strange_complex: (Dracula 1958 cloak)
I did something I've been meaning to do for a while today: grabbed Wikipedia's list of Hammer films and went thought it bolding all the ones I'd seen and additionally noting those I've seen in the cinema (well - on a big screen, not always in a traditional cinema). The answers are that I've seen 68 out of 175, mainly but not exclusively gothic horrors, of which 16 on the big screen. I am not going to try to link from this list to the other posts where I have reviewed many of them here. That's too big a task. But I will keep updating this post as I go along!

Complete list under here )
strange_complex: (ITV digital Monkey popcorn)
A full list of the 102 films which I watched in 2024, mainly with Joel. Includes 24 films with Christopher Lee in them and 21 Hammer films. My most-watched director was Terence Fisher with 5, while Freddie Francis, Mario Bava and Roger Corman are equal second place with 3 each. There's at least one film on the list for every decade since the 1910s, peaking at 21 each for the 1960s and '70s.

1. Le Frisson des Vampires (1971), dir. Jean Rollin - amazing lesbian vampire film executed with the trippy crushed-velvet excess only possible c. 1970.
2. Daughter of Darkness (1990), dir. Stuart Gordon - not to be confused with Daughters of Darkness (1971). An American woman goes to Romania in search of her father, who turns out to be a vampire.
3. Transylvania (2006), dir. Tony Gatlif - a portrait of the region, focused especially on the Romani people there, seen through the eyes of a Romani-Italian girl who goes there in pursuit of a lost boyfriend. Very rich and human.
4. Il mostro dell'opera / The Vampire of the Opera (1964), dir. Renato Polselli - a vampire haunts a neglected old theatre in which an opera troupe are rehearsing a new production. Not particularly good.
5. Nandor Fodor and the Talking Mongoose (2023), dir. Adam Sigal - about this case. Trying to do something about the reasons why people are drawn to belief in the supernatural, including a personal character arc from scepticism to a desperate desire to believe on the part of Fodor, but somehow a bit flat in the delivery and not really that profound in the end. Good to spot location footage in the Victoria pub, Leeds and Whitby harbour, though.
6. The Woman in Black (1989), dir. Herbert Wise - the ITV version, which now has quite the status of a cult classic in vintage horror circles. Very good, and delivering sustained creepy, squirm-inducing scares in a way that modern jump scares can't really match.
7. Blade II (2002), dir. Guillermo del Toro - I didn't think I'd seen this, but it turned out I had. I just knew I'd only seen one Blade film and assumed it had been the first. Good cyber fun, very of its era.
8. Once Upon a Spy (1980), dir. Ivan Nagy - terrible American wannabe James Bond movie with Christopher Lee as a mega-villain threatening the world with a shrink-ray!
9. The Woman in Black (2012), dir. James Watkins - the revived Hammer version, which I saw in the cinema when it came out. Doesn't have the same atmosphere as the 1989 version, and even the jump scares weren't as effective at home as in the cinema. Still, had a good cast and looks nice.
10. Dark Places (1973), dir. Don Sharp - little-known contemporary-set horror film in which a man inherits a house with money hidden somewhere within it, but is haunted by the tragic legacy of the previous owner, with Christopher Lee in a minor role. Pretty solid psychological horror, better than we were expecting.
92 more films under here )
strange_complex: (Daria star)
So help me, it's a list of every single film I watched in 2023. I've put notes where I could remember anything particular about the film or the viewing circumstances, but haven't tried to do that consistently. This is more about record-keeping than reviewing now.

1. Dracula (1958), dir. Terence Fisher - deliberately chosen as our first film of the New Year so we'd be starting it out right!

2. Fright Night 2 (1988), dir. Tommy Lee Wallace

3. Dracula Has Risen From The Grave (1968), dir. Freddie Francis

4. Hellboy II (2008), dir. Guillermo del Toro

5. The Vampire Bat (1933), dir. Frank R. Strayer

6. Vampire in Venice / Nosferatu a Venezia (1988), dir. Augusto Caminito - would be an amazing film about decay and ageing, if it didn't also have Klaus Kinski being actively peedy in it.

7. Caligula (1979), dir. Tinto Brass, Giancarlo Lui and Bob Guccione - the fullest, unexpurgated version, seen at Wharf Chambers as a Pervert Pictures screening, complete with a contextualising introduction. It's the logical extreme of the decadent Rome trope.

8. The Company of Wolves (1984), dir. Neil Jordan

9. Dracula Bloodline (2013), dir. Jon Keeyes

10. The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb (1964), dir. Michael Carreras

There's another 94 under here )
strange_complex: (ITV digital Monkey popcorn)
Well, happy New Year LJ / DW! I hope anyone reading this had a lovely celebration last night and is starting 2024 in good spirits.

