Historical Facts as the year draws to an end.

This year was the tenth year of me writing this blog. As 2022 draws to an end, I thought some probably true historical facts could be amusing as the next entry will be on January 2^nd 2023. So thanks for reading, have a great new years eve, as well as a safe and great week, and I'll see you all next year!

-From 1912 to 1948, the Olympic Games held competitions in the fine arts and awarded medals.

-Napoleon Bonaparte was attacked by a horde of angry bunnies during a rabbit hunt.

-The owners of the Titanic never claimed the ship was unsinkable, despite what the press said.

-Mary actually existed and she owned a little lamb.

-Nixon was a skilled musician and could play the piano, saxophone, clarinet, accordion, and violin.

-In 1830 ketchup was sold as indigestion medicine.

-Abraham Lincoln is in the wrestling hall of fame and was a licensed bartender.

-No one was burned in Salem for being a witch. Most were jailed and a few were hanged, but no one burned.

-Walt Disney was cremated, not frozen.

-Before the drink Bloody Mary was called such, it was called Red Snapper and before that, A Bucket of Blood.

-In 1917, four years before women in the U.S. could vote, one woman was elected to Congress.

-Machu Picchu was built in 1450. The Tower of London was built in 1078.

-The shortest war in history is the Anglo-Zanzibar War which happened on August 27, 1896 and lasted 38 minutes.

-Tablecloths were originally designed to function as communal napkins to be used by all the dinner guests at once.

-100 million years ago, there were galloping crocodiles in what is now the Sahara Desert.

-Oliver Cromwell banned eating pie, claiming that is was too pagan.

-It is estimated that about 97% of history is lost in time.

-Even mentioning Genghis Khan in the Soviet union was illegal.

-The year 46 BC was 445 days long and included two leap months. Julius Caesar arranged this to make his new Julian calendar sync up.

-The worlds oldest still functioning parliament in the Islandic Althing which was started in 930.

 

Don't Torture a Duckling

When researching the recent movies I have talked about, I came across a giallo with the silly name of:

Don't Torture a Duckling (1972).

First off, don't worry. There are in fact no actual ducklings in the movie, tortured or otherwise. Secondly, I may have seen this movie back in the 90's, but I had no real memory of it, nor did I recognize any scenes.

Set in the poor rural town of Accendura in southern Italy, this giallo is directed by horror maestro Lucio Fulci, and marks his first cinematic use of heavy gore. He has also called it his favorite movie in his catalogue.

Don't Torture a Duckling stars Florinda Bolkan, Tomas Milan and Barbara Bouchet. Bouchet has been in several of the movies I've talked about recently and Tomas Milan starred in Almost Human that I've also reviewed.

So on to the plot. The movie starts by showing us some of the immoral and sinister people in town. The slow witted Giuseppe Barra who spies on people. The mysterious witch La Magiara who unearths a baby skeleton. Young thrill seeker Patrizia who taunts and flirts with an eleven year old boy while naked. This scene landed Fulci in hot water with the law, as he was accused of corrupting a minor until he could prove that the child actor was substituted for an adult little person when on screen with the naked Bouchet. Fulci was cleared off all charges.

Soon enough, a boy disappears and a few more are murdered. The police start an expansive investigation with several competent officers. In many giallo movies, the police are usually just there to answer the question; “Why don't they call the cops”, but normally it's the main hero who solves the case. In Don't Torture a Duckling the police are pretty sharp, especially once the eagle eyed and clever journalist Andrea Martelli arrives from Rome to help.

Every time a boy gets killed, the townsfolk get more angry and a mob soon starts forming. Violence follows and everyone is on edge. It all comes to a boil in the end, and as usual, I'm not spoiling it.

Don't Torture a Duckling stands out from many of the other gialli I've written about. It feels like a much bigger movie with a larger budget, and the whole piece feels a bit more competent. I'm not trying to trash anyone's work, it's more a gut feeling than anything else. I have no technical complaints whatsoever, even though none of the shots feel as artistic as some that appear in other movies. Despite that Fulci demonstrates a smooth competence throughout.

My biggest and perhaps only real complaint apart from the title, is that there is such a small pool of suspects and once the police starts eliminating them, the field is very narrow. I would have liked to see more paranoia between the townsfolk, but I get it. With a runtime of 105 minutes, it is already a long movie and one that drags a bit as it is. For the paranoia to work, we'd have to get to know even more characters and that just isn't possible. You'd need a mini series for that to work.

So, do I recommend this movie? Oh yes, to giallo fans, absolutely. It is one of the benchmark movies in the giallo genre. Not as good as Argento's Bird With the Crystal Plumage perhaps, but a solid movie nonetheless. Other thriller fans might like it, so perhaps give it a shot.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a safe and great week! Oh, and Happy Holiday's to you all!

 

Two Titles

I watched two giallo movies this week. The first one has the suggestive title:

The Forbidden Photos of a Lady Above Suspicion (1970).

Minou (Dagmar Lassander) is the young wife of businessman Peter (Paolo Capponi) and one night while out by herself, she is attacked by a sinister man. He threatens her with a stick that has a knife blade in it, but instead of violating her, he tells her that her husband is a fraud and a murderer, then lets her go. Minou is understandably terrified and confides in her best friend Dominique (Nieves Navarro), as she feels that she can't got to Peter with this. Soon the man is back, this time with a audio recording of Peter and another man talking about disposing of a mans body. In return for the tape he demands sex. Once Minou gathers up the courage to tell Peter, she finds it impossible to prove anything and everyone including her starts to doubt her sanity.

That's as much as I can tell without going too far into spoiler territory. Overall, The Forbidden Photos of a Lady Above Suspicion is not a bad movie. It is well shot, the actors are fine etc. The problem is that everything that transpires is to set up the ending, which I won't spoil. It's not that it is boring, it's just a pretty average journey until the end, which was quite good.

This realization left me with a problem. What now? Clearly this isn't enough so I sat down and randomly chose:

Amuck (1972).

Greta Franklin (Barbara Bouchet) arrives at a large villa in Venice to work as secretary to a big time writer, Richard Stuart (Farley Granger), as his previous secretary has disappeared. At the villa she also meets Eleanora Stuart (Rosalba Neri), Richards wife and their butler Giovanni (Umberto Raho). The real reason Greta is there is because the previous secretary, Sally (Patrizia Viotti) was Greta's best friend since school. Once settled in, she quickly discovers that the Stuarts like to host drug fueled sex parties, and she is equally quickly drawn in with some spiked drinks. She wastes no time in her investigation, getting into one scrape after another.

Amuck is really interesting as there are very few possible suspects, but with its 100 minute run time, you have all the time in the world to suspect them all, dismiss half and then suspect them again. Ultimately it isn't the truth that is the important part in Amuck. It is the journey. Barbara Bouchet does sterling work as the scared but determined heroine that takes risk after risk to find out what happened to her friend. The atmosphere is a great mix of tension and relief that actually sustains you throughout the whole movie.

Both movies do what they set out to do with Amuck doing it considerably better. Both movies have a good share of nudity, but very little gore overall. Nothing too bad for sensitive audiences, but I wouldn't watch either movie with your kids or parents in the room, if you know what I mean.

So, would I recommend these films? Concerning The Forbidden Photos of a Lady Above Suspicion, maybe. As I said, it isn't bad by any means, it's just that this story has been told by other better movies. Watch it if you like, no harm done. What about Amuck? Yes, this is a really nicely done giallo. Quite racy but that does not get in the way of the plot, and is not used to cover up a lack of ideas or story. A well crafted movie, no doubt about it.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Eye in the Labyrinth

I was in the mood for Italian mystery cinema and randomly picked:

Eye in the Labyrinth (1972).

Directed by Mario Caiano and starring Rosemary Dexter, Adolfo Celi, Horst Frank and Sybil Danning. Adolfo Celi is perhaps best remembered from his role as the main villain, Largo, in the James Bond movie Thunderball.

The movie opens with a creepy scene where an injured man is fleeing for his life from some unknown enemy or enemies through a labyrinthine place. We soon discover that it was all a bad dream his girlfriend, Julie (Rosemary Dexter), was having. Someone soon after calls her and asks where he, Luca (Horst Frank), is but she doesn't know. The following day she goes to the psychiatric hospital where he works as a psychiatrist, but his colleagues don't know his whereabouts either. A patient screams that Luca is connected to Maracudi.

Julie gathers some more clues and soon finds herself in the small town of Maracudi. Asking around after Luca, she eventually meets the kind old gentleman Frank (Adolfo Celi) who suggests that she heads off to a villa owned by his acquaintance Gerda.

Gerda's luxurious villa is a kind of artists enclave with amongst others a composer who only works with natural sound, a photographer obsessed with closeups of body parts etc. They welcome Julie at first, but together with Frank, she soon starts to uncover strange secrets, unsettling facts and several attempts on her life that culminates in a smart finale.

Eye in the Labyrinth is honestly a strange movie. For the most part it is brilliantly filmed with some very interesting angles and dramatic shot composition. But at the same time, it is for the most part pretty pedestrian. Many scenes sort of plod along and I got the feeling more than once that small scenes are missing. The worst one is when Julie wants to cool off by going skinny dipping on a lonely stretch of beach. However a trio of hoodlums find her clothes and grab them while laughing at her. Rather than going back to the beach naked, she swims further out and in the next breath, Gerda wraps a towel around her and welcomes Julie to the villa. We had no inkling that she was that close to the house, and we never find out when or how her car arrives there. In a movie that functions on several levels, these inconsistencies are a bit of a problem.

Despite these problems I found myself genuinely intrigued to see the end and have the mystery solved, since I didn't manage to figure it out. The actors are a cut above the norm but like The Red Queen Kills Seven Times, the music is again a problematic jazz score that only fits some of the scenes. Still not a deal breaker, but worth noting.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, absolutely. Fans of Giallo or just mysteries in general should enjoy it. Sure it is a bit of a slog to get though at times, but it is worth it as the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. There is a bit of gore and nudity but not so much that more sensitive viewers should have a problem. You should of course exercise your own judgment. All in all, I found Eye in the Labyrinth an entertaining watch.

That is that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

The Red Queen Kills Seven Times

I decided to watch a Giallo with a wonderful title:

The Red Queen Kills Seven Times (1972).

Mild Spoilers Ahead

The movie opens with a young girl, Kitty, playing with a doll in a castle garden. Her sister Evelyn steals it and runs away. Their invalid grandfather tries to make peace between them until Evelyn, apparently influenced by a grisly portrait stabs and destroys the doll.

The painting is of a woman dressed in red with black hair stabbing a blond woman in a black dress. This is the legend of the Red Queen who tormented her sister, the Black Queen, until she snapped and killed her sister. The Red Queen then rose from her grave and killed six people culminating with the Black Queen being the seventh victim. Every hundred years two sisters are born that are cursed to reenact the original Red Queen – Black Queen drama.

Cut to ten years later. The uncle, Tobias Wildenbrück is suffering from a bad heart as well as being confined to a wheel chair. His eldest granddaughter Franziska and her husband lives with Tobias in his castle, when one night the Red Queen appears and he dies from fear induced cardiac arrest. Everyone is shocked, but Kitty, now a successful fashion photographer is horrified. A year or so earlier Kitty fought with Evelyn when Evelyn hit her head and fell in the moat. Everyone knew the sisters hated each other, so Kitty and Franziska hid the body in the castle cellar since no one would believe that it was an accident. Then they told everyone that Evelyn had moved to America.

Soon enough, more people get murdered, and each time, someone sees a woman with long black hair and a red cape fleeing into the night laughing maniacally. The Red Queen is back!

This Italian movie is directed by Emilio Miraglia who also directed The Night Evelyn Came out of Her Grave. The movies are not connected despite the similar names. It stars Barbara Bouchet, Ugo Pagliai, Marina Malfatti and Sybil Danning amongst others.

Overall, The Red Queen Kills Seven Times is a really nice mystery thriller. The cinematography is excellent, the actors are a cut above the norm but the soundtrack is pretty awful. Several tense scenes are accompanied by an upbeat jazz score that really doesn't fit at all. The kills are good, suitably violent and sometimes pretty gory but not too over the top. There is some nudity, but it is tastefully done and avoids feeling too sleazy.

The overall story is actually really good. It had me guessing from the start and I failed to solve the mystery before the movie ended.

There are a couple of missteps though. The biggest has to be Peter, a sleazy, greasy junkie who blackmails Kitty. He claims to know that Evelyn is not in the US and demands money to keep quiet. Later on he assaults Kitty in her bedroom leaving her traumatized. But then this is never mentioned again. The scene of her sitting half naked, horrified and barely sane is a harrowing image and in the next scene she is fine. Why include this if it has no impact on the character on indeed on the movie?

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes I do. The Red Queen Kills Seven Times is not a masterpiece, but rather a pretty solid middle-of-the-road affair. It does what it sets out to do and does it well enough. Not one of the great classics in the Giallo genre, but nevertheless a solid watch.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

Lovecraftian, or Comsic Horror Humor

Yesterday I tripped over a trio of Lovecraft based comedy sketches, and since I needed something for you guys, here you go! I hope you will join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

First up is the HPL Insurance company: 

 

 

 

Then The Unnamable Unimaginable Thing In My Basement:

 

 

Finally, The Epiphany Continuum Sketch: 

 

World of Warcraft News

There are some exciting things coming up in World of Warcraft, starting this week.

First up, the WoW 18^th anniversary event has been up and running for about a week and will continue for some time, but with the upcoming elemental invasion pre-patch event, it will probably be very hard, if not impossible to get any help against these world bosses.

Now, starting this week, on November 15^th, the elemental invasion will start. In a nutshell, you kill elementals that spawn in certain places and who drop tokens when defeated. These tokens are a currency for some seriously good gear, and well worth getting. When a hundred elementals or so are killed, a boss will spawn, who drops more tokens and can also drop gear directly. At least, this seems to be t he case, as official info is hard to find.

For a more detailed look, check out this link:

https://www.wowhead.com/guide/primal-storms-dragonflight-pre-patch-event

Also starting this week is the Twitch drop event with Blizzard. Simply connect your Twitch account to your Blizzard account and then watch live streamers play WoW and you can get some cool stuff like a mount.

Here are the dates and some more detailed info including instructions on how to connect your accounts:

https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/news/23873861/updated-nov-1-dragonflight-twitch-drops-earn-rewards-watching-and-supporting-creators

My wife and I will be streaming during these dates on Twitch.tv/Chelidda so why not come on by and watch to grab some cool stuff. If you don't want to chat, it is enough to merely have the stream on for the required amount of time. There are of course lots of streamers to choose from, so find someone you like, sit back and enjoy.

Finally, this week is when those who own Dragonflight already can make and start playing the new Drachtyr race. They start at level 58 but can only be one class, the Evoker. Evokers are either healers or dps casters, and based on my experiences on the Beta, they are a lot of fun to play. They can even fly without a mount, although they use the same mechanic as the new Drakes in Dragonflight. This flying technique takes some getting used to, so it may pay off to get some practice in early.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Mother of Tears

I have previously written about Dario Argento's Suspiria (1977) as well as its sequel Inferno (1980), but this time we are talking about the third movie in the trilogy:

Mother of Tears (2007).

Like the two other movies, Mother of Tears is directed by Dario Argento who also co-wrote them with his one time partner Daria Nicolodi. The movie stars Dario's and Daria's daughter Asia Argento, a whole bunch of actors I don't know and horror veteran Udo Kier. Like in Suspiria, Kier plays a small but important role, but they are not the same character in case anyone is wondering.

The core of the Mothers Trilogy is three ancient, evil and powerful witches, Mater Suspiriorum (Sighs), Mater Tenebrarum (Darkness) and Mater Lachrymarum (Tears). These three witches eventually settled down in Germany, New York and Rome. We see the story of Mater Suspiriorum in Suspiria, Mater Tenebrarum in Inferno and now Mater Lachrymarum in this movie.

Some spoilers ahead.

The movie opens with some workmen accidentally finding an old coffin with a box chained to it. A cardinal orders the coffin reburied, but keeps the box which is constantly referred to as an urn for some reason. He opens it, gets really scared and sends it to a friend who is the curator of a museum.

When the “urn” arrives, the curator is not in, so the assistant curator decides to open it and invites an American art student to join her. In order to translate some old text, the student Sara Mandy (Asia Argento) is sent to fetch a dictionary. While she is gone, three entities appear and murder the assistant curator in a seriously gory scene. Sara escapes only because a voice helps her. So far so good, but from here on the story gets a little convoluted.

The contents of the box seems to empower the Mother of Tears enormously and a make the citizens of Rome go crazy. People are murdered, they fight savagely in the streets, vandalism becomes commonplace, in short, things get pretty nuts. The other thing that happens is that witches from all over the world flock to Rome as Sara struggles to survive and find out what happens while dodging both witches and the police. She goes from person to person sometimes getting help, sometimes not. She does discover that the voice is her mother who was a powerful white witch that was murdered after fighting and grievously wounding the Mater Suspiriorum prior to the events in Suspiria. Fun fact, it is Daria Nicolodi who plays Sara's mother, in other words they are not just playing mother and daughter, they are mother and daughter.

Sara ultimately decides to confront the Mother of Tears in her lair and roll credits. There is obviously more, but as usual, you can watch the movie yourself.

Mother of Tears is a good idea executed in a sloppy manner. I like the overall feel of the movie, and the idea of a power that makes the population go nuts is cool, but even though the movie is 102 minutes long, it feels extremely rushed. Scenes begin only to quickly be shuffled along into the next one, characters are introduced and killed in the same breath and concepts are brought up only to never be explored again. It seriously grated on my nerves after a while.

The witches' arrival is also handled in a weird manner. They look like they just stepped out of an 80's pop music video. Big hair teased into huge plumes, excessive make-up, dramatic and colorful clothes etc. They also mostly just wander around in groups laughing loudly, while snarling and hissing at people. It made no sense to me. Finally I don't understand what Sara hoped to achieve in the end. Sure she knows that she has inherited a lot of her mothers powers, but she doesn't know how to use them. In Suspiria and Inferno, the endings made some kind of sense, but the ending in Mother of Tears is kind of dumb. Not quite deus-ex-machina, but not far from it.

I also feel I should talk about the gore and the nudity, because there is a ton of it. The really heavy gore scenes aren't that many but they are almost excessive. Very well executed scenes to be sure, but most of them felt like they were there just to be there. And the nudity is the same way. It's one thing for a hysterically cackling mad woman to not notice that her shirt has fallen open, but it looks like Dario took every opportunity to shoehorn in either brutal gore or nudity in most scenes, possibly both. I'm not a prude by any means, but blood and boobs for the sake of blood and boobs feels both cheap and a bit desperate, and I know Argento can do better.

There are good sides as well, from the cinematography, to the sound to the overall mood of the movie, but the shortcomings sadly overshadow the good. I could go on, but I'm worried you might think I hate the movie when I don't.

So, do I recommend this movie? Not really, but maybe? Overall I enjoyed Mother of Tears, and to be fair it's not a totally bad movie as such, it's just disappointing that it took 27 years to complete the trilogy and instead of an interesting occult mystery all we really get is a somewhat slapped together paint by the numbers horror movie, doused in gore. Horror fans might enjoy it, particularly fans if Suspiria and Inferno, but watch it with the proper expectations.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

The Long Hair of Death

I really felt inspired by last week's entry, Mario Bava's Black Sunday, so when I found:

The Long Hair of Death (1965),

I watched it. Directed not by Bava, but by Antonio Margheriti who is known as the number two of Gothic Italian horror behind Bava, this movie also stars Barbara Steele. Also starring are George Ardisson, Halina Zalewska, Umberto Raho amongst others.

The film is set in the 1400's in what I assume is some Germanic country. A woman is being dragged to the stake, accused of witchcraft. Her older daughter Mary (Steele) rushes to the local lord, Count Humboldt, pleading for her mothers life. The count agrees if she sleeps with him, which she does, but her mother is burned anyway. Dying on the flames, the woman curses the house of Humboldt, as they tend to do. The count kills Mary as well, in the first of a series of moves the characters do that make no sense to me. The youngest daughter, Lisabeth, is taken in by the Humboldt's for some reason.

Cut to when Lisabeth is an adult. The count's son, Kurt is determined to possess Lisabeth, despite pretty much laughing as her mother burned to death. She makes it clear that she hates him so of course Kurt arranges for them to be married. After the wedding night, he is dismayed to learn that she still hates him... What a shock!

At this time, the dead mothers curse comes to pass and a gruesome plague sweeps the area. To make matters worse, Mary returns from the dead in a pretty damn cool scene. No one seems to recognize her except the old count as she introduces herself as Helen Rochefort, and Kurt is immediately smitten by her.

This is as much of the plot as I'm willing to “spoil”.

The Long Hair of Death is a mixed bag for me. On one hand it is a Gothic masterpiece, a delightfully dark dream of wonderful imagery. On the other hand it is a fairly predictable story dotted with some completely dumbfounded decisions and details that aren't explained at all. There is a priest in the castle, Von Klage, who for some reason seem to have more power than the count and no one ever explains why that is. There is a murder plot that is ridiculously convoluted. Things like that does detract from the over all enjoyment.

The actors do a creditable job, I can't complain, and the music is... passable but if it wasn't for the incredible scenery, this movie would be a complete joke. I mentioned last week that despite filming in black and white, Bava painted the set of Black Sunday in those colors to heighten the effect. The Long Hair of Death doesn't do that and it amazed me to see that I could tell the difference.

So, do I recommend this movie? To fans of the genre, yes, I liked it, but to casual movie watchers, no. I'd say that The Long Hair of Death is a bit of an acquired taste and if Gothic dramas aren't your thing, you'll probably be a bit bored. You can't compare a movie like this to modern horror, that would be unfair, but if that is what you want, this isn't for you.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Black Sunday

This week we are following last week's Mario Bava entry with his arguably most famous movie:

Black Sunday (1960).

To be fair, I have seen this movie before but that was back in the early 90's or so, and I only remembered four things; it's in black and white, it stars Barbara Steele, there is a big metal mask with spikes on the inside and the fact that I liked it. So it was with a pretty neutral state of mind that I sat down and gave it a go.

The movie opens in Moldavia in 1630 with an eastern orthodox inquisitor (those were real I just learned) who is condemning his sister to death for trafficking with Satan. Princess Asa Vajda (Steele) and her lover and accomplice Igor Javutich are executed by having the above mentioned masks hammered on their faces but before the corpses can be burned, a storm breaks out making it impossible to do so. Other methods of burial are instead employed.

We jump two hundred years forward and meet Professor Kruvajan and his young handsome assistant Dr. Gorobec. They are on their way to a conference but are delayed due to a carriage malfunction. Bored and curious, they find Asa's tomb and accidentally release her. Later, they meet the beautiful Katia Vajda (also Steele) and become embroiled in the supernatural horrors that ensue as Asa resurrects her servant Javutich in order to get revenge on her family.

Black Sunday is still a really good horror movie. Sure, it is hammy at times and some of the dialogue is silly, but it was made in 1960 and movies were made very differently back then. Seeing as it is an Italian movie with an international cast, some things are slightly lost in translation as well. That said, it is incredibly atmospheric and actually really gruesome at times. Movie goers back then must have been pretty shocked at some of the imagery, some of which still holds up to this day.

Bava not only shot Black Sunday in black and white, he actually painted the sets black and white as well, to really lean into the stark imagery, and at times, it almost feels like a shadow play. The actors do a really good job and the plot is pretty smart. Nothing just happens, instead a small thing early on can have a big impact later and the movie builds up slowly and with good effect. The story drags a bit in the middle, but not so much as to become boring, and the end product stands tall.

The supernatural elements are interesting and deserves a mention. Asa seems to be more of a witch but her servants behave more like vampires, even though there are no fangs or typical vampire tropes. They are more generically undead than specifically vampires, and I wouldn't have made the vampire connection except for the fact that they use the word in the movie.

So, do I recommend this movie? Absolutely! Every horror fan should watch it but be aware of it's age. Yes it can be a bit silly, but put that out of your mind and enjoy a seriously good horror classic!

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Blood and Black Lace

I took the opportunity to watch the second ever Giallo movie:

Blood and Black Lace (1964).

Directed by Mario Bava and starring Cameron Mitchell, Eva Nartok and others, Blood and Black Lace is a peculiar movie.

A young woman, Isabella, is murdered just before arriving at a fashion show where she is set to model. We see the murderer, a man in a black rain coat, black hat and a pale cloth mask that covers his face. Later on, her diary is found, and everyone starts acting suspicious, making it obvious that the diary is extremely important. More women are murdered by the above mentioned killer, and fair warning, one is beaten up quite badly in a pretty gruesome scene. Obviously I'm not going to spoil the ending, but it was pretty good.

Blood and Black Lace plays it straight, as in it doesn't cheat with the mystery, something that I always appreciate. I did solve a crucial part of the mystery, even though I failed to discern the killer's actual identity.

What makes the film peculiar is the fact that it is a joy to watch but the story is surprisingly pedestrian. The colors and the cinematography are first rate. Yes, it is a typical 60's movie, but Bava really managed to make the visual elements incredibly enjoyable. The story on the other hand is fairly lackluster. To be fair, most murder mysteries have fairly normal motives when you get down to the details, but in Blood and Black Lace I found myself wanting something more from the plot than what we get. Still, it's not really a complaint, but more of an observation.

The actors are fine, but it is an Italian film, so it is naturally dubbed, which sometimes makes it hard to really judge the actors. No complaints, but no stand out performances either. The music is 60's jazz so it is up to you whether you like it or not.

As mentioned, the movie has some fairly rough violence but little blood as such, and no real nudity either, possibly because it was made in 1964. Not that those things are needed to make a good movie, I just thought I'd bring it up.

So do I recommend the movie? Yes and no. Fans of murder mysteries could enjoy it, and fans of Giallo should watch it for it's place as the second Giallo ever, but casual watchers are likely going to be bored. I liked it, and I had a good time, but it is hard to really recommend it despite the lovely visuals.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Professor of Rock

A couple of weeks ago, I found the Youtube channel Professor of Rock:

 

 https://www.youtube.com/c/ProfessorofRock

I felt like sharing it with you, since I have found it really relaxing, informative and very nostalgic to listen to his videos. He covers trivia on famous songs, what was in the top charts back in the day (with added trivia), interviews with some of the big names in rock and pop and much more. 

The professor, who I assume isn't an actual professor, is calm but passionate and he has a great way of talking about the subject without getting too preachy, even though some of his video titles are a bit... dramatic. The content covers mostly 70's, 80's and 90's music and I for one couldn't be happier.

So if you like that era's music, go check it out! I'll link a couple of videos below so you can get a feel for what his channel is about.

Beyond that, that is that. I have to keep it short this week, but do join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

 

  

 

 

Red Sparrow - again.

Back in June I talked about the (sort of) spy thriller Red Sparrow. I have now read the book and feel like doing a bit of a comparison.

To no one's surprise, the basic story is the same as the movie. There is a mole in the SVR, Dominika is trained to be a spy, lots of tradecraft, the CIA etc...

However there are lots of differences as well. Take Dominika's training for example. In the book she is fully trained at the SVR academy before she is sent to the sparrow school. The movie really exaggerates the sparrow element for obvious reasons, but it also cheapens Dominika's skills. There is also the fact that she has synesthesia, or the ability to see sound as color. This is why she was so good at dancing, and why she is a human lie detector. The book kind of wears off a bit, treating her condition as more or less aura reading which is a bit much but it is an interesting element, so I didn't mind.

In the movie, a lot of the action takes place in Budapest which is fine, but in the book Nate and Dominika duel in Helsinki which really amused me as I live there. The author, Jason Matthews really did a good job, and described many places accurately. However, I did get a good laugh when a couple of CIA agents are described as knowing the city like the back of their hands, having even mastered the metro... The Helsinki subway isn't like London, Paris or Moscow. The book was published in 2013 and our metro at the time looked like a fork. One long line and a short fork on one end. Not all that impressive to master that... But it was fun to see my hometown through the filter of a spy thriller. Dominika and Nate even eat at a restaurant that I have eaten at a dozen times, at least. In fact, I didn't even know the place still exists, so that was a fun bonus.

