(Corona-) Summer of Terror/Masterpiece of Horror: Psycho

    This summer has been rough for everyone on Earth. It was definitely rough for me. I unfortunately didn't plan out this series very well, admittedly, and the anxiety just got very overwhelming (Seasonal depression has also reared its head). However, I do feel like finishing off the Universal Monsters. However, this went into October. As I laid in bed, suddenly, an idea came: Why not do a transitionary phase here. 

    Okay, like I said last time, this film is a lot more of a stretch to be on here, namely in that it technically originally wasn't even a Universal film. Let's go back a bit though. In 1957, a Wisconsin handyman named Ed Gein was arrested for the murders of two women living nearby. A search of his place revealed that items made from various parts of the human body, including skin lamps and shrunken heads. At the time, this was unknown to horror writer Robert Bloch, despite living only 57 miles away. A correspondent and friend of HP Lovecraft, Bloch started out in that style and genre before the advent of the atomic age caused him to switch instead to psychological horror. He wrote a story about a man isolated from civilization in a motel who has an overbearing mother and kills multiple women. When he heard about Gein, he was disturbed to learn the parallels. Nevertheless, the book would be a big commerical success, and it would reach acclaimed director Alfred Hitchcock, fresh off hit North by Northwest through his assistant. Hitchcock, very impressed, chose this project over several others, including an adaptation of Casino Royale, and even bought up all the copies he could of the novel to prevent the twist from being revealed. However, Hitchcock saw resistance from tradition backer Paramount, so he shot the film on a low budget, using the crew from his television show in the Universal Studios lot (part of the reason I decided to include it here), and shooting the film in black and white. Joseph Stefano (later the co-creator of the 60's Sci-fi anthology series The Outer Limits) wrote the screenplay. Starring in the film were Vera Miles (who had appeared in several Hitchcock productions beforehand), John Gavin  (who starred in the critical success Spartacus that same year), Janet Leigh (who had starred opposite Charlton Heston in Orson Welles' A Touch of Evil) and as the unsuspecting killer Norman Bates, relatively unknown supporting actor Anthony Perkins was cast on account of his boyish charm. Hitchcock regular Bernard Hermann would do the iconic score. Entire books and even films have been made about the production of this movie, so not too much more detail here, but the film was fairly controversial upon its release in 1960, as the Production Code was dying due to an influx of racy European films. It was also extremely successful, with audiences shocked by the big twist of the film. It has gone on to become one of the most iconic films of all time, and is something of the prototype for modern horror as we know. Also, despite Paramount releasing the films, the rights were ultimately sold to Universal, so it does count. 

     Marion Crane (Janet Leigh), a secretary in a real estate company in Phoenix, Arizona finds herself in hot water when she steals some money from a client, to pay for a home for her and boyfriend Sam Loomis (John Gavin). She flees to California, and eventually, comes across a motel run by the mysterious Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins), who has a close relationship to his mother.... (You know what, you probably already know how the rest goes, so, yeah.)

      It's hard to really discuss this film, because it is  monumental in the history of film. Everyone knows the central twist, everyone knows the plot, the music cues, the shower scene. Given this film has been studied, dissected, and parodied so many times since 1960, does it still hold up as its own film? Yeah, it definitely does. It helps that it constantly keeps you on your toes, changing its focus multiple times to throw you off. First a standard Hitchcockian thriller, than a proto-slasher, then a murder mystery. The film does a good job of hiding all the necessary elements, especially with its now iconic twist. (NORMAN BATES WAS DRESSING AS HIS MOTHER WHEN HE COMMITS THE MURDERS, in case you don't know). Anthony Perkins shy, delightfully charming, but ultimately psychaotic presence also helps to cement the character as a new kind of monster, less supernatural, but no less menacing. He is easily the most interesting part of the score. And the things to praise about this film have been noted. Hermann's score, Russell's cinematography. 

     The film does spend a lot more time than I thought was needed on the investigative part. Maybe it is the fact that the twist is very well known now, but the audience might've been able to piece together part of the twist towards the middle of the third act. Also, the subplot about the private investigator could've been cut, but does serve an important plot driver, so eh. 

     Even though you probably know how the film goes, I still recommend seeing it, if only to see the various techniques used both narratively and cinematically. It is still a fascinating film, and it is still very scary when it needs to be. I very highly recommend it as a piece of horror history, and just film history. 

    I was going to end this with an overall look at the Universal Monsters, but I'm really tired and just want to end this, so I'll make it brief here. Needless to say, they have had an incredible influence not only on the horror genre on film, but on the general culture. Most people, even if they've never actually seen any of these films, have a good understanding of them. And despite the presence of more contemporary monsters in films like this and Targets, they still have a presence in the culture, whether through the various Hammer remakes in the 50's and 60's, or the severely botched Mummy remake from 2017. 

  Speaking of..... Tune in tomorrow for a review of that.

Current Film Review/Coming to a Video Screen Near You- Scoob!

       Yep, the pandemic is still going on. We're all still stuck at home, and most movie theaters are still closed. So, it's mostly direct-to-VOD for a lot of movies. So, for this month, it was either this or Josh Trank's Capone. I didn't really want to spend time talking a movie where nothing happens except Tom Hardy growling at people and shitting his pants, and this actually seemed to have potential from the trailer. I greatly enjoyed the comic series Future Quest, and this seemed to capture similar energy, creating a universe of Hanna-Barbera characters. And hey, it's a crossover between my Current Film and VOD reviews, appropriate for this film.

        Based on Joe Ruby and Ken Spears' venerated series (and featuring characters from other Hanna-Barbara produced series), the film, of course, centers on Mystery Inc.: Fred (Zac Efron, which is too perfect casting to have not been considered before), Daphne (Amanda Seyfried), Velma (Gina Rodriguez), and the ever loveable Shaggy (Will Forte, doing a decent Casey Kasem impression) and Scooby Doo (Frank Welker). After Simon Cowell (Simon Cowell) questions the latter two's contribution to the group, they sulk a bit in a bowling alley (In a cute nod, named for veteran Hanna-Barbara animator Iwao Takamoto), before they are attacked by scorpion robots and beamed into the Falcon Fury, the sanctum of the superhero Blue Falcon (Mark Wahlberg) and his assistants Dee Dee Sykes (Kiersy Clemmons) (from Captain Caveman and the Teen Angels) and Dynomutt (Ken Jeong). Apparently, the robots were sent by nefarious villain Dick Dastardly (Jason Isaacs) (from The Wacky Races) to capture Scooby. What results is a globe-trotting adventure as the gang with their new allies try to stop Dastardly and his mysterious scheme. 

      First, a lot of really good jokes and gags littered throughout. Very subtle jokes alongside very good references. The jokes appeal to all ages too, so you don't have to be very young to appreciate them. I liked all the references they made both to the old cartoon (including a CGI recreation of the original theme) and the other Hanna-Barbara creations, especially in terms of the designs. Jason Isaacs hams it up as Dick Dastardly. The animation is pretty good, with very fluid motion and colorful design. I really liked that they included all the little cartoon sound effects from the original series all over, which gives it a lot more oomph. 

     I'd honestly try not to think too hard about the plot, because it gets into a lot of confusing territory real quickly. There are basic character arcs that mostly work, but the plot goes into some weird directions to try to connect all these characters together. Even as an adult, I had trouble really following some of this story, so the target audience might also have trouble figuring out the mechanics of the plot. And unlike those direct-to-video Scooby movies from when I was a kid (like Zombie Island and Cyber Chase) , it really doesn't follow the Scooby formula very much. It's just a standard adventure story that Shaggy and Scooby just happen to be in. There are nods to the original format, and even a short bit where they homage parts of the formula, but the story doesn't have that Scooby Doo feel to it. 

     This movie delivers what was promised:  a nice, decently Hanna-Barbara crossover with tons of little nods, potentially setting up an animated cinematic universe of those characters (especially in the end credits). If you're familiar with these characters, like I am, you'll probably get a kick out of all the little references. Even if you aren't and you watch it with little children, it's good enough on its own, with tons of funny gags and nice animation to keep you satisfied, even if the plot has some trouble. 

     Anyway, thanks for reading, and if you like this review, please consider donating a bit to my Ko-Fi: https://ko-fi.com/rohithc. I'll sign off with this interesting compilation of Scooby Doo openings through the decades:

Dailles and Nightlies- Beyond the Sea

       So, yeah, big global pandemic. Really distressing. Couldn't really do anything last month with the whole "country in shutdown" ordeal. Might as well look at a film by noted actor, sex predator, possible murderer Kevin Spacey. A film that he not only starred in, but he directed, produced, and co-wrote. Yes, this was his passion project, his magnum opus, his attempt to bring a unique vision to the screen. Watching this in light of Spacey's fall from grace, it becomes clear the film is little more than a vanity project by a narcissist who wants to show just how great he is and how much people love him. Oh, and also something about Bobby Darin. Maybe.

     So, the film chronicles the life of crooner Bobby Darin (Kevin Spacey, even when Darin is a young man, and yes, it's off-putting), from his childhood in the Bronx as Walden Robert Cossotto (William Ullrich, who Spacey spends a lot of time interacting with, and yes, it is incredibly creepy to watch now), encouraged by his former vaudvillian mother Polly (Brenda Blethyn), his sister Nina (Caroline Aaron) and Nina's husband Charlie (Bob Hoskins) to become a star on par with Frank Sinatra. He manages to do so in the late 50's, with the help of agent Stephen Blauner (John Goodman) , with hits like "Splish Splash" and "Mack the Knife". From there, he makes his mark on entertainment, headlining the famous Copacabana nightclub, starring in award-winning films, and romancing movie starlet Sandra Dee (Kate Bosworth). All the while, he feels his time is slowly diminishing, primarily because of a childhood disease he was not expected to survive.

     If the slimy, skeevy presence of Spacey is too much to bare, we are a character actor double punch of Bob Hoskins and John Goodman, who both manage to be the best parts of whatever scenes they're in. Hoskins especially has his usual charisma and energy popping out every time he's on screen. There's a nice sequence detailing the production of 1963's Come September in Italy, that looks far better than the rest of the film. Some of the renditions of the songs were alright.  Kate Bosworth is alright.

    Before I get into the meat of my criticisms, let me start with the fact that this movie looks terrible. Awful, cheap looking sets; a weird, distracting blue tint to the scenes that drains all the energy out of the scenes; bad production design for many of the musical sequences. It's not even so much bad as just weird. These large elaborate song sequences, set against these really cheap looking club sets and small feelings venues. Not helping is the fact that Kevin Spacey is way too old to play this role. He was 45 when he did this part. The real Bobby Darin died at age 37. Whenever he's in Darin's most iconic roles, it's jarring. He looks like a 40 year old being a teen idol, and yeah, hindsight is a big part of why this doesn't work, but he still couldn't pull off being a wide-eyed younger Darin trying to make his way through show-business. The film also has this bizarre framing device where they're filming Darin's life with Darin in the lead role, and it is so weird and confusing, and brings Spacey in proximity of that kid, and it's creepy as hell watching it. A lot of this film is just Spacey displaying his various skills, showing both light-acting, hard emotional acting, singing, dancing, impressions. Which might be forgiven for this, but in light of the revelations, comes across as the work of a massive narcissist who wants to show the world just how talented and awesome he is, and burying the fact that he's a manipulative rapist.

    I honestly don't know why I did this. We're all stuck at home, watching as governments and organization struggle with the fact that this pandemic is still ever-growing. I don't recommend watching this except maybe morbid curiosity. Spacey continues to pop up every Christmas like an anti-Santa Claus and remind us that the law hasn't caught up to him yet. Let's hope it does in the coming years. 

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Blood and Black Lace

        In the aftermath of World War II, the Italian film industry went through something of a renaissance with the advent of democracy. Movements like neorealism emerged under filmmakers like Federico Fellini and Roberto Rossellini and Hollywood productions flocked to the scenic Italy to make Sword-and-Sandal epics (the center being the Cinecitta Studio in Rome, sometimes called "Hollywood on the Tiber"). In this climate, genre films began to sneak their way in. Leading the charge was Mario Bava. A longtime figure in special effects and cameras since the time of Mussolini, he became a prolific cinematographer of some renown during the late 40's and early 50's, before getting his chance at directing an uncredited segment in 1954's Ulysses. Later in 1956, when director Richard Freda left the vampire film I vampiri due to a dispute with the producers, he stepped as an uncredited director to finish the film. He would do the same for several other films, including Italy's first science fiction film The Day the Sky Exploded, either ghost- or co-directing films. Finally, in 1960, he would make his solo directorial debut with the gothic horror film The Mask of the Demon, which was translated in the United States as Black Sunday by American International Pictures. After a few historical epics, he would direct The Girl Who Knew Too Much and Black Sabbath (which, yes, was the namesake of the band), both of which would help launch the giallo genre of Italian horror-murder thrillers. Because of the success he had with these films and this burgeoning genre, he was given creative freedom on the film. Already tired of the more murder mystery oriented direction of the other films, he took more emphasis on the killings part of the equation. The film, a West German co-production, was filmed in Rome over the course of 6 weeks. Because the dialogue (when translated into English to appeal to that audience) sounded stilted, actress Mary Arden rewrote it as they filmed. An original dub with the actors reprising themselves was rejected by the American distributors, who instead took a dub with the male voices by prominent voice actor Paul Frees. A moderate financial success in Italy and the US, it received mixed reviews in the US press. It has come to be seen as a classic of the giallo genre, and a big influence on the slasher genre.

      At a fashion house in Italy, a model Isabella (Francesca Ungaro) is killed by a mysterious person in a black coat and mask. She is found in a closet by the head of the fashion house, Countess Christina Como (Eva Bartok). Soon, Inspector Sylvester (Thomas Reiner) is sent to investigate, interviewing many of the people associated with the fashion house, including manager Max Morlan (Cameron Mitchell). However, another model Nicole (Arianna Gorinni) found Isabella's diary, and the killer is soon after her as well..

      This has incredible lighting and colors to it. It both emphasizes the rather bright colors and hues that populate the settings that the film takes place in, and the dark shadows underneath. Many great scenes have a distinct color to them which helps set up the mood of the scene, and builds up the inevitable killing. It gives the film a unique look. Even the clothes are bright, and stand out amongst the shadows that are all over the film. (I suppose, since it is a film about fashion, it makes sense). Especially the killer wearing all black. Along with this distinct look, the special effects are superb, with many scars and burns and injuries looking disturbingly realistic. This helps make the killing scenes a lot of more impact, especially the most disturbing ones, including when the killer shoves someone into a burning light. And, having been used to the slasher format of the 80's, the murder-mystery was intriguing and it keeps the viewer engaged with the film to figure out what happen.

    This isn't really the fault of the filmmakers, since their dub was overwritten, but it sounded off most of the time. Maybe because Paul Frees (a very talented voice actor, mind you, who I've enjoyed in many 60's era animated production) does get the timbre right for the characters. I also got a bit lost during parts of the movie, but I could still follow most of it coherently.

     This was an interesting film, and you can see the strong influence it had on slashers, especially the idea of a masked, silent killer slowly moving their way through victims. I highly recommend it for fans of slashers as well as Italian films, since this is very firmly Italian in setting and sensibility.

    So, to close out this year of Masterpiece, we will look at one of my favorite films: John Carpenter's The Thing.

Reason for the Season- Twilight Zone (2019)

    A couple years ago, I did a piece on this very blog lamenting that science fiction anthologies were not as common (relegated to season long anthologies at that time). In that piece, I mentioned that they shouldn't do another *Twilight Zone*, because there were at least two others before it. Well, they went and did it anyway, so that's why I decided to review it: to see if this lives up to any of the previous incarnations and to see how the anthology format holds up now. Just a reminder, these are more free-form, stream of consciousness than my typical reviews, and I include spoilers with abandon.  Also, I want to make this an official series, so there's a title. (Get it? Because TV series are organized into seasons and... you get it.)


    Okay, of the three version of this show, this is easily worst. I've said this for weeks as it has been released. For a long time, I regarded the 2002 version as the weakest one. Even that had some highlights and some good episodes (especially the sequel to "It's a Good Life," with Bill Mumy himself). This, however, has the weakest set of episodes so far. And it starts off fine. The Comedian episode with Kumail Nanjiani was pretty good, with a Twilight Zone-esque twist and very universal themes. It goes downhill from that almost immediately with the second episode, a very loose remake of Nightmare at 20,000 Feet called Nightmare at 30,000 Feet, which had... a podcast, I think, and Adam Scott running an airplane. Honestly, I don't remember a lot of it, and that's the problem with a lot of these. They don't really have those clincher moments that the standard Twilight Zone episodes do. Like, take the classic episode *Time Enough at Last*, of course about a dude who just wants to read, but is constantly distracted by the people in his life. At the very end, he has the time to read all the books he wants, since everyone else was wiped out by the apocalypse, but just he is about to, he breaks his glasses. That is a very iconic and very memorable moment. That is largely absent from this new incarnation, and in its place is... attempting to comment on modern social issues. Like, in the least subtle manner possible. The worst offender is "The Wunderkund", about John Cho as a political advisor who gets an 11-year old elected President. It is very clearly about Trump, and it is so painful to watch. Like, imagine all those hacky Trump jokes from like, Jimmy Kimmel and Bill Maher, and make them into a *Twilight Zone* episode and here's what we've got. "Not All Men" could've been interesting exploration of toxic masculinity, but doesn't really demonstrate that and has an ending that just contradicts itself. "Point of Origin" could've been as biting as an episode of the original, with a focus on the current immigration crisis. Again, though, it doesn't really explore these issues or really makes a point about them. It's just "yep. This is happening." People have defended (correctly) that the Twilight Zone from the 60's was political, but it always felt complete, and further more, held up as stories in their own right with universal themes. "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street" could be held as a commentary on McCarthyism and the Red Scare, but could be seen as a simple story about mass hysteria and the dangers of paranoia. Hell, the 2002 one had an update that was pretty good, while also commenting on the hysteria following 9/11. A lot of these, beside being unsubtle, are just not really good or memorable. Okay, there is one, and it's the best one of this season "Replay". There is a strong undercurrent about police brutality and racism, but it never feels too attached to that. Instead, it has more of an overriding theme about changing the past and trying to build a future. That makes it work a lot better, since it combines contemporary themes with more universal ideals. Aside from that, it just isn't very memorable. I've heard "Six Degrees of Freedom," was touted as a highlight, but I didn't care for it, especially the end. I can't tell you anything that happens in "A Traveler" or "Blue Scorpion". The very last episode of the season "Blurryman" is also pretty mediocre for the most part, though its message about how people ought to explore and expand art in all different directions and explore new ideas and worlds, and that something can be both good art and good entertainment was decently handled in the closing narration (the episode leading up to it was decidedly less adept at this message). That narration reminded me a lot of how Rod Serling, a long suffering TV writer who had scripts regularly censored by sponsors for their too-close-for-comfort stories, was able to use SF/Fantasy to explore contemporary themes and new ideas. (They might've also taken influence from the old Tower of Terror ride in Disney California Adventure with their TZ homages) The thing with this is that it has potentially good ideas and has a stellar cast and crew. Thus, none of it is really bad per se, but at that point, it just doesn't reach the level of being good. It's solid mediocrity, and that's probably the worst part. It just doesn't evoke an emotion within you. I'll probably never see any of these episodes again, and I've rewatched plenty of the *Twilight Zone* from all its incarnations. It is revived for a second season, and hopefully, it does get a lot better, because I do see potential in this series, if they can look at what didn't work for people and fix it, this could be a great show. Finally, Jordan Peele does a decent job as narrator. I honestly preferred Forrest Whittaker during his short stint, or even the unseen narrator from the second season of 80's series. 

Well, with that out of the way, join me in a little bit as this year sees the next Summer of Terror with the Nightmare on Elm Street series.

Dailies and Nightlies- Down with Love

         Two things prompted my review of this (well, three, if you count the Valentine's Day tie-in). A while ago, I was reading through the comments section of an old (meaning several year old) news article in film news, and one commentor lamented that Edgar Wright was passed over for the "director of Bring It On" (Peyton Reed) for Ant-Man (because the article was another celebrity (Simon Pegg, incidentally) whining about the decline of cinema or whatever). That comment stuck with me primarily for the way it was framed. The commentor refers to Bring It On, a film with a very specific cultural prominence as a film about cheerleading, and contrasts it with Edgar Wright, with the implication that the comparison is self-evident. According to the Googles, Bring It On has a 63% on Rotten Tomatoes, meaning a decent number of people seemed to enjoy it. The implication from the comment was that Reed was wrong for the role of director of Ant-Man because he directed more feminine movies. Now, I love Edgar Wright very much (indeed, he's a favorite of mine), but it's hard to deny that he generally focuses on topics that generally appeal to the more male dominated film nerd culture. Anyway, that comment stuck with me, and prompted me to look into Peyton Reed's filmography, and found this one, which seemed to be very beloved in many circles. The second is shorter, but also involves Reed and Marvel. Reed apparently pitched Fox a 60's era Fantastic Four script, and I do like to speculate on what might've been, and the actual 60's era film that he directed seemed like a good start.

          In Camelot-era New York, the new sensation in the literary world is Barbara Novak (Rene Zellweger), who has the radical idea of having sexual relations without necessarily a romantic one. (remember, early 60's). Her shot to fame, helped by editor Vikki Heller (Sarah Paulson), prompts womanizing reporter Catcher Block (Ewan McGregor) and his editor Peter McMannus (David Hyde Pierce) to do an investigation hoping to expose Novak and her liberating ways. But... complications arise, and from the title, I suppose you know where this is going.

        I'm not terribly familiar with the Rock Hudson/Doris Day comedies this was meant to pay homage to, but even I could see how intricately they recreated just a sixties film. From the long animated opening to the large elaborate sets to the very bright color scheme to the transitions and split shots, it resembles an early 60's film aesthetically to an admirably meticulous degree. Simultaneously, it still has modern innovations that work seamlessly, with the more jarring datedness of 60's films ironed out, allowing the viewer to focus more on the film itself and not any of the agedness. Aside from the aesthetic, there are a number of very good gags and jokes in here. I was laughing pretty consistently throughout the film at all the clever visual gags, subtle nods, and wordplay, which were all quite charming in their own way, and helped ease the viewer more into this world that the film created, which is helped by the actors, who fit into their 60's archetypes well. Especially David Hyde Pierce as a hapless Tony Randall sort.

       My biggest problem with the film is that the plot kind of sputters out towards the middle, and it never really recaptures its momentum afterwards. I can pinpoint this problem to when it begins to shift gears about its message, which I won't spoil, but needless to say, the attempt to balance old-fashioned and modern sensibilities ends more towards the former, and it is a bit odd that they decided to go this particular direction. Another, more minor one is that they do a gag about people doing innocuous things but sounding sexual whilst doing it. It's funny once or twice, but they do the gag several times, which was a bit tiresome, and a tad awkward (also, this is a very common joke).

      I enjoyed this feature. Granted, I couldn't fully get into it, but I had a good time watching, regardless, and if you enjoy these sorts of romantic comedies or period pieces, I recommend it. Think of it as a light-hearted predecessor to Mad Men. 

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Frankenstein Conquers the World

      I talked a bit about Willis O'Brien (best known as the special effects director of the original King Kong) last time, and this film is, in a sense, bourne from him as well. In 1961, he came up with a proposal for a film called King Kong meets Frankenstein, which is exactly what reads: King Kong fighting a massive version of Frankenstein's Monster in San Francisco. He eventually sold the idea to producer John Beck who shopped it around to various studio (including Kong rights holders Universal and RKO), before getting interest from Japanese studio Toho. Toho had wanted to make a King Kong film for a while, but eventually changed Frankenstein's Monster into Toho's own monster, Godzilla. Thus, King Kong v. Godzilla was made and released in 1962. They returned to the large Frankenstein's monster concept for a proposed sequel, Frankenstein vs. Godzilla, where Frankenstein's monster would be irradiated and grow to giant-size, prompting a fight with the Big-G. Eventually, Toho dropped Godzilla. Eventually, they would enter with American production company Henry G. Saperstein Enterprises (previously animation studio UPA) to produce the film. This new American involvement prompted the creation of a new monster called Baragon to replace Godzilla (and Godzilla actor Haruo Nakajima plays him), and allowed American actor Nick Adams (notable for his friendship with James Dean and Elvis Presley) to star. The titular Frankenstein was played by Koji Furuhata, who got the role through an open audition. Ishiro Honda, the director of the first Godzilla and some others in the series, directed, and Eiji Tsuburaya did the effects as he did with other Kaiju films.Originally, Frankenstein was to fight a giant octopus in a callback to King Kong vs. Godzilla, which was filmed but this was ultimately chucked from final release, due to Saperstein being dissatisfied with it.  Honda stated that this was one of several alternate endings filmed. The film had Nick Adams speaking English, while his cast mate spoke Japanese, and dubbing each other for each release. Released as Frankenstein vs. Baragon in Japan and Frankenstein Conquers the World in the US, it was enough of a success to prompt a sequel, War of the Gargantuas in the US.

        During the final days of World War II, Dr. Risendorf (Peter Mann) finds his experiments disrupted by an SS officer and goons, who steal a chest over the Doctor's protests. The chest is transported by U-Boat to their allies in Imperial Japan. The chest is revealed to hold the heart of Frankenstein's Monster, which cannot be destroyed and can be used for presumably stem-cell sorts of activities. The researchers are in Hiroshima, however. 15 years later, Doctors James Bowen (Nick Adams), Seigo Togami (Kumi Mizuno) and Ken'Ichiro Kawaji (Tadao Takashima) are alerted to the presence of a strange child (Sumio Nakao) roaming the streets of Hiroshima. They take him in, where they note that he has a strange resistance to radiation and a massive appetite. Sure enough, the child grows more and more, breaking from any cage he's in. Eventually, after investigation, they learn that the child was likely grown from the irradiated heart of Frankenstein. The aged Risendorf suggests cutting off a limp to test this. However, the child escapes and rampages through Japan. Meanwhile, Kawai (Yoshio Tsuchiya), who brought the heart to Hiroshima and now works for an oil company, witnesses Baragon (Haruo Nakajima) emerge. Baragon also rampages, which is blamed on Frankenstein (over the objections of Bowen and Togami). Now the researchers must race to capture Frankenstein before more harm comes to him or anyone else.

        First, I really like the fight scenes in this. They are sufficiently long, they never overstay their welcome, and they end rather satisfyingly. Originally, it seems that Baragon and Frankenstein are unrelated, just to build up the final fight. However, I do like that they do integrate the two, such that they are related in more than the fact they are giant monsters. I liked the Frankenstein's Monster itself. It was distinct from previous interpretations, but still recognizable. The make-up is well done, and both actors do well in adopting the more animalistic mannerisms that is supposed to have. Finally, the concept is very creative, with radiation prompting a full creature to form from a regenerating heart. It seems sort of like a Marvel comics character.

     This is not directly the film's fault, but the translation felt off. Like, it seems very curt and to the point, and doesn't seem to translate the full sentence. This could just be how the film was. I also found the ending to be underwhelming, when Frankenstein is just put into a large pit and presumably dies. It feels like there should be more. Apparently, a lot of this film was cut down, so that could be the reason.

     This was a pretty good monster movie, and probably a good Kaiju film (as someone who hasn't seen many Kaiju films). I recommend it on those grounds, or just some fun 60's era B-movie action. It was never boring and always entertaining, while never going into outright cheesy. Certainly see why this is a cult classic.

    Next week, we take a look at the Lovecraft adaptation Re-Animator. 

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Night of the Living Dead

       Well, it's October, so it's time for another Masterpiece of Horror Theatre, and it's a special one. This is the 5th anniversary since I decided to rip-off Linkara and make a series of horror film reviews to do while I was in fall break on my Facebook. I decided to honor this anniversary by starting this year with a film that I reviewed back then, and a film that has its own 50th Anniversary this year: Night of the Living Dead.

     After graduating from Carnegie Mellon in 1960, George Romero started out his film career in the local Pittsburgh area.  He mostly specialized in industrial films and TV commercials (To tie in to the recent resurgence of Mr. Rogers in culture in the wake of the new documentary and his own 50th anniversary for his show, one of Romero's earliest films was actually a segment on Mr. Roger's Neighborhood while it was a local Pittsburgh show). Eventually, he and friends John Russo and Russell Steiner formed Image Ten and for its first film, decided to make a horror movie, since that was still in vogue. Image Ten got support from Pittsburgh based industrial firm Hardware Associates, which raised $114,000 (around $825,000 in 2018 dollars) for the film. The name was not pinned down despite this. Romero and Russo's original script was called Monster Flick, and played more of a horror comedy, focusing on teenage aliens meeting human ones. The second draft brought in the idea of the aliens being flesh eaters, and eventually, the final draft (heavily influenced by Richard Matheson's I Am Legend, itself adapted into film several times before and after) had the villains as the resurrected dead (whom the script calls "ghouls"). The leading role of Ben was given to local theatre actor Duane Jones. The casting of an African American in the lead proved controversial in the late 60's, especially in the more niche, mostly white horror genre. In another Mr. Rogers connection, Romero originally wanted Betty Aberlin (aka Lady Aberlin) in the lead female role of Barbara, but Fred Rogers refused to allow it. The role was instead given to Judith O'Dea.  Much of the film was shot in remote locations around rural Evan City, Pennsylvania, with its cemetery being the opening scene due to it being isolated from any onlookers or police, and the house setting from a house scheduled for demolition. Because of the low budget of the film, the actors were largely local actors or even the producers and investors in the film, and the effects was cheap (chocolate syrup was used for the blood, as was common practice at the time, and meat and clay, among others, were used to simulate body parts.) Even while filming, the name largely changed, first to Night of Anubis and then to Night of the Flesh Eaters.  The first zombie to appear was S. William Hinzman, one of the investors in the film, who based his now iconic walk on a Boris Karloff performance. After the shocking content caused both Columbia and American International Pictures to decline distribution, finally, the New York based Walter Reade Organization agreed to distribute, though with addition edits (ten minutes by some accounts), and having to change the name to Night of the Living Dead (since The Flesh Eaters had been made in 1964). The film premiered at the Fulton Theater in Pittsburgh on October 1st, 1968, and would go on to make $30 million at the box office, a massive success for a low budget independent film, and would garner critical acclaim, with even Pauline Kael praising the film. The film would come to define and influence the "New Horror" period of the late 60's, 70's, and 80's. However, the biggest impact of the film came when the Walter Reade Organization, while changing the title card of the film, forgot to put the copyright notice on it (which was on the title card when the film was called Night of the Flesh Eaters), meaning the film immediately fell into the public domain. This mistake would allow others to use the creatures and elements used in the film, leading to the zombie genre we know of today.

     The film begins with Barbara (Judith O'Dea) and her brother Johnny (Russell Steiner) driving to a cemetery to visit their father's grave. Johnny lightly teases her, especially when a strange man (S. William Hinzman) comes around. However, the man immediately attacks Barbara, and Johnny promptly comes to her defense, allowing to flee, while the man chases her. She comes to a farmhouse, where she finds a corpse. Soon, other strange people pop out, and slowly move towards her, prompting her to flee further. She eventually reaches a home, which she safely enters away from the creatures. There, she meets Ben (Duane Jones), who barricades the house. Ben had come to the house after finding more of the creatures at the door. They soon find Harry (Karl Hardman) and Helen Cooper (Marilyn Eastman), in the cellar of the house, where they fled after the creatures overturned their car and bit their daughter Karen (Kyra Schon), who has a strange illness. Teenagers Tom (Keith Wayne) and Judy (Judith.... Ridley) also come after hearing on the radio that more of these creatures are popping up all over the East Coast, causing mass murder all over. These seven people are beseiged by these mysterious ghouls, who wander outside the house, and only increase in number. Even the talking heads in radio and TV are baffled, with only a vague hint of an irradiated NASA probe (likely a remnant of the earlier script). As tensions rise between the occupants, it seems they are living on borrowed time.

      I decided to see this on my TV, since the last time I saw this years ago, it was on a small screen Youtube video. On a larger screen, I can finally appreciate the lighting of the film. Romero manages to effectively use shadows in both subtle and explicit ways, emphasizing the claustrophobic situation for the characters, and the creeping terror outside. It also increases the horror, as the lighting shows the full extent of the brutality on screen (the shadows make it look like real blood.) This is very effective in black-and-white, since it fully displays this contrast. For how low budget the film is, the effects and settings are very unsettling. The main innovation often cited of the film was setting a classic gothic living dead scenario in what was then contemporary America. (Even Targets from a year earlier, despite being similarly set in the then modern day, had elements of a gothic film in the form of the in-universe film) Thus, the setting (including a cemetery and an abandoned house) signal a more modern feel for the film, especially since they gain info from radio and television broadcasts. The zombies, in their make-up and tattered clothes, look very unsettling, but unlike modern zombies, they still look relatively normal, which makes them even more terrifying when they begin the killings. The actors do great, with Duane Jones and Karl Hardman (the latter another investor who was in the film) particular highlights. The sheer claustrophobia of the film increases as the zombies come in, and the characters are killed off one by one. The ending was especially chilling, when Ben, having managed to survive, is killed by a group of vigilantes hunting zombies. If there were a more explicit message in that, I can't find it any.

    I remember I didn't like that much of the film was focused on the people in the house. Obviously, I've turned around on it, but I think I had a particular problem around the hour-ish mark, where it did kind of slow down, and feels like a repetition of previous scenes. I also feel the film could've been slightly longer, like that ten minutes that was cut (which has been lost due to a flood), or maybe more focus on the large scenario through the TV or the radio.

    When I first saw this film years ago, I didn't much like it. It took years for me to turn around on it, and you can consider this a reevaluation of the film with hindsight behind it. While I prefer Dawn of the Dead, this is an excellent feature, and I highly recommend it for horror and zombie fans, or people who like black-and-white films for their look.

    Which brings me to tomorrow, where I will look at this film's color remake from 1990.

Dailles and Nightlies- Across the Universe

        About two months ago, during a visit to Las Vegas, my Dad and I saw the Love show at the Mirage. It was a Cirque du Soleil production which utilized Beatles songs to score some impressive acrobatics and dance sequences. While I was watching the performance, I thought a bit to the use of Beatles songs in other films. Two very notable examples came to mind. One was Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band , a 1978 film using music from the titular album and Abbey Road by producer Robert Stigwood, famed for his other '70's musicals, Grease and Saturday Night Fever. That film featured several prominent artists of the 70's (Peter Frampton; Earth, Wind, and Fire; Aerosmith; the Bee Gees) performing these songs in a plot loosely based on Sgt. Pepper. The film was a critical and financial flop, and doesn't seem to be remembered fondly today. Of course, the other was the film in the title. Directed by famed stage director Julie Taymor, who is probably most famous for directing The Lion King on Broadway, and in terms of film credits, had directed an adaptation of Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus, this 2007 feature is not based on any particular album or song, but is a simple jukebox musical, with a plot and characters centered around the songs, as well as the 60's period that Beatlemania emerged in. The surviving members of the Beatles seemed to enjoy it. Everyone else seems ... mixed on it. It seems to be brought up as a strange failed experiment on Taymor's part. Does it deserve this reputation? I decided to start a new series separate from my current film or horror reviews, where I just talk about whatever film I want to, whether it be a fairly obscure flop or a classic for the ages, and anything in-between. It'll be infrequent, mainly to pad out months I have little to no material on, and will range from first impressions to films I've probably seen a dozen or so times. So, without further delay.

       Jude (Jim Sturgess, and yes, that name is intentional. The song is played at one point) is a young shipyard worker in Liverpool, who decides to come to America to find his birth father, an American GI from the war. He finds himself in Princeton, where he has a brief discussion with his father (Robert Clohessy), before befriending Max (Joe Anderson, and the name is another Beatles reference), a Princeton student and bohemian, who introduces him to his family, including his sister Lucy (Evan Rachel Wood, and yes, another reference. Look, it's clear where this is going). Lucy is saddened by her significant other being drafted to fight in Vietnam. Max decides to drop out of Princeton, and join a group of Bohemians including Sadie (Dana Fuchs), JoJo (Martin Luther McCoy), and Prudence (TV Carpio). As her boyfriend is killed in action and Max is drafted, Lucy becomes more involved with the anti-war movement, and her relationship with Jude blooms, as the 60's gradually become more radical.....

      There are a number of good renditions in her. "Let It Be", "With a Little Help from My Friends", "Blackbird", "Hey, Jude", "Come Together", and "All You Need Is Love" are all very well-done and memorable renditions, distinct from their original recordings. All the actors do a fine job of singing. The film's plot is simple, but relatively easy to follow, especially with its various characters and their storylines. It also has good, high quality production design, with little CGI, making it feel more real than your average musical. Just generally, it was never boring to watch. It always had something interesting to watch, whether it be actually good or bizarrely bad, and I was never bored by the film.

     I talked about the good renditions, but there are some.... weird ones. "Being for the Benefit of Mr.Kite", (with Eddie Izzard as some sort of ringleader), and a mash-up of the titular song and "Helter Skelter" are two examples. The former is competent and true to the spirit, but comes out of nowhere, and is incongruous with the rest of the film. The latter just doesn't work, with the two songs competing for attention. There was also "She's So Heavy", which features military trainers in Max Headroom masks, and "Revolution", where Jude literally points to a Mao portrait when he says a line. Another problem this film has is it feels too much like a cliched late 60's period piece. Like, of course the characters become involved in the counterculture, of course the lead girl becomes anti-war, of course there is a Vietnam subplot, and of course, the anti-war movement grows more radical as times goes on. It feels too cliched in regards to the period, and feels eeriely similar to Forrest Gump (which originated many of these cliches).

     I enjoyed this feature, even if parts of it didn't work for me. It's fun, looks nice, and the songs are well done. Honestly, that's all it needed to be. If you like the Beatles or like the songs of the Beatles, this will very likely appeal to you, especially with all the other little nods and references made throughout the film.

    I hoped you enjoyed this inaugural entry, I don't know when and what the next entry will be, but stay tuned to find out. I also don't know what my next review will be.