As recently as April 2023 (LJ / DW), I was still trying to catch up on writing anything at all about a massive backlog of films I'd watched, mainly with Joel. But I still had 30 films outstanding from 2022 at that point, and have now watched 104 in 2023.

There is no way on this earth I'm going to manage to write anything coherent or meaningful about all of those 134 movies now, so it is just going to have to be lists at this point. Maybe with the occasional explanatory note if there was something special about the viewing experience or I wrote something down at the time. Here we go:

Thirty films watched in 2022 )
strange_complex: (ITV digital Monkey popcorn)
Having managed to get back up to date with Things I've Been Up To, I can now attempt some of the other catch-ups I said I was going to do in this entry in February: LJ / DW. Today, I will have a crack at catching up on films I've watched, including links to Twitter threads if they exist but not full cross-posts of their content, and otherwise just a sentence or two per item.

41. Night of the Living Dead (1968), dir. George A. Romero, broadcast 16 September 2022 - a Cellar Club screening, which I live-tweeted at the time. It's a perfect example of people's personalities disintegrating and being brought into conflict with one another under extreme stress in an enclosed setting, much like The Thing.

42. Dracula AD 1972 (1972), dir. Alan Gibson - watched with Joel in a disused church in Morley on the 50th anniversary of Dracula's resurrection (i.e. 18 September), which I wrote about separately. An amazing experience! We watched it on my tablet, but also connected it to Joel's sound-bar using Bluetooth, which meant really impressive sound quality. I heard some background dialogue as they're all gathering in the church which I don't think I'd ever really picked up before, about the shrouds Johnny had brought and what sizes were available. Joel also wrote this very funny in-universe blog post based on it afterwards.

43. The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1973), dir. Alan Gibson - I think we came straight home and watched this afterwards, as the obvious follow-up viewing? I know we talked about it and exchanged thoughts and views as we watched, and I know I enjoyed it, but I've seen it so many times I don't think I can remember and specific thoughts that were unique to this viewing now.

44. Never Take Sweets From A Stranger (1961), dir. Cyril Frankel, broadcast 23 September 2022 - another Cellar Club screening which I tweeted along to at the time. It's a b/w Hammer film, but not a Gothic horror. Rather, it's a surprisingly progressive and thought-provoking treatment of the topic of child sexual abuse. What's depressing is that it sets out quite unequivocally all of the factors which help abusers to get away with their activity, such as members of the community rallying round when the children and then their parents try to speak out to dismiss their claims and defend and protect the abuser, basically out of fear of even admitting to themselves that such a thing could be happening. And here we are, 60+ years later, still regularly watching the same patterns play out. :-(

45. Faust (1926), dir. F.W. Murnau - a fairy-taleish version of Faust, in which he does a lot of terrible things, but is redeemed by love at the finale rather than being dragged off to hell. It comes four years after Nosferatu, and is very definitely both more lavish and more technically developed, reflecting the evolution of the film industry and Murnau's career between the two. It did perhaps drag a bit towards the end, though.

46. I Sell The Dead (2008), dir. Glenn McQuaid - a horror comedy about resurrectionists who begin specialising in dealing with the undead. Quite fun, definitely a lot of unexpected turns, and a nice gothic horror aesthetic to it.

47. Ed Wood (1994), dir. Tim Burton - I hadn't seen this one since the mid-nineties, so it was quite the revisit. I'm not wild about the Tim Burton / Johnny Depp machine these days, but this is really a classic, with very sympathetic and moving portrayals of everyone involved.

48. Return of the Vampire (1943), dir. Lew Landers - an obvious follow-up watch to Ed Wood, as it features Bela Lugosi as Dracula in all but name (he's actually called Armand Tesla), appearing to trouble a particular group of characters first during the First World War and then again during the Second. I'd seen it before, but I think Joel hadn't. I remember noting down various ways in which it had clearly influenced later Hammer films on my first watch, such as the disintegration scene in the ruined church at the end of the movie, and I may have noted this one already anyway. But just in case I didn't, the staking scene in the crypt which is shown via a silhouette on the wall must also surely have fed into Hammer's portrayal of Van Helsing staking Jonathan Harker in Dracula (1958).

49. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (2003), dir. Stephen Norrington - very silly fin-de-siècle crossover action movie, brought round by Joel as escapist distraction on the evening of the day when my Dad texted to say that cancer had been identified in one of the polyps in his bowel. It required no intelligence of any kind to follow the plot, which was telegraphed throughout in six-foot-high letters, and of course I enjoyed spotting all the different characters from a range of Gothic and crime fiction of the era, so it definitely helped.

50.The Mutations (1974), dir. Jack Cardiff, broadcast 7 October 2022 - another Cellar Club tweet-along. It was very accomplished both visually and aurally, had some superb seventies fashions, and generally hit a sound moral note about the mutated characters it depicted (in a similar and I think directly referential manner to Freaks), but did get a little bit silly towards the end.

51. Gods and Monsters (1998), dir. Bill Condon - a biopic about James Whale in later life, and thus a fairly natural follow-up to us watching Ed Wood a couple of weeks earlier. It stars Ian McKellen and Brendan Fraser, both putting in excellent performances, and deals with Whale's homosexuality and his sense of lost opportunities and the loss of his health as he approaches the end of his life. Moving, well made and definitely recommended.

Hmm, that's got us reasonably far, but that feels like all I can manage for today, and there are still a lot to do. I watched 81 films in 2022 in the end, and have kept up a similar rate in 2023 so far. I might have to resort to simple lists of titles yet, but let's leave that decision for another day.
strange_complex: (True Blood Eric wink)
38. Death Line (1972), dir. Gary Sherman

This is a firm favourite which I've written about in detail before (LJ / DW). I still very much stand by that previous review and indeed can only add minor points to it. One is a nice piece of narrative construction which I don't think I'd previously noticed. At the start of the film, the reason there is a policeman around in the underground station at all to approach for help when the young couple find James Manfred, OBE, unconscious on the platform is precisely because of his actions in the previous scene, as the copper is talking to the sex worker whom Manfred had propositioned before being attacked. Another is that the last surviving tunnel-dweller only says the words "mind the doors" to surface-dwellers, not for example his fellow tunnel-dweller who dies part-way through the story. So it's not just that that is the only English-language phrase he knows how to say, and which he uses in all situations - he specifically thinks of it as 'their' language, and is trying to use it in the appropriate context to communicate with them. It's another example of the very thoughtful and humanising characterisation used to create him.

The only small plot issue which niggles at me with this film is the question of when exactly the survivors of the original roof-fall broke back through the blockage, allowing the man we see in the present day to get through to the platforms and attack his victims. You would assume that if it had happened while any of the original generation of construction workers were still alive, they would have wanted to come out and return to normal life rather than stay underground, but it's also rather hard to believe that digging their way out would have taken that long, as it really doesn't appear to be a very large roof-fall in the film. The best explanation I can come up with is that they had been there long enough to have become so disillusioned with the society which had caused the fall and then abandoned them that they chose not to return to it. In that scenario, the main motivation for digging through the roof-fall would have been (or become if it wasn't initially) simply to reach a food source, rather than to escape.


39. Therapy for a Vampire (2014), dir. David Ruehm

I'd never heard of this film until Joel suggested watching it, but it's really lovely and was well worthwhile. It's a horror comedy about a vampire in 1930s Vienna who goes to Sigmund Freud for therapy. He's unhappy with his marriage, largely because his wife is driven mad by her inability to see her own face in the mirror and desperate for any kind of reassurance that she is still beautiful. Sigmund offers the services of a struggling young artist to paint her portrait, but the vampire is more interested in the painter's girlfriend. This is for a reason which I often find annoying, in that she is the reincarnation of his lost love, Nadilla, who died centuries earlier. However, in this context it's a trope which is knowingly undermined, so it was all part of the film's lightly-satirical approach to its subject matter. The story overall is quite touching, and it's very nicely shot, with a slightly fantastical style achieved via strong colours and contrasts and well designed sets. Some scenes even struck me as not just coincidentally being set in the same city, but deliberately designed to recall The Third Man, such as the cafe where the girlfriend works and a street fountain.


40. The Invitation (2022), dir. Jessica M. Thompson

Seen with Joel at The Light, using some free Vue cinema vouchers which are one of a choice of perks you can get with the bank account I have. Briefly, the heroine, Evie, is American, and working in temporary catering placements when the story begins. She discovers via a DNA test that she has English relatives, who prove to be an aristocratic family and invite her over to their mansion at their expense for a wedding. There, she meets the supposedly extremely attractive (but actually hugely skeevy) head of the household, Walter De Ville, but soon also begins having scary and unexplained experiences. It turns out he's a vampire, and she has been brought over to be converted into a vampire herself and complete his coven of three brides.

It's supposedly 'inspired by Dracula', which was why we went to see it, and in fairness there are plenty of references to Stoker's novel. One branch of the family is called the Billingtons and are lawyers from Whitby; the name De Ville is used by Dracula as a pseudonym; he also mentions that he was once known as Son of the Dragon; and lines from the novel (or close paraphrases of them) crop up periodically (e.g. "Tonight is mine, tomorrow is yours"). The basic set-up in which a mixed-race, working-class American woman gets to defeat a load of literally and metaphorically vampiric British aristocrats is obviously also good fun.

