Notes from the Last Drive-In: S4E9 – ‘Head of the Family’ and ‘Habit’
It is 1990s indie night at The Last Drive-In, and we’re here to cover the fun, COVID-be-damned. The review/recap this week might be lacking a little of the usual flair due to my being an incubator for a virus I dodged for two years, but the drive-in never dies, and neither have I. Tonight we get a little bit of east vs. west 1990s indie horror with Head of the Family (1996) and Habit (1997).
So how is the show this week since we gave dads their due last week? What did Shudder share with us this past Friday, June 24th?
Head of the Family (1996)
The first film of the night was the 1996 black comedy Head of the Family, directed by Charles Band. The film was written by Benjamin Carr based on a concept by Charles Band. Adolfo Bartoli served as the director of photography. The music was handled by Richard Band and Steven Morell, which Band’s contribution mostly being the theme. The film stars Blake Adams, Jacqueline Lovell, and Gordon Jennison Noice. The freaky family is played by J.W. Perra, Bob Schott, James Jones, and Alexandria Quinn.
The 1990s indie film follows two lovers, Loretta (Jaqueline Lovell) and Lance (Blake Adams), as they scheme to rid themselves of Loretta’s criminal husband, Howard (Gordon Jennison Noice). Lance soon discovers that the local family of weirdos, the Stackpools, have been secretly entrapping and murdering people under the direction of the head of the family, Myron (J.W. Perra). Lance then tries to manipulate Myron and his siblings (Bob Schott, James Jones, and Alexandria Quinn) into killing Howard, with disastrous results.
Head of the Family is one of the many bizarre, wonderful films out of Full Moon Entertainment, and for a low-budget mid-1990s film is a pretty quality production. The movie is hilarious and probably the most significant asset to why it succeeds. The concept is weird, and the play of a southern gothic-style crime story with a mutant freak family works surprisingly well. The plot of two lovers planning to rid themselves of a significant other getting in the way of their romance is old hat, but how often is it done with four superpowered siblings, one of which is a giant, wheelchair-bound head?
Except for a little bit of an info dump around the end of the first act (am I legally allowed to refer to “acts” in a Full Moon movie?) by Myron, the writing of the film is whip-smart with fun lines and great back and forth between wildly exaggerated personalities. Even the largely silent Stackpools – Otis, Wheeler, and Ernestina – have their character moments, albeit mostly in silence. The best material, however, comes from Myron’s pseudo-intellectualism contrasted with Lance’s southern-fried con-artist huckstering and Loretta’s scheming hellcattiness.
J.W. Perra is the strongest actor of the bunch, and his long career is an excellent reflection of that. He makes Myron the most fascinating part of the film and does a fantastic job making the smarmy intellectual character my favorite in the bunch. Jaqueline Lovell is also quite fun with her husky southern voice and oversexed energy. As much as I liked Blake Adams as Lance, I think Lovell held her own better against Perra, and their scene is hilarious and disgusting in equal measure.
The film’s pacing is mainly solid, though it does fumble in the third act as Myron’s overly-elaborate “Joan of Arc” stage show scene drags a bit before giving way to a hilariously hasty conclusion. There is just enough B-grade weirdness and trash to keep you going. If there isn’t some funny dialogue flying, there may be a man with a giant head or a gratuitous shot of full-frontal nudity. Sometimes there are all three at the same time. It’s wonderful.
Visually, the movie holds up quite well (sort of), and the forced perspective shots of Myron, the titular “head of the family,” are among the best achievements in the film. Forced perspective can work wonders, and though there are moments when the look can falter, Myron’s introduction is one of the best-looking scenes in the movie. Now, this is also a mid-1990s Full Moon Entertainment movie, so it can also look pretty cheap. I found myself ridiculously entertained by the wall of the bedroom set shaking violently when Otis pins Lance against the wall. Also, the diner location is one of the fakest diners I have ever seen. It’s marvelous.
My biggest gripe with the film may be the music. Full Moon movies tend to have somewhat zippy, bouncy scores that blur together and often are a tonal mismatch with the film itself. Head in the Family is already a farce – it doesn’t need to sound like one, too. There were moments during the movie when I heard the score and wondered if tumblers and acrobats were just off-screen, plying their trade.
Joe-Bobservations on Head of the Family
This week was a double header of special guests, pun-intended. Both guests perfectly encapsulated the 1990s indie theme. Charles Band himself dropped by the show to share some of the histories of Head of the Family, the Full Moon Entertainment story, and his thoughts on film in general. Of course, there were plenty of fabulous factoids about the movie, but the real focus was, justifiably, an extended conversation with Charles Band.
Any time Joe Bob sits down and talks with a producer, you have something gold. Charles Band is a director and writer, but he is also a producer, and that may be where his influence is most significant. The role of the producer is sometimes neglected by film writers when it really shouldn’t be. Like Uncle Lloydie, Charles Band has created something special with Full Moon that fills a niche that has become increasingly vital in this world of megacorporate film production. Joe Bob taking the time to sit and pick the brain of one of these producer powerhouses is an excellent opportunity for any filmmaker to learn a thing or two.
With that being said, if you thought Joe Bob Briggs was loquacious, Charles Band can give him a run for his bolo.
Final Thoughts on Head of the Family
As a whole, Head of the Family is a great choice for a Drive-In feature, especially as a 1990s indie. It may be a bit lighter on the blood, but there are breasts, and I would say the Stackpools are technically beasts. For what is a 1996 direct-to-video feature, I was pretty impressed with the quality, and it helps that Charles Band films tend to dig into the camp and low-budget nature and just run with them. With this movie, you get a little sex, and little violence, and a big head. Not bad for a Friday night.
Joe Bob Briggs gave Head of the Family four out of four stars. I think that assessment is pretty fair. This is just that sort of drive-in cheese we need these days. While the film was a lot of fun, some minor issues here and there, mostly the grating music, tell me to be a little more conservative with my score. I give Head of the Family four out of five Cthulhus.
(4 / 5)
Best Line: “What’s the point of murdering your husband if you can’t fuck in a bed?” – Lorretta
Habit (1997)
The night’s second half featured the 1997 New York indie vampire film Habit. The release date has been listed as 1995 and 1997 across different databases, but most likely, I would say 1997 is the more accurate. If I mention a mid-1990s New York indie film, you might already understand where this movie goes, and you’d be correct. This one is bleak.
The film was written, directed, and edited by Larry Fessenden, who starred. Fessenden is joined by cinematographer Frank G. DeMarco and Geoffrey Kidde handles music duties. The other performers include Meredith Snaider, Aaron Beall, Patrician Coleman, and Heather Woodbury.
Habit is a variation on Dracula set in mid-1990s New York that follows Sam (Larry Fessenden), a disaffected alcoholic who has lost a father and his long-time girlfriend. At a friend’s Halloween party, he encounters the mysterious Anna (Meredith Snaider), who pulls him into a world of kinky sex which begins to unravel his life, much like his other addictions have before.
Habit is a bleak film but also is an excellent take on a vampire story. There are some direct references to Dracula here and there. Still, the film ultimately strikes out on its own to deliver a fascinating story about a man substituting one vice for another and the self-destruction that comes with it. The metaphor is obvious but very well executed, and the real horror doesn’t come from the vampire but rather from watching a man self-destruct and failing to do anything about it until it is too late. Sex with Anna is too exciting, too addictive, and even though Sam sees the toll it takes on his life and relationships, he cannot stop, even giving in during a struggle for life and death.
Fessenden is a fascinating character who has been a staple of the New York independent film scene for decades, and this is the work of a seasoned filmmaker. He is also a naturalistic performer, and while one may smirk at him writing and directing a film where he has sex with a manic-vampire-dream-girl, he conveys in his acting that it takes its toll. He has a presence, and at times I found myself drawing parallels to Jack Nicholson in his performance. The vaguely-autobiographical choices in characterization and performance lend a rawness to the film, which it benefits from.
The beautiful and seductive Anna is the most critical role in the film. For all the importance of Sam’s self-destructive choices, we need to buy into the idea that this blood-sucking woman is worth it, and Meredith Snaider, in her only film role, absolutely pulls it off. Snaider’s androgynous appearance and the voracious physicality of her performance establish the danger and temptation of Anna. She can go from charming to menacing at a moment’s notice, but it doesn’t matter to Sam or the audience. Everyone has a little kink, and Anna might be enough to draw it out of most viewers. What is a little bite in the throes of passion, anyway?
The acting choices of the supporting cast are generally excellent and nuanced, lending the film a realistic feel despite the supernatural theme. With that said, only one performance of the bunch frequently frustrated and confused me, and that was Aaron Beall as Nick, one of Sam’s friends. With that said, I do not feel like Beall did a poor job, but I do feel he was the wrong choice for the role, especially given an absurdly on-the-nose monologue in the film’s final act. The minute he showed up in the movie, I couldn’t help but say, “ah, so here is the theater kid.” If you know, you know.
The writing is strong as a whole with good dialogue, but the last act falters with one of the most overwritten monologues I’ve seen in recent memory. The film had done such an incredible job laying out its themes and metaphor using the language of cinema that to have Nick just rattle them out to a strung-out paranoid Sam also felt insulting to me. It may be that the hamhandedness of this moment colored my perspective on Beall’s acting. It was a real sour spot for me.
The film’s best moments may be those removed from New York City, however, as the friends go to a beach house and we get a glimpse of a better, more free Sam. A lovely scene on the shore gives us a look at what Sam could be if he could kick his habit. Still, Anna’s menace in the background, combined with the most traditional horror scene in the film, illustrates the underlying inescapability of his addiction.
The film’s aesthetics are particularly appealing to me. The sort of grungy, gothic New York City, devoid of the usual landmarks, looks fabulous. For being a film draped in shadows, the film handles light far better than billion-dollar franchises today. The film has such tremendous visual quality that while it is in color, I would love to see a black and white version. That might make it the ultimate 1990s indie vampire movie.
Joe-Bobservations on Habit
The second half of 1990s indie night featured an extended interview with the charming Larry Fessenden, who is just a cool, kind of weird dude. He has such a low-key and professional attitude to the craft for someone so admired and ingrained in the independent film scene in New York. Whereas Charles Band has a more slick and west coast sensibility to his cadence, Larry exudes an east coast vibe.
The interview segment was fantastic, and Fessenden was appropriately cagey regarding interpretations of his movies. Much hay is made about meaning and analysis when it comes to films like Habit. Hell, I’ve indulged in that in this very review. But there is something exhilarating about having the filmmaker commit to no answer and just encouraging whatever interpretations are out there.
Final Thoughts on Habit
Habit is on my shortlist of truly great vampire films. This 1990s indie film’s quality extends far past the novelty of the setting and theme. The performances are strong, and barring a significant misstep, the writing is excellent. I really found myself drawn in by the exploration of vampirism and addiction. In a genre as overstuffed as vampire movies, Habit is a standout.
Joe Bob Briggs gave Habit three and a half out of four stars. I think he could have bumped it up a half-star, personally. I loved it, but that third-act monologue harshed my buzz, as they said in the 1990s. I give Habit four out of five Cthulus.
(4 / 5)
Best Line: “I suspect that the less you know about me, the longer you’ll stay interested.” – Anna
Haunted MTL Drive-In Totals
As always, we have the official Drive-In Totals from Shudder.
We also have my totals. As I was sick with COVID (and still am as I write this review), I do not have as many notes to work from. Hell, I didn’t even live-tweet the show this week, either.
- 5 Question Digressions
- 11 Utterances of “Thee-ate-er”
- 12 Puppet Master Movies
- 24 Speaking Roles over 4 Days (Head of the Family)
- 30 Full Moon scripts by Benjamin Carr
- Gratuitous Sets
- Gratuitous New York Grunge
- Gratuitous Talking Heads Parody
- Surprise Yuki
- Surprise Horniest Drive-In Yet
- Banking Joking
- Necrophilia Joking
- Slurp Fu
- Clipboard Fu
- Full Moon Fu
- Head Rolls
- Darcy Cosplay: Loretta
- John Brennan Cosplay: Otis
Episode Score for The Last Drive-In S4E9 – Head of the Family and Habit
I think that 1990s indie night was a compelling theme this week, and it certainly helped that I loved both films for very different reasons. There wasn’t much in the way of gimmicks in the host segments either. Not that gimmicks aren’t hilarious and welcome, but sometimes Joe Bob just chilling with the mutant fam, talking about movies, is welcome enough. The film had a sub-theme of east vs. west 1990s indie double feature that was also pretty impressive, and I think that Head of the Family and Habit were good representations of these two different spheres of film.
Combine two good movies with two great interviews with two independent film icons, and you have a good night at the drive-in. I didn’t even get into the Talking Heads parody in the night’s first half. I would give this episode of The Last Drive-In four and a half out of five Cthulhus.
(4.5 / 5)
And that is it for us this week. Did you enjoy 1990s indie night? Let us know.
Please join us on Twitter next Friday as we live-tweet with the rest of the Mutant Fam during The Last Drive-In with Joe Bob Briggs. I should be over this horrid virus by then, I hope.
Movies n TV
Anna (2013) To Some, Mindscape to Others, a Thriller Film
Anna (2013), also known as Mindscape, is a psychological thriller of a struggling memory detective named John.
Anna (2013), also known as Mindscape, is a psychological thriller directed by Jorge Dorado. This R-rated directorial debut stars Mark Strong, Taissa Farmiga, Brian Cox, Saskia Reeves, Richard Dillane, and Indira Varma. As of this review, interested viewers can watch this film on VUDU, Hoopla, Plex Channel, Pluto TV, Roku Channel, Tubi TV, Amazon Prime, and more. Anna originally released in 2013, but it released in the US in 2014.
Struggling to return to his work as a memory detective, John (Mark Strong) pursues a new assignment. Anna (Taissa Farmiga) views John as her last chance to prove her innocence before she’s condemned to an asylum. As John searches through her memories, a tale of abuse and manipulation unravels.
What I Like about Anna (2013)
Anna earned three nominations but no award recognition. From the Sitges–Catalonian International Film Festival, it earned a nomination for Best Motion Picture. The Goya Awards recognized Jorge Dorado with the 2014 nomination for Best New Director. Finally, Anna received a nomination from the Gaudí Awards for Best Art Direction.
Taissa Farmiga’s performance balances the line between suspicious and innocent, which is necessary for this unraveling mystery. It’s a delicate role, but Taissa Farmiga brings to life the material given.
No products found.
Anna‘s plot rotates around a new fringe science that’s slowly gaining traction. It’s less a dissection of this science and more a norm that Anna expects viewers to believe. It’s an interesting concept, though not unique. Still, it’s a nice additional dynamic to the mystery.
While not a horrifying film, it does deliver a mystery that keeps viewers engaged with enough hooks to add an extra layer before something gets stale. That mystery does linger in the mind in some respects but doesn’t haunt the viewer.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
Despite Anna not depicting these moments, sexual assault remains a recurring element of the film. Little remains conclusive, with some suggestions that these are false allegations. Furthering this point, the film depicts Anna as a manipulator and flirt when some incidents suggest she’s a survivor of assault.
Derogatory language might upset some, but these remain brief moments. The use indicates a particular character’s immaturity, but I’ll raise the point regardless. Furthering this line of analysis is a moment where a bullied character is implied to be gay, but it’s likely just an insult.
While not inherently a trigger, this new field of science earns the claim of being somewhere between forensic science and lie detector tests, a massive gap that anything can fit in. It makes everything subjective when the film wants to claim absolute evidence. I can’t help but wonder what exploring that unreliability might look like, but that’s not this film.
What I Dislike about Anna (2013)
The biggest deal breaker for some is this concept of a teen mastermind. I won’t go into details about the mystery, but I am often fatigued with this idea of a teen femme fatale. While Anna gives enough mystery, it’s an overused trope.
Mark Strong’s performance delivers on the material, but John seems so easily manipulated for someone who does this as a profession. While out of practice, I don’t understand why he believes or doesn’t believe information. If Anna depicts John as overly critical or gullible, the film will have a more consistent character.
I assume there remains an understandable reason for the name change, but Anna appears as a common title for a film, spinning a series of some recognition. Mindscape also earns some recognition and competition, but it’s a more memorable title than a single noun name.
Final Thoughts
Anna provides an interesting concept and mystery, but many shortcomings hinder the execution. Viewers eager for a psychological mystery with a drop of sci-fi, Anna delivers an engaging story. However, the market does provide competition, making it a tough film to recommend. 
(3 / 5)
Movies n TV
Tips on Raising Evil from “The Demon of Parenthood”
The assessors investigate cursed toys in an attack against commerce, but Ben has a finger on the issue in “The Demon of Parenthood.”
“The Demon of Parenthood” is the eighth episode of season 3 of Evil, created by Michelle King and Robert King. The central cast includes Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi, Michael Emerson, Christine Lahti, and Andrea Martin. As of this review, it’s available through Netflix and Paramount+ and its add-ons.
The assessors investigate cursed toys in a terrible attack against commerce, but Ben (Aasif Mandvi) has a finger on the potential issue. David (Mike Colter) receives another task from the Entity. Kristen (Katja Herbers) learns more about her missing egg. Leland (Michael Emerson) invites Dr Boggs (Kurt Fuller) to the darker side of spirituality. Sheryl (Christine Lahti) takes her granddaughter to work.
What I Like about “The Demon of Parenthood”
I enjoy the espionage aspect of the Entity, pushing David to questionable grounds as he navigates what’s right against what’s demanded of him. While this plotline doesn’t reach its full potential, this episode highlights one of the more interesting opportunities of this idea. The Entity consistently interferes with the procedural case, possibly covering up abuse to support its objectives. This episode highlights this dynamic to perfection.
Kristen gets pulled in multiple directions, forced to question her trust in David, and faces a unique horror after learning about her missing egg. While I won’t dive deeper into this issue for this review, it’s safe to say this episode belongs to Kristen, and Katja Herbers delivers.
Her unsettling night terrors suggest an intuitive understanding of some of the manipulations around her, highlighting these moments to the viewer by proxy. Beyond these meta moments, the execution of these night terrors remains pleasantly unsettling.
![Evil: Season Three [DVD]](https://hauntedmtl.com/wp-content/plugins/aawp/public/image.php?url=YUhSMGNITTZMeTl0TG0xbFpHbGhMV0Z0WVhwdmJpNWpiMjB2YVcxaFoyVnpMMGt2TlRGYWJYaGtVVFpFYlV3dVgxTk1NVFl3WHk1cWNHYz18MTc0MDQxOTk3Mw=)
- Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi (Actors)
- Robert King (Director)
- Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated)
![Evil: Season Three [Blu-Ray]](https://hauntedmtl.com/wp-content/plugins/aawp/public/image.php?url=YUhSMGNITTZMeTl0TG0xbFpHbGhMV0Z0WVhwdmJpNWpiMjB2YVcxaFoyVnpMMGt2TlRFdGJuQndVRmhtU1V3dVgxTk1NVFl3WHk1cWNHYz18MTc0MDQxOTk3Mw=)
- Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi (Actors)
- Robert King (Director)
- Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Last update on 2025-01-31 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
Among a constant trail of failures, Leland lingers in the background as he puts pieces together for his master plan. We don’t see the full scope of his vision yet, but the suspense it builds for future episodes earns its place. I’m interested to see how these plots will evolve, even if Leland’s luck seems to turn sour. Perhaps it’s because of this dynamic that the tension works so effectively.
With a shocking moment tied into this episode, “The Demon of Parenthood” creates one of the more haunting episodes. However, the greatest accomplishment in the episode is what it establishes for the future of the series. While not all these points follow through by the end of Evil, it’s still an episode that ripples across the show’s progression.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
Without diving into too many details, spousal abuse and murder occur in the episode. This abuse might indicate a demonic influence, but such points remain speculation.
A severed body part and some gore stand out in this episode. It hardly earns enough attention from fans of gory horror, but the squeamish should tread carefully toward the end.
What I Dislike about “The Demon of Parenthood”
Many dropped ideas seem genuinely interesting, building to some potential development that receives little payoff. Missing these opportunities will never feel satisfying. While some changes are understandable, it creates holes in the narrative. For example, Dr. Boggs’ dark seduction slows in pace, becoming implied or withheld from the audience soon after “The Demon of Parenthood.” These experiences often adapt the concept of evil that the show seeks to bring to life.
Sheryl’s compliance with Leland’s plan still seems underdeveloped as a concept, especially with how far she takes it in this episode. While later episodes add a different perspective, I can’t help but feel these are retcons or concepts not thoroughly thought out.
Final Thoughts
“The Demon of Parenthood” progresses the plot and delivers some genuinely haunting moments. While a retrospective assessment does note many missed opportunities, the episode stands up beyond these missed opportunities. (4.5 / 5)
Movies n TV
You’ll Have a Bloody Good Time with this Eternal (2004) Health Tip
When Raymond Pope’s wife disappears, he follows the trail. But each lead points him to the Eternal beauty of Elizabeth Kane.
Eternal (2004) is a horror thriller written and directed by Wilhelm Liebenberg and Federico Sanchez. This R-rated film stars Caroline Néron, Victoria Sanchez, Conrad Pla, and Ilona Elkin. As of this review, it is available for Amazon Prime members with renting options from Spectrum on Demand.
When Raymond Pope’s (Conrad Pla) wife disappears, he’s swept into the mystery of Elizabeth Kane (Caroline Néron). As his investigation becomes increasingly bizarre, bodies pile up and point to Raymond Pope. Will he clear his name, or will this bloody rampage drown him?
What I Like about Eternal
While all of the performances add to the film, Eternal thrives on the charisma and mystique of Caroline Néron’s Elizabeth. She enchants her targets, lowering their defenses until that final moment.
Conrad Pla’s Raymond Pope also requires a delicate approach to succeed. The sleazy and hypocritical detective seems genuinely concerned for his wife (at least initially) and sells that concern. While far from an easy character to root for, the audience understands him and the danger he faces.
There’s a heavy erotic thriller angle that Eternal delivers on. I’ll linger on this point in later sections, but it certainly knows how to build tension within a single scene or between characters. These moments don’t feel forced, and while they often target a male audience, interesting dynamics rise above general exploitative content, if only slightly.
This seems to be a passion project between the creators, Wilhelm Liebenberg and Federico Sanchez. This passion lingers in the moments to deliver something unique, if not without its flaws. The film doesn’t hold back, a point that fluctuates between negative and positive depending on the situation. Regardless, it holds a charm in that commitment that’s hard to replicate without passion behind the scenes.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
The film labels itself as “Inspired by True Events,” which only relates to the general discussion of Elizabeth Báthory. It’s also worth mentioning that, much like Vlad Dracula, her story remains heavily dominated by modern interpretations. I won’t pretend to hold exclusive knowledge of these historical figures, but cultural interpretation reduces realism. The claim means little to nothing.
The predatory queer trope applies to Eternal, with little complexity to challenge the point as the violence often targets women. It’s important to note that Elizabeth acts as a femme fatale in general, but the targets remain clear. However, this film did earn a moment of recognition from the Glitter Awards (a clip was used in 2006), which might suggest the standout performance of Caroline Néron’s Elizabeth earns back some goodwill.
What I Dislike about Eternal
The erotic thriller holds a stigma that Eternal doesn’t challenge. Elizabeth remains a clear femme fatale with a slightly supernatural twist. While the performance executes this character perfectly, viewers likely know if this remains an interest or a tired cliche for themselves.
While most of Raymond’s acts make sense for the character, I hold issue with the end. Without going into too many details, he is asked to do one thing to protect himself and does the opposite for no reason. Perhaps this indicates supernatural influence, but such a claim lingers in headcanon.
The film ends ambiguously, which hardly seems fitting given the evidence and weakens the overall film. A definitive ending, or something moderately more definitive, would strengthen Eternal.
Final Thoughts
Eternal’s major obstacle in executing its erotic thriller is that of tired tropes in the modern era. If one looks past these dated points, there’s a haunting thriller that can meet moments of excellence. The plot falls short in many areas towards the end of the film. Ultimately, if a vampire-esque thriller interests you, Eternal certainly adds its perception to the niche but in a familiar form.
(3.5 / 5)
