Been a little busy recently, thus few updates but here are some comments on films I have seen.
Lets starts with the worst, The Invasion. A truly wretched film. I never thought you could mess up Invasion Of The Body Snatchers but this managed it. Its just awful. The first half is full of wandering scenes with dull dialogue that feels to be unmatching to what we just saw. There is no scene that adds tension. Its just a collection of shots with no dramatic purpose. Then suddenly the film has fits and starts into action that don't make much sense and make the situation even more confusing and dull. Or maybe I just fell asleep. Its obviously been hacked around but there's little to suggest a film that was ever any good (in fact the obviously added on ending is actually more fun than the rest of the film).
Now onto a film that got a lot of bad notice but wasn't so bad (at least visually) The Happening. Yes the film has terrible dialogue and acting to match. As everyone acts the same unfocused way you have to blame the director as they couldn't all have made the same duff acting decisions. Some of the dialogue is laughable. And yet the film has many terrific silent sequence, simply of wind blowing, people losing the ability to want to stay alive. If the film was a silent movie it would have been much better.
Finally a no-holds-barred good monster movie The Mist. A group of people trapped in a supermarket after a mist falls on a town, with many monsters within the mist. While the set-up sounds hokey its played for real, from the point of view of people in the situation acting like normal people (some are suicidal, some go religious). While under pressure, things get out of hand between the survivors and they start killing one another eventually, due to basic human weakness. The ending, although badly scored, has a terrific punch as its pretty ballsy. This one is like Tremors or Arachnophobia. It takes a b-movie premise and elevates it due to simple craft and focus.
Terminator Salvation: A decent enough film, not really worthy of the ire its been getting. Its main trouble is that its not very surprising and that the Terminator TV show did a lot more with character detail and expanding the world than this managed, even with all the money it had. Christian Bale is actually fine as John Connor. Not as good as he's been in other films but he did his job. And the future world was interesting to a degree, in that you've seen it all before but it worked in a b-movie way. I think this film is getting the rage than Terminator 3 deserved. Its not a film that's ripe for rediscovery but its fine. In the fun movie blockbuster stage Star Trek is much better but I can imagine Transformers 2 will be much worse. I can imagine now that the Terminator TV show will be the best remembered follow-up to the first two films.
Drag Me To Hell is a riot. Its incredibly shallow but that's not a criticism. The film is simply a scarefest, best seen in an audience full of screaming people. It has loads of sick images and cheap scares but simply delivers on what is needed.
Have been watching some Fassbinder films and Angelopolous but those would take a more thorough posting than I have time for at the moment, as they are a lot more thoughtful, as well as the masterpiece Satantango.
Sunday, 28 June 2009
Sunday, 31 May 2009
Quota Quickie Directors Notes.
From the diary of George McBride, director of Dracula's Soho Virgin Bride.
Written 1957
Terrible morning. Woke, went to the studio to see Gustav before filming begins tomorrow, that bore with his grotesque wandering accent. Where does this fat and annoying man come from? Seems to have no real past, accents and stories wandering from all over. Most of them were made up from what I've have heard but have moments of truth, like the story of him helping Howard Hawks dispose of a body in someone's pool. I hear it had something to do with a homosexual actor in one of Hawks' films, a night of passion gone awry, and no police. Or the tale of helping three forgettable hussies rip-off a Howard Hughes flunky of no little stature and doing it so well that Hughes himself gave them better parts in his movies, as he found the story so tremendously funny. He calls me the jock and complains I offer no direction. How to direct a man as offensively verbal as he, whose response to avoid leaving the light is I'm Dracula, I know what Vampires do, and then spins off a yarn involving Valentino's dead body and a cabal of strange yet well-paying fans, who wanted the body for reasons that he would not go into but assumes me that its got to do with his portrayal of Dracula.
Walking into the ramshackle studio in the morning, saw a dead body of a young actor lying at the front door. Recognised the actor. He's not very good so its no great loss. That grotesque leading man Michael Deer walked up behind me, saw the body and started kicking it violently for ten minutes, in a rage, yelling obscenities at this deceased thespian. The stagehands then took the body and threw it over a bridge nearby, then called the police, who found the body. Now the bruising and method of death is a great mystery but is free publicity for three as yet unreleased of my films, which this actor tried to ruin. With Help from Mr's Deer and Trebeck.
Jackson Tulord Breen DeWitt Delauncy 111 called me into his office, where he crawled from the door back to his seat, his desk surrounded by lots of paper that he'll never read. So much dust in this office that it's hard to breath. He is our studio head as he calls it, owns 30 percent of studio, some annoying lord owning the rest but wants to keep it quiet. In his mid-seventies, wears a ridiculous brown wig like a teddy boy while he coughs for breath. He is most famous for a line he said last week when his accountant (who was in his mid-fifties and still lived with his mother) decapitated a minor actor in a rage. He said "There's an ugly head in my soup and I know ugly as I work in the British film industry!" Informs me that I owe him three more films in the next two months so I better get cracking. Also informs me I'll have a good writer for one of them but doesn't know what the plots are as of yet. Also says don't worry about the dead body outside. Payments have been made. His accountant also has gotten off as they have framed the now-dead actor and said they were after the same woman. Which is odd as the one who died last week was gay and the other one had his balls cut off. Which led to a unique acting style that is difficult to write for.
Met with two writers.
One was an actor, then my assistant, now a writer. not bad for a man who has been here six months. He's pitched me the sequel to Soho Bride involving lesbians but I have been told by Delauncy 111 that no lesbians shall pass in a horror nor any other British movie. Therefore the new blood have to be male. I think we're onto something yet the writer looks disappointed.
The other one is an alien invasion movie set in a public school. I give the nod, having no idea how we'll be able to afford it. It'll get cancelled and they'll still have to pay me.
Met with third writer in private. He is drunk and a national poet (and pulp writer under an alternate name for the money). he can only come here while drunk as we offend his dignity but is paid and says he'll come up with something. Which is good enough for me. I'm going up in the world.
P.S. His name is Alistair Brian Jones McLellan and his poetry is bloody awful. As are his novels, and lamentably, his film scripts.
LATER IN WEEK
Shooting is going okay. Gustav Trebeck continues to annoy and molest the leading lady but she doesn't say anything, is terrified of losing this job. Getting fired from here is the next direct step to prostitution. Although she can probably keep the same agent for those services.
The set looks bloody awful and my DP keeps spitting up blood. I do say eventually that he should go see a doctor but he says "No bloody way do I go see a duck." I don't know exactly what that means. It kind of makes sense yet the way he said it was crazy enough for me to think it meant something more sinister and oddly sexual.
EARLY NEXT WEEK
Gustav has started importing prostitutes and is grooming his leading lady to be one of them. And she seems willing. Odd his late forties fiancee is watching with interest and not disgust. I just don't get these people and am not sure that I want to. A mature-looking youngster also appears on set, making Gustav very nervous. He makes some sinister visual suggestions to his fiancee, who nods in a way that suggests, well, I don't want to know.
MID-WEEK
Gustav refuses to learn his lines. He has them placed out of camera view, meaning few establishing shots are possible as this vampire talks way too much, most of it improvised so why demand that there are cards. I can't see any rise or lowering of quality in the improvising though, to be honest. The D.P worries me. he seems to be very ill.
LATE-WEEK
Gustav Trebeck died this morning. Heart gave out after being drown in fat and being full of s**t. Oh god, what do I do now? On the plus side, my D.P looks to be a lot better now.
EARLY THE NEXT WEEK
Start shooting Dracula's Virgin Soho Bride with a stand-in for Gustav. Kinda looks like him and I am assured that no-one will notice the difference. I am not convinced but am under contract and will do as I am told.
Written 1957
Terrible morning. Woke, went to the studio to see Gustav before filming begins tomorrow, that bore with his grotesque wandering accent. Where does this fat and annoying man come from? Seems to have no real past, accents and stories wandering from all over. Most of them were made up from what I've have heard but have moments of truth, like the story of him helping Howard Hawks dispose of a body in someone's pool. I hear it had something to do with a homosexual actor in one of Hawks' films, a night of passion gone awry, and no police. Or the tale of helping three forgettable hussies rip-off a Howard Hughes flunky of no little stature and doing it so well that Hughes himself gave them better parts in his movies, as he found the story so tremendously funny. He calls me the jock and complains I offer no direction. How to direct a man as offensively verbal as he, whose response to avoid leaving the light is I'm Dracula, I know what Vampires do, and then spins off a yarn involving Valentino's dead body and a cabal of strange yet well-paying fans, who wanted the body for reasons that he would not go into but assumes me that its got to do with his portrayal of Dracula.
Walking into the ramshackle studio in the morning, saw a dead body of a young actor lying at the front door. Recognised the actor. He's not very good so its no great loss. That grotesque leading man Michael Deer walked up behind me, saw the body and started kicking it violently for ten minutes, in a rage, yelling obscenities at this deceased thespian. The stagehands then took the body and threw it over a bridge nearby, then called the police, who found the body. Now the bruising and method of death is a great mystery but is free publicity for three as yet unreleased of my films, which this actor tried to ruin. With Help from Mr's Deer and Trebeck.
Jackson Tulord Breen DeWitt Delauncy 111 called me into his office, where he crawled from the door back to his seat, his desk surrounded by lots of paper that he'll never read. So much dust in this office that it's hard to breath. He is our studio head as he calls it, owns 30 percent of studio, some annoying lord owning the rest but wants to keep it quiet. In his mid-seventies, wears a ridiculous brown wig like a teddy boy while he coughs for breath. He is most famous for a line he said last week when his accountant (who was in his mid-fifties and still lived with his mother) decapitated a minor actor in a rage. He said "There's an ugly head in my soup and I know ugly as I work in the British film industry!" Informs me that I owe him three more films in the next two months so I better get cracking. Also informs me I'll have a good writer for one of them but doesn't know what the plots are as of yet. Also says don't worry about the dead body outside. Payments have been made. His accountant also has gotten off as they have framed the now-dead actor and said they were after the same woman. Which is odd as the one who died last week was gay and the other one had his balls cut off. Which led to a unique acting style that is difficult to write for.
Met with two writers.
One was an actor, then my assistant, now a writer. not bad for a man who has been here six months. He's pitched me the sequel to Soho Bride involving lesbians but I have been told by Delauncy 111 that no lesbians shall pass in a horror nor any other British movie. Therefore the new blood have to be male. I think we're onto something yet the writer looks disappointed.
The other one is an alien invasion movie set in a public school. I give the nod, having no idea how we'll be able to afford it. It'll get cancelled and they'll still have to pay me.
Met with third writer in private. He is drunk and a national poet (and pulp writer under an alternate name for the money). he can only come here while drunk as we offend his dignity but is paid and says he'll come up with something. Which is good enough for me. I'm going up in the world.
P.S. His name is Alistair Brian Jones McLellan and his poetry is bloody awful. As are his novels, and lamentably, his film scripts.
LATER IN WEEK
Shooting is going okay. Gustav Trebeck continues to annoy and molest the leading lady but she doesn't say anything, is terrified of losing this job. Getting fired from here is the next direct step to prostitution. Although she can probably keep the same agent for those services.
The set looks bloody awful and my DP keeps spitting up blood. I do say eventually that he should go see a doctor but he says "No bloody way do I go see a duck." I don't know exactly what that means. It kind of makes sense yet the way he said it was crazy enough for me to think it meant something more sinister and oddly sexual.
EARLY NEXT WEEK
Gustav has started importing prostitutes and is grooming his leading lady to be one of them. And she seems willing. Odd his late forties fiancee is watching with interest and not disgust. I just don't get these people and am not sure that I want to. A mature-looking youngster also appears on set, making Gustav very nervous. He makes some sinister visual suggestions to his fiancee, who nods in a way that suggests, well, I don't want to know.
MID-WEEK
Gustav refuses to learn his lines. He has them placed out of camera view, meaning few establishing shots are possible as this vampire talks way too much, most of it improvised so why demand that there are cards. I can't see any rise or lowering of quality in the improvising though, to be honest. The D.P worries me. he seems to be very ill.
LATE-WEEK
Gustav Trebeck died this morning. Heart gave out after being drown in fat and being full of s**t. Oh god, what do I do now? On the plus side, my D.P looks to be a lot better now.
EARLY THE NEXT WEEK
Start shooting Dracula's Virgin Soho Bride with a stand-in for Gustav. Kinda looks like him and I am assured that no-one will notice the difference. I am not convinced but am under contract and will do as I am told.
Saturday, 16 May 2009
Caprica
I've seen Caprica, the new Battlestar Galactica prequel.
The good news on this project is that, following a slightly dramatically unfocused first fifteen minutes, it becomes a terrific sci-fi show. It isn't as unrelated to Battlestar as the producers have suggested, although I do think if you haven't seen Battlestar, there isn't anything that will alienate. But if you are a Battlestar fan then there's a lot of details that will thrill.
The big link is that Adama is in it as a child. But he's not developed in a way to suggest that he will be significantly confusing. He's a child who has lost his mother and older sister and that is it. The central drama is between his father Joseph, and Daniel Greystone, a genius advancing AI. They both lose their families in a terrorist attack and are hell-bent on finding a way to get their families back. With the advance in AI, there may be a way to do this.
The show has two areas of interest. First is in the central two characters, One Joseph, has shady mob connections, the other Daniel, is a genius with a mix of compassion and coldness that mirrors Battlestar's Baltar, although his demons are unique. Daniel is the most intriguing character in the show, the one who is most likely to do odd, immoral actions. He gives the drama its life in the pilot, and is the character you want to see in his full mad-bastard glory as the show continues. Eric Stoltz plays him and its great casting, as Stoltz's coldness and suppressed emotions that are there usually as an actor give his character as sense of an odd, unusual life.
The second interest is in the technology. The Internet has advanced in this show to be able to project avatars as people going through virtual landscapes that resemble real-life locations, so people can go to clubs, take part on group sex without ever doing it physically. By the time the show has begun, Daniel's daughter has found a way to download memories, emotions, so an avatar can be a person. The existence of this avatar is the propellant for Stoltz and how he goes to hell. he finale, where Stoltz downloads his daughter's avatar into the first cylon, is a great moment, both for Battlestar fans (as it explains so much about what follows in various ways) and in sci-fi, as you see a new life form emerging, evolving.
Like Battlestar there is religion and it is intriguing, propelling the plot, with a belief that society is sinful and failing, that there is only one true god versus other religions. But this is set-up in the pilot, so it doesn't propel the story as interestingly as the central characters.
There are flaws. As I stated, the first fifteen minutes don't work so well. There's an investigator character that's pretty dull. That's kind of s situation where they need to invent a new character that can slot into a plot-line that is building rather than anything else. But that's two minor flaws in a great new series. It's not as strong as the Battlestar Galactica miniseries but its still pretty great.
The good news on this project is that, following a slightly dramatically unfocused first fifteen minutes, it becomes a terrific sci-fi show. It isn't as unrelated to Battlestar as the producers have suggested, although I do think if you haven't seen Battlestar, there isn't anything that will alienate. But if you are a Battlestar fan then there's a lot of details that will thrill.
The big link is that Adama is in it as a child. But he's not developed in a way to suggest that he will be significantly confusing. He's a child who has lost his mother and older sister and that is it. The central drama is between his father Joseph, and Daniel Greystone, a genius advancing AI. They both lose their families in a terrorist attack and are hell-bent on finding a way to get their families back. With the advance in AI, there may be a way to do this.
The show has two areas of interest. First is in the central two characters, One Joseph, has shady mob connections, the other Daniel, is a genius with a mix of compassion and coldness that mirrors Battlestar's Baltar, although his demons are unique. Daniel is the most intriguing character in the show, the one who is most likely to do odd, immoral actions. He gives the drama its life in the pilot, and is the character you want to see in his full mad-bastard glory as the show continues. Eric Stoltz plays him and its great casting, as Stoltz's coldness and suppressed emotions that are there usually as an actor give his character as sense of an odd, unusual life.
The second interest is in the technology. The Internet has advanced in this show to be able to project avatars as people going through virtual landscapes that resemble real-life locations, so people can go to clubs, take part on group sex without ever doing it physically. By the time the show has begun, Daniel's daughter has found a way to download memories, emotions, so an avatar can be a person. The existence of this avatar is the propellant for Stoltz and how he goes to hell. he finale, where Stoltz downloads his daughter's avatar into the first cylon, is a great moment, both for Battlestar fans (as it explains so much about what follows in various ways) and in sci-fi, as you see a new life form emerging, evolving.
Like Battlestar there is religion and it is intriguing, propelling the plot, with a belief that society is sinful and failing, that there is only one true god versus other religions. But this is set-up in the pilot, so it doesn't propel the story as interestingly as the central characters.
There are flaws. As I stated, the first fifteen minutes don't work so well. There's an investigator character that's pretty dull. That's kind of s situation where they need to invent a new character that can slot into a plot-line that is building rather than anything else. But that's two minor flaws in a great new series. It's not as strong as the Battlestar Galactica miniseries but its still pretty great.
Saturday, 9 May 2009
30 Days Of Night
This will be brief. 30 Days Of Night is a terrific little vampire film starring Josh Hartnett. Set in Alaska, in an area that have thirty days of darkness, the occupants have the misfortune to be attacked by very brutal vampires, who act like animals on the hunt rather than humans. Cut off for these thirty days, these people have to hide from the attacking vampires, in the middle of a very cold winter, over this time, being picked off one by one.
The film has a wonderful sense of build. From the start something is off, little details adding to unease as the characters are introduced, the vampires finally going brutal at the thirty minute mark, taking out most of the town in a coldly executed style. In the next section of the story we watch the survivors hide and get hungry as days past, all of them very human, making the kind of mistakes that would be expected under pressure, getting themselves and family members skilled, which is fascinating to watch. In the final section, as the final days before sunlight approaches, the humans and vampires both get desperate and up the ante in horrific ways.
What the film has going for it is its bleakness. Decent people are established and are killed, have their families suffer in the most horrific ways. Even Hartnett, as the hero, is given few hero moments, any he does have coming with tragic consequences. Its probably one of the darkest horror films in events since the eighties with films such as The Thing and Day Of the Dead. Its got that essential bleakness which is thrilling in a horror film, having been lost for so long in a genre that is gimmicky as hell. It has good solid performances all round and is calmly framed within the horror, kept at a distance for the more horrific moments.
So this is a very good film that's likely to be a cult film pretty soon and deserves that status. It was produced by Sam Raimi's production company, the first really solid film I've seen from them. The Grudge remake was okay but weak in comparison to the terrific original, and the rest of them have had reviews to make you want to avoid the films like the plague.
So this and Star Trek has made it an excellent weekend for films for me.
The film has a wonderful sense of build. From the start something is off, little details adding to unease as the characters are introduced, the vampires finally going brutal at the thirty minute mark, taking out most of the town in a coldly executed style. In the next section of the story we watch the survivors hide and get hungry as days past, all of them very human, making the kind of mistakes that would be expected under pressure, getting themselves and family members skilled, which is fascinating to watch. In the final section, as the final days before sunlight approaches, the humans and vampires both get desperate and up the ante in horrific ways.
What the film has going for it is its bleakness. Decent people are established and are killed, have their families suffer in the most horrific ways. Even Hartnett, as the hero, is given few hero moments, any he does have coming with tragic consequences. Its probably one of the darkest horror films in events since the eighties with films such as The Thing and Day Of the Dead. Its got that essential bleakness which is thrilling in a horror film, having been lost for so long in a genre that is gimmicky as hell. It has good solid performances all round and is calmly framed within the horror, kept at a distance for the more horrific moments.
So this is a very good film that's likely to be a cult film pretty soon and deserves that status. It was produced by Sam Raimi's production company, the first really solid film I've seen from them. The Grudge remake was okay but weak in comparison to the terrific original, and the rest of them have had reviews to make you want to avoid the films like the plague.
So this and Star Trek has made it an excellent weekend for films for me.
Friday, 8 May 2009
Star Trek
This is a very brief blog for now. Just saw Star Trek and thought it was loads of fun. Its was well cast, fast-paced and tied its plot together pretty well (even if the third act seemed pretty short). It had its plot contrivances but nothing that was painful, all done to keep the story moving at a fast pace. It had good character moments through-out, on the pulp level, and had a nice build and mix of scenes that kept the story constantly interesting. Most importantly, while it never went for the more idea-led idealistic face of Star Trek (which a lot of the times leads to dull pretension) it got back to the fun side of the show that has been achingly missing from Trek for years, with the Next Generations and the like, who simply talk slowly to signify something needs thought and leave out the fun. This Trek blows up planets and has Kirk screw a green chick. It reminds of of the fun movies of last year such as Iron Man, Speed Racer and Hellboy 2, where the emphasis was on fun. Basically its a drunken riot, and can that be wrong.
Monday, 20 April 2009
J. G. Ballard 1930 - 2009
Ballard was a major writer for me, a huge influence. The news of his death is a huge shock. Early novels such as The Crystal World to later works such as Crash, High Rise and The Kindness Of Women, as well as his many short stories, were stunning works. One of those deaths where I can't help but think someone important has died.
Friday, 17 April 2009
Hammer Part 2
While I have blogged already regarding Hammer, I have been watching more films from this brilliant b-movie studio.
The Kiss Of The Vampire - Directed by Don Sharp, this is by far the greatest of the films in this grouping. Starts with the obvious cliches, a couple stranded by fate in a village near a castle, invited by strange people while horrified villagers look on. But save a slightly stiff leading man, this one is a stunner. The film starts with a funeral that is interrupted by the dead young woman’s father drunkenly putting a shovel through the heart of his vampire daughter, making people run like hell away. The strange people who turn out to be vampires are fleshed out as an interesting, complicated family who seduce the family for days before kidnapping the wife at a masked ball, having everyone say that the husband came alone. Its full of great atmosphere, the masked sequence and the strange look at a repressed marriage in many ways foreshadowing Eyes Wide Shut. I don’t say that lightly. Both films have odd, intimate atmospheres that get under your skin. This is a brilliant film of odd details, sequence upon sequence of wonderful atmospherics, leading to a conclusion that is brilliant but with a sense of humour (similar to but shot at the same time to the Birds. This is the superior film of the two.) This is the best of the Hammer vampire films, along with The Horror Of Dracula.
Brides Of Dracula & The Curse Of The Werewolf - Two Terrence Fisher gothics, both having flaws narratively made up for by stunning images and sequences. Brides Of Dracula stars peter Cushing, even though he really has a supporting part. Dracula doesn’t appear. Instead a disciple of Dracula is the dreaded vampire. We follow a school mistress, abandoned by her coachman at a village, invited to a nearby castle to stay the night by an old woman. She goes, is seduced by, and frees the woman’s vampire son, who is loose. The school mistress escapes, is found by Cushing’s Van Helsing, is sent out of danger while Cushing hunts the vampire. The vampire follows the school mistress, creates his own vampire disciples as he goes. The film is of two great sequences. The first half hour, of abandonment and going to the castle, up to the freeing of the vampire, is a terrific build, matched by the finale section, of the vampire and his brides focused on the school mistress, being hunted by Van Helsing, leading to a great windmill finale. These are terrific as they a visual sequences where there is story but plotting doesn’t get in the way of visual splendour. The bit inbetween, joining these two great sequences, is solid but has plotting concerns amidst some great mainly silent moments, but needed another pass. The film is still in the top rank, at the level of Dracula Prince Of Darkness. The Curse Of the Werewolf isn’t as solid, has a very clunky, suspense less script, but has amazing sequences and moments, scene by scene, which makes up for an obvious story and lack of momentum. It also has Oliver Reed as a werewolf. The first half hour covers the creation of the werewolf curse, telling the story of an imprisoned beggar, a cruel lord and a mute serving lady, leading to a cursed child without parents, taken in by a kindly academic. This is the best part of the film, is its own little story on life’s cruelties. Then we get into the werewolf section, of the child becoming a man, which is solid but is achingly unoriginal compared to what came before. But the film does always build great moments, and does place a great reason for the worse, not based out of being bitten by someone but more of being the victim of sin, weakness, and cruelty. The end section, where Reed becomes a werewolf (the bit you want to see for the entire film) is top class. Reed makes a great monster, is the best under the make-up.
Frankenstein Must be Destroyed & Evil Of Frankenstein - One of these Frankenstein was directed by Terrence Fisher, the other by legendary cinematographer Freddie Francis. Fisher’s Frankenstein Must be Destroyed is a late entry in the cycle and suffers from the same stop-script weaknesses as the other films mentioned above. The first twenty minutes are slow but eventually the film finds its feet, its theme being of moving a brain from one body to another. There are two distinctive areas in the film. First is the treatment of the monster. This monster looks human, has the brain of an intelligent man and can reason yet finds the world an unworkable place. But he can reason and articulate. it’s a wonderfully moving performance, giving the last third real resonance. The other area of interest is that the real monster is Frankenstein, who blackmails a young couple, essentially ruining their lives throughout the film. He rapes the woman and later kills her brutally, ruins the man professionally, is deserving of his grisly fate. Its very interesting to see a character so unlikable at the centre of a film. On the pulp site the film does have its fare share of insane asylum’s body parts, all the pulpy fun stuff. Francis’ The Evil Of Frankenstein is pulp. The film opens with a little girl witnessing her father’s body being stolen, to be used by Frankenstein, who attacks a man of the cloth within the first five minutes) We have a fairs, hypnotists, a hunchbacked mute woman, a brutally murdered burgermaster. You couldn’t accuse of it of having ideas but it is very enjoyable and atmospheric, and has a creepy, very dead-looking monster at its centre. Its kind of a freak show of a film, which is no bad thing, held together by Cushing.
The Vampire Lovers & The Legend Of The Seven Golden Vampires - These are two insane Roy Ward Baker films (director of A Night To Remember and Scars Of Dracula). The Vampire Lovers is the Hammer going for the lets get cash with a lesbian (but not dyke-looking) vampire, who seduces young women and confuses their fathers. Its stupid, badly scripted, doesn’t have any real pacing nor narrative momentum, made by a director who is not very interested. What it does have is lesbian vampires so all is forgiven. The Legend Of The Seven Golden Vampires is tosh. It doesn’t try to hide that and is oddly lovable for that. Van Helsing goes to China to fight vampires (who can do karate), has his own karate group, ends up in a Seven Samaria plot. Its dumber than Vampire lovers but made with more energy. What the film does have OTT colours, some odd looking zombie vampires, kung fu and a general weirdness. Even Dracula shows up for no real plot reason. Basically, I want a sequel. Its a film, like Tobe Hooper’s Lifeforce, that you can’t help but love in some way.
Night Creatures - A film about ex-pirates becoming smugglers on the English coast, directed by Peter Graham Scott, who I’ve never heard of. This is one of those likable solid films. Its not going to stun anyone with originality, has moments where the plotting could have progressed in a manner that is a tad more inventive but it has Peter Cushing as a pirate disguised as a priest, a fat nutcase whose tongue Cushing tore out and left for dead for raping Cushing’s wife, a troop of soldiers trying to shut down smugglers, a scarecrow who warns smugglers, skeleton soldiers, Michael Ripper in a larger role than normal, and Oliver Reed as the romantic lead, who attempts to marry Cushing’s daughter. So it has lots of good elements that cover the duller parts and is well worth a look.
Non-Hammer Gothic
Fearless Vampire Killers - Roman Polanksi’s Hammer homage is a fun film on its own, and is visually brilliant, but comparing the film to the source of its mockery, Hammer films, shows up the film’s lack of imagination. An old fool and a half-wit assistant arrive in a small village near a castle in winter, to find it under the threat of vampires from the castle. After a few hijacks they travel to the castle, verbally spar with the vampires, escape and accidentally cause the spread of vampirism around the world. The problem with this film is that its got a thirty minute plot with no sub-plots. The good thing about this film is Polanski the director is great at atmosphere so the pace is careful and you don’t really notice, except at the end, where you kind of wonder, is that it? Its never actually scary nor hilarious, even though it always stays amusing. Its one of those decent films where you wish they spent more time being inventive in the script to make a film worthy of its director, as well as creating incidents that would allow Polanski the range to make some proper horror sequences, and give the film some kick. It doesn’t even manage to compete with the solid to best hammer on the odd fairy story feel that they could create. If it weren’t directed by Polanski it would be seen as a good solid effort but seems slight in comparison to Knife In The Water, Repulsion, Rosemary’s Baby and his brilliant early shorts.
The Fall Of The House Of Usher & The Pit And The Pendulum - Two Roger Corman films starring Vincent Price. Best get the worst out of the way first. Some of the acting around Vincent Price is stunningly bad. You get used to it and shut it out, incorporate it into the style. What’s great about these two films, apart from Price, who was born to play romantic, mad, incestuous, nutters with a tragic family past, is the writing and atmosphere. Richard Matheson wrote the scripts and they are very good, with premature burials, strange family pasts that destroy any chance of happiness, doomed romances. They are pacy, stay to be point so that even when you get ahead of the story in places, there’s always something dark and twisted coming in a few minutes. The atmosphere feels doomed, the buildings old, full of ancient chambers, family tombs, torture chambers and crumbling houses. Its terrific and a potent alternative to the Hammer films.
So that’s Hammer and their cousins. This is unlikely to be the last of the old-school horror films covered here as I have that kind of taste.
The Kiss Of The Vampire - Directed by Don Sharp, this is by far the greatest of the films in this grouping. Starts with the obvious cliches, a couple stranded by fate in a village near a castle, invited by strange people while horrified villagers look on. But save a slightly stiff leading man, this one is a stunner. The film starts with a funeral that is interrupted by the dead young woman’s father drunkenly putting a shovel through the heart of his vampire daughter, making people run like hell away. The strange people who turn out to be vampires are fleshed out as an interesting, complicated family who seduce the family for days before kidnapping the wife at a masked ball, having everyone say that the husband came alone. Its full of great atmosphere, the masked sequence and the strange look at a repressed marriage in many ways foreshadowing Eyes Wide Shut. I don’t say that lightly. Both films have odd, intimate atmospheres that get under your skin. This is a brilliant film of odd details, sequence upon sequence of wonderful atmospherics, leading to a conclusion that is brilliant but with a sense of humour (similar to but shot at the same time to the Birds. This is the superior film of the two.) This is the best of the Hammer vampire films, along with The Horror Of Dracula.
Brides Of Dracula & The Curse Of The Werewolf - Two Terrence Fisher gothics, both having flaws narratively made up for by stunning images and sequences. Brides Of Dracula stars peter Cushing, even though he really has a supporting part. Dracula doesn’t appear. Instead a disciple of Dracula is the dreaded vampire. We follow a school mistress, abandoned by her coachman at a village, invited to a nearby castle to stay the night by an old woman. She goes, is seduced by, and frees the woman’s vampire son, who is loose. The school mistress escapes, is found by Cushing’s Van Helsing, is sent out of danger while Cushing hunts the vampire. The vampire follows the school mistress, creates his own vampire disciples as he goes. The film is of two great sequences. The first half hour, of abandonment and going to the castle, up to the freeing of the vampire, is a terrific build, matched by the finale section, of the vampire and his brides focused on the school mistress, being hunted by Van Helsing, leading to a great windmill finale. These are terrific as they a visual sequences where there is story but plotting doesn’t get in the way of visual splendour. The bit inbetween, joining these two great sequences, is solid but has plotting concerns amidst some great mainly silent moments, but needed another pass. The film is still in the top rank, at the level of Dracula Prince Of Darkness. The Curse Of the Werewolf isn’t as solid, has a very clunky, suspense less script, but has amazing sequences and moments, scene by scene, which makes up for an obvious story and lack of momentum. It also has Oliver Reed as a werewolf. The first half hour covers the creation of the werewolf curse, telling the story of an imprisoned beggar, a cruel lord and a mute serving lady, leading to a cursed child without parents, taken in by a kindly academic. This is the best part of the film, is its own little story on life’s cruelties. Then we get into the werewolf section, of the child becoming a man, which is solid but is achingly unoriginal compared to what came before. But the film does always build great moments, and does place a great reason for the worse, not based out of being bitten by someone but more of being the victim of sin, weakness, and cruelty. The end section, where Reed becomes a werewolf (the bit you want to see for the entire film) is top class. Reed makes a great monster, is the best under the make-up.
Frankenstein Must be Destroyed & Evil Of Frankenstein - One of these Frankenstein was directed by Terrence Fisher, the other by legendary cinematographer Freddie Francis. Fisher’s Frankenstein Must be Destroyed is a late entry in the cycle and suffers from the same stop-script weaknesses as the other films mentioned above. The first twenty minutes are slow but eventually the film finds its feet, its theme being of moving a brain from one body to another. There are two distinctive areas in the film. First is the treatment of the monster. This monster looks human, has the brain of an intelligent man and can reason yet finds the world an unworkable place. But he can reason and articulate. it’s a wonderfully moving performance, giving the last third real resonance. The other area of interest is that the real monster is Frankenstein, who blackmails a young couple, essentially ruining their lives throughout the film. He rapes the woman and later kills her brutally, ruins the man professionally, is deserving of his grisly fate. Its very interesting to see a character so unlikable at the centre of a film. On the pulp site the film does have its fare share of insane asylum’s body parts, all the pulpy fun stuff. Francis’ The Evil Of Frankenstein is pulp. The film opens with a little girl witnessing her father’s body being stolen, to be used by Frankenstein, who attacks a man of the cloth within the first five minutes) We have a fairs, hypnotists, a hunchbacked mute woman, a brutally murdered burgermaster. You couldn’t accuse of it of having ideas but it is very enjoyable and atmospheric, and has a creepy, very dead-looking monster at its centre. Its kind of a freak show of a film, which is no bad thing, held together by Cushing.
The Vampire Lovers & The Legend Of The Seven Golden Vampires - These are two insane Roy Ward Baker films (director of A Night To Remember and Scars Of Dracula). The Vampire Lovers is the Hammer going for the lets get cash with a lesbian (but not dyke-looking) vampire, who seduces young women and confuses their fathers. Its stupid, badly scripted, doesn’t have any real pacing nor narrative momentum, made by a director who is not very interested. What it does have is lesbian vampires so all is forgiven. The Legend Of The Seven Golden Vampires is tosh. It doesn’t try to hide that and is oddly lovable for that. Van Helsing goes to China to fight vampires (who can do karate), has his own karate group, ends up in a Seven Samaria plot. Its dumber than Vampire lovers but made with more energy. What the film does have OTT colours, some odd looking zombie vampires, kung fu and a general weirdness. Even Dracula shows up for no real plot reason. Basically, I want a sequel. Its a film, like Tobe Hooper’s Lifeforce, that you can’t help but love in some way.
Night Creatures - A film about ex-pirates becoming smugglers on the English coast, directed by Peter Graham Scott, who I’ve never heard of. This is one of those likable solid films. Its not going to stun anyone with originality, has moments where the plotting could have progressed in a manner that is a tad more inventive but it has Peter Cushing as a pirate disguised as a priest, a fat nutcase whose tongue Cushing tore out and left for dead for raping Cushing’s wife, a troop of soldiers trying to shut down smugglers, a scarecrow who warns smugglers, skeleton soldiers, Michael Ripper in a larger role than normal, and Oliver Reed as the romantic lead, who attempts to marry Cushing’s daughter. So it has lots of good elements that cover the duller parts and is well worth a look.
Non-Hammer Gothic
Fearless Vampire Killers - Roman Polanksi’s Hammer homage is a fun film on its own, and is visually brilliant, but comparing the film to the source of its mockery, Hammer films, shows up the film’s lack of imagination. An old fool and a half-wit assistant arrive in a small village near a castle in winter, to find it under the threat of vampires from the castle. After a few hijacks they travel to the castle, verbally spar with the vampires, escape and accidentally cause the spread of vampirism around the world. The problem with this film is that its got a thirty minute plot with no sub-plots. The good thing about this film is Polanski the director is great at atmosphere so the pace is careful and you don’t really notice, except at the end, where you kind of wonder, is that it? Its never actually scary nor hilarious, even though it always stays amusing. Its one of those decent films where you wish they spent more time being inventive in the script to make a film worthy of its director, as well as creating incidents that would allow Polanski the range to make some proper horror sequences, and give the film some kick. It doesn’t even manage to compete with the solid to best hammer on the odd fairy story feel that they could create. If it weren’t directed by Polanski it would be seen as a good solid effort but seems slight in comparison to Knife In The Water, Repulsion, Rosemary’s Baby and his brilliant early shorts.
The Fall Of The House Of Usher & The Pit And The Pendulum - Two Roger Corman films starring Vincent Price. Best get the worst out of the way first. Some of the acting around Vincent Price is stunningly bad. You get used to it and shut it out, incorporate it into the style. What’s great about these two films, apart from Price, who was born to play romantic, mad, incestuous, nutters with a tragic family past, is the writing and atmosphere. Richard Matheson wrote the scripts and they are very good, with premature burials, strange family pasts that destroy any chance of happiness, doomed romances. They are pacy, stay to be point so that even when you get ahead of the story in places, there’s always something dark and twisted coming in a few minutes. The atmosphere feels doomed, the buildings old, full of ancient chambers, family tombs, torture chambers and crumbling houses. Its terrific and a potent alternative to the Hammer films.
So that’s Hammer and their cousins. This is unlikely to be the last of the old-school horror films covered here as I have that kind of taste.
Friday, 3 April 2009
The Father of Dalton Trebeck
While researching the life of dead movie star Dalton Trebeck, I never felt the need to go into the life of his father, Gustav Trebeck (1901-1957). After all, they never met, the father marrying a nineteen year old who had been released from an insane asylum for imagining she was being stalked, before knocking her up and dying in mysterious circumstances. But the more you look into it, the more fascinating this man becomes.
By the end of world war 2, this contract player of dubious indie studios z-level films, making fifty in all within a decade and a half, mostly thankfully rotted, was in career trouble. He was a frequent co-star of a failing Bela Lugosi, viewed as a fat yet low-rent Clifton Webb, was hitting drug addiction and the blacklist. He was in fact brought to the attention of the McCarthy scum by his attempt to bugger Trotsky in Mexico not long before his death. This got the McCarthy people interested, as did a commendation for his acting ability by Stalin. It wasn't long before Gustav was on the run from the US then forgotten, because is a bad actor really of any interest to anyone.
Finding himself in London, and failing to get himself any work, even in theatre, he went into the quota quickies, always leeching onto any new black-listed actor or director than came his way (Joseph Losey kicked him in the nuts more than once, also threatening to knife him). He always hoped these people would show loyalty to a fellow lefty but all saw him as a fake. Not even Orson Welles would hire him as an extra.
With every insult he returned to the quota quickies, working as back-up to many a staple of two-days film runs backed by American studios trying to get their product into British cinemas. Working from a Yorkshire studio mostly, he supported the tawdry comedy of the Dalry Sisters (later convicted of cannibalism, their victims young newlyweds), Mick McDick (an old man who liked very short women off-stage, which somehow, due to his manner, made people feel uncomfortable), more often than not in some rambling thriller/horrors where he would be the sex-addicted killer. His most notable credit during this time was a never released film version of James Bond, made in 1953. He played M with a very Russian accent, and as a flaming homosexual. Bond was also played in a very camp way, by alcoholic forties acting legend Michael Deer, who looking down upon playing "such an appalling scallywag". The fights were laughable, the dialogue worse. It was written by Warwick Jehane the second (Grandfather of Dalton Trebeck's future master director, also on the blacklist, before returning to American television, after all that nonsense subsided.)
So he stayed in Yorkshire for a few years, on these terrible films, his girth expanding by the film, alcoholism and rumours of bisexuality out of control, before finally giving up altogether and not bothering to learn lines. In the modern era this is called doing a Brando but in that time it was called who cares, who will see this film. His acting improved a lot during this era, when he was just making things up and ignoring the story. Apparently the studios here were haunted, had aliens, had many suicides, but this might simply have been viewed as a respectable way out of a failing career.
His final role was that of a fat Dracula in a quite terrible, amazingly tacky low-budget rip-off of Christopher Lee's Hammer film. This was his only film in colour, he at one point vomiting blood on a young virgin. Gustav died halfway through the film, replaced by a dwarf-like actor. It was set in the modern-day, a bald fat Dracula hitting on hookers in Soho, slashing them to death at times also, a la Tod Slaughter. While some writers say its may have influenced Peeping Tom, can anyone really imagine Michael Powell watching a dubious Gustav Trebeck vehicle (assuming he knew who Gustav Trebeck actually was) named Dracula's Soho Virgin Bride. I think not.
As you can see, this was a man forgotten in his own time. Dalton never talked about this man, never acknowledged this man's staggering failures. Its sad but true.
By the end of world war 2, this contract player of dubious indie studios z-level films, making fifty in all within a decade and a half, mostly thankfully rotted, was in career trouble. He was a frequent co-star of a failing Bela Lugosi, viewed as a fat yet low-rent Clifton Webb, was hitting drug addiction and the blacklist. He was in fact brought to the attention of the McCarthy scum by his attempt to bugger Trotsky in Mexico not long before his death. This got the McCarthy people interested, as did a commendation for his acting ability by Stalin. It wasn't long before Gustav was on the run from the US then forgotten, because is a bad actor really of any interest to anyone.
Finding himself in London, and failing to get himself any work, even in theatre, he went into the quota quickies, always leeching onto any new black-listed actor or director than came his way (Joseph Losey kicked him in the nuts more than once, also threatening to knife him). He always hoped these people would show loyalty to a fellow lefty but all saw him as a fake. Not even Orson Welles would hire him as an extra.
With every insult he returned to the quota quickies, working as back-up to many a staple of two-days film runs backed by American studios trying to get their product into British cinemas. Working from a Yorkshire studio mostly, he supported the tawdry comedy of the Dalry Sisters (later convicted of cannibalism, their victims young newlyweds), Mick McDick (an old man who liked very short women off-stage, which somehow, due to his manner, made people feel uncomfortable), more often than not in some rambling thriller/horrors where he would be the sex-addicted killer. His most notable credit during this time was a never released film version of James Bond, made in 1953. He played M with a very Russian accent, and as a flaming homosexual. Bond was also played in a very camp way, by alcoholic forties acting legend Michael Deer, who looking down upon playing "such an appalling scallywag". The fights were laughable, the dialogue worse. It was written by Warwick Jehane the second (Grandfather of Dalton Trebeck's future master director, also on the blacklist, before returning to American television, after all that nonsense subsided.)
So he stayed in Yorkshire for a few years, on these terrible films, his girth expanding by the film, alcoholism and rumours of bisexuality out of control, before finally giving up altogether and not bothering to learn lines. In the modern era this is called doing a Brando but in that time it was called who cares, who will see this film. His acting improved a lot during this era, when he was just making things up and ignoring the story. Apparently the studios here were haunted, had aliens, had many suicides, but this might simply have been viewed as a respectable way out of a failing career.
His final role was that of a fat Dracula in a quite terrible, amazingly tacky low-budget rip-off of Christopher Lee's Hammer film. This was his only film in colour, he at one point vomiting blood on a young virgin. Gustav died halfway through the film, replaced by a dwarf-like actor. It was set in the modern-day, a bald fat Dracula hitting on hookers in Soho, slashing them to death at times also, a la Tod Slaughter. While some writers say its may have influenced Peeping Tom, can anyone really imagine Michael Powell watching a dubious Gustav Trebeck vehicle (assuming he knew who Gustav Trebeck actually was) named Dracula's Soho Virgin Bride. I think not.
As you can see, this was a man forgotten in his own time. Dalton never talked about this man, never acknowledged this man's staggering failures. Its sad but true.
Sunday, 22 March 2009
Battlestar Galactica Finale
This will be brief for the moment. I've just seen it and there's that kind of relief that a lot came together with some disappointments (the end essentially remakes The Matrix Revolutions with more character and less wonderful weirdness). So its a odd one. Its sort of like the conclusion for Homicide and The Wire for me. Lots of wonderful moments and character beats finally coming together but with a little overt sentimentality and some missed elements which felt important in the run of the shows.
There were lost moments. There's one nasty moment that I feel went too far because it hadn't been built up enough and lacked proper dramatic resolution (Tyrol kills Tory for the murder of his wife while saving his son, a situation on which he was partially responsible for, as well as being very responsible for the mess they found themselves in the finale, which also destroys a fragile truce, causing more deaths). Now the act was shocking and nasty, powerful, and hopefully a longer released cut will fill in some blanks, but there's so little afterthought, so little balance that its resolved as the bitch is dead. As the situation was more complicated, you wanted more, especially as they had built up Tyrol's disenchantment with everyone and Tory's falling into the background, trying to hide from the past, throughout the second half of the season. You kind of feel that you got all the build-up, then horrible violence and no dramatic pay-off. It also means that the image of a man killing a woman and then walking away is distasteful and leaves a lingering bad taste after the finale. The Adama-Roslin finale has the opposite problem, feeling too long and self-indulgent, getting and repeating points so often that it grates by the time you're meant to feel emotion.
There's a lot of good stuff. Baltar finally comes together, shows some guts and loyalty, creating a truce by showing his madness and talking common sense. He faces his worst fear (basically its settling down with someone who knows him), the character arc really working, a more traditional ending likely seeing him dead. Lee also worked well, someone who saw the mess around himself and realised that everything had moved too fast, that everyone was damaged, out of control, to have realistic expectations (over-coming his main flaw in his own life). The Kara reveal was good, nicely unforced and mysterious, a figure disappearing, not really revealing much. Its nice not to be told too much.
The finale, the jump 150,000 years later worked okay but was a little forced. Am still not quite sure what to think of it but will probably blog on it again after a few days.
There were lost moments. There's one nasty moment that I feel went too far because it hadn't been built up enough and lacked proper dramatic resolution (Tyrol kills Tory for the murder of his wife while saving his son, a situation on which he was partially responsible for, as well as being very responsible for the mess they found themselves in the finale, which also destroys a fragile truce, causing more deaths). Now the act was shocking and nasty, powerful, and hopefully a longer released cut will fill in some blanks, but there's so little afterthought, so little balance that its resolved as the bitch is dead. As the situation was more complicated, you wanted more, especially as they had built up Tyrol's disenchantment with everyone and Tory's falling into the background, trying to hide from the past, throughout the second half of the season. You kind of feel that you got all the build-up, then horrible violence and no dramatic pay-off. It also means that the image of a man killing a woman and then walking away is distasteful and leaves a lingering bad taste after the finale. The Adama-Roslin finale has the opposite problem, feeling too long and self-indulgent, getting and repeating points so often that it grates by the time you're meant to feel emotion.
There's a lot of good stuff. Baltar finally comes together, shows some guts and loyalty, creating a truce by showing his madness and talking common sense. He faces his worst fear (basically its settling down with someone who knows him), the character arc really working, a more traditional ending likely seeing him dead. Lee also worked well, someone who saw the mess around himself and realised that everything had moved too fast, that everyone was damaged, out of control, to have realistic expectations (over-coming his main flaw in his own life). The Kara reveal was good, nicely unforced and mysterious, a figure disappearing, not really revealing much. Its nice not to be told too much.
The finale, the jump 150,000 years later worked okay but was a little forced. Am still not quite sure what to think of it but will probably blog on it again after a few days.
Saturday, 21 March 2009
Watchmen The Film: What A Horrible Mess
As a fan of Alan Moore's Watchmen, the real Watchmen, this Zack Snyder film is an obscenity. Gratuitous violence, an ending that both ignores the book and changes itself into something dumb and horrifically anti-climatic (the film ends with twenty minutes of, is that it? That's the stupid moment you've been building towards). The actors are at best miscast, at worst woeful (take a bow the guy playing Rorschach for all those horrific and misplaced line-readings). The camera moves all over the place but forgets to actually frame and cut to suggest subtext, nor to place actors in frame that gives the film drive and feeling. Action scenes extend themselves far longer that what Moore suggests, and are in love with blood. The music is just awful, plastered on every few minutes loudly, with no reason.
Above are the base problems with the film. For narrative problems we have simple bases not covered. The world is not set up coherently. If I hadn't read Watchmen I wouldn't have had a clue what was going on a lot of the time. The film spends a lot of time showing the characters in different time zones yet never establishes character nor emotional context. The point repeatedly made in the comic book is that these loony superheroes are at base an expression of various absurd forms of cultural immaturity made manifest in different time periods in American history, suggesting bizarre dreams of of an immature American culture that in the forties gave us noir, in the fifties the cold war, the sixties Vietnam, the seventies distaste and civil revolt, in the eighties all-powerful American expansion policies. Moore takes these feelings to the extreme by showing his characters, setting them up carefully in context, in carefully separated and chaptered segments of the story, have stories within stories (such as the Black Freighter) that introduces the fiction of this Watchmen world, which gives atmosphere, character and subtle plot details as well as to suggest how the fiction influences and creates absurdities in the minds of those reading it. Within the main narrative itself you have these stories flashing back and forward, always compact within themselves to suggest what the characters are feeling, with much clearer suggestion of the emotions in the fictional world of the characters and the real world we live in that has been given one last fantastical push by Moore into various myopic absurdity. (All the Watchmen characters are myopic, thus who watches the watchmen)
The film doesn't get that. The idea of stories within stories is dropped, the social ideas in the books are placed up and made to look stupid, not having the wonderful sense of humour and of the absurd that Moore gave them, where the joke is any type of self-appointed ambitious leader is a total nut in one way or another, now lets look at them. The Vietnam sections in the film are absurd, make you think what, while in the book its handled with a lot more humour, of immature wish fulfillment and brutality, not as a plot point. There are civil disputes in the seventies that are brutal yet suggestive of something worse, make narrative points while in the film are crude and have no punch, make you wonder is that it. There's no sense of humour to the right-wing fascism shown throughout in the story while its all over Moore's comic.
Another example of the lack of humour is the film tries to make a character called the Nite-Owl sexy and dangerous, this a character who intentionally always looked silly in the comic. They try to make his characters actions exciting where in the comic there is a wonderful grace to the moments where he flies his ship and does things because it looks goofy. That's one of the main points where the film kept losing me. The mocking tone on the world and what these characters think of themselves, as well as their subtle brutality, is not there, is instead replaced by scenes that go on forever and make a fan of the book bored. Watchmen is a pretty boring film based on something that is clear and self-contained.
I could go on about what the film gets wrong, such as a truly awful sex scene (worse than anything in Showgirls) replacing a wonderful moment in Moore's original, a dull prison scenes, the lack of stillness in the story (the comic had a wonderful sense of framing to suggest emotion amongst what should be pulp absurdity). But the film is just a mess. The only reason its not the worst Moore adaptation is because The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen exist. But the theatrical cut is a very weak, ignorant film in dire need of a good director and writer. It hasn't raised the level of the genre (and who cares about that, these movies are meant to be imaginative and a little pulpy). All its done is make the source look stupid. I think Alan Moore has had enough of that already. I just hope they leave the poor guy alone and stop adapting him.
Above are the base problems with the film. For narrative problems we have simple bases not covered. The world is not set up coherently. If I hadn't read Watchmen I wouldn't have had a clue what was going on a lot of the time. The film spends a lot of time showing the characters in different time zones yet never establishes character nor emotional context. The point repeatedly made in the comic book is that these loony superheroes are at base an expression of various absurd forms of cultural immaturity made manifest in different time periods in American history, suggesting bizarre dreams of of an immature American culture that in the forties gave us noir, in the fifties the cold war, the sixties Vietnam, the seventies distaste and civil revolt, in the eighties all-powerful American expansion policies. Moore takes these feelings to the extreme by showing his characters, setting them up carefully in context, in carefully separated and chaptered segments of the story, have stories within stories (such as the Black Freighter) that introduces the fiction of this Watchmen world, which gives atmosphere, character and subtle plot details as well as to suggest how the fiction influences and creates absurdities in the minds of those reading it. Within the main narrative itself you have these stories flashing back and forward, always compact within themselves to suggest what the characters are feeling, with much clearer suggestion of the emotions in the fictional world of the characters and the real world we live in that has been given one last fantastical push by Moore into various myopic absurdity. (All the Watchmen characters are myopic, thus who watches the watchmen)
The film doesn't get that. The idea of stories within stories is dropped, the social ideas in the books are placed up and made to look stupid, not having the wonderful sense of humour and of the absurd that Moore gave them, where the joke is any type of self-appointed ambitious leader is a total nut in one way or another, now lets look at them. The Vietnam sections in the film are absurd, make you think what, while in the book its handled with a lot more humour, of immature wish fulfillment and brutality, not as a plot point. There are civil disputes in the seventies that are brutal yet suggestive of something worse, make narrative points while in the film are crude and have no punch, make you wonder is that it. There's no sense of humour to the right-wing fascism shown throughout in the story while its all over Moore's comic.
Another example of the lack of humour is the film tries to make a character called the Nite-Owl sexy and dangerous, this a character who intentionally always looked silly in the comic. They try to make his characters actions exciting where in the comic there is a wonderful grace to the moments where he flies his ship and does things because it looks goofy. That's one of the main points where the film kept losing me. The mocking tone on the world and what these characters think of themselves, as well as their subtle brutality, is not there, is instead replaced by scenes that go on forever and make a fan of the book bored. Watchmen is a pretty boring film based on something that is clear and self-contained.
I could go on about what the film gets wrong, such as a truly awful sex scene (worse than anything in Showgirls) replacing a wonderful moment in Moore's original, a dull prison scenes, the lack of stillness in the story (the comic had a wonderful sense of framing to suggest emotion amongst what should be pulp absurdity). But the film is just a mess. The only reason its not the worst Moore adaptation is because The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen exist. But the theatrical cut is a very weak, ignorant film in dire need of a good director and writer. It hasn't raised the level of the genre (and who cares about that, these movies are meant to be imaginative and a little pulpy). All its done is make the source look stupid. I think Alan Moore has had enough of that already. I just hope they leave the poor guy alone and stop adapting him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)