jcaraway3 Reviews

The Face Behind the Mask (1941)

Peter Lorre's finest hour

[9/10 · 8 November 2015]

After seeing this years ago on TCM, I was finally able to track this down on Youtube. I had remembered the beautiful love story it had portrayed between a disfigured immigrant and a blind girl. It has always stuck with me, and it was a pleasure to see it again. While the story is familiar, I have a soft spot for movies about "different" people, and the story this film tells is tragic and touching.

Peter Lorre's performance is top notch, with a sensitive and well written script to boot. The character development here is fantastic. Janos Szabo goes from an innocent foreigner who can barely understand English, to a hardened criminal in less than an hour. What's remarkable is, he retains some of the good natured qualities he had at the beginning of the film throughout the movie. He knows who his friends are, and never forgets who he is. I guess he reminds me most of Jurgis Rudkus from "The Jungle".

The film also features some elements of horror. There is one scene where you can see Janos' face after the accident, and it is quite unsettling. The mask he wears about halfway in is quite grotesque as well, and the sight of him dressed all in black with the pasty white face and bulging eyes is certainly something to behold.

Except for the somewhat clichéd premise, my only real complaint about the film is it's somewhat anti climactic ending. The gang all get their just deserts, but the way it happens seems a bit out of place. In spite of that though, the movie holds up well, and manages to tell a compelling story, and may even make you shed a tear or two.

X the Unknown (1956)

Entertaining sci-fi romp

[10/10 · 8 November 2015]

Made in the heyday of radioactive sci-fi monster movies, 1956's "X-The Unknown" is all at once archetypal and original. The plot is very creative, concerning a mass of energy which feeds on radioactivity and can take on any form it wants. All of the familiar characters are here. Soldiers who become food for the monster, scientists, and other assorted victims who are typical of this kind of film make appearances. Dean Jagger plays an atomic researcher who attempts to destroy the monster by removing it's radiation. He turns in a dignified and respectable performance, in spite of the pseudo science he speaks throughout the film.

There is plenty of action and monster slop to go around, and, this being an English production from Hammer Studios, the dialogue and story seem a lot more intelligent than it should be. The film is much gorier than most 50s sci-fi movies, featuring scenes of burn victims, and even a couple of melting bodies, (Check out the scene with the doctor in the hospital) with some great special effects.

Near the end of the film, the monster takes on the form of a big pile of oozing mud which resembles chocolate mousse , and you can see where "The Blob" may have got it's inspiration. My only problem with this film is, if it can take on any form it wants, couldn't it have taken on human form? Maybe it just wasn't intelligent enough to. Either way, it seems like that could have been a neat plot point.

Still, this is fun fare that any fan of 50s science fiction shouldn't pass up.

Invisible Ghost (1941)

"I must've been sleep walking"

[7/10 · 7 November 2015]

Well, the title doesn't make any sense. Aren't all ghosts invisible? Either way, there are no ghosts in this movie, transparent or otherwise. The film is about Charles Kessler (Bela Lugosi) who unknowingly commits a series of murders after his wife seemingly dies in a car accident. This is a fine effort for a cheap Sam Katzman production. Most of the performances are good, and Clarence Muse steals the show as Mr. Kessler's butler, Evans, who gets a decent amount of screen time, lines, and isn't too stereotypical. Muse doesn't portray Evans as the typical "Oh Lawdy" scared black servant that was popular in old dark house horror movies at the time. Something in his facial expressions and delivery gives him a sarcastic and humorous edge. Unfortunately, this isn't one of Lugosi's best performances. He is so expressionless throughout, it's hard to tell when he is or isn't in a trance. However, he still has that certain something that always makes him fun to watch.

The story also leaves something to be desired. Unless I missed something, I don't think it ever explains why he killed anyone. I must say though, it does have some artful cinematography and lighting. The scenes where Kessler sees his "dead" wife through the window are expertly shot.

Overall, I have to say this is fun rainy day entertainment. If you have a tolerance for low budget 40s horror movies, you just might have a good time watching this one. Also, watch for the scene in which Lugosi has his butler serve him and an empty place for his wife at the dinner table. Definitely the eeriest scene in the film.

Deadly Friend (1986)

Works, in spite of itself

[6/10 · 3 April 2015]

Talk about a far-fetched plot! Just as a guy is falling in love with the girl next door, her abusive father knocks her down the stairs, causing brain death. The guy has a miracle chip which he inserts into her brain, causing her to regain life. The downside is, she has the mind of the guy's vengeful robot BB,(who was destroyed by an evil neighbor), and she goes on a killing spree, murdering those who were mean to her.

