The Child's Play franchise will go down as the best of the 80s slasher franchises that dominated pop culture once. Chucky has outlived & outclassed the likes of Freddy, Jason, Pinhead & the others. Only Leatherface stands next to Chucky as both had new films this year, but Child's Play has retained most of its first predecessor's charm, intelligence & horror credibility by keeping the voice of its creator. No, the Child's Play producers have gone a step further and given the auteurist credit solely to the writer by letting him direct. And Don Mancini has evolved into a formidable & singular talent. He's already one of the supreme directors of low budget horror IMO.
"Cult" follows the very strong "Curse of Chucky" from 2013 (the same year as TC3D hmm). That film was a pseudo-reboot that returned the film to its Urban Gothic roots as a serious mind-bending supernatural stalker film with a psychotic twist. That film was also built on Mancini's economical crafting of a vintage Hammer Studio-like atmosphere & VERY sharp social awareness and genre postmodernism & it was a much more successful experiment than the misunderstood and less popular Seed of Chucky.
Cult is not as successful as Curse, but there is so much to recommend. The plot is cleverly weaved, witty in its plot twists, surprisingly lyrical for a Chucky film and very hard to classify. Like Antonioni's Blow Up, the films of David Lynch & many European styled films, the main gimmick is perception. This is the most essential but underutilized theme in telling a story on film. Mancini has done his homework and even stretches it a bit. He makes some interesting comments about the nature of truth, reality, sanity, society & morality. The film works like an old school art film, not like a killer doll movie. In fact, there might not be enough Chucky for slasher fans. I think its an okay trade-off.
It fun to let the other characters in the Chucky myth basically drive the entire plot. Chucky becomes a Hitchcockian "McGuffin". He ties these vastly different perspectives together and represents different psychological traumas for them & that works best after 6 movies. These characters being the leads in different chapters all meeting for the first time. Very cool.
I was a bit disappointed in the resolution. It was more neat, bleak and open-ended than the previous endings. Even that is a twist on typical slasher sequel expectations. It leaves us in a new territory thats more abstract and gritty than anything in the other Chucky stories. I'm totally sold on Mancini's direction for the next film as its shaping up to be a very personal epic saga of his own demons & angels.
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
Monday, November 6, 2017
What is the underlying opinion on race in the Alien franchise? With the Prometheus/Covenant entries Ridley Scott suggests the story has always been a horror deconstruction of white racist eugenicist theories, specifically targeting the intersectionality between Nazism & white Christianity. This is supported in the thematic work of Dan O'Bannon & HR Geiger, Alien's respective screenwriter and key artistic designer.
Prometheus details the absurd idea of a white God complex poisoned by his own black genetics and the authoritarian fascist corporation out to profit from the realization/discovery of the "Master Race". Ridley Scott's horror/scifi franchise is destined to be one of the most frightening, intellectually probing and subtle fictional constructs in popular media. Whats most frightening is how many simply buy it at face value as a story about "mankind finding his roots". Scott is playing on the audience's own deeply ingrained racism/authoritarianism and using it against them, to produce scares and ticket sales. Thats one reason he's one of the best directors ever.
Sunday, November 5, 2017
Venus In Furs 1969 (2nd review)
Writing reviews this year has opened up my appreciation of cinema and I've learned a lot. Much of that credit belongs to Jess Franco, the obscure Spanish surrealist/grindhouse director I covered for the first half of 2017. Studying his work properly introduced me to tons of concepts & artistic grammar that I was only fuzzy about. Postmodernism, Dada, Existentialism. These themes perfectly reflect the dark crises Earth is handling now. I'm a totally different viewer after this harsh year and my outlook has widened tremendously.
I can admit I'm now embarrassed by one of my early reviews. Rewatching "Venus in Furs" last night, the film was a richer, more clear experience and it deserves a new review. But I will not erase my initial, less informed opinion. We should all give things an educated perspective.
https://hollyweedbabylon.blogspot.com/2017/01/venus-in-furs.html
Now Venus is a case like Blade Runner or Night of the Demons where a young ambitious artist made a deeply existential work of art and producers interfered to make it more commercial, thus losing a lot of the intended power. Funny how all 3 of these films revolve around the concept of perception, an essential component of cinema but maybe the least understood or examined.
I wrote off Venus as a clunky, sexy supernatural slasher like Franco's later work because thats what it is on the surface. Even on first viewing I could tell the film was heavily inspired by Vertigo, Carnival of Souls & Dr. Caligari, as its a dream narrative with dream logic and heavy political symbolism. Franco's film is a uniquely Spanish work examining themes of chauvinism/feminism, racism/colorism, sadism, schizophrenia, memory and probably LSD. The sex & supernatural is only a hook for audiences, but the producers re-edited the narrative to highlight these elements at the expense of any meaning. The film can seem convoluted if you aren't keenly aware of the lyrical storytelling that is mostly intact.
One of my favorite writers of the film blog era, Jeremy Richey of "Moon in the Gutter", detailed a connection between Franco's Venus and Lynch's Lost Highway. I originally thought he was off-base but now the similarities are glaring. The way Franco uses surreal photographic techniques and jazz scoring to highlight the dreaminess and artificiality of certain plot points. Franco gives clues and absurdist touches the way Lynch would after him. There's also the shared sensibility in ghostly, unreal femme fatales, unholy affluent boules and a confused, jazz playing spectator to all of the violent insanity who is oblivious to his role in everything. Franco & Lynch both imply that the world's depravity is at the heart of our sick culture, not a byproduct or separate fringe entity. You have to seriously ask if David Lynch, a monolithic American artist of our times, is a fan of this totally ignored cult director.
Its a hard argument for those uninitiated to Franco because Lynch is so quiet about his influences, unlike Franco in his day. Also Lynch fans are a bit dogmatic in praising Lynch's originality and genius. How can that great unique savant be compared to an inconsistent director of lesbian vampire pornos? As I've tried to argue in the past, Franco was a true auteur and genius and I'm sure his infamy is well-known to enormous film fans WITHIN the directing field. Jess Franco's films predicted so much because they were so structuralist and eventually post-structuralist. By "Venus", every shot is a reversal of the expected. Its a totally fresh experience despite its debts to other films. Because Franco, a super movie buff, was combining all of the radical ideas of his contemporaries (Godard, Antonioni, Bunuel, Welles, Fellini) and boiling them down to a level Spanish & American teenagers could even understand. Following these postmodern directors, it could be argued Franco was the original major post-postmodern & remodernist director like De Palma, Tarantino, Rodriguez and so many later.
I see now how seminal this film is to Franco's oeuvre, even if it wasn't the career gateway he wanted. It really summarizes his aesthetic well and explains the frustrated vision of his later, cheaper work. Many times he tried to execute the misunderstood mysticism of Venus in different terms. Some more mature (Other Side of the Mirror), some more juvenile (Virgin Among the Living Dead). I think Venus is more successful and watchable. But maybe Franco's best and most original take on this type of film poetry was "Succubus". But Venus is right next to it as Franco's attempt at a Roger Corman-esque drive-in mindblower. And to be honest, its a perfect hybrid of Corman's LSD and Gothic horror films, but better than both.
I can admit I'm now embarrassed by one of my early reviews. Rewatching "Venus in Furs" last night, the film was a richer, more clear experience and it deserves a new review. But I will not erase my initial, less informed opinion. We should all give things an educated perspective.
https://hollyweedbabylon.blogspot.com/2017/01/venus-in-furs.html
Now Venus is a case like Blade Runner or Night of the Demons where a young ambitious artist made a deeply existential work of art and producers interfered to make it more commercial, thus losing a lot of the intended power. Funny how all 3 of these films revolve around the concept of perception, an essential component of cinema but maybe the least understood or examined.
I wrote off Venus as a clunky, sexy supernatural slasher like Franco's later work because thats what it is on the surface. Even on first viewing I could tell the film was heavily inspired by Vertigo, Carnival of Souls & Dr. Caligari, as its a dream narrative with dream logic and heavy political symbolism. Franco's film is a uniquely Spanish work examining themes of chauvinism/feminism, racism/colorism, sadism, schizophrenia, memory and probably LSD. The sex & supernatural is only a hook for audiences, but the producers re-edited the narrative to highlight these elements at the expense of any meaning. The film can seem convoluted if you aren't keenly aware of the lyrical storytelling that is mostly intact.
One of my favorite writers of the film blog era, Jeremy Richey of "Moon in the Gutter", detailed a connection between Franco's Venus and Lynch's Lost Highway. I originally thought he was off-base but now the similarities are glaring. The way Franco uses surreal photographic techniques and jazz scoring to highlight the dreaminess and artificiality of certain plot points. Franco gives clues and absurdist touches the way Lynch would after him. There's also the shared sensibility in ghostly, unreal femme fatales, unholy affluent boules and a confused, jazz playing spectator to all of the violent insanity who is oblivious to his role in everything. Franco & Lynch both imply that the world's depravity is at the heart of our sick culture, not a byproduct or separate fringe entity. You have to seriously ask if David Lynch, a monolithic American artist of our times, is a fan of this totally ignored cult director.
Its a hard argument for those uninitiated to Franco because Lynch is so quiet about his influences, unlike Franco in his day. Also Lynch fans are a bit dogmatic in praising Lynch's originality and genius. How can that great unique savant be compared to an inconsistent director of lesbian vampire pornos? As I've tried to argue in the past, Franco was a true auteur and genius and I'm sure his infamy is well-known to enormous film fans WITHIN the directing field. Jess Franco's films predicted so much because they were so structuralist and eventually post-structuralist. By "Venus", every shot is a reversal of the expected. Its a totally fresh experience despite its debts to other films. Because Franco, a super movie buff, was combining all of the radical ideas of his contemporaries (Godard, Antonioni, Bunuel, Welles, Fellini) and boiling them down to a level Spanish & American teenagers could even understand. Following these postmodern directors, it could be argued Franco was the original major post-postmodern & remodernist director like De Palma, Tarantino, Rodriguez and so many later.
I see now how seminal this film is to Franco's oeuvre, even if it wasn't the career gateway he wanted. It really summarizes his aesthetic well and explains the frustrated vision of his later, cheaper work. Many times he tried to execute the misunderstood mysticism of Venus in different terms. Some more mature (Other Side of the Mirror), some more juvenile (Virgin Among the Living Dead). I think Venus is more successful and watchable. But maybe Franco's best and most original take on this type of film poetry was "Succubus". But Venus is right next to it as Franco's attempt at a Roger Corman-esque drive-in mindblower. And to be honest, its a perfect hybrid of Corman's LSD and Gothic horror films, but better than both.
Thursday, November 2, 2017
Death Laid An Egg 1968
I told myself while watching this, "this is one heck of a movie".
I was usually so caught up in the impeccable camerawork or stunning use of montage to make sense of the plot. But I think I understand it: a man is driven insane from the numbing experience of working at a chicken farm with 2 women who are fighting over him. The plot is extremely loose and a bit absurd but its full of clever metaphors for the social factors in his breakdown.
Gian Piero Brunetta, author of The History of Italian Cinema, considered the film to be "worth remembering", comparing it to the works of Luis Buñuel and Michelangelo Antonioni. Brunetta felt the film held several thematic undercurrents, dealing with the conditions of farm labourers and the changing social attitudes towards the class system in Italy
I want to compare it to the work of Jess Franco because its so jazzy, surreal, sexy, psychological and obtuse... yet commercial. Its actually more polished and entertaining than the typical Franco film by a long shot and has the added poetics, social commentary and New Wave sensibility of maybe a Jean Rollin film. But this baby doesn't come from Spain or France. Its Italian. One of the most extreme Italian films I've seen from the period. Its somewhere between a Fellini & Bava, art & exploitation. Its a beautiful experiment in contrasts. A marriage of high and low art. Aesthetically and politically its very similar to the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, so that details its pedigree.
Essentially you want to see this if you love giallo AND "acid cinema". I imagine it was inspired by the radical commercial experimentation in the previous year's "Bonnie & Clyde", but "Death" manages to outdo it in sheer stylish lunacy.
I was usually so caught up in the impeccable camerawork or stunning use of montage to make sense of the plot. But I think I understand it: a man is driven insane from the numbing experience of working at a chicken farm with 2 women who are fighting over him. The plot is extremely loose and a bit absurd but its full of clever metaphors for the social factors in his breakdown.
Gian Piero Brunetta, author of The History of Italian Cinema, considered the film to be "worth remembering", comparing it to the works of Luis Buñuel and Michelangelo Antonioni. Brunetta felt the film held several thematic undercurrents, dealing with the conditions of farm labourers and the changing social attitudes towards the class system in Italy
I want to compare it to the work of Jess Franco because its so jazzy, surreal, sexy, psychological and obtuse... yet commercial. Its actually more polished and entertaining than the typical Franco film by a long shot and has the added poetics, social commentary and New Wave sensibility of maybe a Jean Rollin film. But this baby doesn't come from Spain or France. Its Italian. One of the most extreme Italian films I've seen from the period. Its somewhere between a Fellini & Bava, art & exploitation. Its a beautiful experiment in contrasts. A marriage of high and low art. Aesthetically and politically its very similar to the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, so that details its pedigree.
Essentially you want to see this if you love giallo AND "acid cinema". I imagine it was inspired by the radical commercial experimentation in the previous year's "Bonnie & Clyde", but "Death" manages to outdo it in sheer stylish lunacy.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)