DOG FACTORY (1904)
Article 2056 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-31-2006
Posting Date: 3-30-2007
Director Unknown
Cast Unknown

Enterprising businessmen maintain a thriving business turning dogs into sausages – and back again.

The concept of a machine that would turn dogs into sausages actually pops up a few times in early cinema. Apparently, this was a common theme in vaudeville at the time as well. Apparently, turning a dog into sausages doesn’t hurt him, and if you want him back, just pop the sausages back in and voila! Instant Dog. This movie stretches the idea to four minutes and pretty much exhausts the premise. My favorite touch – the sausages are hung on several hooks in the shop, each marked with the breed of dog the sausage came from.

Ahh, the joys of early movie-making…

DOCTOR DOLITTLE (1967)
Article 2052 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-27-2006
Posting Date: 3-26-2007
Directed by Richard Fleischer
Featuring Rex Harrison, Samantha Eggar, Anthony Newley

A veterinarian who can talk to animals sets out on a quest to find a giant pink sea snail.

A big-budget musical version of a children’s classic? I went into this one expecting an exercise in excess on the level of CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANG, but such is definitely not the case. This movie projects an air of genteel whimsy, and it never once lets excess destroy this air. Yet therein lies the problem; genteel whimsy is not compelling or exciting, and if a movie is going to maintain interest level over a two-and-a-half-hour running time, it needs something compelling and exciting. But the songs (which aren’t particularly strong in the first place) are underplayed and muted, the dancing is virtually nonexistent (I think the pushme-pullyu has a few steps), the plot is extremely slight, the animals are surprisingly dull (Chee-Chee the chimp doesn’t engage in a single animal antic throughout the movie, and does Gip the dog do anything?), and the crowd scenes mostly have people standing around or doing uninteresting things). The only scene that really tries to instill any energy into the proceedings is an early scene that illustrates why the doctor abandoned his practice on humans, and, unless you really think a series of gags that mostly involve people stepping on the foot of a man with gout to be the height of hilarity, the scene is awful. The end result is that the movie pays the price of avoiding energy and excitement; it becomes terribly dull for much of its running time, despite the fact that it maintains its genteel whimsy. Still, I suspect that, whatever the flaws of this movie, I’d still prefer it to the 1998 Eddie Murphy remake.

DONKEY SKIN (1970)
aka PEAU D’ANE
Article 2051 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 9-26-2006
Posting Date: 3-25-2007
Directed by Jacques Demy
Featuring Catherine Deneuve, Jean Marais, Jacques Perrin

A king vows to his dying queen that he will marry again when he finds a woman lovelier than her. The only woman he finds to match this description is his own daughter, the princess. He vows to marry her, but she disguises herself in a donkey skin, escapes with the help of her fairy godmother, and poses as a scullion in a local village.

This lovely French fairy tale would serve as a perfect companion to Cocteau’s BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (Cocteau’s name appears in the credits, though I don’t know enough French to say what his contribution was, though I suspect it was of an inspirational nature, as he was seven years dead when this was made). It may lack the bizarre surrealism of the aforementioned Cocteau movie, but it’s elegant, delightful, beautifully photographed with lovely sets, and makes stunning use of color throughout. It is also laced with a fine sense of humor, and there are touches of weirdness to the proceedings; there’s a donkey that produces precious jewels out of its -well, I’ll leave you to find this out for yourself-, the households of the two royal families are color-coded (right down to the skin color of the servants), there is an ugly old woman who spits up toads on occasion, and the king uses a decidedly modern form of transportation (a helicopter) in the final scenes. It’s also a fairy tale I was not familiar with, so the story did come as a surprise, though you’ll probably figure out that its writer (Charles Perrault) is the same one who gave us “Cinderella”, as there are some very marked similarities between the tales. Wonderful work from Catherine Deneuve, Jean Marais and Delphine Seyrig (as the fairy godmother who has her own agenda).

