Home Alone (1990) Review

HOME ALONE

**** Out of 5

Tagline- A Family Comedy Without the Family.

Release Date- November 16th, 1990

Running Time- 103-Minutes

Rating- PG

Screenplay- John Hughes

Director- Chris Columbus

Starring- Macaulay Culkin, Joe Pesci, Daniel Stern, John Heard, Robert Blossom with John Candy and Catherine O’Hara

Released in 1990 Home Alone would become one of the most popular comedies of the 90s and spawn sequels and even video games. I remember seeing Home Alone when it was released theatrically and I was 11-years old at the time and while a couple of years older than the main character it was still something I could connect with and I also even remember having the video games as well. As a kid Home Alone was easily one of my favorite comedies and I think every child kind of had that fantasy of being alone and battling monsters or this case burglars. Home Alone may not be as epic as it was in 1990, but its a film that actually stands the test of time and still makes for a really fun time no matter how old you are.

The McCallister family are heading to France over Chrustmas vacation and with a late start in the morning they rush to the airport and everything goes smoothly that is until they realize they forgot one minor detail. 8-year old Kevin (Culkin). Now home alone Kevin must defend his house from two bungling thieves.

The screenplay was written by John Hughes and at this stage of his career he kept all the trademarks that helped make him such a great writer, but he was also going in a different direction as well. While he’s best known for his teen driven films such as Sixteen Candles, the Breakfast Club and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off all, which he also directed, but starting with Plains, Trains & Automobiles he began to move away from teen films and by the 90s he was writing more family themed films. Uncle Buck in 1989 can also be seen as the transition to family themed comedies, but Home Alone is the one that really kicked it off. The script by Hughes is terrific and heartfelt and nobody can write characters like John Hughes. What makes the characters in a John Hughes film so great is they feel like real people. They aren’t perfect and are flawed, which makes them so believable. A lot of films where a child is the main character might be great for children, but can be torture for adults, but no matter how old you are Home Alone can still be enjoyable as you’re bound to find one character to relate to. Sure the script can be silly at times, but Hughes knew how to balance silly from absurd where its too far over the top. In my opinion while Hughes would still write some solid films in the 90s such as Dutch and Career Opportunities, but times were changing and with the emergence of writer/directors like Kevin Smith the new era was upon us and Hughes would stick with family friendly films for the most part with Dennis the Menace and 101 Dalmatians and by the late 90s would basically retire with only a couple of credits here and there. While certain themes may have changed Home Alone has everything that made John Hughes such an iconic writer. Characters are great and there’s always that lesson learned by the characters in the end. Another thing Hughes was masterful at was mixing comedy and drama so well and that’s very much on display here as Home Alone is both funny and touching.

Home Alone was directed by Chris Columbus who started out writing such films as Gremlins and the Goonies and made his directorial debut in 1987 with Adventures in Babysitting. Columbus also directed the Robin Williams classic Mrs. Doubtfire and would later go into direct two Harry Potter films (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets). As director Chris Columbus delivers a well paced and fun film that very much captures the spirit of the screenplay by John Hughes. Columbus gives the film a
natural flow and even the more over the top scenes fit in perfectly and work well where it doesn’t seem silly. The final act is quite hysterical and even all these years later I probably laughed just as much as when I was a child.

The cast is excellent and in general children in films tend to get on my nerves even when I was a child. But Macaulay Culkin is actually quite terrific and even though he was very young at the time he does a great job in carrying the film. Joe Pesci as Harry and Daniel Stern as Marv the bonehead thieves are a laugh riot and for me at least Home Alone works best when they’re onscreen as these are two truly great actors that aren’t afraid to be silly and really sell the final act. And the scene when Kevin puts the tarantula on Marv’s face and that scream he lets out puts me in tears laughing so hard. John Candy one of the truly great actors of his time has a bit, but highly memorable role and since Candy’s passing in 1994 comedy hasn’t been the same.

Overall Home Alone is a wonderfully funny and heartfelt film that only John Hughes could write. In my opinion Home Alone is essential christmas viewing or should I say simply essential viewing anytime of the year.

Christmas Vacation (1989) Review

CHRISTMAS VACATION

*** ½ Out of 5

Tagline- Yule Crack Up!

Release Date- December 1st, 1989

Running Time- 97-Minutes

Rating- PG-13

Screenplay- John Hughes

Director- Jeremiah S. Chechik

Starring- Chevy Chase, Beverly D’Angelo, Juliette Lewis, Johnny Galecki, Doris Roberts and Randy Quaid

Released in 1989 Christmas Vacation is the 3rd part of the popular National Lampoon’s Vacation series. By many fans of the Vacation franchise this one is considered the best and the IMDb rating comes in at a solid 7.5 just edging out the original’s 7.4. As much as I enjoyed Christmas Vacation I can’t really agree with the majority on this being the best of the series, but regardless it is still a solid and very entertaining film and is very much classic John Hughes. In some ways with the 80s ending the classic era of John Hughes ended as even at this time he was starting to move away from teen films and started to focus more on adults or adult issues and by the 90s Hughes would begin to write much more family themed comedies.

After taking a trip to Wally World than Europe the Griswold family stays home for Christmas, but are joined by their families including Cousin Eddie (Quaid). And just like how the Griswold’s vacations turn into chaos so does their Christmas gathering as whatever can go wrong often does.

The screenplay by John Hughes is well written with some truly memorable characters. In the good portion of the films Hughes wrote they all have a certain theme and you know a John Hughes film when you are one, but yet despite certain themes these films never seemed like a rehash and have their own identity, which just goes to show how great of a writer John Hughes was since other filmmakers that use a lot of the same themes it becomes tiresome and feels like the same exact script being written over and over again, but Hughes 99% of the time always made his trademarks feel fresh each time out. The screenplay for Christmas Vacation is excellent, but than again its John Hughes so its expected. The script is quite funny with some of John’s best dialogue as mentioned the characters are strong and while like many of the scripts by John Hughes it can be a little over the top, but yet it works well.

Christmas Vacation marked the directorial debut for Jeremiah S. Chechik who would go onto direct such films as Benny and Joon and Diabolique and Chechik has also directed various TV shows including the Bronx Is Burning, Gossip Girl, Chuck and Burn Notice. Sometimes filmmakers make their best film with their debut since they might take chances they normally wouldn’t with more experience. However there are also times where while the film can be well made and even a good film there might be that little something missing and for me that describes Christmas Vacation. Jeremiah S. Chechik delivers a well made and generally well paced film, but it just lacks that extra something that keeps it a good film. There are some really hysterical moments, but the production just feels a little restrained and perhaps that could be due to the PG-13 rating, but for me this one really doesn’t differ from the previous two and while the original was R-rated, European Vacation was also PG-13. While Chechik makes a fun film that’s high on the re-watch factor, but I think a director with a little more experience may have gotten a little more like even perhaps John Hughes. Regardless, Chechik delivers an entertaining film that’s essential christmas time viewing.

Overall Christmas Vacation is a highly entertaining film with a terrific cast and top notch writing from Hughes with no shortage of quotable dialogue. While I cannot rate this as highly as many seem to, but I still found the film a lot of fun. As mentioned perhaps a more seasoned director could have gotten a bit more, but what we do get is good enough.

Gremlins (1984) Review

GREMLINS

*** ½ Out of 5

Tagline- Cute. Clever. Mischievous. Intelligent. Dangerous

Release Date- June 8th, 1984

Running Time- 106-Minutes

Rating- PG

Screenplay- Chris Columbus

Director- Joe Dante

Starring- Zach Galligan, Phoebe Cates, Hoyt Axton, Frances Lee McCain, Corey Feldman

Released in 1984 Gremlins is a film I saw as a kid, but than it was years and years until I finally saw the film again. I’ve seen it on TV and watched a few minutes here and there, but it wasn’t until I bought the blu-ray I finally saw the film again in its entirety and that viewing came 30-years after the original release. There are those films you haven’t seen in ages, but as you watch it scenes start coming back to you, but than there are those films that you haven’t seen in so long that when you see it again its almost like seeing it for the first time and that’s what my reviewing of Gremlins was like. There were a couple of scenes I remembered, but I was surprised at how little memory I had whereas Gremlins 2, which I probably only saw once and that was the theatrical release, but I had more of a memory of that film. Gremlins is a film that features horror aspects, but done more in a family viewing kind of way, but there are scenes that might be a little tense for kids. Horror films that aimed to attract families were a little common in the 80s and outside of Gremlins, the Monster Squad and the Goonies are the most notable.

Gremlins was rated PG and while the film isn’t exactly graphic there is some decent amount of violence as well as I mentioned scenes that might be a little intense for kids. Apparently, Gremlins is one of the films that helped create the PG-13 rating. The Flamingo Kid was the first film to receive a PG-13, but Red Dawn would be the first film released as PG-13, which like Gremlins also came out in 1984. When Gremlins 2 came out 6-years later in 1990 it would be rated PG-13.

Billy Peltzer (Galligan) receives a Mogwai named Gizmo as a gift from his father, but there are 3 important rules. The Mogwai must be kept out of bright lights, isn’t to be fed after midnight and he must not get wet. After an accident, which water spills on Gizmo suddenly more Mogwai’s appear, but soon they turn into ugly gremlins that wreak havoc around town.

The screenplay was written by Chris Columbus who also wrote the Goonies and would direct such films as the first two Home Alone films, Mrs. Doubtfire and Adventures in Babysitting (which was his directorial debut). The script by Columbus is well written with solid characters, but the only real flaw is it does take too long for the plot to get going and despite some solid character development in the first half, Gremlins doesn’t really have a direction until the film gets going. Regardless of the issue I have Chris Columbus does deliver a highly entertaining script in particular the 2nd half with great characters.

Gremlins was directed by Joe Dante who got his start working for Roger Corman and directed the Corman produced Piranha and than would direct the Howling, which is why he got he directing job on Gremlins since producer Steven Spielberg was a fan of the Howling. I can’t say I’m the buggiest fan of Joe Dante, but he’s made some terrific films and Gremlins by many is considered his best. At 106-minutes I personally found Gremlins a little overly long, but with that said I was never bored as the pace is fairly strong, but the first half does have scenes that feel more like filler scenes. However the 2nd half is quite excellent and is filled with some truly hysterical scenes as well as some solid suspense. The highlights include the gremlins running amok in a bar where they drink beer and smoke cigarettes and another classic scene finds them being obnoxious while watching Snow White.

