Touchez pas au grisbi (1954)

A true masterpiece, 1 April 2007

I feel so inadequate even attempting to discuss this movie. But I'll give it a try. For those who haven't seen Touchez pas au grisbi, it's the story of an aging gangster named Max (played to perfection by Jean Gabin). With the help of his partner Riton (also played to perfection by René Dary), Max has just pulled off the biggest caper of his career and is now set to retire. But a few of the other local thugs have other ideas. They kidnap Riton and offer to a trade him for the loot.

While that may be the five sentence review of the plot's highlights, the robbery and subsequent kidnapping are hardly what the movie is all about. These are merely devices to push the plot along. Instead, Touchez pas au grisbi is about the never ending friendship between two people. It's about willing to forfeit a fortune if it means saving your best friend. It's about their day-to-day lives, the nightclubs they visit, the women they use, and, in one of the more bizarre moments, even their dental hygiene habits. While it hardly sounds glamorous, it's one of the more compelling movies I've seen recently. Max's life pulled me in to the point that it almost seemed real. Director Jacques Becker lets the viewer really get to know these two guys so that later on when the pair finds themselves in danger, we feel for them.

Touchez pas au grisbi may not be action-packed, but when the violence does come, it's jolting in its abruptness. While the shootout near the end of the film is an obvious example, there's a moment earlier on in the movie that shows how abrupt and effective the violence in Touchez pas au grisbi is. Max has located Riton's girlfriend who he believes to be at least partially responsible for Riton's kidnapping. Up to this point, with a few very minor and brief exceptions, Max has hardly seemed capable of excessive violence. Up to this point, he's come across almost as a kindly Grandfather. But when Max confronts the girlfriend, we see what he is capable of. The rough manner in which he handles everyone in the room, including repeatedly slapping the girl to get the information he's after, is quite shocking. It's a scene that's very nicely done.

In the end, Touchez pas au grisbi is a true masterpiece that deserves all the accolades it has received. I know it's one of the best movies I've ever seen.

9/10

The Horror of Party Beach (1964)

"It's the voodoo, I tells ya!", 1 April 2007

When radioactive waste is dumped in the ocean, the consequences prove deadly. The waste animates a few long dead corpses at the bottom of the sea and mutates them into "fish monsters" with a taste for human blood. In no time at all, Party Beach becomes Death Beach.

Trying to decide the worst aspect of The Horror of Party Beach is a daunting task. It's a laundry list of "badness":

1. The nonsensical plot. I realize that this kind of movie often has a few plot holes, but this is ridiculous. For example, exactly how many bodies are at the bottom of the ocean where the radioactive waste was dumped? And how did they get there? No one seems the least bit concerned that there appears to be a graveyard just offshore.

2. The creature effects. There are a lot of candidates for the worst monster effects in the history of movies. Some claim it's the Eye Creaures or the Giant Leeches or the Creeping Terror or the Killer Shrews. But the "fish monsters" in The Horror of Party Beach give any of these a run for their money. They look like large paper-mache hats worn by people in silly looking costumes. There is absolutely no animation or life to the heads at all. And what's with the mouthful of hot-dogs? What is that supposed to be?

3. The acting. The acting in The Horror of Party Beach is horrendous. And I'm talking Ed Wood/Ray Dennis Steckler/Al Adamson bad. I'm not at all shocked to see that most of these people (I refuse to call them actors) ever did much other than their work for director Del Tenney.

4. Del Tenney. The direction in The Horror of Party Beach can best be described as amateurish. There's no flow or pace to any of the movie. Everything comes across as "staged". And Tenney's use of closeups of the monster is pointless as the viewer has no idea what they're looking at. The fact that Tenney directed four movies is a minor miracle in itself. Who was financing this guy?

I could go on and on, but there's really no point. The movie is as bad as they come. The only reason I haven't rated it lower is, of all things, The Del-Tones. Yes, that annoying little band that plays on the beach during the movies opening scenes. While they may not be the best band you'll ever hear, they do give the film a little energy and the appropriate feel. Unfortunately, it's too short lived and we're left with the rest of Tenney's disaster.

2/10

The Phantom of the Opera (1962)

"And when you sing, Christine, you will be singing only... for me.", 1 April 2007

Almost every movie fan knows the story – an opera house is beset with problems as a new production is set to open. At first it's strange, annoying occurrences like missing music or damaged instruments. But it goes beyond mere annoyance when a stagehand is murdered. What evil force is behind this series of events?

As a fan of Hammer, there's a lot here to enjoy. The first thing I always notice, and it's hard not to, is the film's "look". Hammer made some wonderful looking movies and The Phantom of the Opera just might be at the top of that list. Beautiful is the way I would describe it. The colors, the sets, and the costumes are so incredibly pleasing to the eye. Everything from the rich burgundy curtains on the opera stage to the simple, but effective mask worn by the Phantom are perfect. You could spend three times the budget of The Phantom of the Opera and not come up with something that looks this good.

Terence Fisher directed some of Hammer's best films. And his work on The Phantom of the Opera is among his best. I've read complaints that Fisher lacked imagination and was, at best, a workmanlike director who was lucky to be "in the right place at the right time". With The Phantom of the Opera, Fisher shows more artistic touches and allows the camera to be more fluid than at any time I can remember. Fisher was aided by an impressive cast. Other than Heather Sears in the female lead, the acting is solid. Edward de Souza, Thorley Walters, and Herbert Lom are all great in their respective roles. But, as usual and as expected, Michael Gough as Lord Ambrose d"Arcy steals every scene in which he appears. He's just so deliciously evil and over-the-top.

There are several little moments in The Phantom of the Opera that make it special. Scenes like those involving the rat catcher or the opera house cleaning women might seem like throwaway moments, but they help add life and interest to the film. Or the dinner scene when Sears character turns down d'Arcy's advances. The look of contempt on Gough's face as he stalks out of the restaurant is priceless. Very well done!

In the end, while there have been any number of versions of The Phantom of the Opera made over the years, Hammer's version is my favorite. It's definitely a movie that any Hammer fan or anyone interested in learning about Hammer should see.

7/10

My Favorite Brunette (1947)

"Everything you touch turns to rigormortis.", 1 April 2007

What a wonderfully entertaining and funny movie! Bob Hope and Company do an incredible job in My Favorite Brunette of parodying the dark detective movies that were so popular at the time. The situations in which Hope finds himself are perfect for his brand of humor. The jokes come fast and furious and, fortunately, most hit their mark. Hope is joined by an excellent cast that includes Dorothy Lamour in the femme fatal role, Peter Lorre as a knife-throwing killer, and Lon Chaney, Jr. as a simple, but ultimately kind gangster whose efforts to help Hope only seem to get him in deeper. The whole supporting cast is great. And director Elliott Nugent keeps the pace flowing with never a dull moment. In fact, it's a first rate job from everyone involved. My Favorite Brunette is one that any fan of classic movies (especially film noir) should not miss. I only hate that it took me so long to see the movie.

8/10

Colossus and the Headhunters (1963)

- Maciste contro i cacciatori di teste
Pass the caffeine, 1 April 2007

Colossus and the Headhunters should come with a warning similar to those found on bottles of medicine. Inducing drowsiness or sleep is an understatement - leaving the viewer comatose is more like it. Colossus and the Headhunters is the very definition of a dull movie. Every single moment is a complete and utter bore. Erupting volcanoes and battles between armies have all the excitement of taking a bottle of sleeping pills. The actors certainly don't help matters any. The present all the life and vitality of a tree stump. Kirk Morris as Colossus (actually he's called Maciste (pronounced ma-cheese-steak) in the movie) is the worst offender. You would have to search far and wide to find a more unappealing, do-nothing hero. He's even late for the film's "climatic" battle scene.

