Dementia 13

Dementia 13 (1963)

Runtime: 75 minutes

Directed by: Francis Ford Coppola

Starring: William Campbell, Luana Anders, Bart Patton, Mary Mitchel, Patrick Magee

From: AIP

RIP Roger Corman

Like everyone else (well, except Paul Schrader but that’s not dwell on that) I was saddened to hear that he passed away at the age of 98. The fact that less than 6 weeks ago he was at that private screening of Coppola’s Megalopolis where Francis Ford was attempting to find distribution for his movie made the news surprising when I saw interviews w/ him in recent years and he was rather spry for his age. It is incalculable the impact he had on more than one generation of Hollywood with the number of legends & names who worked for him… everyone from Coppola, Jack Nicholson & De Niro to James Cameron, Bogdanovich and Jonathan Demme. It’s a shame that even with Hollywood’s numerous differences since the 60’s and 70’s, there’s no producer like Corman who can help nurture young talent to pay their dues before they made films with the big studios.

Out of all the films I could have chosen, Dementia 13 was chosen not just as an example of him giving Francis Ford a big break but it’s a film I had previously seen years before joining Letterboxd. Coppola worked for Corman for awhile and was in Ireland to assist in his directing 1963’s The Young Racers. Roger was famous for not wasting a nickel during production and was happy to make more than one movie with many if not all of the same set, actors & crew. Corman had money left over from The Young Racers and tasked FFC with creating a Psycho riff. With only a few days, a script was written and while there is stilted dialogue, the overall effort was still a fine 75-minute feature.

Louise is with her husband John in a rowboat. He has a bad heart so he dies of a heart attack after a dispute over his mother’s will. As Louise won’t receive a nickel if he dies first--she forges a letter saying he can’t make it to the annual ceremony of his young sister’s death at a castle in Ireland. She attends and has a scheme to acquire the family fortune but what misfortune that someone with an axe is about…

If given more time, Dementia 13 stood a satisfactory chance of being a better movie. As is, even as a rushed movie where some plot beats suddenly materialized, the movie had decent Gothic atmosphere (filming at an actual Irish castle was an asset) and I was engaged w/ the story, as predictable as it was in my opinion. For the record, I saw the original 75-minute cut that played in places like drive-ins across the United States rather than the shorter director’s cut that Coppola created (as he’s wont to do) several years ago.

Since I’ve been on Letterboxd I’ve viewed more than a few productions that involved Corman, whether it be as director or producer. I’ll be happy to do the same in the future. I do feel bad for Coppola that he loses the man who brought him into the industry soon after his wife (who apparently he met on the set of this film) dies. Also expect some FFC reviews later in the year, including hopefully Megalopolis.

Don't Look Now

Don’t Look Now (1973)

Runtime: 110 minutes

Directed by: Nicolas Roeg

Starring: Donald Sutherland, Julie Christie, Clelia Matania, Massimo Serato, Hilary Mason

From: Paramount released it in the United States

What, don’t YOU sketch in the nude?

Not only was it overdue for me to discuss this famous 70’s thriller, but to talk about Nicolas Roeg as a director for the first time. He didn’t make that many yet many are easy to track down—for certain, in the future some others will be discussed. For Don’t Look Now, a key aspect is the at times unique editing which helps drive the story & assuredly augments the original Daphne Du Maurier story this was based on, along with the obvious motifs of water & the color red.

This was done as the opening is the daughter of Donald Sutherland & Julie Christie passes away in a tragic accident by drowning in a pond while wearing a distinctive red jacket. Besides the obvious of the movie moving from England to a city famed for its canals so he can work on restoring an old church, Sutherland sees a small girl wearing a similar jacket around Venice as his wife meets a pair of twin sisters-because this was partially an Italian genre production from the 70’s, OF COURSE one of the sisters is blind, and of course she’s psychic-causing an escalation of bizarre moments and strange images that Sutherland witnesses.

The film is a meditation on grief expressed through various motifs and recurring moments as the lead couple struggle to maintain their relationship despite still having a healthy son. Venice was successfully presented as an alien world to the lead couple, one where the locals commonly stare at them and as a viewer, unless you speak Italian we are kept in the dark as those aren’t translated. A relative went to Venice and noted that “the city smelled terrible” and “there was constant flooding.” I can’t verify those statements and if it was true then hopefully the city has improved… in any case, the city was presented quite well—many different locations seen throughout.

Mix in a quality Pino Donaggio score and this is a movie that people should stick with even if they feel it lags at times or you’re befuddled as to the plot. Once the great conclusion is seen, everything comes together and there’s an explanation of sorts for the peculiar moments. Both Sutherland and Christie deserve praise for their excellent performances, as does Roeg for his solid direction. At least I finally got around to discussing this piece of work and a movie from the famed director.

By the by, there is a random moment where Ol’ Donald starts sketching after getting out of the shower without putting any clothes on, leading to an awkward moment w/ the maid. I don’t sketch myself; even if I did, it wouldn’t be when I was naked!

