Tag Archives: entertainment

More of a B Feature

Posted on January 16, 2013 by mohawkvalleygirl

I wanted to make sure I watched a movie this weekend, so I would have something to write about one day this week. I don’t know that I picked a cheesy one, though. I would say more of a B feature. But it featured an intrepid girl reporter, so I thought it would suit my purposes: Fly Away, Baby (1937).

The description in the digital cable guide, on the strength of which I DVR’d it from TCM, said something about newswoman Torchy Blane proving to her policeman boyfriend that she could so solve a murder. The words “intrepid girl reporter” were not actually used, but I can read between the lines. With a name like Torchy, I figured she’d be wise-cracking as well. Right on both counts.

In pre-movie commentary, Ben Mankiewicz tell us this is the second of nine Torchy Blane movies. I believe TCM was going to or did show more of them, but this is the only one I caught. So, apologies to any Torchy Blane fans out there who might have been hoping for multiple posts.

The movie starts right out with the murder. The police are not letting anybody in, especially reporters. The door is being guarded by a hapless beat cop whose name I don’t remember, largely because it is one of those names that when you hear it you have no idea how it’s spelled. I could have made a note in the TV Journal. He shows up again later on, in a part I thought was going to be a whole lot more important, but I suppose I should not ask for miracles in a B picture.

Back at the city desk (I don’t remember the names of the papers; you know how I am), the editor is looking for the one reporter who can surely get in — Torchy Blane. So right away this movie is different from other intrepid girl reporter tales: the editor likes her and considers her a good reporter. Perhaps he learned so in the first installment, which makes this a worthy sequel in my book. So many sequels want to act like the first one never happened and we have to solve a bunch of stupid problems all over again. But that’s a whole other blog post.

Where is Torchy? Off to get a marriage license. Oh no! We all know married ladies don’t have jobs (this was the last century, after all). But no fears. Torchy’s boyfriend stood her up because of the murder (he’s a cop, remember?). So Torchy makes it to the murder after all and, true to her editor’s expectations, she manages to get in.

Another reporter also manages to get in. He’s a spoiled brat whose daddy got him a job on a rival newspaper. And he’s friends with the dead man, a jeweler. Or is he? It is brought up several times that Rich Boy is a heel, but as Cop Boyfriend points out, that does not make him a murderer. Of course it’s up to Torchy Blane to find out.

A reporter from a third paper also plays a role. He’s a fun guy with a rich wife and a way with words. He and Rich Boy are about to have a race around the world.

“I intend to show him the backs of two heels,” Fun Guy tells reporters. “Counting him, that will make three.” See, everybody says this kid is a heel.

As you may have expected, Torchy gets in on the race, in hopes of catching Rich Boy with the evidence.

Mankiewicz says this part was inspired by an air race in which Dorothy Kilgallen, a real life intrepid female reporter, took part. I may have to look up some Kilgallen biographies and read more about this, because quite frankly, I don’t get it. The reporters are not flying the planes themselves. They all get on the same plane. Then stay in the same hotel. They end up on the same zeppelin for the dramatic climax. Where’s the race?

This is only one of several “Waaait a minute” plot points. There are also a couple of clues that Torchy seems to find way too easily. What self-respecting murderer just leaves clues lying around in such a careless fashion? (I know, all of them.) But “Waait a minute” plot points are a movie staple, be the movie A, B or C for cheesy. The question is, does the movie carry us along in an entertaining manner so that we don’t say “Waaait a minute” till much later (ideally waking up in the middle of the night to ponder the points, from a movie maker’s point of view)?

The answer is this one pretty much does. The supporting characters are fun (not just Fun Guy), and Torchy Blane is an endearing heroine. She cracks wise, she doesn’t make egregiously stupid mistakes, and she’s always hungry. What’s not to like? I may try to catch further entries in the series.

Leave a comment

Posted in humor, movies and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Bela and the Baboon

Posted on January 4, 2013 by mohawkvalleygirl

I seem to remember mentioning a cheesy horror flick involving Bela Lugosi and a baboon. Having no other topic at hand, I thought I’d try to write about it: Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932).

Full disclosure: I did not watch the whole movie. I didn’t even pay a whole lot of attention to the parts I did watch. For a horror movie based on an Edgar Allen Poe story, starring Bela Lugosi and featuring a killer ape, I found it to be a pretty dull movie.

According to the Guide on digital cable, the movie concerns Lugosi murdering women for his experiments with apes. They had me at Bela Lugosi, but mad scientist and murders (after all, they go together) sounded good too.

The picture opens during Carnival in Paris. Many revelers are having a wonderful time, including a beautiful girl, a handsome man and his not so handsome friend. They go into a side show where they meet Lugosi and the killer ape, although of course they don’t know it’s a killer at the time.

“It’s only a baboon,” comforts Handsome Man when Beautiful Girl is frightened. I don’t know if it was a baboon, a gorilla or an overgrown chimpanzee. I can’t even be sure whether it was an authentic animal or a guy in a suit. These days I suppose they would have faked something up with CGI, quite possibly having first indulged in a little research. I made him a baboon in the headline for alliterative purposes, but you probably guessed that.

I’d like to just say a word about Bela’s hair (I know it’s more proper to refer to him by his last name, but I just feel I want to call him Bela). It’s not the elegant, slicked back Dracula look we are used to. It’s wild, shaggy and almost curly. Like he used volumizing mousse instead of maximum hold gel, although I have no idea what hair products were available at the time this movie was made (I did not indulge in any research while writing this post. Sorry). As a theatre person myself, I have no problem with an actor mixing it up a little, changing appearance to serve the character. It was just a little disconcerting is all. He still has the scariest eyes in show business.

Do I really need to tell anybody that he meets Beautiful Girl and is immediately taken with her? When she gets too close to the cage and the baboon snatches her bonnet, Bela smoothly promises to send her a new one, what’s you address, my dear? Handsome Man blocks that gambit, but not to worry. Bela has at least one henchman who can follow Beautiful Girl home. Just in case anybody was worried that the mad scientist would not get her into his evil clutches eventually.

Apparently he has already had other women in his evil clutches. We only see him actually abduct one, but when the authorities find her dead body (did I need to include a spoiler alert that somebody dies in a movie with “Murders” in the title?), we learn that she is not the first. Soon Handsome Man is investigating the murders, something to do with something in their blood, while letting his Not So Handsome Roommate eat all the lunch.

I stopped paying attention about the time Beautiful Girl gets the new bonnet from Bela and doesn’t worry too much about how he found her, because it’s such a fetching piece of headgear. So I don’t really know how she gets into his evil clutches or even what his evil plan is (although I know it has something to do with blood). Naturally there is a dramatic climax involving the baboon getting loose and climbing all over the city, but like I said, not really watching by that time. I may yet go back and watch it again, paying more attention this time. Which may or may not be worth another blog post.

I never read the story the movie is based on. The next time I go to the library I’ll look for it. Not that I expect it to inform any subsequent viewings of the movie. Hollywood is famous for taking liberties with adaptations and never more so than when they attempt Poe. In their defense, Poe is a very literary writer. Perhaps I should watch a series of movies based on Poe stories, read the stories and write a doctoral thesis (I bet you thought I was going to say blog post). Do you suppose I could find a university that would give me a degree for that?

Leave a comment

Posted in horror, humor, movies and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Cheesy Christmas

Posted on January 1, 2013 by mohawkvalleygirl

I wrote in a post earlier this month how I like to write about cheesy movies and was afraid people would hate on me if I wrote that way about Christmas movies. I tried to solve the problem with a cheesy Christmas movie: Mystery Science Theatre 3000: Santa Claus Conquers the Martians.

I first heard of Santa Claus Conquers the Martians many long years ago in high school. I was writing a piece for Speech Club making fun of Milton’s “Paradise Lost” (I hated that poem), and my speech coach suggested I have one character ask another who claimed to be a great Actor (pronounced Ac-tore) if he wasn’t in Santa Claus Conquers the Martians.

In answer to the question I feel sure at least one of you just asked, yes, in fact, I could have been more of a geek. If I had studied more I would have been a great deal more geeky. I will, however, admit to a certain misfit quality, that I retain to this day.

But I digress.

I finally got to watch the silly movie when TCM showed it in, I believe, 2001. We videotaped it on our VCR, just to put it in historical context. We were charmed.

Is it cheesy, you ask. It’s like a Velveeta factory exploded onscreen! The martians’ make-up is in unevenly applied. Their killer robot looks like a homemade Halloween costume. The North Pole looks like a set from Lost In Space. When a polar bear chases the two earthling kids, you can see where the head piece is separate from the rest of the guy’s costume!

In short, this movie was begging for the robot head treatment.

It was actually just a few years ago that Steven discovered the MST3K version of the flick. We used to watch MST3K every Saturday on the SciFi Channel. However, these were in the later seasons, when Mike Nelson had replaced Joel on the space ship. They never showed the Santa Claus movie, and Steven always lamented that there was no Christmas episode of MST3K.

Imagine our delight to discover that there was so a Christmas episode and it featured a movie we already loved.

Well, now I’m getting all mushy and misty-eyed, thinking of my beloved MST3K, a truly delightful cheesy movie and, of course, Christmas. I warned you this might happen. Perhaps I should return to my DVR, where I have a fairly rancid movie involving Bela Lugosi and a baboon. I assure you, if I write about that one, no mush or mist will be involved. I hope you are all enjoying the latter part of your Christmas holidays.

2 Comments

Posted in humor, movies, personal and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

I Think I Like Cheesy Movies Better

Posted on December 17, 2012 by mohawkvalleygirl

When I saw Forbidden Planet listed on TCM, I got all excited.

“That’s a famous bad movie,” I told Steven. Turns out I was half right: it’s famous. I remembered that the movie was based on The Tempest by William Shakespeare (loosely, I believe) and that it is the movie that introduced Robbie the Robot.

I know Robbie the Robot from Lost in Space. I remember in one episode he played The Robotoid, who was apparently a better robot than The Robot, and The Robot got all jealous and sad. And I seem to remember Robbie being an evil robot as well, but that may have been the same episode. (Of course The Robot started out evil, but let’s not get all bogged down in Lost in Space reminisces.)

When Ben Mankiewicz gave his pre-movie commentary (which I love), he informed me that Forbidden Planet broke the mold of previous science fiction movies by having a budget and taking pains with the script, sets and acting. Who knew? Well, I’ve mentioned in the past it seems foolish to not watch a movie because I’m afraid it will be too good. I thought I’d give it a try.

I almost didn’t recognize Leslie Nielsen without his white hair and with his tongue not in his cheek. Ann Francis is the only girl both on the planet and in the movie, and Walter Pigeon plays her father. Those were the names I recognized in the cast.

I thought the plot of the movie was a little bit “Waaait a minute.” Leslie and ship have traveled two years through space to check on a group that set out to colonize some planet (I forget the name of the planet, and you know, nobody in the movie actually refers to it as “forbidden.” Just saying). Hello, 20 years? They didn’t let the Pilgrims go that long without checking on them, and proportionally travel and communications was a lot less sophisticated back then (I say “proportionally” because, you know, space vs oceans).

Then, after they find all is not well, although Walter Pigeon insists that it is, it’s going to take them like a month to cannibalize their ship to build a device to communicate with earth for further instructions. Excuse me, what? What were their original instructions and what did they expect to find? Didn’t they think they MIGHT need to call home? And how are they going to get back home once they’ve dismantled the ship to build this fancy telephone?

Perhaps I read too much into it. Or perhaps I was not paying enough attention, as you know is sometimes the case with me. I must observe, the movie got a little dull. It certainly moved slowly. The monster didn’t show up till like 45 minutes into it, and then it was just mysterious breathing. We don’t actually see the monster till much later and then we don’t exactly see it.

That, by the way, is my favorite special effect in the picture. The effects and the sets are pretty good for the time. A couple of the scenes look pretty definitely painted, but they’re lovely and nothing really looks fake.

The ending gets exciting. I don’t want to say a whole lot about how things develop and what happens, but it gets kind of heady and philosophical, while still remaining exciting. Not an easy trick to pull off.

On the whole, I would say Forbidden Planet is worth a watch if you’re interested in science fiction, movies and their history together. Next I’m going to read The Tempest, so I can do a compare/contrast on the plots. That might be good for another blog post.

1 Comment

Posted in commentary, humor, movies and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Actors Have Bills to Pay, Too

Posted on December 11, 2012 by mohawkvalleygirl

Spoiler Alert! I intend to pretty much recount the plot of the following movie. I will not give away the ending, however, because by that point I had almost entirely ceased paying attention.

I had DVR’d Dracula Rises from the Grave (1968) when I DRV’d the other Christopher Lee Dracula movie whose name escapes me. Saturday I watched it while Steven was at work. I would have waited and watched it with him, but Steven is pretty much All Christmas All The Time these days (with the occasional DVR’d Castle episode or true crime show thrown in).

In pre-movie commentary, Ben Mankiewicz says that Lee did not want to play the role a third time, but the studio talked him into it, probably with a fat check. It must have been, because they sure didn’t tempt him with a great script that offered acting challenges and Oscar talk. Well, I’m not judging. Actors have bills to pay, too.

The movie opens with a cheerful young man whistling as he rides his bike to the church, where he works. When he goes to ring the bell, blood is running down the rope. Eek! I like a movie that doesn’t waste any time. In a creepy shot, we see a slaughtered young lady hanging upside down inside the bell (cue jokes about her face ringing a bell).

The young man spends the rest of the movie saying, “Ah-uh-ah!” instead of actual lines, apparently shocked into imbecility, because he seemed pretty normal before. These movies love to have a character that can only say, “Ah-uh-ah!” I’m sure it makes it easier to write dialogue.

As the movie progresses, the lady in the bell takes on a real “Waaait a minute” quality, because Dracula actually has not yet risen from the grave at this point. It’s never explained. I guess it’s just a set piece to start us off creepy and get the kid out of having to learn any lines.

There’s this fairly wimpy parish priest with the oddest pattern of baldness I’ve ever seen, a narrow strip down the middle of his head. All he wants to do after the bell lady incident is sit in the pub and drink. This is where the Monsignor finds him. The Monsignor is told that nobody will go to church because they fear the evil Dracula. Yes, we thought he was dead, but the shadow of his castle falls on the church, obviously a bad sign.

The Monsignor decides that he and Wimpy Priest will go to the castle to prove the evil has been destroyed. Stand by for the next “Waaaait a minute” development. The two holy men leave before dawn, carrying a really big crucifix for good measure. Finally Wimpy Priest can go no further, they must turn back, soon it will be dark.

Excuse me, what? How far away is this castle? And how big is it if from that distance it can still cast a shadow that touches the church. Perhaps it is on a mountain that goes straight up, but still.

Now, anybody who saw the previous Christopher Lee Dracula movie (whose title escapes me) knows the titular vampire went to a cold, watery end (I can’t say “grave” because that’s where he sleeps when he is undead). So right away Dracula is better off in this movie, because you may recall that he began the other movie as a box of ashes. At least now he is already reconstituted. And apparently the cold water helped him regenerate his vocal chords, because he has lines this time. But I’m getting ahead of myself.

Monsignor begins some exorcism rite at the door of the castle, leaving Wimpy Priest to wait for him partway down the mountain. There is a lot of thunder and lightning. I’m not entirely clear on this, but I think what happens is that Wimpy Priest falls, hits his head and bleeds on frozen Dracula.

You may recall that blood revived Dracula when he was ashes, and so it is now that he is frozen. And it doesn’t take a whole person’s worth of blood to do it this time, so bonus for Wimpy Priest: he gets to be in the rest of the movie.

Monsignor, meantime, has completed his exorcism (or whatever it was) and sealed the door to the castle with the big crucifix. I had thought that in cases like this you burned the castle (or house or mansion, as the case may be) and scattered the ashes. Apparently not always.

Boy, is Dracula ticked off when he arrives home to find the locks have been changed.

And we’re off on a vampire revenge caper. We meet a beautiful blonde, a tawdry redhead and a stalwart hero, among others. “Ah-uh-ah” boy makes another appearance, and Wimpy Priest gets to be Dracula’s henchman.

I have to admit, I pretty much stopped paying attention after a while. I only let the recording play out so I could write this blog post. And I see I am over 800 words, so I guess it’s a good idea to stop my plot summary now anyways. It actually isn’t too bad of a movie. I may DVR the other Christopher Lee Dracula movies if they turn up on TCM. I’ll let you know.

(NOTE: The movie title that escaped me earlier was Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966); I wrote a blog post about it.)

1 Comment

Posted in horror, humor, movies and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

No Cheese for Christmas?

Posted on December 5, 2012 by mohawkvalleygirl

I do not have a cheesy horror movie to review this week and for that I blame Steven.

Saturday night we watched DVR’d episodes of Castle (to make space on the DVR for more horror movies). Sunday, Steven insisted we watch Christmas. Well, I have to let him get his way sometimes.

I would write about our Christmas movies, but I just don’t know if I can poke fun at them the same way I poke fun at a sleazy horror movie (I know, I usually describe them as “cheesy,” but for some reason, today the word “sleazy” came to mind. I’m sure that in many cases it is apt).

Where was I? I’m afraid in the midst of a Why I Can’t Write a Post Today post.

Wow, as soon as I wrote those words, I stopped writing.

That was as far as I wrote while at work today (on a break OF COURSE). To make an accurate account, there was a long pause between the last two sentences. I did not push it. Instead I flipped over a couple of pages in the notebook and wrote more on the novel I’m working on. So I’m not completely illiterate.

Perhaps a few sentences about Why I Don’t Want to Write About Christmas Movies is in order.

Almost every Christmas movie is somebody’s favorite or the center of a cherished memory. While this may also be true of, for example The Corpse Vanishes or The Screaming Skull, it is less likely, and it seems to me one is more apt to be forgiven in these cases. (Actually, I seem to remember sharing one of my cherished memories when I wrote about It: The Terror from Beyond Space. So you see.) Perhaps I am faint of heart, but I don’t want to be hated on at Christmas time.

I don’t rule out writing about our Christmas movies as we continue to view them, but I warn you: I will probably get a little fluffy and sentimental. What can I say? It’s December. To quote one of my favorite philosophical sayings, You’ll have that.

Leave a comment

Posted in commentary, humor, personal and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

It Sure Wasn’t Shakespeare

Posted on November 29, 2012 by mohawkvalleygirl

Spoiler Alert! I intend to give away all major plot points of the following movie, including how they escape from the monsters and who lives at the end.

As I write this (on a break at work), I find I cannot quite recall the exact title of today’s cheesy horror flick. Something about shrews. Attack of the Killer Shrews or Giant Killer Shrews. You may guess from this that it is not a particularly memorable movie, and you’d be right.

I know what else you might be thinking: Shakespeare. I suspect the makers of the movie anticipated such a thing as well, because they have one of the characters say, “As in ‘Taming of’?” Which is exactly what Steven said when I informed him which movie we’d be watching. Imagine my husband having something in common with the main guy of a cheesy horror flick (I don’t say “hero.” I would not call most of these main guys heroes.)

It seems Main Guy is captain of a boat bringing supplies to an island. According to these movies, there are a bazillion isolated, difficult to reach islands, usually peopled with mad scientists, who often have beautiful daughters.

The scientist on this island has a beautiful daughter, but he’s not particularly mad. We know, of course, what animal he is researching, and the first ones we see are small.

“It looks like a rat,” remarks Main Guy. Actually, it looks like a mouse. “Does it bite?” he asks, as he holds it in his hand.

“Only when it’s hungry,” is the answer.

I forgot to mention that Main Guy does not intend to depart that night or even unload, because of an imminent hurricane. So it’s tough luck on Beautiful Daughter, who counted on leaving the island with him. She tries to convince him to stay with them in the house, not because he is so handsome and debonair (he’s neither), but because she is afraid. He, of course, intends to spend the night on the boat. In a hurricane! What the hell?

Scientist Dad has several people working for him in capacities that are never fully explained. One at least is a pure research assistant. He spends his last minutes recording his exact symptoms as he dies of poisonous shrew bite. But I’m getting ahead of myself.

First we meet Beautiful Daughter’s ex-fiance, a drunkard who left the cage door open. I don’t think we find out which of those if either factored into her breaking the engagement, but then, you know I never pay close attention to these things.

Soon we are all being terrorized by the giant shrews, which look like mice with long hair and are the size of wolves (I was going to say “dogs,” but you might say, “Chihuahuas? Great Danes?”) The close ups of the sharp teeth are scary enough. The beady eyes peeping through various orifices less so. In those shots you can pretty much tell they made use of perspective as a special effect.

The giant shrews have apparently eaten all possible food on the island and will soon begin eating each other, thus leaving the humans only one really fat shrew to deal with. It’s a good plan, except that the shrews discover the people and want to eat all of them first, quite naturally.

So the shrews start picking off the people one by one. It turns out the shrew bite is poisonous, so if you get bit you’re a goner even if you’re not dinner.

When they’re down to just four survivors — Dad, Daughter, Main Guy and Ex-Fiance — they decide to duck walk to the beach in oil drums. I’m not kidding you. Have you ever tried to duck walk any distance? I have not, but the mere thought of it hurts my thighs. They put these slits in the oil drums so they can see out, although I think that is mainly so we can have some scary shots of sharp teeth trying to break through.

So there they are, oil drums strapped together, only three of them because Ex-Fiance has decided to remain on the roof (guess what’s going to happen to him). The camera shows close ups on each face as they make their fearful way. Boy, are they good duck walkers! Their heads and shoulders don’t move at all! I know some dancers who would love to achieve that kind of isolation!

Oh, you don’t have to tell me I’m carping. Listen, I’m not method actress myself. I don’t feel I would need to actually duck walk through a jungle to convincingly look as if I might faint (did I really need to tell you Beautiful Daughter almost does?) (faint, I mean, not actually duck walk). Still, if I had been directing that scene, I would have insisted on at least a little up/down movement.

I’m sure you’ll be happy to hear that all three make it to safety. I was a little relieved they let Dad live. Many movies would have killed him off. Some even would have offed the girl. I thought Ex-Fiance’s death was rather pointless. Often that character gets to do something heroic and sacrifice himself, since he obviously isn’t going to get the girl. Or he could have done something dastardly to save himself, but it backfires and he gets his comeuppance.

But no, he just jumps off the roof, while Steven and I yelled, “What are you thinking?” I suppose he figured the shrews were distracted, and he could run faster than the other three could duck walk. But, hello! How distracted do you think the shrews are?

Here’s a shrew, trying to get at a duck walker in an oil drum and he doesn’t have a can opener (oh, I’ve been there. It was cream of mushroom soup, but a similar frustration). Now here’s this fine specimen, out of a tin can and marinaded (remember? he’s a drunkard). What would you do if you were a hungry shrew? I thought so.

Scientist Dad says in X amount of time the shrews will have eaten each other, and the menace will be over. Phew! You don’t suppose they’ll start having babies really fast first, do you, and replenish supplies? Or maybe go vegetarian till something better comes along? Learn to swim? In short, adapt in time for a sequel. Well, if anybody hears of a sequel, please let me know.

NOTE: On consulting the TV Journal, I see the title is The Killer Shrews. Leonard Maltin doesn’t list it.

Leave a comment

Posted in commentary, humor, movies and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Of Hogarth and Karloff

Posted on November 28, 2012 by mohawkvalleygirl

A friend who enjoys my postings about Classic Horror films recently sent me a DVD of two with Boris Karloff. What a lovely addition to my collection! Sunday Steven and I enjoyed Bedlam (1946).

According to the box, Karloff plays the evil head of an insane asylum. Insane asylums have been staples of horror movies and haunted houses for years, especially older, unenlightened ones. Since it was an older movie, naturally this would be an older insane asylum. Then I saw it was a period piece. Goody.

The opening credits are shown over a rather menacing looking painting. Jut as I was thinking it looked like a Hogarth print, I saw that the movie had been inspired by a William Hogarth painting.

I am not an art scholar, and I don’t know much about William Hogarth, but I have looked through books of his stuff. I know he painted in the 1700s and that his works are realistic depictions of the grimier side of London life. He was very moral. One of his series, A Rake’s Progress, depicts the stages of life of a bad man who comes to a bad end.

So I sat back and waited for some grit. And a bad end for those who deserved it.

The movie takes place in 1761, a time when those deemed insane were locked up and badly treated. People would pay tuppence to walk through the asylum and marvel at the inmates in their cages.

Boris Karloff is smooth and sinister. His gentle, kindly-sounding voice serves the part well.

I found it more of a moral tale than a horror tale. There are a few creepy images of the inmates. One of hands reaching out from darkened cages is very effective. When Karloff’s character finally gets his comeuppance, I thought it was fairly horrible (that’s not a spoiler; in a moral tale you must know there will be a comeuppance).

I really liked the movie, but I can’t call it a cheesy horror flick. It was interesting and at times suspenseful. I was concerned about what would happen to the characters. It was even, dare I say, thought provoking. And it reminded me about William Hogarth. I will soon make my way to the library in hopes of looking at a book of his works.

2 Comments

Posted in commentary, movies and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Just a Common or Garden Vampire

Posted on November 13, 2012 by mohawkvalleygirl

Spoiler Alert! I’ll try not to give away the dramatic conclusion, but I am pretty much going to tell you what happens in this picture.

I have to confess that I am not as fond of the horror movies made after 1960. Could it be the color film which is so much less atmospheric? Could it be the increasingly graphic quality of the violence (don’t even get me started on the body count slasher flicks of the ’70s)? In any case, it was in some trepidation that I sat down to watch Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966).

I noted that it was a Seven Arts/Hammer Production. Hammer, I learned recently, was a British company that became somewhat renowned for its horror movies in the ’60s. On consulting one of his movie books, Steven informed me that this movie was the sequel to Horror of Dracula. I imagined we would be able to follow the plot in spite of having missed the first installment. I was right.

The movie opens on a life and death struggle between a vampire and some guy. We never find out who the guy is, but he triumphs and the vampire eventually crumbles to dust in a not bad special effect for the time. My guess is that this is how the first movie ended, which I certainly like better than the whole movie being a flashback telling us how we got to this point.

So call that the prologue. The real movie starts with an old woman chasing down some sort of funeral procession starring a beautiful young blond girl. I thought she looked a little like a young Cybil Shepherd. That reminded me of her eponymous sitcom where her character was a actress who would have been grateful to get a dead body part.

The anchor guy in the procession carries a wooden stake, and the procession leads to a pile of sticks. Apparently they are going to stake the young woman and burn her JUST IN CASE she is a vampire. And that is the first “Waaait a minute” moment in the film. If she was a vampire, wouldn’t she be crumbling into dust from the daylight? No matter, these guys are taking no chances, despite the old woman’s protests that her daughter deserves a proper Christian burial.

Enter a monk on a horse with a shotgun, who stops the whole thing, insists the girl be buried, but does not stick around to see it carried out. We don’t see it carried out either, but I think it was done. Anyways, that was just more background: the vampire is dead but people still fear him.

Next we’re in a tavern where an upper class guy is doing what looks like a fraternity party chug-a-lug with the lower classes. His sister-in-law disapproves but his wife thinks he’s cute and, besides, “We can afford it.”

When the monk (I can’t capitalize it or you’ll think I’m talking about the Tony Shaloub show on USA) shows up, hollering at the crowd for being such superstitious louts, he meets the upper class foursome: two brothers and their wives on vacation to improve their minds.

The monk, refreshing himself with mulled cordial and hiking his robes up to warm his backside at the fire, invites them to come stay at his monastery. At any rate, they mustn’t go to Carlsbad, where they originally intended, and if they do they must stay away from the castle.

Hmmm…. Where do you suppose they’re going to end up?

How they get to the castle is less “Waaait a minute!” than “Oh, PLEASE!” Nobody but Disapproving Sister-in-Law is the least bit disconcerted that they find themselves dropped off at the castle by runaway horses, their luggage mysteriously brought upstairs, and dinner ready to be served by a singularly creepy servant who appears to be the castle’s only inhabitant.

You know, I’m all for mysterious things happening in horror movies. And I’m even OK with going with the flow and having an adventure. I KNOW that if these people would have sensibly gone to stay at the monk’s house it would have been a dull movie. But I think these people took things entirely too far.

In a rather gruesome scene, one of the four gets sliced open in order to bring the vampire’s ashes back to life. Apparently the creepy servant carefully preserved them in a funereal-looking box.

And you know, I think they missed a bet. Have you ever tried to sweep up ashes? Heck, even sweeping ordinary household dirt you don’t get it all. You know how it is: you sweep, sweep, sweep it into the dustpan, then you scatter around the last little bit that you just can’t get. And then some of it stays on the broom or in the dustpan. There’s no way that entire vampire would have been there!

Actually, come to think of it, he wasn’t. As Dracula, Christopher Lee has no lines. Was this so the producers wouldn’t have to pay him as much, or were Dracula’s vocal chords still stuck in the cracks between the flagstones where he met his end? Points to ponder.

Be that as it may, the movie continues with another member of the party lured to her doom. Of course she becomes a vampire, which improves her personality as well as her hair-do. Eventually the other two are fleeing for their lives.

They meet up with the monk again, who tells them how to kill a vampire. Did you know you could drown a vampire in running water? I didn’t. I thought it was sunlight or stake through the heart, although you can temporarily chase them off with garlic or a crucifix.

I was a little disappointed in the movie. For one thing, it didn’t really seem like Count Dracula. He just seemed like any common or garden vampire, and he didn’t even have that big a part. He was scary enough when he was onscreen, although as with many movie monsters, he moved too slowly. Perhaps I should cut him a break on that one, though. After all, he was only ashes just that morning.

But he was not onscreen enough. It took forever to get him brought back from ashes and even then he didn’t spend nearly enough time chasing his victims to suit me.

But perhaps I ask too much. At any rate, I have another Christopher Lee Dracula movie on my DVR, probably a sequel to this one. I’ll watch it and report on whether he gets a little more personality or at least the use of his vocal chords.

3 Comments

Posted in commentary, horror, humor, movies and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Not Whistler, Western

Posted on November 6, 2012 by mohawkvalleygirl

In my quest to DVR movies to watch and write about later, I came across The Kansan (1943) starring Richard Dix.

Richard Dix, astute readers may remember, starred in the Whistler movies I have enjoyed so much. This one did not look like a Whistler movie, however. The word “marshal” in the description made me suspect it was a Western. Still, Richard Dix. It might be worth a watch.

Then I saw that it also starred Albert Dekker. Dekker was the subject of an episode of Mysteries & Scandals, cheesy show we used to enjoy during the early ’00s. He had a rather sordid private life and died under mysterious circumstances, either a suicide or a kinky sex game gone wrong. Of course, this has nothing to do with the movie, even as backstory. For heavens’ sake, the man was an actor. His personal life and death are separate things from any characters he may have played. Still, it added a little interest to our viewing.

Dix plays a stranger who happens to come to town just as a bank is being robbed. Apparently banks were always getting robbed in the Old West, which strikes me as odd considering almost everybody carried a gun and the tellers were NOT instructed to just hand over the money. Hard luck on depositors, since these were also the days before FDIC. But I digress.

It seems there is a shoot-out in which Dix saves the bank’s money but is himself injured. He wakes up in the hospital and is informed that the town has just elected him marshal. I guess this was also fairly common in the Old West. I seem to remember a similar thing happening to Cleavon Little in Blazing Saddles. Oh, and to James Garner in Support Your Local Sheriff.

Dix had been just passing through but decides to say a while after meeting the lady who owns the local hotel. I have to wonder what it is like to be so pretty that men change their entire career path before they even ask for a date.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the new marshal in town soon discovers that things are not what they seem. It turns out the banker (Dekker), who was instrumental in getting Dix the marshal gig, is pretty much the main bad guy in town, although technically the law is on his side. There is a love triangle among the banker’s brother, the hotel owner and Dix, but this does not cause as many complications as I thought it would.

In pre-show commentary, Ben Mankiewicz said you could check off Western movie staples as you watch: stranger in town, cattle stampede, bar brawl, climactic gun fight. He left off hooker with a heart of gold, as did the movie, but I guess you don’t always have one of those.

It is actually a pretty entertaining flick. The plot moves right along and there is excitement along the way. I know I usually like to talk about bad movies in this space, the cheesier the better. However, I had a busy weekend and only had time to watch one movie. I thought it would be a little silly to turn it off because it was good. I’ll look for a bad movie next time.

Leave a comment

Posted in commentary, humor, movies, personal and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
← Older Posts
Newer Posts →