- Published on
If I'm being perfectly honest, then I'd have to concede that 1985's Flesh+Blood from writer/director Paul Verhoeven really isn't all that much Fantasy than a good many folks have suggested it is.
You see, the story of dueling barbaric regimes in pursuit of the same lovely lady is really much more of a bloody and sensuous Period Piece than it is authentic Fantasy. One might argue that it very loosely incorporates a few Fantasy elements -- such as the kinda/sorta use of very primitive Science to engage in some of the most curious entanglements brought to film -- but I've always that even that supposition a bit of a stretch. However, there is a hint that perhaps some spectral and/or religious and/or supernatural elements at play extremely circumstantially (as it relates to the Rutger Hauer character claiming to act on 'divine inspiration'); and yet even that could be dismissed as a bridge to far when Flesh+Blood gets paired up with other Fantasy entries of the early to mid 1980's. It just doesn't measure up.
Still, I do mention it in this space on SciFiHistory.Net because it's often cited as part of a string of feature productions that put Hauer on the map in the world of genre entertainment. His participation in 1982's Blade Runner along with 1985's Ladyhawke truly delivered a presence that audiences embraced even though Flesh+Blood has him playing a kinda/sorta good-guy-bad-guy not quite out of his mind as we'd eventually see him capable of being aboard 1986's The Hitcher. Indeed, the actor was becoming a man of many talents in those days; and I think because I see so much of his potential that Flesh+Blood deserves a mention amongst other entries into the realms of the Fantastic. Disagree if you will.
In any event ...
Here's the straight skinny as already penned on the Daily Citation Page for June 10th:
On this day in 1985 (in the U.S.), audiences in attendance of the Seattle International Film Festival were treated to the exclusive theatrical premiere of Flesh+Blood. Written (in part) and directed by Paul Verhoeven, the Fantasy/Thriller starred Rutger Hauer, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tom Burlinson, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"In medieval Europe, a young girl from a noble family is obsessed with her captors - commoners."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Flesh+Blood earned a wee bit of attention from screenings on the film festival circuit.
ExtraExtra Alert:
In early 2025, I received a promotional new home video release of Flesh+Blood (1985) from a distributor in exchange for review coverage on SciFiHistory.Net. Interested readers can find my review right here.
-- EZ
You see, the story of dueling barbaric regimes in pursuit of the same lovely lady is really much more of a bloody and sensuous Period Piece than it is authentic Fantasy. One might argue that it very loosely incorporates a few Fantasy elements -- such as the kinda/sorta use of very primitive Science to engage in some of the most curious entanglements brought to film -- but I've always that even that supposition a bit of a stretch. However, there is a hint that perhaps some spectral and/or religious and/or supernatural elements at play extremely circumstantially (as it relates to the Rutger Hauer character claiming to act on 'divine inspiration'); and yet even that could be dismissed as a bridge to far when Flesh+Blood gets paired up with other Fantasy entries of the early to mid 1980's. It just doesn't measure up.
Still, I do mention it in this space on SciFiHistory.Net because it's often cited as part of a string of feature productions that put Hauer on the map in the world of genre entertainment. His participation in 1982's Blade Runner along with 1985's Ladyhawke truly delivered a presence that audiences embraced even though Flesh+Blood has him playing a kinda/sorta good-guy-bad-guy not quite out of his mind as we'd eventually see him capable of being aboard 1986's The Hitcher. Indeed, the actor was becoming a man of many talents in those days; and I think because I see so much of his potential that Flesh+Blood deserves a mention amongst other entries into the realms of the Fantastic. Disagree if you will.
In any event ...
Here's the straight skinny as already penned on the Daily Citation Page for June 10th:
On this day in 1985 (in the U.S.), audiences in attendance of the Seattle International Film Festival were treated to the exclusive theatrical premiere of Flesh+Blood. Written (in part) and directed by Paul Verhoeven, the Fantasy/Thriller starred Rutger Hauer, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tom Burlinson, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"In medieval Europe, a young girl from a noble family is obsessed with her captors - commoners."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Flesh+Blood earned a wee bit of attention from screenings on the film festival circuit.
ExtraExtra Alert:
In early 2025, I received a promotional new home video release of Flesh+Blood (1985) from a distributor in exchange for review coverage on SciFiHistory.Net. Interested readers can find my review right here.
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 1983 (in West Germany), Dance Of The Dwarfs (aka Jungle Heat) enjoyed its glorious big screen debut. Directed by Gus Trikonis from a story by Geoffrey Household, G.W. King, Larry K. Johnson, and Michael Viner, the Horror film starred Peter Fonda, Deborah Raffin, John Amos, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"An anthropologist hires a down-on-his-luck helicopter pilot to fly her into the jungle, where she is searching for a scientist who is investigating reports of a tribe of reptile-men."
-- EZ
On this day in 1983 (in West Germany), Dance Of The Dwarfs (aka Jungle Heat) enjoyed its glorious big screen debut. Directed by Gus Trikonis from a story by Geoffrey Household, G.W. King, Larry K. Johnson, and Michael Viner, the Horror film starred Peter Fonda, Deborah Raffin, John Amos, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"An anthropologist hires a down-on-his-luck helicopter pilot to fly her into the jungle, where she is searching for a scientist who is investigating reports of a tribe of reptile-men."
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2001 (in Canada), Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter enjoyed bringing its measure of blood-sucking merriment to the masses-at-large. Directed by Lee Demarbre from a story by Ian Driscoll, the film starred Phil Caracas, Murielle Varhelyi, Maria Moulton, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Jesus returns to Earth to judge humanity but first he must team up with a Mexican fighter to combat vampires who walk during the day."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter earned a wee bit of praise from screenings on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
On this day in 2001 (in Canada), Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter enjoyed bringing its measure of blood-sucking merriment to the masses-at-large. Directed by Lee Demarbre from a story by Ian Driscoll, the film starred Phil Caracas, Murielle Varhelyi, Maria Moulton, and others. According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Jesus returns to Earth to judge humanity but first he must team up with a Mexican fighter to combat vampires who walk during the day."
For the record:
To the film's credit, Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter earned a wee bit of praise from screenings on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
- Published on
press release
Female Mercenaries on Zombie Island Collection (Blu-Ray / DVD Combo)
Directed By Gary Whitson
Stars Tina Krause, Pamela Sutch, Laura Giglio, Kelli Summers
Original Blu-Ray/DVD Release Date: October 5, 2021
Camp Motion Pictures is proud to present two of the most eye-popping, jaw-dropping movies from New Jersey independent film studio W.A.V.E. Productions in an all-new Blu-ray / DVD combo collection available October 5, 2021. FEMALE MERCENARIES ON ZOMBIE ISLAND COLLECTION includes FEMALE MERCENARIES ON ZOMBIE ISLAND (1995) and sequel MAD DOCTOR OF ZOMBIE ISLAND (2008) along with new trailers and never-before-seen early shorts from W.A.V.E. founder Gary Whitson.
Shot on S-VHS and Super 8, this astonishing collection delivers all the genre tropes W.A.V.E. fans love, while shedding light on the cinema serials and pulp fiction that served as inspiration for W.A.V.E. in its earliest years. Themes like Damsels in Distress, Cannibalism, Torture, Bondage, Cat Fights, Mad Scientists, Demonism and Cyborgs – you’ll find all that and more in this celebration of micro-budget independent filmmaking and entrepreneurial chutzpah!
FEMALE MERCENARIES ON ZOMBIE ISLAND COLLECTION INCLUDES:
Shot on S-VHS and Super 8, this astonishing collection delivers all the genre tropes W.A.V.E. fans love, while shedding light on the cinema serials and pulp fiction that served as inspiration for W.A.V.E. in its earliest years. Themes like Damsels in Distress, Cannibalism, Torture, Bondage, Cat Fights, Mad Scientists, Demonism and Cyborgs – you’ll find all that and more in this celebration of micro-budget independent filmmaking and entrepreneurial chutzpah!
FEMALE MERCENARIES ON ZOMBIE ISLAND COLLECTION INCLUDES:
- FEMALE MERCENARIES ON ZOMBIE ISLAND (1995 - S-VHS Feature) “It’s the year 2008, and an asteroid collides with the earth, destroying 90% of the world’s population. The remaining humans swiftly revert into savages, led by a once brilliant but now mad doctor who experiments with brain transplants, cloning and cannibalism!” It’s a post-apocalyptic uprising as mercenaries battle an Evil Doctor using brain transplants, cloning and cannibalism to rule the world!
- MAD DOCTOR OF ZOMBIE ISLAND (2008 - Mini-DV Feature) The fiendish Doctor is back with a new army of clones, to continue her quest for world domination!
- THE MISADVENTUES OF FANNY STARR (1981 - Super 8 short) Investigating her sister’s murder, Private Detective Fanny Starr uncovers a satanic plot to open a doorway between Hell and earth!
- IF A GOD SHOULD FAIL (1976 - Super 8 short) To save the mankind, Zeus sends Hercules to earth to battle a cyborg! Includes Director commentary on IF A GOD SHOULD FAIL
- 1995 Interview with director / producer Gary Whitson
- 2021 Footage of the W.A.V.E. Studio
- Double Sided Color Blu-Ray Wrap
click the banner below to order from alternative cinema
- Published on
press release
SpiderBabe Unrated (DVD)
stars: Misty Mundae, Julian Wells, Darian Caine, Ruby LaRocca, Kelli Summers (Suzi Lorriane)
Original DVD Release Date: October 14, 2003
Seduction Cinema starlet Misty Mundae is Patricia Porker, a shy and studious college girl with sweet dreams of romance with a handsome jock. When bitten by her science teacher’s genetically engineered arachnid, she gets more than she could have ever wished for! Suddenly transformed into a wall-climbing, building-bounding beauty with superhuman strength, Patricia takes the name ‘SpiderBabe’ and quickly warms to saving lives and fighting crime in New York City. But little does SpiderBabe know that a sinister arch-enemy is plotting her downfall. Her name is Lucinda Knoxx, a.k.a. The Femtilian (Julian Wells) – a lithe, deadly and delectable evil genius with her own taste for adventure – and she will stop at nothing in her mad quest for global domination.
DVD includes:
– SpiderBabe Unrated feature film
– “OutThere TV” Clip featuring Emily Booth
– Multiple “Naughty” Deleted Scenes
– SpiderBabe Behind-The-Scenes
– Special FX Behind-The-Scenes
– Making the Costume
– TRAILERS to Other Seduction Cinema Films
DVD includes:
– SpiderBabe Unrated feature film
– “OutThere TV” Clip featuring Emily Booth
– Multiple “Naughty” Deleted Scenes
– SpiderBabe Behind-The-Scenes
– Special FX Behind-The-Scenes
– Making the Costume
– TRAILERS to Other Seduction Cinema Films
click the banner below to order from alternative cinema
- Published on
press release
the Erotic Time Machine
Starring Kelli Summers
also starring Laurie Wallace, Misty Mundae, Tina Krause
Original DVD Release Date: August 27, 2002
In the distant future, physicist Miss Manners (Kelli Summers) has unlocked the secret of time travel in the hope of saving mankind from an uncertain future. But there’s just one catch: breaking the time-space continuum is an intense erotic experience that Manners is becoming swiftly addicted to and is in danger of forgetting her ultimate goal. Driven by urges beyond her control, Manners sets her “Erotic Time Machine” to the 20th century, where untold lesbian steamy encounters await. Featuring the juiciest highlights from Erotic Survivor 1 & 2, Titanic 2000, Girl Explores Girl: The Alien Encounter, and The Vampire’s Seduction, The Erotic Time Machine is a must-see for fans of Kelli Summers and Seduction Cinema classics.
to pre-order from alternative cinema click below
- Published on
Confession time: I am not the world’s biggest Alfred Hitchcock fan.
I know, I know, I know. Hate me if you must. I think – like any accomplished director – Hitchcock definitely produced a string of watchable art that resonates in different ways with different people for different reasons; and yet even some of his best regarded motion pictures just feel a bit hollow to me. For example (and I realize this might be some risky disclosure), his oft-lauded Vertigo (1958) is a bit of a snoozefest to me, burying an interesting idea and some understandable characters in what feels more like a San Francisco sightseeing tour than it does an edge-of-your-seat thriller. 1959’s North By Northwest is much of the same, though I do like Cary Grant’s work in the film far more than I did Jimmy Stewart’s in the former. Ultimately, I’ve made peace with the idea that some yarns just aren’t for me, so I pass them up when given the chance to reconsider them on television, preferring to stick to his entries like Rear Window (1954), Psycho (1960), and – of course – The Birds (1963).
In any event, I do always keep my eyes peeled for opportunities to screen something else from what of the industry’s most revered storytellers; so I’m glad to announce that I’ve finally gotten around to the 75th anniversary edition of Jamaica Inn (released on Blu-ray back in 2015 by Cohen Media Group). Sidney Gilliat and Joan Harrison are credited with adapting the novel from Daphne Du Maurier – with some further additions coming from J.B. Priestley – and the film starred Charles Laughton, Maureen O’Hara, Leslie Banks, Marie Ney, Robert Newton, and others. The story unquestionably dabbles in territory that Hitchcock explored throughout his body of work – morality, authority, psychology, etc. – so it’s easy to see why he was likely driven to this project; but beyond some excellent production details, a breakout role for O’Hara, and a curiously wild performance from Laughton the rest of the affair is a bit feeble.
(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 …)
I know, I know, I know. Hate me if you must. I think – like any accomplished director – Hitchcock definitely produced a string of watchable art that resonates in different ways with different people for different reasons; and yet even some of his best regarded motion pictures just feel a bit hollow to me. For example (and I realize this might be some risky disclosure), his oft-lauded Vertigo (1958) is a bit of a snoozefest to me, burying an interesting idea and some understandable characters in what feels more like a San Francisco sightseeing tour than it does an edge-of-your-seat thriller. 1959’s North By Northwest is much of the same, though I do like Cary Grant’s work in the film far more than I did Jimmy Stewart’s in the former. Ultimately, I’ve made peace with the idea that some yarns just aren’t for me, so I pass them up when given the chance to reconsider them on television, preferring to stick to his entries like Rear Window (1954), Psycho (1960), and – of course – The Birds (1963).
In any event, I do always keep my eyes peeled for opportunities to screen something else from what of the industry’s most revered storytellers; so I’m glad to announce that I’ve finally gotten around to the 75th anniversary edition of Jamaica Inn (released on Blu-ray back in 2015 by Cohen Media Group). Sidney Gilliat and Joan Harrison are credited with adapting the novel from Daphne Du Maurier – with some further additions coming from J.B. Priestley – and the film starred Charles Laughton, Maureen O’Hara, Leslie Banks, Marie Ney, Robert Newton, and others. The story unquestionably dabbles in territory that Hitchcock explored throughout his body of work – morality, authority, psychology, etc. – so it’s easy to see why he was likely driven to this project; but beyond some excellent production details, a breakout role for O’Hara, and a curiously wild performance from Laughton the rest of the affair is a bit feeble.
(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:
“In early 19th century Cornwall, a young orphan, Mary, is sent to live with Aunt Patience and Uncle Joss who are landlords of the Jamaica Inn. Mary soon realizes her uncle's inn serves as the base for a gang of ship wreckers - who lure ships to their doom on the rocky coast, and Mary begins to fear for her life.”
Without splitting too many hairs, it’s difficult to home in on what a story like Jamaica Inn is fundamentally about. Based entirely on its set-up – opening text educates the viewers on the prevalence of ‘land pirates’ who lure ships to their rocky shores so that they can pillage the goods and gold from their wreckage – one expects to treated to a theatrical expose on the dangers of maritime commerce. After a reasonably gruesome set-up with a surprising body count of sailors being dispatched to Davy Jones’ locker (or thereabouts), the film segues into the story of the young and impressionable Mary (played by Maureen O’Hara) who’s travelling by stagecoach to be reunited with her family at the very inn of the title. Given that the drivers refuse to stop at the place and instead speed past out of fear, the suggestion is clearly in place that dark things are afoot in a place all men should avoid.
However, once Mary is dropped off just out of town and is encouraged to head for the nearby residence of Sir Humphrey Pengallan (Charles Laughton), the tone shifts dramatically, morphing into a somewhat bizarre character comedy with the lord of the manor rather buffoonishly presiding over a lavish dinner with equally bereft snobs. Sir Humphrey is a braggard, you see, and more than a bit of a blowhard. He’s surrounded himself with sycophants who ignorantly look down at the lower classes as social castoffs not worth their time and effort. The truth, however, is that he’s secretly using these wealthy folks to obtain all information regarding the present and near-future ships passing through their harbor and is devising the plans for these land pirates to plunder at his behest. While the socialites see him as their gracious host, he’s secretly a criminal overlord.
Mary’s arrival brings out the potential lothario in Sir Humphrey as he’s understandably smitten with the young woman’s good looks. Despite his knowledge of the fact that, indeed, the Jamaica Inn is “a wretched hive of scum and villainy,” he’s somehow all too happy to arrange for her transport to the place so that she can be reunited with her Aunt Patience (Marie Ney). This also puts the woman under the influence of her uncle Joss (Leslie Banks), the man who serves as Pengallan’s right hand man in the thieving of the shallow seas. As much the predator as is Sir Humphrey, Joss Merlyn is only too happy to take such a beautiful specimen under his roof as it would appear he’s grown somewhat tired of Patience’s fleeting charms.
“In early 19th century Cornwall, a young orphan, Mary, is sent to live with Aunt Patience and Uncle Joss who are landlords of the Jamaica Inn. Mary soon realizes her uncle's inn serves as the base for a gang of ship wreckers - who lure ships to their doom on the rocky coast, and Mary begins to fear for her life.”
Without splitting too many hairs, it’s difficult to home in on what a story like Jamaica Inn is fundamentally about. Based entirely on its set-up – opening text educates the viewers on the prevalence of ‘land pirates’ who lure ships to their rocky shores so that they can pillage the goods and gold from their wreckage – one expects to treated to a theatrical expose on the dangers of maritime commerce. After a reasonably gruesome set-up with a surprising body count of sailors being dispatched to Davy Jones’ locker (or thereabouts), the film segues into the story of the young and impressionable Mary (played by Maureen O’Hara) who’s travelling by stagecoach to be reunited with her family at the very inn of the title. Given that the drivers refuse to stop at the place and instead speed past out of fear, the suggestion is clearly in place that dark things are afoot in a place all men should avoid.
However, once Mary is dropped off just out of town and is encouraged to head for the nearby residence of Sir Humphrey Pengallan (Charles Laughton), the tone shifts dramatically, morphing into a somewhat bizarre character comedy with the lord of the manor rather buffoonishly presiding over a lavish dinner with equally bereft snobs. Sir Humphrey is a braggard, you see, and more than a bit of a blowhard. He’s surrounded himself with sycophants who ignorantly look down at the lower classes as social castoffs not worth their time and effort. The truth, however, is that he’s secretly using these wealthy folks to obtain all information regarding the present and near-future ships passing through their harbor and is devising the plans for these land pirates to plunder at his behest. While the socialites see him as their gracious host, he’s secretly a criminal overlord.
Mary’s arrival brings out the potential lothario in Sir Humphrey as he’s understandably smitten with the young woman’s good looks. Despite his knowledge of the fact that, indeed, the Jamaica Inn is “a wretched hive of scum and villainy,” he’s somehow all too happy to arrange for her transport to the place so that she can be reunited with her Aunt Patience (Marie Ney). This also puts the woman under the influence of her uncle Joss (Leslie Banks), the man who serves as Pengallan’s right hand man in the thieving of the shallow seas. As much the predator as is Sir Humphrey, Joss Merlyn is only too happy to take such a beautiful specimen under his roof as it would appear he’s grown somewhat tired of Patience’s fleeting charms.
Naturally, there’s a bit more to this melodrama. Some of Hitchcock’s more renowned works are revered for their use of the winding subplots, and Jamaica Inn is no different. The pirates have grown a bit tired of their ill-gotten gains, and they’re beginning to rebel against Merlyn’s designs. Thinking that someone within their ranks must somehow be getting more by pocketing treasures on the side, they turn their sites on the newest member – Jem Trehearne) Robert Newton – who is secretly a man of the court working undercover in an operation to bring the criminals down. Their attempt to string him up goes awry when Mary secretly cuts the hangman’s noose, and they spirit off together back to Pengallan’s lavish estate. Once they are there, it’s Sir Humphrey who realizes he must now outfox Trehearne in order to maintain his innocence, steal young Mary Yellan to satisfy his own sexual appetite, and abscond with the booty from the latest naval ship entering the territorial waters. It’s a lot to take in … but Laughton’s a talent who was always up for the challenge.
The trouble with the film’s second half is just that – there’s an awful lot of ground to cover with shifting identities and unstable alliances, so much so that some sequences feel a bit rushed when more character nuance was needed. Laughton’s transition from top thug to earnest social benefactor takes place like the flipping of a switch, necessarily suggesting that perhaps this great big oaf a man may not exactly be in his right mind, a sentiment that eventually gets reinforced with his closing scenes but could’ve been explored earlier with greater specificity. The way he commands the screen – even with some comic intensity – is admirable; but the screen chewing wears thin after a time, reducing him from being any legitimate mastermind to little more than a guy who got by on a helluva lot of luck instead of raw intelligence.
In fact, Jamaica Inn’s main plotline is one of those that only works because that’s how it was both conceived and executed. Patience loves her unruly husband Joss only because the script requires it even though we’re never shown that the man gave so much as a damn about her at any time throughout the running time. We even see her a bit dejected in one scene wherein she catches him coming out of Mary’s bedroom, the look on her face hinting that she suspects he may’ve even ignored his wedding vows. Yes, she delivers a throwaway line about ‘the man he used to be,’ and yet we – the audience – are given absolutely nothing – not a single scene – but only her words to accept them as even remotely plausible. Furthermore, why such a backwoods, feral, and brutal ne’er-do-well would ever take direction from the – ahem – flamboyantly boisterous boss Pengallan is never spelled out clearly enough for my likes. Just how and why this criminal organization came into being could’ve used stronger subtext because – as presented – it never seemed the stuff of local legend. I honestly expected the tables to be turned at some point with Merlyn emerging victorious, but that never happens even though circumstances evolve wherein it could have.
The trouble with the film’s second half is just that – there’s an awful lot of ground to cover with shifting identities and unstable alliances, so much so that some sequences feel a bit rushed when more character nuance was needed. Laughton’s transition from top thug to earnest social benefactor takes place like the flipping of a switch, necessarily suggesting that perhaps this great big oaf a man may not exactly be in his right mind, a sentiment that eventually gets reinforced with his closing scenes but could’ve been explored earlier with greater specificity. The way he commands the screen – even with some comic intensity – is admirable; but the screen chewing wears thin after a time, reducing him from being any legitimate mastermind to little more than a guy who got by on a helluva lot of luck instead of raw intelligence.
In fact, Jamaica Inn’s main plotline is one of those that only works because that’s how it was both conceived and executed. Patience loves her unruly husband Joss only because the script requires it even though we’re never shown that the man gave so much as a damn about her at any time throughout the running time. We even see her a bit dejected in one scene wherein she catches him coming out of Mary’s bedroom, the look on her face hinting that she suspects he may’ve even ignored his wedding vows. Yes, she delivers a throwaway line about ‘the man he used to be,’ and yet we – the audience – are given absolutely nothing – not a single scene – but only her words to accept them as even remotely plausible. Furthermore, why such a backwoods, feral, and brutal ne’er-do-well would ever take direction from the – ahem – flamboyantly boisterous boss Pengallan is never spelled out clearly enough for my likes. Just how and why this criminal organization came into being could’ve used stronger subtext because – as presented – it never seemed the stuff of local legend. I honestly expected the tables to be turned at some point with Merlyn emerging victorious, but that never happens even though circumstances evolve wherein it could have.
To her credit, O’Hara does a nice job, though it’s not anything particularly noteworthy. Serving as the story’s emotional center, she takes viewers through her own highs and lows, some of it a bit too scripted in spots. Still, she remains relatable, and her presence grounds the picture with some of its best moments. In fact, it’s pretty spiffy that – decades ahead of the whole women’s liberation movement – it’s her Mary who manages to slip away from her captors, climbs the hillside, and gallantly risks all to wave a burning blanket to warn the ship from crashing into the shoreline. For me, it’s Jamaica Inn’s best moment, and it echoes with pure heroism in the face of some despicable adversity.
Well done, milady. Well done.
Jamaica Inn (1939) was produced by Renown Pictures Corporation and Mayflower Pictures Corporation. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Cohen Media Group. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, this 4K restoration looks magnificent, but I found the sound quality a bit underwhelming. Some of the clarity seems lost – actors speaking quickly and with accents can make for a trying experience with this older releases, giving everything a tinny quality – but this is likely owed to source issues. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? The disc boasts an audio commentary, a video essay (from author Donald Spoto), and the theatrical trailer. A solid collection.
Recommended.
Even though I don’t consider myself an expert on Alfred Hitchcock’s library of films, I still can’t imagine Jamaica Inn being anything more than an oddity amongst those titles. While it debatably hints at some of the storyteller’s enduring themes, it’s all still a bit too waterlogged (snicker snicker) to float (snicker snicker) instead of swim (guffaw guffaw) on its own merits. There are a few flourishes here and there – mainly, O’Hara’s big fight to save the day, and Laughton’s ability to shock and awe audiences – but overall, it all feels a bit damp (ROTF). Purists might have more to say about it than I do. As is, it’s just okay.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at the Cohen Film Collection provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Jamaica Inn (1939) 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
Well done, milady. Well done.
Jamaica Inn (1939) was produced by Renown Pictures Corporation and Mayflower Pictures Corporation. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Cohen Media Group. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, this 4K restoration looks magnificent, but I found the sound quality a bit underwhelming. Some of the clarity seems lost – actors speaking quickly and with accents can make for a trying experience with this older releases, giving everything a tinny quality – but this is likely owed to source issues. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? The disc boasts an audio commentary, a video essay (from author Donald Spoto), and the theatrical trailer. A solid collection.
Recommended.
Even though I don’t consider myself an expert on Alfred Hitchcock’s library of films, I still can’t imagine Jamaica Inn being anything more than an oddity amongst those titles. While it debatably hints at some of the storyteller’s enduring themes, it’s all still a bit too waterlogged (snicker snicker) to float (snicker snicker) instead of swim (guffaw guffaw) on its own merits. There are a few flourishes here and there – mainly, O’Hara’s big fight to save the day, and Laughton’s ability to shock and awe audiences – but overall, it all feels a bit damp (ROTF). Purists might have more to say about it than I do. As is, it’s just okay.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at the Cohen Film Collection provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Jamaica Inn (1939) 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
In being perfectly honest right up front, I’m going to state that it’s difficult to effectively review a feature like The Black-Eyed Children (2025) on its own because given all practical appearances the story as presented is entirely incomplete. (FYI: anyone interested can see that there’s already a listing on IMDB.com regarding the fact that its sequel is in production, and I’ve been assured as much by the creator himself.) The first installment really only sets the parameters around which this world has been established: in fact, there’s no way of knowing precisely how much of the first chapter’s various players will bob and weave throughout the second, nor how much of the mechanics of the presented High Strangeness might continue or change given whatever new circumstances might come to light. Please keep in mind that, functionally, I find myself somewhat limited to critiquing the mechanics of the piece as opposed to what’s truly happening here, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt.
Furthermore, I occasionally remind readers that – as a young’un – I grew up reading a slew of vintage crime thrillers, the kind of which taught me to keep an eye out for certain clues at misdirection along the way. This formative experience had the downside of forcing me to evaluate damn near everything I watch, and it had me questioning why certain sequences in film and television projects were assembled one way as opposed to another perhaps easier approach. Usually, this happens because the storyteller wants you – the audience – to focus on what’s taking place right here and to never mind what’s going on over there. (Of course, sometimes this is nothing but budgetary constraints, but I’ll dismiss that for now.) It’s the same thing a good magician does with his or her sleight of hand: the best filmmakers employ a bit of that especially if they’re intent on dazzling you with the big reveal.
That said, it’s rather easy for me to pronounce that the central story to The Black-Eyed Children is really only beginning. This is the kind of effort that Horror fans generally embrace because it keeps them captivated with wondering exactly what’s going on, and this enthusiasm will likely bring them back to a second, third, and maybe even a fourth helping. Mind you: answers must emerge – and they’d better drop some greater details in the sequel – or else those same fans will depart for greener (if not bloodier) pastures mostly because Part One – while intriguing – never once establishes a foundation other than a place and hints of an event. Anything else of certainty remains a matter of one’s opinion versus another’s, and that’s no way bring people together.
(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 …)
Furthermore, I occasionally remind readers that – as a young’un – I grew up reading a slew of vintage crime thrillers, the kind of which taught me to keep an eye out for certain clues at misdirection along the way. This formative experience had the downside of forcing me to evaluate damn near everything I watch, and it had me questioning why certain sequences in film and television projects were assembled one way as opposed to another perhaps easier approach. Usually, this happens because the storyteller wants you – the audience – to focus on what’s taking place right here and to never mind what’s going on over there. (Of course, sometimes this is nothing but budgetary constraints, but I’ll dismiss that for now.) It’s the same thing a good magician does with his or her sleight of hand: the best filmmakers employ a bit of that especially if they’re intent on dazzling you with the big reveal.
That said, it’s rather easy for me to pronounce that the central story to The Black-Eyed Children is really only beginning. This is the kind of effort that Horror fans generally embrace because it keeps them captivated with wondering exactly what’s going on, and this enthusiasm will likely bring them back to a second, third, and maybe even a fourth helping. Mind you: answers must emerge – and they’d better drop some greater details in the sequel – or else those same fans will depart for greener (if not bloodier) pastures mostly because Part One – while intriguing – never once establishes a foundation other than a place and hints of an event. Anything else of certainty remains a matter of one’s opinion versus another’s, and that’s no way bring people together.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A young woman takes a job at an autumn camp in the woods, only to arrive to find that all the children have mysteriously disappeared. But as night falls, much to her dismay, some of them return.”
Often, I find myself reminding the readership that I’m one of the last remaining fans of the whole Found Footage Format subgenre of Horror filmmaking. Without going to any great details, I just love the imperfections and freshness that comes with something told from a technologically unique point-of-view, even though a fair amount of narrative trickery on the part of some talented craftsmen usually gets in the way of pure, unabashed originality. Though I appreciate why so many have kinda/sorta left it behind, I’ll almost always seek out and explore offerings big and small that continue to try doing something different with it; and that’s mostly what brought me to The Black-Eyed Children.
However … Children both is and isn’t found footage. (I know, I know: I can feel the screeching now, but hear me out.)
Like a great many projects, Children really only makes liberal use of such found footage, cleverly inserted said raw material around a great deal of documentary-style storytelling, if not even a few rather conventional scenes involving darkly-clad investigator of the beginning and ending suggesting that something even more nefarious could be occurring in this space. And an argument could be made that a good deal of its purported found footage is questionable as to why it’s even in here much less adds significantly to the plot, making me suspect that – as I said above – there’s more to this story than writer/director József Gallai and co-writer Roy McClurg Jr. wanted to divulge in Part One. (For those watching closely … yes, that is indeed Gallai filling in the shoes of the fateful Man In Black in the motion picture.)
Excited with the prospect of hew employment, Claire Russell (played by Kata Kuna) can’t wait for the chance to get down to working with the children of St. Beatrice Camp. Giddy with delight, she begins videotaping her reflections and decides to continue filming her moments at this isolated campground. Alas, she’s somewhat astonished to find the place essentially deserted on her arrival. Strolling around the unlocked buildings and through the nearby forest, she finds nothing more than a handful of abandoned toys and chilling silence. Concerned that something has gone horribly wrong, she telephones her employer – Mr. Donahue – only to have the young female receptionist announce, “We’ve been waiting for you, Claire,” before hanging up.
“A young woman takes a job at an autumn camp in the woods, only to arrive to find that all the children have mysteriously disappeared. But as night falls, much to her dismay, some of them return.”
Often, I find myself reminding the readership that I’m one of the last remaining fans of the whole Found Footage Format subgenre of Horror filmmaking. Without going to any great details, I just love the imperfections and freshness that comes with something told from a technologically unique point-of-view, even though a fair amount of narrative trickery on the part of some talented craftsmen usually gets in the way of pure, unabashed originality. Though I appreciate why so many have kinda/sorta left it behind, I’ll almost always seek out and explore offerings big and small that continue to try doing something different with it; and that’s mostly what brought me to The Black-Eyed Children.
However … Children both is and isn’t found footage. (I know, I know: I can feel the screeching now, but hear me out.)
Like a great many projects, Children really only makes liberal use of such found footage, cleverly inserted said raw material around a great deal of documentary-style storytelling, if not even a few rather conventional scenes involving darkly-clad investigator of the beginning and ending suggesting that something even more nefarious could be occurring in this space. And an argument could be made that a good deal of its purported found footage is questionable as to why it’s even in here much less adds significantly to the plot, making me suspect that – as I said above – there’s more to this story than writer/director József Gallai and co-writer Roy McClurg Jr. wanted to divulge in Part One. (For those watching closely … yes, that is indeed Gallai filling in the shoes of the fateful Man In Black in the motion picture.)
Excited with the prospect of hew employment, Claire Russell (played by Kata Kuna) can’t wait for the chance to get down to working with the children of St. Beatrice Camp. Giddy with delight, she begins videotaping her reflections and decides to continue filming her moments at this isolated campground. Alas, she’s somewhat astonished to find the place essentially deserted on her arrival. Strolling around the unlocked buildings and through the nearby forest, she finds nothing more than a handful of abandoned toys and chilling silence. Concerned that something has gone horribly wrong, she telephones her employer – Mr. Donahue – only to have the young female receptionist announce, “We’ve been waiting for you, Claire,” before hanging up.
At this point onward, Children descends into the usual and somewhat predictable circumstances a good many found footage films exploit. Once empty spaces are suddenly populated with supernatural clues – i.e. disturbing children’s drawings, a mysterious journal promising strange doings underfoot, telephones behaving in a way highly suspect, conundrums of time and space, etc. – so it grows increasingly clear that something not only went horribly wrong at St. Beatrice but also such High Strangeness persists. Indeed, Claire grows increasingly despondent once she stumbles across an old media card (which her laptop rather conveniently still has a supporting port) that bears a video message from Donahue (Bill Oberst Jr.) to her which promises things are likely only to go from bad to worse.
So … this is what one gets when one checks into Camp St. Beatrice. It isn’t long before the black-eyed children emerge from the woodwork and begin terrorizing Claire with their tauntings, hauntings, and more. While there are some obvious suggestions that no harm is intended, our narrator reacts probably in the way which any of us would: cut off from any means of escape, she’s left with trying to outsmart these spectral entities in ways that probably appear less-than-smart in retrospect. As she came to this place willingly, it’s progressively clear that – even as she eventually suggests – Claire is right where she’s supposed to be, evil be damned.
Chiefly, the problem with Children is that its narrative only shows enough material to leave viewers asking questions. Why is it that Claire experiences déjà vu throughout the compound? Could the journal she finds, in fact, be something she wrote when she was here before? What is the physical illness she suffers, coughing up blood in a few sequences, and why has she apparently never sought treatment? Who is the dreaded Man in Black, and how is it he walks unimpeded by law enforcement throughout an active crime scene? And – for that matter – who even called in the authorities given the fact that we’re never shown any other living, breathing people on camp property? When are we? Is this the present? The past? Or could this be something we’ve yet to see?
Such ambiguity will almost always work against the narrative’s forward momentum, but because Children is highly suggestive of something David Lynch perfected – nothing is what it seems – I’m willing to give Gallai, McClurg, and their cast and crew the breathing room necessary to keep spinning this yarn. (It ain’t Camp Crystal Lake, after all, so the gore and bloodshed is nowhere in sight.) I’d like to know where this is heading, and that anticipation helps to keep me focused even though details are exceedingly short in supply. In some ways, I felt I knew less when I finished the picture than when I started, but that could be just the way my deductive reasoning works.
Yes, there are hints to a gate between worlds and even some mystical time placement all through the script; and yet there’s no real answers provided anywhere. Most players are thinly-defined – if at all – so I’m left at a loss to conclude what a handful of scenes were truly saying or if they were even necessary. At 70-minutes running time, the film lags in a few spots – Claire does the usual herky-jerky camera work for sequences that could easily be trimmed, and I found myself on several occasions wondering why (oh why) she felt she needed to videotape some of the minutiae of her experience. For example, if you honestly believed you were running away for dear life would you logically then stop and place your smartphone and/or video camera to give your next interaction the best possible film angle? I know I wouldn’t but call me old-fashioned. Still, I can’t help but ponder if this story might have been presented better in a more traditional format, one that would allow us less cinematic trickery and more character interactions.
So … this is what one gets when one checks into Camp St. Beatrice. It isn’t long before the black-eyed children emerge from the woodwork and begin terrorizing Claire with their tauntings, hauntings, and more. While there are some obvious suggestions that no harm is intended, our narrator reacts probably in the way which any of us would: cut off from any means of escape, she’s left with trying to outsmart these spectral entities in ways that probably appear less-than-smart in retrospect. As she came to this place willingly, it’s progressively clear that – even as she eventually suggests – Claire is right where she’s supposed to be, evil be damned.
Chiefly, the problem with Children is that its narrative only shows enough material to leave viewers asking questions. Why is it that Claire experiences déjà vu throughout the compound? Could the journal she finds, in fact, be something she wrote when she was here before? What is the physical illness she suffers, coughing up blood in a few sequences, and why has she apparently never sought treatment? Who is the dreaded Man in Black, and how is it he walks unimpeded by law enforcement throughout an active crime scene? And – for that matter – who even called in the authorities given the fact that we’re never shown any other living, breathing people on camp property? When are we? Is this the present? The past? Or could this be something we’ve yet to see?
Such ambiguity will almost always work against the narrative’s forward momentum, but because Children is highly suggestive of something David Lynch perfected – nothing is what it seems – I’m willing to give Gallai, McClurg, and their cast and crew the breathing room necessary to keep spinning this yarn. (It ain’t Camp Crystal Lake, after all, so the gore and bloodshed is nowhere in sight.) I’d like to know where this is heading, and that anticipation helps to keep me focused even though details are exceedingly short in supply. In some ways, I felt I knew less when I finished the picture than when I started, but that could be just the way my deductive reasoning works.
Yes, there are hints to a gate between worlds and even some mystical time placement all through the script; and yet there’s no real answers provided anywhere. Most players are thinly-defined – if at all – so I’m left at a loss to conclude what a handful of scenes were truly saying or if they were even necessary. At 70-minutes running time, the film lags in a few spots – Claire does the usual herky-jerky camera work for sequences that could easily be trimmed, and I found myself on several occasions wondering why (oh why) she felt she needed to videotape some of the minutiae of her experience. For example, if you honestly believed you were running away for dear life would you logically then stop and place your smartphone and/or video camera to give your next interaction the best possible film angle? I know I wouldn’t but call me old-fashioned. Still, I can’t help but ponder if this story might have been presented better in a more traditional format, one that would allow us less cinematic trickery and more character interactions.
Lastly, I’d be a fool is I failed to give a shout-out to actor Oberst, Jr. for his slim work in the picture. Like Claire’s work, his is chiefly ‘found footage,’ and it amounts to an incredibly effective ten-minute uninterrupted sequence wherein he properly sets the stage (to a small degree) for the core mystery of who, what, when, and where that propels the film. The man delivers a real gut punch that probably woke up those who may’ve nodded off; and it’s the kind of performance that elevates creepiness to the level required these days. Well done, hats off, and let’s see more of that in Part Two!
The Black-Eyed Children (2025) was produced by McClurg Productions, Nguyen Bros. Production, Rix Cafe Texican, Car Trek, Chizfilm Productions, and a few other participants. (A full accounting – for who like it – is available on IMDB.com.) A quick Google.com search indicates that the film is presently available for streaming on Amazon Prime and Hoopla Digital. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I still found the provided sights-and-sounds mostly very, very good: there are several night-time bits and even some dark interiors that needed a bit more light, frankly, and I’m not convinced I saw everything I needed. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? As I viewed this one via streaming, there were no special features under consideration.
Recommended.
2025’s The Black-Eyed Children is a paranormal flick that incorporates documentary-style storytelling along with some traditional sequences and even a bit of found footage to cast a Folk Horror spell about a particular time and a particular place wherein our universe may not function by the established rules of physics. While it’s easy to conclude that something is afoot, there’s still too much opacity across too much of it, though I am holding out hope that the forthcoming second chapter might dispel some of those questions with the answers needed to make all of this work beyond the obvious spookiness.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at McClurg Productions provided me with complimentary streaming access to The Black-Eyed Children (2025) 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 Black-Eyed Children (2025) was produced by McClurg Productions, Nguyen Bros. Production, Rix Cafe Texican, Car Trek, Chizfilm Productions, and a few other participants. (A full accounting – for who like it – is available on IMDB.com.) A quick Google.com search indicates that the film is presently available for streaming on Amazon Prime and Hoopla Digital. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I still found the provided sights-and-sounds mostly very, very good: there are several night-time bits and even some dark interiors that needed a bit more light, frankly, and I’m not convinced I saw everything I needed. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? As I viewed this one via streaming, there were no special features under consideration.
Recommended.
2025’s The Black-Eyed Children is a paranormal flick that incorporates documentary-style storytelling along with some traditional sequences and even a bit of found footage to cast a Folk Horror spell about a particular time and a particular place wherein our universe may not function by the established rules of physics. While it’s easy to conclude that something is afoot, there’s still too much opacity across too much of it, though I am holding out hope that the forthcoming second chapter might dispel some of those questions with the answers needed to make all of this work beyond the obvious spookiness.
In the interest of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at McClurg Productions provided me with complimentary streaming access to The Black-Eyed Children (2025) 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
press release
A MODERN HORROR CLASSIC RETURNS
IN A COLLECTOR’S EDITION BLU-RAY STEELCASE
FEATURING BRAND NEW BONUS FOOTAGE
One of the best reviewed horror films of all time, Ti West’s THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL is being released as a special collector’s edition Blu-ray steelcase on June 3, 2025. Becoming an instant cult classic upon its release in 2009, THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL collector’s edition steelcase will include all new bonus features. The release will be available exclusively at Dark Sky Selects.
https://selects.darkskyfilms.com/products/the-house-of-the-devil
Upon its initial release in October 2009, THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL was hailed by critics everywhere. The New York Times’ Manohla Dargis said West “has come up with a period pastiche that mimics the low-res vibe and look of early-1980s horror. And he’s done it with more shiver than splat. … Mr. West doesn’t just rise to the horrific occasion, he also revels in its simplicity, squeezing chills by turning on the lights, squeaking the floorboards and, in a heart-thumping scene, sending his heroine up the unavoidable stairs. … After years of vivisectionist splatter, here is a horror movie with real shivers.”
A creaky Victorian mansion, a graveyard, a lunar eclipse and a pretty college girl: filmmaker West brought back all the elements of classic ’80s horror – with a modern twist – in THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL. West (The Innkeepers, Pearl, X) set his tale in the early 1980s and created an old-school atmosphere of dread and “satanic panic” that rivaled the best of that classic era of shockers.
The film has a classic, deceptively simple set-up. Samantha (Jocelin Donahue, Dead Awake, The Last Stop in Yuma County), a pretty college sophomore, needs to come up with extra cash to pay the rent in her new apartment. She accepts a babysitting job from Mr. Ulman (Tom Noonan, Manhunter, Robocop 2), a tall, creepy man who lives in a gloomy old house near a cemetery in the woods. Samantha soon learns that Ulman and his wife (Mary Woronov, The Devil’s Rejects, Eating Raoul) don’t even have a child, but Ulman explains that he simply needs Samantha to keep an eye on his elderly mother-in-law while he and his wife go out to celebrate the lunar eclipse. Also in the cast is the then-rising indie It Girl, Greta Gerwig.
The new collector’s edition will include the following bonus features:
Constructing The House of the Devil - New
The Gallery of the Devil - New
Blood for the Devil - New
Channel 13 News Segments - New
In The House of the Devil
Behind The House of the Devil
Deleted Scenes
Commentary with Ti West and Jocelin Donahue
Commentary with Ti West, Producers and Crew
Trailer
ABOUT DARK SKY SELECTS:
Dark Sky Selects is committed to delivering a meticulously curated selection of high-quality, limited edition film releases and exclusive merchandise to the collector's market. As an extension of MPI Media Group and Dark Sky Films, Dark Sky Selects hails from nearly five decades of experience in genre films, as a specialty label dedicated to preserving the legacy of iconic titles like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, and modern classics like The House of the Devil. Our mission is to provide premium, collector-focused products that honor our cinematic heritage and ensure its preservation for future generations.
https://selects.darkskyfilms.com/products/the-house-of-the-devil
Upon its initial release in October 2009, THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL was hailed by critics everywhere. The New York Times’ Manohla Dargis said West “has come up with a period pastiche that mimics the low-res vibe and look of early-1980s horror. And he’s done it with more shiver than splat. … Mr. West doesn’t just rise to the horrific occasion, he also revels in its simplicity, squeezing chills by turning on the lights, squeaking the floorboards and, in a heart-thumping scene, sending his heroine up the unavoidable stairs. … After years of vivisectionist splatter, here is a horror movie with real shivers.”
A creaky Victorian mansion, a graveyard, a lunar eclipse and a pretty college girl: filmmaker West brought back all the elements of classic ’80s horror – with a modern twist – in THE HOUSE OF THE DEVIL. West (The Innkeepers, Pearl, X) set his tale in the early 1980s and created an old-school atmosphere of dread and “satanic panic” that rivaled the best of that classic era of shockers.
The film has a classic, deceptively simple set-up. Samantha (Jocelin Donahue, Dead Awake, The Last Stop in Yuma County), a pretty college sophomore, needs to come up with extra cash to pay the rent in her new apartment. She accepts a babysitting job from Mr. Ulman (Tom Noonan, Manhunter, Robocop 2), a tall, creepy man who lives in a gloomy old house near a cemetery in the woods. Samantha soon learns that Ulman and his wife (Mary Woronov, The Devil’s Rejects, Eating Raoul) don’t even have a child, but Ulman explains that he simply needs Samantha to keep an eye on his elderly mother-in-law while he and his wife go out to celebrate the lunar eclipse. Also in the cast is the then-rising indie It Girl, Greta Gerwig.
The new collector’s edition will include the following bonus features:
Constructing The House of the Devil - New
The Gallery of the Devil - New
Blood for the Devil - New
Channel 13 News Segments - New
In The House of the Devil
Behind The House of the Devil
Deleted Scenes
Commentary with Ti West and Jocelin Donahue
Commentary with Ti West, Producers and Crew
Trailer
ABOUT DARK SKY SELECTS:
Dark Sky Selects is committed to delivering a meticulously curated selection of high-quality, limited edition film releases and exclusive merchandise to the collector's market. As an extension of MPI Media Group and Dark Sky Films, Dark Sky Selects hails from nearly five decades of experience in genre films, as a specialty label dedicated to preserving the legacy of iconic titles like The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, and modern classics like The House of the Devil. Our mission is to provide premium, collector-focused products that honor our cinematic heritage and ensure its preservation for future generations.
- Published on
As I’ve written about before, there’s (sadly) no universal consensus over what does and does not define a flick as a ‘film noir.’
I don’t offer that statement up as any controversy. The point is that a great number of people – vastly smarter than I am – insist that film noir (as its own genre) remains alive and well today whilst others will argue that true noirs were produced for only a reasonably short period of time (roughly the late 1940’s through the mid-1950’s). Anything resembling those older features today is more appropriately dubbed a ‘neo-noir’ – a conclusion I personally agree with – but academics, critics, and other members of the intelligentsia will more likely continue this debate into the next millennium, mind you. But because I tend to like classic film noirs and occasionally cover them in this space (under my ‘Monsters Of A Sort’ heading), I do like giving a bit of context for those who stumble into these reviews.
That said, 1950’s Mystery Street falls smack dab into the middle of that fateful era attributed to the best noirs; and even IMDB.com indicates first and foremost that the picture is considered a true film noir. Directed by the acclaimed John Sturges, the script shows attributed to Leonard Spigelgass, Sydney Boehm, and Richard Brooks. The cast includes such faces as Ricardo Montalban, Sally Forrest, Bruce Bennett, Elsa Lanchester, Marshall Thompson, and others. It’s worth noting that the film did receive a 1951 Academy Award nomination in the category of ‘Best Story,’ and – on that point alone – I honestly went in expecting to enjoy this one more than I did.
Impressions being what they are, Mystery Street is a good film, one that largely has the look and feel of the best noirs. Sadly, the similarities really end there – in my opinion – as the tale feels more like producers were pushing a bit away from noir’s usual doom and gloom, instead relying much more strongly on the inclusion of forensic science to bolster their picture’s popularity with audiences. While it’s definitely interesting, such procedural focus never quite competes with the genre’s tried-and-true characters, of which only a few turn up in the 90-minute running time. What emerges isn’t a disappointment, but it’s still rather bland in a few spots.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the kind of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A small-town policeman is assisted by a Harvard professor after the discovery of a human skeleton on a Massachusetts beach.”
I don’t offer that statement up as any controversy. The point is that a great number of people – vastly smarter than I am – insist that film noir (as its own genre) remains alive and well today whilst others will argue that true noirs were produced for only a reasonably short period of time (roughly the late 1940’s through the mid-1950’s). Anything resembling those older features today is more appropriately dubbed a ‘neo-noir’ – a conclusion I personally agree with – but academics, critics, and other members of the intelligentsia will more likely continue this debate into the next millennium, mind you. But because I tend to like classic film noirs and occasionally cover them in this space (under my ‘Monsters Of A Sort’ heading), I do like giving a bit of context for those who stumble into these reviews.
That said, 1950’s Mystery Street falls smack dab into the middle of that fateful era attributed to the best noirs; and even IMDB.com indicates first and foremost that the picture is considered a true film noir. Directed by the acclaimed John Sturges, the script shows attributed to Leonard Spigelgass, Sydney Boehm, and Richard Brooks. The cast includes such faces as Ricardo Montalban, Sally Forrest, Bruce Bennett, Elsa Lanchester, Marshall Thompson, and others. It’s worth noting that the film did receive a 1951 Academy Award nomination in the category of ‘Best Story,’ and – on that point alone – I honestly went in expecting to enjoy this one more than I did.
Impressions being what they are, Mystery Street is a good film, one that largely has the look and feel of the best noirs. Sadly, the similarities really end there – in my opinion – as the tale feels more like producers were pushing a bit away from noir’s usual doom and gloom, instead relying much more strongly on the inclusion of forensic science to bolster their picture’s popularity with audiences. While it’s definitely interesting, such procedural focus never quite competes with the genre’s tried-and-true characters, of which only a few turn up in the 90-minute running time. What emerges isn’t a disappointment, but it’s still rather bland in a few spots.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the kind of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A small-town policeman is assisted by a Harvard professor after the discovery of a human skeleton on a Massachusetts beach.”
Sometimes the difficulty in reviewing classic films is that there have been so many technical evolutions and revolutions in all of filmdom since the bygone eras that older flicks just don’t quite compete. It’s incumbent upon watchers to place a particular story in the proper time and place historically when considering what it may’ve done right and wrong as opposed to hating it outright because so many other storytellers may’ve done it better since way back then. I’m constantly reminding myself of that simple premise, and it certainly helps when examining something as bland as is so very much of Mystery Street.
Struggling to make ends meet, professional bargirl Vivian Heldon (played by the incandescent Jan Sterling) finds herself with no alterative other than to put the financial squeeze on loyal patron James Harkley (Edmon Ryan): she demands he pony up serious cash to pay her rent or she’ll out him to his family, bringing public shame onto his business of crafting designer yachts. After she convinces drunk shlub Henry Shanway (Marshall Thompson) to drive her out to Harkley’s estate, Vivian can finally see dollar signs in her eyes. But once she arrives in Cape Cod, she manages to dump Shanway out on the side of the road so that she can meet up with her married lover and get some of the cold cash. Lo and behold, Harkley has other designs in mind: in the dead of night, he pulls out a .45, plugs her with a bullet, dumps the body nearby, and chucks the car into the nearest lake.
Eventually, Heldon’s body is found, and the discovery sets in motion a series of events on the part of Massachusetts State Police Detective Peter Moralas (Ricardo Montalban). As Vivian was entirely decomposed, he enlists the assistance of Harvard scientist Dr. McAdoo (Bruce Bennett) to aid in identification as the man’s cutting-edge use of criminal forensics is just coming into prominence. Together, the two become a contemporary version of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson as they separate the layers of fiction from fact, leading them back to the boarding house where Vivian left a fateful clue in the hands of her conniving landlady Mrs. Smerrling (Elsa Lanchester).
Structurally, Mystery Street shares the DNA of just about any other film noir of its day. Characters like Heldon, Harkley, and Smerrling are the backbone around which the body of this dark tale of duplicitousness is aligned; and Shanways – the married husband and his young somewhat misfortunate wife Grace (Sally Forrest) – find their love tested by the circumstances of an inebriated young man making a poor choice as a consequence of his bad behavior. But – for my tastes – Montalban’s crusading cop only has his studiousness going for him: he never quite seems anything greater than the film’s moral conscience, behaving entirely as written and failing to rise off the screen as an authentic person. While the actor turns in an affable enough performance, it’s too ‘color by numbers’ to be believable against everyone else.
Additionally, Mystery Street falls back more on traditional melodrama in its second half, never quite overcoming the script’s desire to concentrate more on the procedure of solving crimes with evidence than crafting interesting yet stock characters that could be interchangeable with any like-minded picture. McAdoo – as the resident brainiac – shows up to provide the necessary exposition to move the whole affair from point A to point B to point C, so much so that I began wondering how in the Hell did Moralas ever get promoted to the point of serving as a chief detective. All too often, the science intercedes – perhaps trying to show why it should be trusted over all of those uncontrollable emotions – and no player here is strong enough to give the cast the presence it needed.
Struggling to make ends meet, professional bargirl Vivian Heldon (played by the incandescent Jan Sterling) finds herself with no alterative other than to put the financial squeeze on loyal patron James Harkley (Edmon Ryan): she demands he pony up serious cash to pay her rent or she’ll out him to his family, bringing public shame onto his business of crafting designer yachts. After she convinces drunk shlub Henry Shanway (Marshall Thompson) to drive her out to Harkley’s estate, Vivian can finally see dollar signs in her eyes. But once she arrives in Cape Cod, she manages to dump Shanway out on the side of the road so that she can meet up with her married lover and get some of the cold cash. Lo and behold, Harkley has other designs in mind: in the dead of night, he pulls out a .45, plugs her with a bullet, dumps the body nearby, and chucks the car into the nearest lake.
Eventually, Heldon’s body is found, and the discovery sets in motion a series of events on the part of Massachusetts State Police Detective Peter Moralas (Ricardo Montalban). As Vivian was entirely decomposed, he enlists the assistance of Harvard scientist Dr. McAdoo (Bruce Bennett) to aid in identification as the man’s cutting-edge use of criminal forensics is just coming into prominence. Together, the two become a contemporary version of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson as they separate the layers of fiction from fact, leading them back to the boarding house where Vivian left a fateful clue in the hands of her conniving landlady Mrs. Smerrling (Elsa Lanchester).
Structurally, Mystery Street shares the DNA of just about any other film noir of its day. Characters like Heldon, Harkley, and Smerrling are the backbone around which the body of this dark tale of duplicitousness is aligned; and Shanways – the married husband and his young somewhat misfortunate wife Grace (Sally Forrest) – find their love tested by the circumstances of an inebriated young man making a poor choice as a consequence of his bad behavior. But – for my tastes – Montalban’s crusading cop only has his studiousness going for him: he never quite seems anything greater than the film’s moral conscience, behaving entirely as written and failing to rise off the screen as an authentic person. While the actor turns in an affable enough performance, it’s too ‘color by numbers’ to be believable against everyone else.
Additionally, Mystery Street falls back more on traditional melodrama in its second half, never quite overcoming the script’s desire to concentrate more on the procedure of solving crimes with evidence than crafting interesting yet stock characters that could be interchangeable with any like-minded picture. McAdoo – as the resident brainiac – shows up to provide the necessary exposition to move the whole affair from point A to point B to point C, so much so that I began wondering how in the Hell did Moralas ever get promoted to the point of serving as a chief detective. All too often, the science intercedes – perhaps trying to show why it should be trusted over all of those uncontrollable emotions – and no player here is strong enough to give the cast the presence it needed.
Of course, some of this could be owed to the fact that – from what I’ve read – Mystery Street was a B-Movie, meaning that it lacked any major star power at the time. While it boasted a few familiar faces from cinema, there certainly was no marquee presence based on what I know of 1950’s films. Montalban was just kinda/sorta coming into his career, and Lanchester – while very good as the landlady trying to scheme her way into the lifestyles of the rich and famous – just never has enough screen time though she uses what she’s given admirably. The beguiling Sterling was only enjoying her fifth screen role: given that she disappears fairly early in the film (what with her character being shot and killed), the actress could perhaps have been used better in a stronger role.
None of this is to suggest in any way the Mystery Street is a bad film. Technically, it’s quite good; and a strong case could be made that perhaps the story as designed was meant to bridge the gap between noir and traditional melodrama. While the players and craftspeople all achieve something of interest in it, there’s still that spark – the real fire of immortality that strikes from memorable roles and production quality – that’s missing; and perhaps that’s the most notable misstep here.
Mystery Street (1950) was produced by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the Blu-ray’s sights and sounds to be pretty exceptional from start-to-finish: John Alton’s cinematography is top-notch across the flick, occasionally oozing with perhaps more atmosphere than was needed but is still appreciated. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? The disc boasts a commentary by Alan Silver and Elizabeth Ward, a featurette exploring the use of forensics in the production, a few classic cartoons, and the original theatrical trailer.
Recommended.
Mystery Street (1950) is the kind of production that may’ve stirred up a minor bit of buzz back in its days, and yet the film can’t really hold a candle to competing noirs that both set the stage and following over the next few years. A quick Google.com search suggests it was a box office loss for the studio – not surprising necessarily – and that kinda/sorta underscores my two cents on the affair, suggesting it just never quite generated any heat amongst its players and their respective circumstances. Still, it looks good – Alton and director Sturges weren’t phoning their work in – and there’s just enough substance in there to make for an interesting hour-and-a-half, though probably not a memorable one.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Mystery Street (1950) 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
None of this is to suggest in any way the Mystery Street is a bad film. Technically, it’s quite good; and a strong case could be made that perhaps the story as designed was meant to bridge the gap between noir and traditional melodrama. While the players and craftspeople all achieve something of interest in it, there’s still that spark – the real fire of immortality that strikes from memorable roles and production quality – that’s missing; and perhaps that’s the most notable misstep here.
Mystery Street (1950) was produced by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Warner Archive. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the Blu-ray’s sights and sounds to be pretty exceptional from start-to-finish: John Alton’s cinematography is top-notch across the flick, occasionally oozing with perhaps more atmosphere than was needed but is still appreciated. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? The disc boasts a commentary by Alan Silver and Elizabeth Ward, a featurette exploring the use of forensics in the production, a few classic cartoons, and the original theatrical trailer.
Recommended.
Mystery Street (1950) is the kind of production that may’ve stirred up a minor bit of buzz back in its days, and yet the film can’t really hold a candle to competing noirs that both set the stage and following over the next few years. A quick Google.com search suggests it was a box office loss for the studio – not surprising necessarily – and that kinda/sorta underscores my two cents on the affair, suggesting it just never quite generated any heat amongst its players and their respective circumstances. Still, it looks good – Alton and director Sturges weren’t phoning their work in – and there’s just enough substance in there to make for an interesting hour-and-a-half, though probably not a memorable one.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Warner Archive (via Allied Vaughn) provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Mystery Street (1950) 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