Oct 051986
 
4.5 reels

Dr. Edward Pretorius (Ted Sorel) and his assistant, Crawford Tillinghast (Jeffrey Combs) invent a machine that allows anyone within its field to see (and touch) a world that is normally hidden from us. Unfortunately, that means the creatures in it can see them. Their trial ends in tragedy, with Predtorious dead and missing his head, and Tillinghast in the local asylum. Wiz-kid psychologist Dr. Katherine McMichaels (Barbara Crampton) gets permission to take Crawford back to the lab, under the scrutiny of policeman Bubba Brownlee (Ken Foree), to reenact the experiment. Unfortunately, it works, and they all are brought into contact with things that no one should ever see.

The concept that the universe is fundamentally cruel and outside our understanding, and that we only survive by doing little, knowing less, and not being noticed, is at the heart of the writings of H.P. Lovecraft. Humanity is of no importance in the great scheme of things, and that may be the one bit of good luck we have. It’s dark and scary out there, and even a brief introduction to a small part of what really exists would drive us mad.

Now that’s creepy stuff. And perfect for horror stories. But few Lovecraft-based films have hit the right tone or come close to giving form to that idea. Most have been bumbled retreads of standard movie-monster rampages, with a few Lovecraftian terms tossed in (how many movies mention The Necronomicon?). But since Lovecraft’s stories rarely managed to live up to the central concept either, it is hard to blame the filmmakers. Ah, but that was before Stuart Gordon came along and proved that it could be done.

Gordon found the right mix of twisted humor and blood for the Lovecraft-inspired Re-Animator (1985), which, while brilliant, had only a minor connection to the author (and that’s a good thing as even he admitted the four stories this is based on were nothing to brag about). Re-teaming with its stars, Jeffrey Combs and Barbara Crampton, producer Brian Yuzna, and most of the crew, Gordon has nailed that creepy “there are things it is best not to know” feeling in the much more Lovecraftian From Beyond. This may be the only Mad Scientist flick that manages to make a persuasive argument for giving up science and hiding out on a farm somewhere. In most, it isn’t the knowledge that’s the problem, but the foolishness of those seeking it that causes the problems.  Not that there isn’t plenty of foolishness at work here (there are three characters who could claim the title “mad scientist,” plus an extra one who is petty and vicious), but even if everything was done perfectly, it would be far better if no one ever embarks upon the line of research that has obsessed Dr. Pretorius. (Fans of classic horror may notice that the good doctor shares a name with the eccentric monster-maker in Bride of Frankenstein.)

That makes this sound like an unsettling morality play. Nothing could be further from the truth. Gordon has pulled out all the stops to make From Beyond a joyride of gore, nudity, sadomasochism, violence, retribution, and dark humor.  There’s a giant, man-eating worm that sucks off hair and a few layers of skin, and there are flying barracudas that do pretty much what the swimming ones do. There are ax-attacks, brains sucked through eye sockets, and a shape-changing rubber demon with a breast obsession. And there’s Barbara Crampton, first in a ripped nightgown, and then in S&M gear. If you can’t find something to enjoy in that list, you’re not trying.

The cast is small, and most of the movie is set in one house with a limited number of rooms, but that’s not a disadvantage. It seems both homey and claustrophobic. The few moments outside of that environment are weaker; the story doesn’t need an expansive venue. Combs, who is the man to call if you are looking for a whacked-out scientist, is at his freaky best, skating the line between dramatic neurosis and twitchy humor as only he can.  Crampton proves she’s a pro just by keeping up with him. The third star, Ken Foree, best known as the zombie-killing SWAT-team member in Dawn of the Dead, has a tricky role as both straightforward comic relief and the voice of reason, and pulls it off flawlessly.

There are a few moments when the special effects fail to keep up with the filmmaker’s imagination (it’s obvious at one point that the actor is sticking his head through a hole in the floor and his body is a fake, and a flying creatures obviously…can’t), but that’s a minor complaint. Only two serious problems mar this gleeful production: It is not available in the U.S. (I saw it in ’86 in as good a shape as anyone ever has, but my most recent viewing was via a Chinese DVD that had obviously been “mastered” from a VHS tape and had Chinese subtitles burnt in), and close to seventeen minutes were cut before it was initially released to please the MPAA. Here and there, I can see where those minutes fit in. However, there are reports that the missing film has been found and we may be getting an “extended edition” in the near future. Until then, get a hold of the Chinese disc (I’m assuming it is a legal release, but I have nothing to back that up), and revel in a type of movie that no one else ever made.

Also known as H.P. Lovecraft’s From Beyond.

Stuart Gordon’s other genre work as a director: Dolls (1987), The Pit and the Pendulum (1990), Daughter of Darkness (1990), Robot Jox (1990), Fortress (1993), Castle Freak (1995), Space Truckers (1996), Dagon (2001), and King of the Ants (2003).

Oct 041986
 
two reels

Larry Abbot (Gene Wilder), star of a mystery radio program, has recently announced his engagement to fellow radio actor, Vicky Pearl (Gilda Radner).  He’s also developed a phobia of storms and begun to forget his lines.  His psychologist brother (Paul L. Smith) informs Larry’s employers that he can scare him back to normal in just a few days.  Larry and Vicky travel to his ancestral home, where his odd relatives are gathering, and murderous events begin to occur.  Are all of the foul deeds part of the shock therapy, or are some due to Aunt Kate (Dom DeLuise) changing her will in Larry’s favor?  Or, might it be the werewolf?

Old-dark-house mysteries were a staple of the ’30s and have been parodied ever since.  The structure is simple: a group of people gather in an old, dark house (thus the sub-genre name, “old-dark-house”) where there’s a murder and supernatural activity, but it all turns out to have a rational explanation (usually a killer after the family fortune).  Some of the earliest examples, such as James Whale’s 1932 The Old Dark House, steer toward the sinister while others, like 1944’s One Body Too Many, play up the humorous side.  Haunted Honeymoon is a full blown comic version.  Unfortunately, it isn’t a strong sub-genre, and any jokes that could be wrung from it were used long ago.

Still, there’s a little fun just in the joy that the filmmakers take in the project.  It looks like everyone involved was having a great time and had fond, childhood memories of the original old-dark-house pictures.  Writer, director, and star, Gene Wilder shares the screen with his then wife Gilda Radner, making it a family affair.  I get the feeling I’m not so much watching a competent film as joining a party that is celebrating the earlier works.  That’s the best way to look at it as there isn’t much new, interesting, or humorous here.  The tepid screenplay is designed to emulate, not to make sense, with gigantic and plentiful plot holes, and in the end it all comes to nothing.

As for the comedy, Wilder shouts and screams a lot, Dom DeLuise wears a dress, and there are a few tired, mistaken-identity gags.  There is even the worn-out bit were someone yells all the time at a person they incorrectly believe is hard of hearing.

At least Radner had a likeable character to work with.  She’s the best thing about the film (though several of the supporting cast members do their best with the material), and it was her last.  She died three years after filming.

For any long-suffering werewolf fans (there just aren’t many worthwhile werewolf films) who are reading this review because of the list I put it on, the movie will be another disappointment.  Yeah, there’s a bit of fur and a mask, but not much else.

Oct 031986
 
one reel

Rich Muffy (Deborah Foreman) invites her college-aged friends to her island estate for a weekend of pranks.  But when people start dying, it isn’t clear what is an April Fool’s joke and what is real murder.

April Fool’s Day is the result of a major studio meddling in the Slashers sub-genre. It was hardly the first time a major studio backed a psycho with a blade flick, but normally, the executives leave it to the edgy incompetents and only poke their heads in when it’s time to pick up the cash. Not so here.

Most Slashers are made with the artistic eye of a drunk weasel and with that skill of an obsessed chimp, possibly obsessed with that weasel. The scripts are scrawled by myopic twelve-year-olds in the attempt to impress fourteen-year-old boys who haven’t had a date…ever, and then handed over to those chimps who choose their shooting technique based on having only partly opposable thumbs and trouble walking upright. When you have absolutely nothing going for you, even this collection of misfits knows that exploitation is the way to go. So, there’s plenty of blood, twisted on-screen murders, and several busty co-eds who suddenly feel the need for a shower.

