessions of William Weber. Weber was the family's lawyer and also, interestingly, had defended Butch DeFeo during his murder trial. Following a dispute with George Lutz over money, Weber confessed in 1979 that he, George and Kathy had fabricated the entire haunting 'over several bottles of wine'. The Lutzes were motivated by money, Weber by his desire to get a re-trial for DeFeo, aiming for a 'Devil made him do it' approach. 

Anson's book claims to be 'A True Story':
however, lawyer William Weber claims he and the
Lutzes fabricated the story.


Similarly, Dr Stephen Kaplan of the Parapsychology Institute of America had his suspicions that the ordeal was entirely fabricated, after he received a phone call from George Lutz in 1976 requesting an investigation from his team. When Kaplan asked Lutz questions about the nature of the haunting, he received vague and unconvincing answers, and when he informed Lutz that there would be no fee but the public would be made aware of if the story was a hoax, Lutz cancelled the investigation, claiming he didn't want any publicity around the family - perhaps why Kaplan was so shocked to see the Warrens's seance broadcast of channel 5. In addition, Kaplan discovered, with the help of a columnist at the local paper, that the Lutzes had returned to the 'hell house' just one day after they fled in the middle of the night to hold a garage sale, and that movers who went to retrieve the Lutz's belongings reported no sign of paranormal activity in the house. Kaplan published a book titled The Amityville Horror Conspiracy shortly before his untimely death in 1995, in which he maps out his overwhelming evidence against the Lutz's and Warrens's claims that the house was definitively haunted. 

So what do you think, my lovely, spooky reader? Do you believe that George Lutz is telling the truth and that naysayers do so just to spite him? Or do you think that he created the story in order to make a quick buck on the tragic murders of the DeFeo family? Let me know! 

Special thanks to the following sources where I did my research: 

Keep it weird, 
Jazz xo



0 comments:

TRULY TERRIFYING: HH HOLMES AND THE 'MURDER CASTLE'

October 21, 2018 Jazz Blackwell 0 Comments

Herman Webster Mudgett, better known under the pseudonym of Dr Henry Howard Holmes, was a 19th century entrepreneur who is widely regarded as one of the very first serial killers - at least, in the modern sense of the word. 
Herman Webster Mudgett would later go on to be known as H.H.Holmes 


Born in 1861, Mudgett was the third child of Theodate Price and Levi Mudgett. Both devout Methodists, his parents owned and ran a farm in Gilmanton, New Hampshire. Mudgett claimed to have been bullied as a child, including one incident where classmates forced him to touch a human skeleton after discovering his fear of the local doctor. Despite his claims that this event had terrified him, it is widely believed that this was the beginning of Mudgett’s obsession with death. 
In 1878, Mudgett married his first wife Clara Lovering, who gave birth to a son named Robert in 1880. 
Mudgett graduated from the University of Michigan’s Department of Medicine and Surgery in 1884. While attending the University, he would routinely steal corpses from the laboratory, disfigure them and claim they were killed accidentally in order to collect the insurance money from policies he had taken out on each deceased person. In 1886, he moved to Chicago to pursue a career in pharmaceuticals. He also became involved in several shady businesses and adopted the name of HH Holmes. 
In 1887, while still married to Lovering, Holmes married Myrta Blekna, who later had a daughter, Lucy Holmes, in 1889. Holmes lived with his wife and daughter in Willemette, Illinois, though he spent most of his time in Chicago attending to business. In 1894, while still married to both Blekna and Lovering, Holmes married Georgiana Yoke. He also took up a lover in Julia Smythe, who would later become one of his victims. 
Upon his arrival to Chicago, Holmes was given a job in the drugstore of Dr Elizabeth Holton. When her husband died, Holton agreed to sell the company to Holmes. He paid for it mostly through funds obtained by mortgaging the company’s stock and fixtures, a loan which he paid off in substantial instalments of $100 per month (around $2,625 in today’s money.) Using the profits he made from the shop, he bought a lot of land across the street. It was here that he built his three-storey, block-long hotel, dubbed “the Castle” by locals. 
"The Castle" was a large building, constructed in time for Chicago's World Fair
Holmes repeatedly hired and fired different builders from different companies to construct his project and, thus, was the only person who fully understood the complicated layout of the building, in particular the labyrinthine structure of the top two storeys. Features amongst the maze of 100 windowless rooms included doors that could only be opened from the outside,  stairways that led to nowhere, doorways that would open to brick walls and hallways that sat at bizarre angles. 
Opened as the World Fair Hotel in 1893, “the Castle” proved a success amongst those who had travelled to attend the fair, with much of the ground floor being dedicated to commercial space including Holmes’ own relocated drugstore and other shops. Selecting almost exclusively female members of staff as his victims (though some were also hotel guests or Holmes’ lovers), Holmes soon began his string of murders. 
The ways in which the murders were conducted were gruesome, yet creative. His methods included, but were not limited to, locking victims in soundproof bedrooms with gas lines that allowed Holmes to asphyxiate them at his will and locking victims in a large, soundproof bank vault close to his second-storey office, where they would be left to suffocate. The bodies were dropped via a secret chute into the basement, where Holmes would meticulously dissect the corpses, strip them off flesh, craft them into skeleton models and send them off to medical schools across the country. Some bodies were cremated and others were dumped into lime pits for destruction. Due to the connections he had established whilst at medical school, Holmes had no issue illegally selling skeletons and organs. 
Following the ending of the fair and the general decline of the economy, Holmes left Chicago. He first reappeared in Fort Wrath, Texas, where he had inherited the property of two heirless sisters, one of whom he had promised to marry and both of whom he murdered. After abandoning an attempt to construct another project similar to the Castle, Holmes travelled around the USA and Canada. During this time he was arrested for horse theft. Despite being bailed out quickly, he met convicted train robber Marion Hedgepath, with whom he cooked up a plan to take out a life insurance policy of $10,000 and to then fake his own death, promising Hedgepath a $500 cut for naming a lawyer who could be trusted. However, the insurance company became suspicious of Holmes and refused to pay. 
Due to his inability to get insurance on himself, Holmes involved long-time associate Benjamin Pitezel who agreed to take apart on the condition that his wife would take half of the $10,000 insurance payout should the plan be successful. Holmes agreed but instead of faking Pitezel’s death as planned, actually killed his associate and even went on to manipulate Pitezel’s wife into granting him custody of three of her five children. 
Holmes manipulated his dead associates wife into handing over
three of their children. He would later murder all three.
Holmes resumed travelling around the country, leading Mrs Pitezel on a parallel route and lying to her not only about her husband’s death (claiming he was in hiding in London), but the whereabouts of her children. The remains for the two Pitezel daughters were found in the cellar of a house Holmes had rented in Toronto, the third child and only son’s bones and teeth being found in the chimney of a house in Indianapolis. 
Holmes’ murder spree ended in 1894, following his arrest in Boston. Hedgepath, angry that he have never been paid as promised, had tipped police off that Holmes was engaging in illegal activity and he had been tracked from Philadelphia. After the Castle’s custodian, Pat Quinlan, informed the police he had never been permitted to visit the top two floors, an extensive investigation revealed the horrors of Holmes’ life of crime. 
The true extent of the murders has never been fully discovered. Holmes confessed to 27 counts of murder, however the true number of victims is thought to be closer to 200. Police reports state that there were so many disfigured remains in the Castle’s basement it was difficult to tell how many separate bodies there were. Although the victims were primarily blonde adult females, it was noted that many of the remains appeared to have come from men and children. 
Holmes was hanged at Philadelphia County Prison in May 1896. He is quoted in his confession as saying; "I was born with the devil in me. I could not help the fact that I was a murderer, no more than the poet can help the inspiration to sing — I was born with the "Evil One" standing as my sponsor beside the bed where I was ushered into the world, and he has been with me since."


Keep it weird, 
Jazz xo

0 comments:

NETFLIX REVIEW: THE HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE (2018)

October 18, 2018 Jazz Blackwell 0 Comments



The latest in Netflix's original horror series The Haunting of Hill House has been something of the talk of the internet lately - and for a number of reasons. Loosely based on the 1959 novel of the same name, the show has been receiving relatively mixed reviews, with some people claiming it was so scary it made them puke and others claiming they were... well, just plain disappointed.

I, personally, fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. As a literature nerd and self-confessed Big Ol' Goth™, I was rather excited by the prospect of Shirley Jackson's delightfully frightening 1959 novel of the same name being serialised - after all, the 1963 film adaptation The Haunting was fantastic. If you're expecting something similar - don't. The Netflix series is, to put it bluntly, absolutely nothing like the novel on which it claims to be based. There are nods to the book certainly - through the names of several of the characters and the mention of the 'cup of stars'. But the similarities really begin and end there. 

Instead, the series follows the five Crain siblings - Steve, Shirley, Theodora (Theo) and twins, Luke and Eleanor (Nell). All individually troubled as adults, the series tells its story through a combination of present-day and flashback scenes. The flashbacks depict the summer they spent as children in the titular Hill House, while their parents renovated and eventually planned to sell it. Of course, this is a ghostly-spooky-horror series and, as is the way with such things, all is not as well as it seems in the house, and the siblings are left mentally scarred by their experiences there.

Now don't go getting me wrong. The series is good. Very good. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's pass-out, vomit-inducing scary as some people are claiming, but it's certainly unnerving and, at times, downright upsetting. It's incredibly well-directed, with plenty of scares and "oh my God!" realisations throughout the ten episodes. The casting is also incredibly strong, with the show being incredibly well-acted by the core cast, which includes total-hunk-slash-potential-love-of-my-life Michel Huisman, horror-movie regular Kate Siegel (whose husband Mike Flanagan directed the series) and the ever-brilliant Timothy Hutton. The series also gets major props from me for its LGBT+ representation and it accurate (if harrowing) portrayals of mental illness and drug addiction.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the series and my only real gripe with it is that really, if we want to be pedantic (which I always want), it isn't The Haunting of Hill House at all. It is, however, in and of itself a deliciously spooky series and one I would definitely recommend if you're up for a bit of a scare this spooky season. Overall, I'd rate it a 9/10. 

Keep it weird,
Jazz xo 

0 comments:

TRULY TERRIFYING: DENNIS NILSEN, "THE KINDLY KILLER"

October 17, 2018 Jazz Blackwell 0 Comments

Hello dear reader, and welcome to another new series on the blog that I'm introducing for the Halloween period. Truly Terrifying focuses on true, documented, frightening crimes, including both solved and unsolved cases. The first instalment focuses on Dennis Nilsen, Britain's second most prolific serial killer. I'll note that this was first written in 2016, back in the days when I thought running a horror blog sounded like fun. I've done my best to edit, adapt and correct it so the information is all currently up to date and please accept my apologies if anything is incorrect.

Nicknamed by the media as 'The Kindly Killer' and sometimes as 'the British Jeffrey Dahmer', Dennis Nilsen murdered at least twelve men, and attempted to murder at least two more, between the years 1978 and 1983.

Nilsen is now known as a cold, calculating and
narcissistic killer


Nilsen was born in 1945, the second of three children in the unhappy marriage of Scottish housewife Elizabeth Whyte and Norwegian soldier Olav Nilsen. Olav had difficulty taking marriage and family life seriously, neglecting to spend any significant amount of time with his wife and children. As a result, the couple divorced in 1948, shortly after the birth of  their third child, when Elizabeth concluded she had "rushed into marriage without thinking." Her parents, who had never approved of Olav as a choice of husband, were vastly supportive of Elizabeth's choice, and doted on their grandchildren. This feeling was strongly reciprocated by Nilsen, who held great particular adoration for his grandfather, Andrew Whyte, and has reported some of his earliest memories to be of the long walks they would take together. 