The cast for Gremlins is excellent with the highly underrated Zach Galligan and of course 80s dream girl Phoebe Cates. Corey Feldman also appears in a bit part as does cult actor Dick Miller. And Howie Mandel is the voice of the adorable Gizmo.

Overall Gremlins is an entertaining film that provides plenty of fun moments and while in my opinion the film doesn’t quite hold up as well for me I still enjoyed it. And come on who doesn’t love Gizmo?

Ghostbusters II (1989) Review

GHOSTBUSTERS II

**** Out of 5

Tagline- Guess Who’s Coming to Save the World Again?

Release Date- June 16th, 1989

Running Time- 108-Minutes

Rating- PG

Screenplay- Dan Aykroyd & Harold Ramis

Director- Ivan Reitman

Starring- Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Harold Ramis, Ernie Hudson and Rick Moranis

The original Ghostbusters, which was released in 1984 became a massive success pulling in roughly 242-million in the US and about 295-million totaled worldwide. That’s a whole lot of money in any era, but for 1984 its an insane amount of money and it seemed as if everyone in the world went to see Ghostbusters. Not only was it a massive hit in the box office, but it was a critical hit as well. Ghostbusters became a pop culture phenomenon that spawned an animated series and a ton of merchandise. When looking back at film in the 80s it was very much a decade of sequels and to me the biggest surprise it took 5-years until Ghostbusters II was made. When looking back at the 80s Friday the 13th, which came out in 1980 spawned 7-sequels in the 80s alone with most coming out the following year. The first Police Academy, which like Ghostbusters was released in 1984 would have a sequel every year through the 80s. A Nightmare on Elm Street another 1984 film would have a sequel in every year except 1986. Even the Halloween series, which after a few years away returned in 1988 and the 5th film came out a little less than a year later, which makes it even more surprising it took 5-years for Ghostbusters II seeing as it was far more successful than any of the films I mentioned. However by the late 80s the tide was starting to turn on sequels and 1989 saw such films as Halloween 5, Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan, A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child and Police Academy 6: City Under Siege pull in roughly half of what the previous films made. Ghostbusters II made far more than all those films combined, but was seen as a slight disappointment as Ghostbusters II pulled in about 112-million, which is far below the 242-million of the original however the sequel did make more money than the original outside of the States, which brought the worldwide total to about 215-million, which is still far below the original, but a little closer. However Ghostbusters II did open to 29-million, which was a bigger opening than the original film, but unlike the original, which spent several weeks as the number 1 film, and did the rare lose it than get it back, the sequel though didn’t quite have the same lasting power, but based on the opening the hardcore fans came out and the rest moved on. All those other films mentioned at some point had sequels, but Ghostbusters III has been just long rumored. I think Ghostbusters II perhaps waited a little too long and with the market dominated by sequels I think the audience was growing tired. Sometimes for whatever reasons a film fails to catch on if we look at John Carpenter’s the Thing and Big Trouble in Little China both films didn’t fair well despite being now seen as classics (the Thing in particular). So when it comes to Ghostbusters II I think its partly the 5-year gap as well as the market being dominated with sequel after sequel. By most Ghostbusters II is seen as inferior to the original, which is usually the case for sequels and perhaps the high expectations could have led to a drop, but over the years Ghostbusters II while still considered inferior to the original has found an audience and is looked upon to some degree as a classic in its own right.

5-years after the events of the original the Ghostbusters business is going bankrupt due to the amount of lawsuits filed on them. But soon they’re forced to get back together and save New York once again.

The best thing about Ghostbusters for a studio is its easy to turn into a franchise. There’s so many directions that the sequel could have gone. The screenplay by Dan Aykroyd & Harold Ramis is quite solid and while not as strong as the original it’s still quite effective. With character development out of the way there’s more that can be done with the characters, but don’t take that wrong as characters are as well written with plenty of depth like the original and all the characters have some truly great moments. The story does take a little longer to get going and perhaps a little more could have been done with it. I liked the idea and I liked the script, but with a 5-year gap one would think Aykroyd & Ramis could have done a bit more with the concept in regards to maybe expanding on the idea. To some degree it does follow the structure to the original film and doesn’t mix things up as much as I’d hoped. Regardless of a couple of issues Aykroyd & Ramis are very talented and they deliver a fun and well written script that had potential for more, but with that said Aykroyd & Ramis Ghostbusters II is terrifically written, funny and has great character moments.

Once again Ivan Reitman returns to direct and Reitman while a highly successful filmmaker is also someone I find underrated as he’s made some wonderful films. Reitman made his directorial debut in 1971 with a film called Fox Lady and he also directed a film back in 1973 called Cannibal Girls, which starred Eugene Levy and Andrea Martin from Black Christmas. Reitman’s breakthrough film was with Meatballs in 1979 and was the first time he worked with Bill Murray and Harold Ramis. He would than go onto direct the classic Stripes and in 1984 with Ghostbusters he would have his biggest success. Reitman also directed the comedy classics Twins and Kindergarten Cop both starring Arnold Schwarzenegger. Ivan Reitman had also done some prolific work as a producer as he worked with David Cronenberg on such films as Shivers and Rabid. He also produced Animal House, Beethoven and Private Parts. As mentioned Ivan Reitman is a very popular filmmaker, but in my opinion deserves more credit. With Ghostbusters II he does play things a little safe, but he delivers a well paced film that’s high on the fun factor throughout. Pacing is quite strong, which also has a lot to do with watching these terrific actors. While Ghostbusters II is an excellent film, but sure a bit of a letdown, but Reitman delivers another solid film in his excellent career.

In someways Ghostbusters II is a bit of a letdown after the terrific original and again it doesn’t really expand on the concept as much as maybe it could have. The original film holds up quite well and for me personally it isn’t quite as epic as it was in the 80s, but I still however very much enjoy it. Ghostbusters II is also very good and one of the stronger sequels in regards of standing proudly next to the original. Ghostbusters II has all the right elements to be a fun ride and it brings back the core of the cast and the director and unlike the majority of modern Hollywood blockbusters Ghostbusters II delivers the good even if it plays it a bit safe. Despite the advancements of technology the special F/X in both Ghostbusters movies hold up quite well, which is also assisted on how its was filmed and edited and sure certain F/X show their age, but revisiting the series I was quite surprised by how terrific both films hold up with the F/X. Overall Ghostbusters II is a solid and highly entertaining film and the cast really elevates the film and Rick Moranis again steals the show. Ghostbusters II isn’t as good as the original, but to be honest it really isn’t far behind it either. Again I’ll say it I think a little more could have been done with the concept, but regardless Ghostbusters II is a terrific and fun filled movie with great performances from the cast. There’s been other films that grossed about what Ghostbusters did only to see the sequel drop to roughly what Ghostbusters II made, but the fact the original film became such a pop culture phenomenon I suppose the studio expected around the same box office return. Though I still find it odd that despite the drop Ghostbusters II was still a massive hit, but yet nothing ever came about making another one.

Ghostbusters II was released on blu-ray in a single disc edition as well as packed with the original for the 30th-Anniversary of the original and 25th for the sequel. Ghostbusters II has a brand new 4k scan and all I can say is wow. The HD presentation on both films are incredible and they look like newer films. Everything is natural with no use of DNR. In my opinion the Ghostbusters films might be the best looking blu-ray’s for an 80s film I’ve seen. Actually they look so good its almost distracting as I’m thinking the whole time how beautiful the HD quality is. The colors jump right off the screen and detail is amazing.

Die Hard (1988) Review

DIE HARD

**** Out of 5

Tagline- Twelve Terrorists. One Cop. The Odds Are Against John McClane. That’s Just the Way He Likes It.

Release Date- July 15th, 1988

Running Time- 132-Minutes

Rating- R

Screenplay- Jeb Stuart & Steven E. de Souza

Director- John McTiernan

Starring- Bruce Willis, Bonnie Bedelia, Reginald VelJohnson, Paul Gleason and Alan Rickman

Released in 1988 Die Hard became not only one of the most successful action films, but one of the most influential and along with Lethal Weapon shaped the 80s and 90s action film and even in the following decades these two films are still influencing filmmakers. I always preferred Lethal Weapon, but Die Hard is no doubt one of the greats and I know this is a cliched saying, but they truly don’t make them like this anymore. Action films have become nothing except big explosions with little story and even less character development. If only more filmmakers would utilize the story and character aspects of Die Hard the action genre would be far better off. Die Hard actually quite an interesting journey to the screen as its based off a novel Nothing Lasts Forever, which was written by Roderick Thorp. In 1966, Thorp wrote the novel the Detective, which was turned into a movie by the same name in 1968 and starred Frank Sinatra. Nothing Lasts Forever was first published in 1979 and was a sequel to Thorp’s novel the Detective. There was an attempt to adapt Nothing Lasts Forever into a film, but nothing came about due to Sinatra passing on it. Nothing Lasts Forever was than adapted to be Commando 2, but when Arnold Schwarzenegger passed on the project it was rewritten into Die Hard. The script for Die Hard takes the basic premise of the novel, but seeing as the novel is a sequel and Die Hard its own films obviously changes has to be made. However a lot of aspects of the film remain true to the novel. Many actors were offered the role of John McClane with all passing until Bruce Willis accepted and at the time Willis was starring on the TV show Moonlighting and while a TV star he wasn’t a bankable film star and that all changed after Die Hard as Bruce Willis became one of the most successful film stars and became one of the top action film stars along with Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

John McClane (Willis) an NYPD cop arrives in Los Angeles to visit his wife over Christmas at the Nakatomi plaza where she works. A terrorist group led by Hans Gruber (Rickman) take control of the plaza and take hostages including McClane’s wife. Now its up to McClane to save the day.

The screenplay was written by Jeb Stuart & Steven E. de Souza and its a truly great script. Die Hard is well plotted, but its the characters that drive the film and with such a great cast we get some of the most memorable characters. Stuart & de Souza give the characters their own identity and depth as almost all the characters have these great character moments and I really can’t think of many films that had the amount of characters Die Hard does and almost every single one of them have depth. While well plotted Die Hard as mentioned isn’t driven by it, but everything here is so well written that it adds depth to everything here. This is how you write an action film and the script by Jeb Stuart & Steven E. de Souza should be studied on how to structure an action film.

Die Hard was directed by John McTiernan who made his directorial debut with Nomads in 1986 and would than go into direct such films as Predator, Hunt for the Red October, the Thomas Crown Affair and McTiernan would also return to the Die Hard series with the 3rd film Die Hard with a Vengeance. John McTiernan has made some truly great films in his career and looking up his filmography he’s had plenty of success with perhaps the only real dud being Rollerball, but despite the success he’s had and despite what some hail as the greatest action film ever made with Die Hard he is also vastly underrated. As mentioned along with Lethal Weapon, Die Hard since its original release date has become the most influential action film. A lot of people dub Die Hard the ultimate guy film, which is fair, but in my opinion undersells the film as when I think of the so called guy film I think mindless fun and Die Hard isn’t just some mindless action film. It’s driven by characters and story and the action doesn’t really kick into roughly the 20-minute mark and even after that there’s still plenty of character moments to go along with the action. Die Hard is one of my favorites and while I personally wouldn’t rate it as my favorite action film it is however the one with the best structure on how to make an action film. Despite the 132-minute running time Die Hard is well paced and often quite exciting and McTiernan delivers some epic action scenes and Die Hard isn’t just a great action film, but a great film.

What I love most about Die Hard is the truly terrific cast and one you would never see in a modern Hollywood film as nobody was a big Hollywood star, but instead Die Hard is basically filled with truly great character actors. Paul Gleason was in my opinion one of the very best actors of his time and he’ll be forever know as Richard Vernon in the Breakfast Club. Reginald VelJohnson who basically steals the show is another great character actor who is best known for playing Carl Winslow on the sitcom Family Matters. Than add in such actors as William Atherton, Clarence Gilyard Jr, Hart Bochner and Robert Davi and Grand L. Bush who would both appear together again in Maniac Cop 3: Badge of Silence along witn Paul Gleason and what you have is again a truly great cast of terrific actors. Alan Rickman made his theatrical debut with Die Hard and as mentioned at this time Bruce Willis was a TV star and any films he’d done prior he either had a small role or the film wasn’t very successful. Die Hard was a summer blockbuster and no way in the modern era would you have a cast made up of character actors regardless of talented they are and the hero and villain played by actors who aren’t proven movie stars. Die Hard is a wonderful film in terms of writing and directing, but the cast also helps elevate it. The cast may not be made up of big time Hollywood actors, but you’ll be hard pressed to find a better cast as every actor makes their part memorable including De’voreaux White as Argyle who doesn’t have a lot of screen time, but makes so much out of it Argyle was one of the best characters in the film.

Overall Die Hard is a truly wonderful action film with an amazing cast and memorable characters. Die Hard is not only a classic action film, but a classic film and this one forever changed the action film.

Christmas Themed Reviews Vol. 3

Once again the entire month of December will be films of various genres set on or around Christmas.

Not sure what I’ll post just yet. But Ghostbusters II, Die Hard, Christmas Vacation and Home Alone are the only for sure ones at the moment. If I have time perhaps a couple of TV episodes set on or around Christmas.

House of Long Shadows (1983) Review

HOUSE OF LONG SHADOWS

** Out of 5

Tagline- Room for Every Nightmare. A Nightmare in Every Room

Release Date- June 17th, 1983

Running Time- 102-Minutes

Rating- PG

Screenplay- Michael Armstrong

Director- Pete Walker

Starring- Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, Desi Arnaz, John Carradine, Sheila Keith

Released in 1983 House of Long Shadows is a semi-forgotten film, but has retained some notoriety due to the cast, which includes iconic horror actors Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and John Carradine. The cast also includes the wonderful Sheila Keith who sadly seems sort of forgotten. Lastly, House of Long Shadows was also the last film directed by Pete Walker best known for his genre classics House of Whipcord and Frightmare, which are my two favorite Pete Walker films. With such a great cast, perhaps the best casting for any horror picture and a great filmmaker in Pete Walker, House of Long Shadows should have been epic and the film was also produced by Yoram Globus & Menahem Golan, but instead the end result was simply an average film that was a nice attempt, but ultimately extremely lackluster.

House of Long Shadows is in many ways a throwback to the Universal horror films of the 30s and is often compared to the James Whale classic the Old Dark House, which was later remade by William Castle in the 60s and Castle was a filmmaker Vincent Price had plenty of success with. Unlike many of Pete Walker’s films of the 70s, which could be graphic at times and of course 80s horror were often quite gory, House of Long Shadows relies more on atmosphere just like the horror films of the 30s. As much as I love 80s horror I also adore horror films from the 30s as it was a much simpler time. I have zero problems with nudity and gore, but when it becomes a cheap gimmick to cover up subpar filmmaking I do have as issue so I appreciate what Pete Walker was attempting it just again was lackluster. Getting a copy of House of Long Shadows is quite difficult and pricy. I saw the film on Amazon Instant Video and it had to be from a VHS since at times its far too dark to make anything out and maybe in someways it also hindered my enjoyment. As I read reviews I see a lot of perfect scores or nearly perfect and while I understand we’re all gonna have a different opinion, but would you really rate this as highly as something as Dawn of the Dead? When a film is long OOP or a seldom seen film it seems to me as if reviews are often overly kind and I can’t help except think people rate films like this higher since they’re tough to come by and aren’t well known.

Kenneth Magee (Arnaz) a successful author makes a 20-grand bet with his publisher he can write a classic novel in only 24-hours. He heads off to a remote manor to get started, but upon arriving he finds the manor inhabited by a strange family harboring a dark secret.

House of Long Shadows is based off a novel from 1913 titled Seven Keys to Baldpate by Earl Derr Biggers and is also based off a play by George M. Cohan of the same name as the novel. Since I never read the novel or saw the play I have no idea how true to the script sticks to the original material. The Old Dark House was also based off a novel from 1928 titled Benighted by J.B. Priestly. So I really couldn’t tell you if any of the novels are a like or if House of Long Shadows has more in common with one than the other. I love the idea behind the film, but the script by Michael Armstrong just isn’t as interesting as the plot. Characters are fairly decent, but also not interesting enough to carry the film despite having a truly terrific group of actors. I think many of the problems of the film boil down to the script. While not poorly written per se its just again never as interesting as the plot.

Director Pete Walker gained a cult following with his films in the 70s such as Schizo, House of Whipcord, Frightmare, the Confessional and the Comeback. House of Long Shadows was quite a departure from those films for two reasons. The first being all those films have a decent amount of violence however they aren’t body count films and Pete Walker really knows how to stage a great death scene and along with Dario Argento are my two favorites in that regard. Walker is also no stranger to controversy as such films as House of Whipcord, the Confessional and Home Before Midnight caused a bit of a stir and if released in modern times they would still be controversial in particular the last two films mentioned. House of Long Shadows however features very little violence and there’s no controversy either. Most of the deaths aren’t seen and the most graphic is a woman who has her face burnt, but we don’t actually see it happen we just see her face afterwards, but its nothing graphic and the PG rating is warranted unlike films such as Jaws and Grizzly, which are quite violent for PG rated films (of course those two as well as this came before PG-13 it wasn’t until 1984 with Red Dawn though Red Dawn was the 2nd film rated PG-13, but first to be released). As much as I like Pete Walker his films can at times have some pacing issues and I found the pace to House of Long Shadows quite slow and while there is some decent suspense at times this would easily rate at my least favorite film he’s made with this being the 6th film I’ve seen by him.

The cast as I mentioned was terrific and Price, Cushing, Lee and Carradine like always are wonderful too bad they didn’t have better material. Sheila Keith at least to me is just as iconic in the horror genre as the other actors in the film and she deserves far more attention than she gets. Her performances in Pete Walker’s other films such as House of Whipcord, Frightmare and the Comeback are amazing. Desi Arnaz, Jr is of course the son of Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz and he’s gotten some negative reviews here, but I think they’re off base as he was actually quite good and it really isn’t fair to compare him to the other actors as they’re icons for a reason.

Overall I really wanted to like House of Long Shadows as a fan of the cast and director, but after a decent start I found the middle sections a little too slow before getting better in the final act, but by this time the film lost me. Perhaps on another viewing I’ll warm up to it, but I just wasn’t feeling it. As I mentioned this was the final film made by Pete Walker.

Women in Cages (1971) Review

WOMEN IN CAGES

*** ½ Out of 5

Tagline- White Skin on the Black Market

Release Date- October 20th, 1971

Running Time- 81-Minutes

Rating- R

Screenplay- James Watkins & David R. Osterhout

Director- Gerardo de Leon

Starring- Judith Brown, Roberta Collins, Jennifer Gan, Sofia Moran and Pam Grier as Alabama

Women in Cages released in 1971 is one of the early examples of Women in Prison movies a style of film that became quite popular in the 70s before starting to fade away in the 80s like many exploitation films. While this one may not feature the violence and sleaze this type of film is known for it still succeeds on both levels. It’s not always about showing the most, but how it’s done. The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a great example of a movie that is really graphic yet features very little gore, but yet many recall gore scenes from the movie since it was done in such a graphic way you think you are seeing more than you actually are. Women in Cages may not be the holy grail of the WIP movie, but in my opinion it’s one of the essentials of this style of film.

Women in Cages was produced by the legendary Roger Corman and if you’re a fan of his work you should know what to expect here. This film is from an era gone by and I really have a fondness for these films and the 70s rates as my favorite time for film of any genre, but the exploitation flick was just never the same after the 70s even if some good ones were produced in the 80s. Women in Cages only has a 4.3 rating on IMDb and while sure this isn’t exactly filmmaking at its very best it still has something to offer and what really makes this film for me is Pam Grier as the cruel Alabama. I’m a big fan of Pam Grier and this was a great performance and she looked stunning as well.

Carol Jeffries (Gan) is an American woman staying in the Philippines and is sent to prison after being set up by her boyfriend Rudy (Charles Davis) on a drug charge. Carol kind of naive is subjected to extreme conditions in the prison run by the cruel Alabama (Grier). While in prison Rudy gives Stoke (Collins) her fix and in return he wants her to kill Carol. Tired of the harsh conditions Carol hatches a plan with her cell mates to attempt to escape from prison, which many have tried before, but all have thus far failed.

The screenplay by James Watkins & David R. Osterhout is a lot of fun filled with entertaining characters and while most may not have a lot of depth they however for the most part add to the film. The plotting is fairly decent and I doubt people go into movies like Women in Cages for a deep and powerful script, but all things considered its a fairly well written exploitation film.

Director Gerardo de Leon delivers a fairly well paced film though despite running at only 81-minutes there are a couple of sluggish moments. As I mentioned this isn’t the most graphic WIP film in terms of violence or sexuality, but it has a good amount of both. The film also sort of has a mean spirit behind it as well. The final act is where a bulk of the action scenes take place and while fun, De Leon doesn’t stage them as strongly as other films. Odds are Women in Cages would have been better off with someone like Jack Hill, but when all is said and done Gerardo de Leon delivers a fun and somewhat mean spirited film.

Fans of 70s exploitation films and WIP films will no doubt recognize a good portion of the cast. While the writing for the characters like I said does lack depth, but the cast more than makes up for it. All the women are excellent in their roles however its Pam Grier as Alabama that elevates this film. I already mentioned Pam, but she deserves a ton of praise. This may not be Pam Grier’s best film, but a case can be made for this being her best performance. She’s a terrific and stunningly beautiful actress and she’s a joy to watch here.

Overall Women in Cages is a solid WIP film and while not the holy grail of this genre I do think its an essential. With a great cast and a mean spirited tone make Women in Cages a fun film with a very downbeat closing shot.

Comedy of Terrors (1964) Review

COMEDY OF TERRORS

*** ½ Out of 5

Tagline- Your Favorite Creeps Are Together Again!

Release Date- January 22nd, 1964

Running Time- 84-Minutes

Rating- NR

Screenplay- Richard Matheson

Director- Jacques Tourneur

Starring- Vincent Price, Peter Lorre, Boris Karloff, Joyce Jameson and Basil Rathbone

The Comedy of Terrors apparently had a showing in 1963 before getting a theatrical release in 1964. The Comedy of Terrors mixes horror and comedy and features quite a legendary cast with Vincent Price, Peter Lorre, Boris Karloff and Basil Rathbone. I really can’t think of a horror film with a better cast as all these actors are icons and it doesn’t end there as the script was by Richard Matheson and directed by Jacques Tourneur. Comedy of Terrors has amazing talent involved and it doesn’t really disappoint either, but with such talent involved the stakes are raised. While I enjoy horror and comedy there aren’t many though that would make my top list and slapstick, which this film often goes for can be hit or miss even within the same film for me.

With his business failing Waldo Trumbull (Price) does what any good owner of a funeral parlor would do and that’s murder people to drum up business.

Richard Matheson is perhaps best known for his novel I Am Legend and a year after this movie he’d co-write an adaption of it titled the Last Man on Earth, which starred Vincent Price. As a screenwriter Matheson’s most notable films are probably the Edgar Alan Poe adaptions directed by Roger Corman and starring Vincent Price with such films as House of Usher, Pit and the Pendulum and Tales of Terror. Richard Matheson also wrote a number of episodes of the Twilight Zone, while continuing to be a critically acclaimed author. The script for Comedy of Terrors has a simple plot, but the writing is quite sharp and often funny. Characters are terrific, which is a mixture of the writing and the actors involved. Comedy of Terrors is a well written spoof and while it can get a little too silly in spots it always remains funny.

Director Jacques Tourneur is quite an iconic horror filmmaker and its s shame he isn’t talked about more. Curse of the Demon is seen as a classic of the genre and his work with Val Lewton with Cat People, I Walked with a Zombie and the Leopard Man are some of the most influential genre films of their time. Jacques Tourneur delivers a well made and well paced film and stages some terrific comedy. The film high on camp is a joy from opening to start and for me the best moments are the ones that border slapstick, but are held back just a notch. The more over the top gags are also quite funny, but for me after a bit slapstick can get a little tiresome and while here I always found it funny I did prefer the scenes where Tourneur held back just a bit.

As mention the cast is legendary are is hands down one of my favorite casts of any genre. Vincent Price is hysterical as Waldo Trumbull and it was clear he enjoyed playing the role. Price was one of those actors that was so gifted he could even make a subpar film just a little better. My personal favorite Vincent Price film and performance was the Witchfinder General. Price’s performance with Comedy of Terrors is no doubt one of my very favorites as well. He’s simply a joy to watch here and his work with Peter Lorre is a riot. Boris Karloff is one of my all time favorite actors and his performance in the 1931 version of Frankenstein despite having no dialogue is in my opinion amongst the greatest performances ever. At this stage in his career, Karloff was making a bit of a comeback thanks to Roger Corman, but his health was starting to decline and originally Karloff was cast as Mr. Black, but due to his arthritis he wasn’t able to play the demanding role and Basil Rathbone took over the part and Karloff took the role of Amos Hinchley. Karloff’s comedic timing is excellent and I’ve seen many Karloff films and this could very well make my top 5 Karloff performances. Basil Rathbone is best known for his performances as Sherlock Holmes, but he’s no stranger to the horror genre and one of his most notable horror roles came in Son of Frankenstein, which also happened to be the last time Boris Karloff played the Monster. Rathbone is simply outstanding in a wild performance as John Black. Like a true pro Rathbone and the rest of the cast aren’t afraid to ham it up.

Overall the Comedy of Terrors is a terrific film that’s quite funny throughout and while the comedy can be a little too over the top for me at times I never lost interest. As mentioned when you have the talent of the highest level involved the stakes are raised so I can see how some might be letdown, but with strong writing and directing a cast that is clearly having fun working with each other the Comedy of Terrors delivers the goods.

The Big Doll House (1971) Review

THE BIG DOLL HOUSE

*** ½ Out of 5

Tagline- Soft Young Girls Behind Hard Prison Bars

Release Date- April 30th, 1971

Running Time- 94-Minutes

Rating- R

Screenplay- Don Spencer

Director- Jack Hill

Starring- Judy Brown, Roberta Collins, Pam Grier, Brooke Mills, Pat Woodell and Sid Haig as Harry

Released in 1971 The Big Doll House by many is considered the film that started the new wave of Women in Prison films that were highly successful in the 1970s before fading by the end of the decade, but like always filmmakers will try and squeeze every last dollar out of something and a few were made in the 80s, but most weren’t very successful and the WIP film became a thing of the past. The Big Doll House wasn’t the first WIP film nor was it the first to feature the things these films would be known for. In 1969 99 Women was released, which was directed by Jess Franco and in someways that’s the film that started many of the cliches, but despite coming first it was the Roger Corman produced WIP films that kick started the genre and the Big Doll House is pretty much the film that got this genre going.

The Corman produced WIP films feature some violence as well as nudity, but they aren’t very sleazy with perhaps Women in Cages being a slight exception. That may have been a little sleazier than the others, but nowhere near the level these films would later reach. Filmmakers such Jesùs Franco & Oswaldo de Oliveira would very much up the ante on the sleaze factor, but while the Corman WIP films may be a little tame when compared to such films as Franco’s Sadomania or Oliveira’s Bare Behind Bars, they still very much deliver what fans of the WIP films expect to see and even if they lack the graphic nudity on sex they are in my opinion the best the WIP genre has to offer. The Big Doll House was a solid if not flawed film and my personal favorite film of this genre would be the sequel of sorts the Big Bird Cage (released the following year in 1972), but the Big Doll House is still a highly entertaining film.

Unhappy with the harsh conditions where torture is frequent and wanting freedom several women hatch an escape plan from the prison they’re being held in.

The screenplay was written by Don Spencer and its light on plot as the escape plan doesn’t enter to about the midway mark. The beauty of the WIP film is plot isn’t really required, but in someways it does hinder the script as it has no real identity or point for that matter. However the Big Doll House is still fairly well written as it features fun and highly entertaining characters (the excellent cast helps that) and the script is just a lot of fun even if it does feel like random scenes were written. Despite the flaws I have no issues with Spencer’s script that keeps me from enjoying it as again despite the lack of plot its made up for in the fun factor.

Director Jack Hill crafts a fun film that at 94-minutes does feel a little overly long due to the lack of plot, but to Hill’s credit he manages to always keep the film fun despite the pacing issues. While the film features all the aspects the WIP film is known for it also is a little restrained in content, which is why the Corman productions are my favorite of this genre. As much as I enjoy the WIP film and love the exploitation film as a whole too many filmmakers tried to up the ante by adding graphic nature, which I have zero problems with, but at times it did feel a little forced. That’s not to say the Big Doll House was tame, but Hill never takes the film too far to where it even becomes absurd like Franco’s Sadomania (which however was a blast). The Big Doll House very much earns its R-rating and again the film isn’t tame, but Jack Hill is a good enough filmmaker that he doesn’t need to resort to shock value for the sake of it. Overall Jack Hill delivers an excellent and fun film and while I did have issues with the pacing at times as I mentioned I was never bored though. This was Hill’s first WIP film and in my opinion he would master it with the Big Bird Cage, but when all is said and done flaws and all, Jack Hill delivers an exploitation classic.

The Big Doll House features a terrific cast and fans of 70s exploitation films should recognize most of the cast. Judy Brown also appeared in Women in Cages and her last credit was in 1986 with an episode of Falcon Crest. Roberta Collins also appeared in Women in Cages and appeared in another Corman WIP film Caged Heat and was also in Death Race 2000. Of course Pam Grier and Sid Haig need no introduction. The Big Doll House was Pam Grier’s first starring role. The previous year in 1970 she had a role in Beyond Valley of the Dolls, which was written by Roger Ebert. Grier would work with Jack Hill several times on such films as Coffy and Foxy Brown and the Big Bird Cage all of those, which also starred Sid Haig and they would later both appear together in the Tarantino classic Jackie Brown. Sid Haig also starred in Spider Baby, which was Jack Hill’s directorial debut.

Roberta Collins sadly passed away on August 16th, 2008 at the age of 63 from an accidental overdose from alcohol and drugs. After the suicide of her son she fell into a deep depression.

Overall the Big Doll is a highly entertaining film with an excellent cast and while the lack of plot in someways does hinder the film it is made up for in the fun factor. The following year with the Big Bird Cage, which is a sequel of sorts (though no connection between the films) is for me the better of the two, but the Big Doll House still isn’t to be missed for fans of the WIP film.

The song in the opening Long Time Woman is sung by Pam Grier. Not only incredibly beautiful and a great actress, but a very good singer as well.