DISCIPLE OF DEATH (1972)
Article 2050 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-25-2006
Posting Date: 3-24-2007
Directed by Tom Parkinson
Featuring Mike Raven, Ronald Lacey, Stephen Bradley

Two lovers make a blood vow near the grave of a suicide, and accidentally resurrect him. He is now a vampire and a Satanist.

All the best moments of this movie come in the last thirty minutes; it is here that the movie shows a modicum of wit, displays a certain creativity in coming up with a new monster mythology, actually gives a hint of the fairy-tale feel that the opening of the movie seems to promise, and it manages to dredge up a bit of energy. If this sounds like damning with faint praise, it is; when it comes right down to it, the last thirty minutes of the movie are really not that good. However, it’s worlds better than the first hour of the movie, which may be the single dullest cinematic stretch I’ve encountered this side of a Jerry Warren film; it could be more accurately renamed DISCIPLE OF SNORES. About the only point of interest I found in in this part of the movie was the presence of Louise Jameson, who would become known for playing Leela on “Doctor Who”. For the most part, it’s just an uninteresting variation on “Dracula”, and even if it does have a handful of nice touches near the end, that’s hardly enough to recommend it. The perfect insomnia cure.

DEMON SEED (1977)
Article 2049 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-24-2006
Posting Date: 3-23-2007
Directed by Donald Cammell
Featuring Julie Christie, Fritz Weaver, Gerrit Graham

A super-computer takes over the house of the estranged wife of its creator, with the intention of fertilizing her and creating a child for itself.

When I first heard of the concept of this movie, I thought it was an absurd idea, and had the script been any less well-written than it was, I’d still think so. Still, despite overcoming this obstacle, this cross between COLOSSUS: THE FORBIN PROJECT and a certain type of exploitation horror movie (THE PSYCHO LOVER is an example) doesn’t quite work. It’s certainly scary enough, and it’s downright brutal at times (Proteus is more adept at terrorizing people than is strictly necessary), and the fact that it doesn’t aspire to crude exploitation doesn’t make the movie any less queasy. At times it even aspires to a 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY type of mysticism, and you might find some interesting parallels between the two movies. My biggest problem is with the ending, and I’m not even quite sure why; there seems to be something missing, and the movie seems a little incomplete. The special effects are extremely good, and I especially like that bizarre metallic structure that Proteus creates; it looks somewhat like a three-dimensional puzzle that was popular for a while several years back. I’ve always wondered as to whether a sequel might have been planned; I, for one, am quite curious as to what would happen next.

DELIRIUM (1979)
Article 2047 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-22-2006
Posting Date: 3-21-2007
Directed by Peter Maris
Featuring Turk Cekovsky, Nick Panouzis, Terry TenBroek

A psycho-killer is on the loose, and detectives are trying to catch him. Meanwhile, criminals who have escaped justice are found hanged, and evidence indicates it was suicide, though in truth, they were murdered by a vigilante group. Are these incidents related?

Probably the best thing about this movie is its central premise; a psycho killer is hired by a vigilante group. While watching this movie, I found my mind playing around with the possible ways you could handle the story, especially in terms of how you would handle certain characters to make the story plausible. I wish the makers of the movie had bothered asking these questions; instead, we get a compendium of cop/action and psycho-killer cliches (the psycho killer is both a disturbed Vietnam vet AND impotent – the cop investigating the case has a romance with one of the witnesses – witness decides to do her own investigation instead of waiting for the police) and stupid characters (vigilantes take extra care in making their punishments look like suicide but take none of that care when knocking off their people in their own group – hitchhiker victim of psycho, despite knowing that she’s been picked up by an obviously disturbed man, uses her opportunity to get away from him to follow him down to the river, go skinny-dipping in front of him, and taunts him for not taking off his clothes and joining her – witness decide to do her own investigation instead of waiting for the police – wait, did you just hear an echo?). For all that, the movie is watchable in its own low-budget way, but I really got tired of the Vietnam flashbacks after a while.