On Halloween 1951, Nilsen's grandfather passed away whilst working as a fisherman. His body was returned to the family before burial, and Nilsen stated that his most vivid recollection of childhood is of his mother weeping and asking if he would like to see his beloved grandfather one final time. When he said that he would, he was taken to the room where Whyte's body lay in an open casket. His mother informed him that his grandfather was sleeping. Nilsen has blamed this incident for his development of psychopathic tendencies in later life. 

Nilsen's mother would go on to remarry a man who he at first regarded as cruel, but would grow to respect in adolescence. It was around this time that Nilsen's homosexual desires made themselves known. However, he first believed that the affections he felt towards his male peers was nothing more than a manifestation of the deep care he felt for his sister Sylvia, due to the fact that most of them bore very similar facial features to her. Because of this belief, Nilsen sexually caressed his sister on one occasion, and at the time used this at evidence that he was bisexual.

After leaving school in 1961 with results that were considered above average but not exemplary, Nilsen worked at a canning factory for three months, at which point he decided he would join the army where he intended to train as a chef. He achieved this goal in 1966 and in the meantime served as a private. During this period he was stationed at Onsabruck, West Germany and his alcohol consumption increased quite considerably. One notable incident saw Nilsen drink to excess with a German youth and wake up on said youth's floor the following morning. Although no sexual activity occurred on this occasion, it was this that made Nilsen realise his desire for a young, slender male who was unconscious or even dead as a sexual partner. Nilsen retired from his military career in October 1972, at the rank of corporal.

Following the cessation of his eleven-year army career, Nilsen briefly moved back home with his family, where his mother became increasingly concerned at his apparent lack of desire for female companionship. On one occasion whilst living at home, Nilsen watched a documentary on male homosexuality with his brother, sister-in-law and another couple, all of whom spoke of the topic as repulsive. Nilsen, however, spoke ardently in favour of gay rights - an act which would lead to a fight with his brother, who informed their mother of Dennis's homosexuality. Nilsen reports that, following this incident, he never spoke to his brother again.

In December of 1972, Nilsen moved to London to begin police training. In April of the following year, he began working at Willesden Green as a constable. During summer and autumn of this year, Nilsen began a lifestyle he would later describe as a "vain search for inner peace", which involved the frequenting of gay pubs and numerous casual liaisons with men he met there. A failed relationship during this time led Nilsen to realise that his personal and professional life could not co-exist any more, and he resigned from the police force in December. For several months after his resignation, Nilsen worked as a security guard, until he eventually became a civil servant and began working for the Jobcentre. He was promoted several times within this job, and worked as an Acting Executive Officer at the time of his arrest.

In 1975, Nilsen purchased his now infamous flat on Melrose Avenue with then-partner David Gallachian, using the £1,000 his now-deceased father had bequeathed to him. The couple lived contently for almost two years, though there was little sexual connection, and Gallachian eventually left. It was here that Nilsen would begin his string of murders.

Nilsen committed his first murders at 195 Melrose Avenue

His first victim - fourteen year old Stephen Holmes - was murdered on 30th December 1978. The pair met in the Cricklewood Arms pub, where Holmes had been refused service of alcohol. Nilsen, believing the boy to be at least three years older than he actually was, invited Holmes back to his flat to drink alcohol there. Holmes spent the night, and when Nilsen awoke to the sleeping boy beside him, he became nervous that Holmes would wake up and leave - a deep fear of Nilsen's, who had at this point convinced himself he was impossible to live with. In order to have the boy "stay for the New Year, whether he wanted to or not", Nilsen strangled Holmes with a necktie until he was unconscious, then drowned him in a bucket of water. Holmes' body was stowed under the floorboards in Nilsen's bedroom for eight months before being burnt on a bonfire that Nilsen built in the garden of the flats - which he negotiated exclusive use of from the landlord. Holmes was the only one of Nilsen's known victims who was not dismembered before his corpse was disposed of, and he was not identified as a victim until 2006.

Holmes was just fourteen at the time of his death


It wasn't until October of 1979 that Nilsen attempted to murder again. He picked up Hong Kong student Andrew Ho in a pub on Saint Martin's lane. Having lured Ho back to his flat with the promise of sex, Nilsen proceeded to strangle the student, who managed to fight off his attacker and flee the scene. Although Nilsen was questioned by police about the event, Ho decided not to press charges.

Only two months after the attempted murder of Ho, Nilsen carried out his second successful murder. This time, his victim was 23-year-old Canadian tourist Kenneth Ockenden. Upon discovering that Ockenden was not a local, Nilsen offered to show him notable London landmarks when they met in a West End pub. He also offered the youth a meal and alcohol back at his flat, an offer which Ockenden accepted. Nilsen went on to strangle Ockenden with the cable of a set of headphones, with which he recalled using to listen to music shortly after the strangling took place. The following day, Nilsen purchased a polaroid camera which he used to photograph Ockenden's body in several suggestive positions, before wrapping the body in a curtain and stowing it beneath the floorboards. Over the following fortnight, Nilsen would remove Ockenden's body from its resting place on four occasions, when he placed the body alongside himself in his armchair while he watched television.

Ockenden was set to return to Canada the
day after his murder took place.

The third victim was sixteen-year-old catering student Martyn Duffey, who had been sleeping rough for four days when he met Nilsen outside Euston Station on 17 May 1980. The boy, exhausted and hungry, readily accepted Nilsen's offer of a meal and a bed for the night. It was while he slept in Nilsen's bed that Duffey was strangled with a homemade ligature to the point of unconsciousness. Following this, Nilsen drowned the boy in his bathroom sink then proceeded to bathe with the corpse. After bathing, Nilsen placed the boy's body in his bed where he kissed and carressed it multiple times, before putting it into a cupboard for two days. The body was stowed alongside Ockenden, beneath the floorboards, when Nilsen realised that it had become bloated.

Following Duffey, Nilsen's rate of murder increased substantially. By the conclusion of 1980, Nilsen had committed five more murders of mostly unidentified homeless youths, and attempted to murder one more. Although Nilsen claimed only vague memories as to the identity and appearance of all but one of these victims (one being identified as 26 year old William Sutherland), he has given detailed accounts of the logistics of each murder, including one incident where he made an unsuccessful attempt to resuscitate the victim, and another where he lay alongside the body in his bed, listening to classical music before bursting into tears.

By Autumn of 1980, Nilsen's flat reeked of decay and was infested with flies and maggots. Although he sprayed insecticides and deodorants regularly, the problems did not cease and so Nilsen realised it was time to dispose of the bodies. Each was dissected and burned on a bonfire, on which Nilsen recalled adding car tyres so as to disguise the smell of burning flesh. He also recalled that three children stood by and watched the fire.

In early January 1981, Nilsen met an unidentified 18-year-old Scottish man, who he remembered having blond hair and blue eyes. On the twelfth of the month, he called in sick to work in order to dispose of this body and that of another unidentified victim. In the same year he met "an English skinhead" and "a Belfast boy." Though Nilsen recalled few details about these young men, he remembered quite vividly that they met much the same fate as their unfortunate predecessors. 

23 year-old Malcolm Barlow was the final victim at Melrose Avenue. On 17th September 1981, upon discovering the young man slumped outside the property, Nilsen inquired about his wellbeing and discovered that his legs had been weakened by epilepsy medication. Showing apparently genuine concern, Nilsen supported Barlow to his flat and called an ambulance. Upon release from hospital the next day, the young man returned to Melrose Avenue in order to thank Nilsen for his kindness. After eating a meal and drinking with Nilsen, Barlow was manually strangled while he slept. His body was stowed in the cupboard beneath the kitchen sink.

Shortly after the murder of Barlow, Nilsen's landlord asked him to vacate the property so that renovations could be carried out. Initially resistant to the request, Nilsen finally accepted an offer of £1,000 to move away from Melrose Avenue. On 5th October 1981, he moved into the attic flat of 23D Cranley Gardens, where he would reside until his arrest. The day before leaving, he again burned the festering remains of his most recent victims, and again disguised the smell by crowning the bonfire with a car tyre.

23D Cranley Gardens, deemed 'the murder flat', was sold in 2015
for £300,000


Things were different at Cranley Gardens. Being in the attic flat, Nilsen had no access to a garden and little space to stow victims' remains. Nilsen did not kill again for several months, despite attempting to strangle 19-year-old Paul Nobbs on 23rd November 1981.

The killing streak began again in March of the following year, when Nilsen met 23-year-old John Howlett in a Leicester Square pub. The pair continued the night's drinking at Cranley Gardens, where Howlett eventually passed out. After watching the youth sleep whilst consuming more alcohol, and an unsuccessful attempt to rouse him, Nilsen decided to strangle Howlett with an upholstery strap. A vicious struggle ensued, and Howlett was eventually strangled into unconsciousness, despite being still alive at this point. Believing that he would be overpowered, Nilsen made three more unsuccessful attempts to kill Howlett within the next ten minutes. Eventually, he drowned the youth in his bathtub.

Just two months later, in May 1982, Nilsen met 21-year-old Carl Stottor at a pub in Camden. With the promise of more alcohol, Stottor went with Nilsen back to Cranley Gardens, where he eventually fell asleep on an open sleeping bag. He awoke to Nilsen strangling him and imploring him to 'stay still'. In his testimony, Stottor stated that he initially believed he had become entangled in the sleeping bag and that Nilsen was simply attempting to free him. He also recalled 'hearing running water' upon regaining consciousness, before realising his head was submerged in the bathtub and Nilsen was attempting to drown him.

Stotter was lucky and bafffled to have survived
his encounter with the Kindly Killer.

Believing the youth to be dead, Nilsen seated Stottor in his armchair. When his pet dog Bleep began to lick the boy's face, however, Nilsen realised his drowning attempt had been unsuccessful. Rather than try again, as he had with Howlett, Nilsen rubbed Stottor's arms, legs and chest in order to improve circulation. He then covered the youth in blankets and laid him on the bed. The youth drifted in and out of consciousness for the next two days. When Stottor regained enough sense to recall the experience and question it, Nilsen informed him that he had almost strangled himself after becoming entangled in the sleeping bag's zipper, and that Nilsen had placed him a bathtub full of cold water as he was in shock. Shortly after this, Nilsen accompanied Stottor to a nearby train station, where he expressed a desire to meet the youth again.

In September of the same year, Nilsen met 27-year-old Garaham Allen in Shaftsebury Avenue. Accepting Nilsen's offer of a meal, Allen accompanied him back to Cranley Gardens. After being strangled to death, Allen's body was retained in Nilsen's bathtub for three days before it was dissected on the kitchen floor. Nilsen again called in sick to work in order to complete the dissection.

Nilsen's final victim was killed in Jauary 1983. 20-year-old Stephen Sinclair was a deeply troubled young man, and was last seen by friends heading into a tube station with a man fitting Nilsen's description. After falling into a drug-and-alcohol fuelled sleep in Nilsen's flat, Sinclair was strangled with a ligature made from a neck tie and length of rope. Following the murder, Nilsen noticed crepe bandages on the boy's wrists, which he moved to reveal deep scars left behind by a recent suicide attempt. Nilsen proceeded to bathe and apply talcum powder to Sinclair's corpse and to arrange three mirrors around the bed, where he then lay naked next to the dead youth. Several hours later, he turned the corpse to face him, kissed the forehead, bade Stephen goodnight and fell asleep. Sinclair's body was also dissected.

As the lack of access to a garden ruled out burning the remains at this address, Nilsen instead boiled the extremities and heads of the victims' corpses to remove their flesh and attempted to flush the remains down his toilet. However, on 4th February 1983 - just nine days after murdering Sinclair - Nilsen, encouraged by the other tenants, wrote a letter of complaint to an estate agent, claiming that the drains were blocked and living conditions in Cranley Gardens were becoming intolerable.

Nilsen's neighbours complained of blocked pipes resulting in smelly and
dirty water


The letter would prove to be a mistake on Nilsen's part. On 8th February 1983, drainage worker Michael Cattran discovered a flesh-like substance and several small bones inside a drainage cover on the side of the house. As the discovery occurred at dusk, Cattran and his supervisor, Gary Wheeler, decided to postpone further investigation until the following morning. Nilsen and neighbour Jim Allock conversed briefly with Cattran about the unsettling discovery, to which Nilsen nonchalantly responded that somebody must have flushed the remains of a fried chicken takeaway meal.

At half past seven the next morning, Cattran and Wheeler returned to find the same section of the drain cleared. Highly suspicious, the men investigated further and eventually discovered what appeared to be the remains of a human hand in a drainpipe leading from the top floor. Alarmed, they contacted the police, who found further scraps of a similar flesh-like substance to that which Cattran had discovered the night before. At the mortuary in Hornsey, pathologist Professor David Bowen confirmed that the flesh was indeed human and concluded that one piece, which he believed to have come from the neck, bore ligature marks.

After retrieving Nilsen's full name and place of work from neighbours, DCI Peter Jay and two colleagues decided to wait outside of 23 Cranley Gardens for Nilsen to return. When he did, Jay informed Nilsen that he and his colleagues had come to inquire about the blockage in his drains and requested entry to his flat, which Nilsen granted with little resistance. All three officers reported that, upon entering the flat, the stench of death was immediately overwhelming. When he was informed that the flesh found in the drains was human, Nilsen initially feigned shock and horror. However, when asked where the rest of the body was, he calmly told the officers that they could find the rest of the mains in two plastic carrier bags in the wardrobe in the bedroom. Horrified, the DCI Jay asked if any other body parts were to be found to which Nilsen responded;

"It's a long story. It goes back a long time. I'll tell you everything, I want to get it off my chest. Not here - at the police station." 

As DCI Jay and his colleagues escorted Nilsen to the station, he was asked if the remains came from one body or two. Staring out of the window, Nilsen casually responded that there were 'about fifteen or sixteen, since 1978'. With the aid of Nilsen's confession, several human remains - including two human heads which had been exposed to moist heat, and a torso with the arms still attached but the hands removed. Nilsen confessed to having masturbated beside or over the corpses, but stressed that he never sexually penetrated any of the victims, claiming that they were 'too perfect and too beautiful for the pathetic ritual of commonplace sex.' When questioned as to whether he felt remorse for his actions, Nilsen claimed that he "wanted to stop, but couldn't", claiming that he "had no other joy or thrill." He also stressed that he did not enjoy the act of killing but "worshipped the art and act of death".

Nilsen was eventually tried at The Old Bailey

Nilsen was formally charged with the murder of Stephen Sinclair on 11th February 1983, and was held in Brixton Prison on remand while he awaited trial. Nilsen was resitant to wearing a prison uniform, although he reluctantly agreed upon being told exceptions would not be made for him. In response to what he believed to be breaches of prison rules, Nilsen threatened to protest by refusing to wear any clothing at all. He also threw the contents of a chamber pot out of his cell, hitting several officers. This resulted in him being found guilty of assaulting an officer, and sentenced to 56 days in solitary confinement.

Nilsen was brought to trail at the Old Bailey on 24th October 1983, charged with six counts of murder and two counts of attempted murder. The defence pleaded not guilty to each charge; Nilsen's solicitor Ronald Moss plead diminished responsibility, and requested the charge be reduced to manslaughter. However, following a ten-day trial and several testimonies - including from survivors Paul Nobbs and Carl Stottor - the jury found Nilsen guilty of six counts of murder and the attempted murder of Paul Nobbs. Nilsen was sentenced to life imprisonment, with a recommended minimum sentence of 25 years.

Nilsen was incarcerated at  HMP Wormwood Scrubs


Nilsen was transferred to Wormwood Scrubs immediately after his conviction. As a Category A prisoner, he was allocated his own cell, but was allowed to mingle with other inmates. In December 1983, Nilsen was attacked by fellow inmate Albert Moffat using a razor blade, which resulted in Nilsen requiring 89 stitches on his chest and face. Following the attack, Nilsen was transferred to Pankhurst Prison and later transferred again to Wakefield, where he remained until 1990. He was then transferred to a vulnerable-prisoner unit at HMP Full Sutton after concerns for his safety arose. Three years later, he was tranferred again to Whitemoor prison as a Category A prisoner, with increased segregation from other prisoners. In 1994, the 25-year-minimum sentence that Nilsen was issued eleven years previously was exchanged for a full-life tariff, ensuring that he will never leave prison. In 2003, he was transferred back to HMP Full Sutton, where he resided until his death in May 2018 He spent much of his free time painting, reading, composing music on a keyboard and writing to individuals who requested correspondence with him. Nilsen expressed no desire to obtain freedom, insisting that he fully accepted his punishment.

Special thanks to the following sources where I did my research: 
Dennis Nilsen on Wikipedia
Dennis Nilsen on Biography.com
The Serial Killer Next Door: Dennis Nilsen on mudermap.co.uk
Interview with Dennis Nilsen (Murder in Mind, Carlton TV, 1993) by GuildfordGhost on Youtube

0 comments:

CREEPY CRYPTIDS: THE OWLMAN

October 16, 2018 Jazz Blackwell 0 Comments

If you're anything like me, my dear, sweet reader, then you've got an interest in creatures which may be fact or fable that borders on the unhealthy. That being the case, I'd say it's pretty safe to assume you've heard of the infamous Mothman - a large, winged creature that terrified residents of Point Pleasant, Virginia in the mid sixties. Mothman is without a doubt one of the most well-known cryptids ever to exist. But how much do you know about his English cousin?
A statue dedicated to Owlman's more famous
American cousin, The Mothman.
The Owlman is a cryptid believed to reside in the English county of Cornwall, sighted several times between 1976 and 1995. It was described as a man-sized owl, silvery-grey in colour, with red eyes, pointed ears and massive black pincer-like claws. Due to similarities in appearance, Owlman has been labelled by some as 'England's Mothman'.

The first sighting of the cryptid was reported by Don Melling, who was visiting Cornwall from Lancashire for a holiday with his wife and two daughters. He approached paranormal researcher Tony Shiels in April 1976, claiming that on the seventeenth of the month his daughters - aged twelve and nine - had been walking in the woods near Mawnan church when they spotted a massive bird-like creature hovering about the church's steeple. Terrified, they ran back to their accommodation to tell their parents what they had seen. The family was so perturbed that they abandoned their holiday three days early. According to Shiels, Melling would not allow either of his daughters to be interviewed. He was, however, provided with a drawing of the beast by twelve-year-old June Melling.

June's drawing depicts a terrifying bird-man hybrid.
On 3rd July of the same year, two young girls took an innocent camping trip to the woods near by the church. Late at night while fourteen year old Sally Chapman stood outside her tent and heard a strange hissing sound from behind her. She turned to see what she described as an owl as big as a man with glowing red eyes and pointed ears. She and her friend reported that the beast took flight, revealing black pincer-like claws on its feet. Several sightings of the creature were reported the following day, when the creature was described as being silvery-grey in colour. The creature was also sighted on two occasions in 1978 - in June and August respectively. All of these sightings took place within vicinity of the church.

The subject of the Owlman's existence stirred up much debate in the paranormal community - mostly because of who publicized it. Shiels was an eccentric with a known fondness for hoaxes and as such, many argued that he'd simply invented the creature himself. Among the nay-sayers was Shiels' fellow paranormal researcher, Robert Downes. However, while Downes acknowledges the possibility that Shiels invented the beast, in 1989 he interviewed a young man known only as 'Gavin' who reported a sighting of the Owlman independently from Shiels. 'Gavin' claimed that he and his girlfriend had seen a creature that he described as follows: "About five feet tall...The legs had high ankles and the feet were large and black with two huge 'toes' on the visible side. The creature was grey with brown and the eyes definitely glowed." 

Downes' book available  on Amazon
here (UK) and here (US)
The most recent sighting of the beast came in 1995. A female tourist, visiting Cornwall from Chicago, USA, wrote to the Western Morning News in Truro - a city close to Mawnan church - claiming that she had seen "a man-bird...with a ghastly face, a wide mouth, glowing eyes, pointed ears and clawed wings." 

So what do you think of the Owlman? Real, or simply a myth? Perhaps you believe he was fabricated by Shiels, and it was an all just an elaborate hoax. The sightings for this beast didn't begin until sometime after the Mothman apparently vanished - perhaps they aren't cousins at all. Perhaps the same monster travelled and took up residence in the rural church. Whatever you believe, this is certainly a strange and mysterious case and one that - as of yet - seems to have little explanation.

Keep it weird,
Jazz xo

0 comments:

BASED ON A TRUE STORY: THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE

October 15, 2018 Jazz Blackwell 0 Comments

It's not at all uncommon for horror movies to claim they were based on actual events. Particularly in the last 20 or so years, the tagline 'based on a true story' seems to have become a really popular marketing ploy. I often find myself questioning with these movies, however, exactly how accurately they really portray the events upon which they claim to be based - and I'm sure you do too. That's why I've taken it upon myself to research into what really happened to inspire these films, and whether or not they can accurately make the claim to be 'based on true events'. And what better place to start than with my own favourite film - 2005 demonic possession flick The Exorcism of Emily Rose. A couple of words of warning - this post, as with the others in this series, will likely contain spoilers to some extent, so proceed at your own risk. This post in particular also contains some disturbing images and links to disturbing audio involving death and apparent demonic possession. Please be aware if you are sensitive to such material that you ought to continue reading with caution.



To give a rundown of the film, The Exorcism of Emily Rose follows a court case surrounding the death of a young woman - the eponymous Emily Rose. Emily has passed away from a combination of self-inflicted wounds and malnutrition following a series of Catholic exorcisms, and the jury is left to decide whether or not Emily was ever really possessed or whether she was severely mentally ill and in need of psychiatric care with which she was not sufficiently provided. 

The film claims to be based on the true story of Anna Elisabeth "Anneliese" Michel, a young German woman who similarly passed away following a series of exorcisms. 


Anneliese Michel, shortly before her apparent demonic possession began.

Anneliese was born in Bavaria, West Germany to a Roman Catholic family on 21st September 1952. She, along with her three sisters and her parents, Josef and Anna, would attend Mass twice a week. While she was the oldest of Josef and Anna's children together, she was not Anna's first child. Before marrying Josef, she had an illegitimate daughter named Martha, who passed away during surgery. In order to atone for her mother's perceived sin, Anneliese was pushed to devote herself to God, a role she took to with enthusiasm, and not only for her mother - throughout her teenage years, Anneliese would often sleep on the family home's cold stone floor in order to atone for drug addicts and other wayward youth.

Aged sixteen, Anneliese suffered what would be the first of many episodes of losing consciousness, blacking out during school and wandering around in what friends and family would later describe as a 'trance-like' state. Michel claimed to remember nothing of the event, but reported later that night she felt pinned to her own bed by an invisible force on her chest. 

Diagram highlighting the area affected by temporal lobe epilepsy


Eleven months later, Anneliese experienced a similar episode, during which she entered a similar 'trance-like' state, convulsed and wet the bed. After this second occurence, her mother Anna took her to be evaluated by both the family doctor and a neurologist, who diagnosed her with temporal lobe epilepsy, a neurological disorder which can cause epileptic psychosis, which is categorised by memory loss and hallucinations, both auditory and visual. Perhaps interesting to note, temporal lobe epilepsy has also been known to cause Geschwind Syndrome, whose symptoms include hyperreligiosity - that is, increased, intense and sometimes abnormal religious beliefs and experiences. 

In June 1970, Anneliese was a resident in a psychiatric hospital, where she experienced her third seizure. It was at this point that she was first prescribed anti-convulsant medication, namely Dilantin. However, this did little to alleviate the symptoms of her condition. Anneliese also began to complain of seeing 'devil faces' at various times of the day. For these apparent hallucinations, Anneliese was prescribed the anti-psychotic medication Aolept, which is sometimes used to treat psychoses associated with some types of schizophrenia. 

Anneliese was prescribed Dilantin for a number of years
in a failed attempt to alleviate the symptoms of her epilepsy.


Despite her condition, Anneliese enrolled in the University of Würzburg in 1973. Classmates and friends stated that she was a withdrawn and deeply religious young woman, preferring to stay in her room and pray rather than partaking in the various social activities that university had to offer. However, her withdrawal was perhaps not devout in nature - Anneliese was rather effectively masking a serious decline in her mental health, suffering from rather severe depression. It was also around this time that she claimed she began to hear voices taunting her while she prayed, telling her she was 'damned' and ensuring she would 'rot in hell'. Despite extensive psychological treatment, Anneliese's mental state seemed only to deteriorate and she eventually began to attribute her condition to demonic possession. She became intolerant of religious symbols, such as the Madonna and the crucifix and is reported to have complained that the "soil burned like fire" on a religious pilgrimage to San Damiano with a friend. In late 1973, she was taken off Dilantin on recommendation of a Freudian psychologist, and instead prescribed Tegretol, a much stronger anti-convulsant which is also used in the treatment of schizophrenia. 

Upon believing herself to be possessed, Anneliese began seeking a priest who would perform an exorcism. Anna Michel claimed that they sought a Jesuit on the advice of neurologist Dr Luthy, however Luthy has fervently denied this claims in the years following Anneliese's death, and it is unknown whether or not the family truly acted on his recommendation or of their own volition. Regardless of their reasoning, the family were rejected on their first two applications for exorcism, with clergy insisting that Anneliese seek medical help instead. During this time, Anneliese suffered from intense psychotic episodes and exhibited bizarre behaviours, including eating insects and drinking her own urine. The Michel family also reported supernatural activity in their home, including swarms of flies and flickering lights. Psychiatric treatment seemed to no longer be of any use to Anneliese, as nothing seemed to improve her condition. 

Bishop Stangl

In 1975, the Michels submitted their third application for exorcism, which was approved by Bishop Josef Stangl of Würzburg. He appointed local pastor Father Ernst Alt and former missionary Father Arnold Renz to carry out the exorcism, which they began on 24 September 1975. During the exorcism, it was revealed that Anneliese was apparently possessed by six entities - a disgraced priest, Roman emperor Nero, Hitler, Cain, Judas Iscariot and even Lucifer himself. At one point, it was believed that Anneliese had been rid of all but one of the entities - only for the other five to return the very next day. When questioned why Anneliese was being possessed, the entities replied that she was being punished for her mother's infidelity.

Prior to the exorcism's beginning, Anneliese had claimed on several occasions that she had been visited by Mother Mary. During a quiet period the rites, in October 1975, she claimed to have experienced another such visit, in which Mary asked her to do penance for lost souls. Anneliese agreed, and thereafter her apparent possession intensified. Due to this event, some regard Anneliese as a saintly figure. 

Anneliese, pictured here with her mother, deteriorated physically
as well as mentally during her exorcism. 
Anneliese's exorcism went on for another ten months and included more than sixty seven rites in total. During these months, she performed hundreds of genuflections daily, to the point where the ligaments in her knees were permanently torn. She would also eat coal, insects and dead animals, urinated freely and at one point crawled under a table and barked like a dog for two days straight. Her convulsive seizures also returned as she had given up on her medication, and she refused to eat and drink, claiming it would protect her against Satan's influence. Her final  and fatal exorcism took place on 1st July 1976. At this point Anneliese, aged 23, weighed just 68lbs (4st 12). During her final moments, she told the priests to "beg for absolution" and spoke to Anna, saying only "Mother, I am afraid."

Anneliese's partner, Peter, alongside her parents and Father Renz
at her funeral


Following Anneliese's death, her parents and the priests were harshly criticised; medical specialists and religious skeptics alike argued that Anneliese had not been possessed but, rather, severely mentally ill and suggested that referral to a psychiatric hospital would have been preferable to the exorcism rites that she went through. It was also suggested that had she been force-fed even a week before her death, she likely would have survived the exorcisms. Even Bishop Stagl noted that he had not been made aware of Anneliese's prior psychiatric issues, and claimed he would not have okayed the exorcism had he known. 

The case went to trial in March of 1978, where the Anna and Josef Michel, as well as Fathers Alt and Renz, were accused of murder by gross negligence. The defence argued that all four should be protected by German constitution, as exorcism could be considered a protected religious practise. They also played tapes of Anneliese during the exorcism (which can be heard here - be warned, they are very unsettling), claiming them as definitive proof that she was possessed. The prosecution, however, argued that the priests may have subconsciously encouraged the type of psychotic behaviour required to be possessed. After three weeks, all four were convicted of negligent homicide and sentenced to six month's prison time. The sentence was suspended, however, with three years probation and the prison time was eventually dropped with both the Michels and the priests being fined. 

Whether you believe Anneliese was truly possessed or that she was suffering a severe form of epileptic psychosis one thing is plainly clear - she was a kind and selfless young woman, who dedicated her short life trying to atone for the sins of the lost. Her premature death was a tragedy, and one can only hope that wherever her soul is now, she is resting in the peace she so sorely deserved. 

As for the similarities between the real case and the film - they're not exactly few and far between, but they're hardly exactly the same story either. Is it fair to called The Exorcism of Emily Rose 'based on true events'? Perhaps loosely, but it is by no means an accurate retelling of Anneliese Michel's story. 

Special thanks to the following sources which I used for my research: 

Keep it weird, 
Jazz xo

0 comments:

MY TOP 10 HORROR MOVIE RECOMMENDATIONS

October 14, 2018 Jazz Blackwell 0 Comments

In my typical fashion, this post is going up far later than anticipated. My excuse this time? Uni and fitness classes (I know - me in a fitness class, shocking) have gotten in the way of what for months has been my 'free time' and I simply haven't been able to sit down and finish a blog post. My original plan was to partake in a sort of 'Blog-o-ween', where I'd have some sort of spooky post up every day in October. Clearly, that didn't quite go to plan. However, I'm not necessarily deterred and this is me promising, right here and now, that you will have a blog post that, in some way, relates to Halloween - be that directly or by virtue of being spooky - every day between now and then.

