Peeping Tom - 1960

Peeping Tom is often mentioned alongside Psycho, and given this and the other things this movie revolutionized, it's amazing that I haven't ever seen it.

As the movie begins it's a revolution right from the get go. We see, first person, as a killer approaches and hires a prostitute and hires her to take the cameraman up to her room. Then, we watch as an entire sequence happens as the killer goes after her. The very first first-person thing done in a horror sense, and it's a kill scene nonetheless.

The killer in question is Mark Lewis. He's a private, quiet, solitary man living a life of relative obscurity in a camera related position on films and he also has a side hustle as a shooter of erotic photographs. He is a maniac, through and through, and we are curious as to the nature of his madness. The movie puts a love interest in his life in the form of Helen, a curious next-door neighbor. Things go from there as he murders people, as the courts the young woman, and as various other things happen.

THis movie is innovative, enjoyable, and well paced. The acting is good, the leading man is really great as is the girl interest. The obvious comparison here is Peeping Tom versus Psycho. While Psycho has a lot more suspense, this is a much more human story. Yes, this is thinly written, but somehow it's pulled off very well. Psycho obviously wins out, but this is an overlooked entry and a hot contender.

I'll give this one 4 stars.

War of the Gargantuas - 1966

My library here has a little "new to the library" section on their website which has stuff cycling through whenever you go to their homepage. On that, out of nowhere one day, appeared War of the Gargantuas. I clicked on it and hit reserve without thinking. It had been a while, thought I. It might be fun.

Yeah, I've seen this before. I don't know which kaiju films I've seen and which I haven't seen, but this one I know I've seen. I was always interested in the more obscure, unheard of entries to any franchise. I love things like the two Bond films with Timothy Dalton, I love the bizarre unheard of crossover movies that exist later on in franchises when they get weird. I love things that exist in a state of obscurity, and appeal to little. I think it's something about the process of finding a "hidden gem" which people don't know about. That is a really cool prospect to me.

War of the Gargantuas was apparently a inspiration for Tim Burton, Quentin Tarantino, Brad Pitt, and many others. Why, is anyone's guess. At this point, 12 years had passed since Godzilla had come out, and there were about 6-7 Godzilla films out. There had been a cesspool of other kaiju films in Japan, and shit, I count a quick 18 kaiju films in total released by this time. This was one of many released in the year 1966, the others being Ebirah Horror of the Deep, Gamera Versus Barugon, and all three Daimajin films.

Given the quick cluster of kaiju films around this time, for me, it's very hard for them to stand out. Far as I can tell, Gargantuas was made to introduce Frankenstien to the kaiju theater. Originally, it was going to be Frankenstien in the King Kong Versus Godzilla film. The original Gargantuas film was called Frankenstein Conquers the World, and I believe the Mary Shelley estate stepped in and told them not use the name anymore. Or something like that. Hence the Gargantuas name in this film. Ah, who knows, who cares.

I didn't quite enjoy this film. it felt like every other. First they try to kill the creature, then that doesn't work, then there's two of them with one being good and one being evil and mankind thrown in being all scared. People do stuff, things get destroyed. Obvious miniatures are thrown around. Eventually, there's big kaiju fights and the film ends. Yup, seen this before.

It's not my favorite. 2 average kaiju film stars.

If... - 1968

I've wanted to watch this well known Malcolm McDowell film for a long time, and I found it free on Amazon. So, I finally got around to it.

This is the film role which got Malcolm McDowell noticed by Stanley Kubrick and ended up getting McDowell into A Clockwork Orange. This film is also well known for being revolutionary in being rated X when it came out, for bringing on controversy with the British Ratings Board, and for being called everything from vile, to disgusting, to completely godsend. Such a film likely can and will be divisive, and I went in without knowing the first thing about it.

About 35 or 45 minutes into If, I paused it and exited the Amazon player. I said aloud "Does this movie have a plot?" From IMDb: "In this allegorical story, a revolution led by pupil Mick Travis takes place at an old established private school in England." And yes, in the end, that is what this film is about. If you sit through about 90 minutes, that does happen in the last 20 minutes.

The first thing I noticed about this is the bizarre, nonsensical randomness that happens. It's a halucinatory, visual film, stuffed full of bizarre artistic shots such as odd women, slightly offbeat surreality, and cryptic imagery. Although that sounds cool, you might only get one of these every 20-30 minutes, so don't get too excited. For the most part, the majority of the time, you're watching British kids wandering around, saying stuff to each other, going to school and absolutely nothing happening. Yes, this movie is VERY slow.

I didn't like If for most of the time I was watching it. I found it to be ponderous, self indulgent, and if it was supposed to be justified that the end took the angle that it did, that certainly was never explored. If leans heavily on Malcolm McDowell, which you can tell was the right move, and he fucking kills it as Mick Travis. No Malcolm, no movie in this case.

I don't know. I didn't like it when I watched it, and now the flow of it is sitting with me days later and I'm liking it more. I do wish it was at least 25 minutes shorter. You don't even meet Mick Travis until like minute 15 or so, and you don't need ANY of the stuff before he comes along.

I'll give it 3.5 stars.

The Embalmer - 1965

I just finished "watching" The Embalmer. I'll admit I paid little attention. The boxset has to have a few I don't pay attention to, otherwise I'd never get to say "I should rewatch this" after all.

I was struck early on by the fact that The Embalmer had a bit of good cinematography. That didn't last too long. Overall, it's a murder story, a mystery, a thriller I guess. It's really shitty black and white film. I always wonder about that, because there were so many color films by this point, and because even black and white films at this point looked better. But, low low budgets will bring in bad bad quality.

It was a bland, slow, talky movie from what I could tell. I texted friends about whiskey, I looked up some other stuff online, I watched the movie. It counts. It's "good enough". I don't think I missed much. 2 stars.

The Undertaker And His Pals - 1966

I'm going through the list of movies on this boxset, watching the shortest ones first. So far, I'm not finding any lurking 2 or 3 hour films thank god.

The Undertaker and His Pals. Okay, so in the title I'm guessing that they're going for an alt/comedic approach? And yes, they are...uuugh. I thought of something in the realm of comedy as I watched this, I'll explain here:
There's this idea in comedy, and I will first say I don't find it funny. It's the John Waters approach, similar in Undertaker here, and it's the idea that "gross" and "classless" is just soooooo funny. I never find this kind of comedy very funny. So your redneck or your trans actor says something gross and makes a weird face while wiping their ass with the American flag. Is that funny? No, I say no.

Undertaker follows that approach with it's comedy a lot, and when it's not doing that, it follows the same plot of The Corpse Grinders. Some guys are using dead bodies to provide food, this time it's for people instead of cats. They run a shitty greasy spoon restaurant where no one comes anyways, and they dress up in stupid costumes sometimes to chop up and kill people... yeeeeep.

The Undertaker and His Pals is a ok horror comedy with no horror and no comedy. The characters try, the movie tries and you can tell. But it's too amateur to be anything but a dumb flick. With no skin, no real development, and nothing else worth mentioning, it ends up in a weird grey middle are where I feel bad for slamming it, but I certainly didn't enjoy it. 1 star.

Guru, The Mad Monk - 1970

Well, I had to get a clunker on the new boxset eventually. Guru was pretty lame.

First of all, this is not THAT bad. It's not even 1 hour, it's amateur as fuck with terrible actors, but I am sure it has a following of cult weirdos.

Andy Milligan is yet another little known cult filmmaker in this vast movie landscape we live in. He had loose connections to Andy Warhol, he made off off off Broadway plays that got him into making horror, and these eventually had followings.

Guru is about what one would expect given this knowledge. Terrible actors delivering awful dialogue as they wear clearly theatrical robes... Guru borders so bad it's great territory, but I wasn't in the mood for it.

Not necessarily a clunker for everyone, Guru is about a 1.5 star film for me.

The House by the Cemetery -1981

Lucio Fulci is a well known, well documented Italian schlock hero, Zombi and all the others being true giallo classics if you love B movies.

I watched House here not knowing it was Fulci. I might have paid more attention had I known that. but, I don't think I needed to. I don't feel like I missed much of anything.

House begins with Michael and his wife and their son Bob moving into a old Victorian house by a cemetary. The house immediately seems spooky to the wife, and son Bob begins to see a phantom girl no one else can. There's a locked basement door that's spooky, and wierd sounds coming from different corners.

The initial build being fine, we look to the end, where shit naturally gets whack. It's sheer insanity from one moment to the next, and the last 20 minutes is gold.

I think I liked this! I'm inclined to look back, I felt like I'd seen Fulci do better, but this was not a bad movie. the music, settings, camera work, nudity, practical effects, weird monster. It's all here. once the monster really shows up, there was no where else I wanted to be.

I'll give this one 4 stars.

Death Warmed Up - 1981

Sometimes you can just tell when a movie has a cult following. And sometimes all it needs is to be made in New Zealand.

Death Warmed Up has a plot synopsis listed on IMDb and Wikipedia. They might be accurate, for all I know. I don't remember this movie having a plot at all besides "random shit happening and characters reacting". In the beginning of this movie, some guy Michael and a few of his friends are driving around and pretty soon all sorts of crazy shit is happening to them. There's a cult that's after them and pretty soon demons and such show up.

I could tell that this had a cult following because it was really over the top, really fast paced, and really stupid. I never knew what was going on, but I was entertained, and that's something.

I'm unconvinced about the plot, but it's better than a lot of movies, boxset or not. 3 stars.

Dead Ringers - 1988

I am in a rewatching marathon right now, and you know what? It's the good shit. It's not the usual rewatching of stupid fluff that I rewatch for god knows what reason. I'm reawatching actual good movies. Imagine that.

David Cronenberg. How did I learn of him? I have no memory of it. I have no memory of what I saw first and when. I know that I was in high school-ish age, and that I got in deep and fast, watching all of them in a line. Pretty much. It was circa 2000, and lil' Theo was slamming through Cronenberg, Lynch, Kurosawa, and many other great directors. Man, I miss those days.

