Journey to the Seventh Planet (1962)

JOURNEY TO THE SEVENTH PLANET (1962)
Article #1712 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-21-2005
Posting Date: 4-20-2006
Directed by Sidney W. Pink
Featuring John Agar, Carl Ottosen, Peter Monch

A group of astronauts on a mission to explore the planet Uranus discover a startling Earth-like paradise, the creation of an alien brain with sinister intentions.

There is something about the movies that came from Sidney Pink and Ib Melchior that makes me wish that they had been better directors and writers. There’s the occasional neat idea, the colorful photography and the sometimes surprising storylines that make me wish they were better presented, but there’s always something to be enjoyed. Here, the concept of an alien that can create complex illusions is a novel touch, even if owes quite a bit to Ray Bradbury’s story “Mars is Heaven!”. There’s also a startling scene where a man starts to recount a memory of an old village, and we see the village appear in the background as he describes; this scene is the high point of the movie. Unfortunately, the story is a muddle (though the alien makes it clear at one point that he means to take over the Earth, I haven’t a clue as to how this whole set-up will help him accomplish this goal), the dialogue is laughable (especially whenever the men start talking about or flirting with women), and the pacing is terrible; there are so many gaps of dead air between the lines of dialogue that I bet you could cut ten minutes out of the movie just by editing them out. Yet, because of the good moments, the movie never becomes unwatchable. And I will give credit to the director for one thing; he has the cast pronounce the name of the planet so that it rhymes with the phrase “You’re honest.” rather than using the more common pronunciation (the one used in HERCULES AND THE CAPTIVE WOMEN, for example). At least he kept the movie from turning into an inadvertent series of sphincter jokes.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Journey to the Center of Time (1967)

JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF TIME (1967)
Article #1711 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-20-2005
Posting Date: 4-19-2006
Directed by David L. Hewitt
Featuring Scott Brady, Anthony Eisley, Gigi Perreau

A group of scientists are thrust into the future and then into the past when they experiment with time travel.

A perusal of David L. Hewitt’s credits on IMDB shows that he had an interesting career; he’s worked on special and visual effects, and as a producer, director, writer and occasionally actor (he played the title role in THE MIGHTY GORGA, for example). For this movie, he rewrote his story for THE TIME TRAVELERS and shot his own version of it on what looks like a mere fraction of the original’s budget. Though I admire his spirit, he should have left well enough alone; for the most part, this movie is a bore. I think a good seventy percent of this movie consists of either a) stock footage (especially the long travel back through time) or b) people standing at consoles spouting jargon. The middle of the story has been changed completely, but not in any positive way – there is a sequence involving blue aliens in the future that starts to set up a plot, but this whole situation is resolved so quickly that you wondered why the bothered. The only change I liked involved the ironic death of the villain, one of those stupid, boorish non-scientist types who puts everyone else in peril when he does something idiotic. The real problem with the movie is pace; Hewitt doesn’t know when a scene has gone on too long, and this is especially noticeable near the end when he borrows the time loop sequence from the original version of the movie and then makes each sequence in the loop go on too long to attain any of the sense of dramatic urgency. Still, for all that, there is something likable about the movie; I find his movies easier to enjoy than ones by Larry Buchanan or Andy Milligan, for example. Carol Burnett fans might be surprised to see Lyle Waggoner in a small role in this one.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Frankenstein Created Woman (1967)

FRANKENSTEIN CREATED WOMAN (1967)
Article #1710 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-19-2005
Posting Date: 4-18-2006
Directed by Terence Fisher
Featuring Peter Cushing, Susan Denberg, Thorley Walters

Dr. Frankenstein takes the dead body of a deformed woman, cures the deformities and brings it back to life, instilling it with the soul of her former lover who had been wrongly executed for murder. She seeks vengeance on those who were really responsible for the murder.

I’m afraid that this entry in Hammer’s Frankenstein series doesn’t to a lot for me. Part of the problem is that the script seems obvious and weak. I find it hard to really enjoy a movie which tries this hard to push certain emotional buttons; the three drunk nobleman are such total rotters that they never emerge as real characters at all, and the attempts to gain sympathy for the deformed woman are so blatant and repetitive that they get truly annoying; if a movie is going to play on your emotions, it should do so subtly and convincingly. Still, the main problem is that the movie spends so much time concentrating on these one-dimensional characters rather than on Dr. Frankenstein himself, who, as played by Peter Cushing, is far and away the most interesting character in the movie. The more I see of Cushing, the more I marvel at his work; his ability to flesh out characters by using subtle quirks and interesting details is breathtaking, and he gives his characters an air of mystery that leaves you wondering what they’re thinking about at every moment. I like the movie when Cushing is on the screen, less so when he isn’t.

Still, I have to admit that I’ve developed a fondness for one other aspect of the Hammer Frankenstein series, and that is the lab equipment they use. There is something convincingly period about it all, and I like the fact that it all looks a little dingy and used rather than clean and spotless. In some ways, this style of lab equipment is as much a signature of these movies as the Strickfadden equipment was for the Universal series.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

It Conquered the World (1956)

IT CONQUERED THE WORLD (1956)
Article #1709 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-18-2005
Posting Date: 4-16-2006
Directed by Roger Corman
Featuring Peter Graves, Beverly Garland, Lee Van Cleef

A scientist halps an alien from Venus come to the Earth under the belief that the alien will help save mankind from itself. He fails to see that the alien is bent on conquest for his own reasons.

Beulah (as the vegetable-shaped creature of this movie was named by creator Paul Blaisdell) is one of the silliest monsters from the science fiction movies of the fifties. As such, the monster does garner quite a bit of affection, and I have to admit that I love it myself. Nevertheless, I wonder how much better the reputation of this movie would have been with a more convincing creation (or if, as originally planned, it had not been trotted out in the open for all to see). The movie is actually quite strong, largely because of a script with far more depth than is usually found in low budget movies of this period; the philosophical discussions about the power of human emotion and the folly of trying to get outside forces to solve our problems for us have a real bite and relevance to them. Given this sophistication, it’s no surprise that the script was actually written by Charles B. Griffith instead of the credited Lou Rusoff; it shows the same sophistication of many of his other scripts for Corman (THE UNDEAD, BUCKET OF BLOOD, NOT OF THIS EARTH, etc.) . The movie also has some sharp and fascinating editing at times; I love moments like the one where a shot of a soldier cleaning his gun cuts to a shot of one of the scientists cleaning his own gun as well. The performances are also quite good, though Beverly Garland takes the prize as the traitorous scientist’s wife, a rather difficult role which she pulls off extremely well. The movie is also shot through with real tragedy; of the four major characters in the story, take note of how many are alive in the final reel. Outside of the monster, the other main thing that I would change in the movie would be to remove  character of the Mexican private; Jonathan Haze is extremely unfunny in the role, even with the help of a great straight man like Dick Miller. Haze would do a better job in LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS a few years later. Still, despite the flaws, this is a quite powerful low-budget science fiction feature.

2 CommentsLeave a comment

Invisible Invaders (1959)

INVISIBLE INVADERS (1959)
Article #1708 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-17-2005
Posting Date: 4-16-2006
Directed by Edward L. Cahn
Featuring John Agar, Jean Byron, Philip Tonge

Invisible aliens from outer space invade the earth by taking over the bodies of the dead.

This movie’s main claim to fame anymore is the similarities it has with Romero’s NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD; the scenes of the dead men (the aliens don’t possess the bodies of dead women, for some reason) in various states of decay wandering around does indeed recall those of the later movie. Still, this movie lacks many of the qualities that made the Romero movie a classic, but I suspect the budget of this one was even lower than the one of that one. After all, we’re talking about an alien invasion story with only about ten speaking parts, filled out with tons of stock footage, familiar locations (the bunker is hidden inside Bronson Caverns) and with budget-minded monsters. Still, I can’t be too hard on it; it does manage to work up a chill or two, and some scenes are memorable enough, even if the story drags (particularly in the second half). It does have one other noteworthy aspect; it’s the only cinematic union of horror and science fiction actors John Agar and John Carradine. And anybody who has seen “Police Squad” should have a little laugh when Carradine dies thirty seconds after his character is introduced before he’s had a chance to say a word.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

The Anniversary (1968)

THE ANNIVERSARY (1968)
Article #1707 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-6-2005
Posting Date: 4-15-2006
Directed by Roy Ward Baker
Featuring Bette Davis, Sheila Hancock, Jack Hedley

The sons of a tyrannical matriarch try to escape from her clutches during the celebration of the anniversary of her marriage to the deceased father.

Usually, this is the type of movie I shuttle off to the marginal categories, but I consider this one to really be out of the genre, despite its inclusion in Bryan Senn’s and John Johnson’s FANTASTIC CINEMA SUBJECT GUIDE under the “Madmen” category (and hence, its inclusion in this series). Yes, it features a monster, but only in the sense that Bette Davis’s character is one of the cruelest and most manipulative characters in cinema history, but she remains distinctly human. And though she may be mad, it’s not the psychotic madness of horror but the madness of glorying over one’s manipulative power. Its biggest claim to horror is its pedigree; Davis’s last two films had been THE NANNY and HUSH HUSH, SWEET CHARLOTTE, this one was made at Hammer with a script by Jimmy Sangster and direction by Roy Ward Baker. Still, I really find it impossible to class this one as belonging to the horror genre.

It is, however, a deliciously nasty comedy, one that seemed tailor-made for Davis. As the strident, crude one-eyed matriarch of the family, she spews out lines that would never have passed muster in the days of the production code, and plays tricks of such consummate cruelty that you find yourselves glad that you’re not there in person. It’s a fascinating battle; though her sons are weak, the women in their lives are quite willing to take her on, but their ultimate success depends on the support they receive from the sons. Who will win the final battle? I certainly won’t give it away, but it’s good to remember that it’s not over till it’s over. Fans of black comedy and/or Bette Davis will have a field day with this; those expecting a horror movie instead will come away frustrated.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

The Last Days of Pompeii (1959)

THE LAST DAYS OF POMPEII (1959)
(a.k.a. GLI ULTIMI GIORNI DI POMPEI)
Article #1706 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-15-2005
Posting Date: 4-14-2006
Directed by Mario Bonnard
Featuring Steve Reeves, Christine Kaufmann, Fernando Rey

A centurion returns to Pompeii to find that his family has been killed and robbed by a band of hooded murderers who leave crosses painted on the homes of their victims. He vows to find out who was responsible.

This movie opens with the slaughter of the centurion’s family. Once I saw the cross painted on the wall, I was able to figure out the moral arc of the story in just a couple of minutes. You can, too, with the help of this simple set of questions to ponder.

1) Given that the event at the end of this movie can be rightly called and Act of God, just what sort of behavior would have inspired God to perform such an act? (And if you don’t know how the movie is going to end, look at the title one more time and use your knowledge of history.)

2) What do you think the odds are that this movie would actually have a Christian sect be responsible for the sadistic murders of the family when there are paganistic worshippers of Isis also in the story?

3) Irrespective of who the real murderers are, who do you think will be blamed for the murders by the Roman government in charge of Pompeii?

4) What do you think the Roman government will do to the people who they believe are guilty of the murders? (Hint: The answer to this question is the same as that of the one to question one.)

That should keep you busy for a couple minutes.

However, there’s still the question of the movie’s fantastic content to deal with. This movie is listed as Fantasy by the multi-volume THE MOTION PICTURE GUIDE from the eighties, but I seriously question this classification. Granted, many of the sword-and-sandal movies of the time did indeed have fantastic content, but this isn’t one of them. Steve Reeves is the hero, but he’s not super-strong here; I’d say his acts do fall within the bounds of that of a really strong man. There are also no monsters here, unless one crocodile counts. It is, in some ways, a better than average example of the genre; the story is easy to follow, the dubbing is much better than usual, and Fernando Rey makes an excellent villain. Still, the fight scenes seem poorly paced and rather stiff, and even the spectacular eruption sequence falls very short of what it would be like in real life. This one is a mixed bag.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Hansel and Gretel (1954)

HANSEL AND GRETEL (1954)
Article #1705 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-14-2005
Posting Date: 4-13-2006
Directed by Michael Myerberg and John Paul
Featuring the voices of Anna Russell, Mildred Dunnock, Frank Rogier

Two children are sent out into the woods to gather strawberries. They get lost, and find themselves threatened by a witch who means to eat them.

It’s opera time, again. However, this one is based on a familiar children’s story, and it contains spoken passages as well, so following the story is a snap. It is also animated with electronic puppets, so it should be of interest to animation and puppetry fans as well.

Nonetheless, I am a little disappointed with this one. Though it’s obviously a labor of love, it lacks somewhat that sense of magic that really brings this sort of thing to life. Part of the problem is the design of Hansel and Gretel; their mouths, though articulated, are locked in a perpetual smile, which somewhat destroys the illusion of danger. The movement of the puppets also doesn’t quite sync up with the music to the extent that would make this one a real delight; in this respect, it falls far short of FANTASIA, a movie which is mentioned in comparison on the back of the DVD package for this one. It has some nice moments, and I do applaud the effort, but I did find myself getting bored frequently, especially since there really isn’t much of a story, and the movie doesn’t quite have the necessary charm to fill in during the dead spots. Still, the witch has some fascinating facial movements, and a short “making of” extra on the DVD shows how this was done. Interesting, but not quite satisfying overall.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Captain Nemo and the Underwater City (1969)

CAPTAIN NEMO AND THE UNDERWATER CITY (1969)
Article #1704 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-13-2005
Posting Date: 4-12-2006
Directed by James Hill
Featuring Robert Ryan, Chuck Connors, Nanette Newman

The lives of several passengers of a sinking ship are saved from death by Captain Nemo, who takes them to his underwater city. Though they wish to return to dry land, he refuses to let them go for fear that it will destroy the utopia he has created.

What happens when you cross 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA with LOST HORIZON? Here’s the answer; an underwater adventure / utopia thriller which is too busy recalling the glories of the two earlier movies without ever really coming into its own. And that’s the main problem with the movie; even with the utopia element thrown in, it’s just a rehash of LEAGUES; in fact, if it weren’t for the fact that there’s a little more skin on display, this one might as well have been made a couple of years after the Disney movie. It even throws a monster manta ray to serve as an equivalent to the giant squid in that one, but I invite you to compare how the battles with these monsters in their respective movies compare to tell the difference between film-making that is inspired (in one case) and routine (in the other). Probably the person having the most fun in this movie is the art director, and even he goes over the top in certain cases; it’s hard to take the panic and fear seriously when the alarm announcing it is shaped like a lobster, or when Captain Nemo barks urgent orders through a fish-shaped microphone. It’s really hard to gauge Robert Ryan’s performance in the title role here, though he does have something of a thankless task here; how do you make a character like this your own when the production seeks to remind you of the earlier production in which James Mason did a definitive take on the same role?

Still, the movie, predictable as it is, does dredge up one real surprise in the course of events; at the end of the movie, all the main character have either 1) escaped from the underwater city, 2) remained in the underwater city, or 3) died. Usually you can predict who will suffer what fate, but this time, the fates of two characters are the opposite of what you might expect. And overall, despite its air of redundancy, the movie is watchable enough.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Mysterious Doctor Satan (1940)

MYSTERIOUS DOCTOR SATAN (1940)
(Serial)
Article #1703 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 11-12-2005
Posting Date: 4-11-2006
Directed by John English and William Witney
Featuring Eduardo Ciannelli, Robert Wilcox, William Newell

An evil scientist plans to take over the world with an army of robots, but he needs the secret for a control cell created by a noted professor. In his attempts to get this information, he encounters resistance from a masked hero known as the Copperhead.

The villain here is the real draw; he was played by Eduardo Ciannelli, who had a long career playing villains of this sort and was very good at it. It’s no wonder this is one of those rare serials in which the villain nabs the title rather than the hero (like THE PURPLE MONSTER STRIKES or THE PHANTOM CREEPS). Like so many other villains, Doctor Satan wants to take over the world with an army of robots, though he’s only created one of them, and if the robot he has created looks familiar, look no further than THE UNDERSEA KINGDOM; this is the second entry in a row here to feature a recycled robot. However, I’m thinking the title would have been different if the original plan for the serial (it was supposed to feature Superman as the hero) had gone through. Certainly, the Copperhead is no Superman (doesn’t fly, no super powers); in fact, he wins an award for the hero with the least secret secret identity I’ve encountered. All he does is to don his face mask (no other change of costume) to become the Copperhead, and I’m willing to bet that everyone who doesn’t know who he really is is just pretending so as not to hurt his feelings. Nevertheless, this is a strong Republic serial; it’s well-paced, has decent cliffhangers, and fairly fun. Yes, I would have liked to have seen more of the robot, but that’s just me.

0 CommentsLeave a comment