"Black Moon" is a Dadaist dream about a young girl who is fleeing a war between men & women. She seeks solace in a dreary country farm occupied by an old woman who knows everything about her and an incestuous mute brother & sister. The film is full of abstract episodes that are probably clever statements on female sexual maturity a'la Alice in Wonderland, but I didn't recognize them. Overall, the experience is rather grating. Its studiously composed but the film feels pretentious with its abundance of cruelty to animal actors, boring metaphors and faux-educational exploitation of its extremely young actress' sexuality. Its worth a watch because it is so unique and its frequently entertaining, but its no lost gem. My impression of director Louis Malle is a wannabe Godard/Bunuel without much originality or talent.
Walerian Borowczyk is much more impressive with his loose adaptation of a classic horror novel. He brings so much voyeuristic intensity and expressive technique to what has to be a minuscule period piece production. The film is a rare accomplishment in balancing erotic and horror tension so well. This is truly one of the most sensual and glossy films of its period (or any period) but it has a grisly urgency. It walks that fine line between art and exploitation beautifully. Seek this movie out.
Messiah of Evil is a film by the couple who wrote Temple of Doom & Howard the Duck for George Lucas. Its a post-hippie horror "feature" about a young woman in a spooky seaside town of zombies. Its freakishly similar to Franco's Virgin Among the Living Dead but they were released the same year (but, Virgin was shot in '71). Its a decent snapshot of a time and generation but its not effective on scares or mood beyond some stylish lighting and minimalist staging. It feels like an arty cash-in on drive-in films without any respect for its audience. Its determined to show off its own intelligence, but there isn't much. To its credit, the film features production design by Jack Fisk, husband of Sissy Spacek and lifelong friend of David Lynch. There is actually a HUGE impression of Twin Peaks in the setting of this story, so its memorable and important for that.
Bloodsucking Freaks could be the best film Troma ever released, alongside The Toxic Avenger and maybe The Last Horror Film. Like those movies, it is a lurid portrait of NY independent filmmaking from a bygone era of sleaze, art and political dissidence. This is the most extreme of its kind, a satire about white slavery full of cannibalism, torture, murder and brainwashing. A decade ago, this film made me queasy to watch. Now I appreciate the immense intelligence and bravery in pulling off such a disturbing but complex little exploitation. A film like this is looking to make a statement more than a profit.
I finally watched Ken Russell's The Devils. Besides maybe a snippet of Tommy, this is my first film by popular British cult director. Wow. What a brilliant technical director and stylist he is. His camera is so alive and magnetized by every action on the screen. There isn't one lazy performance or dull scene or false moment in this classic story of religious persecution and moral corruption. The story itself is a great and bold attack on Catholicism, but it avoids tempting melodrama or bland tragedy by setting us up with so many laughs and spectacles. Russell's film has a broad irony that had to be a game-changer then. He really reflects the Mod sensibility of his generation and marries it with the most classic but unsuspecting narrative tropes. And its more than just a bunch of clever tricks. It moves you and haunts you.
Showing posts with label 1975. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1975. Show all posts
Friday, March 2, 2018
Thursday, February 22, 2018
Sgt Kabukiman NYPD 1990 / The Evil Dead 1981 / Monty Python & The Holy Grail 1975
Kabukiman is Lloyd Kaufman & Michael Herz' comeback film after the drizzling Toxic Avenger 3 and is their last directing collaboration to date (with Herz becoming the primary producer). Kabukiman tweaks the Troma formula by satirizing/exploiting a big budget film (Batman) and toning down the sex & violence. Its more of a return to the screwball comedies Troma produced pre-Toxic Avenger. The film is low on laughs and the action is amateurish, but its heavy on social commentary and low budget charm.
Troma films have this unique quality of mixing slapstick violence and realistic violence, which is very surreal and creates a meaningful conflict in style. At the same time, you can't take the drama seriously or the comedy lightly (perfectly realized in the fist two Toxic Avenger films and the original Class of Nuke 'Em High). I actually think this element works better in SK than in Toxie 3. Whereas that film had a moody aura that was actually missing humor, SKN is humor with a dash of realism. It plays as a very modern film because of this gritty slapstick and artificial realism. Let's face it: Guardians of the Galaxy movies are Troma films minus the political activism, risky jokes or modest production. Kabukiman is not one of Troma's best but its one of their most sincere and least offensive.
The Evil Dead is not a masterpiece in my eyes, but its one of the most impressive debuts of a director to date. The technical know-how, genre-savvy and inventive low-budget creativity is almost unparalleled. The plot is a more conservative, lowbrow, exploitative remix of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Exorcist, the early work of Wes Craven, an obscure film called Equinox and a few others (the nod to Rosemary's Baby is almost groan-inducing). But the postmodern genre of "fan film" owes a lot to Evil Dead. Raimi takes what could've been absolutely absurd and kitsch and makes it absurdist and camp. The poor continuity, cheap FX and amateur performances work cohesively to create a Gonzo style. I've never found Evil Dead to be the emotionally intense or haunting commentary that truly great horror films are, but it has a claustrophobic mood and grim surrealism that perfectly bridges the 1970s to the 1980s. Its artistic entertainment, not entertaining art. Thats okay for such a small project and its still the best thing Raimi has ever done.
I grew up loving Holy Grail for its downbeat rhythm and strange, inexplicable laughs but only now do I recognize the intelligent design and commentary behind the carefully crafted surrealism. Holy Grail works as a series of deconstructionist sketches, each applying the group's shared Marxist philosophy to a different subject: monarchy, feminism, nationalism, militarism, homophobia, racism, generational transition, existentialism, nihilists etc. Cleverly the postmodernists tackle British modernism by starting at the source, the ridiculous legend of King Arthur and his insane, murderous, superstitious and literally criminal Knights of the Round Table. By today's standards, some of the humor might verge on insensitive, ex. the somewhat racist Black Knight skit is amended in Meaning of Life's Zulu skit. But overall its a witty, next-level and quite elementary guide to Western intellectualism.
Famously, Lorne Michaels and Chevy Chase met at a screening of Holy Grail and basically conceived SNL as the American "Flying Circus". Watching Holy Grail you find everything SNL lacked as a totally poser, hipster, neoliberal misreading of surrealist political satire. That show was more diverse, more populist and more upbeat, but not nearly as enlightened, dangerous or moralistic. I'm kind of tired of SNL being honored as such a groundbreaking institution of comedy when it never surpassed Python in the most important element: humor.
Troma films have this unique quality of mixing slapstick violence and realistic violence, which is very surreal and creates a meaningful conflict in style. At the same time, you can't take the drama seriously or the comedy lightly (perfectly realized in the fist two Toxic Avenger films and the original Class of Nuke 'Em High). I actually think this element works better in SK than in Toxie 3. Whereas that film had a moody aura that was actually missing humor, SKN is humor with a dash of realism. It plays as a very modern film because of this gritty slapstick and artificial realism. Let's face it: Guardians of the Galaxy movies are Troma films minus the political activism, risky jokes or modest production. Kabukiman is not one of Troma's best but its one of their most sincere and least offensive.
The Evil Dead is not a masterpiece in my eyes, but its one of the most impressive debuts of a director to date. The technical know-how, genre-savvy and inventive low-budget creativity is almost unparalleled. The plot is a more conservative, lowbrow, exploitative remix of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Exorcist, the early work of Wes Craven, an obscure film called Equinox and a few others (the nod to Rosemary's Baby is almost groan-inducing). But the postmodern genre of "fan film" owes a lot to Evil Dead. Raimi takes what could've been absolutely absurd and kitsch and makes it absurdist and camp. The poor continuity, cheap FX and amateur performances work cohesively to create a Gonzo style. I've never found Evil Dead to be the emotionally intense or haunting commentary that truly great horror films are, but it has a claustrophobic mood and grim surrealism that perfectly bridges the 1970s to the 1980s. Its artistic entertainment, not entertaining art. Thats okay for such a small project and its still the best thing Raimi has ever done.
I grew up loving Holy Grail for its downbeat rhythm and strange, inexplicable laughs but only now do I recognize the intelligent design and commentary behind the carefully crafted surrealism. Holy Grail works as a series of deconstructionist sketches, each applying the group's shared Marxist philosophy to a different subject: monarchy, feminism, nationalism, militarism, homophobia, racism, generational transition, existentialism, nihilists etc. Cleverly the postmodernists tackle British modernism by starting at the source, the ridiculous legend of King Arthur and his insane, murderous, superstitious and literally criminal Knights of the Round Table. By today's standards, some of the humor might verge on insensitive, ex. the somewhat racist Black Knight skit is amended in Meaning of Life's Zulu skit. But overall its a witty, next-level and quite elementary guide to Western intellectualism.
Famously, Lorne Michaels and Chevy Chase met at a screening of Holy Grail and basically conceived SNL as the American "Flying Circus". Watching Holy Grail you find everything SNL lacked as a totally poser, hipster, neoliberal misreading of surrealist political satire. That show was more diverse, more populist and more upbeat, but not nearly as enlightened, dangerous or moralistic. I'm kind of tired of SNL being honored as such a groundbreaking institution of comedy when it never surpassed Python in the most important element: humor.
Thursday, February 15, 2018
Exorcism 1975 / Dracula, Prisoner of Frankenstein 1972
2 solid mid-tier Franco films, both stronger than they are weak.
Exorcism is a very small, restrained effort from Franco. He made it for EuroCine's Marius LeSoeur, maybe his most cheap and gritty producer of the 1970s, so its heavy on sexuality and low on plot action or even visual style. But the film is notable for 2 things: its wonderfully satiric plot & Jess Franco playing the lead. Perhaps this film is one of his most ordinary visually because he's usually the cameraman. Its a decent trade off because he IS a great on-screen performer. Jess plays a sadistic priest who mistakes a faked black mass as a real one and feels compelled to murder the participants to save them. Its a fairly lyrical, personal and darkly hilarious spoof of the Catholic church who censored and persecuted Franco for his Marquis de Sade-inspired works. It words doubly as the classic interpretation of people who can't read de Sade properly, like the murderer of Pier Paulo Pasolini. So while a minor film, Exorcism is still meaningful and effective.
Dracula Conta Frankenstein kind of blew me away. Its a campy tribute to old Universal horror films, intentionally absurd and yet evocative of the great influence those monster movies had on Franco's cinema. What do I mean? The film is packed full of mood, grim images, violence, archetypal villains and sorcerors. But its rendered in a cartoon style. The film is almost completely a silent film. Franco admits that he was inspired by Eerie horror comics and stages everything in the same rigid but larger-than-life style. DCF has some of Franco's most inspired direction outside of his more personal work. This is pulpy commercialism obviously, but Franco is having fun and is a real fan of the genre he's mocking. I can't tell if I like this more than its sequels Daughter of Dracula & Erotic Rites of Frankenstein. Its a perfect synthesis of both. Its probably a much more lavish and cohesive film than both.
I have to say I was disappointed that both films showed animal cruelty. I would've hoped Franco was kinder than this, but he did come from a totally different time and place, so I won't judge given his other philosophical contributions, but its very sad and disturbing. Be warned.
Exorcism is a very small, restrained effort from Franco. He made it for EuroCine's Marius LeSoeur, maybe his most cheap and gritty producer of the 1970s, so its heavy on sexuality and low on plot action or even visual style. But the film is notable for 2 things: its wonderfully satiric plot & Jess Franco playing the lead. Perhaps this film is one of his most ordinary visually because he's usually the cameraman. Its a decent trade off because he IS a great on-screen performer. Jess plays a sadistic priest who mistakes a faked black mass as a real one and feels compelled to murder the participants to save them. Its a fairly lyrical, personal and darkly hilarious spoof of the Catholic church who censored and persecuted Franco for his Marquis de Sade-inspired works. It words doubly as the classic interpretation of people who can't read de Sade properly, like the murderer of Pier Paulo Pasolini. So while a minor film, Exorcism is still meaningful and effective.
Dracula Conta Frankenstein kind of blew me away. Its a campy tribute to old Universal horror films, intentionally absurd and yet evocative of the great influence those monster movies had on Franco's cinema. What do I mean? The film is packed full of mood, grim images, violence, archetypal villains and sorcerors. But its rendered in a cartoon style. The film is almost completely a silent film. Franco admits that he was inspired by Eerie horror comics and stages everything in the same rigid but larger-than-life style. DCF has some of Franco's most inspired direction outside of his more personal work. This is pulpy commercialism obviously, but Franco is having fun and is a real fan of the genre he's mocking. I can't tell if I like this more than its sequels Daughter of Dracula & Erotic Rites of Frankenstein. Its a perfect synthesis of both. Its probably a much more lavish and cohesive film than both.
I have to say I was disappointed that both films showed animal cruelty. I would've hoped Franco was kinder than this, but he did come from a totally different time and place, so I won't judge given his other philosophical contributions, but its very sad and disturbing. Be warned.
Monday, February 12, 2018
Salo of the 120 Days of Sodom 1975
In a decade of such unspeakable evil and corruption and many films that tackled it head on, Salo stands apart. It doesn't name names or even have to point in the right direction of the elite oppressors. It simply holds up a mirror to evil and lets the audience figure out who the monsters are. Every scene of this film is part of a sober and academic study of the structure of government and capitalist abuse of power. The very psychology and methodology of exploitation and sadomasochism are laid out in a realist horror film, an anti-porno, a satire of the worst tragedies. And the result is a truly hilarious and moving work of beauty.
Whats scary is how much of Pasolini is in the film... and how much of everyone is in this film. We, as victims of the social game, all empathize with both sides of the madness, the victims and the predators. Because the evil protagonists of this film are the protected and aspired to leaders of our world throughout the course of human history. When its "dog eat dog", the puppy is a snack and the closest thing to a hero is the closest thing to a wolf.
Are the shocking events in this film to be taken as metaphor or as presumed realistic accounts? It doesn't matter. Because the ideas exist and the systems of society let them exist. Total freedom is not the same as total morality. Total power is not the same as total superiority. How can anyone find a fabricated film so offensive but be utterly apathetic to the reality that inspired it? Pasolini's murderer only confirmed that the truth won't just set you free. It might drive you mad. Welcome to the mad world.
Friday, November 17, 2017
T2 Trainspotting (2017) / Willard (1971) / The Passenger (1975)
Danny Boyle scored a real winner with T2, the best sequel/spinoff film I've seen this year. It respects the original so much because its a totally natural progression as a story & personal meta-narrative. T2 succeeds because its not someone new giving their version of the old vision. Its the original vision just 20 years more mature and established. So many corporate reboots fail because they decide on a fresh update and re-treading. Boyle makes a great theme out of the past and uses his first entry as a stylistic gimmick, but he (and the material itself) clearly state that they are not suckered by a cheap nostalgia tour. The film is helped tremendously thats its working off a sequel novel, but only loosely.
T2 won't get its props because its one of the rare higher profiled films this year that wasn't for kids, teens or families. This was the only mature 2017 film I've seen that wasn't partly trying to pass itself off as exploitation or a "popcorn film with a message". But the film isn't overly bleak. Its fun, gorgeous, experimental, sincere, thoughtful and a bit abrasive. Its a self-aware mid life crisis for the characters within and outside of it, including our society. Its not interested in returning to the70s, 80s & 90s but analyzing the changes, positive and negative, and celebrating LIFE 20 years later. Its so grateful for its audience and the opportunity to step back into its rare lot in cinema history.
I won't say its better than the original but maybe equal. I didn't want a Trainspotting sequel but this is the film I didn't know I needed. It totally recontextualizes and romanticizes and in some ways eclipses the original. Maybe this is easier to find in European cinema than in American when I think about the charming and welcomed Ab Fab film from a few years back. They are more accustomed to picking up stories again and respecting the virtues of storytelling in commercial filmmaking.
Willard took me by surprise too. I remember the stylish but hollow remake from the 2000s and that both films follow a 1967 novel. I expected a brainless Psycho ripoff with rats eating people. This is much more sophisticated, at least the script is. Its a very introspective study of society's victims and the realistic circumstances that leave them reduced to animal behavior to survive. Willard creates a complex, intelligent metaphor out of its title character. He's a true anti-hero or tragic hero. And the actor Bruce Davison does a lot of good work in the role.
Now the production is not so ambitious but quite memorable. Produced as studios faced a recession, Willard is shot closer to a B&W 1960s thriller TV series like Twilight Zone or Hitchcock Presents. Its very bare bones and muted, but this serves the tone of the film. There isn't much on suspense or action, so we the directing is focused on fleshed out performances and a sense of nerve that creeps up.
But the film is more than a serviceable adaptation of a good story. It surpasses the original text from my understanding in that Willard becomes a catalyst for the zeitgeist of angry youth. It worked well for the political climate then & now. Millennials will relate to the economic and generational abuse this character suffers. He rises into an avenging arm of rebellion, a Marxist. And he suffers a fate that is more poetic and radically leftist than his modest Poe-esque fate in the original tale. He becomes a mirror for the failures of the Love generation and a casualty of class warfare, selling out his own ideals by following the cycle of abuse he set out to destroy. Its heady, very appropriate and shocking for a low budget horror film that could've wasted effort on FX and decor (like the remake and surely the upcoming re-remake).
Jack Nicholson might be the greatest film actor of all-time by body of work. He's made a long list of excellent films because he's worked with some of the best directors of his era: Kubrick, Mike Nichols, Roger Corman, Polanski, Tim Burton, Scorsese and fit all of their esteemed aesthetics. The Passenger unites Jack with influential director Michelangelo Antonioni for a political/existentialist/postmodern/travelogue about identity and freedom. Antonioni loves to create surrogate characters of himself who take on harsh journeys into themselves to either triumph or crumble from their own reflection.
This is the 3rd Antonioni film I've watched and the 3rd in that timeline. Following Il Grido and Blow Up, The Passenger is an even wider and more abstract pilgrimage into the cinematic form. The director is fine playing off established tropes and motifs because he bends them in new ways, like he's revising a world view by performing the same story in vastly different ways. One big distinction is the change in female perspectives in these stories. In this one, Maria Schneider plays a radical youth who acts as a spirit guide or perhaps a siren who leads him to one of two fates. Antonioni might've been a Hitchcock fan because the film builds to an incredibly intense climax loaded with meanings.
"The Passenger" is a sure masterpiece like Blow Up before it, "Willard" is a very tuned in piece of mainstream-meets-counterculture that has aged terrifically & "T2" is a spiritual poem that lives up to the spiritual poem that inspired it. 3 great movies to enjoy forever.
T2 won't get its props because its one of the rare higher profiled films this year that wasn't for kids, teens or families. This was the only mature 2017 film I've seen that wasn't partly trying to pass itself off as exploitation or a "popcorn film with a message". But the film isn't overly bleak. Its fun, gorgeous, experimental, sincere, thoughtful and a bit abrasive. Its a self-aware mid life crisis for the characters within and outside of it, including our society. Its not interested in returning to the70s, 80s & 90s but analyzing the changes, positive and negative, and celebrating LIFE 20 years later. Its so grateful for its audience and the opportunity to step back into its rare lot in cinema history.
I won't say its better than the original but maybe equal. I didn't want a Trainspotting sequel but this is the film I didn't know I needed. It totally recontextualizes and romanticizes and in some ways eclipses the original. Maybe this is easier to find in European cinema than in American when I think about the charming and welcomed Ab Fab film from a few years back. They are more accustomed to picking up stories again and respecting the virtues of storytelling in commercial filmmaking.
