The chosen film for the Crappy Movie Night this past Friday was this H.P. Lovecraft adaptation from the makers of “Re-Animator.” There’s a reason for that.

Now, here’s where I’m at a loss: describing the plot. I wouldn’t know where to start, so I’ll break it up into little blurbs. Two scientists created a machine called the Resonator, its desired effect and purpose is to stimulate the dormant pineal gland in the human brain, making possible to see beyond the external aesthetic offerings of the third dimension. Instead of the machine offering simple “sight”, however, it elongates the pineal gland into a freaky looking worm type thing that protrudes from the center of your head. Apparently it’s some kind of a third eye. Another side-effect: it causes sexual overload, madness, and possibly (it’s never really stated) opens up a door to another place fittingly dubbed “the beyond”. Convenient, isn’t it?

Now, being a novice in the field of Lovecraft, I’m hesistant to make this observation, but here goes: Lovecraft obviously was a simple-minded storyteller with tons of vivid imagery in his head, but with no skills of how to craft a story around them. If “From Beyond” is any indication, his mind gave him a picture of an insane otherworldly overlord created by this machine for reasons unknown. No explanation whatsoever is offered for what we are given; we’re just supposed to accept it at face value. Well, sorry, but I have a hard time doing that when Earthworm Jim is sticking out of the “Re-Animator” guy’s forehead and peeking around (“Talk to the worm, cuz the face don’t wanna hear it anymore” was a comment I uttered during the group viewing that got a huge laugh).

Why does the machine take over the entire essence of the first mad scientist but not the second? How is it that the creatures seen while the machine is on can take on actual physical presence (they inflict injury and decapitate people), yet they don’t carry over into reality once the machine is off (like Jeffrey Combs’ third eye does later on)? These are questions that director Stuart Gordon and producer Brian Yuzna (who directed the superb “The Dentist”) aren’t interested in answering. They expect us to leave logic at the door and be taken along for the ride of this ludicrous story. Gore effects are enough to propel a Lucio Fulci film because that’s what his films are about. But this film actually tries to involve us in a story fit for an audience of tards, and it packs in as much gore as it can. Sorry guys, but you can’t have it both ways.

Anyway, that’s my little review for the film. Now, imagine a room full of people who share my opinion watching this turd and shouting out comments, additional dialogue, and expletives to describe the inate characters. (Even poor Ken Foree, who was such a strong presence in George A. Romero’s “Dawn of the Dead” as the black SWAT team member, got caught up in this dreck. Not only that, he got stuck with the name “Bubba.” If that’s not a step down from one of the best dark comedies ever made, I don’t know what is.) Our little group of movie defecators were merciless to this celluloid, pelting every second of it with a sarcastic comment. From my own lips, we heard: “Whore!” “Best y’all be eating my dumplins!” “It’sa me, Mario!” and other such phrases.

Lovecraft stories have a history of bad film adaptations, this one and another Yuzna-produced film, “Necronomicon,” being the most obvious examples. They should really learn to leave well-enough alone. The best Lovecraft film to date wasn’t actually a Lovecraft film. It was John Carpenter’s “In the Mouth of Madness.” Ain’t that a slap in the face?

This is the worst example of stereotyping of witches I’ve ever seen. It should be renamed “4 Hours of ads for BAD Witch Movies.” All the depictions of witches in this video are so negative that it definitely leads one to believe that all the bad publicity given to witches is justified.