Ex Machina.

Review #884: Ex Machina.

Cast:
Alicia Vikander (Ava), Domhnall Gleeson (Caleb Smith), Oscar Isaac (Nathan Bateman), Sonoya Mizuno (Kyoko), Symara A. Templeman (Jasmine), Elina Alminas (Amber), Gana Bayarsaikhan (Jade), and Tiffany Pisani (Katya) Directed by Alex Garland.

Review:
Ex Machina is certainly an interesting movie in so many ways. The first component is the atmosphere set up quickly in the film, which is this high-tech (and obviously reclusive) residence, with some shots of the residence and the environment around it that show some form of isolation. There is a small dedicated range of characters that also help to that feeling, and they are excellent. Vikander does a good job at giving this character some sort of life and you do sympathize with her in some part. There really is no sort of definitive hero kind of character, as everyone seems to have sort of hidden edge to them, even with Gleeson's character, who comes off as somewhat of an everyman with his own kind of desires to exploit, and he plays it well. Isaac is the only real clear cut type of character a bit easier to define, in part because of his reclusive nature, and without spoiling too much he does a good job at portraying this narcissistic kind of person, carrying the dialogue without a shred of unbelievability. The dialogue between Isaac and Gleeson also contributes to the tone of the film being more than just a case of a Turing Test, with Vikander and Gleeson having a fine amount of chemistry as well. Mizuno doesn't have any lines, but her performance is noteworthy in its own way because she still manages to have a kind of presence even when in the background. The effects are also pretty good in that they seem to mesh with the film without becoming too distracting, with the robots being a good case of that. It's a tightly made film, with no real compromises but a good deal of consequences and stakes. The ideas it presents have touches of influence from other concepts (Frankenstein might be a good example), but it is done in a way that feels fresh and works in an acceptable manner. It's good entertainment, but it's better pondering material as well, especially with the ending. I recommend the movie, in part because of what it does with what it is given, with a cast and execution like this.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Kite Runner.

Review #883: The Kite Runner.

Cast:
Khalid Abdalla (Amir Qadiri), Zekeria Ebrahimi (Young Amir), Ahmad Khan Mahmidzada (Young Hassan), Homayoun Ershadi (Agha Sahib), Atossa Leoni (Soraya), Shaun Toub (Rahim Khan), Saïd Taghmaoui (Farid), Abdul Salaam Yusoufzai (Assef), and Elham Ehsas (Young Assef) Directed by Marc Forster (#384 - Quantum of Solace and #542 - World War Z)

Review:
The Kite Runner (based off the novel of the same name) manages to be satisfactory in the simplest sense of the word, but I feel that this probably worked better as a novel than as a film. It's not so much that it lasts over two hours (128 minutes, to be precise) as it feels a bit stilted in drama. The first act of the film (with the children) is neatly crafted in drama and it manages to create some atmosphere, while having a shocking development that is carefully executed. The kite running is something that manages to evoke wonder and fun, in part because I hadn't heard of kite running before. The child actor are fairly entertaining as well. Though technically an American film, Dari is used for a great portion of the film, which is noteworthy. It seems there is a good amount to like (and that is true), but I feel the flaws lie a bit with the second half. Once it gets to adult Amir, I feel that it isn't as compelling, feeling more like it is going through the motions of melodrama without a real sense of fulfillment. It's not so much the movie doesn't have enough emotion, it just doesn't seem to have the right amount of connection. It doesn't run out of steam, it just comes off as faint where it really could have registered as something more. The main cast (Abdalla, Ershadi, Leoni) are pretty compelling in their own ways, though I find Ershadi's character more relateable that Abdalla's to care about. On the whole, it doesn't so much drag as just move a bit slow, but it is somewhat entertaining with a fair amount of impact, even if it isn't as good as it could have been.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Big Clock.

Review #882: The Big Clock.

Cast:
Ray Milland (George Stroud), Charles Laughton (Earl Janoth), Maureen O'Sullivan (Georgette Stroud), George Macready (Steve Hagen), Rita Johnson (Pauline York), Elsa Lanchester (Louise Patterson), Harry Morgan (Bill Womack), Harold Vermilyea (Don Klausmeyer), Dan Tobin (Ray Cordette), Richard Webb (Nat Sperling), Elaine Riley (Lily Gold), Luis Van Rooten (Edwin Orlin), Bobby Watson (Morton Spaulding), and Lloyd Corrigan (McKinley) Directed by John Farrow.

Review:
The Big Clock utilizes its main actors (Milland and Laughton) to great effect, in a movie that manages to work a film noir in part due to its sharp and quick pace. Laughton portrays this villain with a great kind of villainy, in part because how mean he comes off. It's so easy to see parts of this man in other people, but Laughton manages to make him seem so compelling. You know from the gecko that he's a villain, but the way he oozes the lines makes him so watchable. Milland shouldn't be forgotten either, as he makes for a good everyman protagonist. He's a believable character who isn't overplayed from reality. It is a film noir, but it also has some good snappy dialogue along with melodrama. O'Sullivan is okay, though she doesn't really get much screen time. Corrigan is pretty noteworthy, especially around the climax, alongside Macready's effort with a sniveling character. The ending of the movie is swift, after a good deal of buildup and suspense. It's a clever film where the hunter becomes the hunted, but it also is a nifty little look into newspaper editorials of the time, with a serviceable length of 95 minutes and some nice shots (such as the clock) which work well enough for me, and I'm sure it will work well enough for you as well.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Fantastic Voyage.

Review #881: Fantastic Voyage.

Cast:
Stephen Boyd (Charles Grant), Raquel Welch (Cora Peterson), Edmond O'Brien (General Carter), Donald Pleasence (Dr. Michaels), Arthur O'Connell (Colonel Donald Reid), William Redfield (Captain Bill Owens), Arthur Kennedy (Dr. Peter Duval), and Jean Del Val (Dr. Jan Benes) Directed by Richard Fleischer (#453 - Soylent Green, #460 - Doctor Dolittle, #624 - Conan the Destroyer, #829 - Red Sonja, and #870 - The Narrow Margin)

Review:
Fantastic Voyage is an entertaining movie that manages to have enough spectacle moments and a fine amount of atmosphere to overcome some structural faults. The film moves at a relatively adequate pace, trying to set up its plot with some form of legitimacy and pace, not taking too long to get to the body effects. Boyd is fairly decent as this every-man kind of role, not being too strong or dull in any one direction. Welch is interesting, though she isn't given too much screen time. Pleasence is engaging as always, giving off the right sense of clout. The effects are the showcase for the movie, and they are quite interesting for the time (1966) it was made, especially when you first see the body, giving off a sense of wonder. There are some fairly good moments, such as when they have to go through the ear drum, with silence required throughout the operating room in normal size. It takes its time while building up tension, with a fairly good culminating noise and ensuing action. The plot-holes that enter the surface around the climax derail some of the momentum, such as the fact the ship is left in the body at the end (Isaac Asimov fixed this in his novelization of the movie, which managed to be released months before the film). The saboteur revealed at the end is a bit strange, in that there really isn't too much motivation given for it besides "working for the other side". However, the film is entertaining enough that this can be somewhat forgiven. If the film wasn't as interesting, it wouldn't be easy to forgive.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Tillie's Punctured Romance.

Review #880: Tillie's Punctured Romance.

Cast:
Marie Dressler (Tillie Banks, Country Girl), Mabel Normand (Mabel, Charlie's Girl Friend), Charles Chaplin (Charlie, City Slicker), Mack Swain (John Banks, Tillie's Father), Charles Bennett (Uncle Banks, Tillie's millionaire uncle), and Chester Conklin (Mr. Whoozis/Singing Waitor) Directed by Mack Sennett.

Review:
I figured that there really needed to be something unique to begin the month of December, and it happens to be my birthday today as well. As such, it only make sense to do the first feature-length comedy, released nearly 102 years ago. This is the earliest film covered on Movie Night (one year earlier than #763 - A Fool There Was), based off a play called Tillie's Nightmare. The film certainly seems a bit stagey at times, though that's not necessarily a bad thing. It was made by Keystone Studios, with Mack Sennett, a legendary comedic innovator (known as "The King of Comedy" during his lifetime) of the time in the form of slapstick, which is present heavily in this film. The movie runs from 74 to 82 minutes, depending on what version you are watching, though it runs smoothly enough regardless of the cut. Dressler manages to have a fair amount of screen presence, and she handles the slapstick quite well, while expressing herself quite a bit with a fine amount of grace. Chaplin (in a role not like The Tramp, for once) is also pretty good, in part because he handles the slapstick and action with enough cleverness and his own kind of charm. Normand is also pretty good, handling the situations that go on with a fine bit of presence while having some decent chemistry with Chaplin, with Swain and Bennett also doing fair jobs as well. The Keystone Cops make an appearance in the film as well, and they are pretty funny in the scenes they show up in. The slapstick presented in the movie manages to work most of the time, in part because of how quick it is, without any sort of cartoonishly overplayed comedic element. The trips and falls (and hits) are conveyed well, even in silent form. The story is pretty efficient at accompanying the comedy as well. The climax is one to behold, with lots of falls and a large set to open up many sort of gags, one involving a falling bed. On the whole, this is a neat movie that is more than just a historical footnote, with a good deal of comedy that works on numerous levels that make for good entertainment.

Happy Birthday to all the people on December 1, such as Bette Midler, Woody Allen, Sarah Silverman, and...me, too.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Planes, Trains and Automobiles.

Review #879: Planes, Trains and Automobiles.

Cast:
Steve Martin (Neal Page), John Candy (Del Griffith), Laila Robins (Susan Page), Michael McKean (State Trooper), Kevin Bacon (Taxi Racer), Dylan Baker (Owen), Olivia Burnette (Marti Page), and Larry Hankin (Doobie) Directed by John Hughes (#046 - The Breakfast Club, #207 - Ferris Bueller's Day Off, #249 - Sixteen Candles, and #643 - Uncle Buck)

Review:
When it comes to great buddy films and great holiday films, this one will likely spring to mind. Martin and Candy are a great duo, in part because of how easy they seem to portray their roles, along with having some wonderful chemistry. But like other good comedies, there is also a good edge of drama as well, with a great sense of realness and charm within itself. Sure, there are good funny scenes (such as when the two learn about being robbed), but there are also good dramatic scenes, such at the motel and even near the end as well. The story structure is a familiar one, but it is executed in a fresh manner. The timing is excellent, with gags and secondary characters that serve their purposes well. It uses its scenery (mostly with snow) nicely, where everything seems real and looks real too. It's not a movie with mere caricatures, as both are equally likable in their own way, contributing their own kinds of emotion that makes for a film filled with depth. In short, this is a fine film that keeps itself in check, with Martin and Candy providing for many highlights that make for an excellent film.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Long, Long Trailer.

Review #878: The Long, Long Trailer.

Cast:
Lucille Ball (Tacy Bolton-Collini), Desi Arnaz (Nicholas 'Nicky' Collini), Marjorie Main (Mrs. Hittaway), Keenan Wynn (Policeman), Gladys Hurlbut (Mrs. Bolton), Moroni Olsen (Mr. Tewitt), Bert Freed (Foreman), and Madge Blake (Aunt Anastacia) Directed by Vincente Minnelli (#405 - The Reluctant Debutante, #510 - Father of the Bride, and #620 - Lust for Life)

Review:
Honestly, I'm not a big fan of I Love Lucy. If you've known me over the years I've done this show, you are aware that I tend to veer towards older movies (in fact, 510 (including this one) of the films reviewed by me were before 1990), but Lucy was never one of my go-to shows growing up, though I know of its reputation and of its long lasting length as reruns on television. The Long, Long Trailer was one of only three films released during the time it was on (with The Magic Carpet and Forever, Darling being the other films), and the story goes that MGM believed the film wouldn't be much of a success because of the fact audiences could see the duo on TV. However, the film turned out to be a success, in part due to the slapstick that is (somewhat) endearing to me and no doubt endearing to the audiences of the time as well. There is something about the movie that manages to feel so real, with location shots (such as Yosemite), and adequate enough timing without being too canned. The part with the rocks inside the trailer is one highlight for me, in part due to the timing of the right moment of when everything culminates. The other cast members are pretty decent, though it really is all about
Ball and Arnaz, whose chemistry helps the movie out. The trailer is an interesting set in it of itself, and it certainly is sizable enough to contribute to some fine gags. As a whole, it's a decent little movie that is endearing enough for at least one watch. It's not a hallmark of comedy by any means, but it is at least entertaining.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Three Ages.

Review #877: Three Ages.

Cast:
Buster Keaton (The Boy), Margaret Leahy (The Girl), Wallace Beery (The Villain), Lillian Lawrence (The Girl's Mother), Joe Roberts (The Girl's Father), and Kewpie Morgan (The Emperor / Cave Man / Roman Thug) Directed by Buster Keaton (#757 - Seven Chances, #762 - College, and #805 - The Navigator) and Edward F. Cline.

Review:
This was the second starring role for Keaton, made three years after The Saphead and his first feature that he directed. The film was structured and shot as three separate shorts, as a form of insurance in case it did not work well as a feature, with the three films representing a different Age, from the Stone Age to Rome to the modern-day. The main prevailing theme in all three parts is the prevalence of love in society all-throughout time, with Keaton getting the girl in each story. In that regard, it is somewhat interesting (if not slightly repetitive), though the end result is a film that is moderately entertaining, but not really all that funny. In other words, you'll get some chuckles, but nothing is really that memorable (although Keaton escaping a prison due to his phone booth being towed out of the prison). Neither period really stands out entirely from the others, but they are fine for the course. Leahy is a decent lead, and Beery is a fair enough villain. It has good moments, but nothing that you could really say is rip-roaring hilarious, though Keaton is good as it gets. In a sea of Keaton films, this likely wouldn't be one I would recommend immediately, but it is adequate enough to see at least once.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Red Zone Cuba.

Review #876: Red Zone Cuba.

Cast:
Coleman Francis (Griffin / Narrator), Anthony Cardoza (Landis / Fidel Castro), Harold Saunders (Cook), John Carradine (Mr. Wilson), John Morrison (Joe), George Prince (Cherokee Jack), Tom Hanson (Bailey Chastain), Lanell Cado (Ruby Chastain), and Charles F. Harter (Cliff Weismeyer) Directed by Coleman Francis (#744 - The Beast of Yucca Flats and #767 - The Skydivers)

Review:
It has been 50 years since Red Zone Cuba (made on a estimated budget of $30,000; also known as Night Train to Mundo Fine) was released (even though there really isn't a source that gives a definitive date, I'm doing it on this day as a "Turkey" gift to you at home for Thanksgiving Eve). This was the third and last film that Coleman Francis directed. It took me a while to recover from his last two films, but here we are nearly a year later. Oh boy, this film. Remember how Madea seemed like the breaking point for this show? Here's one that will shatter those thoughts and assemble them into jagged edges. It only makes sense that Francis also had to star in this film, because I guess no one could play a wretched lead other than him (if he had wanted to star in another film, he should've played the part of a talented director). The movie might good at one thing, which is the fact that it might poke a hole in the idea that a movie can be be so bad it's good. Believe it or not, this movie isn't very good, nor is it shot in Cuba (shocking, I know). There is some sort of plot within this, with a trio of main characters that are about as appealing as melted cauliflower. Francis is at least consistent with the sound quality once again, in that it is questionable at certain points. Carradine (in a guest starring role) appears briefly in the movie, even singing the title song "Night Train to Mundo Fine", which could be the perfect song to play right before a movie as strange as this. On second thought, strange is somehow too nice of a word to describe this film as. The fact that he is used as a framing device to set up the plot (that he has no connection to) is almost as ridiculous as the song.

There must really be some sort of thought process to make a movie that goes from "escaped convict" to "Bay of Pigs" to "mining metals". Oh sure, there's acting, in the sense that I'm enacting a decision to waste time on a movie that has a guy with a Brooklyn accent playing a character obviously meant to be someone else. Here's a highlight: Francis' character stating how he wants to go legit, and 20 seconds later he attacks Cardoza's character for not giving him a ring. Even something like a character who was left for dead suddenly reappearing at the end isn't the most ridiculous aspect of a movie that thinks parts of California can pass off as Cuba (another gripe: Black title letters on a dark greyish background). You might be wondering why I even decided to review the film on its 50th Anniversary. On top of the fact that I like honoring film anniversaries (and certain birthdays), I figured that it was time to finally finish the last of the Francis films and fully give an assessment on his "trilogy", which goes as follows: They are all terrible, with scattershot plots and more scattershot acting than you can shake a stick at. You could watch his films...or watch the MST3K versions. Even giving this film a 0 doesn't do this film justice: Watch at your own risk.

In any case, I wish a Happy Thanksgiving to all of you readers at home. Enjoy tomorrow, but also if you're having a "Friendsgiving" today. Look it up.

Overall, I give it 0 out of 10 stars.

Babes in Toyland (1934).

Review #875: Babes in Toyland.

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

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

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Doctor Strange.

Review #874: Doctor Strange.

Cast:
Benedict Cumberbatch (Dr. Stephen Strange), Chiwetel Ejiofor (Karl Mordo), Rachel McAdams (Christine Palmer), Benedict Wong (Wong), Michael Stuhlbarg (Dr. Nicodemus West), Benjamin Bratt (Jonathan Pangborn), Scott Adkins (Lucian), Mads Mikkelsen (Kaecilius), Tilda Swinton (the Ancient One), and Zara Phythian (Brunette Zealot) Directed by Scott Derrickson.

Review:
It's good to back in the theater again, and this time with friends to watch it with. When it comes to these Marvel films, it always seems that I can't not be surprised by the end product, no matter how good (or great) they usually are. There's always something to be surprised or amazed by, and the way that this movie universe is built makes for a diverse amount, and even if I don't know much about the comic book they usually end up being pretty good. The same can be said for Doctor Strange as well. It's an entertaining film, in part due to its cast and effects. Strange manages to change throughout the movie in terms of his manner, and Cumberbatch succeeds in conveying that, convincing in his mannerisms and timing, even getting time to say some quips. He's not as arrogant as Tony Stark for example, but he displays some sort of humility and some sort of charm. Ejiofor is also pretty good in portraying a character as rigid as the script allows him to be. McAdams isn't given too much to do, but at least she isn't meant to just be a love interest this time around, having a bit more independence and some sort of grace in the role Any movie that begins with "Shining Star" and "Feels so Good" wins at least some vote by me. The rest of the cast is exceptional, with Mikkelsen playing a fairly entertaining villain (even if half the time he's wearing what looks like glitter...long story), and Swinton and Wong are also pretty good, achieving some sort of mystical allure. The climax is also pretty good, demonstrating some creativity, with two credits scenes at the end that are also pretty well done (par for the course). The effects are where the film excels at, whether during some action or when Strange first meets the Ancient One. It looks really stunning, along with having a good fit with a film as mind-bending as this one, having some fun with the weirdness that goes on. There isn't technically a big bad villain to beat, but this film manages to still go along with a winning formula with its own kind of flair and own kind of imagination to succeed.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon.

Review #873: Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon.

Cast:
Basil Rathbone (Sherlock Holmes), Nigel Bruce (Doctor Watson), Lionel Atwill (Professor Moriarty), Kaaren Verne (Charlotte Eberli), William Post Jr. (Dr Franz Tobel), Dennis Hoey (Inspector Lestrade), Holmes Herbert (Sir Reginald Bailey), Mary Gordon (Mrs. Hudson), and Henry Victor (Dr. Joseph Hoffner) Directed by Roy William Neill (#846 - Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man)

Review:
This is the fourth of the Holmes series with the Rathbone-Bruce duo (with the previous three reviewed here previously: #583 - The Hound of the Baskervilles, and #721 - The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, #798 - Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror), premiering in Los Angeles in late December 1942. This film uses elements of the Doyle story The Adventure of the Dancing Men (actually just the code, but still), while taking place during the War, though this one is more of a spy flick. On the whole, it's a standard kind of flick that entertains in part due to Rathbone and Bruce, but also a relatively good climax. Obviously it's not a film to watch for faithfulness to Holmes stories (literally watch any other Sherlock adaptation), but the charm of the two actors along with a relatively sane plot make for good entertainment. I especially like how Holmes goads Moriarty on to drain his blood slowly, which is one of a few good moments in a climax that moves at its own pace. Obviously the tones of the war are prevalent once again (with a bombing test in the middle of the film), but there is some room for some sort of mystery. Atwill plays Moriarty fairly decently, stated with a good deal of coldness for an actor very prevalent in this era. Moriarty had already been portrayed in the series before (by George Zucco in the second film), but I suppose it's part of the tradition to reuse (or "revive") villains. The rest of the cast is okay, with some comic relief by Hoey and Bruce (the former would star in five more Holmes films), though the real focus is how the movie goes through the motions with some grace and some logic, with no real twist this time around. On the whole, it's an average film that would be nice for anybody looking to kill some time at 68 minutes, or just someone looking for some fine standard fare, with a bit of adventure for the time.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

A Madea Christmas.

Review #872: A Madea Christmas.

Cast:
Tyler Perry (Mabel "Madea" Simmons), Larry the Cable Guy (Buddy Williams), Kathy Najimy (Kim Williams), Chad Michael Murray (Tanner McCoy), Anna Maria Horsford (Eileen Murphy), Tika Sumpter (Lacey Murphy), Eric Lively (Conner Williams), JR Lemon (Oliver), Alicia Witt (Amber), Lisa Whelchel (Nancy Porter), and Noah Urrea (Bailey McCoy) Directed by Tyler Perry.

Review:
Has Movie Night gone under the hill? Is it reaching for anything now? Am I reviewing...a Christmas film in November? Actually, this is the first film I've done starring Tyler Perry, creator of things that likely clogged up TBS years back, because I can't remember anything about his shows. There really doesn't seem to be a consistent plot to this film...is it a movie about this family? Is it about doing a Christmas jubilee (because I guess it's the town's anniversary? Because that only applies to 25 or 50 year celebrations), or is about farming? A dam? For some reason, the farmer sell their crops on this jubilee...wha, you've never heard of selling crops in winter? Also, did you know that mayors can just fire teachers but can't read a contract to see its stipulations? Somehow, the movie keeps going in spite of itself. There must be a problem when Larry the Cable Guy is actually more endearing than Tyler Perry...the bar is set so low by so many lame and tired jokes that exist in some sort of vacuum. The movie doesn't even have much to do with Madea, which is a blessing covered in muck. There is some sort of anti-bullying plot...which ends with Lively's character punching Murray in the face...after the latter gets saved from a car wreck (don't worry, one of them apologizes...the latter one. Heck, they give the family a pie). Did I mention that one of the characters lied to their daughter about their dad being killed (instead, he jilted her for another woman)...and it doesn't really seem to be addressed again after that. It's like there are no consequences, where characters can just steal stuff from a store after being fired, tie up a kid to a wood board with Christmas lights, and flat out lie about a company giving a town money in front of the company's representatives. There isn't really a villain, which is somewhat surprising. I guess they decided that there needed to be more focus on padding itself out with repetitive dialogue. It fails as a comedy and it fails as a drama, having both no real sense of joy and also no sense of dramatic impact, respectively.

At the end of the day, this is already bottom of the barrel stuff that is also mixed in with bottom of the barrel Christmas stuff. I'm not a fan, but I'm sure some of the people who read this are fans, so I guess if you like Madea already, go right on ahead. Honestly, I don't understand this phenomenon (much like other trends in media), but that's how it goes.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.

Review #871: Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.

Cast:
Elizabeth Taylor (Margaret "Maggie/Maggie the Cat" Pollitt), Paul Newman (Brick Pollitt), Burl Ives (Harvey "Big Daddy" Pollitt), Judith Anderson (Ida "Big Mama" Pollitt), Jack Carson (Cooper "Gooper" Pollitt), Madeleine Sherwood (Mae Flynn "Sister Woman" Pollit), and Larry Gates (Dr. Baugh) Directed by Richard Brooks

Review:
Can't say I expected to do this one (based off the play of the same name by Tennessee Williams, who already had his play A Streetcar Named Desire adapted into a film earlier in the decade), but sometimes college and this show mesh together (as opposed to being on different ends). At best, it is an alright movie, up to the standard of films of the time, though it isn't likely one of my favorites. Taylor and Newman certainly have fine chemistry together (even in scenes not so pleasant), with a fair amount of screen time dedicated to the two. It takes time to get interesting (with the plot and all, especially with lengthy scenes setting up the main characters), but the climax is fairly serviceable. The big highlight (and where it gets fun) is Burl Ives, who practically steals the show after he appears midway through. His insults are edged entertainingly, but he's not completely without some sort of humanity, and he does well to contribute the climax. The rest of the cast do an adequate job in their roles, having some sort of arc that works. The sets are also pretty fine, and the movie flows well at about 100 minutes. If you're looking for a fairly adequate adaptation of a play, I think this will work for you, as opposed to Williams, who reportedly told people waiting to see it that "This movie will set the industry back 50 years. Go home!" Regardless, while I don't think I'll watch it in the near future again, I think it is at least fine as its own thing. It has enough drama and atmosphere to work just neatly enough.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Narrow Margin.

Review #870: The Narrow Margin.

Cast:
Charles McGraw (Det. Sgt. Walter Brown), Marie Windsor (Mrs. Frankie Neall), Jacqueline White (Ann Sinclair), Peter Virgo (Densel), Gordon Gebert (Tommy Sinclair), Queenie Leonard (Mrs. Troll), David Clarke (Joseph Kemp), Don Beddoe (Det. Sgt. Gus Forbes), and Paul Maxey (Sam Jennings) Directed by Richard Fleischer.

Review:
With a cast of unknowns and a low budget, this is a film that manages to be a serviceable efficient little film noir. There is some sense of suspense within itself, not spending too much time wasting away, establishing characters without much effort. They have the characteristics of ones you might notice in other noirs of the time, but this manages to click at the right points in part due to its cast. McGraw is a pretty good everyman, and Windsor is also pretty alluring as well. They have a fine amount of banter mixed with bits of cynicism that is engaging enough to work. White is also pretty interesting, having some decent chemistry with McGraw. The rest of the cast also does fine (Maxey stands out in part due to his scenes with McGraw), and even the kid actor (Gebert) isn't too annoying. The train setting helps keep the movie compressed and interesting. There is some action (and at least one fight on a train), which is nice and dandy to watch. The twist at the end is pretty clever as well, not being too far fetched or too unknown. On the whole, this is a nice flick because of it goes through the motions in a satisfactory manner.  As such, the directing is good for the time, having some fairly decent shots and a fairly balanced plot that more often then not knows what it wants to be. Quite simply, if you like film noirs, old cinema, or movies that don't overstay their welcome, this is the one for you.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

D2: The Mighty Ducks.

Review #869: D2: The Mighty Ducks.

Cast:
Emilio Estevez (Gordon Bombay), Kathryn Erbe (Michelle McKay), Michael Tucker (Mr. Tibbles), Jan Rubes (Jan), Carsten Norgaard (Wolf "The Dentist" Stansson), Maria Ellingsen (Maria), Joshua Jackson (Charlie Conway, #96), Elden Henson (Fulton Reed, #44), Shaun Weiss (Greg Goldberg, #33), Matt Doherty (Les Averman, #4), Brandon Adams (Jesse Hall, #9), Garette Ratliff Henson (Guy Germaine, #00), and Marguerite Moreau (Connie Moreau, #18) Directed by Sam Weisman.

Review:
Though the first film isn't technically a great piece of film, it was at least (to me, anyway) a moderately entertaining movie that had some sort of charm to it, even among its hokey-ness. Maybe it was the hockey, or maybe it was just the way it flowed. But with the sequel (and its bizarre title), there doesn't seem to be as much faithful charm. It seems to be more a movie muddled it wants wants to be. There is nothing that seems convincing (in both characters and plot), with no real motivation to care about this team trying to win (the Junior Goodwill Games, of course). Norgaard is moderately entertaining as the villain (did you expect Iceland as the final opponent? Me either), fitting his nickname of "The Dentist" as well as one can. The slapstick and hockey don't really stand out from what you might expect, not really being entertaining enough to talk about (roping an opponent isn't as cool as it seems), going through the motions you'd expect. As a whole, it's a mediocre Disney film that would be good to watch once, but it isn't anything special enough to want to watch more than that.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

The Mighty Ducks.

Review #868: The Mighty Ducks.

Cast:
Emilio Estevez (Gordon Bombay), Joss Ackland (Hans), Lane Smith (Coach Jack Reilly), Heidi Kling (Casey Conway), Josef Sommer (Mr. Gerald Ducksworth), Joshua Jackson (Charlie Conway, #96), Elden Henson (Fulton Reed, #44), Shaun Weiss (Greg Goldberg, #33), M. C. Gainey (Lewis), Matt Doherty (Lester Averman, #4), and Brandon Adams (Jesse Hall, #9) Directed by Stephen Herek (#021 - Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure and #502 - Man of the House)

Review:
What is it about this movie that inspires joy? It's not as cynically honest as The Bad News Bears (though it does have a similar premise), but there is a sort of charm to this film in its silliness. The characters are about as interesting as the movie allows them, with Estevez being good at being a grouch, with some sort of believably as a coach. There is at least a semblance of atmosphere, with some nice shots of Minnesota. It has its interesting moments (mostly involving hockey, with the flying V standing out), and though it ends like the way you would expect there is at least some sort of closure to the plot. Sure, the movie waddles between ridiculousness (especially when it starts quacking) and legitimacy, but it is serviceable. The villain (of sorts, played by Smith) is also serviceable in his ridiculous competitiveness. The movie is funny when it is being itself and not going for something inherently ridiculous. The child actors are fairly decent as well, with the varying kinds of of personalities that are in some way charming. I wouldn't say the movie breaks any real ground, but it is at least a good way to spend 100 minutes. Obviously there are other sports films to watch and obviously there are other kids films to watch, but I suppose that if you really need a fix of both Disney flicks and hockey this is the one for you.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Alice, Sweet Alice.

Review #867: Alice, Sweet Alice.

Cast:
Linda Miller (Catherine Spages), Mildred Clinton (Mrs. Tredoni), Paula Sheppard (Alice Spages), Niles McMaster (Dominick 'Dom' Spages), Jane Lowry (Aunt Annie DeLorenze), Rudolph Willrich (Father Tom), Michael Hardstark (Detective Spina), Alphonso DeNoble (Alphonso), Gary Allen (Jim DeLorenze), and Brooke Shields (Karen Spages) Directed by Alfred Sole.

Review:
40 years ago (November 13, 1976) this film (originally known as Communion) was released, and I figured that it was time to get to reviewing it. From the beginning there is a certain kind of strange aura to everything, from the imagery to the characters, with DeNoble being one of the standouts in terms of creepiness. The mask used by the killer is especially creepy, in part due to how translucent it is. The scenes where the stabbings take place are great, in part because how sudden they are along with the fact that the movie builds up the right mood for it. I should note that the movie is set in the 1960's (filmed in Paterson, New Jersey), and the look of the movie helps make for a nifty mystery. The characters are written with a bit of cynicism to them, where authority figures aren't necessarily the ones easy to root for, which is a nice twist. The family dynamic is also riveting in its own right, because it plays a significant part in the plot while also making for fine drama. It even manages to have a good twist (thankfully not just placed at the end) which certainly leaves for some good thrill along with a bit of thinking to it. The music by Stephen J. Lawrence is also pretty good, having the right sense of chills and atmosphere, especially around the death scenes. The last one in particular is great, because it manages to seal the eerie nature of the movie with a semblance of macabre to everything.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Nothing Sacred.

Review #866: Nothing Sacred.

Cast:
Carole Lombard (Hazel Flagg), Fredric March (Wally Cook), Charles Winninger (Dr. Enoch Downer), Walter Connolly (Oliver Stone), Sig Ruman (Dr. Emil Eggelhoffer), Frank Fay (Master of Ceremonies), Troy Brown (Ernest Walker), Maxie Rosenbloom (Max Levinsky), and Margaret Hamilton (Warsaw, Vermont Drugstore Lady) Directed by William A. Wellman (#349 - Wings and #494 - The Public Enemy)

Review:
In a time like this, Nothing Sacred manages to find its place in being relevant to the point where it is timeless, in part due to a neat simple story and some fun screwball comedy within its satire elements. This film is readily easy to find, due to it being in the public domain after its copyright registration wasn't renewed in 1965, so you can find it on the Internet (or other alternative manners) without problem. It should be noted that this was the first screwball comedy in color, along with Lombard's only film in Technicolor, and it certainly stands out. This was also a film that used effects such as rear screen projection (most notably during the scene where the characters arrive in New York via plane). Lombard and March certainly have a decent chemistry together, especially when they argue, which culminates with a "boxing" scene at the end. Lombard has a welcoming presence, being one easy to root for, certainly fitting the part with enough grace and charm to fit such a fun role, which she often called one of her favorites. Connelly certainly stands out as the exasperated newspaper head; one of my favorite parts is when he tells March's character some news with a cracked voice, obviously trying to hide exasperation, which is amusing. As one would expect there is enough fine little lines, with a fine balance of timing. The rest of the cast is also pretty good, even if the film is really all about Lombard and March, who seem to have a really good time. The satire excels in that it doesn't choke the fun of the film nor does it seem artificial. It's not a film that will make you deeply about journalism and the "big story", but it is a movie that would inspire at least one conversation, and I suppose that is all that counts.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Saphead.

Review #865: The Saphead.

Cast:
Buster Keaton (Bertie "The Lamb" Van Alstyne), Beulah Booker (Agnes Gates), Edward Connelly (Musgrave), Edward Jobson (Rev. Murray Hilton), Edward Alexander (Watson Flint), Odette Taylor (Mrs. Cornelia Opdyke), Carol Holloway (Rose Turner), Irving Cummings (Mark Turner), Jack Livingston (Dr. George Wainright), and William H. Crane (Nicholas Van Alstyne) Directed by Herbert Blaché and Winchell Smith.

Review:
This was Keaton's first starring role in a feature film, as he was recommended for this movie by Douglas Fairbanks, with this propelling him to stardom. This was not written by Keaton unlike some of his later films, but there is at least a decent enough story, albeit with a weight of melodrama that nearly crushes it. It takes a while for the plot to get to Keaton, in part due to having to set up the plot lines that will soon converge into such a strange mish-mash, with secret affairs, staying out to late to impress a girl (who is also your adopted sister), stock broking, and a last act that manages to show a bit of what made Keaton so interesting to watch. One of my favorite parts is him trying to keep his balance (of sorts) while at the stock exchange being bullied a bit by the other brokers, keeping his composure neatly enough. The movie is only really interesting when Keaton is around, showcasing his famed stoic expression and his grace that would make him a star. The rest of the cast isn't bad, being serviceable for this kind of silent film. The film takes a while to dig itself out of being a drama, but it is decently paced at 77 minutes. For 1920, it is a relatively decent movie, and it is fine to suggest this film for someone wanting to start getting into Buster Keaton films.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Hot Water.

Review #864: Hot Water.

Cast:
Harold Lloyd (Hubby), Jobyna Ralston (Wifey), Josephine Crowell (Her Mother), Charles Stevenson (Her Big Brother), and Mickey McBan (Her Little Brother) Directed by Fred C. Newmeyer (#667 - The Freshman, #674 - Grandma's Boy, #758 - Safety Last!) and Sam Taylor (The Freshman, #727 - For Heaven's Sake, Safety Last!)

Review:
The last time I did a Harold Lloyd film was last November, and I figured that it was time once again, with around 20 days to Thanksgiving and such. This time around (in his 7th feature film) is an episodic kind of film, with three parts merged into one feature, as opposed to the plot driven Lloyd films (like Safety Last!, for example). The first part (involving him winning a turkey in a raffle and the ensuing ride home) is pretty well done, with the turkey naturally playing a good part in some fine gags. The second part (about Lloyd and some of the extended in law family going on a ride in a new car) is also well done. One moment that was pretty quirky was when the mother-in-law starts crying (because her wedding gift was broken - by an annoying little kid, naturally) and Lloyd consoles her by kissing her on the cheek...via a dog, of course. I do like that one of the inter titles talks about how the couple will soon have a new car to themselves...after 59 payments, of course. Naturally this was made in a time where neck ties were important to wear (I myself wear two ties), which leads to a fine little gag when he puts one on when driving. The gags are fun to watch as usual, with Lloyd being a good every-man. The last part (involving the mother-in-law sleepwalking around the house) is pretty funny with all of the misunderstandings by Lloyd, with a chase scene in the middle of a wind storm at his house. His hair even goes up near the end, which is a charming little shot. The movie itself is quick at 60 minutes, and if one is looking for a Lloyd film, this would fit the bill nicely.

So there was a baseball team that won the World Series on Wednesday (November 2nd), from Chicago. Must've been the White Sox. (Ha!) 
Congratulations to the Cubs, who I first referenced in my Sharknado (#625) review (back in 2014, when talking about the fact that the film was made meaning the Cubs would win in my lifetime...with a footnote saying I could live to be 100.), and now they finally did it. Strange year, this is. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Waxworks.

Review #863: Waxworks.

Cast:
Emil Jannings (Harun al-Rashid), Conrad Veidt (Ivan the Terrible), Werner Krauss (Jack the Ripper / Spring-Heeled Jack), William Dieterle (The Poet / Assad the Baker / A Russian Prince), John Gottowt (Inhaber der Panoptikums), Olga Belajeff (Eva-Maimune-Eine Bojarin) Directed by Paul Leni and Leo Birinsky.

Review:
Waxworks (known as Das Wachsfigurenkabinett in Germany) is an anthology film, with some fantasy and horror elements (yes, this another German "world cinema" film on Movie Night. Do not worry, other countries will get their due all in good time). Two main stories (Harun al-Rashid, Ivan the Terrible) and a closing one (Jack the Ripper/Spring-heeled Jack) are conveyed to us (with the framing piece being that the Poet must come up with backstories for the two wax figures), with Dieterle being in all three parts. The sets and costumes for the two main stories are spectacular, with fine cinematography work by Helmar Lerski. There is also a bit of neat color tinting as well. The first segment is pretty good, with a nice performance from Jannings that brings out some nice humor. It's the longer segment (by a few minutes), but it doesn't overstay its welcome too much. The second segment is also pretty interesting, with Veidt playing this villainous kind of role with a bit of lunacy that later turns into desperation, with the scene of him trying to reverse the hourglass being quite frantic, with his fate at the end being quite poetic. The final piece to close out the film is brief (around six minutes), but it is serviceable, even if it ends a bit like you'd expect (who could've dreamed that one up, I wonder), for the 20's anyway. Obviously it isn't likely realistic with world history facts, but there is a curiosity that the movie inspires within itself. Krauss does fairly well as the last villainous character. On the whole, this is a fine piece of work, weaving some enjoyable stories together with a good sense of style and flair for the time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Incubus.

Review #862: Incubus.

Cast:
William Shatner (Marc), Allyson Ames (Kia), Eloise Hardt (Amael), Robert Fortier (Olin), Ann Atmar (Arndis), and Milos Milos (Incubus) Directed by Leslie Stevens.

Review: 
Before the review, I will provide a bit of background to this movie in the following paragraph. If you'd want, move on to the next paragraph, which contains the review. 

Incubus (Inkubo) was released 50 years ago on October 26, 1966 at the San Francisco Film Festival, with a bunch of enthusiasts of the Esperanto language there. This was directed by Leslie Stevens, creator of the original "The Outer Limits", which had been cancelled prior to this film, with Dominic Frontiere (composer of the first season of the show) contributing the music for this film. Conrad Hall (winner of three Oscars) did the cinematography, in his first credited contribution. This is the second film released in the language (the first being Angoroj in 1964), which had been created in 1887 by L. L. Zamenhof. The language is popular among parts around the world, but apparently not enough in a concentrated area. As for the pronunciation of the language in the film, supposedly the Esperanto enthusiasts were laughing at the way the actors (who rehearsed for less than two weeks in phonetic training of their lines) spoke the lines. The film, while not popular in the United States, was somewhat popular in France.  The film was thought to be lost for 30 years due to a fire. However, one copy was found in France (with subtitles on the bottom), and the film was restored and is now available after all these years. It should be noted that one of the actors (Milos) killed himself before the film's release, Stevens' company went bankrupt not long after, Hardt's daughter was kidnapped and killed two years later, and Atmar died the same month of this film's release. By the time of its release, Shatner had already started his run on Star Trek. On this Halloween, it only seems fitting to review this movie, with the legacy that it has.

Now then, with all that history, how is the movie? I can't really judge their pronunciations of Esperanto (I had never even heard the language spoken prior to this film), so the best way to judge the acting is to see how they interact with the movie around them. I should note that Shatner doesn't show up until around 15 minutes in, with the film focusing on the succubi and darkness around a village. The scene where Ames kills one of these travelers in the water is pretty interesting, in part due to the camera work. When it comes to uniqueness, this one may take the cake, with one scene showing a priest sucking an egg while carrying a frog (knock yourself out trying to interpret that). This is the kind of movie that one might show to some friends late at night, or at an art house to try and figure it out. The music by Dominic Frontiere is also quite interesting, adding to the film's mystique. It isn't really a boring movie, just one with some sort of controlled vision that tries to stand out in being something eerie and different without being too pretentious. The film lasts just under 80 minutes, which is somewhat a positive in that it can't really droll too long. The camera shots range from closeups to superimposing shots, all of which are interesting in their own right. This is the kind of movie that could almost be enacted on the stage, for better or worse. Shatner is fairly engaging (as one would expect), with enough interesting moments of him speaking dialogue as interesting as it gets. He certainly has some chemistry with Ames. She is pretty interesting to watch as well. Hardt is also adequate, with a better presence than Milos does. The climax is one to behold, as Ames faces off against the Incubus...who has turned into a goat. It's so strange seeing this fight as it cuts between a real goat and a goat head pushing against her a few times, with one shot of the goat licking itself. It's not a great seminal work, but it is a film with a certain kind of vision that works in the ways that it wants. There is a certain intriguing nature to this movie that not a lot of films can bring within its eeriness. This is the kind of film that you should at least check out for curiosity's sake, or for Shatner, at least. Happy Halloween.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Golem: How He Came into the World.

Review #861: The Golem: How He Came into the World.

Cast:
Albert Steinrück (Rabbi Loew), Paul Wegener (The Golem), Lyda Salmonova (Miriam), Ernst Deutsch (Loew's assistant), Lothar Müthel (Knight Florian), and Otto Gebühr (Emperor) Directed by Paul Wegener and Carl Boese.

Review:
It has been a while since the last time I reviewed a world cinema film, and it only made sense to a famous one from Germany, which was where the last world cinema film was from (#797 - People on Sunday). The Golem: How He Came into the World (known as Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam in Germany) was released on October 29, 1920, and it was the third Golem film made by Paul Wegener, with the other two being The Golem (1915) and The Golem and the Dancing Girl (1917). However, this is the only one that is not lost, and it happens to be a prequel to the previous two films as it shows how the golem (a mythical being created by inanimate matter by magic) is created. The film has been called an influence on the 1931 version of Frankenstein (#072), and I can see that in some parts, such as with the Golem himself, who lumbers around in a menacing matter one that somewhat resembles Karloff's movements 11 years later. In any case, Wegener (who also co-directed the film) does an excellent job, making the Golem a truly interesting monster with a fair amount of facial expression to him as well. It's also been used as an example of German Expressionism, with sylish angles and color tints that correspond excellently with the cinematography by Karl Freund and Guido Seeber. Steinruck does a favorable job, having the right sense of gravitas without becoming cartoonish in his movements. Salmonova is fair, though she isn't given much to do aside from the climax. It is interesting that the Golem isn't stopped by another monster or anything particularly brute in force, but by a child of all things. For anyone looking for a great piece of cinema from yesteryear (96 years) or some fine horror that works at its own pace, I would suggest this film as one you should check out. Happy Halloween.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Dracula Has Risen from the Grave.

Review #860: Dracula Has Risen from the Grave.

Cast:
Christopher Lee (Count Dracula), Rupert Davies (Monsignor Ernest Muller), Veronica Carlson (Maria Muller), Barry Andrews (Paul), Ewan Hooper (Priest), Barbara Ewing (Zena), and Marion Mathie (Anna Muller) Directed by Freddie Francis (#856 - The Evil of Frankenstein)

Review:
For Halloween Eve (as I would call it), here's one more Hammer film. With a title like that, what can you expect? This was third Dracula film with Christopher Lee in the title role, and he actually does speak this time. It starts out with a girl found in a bell tower, an apparent victim of Dracula (who is she? Who knows?), which is somewhat amusing. Dracula (still frozen in ice) is brought back in a particularly amusing scene, as a priest falls on a rock, and the blood from his head reaches a crack in the ice and bleeds onto Dracula's mouth, with Dracula arising not long after, with reddish eyes to boot. Andrews is interesting, and he has some decent enough scenes with Carlson (another person familiar with Hammer films). Davies is pretty good as well. I liked the previous film a bit more than this in terms of the characters, but it works just enough on its own merits. There certainly is a good deal of style with the camera shots (especially when Dracula is around), and the effects are fine as usual. This time around, Dracula can only be killed with a stake if you have faith, which either is a bit clever or just a way to make the film last a bit longer. I guess it's better than being killed by water. At 92 minutes, this is a decent enough film that has enough flair and Hammer cliches to work.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Dracula: Prince of Darkness.

Review #859: Dracula: Prince of Darkness.

Cast:
Christopher Lee (Count Dracula), Barbara Shelley (Helen Kent), Andrew Keir (Father Sandor), Francis Matthews (Charles Kent), Suzan Farmer (Diana Kent), Charles Tingwell (Alan Kent), Thorley Walters (Ludwig), Philip Latham (Klove), Walter Brown (Brother Mark), and Jack Lambert (Brother Peter) Directed by Terence Fisher (#257 - The Curse of Frankenstein, #258 - Dracula (1958), #272 - The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959), #469 - The Revenge of Frankenstein, #833 - Spaceways, #857 - Frankenstein Created Woman, and #858 - Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed)

Review:
This was the second of the Dracula Hammer films to feature Christopher Lee (eight years after his last appearance), though this time Peter Cushing (as Van Helsing) does not return. In fact, Cushing wouldn't feature with Lee in a Dracula film again until Dracula A.D. 1972 (I should note that Cushing starred in The Brides of Dracula, whereas Lee did not), though he is shown in the prologue, taken right from Dracula (#258) and its climax. This time around, the Kent family are the ones who encounter Dracula, revived due to mixing blood of one of the Kents with his ashes. The scenery is brilliant as usual. Dracula appears halfway through the movie, and the effects used to show his revival (along with his awakening from the place he was buried) is quite excellent. It should be noted that Lee doesn't speak all throughout the movie, with it either being due to Lee not wanting to speak the lines written for him (as said by Lee) or that there were no lines written for him (as said by the writer). In any case, his performance relies on his facial expressions, his hissing, and his imposing features, which he does quite well. Shelley is somewhat annoying (yes, she is the one who warns them to leave), but she is interesting after she becomes one of the undead. Keir is good at giving some sort of exposition about Dracula but also being quite entertaining. Matthews and Farmer are fine, having the sort of chemistry together one would expect in a horror film like this, which isn't overbearing nor too radically different. The scene where Lee and Farmer are alone together is also quite eerie and creepy, in part due to the music by James Bernard. It's interesting to see Walters (who you'd recognize from Frankenstein Created Women) as a sort of Renfield type of character, and he has a certain strangeness about him that works. You don't have to see the first one in order to get a grip on this film, which is nice. This time around, Dracula succumbs not due to the sun or a stake, but...(are you ready for this): running water. There is something amusing about that, in part because of Lee flailing around in the ice, but the movie doesn't really lose too much steam, in part because it ends not long after. On the whole, it's obviously not as good as the first film, but it is enjoyable in its own right, even after over 50 years.

Side note: If one is checking the Labels section and wondering why (British born) Jack Lambert is listed with a (B) next to his label, it is to differentiate him from the American actor of the same name.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed.

Review #858: Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed.

Cast:
Peter Cushing (Baron Victor Frankenstein), Veronica Carlson (Anna Spengler), Freddie Jones (Professor Richter), Simon Ward (Dr. Karl Holst), Thorley Walters (Inspector Frisch), George Pravda (Dr. Frederick Brandt), Windsor Davies (Police Sergeant), Allan Surtees (Police Sergeant), and Maxine Audley (Ella Brandt) Directed by Terence Fisher (#257 - The Curse of Frankenstein, #258 - Dracula (1958), #272 - The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959), #469 - The Revenge of Frankenstein, #833 - Spaceways, and #857 - Frankenstein Created Woman)

Review:

With a title like that, what can you expect? Frankenstein certainly is a bit more evil in this one, though at least this time he does create a monster, and they even fight in the climax. At least this time around there's some blood (especially in the beginning) and some violence to appease someone. This was the fifth in the Hammer line of Frankenstein films (after The Curse of Frankenstein (1957), The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958), The Evil of Frankenstein (1964), and Frankenstein Created Woman (1967)), and one would guess that if you're already this far into the franchise, anything can happen and it wouldn't be surprising...which proves to be the case here. This time, Frankenstein wants someone's knowledge, because I suppose the scientist that transferred someone's soul into a body can't find the secret to preserving a brain in suspended animation. Cushing is certainly more villainous this time around, which certainly makes things a bit different this time around. I should note that there is a rape scene in the film, which Cushing, Carlson and Fisher all objected to. It's a disturbing scene that was added in by a producer of the movie. Carlson and Ward provide fairly compelling counterparts to Frankenstein, somewhat easy to root for. Jones is a decent enough Creature, particularly in the climax. The final 20 (or so) minutes are when the movie gets interesting, with a fight between the characters, accompanied with fire that seems reminiscent of the Universal Frankenstein films, but it does its own spin on that. I'd say this is better than the previous Frankenstein film, in part because of the entertainment value. The effects for the Creature (with stitches and a bald head to boot) is pretty excellent, with spurts of blood made at the end of the decade.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Frankenstein Created Woman.

Review #857: Frankenstein Created Woman.

Cast:
Peter Cushing (Baron Victor Frankenstein), Susan Denberg (Christina), Thorley Walters (Doctor Hertz), Robert Morris (Hans), Peter Blythe (Anton), Derek Fowlds (Johann), Duncan Lamont (The Prisoner - Hans's Father), Barry Warren (Karl), Alan MacNaughtan (Kleve), and Peter Madden (Chief of Police) Directed by Terence Fisher (#257 - The Curse of Frankenstein, #258 - Dracula (1958), #272 - The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959), #469 - The Revenge of Frankenstein, and #833 - Spaceways)

Review:
With this installment in the Hammer Frankenstein films, I suppose having a monster being created by Frankenstein was getting a bit tired, which explains the change for this film...involving the soul. Honestly the movie's enjoyment might rely on whether you can really buy into the whole "putting people's soul into dead bodies" premise as something to enjoy. I guess it's admirable that they went with something newish, but it still manages to be confusing later on. It is an okay movie, with some fun provided by Cushing, always reliable in making a movie that isn't really that exciting somewhat energetic. Denberg is decent as the "Woman" in the title, having a fair amount of presence. Walters is decent in a bumbling role, different from the usual crop of assistants in these films, though he'd probably be best suited for being a Mall Santa. What I find strange is some of the plot structure, particularly the set up for what turns out to be the Woman "created" by Frankenstein (to be clear, he transfers Hans' soul into his deal girlfriend's body)...Why would Hans not just say where he was on the night of a murder? Is it that embarrassing to say that he was with her? Also, it seems that the soul of Hans "talks" to Christina (via his head, of course)...which we get to hear, so he's basically talking to himself, considering his soul is in her...or maybe it's some sort of split thing, not conveyed very well. There isn't a ton of blood, but there is a decent amount of violent action, though one has to get through the soul aspects first. It's a serviceable movie, at least.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Evil of Frankenstein.

Review #856: The Evil of Frankenstein.

Cast:
Peter Cushing (Baron Victor Frankenstein), Peter Woodthorpe (Zoltan), Duncan Lamont (Chief of Police), Sandor Elès (Hans), Katy Wild (Rena the Begger Girl), David Hutcheson (Burgomaster of Karlstaad), James Maxwell (Priest), Howard Goorney (Drunk), Anthony Blackshaw (Policeman), David Conville (Policeman), Caron Gardner (Burgomaster's Wife), and Kiwi Kingston (the Creature) Directed by Freddie Francis.

Review:
This was the third Frankenstein film released by Hammer, released six years after The Revenge of Frankenstein (#469) and the first in the series not directed by Terence Fisher, but it is also the first film in the series where the Monster resembles the classic Universal look, due to a deal between the two. The monster here resembles the classic look somewhat, but it honestly isn't very terrifying, resembling papier-mâché more than anything. If you're going to emulate the classic look, you invite the criticism when comparing the looks. The sets do look pretty good, with the same kind of neat scenery one would expect. The continuity of the first two films seems to be thrown out the window, which is disappointing, though the biggest problem is that Frankenstein seems to be less evil than he usually is (apart from the opening scene), seeming to emulate the Universal films a bit (obviously). It's funny that the least villainous incarnation of Frankenstein is in the movie called "Evil of Frankenstein", with a hypnotist being the true villain. Woodthorpe is only as threatening as one would be of a hypnotist, so take that for what it is Elès and Wild are moderately enjoyable as well. There is some decent horror (and some interesting effects for ice), at least. It isn't boring, but it certainly isn't as good as the other two films, falling around the same quality as one would see in the Universal Frankenstein films, which is only as good as you make it.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Wolf Blood.

Review #855: Wolf Blood.

Cast:
George Chesebro (Dick Bannister), Marguerite Clayton (Miss Edith Ford), Ray Hanford (Dr. Eugene Horton), Roy Watson (Jules Deveroux), Milburn Morante (Jacques Lebeq), Frank Clark (Old Pop Hadley), and Jack Cosgrave (Edith's uncle and manager) Directed by George Chesebro and Bruce Mitchell.

Review:
Wolf Blood (also known as Wolfblood: A Tale of the Forest) is the earliest known surviving werewolf film in existence, as The Werewolf (released in 1913) is now lost to history. This was made by an independent company named Ryan Brothers Productions. The werewolf in this film is not one that comes from a werewolf bite, but a transfusion of wolf blood into an injured person, hence the title. Halfway through the movie (which is only 67 minutes) is when the transfusion happens, though he doesn't actually turn into a wolf, as it is all in his head. There is some fairly decent location work, with the wilderness and all. The movie is more about the love triangle romance between Chesebro-Clayton-Hanford (yes, a love triangle...which is quite strange), which is somewhat entertaining, but nothing special. There is some decent music and color tinting, at least. The plot isn't really that much about the wolf, but it is serviceable for the drama genre of the silent era. There really isn't too much werewolf action (aside from a dream part with wolves), so in that sense the movie is disappointing if one is looking for horror. I suppose one could look at the film from a psychological standpoint (though the twist at the end isn't really that surprising), or study the dynamic of how one falls in love with someone really quickly despite being engaged (par for the course, I guess). From a historical aspect, there is some importance to the movie, but it isn't a seminal piece of film to write home about. It's an okay silent drama (if you haven't seen a dozen of them already and don't have high expectations), but it's not much of a horror film to pick out of the numerous ones with wolves.

Overall, I give it 6 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.

Fiend Without a Face.

Review #853: Fiend Without a Face.

Cast:
Marshall Thompson (Major Jeff Cummings), Kynaston Reeves (Professor R. E. Walgate), Michael Balfour (Sergeant Kasper), Kim Parker (Barbara Griselle), Terry Kilburn (Captain Al Chester), Gil Winfield (Captain Warren, M.D.), Shane Cordell (Nurse), and Stanley Maxted (Colonel G. Butler) Directed by Arthur Crabtree.

Review:
This was an independent movie made in England (though set in Canada) based upon the short story "The Thought Monster" by Amelia Reynolds Long, about an invisible life form that feeds upon atomic power...and brains. As hokey as this could have been, there is a sort of enjoyment in watching stop motion effects being utilized with this invisible "fiend", and a plot that moves fairly quick...which does indeed have monsters carried by thoughts. There is something interesting about this invisible monster and that strange sound it makes when moving around and stalking these people, which is slightly amusing but also clever. Thompson isn't too bad of a lead, being as fine as the movie allows him to be. The rest of the cast is alright, though the real fun is the climax, where they battle the monsters. The last 15 minutes is when the movie gets really interesting, in part because of the fact that the monsters become visible...as brains with spinal cords. The movie never comes off as too serious or ridiculous, falling around the middle with enough sense to let itself be and show some wonder and delightful horror, especially when one of the monsters gets hit with a hammer. There's just something weird and wild about this climax that just makes for so much fun, much like good b-movies do. The liquid effects are also pretty clever, in a movie that manages to be nifty and workable in being a serviceable atomic flick workable for anyone.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Terror (1963).

Review #852: The Terror.

Cast: 

Boris Karloff (Baron von Leppe/Eric), Jack Nicholson (Andre Duvalier), Dick Miller (Stefan), Sandra Knight (Helene/Ilsa), Dorothy Neumann (Katrina the Witch), and Jonathan Haze (Gustaf) Directed by Roger Corman (#368 - The Little Shop of Horrors and #684 - It Conquered the World)

Review: 

It figures that I get to a Roger Corman movie for this month, and it just so happens to have Jack Nicholson in one of his earliest roles, alongside Boris Karloff. The idea for the movie came not because of a really great idea for a movie, but because Corman wanted to take advantage of sets left over from another production of his, The Raven. In fact, Karloff's scenes were done in three days, and he later described Corman as having "the sketchiest outline of a story.", which is amusing. One thing I can say is that there are some good looking sets, and some moderately entertaining effects. The movie is a bit of a mess, suffice to say, but what do you expect? In addition to Corman, there were four other people who directed parts of the movie (Francis Ford Coppola, Monte Hellman, Jack Hill, and Jack Nicholson), with an 81 minute run time as well. The movie runs at such a strange jumbled pace, with a small cast making up the characters and plot twists being revealed here and there, which one should remember was written for the price of $1,600. You might as well make a flow chart for the movie, or set up a bingo card of things that happen (witch being struck by lightning got me bingo)...and what is The Terror anyway? (the answer to this is placed under your floorboard). I especially love the climax where Karloff and Knight "fight" each other right before a flood happens. Karloff does what he does best in a role as strange as it would be for anyone not named Boris Karloff, and he has quite the screen presence. Nicholson can't really give his character much charisma, but he tries his best to make for an adequate performance. Honestly this isn't a terrible movie, just a strangely cobbled one that could be entertaining to watch late at night before going to bed, which is easy considering this is in the public domain. 

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

The Monuments Men.

Review #851: The Monuments Men.

Cast:
George Clooney (Lt. Frank Stokes), Matt Damon (Lt. James Granger), Bill Murray (Sgt. Richard Campbell), John Goodman (Sgt. Walter Garfield), Jean Dujardin (2nd Lt. Jean-Claude Clermont), Bob Balaban (Pvt. Preston Savitz), Hugh Bonneville (2nd Lt. Donald Jeffries), Cate Blanchett (Claire Simone), Serge Hazanavicius (René Armand), Sam Hazeldine (Colonel Langton), and Dimitri Leonidas (Pvt. Sam Epstein) Directed by George Clooney.

Review:
Don't worry, the next review will be something in horror. This one just happened to come up.
It's clear that Clooney (who also wrote and produced the movie along with Grant Heslov) wanted to make a good movie about a real life event (while based on the book "The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History" by Robert M. Edsel and Bret Witter), with a fairly established cast and a fair budget of $70 million. The end result however comes off as just an average kind of production that really seems lacking in its own kind of personality. The light-hearted barbs throughout the movie are good, but there really isn't much to these characters that you wouldn't see in any other corny kind of work. It's not so much that these characters are uninteresting, it's that the actors (such as Murray) can only stretch it as far as the script wants them to go (with the set up for these characters also being a problem). Clooney is vaguely there as a main character, with only the end scene being noteworthy, in showing some sort of emotion. Damon is only interesting when paired with Blanchett, but it doesn't go anywhere unexpected. Murray and Balaban are fine, but I still wish there was something to the background of even just one of these characters. Even taking into account some of the historical quibbles, it's not really anything that entirely special. The movie is just a bit under two hours, but it feels so long to the point where I was wondering when it actually will get to to some sort of action. It's not that the movie would've been better with more war action, it's that the movie takes its time to actually get to searching for the art. While I admit that I didn't hate the experience of watching it, I kept feeling that reading a book or documentary based on the real life Monuments Men would've been a bit more substantial. The movie does have wonderful scenery, but it is wasted in a movie that really seems to go nowhere other than just through some vague sort of motions. If you're looking for a movie to watch late at night to sleep on or watching it for an Art class (like I did), I suppose it could work on some level for you, but you might be better off researching the subject matter instead.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1923).

Review #850: The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

Cast
Lon Chaney (Quasimodo), Patsy Ruth Miller (Esmeralda), Norman Kerry (Phoebus de Chateaupers), Kate Lester (Madame de Gondelaurier), Winifred Bryson (Fleur de Lys), Nigel De Brulier (Don Claudio), Brandon Hurst (Jehan), Ernest Torrence (Clopin), and Tully Marshall (King Louis XI) Directed by Wallace Worsley.

Review
While this does not necessarily fall into the horror genre (being more of a romance/drama), it is often considered the first film in the "Universal Monsters" series, with a few of the films from that line already reviewed on this show (such as The Phantom of the Opera (#774), the Dracula films, the Frankenstein films, The Invisible Man (#069), The Old Dark House (#465), Murders in the Rue Morgue (#531), The Mummy (#632)...), adapted from the 1831 novel of the same name by Victor Hugo, with certain liberties taken. I figured it was time to get to this film, which I had considered doing for quite some time, though I always seemed to push it back for other movies, until now. It is clear to see why Chaney was often called "The Man of a Thousand Faces", as he is spectacularly unrecognizable as the Hunchback, with the makeup being exquisitely grotesque, looking great for the time and even now. Miller and Kerry do fine in their romance scenes, having some sort of chemistry amidst the ultimate heartbreak. Hurst plays a decent villain, but the real star of the show is the grand scale of everything. There is a good deal of depth in the sets and costumes that create such a magnificent and true atmosphere, with different color hues in certain scenes that really stick out nicely. There isn't too much use of inter-titles, but the film manages to convey itself neatly without dialogue, like most great silent films do. The version I watched includes music compiled by Donald Hunsberger (with adaption and conduction by Robert Israel and his orchestra), which accompanies the movie excellently in capturing the movie's scale. The length of the movie depends on what copy you are seeing, ranging from 95 minutes to over two hours, with the version I watched being nearly around 110 minutes, and it paces itself well. Clearly I recommend this movie, and you can find it almost anywhere in part due to it being in the public domain.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

House of Dracula.

Review #849: House of Dracula.

Cast
Lon Chaney, Jr. (Lawrence "Larry" Talbot/The Wolf Man), John Carradine (Count Dracula / Baron Latos), Martha O'Driscoll (Milizia Morelle), Lionel Atwill (Police Inspector Holtz), Onslow Stevens (Dr. Franz Edelmann), Jane Adams (Nina), Ludwig Stössel (Ziegfried), Glenn Strange (The Frankenstein Monster), and Skelton Knaggs (Steinmuhl) Directed by Erle C. Kenton (#845 - The Ghost of Frankenstein and #847 - House of Frankenstein)

Review
This was the last of the monster mashup movies by Universal in a dramatic light, released a year after House of Frankenstein (#847). By this point, it seems they were running out of gas, with this film lasting only 67 minutes, which is the same length of The Ghost of Frankenstein (#845). I guess that is the case when you release four of these in three years (1942-1945). At least this time around Dracula is given something to do...in that he wants to be cured of being a vampire (sort of). This time, the theory about the Wolf Man is due to some form of "pressure around the brain", whatever that means. At any rate, continuity is thrown out the window and promptly steamrolled into the ground once again, which never ceases to amaze me. Once again, Dracula does not fight any of the monsters, though someone else does get turned into a vampire this time around. Footage is recycled (for some scenes with The Monster, including the climax from The Ghost of Frankenstein), which is disappointing but not exactly surprising considering the low budget and the time this was made. The movie isn't a clunker, but it really shows the decline of these monsters and it doesn't stick out in any real successful way. Chaney is fine as ever, though you could watch him in any other film with the Wolf Man, though at least he gets some closure to his arc. Carradine is given a bit more to do, but it doesn't really translate to anything too memorable. This was one of Lionel Atwill's final roles before dying four months later. Stevens gets to be interesting when he turns into a vampire over halfway through the film, because for one thing he doesn't just mosey on about like Carradine, with this vampire getting to do the crazy eyes and also attack someone, too, though that may be the highlight sadly. O'Driscoll and Adams are fine, but they can't help a movie undedicated to being anything other than a standardized experience. Instead of getting angry over it being what it is, I can only come up with an exasperated sigh. There isn't much mash to this "monster mash", and really there isn't much of anything to this, but I guess this could work as a way to kill an hour...or not. Honestly, stick to any other Universal horror film of the era previously reviewed here, or write your own Dracula/Frankenstein/Wolf Man story.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

The Return of Dracula.

Review #848: The Return of Dracula.

Cast
Francis Lederer (Count Dracula / Bellac Gordal), Norma Eberhardt (Rachel Mayberry), Ray Stricklyn (Tim Hansen), John Wengraf (John Merriman), Virginia Vincent (Jennie Blake), Gage Clarke (Reverend Doctor Whitfield), Jimmy Baird (Mickey Mayberry), Greta Granstedt (Cora Mayberry), and Enid Yousen (Frieda) Directed by Paul Landres.

Review
Four years to the day since I reviewed Dracula (1958, #258), I decided it was time to review the other Dracula film released that same year, with this one produced by Gramercy Pictures (no relation to the current studio of that name) and released by United Artists. This was released in April of 1958, a month before the Hammer production of Dracula was released in America. The plot structure has some resemblance to Shadow of a Doubt, though I didn't think I'd see Dracula roaming the streets of a small town in California (one of my favorite lines is the mother suggesting her daughter to cut class in order to escort "Cousin Bellac" around town). While the movie is low budget, there is at least some fairly good camerawork and camera shots on Dracula are satisfying to look at. To be honest, I didn't really have kind of expectation for this film before seeing it. I hadn't heard of Francis Lederer, and I wondered how he would try to provide his own spin on the role. After all, the Dracula character is such an interesting one to see people try and carry their own flair, with the Lugosi and Lee ones being the most notable. Lederer does fine in the role, making a serviceable effort. He isn't inherently memorable, but he is at least better than a stage version of Dracula, one might say. It should be noted that he would play the role once more in an episode (named "The Devil Is Not Mocked") of Night Gallery (created by Rod Serling) thirteen years later. One thing I really didn't expect was that apparently Dracula can transform people he attacks into dogs (I guess it's better than just having them being zombie like). Then again I guess the mythos of Dracula always seems to have strange things included, so take it for what it is. The climax is fairly decent, with a surprise shot of color that certainly sticks out in a nice way, with a fairly decent way to have Dracula killed. It isn't anything monumental, but it is at least a serviceable horror film. It's not better than the Hammer Dracula film, but it is at least something one should at least consider watching around Halloween time, even if just for a look.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

House of Frankenstein.

Review #847: House of Frankenstein.

Cast
Boris Karloff (Dr. Gustav Niemann), Lon Chaney Jr. (Lawrence "Larry" Talbot/The Wolf Man), John Carradine (Count Dracula), J. Carrol Naish (Daniel), Elena Verdugo (Ilonka), Anne Gwynne (Rita Hussman), Peter Coe (Karl Hussman), Lionel Atwill (Inspector Arnz), George Zucco (Bruno Lampini), Sig Ruman (Bürgermeister Hussman), William Edmunds (Fejos), Charles F. Miller (Tobermann), Philip Van Zandt (Müller), Julius Tannen (Hertz), Hans Herbert (Meier), and Glenn Strange (The Monster) Directed by Erle C. Kenton (#845 - The Ghost of Frankenstein)

Review
Released one year after Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, House of Frankenstein not only brings in Dracula and a hunchback to the monster mix, but it also has Boris Karloff, now starring in a main role who gets more time on screen than the monster he had originally played less than a decade before. This time around, Glenn Strange (the fourth actor to play him) plays the Monster for a very brief amount of time, which I guess makes sense considering how much we've seen of the character in the past few films, only being in the climax. Karloff and Naish do go well together, having some fine banter along with seeming right for the roles. Chaney is good as ever, just like the effects. If you're looking for a Dracula meet up with Frankenstein's monster, you will be sorely dissappointed, as Dracula is killed off less than an hour into the film. It is funny that he was brought back to life only because Karloff's character removed the stake from his heart. Carradine is fairly decent, but he doesn't really seem to evoke any creepy charisma that Lugosi had in the role. Verdugo is not as interesting to watch, although her calling Naish's character "mean and ugly" (the whole exchange is pretty strange itself) is somewhat enjoyable cheesy. The characters aren't really anything too special, but it is fun at least to see the ways that everything tries to be set in place, even if it comes off as cheesy, though that can work for most. At least it isn't the Wolf Man fighting Frankenstein's monster again, though there really isn't a full on monster mash. At 71 minutes, it works okay enough to pass for at least somebody. I find it to not be as good as the previous film, but it is marginally entertaining.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man.

Review #846: Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man.

Cast
Lon Chaney, Jr. (Larry Talbot/The Wolf Man), Ilona Massey (Baroness Elsa Frankenstein), Patric Knowles (Dr. Frank Mannering), Lionel Atwill (Mayor), Béla Lugosi (Frankenstein's Monster), Maria Ouspenskaya (Maleva), and Dennis Hoey (Inspector Owen) Directed by Roy William Neill.

Review
This was the first in the Universal franchise to utilize two monsters for a crossover film, although one could see this as a sequel to The Wolf Man (#260). Chaney is excellent once again as the Wolf Man, expressing the tragic nature of this character with ease, along with wonderful effects and transformation once again. Lugosi's performance is well known for having been butchered by the studio, to the point where you do not get to hear him speak, not get much context into his walking nature. It's not a movie where the monsters just fight each other (that happens briefly near the end), but it is a fairly engaging yarn to watch. The music number (yes, you read that) is somewhat amusing, in that you wouldn't really expect it to actually occur. Massey does a fine job as well. Knowles is okay, but nothing too special. Atwill returns once again, getting to play a mayor, which is a bit amusing in that this time he doesn't end up dying. The continuity is a bit strange (the Monster is found in ice. What exact time period is this set in? And why does the Wolf Man need to die like this instead of just getting shot by silver and buried deeper?), but there is at least a plausible set up to most of the events of the film. The climax is satisfying in that we get to see these two monsters meet and fight (briefly), which seals the fun aspect of a concept that could have been played out terribly but thankfully isn't.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Ghost of Frankenstein.

Review #845: The Ghost of Frankenstein.

Cast
Lon Chaney Jr. (The Monster), Cedric Hardwicke (Dr. Ludwig Frankenstein/Henry Frankenstein), Ralph Bellamy (Erik Ernst), Lionel Atwill (Dr. Theodore Bohmer), Béla Lugosi (Ygor), Evelyn Ankers (Elsa Frankenstein), Janet Ann Gallow (Cloestine Hussman), Barton Yarborough (Dr. Kettering), Doris Lloyd (Martha), and Leyland Hodgson (Chief Constable) Directed by Erle C. Kenton.

Review

The original three films (#072 - Frankenstein, #394 - Bride of Frankenstein, #844 - Son of Frankenstein) are all entertaining, with Boris Karloff making for a superb monster. This is the first film without Karloff playing the role, with Chaney (who we saw in #260 - The Wolf Man) now taking the role. His performance in this one isn't as interesting, mainly because he never speaks, mainly just lumbering around, more than he did in the last one. The monster this time is wearing a suit (unlike that fur coat from the last one...don't ask how he's back to the suit), and it's a shame that there isn't much to him, save from lifting a girl to try and get a ball midway through the movie. At least Lugosi returns once again, though it isn't as memorably creepy this time. The lines at the end where he talks about living forever are pretty chilling, though. It really a movie only interesting at the end, when the Monster gets some sort of brain surgery. It is a quick movie at 67 minutes, but there really aren't too many great moments to it. I do find it funny that there is another Frankenstein around to operate on the monster (and that the ghost looks like him, too), but also funny that when he looks at the original Frankenstein's notes that it shows clips from the first film. Hardwicke does okay, but he isn't as fun as the other two Frankensteins. The effects are adequate, but it is clear to note this was the first Frankenstein movie made as a "b-picture", with lower budgets and reuse of actors. It's not a bad flick by at means, but it really doesn't seem to do anything new, which is probably why the next film would be a crossover between a familiar monster...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Son of Frankenstein.

Review #844: Son of Frankenstein.

Cast
Basil Rathbone (Baron Wolf von Frankenstein), Boris Karloff (The Monster), Bela Lugosi (Ygor), Lionel Atwill (Inspector Krogh), Josephine Hutchinson (Elsa von Frankenstein), Donnie Dunagan (Peter von Frankenstein), Emma Dunn (Amelia), Edgar Norton (Thomas Benson), and Perry Ivins (Fritz) Directed by Rowland V. Lee.

Review
After three years (or around 1214 days), I finally got around to seeing the third Frankenstein movie released by Universal. The previous one (#394 - Bride of Frankenstein) was an excellent follow up to the first film, with an excellent climax to boot, though the monster movie craze for Universal had declined by 1936. On August 5, 1938, the Regina-Wilshire Theatre showcased a double feature of Dracula and Frankenstein (with some also reporting that Son of Kong was also shown), which was a success. The successes from other theaters inspired Universal to rush this movie into production by late 1938, though without Colin Clive (who had died in 1937) and James Whale, with the focus now on the son of Dr. Frankenstein. I do wonder about how long this is set after though, since Atwill's character relates about having his arm ripped out of him when he was a young boy, or where Lugosi's Ygor was during any of those events since he didn't seem to be there before...but the movie is entertaining enough even with some quirks like that. Rathbone is excellent as ever, clearly getting into this role with enough believably. Karloff (in the last time playing the Monster for Universal) is fine, even if this time he doesn't have much to say, save for occasional growls. It is strange to see him in a fur vest, too. Lugosi is excellent as Ygor, having a haunting creepiness about him (particularly when revealing his neck wound from being hanged) that works in the movie's advantage. The effects and camera shots are also pretty wonderful to look at as well. On the whole, it's not as good as the other two films, but it is a serviceable monster movie that works well enough at 99 minutes.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Last Man on Earth (1964).

Review #843: The Last Man on Earth.

Cast
Vincent Price (Dr. Robert Morgan), Franca Bettoia (Ruth Collins), Emma Danieli (Virginia Morgan), Giacomo Rossi-Stuart (Ben Cortman), Umberto Raho (Dr. Mercer), and Christi Courtland (Kathy Morgan) Directed by Ubaldo Ragona and Sidney Salkow.

Review

Based off the novel I Am Legend by Richard Matheson (which inspired George Romero to make Night of the Living Dead), this was an Italian production that was released by American International Pictures, who have been covered before (#592 - Dementia 13, #654 - The Screaming Skull, #656 - Invasion of the Saucer Men, #792 - Black Sabbath) on this show. Price does a fairly decent job, but I find him to be more fun in other movies when he is playing something with a bit more edge to it, as strange as it seems. Bettoia is only in the last half of the movie, but she is moderately enjoyable. The movie does at least have some sort of downbeat mood that is fairly consistent, with some fine scenes of showing the main character in his desperation. The vampires aren't really anything too scary, but they do provide an adequate enemy for Price. The flashback scenes are okay, helping to make Price a bit more developed. It sometimes seems a bit hokey, but it is at least entertaining enough in serving its purpose. The climax has some decent enough tragedy, at least. At 86 minutes, it is a movie that doesn't really go too long, and if you're looking for a Vincent Price horror film this may work for you.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.