The book also deals with espionage within the US, with a highly placed mole, which the movie ignored completely. There are scenes taking place in Athens and Rome that are likewise ignored. I get that it would have ballooned the budget, and it's not like the movie had to have these elements but it would have elevated the movie a great deal.

In a surprising twist, I actually prefer the movie's ending to the one in the book. The novel has a more realistic ending, but I found the movie ending more satisfying.

All in all, the novel really paints a more complete picture of Dominika which makes some scenes in the movie make more sense. It is only natural that a book can go deeper into detail than a movie, but the movie really messed up in so many small ways that they could have fixed if they hadn't been so focused on doing other things instead. In the movie, Dominika has to fend off the lecherous advances of the Russian station chief in Helsinki. In the book, he is a scumbag but he does not dare hit on the niece of the Deputy Director. Things like that I wish the movie could have just handled better.

In conclusion, I really enjoyed Red Sparrow. Jason Matthews writes well and his long experience in the CIA really shows. He manages to create believable and tense surveillance scenarios without loosing the reader in tech-babble. If you like spy novels, read Red Sparrow, it is worth it.

 

Dragonflight Beta!

I got into the World of Warcraft Dragonflight Beta and this is a bit of info and a few thoughts in no particular order.

But remember that this is a BETA and all information is subject to potential change. Nothing is written in stone.

First up, the new talent trees. Old players and those who play classic are familiar with how the talent trees used to be; huge and hard to use. Then they changed them to a choice between three options every fifteen levels or so. Now? It is amazing!

Every class has two trees, one generic for the class, and one for the spec. At first glance they look really intimidating, but once you look more closely, it's not that complicated. It pays off to go over all the talents and trace a path down to the higher level talents you want. On top of that, different aspects of the class, like AoE abilities, healing and so on tend to be on one side of the tree. You can even choose to leave abilities that you don't use. So far I'm very impressed with the new system, just be aware that once Dragonflight comes, it is going to take time to go though all your characters, and you need to let it take that time. 

Check them out on Wowhead: https://www.wowhead.com/beta/talent-calc

Lets talk about the new UI next. It is very different, and a lot of the elements are super small. Bags, buttons, character window, all is much smaller than it used to be. On top of that, most of the UI is now customizable. Right click your character portrait and choose edit layout and you can move the action bars, resize them, you have a lot of options. You can even choose where you want your character portrait to be. There is also an option in the game options to re-scale UI, so if you fiddle with that and perhaps shrink the action bars, I'm sure you can get the UI to be what you need it to be. There is also a new bag slot, but that one is for specific crafting bags only.

I haven't had time to check out the new crafting system, so we're skipping that.

I did however try out the new race, the Dracthyr. This new race of dragon people start at level 58 and have their own start zone. I hope Blizzard re-balances some of the mobs in the start area, because I died a lot. That said, it was a very enjoyable journey and they did a credible job teaching you to play this new race. But why do you need to learn how to play a race you ask? Because Dracthyr can only be Evokers, either as mid-range DPS casters or as healers. They can't take any of the normal classes at all, but that is fine because their class really lean into being a winged dragon-person. They also have a humanoid form, and holy hell do they get customization options! No other race comes even close to the amount of choices you get here. Oh, and they can fly! Not just glide like Demonhunters, (they can do that too) but actually take off and fly.

This flight mechanic uses the same mechanic as they new drakes that can only fly in the Dragonflight zones and that is not always easy, but super fun when you get it to work.

From what I have seen of the first zone in the Dragon Isles, it is nice. Nothing too stand out, but after the mess that is Shadowlands, I'm so happy that it feels like Azeroth again. Some of the changes are big and sweeping, but I have high hopes that the new expansion will feel like World of Warcraft again! Rogues can even survive getting an add in a fight again, unlike now...

I don't know when the beta ends, but if possible, I'll bring you more insights at a later date, but this will have to be enough for now. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Busting Crime

It was quite by accident that I came across:

Crimebusters aka. Poliziotti Violenti (1976).

I wasn't looking for a poliziotteschi movie, but it popped up and I said why not?

Directed by Michele Massimo Tarantini and starring Henry Silva and Antonio Sabato, Crimebusters is not one of the greats in the poliziotteschi genre, but it is compelling to watch.

Some spoilers ahead.

Henry Silva who I have mentioned many times, plays Paratrooper Major Paolo Altieri, an officer, a gentleman and a moral professional. He gets promoted and moved to Rome, where he runs straight into one dangerous situation after another. He foils a kidnapping which earns him the enmity of some very dangerous people who have him beaten up. The beating is overseen by a mid level thug who can't get through a single scene in the entire movie without stuffing himself with chocolate. (He is even listed on IMDB as Man Eating Chocolate). In hospital, Major Altieri meets Inspector Tosi (Sabato) and they don't hit it off. They do however keep running into each other, especially during a shootout between the cops and some thugs with submachine guns. Guns, the Major knows should only be in the hands of his old paratrooper regiment. The Major and the Inspector join up to uncover the clear corruption that goes on.

I should warn you that there is a pretty rough scene where two thugs assault Altieri's girlfriend to get to him. 

A few fights, some chases, a hand grenade or two and things finally escalate to a violent and abrupt end.

All in all, the story in Crimebusters is very good, but the movie is let down by some questionable directing decisions. Example: the car and bike chases are very good, but the camera keeps zooming in on the spinning wheels, breaking the momentum of the chase itself. It ruins the flow and is, ultimately, pointless.

The acting is standard fare for a poliziotteschi, so no real complaints and as I said, the story is actually pretty damn good. The movie does a great job in showing the thugs for what they are; vicious, sadistic jackals that delight in violence but run desperately away as soon as the police arrives. There is no glamour here, nothing admirable, just savagery and cowardice. Our heroes could stand to be a tad smarter, but you can't get everything.

Beyond the somewhat questionable direction (and to be fair, it was the directors fourth movie), I disliked that the ending was as abrupt as it was and that so many bad guys just got away. I'd liked to have seen them get some comeuppance. Likewise, the plot itself is only half way solved. It's not that we don't know what is going on, but that the movie isn't long enough to get everything done. Maybe they ran low on money or time or they just got sloppy, I don't know. What I do know is that it was too much for a 94 minute film. I have suggested before with other movies that the story would need a short TV series to really get things done, and Crimebusters is absolutely such a movie.

So, do I recommend it? To poliziotteschi fans, and fans of 70's crime movies, yes. Just be aware that it is flawed. To others? No, skip it and watch one of the better poliziotteschi like Caliber 9, Goodbye and Amen or The Boss.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Annihilation

Today we're looking at the surreal horror movie:

Annihilation (2018).

Directed by Alex Garland who amongst other movies also directed 28 days later, and starring Natalie Portman and Jennifer Jason Leigh.

The movies is based on the novel by the same name by Jeff VanderMeer, which I haven't read so I can't comment on how accurate the movie is to the book.

Natalie Portman plays Lena, an army vet who now works as a cellular biologist. Her husband, Kane is active in the military and is frequently away on mission for long periods of time. As the movie starts, he's been gone for a year and Lena has gotten no information on his whereabouts and so fears him dead. Then he suddenly comes home, but collapses and on their way to the hospital they are grabbed by some agency.

They are brought to a facility near a national park where Lena meets Dr. Ventress (Leigh). She explains to Lena that a meteor hit a lighthouse in the park and a strange zone popped up. From the outside the zone looks like gasoline on water, but as a huge wall instead of a puddle. The zone grows slowly and all efforts to send people inside leads to them disappearing. Kane is the first to return but he is dying. Lena meets an all female team who is set to go inside and she volunteers to go along.

Annihilation is a really strange but very well crafted movie. Most of what happens is unsettling and disturbing, so when the real horror hits, it hits hard! I have often talked about the balance needed between outright horror and other things in order to make a movie really scary. Annihilation navigates this balance extremely well which makes for a truly enjoyable experience.

I have seen this movie listed as a Lovecraftian movie, and this is neither false or true. There are clearly elements of cosmic horror at play, but there is nothing outright Lovecraftian about it. The Cthulhu Mythos is completely absent, so if you are expecting that, adjust your expectations accordingly.

From a technical aspect the movie is truly well made. Actors are great, visuals are amazing, directing is solid and so on. The choice of music is weird though. It works, but might throw you for a bit of a loop.

There are some similarities between Annihilation and Roadside Picnic, better known as STALKER, but VanderMeer swears that this is incidental, and I believe him. Some similarities are unavoidable as both books feature a mysterious zone, but that is about it. By the way, if you haven't read Roadside Picnic, I recommend it. It was really good.

That's about as much as I can tell without going into spoiler territory, but if you haven't figured it out, I liked Annihilation a lot and recommend it to all lovers of weird movies and horror. It's a strange movie that leaves you scratching your head at times, but it is a cleverly done modern horror movie that doesn't rely on dark scenes and shaky cam. Enjoyable from beginning to end.

That is that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have great and safe week!

 

Pieces of History

I was in a bit of a documentary mood and since I wanted to find something to share with you, I went to Youtube and found myself a couple of documentaries about WWII, more specifically Hitler as well as the still ongoing hunt for lost Nazi gold.

The first documentary is The Hidden Side of World War II: Last Secrets of Nazis. This is a horrible title as the film itself all about Hitler, his start, and his rise to power. Most of what is presented here I knew about, but there were a couple of details I had never come across before. All in all, a good watch.

The second entry is The Hunt for Hitler's Lost 'Gold Train'. This is a much better title and concerns the hunt for hidden tunnels, buried trains, gold and even the fabled Amber Room. I liked this one a lot, it has a good sense of mystery without going overboard and making myths into fact.

So enjoy and I'll see you next time. Until then, have a great and safe week!

 

 

 

Getting in the mood.

Summer is almost over and Autumn is around the corner and I figured we could get into the spooky season with some light practice. So I have a trio of horror parodies for your amusement. 

Please enjoy and join me again next time, and until then, have a great and safe week!  

 

 

  

 

 

Funny Ads

I have had a busy week so today we're doing a bit of blast from the past with funny commercials. It's been a while since we did this so I hope you enjoy!

Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

 (One of these is muted due to copyright)

 

 

The House that needed a Bandaid

Last night, I watched:

The House That Dripped Blood (1971).

Despite the macabre title, the house itself does not drip blood, nor is there any blood in the entire film. It is the setting for four stories that make up the movie, all of who were written and scripted by horror veteran Robert Bloch. The movie is directed by Peter Duffell who has mostly got TV credits in his resume and it doesn't surprise me. The House That Dripped Blood feels like a TV show more than a movie, not that it really matters. The House That Dripped Blood was distributed by Amicus, the second fiddle to Hammer Horror. It can be hard at times to distinguish the difference between the two studios, but it is classic British horror in the end anyway.

The house is the central theme that unites the stories, and the plot is driven by a Scotland Yard inspector who is investigating the disappearance of a famous actor who rented the house.

The first episode Method for Murder is about a horror writer, Charles Hillyer (Denholm Elliot) and his wife Alice (Joanna Dunham). They rent the house in order to help Charles get over his writers block. This works too well as he invents a mad strangler and can't stop writing. Soon he starts seeing his creation in real life and things spiral out of control.

The second part is called Waxworks and stars Peter Cushing as the retired stock broker Philip Greyson. He wants a quiet life and is content to listen to music and work on the garden. He broods over a woman he was obsessed about and is shocked to find her likeness in a local wax museum of horror. An old friend and romantic rival, Neville Rogers (Joss Ackland) visit him and well, things don't go well.

The third entry is Sweets to the Sweet and here we find that John Reed (Christopher Lee) movies in with his strange daughter Jane. He soon hires Ann Norton (Nyree Dawn Porter) to be the girls tutor as he insists on keeping Jane isolated. Ann is puzzled by his decisions but he promises to tell her everything in time. I'm sure you can see the pattern as horrible things soon happen.

Last but not least, we have The Cloak starring Jon Pertwee as Paul Henderson, a veteran horror actor and amateur occultist. He and his costar/girlfriend Carla (Ingrid Pitt) are starring in a new horror movie together and he likes the house as it is convenient for him. He is however disgusted at the cheap props that are being used and goes off to buy a cloak from a creepy shop. The cloak however causes him some... trouble.

The four stories themselves are not really anything new, but they each contain something different. A twist on a familiar trope, a variation on a common theme and so on. The direction is fine, nothing to really comment on, but the music is a bit atrocious. The actors are outstanding as you can see above. Cushing, Lee, Elliot, Pitt and Pertwee who at the time still portrayed Doctor Who are excellent and to be fair carry the movie a great deal. The atmosphere is surprisingly good though. Even in the weaker stories, there is a good sensation of doom lurking around the corner.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, I think I do. Seasoned horror fans will likely fall asleep unless they love older movies like this, but for someone who wants to dip their toes in the murky waters of horror, The House That Dripped Blood might be just scary and tense enough.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Horror Express

I found the time to finish the movie I mentioned last week so today we're talking about:

Horror Express (1972).

Starring Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, Telly Savalas and directed by Eugenio Martin, Horror Express is a great horror story wrapped in a stiff movie.

Minor Spoilers ahead! The plot is loosely this: In 1906, an anthropologist, Sir Alexander Saxton (Lee), discovers a frozen half man - half ape in Manchuria. He intends to bring it back to Britain on a Trans-Siberian train. He runs into his rival Dr. Wells (Cushing) who is curious about what Saxton has and accidentally help set the evil free. The monster, an alien intelligence that can kill with a look, leaving its victims with white bleeding eyes, is a real treat. With everyone confined to a train hurtling through the Siberian winter, the tension and the danger ramps up quickly.

End of minor spoilers. I say minor, because if you google the movie, you will get the above info immediately.

The actors are good, particularly Lee and Cushing, and Savalas is entertaining even though he is barely in the film. Cushing had just lost his wife so it is understandable that this is one of his weaker performances. In fact he nearly left on the first day as he felt unable to work due to his grief, but Lee talked him around and went out of his way to make his old friend as comfortable as possible.

The story is possibly plagiarized from John W. Campbell's story “Who Goes There?” which is sometimes re-titled “The Thing (from Another World)”. This story is the origin of The Thing from Another World (1951) and The Thing (1982). This comes as no surprise to me as I was struck by how similar Horror Express is to The Thing, even though Horror Express is nowhere near as grisly as The Thing. That is not to say Horror Express is without blood. There is some but the “Ick Factor” mostly comes from the bleeding white eyes and some pretty gruesome autopsy scenes.

My biggest gripe with the movies is how stiff it feels. Several scenes feel clumsy as the actors stand around awkwardly and it is mostly the experience of the actors that save the scenes. The story itself is good, and although the movie is low budget, they did a lot with what they had. It's hard to nail down the problem, perhaps the director wasn't up to it, perhaps it took too long to redress the few train cars they had between scenes, I don't know. I do know that I actually want to see a competent remake.

I also loved the ending. As with many horror movies, everything accelerates towards the end, and Horror Express is no different. All in all, this movie does it's thing differently and with intelligence rather than relying on shock factor and nudity.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, absolutely. Horror fans should give it a look if they haven't already, and even occasional horror watchers could have a good time here. It's not a great forgotten gem, but Horror Express does deserve its cult status.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

Not what I had planned.

I started watching a Hammer Horror movie starring Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, but I didn't have time to finish it, so that is on next week's agenda.

This left me in the lurch for this week, so I'm forced to improvise. Thus I present History of Japan by Bill Wurtz, the same genius that made the History of Everything video I shared a couple of years ago. Then I also have The Fallen of World War II, which is obviously very somber but a very interesting watch.

So, enjoy and join me next time, and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Tower of Evil

This week's entry is:

Tower of Evil (1972).

Also known as Horror on Snape Island and Beyond the Fog, this delightful horror movie is directed by Jim O'Connolly and stars Bryant Haliday, Jill Haworth. Mark Edwards, Jack Watson, Anna Polk and Derek Fowlds amongst others. The name that stuck out the most is Derek Fowlds who is most known for playing Bernard Woolley in Yes Minister/ Prime Minister.

First off, an epilepsy warning. There are a few scenes with strong flashing lights and you may need to be careful if you are sensitive.

The story is this; a group of young Americans are found murdered on Snape Island, a grim and lonely place that even the seagulls avoid. The only survivor is obviously the main suspect but she is completely catatonic from whatever horror befell them. One of the victims was killed with an ancient Phoenician spear made from gold. Such a find on a British island causes quite a stir and an expedition is put together to see if they can discover more. Of course, this being a horror movie you can probably guess that a lot of horrible stuff follows, and you'd be right.

Tower of Evil is a surprisingly slick little horror movie. Apart from one scene it is completely shot in a studio and although it shows, it didn't detract from the experience. The entire island and its decrepit lighthouse is already such an unbelievable place that it didn't bother me to see how clearly it is a set piece.

The actors are good, most of them veterans of British TV and film, although many weren't veterans yet. The music is also fine and the movie itself is pretty stylishly shot. Beyond a couple of plot holes, I have no complaints about this movie. There was a scene or two that I thought were screw-ups at first but they made sense upon further reflection. For my money though, it's the beginning that really sold me on this movie. It is really one of the best openers in horror movie history in my book. Not the best, no, but up there. Sadly I can't go into more detail, but I won't spoil this film.

There are several scenes with grisly gore and quite a bit of nudity, so adjust your watching companions accordingly.

So, do I recommend this movie? If you couldn't tell, then yes, absolutely. Overall it is a product of the 70's. It's not really all that scary, not by today's standard and the fashion and the haircuts are something else, but for a low budget horror movie it does a good job. Any fan of older horror movies do need to see Tower of Evil, but do keep your expectations in check and you'll have a good time. They didn't try to reinvent the wheel and as a result they got a solid piece of work and sometimes that is all you need. 

 

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

The Whip and the Body

I jumped into vintage horror and watched:

The Whip and the Body (1963)

Directed by Mario Bava and starring Christopher Lee, Daliah Lavi, Tony Kendall, Evelyn Stewart and a couple of others. I do mean only a few others as the cast is very small, not that it is in any way a complaint.

Before watching this movie I was given a warning and I'm paying it forward; Christopher Lee is dubbed. Let me explain. Back in the day, all Italian movies were recorded without dialogue, as they were all dubbed later on in a sound studio. Lee may have been unaware of this, as he had returned home to Switzerland by the time the movie wrapped. He regretted that he couldn't do his own voice as he considered The Whip and the Body to be one of his better movies of that period. Since I was prepared, I could enjoy the movie, so be warned. The voice they used, that of Dan Sturkie, is good, but Lee had a great voice and it is a shame that you can't enjoy it here.

On to the plot. IMDB tells us this:

The ghost of a sadistic nobleman attempts to rekindle his romance with his terrorized, masochistic former lover, who is unwillingly engaged to his brother.

Now this is a minor spoiler and somewhat erroneous as the former lover is in fact married to the brother, and there is some rough rekindling before anyone even becomes a ghost. In essence The Whip and the Body and is a mix of a whodunit and a ghost story. Lee plays Kurt Menliff the oldest son of Count Menliff. One evening he returns to his ancestral home and receives a cold welcome. He wastes no time showing everyone why he had to leave home to begin with, and in the process, people are murdered, ghosts roam the night with muddy boots and unhappy hearts vie with dark lusts. That is all I can tell without going into deep spoiler territory.

Seeing as this is a Mario Bava film, I wasn't surprised that is wonderfully well shot. From beginning to end it is a Gothic love letter. The locations, the clothes, the sounds... everything is on point for a 60's horror movie. If I hadn't known it was directed by Bava, I would have sworn it was made by Roger Corman. He made most of his movies in the same color palette as The Whip and the Body, and he knew his Gothic horror extremely well.

The actors are good, particularly Christopher Lee (of course), and I have no technical complaints. The story is a slight cut above the usual fare, and even though I guessed the ending, it was a good ride from the beginning to the end. The Whip and the Body is tricky to talk about since I don't want to spoil anything, but the name is a clue and anyone with a sensitivity to people being whipped, should probably be careful

So, do I recommend this? Yes, without a doubt. If you hate old movies, sure go ahead and skip it, but any fan of old cinema and Gothic horror in particular, will likely love it. I did.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time, and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

Climbing the Greasy Pole

This weeks movie is an Italian crime drama called:

The Climber (1975).

Originally titled L'ambizioso and directed by Pasquale Squitieri, who also co-wrote it with Carlo Rivolta. It stars Joe Dallesandro as Aldo, the climber and Stefania Casini who also starred in The Bloodstained Shadow and Suspiria.

Minor Spoilers ahead.

The movie opens with Aldo, a low level American thug, living in Naples selling smuggled cigarettes on behalf of a gangster crew. They are however tired of Aldo's loud and reckless ways and so they beat him and throw him out of town. Brusied and broke, he begs a ride from Luciana (Casini) who drives him to Rome and lets him stay with her. They start a relationship as Aldo starts to climb the ranks. He forms a crew, moves back to Naples and gets down to business.

The Climber is a bit of a mixed bag for me. The cinematography is fine, the actors are better than usual for a movie like this, and the music is mostly off-brand 70's rock and thus fairly good. So far so good, but it is the story and how it is told that leaves me scratching my head.

The story of a young ambitious criminal rising through the underworld only to discover that the top isn't what he thought it would be, is not new. There are in fact many who claim that The Climber was an inspiration for De Palma's Scarface (1983) but I can't find any official sources for that. I did come to the same conclusion myself though, as the two movies have a lot in common. But where Scarface is over the top, The Climber is much more muted, probably due to budget differences. I don't know how big The Climber's budget was, but it wasn't $25 million, I can tell you that.

The beginning of Aldo's rise is actually pretty damn good. He has nothing but brains and balls, but he makes a go of it with a couple of friends and Luciana at his side. The problem is that Aldo's ultimate takeover is pretty underwhelming. He gathers his crew and just sort of wins. I guess it is either the budget again, or then the director didn't know how to show the takeover, so it kind of just flops over and is there. I wouldn't call it bad, not by a long shot, but with a little extra care and effort, The Climber could have been stellar.

So, do I recommend The Climber? It is a solid middle of the road affair. Too good to be bad, and too weak to be really good. Like so often, I can recommend it to fans but perhaps not to most viewers. I did like it, but if I sat you down and explained it, I doubt most of you would care to look it up.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

The Night Evelyn Came Out of the Grave

Although my brain is still melting out of through my ears, I wanted to give you people a real post, so I sat down and watched:

The Night Evelyn Came Out of the Grave (1971).

Directed by Emilio Miraglia and starring Anthony Steffen and Marina Malfati amongst many others, this is the weirdest Giallo I have ever seen. There will be spoilers ahead, but I won't spoil the ending.

The movie starts with a man trying and failing to escape from a psychiatric clinic. Cut to the same man, Lord Alan Cumming sitting in a sports car with a beautiful red haired prostitute. He pretends to stop in order to check the tires, but in reality he removes some false number plates before driving them to his half ruined castle. There he rebuffs her attempts to get it on and leads her to a torture chamber. Before he can brutalize her, he has a mental episode and believes that the prostitute is his dead wife, Evelyn. In a rage he kills her with a knife.

It turns out that he thinks his dead wife betrayed him and had an affair. After her death, his mind unraveled and was committed. Now he seeks (I think) closure by victimizing red haired prostitutes since his wife also had red hair.

We are also introduced to his former brother-in-law, Albert who works as Alan's groundskeeper and blackmails him. We meet Alan's young and sinister Aunt Agatha and his libertine cousin George. Alan's friend and physician Dr. Richard insists that he won't be cured until he remarries and at one of George's decadent parties, Alan meets and falls in love with the beautiful and blonde Gladys. The couple is soon married and they move into Alan's newly renovated castle.

It doesn't take long before Evelyn starts haunting Alan whose mind deteriorates quickly. People get murdered and we finish with a surprisingly good ending.

The Night Evelyn Came Out of the Grave is really odd in two major ways. First off is the fact the the movie pretends to be in England, and the way that it's shot gives it a late era Hammer Horror vibe, but with Giallo sensibilities. There is a ton of nudity but very little blood. The first murder takes place off camera and the subsequent murders are all pretty bloodless or take place in the dark. Some Hammer films were a lot bloodier although they didn't have all the skin on parade. I don't mind this approach but it almost gives the movie an identity crisis.

The second way this movie is so weird is the fact that Alan is a murderer. The fact that he had the false plates on his car proves that it was premeditated murder and she isn't his only victim either. Yet as the movie goes on, we are asked to sympathize with him. He takes the role of the Victim/Hero and if that wasn't the intent, there is no other character that fits that bill. I could find no reason why they filmmakers thought this would work. If he had hired the prostitute to soothe his grief and then had an episode and killed her in a fit of rage, then maybe, but this is not the case. As I said, weird.

So, do I recommend this movie? No, not really. Completionists and Giallo super fans might enjoy it but it falls short for me. It is competently shot but most of the actors are wooden and the overall quality is sub par. If you want to see a good movie where a man is haunted by his dead wife, watch The Tomb of Ligeia instead, it is superior in every way.

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

Intersting Insights

Summer has come with a vengeance and my brain is slowly melting out of my ears. So I haven't had the energy to come up with any kind of analysis or insights of my own. Thus, I have to rely on the insights of others.

In 1972 the Watergate scandal erupted and sent a lot of powerful people to prison and ultimately ended Nixon's presidency. If you aren't aware of what the Watergate scandal was, read up on it here: 

Watergate Scandal

 

I found some cool old 60 Minutes interviews with amongst others, John Ehrlichman, G. Gordon Liddy and others on the official 60 Minutes Youtube Channel and thought I'd share with you good people.

So enjoy and hopefully my brain will be slightly less molten next week! Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!

 

 

 Full playlist:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLI1yx5Z0Lrv4B1LrQtjANg_Sv-udZJMkl

Red Sparrow

This week I watched:

Red Sparrow (2018).

Based on the novel of the same name by Jason Matthews who spent thirty-three years at the CIA. It stars Jennifer Lawrence, Joel Edgerton, Ciarán Hinds and Jeremy Irons amongst others. It is directed by Francis Lawrence (no relation to Jennifer) who directed the Hunger Games movies.

The story in a nutshell is this (Mild Spoilers):

Dominika (Lawrence) is a Prima Ballerina until her career is destroyed. Her mother is an invalid and both her doctors and their apartment are payed for by the ballet company, something they will no longer do now that Dominika can no longer dance. Her uncle Vanya, the deputy director of SVR, the Russian foreign intelligence service, wants to help her so he sends Dominika on a “simple mission”. After the mission ends dramatically Vanya talks her into joining a sparrow school in return for the apartment and the doctors being payed for.

The sparrow school is an institute that trains spies in the art of seduction, or rather it trains spies for that role. They learn to shoot, pick locks and other spy stuff as well of course, but the manipulation and sex is the main thing. Failure to graduate means a bullet to the head.

Parallel to this is a CIA agent, Nate Nash who has to flee Russia, but his highly placed mole refuses to deal with anyone else so he has to go to Budapest to introduce a new contact to the mole. Dominika, despite her trainers objections is sent to Budapest as well by uncle Vanya to find out the name of the mole from Nash. What follows is a back and forth as Nash tries to make her defect and we wonder whether she wants to or if she is playing him, everything ultimately culminating in a dramatic ending.

Red Sparrow is like a marble floor, very pretty but cold, hard and uncomfortable. It is beautifully shot and the actors are all great, but the movie lacks passion. Add to this the fact that it is two hours and twenty minutes long and it becomes a slog at times. It's not that the movie wastes time, it's just that there are so many scenes that are boring. I appreciate a slow moving spy drama like Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy but Red Sparrow is too dull at times. There is unsurprisingly quite a lot of nudity and sex in the movie but do not expect titillation, it is all rather unfeeling and tawdry. The action that there is is good but pretty unremarkable and if it wasn't for the ending, I would have been disappointed.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, if you really like spy movies but otherwise not really. Perhaps it is me, but everything that was supposed to be shocking and dramatic, I have seen other movies do better so ultimately it left me with very little. There is nothing really wrong with Red Sparrow and it could be you would like it more, but in that case it has to be your decision to watch it rather than my recommendation.

 

That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great and safe week!