- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2019 (in the Czech Republic), audiences in attendance of the Flash Film Festival were treated to the exclusive theatrical debut of Coma. Written (in part) and directed by Nikita Argunov, the film starred Rinal Mukhametov, Lyubov Aksyonova, Anton Pampushnyy, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"After a mysterious accident, a young architect comes back to his senses in a very odd world. He must find out the exact laws and regulations of it while he fights for his life and keeps looking for an exit to the real world."
-- EZ
On this day in 2019 (in the Czech Republic), audiences in attendance of the Flash Film Festival were treated to the exclusive theatrical debut of Coma. Written (in part) and directed by Nikita Argunov, the film starred Rinal Mukhametov, Lyubov Aksyonova, Anton Pampushnyy, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"After a mysterious accident, a young architect comes back to his senses in a very odd world. He must find out the exact laws and regulations of it while he fights for his life and keeps looking for an exit to the real world."
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 1993 (in the U.S.), the Addams Family returned to the silver screen with the theatrical release of Addams Family Values. Directed by Barry Sonnenfeld from a script by Charles Addams and Paul Rudnick, the film starred Anjelica Huston, Raul Julia, Christopher Lloyd, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"The Addams Family try to rescue their beloved Uncle Fester from his gold-digging new love, a black widow named Debbie."
For the record:
-- EZ
On this day in 1993 (in the U.S.), the Addams Family returned to the silver screen with the theatrical release of Addams Family Values. Directed by Barry Sonnenfeld from a script by Charles Addams and Paul Rudnick, the film starred Anjelica Huston, Raul Julia, Christopher Lloyd, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"The Addams Family try to rescue their beloved Uncle Fester from his gold-digging new love, a black widow named Debbie."
For the record:
- At the 1994 Academy Awards, the film received a nomination in the category of 'Best Art Direction - Set Decoration.'
- At the 1994 Saturn Awards, the film received an incredible seven nominations across a variety of categories; but -- at the end of the evening -- only 'Best Make-Up' went home with the big trophy.
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2022 (in a whole host of countries around the world), the Walt Disney Company sadly buried Disenchanted -- a sequel to its wildly popular Enchanted (2007) -- on its ill-conceived streaming platform, Disney+. Directed by Adam Shankman from a screenplay by Brigitte Hales, the film starred Amy Adams, Patrick Dempsey, Maya Rudolph, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Fifteen years after her happily ever after, Giselle questions her happiness, inadvertently turning the lives of those in the real world and Andalasia upside down in the process."
-- EZ
On this day in 2022 (in a whole host of countries around the world), the Walt Disney Company sadly buried Disenchanted -- a sequel to its wildly popular Enchanted (2007) -- on its ill-conceived streaming platform, Disney+. Directed by Adam Shankman from a screenplay by Brigitte Hales, the film starred Amy Adams, Patrick Dempsey, Maya Rudolph, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Fifteen years after her happily ever after, Giselle questions her happiness, inadvertently turning the lives of those in the real world and Andalasia upside down in the process."
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2021 (in Germany), the holidays came early with the theatrical release of A Boy Called Christmas. Written (in part) and directed by Gil Kenan, the film starred Maggie Smith, Isabella O'Sullivan, Joel Fry, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"In this origin story of Father Christmas, an ordinary boy--with a loyal pet mouse and a reindeer at his side--sets out on an extraordinary adventure to find his father, who is on a quest to discover the fabled village of Elfhelm."
-- EZ
On this day in 2021 (in Germany), the holidays came early with the theatrical release of A Boy Called Christmas. Written (in part) and directed by Gil Kenan, the film starred Maggie Smith, Isabella O'Sullivan, Joel Fry, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"In this origin story of Father Christmas, an ordinary boy--with a loyal pet mouse and a reindeer at his side--sets out on an extraordinary adventure to find his father, who is on a quest to discover the fabled village of Elfhelm."
-- EZ
- Published on
(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:
“Astronauts, and their robotic dog AMEE (Autonomous Mapping Evaluation and Evasion), search for solutions to save a dying Earth by searching on Mars, only to have the mission go terribly awry.”
Surprisingly, I’ve seen Red Planet (2000) more times than any one person should ever need.
Now, don’t take that as an assessment of its quality because – in all honesty – this little picture is occasionally a bit of mess. The script attributed to Chuck Parrer and Jonathan Lemkin never quite figured out what it wanted to be, sometimes feeling like a homegrown space adventure where Artificial Intelligence – not unlike The Terminator – has found us inferior and sets out to rule the Martian roost. Still, in other spots, Planet tries very hard to be that ubiquitous SciFi/Romance – a rarity if ever there were – where two star-crossed souls find themselves against the backdrop of space exploration. But the sad thing is that there are even more places wherein this 100+ minute morality play has all the makings of an episode of the classic Star Trek, albeit one where not every member of the crew makes it out alive.
The difficulty is presenting a story with so accommodating an aesthetic is that audiences tend to gravitate more strongly toward a cohesive whole they can either identify with or – minimally – understand the plain stakes. It’s for this reason that I’ve spent so much time with Red Planet: I wanted desperately to understand why it didn’t coalesce around a central narrative, so I sat through it (on DVD over the years) a few times. Thankfully, this isn’t the only project I’ve done this with, but it is one whose central shortcomings still elude me to this day. And, yes, that’s frustrating.
Essentially, Planet starts out with the standard Hollywood trope: in the near future, we’ve pretty much destroyed Earth and need to establish colonies elsewhere, the most obvious planet of which would be Mars. For reasons these future scientists don’t understand, our terraforming efforts from afar have broken down, mustering up the need to send a ship and a crew to the world to investigate. Space – being forever an inhospitable host – throws several monkey wrenches into the mix once the crew arrives, forcing the specialists into a somewhat ‘crashed landing’ situation while the brave female captain Bowman (played by Carrie-Anne Moss) stays in orbit trying to repair their craft’s damage for the return voyage. On the surface below, the men – Chantilas (Terence Stamp), Santen (Benjamin Bratt), Pettengil (Simon Baker), Burchenal (Tom Sizemore), and Gallagher (Val Kilmer) – succumb to differing threats one-by-one, leaving them in a race for survival against the elements and a murderous robot gone haywire owed to no fault of their own.
Now, I’ve spent a bit of time with this new release from Arrow Films – one of the best distributors in the business – in hopes of uncovering some glint of information to help me better grasp why the flick has never quite worked for me. The only thing that I came across – which was really more an affirmation of things I already knew to a small degree – was that some elements of Planet’s final story kinda/sorta emerged while it was actually in production. For those of you who didn’t know this, it was an effort heavily plagued by – shall we say? – cast disagreements, arguments so heated that both Kilmer and Sizemore refused to appear on set together at any time. (I’ve even read that restraining orders were taken out on each other, but I’ve never seen that substantiated.) If you’ve seen Planet, then you realize what difficulties this created as their two characters – and their planet-bound friendship – arguably carry the second half of the picture.
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Astronauts, and their robotic dog AMEE (Autonomous Mapping Evaluation and Evasion), search for solutions to save a dying Earth by searching on Mars, only to have the mission go terribly awry.”
Surprisingly, I’ve seen Red Planet (2000) more times than any one person should ever need.
Now, don’t take that as an assessment of its quality because – in all honesty – this little picture is occasionally a bit of mess. The script attributed to Chuck Parrer and Jonathan Lemkin never quite figured out what it wanted to be, sometimes feeling like a homegrown space adventure where Artificial Intelligence – not unlike The Terminator – has found us inferior and sets out to rule the Martian roost. Still, in other spots, Planet tries very hard to be that ubiquitous SciFi/Romance – a rarity if ever there were – where two star-crossed souls find themselves against the backdrop of space exploration. But the sad thing is that there are even more places wherein this 100+ minute morality play has all the makings of an episode of the classic Star Trek, albeit one where not every member of the crew makes it out alive.
The difficulty is presenting a story with so accommodating an aesthetic is that audiences tend to gravitate more strongly toward a cohesive whole they can either identify with or – minimally – understand the plain stakes. It’s for this reason that I’ve spent so much time with Red Planet: I wanted desperately to understand why it didn’t coalesce around a central narrative, so I sat through it (on DVD over the years) a few times. Thankfully, this isn’t the only project I’ve done this with, but it is one whose central shortcomings still elude me to this day. And, yes, that’s frustrating.
Essentially, Planet starts out with the standard Hollywood trope: in the near future, we’ve pretty much destroyed Earth and need to establish colonies elsewhere, the most obvious planet of which would be Mars. For reasons these future scientists don’t understand, our terraforming efforts from afar have broken down, mustering up the need to send a ship and a crew to the world to investigate. Space – being forever an inhospitable host – throws several monkey wrenches into the mix once the crew arrives, forcing the specialists into a somewhat ‘crashed landing’ situation while the brave female captain Bowman (played by Carrie-Anne Moss) stays in orbit trying to repair their craft’s damage for the return voyage. On the surface below, the men – Chantilas (Terence Stamp), Santen (Benjamin Bratt), Pettengil (Simon Baker), Burchenal (Tom Sizemore), and Gallagher (Val Kilmer) – succumb to differing threats one-by-one, leaving them in a race for survival against the elements and a murderous robot gone haywire owed to no fault of their own.
Now, I’ve spent a bit of time with this new release from Arrow Films – one of the best distributors in the business – in hopes of uncovering some glint of information to help me better grasp why the flick has never quite worked for me. The only thing that I came across – which was really more an affirmation of things I already knew to a small degree – was that some elements of Planet’s final story kinda/sorta emerged while it was actually in production. For those of you who didn’t know this, it was an effort heavily plagued by – shall we say? – cast disagreements, arguments so heated that both Kilmer and Sizemore refused to appear on set together at any time. (I’ve even read that restraining orders were taken out on each other, but I’ve never seen that substantiated.) If you’ve seen Planet, then you realize what difficulties this created as their two characters – and their planet-bound friendship – arguably carry the second half of the picture.
In his interview available on the Arrow Films’ release, special effects supervisor Jeffrey A. Okun details the extent to which the Kilmer/Sizemore feud derailed the production. The man also highlights precisely how some digital challenges were resolved on the set; and he expands upon the lengths to which he had address a good number of these creative issues on the fly. To the man’s credit, his work rather seamlessly pulled a lot of these loose ends together – so much so that I suspect the majority of the audience was properly fooled – but because his account also clarifies that some trickery had to be resolved whilst the feature was actively being shot, there is the lingering suggestion that some elements were changed so that producers could stay under budget.
Of course, I’ve absolutely no way to know today precisely how much of this imaginative problem solving ultimately effected the end product; but – as a reasonable person – I’m willing to venture a guess that it did require significant course corrections. Planet always felt to me like there were – for lack of a better phrase – band-aids applied to cover up the scars here and there because there was no way to halt production entirely and let the healing begin. No development moves organically from one to the next; and – thematically – the finished product feels very much like it was pasted together more out of necessity than anything else. As a consequence, Moss’ voiceovers – while interesting – only serve to frame a rather impromptu romance between her and her subordinate, never quite justifying the reason for their attraction except that … well … she’s hot and so is he.
I don’t often do this, but I think Planet could’ve been better received had this actually been a Star Trek-style fable. Imagine that some Earth corporation or institution in the distant future had set about the business of locating suitable worlds of expansion (someplace vastly further out than merely Mars); and – just like happens in the existing script – that science mysteriously fails. Necessarily, a captain and crew would’ve been dispatched to investigate, only to uncover some new menace or emerging science forcing mankind to rethink its place in the cosmos while racing against the clock to get out alive. While that thing has been done before, it generally interests ticket-buyers when it’s done right; and such a simple change could’ve been the foundation for a new SciFi franchise.
Red Planet (2000) was produced by Warner Bros., Village Roadshow Pictures, NPV Entertainment, The Canton Company, Mars Production Pty. Ltd., and Zaman Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Arrow Films. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, wow. Seriously, Planet was always a pretty good-looking film technically, but this 4K upgrade both looks and sounds incredible. While the space fire sequences are still a bit underwhelming (they’re just so obviously CGI), Okun and his team truly put the lion’s share of their budget to excellent use throughout, as did the costume and set designers. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Finally, Planet is getting its due, and Arrow has produced some interviews, a visual essay, and some deleted scenes (nothing revelatory) to give fans something worthy of the investment.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended except if you’re considering the upgrade because this is definitely worth the purchase.
While some might suggest that there are a myriad of small problems that keep a flick like Red Planet (2000) from truly achieving anything significant, I tend to chalk its general failure to being a film that didn’t know what it wanted to be. Part space adventure, part psychological drama, and part morality tale, it isn’t quite Star Trek enough to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with that franchise; and yet it shares some of the same storytelling DNA which suggests perhaps that was a better way forward. That and a whole lot of bad press in the industry trades portend that maybe this little film was never ever going to go boldly where no one had gone before, and instead it sits where it is – on our big blue marble – waiting to be discovered and appreciated for what it is … which is pretty forgettable.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Films provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray copy of Red Planet (2000) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
Of course, I’ve absolutely no way to know today precisely how much of this imaginative problem solving ultimately effected the end product; but – as a reasonable person – I’m willing to venture a guess that it did require significant course corrections. Planet always felt to me like there were – for lack of a better phrase – band-aids applied to cover up the scars here and there because there was no way to halt production entirely and let the healing begin. No development moves organically from one to the next; and – thematically – the finished product feels very much like it was pasted together more out of necessity than anything else. As a consequence, Moss’ voiceovers – while interesting – only serve to frame a rather impromptu romance between her and her subordinate, never quite justifying the reason for their attraction except that … well … she’s hot and so is he.
I don’t often do this, but I think Planet could’ve been better received had this actually been a Star Trek-style fable. Imagine that some Earth corporation or institution in the distant future had set about the business of locating suitable worlds of expansion (someplace vastly further out than merely Mars); and – just like happens in the existing script – that science mysteriously fails. Necessarily, a captain and crew would’ve been dispatched to investigate, only to uncover some new menace or emerging science forcing mankind to rethink its place in the cosmos while racing against the clock to get out alive. While that thing has been done before, it generally interests ticket-buyers when it’s done right; and such a simple change could’ve been the foundation for a new SciFi franchise.
Red Planet (2000) was produced by Warner Bros., Village Roadshow Pictures, NPV Entertainment, The Canton Company, Mars Production Pty. Ltd., and Zaman Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Arrow Films. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, wow. Seriously, Planet was always a pretty good-looking film technically, but this 4K upgrade both looks and sounds incredible. While the space fire sequences are still a bit underwhelming (they’re just so obviously CGI), Okun and his team truly put the lion’s share of their budget to excellent use throughout, as did the costume and set designers. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Finally, Planet is getting its due, and Arrow has produced some interviews, a visual essay, and some deleted scenes (nothing revelatory) to give fans something worthy of the investment.
Alas … only Mildly Recommended except if you’re considering the upgrade because this is definitely worth the purchase.
While some might suggest that there are a myriad of small problems that keep a flick like Red Planet (2000) from truly achieving anything significant, I tend to chalk its general failure to being a film that didn’t know what it wanted to be. Part space adventure, part psychological drama, and part morality tale, it isn’t quite Star Trek enough to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with that franchise; and yet it shares some of the same storytelling DNA which suggests perhaps that was a better way forward. That and a whole lot of bad press in the industry trades portend that maybe this little film was never ever going to go boldly where no one had gone before, and instead it sits where it is – on our big blue marble – waiting to be discovered and appreciated for what it is … which is pretty forgettable.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arrow Films provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray copy of Red Planet (2000) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2015 (in the U.S.), audiences in attendance of the Housecore Horror Film Festival were treated to the theatrical launch of When Black Birds Fly. Written and directed by Jimmy ScreamerClauz, the animated film featured the voice talents of J.D. Brown, Brandon Slagle, Devanny Pinn, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A charismatic leader named Caine demands obedience from the citizens of a town named "Heaven". The town is at peace until two children break his greatest rule: Never venture beyond the town's walls."
