Category Archives: Foreign Films

Tribute (1980)

Posted on December 1, 2023 | Leave a comment

tribute

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Father reconciling with son.

Scottie (Jack Lemmon) has been working in show business for decades and has built up many friends and fans, but finds it all come crashing down when, at the mere of age of 55, he gets diagnosed with leukemia. His greatest regret is not having a close relationship with his now grown son Jud (Robby Benson). He wants to reconcile, but not make it obvious that’s it’s because he’s about to die. When Jud comes over for a surprise visit with his mother (Lee Remick), whom Scottie has long since divorced, he tries to mend things and become the father he never had, but the hurt runs deep and Jud proves to be resistant to everything Scottie tries making him feel even more hopeless and forcing him to come to terms with his personal faults and inadequacies.

The film is based on the stageplay of the same name, which also starred Lemmon, and got sold into a $1 million movie deal before the stage version ever hit Broadway. On the surface it’s deemed a drama, but the script by Bernard Slade, who also penned the play, comes off more like a desperate comedy akin in tone to Same Time Next Year, which is Slade’s most famous work that had a strong dramedy vibe to it. This works on that same level as it attempts to lighten the poignant moments with comical bits, but it fails miserable.

Had some of it managed to actually been funny I might not have complained, but it amounts to cringe instead. The most eye-popping moment is watching Lemmon in a chicken costume run around his place going ‘balk-balk’ and even lay a giant egg on the sofa, which I felt was a career low point. What’s even dumber is his wooing of a young woman, played by Kim Cattrall, who’s also a patient at the hospital. He gets into her room by pretending to be a doctor and then gropes her breasts in a feeble attempt to check her heart rate. A normal woman of today, and even one back then, should respond with outrage for him copping-a-feel by disguising himself into being someone he isn’t, but in this stupid movie she’s instead ‘charmed’ by his antics and it’s enough to get her to go to bed with him later.

What’s worse and even more outlandish is that Scottie then sets her up with his son to have them conveniently ‘bump into each other’ in public and then begin going out. Yet how many sons are going to be cool with Dad sleeping with their girl first? Of course Scottie never tells him that he’s already ‘tested her out’, but it does end up showing inadvertently what a conniving jerk the old guy is and what the film considers to be nothing more than an amusing comic side-story really hurts the likability of the character if you think about it.

The acting is good. Lemmon is expectedly strong and so is Remick as his wife though her part is limited. I liked seeing Benson, who usually got stuck with immature parts due to his young, geeky features, play the mature and sensible, level-headed adult of which he does perfectly. Colleen Dewhurst has some strong moments as the caring nurse and Cattrall, despite the annoying nature of her dippy character, is pleasing enough. Yet the ultimate scene-stealer goes to Gale Garnett famous for the mid-60’s folk song ‘We’ll Sing in the Sunshine’, who plays a hooker and in one segment goes topless (looks great), but it’s a bit jarring when you realize it’s the same person who sang such a sweet-natured tune, tough in some ways you could say it’s also a testament that her creative talents are quite broad.

The third act, where they have this major tribute for Scotty has a touching potential, but gets overdone by filling-up an entire auditorium with all of his ‘close friends’, which even for a social butterfly seemed a bit exaggerated. The scene where the hooker gets a restaurant packed with all of her male clients who have ever slept with her has an amusing quality though again equally hard to believe that all of these men would be cool with everybody knowing that they’ve bedded a prostitute. I’ll give props though to the segment showing Scotty getting treatment in the hospital, which gets shown exclusively through still photos, which I found visually innovative.

Unfortunately everything else falls into second-rate melodramatics. It doesn’t even have the decency to tells us whether Scotty dies or not. When an entire movie deals with a character’s ultimate demise I think it should eventually get answered instead of leaving it open. It makes the whole terminal illness thing seem like a tease done to emotionally manipulate the viewer than an actual reality that it supposedly is.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: December 19, 1980

Runtime: 2 Hours 1 Minute

Rated PG

Director: Bob Clark

Studio: 20th Century Fox

Available: DVD-R

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Comedy/Drama, Foreign Films, Movies Based on Stageplays, Movies from Canada, Movies that take place in the Big Apple, Movies with a Hospital setting, Movies with Nudity, Obscure Movies

Tagged , , , , ,

The Garden of Delights (1970)

Posted on November 5, 2023 | Leave a comment

garden2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: He’s unable to speak.

Antonio (Jose Luis Lopez Vazquez) is a wealthy owner of a construction business that he took over from his father (Francisco Pierra) years earlier. Unfortunately just as he’s ready to reap his profits he gets into a car accident, which confines him to wheel chair and unable to speak, or write, or even remember anything. His greedy family becomes determined to get him his memory back even if it means drastic shock therapy as Antonio holds all the business secrets including the combination to the safe and the Swiss bank accounts. The family’s brazen attempts seem to be working though not enough to get him to speak, but while this is going on, inside Antonio’s head, he begins experiencing surreal events that seem almost real and are both fascinating and frightening.

The film’s director Carlos Saura started out his career in the 50’s as a director of documentaries and shorts, which eventually lead to him getting the offer to direct his first feature length film in 1966 with The Hunt, a film about three middle-aged male friends who go on a rabbit hunt that starts out pleasant enough, but ends in brutal violence for all three. That film won him many accolades and gave him the opportunity to direct this one, which plays out more as a metaphor. His home country of Spain was at the time under the authoritarian rule of Francisco Franco who did not allow for free speech and often punished those who spoke out against him. To get around this Saura uses many allegories to convey his anger at the oppressive government, but in a way that didn’t make it obvious enough for him to be arrested.

The main character of Antonio is meant to be a metaphor of the Spanish people with his mute condition being similar to their inability to speak out against their country’s leader. Unfortunately many of today’s viewers aren’t going to get this either because they haven’t bothered to study up about it, or just don’t care. Because of this many viewers will miss the symbolism and leave at the end, if they managed to stay with that long, shaking their heads. Since few people of today were around when it occurred and most Americans don’t have a good grasp of Spainish history it will all be unrelatable for most.

The lead role is well played and Vasquez has a very expressive face, which helps add nuance to a character that otherwise has no other way of expressing himself. I did find it frustrating that we don’t learn much about him. The scenes where he looks around his empty warehouse that he once ran does convey the quandary of someone who once felt powerful, but now only a shell of what he once was. The viewer though is unable to completely identify with him as not enough of his backstory is given. We do eventually during the third act see him in a flashback moment where he speaks with his father and aggressively takes over the company, we also eventually witness the car accident that put him into this condition as it had only been referred to before as ‘an accident’ with no details given, but I felt both of these things should’ve been shown and introduced a lot earlier.

Spoiler Alert!

Pierra as the father gives a thoroughly delightful performance and some of the surreal moments including Antonio’s vision of being pushed into his backyard pond and the recreation of a religious ceremony being two of the best. Yet there are other moments that miss the mark including having a live pig brought into the home and then trapping Antonio inside a room with it in order to jog his memory from a painful past event, but his confrontation with the animal is never shown, which is a letdown. The family members are confusing as it’s never clear whether they have bad intent, or are just acting the way they are due to being put in a desperate situation. The ending in which all the characters become bound to a wheelchair and unable to speak just like Antonio was trying to show how all of the Spanish citizens where being oppressed beyond just him, but emotionally it isn’t compelling and a potentially good story and character study get lost with Saura’s obsession to put political symbolism first and foremost.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: November 5, 1970

Runtime: 1 Hour 30 Minutes

Rated GP

Director: Carlos Saura

Studio: Video Mercury Films

Available: DVD-R (dvdlady.com)

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Black Comedy, Foreign Films, Obscure Movies, Surreal/Fantasy

Tagged , , , , , ,

Who can Kill a Child? (1976)

Posted on October 26, 2023 | Leave a comment

who3

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Children kill the adults.

Tom (Lewis Fiander) and Evelyn (Prunella Ransome), who is pregnant, travel to an island off the coast of Spain in order to find some peace and quiet while on vacation. Once they arrive they find the place conspicuously devoid of any adults with many of the shops and bars looking like they’ve been abandoned. The only people around are children who behave strangely and will not talk to Tom, or Evelyn even when spoken to directly. They then come upon an adult survivor named Padre (Antonio Iranzo) who describes to them how the night before the children suddenly went crazy and began killing all the adults on the island without any provocation. Can Tom and Evelyn escape, or will they become yet another victim?

While there’s been other movies detailing children, or even groups of kids, who murder the adults around them this one is considered the granddaddy of all of them and, though not ever verified, the possible inspiration to Stephen King’s Children of the Corn. The film’s creepiness comes not so much with scares, as there’s very little of that, but more through its quiet atmosphere and isolation that grows increasingly more ominous as it goes. Violence-wise it’s scarce with only the minimum of gore though the sequence done over the opening credits, which has grisly real-life footage of victims of the Holocaust as well as both the Korean and Vietnam Wars is not for the squeamish and may be too explicit and grim for some to sit through.

The script was written in only a matter of 4 short days and it shows with character motivations that aren’t particularly well thought out. For instance I didn’t understand why Tom wouldn’t tell Evelyn about what he saw, in regards to the child beating up and eventually killing an old man, and wanted to somehow play down and even lie about what was going on. This is a pregnant woman who has a right to know about the dangers lurking about. Shielding her from the horrifying realities isn’t going to help her be alert and put up her defenses and if anything just make her more vulnerable to be taken advantage of by the kids. What kind of husband lies to his wife about such urgent matters? Does he think because she’s female she won’t be ‘strong enough’ to handle the truth? If so it makes him sexist and not particularly likable because of it.

Tom also is too slow to respond to things. Even after witnessing first hand the children’s atrocities he doesn’t immediately try to arm himself, get off the island, or board him and his wife off in some sort of safe room with a fortified door. Instead they remain pretty much out in the open in an abandoned hotel with both the entrances and exits wide open for anyone to come into. At one point he even gives his wife a sedative and tells her to take a nap inside one of the hotel rooms while leaving the door open as he goes downstairs to speak to the male survivor, but how does he know a kid won’t sneak into the room while he’s gone?

It’s strange too how the children kill a Dutch woman and even strip off her clothes, but when Tom walks in they all scurry away. If they’ve already killed a vast number of adults why would they fear Tom when he comes in and instead not just attack him too? For that matter why does Tom feel so emboldened to walk in on these kids to begin with? He’s seen what terrible things they can do, so why does he risk exposing himself to them? These clearly aren’t normal kids, so he should remain at a safe distance and view what they’re doing from a hiding spot.

While there’s creepy moments and imagery it all mainly comes during the third act and some more scares and action earlier could’ve helped. The special effects aren’t too great either with the shot of the bloodied old man, whose supposedly just been killed, clearly still breathing as his chest heaves up and down, though Tom carries him away like he’s now nothing more than a corpse. Having Padre describe the violent attacks of the children onto the adults from the previous night was disappointing as this should’ve been played out visually, even if through flashback, as it would be much scarier to see this instead of just being told about it.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending has its fair share of suspenseful moments, but again more logic loopholes. When Tom and Prunella are trapped in a room behind a wooden door a small child crawls through the window space and tries to shoot at them, but Tom manages to hit the kid with a bullet first with a rifle he’s found. The other kids then quit trying to break the door down the couple are in once they hear the shot and all go filing away. Tom says this is because none of the other adults responded with aggression and violence towards them like he did. Once they realized, by hearing the gunshot, that Tom meant business they all backed off knowing that he might kill them as well. However, the kids could not see through the door, the tiny window on it was too high up for them to look through, so for all they knew the gunshot was the sound of the small kid shooting the couple with his gun and therefore they should’ve continued the attack and not immediately stopped.

The children are also able to somehow brainwash their peers into doing their evil bidding by simply looking into their eyes, which somehow puts them under a spell. They even use this power to get the fetus inside Evelyn’s womb to attack her, but where do they get this power from? What kind of entity is behind all of this? Nothing gets answered, which leaves too many questions open and thus not as effective as it could’ve been.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: April 26, 1976

Runtime: 1 Hour 53 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Narciso Ibanez Serrador

Studio: Penta Films

Available: DVD (Region 0), Blu-ray (Region B/2)

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, Cult, Foreign Films, Horror, Movies with a Hotel setting, Movies with Nudity, Mystery, Obscure Movies

Tagged , ,

Hellbound: Hellraiser II (1988)

Posted on October 18, 2023 | Leave a comment

hellbound

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: The cenobites come back.

The story begins immediately where the first installment ended with Kristy (Ashley Laurence) in the hospital recovering from her injuries while she pleads with Dr. Channard (Kenneth Cranham) and his assistant Kyle (William Hope) to destroy the bloody mattress that her stepmother Julia (Clare Higgins) died on for fear that it might bring the woman back to life. Dr. Channard finds this possibility intriguing, so he brings the mattress back to his home and then has one of his mentally ill patients bleed on it, which brings Julia, minus her skin, back from the other dimension. She feeds on the patient, which gives her strength and Dr. Channard supplies her with more of them until she is able to take human form. Kristy finds out about it and travels to Channard’s home along with Tiffany (Imogen Boorman), a mental patient at the hospital whom she meets that cannot speak, but has a gift for solving puzzles. When they confront Julia and Channard all four get taken to the other dimension known as the labyrinth that houses the cenobites.

While Clive Barker wrote the script and produced he did not direct and instead handed over the reins to his friend Tony Randel. Randel wanted to turn into more of a dark fantasy and the transitions works making it visually arresting. The mazes that make up the other dimension, which are captured from a bird’s-eye view as we see tiny dots, which represent the characters running, are amazing and I enjoyed Tiffany’s brief foray into a circus like freak show that had a giant fetus with its lips sewn shut, that was creepy and I wished extended further. The scene where Julia bursts out of the mattress to attack the patient I found genuinely horrifying and a dare say one of the scarier moments in horror film history. I also liked the backstory revealing how pinhead (Doug Bradley) came into being. Supposedly this backstory was supposed to take up a major part of the runtime, but due to budget limitations it had to be scrapped and we only see a brief snippet of it through quickly edited segments, which to me was probably best.

The script though does seem a little weak in the way it sets up the premise as it’s way too convenient that the patient in the neighboring room to Kristy’s would have this fixation to solving puzzle boxes, which just makes it highly predictable where its going to go. Have her Dr. show an equal fascination with the puzzles and the cenobite world is again betting long odds and having someone with this dark obsession from outside the hospital track Kristy down would’ve been more believable. The way the mental patients are housed looks dated like we’re seeing an asylum from the 16th century though it still works, if you suspend your belief a bit, with the film’s over the top style.

I was glad that at least Andrew Robinson’s character from the first one doesn’t appear here. He was asked to reprise his role, but refused, which was good because if he had returned the script would’ve had a scene where he and Frank where together in the same body like Siamese twins, which sounded ridiculous. I also don’t like movies that have a character die-off, like Robinson’s did in the first one, and then magically come back to life later, which seems to defeat the purpose. If someone dies then they should stay dead otherwise it’s really not that horrifying seeing anyone get killed if we know that somehow they can still find a way to exist.

Spoiler Alert!

The Julia character, which was already poorly defined in the first installment, gets worse here. Supposedly, she was so madly in-love with Frank that she was willing to kill for him, which meant they must have some sort of special and perverse bond, but in this one she gleefully rips his heart out, literally. In the first one she showed signs of being conflicted over what she was doing, but here she becomes one-dimensionally evil and very boring.

The only cool thing about her is the way she sheds her skin off, but this proves problematic when Kristy puts on the skin in order to disguise herself. The women had different body types and heights, so the skin should not be able to fit her. Also, the inside of the skin was lined with blood from Julia, so putting it on should make Kristy suffocate and quite frankly gag at the grossness of having someone else’s blood seep all over her and thus not be able to wear it for more than a few seconds, or at least that’s how I would respond if I were in that situation, which makes the ending here a bit problematic.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Release: December 23, 1988

Runtime: 1 Hour 37 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Tony Randel

Studio: New World Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Plex, Pluto, Tubi, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, British Movies, Cult, Foreign Films, Horror, Movies with a Hospital setting, Sequels

Tagged , , , ,

Hellraiser (1987)

Posted on October 16, 2023 | Leave a comment

hellraiser

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Former lover needs blood.

Frank Cotton (Sean Chapman) purchases a puzzle box and brings it home to solve it. When he does he finds that it brings out demons known as Cenobites who enjoy inflicting pain on others for their own pleasure. After tearing Frank apart they reset the box and return to their own dimension. Larry (Andrew Robinson), Frank’s brother, moves into the house along with his wife Julia (Clare Higgins), who at one time, unbeknownst to Larry, had a brief affair with Frank. While moving in some boxes Larry cuts his finger and bleeds onto the attic floor where Frank was killed. Pieces of Frank still exist under the floor boards and the blood allows him to regain life though his body still needs more blood to regain its full form. He convinces Julia to bring in strangers from the bar home, so that she can kill them and allow Frank to drink their blood and regain more strength. Julia agrees to do this, but then Kristy (Ashley Laurence) becomes aware of what Julia is doing and is determined to put a stop to it by confronting Frank and taking away his puzzle box.

This was the first movie directed by Clive Barker and is based on his 1986 novel ‘The Hellbound Heart’. After being dissatisfied with how Rawhead Rex, based on another novel Barker had written, he became determined to direct the next feature in order to give it, in his words, some ‘directorial oomph’, which he had felt was missing in the previous film. Special effects wise the film hits all marks and is a precursor to what’s called Horror Porn today with a lot focus put on the effects that are both realistic and cruel. Watching Frank’s body slowly take form by growing out of the floorboards is quite impressive, but my only complaint are the close-ups of the skin particularly when a hook slices it open, which to me resembled more silly putty.

While the effects are great the characters aren’t. All of them come-off as dark and mean and there’s really no one to cheer for, or side with. Supposedly it’s Kristy the viewer is intended to get behind, but she came-off looking older than college aged and more like she was in her late 20’s. She’s also worldy-wise and seems able to handle herself, as is seen when she comes into contact with a couple of lecherous movers, quite effortlessly, so there’s no real character arch. Having her start-off as shy and sheltered and then grow stronger and confident as she learns to take on the cenobites would’ve been much more interesting and would’ve allowed for tension as you would initially question whether she had to guts to confront the evil like she eventually does.

The Julia character is weak too. I didn’t understand what drew her to Frank. Maybe in the novel this gets better explained, but in the movie it’s nebulous. Her brief fling with Frank, in the few backstory scenes that get shown, makes it seem like it was rather cold and distant and Frank doesn’t necessarily treat her all that well, so why would she bother helping to bring him back to life? Maybe she had a sadomaschistic bent, but if that was the case why would she marry Larry who treats her differently almost like he’s the passive and she’s more in control. If the woman prefers the man to be in control then that’s what she looks for in her next relationship not the opposite.

Spoiler Alert!

The twist near the end where Frank kills Larry and then begins to wear his skin gets botched too. It’s intended to be a surprise reveal for the viewer who, like with Kristy, initially think it’s the real Larry though it’s pretty obvious something isn’t right as blood is seeping out on the edges of his face, which Kristy should notice, but apparently because she’s so upset she doesn’t. It would’ve been better though to have the killing played-out and shown the final shocked expression on Larry’s face when he realizes he’s been betrayed by not only his brother, but wife too, which would’ve been priceless.

What’s even more perplexing though is why is Frank speaking in Larry’s voice? He may have his skin, but not the voice box. Even if he had tried to disguise it, in an effort to trick Kristy, I don’t think it would’ve come-off so convincingly. Then, once the gig is up and Kristy realizes it’s Frank, he still continues speak with Larry’s voice by why bother at that point since he no longer needed to fool her?

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: September 11, 1987

Runtime: 1 Hour 34 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Clive Barker

Studio: New World Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Pluto TV, Tubi, YouTube

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, British Movies, Cult, Foreign Films, Horror, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with Nudity

Tagged , , , , , ,

Tales that Witness Madness (1973)

Posted on October 11, 2023 | 1 comment

tales

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Four tales of terror.

Directed by legendary cinematographer Freddie Francis, the film revolves around four stories where the protagonist is perceived as having gone mad, but in actuality it’s evil from another dimension that gets them to see or do odd things and in reality they’re the sane ones. The connecting element is Donald Pleasance who acts as their psychiatrist who keeps them at his clinic in an effort to improve their mental state. In the first story we have a boy named Paul (Russell Lewis) who boasts about having a live tiger in his room even though his parents (Donald Houston, Georgia Brown) don’t believe him. The second story deals with Timothy (Peter McEnery) an antique collector who’s able to ride an old Penny Farthing bicycle that allows him to go back into time and inhabit another man’s body. The third tale deals with a man (Michael Jayston) who brings home a dead tree and mounts it in his living room much to the annoyance of his wife (Joan Collins). The final story is about a rich socialite (Kim Novak) who courts a younger man only for him to have show more interest in her beautiful daughter (Mary Tamm).

This Review Contains Spoilers!

The first story is pretty weak mainly because you presume going in that there’s probably, despite the long odds, some sort of tiger present because after all this is a horror movie dealing with the supernatural, so seeing the parents getting attacked at the end isn’t surprising, or even shocking and you’re pretty much just waiting for it to happen from the get-go. Director Francis makes the mistake of attempting to film the attack as it happens by editing in stock footage of a tiger and mannequin parts with red paint standing in for the parent’s bodies, but it all looks quite fake. Since the tiger figures in again at the very end of the movie a better idea would’ve been to keep it a mystery whether he existed, or it was just a homicidal child that had killed his mom and dad. When the parents walked into the son’s room the camera should’ve remained outside in the hall and the viewer hearing their screams, which would’ve been scarier than anemic special effects that we ultimately do see.

The second story is limp as well as it features a picture of ‘Uncle Albert’ whose facial expressions and eyes are constantly moving and changing, which has been parodied in many other films making this one seem more campy than scarry. The third tale is dumb too as anyone who brings a dead tree into their living room and wants to keep it there is mentally ill and the wife would’ve been smart to have left him versus fight for his affections. The twist here is no surprise either as I saw it coming right from the start though Collins does give a good performance and the viewer gets treated to a shot of her breasts although I suspect it was done by a body double.

The fourth segment is the only one that merits any type of mention as it features the bad guys not only killing the daughter, but slicing her up and then serving her to the mother as a piece of ham during a Hawaiian-style luau. The audacious idea deserves some points and Novak’s performance is fun as is Tamm’s in her film debut, who you also get to see nude from the backside, but it fails to make up for the rest of it, which isn’t up to par with the other British Anthology horror films from that period.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: October 31, 1973

Runtime: 1 Hour 30 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Freddie Francis

Studio: Paramount

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

1 Comment

Posted in 70's Movies, British Movies, Foreign Films, Horror, Movies with Nudity

Tagged , , , , , ,

The Last Remake of Beau Geste (1979)

Posted on September 20, 2023 | Leave a comment

beaugeste

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: Brothers join the army.

Sir Hector Geste (Trevor Howard) decides to adopt a son to be his rightful heir and carry on the family name. He goes to an orphanage where he spots Beau (Michael York) a dashing young boy who shows immense prowess. Hector immediately decides he wants him, but it comes with the caveat that he must also take on Beau’s twin bother Digby (Marty Feldman) who’s not nearly as handsome, or brave. After bringing both boys home Hector then gets married to Flavia (Ann-Margret) a much younger woman who’s more in-love with the Blue Sapphire diamond that’s in Hector’s possession than Hector himself. In order to keep Flavia from absconding with it Beau decides to take it out of the family home and bringing it along with him to Africa where he joins the French Foreign Legion. Digby eventually joins and they go on to have many adventures, but Flavia catches up with them determined to get the diamond using any means necessary.

The film is based on the 1924 novel of the same name written by P.C. Wren that had already been made into a movie three other times: in 1926 starring Ronald Coleman, 1939 starring Gary Cooper, and finally in 1966 starring Guy Stockwell. In 1976 when Marty Feldman signed a 5-picture deal with Universal to write, direct, and star in any film project he choose he decided to do a parody on a film he had seen growing up. He mistakenly thought it was Beau Geste, but came to realize once he watched the movie that it was really The Four Feathers that had a similar storyline and came out around the same time. He eventually went with doing this version since he felt ‘The Last Remake of the Four Feathers’ didn’t sound right.

The production, which was filmed in both Ireland and Spain, was met with many obstacles, including having Feldman getting sick during the shoot and putting the production on-hold for many weeks. It eventually went over budget and over schedule and the studio was not happy with Feldman’s final cut and determined to re-edit it while giving Feldman a 2-week vacation under the guise of letting him rest and recuperate. When Feldman returned and found out what the studio had done he became irate, so the studio heads decided to make him a deal; they would show both versions to a test audiences and which ever one rated better would be the one that would be released. Feldman agreed to this and to the studios shock Marty’s cut got much higher ratings, but the studio then went back on their word and released their version instead, which did not fare well with either the critics, or public. To this day Marty’s version has never been seen, but by only a few people even though those that have viewed say it’s much funnier and efforts have been made to find it and give it a proper Blu-ray issue though this has never come to fruition as of yet.

As for this version it’s okay, but it starts out better than it ends. There’s some funny gags here and there, but the humor tends to be quite broad and many of the jokes fall flat especially after the midway point. The best moment comes when Feldman splices his character into the 1939 film version and we see his character speaking to Gary Cooper and they even share a scene together, which I found to be quite innovative for the time period. Everything else though is hit-or-miss and suffers from not enough people being familiar with the source novel and thus the in-jokes involving the story will most likely go over  most viewer’s heads it also makes many changes from the original plot with the biggest one being that in this movie there’s only 2-brothers, but in the book there was 3.

The array of famous faces making cameo appearances is fun for awhile though I felt Peter Ustinov camps it up too much as the evil General Markov and the part would’ve been better served had it been played by Roy Kinnear who instead gets wasted as Markov’s assistant. Howard is quite amusing as the elderly father and I wished he was in it more, but ultimately his character gets confined to his bed for the second and third act. Ann-Margret offers some sexiness, but really has nothing to say or do that’s funny until the very end when she tries to challenge a guy to a fist-fight, which should’ve been played-out more. Terry-Thomas gets some work before his Parkinson’s condition, which is very obvious here with his trembling left hand, became so severe that it forced him out of acting and into a retirement home not more than a year after this was filmed.

Feldman himself is quite good, but I felt he needed to be seen more, which is the biggest problem with the movie in that it’s neither character nor plot driven. Too much nuttiness and wackiness for its own good. If the comedy had been better disciplined and a smaller cast it would’ve worked better, but the barrage of constant craziness all in the name humor eventually gets overblown.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: July 15, 1977

Runtime: 1 Hour 25 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Marty Feldman

Studio: Universal

Available: DVD-R (Universal Vault Series), Blu-ray

Leave a comment

Posted in 70's Movies, British Movies, Farce, Foreign Films, Movies Based on Novels, Parody

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Runners (1983)

Posted on July 17, 2023 | Leave a comment

runners

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Searching for teen daughter.

Tom (James Fox) is a suburban father who watches his teen daughter Rachel (Kate Hardie) ride off to school on her bike one day only for her to never come home. The police find her abandoned bike, but no signs of her, making it seem like she was snatched by someone driving in a car that was passing by. As the years go by Tom becomes even more fixated on finding her despite the lack of clues. His marriage begins to crack as his wife (Eileen O’Brien) feels it’s time to move on and that Tom needs to just ‘let it go’ though he refuses. He eventually moves out and into the city of London where he becomes determined to use what few leads he has to track her down on his own. Along the way he meets Helen (Jane Asher) a mother searching for her missing son and the two get into a relationship even as the challenges of finding their missing kids becomes even more daunting. Then one day by complete shock Tom finally sees Rachel and manages to corner her to have a brief conversation, but Rachel clearly does not want to see him and runs away again, but Tom becomes relentless to bring her home even if it means doing it by force.

Originally meant as a TV-movie the film did ultimately spend some time in theaters though it never managed to catch-on and was soon buried by bigger hits of the day. The film though still stands out as being the first appearance onscreen, outside of a brief cameo in a religious documentary from 1976, of actor James Fox, who left the movie scene after doing Performance, which was filmed in 1968, where he suffered a nervous breakdown. He then joined the Billy Graham ministries, known as The Navigators in England, and became a missionary, but found that his interest in acting never left and decided to make a foray back into it after 14 years and unlike other stars who drop out of the business and try to make a comeback, Fox found enviable offerings and even lead roles in major productions making it seem like he was still a much sought after commodity who had never left. His performance here is masterful and he looks like he hadn’t even aged a day as he’s clearly the one entity that helps carry the film and keep it interesting and insightful throughout.

Storywise I felt the first hour worked best and in many ways is highly gripping. The way it gets played-out has a certain spooky quality and the mystery element wraps you in and keeps you intrigued. The dynamics between the husband and wife are realistic and the film deserves props for examining how these situations can wear on people in different ways and how the ongoing stress can eat away at even the best marriages. Fox creates a compelling character and the viewer feels as emotionally worn-out as he does as he partakes on a grim search that manages to only give never ending bleak results.

Unfortunately the second hour is where it falls apart. To a degree it’s nice seeing him finally get a breakthrough, but there’s no explanation for why she ran away. In fact the daughter is almost like a ghost who says little and displays a continuous pouty expression and not much else. She’s shown passing out some sort of religious pamphlets, but we’re never told exactly what this literature says. Her motivations are vague as she expresses unhappiness with her upbringing, but never explicitly states what exactly they are. Without understanding what makes her tick, or why any of this happened, it hurts the film and makes it seem, despite its keen direction, as half-baked and ultimately empty-headed.

Apparently there was a rash of teens running away from home in England during the early 80’s and this film was produced in an attempt to tackle the subject as a sort of ‘ripped-from-headlines’ TV-movie of the week, but the filmmakers never made any effort to interview the kids to find out why they left home and without that understanding the rest of it is pointless. Showing things from the parent’s perspective is great, but at some point we need the kids point-of-view too and without that it lacks insight.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: May 9, 1983

Runtime: 1 Hour 47 Minutes

Not Rated

Director: Charles Sturridge

Studio: Cinegate

Available: DVD-R 

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, British Movies, Drama, Foreign Films, Obscure Movies

Tagged , , ,

Hawks (1988)

Posted on July 12, 2023 | Leave a comment

hawks1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Patients hit the road.

Decker (Anthony Edwards) is a former football player stricken with terminal cancer. He’s put in the hospital where his roommate is Bancroft (Timothy Dalton), who’s dying from the same disease. Bancroft though still wants to have some fun and convinces Decker to sneak out of the facility and go on a road trip to Denmark, so they can have one last fling with the prostitutes in the Red Light District. Decker is nervous at first, as he’d rather commit suicide to put himself out of his misery, but eventually decides to go along where they end up meeting two lonely ladies, Maureen (Camille Coduri) and Hazel (Janet McTeer) who’s also harboring a painful secret.

Based on a short story written by Barry Gibb of The Bee Gees the plot has, despite it’s grim theme, a playful quality and comes-off more like a quirky road movie. The scenery is nice especially when they get into Holland and have an extended scene amidst the picturesque windmills, which you can hear slowly rotating in the wind as they speak. There’s also a few funny moments with the best one coming right at the start where Decker takes a frightened SAAB car salesman (Geoffrey Palmer) on a test drive at reckless speeds and right to the edge of a cliff.

The acting is great with Dalton, who did this between his two stints as Bond and used his notoriety to get it made, which he felt wouldn’t have gotten financed otherwise, being standout and putting to great use his piercing blue eyes, which become even more prominent when he’s wearing his stocking cap. Edwards is also good though he looked wimpy to have ever played football. Some may try to argue that the sickness ate away his weight, but in reality this is the body type he’s always had and the producers should’ve, for the sake of authenticity, had him bulk-up before filming began.

What I didn’t like were the unexplained caveats, like where did these two terminally ill patients manage to get the money to pay for fancy hotels and chic restaurants? It seemed like they could buy anything they wanted, so if that were the case then why couldn’t they get themselves clothes so they didn’t have to run around everywhere wearing nothing but their bathrobes? The sex angle was ridiculous too especially for Decker, who’s so weak he had to be carted around in the wheelchair. If he could barely stand then how the hell is he going to get the energy for sex?

Initially I found Hazel and her clumsiness as annoying as Bancroft did, but like with him she eventually grew on me, but I didn’t think she needed to be introduced already in the first act before she even met the two men. She has a scene on a bridge all alone and I didn’t understand what she had to do with the story, only later during the second act when she appeared again did it make sense, but again her personal troubles could’ve waited to be explained when Bancroft and Decker heard about it. I actually enjoyed more Sheila Hancock, who plays Regina, an aging 50-something hooker they meet, who shows a good propensity at fixing things like TV’s and I wished she’d been the one they had befriended long term and the two younger ladies cut out altogether.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending is touching particularly the way the plastic red clown nose comes into play. The wedding in which Bancroft marries Hazel, who’s secretly pregnant by a man who disowns the child, is cute too though I didn’t understand how Bancroft, who had been losing his hair throughout, suddenly seemed to grow it all back as he walked down the aisle. If anything he should’ve been completely bald by that time and it would’ve been more realistic had he been shown that way.

hawks2

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: August 5, 1988

Runtime: 1 Hour 47 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Robert Ellis Miller

Studio: Skouras Pictures

Available: VHS, DVD-R (dvdlady.com)

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Black Comedy, British Movies, Buddy Movies, Foreign Films, Movies Based on Short Stories, Movies with a Hospital setting, Movies with Nudity, Obscure Movies, Road Movies

Tagged , , , ,

Bedroom Eyes (1984)

Posted on May 18, 2023 | Leave a comment

bedroom1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: Voyeur witnesses a murder.

Harry Ross (Kenneth Gilman) is a businessman who enjoys taking a late night jog in the Toronto neighborhood in which he lives. One night he steps in dog poo and as he’s trying to scrape it off he notices a light coming from a nearby window. Out of curiosity he peers in and sees a half-naked woman (Jayne Catling) dancing provocatively. It turns him on and he decides to make it a point to peer into the window each night when he goes for a run. He though begins to feel guilty about what he’s doing and thinks he may be a ‘pervert’ and thus schedules an appoint with Alex (Dayle Haddon), who is a psychiatrist, so that they can talk it through. During their sessions he also becomes attracted to her and things slowly work into a relationship. While this is going on he continues to look into the window each night, but eventually witnesses the woman getting murdered and now must go into hiding inside Alex’s apartment as not only the police, who mistakenly think he did it as they get his prints off of the window, are after him, but so is the killer.

This film was directed by William Fruet, a prolific writer/director from Canada, who shot to fame with the excellent Wedding in White and then followed that up with a lot lame thrillers and horror films. While some of those were diverting this one isn’t and the tacky set-up is the biggest problem. The fact that Harry isn’t portrayed as being a life long voyeur, but instead quite literally just ‘stumbles’ upon it is farfetched and the character would’ve had more depth if this had been a constant trait that he had to deal with. Having him ‘panic’ that he was afraid this made him a ‘pervert’ was ridiculous too as I’d think just about any heterosexual guy would get aroused seeing a hot lady cavorting around erotically. The way he peers in, the camera captures it from the inside looking out, is quite obvious as his face is fully light, from the indoor lamps, and thus all the people needed to do was glance up briefly to see him, which I would think would’ve occurred at some point especially since he continues to do it over multiple nights. The fact that they always leave the window shade half open seems like they’re inviting someone to look in though the movie acts like this is unintentional and just a ‘coincidence’. The place is lit in a way that makes it seem like it’s a set for soft core porn flick and the woman behaves like an adult actress, which completely ruins any sliver of plausibility.

Initially I liked seeing Haddon, who was at one time a super model before she got into acting, cast as the therapist as this was traditionally at that time still more of a man’s profession, so she was playing against type, but having Harry immediately asks her out on a date was dumb. Due to this being a professional doctor and patient relationship he should’ve at least waited until after several sessions before he got up the nerve to do it and even then it’s putting her in an unethical spot and he should’ve known that. Fortunately she tells him ‘no’ the first couple of times, which is what she should’ve done, but I knew, going by how stupid this script had already been, that she’d eventually cave and of course she does, which makes the whole premise become even more ludicrous. Having her spot him at a fancy restaurant was too coincidental in such a big city and having his girlfriend perform a sexual act while inside the place with all sorts of people around was over-the-top. If anything Haddon should’ve just been cast as his girlfriend, who just happens to work as therapist, and he could’ve still spoken to her about his voyeurism in private when they were together and this would’ve helped made it more believable.

It does get a bit intriguing for a few minutes when the police begin to close-in on Harry and I enjoyed the inner-rivalry of the police department where the two lead detectives became irritated at how a young ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ kid (Alf Humphreys) was always coming up with new leads and clues before they did, but other than that there’s very little to recommend. The climactic sequence in which the killer ties Harry up while he’s inside Haddon’s apartment, is quite boring and the female actor who plays the culprit shows no panache and thus making her scenes quite dull. In 1989, at the request of no one, this was made into a sequel, but with a completely different writer, director and actors with the only thing connecting the two being the Harry Ross character.

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: November 30, 1984

Runtime: 1 Hour 30 Minutes

Rated R

Director: William Fruet

Studio: Pan-Canadian Film Distributors

Available: DVD-R

Leave a comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Erotica, Foreign Films, Movies from Canada, Movies with Nudity, Mystery, Obscure Movies, Police Drama, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , ,