Good Intense-ions
Dementia
USA 1955 (possibly earlier)
Directed by John Parker
(or possibly Bruno VeSota)
BFI Blu Ray Zone B
Well now. Dementia is a strange film and reminds me of something I wrote myself when I was a teenager (which I tried to get shot three times and when it was finally shot and halfway through the edit, the videocassette tape was physically lost, quite literally fallen off the roof of a car... so a story fated never to be told).
Anyway, my woes aside, Dementia was not released when it was made because it was, from what I understand, scaring people and was just too surreal for the perceived public consumption. It was continually denied certification in the US and banned for a while in the UK as well, until a few screeings in the 1970s. I believe an interracial dance scene at a jazz club was also something censors were keen to deny people the right to see (with the legendary Shorty Rogers playing jazz in the sequence).
So, a black and white, surreal and noirish thriller with, I should add, no dialogue. There was another version a few years later, a bastardised version with cut footage (taking account that this original version is already only 56 minutes long), with a different score and added voice over dialogue, called Daughter Of Horror. This cut is also on the BFI Blu Ray but, out of respect for the original, uncompromised version, I have only watched the original, dialogue free version with a score by George Antheil... I might circle back to the other version at some later point because, at one time, it was better known and perhaps the memory of that led to this version being rediscovered. It’s the Daughter Of Horror version which is being watched by a bunch of teenagers in the original 1958 version of The Blob.
Adding to all the confusion, director John Parker is said to have ‘disappeared’ shortly after... or perhaps he never existed in the first place... although his secretary, Adrienne Barrett, plays the main protagonist in this, known as The Gamin. All of the characters have names like this, cyphers for their function, such as The Evil One, Mother, Father and, in the case of the actor who actually claims to have directed at least half of it, Bruno VeSota... The Rich Man.
And it’s an interesting film, for sure.There’s not a lot of plot and its a fairly abstract story but it does tell a tale, of sorts... and it certainly holds the attention. Antheil’s score features a prominent wordless voice and it sounds very much like a theremin or ondes martenot, specifically the theremin used in one of the two films this one strongly reminds me of... Spellbound. I can’t help but think that the director, whoever it was, was significantly influenced by the Salvador Dali dream sequence in this classic Hitchcock movie and also, very much so, by the score by Miklos Rosza. And, the other film it reminds me of is another Dali work, his co-creation with Luis Buñuel, Un Chien Andalou. Not just in tone but also in specific moments, such as the importance and focus on a specific severed hand at a couple of points in the narrative (such as it is).
That story being about a half deranged woman who is living in a world where women seem to be used and abused by men and who ends up killing some specific men... both in her past and during the course of the events which are told as graveyard flashbacks to her childhood.
A few things of note... firstly two of the actors. Dwarf Angelo Rossitto, who is perhaps best known for his role in Tod Browning’s Freaks but also turns up in films by Al Adamson and the like, plays a newspaper seller... which is a profession he also fell back on in real life between acting jobs, from what I can make out. Another interesting and important name is an uncredited night club patron being played by, of all people, Aaron Spelling. Yep, the same Spelling who would become a giant TV mogul in the 1960s and beyond... and into the mid 2000s... you’ll see his name in lots of credits for shows such as Honey West, Starsky And Hutch, Charlie’s Angels, The Love Boat, T J Hooker, Fantasy Island, Hart To Hart, Beverly Hills 90210 and oodles more.
One last thing... lets talk about the nature of censorship. Anyone watching this now will wonder why a film which has been given a 12 rating by the BBFC was once banned for many decades. Well, it’s interesting because there’s a scene where The Gamin is looking in a mirror and she pulls out a switchblade and, after popping the blade out, looks at it almost lovingly, obviously relishing the lethal potential in the blade while smiling to herself. This attitude, to me, is way more frightening and stronger than any gory death a child might stumble on in, say, a gruesome American slasher movie... but the kind of imagery in those are the things which garner them a stupidly high rating. I think little scenes like this make more of an indelible, psychological impact than any kind of strong graphic imagery so, yeah, you have to wonder just why any censorship other than both self-censorship or parental censorship are allowed to exist. It frightens me that censors can wield such power, especially if they let this movie (which, to be fair, features a severed hand) go out with a 12 rating. Preposterous.
All in all, though, I would say I really quite liked Dementia and think it would be a good one to programme for an all nighter of dark movies, for sure. I will definitely be watching this one again, at some point.
Friday, 1 May 2026
Dementia
Tuesday, 13 August 2024
Cuckoo
Waltz N’ All
Cuckoo
Directed by Tilman Singer
Germany/USA 2024
Neon
UK Secret Preview Screening
I don’t usually go to secret cinema screenings, to be honest. Unless I’m pretty sure of what they might be. So the last one I went to was at a FrightFest where I’d correctly guessed it was a preview of the first Sin City movie, way back when. But, I’m on my holidays at the moment and so went to the Secret Screaming strand of Cineworld secret screenings this week, mostly because I was sure it would be the new Alien movie. I’m pleased to say I was very wrong about that and, instead, got a real treat.
Tilman Singer’s new movie Cuckoo, I have to say, had me right from the get go, with a credits sequence full of arguing, shouting and shadow play and just an incredible atmosphere all its own. This is the tale of Gretchen, played by Hunter Schafer, who is moving to a resort in Switzerland, surrounded by forests, to join her father, step mother and younger, mute stepsister after her mother’s death (I’m pretty sure it had an opening marker up for somewhere in Switzerland at any rate, although it appears to have been shot in Germany). When she is there she is given a summer job at the local hotel by the resort owner, played by Dan Stevens but, is told to not try and travel home alone after dark.
Okay, I’m not going to say too much more about the plot but I think I summed up my initial reaction to the film pretty well on Twitter last night. Cuckoo is like if a young David Lynch and a young David Cronenberg had decided to collaborate on a new movie project inspired by Hammer’s The Reptile. And it’s an absolutely unsettling and ravishing assault on the senses... if I can say that without it sounding too much of a cliché. It’s also very quirky.
The tone also really shouldn’t work too well because you’ve got some very different things going on here. For example, Hunter Schafer’s grief ridden, angsty teen is given a very naturalistic performance. Whereas Dan Stevens, who is pretty much the ‘human villain’ of the piece, is playing it like absolutely every kind of mad scientist role you could think of... coming across as a very fun and funny caricature of a villainous stereotype and, yeah, you can tell he’s having a really good time in this role. As was this audience member.
The supporting cast are all great too, especially the young girl played by Mila Lieu, who handles very well a problematic shading to an infant who is totally innocent but, who could also be a killer in the midst (not to give anything away here, I promise).
But the sound design and editing are the real stars of this film. There is a lot of screeching happening in the movie and, with the cinema sound system turned up unbearably loud for this screening (for some reason... luckily it enhanced this particular film inadvertently), it was almost headache inducing and absolutely effective. That’s okay, my favourite Godard movie, Weekend, with it’s blaring, incessant car horns is also headache inducing but, it’s still my favourite by that director. Here though, it’s also coupled with some wonderful shots of pulsing throats and, again without trying to give too much away... well, let’s say weaponised (or at the very least disarming) time loops triggered by the sound of the characters from which the title of the film takes its name.
Now, I have to say that the final act of the film... which is an extended chase/struggle to escape/shoot out etc... felt just a little too long. I think it could have been maybe just five minutes shorter but, honestly, I’m really not complaining. I think it worked well enough and the absolute artist who directed this certainly knows what he’s doing (so I’m guessing it was just as long as it needed to be to feel right, anyway).
And that about wraps it up for me on Cuckoo. I believe this film is getting a release in about ten days time and, if you are fan of the horror genre then you need to go and see this one. It’s very surreal, fast paced and sets up an atmosphere that the silliness of its central premise can just about contain. It would make a lovely double bill with the German horror film Schlaf (aka Sleep, reviewed by me here) and if you liked that one, the feel of the two movies is not dissimilar for their first reels, it has to be said. I hope this one gets a proper Blu Ray release soon... I even liked the needle dropped songs used on the soundtrack.
Sunday, 5 May 2024
Love Lies Bleeding
The Joy Of Flex
Love Lies Bleeding
Directed by Rose Glass
UK/USA 2024
A24
Well Love Lies Bleeding is a very interesting film, to say the least. Lou, played by Kristen Stewart, manages a gym and has a none too great existence... but it’s love at first sight when Jackie, played by Katy O'Brian, comes to pump up her body in preparation for a body building competition to be held in Vegas. After some steroid injecting foreplay, the two become involved but, when Lou’s sister gets badly beaten by her husband (again), something snaps in Jackie’s brain and she tries to put things right in her own way. And did I mention the owner of both that gym and the gun club where Jackie is currently working as a waitress is also the long standing local villain, who also happens to be Lou’s father... played to the hilt by Ed Harris?
If this sounds like a classic set up for a 1940s/50s film noir then, bingo but, here’s the thing, the film is set in the late 1980s (Die Hard is mentioned as being a popular, recent film) and this has a similar feel to one of those retro-noir movies made in the 1980s for sure. But, the other thing about this movie is... it’s the second feature by writer/director Rose Glass, who had a big hit with her wonderful movie Saint Maud a couple of years ago (reviewed by me here). And this next piece of cinematic artistry is a worthy successor to that debut, although it’s in no way aligned with it tonally and this is a much more playful movie, shot through with a much more blatant sense of black humour.
The film looks beautiful, with a rich colour palette and some beautiful camera angles. Glass is not afraid to adopt a birds eye view shot and then hold it for a period of time when she feels it’s appropriate too... which reminded me of certain shots in Hitchcock’s oeuvre from time to time.
It also has a few surprises up its sleeves too with the director bringing in a couple of well placed, healthy doses of cinematic surrealism to throw into the mix, to wrong foot and certainly surprise the audience from time to time. There’s a wonderful moment during the body building contest when Stewart, who isn’t even in the same city, appears a couple of times and makes a truly spectacular entrance in one scene (in a way that totally is what using CGI in cinema should be about). Sometimes these dalliances with surreal occurrences can be excused as hallucinogenic states creeping up on a character due to persistent steroid abuse and at other times... well, there’s a wonderful denouement with Ed Harris which, admittedly goes the way you think it will in terms of deus ex machina outcomes but, spectacularly not in a way many people would see coming. Like the final shot of Saint Maud, this forces the audience to consider the duality of what they are seeing and to find their own interpretation of just what is going on by this point. Which is a nice gift to the viewer and something you can take away with you after the film is done.
Added to all this we have a fetishistic devotion to the way muscles can be pumped up on a body with a truly heightened sense of sound design and which, itself, is a constant foreshadowing for the scene I mentioned with Ed Harris in the previous paragraph. It’s another interesting element of the film that seems almost a throwback to a couple of decades earlier, when Darren Aronofsky was using fast cut montages with enhanced sound design in films like Pi and Requiem For A Dream.
And... while we’re on the subject of Aranofsky, this film is also scored by the composer for those films, Clint Mansell. And it’s got a very distinctive feel to it... sounding a lot more like his early works in terms of commenting on the atmosphere of a scene in a more vibrant way than some of his later stuff. I think he’s consciously, perhaps, trying to sound like something earlier for the sake of the time period of the film but one scene where I was really surprised was in the first sex scene between Kristen Stewart and Katy O'Brian, where Mansell’s score almost goes into full on 1980s porn soundtrack mode... at least that’s the way it seemed to me. It was a bit ‘off putting’ at first but when I figured out the way it fits in with the aesthetic of the piece, I kinda got into it.
And what more is there to say. Love Lies Bleeding, the second feature length film from Rose Glass, is something which at first feels very familiar but then evolves into something much more challenging to what your expectations might be, I’m pleased to say. I was really drawn into the quirkiness of the project and coupled with doses of sometimes uncomfortable, lethal paranoia, I really had a good time with this movie. I suspect it will totally divide audiences straight down the middle but, that’s okay... that just means a film has a powerful voice and falls closer to being an auteur piece than most. I’m glad that this kind of refreshing, cinematic surprise is still able to get a mainstream release these days and, yeah, I hope it does really well.
Tuesday, 16 April 2024
Sleep
Perchance
Sleep
aka Schlaf
Directed by Michael Venus
Germany 2020
Arrow Blu Ray Zone B
Warning: Some slight spoilers here.
Schlaf, or Sleep, was a blind buy for me. It’s a film I think I might have possibly gotten a chance to see at the cinema back in 2020 if it hadn’t been for the coronavirus. I don’t remember this one getting any kind of release in UK cinemas but the people at Arrow have released the movie on Blu Ray and, judging completely by the beautiful slipcase cover art and a nice, intriguing plot summary (such as it is... I’m not sure plot is the applicable word for this movie), I thought I’d take a punt on it. And I’m glad I did as I got two things from it. First up, I really liked it and will probably watch it again sometime in the hope of unearthing more clues as to what really is happening in the movie.
And, the other thing was, well, as is probably now apparent, I have no idea how the various puzzle pieces fit together into a cohesive whole. In fact, having slept on it overnight and realising the age of the hotel owners don’t necessarily match up to what I perceived to be the film’s timeline, it made even less sense on reflection. But, then again, I’m not sure I’m supposed to be able to glean all of its answers anyway.
The story is about Marlene, played by Sandra Hüller and her daughter Mona, played by Gro Swantje Kohlhof and, Mona’s prime relationship to her mother is one of carer, as Marlene has strange psychological issues which are manifesting themselves to her every night in the form of dreams about a specific hotel and the three men she sees suicide there. In fact, she filled countless journals with sketches of the things she sees in this hotel every night. But then, she finds the hotel in a travel brochure and, without her daughter’s knowledge, goes to the village of Stainbach to stay in the hotel and try and get some answers. She knows she’s onto something because photos of the three men are in the lobby of the hotel. And then, in her dream like state overnight, something happens to her in her room and she’s taken to the local hospital in a stupor.
Mona moves herself into the hotel to be near her sick mother but, it isn’t long before she starts entering a world of dreams and also seeing visions of the three men who killed themselves in the distant past, as she walks around areas of the hotel. And that’s really all I want to say about the story itself... partially because I don’t want to spoil it for anyone who’s not seen the film and partially because anything else I say about it from hereon in would only be my personal interpretation, including the mental baggage I’ve brought to my viewing experience of the movie... and that may or may not turn out to be a helpful interpretation of events.
Right from the start of this beautiful looking movie, the director tries to wrong-foot the audience by taking us into perceived realities which turn out to be false. For instance, the film opens with mother and daughter playing Jenga but, on the second go in after the first topple, something very... well... un-Jenga like happens in the game and you realise you were just witnessing the mother’s dream. Or was it her dream? This is one of those movies where it’s very quickly established that any visual information you are given is not necessarily to be trusted so, any attempt to second guess where the story is going not only becomes impossible but it also becomes totally irrelevant.
There are elements brought in which weave a spell... the introduction of a group of people trying to bring back some form of Nazism (one assumes, there isn’t a swastika in sight) and also a witch who later becomes a succubus who may or may not be Mona’s grandmother (I’m plumping for, yes she is, despite the apparent age of the male hotel owner... I guess it could just about match up with things we are shown) and so there’s a persistent kind of folk horror element to the movie too, which is obviously set in a place which brings memories and dreams of the past washing up into the present... and a quite lethal succubus who lives on and can control people through those memories and visions, from what I could make out.
The film is beautifully shot and, as you might imagine, the cinematography helps set up a dream like atmosphere... as does the writing when it shows waking dream after waking dream with the dreamer unsure if they’ve actually awoken yet or trapped in another dream. Certainly, some characters are going on parallel adventures simultaneously in different perceived experiences, it seemed to me.
It would be a huge and obvious cliché to say that the film, with it’s woodland hotel setting and its vaguely surreal imagery and editing reminded me of Twin Peaks but, I think it has to be said that there’s a certain commonality between the two. And, no, I’m not saying this director is anything like David Lynch but there is a certain overlap, perhaps, in some of the themes and the way the more surrealistic imagery is introduced into the film... sometimes creeping up on the audience unexpectedly and, at other times, suddenly jumping out quite out of the blue with no subtlety whatsoever. I think fans of the former will probably enjoy this movie more, is perhaps the point I am trying to make here.
Coupled with a subtle score and some elegant mise en scene, there’s also a very strong cast of actors but a special shout out to Gro Swantje Kohlhof’s portrayal of Mona, who plays the character in a very downbeat, muffled kind of way for a lot of the film and so, in one scene where she takes on the personality of someone else (I don’t want to say too much here for fear of spoilers), you realise just how brilliant she is in this, due to the contrast of the sudden personality shift which is quite a moment to watch. But, yeah, everyone is good in this and everyone is so great at maintaining the idea that there is something amiss in the village of Stainbach.
And I am pleased I bought this one because Sleep, if you haven’t figured it out by now, is certainly a movie I would recommend. It does have various clues scattered throughout the film which do give a semblance of bits of a jigsaw I often found easy to put together... and sometimes not. I will go back and revisit these clues at some point although I suspect, just like Ben Wheatley’s Kill List, the audience is not necessarily intended to join all the dots or, maybe a better analogy is build up a complete, correct picture from the puzzle pieces scattered throughout the film... a carved wooden boar, a ‘five way’ sex scene which may be a metaphor for the protagonist’s mother’s origin being enacted by her (or may not), spiked drinks for Nazis and so on.
I’ve not ploughed through the extras yet but, it’s Arrow and they’ve provided some nice stuff with this including a booklet of essays, a poster and, among the various disc extras, we get to sample the brilliance of Alexandra Heller-Nicholas on one of the visual essays. So, yeah, there’s a lot going on with this release and, like I said, I'm glad I picked this one up while the limited edition version is still about. Check this one out for sure.
Tuesday, 3 October 2023
Jesus Shows You The Way To The Highway
Holy Three Stigmata!
Jesus Shows You
The Way To The Highway
Spain/Estonia/Ethiopia/
Latvia/Romania 2019
Directed by Miguel Llansó
Arrow Blu Ray Zone B
Warning: Yeah... I suppose this has spoilers all through it. In a way.
Jesus Shows You The Way To The Highway is the second feature film by Miguel Llansó, the director of the equally surreal Crumbs (reviewed by me here). Like that earlier feature, the bombardment of various seemingly conflicting or contradicting elements on the audience seems to be the order of the day but, also like that earlier film, once you start to glean and uncover parts of the underlying roadmap, a fairly linear or, at least, penetrable through line on the narrative starts to slowly emerge.
The film had me from the start when the opening title appears over time as an old 1982 ZX Spectrum loading screen, as it would have loaded up from a cassette. We are then flung into the world of the far future where Daniel Tadesse, the male lead of Crumbs, returns in this one as CIA agent D. T. Gagano, partnered with Agent Palmer (played here by Agustín Mateo). After an agent who has been connected to Psychobook, which is something which somehow controls the majority of the future world, has her eyes demolished by a Russian virus, it’s up to Agents Gagano and Palmer to enter Psychoville with their low tech VR headsets, in a series of missions where they can find and trace the source of the virus... which is being distributed as a slimy substance at one point.
Now Gagano just wants to resign from the CIA and stay with his oversexed girlfriend Malin (played by the sensational Gerda-Annette Allikas... this is, bafflingly, her only movie credit). However, when the two agents go in, entering an environment where their masked avatars (of Robert Redford and Richard Pryor) are filmed in a way that is reminiscent of stop motion animation, they come face to face and get into a fight with an Irish accented version of Stalin. On their second encounter, Gagano goes into a coma and is trapped in this alternate reality. A reality where Batman is a fascist president named Bat-Fro, who sends in his subordinate Mr. Sophisticated’s king fu warriors to bring him the Ark of the Covenant... which is actually the very first laptop to enter psychoville. Bat-fro is costumed exactly as Adam West in the old TV shows and, indeed, an old Batman Equal Pay PSA advert starring West, Burt Ward and Yvonne Craig from 1973 is shown playing on a TV set at one point.
And if this all seems fairly mad to you... there’s lots more pop culture references and all of the actors have been deliberately, badly dubbed in English language to mirror the kind of bootleg and international prints of various exploitation films from the 60s and 70s. With some insect men who shoot laser beams from their eyes thrown in for good measure, of course.
Let me just take an aside here to say that the Arrow video contains a relatively short visual essay on the influences of the film and I actually watched that extra (I rarely have time for the extras these days) because it sounded interesting. Alas, the person putting it together correctly identifies that the basic plot structure (or at least as it’s presented to the audience in the most obvious layer) hails from spy movies but he seems stuck on Eurospy films being the influence when, frankly, lots of spy movies have the kind of stylistic qualities inherent in the movie, expecially from the 1960s. And, frankly, citing Our Man Flint as a Eurospy film (it’s an American movie, people!) and, even more alarmingly, incorrectly identifying Bernard Lee as playing ‘Q’ in the Bond movies (he plays ‘M’ guys!), kind of kills the credibility of the piece. Yeah, we can all see he’s referencing Kung Fu movies but, probably not the ones you specifically cite and while I can see it would be worthwhile mentioning the luchador movies such as those made popular by Santo and Blue Demon, it seems to me they’ve kind of missed the point with the obvious homage to knock off superhero movies when you’re not talking about the Filipino and Turkish (among others) superhero movies of the 60s and 70s. So, yeah, was looking forward to the visual essay but I wasn’t impressed, especially when the narrator completely fails to mention the obvious, all pervading influence on the movie... Philip K. Dick.
Okay, so the terrific and chaotic visuals and story strands knitted together before your eyes should all start to come together when, at one point fairly early on in the movie, you find out the full name of Agent Palmer is Palmer Eldritch. As in the Philip K. Dick novel The Three Stigmata Of Palmer Eldritch. Indeed, at one point in the film the viral substance which seems to be opening paths to new realities has been synthesised by the Jesus character into candy, directly referencing one of the two drugs used to gateway into different realities in the novel, Can-D and Chew-Z (with the Z being pronounced in the American way to make sense of the second term). Furthermore, when Jesus first properly appears in the narrative, the story almost nods to the idea of Mercerism, central to Dick’s famous novel Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? And when you realise that the director is referencing Dick and his way of putting characters into alternate realities they had no knowledge of, such as in A Maze Of Death, Ubik and others of that ilk, then the on screen shenanigans of Agents Gagano and Palmer seem relatively easy to decode. Like you’ve just been handed a primer. At some point from then on you realise that all three layers of reality represented in the movie (as barriers between the two layers break down and create a third netherworld between the two) are all just one single alternative reality to an experiment going on at MIT. Except, there’s a little Easter egg towards the end of the picture, referencing the main viral villain, which suggests that even this final reality may well be a false reading.
Whatever the underlying reality, though, Jesus Shows You The Way To The Highway is a chaotic, maelstrom of surrealistic, alternative worlds with lots of fun and bizarre imagery, quite unlike any other film I’ve seen to date, including the director’s previous movie Crumbs, which is an entirely different brand of ‘What the heck?’ than is on show here. It’s one of those films I could easily revisit over and over again and certainly one I’ll be introducing to various film buddies at some point. Why this didn’t get a huge cinema campaign and a shot at the box office over here other than a single, one off screening at Glasgow Film Festival, is a complete mystery to me. People need to be exposed to more films like this, especially in a country where we have quite a diverse range of people living here who would be in more of a position to recognise and understand the visual influences and tropes on display here than some other international audiences, I suspect (and probably more so, for sure, than the expert commentator on the visual essay was able). Anyway, if you love film and want to see something you may well not have seen before then, Jesus Shows You The Way To The Highway is the one to watch. But watch out for those 8-bit music saturated end credits... if you have any leanings toward epilepsy then you might want to give those end titles a miss.
Monday, 17 April 2023
Lips Of Blood
Crypt, Oh!
Through The Two Lips.
Lips Of Blood
aka Lèvres de sang
France 1975
Directed by Jean Rollin
Redemption Blu Ray Zone A
Warning: Slight spoilers I guess.
After The Demoniacs (reviewed by me here), Jean Rollin returned to the realm of vampires and, although there are five, sexy vampire ladies in this one, he does also manage to include the dual theme among them as two inseparable agents of the undead in this are played by the twins, Catherine and Marie-Pierre Castel. It’s also one of my favourite Rollin films (I even have a nice t-shirt with some bosomy poster art on it) because there are not that many plot points to take on board and it’s mostly focused on the main male lead running about the streets of France in the dark. That being said, I really don’t like the main character... for no other reasons than that a) he loses his temper too easily with people and b) his head seems too overly large to properly carry on top of his body. However, my lack of fondness for the man in question, Jean-Loup Philippe as Frédéric, doesn’t detract from my enjoyment of the film which is a tribute, I think, to the power of the director’s beautiful imagery.
Okay, so the basic plot of Lips Of Blood... Frédéric sees a photo of a château at a party. It sparks a long repressed childhood memory of spending the night there as a young boy of 12 with a vampire lady dressed in white (Jenniffer, played by the totally cute and gorgeous Annie Belle... my favourite of the ‘Rollin Vampire Gals’ for sure). His mother denies all knowledge but when he starts to try and find out from the sexy photographer who took the shot (and also to try and find out why she’s being paid not to tell him), he unleashes various misadventures where he is locked in a room then, when he gets out, the photographer is killed, a gunman played by Willie Braque tries to kill him and he is temporarily locked up in an insane asylum. He is rescued by the twins dressed as sexy nurses because he earlier accidentally freed four vampires when they were in their ‘bat state’, when he stumbled upon their coffin in one of the bizarre series of coincidences which dreamily crop up on a regular basis, it seems to me, in the cinema of Jean Rollin (not knocking it, by the way, but can see that the internal logic, such as it is, of these films wouldn’t be for everyone).
Anyway, he keeps seeing the ghostly apparition of Jennifer watching over him and giving him clues and, at last, he finds the château and, despite the warnings of his vampire hunting mother, helps fake her death and releases her ageless vampire self from her coffin prison so they can become lovers once more. She bites him up to seal the deal so that they can be eternally together and then, suddenly, they turn up at that beach that Rollin often features in many of his movies and get in a coffin together, so they can be washed out to sea with the tide. So, yeah, it’s a romantic one.
The film is certainly simplistic in the storyline but, with the exception of Rollin’s early works such as Le Viol Du Vampire (reviewed here), that’s not unusual for this writer/director. What’s also not unusual is the sumptuous and surreal visual images and beautiful compositions which are in abundance throughout the film. Great swathes of the movie are shot at night and mostly without any dialogue... which gives contrast when a character or two do decide to open their mouths and get into an exchange of ideas. During these night sequences, I noticed Rollin does what I’d seen him do on at least one other film, which is to light only the buildings and characters which are points of interest, leaving the rest of the frame in inky blackness and using the negative space to focus the audiences eyes on the highlights he wants you to see. This also gives these scenes a kind of built in ‘unnatural theatricality’ (which obviously doesn’t hurt a Rollin film any) and it’s an unusual way of doing things. I’m not saying it’s a unique characteristic of Rollin’s film-making... I’m sure I’ve seen directors like Bertrand Blier do a similar thing on movies like Merci La Vie... but it’s also not that common either.
Also, much as I dislike the main male lead, I think the acting in this one by all concerned is a heck of a lot better than the majority of the director’s previous films and this all helps... especially in those dialogue scenes. This one never really feels stilted or jarring in the delivery, unlike in The Demoniacs, for example (although I made a special case in my review on why that one perhaps shouldn’t be judged too harshly in terms of where it goes with the style of the acting).
And I really don’t have a lot more to say about Lips Of Blood other than, it’s the usual Rollin affair with naked vampire girls pitched against richly lit architecture and dreamy ideas with a soundtrack which is appropriate to the various sequences. It’s still one of my favourites by this director and this was a good period in Rollin’s career, I think.
Sunday, 12 March 2023
The Demoniacs
Wreck N' Rollin
The Demoniacs
aka Les démoniaques
France 1974
Directed by Jean Rollin
Redemption Blu Ray Zone A
Warning: Some slight spoilerage here.
Jean Rollin’s The Demoniacs is a little different from his usual ‘personal movies’ in that, while it still has the ‘demoniaques’ of the title coming as a pair of girls (almost every set of protagonists or antagonists come in twos in a Rollin film), these two are in no way vampires. Exactly what they are is open to debate but... okay, I’ll run the plot by you first, such as it is.
Set sometime in the 19th century, Rollin uses voice over and shots of the heads of the four ‘wreckers’ in circles as he runs down the background of each one. This is pretty much like an extended and more thorough version of a similar technique used in the opening credits of those old 1930s serials where, for the first few episodes, footage of the actor would be used to introduce the characters and certainly Rollin was a big fan of various movie serials.
Then the credits roll and the film starts in the aftermath of the four wreckers, The Captain (John Rico), Le Bosco (Willy Braque), Paul (Paul Bisciglia) and bad gal Tina (Joëlle Coeur). They are looting their latest shipwreck and then find the two girls of the title survived... played by Lieva Lone and Patricia Hermenier. So they rape them both and kill them (kinda). Shortly after, in the local saloon bar, the captain is plagued with visions of the dead girls haunting him as ghosts and, frankly, even though these ghosts can still be raped and bashed about, I’m going to stick to the idea that they are actually dead at this point. Then the ladies return for more trouble from the increasingly paranoid crew of ‘wreckers’ but get away and visit the ‘cursed Abbey ruins’, where the two guardians, including a lady dressed as a clown (so, yeah, definitely a Rollin film for sure) allow the girls to liberate a demon who has been imprisoned in the Abbey for hundreds of years. There is rumour that it’s Lucifer himself. Certainly, if you can get away with wearing the black coat, white shirt and bear chested medallion look like this guy, you probably are Satan because, yeah, nobody is going to give you any hassle about it if you walk the walk, I guess.
Anyway, Satan (or his nearest equivalent) sexes the two ladies up and gives them special powers to take their revenge on their killers. They start to do this (using powers that make statues fly around the Abbey grounds, projected at their enemies) but the wreckers kill the two guardians and so the gals give the devil his powers back, so he can bring those two back to life. They then go and meet their own rapey, painful deaths (again) but not before all the wreckers have killed each other... or died unconvincingly by their own hand.
So yeah, okay, you never watch a Rollin film for the strength of the acting but this one particularly has some very melodramatic and over the top performances from the cast... as well as a propensity for various actors and actresses to look the audience directly in the eye on occasion, while delivering a monologue, as if they could be breaking the fourth wall. Well, I actually believe the acting in this one is deliberately unconvincing. At the top end of the movie Rollin inserts the on screen credit... “Un film expressionniste de Jean Rollin” and I can’t help but think he’s trying his best to get the cast to act as if they’ve just stepped out of a silent film here. The acting is quite unlike many of his other films I’ve seen, if memory serves. So there’s that.
Of course, what you do watch Rollin films for is the surrealistic imagery and beautiful cinematography and this one is no exception. There are some wonderful shot compositions in this, especially where architecture and the human form meet and, as I remarked to someone when I was looking at this one again, you can tell straight away from looking at any frame in the movie that Rollin directed this. It’s beautiful and it looks really good on the US Blu Ray for Redemption/Kino Lorber.
Also, about this wonderful transfer... this one is touted as an extended directors cut and I did feel that there was extra length to this version than the last time I watched it (in the wonderful Encore boxed edition DVD... which had more extras on it but, like I said, I think this version is longer). Also, again if memory serves, this is probably the one non-porn movie that Rollin made which has the most female nudity and sex in it... even more so in an extended masturbation sequence from Tina at the end of this one. So there’s that if you want it (I certainly do but, that’s just part of the Rollin experience for me).
A couple of things which stood out for me which kinda seemed wrong were...
Okay, so the score is credited to Pierre Raph but I reckon there are also some old library cues in their because, especially near the start, it seems to belong more in a 1930s-50s film, it seemed to me. It certainly didn’t seem to marry up so well with the style of the images in some scenes so, yeah, it’s probably a deliberate ploy to bring it back to the serials or silents (there are some solo piano cues in strange places too) so... well, it is what it is.
Another thing is that one of the patrons in the pub has a beautiful figurine of Bela Lugosi as Dracula (the only time a vampire, Rollin’s stock in trade, gets a look in here) but, yeah, you know, the setting of this film certainly pre-dates Bela’s time on stage and screen as Dracula (and probably pre-dates cinema too, for that matter). And there are apparently a fair few anachronistic objects scattered around the place that I didn’t notice but, yeah, I’m not going to quibble.
Once again, with The Demoniacs, Rollin delivers a heady cocktail of bad acting, nudity, surrealism and great compositional beauty to the table. In other words, he brings ‘true cinema’ and I will certainly be revisiting this film a few more times in my life, if all goes to plan. And this US Blu Ray edition is certainly a nice version of it for sure. Grab this one while it’s still in print.
Tuesday, 19 May 2020
Kotoko
Double Vision
Kotoko
Japan 2011
Directed by Shin'ya Tsukamoto
Third Window Films Blu Ray Zone B
Warning: Slight spoilers.
Kotoko is a movie both directed by and co-starring Shin'ya Tsukamoto (as a novelist/’love interest’ to the main protagonist), who wrote and directed such movies as the Tetsuo trilogy and A Snake Of June. Usually quite nightmarish and surreal in his brutal visions this movie keeps to that to a certain extent but the surrealistic nature of some of the imagery is a lot more toned down and ‘stealth mode’ than what I would normally associate with him as a writer/director and it also has a reason for being there which is rooted in real world concerns. Sometimes the stripping down of those kinds of elements just makes their hijacking of the narrative thread even more potent and such is the case here.
The film stars somebody called Cocco as the title character and it’s about her and her relationship with her little boy. Or. more precisely, this film is all about her and there’s no doubt that this actress, who also wrote the story that the director wrote the screenplay from, is in a showcase performance.
We learn about her from a collection of visual moments of her life as she goes through the film and its all accompanied by her narrative voice-over throughout the entire movie. Very early on in the story we learn of her ‘special condition’ which means she sometimes sees two of a person simultaneously. Sometimes it’s benign like just seeing two bicyclists instead of one... and not knowing which way to dodge to get clear of them. Most times though it can be two of the same person in different parts of a room or street doing different things. One is almost always antagonistic and will brutally attack her and that’s usually the false one which disappears back inside her head after a while... but not always and the ways in which the ‘double’ can be integrated into certain scenes (like when she drops her baby off the roof of her apartment block) is used quite smartly by the director to disorient the viewer.
However, as the narrative starts to go along and you try to see things from her perspective, you may start to suspect that the things she is telling you may be open to suspicion. Have you ever read The Tin Drum by Günter Grass? Like the film, the original book is told first person by the voice of little Oskar but what’s made explicit in the book (and not at all in the movie) is that he is narrating his adventures from an insane asylum and the reader has to judge whether or not Oskar is indeed what he says and has been locked up by people who don’t recognise his special abilities or whether or not he’s actually insane. Well, very early on, I’d say within the first ten minutes of Kotoko, you probably will find yourself questioning her validity, especially when the authorities take her baby away and place him under the care of her sister.
Oh... she’s also into self harm too, cutting into herself in order to feel something quite often. This escalates when she is courted by a novelist (played by the film’s director) who still wants to date her even though both their first dates end with her stabbing him through one or other of his hands with a fork. Later, when they actually get involved, it’s a shock to see how far gone she is when she ritualistically mutilates his face some nights. The slow build to this revelation is slow in coming though and is down to the skill of the actress as she plays her mental aberration very well, pitching between moods and being just a little off kilter and overenthusiastic around those she needs to put up a front to. I’ve witnessed people similarly overcompensating in an attempt to normalise their appearance before and she seems to have caught this ‘look’ and feel of this particular symptom of failing mental health quite well.
So yeah, she’s not the most stable mother and Tsukamoto uses a lot of hand held camera to catch her in juddery motion which, in some ways, brings a certain much needed realism to the focus of the shots, especially with the characters inhabiting an environment that’s so well lit with bold colours and, sometimes, bright orange washes... like the ugliness of reality is trespassing on the beautiful inner world of the title character.
However, he does also take this technique too far, I thought, in certain shots... like one of the scenes set in the rain where the camera lens is equally pelted with drops of water. It has the same effect as seeing a lens flare in a movie... just pops one out of the picture and brings attention to the artificial nature of the medium. Granted, the film does tightrope the fluidity of the real and unreal with equal fervour and this may be the reason why shots like this creep in but, all it did for me was made me question why an obviously beautiful shot had been spoiled like this in the first place. It does make you seem like you are a fly-on-the-wall to a movie set rather than to the actual story, it seems to me.
Funnily enough, it’s not the bloody, violent or surrealistic nature of the film which I found hard. I mean, there are even shots of a young toddler’s head being blown apart in close up with an assault rifle which don’t particularly shock because, by that point in the movie, the hallucinatory nature of the narrative has been well established and so nothing really means much anymore. The thing which really bothered me was three or four sequences where the title character sings acappella songs (and sometimes does dance moves) which stop the action dead. I didn’t hate these sequences because they upended the flow of the story particularly or because they come at unexpected times. Indeed, the underscore to the movie plays effectively against the action and gives the film a kind of lullaby soap opera counterpoint. No, it was just the fact that these particular sequences seemed so interminably dull and boring in contrast with the rest of the movie which got me annoyed. Once would have been fine but it does get grating towards the end. This immediately made me think... unnecessary songs + actress with one name = pop star using a movie as a vehicle for her talent, possibly hooked up with the director. And, sure enough, turns out she’s a big folk singer in Japan with a successful recording career but with only a couple of films to her credit... which does explain certain things here.
However, the inclusion of the songs are a minor grumble because, pop star or not, she does a remarkable acting job here and she really does help carry the film. It’s a truly amazing performance as she brings this character to life and certainly worth the price of admission. Much more so than the conclusion of the story itself, I would say. So, yeah, that’s me done with this one now. It’s a film which was a little disappointing on some levels but I’m so glad I’ve seen this and it is one of the most incredible acting jobs I’ve seen in recent years.
Kotoko is certainly a film I would recommend to most anybody who is into more than just ‘action movies’ and something I may even revisit at some point. I watched this on a Blu Ray edition I bought in a recent sale from Third Window Films but I understand it’s also part of Arrow’s brand new Blu Ray box set of Tsukamoto films so, yeah, maybe give this one a watch at some point. It’s certainly an... experience.
Monday, 30 March 2020
The Complete Peanuts
Snoopy Duper
The Complete Peanuts
Volumes 1 - 26
by Charles M Schulz
The Peanuts Dell Archive
by Schulz and Various
Charlie Brown’s sister Sally is a Harry Potter fan.
I didn’t know that but it kinda makes sense since anybody who has done a lot for getting a new generation of children into reading would surely have appealed to Peanuts creator Charles M. Schulz... or Sparky, as his friends and family knew him.
The reason I didn’t know this is because I pretty much hadn’t read any of the Peanuts strips after around the mid-1980s. I’d read quite a few of them from the years before that but Schulz was knocking these things out for around 50 years, from 1950 - 2000, on a daily basis so, you know, there was a lot there I hadn’t read. So, sometime towards the end of last year, I decided to remedy that and started reading the entire run in the few spare minutes I had left over each day, getting through a year roughly every few days.
Peanuts has always been in my life in one form or another and it’s also one of the things me and my late best friend Kerry also bonded over quite often.
When I was a kid my parents had a subscription to the Sunday magazine edition of The Observer. I used to mostly only read one thing in this, the full colour Sunday edition of Peanuts which had extra panels than the usual three on the regular daily strips. Then, years later when I was in my mid to late teens at school, I discovered a weird little second hand bookshop off the beaten track about twenty minutes walk away. It was only open on a Thursday afternoon and on a Saturday morning. I used to go there almost every Thursday after school to spend my Saturday job money there (in the days when a second hand book would be priced somewhere between 20p and 30p). I read a lot of things which have stayed with me from this shop over the few years it was still open... almost the entire run of Philip K. Dick novels, around 60 or so of the original Doc Savage novels, the Bond books, the Quiller books, the Modesty Blaise novels, 60 or more Michael Moorcock novels... this shop was a magical gateway to fantasy worlds I still inhabit to this day.
And, of course, I grabbed around 40 or so of the paperback Charlie Brown/Peanuts collections from them. They reprinted the strips in chopped up vertical displays and I just adored them. And, yes, thank you... I was the kind of kid who kept a little book of lists of required titles on me to make sure I didn’t buy any doubles. I used to lend them to my friend Kerry too and my favourite Peanuts memory must be the time when I discovered some new reprint books which were slightly thinner but which were maybe an inch taller and wider than the other Peanuts books. So I took it to school the next day and showed my friend the cover of the one I’d bought the night before... Thompson Is In Trouble Charlie Brown! I knew my friend knew all the Peanuts characters as well as I did, possibly better, so I waited the second or so and then, sure enough, Kerry looked at me and said... “Thompson? Who’s Thompson?” I looked at him nonchalantly as I slowly turned the book around to reveal the back cover. This was a depiction of the character Woodstock holding up a sign and, on that sign it said... “Thompson? Who’s Thompson?” Kerry saw this, groaned to himself and started grinning. I don’t know why I still remember this incident but it was one of the few highlights of my school period.
I fondly remember our last collective run in with the Peanuts gang, as it was literally a few months before Kerry’s death. We went into London one Saturday for a big gallery show on the history of Charles Schulz and his iconic strip. We had a good time walking around those galleries and I am very grateful, in hindsight, that we took the time to go around that thing.
So The Complete Peanuts is a 26 volume collection of all of the Peanuts strips from 1950 to 2000 in chronological order, two years per tome. It also includes Schulz’s earliest versions of the characters from the Li'l Folks cartoons, both at the start and the end of the run here and, also, various comic book and advertisement appearances. These are all reprinted in black and white, as the majority of the strips were. They are handsome hardbacked volumes and each has an introduction from a different, famous personality... so Hal Hartley, Wes Anderson, Barack Obama, Garrison Keiller, Whoopi Goldberg... lots of people have been gathered to sing the praises of the man and talk about his influences on them. The Peanuts Dell Archive takes some (not all) of the various Dell Four Colour Comics from the 1950s and 60s and reproduces them in their original full colour. The interesting thing is that it doesn’t reprint just the few Schulz stories from these comics but also a huge amount of the other writers and artists who worked on these.
From the start, Schulz’s strip had something magical and was addressing things in ways which other newspaper strip characters couldn’t even get near. Schulz’s understated stabs of humour peppered with truisms are also often quite surreal at times and have an almost world weary feel to them at others... which is interesting when you are dealing with characters who are perpetually no older than about six years of age (of course, they always seem to know what year it is too... which is hard for continuity conscious people like myself, who can’t work out why these kids don’t grow up in these panels from year to year).
Although it sets a tone with its lead character Charlie Brown (although it’s true that his dog Snoopy could also be considered the lead character too), things are mostly unchanging for him over the years. For instance, one of the very early strips has Charlie Brown walking along towards a group of kids. One of the kids says... “Here comes Charlie Brown.” Then, when he has passed them by and is out of earshot, the same kid finishes off with... “How I hate him.” So yes, the eternal misfortunes of Charlie Brown start here but, especially in the early days, he’s not always the loser he’s sometime made out to be. A lot of the first few years, for instance, regularly has a strip where Charlie Brown ‘winds up’ one of the other kids and the last panel is often of him being chased away from a scene smiling as he says something along the lines of... “I get my kicks.” Much later in the run Charlie even gets a girlfriend, of sorts and does have some good things happening to him from time to time.
In November 1951, we have the first of what would be the annual tradition of Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick and then pulling it away at the last moment. However, the first time this is done, it’s not Lucy who holds the ball at all but Violet...Lucy came into the strip as a toddler in early 1952. The same month as the first ball kick we get the first sighting of Snoopy’s kennel when a TV aerial is bought for it although, like pretty much all of the characters, Snoopy is drawn a little differently to the way he evolved... he’s not a million miles off from where he would later end up visually but, of all the characters, he’s probably the one who changed the most.
And then, in October of ‘52, a character breaks the fourth wall for the first time, although what with the surreal moments in the strip over the years, this is probably the least subtle it’s ever been done. After getting a stupid answer from Charlie Brown, Beethoven fanatic Schroeder walks off saying... “Sometimes I think I should put in for a transfer to a new comic strip.”
Getting back to Snoopy though, its hard to keep a track of just who owns him in the strip in the early days. It seems almost as if he lives with whichever kid seems to take Schulz’s fancy at the start. Somewhere around late 1955 though, he’s finally and positively identified as being Charlie Brown’s dog. In the early days, Snoopy’s kennel is rarely seen except for having that TV aerial installed and then, a little later, to show an air conditioning unit fitted to the side. After a while, though, we get into the iconic idea that he sleeps on top of his kennel. That being said, during his last few years working on the strip, Schulz began to depict him sleeping in bed with Charlie Brown on a number of occasions. In 1993, however, it’s revealed that Snoopy mostly sleeps on top of his kennel because he has claustrophobia... which is a shame but Peanuts does seem to get a little darker and more cynical as Schulz got older, I think. Lots of famous firsts for this character though, as the years go by including a 1964 reference to him as being a ‘Beagle’, which is something we hadn’t known for the 13 years prior to this. In March 1969 he was also ‘the first Beagle on the moon’ and I remember as a kid I used to have a Snoopy figure in his Apollo Mission outfit. At that exhibition last year, we saw a whole bunch of those in very slightly different variations from various manufacturing runs. In June 1970, as the punchline to a joke, Snoopy is seen wearing sunglasses for the first time, which would later become his Joe Cool alter ego’s signature trademark.
In an interesting use of composition and comic strip semiotics, which was something Schulz was continually experimenting with, in February 1961, Snoopy kicks his dog dish through three consecutive panels, thus exploring the idea of linear time over multiple static moments... something which is probably taken for granted in modern times. Another load of surreal turns include various gags of Snoopy interacting in various ways with the depiction of Schroeder's music, manifest in the air as notes on a set of staves but somehow also a tangible force once Snoopy is in a scene. There’s also a sequence in the strip where Snoopy is promoted to Head Beagle and it’s bizarre in that his whole inauguration is televised. And, of course, there are his various flights of fancy from the troubled First World War fighter pilot who is constantly being attacked by The Red Baron to a surreal version of the Foreign Legion as he leads a group of the bird Woodstock’s friends through the imagined desert.
Talking of Woodstock, this character was in it for quite a few years hanging out with Snoopy until he finally reveals his name in June 1970. Other firsts include the 1966 first appearance of Peppermint Patty and the August 1968 arrival of Franklin.
The strip is often whimsical and understated but it always feels right and you sometimes get the feeling that the worlds problems are being debated in this parallel universe of Schulz’s work. And, as I said, the strip does get quite surreal, quite a lot... and that’s not just used for Snoopy’s character. For instance, there’s a running joke starting in 1974, which carries on in subsequent years, of Sally developing a kind of conversational relationship with the bricks that make up the school building. Or there’s that time when Peppermint Patty is held back a year but her old desk in the other class is haunted by the sound of her snores. And, considering that the Peanuts gang were on practically every greetings card you could find in the 70s and 80s, it’s interesting that, when Snoopy wants to send The Red Baron a greetings card, he considers buying a Garfield Birthday card for him.
Another thing I like is the constant stream of movie references that make their way into the strip from time to time. There’s many a mention for Citizen Kane, for example but there are also some great throwaway lines like this one in reference to Alfred Hitchcock...”I don’t trust birds anymore since I saw that movie.”
As I read these beloved strips I realised that it was also a microcosm for the way the world has grown and the attitudes of people over the years. I mean, there’s something really jarring when you get a Harry Potter reference in a Peanuts cartoon and, frankly, realise that in 1993, Lucy is using a mobile phone. And the metatextual nature of the strips can sometimes creep up on you without you knowing it, such as the three daily strips in 1997 promoting a real life concert of Peanuts music at Carnegie Hall. And, considering my profession as a graphic designer, why did it take Schulz to clue me in with a very in-your-face reference, about Etaoin shrdlu? No... you google it the same as I had to.
The Dell Comic Archives are interesting in that they show people and artists who weren’t always 100% in step with Schulz’ style and even the one that Schulz worked on himself for the comic books were somewhat different to the meanderings of his daily strip. I don’t think it’s necessary the extended stories that brought about this change in this material... after all, Schulz had a lot of running stories going on for a few weeks when he got into an idea... I just think that a different version of the medium for a specific audience obviously had different needs and this changes the tone somewhat.
I’d never realised, for instance, that Schulz’ daily Peanuts newspaper strips also quite often delved into the realm of political satire like other newspaper cartoonists often do. My favourite one was a running strip in the... I think... 1970s where Charlie Brown is trying to get a dog license from his local post office for Snoopy. Each day he ends up being given the wrong thing like a fishing license until, on the last day, he gets the right one. On the last day he says something to an ‘out of frame’ Snoopy along the lines of... “No, she says you don’t need a license for that.” The last panel shows Snoopy walking out with some kind of assault rifle. I think that Schulz, who served in the Second World War, made pretty clear his sentiment on the foolish notion that anybody had the right to bear arms in his country and I’m really pleased he did this.
On February 13th 2000 a special strip appeared. The last one. Charlie Brown is seen talking on a phone with the phrase, “I think he’s writing.” Panel two is Snoopy on his kennel typing “Dear Friends...” The third panel is also him writing and a heartfelt message from Schulz which I’ll quote here fully...
“Dear Friends,
I have been fortunate to draw Charlie Brown and his friends for almost 50 years.
It has been the fulfilment of my childhood ambition.
Unfortunately, I am no longer able to maintain the schedule demanded by a daily comic strip, therefore I am announcing my retirement.
I have been grateful over the years for the loyalty of our editors and the support and love expressed to me by fans of the comic strip.
Charlie Brown, Snoopy, Linus, Lucy... how can I ever forget them...
Charles M. Schulz”
Charlie Schulz passed away the day before this strip ran... and if you’ve just spent months reading his entire run, well... trust me, it’s a very moving moment.
The last volume in the series of The Complete Peanuts contains a long afterword by his widow, Jean Schulz, which talks a lot about their time together and, as you can imagine, it’s very touching. I couldn’t think of a nicer way to finish up this series and I found the whole experience both joyful and sometimes very sad. The Complete Peanuts is, as far as I am concerned, worth its weight in gold and if anyone is a budding strip cartoonist, I think you can learn a lot from reading through some of these volumes... strong lines, brevity, not over reaching but teasing out an idea... this is all good stuff. An absolute recommendation from me to anyone who wants to read something often gentle but never unswerving or dodging the bullets... a strip that tackles issues head on and with the right balance to make sure some of these insights really stab home. As well, of course, as being a whole lot of fun. I’ll aim to read through these again in my remaining lifetime, for sure.
Tuesday, 26 November 2019
Giraffes On Horseback Salad
Dali Soup
Giraffes On Horseback Salad
by Josh Frank, Tim Heidecker and Manuela Pertega
Quirk Books ISBN: 978-1594749230
Well this is certainly an interesting book and one I was completely foaming at the mouth for as soon as I found out about it on Twitter which, fortunately, was a Friday night. That meant I was able to get into London and get my hands on a copy within about 12 hours of discovering the existence of this thing (then didn’t get around to reading it for many months after but, hey, it was something less to worry about picking up later). Giraffes On Horseback Salad is a graphic novel which tries, almost, to do the impossible and both succeeds and fails in equal measure but, in this case, the nature of it’s failure is so consistent with an authentic feel for the material, that it’s partial failure is just another sign of its success, so to speak. Yeah, okay, I’ll unravel that one for you in a minute, after this short lead in...
Back in 1980, it turns out, when I was 12 (I always thought it was a lot earlier), the Tate Gallery in London (there was only one in those days) briefly displayed a huge retrospective of the work of Salvador Dali. I remember queuing up for hours with my parents to get in (in the days before timed entry and bookings) and eventually getting through the door and being absolutely blown away by it. This definitely made me want to have some kind of job in art and my ultimate career destination in graphic design is not so far off base, I feel. Dali was my painting hero.
Flash forward to sometime in the mid-1980s and my family got their first video cassette player. It was big, silver, had huge diving board buttons and a cassette tray that popped out the top. On the day we got this, I bought some blank tapes and decided to do a test ‘off the air’ recording of something on television that night. The BBC were showing the first of a small season of late night Marx Brothers movies... I think it was just Animal Crackers, Monkey Business (my favourite), Horse Feathers and Duck Soup. I’d never seen one of their films properly before and so I recorded Monkey Business and, when I watched it the next morning, I was absolutely hooked on the Marx Brothers and decided to try and watch all of their movies as soon as I could (and I would, often multiple times when it came to their first eight films... with their first five made for Paramount being their absolute best).
Also, of course, over the next few years I was reading all I could about my various interests and somewhere, while reading various biographies, autobiographies (such as the brilliant Harpo Speaks) and celebrity correspondence, I got wind of a ‘collaboration’ between Harpo Marx and Salvador Dali. Somewhere in the mid to late 1930s they were trying to collaborate on a film which Dali was writing and which would be an extremely surreal Marx Brothers movie (well, aren’t they all). Now, it has to be said, while I was intrigued and excited by the prospect that something like this could have happened at some point, I was pretty sure the resulting movie would probably have made for some hard viewing. The Marx Brothers, if you’ve never seen one of their films, are already extremely surrealist in nature... not just visually, as evidenced by Harpo’s shenanigans but also in terms of the flexible, pun-like nature of the outrageously funny dialogue written for Groucho and Chico. To put them with the world’s premiere surrealist (even though he’d been excommunicated by the movement naming themselves as such at some point earlier) seemed like taking things a bit too far because, Dali’s form of surrealism was of a completely different kettle of lobsters than the brand exhibited by Minnie’s boys (Minnie was the Marx Brothers mother, manager and driving force in their early years). It didn’t seem to me like it could be a good or even halfway watchable ‘fit’ but it was great to imagine just what might have been.
Well, Josh Frank has taken things a whole lot further than ‘just’ imagining’... although, to be fair, he’s done a lot of that too. Basically gathering and unearthing some rare documents including a 40 page treatment of the handwritten ‘script’, such as it was, by Dali... he has made a graphic novel adaptation of the film that ‘might’ have been. Now, it would be terrible to think that this thing is completely unlike the collaboration that ‘almost’ emerged between Dali and ‘team Marx’ but, there is a basic skeleton apparently, in which Frank has filled in the blanks as best as he could imagine them and made the thing ‘play’ quite well... something Groucho Marx didn’t even think was possible of the material. There are 45 pages of text introduction here recounting, among other things, the approach and breakthroughs made by Frank to get this story told and it’s extremely impressive. You can’t, alas, say this is anything like what the original movie might have been, I think it’s fair to say... but, with the help of Quirk Books (who I’ve mentioned on here before as being an interesting publisher), he has done his best, along with fellow writer Tim Heidecker and the extraordinary illustrator Manuela Pertega, to give us an entertaining and very interesting ‘What If...’ version of how the collaboration might have turned out.
Some creative decisions I agree with and some I don’t but I’m not the artist so that’s all beside the point. Frank says he resurrected the spirit of wonderboy genius Irving Thalberg, who loved the Marx Brothers and took them in at MGM when they needed him most, to help him in his collaboration and, while that’s a nice thought... I can’t help but think that even Thalberg, had he been alive (he died very young), would not have green lighted that pitch.
However, what we have here is an amazing collaboration between the writers and artist involved. The text and images combine to weave a spell, mostly in greyscale but with the odd dashes of colour, which... as mind-bendingly surreal and ill-fitting the spirit of the original collaboration is... roots it in 1930s America and allows it to sit well with the movies that the brothers would be making at the time. It’s tastefully and sympathetically done and although the book doesn’t really come alive until Groucho and Chico arrive in the main narrative... and maybe flags towards the end... this adventure of Jimmy (played by Harpo out of costume and with a large talking role which, from what I know of the sound of his real voice... would never have been allowed to happen) and his love affair with ‘The Surreal Woman’ which causes chaos in the world, is a truly beautiful work which I would be proud to have on my bookshelves, if I had any free bookshelves. As it is, I’m proud to have it stacked up on a huge, precarious pile of other books which I can put my hand out to steady as I pass it by.
The quality of the dialogue and the appropriate nature of it is easy to demonstrate...
Groucho: “Oh, and only pocket the spoons this time. Last time I nearly impaled myself on a fork in an overcoat.”
Chico: “Ah, you crazy. Forks don’t wear overcoats.”
Or how about...
Groucho: “You know what a paradox is?”
Chico: “Why, sure. Everyone knows what that is. I shot two pair-a ducks and cooked them in a nice soup.”
And it certainly delivers on the throwaway Groucho lines too... “Next time let’s take something more seaworthy. Like Esther Williams.” Other times, intriguingly, there are some obvious set ups and, though you know exactly how Groucho or Chico would have responded to it... and, in fact, did respond to these same set ups in various movie adventures, the writers drop the more Marxian response and sail off in another direction. I’m assuming that’s deliberate, by the way, because I’m sure these guys must know the Marx Brother’s work inside out. And probably the right way round, too!
My biggest grumble here is that there’s barely any Harpo in it. The Jimmy character played by Harpo is pretty much any one of many ‘straight romantic leads’ who found themselves coupled with the brothers. So this is like the Allan Jones or Zeppo Marx characters which would sometimes pop up and Jimmy only very vaguely and, not very often strays, into ‘Harpo’ territory. I’d like to say this is probably as Dali intended but I noticed, when some of the original script pages were reprinted in the back (along with Dali’s handwritten notes and sketches for some of these things) he has scenes assigned to Groucho and Harpo which, in the graphic novel version... have been switched to Groucho and Chico. So I’m not 100% sure why this decision in adaptation was made unless... as is more than possible... various treatments and script fragments by Dali were in complete contradiction to each other. I’m guessing that may be the case.
The illustrations are wonderful and, despite the chaos of the content of these drawings, the panels are easy to follow and there are some nice layouts including some wonderful double page spreads where words and images snake away between the two pages without, I’m glad to say, confusing the reader.
Ultimately, this was both more and less of what I wanted from this book but, like I said, its failure I suspect is more coming from the way the original movie might well have failed in its intent, with such a mixture of ‘brands’ being compromised with Dali and the Marx Brothers seeming to be just a slightly ‘out of kilter’ fit. I think lovers of both the artist and the comedians will take to this book like a duck to soup though and, honestly, the interior artwork is just wonderful and worth the price of admission alone. Giraffes On Horseback Salad is a brave and exciting labour of love which, at the very least, will keep you interested and intrigued as you make your journey through it’s alluring pages. I’m certainly glad I bought this one and it definitely a solid recommendation from me. Don’t miss out.
Sunday, 3 February 2019
Daisies
Pushing Up
Daisies
Czechoslovakia 1966
Directed by Vera Chytilová
Second Run Blu Ray Zone B
Daisies is another film which I’d not heard of before seeing it drifting by with high praise on my Twitter feed, advertising the new Blu Ray transfer released over here in the UK by Second Run. Of course, the terms Czechoslovakia and surrealism in such close juxtaposition put me in mind of those abstract, five minute Czechoslovakia cartoon fillers that used to get shown on BBC television in the 1960s and 1970s and, to be fair, there is a certain amount of just that kind of animated experimentation within this movie. The fact that it had been banned on release in it’s home country for, and I quote, ‘depicting the wanton’ and the director forbidden to work again for six years only added fuel to the fire of me wanting to see this excessive amount of ‘wanton’ and I was grateful, therefore, to receive a copy of this on the occasion of my birthday this year.
The film proceeds with an almost sinister opening credits sequence depicting some kind of mechanical contrivance of three big cogs which are intercut to genuine war footage. To describe the plot of the film is, in some ways, redundant due to the fact that it doesn’t really have one but once the credits are done with the audience is treated to a shot of the two main protagonists, both called Marie and played by Jitka Cerhová and Ivana Karbanová, sitting side by side in crisp, black and white photography. Perhaps my first few minutes of the film as I experienced them in synopsis can give you a flavour of what sitting down to watch Daisies is like...
As the two girls decide between them that the world has gone bad and, therefore, they can be bad too, their movements are deliberately wooden and jerky, accompanied by the sound of creaking wood on the soundtrack. Then, when one of the Marias slaps the other, she is propelled by the magic of editing out of that scene to wake up in a field of daisies as the screen explodes into full colour (a tactic redeployed again later by the director as she cuts on one of the girls tugging the others leg and they both end up in a different sequence at the end of the tug). Both girls jump up and down and do some kind of joyful and somewhat hypnotic bunny dance to the upbeat soundtrack.
And there you have the basic attitude of the film. It’s very much, in my opinion, embracing the sixties spirit of the young rebelling against the older generation and their various wars... and had somewhat prophetic timing, in a way, given the tensions of the ‘Prague Spring’ in 1968 (some of the events of which were depicted in the much praised, an deservedly so, film of Milan Kundera’s book The Unbearable Lightness Of Being).
Now, it’s tempting to throw interpretation on some of the scenes here, which consist of the two Maries going around exploiting older men for big meals, abandoning them and then contemplating this or that idea in surrealistic and often non-sequitur sequences which, in general, depict a joyfully chaotic nature reminiscent of something you would have seen depicted in a Marx Brothers movie 30 years before. Indeed, I would be very much surprised if the scene where one Marie is cutting up food with a pair of scissors was not directly influenced by certain Harpo Marx routines. That being said, interpretations which you bring yourself to a film can be especially valid, I think, when the structure is rendered somewhat deliberately elliptical in intent. So, my take on the opening would be the act of rebellion to expected society norms depicted as puppets freeing themselves from their wooden appearance and bursting forth into the real world.
And there’s a lot going on visually with this movie, it has to be said. There are a lot of colour changes, sometimes even within the same shot. I’d say about two fifths of the film was shot in full colour, two fifths in black and white and the remaining fifth set in a variety of colour tinted black and white frames which change seemingly randomly. So you have a green tinted screen which cuts away and then back and then suddenly everything is tinted yellow for no apparent reason. This also, however, occasionally helps out with the way the visual syntax is used in certain scenes.... for instance, a dinner montage where the tints are continually changing on a cut every few seconds helps the director convey a sense of passing time and thus serves a very useful purpose. Other times, those stock treatments may even change on the rhythm of a ticking clock. In one shot of one Marie drinking wine and then crossing her eyes, the colour changes smoothly to another tint as she does so with no cut.
Similarly, another dinner sequence (the girls seem to be obsessed with food for pretty much the whole course of the film) has a moment where a shot zooms out in stages, triggered by words spoken from one of the characters. And the film is riddled with this kind of experimental approach to the visual boundaries throughout, in an almost constant bombardment on the audiences, hijacking the pre-conditioned way of decoding images placed in a sequence before them. For instance, another scene where the girls go scissor crazy and cut off each other limbs and head (all still quite active body parts such as a floating head which looks around and sticks out her tongue) lead into the cinematic frame itself being cut into constantly moving tiny pieces. Of course, in the very next sequence, both girls are back to normal and off on their next escapade.
Some of it is a challenge visually but in terms of the way the mind receives the information... following the main protagonists who are really beautifully played by Cerhová and Karbanová, with the charming Barbara Windsor-esque giggle of one of the characters softening the severity of some of their blase and callous attitudes to every other living creature they come in contact with (the youth of today, eh?)... is all very positive and makes for a fun watch. It’s also very difficult to decode sometimes but then, that’s what makes it so fun... Is the journey in the industrial dumb waiter a metaphorical ascent to heaven as the girls are delivered to a banquet where more chaos ensues or should we just take it at face value? Indeed, should we even take the girls at face value when they are bored and annoyed by the lack of attention they are receiving? When one of the Marias takes the other back to the aftermath of an earlier scene to prove a point she says to the other Maria... ‘There you are! We do exist.” Frankly, I’m not so sure but I was having too much fun by this point to care whether the central protagonists were real characters or only shadows of the puppet people they at first appeared to be.
The use of music is quite good in some places and the needle drop stuff is very well chosen throughout... especially the placement of Siegfried's Funeral March from Gotterdämmerung by Richard Wagner, a piece of music I recognised from its inclusion in Excalibur (reviewed by me here)... used here to create a sinister overtone to upcoming events where it’s not necessarily visually loaded as projecting that particular ambience. I also loved the musical accompaniment to a couple of dancers in my favourite scene where they are upstaged by the increasingly drunken girls whose behaviour at this point leaves a lot to be desired.
And that’s my take on Daisies... a film I’d not heard of until a few months ago but definitely one I’d recommend to fans of movies depicting a celebration of the attitudes of the emerging youth of the period. There’s rarely a dull moment and the pace of the piece is such that it rockets... well, if not forward then certainly sideways... at a furious pace. Definitely one to watch if you are a lover of cinema and you like films like, say, Head starring The Monkees or, indeed, Duck Soup. A definite treat and much thanks to Second Run for releasing this gem.
Sunday, 20 May 2018
Twin Peaks - The Limited Event Series 3
A Prayer For The Diane
Twin Peaks - The Limited Event Series 3
2017 USA Directed by David Lynch
Blu Ray Zone B
Warning: I guess there are spoilers.
So finally... finally... we come to the part of the process that my Twin Peaks rewatch has been leading up to. Namely, I get to see the latest series that aired last year for the first time.
Now, I’m not sure quite what I was expecting here but the one thing I do know for sure is... it wasn’t this.
I remember a couple of years ago that David Lynch and co-writer/co-producer Mark Frost started tweet hinting that the new series of Twin Peaks was on the cards. I also remember Showtime putting the money up for it and then, all of a sudden, David Lynch backed away because he wasn’t being given final cut (if memory serves). Well, I don’t believe he totally had that on the first two series but I couldn’t imagine him doing anything these days unless he has the final say on it and I suspect a lot of people are of a similar opinion because... well, I remember the supporting tweets flying around fast and furious.
However, in the end, Showtime somehow managed to do the right thing and granted Lynch final say and it was all back on again... with twice the number of episodes than originally planned, too.
Honestly, I believe it was absolutely the right thing for Lynch to dig his heels in like that because, having now watched all 18 episodes of this new television odyssey, I can say that I personally don’t believe he would have gotten away with doing a fair amount of what he’s accomplished here on commercial television if he hadn’t stuck to his guns in those early negotiations. Although the ‘brand’ of Twin Peaks has always been synonymous with the auteur David Lynch, I’d have to say that this new incarnation of the show is, if anything, more Lynch-like than anything else we’ve seen made for television... and that includes both his original seasons of the show and another programme I used to like by him called On The Air.
This version of the series feels like an artist at the peak of his powers (which is no mean feat for someone of Lynch’s age) but it also, in many ways, harkens back to his much earlier work and I personally felt that this series was a lot more like the first thing I saw by him many years ago and which has, throughout his interesting career, always been my favourite work of his... Eraserhead.
Certainly the timing and pacing of Eraserhead is all over this thing. People will walk around or sit around and sometimes they will say something and sometimes they won’t say anything but they will, without fail, take their own time about anything they do and this laid back sense of ‘not getting on with things’ permeates the new show in every episode... which is kinda refreshing, actually. When I said, you’d never get away with something like this on television normally I wasn’t referring to the occasional nudity and quite hard violence on display in some of the episodes... the pacing is beyond leisurely but that’s no bad thing.
I mentioned in a previous review that the last time the dead Laura Palmer saw Agent Cooper in the The Black Lodge, where he too was trapped, she told him that the next time she would see him would be in 25 years time and... that’s more or less what it turned out to be, both in real time and also in the time that has passed in the chronology of various characters in the show. This carries on some quarter of a century later and we are reunited, over the weeks, with many of the old cast members (some of them didn’t return)... a number of whom died after finishing their filming. So characters like Catherine E. Coulson’s The Log Lady, Miguel Ferrer’s FBI agent Albert and Harry Dean Stanton (reprising his role from Twin Peaks - Fire Walk With Me) are all in here but, alas, the actors playing them are sadly no longer with us. Many of the old cast returned though, with some notable exceptions. However, there’s also another generation of the families inhabiting the town highlighted in one or two cases so... lots of characters turn up and there are also a fair number of A list movie stars who seemed to have just turned up for the odd episode or two. Some of them, like Michael Cera, are quite unusual and just one offs. Monica Bellucci, for example, turns up as herself in FBI Director Gordon Cole’s dream about her. Others, like Amanda Seyfried, Caleb Landry Jones, Tim Roth, Jennifer Jason Leigh, James Belushi and Tom Sizemore have more substantial roles.
The old gang that do return are, in some cases, significantly moved on from their previous characters. For example, Dana Ashbrook’s Bobby Briggs character, who was a real hooliganistic, murdering brat in the original show, has made good and joined the police force. He’s actually, along with Michael Horse’s good old Deputy Hawk, one of the most trusty and reliable characters in the whole town now... which surprised me. Other returners, like Andy and Lucy, haven’t changed that much... they are still as entertaining to watch as they always were, though.
We also have some replacements for characters who Lynch obviously needed back to make his story work where they’ve passed on in the years between series. So the late Don S. Davis character Major Garland Briggs is found as a non-aged headless corpse (with someone else’s head placed above his in the aftermath of a murder) but that doesn’t stop his head from floating around an alternative dimension and speaking to Agent Cooper, courtesy of CGI effects. Similarly, David Bowie’s character from the prequel film has been replaced by what I can only describe as a sort of giant tea pot that speaks and spells out things with its steam.Didn't see that one coming.
Then there’s Agent Cooper himself, played once more by Kyle MacLachlan. This gets complicated...
There are at least three versions of Cooper to start with. We have the evil version of him who replaced him from The Black Lodge at the end of the last series and he’s the villainous Cooper who has been active in the last 25 years in our world. We also have a kind of stand in duplicate of Cooper called Dougie Jones, made by Bob as a dupe to replace him when he is supposed to return to The Black Lodge. When Bob fools the people in the other dimension by sending Dougie back... Dougie’s arm shrinks and his head explodes into black fire. However, the real Agent Cooper, after a bit of a surrealistic odyssey, manages to get out of the other dimension, escaping back into our world via an electrical socket. Alas, although he is mistaken for Dougie by all... including Dougie’s wife, son and employer... it would be true that he’s not in charge of his faculties and for most of the entire series he pretty much gets handed around by people in the same kind of way that Peter Sellers’ character did in the movie Being There. He’s operating at just one stage past vegetable but, somehow, he accomplishes so much by accident while he’s in this state. It’s actually not until a couple of episodes towards the end until Coop finally returns to us properly.
A significant new cast member is Robert Forster... who was supposed to play Sherif Harry Truman the first time around but had scheduling conflicts. So instead, he’s now playing Truman’s brother and is the sheriff in Harry’s absence (the character is off sick and, apparently, the actor wasn’t asked to return this time around... which is kind of a shame, actually).
Another interesting cast member is Lynch regular Laura Dern as... wait for it... Cooper’s faceless secretary Diane. We’ve heard ‘of’ her so many times over the years but now we get to meet what is actually a quite iconic feeling character in the flesh. Or do we? Well, it’s complicated but... let’s just say that there’s at least as many Dianes running around as there are Agent Coopers in this series and leave it at that. It was just a pleasure to see her interacting with Lynch, Ferrer and newcomer Chrysta Bell as Special Agent Tammy Preston.
What can I say more about this?
Well, it’s a long series and quite a lot of it doesn’t even take place in Twin Peaks but one strand of the story does and it all leads back there and comes together for the end. My favourite installment was episode eight where the second half of the episode goes ‘full tilt Lynch’ as we hurtle back to the first atomic bomb test and a load of surrealist imagery, much of it in monochrome, much of it set to Penderecki’s Threnody to the Victims of Hiroshima. This includes lots of groovy imagery including a kind of flying frog thing which crawls into the mouth of a girl at the end of the episode. Personally, although we’re given absolutely no context or answers to a lot of the things we see on screen, I believe the girl might have been a young Sarah Palmer (Laura’s mother) and that would maybe explain why, in a later episode when Grace Zabriskie’s character is being harassed by someone in a bar, she is able to unhinge her face to reveal a monster on a screen which then lashes out to bite a guy's neck off. At least, that’s the way I figured it.
The series is chock full of cool stuff and, although slow, the experience of watching and wondering how it’s all going to end up is quite an addictive process to be fair. It’s interesting because Lynch does kind of tie most of the things together in the penultimate episode, to the point where I was able to predict a lot of what was going to happen in it and... I did wonder where the heck else he could go in the final episode. Well, after bringing things to a mostly natural conclusion, he then goes one further and messes things up good and proper... at least as far as the clarity of the story goes. I’m not 100% sure of what went down at the end of the final one, although I do have my theories and it’s clear that, although Cooper is put in a bad spot, he also knew most of what was going to happen (if, indeed, it was Cooper). The universe is pretty much reset slightly differently but that doesn’t stop the forces of evil coming for Laura Palmer... or at least the person she has ended up kinda being (or not, depending on your point of view).
A couple of things I didn’t understand were... and if you have seen this series and have any answers then please feel free to leave a comment... just who the heck the ‘glass box’ killer entity was supposed to be. Also, since Audrey’s vision of dancing at the Bang Bang Bar was clearly an illusion from her coma induced insanity (or some such), does that mean the interminable episode endings, where almost every installment finishes with a group performing a song in the bar, are also just a part of Audrey’s nightmare? I don’t know but, in some ways I’m kinda glad I don’t know too... after all, it’s David Lynch we’re talking about here.
Now, I can’t see us returning to the sleepy town of Twin Peaks anytime soon but the possibility is certainly there and, though he seems somewhat less interested than co-creator Mark Frost, Lynch hasn’t ruled out the possibility of a fourth series entirely, so, you never know. Either way, I really enjoyed this third season and would definitely recommend it if you liked the first two series and the movie, with the caveat that it all feels a little less diluted than you’ve seen it before. Approach with a delightful shiver of apprehension.
Twin Peaks at NUTS4R2
Twin Peaks Series One
Twin Peaks Series Two
Twin Peaks - Fire Walk With Me
Twin Peaks Series Three - Limited Event Series











