Showing posts with label 1960's. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1960's. Show all posts

Saturday, November 16, 2024

WTF Watch: Kissin' Cousins (1964)




Watched:  11/15/2024
Format:  Amazon
Viewing:  First
Director:  Gene Nelson

In this movie, Elvis comes down hard on the side of @#$%ing one's cousin(s). 

This is not me inferring something.  This is what happens in this movie from a few different angles. 

To be sure, one is hard pressed to find a more problematic movie than Kissin' Cousins (1964), the movie I watched last night.  And when people say they want to go back to a better America - I want to say "this America?  Cousin @#$%ing America?"  The contemporary reviews of this movie sure weren't great, but they also don't seem overly concerned with how this movie is about two things:  putting ICBM siloes on US soil and normalizing gettin' with yer kin.

It also features suggestions that the best way to win a woman is to pursue her relentlessly and a little bit violently, despite her express wishes.  It goes in hard for sexualizing the infantilization of women.  And probably a dozen other things, but those are some of the eye-poppers.

Like a lot of Elvis movies, it's not so much a musical as an excuse to roll out a new Elvis record.  There's some plot, but it's a framework to stop the eight minutes' worth of story for Elvis to sing a song.  In this way, it's not so much a musical - which uses songs to carry the story and have characters express themselves - as a series of music videos interspersed between goofily delivered plot points.

Wednesday, October 30, 2024

HalloWatch: Carnival of Souls (1962)




Watched:  10/29/2024
Format:  Max
Viewing:  First
Director:  Herk Harvey

I don't know what I was expecting from Carnival of Souls (1962) but a sort of low-budget art-horror film wasn't really it.  Further, The Sixth Sense's twist ending doesn't seem like that big of a deal now.  

Probably famous because someone forgot to put a copyright notice on the film - and therefore it was copyright free and fair pickings for rebroadcast and re-showing on creature features - Carnival of Souls is now part of the horror canon.  It's a low-budget affair that easily could have delved into Ed Wood territory, but instead uses what it has - which is photography and lighting, great locations, pipe organs, a protagonist with a great profile who does a "haunted" look like no one's business...  add in a lot of dark clothes and pancake make-up, and we've put together a tight, spooky flick.

In Kansas, a group of young women cruising on a sunny afternoon race a bit with some young men, but accidentally drive off a bridge into a deep river.  The car is submerged and can't be found.  But three hours later, one of the women emerges from the water, confused and with no idea what just happened.

Saturday, October 5, 2024

Vincent Price HalloWatch: Tales of Terror (1962)




Watched:  10/04/2024
Format:  DVD
Viewing:  First!
Director:  Roger Corman

This movie was SO GOOD.

I don't know what I was expecting, but I'd just never gotten around to Tales of Terror (1962) - an anthology of three Edgar Allen Poe short story adaptations - and I regret I'd never watched it until now.  But when looking at Vincent Price movies, I often look to see who else is in them, because Price clearly loved goofing with specific pals, and this one has Peter Lorre, Basil Rathbone, and the dlightful  Joyce Jameson, who I know from A Comedy of Terrors.

As an anthology, it lets Price play three different characters - showcasing the man's versatility (he could play it all!) while also letting him overplay a bit to suit the needs of each role.  The first segment is "Morella" in which he plays a widower whose daughter returns to him - sent away as a baby after her mother died due to complications from child birth.  In "The Black Cat", we get The Cask of Amontillado with Lorre walling up Price.  In the third - a grisly tale of mesmerism with Basil Rathbone trying to manipulate the will of a dying man and use his horrible power to force Debra Paget into marriage.

Rather than get into three separate stories, what I'd say is - to me, this is when horror is at its best.  The very ideas in the story are chilling.  This is not a surprise as it's Poe, right?  He's sort of the guy for this.  But by keeping it brief, as Poe did, they can stay focused, not worry about filling a movie with movie things.  Love interests, arcs for everyone, etc...  So the actors can really lock in and push toward the themes and ideas, and we know this works - or did - from shows like The Twilight Zone.   

So the ideas - the absolute horror of a mother who *is* furious her baby killed her, the terror of being walled up alive, of being trapped against your will between life and death...  it's good stuff.  

Look, you'll see me bitching about jump scares a lot.  And... they're fine.  They work.  So does walking up behind an old lady at church and blowing an air horn (do not do this).  Of course that stuff works, and sometimes it's fun and I enjoy it.  But it's also not what sticks with me.  Maybe the *vibe* of the movie sticks with me, but give me someone realizing they're all living in a horrendously fucked up situation already, and it's about to come to a head in a weird and horrible way, and I'm in!  And if you can do that without, you know, also making something go "bang!" all of a sudden to I go "tee hee hee", all the better.  

This movie, like some other stuff from Corman's AIP branch, looks pretty good!  The sets are better than necessary, the costumes pretty slick, the color that weird "we won't pay for technicolor" garish, and we have Debra Paget (who is still with us!), so we know to put our money where it counts.

Anyway - people will think you need darkness and limbs twisting and wet hair on females to get terror, but to me - you just need the right concept and the right actors willing to go nuts on screen.  And Corman got that.   I literally applauded after each sequence.  Just perfect chunks of horror to take you into the Halloween season.

Thursday, September 12, 2024

Kurosawa Rewatch: Yojimbo (1961)



Watched: 09/12/2024
Format:  Max
Viewing:  First
Director:  Akira Kurosawa


It's been a long time since I've watched the same movie twice in the same year.  Or, at least, I don't do it often anymore.  There's too much out there, I guess.  

Anyway - I really liked this one the first time, and that was true again on a second viewing.  



Saturday, August 24, 2024

Didn't Care For It Watch: BUtterfield 8 (1960)




Watched:  08/23/2024
Format:  Max
Viewing:  First
Director:  Daniel Mann
Selection;  Jamie, but following my thread that we should try this movie sometime from a week ago

Look, I'm the first person to start lecturing people about how you need to watch a movie from two points of view - (1) the context you bring to it, and (2) the context in which it was made and released.  You sorta need to think of it like watching the customs of another country and trying to incorporate their point of view to appreciate a visit there.  So, it's part and parcel of watching classic film that one will see outdated concepts, racism, sexism, etc...  Our forebears' ways are not the ways of our current norms.

And, yet...  BUtterfield 8 (1960)  is a rough ride.  

It's the sort of thing we'd treat like a punching dummy or pinata in film criticism by the 1990's - so by 2024, it feels super strange.  The culture that spawned the film is on life support or hospice - with some geniuses still thinking this era was somehow golden.  But, yeah, it's essentially a movie in which all the bad habits of virgin/ whore dichotomies are the skeleton upon which the story hangs and this story very much about women is always secretly about the needs of one man - and a horrible man at that.

Thursday, August 15, 2024

Epic Watch: Cleopatra (1963)



Watched:  08/14/2024
Format:  Max
Viewing:  First
Director:  Joseph L Mankiewicz
Selection:  Jamie

Well, I thought about the Roman Empire a lot the past few days, so there's one meme based in fact.  And, I had to flex some brain cells from my two semesters of Roman History, taken circa 1996 that I don't use all that often.

I had pitched watching something else, but when we opened Max, Cleopatra (1963) came up, and Jamie was curious - and I am not one to say "no, no.  No Liz Taylor" and so we embarked on a two-night journey with a four hour movie.  Yeah.  Four hours.

Cleopatra is famed for a few things.  

Thursday, July 18, 2024

Fellini Watch: La Dolce Vita (1960)




Watched:  07/17/2024
Format:  Disc from Library
Viewing:  First
Director:  Federico Fellini

Continuing on my "let's watch some famed directors we've missed" kick, I've returned to Fellini.

With La Dolce Vita (1960), we're about as far as one gets from the world of La Strada's post-war desolation - diving headfirst into the mid-century Italian party scene, mixing the wealthy, the famous, the would-be famous and the hangers-on.  It's a film with a certain malaise I now realize has been borrowed by innumerable other movies, usually by kid who finds himself introduced into high society and finds out, gee, things are complicated here, too.  

But our POV character here is not naive, and he's been at this a while.  Instead, we find our protagonist (Marcello Mastroianni - I'll refrain from calling him a hero) at a tipping point.  And the movie follows him as he considers all the ways he can slip and fall from what seems a charmed position.  He's a successful ladies man, bedding upper-class women (Anouk Aimee), but with a fiancee at home, whom he's growing to despise.  He could be a journalist for some time, but he has a desire to write literature.  He seems to be seeking some truth or revelation through the women he falls for, but once he has them, he rejects them.

Friday, June 21, 2024

Fellini Watch: 8 1/2 (1963)




Watched:  06/20/2024
Format:  Criterion
Viewing:  First
Director:  Federico Fellini


I was unable to find La Dolce Vita streaming, so I had to skip ahead to 8 1/2 (1963) as I continue on my "finally watch a handful of movies from name directors" homework that I've assigned myself.  Obviously I'm checking out Fellini at the moment.  Commenting on my post for La Strada, StevenGH effused a bit about this film, so I didn't mind jumping into the deep end.  

This screening was not taken on due to the passing this week of co-star Anouk Aimée, but the cosmos aligned, and so it's with a farewell salute to the actor that we dove into this movie for the first time.  

Prior to watching this movie, I didn't, honestly, know anything about it other than that it had Mastroianni in the role for which he's best known in America.  So, despite knowing this was a "Top 50 Movies by Critical Consensus" type of film, no one had brought it up with me other than asking if I had seen it - maybe once every few years - and then moving on upon learning I hadn't seen it.

For me, what you may have heard about the reputation of 8 1/2 bore out.  It's both incredibly simple and so complex it's worthy of the endless conversation 60 years of this film existing in critical circles will tell you.  It is about what it is about, while also being the thing that can't be made by the characters in the film.  I'm getting now why a thousand bad films have been made by filmmakers who tried to recapture the lightning in a bottle.  

I don't know if I've ever seen a film this *honest*, where - knowing Fellini was writer, director and ring master of the film - there's no doubt that what we're watching in the screen is a transposition of the real onto celluloid.  Past, present and fantasy mix within the film, and the film seems to play all of these parts for Fellini - down to recasting himself as Marcello Mastroianni (no doubt one of the best male faces to cross the screen) as a true fantasy.  And, look, I don't know how much of this is true - I don't assume this is a 1:1 to Fellini's life, but I do think it taps into something that manages to show a portrait of a character and his challenges and inner-life in a way that is both unique and comes from a place both specific and universal-ish.   

I won't get too much into the cast, but it also includes British actor Barbara Steele, which surprised me when she walked across the screen.  Claudia Cardinale plays more of an idea than a character, and who better to play a concept, really?  The forementioned Anouk Aimée is stunning as the long-suffering wife of Mastroianni, her rage turned into a steely armor.  And dozens of others, none of whom I know as they're Italian actors from 60 years ago.  And I am not here to talk about performances on this one, but there weren't any wrong notes, which I think likely goes without saying.

To be honest, most of the time, it's my feeling that when writers and directors think they should delve into their libido, their strings of romantic and sexual partners and be honest about it, the results are cringe-worthy.  If this movie has a knock against it, it's only that others think they can pull this off and remain interesting and/ or sympathetic.  There are a few that do work (All That Jazz is really something), but a lot more that don't.  Why this works in 8 1/2 is an alchemy of execution of story beats, the use of his past, present and fantasy structure, and that Fellini is clear-eyed about his fictional director.  He sees how people hurt each other, recognizing humiliation for what it is rather than as a comedic crutch.

Like a lot of the films I'll wind up discussing in my Movie Homework Series here on the blog, I don't think I'll have anything new to say.  We're going to be touching some of the most famous, well-regarded cinema on planet Earth, and that means it's been written about in magazines, reviews and academic treatises when it hasn't been the subject of interviews, both primary and secondary.  

What I don't want to do is give these movies short shrift, nor cover well-trod territory, especially when other folks know these movies well.  And, certainly, I'll be returning to this movie, which I'm sure will have deeper impact in new ways when I know where this is going.  But I do appreciate coming in cold, and just sorting out what I was watching as a somewhat pristine experience.

I'll save further commentary on the imitators for another day, for a future re-watch.  There's plenty to discuss in structure, camera work, style, religion on film, libido on film and Claudia Cardinale.  So, perhaps in the future we can return to this movie again.



Thursday, June 13, 2024

Godard Watch: Alphaville (1965)





Watched:  06/13/2024
Format:  BluRay
Viewing:  First
Director:  Jean-Luc Godard


My relationship with the films of Jean-Luc Godard is fraught.  On the one hand, I recognize his unique vision and what his films brought to cinema during the height of his powers - and that we're still playing catch up 60 years later.  On the other, I feel like he's a pretentious wanker who can't get out of his own way.  So watching his films can feel like doing homework or eating vegetables.  I know it's a good thing, and from time to time I'm enjoying myself, but other times I'm eating undercooked green beans, and I know green beans can be really good - just not like this.

That said, Alphaville (1965) has a prescience to it that feels deeply immediate here in 2024, as I am sure it did in 1965.   

The film is about an agent, with the unlikely and phenomenal name of "Lemmy Caution" (aka: Ivan Johnson), in a future world not too far from 1965.  He's entering Alphaville from the Outer Countries to find out what their plans are as Alphaville is secretive and weird and maybe wants to destroy everything that is not Alphaville - which is run by a computer known as Alpha 60 under the view of a Dr. Von Braun.

The people of Alphaville live in ways prescribed by the computer, an emotionless, bland existence where everyone gives the same greetings and operates as dictated by the computer, which applies what it considers logic to everyone's movements.  

Our protagonist is there to find out what it plans, and to try to recall one of their own agents who has risen to become the leader of Alphaville, Von Braun.  Along the way he meets Natacha, the daughter of Von Braun, and the two begin a sort of relationship which threatens them both as she learns about concepts forbidden to anyone in Alphaville - love, a conscience, poetry....

The film is a mix of Godard's intense styling, showing the modernist Paris of 1965 as a sci-fi dystopia, and a sort of not-quite Grahame Greene or le Carre spy thriller.  All stuff with which I am onboard.  The clean, computer perfect world of Alphaville now, of course, has the vibe of post-WWII technology and a booming world moving very fast as computers and technologies I think of as modern are coming into being - and the style of architecture that began pre-WWII with Bauhaus and Brutalism is becoming Mid-Century Modern.  The giant office buildings and their tiny squares of light indicating a person insider are appropriately ominous.  

But, holy hannah, watching this movie where the computer has gotten rid of art and poetry and feeling, but under the watchful eye of humans who think *this is great*, it sure hits different in an era where executives think ChatGPT is the cure to all ills, including making our art and poetry for us.  What would have felt like an abstraction 10 years ago now feels like a concrete clear and present danger.  That was not something I expected.

Yeah, I don't know that reciting poetry is going to free the world from the machinations of the evil machine, and some of that feels like some very-1960's thinking, but I get the sentiment.  And our hard-boiled agent getting the girl at the end certainly has hints of Rick Deckard making his way out of Los Angeles.

Anyhoo.  Glad I took the challenge and finally watched it after it's sat on my shelf for a couple of years after an impulse buy.



Monday, June 10, 2024

Disney Watch: Swiss Family Robinson (1960)




Watched:  06/10/2024
Format:  Disney BluRay
Viewing:  Unknown
Director:  Ken Annakin

A long time ago now, Stuart gifted me a BluRay of Swiss Family Robinson (1960), a kind-of-hard-to-secure item.  I'd expressed to him my fondness for the live-action Disney films that more or less informed a lot of the spirit of Disney in a certain era, from this film to 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea to Treasure Island to Johnny Tremain and more.

Most of these I saw on The Wonderful World of Disney and a collection of other places.  

I'm not at all surprised I took a shine to this movie as a kid.  It had too many pets (including two Great Danes), it's shot in a beautiful location (Tobago), has a lot of zoo animals from tigers to elephants to zebras, a set that's so cool, they recreated it as a great attraction at Disney World and Disneyland, which was a must-do for me as a kid (and adult, when it was turned into Tarzan's house or some nonsense).  

But the basic set-up is that a Swiss family is moving to New Guinea - somewhat fleeing Napolean and what's happening in Europe - and wind up shipwrecked somewhere in the "East Indies" which I put in quotes not because it's not real, but that's a pretty big area to guess about.  

There's pirates about, tigers in the woods, etc...   The two elder boys seek to circumnavigate the island when they stumble upon a Captain and his cabin boy, held by pirates.  Of course the cabin boy is a girl (it is so obviously a girl), which they discover after liberating her.  And with no other women or girls on the island who aren't their mother, they make their way home, while tensions mount.

Sunday, May 26, 2024

Kurosawa Noir Watch: High and Low (1963)



Watched:  05/25/2024
Format:  Criterion
Viewing:  First
Director:  Akira Kurosawa

The Kurosawa journey continues!

So, this was up in my queue when M.Bell wrote to say "if you're watching Kurosawa, you should watch High and Low soon."  So, I *did*.  

I dug this movie.  It's fascinating to see the then-nascent genre of the police procedural from a Japanese perspective and from the eye and hand of Kurosawa.

I've not read Ed McBain's King's Ransom, the novel on which High and Low (1963) is based.  And I doubt this is a 1:1 match for that novel - also, I've never read any Ed McBain, and maybe I should?

The movie stars an army of Toho players, topped off by Toshiro Mifune as an executive with a shoe company that would like more profits.  As we enter the story, he's being recruited by fellow executives to turn against the company president and take over the company.  But Mifune's character has his own plans, and has mortgaged everything against it - and is already millions in debt to make his plan work out.  But, then, his chauffer's son is kidnapped by accident (they intended to take his son, of similar age and build), and Mifune must make the decision to save the boy or himself.  

Thursday, May 16, 2024

Kurosawa Watch: Sanjuro (1962)





Watched:  05/16/2024
Format:  Criterion
Viewing:  First
Director:  Akira Kurosawa

Well, I watched Kurosawa's follow up to Yojimbo.  Sanjuro (1962).  

The movie sees the return of Toshiro Mifumbe as the nameless ronin - who takes on the name "Sanjuro" so folks aren't calling him "my guy".  

He's stumbled this time upon a group of nine samurai who have found corruption within the clan, but targeted the wrong guy as the source of the problem, ratting him out to the actual source of the problem.  They're about to get killed by said bad-guy when "Sanjuro" steps in, saves their skins, and joins their cause.

Look, Yojimbo was lightning in a bottle.  It felt like a western in its way, introduced the nameless ronin, and - structurally - lays the groundwork for a lot of what's to come.  Following up with a sequel by rejiggering a movie in pre-production to include the lead from the last movie was always going to be a little dodgy.  

So, it's not that Sanjuro isn't a good movie - it clearly is.  It's just not Yojimbo.  It's the difference between how an A+ feels versus a B+.  You don't get many A+'s.

Wednesday, May 15, 2024

Kurosawa Watch: Yojimbo (1961)



Watched: 05/14/2024
Format:  Criterion
Viewing:  First
Director:  Akira Kurosawa

So, I've decided to finally watch (a) some Kurosawa and (b) some samurai movies.  

I'm always a little embarrassed by certain gaps in my film-watching, and this is certainly one of them.  I've only seen, I think, three Kurosawa movies, and none of them in this millennium.  It's been a while.   And I just never get around to any samurai movies in my every day life.  Which is bananas.  Samurai movies have more or less paved the way for a huge portion of modern pop culture, in dozens of ways - from Star Wars and the warrior priest Jedi to anime to the various codes even our antiheroes live by (see:  Le Samourai).  Heck, even Samurai Jack was clearly supposed to be a particular flavor of movie samurai dumped into the future.  I have thoughts of whether all of Cowboy Bebop exists because for some reason this Japanese Western has a jazz score.  

They're socially acceptable action movies amongst film snobs, which... I will have comment upon.  

Yojimbo, in particular, was of interest as I was well aware it was Leone's inspiration for For a Fistful of Dollars, released just three years later.  And I've loved me some Spaghetti Westerns since at least college (when Jamie and I started dating, I had a Man With No Name poster on my apartment wall).  But, of course, the similarities between Yojimbo and, at minimum, Dashiell Hammett's Red Harvest, are impossible to ignore.  There may be some Glass Key in there as well.  Which - go watch Miller's Crossing sometime and come back to me for your "compare and contrast" writing prompt.

It should be noted that learned people have disputed the Red Harvest claim, focusing on The Glass Key, to which I say "you're clearly wrong, my guy."

But credit where it's due:  Hammett may have created the (frankly, very good, very readable) books upon which Yojimbo is based, but I think Kurosawa was the one who wound up influencing film and made the concept part of the zeitgeist.

Let's just be super clear up front:  I loved this movie.  

I'm mad I put it off for so long.  I think I've watched every Godzilla movie at least once, and most of them twice, so subtitles and Toho are not a problem for me.  There is just not a good goddamn reason I put this off for so long, and now I'm going to drive everyone nuts by just watching samurai movies for a while, and you can all deal.

Sometimes you just come to a movie, and you say "every choice here is exactly right.  This is the way this story should be told.  This is the perfect way to shoot this.  The dialog is great.  The beats are dead on.  The score is nuts and *perfect*.  And the lead is the most charismatic SOB I've ever seen."  

By the way, for some reason in high school, I rented Kurosawa's Dreams even though I had no idea what it was, what it was about, who Akira Kurosawa was, etc...  It was in, and I judged a book by its cover.  I really need to see that again.  But what I recall is that the movie's visuals were almost overwhelming.  And I can't say enough for the work here.  Young film-makers go watch this.  Take note.  Watch how Kurosawa frames shots, uses levels, deploys the wind, shoots through obstacles.  How he doesn't linger on violence for violence's sake - when it happens its sudden, and brutal and - from our lead - lightning fast.  And then compare that to the first face-off we see between the rival factions.  

Ie:  Try to appreciate visual storytelling in film.

So what do you say about a movie that's more or less already universally loved?  

I dunno.  I'm kind of glad Jamie didn't watch it or I'd be competing with Toshiro Mifune now, and I am not winning that battle.  

Go watch this movie.  

Next up:  Sanjuro

Monday, May 6, 2024

Ape Watch: King Kong Escapes (1967)




Watched:  05/06/2024
Format:  BluRay
Viewing:  First
Director:  Ishiro Honda

I tend to think of myself as someone who would like nothing better than a movie about a giant ape and a robot in the shape of a giant ape duking it out in Tokyo.  Literally, this should check all the boxes for me, but I think I hit the wall as far as Kaiju-tainment for a minute, or else this movie was as dull as it felt.

Honestly, the production history of this movie is more interesting than the final product, which seems impossible when this if your villain.  

he's got panache and joie de vivre!

But the movie has too much plot for it's own good, and I think the editing needs some help.  At just over 90 minutes, it feels like 180 minutes at times.  

My reading tells me that this was some oddball effort fired off by none other than Rudolph-wranglers Rankin-Bass, who were making a King Kong cartoon at the time, that when I saw stills, I think I recall seeing as a small child.  I guess Rankin-Bass - who were outsourcing some animation efforts to Japan - went to Toho, after Toho made the 1962 film King Kong vs. GodzillaRB and Toho jointly went to Universal, and since everyone likes money, they went ahead and made the movie.

I've only seen the US cut released by Universal - Toho has a slightly longer cut they released in Japan - and of course this version is dubbed, with one of our two American-born performers overdubbed by someone not them.  I assume real US kaiju aficionados have their Toho copies, but not I.

Anyway, the plot is that an un-named Eastern-hemisphere country has sent Madame X to work with Dr. Who (yeah, I know) whom she has hired to mine for the mysterious Element X (which I think is probably super-uranium).  Who has stolen plans from a clever... submarine leadership team? to build a giant replica of the legendary King Kong in order to perform the mining.  This is not a sequel to the prior King Kong vs. Godzilla film, but hints that the 1933 OG Kong film was inspired by a real gorilla-guy, and that's OUR guy here.  

That same submarine team, made up of actor Rhodes Reason and his more handsome counterpart, Akira Takarada, hang out a lot with Lt. Susan, the ship nurse, played by Linda Miller (who has some fun interviews online).  


CINEMA



Anyway, there's some stuff that echoes OG Kong, way too much espionage/ James Bond inspired stuff.  Madame X is up to no good.  There's ape hypnosis.  I dunno.  It just goes on and on before we finally get to the big ape fight, which is pretty good, tbh.  Who doesn't want to see that?

The budget on this film seems high.  The detail on the Kong suit is good (if goofy) and the sets are many and highly details, for man and kaiju alike.  And Dr. Who's capes couldn't have been cheap.  And Madame X's couture was excellent. 

I think this one demanded to be watched with other people, and I watched it solo.  This was a mistake.  I may make Jamie watch it with me later this year.  

Monday, April 22, 2024

Toho Watch: The War of the Gargantuas (1966)




Watched:  04/21/2024
Format:  Max
Viewing:  First
Director:  Ishiro Honda

Not as well remembered as the Godzilla movies from Toho, the same studio also made a few "Frankenstein" movies.  If, by Frankenstein, you mean "here's a giant, sort of stupid looking guy in a furry outfit and hideous mask".  I, of course, didn't look up what order to watch these in, so this is the second one, and I have not yet seen the first.  

However, I'm a clever fellow, and I am pretty sure I followed along.

The War of the Gargantuas (1966) follows the tale of a "Frankenstein" appearing in Japan after they believed the Frankenstein they'd previously dealt with in Frankenstein vs. Baragon was killed.  Well, apparently Frank was dropping cells that grew into new monsters, also called Frankensteins, because sure.

The first on to appear is green, and alternately referred to as "Gaira" or "The Green One", because he is green.  And comes from the sea.  And he hates lounge singers.  And the Japanese Self Defense Force.  A second Frankenstein comes down out of the mountains, and is dubbed "Sanda" (and is usually actually just called "The Brown One").  

The two fight while, per usual, the guys in military uniforms and stern men in gray suits ponder what they should do, while our hero seems to know what to do.  Now, weirdly, our hero is Russ Fucking Tamblyn.  And he is having an absolute blast.  

The best part of the movie is that is also has Kumi Mizuno, who has a large role, partnering with Tamblyn as his feisty sidekick.




You can also count on seeing several other players from the Toho company.  Man, getting in with them must have been an okay gig for a bunch of years there.

Somehow more so than other Toho kaiju films, this one really is just two monsters shrieking and fighting for about 50 of the 90 minutes of the movie.  Tamblyn and Mizuno run around behind them for a while, but eventually they get sidelined.  And you will get very, very tired of what seems like a loop of shrieking monsters and buildings crumbling.  THAT SAID, the sets are pretty great on this one, and they came up with interesting set pieces - maybe because the actors are confined within the same amount of kooky latex needed to make Godzilla happen.  

All I can say is, I saw it, I was glad for Russ Tamblyn, and Kumi Mizuno should be in everything.





Friday, March 29, 2024

Kaiju Watch: Gamera the Giant Monster (1965)

Gamera just stepped on a Lego



Watched:  03/29/2024
Format:  Amazon
Viewing:  First
Director:  Noriaki Yuasa
Selection:  Jamie, kind of

We've both seen a lot of Godzilla movies, but I confess to a Gamera gap.  I have not ever really watched Gamera movies outside of MST3K.  

Gamera is from Daiei Film, a competitor to Toho, one supposes.  And it's not like Japan has the lock on movies riffing on popular ideas from other studios.  It's a way of life for popular media here in these United States.  

Anyhoo...  Gamera: The Giant Monster (1965) is the first Gamera movie of what Wikipedia tells me is a dozen films.  It's... a rip-off of Godzilla in some ways, and it's own weird, wacky thing, so you can see how it took off and found it's own voice and following.

The basic gist is that the Russians are flying over the arctic where some scientists are hanging out with what I believe are supposed to be Inuit people trying to determine... something about turtles or something.  I don't know.  Anyway, they're engaged by the USAF who shoot one of the Russkies out of the air, crashing a nuclear payload into the ice.  Which frees Gamera, just in time for the title sequence.  

Thursday, March 28, 2024

G Prep Watch: King Kong v. Godzilla (1963) - US Version




Watched:  03/27/2024
Format:  BluRay
Viewing:  First of this version
Director(s):  original formula - Ishirô Honda / US recut - Tom Montgomery
Selection:  Joint, Jamie and me

We have tickets to see Godzilla x Kong on Thursday the 28th, and we decided to do a little bit of homework prior to the film.  It had been a while since I'd watched King Kong vs. Godzilla (1963), and I was met by a surprise when putting the film on.  

Like Gojira/ Godzilla: King of the Monsters and Godzilla 1984/ Godzilla 1985/ Godzilla Returns - this movie had a cut for the US audiences which is edited, includes new footage and has American talent cut into the original film.  I think I'd only ever seen the Japanese cut of the movie, so I was a little thrown when the movie was framed as a newscast hosted by a genial white American dude, and leaped into action to see what was what.

The version we watched was... insane.  There's so many tones being hit, so many ideas, characters, locations, etc...  Any theme that was originally present (apparently originally a satire on the programming on television and the corporate relationships to that programming) is flattened as the American version literally uses television as the framing device - inserting American-based news anchors to ponder the events unfolding.

Monday, March 25, 2024

Jamie's B-Day Watch: The Sound of Music (1965)




Watched:  03/25/2024
Format:  Disney+
Viewing:  Unknown
Director:  Robert Wise
Selection:  Jamie's birthday choice!

I have no idea when I last watched The Sound of Music (1965).  I've documented most of the movie's I've seen since 2012 - with a break in 2013-2014.  So it's possible I watched it in that window, because it seems like I've seen it more recently than 2011.  Or I just forgot to write it up.  That happens.

It's probably a fool's errand to talk about the movie at length.  It's a bonafide classic, one of the two great American musicals directed by Robert Wise, and the music has permeated culture far beyond the boundaries of the film.  A Few of My Favorite Things has somehow become a Christmas song, which, sure.  Why not?

From a personal standpoint, when I watch this movie, I am about 75% sure this is what my mom wanted out of having kids.  Matching outfits, adventures, happiness and singing.  And while she did an amazing job of mothering, she still wound up with two sarcastic, grumpy, gigantic boys who kind of moseyed through family adventures with a grunt and an eyeroll.  Sorry, Ma.

The Sound of Music is based (extremely loosely) on the real life Family Von Trapp, who were an Austrian family who left their homeland after Hitler invaded.  It was, in it's own way, as dramatic as anything, but also not the short, exciting escape depicted in the film.

It is worth going back and watching for a few reasons.  1)  If your memory of the films is essentially kids prancing around the hills with their governess, it means the last time you saw this movie you went to bed at Intermission.  2)  Putting those songs from the musical into the narrative context of the film is kind of a good idea.  It also tells you a lot about how a musical is supposed to work.  3)  The movie is just masterfully choreographed and shot - and edited.  The entire film looks phenomenal, and clearly no expense was spared for locations, camera placement, time on location, extras, etc...  But also the framing and use of visual language in this movie is kind of mind-boggling.  Check out the Do-Re-Me sequence.  It's phenomenally well done for everything it conveys and the way it's shot and edited.  4) It's not much fun to think about vis-a-vis parallels to current threats to democracy, but at least the Georg in this movie is deeply anti-Nazi and sees the tide rising while everyone else kind of rolls over.  5)  The Lonely Goatherd is an all-time banger.

Watching the film now, I'm always probably more sympathetic than the film wants me to be to the Baroness, who gets tossed aside for the virginal manic pixie dream-nun.  Also, God bless 'em, but they shouldn't have cast the late Charmain Carr as the naive, 16-year old Liesl.  She was probably 21 or 22, looks 24, and it's almost visually confusing seeing her with the actual children.  Meanwhile, a near-30-year-old Julie Andrews is playing a novice, so I'd guess she *should* about 18 or so.  And, btw, Christopher Plummer was about 13 years older than Carr and barely older than Andrews.*  And he's 7 years younger than Eleanor Parker, who plays the Baroness.**  Anyway, once you look at it again, the movie can feel a wee bit jarring and I don't know the in's and out's of why they cast who they did.  

Still, if you want to absolutely want to cock-punch a dude named Rolfe, this is the movie for you.  (man, Rolfe just sucks so fucking bad.  Liesl, NO.)

This is a Robert Wise movie, and I'm going to just keep saying "Robert Wise does not make bad movies".

Anyhoo, I *do* think we're hitting an interesting point as the Gen-Z kids haven't been part of the ritual of watching The Sound of Music on TV once a year or so, and generally people don't really talk about movies with their kids.  So while I'm sure a percentage will have seen this movie, it's no longer the cultural shorthand it was.  And actual Nazis probably seem a whole lot more like something out of a movie than actual people we'd been at war with 20 years prior to the release of this movie.




*apparently the real-life age gap between Georg and Maria was 25 years
**Parker had been in her career peek from the mid-1940's to the mid-50's, but was working consistently til about 1990.  She was the established star in the movie with Academy Awards and whatnot, and she just kills it in this film.  And is not funny looking.

Tuesday, March 12, 2024

Car Watch: Pit Stop (1969)




Watched:  03/11/2024
Format:  Amazon
Viewing:  First
Director/ Writer:  Jack Hill

This one was viewed on the rec of JAL, who will watch just about anything (and does), and only sends things my way if he's pretty sure he knows I'll find something at least interesting about a flick.  And, indeed, this is no exception.  Sadly, this same rule doesn't apply to everyone else who seems to have whole TV shows you want for me to watch instead of a 90 minute movie.

I'm always curious about the folks who run parallel to the studio system, especially those with minimal artistic aspirations - a la Roger Corman.  Like, I get that David Lynch was not going to get Disney to make Eraserhead.  But there's a lot of folks out there, and always have been, making movies fast and cheap in genre spaces, with a wildly varying level of skill.  It seems like a curious world, and it's funny that - for as much as Hollywood loves a story about movie making - I don't know that many movies about this part of the industry, and it seems rife with possibility.

Writer/ Director Jack Hill swung back and forth between respectable studio work (IMDB says he designed the Disneyland castle?) and independent work.  And I get the feeling, a movie about making Pit Stop (1969)* might be more fun than the actual film - which is pretty watchable itself.  Hill came out of the Corman shop, and this movie is produced by Corman (credit-free), so that explains no small part of it.

It's impossible not to talk about the cast, so I'll head there.  

Monday, March 4, 2024

Leone Watch: Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)




Watched:  03/03/2024
Format:  Paramount+
Viewing:  Unknown
Director:  Sergio Leone
Selection:  Oh, definitely me

It had been a few years since I'd last watched this movie all the way through, and it's funny to go back see my concern in that write-up that I'd watch the movie too much and it would lose some magic.  Well, I took about 8 years off between viewings, so there you go (I also wrote the film up briefly in 2015).  

This time I was very, very interested in the movie's not exactly subtle analogy for "the end of the West" as rail threatens to bring civilization and that will end the days of the gunslingers and a way of life that's maybe not lasted all that long, but long enough, and can't be a part of the world.  And what happens to the archetypes as the future rolls in.  None of these men are going to change - but the woman can bring civilization.  

As some pals would say, the movie is "vibes".  The plot is pretty easily summed up, and it has long, drawn-out scenes with characters watching and looking, and only speaking as needed - something I associate with Leone films in general.  

But, yeah, I was pretty tired, and pretty raw I guess when I put the movie on, because I got a bit choked up watching some scenes.  Not sad scenes.  Like, literally just watching the shot from the train, to the station to the crane up to the whole town, and Jill moving forward purposefully - and paired with the incredible Ennio Morricone score.  We just don't get that swing-for-the-fences stuff in movies anymore, if we ever did.  

But this movie goes wide as needed, and close-in as needed.  It's a movie where eyes tell the story as much as words. And, man, does Claudia Cardinale's slightest expression carry an ocean of meaning.

Anyway, if you've never seen it, it remains one of my desert-island movies.  There's so much that's great in the movie, and I think people who know about it, know.  But it still seems to fly a bit under the radar.