Browsed by
Month: October 2015

Connection, The (1962)

Connection, The (1962)

Comments 2 comments

“You will not see the man behind the man — because there is no such man!”

Synopsis:
A director (William Redfield) agrees to fund the next fix for a group of heroin junkies gathered in the apartment of a friend (Warren Finnerty) as they wait for the arrival of their “connection”, a drug supplier known as Cowboy (Carl Lee).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Alcoholism and Drug Addiction
  • Play Adaptations
  • Shirley Clarke Films

Review:
Shirley Clarke’s black-and-white cinéma vérité film — crafted like a documentary, but actually highly scripted and based on a play by Jack Gelber — broke cinematic ground in its gritty depiction of heroin addiction, overtly flaunting New York’s censorship rules. Indeed, watching this independently produced film puts more mainstream movies of the same year in an interesting perspective: while many of these titles (i.e., To Kill a Mockingbird, The Manchurian Candidate, Days of Wine and Roses) were concerned with “social issues”, none were anything close to this raw in their depiction. With that said, The Connection unfortunately isn’t all that interesting or compelling; it’s far too stagy and dry, and I would revisit any of the above titles before this one for sheer entertainment value. Yet The Connection remains of minor interest simply for its historical importance.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • A refreshingly frank (for the time in which it was made) look at drug use

Must See?
No, though it’s recommended for one-time viewing simply given its historical significance. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Portrait of Jason (1967)

Portrait of Jason (1967)

Comments 3 comments

“It only hurts when you think of it. And if you’re real, you’ll think of it a long, long time.”

Synopsis:
Filmmaker Shirley Clarke interviews a self-described gay black “hustler” (Jason Holliday) who tells countless entertaining tales of his life as a sexually voracious “houseboy” and aspiring cabaret singer.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • African-Americans
  • Aspiring Stars
  • Class Relations
  • Documentary
  • Homosexuality
  • Race Relations
  • Shirley Clarke Films

Review:
Shirley Clarke’s cult classic — filmed in her Hotel Chelsea apartment over the course of 12 hours — remains a uniquely structured, unexpectedly haunting entry in her oeuvre as an independent female documentarian. Without explanation or captions, the film plunges into Clarke’s talk with Jason, beginning with how he transformed from “Aaron Payne” to “Jason Holliday” with the help of a budding international spiritual organization which promotes the changing of one’s name to something more “authentic”. (As a bit of trivia, my parents joined this group at around the same time and also changed their birth names.) The film quickly moves on, however, to even more fascinating fare, as Jason, continuously drinking, begins sharing seemingly endless tales of his life as a hustler — or wait, as a houseboy? A companion? What exactly DID Jason do to earn money, and how often did this overlap with his own entertainment? Well, it turns out he did just about anything, and (supposedly) never felt bad about it:

“They think you’re just a dumb, stupid little colored boy and you’re trying to get a few dollars, and they’re gonna use you as a joke. And it gets to be a joke sometime as to who’s using who.”

The stories he has to tell are simply hilarious — at least until the hours wear on and his revelations become increasingly fraught with vulnerability (especially as Clarke’s cameraman, Carl Lee, eggs him on). You’re sure to be engaged — if not haunted, disturbed, and/or entertained — by this most unusual docu-interview.

Note: A docudrama re-imagining what might have taken place during the marathon shooting of this film has just been released; click here to read more.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • A surprisingly engrossing “one man show”, covering both light-hearted and much more serious topics

Must See?
Yes, as a unique historical document by an unusual director. Listed as a film with Historical significance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links:

Kiss of the Vampire (1963)

Kiss of the Vampire (1963)

Comments 1 comment

“I advise you to ask no questions of anyone in this region.”

Synopsis:
A honeymooning couple (Edward de Souza and Jennifer Daniel) staying in a remote inn run by a nervous man (Peter Madden) and his depressed wife (Vera Cook) — with an inebriated professor (Clifford Evans) as the only other inhabitant — are invited to dinner by a local nobleman (Noel Ravna) and his two grown children (Barry Warren and Jacquie Wallis), who seduce the couple with their charms and lure them back for a masquerade ball with nefarious purposes.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cults
  • Horror Films
  • Newlyweds
  • Vampires

Review:
Hammer Studios’ unique entry in the vampire genre offers an appropriate sense of menace, effectively atmospheric visuals and sets, and a convincingly creative vision of what a “den of vampires” might look and act like. While De Souza and Daniel are a little too conveniently naive as the film opens — caught up in conjugal bliss and unaware of how strange their new environment really is — this allows the plot to move forward smoothly, as Daniel is easily taken in by the charms of their enchanting new friends, and de Souza realizes too late that his wife has been brainwashed and kidnapped into the vampires’ cult. The scenes showing white-shrouded vampires sitting around a room waiting for their leader to tell them what to do are eerily reminiscent of Moonie life in the early 1960s, demonstrating the power of fantasy and horror to tap into the cultural zeitgeist. The climax is genuinely heart-stopping, as we wonder how Daniel can be “deprogrammed” without dying. This would make a fascinating if unconventional double-bill with the cult sleeper Ticket to Heaven (1981).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Highly effective sets, costumes, and make-up



  • Atmospheric cinematography
  • Noel Willman as Dr. Ravna
  • The surprising yet innovative ending

Must See?
Yes, as one of Hammer Studios’ best outings, and a uniquely timely take on the vampire genre.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

From Mao to Mozart (1981)

From Mao to Mozart (1981)

Comments 1 comment

“Music is not black and white. It is every color — and even some that painters don’t have.”

Synopsis:
Virtuoso violinist Isaac Stern travels through China three years after the end of the Cultural Revolution, giving concerts and master classes.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • China
  • Documentary
  • Musicians

Review:
This Oscar-winning documentary chronicles the first collaboration between an American musician and the China Central Symphony Society (now known as the China National Symphony Orchestra) — a historical moment perhaps not fully appreciated today, when U.S. relations between China are strained but ongoing, and we have seen countless Chinese musicians embarking on international careers. In 1979, however, when Stern visited Peking and Shanghai, he saw young students just emerging from years of cultural repression, playing “western” classical music with immense technical skill and passion but without personal ownership or deep insight into the music itself. While there’s an inevitable sense throughout the film of a white male Westerner coming to China to “fix” Asians’ musical sensibility (and, in one case, force them to provide him and his accompanist with a more suitable piano!):

this is thankfully moderated by several factors, including Stern’s irrepressible, toothy enthusiasm and talent; stunning footage of highly gifted young musicians; and a powerful strand of cultural context and history woven into the narrative, primarily through a moving interview with violin maker Tan Shuzhen (who survived the Cultural Revolution).

Note: Interested viewers should definitely watch the half-hour follow-up documentary (included on the DVD) in which Stern returns to Beijing 20 years later and we’re privy to interviews with many of the young musicians profiled in the film. It’s interesting to see that Stern became a bit more crotchety and impatient in his later years, though he conceded that Chinese musicians had become much more proficient since his last visit.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Isaac Stern’s enjoyable presence and musicality
  • An uplifting tale of cultural connection after years of division


  • Tan Shuzhen’s story of surviving the Cultural Revolution
  • Chinese children playing with passion and immense skill


Must See?
Yes, as an uplifting and enjoyable Oscar-winner.

Categories

  • Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

Dementia 13 / Haunted and the Hunted, The (1963)

Dementia 13 / Haunted and the Hunted, The (1963)

Comments 1 comment

“Castle Haloran is a bit perplexing — a very strange place, really, old and musty; the kind of place you’d expect a ghost to like to wander around in.”

Synopsis:
A woman (Luana Anders) whose husband (Peter Read) dies from a sudden heart attack dumps his body in a lake and attends a gathering at the castle-home of his mother (Ethne Dunn), who has been in continuous mourning since the drowning death of her young daughter Kathleen (Barbara Dowling) years earlier. Anders soon learns that Read’s brother Billy (Bart Patton) is equally haunted by Kathleen’s death but his brother Richard (William Campbell) — a temperamental artist — would prefer to bury the incident and simply marry his lovely American fiancee (Mary Mitchel). Meanwhile, the family’s longtime doctor (Patrick Magee) hopes to resolve Dunn’s perpetual angst by getting to the bottom of Kathleen’s tragic death.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Francis Ford Coppola Films
  • Horror Films
  • Inheritance
  • Murder Mystery
  • Old Dark House
  • Roger Corman Films
  • Serial Killer

Response to Peary’s Review:
This reasonably effective low-budget serial killer flick is primarily notable as the first “mainstream picture” directed by Francis Ford Coppola, who “was working as Roger Corman’s soundman in Ireland during filming of The Young Racers when he wrote this horror script in three nights”, “got Corman to match his $20,000 investment, borrowed the stars from Corman’s film”, and used “a Dublin castle and estate as his main setting”. Peary writes that he finds “the story hopelessly confusing”, but I must say I disagree: in typical whodunit fashion, there are plenty of red herrings and mysterious passages throughout the film, but they all clearly build towards a “big reveal” of how and why Dowling died, and which of the many suspicious characters has turned into a vicious axe murderer in an attempt to hide the truth. Peary does acknowledge that “the horror sequences are very exciting”, and that the initial death of a main character “is [an] extremely well done”, “gory, creepy sequence” that is also “erotic and poetically filmed.” He further notes that “the composition on night shots is extremely impressive”. It’s fun to see Coppola’s explicit narrative nod to Psycho (1960) as well as other “Old Dark House” films.

Note: Peary puzzles over the film’s odd title, which has since been clarified: an earlier cult film was already named Dementia (1955), so 13 was added “to get the film played on the 13th of each month” (according to an interview by Coppola with James Lipton).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Fine direction by Coppola
  • Atmospheric cinematography
  • Excellent use of authentic locales
  • Ronald Stein’s score

Must See?
Yes, as Coppola’s impressive debut film.

Categories

  • Important Director

Links:

Inheritors, The (1983)

Inheritors, The (1983)

Comments 1 comment

“Let us build a new fatherland. It is time we awoke from this vile coma!”

Synopsis:
A teenager (Nikolas Vogel) with emotionally abusive parents befriends a rebellious motorcyclist (Roger Schauer) and finds himself increasingly drawn into Schauer’s subculture of fascism and neo-Nazi ideology.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Coming of Age
  • German Films
  • Nazis

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “terrifying, important” film — about “how in present-day Germany and Austria bored, alienated, out-of-work youths are joining neo-Nazi organizations to find excitement, a sense of power and importance, sexual fulfillment (with Nazi groupies), and camaraderie” — “caused riots when first shown in Germany”: a reminder that the type of backlash uncovered in the 2006 documentary The Unknown Soldier (about a controversial museum exhibit showcasing war crimes by “ordinary” German soldiers) was already alive and well in the early 1980s. Given that right-wing ideologies continue to flourish in Europe, America, and elsewhere, The Inheritors — conceived after producer-director-screenwriter William Bannert “and some friends were attacked in a pub by a Nazi youth gang” — feels, sadly, more relevant than ever. Unfortunately, it’s a flawed film, with overly simplistic home lives presented for its two main characters, and weirdly “exploitive” [sic] sex scenes that make it inappropriate to show to younger viewers. But it’s worth a one-time look if you stumble upon a copy.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • A frightening look at neo-Nazi ideology continuing to flourish

Must See?
No, though it’s worth checking out for one-time viewing if the topic is of interest.

Links:

Slime People, The (1963)

Slime People, The (1963)

Comments 1 comment

“It looks as if the slime people have won — for now.”

Synopsis:
A pilot (Robert Hutton) landing in fog-filled Los Angeles learns from a professor (Robert Burton) and his two daughters (Susan Hart and Judee Morton) that the city has been overrun by reptilian Slime Men emerging from underneath the ground. Joined by a Marine (William Boyce), the small group of survivors attempts to fight back against the monsters while developing romantic relationships.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Mutant Monsters
  • Science Fiction
  • Survival

Review:
Appropriately lampooned by MST3K, this clunker of a low-budget ’50s monster flick is hard to watch — literally. About half the movie is filmed in a deep (deliberate) mist of fog meant to represent a solidified wall constructed by the Slime Men, thus leaving audiences simply listening to the characters interacting and guessing at who’s on set. The monsters’ costumes are the most effective element of the film by far (see still below), and they’re revealed within the first few minutes, making it unnecessary to sit through the rest unless you’re a serious fan of awful cinema.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • The effective monster costumes (which apparently consumed half the film’s ~$80K budget)

Must See?
No; definitely feel free to skip this one. Listed as a Camp Classic in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Robot Monster / Monsters From the Moon (1953)

Robot Monster / Monsters From the Moon (1953)

Comments 1 comment

“I cannot — yet I must. How do you calculate that?”

Synopsis:
An alien named Ro-Man plots to kill the remaining six Hu-Mans on earth — a mother (Selena Royle), her professor-husband (John Mylong), their two young children (Gregory Moffett and Pamela Paulson), their grown daughter (Claudia Barrett), and Barrett’s boyfriend-scientist (George Nader) — who are protected from his death ray by a neutralizing serum. But when Ro-Man falls for Barrett, he finds his annihilation impulses in conflict.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Aliens
  • Science Fiction
  • World Domination

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary notes that this “laughably lousy sci-fi film, made for $20,000 in LA’s Bronson Canyon” “gets more ludicrous as it goes along” — then he spends the rest of his review detailing exactly how inept it is, and essentially dismissing it as outright dreck. Other online reviews (see links below) provide a more detailed skewering, combined with admiration for all the many ways in which the film presumably deserves its bad-movie cult status: Richard Scheib notes that “the cheesiness of its ineptitude provides… an enormous degree of sheer entertainment value”, while DVD Savant argues that it is actually “very entertaining” and will “bring a smile to anyone’s face”. A redeeming perspective of sorts does emerge near the end, when we learn exactly what the entire adventure has been based on, and many aspects — including the jarring incorporation of “stock footage” such as “a lengthy sequence of prehistoric monsters fighting taken from One Million B.C.” — come into somewhat clearer focus. Watch for the infamous “ending in which Ro-Man emerges from a cave three times in succession (the shot is repeated)”, which “may have inspired Edward D. Wood” when making Plan 9 from Outer Space.”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Countless ludicrously bad elements


Must See?
Yes, once, simply for its cult infamy. Maybe it’s the type of film that grows on you (and most definitely requires a bad-movie-appreciating crowd to enjoy).

Categories

Links:

Creeping Terror, The / Crawling Monster, The (1964)

Creeping Terror, The / Crawling Monster, The (1964)

Comments 1 comment

“Within 48 hours, Dr. Bradford had closely examined the creature and the spaceship and reached a number of conclusions. He was sure the creature had come from beyond our solar system.”

Synopsis:
A sheriff (Vic Savage) returns from a honeymoon with his new wife (Shannon O’Neil) to find a spaceship has landed, and an enormous shaggy monster is devouring everyone it sees.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Mutant Monsters
  • Science Fiction

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “stunningly bad low-budget sci fi film… features the worst excuse for a monster in history” — a creature that “looks like an old deformed carpet with several white misshapen beards and a large mouth”. He points out that the “actors playing the [creature’s] victims actually have to force themselves into the mouth of the barely mobile creature”, and notes that “adding to the absurdity” is the fact that “director Art. J. Nelson” (who also starred as the sheriff under the stage name Vic Savage) “lost his soundtrack, but, rather than tossing out footage of a lot of people having conversations, he simply added a narrator so we wouldn’t be curious about what everyone is saying”. He concludes his review by noting that the “film is for bad-movie lovers only — but even they may find [it] pretty tiresome.”

Indeed, I can’t really imagine watching this sub-Z-grade movie without the “assistance” of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 crew, who add appropriately derogatory commentary and/or supplemental dialogue to every scene in the film — humorously highlighting all of Peary’s complaints above blow-by-blow. Viewed simply as a TRULY TERRIBLE movie, however — how much worse could it be? — this flick holds a certain surreal allure: as Richard Scheib writes, it “exerts a terribleness that is fascinating to see. The gap between what it sets out to achieve and what it actually does achieve is a gaping chasm.”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Stunningly bad — everything



Must See?
Yes — simply for its cult infamy as such a truly terrible movie.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links: