The Canterbury Tales - 1972

 Slam dunked that fucking year broooooooo!

The Canterbury Tales is a collected series of stories by Geoffrey Chaucer, written between 1387 and 1400.  They are loosely fable-like comedic and erotic stories with humor, and plot wise and character wise unconnected.  I mean in the movie at least, I haven't read the actual book.

Pasolini has his Trilogy of Life, with this movie, The Decameron, and Arabian Nights.  I have Arabian Nights in the same boxset as this so I will hopefully get around to watching it as well.  This one is certainly like The Decameron, albeit with a central "storyteller" figure that I don't remember Decameron having.  In this movie it is Pasolini himself as Chaucer, a wandering writer who seemingly just thinks up stories and writes them down - they don't seem to be things he's witnessing in the moment.

There's a lot of these stories in the movie, it's a 2 hour movie and the stories can be short, so I'm not going to try to recall them by any means.  The through line with them seems to be that most of them are somewhat sexual in nature, a lot of them center around an almost fable-like "lesson" that maybe we would learn or maybe we would have to be told, and most of them are humorous in intent.

There is also nudity in almost every one of them, I guess that's a through line as well.  

I'm not going to be able to remember all of these, but some are certainly better than others. There’s some memorable moments in no particular order: the singing Italian boy that has a threesome and gets executed, the guy getting the red hot poker up the ass, the guy pissing on people randomly, and of course the best sequence, a Noah’s ark parallel wherein they act as if a flood is coming to sleep with a guys wife. 

The thing about these is they are different degrees of fun and tedious. The film is a long 2 hours and it doesn’t have the warmth and vibe that The Decameron had. These feel almost oddly stilted and nonsense some times. I almost wonder if they’re over in the book, or if they are supposed to be so disjointed. Nothing against the writing, it’s 1378 and I’m not hoping for a 3 act structure. It’s just definitely different. 

Canterbury is a strange movie, and I will repeat a statement here: I’d love to see this kind of thing come back. If everything is truly cyclical, I’d adore to see something this strange and plotless and sexual and…oddly innocent come back. 

Because that is the unique tone here, same with The Decameron. Because it’s not necessarily cutting edge in comedy or sexual provocation anymore, these instead feel like watching weird Monty Python sketches, or something similar in that vein. You almost expect Michael Palin to come in as a shrew woman. 

This is not as good as The Decameron no matter what you do. It’s fun and it has its moments. 3 stars

Kagemusha - 1980

 Halloween 2025 features Akira Kurosawa and Pier Paolo Pasolini in a decidedly non horror focused review sesh!

I dunno man I been craving it so what can I say?  Kagemusha I believe I have ofter confused for other later Kurosawa fare, specifically Ran and Madadayo.  Things I saw in my youth that I don't remember and in the case of Ran,  another Shakespeare adaptation among many in Kurosawa's filmography.

Kagemusha stars Tatsuya Nakadai, a long time collaborator with Kurosawa and a veteran actor as the high Lord Shingen, the "mountain" leader of a large warrior clan in oldtimey Japan.  His position is a crux point and a controversial one, other clans are clearly inferior to him in either power or status, and he employs his brother as a double occasionally for security purpose.  They find another double, a lowlife on death row, and begin to court him as a stand-in, right at the time Shingen is killed watching the flute performance at the enemies castle.  Now, the initiate has to stand in as the other clans begin to start a conflict.

The Japanese title for this is The Shadow Warrior, a really good name, relevant to a great speech and theme in the film about stepping into a position of power, but also about how much the position is only a placebo, and it essentially means nothing and has no power.  Kurosawa adapts King Lear here, a book I have not read so I cannot compare.  But it's all about hiding and subterfuge with notions of power and the power behind being a good person or not, with some political turmoil intrigue thrown in for tension.

The major takeaway here I thought of during it however is this:  Toshiro Mifune is really underrated as an actor.  In my rewatch of Drunken Angel, High and Low, Seven Samuari and Throne of Blood, it is really incredible just how much screen he can hold and how magnetic his presence is.  Nothing against Nakadai here but this movie would be elevated to an all timer if it was Mifune.  

The thing is that there are moments when Shingen is supposed to be funny, cowardly, acting a part, a fool, a leader, its a dynamic and intense ass performance, and it takes a true genius to pull it off.  Kurosawa lenses it and readies it for that genius, and well.... it falls just a tad flat for me.  It could also be this fairly thin story and 3 hour length is a little bit daunting, but Kurosawa and Mifune can overcome that.  

This is a good later period entry from Kurosawa and its a good character study.  I give it basically a 3.5 towards 4, but honestly let's just say 3.5 here.

Bram Stoker's Legend of The Mummy - 1998

 What did Bram Stoker do after his success with Dracula?  He wrote more books, obviously.  Did I ever think of that?  No.

It's fairly obvious that a successful author would keep writing, and a horror novelist would keep writing horror, but why would I assume he would I dunno, keep on Dracula?  Of course he would branch out.  I just didn't expect it to be one of the other Universal Monster type guys.  

The Legend of the Mummy book was actually called The Jewel of the Seven Stars.  Now it obviously came before the movies, but I wonder if he partly responsible for The Mummy as we know it?  Did he popularize both?  And if so how come Dracula as a title is so good and this book is so bad?  

This movie employs evil cats and evil gems just like The Cat Creature and holy crap if this feels of the same era as well except for Louis Gossett Jr being in this thing.  According to some rich old guy with a bunch of artifacts nothing in his study was to be moved.  It was full of Egyptian shit and naturally someone moved something which caused the mummy to come to life.

The mummy in this looks really good and there are absolutely not enough shots of it doing cool shit.  Instead it seems to inhabit others to do its will, making them act like theyre being attacked and dying from an unseen attacker.  Another thing that dates this?  The neighbor from Home Improvement is in it.

This movie feels like it would have a guy from Home Improvement in it.  Its not that bad but it's really not very good except for the last 20 minutes or so.  I give it a 2.5

The Cat Creature - 1973

 I was telling my girlfriend as I put on The Cat Creature that there was a time when I wanted to watched every animal attack movie, and had a big list of 'em.  She was not surprised.

Not sure what the allure is and not sure how The Cat Creature escaped that list, but Tubi had it come up, expiring soon, and I flipped it on.  I did not call it was a made for TV movie, and that's always fun, less obvious ad breaks than some of these I've seen, I'll say.  From ABC on December 11 1973 to my living room today...

I noticed the name Robert Bloch on this movie's credits and took interest.  I didn't know his name was on so many movies, I only knew Psycho and actually he does have a fair share of credits on IMDb.  This movie also has one of my favorite tropes, random lore about Egypt and tombs.  You see, black cats are summoned by an amulet and start to kill people, and that's about it in this movie.

This is a fun enough B made for TV movie.  This has some good cat shadows and shots, some great scenes of many cats roaming around and some good Egyptomania bullshit.  Its not the most scary or fast paced but it's decent enough.  There's a subplot about a ring that leaves a mark, and there's some good investigating scenes. I liked it fine, 3.5.

Love - 2015

 When Love came out, I didn't hear about it.  I think after 5 or 6 years hearing nothing from Gaspar Noe, I likely googled him at one point in 2015 and found out Love existed.  If memory serves, I then looked up the film, and found it streaming.  I put it on immediately, which happened to be around 11pm, and I watched all of it until the wee early hours of the morning.

Noe has the rare power to upstage all of his previous works at times, and he has rocketed to number one for me at multiple times.  When I saw Irreversible I called it my favorite film of all time.  Then Enter the Void came out and I called that my favorite.  Then Love came out and I called that my favorite.  It has reverted back to Enter the Void since then, and on rewatch it remains Enter the Void, so what is Love?

Love stars actors Noe found in the club scene.  He likely had conversations with them very much like the ones seen in the film Love, where Karl Glusman plays a film director who wants to make a movie out of "semen and blood."  The plot involved him and his girlfriend having a threesome which then leads to him having solo sex with the third girl, getting her pregnant, and her having his child.  Then, in flashback, we reveal his relationship with his girlfriend Electra while he spins from the revelatory news that she has recently gone missing.

This hit me hard initially because I was in a relationship which felt like it had hit a real rough patch.  I split up with my wife maybe 4-5 months after watching this movie.  The darkness of the internal dialogue, the bleakness of the future the main character has, the cruelty of love turned into hurt turned into hate turned into revenge and with smatterings of love still mixed into all of those felt extremely relatable.  

On rewatch, it does feel a little unfocused.  Noe chased a gimmick here, filming the movie in 3D for the purpose of showing the graphic sex in a new way.  About 50% of the movie is graphic sex, depicting real penetration and sitting in it visually.  Then the other 50% is these memories and these moments.  We see how the three-way happened and how it went awry, and we see the relationship dynamics of Murphy and Electra and as the film goes we dive into their dysfunctional relationship.

Love still represents extremely well some of the depths and highs of a relationship.  It still is darkly comedic in certain parts.  It leaves you with questions and feelings, and in no way is it trying to cover all your bases.  There is motif of rain present in the entire movie, which I only picked up on this time.  The atmosphere is quite high here, and the sex is really hot.  

Another thought about it, I believe Love represents a specific time in our lives we hopefully grow out of. A time when we are making mistakes and when we are obsessed with our first loves. How we can hurt the people closest to us when we are young because of that childhood remnant of selfishness and or lack of familiarity with compromise and sacrifice. This all felt way more familiar to me when I was 10 years younger when this came out, less so now.  Not that it makes the movie worse, if anything it makes it better, because Noe is older than me.

Overall, this film is really powerful, but its definitely not better than Enter the Void.  It's part of a dynamic shift in Noe which follows into Vortex very much, with Climax being a slight deviation.  Love is a great film and great statement, and everyone should see it.

The Video Dead - 1987

 The Garland Theater in Spokane WA has had a few movies I've gone to.  I'm too lazy right now to look and see if I have reviewed any I've seen there.  I don't think so.

The Video Dead is a cult horror movie, one that is perhaps a bit overlooked and a bit under the radar.  Only a little bit after than the Evil Dead, one has to assume this was made partially because of that.  Not going to compare because the Evil Dead is a great film, is The Video Dead?

Early on, a mystery television is delivered to a dude.  It keeps turning on randomly, showing a zombie movie, the guy unplugs it and goes to bed.  It turns back on, and the zombies notice the house through the television, crawl through the TV and come into the real world!  They kill the man and escape into the woods and a new family then buys the house and are going to have to face the zombies.  A random dude from Texas also shows up to help with the zombies.

The Video Dead rivals Troll 2 in terms of campy awful actors with ridiculous dialogue and exactly one tone.  The plot moves okay, I will say it's not the most well oiled machine.  I checked the time about 45 minutes in thinking like, okay guys how much longer of this is left...  

Effects wise, it looks quite good and the 80's practical effects don't look like real but they do look fun.  There's lots of blood and gore, there's some good kills and fun logic to them.  This movie lives in Dawn of the Dead zone where the zombies are slightly smarter with slightly more personality.  There are maybe like 5 main zombies, and truly they all have their own little "deal" and are memorable.

It's not on the same level as some others, but it was great to see in a theater with like 9 other people.  3.5 stars.

Door - 1988

 I had looked up Akira Kurosawa on my Hoopla app for it to recommend The Snow Woman and this Japanese movie, Door. Neither of them have anything to do with Kurosawa. 

As for Kurosawa, I did rewatch Seven Samurai recently. Was going to review it, nah. It’s a five star great film though. Door is somewhat opposite to it in all ways just about, I’d say. 

Mrs Honda is a stay home mom with a young son and a busy husband who has to stay late and even stay overnight at the office sometimes. She does the house work and cares for the son Takuto, primarily. She gets the average amount of drop by salesmen and sales calls, and lately one of the callers has been more aggressive than most. 

Her husband must stay overnight for two nights at the office around the same time that the calls have been escalating and the man has started to show up in person. Honda hasn’t seen his face and the police haven’t been able to do anything so everything now comes to confrontation. 

This movie is the kind of thing that defines small scale horror thriller, and makes the best out of what it has. It has good actors, a tight taut script that really moves, fuckin cool music, and good tone management. 

The main villain character is genuinely creepy, the scene at the police station plays up how barbaric the outside world is, it’s like every choice was the perfect one for this movie. 

It feels deeply inspired by giallo and horror manga, but in only the believable and right ways. I dunno man! It’s like I am trying to talk myself into and out of 5 stars in my head. Trying to think of problems with it…? But the end is great also and sticks with you. It might be pretty perfect… 5 stars

The Snow Woman - 1968

 Am I the only one who watches this and thinks oh I’ve seen this! The full length version here I’ve seen before in Kwaidan!

It was my favorite of those shorts and here it’s given just under 80 minutes to spread its wings. I wonder how long the original story is?

Two Japanese wood cutters are out and they find a huge tree. They have to stay the night as the snow begins to fly and during the night the evil mythical Snow Woman comes. She kills the older of the two and spares the younger saying if he promises to never tell a soul he can live. He does but soon enough a beautiful woman comes into him life and changes things. 

This movie is really cool, and it doesn’t feel there is stretching from the shorter version to make this full length. They add more characters in this and have a fire festival and statue carving plot but it works to enhance the tension and the character depth. 

It’s got good acting and cinematography and it’s a fun mood for Halloween! 3.5 stars. 

Enter The Void - 2009

 There is so much to say about Gaspar Noe's Enter The Void.  In a world where subjective reality and opinions clash, in a world where we as a culture have either grown to or grown away from sex and reproduction as fact or as taboo or as "god" or as mechanical, where does Enter The Void fit in?

Oscar is a druggie guy who is living in Tokyo.  In the beginning of the film he gets high, gets a call to meet his friend, and goes to sell him drugs.  He is being tricked and Japanese police run out to snag him.  Oscar runs to the bathroom and is shot and killed.  Then, his soul exits his body and enters death, the ultimate trip.

We have evolved to be a culture that doesn't really understand sex, and even if we do, we certainly don't act as though we do.  There is mention early on in this film, a character saying he never felt better than when he was sucking on his mothers nipple as an infant.  During sex, a character goes to suck his partners nipple and in a flash, we see a child sucking his mothers.  This is the type of cultural denial or at least misunderstanding that is happening all the time: because of our fears of taboo, because of our own misunderstanding of childhood, comfort, taboo, sex, arousal, and more, we cannot see the link between when we did it then and when we do it now.

We do not manifest understanding of the unseen ethereal forces that bond us during love.  We cannot understand the maze like, hazy cultural values any more than the neon soaked cityscapes we cruise through in Enter The Void.  When Noe puts a red filter on Tokyo and turns it upside down, we see artistic expression, and not the fact that really the city makes as much sense in that viewpoint as it does when it is filmed normally; we are just used to the regular way.

Noe's Void is a world in which one building displays Sex Money Power, the next one displays Love, the next one The Void.  The people, the cities, the businesses are wearing the truth on their sleeve just like we do when we advertise, just like we do when we search for what we think we are alone in searching for.  The massive and unsaid hidden values, the misidentification of different needs is all here and its all addressed, just in twisted and convoluted ways.

This movie will make you think.  A lot.  Cryptic visuals, bizarre taboo relationships, awful and searing trauma.  Reincarnation.  Life experience.  The difference between drug induced vision, dream, reality, dream, hope, want need desire, dream, and of course interpretation.  Are any of them real, is any of life real?  

This film is about a lot, and more than anything its about memory and the weird experience that is emotion.  Anger, lust, loss, betrayal, hurt, deception - this is about trauma, this is about grief and forgiveness and reconciliation.  Its about the way that inevitably with all those things and more, wires get crossed, mistranslation happens, and what was once a stabbing pain is now a joyful smile.  This movie is picking at an old itchy scab you've had forever and looking in your eyes and knowing you enjoy its prodding.

When we watch this movie, we enter a tunnel.  We watch the happenings from behind the head of main character Oscar.  We see how deeply fucked he is.  But watching from behind we can project anything onto him.  I think one cannot help but project a passivity, which I think is intentional, but maliciousness or love or desire or need, these are coming from us ourselves.  

I'm fucking shocked that more movies have not tried to copy this film.  I'm shocked that Noe ever got 12 million to make this thing.  I'm also, and I will never believe this, so fucking HAPPY that we live in a world where this movie got made.  Where it exists and it is here waiting to change your life.  And all of it set to a weird throbbing dark soundtrack.

This film is why artistry is important.  It is why we live life; experience.  This movie is not going to change your existence, it IS existence, wrapped up in all the surreal strangeness that you experience every day, and challenging as it was to wake up groggy on a Sunday when it's raining and slowly wake up from a eerie and unreal dream.  Or was watching this movie unreal, and the dream my reality?

Dracula - 1979

 I accidentally typed 2979.  I wonder what Dracula filmed in 2979 would be like.

This version of Dracula I had never heard of.  Oddly enough, I'll tell ya, cause it does have Donald Pleasence in it.  Also Frank Langella as Dracula, which is cool, and he's definitely a compelling presence.  

Released the same year as Herzog's Nosferatu, this telling of the Dracula story is pretty good!  We have VanHelsing, Renfield, with Pleasence as Dr. Jack Seward.  The crowning of this interpretation though, is the excellent camera work, and the atmosphere created by it.  Accompanied by fog, a awesome castle, and great acting, this movie really does fit the bill as a Dracula tale.

The movie has enough to it to stand up to Nosferatu, even with Klaus Kinski.  I know I watched that recently, but I guess I did not review it.  I went through a long period of not feeling like writing.  That's life huh? Phases.

I dunno, this one is good, I kinda wish there were more good versions of these stories.  Like how come there isn't any other good Frankenstiens or Creatures from the Black Lagoon?  I wonder.  I give this 4 stars.

The Package - 1989

 Every one was on a Gene Hackman kick a little while ago when he died. I didn’t really rewatch any of his stuff. But now I put this on randomly. 

This Gene Hackman entry has him as a tough no nonsense military guy up against an insurgence of American neo-Nazi-esque dudes.  For some reason Hackman gets paired with Tommy Lee Jones, who pretty much immediately escapes and now Hackman in on the hunt for him.  Intermixed in this is Hackman getting framed for a murder, and running from the cops.

This was sort of a box office bomb when it came out, and I have to sort of wonder why.  Maybe it was too early for TLJ to be a big draw, maybe it was the confusing ass plot though.  I will admit I had drank a margarita, and I drank a big ol high alcohol beer during this, but I could not follow the convoluted plot at all.  It's filmed in confuse-ovision for sure.

I don't have a lot to say about this one.  Hackman is good and I do think Tommy Lee Jones is a little bit underrated.  When he's a villain in this and in Blown Away, I think he's really good.  Supporting cast is also nice, Dennis Franz, John Heard, and Pam Grier are in this in minor roles.  

I dunno, its not great and its not that bad.  Maybe 2.5