Macumba Sexual 1983 / Voodoo Passion 1977 / Revenge in the House of Usher 1983 / Devil Hunter 1980 / Death Whistles to the Blues 1964 / Mondo Cannibal 1980 / How Seduce a Virgin 1974 / Mansion of the Living Dead 1982 / Fall of the Eagles 1989 / Dr. Orloff's Monster 1964 / The Awful Dr. Orloff 1962

11 Jess Franco reviews for you, bitch... Franco-mania!

Macumba Sexual is an almost masterpiece. Franco remakes "Vampyros Lesbos" with a transgender theme! Replacing the irreplaceable Soledad Miranda is the commanding Ajita Wilson, the most beautiful black she-male in cinema history. She's seducing Lina Romay (as her blonde actress title "Candy Coaster") to take her role as some pan-sexual goddess of lust. The plot is low on incident and keeps to maybe 3 locations, all around a hotel. Its a breathtaking experience despite this, gorgeous and alive with subversive sexual metaphors. Throughout the film, Lina is haunted by physical objects
that are both masculine and feminine at the same time while Franco never hides the fact that Ajita is transgender. He attacks the gender binary and really scrambles what an erotic horror film can be. For him this is an exploitative ride to attack homophobia and sexual insecurity. I don't know if its respectful to trans people, but I think its firmly on their side and is the most brave, entertaining and early examples of the subject in cinema.

Voodoo Passion is likewise a minor classic. Playing similarly to both "Virgin Among the Living Dead" and the formula of "Succubus" and "Nightmares Come at Night", I think Voodoo Passion plays better than all three. It has an impressive production, flawless cinematography, a beautiful score, truly erotic sex scenes, a game cast and some fabulous direction. It also irons out some flaws in the highly disjointed narratives of those previous films. You could only dock it points for being predictable, but Jess provides enough twists visually and narratively that you can call this a successful jazz variation.

Revenge/Usher is "final level Franco". You can't appreciate this until you know his oeuvre, biography and financial limitations. I would call it something of a no-budget masterpiece if Eurocine producers didn't poorly edit it into the kitsch it is today. Franco shot a fairly personalized but tonally correct version of Poe's classic with no budget. Had Jess had a few dollars more, it would be comparable to his Dracula. But Eurocine didn't like it, added 10 minutes of footage from Dr Orloff(!) and then added poorly done inserts to try and smooth it out. They did the same to "Virgin" apparently. If you know the story behind this film, its quite an eye-opener and an amazing demonstration of Franco's genius, but this is NOT for casual fans or horror fans.

Devil Hunter is a solid Eurotrash ride. Its a camp spoof of racist cannibal films made in Italy at the time and it still works as an anti-racist horror film. Franco shows great kindness for black people in his films, especially primitive tribes. This film paints the white characters as just as barbaric and maybe twice as depraved. Like the transgressive bits of transgenderism in Macumba, Franco displays his radicalism not in preachy dialogue, righteous characters or obvious gestures. He uses the power of ironic montage, contrast, dialectical materialism that he learned as a young admirer of Eisenstein. Devil Hunter is surprisingly long and quite absurdist, but its an epic enjoyment for his fans or anyone who is in on the joke. Also, just remember that the bug-eyed native is essentially "Morpho". This will make sense later...

Death/Blues is a small political thriller from Franco's early film period. Its gorgeous, well-paced and extremely heavy on dialogue. While its a refreshing break from many films of its time, it lacks the unique style that Franco would patent later. But it still has his hallmarks: anti-racism, proletariat sympathies, revenge, a sexy tropical atmosphere and a good soundtrack. Its evidence of Franco's ability to handle your regular commercial film but such a solid B&W caper is a footnote to his career and thats a compliment. I still recommend it for the time capsule appeal and the biographical nature of the story.

Mondo Cannibal is known as a piece of shit, but it has its moments. Its hated by fans of the cannibal genre because its low on gore, cannibals and action. But the plot is quite good and would be resurrected for "Diamonds...". This film is a bit of a chore because its maybe Franco's slowest and least artistic film, but it has (shockingly) some of the best photography of this period and the real sell is Sabrina Siani, who is inhumanly attractive and naked throughout the film. I wish this film was as progressive as the other Franco jungle films, but its no big loss because all of the natives are played by Italians! Actually, I suspect that was a joke and that the film is lampooning Italians taste for gore and their rampant anti-black racism. I've heard Franco diss Italian directors for their desire to be seen as white/American and this film is his rejection of the Italian schlock directors he is still lumped in with. In retrospect, this film was an intentionally "bad" anti-gore film.

How to Seduce a Virgin is a not-as-strong remake of the exquisite Eugenie, but it has its areas of supremacy. The sexual content here is excellent, the cast is different but equal, the production is smaller but more moody. This is kind of a dark X-rated doppelganger of a classic. There are some plot tweaks and maybe the best substitution is Lina Romay as the helpless minion. This might be her best role, likewise the underrated Alice Arno.

Mansion/Living Dead is basically a re-do of Bloody Moon, but serving Franco's sensibilities. We have some sexy Spanish girls at a hotel with a slasher. I still prefer Moon, but Mansion is close in quality. It leans towards a smaller, more absurd plot and a more hypnotic, dreamy style of directing. What Mansion does have is better dialogue, sexier lesbian action and a phenomenal female gimp character who steals the entire film each time she arrives. This film becomes a personal account of Franco's relationship with Lina and his own guilt in keeping this much younger, wilder woman to himself, a rather bookish man of small means. Many films from this period revolve around their real world romantic dynamic, its up's and down's and sadomasochism. Lina is more than a muse in these films. She's a strong actress with the unique gift of having a film told through her and about her.

Fall of the Eagles is the cheapest Franco film I've ever seen. It literally a couple really well-directed scenes about a Nazi love triangle before, during and after WW2 with some stock footage linking it together. The performances are strong from Christopher Lee and Mark Hamill (TWO fucking Jedi's directed by the guy who helped inspire Yoda!!!!) while Joe Estavez's son gives what might be the worst acting performance ever. The entire film is so uneven yet so watchable, a perfect time waster. Considering it cost nothing, I didn't feel cheated. It reminds me of the much worse Full Moon films that obsessively use WW2 as a backdrop. Despite its many limitations, Eagles IS a very serious, crafted and poignant story.

Dr Orloff's Monster is a well-made little thriller, way more conservative than its radical predecessor, but it introduces some important tropes into the Franco canon: adultery turning to murder (But Who Raped Linda?) and a young girl inheriting a dark castle of evil secrets (Virgin..., Daughter of Dracula). The plot and style of this film provides the gist of the much more entertaining Erotic Rites of Frankenstein, but you won't be disappointed in the noir-esque photography and what was once groundbreaking treatment of sex and violence. But its no match for...

The Awful Dr. Orloff. Finally I review the one that made Jess Franco a famous international genre director. I've watched it before but its much better with more context of what it spawned. Its been written that Orloff is a rip-off of Eyes Without a Face. Franco denies it and I believe him as The Brain That Wouldn't Die is also ridiculously similar to these two films. I think we have a case of 3 people thinking the same thing at once: surgical horror. They all were deconstructing Gothic horror films and predicting the rise of abused plastic surgery. Eyes is the classiest of the 3, Brain the most vulgar and Franco's little film is a perfect blend of both. Its evident how much the suggestive dialogue and rape-themed violence was in such a Catholic, conservative culture. And this is really the most expressionist and epic film of Franco's career. Its just a finely directed old school horror film that no one can fault. But Francophiles will take sweet pleasure in how personal the film reveals itself to be all these years later.

We witness the birth of Franco's most personal and repeated plot device: The Master and Slave. Dr Orloff (who would return so many times) is a mad surgeon based on Jess' army doctor father and in extension the Generalissimo Franco. He's an affluent, cruel, bourgeois monster, but physically and emotionally human in every way. Early on its revealed that his deep seated obsession with female flesh comes from his own insecurity about control, aging and dying. This rings as a confession of Jess' later lustful work as Orloff's violence is carried out by his demeaned bug-eyed relative, "Morpho". This is an obvious placeholder for Jess and Jess would even play the Morpho role in following films. Is Franco's entire filmography as actor/director his working through a tyrannical Father complex? Definitely.

This film has a solid climax but the rather hollow Dr Orloff's Monster might be even more personal as that film ends with the Morpho monster actually striking down the evil father character. Now read into Orloff killing women to preserve the image of his own daughter? (Or sister in "Faceless") The maternal side of Franco's anxieties would be explored in Jack the Ripper, sibling & daughter incest would pop up later. Having a Mexican father and Cuban mother, I suspect Jess' mother was dark-skinned, explaining his fetish for light skin but his distanced but bleeding heart for darker skinned women. Its so obvious why he found special balance in Soledad Miranda and then Lina Romay. The strange abusive childhood Jess had with some 8 siblings in a fascist militaristic surgeon's home spawned a lifetime of traumatic confessions on celluloid and video. The racial tension between his parents and the mixed heritage in Latin communities also left a huge impact on the little Jesus, turning him to jazz, political radicalism and becoming a malcontent who purposely deprived his genius from popularity.

I hope this sad but beautiful little genius is at peace now and that this amazing body of work will live on forever and become more legendary than it already is.

The Man With Two Brains 1983 / Cracking Up (aka Smorgasbord) 1983

Two very intellectual, avant garde comedies from the same year. Carl Reiner directs Steve Martin in "2 Brains" & Jerry Lewis directs himself in Smorgasbord (its original title by Jerry).

Now TMW2B is more commercial, more Americanized and less personal, but its still a far classier experience than most comedies since. I'd argue its better than most comedies that came before too. This is not the Reiner/Martin collaboration that gets the most props or notice, but its probably the most consistently funny. The plot is secondary but its not non-existent or throwaway. The film is a collection or selection of comedy skits all with the theme of modern romance. It has a detached coolness in its intimate portrayal of social suicides & defeating heartbreaks & magical rebirth.

Reiner was of course rivaling his ex-partner Mel Brooks at the time, so there's heat of critical gesturing and maybe loaded rejections of certain Brooks-style gimmicks. This is a pure Reiner madcap effort while Martin is at the top of his game as a performer & thinker. He trusts the humor and brings his own twists to much of Reiner's retro vaudeville. He plays it in a perfect slapstick tone so Reiner can build the rest of the film (Kathleen Turner, the plot, the music) as the "straight man". The film has a dreamy, sometimes queasy mixture of deadpan with the texture of absurdist realism. Its between a cartoon and a documentary.

I have to heavily recommend this to anyone. Its very welcoming, gentle and yet brilliantly enlightening.
 
Smorgasbord should be watched afterwards, when you have a wet palette for comic extremism. "Cracking Up" was a title studios slapped on it to appropriate it for "general" audiences. "Smorgasbord" is so much more fitting as the film is an almost plot-less collection of wide ranging dreams, fantasies, episodes and introspections from Jerry's well-established clown persona.

Its very low budget, feels European in production style and it actually plays to the European critics who were Lewis' biggest fans at the time. Lewis has some of the most fun of his career here as a humble aging master performer playing to his adoring crowd of philosophically astute and culturally accepting post-French New Wave. This might be Lewis' most auteurist work. Its filled with naked confessions, mature honesty, fiery snark & love for the craft of being a film comedian.

Lewis is one of the greatest screen comedians ever, if not the best. He utilized gags, reactions, one-liners, misdirection, staging, scope, color, timing, editing, emotion, etc. so simultaneously that it all felt effortless. And this is his purist effort. He's like a kid playing with cinematic toys. And he gives us all a fun, strange, gripping seat on a ride through a portrait of his mind. Excuse the word salad, but this film is that psychological, surreal and existentially profound. Yet it stays unpretentious and grounded in the spirit of a big kid having fun in the street with every other big kid.

Jerry famously taught a lot of people how to stay a big kid, but also how to remain an intellectual adult on the outside. In this film, Jerry apologizes for any negative reproach his fans might get, but assures them that they are the real geniuses for understanding his humor. This was the last feature film of Lewis' directorial career and its a wonderful swan song.

Monty Python's The Meaning of Life 1983

Paid this old fave a visit. 2017 has been dry on comedy, certainly anything as broad as this. And over the years I've come to accept that this final work by the Pythons was a bit flawed and undercooked, but its still a fine culmination and final bow by all of the members.

Whats impressive is how the boys followed diverse paths after their success but still found common ground. Each skit feels like a philosophical argument of wits but tied together by a common mantra, finally revealed in their last written scene together.

The unity is tense.

• Eric Idle is of course interested in building a musical comedy franchise from the Python gimmick (and he would eventually succeed!)
• Terry Jones is trying to lend the film as much cinematic credibility as possible
• Terry Gilliam wants to keep it as absurd and infantile as can be
• John Cleese has an inner struggle to not be the scene-stealing ham he loves being
• Michael Palin just wants to be as funny as everyone else and keep them all friends
• and Graham Chapman is channeling the last of his rage against the WASPy machine as he can in what would be the final years of his life

"Meaning" will always be my favorite work by the group because their motives are so clear here as matured, honest and satisfied masters of what they do. They aren't the crazy amateurs of "Flying Circus" or the reunited icons of "Holy Grail" or the ambitious artists of "Life of Brian". They're just some friendly clowns still trying to get the best laughs of their career.

The whole thing has a sad finality to it. It must've been the reflecting on mortality and their showing age, but the spirit of the film is a farewell to fans. A bit of the writing is clunky but each member stretches more than they ever did. Its refreshing to see a film without any phoned in performances. I think some wanted this to be their magnum opus and others saw it as another check before another check. So there's a mix of seriousness with frivolity, which harms the consistency of the humor but also keeps it from becoming too much "Brian" or "Grail". This is a great summary of both hemispheres of their combined brain.

Skit by skit is the only way to cover the action.

1. The Crimson Permanent Assurance - A great opening. It ties in thematically with everything to come while remaining Gilliam's personal statement. Shows just how sympatico the whole team was when the most individualistic & unique member is echoing the sentiments of 5 others.
2. Miracle of Birth Pt 1 - This is light lifting for John & Graham, but its spot-on. Philosophical, juvenile, mean, sympathetic, pissed off and hilarious. And of course a bit metaphysically romantic and heartbreaking. Its a great closer to John & Graham's troubled but true bromance.
3. Miracle of Birth Pt 2 - Finally, Michael & Jonesy outdo John & Graham head-to-head with the thanks of Eric and Graham himself. Its pretty risky to take on Catholicism with such snarling jokes, but thats what they do best. Visually, this is probably the best part of the film and the succession of pointed, brilliant jokes gives ya goosebumps.
4. Growth & Learning - Probably my favorite writing in the whole film. John Cleese fires on all cylinders and you just stew in how brutally witty this guy is at dismantling religion, sex, nationality and any social construct he can work into a skit about ejaculation.
5. Fighting Each Other - 3-part skit that brings down the humor and action. My least favorite? The beginning and ending are kinda painfully predictable and dated topically, but the African skit is really some of the BEST stuff to involve multiple Pythons. Because its them doing what they do best: making fun of British history. The subtle deadpan from John, Eric & Graham is exquisite master class stuff.
6. The Middle of the Film - Perfect. This was probably the most insane scene to play in theaters in the 1980s.
7. Middle Age - Kinda dry and dumb but has a few good lines and Eric is fabulous as a woman for the 2nd of 3 times.
8. Live Organ Transplants - John, Graham & Gilliam being weird, brutal and darkly satirical. This seems like a deleted scene from "Brazil". Doesn't fit but... it fits because the whole joke is that this has nothing to do with anything. But it does summarize middle age I fear.
9. The Autumn Years - Despite John & Jonesy having the most trying friendship in the group, they play off each other so beautifully. They might have the best chemistry in the entire film. And this is the ultimate example of their extreme "Mutt & Jeff" S&M chess game. This is the most dazzling bit of comic directing and vaudeville acting in the whole film. And the way other members (even, Carol Cleveland) are incorporated is superb. Eric's epilogue is wonderful too.
10. Death - 3 part sketch, all dazzling. Poetic, gorgeous black comedy. Each scene really is a tearjerker and gave me gooseflesh. There's so much closure in their collective career playing out and it mirrors the strange downfall of the 20th century and the end of the film itself. Its their most meta of meta moments and a PERFECT final sketch.
11.  The End of the Film - Cherry on top that ties 30 years of stupidity and genius back to their very first sketch on TV. You couldn't plan a better finale for a comedy troupe. It had to have been an intuitive choice that just happened to work.

Ya know, I'm surprised they didn't pursue bigger solo careers because everyone is a mega star in this film. I guess the team brought out that magic in the individuals. God, I wish we got comedy films like this later. Brain Candy, Anchorman 2 and Tim & Eric's whole career have tried valiantly, but its not even 2/3rds of "Meaning of Life". Its probably the most ambitious comedy film to actually work more than not. Shit, most dramas aren't this smart, serious or beautiful.

Diamonds of Kilimanjaro 1983

More Jess Franco madness. This is less madness and more maddening. This was co-directed by someone, but 90% of it felt like Franco. There's very little that feels personal, or commercial for that matter. I don't know how anyone thought this would make a return investment. I guess it was an early example of these quick movies sold by an awesome VHS cover and title that overpromised. But it has interesting merits and its not totally unwatchable. This is near the bottom of the barrel for Franco but still has those qualities that make it preferable to a Pixar movie, in my humble opinion.

So the story focuses on a white jungle princess and her hilariously Scottish father who rule over a (voodoo?) tribe of black "savages". Her mother (a 70+ year old woman played by the 40ish Lina Romay) sends a thoroughly unlikable and uncharismatic team of people to find the jungle girl before the mom dies of illness. There's some subplot about diamond treasure that is given maybe 30 seconds of screen time. The film lack the mood or bizarro characterization of the usual Franco piece, but it does have some startling images and lots of hypnotic power. "Diamonds" is full of filler, stock footage, poor editing and lots of unnecessary dialogue, but there's a semi-good story buried in this. If you edited it down to 45 minutes, you would have something. But this was low budget commercial trash and Franco was too old to bother himself dressing it up or making any fun, pretentious experiments with this, which is a shame. Had he handled this in '73 we would've gotten something more memorable. But he squeezed a lot of blood out of this stone. The script, cast, budget, EVERYTHING is pitiful , but Franco can't not inject his genius in-between the seams. Amateur filmmakers should study his staging and use of lighting in films like this, where he had literally nothing else promoting the film.

The film is rescued by a classic Franco ending that is both upsetting and appropriate, as the unlikeable greedy white people who dominate the story are killed, their black savage antagonists are triumphant and the white natives side with their jungle family. This is what takes the film from stupid jungle adventure territory into Franco's antifascist, darkly humanistic world. Its as if he made a film he hated with the bargain that he gets to tack on whatever ending he wanted. Before the last 5 minutes, I thought "Diamonds" was just a lowbrow, stupid, racist movie with zero morality. Then the ending comes and puts everything back into balance and puts Franco's mastery into focus. Shit, I actually want to rewatch it and see what I've missed. On further meditation, the lone white male protagonist who is killed half-way through for his having empathy might be some kind of placeholder for Jesus himself. And I mean the director and the maryr.

So this is only for the hardcore Franco fans or the really masochistic lovers of bad film. There's some treasure waiting to be unearthed here, but finding it isn't easy. Its funny how thematic messages like this are stated in the actual watching of Franco films and not plainly delivered within the text. So, as bad as it is, Diamonds of Kilimanjaro is as Franconian as can be.