Dead Ringers has Jeremy Irons as twin brothers Beverly and Elliot are both brilliant, charming, attractive gynecologists who who apparently have it all. They are young, successful, and their relationship is so close and intimate that it's scary. They live together, they practice together, they are basically one, to the point where most people cannot tell them apart. When an comes into their lives and Beverly begins to fall in love with her, it creates a rift between the two brothers, and when she introduces Beverly to drugs, things start to really go awry.

This movie is so great. It really is wordless, descriptionless, amazing and powerful. The acting is next level as Jeremy Irons creates a slight distinguishment between the twin brothers. The idea is a consuming, immediate threat as we see the quick road towards destruction we're following. The effects, the darkness of the film is complete, and we get a deep sense of foreboding along with a total mystery as to how the film will end. The music, the whole thing is in effect here, shining bright that these are people who know what the fuck they're doing.

I want to rant and rave about this. When I first saw this, I was very disturbed by it. The gyncological angle that happens in this film is really creepy. These guys invent these weird tools to the treatment of "mutant women" and I found that to be extremely disturbing. There is incredible restraint though, because this movie shows very little until the end. It's powerful when the implication of violence, horror, and the unnerving is worse that the actual experienced horror.

I have to rewatch M. Butterfly, Naked Lunch, and then I might be done. I would enjoy seeing History of Violence and Eastern Promises again, to see if they're better than I remember, but I'm also not gonna force it. I could rant and rave for hours, but instead I'll say it's a great film, and one of the necessary ones.

Anatomy of a Psycho - 1961

Great name for a great movie. I went on the Wikipedia just now and you know what? One big ol' name bright and center as writer: Ed Wood. Hey man, this script wasn't anything stellar, but this might still be the best thing Wood ever made?

Anatomy of a Psycho stars Darrell Howe as Chet. Chet is a tough as nails young man whose brother is sentenced to death. Chet believed the brother to be innocent, but he's the only one. His brother is put to death and soon thereafter Chet is after his revenge. Revenge against who is hard, his anger unfocused at first soon gets honed down when he finds the son of the man who was a witness against his brother.

This movie was pretty great. The dialogue is tight and to the point, and the acting elevates a simple story. Darrell Howe plays a tightly wound, flawed and deeply humane main character in Chet. They capture a huge amount of suburban anger, pent up teenage aggression, and frustration. The cops are in the mix, Chet's gang of troublemakers is there too, and the plot keeps us interested as things progress.

This story is also has the simplicity of "getting in too deep" going for it. It's really easy for these characters to spin a small lie, to deceive a little bit. But as the lies and the actions keep on stacking up, they get dug in deeper and deeper and deeper. A giant spinning top that gets out of control, we're in it as the audience, curious about the outcome.

A couple issues were present in the film, for one the script has dramatic slow downs and speeding back up. The trial towards the latter half slows things down in a huge way, and sometimes there's no point to some of the scenes. They throw in a romantic angle for Chet's sister that feels awkward and rushed, and the whole end is a bit too convoluted to be as powerful as it could have been. That said, I do think the end was refreshingly realistic in many ways.

This is a good new boxset do far! This might have the best run of films in it so far, but I better not get too optimistic huh...? Anything could await me. I'll give this one 3 stars.

Spider - 2002

I remember working at my lil' theater and having the Spider poster on the wall. I was excited because it was David Cronenberg and the title was creepy, and I was in prime Cronenberg mood at the time. I don't remember if we ever played the movie or not, but this was my introduction to it.

I remember that when I saw Spider, I was very disappointed. Now, I will also say that it is likely I partially conflated this movie with something else, some unknown "other very strange" film. I remembered Ralph Fiennes character character having gross physical deformities and being a lot more of a twisted, arcane character. I'm wondering what movie I would've confused this for that DID have the imagery I remember, because whatever that movie is I want to rewatch it too.

Spider is the story of Ralph Fiennes as a weird, mentally impaired man. He is a mystery, a mentally challenged individual but high functioning and 100% we know there is some "reason" for him acting the way he does. He arrives at a home for people with mental problems early on and makes his way towards an existence there. As the story unfolds we begin to see the genesis to his problems, how he got the way he is. Turns out his parents were having many relationship difficulties when he was young, leading towards a fight...

Spider is one of those movies where I want to go through each little plot part, not because of how interesting or cool it was, but because with the simple story outline above you might think it's about some certain thing, while it is about many other things too. It all boils down to a slow burn story of mental illness, of fucked up childhood, of many other things.

Coupled with the plot, we have a great acting by all around and some cool imagery. But overall I didn't think this was great. I guess I'm trying to remove it from the "Cronenberg filter" in my head. I'm trying to look at it like a movie, and not "a Cronenberg movie". But either way, it feels a bit incomplete. It feels a bit lacking, and not just from the vague ending. I get it, it's a dark and fragmented story open to interpretation, but it still didn't feel "all there".

Hm. I dunno. I'll give it 3 stars.