- Published on
Someone had asked me just this morning if I'd seen the second trailer that recently dropped regarding HBO/Max's Raised By Wolves, and I had to admit that I had, meant to share it in this space, got sidetracked, and here we are.
I don't recall (at this point) if I've written a review regarding the show's first season -- though I know I've referenced it on a few occasions -- but it was one of the most pleasant surprises in the last year or so for me. The show's promotional materials (for season 1) were not very impressive -- in all honesty -- so it was a jaunt I wasn't all that interested in taking. I read a few reviews after it released, and even those weren't all that complimentary. I don't remember what put those folks off about the show, but I seem to recall some taking issue with the story's ideology. (Like so many, I'm disappointed when storytellers infuse political messages into their dramas.) As the season wore on, it seemed as if more critics were enjoying it, so the wifey and I gave it a spin. It was quite nice.
Yes, I'd confess that the story has a political undercurrent -- it would seem that we just can't help ourselves these days -- but I found it negligible. Also, I didn't feel the Ridley Scott production really beat any drum (message) singularly: watchers could interpret some of the developments any way they liked, and perhaps I grew to appreciate that kinda/sorta open-ended political narrative more than themes that tell me what to think or caution me to think otherwise. (Hello, Star Trek: Discovery!) By the first season's end, I was more invested in the characters anyway, so the messages were easier to set aside.
There was a trailer release earlier, but now a second one fleshes out a bit more action for what's in store when the new episodes are available. As this one was a pleasant surprise, I'll definitely be tuning in.
Trailer is below. You folks know what to do. As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
I don't recall (at this point) if I've written a review regarding the show's first season -- though I know I've referenced it on a few occasions -- but it was one of the most pleasant surprises in the last year or so for me. The show's promotional materials (for season 1) were not very impressive -- in all honesty -- so it was a jaunt I wasn't all that interested in taking. I read a few reviews after it released, and even those weren't all that complimentary. I don't remember what put those folks off about the show, but I seem to recall some taking issue with the story's ideology. (Like so many, I'm disappointed when storytellers infuse political messages into their dramas.) As the season wore on, it seemed as if more critics were enjoying it, so the wifey and I gave it a spin. It was quite nice.
Yes, I'd confess that the story has a political undercurrent -- it would seem that we just can't help ourselves these days -- but I found it negligible. Also, I didn't feel the Ridley Scott production really beat any drum (message) singularly: watchers could interpret some of the developments any way they liked, and perhaps I grew to appreciate that kinda/sorta open-ended political narrative more than themes that tell me what to think or caution me to think otherwise. (Hello, Star Trek: Discovery!) By the first season's end, I was more invested in the characters anyway, so the messages were easier to set aside.
There was a trailer release earlier, but now a second one fleshes out a bit more action for what's in store when the new episodes are available. As this one was a pleasant surprise, I'll definitely be tuning in.
Trailer is below. You folks know what to do. As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Honestly, I know very little about Moon Knight ... but, then again, I've always said I'm more of a DC Comics guy.
If I remember correctly, I picked up a few issues of something he appeared in back in the late 1980's or early 1990's. Maybe it was even a graphic novel collection. I was a fairly avid collector for a time, but as the rising costs of books became untenable I just gave it all up cold turkey. Anyway, I don't remember being all that intrigued with the character, and maybe I was even a bit confused over what he could do, how he fit into the world as created, and what the limits of his abilities were. (This wasn't an origins tale; that much I recall.) So I didn't follow along with subsequent tales. Such is the nature sometimes in being a fan. But I will say this: if anyone out there who reads this space has a recommendation for a graphic novel involving the character, either leave it in the comments below or drop me a message through the 'contact' page at the site as I'd be interested in boning up my knowledge through a quality experience.
I will say that I'm glad Marvel is continuing a tradition it began with shows on Netflix of introducing some of the characters in its rich pantheon via their streaming series. I think it's a fabulous platform to give some of these heroes a bit more face time than in the typical stand-alone two-hour origins flick that also has to develop a villain; I know I'm in the minority here, but there's something to be said for tales that truly focus on a superhero instead of split-screening a singular source of evil. I get the whole protagonist/antagonist format is kinda/sorta a requirement; I guess I'm a bloke who appreciates more backstory as it helps me better understand individuals.
But I digress ...
I see that Moon Knight is getting some exposure via a streaming series on Disney+. The trailer dropped, and I think it poses more questions than it does truly promote tuning in, especially for non-Marvel folks such as myself. Who knows? That might be because producers are leaving the really good stuff for the show, and they'd rather have you showing up blind as opposed to having a slim expectation. Whatever the case, the two-minute promotion is here, and I'm happy to share it below. You folks know what to do.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
If I remember correctly, I picked up a few issues of something he appeared in back in the late 1980's or early 1990's. Maybe it was even a graphic novel collection. I was a fairly avid collector for a time, but as the rising costs of books became untenable I just gave it all up cold turkey. Anyway, I don't remember being all that intrigued with the character, and maybe I was even a bit confused over what he could do, how he fit into the world as created, and what the limits of his abilities were. (This wasn't an origins tale; that much I recall.) So I didn't follow along with subsequent tales. Such is the nature sometimes in being a fan. But I will say this: if anyone out there who reads this space has a recommendation for a graphic novel involving the character, either leave it in the comments below or drop me a message through the 'contact' page at the site as I'd be interested in boning up my knowledge through a quality experience.
I will say that I'm glad Marvel is continuing a tradition it began with shows on Netflix of introducing some of the characters in its rich pantheon via their streaming series. I think it's a fabulous platform to give some of these heroes a bit more face time than in the typical stand-alone two-hour origins flick that also has to develop a villain; I know I'm in the minority here, but there's something to be said for tales that truly focus on a superhero instead of split-screening a singular source of evil. I get the whole protagonist/antagonist format is kinda/sorta a requirement; I guess I'm a bloke who appreciates more backstory as it helps me better understand individuals.
But I digress ...
I see that Moon Knight is getting some exposure via a streaming series on Disney+. The trailer dropped, and I think it poses more questions than it does truly promote tuning in, especially for non-Marvel folks such as myself. Who knows? That might be because producers are leaving the really good stuff for the show, and they'd rather have you showing up blind as opposed to having a slim expectation. Whatever the case, the two-minute promotion is here, and I'm happy to share it below. You folks know what to do.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Stories involving sleep – or perhaps, more importantly, what goes on in our heads while we’re asleep – have long fascinated audiences.
Dreaming is a universal experience. Our dreams can be inspired, or they can scare the stuffing out of us. Psychoanalysts have long insisted that dreams are a doorway to understanding what truly goes on in the deep recesses of our personalities, and many experts have written extrapolations over what certain symbols mean when evaluated by conscious minds. I suppose the dark secret is that we’ll never truly know just where dreams come from, but they’ll always find a way to keep us up at night, the very antithesis of what a dream should be intended to do.
Filmmakers around the world have used the stuff of dreams to populate all kinds of interesting tales. Douglas Trumball’s Brainstorm (1983) explored the dangers of bringing one’s own troubles along for the ride into another person’s subconscious. Joseph Ruben’s Dreamscape (1984) spun a therapeutic twist on the idea of a specialist entering another’s dream for the sake of curing various phobias. Christopher Nolan’s Inception (2010) played tricks with reality when it investigated the predicament of manipulating a subject’s frame-of-mind by inserting ideas into gray matter. Still, an entire film series – Wes Craven’s Nightmare On Elm Street films – ratcheted up the sheer terror of having an evil villain inhabit the dreams of his victims solely for the sake of killing them in the vilest ways imaginable.
Make no mistake: Michael Venus’ Sleep (2020) is a horror film. It touches on similar ideas from what’s come before in the landscape of dream pictures, but the storyteller also incorporates some heady ideas about how our past continues creeping into our present in much the same way the stuff of dreams affects our waking moments. Though it’s occasionally unclear what all of this means to the characters he’s created, I found most of the flick refreshing enough that I could actively assign meaning where definition was a bit undercooked.
(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 product packaging:
“Tormented by recurring nightmares of a place where she has never been, Marlene cannot help but investigate when she discovers the place is real. Once there, she suffers a breakdown and is admitted to a psychiatric ward. Determined to discover what happened to her, Mona, her daughter, follows and finds herself in Stainbach, an idyllic village with a dark history. What is it that so tormented her mother, and the people of Stainbach? What is the source of the nightmares she suffers? And who is the mysterious Trude that lives in the forest?”
I can’t say this from firsthand experience, but I’ve been told that schools these days don’t teach the real threat Nazi Socialism posed to all of mankind during World War II. (I’ve got no reason to dispute that, either.) I’ve even been told that some students today are told that the Nazis had some good ideas but executed them poorly (and I use that word “executed” lightly). Back in my day when perhaps things were a bit more on track we were told about the horrors that Germany performed, and we were even enlightened about what danger a political party posed to the greater world-at-large. Suffice it to say, the Nazis were some really bad dudes who’d stop at nothing to get what they wanted; and it’s this blinding fury that fuels only a portion of what’s explored in writer/director Michael Venus’ debut feature film, Sleep. Though its characters are much removed from the 1930’s and 40’s, the overall theme here is about lingering influence; much in the same way our dreams impact both our sleeping and waking hours, there’s always a risk of past inspirations affecting subsequent generations. This is why we’re told to learn our history; otherwise, we’re likely to repeat it.
Dreaming is a universal experience. Our dreams can be inspired, or they can scare the stuffing out of us. Psychoanalysts have long insisted that dreams are a doorway to understanding what truly goes on in the deep recesses of our personalities, and many experts have written extrapolations over what certain symbols mean when evaluated by conscious minds. I suppose the dark secret is that we’ll never truly know just where dreams come from, but they’ll always find a way to keep us up at night, the very antithesis of what a dream should be intended to do.
Filmmakers around the world have used the stuff of dreams to populate all kinds of interesting tales. Douglas Trumball’s Brainstorm (1983) explored the dangers of bringing one’s own troubles along for the ride into another person’s subconscious. Joseph Ruben’s Dreamscape (1984) spun a therapeutic twist on the idea of a specialist entering another’s dream for the sake of curing various phobias. Christopher Nolan’s Inception (2010) played tricks with reality when it investigated the predicament of manipulating a subject’s frame-of-mind by inserting ideas into gray matter. Still, an entire film series – Wes Craven’s Nightmare On Elm Street films – ratcheted up the sheer terror of having an evil villain inhabit the dreams of his victims solely for the sake of killing them in the vilest ways imaginable.
Make no mistake: Michael Venus’ Sleep (2020) is a horror film. It touches on similar ideas from what’s come before in the landscape of dream pictures, but the storyteller also incorporates some heady ideas about how our past continues creeping into our present in much the same way the stuff of dreams affects our waking moments. Though it’s occasionally unclear what all of this means to the characters he’s created, I found most of the flick refreshing enough that I could actively assign meaning where definition was a bit undercooked.
(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 product packaging:
“Tormented by recurring nightmares of a place where she has never been, Marlene cannot help but investigate when she discovers the place is real. Once there, she suffers a breakdown and is admitted to a psychiatric ward. Determined to discover what happened to her, Mona, her daughter, follows and finds herself in Stainbach, an idyllic village with a dark history. What is it that so tormented her mother, and the people of Stainbach? What is the source of the nightmares she suffers? And who is the mysterious Trude that lives in the forest?”
I can’t say this from firsthand experience, but I’ve been told that schools these days don’t teach the real threat Nazi Socialism posed to all of mankind during World War II. (I’ve got no reason to dispute that, either.) I’ve even been told that some students today are told that the Nazis had some good ideas but executed them poorly (and I use that word “executed” lightly). Back in my day when perhaps things were a bit more on track we were told about the horrors that Germany performed, and we were even enlightened about what danger a political party posed to the greater world-at-large. Suffice it to say, the Nazis were some really bad dudes who’d stop at nothing to get what they wanted; and it’s this blinding fury that fuels only a portion of what’s explored in writer/director Michael Venus’ debut feature film, Sleep. Though its characters are much removed from the 1930’s and 40’s, the overall theme here is about lingering influence; much in the same way our dreams impact both our sleeping and waking hours, there’s always a risk of past inspirations affecting subsequent generations. This is why we’re told to learn our history; otherwise, we’re likely to repeat it.
In this world, Marlene (played by Sandra Huller), Mona (Gro Swantje Kohlhof), and Trude (Agata Buzek) represent a spiritual trinity joined in ways more than just dreams (I won’t spoil it): the mother, the daughter, and the unholy ghost. Trude has used her otherworldly influence throughout all of Marlene’s life, but the woman’s eventual mental collapse forces the spirit to now redirect her vengeful desires onto Mona, who is necessarily drawn to the mountain town of Stainbach to investigate what happened with her mother. It is here where these forces will converge at a time and a place wherein Otto Fahrmann (August Schmolzer) has risen to prominence in the community and is secretly attempting to bring back the Third Reich as a cultural norm.
There’s a bit more to the story (again, I won’t spoil it), and there’s an awful lot of symbolism the audience might choose to work through; but – at its core – Sleep juggles a handful of personal issues all the while staying mostly true to the classic revenge-from-beyond-the-grave format. Venus and Thomas Friedrich’s script creates a world within a world wherein characters are allowed to be a bit out-of-touch with reality mostly because supernatural influences have taken residence in their respective souls. Mona has grown increasingly despondent, feeling that her mother’s psychological issues have seeped into her DNA. Franzi (Martina Schone-Radunski) – one of Stainbach’s disaffected youth – discloses to Mona that even she has grown so obsessed with her dreams that she occasionally struggles in understanding when they’ve stopped. Even Lore (Marion Kracht) – Otto’s wife – has fallen into a workday stupor wherein she goes about the routine of living, never quite grasping the greater circumstances at play were she to truly open her eyes.
Because evil never sleeps (and goodness takes effort), this collective slumber is the most dangerous place for all of these characters to intersect. That’s where and when Sleep excels as a slow-burning chiller. After all, no one’s truly aware of the danger they’re in until it’s too late. In fact, sleep is exactly what Trude requires of the players in order for her to extract her nefarious rewards. It was a sleeping nation that allowed Adolf Hitler to rise to power, and it’s the drowsy mountain folk of this resort city who might unbeknownst to them embrace that dark call once again. Perhaps that is the warning to all who come to Stainbach: “Always be watchful.”
You can’t do that while you’re asleep.
Sleep (2020) is produced by Das Kleine Fernsehspiel (ZDF) and Junafilm. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by Arrow Video. As for the technical specifications? The film looks and sounds extraordinary, and I might add that sound played a very role in constructing much of the true frights in here. As for the special features? Well, this is Arrow Video, after all, and they rarely disappoint! The disc boasts an audio commentary, a visual essay, some intellectual discussion about dreams, deleted scenes, some making-of materials, various promotional materials, and a collector’s booklet with related essay. It’s a fine, fine collection that should keep interested parties busy for quite some time.
Recommended. Though I could argue that Sleep may’ve bitten off a bit more than it can chew (such can be the nature in an ambitious director’s first full-length feature), I’d be silly to deny that the film conjured up a beautiful yet nightmarish scenario wherein the past is clearly haunting everyone still alive. Though some might scoff at the comparison, the feature also bears a strong resemblance to early adventures with Freddy Krueger in the popular Nightmare On Elm Street films: while Venus’ picture is decidedly more highbrow about it, the central trickery of a vengeful spirit who needs to inhabit those while asleep can’t be denied. Still, not everything went down easily – I’m still trying to process some smaller moments and what they may’ve meant – but such vivid imagery promises what could be an impressive career for the new storyteller.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Video provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Sleep (2020) 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
There’s a bit more to the story (again, I won’t spoil it), and there’s an awful lot of symbolism the audience might choose to work through; but – at its core – Sleep juggles a handful of personal issues all the while staying mostly true to the classic revenge-from-beyond-the-grave format. Venus and Thomas Friedrich’s script creates a world within a world wherein characters are allowed to be a bit out-of-touch with reality mostly because supernatural influences have taken residence in their respective souls. Mona has grown increasingly despondent, feeling that her mother’s psychological issues have seeped into her DNA. Franzi (Martina Schone-Radunski) – one of Stainbach’s disaffected youth – discloses to Mona that even she has grown so obsessed with her dreams that she occasionally struggles in understanding when they’ve stopped. Even Lore (Marion Kracht) – Otto’s wife – has fallen into a workday stupor wherein she goes about the routine of living, never quite grasping the greater circumstances at play were she to truly open her eyes.
Because evil never sleeps (and goodness takes effort), this collective slumber is the most dangerous place for all of these characters to intersect. That’s where and when Sleep excels as a slow-burning chiller. After all, no one’s truly aware of the danger they’re in until it’s too late. In fact, sleep is exactly what Trude requires of the players in order for her to extract her nefarious rewards. It was a sleeping nation that allowed Adolf Hitler to rise to power, and it’s the drowsy mountain folk of this resort city who might unbeknownst to them embrace that dark call once again. Perhaps that is the warning to all who come to Stainbach: “Always be watchful.”
You can’t do that while you’re asleep.
Sleep (2020) is produced by Das Kleine Fernsehspiel (ZDF) and Junafilm. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by Arrow Video. As for the technical specifications? The film looks and sounds extraordinary, and I might add that sound played a very role in constructing much of the true frights in here. As for the special features? Well, this is Arrow Video, after all, and they rarely disappoint! The disc boasts an audio commentary, a visual essay, some intellectual discussion about dreams, deleted scenes, some making-of materials, various promotional materials, and a collector’s booklet with related essay. It’s a fine, fine collection that should keep interested parties busy for quite some time.
Recommended. Though I could argue that Sleep may’ve bitten off a bit more than it can chew (such can be the nature in an ambitious director’s first full-length feature), I’d be silly to deny that the film conjured up a beautiful yet nightmarish scenario wherein the past is clearly haunting everyone still alive. Though some might scoff at the comparison, the feature also bears a strong resemblance to early adventures with Freddy Krueger in the popular Nightmare On Elm Street films: while Venus’ picture is decidedly more highbrow about it, the central trickery of a vengeful spirit who needs to inhabit those while asleep can’t be denied. Still, not everything went down easily – I’m still trying to process some smaller moments and what they may’ve meant – but such vivid imagery promises what could be an impressive career for the new storyteller.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Video provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Sleep (2020) 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
Great gosh a'mighty, the 1980's had an awful lot of B-Movies!
I get panned a lot for saying this, but many of them really weren't very good. By definition, they're lesser flicks to begin with; and whatever amount of moxie the cast and crew put into them can only cover up so many blemishes, goofs, and plotholes. I think that the surge in exploitation pictures -- largely fueled by an unexpected growth in demand thanks for home video recorders -- really accounts for much of this shlock being given life; and the consequence of being introduced to some of this stuff by a young audience led to some incredible nostalgia which encourages us to look at the films again.
Either that, or we're all gluttons for punishment!
In any event, one of the crowning cinematic achievements of the 1980 film year remains Lewis Teague's Alligator. It's basically "Jaws On Land," and it works out a lot of its kinks by way of shedding blood (by the bucket) at every opportunity. Screenwriter John Sayles was nominated for the Saturn Award ('Best Writing'), so it isn't as if to say that the film doesn't warrant a second look ... and second looks is exactly what Scream Factory is hoping will delight mankind as they're re-releasing this for consumer consumption on February 22. (That's right: not long after Valentine's Day, so you boys looking for that something special for your ladies ...)
I've read the promotional materials (they're up on Bluray.com), and I'll be copying and pasting them below to make readers aware. It's a bit pricey by my estimation, but it is loaded to the gills with extras for those of us who like that kind of thing. Those of you interested in preordering at Amazon.com are encouraged to follow the link right here.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
I get panned a lot for saying this, but many of them really weren't very good. By definition, they're lesser flicks to begin with; and whatever amount of moxie the cast and crew put into them can only cover up so many blemishes, goofs, and plotholes. I think that the surge in exploitation pictures -- largely fueled by an unexpected growth in demand thanks for home video recorders -- really accounts for much of this shlock being given life; and the consequence of being introduced to some of this stuff by a young audience led to some incredible nostalgia which encourages us to look at the films again.
Either that, or we're all gluttons for punishment!
In any event, one of the crowning cinematic achievements of the 1980 film year remains Lewis Teague's Alligator. It's basically "Jaws On Land," and it works out a lot of its kinks by way of shedding blood (by the bucket) at every opportunity. Screenwriter John Sayles was nominated for the Saturn Award ('Best Writing'), so it isn't as if to say that the film doesn't warrant a second look ... and second looks is exactly what Scream Factory is hoping will delight mankind as they're re-releasing this for consumer consumption on February 22. (That's right: not long after Valentine's Day, so you boys looking for that something special for your ladies ...)
I've read the promotional materials (they're up on Bluray.com), and I'll be copying and pasting them below to make readers aware. It's a bit pricey by my estimation, but it is loaded to the gills with extras for those of us who like that kind of thing. Those of you interested in preordering at Amazon.com are encouraged to follow the link right here.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
Description: From director Lewis Teague (Cujo) and screenwriter John Sayles (The Howling) comes an unstoppable thriller with bite. A family returning from Florida decides their pet baby alligator is too much to handle and flushes him down the toilet. Meanwhile, Slade Laboratories is conducting secret experiments with animals and disposing of them in the sewer. The alligator, fending for itself, begins to feed on the dead animals, and grows. Now, twelve years later, after several mysterious murders, David Madison (Robert Forster, Jackie Brown) is on the case to find out who ... or what ... is killing people.
Special Features and Technical Specs:
DISC ONE: 4K BLU-RAY - THEATRICAL VERSION
Special Features and Technical Specs:
DISC ONE: 4K BLU-RAY - THEATRICAL VERSION
- EXCLUSIVE NEW 4K RESTORATION FROM THE ORIGINAL CAMERA NEGATIVE
- Audio Commentary With Director Lewis Teague And Actor Robert Forster
- Optional English SDH subtitles for the main feature
- EXCLUSIVE NEW 4K RESTORATION FROM THE ORIGINAL CAMERA NEGATIVE
- NEW Everybody In The Pool – An Interview With Actress Robin Riker
- NEW Wild In The Streets – An Interview With Director Lewis Teague
- NEW It Walks Among Us – An Interview With Screenwriter John Sayles
- NEW Luck Of The Gator – An Interview With Special Makeup Effects Artist Robert Short
- NEW Gator Guts, The Great River, And Bob – An Interview With Production Assistant, Now Famous Actor/Director/Producer, Bryan Cranston
- NEW Newspaper Ad Still Gallery By Drive-In Asylum
- Audio Commentary With Director Lewis Teague And Actor Robert Forster
- Alligator Author – An Interview With Screenwriter John Sayles
- Additional Scenes From The TV Version
- Promotional Materials
- NEW Teaser Trailer (New 2K Scan)
- NEW Theatrical Trailer (NEW 2K Scan)
- NEW TV Spots (NEW 2K Scan)
- Trailers From Hell – Filmmaker Karyn Kusama (Jennifer's Body) On ALLIGATOR
- ALLIGATOR Game Television Commercial
- Still Gallery (Movie Stills, Movie Posters, Lobby Cards, And Behind-The-Scenes Photos)
- Optional English SDH subtitles for the main feature
- NEW 4K RESTORATION FROM THE OCN WITH ADDITIONAL FOOTAGE FROM AN INTERPOSITIVE
- The extended television version is presented in high-deifnition for the first time ever.
- Published on
Every now and then, I stumble along a work that for whatever reason just doesn’t quite ‘click’ with me.
Generally speaking, I’ve found this happens when storytellers prefer some low-key political messaging. I watch films not to figure out how I think about life but – like most – for escape. If you want me to do something about lead in the water, then there’s a time and place for that. I just don’t like it invading my downtime. Still other times are when all involved in the production figure that they’re assembled with big, grand mystery; but it’s so obviously put together to obfuscate the central puzzle that viewers are deliberately watching for seams. Lastly, I loathe films that espouse a limited ideology: trust your viewers to think for themselves, not to show up waiting for you to beat the drum for them, and you have a vastly healthier relationship between seller and consumer. Call me quaint: it’s just how I am.
For all of its creative posturing, Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night felt like a combination of the above; and perhaps that’s why it failed to touch me in the way that it likely will others. I like its characters. I like its setting. I like its story. But the combination didn’t work, mostly because of its construction. This doesn’t make it a bad film in any estimation; it’s just clear that it didn’t mean to me what it might to you.
(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 citation:
“Ulysses is a hundred-year-old man, battling for redemption on his last night on earth. Faced with imminent death, he is forced to rethink his past, his present and his take on reality.”
Trust me when I say that there’s no topic that should escape filmdom. Everything should be on the table for cinematic discussion, and that means that even subjects that make us most uncomfortable are worthy of exploration. The problem, however, is that there are good ways of going about it and less-than-good ways; and these lesser ways tend to create a bit of controversy amongst viewers about how well the end result was ultimately achieved.
Critically, it’s easy to see where a certain group of people will flock to praise a feature like Nocturna. It’s well conceived and admirable performed; my quibbles with it lie almost exclusively with its assembly, and, in that respect, writer/director Gonzalo Calzada and I would likely never see eye-to-eye. He packs his story with long sequences of this kindly old Ulysses (played to perfection by Pepe Soriano) mostly walking from room-to-room in his unusually expansive apartment or with him taking long, heartfelt stares at the possessions and events of his life and memory. Clearly, this elderly man is at life’s ultimate crossroads, but Calzada wants to ensure that there’s absolutely no doubt, so much so that I occasionally felt my life slipping away while waiting for something to substantively happen.
Don’t get me wrong: there are plenty of positives to what was achieved here. Ulysses’ life gets reviewed in flashbacks – some of which may or may not have been clouded over with failing memory – and there are some moments delivered that understandably tug on the audience’s heartstrings in exactly the way intended. My issue here is the pacing of it all, and in that respect Nocturna is entirely too long given its ultimate destination … which everyone likely knows five minutes into this trip.
Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night is produced by Coruya Cine and La Puerta Cinematografica.
Mildly recommended. Sorry, folks, if I’m being honest, then it’s hard to give Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night any ringing endorsement. Conceding that it has a solid central performance from Pepe Soriano, there’s just little else that touches a chord with me. The narrative attempts to achieve a measure of novelty with a premise that’s been done before, and the exceedingly long takes that could’ve easily been shortened do the overall pace of the motion picture no favors. Critically, I’m in the minority with this opinion, but I’ve gotta be true to my word. It doesn’t fail; it just doesn’t truly take me anywhere I haven’t been before.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Breaking Glass Pictures provided me with a complimentary streaming link of Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night 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
Generally speaking, I’ve found this happens when storytellers prefer some low-key political messaging. I watch films not to figure out how I think about life but – like most – for escape. If you want me to do something about lead in the water, then there’s a time and place for that. I just don’t like it invading my downtime. Still other times are when all involved in the production figure that they’re assembled with big, grand mystery; but it’s so obviously put together to obfuscate the central puzzle that viewers are deliberately watching for seams. Lastly, I loathe films that espouse a limited ideology: trust your viewers to think for themselves, not to show up waiting for you to beat the drum for them, and you have a vastly healthier relationship between seller and consumer. Call me quaint: it’s just how I am.
For all of its creative posturing, Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night felt like a combination of the above; and perhaps that’s why it failed to touch me in the way that it likely will others. I like its characters. I like its setting. I like its story. But the combination didn’t work, mostly because of its construction. This doesn’t make it a bad film in any estimation; it’s just clear that it didn’t mean to me what it might to you.
(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 citation:
“Ulysses is a hundred-year-old man, battling for redemption on his last night on earth. Faced with imminent death, he is forced to rethink his past, his present and his take on reality.”
Trust me when I say that there’s no topic that should escape filmdom. Everything should be on the table for cinematic discussion, and that means that even subjects that make us most uncomfortable are worthy of exploration. The problem, however, is that there are good ways of going about it and less-than-good ways; and these lesser ways tend to create a bit of controversy amongst viewers about how well the end result was ultimately achieved.
Critically, it’s easy to see where a certain group of people will flock to praise a feature like Nocturna. It’s well conceived and admirable performed; my quibbles with it lie almost exclusively with its assembly, and, in that respect, writer/director Gonzalo Calzada and I would likely never see eye-to-eye. He packs his story with long sequences of this kindly old Ulysses (played to perfection by Pepe Soriano) mostly walking from room-to-room in his unusually expansive apartment or with him taking long, heartfelt stares at the possessions and events of his life and memory. Clearly, this elderly man is at life’s ultimate crossroads, but Calzada wants to ensure that there’s absolutely no doubt, so much so that I occasionally felt my life slipping away while waiting for something to substantively happen.
Don’t get me wrong: there are plenty of positives to what was achieved here. Ulysses’ life gets reviewed in flashbacks – some of which may or may not have been clouded over with failing memory – and there are some moments delivered that understandably tug on the audience’s heartstrings in exactly the way intended. My issue here is the pacing of it all, and in that respect Nocturna is entirely too long given its ultimate destination … which everyone likely knows five minutes into this trip.
Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night is produced by Coruya Cine and La Puerta Cinematografica.
Mildly recommended. Sorry, folks, if I’m being honest, then it’s hard to give Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night any ringing endorsement. Conceding that it has a solid central performance from Pepe Soriano, there’s just little else that touches a chord with me. The narrative attempts to achieve a measure of novelty with a premise that’s been done before, and the exceedingly long takes that could’ve easily been shortened do the overall pace of the motion picture no favors. Critically, I’m in the minority with this opinion, but I’ve gotta be true to my word. It doesn’t fail; it just doesn’t truly take me anywhere I haven’t been before.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Breaking Glass Pictures provided me with a complimentary streaming link of Nocturna: Side A – The Great Old Man’s Night 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
It’s the 1970’s, and exploitation films were all the rage.
Filmmakers large and small have seen that audiences will flock to practically anything they get a rise out of, so cheaply produced horror films can turn a nifty profit while dishing out very little cash behind-the-scenes. The formula for success is crafted that suggests when you put some reasonably attractive young people in jeopardy – and maybe flash a boob or a butt to fill in otherwise missing plot points – people will plunk down a few bucks in exchange for a meagerly produced spectacle. A good time will be had by all.
Flicks like The Toolbox Murders were frequent attractions for moviegoers of that kinda/sorta bygone era. They filled up the hometown cinemas, and the mom-and-pop video rental outlets that opened their doors in 1977 had shelves rich with similar fare. Though many of these features have yet to see the light of day in the past ten years or so (when the marketplace shifted most heavily from retail to streaming), they’re starting to make a bit of a comeback from specialty distributors like Arrow Video, Shout Factory, and Blue Underground.
These films may not be that good. They aren’t particular well made. They bring no heavy social commentary to the forefront. Instead, they seek to only entertain for the 90 minutes they’re played. That’s all they were intended to do.
I like to think there’s a bit of nobility in that … even when it involves a bit of premeditated violence.
(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 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 product packaging:
“In a quiet apartment complex in Los Angeles, a deranged handyman goes on a killing spree, savagely murdering ‘immoral’ women with the tools of his trade – claw-hammers, screwdrivers, power drills and even a deadly nail gun! But these gruesome massacres are just the beginning of this landmark epic of violence and depravity that was vilified by critics, banned by censors, and treasured by splatter fans worldwide.”
Well …
Filmmakers large and small have seen that audiences will flock to practically anything they get a rise out of, so cheaply produced horror films can turn a nifty profit while dishing out very little cash behind-the-scenes. The formula for success is crafted that suggests when you put some reasonably attractive young people in jeopardy – and maybe flash a boob or a butt to fill in otherwise missing plot points – people will plunk down a few bucks in exchange for a meagerly produced spectacle. A good time will be had by all.
Flicks like The Toolbox Murders were frequent attractions for moviegoers of that kinda/sorta bygone era. They filled up the hometown cinemas, and the mom-and-pop video rental outlets that opened their doors in 1977 had shelves rich with similar fare. Though many of these features have yet to see the light of day in the past ten years or so (when the marketplace shifted most heavily from retail to streaming), they’re starting to make a bit of a comeback from specialty distributors like Arrow Video, Shout Factory, and Blue Underground.
These films may not be that good. They aren’t particular well made. They bring no heavy social commentary to the forefront. Instead, they seek to only entertain for the 90 minutes they’re played. That’s all they were intended to do.
I like to think there’s a bit of nobility in that … even when it involves a bit of premeditated violence.
(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 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 product packaging:
“In a quiet apartment complex in Los Angeles, a deranged handyman goes on a killing spree, savagely murdering ‘immoral’ women with the tools of his trade – claw-hammers, screwdrivers, power drills and even a deadly nail gun! But these gruesome massacres are just the beginning of this landmark epic of violence and depravity that was vilified by critics, banned by censors, and treasured by splatter fans worldwide.”
Well …
I’m not entirely certainly that I would use words like “landmark” or “epic” to describe The Toolbox Murders. Yes, I suppose that for its day it was the kind of film that embraced a certain gratuitousness for gratuitousness’ sake, but it really starts and stops right there. Beyond the victims, the performances aren’t all that riveting: though screen veteran Cameron Mitchell does a good job of conveying a deranged psychotic killer and fresh-faced Wesley Eure hones in on a subtle creepiness to accomplish some of the same, so very much of the script feels like a cut-and-paste job. It lacks any dastardly revelations much less any unanticipated reveals, choosing to stick very close to the usual ingredients that fuel exploitation films.
Yes, Murders stirred up a bit of controversy in its day. Some nations censored it from distribution (an act which inevitably makes more folks want to see it in secret, will those folks never learn!), and I’ve read that its producers were called out in articles about the glorification of violence against women. Having seen this twice, I’d argue like the producers did that there’s not much adoration of bloodshed: in fact, much of it is handled somewhat tepidly. Our killer doesn’t celebrate these murders while in the act; he’s a cool tactician merely carrying out his plan. I would say that once the guilty parties are revealed there’s a bit more exposition about the who’s, how’s, and why’s; but those moments were needed to establish motivation and psychosis. Without a speech here or there, these would’ve been just senseless murders on the silver screen, and that would’ve strayed a bit closer to glorifying these actions.
Respectfully, I think Murders is, at best, a guilty pleasure for those who like to revel in a bit of horrific splatter. It approaches every plot point with an almost workman-like simplicity, never going in for gory effects or fancy camera angles. The kills are even a bit clumsy in places – perhaps elevating the reality factor these storytellers intended – and only a palatable amount of blood is shed. I suppose some might take issue with the fact that the toolman’s victims are all great looking, but even the plot summary explains that the killer had his reasons for choosing those he did.
The Toolbox Murders (1978) was produced by Cal-Am Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being handled by the very reliable Blue Underground. As for the technical specifications? This 4K restoration looks and sounds very good; there’s a bit of grain in a few places, but overall I suspect this is as good as this thriller has probably ever looked. As for the special features? Yowza! Blue Underground has once again pulled out all the stops with this two-disc edition which offers up two commentaries (one older, one new); a handful of newly produced behind-the-scenes shorts; a few older items most likely ported over from earlier releases; and a bevy of promotional materials for those who like that sort of thing. Seriously, Blue Underground has made some impressive steps forward in celebrating some of these smaller pictures from days gone by, and they should be commended.
Recommended but only for folks who enjoy true exploitation fare because, otherwise, there’s very little substance to appreciate in The Toolbox Murders. The film was promoted as being based on true events, but any research I’ve done into it suggests that the script only loosely picks up and runs with facts involving a man and his – ahem – tools. The film retains a bit of novelty by taking a few actors (Cameron Mitchell, Wesley Eure, and Pamelyn Ferdin) of the era and giving them some solid face time, but otherwise it’s low key and a bit half-baked.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Blue Underground provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray oof The Toolbox Murders 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
Yes, Murders stirred up a bit of controversy in its day. Some nations censored it from distribution (an act which inevitably makes more folks want to see it in secret, will those folks never learn!), and I’ve read that its producers were called out in articles about the glorification of violence against women. Having seen this twice, I’d argue like the producers did that there’s not much adoration of bloodshed: in fact, much of it is handled somewhat tepidly. Our killer doesn’t celebrate these murders while in the act; he’s a cool tactician merely carrying out his plan. I would say that once the guilty parties are revealed there’s a bit more exposition about the who’s, how’s, and why’s; but those moments were needed to establish motivation and psychosis. Without a speech here or there, these would’ve been just senseless murders on the silver screen, and that would’ve strayed a bit closer to glorifying these actions.
Respectfully, I think Murders is, at best, a guilty pleasure for those who like to revel in a bit of horrific splatter. It approaches every plot point with an almost workman-like simplicity, never going in for gory effects or fancy camera angles. The kills are even a bit clumsy in places – perhaps elevating the reality factor these storytellers intended – and only a palatable amount of blood is shed. I suppose some might take issue with the fact that the toolman’s victims are all great looking, but even the plot summary explains that the killer had his reasons for choosing those he did.
The Toolbox Murders (1978) was produced by Cal-Am Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being handled by the very reliable Blue Underground. As for the technical specifications? This 4K restoration looks and sounds very good; there’s a bit of grain in a few places, but overall I suspect this is as good as this thriller has probably ever looked. As for the special features? Yowza! Blue Underground has once again pulled out all the stops with this two-disc edition which offers up two commentaries (one older, one new); a handful of newly produced behind-the-scenes shorts; a few older items most likely ported over from earlier releases; and a bevy of promotional materials for those who like that sort of thing. Seriously, Blue Underground has made some impressive steps forward in celebrating some of these smaller pictures from days gone by, and they should be commended.
Recommended but only for folks who enjoy true exploitation fare because, otherwise, there’s very little substance to appreciate in The Toolbox Murders. The film was promoted as being based on true events, but any research I’ve done into it suggests that the script only loosely picks up and runs with facts involving a man and his – ahem – tools. The film retains a bit of novelty by taking a few actors (Cameron Mitchell, Wesley Eure, and Pamelyn Ferdin) of the era and giving them some solid face time, but otherwise it’s low key and a bit half-baked.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Blue Underground provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray oof The Toolbox Murders 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
In many ways, I am a bit old-fashioned, and I do like revisiting my favorites up on the silver screen where they belong.
Consequently, there are a handful of films that I rarely miss whenever I'm given the occasion to see them again in theaters. Sometimes, the audiences are small, but I don't care as I'm there chiefly for my own entertainment. Yes, I realize this can be a bit taxing on the wifey -- I can't tell you the number of times I've dragged her to see Casablanca or Citizen Kane -- but she agreed to the whole 'for better or worse' when we entered into this partnership years ago.
Thankfully, Fathom Events has done an incredible job bringing more and more classics back to the silver screen. Granted, these are limited engagements, and they occasionally can get a bit pricey; but Fathom has been doing introductions for many of these, giving hosts the chance to tell a story or two about the flick set to roll.
Simply put: any chance I get to see the original crew of the Starship Enterprise up in lights, I'm there. Kirk and company are legends in this house, and I celebrate their return whenever I can. Consequently, I'll be there this September when Fathom Events screens Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan (Director's Cut) for the film's fortieth anniversay. (Good Lord: has it been forty years already? Khannnnnnnnnnnn!) Those interested in checking out which theaters in your area will be participating need only follow the link right here.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
Consequently, there are a handful of films that I rarely miss whenever I'm given the occasion to see them again in theaters. Sometimes, the audiences are small, but I don't care as I'm there chiefly for my own entertainment. Yes, I realize this can be a bit taxing on the wifey -- I can't tell you the number of times I've dragged her to see Casablanca or Citizen Kane -- but she agreed to the whole 'for better or worse' when we entered into this partnership years ago.
Thankfully, Fathom Events has done an incredible job bringing more and more classics back to the silver screen. Granted, these are limited engagements, and they occasionally can get a bit pricey; but Fathom has been doing introductions for many of these, giving hosts the chance to tell a story or two about the flick set to roll.
Simply put: any chance I get to see the original crew of the Starship Enterprise up in lights, I'm there. Kirk and company are legends in this house, and I celebrate their return whenever I can. Consequently, I'll be there this September when Fathom Events screens Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan (Director's Cut) for the film's fortieth anniversay. (Good Lord: has it been forty years already? Khannnnnnnnnnnn!) Those interested in checking out which theaters in your area will be participating need only follow the link right here.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Typically, ghost stories don’t resonate with me as they do with other reviewers.
My issue with them is that, conventionally, I’m not all that frightened by the usual visual trickery. A door creeping open by itself or a chair sliding across the floor by unseen forces is interesting to watch, but these scenes do very little to draw me into the meat of the story. Scare tactics – while fun – pull me out of the experience instead of drawing me inside the world. What I appreciate more are character moments properly balanced with the ghostly tinkering of poltergeists. These are moments that make me think about the veil between worlds, how and why it gets tugged away, and those tickle my fancy in ways I can’t describe. Suffice it to say, the best spectral shenanigans are those that shock me awake, not those that make me jump in my seat.
That’s a big bill, and it doesn’t happen all that often.
Mario Bava’s Shock gets it right more often than it fails. The story is peppered with a few all-too-predictable cliches – the bad seed child, the doting mother trying to understand, the house with obvious secrets within its walls – and, as a result, the first half feels more derivative than it does original. While the work is good, it’s set-up is all too familiar to generate any real steam. However, the film takes a welcome turn in the second half that raises the stakes while cleverly tightening the narrative around a single character – Dora, the mother – and then the film becomes something pretty special.
(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 product packaging:
“Dora moves back into her old family home with her husband, Bruno, and Marco, her son from her previous marriage. But domestic bliss proves elusive as numerous strange and disturbing occurrences transpire, while Dora is haunted by a series of nightmares and hallucinations, many of them involving her dead former husband. Is the house itself possessed? Or does Dora’s increasingly fragile grip on reality originate from somewhere far closer to home?”
We’ve all heard something in the darkness that’s made us question whether or not we’re alone, and Dora (played by the lovely Daria Nicolodi) is no different. But her situation might be considerably worse: her first husband committed suicide and left her widowed with an infant. Struggling to bring peace to her world brought on a nervous breakdown (of sorts). Years later, she’s finally found peace – and a new love – and, together, this new family has returned to house where it all came crashing down. As they’re all about to learn, nothing left behind is quite as peaceful as it would seem.
Any reasonable person might question why Dora would return to a place that caused her such heartache – I know I found it a bit confusing – and, if you’re patient, you’ll have that answer all in good time. Bava directs the script from his son, Lamberto Bava, and screenwriters Gianfranco Barberi and Alessandro Parenzo; and the trick to truly appreciating what the group accomplishes here is patience … all will be revealed when the time is right. The laconic tempo of the first half does viewers no favors; the real meat of this meal is a main course fit for a king, and that comes in the second half.
My issue with them is that, conventionally, I’m not all that frightened by the usual visual trickery. A door creeping open by itself or a chair sliding across the floor by unseen forces is interesting to watch, but these scenes do very little to draw me into the meat of the story. Scare tactics – while fun – pull me out of the experience instead of drawing me inside the world. What I appreciate more are character moments properly balanced with the ghostly tinkering of poltergeists. These are moments that make me think about the veil between worlds, how and why it gets tugged away, and those tickle my fancy in ways I can’t describe. Suffice it to say, the best spectral shenanigans are those that shock me awake, not those that make me jump in my seat.
That’s a big bill, and it doesn’t happen all that often.
Mario Bava’s Shock gets it right more often than it fails. The story is peppered with a few all-too-predictable cliches – the bad seed child, the doting mother trying to understand, the house with obvious secrets within its walls – and, as a result, the first half feels more derivative than it does original. While the work is good, it’s set-up is all too familiar to generate any real steam. However, the film takes a welcome turn in the second half that raises the stakes while cleverly tightening the narrative around a single character – Dora, the mother – and then the film becomes something pretty special.
(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 product packaging:
“Dora moves back into her old family home with her husband, Bruno, and Marco, her son from her previous marriage. But domestic bliss proves elusive as numerous strange and disturbing occurrences transpire, while Dora is haunted by a series of nightmares and hallucinations, many of them involving her dead former husband. Is the house itself possessed? Or does Dora’s increasingly fragile grip on reality originate from somewhere far closer to home?”
We’ve all heard something in the darkness that’s made us question whether or not we’re alone, and Dora (played by the lovely Daria Nicolodi) is no different. But her situation might be considerably worse: her first husband committed suicide and left her widowed with an infant. Struggling to bring peace to her world brought on a nervous breakdown (of sorts). Years later, she’s finally found peace – and a new love – and, together, this new family has returned to house where it all came crashing down. As they’re all about to learn, nothing left behind is quite as peaceful as it would seem.
Any reasonable person might question why Dora would return to a place that caused her such heartache – I know I found it a bit confusing – and, if you’re patient, you’ll have that answer all in good time. Bava directs the script from his son, Lamberto Bava, and screenwriters Gianfranco Barberi and Alessandro Parenzo; and the trick to truly appreciating what the group accomplishes here is patience … all will be revealed when the time is right. The laconic tempo of the first half does viewers no favors; the real meat of this meal is a main course fit for a king, and that comes in the second half.
Still, Shock is sprinkled with some nice moments wherein the audience isn’t quite sure what to think. Young son Marco (David Colin, Jr.) appears to have an imaginary friend who might be behind the turn of events, but he’s also more than a bit disturbed in other ways, namely a bit of an Oedipal complex that has him seeking out his mother’s affections in inappropriate ways. Once she spurns his childish advances, it begins to look as if he might be possessed by some dark spirit. Did she cause this, or are there other forces at work? As the tale wears on, it becomes increasingly clear that there’s far more at play than the set-up would have one believe; and this turn of the screw elevates the feature to great heights once Dora gets the close-up she so much deserves.
And that’s the genius of a tautly constructed tale: we’re all allowed to think what we may with Bava’s presentation. He reminds us just often enough that Dora’s mind was broken and rebuilt by therapy and drugs. (She’s secretly being medicated by Bruno, her new husband, and could those drugs be the secret source of these illusions?) Giving her character the benefit of the doubt, she might be telling us the truth as we see much of what transpires through her eyes, or she might be misdirecting us through the skills of a learned director. A handful of scenes are handled with a nebulousness that might even have audiences questioning a secondary character or two; just about the time you think you know what’s happened you realize Bava and company went right when you turned left, and none’s the wiser for it.
Still, keep watching until the very last scene. Otherwise, you might miss what really happened. If we ever really know at all …
Also, as creepy kids go, young David does a pretty masterful job handling the highs and lows of the emotionally and spiritually disturbed Marco. Is he of his own mind, or has someone taken control? He vacillates between moments of childlike wholesomeness and the possibly villainously-possessed the way he should. While he never quite conveys a sense of pure evil, it becomes clear that he’s calculating what to do next with a fair amount of guidance. But how many of his dark deeds were at a spirit’s request? Did he climb on top of his mother on the lawn because of someone else’s sexual yearnings, or was it his own misguided hormones? Did he spy her naked body in the shower at a spirit’s urging, or was that his secret wish? Did he disfigure mom’s underwear because a ghost encouraged him to do it, or was that his idea? The film toys with eroticism perhaps the way a young boy would – part taboo, part innocence – thus amping up the audience’s curiosity with what really is going on in the home’s darkest corners.
You never quite know – Bava never passes judgment – and this element of uncertainty definitely puts Shock a cut above other haunts I’ve enjoyed.
Shock (1977) was produced by Laser Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being handled by the reliable Arrow Video. As for the technical specifications? The packaging reports that this is a brand new 2K restoration, and it looks and sounds spectacular. As for the special features? Arrow never disappoints, and the Blu-ray includes an all-new audio commentary, visual essays, some interviews, behind-the-scenes stuff, and an internal collector’s booklet with a critical essay exploring Bava’s storied career.
Highly recommended. Shock is a very slow burn. In fact, I didn’t much care for it around its midpoint. However, as the second half unspooled, I began to realize that there was far more going on here than director Mario Bava let on initially. (A tightening up on the first half – even if only trimming a few minutes – would make for greater balance.) As the story wore on, I realized I had more and more questions about Dora’s background, intentions, and motivations … so much so that I kept guessing all the way until the last scene to know with certainty what I had just watched. And yes … you won’t know until the very last scene.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Video provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Shock (1977) 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
And that’s the genius of a tautly constructed tale: we’re all allowed to think what we may with Bava’s presentation. He reminds us just often enough that Dora’s mind was broken and rebuilt by therapy and drugs. (She’s secretly being medicated by Bruno, her new husband, and could those drugs be the secret source of these illusions?) Giving her character the benefit of the doubt, she might be telling us the truth as we see much of what transpires through her eyes, or she might be misdirecting us through the skills of a learned director. A handful of scenes are handled with a nebulousness that might even have audiences questioning a secondary character or two; just about the time you think you know what’s happened you realize Bava and company went right when you turned left, and none’s the wiser for it.
Still, keep watching until the very last scene. Otherwise, you might miss what really happened. If we ever really know at all …
Also, as creepy kids go, young David does a pretty masterful job handling the highs and lows of the emotionally and spiritually disturbed Marco. Is he of his own mind, or has someone taken control? He vacillates between moments of childlike wholesomeness and the possibly villainously-possessed the way he should. While he never quite conveys a sense of pure evil, it becomes clear that he’s calculating what to do next with a fair amount of guidance. But how many of his dark deeds were at a spirit’s request? Did he climb on top of his mother on the lawn because of someone else’s sexual yearnings, or was it his own misguided hormones? Did he spy her naked body in the shower at a spirit’s urging, or was that his secret wish? Did he disfigure mom’s underwear because a ghost encouraged him to do it, or was that his idea? The film toys with eroticism perhaps the way a young boy would – part taboo, part innocence – thus amping up the audience’s curiosity with what really is going on in the home’s darkest corners.
You never quite know – Bava never passes judgment – and this element of uncertainty definitely puts Shock a cut above other haunts I’ve enjoyed.
Shock (1977) was produced by Laser Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being handled by the reliable Arrow Video. As for the technical specifications? The packaging reports that this is a brand new 2K restoration, and it looks and sounds spectacular. As for the special features? Arrow never disappoints, and the Blu-ray includes an all-new audio commentary, visual essays, some interviews, behind-the-scenes stuff, and an internal collector’s booklet with a critical essay exploring Bava’s storied career.
Highly recommended. Shock is a very slow burn. In fact, I didn’t much care for it around its midpoint. However, as the second half unspooled, I began to realize that there was far more going on here than director Mario Bava let on initially. (A tightening up on the first half – even if only trimming a few minutes – would make for greater balance.) As the story wore on, I realized I had more and more questions about Dora’s background, intentions, and motivations … so much so that I kept guessing all the way until the last scene to know with certainty what I had just watched. And yes … you won’t know until the very last scene.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Video provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Shock (1977) 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
Since his silver screen debut in 1987, RoboCop has been an unstoppable force.
That first flick -- that hyper-violent satire on American culture and crime -- blasted its way into our collective consciousness and very quickly became a part of pop culture worldwide. Just like Alex Murphy found new life, the franchise has toiled on and on and on -- mostly to the delight of fans, though there have been some grimaces, too: to date, there have been two theatrical sequels, a television series, an animated series, a televised miniseries, and a big screen reboot. Think what you will, creep, but this peacemaker refuses to retire.
Alas, the 1994 TV series never quite achieved breakout status. Honestly, I couldn't even tell you where it aired in the U.S., though I suspect it was probably a syndicated program. While I've seen an episode of two that have been uploaded to YouTube.com, I wasn't all that enamored with the property: the violence was (obviously) heavily toned down to make it palatable for broadcast, and -- for all intents and purposes -- it kinda/sorta ignored any existing RoboCop mythology largely in favor of being its own entity. (There's nothing wrong with that, and I'm offering it only as an observation.) In any event, it came and went in a single season. A subsequent home video release has grown exceedingly rare and correspondingly expensive: those of us who'd rather enjoy a show on DVD aren't all that interested in selling a kidney to purchase a complete unblemished set ... and now we won't have to.
Yesterday, I noticed on Bluray.com a posting for RoboCop: The Series. The announcement confirmed that Liberation Hall (an outlet I'm entirely unfamiliar with) was prepping an all-new collection for the retail market this May, 2022. There are even a few extras promised, so I'm going to do the good thing and copy and paste below for interested readers. I've done a scan of the Information Superhighway, and I do not see it up for pre-order yet ... so hold your horses. You can sign up for a pre-order alert from Bluray.com, though, so if that's your desire then make it happen.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
That first flick -- that hyper-violent satire on American culture and crime -- blasted its way into our collective consciousness and very quickly became a part of pop culture worldwide. Just like Alex Murphy found new life, the franchise has toiled on and on and on -- mostly to the delight of fans, though there have been some grimaces, too: to date, there have been two theatrical sequels, a television series, an animated series, a televised miniseries, and a big screen reboot. Think what you will, creep, but this peacemaker refuses to retire.
Alas, the 1994 TV series never quite achieved breakout status. Honestly, I couldn't even tell you where it aired in the U.S., though I suspect it was probably a syndicated program. While I've seen an episode of two that have been uploaded to YouTube.com, I wasn't all that enamored with the property: the violence was (obviously) heavily toned down to make it palatable for broadcast, and -- for all intents and purposes -- it kinda/sorta ignored any existing RoboCop mythology largely in favor of being its own entity. (There's nothing wrong with that, and I'm offering it only as an observation.) In any event, it came and went in a single season. A subsequent home video release has grown exceedingly rare and correspondingly expensive: those of us who'd rather enjoy a show on DVD aren't all that interested in selling a kidney to purchase a complete unblemished set ... and now we won't have to.
Yesterday, I noticed on Bluray.com a posting for RoboCop: The Series. The announcement confirmed that Liberation Hall (an outlet I'm entirely unfamiliar with) was prepping an all-new collection for the retail market this May, 2022. There are even a few extras promised, so I'm going to do the good thing and copy and paste below for interested readers. I've done a scan of the Information Superhighway, and I do not see it up for pre-order yet ... so hold your horses. You can sign up for a pre-order alert from Bluray.com, though, so if that's your desire then make it happen.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
Liberation Hall plans to bring to Blu-ray RoboCop: The Series, starring Richard Eden, Yvette Nipar, Blu Mankuma, Andrea Roth, and David Gardner. Currently, the five-disc box set is expected to arrive on the market on May 10.
Description: Cyberpunk TV series based on the RoboCop franchise made to appeal primarily to a younger demographic. It lacks the graphic violence of the original RoboCop films.
The TV series ignores the events of the sequels and many character names are changed from the movie series. The RoboCop character has several non-lethal alternatives to killing criminals, which ensures that certain villains can be recurring. The OCP Chairman and his corporation are treated simply as naïve and ignorant, in contrast to their malicious and immoral behavior from the second film onward.
Special Features and Technical Specs:
Description: Cyberpunk TV series based on the RoboCop franchise made to appeal primarily to a younger demographic. It lacks the graphic violence of the original RoboCop films.
The TV series ignores the events of the sequels and many character names are changed from the movie series. The RoboCop character has several non-lethal alternatives to killing criminals, which ensures that certain villains can be recurring. The OCP Chairman and his corporation are treated simply as naïve and ignorant, in contrast to their malicious and immoral behavior from the second film onward.
Special Features and Technical Specs:
- NEWLY REMASTERED
- Behind The Scenes Featurette
- Toy Commercial
- Photo Gallery
- Cast Profiles (Richard Eden, Lisa Madigan, Andrea Roth, Sarah Campbell, & David Gardner)
- From Cinema to the Small Screen
- The Future of Law Enforcement: The History of RoboCop
- Fun Facts & Info
- Put Down Your Weapon: The Auto 9 Gun
- The Car
- The Suit
- Published on
On occasion, I do so love sitting back and ‘watching’ fanboy reactions.
We’re an intense lot, aren’t we? Certainly, I understand all too well how seriously we take our respective fascinations, and I can appreciate how – from time-to-time – we will take to the World Wide Web to voice our displeasure over the direction of a particular property, show, or franchise. We’ll bitch. We’ll gripe. We’ll moan. It all comes from the heart – where passion resides – and even though we might bend a bit too deeply into the deep end of the pool, I honestly do believe it’s an activity we undertake because we care. Besides, restraint has never been a strength of the human race.
Unlike so many who write about entertainment, I generally don’t see anything wrong with it. Sure, it can go overboard and get a bit destructive if not either controlled or moderated but living in a world where free speech is tolerated means that we have to take the good with the bad (and the ugly). There’s plenty of blame to go around – if that’s your thing – and while I may not agree with your opinion of a program I’ll always appreciate your right to sound off. That’s just who I am.
So I went into this week’s installment of The Book Of Boba Fett after having read a rather vicious thread tearing “The Streets Of Mos Espa” into tiny little pieces. There wasn’t a single unifying focus of this – erm – let’s call it ‘hate,’ but quite a bit of it centered around a group of youngsters inducted into Fett’s new Tatooine ‘gang.’ This lot of droid-enhanced gangbangers all truck around the desert world on – yes, yes, and yes – the ugliest collection of floating mopeds quite possibly conceived in Fantasy.
See there, peeps? I’m agreeing with you. Those speeder bikes were ugly.
Yes, I’ll even concede that they were a bizarre creative choice, and I don’t know who thought they were a good idea. (Favreau? Are you listening? Filoni? Are you asleep?) They look nothing like any other speeders we’ve seen in the entire Star Wars universe (no, I disagree with those who insisted the streets and skies of Coruscant had similar color schemes), and – from a narrative standpoint – they make little sense. Gangs seek commonality amongst their members, but this group apparently think individuality and bright shiny colors that clash are the way to go. Why, it’s their own violent little rainbow. How quaint.
Yes, yes, and yes (again). It was a bad decision.
Also, they were a bit young for my tastes.
Given that The Book Of Boba Fett appears somewhat intent on demystifying the ‘legend’ that longtime Star Wars fans have always ascribed to the bounty hunter, perhaps Fett’s conscripting local youth into his posse shouldn’t come as a surprise. The show’s first chapter took the man to a lowly place, indeed (robbed by Jawas, enslaved to the Tusken Raiders); but the second chapter somewhat restored fandom’s expectations when it delivered big moments we’d been expecting all along. If anything, the man is proving a measure of unpredictability, and that trait alone can make for an exciting experience. I’m just hoping Chapter Four doesn’t have the singular sensation and Fennec Shand decided to pack it all up, get hitched, and raise a few younglings of their own. That’ll be a bridge too far.
My wife is no slouch when it comes to Star Wars. She may not be the Jedi Master I consider myself to be, but she knows the difference between a Bantha and a Tauntaun … and that’s something. We watch these Disney streaming properties together, and it’s one of our shared interests. When these kids rumbled onto the small screen in the Mos Espa city square, it was a scene that even brought her to laughter. She immediately suggested that these new characters looked more like Power Rangers than deadly threats to Jabba’s rogue’s gallery.
As the episode unspooled, it did get a bit better as these street rats were given something to do other than look tough on their shiny mopeds. By the finish, they had proven themselves as capable henchmen, though not much more than that. Here’s hoping that they’re granted a bit more dimension in whatever remains of this season; otherwise, Tatooine is looking like ‘slim pickings’ for the new criminal underworld under Fett’s charge.
-- EZ
We’re an intense lot, aren’t we? Certainly, I understand all too well how seriously we take our respective fascinations, and I can appreciate how – from time-to-time – we will take to the World Wide Web to voice our displeasure over the direction of a particular property, show, or franchise. We’ll bitch. We’ll gripe. We’ll moan. It all comes from the heart – where passion resides – and even though we might bend a bit too deeply into the deep end of the pool, I honestly do believe it’s an activity we undertake because we care. Besides, restraint has never been a strength of the human race.
Unlike so many who write about entertainment, I generally don’t see anything wrong with it. Sure, it can go overboard and get a bit destructive if not either controlled or moderated but living in a world where free speech is tolerated means that we have to take the good with the bad (and the ugly). There’s plenty of blame to go around – if that’s your thing – and while I may not agree with your opinion of a program I’ll always appreciate your right to sound off. That’s just who I am.
So I went into this week’s installment of The Book Of Boba Fett after having read a rather vicious thread tearing “The Streets Of Mos Espa” into tiny little pieces. There wasn’t a single unifying focus of this – erm – let’s call it ‘hate,’ but quite a bit of it centered around a group of youngsters inducted into Fett’s new Tatooine ‘gang.’ This lot of droid-enhanced gangbangers all truck around the desert world on – yes, yes, and yes – the ugliest collection of floating mopeds quite possibly conceived in Fantasy.
See there, peeps? I’m agreeing with you. Those speeder bikes were ugly.
Yes, I’ll even concede that they were a bizarre creative choice, and I don’t know who thought they were a good idea. (Favreau? Are you listening? Filoni? Are you asleep?) They look nothing like any other speeders we’ve seen in the entire Star Wars universe (no, I disagree with those who insisted the streets and skies of Coruscant had similar color schemes), and – from a narrative standpoint – they make little sense. Gangs seek commonality amongst their members, but this group apparently think individuality and bright shiny colors that clash are the way to go. Why, it’s their own violent little rainbow. How quaint.
Yes, yes, and yes (again). It was a bad decision.
Also, they were a bit young for my tastes.
Given that The Book Of Boba Fett appears somewhat intent on demystifying the ‘legend’ that longtime Star Wars fans have always ascribed to the bounty hunter, perhaps Fett’s conscripting local youth into his posse shouldn’t come as a surprise. The show’s first chapter took the man to a lowly place, indeed (robbed by Jawas, enslaved to the Tusken Raiders); but the second chapter somewhat restored fandom’s expectations when it delivered big moments we’d been expecting all along. If anything, the man is proving a measure of unpredictability, and that trait alone can make for an exciting experience. I’m just hoping Chapter Four doesn’t have the singular sensation and Fennec Shand decided to pack it all up, get hitched, and raise a few younglings of their own. That’ll be a bridge too far.
My wife is no slouch when it comes to Star Wars. She may not be the Jedi Master I consider myself to be, but she knows the difference between a Bantha and a Tauntaun … and that’s something. We watch these Disney streaming properties together, and it’s one of our shared interests. When these kids rumbled onto the small screen in the Mos Espa city square, it was a scene that even brought her to laughter. She immediately suggested that these new characters looked more like Power Rangers than deadly threats to Jabba’s rogue’s gallery.
As the episode unspooled, it did get a bit better as these street rats were given something to do other than look tough on their shiny mopeds. By the finish, they had proven themselves as capable henchmen, though not much more than that. Here’s hoping that they’re granted a bit more dimension in whatever remains of this season; otherwise, Tatooine is looking like ‘slim pickings’ for the new criminal underworld under Fett’s charge.
-- EZ