The House of the Dead (1978).

Review #2438: The House of the Dead (1978).

Cast: 

John Ericson (Talmudge), Ivor Francis (The Mortician / A Good Feller), Leslie Paxton (Marie), John King (Marie's Husband)

First segment: Judith Novgrod (Miss Sibiler)

Second segment: Burr DeBenning (Growski), Elizabeth MacRae (Mrs. Lumquist), Linda Gibboney (Julie), 

Third segment: Charles Aidman (Detective Malcolm Toliver), Bernard Fox (Inspector McDowal)

Fourth segment: Richard Gates (Cantwell)

Directed by Sharron Miller.

Review: 

Okay, I do have a curiosity for anthology movies. This is one of the movies that popped up when searching for stuff that have a few stories to make up a movie...and it does so with probably the thinnest of premises. A man gets lost in a rainstorm and winds up in a mortician's place with a bunch of caskets with people embalmed due to a strange death. Four of them, in fact. It may interest you to know this is actually the only movie directed by Sharron Miller. She was born and raised in Oklahoma and started directing and writing short films from a young age. She went to both Oklahoma State University and Northwestern University to study in theater and film and soon became a director in Hollywood with work on the TV show The Life and Times of Grizzly Adams in 1976. Miller continued to direct for television and short films into the early 2000s, which included a few Emmy Awards for her work, most notably for "ABC Afterschool Special: The Woman Who Willed a Miracle" (1983). Apparently, the movie was shot in Oklahoma with a budget of barely over $650,000 that had non-unionized broadcasting students from Oklahoma State University. The movie was almost known as "Alien Zone" for some weird reason. At least the movie has had a restored release on home video.

 

The song that plays at the start of the song is probably the highlight. So, let's judge the four segments with the bodies one by one. The first segment involves a woman coming home from her school that has a disdain for children. She comes home and tries to relax by herself only to encounter strange noises. Take a guess what seems to be the problem. It isn't even worth wondering how children can just maul an adult to death. The second segment involves a guy who has a thing for cameras and photography. Okay, and killing women in front of the camera, since he is seen being escorted from court. You see the killing of three women because, well, guy, camera, woman, yea. The segment doesn't even show his execution, the mortician is the one who tells us this, as if saying that the killer was rejected in asking for his execution to be captured on film is ironic. I suppose one is supposed to be unsettled by the segment, but we already know the character is dead from the moment we see him, you couldn't find an ironic way for him to die (what, a camera falls on him making him blindly fall into a fireplace?) rather than just have it be court-ordered execution? The third segment is the best one, mostly because it actually has two people talking to each other. It involves two egotistical detectives trying to assert their status as the great criminologist. One gets a note telling him that someone he knows will die in three days. Technically this is an interesting little duel of the minds, because at least there is something worthwhile in seeing Aidman try to assert himself against Fox in detective work. Of course, since the story only has two characters, I think you can tell what is going to go down for the climax to a point, but at least this one sounds like it could've been its own movie. The fourth segment flat out doesn't even bother to figure things out, since it is just about some rude guy getting trapped in a building that suffers anguish mentally and physically and he only has beer to drink. Then he gets out, sees a person headed towards the building (who insults him just like he did to some hobo...minutes ago, because none of these stories are particularly long to remember anyway) and...later dies of a rotted liver. I guess taking a shower and refreshing oneself after getting out of a "mysterious" building was out of the question, time to start the road to die of alcoholism, I guess. Not explaining what's up with the building in being trapped is one thing, having a guy die off-screen is beyond lame. These stories (as written by David O'Malley) seem more like a collection of short ideas that needed a second draft more than anything, but at least the movie has easy to see action rather than looking like a bad 60s cheapie.

The movie starts and ends with Ericson, who is depicted to be an adulterer. He confronts the fact that there is a fifth coffin and the fact that the four coffins depict people who were victims of their own frail foibles. Yea man, a guy dying of alcoholism after escaping a weird building, really frailty thing right there. The adulterer refuses to believe it is for him, runs off...and is shot by the cuckold. Real open and shut thing, just like the rest of the movie. And then the mortician is seen in the ambulance because ooooh. I think you can tell what I think of the movie: it stinks. Anthology movies do have a problem with having consistent quality within story to story, but this movie manages to sink down to the lousy zone early and never lets up for 80 minutes. You could say there are a few moments here and there when it comes to staging the idea of a scare (or, well, the third segment for an actual pairing), but for the most part, it just comes off as disjointed and not really that interesting to actually see play out. In a sea of horror movies, anthology or otherwise, you probably could do better than this one, but you at least won't hate the whole experience.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Munster, Go Home!

Review #1727: Munster, Go Home! 

Cast: 

Fred Gwynne (Herman Munster), Yvonne De Carlo (Lily Munster), Al Lewis (Grandpa), Butch Patrick (Eddie Munster), Debbie Watson (Marilyn Munster), Terry-Thomas (Freddie Munster), Hermione Gingold (Lady Effigie Munster), Robert Pine (Roger Moresby), John Carradine (Cruikshank), Bernard Fox (Squire Lester Moresby), and Richard Dawson (Joey) Directed by Earl Bellamy.

Review: 

To crib from cliché, remember The Munsters? Oh, I'm sure at least one of you is familiar with the television show, one that premiered (and ended) over a half century ago. But hey, a recap wouldn't hurt, particularly from someone who found themselves watching each of the 70 episodes of the show a year ago. The show ran from September 24, 1964 to May 12, 1966 on CBS. It was created by Allan Burns and Chris Hayward (who each had served as writers on The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show), who had submitted the idea to Universal Studios; Norm Liebman and Ed Haas were then tasked to write a pilot script, while Joe Connelly and Bob Mosher (creators of Leave It To Beaver) were producers. Perhaps it was a coincidence that a sitcom with tinges of the macabre aired right at the same time as another sitcom involving a family with the macabre aired with The Addams Family. Of course, this is a show involving ordinary folks in suburban life that just happen to look like monsters, so who knows in a decade that had plenty of interesting premises. In any case, right around the time of the second season, plans for a film were begun by Universal, who undoubtedly wanted to cash in on introducing the characters to a wider audience (i.e. folks outside the States that had not watched it yet - by the time the series ended its second and final season there were 70 episodes); production for the film began shortly after the end of the production of the series, and it was shot over the course of a month in Hollywood, complete in Technicolor (perhaps it is ironic that one factor attributed to the end of the show was the arrival of a campy competitor series in Technicolor with Batman). Tasked to write the film was Joe Connelly, Bob Mosher, George Tibbles, and Earl Bellamy (the latter three had written several episodes on the show while the latter directed seven episodes). 

The movie was not a major success at the time, but at least it can be said that the series managed to live on in syndication, and a reunion film and sequel series came about in the 1980s; attempts at re-booting the Munsters has persisted for over a decade (with the latest attempt being one directed by Rob Zombie). Honestly, I have mixed feelings about the show (one that attracted my interest because, well, how many TV shows think to do a sitcom with monster makeup?), one that was mildly effective with its attempts at, well, being a sitcom with campy values that had a bunch of puns and gags that came and went (one involving the only non-monster character being thought of as the ugly duckling, ha-ha, huh?). Honestly, the middling quality of the film is not a surprise to those who had watched the show, as if the only difference is not having a laugh track to help with chuckles. Perhaps comparing it to Batman '66 is unfair, but honestly that show seemed to do better with generating good natured humor in regard to how it took its situations with tongue-in-cheek nature, with its theatrical adaptation being just as interesting to watch on the big screen as it was on TV. To me, this is a thin plot that just happens to be 96 minutes long (weirdly enough, its failure influenced the makers behind Get Smart to not do a feature, instead turning the script into a three-part episode). Of course, this is like criticizing a tree for having a few dead branches - the tree does what it does, and it takes a fair eye to appreciate it. To its credit, one knows that the main group does their finest with keeping things on level, mostly with Gwynne (good natured despite plenty of makeup), De Carlo (the tying force), and Lewis (basically playing himself). There isn't a moment where they seem bored with what they are doing, and they each share little interesting moments that will draw a smile for those familiar with these folks (incidentally, they would reprise their roles one more time together with the TV film The Munsters Revenge 15 years later); the sequence between Gwynne and Lewis bumbling around the house looking for the supposed secret of the house is probably the best part of the film, complete with a quiet De Carlo sharing time with a bucket. Patrick has less to do than usual for the film, unless one counts "sleeping in the cupboard" as a thing. Watson replaced Pat Priest in a move felt to boost the then teenaged actress with the studio. She does okay, mostly because the role is quite ordinary to begin with, sharing time with Pine with very okay qualities. Terry-Thomas does fine as the key new face, making his cad presence known for fair chuckles to go with Gingold. Carradine, who, in a habit of being in anything, had actually appeared on the show a few times before, rounds out the cast with his usual lumbering presence within a face full of makeup that I'm sure folks familiar with him will appreciate in their own way. As a whole, my quibbles on the show should not affect the curiosity one can have with the film as a whole, since anyone who cares for the show will find a worthy time to spend here, one that has a few chuckles with a familiar group of folks that makes for a curious sight. There is just enough to sneak by without too many eye rolls (intentionally, anyway), and I suppose that should be just enough for those who are with what the movie wants to do in simple chuckle times with folks who look like creatures.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.