"Eyes Without a Face"/"The Young Girls of Rochefort"

Awright, another two-fer. Mainly because I hadn't gotten a chance to write about the first one yet.

"Eyes Without a Face" is a French horror (sort of) film, directed by Georges Franju and released in 1960. Although its original title may be most familiar as the namesake of a Billy Idol song, it's actually quite a nice twist on the Frankenstein tale, with a forward-thinking surgeon wanting to repair (by replacing) his daughter's face after a car accident claimed a large part of it. The accident was his fault, too. He has an assistant (played by Alida Valli) who had her face fixed by the surgeon earlier and has only a small scar on her neck to show for it. The assistant helps him procure potential ladies with nice faces, and in the first scene, she is disposing of an unfortunate procuree.

This is the second time I've seen the film, and this time a lot of the music really stood out....particularly the comical "shopping music" that plays whenever Valli's character is lookin' for dames. This is still the only film I've seen directed by Franju; "Judex" is on my list for some future time. "Eyes" is worth a watch. Do it sometime.

I need to mention something else. Earlier, I wrote about the film's "original title," which is "Eyes..." After its initial release, an American distributor released an English-dubbed version called.....wait for it....."The Horror Chamber of Dr. Faustus." And it was stuck on a double bill with "The Manster." Yep, see for yourself.

And on we go to the fourth of the Jacques Demy Criterion Collection box...."The Young Girls of Rochefort." And man oh man, the winners keep coming. Four for four from this box. And this movie is pretty much a straight-ahead musical. Hell, Gene Kelly is even in it. Lotsa singing, lotsa dancing. But I gotta tell you, after watching this, I might become a fan of musicals. This one's riveting from start to finish. And this film is a full 35 minutes longer than the longest of Demy's I'd watched this far. It tops two hours. The music (again from Michel Legrand) is fantastic....I'm about to search it on Amazon and probably buy it.

Catherine Deneuve and her real-life sister, Françoise Dorleac star as a pair of non-identical twin sisters lookin' for that special man. And most of the other major players are all lookin' for that special person, too. Most of the end you can predict, but it's one swell multi-colored, swingin' ride getting there. And Gene Kelly speaks French. Pretty well, too.

I'm still just floored by the four Demy films I've watched so far. The final two in the box are not as well-liked as these four.....I'll get to 'em soon and see for myself.

Whew.

A Nice Kurosawa Piece

I just ran into this on YouTube, and it's a really, really nice piece about movement within director Akira Kurosawa's shots and what made them great.

Star of Texas Tattoo Art Revival 2016

Breaking up the monotony of constant movie reviews (!!!), I'll write about what took up this last weekend...namely, the annual Star of Texas Tattoo Art Revival. A good friend of mine has put this on for the last 14 years, and I've done work for her from the beginning.....starting with the web site. I continue to update the web site, sometimes create advertising and promotional video, and as of a few years ago, I've graduated to full-on event announcer and stage manager for the entertainment. Or stage wrangler.

This year's convention went very, very smoothly. It was moved to the Austin Convention Center for the second time. The last few years, the event's been at the Long Center, but beginning in 2014, it was moved to the Convention Center due to a booking conflict. Last year, it was back at the Long Center, but this year, it returned to the Convention Center. Next year? Yep, back to the Long Center. I hope the audience isn't too lost by the ping-ponging. One attendee this year did tell me she mistakenly went to the Long Center first.

This is a job I really love, but it's hard work. And I'm not just saying that because I'm 54. It's not the physicality involved....which isn't much. But it is a mental strain to try to remember each year what to take care of, especially when you don't do it all the time. It's like driving once a year, and when that time rolls around annually, trying to remember the order of steps: put key in ignition, turn ignition, let car warm, etc. Plus, as far as entertainment goes, I'm usually the artist, on the opposite end of the relationship. So on top of making some scratch, it's good to do this and keep in mind what all stage crew goes through for the sake of a smooth performance.

We had familiar faces as entertainment: my wife Michelle Manx, Jigglewatts Burlesque (Ruby Joule, Ruby Lamb, Something Blue, and Dana DeLuna), Brass Ovaries (different ladies this time), and the Lizard Man Experience (Lizard Man, Joel, and Mossy). I'm getting used to dealing with all of them and pretty much know what their needs are....although Michelle and I did have to scramble to get some extra equipment for LME.

Announcing the tattoo contests is something that I really enjoy now but can't say I did so much in the beginning. Our fearless leader has a lot of faith in me, and the first time I announced the contests, she pretty much stuck a mic in my hand and said "go to it!" I'm getting better but still have a long way to go. It's the kind of position where you want to throw in some witty banter to keep people entertained while they await their turn at the contests, but you don't want to overdo it and turn it into "your show." Luckily, this year, Aaron, who took photos of all the contestants' pieces, kept me entertained and laughing throughout. Suzy Homewrecker, pinup model, etc. hands out the trophies, and she keeps me company, too.

This year, I didn't do a TV commercial for the event as a sort of experiment, but I think we'll do one next year. Or at least a promo video for YouTube, Facebook, etc. And there are a couple of other ideas I want to try.

Yay. I'm tired. Maybe I'll watch a movie. Oh wait, I have rehearsal in a few hours.

"The Umbrellas of Cherbourg"

Digging further into the Jacques Demy box set, I hit "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg," the only title I'd heard of before grabbing the set. The first two movies, "Lola" and "Bay of Angels" were big hits with me. What did I think of "Umbrellas?" Well, we're three for three.

"Umbrellas" is a musical. But not like any musical made up until then....and frankly, I haven't seen that many filmed musicals, so it may very well be the only one made in this style. And by style, I mean constant music with all dialog sung. And. It. Works. Beautifully. The film's already a marvel just to look at....the first color one in this set....and the performances are for the most part spot on.

The plot is really rather simple and told with economy. Unlike most musicals, no one breaks into song, because they're already in song, and there are no dance sequences. The male protagonist of the story is an auto mechanic, and it's pretty funny to hear regular garage talk done in a musical style (in French, of course, too). He, midway through the movie, has to go to Algeria to fight in 1959 ("Battle of Algiers," anyone?). The role of Geneviève was Catherine Deneuve's first major one....and she shines, as you'd expect. And the movie's all of 92 minutes long....again, Demy doesn't waste time.

The sometimes-jazzy, sometimes-melancholy music is from Michel Legrand, I swear I had heard the recurring, and closing, theme before somewhere....or several times in my life. In an accompanying feature on the disc, the host refers to the movie as a jazz opera. I had that same thought while watching it.

This is the rare foreign movie I'll try to get my wife to watch. She doesn't like to read subtitles, but I think this one is a ripe case for exception. I'm really looking forward to the fourth movie in this box!

"Dr. Terror's House of Horrors"

I just laughed to myself, typing the title above and thinking about the wonderful SCTV spoof "Dr. Tongue's 3D House of Stewardesses."

So "Dr. Terror's House of Horrors" was one of the first (maybe the first?) anthology film delivered by the Amicus company.....a company formed by American ex-pats doing business in England in the 60s and 70s. They produced several other anthology films as well, such as "Asylum" and "From Beyond the Grave." This one's from 1965, directed by Freddie Francis, and features Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, and Donald Sutherland, of all people. You'll recognize Michael Gough in it, too.

There are five stories held together by the glue of five people riding on a train with the good doctor, played by Cushing, and his tarot deck. At 98 minutes running time, none of the stories wears out its welcome, but I have to admit this was not one of my fave anthology films....and I do likes me some anthology films. Probably goes back to my childhood love of "Night Gallery." None of the individual stories is really that great, and the fourth one is a direct remake of "The Beast with Five Fingers." There's nothing really bad here......just......well, it rates a "meh." Some of the settings are nice to look at; there, I said something positive.

There's never been a Region 1 DVD release of this, and now Olive Films has released this Region A Blu-ray. The absence of the film in America probably helps build up a "this is gonna be great!" feeling, that sadly, doesn't really happen. Nice to have to complete an Amicus collection and for Cushing and Lee, surely.

I couldn't find the trailer, but here's a segment from the third story....a sort of goofy voodoo story.

"We Are Still Here"

Back to the horror well, shall we? "We Are Still Here" is a recent film from Dark Sky, which I've known as a DVD company with some great niche releases under their belt ("Eaten Alive," "Werewolves on Wheels"). Here, they back a newish horror director, Ted Geoghegan, and one of the best veteran genre casts you could ask for.

The plot is pretty much your standard haunted house story, with the protagonists mourning the loss of a child upon move-in. I wouldn't say anything that happens plotwise will be a shock, but the overall feel and atmosphere of the film is really well-done. Many wide shots of snow and the countryside. The last 20 or so minutes are pretty revved-up, but other than that, it's a slow-moving 83 minutes total.

I mentioned the cast: Barbara Crampton ("Re-Animator," "From Beyond"), Andrew Sensenig ("Upstream Color"), Larry Fessenden ("Wendigo," his own projects), Lisa Marie ("Ed Wood," putting up with Tim Burton), and an almost 80-year-old Monte Markham, who looks about 55. It's nice to watch a horror movie and see it fully populated by people your own age.

Is it great? Well, no. But it's enjoyable, well-executed, and I look forward to more from this Ted Geoghegan (just wanted to see if I could correctly type his name twice).

Can't find a trailer on YouTube.....

"Marnie"/"Mad Max: Fury Road"

I have an odd pairing to write about today. "Marnie" and "Mad Max: Fury Road." Well, at least they both start with "M." (Have I written about "M?" Can't remember.)

"Marnie." A Hitchcock film I hadn't seen yet. And, yes, it's a bit of a letdown. There are a couple of decent scenes in it (e.g. the robbery in the office), but the script pushes the fashionable-at-the-time (and maybe even now still) psychology of recovered memories. While Tippi Hedren admittedly does a great job with her role, Sean Connery looks like he's just going through the motions most of the time. At least Diane Baker looks hot when she's onscreen. Yeah, I just gotta say "meh." Pains me to write that, and it might be the first time a Hitchcock film has left me this way. Might not be the last, as I've watched mostly his classics.

Now, "Mad Max: Fury Road." I watched this about a week ago and watched it again today. Last week, I enjoyed it but thought of it as a B+ pic. Today's rewatch clarified a lot in what is a really, really fast-paced movie.....and yeah, I'm bumping it up to an "A." The characters seemed much more defined to me in the second viewing. This film has the current studio film nasty habit of firing the setup exposition at you with all the subtlety of a super water cannon, and does it in roughly four minutes. That's about the only negative I can say about the movie. Of course, a lot of that exposition is unnecessary if you know the previous "Mad Max" entries.....but there are still some newer things you'll need to know at the outset.

But yes, I'm sure you've heard plenty about this movie already, and I agree with the positives. It's a movie told more through action than anything else but doesn't leave you feeling like a halfwit when you're done watching it. Tom Hardy is.......okay.........really, they could have gotten about any other faceless actor to play this part. Charlize Theron is good, but there's not a lot in the way of meaty dialogue for either of them to work with. My favorite performance is by the guy who played Nux, Nicholas Hoult.  But.....this film's all about the plot and look.

One more note: I saw Zoë Kravitz' name in the credits....thought "hmmmm," looked her up, and yes, it's Lenny Kravitz' and Lisa Bonet's daughter. I knew there was a reason I keep getting this AARP material in the mail.

"Lola"/"Bay of Angels"

So, for today's "elocution de movieness," I'll do a two-fer. Recently, I picked up the Jacques Demy Criterion box set, and I'll admit to doing that largely because whenever I see the word "collection" on a DVD box, my buyin' fingers start itching. I didn't even know who Jacques Demy was, although I'd heard of "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg" before. That's not either of the two movies I'll write about now.

In the last couple of weeks, I've seen the first two salvos in this box, "Lola" and "Bay of Angels," and folks, they're both big, big winners. When "Lola" was restored for DVD release, the original negative had been lost. So I thought, upon bringing home this Demy box, I'd put that one in the player and watch five minutes, just to see how it looked. I ended up rooted to "Lola" for its entirety right then....granted, it's only 88 minutes. And I just finished watching "Bay of Angels" today. Both have the same sort of plot basis, a female character in trouble, coupled with a naïve and mostly well-meaning male character.

These films were released in 1961 and 3 respectively, and yet their pacing suggests modern films. "Bay of Angels" is a crisp 84 minutes, and there's not a moment or shot wasted in either movie. I already mentioned getting tangled in "Lola"'s web almost immediately and "Bay of Angels" was no different. I understand that future movies in this box set are largely musicals, so we'll see how that goes, but these first two have me thanking myself over and over that I purchased the Demy box.

"The Demoniacs"

Okay, here's another one: "The Demoniacs," a 1974 French-Belgian release directed by Jean Rollin. Yep, I still get into that Euro-trash horror stuff.

This one has, as usual from Rollin, some great, great photography and mood pieces, although it's a bit high on the rapey scale. The ladies might not go for this movie. There are two fairly longish rape scenes (two women at once in each one....the same ones!). While they make sense for the period plot (and the time period the film was made), they're way, way too long and just.....very uncomfortable. Especially when you have the lead actress gyrating and pleasuring herself nearby during each scene.

That aside, the rest of the movie is pretty good, as these go. The old architecture in most of the movie is wonderful to look at. And the plot itself, concerning the two aforementioned victims' revenge on a gang of ship wreckers, is okay.

I'll give it a B, maybe B-. Or three and a half stars, if you prefer. Can't find a trailer for it....

The Name Has Been Changed to...

Yeah, I just changed the name of the blog. Not sure why. Maybe to confound Google's search engine for a week. Well, that would mean more if I publicized the blog. Maybe one day I will.

"The Martian"

What? Write about a newish movie? Sure, why not?

Just got done with "The Martian." I give it a "very good." And rewatchable. You've probably heard a lot of the plot setup by now, with Matt Damon playing a botanist/astronaut, Mark Watney, stranded on Mars after a storm sends the rest of the crew launching away in the main ship after thinking Watney was dead.

A few things on my mind:

•  This is one of the few films from the last twenty years I've seen where the last half of the movie was stronger than the first half. The tension at the end was built just right.
• You can feel some....what do I want to call it?....not studio interference, necessarily, but let's call it "reasons to greenlight the project:"
• What I call the "Breaking Bad Hangover." There are many spots in the movie where "science saves the day." ("All right, Mr. White! Science, bitch!")
• Despite the science reliance (which is impressive), a shot of a crucifix in there. Damon's character is only using it for parts, but it's still in there....to show that at least one of the astronauts was religious. I find this insert interesting, and I've seen several instances of this in other recent sci-fi (e.g. Shaw's cross and unwavering "belief" in "Prometheus," otherwise-hardcore scientist Romilly's assertion that "some things we just weren't meant to know" in "Interstellar," etc.). I really wonder if these placements are there to placate the touchy religious crowd.
• "Gravity" was a big hit. Not that this film has quite the same tone as "Gravity" (I actually prefer "Gravity" a bit), but there is a definite similarity in setup.

I just mentioned "Gravity," and how I prefer it by a half-star or so to this film, and that's mainly because the one thing I think is missing from "The Martian" is the feeling of isolation that Watney had to have. A lot of the first hour feels rushed, and that's probably to avoid having a three-hour running time.....and that does make sense. But I never got the feeling that Watney was ever really "alone." That feeling is in spades in "Gravity" and "Moon," but those films also had much, much smaller casts.

One more thing: the supporting cast was pretty outstanding, and I want to give a special shout-out to Jeff Daniels as the head of NASA. Daniels has been pretty underrated for all of his career, but can you think of anyone else who's played such extremes as the head of NASA and Harry in "Dumb and Dumber?" And been completely believable?

That's it....watch this one if you get a chance. I give it four out of five.

EDIT (1/18/2016): Had a second viewing of this one, and I think I'll bump up the rating to 4 1/2 stars. Although....I have to add a couple of small negatives.....I mentioned the shot of the crucifix; there's another short conversation between two major characters of the "do you believe/are you religious?" variety. Again, these things really have no place in an otherwise completely science-based script. Product placement for appeasement? Smells like it. Also....

(SPOILER)

It took at least seven months for the Hermes to get back to Mars for the rescue. You'd think by then they would have worked out more details of the actual rescue, instead of going into "what do we do about the velocity?" mode upon approach. Granted, this adds excitement to the film, but it did seem a bit of a (insert Chumley sound) "duuuhhhhh" moment for all involved.

Still.....4 1/2 stars. And Ridley Scott and crew still think there is sound in space.

"The Man Who Fell to Earth"

Last night's late night viewing was of "The Man Who Fell to Earth." For probably obvious reasons. I hadn't seen the movie in almost ten years, so it was as much of a revisiting as a refreshing.

As I'm sure most of you know, the film stars David Bowie as an alien, locally-named Thomas Jerome Newton, who "falls to earth" in an attempt to save his species (and family) back on his home planet by developing patented devices on Earth, making money, and investing that back into devices to fix the home planet. Or something like that. In the meantime, he meets and marries Mary-Lou (played by Candy Clark), and much of the movie has to do with their life together....as he misses his family back home. Rip Torn, Buck Henry, and Bernie Casey also have meaty parts.

While the film is quite an original watching experience, my personal feeling is that it's a very good but not great movie. There's a certain disconnect I feel throughout viewing that is most likely intentional, but I think it has the final effect of making you not become too involved in the proceedings. Many of the plot points can get easily lost due to this disconnect. Plus, and I hate to say it, but Candy Clark's performance is....uh.....good, but an acquired taste. A taste from the '70s, definitely. You just don't see female performances like that anymore and probably not since the mid-eighties or so. The sort-of ditzy, squeaky-voiced dullard that was typified by Georgia Engel on the Mary Tyler Moore Show. (Remember her? Georgette, Ted Baxter's wife?) I'm pretty sure if an actress put on that sort of performance in anything now, she'd be vilified by all women.

As the first of the "Bowie watches," I still enjoy the movie. It has a strange allure, but it's not something I'd watch too often. Onward, folks....

David Bowie

Wow......the old guard rock icons are really dropping. David Bowie now. The real shocker there being that no one in the general public knew of his illness. His camp must've had some tight security!

While I can't claim to being a huge Bowie fan, I did hold the man in very high regard....and dug many of his tunes, too. Rick Wakeman once remarked how Bowie was a highly principled businessman; he kept the "Hunky Dory" sessions running smoothly and on time.

As far as his acting career went....well, I think it speaks to his iconhood that very few roles would he be believable in. I thought his casting as Tesla in "The Prestige" was perfect.

RIP, Mr. Jones.

Where Am I?

Wow.....gotta write in this thing again! It's been too long.....maybe this weekend. Just maybe.