If you must watch Colossus and the Headhunters, make sure you've just had a good nap, load-up on the caffeine, and grab some toothpicks to help hold your eyes open. You're gonna need it.

1/10

Escape from the Bronx (1983)

- Fuga dal Bronx
"No sugar you idiot!", 1 April 2007

I should have known better – a sequel to a movie (1990: The Bronx Warriors) that itself is barely average. Generally, sequels have a hard time matching the standard set by the original. And even though the standard isn't very high in this case, Escape from the Bronx is a failure in comparison with its predecessor. First, the sequel lacks any imagination. We see the same gunfights and explosions we saw in the first film. Half of the death scenes could have been spliced in from 1990: The Bronx Warrior and I doubt anyone would notice. Second, if possible the acting is even worse this time around. Mark Gregory (and his painted on pants) wasn't much of an actor in the first film. Here, he seems to have regressed. Also, I've read review after review that gush about Henry Silva's performance in Escape from the Bronx. My response – what performance? He spends 90% of his already limited screen-time on the phone. What's so impressive about that? Third, I never thought I would miss Fred Williamson, but he's part of what made 1990: The Bronx Warriors as good as it was. An overacting Antonio Sabato is a poor replacement. And finally, the plot in Escape from the Bronx is completely absurd. The scenes of Manhattan indicate that very little has changed in the future. I would assume that would include people's perceptions on the value of human life. The notion that a company would have a business model that includes wiping-out the citizens of an entire city is ridiculous. That company wouldn't be around very long.

3/10

The Amazing Colossal Man (1957)

"Man Lives Through Plutonium Blast", 25 March 2007

During a plutonium bomb test, Lt. Col. Glenn Manning (Glenn Langan) finds himself in the open and absorbs much of the force of the blast. Even though 95% of the skin on his body is burnt away, the bomb doesn't kill him. Doctors work tirelessly to keep him alive. Miraculously and in no time at all, not only is Manning out of danger, his body seems completely healed – no burns and no scars. Surely the plutonium had something to do with Manning's recovery. But what other side effects does Manning face form his plutonium exposure? As Manning begins a slow but steady growth to gargantuan proportions, the side effects become quite obvious.

Bert I. Gordon made a lot of movies that can best be described as trash. I might have a good time with them, but I realize there not very good. That's not the case with The Amazing Colossal Man. I honestly think it's a decent enough movie. I realize that my judgment may be clouded by the fact that this is one of the very first movies I remember seeing. There's no accounting for nostalgia. And, I realize that today some of my enjoyment comes from scenes that fit the "so bad it's good" definition (Manning's trip to Las Vegas and the giant hypodermic needle obviously come to mind), but there are other moments that work for me as intended. For example, I think Manning's descent in to madness is well done. Whatever the reason, I find more good, enjoyable moments in The Amazing Colossal Man than I do bad, dull moments and have no trouble rating the movie a 6/10.

But please, don't take my rating as some sort of recommendation. There are too many problems that even I can see for me to tout The Amazing Colossal Man as a "must see". If you decide to give it chance, don't blame me if you don't immediately move it into your top ten. To begin with, the special effects are weak – not only by today's standards, but by the standards of 1957. The rear projection scenes are quite badly done. In addition, some of the acting is just as bad as the special effects. Other than Langan, no one in the cast comes out looking very good. Finally, the movie is full of padding. The Amazing Colossal Man may only be 80 minutes in length, but a good part of the runtime is taken by Dr. Linstrom (William Hudson) spouting scientific theories at any given opportunity. My favorite is the "single cell" heart theory. And to make the padding even more obvious, he repeats the same scientific mumbo-jumbo on more than one occasion.

6/10

Jungle Goddess (1948)

"I could sure go for a charbroiled hamburger sammich and some french-fried potatoes.", 24 March 2007

Beyond being a bad, terribly dull movie, I have a bigger problem with Jungle Goddess – racism. I'm not sure why it bothers me so much in this movie when I can let it go in movies with similar racial incidents like any of the Tarzan movies, but it really bothered me here. The characters (an by this I mean the white characters) attitudes toward the shooting of an innocent native is so nonchalant. It's no big deal to any of them. You kill a human being and then have the nerve to feel you're being wronged by the other members of his tribe because they want and expect retribution – it's something my 21st Century sensibilities cannot comprehend. And it's not just the "bad" guy. The "good" characters have the same "no big deal" attitude. I honestly think it bothered me so much in Jungle Goddess because the movie is so bad there's nothing to take the edge of these scenes. The racial attitudes of the 1940s were given the opportunity to stand front and center and show just how repulsive they really were.

Okay, off the soapbox for a bit. As I say, Jungle Goddess is Dull with a capital "D". None of the three main actors (George Reeves, Wanda McKay, and Ralph Byrd) seems capable of displaying any of the realistic emotions you might expect from someone lost in the jungle. In fact, McKay plays it much like a little girl going to a tea party. It's completely unbelievable. Speaking of unbelievable, the sets are some of the worst I've seen. You can find more realistic looking plastic plants at the local Wal Mart. And the stock footage scenes of animals don't help at all. It's all too obvious that the characters are no where near the animals. Add it up – cheap sets, dull script, and uninspired acting make for one very bad movie.

2/10

Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie (1996)

"Suddenly I have a refreshing mint flavor.", 24 March 2007

I readily admit it – I'm an unabashed MST3K fan. The concept may be simple, but it's given me hours of entertainment over the years. While I don't necessarily think some of the movies featured on MST3K deserved to be on the show, some episodes are laugh-out-loud funny (MST3K's treatment of Mitchell immediately comes to mind). So I was one of those excited about the prospects of a movie based on the television show. But, honestly, I find Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie disappointing. Sure, there are a few good laughs to be had, but overall, it cannot compare with the best of the MST3K episodes.

What went wrong? As I indicated previously, I don't think some of the films used on MST3K deserved to be there. This Island Earth is one of those films. It's a solid 50s sci-fi film that I would rate a 7/10 on its own. I would have thought that for Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie, the producers would have selected something much worse than this. And why cut This Island Earth? Here again the producers picked the wrong movie. If they were going to turn a 90 minute television show (without commercials) into a 73 minute movie, why pick This Island Earth and its 87 minute runtime? There are plenty of really bad movie with a runtime of right at an hour. Finally, Mystery Science Theater 3000: The Movie lacks to flow found in the television show. I've read that the director slowed down the pace of the movie riffing so theater audiences wouldn't miss anything while laughing. It's this rapid-fire pacing of some of the better MST3K episodes that made it funny.

6/10

Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster (1966)

- Gojira, Ebirâ, Mosura: Nankai no daiketto
Godzilla Does Red Lobster, 18 March 2007

I never thought I would find a Godzilla movie where Godzilla was the weakest part of the film. In most these movies, the various scenes not involving Godzilla could generally be considered filler. They're there to pad out the film until Godzilla shows up and usually aren't very good. The filler in Godzilla vs. the Sea Monster isn't any better or worse than any of the other Godzilla movies (though I must admit to enjoying the James Bond vibe and the groovy dance party), but it's better than Godzilla's moments on the screen. The problem is that Big G doesn't get the chance to do much. This is Toho "on the cheap". The usual rampage through the city is gone. It was cheaper to have Godzilla destroy a mostly deserted island with only a small science/military facility than it was to build an entire city of miniatures. And the few miniatures to be found don't even looks up to snuff. When not trampling the cheap miniatures, Godzilla spends an inordinate amount of time just sitting. That right – sitting! And when he does finally do battle with the sea monster of the title, it's not much of a match. In no time at all, Godzilla rips off the overgrown lobster's claws and its over. Almost 90 minutes to see this non-event – what a waste!

4/10

Lost Continent (1951)

"Look at the size of that footprint!", 18 March 2007

I don't quite understand the reviews for Lost Continent on IMDb. Most of the users who have taken the time to write a review have rated the movie a 5 or better. Huh? What did I miss? Sure, it's not the worst movie I've ever seen, but come on! Lost Continent is about as exciting as watching grass grow or watching paint dry or any other tired, old cliché you can think of. It's deathly dull! It seems that at least half of the movie is devoted to watching the characters either climb a mountain or just walk around. As a viewer, you get to watch all six characters going over the same boulder - and doing so very slowly - and without any tension or suspense - and often without any background music. And when our group of intrepid explorers isn't climbing over the same stage-bound rock for the fourth time, they're walking through a fake looking jungle. Actually, they're not really walking as it seems each time the camera cuts to them they're taking a fifteen minute break. How exciting is that! They don't do much and nothing much happens to them. Two-thirds of the movie is over before the first dinosaur makes an appearance. I realize that Lost Continent was made with a very small budget, but these dinosaurs are terrible. Movies made 20 years previous had better looking stop motion special effects.

But as I wrote earlier, Lost Continent is far from the worst movie I've seen. The acting alone keeps this thing from being a total waste of time. The name actors in Lost Continent are Cesar Romero and Hugh Beaumont. Both do a decent enough job, but they're not given much to stretch their acting abilities. Also present, as he was in seemingly everything made in the 50s and 60s, is Whit Bissell. The name might not be recognizable, but most fans of older films would be familiar with the face and voice.

3/10

The Living Daylights (1987)

"Why didn't you learn the violin?", 15 March 2007

After 1985's A View to a Kill, it became apparent (at least to me) that the Bond series needed a change if it was going to be viable. Enter Timothy Dalton and The Living Daylights. What a breath of fresh air! With Dalton, Bond was changed from a smarmy, one-line spewing 00 agent without the physical presence to any longer play the role into a more serious, mysterious, and athletic figure. Dalton's Bond may come out with a clever line here and there, but he's far form the ridiculous quip machine that Moore had become. And to top it off, The Living Daylights sees Bond returning somewhat to his roots and actually doing a little spy work. Imagine that – Bond as a spy!

The Living Daylights isn't the perfect Bond film. Neither General Koskov (Jeroen Krabbe) nor Brad Whitaker (Joe Don Baker) make for very threatening Bond villains. They come off more as clowns than men to be feared. Also, even though I enjoy Maryam d'Abo's work in the movie, her Kara Milovy is a little too helpless as written. But any weaknesses I see in The Living Daylights are more than offset by the movie's strong points. Some of the various set-pieces are wonderful. I'm particularly fond of the clever method used to get Koskov into the west. And that final fight scene in the airplane is one of the best found in any of the Bond movies. The plot is interesting and just complicated enough to keep you guessing throughout The Living Daylights. Just when you think you've got things figured out, the plot throws another curve ball. Most of the acting is excellent. Even though it was Dalton's first time in the role, I think he nails it. John Rhys-Davis, in a much too small of a role, and Art Malik really standout and deliver a couple of nice performances. As should be evident, the positives easily outweigh the negatives as far as I'm concerned.

I'm one of those who hate the fact that Dalton was only given the opportunity to play James Bond twice. I would have liked to see what he would have done with the role given more time in it.

8/10

Moonraker (1979)

"You appear with the tedious inevitability of an unloved season.", 11 March 2007

Take a look at most of the lists of favorite Bond films found on the internet and you'll usually find Moonraker at or near the bottom. While I don't consider it the worst (I reserve that distinction for Die Another Day), it's not among my favorites either. Most people when writing about Moonraker tend to focus on the ill-advised, Star Wars inspired, laser shootout. As ridiculous as Bond in Space is, it's not my main point of contention with the movie. Instead, I have a real problem with the gag-fest that is Moonraker. It's one lame attempt at humor after another. While humor has always been a part of the series, here it's taken to the extreme.

There is no better example of the buffoonery found in Moonraker than the gondola chase scene. (Bear with me here, this is going to be rather lengthy.) It gets off to an okay start as Bond's gondola passes another one carrying a coffin. The coffin's lid opens and the man inside throws a knife at Bond. Of course he misses giving Bond the chance to throw the knife back at the would-be assassin. The now dead assassin falls into the coffin and the lid slams shut. Oh the irony! But we're just getting started. The coffin falls off the boat and floats under a bridge just as a man hacking up his lungs crosses the same bridge. He sees the coffin and immediately gives up smoking. At this point my sides are splitting with laughter! In the meantime, Bond flips a switch revealing that this is no ordinary gondola, but a supped-up MI6 variety of gondola. Out of seemingly thin air, boat loads of baddies appear and begin chasing Bond. During the chase, Bond barely misses a gondola carrying a couple in the middle of a passionate make-out session. They are apparently so into their lovemaking that they are oblivious to the baddie's boat that "hysterically" slices their gondola in half. As their half of the gondola sails off (apparently still sea worthy), they remain in their oblivious embrace. The gondolier in the other half isn't so lucky. As his half begins to sink, he continues to use his pole in a vain attempt to stay afloat and gives the camera his best look of comic exasperation. Stop it! I've got tears in my eyes! Just when you think things can't get any worse, Bond approaches land and pushes another button turning his gondola into a hovercraft. It's at this point the real "fun" begins. As Bond drives his hover-gondola through a major Venetian square, we are treated to several "hysterical" reaction shots. A man drinking wine swears off alcohol. A painter loses his painting and isn't aware it's gone. Even the animals get in on the act as a pigeon gives Bond a double-take. Yes, that's right – a pigeon does a double-take! The utter ridiculousness of this brief moment encapsulates everything that's wrong with Moonraker. Cubby and Company changed Bond from a tough, womanizing spy with a penchant for the occasional quip into a clown with an infinite supply of gags and one-liners. Ian Fleming must have been spinning in his grave.

It's really too bad because there are some nice moments and things to enjoy sprinkled throughout Moonraker. If you can excuse Lois Chiles and her impersonation of a piece of wood, the acting is okay for this kind of movie. I've read any number of bad things about Michael Lonsdale as Hugo Drax, but I think he's one of the bright spots. I appreciate his cerebral, understated approach to playing the Bond heavy. Some of the action set-pieces in the first half are quite enjoyable. I particularly like the sword fight in the glass museum even if it does end with on of Bond's more groan-inducing quips. And even the final laser showdown in space is well-filmed and enjoyable regardless of how absurd it might be.

In the end, even though there are some things I like about Moonraker, the comedic core of the movie really hurts it in my eyes. The best I can do is rate it a 4/10.

4/10

300 (2006)

"Give them nothing! But take from them everything! ", 10 March 2007

It seems there are only two or three movie releases each year that get me excited. 300 just happened to be one of those movies. Overall, while I enjoyed 300, it wasn't quite the movie I had hoped for. Part of the reason could be that I had over-hyped it in my mind to the point where no movie could live up to that lofty of an expectation. However, with a rating of 7/10, it should be obvious that there was plenty here for me to enjoy.

To begin, the "look" of the film is phenomenal. The stylized visuals perfectly suit 300's graphic novel origins. The action scenes are breathtaking. There is enough slicing and dicing to make any action fan happy. Finally, I found the acting surprisingly good. Gerard Butler may get most of the notice, but most everyone gave a convincing and solid performance. I was especially impressed with Lena Headey as Queen Gorgo. She just seemed so real and natural.

But where 300 falters, in my opinion, is in its extremes. Director Zack Snyder walks a fine line between these extremes and, for the most part, does so successfully. However, moments when historical accuracy bubble to the surface tend to put a drag on the film. Conversely, scenes and images that take 300 into the realm of fantasy and take it too far from its historical roots become all but absurd. It may be a small complaint to some, but this keeps me from rating 300 any higher.

7/10

Count Dracula (1970)

- Nachts, wenn Dracula erwacht
Lee's best performance as Dracula?, 9 March 2007

In the past, I've accused Jess Franco of losing focus about 10 minutes into his films. It's not unusual to see him stray from his subject for a few unnecessary close-ups of any random object or to include several minutes of what appears to be vacation footage he shot out of the window of a car. That's certainly not the case with Franco's Count Dracula. By Franco's standards, it's a very straight forward story. There are a number of other things to like about the movie. Excusing the Spain for England locations, the sets are wonderfully Spartan and very atmospheric. Bruno Nicolai's score is about as good as you'll find in any of Franco's efforts. But the highlight is the acting. Franco assembled one of the most acclaimed casts he ever worked with. Klaus Kinski, Herbert Lom, and Christopher Lee give the film immediate credibility. Lee's performance is the real standout. Of the numerous times he played Dracula, his work in Count Dracula just might be the best of his career. The supporting players, featuring the usual group of Franco regulars, give some of their best performances.

But it's this straight forward approach used by Franco that contributes to the films downfall. Franco was attempting to film a fairly faithful adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel (it was the only way he could get Lee to agree to play Dracula). And while he may have actually been more successful along that line than some of the other, better known Dracula films, unfortunately the end result is incredibly dull and lifeless. While the film gets off to a good start with Jonathan Harker's visit to Dracula's castle, things grind to a halt once Dracula reaches England. So even though Count Dracula may represent one of Franco's most competently directed films, the boredom factor is too high to rate the movie anything better than average.

5/10

Robot Monster (1953)

"You look like a pooped out pinwheel.", 7 March 2007

Why do I do this to myself? I know that there are those who have seen Robot Monster more times than I have, but when you loath a movie as much as I do this one, why would you watch it three times? Yes, that's right – I think Robot Monster is one of the absolute worst movies ever made with virtually no entertainment or other value, yet I've sat through it on three different occasions. I've tried watching it as a "serious" piece of sci-fi – that obviously won't work. I've tried watching it through the eyes of a child (as someone suggested) – sorry, that didn't work either. I've even tried watching it as a piece of unintentional comedy – too boring for that. It makes for one of the worst MST3K episodes I've so far seen. I must have some sort of problem if I keep revisiting trash like this.

I've noticed that many people go straight for the monster design when discussing Robot Monster. But Ro-Man, as he's known in the movie, is the least of the problems I have with the film. In fact, the image of the gorilla with the diving helmet is the only thing that keeps me from rating the movie lower. Whether intentional or some happy accident, the creature design is iconic. Many people who have never seen the movie or even know what movie it comes from have seen pictures of Ro-Man. Instead, my problems with the movie include every other factor you could think of. The acting is abysmal. Imagine my surprise when I noticed on IMDb that most of the cast actually had extensive acting backgrounds that just happened to include Robot Monster. Did they get on set and suddenly forget everything they knew about acting? The music for Robot Monster was written early in his career by the famed composer Elmer Bernstein. I'm sure this is a proud entry on his resume. The opening music is mind-numbingly bad. Finally, the direction is terrible. The movie has no pace or flow. It's about as exciting as watching grass grow. As a cure for insomnia, Robot Monster might be a winner. But as a movie that provides entertainment on any level, Robot Monster is an unqualified disaster.

2/10

The Cynic, the Rat & the Fist (1977)

- Il cinico, l'infame, il violento
Lived up to the hype, 6 March 2007

After watching a bunch of less than stellar Poliziotteschi in recent months, I am happy to report that this one lived up to just about every positive review I've read. With a cast that includes Maurizio Merli (doing less "posing" than in some of his other films), Tomas Milian, John Saxon, and a bunch of other familiar faces, Umberto Lenzi's The Cynic, the Rat & the Fist gets off to a fast start and keeps going at a good pace through most of the film's runtime. Nice action, violence, direction, and a catchy score (by Franco Micalizzi) also add to the enjoyment. Of all the great moments in the film, the sparring scenes between Milian and Saxon are easily my favorites.

My only real complaint comes at the films climax. It's over too quickly. There's a nice setup for the film's finale, but it's over before you know it. An ending that didn't feel so rushed would have made this one a real standout in the genre.

8/10

Poirot "Peril at End House" #2.1 (1990) (TV)

One of my favorites from the series, 14 January 2007

I love the Poirot movies! There's something about England in the 1920s that I find especially appealing. These movies have a way of transporting me to that time and place. The attention to period detail in this series is remarkable (at least to my untrained eye). Clothing, set decoration, cars, and even mannerisms seem spot on. I'm amazed that in the 1990s, locations could still be found that look as they did 70 years previous.

The Poirot "regulars" give their usual wonderful performances. It's taken me awhile, but David Suchet has grown in my eyes to become the definitive Hercule Poirot. He nails the character. In many of these movies, the supporting cast can leave something to be desired. That's not the case with Peril at End House. They're quite good. Polly Walker is especially a standout. She gives her character real life.

But if you're really going to enjoy a Poirot movie, I think it helps to be a fan of Agatha Christie's books. I say it helps because those familiar with her work seem to be more forgiving of the plot holes, 2-D characters, and other problems with her plots. Fortunately, I have been a fan as long as I can remember. Peril at End House is classic Christie with red herrings, clues, and intrigue at every turn. As Hastings might say, "It's an all around good show."

8/10

The Aztec Mummy (1957)

- La momia azteca
Hopelessly Dull, 14 January 2007

After watching the first movie in BCI's new Aztec Mummy Collection, it's difficult to believe how excited I was about the set and how upset I was when the release date was pushed back. I've watched a lot of Mexican horror in recent months. Some great – The Curse of the Crying Woman. Some entertaining despite obvious flaws – Night of the Bloody Apes. And some Cheesy – Pick any Santo movie. One thing that all these movies have in common is that none can be called "dull". Well, that's not the case with The Aztec Mummy. It's been awhile since I last watched something so sleep inducing. I wasn't hoping for or expecting a great movie, but at least entertain me! The Aztec Mummy takes every situation that could be interesting and sucks the life out of it through repeated scenes of people doing nothing and then extending those scenes for what fells like an eternity. I guess that's what happens when you make an 80 minute movie with only 30 minutes of material. Padding extraordinaire! For example, for anyone who has seen the movie, what purpose does The Bat have other than to bring a masked wrestler type to the screen and to extend the runtime by 15 or so pointless minutes?

I can only hope that the other two movies in The Collection are more entertaining than this one.

3/10

The Most Beautiful Wife (1970)

- La moglie più bella
Compelling, 18 November 2006

The Most Beautiful Wife is the kind of movie I usually avoid. I usually don't go for these overly depressing tales. But The Most Beautiful Wife is oddly compelling and drew me in from the start. The film is based on a true story and deals with the barbaric treatment of women (who am I kidding, these are girls) at the hands of their future husbands. Rape was an acceptable means of forcing a marriage. No other man would want the woman as she was no longer a virgin.

But as depressing as the subject matter may be, director Damiano Damiani and cinematographer Franco Di Giacomo created an incredibly lovely film with The Most Beautiful Wife. The contrast between the green, lush farm lands and the crumbling city scenes is pleasing. And Ennio Morricone's score is what I've come to expect – a work of genius. It suits the film perfectly.

Ornella Muti gives a terrific performance in the title role. And when you consider that this was her first film and that she was only 14 years old, it makes all the more amazing. As the whole film is centered around her and as she is the focal point of almost every scene, it's imperative that her performance be believable if The Most Beautiful Wife has a chance at all to work. She pulls it off flawlessly. I doubt an actress twice her age with years of experience could have done any better. It's an impressive piece of work.

8/10

Big Deal on Madonna Street (1958)

- I soliti ignoti
I loved it!, 4 September 2006

Two weeks ago, I had never even heard of Big Deal on Madonna Street. Now I consider it one of the very best, most enjoyable films I've ever seen. I loved it! The movie is essentially a spoof of the many Italian (and I like to think other European) heist films so common in the 1950s. Director Mario Monicelli and the many credited screenwriters nail the essence (and absurdity) of the genre perfectly. I actually found myself laughing out loud on more than one occasion - and that's quite the accomplishment. While watching Big Deal on Madonna Street, I kept picturing the film Rififi in my mind and replacing the hardened, serious criminals in that movie with this bunch of misfits. It's pure genius. Fans of European heist films owe it to themselves to check out this movie.

Other than the comedy, the acting is the highlight of the movie. Vittorio Gassman, Marcello Mastroianni, Memmo Carotenuto, Renato Salvatori and the rest seem to perform effortlessly. It's a joy to watch such a talented cast. My only complaint with Big Deal on Madonna Street (and the only reason I didn't rate it a 10/10) is the way Claudia Cardinale's character is used. More Cardinale is always a good thing.

9/10

Man Bait (1952)

The ineffective George Brent, 4 September 2006

A respectable book shop manager, named John Harman (George Brent), gets mixed up in blackmail and murder when he crosses paths with Ruby Bruce (Diana Dors). It's either pay up or she'll go to the police with a made-up story of Mr. Harman attacking her. He agrees to hand over the money and thinks he's put the whole matter behind him. But things only get worse for Mr. Harman when Ruby's dead body is found in his house.

Horror icon Terence Fisher directed this sordid tale for Hammer. He does a good job of wringing tension out of what is essentially a weak script. There are certainly moments to enjoy, but overall, Man Bait is to uneven to consider it anything other than average at best. For example, the acting of the principles is terrible. Dors is terribly miscast and doesn't come across as the temptress she playing. Even worse is Brent. What a mamby-pamby man! The whole notion of this milk-toast being on the run from the police is hysterical. A complete change in casting would have gone a long way in making Man Bait a much better film.

5/10

Stolen Face (1952)

Are there really fans of Lizabeth Scott out there?, 4 September 2006

I've now watched three of the Hammer noirs that were recently released on DVD and while each is okay, there's nothing very memorable about any of them. That's precisely how I feel about Stolen Face – it's a decent watch, but it's nothing I would go out of my way to see again. While Paul Henreid gives a nice performance and Terence Fisher's direction is solid, the screenplay really lets them down. There just aren't any surprises. It's all nicely done, but I've seen it before. And if you haven't seen it, you can probably predict the film's outcome with a great deal of success. It's about as subtle as a hammer (pun intended) to the head. My enjoyment of the film isn't helped any by the presence of Lizabeth Scott. I've only seen her in two movies that I can name off the top of my head (this one and The Strange Love of Martha Ivers) and that's two too many. I can't stand the woman!

One interesting aspect of Stolen Face is the interjection of little elements horror/sci-fi. After all, this is Hammer and this is Terence Fisher. It somehow seems appropriate.

6/10

Let's Scare Jessica to Death (1971)

"Do you like my new dress? My new old dress?", 3 September 2006

Jessica (Zohra Lampert) is a troubled woman. Recently "cured" of a psychological disorder, she and her husband, along with a friend, move to a large house in the country. Upon arriving, they find a mysterious, but agreeable woman named Emily (Mariclare Costello) living in their house. They invite her to stay and things seem to be going smoothly. But Jessica has started having visions again. She sees people who aren't there, hears voices, and discovers dead bodies. No one else notices anything. Is Jessica going mad? Or is there something more evil going on?

For the most part, Let's Scare Jessica to Death works as a slow-moving, atmospheric horror film. If you need chainsaws rumbling, masked killers, and blood spurting, steer clear of this one. But if you're a fan of slow-burn, subtle horror, you will find a lot to enjoy. There are moments in Let's Scare Jessica to Death that go beyond creepy and enter the realm of downright scary. The film has the feel to it of something just under the surface you can't see, but scares you nonetheless. Images like Emily coming out of the water in her wedding dress are classic. And, overall the film looks great – and by great I mean suitably dark and foreboding. The acting is generally good with Costello giving a standout performance. A lot has been written about Lampert – some going so far as to call her performance "Oscar Worthy". To me, she seems to be trying a bit too hard. Yeah, we know she's a nutcase, but that doesn't excuse some of the over-the-top histrionics. Get over yourself!

Notice I wrote that Let's Scare Jessica to Death works "for the most part". I have never cared for the ending. The finale takes the film in a completely different direction from anything that comes before. For lack of a better work, it's too obvious. It's as if someone demanded something more overt in the ending. A more subtle, mysterious ending would have fit better with the atmospheric feeling that the film had been building. Instead, we're given an ending that really harms what is otherwise a classic horror film.

7/10

The 1,000 Eyes of Dr. Mabuse (1960)

- Die 1000 Augen des Dr. Mabuse
My first venture into the world of Dr. Mabuse, 30 August 2006

The 1,000 Eyes of Dr. Mabuse represents my first venture into the world of Dr. Mabuse. Pigeon-holing this movie into a single genre is difficult. It's one part traditional krimi, one part spy movie, and one part thriller. Combined, these elements create, at least for me, a one of a kind experience that I really can't compare with much of anything I've seen before. I refuse to give the normal plot synopsis. Any plot details or other information would ruin the many twists and surprises found in The 1,000 Eyes of Dr. Mabuse. Fortunately for me, I went into the movie completely blind, knowing very little of what to expect. I would suggest not even looking over the IMDb page as vital information is presented on Mabuse's identity. The acting is good from a cast that, even if I didn't know all of the names, I recognized from years of watching WWII movies. Actors like Gert Forbe, Werner Peters, and Peter van Eyck give sold performances. Fritz Lang's direction is as competent as ever. The 1,000 Eyes of Dr. Mabuse has style to burn. Considering the movie was made more than 45 years ago, it still feels remarkably fresh. The mystery of who Dr. Mabuse is and what his fiendish plan is all about are wonderfully compelling and really pull you into the movie. The jazzy score is impossible to get out of your mind and fits well within the film. In short, it's movie like this that keeps me excited about exploring "new" cinema. If all of my first time viewings could be this entertaining, I would be very happy indeed.

If The 1,000 Eyes of Dr. Mabuse has one weakness, it's the slow pace of the second act. The pace grinds to a crawl as the police begin their investigation into the events taking place. While it's fairly interesting and Gert Forbe is a good enough actor, there's not enough action in this portion of the film when compared with what came before and what comes afterward. A little more pep in the middle third of the film would have made it a real winner with me. It's a minor issue I have with the film, but it's an issue nonetheless.

As I wrote previously, The 1,000 Eyes of Dr. Mabuse is the first Mabuse movie I've seen. After my wonderful experience with the movie, it won't be the last.

8/10

Bad Blonde (1953)

Payton's personal life may be sad, but that doesn't make her an actor., 30 August 2006

Bad Blonde is a great title for a very average movie. It's also the first of the Hammer noirs made in the 1950s I've had a chance to watch. I've always been a fan of Hammer's horror output, so it's a treat to get the opportunity to see what the studio was doing pre-1957. The movie tells the (somewhat unoriginal) story of young up-and-coming boxer who gets mixed up with his promoter's steamy, blonde wife. She bends him to her will and uses him to get what she wants – even if that means committing murder. In a broad, general sense, Bad Blonde kept me entertained throughout. Director Reginald Le Borg keeps things moving at a good pace. The film looks good and the country estate set is a standout. And the movie features a wonderful performance from Sid James. The man carries much of the film on his own. Unfortunately, I can't say the same about some of the rest of the acting. The problems I have with Bad Blonde that make it just barely above average relate almost completely to the two leads. Tony Wright and Barbara Payton, are terribly unconvincing. For Wright, this was his first film, so I can forgive some of his stiffness. But for Payton, Bad Blonde was supposed to something of a return to glory. After only four years of making films, she was already washed-up by 1953. Her story may be a sad one filed with every possible form of self-destruction imaginable, but it doesn't change my opinion of her acting. With the exception of a few memorable moments, she doesn't come across as the smoldering sexpot she's supposed to be. To the contrary, I actually found her quite unappealing.

Even though Bad Blonde didn't knock my socks off, I'm looking forward to giving the other five films in the new Hammer Film Noir Collector's Set a chance. At a minimum, and if for no other reason, it's interesting to see how the American B-noirs were translated to Great Britain.

6/10

The Black Pit of Dr. M (1959)

- Misterios de ultratumba
Another Mexican horror winner!, 29 August 2006

Another Mexican horror winner! Until just recently, I doubt I could have named more than a half dozen Mexican horror films that didn't feature a masked wrestler. As I'm quickly discovering, Mexican horror has much more to offer – especially for fans of Gothic horror. Films like The Black Pit of Dr. M appear to be heavily influenced by the classic Gothic Universal films of the 1930s. They have the same thick atmosphere, similar looking sets, a familiar grand but foreboding score, and common plot themes. In fact, if the actors weren't speaking Spanish and you could replace the main actor with Boris Karloff, you would essentially have a 1930s American horror film.

The Black Pit of Dr. M is the story of a couple of doctors who have made what is in essence a death pact. The one who dies first will do whatever he can to comeback to let the another know what the afterlife is like. But Dr. Mazali isn't content with knowing what happens after death, he wants to experience it. His recently departed friend, Dr. Aldama, informs Dr. Mazali that it might be possible him to experience the afterlife, yet return to the living. But is Dr. Mazali willing to pay a heavy price to cheat death?

If I have one complaint with The Black Pit of Dr. M it would be with the predictable nature of some of the plot points toward the end of the movie. Maybe I've seen too many similar movies or maybe the movie really is predictable, but a few more plot twists in the films finale would have made this one even better. As it is, The Black Pit of Dr. M is a wonderfully entertaining movie even with this weakness. Fans of Gothic horror are sure to enjoy this one.

Casa Negra's new DVD is amazing given the obscure nature of the movie. I sincerely doubt that The Black Pit of Dr. M ever looked better. The DVD includes a warning about some brassy moments in the film's soundtrack, and while I noticed it, the audio weaknesses never distracted or took away from the film's enjoyment. The extras are nice and include a very informative commentary with IVTV founder Frank Coleman. Overall, it's another solid job by Casa Negra.

8/10

Evil Under the Sun (1982)

"You know how funny people can be about a spot of murder.", 28 August 2006

I've lost count of the number of times I've seen Evil Under the Sun. The natural question may be "Why watch a mystery more than once when you already know whodunit?" The simple answer – entertainment. Evil Under the Sun never fails to provide me with almost two hours of entertainment. The movie is so much more than the mystery. Truth be known, Evil Under the Sun is one of the weakest of Agatha Christie's novels relying far too heavily on some absurd coincidences. So beyond the mystery, it's the location, the acting, and the character interactions that bring me back time and time again.

- Location: The island scenery is simply breathtaking. The rocky cliffs set against the blue Mediterranean are beautiful. It's hard to believe that such places actually exist. The palace/hotel in which much of the film takes place is filmed in grand style. In short, Christopher Challis' cinematography is stunning.

- Acting: Evil Under the Sun features some wonderful actors having what appears to be a grand old time with their characters. Peter Unsitnov, James Mason, Diana Rigg, Roddy McDowell, and Jane Birkin are all truly wonderful in their performances. But for me, Maggie Smith makes Evil Under the Sun something special. Her catty Daphne Castle is a remarkably enjoyable character.

- Character Interactions: Watching any of these fine actors working together is a real treat. But the best example of what makes Evil Under the Sun so much fun is watching Maggie Smith and Diana Rigg go at each other. One of my favorite moments has to be when Smith characters describes why Rigg's character went further as an actress than she did. She explains that not only could Rigg's character kick her legs higher, but also farther apart. It's a wonderfully funny moment.

8/10

Night of the Demon (1957)

- Curse of the Demon
"It's in the trees! It's coming!", 23 August 2006

Being a fan of classic horror, I'm almost embarrassed to admit that this was my first viewing of Night of the Demon as it is very nearly the perfect horror film. It's got everything I could ask for. Instead of going into detail on everything that works, I'll give the laundry list of highlights: an interesting premise, an intelligently written script, good acting, atmosphere you can cut with a knife, nail-biting suspense, beautiful cinematography, and touches of humor that add to rather than take away from the film. There is nothing that I would change about the movie. And that includes director Jacques Tourneur being forced to show the demon. I think the demon scenes are nicely done and do not take anything away from Night of the Demon. Contrary to a couple of reviews I've read, they're not "cheesy" in the least. In fact, the demon is downright frightening. While I admit that the film might have been even better had the demon's image been left to the imagination, it's there. Just enjoy it for what it is.

10/10

Murder by Death (1976)

"Room filled with empty people.", 23 August 2006

There are three movies that, for whatever reason, I have watched literally 100s of times. Murder By Death is one of the three movies. The great thing is that I never get tired of it. It never gets old with me. The comedy is as fresh today as it was in 1976 when I saw Murder By Death in the theater. I think the movie appeals to me because I grew up reading Agatha Christie and watching Charlie Chan on The Late Show. Later, when I discovered the Humphrey Bogart movies and the Thin Man movies, I became an instant fan. I get a real kick out watching Neil Simon poke fun at the characters from these books and movies. The screenplay is clever, intelligent, and, most importantly, funny. I all but laugh out loud every time I watch the "dead, naked butler" bit or listen to Peter Selles arguing with the "cow" on the wall. It's good stuff!

In addition to Simon's writing, the acting in Murder By Death is a real highlight. The cast is a Who's Who of some of the best actors of the 60s and 70s. David Niven, Peter Sellers, Alec Guinness, Peter Falk, and every other member of the cast (including the usually annoying James Coco) are all wonderful. Their parodies of the famous detectives are dead-on perfect. But the best, in my opinion, is Maggie Smith. It's amazing that in a group of such renowned actors, Smith is able to steal almost every scene and become the center of attention. She is simply amazing in Murder By Death. I could watch her all day.

So, here's to another 100 viewings of Murder By Death! I can't get enough of it.

9/10

Battle Royale (2000)

- Batoru rowaiaru
"Here's your list of friends in the order they died.", 23 August 2006

I finally got the chance to see what all the fuss is about. For the most part, Battle Royale lives up to the hype. The violence is as over-the-top as I had been led to believe. What I wasn't expecting, however, was such a well made, engrossing film that's full of some of the blackest humor I've seen in a while. For those uninitiated, Battle Royale is the story of one class of young teens in Japan that are chosen at random to participate in the government's new "game" designed to put order back into society. The class is taken to a deserted island and each member of the class is given a weapon. At the end of three days, the one class member left alive is the winner. If more than one person is alive, everyone dies. The plot may seem completely ridiculous and outlandish, but it works. It's difficult not to be drawn into the film from the very beginning. The action comes fast and furious as classmates kill each other in a variety of inventive ways. Friendships are put to the test, trust becomes something foreign, and love means nothing when it's kill or be killed. Director Kinji Fukasaku does a masterful job of making the characters seem real and sympathetic in Battle Royale – even those with limited time on screen. The acting is good, the special effects are believable, and the cinematography and lighting are well done. Overall, Battle Royale is a nice combination of compelling story and technical know-how.

Battle Royale could have been a near perfect film if it weren't for two faults that I can't look past. First, there are too many unnecessary love stories. While I understand the need to present the relationship between the two main characters, is it necessary to hear every teenager's deathbed confession of love? Maybe this was part of Fukasaku's sense of humor, but it quickly became tiresome. Second, the ending is a let-down. I was expecting and hoping for an ending as gratuitous as the rest of the film. Instead, Battle Royale limps to a finale that's uncharacteristically bland given everything that came before. Regardless of these two criticisms, Battle Royale is a film that's well worth seeking out. It's a one of a kind experience and new favorite of mine.

8/10

Heller in Pink Tights (1960)

This one fails at almost every turn, 20 August 2006

What an average, ordinary movie. And by average and ordinary, I mean dull. The plot revolves around a traveling show in the old West. The group runs afoul of Indians, sheriffs, and killers as they seek to make their fortunes. Sophia Loren is the star and is in almost every scene, but not even she can save Heller in Pink Tights from achieving nothing more than mediocrity. Anthony Quinn is also top billed, but he is terribly underutilized and looks like he's just going through the motions. The chemistry between the pair is non-existent. The only bright spot in the cast is Eileen Heckart who, as usual, steals every scene in which she appears. Director George Cukor shot Heller in Pink Tights in the most gaudy of color schemes that hardly seems natural give the time period in which the movie takes place. An exploding paint store wouldn't produce this much color. I'm not sure what Cukor was going for, but he failed at almost every turn.

In short, this one should be reserved for Cukor or Loren completists only.

4/10

Muñecos infernales (1961)

- The Curse of the Doll People
The "dolls" certainly are creepy little buggers, 20 August 2006

I feel very fortunate to have seen the original Spanish version of Munecos infernales instead of the cut, poorly dubbed American film known as The Curse of the Doll People. If you go into Munecos infernales expecting great cinema, you'll probably come away disappointed. But, if you lower those expectations a bit and enjoy the film for what it is, you might just have fun with it.

The plot concerns a group of men who have returned from a trip to Haiti. While there, they witnessed a voodoo ritual and managed to steal a voodoo idol. Before they could get away, however, the voodoo priest put a curse on the men and their families. Now, one by one, the men are dying mysterious deaths.

The best part of Munecos infernales has to be the "dolls". In reality, they're nothing more than midgets with paper-mâché masks that resemble their last victim. It may sound silly, but these are some creepy little buggers that actually manage to create a little atmosphere and sense of dread. On the downside, the film fells terribly padded to extend the runtime. For example, there are a couple of scenes where we see people going through windows that seem to go on forever. I previewed The Curse of the Doll People and, unfortunately, the cuts made to it don't include scenes like this.

6/10

One Missed Call (2003)

- Chakushin ari
A restrained Miike, 18 August 2006

In Takashi Miike's One Missed Call, there's really very little new ground covered. If I've seen one Asian film that revolves around a pale-skinned, long black-haired female ghost, I feel as if I've seen a dozen. Whether One Missed Call is derivative of other Asian horror films or whether it's the other way around, I don't know (or really care). The similarities, though, are undeniable. But it hardly matters when it comes to enjoying the movie. Miike has put together an entertaining and at times frightening tale of a young girl seeking retribution for her death. It's far less bloody and over-the-top than most of Miike's other films, but for the most part, it works. Miike is much more restrained and relies on very subtle moments to create unease in the viewer. One of the best examples is the "ghost in the cupboard" scene. It's a simple moment without a lot of fanfare, but it's very effective in generating the desired response. Other highlights of the film include the death scene at the television studio and the search through the abandoned hospital. These moments help Miike's film standout from the crowded field of similarly themed J-horror films.

Whether the plots of these J-horror ghost stories appeal to you or not, as usual, it's difficult to deny the level of artistry and technical brilliance that goes into these films. One Missed Call is no exception. Thanks to some interesting cinematography and lighting, the film has a "look" that helps create an atmosphere of dread. The special effects, both visual and sound, are well done. The acting is good. Both of the leads, Kou Shibasaki and Shin'ichi Tsutsumi, are more than adequate. And Miike's direction expertly creates the desired tension. Overall, it's the kind of well-made Asian horror film that I've come to expect.

But One Missed Call isn't without its faults. Beyond the "been there, done that" aspects of the plot, the film's pacing could have been better. While the first and third acts are enjoyable, the middle portion of the One Missed Call tends to drag a bit. Some of the investigation scenes into what's behind the mystery put a halt to what is an otherwise well paced film. A little judicious editing might have helped the film flow better. One Missed Call also includes a number of plot points that are never adequately resolved. For example, why was the mother's dead body in the abandoned hospital? And could the ending have been more confusing? I admit that I'm completely at a loss to explain the films finale. That doesn't mean I didn't enjoy it, but don't ask me what it all meant. Maybe a second viewing is necessary to resolve some of these issues.

7/10

Do You Like Hitchcock? (2005) (TV)

- Ti piace Hitchcock?
I can't help but feel a bit disappointed, 17 August 2006

Maybe I get myself too worked up over a new Argento release because, once again, I'm somewhat disappointed. I wasn't expecting a return to the grand old days of Deep Red or Tenebre. I would have been satisfied with something along the lines of Sleepless. What I got with Do You Like Hitchcock? was something just barely above average. Yeah, I know, it's a TV movie. So what? Mediocre is mediocre. While there are some enjoyable moments in the film and instances where flashes of the old Argento shine through, these aspects of Do You Like Hitchcock? are offset by some equally unenjoyable, uninspired moments in the film.

The concept of a film that pays homage to Hitchcock is an interesting idea. For the most part, Argento and co-scriptwriter Franco Ferrini do an acceptable job of setting up tense and thrilling moments that would have made Hitchcock proud. The first kill scene is classic Argento. You know what's coming, but Argento drags it out and builds the tension until it's almost unbearable. Again, it's a classic Argento moment. Unfortunately, there are places where Do You Like Hitchcock? drags. Despite Argento's best efforts, the scene where the protagonist is trying to make a getaway on his moped in the rain goes on and on far too long. You know the character is in no real danger at this point in the film, yet Argento seems to insist on dragging out this non-suspenseful sequence with no payoff. It's a real low point in the movie.

The film's main Hitchcock inspirations are Rear Window and Strangers on a Train. And while Argento successfully plays the Strangers on a Train plot aspects, the Rear Window bits felt more like Argento paying homage to Brian De Palma paying homage to Hitchcock. The final scenes in Do You Like Hitchcock? have much more in common with De Palma's Body Double than they do Hitchcock's Rear Window.

Argento's films are known for their "look". Bright, vivid colors dominate much of Argento's earlier, more successful work. And there are moments in Do You Like Hitchcock? where you can see the Argento "look". The night scenes feature a variety of colors and interesting angles and are a throwback to Argento's previous films. There is one scene in particular of a red staircase with a purple handrail and unique lighting that could have been from Suspiria. But the daytime scenes are just the opposite. In comparison with the nighttime scenes, those shot in the day are downright pedestrian. They look as if anyone with a camera could have filmed these scenes.

There are a lot of aspects (acting, special effects, score, etc.) that I haven't even touched on, but I'll end this here anyway. Overall, I'm glad to have gotten the chance to see Do You Like Hitchcock? And while I was reasonably entertained throughout, I can't help but feel disappointed. Those hoping for a return to Argento's glory days will most likely feel the same disappointment.

6/10

The Saint: Vendetta for the Saint (1969) (TV)

It's good, but I expected a little more, 15 August 2006

For what it is, Vendetta for the Saint is a reasonably entertaining movie with a decent plot that kept me interested throughout. If you're a fan of the television show The Saint, you should enjoy this movie, because Vendetta for the Saint isn't really a movie at all. It's actually a double length two-parter that's been combined into one single entity. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that. I enjoy The Saint. But I expected a little more from something marketed as a movie. I expected more in the way of set design, special effects, and the overall feel of the movie. However, I should point out at least one area where Vendetta for the Saint excels – locations. The location shots of Palermo (at least I think it really was Palermo – it looked how I imagine Palermo looking) are breathtaking and beautiful.

Overall, if you're fan of The Saint, you should enjoy Vendetta for the Saint. But if you want something that goes beyond The Saint, you might be disappointed.

6/10

Charlie Chan in the Secret Service (1944)

An average Chan - and I'm being generous calling it that, 13 August 2006


I've been a Charlie Chan fan as long as I remember. Some of my earliest memories involve watching Chan late at night on television. But Charlie Chan in the Secret Service doesn't work for me the way most Chan films do. Sure, it has its moments (like introducing Birmingham Brown), but there are too many problems I have with the movie for me to call it anything other than average.

What are the problems with Charlie Chan in the Secret Service? Glad you asked. Two areas where I have real issues with the movie are the means of murder and the padding. First, Charlie Chan in the Secret Service features a couple of fairly elaborate murder weapons that would have taken some time to set up. But the killer was just a guest in the house. So when did the murderer get inside and re-do the electrical wiring to be able to commit murder? Second, Charlie Chan in the Secret Service has a runtime of only 63 minutes. But if you were to take out the numerous instances of padding, you might end up with a movie less than 45 minutes in length. The most egregious example is the scene where Chan leaves the Secret Service building. We see Chan walk down the hall, through the doorway, down the steps, wait for a cab, get in the cab, ride to his destination, exit the cab, and finally get inside the house. Alone, these scenes take a good two or more minutes and add absolutely nothing to the film other than stretching its runtime.

I realize that most of the Monogram Chan films can't compare with what came before. But Charlie Chan in the Secret Service is weak even by Monogram standards.

5/10

Creature with the Blue Hand (1967)

- Die blaue Hand
Very enjoyable krimi, 13 August 2006

I'm still relatively new to these krimis, but I rate Creature with the Blue Hand as one of the best I've seen so far. It's the story of man named Dave Emerson (Klaus Kinski) who has been committed to an asylum for murdering his family's gardener. Dave escapes and makes his way home (which is conveniently located a stones throw from the asylum) and attempts to convince anyone who will listen that he's innocent. But it's difficult for his family and Scotland Yard to believe Dave as the bodies begin to pile-up?

There's certainly plenty to enjoy in Creature with the Blue Hand – a crazy twin brother, a devilishly sinister medieval glove with retractable spikes, secret passageways, a mad doctor, and enough suspense to keep most fans happy. Creature with the Blue Hand is successful in creating that one ingredient necessary for a film of this type – atmosphere. The film has a nice pace to it and never seems to drag. The acting is hit or miss at best. Kinski gives a nice, restrained performance. The sets are amazing and far exceed the film's obviously limited budget. Even though the film is set in modern times, the sets would have been perfect for a period piece.

The DVD I watched also features an American cut of the film, re-titled The Bloody Dead. This version contains 15 or so minutes of added gore scenes filmed some 20 years after the original movie was made. I haven't watched it yet and, based on everything I've read, I probably never will.

7/10

Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein (1972)

- Drácula contra Frankenstein
At least it has a decent Bruno Nicolai score, 12 August 2006

Because this is Franco, giving a plot rundown is something of a futile challenge, but I'll do my best to hit some of the highlights. Dr. Frankenstein arrives in some unnamed village to work in a supposedly abandoned castle. The castle actually isn't so abandoned as it's really the home of Dracula and his vampire servants. It's not long before Dr. Frankenstein revives his creation. Dr. Frankenstein puts his monster and Dracula to work kidnapping local women for his experiments. Why? I have no idea, but he straps them to a table and does his thing. But Dracula being Dracula is sucking the life out of some of the locals. It's up to Dr. Seward and the local gypsies/werewolves to put a stop to Frankenstein and Dracula.

During the first few moments of Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein, I was having trouble believing that this was a Franco film. The opening shots of the castle with Bruno Nicolai's score are well done and, for the lack of anything better, un-Franco-like. But this impression only lasted a few moments as Franco quickly shifts from the imposing and foreboding castle to a shot of a random dog on a random staircase. That's Franco for you.

Compared with some of the other Franco films I've seen, Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein isn't too bad. Don't misunderstand, it's not very good, but if you've seen something like Franco's Oasis of the Zombies, this movie is a winner. You get a lot of what you expect from Franco – suspect acting, poor make-up effects, and shaky camera work. One thing that really bothered me, though, is that Franco can't seem to decide what time period his film is set. While some characters drive cars, Dr. Seward gets around in a horse and buggy. And even though Dr. Frankenstein has a large collection of machines that require electricity, there's not a light bulb to be found anywhere. Things like this just bug me. . In the end, I can't in good conscious recommend Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein to anyone other than the most die-hard of Franco completists.

3/10

The Thomas Crown Affair (1968)

It could have been so much better, 12 August 2006

Thomas Crown (Steve McQueen) is a wealthy man. Wealthy – yes. Satisfied with life – no. He needs some excitement in his life. He needs a challenge. Crown concocts a plan to rob a local Boston bank. He hires five men who know nothing of each other to carry out his scheme. Things go just as Crown planned – Crown has the money, no one was caught, and the police are completely baffled. The perfect crime! But Crown wasn't counting on the ruthless, hard-nosed insurance investigator (Faye Dunaway) sent to find the daring bank robbers. And Crown certainly wasn't expecting the insurance investigator to be so beautiful.

The Thomas Crown Affair starts off with a bang. The film opens with an intelligent, well-planned, and cleverly written bank heist. Unfortunately, the bank heist only takes 20 minutes of the film's runtime. The 60s were full of these ingenious crime/caper/heist films and had the remainder of The Thomas Crown Affair lived-up to the promise of the first act, it might have been one of the better examples of the crime/caper/heist film ever made. But things fall apart shortly after Dunaway makes her appearance. She's neither very believable in her role nor do she and McQueen have any on screen chemistry. I will admit that the first meeting between McQueen and Dunaway was interesting, but their cat and mouse game soon gets very tiring. Their scenes together feel forced and unnatural. Many of the reviews on The Thomas Crown Affair highlight "the chess scene" and go so far as to call it "sexy". If by "sexy" they mean too long, too drawn out, and too dull, then I guess it's "sexy".

Director Norman Jewison seems intent on using every single ridiculous camera trick at his disposal. Split-screens, gel lenses, and psychedelic colors are only a few examples of what Jewison has up his sleeve. Here's an idea – just tell your story. The camera tricks do nothing but help to destroy whatever flow and pacing the film might have had. A few of these techniques is okay, too many becomes distracting.

Other than the opening 20 minute heist scene, the only other real highlight is the film's final twist as Crown pulls the wool over the eyes of the insurance investigator. It's a nice ending for The Thomas Crown Affair and helps to make up for some of what came before. And fortunately for us, it's a signal that we will no longer be subjected to the terrible on screen pairing of McQueen and Dunaway.

6/10