Trog.

Review #2143: Trog.

Cast: 

Joan Crawford (Dr. Brockton), Michael Gough (Sam Murdock), Bernard Kay (Inspector Greenham), Kim Braden (Anne Brockton), David Griffin (Malcolm Travers), John Hamill (Cliff), Thorley Walters (Magistrate), Jack May (Dr. Selbourne), Geoffrey Case (Bill), Simon Lack (Lt. Colonel Vickers), Chloe Franks (Little Girl), and Joe Cornelius (Trog) Directed by Freddie Francis (#854 - They Came from Beyond Space, #856 - The Evil of Frankenstein, #860 - Dracula Has Risen from the Grave, #1145 - Tales from the Crypt, #1419 - Dr. Terror's House of Horrors)

Review: 

"What a terrible film that was. I did it because of Joan Crawford, and poor Joan by this time was a very sad old lady. We had to have idiot cards all over the place because she couldn't remember her lines. It was the last thing she ever did and she shouldn’t have done it. Neither should I. She had no friends, and she kept writing sad letters to my wife and I until she died."

Okay, so you might be wondering just what the appeal for this film is. Well, it was a horror film that just happens to be the last film appearance of Joan Crawford. By the year of 1970, she had appeared in over eighty films in nearly a half-century of work in films to go with a handful of television appearances (one of those notably saw her perform a role several years younger than her - she was filling in for her sick daughter on a soap opera!). But this was her last film before her death in 1977 at the reported age of 69. The 1960s saw her go from starting with What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) to ending with Berserk! (1967). That latter film was produced by Herman Cohen, who happened to produce this film. Three writers were credited for this film: Peter Bryan, John Gilling, and Aben Kandel (the first two had previously collaborated on The Plague of the Zombies while the latter was a mainstay on Cohen productions, even at the ripe age of 73). It's a shame for Francis to be here directing a horror film like this, because while he wasn't exactly pleased to be pigeonholed as a director of the medium (he was once quoted as saying horror films liked him more than he liked horror films), he was an acclaimed cameraman. This is the man who shot Sons and Lovers (1960) and later Glory (1989), winners of Academy Awards for cinematography. Mumsy, Nanny, Sonny and Girly (1970), his previous effort as a director, was one he was quite proud of even though it took a few years to become a cult favorite. While this film wasn't exactly a hit for anyone, Francis would stay busy as a director for the rest of the decade, which included The Vampire Happening (a West German comedy horror film that apparently was just as bad of an experience for Francis released in 1971), and, well, Craze (1974), the last production spearheaded by Cohen.

You're kidding me, right? This is the way a vaunted actress such as Joan Crawford went out? Wearing her own wardrobe while apparently enjoying quite the amount of alcohol? This is such a miserable film when it comes to the amount of time it spends in trying to establish credibility with some sort of ungodly presentation of nurture and nature that has no sense of tension or doing anything beyond making one wonder just long before you get to see the silly mask again. Supposedly, the outfit for the title character was cribbed from 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), but I guess they got the worst outfit of the bunch, because it is a very sad looking thing to say the least. The fact that the film has the balls to re-use footage that had been produced by Willis O'Brien and Ray Harryhausen for The Animal World (1956) for a sequence involving dinosaurs is probably the most hilarious part of a movie that has nowhere to go but digging up from the pit that it has buried itself by the first half of a 93-minute movie of amusement. Crawford may or may not be under the influence of some liquor (vodka, reportedly) or cue cards, but there is definitely something stilted about her role in the film, which never really manages to make a compelling argument for why anyone would care for Trog in the first place (this is a beast that we first see kill folks in a cave, remember). Seeing her try to show the creature colors and play catch with it only furthers this amusement that comes full circle when you realize, yes, she really did bring her own colorful clothes for this. Honestly, I was expecting her character to become another victim of the beast to close the circle, because, well, wouldn't that be a surprise to have someone who was completely on Trog's side just get blindsided? Gough just comes off as the most obvious strawman when it comes to "beast bad", most amusingly coming for the court scenes that see him continuously interrupt the proceedings until he finally gets kicked out after like the 4th time this happens. I think the death sequence (hell, you know it was coming) is especially amusing, because he lets the beast go and seems completely unplanned for, well, getting the hell away from the one thing that could kill him like it was a cockroach ASAP. Kay and the others don't chuckle at the material in the same way one might see from even the lesser Hammer film experiences. This is the kind of thing that can appreciated for folks such as, say, John Waters when it comes to the cheapies, but this is just one of those dubious British films where the material lives and dies on just how much the actors care, and the answer here is "slim". Kitsch for some sure, but this is just crap.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Turkey Week 4 is upon us, folks. From November 19 to November 25, enjoy a round of cruddy "turkey" films to enjoy the Thanksgiving season. Trog is merely an appetizer for some rancid films to come, which will see a return of such great voices like Uwe Boll and Neil Breen and more. Enjoy the suck, because the next few films are much worse than this. House of the Dead, for example....

Redux: Batman & Robin.

Redux #218: Batman & Robin.

Cast: 

Arnold Schwarzenegger (Dr. Victor Fries / Mr. Freeze), George Clooney (Bruce Wayne / Batman), Chris O'Donnell (Dick Grayson / Robin), Uma Thurman (Dr. Pamela Isley / Poison Ivy), Alicia Silverstone (Barbara Wilson / Batgirl), Michael Gough (Alfred Pennyworth), Pat Hingle (Commissioner James Gordon), John Glover (Dr. Jason Woodrue), Elle Macpherson (Julie Madison), Vivica A. Fox (Ms. B. Haven), Vendela Kirsebom (Nora Fries), Elizabeth Sanders (Gossip Gerty), and Robert Swenson (Bane) Directed by Joel Schumacher (#197 - Phone Booth and #217 - Batman Forever)

Review: 

"Look, I apologize. I want to apologize to every fan that was disappointed because I think I owe them that." - Joel Schumacher

On June 20, 1997, Batman and Robin was unleashed onto theaters, one that would serve as the tombstone for Batman movies for eight years. Any plans for Schumacher making a third filmed (tentatively called Batman Unchained) were shelved. Batman Forever (1995) was a clear-cut success for the powers that were in Warner Bros. I can defend the movie as one that decided to eschew the dark sensibilities from before with a tone that could have rivaled the 1960s adaptation in...off-kilter approach. Akiva Goldsman served as the lone writer for the script this time around. No one can defend Batman & Robin. No one. Joel Schumacher apologized for its failures again and again. George Clooney apparently would give you a refund if you told him about seeing the movie in theaters. At any rate, it probably didn't help that Val Kilmer (who apparently had disagreements with Schumacher during production of the previous movie) dropped out of the role of Batman to star in The Island of Dr. Moreau (1996). Keep this in mind: starring with Marlon Brando in what ended up being one of the worst things to happen to novel adaptations was a decision made by someone of clear mind rather than star in this movie. Clooney was chosen to star in this movie due to the success he was having as a star on the television series ER. Schumacher once questioned himself on why he wanted to make this movie. You have to remember that he was a man that loved movies from his adventures watching them due to growing up in a movie theater as a child, so he was not just a man set out to make movies as a tool of studio obedience. Schumacher got to direct movies until 2011 in a career that spanned three decades, while Goldsman got to write scripts of varying quality in mockery/notice for the next couple of decades (even getting his hands on something that calls itself "Star Trek").

You know and I know the movie is bad, but there are technically things to say about it more than the 250 words I thought of it when I saw it just once before. If you remember correctly, there were two television shows with the character of Batman as the focus. The Adam West edition excelled with its tongue-in-cheek manner due to how the actors took the material and rolled with the punches, while the animated series took the best aspects of the Tim Burton movies and made them work well for a half-hour that could work for kids and adults. Batman & Robin is only a good example of what a sell-out looks like, trying to desperately snatch elements from both shows but failing to realize what had made those parts interesting in the first place. Clooney obviously learned a good lesson from starring in a movie where the title role looks like they could be played by anyone with a good jawline. Beyond just staring at the suit with its certain style choices inspired by Greek statues, one sees that Clooney just doesn't have much to really work here, as the script is bereft of anything meaningful to say beyond vapid lines that even Adam West would roll his eyes at. His brief scenes with Macpherson is the equivalent of staring at a wall, to put it mildly. O'Donnell is exactly as I remembered from before: whining and completely out of his element. Him and Silverstone (playing a Batgirl that is related to Alfred rather than Gordon from the comics due to it being more "believable") should have made their own club in how utterly pale in characterization they are in this movie. This is a problem, since one is trying to believe that there is a "Family" angle, and they are as lifeless as broomsticks. Imagine having another movie where a motorcycle sequence is like watching a video game cut-scene. The character of Batgirl is barely even in the movie, as if it was an unintentional tribute to the character being a last-season addition to the 1960s series. Gough probably has the most to do in these four films than anything - go figure that it is the one where he is dying of a fictional ill-defined disease wracked with one convenient factor. The best line he has is one that could have either been used for the series or for parody, since he calls the caped crusader an effort to "master the chaos" that attempts to control fate and death itself (this is of course a movie that also has him scan his brain patterns to the Bat-Computer in anticipation that someone won't follow the rules and fight crime). In that sense, it is good to see him one more time.

The character of "Mr. Freeze" was actually originally called "Mr. Zero" before the 1960s series renamed him, complete with portrayals from George Sanders, Otto Preminger, and Eli Wallach. However, it was the animated series and the voice portrayal by Michael Ansara that helped to define the character in the current age, particularly with the episode "Heart of Ice", and the movie takes a few elements from that episode (incidentally, that animated portrayal would have their own direct-to-video film the year after this film was released). Schwarzenegger managed to get top billing and a hefty sum of money all to spend hours in a chair to have acrylic paint on his face, complete with him wearing a bald cap and LED lights. In my mind, I regard him as a fairly decent actor within his own particular range. Unfortunately, having him do pun after pun after pun with only the bare minimum of drama is not that range. He is amusing to watch, but there is nothing to draw on in actual pathos - you are here to see him lumber around, which works for anyone watching the movie for perverse amusement; unsurprisingly, he doesn't regret starring in the movie. Thurman does not regret her appearance in the film either, and it isn't hard to see why. The femme fatale characterization actually plays well to her strengths when it comes to easy innuendos, which she does pretty well in ways that I had forgotten before. She would fit right in with the 1960s series, complete with shouting "Curses!" when being caught by her own plants (so yes, there is a bit of camp here, or whatever you want to call it). Bane was one of those comic characters that got hot in the 1990s with their own respective interpretation in the animated series, with the most noted moment being the breaking of Batman's back. Here, played by bodybuilder/WCW wrestler Robert "Jeep" Swenson, he is used as a tool that just says one word from time to time that doesn't even get to fight the lead hero. Hell, Glover's brief moments in chewing scenery is more interesting to hear, and he doesn't even make it past the first hour of a 125 minute movie.

For a movie made around $125 million dollars, it really does come off as one of the most expensive B-movies. Talking about a plot to freeze a city is straight out of a rejected James Bond movie, but the fact that the villains involve ice and plants is especially amusing to consider with the differences provided. Look, saying that the movie is one big corporate product is the easiest thing to say about the movie. But if you think about this, it is probably a benefit that the movie came out the way it did. If the movie was actually a moneymaker without such vitriolic reception, maybe the comic book movie would have gone even further in vapid nonsense. Sure, trying to hone in a realistic tone to a comic book movie might not be everyone's taste, but there is a lesson to be had in seeing what occurs when the desire to further a franchise is more apparent than making a worthwhile movie with at least some sort of story to it. At any rate, one can see the de-evolution of the Batman series of films in the span of eight years and then see the evolution of the next Batman series that essentially makes a worthwhile balance. No matter what decade it is, Batman & Robin is a magnificent failure, a great grand gesture of kvetching kitsch that will live in inflamed infamy for all time.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

To anyone who have read these Redux Reviews, I hope you enjoyed them. I know it seemed sudden to do a group of revisitations, but the timing of Batman Returns and Batman & Robin each having special anniversaries had me thinking to look back on the films that preceded them. I have been trying to carefully look back on reviews that to me...needed to be better. As such, I hope these reviews have given you some form of interest, whether in looking upon the comic book material or on perspectives or even just a fun fact. At any rate, there will be a couple more Reduxes in the future along with actual reviews. Suggestions are also welcome.

Redux: Batman Forever.

Redux #217: Batman Forever.

Cast: 

Val Kilmer (Bruce Wayne / Batman), Tommy Lee Jones (Harvey Dent / Two-Face), Jim Carrey (Edward Nygma / The Riddler), Nicole Kidman (Dr. Chase Meridian), Chris O'Donnell (Dick Grayson / Robin), Michael Gough (Alfred Pennyworth), Pat Hingle (James Gordon), George Wallace (The Mayor), Drew Barrymore (Sugar), Debi Mazar (Spice), Ed Begley Jr. (Fred Stickley), with Ofer Samra (Harvey's Thug), Elizabeth Sanders (Gossip Gerty), and René Auberjonois (Dr. Burton) Directed by Joel Schumacher (#197 - Phone Booth)

Review: 

"I have often been criticized for objectifying men and women sexually in my films. I have yet to find out what the bad part of that is."

This wasn't the first Batman movie to follow Batman Returns (1992), remember. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (1993), was the big-screen spinoff of Batman: The Animated Series, and I think we all know that it was a pretty good movie. And yet, here we are with the next live-action Batman movie with Batman Forever. You have to remember that Joel Schumacher wanted to make a Batman movie that wanted to look into the growing fear of the crusade started by Batman, and he happened to be a fan of the comics as a child. In fact, this is the first Batman movie to show the origin of Bruce Wayne stumbling onto what would become the Batcave. Basically, he wanted to possibly adapt Frank Miller's Batman: Year One comic to the screen, but Warner Bros. rejected this idea, which is where Keaton decided to leave the main role. The design of Gotham would be packed more with statues and neon that seems more akin to the 1950s style of Batman rather than Tim Burton's Batman (Burton was relegated to producer). But Schumacher apparently really did want to make a darker movie, reportedly doing a three-hour cut. He also found inspiration to cast Kilmer (favored by the studio as opposed to casting William Baldwin) as Batman when he saw Tombstone (1993). Husband-and-wife duo Lee Batchler and Janet Scott Batchler were tasked to write the story for the film, although Akiva Goldsman (writer on the script for Schumacher's The Client (1994)) would be brought in to do re-writes. Reportedly, Schumacher did in fact shoot scenes for a version of the movie that would have made the film run considerably longer than its two-hour run-time that had a test screening, but it is unknown if the footage for any kind of "Schumacher Cut" could be cobbled together for anyone to see (I would naturally be in favor of the idea).

Honestly, while I can see why the director would wanted to try and maintain some of the dark elements from the previous two movies, I can appreciate what managed to come out from a comic book's comic book movie. Schumacher wants a world with black lights, pastel colors and rave lighting that makes a curious studio product, and it actually managed to grow on me from the nine year difference since I saw it. In other words, if you can't beat doing the Burton look, why not just go for a different kind of distinct look? I think it does just fine in that regard, keeping Gotham in the spotlight of distinct staging that one even sees a knockoff Statue of Liberty for a brief scene. Apparently Kilmer found the movie packed with "kitschiness". He isn't particularly wrong, but it is interesting to look back at the movie in the past and present tense, particularly with what was to come from Schumacher and company two years later. Kilmer takes the lessened reclusive approach to the dual act of the main role, to moderate interest. Granted, he won't be considered better than the previous approach by Keaton, but he basically tries to pull a cheap James Bond impersonation that kind of works in a weird sort of way where folks either want to love him or be him while he tries a bit of dry deadpan alongside a bit of psychological profiling about why he just can't quit being a man dressed as a bat. Kidman seems seeped right in for camp with the offbeat attempts at building chemistry with Kilmer, which only work on a marginal level (i.e. around the level of what you saw from Kim Basinger matched with Keaton in the '89 Batman, only with Kidman being the loony one). I had forgotten to mention that Marlon Wayans was the name considered for the role of Robin when Batman Returns thought of having the character in mind. It did not work out, but at least the idea of Robin being in one of the films was retained, seemingly influenced by the other incarnations of the Robin character (such as Tim Drake). O'Donnell is only marginally useful in the movie, reminding one that the Burt Ward interpretation matched the lead star with striking effectiveness in general timing that O'Donnell (playing a "teenager" while in his twenties) wishes he could do rather than the mediocrity presented here.

It is probably amusing to see Jones and Carrey trying to play villains together, since the former apparently hated the latter because he could not "sanction his buffoonery". Jones had previously worked with Schumacher on The Client, and the director had him tabbed as the first choice. Warner Bros. had to pay out their contract with Billy Dee Williams (cast as Harvey Dent for the 1989 Batman movie) just to get Jones, and I honestly can't see what was such a good idea about doing this. Jones isn't terrible in this movie as it just happens to be a misguided approach to material that seems a bit ripped from Jack Nicholson's Joker from 1989. One needs a better introduction to the character of Dent rather than just have him thrust upon you for the opening action sequence...kind of like having that courtroom scene (shown on TV as exposition) but expanded rather than just being there for a minute (hence the deleted scenes, with one apparently showing how he had escaped from an asylum). The suit he wears begs for the grotesque, but he instead is plastered there like a rabid dog trying to move around with three good legs. Jones is a fine actor well worth talking about, but this isn't exactly one of his shining achievements. Carrey wasn't even the second name thought to be up for the Riddler, since Robin Williams and Steve Martin each turned it down. At any rate, the success of Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994) helped attract Schumacher to casting Carrey. He is the star of the show, which works out for some general interest when it comes to seeing someone try to flaunt their intellectual superiority in a brain drain scheme. He has managed to cultivate some of the charm brought out by Frank Gorshin's portrayal of the villain in the 1960s version while still maintaining his own distinct habits to useful results (some might say too useful if one finds the movie as a Jim Carrey movie rather than a Batman movie). 

In total, the plot cohesion is roughly the same as the other two movies, albeit with more of a James Bond type of villain plot involving guys taking people's IQ with a device to get smarter just to get back at rejection. Besides, the deduction to finally put it together on the identity of the Riddler (M-R-E, get it, because it's a mystery?) is not as hard of a leap as when it was done in the 1960s.  The idea to tie a hero's motivation for revenge because the character just happened to kill their parent? Are we talking about Batman (1989) or this movie? The only difference is that the lead hero isn't going around potentially leading henchmen to their doom. In this sense, I appreciated it more in its offbeat manner that is a weird product of its time in the same sense that '89 Batman swept people in its own brand of Batmania. Sure, that movie didn't have anything as...striking as having the Batman costume feature codpieces and rubber tips, but I think you understand what I mean when I say that the movie managed to turn a corner with me. It may be loud and it may sometimes be dumb, but there is something striking about its off-center style that proves a curiosity in the right places to succeed more so than when it strikes out. It won't please everyone that follows the caped crusader in film/television, but it ekes out as a suitable winner in my mind.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Redux: Batman Returns.

Redux #316: Batman Returns.

Cast: 

Michael Keaton (Bruce Wayne / Batman), Danny DeVito (Oswald Cobblepot / The Penguin), Michelle Pfeiffer (Selina Kyle / Catwoman), Christopher Walken (Max Shreck), Michael Gough (Alfred Pennyworth), Pat Hingle (Commissioner James Gordon), Michael Murphy (The Mayor), Vincent Schiavelli (The Organ Grinder), Andrew Bryniarski (Charles "Chip" Shreck), Cristi Conaway (The Ice Princess), Rick Zumwalt (The Tattooed Strongman), Anna Katarina (The Poodle Lady), Paul Reubens (Tucker Cobblepot), and Diane Salinger (Esther Cobblepot) Directed by Tim Burton (#040 - Batman, #107 - Beetlejuice, #132 - Alice in Wonderland, #196 - Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, #262 - Corpse Bride)

Review: 

"I like Batman Returns better than the first one. There was this big backlash that it was too dark, but I found this movie much less dark."

Tim Burton did not originally intend to return for the sequel, if you can believe it. But he elected to return when Warner Bros. granted him more creative control along with the shuffling of Jon Peters and Peter Guber to executive producers (the same fate as the people they basically screwed over in Benjamin Melniker and Michael E. Uslan) while Burton became a co-producer. Beforehand, Sam Hamm was tasked to write the script once again, with his apparent first script having the villains of The Penguin and Catwoman looking for buried treasure involving a secret group of wealthy Gotham citizens, which apparently featured a climax reveal where the society was really behind the death of Batman's parents (one part does ring familiar in the Penguin trying to frame Batman). At the request of Burton, he was later replaced by Daniel Waters (writer of the dubious cult favorite Heathers in 1989). It should be noted that Waters helped create the character played by Walken, as opposed to possible ideas by Hamm to include the character of Two-Face. Perhaps it is strange irony that the idea of the Penguin running for Mayor actually had been seen before in the Adam West interpretation of Batman ("Hizzoner the Penguin"/"Dizzoner the Penguin", for those at home).Wesley Strick was tasked to flesh out the script during principal photography, specifically with devising a "master plan" for the climax (Warner Bros. apparently tried to go with either freezing or warming Gotham), which doesn't seem too far removed from the prodigal son angle seen through the film; I should note however that the character of Max Shreck was actually meant to be the younger brother of the Penguin before Strick excised it from the script (which also saw the character of Robin go by the wayside). However, the practices of the Writers Guild of America in dealing with scripts and principal photography meant that Strick didn't get credit as a writer. The design might have been under a different designer (Bo Welch) this time around, but it does continue to remind one of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920), which does manage to make one enchanted by what one could do in a time of sound stages and miniatures (the movie does used CG effects with a Batmobile shield and remote Batarang, of course). This is also true for the army commanded by the Penguin, which sees real penguins alongside actors in suits, puppets, and animation. Casting is sometimes a stroke of chance. Apparently, the first choice for the character played by Walken was David Bowie. He rejected it to do a part in Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me (1992) while Burton had to be convinced to cast Walken because he was apparently scared of him. Pfeiffer got her role because Annette Bening became pregnant, and DeVito was one of dozens of people considered for his role when Dustin Hoffman turned it down.

You know, it is a funny thing to consider the legacy of the movie after 30 years since its release on June 19, 1992. It wasn't as big of a success as the original 1989 film, with one major thing about it being the fact that it was apparently too dark. To me, I think this is a ridiculous assessment, as if one couldn't accept the idea of a Tim Burton movie that sees him not shackled by producers or studios who are starting to think about making products that could be riper for toys. I for one welcome movies that feature folks with dark saliva or brief shots of someone putting a bird in their mouth. Besides, it wasn't like Batman didn't lead anybody to their downfall in the 1989 movie, so trying to go with that argument is even worse. In fact, I will state with no doubt in my mind that this movie is superior to the 1989 movie, because it elevates the eerie atmosphere of cynicism and style with even further burrowing into the psyche of people struck with forms of duality that make a capable dark fairy tale. Granted, the overall story is probably not as cohesive as it could be, but it most definitely has better sticking points than what was seen in the 1989 movie when it comes to duality that isn't just a show for one villain and not much else. Keaton continues his timing from the first portrayal that seems him deal with more threats of people who look to match him in looney double sides that will either see him try to not show his scars to one while the other just thinks he is jealous that he's a genuine freak that doesn't have to wear a mask. He doesn't say too much here, since he felt that that the suit would do most of the talking (requesting as such in trimming lines from the script). Burgess Meredith did do a fine job in the 1960s interpretation of the Penguin that I can still hear in my mind when it comes to dubious gentlemen of eloquence. Burton, seemingly inspired by Lon Chaney and his performances such as The Phantom of the Opera, has decided to go with a portrayal of the Penguin with trauma and deformed lunatic for DeVito to play. Some might not care much for the creeping oddball in a movie that starts a bleak streak with showing a child being left to die. But I actually appreciate his antisocial interpretation of someone with the mindset of a sewer that makes a properly decadent villain. Several people played the Catwoman in the 1960s, most notably with Julie Newmar. Pfeiffer makes a quality portrayal in her own double-edged sword that grows in confidence with wicked fierceness that does make a quality pairing with Keaton in captivating torment. The scene where she arises from death to smash her place while spray painting things black is probably the best highlight, although seeing her descent of revenge meet its logical conclusion works as well. Undeniably, Walken is the ideal choice to stand well amongst costumed freaks because of his useful timing when it comes to essentially playing a robber baron, having a decadence of craven ooze that seems reminiscent of Vincent Price in all the right ways. Gough and Hingle do what they need to do while Schiavelli makes an interesting side face of terror. The movie does have some of the offbeat plot motivations from before that make it another example of style and substance clashing together. I'm fine with the general story, all things considered.

It is interesting to see the differing paths that came out in the next couple of years. Warner Bros. decided to make another Batman movie without Burton as director, with him being utilized as a producer for what became Batman Forever (1995) because they clearly desired making more money rather than see what Burton might have had in mind or keep a darker sensibility. The portrayal of Catwoman attracted attention enough to make plans for a spinoff with Pfeiffer that had a script from Waters (which apparently involved her turning up in a resort run by superheroes that poked fun at the mythos) and ideas in mind to have Burton to direct; a script was turned in to Warner Bros the same day that Forever came out, but the movie would languish in development hell until one finally saw Catwoman on screen again in 2004, albeit with Halle Berry. In 2021, a comic book series called Batman '89 was released by DC Comics that served as a continuation of the two movies with Sam Hamm as the main writer. I appreciate the guiding vision laid out by Burton in dark sensibility with shades of the grotesque that is in my mind the best Batman movie of the series released by Warner Bros in the 20th century. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Redux: Batman (1989).

Redux #040: Batman (1989)

Cast: 

Jack Nicholson (Jack Napier / The Joker), Michael Keaton (Bruce Wayne / Batman), Kim Basinger (Vicki Vale), Robert Wuhl (Alexander Knox), Pat Hingle (Commissioner Gordon), Billy Dee Williams (Harvey Dent), Michael Gough (Alfred Pennyworth), Jack Palance (Carl Grissom), Jerry Hall (Alicia Hunt), Tracey Walter (Bob the Goon), Lee Wallace (Mayor Borg), and William Hootkins (Lt. Max Eckhardt) Directed by Tim Burton.

Review: 

"I liked parts of it, but the whole movie is mainly boring to me. It's OK, but it was more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie." - Tim Burton

If you remember correctly, 1989's Batman took the world by storm when it was released in June of 1989 in ways that have not been forgotten when it comes to blockbusters and comic book movies. Michael E. Uslan, inspired by reading Batman comics as a kid, had a desire to make the definitive version of Batman that had been envisioned by artist Bob Kane and writer Bill Finger when they created the character in 1939. Uslan was a fan of the main character alongside the family of villains, and he even taught a class about comic books at Indiana University. Of course, when Uslan first approached DC Comics about making a movie, they thought it was a crazy idea, because the character's popularity had diminished in the years that followed the cancellation of the 1966 television series, which certainly was still in the public consciousness for the character (which makes sense, as the Adam West interpretation certainly matched the era to a T). Uslan cultivated his movie credentials by working at United Artists (after graduating law school), and he credit DC head Sol Harrison as a mentor in getting the process to a good start - the rights to Batman were bought by Uslan and Benjamin Melniker in 1979, aligning with producers Jon Peters and Peter Guber (it should be noted that Guber and Peters, hairdresser-turned producer and possible scumbag,  manipulated their way to be main producers in getting a deal with Warner Brothers that sent Uslan and Melniker to executive producers with only "net profits"). Uslan even wrote a script with a friend to try and give people an idea of what he wanted to make to counteract the preconceived idea from doubtful skeptics along with a "creative blueprint" memo, complete with having Jack Nicholson in mind for the Joker. Warner Bros. decided to serve as the studio to produce Batman in 1980, but their attempts to have a script by Tom Mankiewicz (contributor on the Superman movie in 1978) did not go well. At any rate, pre-production stalled until 1986. Warner executive Bonni Lee got Burton to join in on the project, helped by the success seen in his work on Pee-wee's Big Adventure (1985) for the studio, although the success with Beetlejuice (1988) gave the formal greenlight in 1988. Burton, at the suggestion of Peters, picked Keaton to play Batman because of their work together on the latter film, one that he felt would have the audience suspend its belief and take the actor seriously. He also stated that the locale of Gotham City had to be just as important a character for the movie to work. Steve Englehart and Julie Hickson each wrote film treatments before a screenwriter was hired. Sam Hamm wrote the story (alongside side work done by Burton, without credit), but the screenplay was done by Hamm and Warren Skaaren. Rewrites were done by Skaaren with others, excluding Hamm due to a strike by the Writers Guild of America. Influences included stories such as Alan Moore & Brian Bolland's The Killing Joke (a story that Burton personally loved in understanding the mythology) and Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. Bob Kane worked as a consultant on the film (coincidentally, he credited Finger, who died in 1974, as a "contributing force", although Finger was not given proper credit until 2015). Peters tried to mold Burton in his image when it came to making a Batman that he didn't want to be thought of (in his words) "Wussman", complete with making suggestions for the climax, which originally involved a different character meeting their end, and he actually commissioned a 38-foot model of a cathedral for the characters to be for said climax. At any rate, Peters and Guber did not return to produce the sequel, but they reaped the benefits of being behind one of the biggest blockbusters of its time; as his third feature film, Burton described the filming process as "torture", but he returned for the sequel in 1992.

When I saw this film originally in 2011, I was a fourteen-year-old trying to write quickly and write what I liked on the spot with a movie. Long story short, those reviews aren't great, so a redux movement is slowly building up steam by me to get as many redux-es possible for reviews I feel deserve better. This one, even with 200 words for what was somehow called a 10/10 movie, seemed very ripe for a second look. Actually, it is a third look, because I did watch this movie a couple of years later to try and refresh my memory, which didn't exactly help this movie too much. The third time around has basically confirmed that the best memories about a movie are sometimes left to younger eyes. Burton thought that the best way to approach the movie is to see Batman and Joker as essentially two of a kind in odd freaks that are intertwined in origin. Anton Furst and Peter Young designed the sets for the film, which shows an Art Deco style that makes Gotham seem reminiscent of something like The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) or noir. You have to understand that people actually thought that casting Keaton was going to make it seem like a comedy because of his work on stuff like Mr. Mom (1983). It is interesting to consider that because of the fact that Keaton approaches the material with righteous timing and balance required, even if one seems to think that he is overshadowed by you-know-who - him going "you wanna get nuts?!" is an interesting highlight when thinking of the fair blend of seeing the deeper-voiced Batman and the unassuming Bruce Wayne. Of course, the high-priced and high-billed Nicholson steals the show, because playing an agent of chaos that grins his way through the proceedings is a role to dream for that he stretches right to form. This isn't to say that it is a hammy performance as it is just one that controls the mood of the movie that might as well make it his movie more than Keaton's movie. Basinger does fine with the balance between the battle of freaks, bewildered but not washed out; the scene where she waltzes into the Batcave doesn't exactly help. Apparently, Wuhl's character was meant to die in the climax, but the filmmakers liked him so much they let him live. That is probably the best compliment I can find when talking about him in this film, because the less said about him, the better. Hingle and Gough don't have too much to particularly do, but at least one takes them seriously for what is needed. Williams in theory should be really interesting, but since there would be no more Williams as the character of Dent, it comes off as ridiculous to have him cast but not actually do anything (besides, Walter is the amusing quiet man in the group). 

Maybe there is an argument that the movie might be a bit too dark for younger folks. This is ridiculous, since I doubt that one will really have this much trouble with a PG-13 rated movie like this in just letting the visuals play out on screen; one could also just stick with the West version of Batman, since it also holds up well, incidentally. Danny Elfman, best known for his work with the band Oingo Boingo alongside Burton's previous two features, did the music, albeit with Prince composing and writing songs as well. The music score ends up sticking better than the songs, because one clearly won't forget the main theme. As a whole, the 126 minutes does go by with loose construction, one that tries hard to ride on style rather than substance, which only can go so far before falling all the way off the offbeat wayside. Seeing the origin for the Joker is far more interesting than the eventual reveal of the Wayne murder, because it makes things too convenient to have two characters create the origin for each other (i.e., having a random guy being the killer is far more tragic than just finding out it is the guy you happen to be going off to face and probably take down). I think the fact that the success of the movie inspired the development of an animated series for television probably is more of a point in the favor of the legacy of the film in what it impacted rather than the overall content of the film itself (the series, premiering in 1992, is arguably the best portrayal of Batman outside of the comics). It is a roaring adventure that builds a mystery with fair success for haunted spectacle with Burton's sensibilities clashing with other visions to make a strange concoction that lives and dies in the time it was made. It is the movie that tried to top the heights raised by Superman (1978), pure and simple. Of course, whether the movie works or not in its execution is up to you. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Dr. Terror's House of Horrors.

Review #1419: Dr. Terror's House of Horrors.

Cast: 
Peter Cushing (Dr. Schreck)

"Werewolf" segment": Neil McCallum (Jim Dawson, Ursula Howells (Mrs. Deirdre Biddulph), Peter Madden (Caleb), Katy Wild (Valda), and Edward Underdown (Tod) 

"Creeping Vine" segment: Ann Bell (Ann Rogers), Bernard Lee (Hopkins), Alan Freeman (Bill Rogers), Jeremy Kemp (Jerry Drake), and Sarah Nicholls (Carol Rogers)

"Voodoo" segment: Roy Castle (Biff Bailey), Kenny Lynch (Sammy Coin), Harold Lang (Roy Shine), Christopher Carlos (Vrim), and Thomas Baptiste (Dambala)

"Disembodied Hand" segment: Christopher Lee (Franklyn Marsh), Michael Gough (Eric Landor), Isla Blair (Pretty girl), Judy Cornwell (Nurse), and Hedger Wallace (Surgeon)

"Vampire" segment: Donald Sutherland (Dr. Bob Carroll), Max Adrian (Dr. Blake), Jennifer Jayne (Nicolle Carroll), and Al Mulock (Detective)

Directed by Freddie Francis (#854 - They Came from Beyond Space, #856 - The Evil of Frankenstein, #860 - Dracula Has Risen from the Grave, #1145 - Tales from the Crypt)

Review: 
"As far back as I can ever remember, without really knowing it I wanted to be an actor. I was always dressing up, you know, playing pretend, putting on mothers hats and things. I'm sure Freud would have something to say about that. It was very much in my blood."

"Making films has never just been a job to me, it is my life. I have some interests outside of acting - I sing and I've written books, for instance - but acting is what keeps me going, it's what I do, it gives life purpose."

Horror, particularly horror in a decade of expanding tastes like the 1960s, can come in any kind of package. Anthology is a particular interesting manner in telling stories revolving around something creepy that can be linked together by either a theme, a character or a framing device. There have been plenty of anthology films in numerous genres, but one key anthology film that helped inspire this was Dead of Night (1945), a British production that producer Milton Subotsky liked enough to feel inspired to do his own multi-story film. He had started his work in television, but soon moved to films such as Rock, Rock, Rock (1956) and The City of the Dead (1960), which he produced with Max Rosenberg. In 1962, they would form Amicus Productions, a British company led by the American producers and writer that lasted until 1977. They specialized primarily in horror over the years that would have a share of name actors alongside young and old actors in the cast, particularly when it came to their anthologies. This was the first of seven anthology films they would do over a span of nine years, with those including Torture Garden (1967), The House That Dripped Blood (1970), Asylum (1972), Tales from the Crypt (1972), The Vault of Horror (1973) and From Beyond the Grave (1974). This was filmed in a span of less than three months from Freddie Francis, who had a career of over four decades in both directing and cinematographer that was known for his work on British horror films while winning two Academy Awards for the latter.

Honestly, the parts that are really interesting are the scenes inside the train with Cushing and the main five, since he tries on a beard and an German accent that stand out from the curious others. This isn't surprising to me at this point, because he had a perfectionist and dignified attitude that served him well in six decades of film, stage, television and radio, treating every role with seriousness that he felt his audience would like. One can have a soft spot for British horror when it is done right and Cushing always seems to end up fitting in to most of the right ones. Accompanying him is fellow British actor and friend Lee, who had a career just as versatile and long (nearly seven decades! This includes a singing career before turning 90!) with a distinctive voice that for a change is not playing someone villainous but merely just pompous, which he breezes by without trouble. McCallum and Freeman aren't exactly as well-known in presence (the former being an actor of stage and television and the latter being a disc jockey and radio personality), but they are least serviceable to starting the film with decent leads in their respective stories. Castle, a dancer/singer/comedian comes off with the lesser of the five stories and suffers for it. Sutherland, a Canadian actor doing British roles in film and TV before hitting it big later in this decade, makes for a composed turn in his third career role, fresh in looking for more beyond horror fare.

The segments each have a focus on something you've likely seen in a horror film before, whether that means a supernatural beast or a killer plant/hand or voodoo, and they generally range from average to slightly above average. In this sense, the Lee story involving a hand that follows him around is my personal favorite of the bunch, since it also features Gough for a time (making fun of an art critic, no less) in a segment that has a silly looking effect but enjoyment value regardless. I would say that the werewolf story is a notch below that, having a bit of interest in its coffin hidden in a fake wall that leads to a somewhat played out ending. The vine story also has a silly-looking effect, particularly since it doesn't have much of an ending (regardless of the resolution for the film, which is just as odd), although at least it is nice to see Bernard Lee play his type of authority role and utilize a pipe for safety. The vampire tale is fair, although it probably suffers from having a small time to build a story from the most, complete with the final twist in the knife with its last line (as is the case with the wolf and hand story). The voodoo is the lesser of all the tales (although none are actually terrible), mostly because of how hokey it is in generating actual suspense (copying a tune and getting followed for it, what a twist), but at least none of these tales manage to bore the senses or hold for too long. In the long run, this is a fair package of horror that utilizes its familiar trappings of its genre and stars to useful effect, and it is a serviceable film for its era to pick up on a day for curiosity.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

They Came from Beyond Space.

Review #854: They Came from Beyond Space.

Cast:
Robert Hutton (Dr. Curtis Temple), Jennifer Jayne (Lee Mason), Zia Mohyeddin (Farge), Bernard Kay (Richard Arden), Michael Gough (Master of the Moon), Geoffrey Wallace (Alan Mullane), Maurice Good (Agent Stillwell), Luanshya Greer (Female Gas Station Attendant), John Harvey (Bill Trethowan), and Diana King (Mrs. Trethowan) Directed by Freddie Francis.

Review:
It figures I had to pick some low budget sci-fi flick for today, especially one made from sets from another Amicus Productions film, Daleks - Invasion Earth: 2150 A.D (#472), while being based on a novel named "The Gods Hate Kansas"...while utilizing a title as cliche as one would expect. It is evident early on the lack of charisma this movie has, with everything being conveyed in a very dull manner with its ridiculous aspects seeming to be cobbled from better projects. If you like seeing random sets and random splotches of plot (like a metal plated scientist being protected from some sort of attack), this is the movie for you, with all the stops of lunacy one would expect from a low budget, low rate film. This is the kind of movie where you fight to stay attention and watch it, in part because you want to make sure you're still conscious. The cast doesn't really have any seeming life to them, with Hutton being as standard as it gets, and there is no real charisma between any of these actors. One highlight (or whatever word you would use) is one of the characters melting down their silver trophies in order to make a "helmet" to protect himself from the intruders...and it looks about as you'd expect. Naturally, the climax is a cluster of stuff thrown on the wall, with Michael Gough appearing as the Master of the Moon, where it is revealed that they did their intrusion in order to get workers to get them home to die. Yes, I'm serious. At the end (to spoil it for you), the two groups agree to have a partnership together, because I guess enslaving humans as workers to build a ship can be swept under the rug because they learned they could just have asked. The best thing about the movie? It lasts only 85 minutes. If you know me and this show well, I do have a spot for low budget flicks, provided that the movie actually looks like it's trying to be good, but this is not the right example of a good low budget film, nor a competent one.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Top Secret!

Review #585: Top Secret!

Cast
Val Kilmer (Nick Rivers), Lucy Gutteridge (Hillary Flammond), Christopher Villiers (Nigel), Jeremy Kemp (General Streck), Omar Sharif (Agent Cedric), Peter Cushing (Bookstore Proprietor), Michael Gough (Dr. Paul Flammond), and Warren Clarke (Colonel von Horst) Directed by Jim Abrahams (#028 - Hot Shots! and #375 - Hot Shots! Part Deux), David Zucker, and Jerry Zucker.

Review
This is the first film reviewed on this show directed by the famed ZAZ trio (though I've reviewed two films of one of the three already), who are more well known for directing Airplane! and The Naked Gun. So how does this film hold up? If you love sight gags and love a dose of charm with an exceptional cast that's not too long, you'll love this film. Val Kilmer meshes well with the cast and he also seems to be a decent singer as well, the rest of the cast is certainly memorable (especially Omar Sharif, whose last scene consists of him being stuck in a crushed car...and surviving), and it is nice to see Gough and Cushing, even if it is brief. The sight gags are fun and brief, and this is a movie that is entertaining enough to last 90 minutes, which is perfectly fine for a Friday night on Summer break.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Corpse Bride.

Review #262: Corpse Bride.

Cast
Johnny Depp (Victor Van Dort), Helena Bonham Carter (Emily), Emily Watson (Victoria Everglot), Tracey Ullman (Nell Van Dort/Hildegarde), Paul Whitehouse (William Van Dort/Mayhew), Joanna Lumley (Maudeline Everglot), Albert Finney (Lord Finis Everglot), Richard E. Grant (Lord Barkis Bittern), Christopher Lee (Gallswells) and Michael Gough (Elder Gutknecht) Directed by Tim Burton (#40 - Batman, #107 - Beetlejuice, #132 - Alice in Wonderland, and #196 - Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) and Mike Johnson.

Review
Once again I'm reviewing a Tim Burton film, and it is filled with familiar faces (This is the 3rd review with Johnny Depp, the 8th with Helena Bonham Carter, and the 7th with Christopher Lee.) So how is this film? It's...Good. Not great, but good. The animation is stellar, and it does have a well developed story. The acting is stellar, Depp and Carter do a fine a job along with the rest of the supporting cast (One standout being Richard E. Grant portraying an excellent villain) It has some good moments combined with good animation and acting to make a good film. A good success in all in all. The month is nearly over, but October is still going well.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Dracula (1958)

Review #258: Dracula.

Cast
Peter Cushing (Doctor Van Helsing), Christopher Lee (Count Dracula), Michael Gough (Arthur Holmwood), Melissa Stribling (Mina Holmwood), Carol Marsh (Lucy Holmwood), John Van Eyssen (Jonathan Harker), Janina Faye (Tania), Charles Lloyd-Pack (Doctor Seward), George Merritt (Policeman), and George Woodbridge (Landlord) Directed by Terence Fisher (#257 - The Curse of Frankenstein)

Review
One year later after The Curse of Frankenstein's big success, there would an adaptation of the classic novel Dracula, by Bram Stoker. Cushing and Lee are once again here, and they click here as well. Actually, the whole film works. The scenery looks good, some nice shots in the castle, giving a bit of mood. I don't want to forget Michael Gough and his good performance as well. The film is good, having some chilling moments and in glorious Technicolor. Lastly, the end scene is very climatic, with some really good effects used. In the end, this film works, just like The Curse of Frankenstein, but in an entirely different, but a good way. It's fitting to review both a Frankenstein and a Dracula film, having done this once before (#071 - Dracula and #072 - Frankenstein)

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Review #132: Alice in Wonderland.

Cast
Mia Wasikowska (Alice Kingsley), Johnny Depp (The Hatter), Helena Bonham Carter (Red Queen), Anne Hathaway (White Queen), Crispin Glover (Knave of Hearts), Michael Sheen (The White Rabbit), Matt Lucas (Tweedledee and Tweedledum), Stephen Fry (Chesire Cat), Alan Rickman (Absolem the Caterpillar), Barbara Windsor (Mallymkun the Dormouse), Timothy Spall (Bayard the Bloodhound), Michael Gough (Uilleam the Dodo), and Christopher Lee (Jabberwocky) Directed by Tim Burton.

Review
Tim Burton is known for his dark films (Batman - #040), Edward Scissorhands, Corpse Bride, Beetlejuice - #107, Ed Wood, etc), and this is no different. It feels like a tale of fun with many things along the way. Granted, they may be CGI, but they at least do look like they were meant to be in Wonderland. Wasikowska does a good job as Alice, making you feel for her and her struggles. Depp does a good job as well, making you interested in the film. The rest of the cast (Carter, Hathaway, Sheen, Rickman, Fry) do good jobs as well. But the two that while not having lines that stand out are Lee and Gough. Lee feels like the Jabberwocky, with that still deep voice. Gough does a decent job in his final film role, doing his best. This film tries to be great, and it works until you realize that it feels like it runs into the same thing over and over again as we get a fight that doesn't feel special given all we have seen. I have not seen the other film adaptions or even the book, but this is at least a good flick.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.