Longlegs (2024)

I saw this film with high hopes, fueled by good word of mouth from several members of my blogging community, and it’s surprising performance at the box office. I love Nicolas Cage, and I am always willing to give him wide latitude on his acting choices because they are so out there. I had not seen a trailer for the film before I went, so the only thing I was aware of were the comparisons some had made to “Silence of the Lambs” and “Seven”. Brother, are these people overselling this pile of excrement. I started having doubts a few minutes in, and by the time the film was done, I loathed it. Sorting your sock drawer is a more productive use of two hours.

The film starts out as a procedural, but quickly turns into a supernatural thriller when our hero turns out to be psychic. No wait, she is only half psychic because she only scored 50% on a test that the FBI has for supposed psychics. So we are plunged into a world with no worldbuilding, almost immediately. Agent Lee Harker fingers a house where the bad guy is, by just looking around. We don’t actually know why they are in this neighborhood in the first place, but whatever. A tragedy occurs when the partner she has been assigned to, ignores her warning and request for back up. The two of them feel like the most inept FBI agents ever, they will fit right in with the Secret Service team that was supposed to be protecting Trump. They are not sympathetic, they are pitiable. 

Just to add to the stupidity, her supervising agent, is an alcoholic who has been working the serial killer case they are on, for a dozen years without any progress. Whether he is incapable of reading her social reticence or is simply pushing her to grow, he comes across as completely thoughtless. When he forces her to meet his family, the director might just has well hung a sign over the front door which reads” Here lives the family That will be targeted at the end of the film”. It was such a ham fisted moment it probably tainted everything for me for the rest of the film. In truth though, nothing happens in the first part of the movie that gives this any verisimilitude. Harker comes across as a naif, rather than a steely mind in the FBI. The production design also undermines the film. The time period is set in the 1990s for no particular reason. The location is supposed to be the Seattle area, but making the FBI offices look like log cabins or paneled walls from the 70s seem amateurish. 

The three performances that matter the most are inconsistent. Maike Monroe who plays Harker, is doe eyed and a waif. Even though Jodie Foster’s character in “Silence of the Lambs” is being diminished by the men around her, she still felt like a woman, not a shrinking violet. She can hardly make her voice heard, she moves suspiciously slow in every scene and she just never seems to be up to the job. The only thing she might have going for her is that “psychic” vibe, but there is no backstory on how it might have helped her get into the FBI. Her mother is played by Alicia Witt. This character starts setting off warning signals when we just hear her voice over the telephone line. When we encounter her, the phrase “hoarder” comes immediately to mind. This film was produced by the company “NEON”, they might just as well put neon signs around every foreshadowing twist. 

Finally, let’s get to Nic Cage. The part of Longlegs is a serial killer with satanic influences. We don’t get any clues to that except the cryptic messages he leaves in code, so the idea that this is a procedural investigation film goes out the window. This is an X-Files episode that was not strong enough to make it to the screen, unless you have a strong visual hook. Enter Nicholas Cage, in make-up that renders him unrecognizable, and with mannerisms that would set off an air raid siren for every police official within a hundred miles of him. Cage screeches through some dialogue, pops his eyes out, and contorts his body enough to be creepy to look at. Who in their right mind would let a character like this any where near their family?  When we get an exposition dump at the start of the third act, we are asked to accept some incredulous ideas and just go along with them because we now get to see some flashbacks. This film tries to make a mystery of the means of killing, rather than exploiting the supernatural and satanic story that is really there. 

I have been an outlier before on some horror based films. I disliked “The VVitch”, hated “The Lighthouse”, laughed at “US” and now I am dismissing “Longlegs”. I don’t have to have something conventional, but I do need something that is coherent and does not insult my intelligence, a standard that this film cannot meet.  

Videodrome (1983) Paramount Classic Summer Film Series

David Cronenberg films are an acquired taste. They often have a cult status to them that may be off putting to those who are not familiar with his aesthetic. So it makes perfect sense that the presentation of this film as part of the Paramount Summer Classic film Series, is presented by the Hyperreal Film Club. Their film choices are often off center or feature some esoteric element that makes the movie distinctive. This seems like a perfect match for them. The guest host from the club spent a good deal of time, warning the audience about some of the extreme elements of the picture. They also suggested a number of themes that you could look for in the story to help make it a more insightful experience. There was a little drift in the intro when the film’s star came in for a bit of criticism that was not based on the movie and made some presuppositions that were never justified, but that is a minor point.

“Videodrome” takes place in a different cultural time and the technology will seem quaint to an audience forty years from it’s origins, but the themes are still relevant, and if we adapt our assumptions from television to the internet, they actually seem more vibrant than ever. At the center of the story is a conspiracy to modify the view of the world for those who consume this product. The hypnotic effects results in fantasy sequences of body horror and violence, or are they fantasies? Cronenberg seems to be having it both ways, the images we are seeing are real and they are imagined. This is also a theme of the film, what is reality? 

Debbie Harry is listed as one of the stars, and she is featured, but her role is definitely a supporting character. After the first act, she is seen only in brief hallucinogenic moments by the protagonist played by James Woods. Max Ren, is a cable TV producer, who has a knack for finding disturbing material that his customers can’t take their eyes off of. He is a sleazy character who is primarily motivated by money, but although he does not appear to have a clear ethos, there are lines that he begins to see should not be crossed. Woods appropriately plays him as both hero and victim because that is what Max is. He is heroically, but futilely resisting the Videodrome technology, while at the same time succumbing to the seduction. In what amounts to the first virtual character in a film, Professor Brian O’Blivion , turns out to be the real hero of the film story, although be is never seen except on TV. 

This is one of those mind f*** movies that puts the audience in the position of trying to figure out what is really going on and whether or not they are a part of it. One of the things that makes it disgustingly compelling, is the terrific special effects make-up created by the great Rick Baker. Baker is one of my unsung movie heroes although unsung is hardly the truth, he does have seven Academy Awards to his name. It’s just that make-up is often overlooked in the success of a film, but in this case it is essential. Max has physical changes that are revolting to think about, but fascinating to watch on the screen. I do like the trivia that the video tapes used in the film are BetaMax tapes, because VHS was too large for the effect that they created. I think it is also appropriate that they are “Beta” MAX, given out central character. 

The Hyperreal Film Club also presents a short film from one of their members as part of this series. It will supposedly be available later this year on-line. I was quite entertained by “We Joined a Cult”, and when it is available, you will get four minutes of gruesome laughs yourself. 

A Quiet Place Day One (2024)

This is a worthy follow-up to the two previous films, set in the world that suddenly has to be silent. The original “A Quiet Place” was one of the best films of its year and continues to inspire us in the performance of Emily Blunt. She does not make an appearance in this film which is set in New York City on the day that the aliens first arrived on Earth. Our new protagonist is named Samira, and she has a different set of problems that she has to manage. She doesn’t have children and she’s not pregnant, but she does have a cat and I don’t think this is much of a spoiler, but she is also terminally ill. This puts a new face on the survival theme of the movie, and the perspective is an interesting one especially when contrasted with the other characters she encounters.

Samira our lead character is played by actress Lupita Nyong’o, who speaks sparingly and communicates so much with her eyes and body language. She is a defiant patient at a hospice facility, she is much younger then most of the other clients there, and this displacement has given her additional attitude toward the world around her. It may in fact be that defiant attitude that helps her navigate the crumbling city as the auditory predators are taking out the population rapidly.

The characters in this version of the story don’t have the advantage of speaking sign language, they have to rely on descriptive gestures, pointing, and occasional notes on whatever surface is available for them to write on. This adds an extra wrinkle to the story and makes every potential attempt to communicate a bigger threat because of the high concentration of aliens in the city. Having established that the waterfall effect blocks the aliens ability to hear low-spoken dialogue, there is an interesting sequence where Samira encounters two children hiding inside of a water fountain and she tries to direct them to a safer spot. In the long run we never discover what happens to the vast majority of people that she encounters. We do get a dramatic moment with some of the people that she knew from the hospice, but those folks on the streets are not likely to make it to the next scene, at least not for long.

It is probably essential that another person be involved in the story for us to be able to engage with the character.  About a third of the way into the film Samara encounters a frightened law school student from Great Britain who is so uncertain about what to do that he is practically in tears. The two of them form a tenuous alliance in order to navigate the treacherous streets of New York City in an attempt to reach a pier on the river. Supposedly boats are being used to transport survivors off of Manhattan Island, where it appears that the aliens have trapped themselves due to their inability to navigate water. We know from other films that this is it best a short-term solution, but that’s not really part of this particular story. (Although there is one link to the second film)

The first act of the film sets up the conflict and establishes Samira’s character, it also provides us with a lot of action beats. During the second act the action moments are more subdued but there are occasional outbursts of violence and more people are sacrificed to the narrative of overwhelming odds facing them. One of the best moments in that opening act involves Samira taking in a marionette puppet show, that she has been maneuvered into attending with other patients at the hospital. Although very resistant to the idea, she did become entranced by a couple of moments in the show, which of course is exactly the point at which the alien invasion arrives. The contrast between human ability to create something beautiful and the aliens ability to destroy everything that humans have created is exactly what was needed at the start of the story. We also get a sense of how headstrong Samira is because of the way she handles being dragged to the puppet show.

The movie is not quite as frightening as it’s two predecessors, in large part that’s because we already know what the rules are concerning the aliens. We also see the alien creatures far too much in the light of day, and up close. So it is mostly the sudden lightning-like appearance of the aliens when alerted by a sound that gives us a jump scare or two along the way. Most of the fright that takes place in this film is a result of anxiety as we watch the characters that we are growing to care about, struggle to hide and remain silent in the face of the threat. Djimon Hounsou has two brief scenes in the film,  in the first act, a moment of desperation changes him forever, but in the final act, we see that fear and survival instincts have not eliminated his humanity. 

I can recommend the film as a piece of tense theater with two central performances that are very effective. Our terminally ill hospice patient and her frightened companion the British law student, are an unlikely match, but in the long run they show us that humanity can exist even in the worst circumstances, and even between people with very little to connect them,  that is ,except maybe a cat.

MaXXXine (2024)

There was probably no way that my most anticipated movie of 2024 would live up to my expectations. The bar had been set too high and I amped myself up for months looking forward to this film. I can’t say that it’s a disappointment, but maybe more of a let down. I wanted something more, and I thought I was going to get it when I saw the opening 5 minutes of the film in a preview with the film “X”, that this is a sequel to. Mia Goth has a great moment at the start of the film, and her character of Maxine has flashes of that brilliance throughout the film. However those are only moments and there’s a lack of consistency in the character which was frustrating.

Those of you not familiar, “MaXXXine” is the continuation of a story that we got in 2022 set in 1979 in Texas, about a group of wannabes trying to make an X-rated film, and running into a couple of older people who resented their youth and their sexuality. This movie tries to continue the story by tapping into a connection that was made near the end of that film. From the very beginning I knew who the villain of the film was going to be, and the lack of suspense there undermined what I was looking for in the movie. The film does manage to create the same tone that some of the sleazy action films of the mid 80s had. The most likely comparison that will make sense is to the movie “Angel” 

where the featured ingenue is a student by day and a hooker by night on Hollywood Boulevard. The gritty streets, over the top clothes and mannerisms on the street people from the 1980s feels like it was matched pretty well in this movie. Director Ti West has also tried to slip in some red herrings with the presence of the Night Stalker, the notorious killer who terrorized Southern California in 1985. For the most part the connection needs to be stronger, we’re not sure why the LAPD detectives who are investigating the murders of young women in the adult film industry believe that the deaths are unrelated to The Night Stalker, especially when the media seems to be playing up such a connection. This is simply part of an incomplete storyline about the investigation of the murders. Maxxxine is a witness, and ultimately a target, but seems to be incapable of deciding how to proceed in the situation. That is not the way the character in the previous movie and the first 5 minutes of this movie would react.

Kevin Bacon shows up as a sleazy private detective who is working for an unseen superior, trying to track down Maxxxine and lure her to an address in the Hollywood Hills. We know right away that this is where bad things are happening, because some of the girls that Maxxxine works with mention that they were going to a party in the Hollywood Hills, and later we see them being abused on video camera. It’s not until the climax of the movie that we see the totality of what is going on, but the mere fact that we didn’t see the murders of those girls first hand, doesn’t mean that we can’t see what’s coming.

Another subplot that lacks development, but should be the most important part of the story, is Maxxxine being cast in a traditional film and starting to play that part. Instead we get the director pontificating about being ruthless in pursuit of her objective, and therefore acting as a role model for Maxxxine. But we already know that Maxine does not need that kind of role model, she is capable and driven and I would pity the fool who goes up against her. We even get a brief sequence, that has nothing to do with the main plot, which shows exactly how brutal Maxxxine can be in pursuit of her goals. This was exactly a flattering image of Buster Keaton, let’s just say some impersonator did get something busted. (Nut Busted Keaton should be the credit name for the character)

The movie is not really a horror film any longer, but rather a suspense thriller. The problem is that there’s just not much suspense. The main victim should be stalked more ominously, and the threat should be visualized a little more directly. Other than the occasional interviews by the detectives you don’t really see how Maxxxine is being threatened by the secretive employer of Bacon’s Detective. In one scene that makes no sense whatsoever, the detective chases Maxine menacingly around the Warner Brothers lot, which then turns into the Universal lot, and puts her in the Psycho house hiding, without a plan. OK, we get the reference to the first movie, but it was a weak scene. Maxxxine can be backed into a corner but she always has a plan, in this movie though,  she just lucks out. And the convenience of at least two lucky interventions undermines the storytelling we’d seen in the two previous movies. The side stories might be consistent for the 1980s style film but as we’ve said before the things that are happening in the past need to be visualized more in the present. For a film set on the fringes of the pornography industry is surprisingly light on sexuality. There’s one passing moment when an X-rated video is being filmed as Maxine walks by, all of the other porn references are to the film that was made in the original movie.

Were I ranking the three movies in the X Series I would simply say they were in declining order. The gap between “X” and “Pearl” is the smallest, those two films were near perfect in the way they mimicked the filmmaking styles of earlier times. They were inspired by films of different eras. Maxxxine is a step down, it gets some of the 80s vibes right but in trying to become something more, like the movie Puritan 2, featured in the storyline, it just doesn’t amount to anything nearly as great.

Paramount Summer Classic Film Series-Evil Dead II

The Evil Dead series has fascinated me since I first discovered it in the early 1990s. I was aware of the films for a number of years but never bothered to investigate them, because I didn’t know anybody else who had seen them. That changed one night on a Halloween when I was at a friend’s party and we watched “Evil Dead 2” after the kids had gone to sleep. I laughed and screamed at the ridiculous amounts of blood, body parts, and Three Stooges jokes that were being thrown at me. These were my people.

I’ve seen the Evil Dead, and Army of Darkness, on the big screen multiple times. This may have only been the second or third time I have seen “Evil Dead 2” in a theater. But as with most theatrical experiences, the presence of an audience as well as the big screen, and the requirement that you stay engaged, makes the experience something that is far superior to home viewing.

I’ve been to two or three presentations where the “Man God” Bruce Campbell, has appeared in person to talk about the films we are watching. 3 years ago in this same theater we came for a screening of the original “Evil Dead”, and Bruce was there. We had sprung for an extra couple of bucks in order to get a picture opportunity, but it was Covid and the pictures required social distancing, which makes it look a little bit like it’s photoshopped. I don’t care, we were in the presence of greatness. The talent of Bruce Campbell is especially on display in “Evil Dead 2”. His performance involves a physicality that most actors in an action film would have a hard time achieving. In addition he has to convey some of those emotions that are going on in the character while under a layer of makeup and appliances that would make most of us cringe to think of having on our bodies. He is really quite effective and there are so many close-ups on his face that require him to communicate those emotions in a humorous way but in a way that is also quite immediate. He Nails it.

Some of the storytelling and much of the acting is deliberately ham-fisted in order to gain as much humorous power as possible. The audience last night laughed uproariously at each situation that required Ash to come up with another solution that was ridiculously violent. Most of those moments occur after he has decapitated his girlfriend with a shovel. I understand that budget limitations produced some of the slightly clunky stop motion effects in the film. I have always been a fan of stop motion special effects, I’m not sure that Ray Harryhausen would approve of the way the technique is used in the first part of the film. It’s definitely brilliant, even if it isn’t as polished as a Harryhausen film would be.

Even the cheesiest jokes work well in this film, because director Sam Rami, knows what he’s going after. The goal is to shock and entertain the audience with the most audacious visualized or violence, and the silliest hero’s journey you can imagine. There’s just one word for the whole thing… groovy!

X (2022) Re-visit

It is no secret that the Ti West film “X” was my favorite movie of 2022. Along with the immediate prequel “Pearl” director west has created an indelible set of characters, tied together by sexuality and a desire for fame. In two weeks we will be getting the next chapter in this franchise, “Maxxxine”, and it is my most anticipated fil of the year. I am always happy to see a movie that I love on the big screen, but this week’s screening was special because at the conclusion of the film, we get the five minute opening of “Maxxxine” as a dessert. The amazing Mia Goth, should have been nominated for an Academy Award for the tremendous work she did in “Pearl”, and it looks like there will be more of that caliber work in the new film. The tone of the clip we saw was perfect, and the exit line that leads to the titles, tells us that this character is a force to be reconned with. I can hardly wait.

As for “X”, this movie continues to impress me with it’s verisimilitude of the late 1970s film scene. The rag tag band of pornographers runs into a older couple that has a dark history and a misanthropic perspective of the world. The movie provides a variety of horror thrills, from slashers, to animal attacks and body horror. That it does so with a great sense of style and humor is what makes the film so memorable. The aforementioned Mia Goth has a dual role in the film, and she hits the right marks of both a scream queen and a horror villain. 

The obvious horror influences are “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” and “Psycho”. The setting at an isolated farm in Texas with a weird family of residents is supplemented by the group arriving in a van, and going through some of the same stages of travel as were found in that 1974 classic. The “Psycho” connections are slightly more subtle but also more plentiful. There is an infirm old lady, watching from an upstairs window. Voyeurism is at the heart of the story as we peek at the sex being filmed for a low budget porno, the main antagonist does some peeking as well. “Psycho” gets name checked by the film student/director of the movie within the movie, and he has a shower scene that anticipates the Janet Leigh treatment he receives just a few moments later. The stud film star, who is acting sympathetically to the old man in the story, gets the Martin Balsam treatment. 

In an early scene in the movie, we are treated to a Peeping Tom’s overhead view of Maxxine taking a nude swim. Included in the overhead shot is an encroaching crocodile, which is disappointed at the last minute, but Director Ti West knows that Chekov’s crocodile must play a part in the mayhem, and he does not disappoint. Brittany Snow plays the cocksure actress who can both make it and fake it. Martin Henderson as the ambitious film producer manages to be slimy but also somewhat charming and polite. Jenna Ortega was in her third horror fil of the first half of the year when she gets tempted to the dark side of sexual fame. Her hysterics in the final act are one of the things that make the climax feel so much like “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”. 

Although there is gore a plenty in the film, the sense of terror does not rely on those bloody images. Two example perfectly explain what I am talking about. Wayne, the producer has a encounter with a rusty nail that invokes more horror than his final confrontation with a pitchfork. Ti West knows how to milk that suspense, and when the sudden puncture away from the foot happens, it is almost a relief and comic by comparison. The second scene that shows off the horror bona fides of the director comes when Mia Goth encounters Mia Goth in her bed. It is as disturbing as is possible while also having some sympathy for the horrible Pearl. 

I hate that I have to wait an extra day to see “Maxxine”, we have some other commitments. I guess being an adult carries the weight of responsibility with it. Although I have to say, loving these movies may undermine all that I do in the rest of my life to prove I am a grown up. 

Paramount Summer Classic Film Series -The Bride of Frankenstein and Dracula’s Daughter

Midweek we enjoyed a double feature of horror films from the 1930s. The classic “Bride of Frankenstein”, and the lesser known but very stylish “Dracula’s Daughter”. It’s been less than 18 months since I saw the Bride of Frankenstein in a theater. Back in 2022 I saw The Bride with “The Mummy” in a Fathom event and I wrote about it then and you can read about it here.

The “Bride of Frankenstein” is one of the most stylish films from the 1930s. Filled with what might be described as German expressionism, the lighting and shadows are dramatic and exactly the kind of thing that foreshadows film noir coming in the next decade. Of course there are also the over-the-top performances of Dr Frankenstein and Doctor Septimus Pretorius. The one actor who clearly outshines everyone in the film continues to be Boris Karloff. Although he was against it, this version of the monster developed some language skills, and it helps the story take on some even greater moral dilemmas.

Where is Henry Frankenstein stitched together body parts of the Dead and used electricity to try and bring them back to life, Dr. Pretorius seems to have been using recombinant DNA to achieve his goal, and this is well before the concept of DNA was understood. He appears to have been using cloning and some kind of genetic Magic to produce his set of miniature living beings. That sequence is mostly used for humor, but it does set up the idea that they’re going to grow a body around a bone structure as opposed to trying to assemble one from body parts of others. Of course the one exception as they get close to creating the bride, comes when they have to have a fresh heart. Now we’re not dealing with grave robbers but murderers.

The Bride of Frankenstein does continue to raise the question of man’s control over life and death, and whether we are crossing a Rubicon by trying to create life. The film is all the better for the prologue that features Byron and Shelly and Mary  Wollstonecraft Shelly telling the stories on a dark and stormy night. Byron in particular is portrayed as a romantic in a very theatrical way, which sets up the rest of the story very effectively.

“The Bride of Frankenstein” relies on a variety of special photographic effects, miniatures, and production design that creates a Gothic image in a faraway place to give us the creeps. “Dracula’s Daughter” is much more sparse in its use of any special effects. They are one or two moments where the process of hypnosis is visualized using some photographic techniques, but when they get to Dracula’s castle it’s a very basic sequence that is not drawing attention to itself the way the exploding Laboratory at the end of the “Bride of Frankenstein” was doing.

I know I saw this movie two or three times as a kid, but I remembered only a few particular moments. I remembered the ring the Countess Zeleska uses to hypnotize and subdue her victims. I remembered the creepy familiar, Sandor, with his pasty face greased down hair and deep set eyes. He looked like a vampire well before being given eternal life. I also remembered the sequence where the Countess is testing herself with a girl she acquires as a model. When the young woman takes off her blouse and drops down the straps on her chemise, there is a moment of desire that overcomes the Countess,  and that largely accounts for the films Sapphic reputation. 

The film is atmospheric and has some nice visuals, but it feels like a very straightforward drama with a few horror elements added. The opening and closing of the coffin at the count is sleeps in, and the wrap that she cloaks herself in, revealing only her eyes are as close to transforming into a bat or revealing fangs that we are going to get. We never even see the puncture wounds that doctors refer to on the victims. So everything is played very subtly. Of course that’s part of the story The Countess thinks now that Count Dracula is gone, that the spell she is under is broken and it is only her mental state that forces her into continuing to live the nocturnal vampire existence. Thus her interest in the mealy mouth psychiatrist/doctor that she begins to consult and ultimately decides that she wishes to make her Eternal mate.

I had completely forgotten that Van Helsing appears in the film, and that the reason the doctor is involved in the story in the first place is to help his former mentor escape conviction for murdering Count Dracula. The chief of Scotland Yard is portrayed as barely competent, and completely skeptical, but surprisingly accommodating to both Van Helsing and his young former pupil.

There are no big action scenes, we don’t get a stake through the heart, at least not on screen. The Countess is betrayed by her familiar rather than the hero. And the vampire doesn’t melt in the sunlight at the last minute. The movie ends with very little in the way of dramatic climax, and although we’re supposed to have some sympathy for countess Zaleska, we’re mostly left with a feeling of sadness for everybody involved. For a movie with very limited horror effects it manages to have the desired outcome on our emotions. A a very worthwhile sequel to the original Dracula.

Paramount Summer Classic Film Series-Young Frankenstein

50 years ago was the start of a wonderful relationship for me. This was the year that I discovered Mel Brooks. Both “Blazing Saddles” and “Young Frankenstein” came out this year, and I saw them with my high school friends who all laughed as loud as I did. We knew we were in the presence of somebody who knew how to be funny, especially to high school boys. “Blazing Saddles” was the first of these two films to be released in 74, and it’s raucous, irreverent, and some times down right offensive. It was also a western, which I have a deep abiding Love for.

In spite of my admiration for “Blazing Saddles”, I’ve always felt that it was the second best Mel Brooks film of 1974. “Young Frankenstein” goes beyond silly parody, to be a genuine tribute to and echo of the classic Universal horror movies. Of course it is hysterical, there was little doubt that with the input of Brooks and co-screenwriter Gene Wilder, that this is going to be incredibly funny. It turns out that it is also incredibly sweet, with a soft spot for all of the characters in the film, even some of those loathsome villagers who think it’s time for a riot. There is something to laugh at and embrace in just about every scene.

To start off with, they made the film in black and white. In 1974 that was not very typical. Sure there were a few other films at the time that used black and white to suggest the past. Films like “The Last Picture Show”, “Paper Moon”, “Lenny” and a few more, They all use black and white to draw attention to themselves in a way that made them stand out in the crowded ’70s field. But in the field of comedy, you don’t get a lot of black and white films that are contemporary, until Woody Allen gets going a few years later. The truth is, this movie wouldn’t have worked in color, because our collective memory of the Universal films is black and white. Boris Karloff may have had green face makeup when the original Frankenstein was created, but we only saw the black and white and that’s what we remember. It would have been disturbing to have Peter Boyle on screen as the monster with a green face. Besides, all those great sets that were being used to make the movie wouldn’t look nearly as Gothic and creepy if they were in color. The villagers walking through the forest with fog rising from the ground in black and white just makes sense.

It would be pretty hard to go wrong with a cast that includes Gene Wilder, Marty Feldman, Madeline Kahn, Teri Garr, and Kenneth Mars, but when you add a surprise guest performance by my favorite actor in a completely unexpected role, I’m just going to have to say this film approaches perfection. Let’s face it Gene Hackman, as an avuncular blind man stumbling his way through making a new friend, may be the funniest 5 minutes in the whole movie, and that saying something.

The John Morris score is also something pretty special. It recalls Frankenstein with its limited score, Dracula with its borrowed themes, and classical source music. The little horn section gets its own joke when Marty Feldman as Igor, plays his little horn to accompany Inga on the violin. It’s guaranteed to get a chuckle for you. Next to the sequence with Gene Hackman, the dance routine with Gene Wilder and Peter Boyle to “Puttin’ on the Ritz” maybe one of the most bizarre, ridiculous, and ultimately perfect realizations of the absurdity of this story. Super duper.

As family-friendly as Young Frankenstein is, there are a couple of raunchy jokes built into the movie, especially at the end. Most of these will sail over the heads of kids, but teens and adults will smile at the sexual innuendo that is never explicitly stated. The film is certainly not as ribald as Blazing Saddles, but it’s not G-rated for a reason. We are reminded once again how sadly we miss Gene Wilder on screen, his performance is one for the ages. The moment of his frustration when he can’t get his two assistants to understand what he’s asking for as he’s being strangled by the monster, is both pantomime perfect, and then when he gets his voice back vocally hysterical. I have no patience for anybody who doesn’t think this film is funny. It’s so funny that I was amused by the slot machine that was based on it and was ubiquitous in Vegas two decades ago. Too bad you can’t find those slots now, I’m really in the mood for dropping some coin and hoping to get a bonus.

Abigail (2024)

This is a movie that would have worked so much better if the premise had not been given away in all of the advertising and the trailer. What starts off as a tense kidnapping story, takes a turn a quarter of the way into the movie, and it’s a very clever twist. The problem is that we all knew it was coming, which undermines a lot of the stuff they get set up at the start of the film. That said, there is still fun to be had here because when it hits the fan, there’s a glorious amount of Gore, violence, and ironic comedy.

Basically this is a variation of 100 other horror stories over the years. 10 Little Indians, Alien, The House on Haunted Hill, and dozens of other movies where a group of people are trapped in a situation where they will be picked off one at a time. Will they be able to figure out a solution? Will the antagonist reveal a motive? Is there any point to the story? The answers to these and other questions will come if you stay to the end of the movie. As in a lot of contemporary films, the people involved are not particularly pleasant, and we may very well feel that as things go along that some of them are getting what they deserved. Let’s face it, everybody in this house was there because they were kidnapping a little girl. Maybe some of them are worse than others, and maybe there is possible redemption, but we’re going to have to get a lot of dead bodies before we get to the point where we’re glad that anybody is surviving.

Imagine if you were Claudia from the film “Interview with the Vampire”, and you had to spend your eternal life as a child. What kinds of amusements could you come up with to keep you interested and at the same time allow you to continue your cover as an innocent child? Well that’s basically what this film attempts to answer. The fact that the house it’s full of booby traps, secret passages, and dark foreboding images adds to the fun. Characters betray one another and sometimes they actually support one another, but we’re never sure of which outcome we’re going to get before the events play out. This is where some of the fun comes in. This movie is not quite as engaging as “Ready or Not“, the film from the directors that preceded this, but it’s unlikely that you’ll feel ripped off by watching it. Especially if you enjoy over the top monster action that results in blood splattered all over the screen on the set.

Actor Kevin Durant is a Canadian performer that I have seen in movies since the late 1990s. He’s a big guy with a distinctive face and I’ve enjoyed most of his performances. This week, after not having seen him in films for several years because he was working regularly on on several television series, he turns up in two movies that I saw back to back. In “Abigail” he is the muscle on the team of kidnappers, and in “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes”, he performs and voices the King,  Proximo. It’s strange sometimes how little things line up and create interesting coincidences. He’s actually very good in this film trying to be a sympathetic monster of a human when faced with a real life monster it’s even more evil than he is.