However, it spends rather too much time lingering over the rom-com it's initially supposed to appear to be rather than getting on to the vampirism. The plot set-up means it kind of has to, because if Evie really understood her true situation at any time before the wedding feast where it is finally revealed, she would obviously never have agreed to go into the room. So to preserve that big moment of revelation, as the producers obviously wanted to, she can only experience a few relatively minor doubts and concerns before that point - hence being stuck in boring rom-com mode for too long before going from zero to full blast on the horror. It's also just extremely unsubtle in almost every respect. The Dracula references are all repeated multiple times, Walter De Ville is blatantly villain-coded from his very first appearance, and it's full of jump scares rather than tension and atmosphere.

But what all that comes down to saying is that it was not produced for us, seasoned horror-viewers and massive Dracula geeks. It was made for the other people who were there in the cinema auditorium with us - c. twenty-year-olds with no particularly strong adherence to the horror genre. Whether it actually worked for them, I don't really know, but I guess for us it did at least assuage our curiosity about the latest entry in the ever-expanding universe of Dracula-inspired narratives. Lord knows, I have seen plenty of shitty films in my time in pursuit of that goal!
strange_complex: (Vampira)
I'm watching huge numbers of films at the moment, mainly with Joel, and indeed going about all over the place doing lots of cool things as well. Which is awesome, but while I'm managing to record the various trips and adventures on FB at least, there is a big queue of films waiting to have anything at all written about them anywhere. This post is an attempt to address something of that backlog.


33. The Monster Squad (1987), dir. Fred Dekker

Watched with Joel in Whitby on my birthday, and not of course to be confused with The Monster Club (1981). While we should in theory have been able to cast it onto the massive TV on the wall of the apartment where we were staying, unfortunately the wifi was so bad that we actually couldn't, and ended up watching it huddled over his phone instead. Ain't technology marvellous, eh? It's about a bunch of kids who love classic monster movies, and have a club which meets in a clubhouse lined with posters from them. But little do they know, monsters are real, and Dracula is busy gathering together / resurrecting his own squad of monstrous chums to try to take over the world via the medium of a powerful amulet. They, of course, have to figure out how to stop Dracula and save the world, with the aid of a diary written by Van Helsing exactly a century earlier and a neighbour who lives in a scary, dilapidated old house, but turns out to be very kind and helpful towards them - and is also incidentally a Jewish former concentration camp inmate.

It's fun, silly, and a nice example of the self-referential humour which flourishes within the horror genre. I think in fact that the kids in the squad probably map fairly directly onto the monsters in theirs - e.g. one of them has a dog, which matches up with the Wolfman; Sean, the ring-leader, wears black and red just like Dracula; his little sister develops a special affinity with Frankenstein's monster which is clearly meant to recall the (doomed) friendship between the monster and the little girl by the lake in the original Universal movie, etc. But I was a bit too tired to really put the full details of that together as we were watching. Meanwhile, as Joel pointed out, it has one of the most bad-ass Draculas ever committed to celluloid, who fights practically every other character in the film, lobs live sticks of dynamite about the place, rips the door off his own hearse with his bare hands, etc etc. All good stuff.


34. Byzantium (2012), dir. Neil Jordan

I've watched and written about this before (LJ / DW), but on my first viewing I had no idea how good it was going to be, so have long wanted to revisit it with the full focus and attention it deserves. Luckily, Joel was amenable to the suggestion. ;-) And it does indeed very much reward a second viewing. There is a great deal in the early scenes which makes fuller sense in the light of what the film later reveals about the characters than it can on a first viewing, such as Clara singing what is clearly a nineteenth-century nursery song to Eleanor in the cab of the lorry as they flee their original location. And so many other clever echoes between the present-day and flash-back scenes, like Eleanor desperately sucking up Frank's blood from a discarded tissue after he has cut himself, followed later by Clara coughing up her own consumptive blood into a similar handkerchief. Having not felt like I did this film justice last time I wrote about it, because it was part of a multi-film catch-up post written long after the fact, I'm annoyingly in much the same position again now. But suffice it to say that I love it, and it remains very comfortably within my top five non-Dracula-based vampire films.


35. Penda's Fen (1974), dir. Alan Clarke

A folk horror classic which I've been wanting to watch for an extremely long time, and therefore put on the birthday present wish-list which I supplied to my family. It's basically about both homosexuality and paganism bubbling up from under attempted suppressions, impossible to eradicate no matter how hard conservative society might try - all of which is obviously immensely appealing. It's surreal, contemplative and very beautifully filmed, and will certainly reward repeated viewings. I also hadn't really taken on board before watching it just how deeply engaged it is with the landscape and history of my native Midlands, what with its setting amongst the Malvern hills (prominent and extremely recognisable in the photography), its interest in the music of Elgar, who was born in Worcester, and of course the appearance of the eponymous Penda, king of Mercia. As for Byzantium, it's one I'll probably want to rewatch now that I know all that, so that I can really appreciate how it all works together.


36. Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992), dir. Francis Ford Coppola

A re-watch, with a previous write-up here: LJ / DW. My basic opinion that it is tonally uneven, with flashes of what could have been a great film just serving to show up the flaws around them, remains unchanged. I particularly bridle at the stuff around Dracula's wife, which rolls two misogynistic tropes into one. First, her death provides Vlad's whole motivation for turning against the church and becoming a vampire, so is a prime example of fridging, and second the whole reincarnation trope inevitably erodes Mina's agency - although, to be fair, Mina does not just fall straight for Vlad, as usually happens with reincarnated lost lovers, but rejects and resists him at first, and has some general conflict about the whole thing.

But the reason we watched it was following a conversation about some of the Classical references in it, such as moving snakes in one of the brides' head-dresses very clearly referencing Medusa, and it was worth returning to with those eyes on. There's actually quite a lot of Classical statuary and artefacts dotted about the place, and generally used intelligently to add extra dimensions to the story - e.g. a bronze head and vase in a cabinet at the party where Lucy's suitors are introduced, signalling that the hosts are established aristocrats whose ancestors did the Grand Tour, a Marsyas in the cemetery / garden, signalling punishment and torment, and a Lar on Lucy's nightstand signalling domesticity. So, again, an insight into what some people involved in the film were trying to achieve, even if the efforts weren't consistently sustained.


37. Razor Blade Smile (1998), dir. Jake West

I hadn't (that I can remember) heard of this film before, but Joel suggested it because he thought I'd appreciate its '90s Goth vibe, which I did! It's basically about a vampire called Lilith who spends her time partly hanging out in Goth bars and partly operating as an assassin hunting down the members of a mysterious and evil sect. It's extremely low-budget, but it was evidently made with enthusiasm and is definitely a nostalgia-trip as far as '90s fashions and interior decor are concerned. Lilith wears a great deal of PVC, and indeed has something of the vibe of Tanya Cheex from Preaching to the Perverted (which came out the year before) about her, but she still has a terrible pine bed-frame, exactly like that found in every teenager's bedroom and rental property at the time. Oh, and there's a nice little twist ending, where it turns out the whole assassin / sect thing is just a game she plays with her long-term lover to while away the centuries. Excellent fun, but should definitely be watched with alcohol.
strange_complex: (Dracula 1958 cloak)
On Thursday, I had the pleasure of delivering the second Goth City World Dracula Day lecture at the Midland Hotel in Bradford, and thus helping to cement it as an annual institution. I went to the first one last year (LJ / DW), and had already booked a ticket for this year when I got a message from the organiser asking if I would deliver it this time. I hadn't quite expected that, but I am generally up for any opportunity to talk about Dracula-related things in a public forum, so I agreed.

Various ideas for the topic sprang to mind, but after a chat through the options with [personal profile] lady_lugosi1313 in her garden I decided to run with one which really leaned into the theme of anniversaries. The main one was the 125th anniversary of Dracula's publication, but as it happens this year is also the centenary of Nosferatu, 50 years since the release of Dracula AD 1972 and 25 years since the launch of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I managed to fill the rather awkward 75-year anniversary gap with a 1947 revival of the Dracula stage play, and thus a journey through time working in 25-year slices was born.

The audience was small, but they seemed to enjoy themselves, and it was certainly fun getting gothed up celebrating Dracula's 125th anniversary. I can say I played my part in a worldwide event which included Dacre Stoker doing a tour of the UK and a world-record-breaking gathering of people dressed up as vampires in Whitby. Here are a few pictures of the event )
As if that weren't enough, thanks to the wonders of modern technology I also managed to be part of another World Dracula Day initiative on the same day. This was the first of a series of videos to mark the anniversary made by Erin Chapman, whom I met at the World Dracula Congress in Dublin in 2016 (LJ / DW), for the YouTube channel Morbid Planet. She had contacted a bunch of Dracula scholars and commentators, for some reason including me(!) around February, asking us to record little pieces to camera answering three questions she had set us. So we all sent our footage in, and she has now compiled it into three videos, the first of which was released this Thursday and the other two of which will follow. If you'd like to know what I, Dacre Stoker, Christopher Frayling and a bunch of others would ask Bram Stoker if we could sit down for a coffee with him, the answers are here:

strange_complex: (Wicker Man sunset)
The latest Cellar Club screening, and a really good one! It was the only entry from Corman's Poe cycle which I hadn't seen, though of course in fact it isn't a Poe story at all. Instead, it's based on H.P. Lovecraft's 'The Case of Charles Dexter Ward' (framed by few lines of Poe's poetry), which I also haven't read, so it was all new to me. Extremely visually accomplished and a perfect role for Price.