Who Saw Her Die?

Who Saw Her Die? (Chi I’ha Vista Morire?) (1972)

Runtime: 94 minutes

Directed by: Aldo Lado

Starring: George Lazenby, Anita Strindberg, Adolfo Celi, Dominique Boschero, Peter Chatel

From: Several different production companies

Featuring Not Timothee Chalamet

There’s plenty of giallo for me to possibly view in the future. The reason why this was selected? It has some story beats which will remind you of a thriller quite famous: a little girl is shown dead in the opening, drowning is involved, the setting is Venice. Lest you think this is a B-movie ripoff of that film (which I haven’t reviewed… yet), this came out first. It may be a case that this was also based on the same Daphne Du Maurier short story, but let me not get sidetracked.

Who’s plot: George Lazenby (w/ great mustache) lives in Venice; his daughter Roberta visits him from London but estranged wife Elizabeth doesn’t come along. They visit several characters which will eventually become red herrings after Roberta is murdered by yes, someone wearing black gloves. Elizabeth comes down and she is dragged into her husband’s attempt at investigating this crime. The guy I call Not Timothee Chalamet is a minor character who has limited screentime and only one scene of note, but his appearance did amuse me.

The plot meanders at times due to a lack of momentum. Otherwise, this was a fine giallo effort which has some blood and plenty of sleaze; besides a sex scene soon after the death of their daughter, there’s a key character accused of pedophilia and another exhibits creepy behavior towards Roberta at one point. Even if you exclude the whole child murder aspect, there are affairs, bad rich dudes, even badder behavior… this is all done in a Venetian setting that was sometimes covered in fog, leading to nice atmosphere.

A huge asset for the film was the Morricone score; the keystone there was a child’s choir, but it wasn’t always used to create angelic music. Instead, it at times was used in odd, unexpected ways to create something bizarre & unnerving for your ears that augments the actions on screen. Thankfully, it’s on YouTube for those curious, as the score is pretty wild. For better or worse, the denouement was undoubtedly one you’d find in a giallo. In fact, without remember specific examples, it does resemble at least one other I’ve heard in a genre I’ve only seen a small amount of.

Does this work as the B-movie in a double feature at home, following Don’t Look Now? Yes it does; naturally, this movie isn’t as mature or contemplative as Roeg’s classic but it is one many genre fans can dig.

 

Airplane!

Airplane! (1980)

Runtime: 88 minutes

Directed by: The ZAZ trio

Starring: Robert Hays, Julie Hagerty, Leslie Nielsen, Robert Stack, Lloyd Bridges

From: Paramount

Surely you can't be serious in saying you don't even remember the last time you saw this in full?

I am... and don't call me Shirley.

Quite simply, when I discovered last night that this movie was on Prime (& it could be seen free for me as a Prime member) the choice was easy for me.

By now many people have the foreknowledge of Airplane's plot. It spoofs the Airport disaster movies of the 70's-which I've viewed-along with closely following the plot of 1957's Zero Hour, which I haven't seen for comparison's sake. Unlike what happened to spoof comedies a few decades ago, this is not predicated on then-modern humor (for the most part) for its gags. Rather, the humor is full of silly puns involving names, sight gags, running gags revisited occasionally, wordplay, etc.

Also, there was more off-color humor than what was in my memory banks. Not all of my Letterboxd mutuals enjoyed that aspect, which is fair. There's a pun involving a woman inflating the automatic pilot (those unfamiliar w/ the movie, it makes sense in context!) which looks incredibly vulgar from behind, Peter Graves plays a pilot who implies he likes little boys, a little girl “likes black men”, etc. Personally, it's too silly for me personally to be offended. Jerry Seinfeld says that comedy now is “too woke” and I'd rather not go down that path... except to say that no matter your opinion on the topic, the subsequent release of his big Netflix movie flopping hard in terms of general reception did not help his cause.

In any regard, even if you've never seen Airplane it is likely you've heard some of his most famous phrases/moments that have entered the lexicon. From old white lady Barbara Billingsley talking jive and “I've picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue” to Otto the blowup doll automatic pilot and many others, it's quite the feat that the movie has soared since 1980 when before release it was just seen as a silly little comedy no one had expectations for. They were able to hire familiar faces known for drama who never winked at the camera while they acted serious in increasingly absurd situations.

As I believe that modern comedy in general is pretty terrible-no matter the reasons why this may be the case-it is a relief that Airplane for the most part hasn't aged poorly.

Mars Express

Mars Express (2023)

Runtime: 88 minutes

Directed by: Jeremie Perin

Starring: This animated film from France was dubbed in English

From: A shocking number of French companies

I was happy to see a mature sci-fi animated film on the silver screen last night. Sure, this French movie received a halfway-decent theatrical release in the United States due to the lack of movies made last year and the version GKIDS put out is dubbed in English, but I can’t complain. Despite GKIDS releasing the film, there are several F-bombs and other cursing, so that alone is why I proclaim it is mature.

Going into the film, little was known of its plot; I’ll attempt to be on the vague side myself. In the year 2200, a detective and her android partner (one of several different robots that exist. There are synthetics which can hold the soul of someone after they pass away) investigate the disappearance of two college students from Alan Turing University-an amusing reference-but it naturally is much more complicated. There’s a conspiracy involving a powerful person and believe it or not, Mars Express is a neo-noir sci-fi picture. To answer a burning question: yes, AI is a plot component. The protagonist is a flawed character who fights to stay sober on a daily basis. That is not the only aspect which (figuratively) colors this movie a little darkly.

The animation looked nice, the dubbing was satisfactory & the swell score was appropriately electronic. However, it was the interesting characters and the complex, thought-provoking story which was the biggest delight. The plot slowly unfurled in a dome world obviously modeled on the Los Angeles area and I was always at rapt attention viewing the leads attempt to discover why some robots are exhibiting unusual behavior. The movie is reminiscent of a few other properties, as people have noted. Ghost in the Shell was an obvious example, as was Blade Runner. There even is a 2001 moment, as I deem it.

That said, Mars Express never felt derivative, telling a worthy tell in only 88 minutes, including end credits. It was a treat seeing a movie like this theatrically. Perhaps in the future I’ll view more mature animated movies, including those in the science fiction genre.

 

The Rats are Coming! The Werewolves are Here!

The Rats are Coming! The Werewolves are Here! (1972)

Runtime: 92 of the longest minutes of my life

“Directed by”: Andy Milligan

“Starring”: A bunch of performers who I’ll save the embarrassment of naming

From: Constitution Films

A movie I only saw due to its title; it’s also my first (& last) Andy Milligan movie. For years I’ve known Milligan was an infamous British exploitation director. Those in that field can create interesting schlock… or insufferable garbage. Sadly, for me I don’t get the love that some have for this; it’s a shame as the general idea wasn’t terrible.

There’s a family of werewolves and the youngest daughter wishes to find a way to end this curse. That’s about as in-depth as the story is presented here. Much of this is just flat-out boring as it’s crummy actors either constantly yelling at each other or just prattling on about nonsense I couldn’t be arsed to care about. Milligan decided to write acres upon acres of dialogue for these unexperienced chaps to babble about; it’s just bad.

Hardly any horror is present, unless you consider the animal cruelty to be horrifying. It’s just amateur crap, technically inept… most of this “affluent” family wears just one outfit despite the passage of days. Literally, the scenes with the rats were added a few years after the majority of the film was in the can due to the popularity of Willard, no kidding. When I wasn’t annoyed, this cure for insomnia had me nearly doze off into slumberland.

Instead of diving deeper into the filmmaker’s filmography in an attempt to determine why he has a small cult of fans, I’ll punt and not concern myself as there are MANY other directors to explore, let alone great motion pictures I still need to witness.

Gaslight (The 1940 Version)

Gaslight (1940)

Runtime: 84 minutes

Directed by: Thorold Dickinson

Starring: Anton Wahlbrook, Diana Wynyard, Frank Pettingell, Cathleen Cordell, Robert Newton

From: British National

A movie to watch if you’re a fan of the 1944 Gaslight; I am a fan of both. I won’t do much comparing between the two except to mention some basics. As I stated a few years ago when reviewing the more famous MGM version, it’s incredible how “gaslighting” as entered the lexicon while probably even now, plenty are unaware of its origins. The 1940 British movie was the first to bring the play to the silver screen; despite MGM’s best efforts to destroy all copies of this so there’d be no comparisons to their 1944 picture, that task failed and this movie can easily be viewed… for me this was DVR’ed off a TCM showing way back last October.

Those familiar with the American movie will know that the lead girl moves into the house that her aunt was murdered in w/ her husband, only the husband is an evil bastard who for a diabolical reason is mentally abusing his wife for the purpose of driving him insane. There’s a former detective who starts investigating as he was part of the investigation into the aunt’s death. The 1940 movie was less glossy and grittier than the MGM version; it is also a half hour shorter. Which version you prefer is up to personal opinion. 

I enjoy both for their different qualities—although there is the bias of me having seen this second. In any regard, the villain here (named Paul, played by Anton Wahlbrook) was a real vile SOB; besides his gaslighting, he openly dated one of his maids. As the film has nice atmosphere, solid direction from Thorold Dickinson and nice turns from Diana Wynyard as lead girl Bella & Frank Pettingell as B.G. Rough the former detective, that helped make this movie delightful. B.G. was quite amusing: he was quite different from Joseph Cotten in the ’44 version in appearance/demeanor. He was an average middle-aged chap in any fashion, including his charmingly braggart attitude; at one point he proclaims how great he was! That was after a big moment that cracked the case…