Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

I decided to knock a classic off the list, so I watched;

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966).

This movie, based on a play by the same name, stars Elizabeth Taylor as Martha who is married to George, played by Richard Burton. They receive two guests, Nick and Honey, played by George Segal and Sandy Dennis. There's also a roadhouse waitress and a manager played by Agnes and Frank Flanagan, and that is the entire cast. That's it, six people and two are barely in the movie.

I've been trying to figure out how to explain this movie without spoiling it. Essentially, the older couple George and Martha are both alcoholics, and they receive Nick and Honey as guests. What follows is two hours of drinking, screaming, crying and the most vicious, sadistic emotional attacks I've ever seen in a movie. It is at times horrific to watch, but you kind of can't look away. If it wasn't for the amazing acting talent on display, this would have been a real flop, but it is in fact brilliant.

George Segal and Sandy Dennis both do a really good job, but they are up against Taylor and Burton at the height of their craft, and it's no shame to be overshadowed by such talent.

This is the first movie by director Mike Nichols, who had previously worked in theater, and according to many of the crew, he worked incredibly hard and it shows. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? isn't a cinematographic masterpiece, but it is incredibly solid as a movie. It is also shot in black and white, but unlike say Psycho (1960) which was shot in black and white for economic reasons, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is shot this way for technical reasons. Both Taylor and Burton wore heavy makeup to age them, and this makeup didn't look good in color. Nichols also decided that Burton looked more brooding and sinister in monochrome, and he wasn't wrong.

The story is simple in its complexity. There are layers within layers and you are never really sure what is real and what is a cruel lie designed to cause or hide pain. Just when you think you have it figured out, the movie runs off in another direction, leaving you to follow along as best you can. If any element had failed, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? would have gone down like a lead balloon, but all the pieces matter and fit perfectly.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, I really do. Unless the subject matter is too heavy for you, you should take the time to watch it. It is a hard watch, but it is also at times strangely beautiful, and seeing great actors pull out all the stops and really go for it is a treat.

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

 

A dose of reality.

This week I haven't watched any movies, but I have a couple of documentaries to share with you.

The first one is The Seven Five, a documentary about some of the goings on at the 75th Precinct in New York back in the late 80's. This movie details exactly how the proverbial Slippery Slope works. How a little skimming turns into a massive crime spree with murders, drugs and massive corruption. 

The Seven Five was a fascinating documentary,and well worth the time to watch. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adZaHShRa3A&list=WL&index=16

 

Our second entry is The Shock Doctrine, a documentary based on a book by Naomi Klein, demonstrating how the economic principles of Milton Friedman has led to the dictatorships in Chile and Argentina, how the eponymous Shock Doctrine is used to stun the population and make the really rich ultra rich. I'm not educated enough to be able to critique it  100%, but everything it talks about did happen. I guess you need to make up your own mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL3XGZ5rreE

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

Ouch, what a burn

Today we're doing things differently, we're talking about:

The Burning (1981)

But with SPOILERS!

The reason for the spoilers is simple, without them, all I can say about The Burning is “campers are stalked by a madman” which wouldn't be very satisfying. Besides, if you've ever watched a horror movie, especially a slasher, then you can predict 90%+ of The Burning.

The movie opens at Camp Blackfoot, where a group of older kids are planning their revenge against the cruel and sadistic camp caretaker, Cropsy. This goes wrong and Cropsy is severely, almost fatally burned. He is released from hospital five years later, kills a prostitute for some reason, and goes to Camp Stonewater to stalk and kill the kids there, even though they had nothing to do with his burns. We meet all the campers and their counselors, and see Cropsy lurking in the background. A big event, the overnight canoe trip is coming up and soon enough the kids are off and so is Cropsy and his trusty pruning shears. Cropsy kills some kids and we get to the finale.

If you get some Friday the 13^th vibes, it is apparently a coincidence. The Cropsy legend is a genuine campfire story told in real life. It was turned into a script before Friday the 13^th was shot, according to effects maestro Tom Savini who does the effects for The Burning. Miramax clearly wanted to turn Cropsy into a franchise, but the movie didn't sell well enough outside Japan, where it became a huge hit.

The Burning is a very mixed bag for me. The actors are overall very good and stars some famous names in their first movie roles like, Jason Alexander, Fisher Stevens and Holly Hunter. The effects are good, they are Savini effects after all, even though he was extremely rushed, and the cinematography is simple but decent.

The script is sadly weak and the dialogue is pretty awful. If you're feeling generous you can see it as “that's how teens talked back then” and maybe they did, but there are no good lines in The Burning.

Seeing as this movie was released in 1981, and it is one of the original slashers, we can forgive the fairly lackluster setup of “disfigured madman massacres teens” as it wasn't overused back then. What I'm having a hard time with is Cropsy's apparently supernatural ability to travel large distances instantly and to hide in plain sight. It is one of those things you're not supposed to think too much about, but they explain and show so much of Cropsy's backstory that you know exactly what he is, there is no mystery like in Halloween and Friday the 13^th. He is just a disfigured man with murder in his heart, yet he possesses borderline supernatural abilities.

So, do I recommend this movie? Depends really. Dedicated horror fans shouldn't miss The Burning as it is basically a classic, but others can probably find something better to watch. The Burning isn't a bad movie, but it really isn't that good either. It beats out many of the sequels in the more famous franchises but can't compete with their originals.

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

 

Hellraiser

Lo and behold, I saw a movie from this decade! The topic for today is:

Hellraiser (2022).

This new adaptation of Clive Barker's original book is directed by David Bruckner with input from Barker himself.

The main character, Riley (Odessa A'zion) is a recovering drug addict who lives with her brother Matt (Brandon Flynn), his boyfriend Colin (Adam Faison) and their roommate Nora (Aoife Hinds). Riley has a hard time getting her act together, so when her sort of boyfriend Trevor (Drew Starkey) suggests a break in to get some quick cash, she's in. They break into a warehouse to find some, and I quote: “billionaire shit” and instead find the Puzzle Box. Things quickly get extremely nasty on several levels and they desperately try not only to survive, but to understand how and if surviving is even an option.

There are a total of eleven Hellraiser films, of which I have seen all but one. Most of them range from pretty bad to downright awful, so it was with a bit of trepidation that I sat down for this one. I was however very pleasantly surprised, Hellraiser 2022 is actually enjoyable!

First off, it is a gorgeous movie. The shots are lavish and the effects are sterling. The Cenobites, the creatures that are summoned when the Puzzle Box is opened, are almost completely redesigned, and in my opinion, the design is great. In the older movies starting with Hellraiser 1987, they are mutilated beings dressed in black robes with a fetish twist. Bruckner and Barker agreed that this look is not exactly shocking in the 2020's anymore, and to be fair they are correct.

In Hellraiser 2022, the Cenobites are basically naked, but “clothed” in their own partially flayed skin, and decorated with hooks, wires and pearl tipped needles. This has a creepy and disturbingly sexual effect. Nothing about them is alluring but you can't look away. Doug Bradley who played Pinhead, the head Cenobite, in eight movies had this to say about their redesign:

"I'm a bit blown away by this! The clever re-design of the make-up; the shimmer of the "pin heads"; the palette; whatever that keyhole/locket/tracheotomy thing is at the throat. It's simple, subtle, disturbing and sexy. Everything it should be. Peace and Pain, Doug."

The story is alright, with a couple of minor plot holes, but nothing too bad. It's not a blow your mind script, but can you really expect that? The actors are likewise good, but unfortunately the characters aren't. I found it hard to really care about them which does detract from the overall experience. Most of the characters are pretty one dimensional, if even that and Riley is too much of a screw-up for me to really care about.

The score is good, with some elements from the 1987 movie soundtrack incorporated, which gives a nice sense of a nod of respect to the original. There are likewise a couple of lines lifted from the original to do the same. Not quite easter eggs, but a fun thing non the less.

My biggest complaint about Hellraiser 2022 is the fundamental reasoning behind the Puzzle Box. In the second movie, Hellbound: Hellraiser II, Pinhead says “It is not hands that summon us. It is desire”, meaning that even if you fool someone into opening the box for you, the Cenobites will take you with them to hell instead of your patsy. This is completely abandoned in the 2022 version. Anyone who as much as nicks themselves on a sharp corner of the box is fair game. I get it though as it adds the idea that no one is safe, but it kills the tempted into your own damnation angle.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, to horror fans I do! I had a blast with Hellraiser 2022, so much so in fact that the two hour run time flew by. It is far from perfect, but definitely good enough that I'll watch a sequel if they make one. Hellraiser 2022 joins the original Hellraiser 1987 and its sequel Hellbound: Hellraiser II (1988) as the three best movies in the franchise. A couple of the others have elements that are good, but if you watch these three, you've seen the best of what Hellraiser has to offer.