This movie just doesn't work as a horror movie, as there are very few genuinely creepy moments. It also tries to be funny, but ends up being lame most of the time. However, for some reason, I was glued to my set the entire time. I think the cast is genuinely endearing and really helps this bizarre picture along. All of the main characters are at least somewhat likable. Even the mom is enjoyable. Kristy Swanson is great as Sam, but her performance as the BB/Sam robot thing was unintentionally funny. Richard Marcus is very Freddy Kruger-ish as Sam's Father. The BB robot looks like it was trying to be a copy of Gizmo from Gremlins thanks to it's annoying speech patterns. Fortunately, he's dispatched pretty early on. Anyway, despite it's many mistakes, "Deadly Friend" manages to present characters you can root for, a few good death scenes (I think you know which one I'm referring to), and even has a few moments of poignancy.

If you watch this one thinking it will be bad, it may be a pleasant surprise. Just don't go into it thinking it's one of Craven's masterpieces, which it most certainly isn't.

Jaws 3-D (1983)

Dead air- now in movie form!

[2/10 · 22 August 2014]

It's amazing how tired a film series can become. Well, seeing as how this film is the third in a series all about the same exact thing, I'm surprised anyone decided to OK this one at all. Anyhow, a mere 8 years after the original "Jaws" scared the living you-know-what out of moviegoers, this bore fest was tossed in to theaters to milk the series of a few more bucks. The plot is exactly the same, only it takes place at Sea World, so we'll skip it. Not one of the cast members from the first two films showed up, but this was scripted by Carl Gottlieb, (original Jaws Screenwriter) ,and, for some peculiar reason, Richard Matheson. Dennis Quaid plays Michael Brody, the kid from the other movies (people age faster in sequel-land, I guess), and he is no substitute for Roy Scheider. Really, he's dweeby, unimposing, and an all around "nice guy". The coolest stunt he does in the film is crash a golf cart. None of the other characters really left much of an impression on me either.

The mechanical shark is as bad as in the first two films, but this time the film makers were dumb enough to show it all the time, showing just how fakey it is. At one point, it even crashes through the control room at Sea World, kind of like the Airplane in 1980's "Airplane", only even funnier. There's a lot of showing the shark swimming around, but not much action, making it very tedious and boring.

I only gave it 2 instead of one star because the make up effects on the mutilated dead guy they fish out of the tank, as well as a few of the "3-D" effects looked pretty cool.

Other than that, there's no reason to recommend this one. Stick with the classics. This ain't one of 'em.

Jaws 2 (1978)

Cmparing it to the original-why bother?

[6/10 · 16 August 2014]

This half baked sequel once again takes place on Amity Island, and, you guessed it, there's a giant killer shark on the loose to feast upon unsuspecting vacationers. I guess I have to compare it to the original, although it seems a bit pointless. While the film benefits from including several of the cast members from the original, the script is probably the weakest aspect of the whole production. Let's compare. The original had lots of humorous dialog from many of the quirky islanders and even added a bit of realism by often showing several conversations happening at once, whereas this one is flat and dull. Also, in the original, you can sense the strong bond Brody has with his family, with many little charming moments like the scene where he and his son make shark faces at each other. This one has nothing even close to that, except maybe when Brody hits his head on a low hanging lamp in their house. This movie also suffers from the inclusion of a bunch of annoying teen characters. Most of them have very little to add to the film, except to become "damsels in distress" of a sort for Brody to rescue at the end. Most of them have hardly any interesting character traits or even become shark bait, so there was really no reason to include so many of them. The original was the perfect "Man vs. Nature" film, but this one just feels like a bad slasher flick where barely anybody dies. To it's credit, this movie does try to have a real storyline involving Brody's dismissal from the police, not just the shark eating random people, but I would have liked to see more of that than scenes of the teens sailing. It's also nice that Hendricks (Jeffrey Kramer) has a more substantial role, and, to it's credit, it does have some nice shark attack scenes for undiscriminating movie monster fans. It's just nowhere near as good as the original. It may have been a bit better if Spielberg had stepped behind the camera again. Either way, while the original introduced us to the most terrifying killer shark in movie history, this one is little more than a cinematic plate of fish and chips.

The Purge (I) (2013)

A victim of it's own poor writing

[3/10 · 29 March 2014]

The story, though extremely far fetched, could have made a very good dystopian sci fi horror flick. Unfortunately, this film takes that idea and goes nowhere with it. We never find out who these mysterious New Founding Fathers are or how such a law could have been passed in such a short time. On the other hand, the film's main villain, the "Polite Leader" is laughably one dimensional and shallow. Thanks to this character's ridiculously cheesy opening dialog, we know exactly what he and his friends want within 2 minutes of screen time. Any possible social commentary this film was trying to convey becomes lost in the awful script and wooden performances of most of the cast. Now, let's talk about the climax. My God, what a "I'm the screenwriter and this is the big twist I pulled out of my you-know-what" ending. Let me "spoil" it for you. The neighbors all gang up on our heroes and attempt to "purge" them themselves. Why? Well, because they got rich selling them expensive home security systems, that's why! Sorry, did I miss something? They traded their money for a product they wanted, and they're so mad about it that they would kill because of it? Basically, they're jealous they're not making as much money as our heroes, though they are clearly in the same basic financial situation as them, as they live in the same neighborhood. I'm sorry, but even for a movie like this, that makes no sense! Anyway, the movie kind of fizzles out after that, and the audience is left to ponder just how bad the effects of a "Purge" would be, though most people who saw the film would know such a law would be a bad idea in the first place.

While "The Purge" features some good action sequences, I found myself too distracted by the incredibly inane characters and ridiculous plot twists to care. Also, that robotic baby thing was clearly lifted from "Toy Story". Also, the masks were lame. Seems like if it's legal to kill all these people, you wouldn't need to hide your identity, and might make you really sweaty too.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985)

A different (but still lousy) approach

[3/10 · 24 January 2014]

The first one had a teenage girl in a life or death struggle against a horrifying monster who only exists in her dreams and the dreams of her friends, who are quickly dying around her. This one? This is the one where a guy in his underpants sits around in a hot room and sweats for half the movie.We hop from the greatest in the series directly to the worst, with this ,the first of many inferior sequels to the original classic. The filmmakers go for sort of a "Wolf Man" approach, in which our hero, played by Mark Patton, is possessed and eventually transformed into the dream stalking Freddy Krueger. While this movie deserves props for originality , the plot makes little sense. I guess Freddy wants to take over the body of Jesse so he can be free to kill people in real life and in the dream world. The problem is, most of the suspense and fear of falling asleep from the first film vanish when most of the deaths occur outside the dream world. And the death scenes that are there are among the worst in the entire series. A couch being towel whipped to death? Really? A bunch of people being chased by Freddy at a pool party? Who thought that was a good idea? The plot structures of the many sequels, while formulaic, work because of the constant fear that a madman will get you in your sleep. This one has none of that.Jesse's transformation scene and the death of Grady do include some great visuals, as well as the hell dogs at the end of the film, but all of the "Nightmare" movies have good visuals, and this one doesn't really stand out too much. And the performances? Ouch. This was after Freddy was ghoulish and scary, but before he became a tongue in cheek pop icon, so he's kind of just "there" in this one. He has a couple of one liners, but there's nothing too humorous or creepy here. Mark Patton is prissy, obnoxious, and screams like an 8 year old girl. Kim Myers is cold, and looks very bored in her role as Lisa. Clu Gulager is one of my favorite actors, but he doesn't have too much to do here.

And as far as the "gay subtext" is concerned, it's great they tried to give this film a little depth, but this doesn't help it out at all as a horror film. In fact, with the audience constantly looking for "gay stuff" throughout the film, any possibility of it being taken seriously is vanquished.

So, all in all, this is the film equivalent of a hotdog which has been sitting directly under the hot sun in a parking lot in New Jersey for the past week. It's ugly, nauseating, and you couldn't get me to look at it again if you paid me to.

Voodoo Man (1944)

About what you'd expect

[5/10 · 19 January 2014]

This is about what you'd expect from a Bela Lugosi vehicle from the mid 1940s. At this point, his career was steadily sliding downhill, but hadn't quite reached rock bottom as he would in the early to mid 50s. This is a low budget Monogram quickie, with nothing particularly exciting or memorable going for it. The plot is predictable and derivative of an earlier, slightly better Lugosi flick- "The Corpse Vanishes". Bela plays a mad doctor (wow, really?) who drains the life out of several young women into the body of his decades dead wife(who happens to possess a stylish 1940s hairdo). He is aided by a Voodoo practicing gas station attendant and two imbecilic henchmen. All is going well until a Hollywood scriptwriter stumbles upon their little operation.

While some of the characters and situations are somewhat different from your typical low budget Monogram flick, it's mostly just same ol' same ol'. You've got a creepy house in the middle of nowhere, lots of driving through the woods, and Bela doing what he does best. (or at least most often). To it's credit, the movie does have a decent cast. Bela's great as usual, John Carradine and George Zucco make formidable secondary characters, and this does contain some nice looking ladies, including Louise Currie, who happens to slightly resemble Gillian Anderson of "X Files" fame, at least to me... Also, the set design is decent as well. The finale, which takes place in a cave, springs to mind.

But overall, this is just a mediocre 1940s horror flick, clearly only made to make a few bucks, with very little effort on the part of the writer or director.

Santa and the Ice Cream Bunny (1972)

Obsecenely Overrated

[1/10 · 19 January 2014]

This is pretty much the "Inception" of God Awful cinema. We have an unknown narrator telling us the story of Santa Claus being stuck on a beach in Florida, who, in turn, tells a group of children a random story about Thumbelina, which is from the viewpoint of ANOTHER narrator, who happens to also play an aging female mole. Confused yet? This movie has a total of three different storytellers, yet it still manages to make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Probably because, from what I can tell, the Santa film and Thumbelina were made at separate times as promotional films for a now long forgotten theme park in Florida. So what we get is a hodgepodge of absolute nonsense involving randy moles, various farm animals being attached to Santa's sleigh,and hippies popping out of flowers. And what about that Ice Cream Bunny? Oh yeah! What we get is a very disturbing man in a filthy rabbit costume riding around in an antique Fire Truck loaded with helpless children with the doomsday alarm blaring out of some unseen loudspeaker. All the while, the rabbit's face remains emotionless and blank, lost in his own sickening thoughts which probably involve children and the dozens of melting ice cream bars he has packed inside various parts of his trousers. (Hey, they said he was an ice cream bunny, and I don't see any ice cream anywhere else, so I'll assume it's inside the costume). Anyway, the bunny comes to Santa's rescue. Some garbled, incoherent dialog seep past his most likely slavering lips, picks up Santa, and leaves the children and the sleigh in the middle of nowhere. I swear, just the sight of the bunny driving the truck through the park nearly made my skin crawl. I just wouldn't give it the satisfaction. So there you have it. . Try eating pizza and watching this movie right before bed. I guarantee the nightmares you have will make more sense than this sorry excuse for cinema.

Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II (1987)

It could've been the next slasher series- if it had dropped the "Prom Night" Moniker

[7/10 · 1 December 2013]

"Hello Mary Lou"... concerns a girl who finds herself possessed by the vengeful spirit of a deceased prom Queen.This was a surprisingly spooky and nifty little horror flick by my standards. It's not exactly the best movie ever made, but I'll get to that in a minute. The ultimate strong points of this film are most definitely the special effects and it's decent writing . The special effects are top notch, and the stunningly original ideas behind them make them even more impressive. We get a creepy as all get out rocking horse which springs to life, a chalk board which becomes a pool, a locker which squishes some poor girl, some really good burn makeup, and much more. While some of the effects seem similar to another popular slasher series of that time (Nightmare on Elm Street), they are still very good in their own right. The plot and storyline, while a little too "Carrie"-esque, do move along quite well. It was quite interesting to see Vicki's slow transformation from average school girl to insane demon, and the kills which get thrown in are less than routine (see the locker death I mentioned above).

Earlier I said this wasn't exactly the best movie ever made. I have my reasons. Mostly it's due to the acting. While it was interesting to see Vicki become Mary Lou, Wendy Lyon's performance just becomes more and more over the top as we go along, and builds up to an absolutely ridiculous, "Places to go, people to kill" answering machine message. No one else's performance was much to write home about either.

Another beef- Mary Lou's spirit just isn't that scary. She's still a rebellious and "loose" teenage girl, and while that actually makes sense for this film, it was still more campy than scary to me.

Overall, it's a very effective and chilling mini masterpiece of a horror film. It's underrated, probably due to it's lame title and it's odd association with a less than stellar slasher film from seven years earlier(which makes me wonder why they chose to call it a sequel at all. It has practically nothing to do with the original, and by 1987, "Prom Night" must've already been old news; it's not like there could've been legions of fans clamoring for even an in name only sequel or anything, but what do I know?) Lord knows that's why I had avoided it for so long. But give it a shot, if you're into an unusual slasher with great, surrealistic effects and a little originality to boot.

Hollywood Party (1934)

What's not to like?

[9/10 · 5 August 2012]

Like the cover states, it has everything! It has Jimmy Durante fighting lions, Laurel and Hardy, musical numbers, laughs, Mickey Mouse, and even the Three Stooges (with Ted Healy) appear as reporters. We also get a color Disney animated short, a funny scene featuring Laurel and Hardy, Lupe Velez, broken eggs, and a revealing dress, not to mention the naked shadow of a woman's breast. This movie is so typical of the 30s upper class lifestyle, it almost felt like I was transported to that time period. This is one of those movies that I mainly like just for the look of it. Sure it has almost no plot whatsoever, but you could say that about almost any "party" film. Overall, it's just a really fun movie. And for a little bonus- check out the outfits on some of the ladies. Yowza!

Safe in Hell (1931)

Why does everything bad have to happen to her?

[7/10 · 5 August 2012]

Poor Dorothy Mackaill just can't catch a break. After falling into the prostitution racket, she accidentally kills the man who was partially responsible for her line of work in the first place (or so she thinks).Her sailor boyfriend smuggles her onto an island with a bunch of weirdos to avoid arrest. Things get a little complicated when (SPOLIERS!) the man she thought she killed shows up on the island. This is a decent pre code drama, however, it is very draggy in some parts, (featuring many scenes of the half drunken old criminals sitting around in wicker chairs) ,has the production values of a poverty row flick, and drifts off into fairly standard early 30s courtroom drama by the third act. But the last ten minutes or so provide a couple of moving, powerful scenes, and the depressing, but effective ending more than makes up for the rest of the movie being slow. It also helps that the two black actors, Noble Johnson and Nina Mae Mckinney, aren't total stereotypes, which is remarkable for a film of this age.

So don't be fooled by the seemingly endless "sitting around on an island" scenes. Just wait til the end, it'll be worth it.

The Dukes of Hazzard: Reunion! (1997 TV Movie)

A reunion? They should've tossed their invitations.

[3/10 · 6 June 2012]

The dukes and all of their friends return to Hazzard county for a reunion festival, and have new adventures which include a predictable plot about a greedy woman who wants to buy Uncle Jesse's land, and plenty of car chases. Despite aging and deceased actors, this movie manages to retain most of it's original style. The characters still act like you would expect them to, and the action is as entertaining as ever. A special kudos can go out to the casting department for getting all of the original actors they could, and not trying to cover up Sorrell Burke's death by having another actor play Boss Hogg.

That's pretty much all the good I can say for this movie. Other than that, Roscoe Coltrane just isn't as funny without his "little fat buddy" around to constantly harass and degrade him. It's not quite as funny to see him as the new "boss", although it is fitting for his character. Seeing him as a dimwitted sheriff was funnier. The other characters work better, but it's hard to see Denver Pyle struggle to say his lines with his impending death of lung cancer.

And now the major flaw-Political Correctness. This movie, like many other TV shows and movies from the 90s, was injected with an overdose of pc. The "Tough Man" contest is changed to the "Tough Person" contest, there is a 100 pound blonde female wrestler who physically harms at least half the male cast, including her boyfriend, which Daisy seems to think is a victory for all women everywhere. The bad woman basically turns good in the end to avoid being arrested, while her male underlings learn nothing and are abused as a consequence. (One guy is even taken for a ride in the trunk of the General Lee. And in the end, Daisy decides not to marry poor Enos at their Wedding, just because she basically didn't feel like it. What a cop out! Geez, they might as well have removed the confederate flag from the General Lee!

But the worst part is, there really isn't a whole lot of laughs. What made the original series so funny was Boss Hogg and Roscoe's banter- which, like I said before, can't be found in this movie.

Anyhow, long-time fans who don't mind the PC, and are really interested in seeing what happened to the characters may find it entertaining. To anybody else, it's just a dumb, dumb movie.

Strange Behavior (1981)

Different horror film, but falls apart in the middle

[5/10 · 25 April 2012]

The first half of this horror film, about strange experiments going on at a small campus, is very good. It was very effective thanks to a chilling score by Tangerine Dream and had some expert cinematography. It also had some big names in the cast. Michael Murphy (M*A*S*H), Louise Fletcher(One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest) and classic film actor Charles Lane.

But then, maybe 3/4ths of the way through, it gets terrible. And it gets there quick. I think the scene that convinced me this movie was no longer good was the one where Michael Murphy's character is talking to Louise Fletcher's at the kitchen table. He talks about this evil scientist like he's some cartoon super villain. In fact, the plot to this whole movie becomes a ridiculous mad scientist/ revenge story like you would see in a Poverty Row production from the 30s or 40s, with hilariously campy lab scenes straight out of a bottom of the barrel James Bond flick. It loses all credibility here. It loses it's atmospheric feel , the blond kid acts like he's high for most of the rest of the film, and it has a climax that is very predictable and feels like it was thought up right on the spot. It also has one of the most pointless and confusing (to me anyway) "last lines" in movie history, and ends abruptly. I would also like to note that, unless I missed something, we never find out what happens to any of the kids that the mad doctor experiments on. (SPOILER) They just kill and disappear from the film altogether.

So to me, it just seems like the filmmakers stopped caring halfway through. They don't even try to cover up this one kid's New Zealand accent (it's set in Illinois, but was shot in New Zealand.)

This movie is included in the same set with "Patrick". It is marginally better than that film but alas, only marginally.

Patrick (1978)

A movie about a guy in a coma- that will put you in a coma

[3/10 · 23 April 2012]

Patrick is a 1978 horror film made in Australia about a guy who falls into a coma and communicates with a nurse- and it's about as dull as Psychic killer movies can get. This movie gets a couple extra stars from me because of it's decent writing and mature mood, but the movie is far too boring to get any better of a rating than a 3 from me. Seriously, almost nothing at all happens in this movie. Most of it is just the guy writing things on the nurse's typewriter using...his mind! Ooh, how horrifying! Other than (SPOILERS!) the couple dying at the beginning, and a nurse being fried(which we don't actually get to see), not much happens. A guy almost drowns in a swimming pool, another guy burns his hands on a crock pot, and a nurse passes out. Pretty much an uneventful film. At one point, Patrick actually wakes up and turns his head. I was hoping that maybe that would mean we were over the whole "lying in a bed" part of the movie, but nope, the next scene he's in, he's right back in his coma. Explain that one. Now, I don't want to sound like some modern horror movie fan with no appreciation for the "less is more" classics, but if you want to have an effective horror movie, you at least have to show us SOMETHING throughout your film!

Anyway, Patrick is a horror movie that just never really took off. The DVD cover lied. It was not "extrememly bloody" like the review clip on the front said, and the synopsis is wrong. People in the nurse's life do not begin to get killed in mysterious ways. It's a movie that gives the viewer almost nothing throughout, and does almost nothing.

The Birth of a Nation (1915)

It is what it is

[8/10 · 8 April 2012]

All racism and hilariously bad black face make up aside, this movie is the epic story of the post Civil War south that it claimed to be. It is the earliest film I've seen that successfully tackled such a long and complex, yet easy to follow, plot. It kept me interested in the story, which is quite an accomplishment, especially without the use of any spoken dialog whatsoever. Despite how despicable it's ideas are, it is a brilliantly told story of War, Reconstruction, and the men who set out to save their way of life. Love it or hate it, this was the first epic film, and the effort put into every last detail of it's immense scope is certainly something to be admired. It is a film which has been wrongly ignored and hidden from modern movie goers, who are, apparently, too sensitive to take the subject matter. The same can be said for the director, DW Griffith, who should rightly be a household name, but is instead unknown or forgotten to most people under the age of 70. So, it is what it is: A film to be watched and remembered by anyone who is fascinated by early cinema, and those who are interested in history, but do not wish to dwell on it.

Trilogy of Terror (1975 TV Movie)

Was this movie ever scary?

[5/10 · 4 March 2012]

Made in 1974, Trilogy of Terror was made for ABC, included in their "Movie of the Week" series.It features three Dumbed-down-for-TV versions on short stories by Richard Matheson. It is definitely not as good as another Matheson ABC movie, "Duel", which starred Dennis Weaver, and was directed by Stephen Spielberg.

Now, I can see you might be frightened by this film if you were a 10 year old kid in 1975 who had turned the TV on to the Zuni doll story by mistake, but the first two stories just don't cut it, and even the Zuni doll seems more funny than scary today (as it probably was in 1975 too.) There is even a post on a message board on this site that claims you must be in denial to even say that this movie isn't scary, and that you are scarred on the inside from fear. But I just don't think this movie was the least bit frightening.

Let's have a look at the first story "Julie". (spoilers ahead). It features a woman with some sort of demonic powers who lures men into a seductive deathtrap. I wasn't exactly surprised by the ending of this story, mostly because I had already read the original short story by Richard Matheson. Now, maybe people who haven't read the story before might find it clever, but certainly not scary.

The next story, "Millicent and Therese" has an ending so predictable, a blind cave fish trapped in an oil spill would have seen it coming.

And the last story, "Amelia", the only story that anyone remembers, was written by Matheson himself, and is the only one that even comes close to being scary. But even here, there isn't as much suspense as one would expect, and even less jolts. However, it does manage to be entertaining, and even a little gory.

I do have to give credit to Karen Black, though. She does a fine job juggling four (or is it three?) completely different characters in one movie.

But while the first two stories do have their moments, I felt they were really only there to build up to the last, and best story, which isn't all that great in itself.

The Flying Deuces (1939)

Another fine film series I've gotten myself into

[8/10 · 26 February 2012]

This was my introduction to the classic comedy stylings of Laurel and Hardy. I bought it at Half Price Books for one dollar, on a double feature with "Utopia" which I haven't seen yet. I must say, it was a delightful introduction to their craft for me. I love both of the duo's personalities. I love Laurel's mellow, dimwitted, and carefree persona, as well as Hardy's constantly frustrated, irked, and grumpy one. The film gives us scene after scene of great comedic sequences, and culminates in an exhilarating climax in a plane. The very end is funny too. I won't give it away, but I will say it involves a very funny horse. It is by no means a perfect film, though. Some of the plot lines go nowhere, ie: Ollie in love, and the escaped shark;The lines are often said with little to no emotion, and the pacing is sometimes bad (a more frequent musical score probably would have helped these two problems), but it is still a very amusing film with plenty of moments you just can't help laughing out loud at. Thanks to this film, I'll probably be shelling out money left and right to get my hands on more of their stuff.

The Scorned (2005 TV Movie)

What happens when you don't cast ACTORS for your film...

[1/10 · 25 December 2011]

One cracked and broken step above pornography, this "movie" tells the tale of a comatose lover whose spirit leaves her body to wreak havoc at an old beach house, killing random lovers who cheat. This may sound like an interesting idea, but it is so poorly executed, it's not really worth anyone's 87 minutes. That's 5220 seconds, by the way. 5220 long, long seconds. Anyway, let's start with the cast. It is comprised entirely of reality TV stars. This is a failed gimmick, because none of them can act. The only performance that is even entertaining is that of Ethan Zohn, who plays an eccentric, half baked, (okay, totally baked) psychic. I'm not saying his performance is good, it's just so crazy it's funny. And then there's Jenna Lewis. My question is, why cast this lady in one of the main roles when her voice sounds like she has sandpaper in her throat? Her voice cracks whenever she tries to scream, for Pete's sake! The rest of the cast is terrible. Remember, these are contestants on a TV show, not actors. The plot is slow too. The filmmakers fit in as much sappy TV style "drama" as they can, only killing these annoying characters off in the last 20 minutes or so. And I'd say that a good 30 percent of this film is pure sex scenes.

So basically, fans of reality TV won't like the gore, and fans of gore won't like the reality stars. So there's really no reason for anyone to watch this trash.

Anyhow, it's Christmas, I've got better stuff to do.

The Outlaws Is Coming (1964)

The last good Stooge effort

[9/10 · 20 December 2011]

This 1965 film was the last film the Stooges made for Columbia Pictures, and in my opinion, it is the last good film they ever made. They have a 1970 film called Kook's Tour that just wasn't very funny, or even complete. Here's the plot: The Three Stooges are magazine photographers who, along with their boss, (Adam West) ride out into the west to save herds of buffalo that are being killed off by Rance Roden (Don Lamond), who plans to take over the entire West.

While the picture follows the same formula of earlier Stooge movies with Curly Joe where The Stooges are older men helping a young guy save the day and fall in love with some girl, this time the guy is Adam West! It also features real stooge mayhem similar to their older work, not just toned down family entertainment like many of their later movies. This movie also has superior jokes and gags than their other Curly Joe films as well.

I've seen all of the Curly Joe movies except "Have Rocket, Will Travel", and this is certainly the best of the bunch.

Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948)

The Monsters=Great Bud and Lou=eh..

[6/10 · 20 November 2011]

Maybe there's something wrong with me, but, get this, I don't find Abbott and Costello funny. Except for the "Who's on first" routine.I haven't seen very much of their work, but I didn't find them funny here, and since many people seem to think this is them at their greatest, I'll have to stick with my opinion. They generate a few laughs here and there, but that's mostly when Costello is ripping of Curly Howard's various sound effects. Maybe there were just too many monsters in this movie for me to pay attention to their routines. The monsters, by the way, are what make this movie passable. It has Frankenstein's Monster, The Wolf Man, Dracula, and even a surprise cameo by The Invisible Man. I have to agree with Leonard Maltin's movie guide, which says the monsters were great in this film because they play it straight. They didn't liven up their acts because they were in a comedy film, or make light of themselves. Lon Chaney jr's Wolf Man is as troubled and dark as ever, Lugosi's Dracula is as menacing and evil as ever, and Glenn Strange, filling in for Boris Karloff, shuffles around and moans like a serious Frankenstien's monster should. All in all, this is just one of those movies you sit around and watch. Don't expect many hilarious moments, but don't turn it off out of boredom. The monsters outnumber the comedians, and it shows.

Meet the Baron (1933)

Amiable 30s Comedy

[8/10 · 3 November 2011]

Our film begins in one of the last places I would have guessed: A jungle. Jack Pearle and Jimmy Durante (both heavily bearded) are abandoned by Baron Munchausen. The two are rescued, and Pearle is mistaken for the real Baron Munchausen. He is thrown a parade, is asked to speak at an all girl's college called "Cuddle College", (And by the way, why give a speech there of all places? Why not Harvard or Yale or something?), and even finds himself romantically involved with a beautiful maid, Zasu Pitts. Yep, things seemed to be going well for our illustrious impostor, until the real Baron shows up...and I won't give out any more than that. Anyway, on to the critique. "Meet the Baron" has much to offer. It moves at a lightning pace, with jokes often coming mere seconds after another, most of them good. Though underused, the scenes with the Three Stooges in them are especially good, with slaps and quips that work quite well. Jimmy Durante had the most jokes, and was probably the most entertaining. The relationship between The "Baron" and Zasu Pitts was endearing and sweet, with an especially funny scene in a freezer. And the shower scene! Yowza! I'm not giving this any more than 8 stars, because, while fun, it does sometimes show it's age, and doesn't break much new ground. But by all means, give "Meet the Baron" a spin in your DVD player if you are a fan of classic comedy.

Black Bart (1975 TV Movie)

Horrendous TV pilot, thankfully not picked up for more episodes

[1/10 · 30 August 2011]

Black Bart: It has all the offensiveness of "Blazing Saddles" and none of the humor. This possibilities for raunchy humor on TV were limited back in 1975, so this proposed TV version of The classic Mel Brooks film "Blazing Saddles" relied on using almost every racial slur in the book. It didn't even include the slurs in a joke, it kind of just threw them out there in the air. The perfect combination to offend everyone, while making nobody laugh. Louis Gossett Jr, Steve Landesburg, and Millie Slavin all look like cheap stand ins for the original actors. Noble Willingham of "Walker, Texas Ranger" fame turns in an okay performance as the Mayor. Look for Brooke Adams as "Jennifer". If this show had been picked up, my guess is, all we would have to look forward to would be more misplaced racial slurs and 60s TV show humor. And that is basically what this show was- a show with Gilligan's Island style humor and mean spirited name calling. This would all be fine if it were funny, but believe me,it's not. Maybe if it had lasted longer, I would have a different opinion on it, but it probably would have still been terrible.

Five Minutes to Live (1961)

Five minutes to live- 74 to watch a dull, dull movie

[2/10 · 30 July 2011]

This movie starts out fair enough. We see Johnny Cash shooting down police officers, his face jiggling as his machine gun rattles. A cool song of his comes on called, appropriately enough, "Five minutes to live". A couple of scenes pass buy, introducing the characters, who seemed interesting, at first. Johnny Cabot is an ex-con looking for a way to make some quick cash. Nancy Wilson is a housewife too caught up in activities outside the home to spend time with her family. Donald Wilson is her bored bank president husband, who is seeing another woman on the side. And then there's "Ronnie" Howard, as their son. There's a couple of other characters, two cons who include Johnny in their scam in robbing the banker. If he doesn't give them the cash, his wife gets shot by Johnny Cash. So the first few minutes were promising. Them, when Johnny got the banker's wife into her home alone, I could tell this was going to be boring. After Johnny smashes some pottery and forces himself upon Nancy, there really wasn't much left for them to do except sit around playing guitar while one points a gun at the other. I'll admit a bit of suspense comes into play, as the two wait for the call from the banker that will save the woman's life,but this accumulates to nothing, as, rest assured, owl' Donald comes to the rescue just in time to save his wife. The problem with this movie was, it tried it's best to NOT be dark. It added bland humor at every possible moment, gave Ronnie some mildly funny jabs, and makes sure the ending is as happy as possible. Ronnie doesn't get shot, after all, bad guy dies, Donald ends his affair, and they all lived happily ever after. The movie is wrapped up with a little bow, as Nancy and Donald drive off with grins on their faces and stars in their eyes.This overshadows the somewhat dark performance by Johnny Cash, and the first 10 minutes or so, which has several people shot down by Johnny. In my opinion, it looks like they tried to make a film noir for Andy Griffith fans, and just didn't pull it off successfully. Maybe, if this film were remade by the Coen Brothers, we would have a good film. I can see William H. Macy as Donald Wilson right now... Note:I was calling the hero character Donald Wilson. The character's name is Ken Wilson, while the actor's name is Donald Woods. My mistake.