THE DOOMSDAY MACHINE (1967)
(a.k.a. ESCAPE FROM PLANET EARTH)
Article #781 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-5-2003
Posting Date: 10-2-2003
Directed by Lee Sholem and Harry Hope
Featuring Bobby Van, Ruta Lee, Henry Wilcoxon

When China sets off a doomsday machine to destroy the Earth, a rocketship is sent to Venus manned by four men and three women.

Within the first ten minutes of the movie, I was given two plot points. 1) There was an ominous machine in China that had only seventy-two hours before it went off, and 2) an expedition to Venus was suddenly pushed ahead in time, and three men of the all-man crew were unexpectedly replaced with women. With these two facts, I was quickly able to piece together that almost all the rest of the movie would be about seven people interacting with each other in a spaceship. The special effects are subpar, and the dialogue is hackneyed and hopeless. The movie does have a few small surprises after this point; one of the characters is even more of a jerk than you might expect, a death scene in an airlock is a little nastier than you might have anticipated, and the thoroughly unsatisfying ending comes out of left field, and leaves me suspecting that the reason that the movie ends this way is to save money by sparing the crew from either finding a new location or building a new set for the last scene. You might like this if you’re partial to talky space journey movies; as for me, it reminded me of an eight-hour drive I once took on the interstate through South Dakota, where the monotonous sameness of the scenery almost lulled me into a slumber, which can be pleasant in its own way, but is not to be recommended when you’re the one driving.

DEAR DEAD DELILAH (1972)
Article #778 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-2-2003
Posting Date: 9-29-2003
Directed by John Farris
Featuring Agnes Moorehead, Will Geer, Michael Ansara

People searching for lost money on a southern plantation are being stalked by an axe murderer. Could it be the matriarch’s new housekeeper, who was just released from prison for killing her mother with an axe thirty years ago?

This movie has one of those alliterative titles that makes it tempting to come up with a catchy alliterative three-word phrase to describe the movie, such as “dull dreary disappointment”, but that seems like a downright dreadful dismissal. Unfortunately, this lame axe murder movie lives up all too well to that description; it’s cheap, uninspired, flaccidly directed, and what very few interesting ideas it has are poorly handled. It was another of those movies that came in the wake of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE in which an older actress graces a horror movie with her presence; in this case, Agnes Moorehead, who seems to be on autopilot here (it would be her last movie). The best performance here is by Will Geer (Grandpa Walton; didn’t I just talk about Grandma the other day?), but I wouldn’t get too attached to his character, if you know what I mean. It was produced by Jack Clement, who also served as a musical producer for several country singers, and there is a faint country air to the movie (it was shot in Nashville), but not enough to really make a difference. Gore fans may get the most satisfaction here, as some of the deaths are on the bloody side, but even they will probably spend quite a bit of time at the fast forward button. This one is for axe murder completists only.

DEAFULA (1974)
Article #777 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-1-2003
Posting Date: 9-28-2003
Directed by Peter Wechsburg
Featuring Peter Wechsburg, James Randall, Dudley Helstreet

A theology student who is the son of a preacher has fits where he turns into a vampire and attacks people.

This is a weird one, and part of the reason is that it is the only movie made entirely in sign language for the hearing impaired; there is voice-over dialogue for those not able to read sign language, and the overall effect is that of bad dubbing. Still, it would have been a weird one even if it hadn’t been done in sign language. The movie itself is all over the board; it jumps from gritty to campy to moving to comic to pretentious so often that I don’t really know what to make of it. The main character is actually in a very interesting situation; he is essentially a split personality trying to reconcile the good side and the evil side, and his dilemma has a certain poignance. However, when he turns into the vampire, he looks ludicrous, with a changed hairstyle, a cape, and a fake nose that makes him look like Cyrano de Bergerac. The Van Helsing role is played for laughs; his main way of arguing is to point out that he is from London, and therefore knows how to spot a vampire. There are touches in this movie that are like nothing I’ve ever seen, including a subplot involving a character who eats peanuts without shelling them and one character who is missing his hands (an effect that is achieved by having him wear tin cans on his hands; I kid you not), which, if you think about it in terms of a movie in sign language, makes him a mute. This is definitely one of the odder movies out there.

THE DEATH KISS (1932)
Article #770 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 4-24-2003
Posting Date: 9-21-2003
Directed by Edwin L. Marin
Featuring David Manners, Adrienne Ames, Bela Lugosi

When an actor is murdered on a film set, the primary suspect is an actress. A mystery writer tries to keep one step ahead of the police in an effort to clear the actress from suspicion.

This forgotten horror isn’t really a horror movie, and as far as fantastic elements go, it may have a hint of science fiction in the modus operandi of one of the murders, but it’s pretty slight. However, it might be of interest to horror fans in that it features three actors from DRACULA; namely, Bela Lugosi, Edward Van Sloan, and David Manners; the latter in particular has never been more fun than he is here as the wise-cracking mystery writer intent on finding the solution before the police do. In fact, the whole movie is a surprisingly sturdy treat; it’s well-directed at a brisk pace and has an almost dizzying array of colorful characters that pop up as the story unwinds. It also has some scenes that make subtle but effective use of hand-coloring, that is, if you get hold of the right print. And whether or not Bela Lugosi is a red herring, at least he doesn’t stalk around acting suspicious the whole movie (a sure sign that he’s innocent), so you’re really left wondering if he’s the villain till the final reel. Once again, even if this one doesn’t really belong to the fantastic genres, it is definitely recommended.

DIRIGIBLE (1931)
Article #709 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 2-22-2003
Posting Date: 7-22-2003
Directed by Frank Capra
Featuring Jack Holt, Ralph Graves, Fay Wray

An attempt to reach the South Pole by means of a dirigible is made.

This early marginally-science-fictional directorial effort by Frank Capra is quite entertaining, even if the romantic triangle storyline that pervades a good deal of it is hackneyed; he is very good at keeping the story moving and holding your interest. However, it’s the special effects which take center stage here, what with the shots of the dirigibles and the planes flying among them. Unfortunately, for this to have maximum effect, you need something that I don’t have; a good print. Mine is in very bad shape, with the sound inaudible at times and human beings occasionally looking nothing more than amorphous blobs, and I hope someday to be able to upgrade to a better print. It is entertaining nevertheless, especially towards the end when it becomes almost harrowing. I find it not at all surprising that Frank Capra went on to a quite distinguished directorial career after making this one.

DRACULA (1931) – Spanish Version
Article #707 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 2-20-2003
Posting date: 7-20-2003
Directed by George Melford
Featuring Carlos Villarias, Lupita Tovar, Barry Norton

Dracula moves to London from Transylvania and sets his sights on the daughter of the doctor of a sanitarium.

Shot at the same time and on the same sets as the Lugosi DRACULA, with the same script, but a different cast and crew and in Spanish, this version of the movie was forgotten for many years. The print does not appear to be in the best of condition, but I’m just glad it’s still around for comparison. Despite having the same script, this version runs almost a full half hour longer than the Browning version; I suspect a lot more was cut out during the editing of the latter. Quite frankly, this one is much better directed, eschewing Browning’s static style and staging many of the sequences in a more interesting fashion, and though it could use some judicious trimming here and there, I didn’t nod off at all on this version. Pablo Alvarez Rubio gives Dwight Frye a run for his money as Renfield, and Eduardo Arozamena as Van Helsing has an insane stare that makes him seem just as crazy. Carlos Villarias is good, but his performance pales next to Lugosi’s star-making turn in the Browning version. I dream of what it would be like to have combined the strengths of each of the two versions and come up with a superior version of the story. Apparently, the director, George Melford, could not speak Spanish and had to work with his cast through translators.

DR. NO (1962)
Article #700 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 2-13-2003
Posting Date: 7-13-2003
Directed by Terence Young
Featuring Sean Connery, Ursula Andress, Joseph Wiseman

James Bond investigates the murder of an associate in Jamaica who was investigating the causes of missile sabotage at Cape Canaveral.

Somehow, I find it serendipitous and quite fitting that Musing article #700 should be an 007 movie, though it is a coincidence. However, never really having been a James Bond devotee, I can’t really get excited about it. It’s not that I think the James Bond movies are poorly made or are not good examples of their type of entertainment; it’s just that I’ve always found them and their ilk to be just a little too ingratiatingly escapist for my taste, with their emphasis on violence, stunts and sex over plot seeming like an overly obvious and easy formula. Therefore, I think it’s vital that my opinions on these movies be taken with a grain of salt, perhaps discarded in their entirety; I can never quite turn my mind off to the extent that I would need to do to enjoy them fully.

Of course, this was the first of the series, and it takes itself a little more seriously. It does have a plot, but it’s easy to miss because it doesn’t dwell on plot points for any length of time (they’re in a hurry to get to the sex and violence). There are touches I like and touches I don’t like; as an example of the former, I do like how Dr. No’s physical handicap plays a subtle but marked impact on his ultimate fate near the end of the movie, and as an example of the latter, I’m always annoyed when supposedly intelligent characters mistake machines for living creatures (the “dragon” is so obviously a motor vehicle that I don’t see how anyone could possibly mistake it for a “real” dragon). All in all, it’s an entertaining time-killer, but for me, I’m afraid it will never be anything more than that.

DIRTY WORK (1933)
Viewing Date: 2-12-2003
Posting Date: 7-12-2003
Directed by Lloyd French
Featuring Stan Laurel, Oliver Hardy, Sam Adams

Stan and Ollis are working as chimney sweepers in the home of a mad scientist.

One of the nice things about doing a comprehensive survey of fantastic cinema is that I end up watching a fairly wide variety of movies. As it happens, practically every great comedian has ventured into the realms of the fantastic at one point or another, so I get to touch on a lot of them. Unfortunately, it is often not their best work; I certainly hope no one judges the talents of Charlie Chaplin on the strength of HIS PREHISTORIC PAST (though, in all honesty, some of his other works will be represented before all is said and done). This one gives me another chance to touch on Laurel and Hardy, though I don’t quite rate this one with their best shorts. It follows a standard pattern for them; it gives them a specific profession and allows them to wreak havoc with it. The chimney-sweeping scenes are the best parts of this short, though the snidely sarcastic butler gets in a few zingers. The mad scientist plot (he has created a rejuvenation formula) is what causes this short to qualify as fantastic cinema; it is also there primarily to set up the final gag. All in all, this is pretty standard Laurel and Hardy, and that is not a bad thing by any rate.

DAUGHTER OF HORROR (1955)
(a.k.a. DEMENTIA)
Article #691 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 2-4-2003
Posting date: 7-4-2003
Directed by John Parker
Featuring Adrienne Barett, Bruno Ve Sota, Ben Roseman

An insane woman murders a man and finds herself running from the police.

Fans of THE BLOB will certainly remember that freaky movie the teenagers were watching in the movie theater; here it is in all its glory. In some ways, it’s not really a horror movie, but the underlying theme of madness and the darkly disturbing surrealness of the proceedings make it more horrifying than any number of more conventional horror movies. Except for some narration provided by Ed McMahon, there is no dialogue to the movie, though to call it a silent movie is to ignore the use of sound and music throughout, and though we hear no one talk, we do hear them laugh. The movie is about madness; madness pervades every frame of this movie, every arty shot, every close-up, and it is really unlike any other movie I’ve seen in this regard. Some people love this movie; some people hate it. Me, it depends on my mood, but I do think it is one of those movies to which a closer look should be given. It also features Angelo Rossitto in a cameo role.

DEATH TAKES A HOLIDAY (1934)
Article #648 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-23-2002
Posting Date: 5-18-2003

Death manifests himself in human form for three days to try to discover why man fears him so.

I’ve heard DRACULA was advertised with the tag line “The Weirdest Love Story ever told!” (this is probably a paraphrase), but at heart, I’ve never felt that you could honestly call that movie a love story. The tag line would be much more appropriate for this one, since it ultimately boils down to what amounts to a love story. This movie is very good indeed, particularly if you consider that it is built around a concept that could have easily been handled in a cute or facile manner. Instead, it is handled as seriously as possible, with some real thought put into how death would try to come to terms with a life and an outlook that was to that point totally unfamiliar to him; much of the credit does go to Fredric March in the title role. It’s quite scary when it needs to be, particularly during the first twenty minutes. From then on, it deals with its themes with subtlety, a quiet wit, an enduring sadness, and an everpresent tension on how Death might react if crossed. It’s not perfect; some of the dialogue is self-conscious and artificial, as if the writers knew they were dealing with weighty issues and were trying to be profound. But I am certainly glad they didn’t try to turn it into a musical comedy of sorts.