In the early days of my film fandom, there were certainly many filmmakers who names I encountered frequently. It would be years before I actually got around to watching many of Lucio Fulci's or Gregg Araki's movies but, during my teenage years, I already decided they must be up my alley. Similarly, I read a lot about Ken Russell before seeing any of his films. This was owing to the general rarity, at the time, of many of his motion pictures. It's not like you could rent “Whore” from your local Blockbuster. Luckily, with the advent of sketchy streaming sites, I was able to see the likes of “The Music Lovers,” “Listzomania,” or “Salome's Last Dance.” (Though, even now, there's about a dozen Russell movies I need to catch up with.) During his very controversial career, none of Russell's films would prove more controversial than “The Devils.” In fact, some consider this 1971 hybrid of historical biography, religious horror, and psycho-sexual melodrama among the most controversial films ever made.
As the text introduction informs us, this is a true story. Following the Thirty Years' War, Cardinal Richelieu orders Louis XIII to tear down the walls around France's cities, consolidating the different states. The King, however, previously promised the Governor of Loudun that the city would remain untouched. The Governor recently died, leaving Urbain Grandier – a beloved, handsome and sexually active, priest – as the upholder of that promise. Meanwhile, the abbess of a local convent – the hunchbacked Sister Jeanne Des Anges – develops a hysterical obsession with Grandier. Mad with jealousy after hearing Grandier has married a secret lover, Jeanne claims the priest is a sorcerer that has bewitched her. This “demonic possession” then spreads to the other nuns in the abbey, attracting much attention and giving those in power the excuse they need to remove the troublesome priest.
While the insight “The Devils” has into social issues remain startlingly relevant, I don't think this is what interested Ken Russell the most about the material. This is also a story about the horrors of sexual repression. Grandier is the closest thing the film has to a hero, due to his ability to balance his sexual desires, his religious beliefs, and his professional responsibilities. (Even then, his dick gets him in a lot of trouble.) Everyone else in the film is out-of-balance. The people of the King's court and the witchfinders the church hires are sexually depraved, hedonistic or sadistic. The nuns, and Sister Jeanne especially, attempt to repress their sexually wants. Inevitably, this boils over in hysterical displays of uncontrollable lust. They become like rabid animals, consumed by passions too long denied.
The part of Urbain Grandier was originally intended for Richard Johnson, who played the part on-stage. Instead, Ken Russell would slot his frequent leading man, Oliver Reed, into the role. This was a wise decision. Reed's raw masculine sexuality and ability to be both unhinged and dignified makes him ideal for Grandier. Vanessa Redgrave is similarly compelling as Jeanne. She is equal parts traumatized victim, conniving villain, and demented mad woman. Just about all the acting in “The Devils” is on this theatrical level. Michael Gothard, as the witchfinder Father Barre, barely hides his perverse sadistic pleasure behind a veil of righteousness. Graham Armitage' interpretation of Louis XIII is a theatrical dandy. This isn't the kind of movie you watch for subdued acting. Every performer in “The Devils” is on its page of unbridled hysteria.
The remake of “The Amityville Horror” was the first film in the series in seven years and the first theatrically released entry in twenty years. This suggest there was limited interest in “The Amityville Horror” in the 2000s. That would change soon afterwards. In-between 2005 and 2017, twelve movies with “Amityville” in the title would be released on DVD. None of these films were officially linked to the previous “Amityville” books or movies, most of them being unrelated flicks simply capitalizing on a well-known urban legend. Into this crowded market place, Dimension attempted to release a found footage sequel called “Amityville: The Lost Tapes.” Once Franck Khalfoun, of the acclaimed “Maniac” remake, came on-board, the new film mutated into a traditional narrative feature. I was hopeful Khalfoun would bring something special to the material but, by the time I finally saw “Amityville: The Awakening,” it was clear this was another generic entry in the misbegotten series.
Belle is not your typical teenage girl. Her twin brother, James, has been a bed-bound invalid for years, following an accident. This has put a huge strain on Belle's relationship with her mom, who is obsessed with the unlikely possibility James will get “better.” The family – also including an aunt and a little sister – move into 112 Ocean Avenue in Amityville, Long Island. Belle is initially unaware of the home's notorious history but her new friends quickly make her aware of it. At the same time, James' condition begins to improve. When paired with frightening visions and nightmares, Belle begins to suspect the notorious home's evil spirit is coming to possess to James' body.
