Movie Night: The Oscar.

Review #549: The Oscar.

Cast
Stephen Boyd (Frankie Fane), Elke Sommer (Kay Bergdahl), Milton Berle (Alfred Kapstetter), Eleanor Parker (Sophie Cantaro), Joseph Cotten (Kenneth H. Regan), Jill St. John (Laurel Scott), Tony Bennett (Kelly), Edie Adams (Trina Yale), and Ernest Borgnine (Barney Yale) Directed by Russell Rouse.

Review
In honor of the 86th Academy Awards this Sunday, I decided to review a movie with many stars (some of which who won Oscars before this movie), many cameos...and a big ego. The movie is billed as a drama, when it really is an unintentional comedy that goes so over the top in trying to be a drama, that it becomes laughable. The main problem of the movie is the unlikable characters. Aside from the main character, there are no characters to root for, none to actually feel for nor care about, and while it could be argued that there are films with unlikable characters that are actually good, this is not one of them. This is a movie that decays from beginning to end, a movie that tries to disguise its faults with cameos, basically trying to plug a hole with a band-aid. Tony Bennett is bad (one might say inept is a better term, but let's be fair, this was his film debut and consequently his only dramatic role), but with the lines (Example: "I was running out of numbers! He used 'em like Kleenex! Once, and threw 'em away!") he has to say, I can't blame him. The movie is bloated in length, self-indulgent in style, and an overall mess that almost is so bad, it's good, until it goes back into so bad, it's bad. I'd stick to the "The Nobel" by SCTV instead. Whatever you may think of the Oscars, this is a definite skip it.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Predator 2.

Review #548: Predator 2.

Cast
Danny Glover (Mike Harrigan), Kevin Peter Hall (The Predator), Gary Busey (Peter Keyes), Ruben Blades (Danny Archuleta), María Conchita Alonso (Leona Cantrell), Bill Paxton (Jerry Lambert), and Robert Davi (Phil Heinemann) Directed by Stephen Hopkins.

Review
The first Predator was a fun action packed thriller that had a good setting, fun atmosphere that soon changes, and good action sequences. Then came the sequel. No Arnold Schwarzenegger, no jungle setting, the only thing linking the two is Kevin Peter Hall as the Predator. But at least Danny Glover tries his best, he certainly is an entertaining person to watch in a movie as mediocre as this. It's hard to define the biggest problem of the movie. Is it the okay action? The non memorable characters? The idea to move the Predator to the city? It's probably all three, given that while the movie doesn't do anything too awful, it also doesn't do anything good either. At least Hall does a good performance in the suit, though Busey is probably more entertaining with his interactions with Glover. The rest of the cast isn't bad, Paxton is mildly entertaining. While the movie could've been much worse, it isn't that bad, and if you want to skip it over for Predators, you're not missing too much, I suppose.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Superman (1978).

Review #547: Superman.

Cast
Marlon Brando (Jor-El), Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor), Christopher Reeve (Clark Kent/Superman), Margot Kidder (Lois Lane), Ned Beatty (Otis), Jackie Cooper (Perry White), Glenn Ford (Jonathan Kent), Valerie Perrine (Eve Teschmacher), Phyllis Thaxter (Martha Kent), Trevor Howard (First Elder), Maria Schell (Vond-Ah), and Terence Stamp (General Zod) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged, #355 - Lethal Weapon, and #356 - Lethal Weapon 2)

Review
Of all the comic book movies I've done on this...show, I suppose, the one glaring omission has been the Superman franchise. Superman was the first major superhero feature movie made (Side note here: There had been three serials made before this movie, such as Superman (1948), Atom Man vs. Superman (1950), and Superman and the Mole Men (1951), along with animated shorts made by Fleischer Studios, a radio and television series), and the movie's success would lead to more superhero films. But anyway, how is the film itself? Let's start with the actors. Brando does well for the small amount of time he has, and his speech to his newborn son is effective, but also powerful. Hackman is a decent villain, he does pair well with Beatty, who isn't half bad in a supporting role. Christopher Reeve is just perfect in both roles, managing to act well enough to make these two personalities stand out effectively. Kidder is good, she pairs off well with Reeve, and the scene where Superman takes Lane on a flight is a really good scene that only shows the emotion the movie has. The movie has excellent effects and manages to tell a good story with only a few bumps along the way. The ending either makes Superman's character fully defined...or a cop out that is actually more confusing in how it works then infuriating. I think it's more of both, it defines that Clark/Superman is here for a reason, a point mentioned by Kent's adoptive father, in contrast to Jor-El's warning about changing history. Superman finds his destiny, and it does make sense, though the time traveling part boggles my mind. Endings aside, the movie is a fine epic that succeeds in nearly everyway possible.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Cinderella Man.

