6. The Keep (1983), dir. Michael Mann

[strange_complex]

Alas and alack for me, I watched two terrible films in a row, and this was the second one. At least I didn't subject lady_lugosi1313 to this one - I'm not sure our friendship would have survived it... ;-)

I wanted to watch it because the plot summaries said it was about an unknown, terrible and implicitly quasi-vampiric Thing which had been trapped inside a keep in Romania for centuries, and was unleashed upon modernity by occupying Nazi troops during the Second World War, which sounded like a good premise. I also read that the Thing's name was Radu Molasar, and as Radu is the name of the historical Vlad III Dracula's brother, this spoke to my theory that the 'Dracula' played by John Forbes-Robertson whom we see at the beginning of Hammer's Legend of the Seven Golden Vampires, who is similarly imprisoned inside a castle, is the Christopher Lee-Dracula's brother, imprisoned by him for some kind of betrayal or misdemeanour centuries earlier. However, none of the vampiric promise of the film was realised.

In fairness, some aspects of the visual design were worthwhile. Somebody had obviously got out some books on Romania and made a fair effort to reflect its appearance in the architecture of the village outside the Keep and the villagers' clothing. Although the film was actually shot in Wales, they had hidden this fact quite well via tight camera angles. They had also built quite an impressive set for the interior of the Keep, and used it to good effect sometimes in shots involving interesting angles, lighting and smoke. But even in the visual department, much of it was shot and soundtracked like an '80s rock video. Apparently, Tangerine Dream did a soundtrack album for it, but as far as I understand it this isn't what's actually on the prints of it now available. Instead, it's just dreary synths wandering in and out of tune. The Thing is initially shown as merely two glowing eyes obscured behind a huge cloud of smoke, which is quite good, but then later on the smoke clears and we see him, and this turns out to have been an error.

Otherwise, there is not much good I can say. The script was considerably worse than that for The Secret of Dorian Gray. I think those involved in the production thought it was atmospheric and profound - certainly, there were a lot of shots designed to convey this. But the greatest actual complexities it achieved involved the Thing declaring that it wished to scourge the Nazis from its land, but then turning out to be just as bad as or maybe worse than the Nazis. Quite the conundrum.

The rest of plot is neither very good nor effectively conveyed. After the scenario with the Nazis and the Keep has been established, we suddenly switch to Piraeus (the port of Athens), where we begin following the journey of a mysterious figure called Glaeken. (I'm not sure whether his name is ever actually used in the film - I got it from the Wikipedia page). Over time, we learn that he has purple eyes and green blood, cannot be seen in a mirror, is not killed by bullets, and carries a mystical staff which he eventually combines with a mcguffin from inside the Keep to create a weapon which defeats the Thing using the very latest '80s laser effects. (These scenes in particular very much reflect the recent popularity of the original Star Wars trilogy.) But it's never made at all clear who he is, how he got the staff, how he knows the Thing has been unleashed from the Keep, or why he wants to defeat it. Also, the film contains exactly one (1) woman, Eva, who is there primarily to be an object of desire or concern for the male characters - especially Glaeken, with whom she unconvincingly falls in love, and her father, a medieval historian roped in by the Nazis to try to understand the Thing. She is the subject of an attempted rape by the Nazi soldiers, and after that her role is for her father to struggle to protect her and for her to express trauma when Glaeken appears to have been killed.

The Wikipedia page relates a troubled production history, including how the director had envisaged a much longer running time allowing for a more dramatic final confrontation followed by a happy ending for Eva, Glaeken and her father and all sorts of extra details. But space could have been made to clarify the plot and develop the characters better within the running time allowed by halving the length of the many lingering atmospheric shots, which the film as it stands does not really earn. And I am here to tell you that nothing I have read about the additional material the director wanted to include would have improved the film - only lengthened it.

Don't go there; don't even think about it. I have watched this film so that you will never need to.

Comments

[softfruit]

Thank you for your service

[strange_complex]

You are welcome!

[coyotegoth]

Where did you find a copy?

[strange_complex]

Haha, I feel like I shouldn't tell you the answer to this, to protect you from yourself! But it is available for rent on Amazon video, certainly to UK users. I am not responsible for what you do with that information...

[coyotegoth]

Thanks :)

[magister]

I watched it about 25 years ago. The one moment I remember impressing me was a soldier removing a brick in a wall and the camera going through it and then pulling back and back and back to reveal the most enormous space. Other than that, it was crap.

[strange_complex]

Yes, that bit was indeed quite good! You kept thinking, "Wow, that is quite a big space!", and then realising there was a whole bunch more of it still to come. Well remembered.

[sovay]

The Thing is initially shown as merely two glowing eyes obscured behind a huge cloud of smoke, which is quite good, but then later on the smoke clears and we see him, and this turns out to have been an error.

Ouch.

I know some people who love The Keep, but none of them have ever tried to persuade me that it's not a mess. The vampirism-plus-Nazis angle reminds me of another movie I haven't seen, Blood Creek (2008).

[strange_complex]

I am glad that it makes some people happy. However, I think I am a bit burnt for vampirism-plus-Nazis movies now, and nothing a cursory Google is telling me about Blood Creek seems calculated to change that. Do let us know if you ever watch it!

[theandrewhickey]

I looked this up on Wikipedia. I was quite surprised that a film directed by Michael Mann, who's a decent enough director, and with a good cast, could be quite so bad. Then I read the phrase "based on The Keep by F. Paul Wilson", and that explains everything. A couple of years ago I reviewed one of his books -- https://andrewhickey.info/2017/08/09/the-prometheans-wheels-within-wheels/ . It... wasn't good.

[strange_complex]

Oh my! I love your review of it, though. I learnt a lot about the history and evolution of SF from that. This would also explain why the small number of good things I was able to say about this film are basically about the production and direction, rather than the plot or characterisation. Certainly, I had already looked at the Wikipedia page about the novel, and could see from there that this wasn't a case of a great novel being butchered in the course of film adaptation.

[thisbluespirit]

Don't go there; don't even think about it. I have watched this film so that you will never need to.

Ohhh dear! One of those! (Of course, that is the worst thing to say to people who will then take it as a challenge. You should probably put that on things you want people to watch and recommend the terrible things...)

[strange_complex]

Heh, I know what you mean! I could see perfectly well that this had attracted a lot of bad reviews before I started, and paid them no heed. Of course those of us who like genre stuff, and particularly old genre stuff, are used to people panning the things we like, so it isn't necessarily a good guide to whether we'll like it or not.

[thisbluespirit]

I read The Mysteries of Udolpho last year not 100% because someone told me it was the most boring thing ever, but I was a bit... CHALLENGE ACCEPTED about it. (I liked it a lot!)

But, yeah, some things you have to be, "When I say, don't watch it, I mean it. I really mean it!"