Hell of a Summer (2025)

We got a chance to see this fun little horror film, a little early, as it was being presented in a promotional screening that included streaming Q&A from two of the Stars who also happen to be the writers and directors of the film. Finn Wolfhard and Billy Bryk, are our young actors who have come up with a script and somehow got the green light to make the movie. Wolfhard would be familiar to most of you as Mike from “Stranger Things”. The youngsters have been watching their ’80s horror movies and they have a pretty good grasp of the tropes that they want to take advantage of in their little concoction.

The movie is set at a summer camp, had a remote location, with the camp counselors arriving early in preparation for this season’s Camp session. One of the counselors is returning for the 6th time as a counselor, at the age of 24 is a little old be working this as a summer job, but it appears to be his dream, and he loves what he’s doing. The character is Jason, as if that is not a tribute to earlier horror films, and he is a nebbish but sincere guy who just wants to have the best summer ever. The younger counselors, come from a slightly different generation, and they have a hard time understanding Jason and his enthusiasm for outdoor activities.

The film is a comedy, but it takes the murders fairly seriously. The only time one of the deaths has a cartoon quality to it is in the opening scene, when a guitar is used as a grizzly marker for murder. Other than that tuneful moment, the deaths themselves, even as they pile up, are treated as real murders and not as the punchline to an elaborate joke where the death of a teenager is supposed to be laughed at. So the film is very much in keeping with the tone of the early Friday the 13th or Halloween movies.

Most of the humor occurs when the counselors panic about how to respond to all of the death, and they false the accused Jason of being the murderer. They’re attempted solution to the problem offers lots of opportunities for us to laugh at the callousness and the cluelessness of this new generation of campers. The two step brothers, who also happen to be the writers and directors of the film, also offer us a lot of humorous moments as they bicker like siblings might, over little things such as who gets to sit in the front seat of the car. They did a pretty good job letting us know something about the characters in the film, so that we care a bit about the outcome. There are one or two small Clues as to who is responsible for the killings, those come early on and if you are not paying attention it would be easy to miss them and have to wait for the reveal when it shows up. I’m perfectly willing to say that I miss them the first time around, but I appreciate it that the screenwriters made an effort to give us a chance to honestly solve the puzzle before they do.

In addition to the humor, the main draw of the film will be the Practical effects that are used to present the deaths. There is solid work done by the makeup team, but they don’t go overboard and try to make things so gross that we are reacting to just the physical image more than the concept of what’s been done to these poor kids. The character of Jason is also a rich source of humor in the film, since he wants to be at the camp at all, and eventually wants to take on the role of hero, in spite of being accused by and tied up by the other counselors.

Maybe it takes a while to get things started after we had those initial kills, but I just thought that that was good storytelling. I have no objection to a slow burn as long as it pays off, and I think hell of a summer paid off pretty well. It’s a solid first part of the Apple for the two aspiring filmmakers, and it should satisfy people who have a love for horror movies rooted in the 1980s.

My Bloody Valentine (1981) Revisit

How some films become cult classics is beyond me. It’s obvious that a film like “Rocky Horror Picture Show” was picked up by fans because of the obvious opportunities to participate in the fun. I never understood why “The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension” wasn’t a hit in the first place, but it makes perfect sense that it is revered now because it’s concept and execution are finally recognized. There however is little reason to believe that “My Bloody Valentine” from 1981 will ever be seen as a hidden gem. The remake from a dozen years ago was far superior in every way. How does that happen?

This Canadian film as little going for it, except the title. The production values on the movie are not great, the script is at times preposterous, and frankly the acting is atrocious. I know they were working on a small budget, and the actors are relatively inexperienced, but it never seems like they got a second take to fix things in their original line deliveries. Sometimes the presentation is so wooden you think the movie is a parody of horror slashers. It’s not a parody, it’s simply not a very good. Maybe the final song and the demented fade out account for whatever credence the film has.

This criticism should be seen as a reason not to see the film. I still enjoyed being in the theaters the other night, sort of experiencing a nostalgic rush of ’80s Horror. As long as you don’t mind a horror movie that is not particularly frightening, and is not very titillating, then you can enjoy this film. The main thing that it has going for it is that preposterous concept. A crazed miner, rescued from a cave in after surviving by cannibalizing other coworkers while awaiting rescue, became a spree killer. Now 20 years later, it seems that the spree killer has returned, provoked by the Valentine’s Day celebrations which ignored the lead up to the disaster two decades earlier. The pickaxe that is used to kill some of the victims is a good concept but it’s not visualized in a very interesting way. Which is why the movie fails to satisfy fans of gore. The kills are relatively tame, and most of them lack of jump scare to pull them off. 

I can see what this movie wants to be, and I can also see where it misses the mark on a regular basis. The 2009 3D version at least had the good sense to include an eyeball impaled on the end of the pickaxe, in a 3-d effect. That’s a movie that knows what it’s supposed to be doing. So for nostalgia and for setting up the concept, “My Bloody Valentine” is adequate, the problem is it never gets to be insane until the last moment when the crazed killer is finally revealed and runs off screaming curses and a vow to kill again. That’s sort of the  delivery which could have made this a lot more entertaining.

Companion (2025)

[The above trailer is the teaser that does not reveal too much. Avoid the second trailer entirely]

I’ve been looking forward to this film for a couple of months now, based on an early trailer which suggested it was a horror film involving a toxic relationship. I didn’t want to know too much about it, and that first trailer made me anticipate the film without giving anything away. Sadly, the night before we were supposed to see this movie we went to another film and there was a new trailer for “Companion”, and it gave away a major plot point. I am a little pissed. Overall I enjoyed this film very much but I know I would have enjoyed it much more if that twist had not been revealed to me less than 24 hours before I first saw the movie.

“Companion”, is in fact a type of horror film but it is also a social commentary, a science fiction story, and a dark comedy. Writing about this without giving away the plot twists is going to be complicated. I want people to go into this movie knowing less than I did so they’ll enjoy it more than I did. Let me just say, that there is indeed a toxic relationship in this film, but it is quite a bit different than any that you’ve seen in other movies. I’m not even going to mention some of the films I would compare it to because that would spoil some of the surprise. The plot takes us in several different directions, and those shifts in direction are result of actions that happen in the film that feel completely earned.

Self Generated Poster because the official poster
 gives away too much as well

The young actress who appears in this film, Sophie Thatcher, was also in the movie “Heretic” which I saw near the end of last year. She has a quality to her voice and mannerisms that come across as sincere and innocent, while at the same time being able to convey a steely resolve. I thought she was excellent in both films. Her co-star in this film is Jack Quaid, who I know mostly from the Prime video series “The Boys”. He also has an innocent quality, and a geeky charm, that is used quite deceptively in this story. Some of the turns that take place are surprising enough, but they are more surprising in the way that our characters have been set up.  

This is something like a cabin in the woods scenario, where a group of friends is spending the weekend in an isolated location and bad things start to happen. Unlike a horror film though, the bad things happen because of deliberate choices made by our characters. Technology also plays a role in the story, and I was on edge from the very beginning when our main couple is riding in a car is completely autonomous. I see those types of vehicles here in Downtown Austin whenever I’m going to the Paramount Theater, and I actually saw one picking up a couple at Lawry’s when I was in LA at Christmas time. It’s going to be a long time before I am ever comfortable enough to step into a vehicle that is being driven by a computer rather than a human being. My reticence about embracing technology that can do these kinds of things is part of the reason that I’m willing to call this a horror film.

This will probably be the final film I see in January, and interestingly enough everyone I’ve posted on this year I have seen in a single week. It’s still early, but I’m happy to say “Companion” has been my favorite film of January. Go see it, but close your eyes and plug your ears if the trailer comes on at another film before you do. 

Den of Thieves Pantera (2025)

It was 2018 when the original film opened early in the year and gave us a testosterone fueled, action-packed, two hours20  minute Excursion into a brutal crime group and the equally brutal cops that were after them. Gerard Butler has made a career in the last 20 years playing flinty, grizzly, misanthropes in various careers. In this film his Lieutenant in a Major Crimes unit of the LA Sheriff’s Department he is out of his jurisdiction when he goes to Europe in pursuit of a lead for the criminal that got away at the end of the last film.

Maybe it would have helped if I had gone back and watched the original film again, so I can make a little more sense out of the opening scenes in this movie. Butler’s character, known as Big Nick, is following a lead in the robbery of the Federal Reserve, which the Federal Reserve denies even happened. I was confused about what this was all about, but I didn’t worry too much about it since this film is really not something to take seriously but rather to be digested as a puzzle exercise. O’Shea Jackson plays the bartender who it turned out, was the mastermind in the previous crime. He returns as the planner for a diamond heist in Amsterdam. that has drawn the attention of Big Nick. So, there is a connection between the two films, and Nick’s primary goal seems to be to make sure that the last time when he was one upped, that he gets even.

Unlike the previous film, Pantera is not filled with action sequences and shootouts. Those scenes occur primarily at the end of the film. Most of the time we are watching the machinations of three different groups who are going to come into conflict with each other over a new robbery. The collection of criminals who are planning the new diamond heist, the law enforcement personnel, who may or may not be aware of what is going on, and a third party of mafiosi’s who have been accidentally robbed by the first group, and now want their goods back. It is the confluence of the individuals in the in these groups that makes up the vast majority of the picture. There is intrigue, and the threat of violence, not a whole lot of action.

While the previous film was also a heist movie, most of it centered around the pissing contest between Big Nick and his adversary. I don’t remember the heist as being particularly clever. In this film on the other hand, The heist is shown in meticulous detail, we get some idea of the planning that is involved, but as usual some things are left out so that we can discover them while watching the actual crime take place. When it comes to the robbery, for a change I appreciate the fact that the security personnel were not doofuses that the crime gang was taking advantage of. They were professionals that the criminals had to work around. Big Nick has inserted himself into the crime group giving the impression that he is fed up with being on the right side of the law and is looking to make some money. During the course of the film we get several red herrings that lead us to believe either he is still working with the cops, or he is deceiving them in order to work with the criminals. Like I said this movie is full of betrayals and complex relationships.

The high point of the film is in fact the heist, which is as it should be. It has a good deal of suspense, and a couple of humorous moments, as we see that robbers have made good plans but also have improvised so that they can deal with the competence of the security people. As usual as part of the events that take place during the robbery, there are complications that make the plans have to be changed. In a movie of course the getaway car, the communications, and the equipment, all get a chance to play a part. There is a high-speed chase that occurs after the crime, but it is basically another set of criminals, who are trying to hijack the original heist. How it all gets resolved is one of those things that only happens in the movies, but we appreciate the plot development because it is paying off on something that was set up earlier.

You don’t need to have seen the previous film to appreciate what’s going on here, but I suspect that the movie will not appeal to anybody who hasn’t already seen that first movie. If you like Gerard Butler in gruff mode then you should be satisfied with this film. O’Shea Jackson does have a nice screen presence, but it seems odd that he and at least two of the other co-conspirators seem to be a little on the hefty side. When the plot is being executed, it’s hard to believe that a couple of these guys can do some of the physical things that are required of them.

If you like this movie, then you can look forward to the next installment which is set up by a plot twist that occurs in the last 5 minutes of the film. There are some character points that help make it make sense, but in the real world of course it would never happen. This however is a movie, and we want to enjoy the creativity of the screenwriter who is finding interesting ways to manipulate these characters. The film is a slow burn with almost an hour and a half before the major crime takes place. If you’re looking for an action film with energetic sequences every 5 minutes that display incredible stunt work or EFX then you are probably in the wrong movie. This plays like one of those 1970s crime films where you get a lot of atmosphere, by-play between the characters, and complications set up during the lead into the crime. You want the payoff to all of those things to be satisfying, and as far as I was concerned in “Den of Thieves Pantera” they were.

The Best Christmas Pageant Ever (2024)

I had never heard of this film or seen a trailer for it until I saw a report that mentioned it was doing surprisingly well at the box office. On Social Media, there were a couple of posts when I checked that said it was a pretty solid outing. The thing that convinced me to go however, was the realization that it starred Judy Greer. She has never been the main feature in a film I have seen, but she has always been a presence that elevated whatever I was looking at. I actually know her voice work best because she has been a character on my favorite animated tv show for a decade. She is one of those second tier performers who do their job, and make a project better, but usually don’t get the credit for doing so. It is the character actors dilemma. 

She however can get complete credit for this movie, which feels like it might be out of a lot of people’s comfort zone, because of religious themes, but it is really just about good values and not a Sunday school lesson. She plays Grace, a stay at home Mom from the seventies, who is raising a couple of good kids, but she is not on the inside of the good society in the small town that she lives in. She does the best she can but feels judged by snooty other members of the community. It is only when an accident takes out the grand dame of the church Christmas festivities, that Grace takes a chance and steps up to direct the local Christmas Pageant. Greer has a lovely, face but she is not striking. Her voice is distinctive but not particularly authoritative.  Having played mothers in both the MCU and Jurassic World films, she is no stranger to a part like this, but those films never gave her the chance to be at the center of activities.

So the story is one of redemption, which is typical for a holiday film. Grace wants to redeem herself as a competent member of the congregation and community, but she is not the only one who needs to be redeemed. Her kids, and in fact the whole small town, are terrorized by an unruly family of children, the Herdman clan is notorious. There are six kids and they all are incorrigible, but are they unredeemable? The town ladies are also so snobbish and self centered , that they need to be given a chance at redemption as well. Even Grace’s kids, have some faults that maybe being confronted with a major problem could help them address. 

The set up of the conundrum is well executed in the first section of the film. There are plenty of comic moments as we see the frustrations of Grace’s children in dealing with the Herdmans. The six Herdmen kids are given small moments to shine in their horribleness, and the oldest of the clan,  Imogene, seems to be a hard case, and in control of every situation when confronted by an adult. The struggle between Grace and Imogene is the lynchpin of the movie, as a desperate and well meaning Mom, tries to find a way to be a good neighbor, and a competent adult in the face of chaos. 

Abundant humor is found in the story, and surprisingly, the comedic voice of Judy Greer is less responsible for the laughs than the heartfelt sentiment of the movie. The film being set in an earlier time and a small place in the world, makes the Christmas elements feel more connected to the events and a lot more intimate. Greer carries scenes without overshadowing the performances of the kids. Beatrice Schneider as Imogene and Molly Belle Wright as Beth, Grace’s daughter, are the real leads of the film. Greer’s performance stakes the kids story into something more tangible than the usual kids film. Schneider is impressive in conveying the hardscrabble but emotionally vulnerable Imogene, and Wright has just the degree of childhood innocence to pull off the realization that she needs to for the whole moral of the story to work.

Set at Christmas and steeped in church going traditions and the Christmas story, you might expect that a film like this from a faith based production group would be about proselytizing. The moral sentiments are accessible to anyone and do not require that you have a spiritual reawakening to appreciate them. “The Best Christmas Pageant Ever” reminds me of the nostalgia of “A Christmas Story” but it adds a little moral message and a broader platform to the process. I won’t say it is likely to be played for 24 hours straight on TV at future Christmas Seasons, but I can say it will be viewed on a regular basis at Christmas time in this house. 

Paramount Summer Classic Film Series-Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Let’s get this straight off the bat “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” is a terrific film, hugely entertaining, written in a style that was fresh and well researched. There is nothing about this film that is problematic. Which makes it so much easier for me to spend this post focusing on just a single element of the film, instead of finding a new way to evaluate a movie that people already love. So this post will be dedicated to the consistent crime that is committed by one of the world’s greatest character actors, he not only steals the scenes he often steals the movie, Strother Martin.

It should be tough for an actor like this to make a big impact on a movie that is over 2 hours long and in which he appears for only about 10 minutes. However, when William Goldman is the screenwriter and the actor is the late Strother Martin, it’s easier than a pickpocket lifting a wallet from an inattentive subway rider. Martin plays Percy Garris, the mine operator who hires Butch and Sundance to be payroll guards while they are down in Bolivia. This sequence takes place more than 80% of the way into the film, but it has the consistent humor, and dramatic heft that the film has sustained up to this point, and the gets elevated by the Percy Garris character. .

Percy Garris is diminutive fellow with an ill-fitting vest. a military style hat and a habit of burying his hands in his pockets when he’s not quite sure what to do with them. However, when he is sure what to do with them, Strother Martin uses them like instruments to pull us into the story. When trying to test Sundance to see if he really can shoot accurately, he first asks to see the firearm that Sundance wears on his hip. Garris handles it efficiently, but without the flourish of a gunfighter or someone who knows how to brandish a weapon effectively. He takes the gun admires it and hands it back to Sundance, but puts his hands up in the air and pushes down when Sundance tries to put the gun back in his holster. All Garris wants to see is whether or not he can hit a target. He then reaches into his own pocket, pulls out what looks to be a small package, maybe of chewing tobacco, and tosses it about 20 ft away. Nothing flashy is being done here, but Martin actually dominates the scene when he is playing against Robert Redford and Paul Newman. The character constantly spits, and frequently without the force necessary to hit a target himself. When he does however hit whatever target on the ground he is eyeing,  Garris announces “bingo”. We never see exactly what it is he hit, we just know the satisfaction that he gets from saying the word.

When Redford misses, Martin gives us a bemused look, when Sundance wants to draw on the target down on the ground, but he also gives a look of amazement as Sundance moves quickly and hits the target twice. Garris announces immediately “you start tomorrow”. Martin’s timing on all the comedic lines in the scene is perfection

As they begin their Journey down the mountain, Garris on a mule and Butch and Sundance behind on their horses, Garris sings a song full of innuendo, and old-fashioned cadences. He leans back in his saddle, comfortable and confident because he knows no one is going to rob them going down the mountain. Which is why he thinks of Butch and Sundance is being morons when they are being overly watchful on the trip to the bank. As he puts it, “I’ve got morons on my team”. This is his key line in the movie. He is an old hand in Bolivia and feels superior to the two rookies he is hired to prevent a robbery. Of course later on, we do discover that he is capable of making a mistake. That mistake comes immediately after he explains to the two, that he’s not crazy, he’s just colorful.

This is a 55-year-old film so it’s probably too late to worry about spoilers, but Percy Garris does not make it to the end of the movie. He is the one character who dies, before the end of the film, that we care anything for. He’s hired our anti-heroes, he’s passed on some wisdom, and he’s engaged in some jocular conversation with the two outlaws he has hired to guard against robbery. This makes it a poignant moment when he is killed so suddenly, without much of an exit line. The character is well written, but it is the delivery of those lines, and the unique voice of Strother Martin that makes these scenes work. Martin worked with Paul Newman a half dozen times or more, this was his only collaboration with Robert Redford. He almost certainly would have been in “The Sting”, had he not been shooting another picture. That’s because he also worked with director George Roy Hill multiple times. Having an acting ensemble is one of the things that made these movies from 50 years ago so much more memorable.

Oh yea, he is fourth billed, right after the three stars.

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. 

Parmount Summer Classic Film Series-Lady Sings the Blues

So it has only taken me fifty-two years to catch up with this movie, a film that was very popular in it’s release during my favorite decade of movies. So why have I missed it for so long? I can’t exactly say, although I suspect I was hesitant because of the downbeat drug elements in the story. Billie Holiday died decades before Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin and Jim Morrison, but she died from the same disease, out of control drug use. As I was watching the film, I saw that the producers did their best to create an upbeat ending with a redemptive arc, that was not really the way the story ends. In a way, that should have made it more appealing to me as a film, because it focuses on entertaining us, but I still think it is a bit of a cheat.

Nevertheless, “Lady Sings the Blues” is an entertaining biopic that tries to capture the talent of it’s subject, while also describing the hard luck existence that describes her life. The biggest plusses the film has going for it are the musical sequences and the star turns by the two leads. I am not an aficionado of Billie Holiday, and I have seen in some places that Diana Ross’s interpretations of her songbook are not as impressive, but on their own, they are very effective and I think anyone listening would enjoy her song stylings. Diana Ross also has great star quality, which I don’t think was captured in any other screen performance. Of course she only made three films, and was woefully miscast in “The Wiz”. She was a better fit for the fashion show that masqueraded as a movie “Mahogany”, although that film is not good at all (See my comment on 1000 Nights at the Movies with Dee).

Her acting in this film is stellar, and she maneuvered through a range of ages convincingly, as well as showing us the dark side of addiction. The scene in the bathroom where she threatens Billy Dee Williams with a razor over her drug kit is chilling and sad. The motionless lump that she becomes in the aftermath may seem like an easy shot, but there is physicality to it that requires the actor to commit and boy did she. Her cluelessly high performance while Richard Pryor is being beaten is another spot where her acting talent gets a moment to shine.  Billy Dee Williams as her co-star husband gets credit for spilling his charisma all over the screen. His part is underwritten and I know it is a compendium of characters that his role encompasses, but the script gives him little to do and it is in fact antithetical at the climax of the film. Still, it doesn’t matter much when that face appears on the screen and the smile crosses it. That will fill in for a lot of unexplained back story.

There are of course historical markers in the film that are important, but they really come across as cliched, although I think that in 1972, they would have played more dramatically. The incident that provokes the song “Strange Fruit”, in particular, feels like it is dramatically staged rather than a natural incident. The screenwriters and director Sidney Furie, try to make it work for the movie, but it feels so staged that it undercuts the moment.   Holliday’s defiance of a Klan March while she is on the bus with the band is a good moment for Ross to show off in, but another moment that feels dramatically staged. 

Overall, I quite liked the film and I was impressed with Miss Ross as an actress. She certainly deserved the accolades that she received for that performance. I am not sure, but the soundtrack album may be in my collection in the garage. If it is, it was something that my wife brought to the marriage, because I know i did not buy the record. When I look, if it’s not there, I will correct that because the music in the film worked for the movie. This was the third musical in a row that we saw at the Paramount. July is heavy with their theme of “Pop (corn) Idols”. They are not all musicals, but I’m happy these were.  

Paramount Summer Classic Film Series- A Clockwork Orange

This has always been the controversial film, but especially at our house. My late wife rarely disliked movies but when she did she did so with a passion and “A Clockwork Orange” is one of the films that she loathed. The reason that makes it controversial at our house is that it’s a film that I have loved since I first saw it in the mid-70s. Despite our difference of opinion on the movie I continued to watch it every few years. And last night’s screening gave me a little bit more insight into why my dearly departed love disliked the film so much.

Not only is the film misanthropic it is highly misogynistic and rarely offers any sort of redemption for those attitudes. Alex DeLarge, the self-described hero and narrator of the film, is a loathsome violent criminal, who has disdain for any conventional rules, although he is capable of putting on a facade of politeness when it suits him. There are three distinct scenes where women are helpless as they’re being assaulted by multiple criminals in the story. None of these woman are really given much of a chance to be a fully realized character. Although the defiance of the cat lady who is the final victim of Alex, is at least an attempt to give a female character a personality in the story.

The movie is a dystopian view of a not too distant future, and although the book was written in 1962, and the movie came out in 1971, 2024 does not feel as if it is too far in front of a world very similar to the one depicted in this story. The plot goes a long way toward trying to criticize the nearly fascist political party in charge of Britain and its criminal justice system. And although Alex suffers as a result of the treatment that he receives, it’s awfully hard not to sympathize with the victim that turns the tables on him at the end of the film. The whole tone of the movie is one of cynicism directed at irredeemable youth, intransigent bureaucracy, and conniving political creatures.

As much as she disliked the film, my wife would have agreed with me about Malcolm McDowell the star of the movie. He is perfect in this movie. Director Stanley Kubrick notoriously a perfectionist, must have worked McDowell to near exhaustion to get some of the scenes that resonate so well especially in the final sections of the film. When the Minister of Justice starts hand feeding Alex in his hospital bed, he is mocked subliminally by the smacking noise that Alex makes with his mouth each time he’s ready for another bite of food. The political obtuseness of the minister is one of the points of the film. There is a theme in the movie that also concerns free will, but that feels like it is only there is as justification for making us feel guilty about the treatment that Alex receives.

Alex’s parole officer, is not a particularly pleasant person, but he seems to have one of the most accurate views of Alex of anyone in the film. The corrections officer at the prison, is seen as a totalitarian tool, but he also has a keen understanding of Alex, although one that is so single-minded that it seems unreasonable. And that’s in spite of what we know about Alex and his character. This may be one of the faults that critics of the film justifiably point to because it makes Alex a victim when what he really is, is a monster. The feckless parents and the manipulative Justice minister are reflective of the powerless society that has allowed this sort of crime spree to exist. Kubrick, and apparently Anthony Burgess the author of the book, seem to be trying to have it both ways, abhorring the aberrant behavior of the young thugs, but also averting our eyes in horror at the brainwashing of those same thugs to condition them to be more social creatures.

The movie has the added bonus of a synthesizer heavy score that frequently manipulates classical music into its themes. There’s nothing wrong with a little Beethoven to go along with your ultraviolence.