The Keep

In 1981, F. Paul Wilson published The Keep, a horror novel set in WWII Romania. The movie has been on my radar for quite some time, but I never really got around to watching it.

Then Bookbub had the book on sale for 0.99 cents, so I grabbed it. I wanted to read it before finally watching the movie, and so I did.

Romania, 1941 before the German invasion of Russia. A group of soldiers led by Captain Woermann arrives at The Keep, in fictional Dinu Pass. A greedy soldier intent on loot accidentally releases an old evil called Molasar, which starts to kill one soldier per night. The captain sends for help, which arrives in the shape of SS-Sturmbannführer Kaempffer and his einsatzkommandos. The officers knew each other form the first world war and their mutual antagonism is a relevant part of the plot. The killings continue and the Germans discover that Jewish professor Cuza is the closest thing to an expert of the keep there is. He is forcefully taken to the Keep by the SS and the Romanian Iron Guard together with his daughter Magda.

At the same in Portugal, a strange man named Glenn becomes disturbed, and grabbing his belongings, hastens to Romania.

I'm not going to explain more of the plot than this, to avoid spoilers.

Even though the it all sounds a bit cheesy, the book is actually pretty good. The pressure brought on by the killings which are clearly supernatural adds tension, as threatened soldiers are prone to lash out. I enjoyed it from start to finish, especially since Wilson writes good characters, but the film, well, that's another question entirely.

The movie, directed in 1983 by Michael Mann (Last of the Mohicans, Heat) is awful. It has three problems in my opinion.

The biggest reason for it's ghastliness isn't Mann's fault. His original cut was 210 minutes, which the studio refused outright. They had it cut down to 96 minutes, after which Mann disowned the movie altogether. The cuts really savage the plot. I knew what everything meant because I read the book, otherwise I would have been completely lost. Very little makes any sense in the film as it stands. It jumps around, it rushes through the plot so fast at times that what for example, should be a blossoming romance is boiled down to a weird surreal sex scene. Things like that.

The second problem is it's extremely 1980's style. Even though it's set in 1941, it has an electronic soundtrack by Tangerine Dream, and it sounds terrible. In another movie it would be fine, but in a WWII film it's awful. There are also several special effects and shots that are completely out of place but were popular in the 80's. It looks at time more like a music video for Kate Bush, than a horror movie. This is very much Mann's fault.

Finally there are the inevitable changes. Surprisingly, the film is mostly very faithful to the book, but the most glaring changes are really irritating. First, Magda is changed to Eva. Why? Magda is a perfectly functional name. Silly change. Secondly, a priest is added to the film. He replaces the innkeeper from the book, but there is also an innkeeper in the film. So why bother adding a priest that serves no purpose? Worst of all, Molasar is completely changed. There is a very good reason why he looks like a pretty stereotypical vampire in the book, but in the movie he is an odd Golem-Demon-Smoke-Monster. So incredibly dumb. So are the way in which he kills. In the novel, he kills in bloody, shockingly gruesome ways, but in the film, it's all a light show. Terrible...

I would like to actually see Mann's 210 minute cut, but it is lost in the mists of time. Because of this I can't go into all the things that are missing from the book. He may well have filmed them, but lost them on the cutting room floor.

End summary: do read the book, it's in my opinion worth it, but avoid the film at all costs.

That's it for this time. Until we meet again, have a great week!

Tenebre

Many years ago, during the heyday of my obsessive horror watching, I had a chance to see Dario Argento's Tenebre (1982).

This movie is considered by many to be one of his finest works, but I loathed it. I found it uninteresting, long winded and frankly boring. I enjoyed the ending, but that was it.

Looking back, I'd say I came in to the film with the wrong expectations. I had previously seen and enjoyed some of his other movies like Suspiria (1977), Inferno (1980) and Opera (1987). Suspiria and Inferno are part of a loose trilogy of supernatural horror, and I liked them well enough. Opera was and still is, one of the most stylish horror films I've ever seen.

At first I thought that the lack of anything supernatural in Tenebre might have been what was wrong with it. But Opera is also without anything supernatural, so that wasn't what I disliked.

Last week, I was itching for an older horror classic and tripping over Tenebre, I thought, why not? I have certainly seen worse movies since my first outing with ol' Tenebre. You know what? I actually liked it.

As I said, there is nothing supernatural here, it's a thriller with slasher elements through and through. I'd even question if it really is a horror film at all. It sits on the fence between genres, I suppose.

A mystery writer goes to Rome on a book tour for his latest hit, Tenebre, and becomes involved in a police investigation of a deranged killer who murders those he/she sees as deviants, using the novel as inspiration. The killer also sends the writer gloating notes after each kill.

This is the plot in a nutshell. We get to see each kill in sometimes very bloody detail, which is what separates it from a regular whodunnit or serial killer thriller.

The plot is simple, which is a boon as you try to figure out who the killer is before it's too late.

Argento has done a great job from a technical standpoint. The film is visually wonderful, a real joy to watch, with some amazing shots. The general mood is both surreal and realistic at times, which heightens the violence rather than distracts from it. There aren't that many kills overall, which again is good for the balance of the film.

The biggest “problem”, is the soundtrack. Tenebre was shot in 1982 and Synth Pop was the order of the day. If you can't stand that, stay away.

What we have here at the end of the day is a pretty stylish 80's thriller with some partial nudity at times, a very gory ending, shot with real skill. It is American-Italian, and some actors are clearly dubbed, but it's well done and works.

I can definitely recommend this movie. It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it is a good stepping off point for Italian horror cinema.

That's all folks, until next time, have a great murder free week!

Pioneer in Horror

Hello and welcome to another issue of Eccentric Spheres.

Today, I have an interesting documentary about one of my favorite writers, H.P. Lovecraft. He is concidered by many to be (one of) the father(s) of modern horror.
This documentary includes interviews with many luminaries of the horror genre, including Caitlin R. Kiernan, Guillermo del Toro, Ramsay Campbell and many more.

So enjoy this fascinating look into the creative genius behind the popular Cthulhu Mythos:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17tj18qpJf0





Until next time, have a great week!

Smiley's People

Back in the dim mists of 2012, I wrote a short post about John le Carré's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (1979), starring the always amazing Sir Alec Guinness as veteran spy George Smiley.

The original mini series is still absolutely amazing, an absolute must-see for fans of the espionage genre. (the movie is a bit meh...)

Quite by accident I discovered that a sequel series, Smiley's People, had been filmed back in 1982 so I jumped on the opportunity to watch it.

I thought about going over the plot, but ultimately decided against it for two reasons.

1. If you've seen Tinker Tailor, and thought the plot was complicated, buckle up.
2. I can't explain what's going on without spoiling it.

You see, the story structure in Smiley's People is unforgiving. It does what it needs to do whether you understand anything or not. In due time, when the characters figure things out, you get to puzzle it together as they do. If you haven't been paying attention, you get a bit left behind. It doesn't stop to explain anything. In fact, during its original airing, Terry Wogan used to run a “What's going on?” segment on radio, which amused John le Carré a great deal.

A part from the complicated plot, this is a sterling show. Great actors, including two Bond villains, incredible tension, you name it. You feel Smiley's isolation as he works to unravel the web created by the Soviet spymaster Karla. The political uncertainties, the possibility of an assassin around every corner, and the scalpel like precision of trained intelligence officers at work, all awesome stuff.

There's also that hint of realism so many films lack. John le Carré actually worked for MI5, during the 50's and the 60's, so he knows what it's really like. The long periods of slow quiet, followed by a rush of activity and action. This realism is something I wish modern cinema and TV would use more. If it's done wrong it gets boring, but done right, like here, its a tense wonder to behold.

If you haven't seen Tinker Tailor, you can enjoy Smiley's People, but it's advantageous to watch them in order. Many actors reprise their roles and make more sense if you have the foundation of Tinker Tailor.

There we are, go jump into the exciting world of Cold War espionage, and until next time, stay away from spies and have a great week!

Just the facts

Hello, and welcome to the never ending fountain of knowledge that is Eccentric Spheres.

Today we once again dip our toes into the vast ocean of general knowledge and trivia, enjoy!

- After four years of eating Cap’n Crunch with Crunchberries, a woman sued the distributor of Cap’n Crunch because she discovered that she was eating brightly-colored cereal balls and that “Crunchberries” aren’t a real fruit like she had thought.

- A 32,000 year old extinct Arctic flower was resurrected using seeds found by an Ice Age squirrel.

- Unlike James Bond, real MI6 agents don’t need a license to kill because everything they do outside the UK is already illegal. The UK spy agency makes Bond-like gadgets for operatives but, as one said after retiring; they “frequently fail to work upon arrival at our destination”.

- A young stripper named Shelly Bauman lost her leg in a freak confetti cannon accident. She sued and used the money from the settlement to open Seattle’s first gay bar, which she named “Shelly’s Leg.”

- On June 28, 2009, Stephen Hawking held a party open to all, complete with hors d’oeuvres and iced champagne, but only publicized the party after it was over so that only time-travelers would know to attend; as expected, nobody showed up to the party.

- George Washington feared the growing influence of political parties in the US. He thought that it would lead to “the alternate domination” of each party, taking revenge on each other in the form of reactionary political policies and that it would eventually cause the North and South to split.

- During a speech to senators intended to convince them that the dust bowl epidemic was a real issue, a massive dust cloud enveloped Washington DC, blackening the windows of the hearing and caking the room with dust. The Soil Conservation Act was passed later that year.

- The ancient Greeks didn’t wear pants because they found them “ridiculous”. The Romans didn’t wear them because it was seen as uncivilized and only Barbarians wore pants.

- In 1976 a Soviet pilot defected to Japan with one of their most advanced jet, a MiG-25P. They returned it after learning all its secrets with a $40k bill asking for the shipping fare and repair for the damage it caused to the runway.

- Webcams were invented because some computer scientists were too lazy to get up to check if their coffee was done.

That's that. Until next time, have an awesome week, and stay away from confetti cannons!

Lake Placid

Hello and welcome to a new installment of Eccentric Spheres!

Buckle up as we take a journey to a lovely place called Lake Placid. Well, to the movies called Lake Placid to be more precise. There is a real Lake Placid in New York state, but that's not why we're here.

The movies are all about impossibly large crocodiles that eat people in a lake in Maine. Then the heroes show up and stop them. That's it really. Not exactly rocket science...

The first film came out in 1999, but we won't be talking about that, cause it's been ten years since I saw it, and I didn't fancy watching it again. It started the whole thing, but it's the sequels we want, because my wife and I just binge watched them all.

There are four sequels so far, Lake Placid 2 (2007), Lake Placid 3 (2010), Lake Placid: The Final Chapter (2012) and Lake Placid vs Anaconda (2015).

Now to be fair, they're not totally awful. They know what they are about and they know what you want. They rely heavily on lousy CGI because crocodiles are dangerous and good CGI is expensive. The first two sequels were made on estimated budgets of 2 - 2.5 million dollars, so not a lot to go around. I don't know what the other two went for, but judging by the outcome, I'd say they are in the same ballpark. Apart from the CGI there are actually some (not many) decent actors here,so that's nice.

What I found interesting, is that although they sit squarely in the monster category of films, the crocs behave more like slashers. They always eat the “worst” people first. In a sense one could say the crocodiles have very traditional conservative morals. Poachers, Litterbugs, Peeping Toms, Insensitive Jackasses and Pretty Girls Who Take Their Tops Off are all on the menu very quickly. Sure, some “innocent” people are gulped up as well, but at a much more reduced rate.

The only recurring character is introduced in Lake Placid 3, the tough as nails, no nonsense poacher, Reba. In The Last Chapter, she works for Fish & Wildlife, and in vs Anaconda, she's the sheriff. She was a fun character, and really made the movies better. But sadly the character was badly written in vs Anaconda. All her glorious snark was missing. A tragedy if you ask me.

For being movies that all hover just above the three star line on IMDB, they are surprisingly watchable. Just make some popcorn, crack open a cold drink, sit back and enjoy. If you don't want to sit through all of them, watch Lake Placid 2 and Lake Placid: The Final chapter. They are the best ones overall in my opinion. Lake Placid 3 is okay but vs Anaconda is pretty awful.

There you have it, six hours of entertainment, if you can stomach it, so until we meet again, have a great week, and stay away from crocodiles!

Shaking like a leaf

My wife and I decided to watch a movie, and since we're both excited to play the new Conan Exiles game by Funcom, we thought we'd watch the Conan movie from 2011 as neither of us had seen it.

Opinions are mixed on the original Conan the Barbarian (1982) with Arnold Schwarzenegger, but please trust me when I say it is infinitely superior than this garbage.

This is not a review piece, there's no real point to review it, it's too sad. Conan (2011) has a great cast of solid experienced actors, and the props are mostly good, as is the CGI, but the rest? The script is horrible and the film itself is terrible. The movie jumps all over the place and I got flashbacks to the Star Wars prequels (Ep. 1-3). Like George Lucas, Conan's director Marcus Nispel wasn't up to the task. There's the seed of a good movie hiding amongst the jump cuts and shaky action scenes, but you're going to have to find it yourself.

And here we come to the core of today's subject matter: bad action scenes. It should be said that breaking or subverting the rules can be a tremendously effective tool, if you know what you're doing. If you don't, you get a hot mess instead of a hot piece.

Conan has this in spades. The camera shakes and jumps and the entire movie is made up of super fast cuts. It seems that Mr. Nispel got his start directing music videos and it shows. But a movie is not a music video where you have only minutes instead of hours. The average music video is about four minutes long, but when you have almost two hours, you can take a bit of time to establish things.

I'm linking a video from the Youtube channel Rossatron, please watch it, because he explains so much better than I can how detrimental the modern trend to use shaky cam to film action scenes is.

I am growing seriously tired of all the shaky and dark action scenes that have infested modern action cinema. I hate not being able to tell what is going on. It's cheaper and easier, sure, but if the director can't shoot good action scenes in your action movie, don't give him the job!

I'm getting to the point where I'd rather go backwards and re-watch old action movies because they are simply better! Die Hard, First Blood, Lethal Weapon, The Terminator, and a whole pile of Asian action films, most of the from Hong Kong, are great. You understand the story, you can follow the action and at the end of the day, you feel satisfied.

Seriously Hollywood, I'm sick of this. Get your act together!

Well that's enough ranting for one day. Until next we meet, go watch a good action movie and have yourself a great week! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTNPtW0Le6U