To anyone with even a passing acquaintance with film, Slashers are an embarrassment, and no studio exec wants to be embarrassed. So, with a waive of the studio resources magic wand, April Fool’s Day is transformed into what passes for a respectable film. It has actual production values. The picture isn’t grainy. The camera normally is pointed in the right direction, and while the acting doesn’t even reach that of the average Kevin Costner piece, it won’t cause the view to cringe or break out laughing.  Naturally, in a respectable picture, all that nasty exploitation has to go. No onscreen blood.  No intestines flopping on the floor. And not the slight peek at naked, nubile flesh. And with those, no point in seeing this.

 

 Reviews, Slashers Tagged with:
Oct 011986
 
three reels

The Potter family (Michael Moriarty, Shelley Hack, Noah Hathaway, Jenny Beck) move into an apartment building filled with eccentric characters, including a witch (Anne Lockhart), a swinger (Sonny Bono), a right-wing survivalist (Gary Sandy), an English professor dwarf (Phil Fondacaro), and a partying actress (Julia Louis-Dreyfus), on the day when supernatural creatures walk freely.  A troll abducts Wendy Potter and takes her place, using her form as he transforms the building into the realm of faerie.  Only her brother, Harry, and the witch see what is happening and can stop it.

This is B-movie heaven.  There’s witty, cynical dialog, excellent makeup, plenty of sock puppet mayhem, a pre-Seinfeld Julia Louis-Dreyfus running about clad only in a few leaves, Sonny Bono being beaten by a troll, an ex-Charlie’s Angel playing mother, monsters, and magic.  It’s all fun and not to be taken seriously.

I loved this movie from the first moment I saw it.  OK, it’s not a 4 love, but this is a B-movie, so 3s is about as good as it gets, since we’re talking home-wrapped-in-a-blanket-on-the-couch-in-the-afternoon viewing, not night-out-at-the-cinema viewing. Now you have to be a fan of evil sock puppets, but then who isn’t?

Strangely, my favorite moments don’t involve malevolent critters turning people into foliage, but rather conversations between young Harry and Eunice St. Clair, the witch.

Harry: “Can I come in?  I think I’m going to throw up.”
Eunice: “How can I resist an offer like that?”

Harry isn’t the usually movie teen, but is actually a kid I wouldn’t mind meeting.  And Lockhart is a riot.  If she didn’t have a good time making this, I’d be shocked.  There’s nothing better than seeing Lassie’s mom casting spells.  Troll also uses an ingenious, budget-conscious method of transforming St. Clair into her younger, sexier self—the filmmakers hired her look-a-like daughter, Anne.

The rest of the cast is a notch up from normal low-budget fare, with everyone going for colorful characters rather than realism.  No one is pretending this is drama, so instead of truth, you get character’s you’ll remember.

When I first saw Troll, I found nothing strange about the characters’ names, primarily because there wasn’t anything strange about them.  But there is now.  Notice that Troll is the story of the young Harry Potter, who learns of a world of magic all around him, and must fight off the denizens of evil.  Sound familiar?  It should.  And keep in mind, Troll came out several years before J.K. Rowling published her first Harry Potter book.  I wonder what movie she was watching late at night.

Troll takes a beating from horror fans for its lack of frights.  But criticizing Troll for not being scary is much like attacking Schindler’s List for having weak musical numbers.  Troll isn’t a horror film.  Nor is it Film Noir, a Swashbuckler, pornography, or a musical.  It is a magical fantasy film, and for what it is, it works nicely.

Back to Fantasy

 Fantasy, Reviews Tagged with:
Sep 201986
 
five reels

The most enjoyable film in the franchise, The Voyage Home was a huge hit and it is easy to see why. While The Search For Spock is mostly fluff, this film went further to become a comedy. There’s some action and quite a bit of adventure, but the jokes are the point and they are really funny.

The setup is very much like Star Trek: The Motion Picture. An alien vessel appears on a course for Earth. It is unstoppable and the planet will not survive unless a way is found to communicate and give the aliens what they want. But in The Voyage Home, they answer “what” right away, and then go on a mission to make it happen, to find a pair of Humpback whales in the past who can talk to the space probe.

While the crew of the Enterprise sometimes had problems with drama, they are adept at comedy and every one excels as a fish out of water. Uhura and Chekov have a great routine where they come off as terrorists, asking the police and pedestrians where they can find the “nuclear wesles.” Spock and Kirk do a comedy bit on lying as they try and fail to answer simple questions. They also comment on the literary giants of our age (including Harold Robbins) and deal with an overly loud punk rocker which resulted in cheers and roars of laughter in the theater back in 1986). Bones shines as he discusses the barbarism of modern medicine and Scotty tries to chat with an old Mac. Only Sulu lacks a really crack routine.

The film carries a strong message too, which it sledgehammers into the viewer. This would have been a major annoyance in a drama, but as a comedy, it works, giving us some meat to support the action while defusing the weight with a few jokes.

This is the most feel-good of all Star Trek films, and the one that best deals with what good there might be in man and that maybe our humanity truly is a good thing. The Voyage home would top my list, but a few minor items bring it down. Though softened, the message could have used a bit of subtlety, and while whale biologist Gillian is a great addition when with the regular crew, the few scenes of her on her own should have been cut. This has always been my “favorite” Trek film, but I will place it as second “best.”

My ranking of all Star Trek movies is here.

Aug 031986
 
three reels

In the late ’50s, alien parasites turn a person into murderous zombie.  Over 25 years later, two nerds, Chris Romero and J.C. Hooper (Jason Lively, Steve Marshall), in an attempt to join a fraternity, accidentally free the zombie from a cryogenic chamber, unleashing hordes of parasites and then, hordes of zombies on the hapless college.  Only love-starved nerd, Chris, and suicidal policeman, Det. Ray Cameron (Tom Atkins), can stop the killing.

Quick Review: When you’re finished with serious or frightening zombie pictures, the campy Night of the Creeps will be there for you, offering nothing new or interesting, but in an entertaining package.  The production values are on the high side for a zombie pic.  Jason Lively (National Lampoon’s European Vacation) is amusing as the nerd who ends up with a flamethrower, and Tom Atkins is better as the only cop who believes in zombies.

It’s pretty formulaic but the formula is carried out with style and humor.  The underdog nerd is teased by bullies, but wins the girl as he bravely defends her from the zombies.  It is nice to see the girl, Cynthia Cronenberg (Jill Whitlow), show competence when needed.   There’s a gratuitous sorority-girls shower scene, some heads exploding, a few good zombie stand-offs, and plenty of deaths.  It’s all fun, with the main characters all having the names of horror film directors (Romero, Hooper, Cronenberg, Cameron, Landis, Raimi) and the detective blurting out memorable lines (“I’ve got good news and bad news girls.  The good news is your dates are here.  The bad news is they’re dead.”).  Watch it with a few friends, some chips, and a beer or two.

Back to ClassicsBack to Zombies

 Aliens, Reviews, Zombies Tagged with:
Jun 291986
 
five reels

Connor MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod (Christopher Lambert) is a four hundred-year-old immortal, who has been drawn to New York for a final battle with the other surviving immortals.  They fight with swords as only by having their heads cut off can immortals die; in the end “there can be only one.”  He was trained long ago by the cultured Juan Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez (Sean Connery), but now, he is alone, and must face the strongest of the immortals, The Kurgan (Clancy Brown).  Of course, beheadings tend to draw attention, and Connor must deal with the police and a weapon historian (Roxanne Hart) who begins to uncover his secret.

There aren’t many urban fantasies, and those that exist usually follow the example of the nearly forgotten Chandu the Magician, with one wise mage protecting the follies of modern mankind from unknown evils.  Films like Doctor Mordrid, Dr. Strange, and The Magicians fit this category.

Where does Highlander fit in?  It doesn’t.  When it slipped into and out of theaters far too quickly back in 1986, it was something new, which could explain its poor critical notices and lack of an audience.  But I was mesmerized by it than.  It was an extraordinary picture that gleefully merged genres: a little epic, a little gritty street fighting, a lot of tragic romance, a touch of Film Noir, just enough from music videos, a dabble of costume drama, plenty of comedy, tons of adventure, and a foundation of High Fantasy.  Literary fantasy is filled with dark stories of eldritch creatures living a secret existence within modern cities.  A sub-genre in which elves, wizards, and similar beings fight with a combination of guns and bows became popular in the ’80s.  But film had little to echo that movement, until Highlander.  It gives us undying, magical swordsmen living secretly amongst us, and fighting in the urbane jungle for a prize.  It’s a fairy tale (in the Grimm sense) for modern times.

