Good morning, gentle readers, and welcome to the start of an all-new week of fun and frivolity!  Happy Monday!

Ah, there it is ... the smell of Monday morning ... doesn't it just make you want to climb back under the covers?  No, no, no, my friends!  Pull yourselves out of that stupor and get to it.  Pull the bandaid off.  Make it happen.  Seize the day and own it.  Make the best of this one, folks, as it's the only one we get!

Well, well, well ... the wifey treated me to an all-new laptop over the weekend, folks.  (She's really too good to be true, isn't she?)  The one I've been using has just started to behave so poorly that it was about time.  It hadn't crapped out completely, but it was clearly struggling with some processing issue.  A few websites were starting to appear 'funky' (that's the only term I can apply to it), so I'm wondering if a little 'something something' weren't occuring deep within.  No way for me to know -- no a techie person in the slightest -- and here we are.  I spent the better part of Sunday afternoon transferring files from one laptop to the new, loading up softwares, and going through the usual routine of transitioning from one machine to another.  I did buy an extra peripheral device that (cough cough) Amazon.com SAID was a damn near necessary add-on, but lo and behold it requires a connective cord that the laptop itself doesn't even have a port for, so I'll have to be talking to the retailer today to figure out why they bundled these items together in the first place.  (They always screw you at the drive-thru.)

Also -- for those who like this kind of information -- she treated me to a late Saturday afternoon showing of Star Wars: Episode II - Attack Of The Clones on the big screen at the nearby cheapie theater.  Fabulous to see some authentic Star Wars back on the silver screen, no?  I just can't pass them up when they're in the area, and this one had a very good turnout (to my surprise).  With all of those folks who reportedly hated the Prequel Trilogy, it was impressive to see such a positive reception for the George Lucas stuff.  If my time allows, then we'll be taking in Revenge Of The Sith next weekend for posterity.  Gotta love it.

Also -- and this is just for information's sake -- the posts to the MainPage might be a bit off today, tomorrow, and Wednesday.  I have a minor medical procedure scheduled for Wednesday morning, and there's a bit of prep that goes into it as well.  I mention this solely because it'll likely cut into my time spent updating the Daily Citations as well as posting new material.  (Holy Mother of Dragons, I have a short stack of films I received on Friday and Saturday, so I've my work cut out for me.)  So if you're watching for reviews, then it'll likely be slim over the next few days.  Gotta do what one's gotta do, you know.  I'll try to get something up, but just warning you if it's quiet.

Otherwise, here's the real reason why you're here ...
​

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

I’m often accused of liking bad movies.
 
Rather than defend my choice of flicks, I’ve often pointed out that I don’t criticize others for liking what they like, either.  Taste varies from person-to-person, meaning that what I find funny, what I find touching, what I find endearing, and what I find confusing may very well not be what the rest of you out there in Cyberspace find; and to each his own.  Also, I’ve argued that just because a particular picture entertains me doesn’t necessarily mean that I like it, promote it, support it, or want to own it.  But if it strikes a chord – and whatever sound that may be – then I think it deserves a bit of discussion and/or reflection, which is largely what I’ve always done in this space on SciFiHistory.Net … and I’ll do so as long as I can.
 
That qualifier out of the way … yes, I’ll admit that I’m somewhat easily entertained by the likes of Sharknado.  Doesn’t mean I like it.  In fact, all that really means is that I’m not afraid to admit it.  Does the film make sense?  Of course not!  Is it a fine example of cinema that deserves to be inducted into the U.S.’s National Film Registry?  Again, I’m inclined to suggest not.  Will it achieve world peace?  Well, that probably depends upon what planet you’re talking about, but Earth?  Meh.  Survey says, “Doesn’t seem likely.”  But is it a movie?  Does it have a premise?  Does it deliver on said premise?  And does it warrant you time, effort, and consideration?
 
If you’re willing to be entertained, then perhaps make it so.
 
(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:
“When a freak hurricane swamps Los Angeles, nature’s deadliest killer rules sea, land, and air as thousands of sharks terrorize the waterlogged populace.”

Look.
 
Seriously.
 
I’m not here today to convince you to undertake Sharknado.  It’s a film I didn’t catch when it originally aired on Syfy back in the day, but I did see it not long thereafter on home video (via a promotion).  With a title like that, I knew full well going in just about what I was getting, and I’m happy to say that my expectations were met.  Frankly, I gave up hope a long time ago that features made in conjunction with Syfy were ever going to be anything spectacular; and I’ve even long suggested that the network might do well to kinda/sorta give damn near everything they attach their name to either a respective grindhouse treatment or a healthy dose of Sharknadoing.  Such a branding might at the very least earn back fans of schlock cinema, giving the fans of Charles Band’s Empire Pictures or Full Moon Pictures a run for their money.  God knows they’re out there, and it’s a shame no one’s universally tapped that market.
 
The beauty of a property like Sharknado – besides the fact that it’s produced an incredible six features – is that it has transcended art: it’s become it’s very own thing.  Folks who haven’t seen a single outing likely have still heard of it, and there’s no denying the cultural cache that comes with such name recognition.  An incredible number of storytellers have committed entire careers and have built entire studios around the idea that they, too, could achieve household status … and they’ve failed.  Think what you will of it but Sharknado has risen to that level.  Whether or not it’s deserved?  Well, that’s a debate best left to saints and sinners … or academics.
 
But as to the merits of it as a film, you ask?
 
Well, the Sharknado is a rare meteorological event that’s yet to have been captured in nature.  (FYI: last time I checked, we’re still missing the definitive link between apes and man, too, so never say never, folks.)  Sharknado is a word that – unless I’m mistaken – is never even uttered in this inaugural adventure, only appearing in the credits and advertising materials.  Still, that won’t stop Fin Shepard (played by Ian Ziering) and his merry band of sharkbait to rise to the challenge and save their corner of mankind from being eaten by the sea’s deadliest predators, now incessantly airborne.
 
Simply put, it’s the tale of one man and his family and friends.  He’ll stop at nothing to save them when the direst circumstances appear, and that’s as commendable today as it was when Abraham Lincoln vowed to put the Union back together way back then.  It’s a relatable hero’s quest – not to be confused with Joseph Campbell’s scholarship – and it serves every picture well enough every time it’s tried.  Fortunately, Fin has surrounded himself with a likable team – the late John Heard as George, Jaason Simmons as Baz Hogan, and the stunning Cassandra Scerbo as Nova Clarke.  They share their leader’s moral core, and they’ll also risk life and limb to help keep one man’s family safe from existential doom.
​
Sadly, Fin’s ex-wife April Wexler (Tara Reid) never quite comes across as an ‘ex’ worth saving, a popular sentiment among mainstream divorcees.  Her delivery of lines leaves a lot to be desired as she shows up basically speaking them as if read emotionlessly from pages of a script.  (Perhaps she can’t believe this is where her career ended up?)  Daughter Claudio (Aubrey Peeples) is equally bland, but some of her character’s weakness might ascend from the fact that she’s none too fond of dear old dad for reasons never quite discussed.  At the very least, son Matt (Charles Hittinger) has the chops to recognize that someone’s gotta stop these sharknadoes from a’blowin,’ and he hatches a plan that conveniently utilizes the flying skills he’s currently enrolled in school to bolster.  At least someone’s a chip off the old block, after all!
​

What perseveres from start-to-finish throughout the film is the talent’s due diligence: at no point in the excursion does anyone break the spell.  For all intents and purposes, the predicament that is Sharknado is real.  This is an end times scenario that the Bible never warned us about.  These characters stop at nothing to not only save themselves but also the helpless they encounter along the way.  Sure, some of the defenseless wind up getting eaten; it is a movie, after all.  But if nothing else, the viewer should appreciate that everyone involved spun their web – for good or ill, for better or for worse – and they stayed on task.
 
I’ll always applaud the effort expended especially when it’s given in an honest attempt to do something different.
 
In that regard, Sharknado deserves your attention.
 
Sharknado (2013) was produced by Southward Films, Syfy, and The Asylum.  At present, the film is available for free (with adverts) on a variety of streaming platforms or one can purchase it on DVD.  However, those wanting something a bit extra special are encouraged to seek out and explore the latest and greatest incarnation – Sharknado: The 10th Anniversary Edition has been not only fully remastered (?!?!?!) but includes what’s being billed as hundreds of new special effects.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights-and-sounds to this remastering looked pretty spiffy: the FX – even in the original – are certainly not up to the Stanley Kubrick, George Lucas, or Steven Spielberg level, but – here’s a tip – they aren’t intended to be.  As for the special features?  As I viewed this via streaming, there were no special features to consider.
 
Recommended.
 
Much like I’ve always said that 1984’s Dune is a subject matter best left to fans of the source material, 2013’s Sharknado falls into the same category: in fact, Sharknado is precisely the kind of film that’s best left to folks of such goofily inspired cinematic fare.  It makes little narrative sense, it isn’t based upon any true story (that we know of), and it’ll likely only ever achieve a measure of cult statis … but as a franchise it persisted.  Doesn’t that count for something?  The fact that storytellers and audiences embraced this measure of lunacy for not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, but an incredible six features says something about how easily an intellectual property can earn its sea legs.  Until such a time that there’s “Son Of Sharknado,” “Bride Of Sharknado,” or “Sharknado Vs Ben-Hurricane” those who enjoy such fare will just have to make the best of that half-dozen flicks … unless Hollywood comes a knockin’ for a big budget reboot?
 
So … who wants chum?
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at The Asylum for providing me with complimentary streaming access to Sharknado: The 10th Anniversary Edition 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

It's finally here, folks!  Happy Friday!  It's the start of another fabulous weekend!

Ahhh ... and will you look at that?  You have an incredible 80 different trivia citations all across the worlds of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror awaiting your discovery!

Could there be a better time to be alive?

I think not ... and I'm glad that SciFiHistory.Net can play a part -- if even small -- in bringing a measure of joy to the world-at-large.

Not all that much to report this morning.  Actually was a reasonably light day around the SFH News Desk.  I got a bit of data wrangling done -- along with several new tidbits added to today's citations -- and I managed to squeeze in a screening of the 10th Anniversary Edition of that beloved Horror/Classic Sharknado from the knuckleheads over at The Asylum.  (Yes, I'm an 'inmate.')  I'd seen it before -- I think I've screened it with a previous DVD release, but I couldn't be sure.  However, when I'd read that for its tenth anniversary they were giving it a bit of an overhaul with some new effects and new music (or something to that effect) could a guy like me really pass that up?  Could I really?  No, I could not.  So I streamed it.  I'm going to try to have a review up later today, but I'm off to the eye doctor for the annual exam here shortly.

Also -- just an advance tip -- next week might be a little light on new content to the MainPage and within.  I have a medical appointment that's going to knock me out of commission for the better part of a day or two (nothing to worry about).  Still, it'll cut rather deep into my viewing and blogging time, so I wanted to give you peeps advance notice on the deets.  You're welcome.

Otherwise, I'm off the brush my teeth and whatnot shortly.

In the meantime, you know what to do ...
​

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

One word – “house” – conjures up several ideas.
 
A house is a home.  It’s a place of comfort and serenity, a haven where one can go to hang one’s hat, to get a good night’s sleep, and to exist in peace in the bounty of family.
 
But …
 
In twists of fate, houses can be destroyed both from outside forces and from within.  If not properly maintained, they can turn into little more than dens of escape from the true troubles of one’s life.  What you bring into a home can ultimately affect not only yourself but everyone else under the same roof … and what even risk do housemates share when they don’t truly know one another?
 
Family dramas aren’t always worth the effort, both to consider as well as to watch for pure enjoyment.  I tend to find them all a bit overly dramatic, but when they’re handled with greater deftness – and avoid the usual crying, hand wringing, and big shouting matches – they can be quite remarkable.  It’s this definition of family – and how it interacts with a wider society at large – that makes Strangers In The House a worthwhile film.
 
Well, that and the fact that it’s a fabulous courtroom drama, as well …
 
(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:
“Loursat, a lawyer, lives with his daughter Nicole.  Abandoned by his wife about 20 years ago, he has sunk into alcoholism.  One day, the corpse of a stranger is discovered in the attic of his residence.”
 
Ahhh, God bless the stewards over IMDB.com!  From time-to-time, their provided synopses are so incomplete that they produce a chuckle, and that’s the case this morning.  While the above does highlight only a vague hint as to the picture’s actual story, I suppose that might be enough to go on for some folks searching for a title to explore, but the brevity certainly leaves a great deal more context to be desired.
 
Strangers In The House is a deft character study of both one man – celebrated actor Raimu whom IMDB.com states Orson Welles called the greatests actor who ever lived plays the somewhat fallen pariah Maitre Hector Loursat – and the society of its time.  Somewhere – I couldn’t say where at the moment – I’d read that the film was called a great example of film noir, and I’ll just say in my humble opinion I think that’s a bit off-base: for starters, Strangers isn’t an American release (it’s a French film), and it only flirts with the tenets of noir the way so many features from the early 1940’s and well into the 1950’s did.  I can understand the association; still, I think it’s inaccurate.
 
Based on the novel by Georges Simenon, the Henri Decoin film peels back the layers that time and experience have left on Loursat.  Abandoned by what we’re led to believe was a promiscuous and unfaithful wife (there are repeated suggestions that Nicole is not his daughter), he’s sheltered himself away from the townsfolk and has sought companionship from, largely, liquor alone.  Indeed, the film opens with a fabulous scene involving one of his house’s two maids openly mocking the man in front of Nicole (played by Juliette Faber), and argument about the proper role in society ensues.  Effortlessly while this takes place, Loursat simply withdraws – drink in hand, of course – as he’s no longer interested in what cultural norms have come to be.  Nicole and the house’s senior maid take a stand against the younger vocal complainer, and the woman is ultimately ousted from her employment.
​

This brilliant set-up wonderfully introduces the dynamic of the entire film.  As the remainder of its 95-minute run-time unfold, we’re treated to the various layers of society – along with the movers and shakers of prominent and not-so-prominent families – come together around the feature’s criminal event: the dead man lying in Loursat’s attic apparently had some ties to the city’s disaffected youth – all of which appear to have been involved in no small way with the victim’s fate – and the police go about proving their theory of what went wrong instead of following the evidence wherever it might lead.  Just as Nicole and the older maid rise up and take a stand tied to the structures of the day, so too will Loursat have to pull himself from his self-imposed stupor before all is said and done and take his own stand against society at large once he sees just how complicit they are in sweeping truth under the rug in their own kangaroo court.
 
But … is this noir?
 
Well, Strangers does dabble significantly in ideas of pessimism and menace the way so many good films from this period do, but there are no real heroes and/or antiheroes at work in the script as adapted by Henri-Georges Clouzot.  Loursat has a logic behind his isolation, and when examined in full he’s reached a conclusion he’s found acceptable to withdraw from life.  His dour expressions and his unwillingness to defend his honor against even a housemaid are part of his chosen existence; and it isn’t until he privately realizes that – like a possible happiness was one time stolen from him – so might the future of Emile Manu, the young man who appears to have been selected amongst these French people to accept the guilt for a crime he didn’t commit but may’ve had a small role in.  Loursat’s actions in the finale are heroic, but again I’m not so sure that the man emerges as a film hero.
 
However, Loursat delivers a fascination post-mortem of this particular French society in his courtroom performance, and it’s definitely a performance for the ages.
 
He rather eloquently outs each and every member of the elite class – or, at least, those seated in the galley – initially demonstrating how ‘it takes a village’ to make any young soulless turk into the tarnished soul who might steal, swindle, cheat, or even murder.  But because Emile is, ultimately, innocent of the crime he’s been accused of by this very society he’s willfully chosen to be one part of, the fallen man inside Loursat rises up only when such a defense is his moral duty as a citizen and as a member of that same society.   He does this not as a man – because a man should be able to defend himself when the odds are fair.  (Here, they aren’t.)  He does this not as a father – we’ve already seen that he feels little obligation to earn Nicole’s love nor that of her suitor, Emile.  Rather – as I said – he does it because he sees the evil of the mob, and this is the role he’ll play in countering their rush to judgment.
 
Strangers In The House (aka Les Inconnus dans la Masion) (1942) was produced by Continental Films.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the good people at Kino Lorber.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I found the sights and sounds of what’s reported to be a 2K restoration to be strikingly good throughout, though there was a bit of loss here and there (traditionally) in some fadeouts.  As for the special features?  Along with the theatrical trailer, there’s a reasonably lively audio commentary from film historians Howard S. Berger and Nathaniel Thompson.  While I didn’t feel that there was a great deal of behind-the-scenes data provided, I thought the two very clearly expressed their fondness for the picture, and the discussion stayed on track most of the time.  Well done.
 
Highly recommended.
 
1942’s Strangers In The House is a vivid portrait of a society in a curious kind of moral decay that we don’t often see.  Evil has many faces, but courtroom dramas tend to focus more often than not on some rather obvious villainy.  Here, director Decoin and his cast explore the shadows where a culture is taking those first fateful steps in a decidedly wrong direction and, yet, they’re collectively ignorant to the road that’ll put them upon.  But one man awakens long enough to see the path ahead, and he does his duty by condemning them before they’ve sealed that unintentional deal with the Devil.  It’s a brilliant film, punctuated with a brilliant performance for the actor Raimu.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Kino Lorber provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Strangers In The House (1942) 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

Good morning, gentle readers, and welcome to August 17th!

Ahhhh ... the week is starting to wind down, and the weekend is just around the corner.  Can't you see it?  Can't you just see it peeking through on the horizon?  Relax, and it'll be here in no time.  Mark my words.

Well, well, well ... it would seem that the Mouse House has begun its build-up to the Ahsoka streaming premiere.  I've said before that I do not believe that the Dave Filoni property will be the (cough cough) Second Coming of Star Wars; and I've in fact mentioned that I don't see Ahsoka being all that well known a character outside of general Star Wars fandom.  She's really only occasionally mentioned in the mainstream, and if you can't tap into the cultural zeitgeist any other way then how do you expect this series to be a tentpole event?  It just seems like the usual studio suits are investing too much hope into what might be more of a fringe element of the galaxy far, far away; but -- like all of you -- I'll keep my eyes peeled for signs of life beyond the rest of us.  I mean no disrespect to Dave in the slightest but he always looks and sounds like a recovering stoner to me.  Maybe he can pull it off.

I spent a good portion of my time yesterday screening flicks, honestly.  I had a small pile built up, and I had to get into a few of them or there was going to be no end to the watching.  I did view a few (reviews for Psychosis and Australiens are up with links respectively), and -- God willing -- I'll have one more up later today (a film noir).  That's just a tease for what you folks have coming.

​Also, my laptop is misbehaving notoriously.  I don't think I've mentioned this before -- apologies if I have -- but it's developed this massively frustrating quirk in that the audio card seemingly decides when it wants to fully mute everything; and I can't get the sound to turn back on.  In the past, it's only happened when I was using Zoom-like software, but now this glitch has expanded to damn near anything with audio.  Does that mean it's getting progressively worse?  Is the sound card dying?  I spoke with a representative of the manufacturer yesterday, and I updated the sound drivers (which he initially thought was the problem).  That didn't fix it.  Eh, gad.  I both hate and love technology.  It's both a demon and a savior.

Otherwise, that's probably all I have for today, at least for now.  I might watch another stream or two; and if time permits there could be more coming.  We'll see.

​In the meantime, here you go ...

Yes, yes, and yes: I realize a scant 53 citations is a bit low for the day, folks, and I'll work on that as I can.  I did find a few items to add this morning -- along with a few more I'm still searching for online -- but it is what it is.

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

... and our cultural fascination with the creatures of the undead continues!

As can happen from time-to-time on SciFiHistory.Net, I'll get pointed by a reader or an advert or a slip of information here or there about a distant or recent release that needs inclusion to our pages.  I'll go digging only to find that there isn't a whole lot of data on the Information Superhighway regarding this obscure title, but I'll still do the good steward's part of trying to shine a little light onto it in my own humble way.

Today's effort was a little 'something something' that originally went under the name of Guardians Of The Night.  It does look like this one was slightly repackaged outside of its original Russia under the title of The Last Vampire Princess, though the advertising and promotion under that name is equally soft online.  Directed by Emilis Velyvis from a story by Oleg Malovichko, the Horror/Fantasy dabbled in the world of the supernatural by showcasing what seems to be a veritable cast of creatures all battling for some kind of dominance of the streets.  It starred Ivan Yankovskiy, Leonid Yarmolnik, Lyubov Aksyonova, Sabina Akhmedova, and Ekaterina Volkova in big roles.

​Here's the plot summary as provided by our good friends at Amazon.com:

"Pasha has regular nightmares about an underground world full of monsters and demons. When he sees a girl from his dreams on the street he follows her only to walk into the world of his nightmares. He is introduced to a world of vampires, witches and werewolves and the secret society of Guardians that protect mankind from them. When he discovers the demon world is planning to take over ours he teams up with the Night Watchmen on a mission to save the world. Pasha is about to discover that nightmares can be very real!"

Sadly, though, that's about all I can find about this feature this morning.

There are a few reviews posted at random website, but not even the usually reliable IMDB.com has much on it.  (I think as of today's date there are only a handful of reviews.)  While the trailer looks interesting, the fact that this apparently large budget creature feature has not been heavily seen outside of Russia doesn't exactly bode well.  Amazon.com shows only a few foreign DVD releases for it -- meaning one might not even be able to get a viewable copy in the U.S. -- and I don't see that it's available for streaming online.  I'll do some digging as based entirely on the trailer it looks interesting.
​

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

Comedy is very near and dear to my heart.
 
At one time, I dabbled in writing a bit of my own stuff.  Back in high school, but Original Comedy routines were the stuff of local legends on the high school speech circuit, and I even penned a few scripts for live theater and/or radio adaptations.  While I’ve not been fortunate enough to make a career out of such efforts, it’s still something that every now and then I’m apt to pull out the pen and paper (sorry, kids, but I’m very old-fashioned when it comes to jotting ideas down in ink) and give it a go.  Who knows?  Maybe at some point in the ensuing years I’ll put something together than I can shuck even in this space.  I suspect, if I do, it'll have an undercurrent of humor behind some of it.
 
Still, one of the hardest lessons I had to learn when being tutored in the craft was when to sacrifice a joke, punchline, or setting that the audience or the instructor felt was ‘beneath’ the rest of the work.  Early on when I was experimenting with finding my creative voice, I’d use just about anything I felt was funny – be it traditional humor, puns, and the like – and what I can to understand was that certain parts of routines tended to slow down the pacing of the material, robbing it of some intrinsic value.  Knowing what to cut – and knowing how to incorporate the proper comedic tone – is a skill that many in that business have to master in order to achieve success.
 
This is where I struggled just a bit with the obviously comedic Australiens.  Because I love a good alien invasion and because I love to laugh, I hung with it until the bitter end.  While I’m glad I did, I’d still have to point out that, thematically, the feature is all over the place with jokes intended for young and old audiences.  This unevenness might get celebrated with crowds here and there, and yet I can’t help but point out that if you wanted this thing played for kid audiences then you’d best be prepared for a few upset parents.
 
(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:
“Extra-terrestrials launch a nation-wide assault on Australia, much to the bafflement of the rest of the world.”
​

As effortless as comedy can be to some, I suspect scribes Rita Artmann and Joe Bauer (who also directed this) might need a polite refresher.  This isn’t a complaint about the totality of the script as a very good deal of Australiens works just fine as it was clearly intended.  Where I’d advise caution is in both tightening the details and, tonally, figuring out just who your desired audience is.
 
So very much of this occasionally schticky and occasionally slapstick Earthbound adventure feels like it was meant to entertain the very youngest among us.  The obvious farcical elements would likely appeal strongest to children in the age group of, say, ten to sixteen-year-olds.  Artmann and Bauer might’ve even sought a bit younger; while on the face of it there’s nothing wrong with that but Australiens embraced a bit of violence here and there that might frighten the stuffing out of those young skulls.  At my advanced age, I understand that having a person running across the screen fully engulfed in flames and screaming was intended for laughs; the fact that no one in the cast noticed this – much less thought to lend a helping hand to a soul clearly in need – might distress some kids.  (Just sayin’.)
 
Furthermore, I’m at a loss to fully grasp the when’s and where’s that this talented ensemble is when it comes to their years on Earth.  The film opens with what looks to be three very young(ish) ones in bed joking around with one another.  While I’m not great with guessing ages, I suspected them to be in that eight to ten-year-old bracket.  Well, once this prologue finishes (we’re basically introduced to a few central characters and the premise of aliens watching our big blue marble for their own purposes), the audience is told in script that the story now forwards to “17 years later.”  Doing the math in my head, I put these folks now in the category of a ‘young adult age,’ say 25-30 … but once this section of the film begins it’s very clear that they’re all behaving as though they’re twelve-to-fourteen years old.
 
See what I mean?
 
Tonally, Australiens never quite makes sense.  I realize that, functionally, this may not be that big an issue with some of you, but I can say in my years of both writing and talking about film this kind of disconnect matters to parents.  The kind of person who is going to sit a child down in front of the screen these days likes to know a bit more about a particular property, and I can’t help but wonder if they might be offended by having so many young adults acting like they’re pre-pubescent teenagers.  Granted, this may not affect a good portion of the humor; but there’s still an uneasiness here that I couldn’t reconcile.
 
Setting aside those core complaints, I’d have to agree with most who watched this and found it about as entertaining a space farce as it can be.  It’s quirky and uneven in spots, and the effects work – while seemingly low budget in plenty of places – actually helps underscore that none of this should be taken seriously on any thematic level.  The ensemble works well, and their camaraderie actually elevates the piece even through its campier moments (hello, why did none of you notice that your alien-replaced friend is now fully g-r-e-e-n in skin tone?).
​

Is it perfect?  Of course, not.  Does it try to be?  No, it doesn’t.
 
So if you’re entertained by this, then so be it.  It worked for me about as often as it didn’t, and I still had no problem saying that if you embrace ‘the silly’ then this might be one of the better alien invasion silliness to come along in quite some time.
 
Lastly, I’d be remiss in my duties of championing All Things SciFi and Fantasy if I failed to mention that Australiens was the recipient of some praise on the film festival circuit.  The flick played to some modest acclaim at such venues as FilmQuest, Galactic Film Quest, the Sydney Indie Film Festival, Buffalo Dreams Fantastic Film Festival, and the Best Actors Film Festival.  Congratulations are extended to all whose extra effort showed and was recognized with either nominations or trophies.
 
Australiens (2014) was produced by ArtSpear Entertainment.  According to a Google.com search, the film is presently available for streaming on such platforms as The Roku Channel, Tubi TV, and Darkmatter TV (for free with ads).  The film also shows available for DVD purchase via Midnight Releasing on Amazon.com.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I can say that I found the sights-and-sounds to be fairly well constructed: while the general quality is high, it’s very obvious that – even as of 2014 special effects standards – there are a good many sequences to be a bit underwhelming.  Granted, it’s all in the keeping of a comedy at times, but be warned.  Effects are Saturday morning TV quality.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Alas, I viewed this one via streaming, so there were no special features under consideration.
 
(Mildly) Recommended.
 
Despite some shortcomings textually (what I find funny may not be what you find funny, and vice versa), Australiens still manages to achieve a middle-of-the-road sensibility with respect to its humor.  Granted, I think more of the jokes are intended for children, but don’t let that put you off finding a good laugh here and there.  The repeated joke of (cough cough) inadvertently puking on one of your peers never overstays its welcome, and I suspect that a good time was had by all in the making of this space farce.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Midnight Releasing provided me with complimentary streaming access to Australiens (2014) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review.  Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

​-- EZ

Regular readers of SciFiHistory.Net know of my affinity for film noir.  I’ve been known to scribble on about it from time-to-time on the MainPage, even covering some older releases finding new life on home video mostly through my contacts with Kino Lorber and a few other distributors.  While my opinion on some of the sub-genre’s classics do tend to be a bit more sedate as compared to cinema purists, I’ll continue to champion the flicks from the bygone era, mostly because they not only speak to me on some psychological level but also because they’re usually extremely accessible for casual fans.
 
So … it goes without saying that I love it when a modern release does try to seize on the elements that make film noirs such a pleasant experience – the starkness of black-and-white cinematography, the world-weary heroes and antiheroes, and the usual labyrinthine plotlines.  While I’ve seen many attempts that didn’t quite capture the milieu as effectively, I think it’s easy to spot the effort to get it right … and that’s definitely the case with Pirie Martin’s Psychosis, a new release that’s presently screening on the film festival circuit.
 
Psychosis introduces audiences to the character of Cliff Van Aarle (played wonderfully by Derryn Amoroso), a ‘gun for hire’ legman who uses the earnings from his odd jobs to care his bedridden sister slumbering in a deep coma at the city hospital.  Tortured by a troubled past along with the fact that he suffers from an intense case of paracusia (i.e. he’s constantly hearing voices in his head), he’ll still stop at nothing to get the job done, even if the mission of mercy points him in directions where angels fear to tread.
 
(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 criminal fixer who experiences auditory hallucinations must confront old demons when a new contract drags him into a surreal maelstrom of mind-altering drugs, delusional vigilantes, and a sadistic hypnotist who seems more monster than man.”
​

​I’ve often argued that films I tend to enjoy more are those that don’t stick to a simple tried-and-true path but actually combine a bit of this with a bit of that, giving the end result a freshness precisely because all involved sought to ‘color outside the lines.’  In other words, why stop at being a conventional Drama when you can infuse plotlines with a measure of Mystery and intrigue?  And why not incorporate a pinch of Science Fiction with a small dose of Fantasy if you can blend the ingredients seamlessly?  Such mixtures give a storyteller the opportunity to both widen audience appeal as well as craft a more compelling fictional universe, one that might grow powerful and interesting enough to swing open doors for another feature, a sequel, a prequel, or even a budding franchise.
 
That’s how Psychosis (2023) feels to me.
 
Martin’s flick at times feels like a traditional gumshoe-style picture – one wherein a tired detective (here more of a problem solver, but you get the idea) has to face insurmountable odds in order to get to the bottom of the mystery – but there are a good number of other influences at work in the narrative at different times.  In fact, the film’s pervasive drug use gets likened to creating a world of ‘Living Dead’ inspired chaos, harkening back to the enduring George A. Romero universe at a few times.  There are also greater hints – through a largely undeveloped subplot – that Cliff and his ailing sister were subject to some mind-altering experiments by ‘dear old dad’ at some point in their youth; and the fact that this unseen influence emerges as a possible source for evil in the present day, too, suggests that there’s more to that story worth a second look.  Add to the whole affair the emergence of vigilante justice – there’s a streetwise character who functions under the caped-pseudonym of ‘LoneWolf’ – and I begin to wonder about the seemingly endless possibilities Martin only tapped in here, dangling the potential but never quite swinging open the door.
 
Therein lies Psychosis’s chief problem: outside of a fairly rudimentary detective story, it never quite develops into anything deeper.
 
Under Martin’s direction, there’s a bit of trickery employed here and there.  The film is chiefly shot in black-and-white, but – on a few occasions – he slips in a frame or two of color; and it’s all meant to signify … well?  I’m not quite sure.  The bulk of these flourishes involve the feature’s chief antagonist – an Octopus-themed costumed madman who goes by the name Joubini (a type of octopus) – and it would seem the villain has and employs a skill set of hypnotic powers to both lure users to his street drug of preference as well as to maintain his empire.  Sadly, it’s all a bit confusing: he exists and has clearly conscripted others to work in service, but is that all it takes to satisfy a man with such magical abilities?  Street domination?  What about the world?  And what exactly was his allegiance to Cliff’s father?
​

Because far too many of these threads were just dangled and perhaps not given as much exploration or impact as possible, Psychosis might feel a bit incomplete to some.  I say this not to diminish the feature’s potential to build an audience: it’s a good film, and – given ample time and exposure – it might be the kind of quirky feature to develop a cult following.  Amoros is particularly effective as the lead: he handles the full spectrum of Cliff’s mindset – along with the voices constantly telling him what to do even when it’s in the contrary to his best interests – with a surprising deftness.  In fact, one would think he’s been in this man’s shoes for quite some time, and that’s not the case.
 
But if Van Aarle’s called back into duty in another picture?
 
Well, I like this one well enough that I’d hope to see the world continued.  Granted, not every player gives his or her A-game; and there are more questions left unanswered than there are closed.  But there’s a charm to a good deal of this independent feature, and I can’t help but wonder just how far Martin and Amoroso’s shoulders might be able to carry the effort.  There’s room for more, true.  I just hope there’s desire to continue.
 
Psychosis (2023) was produced by Pirie Martin and Jarrad Bhatia.  From the information I’ve been provided, the film is currently having its world premiere at the 2023 Popcorn Frights Film Festival in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought the sights-and-sounds to this independently produced flick to be exceptional: there’s some infrequent tinkering with color images that I suspect was meant to be demonstrative of something bigger in the story, but I’m at a loss presently to suggest what that might be.  Who knows?  Maybe the trickery added up to something more.  As for the special features?  Alas, folks: I viewed this one via a streaming portal, and there were no special features to evaluate.
 
Recommended.  No doubt fans of film noir will be tickled pink by this black-and-white, and SciFi and Fantasy enthusiasts have some tidbits here and there to look forward to.  Hell, there’s even a streetwise vigilante, so Superhero fans could tune in, though those elements are used only sparingly.
 
Surprisingly, there’s an awful lot to unpack with Psychosis (2023).  While the narrative tries to work as a straightforward noir-tingled private eye flick, Pirie Martin’s thriller also dabbles in more conventional territories of Drama and Horror.  Clearly, the storyteller is drawing upon a lot of influences to spin this yarn; and – while I liked a good deal of what emerged – the premise lacks a foundational explanation of what authentically was going on here, how directly it was tied to Cliff Van Aarle’s past, and just what trauma was fully responsible for rendering both Cliff and his comatose sister Louisa in their dire states.  As near misses go, I still had an awful lot of fun with this one; it’s an occasionally prescient indie picture that shows real potential for an emerging auteur.  Better luck next time!

In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Millennial Public Relations for providing me with complimentary streaming access to Psychosis (2023) 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, well, well ... good morning, gentle readers, and welcome to August 16th!

For those of you who don't know, Wednesday -- Hump Day, as it's affectionately called -- is usually a light day for me on the blog.  I usually just get up a single post, maybe two, as I do try to cram as much of my viewing requirements (films, TV episodes, etc.) into a single day.  That way, I can spend a bit of time fleshing out my thoughts in the written pieces that appear on SciFiHistory.Net's MainPage for posterity.  No, no, no: I rarely scribble my thoughts blindly, and I like to give it a little bit of organization.  I think that helps me make sense of a film, and I think that also helps me in helping you understand it better.  Make sense?  Let's hope so.

Well, well, well ... how about that Rachel Zegler, eh?  Just when you think things for the Walt Disney Company couldn't get any more toxic they come out and prove you wrong, am I right?  Good grief.  If it were me (and I'm glad that it's not), then I'd order that she be dumped from the film and have her entire part reshot.  I don't care if she's the lead or not.  You don't blaspheme iconic roles from film history, milady, as those of us who follow it don't take those things lightly.  But -- as I always say -- what do I know?  I'm just a blogger.

Well, well, well ... how about those Disney+ subscriptions flatlining?  Heh, heh, heh.  Guess Bob Iger's got his other pair of hands full on another front as well.  You can't practically double your subscription prices in a single year and expect casual consumers to sit there and take it.  I think the era of Bud Light and Target boycotts are demonstrating better than ever that consumers have a choice, and -- when you spit in their eye -- they'll happily take their business elsewhere, if that's what it takes to send a message.  It's not like the Mouse House needs our money anyway, right?  They've been on a downward fiscal trajectory for some time, and I'm thinking even its stockholders and shareholders don't give a damn about making a profit any longer, so ... why give them more money?  I'm thinking about cancelling ours after Ahsoka.  Nothing on there to watch anyway.

Well, well, well ... thus far, it looks like the actor's and writer's strikes are continuing.  I realize that there have been some indications that all parties have met and discussed some of the particular demands.  Alas, I can't see any end in sight -- not that I'm watching all that closely as I learned a long time ago to not take my cultural and moral marching orders from the class that gave us Harvey Weinstein, Roman Polanski, Woody Allen, Alec Baldwin, and Bryan Singer -- so maybe it's best to let it all burn down and start over.  What could that hurt?  I think even that knucklehead Mark Ruffalo had a good suggestion -- that being actors and industry types might want to band together and group-finance their own projects.  That way, they'd have some real skin in the game.

At present, I think that's all I have to sound off about this morning, and that's not really why you're here anyway.  You want this, and I'm all too happy to provide:
​

So there it is.  The Daily Grindhouse.  Get to it, folks.  Get out there and own the day!  Own Hump Day!

As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

(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 production packaging:
“Two billion years in the future, humanity finds itself on the verge of extinction.  Almost all that remains are lone, surreal monuments – the futuristic, solemn, Brutalist stone slabs erected during the communist era of the former Yugoslav republics, arrestingly photographed in luminous 16mm black-and-white …”
 
There’s a bit more, but – frankly – I think it both gives away too much of director Jóhann Jóhannsson’s central technique, so I decided it best to truncate that.  Still, it isn’t that often when I find so very little to say about a project, and yet that’s the case with Last And First Men (2020), an impressive debut but equally hollow so far as this under-educated critic is concerned.  Rather than present a story (there are pieces of a narrative pulled apparently from a cult SciFi novel written by Olay Stapledon), instead the filmmaker dabbles in imagery and sets it up against what serves as a brief yarn exploring the synchronized tenets of life, death, and extinction … or that’s what I’m going with.
 
Having read only a fair amount of vintage Science Fiction, I can assure you that – practically from the get-go – Last And First Men feels like SciFi and Fantasy of the bygone era.  That isn’t necessarily a strength, however, as I’ve found most academics tend to dismiss the stuff from the earlier part of the 20th Century as being vastly too pulpy and/or simplistic to be recognized as ‘literature.’  Stapledon’s work – or what bits and pieces are represented in some of the slowest, most languid narration captured for the screen (no offense to actress Tilda Swinton, but a bit of vocal excitement might’ve pricked this thing up a bit) – essentially deals with the descendants of our world migrating to a distant world in order to avoid extinction … only to find out they’re about to burn out yet again.  It’s a dour rumination but does make some useful observations here and there; and Jóhannsson has done an affable enough job pairing up the tale with some striking visuals.
 
Still, the problem I had with all of this was that it was just too long.
 
As I stated, Swinton’s delivery is one thing, but the entire film is stretched to its running length by what feels like endlessly and unnecessarily long sequences.  While the architecture makes for some stunning views – and they definitely point out the irony of monoliths surviving long after their builders have all but vanished – I don’t need to stare at it for 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 seconds with the ponderous music weeping in the background.  Had anyone suggested to crop this thing in half – though I could be wrong, I can’t imagine Swinton’s speeches and vignettes stretching longer than 15 minutes tops in here – then perhaps the end result would’ve resonated with me more strongly.  It isn’t as if I disliked the premise or failed to miss the point; rather, it’s interminably pretentious for the casual viewer.
 
Imagine your favorite half-hour episode of, say, The Twilight Zone or The Outer Limits.  Now, imagine someone suggesting that the director pad that thirty-minutes with an additional forty-minutes of scenery and music just because it looks pretty and sounds grand.  That’s where I’m at with this otherwise impressive flick: it needed to exercise some restraint … much like the universe kept going after mankind no matter how far they traveled from Earth.
 
Last And First Men (2020) was produced by Zik Zak Filmworks.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the fine folks at Kino Lorber.  As for the technical specifications?  Though I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights-and-sounds included in this 71-minute film were largely very good: there’s a fair amount of camera trickery employed that doesn’t always appear to mean anything substantial (at least, it didn’t to me), and there are a few sound cuts that definitely give viewers watching closely something to think about.  As for the special features?  Well … a big miss … as there are none, save the theatrical trailer, which is basically the film’s opening 2 minutes, so … yeah.  A big miss.
 
Alas … only Mildly Recommended.
 
In fact, let me go one step further: I suspect only folks who are true cinema aficionados and/or fans of experimental storytelling will have all that much use for Last And First Men.  I say this because it’s really more of an idea than it is an authentic story – there’s only a loose structure here with a recognizable beginning and finish, but that’s about it.  So if that’s your thing?  Film nerds and academics, this bud’s for you!  Well … it might be for you.  Honestly, I would’ve enjoyed it a bit more had it clocked in at half its run time.  Otherwise, it’s a ponderous meditation on existence more than it is anything else … only occasionally impactful and sparingly edifying.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Kino Lorber provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Last And First Men (2020) 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