Showing posts with label First viewing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label First viewing. Show all posts

Monday, November 25, 2024

Holiday Watch: Hot Frosty (2024)





Watched:  11/24/2024
Format:  Netflix
Viewing:  First
Director:  Jerry Ciccoritti
Selection:  Jamie

Every Christmas, we're inundated not just with Hallmark-style Christmas films - we also get a few comedies, many which that involve some straight up magic as the premise.  After all, it is Christmas, and Christmas includes Heat Misers and flying reindeer and Mariah Carey.

But those Christmas comedies are not always winners.  Last year, I nominated two magical Christmas comedies for some of the worst films I'd seen all year.  Those included Genie and my selection for worst of 2023, Candy Cane Lane.  So I am not just easily in the bag for anything that comes along, Christmas-wise.  (I do remember liking parts of Dashing Through the Snow, but that may have just been Teyonah Parris smiling on screen).

Mostly, this movie made me happy for Lacey Chabert, who accidentally fell backward into being the second-most-popular Hallmark star, and then was promoted to full-Hallmark status when Candace Cameron Bure decided Hallmark was now too woke for her.*

Chabert had been kind of pushing the envelope at Hallmark the last few years, finding movies that didn't exactly fit the Hallmark mold as we knew it.  Haul Out the Holly, por ejemplo, was an attempt to just do a plain 'ol family comedy.  It even has Gen X's favorite Ned, Stephen Tobolowsky.  

Hot Frosty (2024) is a leap into a straight, goofy comedy, as evidenced by some of the casting, from Schitt's Creek's Dustin Milligan to Katy Mixon Greer, who I particularly loved in Eastbound and Down.  I also was delighted to see Lauren Holly show up (and she was really funny, as pre-usual).  And, lastly, if you don't know Craig Robinson and Joe Lo Truligio, well...  your life is a poor shell of an existence and I pity you.  

Sunday, November 24, 2024

Christmas Watch: The Best Christmas Pageant Ever (2024)




Watched:  11/23/2024
Format:   Cinepolis Theater
Viewing:  First
Director:  Dallas Jenkins
Selection:  KareBear

So, yes.  This was not entirely my idea. 

The book which inspired the film The Best Christmas Pageant Ever (2024) was a staple in our household while I was growing up.  In it's way, the book was as familiar as Judy Blume and Beverly Cleary for me (I can't speak for Steanso).  But I honestly haven't revisited the book in decades or seen the older movie version with Loretta Swit.  But every Christmas, whether it's at church with my folks or watching someone at the Vatican read scripture, when they get to the right part, I think of Gladys yelling "Hey!  Unto you a child is born!"

For context - While growing up, we were very involved in any church we attended, and my mom, The KareBear, ran the Sunday School at a couple of them.*   My mom's perennial draw to the book likely stemmed from seeing herself in several roles in the book - from the hard-scrabble kid growing up figuring things out, to the pious girl who loves church (our narrator, Beth), and culminating in herself as the overextended mom running a Christmas Pageant wherein things are not ideal.  

I'll admit, from the kid participant perspective in Christmas pageants - this thing lands.  (My earliest memories include my mom making me be an angel in a Vacation Bible School production and having to explain to me that angels are also dudes despite the felt-craft imagery I'd seen to date.)

And, lo, this fall my mother declared that *all she she wanted for Christmas* was for the fam to gather and go see the movie.  So, last night my folks (The Admiral and KareBear), Jamie, Steanso, Cardboard Belts and the kids all went to the theater and caught the film.  

Saturday, November 23, 2024

Hallmark Watch: A Very Merry Mix-Up (2013)




Watched:  11/22/2024
Format:  Amazon
Viewing:  First?
Director:  Jonathan Wright

Ah, the Golden Age of Hallmark.  If you weren't a city-gal falling for a simple boy from...  somewhere else even 45% more rural?...  were you even Christmassing?  This one is still from the Hallmark era of Actresses I Knew From Other Things Picking Up A Quick Paycheck.  And, to wit, Alicia Witt is our star.  

In this movie, Witt plays the world's perkiest depressed girl.  In the wake of her father's passing, she's running his antiques business - right into the ground.  While she has no visible traffic in her shop, she also won't find time to organize the store, do her books, or do much but stand in place behind the counter.  She seems to have no friends and her mother has left.  She's dating a guy who openly has contempt for her, and seems to have picked her because she'll agree to whatever, like a real life Sim.

She is unwell.

Her man is, of course, Business Man.  And that is bad.  Because business.  City.  Cell phone.  He is bad.  Even if, you know, he's rightfully pointing out that she's running her dad's business into the ground.  That is bad.  Do not point out the inevitable failure.  He proposes to her stupidly and publicly, and for reasons, she agrees, because depression is a wild ride, I guess. He then tells her she's flying to meet his family, and he'll catch up.  And she does this.

The titular very merry mix-up occurs as Witt is a moron who meets another moron and neither realizes the other's story doesn't match, and she just leaves the airport with this guy and goes to his house, believing he's the brother of her fiancée.  Btw, she's never even heard her fiancée has a brother also, btw, (friends, do not go with a stranger just saying things that sound vaguely comforting to a second location).  

She, of course, falls for the brother because we can't quite do While You Were Sleeping, but we can come close!  And she loves Christmas, and... get this... so does he!  The brother, Matt, is not much of an actor, and you can feel Witt just over-caffeinating herself to get some energy out of their scenes, because she's, like, good and stuff, and kind of stuck in this movie.

Anyway - she figures out she has the wrong house and goes to the right house, and Business Man's family is hilarious.  Yes, they suck, but that sucking is by far the best part of the movie.  It's Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf about to break out at any moment. 

Knowing Witt is ruining her dad's business, Business Man (a) finds a way for her to sell the property for $3.5 million, and then (b) offers to help her set up in another spot a couple of blocks over.  Yes, this will benefit him, too.  Which is something that would help her, is she's marrying him.  It's the definition of win-win.  Yet...  Witt, who thinks owning a business is about nostalgia for one's childhood and not feeding oneself, gets mad and breaks up with Business Man, refusing the deal.  

She gets back with dumb-dumb.  The End.

This is a movie about dumb, sweet people belonging together.  There's worse things. I think they'll likely be bankrupt within a year, but okay.

The movie is full of gigantic plotholes, the main character seems traumatized and that goes undiagnosed (and I worry for her).  It's dumb things happening so movie will happen. It hits all the Hallmark waypoints.  City bad.  Business bad.  Not Business Man good.  Wise old relative.  Stupid stories about the past.  Decorating a tree too close to Christmas.  

It was good to go back and see one of these Classic Formula movies, and I do miss them starring someone famous for something outside of being in Hallmark movies.  

Anyway, if you want to buy me the Alicia Witt Christmas record, I won't complain.  



Witt is, of course, a stone cold fox, which makes this easier to watch.



Sunday, November 17, 2024

90's Regret Watch: Armageddon (1998)

this @#$%ing pile of *&^%




Watched:  11/16/2024
Format:  Hulu
Viewing:  First
Director:  Michael Bay


I write this post from beyond the grave.  

I'm not sure what it was that, specifically, convinced my soul to abandon my body during Armageddon (1998).  There were so, so many options - from Ben Affleck leading the cast in singing "Leaving on a Jet Plane" to Bruce Willis shooting up a functioning oil rig with a shotgun to Liv Tyler disrupting everything in NASA Mission Command screaming about her "daddy".  Or maybe just the premise of the film altogether.  But with 30 extremely loud and stupid minutes left to go, I realized I had passed on to the blogging platform in the sky.

This movie is essentially the redneck fever dream of people furious at other people who paid attention in school or watch PBS because that shit ain't cool.  Michael Bay and Bruckheimer are convinced only nerds care how things work and what the movie needs to do is think of funny and rad things to show - but are neither funny nor that rad.

I'm not averse to anything about the movie on paper.  A ragtag crew is called in to save the world and blow up an asteroid aimed at Earth.  Sure.  Why not?  The actors lined up are *good* to *great*.  So the challenges arrive in every writing, directing, editing and other creative decision that went into the film. 

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, November 13, 2024

Action Watch: Monkey Man (2024)




Watched:  11/12/2024
Format:  Amazon
Viewing:  First
Director:  Dev Patel

When I saw the trailer, I recall wanting to see Monkey Man (2024).  But, honestly, 2024 has been another year of WTF, as every year has been since we lost Bowie.  And, events conspiring as they did, I missed the film until now.  

Why now?  Well, Jamie said "I want to watch an action movie", and I was really looking hard at Lady Snowblood, which she hasn't seen yet.  But I said "you know, that movie features so much trauma stuff and violence, so maybe not."  And, instead, chose the light action-comedy, Monkey Man.*  But, curiously!, there's a really, really similar plot line between Lady Snowblood and Monkey Man, and both have some pretty crazy amounts of balletic violence going on.

I am the first to admit - I am, at best, vaguely aware of Indian politics and current events/ issues.  And while I followed the film, I'm also certain I missed piles of nuance and subtext that someone more culturally literate than myself could track.  

The gist is, years ago a young boy is a fan of the mythical character, Hanuman (a monkey figure).  Through flashback interspersed, we learn that his village was burned by a sort of religious figure who is also an industrialist who used the cops to enforce his desires - like taking the land owned and occupied by minority ethnicities or religious factions.  In the course of the village's destruction, the Kid's mother is murdered in front of him.

Sunday, November 10, 2024

Doc Watch: National Geographic's "Endurance (2024)"




Watched:  11/10/2024
Format:  Disney+
Viewing:  First
Director:  Jimmy Chin, Natalie Hewit, Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi


If you have any passing interest in the the Shackleton expedition, this is both a good summary of what happened - giving the viewer a pretty good idea how Shackleton's expedition to cross Antarctica did not, in fact, work out - but somehow the crew survived two years of nightmare conditions after their ship was first iced-in and then sank.  

The story is paralleled by the contemporary search for The Endurance - lost in the ocean at almost 2 miles down.  

The doc is Nat Geo-worthy, and therefore very watchable.  But here's the thing - Shackleton's expedition was launched in 1914 (it's amazing how small the world got in a 100 years) - and so he was smart enough to bring a filmographer and photographer.  So!  Get ready to see actual filmed footage of the expedition.

Perhaps more controversial - because everyone survived, they were interviewed later.  And so we get snippets of their interviews (not an issue) but excerpts from their diaries are then read by AI versions of those people's voices derived from the interviews.  Which... I guess we can do that now? 

It's a good effect - especially mixed with the silent footage an some re-creations of the events that couldn't be filmed.  

I'm gonna try to let all of that pass without too judgment.  We're in a new era of media, and I'm not sure that didn't have an interesting effect.  I know we're all supposed to be mad at AI all the time, but it's an interesting use of the technology.

There is a moment in the doc that left me dumbfounded where the scientists say "hey, we ran this program to guess the drift of the Endurance based on some details in the original logs" - and if you're me, you're staring goggle-eyed that they mounted this whole expedition and are more than 10 days in when they thought this up.  Like - not to be a dick, but I literally *assumed* they'd done this just to get funding.

All's well that ends well, and the film does wrap up with nice footage of the Endurance at the bottom of the Antarctic waters

Crime Watch: Wolfs (2024)





Watched:  11/09/2024
Format:  Apple+
Viewing:  First
Director:  John Watt


We've fallen into a pattern on the weekends.  Fridays - we watch something silly, funny, etc...  On Saturday, if we aren't busy, we watch something we've meant to catch on streaming.  And, Wolfs (2024) is one of the films, as is the Matt Damon one also sitting in queue over on Apple+, a service I'm not all that interested in minus MLS soccer.  But it's free through T-Mobile and was the home for Ted Lasso, and so here I sit.

The draw, of course, is that you liked George Clooney and Brad Pitt's dynamic in the Oceans 11 movies that happened more than 20 years ago.  And I did.  And the movie was essentially free, so... we watched it.

I will confess - I am not in love with the work of writer/ director John Watt, and so when his name popped up at the beginning, I kind of braced myself.  Watt turns in movies that are... fine.  They're never bad, but they're also never exactly sparking with auteurism or breaking new ground.  

The central conceit of the movie is that a Manhattan DA (Amy Ryan, always welcome) is frolicking with a young man who is not her husband, in a hotel room, when he falls off the bed and seemingly dies after hitting his head.

She has a phone number for a cleaner - a job I assume might exist? - who covers up the accidents and mis-doings of powerful and wealthy people.  We got this idea from Pulp Fiction, where Harvey Keitel was absolutely amazing as The Wolf - which is where I assume they took the name for this film.  And let me tell you how old one feels when a movie they watched 30 years ago is referenced this way.  But this is how culture works.

If you were counting on loving the banter between Clooney and Pitt, you basically get the idea and then it just keeps happening for 1/2 of the movie.  Which is a real YMMV proposition.  I get the feeling Clooney and Pitt and Watt were having a grand time doing this.  But it feels like the movie just takes forever to get going, and the gags it wants to do - this is a comedy - are a light chuckle more than a laugh-out-loud proposition.  Plus, it takes a minute to figure out how goofy this world is that we're in, as there's really no clues about it until... I dunno, 45 minutes in?

I also cannot for the life of me figure out why Amy Ryan's character was picking up this absolute dweeb of a guy.

Anyway, the movie is fine.  It really doesn't mark out any new territory, but if you're looking for a lower-budget hang with the guys you liked around 2001, you can do way worse.  I do like a good hang with these guys!  And a walk-on by Richard Kind (who publicly said this year he doesn't turn any roles down, which is hilarious).  

SPOILERS

The movie ends in a sort of Butch and Sundance moment, but apparently they're making another one.  Which... I think Butch and Sundance also got an off-brand sequel so maybe that's fine.

The back 1/3rd of the movie is, for my dollar, what the whole movie could have/ should have been - a sort of absurdist fantasy of this world.  And maybe the sequel will lean into what worked, now that we've gotten past the squabbling part.




Thursday, November 7, 2024

Noirvember Watch: Pickup Alley (1957)





Watched:  11/7/2024
Format:  Criterion
Viewing:  First
Director:  John Gilling

It's Noirvember, so I'm trying to get a few of ye olde Noir films in.  Luckily, Criterion is here to offer up the goods with three separate categories of noir.  I got lazy and picked the category "Columbia Noir" which includes some Brit Noir.  

I will be 100% honest and say, I was just like "Victor Mature.  Sounds good."   I knew nothing about this movie until the credits started crawling by.  Had I seen the poster, I would have known THIS IS A PICTURE ABOUT DOPE!  I might also have noticed this is European film - and, in fact, a pretty British film.  Directed by a Brit and produced by one of the Bond-famous Brocolis (Cubby) and Irving Allen, who worked in both England and the US.  

The cast is anchored by Victor Mature, who looks mildly upset the whole time, but who has no character to work with or speak of.  He's just the relentless hero.  I assume this movie really got in the way of his European golfing vacation.

Anita Ekberg plays The Dame, and is... fine?  If you wonder what the big deal was with Ekberg and why you've heard her name, his movie is a pretty good argument for why.  Lastly, the movie stars Trevor Howard, who was in sort of everything - but Superman nerds will flip out realizing this is the guy who told Jor-El to be reasonable in Superman while the planet was set to explode.

And Trevor Howard is *great* in this as a mastermind drug kingpin.  Reviews at the time mostly agree.

What surprised me watching this, with the name Broccoli floating around in my head, is that there's certainly some Bond DNA here.  It's very light, but it's about a relentless government fellow pursuing an established mastermind across Europe, treating each place as an exotic locale and the locals as scenery.  There's, of course, a beautiful woman wrapped up with our villain who is doing his dirty work and doesn't like it.

It's not a 1:1, but once the idea is in your head, it's hard to shake.  

The idea is:  Mature's sister was about to finger Trevor Howard for the NYPD when he figured it out and killed her.  Since, Mature's been a mad-bull on the streets hoping to punch his way to the mysterious McNally.  They get a lead and he's sent to England to work with InterPol (the International Police, not the band).  Shenanigans happen and Mature and Co. get Ekberg's fingerprints and begin tracking her to get to Howard.  Soon, they're in Lisbon.  Then in Rome.  Then Athens.  It's sort of one long, continent-wide chase.  

It's not a great movie, but it gets the job done.  Lots of action, some amazing locations, camera work, and a score that does tons of heavy lifting.  

It is noir?  Sort of.  Close enough.




Wednesday, November 6, 2024

Doc Watch: Music By John Williams (2024)





Watched:  11/06/2024
Format:  Disney+
Viewing:  First
Director:  Laurent Bouzerau

I don't have a special relationship with the music of John Williams - we *all* have that relationship.  

Music lays there in your mind somewhere next to the smells of your grandparents' basement that will come back to you when you smell something similar, or the taste of the food from your youth.  And John Williams' music was as important to us as pop, as Christmas music, as *anything* we heard growing up.

Of course there are other great movie composers... but probably the vast majority of them I'd put anywhere in the category of Williams are dead.  And none who seemed to hit with every score.

My earliest memories are of John Williams' music.  As a very small kid, post-Star Wars, we'd Imperial March around the house.  I remember the Christmas after Empire came out, my cousin Susan had purchased me the two-record soundtrack, and I lay on the floor listening to it over and over. 

Now, I get teary hearing Leia's theme - and have since Force Awakens reused it as Leia came off the ship. I still feel my pulse quicken to the Indiana Jones theme, or Superman.  I feel that pit in my stomach when I hear the Schindler's List score, or swell with wonder with Jurassic Park and Close Encounters.  Or ET.

We could probably rattle off his scores all day.  He's made plenty (I about gasped when I saw Home Alone for the first time since high school a couple of years ago and John Williams' name was on the film).  Honestly, it's staggering how prolific he's been, and that's part of what the doc tries to cover.  It's not just one Star War - it's 9.  It's not one Indy movie, it's 5.  


  • Music Department:  321
  • Composer:  177
  • Soundtrack:  517 (this is a mish-mash of work he did used on films - like "Superman Main Titles" being used on Superman IV)

I will be honest - I found out I knew absolutely nothing about John Williams while watching the doc.  My assumptions about who he was, his background, his education... all completely wrong.  I won't get into his background - that's in the doc.  But I will say that if I appreciated Williams before, I'm in absolute awe of him now, and don't just think he's a genius, he's a prodigy.

I was also unaware of his personal tragedy, or how he fell in with the biggest filmmakers of the past several decades.  

The doc trots out a who's-who of personalities, none of them a lightweight, to make their arguments for Williams, to talk about their experience working with him, and it's all a delight.  I am fine with the narrative that Williams' genius is innate, he's kind, etc...  the man is the greatest possible argument for the value of sound in movies, and maybe the last great orchestrator for film.

And, yes, I don't understand why - in this era of franchise pictures - we don't have more folks emulating Williams.

What I agree with - and looking at the listings for the Austin Symphony bares this out - is that film music is now as serious and important to symphonies as anything.  Sure, you still have the heavy hitters - some Mozart, Dvorak - but there's the show the whole family will dig.  John Williams.  

Anyway - watch the doc.  I found myself getting a bit emotional.  That music has a hold on you and taps into something pretty serious, and hearing all of it together is *a lot*.  But watch the doc and learn more about the man and the myth.


Sunday, November 3, 2024

Somehow Not 1998 Watch: Canary Black (2024)





Watched:  11/3/2024
Format:  Amazon Prime
Viewing:  First
Director:  Pierre Morel

I always intend to watch the espionage-ish movies I see go by on streaming services.  They're usually shot in Eastern Europe and with women with cool hair.  And let me tell you - Kate Beckinsale's hair is so cool in this movie, it's its own character.  This is not a complaint.

The basic pitch of Canary Black (2024) is that there's a MacGuffin, and if Kate Beckinsale doesn't get it and deliver it to the baddies, then they'll kill her poor husband, who is just a nice Doctors Without Borders doctor who doesn't know his globe-trotting wife is a bad-ass spy.  Avery agrees, and this sends the CIA after Avery Graves (Beckinsale), and now she's in a dilly of a pickle.  

The plot is mostly an excuse to give Beckinsale tons of opportunities to (a) look amazing in all black on the nighttime streets of Eastern-Europe-Land, and (b) kick so many people's asses that John Wick would raise a glass to her.

Geriatric Watch: Thelma (2024)




Watched:  11/02/2024
Format:  Prime
Viewing:  First
Director:  Josh Margolin

So, Thelma (2024) is basically every one of my anxieties about what's coming with my parents - and, god willing, eventually myself - but with a laugh track.

I want to be clear, this is a good movie.  I died laughing at some parts.  But I also did not laugh at other parts I know were supposed to be funny, and that's on me and my hang-ups and not on the movie.  

The basic set-up is that an elderly woman, Thelma (June Squibb), who loves her 24-year-old grandson, is scammed by someone pretending to be her grandson on the phone and sends $10,000 to a PO Box, lest he rot in jail.* When she finds her grandson is safe and it was a scam, she goes on a mission to retrieve her money, against the express wishes of her daughter - Parker Posey, typically *great* - and her son-in-law, good ol' Clark Gregg.

There's certainly some valid critique of how the elderly adults and the adult children are infantilized by the functional adults, as it's maybe more convenient for the middle-aged adults to feel they have everything contained.  The movie also has a nice story of a young man realizing maybe he is slightly capable if he stops living with his parents guard rails.

The cast is solid - June Squibb is the definition of "working actor" and it's amazing to see her get a starring role at this point in her career.  Richard Roundtree plays her pal, and he's... really good.  Which I guess isn't a shock (RIP, Richard Roundtree).  The grandson is Fred Hechinger, who manages to take a character I'd normally have minimal sympathy for and make him likable.  

The movie is not as wacky as I'd believed it would be, but more absurdist and a lot depressing in ways I was unclear it intended to be.  But you can't beat the senior citizens home's take on Annie.  I kind of get the feeling the people find this particularly funny are not the ones living with the absolute certainty they're getting tapped to handle everything when the time comes and have already been thinking about these things for a decade or two.

Anyway, it was fine.  Any issues with it are my own issues.


*this is a real scam, and people are now using AI to mimic people's voices.  What doesn't make sense is that the US mail apparently finds and sorts the mail the same day.  Also - why Thelma doesn't just ask the cops to go to the local PO Box.  A huge number of these scammers are overseas or VPNing from across the country.

Saturday, November 2, 2024

Noirvember Watch: Desert Fury (1947)





Watched:  11/1/2024
Format:  Criterion
Viewing:  First
Director:  Lewis Allen

Well, I'm not sure I started Noirvember 2024 with a bang, but I did finally check this one off the list.

First - yes, this thing is in color, and maybe worth seeing a 1947 crime film shot in vivid, even lurid, color.  See Lizabeth Scott's golden locks!  Marvel at the color of Mary Astor's pants!  (No, really, it's a pretty movie and maybe worth a watch just for that.)  But the minute people start talking in what is supposed to be snappy crime-drama dialog, you kind of know you're in trouble.  It's mostly non-sequiturs and stern declarations.

To me, Desert Fury (1947) is a bit of a melodramatic slog, and hinges on a protagonist hurling herself into bad ideas so often, while offering no sympathetic or redeeming qualities (other than a stellar wardrobe), it's hard to get, here in 2024, what we're supposed to like about her.  The motivation of the criminals in the movie is murky - and why they're even in the little desert oasis just feels like incompetence on someone's part.  

The set-up is that a clearly mid-20's Lizabeth Scott (playing 19 here and looking 32) returns home from quitting another finishing school.*  She wants to come work at her mother's casino so she can make a ton of cash and lord it over the judgey people of her hometown.  Not a bad plan.  On the way into town, she comes across John Hodiak and Wendell Corey, a pair of crooks.  A very young Burt Lancaster plays the town Deputy and soda bottle seller?  I never figured out what was happening.

Mary Astor, who looks like an older cousin to Scott (only 15 years older but looking maybe 7), plays her mother.  She's obviously the best actor in this by a country mile, playing a tough-girl from a rough background who made it big out west.  They live in an amazing mansion.  But Mary Astor basically wants for Scott to marry a nice-boy and join polite society and get away from her frankly very awesome-looking life of running a casino.

Hodiak and Corey have returned to the small town to sort of lay low and do some gambling at Mary Astor's casino.  Why?  It's unclear.  Hodiak is still recovering from the death of his wife that occurred in this one-horse-town.  So why they came back is anyone's guess.

Scott falls for Hodiak for absolutely no reason other than everyone tells her not to.  Just as she does everything just because someone told her not to - no matter how stupid that thing appears to be.  Men fall for her because she's the only sexually available woman in the movie, so Lancaster thinks she's swell, and Hodiak hurls himself at her.

Very, very clearly Hodiak and Corey are supposed to be in a gay relationship, and we learn that Hodiak was previously married to a woman - Scott's doppelganger - who wound up dead under mysterious circumstances.  And STILL Scott is like "I don't care!  I love his tiny mustache!".  

Things come to a head because everyone in this is kind of dumb, and the movie ends as you'd expect.

I'm just not a Lizabeth Scott fan.  She's fine.  She's not annoying when playing a well-written character.  But in an era littered with other actors I like, she doesn't move the needle for me as a plus for watching a film.  My understanding is that producer Hal B. Wallis was deeply in love with her, it ended up destroying him, and there's probably an interesting movie in there.

The movie was... okay.  From a "what's actually happening versus what we got past the censors" this movie is pretty amazing.  From a "do I like these characters or care about what's happening?" the movie was a bust for me.  I can take convoluted plots and characters making mistakes, even walking right into a bad idea for money or sex, but I'm not sure this one pulls it off enough that I care.  



*I finally read up on what finishing school was, and the past is a fascinating and foreign land

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.

Sunday, October 27, 2024

Robo Crampton Watch: Robot Wars (1993)




Watched:  10/26/2024
Format:  Amazon 
Viewing:  First
Director:  Albert Band

Some time back in the early 90's, I remember renting Robot Jox, and kind of liking it well enough, while absolutely understanding I was watching a very silly movie.  It was only in recent years that I figured out that Robot Jox and Robot Wars (1993) were not the same movie.  But I didn't at all care.

But that was before I decided Barbara Crampton is a good idea, and I was looking to see what else she's in that's on Prime.  And, lo and behold.

A trim 72 minutes of movie later, I have now seen Robot Wars.  

This movie is not super good.  It's the kind of stuff made for the rental market and then dumped onto USA Up All Night by 1996.  I'm becoming more familiar with Full Moon Features and its output, and I'm not mad at it.  It's utterly lacking in pretention, and I imagine these shoots were kind of fun.  

Robot Wars takes place in 2041, I believe, after wars and disasters have changed the world.  I'm not sure if it's a sequel to Robot Jox, shares a universe, or whatever.  But there's only one giant, scorpion-shaped robot left in the world, and it's used to both defend the civilized world and transport folks across wastelands full of hostile forces - touristy!

There's a *lot* of plot.  Because they can't really afford a lot of action.  After all, when the robots are in motion, it's Stop-Motion (Jurassic Park is this same year).  And the laser-gun action is mostly... perfunctory.  But there's a lousy guy running the free world, trying to be friends with China.  So, we get two "that guy!" Asian actors having what seems to be a good time.  Two dopey dudes stand in for the hunky hero and his pal, and there's two lovely women running around as our actual heroes.

Anyway, a pre-surgery Lisa Rinna plays a reporter whose pal, Leda (Barbara Crampton) is checking out the wastelands and find out if the toxic-spill areas are safe or not.  

All you need to know is this is a movie with some robot fighting, 1993 LA doubling for a city abandoned in 1993, many steam tunnels, basements, AV equipment doubling for robot command consoles, and the most attention of anything paid to Rinna and Crampton's hair.  They both look 1993-fabulous.

The movie is the equivalent of cotton candy.  You'll know you consumed it, but just be left with a blue tongue and a slightly upset stomach, and then want to have some more.

Anyway, if the goal was to see robots (in general), robots fighting (specifically), actors you recognize and are surprised to see in this...  sign yourself up. 

Friday, October 25, 2024

Whoops Hallo-Watch: Legend of the Wolf Woman (1976)

this poster way oversells the movie




Watched:  10/25/2024
Format:  Full Moon on Amazon
Viewing:  First
Director:  Rino Di Silvestro

Well, I accidentally watched an Italian sexploitation movie thinking I was watching a werewolf movie.

This is what Amazon pitched to me/ possibly rolled over into after Castle Freak, and I was like "sure, why not?  I haven't watched much straight-trash yet this year for Halloween.  Let's watch a 1976 Italian werewolf film."

To my credit - it IS called "Legend of the Wolf Woman" (1976) and the first scene had a werewolf in it.

After that, it's about a lady (the lovely Annik Borel) with some serious issues who goes on a killing spree, *thinking* she's a werewolf, getting naked occasionally, and sometimes having sex.  

Major content warning:  It also has a really grim sexual assault scene I wasn't expecting and was super unpleasant and unnecessary.

Is the movie good?  No.  Did I keep thinking maybe she'd turn into a werewolf and redeem my use of time?  Yes.  Was I wrong and zero werewolves appeared after the first scene?  Also: yes. 

The poster says it's based on a true story, and the movie suggests so at the end, but... who knows?

Anyway, I'm calling this one a mulligan.

If anyone knows of anything with Annik Borel that isn't... bad.  Let me know.




Thursday, October 24, 2024

Crampton Hallo-Watch: Castle Freak (1995)


One poster shows the villain, which is a spoiler, and one is a teenager in a bra, so you get Crampton


Watched:  10/24/2024
Format:  Amazon
Viewing:  First
Director:  Stuart Gordon

I am not always in-line with all of the thinking that goes into being a hard-core horror film fan, but I love how much they celebrate the work of their favorite actors - and keep them employed for decades.  One such fave I've been aware of for some time has been Barbara Crampton, and I'm on board.  Sign me up for the Crampton fan club.  

So, we'll be digging a bit more into the Crampton-filmography over time.

When I saw that Castle Freak (1995) re-teamed director Stuart Gordon with actor Jeffrey Combs and Crampton, and I saw some notes about "this is a horror movie with a kind of grown-up storyline" I was curious.  I like a good "whoops, the robots have flipped out at the shopping mall" movie as much as the next guy, but I wanted to know what this team looked like doing a bit more drama and little less in the way of re-animated corpses running about.  

Combs and Crampton play a couple on the rocks following the blinding of their daughter (Jessica Dollarhide) and death of their young son after Combs drove them off the road, drunk.  Clearly Crampton can't forgive and forget, and Combs is maybe too much of an egoist to really accept what he did.  But a mysterious relative has just passed, and when that occurs, Combs learns that he's inherited a castle in Italy.  Apparently he was Italian nobility.

Well, wouldn't you know it - there's a freak living chained up in the basement of the castle.  And by freak, we mean a hideously deformed, savage human, that for some reason, someone decided it was best they keep in a cage in the basement.  

The arrival of the fractured family leads to the "freak" flipping out and escaping, where he hides in the many hidey-holes of the castle and occasionally popping out to harass and then murder.  There is a housekeeper, who is aware of the freak (who is named Giorgio, so I can stop calling a fictional disabled person a "freak") but has been complicit in Giorgio's horrible life.

The family fractures all the more, and Combs goes out where he picks up a bottle again and accidentally picks up a hooker.  Things go sideways as the hooker leaves - and it brings things to a head, as police want to look into the castle.

As a stand-alone story about a family trying to move past trauma, you do get the idea that Combs and Crampton would have been interesting in a straight drama about loss.  The Crossing Guard, which is @#$%ing great but depressing, comes to mind.  We're nowhere near that - after all, we have a dude running around murdering people with his bare hands to contend with - but we do get to use that as a sort of investigation of the secrets families keep, our own weaknesses and what we can do to make amends.  

There's a 2020 version of this film for reasons I cannot fathom, which sounds like it's much more Lovecraftian in nature and changes all the major details that make this one different and/ or interesting.  What it does do is say "maybe we shouldn't make a wretched human an actual monster" which plays very oddly now, as I know it probably did in 1995 - but which arrived in a period full of serial killer movies, so who knows?

I find it interesting that this was poster-girl Jessica Dollarhide's last movie.  Maybe she went to college and was done.  I can't say.  She's certainly not bad in the movie.

Anyway, I don't want to oversell it, but it *is* different.  The same sort of lived-in, real-world problems, like, say, in The Shining, are an interesting refraction against the part that makes the film "horror".  



1930's HalloWatch: Vampyr (1932)



Watched:  10/23/2024
Format:  Max
Viewing:  First
Director:  Carl Theodor Dreyer

Apparently when this movie came out, people were just *mad* at it.  Like when you read that people freaked out about Stravinsky's Rite of Spring and rioted*, when Vampyr (1932) was shown, it seems the good people of Vienna wanted their money back and subsequently rioted. Berlin just boo'd the picture.  And it kind of went from city to city, earning a terrible reputation.

But imagine just dumping David Lynch or Tarkovsky on people who think they came to see Universal's very palatable Dracula.  

That said, this movie is *great*.  And that's with the viewing I did which was of a stitched together restoration of a film no one really wanted to see again after 1932 and was more or less lost.  

In theory, based on the work of Sheridan le Fanu, it's really it's own thing, nodding to bits of his collection of works entitled In a Glass Darkly, which contains the novella Carmilla - upon which my fave rave, The Vampire Lovers, takes inspiration.

The film is creepy enough, just based on the concepts.  A young man comes to a small French town and is visited by an older gentleman in the middle of the night (in the film's first real tell about how weird it will be), who leaves him with a package marked "open in the case of my death".  Soon, he's seeing disembodied shadows running around, a mysterious doctor, a mysterious older woman... and then witnesses the murder of the older gentleman through his window.  And then it gets weird.

Saturday, October 19, 2024

HalloDocWatch: Haxan (1922)

surely someone remade this as an album cover in the 80's


Watched:  10/19/2024
Format:  Criterion
Viewing:  First
Director:  Benjamin Christensen

What an incredible film.  

I mean, obviously.  This is a silent film that has thrived well into the modern era, so I'm no genius for noticing that it's pretty good.

Essentially a documentary/ presentation about the history of what we consider witches and witchcraft, the film feels a wee bit like an early Powerpoint at first, but it has a lot of territory to cover - like explaining how people a few hundred years ago thought the universe was constructed and the way in which that informed their entire worldview. If you literally believe Earth is the center of all things, flat, and God is sitting beyond line of sight directing celestial bodies for fun and profit, and Satan literally sits in a spot in a hole in a firey hole in the Earth, then you're going to be willing to believe he's also in your neighbor's house making it with the old lady who lives there.

The film doesn't just have fascinatingly well-constructed arguments, it's a prime example of the imagination, visual artistry and astounding craft of film by 1922.  If you ever think silent film was primitive - my dudes...  The movie creates scene after scene with unbelievable art and set design, costuming, lighting, optical and practical FX... many positively surreal.  They show the cosmos at work from a Christian cosmology perspective, what people imagined was happening at Black Sabbaths, complete with the devil in many forms and troupes of demons alongside him, recreate scenarios for how a witch hunt could begin...  And they also show very practical demonstrations of torture devices, etc...  

It's hard to explain how incredible these visuals are, so...


The movie is scary, but not in the "ooOOOooo...  witches!" way.  Instead, it's a reminder that humans are terrible, the world is drowning in abuse of power and misogyny, and religion is used as an excuse to do all sorts of things your deity of choice would really frown at, especially done in His/ Her/ Their name.  Basically, the film is about how we decide to abuse power, mostly for no reason, other than that we have a hard time seeing certain kids of people *as* people, and we fucking love to punch down.  

They also discuss how the very world that people lived in, and the rules they believed they lived by - ie: Satan could just pop up, sex you, and now you're evil (I don't know, man) likely had profound psychological impact on people and led to all sorts of weirdness in the Middle Ages (for an example, we can look at Ken Russel's film The Devils, based on a true story).  And led to nonsense like Salem.

Not so curiously, by the film's end, they leap to the modern era (of 1922) and rather than say "but we're so advanced now", they say "look, this is how we do the same shit now, only we dressed it up for polite society" by showing similar treatment of women in the modern era.  Remember - 1922 is also when we'd, like, lock up our wife in an asylum for getting sick of our shit and talking back.  And while there are plenty of 2024 examples, these are the good old days a whole lot of people think they want back because their context of the past are glimpses of old TV shows.*

Anyway, reality is a hellscape of terrors inflicted on each other for reasons that don't seem to make much more sense than believing our  omnipotent friends would have us do that, and/ or we're really sickos who found ourselves in a position where we could abuse the shit out of people and make money doing it.

Never trust anyone who desires power.

Happy Halloween!



*the past mostly sucked, and the desire to go back to any period before a Star Trek future makes absolutely no sense to me.  Unless you get to have a candlelit dinner with Myrna Loy.  Then it makes sense.

Thursday, October 17, 2024

HalloWatch: The Vampire Happening (1971)




Watched:  10/16/2024
Format:  Prime
Viewing:  First
Director:  Freddie Francis

Imagine a movie written entirely with the same vibe as one panel comics from mid-Century Playboy.  That's the entire vibe of this "movie".  

During the darkest days of COVID lockdown, I would scroll Amazon Prime for movies to Watch Party, and at some point, The Vampire Happening (1971) came up, and I laughed at the title and checked it out, deemed it far too boob-tacular to make it into the queue, and moved on.  But Amazon Prime was not done with me.  And so - for whatever reason only the algorithm knows, this movie always found it's way into my line-up of offerings.

It's a goofy comedy that works by 1970's European erotic movie rules, so you kind of have to just roll with it.  But the basic story is that a Hollywood actress inherits a castle in Transylvania.  She looks just like an ancestor who was some sort of vampire.  Her arrival means her relative rises from the grave again, and while Betty romances a strapping young man, her double is out there making new vampires.

Eventually there's a vampire party, or, as us hep cats said in the late 1960's - a vampire happening - complete with the arrival of Dracula.  

Italian produced, written by Germans and shot in Germany by an English director, and starring a ragtag pile of Euro-talent and staying just on this side of softcore, it's truly an artifact of its time.

Basically, the movie was a weird excuse for the Italian producer to put his wife on film, and have a big party in a castle.  I can only imagine what was going on behind the scenes.  But in watching this movie, there's a distinct feeling you're watching the product of someone's scheme to have a very adult good time on someone else's dollar.  As such, it's not... good.  It's not funny or particularly sexy and feels interminable for the first 2/3rds.  It had one line I found laugh out loud funny right at the end of the movie, and I did like the winky end to the film.  And Dracula is kind of funny.

The star, Pia Dagermark - wife of the producer - had won awards at Cannes in 1967, and I think this movie was what more or less ended the movie business for her.  It happens.  

Just go watch a Hammer vampire movie instead.