Of course, it wouldn't be spooky season without those cosy nights in, watching every horror movie from cheesy to terrifying. If you're a horror film buff like me, you wait anxiously for this time of year to come around because it's the time that they actually decide to show the creepy shit on TV. Here, I've compiled a list of my top ten recommended scary movies for your viewing pleasure.

#10 The Exorcist (1973)
IMDb rating: 8/10. Rotten Tomatoes rating: 86% 
 Ah, the classic. The Exorcist is one of those films that you just can't really get away with not watching if you're going to have a horror-movie binge during the Halloween season. A trailblazer for the genre, at the time of its release in 1973, this was the scariest film ever made and has inspired rumours - true or otherwise - of people passing out and vomiting from fear in the theatres. If you haven't seen this film yet, you're missing out and I implore you to watch it. Right now. Immediately.

#9 The Nun (2018)

     IMDb rating: 5.7/10. Rotten Tomatoes rating: 26%
This is the newest movie on this list, and I strongly disagree with the ratings of other critics. I posted something of a glowing review of it not so long ago, and I still stand by everything I said in it. The Conjuring franchise as a whole provides something of a genuinely unsettling experience, and The Nun serving as the prequel to the titular films, is no exception. I would thoroughly recommend including this one in this year's Halloween-horror roster. 

#8 Zombieland (2009) 

   IMDb rating:7.7/10  Rotten Tomatoes rating: 90%
Look, I get it. Not everybody is a creepy weirdo like me and not everybody likes to be scared. If that's the case for you, but you also have a touch of the old FOMO, and want to be included on the spooky Halloween fun this year, then Zombieland maybe the movie for you. A gem of the comedy-horror genre, I guarantee it'll have you peeing your pants laughing. And let's face it - who doesn't love Emma Stone?

#7 The Boy (2016)

   IMDb rating:6/10  Rotten Tomatoes rating: 28%
Now, here's the thing with The Boy. I've put it on this list not because I necessarily think it's a great movie. Truth be told, I don't. As far as the scare-factor goes, it rates at a 'meh' at best - it's by no means horrendous, but it's not going to leave you with nightmares. The reason that I enjoy this film is because of it's pretty shocking and rather clever twist towards the end. I can't say much more without giving you spoilers - you'll have to watch it yourself to see what I'm talking about!

#6 What We Do in the Shadows (2014)

   IMDb rating: 7.6/10 Rotten Tomatoes rating: 96% 
Much like Zombieland, this is one of those horror movies for people who don't like horror movies. Directed by, written by and starring Kiwi dreamboats Taika Waititi and Jermaine Clement, What We Do In the Shadows is a hilarious take on every stale trope in the vampire movie genre. The mockumentary style only makes it more piss-your-pants hilarious. Highly recommend to anyone who wants to have a giggle this spooky season.

#5 Halloween (1978)

   IMDb rating:7.9/10  Rotten Tomatoes rating: 93%
Of course Halloween was going to end up on this list. I mean for God's sake, it shares its name with the holiday. You'd be doing yourself a disservice if you didn't watch it around this time of year. On top of that, the long-overdue canon sequel is set to be released in the coming weeks - what better way to celebrate it than to watch the original first?

#4 Pet Sematary (1989)
  IMDb rating:6.6/10 Rotten Tomatoes rating: 48%
Stephen King famously called Pet Sematary the only adaptation of any of his works that ever genuinely frightened him - and with good cause. I was only about twelve the first time I saw this film and I still find it as absolutely bone-chillingly frightening as I did way back then. Of course, given that it's nearly 30 years old, the special effects are - to put it kindly - rather lacklustre and a little bit cheesy. But the horrifying storyline and terrifying side story more than makes up for it. There's a remake of this being released early next year- all the more reason to catch the original so you can compare!

#3 The Shining (1980)

   IMDb rating: 8.4/10 Rotten Tomatoes rating: 86%
Based on one of my all-time favourite novels, The Shining is something of a legendary horror movie for a damn good reason. It's a horrifying depiction of the psychological decline of Jack Torrence and the torment of his young family at the hands of a haunted hotel. The late, great Stanley Kubrick really worked his unique magic on this one and, of course, Jack Nicholson's performance as leading man is absolutely iconic. The only thing I implore of you is that you read the book either before or after seeing the film - it's an absolutely tantalising scary delight, and I promise you won't be disappointed.

#2 The Amityville Horror (1979)

  IMDb rating: 6.2/10 Rotten Tomatoes rating: 29%
To be honest with you, I had a bit of a tough time deciding between this and the next movie for top spot. The only reason this one gets beaten out by a slim margin is because of the slight controversy surrounding the 'true story' on which the film is based and some of my own personal reservations about the Warrens (both of which I plan to explain in later posts!). That said, this is a truly brilliant movie. A classic of the paranormal genre, I strongly recommend that you watch this if you haven't already (And no, the 2005 remake doesn't count. I don't care how hot Ryan Reynolds is. Watch the original first.)

#1 The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005)


   IMDb rating: 6.7/10 Rotten Tomatoes rating: 48%
My all time favourite horror movie, and one of my favourites over all, The Exorcism of Emily Rose is great in its uniqueness. Loosely based on the real story of a young German woman named Anneliese Michel, the film follows a court case surrounding the death of a girl, which may or may not have been caused by demonic forces. Made all the more impressive by the fact that Jennifer Carpenter actually did all of those crazy twists and contortions herself, this is my absolute must-watch film for any horror binge at any time of year. If you watch no other scary films this season, make sure you see this one.

So - those are my ten horror movie recommendations for this Halloween season. Do you agree with my recs? Have any you'd like to add? Let me know!

Keep it weird,
Jazz xo

0 comments: