The Penultimate entry in Hammer’s ‘Frankenstein’ series. and after having a really bad time with ‘Frankenstein Must be Destroyed’ you can only IMAGINE the look on my face when I read some cursory notes on this film and was met with the information that:

A – This was basically a slightly tweaked remake of ‘Curse of Frankenstein’…so ANOTHER reboot to the franchise.

And B – That this one doesnt feature Peter Cushing, and as such has widely been classed as ‘Non Canon’ by Hammer horror fans.

So…this Standalone outing for the Baron and the creature was already making me feel woozy before i’d even hit play. But to my surprise ‘Horror of Frankenstein’ (while not AMAZING) does have some things working in its favour.

The film does pretty much follow the plot of ‘Curse’ with a few notable changes to the running order and who makes it to the end, its similar enough to ‘Curse’ that longtime Hammer fans may begin to feel a little *too* familiar with it’s plot beats, but different enough that, by the time the third act rolls around, you may begin to wonder how this thing is going to end.

The plot follows a somewhat more ‘Frat Boy-ish’ take on Baron von Frankenstein. Here? hes portrayed as more of a ‘spoilt rich kid’ who womanizes, gets what he wants and acts before thinking…We open with the Baron as a child and we’re introduced to most of the main players this way, before the film jumps 6 years into the future, everyones in their early to mid 20s and the Baron returns to his home town after an extended period studying with the creation of a living man on his mind.

And, for me? the big recurring feeling that this film gave me across the full runtime is ‘TV Movie’ vibes. The plotting, pacing, narrative structuring, it all feels like it was supposed to be some kind of multi part TV serial, thats had all the pieces stitched together into a 90 minute movie. As such, things do feel a little bit less distinct or lavish when compared to earlier Hammer offerings. But I do feel it handles its ‘reboot’ MUCH better than ‘Evil of Frankenstein’ it may not have the looks of ‘Evil’ but it carries a lot more heart and the story feels much better assembled.

The characters lack the depth and moral grayness of ‘Curse of Frankenstein’ but it makes up for that with a more humourous tone that I quite liked and somewhat quicker pace, which rather appealed.

In fact, barring the ending. Which I think was VERY out of left field, VERY rushed and ultimately was the thing that cost this movie another half star. I thought this was a cheaper feeling, but altogether very robust production. That did what it was aiming to do quite well, and only *JUST* overstayed its welcome in doing so.

Direction was reletively solid given this was a first attempt from Hammer legacy writer Jimmy Sangster, I wouldnt have guessed this was his first stab behind the camera had I not checked his credits. Its professional, shwos a clear creative vision and brings a level of style to what would have otherwise been fairly generic set designs.

The cine is a bit on the bland side, theres nothing here that really experiements or pushes the medium. Which is a bit of a shame, give theres ample opportunity to utilise strong colour and light play…but its simplicity is particularly solid, and as mentioned it only further made me think of TV movies for its simplicity on how it presented its dialogue exchanges.

The performances are kind of muted. I think Kate O’Mara really steals th show here as the housekeeper, with a cunning and border dazzling performance, she really oozed charisma whenever she was on screen. Ralph Bates by contrast, didnt really do it for me as ‘Frankenstein’ apart from the fact that the character just…isnt as complexly written as he ahs been in previous outings. Ralph plays the part mostly upbeat with very little onscreen menace. which makes th emoments wher he needed that flash of malevolence (whether physical or otherwise) distinctly lacking.

There are some decent supporting actors here like the Burke and Hair style gravediggers who offer some solid comic relief, or the lead professor with whome Frankenstein becoems obsessed with his head…who gives a warm and eccentric turn that I personally quite enjoyed.

Of all the ‘Frankenstein’ reboots, I think this one may be my favourite, an imperfect outing. but an enjoyable one non the less. I personally will probably stick with ‘Curse’ if I want an outing with ‘Frankenstein’…But this one definitely had charm, and I could easily see myself revisting this one again in future.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-horror-of-frankenstein/

Continuing a recent ‘Spree’ on the Hammer ‘Frankenstein’ movies I arrive at ‘Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed’ a DREARY little picture thats as dull as it is unwelcoming.

The film once again kind of severs with continuity, not revealing WHEN the film takes place, or if its connected to any of the other films…Not that that really matters because the film establishes fairly early on a strong character change for Baron Frankenstein. Where previously he’d been an ethically grey character with good points and bad ones, tarred with a very morally questionable practice…Here? Frankensteins just flat out malevolent and evil for most of the runtime. Very different from how he’s been seen previously.

The plot? is a bit of a confusing mish mash, not helped at all by the fact this things an HOUR AND FORTY minutes long…and the longest ‘Frankenstein’ movie up to this point. As far as I can recall, the plot involves the Baron blackmailing a young couple who are drug smuggling into a plan involving drugging insane asylum inmates and taking them back to Frankensteins makeshift lab for experimental treatment.

And thats the first problem this film has, a whole lot of subplots and not a whole lot to show for it. our characters spend most of the time planning out verious activities that then either never happen, or if they do take 10 minutes to plan and 2 minutes to orchestrate. Which is frustrating.

Mild spoilers here, but the total lack of a ‘monster’ through this only further drags the film down, I liked a morally questionable Frankenstein. I liked being able to have characters who, maybe wernt perfect, but at least had enough depth and complexity that I could wish SOMETHING…ANYTHING towards them.

Here? not one single character is likeable, noone does anything to really define what the films supposed to be doing. and given that the ‘creature’ in this film is actually just a slightly mind altered asylum patient. AND that that patient doesnt get to do anything till 15 minutes off the end of the film…Well, you best have a phone on hand because you are going to be bored out of your wits for at least an hour of this thing.

The tones all over the place, this is easily the most mean spirited Hammer Frankenstein film. Theres a rape scene mid way through that I really didnt think was needed (and nor did the cast and crew seemingly) and the finale is very underwhelming compared to the other entries (which again, is saying something!)

Similarly to ‘Evil of Frankenstein’ at multiple points through this film I stopped and asked myself ‘Whats the point of this film? why does it exist’ and the only answer I could really find after thinking about it is that they just…Hadnt made a Frankenstein movie in a while…and decided they should…but not out of a hunger of WANTING to make one…more out of a feeling of sheepish obligation to do one, just because they hadnt in a while.

As such, the end product feels bland, overly generic, runs AT LEAST 30 minutes longer than it should. is unlikable, and worst of all. DULL to sit through.

The direction and cine dont fare much better. for the most part this feels like a film thats almost parodying the style of earlier Hammer films. This thing came out in 1969, The same year as ‘I drink your blood’…and it LOOKS like a film made in the mid 50s.

Everything is underlit, to the point it becomes hard to make out what your actually looking at, colour use is underplayed and looks like a production going through the motions, rather than a film WANTING to impress. the direction feels largely on auto pilot for the most part. its ‘on the level’ in terms of a creative vision…But never rises above that.

There were allgedly tensions on set with this one. as director Terrance Fischer was not well, and was having chronic arguments with the distribution company, who seemingly had never SEEN a Hammer horror film, and didnt care to…Who wanted more nudity, sex and violence in the picture. to the point that Peter Cushing regularly refused to participate in the production if the changes pushed by the distributor had to be done.

Depite this, most of the cast involved said that this was one of their favourite movies to shoot. and that, barring the rape scene…which was allegedly the WORST thing they ever had to shoot. a lot of very good friendships were made on this set, and Terrance considers this one of his favourite films to work on…so im glad SOME good came from this thing.

The cine is just continual drab, lifeless sequences that dont really hang together well and regularly fail to satisfy. composition of shots was fine enough. But nothing here pushed the envelope and the final results are underwhelming to say the least.

Performance wise, noone really stood out barring Cushing. Who inverts his character here and comes across as genuinely inpleasent. While I applaud a truely nasty performance. its hard for me to enjoy a film where the lead is an antagonist with NO likable traits whatsoever, who doenst really get much in the way of commupence.

All in all, ‘Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed’ is a tired picture. a film seemingly made out of obligation rather than love or drive. its firmly planted a decade in the past and having decisions made on its behalf by people who dont care, and dont understand Hammer as a studio. Its a deathly boring film. and i’ll genuinely be surprised if things get worse from here.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/frankenstein-must-be-destroyed/

I last saw ‘Frankenstein Created Woman’ SO long ago, that rewatching it today I seemingly had absolutely no memory of it. I KNOW I did watch it…but it was such a new experience to me here, that im going to log it as a first time watch because…for all intents and purposes…it might as well have been.

Here? we see a return to form for the series. This one seemingly ignores ‘Evil of Frankenstein’ and is a sequel instead to ‘Revenge of Frankenstein’ picking up an undisclosed number of years from ‘Revenge’ and somehow the Barons Mustacheoed disguise failed (I cant imagine how!?) and he died under circumstances not really elaborated on…What IS important, is that somehow he’s been frozen and transferred to a new doctors lab. The new doctor promptly thaws him out, and within seconds, Frankensteins working wonders in the lab and discussing his work.

This is really where the main plot of the film comes in, as we follow Hans (a different Hans to ‘Revenges’ Hans.) and his love interest Christine. Christine has a deformity on her face, and the local ‘Toffs’ take great pleasure in mocking her furiously. Hans meanwhile is the son of an executed murderer and the town takes out their grief on him.

Chrstines father refuses the two of them to be together, but when has that ever worked? because they’re hooking up. When the Toffs go too far and accidentally murder Christines father, Hans is suspect number 1 and…well..the rest of the film will really be spoiled if I go any further.

But it really is something of a return to form, the script is punchy, keeps a really solid pace for most of the runtime, the characters are a little one note, but they contrast that basicness with some moral grey zone work which I think really works in the films favour, its not as grand as ‘Evil’ nor should it be trying to be.

I really like that it deals more in the ethereal of ‘What makes a person who they are’ and the concept of a ‘Soul’ rather than the last few films being too ground down in pseudo science and ‘brain waves’.

This film has a really solid 3 act structure, it mixes wonderfully bleak humour with macarbre horror. and most important of all, its FUN and it feels like it has something to say about humanity. Which really put it ahead of the last entry for me.

The direction and cine are a pretty strong return to form. While it is a shame we dont get quite the visual spectacular of ‘Evil’ for me? Hammer has never really been about that sense of grandness and whats presented here feels solid. With excellent colour use, interesting compositional choices and some wonderful scene and sequence building. Fischer being back at the healm really helps give this production a much needed boost in terms of whats seen, and whats explained.

The performances are frankly delightful with both Peter Cushing and Thorley Walters as Baron Frankenstein and Doctor Hertz delighting for most of the runtime. Robert Morris and Susan Denberg are equally wonderful as Hans and Christina. and everyone here seems to know the EXACT energy with which to play this. Its really quite wonderful.

Throw in a great score that perfectly punctuates the film…and while I feel the vision maybe isnt *quite* as sharp as ‘Curse’ or ‘Revenge’, ‘Frankenstein created Woman’ is still an absolute delight of a picture thats very well made, very well handled and really is must see hammer in my opinion.

That being said, I feel a wider discussion on whether this really truely IS a ‘Frankenstein’ movie is really rather needed…as to me? it felt less like a ‘Frankenstein’ picture…and more a ‘picture with Frankenstein in it’…Answers on a postcard.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/frankenstein-created-woman/

A recurring thought that crossed my mind throughout ALL of ‘The Evil of Frankenstein’s runtime was ‘Whats the point of all this?’ and its a question that…Really doesnt get answered.

The film itself is something of a soft reboot for the franchise, taking elements from ‘Curse’ and ‘Revenge’ of Frankenstein and slamming them together to create a new narrative from which THIS film spings forth.

In this films portrayal of events, Baron Frankenstein lives in a big ‘Mad Scientists’ castle on a cliff face, and years ago (without Paul) created a hideous monster that fled into the hills after killing a large number of animals, and eventually was wounded, and vanished. With the police wanting the Baron for murder, he fled the country, changed his name and continued his research elsewhere, eventually picking up an assistant called Hans. The pair in this film are now returning after a period in hiding to try and restart the works.

Only, on arriving back at the castle, its revealed the place has been ransacked. with the burgermeister (chief of police) having taken around 90% of Frankensteins possessions for himself. The baron is furious, but is subdued quite quickly when a local deaf woman reveals to him that his creation is in fact in tact, and had been frozen in ice since the day he was shot.

Enlisting the help of a stage hypnotist, the Baron once again begins his experiments in the hopes of proving his theories to the world.

And thats kind of the whole movie. and one fact I learnt about this one going in, is that around the time this film was greenlit, Universal pictures finally arrived at a firm distribution and work deal with Hammer studios and part of that agreement was that Universal would no longer take legal action against Hammer if they were to use themes and ideas from the Universal monster movies.

And thats basically what this feels like, like Hammer got the greenlight to use as much of the universal monster stuff as they wanted…SO without really thinking, they just rushed a movie out the door that did EVERYTHING Universals frankenstein movies did…just because they could…whether they SHOULD have however, is a different matter entirely.

I found this thing to be quite dull. the revisionism of the first 2 frankenstein films is annoying as I personally liked the direction they were going in, the plot itself is quite uninteresting and doenst really have any kind of firm direction, the title is quite misleading, as this is argably the nicest we’ve seen Frankenstein in ANY of the Hammer films. the characters all have little to no motivations, and are pretty base line developed.

The act structuring is loose and uneven, the tone is inconsistent and bland. The direction and cine are ‘On the level’ but dont really develop much beyond the kind of stuff we’ve seen previously.

Everyone looks quite bored here, and the HIDEOUS design for the Frankenstein monster itself REALLY brings down the films overall quality for me honestly.

A mid range uninspiring horror score really polishes this thing off as being just…really quite a dull viewing experience. Not Hammers finest hour, it feels rushed, unfinished and incoherent at times. Not one I can personally recommend. Not one I plan to revisit anytime soon.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-evil-of-frankenstein/

I’ve been down for most of the past week or so with ‘The Dreaded Lurgy’ and sleeping for between 12 and 15 hours a day isnt conducive to movie watching…So i’ve had to keep things light. While i’ve listened to plenty of episodes of MST3K over the past few days, today has been the first day that I’ve felt I could actually sit and watch something without sliding over for a bout of nap time… And ‘The Girl from Pussycat’. is pretty much the perfect ‘mid’ covid film because…there REALLY isnt a whole lot here to need to focus on.

Essentially this was the B-feature on the AGFA ‘She Mob’ bluray. its 61 minutes long and can GENEROUSLY be described as a ‘roughie’ about a girl gang who rob a bank and ‘get what they want!’ But in reality, its about 50 minutes of queer coded sex scenes married up to about 11 minutes of plot that gets surprisingly deep given that the rest of the film is rutting, or running about.

The quality of the print is a bit of a mess, which makes it hard to guage if the jump cuts were intentional and a sign of poor ediitng…or if just enough of the reel was missing that what we’re seeing is basically just ‘what survived…’

In either case, theres clearly a strong French New wave influence present here. with plenty of jump cuts, flash cuts and experimentation within the direction and cine.

The script is wafer thin, it cares not for act structuring, tone or resolution. it’s here to show beautiful women having softcore sex and attractive men undulating passionately.

The cine has that new wave flare of being a bit rough and ‘on the fly’ in terms of it zipping around the set and location following the girls as they do what they need to. The score is a jazzy little number that just about does the job.

If your coming to this one off the back of ‘She Mob’ and are looking for more of the same, you’ll be dissapointed. This is basically a girl gang picture hardened up with more nudity. I think as an extra though on the AGFA release…Just as a ‘nice’ thing you have the option of watching alongside ‘She Mob’ its inoffensive enough.

But as a standalone work? theres MUCH better out there thats worth your time. This was just a fairly flat picture with a few glimmers of good ideas sprinkled throughout that never really get realised…

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-girl-from-pussycat/

A bit of a ‘stop/start’ affair for me today as I had a few things going on. I’ve been meaning to catch ‘She Mob’ since it initially ran out of print with AGFA, recently it got a reprint. I picked that up. and nearly 4 years after its initial home video debut, I really regret not grabbing this one sooner.

The film predominantly revolves around a group of all Lesbian/Bisexual convicts (led by the VERY domineering ‘Big Shim’) as they try to plan their next move after a daring escape. The problem? the girls are bored and after a stretch in the pen, they want a MAN.

So; Big Shim gets on the phone and arrives on a friend of a friend ‘Tony’. Tony’s a gigalo who’s currently shacked up with the owner of a very prestigeous business…the problem is, the owner is already in a very public relationship, and the affair could break her business. She’s loaded and has basically been keeping Tony ‘on retainer’ to help her with all her ‘stressful’ situations.

Big Shim offers Tony good pay and a night of fun if he’ll come and entertain the girls. So he heads over, only to find that, once he’s confirmed he’s on the line to a very wealthy client, they kidnap him, tie him to a bed and basically commit to doing devious acts on him until the wealthy client pays a bribe to both have him released AND to keep quiet about the affair.

And the rest of the movie from that point on is Tonys repeated attempts at escaping and being Dommed by the convicts. All the while our wealthy client assigns scantily clad gumshoe for hire ‘Sweety East’ to get on the case of rescuing Tony.

This film is INCREDIBLY surface level, but a lot of fun all the same. The ‘She Mob’ are all overtly campy, WAY over the top and their aggressive outbursts OOZED a certain ‘John Waters’ charm that is quite hard to replicate in the post modern age.

The scripts pacing is pretty solid, though it is a bit repetative. Basically; if you go into this knowing what your getting, I think you’ll be fine. But without the awareness that this is a very OTT small budget production, you may think it drags a bit.

The dialogue is EASILY some of the best reasons to tune in, its just so effortlessly mean that I honestly really quite fell in love with it.

The direction is…unique, for lack of a better word. with a clear vision on display as the mob terrorize Tony…But whether that ‘clear vision’ is a good one will I feel largely be down to audience preference. I liked it. I thought it had the rough and ready gritty edge that these kind of Roughie pictures really quite thrive on. And I really enjoyed seeing an early example of role reversal within the Roughie genre (I.E girls throwing a guy about, rather than the other way around)

Cine is messy, but has a charm to it, the edit is VERY rough around the edges, in part because of the small crewing list for this picture resulting in people editing the film who wernt necessarily considered ‘Professional’ and in part because, over the years, the films lost a few inches off its reels, leading to jumpy and fragmented sequences where dialogue jumps all over the place.

The performances are SUPERBLY cheesy, given this was one of the first ‘Something Weird’/ ‘AGFA’ collaborations, I think they really chose a good one to get things started, to give you an idea of the kind of content ‘Something Weird’ is known to distribute. Everyone has a very blunt, loud and aggressive attitude in this thing. and for SOME bizarre reason, this is a film with a near all female cast where its actually more surprising to see a women DRESSED than it is nude.

The scores like an explosion in a Jazz factory. I really liked this thing on the whole, its badly made, weirdly written and paced, and outside of fetishists and weirdos who thrive on cheesy and strange cinema I dont know WHO this film was for ultimately, But I had a good time with it (especially when compared to movies like ‘The Violent Years’ or ‘A Smell of honey, A Swallow of Brine!’) and I could easily see myself rewatching it again.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/she-mob/

One of only a handful of ‘Adult’ features directed by John Hayes, and the ‘B’ feature on vinegar syndromes ‘peekarama’ set of Hayes work. ‘Hot lunch’ is a much more stable and traditional offering over some of his other works. The usual themes of group sex and voyeurism are present. But we have a much more refined offering vs his work on ‘Baby Rosemary’ 2 years prior.

And…for the record…its a bit of a misleading title and poster…they spend collectively about 10 minutes in a diner scenario, before the film COMPLETELY changes tact for the rest of the runtime…

The film follows ‘Andrew’, and opens with Andrew and his wife drifting into town to start afresh. They have no money and are crashing in a friends loft until Andrew can find a job to support the pair. His first outing? is to a dive bar restaurant offering ‘Hot Lunches’ that also doubles as a base for the local sex worker operations.

When things dont quite go to plan, Andrew finds himself fired on his first day as a dishwasher, and on returning home he finds his wife in bed with her two musician friends, who mock him for his attempt at dish washing going arwy.

Things get so bad that Andrews wife divorces him, and its here that the main ‘thrust’ of the movie really shapes up. Andrew is assigned a public defender who charges $75 an hour, when Andrew tells her he has $15 all together, and $4.50 of that is in his pocket right now. She tells him she can try and get him a job with a friend shes going to have a meeting with shortly.

The meeting goes well…a little too well infact. as Andrew is assigned a job selling encyclopedias to anyone who’ll buy them, but on the sly, Andrew is having sex with his potential customers in order to ‘seal the deal’. Andrews new boss catches on to his ‘practices’ and after sampling his wares for herself, she decides she can really run with the idea. quickly pushing her company up to ‘wall street’ levels. But…will Andrew ultimately be happy in a job where he’s trading his body for sales? well…keep watching and you’ll find out.

And…there really isnt that much to say about this one. It feels a lot more coherent than Hayes previous works pretty much across the board. Which in some ways is good, but in others does take away a bit of the sparkle that made things like ‘Baby Rosemary’ as ‘unique’ as it is.

The script for a starters actually has a full plot driven linear narrative, its a clean 3 act structure with reletively seamless transitions. The tone is largely light hearted, but they’re not afraid of confronting a little drama and introspection in the 3rd act which was nice. The characters get a little more depth than these kinds of films usually have, which was good to be stuck with for most of the runtime. It ends pretty satisfactorally and the dialogue (for the most part) is pretty solid, and even pretty funny in places. Though, the dialogue during the sex scenes is still honestly pretty painful. its SUPER cringey. and I know films from this era can go that way….But this really is bad.

The direction here definitely seems to have had more forethought put in. the non sexual scenes are competently structured and clearly have had some creative thought put into them. Its nothing ‘breathtaking’ they’re pretty basic scene structures. But theres been thought as to what to focus on, how long to hold in a particular shot type, WHY things are being focussed on. Which sounds basic, but when it comes to ‘adult’ cinema…its honestly a boon.

The sex scenes are much more stable and have definitely had more thought put into how they should operate. Given ‘Baby Rosemary’ was ultra shakey, or just shoved on a tripod in a mid wide for the full duration. This ACTUALLY has planned scene structuring, it gets up close to the cast when it needs to show intensity, you see facial reactions, it pulls back when it wants you to take in the atmoshphere. Its pretty solid, but not spectacular work truthfully.

The cine is also pretty solid, they’ve gone for a much softer lighting setup here, and they even experiement with soft coloured lighting for a scene or two, which I thought was a nice touch. it feels largely like a relaxed environment and given some of Hayes previous films have looked distinctly ill and floodlit, to get something softer and easier on the eye compositionally is a real win honestly.

The performances are a little hammy and over the top for the most part, but given its supposed to be largely a light hearted prodcution thats quite understandable. the sex scenes are professional, but as mentioned its a shame about the dialogue, both in terms of whats said, and how its said. If its improvised, it should have been blanked out, if it was planned, its awful.

All in all, this one was pretty solid, not a ‘must see’ by any stretch, but a good common example of 70s adult cinema, its fun, isnt taking itself too seriously and has enough of a plot that you’ll probably stick around past the naughty bits. soft recommended.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/hot-lunch-1978/

‘Jesus christ…’ – That was my lasting impression from sitting through ‘Baby Rosemary’ a film that…genuinely is probably one of the more unique and deeply unsettling adult films to come out of the 70s…and THAT’S saying something.

The plot? follows a young woman called Rosemary, her mother died when she was young, her father couldnt raise her as a single parent AND he seemingly had a lot of involvement with adult photography surrounding himself with very shady characters, and so handed her over to an orphanage.

We pick up with the film with a grown up Rosemary, going steady. But theres a problem, she’s absolutely revolted by the concept of sex. She can just about handle making out, maybe even touching. But anything involving penetration deeply unsettles her. much to the frustration of her partner who, after one final attempt to make it happen (given the pair are going to be apart for a couple of years after the current date they’re on) decides to leave to go have ‘fun’ elsewhere.

Rosemary is a little neurotic about it, promising that ‘she’ll raise her girls right when she has them’ to stop them from having impure thoughts or wanting anything to do with sex.

Anyway, the next evening Rosemary goes to visit her father for something, only to find he’s out. While writing him a note to say she dropped in, two of her fathers ‘clients’ appear in the doorway, and, at knifepoint, rape her.

Stunned, shes stumbles from the apartment complex, and when we next pick up with everyone, a couple of years have past and her former boyfriend, has now become a police officer, and is here to break the news to Rosemary that her fathers sadly passed away. At this point Rosemary also introduces us to ‘her girls’ two young women who are part of a ritualistic sex cult, that Rosemary is trying to be an influence on.

She goes with her ex to fill in the paperwork relating to her fathers passing and stops off at the apartment complex only to discover the 2 people who raped her two years ago, are having sex in the room opposite her dads old room. She watches them, before realising that shes only aroused by the idea of being sexually assualted. This then leads Rosemary down a rather dark path of trying to find ‘fullfillment’ leading to one of the most surreal and unsettling closing 10 minutes to an adult film that i’ve ever seen.

And, honestly, im having a bit of difficulty really figuring out my feelings on this one, as a work of ‘Adult’ cinema, to me? its a failure, the sex scenes arnt engaging, come in either two styles, ultra messy, shakey handheld footage, shot flat, with floodlit lighting (the least sexy lighting) or a tripod wide shot…Thats it. it looks incredibly clinical in places and the dialogue during the sequences themselves are incredibly cringey and unpleasent. This isnt shot like ‘Erotica’, its shot like someones reinacting a crime scene.

The plot itself, I assume is catering to a ‘specialist’ audience, it wasnt really for me. But in the last 10 minutes the film changes pace turning into what I can only describe as a ‘Blue Velvet’ level nightmare gang rape sequence. complete with ultra loud electronic scoring, Bizarre use of smoke machines and slow motion footage and a deeply unsettling scenario filled with unpleasent and upsetting characters engaging in horrible acts.

Its an incredibly powerful energy that genuinely unsettled me, and had the film carried that kind of power through the whole runtime, rather than soft loading it 20 minutes off the end, then running fully with it 10 minutes off the end. I probably would have been much more favourable to its dark and twisted-ness.

As it stands, instead? it just comes across as inconsistent, with the opening 40 minutes or so being fairly standard SA porn with a threadbear and unusually textured plot to hold it together, before we take a deep dive into a living nightmare. It literally feels like 2 movies have been stitched together.

Same applied to the direction and cine, with the bulk of the film feeling ugly, murky, sickly and floodlit, rough around the edges and it seems uncertain as to whether it wants our audience to reject the rape scene, or be aroused by it. I STILL dont quite know what the director wanted me to feel with the way this was framed and shot. But its unmistakable he wanted fear and shame to be the subject of the last 10 minutes.

Composition is all over the place, the edits super loose and im not sure if its my DVD copy or an error on the print scanned for the DVD, but 15 minutes of the film loops near the start as well…Which added to the dream like vibe of the production, but didnt help its case

Sharon Thorpe plays Rosemary here and its really hard to get a grip on the performance she’s trying to play, at first I thought she may be playing it autism coded and that the film was an experimental piece trying to display a world as percieved by an autistic person (for example, theres a scene where the casual phrase ‘Im gonna kill you for this!’ is said, but because its in the hazy nightmare sequence the guy saying it brandishes a knife at her. I thought they were being surreal) But then I realised this film ISNT multi layered by ANY stretch. and that they were actually probably just trying to depict someone fairly neurotic and isolated being forced into situations against their will…Which again, REALLY didnt help this films case.

Im still not sure how I feel about this film, whether im revolted by its tone and subject, upset at how rudamentary it all feels, or genuinely impressed at the BALLS of this film to go absurdist nightmare…given its poster and given what paying customers would be expecting from a film called ‘Baby Rosemary’. One thing I do know, it was crudely shot, looked ill and ran for about 40 minutes too long…and in my view, whichever way you cut it, that aint good. Worth watching at least once as an unsettling oddity. But otherwise, nah.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/baby-rosemary/

Another blind buy, I was under the impression that ‘Top Knot Detective’ was going to be just some random Japanese sci-fi samurai flick. Something with just the right level of crazy to help while away 90 or so minutes this memorial day weekend.

It is in fact a bit more involved than that. This is in fact a mockumentary coveirng the cultural phenominon that was ‘Top Knot Detective’ and its spiritual sister show ‘Timestryker’ 2 shows that ran between 1988 and 1992 in Japan before scandles, rumours and even grimmer topics forced it off the air…where it would remain for around 10 years until, randomly, VHS quality copies were broadcast on australian television leading to renewed interest in the series.

through the documentary we learn about the origins of the show, we get first hand accounts of life on set from surviving cast members, we explore the companies that promoted the show, the scandles that took it off (and returned it) to air. and a chunk of the film is dedicated to trying to hunt down the ‘Top Knot Detective’ Himself ‘Takashi Takamoto’ who dissapeared under mysterious circumstances shortly after the show was cancelled in 1992.

Now, as a bit of an achillies heel, reviewing documentary (and by extension Mockumentary) is not my strongest suit. But what I can say is that this one really pleasently suprised me. the pacings a little on the slow side, and I think the core concept just about overstayed its welcome by the time of the end credits. But he journey through these two shows history is very well handled, the humour is fantastic across the runtime, and despite it not ACTUALLY being a japanese crazy sci-fi samurai picture, theres enough clips of our cast doing crazy Japanese sci-fi Samurai picture stuff that it still scratched the itch.

A lot of the footage in this film is on mixed formats, and I think they handle the direction of the archive media superbly, quite honestly, for the first 10 or so minutes of this film I was truely wondering if this show really had existed. they that accurately copy Japanese television from the late 80s and early 90s…With only a handful of CGI moments ultimately pulling it out of place.

The cast all come across as genuine and belivable, and given the budget and scope. I was honestly really quite impressed with just how accurate to ‘talking head’ nostalgia docs this thing managed to get iteself.

An absolute must watch if you enjoy asian cinema, Toei style ‘Kamen rider’ serielized shows or just love a bit of strangeness. I had a really good time with ‘Top Knot Detective’, and its definitely one I can recommend.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/top-knot-detective/

I’d somehow convinced myself that this film was 2+ hours long and as such, i’ve had it on the backburner for a couple of years, waiting for a long weekend, or some vacation time to give it the plunge. Well, its a memorial weekend, and I just spent 94 minutes in the company of Olivia Newton John, ELO and Gene Kelly learning a valuable life lesson on finding a reason to keep on trucking, and I had a really good time.

Xanadu was the butt of many a joke through the 80s and 90s, it almost seems like an easy target, an oft surreal at times, Camp without being ‘rocky horror’ style aggressive, upbeat muscial not only harkening back to the golden age of musical cinema, but attemping to almost bridge the gap (quite literally) between those heady days of the 40s and 50s, and the all electric ‘new wave’ stylings of the 80s.

The film follows album artist Sonny Malone, a man frustrated by his work as he doesnt have the inspiration or steerage to drive his own projects, but when employed, he’s told to simply use his craft, rather than his emotions. Sonny recently quit the album game to try and go solo, but due to paid gigs not quite taking off, he’s back under strict guidence from his boss.

Things arnt looking to great for Sonny, that is until one of his own creations gives him a mystery, a rollar skating lady called Kira, who enters Sonnys life purely by random, at first in a blink and you’ll miss it intro, but later as the proposed cover art to one of Sonnys upcoming art pieces.

Captivated Sonny tries to learn more, and by chance eventually encounters Danny McGuire (Gene Kelly) a former artist who ALSO had a run in with a mystery girl back in the 30s and 40s while working with Glenn Millar, who left those days behind him in 1945 to focus on building a stable career.

Between them, both Danny and Sonny will discover the Kira is far more than just some rollar skating mystery, and in it will form a bond uniting two artists in a common goal, to reignite the passion they still have for their craft. In all it’s alt art deco 50s on 80s vivid colour explosive glory.

Right off the bat, I can kind of understand why some folks were turned off by this picture, fans coming off of ‘Grease’ into this for the ‘Newton John’ factor would likely have been dissapointed that this wasnt an out and out comedy in which ‘hunky guy, meets sexy girl’ and 50s shenanigans ensue.

It doesnt help either that the opening of the film is a little slow to get going, and the subtext of the film a little more advanced that just LITERALLY showing and telling people whats on screen. Indeed I feel sorry for anyone who went to this film expecting something like ‘Grease’ and got baffled for 94 minutes about talks of ‘dreams’ and ‘muses’.

As for me? I went in with the bar on the floor after years of this film being a punchline, and once I got past the first act, I loved it. ‘They dont make’em like they used to’ is often thrown around these days, but with ‘Xanadu’ they really dont. A film that is so unapologetically upbeat and not playing itself as ‘self aware’ in doing so. This is just a big, at times silly, bag of cheer of a film with a core message, as Gene Kelly so wonderfully puts it, that ‘Dreams dont die on there own, we allow them to be killed’.

While I think the plot of the script is a little stop/start, the core messaging and tone of the film is delightful. I love how we see the paralells between Danny and Sonnys characters, the former an artist who clung tightly to his vision, and fell out of style waiting for it to come back. and Sonny, a man on a similar path, learning the need to grow and develop to avoid the same fate.

Through the runtime these two men help each other to try and create a new vision, implementing aspects of the things Danny loved so much, with the things Sonny wishes he could get people on board with. Its a strong message not to let your dreams die, and to keep developing and growing your own dreams to keep the inspiration alive. And while, it may be a bit suspect in 2024, to have the very concept of a ‘Muse’, a dream, be a beautiful women from an objectification standpoint. I feel like, for 1980. its a strong message to lead with.

As mentioned the scripts a slow starter, but around the 2nd act it picks up a clip and once it builds up a head of steam, this film really doesnt stop, delivering a grand and satisfying closure to the film that really channels the overarching messaging. I think it nails the balance between being campy without being TOO goofy, and sentimental without getting TOO schmaltzy really quite well.

The characters are all pretty decently fleshed out within the world the film takes place in, I think a minor drawback here is, it would have been nice to see more ‘muses’ or to actually explore the concept of how inspiration isnt necessarily sauced from a single place. it might have been nice to have seen a ‘muse’ based on nostalgia, a ‘muse’ based on sadness etc…something to have really given the film just a bit more of an extra dimension and point of interest beyond Olivia Newton John being the central figure of all inspiration.

I think it may have also been in the films interest to give Danny and Sonny a bit more of a complicated relationship as a means of shoring up that first act a bit more. As it stands, the two meet on a beach, grab a coffee and suddenly, they’re in a palace jamming to Glenn Millar and are about to go into business together…It would have been nice to see the pair maybe have a contrast of opinion, to maybe have a bit of a struggle, but to make that difference of opinion the thing that holds them together stronger. It all felt a little bit too easy.

Kira too seems a little flat in the first act, as a character, she seems to mainly only pop in and out for the first act and when she does turn up, its usually just to ask questions to Danny and Sonny, then leave. I think it probably would have made more sense for Kiras presence in the film to have grown and grown, and for her to start shaping Danny and Sonnys world (as inspiration does) rather than her just basically being an individual that questions their motives.

On the direction front, its wonderful. a sense of grandness seldom seen in cinema at this point in time, Robert Greenwald manages to capture the feeling and tone of the golden age of musicals while blowing a new lease of neon soaked life into it with that 80s twist. Its a very creative picture for the time that revels in 50s and 80s culture, taking every opportunity to slam them together into something all together rather groovy. While I Think at time its a little *too* heavy handed on the ‘SEE!? THE 50S AND 80S WERE MORE SIMILAR THAN YOU THINK!’ messaging…where it hits. it hits for me, and we have a very professional piece that is ABSOLUTELY not afraid to experiement. Going so far as to even getting the wonderful Don Bluthe in to work on a few scenes that I felt really elevated the film to the next level.

The cine is delightful, constantly moving, creative, largely well composed. There were a few shots that seemed to lack focus here and there that were used as cutaways. But I can be merciful when this same film ALSO provides us with the frankly EPIC finale sequence that it does. The edit is largely tight, focussed on precise cuts and I love love LOVE! the creative transitions slides used across the movie, it really gives the film an additional layer of identity and I wish more films were creative with how they handle scene changes.

Performance wise? I have to give it to Michael Beck and Gene Kelly. their relationship on screen is played with absolute sincerity, they have a strong on screen presence and it ties nicely into the ‘bridging the generational gap via the dream of a common endeavour’ themes the scripts working towards.

Kelly here is wonderful, playing an upbeat on the surface but whistful for his lost past just beneath it character, his spry, lively and gets a really solid range to work here. I think he’s arguably one of the best parts of this film, and his dance numbers and physical performances across this film CLEARLY showed that there was life in the old dog yet.

Becky too has a fairly animated presence. I do kind of wish the script had fleshed him out a little more, as we really spend most of the film dealing with him in the ‘here and now’ with not a whole lot of information on how he got to where he is to go off. It feels very much like he’s a bridging catalyst between Kira and Danny, aiding him to recapture his dreams and inspirations. But he does get his own character arc that is resolved pretty satisfactorally. I do wish he’d had a bit more range however.

I mean, you know a films onto a good thing, when the weakest element is Olivia Newton John, who’s physical and muscial performances here are absolutely faultless…her acting though… … … d’yer like physical and musical performances? shes great at those! The rest of the cast are all vibrant, animate and lively bringing a real sense of wonder and scale to the production. and the choreography of the musical numbers really is superb, borrowing some of the better routines from muscials of yesteryear and marrying them up to modern dance sensibilities. they’re brilliant.

But easily, the very VERY best thing about ‘Xanadu’ is its soundtrack and musical numbers. Geoff Lynn and ELO craft a GORGEOUS score to this film that just oozes personality, with hits such as the titular ‘Xanadu’ and ‘All Over the World’ being married up to some lovely ballads such as ‘suspended in time’, or charming and reflective tracks like ‘Whenever your away from me’. its a wonderful mesh of 80s influenced 50s motivated hybrid tracks. and its as well rounded, full and pleasent as you can imagine.

Is ‘Xanadu’ perfect? no. its a little way off that, but this IS a very charming and quite contageous love letter to the days gone by, and anyone who’s ever had and lost a dream. if you can make it through that first act, you’ll be rewarded ten fold. I guarentee it.

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