22. The Haunted Palace (1963), dir. Roger Corman, broadcast 13 May )
strange_complex: (Chrestomanci slacking in style)
This film came at the end of what had felt like a long week, so I was in something of a state of torpor on the sofa by the time it came on and don't think I really engaged with it very productively. But I also don't think the problem was entirely me - it just wasn't really up to much, and I'm afraid has only confirmed my existing view that few horror comedies really are.

20. The Comedy of Terrors (1963), dir. Jacques Tourneur, broadcast 6 May )

And the credits roll. That was well-shot, had some great stars (not the least of which was Orangey / Rhubarb the cat) and gave them some decent individual lines. But overall it's confirmed my view that horror-comedy usually fails on both fronts. #CellarClub #TheFilmCrowd
strange_complex: (Figure on the sea shore)
So, having finally got up to date with recording all my film-watching, I can transfer the tweets for the ONE film I watched last night here! It was a cracker, and indeed probably a lot better than I really captured given that I'd only just submitted an article and hastily cooked dinner in time to catch the beginning of the film.

18. The Tomb of Ligeia (1964), dir. Roger Corman, broadcast 29 April )

Absolutely loved that! A++ would watch again. A great film and a truly great way to unwind after a hard day's work. #CellarClub #TheFilmCrowd
strange_complex: (Nuada)
It's been a lovely weekend. I've done some errands, gone shopping, lounged about in [personal profile] lady_lugosi1313's garden, worked out some ideas for a lecture on Dracula I've been asked to deliver, eaten some lovely food and of course live-tweeted the latest Cellar Club film. Just the kinda stuff a girl can do when she's no longer devoting all her evenings and weekends to a largely hopeless cause! Anyway, talking of live-tweeting, I thought I'd get another few Twitter threads down here.

18. Sing-along-a-Wicker-Man in Sheffield, 20 November )

19. Island of Terror (1966), dir. Terence Fisher, broadcast 26 November )

20. A Candle for the Devil (1973), dir. Eugenio Martín, broadcast 10 December )
strange_complex: (ITV digital Monkey popcorn)
In September 2021, Talking Pictures TV launched the Cellar Club, a Friday-night horror / SF triple-bill introduced and hosted by Caroline Munro. Usually they start with a good solid classic, followed up by two more films which are - shall we say? - usually more deservedly obscure. For the first three weeks, the top-billed movies were Hammer's Golden Trinity: The Mummy, Dracula and Curse of Frankenstein (working through them in backwards chronological order of production for some reason). Combined with Caroline Munro hosting them, of course I was going to make the effort to watch those live. And, as I could see that lots of my friends were also talking about them excitedly on Twitter, somehow it felt right to live-tweet them during broadcast.

I don't usually live-tweet films. It's not really a great way to watch a film you haven't seen before, because half the time your eyes are on your device rather than the TV, so you miss visual details and quite often plot points too as you write about the last thing which happened. But I gradually realised there was a whole community of people watching and live-tweeting the top-billed Cellar Club film each week, led by the [twitter.com profile] TheFilmCrowd account. Soon I was not just tweeting my own thoughts into the void, but engaging with other people's and getting feedback on mine. So, although it's still not how I would watch a film I really wanted to engage with deeply, I've come to consider it a different but fun way of watching in its own right. I've also made a bunch of new Twitter friends that way and really enjoyed interacting with them, including between the live-tweets.

The whole thing has posed a problem for the way I record my film viewing in this journal, though. I've been writing at least something here for every film I've watched since 2007. It's a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it absolutely definitely means I don't watch as many films as I might if I didn't do it, because the 'cost' of watching any film is that I have to write an LJ / DW post about it. Although I tried to set a rule at the beginning that they didn't have to be extensive reviews, and just a record and quick reaction would be fine, that simply isn't what I'm like. I always have a lot of thoughts I want to record, which in turn becomes a burden. On the other hand, though, the knowledge that I'll need to write something down after watching has definitely made me more attentive to what I see, and the regular practice of articulating my thoughts has probably made me a better film critic. I'm pretty sure it's the reason why my Cellar Club live-tweets ended up getting me invited onto a live webcast to discuss Hammer films on Sunday.

But I've been struggling with what to do about the fact that I've been gaily watching all these films, and without yet 'writing up' a single one here. Initially I told myself these views 'didn't count', because I wasn't watching 'properly' (due to looking at my device half the time), and at least initially had seen the films before so had written up 'proper' reviews here on earlier occasions anyway. But increasingly as the Cellar Club moved onto films I hadn't seen before, including some I'd been meaning to watch for a while, that position has become unsatisfactory. And in any case, the very nature of the whole thing means that I do have a written record of each film anyway. That's what the live-tweets are! They just aren't here.

So, all this is by way of saying that I'm now going to perform the rather tedious (probably for both me and my subscribers) task of importing the content of these threads here, so that I can integrate them into the record of my other LJ / DW write-ups. Thankfully, every live-tweet is neatly threaded - something I did in the first place mainly to avoid swamping followers who weren't interested with a barrage of tweets about a movie they weren't watching. So my plan in each case is to link directly to the first tweet in the thread, which will mean I can see them again easily in their original context in future. But I'm also (this is the most tedious bit for me) going to copy and paste the content of each individual thread into the body of an LJ / DW entry, so that I don't have to go to Twitter for the details, and indeed I have an independent record in case some day Twitter ceases to exist. (More likely for LJ at the moment, but that's why I also use DW.)

Some of the individual tweets won't make sense any more out of context, even to me, but that's the nature of the thing. I reserve the right to quietly correct typos, break hashtags which I don't want LJ to replicate or insert editorial comments where I can remember the context and want to clarify it, and indeed to include a paragraph of prelude or commentary where I want to say a bit more here than was included in the original thread. It'll take a few entries over a few weeks, so sorry for the spamminess while that's happening. Each thread will always be under a cut anyway, so hopefully not too annoying. And then once I've brought things up to date, I can just keep up the habit on a weekly-or-less-frequent basis, and I'll be back to business as usual but with a better record of my film viewing. Phew!

12. The Mummy (1959), dir. Terence Fisher, broadcast 3 September )

13. Dracula (1958), dir. Terence Fisher, broadcast 10 September )

14. The Curse of Frankenstein (1957), dir. Terence Fisher, broadcast 17 September )

OK, that wasn't too bad actually. I think I can catch up in this way reasonably quickly. Probably not this week, as I'm going to Oxford on Thursday and need to pack for that tomorrow evening. But judging by this first experiment, it seems feasible and a reasonable compromise for the sake of my record-keeping. Cool.
strange_complex: (Dracula 1958 cloak)
As mentioned last weekend (LJ / DW), I'm going to be a guest on a live webcast next Sunday. I spent last weekend rewatching the Hammer vampire films we'll be talking about, and noting down things to discuss about gender, sexuality and subtext in them. But these are films which I've already spent more time than is really healthy geekily over-thinking, so obviously I spotted loads of other things while watching which won't be relevant to our webcast. This post is a place to get those down on (electronic) paper. I wouldn't call what follows 'reviews' as such - more just a record of spots and comments.

Dracula (1958) )

Brides of Dracula (1960) )

Kiss of the Vampire (1963) )

Dracula, Prince of Darkness (1966) )

OK, that's it, I am done!
strange_complex: (True Blood Eric wink)
I watched this last Sunday, choosing it deliberately because I knew it would be fairly undemanding and I had been out late the night before. I knew about it because it had been screened at the Starburst Film Festival in 2018, but had clashed with other things that I and the people I was with wanted to see, so I hadn't been able to watch it at the time. However, it was also screened on the Horror Channel not long afterwards, so the recording had been waiting for me on my Sky box for some time.

The main narrative involves a couple called Josh and Beth. Josh is a musician who has recently been diagnosed with leukaemia, so they are doing 'bucket-list' things, which for him includes going on a three-day hike up a mountain to some falls, camping overnight along the way. He and Beth meet two rangers during their hike: one at the start who warns them to stick to the designated public area and not go off the path, and then another part-way up who says he is a 'special' kind of ranger, carries a bag of sharpened wooden stakes, and just casually double-checks with them that they are not planning to go near 'the mausoleum'.

Well, you can see where this is going. Obviously, they go off the path, an action which Josh suggests on the grounds that it will allow them to take a short-cut and therefore have more time at the falls. Once they've done so, scary things start happening. During the day-time they start coming across patches of slimy gore on the forest floor, and at night they begin hearing cries and seeing humanoid figures amongst the trees. By their second night off-piste, what is clearly a vampire (of the ravening predator kind) prowls directly outside their tent, and they have to scare it away with a flare and run for it. They end up at the ranger camp at the top of the mountain, but find only a few scattered remains of the ranger left, and come under attack by a horde of vampires who pull Josh off into the depths of a building, leaving Beth alone and terrified.

So far, so good. We have the classic and often very effective set-up of people dealing with a real-life trauma (Josh's leukaemia) also finding themselves face to face with supernatural terrors, and the two situations mirroring and feeding into one another. Even before the vampires start showing themselves, the tensions in Josh and Beth's relationship are neatly sketched out. She's terrified of losing him, he doesn't really want to give her space to say that and is irritated that she's bringing the mood down on his adventure. And obviously the scarier their situation gets, the more the fragility of their relationship shows up. Meanwhile, the gradual build-up of atmosphere as strange things happen around them is well-paced, and we get some nice scary moments by the time the vampires are stalking them directly.

Then there's a twist. So I will cut the rest, as it's better watched unspoilt )

So, in the end the ending just wrecks the whole thing, and presumably explains why it has a catastrophically poor rating on any internet review-aggregator site you might care to consult. Still, for character development and building tension along the way, it is not actually as bad as those scores might suggest. Good enough for a brainless Sunday evening watch, anyway.
strange_complex: (Vampira)
This is the American / British Hammer Productions remake of the Swedish film Let The Right One In (2008), which I watched last night on the Horror Channel. I've seen the Swedish version twice: once while travelling in Australia in 2017 (LJ / DW) and once at the Hyde Park Picture House in 2019 (LJ / DW). My previous experience of such remakes had led me to assume it would be crass and unsubtle, but for once that isn't a fair accusation at all. According to the film's Wikipedia entry, the producers aimed to stay true to the original novel and film, while making it accessible to a wider audience. I'd say they very much succeeded - though it's a pity for many reasons that the additional people this version will have reached won't normally contemplate stepping beyond their cultural bubble and watching a 'foreign' film.

The setting is transposed to New Mexico, which I did not know gets such a lot of snowy weather, but apparently it does, allowing the snowy setting of the Swedish original to be retained. The names are of course changed, so that Eli (the vampire) becomes Abby, her 12-year-old friend Oskar becomes Owen, and her previous servant Håkan becomes Thomas. Some of the special effects are slightly shonkier, like Abby's eyes when she is in full vampire mode, which definitely lack the subtlety of the original. But the general emotive power of the original is well matched, and so is the quality of cinematography and editing. Largely speaking, the story, the scenes used to convey it and the dialogue are unchanged except for being culturally Americanised: e.g. through more emphasis on religious belief in good and evil, more use of cars including a high-speed accident, and a more jockish feel to the high school bullies.

That said, there are various minor differences of detail - or at least I think these are differences, though I may be mistaken due to an imperfect memory of the original. We start with the capture, hospitalisation and suicide of Abby's previous servant, Thomas, from the point of view of the police and hospital staff, and then go back in time a couple of weeks to the two of them arriving at the apartment complex, before working our way back later on to the same events from his and Abby's perspectives. There's also more emphasis than I remember on the police officer as a character, I supposed again fitting American cultural expectations arising from the ubiquity of cop shows and movies. By contrast, Owen's father is largely removed from the narrative - Owen doesn't go and stay with him, and he appears only as an inadequately-supportive voice on the end of a phone-line. The cat-lady who gets bitten by Eli in the Swedish version and survives but begins turning into a vampire here has one dog instead of many cats, isn't as fully developed as a character, and bursts into flames because a nurse innocently opens the hospital blinds in her room, rather than because she has realised what's happening and asks for the blinds to be opened as a way of stopping it.

The questions which the Swedish version raised around gender were also pushed a little further here. Eli's statement about not being a girl is repeated verbatim by Abby, though Abby follows it up a bit further when Owen pushes her (them?) on it by saying she is 'no-one'. Meanwhile, on Owen's side, one of the main ways in which his bullies torment him is by calling him 'little girl' and referring to him using female pronouns. I'm 90% sure this isn't matched for the Oskar character in the Swedish version, so it becomes another thing they have in common in the remake: that both occupy a space outside of gender norms, whether willingly or unwillingly.

This version also seemed to make it more explicit to the viewer that Owen will become Abby's next servant, ending up like Thomas. This isn't to say that wasn't a suggested by the Swedish version - I noted exactly that in my first review of it (LJ / DW). I may also have been more alert to the pointers in this version, having already seen the other twice. But I felt there were two specific cues pointing fairly explicitly towards the parallel, and although the first may have been in the Swedish version too, I'm close to certain the second wasn't. One was a scene of Abby knocking on Thomas' hospital window and asking to be let in so she can kill him, followed immediately by another of her knocking on Owen's window and asking to be let in so she can snuggle up with him - i.e. the editing established a strong parallel between the two characters. The second was Owen finding passport photo booth pictures of Abby with Thomas when he was much younger in their apartment, looking just as nerdy as Owen and confirming for us the path that Thomas has been on. For me, this greater clarity made the developing relationship between Abby and Owen look rather less charming and a lot more like her grooming him, although again that may also be because I'm pretty familiar with the overall story by now.

Overall, definitely worth watching if you enjoyed the Swedish version, although the clearer delineation of Owen's future fate made the ending a little less bittersweet and more simply icky.

Profile

strange_complex: (Default)
strange_complex

January 2026

M T W T F S S
   123 4
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Tags

Active Entries

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Tuesday, 6 January 2026 18:02
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios