SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT (1974)
Article #1783 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 1-31-2006
Posting Date: 6-30-2006
Directed by Theodore Gershuny
Featuring Patrick O’Neal, James Patterson, Mary Woronov

The owner of a large deserted house returns home after a long absence. He catches fire in his house and burns to death, and is buried. The house is inherited by his son, who has never seen it. Twenty years later, the house is put up for sale. On discovering this, a violent inmate in a nearby insane asylum breaks loose, and before long, people are dying…

What is it about the song “Silent Night” that seems to inspire the titles for Christmas-themed horror movies? I fully anticipated that I was about to watch another of those killer-Santa-Claus movies, and I wasn’t expecting much. Such is not the case, though – there are no killer Santas to be found here. Instead, I found myself sucked in by this one. It’s not a great movie, but it is surprisingly suspenseful at times, largely due to the fact that a certain amount of creative style went into it, and the central mystery/backstory is truly intriguing. I guessed at least one aspect of the mystery before it was all over; the committee of townspeople that greets the lawyer (a group which includes John Carradine as the editor of the newspaper, who, oddly enough, can only speak in a croak and does most of his communicating by ringing bells) in charge of selling the house all have something in common that makes them specific targets for the lunatic. The acting is quite uneven, and it looks like the movie was heavily edited at one point; there are a number of abrupt jump cuts that seem unnatural. At other times, the editing is fascinating, and the use of Christmas music on occasion is unexpectedly haunting. This one was better than I expected it would be.

SHE (1965)
Article #1782 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 1-30-2006
Posting Date: 6-29-2006
Directed by Robert Day
Featuring Ursula Andress, Peter Cushing, Bernard Cribbins

When an adventurer receives a map to a lost city from a beautiful but mysterious woman, he and two friends make the journey to Kuma, the land of Ayesha, She who must be obeyed.

If I had just seen the beginning and end of this movie, I would have considered it a fine adaptation of H. Rider Haggard’s adventure story; those parts of the movie are energetic and fun. Unfortunately, when watching the movie as a whole, you have to contend with the middle of the movie, and there is the problem. Once the journey begins, the movie is singularly dull; the journey itself is uneventful and full of cliches (do we really need to see all three adventurers throw away their empty canteens?), and things don’t really improve much when they reach Kuma, as the movie becomes mired in endless and ponderous chatter. Even Peter Cushing, as adept he is at bringing his dialogue to life, can’t quite overcome the triteness of some of his ruminations, and Ursula Andress comes across as  unexpressive throughout the movie. At a hundred and six minutes, the movie could really have used some major trimming. I do like some of the changes made to the story in this version, though; in particular, the movie manages to get Ayesha into the story without resorting to the extended flashbacks of most other versions. However, the subplot about the high priest seems to exist only to give Christopher Lee a more prominent role in the proceedings. Nonetheless, this must have been an ambitious undertaking for Hammer studios.

THE SHAGGY DOG (1959)
Article #1781 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 1-29-2006
Posting Date: 6-28-2006
Directed by Charles Barton
Featuring Fred MacMurray, Jean Hagen, Tommy Kirk

A teenager puts on a ring that places a curse upon him so that he will sporadically turn into a dog. His father is a mailman who hates dogs. Hilarity ensues.

Witness, if you will, the birth of the shopping cart movie. It’s relatively subdued for the form; it even takes itself a little more seriously on occasion than they normally do. It’s a little sluggishly paced and runs on a bit too long, but it has an amusing cast that features Fred MacMurray, Jean Hagen, Tommy Kirk, Annette Funicello, Cecil Kellaway, Paul Frees, Strother Martin, Jack Albertson, Jim Bannon and Gregg Palmer. It’s pretty predictable, and most of the humor revolves around people reacting to a dog talking, driving, getting out of locked rooms, etc. Later shopping cart movies would perfect the formula but would get quite a bit sillier in the process. Good trivia question to ask about this one: In which movie does Fred MacMurray chase his son with a shotgun?

SCREAM AND SCREAM AGAIN (1969)
Article #1780 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 1-28-2006
Posting Date: 6-27-2006
Directed by Gordon Hessler
Featuring Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing

A serial killer is on the loose. This is somehow connected to a man who finds his limbs being amputated in a hospital and a murderous official in a foreign country.

On a certain level, I admire this horror / science fiction thriller for what it’s trying to do. It’s really rather ambitious in structure, juggling several story threads before winding them all together in the end. I just don’t think it does it very well. For the most part, the movie comes across as a confusing mess. One of the problems is that it becomes difficult to figure out who the main characters are. The presence of three horror stars should have made this easier, but Vincent Price has only two brief cameos before the climax of the movie, Peter Cushing has one scene in the middle, and Christoper Lee’s entire performance consists of about three cameo appearances. The best scene of the movie is probably the pursuit of the serial killer by the police (and it features the most memorable moment, which involves a man handcuffed to the bumper of a car), but part of the reason this is so is that it’s the first time the movie ever dwells on one thread long enough for the movie to gather some momentum. Fortunately, this thread is also the one most worth following if you want to keep track of the story. Still, I find the movie generally a disappointment; the ending in particular feels is a bit of a letdown, despite the fact that it features the only scene in which two of the horror stars interact. Still, I think this is the best of the Gordon Hessler horror movies I’ve seen so far.

THE SPIDER RETURNS (1941)
(Serial)
Article #1760 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 1-8-2006
Posting Date: 6-7-2006
Directed by James W. Horne
Featuring Warren Hull, Mary Ainslee, Dave O’Brien

Noted criminologist Richard Wentworth pits his abilities against an industrial saboteur known as The Gargoyle.

This is a sequel to the 1938 serial THE SPIDER’S WEB, which I’ve already covered for this series. I expressed a certain degree of disappointment with that serial, largely because the villain didn’t turn out to be as interesting as I hoped. The villain here is even less interesting; he’s mostly a rehash of The Octopus, but lacking even that villain’s gimmick. Yet, I found myself really enjoying this one more than the original, and it’s probably because I was really glad to see the return of my favorite character. No, it’s not Wentworth himself, though I do feel that Warren Hull made for a truly charming serial hero. Nor is it Wentworth’s alter ego, the Spider, who seems slightly tamer than he does in the earlier serial. No, it’s Blinky McQuade, Wentworth’s other alter ego, a seedy crook who tries to get in cahoots with the Gargoyle and his gang. McQuade is a hoot, and it seems to me that they figured out how well he went over in the original serial, and gave him a much greater role in the proceedings here.

In fact, this serial has a strong sense of humor throughout, and it makes it a lot more fun for me. The science fiction content is also much stronger, thanks to the Gargoyle’s inventor sidekick whose biggest creation is an X-Ray Eye Machine, which allows the Gargoyle to spy on anyone who is wearing one of his special belts. It looks like some bizarre tentacled robot, and when it’s warming up or malfunctioning, it vibrates and waves its tentacles around in a memorable but hilarious way. The cliffhangers are colorful as well, and it even includes a scene of Wentworth being tied to the railroad tracks! I haven’t had this much fun in a serial since I saw THE LOST CITY.

SCRAMBLED BRAINS (1951)
Article #1737 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-16-2005
Posting Date: 5-15-2006
Directed by Jules White
Featuring Moe Howard, Larry Fine, Shemp Howard

Moe and Larry care for Shemp, who is suffering from hallucinations.

The fantastic content in this Three Stooges short is probably the bizarre hallucinations Shemp has. In particular, a sequence where Shemp is playing the piano only to discover he’s sprouting extra hands belongs to the realm of fantasy. Not only does it have some nifty special effects, but It’s also one of the two funniest scenes in the short. The other is a sequence where the Stooges get stuck in a phone booth along with Vernon Dent and his bag of groceries. The short also features Stooge regular Emil Sitka as a doctor who suspects that Shemp may be pregnant. Quite frankly, this is one of the most amusing shorts I’ve seen by the Three Stooges.

SVENGALI (1954)
Article #1734 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-13-2005
Posting Date: 5-12-2006
Directed by Noel Langley
Featuring Hildegard Knef, Donald Wolfit, Terence Morgan

A model finds herself falling in love with an artist, not knowing that she is arousing the jealous wrath of a hypnotic musician who has his own plans for her.

I was all ready to dismiss this version of the classic Du Maurier novel for the simple reason that I was largely familiar with the work of Donald Wolfit through his performance in BLOOD OF THE VAMPIRE, which did not impress me. Nonetheless, I was glad to see that he gave a much better performance than I expected; he is quite good in the role, despite the fact that physically he is all wrong for playing a character who is described as a “scarecrow”. Still, Wolfit is not John Barrymore, and he never quite glues you to the screen in the same way Barrymore did in the role in the 1931 version of the movie. For most of the movie, this doesn’t matter all that much; the acting from all concerned is very solid, and I especially liked Paul Rogers as one of the trio of artists who Trilby encounters. The solid acting compensates somewhat for some uneven editing and some abrupt and poorly paced scenes. It’s not until the last third of the movie that it really loses steam, primarily because we don’t have a Svengali that really commands the stage. In this context, I suppose it makes sense that the ending is changed from tragic to happy, but overall the movie has much less impact than the 1931 version. It’s not a disaster, but I do know that when I want to rewatch a version of this tale, it won’t be this one.

STRANGE HOLIDAY (1945)
(a.k.a. THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW)
Article #1733 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-12-2005
Posting Date: 5-11-2006
Directed by Arch Oboler
Featuring Claude Rains, Martin Kosleck, Milton Kibbee

A businessman returns home from a long vacation to find that no one will talk to him. and the few people he can find are living in abject fear. He then finds his family missing and himself arrested.

This piece of wartime propaganda is so paranoid, so overwrought, so preachy, and so emotionally manipulative, I found myself wondering just what brought on this serious lapse of taste. If anything, it’s even more simplistic and unbelievable than its nearest cinematic equivalent, INVASION U.S.A. (1952), and it’s only the impressive thespic talents of Claude Rains that keeps the movie from sliding into total camp. However, a quick perusal of the entry in the Maltin movie guide gave me the crucial clue in understanding why this movie was the way it was; the movie was not originally intended for the viewing public, but was sponsored by GE for the purpose of being shown to its employees only. This places the movie’s origins in the realm of what my wife refers to as Film Ephemera; that other film industry that geared its products to industry and educational purposes. For those who remember the Bell Science Lab films that we all watched in high school, you’ll know the type of thing I mean. This goes a long way towards explaining why the movie is so unsubtle; it primarily existed for its message, which was to keep its employees from taking long vacations while the war was going on. What else can you say?

SINS OF THE FLESHAPOIDS (1965)
Article #1729 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-8-2005
Posting Date: 5-7-2006
Directed by Mike Kuchar
Featuring Bob Cowan, Donna Kerness, George Kuchar

In the far future, humans are served by robots with fleshlike skin called fleshapoids. What they do not know is that during a long post-apocalyptic period when the fleshapoids were left on their own, they began to develop emotions.

I have yet to see a film by John Waters, but I have heard enough about him that when I discovered that he was heavily influenced by this film, I considered myself warned. Furthermore, the cover of the DVD made the movie look like something along the lines of a Kenneth Anger movie. Is it any wonder that I went into this movie expecting a barrage of trashy artiness?

Yet, to my amazement, I found myself thoroughly enjoying the movie. Sure, it’s arty, but it’s arty in the sense of being enormously creative and innovative on a miniscule budget; it’s the sort of thing I expect from people who are really enjoying the art of moviemaking. Furthermore, it’s not self-indulgent; it has a story to tell, and it tells it well and with a surprising amount of wit. It’s virtually a silent movie; when the onscreen characters speak, it’s through comic-book-style balloons, and the soundtrack is full of bizarre music and narration. Yes, it has acres of flesh (if no explicit nudity) and has a strong erotic edge to it, but it isn’t exploitation. Imagine, if you will, a humorous cross between DAUGHTER OF HORROR, INAUGURATION OF THE PLEASURE DOME and THE CREATION OF THE HUMANOIDS, and you might get an idea of what this is like. If you’re allergic to underground cinema, you’ll probably have no use for it, but I found myself both intrigued and entertained.

SIGFRIDO (1957)
(a.k.a. THE DRAGON’S BLOOD)
Article #1728 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-7-2005
Posting Date: 5-6-2006
Directed by Geicomo Gentilomo
Featuring Sebastian Fischer, Ilaria Occhini, Rolf Tasna

A young man forges a magic sword with which he does battle with a ferocious dragon. He then bathes in the blood of the dragon, rendering him invincible. He then gets hold of a magic net that makes him invisible. He uses these powers to win the woman he loves, but not without making enemies.

Some movies are so difficult to find that when I do finally get my hands on a copy of one, I find it hard to complain too loudly about aspects of the print that disappoint me. The fact that the print is in unsubtitled Italian is the sort of problem I’ve come to expect with rare foreign films. My print is also badly panned-and-scanned; it’s one of those movies where you spend a lot of time watching two profiles on either end of the screen talking to each other. Nonetheless, I’m just grateful to have had a chance to catch this one.

Of course, the movie being in Italian makes it difficult for me to give any sort of meaningful criticism of the film, since I can’t say that I entirely understand what’s going on. However, the fact that it largely follows the same plot as Fritz Lang’s SIEGFRIED helps, and I know enough of the basic story to follow it up to a point. It’s only after Siegfried’s wedding that the plot really becomes talky and I lose track of the characters’ allegiances and motivations. Nevertheless, on a visual level, the movie is a bit of a mixed bag. Some scenes are very well staged; I like the action sequences in particular, and the Dragon (an uncredited creation of Carlo Rambaldi, if my sources are correct) is a lot of fun. Other scenes seem a little puny for an epic story (they could have used a few more extras in some of the scenes), and there are times where I almost wanted to laugh; in particular, Sigfrido’s fluffy costume near the beginning of the movie struck me as rather silly, and I would have preferred my hero to look more rugged than pretty. Nonetheless, this is an entertaining version of the story, and I hope to catch it some time with the proper subtitles and at the proper aspect ratio.