The Terry Nation Estate REALLY needed a top up on their bank balance in the mid 60s it seems. With Terry seemingly doing EVERYTHING within his power short of ACTUAL deals with the devil (though that cant be scientifically ruled out) to try and get his creation, ‘The Daleks’, onto as many screens and into as many homes as possible.
in 1965 Nation sold the rights to the story elements of the first ‘Dalek’ serial to AARU films and the results were a strange hodge podge supercut of the key beats of the original BBC story, along with a load of random ‘lore’ that fundamentally seemed to misunderstand why people liked ‘Doctor Who’ in the first place.
Well! 12 months later they were back again! adapting the 1964 serial ‘The Daleks Invasion of Earth’ to the big screen with Peter Cushing returning as the DEFINITELY 100% human ‘Dr. Who’ along with his grandaughter ‘Suzy’, ‘Barbara’ his *other* daughter and…Ians paycheque must have bounced because he aint in this one. Instead; we have lovable Burnard Cribbins playing a local Bobby (policeman) called ‘Tom’…Who…isnt based on anything from the BBC series…they just wanted someone to act goofy.
Now, I do feel context is key here, as I think not only will it explain why this film wasnt *quite* as successful as it could have been, but also why I take grief with it in some ways.
So the film, as mentioned, is an adaptation of a serial from 1964. By 1966, ‘Doctor Who’ still wasnt *quite* as established in ‘lore’ as it would go on to be (the core foundations of the show wernt really, properly fleshed out until a five year gap occured between VERY late 1969 and early 1975. Where basically the show everyone knows and loves today took shape. In 1966; Time lords? Gallifrey? Regeneration? all still either non existent or very much in its infancy.
And yet, Where the show was in 1964, and where it was at the point that this film came out in 1966 couldnt have been MORE starkley different if it tried. 1964 ‘Who’ had William Hartnell at the healm, he was an irrasible, but ultimatley lovable grumpy grandfather figure, with a little bit of a ‘Daffy Duck’ twinkle in his eye at times for good measure. The show was still running 6 part serials as the standard, and they relished the opportunity to slow burn stories for as long as the budget could carry them. The companions were a little better established, and the format was just about taking shape. But the only solid confirmations by this point were that ‘The Doctor’ and susan were aliens whod decided to see the world via a time travel spaceship after fleeing from their own people for some unmentioned reason.
Why do I clarify this? Because by the time THIS film came out, the BBC version of the show was unrecognisable to what had come before it.
Doctor who was in the middle of a ‘brief’ pause as one of the shows biggest ‘lore’ moments had just happened (Regeneration) Patrick Troughton was now known as the face of the show, and in the previous 2 years we’d gone from 4-6 part stories (emphasis on 6 parts) that were either educational attempts at historicals, or alien planets that used a studio the size of a bedroom. to 4-6 part stories (emphasis on 4 parts) that were significantly lighter in tone (Daleks Masterplan omitted) faster paced, and striving to be more modern and to appeal to the mid 60s ‘kids of today’ rather than the early 60s ‘Kids being made to watch what their parents *think* is good for them’.
Television had moved on considerably in those 2 years, the culture had moved on significantly in those 2 years. When Troughtons era formally began in November 1966 the last of the ‘true’ historicals would go out, and from then on in it was fantasy and whimsy right the way up to the 70s…and I mention that because, amongst the many MANY reasons the show refreshed in 1966 WAS that the show had found itself in a bit of a rutt, where audiences thought the programme was a bit *too* uptight and needed to let its hair down a bit. Its the 60s MAAAAN (and…all that)
Its because of that, why ‘Invasion Earth 2150 ad’ is such a strange end product for the time. Because right as the public were banging the table for change, out pops one of THE most early 1960s style doctor who adventures you could ask for, with little more changed to it than a few more pratt falls and large chunks of wandering about cut out. Its a bit like answering the question ‘How do we make this show fresh again?’ with ‘Do the old stuff, but quicker.’
And thats basically all this is. an old story, dusted off, with an hour chopped out of it and some of the dialogue/characters rotated to make up for their absence in this film adaptation, or to remove any references to the doctor being an alien.
A good example? In the BBC serial theres a moment where the first doctor, Ian and a human survivor of the Dalek occupation are put into a cell with a logic test, the doctor solves it immediately (the humans had no idea) and the Daleks use this as an opportunity to PROVE the doctor is of a higher intelligence and suitable to become something of a stratagist.
In this film, Dr. Who, Tom and a human survivor of the Dalek occupation are put into a cell. And the doctor uses a comb to break the magnetic lock on the cell door, at which point the Daleks swoop in, announce that THAT was a logic test and send the whole gang off to become ‘Robomen’ (the Daleks ‘on the ground’ human converted slave drivers)
Its oversimplification to the point of daftness, and its prominent pretty much throughout the whole thing. Also the statement ‘The Daleks Swoop in’ could be used on any and every single page of the script for this thing. I think the only piece of feedback the production team took to heart was that in ‘Doctor Who and the Daleks’ the Daleks didnt turn up for a while (because they dont in the actual serial for 2 or so episodes) and so they decide to crash the daleks into every single scene in this thing, sometimes MULTIPLE times.
I cant particularly fault the direction, the scenes they do recreate from the original BBC serial look 100% better, grander and more detailed than the original broadcast version (they had a budget and a set space bigger than a shoebox though…So I cant exactly say its a fair comparison) But the majority of the movie itself is decent enough, super colourful and a clear line of thought has been put into exactly how this should look and feel. It would have been easy to just recreate how things looked from the TV version, but here it does have a grander and richer vibe to it, that I personally quite liked.
Cast direction is a bit of a flop on the other hand, with most of the cast looking lost when on set, and in some cases the ‘set’ itself is just a black curtain…Which doestn exactly give them a lot to work with in terms of hitting marks and utilising props.
Nevertheless, the cast do muddle on and there is some genuinely well handled moments here, though, most of them appear to be from Bernard Cribbins who was renowned for being a fairly solid physical performer.
The script itself, being an adaptation kind of lives and dies by that. and I do think they cut this thing a little too close to the bone, its supposed to show a dystopia. But all it really is, is a load of upbeat british folks wandering around a couple semi demolished buildings…Not exactly ‘end of the world’ vibes…Also; they decided for some reason to tone down certain KEY characters here. Susan (who…well basically this is her story! its the one where she leaves, finds love and starts trying to rebuild the planet) is snookered here. Suzy is 6 years old. So obviously love and philanthropy on a dystopic world is out. But rather than try to make her fit the plot, they take the kid (who was VERY vocal and precotious in the first film) and basically just, write her away here. She has VERY little dialogue and spends most of the film wandering around various bunkers and woodland until she’s reunited with Cushing.
But even more strangely, The Doctor himself is abscent for a decent chunk of the movie, and when he does turn up, he has minimal lines and largely just re-emphisises the plot as it stands. Its bizzare. This is a DOCTOR WHO movie, and DOCTOR WHO has barely anything really to do with it.
They seem to struggle a bit with tone, they want it dystopic, but not *too* dystopic. They want comedy, but not *TOO*much comedy, they want to remain faithful to Terry Nations vision. But this is a Gramaphone of a story in a ‘CD’ world. its…a square peg in a round hole honestly. I dont HATE it, but its weird to see why anyone would bother doing THIS, NOW.
The cine is fine, compositions about as good as it gets for these low budget runs. I adore the use of colour here and the Daleks shell colours are all utterly delightful honestly. its vivid and creative, maybe a *bit* safer than the first outing. But ultimately still solid enough.
The performances are largely sitting on Bernard Cribbins and Peter Cushing (whenever he ACTUALLY gets a chance to DO something) I also have to give a special shout out to ‘Philip Maddoc’ one of the few TV doctor who actors to somehow land a part in these films. And my favourite ‘person who gets blown up in a shed, when he thinks the daleks cant blow up sheds.’ delightful.
Also; on the soundtrack front, we’re still doing big band orchestral pieces, and this one sounds even MORE like some kind of strange ‘Showa’ era TOHO production. It…wasnt for me, and felt quite dated for the time it came out…but hey ho!…
Daleks: Invasion Earth 2150AD was a sequel noone really asked for, and that reflected in the box office. A third film adapting ‘The Daleks Masterplan’ was kicked around for years befor eventually being abandoned in 1970. and LORD knows what THAT would have looked like. To me? I kind of just put this film in a compartment of my brain that acknowledges it exists….But doesnt really know why. I dont hate it, but I certainly dont love it. It has its moments, but whenever the credits roll Im always just left with ‘why?’
I’d say if you like your low budget, cheesy 60s sci fi stuff, this is absolutely a curio not to be missed. But doctor who fans may see this more as an oddity than anything ACTUALLY worth their time, and I personally will probably leave it a bit before revisiting this one.
2024 was almost certainly an ‘event’ year for me personally, one where I kind of put my hobbies and enjoyments on hold for 12 months in order to do a bit of ‘personal growth and development’. It was one of those years where 10 years progress was done in 12 months, and Im hoping (FINALLY) after 2 years of life changing significant events, that i’ll be able to (FINALLY) settle back into the nice, comfortable life I was leading pretty much right up to the start of 2023…How likely that is to happen however has yet to be seen ultimately.
Im sure many folks are bored BEYOND death about me talking about me and my partner buying our first house this year. I fully promise that the next couple of blogs on this site will basically be the end of it. But that has kind of been my year. 4-6 months of paperwork and trying to keep the momentum up, followed by 4-6 months of heavy renovation work, moving, re-moving, re-re-moving and finally unpacking and getting set up. And even now, as of Jan 4th 2025 we’re still not FULLY done…We’re basically just unpacked and set up enough that we can start to lead a normal day to day life without feeling like we’re on a building site or living out of boxes. But we still have a bit of a journey to go.
I mention this because its had a detrimental impact on my movie watching this year on multiple levels. For one, its meant i’ve had to make all my youtube content up front (basically all the videos you watched this year, barring collabs were written, recorded, edited and uploaded between December 2023 and April 2024, With the last video going up around July time). So I’ve kind of been out of the loop this year on that front. But the other knock on is that during the actual process of home buying and DIY-ing, i’ve been WAY too busy and consumed with getting the place habitable to even THINK of cracking open new movies. Meaning my year in film basically reads:
January – June: A few New movies mixed in with some firm favourites
July – November: Barely ANY movie watching, and if there was any it was nostalgia heavy favourites to try and keep my brain on side.
December: A rushed mixture of trying to cram in as many new movies as I could on top of as many christmas movies as I could, While ALSO doing MEGA late christmas planning because I ran out of time and money.
Its been. A. Year. But certainly a rewarding and enriching one!
And now its 2025! And im ready to let the rubber ACTUALLY hit the road, im delighted to be back and keen to get started on making new videos, hanging on streams with folks and getting back into the swing of things. But before I can really TRUELY get started…Its become a bit of an annual tradition round these parts to look back over the last 12 months and spotlight the films that I caught for the first time last year and shine a light on them to highlight just how awesome they really were!
This years list was a little easier than most years, as there wasnt *as* many to choose from, but I still had a good time shortlisting 20 films out of the many new titles I did watch and then whittling them down to a top 10. As always, these films are in no particular order. These are just 10 films I caught for the first time last year, that I think you’ll really get a kick out of if you choose to check them out! So without further ado!
Pufnstuff:
Prior to 2024 I had only a very limited knowledge of the works of Sid and Marty Krofft. Other than show titles, I hadnt really seen any of their work and had you asked me my opinion on them before last year, I’d have probably just written them off as wannabes who jumped on the psychedelic movement of the 60s and then spent the rest of their careers riding the coat-tails of Jim Henson.
But then this year, I saw Pufnstuf. And well, i’ve never really quite been the same since.
This, VIVID. Offering landed at just the right moment when I needed some surrealist hyper colourful silliness without the sneer, and it quickly won me over without much of a fight.
The plot of ‘Pufnstuf’ in and of itself is a bit surreal telling the tale of a lad who finds a magic talking flute and moments later a fully functional talking boat that takes him to a strange island full of felt folk who are just happy to have new visitors. This is all short lived however when the film introduces Witchipoo, a local witch to the island whos spotted the magic flute and wants it to allow her to do exceptional magic AND to show off at the annual Witches convention.
The relentless happiness, and bizarre imagery this film conjures up across its runtime left my jaw firmly on the floor at multiple points, and when I showed the folks on my discord page the movie, they too were equally beside themselves with laughter and confusion as to what the hell they were actually even watching…But in a good way, not a confused ‘call the police way’.
With solid direction, fun and interesting characters, the BIZARRE plot, vivid and creative script and set choices, a superb cast and memorable music numbers. ‘Pufnstuf’ may actually be one of the few films on this list that I could really solidly recommend to just about anyone with even a passing interest in surreal and strange cinema. Put it this way, Im not ranking these films on this list. But if I were, ‘pufnstuf’ would be a top 3 contender no doubt about it.
Hey Folks! It’s intermission time mixtape!:
I’ve been on a bit of a journey with boutique labels over the last decade or so, when I first got into active collecting back at the turn of the 2010s, it was ‘Arrow Video’ that acted as a gateway to strange and surreal cinema and opened up a whole world of film to me. Around 2018/2019 however, I began to notice that more and more ‘mainstream’ titles were entering their release schedules and the types of films that had previously been the backbone of the company (The Beast Within, City of the Living Dead, Inferno etc…) were increasingly becoming rarer to see on the slate, eventually sometime around 2019, Vinegar Syndrome made their international shipping options MUCH more palatable, and I became a devout Vyn-Sin connoisseur. For a good 4-5 years I bought pretty much anything they’d put out, I went through their back catalogue and tried to mop up as much as I could.
And while I CERTAINLY wont be throwing stones here, they’re good people. I have to say that, while those 4-5 years were good…by the end of last year, I was kind of tapped out.
I’d basically bought everything I was interested in, the stuff I didnt already own, but wanted, was skyrocketing in price due to VS’s ‘once they’re gone, they’re gone’ way of distributing films. They too have slowly been releasing more and more ‘upper end’ studio pictures (show girls, roadhouse, The Tenant) and that combined with there just, not being as many titles released that im fully interested in owning, and the fact that they seem insistent now in releasing the majority of their titles in 4k (at 4k prices) has meant i’ve spent a lot of the year drumming my fingers with Vinegar syndrome, hoping that their next month of releases has maybe ONE film i’d actually be interested in, and could afford once it hit sale prices…and then being somewhat disappointed when that didnt happen…2024 in that regard has been a bit of a washout.
But, while Vinegar Syndrome have kind of been off my radar this year, AGFA (American Genre Film Archive) have, for the last 3-4 years now, slowly been warming up to becoming my new favourite boutique label. The organisation, which heavily promotes the preservation and proliferation of VERY deep cut productions, has been on a bit of a roll in recent years with barely a month going by where they havent released SOMETHING that i’ve absolutely fallen in love with.
In recent years, they’ve tackled the works of Barry J. Gillis, re-released two Ed Wood classics, astounded with movies like ‘Final Flesh’ and ‘Video Diary of a Lost Girl’ and slowly, but surely, their library has basically become my film collection.
Probably the most exciting news to come from them over recent years has been their increasing closeness with ‘Something Weird Video’ a similar preservation company that started in the late 80s and ran through most of the 90s, 00’s and 10’s before becoming an archive and resource streaming service as of 2025. Something weird is responsible for saving a frankly obscene number of movies from falling quite literally into non existence. Films like ‘She Freak’, ‘Bat Pussy’ and ‘The Curious Dr. Hump’ would either only exist in incredibly rough prints, or not exist at all if it wasn’t for the work of ‘Something Weird’. And 2024 would see the release of what I frankly considered a ‘grail’ offering up until now.
‘Hey Folks! It’s Intermission time’ was a series of curated compilations from ‘Something Weird’ totalling 6 volumes of cinema intermission trailers, usually the stuff trying to convince you to go spend money at the snack bar, or general notes from the theater themselves, either welcoming you to the theater, offering friendly advise of services the cinema offered, telling you of upcoming events, or trying to help raise money for charity.
They’re quirky, interesting little remnants of a by-gone age. With most screens in the UK at least now having highly polished, mass distributed pre film screens. I find it fascinating to see just how home grown and unique a lot of these little trails, that were widely seen as disposable, ended up being.
Which brings me to the ‘Hey Folks! Its Intermission Time Mixtape’ the main feature on a set released this year from AGFA that upscales, restores and re-releases all 6 volumes of Something Weirds original compilation series. But also offers a unique remix of some of the more memorable and interesting intermission trails, turning it into a mind melting 70-80 minutes of psychedelic and trippy re-editing that I feel offers an entirely new viewing experience to these decades old stings. AGFA have been doing remixes like this for likely coming up to a decade at this point, their ‘Horror trailer show’ and ‘Cult of AGFA’ releases, not to mention their ‘Special Christmas Special’ all showcase some superb editing and its clear they have a talented and creatively minded team fronting these ventures.
‘Hey Folks’ is another fantastic entry in this style of presentation. And Frankly this was likely my ‘Bluray of the year’ honestly. Given thats a year that ALSO included another grail of mine ‘The Dragon Lives Again’ FINALLY getting a correct aspect ratio release for the first time ever. Thats an incredible feat. a set I personally think is an essential, if you havent checked out ‘Hey Folks! Its Intermission time’ absolutely take some time to fix that! Its a great set, and it makes an even greater gift!
Last House on Dead End Street:
An unexpected entry on my list this year, I came so close to NOT seeing this film, its actually quite bizarre. So, I had heard of ‘Last House on Dead End Street’ over the years as being a particularly gruesome picture that, most notably, Vinegar Syndrome had been working on remastering for a number of years. I figured i’d likely check it out when they put out the cleaned up version, until one night while doing some research for ‘The After Dark Collection: Volume 2’ (Coming 2025) I landed on a reddit thread discussing Vinegar Syndromes ‘Adult’ movie releases, and found out that *apparently* hidden in the menus for their release of ‘Corruption’ was a ‘grindhouse’ style HD scan of ‘Last House on Dead End Street’ and just by chance, I had only recently VIEWED my copy of ‘Corruption’…So! I popped it into my player, messed around with it for a bit, and *boom* I had a copy of ‘Last House on Dead End Street’ in my hands.
And I really wasnt disappointed with this one. as billed, its a particularly unpleasant, seedy and graphic depiction of psychopathy, and the rawness in the performances and actions (given its about making snuff films) left a long lasting impression on me. Reading in to the behind the scenes on it only made me despair even harder as I read of the struggles the writer/director had to even GET the film out to the public. Not to mention the fact that, by the time it actually DID get a wider showing, he had NO idea it was even happening. Its…got a BTS thats somehow even crazier than the film itself honestly.
I think if this DID have a wider release in good quality, it would likely be held in a much higher and respected regard. As it stands, all I can personally say is. It is NOT for the squeamish, but if you enjoy films like ‘Bloodsucking Freaks’ or ‘The Sinful Dwarf’ you will almost certainly love ‘Last House on Dead End Street’.
Hundreds of Beavers:
At the complete opposite side of the spectrum from ‘Last House on Dead End Steet’ we have the indie darling of the year, and a personal favourite of this years movie crop ‘Hundreds of Beavers’. A film that got recommended to me AT LEAST a dozen times within the first couple months of it doing the indie circuit. So much so that ‘friend of the show’ Triv of Trivial Theater, managed to cop a screener, and essentially pulled me out of the reno work to make it clear that this WASNT something I should sit out on. And damnit if she was absolutely right.
The plot follows a fur trapper attempting to collect ‘hundreds of beavers’ to sell the pelts of in order to win the heart and hand of a merchants daughter, the whole film is shot and framed like a kind of hybrid between Fleisher era animation and a ‘Loony Tunes’ short. With PLENTY of references back to Buster Keaton, The Stooges, The Marx Bros and many more silent movie icons.
Its clearly a labour of love, it looks fantastic, astoundingly so given the budget, its brimming with creative slapstick ideas, and barring a couple of moments that are a *smidge* (and I mean a *smidge*) more ‘adult’ oriented, this could easily be a family movie. I’ve kind of made it my mission this year whenever anyones asked me for recent film recommendations to send them over to this one.
Its got a good heart, a good soul. And I like that its playful and not afraid to be self aware without trying to be openly controversial. I had a real good time with this one, and could happily recommend it.
Xanadu:
If theres 2 things that ‘Xanadu’ is known for, its the frankly stonking soundtrack by ‘ELO’, and its for being the butt of pretty much every late night comedy show from 1987 till about 2003. ‘Xanadu’ was and still kind of is seen widely as a laughing stock of a movie. But this year, someone I very much respect, Frank Conniff made a lengthy twitter/bluesky post essentially admitting that, after years of using it as the aforementioned butt of several jokes through the 90s, he still hadn’t actually *seen* ‘Xanadu’ and recently decided to change that…And to his shock and horror it actually wasn’t a cringe worthy terrible musical, it was maybe a bit overlong, but he actually really liked it. Issuing something of a public apology for dunking on it for all these years.
Well; that was enough interest raised for me to go out and grab a bluray copy of the movie to see ‘whats what’. And What WAS what is that ‘Xanadu’ IS in fact a quite fun little 80s musical. Is it ‘Grease’ memorable? Absolutely not. But its a charming and warm little musical about never giving up on your dream and realising that you don’t have to be young to still go after what you really want in life.
Obviously, the ELO soundtrack IS what makes the movie fantastic, but it cant be overstated just how good Gene Kelly is in this, playing a weary property developer who yearns to return to a simpler life playing in a big band, when life was less complicated and he had something to strive for.
The film does get a little tangled up in trying to make Olivia Newton John the personification of ‘your dreams’. But I find that musicals largely trade on vibe, and a few mixed metaphors and some 2nd act pacing issues arnt going to come between me and this campy and funky little movie having a fun time.
‘Xanadu’ wont be for everyone, I know that. But I honestly would say, if you do enjoy musical cinema and have been put off by years of people dunking on this one, without ACTUALLY having watched this. I’d say give it a go, you may be genuinely surprised…At the very worst, you’ll have still listened to a pretty awesome ELO score.
Cecil B. Demented:
The Number of John Waters films I have yet to watch is slowly becoming a dwindling pool. I had seen almost all of his earlier works, but his later works are a little scattershot to come by in the UK. I had been hoping to wait for ‘Cecil B. Demented’ to get a proper Bluray release in the UK. But Criterion have now been quiet for a couple of years on that front, and it looks like Kino Lobar are picking up the slack on 90s ‘Waters’ movies…So I threw in the towel on waiting this year and just decided to hit it up on Tubi. And I absolutely loved it.
Im less enamoured with Waters ‘studio’ era. Basically everything after ‘Hairspray’ to me feels a bit forced and self referential. Cry Baby didnt really move me, Serial Mom is a much loved fan favourite, but left me cold. And Pecker just felt too safe for me. But Cecil B. Demented has a rogue twinkle in its eye that suggests to me theirs life in the old dog yet.
A film largely attacking BOTH the mainstream studio system and ‘puritan’ indie film makers who go WELL above taste and decency for their art. I feel like this was a return to form for Waters work, that would continue into his next production ‘A Dirty Shame’.
What we have here is a film that pushes the boundaries of studio cinema more than his previous studio works, but doesnt go AS far as his early films (Female Trouble, Pink Flamingos, Multiple Maniacs’ and it manages to hit a nice compromise of being a clear, concise and well structured picture, that equally has a tenacious ‘daring’ quality to it. The feeling of the old Waters pictures where anything could happen, and sometimes it actually DOES!
I really enjoyed seeing this one for the first time this year, I would highly recommend it to any Waters fans who maybe jumped off at ‘Polyester’ or felt like he lost his bite a bit post ‘Hairspray’ as I really do think this and ‘Dirty Shame’ were steps in the right direction. And with rumblings that a new John Waters film could be just around the corner. I sincerely hope it continues on this trend!
Oh…and on the off chance someone from Criterion is reading this, don’t leave us hanging, PLEASE for the love of GOD release ‘Desperate Living’. You cant just release all of John waters early work and leave out the film bridging ‘Female Trouble’ to ‘Polyester’ I NEED more high definition Mink Stole rants in my life thank you very much!
Batman 1966:
I imagine some will be surprised that, until this year i’d never seen the 1966 ‘Batman’ movie. Indeed, I myself felt some shame at having not gotten to it sooner, given that I love the original TV series and had a great respect for Adam West.
But sometimes, things just don’t line up properly, sometimes there just isnt a good bat-time or a solid enough bat-place to fit a movie in. But this year, I made it a point (having been invited to talk about it on ‘Friend of the show’ Jon Norths podcast) to FINALLY crack it open. And I had an absolute blast with it.
Honestly, I don’t have a lot to say about it, its a feature length take on the TV series, it feels like a long TV episode with a slightly bigger budget and thats about it. It absolutely should have done EXACTLY what it did do, it looks great, sounds great and the extra funds really help take things to the next level. Having all the classic villains from the TV series appear as the baddies in the theatrical outing is a great ‘raising of the stakes’ and the 60s campy silliness is still here in full force delivering an end product that hilarious, charming and just an utter delight to sit through. If you’ve never seen ‘Batman ‘66’ this is a great starting point, and if you enjoyed the TV series, but havent seen the film. You really need to fix that.
Beetlejuice:
Another one im sure will surprise some people, but again. Sometimes things don’t align when you think they *should* have, and instead align at the strangest times. I had seen the beetlejuice TV series MANY moons ago. But I’d just never got around to the movie. But, with ‘Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice’ going down a storm at the box office, my partner was horrified to learn i’d not seen the original and made me watch it pretty much as soon as she found out.
And it was great fun! Barring a slightly rushed ending I thought this was another creative powerhouse, delivering surreal visuals and fantastic performances one after another after another. I came away very pleasantly surprised, and while im sure the vast majority of you have already seen ‘Beetlejuice’ as someone who hadnt, it really endeared me to the concept…Though, it did make me wonder why their was such pressure for a sequel for all those years, given the film ends pretty conclusively…I dunno!, in either case I really enjoyed this one. Its probably the most well known film I saw for the first time this year and i’m going to have to try and dig out the sequel relatively soon!
Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl:
One of the more unexpected offerings of the year, I had no idea that Aardman had been working on a new ‘Wallace & Gromit’ film, letalone that it was another ‘feature’ outing for the pair, but! On Christmas day, the BBC released ‘Vengence Most Fowl’ a sequel to ‘The Wrong Trousers’ that sees that rogue criminal ‘Feathers McGraw’ trying once again to steal precious gems, AND trying to get revenge on the popular pair who put him away!
Meanwhile Wallace is back in debt, and, as a way to try and get out of it, has built the worlds first ‘Smart Gnome’ a little gardening fellow who’ll do any job, no matter how big or small. It all goes wrong as you can imagine! But it was a nice idea while it lasted!
I LOVED this special, it was probably my second favourite broadcast of the day (outside of the Gavin & Stacy finale) While I don’t *quite* think they match or surpass the complexity of animation seen in ‘The Wrong Trousers’ The film is still genuinely funny has the warmth and familiarity that makes the ‘Wallace & Gromit’ films so enjoyable and was a definite improvement over their last outing 2008s ‘A Matter of Loaf and Death’.
The comedy was superb, with several gut busting laughs throughout, the animation is still superb and the character have some nice set pieces that tie the whole thing together, including some excellent celebrity voice cameos from Peter Kay, Reese Shearsmith and Diane Morgan. A christmas highlight. If your looking for laughs and something a bit light hearted, you cant go wrong with this.
Singing in the Rain:
With only 2 hours to go before the year officially ended, I had watched 299 films, and to finish the year off AND claim my 300th film watch, I decided to take a look at a film that ‘Siskel & Ebert’ literally COULD NOT shut up about through most of their ‘Holiday Gift Guide’ specials.
‘Singing in the Rain’ has often been cited as ‘the greatest musical ever made’ I honestly wouldn’t go that far. But what you have here is a genuinely sincere, surprisingly self aware for 1952 and warm ‘smile’ of a movie that documents the cinematic shift from silent era productions to ‘talkies’ in 1929.
Gene Kelly and Debbie Reynolds are a tour d’force here, without them the film would have fallen flat I feel, with them, its a match made in heaven. And even though Kellys behaviour off screen was horrific to say the least. It cant be denied that this film oozes charm and joy, and I defy anyone to watch this without cracking *at least* a smirk once or twice throughout.
With some astounding and colourful visuals on hand, a whole host of iconic and culturally significant musical numbers and some of the most complex and tightest dance routines you’ll likely ever see. ‘Singing in the rain’ was a fabulous way to see the old year out and ring the new one in. I’ll almost certainly try and poach a physical media copy at my next convenience and if you havent got around to this one yet, all I can say is, it definitely needs bumping up your list. A great script, razor cine and direction, killer performances and a bloody ASTOUNDING score.
I also only realised the next day after watching this, that as of 2025 all works from 1929 (when this film was set) are now in the public domain. Making it a particularly poigniant watch!
And! That was my top 10 of 2024! Not a particularly controversial list…But then, they rarely are! I hope you decide to look into some of these as I had an absolute blast watching them, and as i ease back into more regular ‘new film’ watching. I can only hope that this year is as kind to me with astounding features as I hope it will be for you.
I missed my chance catching this in the cinema, and trying to find a copy of this film on physical or even digital that wasnt stupidly expensive was problematic to say the least. Mercifully ‘Channel 4’ appear to have screened it over the new years, and they’ve JUST by chance got their streaming app back up and working on google and android systems. So I grasped at the chance to catch this one while there was still a window to do it legally for free…and I was NOT dissapointed.
The film is essentially one giant spoiler. So I cant really go into any kind of detail without ruining the experience. Suffice to say, I went into this largely blind with only the knowledge that it involved jumping around in multiverses in some way, and that apparently it was a bit weird (my kind of remit). But I dont think I was prepared for the subtext of this piece to really smack the audience across the face in the 2nd and 3rd acts.
The universe hopping is really just window dressing, the framework from which the main plot is draped, which is predominantly around finding and accepting your place in the world, working through trauma and acknowledging when that trauma is influencing your life and your decisions to both yours and the people around you’s detriment. and learning to continue growing, learning acceptance and actually striving to evolve, rather than shutting down and just accepting your lot in life.
This film is basically a ‘growth’ story, but it does the wonderful thing of not just making it a lone persons growth story, much like the multiverse plot thats being thrust to the forefront of the pictures marketing. this film is about the growth of a family, the development of a family, and how one small change can create unexpected bigger ripples (something the film cleverly talks about literally with the multiverse elements, while doing it metaphorically with the characters themselves.)
I really quite enjoyed this one. I felt the script was refreshing, ran at a clip and structured itself remarkably well while spinning so many plates. I always say the sign of a great movie is when you become so wrapped up in the world the films building that you end up having a a shock realisation of the logistics it would have taken to handle some of the themes, elements, shots or direction choices the film made. and I found myself constantly having to pause the film to catch my breath at some of the shot choices, thematic choices and effects utilised. Its honestly a remarkable work, with influences stretching from anime titles like ‘Paprika’. ‘Perfect Blue’ and ‘Ghost in the shell’, to surreal Japanese cinema offerings like ‘House’ to Western influences ranging from ‘Monty Python’, to Disney right through to the 1964 film ‘L’Enfer’
It casts its net into so many genres, movies, fields and thoughts it can quite quickly become a rather overwhelming experience (Lord knows how it felt to watch this thing in Imax, im sure ushers had to scrape peoples brains off the ceiling).
The script itself is charming, interesting and relentless baraging the audience with philosophical concepts and ideas from start to finish. the act structuring is solid, the decision to split the film into 3 parts I thought worked well and the ideas coming off this script are astounding, its a firework of a film honestly shedding sparkles of genius with ever throb.
While I do think the film starts to slow a little in the back half of the 2nd act as it gets bogged down with the concepts the films trying to present. I think i’d find it hard to get this movie down to sub 2 hours. Im almost always an advocate that your film could be 10-15 minutes shorter and twice better for it. This film is no exception, but it really becomes a case of ‘where to cut?’ because even the small moments, are nice and add subtle additional layers to the storytelling.
The direction and cine are both exemplary, theres a reason this film did well during awards season with ultra creative directoral visions beautifully captured in razor sharp cinemetographic choices. I do think it relies on CGI a little *too* much at times, and at times it does feel like it prioritizes the visuals over the vision. But I can forgive it that given how folks quite often will remember an image over an idea.
The colour use is superb, the shot variety and edit are astounding, clear, precise works that honestly delighted. with humour being gently sprinkled across the runtime, in ways that CAN be up front, but are often quite subtle.
The performances are equally astounding. Of course, the centerpiece of the whole thing has to be the frankly genius acting of Michelle Yeoh and Stephanie Hsu as Mother and Daughter Evelyn and Joy. Delivering an astounding range over 150 minutes from genuine gut punches to solid laughter and everything in between, the film would have been a poorer experience without their sincerity and genuiness oozing out of the screen.
Of course, thats not to ignore Ke Huy Quan here as Waymond, who gets a split personality role ranging from a suave action type, to a soul crushed gent who ‘missed an opportunity’ to a doting husband on both sides of a divorce. he too gives an astounding range of performances and his charm really does help pull the audience in and bring them along for every bump of the ride.
That of course isnt to play down the supporting cast, in particular James Hong and Jamie Lee Curtis as ‘Gong Gong’ and ‘Deirdre’ respectfully…who do a fine turn in their respective roles. They fully capture the parts they’re playing and seem to be having a lot of fun doing so. Put it this way, when JAMES HONG…AND JAMIE LEE CURTIS…ARE BOTH…Starring in your film, and they’re great, but arnt a patch on your leading cast. My god, you’re cooking with something special.
Throw in a solid soundtrack that really helps punctuate key moments and is used almost a layering tool to help further pull you into the situation, and I think you have a real winner on your hands here honestly.
I didnt really know what to expect from ‘Everything Everywhere All at Once’ going in. I was just hoping what i’d heard was done effectively. And I really wasnt dissapointed. an astounding journey of a movie with a unique flare and style that was MORE than deserving of the praise the academy gave it at the time. I highly recommend checking this one out. But my advise is to make sure you have the time to catch it all in one sitting, uninterrupted. I struggle to find 2+ hours free a day, and I feel being pulled in and out of the action didnt solidly help me. But if you can stay in that world, it’s a rich and rewarding experience.
The last film on the ‘Short Sharp Shocks: Volume 2’ set I had yet to watch. ‘Hangman’ is a ‘Safety at Work’ film aimed at helping building site workers not die by drinking 16 largers and doing a bit of scaffolding.
Incredibly campy, it sounds like the whole film was narrated by Mike Reid, as he cheekily narrates the pitfalls ans follies that could lead to your demise.
I’m a sucker for PIF’s and this one’s great fun. Little on the more violent side than most. And I do feel the structure of the film (which is essentially a ‘guess what happens’ piece) is undermined by the opening 3 minutes in which they show basically all the accidents nastiest bits.
But hey, this is probably one of the more fun films on these sets, and arguably in the top 3 I’ve seen so far. I’d say if you enjoy public information films, you’ll probably get a kick out of this one.
Well, I figured i’d kick start the new year with a bit of cheer and merryment, and they seldom get as cheery or merry as ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’ the unholy union of the guy who wrote the ‘James Bond’ books, teaming up with the guy who wrote ‘The Witches’ and ‘James and the Giant Peach’ to create simulatneously the most delriously eccentric and terrifying work the 60s had to offer.
Its a bit of a nationwide staple is ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’ around this time of year, some watch it around christmas time, others prefer to have it on in that weird gap between the 27th of December and New years (I fall into this camp) but in the UK its usually playing somewhere and is something of a festive favourite alongside similarly bizarre and troubling films like ‘Oliver!’ and ‘Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory’.
The plot?..Thats a loaded question. But i’ll give it a go. Its 1911, and Two kids find a rundown car in a junk yard thats alledged to have been a world champion racer for 3 years on the bounce. The kids love the car, but a scrap merchent threatens to buy it and melt it down…Unless of course the kids can cough up 30 shillings (approximately £155 in todays money, or nearly $200 American).
They head home and tell their dad, who reveals (to the audience) they are in fact poor…SO very poor, and they dont have that kind of money just lying around to buy broken cars with. It turns out the dad is an eccentric inventor whos inventions almost never work, who’s also taking care of his aging father, who’s also an eccentric, who believes he’s still in the military (whether he ever actually was to begin with is up for debate).
Anyway a chance encounter with a lady called ‘Truely’ sets our inventor up with a meeting at a sweet factory to try and sell his latest invention, the ‘Toot Sweet’ a sugar stick you can blow like a whistle. it passes the audition, but an EQUALLY chance encounter at a fair ground with a man who gets a particularly bad hair cut from our inventors ‘automatic haircut’ machine ends in greater success, when he joins in on a random carnie side show and makes the 30 shillings for a 3-5 minute performance all in one go.
Anyway; they buy the car, they do it up, they take it out for a ride (along with Truely) and while spending the day at the beach, the dad recalls a tall tale about a group of nasty folks from a faraway european country called ‘Vulgaria’ who’ve heard about the car, and its supposed magic ability to fly and float on water…and they want it. Cue a madcap adventure to Vulgaria complete with Elder-napping, Noncery and traumatising visuals, guarenteed to ensure your kids wont WANT to see January 2nd.
It’s got to be *AT LEAST* 13 years since I last watched this film all the way through, I remembered always having a quite sincere soft spot for its whimsical nature. But the curse of media literacy, and 7.5 years of film journalism (not to mention the 20+ years of film making) has had devestating consiquences on my ability to enjoy movies…So much so that rewatching this now, I had to deal with my nostalgia trying to overlook simply unforgivable things about this film.
For a starters, I completely forgot that this film is nearly two and a half hours long. HOW?! How is this movie nearly 150 minutes long?! It absolutely doesnt warrent it. it has NO business being this length. and that factor alone has a devestating impact on the scripting.
The first act, CRAWLS. It CRAWLS…to get to a place where it starts picking up steam. I had completely forgotten most of the first act going into this, I had always just assumed the film started with Carattacus Potts bringing the car into the workshop and slowly working to get it up to speed.
I’d COMPLETELY forgotten about the extended race car intro that goes on for approximately 25 years, the kids arguing with the scrap man, the family finance issue plotline, the first meeting with Truely, a good 2-3 of the musical numbers in that opening half hour. and its PAINFUL waiting for this thing to ACTUALLY kick in and BE the movie I want it to be.
It isnt really till around the half way point that we actually get into the more fantastical elements of the production, and they’re fun, dark at times, but largely in a way that invites the audience to laugh along, rather than recoil (child catcher aside of course.) But by that point i’d felt like i’d been waiting in an airport departure lounge for a week.
And I think thats a core issue with this script, the characters are great, when they’re doing whimsy and charismatic things…But when that isnt happening, its like their entire personalities fall off. they just become exposition spreaders and not much else really…and because the whimsy doesnt really begin till the 2nd half (with the fair ground and the sweet factory sequences as VERY notable exceptions) I found myself getting impatient for the actual film to start proper.
From there the second and third act are largely fine, charming, witty, genuinely funny in places. But because of the ‘epic’ runtime, it has a real problem trying to establish and stick with tone. on one side of the see-saw you have Potts and Truely doing pratt falls, physical comedy and funny faces. On the other, you have the baron trying to kill his wife, the child catcher leering on children and questionable language choices such as ‘Fuzzy Wuzzies’. its disorienting. My understanding is that the brief was to try and make a film with a plot that replicated the Grimms fairytale type structure…and on that front they do succeed…But at what cost I ask you?
I dunno, Im conflicted on this rewatch about the structural integrity of the script. I feel like had it been 90-100 minutes and it had binned off most of the opening act, alongside tightening up the tone to help (if nothing else) make the contrasts a bit more consistent, it could have been absolutely perfect. As it stands, I feel most people forget the *thud* that lands with this film when the hit play.
The direction and cine are probably the films 2nd strongest elements honestly (outside of the performances) we have creative direction and cinematography a-plenty here, its exploding with possibilities, unusual decisions that just somehow work and fantastical visions that make it stand out as a film that has clearly lasted the test of time. Only matched by some superb cast direction that delivers moments that are burned into the minds of the nation. perfect set placements, perfect designs. I LOVE the look and feel of this film visually and its probably one of the sole reasons the film is remebered so fondly. Because while the scripts a bit of a mes, the ‘feel’ this film has is frankly unmistakable.
Easily however, the thing that saves this film and probably the best aspect is the casting. From the top; Dick Van Dyke, Sally Ann Howes, Lionel Jeffreys, Gert Frobe, Anna Quale, Robert Helpmann and Benny Hill? No notes. Perfection. Its a remarkable thing to get THAT MANY folks who just so perfectly personify the characters they’re being asked ot play. its frankly insane to have so many bottles of lightning all in one movie, but they somehow do. Its incredible.
Thats not to do a disservice to the rest of the cast however, who also all deliver remarkably good performances that mix high energy with some genuine feeling and deliver an outcome that manages to really get things over the line and cooking. I wont go as far as to say their isnt a BAD performance here…Just that I cant recall any.
And tying it all together is the soundtrack, which is best described as ‘A third of tracks I dont remember at all, that are utterly forgettable. A third of tracks that I vaguely remembered, but largely didnt care for. and a third of tracks that absolutely blow me away and are some of the finest musical numbers ever composed.’ the films that fractured. Truleys song lamenting Caratticus was NOT my cup of tea at all, but an addled ex-army general singing about being carried off to ‘the posh life’ while being kidnapped in his shed by a blip, while ALSO getting dunked like a biscuit! YES PLEASE!
Hits include ‘Me old bamboo’, ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’, ‘The posh posh travelling life’, ‘Doll on a music Box’, ‘Choochie face’ and much…MUCH…MUCH MUCH more. go nuts. you’ll find at least half a dozen you like.
Having given it time between rewatches, i’ve found with this instance that ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’ frustrated me, I really wanted to like it like I used to, I wanted to enjoy it the same way I recalled enjoying it in my memories. But the reality is, its overlong, tonally all over the place and a big chunk of the songs are just flatlining.
There is an incredible movie in here, and I think with some re-editing I could love it a HELL of a lot more than I did with this watch…But for now, I think im going to need a bit of time before I give this one another spin.
For my 300th (and final!) movie of 2024, I decided to go out on a high, with what a vast majority of critics (inlcuding Siskel and Ebert) alongside multiple online aggregate sites list as ‘The Greatest Musical Ever Made!’ Yep, I sat down in the middle of a severe weather warning for wind and rain on New Years Eve with my partner, and together in the warm glow of the christmas lights, we watched ‘Singing in the Rain’ for the first time ever. And we had a pretty great time.
The films set in the 1920s and follows Silent film lethario ‘Don Lockwood’ (Played by Gene Kelly) and his malicious co-star Lina Lamont (Jean Hagan) Linas maliciousness is spurred by the fact that Don really just, isnt that into her, despite her being MASSIVELY into him. The pair are icons of California appearing as THE romantic pairing in all of the major films of the day.
But one fateful night, two incidents will set in motion events that will change the face of Hollywood forever. The first is Don, while being hoarded by fans, tries to escape by jumping into the car of one ‘Kathy Selden’ (Debbie Reynolds) at first the pair cant stand each other, with Kathy insulting Dons acting ability and Don swiping at Kathy for being a lower rung on the actors ladder than he is. But after another encounter later at a party being held by the head of ‘Monumental Pictures’ (R.F Simpson) Don is left swooning by Kathys attitude and way of being…which only upsets Lina even more when she clearly sees he’s more interested in Kathy than her AND during the party Kathy accidentally sends an entire birthday cake into linas face.
The other incident is that, while at the party, R.F Announces a special treat, revealing a new revolution in moviemaking…Sound. specifically they cite that warner brothers is soon to release the first fully talking picture ‘The Jazz Singer’…They’re not worried though as, at this point, its just being seen as a gimmick…That is until ‘The Jazz Singer’ does gangbusters at the box office, leading ‘Monumental’ to urgently rework all their ‘in production’ silent films into ‘talkies’.
For Don, thats not a problem, he’s maybe a little stiff on delivery and line memory, but he’s fine…But Lina? she has a voice that could cut a two by four in half. She cant remember lines, she has trouble pronouncing words…She isnt built for the ‘Talkies’…But you know who is? Kathy. And when Don and Kathy are reunited. the pair along with Dons lifetime friend Cosmo hatch a scheme to put Kathy on the map, while also keeping Lina from stirring up trouble…IF they can pull it off that is.
And y’know what? I think ‘Greatest Musical Ever’ is *probably* an overstatement. But I’ll tell you what, this is a MORE than fantastic little musical that had me grinning for most of the runtime.
In an era where musicals were often a little…’rigid’. Where they basically came in three flavours, ‘Very serious and dower’, ‘Farsical comedies’, or ‘Opera’. ‘Singing in the Rain’ breaks new ground by looking at the framework of the ‘muscial’ genre up to that point and remodelling it with the slightly more swinging and hip sensibilities of the 1950s.
Its a musical that inherently takes itself VERY seriously, with careful consideration put into every dance routine, line delivery and musical number. and BECAUSE it spends so much time trying to master the hard stuff to the point it looks effortless, it grants them the tremendous fortune of being able to actually PLAY the film as a bit self aware, a bit laid back. a more natural happening, rather than an almost pained movie of routine after routine.
And everyone in this film quite literally put their blood sweat and tears into the production (I lost a lot of respect for Kelly over this film) but it cant be denied the end result is a masterwork. A film that from top to bottom feels like its been optimised almost to the point of perfection for the genre at that time.
For a starters the script is a VERY pacy hour and 42 minutes long, the tone is easy going, playing for laughs, but not to TOO much of an obnoxious degree. he cast are charming, charismatic and entertaining throughout. I had a warm smile for most of the runtime on this thing just watching the antics go down, and there are some really solid laughs in this to boot too!
The songs are well paced out, not *too* often, but plentiful enough (and consistent with hits) to keep you engaged. I feel its biggest triumph is taking an element of movie history (the jump to the talkie) and actually managing to translate it not only into a successful musical, but an entertaining and well played one at that. It could have been SO easy to mess this up, and wind up with an insincere piece that felt flat and too tied to the time to be fun. But they relish every scene their in with quirky dialogue and *just* the right amount of snark as and when required to just about keep the production afloat for the whole runtime.
In fact my only criticism is the somewhat surreal ‘Gotta Dance’ sequence in the 3rd act…Which for me? while VERY nicely handled, did feel out of place with the rest of the movie and seemed to go on for an AGE. I understand why its there because it helps to further work on Don as a character a bit. But I think it could have been cut, or at the very least trimmed a fair bit and this would have been even better still.
Direction is frankly superb, the dance numbers are cited as some of the most difficult routines in musical history, Debbie Reynolds hadnt done anything like this before and somehow, via supernatural powers or the pure wrath of Gene Kelly, they managed to pull off some of the most memorable, creative and interesting direction that i’ve seen in a movie in a good while, constantly shapeshifting and evolving, theres sequences in this film that feel 30 years fresher than they actually are. It honestly blew my mind to find out this was 1952, as i’d have had it as a late 50s film truthfully.
Direction of the cast is extroadinary as well, again these were NOT easy routines to learn and Kelly, Reynolds and O’Connor MASTER them. I dont think i’ve ever seen footwork and intensity in a performance anywhere quite like whats shown here. its truely remarkable. Concerning…But remarkable.
As for the cine, its beautiful, intense and creative sequences flow beautifully from one scene to the next, theres room for creative compositions that most all land, sequence building is a little stiff in places (but it is 1952) and I think a little more B-roll would have got it over the line fully for me…But its a minor grumble, this thing looks fantastic, its vivid, colourful, engaging, SHOWS more than it tells and the edit is seamless, equally smooth and frankly an utter delight.
Performance wise, Debbie Reynolds and Gene Kelly are astounding. Given what we know Kelly did to Reynolds through this production I almost feel perverse praising him here. But the pair really do have a strong on screen chemestry, they both astound in their roles delivering fantastic performances that largely (and successfully) carry the film from start to finish.
Donald O’Connor and Jean Hagan as Cosmo and Lina equally delight as comedy foils for the production, with O’Connor *maybe* just about pushing the comedy foil a bit *too* far for my taste. But never full crossing the line. and Hagan is just perfect as Lina, giving a performance thats rich, multi layered and varied. I laughed at her when we found out her voice was a dud for ‘talkies’ I winced when she started flexing her stranglehold on the studios when she found out they were employing Kathy. It takes a strong performance to be able to play both the victim of comedy, the comic foil AND the villainess all at the same time, all in one movie. But she really truely nails it delivering a memorable performance that helps tie the whole thing together.
And as if I could review this without talking about the soundtrack. the titular ‘Singing in the Rain’ is a wonderful classic, but ‘Good Morning (to you)’, ‘Gotta Dance’, ‘Make ’em Laugh’ and ‘Moses’ are all show stoppers in their own right and really showcase the talent both on screen and the crew behind it. I was beyond impressed and was in awe of the craftsmanship behind it.
Is ‘Singing in the Rain’ the greatest musical ever made? In my opinion? im not fully convinced. I could easily see a point where, through re-watches, this becomes one of my favourite musicals. In terms of technical ability it almost certainly is in the top 3. But for me? this is just a really solid, charming and astounding work that is guarenteed to raise even the sourest of moods and was a fantastic way for me to see out 2024. The only thing better than finishing ‘Singing in the Rain’ is knowing a next time will always be on the cards.
Probably the best entry so far that I’ve seen in all of the ‘Short Sharp Shock’ boxsets. ‘The Dumb Waiter’ is a simple stalked/home Invasion piece in which a woman is contacted by a man claiming to be following her, and from there the action and tension just keeps getting ratcheted higher and higher.
I’m going to keep my thoughts on the script to a minimum because, it is a quite short film and I don’t want to spoil it. But the direction and cine are really rock solid, reminding me very strongly of the sense of isolation and creativity seen in Bob Clarkes ‘Black Christmas’…which I’m sure is probably one of the higher honours I can bestow a short like this.
Tense, creative and the first film in ANY of these sets to genuinely have me on the edge of my seat, ‘The Dumb Waiter’ is a fine fine movie. And one I can definitely recommend.
A real shame honestly. What we have here is a pretty decent idea, a nasty racist politician ressurects an occultism from the 15th century to aid him in passing what (at the time) was heavily draconian legislation…but by modern standards is par of the course seemingly…Only to wind up biting off more than he could chew.
It’s a simple idea with scope to be really effective…and the film looks great with some pretty solid performances to boot!
The problem is this movie is just shy of an hour…and the idea can seemingly only really sustain 25 minutes…meaning at least half the movie feels like padding…and not particularly interesting padding at that.
Not helping matters either, the actual plot beyond that initial pitch gets VERY contrived and confusing fairly quickly making a film that was already a bit of a drag, even harder to stay invested in even as the final minutes drew in.
I ultimately started clock watching by the 35 minute mark, and was checking my phone by 50 minutes…its a shame really, as I think had this been 30 minutes, it’d probably have been at least a star and a half higher for me…ah well, can’t be lucky every time.
TYTD Reviews 