Cherry, Harry & Raquel! (1969)

Cherry, Harry & Raquel! (1969)

“Nevertheless, pity the poor potheads.”

Synopsis:
While a busty Swede (Uschi Digard) runs naked across the desert, a corrupt sheriff (Charles Napier) working in collusion with a marijuana dealer (Franklin Bolger) and a Chicano deputy (Bert Santos) tries to track down an elusive competitor known as “The Apache”. Meanwhile, Napier sleeps with both a busy prostitute named Raquel (Larissa Ely) and his nurse-girlfriend Cherry (Linda Ashton), who eventually fall for each other as well.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Drug Dealers
  • Sheriffs and Marshalls
  • Russ Meyer Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “compact Russ Meyer film” features a “tried-and-true combination of sex, violence, and humor”, with the injection of “intentionally silly footage of superstacked Uschi Digard romping naked (but for an Indian warbonnet) around [the] desert.” He asserts that while it’s “somewhat dated”, it “remains one of Meyer’s best films” given that it “has wit, sharp editing, several Don Siegel-like action sequences, and a solid lead in square-jawed Napier”.

I can understand why Meyer fans would be enamored with this flick, which shows ample evidence of the gonzo-surreal sensibilities and rapid-fire editing that would infuse Meyer’s first major studio film, Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970). However, it’s really not for all tastes; my favorite moments came early on, during his laughably earnest opening voiceover: “The evil of marijuana caresses all it comes in contact with.”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Fine location shooting
  • Skillful editing

Must See?
No, though I’m sure some film fanatics will be curious to check it out.

Links:

Finders Keepers, Lovers Weepers! (1968)

Finders Keepers, Lovers Weepers! (1968)

“You try any funny stuff on me, buster, and I’ll slice you up like a jigsaw puzzle.”

Synopsis:
As two ex-cons (Duncan McLeod and Robert Rudelson) wait until closing time to rob the safe of a topless dancing club, the club’s owner (Paul Lockwood) is lured to the home of a madam (Lavelle Roby), where he’s seduced by an Amish woman (Jan Sinclair) as well as Roby herself. Meanwhile, Lockwood’s sexually unsatisfied wife (Anne Chapman) has a guilty affair with the club’s bartender (Gordon Wescourt), and all three end up unwittingly involved in the heist back at the club.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Heists
  • Infidelity
  • Russ Meyer Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “piggy Russ Meyer film… probably won’t please even his diehard fans”, given that it “has none of the typical Meyer humor” and “even has a cruel edge to it.” He adds the unnecessary comment that “of course, the women have large chests; but they’re not particularly pretty — they’re the types who show up in stag films” (!!!). Vincent Canby’s review for the NY Times is a bit more delicately worded, if similarly dismissive: “Meyer’s sole preoccupation with extraordinarily well-developed female breasts, usually photographed from a low angle and while they’re in some sort of motion, is no longer particularly erotic.” (And kudos to Canby for introducing me to the new term “satyriasis.”) To Meyer’s credit, he perfectly captures the essence of the “male gaze” in the creatively shot and edited opening sequence of this film, which remains its artistic highlight.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • The cleverly filmed opening sequence


Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for Meyer fans.

Links:

Common Law Cabin / How Much Loving Does a Normal Couple Need? (1967)

Common Law Cabin / How Much Loving Does a Normal Couple Need? (1967)

“How’s your motor working?”

Synopsis:
An alcoholic boat captain (Frank Bolger) brings three new clients — a man with a briefcase (Ken Swofford), a spineless doctor (John Furlong), and the doctor’s lustful wife (Alaina Capri) — to a broken-down tourist destination where the owner (Jackie Moran), his busty French housekeeper (Babette Bardot), and his pubescent daughter (Adele Rein) are ready to entertain.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Deep South
  • Incest and Incestuous Undertones
  • Infidelity
  • Russ Meyer Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary refers to this memorably-titled exploitation flick — set in “an out-of-the-way tourist trap on a little-traveled Colorado River tributary” — as “one of Russ Meyer’s ‘sweat’ films”. He notes that it “drags in spots, but holds interest due to sexy women… , smutty lines by [the] doctor’s wife(!!!), and [the] gathering of [a] strange group in a strange location.”

He argues that the “existential aspects of the story would have made it an ideal project for some European director; in fact… if it were left intact, and made in a foreign language, it could pass as a masterpiece (that would be a suitable second feature to a film like Knife in the Water).” Oh, Peary — not quite. I actually gave this a try (playing portions of the film without any soundtrack), and was hard pressed to think about how any of these scenes, for instance:



… might be perceived in an “existential” fashion as part of a “masterpiece”.

Note: Swofford (see still below, bottom right) looks remarkably like a combination of Burt Lancaster and Damian Lewis.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Reasonably creative direction

Must See?
No; you can skip this one.

Links:

Mud Honey / Rope of Flesh (1965)

Mud Honey / Rope of Flesh (1965)

“I always wondered if you was any kind of a man at all.”

Synopsis:
An ex-con (John Furlong) takes a job working for an aging farmer (Stu Lancaster) whose niece (Antoinette Cristiani) is married to a sadistic, alcoholic psychopath (Hal Hopper). As Furlong realizes he’s falling for Cristiani, he tries to distract himself by going to visit two local prostitutes (Rena Horton and Lorna Maitland) and their madam (Princess Livingston) — but Hopper’s rage and jealousy know no bounds, and when a local preacher (Frank Bolger) and his wife (Lee Ballard) treat Hopper like a “poor sinner”, he takes this designation and runs with it.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Deep South
  • Domestic Abuse
  • Ex-Cons
  • Infidelity
  • Russ Meyer Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “tawdry tale” may be director “Russ Meyer’s best film” — a dubious designation I can’t agree with, given that Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1965) remains his most memorably oddball flick. Peary describes Mud Honey — what exactly does this (or the alternate title, Rope of Flesh) refer to? — as being “set in a small town in Missouri that’s full of stupid but shrewd, sweaty, hypocritical men and stupid, big-breasted women” (an unfair assessment, given that Cristiani is overly loyal rather than stupid), where “everyone is driven by lust, hatred and greed” (again, not entirely accurate — what about Cristiani and Lancaster?).

In his review, Peary reveals a major spoiler that doesn’t occur until the last 15 minutes of the film (unusual for him), thus making it hard for me to quote too much more of his assessment. However, I’ll cite and agree with his statement that this “sleazy fake morality play is surprisingly well made”, with “Meyer’s camera work… fairly creative”:

the acting “satisfactory”, and the dialogue “flavorful”; we really are made to “believe that the characters live in this hellish version of Tobacco Road” — a place we’re oh-so-eager to say goodbye to once the dramatic, violent denouement comes to an end.

Note: Viewers will surely notice the distinctive presence of cackling “Princess Livingston” (what a name!), whose red-wigged, middle-aged dancing in Meyer’s Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970) stands out in a veritable sea of surreal, bombarding imagery.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Strong direction and cinematography

Must See?
No — though naturally, Russ Meyer fans will want to check it out.

Links:

Lorna (1964)

Lorna (1964)

“I’m married, sure — but we never REALLY married, like now.”

Synopsis:
The sexually dissatisfied wife (Lorna Maitland) of a kind salt mine worker (James Rucker) is raped by a violent ex-convict (Mark Bradley), who she then desires as a lover and brings home — but when Bradley and his two co-workers (Hal Hopper and Doc Scortt) come home early that day after Rucker has fought Bradley on behalf of Maitland’s honor, they’re in for an unpleasant surprise.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Deep South
  • Ex-Cons
  • Infidelity
  • Russ Meyer Films
  • Sexuality

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “Russ Meyer potboiler” — “his first attempt to make a serious film with a plot and theme” — “recalls those independently made, sleazy, sex-filled fake social dramas of the thirties (i.e., Child Bride).” He notes that “Meyer mixed Erskine Caldwell, John Steinbeck, and [a] phony morality tale to pretty good effect”, “impressively creat[ing] the sweaty, puritanical backwoods environment” and establishing “how a young woman could go crazy trying to repress her sexual impulses in such a ‘hot’ environment”. He points out that “Lorna’s character goes through much of what Hedy Lamarr does in Ecstasy; like Lamarr, she must be punished — according to a male filmmaker — for fulfilling her fantasies.” Given that the film opens with a near-rape — Hopper follows a drunk woman (Althea Currier) home and savagely beats her after she refuses his advances — then Lorna later “gets turned on by a rapist”, this film is clearly made from and for a certain perspective, and is really only must-see for Meyer enthusiasts.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Atmospheric b&w cinematography

Must See?
No, though of course Russ Meyer fans will certainly want to check it out.

Links:

Tarzan the Magnificent (1960)

Tarzan the Magnificent (1960)

“I can’t understand a man who would rather live in fear than fight it — no matter the cost!”

Synopsis:
Tarzan (Gordon Scott) escorts cop-killer Coy Banton (Jock Mahoney) to the town of “Kairobi” in order to get reward money to give to the wife of the slain policeman (John Sullivan). He is accompanied in his dangerous overland trek by a group of individuals whose boat has been destroyed by Mahoney’s vengeful family, and are also eager to make it to Kairobi — including the boat’s shipmate (Earl Cameron); an arrogant businessman (Lionel Jeffries) and his wife (Betta St. John); a one-time doctor (Charles Tingwell); and a young woman (Alexandra Stewart). Along the way, the travelers must contend not only with wily Mahoney, but with his determined father Abel (John Carradine) as well as his three brothers — Ethan (Ron McDonnell), Johnny (Gary Cockrell), and Martin (Al Mulock) — who will stop at nothing to free Mahoney.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Africa
  • Cat-and-Mouse
  • John Carradine Films
  • Jungles
  • Road Trip
  • Tarzan Films

Review:
This follow-up to Tarzan’s Greatest Adventure (1959) more closely resembles a western than a traditional Tarzan flick in its narrative style, given the presence of the murderous Banton clan, with Tarzan functioning essentially as a sheriff for a terrorized settlement which is unwilling (or unable) to provide sufficient support. Mahoney is highly effective as psychopathic Coy Banton; it’s interesting to know that he took over playing Tarzan in the very next film of the series (!). Overall, this remains an exciting and well-filmed flick, with many adventures (and gruesome deaths) along the way. Also of note is the refreshing humanization of local black Africans:

— though it’s distressing that a village chief was played in blackface by a white man (why??).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Jock Mahoney as Coy Banton
  • Numerous exciting sequences

Must See?
No, but it’s recommended.

Links:

Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970)

Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970)

“This is my happening, and it freaks me out!”

Synopsis:
Three rock performers — Kelly (Dolly Read), Casey (Cynthia Myers), and Pet (Marcia McBroom) — travel with their manager Harris (David Gurian) to Hollywood, where Kelly’s Aunt Susan (Phyllis Davis) introduces her to wild parties led by Z-Man (John Lazar). Soon Z-Man helps the three musicians form a new band called The Carrie Nations, and tensions arise between Z-Man and Harris. Meanwhile, romantic entanglements quickly ensue: Kelly starts an affair with a hunky player named Lance Rocke (Michael Blodgett) while also seducing her aunt’s financial caretaker (Duncan McLeod) into giving her a larger portion of their inheritance; Harris is relentlessly pursued by a bosomy porn star (Edy Williams); Pet falls in love with an aspiring lawyer (Harrison Page) but strays with a prizefighter (James Iglehart); and Casey falls for a lesbian (Erica Gavin).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Hollywood
  • Musicians
  • Rock ‘n Roll
  • Russ Meyer Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “cult favorite” by Russ Meyer — “about a small-town three-woman rock band… who make it big in Hollywood, the land of sex, drugs, moral corruption, and deviance” — was originally “slated to be a sequel to Valley of the Dolls, but instead of expanding on Jacqueline Susann’s trashy best-seller it turned around and parodied the first film and other overblown, cliche-filled Hollywood soap operas.” However, as Peary complains, “there is nothing worse than a multi-million-dollar spoof of movies that are already self-parodies.” He expresses frustration that “when Meyer finally got his chance to make a studio picture (with 20th Century Fox)… he proved to be lazy and conservative” instead of “really inventive”, “opting to make an outrageously campy caricature-populated film rather than attempting to make a serious, solid melodrama”. Peary adds that “critic Roger Ebert’s script is smug and vulgar, and full of violence-against-female scenes (which Meyer films seriously) of the type he has crusaded against as a critic.”

Peary expands upon his frustrations and disappointment with this film in his first Cult Movies book, where he starts by discussing Meyer’s two cinematic “phases” before BTVOTD: Meyer began as “King of the Nudies”, making a “fortune as the independent producer-director-cameraman-editor-writer-distributor of such cheapie harbingers of the Naked Cinema as the ground-breaking The Immoral Mr. Teas (1959)…” Next he made “infinitely more ambitious” “tongue-in-cheek potboilers” that “served as the basis for the pre-Beyond the Valley of the Dolls cult: Lorna (1964), Mud Honey (1965), … Faster Pussycat, Kill, Kill (1966) … and [Peary’s] favorite, Cherry, Harry, and Raquel (1969).” Peary describes this second string of films — “set in rugged terrains… [and] inhabited by sexually driven buxom beauties…, strong-jawed, no-nonsense heroes, and an assortment of religious zealots, rapists, and sweaty lowlifes” — as “essentially fake morality plays, in which the numerous sinners either repent or are punished severely.” He argues that “as skin flicks, Meyer’s 1964-1969 films were far superior to those of his competitors”, given they are “extremely well-photographed” and feature “wild, absurd visual humor, dialogue that makes no sense…, and ridiculous plot situations — while his actors play their roles straight.”

Peary goes on to say that while “to many moviegoers who hadn’t seen a Russ Meyer film, BTVOTD was a revelation — a film that they (mostly college students) considered to be their own ‘far-out’ wave length” — Peary and others realized they’d “overestimated [Meyer’s] talents”. Peary refers to BTVOTD as “really a terrible film, energetically but poorly acted by ex-Playboy bunnies Dolly Reed and Cynthia Meyers, model Marcia McBroom, and under-emoting or overemoting stars.” He points out that “cryptic jargon and Meyer’s rapid-fire editing techniques” (your head will seriously spin!) “are meant to camouflage the picture’s emptiness” — but “the holes in the script come through”. He ends his scathing review (which I essentially agree with) by noting “there is little in [it] to recommend”, and that it simply “proved that what [fans] had seen in his early films were everything Meyer had to offer”; “by choice (!), Meyer returned to making independent sex films — in the Vixen mold but not as good”, which “unfortunately [was] the milieu to which he [was] best suited.”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Colorful sets
  • Far-out cinematography

Must See?
Yes, once — but simply for its cult status and notoriety.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links:

Where’s Poppa? (1970)

Where’s Poppa? (1970)

“You don’t put your mother in a home: she’s got a home; this is her home.”

Synopsis:
When a lawyer (George Segal) living with his senile mother (Ruth Gordon) falls in love with a beautiful young nurse (Trish Van Devere), he tells his married brother (Ron Leibman) he’s determined not to let anything get in the way of his new romance — including their troublesome mother.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Black Comedy
  • Carl Reiner Films
  • Elderly People
  • George Segal Films
  • Grown Children
  • Living Nightmare
  • Ruth Gordon Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this black comedy by “director Carl Reiner and screenwriter Robert Klane (working from his own novel)” is “a litmus test for viewers that will expose one’s taste for comedy and tolerance for tastelessness.” He suggests you see this film “with an audience rather than alone at home on a cassette” (ah, the ’80s!) given that “one’s laughter is enhanced by the realization that all those around you… are being subjected to the same embarrassing material” (“collective embarrassment can be fun”). He notes that this “haywire world we are presented is unforgettable: Cabbies pick up men in gorilla suits rather than perfectly dressed black ladies. Coaches snatch 10-year-old kids without their parents’ permission… Female prostitutes turn out to be male cops in drag — [and] the one on whom Leibman is forced by a gang to perform a deviant act gets a crush on him (which is reason enough for viewers to have a negative response).” Indeed, “the craziness in the apartment Segal and Gordon share is merely a reflection on the surrounding world.”

Peary points out that “even those turned off by the humor will enjoy the standout performances” by Gordon — who plays Mrs. Hocheiser as someone with “no redeeming qualities” — and Segal, who “gives a remarkable impression of a man who is on his last legs.” He notes that because “both Gordon and Segal were given much freedom”, they “gave performances that are comedic gems”, and he argues that “for them alone, this film is worth seeing.” Equally memorable, however, are Leibman as Segal’s impossibly put-upon brother, and Van Devere (in her film debut) as a traumatized young divorcee clearly willing to wear her heart on her sleeve. I was both deeply discomfited and pleasantly surprised by how boldly this (highly politically incorrect) film stays its course as a movie determined to offend in as many ways as possible — while also providing plenty of uncomfortable laughter. The most distressing sequences involve the depiction of Central Park as “a veritable jungle… ruled by uncivilized ‘tribes’ (black gangs)”; while meant to simply be part of the collective satire, these hit especially hard and may stretch your tolerance.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • George Segal as Gordon
  • Ruth Gordon as Mrs. Hocheiser
  • Ron Leibman as Sidney
  • Trish Van Devere as Louise
  • Many darkly amusing sequences

Must See?
Yes, as a cult favorite.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links:

Seance on a Wet Afternoon (1964)

Seance on a Wet Afternoon (1964)

“We have borrowed a child, Billy — borrowed; borrowed.”

Synopsis:
A mentally disturbed medium (Kim Stanley) conspires with her husband (Richard Attenborough) to kidnap a wealthy child (Judith Donner) in order to bring fame to her psychic abilities by sharing where the girl is hidden.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Bryan Forbes Films
  • Henpecked Husbands
  • Hostages
  • Kidnapping
  • Kim Stanley Films
  • Mental Illness
  • Psychic Powers
  • Richard Attenborough Films

Review:
Other than playing a Marilyn Monroe-esque actress in The Goddess (1958), Kim Stanley’s best-known cinematic role was in this film by director Bryan Forbes, playing a deeply disturbed “psychic” whose delusional mental illness causes not only distress but serious harm to those around her. The atmospheric film gets off to a somewhat slow and talky start, but then shifts into gear as the kidnapping proceeds, and we’re kept on tenterhooks wondering what in the world will happen next. Our primary focus is on Attenborough, playing the epitome of a co-dependent spouse whose sympathy for his wife’s grief upends all logic; he’s highly effective in the role and compulsively watchable. Stanley’s performance is equally convincing, but evokes horror more than sympathy; this is a woman willing to take the world down with her as she enacts what she believes to be the warped “truth”.

Note: The girl (Judith Donner) chosen to play the hostage only has this one film to her name in IMDb, but she’s suitably realistic.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Kim Stanley as Myra
  • Richard Attenborough as Billy
  • Atmospheric cinematography and direction

  • Effective use of real-life locales

Must See?
Yes, as an unusual and powerful film, and for the performances.

Categories

  • Good Show
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

Tarzan’s Greatest Adventure (1959)

Tarzan’s Greatest Adventure (1959)

“Death is never a pretty sight — and you’ll see it again before the hunt is over.”

Synopsis:
Accompanied by a local pilot (Eve Brent), Tarzan (Gordon Scott) pursues a group of four British criminals — Slade (Anthony Quayle), O’Bannion (Sean Connery), Kruger (Niall MacGinnis), and Dino (Al Mulock) — who, with support from Slade’s girlfriend (Scilla Gabel), have stolen explosives in order to raid a diamond mine.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Africa
  • Anthony Quayle Films
  • Cat-and-Mouse
  • Jungles
  • Niall MacGinnis Films
  • Sean Connery Films
  • Tarzan Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that while he’s “partial to the Johnny Weissmuller-Maureen O’Sullivan films”, this “colorful, action-packed adventure picture” — “produced on a fair-sized budget”, “filmed in CinemaScope, and made on location in Kenya by a talented British crew” — is “usually regarded as the best of the entire Tarzan series”. He notes that “Gordon Scott, who had played the jungle hero in several low-budgeted, studio-shot films in the early and mid-fifties, returned as the more introspective, human, mature… , and articulate Tarzan than he had played before”:

… and adds that “the villains he confronts aren’t cartoon characters, but complex men with singular motivations for committing crimes”.

While I haven’t see any Tarzan films outside of those listed in GFTFF, I’m in agreement that this is surely among the best. We get authentically caught up in the drama, which features realistic (and scary) settings, plenty of tension, well-filmed action scenes, and memorable supporting roles (including Connery as a naughty villain).

We’re never sure what will happen next, who will die next (or how), and — in particular — what will conspire between scar-faced Quayle and McGinnis (playing a greedy, cunning, bespectacled German completely obsessed with diamonds). While I’m not a fan of Shane’s sexually aggressive American pilot:

… she shows impressive growth throughout the film and “deserves” her ultimate dalliance with Tarzan. This one remains well worth a look — as does its follow-up, Tarzan the Magnificent (1960).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Anthony Quayle as Slade
  • Niall MacGinnis as Kruger
  • Fine location shooting
  • Many well-filmed, exciting scenes

Must See?
Yes, as a fine example of what the Tarzan films were able to transform into in later years.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links: