Kagemas: Spicy fun

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is fe6ig-zxoaoxaw5.jpg
Me trying a chocolate 7 pot. One of the hottest peppers in the world.
A gift given to me 12/24/21

So the above photos are to give some background to this short Kagemas review. I have been eating hot peppers heavily since I was about 17. This would be 2003. Although I did try some in the 1990’s, I wasn’t overly enchanted with a lot of spicy stuff. Anyways, the point is I have a pretty high fuckin’ tolerance after nearly 20 years of eating hot shit.

Let me start with Steve O’s hot sauce. I watched Jackass as a kid. It had it’s moments, but it isn’t high brow by any stretch of the imagination. Steve O is a fuckin’ idiot, so when I was given this hot sauce, I actually had high hopes that it would be stupid hot. That wasn’t to be. While it smells and taste great, it is, overall a mostly meh sauce. You can get one that smells like, but taste slightly different than this one, if you buy Badia’s Ghost Pepper sauce or Melinda’s Ghost pepper sauce. Both are far cheaper than this stuff is and probably comparably hot. Granted, it will probably be hotter if you’re not a “expert” like I am at peppers or eating hot sauce, so a rookie might think it is too hot. Overall though, it’s good and I could be inclined to keep a bottle around every once in a while.

3 1/2 stars out of 5.

The next product is not to be underestimated. It only has the scoville rating of a Jalapeno, which, for me, is like eating a bell pepper. So I had a bowl, sans the stir fry part and boy did this fucker kick. You would of thought I was a rookie at eating hot stuff, but nope, as I assured you above, I have been an hot sauce idiot aficionado, for quite some time. I can see why so many people didn’t make it through the Youtube challenges. It’s price is decent, but not the cheapest ramen. If you try it, make sure to have milk, because it doesn’t fuck around.

4 out of 5 stars.

Kagemas:Jack Frost Movie Review

INTRODUCTION: Jack Frost, a movie I saw years too late and watched again recently. Not to be confused with that heart felt movie that with Michael Keaton, where the father comes back as a snowman, after he dies, produced around the same time. This one is a horror comedy with a young Shannon Elizabeth. It is quite interesting and very 90s.

SYNOPSIS: A killer, being transported to his execution, ends up in an accident. Unbeknownst to anyone, it is also transporting a top secret government science project that turns the killer into a snowman.

CHARACTERS: Well, it seems like a tight nit community and the characters are developed ok. I wouldn’t say you care about them, but it is done well enough to make you think this is real.

ACTING: Better than a Hallmark movie, worse than a good movie, but very passable.

MUSIC: Works, but nothing to write home about.

FX: Dated, but they would have been decent in their time. It works, I mean, it’s about a killer snowman, don’t overthink this.

SUBTEXT: Honestly, I think this has some, but it is weak. It’s about community, family and coming together in a way a lot of cheesy, hallmark rom-coms cannot even pull off.

CONCLUSION: This is a fun movie, but doesn’t really go far enough. It lacks the old school suspense of things like Halloween or Friday the 13, but is still enjoyable to watch. It has all the makings of a cult classic and is an excellent change of pace compared to other horror in its time. It wasn’t ever going to be an amazing flick, but for fucks sakes, it has a Snowman rape scene that is pretty brutal and hilarious at the same time and if that isn’t enough to sell you on at least seeing this one time, I don’t know what will, because it rarely gets more fucked up than that. Watch it for Christmas, because it is a lot less corny in comparison to everything else on television.

2 ½ out of 5

Kagemas: All the Creatures Were Stirring

INTRODUCTION: This was one for 1st Kagemas, but I guess I couldn’t have been bothered to write a review for it. Why? Well, read on.

SYNOPSIS: Couple go to movies where the play resembles stories about to be told.

ACTING: It’s acting, which is something that it indeed is.

VISUALS: Not bad. Shit movies have better budgets now a days.

TENSION: Only in the struggle to watch it.

MUSIC: it’s there. So that has to account for something, right?

FX: Better than 80’s movies, not that I hate old school FX.

DIALOGUE: People speak, so.

SUBTEXT: LOL

CONCLUSION: The very first story is the best, reminiscent of the 60’s Batman style. One would think the Joker was behind everything. This should have been turned into its own independent flick. After that, much like A Christmas Horror Story, they didn’t even try to make the stories interesting. If you’re looking for a good movie, this isn’t it. To be fair, I hate Anthologies even more than I hate Found footage flicks. Anthologies are usually lower brow than episodic TV and only just above Youtube videos. Dramas are slightly better, because they’re closer to movies in length and build. Movies are the height form of visual medium. I don’t watch many anthologies, but this isn’t a good one. Don’t waste your time.

1 ½ out of 5.

Kagemas: Dicken’s A Christmas Carol

INTRODUCTION: A Christmas Carol is one of my favorites of Dicken’s novels, but that doesn’t mean that it is perfect. In fact, quite the opposite, but still, this book has its charm and it is pretty much his most iconic novel ever made. Innumerable movies have been made from it, including my favorite, A Muppet’s Christmas Carol. So, what can we say about this book 200 years later?
SYNOPSIS: a cranky old miser finds himself on Christmas Eve being visited by three ghost whom are there to get him to change his wicked ways.

PROSE: As much as I love this novel and others of Dickens, here he isn’t at peak form. He has one too asides, that while iconic, are just not needed. I refer to things such as “Marley was dead, to begin with.” This is one par with a “It was a dark and stormy night.” He shows a bit but relies too much on telling from some nonexistent narrator. He doesn’t tell us much about what the other characters look like, but Scrooge gets the most emphasis. I know we need to “hate” Scrooge, but he could have described the other characters better. Dickens was better than this, but his uneven prose here, especially for such an iconic book, is annoying.

DIALOGUE: Excellent! A hell of a lot of iconic lines.

CHARACTERS: The only really developed character is Scrooge. The rest are only kind of developed at the end of the book, during the hauntings. Scrooge is a fantastic character, though and a way writers should be building characters and something I like to do myself. Much like Bram Stoker, the dialogue reflects who the character is, his core being, if you read between the lines. Fred for instance is really a horrible character and worse than Scrooge could ever be. He hate people, but parades around like a mirthful little shit who loves people, but really he is fake as fuck. Scrooge may be a misanthrope, but with lines that suggest he thinks his workers are horrible and that Christmas is the one time they can stop acting as if they’re (upper class) are better than his workers and a few other horrible lines, suggesting he is no better than Scrooge, it really shows the subtlety that is in Fred’s character and that he is just pretending to be something he isn’t.

SUBTEXT: Most people put the subtext as Scrooge being an analogy for Dickens himself, but I disagree. I think the movie “The Man Who Invented Christmas” nailed it as Scrooge being England and other cultures at the time whom had banned Christmas until about the mid 1800’s. I did notice though, that while it seems shallow of more subtext, the second ghost, seems to be an analogy for god himself. He even mentions that humans put blame on them, but I cannot recall a time period in history in which ghost were so senselessly victim blamed. Only the heavens seemed to get that. So perhaps there is more to these “ghost” than just gravy.

CONCLUSION: This book still shines in spite of its flaws, that it is almost like Scrooge himself, who, despite the flaws is redeemable and while I doubt that was Dicken’s intent, it still adds character to the novel. Still, there are stronger versions of this book and we never got it, but it is still a testament to Charles Dickens that even a weaker version is still so iconic. Personally, Scrooge is one of my favorite characters ever and I am glad this book gave birth to him and his iconic persona. Christmas truly is a bah humbug and even though Scrooge was eventually redeemed, someone had to mention it and while Scrooge has never put a dime in my pocket, I say, he has done us good and will do us good, so I say God bless him.

This book gets 4 out of 5 and isn’t a poor excuse for hogging up a man’s time every 25th of December.

Kagemas: A Christmas Horror Story

INTRODUCTION: a Christmas horror story is a weird, kind of anthology series that is all interlinked, but not very well. It seems like it wants to be one whole story, but breaks it up into pieces that connect, as if the writer wasn’t sure how to do it. Well, it is different, that is for damn sure.

SYNOPSIS: WHO THE FUCK KNOWS?

CHARACTERS: BANAL AS FUCK!

ACTING: It has Bill Shatner and everything is ok, nothing too horrible.

DIALOGUE: Not bad.

TENSION/PACING: NOT A TAD FUCKING BIT

FX: OBVIOUS CGI IS OBVIOUS. Krampus is on point, though.

MUSIC: MEH

SUBTEXT: FUCK YOU!

CONCLUSION: I know this is different from my normal reviews in that it seems like I am not even trying and to be fair, you’re right and that is how you should feel, because that is how this film seemed. Oh it isn’t that bad, sure and you could possibly enjoy it, but it isn’t re-watchable and it isn’t overly enjoyable. It has it’s moments, but you’ll sympathize with Shatners character of wanting to get it over with as soon as possible or being drunk to get through it.

2 out 5

Kagemas: Christmas Evil Review

INTRODUCTION: Here is an old movie that, sadly, I have never seen. It is one of those hidden gems and it has the benefit of being in a rare category of Christmas horror films that are not done well, or at least, not often enough. This though, this isn’t a lump of coal. Whoever was on the good list that year, thank you, because this is a fun flick!

SYNOPSIS: A young boy suffers a traumatic Christmas one year in the 1930’s. 50 years later, he takes his love for the holiday a bit too far.

CHARACTERS: This movie predates Joker, which just came out and I have to say, there is a similarity between the two characters and while, even though I haven’t seen it yet, I am sure Joker does it better, but this is an even cooler concept than just a psychological expose on an Incel in 1980’s New York. The character, in my mind, is more sympathetic, because he seems out of place in the world. There is an innocence, instead of mental illness. He is creepy, albeit, not intentionally. He loves Christmas and he is not very accepted by the world. The rest of the characters could have used more development, but the point of view is Santa.

ACTING: Very, very good. No one is going to win any awards here, but it is better than a lot of modern TV shows and very good for the B movies of the time.

DIALOGUE: is very good, nothing to complain about.

MUSIC: Excellent to build up the tone and tension.

VISUALS: It’s the 80s and very low budget but good for what they wanted to achieve.

SUBTEXT: None, except that being yourself isn’t beloved by everyone.

CONCLUSION: This movie is nearly two hours long and it really has few kills to make it a horror movie. It still builds up tension well and makes you wonder when he will finally go insane. It has flaws, but they’re few and far between. It is, as I pointed out, a character piece akin to Joker and very good at that. Why this isn’t bigger around the holidays is beyond me, but it really needs to be.

3 ½ stars out of 5.