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

 

All the Colors of the Dark

We are back in Giallo territory with Sergio Martino's:

All the Colors of the Dark (1972).

Jane (Edwige Fenech) suffers from terrible nightmares stemming from both her mothers murder and from the fact that she miscarried when she and her lover, Richard (George Hilton), were in a car crash. Jane's sister, Barbara (Nieves Navarro) urges her to talk to the psychiatrist Barbara works for, Doctor Burton (George Rigaud), but Richard hates that idea and urges Jane to just rest and take vitamins he gives her. A recurring element in Jane's nightmares is the man with piercing blue eyes, since he is the one who stabs her mother to death in her dreams. Imagine Jane's terror when that man (Ivan Rassimov) starts stalking her in real life! Or is it real? Is she hallucinating? In one such panicked state, Jane meets her neighbor, Mary (Marina Malfatti) and they become friends. At one point, Mary confides that she got rid of her problems by joining a cult and performing a black mass. Desperate for help, Jane agrees to attend a black mass and that's when things get really crazy.

All the Colors of the Dark is not only an amazing title, but as solid a movie as any Giallo Martino has directed, but it struck me that it is more a Gothic thriller than a Giallo. A fusion of styles, if you will. The actors are good as ever, particularly Fenech who again demonstrates her ability to convey absolute terror with only her eyes.

The cinematography is good as usual, and Martino plays a lot with contrasts here. In one scene, Jane parks her small gray Mini Morris in front of an equally gray Jaguar and you are struck by how they are both gray cars with round headlights, but otherwise they couldn't be more different. Jane and Mary both compliment and contrast each other, and it all just works.

The story in All the Colors of the Dark is both its strength and weakness. It isn't the kind of story that you can really solve, so we don't need to worry about the movie cheating, but with Janes hallucinations and dreams, it is sometimes frustrating to know what is actually happening. I also wish that Jane could have one moment of power, but alas she spends her time screaming, running and falling down. Admittedly, Fenech does that as well as anyone, but it got a bit samey after a while.

While there are some minor plot holes in All the Colors of the Dark, they aren't that bad. Overall, everything is explained in the end, which again is a Martino staple.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes! Obviously Giallo fans should see All the Colors of the Dark if they haven't, but it could also serve as a “beginner” Giallo since a lot of the expected tropes are absent and replaced with more conventional Gothic themes instead. All in all, this is a solid if somewhat confusing thriller that kept me interested throughout.

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

The Cremator

This week I watched the Czech black horror comedy:

The Cremator (1969).

This is going to contain some spoilers, so be aware.

The titular character, Karel Kopfrkingl, is a senior employee at a crematorium in Prague. He seems to be happily married with two children, but there is a lot of darkness beneath his constant beatific smile and heavy, bulging eyes. He meets an old army buddy, Reinke, from WWI who has become a Nazi, and who pushes Kopfrkingl to join the party as well. Kopfrkingl isn't that interested, as he only really cares for his crematorium, or Sacred Temple of Death, as he call it, as well as a book on Tibet and Buddhism. Kopfrkingl believes that when the body is gone, the soul is free to reincarnate or go on to its heavenly reward. This means that in his mind, cremation hurries the process along, which makes it a sacred act. However, Kopfrkingl has a weakness: sex. Once a month he visits a brothel in secret, and once Reinke shows him pictures of all the pretty girls he can be with as soon as he joins the Nazi party, Kopfrkingl eagerly jumps on board. He is literally seduced into national socialism, and once he gets a taste of what this can get him, a grim downward spiral starts that will cost a lot of people their lives. After all, his wife is half Jewish...

The Cremator is one of the stranger movies I have seen, so I need to break this down a bit.

The comedy elements seem to be concentrated on a couple who always arrive late to everything, and then leave immediately as the wife invariably becomes hysterical over something, so that her husband has to drag her back out while admonishing her angrily. This happens again and again, but I didn't find it funny as such, rather it adds to the surreal atmosphere that has this movie in a iron grip.

The horror isn't what you might think just from the word either. There are no jump scares, very little blood and no common horror tropes at all. What The Cremator has is an unrelenting creepy and unsettling atmosphere from beginning to end.

Kopfrkingl is played by Rudolf Hrusínský and he does an amazing job! His entire being becomes this disturbing little man who seems harmless at a glance but carries volumes of horror in his soul once you look closer. He has this weird habit of repeating the same lines over and over once something triggers them, like how he met his wife at the zoo, or how he is abstinent, even if it makes no sense to repeat them. He also likes to comb other peoples hair, then his own, even the corpses at the crematorium gets the comb, and you never see him wash the comb either.

The Cremator is shot in black and white by choice to give it a more sinister look, and as it takes place just prior to WWII, the monochrome look fits well with the period. The director, Juraj Herz decided to shoot with a variety of lenses, one that he had to go to France to get, as it was that rare. The strange angles are in order to disorient the viewer, a clever move, since it makes Kopfrkingl's eyes pop more and makes many scenes even more unsettling due to forced perspective. Brilliant cinematography in other words. The movie also uses lots of quick cuts when Kopfrkingl becomes excited by something which mimics his quick darting thoughts.

So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, it is brilliant, but it is also really strange. The Cremator is entirely in Czech, so unless you know the language, prepare to read the subtitles. I suppose I missed out on a lot of subtleties, as subtitles usually don't convey nuance too well, but this didn't detract from the enjoyment of watching this movie. The Cremator is a bizarre masterpiece and if either Herz or Hrusínský had dropped he ball the entire movie would have fallen apart. I don't think this is a movie for everyone, but if you like disturbing surrealism, do give this a go.

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

 

Death Walks on High Heels

Quite a while ago, I talked about The Forbidden Photos of a Lady Above Suspicion (1970) by Luciano Ercoli. That was the first movie he directed, today we're looking at his second movie;

Death Walks on High Heels (1971).

The movie starts with a murder on a train. We then meet the daughter of the murdered man, Nicole (Nieves Navarro), a stripper who lives in Paris with her ne'er-do-well lover Michel (Simon Andreu). It seems her father stole a load of diamonds and everyone wants them. The common belief is that she has them, despite her protestations to the contrary. The killer calls and threatens her before attacking her in her home. Terrified, paranoid and desperate to get away, Nicole leaves town with an ardent admirer from the club where she dances, Dr. Matthews (Frank Wolff). The good doctor is a respected medical man from England and she gratefully jumps the country with him. He spoils her shamelessly and sets her up in a love nest by a lake. Unfortunately, he is already married although unhappily. To make it worse, it's his wife Vanessa that owns all the money, including his clinic. Then things get worse, much worse, until we reach a dramatic finale.

Death Walks on High Heels is solid in all matters from acting, to locations, props and music. No problems at all. The dialogue, at least the English dub, was a bit subpar, but long term Giallo fans are used to that. My biggest complaint is that the movie tries to pack too much into a time frame that is almost too short to handle it. The run time is 1 hour 48 minutes, which is already long, but this story, which is very good, would do better as a short mini series. There is just so much to unpack.

Much like The Iguana with the Tongue of Fire, it is almost impossible to solve the central mystery. Not because everyone looks guilty as all hell, but because no one really looks all that guilty in the first place. To solve the riddle that is Death Walks on High Heels, you need a great deal of information, and the movie doesn't give you that until the very end. Instead it drowns you in clues, some relevant, some red herrings and some that you don't know the relevance of yet.

I won't go so far as to accuse Death Walks on High Heels of cheating, but it is close. By the end all the threads are sewed up, and everything makes sense, but up until then I was very confused. The movie also has an interesting tendency of slamming on the brakes and doing a 180, only to do it again moments later. A dangerous technique in film making, but it really works. Ercoli pulled it off, which is impressive considering it was his second time directing.

At times I wondered what I was watching, especially in the early middle of the film where the pace dies a bit, but once the end rolls around I was impressed. As mentioned above, the story is really good, one of the better in all the Gialli I have watched. Often the story isn't that important, it's in how it is told that Giallo shines. Death Walks on High Heels almost does the opposite.

I have a couple of very minor nitpicks I want to share. At one point, Nicole and Dr Matthews is eating fish. The scene is clearly meant to be intimate and erotic, but seeing them plop bits of greasy fish in their mouths was way too gross to be sexy. I also noticed that the junior Scotland Yard officer wears white socks... I very much doubt that would have been allowed. Finally I want to mention the unevenness of the murders. One is very bloody while another is incredibly lame and one even happens off camera. Odd, but no deal breaker.

So, do I recommend this movie? Absolutely! Death Walks on High Heels maybe a bit slow at times, but it is an excellent thriller and a damn fine Giallo.

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