As potentially interesting as “Amityville: The Awakening” might be, the execution is utterly uninspired. This is another stock-parts horror flick, filled with many of the worst cliches of the genre. There's multiple jump scares, spooky faces appearing in mirrors or windows suddenly. Loud shrieks on the soundtrack are paired with these images. Once again, the sound design is way overdone, with crackling noises and lumbering music heard during every minute. Fake-out dream sequences happen several time. As a horror movie, this is pretty lame, underwhelming in every way. There's no indication of the stylish direction Khalfoun brought to his “Maniac.” The film pauses to mock the 2005 remake – or at least crack an in-joke about Khalfoun's last movie being a remake – but ultimately isn't much better than it.
Ultimately, the story around “Amityville: The Awakening's” release proves more interesting than the movie itself. Filmed in 2014, the movie's release date would be pushed back five different times. This was mostly a result of the turmoil surrounding the Weinstein Brothers – the owners of Dimension Films – though the movie was also extensively re-edited after negative test screenings. This shifting went on for three whole years before the film was released for free on, of all platforms, Google Play. That seems like an awful lot of effort for a mediocre new installment in a long-in-the-tooth series that not a soul was demanding. When I first saw it, I rated “Amityville: The Awakening' extremely lowly. After watching my way through the rest of the series, I like it a little more. It's still pretty shitty but at least it's less aggressively bad than the remake. [5/10]
Last year, I reviewed an episode of “Thriller” adapted from a story by Robert E. Howard. This year, I settled on an episode written by another great pulp horror author: Robert Bloch. “The Grim Reaper” revolves around a disturbing painting of the hooded, skull-faced spectre of death himself. The artist who created the painting committed suicide immediately upon completing it. Now, the scythe inside the painting is said to bleed, an omen that someone near-by is about to die. The painting is currently in the possession of famed mystery author Beatrice Graves. Her young nephew Paul comes to visit, meeting her far younger husband. Paul explains the painting's curse but nobody takes it very seriously... Until people start to die.
Aside from Bloch's writing credit, there's another reason I wanted to watch “The Grim Reaper.” This was another early credit for William Shatner. The part of Paul plays to Shatner's strength, as he gets to explain the details of the cursed painting with all the melodramatic flare you've come to expect from him. His presentation of his bloody fingerprints are touching the painted blade are especially vivid. The painting itself, as far as paintings of the Grim Reaper go, is pretty creepy. The subplots, involving infidelity and inheritance, aren't very interesting. It's all just set-up for the inevitable betrayal, which is very easy to predict. However, the climax of “The Grim Reaper” is surprisingly creepy, the curse being fulfilled in such a way that we only see the victim's panicked face as the Grim Reaper claims them. Good stuff! Though I do wish Boris Karloff both introduced and concluded the episode, as we needed more of his sardonic words. [7/10]
The “Forever Knight: Season Three” formula of opening each episode with a little sex and violence reaches its most ridiculous form here. A woman gets a tattoo – in a bikini for some reason – before a man hits her with a crowbar and surgically removes her heart. This reminds Vetters of her uncle, who is awaiting a heart transplant. This leads her in the direction of an underground organ trafficking ring. Meanwhile, Natalie is undergoing surgery of her own, to repair a bum knee. I don't suppose those plot points will align in any way? While hunting down leads, Nick thinks back to a time in the 1800s when a friend of his asked the vampire to help retrieve a fresh heart for his near-death girlfriend.
Once again, the show is still floundering with what to do with Tracy Vetters. She's given gratuitous connection with the Case of the Week, with the subplot involving her uncle – who we never actually meet on-screen – and a truly random expertise of tattoos. She still ends up getting captured too, though she is more proactive during the finale. Her subplot, which ties in with the organ harvesting story, wraps up in a very underwhelming fashion. The flashbacks are some of the more entertaining parts of this episode. Seeing Nick involved with a mad scientist of sorts, giving him electric jolts to cure him of his condition, is fun. I was really hoping the episode would go in a more Frankensteinian direction. It's a good thing the flashbacks are cool, as Nick doesn't do much beside sit at the computer in this episode. Though there are some cute ship teases between him and Natalie, which it feels like we haven't gotten in a while. [6/10]
No comments:
Post a Comment