It’s true that in most survival stories, the participants are going to be faced with choices that they have to make which involve moral dilemmas. It’s also true that we can probably pick out some of the characters who will not have any moral qualms about stabbing their fellow survivors in the back in order to be the ones who are still standing at the end of the story. We got a couple of those in this film, Complicated by some storytelling that is a little shaky. The resolutions come however they’re kind of satisfying.

Don’t be too panicked, the people who deserve to go will. Some people who don’t deserve to die will. And logic will go out the window pretty quickly, actually just as fast as the windows are shut to close people into the house. Then all bets are off and you should just enjoy the bloody Mayhem.

The Mummy (1999) Revisit

The 1999 version of The Mummy is mostly critic proof because it is full of the kinds of things that a summer movie needs, with a nostalgic feel, that even people who never experienced movies of this type will recognize. It’s full of the kinds of things that I love in an old style Adventure. There are horrible booby traps, secret passages, and rooms and tunnels that have to be explored by Torchlight. I’m not sure that there’s anything more satisfying, then sitting in the dark theater watching adventurers try to Traverse dangerous passages in the dark aided only by a flame at the end of a stick. Who knows how such Flames managed to keep burning for as long as they do, it doesn’t matter because we are enchanted by the idea and ready to take the journey with them.

I first saw this film in the theaters when it originally opened, and I took my kids and we had an adventure on a Saturday afternoon, it was exactly what a family would want for a summer day. A few years ago “The Mummy” was chosen as movie of the month on the Lambcast, and I revisited it then, as a way of getting ready for our discussion. Like a character in this film, I had to go in search of some treasure, the recording of the original Lambcast for this movie of the month. This was one of the recordings that I had deleted when I took over the podcast as host and I was trying to make room on our hosting site, by deleting files. I finally gave up on that and just started paying for the site so that I can have unlimited storage. Unfortunately by then several years of old episodes, had been lost. I say lost but not completely. The former host of the Lamb does have a treasure trove of archived podcast episodes on a hard drive that he’s still owns. I contacted him, he went searching, and now I have restored the podcast to its original link. I feel a little bit like the lead character in this movie.

Rick O’Connell as played by Brendan Fraser, is a dashing ne’er-do-well  who is basically the Han Solo of this adventure. He went on to do the character two more times in this series of films, and this helped make him a legitimate action star until injuries and other Hollywood insider crap took him out of the movies for several years. He recently won an Academy Award in a comeback film “The Whale”, and of course he’s put on quite a bit of weight and age but he still has a personality that is quite appealing on screen when given a chance. These films gave him the best chance to convey that kind of personality. Rachel Weisz, has also gone on to win an Academy Award since performing in this movie, and she is the Plucky Damsel in Distress, who is not a helpless woman but rather one slightly over her depths, but with enough intelligence and gumption to be a legitimate partner in the Treasure Hunt that these people are engaging in. Most people will remember the film as having taken place largely in the Subterranean temples of the lost city where the Mummy is located. There are however large sections of the movie, that take place in Cairo, and there’s a segment where a group of treasure Hunters, is on a boat headed down the Nile and some of the adventure takes place on board.

The Mummy himself is played by Arnold Vaslovo, who had played Darkman in the two sequels to the original Sam Rami film. Of course half the time, The Mummy is a CGI creation, and the 1990s version of CGI would have been impressive at the time but now looks a little worse for wear. It’s not bad but it does sometimes take you out of the film. I don’t have a problem with casting outside of a racial identity, but I suspect that having Kevin J O’Connor, a white American, playing an Egyptian with dark face would not pass mustard these days. It is however his performance that adds much of the humor and satiric charm to the movie. When his resolution comes up we are both disappointed and satisfied that his end arrived as it did.

From my point of view maybe the best thing about the film is the heroic score by composer Jerry Goldsmith. I’ve said it on numerous occasions on this site, that Goldsmith is my favorite film composer, and his work here is excellent as usual. With a rousing heroic theme, and appropriate cultural motifs, the soundtrack for this film is something that you could probably listen to on its own, and enjoy with a great deal of pleasure as you remember the film that you saw.

I haven’t yet listened to the whole Lambcast episode, but I have included it here, and I doubt that my opinion of the film has changed very much. It may not be a great artistic achievement, but it’s one of those fun adventure films that you see as a kid, which make an impression on you and convince you that swashbuckling films are where you should be spending your time. I know my kids grew up loving movies like this, which were vague echoes of Indiana Jones, but sometimes you just take what you can get.