Track the Films You Watch (2010) - Page 38

It might just have something to do with these longer threads.  There were issues with the horror thread and you can't even pull up some of the older TRACK threads (at least page 1).

For the past week each time I went to post my reviews it had some sort of error.  I usually do the spell check, put the bold in and then add the stars.  You then hit submit and what gets posted in your text BEFORE you added the bold, spelling or stars.  You then have to edit the thing again and go back and do it all over again. 

Now I'm dying to know what Mario's original post was.  I think it's best to just copy and paste before hitting submit.  I've had some PM from a few people on the front page and apparently this type of issue is going on there as well.

About Last Night... (1986)

Edward Zwick

Based on David Mamet's play, the film tells the story of Danny (Rob Lowe) and Debbie (Demi Moore) who have a one night stand and then try to build a relationship from it even though both have friends (James Belushi, Elizabeth Perkins) warning them against it.  You can find hundreds of love stories from the 80s but in my opinion this one here is without question one of the best even though when viewing it today there are a few problems with it.  I think the positives are so strong that you can't help but view them as a contemporary classic.  For starters, I think Mamet's play is an incredibly strong one that translates to the screen without any trouble and this is due in large part to the terrific screenplay that has some wonderful dialogue.  While watching the film there's no question it deserves its R-rating but the dialogue seems incredibly fresh and like something you would actually hear between friends.  The raunchy talk between Lowe and Belushi as well as the "other side" of things done in more adult manner between Moore and Perkins.  The screenplay gets everything down so right that you can't help but feel you're watching a real relationship over the course of a year and when you see the ups and downs you feel as if this movie is giving it to you pretty straight.  Another major plus are the performances and while the actors themselves might disagree, I'd say this is the best work any of them have done.  Lowe and Moore make for the perfect couple and both of them make their characters smart, funny and of course at times dramatic.  They are wonderful together during the sexual scenes and they really shine once the relationship gets started and of course begins to sour.  Belushi is downright hilarious here and you can't help but wish you had a friend like him.  Perkins is also very good in her role.  The screenplay is all about relationships both sexually and more emotionally and I think the movie does a very good job at handling both of them.  You can tell from the way the film was built that it's based on a play but this never hurts the film.  Director Zwick does a very good job at handling the romance and mixing it in with the raunchy comedy and more dramatic moments.  I think the film does run a bit too long and there's a bit too much music in it but ABOUT LAST NIGHT... is still one of the more memorable love stories of the decade.  With the strong screenplay and performances, it still remains rather fresh after all these years.

Titanic II (2010)

Shane Van Dyke

When James Cameron's TITANIC ending and the lights went up in the theater, it was clear everyone was wanting a sequel.  Here we are in 2010 and the guys (and gals) at The Asylum have finally delivered.  The film starts on the 100th anniversary of the sinking of Titanic so the new boat Titanic II decides to leave and take the same route as the first ship.  Along the way a tsunami causes an ice burg to go in front of Titanic II and we have a whole new disaster.  When you go into an Asylum movie named TITANIC II then you pretty much prepare yourself for the absolute worst and I must admit that the film isn't as horrible as it should have been.  I was actually rather surprised to see that much of it was rather well-made and we also got a few good performances.  With that said, the low-budget certainly adds a lot to the negative side because we've got a lot of horrid CGI and towards the end the story gets a tad bit silly but thankfully the ending didn't go in one direction as I feared it would.  The screenplay, by director and star Van Dyke, actually plays everything very serious so don't expect any camp or spoof matters.  The story builds up some nice tension as the ice burg starts coming towards the ship and after the majority of the people are killed off we're given a fairly entertaining version of THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE.  We see our two heroes trying to make it to safety where they're going to wait for someone to come help.  The CGI shots of the ship are all rather poor as are the scenes where we see the tsunami coming towards the ship.  The global warming stuff is rather bland but it had to be done for the story.  I think where the film works is in its drama as director Van Dyke at least builds up some nice tension as the sinking starts to take place.  He also gives a decent performance in the film as does Marie Westbrook who plays his former girlfriend.  Bruce Davison plays her father and he too delivers a good performance.  Usually when you see familiar names in these type of films they're just cashing a paycheck but to his credit Davison does at least try and in the end delivers a nice performance.  At 90-minutes the film starts to lose steam towards the end but considering you're watching something called TITANIC II you can't fault it too much.

Broken (2006)

Simon Boyes, Adam Mason

Yet another mean-spirited SAW wannabe with this one coming from Britain.  In the film a woman (Nadja Brand) goes out on a date and goes to bed but when she wakes up she's inside a coffin.  She doesn't know where she is or how she got there but soon she's tied up to a tree where she must rip a razor out of her stomach in order to cut herself down.  She's then introduced to the man (Eric Colvin) doing all of this stuff and from here on out it's one torture after another.  The SAW movies have had some major ups and downs but I think you can view those films as at least well-written and made but that can't be said about BROKEN as it's one confusing mess that never really adds up to much and in the end it's pretty pointless.  The pointless aspect would mean I would have to give a spoiler to the ending, which I won't do here but I'm sure most will came to the same train of thought after sitting through this thing.  It's never made clear why the man kidnaps these women unless the only point was for them to grow a garden for him and keep his pots and pans clean.  If that was the reason for everything going on then the screenplay is worse than I thought.  If the entire point of this movie is to just see the woman tortured then that's simply not good enough.  We've seen this type of film so many times that there's nothing fresh or original done here with the exception of the killer constantly being by the victim.  There are a couple interesting scenes where he's taking care of her as if he cares but sadly this doesn't last too long and this emotion never comes back.  The torture scenes are all rather cheaply done but we do get some special effects and this is especially true during the scene where the women have to remove stitches, dig into themselves and pull the razor out.  Most of the other violence is rather bland and really doesn't get too hard to watch.  The performances really aren't all that bad with both Brand and Colvin fitting their roles nicely but once again the screenplay really doesn't give them too much to work with.  A third character is introduced and is so annoying that you'll be cheering for the killer.  BROKEN is yet another entry in the so-called "torture/porn" genre that keeps delivering hit and miss flicks.  This one here is certainly a miss and it's the type of film that will keep making you more and more frustrated as it moves along.  You sit there watching just to finally get to the point but that point simply never comes.

Hound of the Baskervilles, The (1988)

Brian Mills

The number of adaptations Arthur Conan Doyle's novel The Hound of the Baskervilles has received over the years must make it one of the most popular.  Some might say it's because the novel is so easy to put on screen while I've read a few who said it's because the story is more horror-like.  Whatever the reason this one here features Jeremy Brett as Holmes and Edward Hardwicke as Watson and they try to protect Sir Charles Baskerville (Raymond Adamson) from the deadly curse of the hound.  Many Holmes fans claim this is the best version of Hound but I personally wouldn't go that far.  While there's a lot to enjoy here I still think the Rathbone and Cushing versions are better.  I think the biggest problem I had with this one was its rather slow pacing that really made the 100-minute running time feel longer.  The strange thing about this version is that they actually expand all the early stuff without Holmes so this keeps everyone's favorite mystery solver on the back burner until around thirty-minutes left in the movie.  Hardwicke does a nice job in the role of Watson but I think he was a tad bit too dry at times so a lively performance might have helped the film move a little better.  I really didn't care too much for Adamson in his role and I felt Alastair Duncan was a little weak as Mortimer.  As for Brett, he's a favorite to many people and I'll admit that I found him to be a very intelligent Holmes.  That's always the most important part to whoever plays the character so Brett had no trouble at making you believe he could be as wise of a person needed for Holmes.  The atmosphere is rather thick throughout and this includes the nice ending.  The production design is quite nice throughout, which is another plus. 

You Only Live Once (1937)

Fritz Lang

Social drama has Henry Fonda playing Eddie Taylor, a three time loser who manages to get out of prison thanks to his girlfriend (Sylvia Sidney) who works for the public defender.  Once out he plans on going straight but he can't catch a break and soon he's arrested and sent to prison for a crime he didn't commit.  Soon he's able to break out and goes on the run with his girl but the police are always one step behind.  As you continue to read this you're going to hear mostly negative things so you might wonder why on Earth I gave this thing three stars.  That there is pretty simple because if you're a fan of this type of drama then you're probably going to enjoy this one.  If you're a fan of director Lang then you're going to enjoy all his great touches that he puts on the film.  This film was made way before the term noir came about but I think it would be fair to put it in that genre and the visual look here will certainly remind people of countless noir titles the director would go onto make.  The way Lang uses all the shadows and fog made for a great, dark atmosphere.  Another thing that makes this film worth watching are the performances by Fonda and Sidney.  Both are extremely good in their roles with Fonda really sticking out great in this early performance.  He manages to be quite menacing when he needs to but he's also very sympathetic in the early scenes.  That terrific voice really captures the character's spirit of wanting to do right only to have one bad thing happen after another.  Now, what really kills this film and keeps it from being better is the downright horrid and embarrassing screenplay.  I'm in no way a professional writer but I think this screenplay here is without question one of the worst I've seen from a professional.  The thing plays everything out in such a simple manor that you can't help but roll your eyes and be well aware of what's going to happen at every turn.  The way Fonda gets out is too simple.  The way he gets back into trouble is too simple.  The twist once he's in prison is too simple.  The breaking point of the Sidney character is too simple.  I won't give away the ending but the twists that come in the final twenty-minutes are just way too simple and laughable.  The screenplay doesn't do either character any justice either because by the end of the film you hate the Fonda character and you can't stand the Sidney character and both of these are emotions the film certainly didn't want you to have.  YOU ONLY LIVE ONCE is worth watching if you're fans of the director or cast but be sure you're in a light mood because this horrid screenplay will have you wondering how on Earth it got pass anyone with a green light.

Four Around a Woman (Vier um die Frau) (1921)

Fritz Lang

This German film from director Fritz Lang was lost for many decades before a print finally showed up in Brazil.  Running a very short 55-minutes, the film tells the story of a woman (Carola Toelle) who was found by her husband tied up on their wedding night.  It looked like a thief did it but years later a blackmailer comes forward with the truth so the husband plants a trap to try and find out if his wife has been seeing another man.  This early Lang film has a lot of the director's touches but in the end it's just way too confusing and rather bloating to be very entertaining.  I think those interested in Lang's career might want to check it out for curiosity sake but all others would probably be best to avoid it.  The film opens up with a magnificent shot of a camera zooming in and then doing a circle around a table that really sets up the action that is about to follow.  The beautiful shot certain contains that German Expressionism that is so loved in this era.  Lang also does a very good job building up the dark, dirty streets where a lot of the crime takes place.  As you'd expect, Lang uses dark alleys, dark corners and various shots of shadows to build up this atmosphere and the cinematography perfectly captures all of this.  Toelle is very good in the role of the wife as she has no problem giving various emotions and getting them to come across on screen.  Fans of Lang will also notice actor Rudolf Klein-Rogge in a small bit here.  One could also make the case that his character here might have been an influence on the Mabuse character that he would play for Lang the next year.  The rest of the supporting performances are pretty good if no one else really stands out.  I think the biggest problem is that there's very little story actually going on and it gets expanded to the point where you feel as if you're just going in circles.  At times it's rather confusing to know what's going on but I'm not sure if part of this film is still lost or not.  Considering how long most of Lang's films were around this time I have a somewhat hard time believing that 55-minutes is all there is.  With that said, it's better to have this print than nothing at all but I think most non-Lang fans will be hitting the stop button long before the finale. 

Iron Horse, The (1924)

John Ford

John Ford's first epic was a massive production for Fox who pretty much spent a ton of money hoping that the film would bring people in, which it eventually did.  The film made a ton of money for Fox but more important it took Ford out of the gutters of "B" Westerns and made him a director to be reckoned with.  The film tells the "true" story of the first transcontinental railroad as Davy Brandon (George O'Brien) tries to fulfill the dreams of his father who was killed by Indians years earlier.  Davy must also try to win the heart of a former love (Madge Bellamy) while fighting off a man who wants to see the railroad fail.  There's no question that Ford and Fox pretty much threw everything into this film and you can tell because it's story is all over the place.  While I think the film isn't nearly as good as its reputation you still can't help but be impressed by many of the visuals.  According to legend there were over 6000 people employed on the production with most of them being extras to give all the scenes a more epic look. I'd believe this legend because the scenery is downright beautiful to look at and there's no question that it has the look of a mammoth epic.  The highlight for me were all the scenes where we see the railroad being built as the boards are placed and railings hammered down.  There were many future films that dealt with the railroad but I must say this one here makes it look the most realistic.  We get many other great action scenes including countless fights with the Indians where once again you can see the large scale with the amount of people, horses and of course stunt men.  I think what really hurts the film is the fact that it really doesn't tell a clear story.  I'm not sure if the film originally ran much longer but the 135-minute running time feels way too long but the reason for this is that so much happens and often times it doesn't really connect together.  Instead of telling one full story, it seems the screenplay bounces all over the place and tries to tell as much as possible.  One minute we're dealing with the railroad and then we jump to some town being built up.  One moment we're dealing with the Indians but the next moment we're worried about the dress Bellamy is going to wear.  It feels as if we're just getting countless vignettes pieced together without much need to bring everything together.  Perhaps Fox was going for a Cecil B. DeMille type epic but this here didn't fully work.  The film starts off saying that the history is true but that's clearly not the case as there are certain historic figures used in the film that had no place in the original events (like Buffalo Bill).  Both O'Brien and Bellamy are good in their roles as are Cyril Chadwick, George Waggner, Will Walling and Charles Edward Bull who plays President Lincoln.  THE IRON HORSE is certainly worth watching once for its importance to film history and while there are many impressive moments on the whole I think the film comes up a tad bit short. 

Fugitive, The (1947)

John Ford

Henry Fonda plays a priest in Central America who finds himself on the run after the government bans all religion.  Fonda manages to go from town to town with religious folks willing to protect him but soon he runs into a crooked police informer (J. Carrol Naish) who might be giving information to the Lieutenant (Pedro Armendariz) who will stop at nothing to clear the streets of the evil religious figures.  This film was a notorious flop when it was released and I'm fairly positive it would flap in any year in any decade.  That's not because it's a bad film because it isn't but the film is so depressing that you can't help but feel most people wouldn't want to sit through it.  The film contains some absolutely breath-taking cinematography by Gabriel Figueroa, which ranks as some of the best I've seen from this era.  If you think the noir genre was good at using shadows and darkness then you haven't seen anything yet.  As I said, this movie is 100% depression and what really fits the mood is the cinematography because it paints the perfect atmosphere.  There are countless memorable scenes including the final shot with a cross as well as an earlier one where Fonda is hiding in a church and many parents from the village come in to get their children baptized while they have the chance.  Another major plus working for the film is Ford's direction, which is top-notch as usual.  I'm really not sure why this film would appeal to him but it's always amazing to go through Ford's career and see how many times he would direct something outside his range and pull it off.  Ford does a terrific job building up this sad atmosphere and I really enjoyed the fact that he didn't pull any punches by adding fake comedy or just trying to lighten up the mood.  Then, of course, there's Fonda who once again delivers the goods.  The way Fonda walks here makes it seem as if he's a feather blowing in the wind because he's obviously a weak man who is struggling with being hunted.  I thought the actor did a tremendous job showing the frailty of the character and the inner struggles he's having with the religion.  Naish made a career out of playing snakes and once again he delivers an excellent performance and I'm sure by the end you'll be wanting to kill this guy yourself.  Dolores del Rio plays a disgraced woman who is befriended by the priest and is excellent as well.  Leo Carrillo, Ward Bond and Robert Armstrong add nice support as well.  It's Armendariz who steals the show however as the truly tortured soul who is fighting to keep the religion out of his streets but is doing so due to some secret issues.  THE FUGITIVE has all the right elements but it's still lacking something.  Perhaps the film is just too laid-back for its own good but it never really crosses the greatness mark.

Private Eyes (1953)

Edward Bernds

The Bowery Boys Club is doing just fine in back of Louie's parlor but after Sach (Huntz Hall) is punched in the nose he grows the ability to read people's minds.  Sach (Leo Gorcey) gets the bright idea to buy a detective agency and sure enough a beautiful blonde comes in asking for help and the boys soon find themselves battling crooks.  If you've hung around the series long enough to reach this thirty-second film then you're not going to see anything you haven't already but the film moves along well enough for the fans.  I think the first twenty-minutes are the best as the stuff dealing with the boys club will certainly have you flashing back to the East Side Kids days and the stuff with Sach getting beat up was rather funny.  The early stuff dealing with Sach reading everyones mind actually had some well-written lines but once the entire subplot dealing with the crooks kicks in we get one tired joke after another.  It's a real shame that everything was pretty straight-forward because there's enough material that they could have done to make this much better.  Very briefly does Sach do his Sherlock Holmes impersonation so why they didn't keep this going is beyond me.  They set up all sort of noir elements but do nothing with them.  Instead we get the same boring joke over and over and the final slapstick dash through the health resort just falls on its face as we get the same gag over and over with the main one being men falling into a hot tub.  Both Hall and Gorcey seem to be up for the events as both deliver fine performances with energy.  Bernard Gorcey doesn't get much to do this time, although he at least gets a pie in the face.  The rest of the cast are just so-so.  PRIVATE EYES isn't a good film by any stretch of the imagination but it's certainly better than you'd expect from the thirty-second film in a series.

Paris Playboys (1954)

William Beaudine

Weak entry in the series has a few good ideas but the execution is rather poor.  In the film Slip (Leo Gorcey) and Sach (Huntz Hall) head to Paris after some French scientist mistake Sach for a brilliant professor who has disappeared.  Their hopes is that the real professor will see the impersonator, get jealous and come back home but sure enough some bad guys mistake Sach for the real thing.  One-Shot Beaudine returned to the director's chair for this thirty-third entry and you can tell due to the slower pacing compared to the previous few films.  Once again we're treated to some rather good things but the majority of the film is just deja vu as we've seen this stuff countless times before.  It's amazing how little the series has changed even after thirty films as we get the same basic set up and then the familiar conclusion as a group of bad guys get involved and mess everything up.  The bad guys here are all poorly written and appear to be rejects from countless other movies that we've all watched.  Another problem is that nothing really goes on here until the very end of the film when things finally pick up.  When the "professor", also played by Hall, shows up the film goes into overdrive and we actually get several laughs because the professor is an insane jerk who is constantly slapping Gorcey around and even Bernard Gorcey is brought to tears by his meanness.  Hall finally got his name above the title and next to Gorcey and it was about time as the series is certainly going into his direction.  Hall handles Sach with ease but the really impressive bits come from him playing the professor.  The French accent is fun but seeing him playing a passionate lover and tough guy was great fun and he pulled it off nicely.  It's just too bad they saved this until the end of the movie.  Gorcey goes through the motions but is fine and good old Bernard gets some funny moments as well.  In the end, PARIS PLAYBOYS is pretty much what you'd expect.

Bowery Boys Meet the Monsters, The (1954)

Edward Bernds

Fast-paced and fun entry in the series has Slip (Leo Gorcey) and Sach (Huntz Hall) traveling to a creepy mansion so that they can ask the owners if the Bowery kids can use their lot to play ball.  Soon the duo are being held captive by the mad scientists who want to use their brains in some crazy experiments.  After several so-so entries, it's good to see the series back with a winner as this one perfectly mixes the laughs with the various horror elements.  This is clearly influenced by the Abbott and Costello flicks but that's not a bad thing especially when you get such a winning film.  I really loved the fact that Bernds was back behind the camera as he kept the action coming very fast and helped keep everything moving.  The laughs are plenty as we get countless good jokes including one that must have been seen by Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder as it would later be used in YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN.  At one point the creepy butler tells Sach and Slip to "walk this way" which they do by mocking the way he's walking.  Other funny jokes include the various horror elements including a sexy vampire, a living tree who eats humans, a killer gorilla and a robot who keeps losing its head.  All of these elements are perfectly blended into the story and we also get a kind old lady who wants to feed the fat Slip to her tree.  Both Gorcey and Hall are on the top of their game and deliver fine performances.  The comedy here is pretty wide ranged as we get a lot of physical stuff but also a lot of one liners and both of them deliver just fine.  Bernard Gorcey has a couple funny bits including a very good incident with the gorilla.  Some might be disappointed that the "monsters" aren't Dracula, Frankenstein or the Mummy but it really doesn't matter because of how well everything works here.  A lot of the jokes fall on their face but that's only because so many are flying around that your bound not to have them all work.  Fans of the series will certainly find this to be a winner but I think even those who can't stand them will find this one entertaining.

Das wandernde Bild (1920)

Fritz Lang

This 1920 German film is one of Fritz Lang's earliest and for decades it was considered lost before a print turned up in Brazil in 1986.  As with FOUR AROUND A WOMAN, another Lang film, this one here is missing at least two or three reels.  I've read four different reviews for this film and each one gave a different description of the plot.  What is certain the film is about a woman (Mia May) who runs away from her abusive husband.  She ends up in some mountain era where she hides out only to run into what appears to be her husband's twin brother.  Soon the husband is back on her trail as she runs into a former boyfriend who had taken a vow of celibacy.  There are other plot twists with more people coming and going but it's pretty hard to tell exactly what's going on for a couple reasons.  Of course there's the fact that so much of the film is missing but another negative thing is that the film has Portuguese inter-titles and the English translation is extremely poor at times.  With that said, there's enough interesting aspects to make this film worth watching.  There's no question that it's quite unlike anything else that Lang was doing around this time unless his other lost films turn out to be like this.  The film really seems like it could have influenced Luis Bunuel due to all the religious stuff here.  There are some striking images including one of the Virgin Mary coming down a mountain as well as other scenes that take a look at religion.  I've heard one person call this film something that Dreyer would make instead of Lang and I think that's a fair statement.  Another thing that makes this worth viewing is the performance by May who is downright breath taking at times.  I thought she did a marvelous job showing how tortured and frightened this woman was.  The actress never has to overact and makes for a very interesting character and one that you really care for.  The rest of the performances were decent at best so there's no question this belongs to May all the way.  Also known as THE MOVING IMAGE, you can't help but hope that a complete print turns up at some point because it would undoubtedly make the film all the more interesting.  There appear to be all sorts of subplots that have been cut out so I'm sure a complete print would help when it comes to figuring out the story. 

As I said in my review, I think the producer's or perhaps the director realized that they could hype this film up to make people see it, which they did, but then the people would probably walk away disappointed.  I really hope the sequels deliver the hype that this one actually had behind it.  This was playing via Netflix streaming and I walked in on my girlfriend's daughter and her grandmother watching it.  Neither was overly impressed or shocked about anything and both are about as square as you can come.  I did love the leading performance though.

Mystery of the 13th Guest, The (1943)

William Beaudine

Decent "B" movie about a family getting together for the eldest to announce that his will won't be read for another thirteen years after his granddaughter turns twenty-one.  Thirteen years later the guests at that party start turning up dead so it's up to a private detective (Dick Purcell) and a Police Lt. (Tim Ryan) to figure out who's doing the killings.  If you're looking for high art then you're not going to find it here but if you're looking for an hour to kill with some light entertainment then you might find this Monogram quickie entertaining.  Old 'One Shot' Beaudine certainly doesn't do anything overly special with this murder-mystery but he at least keeps the pace up so that the brief 60-minutes go by quickly and without too much dead space.  The screenplay itself certainly doesn't try to do anything ground breaking but it keeps the characters interesting and the murderer under wraps until the very end, which is pretty much all you can ask for out of a film like this.  Purcell does a pretty good job with his role and makes the fast-talking wise guy fun to watch.  His back-and-forth banter with Ryan is pretty entertaining and Helen Parrish makes for a good female lead.  Frank Faylen plays the dimwitted cop and gets a few laughs.  The rest of the cast are serviceable and give pretty much what you'd expect out of them.  The mystery itself is a pretty good one as I found the murder weapon (an electrical wire attached to a phone) to be quite fun and all the horror trappings like the mysterious hidden doors and traps to help keep things moving.  No one is ever going to mistake this film for a classic but if you're a fan of the genre then you'll know that there's much worse out there.

Fashion Model (1945)

William Beaudine

Cheap but fairly entertaining murder-mystery from Monogram has stock boy Danny O'Brien (Robert Lowery) being accused of killing a model so he runs off with his girlfriend (Marjorie Weaver) to try and clear his name while a detective (Tim Ryan) tries to find them.  When you see the Monogram logo go up on the screen that there should tell you not to expect any type of art film or masterpiece.  Those who enjoy these "B" movies will probably find this one here slightly entertaining or at the very least it's a good way to kill an hour.  As with the majority of films like it, this one here suffers from some really bad comic relief.  I've seen dozens of these films and I've always wondered why they added so much comedy relief and especially considering how over-the-top and rather silly they make it.  We of course have the one standard cop role who is such a moron that he could only be a cop in a "B" film like this.  The comic banter between Lowery and Weaver is also pretty high as it appears they're wanting to be some sort of Abbott and Costello team.  I thought the two were fairly good together but it's very possible that 'One Shot' Beaudine really wasn't giving them the opportunity to build anything in terms of chemistry but instead just wanted the quickest take they could give.  Ryan is pretty good in his role as well and we got some nice stuff from Lorna Gray and Dewey Robinson.  The actual mystery behind the film isn't too bad but then again you shouldn't be expecting something like Hitchcock.  There is one major goof in the film when a character offers a $5,000 reward for a piece of jewelry that is missing.  The next scene one of the characters this reward was told to says that the reward money is three times as much as what was previously said.

Girl Who Dared, The (1944)

Howard Bretherton

Decent "B" flick from Republic has a group of people invited to a party at a creepy house where legend has it a ghost appears once a year.  It turns out this group doesn't know who invited them and sure enough it doesn't take long before one by one they start dropping dead.  The "old dark house" genre was more than fifteen-years-old by the time this one here was released to theaters so needless to say there's really nothing new or original here.  The more of these films I watch the more I realize that they were all for the most part cheaply made and I'm really not sure what the point of so many of them were unless they simply made a lot of money on small budgets.  This one here certainly isn't a masterpiece but at just 52-minutes the thing is short enough to be fairly entertaining.  I think the best thing the film has going for it is the nice cast, which includes Peter Cookson as a mysterious mechanic, Lorna Gray as the main female, Willie Best as the nervous servant and Grant Withers as one of the many possible murderers.  Each person turns in a fine performance with Best once again doing that scary-cat act like no other.  The story itself isn't all that bad and I actually enjoyed the backstory dealing with a pirate ship that crashed a hundred years earlier and this is where the ghost comes from.  We also have a subplot dealing with radiation and the impact it might have on the person who comes in contact with it.  There's some fairly good atmosphere but there's no question that they weren't meaning for this to be anything other than cheap entertainment.  Fans of the genre who must see everything will certainly want to check it out but others will probably be squirming in their seats.  This certainly isn't the type of movie for everyone but fans of the genre should find it entertaining.

London Blackout Murders (1943)

George Sherman

Bland, boring and rather predictable "mystery" from Republic set during London as WWII is at full steam.  The people are terrified about the bombs dropping from the air but they've also got to worry about murders happening in the streets by a nut with a hypodermic needle.  It turns out the killer is a store owner (John Abbott) who is considered one of the nicest men around so it's not who is doing the crimes but why.  When you watch a Republic film you know very well not to expect anything overly special.  At best you hope for a slightly entertaining film but sadly that's not the case with this thing, which even at 55-minutes seems way too long and pointless.  The film tries to be clever and there are a few nice touches but in the end there's just not enough going on with this thing to make it worth viewing.  Some of the interesting aspects is having it set during the war with the people of London having to deal with the air raids.  This also leads to a couple nice scenes showing the women in the factories working while the men are off fighting in the war.  This was something that was happening and it's rather shocking that so few movies mention it.  We even get some talk of Jack the Ripper but outside of this stuff LONDON BLACKOUT MURDERS is very flat.  The entire reasons as to why this nice man is killing people should be obvious within the first few minutes of the film so when the big twist happens it comes way too late.  Abbott is a fine actor and does what he can with the role but even he can't work miracles.  Mary McLeod plays the woman renting a room from him but she can't add much either.  The final courtroom stuff is rather embarrassing so needless to say there's not really any reason to check this one out.  Universal horror vet Curt Siodmak wrote the screenplay.

Fatal Witness, The (1945)

Lesley Selander

If it's from Republic then you know it's going to be cheap and quick.  The film tells the story of a young man  (George Leigh) who fights with his wealthy aunt before storming out of the house.  The next morning she's found murdered so Inspector Trent (Richard Fraser) is on the case and knows her nephew was behind it but it turns out he was in jail all night.  This "B" flick runs just under an hour and you can't help but wish that a better director had been assigned to the film because there are actually some fairly good moments here that are wasted.  Director Selander doesn't show any signs here of wanting to make anything than something under budget and the reason I say that is because there's really not a single scene where there's any energy nor does anything appear to have been done with any style.  The actually story is a pretty good one and especially for Republic standards.  The mystery behind who did the killing is kept a secret for the most part, although we get more and more clues before finally getting the big secret told to us with about twenty-minutes to go.  From this point on there are a few neat twists and turns that are actually pretty fun but sadly all of this is wasted because of the pacing and overall lack of atmosphere.  The pacing is so poor that this 58-minute movie actually felt twice as long and that's not a good thing when you're watching something like this.  There's never any real drama or tension, which is a real shame and especially during the downright crazy ending, which carries over into horror territory.  The additional twist at the end was a nice one even if it's nearly impossible to believe.  Both Leigh and Fraser turn in fine performances and we even get Evelyn Ankers in an important part.  Fans of her Universal films will enjoy seeing her here as she has that same charm she always has.  THE FATAL WITNESS is pure "B" madness but it's fairly good but you can't help but think it should have been much better with some stronger direction.

Exposed (1947)

George Blair

Yet another cheap and bland "B" picture from Republic.  This time out smart alack P.I. Belinda Prentice (Adele Maria) is hired by a rich father to do some snooping on his son who recently moved out of his house.  Soon the father is murdered and Belinda must try to work around the family to get clues as well as her inspector father (Robert Armstrong).  If you must watch every murder-mystery that was released during this era then I'd recommend this to you but all others should certainly avoid as there's very little to recommend here.  I would love to say that the screenplay was horrid and the entire investigation was just poorly written but I wouldn't say that in good faith.  The film is so blandly directed that it's hard to really care about the investigation and it's not even fun trying to figure out who the killer was.  The movie gets off to a rather silly start as our "hero" is held up only to use her brains to get out of it.  The problem is that I didn't believe she was smart for a single second.  To make matters worse is that her "catch" is that she has a smart and sassy mouth, which grows very tiresome very quickly.  It doesn't help when you're suppose to be rooting for someone yet you can't stand her.  To be fair, Maria is pretty good in the role as you can tell she's giving it her all but the screenplay simply makes her character unlikeable.  It's always fun seeing Armstrong even if, again, the screenplay doesn't do much for him.  The supporting cast includes Lorna Gray, Mark Roberts and cult favorite Bob Steele playing a gangster-like character named Chicago.  EXPOSED runs an hour but you'll be running out of patience around the twenty-minute mark and sadly things never really pick up.  This isn't a horrible movie by any standards but there's simply no life or energy and in     the end there's really no point in watching it.

I've got about five more noirs on my DVR that I didn't finish watching a month or so ago.  I've got it set to record QUICKSAND this week.  I already own the PD version but I'm hoping the picture quality is a tad bit better.  I've never seen the thing but there's just something about it that has me curious.  Perhaps it's just Rooney and Lorre working together.  I've heard a few people call it ANDY HARDY GETS INTO TROUBLE but I'm still rather curious to see it.

Burning Bed, The (1984)

Robert Greenwald

Farrah Fawcett won critical acclaim for her portrait of Michigan wife and mother Francine Hughes who after thirteen-years of abuse by her husband (Paul Le Mat) finally got away by pouring gas on him and setting him a fire.  This certainly isn't the greatest movie about abuse but there's no question that Fawcett turns in a marvelous performance and this alone makes the film worth sitting through.  It's rather amazing seeing this film today just because of how different domestic abuse laws are.  There are countless times in the film when the cops show up, see Fawcett beat to a bloody pulp yet they don't even arrest the husband even after one incident where they catch him in the act.  I can't help but think a lot of younger people would view this film as nothing more than pure fiction but it would certainly be important to let them know that there was a time when this type of stuff happened.  There's no question that the performances are the main reason to watch this thing as Le Mat is very effective as the bum husband and Richard Masur gets a few good scenes as Fawcett's trial lawyer.  Grace Zabriskie, who most will remember as the mother in AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN, turns in a terrific performance as the husband's mother who sees her "baby" doing no harm.  The coldness of her character makes her nearly as bad as her son.  Then, of course, there's Fawcett who certainly gives the performance of her career.  I've read a few reviews that said she comes across too tough in the role and it wasn't believable when she was getting beat but I'd have to disagree.  I thought Fawcett handled the abusive scenes perfectly and I thought she really sold it wonderfully.  The final abuse sequence when the husband is playing with her by pretending he's getting ready to throw a punch is so effective because of Fawcett's reactions.  I've been quite negative on several of her performances but this one here is flawless.  With that said, THE BURNING BED still has a lot of problems and most of them are the typical made-for-TV stuff including the constant build ups before the commercial break as well as some stagy storytelling.  The final ten-minutes when we're shown the events of the day that the husband was murdered are downright chilling and it's a shame the rest of the movie couldn't have been as powerful.  Either way, the film is certainly worth viewing for Fawcett's performance alone.

Outfit, The (1973)

John Flynn

Nice crime-thriller has Robert Duvall playing the small-time criminal Macklin (Robert Duvall) who is released from prison and learns that his brother has been killed by an outfit.  Macklin just avoids being killed by a hit but learns that a bank he, his brother and another man (Joe Don Baker) robbed was owned by this outfit.  It turns out one (Robert Ryan) put a hit out on all of them so Duvall and Baker decide to rob them until the outfit agrees to pay them $250,000 to leave them alone.  THE OUTFIT certainly doesn't offer anything we haven't seen in countless crime pictures but at the same time it's simply so exciting that you can't help not to enjoy it.  Of course the main draw to a crime picture like this is for the performances of both Duvall and Baker.  In a lot of ways this is a buddy picture since the two men obviously care a lot for one another and it's always fun for the viewing when our two heroes are kicking back and enjoying all the damage that they're doing.  There are several heist scenes in the picture where Duvall and Baker must enter all sorts of dangerous situations to try and walk away with cash.  I think a lot of people are going to be reminded of THE GETAWAY and this here is just as gritty and rough.  The violence in the film is pretty graphic but it still remains within that 70s PG limit.  We get countless shootings, a few broken bottles to faces and of course we have the at the type familiar scene of women getting knocked out by men.  As you'd expect, Duvall turns in a wonderful performance simply because he really isn't the action or anti-hero type.  When you think of Duvall you certainly don't picture him in a movie like this but he exploits every bit of energy out of the screenplay and in the end he's quite believable in the role.  Baker is a lot fun as well as it's obvious he's having a blast playing this tough role as he always does.  Karen Black plays Duvall's girl and she too delivers the same type of winning performance you expect from her.  RObert Ryan is delightfully evil as the main gangster who double crosses the boys and becomes their main target.  The supporting cast includes familiar faces like Jane Geer, Elisha Cook, Timothy Carey and Marie Windsor.  The screenplay is pretty simple in terms of story structure but it's still good enough to create some great atmosphere and it certainly lets the actors do their thing.  The movie is pretty much what you'd expect out of the good 70s crime flick so fans of the genre will certainly want to check it out.

Hellraiser III (1992)

Anthony Hickcox

Third entry in the series has an investigative reporter (Terry Farrell) needing a story and she gets one when a guy is rushed into an emergency room ripped to shreds by what appears to be hooks and chains.  She begins to investigate and sure enough she eventually runs into Pinhead (Doug Bradley) who is once again recruiting people to bring him flesh.  Many will say that this is where the HELLRAISER series really went to hell and I'd have to agree, although I'd stop a little short of calling this film truly bad.  I think it's a major disappointment considering how good the first film was and what a decent first sequel we got.  The biggest problem with this film is that it was sold to Miramax and it was clear that they wanted the film to appeal to a larger audience so it really does seem as if they wanted this to fit the teen crowds and not necessarily adults.  The first film in the series and to a lesser extent the second at least tried to stay away from the slasher or teen circle and instead went for dark atmosphere, some brutal violence and a rather smart story.  The gore and violence is still here but there's very little else working in this thing.  For starters, the screenplay has all sorts of dumb one-liners that make you feel as if they wanted to turn Pinhead into Freddy in order to make him seem more cool.  I'll admit that a few of the lines work early on but the more that come the more annoying they get.  Another problem is the actual story, which is just downright weak and really never goes anywhere.  We get pretty much the same structure as the first two films only this time it's watered down and not nearly as smart.  Farrell is decent enough in her role as is Paula Marshall as the punk chick who helps her.  Bradley is wonderful in the role of Pinhead even if the screenplay doesn't do too much for him.  It's well-known that the violence and blood was cut to pieces by the MPAA and it's uncut version is pretty brutal especially the bar massacre where dozens of people get ripped apart in a variety of ways.  This sequence is one of the few high points in a disappointing entry to a series that had clearly seen better days but was about to see much worse.

Christine Jorgensen Story, The (1970) BOMB

Irving Rapper

Dreadfully awful bio-pic about George Jorgensen (John Hansen) who just didn't feel like playing football or building things as a small child.  No, he preferred playing with dolls and putting his sister's dresses on.  As an adult he went to Denmark where he had a sex reassignment operation and became known as Christine Jorgensen.  People might not know it but originally Ed Wood and company where going to make a film about Jorgensen but due to legal reasons they couldn't so that film ended up being turned into GLEN OR GLENDA? and I must say that Wood was way ahead of his time and actually delivered a much better and (believe it or not) more serious picture.  Director Rapper worked with Bette Davis countless times including NOW VOYAGER and I think it's very safe to say that he had no idea what to do with this story.  The movie is completely embarrassing due to how poorly made it is and how awful the acting is.  I guess we can start with the downright horrid direction which never seems to know what it wants to do.  At times the movie seems like something meant to make fun of gays.  The next minute it wants to educate you yet it tells us nothing.  The next minute it wants to be a love story about the "new" woman and the man in her life.  Then it wants to be about the troubled boy and his father who overlooks the obvious problems.  All of it is handled so poorly that you can't help but roll your eyes.  I really never knew if this thing was meant to be taken serious or if they were simply making fun of the situation.  At least GLEN OR GLENDA? wanted to be taken serious but the poor filmmaking put it into a different category.  This thing here is just awful without a single thing going for it.  Hansen is downright awful in his roles but you really can't blame him too much since the screenplay is so bad and this was his first movie after all.  As a man he is way too woman-like and as a woman he's way too manly so his performance doesn't work no matter which character he is.  As a man you can't help but wonder if we're suppose to be laughing at him because of all the stereotypes going on plus you get more laughs from the sorry performances.  The support cast aren't much better but I give everyone credit for being willing to do this film.  THE CHRISTINE JORGENSEN STORY has pretty much been forgotten, although to be fair it really wasn't noticed when it was originally released.  The movie might appeal to those who enjoy horrid movies but I found this thing to be so bad that I couldn't have any fun with it.  

Ordeal (1973)

Lee H. Katzin

Decent made-for-TV flick about a rich husband (Arthur Hill) who goes out into the desert with his wife (Diana Muldaur) and a guide (James Stacy) trying to find a certain location he might be buying.  The abusive and hard-headed husband ends up falling down a cliff and breaking his leg.  The wife and guide go to get help but she talks him into letting her husband die so that they can keep his money.  The only problem is that he realizes what they're up to when no one comes back for him so he plans on making it out by himself.  ORDEAL has a lot of silly stuff in it and it goes on a bit too long even at just 88-minutes but there's enough entertainment here to make it worth viewing as long as you don't go in expecting too much.  One of the biggest flaws in the story is how the rich man ends up out in the desert on his own.  He pretty much refuses to go with the wife and guide after he's injured and instead wants to stay out there by himself until they can get help back to him.  Considering how he's been rich all of his life and never been out in the wild I had a hard time believing he would do this.  Once you get past that the story clears out a little better and we get some nice scenes.  I was shocked to see how much more I preferred the story happening outside the desert.  The film cuts back and forth to what the husband is doing to what the wife and guide are doing.  I thought the stuff between the wife and guide was actually more entertaining as the two begin to fear that the husband might not be dead and how they might have to change their plans.  The stuff in the desert is nice as well since we get some great visuals.  I think some people, myself included, are going to have a hard time believing what all the husband does considering his background but after a while you just get caught up in the story and go with it.  The performances are a major plus with Hill doing a terrific job showing how desperate the man is.  I thought he was very good in the scenes dealing with his hatred towards the wife as well as him struggling to survive.  Muldaur is also quite good and perfectly gets across her spoiled side.  This would turn out to be Stacy's final film before a drunk driver would hit him while he was riding his motorcycle and ripping off his left arm and leg.  He actually turns in the best performance here and really makes you believe the tension his character starts to feel as things don't go as planned.  It seems like the 70s delivered just about every type of storyline when it came to made-for-TV movies and this one here is a bit far-fetched at times but there's enough going on here to make it worth viewing.

Dave, Warner just released THE OUTFIT in a remastered edition through their Archive.  I'm sure Movies Unlimited, DDD or a few others will probably have it.  I watched a full frame version but still enjoyed the movie.  Not enough to buy it but I always forget what a terrific actor Duvall is as he pretty much gets overlooked by most due to the other talent from that era. 

I saw that Twilight Zone footage a year or so back and really wished I hadn't.  I read about the trial and everything else but I still really haven't made up my mind on Landis.  I don't agree with what he did but at the same time I can't help but think it was going on all the time. 

Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950)

Otto Preminger

Excellent noir about the hard-nosed Detective Mark Dixon (Dana Andrews) who has been warned about his hot temper and willingness to beat confessions out of hoods.  He starts to investigate a murder case where it's clear a local thug was behind it but when he finds a main suspect he accidentally kills him.  Now Dixon must try and cover his own tracks while continuing to pursue the killer of the first man.  There's certainly nothing historic or ground breaking with this noir but I think it contains all the right elements and everything is done so extremely well that you can't help but enjoy the film every step of the way.  We get pretty much everything you'd expect from the shadows to the tough cop to the pure slime bad guy and we even get the beautiful Gene Tierney playing the love interest.  The movie features the wonderful, tough dialogue that you've come to expect from a noir and the strong situations and seedy locations makes this a must see.  I think the greatest thing the film has going for it are the performances by the terrific cast.  Andrews made a career out of playing these flawed tough guys and he once again delivers the goods here.  I won't give away the twist at the end but when the character has to make a certain decision you can't help but want to see him do the wrong thing even if the film pretty much plays against that.  Andrews perfectly handles roughing up the bad guys but he also handles charming Tierney very well.  Tierney also does a terrific job as she's certainly easy on the eyes but she also makes us care for her character and her father who gets caught up in the murder.  Gary Merrill plays the bad guy and is perfect in the role.  It's always fun seeing Karl Malden who has a brief role here.  I once read a review that compared noir films to the Bible as they have dark, violent stories but in the end they're just a morality tale about right and wrong things as well as what happens when you do something bad.  That pretty much sums up this film because we're dealing with a flawed guy who has been running from his past his entire life but now finds a shot at redemption.  The entire film contains some very stark drama and the atmosphere certain adds to the tension.  Throw in the terrific cinematography and WHERE THE SIDEWALK ENDS is without question one of the best noirs from this era.

Big Clock, The (1948)

John Farrow

Tense thriller about a crime magazine editor (Ray Milland) who spends the night with a blonde (Rita Johnson) not knowing that she's involved with his sadistic boss (Charles Laughton).  It turns out that after the editor sneaks out of the woman's apartment he sees his boss enter and the next morning she's dead.  The boss tried to hide his guilt and puts the editor on the case not knowing he knows the truth but all the evidence points to the editor who must try and clear his name before anyone finds out.  I'll plead guilty and admit that I think the remake NO WAY OUT is a better all around movie but that doesn't take away anything from this film, which still manages to be quite intense and highly entertaining.  I think it goes without saying but the greatest thing this movie has to offer is Milland and Laughton who deliver terrific performances.  Milland was always great at acting nervous and that comes in handy here because of the tension his character is constantly under.  No matter where in the story you are you can just look in his eyes and see how panicked he is.  Laughton, on the other hand, was perfect at playing creeps and he does a wonderful job with this character.  The actor makes this guy such a snake you can't help but hear rattles each time he opens his mouth throwing out another demand.  The scenes where the men are going against one another with Laughton not knowing what Milland knows is terrific and adds a lot of fun.  Johnson is also very good in her few scenes in the film as is George Macready as the snake trying to help Laughton.  Maureen O'Sullivan is wasted as Milland's wife, although the performance isn't too bad.  Another very impressive thing about this film is that it takes place inside a magazine office where their job is to track down killers using their own method.  This method of piecing everything together is quite clever and I think it adds a lot of fun to the film as they slowly pick up pieces that shine the light on Milland while at the same time he's trying to get evidence to clear his name.  One of the best scenes in the film happens once the building is closed down and no one can leave without walking past a man who can identify the Milland character.  The ways this is played out were quite effective and worthy of a few nail bites.  I think some of the comedy in the film works but at times it goes a bit too far and the entire subplot with Milland's wife was rather bland and didn't add too much.  It also doesn't help with plot holes including Laughton being able to give orders to lock down a building and being able to order people to shoot a man to death without the cops being involved.  With that said, the attractive cast and tense direction makes THE BIG CLOCK a film that still doesn't get the credit it deserves.

Niagara (1953)

Henry Hathaway

A honeymooning couple (Jean Peters, Max Showalter) arrive at Niagara Falls for some fun and relaxation but this doesn't happen when they meet another couple there.  The adulterous wife (Marilyn Monroe) tells them that her husband (Joseph Cotten) is crazy and is likely to hurt himself.  What she might really be hiding is that her and her lover plan on killing him but make it look like suicide but the husband might have a few of his own plans.  NIAGARA is a pretty interesting little film that isn't a complete success but I think there are enough good moments to where you can overlook some of the silliness in the plot.  I think the film manages to be entertaining thanks in large part to a terrific cast but also some beautiful locations that would have stole the show had it not been for an unforgettable pink dress.  The movie is basically a big free for all on whether the husband will kill the wife or if she will kill him first.  As the honeymooning couple rightfully puts it they're both off their rockers.  I thought Cotten and Monroe both did a terrific job with their roles and it's certainly one of the best things I've seen from Monroe.  She's very believable in her part and I enjoyed the way the film used her beauty as not just a marketing ploy but as something real and beneficial to the story.  There are several early scenes where they like showing her without as much clothing as they can possibly get away with but the real sparks comes during a sequence where she's wearing this pink dress, which will certainly have your tongue on the floor.  Monroe pulls off the sexiness very well but she handles the rest of the role without issues.  Cotten has always been one of the most underrated actors in the history of cinema and he too offers up another terrific part.  I really thought he played crazy extremely well and he also managed to make you feel sorry for it (as much as one can for someone married to Monroe).  Peters is also extremely good in her role and I didn't mind Showalter too much either, although the screenplay makes him go a tad bit too over-the-top at times.  The Technicolor really shows off all the locations very well and the cinematography is nice too.  The ending is a tad bit old-fashioned and doesn't work as well as it could have but everything leading up to it is very satisfactory and this includes a very good sequence inside a clock tower.

Red River (1948)

Howard Hawks

Landmark Western has John Wayne playing Thomas Dunson, a Texas rancher who spends fourteen years building the greatest cattle ranch in Texas but after the war cattle prices are so low he finds himself broke.  In order to try and get money back he decides on a cattle drive to Missouri where along the way he's going to battle Indians, his own men, bad weather and eventually his own adopted son (Montgomery Clift).  This iconic Western has apparently become so well-known that when people think of a cattle drive they don't think of real history but instead just think of the events in this film.  This film has pretty much become history for many people and while the film, at times, goes on way too long I think there's enough here to where you can easily call it a classic.  The story itself is pretty much just Mutiny on the Bounty out West but this certainly isn't a bad thing as we get to see Wayne in one of his greatest performances.  There's no question Wayne was the ultimate good guy but whenever a script gave him the chance of being bad then he certainly ate it up and this is one of the greatest examples.  The coldness that Wayne delivers is pitch-perfect and the way he slowly begins to lose his mind is handled wonderfully well by the actor.  Clift, on the other hand, is completely different as his method style clearly was bringing in a new style.  The one thing that rarely gets mentioned when RED RIVER is discussed is the two different styles of acting.  With the likes of Wayne, Walter Brennan, Harry Carey and Noah Beery, Jr. you had that old school but mixing it with the newer style of Clift and John Ireland you've got a pretty interesting texture that really mixes well together and the results are clearly on screen.  Watching how Wayne and Clift play off one another really gives us some fireworks and helps keep the film moving.  The scenery is another major plus as you really get the feeling that you're in the old West and along on this trail.  There are many classic scenes here and too many highlights to name them all but the opening sequence with Wayne taking off only to be attacked by the Indians is priceless as is another sequence where the cows start a stampede.  I think the film does start to get watered down and feel as if it's going on too long but most of this is due to the romance, which is added towards the end of the movie.  I didn't think this here worked at all and I think the ending really lets everything down that came before it.  With that said, RED RIVER is still one of the most famous films ever made and it clearly lives up to its reputation. 

Red River (1988)

Richard Michaels

Watered-down remake of Howard Hawks' 1948 classic has James Arness stepping in for John Wayne and Bruce Boxleitner doing the Montgomery Clift part.  Once again we see tyrant Arness taking a cattle drive 1,000 miles and battling a wide range of things.  I always found it interesting when these made-for-TV flicks would come along and remake classics from the past.  I think sometimes they worked to minor entertainment (STAGECOACH) but at other times you really have to wonder what the entire point was.  This remake runs nearly thirty-minutes shorter and everything missing is pretty much the heart and soul to the original movie.  It really does seem like the filmmakers and cast simply sat down, watched the original and then just done a cheap copy of it without trying to improve anything.  Some people might give this film credit for being smart enough to not trying anything different but in the end we're left with a rather bland film without any excitement and little entertainment.  I think the biggest problem is the actual screenplay, which adds very little to the original movie and what it does add doesn't get the job done.  On the cattle drive there's a kid involved but this goes no where.  We also have a former slave along for the ride who gets racist cowboys after him but again, this adds nothing.  The entire relationship between Arness and Boxleitner has no emotion behind it and everything that worked in the original is missing here.  You don't care about either men, their cattle, their journey or anything else.  The entire film is just a reenactment of the original and it just isn't entertaining.  Both Arness and Boxleitner sleepwalk through their roles as does Gregory Harrison as Cherry Valance.  Ray Walston takes over the role that Walter Brennan originally played and he's the best thing here.  RED RIVER has very little going for it and if you think it's unfair to compare the film to the remake then I'd agree.  The only problem is that the film doesn't work on its own either.

Thanks Martin.  I wish the Andrews character in SIDEWALK had done the opposite of what he did at the end but I'm still shocked at some of the reviews I read for it.  Most were positive reviews but at the same time I don't think they gave the film enough credit as it pretty much contained everything a great noir should have. 

I don't want to turn into George (wish he'd come back) but I'll throw in a son comment.  My poor kid was sick as hell earlier in the week so he spent a lot of time just sitting in my lap too weak to really do much of anything.  He sat there trying to sleep while I was watching NIAGARA and the first time Monroe walked onto the screen he sat up and really noticed her.  He would lay back only to rise up again each time she came on the screen so I guess he's a fan now. 

I still need to watch the uncut BABY FACE as I've only seen the "cut" version.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1920)

John S. Robertson

The first of three versions of Robert Louis Stevenson's story released in 1920, this one here features John Barrymore as Dr. Jekyll, the kind doctor who decides to take a potion, which eventually turns him into the evil Mr. Hyde.  This story has been filmed countless times over the years and I'd say that none of them were perfect but most offer up their own interesting ideas on the story and the reasons behind Jekyll doing the experiments.  I thought the story here was a pretty strong one as it seems Jekyll is just "too good" to be able to do bad things as he doesn't want to ruin his soul and this is the main reason he decides to become Mr. Hyde.  This will allow him to do the bad things he's curious about without his soul being turned dirty was an interesting set up and I think Barrymore is excellent enough to make this work.  The transformation sequences aren't the most impressive out there but they're clearly the best I've seen from any of the silent versions.  Barrymore, early on, must rely on his own acting for the transformations but we finally get some trick shots later in the film as Hyde becomes more evil.  The egg-shaped head on Hyde is pretty effective and the deformed face that Barrymore uses is also quite nice.  This certainly isn't the greatest performance from Barrymore but he makes for a very good Jekyll and Hyde.  I thought the actor does his best work as Hyde because you can just tell that he's having fun transforming himself into this monster.  Considering the actor could go over=the-top at times, I'm surprised he never did that here and instead plays both parts fairly straight.  Charles Lane and Nita Naldi offer up fine supporting performances.  I think the one thing that does hamper this version is that it really doesn't go into the Stevenson story too much.  For the most part it takes the most dramatic moments of the story and films them very well but there's just not enough meat in the story to make it fully work.

Christmas Carol, A (2004)

Arthur Allan Seidelman

Musical version of Charles Dickens' novel features Kelsey Grammer as Ebenezer Scrooge, the old miser who is visited by three ghosts who hope to show him the right way to live.  A CHRISTMAS TALE has been filmed dozens of times since the silent days so it's always a challenge for filmmakers to tell the story in a new way.  This one here decides to have Alan Menken do the music and I'm sure fans of his are going to enjoy the treatment.  With that said, I think fans of the story are going to be disappointed because the heart of Dickens story is pretty much removed and replaced by scenes that are either boring or really serve no purpose on the story.  We get more footage from Scrooge's childhood and this includes seeing his father taken away to prison as well as him working in a boot factory.  Neither item is from the original novel and neither add anything here.  The creepiness of the story has pretty much been watered down as the ghosts aren't a tad bit scary and none of the situations are directed to further any of the story.  Instead we get a lot of musical numbers but I found most of them to be boring.  Again, fans of musicals might enjoy them more but I found all of them to be rather poorly staged and they didn't do anything for the actual story.  If you're going to film Dickens most famous story then you might want to write your musical numbers around the actual story.  There's one nice number between Cratchit and his son but that's about it.  The stuff with the three ghosts really don't work, although Jason Alexander does a good job as Marley's ghost.  Those who have seen the 1910 version of FRANKENSTEIN are going to notice that his ghost looks exactly like the monster from that film.  Grammer isn't too bad as Scrooge but he pretty much gets lost in the musical numbers.  Jennifer Love Hewitt, Jane Krakowski and Geraldine Chaplin appear quickly but add very little. 

Come Along with Me (1982)

Joanne Woodward

Strange made-for-TV drama about a woman (Estelle Parsons) who loses her husband and after the funeral sells the house and all of his belongings.  She then heads off East with no real plans in mind but winds up renting a room from a lady (Barbara Baxley) who also recently lost her husband.  It should also be mentioned that Parsons character is able to predict the future and communicate with the dead as well as hear her dead husband's voice (Paul Newman).  I've seen a lot of strange movies in my life but this made-for-TV thing really took me by surprise.  I really can't say it's a good movie because it isn't but at the same time it's so darn strange that I couldn't help but keep watching.  Now, I think it's fair to say that this movie wasn't made for a 30-year-old guy so I'm sure the group it was made for will probably enjoy it a little more.  I'm really not the type to say any movie is made for a certain person but I will admit that this thing really threw me.  I'm going to guess it was meant for those who would connect to this woman who loses her husband but why on Earth did they make it so strange with the seances?  What's the real point of showing the various flashbacks to the woman's childhood where we see this skill of being able to talk with the dead?  The film thankfully runs just 57-minutes but when the end credits came up I will admit that I was confused at the point of any of it.  Woodward made her film directorial debut with this and she handles the material fairly well.  She at least keeps the film moving and the simple storytelling is actually a good thing, although I'm still curious what the point of the film was but I'm sure some might get it.  Parsons turns in a decent performance but she doesn't have that much to work with.  Sylvia Sidney, who worked with both Fritz Lang and Alfred Hitchcock back in the 30s, appears briefly and it was nice to see her.  Newman does the voice work of the husband but unless you already knew this you'd probably miss him because of the accent he uses.  COME ALONG WITH ME certainly isn't a horrible film but when it's all said and done there's simply not enough here to make it worth viewing.

Jungle Gents (1954)

Edward Bernds

The Bowery Boys head to Africa after its learned that Sach (Huntz Hall) has the ability to smell diamonds.  Once in Africa they must battle natives, lions and of course some bad guys who want to steal the diamonds.  By the time this entry came along it was doubtful anyone was expecting any type of classic and a classic is exactly what we don't get.  JUNGLE GENTS isn't the worst film in the series but at the same time you can tell that the writers started to aim at a lower type of comedy meant to appeal to those under the age of ten.  I don't mind that the series is working away from some of the darker entries but at the same time I found much of the humor to just be downright silly and not in a good way.  There's a lot of added sound effects, which were clearly being "borrowed" from the Three Stooges shorts but they don't work here.  Even Hall is a lot more animated with his facial gestures and they too don't get any laughs.  The film contains a lot of stock footage from the BOMBA series and this includes various shots of the wild life.  One of the most embarrassing moments in the film is also perhaps the funniest and it's when Sach and Slip are in a tent sleeping an a lion walks in on them.  There's some footage of a real lion but then it switches to a fake one and this fake lion is without question the worst prop I've seen from a movie in God knows how long.  If you've seen any of pre-1920 versions of THE WIZARD OF OZ you will see that the lion, as expected, is played by a man in costume but you also have humans playing horses and various other animals.  Those outfits looked a lot more realistic that the fake lion here but what happens with the boys at least made me laugh.  Gorcey must have paid the writers a few extra bucks because his mangled words are faster and happening at a higher rate than the previous entries.  Hall and Gorcey are both in the right mood and deliver a few nice moments.  Bernard Gorcey is on hand as usual as is Woody Strode in a few scenes.  Clint Walker nearly steals the film with a hilarious bit at the end.  The thirty-fifth entry in this series isn't one of the best but it'  s fast moving enough to where fans will want to watch it.

Savage Vengeance (1993)

Donald Farmer

This might be the most notorious unknown movie ever made.  Legend has it that originally it was meant to be a sequel to I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE as Camille Keaton returned playing a woman named Jennifer.  Further legend has it that the entire production was one mess after another, which caused Keaton to quit the picture.  Filmed in 1988 it wasn't released until five years later because there was some sort of legal issue that happened when I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE's director Meir Zarchi got involved somehow.  After all these years Keaton refuses to discuss the film as the only time she was publicly asked about it she said she wasn't allowed to talk about it.  Zarchi has only said a few things on it but said due to legal issues he can't comment further.  Then you have director Donald Farmer who has yet to really speak about the film.  It pretty much makes sense as the Jennifer character here is raped by four guys, not convicted by a jury and this would pretty much set up a sequel to the original film.  Not to mention that Jennifer's last name is dubbed out of this picture.

The rest of the story pretty much has Jennifer and a friend going out to the woods for a vacation but the friend is gang raped and murdered.  Jennifer goes to check on her and is raped as well but she then seeks her vengeance against the two creeps.  No matter what truth there might be behind the making of this film, it's clear that the only ones who should bother with this thing are those fans of the original 1978 film who just want to see what this thing is about.  The film was shot on video and seems to have a budget less than what it would take to buy a couple apples so you really shouldn't go into this thing expecting any type of professional looking film.  The entire thing is pretty much a disaster as in its current state there are all sorts of things that happen but don't make sense including all the stuff dealing with Jennifer's previous rape and eventual trial.  This is clearly meant to connect this film to the previous one but it just leaves more unanswered questions.  There are three different rape scenes here and they have to be among the most pathetic ever shot because both the victims and the rapist keep their pants on the entire time.  I understand the actors being camera shy but why not film it in a way where you can't tell that the men don't even have a zipper down?  I was rather surprised to see Keaton topless here but you can tell she isn't too thrilled with anything here.  I always found her performance in I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE to be brave and quite good but that's not the case here as this is just an embarrassing part.  The supporting players aren't any better but the less said the better.  The murder scenes are all extremely bad as just about everything else including the opening credits that misspell the title!  The only reason I didn't give this thing a BOMB rating is simply because I've been wanting to see it for years now and I must admit that it kept me entertained simply because I kept hoping something good would eventually happen but of course it never did.  SAVAGE VENGEANCE is a very bad movie all around and who knows what the original intent was meant to be but I doubt it would have been any better even without the legal trouble.  Apparently there's a fan edit out there that adds clips from I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE but I've yet to see it.  Again, it probably wouldn't help considering how poorly made this one is.

Quicksand (1950)

Irving Pichel

A squeaky clean mechanic (Mickey Rooney) asks a hot blonde (Jeanne Cagney) out on a date and she accepts but he has a problem and that problem is that he's broke.  He winds up snatching twenty-bucks from his bosses cash register but this here just leads to one problem after another and he soon finds himself running from the police.  This crime-noir film really isn't anything overly special but I think fans of Rooney are going to find it interesting as he both ruins and helps the film.  He somewhat ruins it because he's just not believable in the early scenes where he's picking up the hot girl, acting like a poor boy and there's even a couple scenes where he's smoking and obviously not knowing what he's doing.  The low-budget nature of the film probably kept an outtake in where he tries to light a cigarette but messes up and has to strike a match to light it again.  The early noir moments of our typical male hero just really wasn't made for someone like Rooney.  However, it somewhat works in the film's favor because the screenplay here is pretty stupid as what we've basically got is an idiot guy who does something stupid, tries to correct it by doing something dumber and soon this dumb guy is running for his life.  The entire premise is pretty far-fetched and at times very silly but this is where Rooney starts to work.  Since you don't expect someone like Rooney to be a criminal these dumb mistakes his character makes seems somewhat natural because of who is doing them.  Rooney makes it somewhat plausible that his character, being new to crime, would commit such stupid mistakes over and over and on this level the performance and movie works.  I thought it was rather fun seeing Rooney doing some of this stuff including strangling a man and getting into several fights with the girl's ex-boss who is played by Peter Lorre.  Seeing good boy Rooney going up against sleaze ball Lorre made for some fun scenes.  Both actors are just fine in their roles as is Cagney as the femme fatale.  You can't help but enjoy her performance because she perfectly captures that poor brat who will take advantage of any sap just to get what she wants.  Barbara Bates plays a woman in love with Rooney and we even get Richard Lane playing the main cop.  I think noir fans will probably find a lot of the movie silly due to Rooney so that's why I think it's going to appeal to his fans more than anyone else.  The movie has a lot of silly moments and I think it's fair to say that too much happens to this guy in such a short amount of time but it still features enough to make it worth viewing.  It's certainly not a classic but as a fan of Rooney I enjoyed it.

Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 (2000)

Joe Berlinger

Disappointing sequel to THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT has four strangers meeting a native of Burkittsville and deciding to go on a tour where the first movie was filmed.  Soon after wards three of them are being questioned by the police about eight murders but none of the three seem to remember what happened.  Their video footage of all the events are going to tell the entire story.  It's well known that the directors of the original film weren't ready for a sequel so the studio pretty much just did one on their own and the end results are mixed to say the least.  I don't think this is a good movie and in fact I'd call it a very frustrating one but at the same time I somewhat give the studio credit for trying something at least a little different and not just a rehash on the original film.  The thing that was so frustrating is that the movie is on the brink of becoming interesting so you keep watching it but nothing special ever happens.  Something might happen to wake you up   or make you pay a little closer attention but then you're just letdown by something else that either doesn't work or something that's simply annoying.  One thing that doesn't help is that all five characters are rather annoying.  I thought the actors all did a good job with their roles but the screenplay has them fighting way too much to the point where you'd wish they'd all just shut up and go away.  This certainly isn't a good thing when you're suppose to care for these people and want them to survive what they're going through.  The non-stop fighting just wore my patience thin and after a while I really gave up on the characters and couldn't care what happened to any of them.  Another major problem is that the film itself really doesn't seem to know what type of story it's trying to tell.  The director has stated that the studio took the film over and edited it behind his back and I'd believe this because the entire thing is rather confusing.  There's a big twist ending but I must admit that it wasn't nearly as shocking or horrific as it was trying to be.  I wouldn't say the director was without blame though as some of the heavy metal music didn't work at all and the quick edits of violence was also rather bland.  The screenplay also makes the mistake of having the characters sitting around watching the video of the events that happened in the woods and none of this is very interesting either.  Once again, each time something decent does happen they follow it up with something bland.  Now, the most disappointing thing about BOOK OF SHADOWS: BLACK WITCH 2 is the fact that it's simply not scary.  There isn't one tense moment to be found here and that's a real shame considering how powerful the original movie was.  In the end this sequel just comes off as irritating because you go into it hoping for something special but it just never happens.

Santa's Slay (2005)

David Steiman

Turns out Santa was actually the son of Satan who lost a bet to an angel that forced him to be "good" for a thousand years.  Time is up so Santa (Bill Goldberg) goes back to being bad by killing as many people as he can but it's up to a loser (Douglas Smith), his girlfriend (Emile de Ravin) and his wacky grandfather (Robert Culp) to try and save the day.  If you're looking for high art then you're not going to find it here but if you're looking for a black comedy that isn't afraid to offend then this one here is just for you.  When you see Bill Goldberg on a cover dressed as Santa then you're probably expecting something very stupid and bad but it turned out that this is a rather clever little movie that works well if you know what you're getting into.  This movie isn't trying to be anything ground breaking but instead it just wants to make you laugh.  The film opens up with a hilarious spoof of happy families as James Caan and Fran Drescher play the parents to some ungrateful kids (Chris Kattan, Rebecca Gayheart) and Santa soon shows up to teach them a lesson.  Other victims including a cussing old lady, a Jewish store owner and we even get some Amish folks who show up.  When people think of killer Santa movies they usually think of SILENT NIGHT, DEADLY NIGHT.  Those who found that movie to be too mean spirited will find the complete opposite here because the movie pokes fun at a lot of people and subjects but it's done in good fun.  One of the best moments happen when a preacher asks his people for dollar bills and then after the service he goes to a strip club where of course Santa shows up.  I was really surprised to see how many known faces are on hand here in small roles.  It was fun seeing Caan and Drescher in the opening bit and Robert Culp is always entertaining.  Saul Rubinek and Dave Thomas are on hand as well.  de Raven is very good in her role as the girlfriend and helps keep the film moving.  Goldberg gets to show some of his famous wrestling moves and he handles the part quite nicely.  He's certainly not worthy of an Oscar but he looks just right for a crazy Santa.  There's some pretty good gore scattered throughout as well.  SANTA'S SLAY isn't the greatest movie ever made but it's a pretty good little gem that manages to make you laugh and it's certainly something different from your typical Christmas flick.

Bowery to Bagdad (1954)

Edward Bernds

Good ol' Sach (Huntz Hall) finds a weird looking lamp and when he rubs it a genii (Eric Blore) pops out.  Sure enough he soon has mobsters after him trying to get their hands on the genii but Slip (Leo Gorcey) has plans on making them rich.  BOWERY TO BAGDAD is pretty much what you'd expect from a Bowery Boys film as it contains a minor amount of laughs but what really keeps the film moving is its fast pacing from director Bernds.  The film itself really isn't all that original as we get the tired formula of the boys discovering something that's going to make them rich and of course bad guys find out and come after them.  It's amazing how many times this storyline has been transformed in the series but with this being number thirty-six I guess you have to expect some things repeating themselves.  The story itself really isn't all that funny but we do get a few good moments including poor Sach using his wish to order up some milkshakes.  Another funny gag finds a hat pulled down over his nose to where he can't see and he ends up walking out on a high ledge of a building.  Both Hall and Gorcey are fine in their roles with both going well over the top in terms of energy.  Bernard Gorcey doesn't get too many good scenes but the one where he gets drunk with the genii was pretty good.  This turned out to be the final role for Blore and he too is pretty good as the genii.  The lack of laughs don't hurt the film too much because the director keeps all the action happening quite fast and things move along very quickly.  The 64-minutes goes by without any slow spots so that's always good in a "B" film like this.

How to Marry a Millionaire (1954)

Jean Negulesco

This Fox production is short on story but big on laughs and entertainment.  Lauren Bacall, Betty Grable and Marilyn Monroe play poor girls living in New York City who join what's basically a club that's main goal is to get each of them married to rich men.  The three women set out the find the richest out there but soon realize that they're all falling in love with men without money.  With such an attractive cast you'll probably be expecting a classic but this falls well short of that but it's still very much worth seeing thanks in large part to the chemistry of the three ladies.  I think director Negulesco really doesn't get enough laughs as he should as there are many times where it seems like laughs are the last thing he's trying to get.  This was one of the first films to be released in the 2.35:1 ratio and it's clear that this new format is getting a lot of attention from those behind the scenes.  Throughout the film I couldn't help but think they were simply trying to get as much as they could in the frame and really weren't worried about much else.  You'll notice throughout the movie that there's very little in terms of editing or building up any jokes as everything pretty much plays out with the camera in place.  I will give the director credit that he does a nice job getting all three ladies perfectly placed inside that frame to show them off very well.  The lack of a real story really doesn't hurt things too much as Bacall, Grable and Monroe are so entertaining that you'll have fun just watching them act together.  Bacall, of course, plays the tough girl and she gets some great lines about how she's always preferred older men.  Later in the film she starts naming some of the older men she loves and refers to "that one guy in THE AFRICAN QUEEN," which of course was her husband in real life.  Monroe, of course, plays the idiot but she's charming in the part.  Grable doesn't get as much to do but she's still fun.  William Powell, Cameron Mitchell, Rory Calhoun and David Wayne are just some of the men who come into their lives.  HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE is light entertainment to say the least so no one should be expecting any sort of masterpiece.  Fans of the cast should be entertained though.

Duel in the Sun (1946)

King Vidor

Now legendary Western has half-breed Pearl (Jennifer Jones) going to live with a rich family after her father is killed.  Once at the place Pearl's beauty attracts the older, kinder brother Jesse (Joseph Cotten) as well as the young, more violent Lewt (Gregory Peck).  Soon the two brothers are at odds over the woman as both take different paths in their lives but each will wind back up with the girl.  It's no secret that producer-writer David O. Selznick wanted this to match his GONE WITH THE WIND.  It's no secret that this film fell well short of that but while it never reaches the greatness it should have you can't help but admire the film and its many faults.  I've read that the original cut of this thing was over ten-hours and I'd believe this because watching it today it seems as there's all sorts of stuff missing as the story jumps around quite a bit and characters go through certain changes that are never really discussed or shown.  The Cotten character goes through a whole lot of changes after being kicked out of the house and when he returns it's as if an entire life span had gone by yet we never really learn what he was doing in this time.  Even the change in Peck's character seems to come out of nowhere.  The greatest thing the film has going for it is the amazing cast that really makes this thing stand out.  For starters, Jones is downright brilliant in her role as she perfectly handles the seduction side of the character but also the characters confusion about who she is and how she's destroying this family.  Peck and Cotten are both terrific in their parts but it's Peck that really sticks out as the villain.  It's a wonder he didn't get the chance to play too many bad guys in his career because he did a great job with this one.  Lillian Gish plays the boy's mother and as you'd expect she does a great job and really pulls off the sentimental character.  Lionel Barrymore is the mean-as-snakes father and he does his usual great job of screaming and playing a creep.  The final sequence with Barrymore and Gish is quite effective.  We even get Walter Huston playing a fast-wired preacher who tries to save Jones from her sins.  What really makes this film stand out from the other Westerns from this era is its sexuality, which is very high and it's amazing that they got so much past the censors.  The rape scenes with Peck and Jones are effective and the burning lust their characters show on screen is certainly something we didn't see everyday.  Even with all the good things, DUEL IN THE SUN still comes up short in terms of greatness.  The film never reaches the levels of GONE WITH THE WIND but there's enough here to make it worth viewing and especially if you're fans of the stars.

I hope the surgery went well for you, Martin.

PATHS OF GLORY keeps getting better and better with each moving.  I think the ending is very touching and I think Kubrick had balls having it for an ending but at the same time it's never brought me to tears like it apparently does many people.  I remember the interview where Spielberg said he shows that one scene to a group of people and they all started crying.  It never struck me as THAT powerful but it's still effective.

I've been dying to re-watch KWAI since I haven't seen it since I was a kid.  There are many Lean titles I need to check out because I haven't seen them in years and I'm sure I'd enjoy them more today than when I was 9 and watching them.

Hellraiser: Bloodline (1996)

Alan Smithee (Kevin Yagher)

The fourth film in the series turned out to be the last one to get a theatrical release but how this thing ever got released at all is rather amazing considering how poor it is.  The film starts off in 2127 when a doctor has taken over a space station trying to find the secrets of the puzzle box.  The film then flashes back to the 17th Century Paris where a toy maker creates the box so that a magician can bring demons to Earth. Finally, we then flash forward to present times where Pinhead (Doug Bradley) is back and trying to force a relative of the toy maker to build a new and bigger box.  HELLRAISER: BLOODLINE, according to legend, featured a pretty good screenplay, which ended up being tossed out when the producer's felt they needed more Pinhead and less story.  This caused the original director to walk and what we're left with is something of a half and half between what the original screenplay called for and what the producers wanted.  I can't imagine a Director's Cut being much better since he apparently didn't get to film everything he wanted to but either way what we're left with is a real disaster as nothing ever makes too much sense and you can't help but feel as if you're watching something that incomplete.  The biggest problem I had with the film is that there isn't an ounce of energy in the thing.  Not once do you feel any sort of emotion be it tension, drama or anything else so it's impossible to really care about anything going on.  There's no humor or anything else so you're pretty much just sitting there becoming more and more bored with each passing minute.  None of the three segments are very entertaining and in reality they don't mix too well either.  The stuff set in the future looks cheaper than those ALIEN rip-offs that Roger Corman was making in the early 80s and the space station is just downright laughable.  The Paris stuff isn't much better because it's so dry.  Then we have the stuff set in modern times but this too is rather boring and doesn't contain a bit of imagination.  The performances really aren't too bad and some of the special effects are good but this really can't help overcome all the major issues with the film.  With such a lackluster screenplay and a messy production, HELLRAISER: BLOODLINE is a complete misfire on most levels.

Hellraiser: Inferno (2000)

Scott Derrickson

Corrupt cop Joseph Thorne (Craig Sheffer) lies, cheats on his wife and partakes in all sorts of illegal activities but one day he stumbles upon a crime scene where a man has been ripped to death by what appears to be hooks.  The cops ends up stealing a puzzle box that was at the crime scene and when he unlocks it he begins a wild journey trying to track down a mysterious figure known as The Engineer.  This fifth entry in the horror series took a lot of heat when it was released because this really isn't a HELLRAISER movie at all.  If you come into this thing wanting to see Pinhead then you're going to be left disappointed because outside of a ten-second clip he doesn't show up until the 80-minute mark and at the end of the film he appears in just a couple minutes total.  So, why do you take a legendary horror character and cut him down to just a few minutes?  That is a rather good question because I'm really not sure what the point was of making this a HELLRAISER movie but it turned out to be a decent little movie that has quite a bit going for it.  I was really surprised to see how well of a mystery the movie is as we get our anti-hero trying to track down a missing kid who the killer is cutting a finger off and leaving it at a scene of his crimes.  Not only does our cop have to try and figure out who is doing the killings but he soon starts to wonder if perhaps he is the killer.  The film has a lot of psychological moments where the filmmakers want us to be confused about what's going on and question what all is happening and for what reasons.  I personally thought this is what made the film so good because it's not your typical horror flick and especially not what you'd be expecting from the fifth film in a series.  One big positive are the performances with Sheffer really delivering the goods as the tortured cop.  Most will remember him from Robert Redford's A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT but he also appeared in other genre stuff like FIRE IN THE SKY and NIGHTBREED.  The actor perfectly handles the tortured soul of this cop and that's a major positive as it allows us to care for the guy and want to see him survive everything he's going through.  The supporting cast includes strong performances from Nicholas Turturro and James Remar.  Doug Bradley is back as Pinhead but only appears in the film for a few minutes but his "Welcome to Hell" line is delivered effectively.  I must admit that I didn't care too much for the make up used on Pinhead this time around but the gore effects are usually pretty effective.  There's some really bad CGI that shows up towards the end of the film but overall this is a decent little gem that manages to be the best of the series so far outside of the original.

Hellraiser: Hellseeker (2002)

Rick Bota

Sixth installment in the series has Trevor (Dean Winters) and his wife Kristy Cotton (Ashley Laurence) driving in the car when they run off the road and into a river.  Trevor wakes from a coma and finds himself the suspect in his wife's murder but her body has yet to be recovered.  The husband then starts to try and regain his memory so he can figure out what really happened and of course Pinhead (Doug Bradley) is involved.  HELLRAISER: HELLSEEKER has quite a bit in common with the previous entry and the main thing is that there's very little of Pinhead.  Once again we only get to see the monster for around five-minutes of the film so those expecting more are going to be disappointed.  I really don't mind the HELLRAISER title being used to sell a film that pretty much has nothing to do with the series or the original characters but sadly the story they give us here just isn't strong enough to carry it through to the end.  The Kristy character is the main lead from the first two films but she doesn't appear too much after the opening sequences.  The rest of the film is pretty much a dream within a dream as Trevor discovers more murders and various other secrets.  Of course it's never clear if he's really seeing this stuff or if he's slowly losing his mind.  The film is quite active in terms of jumping around as we sometimes get a dream sequence, which is actually one dream wrapped inside another.  I don't mind this type of movies but the screenplay here just isn't strong enough to make us care about anything going on.  The opening sequence really isn't all that effective and nothing that follows really makes you care for anyone involved.  There's a lot of story trying to be told but if you're not into it then it really doesn't matter.  The movie has constant twist and turns and when the big secret is finally revealed at the end it's certainly a good one and you can only wish that the rest of the film had been as entertaining.  The direction is also rather lackluster as he's never able to build up any tension and there's certainly no atmosphere to speak of.  The entire movie looks good visually but without the atmosphere this really doesn't add up to much.  Performances are better than average for this type of film and we of course get some gory special effects.  Now, if they'd only stop with the cheap looking CGI.  HELLRAISER: HELLSEEKER isn't nearly as effective as the previous film but it's still better than the third and fourth parts whatever that's worth.

Hellraiser: Deader (2005)

Rick Bota

The seventh film in the franchise isn't going to make die-hard Pinhead fans happy but if you put the fact that the monster isn't in this too much you might find this mildly entertaining.  This time out reporter Amy Klein (Kari Wuhrer) tries to locate a suicide cult where members kill themselves only to then be brought back to life by the weird guy who runs the organization.  Soon she finds herself in the middle of everything and she might already be dead and not know it.  As I go through these HELLRAISER sequels it's rather interesting reading some other reviews.  There are some who enjoy them because they try doing something different.  There are others who hate them because they want to see a HELLRAISER movie and they're not really doing that.  I can somewhat understand the studio wanting to push a "different" story on people under the HELLRAISER title but I'm somewhat confused on why they wouldn't just make an actual film with Pinhead and the other guys just to keep fans happy.  Either way, this entry isn't all that good but at the same time any horror fan knows the genre has offered up some pretty poor stuff so there's certainly a lot worse out there.  The idea of a group of people killing themselves only to be brought back to life is actually a pretty interesting set up so it's a real shame that more isn't done with it.  As with other sequels this one here never wants you to feel comfortable as we're constantly going from reality to a dream and this here is no different in the fact that you never know where you're really at.  I also had an issue with the main reporter who we're constantly told how brave and tough she is but whenever a shadow appears she jumps and screams like someone who didn't know what they were getting into.  Of course, after the scary bits she goes back to the tough girl.  This got rather annoying after a while.  Director Bota keeps everything moving at a nice pace and he manages to get a good look but there's no question that the film needed some more atmosphere.  The screenplay eventually runs out of fresh ideas and we're left with one cliche after another.  With that said, I'm sure most people are going to be mixed on this film.  HELLRAISER fans are going to be disappointed with the lack of Pinhead and I think others just aren't going to find the film good enough to be worth viewing on its own.

Hellraiser: Hellworld (2005)

Rick Bota

The eighth and so far final entry in the HELLRAISER series has good old Pinhead (Doug Bradley) back and this time he's given more screenplay and gets to mix it up with Lance Henriksen.  The film is about a group of teens who win an internet game that invites them to Hellworld, a party that has many artifacts from the puzzle box's creator.  Of course Hendriksen is running things and it doesn't take long for the teens to start getting slaughtered one by one.  If you've sat through any of these direct-to-video sequels then by this film you're probably well aware of the type of thing you're going to get.  I think many fans will be happy to know that Pinhead gets quite a bit of screentime, which certainly wasn't the case with the three previous films but I'm going to guess that these same fans might be upset to see him killing in such different ways than the first few films.  This thing really turns out to be a slasher as we get a wide range of bloody killings including a decapitation and even a few set pieces that seemed to have been influenced by SAW.  HELLRAISER: HELLWORLD certainly isn't a good movie but it's about what you'd expect from a film like this.  I think the gore is actually pretty good and especially when we're getting stuff that isn't all CGI.  There are several violent killings that gore fans should enjoy.  When the CGI is used it looks incredibly cheap and rather pathetic.  Just take a look at one scene where a guy sets himself on fire.  Hendriksen eats up each scene he's in and he's pretty fun to watch.  The rest of the cast are decent enough even if no one really stands out.  Bradley, as you'd expect, has no problem fitting into his role and I do think the make up is much better here than in previous films.  What really keeps this movie from being better is the rather lame screenplay that offers up nothing but one cliche after another.  There isn't a single surprise anywhere in the film as everything that happens is something you'll be expecting.  The series always tried to mix dreams with reality and for the most part the films did a good job at keeping you off guard.  That can't be said here as the dreams are so obvious you wonder why they even bothered trying to trick you.

Neither did I Travis. HELLRAISER was never a favorite of mine, although I did revisit the first three earlier this year. I enjoyed the first one but after that none of the sequels are films that I'd watch again.

I was talking with a guy at work about various horror films and it dawned on me that I really haven't seen many sequels to popular series. This includes THE AMITYVILLE HORROR, WITCHCRAFT (or is it WITCHBOARD?), LEPRECHAUN, PUPPET MASTER and several others. With that in mind I decided to spend the next year going through them but started with HELL since this guy had copies of them and let me borrow them.

I'm not sure if I'll watch the entire series in a month or perhaps watch one film from each series a month until all are viewed.