The Slime People (1962)

THE SLIME PEOPLE (1962)
Article #641 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-16-2002
Posting Date: 5-11-2003

Five people trapped in Los Angeles try to do battle with invaders that come up from the sewers known as the Slime People.

This movie does for fog what THE FLYING SAUCER does for snow, and that is not a compliment. There are some interesting ideas here; the wall that forms out of the fog and the fact that the slime creatures need to be killed with hollow poles to keep their wounds from closing up and healing are both entertaining concepts. Unfortunately, the movie has a major problem in tone; every scene feels like every other one, so the movie is distressingly lacking in variety (the repetitive soundtrack only makes it worse). This is especially a problem when Les Tremayne’s eccentric goat-loving writer appears; he is far and away the most interesting character here, but the movie’s total inability to treat his scenes any differently than the other scenes makes his character feel less like a breath of fresh air and more like an incongruous intrusion from another (and more interesting) movie. But the worst culprit is the fog that takes over many of the scenes here. Though fog can be used effectively for atmosphere and mood, here it just obscures the action on a regular basis, making many of the scenes hard to see (not to be confused with making scenes hard to watch). Thus, watching the movie ends up requiring more work than is necessary, and the movie just isn’t interesting enough to merit that extra work. Consequently, despite the potential for interest here, the movie is no fun.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Call of the Savage (1935)

CALL OF THE SAVAGE (1935)
(Serial)
Article #640 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-15-2002
Posting Date: 5-10-2003

A jungle boy attempts to help a princess of the lost kingdom of Mu return to her world. Unfortunately, he is the target of fortune hunters because the bracelet he wears has half the formula of a cure for infantile paralysis.

The jungle boy is named Jan, which not only rhymes with Tarzan but reads like Jane with an “e” removed. His pet chimp is called Chicma (kind of like Cheetah). Therefore, I feel safe enough in assuming that we’re dealing with a Tarzan clone of sorts, and considering that he swings through the jungle on vines, that seems apt. He doesn’t have a jungle yell, but he does grin a lot, if that counts, and he speaks in stilted English. All in all, this serial* is kind of a cross between THE NEW ADVENTURES OF TARZAN and THE LOST CITY; unfortunately, it’s not up to the level of either of these. Part of the problem is that once it establishes the characters and the basic plot direction early on in the second episode, it spends the next eight episodes wandering aimlessly from cliffhanger to cliffhanger before any serious attempt is made to have our characters head to the lost kingdom of Mu; about the only plot point in this part of the serial is the recovery of one amnesiac character’s memory. The power struggle in Mu is the most interesting part of the story; however, since they don’t reach it until chapter 11, this whole sequence is rushed; they should have reached the kingdom earlier in the serial and spent more time here than the endless series of jungle perils. Plenty of animal stock footage is used to pad out the episodes; at least there is a fairly wide array of animal life on parade to hold the attention. On the plus side, the cliffhangers don’t cheat as much as some other serials; in fact, I was surprised at how they didn’t cheat in certain scenarios where it seemed certain that they would. Nonetheless, a goodly portion of this serial is a slog. Jan is played by a young Noah Beery, Jr.

* Incidentally, when I first wrote this review, I mistakenly spelled this word “Cereal”, which just goes to show you should never write a review when you’re hungry.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

The Sadist (1963)

THE SADIST (1963)
Article #639 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-14-2002
Posting Date: 5-9-2003

Three travelers try to get their car repaired at a junkyard and become captives of an insane psycho.

If I mention the names Arch Hall Jr. and Marilyn Manning, you might recognize them as the teenage couple from EEGAH: well, here they are again, and the resemblance ends there. For one thing, they were the heroes in that movie; here they are the villains. This is particularly apt in Arch’s case; despite the fact that he was supposed to be cute and cuddly in EEGAH, he was actually creepier than the monster; here, cast as a psycho, he looks the part. This would be damning him with faint praise if I left it at that, though; he also acts the part, and convincingly; he is one of the scariest psychos in screen history, and if there is any justice in this world, he will be judged by his terrifying performance here rather than as a teen idol or a rock star. In fact, this movie is an unbelievably harrowing thriller; you’re sucked in early on and it doesn’t let go until the final moments. In fact, I feel like trotting out an endless succession of suspense cliches, such as pulse-pounding or heart-stopping, because this movie actually lives up to them. It is a little unsteady at times, particularly in the opening scenes, where the dialogue sounds a little forced and contrived at times, and the ending is a shade disappointing, but these are minor quibbles in a movie that tightens the screws this well. A rarity, and a triumph.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Rodan (1956)

RODAN (1956)
Article #638 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-13-2002
Posting Date: 5-8-2003

A combination of overly deep mining and the eruption of a volcano contribute to the hatching of two eggs containing flying dinosaurs capable of supersonic speed and mass destruction.

The two Rodans aren’t the most engaging of Toho’s giant monsters, and a good deal of this movie is a fairly average example of this type of genre. However, as a kid, I found two things about this movie to be unforgettable. One is the ending, which actually had me in tears, at least partially because of the well-phrased narration (which is surprising, as most of the narration during the movie is unnecessary and redundant), and the first twenty minutes, which may be the single most terrifying sequence in this series of movies. Part of the reason is that the initial threat in this movie has a lot more immediate impact than the much larger monsters in the latter half of the movie, as the movie dwells with much more detail on the bloody deaths involved, not to mention the eerie sequences in the flooded mines. These two aspects of the movie still hold up well for me, as well as the special effects. The American version has an unnecessary and cliched prologue about atomic bomb blasts, and the dubbing features perhaps a little too much of the voice of Paul Frees; his voice is a little too distinctive to be used for more than one character. Rodan would make a few more appearances in the Toho movies before he was retired.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958)

THE REVENGE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1958)
Article #637 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-12-2002
Posting Date: 5-7-2003

Baron Frankenstein escapes the guillotine, and continues his experiments in another village under the name of Dr. Stein.

When I hear discussions on which of the Hammer Frankenstein movies are the best, this is one that is often mentioned. Watching it this time, I could see why; I think it’s a marked improvement over the initial entry in the series. For one thing, it’s a lot less obvious; there’s not one mention in the movie about Frankenstein playing God, and his assistant makes no attempt to be the doctor’s conscience. I find this makes the movie more interesting; one can concentrate on what the doctor is trying to do and how things go wrong without endless moralizing. There are wonderful touches here and there; one of my favorites involves a moment when the doctor decides not to place a flower in his buttonhole, a seemingly inconsequential moment which nonetheless catches your attention and puts you slightly on edge during the following scenes. It’s certainly one of my favorite Hammer horror movies, with an excellent and confident performance by Peter Cushing. It’s not perfect; a fight scene in the laboratory seems contrived because the movie fails to pre-establish the character of the janitor, thus leaving the viewer with the sense that the fight merely exists to push forward a plot point rather than being a natural outgrowth of the previous action. Nonetheless, this was definitely a worthy entry to the series.

1 CommentLeave a comment

Babes in Toyland (1961)

BABES IN TOYLAND (1961)
Article #636 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-11-2002
Posting Date: 5-6-2003

Mary, Mary, Quite Contrary and Tom, Tom, the Piper’s Son mean to marry, but the evil Barnaby means to take Mary for his own bride.

Back when I covered THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939), I essentially avoided the pitfall of mouthing platitudes about the movie by cleverly (or spinelessly, as the case may be) speaking of it in terms of other movies entirely. Now that I am faced with this one, I find myself wanting to talk about THE WIZARD OF OZ instead, which is something I find a little ironic.

To start with, I wonder if THE WIZARD OF OZ would be the cultural touchstone that it is if its space as a perennial favorite had been usurped by some other musical fairy tale; this one, for instance. Would I have ended up loving and revering this movie as I do that one? The answer is an emphatic “NO!”, despite the fact that they both feature Ray Bolger and trees capable of expressing themselves orally. What THE WIZARD OF OZ had was a real villain; the closest the wicked witch of the west came to being a comic character was her reaction to the suggestion that someone might drop a house on her, a moment which in no way damaged her role as a dangerous adversary. Barnaby is, on the other hand, more apt to play up the comedy of his role, and you never sense a real threat. This is a mistake; without that sense of danger, this movie never develops into anything other than a piece of fluff. Sadly, this is something that used to be known at Disney; remember how scary parts of SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS were?

The music is another point of contention; in THE WIZARD OF OZ, the songs (for the most part) are strong, memorable, and bound firmly into the plot of the story; they flesh out the themes and advance the plot. Here, they are fairly unmemorable and usually bring the plot to a screeching halt. And as this is an operetta (my definition of an operetta: a musical for people who don’t think there is enough music in musicals and who think operas are too high class), it spends most of its running time at a screeching halt. For me, the movie doesn’t really become fun until Ed Wynn shows up, and though this is partly because I find Wynn a fun and comfortable comic presence, it is also because Wynn’s distinctly non-musical presence inspires the filmmakers to blessedly dispense with the singing and dancing for the most part.

Other points: Barnaby’s comic cohorts bear just enough resemblance to Laurel and Hardy to leave me wishing I was watching the 1934 version of the movie instead. Also, having no kids of my own, I had to watch this one on my own without the excuse of playing it for the kids, and if the truth be told, I think I was more embarassed watching this than I was watching DRACULA: THE DIRTY OLD MAN.

And there’s not a single flying monkey.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Dracula: The Dirty Old Man (1969)

DRACULA: THE DIRTY OLD MAN (1969)
Article #635 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 12-10-2002
Posting Date: 5-5-2003

Dracula takes control of a man and causes him to turn into a werewolf (named Irving Jackalman) to kidnap nubile young women for his pleasure.

I wish I could say a simple perusal of the title of this particular movie would tell you everything about what to expect, but after subjecting myself to this movie, I’m afraid the title doesn’t begin to do it “justice”. Yes, it’s a comedy, and it’s a skinflick; that much you’d be able to figure out. But it looks for all the world as if the movie was originally shot to be taken more or less seriously, and then had a new soundtrack slapped onto it by two ad-libbing Jewish comedians while a light jazz combo plays in the background. Surprisingly, it actually got a couple laughs out of me; once, at the very beginning where a narrator waxes on endlessly about ‘the blue mountain behind the blue mountain behind the blue mountain” (among other things) that is an incoherent parody of “I remember how it all started…” narrative openings of movies, and a later sequence in which the narrator insists on telling you exactly what his character is doing at the moment he’s doing it (“I got out of the car, closed the door,” etc.). It goes downhill from there, as it begins to emphasize the unconvincing gore and the sex scenes, though it still does pull off the occasional gag. Still, the primary question I’m left with after watching this thing is this; which is worse, the fake bat or the werewolf costume? Make sure you send the kiddies to bed before dropping this one into your DVD player.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Zombies of Mora Tau (1957)

ZOMBIES OF MORA TAU (1957)
Article #634 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 12-9-2002
Posting date: 5-4-2003

Adventurers attempt to lay their hands on diamonds in an underwater ship that is under guard by zombies.

This is perhaps the first movie with underwater zombies, a fairly small subgenre, to be sure. Somehow, this is fitting; the movie has the languid, lethargic pace of zombies walking underwater. It is produced by Sam Katzman, directed by Edward L. Cahn, and features Gregg Palmer, Alison Hayes, Gene Roth and Morris Ankrum. Though these names hardly portend great star power, they do give the movie a strong B-Movie appeal, which is a good thing. This appeal may explain why I never quite found myself bored, despite the slowness of the pace and the fairly mundane plot; seeing all these familiar faces and names kept me relaxed and in a good frame of mind for the movie’s seventy minutes of running time. Sometimes, it just helps to like this type of movie.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

You Never Can Tell (1951)

YOU NEVER CAN TELL (1951)
Article #633 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 12-8-2002
Posting date: 5-3-2003

A dog inherits a fortune, and then is poisoned. He comes back from the dead as a private detective in order to solve his own murder.

There’s something about the above description that sets warning lights off in my head telling me that this could end up being insufferably cute or insufferably stupid. Actually, it ends up as neither, and part of the reason is that the private detective and his assistant (who used to be a horse) at least behave with a certain realization that they will call too much attention to themselves if they behave overly much like the animals they are; when the detective gets into a cab at one point, I was afraid we were going to have a shot of him sticking his head out the window with his tongue flapping in the wind. Instead, it’s just this kind of slapstick overkill the movie avoids. Make no mistake; the movie does depend on the central premise for a lot of its gag (the detective eats kibble, and the assistant likes to go the races), but it does so with a touch of wry wit rather than with a bludgeon. It’s a good thing it handles itself with a light touch; the story itself is pretty weak, with an ending that relies overly on coincidence rather than any sort of logic. Nonetheless, this is one of those movies that, though it is no classic by any means, is a lot better than it could have been. Dick Powell is the detective. It was remade in reverse years later by with Chevy Chase. Incidentally, the movie features a sequence in a world of the afterlife called “Beastatory” that is easily the bizarrest scene in the movie.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

The Vampire’s Ghost (1945)

THE VAMPIRE’S GHOST (1945)
Article #632 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing date: 12-7-2002
Posting date: 5-2-2003

An African village is the site of several unexplained murders. The natives believe a vampire is amongst them, and there is; a gambler by the name of Fallon.

When is a Lewton movie not a Lewton movie? When it came from Republic rather than RKO and was directed by Lesley Selander. Actually, Lewton had nothing to do with this movie, but despite the fact that the movie lacks Lewton’s trademark ambiguity (there is no doubt that we are dealing with a real vampire), in mood and poetry it reminds me of nothing else. The direction is merely ordinary, but there is an exquisite sadness about the unusually well-written script (by Leigh Brackett), and a memorable performance by John Abbott as Fallon, whose unusual looks and mesmerizing eyes make him an ideal actor for his role. Fallon makes for an interesting vampire; rather than isolating himself from the rest of the world, he actually seems to be a member of the community and interacts with those around him on a daily basis. Abbott’s refusal to resort to melodrama results in him underplaying the role, and he manages to invest his character with a wonderful sense of world-weariness that I’ve found in no other classic vampire movie that I’ve seen. There are memorable moments; a scene where he hypnotizes a man to leave his body under the full moon, and a jarring sequence involving a mirror both come to mind. I didn’t expect much from this movie going in, but it turned out to be one of the most unexpected (and pleasant) surprises I’ve run into recently.

0 CommentsLeave a comment