A deathly dull Mockumentary from the lens of Charles Band featuring a gaggle of the ‘surrender cinema’ stable ‘NoAngels.com’ is the story of several women’s determination to launch an adult website during the apex of the 2000s ‘dot com’ Craze. And…that’s really all there is to say about this one.

I’m not entirely sure what the point of it was truthfully, the idea of a scripted fake documentary is *generally* that the story is more engaging than anything that could happen naturally…but here, it’s *too* straight cut, with only the occasional, incredibly painful planned shot and the clearly fake ‘drama’ pulling you out of a dreary piece about half a dozen girls going to the club and talking ‘branding opportunities’

The film gets SO fed up with itself, that half way in to the movie it becomes an advert for the ‘hustler store’ and ‘surrender cinemas’ self branded adult toy merch.

The pacing is chronically slow, the direction and cine are jittery and painful…not helped by the fact this was shot in DV wide-screen. But hasn’t been upscaled for streaming platforms. Meaning the copy on full moons streaming service and dvd is a ‘widescreen’ print for 4:3 tvs that hasn’t been recropped to ACTUALLY be widescreen for the digital release. Meaning the entire film has a huge black void surrounding it (a common issue for the less fondly remembered full moon titles…)

The characters arnt interesting, the softcore is basically non existent, the film seems to have lost the point of its own existence before it even really got started and the sound mix is atrocious. With thin tinny vocals that can BARELY be deciphered, getting hard mixed with random music, some copyrighted, others randomly incidental, but all super low quality.

I wasn’t expecting much from this going in, but even I was surprised how little titillation is ACTUALLY present in this movie and just HOW DULL it really truely is. Am absolute waste of 72 minutes. Don’t bother unless your a die hard ‘surrender cinema’ fan…and even then, I think you’ll struggle.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/noangelscom/

Literally only watched this so I wouldnt break my streak. it’s still alright…gets more hate than it deserves.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-night-b4-christmas/1/

Watched on Wednesday November 20, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/hey-folks-its-intermission-time-vol-2/1/

Watched on Tuesday November 19, 2024.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/hey-folks-its-the-intermission-time-mixtape/1/

When I say ‘They dont make them like they used to’ this is the film im specifically referring to. One of the first films to utilize technicolor and what a marvel for the age it really truely was. The 1939 ‘Wizard of Oz’ is a marvellous family film that, while almost certainly dated in some of its less politically sound choices, is nontheless an enjoyable, colourful ride through the wonderful world of ‘Oz’.

What astounded me the most was really how fresh this film STILL feels almost 85 years since its release. while I cant say it looks ‘fresh’ in the face of modern 4k digital CGI and animation, it DOES look fresh from a live action perspective, and moreso; I feel like even modern audiences would find something to latch onto with this.

The scripts…imperfect, I think thats fair to say, its a little slow burn, but manages to keep the audience holding on by way of its VERY unusual aesthetic and imagery. I feel like the film overruns by about 10-15 minutes. Which, by chance is exactly how long (roughly) the sequence where Dorathy is captured by the wicked witch of the west and has to be rescued by the tin man, scarecrow and Lion takes. I’d have honestly been happy enough with a final confrontation with the wicked witch in the emeral city. But! the film feels the need to complicate itself at the final hurdle…which was a bit of a shame.

However, outside of that, we have a really solid time. The scripts dialogue choices are solid with plenty of quotable moments, most of which have been absorbed into modern media via cultural osmosis. The characters are a little basic, but well defined, the land of Oz is a spiriting place filled with curiosities and intreague. the act structuring up to the 3rd act is pretty straightforward and interesting.

Tonally, its campy fun. plenty of fun little musical numbers and because the characters are especially vibrant and animated, it leads to a number of semi slapsticky encounters which I really enjoyed.

The direction, for the time, is remarkable. Honestly; this is an incredible work showcasing the real potential of colour film, and the use of technicolour here REALLY takes things to the next level. I was amazed by the practical effects, the creativity that came into the city and worldbuilding and the costume design, all of which felt grand and intricate.

The cine too was rock solid, with some incredible ‘in camera’ effects, glorious rich and deep colour and surreal compositions that to this day continue to inspire film makers ranging from Tim Burton, to John Waters. compositions are significant. Its an incredible work.

Not to mention the astounding performances from Margret Hamilton, Judy Garland and our anthropomorphic trio. Who are all firing on all cylinders giving performances that very much defined their careers (which is incredibly bittersweet when you know the hardships that these actors went through in order to produce this film)

The musical elements are delightful, memorable and instantly reciteable. hits that carry on reinventing themselves WELL into the modern age. the incidental music is standout and distinctive to.

In short, barring some pacing issues and moments where this film gets a little TOO simplistic at times. I had a ball with this, I have fond memories of watching and rewatching this film on TV as a child on bonfire nights and around christmas time. and given it had been 22 years (at least!) since I last saw this. It felt surprisingly like slipping into a well worn and appreciated armchair.

If you’ve NEVER seen this before, I dont know how you’ll take it, but i’d like to think you’d love it. If you HAVE seen this before, and its been a while, go fix that.

Also; Toto was euthanized 3 days later…

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-wizard-of-oz-1939/

An Academy Award darling, ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’ was a record breaker back in its day, winning Best director, Best Screenplay adaptation, Best supporting actor, Best Actor, Best editing, Best score and many MANY more. and given its been AT LEAST 10-15 years since I last watched it, it was a long overdue rewatch tonight.

The plot? Well its a little open to interpretation, as we follow Randle McMurphy. A con rejected from a ‘workers farm’ for assaulting too many people sent to an institution to be analysed to find out if he suffers from mental illness. The main thrust of the plot follows McMurphys various efforts to either escape, change the operations of the facility or to simply antagonize the wards chief of staff ‘Nurse Ratched’.

Only, McMurphy finds himself in too deep, when he finds out that the ward staff are the people who can decide when he’s free to go, and that being institutionalised is NOT a walk in the park.

The ‘open to interpretation’ element comes in with McMurphys mental health itself, you can choose to interpret the film literally, as in; McMurphy is a con man trying to pretend to be mentally ill to get a cushy ride, only to find the ride isnt quite as good as he figured. OR, you can interpret the film as all being from McMurphys perspective, and that he IS in fact mentally unwell, but warping the situation to how his reality percieves it. Theres evidence throughout the film to suggest both, and either honestly give entirely new readings on the situation.

To be blunt, this is a fascinating film and significantly more enjoyable the second time around when you know what happens and how things are played out, subtle moments that may go amiss the first time around are MUCH more significant on a rewatch and frankly. the whole things fantastic.

The scripts essentially a series of character pieces, but played with a real sense of complexity and care, its easy to dismiss these performances as ‘surface level’ but realistically, there is SO much more going onto these characters, and as the film slowly unravels, you see that complexity in all there different flavours.

The pacings a little stop/start for me, but its kept largely in check by a solid act structuring that never lets the characters rest for too long. Building to a totally unexpected ending that…while maybe a little softer than hoped for some, still has power in its metatext.

My only criticism is I feel had this been 10-15 minutes shorter, it would have been even more effective in what it was trying to achieve. The set pieces are nice, the conversational pieces extroadinary (Seriously, the dialogue here is next level). But I think one more pass through really would have just got it over the line for me.

Outside of that though? The direction is superb, no notes on my part its creative and emotionally satisfying, the cine equally solid, colourful bright, well composed with only a couple of shots really missing the mark for me. The edit is rock solid barring for a couple of continuity issues and the soundtrack, exquisit.

But, for me? the performances MAKE this movie. Outside of early appearences from Danny Devito and Christopher Lloyd (who here are exceptional) But this was an ‘introducing’ credit for Brad Dourif, who is just PHENOMONAL here. giving a genuine and realistic performance that rightfully earned him the ‘best supporting actor’ award.

This? is probably Jack Nicholsons greatest performance. a STORM of a character, he owns every single scene he’s in, works an ASTOUNDING range and takes the audience on a journey that I imagine seldom will forget. I sincerely think this role is the best thing he ever did, and given the work this man did with Kubrick? I think thats exceptional.

One Flew Over the Cuckoos nest is an emotional and engaging story of the mental health system in the US at a time where institutions like this were on the verge of widescale closure for the conditions they bred. A powerful feature film that stands alone and offers an astounding work to anyone willing to put the time in to see it. imperfect, but absolutely worth your time.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/one-flew-over-the-cuckoos-nest/

A painfully frustrating movie, ‘Shannon Matthews: The Musical – The Movie’ is a film that ultimately left me feeling quite hollow. As someone who vividly remembers the events of the 2008 hysteria around the dissapearence and discovery of Shannon Matthews, and the revelation that her mother, Karen Matthews, had masterminded a plot to hide her daughter, report her as missing and then claim the ‘fame’ and reward money for her discovery for herself. I was genuinely intreagued when this movie/musical film was announced for digital release across all major platforms. And I was even more intreagued when I found out the music was all (more or less) written and produced by the infamous ‘Kunt and the Gang’ who have been politically sniping the conservatives now for the better part of half a decade at least.

Unfortunately, the film really kind of fails to live up to its potential. While there was scope here to do a fairly self aware, scathing swipe at the media tornado that surrounded this, Karen Matthews and the people around her as a series of strange and tragic figures and an attempt to genuinely try to play to a more intelligent level of humour using the cases heavy level of detail to play on the circumstances themselves. Instead we find ourselves in a situation where, for most of the runtime, it feels like the film is punching down.

The script leans heavily into generalisations on working class families and is essentially a 90 minute joke at the expense of the working class, peppered thoroughly with ‘nonce’ jokes to boot. Its really only catered to two audiences ‘Centrist dads’ who would take this as overly risque, but would accept it as a ‘funny film with bite’ and Daily Mail readers, who would likely sneer at its depictions of ‘Poverty porn’ claiming ‘its funny because its true!’

I honestly didnt much care for the humour in this, and found myself laughing more at the surreal moments (theres a repeated motif of the detective who’s on the case having ‘Caves of Androzani’ style nightmare visions of Karen matthews head, which I thought was handled quite well) theres a couple of one liners, lone gags that did raise a dirty chuckle from me. But make no mistake, this is paedophile jokes and gags aimed at ‘picking on the povo’s’ for 90% of the runtime.

The tone is largely mean spirited, which can work if the film invites us in to ridicule these awful people while acknowleging they’re somehow intelligent, but the problem here is the film depicts Karen, her boyfriend and her partners brother as being too stupid to fully understand the consiquences of their actions. As a result, it feels less like we’re laughing at the situation and more that we’re being invited to jeer at people lower down on the social ladder.

The pacings a bit up and down, I found myself clock watching by the hour mark, and while the musical numbers do help kick things back into life, MOST of this film could be summed up as ‘Karen Matthews swears and makes grim monologues about her various ‘encounters’ while her boyfriend plays the stooge and makes overt pedo references’.

It ends rather abruptly too, and the resolution doesnt really feel nearly all that satisfying, which…given how these peoples ACTUAL real lives ended up as of 2024…is bizarre frankly. Karen Matthews went on to become a born again christian, and your telling me you DIDNT do a ‘virgin mary’ joke?…wild…honestly wild.

The entire script is very surface level on details, I actually found it quite dissapointing that an opportunity to REALLY make something controversial and interesting got boiled down to whats presented here honestly.

All the way through this film, I kept thinking back to the works of John Waters, and more specifically ‘Female Trouble’ which deals with similar themes. I feel like Waters film worked better because the characters are all larger than life, strange, but most importantly, cartoonish. They’re removed from reality. Here, the characters are simultaineously playing grotesque characatures of themselves, while also being bedded in a largely real story that actually happened. I think that contrast ultimately stops the audience from really fully investing in the work…it certainly did that with me.

The films biggest crime isnt that its offensive or shocking, its that its lazy. its not so much flogging a dead horse, more flogging the marrow. It picks 3-4 topics and mines them till theres literally nothing left. and thats a real pity as I feel the worlds sincerely missing an intelligent or considered take on controversial or sensationalist subjects. Something this film unfortunately doesnt do.

Adding to the woes, the direction is pretty mixed, an overeliance on greenscreen and plug ins left me feeling conflicted, as some moments were deleriously daft, while others felt remarkably cheap. there seems to be only 2-3 locations used in the entire film, with the rest of the production shooting outdoors (likely as a cost saving exercise) and the scenes dont really go much further than ‘locked off shot of living room in a wide, which we digitally zoom into via actual zooms, or hard cuts.’

The cine is overly basic, very little variety in shot types are present, and theres almost no moments of telling the narrative via the cinematography here at all. The colour correction is decidedly drab, with little in the way of style or distinction. and the edit isnt particularly tight, and doesnt utilize nearly enough B-roll, nor does it really get much more complex than cutting in and out of a wider framed shot.

On the performance front, the runaway star for me is Rob Kirtley, who plays the lead detective on the case. and he seems to know EXACTLY what kind of film this is, and the right tone to lean into on his animation and delivery. he’s bright, lands a significant proportion of his lines and feels like a Vic and Bob character got transferred into the film in some way. easily the best moments of the film are when he’s on screen, its just a shame the material he has to work with isnt as solid as his performance.

Samantha Hindman as well as directing stars as Karen Matthews here…and she’s passable in my opinion. VERY one note, essentially just playing a stereotypical gobby council estate woman. every 3rd word she says is a strong swear word, and intimate discussions and descriptions of her vagina wore thin after 10 minutes. In some regards, Id say she nailed the brief of what was asked of her…because…well, this IS what was asked of her…But at the same time, much like Kirtley, I feel like had she had better lines, or if her character was expanded on beyond a total surface level interpretation, there maybe would have been more for her to sink her teeth into.

The remaining cast are all playing it either comedically over-thick, basically doing ‘Gumby’ from Monty Python. or its cardboard. theres no middleground. and let me tell you, it gets insufferable VERY quickly.

Probably the best element of this whole production has to be the score, which was almost entirely written by ‘Kunt and the Gang’ and its pretty solid truthfully, with such hits as ‘You’re a Peadophile’ and ‘Shannon aint dead (she’s under my bed)’ theyre very one note, arnt particularly clever…But my GOD do they get the point across. catchy too. they’re not all great, some tracks are downright irritating. but when its THIS film, your talking about, you take what mercy’s you can get.

I can tell the EXACT audience this film is targeting, and it isnt me. had it been a bit clerverer in its lampooning and take downs, i’d have probably been a bit more invested in this. But the films SO wed to REPEATEDLY banging onto the same 3-4 topics across the whole runtime, it felt like being repeatedly smashed in the face with a barstool.

This film will only be offensive to the folks who would have been offended by even just the title of this film. But to me? this was just kind of dull, a half dozen funny moments sprinkled across a 90 minute runtime and very little else to show for it. I cant honestly recommend it. I probably wont watch it again, and I really wished it had been better.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/shannon-matthews-the-musical-the-movie/

Well, it seems like everyones seen ‘Beetlejuice’ apart from me. Honestly my partner was quite surprised I hadnt given what goes on in the film and my general movie tastes. But it seems like noone ever recommended this one to me, because the assumption was i’d have already seen it. But I hadnt. So tonight we made a date and, yeh…Im kind of sad that I sat on this one for so long.

i’ll keep it short and sweet because…like I say…it seems like EVERYONES seen this movie before apart from me. But I really liked it. Tim Burton here is firing on all cylinders, Danny Elfmans score is pitch perfect. The casting is A+, rich and dense with ideas. The scripts rock solid for the most part, bringing a real sense of chaos to an already fairly chaotic cast of characters. Brimming with imagination and surprisingly fresh even 35-36 years after it initially came out.

I only really didnt like two things about this movie. One is the 3rd act finale feels INCREDIBLY rushed and improvised. I feel like the wedding scenario should have been better weaved into the story through the runtime, rather than dropped on the audience out of left field 15 minutes before the end of the film. The way the film resolves is also VERY rushed and doesnt really do a fair job of giving the audience ANYTHING to grab onto to explain how the hell anything in the final 10 minutes happens.

It doesnt really give a clear indication as to what the situation is between the Deetz and the Maitlands. it all felt a bit abrupt. I feel like 5-10 more minutes to really let that ending breath a bit more would have done this film the world of good.

The other issue is that Beetlejuice as a character isnt really that well explained. Now; I appreciate that he’s an oddity even by afterlife standards, and that going for the ‘hellraiser’ trope of having these paranormal super beings who rock up, do what they’ve got to do and then dissapear, leaving the aduience mystified IS a powerful trope when used well here…But because Beetlejuice is so ‘all over the place’ as a character, it kind of left me questioning the films own rules when he just rocks up, does a load of random stuff in a VERY over the top energetic way, and then dissapears without a trace. I dont want him overexplained. But I personally felt I needed a crumb or two more from him to really truely bed him in as a character.

Other than that, this is a pretty rock solid movie. I think its not something I could just put on and relax into such as Burtons ‘Ed Wood’, but if im in a particular headspace, I could really see myself enjoying this one again. Would almost certainly pair up well with ‘Forbidden Zone’ and I definitely recommend this one if you havent seen it already.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/beetlejuice/

Through October I decided to revisit all 7 of the continuity ‘Childs Play/ Chucky’ movies as it’d been a few years and, I’ve always had a soft spot for the loundmouthed lil stabber.

Well, in 2019, the studio execs decided to see if they could strike out on their own be revitilising the ‘Childs Play’ name and branding and relaunching the franchise with a new entry that was seperate from the current ‘Chucky’ continuity (which span off into a TV series) and tried to reimagine the story in a more contemporary setting. The red letter media guys referred to this as a ‘cover’ and im struggling really to think of a better way to put it really.

Anyway; the film follows Karen and Andy Barkley, a single mother with a tech obsessed child who’ve just moved into a new neighbourhood with the aim of starting life afresh. Around the same time a tech company are launching the ‘Buddi’ doll, a smart home compatible doll that is aimed at being your childs friend, while also acting as a tech butler. they can turn your lights on and off, set off your vaccume, order your groceries…anything your smart home can do, Buddi can do.

And its here where the story really takes shape, as the mass manufacturing plant in Veitnam houses a disgruntled worker who, on finding out he’s being fired, removes all the safety protocols from one rogue Buddi doll before ending his own life. As you can probably piece together THAT Buddi doll (which by chance decides to name itself ‘Chucky’) winds up with the Barkleys.

At first things are fine, but slowly it becomes apparent that, without the safety protocols in place, Chucky doesnt seem to know right from wrong, and doesnt seem to understand the subtlety of the human language. Learning about murder, swearing and deception, without learning that they are in fact, very bad things to do. And..thats it, thats the movie. Andy slowly finding out that ‘Chucky’ has broken programming and has been killing people Andy has a hard time with in order to try and make him happy, and Chucky learning ever increasingly awful stuff that just makes him worse.

And I think the millstone thats hung around this films neck is simply that its called a ‘Childs Play’ movie. the total reimagining of the plot to remove the serial killer and supernatural aspects to this just end up making a sloppily put together production that doesnt seem to really know what it wants to be.

The pacing is BEYOND slow, crawling at times to a finale that, in my opinion was quite underwhelming. The tone dances between dark humour and horror. But the style of dark humour wasnt really for me, and the horror felt a bit forced in places. There are serveral REALLY weird sub plots that dont really develop into anything and feel a bit half baked.

The characters all feel a bit one note and underdeveloped too, they do feel like they belong in the world the film is trying to sell, but they dont really feel fully fleshed out to me.

The whole concept of the Buddi doll going rogue is fun, but its handled a bit haphazardly, by the 3rd act, the dolls just evil for some reason…It stops being about a rogue AI not interpreting human interactions correctly, and just turns into a generic killer doll movie. Not to mention the continuity issues throughout like…If Chucky is LITERALLY just a doll…How does he have the downward pressure to stab anyone. the heaviest dolls are only about as weighty as a couple large bags of sugar…and this things like 2.5 feet tall, so how can it simultaineously be a doll thats light enough for small children to pick up and carry around, but heavy enough to keep a teenager pinned to the floor, and heavy enough to puncture someones ribcage?

Equally, how can a doll that looks like it has 4 points of leg articulation (at most) spend most of the film awkwardly limp/waddling from location to location, but in the last 5 minutes, suddenly gains the agility of Neo from the Matrix?! Its only a movie…I should really just relax…BUT STILL!

Despite the scripting issues, its fairly standard fare for the rest of the picture. the Direction and Cine are to studio quality, though I did feel the edit was a little inconsistent and incoherent at times which really threw me out. I feel like the film either should have been a bit shorter, or quite a bit longer to really flesh out exactly whats happening on screen. but at 90 minutes it feels awkwardly limp. the sequence building is too slowburn for me and, as mentioned, that 3rd act finale really does come out of nowhere.

Almost all of the performances feel phoned in, Aubrey Plaza is probably the best performer here as Karen, but even then she’s playing it a bit stereotyped to the ‘cool mom’ vibe…shes solid here..But theres nothing here that hasnt been seen in two dozen marvel movies up to this point. Brian Tyree Henry is the real star of the show as cop Mike Norris, hitting that sweet spot of charming and charismatic but with a slight stoic edge. I really liked him here honestly.

The child actors, I wont comment much on, other than to say they were kinda sorta fine enough. Not naming names, but this isnt the best ive seen, nor is it the worst.

Mark Hamill as Chucky is *fine*. He’s no Brad Douriff honestly, but he has his own vibe and apart from the issue of him occaisonally drifting into his ‘Joker’ voice. he more or less does what the film needed him to do. I’d be interested in seeing him develop the character/software in a sequel honestly.

The soundtracks probably the best thing this films got, but unfortunately, it wasnt enough to fully win me over.

The 2019 ‘Childs Play’ feels like the bones of a good idea rushed out the door before the meat was even set. its overly slow in places, and doesnt quite seem to know which route it really wants to take, overt references to Star Wars and other Orion pictures productions such as ‘Killer Clowns from Outer Space’ and ‘Robocop’ dont help matters, and even the best of this film is quite ‘Beige’ honestly. I didnt hate it, but I really didnt care for it either. I think i’d likely revisit this one in future to see if I mellow to it a bit. But for now, you aint beating that Mancini/Douriff combo.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/childs-play-2019/

Somewhere in between the overlapping circles of ‘Thriller: A Cruel Picture’, ‘Last House on Dead End Street’ and ‘Bloodsucking Freaks’. We find ourselves in the realm of ‘The Sinful Dwarf’ a…STRANGE film for lack of a better descriptive. I wasnt entirely sure what I was getting into with this one, but when I revved up my severin Bluray copy of this and found that it contained no subtitle OR language options. I knew that what I was about to witness needed only the language of vision to clarify it.

The plots pretty brief. The film follows a couple who are running low on cash and forced to stay at a sleazy run down boarding house while the husband tries to earn them enough money to move them along. What the couple dont realise is that the house is in fact a front for a huge drug smuggling/brothel operation maintained by the titular ‘Sinful Dwarf’ who is the son of the bordinghouse owner.

Essentially, he finds girls on the streets, lures them back to the bording house, where he knocks them out, drugs them up on Heroin to make them dependent on him, before he pimps their drug addled bodies out to anyone willing to pay the price of admission. Naturally the Dwarf takes a liking to the wife of the couple who have just moved in, and when said wife begins hearing the horror filled shrieks of the women being violated in the attic, she begins to investigate….aaaaand you can imagine where this goes from here.

And, I do somewhat feel this films reputation preceeds it. I was led to believe this was a fairly hardcore grubby and seedy little picture. But the elements that MAKE it grubby have all been done in other pictures (like the ones I mentioned in the opening of this review) MUCH more effectively. with that in mind, it kind of makes this film interesting in the sense of it breaking several taboo barriers WELL ahead of its time, but equally a little bit ‘done’ as a result.

The scripts a bit overly basic, once you get the above plot out of the way, it essentially just turns into a rinse and repeat ‘The wife goes to investigate, has to leave before finding out the truth, cue extended rape scene’. It does this 2-3 times before we actually get to the finale, which WAS well handled I felt, but also left me kind of wishing that level of scripting was present across the runtime.

Theres a brief subplot about the couples marriage slowly breaking down as the wife feels neglected and the husband continues to flounder in securing work. But thats never really fully realised and is ultimately cut short for the 3rd act finale.

I watched the ‘European XXX’ cut of this, wanting an ‘authentic’ sinful dwarf experience, but was actually kind of dissapointed to see that the ‘additional footage’ was literally just 3 scenes badly intercut into the wider released version, two of which were incredibly murky hardcore sequences that added nothing to the plot, and one was just an extension of a non hardcore sequence that REALLY added nothing.

The pacing is slow burn, and it feels across the runtime like it might be building to some kind of broader subtext interpretation…But, I honestly dont think it does. I couldnt interpret a message out of this film beyond what was being shown on screen…Not from the elements in play at least. The film opens relatively strong, idles through most of the 2nd act, and ends in a way that I didnt dislike…but I didnt exactly ‘love’ either.

add into this that the tones a bit all over the place, the comedy isnt nearly present enough to act as a contrast to the darker moments, and the darker moments dont really compliment the kitchen sink drama elements much, it all feels a bit ‘addled’ like your part remembering a more coherent movie while slowly falling into a deep sleep. Im not entirely sure how I feel about it, I feel a rewatch may somewhat sharpen things up a bit. But I ultimately came away from it feeling simultaineously like i’d seen it all before, and that I didnt WANT to see anymore.

The characters are all fairly one note, they have their pitch and they stick to it for most of the runtime, I kind of wish there had been more of an exploration of the Dwarfs day to day work, like how he manages his drug deals and how he captures the women. more of an exploration of his thought processes, and in particular a bit more of an investment into his attraction to the wife. Because they hint it a couple of times softly at the beginning of the film, and then just flat out turn him sex nuts in the final act for her. Given the film shows he’s into voyerism, it would have made sense to have really fleshed him out a bit more in that regard.

The direction too is overly basic and VERY grimey, to the point it looks sickly, theres a slightly off-greenish quality to the film elements, that changes to a harsh blue/purple on the hardcore inserts. The prints scratched, smeared. dust filled. and the film is riddled with dirty early 70s cold looking sets that just make you feel like you need a shower with bleach and a scourer by the halfway point. I’d say that was a triumph on the directors part, but in reality, those kind of locations were so common at that point in time, I dont feel like the credit could really be earned.

Composition is messy, unfocussed. shots seem to be set up for whats practical in the location, rather than what would work for the story, and as mentioned the hardcore inserts have been shot overly dark, meaning when it cuts to the dirty stuff, you have NO idea what your actually looking at. Colour is murky and uninteresting, the sequences constructed bluntly with harsh edits that dont always match or work. it feels like it was cut together by someone who’d never used a bench before. I WILL however give the film credit for its opening title sequence, which was simplistic, but VERY effective.

As for the performances? Well…its basically Torben Bille as the Dwarf who steals the show, and that isnt saying much because most of the time he’s basically locked into ‘swivel eyed loon’ mode and is thrashing about screaming, gurning or hobbling from scene to scene. He’s the best performance in this thing, and It feels laboured. So you can imagine that the rest of the cast range from bored, to genuinely confused as to what they’re shooting.

I REALLY liked the experimental noisecore electronic score that mixed whimsical child like compositions with droning screeching. I felt it really helped give the film a bit more life. But it ultimately wasnt enough to fully sell this thing to me.

I think, if you havent seen ‘The Sinful Dwarf’ and like films that are a bit more controversial such as ‘Thriller’, ‘Salo’, ‘Last house on dead end street’ or similar, you may get your moneys worth…I didnt exactly feel cheated. But I did feel like its infamy had been played up a bit beyond what was actually on screen. I have absolutely seen worse than this. and theres absolutely better controversial films out there.

Definitely one i’ll need to revisit sometime.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-sinful-dwarf/