Choosing which two movies I wanted to talk about for my Drive-In Double Feature wasn’t easy. As all the entries this past month have shown, there are endless combinations — none of them wrong, each one utterly singular and wonderfully creative. I had a couple ideas bouncing around (ones I’ll save for next year, or maybe before then) but I finally decided on Beetlejuice and The Frighteners since Beetlejuice — more specifically, its potentialsequel— has been in the news lately.
See, for years now, people have been clamoring for a Beetlejuice sequel — but what they don’t realize is they’ve had a Beetlejuice sequel for years already: The Frighteners. Let’s look at some of the obvious comparisons:
Both are about the dead interacting with the living, specifically the dead helping the living accomplish a goal.
Both are about a living person using the dead to dupe other living people.
Both feature smart-assed ghosts.
Both prove that even the dead can still die again.
And perhaps most damning of all: both were scored by Danny Elfman! I mean, c’mon people!
The similarities don’t end there.
The catalyst in both films is a car wreck: in Beetlejuice, a car accident kills the Maitlands, which allows them to interact with the dead. In The Frighteners, Michael J. Fox and his wife are also in a car accident; the crash kills the wife, but near-death experience allows Fox to — you guessed it — communicate with the dead.
Plus,look at this car chasefrom The Frighteners. Everything is very lush and green, hills are winding, homes are painted white and almost look like models. Tell me these locations don’t look exactly like the model set Adam Maitland builds of the little town in Beetlejuice! Thecar crash at the endof Beetlejuice (the one that takes place on the miniature model) looks identical to the one that happens in The Frighteners. Hell, they even both involve antique model vehicles!
Both also have interesting MPAA ratings: Despite the violence being comical in nature or happening offscreen entirely, The Frighteners was deemed far too violent, and the board forced an R-rating on an unhappy Peter Jackson despite him making as many cuts as he possibly could. Yet Beetlejuice — which features a perverted ghost marrying an underage girl, corpses who talk about suicide, one crotch grab, and one use of “fuck” — snuck by with a harmless PG.
And there is one more loose, tenuous parallel: in The Frighteners, Michael J. Fox lives in an home he never finished building, and it’s in need of major repairs; in Beetlejuice, after the Maitlands die, the Deetzes move in and make major repairs and changes. The homelife in both films, the disarray — it’s too blatant to ignore.
But despite their numerous similarities, the reception to either film couldn’t have been any different. While Beetlejuice became a smash hit and an 80s classic, and probably the most memorable film production for all those involved, The Frighteners failed at the box office and became a mere footnote in Peter Jackson’s filmography. It was also Fox’s last leading role in a live-action feature film. However, in recent years, people seem to be coming to their senses and have now realized what a goddamn gem The Frighteners is, and it has developed, as the cool kids say, a “cult following”.
I remember seeing The Frighteners in the theater with my folks when I was 12 years old. It blew me away. I’ve always been into two things: scary stuff and funny stuff; The Frighteners knocked it out of the goddamned park with both! Aside from just being incredibly fun and well written and beautifully shot, it has tons of incredible special effects. In fact, it required more digital effects shots than almost any movie made up until that time (thanks, Wikipedia!)
I originally saw Beetlejuice as a small child, most likely from a video store rental. I don’t remember when I saw it I just remember being so young that stuff about the film didn’t make sense to me until years later. Like when the Maitlands drown; I didn’t realize they were dead. When Geena Davis trots the horse statue in front of the mirror to show she has no reflection, I had no goddamned idea what was going on. When the Maitlands possess the Deetzes and force them to dance to calypso music, I couldn’t have been more lost — but damn if that wasn’t a great scene to a toddler!
A double feature of Beetlejuice and The Frighteners makes more sense the longer I sit here and type (also, the more beer I drink.) Beetlejuice is a wonderful ode to the practical effects of 80s horror — even utilizing ‘old-school’ stop motion animation in several scenes. The Frighteners shows the turning of the tide, blending both practical effects and digital effects but leaning more on the latter. Both films would be nominated for and win several Saturn awards. Beetlejuice would even win an Academy Award for best make-up!
Both films also have huge, colorful supporting casts — Beetlejuice with Sylvia Sydney and Dick Cavett; The Frighteners with Dee Wallace, John Astin, and Jeffrey Combs!
It feels silly summarizing both films, especially Beetlejuice since it has become so embedded in the pop culture collective consciousness — so I’ll skip the summations. But trust me: these movies are the perfect double feature, not simply because they compliment each other, but because one feels like an extension of the other. Go watch both…now!
Mike and I have known each other for many years. At times, it feels like we were torn from the same cloth. Both lovers of horror movies and comic books, both fond of the drink, and we both love antagonizing a mutual friend we share. But with this Drive-In Double Feature, I can add a new trait we share in common to the list: being delinquent! I’m glad Mike did finally turn a piece in, because the Drive-In Double Feature wouldn’t feel complete without his inclusion.
When I was asked to do a Drive-in Double Feature, I thought to myself “Fuck I gotta write something for another website”. But the more I thought about it, I figured this would be a great way to show off my love of two of the best horror movies of all time with Creature from the Black Lagoon and JAWS. Now many folks will say neither of these are horror movies and more monster movies, but come on those are one in the same, and you can’t tell me a movie (JAWS) that scared people enough to not swim for years isn’t a horror film. Plus I would envision these movies being shown somewhere where the audience can be in the water while they watch these films to add to the scariness of the features.
First I want to start with Creature from the Black Lagoon. This movie is on my list of favorite movies of all time and I feel it’s the best Universal Monster movie as well. This movie was introduced to me as a kid, probably around 6 or 7, by my father who is a huge fan of the franchise as well. Watching it, something about it sucked me into the world this movie was in. Not only did we get an elaborate and beautiful jungle setting, which is amazing since this was filmed in Florida and the Universal back lot, but we got a colorful cast of characters that I wasn’t used to seeing in movies made in the 80’s. We were given the strong confident man of the 50’s in Richard Carlson’s “David Reed”, the business man in Richard Denning’s “Mark Williams”, the know if all rugged boat captain in Nestor Paivas “Lucas” and the smart/damsel in distress with the beautiful Julia Adams portrayal of “Kay”. Along with the wonderful location, the film was shot beautifully as well as the underwater scenes were captured wonderfully, especially considering the technical limitations at the time, and the great score added to the tension of each scene where we thought the Gill-man would show up. Add to that the need for the actor in the Gill-man suit to hold his breath for long periods of time underwater, and you know this movie was a tough one to film. One can’t forget that this was also filmed for a 3-D release so we got some great 3-D gags that if you can see it in a theatre today, you will not be disappointed.
Not only does Creature continue the great legacy of Universal Monsters, but this also offers those great moments where you never know if the Gill-man will show up. A small swim by Kay makes you think her life is in danger, even when nothing is close to her. That and the Creature, like most Universal monsters, is a tragic character that in the end was just trying to protect his home from those stupid humans. Plus, and I’m not sure but it makes sense, I believe Julia Adams portrayal as Kay started my love of ladies with the classic pin-up look, that was luckily brought over by Jennifer Connelly in The Rocketeer, but that is a story for another day.
Next up is the 2nd best movie ever made in my opinion, (The Empire Strikes Back obviously takes the top spot) and that is JAWS. Now not much has to be said about how great this movie is as we all know that already, plus knowing all the trouble the movie had getting made is also common knowledge. But even not addressing any of that, and really we should but whatever, this movie is still one of the most enjoyable and scary movies out there. With a superb trio of stars, Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss and the wonderful Robert Shaw, Steven Spielberg was able to create a fantastic film that featured all three men equally while giving us three completely different characters to all work off each other. Add to that we get a giant killing machine stalking Amity Island creating much havoc and were in for an exciting film. With all the problems the shark had, as we know, is why we barely see the thing until the climax of the film. And of course, tossing John Williams’s score on top of shots makes things even scarier, as we never know when an attack will happen. Much like in Creature, a simple swim by someone has us on the edge of our seats wondering if this is when the monster will attack. Lucky for us we get plenty of carnage even without seeing the shark.
See that image above? To me this is still one of the scariest scenes in movie history. A combination of how it is filmed, done on Spielbergs dime to get one more big scare out the audience, and the shock of seeing Ben Gardners head appear out of nowhere, gives you a jump each time. Whenever I watch it, the scene still gives me chills and fear even though I know exactly what will happen.
So yeah, we get it all with this film…gore, laughs, great film work and a wonderful score. On top of that you get a great cast of main and supporting characters as well and you’re in for a great flick. So there you have it kids, two great movies that would play perfectly together and I’d highly recommend viewing this summer….or really anytime you get the chance.
Mike can be found (and contacted) via Nerd City, both on its website and its Facebook. He provides Nerd City’s most popular recurring piece, Wrasslin’ Wednesdays.
I love nepotism — especially after I looked up the word and figured out what it meant — which is why I’m happy to present Ryan Kirby, brother of earlier contributor Megan Kirby! Ryan chose a great Double Feature; an oft-referenced movie and an oft-overlooked gem. A perfect pair, nonetheless. But I won’t waste anymore of your time. Ryan, let ’em have it!
When I first heard about Camera Viscera’s Drive-In Double Feature, my mind was swimming with ideas of films to pair up with each other. Watching films back-to-back often draws comparisons that you wouldn’t see when viewing them individually, and if the right tone is established between the two films it can heighten both of them into something more enjoyable. When I invite people over to watch movies, I often get a kick out of throwing people wildly out of their comfort zone, and for this reason my immediate reaction was to screen a double feature of Eddie Murphy’s Haunted Mansion and Cannibal Holocaust. However, after giving it some thought, I figured it would be more enjoyable to pick two films that I am actually fond of, as opposed to the life-ruining horror of those two movies.
In my Double Feature, I want to highlight two films that I consider masterpieces, but also two films that don’t fit the standard clichés that people think of when they come to the horror genre. I have long since become desensitized to gore and jump scares, and what really gets under my skin is when a director can nail down an atmosphere. There doesn’t have to be grotesque kill scenes or slow-moving slashers to be truly scary; the key to scaring me is a suffocating air of paranoia and anxiety, and when it comes to that, two films jump up in my mind as prime examples of the mood. Incidentally, they both come from Polish directors; Rosemary’s Baby directed by Roman Polanski, and Possession directed by Andrzej Zulawski.
First up on the bill is Rosemary’s Baby, a film from 1968 that is as unsettling as anything released today. The film is often held up as a classic of horror, but I don’t’ hear it discussed as often as its contemporaries such as The Exorcist or Night of the Living Dead. The reason for this might be that any discussion about Roman Polanski in the modern era is loaded with all sorts of disturbing connotations, but for the sake of this article, I’m setting aside any personal feelings about the director and solely focusing on the film.
Rosemary’s Baby is bookended by overhead shots of the apartment complex where the film takes place, and the slow pan-out Polanski employs makes the structure look utterly labyrinthine, a sporadic mess of windows and doorways that seem to extend out into an eternity. The apartment complex may on the surface seem to be mundane, but like all the mundane occurrences that happen throughout Rosemary’s Baby, there is something sinister hiding just under the façade.
We are introduced to Rosemary, played by the young and beautiful Mia Farrow, and her husband, Guy, played by John Cassavetes, as they are guided through their new apartment. They are your standard portrait of a young couple getting ready to settle down and start a family, enthusiastic about the opportunities that await them in New York City, hardly bothered by the previous tenant’s death in the very apartment they are moving into. Before long, we are introduced to their friendly elderly neighbors, the Castevets, two endlessly talkative and hospitable folk who seem to take pleasure in the company of Rosemary and Guy, to the point where it seems they can barely go an hour without one of them knocking on the door for a quick chat or a delivery of a home-cooked meal.
Their constant pestering of the central couple is obviously a bit overbearing, but the context of their interactions is always innocent. If the viewer was not aware of the movie they were watching, the interactions would seem boring, but since it’s impossible to separate oneself from the trajectory of where the film is heading, the viewer is constantly looking for signs of malevolence, giving all the interactions a feeling of paranoia. We know something is wrong, but the Castavets refuse to tip their hand, leaving the audience searching for the motives behind their suffocating hospitality but unable to gather sufficient evidence against them.
This all changes in the movie’s pivotal scene: Rosemary is drugged by one of the Castevets’ delivered meals, and what follows is a surreal, dreamlike sequence in which Rosemary is raped and impregnated by what appears to be a gargantuan, reptilian creature, surrounded by naked old men and women watching her as some sort of cult ritual. In this sequence, the horror is no longer hiding in the margins, we are forced to confront the reality of what is really going on, and the lens through which we view the rest of the film is changed. We have reason to feel Rosemary is in danger, and we have reason to feel distrustful of all other characters in the film. When Rosemary wakes up, her husband tells her that she had a bit much to drink, and claims he had sex with her while she was unconscious. ”It was fun, in a necrophiliac sort of way” quips Guy, as if this is a perfectly acceptable thing to do in a domestic partnership. Soon after, Rosemary learns she is pregnant.
At this point we are about forty five minutes into the film, and the climax has already happened. What follows is a keen awareness of the trajectory of where it’s all heading, and the crippling dissatisfaction the audience feels that there is nothing Rosemary can do to escape it. Everybody in her life tells her nothing is wrong, nobody is out to steal her baby, nobody is conspiring against her, and from the scenes we see, all the interactions she has could pass for standard small-talk and friendly concern. Everything is so subtle that it’s easy to forget that anything remotely evil is at play; had we not seen the ritualistic impregnation earlier, nothing would seem wrong. But our paranoia about life in the apartment catches up to Rosemary. She slowly begins to become distrustful of the seemingly supportive people in her life; The Castavets, her husband, her doctor. The unflinching reassurance from everybody that nothing is at all wrong occasionally puts her at ease, but the insanity wells up inside her. The tragedy is, by the time she finally decides to take action, it is far too late.
By the film’s conclusion, all of the cards have been laid down on the table, and we see the macabre plot at the center of it all. It has been a slow build, but there is a certain relief on finally being let in on the truth. The lies of everyone dissolve, and we see the true monsters lurking behind the nightmare. It is a pessimistic ending, but an effective one. It leaves the audience questioning how much they are in control of their own lives, and how well they can identify forces out against them. And once the damage is already done, what motive is there really left to fight back? The film makes you feel powerless, and it is one of the most effectively chilling narratives I have ever seen committed to celluloid.
Up next on the bill we have Andrezej Zukawski’s Possession, a movie that stands proudly as perhaps the strangest film I have ever seen, and I am somebody that prides myself on tackling the strangest films cinema has to offer. It would be easy to say that, as a double feature, if Rosemary’s Baby is a slow build up to something completely evil and insane, that Possession uses that ending mood as a launching point and rockets down even further into the pits of hell from there, but the truth is that Possession is on a completely different playing field. The film stars Sam Neill, who you may recognize form Jurassic Park, and Isabelle Adjani, who you may recognize from your worst nightmares.
The acting styles employed in Possession are something that I have never seen replicated anywhere else, but for lack of a better term I would describe them as “Nicholas Cage-Like”. I can only assume that every actor in the film was given three key directions to follow for all of their dialogue: number one, make your eyes as big as possible at all times; Number two, scream all the time, and never stop screaming; Number three, flail all your limbs about in a chaotic fashion constantly.
The plot of Possession is borderline incomprehensible, and very little of it seems intended to be taken literally. At the center, we have a failing relationship between Sam Neill’s character “Mark”, and Isabelle Adjani’s character “Anna”. Mark has just come home from a nondescript mission given to him by a shadowy agency that is never expanded upon, and upon return he finds out that his wife, Anna, has been cheating on him with another man. This is about the only detail I can give you in concrete fact, as narrative cohesion flies out of the window when you realize this is the kind of film where characters will regularly stare directly into the camera and talk about how they have lost faith in god.
Enough can’t be said about how over-the-top the acting is in this film, it is something that needs to be seen to be believed. During the opening scenes it may come off as comical, but the film is taking itself one hundred percent seriously and as the body language and inflection of the characters only becomes more insane, it stops becoming funny and starts becoming downright unsettling. Actor’s appendages seem to operate independent of their speech, illustrating their animalistic nature through bizarre flailing that seems to exist completely separate from their own dialogue. In another film, this would be bad acting, but in this film, it actually earned Isabelle Adjani best actress at the Cannes Film Festival in 1980. This is because the insanity of the performances are so universally committed, at no point does it seem that the actors are self-aware of the completely insane method they are using. They seem to be in a trance-like state, and as a viewer you eventually begin to think that anything could happen in this film, including and not limited to the characters violently clawing their way out of the TV screen.
Special attention needs to be given to Isabelle Adjani’s performance, which, while heightened from reality, seems completely raw and naked in its primal chaos, like Freud’s philosophy of the inner-mind is being worn as clothing. There is no better example of this than the film’s most famous scene, “The Miscarriage of Faith”, an extended take where Isabelle Adjani flails her way down an empty subway station with reckless abandon for the safety of her own body.
Adjani reportedly had been embarrassed of her own performance when she finally saw it at the Cannes film festival, claiming that Zulawski’s had captured her very soul on camera, and had no right to. It is said it took her several years to recuperate from this performance, and watching the end results, it’s easy to see why. This is some intense cinema, and a film that has not left my mind since I first watched it.
Analyzing Possession for its deeper meaning seems an exercise in futility. Anybody who pitches meanings to the scenes of the film could easily be refuted by another, and I am not necessarily into the idea of trying to assign my bargain-bin philosophy knowledge to the contents of the picture. What’s important is the overbearing, uncomfortable, surreal, chaotic, and manic mood. Read deeper if you will, but more likely Possession is the one that’s reading you.
And so concludes my Drive-In Double Feature for Camera Viscera. If you haven’t seen either of these films, they both come with my highest possible recommendation. These are not the films generally associated with standard horror tropes, but in my opinion they are classics, and two of the downright scariest pieces of cinema I have ever had the pleasure of watching.
More of Ryan Kirby’s film reviews can be found on Letterboxd, and his short films can be found on Youtube.
My buddy Trent would give even the best nostalgist a run for their money. His interests seems to exist within a small window of time, maybe 1980-1985. Maybe 1978-1987 if I’m being generous. And I don’t blame him: movies, music, hell even quirky foodstuff was more enjoyable then (Ecto-Cooler, anyone?) So it was my hope that Trent would use his knowledge of the arcane to summon a Drive-In Double Feature of childhood favorites, and he did not disappoint.
Drive-in theaters, you may have heard, have become a dying breed. In their 1950s heyday, locations for seeing the latest film (and in a lot of cases, a pair of films) numbered in the tens of thousands, and accounted for one-third of theaters in the United States. Now, we are at about 350 across the country.
I was near one today, and that seemed somewhat remarkable to me. Now when I see a drive-in, I make a mental note of it and try whenever I can to make it there. It’s one of the few vestiges of pure Americana we have left.
So let’s say I pull up to one, and they are showing a double feature in honor of me (maybe I’m dying or I’m the president or something). I get to pick – which two movies would I want to see in the best setting for the viewing of movies that remains?
I looked at this question from dozens of angles and tried to avoid the following conclusion because since I was five or six years old, I have not been able to shut up about –
I’m leading off with what remains, 31 years later, as my favorite film of all time – Ghostbusters. I’ve seen it on televisions, computers, movie screens, tablets, phones, gaming systems, apartment walls. But to see it in the great outdoors at a drive-in movie theater with my fellow Americans? I would be so happy I’d be eligible to be busted before the theme song kicked in.
I cannot say enough good things about this film. The perfect cast, in their prime, with the perfect script working with possibly the greatest film comedian of all-time in Bill Murray.
It’s not only a great, and hilarious film, it is also a marvel to behold and its huge (and occasionally dated) effects lend themselves to a huge and occasionally dated setting. It’s a film to share in the hot and sweaty company of others, and it puts us halfway through the perfect summer night. So go take a whizz and buy another 6 dollar popcorn and settle in for –
To show you I’m a reasonable man, I cannot laud Teen Wolf the same way I did the previous film. But I don’t care. It’s an even better movie for an old-school drive-in setting than its predecessor, and it’s a fuckin’ hoot. Ever wonder what would happen if you pretended to surf on top of a moving van while your friend blasts “Surfin’ USA”? Nothing, dude. You’d be fine.
Fresh off of Back to the Future (my runner-up, by the way) Michael J. Fox makes you believe a teen could also be a wolf, and use that quirk to his or her advantage, suddenly excelling at basketball and becoming wildly popular.
Playing the son of a hardware store owner (and fellow wolfperson), Mike Fox crushes it as Scott Howard, a teenager who suddenly realizes an ability to become a wolf almost at will (though sometimes against it), and with the help of his enterprising best friend, Stiles Stilinski, capture the school’s attention and takes his basketball team to dizzying heights.
Typing that out loud it sounds a little crazy, but it is, and that’s the point of drive-ins. You go to escape, because making sense isn’t always fun. You go to be with other people, to let your imagination run wild, to immerse yourself in a world where things work out in the end.
Short of finding this perfect pairing at the drive-in, I will keep searching for the next best thing this summer at my local drive-in, in the dwindling moment where seeing a film outdoors from a car is still a thing that can happen on the planet Earth.
Trent spends most of his free time talking about old episodes of Saturday Night Live, reading Kurt Vonnegut, and hustling little kids at the local arcade with his Tommy-like Ms. Pac-Man skills.
Jimmy is a man of many talents: musician, comedian, and he can toss pizza like agoldurn pro! And now he can add “movie reviewer” or “blogger”, or whatever he wants to call it, to the list. The irony of his picks is that he embodies them both perfectly: a punk rock exterior with a heart of gold and great sense of humor. Jimmy’s inclusion of Parenthood may be a controversial one for a horror site, but his love of Keanu Reeves, well, that’s a universal love, and love conquers all. Enough of my rambling: take it away, Jimmy!
I feel like a fun Double Feature would be the film River’s Edge followed by Parenthood. One is a totally twisted bummer fest; the other a sarcastic, coming-of-age comedy. A little sour. A little sweet. Both great movies. And both also happen to star/feature the timeless Keanu Reeves. Yep, you read that correctly. KEANU. REEVES. Two totally different movies. What, you did not realize that he was such a diverse act-OR? Welcome to reality. Wipe your feet. Enjoy your stay.
Keanu’s role in River’s Edge is one of his greatest performances. In this film we see a confused, cynical and slightly nihilistic Keanu. And rightfully so because just after the opening credits, his buddy “wastes” (murders) his own girlfriend. Yikes! Should Keanu help Crispin Glover(!!) cover up the gruesome death? Should he snitch? Should he smoke weed and listen to Slayer while pondering these questions? Yes, lotta Slayer. This movie is filled with grey skies and a dark, brooding score; but also it contains nuggets of some of the most hilarious dialogue in cinema history. Oh! And the part where Keanu orgasms in a sleeping bag with Ione Skye is pretty, pretty funny. (Spoiler!)
Parenthood is kind of the opposite of River’s Edge. Gloom and graininess is replaced with a bright, crisp picture and setting. Sunny-time suburbia. Diane Wiest. The struggles of balancing work and family. And instead of Slayer for the soundtrack, we have Randy Newman. Now, Keanu Reeves (while not really the star of the movie) is peppered nicely throughout and breaks up some of the more tense moments with some classic Reeves comic relief. His character is still confused (not unlike River’s Edge), but this time in more of a “love struck, naive, stupid, stupid dumbass” kind of way. Naysayers might claim that this movie is kind of cheesy, but I really like it. And Parenthood would certainly be a nice palate cleanser to the bitterness of River’s Edge. So fuck you, naysayers.
Jimmy is a human being from planet Earth, but he resides in New Jersey specifically. You can find him on Twitterand you can listen to his amazing band (just one of the many he’s in) onBandcamp.
Alexa is a funny gal living in Los Angeles, doing comedy most nights and acting (“acting”) like a witch every so often on her podcast Witch Show, so it makes total sense that she would choose a couple fun, witchy flicks for her Drive-In Double Feature! Her reviews are succinct and to the point, but are still surprisingly spoiler-heavy so YOU’VE BEEN WARNED. Take it away, Alexa!
I seriously haven’t seen Practical Magic since ’98 and maybe it’s better that way. Sandra Bullock and Nicole Kidman are WITCH SISTERS who MURDER Nicole Kidman’s boyfriend and then BRING HIM BACK TO FUCKING LIFE, but of course he comes back as a DEMON ZOMBIE MAN because they clearly never watched PET SEMATARY and then Sandra Bullock falls in love with the POLICEMAN who is investigating their case! THIS IS LABELED AS A ROMANTIC COMEDY! THIS SHIT IS BONKERS!
Suspiria; ’nuff said. Take the feel good vibes you picked up from the first film and THROW THEM OUT THE FUCKING WINDOW CAUSE THESE BITCHES CRAY. This film has everything: Ominous arrivals! Questionable intentions! An epic soundtrack! Color! Fashion! Blood!
Classic Italian horror, Classic Sandy B. Witches being witches.
Alexa can currently be seen performing in several different shows on various comedy stages around L.A. She is also co-host of the podcast, Witch Show, which (witch?) can be found here on iTunes.