- Published on
Having seen so many independent entries into the realm of Science Fiction and Fantasy over the years, I have lost count of them but occasionally one resonates and will remain active in some distant corner of my brain. 2008's Sleep Dealer is one of those features: while I don't distinctly recall all of its details, I fondly remember thinking it was exactly the kind of smaller flick that indie types should be spending their time with ... a compelling yarn with science and commerce gone a bit awry firmly against an examination of the human condition.
Alas -- if IMDB.com is any indication -- writer/director Alex Rivera really didn't ride the wave of success to anything reasonably similar in reputation. (Folks, that's not an insult; it's just that people like me who write about these projects for a living do hope to see budding auteurs ascend even higher with the next and their next and their next forays into films, and methinks we're honestly surprised when that doesn't happen.) Dealer definitely put the man on the creative map; in fact, I do recall thinking at the time it was the kind of yarn that Hollywood might very well get its mitts into and attempt to rework -- albeit with a bigger budget and grander marquee names -- but that I'm aware of no such remake/rehash/reboot has come to pass. That's a shame to a degree, though I also wonder if more money thrown at a great idea might only cheapen the experience.
In any event, here's the plot summary for the SciFi/Thriller as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
"The near future. Like tomorrow. In a world marked by closed borders, corporate warriors, and a global computer network, three strangers risk their lives to connect, break through the barriers of technology, and unseal their fates."
For what it's worth, I saw the project as tinkering a bit with classism the way Science Fiction can smartly do from time-to-time, showing us an entire class of people made faceless as workers who were taxed with essentially keeping our world running but being constantly denied the benefits of those labors. (Yeah, yeah, yeah: I realize that sounds a bit Communist in many ways, and yet it's an authentic aspect of many, many great stories.) I don't recall all the specifics regarding the main character's personal struggle -- there was an element in his past history that kinda/sorta felt a bit too 'preachy' that I won't go into -- but the film was still a quick trip into a nightmarish prospect for the near-future ... the one lurking in wait just right around the corner.
Well done.
Alas -- if IMDB.com is any indication -- writer/director Alex Rivera really didn't ride the wave of success to anything reasonably similar in reputation. (Folks, that's not an insult; it's just that people like me who write about these projects for a living do hope to see budding auteurs ascend even higher with the next and their next and their next forays into films, and methinks we're honestly surprised when that doesn't happen.) Dealer definitely put the man on the creative map; in fact, I do recall thinking at the time it was the kind of yarn that Hollywood might very well get its mitts into and attempt to rework -- albeit with a bigger budget and grander marquee names -- but that I'm aware of no such remake/rehash/reboot has come to pass. That's a shame to a degree, though I also wonder if more money thrown at a great idea might only cheapen the experience.
In any event, here's the plot summary for the SciFi/Thriller as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
"The near future. Like tomorrow. In a world marked by closed borders, corporate warriors, and a global computer network, three strangers risk their lives to connect, break through the barriers of technology, and unseal their fates."
For what it's worth, I saw the project as tinkering a bit with classism the way Science Fiction can smartly do from time-to-time, showing us an entire class of people made faceless as workers who were taxed with essentially keeping our world running but being constantly denied the benefits of those labors. (Yeah, yeah, yeah: I realize that sounds a bit Communist in many ways, and yet it's an authentic aspect of many, many great stories.) I don't recall all the specifics regarding the main character's personal struggle -- there was an element in his past history that kinda/sorta felt a bit too 'preachy' that I won't go into -- but the film was still a quick trip into a nightmarish prospect for the near-future ... the one lurking in wait just right around the corner.
Well done.
As can happen with some wonderfully made independent features, Sleep Dealer garnered a good amount of praise from the professional audiences who discovered it and appreciated what it did with its complicated subject matter. Its appearance at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival was its most storied as the writing team of Rivera and David Riker took home trophies in both the Alfred P. Sloan Feature Film Prize and the Waldo Salt Screenwriting Award. (Rivera missed out -- having to settle for nomination's honor alone -- in the Dramatic Category of the festival's Grand Jury Prize.) Furthermore, throughtout 2008, the film screened at a solid handful of venues, often the recipient of solid praise from the onlookers. (For a complete rundown, I encourage readers to check out the film's IMDB.com awards page right here.)
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
While I cannot say this for certain, I'm willing to make the educated guess that -- based on the advertising materials and what little I've read about the Italian production The Island Of The Fishmen -- this was a project greenlit and rushed into production almost entirely based upon the popularity and box office of Steven Spielberg's Jaws. In short, there were quite a few imitators brought to life in the years following that tale of the Great White Shark, and this looks to be little more than the variation on a theme.
I do know that this Island saw distribution in the United States after being picked out by Roger Corman and his New World Pictures. IMDB.com reports that -- as happened with Corman's pick-ups from time-to-time -- the producer had some new footage shot and added to the film in order to properly 'Americanize' it for audiences, an effort that commonly included added some known marquee faces to the existing story with these added vignettes. In that respect, IMDB.com asserts that Mel Ferrer, Jim Alquist, Cameron Mitchell and a few others only appear in New World's version of the production.
Also, I think it bears mentioning that director Sergio Martino (who also contributed to the script) considers this film the second installment of what has been dubbed his 'Adventure Trilogy.' (This information appears on IMDB.com's Trivia Page.) His first -- 1978's Slave Of The Cannibal God -- is an (ahem) delightful piece of bloody shlock starring Ursula Andress -- more like 'Ursula Undress' for this picture as it's revered for her nude body -- along with the great Stacy Keach, Claudio Cassinelli, and Antonio Marsina. The final chapter -- 1979's The Great Alligator -- stars Barbara Bach (who appears in Fishmen as well) along with Mel Ferrer and Claudio Cassinelli.
Interestingly enough, Fishmen's script appears to have been original derived from a story credited to the great H.P. Lovecraft. Again, IMDB.com indicates that Lovecraft's "The Shadow Over Innsmouth" served as inspiration for the tale. Though I'm unfamiliar with the tale, various Google citations indicate that the novella does indeed busy itself with the exploits of some sea devils on the shores of a Massachusetts' coastal village. Here's the film's plot summary as provided by the good folks at IMDB.com:
"After their prison ship sinks in the Caribbean, a group of prisoners and a doctor wash ashore on a seemingly deserted island. They soon discover a strange couple, who invite them to stay at their house. While the prisoners try to plan an escape, the doctor does some investigating, and soon finds out just what the pair are really doing, and why the prisoners keep disappearing mysteriously."
If that isn't enough proper fodder to interest you souls in venturing into this bizarre exploit, then how about the charm of a lovely lady? The lovely lady -- who went on to be a 'Bond Girl' for Roger Moore in 1977's The Spy Who Loved Me -- got her start in the role of 'Nausicaa' for an Italian television miniseries adaptation of Homer's "The Odyssey" ("Odissea") and continued to find work in projects afterwards. If her pretty face -- alongside these gruesome sea creatures -- isn't enough reason to enjoy this production, then I'll leave you to your pursuits.
I do know that this Island saw distribution in the United States after being picked out by Roger Corman and his New World Pictures. IMDB.com reports that -- as happened with Corman's pick-ups from time-to-time -- the producer had some new footage shot and added to the film in order to properly 'Americanize' it for audiences, an effort that commonly included added some known marquee faces to the existing story with these added vignettes. In that respect, IMDB.com asserts that Mel Ferrer, Jim Alquist, Cameron Mitchell and a few others only appear in New World's version of the production.
Also, I think it bears mentioning that director Sergio Martino (who also contributed to the script) considers this film the second installment of what has been dubbed his 'Adventure Trilogy.' (This information appears on IMDB.com's Trivia Page.) His first -- 1978's Slave Of The Cannibal God -- is an (ahem) delightful piece of bloody shlock starring Ursula Andress -- more like 'Ursula Undress' for this picture as it's revered for her nude body -- along with the great Stacy Keach, Claudio Cassinelli, and Antonio Marsina. The final chapter -- 1979's The Great Alligator -- stars Barbara Bach (who appears in Fishmen as well) along with Mel Ferrer and Claudio Cassinelli.
Interestingly enough, Fishmen's script appears to have been original derived from a story credited to the great H.P. Lovecraft. Again, IMDB.com indicates that Lovecraft's "The Shadow Over Innsmouth" served as inspiration for the tale. Though I'm unfamiliar with the tale, various Google citations indicate that the novella does indeed busy itself with the exploits of some sea devils on the shores of a Massachusetts' coastal village. Here's the film's plot summary as provided by the good folks at IMDB.com:
"After their prison ship sinks in the Caribbean, a group of prisoners and a doctor wash ashore on a seemingly deserted island. They soon discover a strange couple, who invite them to stay at their house. While the prisoners try to plan an escape, the doctor does some investigating, and soon finds out just what the pair are really doing, and why the prisoners keep disappearing mysteriously."
If that isn't enough proper fodder to interest you souls in venturing into this bizarre exploit, then how about the charm of a lovely lady? The lovely lady -- who went on to be a 'Bond Girl' for Roger Moore in 1977's The Spy Who Loved Me -- got her start in the role of 'Nausicaa' for an Italian television miniseries adaptation of Homer's "The Odyssey" ("Odissea") and continued to find work in projects afterwards. If her pretty face -- alongside these gruesome sea creatures -- isn't enough reason to enjoy this production, then I'll leave you to your pursuits.
Alas, I do tend to avoid 'fish stories' -- if you catch my meaning -- but this looks interesting enough that I might someday explore it further. In the meantime, I'll leave this one to the Bucket List.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Though my review of Cooties (2014) is nowhere posted on SciFiHistory.Net presently, I know that I've seen it.
Back in 2014, I was posting the bulk of my reviews as an Amazon Top 1,000 Reviewer over on the popular merchant site; but once they unceremoniously changed their rules without so much as a notice, they dumped my content ... and I've since struggled to recover from the vastness of properties I've reviewed. When I have a few moments here and there, I do search my archives ... but, in the meantime, I'm going off of some fuzzy memories when I say that while I found this flick funny I just saw it as forgettable as well. I think it was too much secondary melodrama surrounding the teachers and their private lives, but I could be mistaken. It was clever ... just not clever enough to endure longer than the original viewing experience. A 'one-off,' if you will.
In any event, Cooties was first unveiled to the world at large -- according to IMDB.com -- at a screening for audiences of the Sundance Film Festival on this day back in 2014. It was picked up for distribution -- as are many of these quality features -- and it found general domestic release late in 2015 (after playing at other festivals here and abroad).
Written by the team of Leigh Whannell (who also starred), Ian Brennan (who also had a part), and Josh C. Waller, the feature was directed by the team of Jonathan Milott and Cary Murnion. Milott and Murnion went on to direct Becky (2020), a reasonably dark revenge picture about a teenager extracting her own form of justice on a small band of convicts who murder the girl's father. They cast such known commodities in big roles such as Elijah Wood, Rainn Wilson, Alison Pill, and funnyman Jack McBrayer; and -- to their respective credit -- they do all seem to have a grand ol' time releasing the stress of being a teacher on the flesh-eating urchins intent on making the staff part of their next meal.
Here's the film's plot summary as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
"A mysterious virus hits an isolated elementary school, transforming the kids into a feral swarm of mass savages. An unlikely hero must lead a motley band of teachers in the fight of their lives."
Back in 2014, I was posting the bulk of my reviews as an Amazon Top 1,000 Reviewer over on the popular merchant site; but once they unceremoniously changed their rules without so much as a notice, they dumped my content ... and I've since struggled to recover from the vastness of properties I've reviewed. When I have a few moments here and there, I do search my archives ... but, in the meantime, I'm going off of some fuzzy memories when I say that while I found this flick funny I just saw it as forgettable as well. I think it was too much secondary melodrama surrounding the teachers and their private lives, but I could be mistaken. It was clever ... just not clever enough to endure longer than the original viewing experience. A 'one-off,' if you will.
In any event, Cooties was first unveiled to the world at large -- according to IMDB.com -- at a screening for audiences of the Sundance Film Festival on this day back in 2014. It was picked up for distribution -- as are many of these quality features -- and it found general domestic release late in 2015 (after playing at other festivals here and abroad).
Written by the team of Leigh Whannell (who also starred), Ian Brennan (who also had a part), and Josh C. Waller, the feature was directed by the team of Jonathan Milott and Cary Murnion. Milott and Murnion went on to direct Becky (2020), a reasonably dark revenge picture about a teenager extracting her own form of justice on a small band of convicts who murder the girl's father. They cast such known commodities in big roles such as Elijah Wood, Rainn Wilson, Alison Pill, and funnyman Jack McBrayer; and -- to their respective credit -- they do all seem to have a grand ol' time releasing the stress of being a teacher on the flesh-eating urchins intent on making the staff part of their next meal.
Here's the film's plot summary as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
"A mysterious virus hits an isolated elementary school, transforming the kids into a feral swarm of mass savages. An unlikely hero must lead a motley band of teachers in the fight of their lives."
I'd be remiss in my duties as a genre influencer if I failed to mention that Cooties was the recipient of some small praise.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- For the 2015 Fright Meter Awards, Leigh Whannell was awarded the 'Best Supporting Actor' trophy for his work in the flick while co-star Rainn Wilson had to settle with the honor of being nominated alone in the same category.
- For the 2016 iHorror Awards, Wilson was nominated again -- this time in the category of 'Best Male Performance - Horror Movie' -- alongside the project as a whole in the grouping of 'Best Indie Horror Film.'
- Lastly, relative newcomer Armani Jackson scored a nomination in the category of 'Best Supporting Young Actor - Feature Film' at the 2016 Young Entertainer Awards.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Regular readers to this space known all-too-well that I do love films that tinker in realms of fringe subjects, and 1977’s Audrey Rose is exactly the kind of older flick I love to wade through. Directed by Robert Wise – a genre master with 1951’s The Day The Earth Stood Still, 1971’s The Andromeda Strain, and 1979’s Star Trek: The Motion Picture to his credit – Rose is a slow-burning contemporary melodrama set against the backdrop of spirituality, the kind of story that tries to examine us and our place in the big, bad universe.
As is often the case with older pictures of the somewhat bygone era, I’d seen bits and pieces of it from a variety of locales – late night television, cable channels, and probably a snippet or two on the screen of a local video store back in the days. Still, I’m quite certain I’d never seen all of it. Naturally, when and if I’m offered a screener of it for review consideration on SciFiHistory.Net, I jumped at the chance. While I’m glad I did, I’m going to say – right up front – that I’m not entirely certain this one will be as impactful with modern audiences. Like many of Wise’s pictures, it’s a bit slow – the director definitely took his time in crafting visual wizardry – and it only superficially introduces some supernatural elements into the narrative.
But I’m getting ahead of myself …
While it may not have won any awards or started in trend with studios scrambling to produce like-minded fare, Rose is still quite good in its own respects. In fact, it might be the kind of thing some newfangled Horror company might wanna pick up and try again someday, even if for no better reason to ratchet up the scares and get a few more butts into corner cineplex.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A stranger attempts to convince a happily married couple that their daughter is actually his daughter reincarnated.”
Reincarnation is a prospect I’ve only thought about in passing.
Honestly, the possible mechanics of where all of these souls could be coming from kinda/sorta escapes me. At some point, wouldn’t we have to have a bunch of new souls? Aren’t there more people alive today than there are past souls for them to fill? See what I mean? Somewhere in all of mental exercise, the existential math escapes me, so it is a subject I leave to those more cerebrally-inclined than I. Still, the premise fascinates me, and I think the script penned by the late Frank De Felitta – adapted from his own novel – presents the phenomenon in an entirely relatable way, perhaps even defusing skeptics who might otherwise look too closely at the supernatural trickery.
Ivy Templeton (played by Susan Swift in her screen debut) has spent her young life plagued by nightmares, nocturnal visions that grow increasingly disturbing each year close to her birthday. Bill (John Beck) and Janice (Marsha Mason) Templeton have given her a good life – along with visits to physicians and psychologists – in hopes of finding a solution to whatever troubles the girl’s psyche. When Elliot Hoover (in an incredibly heartfelt performance from the great Anthony Hopkins) enters their lives with the explanation that their Ivy’s soul is actually that of his deceased daughter Audrey Rose (she died in a violent car crash and wasn’t ‘allowed’ to cross over into Heaven), they’re obvious unconvinced. It isn’t until Hoover forces himself into their lives, witnesses a few of Ivy’s episodes, and the afflicted young lady begins responding to him that Janice starts wondering if there might be more to his suggestions than what she originally believed.
As is often the case with older pictures of the somewhat bygone era, I’d seen bits and pieces of it from a variety of locales – late night television, cable channels, and probably a snippet or two on the screen of a local video store back in the days. Still, I’m quite certain I’d never seen all of it. Naturally, when and if I’m offered a screener of it for review consideration on SciFiHistory.Net, I jumped at the chance. While I’m glad I did, I’m going to say – right up front – that I’m not entirely certain this one will be as impactful with modern audiences. Like many of Wise’s pictures, it’s a bit slow – the director definitely took his time in crafting visual wizardry – and it only superficially introduces some supernatural elements into the narrative.
But I’m getting ahead of myself …
While it may not have won any awards or started in trend with studios scrambling to produce like-minded fare, Rose is still quite good in its own respects. In fact, it might be the kind of thing some newfangled Horror company might wanna pick up and try again someday, even if for no better reason to ratchet up the scares and get a few more butts into corner cineplex.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A stranger attempts to convince a happily married couple that their daughter is actually his daughter reincarnated.”
Reincarnation is a prospect I’ve only thought about in passing.
Honestly, the possible mechanics of where all of these souls could be coming from kinda/sorta escapes me. At some point, wouldn’t we have to have a bunch of new souls? Aren’t there more people alive today than there are past souls for them to fill? See what I mean? Somewhere in all of mental exercise, the existential math escapes me, so it is a subject I leave to those more cerebrally-inclined than I. Still, the premise fascinates me, and I think the script penned by the late Frank De Felitta – adapted from his own novel – presents the phenomenon in an entirely relatable way, perhaps even defusing skeptics who might otherwise look too closely at the supernatural trickery.
Ivy Templeton (played by Susan Swift in her screen debut) has spent her young life plagued by nightmares, nocturnal visions that grow increasingly disturbing each year close to her birthday. Bill (John Beck) and Janice (Marsha Mason) Templeton have given her a good life – along with visits to physicians and psychologists – in hopes of finding a solution to whatever troubles the girl’s psyche. When Elliot Hoover (in an incredibly heartfelt performance from the great Anthony Hopkins) enters their lives with the explanation that their Ivy’s soul is actually that of his deceased daughter Audrey Rose (she died in a violent car crash and wasn’t ‘allowed’ to cross over into Heaven), they’re obvious unconvinced. It isn’t until Hoover forces himself into their lives, witnesses a few of Ivy’s episodes, and the afflicted young lady begins responding to him that Janice starts wondering if there might be more to his suggestions than what she originally believed.
Director Wise stages all of this lightly supernatural affair with an eye on realism. While there are some visual suggestions tied directly to Ivy’s afflictions and injuries, they’re all delivered organic to their respective circumstances, and there isn’t a hint of gratuitousness (so common to traditional mainstream theatrics) anywhere. A lesser director might’ve ramped up those screen antics, especially given the box office rewards of the previous ‘kids in paranormal circles’ The Exorcist (1973) a few years earlier. Rose is a vastly more cerebral exercise than it is visceral thrill ride, and I can only wonder if that were to the disappointment of its producers.
However, all was still not green within. While Rose as a picture is exceedingly comfortable raising questions about life and rebirth, it never quite finds an appropriate rhythm with which to balance all of its parts.
The set-up – especially the sequences involving Hopkins and his stalking the Templeton family – is handled quite expertly, as are the scenes of exposition wherein he tries to convince Bill and Janice of their daughter’s secret identity. But once is settles into the world of the paranormal, Wise does have to resort to a bit of screen trickery to push Janice into embracing Hoover’s possibilities. The second half involves a not-quite-legally-substantiated court case – Hoover’s on trial, but I’ll be honest in saying I’m not quite sure what the charges are exactly given his mounted defense is entirely dismissive of the charges and instead focuses on alleging Ivy’s soul is his property (thereabouts) – and his attempts to establish the girl’s identity through hypnotic regression. All of this is played out – to high drama, even – but it’s wrapped up with a somewhat somber and milquetoast coda wherein Janice has resigned herself to being almost happy that she’s lost her troubled daughter.
In fairness, I’m not sure what I expected, but I can only say I didn’t expect this. Mothers – the good ones, anyway – are never happy to lose their children. Such heartbreak leaves an emotional scar that never heals, and it’s a wound they carry to the end of their days. (Bill’s particular circumstances are a bit different, and to a degree his disillusioned mindset makes more narrative sense.) Mason plays it as though she’s entirely relieved that Ivy and Audrey are at peace, never quite expressing any measurable depth of mourning akin to a momma bear tragically losing her prized cub. All I can say is that the sentiment doesn’t feel right, making hers a curious screen exit.
Audrey Rose (1977) was produced by Sterobcar Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the good folks at Arrow Films. As for the technical specifications? Though I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights and sounds were quite good. (I was provided a screener copy for this review, so I’m unaware of whether or not the video was an all-new scan.) Lastly, if you’re looking for special features, then – as this is Arrow – you’re likely not going to be disappointed as the disc boasts an audio commentary track by critic Jon Towlson (I had some trouble getting it to play, the disc kept restarting for some reason); some promotional materials discussing the film as well as the subject matter and score; the theatrical trailer; and a bit more. As usual, it’s a grand collection that should keep you busy for hours.
Mildly Recommended.
While it’s definitely a bit dated, Audrey Rose (1977) is still a solid entry into the realm of fringe topics, though genre fans might be a bit disappointed with the slow, methodical pace of the script as well as the focus on marital melodrama as the tale unfolds. Still, the cast are quite good – young Susan Swift is quite convincing as the disturbed child – and it’s one of those rare cinema entries that tries to examine the prospects of reincarnation respectfully and authentically … with a bit of spookiness thrown in for good measure.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Films provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray screener of Audrey Rose by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
However, all was still not green within. While Rose as a picture is exceedingly comfortable raising questions about life and rebirth, it never quite finds an appropriate rhythm with which to balance all of its parts.
The set-up – especially the sequences involving Hopkins and his stalking the Templeton family – is handled quite expertly, as are the scenes of exposition wherein he tries to convince Bill and Janice of their daughter’s secret identity. But once is settles into the world of the paranormal, Wise does have to resort to a bit of screen trickery to push Janice into embracing Hoover’s possibilities. The second half involves a not-quite-legally-substantiated court case – Hoover’s on trial, but I’ll be honest in saying I’m not quite sure what the charges are exactly given his mounted defense is entirely dismissive of the charges and instead focuses on alleging Ivy’s soul is his property (thereabouts) – and his attempts to establish the girl’s identity through hypnotic regression. All of this is played out – to high drama, even – but it’s wrapped up with a somewhat somber and milquetoast coda wherein Janice has resigned herself to being almost happy that she’s lost her troubled daughter.
In fairness, I’m not sure what I expected, but I can only say I didn’t expect this. Mothers – the good ones, anyway – are never happy to lose their children. Such heartbreak leaves an emotional scar that never heals, and it’s a wound they carry to the end of their days. (Bill’s particular circumstances are a bit different, and to a degree his disillusioned mindset makes more narrative sense.) Mason plays it as though she’s entirely relieved that Ivy and Audrey are at peace, never quite expressing any measurable depth of mourning akin to a momma bear tragically losing her prized cub. All I can say is that the sentiment doesn’t feel right, making hers a curious screen exit.
Audrey Rose (1977) was produced by Sterobcar Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the good folks at Arrow Films. As for the technical specifications? Though I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights and sounds were quite good. (I was provided a screener copy for this review, so I’m unaware of whether or not the video was an all-new scan.) Lastly, if you’re looking for special features, then – as this is Arrow – you’re likely not going to be disappointed as the disc boasts an audio commentary track by critic Jon Towlson (I had some trouble getting it to play, the disc kept restarting for some reason); some promotional materials discussing the film as well as the subject matter and score; the theatrical trailer; and a bit more. As usual, it’s a grand collection that should keep you busy for hours.
Mildly Recommended.
While it’s definitely a bit dated, Audrey Rose (1977) is still a solid entry into the realm of fringe topics, though genre fans might be a bit disappointed with the slow, methodical pace of the script as well as the focus on marital melodrama as the tale unfolds. Still, the cast are quite good – young Susan Swift is quite convincing as the disturbed child – and it’s one of those rare cinema entries that tries to examine the prospects of reincarnation respectfully and authentically … with a bit of spookiness thrown in for good measure.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Films provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray screener of Audrey Rose by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
1992’s Freejack is a flick I had the good (or bad?) fortune of seeing in theaters, and I honestly don’t recall much more than walking out of it and thinking, “What the Hell did we just watch?”
I know, I know. The same could be said of a lot of flicks, but if I recall correctly my sentiments were that the film didn’t entirely make a lot of sense. If the bits and pieces of the narrative don’t quite add up to a complete whole, then I’m apt to struggle in having anything relevant to say about a project. I can assure you that I recently – last year? – rewatched this one from an airing on cable, fully with the intent to craft a review for SciFiHistory.Net. At the conclusion, I just couldn’t bring myself to do it, though I may (sigh) give it another go in the future. Yes … I can be that persnickety.
From what I’ve read, Freejack endured a bit of controversy in being loosely adapted from the Robert Sheckley novel (1958’s “Immortality, Inc.”) to the silver screen. Initially, it was directed by Geoff Murphy, who had previously worked with the film’s lead Emilio Estevez on the popular Young Guns II (1990). As genre credentials go, Murphy did have 1985’s The Quiet Earth under his belt, and that flick was not without some industry and festival praise. But test screenings were so bad that Freejack needed a retooling, requiring producer Ronald Shusett to roll up his sleeves and put on his big boy pants to allegedly reshoot about half of the flick. Ouch. That’s gotta leave a mark. The end result – even after three decades – still has the picture with an aggregate 34 (out of 100) on the Metacritic.com website … and that’s nothing to write home about.
In fact, IMDB.com’s Trivia Page for the feature has a little blurb regarding Mick Jagger, The Rolling Stones’ frontman, who has a respectable role as a good-guy-bad-guy in Freejack. Jagger states that he accepted the chance to play ‘Victor Vacendak’ entirely on being told the story of the film and without being provided a script. He says that had he actually read one that he would’ve passed on the project … and that would probably have been a good idea.
In any event, here’s the premise as provided by the good folks at IMDB.com:
“Bounty hunters from the future transport a doomed race car driver to New York City in 2009, where his mind will be replaced with that of a dead billionaire.”
Somehow – and I do mean somehow – the Academy Of Science Fiction, Fantasy, And Horror Films actually nominated Freejack for an incredible three Saturn Awards (‘Best Costumes,’ ‘Best Supporting Actress,’ and – gasp – ‘Best Science Fiction Film’). Thankfully, it didn’t win a single trophy, and that probably saved the Academy from having a little egg on its face that year.
I know, I know. The same could be said of a lot of flicks, but if I recall correctly my sentiments were that the film didn’t entirely make a lot of sense. If the bits and pieces of the narrative don’t quite add up to a complete whole, then I’m apt to struggle in having anything relevant to say about a project. I can assure you that I recently – last year? – rewatched this one from an airing on cable, fully with the intent to craft a review for SciFiHistory.Net. At the conclusion, I just couldn’t bring myself to do it, though I may (sigh) give it another go in the future. Yes … I can be that persnickety.
From what I’ve read, Freejack endured a bit of controversy in being loosely adapted from the Robert Sheckley novel (1958’s “Immortality, Inc.”) to the silver screen. Initially, it was directed by Geoff Murphy, who had previously worked with the film’s lead Emilio Estevez on the popular Young Guns II (1990). As genre credentials go, Murphy did have 1985’s The Quiet Earth under his belt, and that flick was not without some industry and festival praise. But test screenings were so bad that Freejack needed a retooling, requiring producer Ronald Shusett to roll up his sleeves and put on his big boy pants to allegedly reshoot about half of the flick. Ouch. That’s gotta leave a mark. The end result – even after three decades – still has the picture with an aggregate 34 (out of 100) on the Metacritic.com website … and that’s nothing to write home about.
In fact, IMDB.com’s Trivia Page for the feature has a little blurb regarding Mick Jagger, The Rolling Stones’ frontman, who has a respectable role as a good-guy-bad-guy in Freejack. Jagger states that he accepted the chance to play ‘Victor Vacendak’ entirely on being told the story of the film and without being provided a script. He says that had he actually read one that he would’ve passed on the project … and that would probably have been a good idea.
In any event, here’s the premise as provided by the good folks at IMDB.com:
“Bounty hunters from the future transport a doomed race car driver to New York City in 2009, where his mind will be replaced with that of a dead billionaire.”
Somehow – and I do mean somehow – the Academy Of Science Fiction, Fantasy, And Horror Films actually nominated Freejack for an incredible three Saturn Awards (‘Best Costumes,’ ‘Best Supporting Actress,’ and – gasp – ‘Best Science Fiction Film’). Thankfully, it didn’t win a single trophy, and that probably saved the Academy from having a little egg on its face that year.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Alas, dear readers, I’m honestly not been able to locate that much information on The Electric Grandmother, a Science Fiction and Fantasy telefilm that first aired on this day (in the United States) back in 1982. Wikipedia.org indicates that it originally aired on NBC as part of something dubbed the ‘Peacock Project’ (never heard of that before), and then IMDB.com indicates that being the only release/broadcast of record. Scanning the web, I do see some artwork claiming to be DVD and/or VHS artwork for subsequent home video releases; and yet I’m not seeing anything that looks entirely “official,” if you catch my drift.
In any event, IMDB.com does indicate that this particular Grandmother is based on The Twilight Zone episode “I Sing The Body Electric” from 1962 that was penned by the legendary Ray Bradbury. It looks like this modern retelling was crafted by Bradbury himself along with Jeffrey Kindley. (A glance at Kindley’s IMDB.com profile shows a fair amount of children’s programming to his record, so that definitely seems legit.) It was directed by Noel Black, a veteran of many television productions.
As for the starring line-up?
E.T.’s Robert MacNaughton looks to be the central kiddie along with supporting players Tara Kennedy and Charles Fields. Edward Herrmann starred as the trio’s dear ol’ dad, and the late Maureen Stapleton filled in the central role as the electric elder herself.
Here’s the movie’s premise as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
“Three children and their father get a very special robot grandmother to assist them.”
Though there’s not a great amount of information regarding the project on the Information Superhighway, I do see that the project garnered a bit of love on the awards circuit. In 1982, it was nominated for a Primetime Emmy in the category of ‘Outstanding Children’s Program,’ though it lost out to 1981’s “The Wave,” a decidedly darker program dealing with the threat of socialism in schools. Still, scribe Bradbury and Highgate Pictures were awarded the 1982 Peabody Award (along with several other entries) by that august organization. Lastly, at the 1983 Young Artists Award, emerging starlet Tara Kennedy was nominated in the category of ‘Best Young Actress In A Movie Made For Television’ for her work in the project.
In any event, IMDB.com does indicate that this particular Grandmother is based on The Twilight Zone episode “I Sing The Body Electric” from 1962 that was penned by the legendary Ray Bradbury. It looks like this modern retelling was crafted by Bradbury himself along with Jeffrey Kindley. (A glance at Kindley’s IMDB.com profile shows a fair amount of children’s programming to his record, so that definitely seems legit.) It was directed by Noel Black, a veteran of many television productions.
As for the starring line-up?
E.T.’s Robert MacNaughton looks to be the central kiddie along with supporting players Tara Kennedy and Charles Fields. Edward Herrmann starred as the trio’s dear ol’ dad, and the late Maureen Stapleton filled in the central role as the electric elder herself.
Here’s the movie’s premise as provided by the good people at IMDB.com:
“Three children and their father get a very special robot grandmother to assist them.”
Though there’s not a great amount of information regarding the project on the Information Superhighway, I do see that the project garnered a bit of love on the awards circuit. In 1982, it was nominated for a Primetime Emmy in the category of ‘Outstanding Children’s Program,’ though it lost out to 1981’s “The Wave,” a decidedly darker program dealing with the threat of socialism in schools. Still, scribe Bradbury and Highgate Pictures were awarded the 1982 Peabody Award (along with several other entries) by that august organization. Lastly, at the 1983 Young Artists Award, emerging starlet Tara Kennedy was nominated in the category of ‘Best Young Actress In A Movie Made For Television’ for her work in the project.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Yes, yes, yes. I do so love the fringe elements of our collective existence.
Of what, pray tell, am I speaking? Well, it’s an awful lot of things … but the matters of High Strangeness have always fascinated me. Things like UFOs, alien abductions, and parallel realities have always interested me. While ghosts, spirits, and demons might be little more than ‘wives’ tales’ to some, I tend to believe that there’s likely a little more to experiences involving them than we’re able to comprehend at first blush. There’s even a soft spot in my heart and soul for conspiracies others are quick to dismiss if only because I’d like to believe truth is elusive, and only those pure in heart who search with unbridled diligence will ever be rewarded with a kind of cosmic understanding of those things ultimately bigger than us.
So … Bigfoot?
Well … I’m inclined to believe that there’s more to it than what meets the eye. Science is still actively discovering species in the depths of the oceans – as well as encountering some that they wrote off as extinct years before – so why couldn’t there be a kind of primate/human creature that’s managed to avoid contact with a CNN camera crew and live TV anchor out there in the wild? Think what you may, but I believe it’s entirely plausible … and it’s even exponentially more likely that the vast, unexplored expanse that is so much of Alaska could house something that yet escapes the more civilized portions of the United States.
That’s what Seth Breedlove and a small cadre of photographers and videographers set out to prove – not the existence, per se, but certainly the viability – in On The Trail Of Bigfoot: Last Frontier.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Hundreds of witnesses from across the largest state in the US are encountering something truly bizarre in the frozen wastelands of the north. Now, documentary filmmaker, Seth Breedlove, sets out in search of Sasquatch in the last great wilderness. In Alaska we learn of terrifying encounters that shake the foundations about what we know of the food chain. Witnesses unburdened themselves of encounters with Bigfoot that call into question everything we know about the natural world.”
There’s a wealth more to the synopsis, but I’m leaving it at that. Essentially, the extra stuff on IMDB.com starts to get into some of the specifics, and I’d rather leave that info for viewers to discover all on their own.
Of what, pray tell, am I speaking? Well, it’s an awful lot of things … but the matters of High Strangeness have always fascinated me. Things like UFOs, alien abductions, and parallel realities have always interested me. While ghosts, spirits, and demons might be little more than ‘wives’ tales’ to some, I tend to believe that there’s likely a little more to experiences involving them than we’re able to comprehend at first blush. There’s even a soft spot in my heart and soul for conspiracies others are quick to dismiss if only because I’d like to believe truth is elusive, and only those pure in heart who search with unbridled diligence will ever be rewarded with a kind of cosmic understanding of those things ultimately bigger than us.
So … Bigfoot?
Well … I’m inclined to believe that there’s more to it than what meets the eye. Science is still actively discovering species in the depths of the oceans – as well as encountering some that they wrote off as extinct years before – so why couldn’t there be a kind of primate/human creature that’s managed to avoid contact with a CNN camera crew and live TV anchor out there in the wild? Think what you may, but I believe it’s entirely plausible … and it’s even exponentially more likely that the vast, unexplored expanse that is so much of Alaska could house something that yet escapes the more civilized portions of the United States.
That’s what Seth Breedlove and a small cadre of photographers and videographers set out to prove – not the existence, per se, but certainly the viability – in On The Trail Of Bigfoot: Last Frontier.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Hundreds of witnesses from across the largest state in the US are encountering something truly bizarre in the frozen wastelands of the north. Now, documentary filmmaker, Seth Breedlove, sets out in search of Sasquatch in the last great wilderness. In Alaska we learn of terrifying encounters that shake the foundations about what we know of the food chain. Witnesses unburdened themselves of encounters with Bigfoot that call into question everything we know about the natural world.”
There’s a wealth more to the synopsis, but I’m leaving it at that. Essentially, the extra stuff on IMDB.com starts to get into some of the specifics, and I’d rather leave that info for viewers to discover all on their own.
Essentially, Last Frontier is an effective 80-minute documentary that truly circles the whole Bigfoot legend as it pertains explicitly to the 49th State. It recounts eyewitness interviews as well as explores some Alaskan Native history that ties to suggestions of creatures – both past and present – that might very well have been or are potential suspects in the search for the elusive Sasquatch/Yeti. Lastly, its crew spent hard time in one of the most revered spots on all of Planet Earth wherein some strange activity – sights, sounds, etc. – do strongly point to the possibility of the existence of a creature who might know more than a thing or two about luring, hunting, and trapping us as opposed to vice versa.
As is often the case in documentaries and/or television series that try to dig deeper into various cryptids, the lion’s share of the investigation relies on witness accounts; and Last Frontier definitely has some very good ones. Regular folks – average souls just like you and me who have absolutely nothing to gain by making false claims – share the experiences in the wild or even from the edge of the homes, and their authenticity is never in question. Clearly, these folks saw something – minimally, they’re convinced that they did – and they stop short of claiming it was Bigfoot. Honestly, it’s clear that they’ve no explanation for what they saw, and the shock of that encounter has shaken them to the core. While they don’t quite know what to believe, they all insist whatever these things are they are real … and all insist further study is warranted.
If anything, the sheer hopelessness of these circumstances pervades Last Frontier: very few people are willing to put in the time, money, and effort to conduct ongoing studies into these events, and that’s the real shame here. Breedlove, in particular, deserves to be commended for a willingness to capture these stories, commit them to history (on film), and simply ask questions. He’s giving witnesses an opportunity to be heard. The fact that with all our federal government spends on programs occasionally debunked as frivolous has always infuriated me: why can’t we earmark a fund for a small staff within the greater bureaucracy to legitimately track and explore such mysteries? We’ll waste a billion dollars on hammers; meanwhile, UFOs continue to invade our airspace, and Uncle Sam does (apparently) nothing. A Bigfoot Studies group could be part of the Department Of The Interior … but it is what it is, I’m told … which is nothing.
Finally, I’d be remiss if I failed to mention that – if nothing else – Last Frontier has an incredible amount of footage exploring the astonishing beauty of this wild vastness. It’s honestly one of the prettiest travelogues – with a fringe central subject – I’ve ever had the good fortune to watch, so much so that perhaps the Alaskan authorities might want to pull some and use it to encourage an increase of tourism … though perhaps promoting the less dangerous native activity of hunting for Sasquatches. While I’d happily sign up for that tour of the region, I suspect others might prefer more scenic pursuits.
Recommended.
In fairness, I don’t think that there’s necessarily anything revelatory that comes out of On The Trail Of Bigfoot: Last Frontier, but what there is works just fine. Breedlove’s attempt to provide a cursory examination of Alaska, its history and cultural background, and a handful of important sightings really just scratches the surface of an ever-expanding mystery … one which will likely never be solved to even the most ardent skeptic’s satisfaction. Still, it’s an effective presentation into the realm of what’s truly ‘Out There,’ and it’s definitely an entertaining 80 minutes, even if a bit slow-paced in a few spots.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Small Town Monsters provided me with complimentary streaming access to On The Trail Of Bigfoot: Last Frontier by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
As is often the case in documentaries and/or television series that try to dig deeper into various cryptids, the lion’s share of the investigation relies on witness accounts; and Last Frontier definitely has some very good ones. Regular folks – average souls just like you and me who have absolutely nothing to gain by making false claims – share the experiences in the wild or even from the edge of the homes, and their authenticity is never in question. Clearly, these folks saw something – minimally, they’re convinced that they did – and they stop short of claiming it was Bigfoot. Honestly, it’s clear that they’ve no explanation for what they saw, and the shock of that encounter has shaken them to the core. While they don’t quite know what to believe, they all insist whatever these things are they are real … and all insist further study is warranted.
If anything, the sheer hopelessness of these circumstances pervades Last Frontier: very few people are willing to put in the time, money, and effort to conduct ongoing studies into these events, and that’s the real shame here. Breedlove, in particular, deserves to be commended for a willingness to capture these stories, commit them to history (on film), and simply ask questions. He’s giving witnesses an opportunity to be heard. The fact that with all our federal government spends on programs occasionally debunked as frivolous has always infuriated me: why can’t we earmark a fund for a small staff within the greater bureaucracy to legitimately track and explore such mysteries? We’ll waste a billion dollars on hammers; meanwhile, UFOs continue to invade our airspace, and Uncle Sam does (apparently) nothing. A Bigfoot Studies group could be part of the Department Of The Interior … but it is what it is, I’m told … which is nothing.
Finally, I’d be remiss if I failed to mention that – if nothing else – Last Frontier has an incredible amount of footage exploring the astonishing beauty of this wild vastness. It’s honestly one of the prettiest travelogues – with a fringe central subject – I’ve ever had the good fortune to watch, so much so that perhaps the Alaskan authorities might want to pull some and use it to encourage an increase of tourism … though perhaps promoting the less dangerous native activity of hunting for Sasquatches. While I’d happily sign up for that tour of the region, I suspect others might prefer more scenic pursuits.
Recommended.
In fairness, I don’t think that there’s necessarily anything revelatory that comes out of On The Trail Of Bigfoot: Last Frontier, but what there is works just fine. Breedlove’s attempt to provide a cursory examination of Alaska, its history and cultural background, and a handful of important sightings really just scratches the surface of an ever-expanding mystery … one which will likely never be solved to even the most ardent skeptic’s satisfaction. Still, it’s an effective presentation into the realm of what’s truly ‘Out There,’ and it’s definitely an entertaining 80 minutes, even if a bit slow-paced in a few spots.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Small Town Monsters provided me with complimentary streaming access to On The Trail Of Bigfoot: Last Frontier by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
"You're a scanner, which you don't realize. And that has been the source of all your agony. But I will show you now that it can be a source of great power."
-- Dr. Paul Ruth (played by Patrick McGoohan)
-- Dr. Paul Ruth (played by Patrick McGoohan)
1981's Scanners is one of those films that to some degree even I am surprised I didn't enjoy a bit more than I did.
I think some of my frustration with the flick is that so very, very, very many of the young men I grew up with praised it like it was the Second Coming for oh so long before I did get to see a complete cut of it. I had seen snippets of it here and there -- on cable, edited for television, etc. -- but a complete screening just escaped for a long time. Naturally when something is positioned so high on a pedestal I think it's hard for that reputation to be matched ... and I say this regarding productions of any genre, not simply Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror. My mates had elevated this one to sainthood, and I figured going in that it wasn't going to happen.
(For those interested in knowing my full take on it, my review can be found right here.)
Now, I will say this: I think the lion's share of Scanners' reputation in all of filmdom is honestly owed to a few keys scenes. The script -- as conceived and directed by David Cronenberg (a talent I've honestly been hit-or-miss with anyway) -- doesn't exactly break new ground as we've seen secret conspiracy organizations trying to do both good or ill behind-the-scenes for the better part of three, four, or even five decades. Setting that aside -- along with some reasonably good acting from a talented cast -- I'd still argue that what matters most is those -- ahem -- mind-blowing pyrotechnics brought to an all-new level of 'boomity' by Cronenberg and his technicians. (For those wanting the straight skinny on how those shots were achieved, the Criterion Collection release explores it to great effect in their 'making of' shorts. It's quite vivid.)
Over the years, the film became a bit of a snowball, forever rolling down a hill, picking up weight and momentum as it plundered on its way; and I think the biggest recipient of that progress had to have been Cronenberg. While he wasn't exactly new on the scene with the picture's release, I think this one definitely caught the attention of an awful lot of industry types. Clearly the man had a vision and he had the skills and knowhow to deliver something compelling on the silver screen, so it was natural that bigger and broader projects followed this one ... so at the very least film nuts like myself should be thankful for that.
Here's the plot summary as provided by the good folks at IMDB.com:
"A scientist trains a man with an advanced telepathic ability called "scanning", to stop a dangerous Scanner with extraordinary psychic powers from waging war against non scanners."
I think some of my frustration with the flick is that so very, very, very many of the young men I grew up with praised it like it was the Second Coming for oh so long before I did get to see a complete cut of it. I had seen snippets of it here and there -- on cable, edited for television, etc. -- but a complete screening just escaped for a long time. Naturally when something is positioned so high on a pedestal I think it's hard for that reputation to be matched ... and I say this regarding productions of any genre, not simply Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror. My mates had elevated this one to sainthood, and I figured going in that it wasn't going to happen.
(For those interested in knowing my full take on it, my review can be found right here.)
Now, I will say this: I think the lion's share of Scanners' reputation in all of filmdom is honestly owed to a few keys scenes. The script -- as conceived and directed by David Cronenberg (a talent I've honestly been hit-or-miss with anyway) -- doesn't exactly break new ground as we've seen secret conspiracy organizations trying to do both good or ill behind-the-scenes for the better part of three, four, or even five decades. Setting that aside -- along with some reasonably good acting from a talented cast -- I'd still argue that what matters most is those -- ahem -- mind-blowing pyrotechnics brought to an all-new level of 'boomity' by Cronenberg and his technicians. (For those wanting the straight skinny on how those shots were achieved, the Criterion Collection release explores it to great effect in their 'making of' shorts. It's quite vivid.)
Over the years, the film became a bit of a snowball, forever rolling down a hill, picking up weight and momentum as it plundered on its way; and I think the biggest recipient of that progress had to have been Cronenberg. While he wasn't exactly new on the scene with the picture's release, I think this one definitely caught the attention of an awful lot of industry types. Clearly the man had a vision and he had the skills and knowhow to deliver something compelling on the silver screen, so it was natural that bigger and broader projects followed this one ... so at the very least film nuts like myself should be thankful for that.
Here's the plot summary as provided by the good folks at IMDB.com:
"A scientist trains a man with an advanced telepathic ability called "scanning", to stop a dangerous Scanner with extraordinary psychic powers from waging war against non scanners."
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Full disclosure: though I wasn't all that fond of this particular film, I'll admit that I think its poster is downright genius.
Why?
Well, The Dunwich Horror -- adapted from the H.P. Lovecraft novella for the silver screen -- very amply hints at any measure of subversiveness in its presentation as directed by Daniel Haller. Haller -- not exactly a huge name in genre circles but deserves a bit more recognition -- got his start with his debut picture Die Monster Die (1965) and then delivered this curious little gem but a few years after. He packed reasonably well with some interesting visual ideas, but perhaps what I remember most is this wonderful little bit between stars Dean Stockwell and Sandra Dee. Let me explain it, and you'll see why it kinda/sorta links to the sentiments of this poster ... and maybe you'll agree.
Stockwell plays the film's villain, Wilbur Whateley, a small town loser whose birth ties him to another dimension's source of evil. (I won't spoil it more than that, but Lovecraft fans probably know it well enough.) He woos the lovely Nancy Wagner (Dee, in a bit of a comeback performance from a three-year screen absence) with the intent of sacrificing her with the hope that his deed will usher into our world the 'Old Ones' who'll basically bring an end to life as we know it because -- mostly -- that's what evil does.
In any event, Dee spends the bulk of the film's second half lying on said altar; and -- at one point -- Stockwell reads texts from the original Necronomicon (the Book Of The Dead) in order to usher in this dimensional event. But at one point -- perhaps having grown a bit tired with holding the book up on his own -- he actually rests it between Dee's thighs -- precisely in her (ahem) nether regions -- and continues casting his spell. Forgive me for pounding on this drum, but I thought it was just an incredible visual moment -- so devious, so downright naughty -- that papers could be written about by film scholars for years.
There are many things one could suggest 'belong' within a woman's legs. A book? That isn't one of them.
So 'Happy Birthday' to the cast and crew who brought this delightfully seditious picture to life. It may not have been as successful as everyone had hoped, but them's the breaks in HollywoodLand.
Why?
Well, The Dunwich Horror -- adapted from the H.P. Lovecraft novella for the silver screen -- very amply hints at any measure of subversiveness in its presentation as directed by Daniel Haller. Haller -- not exactly a huge name in genre circles but deserves a bit more recognition -- got his start with his debut picture Die Monster Die (1965) and then delivered this curious little gem but a few years after. He packed reasonably well with some interesting visual ideas, but perhaps what I remember most is this wonderful little bit between stars Dean Stockwell and Sandra Dee. Let me explain it, and you'll see why it kinda/sorta links to the sentiments of this poster ... and maybe you'll agree.
Stockwell plays the film's villain, Wilbur Whateley, a small town loser whose birth ties him to another dimension's source of evil. (I won't spoil it more than that, but Lovecraft fans probably know it well enough.) He woos the lovely Nancy Wagner (Dee, in a bit of a comeback performance from a three-year screen absence) with the intent of sacrificing her with the hope that his deed will usher into our world the 'Old Ones' who'll basically bring an end to life as we know it because -- mostly -- that's what evil does.
In any event, Dee spends the bulk of the film's second half lying on said altar; and -- at one point -- Stockwell reads texts from the original Necronomicon (the Book Of The Dead) in order to usher in this dimensional event. But at one point -- perhaps having grown a bit tired with holding the book up on his own -- he actually rests it between Dee's thighs -- precisely in her (ahem) nether regions -- and continues casting his spell. Forgive me for pounding on this drum, but I thought it was just an incredible visual moment -- so devious, so downright naughty -- that papers could be written about by film scholars for years.
There are many things one could suggest 'belong' within a woman's legs. A book? That isn't one of them.
So 'Happy Birthday' to the cast and crew who brought this delightfully seditious picture to life. It may not have been as successful as everyone had hoped, but them's the breaks in HollywoodLand.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
"Eat this, you big sack of fish shit!"
-- Dr. Diane Norris (Cindy Pickett)
-- Dr. Diane Norris (Cindy Pickett)
Ach ... DeepStar Six (1989). Ach.
In my relative youth, I can remember the excitement of rushing to the theaters to view practically anything that looked even remotely interesting in the realm of Science Fiction and Fantasy. I'm sure many of you -- who are like me -- agree that there are times in your personal history that you'd take in anything -- and I do mean anything -- with the hope of being rewarded for doing your part as a loyal fan and supporting every project you possibly could, even when that mean doing something as simple as buying a ticket. We learned how to expect a bit a schlock because if we did then maybe studios would throw a few more bucks into the next project -- the one currently in production or percolating on a studio's back burner -- and this would lead to bigger and better films. The ultimate hope here was that, eventually, there would be so much money in them that how could they go wrong?
As we learned over time (and with some maturity), more money doesn't necessarily equate to better films. As a consequence, we were really only rewarding the studios for giving us the original schlock to begin with, and this only meant we were going to receive more-of-the-same in the years ahead.
DeepStar Six is exactly the kind of film I'm talking about. While it may not be a particularly good film, it also isn't particularly bad. It was likely intended to capitalize on what competing studios thought was going to be a demand for underwater action pictures -- resulting from James Cameron's The Abyss hitting screens in or around the same timeframe -- and I'm not sure that legitimate demand ever really materialized. Yes, The Abyss did solid business. Yes, Cameron's film was groundbreaking, in its own right. Who knows? Perhaps audiences were -- like in the words of Steven Spielberg's Jaws -- afraid to go back into the water ... and the business for DeepStar Six dried up real quick.
Genre director Sean S. Cunningham (House and House II: The Second Story) did what he could with a script from Lewis Abernathy and Geof Miller. (Interestingly enough, I have read that Abernathy and Cameron were industry acquaintences, and apparently Cameron was even aware that the screenwriter had crafted and was working to fast-track DeepStar to production, maybe to even capitalize on the underwater market before The Abyss.) Greg Evigan -- not exactly a big screen name at the time -- headlined the adventure, with a cast that included the fetching Nancy Everhard, Nia Peeples, and the dynamic Miguel Ferrer. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"A team of navy personnel stationed at a temporary base at the bottom of the ocean and tasked with setting up nuclear missiles discovers a huge underwater cavern which houses a giant prehistoric creature."
As fate would have it, DeepStar never really amounted to all that much at the box office. A quick search on Google.com suggests that -- while budgeted in the vacinity of $8 million -- the flick earned back about that much in worldwide receipts. Breaking even is, I suspect, a nice proposition for some; but that's not going to be viewed all that favorably in Hollywood circles, meaning that DeepStar would go on -- as many films of its day did -- to find a bit more success in the home video market.
In my relative youth, I can remember the excitement of rushing to the theaters to view practically anything that looked even remotely interesting in the realm of Science Fiction and Fantasy. I'm sure many of you -- who are like me -- agree that there are times in your personal history that you'd take in anything -- and I do mean anything -- with the hope of being rewarded for doing your part as a loyal fan and supporting every project you possibly could, even when that mean doing something as simple as buying a ticket. We learned how to expect a bit a schlock because if we did then maybe studios would throw a few more bucks into the next project -- the one currently in production or percolating on a studio's back burner -- and this would lead to bigger and better films. The ultimate hope here was that, eventually, there would be so much money in them that how could they go wrong?
As we learned over time (and with some maturity), more money doesn't necessarily equate to better films. As a consequence, we were really only rewarding the studios for giving us the original schlock to begin with, and this only meant we were going to receive more-of-the-same in the years ahead.
DeepStar Six is exactly the kind of film I'm talking about. While it may not be a particularly good film, it also isn't particularly bad. It was likely intended to capitalize on what competing studios thought was going to be a demand for underwater action pictures -- resulting from James Cameron's The Abyss hitting screens in or around the same timeframe -- and I'm not sure that legitimate demand ever really materialized. Yes, The Abyss did solid business. Yes, Cameron's film was groundbreaking, in its own right. Who knows? Perhaps audiences were -- like in the words of Steven Spielberg's Jaws -- afraid to go back into the water ... and the business for DeepStar Six dried up real quick.
Genre director Sean S. Cunningham (House and House II: The Second Story) did what he could with a script from Lewis Abernathy and Geof Miller. (Interestingly enough, I have read that Abernathy and Cameron were industry acquaintences, and apparently Cameron was even aware that the screenwriter had crafted and was working to fast-track DeepStar to production, maybe to even capitalize on the underwater market before The Abyss.) Greg Evigan -- not exactly a big screen name at the time -- headlined the adventure, with a cast that included the fetching Nancy Everhard, Nia Peeples, and the dynamic Miguel Ferrer. Here's the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
"A team of navy personnel stationed at a temporary base at the bottom of the ocean and tasked with setting up nuclear missiles discovers a huge underwater cavern which houses a giant prehistoric creature."
As fate would have it, DeepStar never really amounted to all that much at the box office. A quick search on Google.com suggests that -- while budgeted in the vacinity of $8 million -- the flick earned back about that much in worldwide receipts. Breaking even is, I suspect, a nice proposition for some; but that's not going to be viewed all that favorably in Hollywood circles, meaning that DeepStar would go on -- as many films of its day did -- to find a bit more success in the home video market.
For what it's worth, I just did a search over on Blu-ray.com, and it appears that in 2020 the good people at Kino Lorber produced a fairly respectable release for the film. It even appears to be loaded with some extras. I had a few bucks available in one of my CashBack programs, so I opted to buy a copy. As time permits, I'll maybe do a re-watch and pen one of my Flashback Reviews. I don't recall loving this film to any degree, but it's been so many years that I may feel differently in the process.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