Willard took me by surprise too. I remember the stylish but hollow remake from the 2000s and that both films follow a 1967 novel. I expected a brainless Psycho ripoff with rats eating people. This is much more sophisticated, at least the script is. Its a very introspective study of society's victims and the realistic circumstances that leave them reduced to animal behavior to survive. Willard creates a complex, intelligent metaphor out of its title character. He's a true anti-hero or tragic hero. And the actor Bruce Davison does a lot of good work in the role.
Now the production is not so ambitious but quite memorable. Produced as studios faced a recession, Willard is shot closer to a B&W 1960s thriller TV series like Twilight Zone or Hitchcock Presents. Its very bare bones and muted, but this serves the tone of the film. There isn't much on suspense or action, so we the directing is focused on fleshed out performances and a sense of nerve that creeps up.
But the film is more than a serviceable adaptation of a good story. It surpasses the original text from my understanding in that Willard becomes a catalyst for the zeitgeist of angry youth. It worked well for the political climate then & now. Millennials will relate to the economic and generational abuse this character suffers. He rises into an avenging arm of rebellion, a Marxist. And he suffers a fate that is more poetic and radically leftist than his modest Poe-esque fate in the original tale. He becomes a mirror for the failures of the Love generation and a casualty of class warfare, selling out his own ideals by following the cycle of abuse he set out to destroy. Its heady, very appropriate and shocking for a low budget horror film that could've wasted effort on FX and decor (like the remake and surely the upcoming re-remake).
Jack Nicholson might be the greatest film actor of all-time by body of work. He's made a long list of excellent films because he's worked with some of the best directors of his era: Kubrick, Mike Nichols, Roger Corman, Polanski, Tim Burton, Scorsese and fit all of their esteemed aesthetics. The Passenger unites Jack with influential director Michelangelo Antonioni for a political/existentialist/postmodern/travelogue about identity and freedom. Antonioni loves to create surrogate characters of himself who take on harsh journeys into themselves to either triumph or crumble from their own reflection.
This is the 3rd Antonioni film I've watched and the 3rd in that timeline. Following Il Grido and Blow Up, The Passenger is an even wider and more abstract pilgrimage into the cinematic form. The director is fine playing off established tropes and motifs because he bends them in new ways, like he's revising a world view by performing the same story in vastly different ways. One big distinction is the change in female perspectives in these stories. In this one, Maria Schneider plays a radical youth who acts as a spirit guide or perhaps a siren who leads him to one of two fates. Antonioni might've been a Hitchcock fan because the film builds to an incredibly intense climax loaded with meanings.
"The Passenger" is a sure masterpiece like Blow Up before it, "Willard" is a very tuned in piece of mainstream-meets-counterculture that has aged terrifically & "T2" is a spiritual poem that lives up to the spiritual poem that inspired it. 3 great movies to enjoy forever.
Thursday, November 2, 2017
Numero Deux 1975
I'm getting back into Godard. "Breathless" totally opened up my world when I downloaded it from an old file-sharing network as a teen. I remember thinking this is the coolest and hippest B&W film I'd ever seen. Its unbelievable that that film was made in 1960. It just happened to be French & low budget too, so I felt like I was now a true cinema hipster. I haven't looked back since, but my other experiences with Godard's work have been shaky. I thought Alphaville was intriguing, Masculin Feminin was cute but underwhelming & Weekend was as astounding as it was frustrating.
Number Two is the most extreme thing I've seen from him & I really enjoyed the experience. I know much more about where Godard was coming from politically and I have a better appetite for challenging, non-commercial art.
The whole thing is one big gimmicky experiment where we join Godard in the editing room as he watches footage on TV moniters of a poor French family speak their minds in a candid but decidedly lyrical style. The family are unhappy with their roles but also desperate to fit in the "machine" that is their family. The parents wrestle with philosophical questions from the mundane to the familial to the political to the existential. There's no plot or action or character growth. Its a stream of Godard's consciousness spoken through 1-dimensional people, making the audience aware of the transference we place from auteur to actors. Another fun game Godard plays is filling the screen with 2 or more images in a frame, letting us edit the footage ourselves. Godard shows that the film is already a film before its "properly" edited and sometimes a rawer experience in this way. Indeed it does create an intimacy with the films within the film. Godard is between his film and us. We are removed from the "story" that we can properly deconstruct it as pure communication.
This is a cool, conceptual piece that will bore newcomers to Godard but will satisfy anyone who likes interacting with or decrypting their cinema. Its self aware pretentiousness and its preaching to a very radical choir, but its definitely art and good art too.
Number Two is the most extreme thing I've seen from him & I really enjoyed the experience. I know much more about where Godard was coming from politically and I have a better appetite for challenging, non-commercial art.
The whole thing is one big gimmicky experiment where we join Godard in the editing room as he watches footage on TV moniters of a poor French family speak their minds in a candid but decidedly lyrical style. The family are unhappy with their roles but also desperate to fit in the "machine" that is their family. The parents wrestle with philosophical questions from the mundane to the familial to the political to the existential. There's no plot or action or character growth. Its a stream of Godard's consciousness spoken through 1-dimensional people, making the audience aware of the transference we place from auteur to actors. Another fun game Godard plays is filling the screen with 2 or more images in a frame, letting us edit the footage ourselves. Godard shows that the film is already a film before its "properly" edited and sometimes a rawer experience in this way. Indeed it does create an intimacy with the films within the film. Godard is between his film and us. We are removed from the "story" that we can properly deconstruct it as pure communication.
This is a cool, conceptual piece that will bore newcomers to Godard but will satisfy anyone who likes interacting with or decrypting their cinema. Its self aware pretentiousness and its preaching to a very radical choir, but its definitely art and good art too.
Sunday, February 19, 2017
The Hot Nights of Linda 1975
I'm falling deeper in love with Jesus Franco's 70s output. This movie is bound to become one of his most popular now that it has wide release in the West. It has everything his biggest fans adore: Gothic photography, straight and lesbian sex, beautiful actresses, a cheeky sense of humor, complex internal dramas of a psychosexual nature and continuity with other successful Jess Franco movies.
Avoid learning about the plot and just trust that its a strong one full of cruel and intense sadomasicistic sex but redeemed by a moral compass and empathy for victims of traumatic loss. The depressing characters, the cold and brutal violence, the shockingly vulgar love scenes and random LOL moments are pure magic. It could've been too much or amounted to a very dark and disturbing piece of trash, but it this is a very entertaining art film that never misses a beat.
What fueled this perfectionism in Jess is the love for lead actress Lina Romay, his future life partner. Every shot of her is so intimate and caressing and could only come from someone who knows every inch of her and all her best sides. She is quite magnetic and plays the camera like a fine instrument. Take account that she is very young here and a very green actress. Franco found his most uninhibited and seriously bizarre star in her and she matches his soul exactly.
I'll keep this short because the less said the better. Find a copy and enjoy!
Avoid learning about the plot and just trust that its a strong one full of cruel and intense sadomasicistic sex but redeemed by a moral compass and empathy for victims of traumatic loss. The depressing characters, the cold and brutal violence, the shockingly vulgar love scenes and random LOL moments are pure magic. It could've been too much or amounted to a very dark and disturbing piece of trash, but it this is a very entertaining art film that never misses a beat.
What fueled this perfectionism in Jess is the love for lead actress Lina Romay, his future life partner. Every shot of her is so intimate and caressing and could only come from someone who knows every inch of her and all her best sides. She is quite magnetic and plays the camera like a fine instrument. Take account that she is very young here and a very green actress. Franco found his most uninhibited and seriously bizarre star in her and she matches his soul exactly.
I'll keep this short because the less said the better. Find a copy and enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)