For the record:
To the film's credit, When Black Birds Fly earned a wee bit of praise from a screening on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
On this day in 2015 (in the U.S.), audiences in attendance of the Housecore Horror Film Festival were treated to the theatrical launch of When Black Birds Fly. Written and directed by Jimmy ScreamerClauz, the animated film featured the voice talents of J.D. Brown, Brandon Slagle, Devanny Pinn, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A charismatic leader named Caine demands obedience from the citizens of a town named "Heaven". The town is at peace until two children break his greatest rule: Never venture beyond the town's walls."
For the record:
To the film's credit, When Black Birds Fly earned a wee bit of praise from a screening on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2014 (in Italy), the laughs were a bit hard to come by -- as planned -- with the theatrical release of Clown. Written (in part) and directed by Jon Watts, the film starred Andy Powers, Laura Allen, Peter Stormare, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A loving father finds a clown suit for his son's birthday party, only to realize that it's cursed."
-- EZ
On this day in 2014 (in Italy), the laughs were a bit hard to come by -- as planned -- with the theatrical release of Clown. Written (in part) and directed by Jon Watts, the film starred Andy Powers, Laura Allen, Peter Stormare, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A loving father finds a clown suit for his son's birthday party, only to realize that it's cursed."
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2010 (in the U.S.), audiences in attendance of the Wanderings Film Festival were treated to the theatrical debut of Unaware. Written and directed (in part) by Sean Bardin, the film starred Heather McCormick in what appears to have been an entirely solo affair.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"In July 2010, a vacationing couple discovered something disturbing on a ranch in rural Texas. Armed with a home camcorder, they captured their experience on video."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Unaware earned a wee bit of praise from screenings on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
On this day in 2010 (in the U.S.), audiences in attendance of the Wanderings Film Festival were treated to the theatrical debut of Unaware. Written and directed (in part) by Sean Bardin, the film starred Heather McCormick in what appears to have been an entirely solo affair.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"In July 2010, a vacationing couple discovered something disturbing on a ranch in rural Texas. Armed with a home camcorder, they captured their experience on video."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Unaware earned a wee bit of praise from screenings on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
- Published on
(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:
“Near the end of WW2, prisoners of war are used in experiments to perfect the "Aryan" race.”
Mind you: I’m no prude.
In point of fact, I’ve watched a great deal of exploitation cinema, some of it by choice and others owed to being offered a new release via a distributor relationship. There’s a good number of titles that deserve a second look – both historically and critically – for if nothing else inspiring a trend and/or attempting to do some novel, creative, or thematic with its subject matter. This isn’t to say that exploitation – as a subset to several major genres – needs any kind of cultural overhaul: rather, it’s clarifying that – on some occasions – some talented storytellers and their associated talent did try to accomplish something greater than spilling blood, flashing breasts, and igniting the viewer’s deepest and darkest passions … for better or worse.
However, SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) just isn’t one of them.
Mirelle (played by Paola Corazzi) and a cadre of equally attractive women have been captured by the Nazis and hauled off to a secret concentration camp under command of Col. von Kleiben (Giorgio Cerioni). There, the colonel orders his men on break from the Eastern Front to participate in an array of sexual experiments meant to seek out and explore mating habits of the Aryan male. All of the research is under control of Dr. Renke (Patrizia Melega) and the somewhat reluctant Dr. Steiner (Attilio Dottesio), a Jewish refugee who has disguised himself as a German scientist. But von Kleiben hides a secret goal – one he has hidden away from prying eyes – which might just prove to be not only the death of him but also the end to this particular brand of Nazi terrorism!
Oy.
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Near the end of WW2, prisoners of war are used in experiments to perfect the "Aryan" race.”
Mind you: I’m no prude.
In point of fact, I’ve watched a great deal of exploitation cinema, some of it by choice and others owed to being offered a new release via a distributor relationship. There’s a good number of titles that deserve a second look – both historically and critically – for if nothing else inspiring a trend and/or attempting to do some novel, creative, or thematic with its subject matter. This isn’t to say that exploitation – as a subset to several major genres – needs any kind of cultural overhaul: rather, it’s clarifying that – on some occasions – some talented storytellers and their associated talent did try to accomplish something greater than spilling blood, flashing breasts, and igniting the viewer’s deepest and darkest passions … for better or worse.
However, SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) just isn’t one of them.
Mirelle (played by Paola Corazzi) and a cadre of equally attractive women have been captured by the Nazis and hauled off to a secret concentration camp under command of Col. von Kleiben (Giorgio Cerioni). There, the colonel orders his men on break from the Eastern Front to participate in an array of sexual experiments meant to seek out and explore mating habits of the Aryan male. All of the research is under control of Dr. Renke (Patrizia Melega) and the somewhat reluctant Dr. Steiner (Attilio Dottesio), a Jewish refugee who has disguised himself as a German scientist. But von Kleiben hides a secret goal – one he has hidden away from prying eyes – which might just prove to be not only the death of him but also the end to this particular brand of Nazi terrorism!
Oy.
Now, as I said, I’m no prude; and, yes, Love Camp wallowed for decades I’m learned with a controversial reception around the world (especially so in Great Britain). Censors in several European countries banned the flick’s release (back in its original release timeframe), a development that actually increased the film’s potential to become an underground fascination. Indeed, these Nazi bastards – dubbed ‘Nasties’ by some – do engage in a great deal of torment, all of which gets inflicted upon some lovely, naked subjects; and, yes, a fair amount of it turns out to be sexual degradation (i.e. rape and other non-consensual acts). Still, in fairness to writer/director Sergio Garrone, I found the vast majority of it very tame, especially by comparison to what I’ve watched elsewhere, which didn’t even rise to the level of censorship (though still deemed controversial content by many).
Perhaps a greater degree of scrutiny was applied to Love Camp because – to Garrone’s credit – the feature possesses the bare bones of a narrative story.
As fate would have it, the devious von Kleiben was neutered (quite literally) in his past when he tried to have his way with what I believe was a Jewish girl (she disguises her willingness to submit long enough to bite off his … erm … manhood); and he’s secretly conscripted Steiner to monitor the endless string of visiting soldiers for a libido replacement. Helmut (Mircha Carven) is assigned to the secret base for a few days, and – after careful examination – Steiner concludes that … erm … this unfortunate man’s testicles could be a suitable replacement. Since the soldier has fallen head-over-heels for his assigned mate Mirelle – who reciprocates because movie love is always ‘love at first site,’ even with a Nazi – the young man is happy to do all he can to stay near her. Little does he know that his inevitable sacrifice will make him entirely incapable of satisfying her carnal desires.
Garrone frames a fair portion of the action around these curious triangle, giving his audience minimally a chance to invest in these characters and their respective relationships. While it isn’t delivered with any great degree of theatrics, each talent does what he or she can with the material; and, thankfully, Helmut and Mirelle’s coupling is staged in such a way to suggest that their sex isn’t forceful nor degrading. Though they’re surrounded on all sides by assault and depravity, their spark is meant to be authentic, suggesting that sometimes even in madness some humanity might prevail. Sure, that’s a pretty hefty message for exploitation, but it’s there, nonetheless.
Of course, the problem lies in the fact that – ahem – none of these players are really all that gifted as Thespians, no insult intended. Second and third tier actors and actresses were drawn to such assignments, and stronger players were required to elevate even these slim pickings to the point wherein audiences might wish our young couple a chance to make it in the wide, wide world beyond this Socialist hellscape. Theirs is a love that wasn’t meant to be; and – as a consequence – it gets destroyed in glorious fashion before the end credits roll.
Perhaps a greater degree of scrutiny was applied to Love Camp because – to Garrone’s credit – the feature possesses the bare bones of a narrative story.
As fate would have it, the devious von Kleiben was neutered (quite literally) in his past when he tried to have his way with what I believe was a Jewish girl (she disguises her willingness to submit long enough to bite off his … erm … manhood); and he’s secretly conscripted Steiner to monitor the endless string of visiting soldiers for a libido replacement. Helmut (Mircha Carven) is assigned to the secret base for a few days, and – after careful examination – Steiner concludes that … erm … this unfortunate man’s testicles could be a suitable replacement. Since the soldier has fallen head-over-heels for his assigned mate Mirelle – who reciprocates because movie love is always ‘love at first site,’ even with a Nazi – the young man is happy to do all he can to stay near her. Little does he know that his inevitable sacrifice will make him entirely incapable of satisfying her carnal desires.
Garrone frames a fair portion of the action around these curious triangle, giving his audience minimally a chance to invest in these characters and their respective relationships. While it isn’t delivered with any great degree of theatrics, each talent does what he or she can with the material; and, thankfully, Helmut and Mirelle’s coupling is staged in such a way to suggest that their sex isn’t forceful nor degrading. Though they’re surrounded on all sides by assault and depravity, their spark is meant to be authentic, suggesting that sometimes even in madness some humanity might prevail. Sure, that’s a pretty hefty message for exploitation, but it’s there, nonetheless.
Of course, the problem lies in the fact that – ahem – none of these players are really all that gifted as Thespians, no insult intended. Second and third tier actors and actresses were drawn to such assignments, and stronger players were required to elevate even these slim pickings to the point wherein audiences might wish our young couple a chance to make it in the wide, wide world beyond this Socialist hellscape. Theirs is a love that wasn’t meant to be; and – as a consequence – it gets destroyed in glorious fashion before the end credits roll.
If you haven’t guessed it already, then let me spell out clearly that – even as exploitation goes – there’s vastly more entertaining stuff out there waiting for consumption; and Love Camp – even with its curious controversies – isn’t quite up for the challenge it lays out. There’s a curious absence of what these Nazis were attempting here – if it’s to expand the Socialist state with newborns, then why are all of these women summarily executed? – and I refuse to accept that it was all intended to restore von Kleiben’s ‘mini me.’ Though a few sequences suggest Garrone (and his other scripters) were mildly interested in sex and intercourse as a practice, there’s just no central explanation for what how they believed rape was the key to the Aryan future, making this whole affair entirely forgettable.
SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) was produced by Società Europea Films Internazionali Cinematografica (SEFI). DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at 88 Films. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can assure readers that the film looks very good but sounds a bit tinny in a few spots. Again, I think it’s easy to conclude that any significant deficiencies are likely owed to inferior sources. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well … wow! There’s an impressive number of extras on here – including an audio commentary that’s informative – and a good deal of it relates more toward exploitation than it does film-specific. (There is plenty to learn, so don’t be put off by that statement.) There’s even a solid collector’s booklet included that’s a great read.
Alas … this one is truly Hard To Recommend … except for those who might be completist about socialist-inspired (soft) pornography.
Erm … is it just me, or does anyone else find it highly hypocritical of the Italians – of all people – to venture into the world of Nazi exploitation filmmaking? I mean … weren’t they in on all of that stuff back during World War II? Seems to me as though that was what I remember from history class; and even though my teacher never covered the subject matter of SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) one would think that wiser minds might’ve prevailed on behalf of the Italians. Whatever the truth may be, Sergio Garrone’s film isn’t so much a mess as it is endlessly messy, never quite clarifying what all of the hubbub in here was about much less precisely where these Aryans thought such “science” might take them. This was a far cry from developing the V2 – which might’ve given them a fighting chance – unless it was Germany’s intent to flood the territories of their enemies with prostitutes.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at 88 Films provided me with a complimentary 4K UltraHD Blu-ray of SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) was produced by Società Europea Films Internazionali Cinematografica (SEFI). DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at 88 Films. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I can assure readers that the film looks very good but sounds a bit tinny in a few spots. Again, I think it’s easy to conclude that any significant deficiencies are likely owed to inferior sources. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well … wow! There’s an impressive number of extras on here – including an audio commentary that’s informative – and a good deal of it relates more toward exploitation than it does film-specific. (There is plenty to learn, so don’t be put off by that statement.) There’s even a solid collector’s booklet included that’s a great read.
Alas … this one is truly Hard To Recommend … except for those who might be completist about socialist-inspired (soft) pornography.
Erm … is it just me, or does anyone else find it highly hypocritical of the Italians – of all people – to venture into the world of Nazi exploitation filmmaking? I mean … weren’t they in on all of that stuff back during World War II? Seems to me as though that was what I remember from history class; and even though my teacher never covered the subject matter of SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) one would think that wiser minds might’ve prevailed on behalf of the Italians. Whatever the truth may be, Sergio Garrone’s film isn’t so much a mess as it is endlessly messy, never quite clarifying what all of the hubbub in here was about much less precisely where these Aryans thought such “science” might take them. This was a far cry from developing the V2 – which might’ve given them a fighting chance – unless it was Germany’s intent to flood the territories of their enemies with prostitutes.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at 88 Films provided me with a complimentary 4K UltraHD Blu-ray of SS Experiment Love Camp (1976) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
When it comes to the fantastic output of Hammer Studios, it’s safe in almost every conceivable way to conclude: “this is most definitely not your father’s average Horror outing.”
While the great monsters of Universal Pictures first came to life on the silver screen in the 1930’s, Hammer Studios opted to give these vintage chillers their own makeover in the 1950’s. With bigger budgets and a greater emphasis on the true gothic template in which all of these creatures and critters inhabit, Hammer presented audiences with some darker, mysterious, and even somewhat miserable interpretations of these tortured lives and their attempts to pursue happiness, sometimes in even the most carnal ways. Though critics were sometimes caught in print ‘clutching their pearls’ over such nasty visions, viewers rather enthusiastically embraced this wicked aesthetic turn, happily plunging into Horror’s grimmer yarns at a time when Science Fiction and Fantasy had grown a bit too pedestrian, a bit too unfocused. Indeed, the studio’s growing success smacked entirely of irony because only a mere two decades earlier merry old England had pretty much banned American Horror imports on the grounds that they had grown too violent and frightening. Now, everything British censors hated was back; and a path to theatrical success showed brightly in the dark.
1957’s The Curse Of Frankenstein wasn’t Hammer’s first Horror film, but it was their first in color. Over time, some have suggested that it was this one simple choice that initially paved the way for what would become an impressive output of Gothic chillers with some growing even more gruesome as the time changed. Directed by Terence Fisher and scripted by Jimmy Sangster (though based obviously on the Mary Shelley novel), the film was also revered for giving Peter Cushing – one of Hammer’s biggest stars – his first big break in the genre. Certainly, the actor made his interpretation of Victor Frankenstein something to watch in true theatrical fashion, a role he inhabited five more times for the studio in sequels to this original. Also aboard this new incarnation were Hazel Court, Robert Urquhart, Christopher Lee, Valerine Gaunt, and others.
Paralleling Victor’s idea of creating bold, new life, this Curse did just that, not only for the Shelley tale but also the entire Horror genre. It was back in style … this time in color!
(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 …)
While the great monsters of Universal Pictures first came to life on the silver screen in the 1930’s, Hammer Studios opted to give these vintage chillers their own makeover in the 1950’s. With bigger budgets and a greater emphasis on the true gothic template in which all of these creatures and critters inhabit, Hammer presented audiences with some darker, mysterious, and even somewhat miserable interpretations of these tortured lives and their attempts to pursue happiness, sometimes in even the most carnal ways. Though critics were sometimes caught in print ‘clutching their pearls’ over such nasty visions, viewers rather enthusiastically embraced this wicked aesthetic turn, happily plunging into Horror’s grimmer yarns at a time when Science Fiction and Fantasy had grown a bit too pedestrian, a bit too unfocused. Indeed, the studio’s growing success smacked entirely of irony because only a mere two decades earlier merry old England had pretty much banned American Horror imports on the grounds that they had grown too violent and frightening. Now, everything British censors hated was back; and a path to theatrical success showed brightly in the dark.
1957’s The Curse Of Frankenstein wasn’t Hammer’s first Horror film, but it was their first in color. Over time, some have suggested that it was this one simple choice that initially paved the way for what would become an impressive output of Gothic chillers with some growing even more gruesome as the time changed. Directed by Terence Fisher and scripted by Jimmy Sangster (though based obviously on the Mary Shelley novel), the film was also revered for giving Peter Cushing – one of Hammer’s biggest stars – his first big break in the genre. Certainly, the actor made his interpretation of Victor Frankenstein something to watch in true theatrical fashion, a role he inhabited five more times for the studio in sequels to this original. Also aboard this new incarnation were Hazel Court, Robert Urquhart, Christopher Lee, Valerine Gaunt, and others.
Paralleling Victor’s idea of creating bold, new life, this Curse did just that, not only for the Shelley tale but also the entire Horror genre. It was back in style … this time in color!
(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:
“While awaiting execution for murder, Baron Victor Frankenstein tells the story of a creature he built and brought to life - only for it to behave not as he intended.”
At a time when Hollywood and many other studios around the world were still relegating Horror stories to second tier entries, Hammer Studios did the unthinkable: they decided to produce their latest effort – The Curse Of Frankenstein – in vivid color.
Lo and behold, one relatively simple creative choice put Hammer on the cultural map … a place they remain even to this day.
My first exposure to the studio’s unique output – believe it or not – was back in my junior high school days, and I remember it vividly though which particular film honestly escapes my old mind. Living in the United States, I wasn’t all that familiar with this uniquely British take on Horror; but at the height of the Halloween season my middle school decided to pull the student body to the gymnasium for a feature film event. The school principal introduced the production, warning the student body that if anyone felt ill at any time during the screening they’d be free to leave. Naturally, we assumed he was joking; but then the lights dimmed, and – while I can’t be exactly certain – I believe the first reel of Dracula: Prince Of Darkness (1966) unspooled. As it did, the boys cheered … and the young ladies squealed. Young fans were made that day, but not a lot of them were of the fairer sex.
But back to Curse …
With the death of his mother, a young Victor inherits the Frankenstein estate. His first executive decision – as it were – is to bring aboard a tutor, one who can teach him the ways of science. Paul Krempe (played by Robert Urquhart) is hired; and over several years (via montage) the two are shown establishing the clinical foundation which the emerging young scientist (Peter Cushing) will enact his agenda to seize destiny on controlling life itself from nature. Indeed, the two are successful at reanimating a young dog – no mention on how the thing passed in the first place, and that should be a cause for concern – and this benchmark rather quickly turns to Frankenstein desirous of more. Once he announces his plans to bring back a human being, it is Krempe who begins to regret the ‘young monster’ he's inadvertently created.
Of course, there’s more to the story than just the growing moral divide between the two men; and – for what it’s worth – the time spent with the seminal monster (Christopher Lee) is reasonably brief in here. (This is not to suggest in any way that it’s insufficient: rather, it’s a bit more supportive of the overall narrative than it is the central focus.) As it turns out, the younger Victor didn’t always have his attentions fixed on his studies; and we learn that he engaged in a highly sensual affair with the castle maid Justine (Valerie Gaunt), a relationship that turns out very poorly for the lady. Also, the mature Victor eventually brings his lovely cousin under the roof: Elizabeth (Hazel Court) proves to be a temptation that some suggest introduces a chasm between our two scientists though nothing regarding a possible love triangle is ever authentically introduced (so far as I could tell) in the script. But as all roads here lead to a climactic confrontation between these players, it’s legitimate to say that these alliances are always shifting; and rarely does that work out to Victor’s benefit.
“While awaiting execution for murder, Baron Victor Frankenstein tells the story of a creature he built and brought to life - only for it to behave not as he intended.”
At a time when Hollywood and many other studios around the world were still relegating Horror stories to second tier entries, Hammer Studios did the unthinkable: they decided to produce their latest effort – The Curse Of Frankenstein – in vivid color.
Lo and behold, one relatively simple creative choice put Hammer on the cultural map … a place they remain even to this day.
My first exposure to the studio’s unique output – believe it or not – was back in my junior high school days, and I remember it vividly though which particular film honestly escapes my old mind. Living in the United States, I wasn’t all that familiar with this uniquely British take on Horror; but at the height of the Halloween season my middle school decided to pull the student body to the gymnasium for a feature film event. The school principal introduced the production, warning the student body that if anyone felt ill at any time during the screening they’d be free to leave. Naturally, we assumed he was joking; but then the lights dimmed, and – while I can’t be exactly certain – I believe the first reel of Dracula: Prince Of Darkness (1966) unspooled. As it did, the boys cheered … and the young ladies squealed. Young fans were made that day, but not a lot of them were of the fairer sex.
But back to Curse …
With the death of his mother, a young Victor inherits the Frankenstein estate. His first executive decision – as it were – is to bring aboard a tutor, one who can teach him the ways of science. Paul Krempe (played by Robert Urquhart) is hired; and over several years (via montage) the two are shown establishing the clinical foundation which the emerging young scientist (Peter Cushing) will enact his agenda to seize destiny on controlling life itself from nature. Indeed, the two are successful at reanimating a young dog – no mention on how the thing passed in the first place, and that should be a cause for concern – and this benchmark rather quickly turns to Frankenstein desirous of more. Once he announces his plans to bring back a human being, it is Krempe who begins to regret the ‘young monster’ he's inadvertently created.
Of course, there’s more to the story than just the growing moral divide between the two men; and – for what it’s worth – the time spent with the seminal monster (Christopher Lee) is reasonably brief in here. (This is not to suggest in any way that it’s insufficient: rather, it’s a bit more supportive of the overall narrative than it is the central focus.) As it turns out, the younger Victor didn’t always have his attentions fixed on his studies; and we learn that he engaged in a highly sensual affair with the castle maid Justine (Valerie Gaunt), a relationship that turns out very poorly for the lady. Also, the mature Victor eventually brings his lovely cousin under the roof: Elizabeth (Hazel Court) proves to be a temptation that some suggest introduces a chasm between our two scientists though nothing regarding a possible love triangle is ever authentically introduced (so far as I could tell) in the script. But as all roads here lead to a climactic confrontation between these players, it’s legitimate to say that these alliances are always shifting; and rarely does that work out to Victor’s benefit.
Thankfully, the melodrama never gets too deeply centered to mire down the story. Screenwriter Jimmy Sangster – an accomplished contributor to the Hammer library – keeps most of the focus on the moral triangle between the men here – Frankenstein, Krempe, and the Monster – leaving a good degree of what could’ve happened between Paul and Elizabeth in the realm of speculation. The scripter also keeps the cast reasonably small as Curse unfolds with a surprisingly intimate story more so about desire gone bad as opposed to science running awry. In this incarnation, it’s Victor’s unchecked ambitions that lead to some monstrous results – both personally and professionally – and the man’s inability to see his descent into ethically dubious territory proves to be what inevitably leads to his own personal doom.
The Curse Of Frankenstein (1957) was produced by Hammer Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? Wow. While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that this 4K restoration both looks and sounds impressive. There are a few sequences wherein colors don’t quite pop – nothing in here is unusually bright, and the template is obviously pretty somber – and I would guess that any deficiency is owed to issues with the source material. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well … it’s alive! It’s alive! This 3-disc collection has an astonishing collection of just about everything (I honestly haven’t made it through all of them at this point), along with four different audio commentaries (two new, two which appear archival) … so true fans will be spending an incredible amount of time with this one.
Strongly Recommended.
Even though I’ll admit to not being as big a fan of The Curse Of Frankenstein as are so many, it’s easy to see how this singular effort arguably set the standard upon which others could build with Hammer’s distinctive style in the years ahead. Instead of portraying Frankenstein as only a scientist possessed by his visions of Godhood, Victor in this tale turns his struggle outward, terrorizing those around him – sometimes unintentionally – as the stakes are raised, always mounting against his success to accomplish the unthinkable. In Curse, he’s far more the monster than The Monster ever truly was; and maybe that’s because of professional jealousy? You see, ultimately, it was god who made his creature’s life possible – with a symbolic strike of thunder – and not Frankenstein’s science. That fact alone likely didn’t sit well with Victor; and he suffered The Curse as a result.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary 4K UltraHD Blu-ray of The Curse Of Frankenstein (1957) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
The Curse Of Frankenstein (1957) was produced by Hammer Films. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? Wow. While I’m no trained video expert, I can still assure readers that this 4K restoration both looks and sounds impressive. There are a few sequences wherein colors don’t quite pop – nothing in here is unusually bright, and the template is obviously pretty somber – and I would guess that any deficiency is owed to issues with the source material. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Well … it’s alive! It’s alive! This 3-disc collection has an astonishing collection of just about everything (I honestly haven’t made it through all of them at this point), along with four different audio commentaries (two new, two which appear archival) … so true fans will be spending an incredible amount of time with this one.
Strongly Recommended.
Even though I’ll admit to not being as big a fan of The Curse Of Frankenstein as are so many, it’s easy to see how this singular effort arguably set the standard upon which others could build with Hammer’s distinctive style in the years ahead. Instead of portraying Frankenstein as only a scientist possessed by his visions of Godhood, Victor in this tale turns his struggle outward, terrorizing those around him – sometimes unintentionally – as the stakes are raised, always mounting against his success to accomplish the unthinkable. In Curse, he’s far more the monster than The Monster ever truly was; and maybe that’s because of professional jealousy? You see, ultimately, it was god who made his creature’s life possible – with a symbolic strike of thunder – and not Frankenstein’s science. That fact alone likely didn’t sit well with Victor; and he suffered The Curse as a result.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive provided me with a complimentary 4K UltraHD Blu-ray of The Curse Of Frankenstein (1957) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