FRANKENSTEIN’S CASTLE OF FREAKS (1974)
(a.k.a. TERROR! IL CASTELLO DELLE DONNE MALEDETTE)
Article #1683 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-23-2005
Posting Date: 3-22-2006
Directed by Robert Oliver
Featuring Rossano Brazzi, Michael Dunn, Edmund Perdom

Frankenstein works on a monster while various assistants yell at each other and a voyeuristic dwarf plots revenge with the help of a caveman named Ook.

This compendium of Frankenstein movie cliches has:

– a rating of PG despite having scads of nudity.

– SOUTH PACIFIC star Rossano Brazzi walking through the role of Dr. Frankenstein

– one time Oscar-nominated dwarf actor Michael Dunn in the embarassing role of the voyeuristic dwarf. He doesn’t even dub his own voice here.

– an actor billed as Boris Lugosi playing the part of Ook, the Neanderthal Man. His real name is Salvatore Baccaro, and he apparently made a career playing characters like this. He looks more Avery Schreiber than either Boris or Bela.

– a mad scientist, a monster, a dwarf, a hunchback, some women with bad clothes sense who like to take baths in front of the dwarf, some mean servants, and angry villagers.

– no sense of discernible style.

– body-builder and Sword-and-Sandal star Gordon Mitchell as Igor. I spot him in a few scenes, but he’s given precious little to do here.

– bad dubbing.

– a final message. Apparently, there’s a little bit of monster in all of us.

– a scene where the dwarf teaches the Neanderthal how to kidnap and rape a woman. Based on the rule that all the horrible people in the movie are to be killed by the monster at the end of the movie, I find it curious that the dwarf is allowed to live.

– nothing about it to recommend it, unless you find the moral profound, or just have to see Michael Dunn embarrass himself, or must see the naked women, or just like seeing Frankenstein cliches glumly trotted out without purpose or style. Though it’s not boring, it’s rather pointless and not particularly fun.

THE FLY (1958)
Article #1682 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-22-2005
Posting Date: 3-21-2006
Directed by Kurt Neumann
Featuring David Hedison, Patricia Owens, Vincent Price

When a woman with a fly obsession admits to having crushed her husband to death in a steel press, her brother-in-law and the inspector on the case both try to get the full story of what happened. It turns out that the husband had been dabbling in experiments with matter transmission, and that something went horribly wrong….

Though this movie has a good reputation, it rarely makes lists of the best science fiction movies of the period for some reason. Actually, I can somewhat understand this; one of the odd things about this movie is that some of the most memorable scenes unintentionally walk a thin line between the horrific and the comic (the scene where Delambre tries to control his arm and the scene in the web come to mind), and how you react to them may be dependent on your mood at the time. I have a strong affection for this one myself; I love the mystery elements that play into the first thirty minutes of the film, I really like all the characters and care what happens to them, and some moments are incredibly powerful (the aforementioned scene with the arm and his last scrawled message on the blackboard are quite powerful). David Hedison does a wonderful job in a part that at certain times only allows him to communicate his feelings via one arm and body language, and Patricia Owens is solid throughout. Vincent Price and Herbert Marshall also do well, though Price is oddly cast here in a role that largely keeps him on the periphery of the plot. The weakest moment in the movie to these eyes is the one where Price and Marshall conjure up a false story to save Helene from being arrested and/or committed; it’s too contrived and even a touch too light-hearted for the movie.

THE FLESH AND THE FIENDS (1959)
(a.k.a. MANIA / THE FIENDISH GHOULS)
Article #1681 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 10-21-2005
Posting Date: 3-20-2006
Directed by John Gilling
Featuring Peter Cushing, June Laverick, Donald Pleasence

When two criminals discover they can be well paid for procuring bodies for an eminent surgeon, they begin murdering people to get the money.

Like the tales of Rasputin and Richard the Third, the story of Burke, Hare and Dr. Knox is one of those historical stories that also qualifies as a fit subject for horror movies. It’s an ideal story for the cinema; it’s not only lurid and sensationalistic, it touches upon any number of subjects; it raises intriguing questions about morality, hypocrisy, class consciousness, and the conflict between religion and science. To its credit, this movie does touch upon all of those subjects at one time or another, and manages to be a horror movie and a compelling drama at the same time. The sturdiness of the script is one strength, and it’s also very well directed. However, the biggest strength here is an excellent and well-conceived performance by Peter Cushing. His Dr. Knox is a fascinating character; he’s fearless and dedicated to his cause, but he’s somewhat blind to his own moral culpability in the matter, and the deformity of one of his eyes is just the movie’s way of pointing out that he doesn’t see as well as he could. It’s fascinating how well certain characters match up; when the chips are down, Dr. Knox will throw Burke and Hare to the dogs, and Hare will do the same to Burke. The doctor who dislikes and suspects Burke and Hare refuses to give them up to the police, whereas Dr. Knox has no such qualms. The movie also features an excellent performance from Donald Pleasence as the decrepit, foppish cane-twirling Hare, and it’s fascinating to watch how in subtle ways he paves the way for his betrayal of Burke later on, though this does not save him. The best moment of the movie for me is near the end, where a child is able to make Dr. Knox understand something that his fellow doctors and the mob could not do; Cushing is simply exquisite in this scene. The rest of the cast also does quite will, and this perhaps the best movie I’ve seen to tell this tale (bearing in mind that the equally excellent THE BODY SNATCHER is not the Burke and Hare story per se).

FUTZ! (1969)
Article #1587 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 7-17-2005
Posting Date: 12-16-2000
Directed by Tom O’Horgan
Featuring John Bakos, Seth Allen, Peter Craig

This movie is about a man who is in love with a pig. I also found it to be well nigh unwatchable. The amazing thing is that these two facts aren’t really connected. As offensive as the bestiality story line is, the movie is so stylized and packed with audience distancing techniques that you never once really believe that you’re watching real people engaging in real acts; as a consequence, it never seems real enough to offend. No, the reason I found it nearly unwatchable is that stylization is so excessive the movie becomes actively annoying. It’s based on an avant-garde stage play that tried to combine stylized acting, music, poetry, dance and contortionism to create a thrilling new art form; in other words, it’s pretentious and self-indulgent. It may have worked better on stage than it does on the screen, but I certainly wouldn’t waste my time trying to mount a stage production of it to find out if that’s true; I can only see so many scenes of people delivering lines and making pig sounds while standing on their heads before my mind rejects the experience. I also suspect that the message of the movie may be a little too trite to merit this level of artiness, but I’m not even sure there is a message or whether I’m just reading something into it. The only reason I’m covering it for this series is that the ending has some horrific touches to it, but it’s by no means a horror movie. It’s not even good for campy laughs, for that matter. This one is only for fans of screen versions of avant-garde theatre.

THE FURY OF THE WOLFMAN (1972)
(a.k.a. LA FURIA DEL HOMBRE LOBO)
Article #1520 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-13-2005
Posting Date: 10-10-2005
Directed by Jose Maria Zabalza
Featuring Jacinto Molina (Paul Naschy), Perla Cristal, Veronica Lujan

A man carrying the curse of the werewolf comes under the control of a female scientist who uses mind control on him.

With this entry we reach another milestone in the MOTDs; this is the first movie I’ve covered to deal with cult actor Paul Naschy. There seems to be a lot of affection for this actor. I suspect this has to do with the fact that he chose a career as a horror actor at a time when this kind of thing was falling out of favor, and had a love of the classic monsters and would trot them out in his movies with glee. Still, I must say that I have yet to see a movie of his that I would actually describe as being good. Now I’ll give myself a couple of outs to that last statement; I’ve only seen a handful of his movies at this point, and those that I have seen have all been of the pan-and-scan dubbed variety, so I can’t say that I’ve seen him under the best of circumstances.

At any rate, this movie shares the same problems I’ve had with some of his other movies. I find the story incredibly muddled; though there is a fair amount of incident, the context for much of it remains a mystery to me. In short, I don’t know why what does happen happens. Furthermore, I’m not impressed with the acting. This is, of course, a questionable statement when dealing with a dubbed movie; I can’t really judge a man’s performance when he’s been dubbed. Still, there are aspects of acting that aren’t affected by dubbing, such as body language and facial expressions, and all too often in this movie I see people not reacting to significant events, looking bored, and failing to express any recognizable emotion. Even Naschy himself gives me that problem; even though he’s played Waldemar Daminsky many times, I still find the only interesting thing about the character is that he becomes a werewolf. Outside of that, he’s terribly uninteresting; the fact that he becomes a werewolf has virtually no effect on his personality. Still, he does work up the necessary energy in his wolfman scenes, even if he lacks the animal grace that Lon Chaney Jr. brought to the wolfman role; Naschy walks and acts like a human being when he’s a werewolf. The ending isn’t bad, but sometimes I think that’s the only part of the movie worth catching. Still, there’s always the chance that a better presentation may make his movies work better, and someday I hope to see some of his movies in proper widescreen and with subtitles. At heart, though, I doubt that I’ll find a significant improvement.

FRIGHT (1971)
Article #1519 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-12-2005
Posting Date: 10-9-2005
Directed by Peter Collinson
Featuring Honor Blackman, Susan George, Ian Bannen

A babysitter is terrorized by the insane ex-husband of the mother of the child she is caring for.

The first half of this movie plays out like an early slasher flick. The main difference between this movie and those of that genre is that the killer lurking outside of the house isn’t just a faceless killing machine, but an actual character, and so the second half of the movie plays out with a little more complexity than your average slasher flick. However, that doesn’t automatically make the movie great, or even good, and at heart I don’t think the movie really works. The problem is that, despite its attempts at character development, it ultimately fails to develop them sufficiently for me to care about them. In particular, I never believe there is a real character behind the psychotic ex-husband; sure, he’s all over the emotional map, but I don’t feel there’s a real person inhabiting the loony facade, and for the twist ending to really work, we need to believe there was a real character there. Sure, there are a few scares and a little tension here; with a psycho threatening a child with a large shard of glass, there’s bound to be. But it misfires too often, and whenever the psycho gets really agitated, his angry rants remind me of an enraged Yosemite Sam or Tasmanian Devil, and if you’re trying to be scary, these are characters you shouldn’t be channeling. The best moments are near the beginning, where the movie effectively uses sound to build attention.

FRENZY (1972)
Article #1518 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-11-2005
Posting Date: 10-8-2005
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock
Featuring John Finch, Alec McCowen, Barry Foster

An out-of-work divorced man becomes the prime suspect in a series of sadistic necktie killings when his ex-wife is found murdered.

Alfred Hitchcock was no longer at the top of his form during his final decade of directing, but this is probably his best movie from the period. Despite the fact that, like PSYCHO and THE LODGER, it deals with a psychotic serial killer, it’s not really a horror movie but more of a suspense thriller, though the killer does push the movie into marginalia in that regard. It’s also a little slow out of the gate; despite the fact that it contains the most graphic murder of Hitchcock’s career, the first two-thirds of this two hour movie drags a little bit, but once the murderer discovers that he left an important clue on the body of his last victim, the movie takes off and never lets up until the end. Still, I find it hard to complain; after all, Hitchcock was an expert at setting up the dominoes, and it’s worth it to be patient during this part of the process. And it’s always graced with Hitchcock’s wonderful sense of macabre humor; as horrible as it is, the scene in the potato truck is quite hilarious. Much has also been made about the use of food in this movie, so this connection is obviously not an original observation of mine, but I can’t help but notice that the movie with Hitchcock’s most graphic murder also has some of the most disgusting meals on film; practically ever meal served by the detective’s wife is likely to turn your stomach, and when she trots out the ingredients of a soup recipe in French, I found myself rather glad that I don’t understand the language.

FOLLOW ME QUIETLY (1949)
Article #1517 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-10-2005
Posting Date: 10-7-2005
Directed by Richard Fleischer
Featuring William Lundigan, Dorothy Patrick, Jeff Corey

Police are hunting for a serial killer known as the Judge.

When I first picked up Tom Petty and the Heartbreaker’s album, “Damn the Torpedoes”, I found myself rather disappointed by it. My problem was that Petty performed his songs with such drama that I was led to believe that the songs themselves would have a little more substance to them when, in fact, I found them to be fairly ordinary love songs for the most part. I was left feeling that the drama was merely a pose.

I feel somewhat the same about this movie. It is full of wonderfully powerful moments that lead you to believe that there’s going to turn out to be a little more to it than there actually is. The end of the movie left me disappointed; I was expecting something more than just a crime thriller, but that’s all I really got from it.

Still, I should have seen it coming; the romance between the detective and the tabloid journalist that makes up a goodly portion of the running time never once felt to me like it was going anyplace interesting, and sure enough, it doesn’t. In fact, the amount of time spent on it only convinced me that they didn’t really have much of a story. Still, when all is said and done, it’s the strong parts of this movie that will stick with you, because they’re fairly breathtaking. The movie certainly uses rain effectively to build up tension, and the dummy modeled off of the killer adds an eerie touch to the proceedings (and even has a good payoff scene). Still, the finest moment in the movie is when the killer comes to the realization that the police are waiting for him at just the moment when we first see the killer’s face; this scene will stick in your memory long after you’ve forgotten the rest of the movie. So, in the final evaluation, this one is worth catching for its high points. Just don’t expect it to transcend itself. Fans of fantastic cinema will recognize Jeff Corey and Nestor Paiva, and that’s Douglas Spencer (Scotty in THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD) as the man who confesses to the crimes.

THE 5,000 FINGERS OF DR. T. (1953)
Article #1515 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-8-2005
Posting Date: 10-5-2005
Directed by Roy Rowland
Featuring Tommy Rettig, Hans Conried, Mary Healy

A young boy dreams that he is a prisoner in Dr. Terwilliker’s Academy where he is forced to play piano.

I haven’t seen the recent big-screen versions of THE CAT AND THE HAT or THE GRINCH THAT STOLE CHRISTMAS, but I think I’m pretty safe in saying that this may be the finest big-screen adaptation of Dr. Seuss. Actually, that may not be quite true; I don’t really know if this is definitely an adaptation or not. I know Dr. Seuss wrote the story, but I think the story may have been intended for the big screen. Dr. Seuss also took part in the screenplay as well as writing the lyrics for the songs. I’m willing to bet that he was on hand for many other aspects of the production, because his fingerprints are all over the place in this movie.

I am simply blown away by the degree of Seussian style in this movie. Here is a quick list of my favorite touches.

– The name of the adult friend to Bartholomew Collins is August Zabladowski.

– The two roller-skating henchman who pursue Bart throughout the movie are siamese twins connected at the beard.

– The happy finger beanies that all the children must wear.

– The ladder that goes nowhere.

– The entrances to the executive offices are not through doors, but holes in the floor.

– The dress that Heloise Collins wears to the Terwilliker Institute that is half business suit, half backless nightgown.

-The huge double-decker piano that can be played by 500 boys with their 5,000 fingers, etc. etc.

In fact, one can go on and on. My only problem with the movie is that some of the songs aren’t very memorable and slow down the story. The two best ones are towards the end; one features a thuggish barbershop quartet singing about the ivy on the walls of the Terwilliker Academy, and the other is sung by the elevator operator to the dungeon. Still, even if some of the songs fall flat, the other musical numbers are magnificent. For me, the finest moment of the movie occurs when Bart finds himself in the dungeon where Terwilliker has imprisoned all musicians who play instruments other than the piano. This big production number makes an astounding use of music, choreography, set design, prop design (the musical instruments are a scream), color photography and acting. This may be my all-time favorite musical number in a movie. There are also great jokes about sink inspections, pickle juice, and the use of the word “atomic”. And Hans Conried makes for a great Seussian villain.

FEARLESS FRANK (1967)
Article #1514 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 5-7-2005
Posting Date: 10-4-2005
Directed by Philip Kaufman
Featuring Jon Voight, Monique van Vooren, Severn Darden

A hick comes to the big city, and is shot by gangsters when he hooks up with a woman. He is then revived from the dead and given superpowers by a doctor intent on fighting evil.

There are different levels of bad. This movie starts out as a bad parody of superhero movies; it’s not totally worthless at this point as it has the occasional funny moment (Best Line: “I can count!”), but for the most part it just falls flat. However, as the story progresses, it starts dealing with some complex moral and metaphyhsical issues having to do with the Doctor’s dictatorial control of Frank as well as the character of an evil version of Frank (known as False Frank or Frankie, a variation on the Frankenstein monster whose scar not only runs down his face but across his suit as well). These are potentially interesting ideas, but they’re so out of tune with the cheesy parodistic approach of the movie that the whole thing turns into an utter disaster that fails to work on any level. It’s hard to believe that this was written and directed by Philip Kaufman, who had already won a prize at Cannes for his movie GOLDSTEIN, and would go on to an Academy Award nomination for the screenplay of THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING, as well as having contributed to other fine movies such as THE OUTLAW JOSEY WALES, THE RIGHT STUFF, and the remake of INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS. This was the first screen appearance of Jon Voight, who would later go on to win an Oscar himself for COMING HOME.