While creating an original setting and mythology, Highlander clings tightly to some of the standard sci-fi/fantasy/adventure tropes.  There is the innocent hero, the experienced tutor, the passing of the great weapon, the tragic loss, the evil villain, and the kidnapped love interest.  It’s the basic story that we’ve all seen, and we all love.  The trick is to present it in a new way, with something surprising, and something we’ll never forget.  The most successful example of this in modern cinema is Star Wars.  It gave us the old story, but with lightsabers and the dark knight in a high tech suit.  Everyone who watches it wants to be a Jedi Knight and save the republic and the girl (or the boy), even though being a Jedi would be an unpleasant existence if you thought about it.  Highlander is one of those very few films that manages to repeat that trick.  It’s a grand opera of loneliness and power and adventure, and offers a new world for us to join, and a new type of hero we can be.  Add Immortal Warriors to our cultural conscious right next to Jedi Knights.

One of the cleverest moves of the script is to give us a mythology of mystery.  There’s a lot of rules for Immortals, so we know what is at stake and what is and isn’t dangerous, but not why.  Why are some people born immortal?  Why must they fight and eventually gather in a foreign land?  Why do they feel “the quickening” when they meet?  We aren’t told, and the characters don’t know.  Early on, Connor would very much like the answers to those questions, though by the end, he doesn’t care.  All of these are equivalent to a human asking why he exists and what is the meaning of life.  If you’re looking for an answer, be prepared for disappointment.  We only know that there are rules.

In a masterstroke of editing, the film tosses us into a sword duel under Madison Square Garden with no explanation, than rips us back to renaissance-era Scotland, then forward to modern New York.  It was an hour before I knew what Connor knew, and by then I was swept into the tale and the lives of the characters.  The scene transitions are ingenious—panning up a 1980’s fish tank to find the surface to be a Scottish loch, and fading from a tired face to a graffiti version of The Mona Lisa to mention two—and on first viewing, I found myself eager for the next to see if it would surpass the last.

The dichotomies in the film keep it fresh: ancient weapons versus metropolitan streets, past versus present, Scottish Highlands versus New York, youthful innocence versus aged cynicism.  The characters change over time, as anyone would who had lived so long.  In Scotland, Connor is happy, courageous, and ready to take on the world.  He’s also inexperienced, and, well, let’s face it, he’s an idiot.  In New York, he is brash, isolated, tired, and if not brilliant, at least worldly.  He has developed a more refined sense of humor, but there’s always pain behind it.  The Kurgan has changed too.  In 1536, he is a determined, proud, and deeply unpleasant warrior.  In modern New York, he’s unhinged.  It wasn’t a long road for him, but he took it.

Highlander doesn’t need Shakespearean actors, but ones whose presence can be felt.  A multifaceted actor who would vanish from the screen is of no use here.  Mythic stories require larger-than-life personalities.  Christopher Lambert fits the bill.  It is easy to accept that there is something not quite normal about him.  He may not be ready to play Hamlet, and his English is questionable, but he can express youthful exuberance as well as pain and loss, and that’s what the part requires.  Sean Connery plays an Egyptian from Japan and Spain, who speaks with a Scottish accent.  It’s probably best to forget preconceived notions of dialect; it’s not as if four hundred years ago, people spoke the way they do now.  He is Connery, funny and certainly noticeable.  Clancy Brown, who had single-handedly saved The Bride with his complex interpretation of Frankenstein’s Monster, creates a memorable villain.  He’s huge (both physically and in the epic sense), loud, over-the-top, yet believable and multilayered.  This is a frightening guy (I’m referring to The Kurgan, but I’d feel uneasy if Clancy Brown was standing over me as well, not to mention confused).

I can’t review Highlander without mentioning the music, which attained fame outside of the film’s fan base.  It combines an orchestral score with driving rock anthems (plus one ballad) by Queen.  Another example of the film’s dualistic nature, the music sets the tone for each time period.  When the renamed Victor Kurgan sticks Give Me the Prize into his tape deck, with its hard pounding drums and heavy metal guitar, it’s clear who he is and that we’re not in Kansas, or Scotland, any more.

The U.S. theatrical release was dumbed down, making the beginning more linear, shortening several fights, and slashing the heart out of one character. Rachel, a Jewish child during WWII, was rescued by Connor. She became his daughter, then his lover, and eventually a mother figure. The U.S. cut pulled the WWII segment, making Rachel just a pushy secretary. But not all the edits were bad. The trimming of a drunken duel improves it by removing a false-step into broad comedy.

While a financial failure when it was first released, Highlander came into its own on video and has become a cult phenomena.  It was followed by the bizarrely misconceived Highlander II: The Quickening, which contradicts much of the first film and explains the immortals as space aliens.  It was later re-cut (twice) to make them time travelers.  Next came, Highlander III: The Final Dimension, which ignored all events in the second film,  Highlander, a television series that ignored the end of the first film and had its own spin-off TV shows, and Highlander: Endgame, which attempted to join the films and TV series.  Several additional films are planned.

Back to Fantasy

 Fantasy, Reviews Tagged with:
Apr 011986
 
two reels

Due to a scientific accident, snarky Howard the Duck is transported from his planet of intelligent ducks to Earth. He befriends Beverly (Lea Thompson) who introduces him to her lab-assistant friend, Phil (Tim Robbins), who in turn, puts him in contact with Dr Walter Jennings (Jeffrey Jones), the man behind the original experiment. In attempting to return Howard to his home, Jennings and company pull a demon to Earth.

I remembered little of Howard the Duck besides not hating it. And as so many people claim to hate it for reasons that are stupid (“A movie with a talking duck is a bad idea”; “Lea Thompson with Howard is icky”), I figured it must be pretty good. So I re-watched it thirty years later; I still don’t hate it, but it is not pretty good.

On the plus side, there’s the basic idea of Howard: a duck with attitude used to comment on our society and delve into psychology. At least that’s what he is in the comics, and some of that comes through—well, a little bit. Lea Thompson is adorable (a term I find myself using more and more for cute females stuck in weak comic book movies), and Jeffrey Jones doesn’t embarrass himself.

That’s about it. It felt like it was going in the right direction at the start, but that didn’t last. With the satire removed, there isn’t much for anyone over ten, which is odd as a lot of the humor at the beginning leans toward the adult. But then the film turns into a slapstick kiddy show. There’s a long—so very long—chase with Howard and Tim Robbins where not crashing is supposed to be very funny, over and over again. Robbins won an Oscar in 2004 and several Golden Globe. Huh. No. No, that’s got to be wrong. No way the guy in this film ever won an acting award. Or had a career after this. There’s a monster designed by Industrial Light & Magic which would be fine in a comedy, but by then Howard the Duck has become an action flick and the special effects aren’t up for that. It is the shabbiest work I can recall from ILM. But SFX and acting are minor problems. It’s the script that pulls it all down.

Howard the Duck was a George Lucas project, but he neither wrote nor directed it. While the Star Wars prequels made me think that hands off is good when Lucas is involved, in this case, I wish he’d dug in.

Mar 091986
 
one reel

Harry (Ted Wass), an American, his daughter Jennifer (Alyssa Milano), and his new wife Lucy (Andrea Marcovicci), move to his ancestral castle in Briton, which is haunted by a ghost (John Gielgud) who doesn’t like visitors.  But they aren’t leaving until they can sell it, and Jennifer finds she likes the ghost.

OK, this doesn’t belong on a page of horror ghost films, but it needs to go somewhere, so here it is.

For one of the most famous ghost stories in English literature, Oscar Wilde’s “The Canterville Ghost” hasn’t been treated well on film.  In this case, little is kept beyond the title, the existence of a ghost (no longer a murderer), and some Americans (though quite different ones from the story).  So it’s different; does that mean it’s without merit?  Yup.  I’m perfectly happy to have stories altered when adapted for the screen, but one messes with Wilde’s words at one’s peril, and the multiple screenwriters here don’t have the skill for such meddling.  They couldn’t even manage mindless family entertainment (something the massively altered 1944 version pulled off).

