TYTD Reviews

Sent to me by a viewer of my youtube channel. I didnt really know what I was getting into when I popped in ‘The Jungle Book: The Movie’, but it didnt take more than 10 minutes and a quick google search to confirm my gut feeling on this one.

This isnt a movie…rather, its more of an ‘Omnibus’. See; This adaptation of ‘The Jungle Book’ was originally released in 2011 or 2012 and ended up being a 156 episode TV series, with each episode being around 11 minutes long. And each self contained story would begin where the last one ended and end where the next one begins (in a very loose way so as to help with syndication)…And what this film is, is essentially 6 stories of the TV series, with the titles and credits lopped off, stitched ‘Human Centipede’ style together into one long unbroken 62 minute long ‘mega episode’…

The 6 stories include, an episode where Mowgli has to fight an agrieved wolf for his right to be able to ‘belong’ to the wolf pack that helped raise him, an episode where Mowgli tries to find the ‘bravest’ animal in the Jungle. An episode where Mowgli teams up with a monkey to scare away humans from discovering an ancient city of treasure, an episode where Shere Khan, Baloo and Bagheera are trying to find breakfast, an episode where Mowgli falls down a well, and an episode where an elephant who wants to show off ends up in trouble, leaving it down to Mowgli and the gang to try and rescue him.

and; as far as this goes as a TV series? I.E – 6 self contained short stories set in the Jungle book universe? I thought it was pretty okay. Its written for kids aged between 4 and 7 years old i’d say and its designed pretty intrinsically to only hold their attention briefly, with a small moral lesson, before dumping them into something with a bit more mainstream appeal. The animation is colourful, vibrant and the direction is fairly fun (though, not a patch on the disney version). ‘Inoffensive’ is what i’d probably label this as, something that would probably exit my brain as soon as the credits rolled.

Why the low score here then? Because this ‘film’ version is SO lazily thrown together, to the point that it quite quickly becomes almost painful to watch…See…a lone episode of this, 11 minutes of my time, is fine as part of a viewing block. but taking 6 almost totally unrelated, INCREDIBLY basic stories that are only loosely tied by a flimsy ‘bridging’ element at the start and end of each episode. that quite often retread similar ground and dont really offer much in the way of complexity. And LITERALLY just topping and tailing the titles and credits off them, at MOST adding in a cross fade and then calling it a day is BEYOND a dull viewing experience.

They had the chance to do something a bit interesting with this, maybe re-edit the episodes so we have 2-3 plots happening concurrently with 156 episodes to choose from, they almost certainly could have cut this film version to have 2-3 plot points that cut across each other and form a makeshift 3 act structure that differentiates them enough from the TV series.

But the laziness of this release to just stitch 6 interconnected episodes together and chuck it out the door is horrendous. They dont even bother creating unique titles or credits for this ‘movie’ release. they just use the TV’s titles and tweak the credits list slightly, but even then they miss some of the cast out.

Add to that that the voice acting throughout is a little too ‘stagey’ and doesnt really (to me) fit the tone and vibe of an animated kids series, it feels more like a radio play or on stage performance vocally, and the fact that they dont amend any of the sound edits here, meaning we get a LOT of repetition of music between episodes. and ultimately? I really dont think kids would appreciate this film version.

If you can find the isolated ‘TV’ edits of this series, I think younger children may get on with it fine enough, but recut into this edition? the pacings terrible, the editing is ultra basic and feels like the editor couldnt be arsed to do anything other than stitch them together end to end and click export.

It feels like an attempt to squeeze some extra cash out of unknowing parents, and an ultra cheap attempt at that. Like I say, go find the TV version and maybe catch one or two. You’ll probably think they’re okay. Avoid this.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-jungle-book-the-movie/

And thus, the Rocky franchise completes its transition from ‘hard hitting, slice of life drama with sports elements’ about a no name bum of a loanshark with a heart of gold who’s is given a chance to be a ‘somebody’ by a cocky professional who underestimated him. To full blown farce sports dramady about a semi blind, retired millionaire with likely brain damage effectively becoming Jesus and declaring world peace and an end to Communism all inside of 90 minutes.

I love Rocky IV very dearly, like ‘Rocky III’ this one was in regular rotation in my house growing up, and even after what could very well be its 30th or 40th full viewing, I still have to absolutely stare in awe at the BALLS of Sylvester Stallone in taking a studios money, and essentially making 4 Rocky music videos and a ‘Sylvester Stallone’ promotional video, and stitching it together into what is very closely approaching an ‘eccentric masterpiece’.

The film picks up some time after the events of ‘Rocky III’ with a recap of the end of that movie (If im guessing, im assuming it takes place a couple of years after…) and Rocky and Apollo are still sparring on and off, Apollos been out of the ring for about 5 years and Rockys pretty much retired and now only fights for fun as a hobby.

That is, until a political upset occurs. The Soviet Union have decided to send one of their fighters to the US to show the talent and technology of Soviet might in the form of ‘Ivan Drago’ a machine of a man who punches with the same pounds of force equal to being hit by a car doing 18-20 mph…for reference, most professionals can punch with the same pounds of force equal to being hit by a car travelling at 7mph…So the guys hardcore. But he’s also considered an ‘amateur’ boxer as he hasnt even performed in a ranked or leagured fight.

As something of a goodwill gesture, an exhibition match is set up (essentially a ‘friendly’) with Drago taking on Apollo Creed with the media running with an ‘East vs West’ type narrative to help keep things a little punchy.

Creeds cocky, he thinks Drago is all bluster and no skill, and if anything doesnt really bother to train that much because…hey; its a friendly…Apollo Creed is then promptly flat out murdered 2 rounds in when its revealed that Drago IS in fact a killing machine. This leads Rocky to take on Drago, not just to avenge his friend, but to put the Russians in their place and to teach the world that the USA IS in fact A-Okay! in a RIP roaring finale that will make anyone who survived the Reagan era feel like getting an Eagle motif painted onto the hood of their car…I know I did…

Whether this is a particularly well made film will obviously fall to personal preference. I feel if im speaking objectively, no. No it’s not a very well made film…but SUBJECTIVELY…I bloody love this film.

My big issue with ‘Rocky III’ was that it was kind of trying to walk the tightrope of having to occupy the world of the first two Rocky films, while ALSO having to suspend SOME degree of belief, becuase by the end of ‘Rocky II’, Rocky should have never gone anywhere near a set of boxing gloves again…Hell, the FIGHT in ‘Rocky II’ would NEVER have happened in the real world after the injuries sustained…But because ‘Rocky IV’ is using ‘Rocky III’ as its baseline, and Rocky III managed to throw off some of the shackles that kept the series grounded to reality. ‘Rocky IV’ is able to now FULLY release itself into a world of fantasy, where its full of evil Russians, Robotic wives and James Brown numbers. Indeed, if you watched the original Rocky and then jumped to this one, you’d be forgiven for thinking someone had spiked you.

The script isnt so much a traditional narrative, more a series of ‘happenings’ intercut with music video style training montages. the core plot of Rocky avenging his friend and representing America on the world stage isnt really explored all that deeply, what i’ve written there is basically as deep as it begins and ends. All our characters have had ANY kind of complexity or intreague sanded clean off. we’re now in a fully ‘Flanderized’ universe, where Rocky is the good guy, Drago is the bad guy and Paulie is just a cookie character with a robot wife, and not a serial abuser with mysoginistic, racist and homophobic tendancies. T

The world this script inhabits doesnt feel real, it feels like it exists under the oddly set pretence that this story needs for it to exist. the pacing is incredibly stop/start, we have AT LEAST 3 full blown training montages and music videos, the ending is frankly ludicrous AND hilarious in equal measures and the tone is so blatently jingoistic to that specific flavour of mid 80s American Nationalism, that watching it tonight, I absolutely understood how the USA has ended up in the position it currently sits in. Its a world of simple answers, very little questions and largely blind acceptance. and I cant help but watch this film with a HUGE smirk on my face throughout for just how wild it is that this actually got made.

I mean, I shouldnt be TOO surprised, Stallone co-wrote ‘First Blood’ a film dealing with topics like ‘PTSD’, Mental health, processing trauma and the horrors of the Vietnam war…and then followed it up with the screenplay for ‘First Blood: Part 2’ a film that basically goes ‘Yeh…mental healths bad innit…GUNS!!!!!!!!!’ he’s not a subtle film maker is what im getting at.

Outside of that though, the direction and cine is striking, VERY heavily inspired by media content from that specific period of the 80s. its sharp, crisp, colourful and focussed direction that isnt afraid to experiment and showcase the ‘new way’ of film making for the MTV Generation. the colour useage blending blues, whites and Reds SCREAMS patriotism from every inch of this celluloid. its a remarkable work on a visual level, let down by, what I feel is probably the ropiest edit in the series to date. Nothing quite flows right, they’re heavily reliant on stock footage from previous films to stitch this thing together, cuts are too soon, or not soon enough. Its so bad that Stallone himself had to try and recut the film a couple of years ago, fixing some things…but also making a few bits MUCH worse (Cutting out Paulies large headed robot wife in the new cut was a sin.)

At this point in time, everyone apart from Carl Weathers has seemingly forgotten how to play their characters, Stallone is just playing his ‘Macho’ persona for most of the runtime, with one touching scene with Adrien being about as good as it gets, Burt Young as Paulie feels less like a performance and more like candid outtakes of a guy on vacation. Weathers is sincere and drags ‘Creed’ back to similar vibes from ‘Rocky II’ but maybe a bit paired back, I thought he was probably the best ‘Genuine’ performance here, outside of maybe Dolph Lundgren as ‘Ivan Drago’ who is EASILY one of the best villains not just in this franchise, but in 80s cinema all together. a silent, cold and methodical machine of a man, and a quick shorthand for ruthlessness. he’s fantastic.

And the soundtrack? Favourite of the whole damn franchise, all killer, no filler. Its rock solid, with my only complaint being that we didnt get a Georgio Mororder rendition of ‘Gonna fly now’. It feels at times almost like Stallone was given the score first and told to build a movie around it, rather than vice versa just for how prominant and front and center the score is for this thing. I love it honestly.

‘Rocky IV’ is very much a film of its time, and the fact its SO bedded into that specific era, coupled with its total eccentricity, has really helped cement it as an iconic picture of that decade. and I feel rightly so. its a totally different beast to the rest of the franchise and absolutely worth seeing in my opinion, purely for just HOW simultaineously messy, yet coordinated it is as a work. Probably the cleanest example of ‘Organised Chaos’ i’ve seen in a mainstream picture.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/rocky-iv-rocky-vs-drago-the-ultimate-directors/

ADRIEEEEEEEEN (We are a non ‘Rocky V’ household.)

1. Rocky II
2. Rocky
3. Rocky IV
4. Rocky III
5. Rocky Balboa
6. Rocky V

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/list/the-rocky-films-ranked/

So up front, I need to make it clear that im giving this film three and a half stars…but its a STRONG three and a half. Thats because ‘Rocky III’ while VERY enjoyable, is ultimately a bit of a deflated experience after the first two films.

Picking up 3 years after the events of ‘Rocky II’, The Italian Stallion is on top of the world, he’s got luxury commercial deals, a nice big house where both him, Adrian, Rocky Jr. and his manager Micky are living comfortably without want and things just keep going from strength to strength.

However; things are about to become rudely disrupted when the number 1 ranked champion ‘Clubber Lang’ (played by Mr. T) begins observing Balboas fights and starts calling him out to challenge him for the Heavyweight world title. Which is problematic because…Rocky’s considering retiring shortly after a statue of him is raised in his home town.

However; at the unveiling, Clubber turns up a taunts Rocky and insults Adrian and Micky, leading Rocky to get hot headed and making him agree to finally challenge him. This is a TERRIBLE idea, as Micky shortly points out, because he reveals that for the last 3 years, Micks been curating Rocky’s fights to keep him healthy and winning. He’s keen to stress that these wernt ‘setup’ fights, but rather, he picked them knowing they wernt going to brutalize Rocky…Lang has every intention of trying to kill him. Aside from that and the various physical issues Rocky’s endured since his 30 rounds with Apollo Creed, Micky informs Rocky that he’s going to have to get serious VERY quickly if he has ANY chance of even HOPING to put Lang on the floor, and that he doesnt feel the ‘Hunger’ is there for the challenge…

And what follows is a story of loss, identity, facing your fears and adversity (without going into too much detail for the sake of spoilers)

Dont get me wrong, I really liked ‘Rocky III’, both this film and ‘Rocky IV’ were on constant rotation in my house growing up, alongside ‘First Blood’ so I know the films fairly well. But its probably been my biggest gap between viewings of this one (at least 15 years) and revisiting it now, especially off the back of watching the first 2 films, I do feel like some of the heart has started to leave the franchise.

The most noticable thing, and the thing that I feel really drags my feelings about the film down is that a LOT of the smaller, more insignificant ‘natural’ moments that were second nature in the first 2 films are largely gone. We get a handful of tender and real moments between Rocky, Adrian and Micky…But they’re all kind of strategic to the plotting and dont feel as natural as earlier entries. It feels like Stallone kind of forgot how to write ‘Rocky’ with this entry, and I can appreciate that 3 years of fame, travel and rich’s will change a person fundamentally. But what I loved about Rocky Balboa in the first two films is that he is fundamentally an under dog, but a humble under dog at that. He has simple pleasures, simple enjoyments and only aspired to be not more worse off than he was the day before.

This iteration of Balboa seems instead to feel like he ‘belongs’ to a certain status, and both him and Adrian remenice about ‘the old days’ as if they wernt literally only 2-3 years ago. Put it this way, in ‘Rocky II’ Rocky is BEYOND content to just stop by the local pet shop or zoo and hang around with the tigers or puppies. If Adrien is there, then its IMMEDIATELY a 10 times better experience. This version of Rocky? I dont feel would have the same affection.

Its not just character mannerisms though, situationally, there just arnt as many smaller nicer moments. Points in the film that make you want to be invested in these characters or this world. Rocky is still an engaging and fun character, but the heart isnt quite there, it feels a bit too polished script wise a bit TOO tight. and the lack of those relatable small moments really pulled me away from this picture. Part of that could be put down to the fact that this film is playing on the trope of ‘Man full of Hubris is knocked down a peg or two and has to work to get back to where he was’ but part of it I feel was just the creative decision to lose the ‘slice of life’ moments in exchange for firming up the base narrative (Balboa V Lang). Which I think is this films greatest loss.

Its also the beginning of the ‘Cartoonification’ of these characters as well, Rocky seemingly has endless powerscaling. After his fights with Creed he realistically shouldnt have been legally allowed to fight again…Letalone 2 rounds with Lang. Lang himself is an almost PAINFULLY cartoonish villain. VERY one note, unreasonably aggressive 24/7. It feels like Stallone wrote him specifically to be as unappealing, egotistical and unpleasent as he could envision an opponent being. Like…Creed was a gloater. But he was a fairly well rounded character, we got to see what he was dealing with and his life behind the scenes. Clubber Lang is just an asshole. and an entitled one at that. Which DOES make the final fight here all the more satisfying. But at the same time, it also removes any sense of tension.

The way the first two Rocky films were written and presented. you could FULLY believe Rocky COULD lose those fights if you hadnt seen the franchise before. But here? they set Lang up as SUCH a pantomime villain, that its almost a certainty that Rocky IS going to defeat him before the end of the film. which again, just sands the emotional edges off this film quite harshly.

Outside of the above, this films quite a bit shorter than the last two, and I feel the pacing struggles a bit as a result, while I appreciate that it handles itself fairly well, it feels like its racing to get us from set piece to set piece without really letting the audience breath or take in the atmosphere or intentions of the piece. They dont really lean on Rockys physical health at all in this one, which would make an audience think he’s pretty fair game, rather than a likely brain damaged, blind in one eye fairly out of shape boxer who really should have retired after Creed.

The characters are still fairly strong (Lang permitting) but they too feel like they’ve had their edges kind of shaved off a bit. Paulie has gone from a struggling, clearly mentally ill and abusive alcoholic, a figure to be pitied more than anything else, to a comedy drunk in the opening, and comic relief by the end of the movie. with the rest of the cast starting to fall into the pit that is ‘Flanderisation’.

Non of this is to say this is inherently a BAD movie, but its just a bit of a fall and pivot from what the last two films strived for. it feels less believable, less natural or honest.

Beyond the script, the rest of the film is technically on the level. Direction and cine maintain the momentum from ‘Rocky II’ though it is maybe a tad less willing to take risks over the last film for my money, composition is strong, theres some nice slow mo and tracking footage which works in the films favour, the training montages were relatively solid, but I dont quite feel they had the same strength as the last films attempts. Its a good looking film, but I dont think it nearly has as much power or enthusiasm as the last entry.

Performance wise? Stallone as Balboa here feels surprisingly low energy. If the first film was Stallones breakout as an actor, and the sequel was him proving his worth in the industry after striking out with an out of nowhere hit. Much like Balboa, he feels a little *too* comfortable here, too tidy, his performance is too polished, he doesnt quite nail that relatable and at times bizarrely awkward character. Its almost like he forgot how to play ‘Rocky’ and is doing a ‘Rocky’ impression based on what he saw when he rewatched the last two movies…which is a bit of a shame.

That being said the single greatest performance in this film absolutely HAS to be Burgess Meredith as ‘Micky’ who absolutely blossomed across these 3 films into a complex, infinitely likeable curmugeonly player, who outshines Stallone in this film with a performance that I would argue is in his top 5 greatest ever honestly.

Talia Shire is a harder performance to read, On the one hand I can interpret her turn as Adrien here as the continuing development of a shy and reclusive woman, slowly opening up to the world around her after years of abuse and neglect and learning to stand by, stand up for and support what she believes in. OR! similar to Stallone, she just hasnt quite remembered how to play the character and is doing an impression of an impression. Or it could be both…Who knows, I enjoyed her turn here, but with only one or two moments between her and Rocky for the entire films runtime. Its hard for me to truely appreciate her best moments because they seem to have been left on the cutting room floor.

As for the score? Not as good as last time being honest, Yes; this is the first film to feature ‘Eye of the Tiger’ (and believe me, I REALLY didnt like that they kept referring to ‘The eye of the tiger’ in the dialogue of the film itself…that was cringey) but whats here just isnt as poweful, energetic or well used as whats been and gone with ‘Rocky I and II’ again, its fine. but it just feels like its missing some freshness, a bit more power or energy which did ultimatley underwhelm the films pace and tone.

All in all, I like ‘Rocky III’ dont get me wrong, its still a fun and entertaining movie from a fun and entertaining series…But this feels to me less like a movie that NEEDED to be made, and more a film that felt OBLIGED to exist. and thats the key difference here. the first two films felt like Stallone and his team had something to say and show to the world. This? feels a lot more corporate and a lot less soulful.

Its a film in the middle of a bit of an identity crisis, which…at this point in time, Stallone was doing the same. So I get WHY it turned out the way it did. but the transition from ‘Slice of life’, real world, hard hitting, tonally heartwarming Oscar winning cinema, to totally silly, over the top, meathead action sports film is well underway. and if I remember ‘Rocky IV’ the way I *THINK* I remember it, I should be in for a treat VERY shortly…

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/rocky-iii/

Probably better than the original, and I’m not afraid to say it.

It’s the rematch of the century, everything you could love about the first film is polished to within an inch of its life, the best bits amplified, the slower pace built up and more evenly distributed.

If I have ANY fault with this film, its that the ending wasn’t quite as closed as I’d have liked it to be. But it’s still damn near perfect.

No…honestly, I have nothing else to say. It’s so close to being a perfect movie it damn near scares me that we could ever get this good.

If you arnt watching a double header of ‘Rocky’ and ‘Rocky II’ tonight. What the HELL else are you up to?!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/rocky-ii/

The First film in the ‘Karnstein Trilogy’, and one of the earlier examples of Hammers ‘Playboy’ era films. ‘The Vampire Lovers was a fine enough watch for me, but suffers from a lot of the recurring issues that Hammer films from this era seem to fall into.

The plot introduces us to the family Karnstein, a group of undead vampires who for centuries had preyed on the local inhabitants of the village, and anyone who happened to roam into the woods or graveyards at night. 40 years prior to the events of this movie, the family was finished by a rival family who realised they were vampires and wanted an end to it.

However, 40 years to the day a mysterious woman claiming to be a baroness arrives at the house of a respected General (played by Peter Cushing) asking for mercy in the face of a serious accident thats left her and her daughter Marcilla abandoned in the middle of nowhere for a few days while alternate travel is arranged.

The general agrees and Marcilla forms a strong ‘bond’ with the generals Daughter Laura. Very strong…its a pseudo lesbian relationship. I say pseudo because, Marcilla is ACTUALLY ‘Carmilla’ the daughter of the family Karnstein, and her and her mother have infiltrated the generals house using false identities to try and enlist servents and bolster their supplies to help ressurect the Karnstein family name…and…for a time, they appear to succeed; Killing the Generals daughter over several days while tormenting her in the process.

The General, on realising his Daughter has been murdered by Vampires, and totally bereft, leaves his residence to seek help from the family who dispatched the Karnsteins in the first place. The Karnsteins meanwhile flee the manor, fake a horse carriage accident and begin their grift again…Only, now time is working against them, as the General rallies the troops and word of the growing grizzly murders begins to spread.

And, Its been just over a Day since I watched this movie, and im already forgetting quite large chunks of it…Which is never a good sign for a movie in my opinion.

Dont get me wrong, this isnt a bad movie by any stretch. But I do rather feel that, while its fresh for early 70s Hammer…In the grand scheme of Hammer and Amacus’s work in this kind of field…it’s a bit lacking.

The scripts fine enough, but as mentioned it does hit the rather unfortunate Hammer tropes of rushing to the 2nd act with great pacing, interesting twists and turns and fun characters. Only to then grind to a halt for most of the 2nd and a bit of the 3rd act, as we get bogged down in runarounds, reams of exposition that dont really add anything to the film and padding which bloat the middle of this film right up to the closing 20-25 minutes or so where, once again, it picks up pace and ends in a pretty satisfying way.

The characters are a little flat in this one, while most of the characters in the latter entries of the Karnstein trilogy get a bit more complexity and interesting plot developments, a layered set of main cast members who all feel like they fit into a well lived universe. This has the OTHER Hammer trope, where the core 2-4 main characters DO have complex character traits and backstories…but everyone else gets one, at a push two charictaristics and basically get nothing to do with the plot itself other than vomit exposition and to take ANY line that the writers didnt feel comfortable giving to the developed cast. Which is a real shame.

I just dont feel this one has the same level of pull as ‘Lust for a Vampire’ and ‘Twins of Evil’ they both were interesting character driven pieces that played more on emotional resonence than plotting to drive the story. This films characters feel a little undercooked and it leads with several subplots that make it feel more like a horror thriller than anything else. and I wasnt really into it for that.

Outside of the scripting though its pretty by the numbers sailing. Cine and Direction are well up to the mark for Hammer standard (which is always above average) later films in this trilogy lean more into modern technical abilities to help keep the cine and direction fresh, experimental and creative…But this ones still quite firmly grounded in the ‘old’ style of Hammer direction, which didnt really evolve much past 1961. as such its VERY nice, grand and rich set and location work. But mixed in with very static, sequences, limited dolly and tracking shots and fairly by the numbers blocking. Colour use I felt was also a little drab here, I didnt feel this was a particularly vibrant film…especially compared to later entries.

Casting is altogether fine, I have no strong feelings on any of the performances, other than to ask the question of why Peter Cushing was even in this movie, hes on screen for probably somewhere in the region of 7-10 minutes and gets near top billing. Which is kind of crazy to me given he plays a character with one significant moment, who then leaves for the majority of the film and only comes back at the end. Wild.

The scoring is half decent too which is nice…Like I say, this is basically about as ‘Middle of the road’ as you can get with Hammer. I liked it, but I do think it definitely could have done with some tightining up on the script front and maybe a bit more experimentation with the compositions and colour work on this…I’d say the Karnstein trilogy on the whole is definitely worth looking into, and if your weakest entry is ‘passably’ good. I think thats a pretty good indicator that you may be onto a good thing.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-vampire-lovers/

A list of the movies we covered as part of the Fifteenth season of my youtube channel ‘TYTD Reviews’ (Sep-Dec 2024)

http://www.youtube.com/TYTDReviews

• New York Ninja
• Little Heroes 2
• Die-B-Que
• Death O' Lantern
• Franky and His Pals
• Halloween Is Grinch Night
• Dracula vs. Frankenstein
• Monsters Crash the Pajama Party
• Out There Halloween Mega Tape
• Camp Blood 4

…plus 6 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/list/tytd-reviews-season-15-films/

A list of the movies we covered as part of the Fourteenth season of my youtube channel ‘TYTD Reviews’ (Feb-June 2024)

• Beyond the Seventh Door
• Dimension of Blood
• We Need Earth Women!
• Camp Blood First Slaughter
• Cry Wilderness
• Mardi Gras Massacre
• Attack of the Beast Creatures
• Strike of the Panther
• Hunting Season
• The Wild, Wild World of Jayne Mansfield

…plus 7 more. View the full list on Letterboxd.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/list/tytd-reviews-season-14-films/

The middle film in the ‘Karnstein Trilogy’ flanked by ‘Twins of Evil’ and ‘The Vampire Lovers, ‘Lust for a Vampire’ was a first time watch for me today, but having seen ‘Twins of Evil’ I feel I encountered the same problems with this film, as I did with that one.

The plot revolves around a recently opened all girls boarding school in Eastern Europe with a…lets say ‘eccentric’ set of teachers. ranging from ‘Giles’ who is obsessed with the local ‘Karnstein’ family, believing them to well and truely be vampires. through to a headmistress whos poured her entire life savings into the academy and is more than happy to sweep ‘incidents’ under the rug if it keeps the prestige of the school in check.

We open by introducing ourselves to Richard LeStrange a travelling author who is to take up residency at the local school as the new English Lit teacher. almost immediatley Richard gets caught up with ‘Mircalla’ a new student to the academy with a captivating gaze…Indeed, theres more to Mircalla than meets the eye…Shes a vampire, thats…thats whats more than meets the eye.

The ressurected daughter of the count and countess Karnstein – Original name ‘Carmilla’ her motives in going to the academy arnt entirely clear, but at a guess, its to have her fill of the student body and maybe recruit a few new servents for the Karnsteins. Unfortunately this is disrupted however when Richard falls head over heels in love with Carmilla, a feeling she resiprocates.

and thuse a complex romance plays out, with Richard slowly gaining an awareness as to what Carmilla is, Giles also slowly piecing things together and Carmilla slowly but surely ‘dissapearing’ more and more students…its only a matter of time before parents start asking questions and the pair find themselves in a perilous situation.

And I for one really enjoyed this film. pretty much across the board it did everything I’d want out of a Hammer vampire movie, it easily blew most of the ACTUAL ‘Dracula’ films out of the water. theres just one element of this that I wasnt quite as fond of…

On the script front, we have a well paced, decently plotted, solidly toned work with strong, complex characters (for Hammer) interesting and complex scenarios and realtionships that are played out in a way that feels genuine. solid dialogue for the most part thats engaging and enjoyable. and a solid 3 act structure that only falters slightly in the closing minutes (and that isnt inherently due to the script, more due to clumsy editing and budget limitations).

I enjoyed pretty much every aspect of the script apart from one. and thats the overtly sexual tone of the whole thing. Dont get me wrong, I enjoy some eroticism in my horror movies, I like a bit of playfulness and I can absolutely appreciate the boundaries this film pushed for the time in showing lesbian relationships in cinema at a time where homosexuality had only recently been decriminalised. However; this era of Hammer is often referred to as ‘Playboy Hammer’ and thats kind of what puts me off. theres a lot of clearly staged out ‘Glamour’ moments that arnt relevent to the plot, take away from the weight and tone of the overall production and are quite literally just there because sex sells.

I wont begrudge anyone who DOES enjoy that kind of thing. but for me? it pulls me out of the action, because its so blatently just…THERE for the sake of being there, that it almost becomes comedic when the cast will, for VERY little reason, randomly start just taking their clothes off. the shift into ‘soft focus’ mode and the somewhat border softcore porn dialogue shifts only further pull me out of this one. I had similar issues with ‘Twins of Evil’ and if anything, its even more overt in this one.

I dont think it ruins the film at all mind, but it did stop me from outright loving this film entirely, because those moments (combined with the ending which is supposed to be an incredibly dramatic and tragic event…but due to lack of budget and a ropey set of cuts makes it accidentally hilarious) snapped me back into the room and made me realise that someone, somewhere in the production of this film decided to hard turn it into a ‘male gaze’ feature…and thats a shame.

Otherwise? Barring the finale bad edit. I loved everything about this film. the direction feels EXACTLY like what Hammer should have been doing all along, pulling modern 70s film making styles into gothic style storytelling and mixing them together into a ‘best of both worlds’ type scenario. It looks fresh, feels great, isnt afraid to experiment and the cast are clearly having fun with a less strict environment to work with.

The cine is rich, vibrant and delightful. rock solid composition, hearty amounts of B-roll, experimentation with processing and film effects. and, for the most part, some decent sequence building. No notes, I loved it.

Michael Johnson as Lestrange is about a strong a leading man Hammer has had since Cushing and Lee. He’s believable for the most part, which, in this studio is honestly a rare thing. he delivers his lines with solid and powerful emotion, has a great sense of physicality and gets a good range of emotions to work with across the runtime. he’s great!

Yutte Stensgaard as Carmilla gave me a case of the ‘Hammana hammana hammana’s’ a genuinely delightful performance again with solid range and she really nails the vampiric elements. Definitely one of my favourite ‘Hammer girls’.

the rest of the cast..well, they’re just kind of your standard Hammer background fodder…fine enough, but a mixed bag of fun and believable performances, to the downright awful. im into that kind of thing though so its all good.

Add to that a VERY refreshing soundtrack that really enhances the visuals of the piece and has some fantastic timing in terms of how its utilised across the films runtime…and I have very little to complain about honestly. Its a film thats maybe a little on the slow side to get going, but once its up and whirring. its about as solid a work as Hammer produced during its first wave.

Very much enjoyed, Very much recommended.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/lust-for-a-vampire/

The ‘Official’ end to Hammers ‘Dracula’ franchise is a continuity destroying co-production with martial arts master studio ‘Shaw Bros’ and…its a tense relationship of a movie right off the bat.

Putting aside the fact they couldnt get Christopher Lee back to cameo as Count Dracula for a handful of scenes so they had to get his non union chinese equivilent. tensions between the Hammer team and the cast and crew provided from Shaw bros ran hot due to a mixture of language and cultural barriers. Which…y’know, nothing shows a sign of a surefire quality film like the director screaming at the actors in english when they primarily only spoke Mandarin because they wouldnt stop spitting on set. we’re in for a wild time.

So the film opens in 1804 and we’re introduced to a traveller who stumbles on the castle of Count Dracula, once awoken. Drac does a ‘Jason goes to hell’ and essentially ‘possesses’ this travellers body as a way to circumvent his inability to leave his castle grounds due to cleansing enchantments that have been placed around the perimeters.

Once free of the castle, Dracula travells to China, where he takes on 7 servents who are all highly trained martial artists and warriors. Its said that every full (golden) moon, anyone who dares set foot outside of the walls of the local village, will meet a terrible fate at the hand of the golden monsters.

We then jump forward in time to 1904, and Peter Cushing is once again back as Dr. Van Hellsing…which instantly botches the chonology because Dracula AD 1972 establishes that Van Hellsing dies fighting dracula in 1872. So how is he in 1904 China? AND that he was born in 1814, which would make him 90 years old at the time this film takes place…AND that ‘Horror of Dracula’ apparently takes place in 1885. Any which way you cut it the continuity is bollocks’d. Because even if you say ‘AD 1972’ isnt canon. and that ONLY ‘Horror of Dracula’ counts as continuity to this one, and lets say we timeshifted Van hellsing so that he was born at a point where he could be in his 40s at the point ‘Horror of Dracula’ took place. it’d STILL be screwed continuity wise because the average life expectency of someone born in the 1830s and 40s was 45. Even with the timeshift Van Hellsing would have been in his late 60s when the events of this film take place…Thats not even to mention that Van Hellsing has a son in this film that gets ABSOLUTELY NO MENTION in ANY of the other Dracula movies, and if he DID exist, then Van Hellsing is clearly a bad father because he has ZERO trace of his existence anywhere near him…

Anyway, im getting bogged down here. in 1904, Van Hellsing is over in china teaching students about history and mysticisms and uses the ‘Golden Vampire’ mythology as a way to try and convince the students that, with their being confirmations of Vampirism in Europe, it stands to reason similar events would be happening in Asia too. They dont believe him, but one student who does decides to stick around, and after discussing it further with Lee and sharing his own knowledge around the folk lore, the pair realise that if this is true, there are still 6 golden vampires out there to take out.

And! after a surprise attack by the vampires one night, Van Hellsing will team up with fighters from the village to take the battle of the vampires cross plaines to see an end to the remaining 6 golden vampires and to rid the world of the head vampire…who MAY ACTUALLY BE DRACULA?!?! SHOCK HORROR!!!

Yeahhh…this one didnt really do anything for me honestly, I like some Shaw bros films, I like Hammer…but it seems like we got the bits a dislike the most from both companies slammed together for this one.

The script has Hammers prolonged endless walking and exposition dumping, which creeps in around the end of the first act and basically stays with the film right up to the final fight. While also having to deal with the excessively long, drawn out and rather dull martial arts fight scenes that I get hung up with on the Shaw Bros part.

Dont get me wrong, I love a good fight scene, fight choreogaphy is a wonderful thing when done right. But here? its kind of generic, nothing to eye popping and it all feels very much like martial artists going through the motions.

I’ve read that there are 3 different cuts of this movie, a 73 minute version used for double features, an 87 minute version (which I watched) and a Shaw Bros edited 118 minute version that has a lot more extended fight sequences and exposition for the asian cast. I dont know if im missing a crucial part of the narrative here. But the 87 minute cut seems to get the main plot ‘kill the 6 remaining golden vampires’ out of the way in the first 20 minutes. and then the rest of the movie is walking, exposition dumping and elongated fight scenes that dont really enhance what was established in those opening 20-25 minutes or so.

The tone is played largely seriously, the pacing is glacial once again, theres very little charisma or charm here. its militantly shot to just, get what needed to be got and get out. Which really doesnt help warm the audience to the characters, their situation or their scenario.

Part of this may be on me. My copy had quite ropey audio that had everyones dialogue tracks on different levels. and my copy abruptly ended 8 minutes off the ACTUAL ending due to some random internet issue, meaning I had to source the final 8 minutes from youtube. But even with that being the case. I dont believe I missed so much of the depth and nuance of this piece to have made it unintelligable. I just think this film isnt that coherent and isnt very well structured script wise.

Cine and direction wise its a bit of a fudge, but it works fine enough, we get some really nice location and set work here, the composition of shots are a bit ‘run and gun’ ad hoc, it feels again like there wasnt enough time to run through sequence structuring while filming so they just shot what was needed, got as much Broll and coverage as they could afford and then moved on…which makes things feel a bit haphazard.

While I appreciated the rather nice coloured lighting work on this one, which was a genuine quality uptick for the production. Ultimately this one just wasnt my vibe visually which is a shame. Still! at least it did try a bit of experimentation and i’ll take this over Hammers tried and tested method of just…making the same film in the same sets and locations 3 times over stealing from themselves and stitching them together to create hybrids of scenes from their movies all rolled into a ‘new’ film…

Performance wise, Cushing is fine as van hellsing. But everyone else is dire. not dislikable…in fact, they do what they can to the point that it adds almost a goofy edge to this film. But these are not good performances by any stretch and I found myself kind of mesmorised by what I was seeing with the performances given. mixed to poor physical animation. and lacklustre fight choreography hamties this production HARD.

and the score is a mix of hammer and shaw scoring. its better than any one of them doing the whole score outright…but its still generic as hell and did nothing for me.

‘7 golden vampires’ is marginally better than some of the worst ‘Dracula’ entries Hammer ever produced. By the skin of its teeth i’d say it was better than ‘Satanic Rites’ if only because it does have some interesting moments going on in places. But this being the final ‘canon’ Hammer dracula movie? is insane to me. its a total nothing of a movie. ‘The Dragon Lives again’ has more of a claim to being the ‘final hammer dracula movie’ than this film does.

Worth watching at least once just for the history of the piece. I didnt much care for it honestly, but I can appreciate why others would like it.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-legend-of-the-7-golden-vampires/