A Coy Decoy (1941)
Article 5485 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 7-27-2017
Directed by Robert Clampett
Featuring the voice of Mel Blanc
Country: USA
What it is: Daffy Duck cartoon

In a bookstore where books come to life, Daffy finds repose in “The Lake”, only to be pursued by the ravenous “Wolf of Wall Street”.

The extra fantastic content in this cartoon is, of course, that it takes place in an environment where characters in books come to life and other characters can enter the environments on the covers of books. Warner Brothers used this gimmick in several other cartoons, such as HAVE YOU GOT ANY CASTLES?, and these cartoons can usually be rather entertaining. This one, however, is a bit of a disappointment, as it never really goes wild with the idea, and the main action in the cartoon mostly takes place in a single book where the wolf lays a trap for Daffy. It also features a few songs and a cameo appearance by Porky Pig. The laughs are a little thin here, though the final gag is perhaps the best moment.

The Capture of Bigfoot (1979)
Article 5480 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 7-16-2017
Directed by Bill Rebane
Featuring Janus Raudkivi, Randolph Rebane, Stafford Morgan
Country: USA
What it is: Sasquatch shenanigans in the snow

A ruthless small-time entrepreneur tries to capture a Bigfoot-style creature known as the Arak.

The IMDB reviews for this one mostly either refer to this one as a camp classic of sorts and or as a worthless piece of dreck. And, given that it’s directed by Wisconsin film-maker Bill Rebane, it’s tempting to declare open season on this one and give it what-for. However, my heart isn’t in it, and I’m in rather a forgiving mood today. Maybe it’s because the thing that most struck me about this movie was the way it captures its “Wisconsin-in-the-winter” milieu so authentically that I often found myself appreciating the movie on that alone; watching big vehicles plodding through the snow, people trudging through drifts, slipping on icy patches, and reminding myself how Rebane was out in the middle of this filming it is something that is rarely captured by Hollywood productions, and I find myself glad that regional film-makers were out there plugging away on productions like this. This is not to say that the movie is good; though it does show moments of competence, it’s full of dull stretches, and when it’s at its worst, it’s horrendous. The acting is the worst culprit this time, with the scenery-chewing entrepreneur and the annoying Bogart-imitating sheriff the worst offenders; the scene where these two characters meet is the worst in the movie. In short, I don’t quite see it as either a camp classic or a worthless piece of dreck; I see it as a bad movie that has its uses.

Captain America (1979)
TV-Movie
Article 5459 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 5-22-2017
Directed by Rod Holcomb
Featuring Reb Brown, Len Birman, Heather Menzies-Urich
Country: USA
What it is: Super-ho-hum-hero

To save a young man’s life after an attack from criminals seeking the plans for a neutron bomb, he is given a steroid developed by his father from his own blood that maximizes his latent potential. It saves his life and gives him superpowers which he uses against the criminals.

The success of “The Incredible Hulk” notwithstanding, the seventies were not a good time for television to take on superhero stories, and I think the mentioned series only worked because its premise lent itself to a “The Fugitive” format more than a crimefighter format. Granted, the special effects for TV series may not have been quite up to par yet, but I don’t think that was the main problem. I think there was sort of a glum timidity at work that made it feel like the makers didn’t think people would buy into the superhero concept. Furthermore, it often felt like nobody was really having fun with the idea; in this one, for example, the writing is uninspired, the direction stodgy, the acting bland, and the presentation simply dull. If I were making a superhero movie (TV or otherwise), I would at least have the music during the opening scenes be rousing and exciting; this movie opens with the hero driving around in a van while some anonymous laid-back music plays, the type of music that just seams to scream that not much is happening and things aren’t likely to improve. Quite frankly, the only thing in this movie that I would call “cool” would be the way the motorcycle seems to explode out of the back of the van when it comes into action. The action sequences are nothing special, and the movie probably has a high IVT*. Not recommended.

• IVT is a new term I coined; it stands for Index of Vehicular Tedium. It stands for the percentage of the movie’s running time that consists of footage of vehicles moving around in a non-action scene mode.

CASTLE KEEP (1969)
Article 5433 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 4-23-2017
Directed by Sydney Pollack
Featuring Burt Lancaster, Patrick O’Neal, Jean-Pierre Aumont
Country: USA
What it is: War movie

During WWII, a group of eight misfit soldiers are stationed in a French castle that is the home of paintings and antiquities. When it turns out to be directly in the route of a German invasion force, the major decides to make a stand at the castle.

Some of the sources from which I cull my hunt list of fantastically-themed films do not explain the reasoning behind the inclusion of certain of them, and occasionally I find myself in the position of trying to figure out why a film that doesn’t seem to qualify (such as this one) was included. I can think of three possible reasons. First, there’s a sequence where a painting comes to life, though it is clearly in the imagine of a soldier. The second is when an attempt to destroy a Volkswagen Beetle goes awry, one of the characters speculates that it may be supernatural. The third is a little more difficult to pin down; there’s something of a surreal, “out of time” feel to the soldiers of the modern day finding themselves in an ancient castle with a moat, and the Peter Falk character speculates as to whether they’re in the right war. For the record, I consider all of these a bit questionable, and the movie is marginal at best in terms of its fantastic content.

As far as the movie itself is concerned, Burt Lancaster felt it was a commentary on the Vietnam war, and is in some ways an anti-war film. It’s certainly difficult to miss the point when we see orchards destroyed, architecture blown up, works of art burned and statues exploded, and the irony of the situation is that they all might have survived if a stand had not been made at this location. The movie’s first half is eccentric and a little bizarre as we meet the various characters and learn about their quirks. The movie becomes much more predictable during the second half where it becomes a full war movie. All in all, it’s interesting, but only sporadically effective.

LA CIGALE ET LA FOURMI (1927)
aka The Grasshopper and the Ant, Jugendrausch, Eva and the Grasshopper
Article 5432 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 4-22-2017
Directed by Georg Asagaroff and Wladyslaw Starewicz
Featuring Camilla Horn, Gustav Frohlich, Else Burkhardt
Country: Germany
What it is: Fable

Grasshoppers party away the summer while the ants work diligently saving for the winter. What happens to the grasshoppers when winter comes?

For the record, I don’t think I’ve seen this complete movie. Two directors are listed, but one of my sources says that Starewicz only directed the animated section. However, my copy is all animated; there is no live action at all, so I’m wondering if for some reason the print I saw was only the Starewicz section of the movie. At any rate, what I saw was self-contained; it tells the well-known fable, though in Starewicz’s own style. The grasshoppers party in a nightclub, playing bizarre musical instruments as the patrons dance. Meanwhile, the ants are trying to work, often while hindered by the pranks and jokes of the other insects. As usual, it’s very creatively done, though occasionally it is a bit difficult to figure out what’s going on. It even has a bit of poignancy; the short ends with a funeral and a crying family of insects. Starewicz’s work is dazzling as always. I just wish I knew more about the full movie and I wonder about the footage I’m missing.

CAMELOT (1967)
Article 5431 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 4-21-2017
Directed by Joshua Logan
Featuring Richard Harris, Vanessa Redgrave, Franco Nero
Country: USA
What it is: Arthurian Musical

On the eve of his invasion of the castle of Sir Lancelot to retrieve Queen Guenevere, King Arthur speculates on the events of his life that brought him to this pass.

Adaptations of the story of King Arthur do not automatically qualify as examples of the fantastic genres for me. It mostly depends on how the character of Merlyn is personified; though sometimes he is portrayed as a wizard with supernatural powers, I’ve also seen him portrayed as little more than a trusted adviser to the king in movies that are striving to be more “realistic”, probably from directors who prefer to approach the legendary king as a historical figure rather than as a man of legend. This version is based on the novels of T.H. White, and that’s a good sign, since the Merlyn in this version was clearly a wizard. However, at this stage of the action, he exists as a memory, and though he appears twice during the movie, they may be as snatches of memory rather than as a mystical creature. Fortunately, there is one event in the middle of the movie that could be interpreted as a miracle, so whether this version of the story qualifies as a fantasy is a matter of interpretation.

Of course, this being a musical, the emphasis is not going to be on the adventures and exploits of the knights; in fact, only a tiny handful of them are even given names in this production. No, the emphasis was exactly where I feared it would be; this movie amounts to three hours of love triangle. I was hoping the emphasis would shift a bit once Mordred shows up two-thirds of the way through, but no, he’s mostly there to serve the triangle plot as well. And for me, the Arthur/Guenevere/Lancelot triangle is one of the least interesting parts of the story, though I do understand how central it is to the whole picture. Combine that with the fact that I’m not a musical fan (and the songs for this movie aren’t exciting enough to win me over), and I’m afraid I have to say that I found this one mostly a bore. The only scene that really caught my attention was the one with the potential miracle; it’s a scene where Lancelot is challenged by three jousters. The actors do a fine job; I’m especially impressed with Redgrave’s performance. However, ultimately, this movie largely reminds me of how much I like the song about Camelot from MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL better than anything here.

CAMERA MAKES WHOOPEE (1935)
Article 5421 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 4-11-2017
Directed by Norman McLaren
Cast unknown, but features a camera
Country: UK
What it is: Experimental film

A camera chronicles the preparations for the Glasgow Arts School Ball, and then attends the proceedings.

The first thing I noticed about this 24-minute experimental film is that there is no sound. This seemed odd for a film that is obviously steeped in music; we see instruments being played, dancing, and the presentation of two ballets. However, I began to realize that it’s the camera’s point of view, and the camera is an eye and not an ear, and we’re experiencing everything from the camera’s point of view. Still, it seems risky to go for an experimental film this long without the help of music, but oddly enough, I found myself quite engaged with the whole thing.

The film falls roughly into two parts; the first documents the preparation for the ball, and we see sets being built, posters being painted, musical instruments preparing themselves (via stop-motion animation), etc. McLaren makes extensive use of double exposure and other camera tricks to document this section. The second section features the ball itself, and we experience the music vicariously through watching the instruments being played and seeing the dancers in motion. Split screen comes into play during parts of this, and some of the dancing features ghostlike figures in abstract landscapes. We take a break for food and drink, and then once it’s all over, the instruments put themselves away and the camera retires for the night (literally).

I ended up finding this one quite fun. The cinematic tricks are entertaining, it achieves a certain visual music, and it even displays a sense of humor on occasion. Granted, you need to be in the mood for experimental film to enjoy this one to begin with, but I certainly found it more engrossing than most of the examples of abstract animation I’ve encountered. And though one could argue about whether something like this properly belongs in the realm of fantastic cinema, this short has an out – the machine ballet in the second half features dancing robots.

THE CAR (1977)
Article 5390 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 3-10-2017
Directed by Elliot Silverstein
Featuring James Brolin, Kathleen Lloyd, John Marley
Country: USA
What it is: Death on four wheels

A killer car is on the loose in a small Utah community. Can the law enforcement officers stop it?

My first brush with this movie was when my wife told me that she’d seen the trailer; it apparently sent her into fits of laughter. So you can imagine that I didn’t go into this one with the highest of expectations. Fortunately, the movie was much better than I expected; the car is creepy enough to pass muster, it uses silence very effectively, and there are moments in the story that are really unexpected. Yet, at least partially because the concept itself doesn’t seem promising, it is always skirting the edge of being campy and comic. The movie also has a sense of weirdness that sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t; the “taunting from the cemetery” sequence and the scene where one character is injured by being knocked aside by the car’s door suddenly swinging open were scenes I found more head-scratching than effective. Also, given the powers that the car exhibits, I find it hard to believe that anyone would really believe that the car was defeated at the end of the movie, but that may be intentional, since the movie heavily hints at a sequel that never came. I will say this much; the movie did hold my interest throughout, and there are not a lot of movies that can do that.

CINQ MINUTES DE CINEMA PUR (1926)
Article 5251 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 9-18-2016
Directed by Henri Chomette
No cast
Country: France
What it is: Experimental film

No plot

If the title translates as FIVE MINUTES OF PURE CINEMA, then I have to say that’s a good title for an experimental film; I’d expect it to be one with a title like that. In this case, what it amounts to is a series of shots of unidentifiable glassy objects followed by some shots of trees. Much of the film is static; we see an object and it fades out as a new object (or a new view of the same object) fades back in. There are a few segments which include movement, but not many. And, for me, that’s one of the problems with this one; I would think movement would be essential for a work to be “pure cinema”; static shots have the air of watching a display of photographs. In fact, in comparison with most of the experimental work I’ve seen, this one is rather dull. Still, there is a chance that the lack of a musical soundtrack in the copy I found might have had a detrimental effect on my viewing; this is the type of short that screams for music. As it is, it’s a bit of a disappointment, and doesn’t quite live up to the title. And I’m not sure anything about this one could be properly said to have any fantastic content.

THE COUNTRY COUSIN (1936)
Article 5221 by Dave Sindelar
Date: 8-3-2016
Directed by Wilfred Jackson
No voice cast
Country: USA
What it is: Disney Silly Symphony

A country mouse is invited to the city by his posh cousin to discover a world of plenty as well as a world of stress and fear.

One of the things I really like about many of the Disney cartoons is the degree to which the animated creations are given personality and character. Both the city mouse and the country mouse here are given their own distinct set of mannerisms, and much of the humor of the cartoon is character driven. This is actually quite a feat when you consider that there is no dialogue to the cartoon; the characters are developed through body language, with a bit of help from the musical score. Initially, it looked like it was going to be an early variation of the “Tom and Jerry” plot, but it’s quite a ways into the cartoon before the feline appears and it only remains in the action for about a minute. My favorite segment of the cartoon is near the end, where the country mouse ends up out on the street at the mercy of the city, and ends up being terrorized by free-floating blaring horns among other things. Sure, the country mouse/city mouse concept is pretty old, but Disney does a solid and satisfying job with it. I liked this one.