Showing posts with label Sid Haig. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sid Haig. Show all posts

February 28, 2025

Foxy Brown.

Review #2353: Foxy Brown.

Cast: 
Pam Grier (Foxy Brown), Antonio Fargas (Lincoln "Link" Brown), Peter Brown (Stevie Elias), Kathryn Loder (Miss Katherine Wall), Terry Carter (Dalton Ford / Michael Anderson), Harry Holcombe (Judge Fenton), Sid Haig (Hays), Juanita Brown (Claudia), Bob Minor (Oscar), and Tony Giorgio (Eddie) Written and Directed by Jack Hill (#1654 - Blood Bath, #1740 - Spider Baby, and #2352 - Coffy)

Review: 
Sure, maybe one can't make a sequel to a successful hit, but they can sure make one that sounds right on the same wavelength. The resulting hit of Coffy made it easy to want to make another Grier movie involving action, albeit not as a sequel that Hill envisioned because American International Pictures apparently believed sequels did not do well with audiences.  Evidently, this was released by AIP as a double feature with Truck Turner. While it wasn't nearly as substantial a hit as Coffy (released thirteen months prior), it was generally well-liked enough and Grier continued her run in movies the following year with Sheba, Baby and Friday Foster. Evidently, Foxy Brown apparently became more of a cult curiosity than Coffy although Hill felt the earlier effort was better, particularly with the character he envisioned that could use their sexuality just as much as using down and dirty street fighting. Hill actually had two films released in 1974, with The Swinging Cheerleaders coming out a month after this movie; apparently, AIP treated Hill lousy enough to not even invite him to a screening of the film, which he shot in less than three weeks (the movie, which runs at 92 minutes, apparently was made on the same budget as Coffy at $500,000, albeit with a raise to both its director and star).

Admittedly, it is funny to make a movie that isn't quite a sequel while also not exactly having time to say the profession of the lead. She just kicks ass and seeks revenge against the scuzziness of the street (which even involved would-be politicians). Instead of a sister that fell to heroin addiction, now we have someone with a scuzzy brother and a dead government boyfriend who, interestingly enough, faces off against a couple involved in a drug/prostitute syndicate (strangely enough, it has a similar ending to the other movie in having a man get castrated). At least you get flashier wardrobe from Grier to go with plenty of violence and skin? I have to agree with Hill that Coffy was the better of the two movies, mainly because of the actual shock value that comes in a kickass lead that doesn't need to be a karate expert but instead is, well, Pam Grier. Sure, she may not get much to actually do that is particularly different from before with a little less guilt in the whole "vengeance" thing, but she still commands the screen just as well as before for obvious reasons. It is clear empowerment, and one is having fun while doing it, what more could you want? This actually was the last (of three) movies where Loder appeared, as she died of diabetes at the age of 38 in 1978. She grips the role with the right amount of chewing, at least compared with Brown (mostly known for Western roles), who dawdles a bit in showing menace. Haig actually appeared in both this and Coffy (where he played a heavy pretty well), and while he may have small time to do comedy, it works out fine I suppose. It definitely tries to up the ante in sheer audacity, whether that means a barroom fight or our lead lighting a farm (and two people) on fire after being sexually assaulted, or the appeal to a "neighborhood committee" to not only get revenge but to, well, play with a knife on a man's lower section. As a whole, it definitely is a slicker movie than Coffy that for better or worse does exactly what you would expect in shameless entertainment that will likely deliver the goods for what you want from a movie of its time.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Coffy.

Review #2352: Coffy.

Cast:
Pam Grier (Nurse Flower Child "Coffy" Coffin), Booker Bradshaw (Howard Brunswick), Robert DoQui (George "King George"), William Elliott (Officer Carter), Allan Arbus (Arturo Vitroni), Sid Haig (Omar), Barry Cahill (Officer McHenry), Lee de Broux (Officer Nick), Ruben Moreno (Captain Reuben Ramos), Lisa Farringer (Jeri), and Carol Locatell (Priscilla) Written and Directed by Jack Hill (#1654 - Blood Bath and #1740 - Spider Baby)

Review: 
It probably has been long enough to finally cover a Pam Grier movie, isn't it? Well, I figured it would be best to go with the one with the catchy enough title, which was in the middle of Grier's tenure with American International Pictures. Born in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Grier got involved in stage productions as a teenager before going to Los Angeles to work the switchboard at American International Pictures. Anybody who makes their debut (in a bit role) with Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970) clearly has good fortune on their side. Jack Hill soon casted her among the leads for New World Pictures' The Big Doll House (1971) when he liked what he heard and saw when she participated in a "cattle call" for actors sent to read for parts (he has been quoted as citing her "authority"). The movie was a hit, and Grier was soon cast in the not-quite sequel The Big Bird Cage (1972), which was sandwiched between a handful of supporting roles. Coffy came about because Larry Gordon lost the rights to the film Cleopatra Jones (1973) and AIP wanted to make a movie to beat it to the market. This one was released in May, two months before the release of Cleopatra Jones. This would be the first non-prison lead movie for Grier that would lead to a handful of further feature roles for the remainder of the 1970s. While her leading roles dwindled in the next couple of years, there have still been enough highlights for a lifetime, as evidenced by Jackie Brown (1997). This was the third of four movies made with Hill. They returned to make Foxy Brown (1974), one that Hill had less control over as a movie that was initially aimed to be a follow-up to Coffy.

I find myself wondering just how much fun one can have with movies of this time period, one that dance the line between timeliness and allure with their style and character presence. As it turned out, there is plenty of each to be found with this movie, which manages to excel in general excitement with a snappy lead that exudes charm and style from the get-go while managing to have a tight conviction in showing a system in all of its bleak facets that would make one go for the idea of trying to strike back at it. It is lurid enough to actually make a quality vigilante movie for 90 minutes of sheer pulp that can't just be labeled as sleazy. Unlike certain movies of its time, you've got a lead who isn't a certain type of expert or playing it for humor but instead one wrapped in the terrors of what they believe themselves is important to do versus the conflict in seeing it actually play out. So yes, Grier kicks ass and looks good doing it, but there is more to her in terms of timing and conscience for how she handles herself that is quite curious to see play out on screen. It just so happens the supporting cast around her is scuzzy enough to make the experience worth seeing vigilance play out all the way to the grisly end (this is a movie that has a character killed by being dragged around with a rope before saving the gnarly-ness for last: shotgun to the groin). It isn't even a movie that wraps itself up in a neat bow, because at the end of the day, the disgusting drug trade and other purveyors of the sewer known as crime will still be around somewhere the law can't quite reach (whether by chance or deliberately) but so it goes. As a whole, it is pretty easy to see how Grier became such a star to see and hear with how much she is wrapped up in making this role more than just straight exploitation by playing it as an avenging angel with resilience that is devastatingly breathtaking in more ways than one.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

November 7, 2022

3 from Hell.

Review #1920: 3 from Hell.

Cast: 
Sheri Moon Zombie (Vera-Ellen 'Baby' Firefly), Bill Moseley (Otis B. Driftwood), Sid Haig (Captain Spaulding), Richard Brake (Winslow Foxworth 'Foxy' Coltrane), Jeff Daniel Phillips (Warden Virgil Dallas Harper), Danny Trejo (Rondo), Dee Wallace (Greta), Daniel Roebuck (Morris Green), Pancho Moler (Sebastian), Steven Michael Quezada (Diego), Jackie S. Garcia (Princesa), Bill Oberst Jr. (Tony Commando), Lucinda Jenney (Nebraska), Austin Stoker (Earl Gibson), Emilio Rivera ('Aquarius'), and Clint Howard (Mr. Baggy Britches) Written and Directed by Rob Zombie (#743 - Halloween (2007), #1590 - House of 1000 Corpses#1751 - Halloween II (2009), and #1756 - The Devil's Rejects)

Review: 
If you remember, Rob Zombie had directed two features involving a family of deranged weirdo killers in House of 1000 Corpses (2003) and The Devil's Rejects (2005). The 2003 movie is certainly a mixed bag if there ever was one, liked by folks who probably dug a musician and horror fan like Zombie making a pastiche of things he liked growing up. Sheri Moon Zombie, Bill Moseley, and Sid Haig made a quality trio, albeit on a small scale due to the variety of folks that were in that film. But I dug that movie as an average little ride of drive-in ghoulishness. The Devil's Rejects was a pretty good movie to those who admired the deranged sensibility that came from a trio of actors that were allowed to breathe a bit more with a couple of notable lines and sequences. It was even more of a drive-in movie, but it does so with such blood-soaked enthusiasm. The ending is a pretty good one when it comes to just going nuts with finding a way to run into oblivion. So yes, 14 years later, here is another Zombie film involving a killer trio, with this being the third of the "Firefly" trilogy. Sid Haig was meant to return alongside Zombie and Moseley for a big role. However, Haig was recovering from surgery that had him lose a considerable amount of weight that would make Zombie have to modify his plans. As such, he has one little scene in the beginning before he is given a sendoff; his one scene is nice, at least. Sadly, Haig died a couple of days after the release of this film at the age of 80. As such, it is Richard Brake who is the new part of the trio of Zombie and Mosley. The film had a special three-night showing in September 2019 before release on home video. This was the 7th feature film from Zombie, with his previous effort having been 31 (2016), a movie he has compared to the aforementioned Rejects film.

I would say that this movie is decent enough to justify being made, which I suppose means that Zombie has managed to make a movie that will be hit-or-miss depending on one's patience for his habits as a filmmaker in trying to aim for the drive-in throwback with his personal favorites of music and actors to go along with a few familiar story beats. It does repeat a few things from the previous feature, for better or worse, which means that one will find that Zombie's comfort zone lies within seeing the nature of chaos in a weary world where killers are more fun than folks interested in revenge or in authority (i.e., if one is big on Zombie, the chaos comes off as renewed rather than repetitive). Of course, the opening sequence is a key distinction, touching upon the family as akin to the Manson family with its public curiosity. Eh, only the explanation to how the trio survived a cadre of bullets is probably the only interest (personally, if the trio responded to the praise with mayhem, it might've been a darkly amusing payoff) before the movie gets a grip and pulls its location of Mexico. For 115 minutes, it also is a bit of a tight demand for some audiences, but I did end up finding it an appropriately grisly time that shows the main three in comfortable chemistry to appreciate. S. Zombie proves effective in showing the growing delusion of the character without needing to rely on hammy tricks, and since we have seen here in two previous films, the lingering characteristics that jump from film to film make it all the more captivating in mayhem. Moseley is just as effective in his marked servitude in the work of the devil that has charm just as before without copying every little schtick moment from before. Brake does just fine here, managing to hold his own in terms of charisma (you know, for a killer) that blends right in with the others that doesn't aim for a Haig impersonation while making for useful chemistry between him and Moseley in film sibling form. The others are merely just puppets for the trio to play around with, such as Phillips being held in captive terror or a mild adversary with Rivera or a wide progression of one-shot wonders (Howard playing a clown, Danny Trejo having the bare minimum to do, a smarmy Edson), you get the idea. It works to a point, although it probably makes the overall climax just a mild display of drive-in horror enjoyment. 

As a whole, it is firmly in the middle in quality when compared to the other two films, which means that those who like it and those who don't like it have equally compelling cases if asked by a curious horror fan what seems best to watch on a late night. I veer on the side of support, as long as one liked what they saw before. Regardless of if this is the final one of these films or if we see Zombie do further films involving drive-in horror ambitions, you will have some sort of curiosity with this film in the long run.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Well, here is the end of another month (and one week) of horror. 28 films (and one redux) that ran the gauntlet of the 20th and 21st century. I hope you folks enjoyed the largest effort of Movie Night's 12th season for concentrated writing about horror. Suggestions are always welcome as we move on to other films, and it is almost time for another Thanksgiving celebration, if you know what I mean.

November 7, 2021

The Devil's Rejects.

Review #1756: The Devil's Rejects.

Cast: 
Sid Haig (Captain Spaulding), Bill Moseley (Otis), Sheri Moon Zombie (Baby), William Forsythe (Sheriff Wydell), Ken Foree (Charlie Altamont), Matthew McGrory (Tiny), Leslie Easterbrook (Mother Firefly), Geoffrey Lewis (Roy Sullivan), Priscilla Barnes (Gloria Sullivan), Dave Sheridan (Officer Ray Dobson), Kate Norby (Wendy Banjo), Lew Temple (Adam Banjo), Danny Trejo (Rondo), and Diamond Dallas Page (Billy Ray Snapper) Written and Directed by Rob Zombie (#743 - Halloween (2007), #1590 - House of 1000 Corpses#1751 - Halloween II (2009))

Review: 
I will give credit to Rob Zombie in one aspect. Anybody who can generate enough interest to get a bunch of folks interested in making horror movies with familiar faces and premises that border on halfcocked and half-original for over two decades certainly merits curiosity. At least this time around one will not be able to see the film as just some sort of offbeat take on horror films like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974), if only because Zombie has decided to take inspiration from other features that range from Bonnie and Clyde (1967) to Badlands (1973). The art of the grotesque has taken its talents to the road, you might say. Technically speaking, it is superior to House of 1000 Corpses (2003), even though the only thing those film have in common is Haig-Moseley-Zombie as the main focus (i.e. no weirdo travelers or even the use of Karen Black, who apparently demanded too much money to return to the role now played by Easterbrook). Experienced horror folks will be right at home with a film like this, one that rolls with brutal swings without having many hitches in its step. Zombie has a knack for making the detestable come off as curious, which I suppose helps when trying to do a psuedo-70s movie (I say this since one really does have to put on a few blinders again when trying to buy this as 1978), complete with a selection of songs that differ from the earlier approach of having Zombie doing his own music (which is fair on its own, but sometimes you need old-time music).

What can I say? If you deliver a fine time with people worth caring about or creepy scenarios with a useful payoff, you have the formula for what a good amount of folks want in horror, and this movie manages to accomplish that in spades by improving on what had been done before from Zombie (and the films he dabbles in cribbing from) that proves gruesome and curious at the same time. It makes for an interesting 107-minute run-time, that much is for sure. If you like seeing Sid Haig in a demented role that inspires a few dark chuckles, you will certainly get what you want here; the best scene might be when he is "borrowing" a car and he asks a kid why they aren't too fond of clowns....so he lets him go and tells him he better have a good reason when he comes back (or...oh hell, you know). Moseley follows along with a terrific role of brutal effectiveness, one that can equally serves as the mark of a devil's servant along with dutiful straight man to this cadre of eccentrics, who can go from bloody events to wanting ice cream in a few minutes. S. Zombie certainly has improved on the wicked allure from two years prior with an added sense of menace that means there is no weak link among the main folks when it comes to unbalanced tools unlike anybody you've seen before. Think about it: we are following some very violent folks for most of its run-time, and yet the folks we are watching are fairly interesting in those moments spent together that muddles the line of what you might usually see from films in the genre, particularly when contrasted with the other side of the coin in the pursuer and the one being pursued. Forsythe (told to base his character as a combination of Lee Marvin and Robert Shaw) certainly homes in the right sense of demented rigidity that makes him a worthy piece to the proceedings, a tool of obsession that has a few moments to let out worthy enjoyment, particularly with the setup for the climax. Foree does pretty well in amusing relief, resonating well when paired with Haig for a few interesting lines together, while the others in the supporting cast are fair for what is needed. Honestly, while I appreciate the build to the climax when it comes to throwing the depravity on its head, I think it nearly stumbles with its resolution (remember that it wasn't exactly just three folks in the last one...), but I do think the final shot will likely resolve that doubt for the most part. If you are squeamish when it comes to certain kinds of horror, it won't prove much for your fancy, but I am sure you know where you want to see in your horror movies anyway. The next film in the series (called the "Firefly trilogy" by some folks) would not happen until 3 from Hell (2019), but at least one knows that The Devil's Rejects has managed to fare well as when it comes to the curiosity of this being the most interesting work that Zombie accomplished in his first few years as a director in executing depraved sequences with useful timing and folks to hold it all up.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
Well, here is the end of another month (and one week) of horror. 27 films that ran the gauntlet of the 20th and 21st century. I hope you folks enjoyed the largest effort of Movie Night's near eleven-year history for concentrated writing about horror; sure, there will be a handful of horror-ish movies covered in the next few months, but suggestions are always welcome. 

October 15, 2021

Spider Baby.

Review #1740: Spider Baby.

Cast: 
Lon Chaney Jr. (Bruno), Carol Ohmart (Emily), Quinn Redeker (Peter), Beverly Washburn (Elizabeth), Jill Banner (Virginia), Sid Haig (Ralph), Mary Mitchel (Ann), Karl Schanzer (Schlocker), and Mantan Moreland (Messenger) Written and Directed by Jack Hill (#1654 - Blood Bath)

Review: 
"It was the first film I could really call mine. It was the only time I actually did a film that wasn't an assignment."

If you remember, the first film released with Hill's name as director was Mondo Keyhole (1966). Of course, there is a bit more to that story, since he came from the (unofficial) school of Roger Corman in the 1960s, and his first key task would be to shoot 20 minutes to be added on The Wasp Woman (1959) for syndication in television, which occurred in 1962. The following year, he would be given the dubious task of being the fourth director asked by Corman to direct scenes for The Terror (1963), which also came with re-writing the script (of course, he wasn't given credit for directing, but neither were the others). Gil Lasky and Paul Monka had a bunch of real estate profits they wanted to invest into a horror film, and they happened to have met Karl Schanzer, who suggested that Hill would be a good choice. 12 days of shooting happened in Los Angeles in August of 1964, but fate dealt a cruel hand when a market crash held up all of Lasky and Monka's assets. David L. Hewitt acquired the film years later and re-titled the film while releasing it alongside Dr. Terror's Gallery of Horrors (also just known as Gallery of Horror). For three decades, the movie's original negative was lost (with middling VHS versions existing in the 1990s, remember) before being acquired by Hill, who had a clean transfer done along with adding a scene deleted from release that he would call his "Director's Cut". 

It sure is a shame that the film did not receive much attention in its time, because it certainly has an interesting place among the line of horror for all of the aspects that would play prominent in more noted films in the half-century since its release. I think there certainly is a line that can be drawn through the timeline that could go from The Old Dark House (1932) to this film to others like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) and House of 1000 Corpses (2003) with their own type of eccentric characters that happen to live in an infested house of murder and other such things. Of course, one involves a chain saw, the other involves rock music directors, and the other is whatever it is...Spider Baby is a creepy movie that holds its own when it comes to vicious goofiness, one that is disturbing in the chuckles drawn, and one will likely be drawn to this from the opening title song (composed by Ronald Stein while sung by Lon Chaney Jr himself, who apparently had a good time singing about spiders, ghouls, and other stuff). Basically, it is a film for the ghoulish at heart, and I readily enjoyed its 81 minute run-time in all the little weird things it ends up doing in building up its ultimate punch-line by the end that merits curiosity. 

This was released near the end of Chaney's career, which had gone through ups and downs in horror and character actor roles (film and television), but it can be safely said that this is definitely one of his best roles. He goes after the role with the right sense of dedicated warmth and edge that comes from contrasting all the strange kooks that inhabit both sides of this on-screen family, one that still has the timing necessary to make the material work with fondness; this is best signified by the scene between Chaney, Washburn, and Schanzer talking about staying together after the discovery of a dead man and the promises one has to keep (while the eyes start to water a bit). Redeker and Mitchel play the "normal" folks (framing the film for its beginning and end), while Ohmart jots in with assertiveness. One can't forget about the trio of eccentrics. Haig doesn't have much to say (as part of the plot, since the older one gets in the family, the less they say...), but he does well with a hodgepodge of moments that goes for weird within being a strong mute that likes to look at everybody (to varying results...). This was the debut of Banner (who had graduated Hollywood Professional School in 1964) in what became her most noted role before her untimely death in 1982. She plays the title character (i.e. someone who likes to play a game called "spider baby", as seen in the opening scene with Moreland). She does pretty well here in generating playful terror, which includes plenty of shots involving spiders in some way (such as tying someone up). Washburn is most likely known for both her appearances in Old Yeller (1957) and this film (having appeared sporadically in TV and film as a child). She contributes to the savagery in her own potent awareness that seems innocent like the other two on the surface that help the movie stay on its feet. Schanzer finishes it off with sniveling potency. As a whole, the movie relies on generating terror with atmosphere in terrorizing chuckles without needing overt effects or bloody gore, which results in a curious charmer that likely will reward folks who see it again and again. Hill would go on to explore further in exploitation films in the next couple of years, but Spider Baby has managed to find a place within his line of work worth checking out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.
Next Time: Dr. Phibes Rises Again 

September 23, 2021

THX 1138.

Review #1725: THX 1138.

Cast: 
Robert Duvall (THX 1138), Donald Pleasence (SEN 5241), Maggie McOmie (LUH 3417), Don Pedro Colley (SRT 5752), Ian Wolfe (PTO), Marshall Efron (TWA), Sid Haig (NCH), John Pearce (DWY), and James Wheaton (Voice of OMM 0000) Directed by George Lucas (#113 - Star Wars, #141 - American Graffiti, #142 - Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace, #143 - Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones, and #144 - Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith)

Review: 
A half century later, there are quite a few things to unpack with this particular movie. For one, it was the feature film debut for George Lucas. As one must remember, the California native grew up with an appreciation for comics and science fiction (take note of the clips shown in the opening of the film), and this would serve him quite well when he entered the University of Southern California and its school of Cinematic Arts; he cited educators Lester Novros and Slavko Vorkapich (chair of the school) as influences on Lucas, who made numerous short movies as a filmmaker that were fairly abstract (ranging from a minute to seven, with only one having a narrative). He graduated with a bachelor's degree in fine arts in 1967, but his time spent with USC did not end there, as he went back as a graduate student in film production, with one of his duties being to teach students of the United States Navy that were studying documentary cinematography and working under Verna Fields in editing movies for the United States Information Agency (Fields would later edit a number of features for fellow USC filmmakers as a pioneer in her own right). In total, Lucas made nine short features from 1965 to 1968; the one that matters most to this discussion is his sixth in Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB, made in the course of 12 weeks in 1967. He had an idea for a future film with existing stuff utilized for said future, and he tasked his friend (and fellow USC student) Matthew Robbins to write a brief outline involving the THX character and a chase scene. He utilized the Navy connection to helpful effect, since Navy folks served as crew for the movie while helping him get access for various locations to shoot. The result was a movie that won 1st prize at the National Student Film Festival in the Dramatic category. Later on, Francis Ford Coppola (fresh off Finian's Rainbow) helped Lucas with a deal to make a feature film with Warner Bros.-Seven Arts (co-produced with American Zoetrope, which Coppola and Lucas founded in 1969), and Lucas made the feature over the course of five weeks in the fall of 1969. A year was then spent in the editing room by Lucas and Walter Murch (who each wrote the movie). If you can believe it, studio executives did not appreciate what they saw of the final workprint, and they requested an edit to be done within the studio, which took out four minutes from the final edit. Made on a budget of $777,777, the movie was a mild success on initial release (making its budget back plus $122K).

I'm sure you are aware of the story that comes from a movie dedicated to the illusions of safety and order within a closed-off society filled with restrictions and watchful eyes everywhere. In fact, I know you have, because there have been a handful of books and movies that have run on similar lines for decades, such as George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four or Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, for example. Of course, we are talking about a movie with Chapperell race cars modified to look like jet cars. We are also talking about a movie that seems quite curious to talk about when thinking about Lucas as a filmmaker given what would come later in the decade, and yet it is the key piece in trying to understand what he aspired to do as a maverick filmmaker in terms of visual storytelling (along with his intent to not have studios try to control the production of his movies). Perhaps it was fate that a bleak movie involving the pitfalls of consumerism and conformity took its own path to reaching audiences. It likely seems more fitting of its decade than with the next two films Lucas directed, that might be for sure, which might seem a bit off-putting for those who come in completely cold for this sci-fi movie. Of course this isn't quite a movie one watches for acting chops; in an interview, Colley noted that Lucas seemed to not be too comfortable around actors, treating the production as like one of his student films (perhaps ironically, an actor in one his future movies would say something fairly similar years later); certainly it is an interesting sight to see a group of shaved actors amidst a crowd of other voices, and Duvall certainly does fine a role that requires a bit of a blank slate sparked into breaking out of obedience into ordinariness. Pleasance, gripping in confined obedience that drips of pathetic ooze within certain pieces of dialogue, matches fine with what is required from someone dealing in the middle of a society without any choices, where fear of the unknown can be a powerful deterrent (and easily identifiable). McOmie (in her one and only film as star) is used for poignant moments with attempts at breaking free with a sense of emotion that can be construed as fear with a bit of warmth waiting to break free. Colley proves curious in those moments seen on screen within the prison sequence, one in the middle between comfort and curiosity in the angle of finding a way out. The movie relies on visual interest within a dystopia where prisons have no walls, kids have IV lines for economics in their veins, and people like to take substances to curb their emotions as they work under jobs that are terribly dangerous (factories even announce the death tolls of the period in an attempt to promote safety); when not working, people just buy things without much thought while watching odd holograms. The robot policeman are the only visual adversary one sees, since you never actually see just who is in control, knowing only that set budgets are set for the capture of anyone who tries to escape. It is mostly a visual movie, which is interesting to see when most of the stuff is white (clothing, bald hair, et cetera) but certainly not the easiest film to sit through in its versions; the movie was restored in 1977 with an 86 minute run-time that restored the four cut minutes on the original release that was later put out on VHS and LaserDisc, while a Director's Cut was supervised by Lucas in 2004 that restored the film on an audio/video level while adding a few bits of computer generated imagery (along with adding detail to certain sequences) that resulted in a run-time of 88 minutes (in fact, one can apparently watch it with just the sound effects and score present with no dialogue, if one is into that sort of thing). Perhaps the easiest parallel in terms of a student film being turned into a movie for effect is Dark Star (released three years later...by sheer coincidence, it was made by a USC alum and included a reference to this movie), where it might have reached better as just a student film; regardless, I thought this movie was interesting in the right parts to work in generating a curious bleak world in imagery that leaves more for thought rather than thrills. It isn't a great achievement in originality with its story, but it does prove diverting in visual nature with the right kind of curiosity to make it worthwhile to overcome its shortfalls and work out fine, one that certainly merits attention as a cult classic, one that is just odd enough and interesting enough to win out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

March 18, 2021

Blood Bath.

Review #1654: Blood Bath.

Cast:
William Campbell (Antonio Sordi), Karl Schanzer (Max), Lori Saunders (Dorian / Meliza), Sandra Knight (Donna Allen), Marissa Mathes (Daisy Allen), Sid Haig (The Tall Beatnik), Jonathan Haze (A Beatnik), Fred Thompson (Another Beatnik), Biff Elliot (Cafe Manager), and David Ackles (Carousel Operator) Written and Directed by Jack Hill and Stephanie Rothman.

Review:
What we have here is an interesting tale of two directors, each in their own beginnings of filmmaking. Born in New Jersey but raised in California, Stephanie Rothman did study in sociology with the University of California (Berkeley), but her focus to film came with a viewing of The Seventh Seal (1957). She subsequently did study with the University of Southern California in filmmaking, and she would earn a fellowship by the Directors Guild of America with her student film directing. She was hired by Roger Corman in 1964 to work as his assistant, and she would do a variety of tasks on films that could range from writing new scenes to final cut edits that had to be done on a set time and budget. Corman was ultimately the first and only mentor she would have when it came to filmmaking. Rothman would direct her first solo effort with It's a Bikini World (1967, although shot two years earlier) and follow it up with five further films in the next few years; her most noted film was The Student Nurses (1970), which ended up inspiring New World Pictures to make subsequent efforts within depicting nurses. Rothman's career stalled in 1974. Although she tried to find work within television and script treatments with her husband, no sales resulted from these efforts (her work in exploitation, which gave her a chance to direct, ended up as a stigma against her when trying to do work away from it). A decade of languishing misses and rejection of going back to exploitation led to her retirement, although she did find work to live on within real estate investment. On the other side, California native Jack Hill started an interest in film within study at UCLA's film school. One of his mentors would be Dorothy Arzner, and one of his classmates was Francis Ford Coppola, incidentally. Hill did a variety of side-work in his rise to the industry with Roger Corman that ranged from editing to contribution within writing/directing, such as shooting a 20-minute prologue to a TV version of The Wasp Woman (1959) or doing re-writes/direction for The Terror (1963). Hill made his formal directing debut with Mondo Keyhole (1966), which he co-directed with John Lamb. Ultimately, Hill would make fifteen films over the course of sixteen years, which ranged from horror with films like Spider Baby to lesser-known works such as The Incredible Invasion (1971, the last of four that Hill directed the US sequences in USA-Mexico productions that all had Boris Karloff as star before his death) and blaxploitation such as Coffy (1973).

Okay, history time. It all started with a film that was slated to be released in Yugoslavia that was named Operacija Ticijan [Operation Titian] (1963), starring William Campbell, Rade Markovic, and Patrick Magee. It was a thriller film involving a stolen painting, and Roger Corman (on vacation in Europe at the time) ended up being a silent partner in the hopes that he could acquire it and Americanize the feature for release later. Francis Ford Coppola was behind script supervision, interestingly enough. However, the final result was something not quite suitable for the drive-in circuit. He commissioned a re-cut and re-scored edit, which was known as Portrait in Terror. Somehow, it did not satisfy Corman, although a re-edited version of that cut would find its way into television; enter Hill, who was tasked to take the footage and write/shoot new material to go on top of what could be used with Campbell in tow (who reportedly got a nice check for his services, which angered Corman and makes me smirk a little), which turned a spy thriller into a horror film. Somehow, this version (known as Blood Bath) was still not suitable enough for Corman. Two years later, Corman wanted to try again, so he hired Rothman to make her own edits in the story while shooting new footage. So now a film that had a killer artist was changed to a killer artist vampire. To add on to this, Campbell did not participate in the re-shoots, so now Rothman had a film with a vampire lead that would have to re-cast its main lead for the vampire scenes (an actor that has not been identified). Corman at last found something worth releasing despite a film with two directors/writers that never even met and they all lived happily...nope, the story isn't over. There is yet one more version of this film that is called Track of the Vampire, which included just a little more footage to play on television (Rothman/Hill's film lasted 69 minutes). Funny enough, you probably wouldn't even know Corman's fingerprints are there at all, because he doesn't even have an on-screen credit. Rothman would later call it a "mish-mosh", while Hill thought it was "totally ruined" by the changes made to his original cut.

So...we have a Yugoslavian film that got edited / re-shot into two television films AND two feature films, and the one that we are focusing on today is the one with Rothman & Hill on the credit (strangely enough, the one cut entirely by Hill is missing, but all the other ones are there). If one intends to watch the film, the best version to watch it would be a recent release that includes a video essay by Tim Lucas that includes detail of the whole saga of what became Blood Bath with interviews that likely make for an interesting hour to listen to (a full detail also is found with a series of articles done in Video Watchdog). Of course I forgot to mention that in this portrait of a killer artist, there are also beatniks included within the process, so one really seems to be in for a familiar rendition of A Bucket of Blood. Honestly, the beatnik stuff seemed better the first time around, what with its rendition of "beatnik slang" alongside its legend about vampire artists; my favorite head-slapping moment is someone mentioning to Knight's character about a tower and the legend having "peculiar things" happening before telling them to find it for themselves because they have their own problems (that's one way to inspire someone to read up on vampires and say exposition). Hill definitely had more of the prints involved when it comes to matching his horror type over Rothman's more conscious style in women's films (although both obviously were cut on the cloth of cheap filmmaking). Trying to guess who made what can be a doozy, but just know that the film probably didn't make any more sense when it was just Hill at the helm...of shooting/re-writes - the fact that it is only an hour long might come from the fact that the seams would probably have snapped if one tried to put more logic if it lasted longer than that. In other words, the only thing to say is that the history behind its making is far more efficient than the actual result - a mess. An amusing mess with curious moments, but a mess. Campbell is a capable guy, but he can only do so much with a role that is bargain-bin killer at best, and the fact that there is a different actor in the terror scenes dilutes credibility in the same way one would see in a creature feature where someone wears a weird costume with a lack of time to act (so The Man from Planet X, but not as good). It all goes on how one views the death scenes, which can range from a decent sequence involving a friendly conversation leading to a cleaver...to someone being chased into a pool and drowned (for some reason). The fact that two of the actresses in the film look similar to each other at any rate makes this an even sillier affair. The other actors act as one could expect from patchwork, which results in distinct levels of mediocrity, with the beatnik aspects having that middling feeling of semi-seriousness that one could only bear in irony drenched in insomnia. At least one could give credit to folks like Haig (who had starred in one of Hill's short films) for not wilting like a confused cat (despite having a conflict of timing that means there are scenes with/without a beard). Saunders is okay, but the focus is technically more on Knight before we are baited and switched on who the focus is (not that it matters anyway, since one can barely make head or tails about who or what matters in the first place in plot). Schanzer is the bare minimum for folks to focus on, seeming like an abstract of a lead hero than anything. For a film with a bloody title, the count of four is probably more about what could be salvaged than any real sense of terror - it is a jumble, where the vampire twist borders on the idea that you the viewer are going to buy into a deranged descendant of a vampire that happens to change his face before turning them into wax for art...which then turn on him for the climax. Rothman and Hill's assembly of footage into what was one film into four others is a curious tale, but for a movie it is easily too average for its own good. At least Rothman and Hill can each say they went on to better things in filmmaking.

Next Time: On the shortlist a few months ago, now seems like a good time to reach out for Daisies [Sedmikrásky] (1966).

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

November 7, 2020

House of 1000 Corpses.

Review #1590: House of 1000 Corpses.

Cast: 
Sid Haig (Captain Spaulding), Bill Moseley (Otis), Sheri Moon Zombie (Baby), Karen Black (Mother Firefly), Chris Hardwick (Jerry Goldsmith), Erin Daniels (Denise Willis), Jennifer Jostyn (Mary Knowles), Rainn Wilson (Bill Hudley), Walton Goggins (Steve Naish), Tom Towles (Deputy George Wydell), Matthew McGrory (Tiny), Robert Allen Mukes (Rufus), Dennis Fimple (Grandpa Hugo), Harrison Young (Don Willis), William Bassett (Sheriff Frank Huston), Irwin Keyes (Ravelli), and Michael J. Pollard (Stucky) Written and Directed by Rob Zombie (#743 - Halloween (2007))

Review: 
"The first film I directed, which people seems to love, is just a calamitous mess. Well, when it came out it seemed like everyone hated it. Now everyone acts like it’s beloved in some way. All I see is flaw, upon flaw, upon flaw… upon flaw.”

Sure, there have been quite a few directors that came across film after having made a name for themselves with another form of media. But how many were musician-turned-directors? Rob Zombie (born Robert Cummings) is one such director. He grew up with an three-pronged fantasy of being like Alice Cooper, Steven Spielberg and Stan Lee, having grown up with an interest in horror as a young child, noting the boom of horror in the late 1960s with media that ranged from The Munsters to magazines like Famous Monsters, although other favorites later included Dawn of the Dead (1978) and Westerns. The Massachusetts native attended both the Pratt Institute and the Parsons School of Design for a time before coming up with the idea for what became the band White Zombie in 1985, which he co-founded with Sean Yseult. Alongside others in the band, they contributed four albums over the next thirteen years, eventually finding recognition for their heavy metal sound, with Zombie directing the music videos. His first album after going solo was influenced by classic horror films (complete with some songs having samples and quotes from his favorites) while also doing work for various media (including animation for Beavis and Butt-Head Do America in 1996). He expressed an interest in directing in 1997, with an actual plan to have him write and direct a sequel to The Crow (set in 2037, I kid you not) before it was shelved. He worked with Universal Studios in designing a haunted maze attraction in 1999, and it was its success that led to them wanting to work with him on a film (thought of on the spot while designing another attraction), which he started directing in 2000. The resulting film did not please Universal, who shelved it in fears of receiving a NC-17 rating due to its violence (an Adults Only rating, as if Universal decided releasing a violent horror film was suddenly too much) before Lionsgate Films eventually signed on to release it, with this serving as the first of so far seven theatrical films directed and written by Zombie.

One can see the influence of films such as The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) and Spider Baby (1968) while also seeing the drive-in qualities that make a gritty and weird experience. Is it for everyone? You best believe it isn't for everyone, because for some it will feel tedious even at 89 minutes for where it wants to go in the art of the grotesque, a film that seems constricted by its influences to be anything more original. On the other hand, there are arguments to be made in favor of Zombie and his direction (alongside co-contribution to the music with Scott Humphrey) when it comes to his mix of horror and dark humor with ghoulish charm, which is why it has proved to have a cult following (alongside two sequels released in 2005 and 2019). I can firmly state that while it may not be exactly as well-developed as something like say Motel Hell (1980), I found enjoyment with its vision of macabre thrill and a fairly consistent cast to make it a worthwhile effort. I found it to be pretty enjoyable, in the sense that it made a madhouse worth investing time to look into without being driven senseless into gore without something to go along with it, even if it isn't exactly the most subtle horror film (its setting of the 1970s is believable to those who want to pretend it looks like that era). To start off, one goes with the first focus-point in Haig, the actor-turned-hypnotherapist-turned actor again (going from blaxploitation and heavy roles to horror). He mainly has three scenes to highlight, but he sure makes them ones to enjoy in ghoulish curiosity, amusing but effective in keeping you on your toes (he, alongside Moseley and S.Zombie, would feature in both sequels). Mosley (best known for his role in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986) alongside other cult horror films) proves just as fiendish in grabbing attention to creep on one's shoulders, demented but useful to what is needed from him. S.Zombie (a dance choreographer and fashion designer that has featured in each of her husband's films) does fine with providing wicked allure for what is needed here, wrapped in terror just like the others that holds well with other fellow familiar actors in horror, such as the case with Black (long noted for work in independent films alongside horror fare), soothing but just as out there with the other members of family creeps (one that seems reminiscent of the Mansion family, what with Zombie inspired by recordings of them for the rants presented here). The other side of the action is the doomed travelers, which is mostly amusing to think back to the faces that eventually found prominence beyond horror, which involves Wilson, eventual star of The Office (2005) and Hardwick, comedian and podcast host (if one is into that sort of thing...no comment). They, alongside Daniels and Jostyn are just fine, in a room temperature kind of charm. I mean, we're watching a haunted ride of ghoulish people that murder people, the least one can do is make sure we aren't taken out of the experience with some jarring seriousness or bland set-ups for body counts. In that sense, I found it to be just enough to win out in the end, despite my reservations about its unwieldy consistency, which may seem like an excuse for Zombie to show off with references or in its weird cuts to those who desire more. It is exactly the kind of weird drive-in charm that makes Zombie an interesting face in horror cinema, one with a passion for the genre that yearns to creep its viewers out to their enjoyment (whether squeamish or not). It's a love it or hate it kind of movie - and I'm just fine with what it is.

Well, it's November 7th. I'm glad to have reached just as many films done in the week following Halloween as it was for the year before with five, and I hope you enjoyed Halloween: The Week After Part II. You can always throw suggestions in for horror films to be done any time of the year, but it is fun to make time for ones to really highlight in the month of fear alongside my personal extension week - enjoy the fun. There may or may not be another themed week coming up before the year ends, so stay tuned.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

December 11, 2019

Jackie Brown.


Review #1307: Jackie Brown.

Cast: 
Pam Grier (Jackie Brown), Samuel L. Jackson (Ordell Robbie), Robert Forster (Max Cherry), Bridget Fonda (Melanie Ralston), Michael Keaton (Ray Nicolette), Robert De Niro (Louis Gara), Michael Bowen (Det. Mark Dargus), Chris Tucker (Beaumont Livingston), LisaGay Hamilton (Sheronda), Tom "Tiny" Lister Jr (Winston), Hattie Winston (Simone), and Sid Haig (Judge) Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino (#638 - Kill Bill: Volume 1, #639 - Kill Bill: Volume 2, #1180 - Reservoir Dogs, #1218 - Pulp Fiction, and #1251 - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood)

Review: 
For a crime film, a well-detailed story can go a long way to make an experience worth remembering. Quentin Tarantino certainly had plenty of films to showcase interesting people and the environments they inhabit, and Jackie Brown proves no different, showing plenty of wit and charm through a 154 minute leisure that has a solid cast and pretty good execution that leaves one fairly satisfied. This happens to be the only Tarantino film where he adapted a previous work, with the source material being Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard (which Tarantino did over adapting Freaky Deaky or Killshot after re-reading), for which there were a few changes made involving its title character alongside her race that Leonard approved of, reportedly saying that this was the best screenplay he had ever read. For his third directorial effort, Tarantino uses a little less violence and a bit more chronology when it comes to telling his story, which works pretty well within some casual confines, featuring six distinct players in something reminiscent of blaxploitation films (having Grier helps in that regard) without losing itself too much in clear style. The main group of actors do pretty well in that regard, starting with its main lead. Grier, already a trail blazer for female action heroes in the 1970s, proves just as capable in sinking her teeth into a towering presence, capable of holding her own with whoever is on screen without even having to use a gun all too much. Jackson exudes ruthless confidence to a tee here, capable of sticking any kind of line involving unseemly things (such as trying to get someone in a trunk as a favor) without too much reluctance. Forster seems completely in his element here, a world weary straight-laced player with complete professionalism and subtle chemistry with Grier that makes for a well-deserved comeback for the character actor that ended up with an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor - the film's only Oscar nomination. Fonda and De Niro also provide welcome players, casual and raw for the moments that need to happen, which all comes full circle with the parking lot sequence in terms of emotion and payoff (sometimes you just need to see it all play out to make it really count). Keaton doesn't have as much time, but it sure is nice to see him and the rest of the supporting cast in those little moments to surround the environment of the plot. It has its choices when it comes to music or homages, doing so with careful ambition that extends to a plot that plays by the book in gathering these characters to the moments that matter without shortchanging them with cheap gags or rushes. The film has its amusing moments, but it knows when to drive itself with sharp senses of focus with characters who all seem to have been around the block a few times and seem weary for it. It's a nice movie that drags itself with daring regard for plenty to see with its characters and its sudden turns that make it all feel worth it. Sure, it isn't his best film, but it does prove a worthy one to view once if not twice to see how the run plays out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.