John Gielgud may have been one of the great actors of the stage, but his film choices were not always sterling.  In The Canterville Ghost, he does not play Sir Simon, but rather John Gielgud.  There is no sign of a long dead nobleman, just an English actor on break.  That puts him worlds above Ted Wass, who uses the same skills he brought to sitcoms (that’s not a complement).  A pre-sexpot Alyssa Milano is only asked to be cute as the sympathetic daughter, and that’s something she manages without difficulty.

Instead of a hint of social commentary and the abuse of the ghost, the focus here is on Jennifer missing her mother and wanting to be rid of her stepmother.  However, we learn nothing of the mother (besides she’s dead) and little more of the stepmother.  We do get some chit-chat and a few ghostly gags before the inevitable climax.

Back to Ghost Stories

 Ghost Stories, Reviews Tagged with:
Oct 091985
 
one reel

In the distant future, the powerful vampire Count Magnus Lee bites the lovely young Doris and plans to return to marry her.  Doris asks for the help of a vampire hunter to destroy the count before she becomes one of the undead.

This is a standard, Japanese samurai movie with vampire trappings. If you’re not familiar with those, think spaghetti western. D is your cold, quiet, hero. He rides in, kills some bad-guys, and rides out. That’s pretty much all the plot you can expect. There’s some wandering about between the killing, and some talking as well, but little of it from D and most of it just filling up time.

As long as you’re not expecting much of a story, the plot will do, and the future world of vampires, werewolves, demons, gas monsters, and racist humans is engaging. But the skill wasn’t here to explore either the story or the setting.  Both more money and a few animators who could draw would have helped. Often, the same cell is repeated. More often, the only movement will be the lips, giving it a silly Clutch Cargo look. When someone jumps (and they jump a lot), they stay perfectly still as a static background is rolled up or down.  And while some of the character designs are acceptable (nothing’s really good), the Count’s vampire daughter looks like a reject from Speed Racer.

The fight scenes are particularly poorly constructed, consisting of a lot of jumping (remember, they are a hopping bunch) and grunting to a background of scratchy lines.

If you are hoping for an explanation of anything, look elsewhere. D has a demon in his hand.  Why?  What are its powers? Who knows.  A hero with secrets is OK, but if one of the secrets is a talking hand that eats dirt (why does it eat dirt?), then a few more details are called for.

Minor, silly mistakes abound. These don’t ruin the film, but show that the filmmakers weren’t putting in the effort required. The Count wants to marry (marry?  Not just jump her?  This is a very moral vampire) a human because that’s a kick to him.  But it is established that his bite will turn her into a vampire soon. So, ummmm, why does he want her?  D states that a note is written in an ancient code only understandable by vampire hunters; as a vampire wrote it, shouldn’t that be an ancient code only understandable by vampire hunters and vampires?  Oh, and if the vamps know it, I’d get a new code.

The target audience is revealed to be young teens (or possibly old men with a thing for young teens). There are a few, very brief, bare breasts (just enough to titillate a twelve-year-old). More significant is Doris, who is supposed to be an adult, but is drawn as if she’s thirteen.  She also has a lot of trouble keeping her panties hidden. I can hear the youthful giggling in the theater even as I type.

The biggest problem is that no action has any meaning to the viewer. Stuff just happens. Exploding light balls and shiny rays pop up all the time and there is no way of knowing if these things are dangerous.  None of it is defined. Most of the time they just cause the victim to grunt (if you like grunting, you’ll like this film). So there’s no real tension in combat. None of it means anything.  The few times something is a threat, it can be undone. D dies, but it doesn’t matter. He gets up soon after. For the powers that D has, I can’t figure why this movie is eighty minutes. He could just walk in and kill everyone; it’d be over in five minutes.

And if all that doesn’t warn you away, let me leave you with a scrap of what passes for dialog. It’s all bad, but D’s shout to Count Lee earns a special place. “You and your kind should go back to the abyss…of oblivion!” Yeah, I hate that abyss of oblivion.

Oct 091985
 
two reels

A beautiful vampire (Lauren Hutton) must bite a virgin three times before Halloween. In the 1980’s she finds few options until her minions spot a high school student and ice cream truck driver (Jim Carrey) who is being frustrated by his girlfriend (Karen Kopins).

Quick Review: A vacuous comedy that screams ’80s, Once Bitten is sitcom level fluff. Lauren Hutton is a sexy vampire, and that’s the best thing in the film. The jokes are almost funny, the story almost makes sense, and the film as a whole is almost enjoyable. Carrey, far too old to be playing a high school student, shows signs of his later trademark insanity, but reins it in, letting the story, such as it is, guide the film. In this overly wholesome sex comedy (if you are hoping for naked vampires, look elseware), there are amusing moments, such as a Greece-style gym dance-off (Carrey is a better dancer than Travolta), but not enough of them. When AMC does its salute to ’80s teen films, Once Bitten will play between Valley Girl and Fright Night, and while weaker than both, will bridge them nicely.

 Reviews, Vampires Tagged with:
Oct 091985
 
three reels

High school student Charley Brewster (William Ragsdale), unfocused on his frigid girlfriend, Amy (Amanda Bearse), notices his new neighbors, Jerry Dandrige (Chris Sarandon) and Billy Cole (Jonathan Stark), carrying a coffin. Watching them through binoculars, he discovers that Jerry is a vampire. Fearing for his life, Charley seeks help from an old monster-movie, TV host, Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall).

It’s impossible for me to view Fright Night without thinking about how much time writer/director Tom Holland spent studying An American Werewolf in London. I can’t fault him for that. In the early ’80s, vampires needed a modern style and American Werewolf had style to spare. Both are horror-comedies, that don’t have a lot of laughs, but do have many light, playful moments.  Both take the traditional monsters (with the traditional rules) and place them comfortably in modern times. Both lack scares, but stick in action, gore, and a touch of nudity, all to a rock soundtrack. Both make substantial use of FX and makeup, with some of it working, and some not.  And both are entertaining.

Ragsdale is pleasant enough as the lead, and it’s easy to enter the story with him, but he is upstaged by Saradon, with his easygoing sexuality, and by McDowall, who has one the great voices in film.

Once the story gets going, it’s all fun, but the first third is uneven. To enlighten all the females and males who can’t recall their youth, no teenage boy will ignore a girl who is offering sex, particularly for the first time, for anything, of any kind. Period. Some guys carrying a box in a yard will not be a distraction. Nor would an atomic bomb. After this unlikely beginning, Charley takes ridiculous actions, telling his mother that Jerry is a vampire, without evidence, and calling the police, when there is nothing to find. Far worse than making Charley appear like an idiot, these scenes commit a far more grievous sin: they aren’t interesting. Gee, the police don’t believe in vampires. No kidding.

Or, perhaps I’m looking at Fright Night all wrong. Charley’s actions at the beginning might not make much sense in a vampire film, but in a tale of a young man confronting his homosexual feelings, it all fits into place. The gay subtext gets pretty overt. Charlie is far more feminine and emotional than the cold, butch Amy.  He’s distracted from certain sex with Amy by the arrival of Jerry Dandrige. Why? Have you seen Chris Sarandon? He’s a pretty, pretty man. Jerry is also living with an attractive younger man (even Charlie’s mother comments that they are probably gay) and they are very hands on. From that point on, Charlie forgets about the girl, always trying to be close to Jerry and gets very upset (jealous?) when he finds Jerry with women. Jerry eventually pops up in Charley’s bedroom, showing him that there is another side.

For help in dealing with his dilemma, Charley goes to the gayest man in town, Peter Vincent (an interesting name when looking at this for subtext). Then there is Charley’s friend, Evil Ed, who meets up with Jerry in an alley (Jerry is wearing a trench coat), where the older man tells the teen “You don’t have to be afraid of me. I know what it’s like being different…all you have to do is take my hand.” Meanwhile, Charley is hoping religion might free him from his demons. Peter Vincent also attempts to use religion, but due to his lifestyle, there is little comfort there.

Add in that Amanda Bearse was one of the first television stars to come out of the closet, and Stephen Geoffreys, who played Evil Ed, later made the films Mechanics bi Day, Lube Job bi Night, Transsexual Prostitutes, and Butt Blazer and it becomes too easy to think of Fright Night as an analogy for teenage homosexuality, though it takes a rather dim view of such desires. I can’t say that was the intention, but it’s hard to see how Holland could have put that much in accidentally.

 Reviews, Vampires Tagged with: