The Corpse Vanishes.

Review #2447: The Corpse Vanishes.

Cast: 

Bela Lugosi (Dr. Lorenz), Luana Walters (Patricia Hunter), Tristram Coffin (Dr. Foster), Elizabeth Russell (Countess Lorenz), Minerva Urecal (Fagah), Angelo Rossitto (Toby), Frank Moran (Angel), Vince Barnett (Sandy), and Kenneth Harlan (Editor Keenan) Directed by Wallace Fox.

Review: 

Okay, sure, the 1940s had a few oddball movies that can be called "horror", at least the ones that aren't part of Universal (such as, in part, The Inner Sanctum Mysteries). But fret not, you have Monogram Pictures here to distribute a cheapie movie mystery horror, complete with finding the one actor they could corral for appearing when not busy with other things: Bela Lugosi. When Lugosi wasn't busy doing stuff like Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943), he did a handful of movies for Monogram with Sam Katzman as a producer. Lugosi wanted to do movies that weren't horror (ironically his popularity had received a boost in 1938 because one man did a double feature involving Lugosi's Dracula) and yet here he was, complete with doing opiates to treat his chronic sciatica and doing stage appearances. The film was written three-fold: the screenplay was done by Harvey Gates (a veteran writer who apparently wrote around 200 movies before he died in 1948), while the story was done by Sam Robins and Gerald Schnitzer. The movie was directed by Wallace Fox, who did over 50 movies that started at the tail-end of the silent era to 1951. 

Okay, let's just say the plot of the movie straight out: a mad doctor aims to target the gland fluid of virgins to help his vain wife from straight up dying of old age. But, well, what's the "corpse"? Uh, well, when the doctor gets his orchid to unwitting brides on their wedding day, the flower knocks the lady out in a way that makes people think they are dead and therefore make the body a sitting duck to finagle out to his totally normal lab. Naturally the one investigative force that moves the plot is a reporter that gets directed to an orchid expert: the doctor, who happens to have a few folks in his cellar in a crazy woman and two sons in a dwarf and a strong half-wit. Needless to say, the movie isn't exactly good, but if you did films such as The Death Kiss (1932) with Lugosi around, you might find something curious in its lurid ideas, mainly because it is just 64 minutes long. Lugosi lumbers around a bit with the usual routine that he does with basically being aloof in saying or leering whatever he has to do, most notably when he talks about finding a coffin more comfortable than a bed. Otherwise the movie is mostly by-the-book in monotone nature, as if just showing a dwarf, a lumbering brute and saying a few weird things is going to be enough. It is ridiculous (particularly the fact that it is an orchid of all things), but you are basically chuckling at the film rather than being all into it such as say, Plan 9. The body count isn't even that lurid, since the only people that are shown to get it are just some of the villains (it occurs to me I didn't bother to think about if the brides were okay). The fake-out for the climax is at least funny because even the villain thought it was a goofy idea to try and do a bride-trap (seriously they try to lure the villain with a "bride" but then it goes to a quick climax because the bad guy takes out the reverend). The movie is too silly to really do anything too morbid about old people wanting to stay young, but so it goes. As a whole, The Corpse Vanishes is nothing particularly special, but it may have a strange lurid taste for those who like the plumb the depths of old movies from the way way back that has a few odd little moments to go along with the general Lugosi performance that comes with movies like this. It's a creaky movie but you can't blame the movie for being what it is.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.

Review #2215: Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome.

Cast: 

Mel Gibson (Mad Max), Tina Turner (Aunty Entity), Bruce Spence (Jedediah), Adam Cockburn (Jedediah Jr), Frank Thring (The Collector), Angelo Rossitto (The Master), Paul Larsson (The Blaster), Angry Anderson (Ironbar), Robert Grubb (Pig Killer), George Spartels (Blackfinger), Edwin Hodgeman (Dr. Dealgood), and Bob Hornery (Waterseller) Directed by George Miller (#380 - Mad Max, #392 - Happy Feet, #493 - The Witches of Eastwick, #707 - Mad Max 2, #781 - Mad Max: Fury Road, #2026 - Twilight Zone: The Movie) and George Ogilvie.

Review: 

"It, in a way of all the films, it’s the one I have most affection for of the three films. Even though most people wouldn’t agree. I realise looking back on it that we almost took on too much story. We told about three, two or three different worlds, trying to struggle … juggle all those things together. So that’s what led to the third story. It’s just … the third film. It’s just the story came along."

In 1979, Mad Max came out with such visceral power that could only come from someone with a dedicated eye to make an involving film, as set out by director/co-writer George Miller and producer Byron Kennedy (who also served as a co-writer with James McCausland). He had studied and had served as a doctor in his native Australia before he was a director, you know. It probably won't surprise you to know that the original idea for what became the third film was actually sprung out of a suggestion made when it was just an offshoot post-apocalyptic film about a tribe of children found by an adult that, well, is what you see in the second half of the film (naturally those familiar with the Lord of the Flies novel would know what I mean); Miller and Terry Hayes, who wrote the last film together, wrote for this one. This was the first of the series made without Kennedy involved, as he died in a helicopter accident in 1983. Miller, already in the ideas of making the third film, decided to move past his reluctance and made it basically as a way to "just to get over the shock and grief of all of that", which in turn saw him bring in George Ogilvie as a co-director. For the most part, Miller and Ogilvie were together during production, as opposed to say, directing separately. This was the feature film debut for Ogilvie, who had worked as both actor and director in the theatre and television since growing up in New South Wales in Australia. He directed three further feature films but was busier with television (such as miniseries) before he died in 2020 at the age of 89. The film was the last Mad Max film (Miller never thought of it as a franchise or envisioned it as such) for three decades, although the idea behind what became Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) had been first thought about since 1987 as "almost a continuous chase".

I wish I liked the film better, I really do. It has a good deal of worthwhile production value of 107 minutes that has a pretty interesting first half involving "Bartertown" when it comes to the ever-shifting mores of where wasteland society (read: place that happens to look like Australia); incidentally, the film is apparently set 15 years after the second film. The performances with its main two of Gibson and Turner is probably the most curious interaction of wanderer and non-wanderer in the last features when it comes to a place that tries to value for trade and, well, an arena that could only be called Thunderdome that has a pretty harrowing battle sequence and decision to come with a mass calling for blood. And then of course there is the part of the film that deals with an oasis of "Planet Erf" and a tribe of children that see our lead as their possible hero. It might not be fair to say it reminds me a bit of Return of the Jedi (1983) when it comes to its place when compared to the first two films of a series, but I digress. Gibson and Turner equally have something worth watching when together in a manner that is distinct from what we saw in the past two films in terms of dueling interests that sees a mix of vitality and one coming to terms with their sense of self (easy to do that when confronting the use of pigs and methane as a potential road forward). This was one of two films with the noted singer Turner in a main role, with the other being Tommy (1975), and she makes the most of it in enterprising stature that she clearly is enjoying going with Gibson and the general self-sufficient nature that comes in the odyssey of a man in sand. He wanders the earth with an odyssey that he commits to in the way you would expect from a pro like him. The chase that arises from that does make for an interesting resolution, at least. This was the last major role for dwarf actor Rossitto, who had a lengthy career prior to his death in 1991, and he lends a few chuckles here and there. The rest of the cast is fine, but somehow, it just feels strange to deal with the fact that one is basically watching two films trying to play as one with a softer sense of the apocalyptic wasteland that is just...okay. I'm not really sure how to put it succinctly, but somehow, having children take ahold of the attention makes the action that come from the climax (plane included) seem more safe than the chaos that made the last two all the more interesting. Besides, having read Lord of the Flies long ago, one can say that the folks here aren't exactly as compelling in that attempt of trying to make do on their own. It is always possible that a re-watch in the next few years could make things seem different, but even calling it the lesser of the Mad Max films is still a compliment when it comes to a film that is pretty efficient in the entertainment value when it comes to that rip-roaring foundation set in the beginning that sticks the eventual landing that stands on its own regardless of what ended up coming later on.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Dracula vs. Frankenstein.

Review #1154: Dracula vs. Frankenstein.

Cast: 
J. Carrol Naish (Dr. Frankenstein), Lon Chaney, Jr. (Groton), Zandor Vorkov (Count Dracula), John Bloom (Frankenstein's monster), Jim Davis (Sergeant Martin), Regina Carrol (Judith Fontaine), Russ Tamblyn (Rico), Anthony Eisley (Mike Howard), Anne Morrell (Samantha), Maria Lease (Joanie Fontaine), Angelo Rossitto (Grazbo the evil dwarf), Forrest J Ackerman (Dr. Beaumont), Greydon Clark (Strange), and Shelley Weiss (The Creature) Directed by Al Adamson.

Review: 
It really is better sometimes to just not take your time making a movie. This film took two years to make, with working titles such as Blood Freaks and The Blood Seekers. You may wonder if this film (written by William Pugsley and Samuel M. Sherman) was haphazardly put together with all of the random plot elements thrown together. Well, we've got Chaney playing an axe-wielding maniac, a doctor trying to cure his paralysis with a serum made from some sort of chemical in the bloodstream through the trauma of death (along with somehow curing his assistant and his evil dwarf), a part with bikers and hippies, and then there's Dracula (with some sort of grease paint and eye-shadow for makeup) somehow mixed in, who suddenly gets the idea to use the serum to give him immunity to the sunlight while bringing back the monster of Frankenstein (with the passing of a comet, no less), who looks like rotted clay. You know how classic movies seem to get re-made or done over and over again? I'm surprised no one has had a focus on improving terrible movies such as this one instead, since this would probably be a good one to make again, whether as a student film or just something for fun. Given how the film looks like it takes place in a big dark room, you might as well film everything in one big room. This is a 90 minute movie that manages to perplex its viewer with such random bits of odd moments - such as an dwarf who eats a dollar, or Vorkov and his ring that vaporizes people to ash. However, the pinnacle of lunacy comes with the fight sequence between Dracula and Frankenstein, which takes place just as the sun is coming up - although you can't really tell due to how dark everything seems to look due to the fact that they are fighting in an area with so much tree leaves and branches. The amazing thing is that they made a fight sequence that lasted less than five minutes that also proves to be incredibly one-sided and dull at the same time. Believe it or not, this was not the original intended ending for the film, which was meant to end with the two main leads (Carrol and Eisley) survived without a fight from the main villains. Instead, we are shown Dracula vaporizing "Mike", played by Adamson from the back as this scene was filmed after production had ended. Honestly, the sequence showing Dracula being melted by the sun is the only effect that sort of works, as if decay is the only thing the movie is good at showing. You may be wondering if this is the only Dracula vs. Frankenstein film out there. Technically, no. There exists a film called Los Monstruos del Terror (1970), which was known under Dracula vs. Frankenstein in the UK alongside other titles such as The Monsters of Terror and Assignment: Terror. There was also another film called Dracula contra Frankenstein (1971) that had several other titles it went by, such as Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein but also Dracula vs. Dr. Frankenstein. In fact, this film had several titles of its own, depending on the country, with my particular favorite being the reissue title in the US of Teenage Dracula - as if that makes Vorkov and his performance seem any less silly. In any case, always check your film titles, I suppose.

It should be mentioned that this was the last films for Naish and Chaney Jr, who both died two years after this film's release. It's pretty easy to see when Naish is reading off cue cards since you can see clear movement of said eyes at times when he is speaking, and the chattering of his false teeth can be heard at times - but at least he is somewhat amusingly hammy. Chaney doesn't have any lines, and he mostly just does a bunch of funny faces, but it definitely isn't him at his best. Vorkov (a pseydonym for his real name of Robert Engel, stockbroker thought of by Ackerman) is terribly wooden, invoking laughter instead of terror, particularly since there is an echo to the voice. None of the other castmates are too particularly memorable, aside from Tamblyn randomly showing up with no bearing on the plot. I do find the brief appearance of Ackerman (who serves as technical consultant) to be interesting, since he was a famed magazine editor (most notably Famous Monsters of Filmland), sci-fi writer/editor along with being a literary agent and avid collector of film memorabilia. Searching about him is far more interesting to think about than the film itself, honestly. Bloom, who played the monster for most of the film, was an accountant, but Weiss is the one with the job of fighting Dracula, lumbering his share for the schlock scene for a movie that does not have much shame. What can you expect from a production company named Independent-International Pictures? This is a terrible movie, filled with ridiculous scenes that make it a mockery among other horror films, particularly ones involving Dracula or Frankenstein - but it certainly will prove entertaining for people wanting campy schlock and not much else.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Babes in Toyland (1934).

Review #875: Babes in Toyland.

Cast:
Stan Laurel (Stannie Dum), Oliver Hardy (Ollie Dee), Charlotte Henry (Little Bo-Peep), Felix Knight (Tom-Tom Piper), Henry Brandon (Silas Barnaby), Florence Roberts (Mother Widow Peep), Virginia Karns (Mother Goose), Pete Gordon (The Cat and the Fiddle), Angelo Rossitto (Elmer the Pig), Zebedy Colt (Willie the Pig), Payne B. Johnson (Jiggs the Pig), Marie Wilson (Mary Quite Contrary), Johnny Downs (Little Boy Blue), Alice Moore (the Queen of Hearts), John George (Barnaby's servant), Kewpie Morgan (Old King Cole), Ferdinand Munier (Santa Claus), Robert Hoover (Bobby Shaftoe), Charley Rogers (Simple Simon), Jean Darling (Curly Locks), Billy Bletcher (the Chief of Police), and William Burress (the Toymaker) Directed by Gus Meins and Charley Rogers.

Review:
Considering that I had never seen a Laurel and Hardy film in the near six year run of Movie Night, it only made sense to do this film right near the holidays. Based off the operetta of the same name, Babes in Toyland (later re-released under the title March of the Wooden Soldiers) is a fairly engaging movie that has a good deal of sets, imagination, and songs that really make for an entertaining watch. Laurel and Hardy have great chemistry and timing together, sharing rip-roaring scenes, such as the peewee scene. They also have some fine exchanges, along with some good wordplay. The rest of the cast is also pretty good, with Henry and Knight sharing a few songs and some chemistry together that contribute to make for such a lively and interesting film. The climax with the wooden soldiers is also pretty charming, filled with joy and some technical achievement, complete with Laurel and Hardy getting in on some fun. The costumes are also pretty good as well, with a world like Toyland being so creatively designed. There are different versions of the film (one of which cuts the film to 67 minutes from the original 77), with a colorized version also existing, which looks fairly decent, but if you're interested in the film, always try to find the best version for a movie as good-hearted as this.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.