The Desperate Hours.

Review #2551: The Desperate Hours.

Cast: 

Humphrey Bogart (Glenn Griffin), Fredric March (Daniel C. Hilliard), Arthur Kennedy (Deputy Sheriff Jesse Bard), Martha Scott (Ellie Hilliard), Dewey Martin (Hal Griffin), Gig Young (Chuck Wright), Mary Murphy (Cindy Hilliard), Richard Eyer (Ralphy Hilliard), Robert Middleton (Samuel Kobish), Walter Baldwin (George Patterson), Whit Bissell (FBI Agent Carson), Ray Teal (State Police Lieutenant), and Ray Collins (Sheriff Masters) Directed by William Wyler (#509 - Roman Holiday, #1022 - Jezebel, #1360 - Mrs. Miniver, #1368 - The Best Years of Our Lives)

Review:  

In 1952, there was a family in Whitemarsh Township, Pennsylvania that encountered three escaped convicts (Joseph and Ballard Nolen, Elmer Schuer) that held them hostage for 19 hours. The Hill family did not receive harm, and the convicts were soon apprehended (read: two of them died in a shootout in New York while the other got years in jail) after leaving the house. Influenced by the ordeal, Joseph Hayes wrote a novel in 1953 called The Desperate Hours that soon saw a theater production in 1955 (set in Indianapolis*), which saw Robert Montgomery stage it while featuring Karl Malden & Nancy Coleman as the parents opposite the convict leader played by Paul Newman. For the film, they wanted Spencer Tracy to play the second role opposite Bogart, but neither wanted to yield top billing, so you get Fredric March instead. You might say this is Bogart coming full circle, as his turn in The Petrified Forest (1934 play and 1936 film) as a gangster on the run was the one that catapulted him into public attention (of course, months before this film was released, Bogart starred in a televised production of that play); diagnosed with esophageal cancer in 1956, this was his penultimate role prior to his death the following year. This was the fourth of seven movies in the 1950s for Wyler, sandwiched between Best Picture nominee films Roman Holiday [1953] and Friendly Persuasion [1956]. Hayes wrote the screenplay for the film (various others have been listed as doing contributions, although this might not be correct). Made on a reported budget of over $2 million, the movie was not exactly a hit with audiences. In later years, it was adapted into a TV film in 1967, a film for India with 36 Ghante [1974] and a 1990 American remake with Desperate Hours that had Michael Cimino as director.

Sure, it probably doesn't hit as well as other thrillers, particularly since it strains a bit of credibility at a certain point in its housebound trappings, but you'll get a few interesting performances to make a decent time regardless with the Hilli(ard) family. It's a thriller not so much about when the cops get into the picture but instead a thriller about if that would actually turn out well for the family at all. It mainly rests on the shoulders of Bogart to make it all work with such an unsettling nature that basically sets the tension on the same level as cutting through butter, doing so with such smoothness that you can't take your eyes off him and his weary eyes, regardless of how movies like this were inevitably going to go back then. March does hold it together in a different type of intensity that wants to hold it all together for the sake of his family that is fairly palpable to where you probably can see him working fine over if it had been Tracy instead. It's a bout of men trying to assert who is the bigger man that happens to involve spectators that could get in harm's way (well, in a movie made a few decades later, probably more so for "harm", but still). Scott and others are more just ordinary, although there is a few moments of sophistication from Young* to go with piggishness from Middleton. It's a big house to set a film in, which is why there are moments spent away from the house because, well, you can only go so far with tension unless you set in the workplace (or, in one instance, the dispatching of one of the criminals). By the time it closes out its 113-minute runtime, you've closed the book on a movie that is fairly solid in lean suspense involving the threat of those with the supposed power and strength to hold you down in your place of residence before the inevitable hit of reality (for a movie at least) steps in. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

song of the day!

*For whatever reason, Life magazine published an article about the doubt of the Broadway show and had pictures of the actors in the house that the family lived in when they were held hostage and called the play a "reenactment". The Hills decided to sue them for violating the privacy law in New York. It eventually wound up in the Supreme Court, where Richard Nixon actually argued for the Hills. Narrowly, in 1967, the court found in favor of Time, Inc.

*The play hasn't been on Broadway since. Incidentally, Sammy Davis Jr did do a run of it for a playhouse a few times: Sammy Davis, Jr. - Theatre - “The Desperate Hours”

*This is the first time I've covered a movie with Gig Young in it. Young, a future Academy Award winner, was plagued by alcoholism in the later years of his life. In 1978, he murdered his wife and killed himself at the age of 64.

Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953).

Review #2549: Gentlemen Prefer Blondes.

Cast: 

Jane Russell (Dorothy Shaw), Marilyn Monroe (Lorelei Lee), Charles Coburn (Sir Francis "Piggy" Beekman), Elliott Reid (Ernie Malone), Tommy Noonan (Gus Esmond Jr), George Winslow (Henry Spofford III), Marcel Dalio (the magistrate), Taylor Holmes (Mr. Esmond Sr), Norma Varden (Lady Beekman), and Howard Wendell (Watson) Directed by Howard Hawks (#951 - The Big Sleep, #1352 - His Girl Friday, #1399 - Rio Bravo, #1687 - O. Henry's Full House, #1773 - Red River, #2060 - Bringing Up Baby)

Review: 

Sure, Howard Hawks made a musical. Apparently, Hawks had one more film he owed to 20th Century Fox, so it fell to this. The film is based on the 1949 Broadway musical of the same name (with the book by Joseph Fields and Anita Loos, lyrics by Leo Robin, and music by Jule Styne), which in turn was based on the hit 1925 novel (originally serialized as sketches in Harper's Bazaar) that had been written by Anita Loos about, well, a blonde gold-digger and a flapper. Sure, the film was not going to retain the original Broadway duo of Carol Channing and Yvonne Adair as the two stars, because Fox wanted Betty Grable and Ginger Rogers, but what they saw from Niagara (1953) with Monroe led to them going with her. Hawks stated he did none of the production numbers on purpose, which were staged by Jack Cole, once called the "the Father of Theatrical Jazz Dance"; he ultimately worked with Monroe on several films all the way to his last with Let's Make Love [1960]. In his book Hawks on Hawks, he described Monroe as "the most frightened little girl who had no confidence in her ability", with filming basically relying on the patience of Hawks and Russell, although he said he did have fun on the film. In 1955, United Artists released Gentlemen Marry Brunettes (as based on, what else, an Anita Loos novel) that had Russell in a different role paired with Jeanne Crain that had Cole involved but with Richard Sale as director, which did not end up as a major success.

This is one of those movies that I find myself waffling over how good it is, mainly because my patience for musicals is not nearly as great as I wish it was (I think when I was younger I never really got off the high of Singin' in the Rain). With this movie, it rides well on the shenanigans from a fairly game duo of leading women that make worthwhile friends from the jump that is far more curious than, say, seeing where the actual ending goes. It zips along with a few musical numbers of varying quality (mostly good, but I think we know which one is the most discussed) that has some glamour (along with mostly authentic singing* from the actual stars) for 91 minutes. To be honest, for me, Russell is the more interesting of the two leads when it comes to timing*, because she is quite funny without having to strain at actually having fun with the people around her or the good friendship with Monroe, because they exchange the type of pleasantries and hijinks that is alluringly curious. Monroe is just as fun, a real go-getter with the natural ability to just exude bubbly charm without being swallowed up in ditzy generalizations, which helps when considering the ditzy qualities that actually around with the prominent men in the film (Reid, Coburn, Noonan, although at least Holmes is supposed to be stuffy and Winslow, well, he's a kid). Basically, both Russell and Monroe glide through the film as if they were laughing the whole way through. Hell, they both get to do renditions of "Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend" (Russell in a wig for a delightfully funny scene near the end and, well, you know the sequence with Monroe in a pink dress), what's not to like? The diamonds may be somebody's best friend, but it's the dynamic between the two in that authentic sense of self that makes it all go together far more than wondering what the fuss about tiaras are about. As a whole, it's basically a movie that freewheels on the charm of Russell and Monroe with a few fine songs and some sparkly glamour to basically ride to the finish line with excitement for those who buy into its charms.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day (obvious choice)!

*Yes, the last musical I saw in theaters was Cats (2019), why do you ask?

*Varied claims say that Gloria Wood and Marni Nixon provided a bit of help with "Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend"

Pickup on South Street.

Review #2541: Pickup on South Street.

Cast: 

Richard Widmark (Skip McCoy), Jean Peters (Candy), Thelma Ritter (Moe Williams), Murvyn Vye (Captain Dan "Tiger"), Richard Kiley (Joey), Willis Bouchey (Zara), Milburn Stone (Winoki), Vic Perry (Lightning Louie a.k.a. "Godkin"), Harry Carter (Detective Dietrich), George E. Stone (Willie, police desk clerk), George Eldredge (Fenton), and John Gallaudet (Detective Lieutenant Campion) Directed by Samuel Fuller (#1790 - Park Row, #2234 - The Steel Helmet, #2400 - The Baron of Arizona)

Review: 

"People living on the edge of society don't give a damn about politics. I wanted my film to be told through the eyes of the powerless. Cold war paranoia? Hell, these crooks were more interested in just getting by."

Sure, it's time again to encounter a Samuel Fuller movie. Pickup on South Street was his sixth feature as a director. With the finishing of Park Row, Fuller, under contract with Darryl F. Zanuck at 20th Century Fox, was approached with a script called "Blaze of Glory" by Dwight Taylor (a former reporter for The New Yorker before becoming a writer with films such as When Tomorrow Comes [1939] and I Wake Up Screaming [1941]) about a woman lawyer falling in love with her criminal client in a murder trial. He liked it, but as a newspaper man in his old days, he knew those cases take time to play out, so he instead wanted to do a film about an outlaw and their gal but on the scale of small-time thieves. Alluding to hot button issues of the time such as fears of communists and secrets being sold (such as the mostly recent case of Klaus Fuchs), Fuller stated later that he wanted to "take a poke at the idiocy of the cold war climate of the fifties". Incidentally, the working title was "Pick-pocket", but executives thought it sounded too "European", so it eventually landed on a title that was inspired by Fuller's special memories of South Street in New York (in 1959, French filmmaker Robert Bresson directed a movie, called, well, Pickpocket). He soon did research on pickpockets through NYPD Detective Dan Campion, who he based the character Tiger on*. Fuller was given credit for the screenplay while Taylor was credited with the story. Despite grumblings from FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover about the nature of the film (which never refers to the FBI at any point), the movie breezed through to release without a hitch, which saw it make double its budget of $780,000 back with audiences. In 1967, 20th Century Fox released The Cape Town Affair, a film shot in South Africa that basically was a remake (with Fuller being co-credited for the screenplay with "Harold Medford") that had James Brolin and Jacqueline Bissett cast in the lead roles alongside Claire Trevor.

All Fuller cared about was making a thriller about people on the margins, and he sure got it here with a satisfying feature that has a dark streak in people that wanted to get by with what they had. Even in a movie filmed on a set, you still have the feeling of seeing a tremendous city of strange seediness. It's a noir movie that is both rich and lean enough for all to enjoy for 80 minutes. It all rides on the cool nature of Widmark (who worked with Fuller once more with Hell and High Water [1954]), who is the usual cocksure self that is easy enough to like for what he does in the long run of tricks and guile. He doesn't care for flag-waving or people trying to get one over on him because if anybody is going to be the conman (physically or emotionally), it's going to be him. Fuller wanted an "average-looking woman" for the lead, which namely meant not wanting Ava Gardner or Betty Grable (contemporary articles apparently stated Grable rejected it, while Fuller's autobiography claimed otherwise) and landed on the bow-legged walking of Peters, who I guess is the kind of person who could make a guy like Widmark try to walk a semi-straight and narrow path, even if they have some offbeat scenes together; at one point, trying to confront someone breaking into his little shabby place. Widmark socks the first thing he sees, which happens to be Peters. Ritter (in an award nominated role) makes for quality support as a stoolie that still has a semblance of charm that shines right through to her final scene, an informant of the streets with standards right to the bitter end. The adversaries are the usual type of crook to lie within the lines of noir (really it could be anybody besides Commies), even if at a certain point you know where it's going to go. With a cast like this, it's got something for everyone with the type of people that show up every now and then. As a whole, if you like the hard touches of Fuller in tabloid narratives and being straight to the point, you'll have plenty to appreciate here. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*Daniel J. Campion served 27 years on the force, which saw him serve as a detective on the pickpocket squad beginning in 1929. He retired in 1954, and died in 1958 at the age of 54. 

The Trouble with Harry.

Review #2509: The Trouble with Harry.

Cast: 

Edmund Gwenn (Capt. Albert Wiles), John Forsythe (Sam Marlowe), Shirley MacLaine (Jennifer Rogers), Mildred Natwick (Miss Ivy Gravely), Mildred Dunnock (Mrs. Wiggs), Jerry Mathers (Arnie Rogers), Royal Dano (Deputy Sheriff Calvin Wiggs), and Parker Fennelly (Millionaire)

Produced and Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, #964 - The Ring (1927), #965 - Downhill, #970 - Mr. and Mrs. Smith, #977 - Frenzy, #1343 - The 39 Steps, #1739 - The Birds, #1828 - Rebecca, #2014 - The Lady Vanishes, #2032 - The Man Who Knew Too Much, #2374 - Blackmail [1929])

Review: 

"With Harry, I took melodrama out of the pitch-black night and brought it out into the sunshine. It's as if I had set up a murder alongside a rustling brook and spilled a drop of blood into the clear water. These contrasts establish a counterpart; they elevate the commonplace in life to a higher level."

I suppose it is hard to be the ugly duckling of a string of movies, but The Trouble with Harry is certainly a curious film in the work of Alfred Hitchcock. Of the eleven movies Hitchcock directed in the 1950s, it served as his only comedy (and one of just two that weren't thrillers, and the other was the based-on-a-true-story The Wrong Man [1956]). Of course, it wasn't his first comedy, as evidenced by Mr. & Mrs. Smith (1941), but Hitchcock apparently was quite keen on doing this film the way he wanted, complete with doing it in VistaVision with primary filming in Vermont (well, at least until they needed leaves on the trees or scenes in a certain gym). There were a few firsts here too. This was the first Hitchcock movie with music by Bernard Herrmann, who he would work with all the way to Marnie (1964). It was also the feature film debut of Shirley MacLaine*. She was not even in her twenties when she moved to New York to try out acting, which had her go from a bit role in Me and Juliet on Broadway to being the understudy-turned-star of The Pajama Game (due to an ankle injury of the star). The result of stepping into the role on Broadway attracted attention by Hal Wallis that eventually saw her signed to a contract with Paramount Pictures (and, well, Hitchcock apparently was interested to do a film with a charming unknown). Based on the 1949 novel of the same name by Jack Trevor Story, John Michael Hayes wrote the screenplay in his third collaboration with Hitchcock (having previously done the screenplay for Rear Window [1954], To Catch a Thief [1955] before doing The Man Who Knew Too Much [1956). While the movie was not a big hit in the States, it did play fine in Europe for years and apparently the film was one of Hitchcock's personal favorites. Hitchcock had the film rights until his death, whereupon it made the rounds in reissuing in the 1980s. 

You might call it a morbid little movie or one of Hitchcock's more mellow efforts, one that might actually be thought of as filled with whimsical nature. So yes, it is a pretty warm and fairly enjoyable affair (one that even can thread the needle of suggestion when one character asks if they can sketch them in the nude). The body is there just to be there, because the mystery is peeling the layers of these peculiar people in this landscape (yes, even with some studio shots, you get some neat views of the autumn season) for 99 minutes. You either are with the film in its casual sly nature for all the things that come with a ride that basically handles death as if it really was just a case of "so it goes" (yes I am cribbing from Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five that had its own views about death, but, well, I actually did read that in college). Leading the way is Gwenn in one of his swansongs. This was among the last of Gwenn's films as an actor, as he appeared in two more movies (and one episode of Hitchcock's Alfred Hitchcock Presents) prior to his death in 1959 at the age of 81. He deftly handles it with the solid professionalism that comes with selling someone who really can just coast with some of the offbeat lines that come in observation and newfound zest, which probably overshadows Forsythe and his offbeat non-conformism (at least he wasn't going for "beatnik") a bit by comparison. Even as the youngest of the ensemble, MacLaine holds her own with a sense of odd grace and the type of confidence that leaves one invested in their lives and the wayward path that might come with being paired with Forsythe. Natwick rounds it out with solid dignity and understated charm, at least when one doesn't see the considerable age difference [28 years] between her and Gwenn. Rounding it out is Dano pulling out the humorless dry authority figure that mostly balances out the whims had by the main quartet, which I guess works out to how it goes in our everyday lives in sobering qualities. In general, it might not be among Hitchcock's best of the best, but it is a curious film you should seek out, one that has some amusing moments within a film full of peculiar characters brought to life with useful energy and a leisurely pace to make it all matter at the end.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Starting now, we're doing a song of the day. Enjoy at your own risk.

*Yes, that would be the younger sister of Warren Beatty. Go figure each actor would use modifications of their names for films, as she would use a modification of her middle name (MacLean) while, well, someone took off a "t" from their last name of Beaty

Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple.

Review #2493: Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple.

Cast: 

Toshiro Mifune (Miyamoto Musashi), Kōji Tsuruta (Sasaki Kojirō), Mariko Okada (Akemi), Kaoru Yachigusa (Otsu), Michiyo Kogure (Dayū Yoshino), Mitsuko Mito (Okō, Akemi's mother), Akihiko Hirata (Seijūrō Yoshioka), Daisuke Katō (Tōji Gion), Kurōemon Onoe (priest Takuan (Takuan Sōhō), Sachio Sakai (Matahachi Honiden), Yū Fujiki (Denshichirō Yoshioka), Machiko Kitagawa (Kogure), Eiko Miyoshi (Osugi, Matahachi's mother), and Eijirō Tōno (Shishido Baiken) Directed by Hiroshi Inagaki (#2173 - Samurai I: Musashi Miyamoto)

Review: 

Sure, let's do another samurai movie. You might remember Samurai I: Musashi Miyamoto (1954) utilized the epic novel Musashi by Eiji Yoshikawa (about the life and deeds of swordsman Miyamoto Musashi) for a worthwhile film that obviously had to keep going. A variety of people returned to do this film ranging from its director in Hiroshi Inagaki and its writer Tokuhei Wakao (who co-wrote the last one with Inagaki as based on a play by Hideji Hojo), its assistant director in Jun Fukuda and select members of its cast. You get some action pretty quickly in the film with the opening that sees the kusarigama (a chain-sickle) get used up before one sees the lead engage himself in self-development while also trying to take on a school of swordsmanship. One year later saw the release of Samurai III: Duel at Ganryu Island, which I take it will surely have an involving duel between Musashi and Sasaki Kojirō, who apparently was described as the toughest opponent he ever faced (of course all of this happens before Musashi even turned 30, because the actual man ended up dying in 1645 in his sixties, in a cave, from what might have been lung cancer).

Sure, you might wonder where the path of enlightenment comes from for a movie that involves a good deal of slashing. Well, there is meant to be a path for the pilgrims who wish to learn the ways of what a samurai are besides thinking it means to turn people into dead slabs (it doesn't involve blood, but in fairness, it was the 1950s). Mifune is now going through the road of stoicism that basically reveals that the road of honor and respect can be a very tenuous one when nobody plays exactly to the rules. There are no easy solutions to growing up as a person beyond actually doing it. Everyone has their own murky intentions because no one is defined by just being someone in somewhere. It just so happens that committing to fight one man ends up being a confrontation with a school because of other people's waylaid views. Mifune is about as good in stoic conviction, mainly because you get the idea pretty quickly that his destiny is going to go down to his choices of seeing himself beyond who he thinks he is and to actually realize it. One respects things in nature and life without becoming reliant on them, I suppose. Tsuruta makes for a solidly addition to the proceedings, curious in his maneuvering at least when compared to the drama played out by returners such as Yachigusa (okay there's also another going after him and a whole thing about other returners, but I think you get the idea). The opening battle sequence is there to show that the journey isn't getting better at swordplay, because anybody can go with swords when they are young. The ambushes that are shown in the film are pretty interesting for the time period, and in general you get a movie that allows its final sequences to breathe on their own in what is past and what is to come. As a whole, Samurai II continues the journey of its one curious samurai with plenty of energy and interest in making a journey of fulfillment come around with enough fun beyond looking at things as just moving through the next blade movement. It sets the stage for what is to come in the next film in setting how the journey has gone in learning and seeing beyond the trappings of period and action dramas for a pretty good time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Les Diaboliques.

Review #2462: Les Diaboliques.

Cast: 

Simone Signoret (Nicole Horner), Véra Clouzot (Christina Delassalle), Paul Meurisse (Michel Delassalle), Charles Vanel (Alfred Fichet), Jean Brochard (Plantiveau), Thérèse Dorny (Madame Herboux), Michel Serrault (Monsier Raymond), Georges Chamarat (Dr. Loisy) Directed by Henri-Georges Clouzot (#2337 - The Wages of Fear)

Review: 

Sure, let's go for another movie with plenty of horror and thriller in it. The movie takes its inspiration from the novel She Who Was No More [Celle qui n'était plus], as originally written by the writing team of Pierre Boileau and Pierre Ayraud in 1952. Apparently, Clouzot was informed about the potential of making a movie of the book by his wife Vera, who read it and told him immediately to read it, sleep be damned. Supposedly, Clouzot purchased the rights to the book just before Hitchcock could do so (just as well, Clouzot took over a year to actually get down to filming). Clouzout and his brother Jean (who for whatever reason went by Jérôme Géronimi for credit) are credited with the screenplay while René Masson and Frédéric Grendel were given a "with the collaboration of" in the credits. There were a few changes, mainly because it dealt with a travelling salesman teaming up with his mistress to murder the spouse (with one big thing in the climax being particularly different). Narcejac once stated that while the film does not resemble the book, the combination of the suspense, pacing and unfolding action were effectively in line with what they wanted, while Boileau noted that the film had an "immersion of the character in a collective universe was the best equivalent to the solitude we described in writing." At any rate, Hitchcock got his chance to adapt a Boileau-Narcejac novel later in the decade with Vertigo (1958). The movie was quite the hit at the time and even had an American release (which apparently trimmed the runtime of 114 minutes to 107), which is where it was known as "Diabolique". Robert Bloch, who wrote the novel Psycho that became its own film by Hitchcock (with its own warning about spoiling the movie), said that Clouzot's film was his favorite horror film of all time.

Apparently, Clouzot was tense during production, even once stating to Signoret that he shouldn't have let her read the end of the script. The tension is palpable for the movie, which practically boils it down to a science with a worthwhile group to lead it. It is the kind of movie that allows you to participate in a game of watching a trap spring all the way to its logical conclusion with the dread of knowing that it is all so believable in motive and the horror of wondering just what is going to happen next in the clear-cut way things are shot. The atmosphere by Clouzot with a boarding school is particularly spooky to consider because of the fact that it probably could be considered as an off-kilter fairy tale (in fact Clouzot aimed to do both a sinister atmosphere and "a somewhat fairytale universe"). The Clouzots married in 1950, the same year Vera worked as a continuity assistant on the film Miquette. This was the second of three movies she appeared in as an actress, which started with The Wages of Fear (1953) and ended with Les Espions (1957); she died in 1960 at the age of 46. Her performance of seemingly aiming for a martyr is fine in her defeated outlook towards it all, even when she gets into the eventual scheme involving a body in the bathtub. Her drawn out nightmare is our drawn-out nightmare, for which Signoret (a future Academy Award winner) excels in drawing the knowing fear that comes with people that know who they are and what they have done in diabolical nature and like it. Of course, it helps that Meurisse makes for a worthwhile lout to set all of this up in unsavory timing. The questions we ask about the movie aren't because we are grousing but because we want to know how the trap will spring.

Now, as for the ending: 

Don't be DIABOLICAL!

Do not destroy the interest that your friends may have in this movie.

Do not tell them what you have seen.

Thank you, on their behalf

Yes, it may be a movie that is seven decades old, but you just have to see it to believe it, really. There is just something so swiftly diabolical in its rug-pull that could only come from someone expressly interested in making everything snap into place. Do I love the ending? Well, it is fine in that final snap of the real trap, but I will say that the part right after it is a bit, well, convenient (which also is changed from the novel). You can only do so much with authority figures that show up now and then, I guess. As a whole, it is the kind of suspense horror movie you just have to watch just as it is. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Yes, it's time for the seventh rendition of having horror movies from November 1 to November 7 with 7 Days of the Week After Halloween

Night of the Demon.

Review #2459: Night of the Demon.

Cast: 

Dana Andrews (Dr. John Holden), Peggy Cummins (Joanna Harrington), Niall MacGinnis (Dr. Julian Karswell), Athene Seyler (Mrs. Karswell), Liam Redmond (Professor Mark O'Brien), Peter Elliott (Professor Kumar), Maurice Denham (Professor Harrington), Reginald Beckwith (Mr. Meek), Rosamund Greenwood (Mrs Meek), and Brian Wilde (Rand Hobart) Directed by Jacques Tourneur (#998 - I Walked with a Zombie, #1898 - Cat People, #2280 - The Leopard Man)

Review: 

"The real horror is to show that we all live unconsciously in fear. Many people suffer today from a fear that they don't begin to analyze and which is constant. When the audience is in the dark and recognizes its own insecurity in that of the characters of the film, then you can show unbelievable situations and be sure that the audience will follow. For another thing, people love to be afraid."

Naturally, this was a movie loosely based on an old short story. M. R. James wrote a handful of stories for More Ghost Stories of an Antiquarty in 1911, and "Casting the Runes" was one of them. Charles Bennett had the rights to the story and thus made a screenplay ("The Haunted") that loosely took inspiration from the short story. He sold the story to producer Hal E. Chester (much to Bennett's regret, because he later found that people like Robert Taylor and Dick Powell were interested in being in the film*) who ended up making changes that resulted in him getting a co-credit, although it was really blacklisted writer Cy Endfield who crafted significant parts of the screenplay. For whatever reason, the movie was called "Curse of the Demon" in the States (often with a double feature pairing with 20 Million Miles to Earth) with a runtime of 82 minutes that cut certain sequences from the original 96-minute cut. This was the last horror movie Tournier made as a director (famously, he apparently rejected the term "horror movies", stating once he made "films on the supernatural" because he believed in it). Tourneur was involved in the project because Ted Richmond (the producer of his prior film Nightfall) gave Chester a recommendation, which in turn got Tournier to show the script to Andrews.  Apparently, the demon was a contentious aspect of the movie for the filmmakers. Hal E. Chester and his co-producer wanted to show the demon at the start and end of the film, but Tourneur and Bennett weren't happy about it, with the latter being once quoted as saying that if Chester was up at his driveway, he would shoot him (a book about the making of the film by Tony Earnshaw contends including the demon was planned from the start anyway). Tournier claimed that the movie was "ruined" by showing the demon from the beginning, stating that he shot just one scene with the idea of a demon in the cloud sequence. Tourneur did five further movies as a director: The Fearmakers (1958), The Giant of Marathon (1959), Timbuktu (1959), The Comedy of Terrors (1964), and City Under the Sea (1965).

Let's get one thing out of the way: of course you show the damn demon on screen. This was the 1950s man, you can't go with the power of suggestion and "maybe" seeing something, at a certain point you're going to do something when "Demon" is in the film title (showing a cloud only for a movie like this would be silly, arguably). At any rate, what we have here is a solid little movie, managing to evoke a sense of dread through mood and atmosphere, one that arguably is Tournier's best horror movie when compared to Cat People (why anyone would reject the term horror movie is beyond me). It lurks in the shadow of noir that gradually makes you wonder just what may be beyond what eyes and ears can sense. It helps that Andrews (who apparently wasn't a fan of Chester either) is the right type of rigid for this role, one whose skepticism can only come from a place of flustered vulnerability that we understand that some can look mystery in the face and see a bottomless pit. Sure, we know there's something lurking beyond the wind rustling, but it helps to have a movie that is patient in the push-and-pull of belief and devotion. MacGinnis is practically the same in that regard when it comes to vulnerability, mainly because he is not merely a mad magician but is instead one who is consumed by a force greater than one could imagine, one who could play tricks for the youth but instead plays tricks on himself and those around him. The rest of the cast do a pretty fine job in that usual dignity of a horror movie that isn't about body counts or creature effects (the demon does look good, in close-up anyway) but instead of the terror of imagination going awry. My one little gripe is with the ending, specifically the very last scene. After spending a whole movie getting his ideas about the supernatural all mixed up, complete with seeing a cloud of smoke and something that may be a demon inflict fear on someone else for the climax...he doesn't go to inspect the body, instead leaving with the girl. I don't know man, I know these movies love to make sure to set the guy up with the girl at the end but c'mon, some things really are better to know. In general, what we have is a pretty neat movie involving the power of belief and what comes from those who are engulfed by it to subservience and those who know exactly where the road leads. It's one of those esteemed old movies that definitely deserve a look, that's for sure.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*Oh who cares about Taylor and Powell when you have Dana Andrews?

Attack of the Puppet People.

Review #2453: Attack of the Puppet People.

Cast: 

John Agar (Bob Westley), John Hoyt (Mr. Franz), June Kenney (Sally Reynolds), Michael Mark (Emil), Jack Kosslyn (Sergeant Paterson), Marlene Willis (Laurie), Ken Miller (Stan), Laurie Mitchell (Georgia Lane), Scott Peters (Mac), and Susan Gordon (Agnes) Produced and Directed by Bert I. Gordon (#929 - Tormented and #2297 - Earth vs. the Spider)

Review: 

Okay, bring out the effects-laden movie by Bert I. Gordon for the holiday season. This was the eighth feature film directed by Gordon, and he had a hand with the writing in the story department, which he had done with a few of his other movies; George Worthing Yates, a semi-regular writer of the first couple of Gordon movies, wrote the screenplay. As you might expect, the movie was done in the wake of The Incredible Shrinking Man, which had come out in 1957. American International Pictures obviously knew where to go with trying to make a movie about small people, although apparently Gordon wanted to call the movie "The Fantastic Puppet People" (the teenagers they wanted to see the movie probably didn't think about the fact the shrunken down people don't really attack anything, to say nothing of that poster of them with a knife). What better way to remind people of one of your films than to have it play: a drive-in sequence early on shows the characters watching The Amazing Colossal Man (1957). Funny self-promotion I guess. Apparently, the movie was paired in certain drive-ins with Gordon's War of the Colossal Beast (1958).

So, you get a sci-fi youth movie about shrinking people. At least Dr. Cyclops (also a movie that does a cutaway from the shrinking moment around 30 minutes into the runtime, coincidentally) had a scientist trying to shrink stuff down with some idea based in science, this is a movie that has the owner of a doll manufacturing company shrinking people down because (you're never going to believe this): he's lonely and therefore puts them in and out of suspended animation when he has the feeling for it (notice how there are several people besides the main group that are shrunk but aren't restored at any point); I guess hookers or beer just wasn't ideal to float around in the 1950s (remember: don't try that at home). This would be an interesting quandary if it wasn't for the fact that it just doesn't lead to much beyond him and his interests in the little things. Hoyt is fine in that regard, I guess. The people aren't really given agency beyond one of them doing a song and bland platitudes. Agar and Kenney have the energy of being stuck at a bus station with no working TV. You don't get a sense of tension, and the effects don't really help all that much because it just looks a bit flimsy in the first place. The sequence near the climax of our lead subjecting these people to a puppet show of Jekyll and Hyde is almost too silly for words in making it, well, really easy to see how things will go when they outnumber him.  The ending isn't exactly much better, mainly because it just ends right at the part when you think it might be interesting: a guy about to be cornered for shrinking people. It just...ends, with him alone. I almost expected him to light the place up or do anything other than just sit there (or hell, throw in his dopey machine being used on him just to reverse him, the dude used it on a cat). Since it really isn't a role that evokes much pity, you really do need to show him get some sort of comeuppance. As a whole, Puppet People just isn't as impressive as it could've been in the look upon loneliness and general adventure in small-ness, managing to instead just toil in bland surroundings that make Dr. Cyclops from nearly two decades prior look better in comparison.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

*Strangely, the movie played a small part of history years later. Apparently, when the Watergate burglary was playing out, the lookout Alfred C. Baldwin III was watching...Attack of the Puppet People on TV and got too distracted to see a cop pulling up right to them.

The Manster.

Review #2448: The Manster.

Cast: 

Peter Dyneley (Larry Stanford), Jane Hylton (Linda Stanford), Tetsu Nakamura (Dr. Robert Suzuki), Terri Zimmern (Tara), Jerry Ito (Police Supt. Aida), Norman Van Hawley (Ian Matthews), Toyoko Takechi (Emiko Suzuki), Kenzo Kuroki (Genji Suzuki), Alan Tarlton (Dr. H. B. Jennsen), Shinpei Takagi (Temple Priest), and George Wyman (the Monster) Directed by George Breakston and Kenneth G. Crane.

Review: 

Sure, you might think the title is a bit of a tell that things are going to be a bit off for the movie. Appearances can be deceiving, but I imagine it probably won't seem true for this oddball movie. It seems oddly appropriate that a movie about two heads has two directors. George Breakston was originally an actor in his young days, having moved to Hollywood from his native France. He served in the US Army Signal Corps with the Officers Candidate School for photography. He became a director with Urubu (1948), which he happened to produce and co-star in. He was the producer and contributor to the story of Tokyo File 212 (1951), the first Hollywood feature to be made all in Japan. He directed a variety of movies overseas, whether that was Geisha Girl (1952) in Japan or Golden Ivory (1954) in Kenya. Breakston would produce and direct all the way until 1966, whether that involved African Patrol (1958-59) or The Boy Cried Murder (1966); he died in 1973 at the age of 53. The screenplay was written by Walter J. Sheldon as based on "an original story" by Breakston. The movie was co-directed by Kenneth G. Crane, who is also listed as "supervising editor" in the opening credits. He started out as an editor for such movies as The Iroquois Trail [1950] and added directing to his foray for a brief time with such works as Monster from Green Hell [1957] and When Hell Broke Loose [1958] (he also directed English-language scenes for the American edit of Ishiro Honda's Half Human in [1957]). The Manster was his last work as a director. Crane continued to be an editor in films all the way to Soul Hustler in 1973; he died in 1995 at the age of 87. The movie had a mix of American and Japanese people working on the film, which was done in Japan; Shinpei Takagi worked on the effects of the "manster" (get it, man, monster, man-monster?). For whatever reason, the movie opened first in Japan in 1959 before being released abroad starting in 1960. Apparently, in 1962, it was enough to justify being on a double feature with Eyes Without a Face (you might remember that it was called "The Horror Chamber of Dr. Faustus" in some places).

In a sea of head movies such as The Incredible 2-Headed Transplant (1971), The Thing with Two Heads (1972) and How to Get Ahead in Advertising (1989), The Manster is probably not very high on the list. You might wonder what the significance of the movie being set in Japan with a handful of Japanese actors involved. Well, not much really, since the movie basically just cribs from Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde while featuring the local scene for about two minutes before finding ways to cut around the terror and the fact that the monster isn't even seen that clearly (particularly in daylight). Sometimes it reminds one of a sack, but the effect beforehand where it is just an eye on the shoulder is at least interesting to look at. Dyneley was probably better known for his work on Thunderbirds (yes, really) than this film. But at least there is a semblance of an idea in basically doing a midlife crisis horror movie. But it doesn't feel tragic enough to be anything more than a goofy ham-handed performance that happens to share time with a guy playing the monster. This was the only movie for Zimmern, a Macau-born woman of varying Eurasian heritage that happened to marry Breakston in 1959. Interludes spent with her would be more interesting if you really felt a sense of doom or anything other than "oh, hey, a woman", and that goes doubly for the mostly forgettable Hylton (who actually was married to Dyneley at the time). You would think Nakamura would have something to do as the mad scientist. But no, he only mildly shows up from time to time, talking about evolution and things that one does when living around a volcano that at least has one interesting thing: he tries to knife himself off before getting disposed of. The climax, for a movie that runs at 72 minutes anyway, does have some silly execution (everybody's got to get to the volcano, ready to erupt) but at least you get to see a fight on a volcano between a man and his manster self that is as delusional as it sounds. As a whole, The Manster is pretty cheesy and pretty crappy but altogether there are a few chuckles and curious moments to be had in watching the two-headed spectacle play out. In the bottom of the barrel, being middle-of-the-road is not as bad as it could be.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

The Tingler.

Review #2436: The Tingler.

Cast: 

Vincent Price (Dr. Warren Chapin), Judith Evelyn (Mrs. Martha Ryerson Higgins), Darryl Hickman (Dave Morris), Patricia Cutts (Isabel Stevens Chapin), Pamela Lincoln (Lucy Stevens), Philip Coolidge (Oliver 'Ollie' Higgins)

Produced and Directed by William Castle (#369 - House on Haunted Hill (1959), #1071 - 13 Ghosts, #1418 - The Night Walker, #1703 - Undertow, #2261 - Macabre, #2300 - Homicidal, #2301 - Strait-Jacket)

Review: 

Well, if you are going to try and give audiences a bit of a scare, you might as well try to make it a whole show of gimmicks to grab attention, I suppose. William Castle's Macabre (1958) had the life insurance policy for anyone dying of fright while House on Haunted Hill (released in January 1959) had an "Emergo" gimmick where a pulley system was rigged so a plastic skeleton could be flown over the audience at a certain point in the film.* Anyway, with The Tingler, released in July of 1959, Castle came up with a couple of ideas: Percepto, in which the underside of select seats would have electrical buzzers attached to try and provide a tingling sensation for moments (as one does when having surplus airplane wing dicing motors from the World War II days). As noted in the opening, said by none other than Castle himself, only certain members would get the shock because "some people are more sensitive to these mysterious electronic impulses than others." And then of course there is the other idea, which involves planted members of the audience for a certain moment in the climax. As with Castle's two previous horror movies, it was written by Robb White, who did two further scripts for him. It was the second and last time that Vincent Price was the star of a William Castle movie. Obviously, the movie was enough of a hit for Castle to continue on with gimmicks: his next film in 13 Ghosts had a gimmick where you could see the ghosts in "Illusion-O" (a trick involving red and blue filters applied to the footage when dealing with the ghosts).

Really if you accept the premise as, well, with tingling curiosity, you already are half-way to having some enjoyment with the film. You've got a guy thinking he can find a creature that looks like a (big) centipede all in the name of science, at least if one doesn't scream about it first. I suppose the real thing about the tingler is that it could be represented as anything that makes us shudder and how we try to cope with apparent fears ahead of us. It has a small cast that naturally is highlighted by Price, who glides through the movie in making you go for the material in a movie that is actually kind of weird. You have a small ensemble, a few weird relationship dynamics being explored for a bit and the use of lysergic acid, or, well, LSD. Since Price looks committed to the material (as opposed to eyerolling it or just playing to scream scream scream), we find ourselves gravitating to the 82-minute runtime as well. The most interesting sequence could be the bathtub sequence (as acted by Evelyn in her final film role - she actually was brought in at the request of Price, who worked with her on Broadway), since it was shot in color that saw the set painted white/black/gray to go along with gray makeup so that way you could see the blood stick out from an otherwise monochrome background. What is particularly strange is that it comes not too long after Price's character tries out some LSD (in an attempt to spook himself without screaming), but one really wonders if he also gave it to someone else, because where else would a scene of red blood in otherwise monochrome stuff come into play? The movie just plays it as he just gave someone barbiturates for a prescription and then they just happen to see weird stuff but really if this had been made a few years later, it probably could've actually implied more that it was really LSD that did her in more than "oh, scared to death" for a trigger to die. Of course, the mystery of the film is where the tingler is going to end up, since it only can reside in folks that are alive. This is where the climax aims for the astounding: the movie actually stops in the guise of the tingler "being loose" and you have to wonder just how it felt with audience plants being around to pretend the thing was around them, although it should be mentioned that for most of the film, all it really does is get set to choke just one person, and the end goal for our hero is...to sew it back into a dead body. Yep, the thing is just going to go right back in, one can't just shoot it but it will slip right in a corpse fine. At any rate, it is an interesting experience to get wrapped in, if you allow it to do so. I don't think it is better than say, House on Haunted Hill, but you can see where Castle could take showmanship a bit further down the road. As a whole, The Tingler is moderately interesting when it truly kicks into gear for the fun that comes out in remembering just what it means to scream, which may or may not make for one heck of a climax if one finds themselves in the mood for what it is selling in the overall experience. If you like the Castle strategy of playing to the horror audience, you've got a winner here.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Evidently, Alfred Hitchcock certainly took notice of the low-budget success of Castle's films prior to making Psycho (1960).

The Brain Eaters.

Review #2433: The Brain Eaters.

Cast: 

Ed Nelson (Dr. Paul Kettering), Alan Jay Factor (Glenn Cameron), Cornelius Keefe (Sen. Walter K. Powers), Joanna Lee (Alice Summers), Jody Fair (Elaine Cameron), David Hughes (Dr. Wyler), Robert Ball (Dan Walker), Phil Posner (the Sheriff), Orville Sherman (Mayor Cameron), and Leonard Nimoy (Professor Cole) Directed by Bruno VeSota (#1202 - Invasion of the Star Creatures)

Review: 

Okay, I wanted to pick a movie a bit out of left field that happened to have a catchy title. It isn't exactly a movie filled with noted names (save for one very brief appearance) or even a big director, but sometimes you get lucky. This was a production that had oversight by who else but Roger Corman, who left himself uncredited as executive producer, but not to worry for this American International Pictures movie, you've got a credit for producer and also lead star in Ed Nelson, who for whatever reason is billed as "Edwin Jackson". Two other key actors must've loved the credit game, they also have alternate names with "Alan Frost" (Alan Jay Factor) and "Jack Hill" (Cornelius Keefe). The movie was directed by Bruno VeSota, who actually had been involved in Chicago television in writing and directing since the late 1940s. He did a variety of acting parts (small or not) in the 1950s, most notably with Dementia [1955] (which may have had co-direction and writing from VeSota, as he later claimed), but he got to direct his first feature film with Female Jungle (1955), which had been distributed by AIP in its "American Releasing Corporation" days after they basically rescued it from being stuck in limbo. VeSota directed one further film with Invasion of the Star Creatures (1962). The movie was written by Gordon Urquhart, although the resulting script seemed a bit similar to the 1951 novel The Puppet Masters (which also dealt with slugs and mind control), as written by Robert A. Heinlein. He sued for plagiarism and got a settlement, although he did not want a screen credit in any shape or form.  

This was a movie that was the B-side of double features with Earth vs. the Spider, if you want to use that as a barometer for the quality. Of course, this is a movie that has a creature made of wind-up toys, fur, and pipe cleaner. For a movie that has a character at one point shoot a gun into a giant metal cone to go along with trying to use the telegraph (hey, at least they didn't try pigeons), it sure is one hell of a boring time. It lacks polish that seems particularly amusing given a runtime of a mere 60 minutes. It has a few tiny eerie moments, mostly in the sequence where the mayor is engaged in a tense standoff with some of the key characters because it actually feels like a movie is going to actually break out before one eventually sinks back into narration (worries over needing the plot to be clear to John Q. Public, 60 Year Old At Large or a trick to get over having poor sound quality - you be the judge) and a general malaise that seems to only move forward when it feels like doing so. You get the yammering from Keefe ("action!"), a middling cast*, the shambling around from doctors about doctor doctor things and the eventual rundown of what the beastly things plan to do. Well, I take that back, they aren't alien, they actually came from underground that want to make a utopia even with the whole putting toxins in the nervous system thing, (as explained by Nimoy and his voice, because he doesn't actually stand up for the one scene he is in). As a whole, it is quite an accomplishment to make Earth vs. the Spider look better on a double feature but it is almost as interesting to have a poster that exceeds the quality of the movie. If you really need to watch something from the old days that you haven't seen yet, you might get something out of it. Or not.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

*At least some of the cast saw better days. Joanna Lee changed course after appearing in four movies to become a television writer, even winning an Emmy Award for writing an episode of The Waltons. Of course, Nelson later became noted for his role on Peyton Place and taught acting in his later days. Keefe was in his last film after plenty of roles in silent films and such. And Nemoy, well....

I Married a Monster from Outer Space.

Review #2428: I Married a Monster from Outer Space.

Cast: 

Tom Tryon (Bill Farrell), Gloria Talbott (Marge Bradley Farrell), Peter Baldwin (Officer Frank Swanson), Robert Ivers (Harry Phillips), Chuck Wassil (Ted Hanks), Valerie Allen (Francine, a Hooker), Ty Hardin (Mac Brody), Ken Lynch (Dr. Wayne), John Eldredge (Police Captain H.B. Collins), Alan Dexter (Sam Benson), James Anderson (Weldon), Jean Carson (Helen Alexander Benson), Jack Orrison (Officer Schultz), Steve London (Charles Mason), and Max "Slapsie Maxie" Rosenbloom (Max Grad) Produced and Directed by Gene Fowler Jr (#1912 - I Was a Teenage Werewolf)

Review: 

"This was strictly an exploitation picture. But there again I tried to put characterization into the monsters. The so-called monsters, the aliens, were very sad people. One of the things I've always found is that you've got to accept the premise, regardless of how ridiculous it is. If you accept the thing as very realistic and very honest, then you can come up with very honest performances and make a fairly honest picture out of it."

Sometimes audiences just don't know what they are missing. Released from Paramount Pictures, the movie ended up as being the second movie on a double feature with the independent acquisition that happened to be in color: The Blob (1958). The script was done by Louis Vittes, and it was Fowler who suggested coming up with an eye-catching title, although he stated in later years of hating the final title (he was interviewed for the film a bit in this book here). As producer and director, Fowler noted that the studio heads insisted that the monsters have a glowing effect, for which he would serve as a designer. It is the kind of movie that could be done with a bit of foliage and wire on a budget of $125,000, but somehow, when compared to The Blob in audience screenings, that movie tested better and therefore was slotted to be the "A" film on the double feature circuit. It may interest you to know that the movie featured the services of John P. Fulton for its special effects: he did movies that could range from The Invisible Man Returns (1940) to Wonder Man (1945) to The Ten Commandments (1956) (in total he was nominated for eight Academy Awards and won three times). This was the second and last horror film Fowler Jr made (he mostly made crime dramas, although he spent far more time as an editor), as you might remember he directed I Was a Teenage Werewolf the previous year. I don't understand the hubbub that arose about the title. 1949 had a movie called I Married a Communist, what is so weird about a movie title like this that is wholly accurate? The movie basically seems like a cousin of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (well okay that movie was a bit different, since the invasion involved emotionless copies and plenty of pods whereas this movie has a spaceship...somewhere) so what exactly did one expect, "Husbands From Space" as a title? 

Honestly, I found this to be a curious little movie to see play out in paranoia but also in tragedy, since you could construe it as such depending on who you find to be the true lead. On the one hand, you have a woman who has a sinking realization that the "honeymoon period" really can just evaporate quickly when being with someone because the real guy they fell in love is in a slab somewhere. But, perhaps most importantly on the other hand, you have a movie with a being who is desperate to keep their race alive and in the process of that desperation finds something shocking: the capability to feel love rather than simply trying to breed (there are probably some guys who might treat a woman like they were stock, incidentally). Tryon was a Paramount contract man since 1955, although he mostly was known for television work more than say, his work as a star, and he apparently was not too keen on starring in this film. Years later, he became a horror/mystery writer with works such as The Other (1971).* You could contend that his performance is a bit wooden (Fowler discussed that assessment, for example), but I would argue that seems to fit the movie to a T if you really get down to it: this is a person who goes around at strange times to meet people rather than be around his wife. Sure, the one scene he has before being taken by the beings (as represented in a composite shot) probably doesn't help this argument, but most of the time you are watching someone that is slowly less inhibited by who they are. It works well with Talbott in that awkward sense of tension and paranoia, because who among us hasn't had a sinking feeling that the people you know are just a bit too strange today? The 78-minute runtime is fairly adept at getting to the point of having one get growing paranoia as the tension becomes more and more clear not only of a burgeoning invasion but of what could happen to folks having to be human longer and longer. There is a body count, with probably one of the odder deaths in quite a while coming from someone looking at a doll in a window before getting spooked to kill some scared passerby. The ending wraps everything up a bit conveniently (the woman who helped spur a posse of new fathers is told to go back home, but the big enemy of the aliens is dogs ripping out tubes), but at least it leaves folks to pause with the fact that a bunch of sexless dudes had been living in town for months. In that sense, what you have is a fairly honest and interesting movie, far better than just being the "B" side of a double feature and worth actual consideration of your time, having a few decent visuals for the time to go with a monster that is far more interesting than what you might expect in perspective for a worthwhile time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

*Tryon died in 1991 as a result of stomach cancer, although he apparently had HIV at the time he died, per the executor of his estate, who disagreed with Tyron's partner about being quiet about the HIV part.

October begins. We'll try to have plenty of interesting horror films all throughout the month that has one hell of time for Halloween night and, well, Halloween The Week After: Year VII.

Gun Crazy.

Review #2424: Gun Crazy.

Cast: 

Peggy Cummins (Annie Laurie Starr), John Dall (Barton "Bart" Tare; Mickey Little as age 7 Bart, Russ Tamblyn as age 14 Bart), Berry Kroeger (Packett), Morris Carnovsky (Judge Willoughby), Anabel Shaw (Ruby Tare Flagler), Harry Lewis (Deputy Clyde Boston; Paul Frison as age 14 Clyde), Nedrick Young (Dave Allister; David Bair as age 7 Dave), Trevor Bardette (Sheriff Boston), and Stanley Prager (Bluey-Bluey) Directed by Joseph H. Lewis (#934 - The Big Combo)

Review: 

"I told John, "Your cock's never been so hard", and I told Peggy, "You're a female dog in heat, and you want him. But don't let him have it in a hurry. Keep him waiting." That's exactly how I talked to them and I turned them loose. I didn't have to give them more directions."

I suppose a weapon like a gun has always been an object of unimaginable desire in our minds for as long as people can remember. Whether to use it for hunting or other methods, there are just some people that have such a reaction to the sight and feel of a gun that likely made it interesting to show what happens when you get a couple of misfits together with a mutual obsession. The basis for the film is a short story ("Gun Crazy", which you can see some of it here if you focus your eyes) originally published in The Saturday Evening Post in 1940 that was written by MacKinlay Kantor. Kantor wrote the screenplay for the film with Dalton Trumbo (formerly, Millard Kaufman was used as a front for Trumbo due to the blacklist), who crafted it into a doomed romance. For whatever reason, the movie was originally known as "Deadly Is the Female" (yes, United Artists thought that would be a quality title for a quality movie) before it eventually was re-issued with the title you know today. In 1992, a movie inspired by the film came out with Guncrazy, as directed by Tamra Davis. This was the first film directed in the 1950s by Joseph H. Lewis, who had been directing features for over a decade by this point in a variety of genres (Minstrel Man, The Falcon in San Francisco, you get the idea). The New York City native (and son of an optometrist) followed his brother to Hollywood and went up from camera assistant to assistant editor to, well, director of cheap but efficient movies. Apparently, before his death in 2000 at the age of 93, one of his last public appearances was to introduce a screening of none other than Gun Crazy, which he called his favorite film.

It is amazing what you can do with a relatively fast production (shot over roughly 30 days for $400,000), isn't it? There is an electricity here for such a sordid little tale of obsession and desire that is shot and executed with commitment to the material that makes one appreciate the qualities that come with such strange people fit for a confident noir. You've got one person who can stroke the gun but can't quite shoot to go along with someone who can't really control their inner self when shooting a weapon. Dall appeared in a total of eight movies in his career (with a handful of stage and TV work before his death at age 50 in 1971); Gun Crazy was his fifth film, which followed his turn as one of the killers in Rope (1948). Lewis apparently picked him because he knew that Dall would show the "inner weakness" of the character*. Lewis clearly had the right idea in mind because Dall does a tremendous job in showing the vulnerability that comes not really knowing who one is beyond choices thrust upon them (reform school, robbing people, for example). He makes for a quality tragic character to see in all of flaws that come with a lack of general direction beyond being good with a gun. This was actually the last of the movies Cummins made in Hollywood, where she had travelled to from England in 1945, having started acting in films at the age of 15 in 1940. She settled back in England for good in 1950 and did a bit of television to go with stuff that probably is best highlighted with Night of the Demon (1957). She was cast over original rumblings of getting Veronica Lake, and it would seem that Cummins was a solid choice, mainly because her troubling desires and shaky hold on reality is also fascinating to see paired with Dall. Their chemistry is interesting because it really is a clash of energy bursting to come out, one with people that are begging to just be one entity that, well, probably fits exactly with what the director told both of them to do for direction. For such a strong duo, the movie also happens to move with damn-good efficiency in showing the descent into crime (which goes from kid troublemakers to back home again) with such charming execution. The robbery sequence in particular, where it decides to just never enter the bank by just shooting from in the car (which naturally is cheaper to do than building a bank set) is probably one of the most interesting sequences you could shoot for a robbery in terms of fascination with how one could pull it off so smoothly (evidently it took a bit of lighting, fiddling with the back of the car and guys on the actual roof of the car for boom mics). I particularly like the ending in showing the culmination of one's choices not so much in what to shoot but in what to shoot for (obviously crime doesn't pay with the time the film was made in but consider how the movie gets to where it is). As a whole, this is an efficient movie that just exudes energy and curiosity over what could've just easily been a Bonnie and Clyde pastiche and makes it into a fascinating and intriguing feature worth anyone's time in the noir stands.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

*Dall was apparently gay, as referenced several times over such as this: https://www.tcm.com/tcmdb/title/77083/gun-crazy#articles-reviews?articleId=581435

20 Million Miles to Earth.

Review #2422: 20 Million Miles to Earth.

Cast: 

William Hopper (Robert Calder), Joan Taylor (Marisa Leonardo), Frank Puglia (Dr. Leonardo), John Zaremba (Dr. Judson Uhl), Thomas Browne Henry (Maj. Gen. A. D. McIntosh), Tito Vuolo (Police Commissioner Unte), Jan Arvan (Contino), Arthur Space (Sharman), and Bart Braverman (Pepe) Directed by Nathan Juran (#613 - Attack of the 50 Foot Woman)

Review: 

Sure, here's a monster movie in Italy. This was the fifth film (not including work for the documentary The Animal World) that had effects provided by Ray Harryhausen, coming in between Earth vs. the Flying Saucers (1956) and The 7th Voyage of Sinbad (1958). This was the first of four movies Harryhausen helped write the story for (strangely, the other ones he did were all Sinbad movies). He didn't get credit for the story in the film itself, but it was his initial idea that made it all come together eventually with the initial working title "The Giant Ymir" (the funny thing is: the resulting movie never names the creature because of fears people would confuse it with the title "Emir", as opposed to the real "Ymir" that refers to Norse mythology*). He worked with Charlott Knight (a regular in appearing on television) in what became a working script, with Harryhausen being the one who set it in Italy because he wanted to have a vacation there (yes, he did get a few days in Rome for the production of this film). Robert Creighton Williams and Christopher Knopf then wrote the screenplay for the movie. Harryhausen made the film with producer Charles H. Schneer (who went on to produce all but one of Harryhausen's ventures starting with It Came from Beneath the Sea [1955]): it was the first of three features with Harryhausen-Schneer-Juran (the Academy Award winning art director-turned-director, starting with The Black Castle [1952]) together, as they did the aforementioned 1958 Sinbad movie together and First Men in the Moon (1964). In the late 2000s, a colorized version was released on home media with the help of Harryhausen, who had originally wanted the film to be shot in color.

It never hurts to watch a creature feature to remind yourself of the fun you can have with the craftsmanship at hand. And it goes double for a movie that reminds you that some creatures aren't even straight up monsters but merely animals reacting to the environment around them (interestingly, the sound effects for the creature here are actually elephant sounds played at a higher speed), with sulfur being the big one in particular. It's the kind of Space Age movie that could have a rocket resemble a V2 rocket because hey, it wasn't quite time to know what a ship for travel would really look like (the Sputnik launch occurred just a few months after this film was released). In a sense, if you're the kind of person who likes seeing a take on King Kong (1933), you'll have a fun time here with another "Dynamation" effort that works out pretty well regardless of if the effect is seen in the dark or not. This was actually one of Hopper's last film appearances (having come back a few years prior due to William A. Wellman), as 1957 saw him do The Deadly Mantis, this film and Slim Carter...and a television show called Perry Mason that resulted in him appearing regularly on the show for nine years. He makes a solid lead in staid calmness, one who has the look of a guy who actually does try to corral the creature rather than straight up killing it. The rest of the cast is relatively satisfactory to what you expect from ones ranging from nurses to authority figures and so on. Sure, the setup for how a container creature comes up from a crashed spaceship (spoiler: beware children bearing things to sell) is a bit on the flimsy side, but you get what you want with an 83-minute feature that is spry on setting up mayhem with a few sights (such as an elephant fight!) that are welcome. As a whole, if you like creature features with a neat look and lean execution to boot, you will find plenty to adore here in a movie fit for a creature of the night.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Interestingly, the movements of the Ymir influenced musician Gene Simmons for his persona for Kiss.