Saturday, 16 June 2012

Night Visions Back To Basics 2012 - Part 2


Finally, here is the latter part of my report on this year's Night Visions festival. I also saw two additional films,  The Raid: Redemption and Ninja Turf, which I won't be reviewing here because this has been a big effort otherwise as well, and I also did reviews of them for the web site Elitisti. If you don't speak Finnish, rest assured, I will come back to talking about The Raid at least. It's the most kick-ass action film of the year, and I'm quite sure it has guaranteed a spot on my top 10 list of this year. But let's go into the films I have reviewed.

The Cabin in the Woods (USA 2011)
Director: Drew Goddard


Is there a more boring horror trope than a group of teens going to a remote cabin for a weekend to party only to end up being killed one by one by a mysterious evil force, serial killer or a bloodthirsty monster? Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard seem to think there isn't, which is why their madcap horror-comedy may be seen as a cry for originality in the horror genre. And from a very clichéd setting they themselves end up making something quite original indeed. But much of the film's originality is determined by its ability to surprise. So I although I won't go too deep into the plot, I'd still advice to skip the next paragraphs and you to go see the movie as unspoiled as possible.

The strong-minded, but lovelorn Dana (Kristen Connolly), the book-smart jock Curt (Chris Hemsworth), his happy-go-lucky girlfriend Jules (Anna Hutchinson) and nice guy Marty (Fran Krantz) are all persons that have more than one dimension, and reasons for acting the way they act. The most hedonistic of them, the stoner Holden (Jesse Williams) is the exception. The pot-head is only interested in weed and various conspiracy theories. Once the teens arrive at the cabin (owned by Curt's cousin), however, they all start to show more goal-oriented and simple-minded characteristics. Unbeknownst to them, they are also being monitored by the mysterious middle-aged suited men Sitterson (Richard Jenkins) and Hadley (Bradley Whitford) in some sort of a secret high-tech base. They await eagerly for a some sort kind of a monster to appear and to kill the more and more like the  teen archetypes in these sort of films.


I feared this would be the sort of film that would steer too closely into Scream-type self-conscious postmodernism. Although poking fun at horror clichés brings much of the comedy here, it's not too in-your-face or cute about it. The characters inside the film aren't intertextually savvy, and can't compare what they are going through with some handy references to other horror films. Paradoxically Sitterson and Hadley then act like a couple of horror aficionados watching a new film. They make bets on who will die first and what the story's monster will be. With such a scattershot approach, it's great that the third act can distance itself from the tropes and throw a few very tasty bones to both fans of classic horror flicks and goofy comedy. The film also manages to tie the old tropes into some other ones, more familiar in books than on film. That's why it almost interwovens a whole new universe of horror, where every horror story you have ever heard could be true. The film also questions what is the greater good, and turns the tables on its protagonists. As the plot reveals itself, we viewers start to root for a different party. The ending is quite good too (if the final shot is a bit too much), as the film practically guarantees there can never be a sequel. Even though this has been a very successful yarn.

★★★  1/2

Ronal the Barbarian (Ronal Barbaren, Denmark 2011)
Directors: Kresten Vestbjerg Andersen, Thorbjørn Christoffersen, Philip Einstein Lipski


Barbarian films aren't actually known to be the smartest of the subgenres. I know, shocking, right. That's why as far as parody is concerned, it is quite an easy target. Nevertheless, a raunchy Danish animation on the subject might have been a good idea in the right hands. Unfortunately, Ronal is way too nice and shy about the subject. To properly make fun of barbarians, one should up the sex and violence ante, but the film resorts to just allude to both of those things and titter while doing it.

Ronal is the weakest young barbarian in his village. His foster-uncle attempts to train him to at least have the warrior's code of courage (and also the sort of weird nobility I myself have a hard time figuring barbarians to possess). Neverthless, the timid and feeble Ronal fails to warn his villagers in time when the vengeful warlord Volcazar and his troops do a surprise attack on the village. Crushing the barbarians is one step in Volcazar's evil plans to use ancient magic take over the world. Several barbarians are taken as slaves and it's up to Ronal to rescue them. On the way, he gets help from the eager young troubadour Alibert, the fierce bounty hunter Zandra, and the fruity and pompous elf Elric.

Ronal goes through the basic clichés of sword-and-sorcery fantasy like a checklist without having much funny or insightful to say about anything. The aim is for heavy-metal loving teenagers, even though the film comes at least 25 years too late to appeal to Manowar's biggest fans. The animation is quite good, however. It's not super-accurate Pixar quality, but good enough to forget at times it was all zeroes and ones. The characters' faces are express in almost Brad Bird-style vividness. The only problem may be in several scenes where the pre-rendered background and the characters don't seem to quite fit. The film's attempts at humor are practically pitiful, and the bland message of courage and believing in yourself is familiar from countless Disney films and their knockoffs. On the positive side, Zandra is, for once, a strong female character that's not over-sexualized (although she has some emotional baggage). The way her Red Sonja-like logic is utilized in the film may be the best part in the film, until the final reel when she becomes another damsel in need of a stronger male to save her.

★★

In Search of Dracula (Vem var Dracula?; Sweden/France/USA 1975)
Director: Calvin Floyd


This Swedish TV documentary benefits of having no lesser man than Christopher Lee at narrating duties. The attempt is to go to the bottom of the myth about vampires, the history of Vlad Dracul Tepes of Romania, and of course, the roots of Bram Stoker's classic novel. The film's narrative is flimsy at best, jumping back and forth between topics. Some areas that don't connect to Dracula are also covered, such as the history of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.


The film crew has visited the real places in which events have happened, such as Transilvania, Hungary and the Lake Geneve. In some parts Lee's narration is pictured with him in role costume. But these inserts don't tell much and seem to be nothing but filler. As Vlad Tepes, for instance, Lee merely takes a stroll through a forest back to his castle in a costume that looks more like a native American hippie than the iron-handed prince who enjoyed watching his enemies impaled. The film's major problem is that it scarcely offers any new information to horror buffs. The clips in which Lee plays Dracula are taken from some of the lesser Hammer vampire films, such as Scars of Dracula. The film is worth watching if one doesn't know too much about the subject. For curiosity's sake there is a curiously staged scene where an actual vampire bat attacks a guinea pig.

★★ 1/2

Some Guy Who Kills People (USA 2011)
Director: Jack Perez


This film sells itself with its posters and such to be an outrageously cartoonish splatter comedy. The comedy is quite black, but there's very little blood and gore in this thing. Comedy, too, as this is more a story of a psychopath trying to come into terms with his world. It's a dark film, reaching all the way to its cinematography. Scenes seem to be set at night more and more as it progresses. The titular character, the 34-year-old Ken Boyd (Kevin Corrigan) is released from the mental institution. The timid young man can't seem to get his life straight, living with his mother (horrifyingly botoxed Karen Black) and working as a mascot for an ice-cream parlor. He has been picked on and made fun of all his life. When bullies harass him at his new work, he decides to get rid of everyone who has made his life a misery.


The gruesomely murdered bodies seem to be killed fast, and with scarcely any link between them. It will take the local sheriff Walt Fuller (Barry goddamn Botswick!) all his mental power to get on Ken's tail. The plot is further complicated as Ken's 11-year-old daughter Amy (Ariel Gade) comes into his life. The smart little girl starts to dig into his dad's past and doesn't like everything she finds. The resulting film is a navel-gazing feel-bad movie that goes into the psyche of the serial killer and questions his rights in the same way that the hit TV series Dexter has been doing. Unfortunately the plot develops glacially and there lacks some sort of a carrot to keep the viewer interested in all these shenanigans. I prefer James Gunn's Super which could deliver the laughs and the colorful imagery as well as the despair and the gloom of a lost individual.

★★ 1/2

Fight For Your Life (USA 1977)
Director: Robert A. Endelson


This 1970's exploitation flick works as a sort of commentary on the social changes of that time. And then again, just as a nasty retread of mean thrillers of that time such as The Hills Have Eyes. Three psychopath criminals are on the run from the law, and take shelter in the house of the Turners, a middle-class African-American family. Particularly their leader Kane (William Sanderson) finds nothing but contempt for the Turner's race, and is willing to say it out loud too. It is hinted he doesn't treat his Mexican and Asian comrades equally either, but they stay along for the ride because the job allows them to do some good looting and pillaging, and the occasional murder. Kane finds pleasure in humiliating the Turner family members, particularly family head Ted (Robert Judd). The worry for his family makes even the proudest, most progressive man take all sorts of mental punishments. But when the shoe switches to another foot and the Turners have the advantage over the thugs, the sound in the bell switches.

Even though it's obvious the film is heading towards a final confrontation of good and evil, or black and white, the film has quite a few surprises in its bag on how it will get there. Some plot threads, such as the 10-year-old boy's blood oath to protect each other, are started just to be shockingly and abruptly ended. The film does good job in building up suspense and pressure to its characters. By the final reel it truly feels as if they all have their backs against the wall, and thus the way they act is the only reason. The film doesn't symphatize psychotic rednecks one bit. They are just as bad and perhaps even more trigger-happy and unremorseful of all the lives they take or the sorrow they cause. There's also a healthy dose of black humor laced all through the film.


In the end, the film doesn't say anything particular about racial politics or social conditions or anything that deep. It's just a tough, uncompromizing exploitation flick, good for catharctic viewing of those inner-city black youths at that time that felt white people treated them like trash. This film doesn't emphasize the view, as it has positive white characters in as well. But it shows that even the most meek of ministers must be prepared to, yes, Fight For Your Right.

★★★★

Tokyo Emmanuelle (Japan 1975)
Director: Akira Kato


I had a strong feeling before this movie that I wouldn't last through it without falling asleep. Erotic films in the small hours of the morning usually mean sleepy Night Visions attendees. But as it happens, the film was one of the craziest of the whole festival and well worth keeping one's eyes open. From the surface it just looks like one of the many, many cash-ins of the famous French softcore erotica that was so popular around the world in the early 70's. The heroine in this isn't even called Emmanuelle, and the title is used to tell audiences that yes, they have bare boobs and softcore sex on show here.

The heroine Kyoko (the decidedly European-looking Kumi Taguchi) is unhappily married to a French diplomat in Paris. When her husband hasn't shown up and eased her sexual urges for four days straight, she decides to travel back home to Tokyo. The city reminds her of the tragic love affair with a race car driver, when they used to have sex in the bushes during races (He did come to the finish line in another way, then. HEY-AWWW!) The sister of her ex blames her for his consequent death, which haunts Kyoko somewhat in between her intercourses with the locals and naked trips to the gym and dolphinarium. She also goes to see a famed sex therapist, who preaches that sex between two people is so normal as to be boring. The real pleasure should come from unnatural, kinky stuff, and attaining this pleasure should be the only reason for living. Kyoko takes this message to her heart (and bangs the therapist in several odd ways). But her trying to patch things up with her ex's family and seeing a sex therapist there is just an excuse to loosely hinge together a group of scenes of Kyoko having sex with various men, women, groups, and possibly even animals (!).

Let's say it bluntly, the movie is bugshit insane and possibly one of the most misogynistic I've ever come across. The film's director Akira Kato has stated that he was influenced a lot by the ancient Roman erotica. One must ask what purpose could there be to bring such old fantasies to screen, particularly as plenty of the things in it are either illegal or immoral nowadays. The film features not only several rape and gangbang scenes which show the woman liking and wanting it, but also the use of (underage) rape as a way to solve social problems. But this was in fact released in Europe uncut, for no matter how sleazy and disgusting the film's world view is, there actually isn't any graphic imagery. Basically you can't see more than a nipple or two. This just goes to show how wrong censors most often were than not.

The end of this review could go on describing various sleazy scenes from the film. Early in the movie we have a troublingly long scene where Kyoko watches a woman eating a popsicle lovingly and slowly, which makes her think of oral sex, which is visualized as bluntly as possible. Another scene sees her in a ski lift with three men. Two of them ogle her from the moment she gets in. Once the lift takes off the ground, they proceed to attack, grope and rape her. The third man in the lift seems terribly uneasy about having to watch this this. Once the two other men have had their go, #3's encouraged to try some himself, which he reluctantly accepts and has a quickie rape with Kyoko. Nevertheless, Kyoko seems totally at peace after all of this and is seen in the next scene driving a bicycle. I did fall asleep once during the movie, only to wake up having to see naked Kyoko having sex with two men (one in the back, one in the front) while they're all riding a horse on the beach. The film ends at Kyoko's attempts to build bridge between herself and her ex-fiancée's sister. She accomplishes this by drugging her, taking advantage of her, and then allowing her boyfriend to rape her.

One simply cannot defend the world view this film offers, which is frankly disgusting. But it's improbably and sleazy scenes do have a certain weirdness factor in it, which make the film worth gasping at during those weird hours in the morning when you can't tell what is real and what is a dream any more.

★★

The Room (USA 2003)
Director: Tommy Wiseau


Night Visions usually doesn't fail with the choices for their final film, and this time around Finnish audiences were treated to the country's premiere of a thoroughbred cult film. That's not to say, of course, that anyone attending hadn't seen it before, of course. There were plenty of aficionados of The Room present in the audience, and they had the film memorized and had a string of comments to throw in each part. Usually I don't like this sort of behavior, but now this made the whole thing seem like a true cult classic screening, which I've experienced way too few during my lifetime. And the comments were quite funny, too, pointing some extra flaws within the ludicrous film that wouldn't be apparent to first time viewers concentrating on its obvious mistakes and odd choices.

The Room is a melodrama about the extended family of a successful San Fransisco broker Johnny (Wiseau) and his fiancée Lisa (Juliette Danielle). Their penthouse door is always open for their friends to pop by. Johnny is not only bringing in the dough for his wife-to-be, he is also a happy-go-lucky fellow who's super nice to his friends. The repetitive scenes emphasizing his lovability make it seem like Wiseau is compensating for something. Lisa eventually gets bored with Johnny, and decides to want to start an affair with his best friend Mark (Greg Serestro). The initially reluctant Mark finally agrees to this. Elsewhere, also other of Tommy's friends and family are having troubles, and his world view comes crashing down.

You're tearing me apart, Lisa!
This plot synopsis makes it seem like there is a proper plot and some sort of development in this film, which is by far not the fact. Wiseau starts a huge number of plot threads that seem important but are immediately abandoned and never resolved. The main infidelity plot doesn't go anywhere until in the final 10 minutes. The film was in the making for a long time, during which at least one actor got fed up with the whole thing and left. That's why in the end scenes a completely new friend takes his place without any introduction or explanation. There are also some baffling scenes like the whole group of friends dressed up in fine suits and going to throw a football around. This scene doesn't go anywhere. It's by far not the only one who seem to exist only to baffle the audience and make them laugh.

The most loved thing about the film is the frankly ludicrous dialogue, spoken either robotically stupidly or with such hammy overacting, Calculon would take note. Characters come and go through the apartement door constantly, but Wiseau never fails to greet them. "Oh hai Mark!"
Then there are the sex scenes. As if one scene where disgusted audiences have to look at Wiseau's wrinkled butt and veiny arms isn't enough, after another 10 minutes the exact same sex scene is shown again! All in all, it is quite clear why this has become such a huge cult hit. There is the lingering suspicion that Wiseau may have some sort of a mental syndrome or slowness. That's why I feel a little guilty about laughing at him and his film, which he has clearly put a lot of effort in. But at least audiences do love what he's come up with, and with a passion that's rarely reserved for any other film.

★ or ★★★★★

Sunday, 10 June 2012

Night Visions Back To Basics 3012 Part 1


About two months ago, I was privileged to take part of another Night Visions Back to Basics festival. The intimacy of classic festival years has been paved in way of attendance records, and accordingly, the festival has become bigger and bigger each year. Just because there's such a big number of films to cover, this festival report comes in so late. But as most good genre films are timeless, one should be able read reviews of them anytime. Let's remind ourselves how much fun we had, eh?

Haywire (USA, 2012)
Director: Steven Soderbergh


The festival kicked off with Steven Soderbergh's love letter to ultimate fighter Gina Carano. I've long held the stand that Soderbergh is a competent director with plenty of good ideas in each of his films. However, it seems that he's unwilling to concentrate to do them properly, instead opting to direct two films each year. Subsequently, he has a huge back catalogue of films no one has seen, and even his high profile films lack in substance. Even though it's admirable that such a big director is willing to make a straight action film that unashamedly is built on people getting their asses kicked, it would've paid to stay a bit longer in the screenwriter's room.

As it is, Haywire is a blandly clichéd agent thriller. Carano's agent Mallory Kane is on the run from her former employer. The agency and the consequent womanhunt seem to be led by Ewan McGregor's Kenneth. Unlinear timeline shows flashes from before and after Kane was betrayed. Her mission to rescue a hostage in Barcelona went, as in the movie's title, haywire. In her subsequent job in Dublin her contact person (Michael Fassbender) turns out to be a double-crosser. In current time, somewhere in the American midwest, she confides in the regular-seeming Aaron (Channing Tatum) to borrow his car.

Like said, there are plenty of things to enjoy here, from surprisingly good performances (Carano in particular shows unexpected acting abilities) to several good action scenes. A backwards car chase in the middle of the woods is one for the ages, and Soderbergh can stage a fight between Carano and an A-list actor like a mofo. Pity that in some instances he attempts to do a really distracting editing style that's more an experiment than a service to storytelling (or ass-kicking). I would've liked to see more famous actors get their asses kicked by Carano, with Michael Douglas and Tatum in particular being sad to be left out. But ultimately, as the viewer can't be bothered to care about any of the supposedly-clever twists and turns of the plot, and any scene without any action causes big yawns. Ultimately, the film doesn't amount to anything above average.

★★ 1/2


Bloody Pit of Horror (Il boia scarlatto, Italy/USA 1965)
Director: Massimo Pupillo


But wait, actually Night Visions opened a bit earlier than that, at least unofficially. In the Bar Molotow there was a sunday evening showing of two past NV movies followed by reminiscing of the 15-year-old history of the festival. I catched the later one of the flicks, a delicious Italian exploitation flick supposedly based on the writings of none other than Marquis de Sade.

The Castle of the Crimson Executioner was where a notorious madman butchered heaps of people back in the 17th century. A modern-day photographer decides that the castle's the perfect milieu to shoot sexy pictures for covers of horror novels. So, a group of hot model girls and technical people arrive at the castle that they think is empty. However, the castle is owned by the former actor Travis Anderson (Mickey Hargitay) who lives there with his two bodyguards. The model Edith (Luisa Baratto) used to date Travis, so they are allowed to stay. But then the model crew starts to disappear one by one. The spirit of The Crimson Executioner seems to be bent on revenge and to torture each and every one of them to death.

So all of the (pretty formulaic) plot exists solely as an excuse to show several torture devices and death traps. Having sex-hungry models in your film also allows for some steamy nudity. The budget hasn't really stretched too far, as the violence doesn't seem too realistic and the other special effects are frankly ludicrous. The unconvincing giant spider threatening a girl in her web, only to be tossed away like an American football by the rescuing Adonis, is probably the most memorable of these.


The main bad guy runs around in red tights and generally dresses like the pulp comic hero The Phantom, but without a shirt on, which is also a plus in my book. But the film also has a somehow twisted atmosphere where almost anything can happen. Like all good exploitation, it seems to exist in a delirious border between fact and fiction, reality and fantasy. Even though the end result is lame, it is quite inventive and the actors seem to be having fun with it.

★ or ★★★★★

Red Tears (a.k.a. Monster Killer; Red tears - kôrui, Japan 2011)
Director: Takanori Tsujimoto


Each Night Visions seems to need to have a new Japanese gore flick in its program. This time, for a change, it doesn't come courtesy of Sushi Typhoon. But still it shares pretty much the regular quality of these flicks, which is that they have a couple of amusing splatter scenes but the flimsy plot and the overacted characters are usually quite dire.

Red Tears is both a detective story and a love story as well as a monster-hunting action film. A bunch of policemen try to figure out who has murdered a large number of people by decapitating them and sucking the corpses dry from blood. The young policeman Tetsuo Nojima (Yuma Ishigaki) falls for the shy, beautiful girl Sayoko (Natsuki Kato) who takes care of her elderly mother. But the more efficient and determined elder detective Genjiro Mishima (Yasuaki Kurata) soon starts to suspect that the women have some sort of connection to these monstrous crimes.

The plot develeopment is slow as snail nailed to the ground. Sudden shocks of the plot suddenly thrushing forward wake the viewer up, but can't manage to maintain interest for long. The unrelenting, bloody fight scenes towards the end do a little better job, but rely way too much on bad CGI effects. But the film also has a very black sense of humor which makes some body mutilation jokes quite funny in a Braindead sort of way. Kurata is also awesome. Still, by no means essential viewing.

★★

The Innkeepers (USA 2011)

Director: Ti West


Ti West has an unique vision among modern American horror directors, which is why his films feel like they're a lot better than they actually are. He doesn't dwell on violence, postmodernist irony, jokes, effects or gore like so many of his peers. West's films build very slowly and give a lot of room for character development. It's a shame, then, that his films are so clichéd. One would almost wish he wouldn't write his own scripts, but rather use his directing talent to better someone else's fresher ideas. After the quite good House of the Devil, West has decided to show others how a Haunted House thriller should be made.

Claire (Sara Paxton) and Luke (Pat Healy) work at a rundown hotel that's about to get closed. There aren't that many customers so they try to find some ways to keep themselves entertained during long shifts at the reception. They both are interested in the hotel's history, which includes a young bride hanging herself after her fiancée left her at the altar. As amateur ghost hunters they attempt to capture some evidence that the bride's ghost still lurks in the hotel. During the hotel's last weekend they get an old actress Leanne Reese-Jones (Kelly McGillis) as a guest. She promises Claire she can get in touch with the hotel's spirits. But Sara soon finds out she got more than she bargained for.

The Innkeepers starts off relatively mild, almost comedy-like as Claire and Luke talk trash with each other and ward off boredom. What first seem like stock-clearence horror movie characters turn out to be kind of multidimensional in that they have several motivations, background and thoughts going on. The viewer allowing him-(or her-)self to get entangled in their lives and to learn to care for what's happening to them, finds the film more rewarding as a result. The suspense builds up very slowly, and supernatural elements are almost crept in a film that in the beginning seemed very down-to-earth. Even usually cheesy shocker points feel a lot creepier than in your average cheap jump-scarer. But once the final chase and shock-train starts, it all falls to very familiar horror tropes, like going to a dark basement to get trapped. West should work more to keep his film's climaxes worthy of such long buildup. Nevertheless, it's always a joy to see a horror film crafted well and with care. I hope West's next film won't disappoint.

★★★

War of the Dead – Stone's War (Lithaunia/Italy/Finland/USA, 2012)
Director: Marko Mäkilaakso


Here's another fresh new genre film that stems from Finnish mindpower but is actually a multinational production. Mäkilaakso's film is about zombies in the Finnish Winter War (1939-40) and has been on production (shelved) for so long that zombies have gone out of fashion thanks to overexposure in pop culture. But actually I got a real kick out of this film, I liked it a lot better than the more in-your-face, you-should-be-laughing-now -styled Iron Sky. Whether that was the intent of the filmmakers, I honestly can't say.

The American soldier Stone (Andrew Tiernan) fights on the Karelian frontier against the attacking Soviet army, alongside a small group of Finnish soldiers. When suddenly the killed soldiers can't stay dead and keep coming for their flesh, the ragtag group realizes that more sinister powers than the sheer fear of Stalinist gulags is driving the zombie soldiers. The group picks up a Russian soldier Kolya (Samuli Vauramo) on their way to get as far away from the armies of the undead and perhaps also solve the mystery. (Hint: It's because of occultist Nazi experiments)

The film is shot in a dark forest at night, and the editing is so sloppy, it's hard to make out what's happening in the most intense scenes. In the end set in a vast underground bunker system, the editing problems ease out. But by then the film looks like just another amateur zombie film shot in a basement or bomb shelter. The film's flimsy "plot" consists mostly of running away, with some frankly ludicrous character building scenes filling out the time between. But none of those problems matter, because the acting is so goddamn hilarious. The film's Finns have thick accents, reminding the production of some of Mats Helge's finest Swedish ninja flicks. This is probably a conscious choice as Finnish war veterans aren't very well known for their abilities to speak foreign languages. But then again it just raises further questions as to why the hell are they even talking in English anyway. Stone's reasons to fight in Finland's own war are familiar to anyone that has read some cheap Boy's Own war comics. Come to think of it, the plot altogether doesn't probably have a single fresh idea in it (save for one zombie horse/car chase). But it's all made with such deadpan seriousness, that the film tricks the audience into laughing at it's ineptdness. The funniest joke is the one where you can't be sure whether the one telling you it is joking or not. Frankly, I don't want to know whether they were serious or not making this, which is why I skipped the Q&A with the makers after the screening. I remain more satisfied that way.

★ or ★★★★★

The Brides of Fu Manchu (UK/West Germany 1965)
Director: Don Sharp


Christopher Lee was not only known as Dracula in the 1960's. He's also one of the most profilic actors to play Sax Rohmer's fiendish supervillain Dr. Fu Manchu, having done the role five times in his career. Night Visions presented the second one of these adventure flicks, with Douglas Wilmer's Sir Dennis Nayland Smith having to match wits against a nefarious plot to conquer the world once again. Because this is a sequel, the film starts with a frankly baffling (for newcomers at least) and explosive scene set on some Asian mountains where the previous film's ending is undone to release Fu Manchu into the world once again.

This time his plot relies on kidnapping daughters of scientists around the world and locking them in a cage in his secret underground lair. Then he blackmails the scientists to build him the technology he wants, the most sinister being a death ray capable of destroying Great Britain's most notable tourist attractions (and the home of some monarchs as well). He keeps the scientists at bay with his hypnotism skills, which can make even the sweetest of scientist daughters the most ruthless of assassins. Smith and the Scotland Yard must find clues and deduce where on Earth Fu Manchu is hiding before his plans come into fruition.

The film has not aged particularly well and multiple things in it look quite silly from today's perspective. First of all, Fu Manchu as a racial stereotype seems quite un-PC, even if this film doesn't make a big scene out of his heritage, making the villain interested in mythology from all over the world. Second, the film relies quite heavily on technology, which by today's standards looks quite primitive. The limited budget has caused many of the most impressive machinery to be described, rather than shown. Manchu's ninja minions working in a computer room also looks quite stupid. And then thirdly, for a film that's set in the modern times of 1960's, some of the threats and perils the film present seem quite out of their sell-by-date, too. Fu Manchu's greatest death trap is a snake pit, which features a couple of quite friendly-looking pythons. If someone is dropped there, the film soon cuts to the pythons squirming amongst a plastic skeleton. But nevertheless these flaws, it is always a joy to see Lee in a villainous role (even so subdued as here), and the international game of cat-and-mouse is, for the most part, fun enough to follow.

★★★

Star Pilot (a.k.a. 2+5: Missione Hydra; Italy, 1966)
Director: Pietro Francisci


This goofy Italian sci-fi gem owns its logo and title to the Star Wars craze, but it was actually made over a decade before George Lucas' Big Ideas, and re-released during that space craze. In actuality it owes a lot more to the Space Race going on during that time, and American 50's sci-fi movies, which often featured a professor, a couple of quarterbacks and the cute and useless girl exploring brave new worlds.

The plot jumps all over the place. We begin in the 18th century, when a spaceship crash lands in Sardinia. There's really no good reason why this sequence needed to be shown. "Why the heck not" seems to be a recurring motif with a lot of things about this film's plot. In the modern day professor Solmi (Roland Lesaffre), his assistants, and his ravishingly beautiful, but ditzy daughter Luisa (Leontine May) are investigating some strange natural phenomena. They find the crashed spaceship inside a cave, but soon find out that they have been followed by chinese communist spies. But no matter, as they all have to witness the attack and subsequent shut-down of the ship's robots (?!). There are also other ones alive inside the ship, and the whole crew is soon kidnapped by Captain Kaena (Leonora Ruffo). They all are kidnapped and flown out of Earth to fix her race's spaceships and find their way back home.


One really can't say that Star Pilot is a non-stop thrill ride, as there are plenty of frustratingly slow-moving scenes in the film. The incredibly slow-moving spacewalk scenes in particular seem to last for ages. But it still offers such large quantities of cheesy dialogue, baffling plot points and groovy 60's era space fashion (with large boob-windows for the gals), that it's impossible to not love this thing. A woman's place is to fix coffee for the working men, whether they want to drink it or go to bed instead. In the last 10 minutes of the film, there are so many plot twists and turns that the film borders on incomprehensible. But it has a strong anti-nuke message to the world - all the more impressive when considered that it was made before the likes of Planet of the Apes.

★ or ★★★★★

Redneck (Senza ragione, Italy 1973)
Director: Silvio Narizzano


The Italian title of this crime/on-the-run flick means Without reason, which would have been a more fitting. Both titles refer to the mentally ill bank robber Memphis (Telly Savalas), who seemingly portrays some of the most crude stereotypic habits (and the thick accent) of gentlemen from the American Bible Belt. He is also prone to killing a whole lot of people just because he feels like it. Hence, without reason.

Memphis has two partners at a big gig, Mosquito (Franco Nero) and his girlfriend Maria (Ely Galleani). But they botch the jewel shop heist operation bad (particularly because they allow Maria to drive the getaway car). While switching to another car, they don't realize a small boy, Lennox Duncan (Mark Lester), is hiding in the back seat. When they find out, they decide to kidnap him. It turns out that they didn't get much money from their heist after all, which sends Memphis into lunatic rage. Mosquito attempts to save the boy from Memphis's wrath, which makes Lennox idolize him and see him as a sort of a father figure. But since law is on their tail, they need to also trust the murderous Memphis until they can get across the border.

Redneck is as cynical and nasty as Italian flicks come. The attitude towards women is quite misogynistic (just look for the scene where Memphis attempts to hire hookers) and dismissive. It's the sort of film that will show happy German children dancing around the tree and the next moment drown them in a sinking trailer. The film's humor is quite black, is what I'm saying. And a bit odd, too. Mosquito spends time shaving naked in front of a mirror, with Lennox looking admiringly. When Mosquito leaves, Lennox checks whether his penis is as big. The film goes all the way with its craziest ideas, which is also why particularly Savalas' scenery-chewing overacting as a total maniac tends to get tiring. But it's a tough, hard flick with very unexpected plot developments and as such it's very much worth a look.

★★★ 1/2

Dragon on Fire (Guai quan guai zhao, Hong Kong 1981)
Director: Joseph Velasco


The most hilarious moments I've ever had in Night Visions (or really, anywhere else for that matter) have been with several incredibly stupid bruceploitation flicks. It's been a few years since we saw Bruce Lee clones at the festival, which makes it all the merrier that the first full night ended with a flick with no fewer than three of them! Yes, Bruce Li, Bruce Lei and Dragon lee all star in this bonkers kung fu epic. Pity that they are never on screen together.

This is the sort of bargain bin martial arts film that has been created by stitching together leftover pieces from previous films. Or at least that's what some friends with expertize on these films figured. That's why it makes little to no sense and trying to sum the plot reasonably is a fool's errand. There are several Bruce Lee-looking martial arts masters arriving to a small village to save it from ruthless gangsters. Plenty of hijinks ensue. The first half of the film in particular has multiple comedic subplots from running away from the landlord in fast-motion and whatnot.

It doesn't seem to be enough that all the lead actors look like Bruce Lee, the film also deliberately tries to confuse the audience with them. That's why one of the protagonists is named Dragon Young and the other Dragon Hung, which is mentioned in the dialogue over and over again. The third Bruce is Hung's brother and creatively named Bruce Hung. While the first two fight gangsters, he spends most of his time arguing with a Buddhist monk about whether it's OK to beat criminals to death. Surprisingly, the monk seems quite liberal on the subject. My whole view of Buddhism has been shattered! I like how the film is completely unapologetic in its shamelessness and extremely un-PC. Bolo Young makes an appearance and is being called "a large body with a very retarded mind." The fights aren't as bad as the storytelling and the goofy comedy in this one, but aren't that spectacular either.

But these kind of films can only be rated on whether they are boring or not. Dragon on Fire is not boring. In fact, even though the plot makes no sense, people appear and disappear to various locations with odd cuts and it's generally a very stupid basic western plot, the film can pace its humor, action and general insanity in suitable doses and thus it never frustrates the viewer. The end fight does take 20 minutes, but the best tricks are saved for it, and with cross-cutting two fights, the thing works quite well, too. Even if it could use even a little trimming. Talk about finding gold in the trash can.

★ or ★★★★★

Saturday, 2 June 2012

Sequels to Prometheus


Today is the world premiere date of the highly anticipated new Ridley Scott film Prometheus. Unless I'm much mistaken, it will make a mint at the box office. And in Hollywood, success means sequels! But fortunately, since I'm currently traveling through time, I had the good chance to see actually four different sequels to Prometheus, each directed by a well-known name! So keep your eyes peeled because I have a feeling we haven't heard the last from the universe of Prometheus yet!

Alien (1979)
Director: Ridley Scott


OK, time to come clean. The link-bait that I am, I actually took on to review the Alien saga as "Aliens" is one of the most regular search results that has brought visitors here. And like Ridley Scott has taught us before, those strange and wonderful visitors are something we should fear, if we are to keep our virginal faces intact.

With the rate it's been parodied, remade, homaged and flat-out stolen (it seems, by Ridley Scott himself as well), it's hard to believe there is still someone who doesn't know the story of the film. The mining ship Nostromo lands on a distant planet to look for the sender of a distress signal. They find the planet deserted and the distress signal to be ancient. But one of the crew members, Kane (John Hurt), has an unfortunate run-in with a creature described as a "face-hugger", that latches itself in his face and won't let go. A day passes and the hugger drops dead. But Kane and the others have some all new worries, as an infant alien creature bursts through his belly. it's up to the other crew members to find the alien, hiding somewhere in the Nostromo, before it kills again.

At it's core, Alien is a serious remake of John Carpenter's Dark Star, co-written by Dan O'Bannon. O'Bannon had a lot of fun with blue-collar space workers with Carpenter's film, and it featured them searching for a deadly alien on board their spaceship. In that case, the alien was a red beach ball with some tentacles. Scott wisely elected for something more sinister and went to the Swiss surrealist H.R. Giger for designs. Suitably for a film that concerns sexual subtexts, the main alien was to look like a combination of a huge penis and vagina dentata.


Scott's film is a seminal ponderous 70's sci-fi film, and that is why it moves along quite slowly. Viewers accustomed to the faster pace of the sequels might well forget that. But we also get to hang around with the crew quite a lot, and see that the future isn't as glamorous and fabled as it's seen in most other sci-fi epics. They still need working class slobs to do the heavy work. One of the theses of the film is as to how far are these poor souls expendable for company's gains. The person representing these views is in fact discovered to not even be human, but an artificial copy. The maternal spaceship computer also shows HAL-like qualities while being completely true to her actual mission. These ideas are quite progressive to be found on a film made in an age before the neo-liberal profit-before-everything-else agenda has poisoned all businesses and politics.


The other major subtext, as I mentioned, is sexuality. Scott made sure as to write every character as asexual before casting the actors. The alien presents the primordial sexual fears of penetration and castration at the same time. Rape and pregnancy are fears here for the both sexes, and the aftermath of them both are bloody. There are no clear romances between the crewmen aboard, so there's no cheap teen slasher flick moralizing. At the time the film was made it was very progressive to see who would in the end turn out to be the strongest-minded and the one person able to destroy the sexual threat. But there is a sense of exploitation and stripping down just for the hell of it to get asses into seats.

Alien is an impressive work, but for me at least, impossible to look nowadays without seeing the legacy it left behind, which wasn't for smart thrillers, sci-fi, or horror movies with subtext to emerge, but to bring back the monster movie, and try to duplicate everything on display here as cheap as possible.

★★★★

Aliens (1986)
Director: James Cameron


The sequel, on the other hand, kicks unholy ass. James Cameron didn't rely on making as subtext-heavy sequel, but had enough gravy to make the beef tastier. This is an action film about the war traumas of Vietnam and the mentality of an American soldier (or rather, space marine).

Ripley's (Sigourney Weaver) escape capsule is found 57 years after floating in space in suspended animation. When finally rescued and awoken, Ripley finds out that no one knows of the Alien threat. In fact, the planet Nostromo's crewmembers found facehugger eggs on, has been colonized. Contact with the colony has also recently been abruptly ended. A team of hard-assed space marines are sent to investigate and to rescue the survivors, with Ripley working on a consultant should they run into Aliens. And they do.

Image courtesy of Rob Clifford.

Ripley, alone, abandoned and confused, puts her trust into new people in the film's beginning. As it turns out, the slimy yuppies are untrustworthy and just want to use her for their own gains. The decades that have passed have changed nothing. This time the real people representing the company were much less humane than the artificial man. Ripley overcomes her prejudicm against androids by the end of the film. But Ripley's real triumph is to build a new core family.


Newt (Carrie Henn) is a ten-year-old that has been the sole survivor of the Alien attack. Ripley shows her responsibility by taking her under her wing. By the end that also means she has to go out her way to protect her. Ripley embraces he motherhood instincts she didn't have the chance to with her own daughter 57 years ago, as she was far away, mining planets. Ripley also manages to find a suitable suitor (altough this is only implied) with Michael Biehn's Cpl. Hicks. He's the only man level-headed enough to survive, while others are prone to be over-confidently macho (William Hope's Lt. Gorman) dumb, or too whining and immasculine (Bill Paxton's Pvt. Hudson).

The men break their true character when they, for the first time, see war as a chaotic battle with no means of control. The American idea of going in headfirst and just shooting everything that moves is not such a good idea against a hidden, organized enemy that knows their surroundings better than the invaders. Unlike Vietcong, Aliens can also move underneath the floorboards and have acid for blood. The loss of control and attempts at gaining them are core issues here, as is rooting for the underdogs to survive while the jocks can't figure out what to do. And all the while it is ridiculously entertaining to watch it. Aliens is truly one of the very best action films of the 80's, a big dose of both masculinity and critique of it.

Aliens proved to be at least as influential as the film that preceded it. And not just in movies, but in videogames. Space marines fighting off huge hoards of disgusting alien monsters has become a haystay of the medium ever since, and probably will stay that way. 

★★★★★

Alien^3 (1992)
Director: David Fincher


If a franchise has spawned two genre-defining classics, then it should be hard work to get the second sequel off the ground. Sadly, more often than not the makers just embarrass themselves, Godfather III style. The third Alien movie went through years of development hell. 20th Century Fox couldn't even come to terms on what exactly should be the main setting or the main hook. Some ideas were quite interesting (a wooden monk planet directed by Paul Schrader), while some seemed doomed to fail (Renny Harlin directing an even bigger action film set on Earth). What was clear that in many aspects, the ending of Aliens had to be undone.

So, our hard-luck heroine still couldn't get rid of all those pesky xenomorphs. A face-hugger crept into their ship at the end of Aliens and caused it to crash. Hicks and Newt die, and Bishop is junk metal. Ripley wakes up to find she's the sole woman on a prison planet. A new xenomorph is born out of a dog (or a slaughtered ox depending on which version you are watching), and runs amok on the planet.


The former music video director Fincher had a horrible time shooting the film. Fox executives seemed intent on watering down every idea he had, and thus the film simply cannot break any new ground. This is his Dune, a film he loathes so much he still renowns the film (every cut of it, no less). It is for all intents and purposes a retread of the first Alien, with attempts at a moody thriller where people get killed one by one. But rather than to cube all the fear, paranoia and social commentary, the return diminishes on all these categories. What is left is a cynical, overtly Christian fable of self-sacrifice. Which is made so cheesy that one can't get at all worked up about it.

I'm prepared to admit I'm a little extra bitter about the film just because it so willfully destroys my beloved Aliens. On the one hand, I appreciate that the film is willing to distance it so much with a very well-loved genre film. These days with internet fanboy outrage it probably couldn't be done. But, as with every other good idea the filmmakers may have had making this film, they don't manage to take the idea anywhere. The result is that the film repeats the early scenes of Aliens, with Ripley disoriented feeling the loss of her family and seeing only the future of dog-eat-dog, kill-or-be-killed. Also, Alien^3 doesn't get going as fast as Cameron could, but lingers on the melancholia and sadness. I'm all for cynicality if it is based on some insight. Here, it just works to remind that the world is bad and the people are rotten. The film's sex-hungry prisoners are so bad, they even have two Y chromosomes (this is a joke, right?). The faux-british accents and horrible dialogue don't do any favors. Even they are saints when compared to their self-obsessed wardens.

One can see at embryonic states some ideas that Fincher came to develop in Se7en, such as a "pregnant" soon-to-be-mother having doubts whether the world is too rotten to raise a child. Here, of course, the baby is a xenomorph, and the people in the film are worse than they are. The worst thing about the film is that it's so goddamn boring. It's easy to see where it is heading at each time, so it won't come as a surprise that everyone else dies, except Ripley and that she decides to do the ultimate sacrifice instead of allowing the xenomorphs be exploited by the Weyland-Yutani corporation. The imagery is once again stark, creepy and beautiful, particularly in the Special Edition, where Fincher is allowed to linger on them for a little more. That cut is a vast improvement otherwise, too, with some of the stupidest scenes removed from the film. But there really isn't that much interesting stuff to replace it with, either. The thing doesn't develop the characters, or the situation, enough for it to be in any way worth watching, whatever the cut is.

Theatrical Cut: ★ 1/2
Special Edition: ★★

Alien: Resurrection (1997)
Director: Jean-Pierre Jeunet


The most maligned of all the sequels is Amélie and Delicatessen director Jean-Pierre Jeunet's attempt to revitalize the genre. The film does have a huge share of flaws, but at least it attempts to break some new ground and the end result is more watchable than Alien^3 in every way. I only have very few films that I feel a bit guilty about liking, but this is so hated, it is definitely in my short list of actual guilty pleasures.

200 years after the events of Alien^3, Ripley and the Alien queen inside her are cloned. The Queen is successfully removed from her body, but the cloning process has given them both some qualities from the other. Ripley is all, "here we go again", and "you gonna die, boyeee". And she's right, because soon the Aliens attack the Resurrection ship and it's passengers. Some of whom are Space Pirates for some reason.

Pirates need water to survive!
The actors and characters in the film are both its greatest strength and it's biggest weakness. One cares infinitely more about Winona Ryder's Call, Dominique Pinon's Vriess and Ron Perlman's Johner than anyone except Ripley in Pt. III. But still, the direction for the actors is simply atrocious. One can easily see Jeunet couldn't speak much English and thus the quality varies form here to here. Dan Hedaya steals the early film with his delightfully malicious General Martin Perez that's so over-the-top he wouldn't be out of place from Romero's zombie films. Jeunet also brings a lot of goofiness and comedy to the film. I almost had a vibe as if the film had been engineered to destroy the franchise, much like Joe Dante's Gremlins 2. But it is probably unintentional.

But in any way, the film captures the zeitgeist of the 90's much in the same way the first two films did. The film concerns itself with the problems of genetic engineering and cloning. The most telling scene about this is the one where Ripley meets an incomplete clone of herself that begs to be killed. What rights to the dead have to be cloned? Are people the property of their genetic code holders? The military complex's biological warfare has developed a whole new layer of evil. And also the sexual undertones of the Alien films are taken to grotesque new levels, with disturbing imagery that's borderline pornographic. Jeunet also knows how to handle the visual side, and the dark, technical spaceship interiors feel familiar and brand new at the same time.


There are plenty of thrilling scenes, the underwater dive with Facehugger eggs on the surface is easily the most exciting and well-executed. But then, they had to spoil the whole thing with the unbelievably stupid last twenty minutes with one of the worst monsters in motion picture history. I would like to think Kevin Smith got the inspiration for the Golgatan in Dogma from this Newborn creature. Still, the film is a lot better than Delicatessen co-director Marc Caro's attempt at sci-fi Dante 01, so Jeunet should be proud.

★★ 1/2

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...