Review #546: Cinderella Man.

Cast
Russell Crowe (James J. Braddock), Renée Zellweger (Mae Braddock), Paul Giamatti (Joe Gould), Bruce McGill (James Johnston), Craig Bierko (Max Baer), Paddy Considine (Mike Wilson), David Huband (Ford Bond), Connor Price (Jay Braddock), Ariel Waller (Rosemarie Braddock), Patrick Louis (Howard Braddock), Rosemarie DeWitt (Sara Wilson), and Linda Kash (Mrs. Gould) Directed by Ron Howard (#301 - How the Grinch Stole Christmas)

Review
Damon Runyon once described the life of James J. Braddock in one quote: "In all the history of the boxing game, you'll find no human interest story to compare with the life narrative of James J. Braddock." The movie attempts to make a winner of that story, and it succeeds. It's taken over 500 reviews, but I finally reviewed a move that has Russell Crowe, and he does a good job, he dominates the movie, but he does let the other two in the main trio of main actors shine, Zellweger does well, especially in the scenes with Crowe, and Giamatti is memorable, along with really talented. The boxing action is good, it certainly looks like a match, and the interior scenes look good along with it. The movie has an old fashioned feel that certainly looks good on film. The movie may have good boxing, but it also focuses on the downturns of the Great Depression and Braddock's family, and the scenes make the movie more whole, it doesn't bring the film down, it just gives it a new voice to keep on going. This is a good film that manages to be both entertaining and warming.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Shaft (2000).

Review #545: Shaft (2000).

Cast
Samuel L. Jackson (John Shaft), Vanessa Williams (Carmen Vasquez), Jeffrey Wright (Peoples Hernandez), Christian Bale (Walter Wade, Jr), Richard Roundtree (Uncle John), Busta Rhymes (Rasaan), Toni Collette (Diane Palmieri), Pat Hingle (Dennis Bradford), Dan Hedaya (Jack Roselli), Ruben Santiago-Hudson (Jimmy Groves), Josef Sommer (Curt Flemming), and Lynne Thigpen (Carla Howard) Directed by John Singleton.

Review
Shaft is strangely not a remake of the notable 1971 film, instead a sequel (The 1990's/2000's/2010's were a hotbed for remakes of films, in fact, there's a RoboCop remake in theaters right now, remakes of films 20-80 years old are common), and hey, the original star from the '71 film (Roundtree) even makes an appearance. For those who don't know, Shaft was a franchise in the 1970's (originally based off the novel of the same name by Ernest Tidyman), consisting of three films: Shaft (1971), Shaft's Big Score, and Shaft in Africa, along with a television series. So after all that history (or whatever), how is the film itself? It has its moments of good action, and Jackson does a wonderful job. But what makes the movie stand out is its (unintentional) hilarity that I sometimes received from the movie. Some of the scenes were effective, but they were also hilarious because of how over the top it could get, the way that the characters react to the action made me laugh. It's funny how Christian Bale went from this film to Batman in only 5 years, just shows that anyone can be Batman (Isn't that right, Daredevil-I mean Ben Affleck?), given the circumstances. The movie has a good deal of style and the right amount of charm (I do like the scenes with Jackson and Roundtree, from...nephew to uncle. I guess Shaft had a brother who named his son in honor of John) to make for a fun film.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: In the Heat of the Night.

Review #544: In the Heat of the Night.

Cast
Sidney Poitier (Virgil Tibbs), Rod Steiger (Bill Gillespie), Warren Oates (Sam Wood), Lee Grant (Leslie Colbert), Larry Gates (Eric Endicott), James Patterson (Lloyd Purdy), William Schallert (Webb Schubert), Beah Richards (Mama Caleba/Mrs. Bellamy), Peter Whitney (George Courtney), Kermit Murdock (H.E. Henderson), Larry D. Mann (Watkins), Quentin Dean (Delores Purdy), and Anthony James (Ralph Henshaw) Directed by Norman Jewison (#127 - Rollerball and #273 - The Cincinnati Kid)

Review

The movie has two notable moments, a quote: "They call me MISTER Tibbs" (Which would also be used as the title for the sequel), and when Tibbs slaps Endicott back, eliciting shock. The movie has other brilliant moments as well, such as when Steiger and Poitier share a scene inside Steiger's character's house, which turns from the two drinking to them talking about loneliness, which is a poignant scene just for the two and their interactions in that and their other scenes in the movie. The actors are good, especially Poitier and Steiger. They have a good deal of tension in their performances, and the supporting cast is fitting for a film with tension like this. The last scenes may end the movie maybe too quick, but the movie still has tension, and a good deal of entertainment value to it. In the Heat of the Night is such an influential film when it all boils down to it, and this is a really slick but classic film.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Valentine.

Review #543: Valentine.

Cast
David Boreanaz (Adam Carr), Denise Richards (Paige Prescott), Marley Shelton (Kate Davies), Jessica Capshaw (Dorothy Wheeler), Jessica Cauffiel (Lily Voigh), Katherine Heigl (Shelley Fisher), Hedy Burress (Ruthie Walker), Fulvio Cecere (Detective Leon Vaughn), Daniel Cosgrove (Campbell Morris), and Johnny Whitworth (Max Raimi) Directed by Jamie Blanks.

Review
So yeah, I hope everyone had a decent Friday, regardless of the harbinger of annoyance, Valentine's Day. So in (dis) honor of the so called holiday, I'm reviewing a movie...called Valentine. At least I'm not reviewing Valentine's Day (or My Bloody Valentine), so there's that. So yeah, a slasher film that has some relation with a holiday, clearly such an original concept (Except for some other films with holiday relation like Black Christmas, April Fool's Day, Thanksgiving (A trailer, but still), Halloween, etc.), too bad the movie stinks. The cast don't work well with each other, and they aren't interesting to watch, since what's the point when it's certain that all of them have a 99-100% of dying. The characters themselves are stale, unlikable (except for Shelton's character, but still not enough to save the movie), and disposable. The movie might've been better if their were comedic elements, but now I'm just thinking of Scream. The killer himself isn't really threatening, he just trudges around, wearing a mask that while I know is a Cupid's mask (real clever), isn't really scary, just laughable. Boreanaz is probably the only notable actor (Unless of course you've never watched Angel or Bones, like me, in that case the only notable actor is Denise Richards, for The World Is Not Enough), and he actually does try in this film, though it's not enough. The movie is never scary, given that since it's easily predictable where the killer is and when the characters will die, there's no suspense. You'd think I'd care that the killer actually gets away with the murders, but given the dull nature of the movie and its lack of surprises of who the killer was, it's best to forget the movie, but not before trashing it.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: World War Z.

Review #542: World War Z.

Cast
Brad Pitt (Gerry Lane), Mireille Enos (Karin Lane), Daniella Kertesz (Segen), James Badge Dale (Captain Speke), Ludi Boeken (Jurgen Warmbrunn), Matthew Fox (Parajumper), Fana Mokoena (Thierry Umutoni), David Morse (Ex-CIA Agent), Elyes Gabel (Andrew Fassbach), and Peter Capaldi (W.H.O. Doctor) Directed by Marc Forster (#384 - Quantum of Solace)

Review

Talking about the book the movie was "adapted" from is pointless, only because it apparently took only the name of the book, with no relation to the book's plot, thus the way the movie adapted the book means nothing in the rating of this film. World War Z has an interesting premise, a war between humans and zombies...at least I thought it was that before watching it. In reality, it's a thriller that sometimes has action, but maybe not enough action. Pitt is at least entertaining, and the cast isn't bad (*insert your Peter Capaldi is the 12th Doctor joke here*), the movie isn't undercut by the cast, it's just not always interesting. It's an okay film, and the zombie attack on the plane is at least interesting to watch, but the zombies to me, while at least quick (slow zombies could be killed really easily), seem to growl really silly, which sometimes undercuts the terror. I'm still wondering why there were no tanks around, but I probably missed that reason for a vehicle that could crush the zombies. The "twist" ending is sort of clever, though admittedly, it could be regarded a plot hole as well. SPOILER ALERT: Sick people are apparently immune to zombies. Why? Zombies don't even have brains, why are they so selective? Regardless, the movie isn't bad, it's just underwhelming, and the ending feels sort of rushed, but I digress. It's an okay movie, but there are probably better zombie movies around. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: A Hard Day's Night.

Review #541: A Hard Day's Night.

Cast
The Beatles [John Lennon • Paul McCartney • George Harrison • Ringo Starr], with Wilfrid Brambell (Grandfather), Norman Rossington (Norm), John Junkin (Shake), Victor Spinetti (T.V. Director), and Anna Quayle (Millie) Directed by Richard Lester.

Review (since modified - editorial, 2023)
This was the third feature effort from Richard Lester, who had been born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and had studied and graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a degree in Clinical Psychology. He got involved in the television industry in 1950 and later moved to England in the decade. One of the main attractions of Lester for the Beatles was his work on a short film called The Running Jumping & Standing Still Film (1959). He directed his first feature film with the musical act film in It's Trad, Dad! (1962). The movie was a hit before it even came out (owing to pre-sales), but there was always a plan to do more than one Beatles film. He would follow up this Beatles film with Help! (1965). 

Ah yes, the Beatles. Fifty years ago on this day, The Beatles made their first appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show, and in honor of that, I'm reviewing this film. I don't know exactly what I expected from a film like this, but I was nevertheless surprised at the result. This is a strange, but clever movie that is extremely entertaining to watch and to listen to. The Beatles themselves are entertaining as entertainers but also as people, and the screenplay seems really natural, really in touch with the film's tone. The music is good, it flows well, and it adds a depth of style to the movie without just seeming like one of those 1950s rock music of acts and little else. The supporting cast is entertaining (especially Brambell), and the comedy is pretty nice, fun to watch all the antics in the film. Lester does a good job directing and the movie has a good pace along with a good heart. This is truly a classic and fun for anyone wanting more of the Beatles, or just for a good ol' musical with a great deal of fun.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Lego Movie.

Review #540: The Lego Movie.

Cast
Chris Pratt (Emmet Brickowski), Will Ferrell (Lord Business and "The Man Upstairs"), Elizabeth Banks (Wyldstyle), Will Arnett (Batman), Nick Offerman (Metal Beard), Alison Brie (Uni-Kitty), Charlie Day (Benny), Liam Neeson (Bad Cop/Good Cop and Pa Cop), Morgan Freeman (Vitruvius), Channing Tatum (Superman), Jonah Hill (Green Lantern), Cobie Smulders (Wonder Woman), Craig Berry (Blake), David Burrows (Octan Robot), and Jadon Sand (Finn) Directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller.

Review
I grew up with LEGOs. I loved how even though it seemed to simple to build with, it was actually a complex but still excellent system, and I do still have them in my house somewhere. So naturally, I went to go see the movie based on them. Movies based off toys don't have the best track record here (#057-#058 Transformers 1-2, #201 - G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, #442 - The Garbage Pail Kids Movie, though #190 - The Transformers: The Movie wasn't half bad), but I went to the theater to see if the movie could break that trend. People who go to theaters have their traditions such as making noise, stealing discarded popcorn from people who've left the movie after it ends, commentating on the film, etc, etc. One of my traditions is to notice the amount of people waiting with me in line for a film...an hour before being allowed to go enter the theater, which either teaches the lesson to forever hate lines...or realize how big hype can be. And this film certainly does live up to the hype. The animation is beautifully done, meshing computer and the minifigure mannerisms that make Lego half of what is excellently. The cast is really excellent, Pratt does a fine job for such a normal but still special character. Ferrell is fun to hear, and the live action scenes he shares with Jadon Sand are touching and really effective. The movie has many moments of comedy, along with many moments of brilliance, and of course many moments of action, all three aspects make for a supreme combo of fun.The things that happen in this film really do bring me back to my younger days, hearing about the danger of gluing bricks together, having an average man be a hero, even the idea of a Lego Movie sounds like what I and probably others always wanted to do when we were younger. We probably didn't actually film these movies (Always hide your tracks in case it becomes an Old Shame years later), but yeah. The movie's greatest strength is the love and care the filmmakers have for the subject matter, and combined with the multitudes of people at my theater laughing and loving this movie, The Lego Movie is a great experience to watch, and is a delightful surprise for young and old. I may heap a high rating for this film, but in this case, I don't mind.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: A Bug's Life.

Review #539: A Bug's Life.

Cast
Dave Foley (Flik), Kevin Spacey (Hopper), Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Princess Atta), Hayden Panettiere (Princess Dot), Phyllis Diller (the Queen), Richard Kind (Molt), David Hyde Pierce (Slim), Joe Ranft (Heimlich), Denis Leary (Francis), Jonathan Harris (Manny), Madeline Kahn (Gypsy), Bonnie Hunt (Rosie), Mike McShane (Tuck and Roll), John Ratzenberger (P. T. Flea), and Brad Garrett (Dim) Directed by John Lasseter (#440 - Toy Story and #441 - Toy Story 2) and Andrew Stanton (#155 - Finding Nemo and #222 - WALL-E)

Review
Comparisons to Antz (#254) aside, A Bug's Life is a fairly decent film to watch with everyone. Is is better than Antz? That depends on what exactly you want. Antz seems to spring to darker themes, but is still a decent flick that works for the most part. A Bug's Life seems to be more bright, but it also has a charm to it, it may not be the best Pixar film, but like other Pixar films, it leaves an impression on you, it's a film that is certainly entertaining. The cast is good, Foley works well, eccentric, but he does a good job. The rest of the cast is good, Spacey is a fine villain, and the cast interacts well with each other. The animation is good (The fact this was made only 16 years ago makes me feel slightly older), and the movie is certainly entertaining enough. So yeah, don't pick Antz or A Bug's Life, pick both movies, and take this film for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Arthur 2: On the Rocks.

Review #538: Arthur 2: On the Rocks.

Cast
Dudley Moore (Arthur Bach), Liza Minnelli (Linda Marolla Bach), John Gielgud (Hobson), Geraldine Fitzgerald (Martha Bach), Kathy Bates (Mrs. Canby), Paul Benedict (Fairchild), Stephen Elliott (Bert Johnson), Cynthia Sikes (Susan Johnson), Ted Ross (Bitterman), and Barney Martin (Ralph Marolla) Directed by Bud Yorkin.

Review
I have reviewed this particular character before, with the remake (#203) which while I may have given a bit too much credit, wasn't awful. I then reviewed the original Arthur (#206), and...yeah, I have a confession to make. After watching the original Arthur once more just recently before doing the sequel, I realized that the first one is actually better then what I first thought. Moore does a very entertaining performance. He of course can be hilarious to himself and others, but the scenes he shares with Gielgud are brilliant and showcases Moore at his best. And Arthur's Theme (Best That You Can Do) is a really good song, especially for a film like that. Steve Gordon did such a good job in sadly the only film he directed. So yeah, I will change my ranking for Arthur, all because of my regret.  And then there's this sequel. Make no mistake, I won't ever revoke my thoughts on a film like Arthur 2: On the Rocks. A seven year wait, and all you get...is a lemon of a sequel. Does it have its moments? Sure, even really awful movies have their brief moments (Except for of course, #442 - The Garbage Pail Kids Movie, which has no merit because that would require me to let out my repressed memories of that film), and the beginning of this film at least tries to make an effort. Then...Arthur goes broke.

After that, the movie segues into even more mediocre quality, until of course it reaches the last possible trick it has, John Gielgud...who appears an hour into the movie (as a drunken hallucination, mind you), and leaves after eight or so minutes. Is he funny? Sort of, but by then, the movie has sunk to a depressive quality that makes you wonder why was this even made. And yes of course Arthur gets his money back, if he didn't, the movie would end with him (and the audience to a lesser extent) doomed. Arthur doomed because the light at the end of the tunnel turned out to be an oncoming train, and the audience, who just realized their time was just wasted. It's all too predictable, half the time you're just waiting for him to get his money back because seeing him try to make the best of his...drunken state, while a novel attempt at trying to twist things up, is not very entertaining. Minnelli is okay, I suppose. At least Stephen Elliott (who is okay, delusional, but okay) returns, though his daughter played by Jill Eikenberry in the original didn't. Sikes is okay, though she can't save the movie. Moore seems more aged, seemingly tired of this role, he even disowned the film after it was released. The movie seems to have a few subplots: An adoption subplot, Bach's attempts to get his money subplot, and Bach's alcoholism struggle, none of the subplots are great, the movie tries so hard, and yet it falls so flat. This is a sad movie when it all comes down to it, it's not awful, it's just a disappointment. If you want to see more of Arthur, I'd recommend it. If you want to see more sequels to movies that were probably forgotten after they were watched, I'd suggest Staying Alive, Grease 2, or Airplane II: The Sequel.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Bride of the Monster.

Review #537: Bride of the Monster.

Cast
Bela Lugosi (Dr. Eric Vornoff), Tor Johnson (Lobo), Tony McCoy (Lt. Dick Craig), Loretta King (Janet Lawton), Harvey B. Dunn (Capt. Robbins), George Becwar (Prof. Strowski), Paul Marco (Kelton), and Don Nagel (Martin) Directed by Ed Wood (#183 - Plan 9 from Outer Space and #536 - Glen or Glenda)

Review

Oh how the mighty have fallen. From Dracula to...mad scientist, Bride of the Monster was Bela Lugosi's last speaking role (With silent roles in his last two films afterwards, which were The Black Sleep and Plan 9, respectively), and he goes out with a film that is merely a whimper. Plan 9 was actually more entertaining then this, while Glen or Glenda was at least trying to convey a subject. This is just another mad scientist film that only succeeds in having laughable moments. I think my favorite moment is when the octopus (that is rubber when interacting with the actors, but stock footage when not, which is so jarring when compared as the two have little to no resemblance) attacks Lugosi's character. Not only is the octopus not moving (The actors move the thing to make it look like it's flailing its arms), a lightning bolt strikes the two...causing a nuclear explosion. Lugosi certainly hams it up, especially when he talks about making a perfect race of "atomic super men", while having a little laugh afterwards. It's sad to see him in this role, doing really silly "threatening" faces to the camera when only 20 or so years ago, he was a creepy, but great Dracula. The title doesn't make any sense, I get the Bride part, but Lugosi only turns into the monster with about 10 minutes left in the film. Maybe they mean Lobo, but that doesn't really make any sense either. Wood directs a typical 50's film that only survives from the bounds of obscurity due to it's awful making. And so ends Bela Lugosi Week. What have I learned from this week? That even if the films were awful (Only two of the films I reviewed turned out to be any good, though it's arguable to add Glen or Glenda for its awfulness), Lugosi always made an effort and was usually the best or the most memorable part of the movie, no matter what it was. I hope you enjoyed this Week, I promise at least one theme week in the upcoming months.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Glen or Glenda.

Review #536: Glen or Glenda.

Cast
Bela Lugosi (The Scientist), Timothy Farrell (Narrator/Dr. Alton), Ed Wood (Glen/Glenda), Dolores Fuller (Barbara), Lyle Talbot (Inspector Warren), Charlie Crafts (Johnny), and Conrad Brooks (Banker / Reporter / Pickup Artist / Bearded Drag) Directed by Ed Wood (#183 - Plan 9 from Outer Space)

Review

Glen or Glenda was Ed Wood's first film that he directed, and boy, it is a real weird one. Inspired by the story of Christine Jorgenson, producer George Weiss decided to exploit it for a film of his own, sans Jorgenson. Wood was recruited to star and direct this film, the only one he did not also produce, also recruiting Bela Lugosi (in the last stages of his career) to star as...a scientist with the most bizarre dialogue ever written for a non narrator, and the way he says "Beware! Beware of the big green dragon that sits on your doorstep. He eats little boys... Puppy dog tails, and BIG FAT SNAILS... Beware... Take care... Beware!" makes me laugh. Lugosi may ham it up (Did I mention at one point he says "Pull the Strings" over footage of buffalo over and over?), but he at least looks like he's having some fun. Or maybe it's the money he was paid that made him satisfied. Lugosi is not the narrator though, that goes to Timothy Farrell, who doesn't fare any better. The dream sequence is either brilliant in its own way for trying to portray the subject matter, or idiotic because it only pads the movie even longer, and I guess in a way it's both brilliant and idiotic, but oh well. Wood (starring under the fake name Daniel Davis) isn't awful, though his technique of making people disappear wouldn't garner any praise from anyone. So which Wood film is better (a subjective word in this case), this or Plan 9? They both are inherently terrible, but Plan 9 is ultimately a smudge better, even if it is for it's mind blowing stupidity that works over Glen or Glenda's valiant, but failed attempt at drama. There is just one more film left for this week, and yes, it is another Ed Wood film. Stay tuned, folks.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.