6/10
Which witch is which?
8 April 2020
I grabbed TWWCFTS expecting it to be a sleazy, schlocky exploitation flick and what I got was a thoughtful, cleverly-written psycho-thriller. I mean that's fine, I guess, but was it was still kinda mis-sold.

Set, and shot, in the genuine scabby areas of Santa Monica in 1976, the movie focuses on Molly, a thirty-something singleton (and Bonnie Bedelia lookalike Millie Perkins) and loving aunt to her two nephews, who she adores. She's hungry for men though, and seems torn between lust and a desire for torture and murder in flashes of primal instinct that haunt her daily. The repressed memories of childhood sexual abuse from her dad are coming back with a vengeance and Molly targets the Hollywood and athletic elite to release her anxiety and act out her revenge on all men.

It sounds sordid, but its written with an anti-morality play edge with strange ideas, and directed with an auteur flair. However, I'm sad to say that no matter how well shot the movie is there is not one ounce of atmosphere that gives it the visual signature of horror or psycho-thriller. Instead it's filled with grotty 70s fashions and lots of broad daylight. The title is actually an allusion to The Birth of Venus by Sandro Botticelli, a painting seen in the movie, so it's nothing to do with Molly having witch powers, which was another disappointment and straight-up lie by the advertising materials and cover art.

There's plenty of nudity however with Millie Perkins going topless for many scenes, not the least of which is one where she gets a massive mermaid tattoo on her torso from her cleavage to her "special area". She doesn't flinch once when getting this ink done. Doesn't even make a fist as the needle cuts into her.

TWWCFTS didn't deserve its status as a video nasty or as a lurid exploitation. It really is neither of those, though it does have a couple of pretty nasty kills and moments of torture. It deserves praise for its moxie to tackle off-kilter and forbidden subject matter and is a curious insight into Los Angeles geography of the era (try actually living on Santa Monica Pier for a peasant's wage now!).

Shot in anamorphic Todd-AO 35 (by Dean Cundey, of all people) the negative to the movie was deliberately destroyed by the director's wife during a nasty divorce when she locked him out of the house. Arrow video have made a noble effort to find the best-looking print and make a 2K restoration. There is a lot of print damage here, and the sound needs to be completely rebuilt, but I doubt the audio masters exist now either, which is a real shame. They've done their best to resurrect this forgotten oddity and open-minded film enthusiasts will probably accept the bumps and dents that feature even on the best releases.

Collector's looking to discover something old and weird will find it here.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed