Last of the Monster Kids

Last of the Monster Kids
"LAST OF THE MONSTER KIDS" - Available Now on the Amazon Kindle Marketplace!

Saturday, September 27, 2025

Halloween 2025: September 27th

 
If you are a properly well-read film fan, it's a question you have an answer to. What is your favorite Hitchcock? For me, it's “Rear Window,” which I'm of the belief might be a perfect film. While a hundred different critics and scholars and cinephiles are likely to give you a different answer each time, there's one person that you probably wouldn't think to ask. Namely, because he's dead but if he was alive: What was Alfred Hitchcock's favorite film out of all his work? Luckily, people did think to ask the man that during his lifetime. While he would occasionally waffle, usually Hitch said that 1943's “Shadow of a Doubt” was his personal favorite. Perhaps not as influential as “Psycho” or “The Birds” – outside of a Chan-Woo Park homage or a remake or two – it is nevertheless recognized as a masterpiece by this most lauded of directors. 

In the sunny, idyllic town of Santa Rosa, California lives the Newton family. Among Joseph and Emma's three kids, is the teenage Charlotte. She is so-named for Emma's brother, whom she refers to as Uncle Charlie. The same uncle arrives unexpectedly at the family's home. He brings many gifts with him, including an emerald ring for his niece. Shortly afterwards, two mysterious men appear at the home, claiming they are there to document the average American family. They seem very interested in Uncle Charlie, however, and Charlotte correctly deduces that they are detectives. The young girl soon arrives at another conclusion: That her uncle is a notorious serial killer known as the Merry Widow Murderer, who have left a trail of strangled old ladies across the country. Uncle Charlie realizes quickly that his niece has discovered his secret, a tense game of wits unfolding between them. 

When we are first introduced to the Newton family and the town of Santa Rosa, they both seem so delightful as to be out of a classic sitcom. Dad is easy-going, Emma is a devoted stay-at-home mom, Middle child Ann is a perfectly precocious young know-it-all while tiny Roger is a typically adorable little boy. Young Charlie emerges as the purest figure in the home, a bright-eyed young woman whose endless optimism and light-hearted wit is irrepressible. Teresa Wright is so charming and effortless in the role that you completely buy into this idea as well. However, like all innocent ages, it will come to an end. “Shadow of a Doubt” is about a girl realizing that the world can be a dark and deceptive place. Moreover, it's a film about how the people we trust and love the most can be the ones with the most unsettling secrets. A quiet tension emerges throughout “Shadow of a Doubt,” always backing away at the last minute from outright saying if Uncle Charlie is a remorseless serial killer or not. As more evidence seems to pile up, there is some degree of doubt. Surely, the young girl is trying to rationalize, her Uncle Charlie can't be a killer? We have clear answers before the end but the presence of the suggestion, the creditable idea that your personal hero could be a monster, is enough to cast a shadow over the young girl's life. 

The apparent ambiguity in Uncle Charlie's guilt is not ambiguous at all. He's introduced fleeing from detectives. He cuts out the article about the crimes from the family newspaper. He rants about how old widows disgusts him, his hands curling into strangulating claws as he does. After someone else is seemingly identified as the killer, it still does nothing to block the obvious truth: Uncle Charlie is the Merry Widow Murderer. Despite that, young Charlotte cares about him. She wants it to not be true. Perhaps the viewer becomes so invested in the young girl's journey that we want it to be true as well. Or, perhaps, maybe Joseph Cotten is so charming in the role that we like the guy too much to want him to be the killer. Either way, the lingering close-ups on Wright's eyes as she is no longer able to deny the truth is quietly heartbreaking.

All throughout his career, Hitchcock returned to the idea of a likable monster. He delighted in making the audience sympathize with definitely or potentially homicidal mad men. Sometimes via misdirection, as with the apparent Jack the Ripper in “The Lodger.” Sometimes it was by making them pathetic victims of their own psychosis, as with Norman Bates. Sometimes it was because they were simply the most interesting character in the movie, as with “Rope” and “Frenzy.” “Shadow of a Doubt” aligns the audience's perspective with Wright's heroine, which means the viewer finds her uncle as charming as she does. The slow reveal that Charlie is a strangler, with some extremely Freudian hang-ups about the women he targets, makes him another in the Hitchcockian line of charismatic killer perverts. 

Maybe this was Hitchcock working through his own guilt over his shitty behavior towards women. Maybe it was a way to address the latent queerness in many of his films, forcing viewers to think about whether societal outsiders were true “monsters” simply because of the impulses they felt. “Shadow of a Doubt” is not that gay of a movie. Which isn't to say there aren't some perverse sexual desires hiding within. As I've said, the Charlies are close. Maybe closer than a niece and uncle usually are. When the handsome police detective played by Macdonald Carey starts to court Charlie, her uncle perceives it as a threat. Ostensibly because he doesn't want to be caught by the cops. However, the idea that he sees the detective as a romantic rival for his pretty young niece is unavoidable. The camera repeatedly focuses on Uncle Charlie's hands, often as they grasp and squeeze as if choking invisible necks. That his targets are elderly women he seems disgusted with, while exalting his young and virginal niece, feels like the man has some clear Madonna/Whore hang-ups. Which makes his murders, much like Norman Bates' two decades later, a symbolic release of his sexual desires. 

The suspense in “Shadow of a Doubt” largely comes from the question of whether Uncle Charlie will try and murder his beloved niece for knowing the truth. And if sex is death and vice versa for this man, what does that mean for his feelings towards his niece? In the climatic moments of the film, when Uncle Charlie attacks Charlotte, it plays out in the enclosed space of a train car alcove. He pins the girl into a corner. She is panicked, terrified. Repeatedly, the camera draws attention to the man's hands and the closeness of their bodies. In other words, it is a symbolic attempted rape. This sees Hitchcock taking the chemistry between Cotten and Wright, which seems chummier than familial love, and making it into a source of tension. Is Uncle Charlie going to kill his niece? Is she in love with her uncle? And, Jesus, which of those conclusions are worst? 

“Shadow of a Doubt” would be co-written with Thornton Wilder, the lauded playwright whose work often reflected an interest in the contradictions of small town American life. The story itself identifies the Newton family as the average, ideal American nuclear unit. The kids certainly are utterly adorable. The town itself seems calm, peaceful, and content. Despite that, this is the place where a serial killer is hiding. He is, in fact, hiding within that seemingly normal family. With the implied threat of incest – that most common of crimes, of betrayals, of abuses, within the outwardly normal seeming American household – always floating under the surface, that makes “Shadow of a Doubt” an examination of that darkness under the veneer of suburbia. (Or what would become suburbia anyway, as this is not exactly a post-war movie.) Once you start to realize that, the other cracks in the foundation show. The father and his weird friend's creepy fascination with true crime, the weirdness in some of the family interactions. Hitchcock, an Englishman of course, seems to have mostly warm feelings towards the American way of life here. However, the film makes it clear that these prosaic, happy locations are where acts of evil can happen as much as anywhere else. 

That same thematic thread is evident in Joseph Valentine's cinematography, as classical an example of film noir visuals as you're likely to find anywhere. The early scenes, before Charlotte begins to suspect the truth about her uncle, are more brightly lit. The small town setting is bright and warm at first. However, as the story grows darker, so does the look of the film. The sequence where Charlotte arrives in a library, to look at the complete paper containing the story on the strangler, makes it clear that the girl has passed into a more shadowy world by this point. This role of shadows is evident throughout. The symmetrical interiors of the suburban home, peering up and around staircases with slanting angles, are often enhanced with jutting, growing shadows. More than once, Charlie is surrounded by lingering darkness, hinting at his true nature. The bars of stairways or windows become metaphorical prison bars, showing the young heroine trapped in a once familiar and now alien home with a man she can no longer trust. 

Those who contend that there is any sort of meaningful barrier between the horror genre and the so-called “psychological thriller” might argue that “Shadow of a Doubt” is better classified as noir. Maybe. It's certainly a part of that tradition too. The grislier stuff is always kept off-screen. However, any movie that mines as much of a sense of unease and tension from the premise of having a murderer in your midst as this one resides comfortably within the macabre to me. (And this is a Universal Picture too, begging the question of whether I can bullshit Uncle Charlie onto my list of Universal Monsters.) As for Hitchcock himself considering this his personal fave, well, I don't know if I could put it above some of the master's other great films in my own ranking. However, it is a fantastic film, skillfully acted, beautifully shot, tensely assembled, and rich and evocative with deeper ideas. [9/10]




I've noted before that, after a certain point, it becomes tricky to tell if a movie was made with Troma or Criterion in mind as their ideal distributors. Lars Van Tier and Pier Paolo Pasolini movies have penises and bodily excretions flopping around on-screen but they're considered serious artists, status-quo challenging provocateurs. Tom Six and Srdjan Spasojevic do much the same and they are hacks only interested in shock value, whose films are made strictly for the strongest stomach-ed of Fangoria subscribers and nobody less depraved. It is not as if the high or low ends of the brow have an exclusive right to pretensions either, as insisting your video montage of dongs and dookie has some deeper meaning is a justification utilized by both schlock slinger and artsy-fartsy types. Perhaps a cinematic depiction of a ding-a-ling or poo poo is itself a neutral act, the execution determining the value of what's on-screen. Which brings me to tonight's stop on the Horror Around the World 2025 journey: “Taxidermia,” György Pálfi collection of penis jokes, puke, and body horror that was submitted as Hungary's official selection for Best International Picture at the Oscars and is described on Wikipedia as satirical, surrealist, and “a metaphorical socio-political retelling of Hungary's history.” 

“Taxidermia” follows one family through three generations. At a frozen outpost in the middle of World War II, Morosgoványi Vendel is forced to perform humiliating task for his commanding officer. Working next to a bath house, he grows increasingly sexually frustrated and desperate to find a way to relieve his urge. His off-spring, Balatony Kálmán, grows up to become a competitive speed-eater in the Soviet era. He pushes his ability to binge and purge as far as possible for the glory of his nation. At the same time, he shares a rivalry with a fellow speed-eater for both contest titles and the love of the same woman. Decades later, Kálmán has become so morbidly obsessed as to be immobile. He lives with his adult son, Lajoska, out of the back of his taxidermy shop. His father, obsessed with raising the world's heaviest house cat, belittles his son and fixates on his past glories. A horrible accident leads Lajoska to build an elaborate device to help him fulfill his grisly destiny. 

“Taxidermia” is book-ended by an art collector presenting his purchases in an exhibit. This establishes, early on, that the film's images clearly mean something. If any one idea reoccurs throughout “Taxidermia's” segments, it is consumption. In World War II, the protagonist is forced by the military system to degrade himself. His thoughts remain on sex and food, the butchering of animals being a reoccurring feature. During the sixties,  Kálmán and his wife – also a competitive eater – are seen shoveling pork and beans into their mouths out of red star shaped trough. The act of eating itself has become part of the national propaganda machine. In the final third, bodies are hollowed out, put on display, and sold as a product. Presumably because Hungary is now a capitalistic nation in a post-Soviet age? While Pálfi's film is clearly reflecting specifically Hungarian thoughts and feelings, its themes are also universal. We are all at the mercy of elaborate systems of control, all of us subjected to having our substance ground into more feed for this machine we call society.

The method Pálfi mostly uses to convey these ideas is grossing the audience out. Within its opening minutes, “Taxidermia” is depicting a man seemingly lighting his own flatulence on fire. The second episode is absolutely filled to the brim with vomit. We are talking multiple scenes in which people gorged themselves to the point of sickness before puking their guts out over and over again. Such unpleasant moments are often depicted with a clinical, unflinching eye. Such as when  Kálmán induces vomiting with a rotating wheel device. The film brings the same approach to its violence. The climatic disemboweling plays out in intimate close-ups of sliced sinew and unspooling intestines, backed up with no music and slowly displayed. As much as the film is enamored with the body's insides coming out, it's main method of repulsion revolves around simply putting obese people on-screen. “Taxidermia” really fucking hates fat people. A heavy-set, elderly woman's body is shown in the nude as a sick joke. The entire middle sequence relishes in flabby folks consuming millions of calories in short spans of time. That anyone would be attracted to bodies that look like this is repeatedly a punchline. The last part features a character so overwhelmingly rotund that he ceases to be human, becoming a Jabba the Hutt-like monstrosity in both appearance and behavior.

I am sure, if pressed on this depiction of large individuals, the makers of “Taxidermia” would insist it was all with a specific purpose in mind. That the clear and evident disgust with overweight bodies that pulsates from nearly the entire movie is about showing the excess of the state or the dehumanization of the self. In execution, however, it amounts to scene after scene of fatty fat-asses being fatly fat. The camera makes sure that the slop they consume is extra sloppy, to better convey its revulsion at these images. I'm not one to throw around terms like “fatphobic” but there's no other way to describe “Taxidermia.” It's a symptom of the movie's biggest problem: A commitment to being grotesque but without any comedic zing or light-sense of absurdity. The first episode almost recognizes an actual human emotion with its hero's sexual frustration, so blue-balled he can't even fuck a hole in the wall in peace. However, that gives way to a suffocating vomitorium – literally – of on-screen nastiness and heavier pretensions. “Taxidermia” is full of gross shit and all of it oh so clearly means something. But at what point does torrents of puke and mounds of latex flab become less symbolic and more self-indulgent? Very quickly, if you ask me.

“Taxidermia” is a technically impressive film. Its cinematography has that sterile artistry to it that seems unavoidable in European genre cinema sometimes. Naturally, the color pallet is mostly icy blues and sickly greens. The make-up effects are exactly as detailed and disgusting as they are intended to be. The climatic sequence, the primary reason for the title and poster, is creatively horrific. At the same time, a motion picture trying so hard to make the viewer queasy, while constantly hitting you over the head with its own metaphorical weight, quickly becomes tedious. If a movie is going to try and make me gag, at least be honest about it. Put gross shit in a movie because it's gross and you want to gross us out. Don't create a ninety minute monologue about how revolting you find fat people before claiming it's actually symbolic, maaaaan. In other words, “Taxidermia” is a film undeniably high on the aroma of its own farts, absolutely compelled by how stomach-churningly foul it can be while rhapsodizing endlessly about the nuances and textures of the pungent scent. I'm good, thanks but no thanks. [5/10]
 

 
Alfred Hitchcock Presents (1986): Beast in View

The only time I think people bring up the eighties revival of “Alfred Hitchcock Presents” is to discuss the couple of episodes directed by notable names. “Beast in View” is not one of those episodes. It was directed by Michael Toshiyuki Uno, who had a mostly undistinguished career of made-for-TV movies. (Though “The Wash,” a rare starring role for Mako, sounds kind of interesting.) But let's give it a try anyway, shall we? The episode concerns Dr. Morgan McGregor, a pop psychologist with a call-in radio show and best-selling books. She has recently married long time boyfriend, Roger. Their honeymoon is disturbed when Roger discovers that Morgan is receiving threatening phone calls. The calls are from a deranged man who promises to kill Morgan for her crime of marrying another man. When pressed, she admits that the calls are from her ex-husband.... Who is dead. Despite that, the stalking and harassment intensifies. When she's attacked in her home, her husband investigates and discovers a startling truth.

Like most of the USA Network's “Alfred Hitchcock Presents” installments, “Beast in View” is a remake of an episode from the original series. In this case, one from the longer “Alfred Hitchcock Hour” season. Both versions are adapted from a novel by Margaret Miller. If adapting a whole novel in a thirty minute program sounds like a tall order, it clearly is. “Beast in View” barely has time to establish Morgan and Roger's relationship before introducing the threat of her stalker. Within a few scenes, she's already been pursued by a strange man at her book-signing. Normally, this would be the half-way point of the story, when the danger has escalated from theoretical to a physical. Instead, the episode heads right into the climax. Maybe that would be less of a problem if “Beast in View” didn't also have a crazy twist ending. One of those wild swerves that barely makes any sense and feels all the more abrupt when shoved in the final seconds of a rushed adaptation such as this.

That “Beast in View” feels unavoidably rushed and abbreviated is disappointing. Otherwise, this is an effective thriller. The cinematography is excellent, establishing a sense of being watched early on. The sequence where Morgan is stalked through her home by the unseen assailant, after ominous footsteps enter, is quite suspenseful. Knowing this script was based on a book by a woman makes it a clear reflection on gendered violence. The cops – special guest star Tom Atkins! – flat-out admits there's nothing they can do to stop the phone calls. The husband starts carrying a pistol, being told that's the best security one can buy. As in real life, having a gun around doesn't actually make anyone safer but instead contributes to the violence. Most of this interesting idea is tossed out in favor of that silly twist, which I'm guessing had more nuance on the page. Still, this is a solid half-hour, with decent lead performances from Janet Eiber and Cliff Potts. [7/10]


The Addams Family: Lurch's Little Helper
 
Here is an episode of “The Addams Family” with a very special guest! “Lurch's Little Helper” begins with Gomez in another spirited round of cultural appropriation, playing samurai with Lurch. This comes around the same time as several other demands on the butler. Morticia begins to worry that they are putting too much pressure on the family butler. Rather than hire more help, Gomez' solution is to build Lurch an assistant. After a day in the basement with Fester, the duo has cooked up a robot named Smiley to help Lurch out. Lurch is told to take it easy for once, which confuses the butler at first. Soon, however, he is delegating all his work to Smiley the robot. The machine is not as talented, however, and the family starts to notice. They cook up a scheme to prove to Lurch how much they need him, by passive-agressively praising the robot and making the butler feel unloved. 

The sixties was a different time, in many ways. This was especially true of television. In today's cynical, thoroughly self-aware world, pro-wrestling and the Muppets remain the sole domains of kayfabe. It is probably best that performers receive the proper credit and all that. At the same time, isn't the world a little more whimsical when we treat a robot like it's an actual actor? “Lurch's Little Helper” was part of a run of special guest appearances across multiple TV shows for Robby the Robot, “Forbidden Planet's” break-out mechanical star. This was after Robby appeared on “The Gale Storm Show,” “The Thin Man,” and in three episodes of “The Twilight Zone.” 1966 was a busy year for the machine, as he also had a memorable guest spot on “Lost in Space” around the same time. Despite his fame, “Smiley” is credited as “himself.” Perhaps this is because Robby notably does not speak with Marin Miller's distinctive voice. 

Now, what about the episode itself? There are some ups and downs here. Ted Kennedy gets some amusing moments to himself, when Lurch is feeling suddenly self-conscious about his lack of activities around the house. As delightful as Robby the Robot's mere presence is, “Lurch's Little Helper' does get into a repetitive pattern too quickly. Someone in the family will ask the butler to do something. He'll then summon the machine to do it for him, the robot doing a less subtle and more painful job. This continues until the show returns to another premise it has been revisiting far too often. Namely, the family feeling the need to trick somebody into behaving a certain way, instead of simply talking it out. Ya know, actually watching this show made me realize that the original Addams Family were a little dysfunctional? That aside, I did laugh a few times, mostly at the silly little side gags. Such as Gomez and Thing playing tug-of-war or an unexpected sing-along session. Also was it just me or did Jackie Coogan sound a little hoarse here? Did Uncle Fester have a cold? [6/10]


Friday, September 26, 2025

Halloween 2025: September 26th

 

I'm glad that we, as a culture, decided to forgive Winona Ryder. Considering the vile acts male movie stars commit,  their careers intact afterwards, a little shop-lifting truly doesn't feel like a big deal. Hell, it's practically morally justified. As clear as that is in retrospect, the lovely Miss Ryder was truly having a downswing in her career at the turn of the millennium. What was supposed to be her big Oscar moment got overshadowed by another actress. She was the love interest in a lame Adam Sandler movie and a lame Richard Gere weepy. And then there was “Lost Souls.” It probably sounded like a solid career move, as the directorial debut of the cinematographer of “Schindler's List.” However, nobody seemed very enthusiastic about the script and the test screenings were disastrous. A wave of religious horror movies coming out in 1999 – all hoping to cash-in on Y2K Revelations anxiety – led to the film being shelved for over a year. It finally dropped in October of 2000... Opposite a re-release of the biggest Satanic Panic thriller ever. Almost as if the studio was intentionally trying to make sure nobody paid attention to this thing. By that point, Ryder was no longer contractually obligated to promote the film, adding to the stink of failure around the whole project. After that, “Lost Souls” was quickly forgotten by normal people. I am not a normal person, however, and promised to review the movie while talking about “Bless the Child” last year. Well, consider the prophecy fulfilled. 

As a teenager, Maya Larkin survived an exorcism, Father Lareaux driving a demon out of her body. Since then, she has become Lareaux's assistant whenever they are needed. The two arrive at a mental hospital, where an epileptic man and family annihilator has been obsessively writing down numbers. The exorcism is a failure, Father Lareaux left catatonic and the victim stuck in a coma. Maya decodes the man's writing and discovers the name Peter Kelson. That is a lawyer and writer famous for his true crime books on the nature of evil. Peter is having strange dreams and odd experiences. A priest attempts to kill him. Maya slips him an audio recording of the exorcism but Peter can't hear anything on it. The same recording pushes his elderly neighbor to suicide. After meeting Maya again, Peter becomes convinced that his life is the result of a Satanic conspiracy. At midnight, on his 33rd birthday, he will become possessed by the spirit of Satan himself. Maya sets out to stop this apocalyptic chain of events before it is too late.

"Lost Souls" is proof positive that gathering a bunch of talented people together is not enough to prevent the making of a stinky dog turd. The narrative's stakes are about as high as they can get, the good guys racing to stop the creation of the Antichrist before he can get the End Times rolling. Despite that, "Lost Souls" is utterly bereft of tension. The script flip-flops between Maya and Peter as protagonists, the indecisiveness stalling a sense of anticipation. The details of Peter's unholy origins are revealed during a dispassionate conversation, not as a traumatic flashback but as a list of names and events. His shock seems minimal. The movie quickly progresses past the revelation that everyone in the male lead's life has been part of a demonic cult determined to bring the Devil into his body. Most of the exorcisms take place off-screen and the arrival of Satan occurs in a literal blink of an eye. Supporting characters and subplots pop in and out, until they are dismissed. A good example of "Lost Souls'" complete unwillingness to generate any excitement is the climax. A Black Mass gathers to crown Peter as the Father of All Lies. A couple of people get shot and then the heroes escape during a scene transition, what would normally be the most important part of the story occurring completely off-screen. 

As far as I can tell, "Lost Souls" is like this because nobody involved wanted to make an actual horror movie. In one of the few interviews Winona gave concerning the film, she refers to it as "more of a supernatural thriller." Director Janusz Kamiński said the film was "not the most ideal project." After it received a rare F grade from Cinema Score, New Line ordered reshoots to make the movie "scarier." This suggests nobody was trying to make a scary movie in the first place. Reshoots like that almost never work, right? You can spot with ease where these new moments were inserted. Such as when Maya has a vision of a knife wielding maniac in a melting bathroom or a blurry sequence of a man's arms and legs cracking and twisting around. If that sounds like a bad cliche, it's far from the only one present. A true groaner of a moment involves a little girl whispering blasphemous statements, amid jerky editing and digital distortion. The only cliche I find more tiresome than that is attempts to emulate the head-bopping demons of "Jacob's Ladder." "Lost Souls" employs that one too, alongside heavy metal music video style glimpses of a screeching, twitching exorcism. 

"Lost Souls" being such a terminally dull experience is all the more frustrating because of the talent assembled. Based on his work with Spielberg, Julian Schnabel, and Vanilla Ice, Kamiński clearly has an eye for visuals. Mauro Fiore – who would eventually win an Oscar of his own for "Avatar" – is credited with cinematography here. "Lost Souls" received some positive notices for its photography but I don't personally see it. This is a gloomy, grey looking motion picture, overly fond of washed-out colors and dimly lit interiors. Reliable performers like John Hurt, Philip Baker Hall, and Elias Koteas are lined up for a selection of interchangeable supporting rows. It's always a joy to gaze into Winona's giant anime girl eyes but she spends the whole movie looking for some sort of emotion to latch onto. This mostly results in her staring ahead, mouth slightly agape, eyes wide with dull surprise. The character's sole defining trait is being a devout Catholic, her faith strictly being an informed and never displayed attribute. She shares zero chemistry with the bland Ben Chaplin as Peter. I think there's supposed to be some sort of romantic chemistry between the two characters but there's no sign of it. There's a mildly clever reveal concerning a hidden pentacle, a brief blip of surprise in an otherwise monotonous story. 

"Lost Souls" is easily the lamest of turn-of-the-millennium Satan movies. "End of Days" is low-tier Arnold but has one or two moments, a cool special effect or a memorable quote. "Bless the Child" is bad but in an occasionally funny, interesting way that reflects the bat-shit beliefs of its author. I don't remember anything about "Stigmata," so I guess I need to write about that one next September. Regardless, you could detect some degree of passion, no matter how misplaced, in those productions. "Lost Souls" is seemingly the result of bored artists showing up, punching a clock, getting a paycheck, and expending not an ounce of themselves in the process. The last scene is so blunt and anticlimactic, furthering the feeling that everybody merely wanted to get this done and move on with their lives. Which is what I shall proceed to do. In their quest to reclaim every studio horror flick of the nineties, and in-between re-issues of "Child's Play" and "The Thing," Scream Factory gave this one a spiffy Blu-Ray. Which did nothing to redeem its reputation. May these souls remain lost. [2/10]
 



It is a mythological concept that exists all throughout Scandinavia but is practically unknown elsewhere. A witch fashions a creation out of bones, stolen wool or hair, nail clippings, or wood shavings She hides it between her breasts and grows it with the wine she spits out when taking communion. It grows into a weird little creature that sneaks out at night, sucking the near-by cows dry. Once gorged on milk, it returns home and vomits up the stolen goods into a churn, the witch using it to make cursed butter. As a reward, the beastie is allowed to suckle from a secret nipple on the sorceress' inner thigh. In Sweden, it usually takes the form of a hare or cat and is called a bjära. The Norwegians imagine the beast as a living ball of wool known as a trollnøste. The Estonian kratt is made from household items and brought to life with blood but still steals for its master. Latvian witches had the pūķis, a small dragon that dragged home gold and grain. In Iceland, however, this particular creature is a gruesome looking worm-thing called a tilberi. In 1987, Icelandic filmmaker Viðar Víkingsson would direct an hour long television movie inspired by this same mythology. Severin would bring this “Tilbury” to its widest audience yet as part of its folk horror box set a few years back. 

The year is 1940 and the place is the Icelandic countryside. Auðun is a young man, a swimmer. He still harbors an attachment to his boyhood crush, Gudrún. After receiving news that he's been recruited into the war effort,  Gudrún's pastor father asks Auðun to check on her. Arriving at the British controlled military base,  Auðun discovers that the girl he knew has grown into a promiscuous young woman. She's carrying on an affair with a married British officer named Tilbury. The eccentric, impish man seems to have a strange sway over Gudrún. Auðun seemingly spies him sucking on her thigh and puking up green butter. As Auðun grows increasingly obsessed with his childhood friend, he becomes more and more convinced that her lover is a monster from Icelandic folklore. 

“Tilbury” begins with a short prologue, explaining the specifics of the folkloric creature its story revolves around. The sequence focuses closely on the witch's breasts, thighs, and her spitting out the sacrament. It brings a distinctly sexual nature to the ritual. When  Auðun spies the officer Tilbury with his lips on his crush's thigh, it is similarly provocative. Especially when these meetings are done in secret places or under tables, leaving slimy residue behind. It's a shock to the boy to see the girl he likes being so wantonly sexual with a creepy little pervert. The more we see of Auðun's childhood recollections, however, the less wholesome they seem. He repeatedly revisits the image of the young girls teasing him by kicking their legs over his head as they're on swings. Is he looking up their skirts or laying down under them in preparation for...? Well, when paired with the tilberi's acts of suckling and vomiting – his lover and creator being the same figure, that he calls “Mommy” – it all starts to feel very kinky. Auðun's resentment of Officer Tilbury is clearly based in jealousy. At the same time, it starts to feel like he equally resents him and Gudrún for being willing to express their sexuality in an open, wanton way. 

“Tilbury” is probably most easily read as a film about sexual repression, a tightly wound young man suffering the culture shock of a more modern, sexually liberated couple. At the same time, there are more international concerns on Víkingsson's mind. The British presence in Iceland is shown as something of an unnatural intrusion, the foul-mouthed Brits often bullying and harassing Auðun. It makes him an outsider in his own country. Chocolate bars are made from the tilberi's green butter. Later on, the film connects this with crass corporate capitalism coming to Iceland, furthering the feeling that the supernatural threat represents the corrosive effects of American excess. Among the soldiers is another swimmer who gets imprisoned for possibly being a Nazi. He obviously sucks but he's also the first person to correctly identify Tilbury as a monster. Which makes me wonder what the hell the filmmaker meant by several Menorahs being present when the villain goes fully demonic. Needless to say, there's something deeper being hinted at here and I don't think it's antisemitic? 

While certain elements of “Tilbury” left me uncertain of how to feel, I still enjoyed it a lot. In general, the film has a delightfully light surreal touch to it. When we are greeted to bizarre sights – like our hero stepping from a swimming pool into a sauce that is also a military watch tower – you're left wondering if you're watching a dream sequence or a reflection of objective reality. The most delightful mixture of these elements occurs during a stylish shot dance sequence, the protagonist's anxieties playing out as a musical number. This is furthered with the bizarre sights we're shown, most of which involve the tilberi's very antisocial behavior. The amount of green butter puke in this movie pushes it into the realm of gross-out comedy at times, which I mean as a compliment. Karl Ágúst Úlfsson has such an uncomfortable greasiness to him in the eponymous role, that you totally believe he's a milk-sucking goblin. The special effects are extremely lo-fi yet the persistently off-beat tone the movie cultivates makes that work.

That might be my primary disappointment with “Tilbury.” Most of the oral tradition and folk art about tilberi depict them as grotesque worm-like creatures. The replicas on display at the Icelandic Museum of Sorcery and Witchcraft recall lengths of intestines, pre-mature fetuses, and massive globs of belly button lint. The creature in the movie, meanwhile, is mostly depicted as a human being with some impish features. Not that I'd expect a low-budget television film to truly have the money and resources to depict a creature that weird anyway. Mostly, it makes me wish that we had way more movies about this particular monsters, to allow for more cinematic interpretations of them. This “Tilbury” is still cool though, an oddly funny and funnily odd tale of witchcraft, sexual hang-ups, World War II, and globs of green butter. [7/10]
 



Presumably following the logic that people spend money on their kids, premium cable channels in the eighties produced a surprising amount of kids' show. In September of 1982, Showtime would begin broadcasting “Faerie Tale Theatre.” Produced and hosted by the fittingly whimsical Shelley Duvall, the series often featured A-list celebrities as guest stars. (And sometimes had high profile names behind the camera too, with Francis Ford Coppola and Tim Burton directing two episodes.) Usually, this was in-service of doing wacky and comical retellings of the most well-known Grimm's fairy tales. Occasionally, however, the show would present a more obscure story. Such as “The Boy Who Left Home to Find Out About the Shivers,” based on the even more awkwardly entitled “The Story of the Youth Who Went Forth to Learn What Fear Was.” As you might have guessed from the title, this was essentially the program's Halloween special, presenting a tone a bit more ghoulish than your standard modernized take on a fairy tale. 

That means it's still less gruesome than the original text, which might be the origin of the hoary horror cliché of spending the night in a haunted house to win a monetary prize. The titular character is Martin, the son of a superstitious carpenter. The boy has never experienced fear, not because he's exceptionally brave but because he's too dim-witted to know better. The boy is sent to ring the church bell at night, a set-up for a prank by the local deacon. This only results in the man getting his leg broken, leading to Martin being kicked out of his father's home. He eventually wanders towards an inn in the land of Transylvania. King Vladimir, the ruler of this land, is staying there with his daughter, Princess Amanda. That's because the castle is so beset by ghosts that nobody is willing to live there. The king makes Martin the same offer he's presented to several lads before him: If he can last three nights in the haunted castle without dying or being scared off, he will win riches and the princess' hand. Martin agrees to the task, despite having no use for money, because he hopes he'll finally be frightened for the first time in his life. However, the boy's cluelessness once again makes him difficult to startled, no matter how many spectres and zombies appear before him. 

The cast list for any given episode of “Faerie Tale Theatre” sometimes feels like if every part in a “Saturday Night Live” sketch was played by a celebrity guest hosts. A not-especially boy-ish thirty year old Peter MacNicol plays the title “boy.” Christopher Lee is King Vlad, explicitly identified as the son of Vlad the Impaler. David Warner is the innkeeper. Vincent Price is the narrator. Most randomly of all, Frank Zappa plays the king's hunchbacked assistant. And would you believe that Zappa gives the funniest performance? He never speaks and instead silently performs physical gags, like smashing a window when asked to let in some fresh air or rubbing a stolen apple on his arm pit. Lee mostly plays it straight, with just a bit more goofiness in his usual style. MacNicol is playing a very silly character but otherwise does it straight, playing a character whose exceptional courage actually extends from a genuine inability to process when he's in danger. 

Despite the Hollywood cast and quite detailed sets, “Faerie Tale Theatre” was still somewhat shot like a “Muppet Show” segment. The camera work is largely stationary. The digital effects are exceedingly cheesy. The writing still feels a little like a comedy sketch stretched to a full hour. Which is not to say I didn't enjoy “The Boy Who Left Hoe to Find Out About the Shivers.” Anytime the episode commits to capturing a non-threatening but suitably spooky haunted house ambiance, it's a ton of fun. The old castle setting looks like a bitchin' small time amusement park fun house. Set pieces involving a pendulum swinging into place or a revolving door feel right out of a classic “Abbott & Costello Meet the Monsters” flick. There's a pretty cool looking Grim Reaper and blinking gargoyle. The highlight of the episode is clearly a sequence where a horde of zombie-like spirits emerge, eventually playing a game of ten pins with skulls and femurs. That sounds like a great party to me! The finale features Christopher Lee shooting some extremely unconvincing laser beams out of his hands, before the punchline of the entire enterprise – the only thing that scares the boy without fear is the thought of getting married, hey-oooooo – arrives right when you expect. I would've absolutely been obsessed with this if I had seen it as a kid. [7/10]


 
The Addams Family: Cat Addams

We haven't seen Kitty Kat, the Addams' pet lion, in a while but the writers haven't forgotten about them. “Cat Addams” is kicked off when Grandmama notices that the feline is acting lethargic and not eating. Gomez quickly comes to the conclusion that Kitty Kat is not sick but rather lonely. The Addams decide to hide out on safari and seek out the help of the family witch doctor, Dr. Mbogo, in locating a mate for Kitty Kat. Unfortunately, this does not work, as Kitty's dad apparently ate Mbojo's dad. Instead, the family calls up a veterinarian called Dr. Gunderson. Gunderson arrives for a house call, assuming he is helping out a regular house cat. When he's terrified by the lion, Gomez and Morticia assumes that the guy is just suffering from a lack fo confidence. They enact a scheme to boost the terrified vet's self-esteem. 

Like “The Great Treasure Hunt” before it, this is another episode of “The Addams Family” that starts off pursuing a plot point far outside the budgetary limits of a sixties sitcom. The idea of Gomez and the gang going on safari and trying to pair Kitty Kat up with a girlfriend would probably be a lot of fun... Sadly, this show couldn't afford to have real actors in the same room with an actual lion. The brief moment where Dr. Gunderson has to interact with the lion is achieved by having stock footage of a lion – clearly not the same one that usually depicts Kitty – awkwardly inserted into the Addams' basement. The producers couldn't even afford to show Dr. Mbogo in his hut, instead using brief reused footage from his first appearance in “Uncle Fester's Illness.”

Instead, the majority of “Cat Addams” is about guest star Marty Ingels as Dr. Gunderson reacting with terror and bafflement to the Addams' antics. Yes, it's yet another episode like that. My familiarity with Mr. Ingels' work only extends to his voice work in crappy old Hanna-Barbera cartoons like “The Grape Ape Show” and “Pac-Man.” (He previously did another sitcom with John Astin.) If I had to guess, I would assume that playing over-the-top cowards like this was part of his regular shtick. Regardless, he does make for an amusing presence. The back-and-forth he has with Cousin Itt and an illness feigning Fester does make for an honest chuckle or two. This episode is also notable for Lurch appearing instantly when summoned, the butler producing a Tsetsee fly right from his jacket, and Astin and Carolyn Jones giving each other some crazy bedroom eyes during one sequence. Pretty standard stuff but, hey, I like it. [7/10]


Thursday, September 25, 2025

Halloween 2025: September 25th

 

The perpetually underrated Olivia Hussey, who passed away in December of last year, of course got her big break as Juliet in Franco Zeffirelli's classic adaptation of Shakespeare's timeless romance. However, this is not the film that ended up predicting the direction of her career. Rather, 1974's “Black Christmas” made the quiet, controlled Hussey into a scream queen. This preceded her appearing in many other off-beat genre projects. After the 1978 version of “The Cat and the Canary” and Kinji Fukasaku's “Virus” – but before “Quest of the Delta Knights,” “Ice Cream Man,” and playing Norman Bates' mom in “Psycho IV” – there was “Turkey Shoot.” Shot during a time when tax write-offs made Australia a hot spot for low budget productions, it was the fifth narrative film from the prolific director Brian Trenchard-Smith. Though English born, Trenchard-Smith would make a number of memorable films during this 10BA era. (So named for the division of Australia's Income Tax Assessment Act that made these productions possible.) That would make Trendard-Smith one of the names most associated with what would eventually be called Ozploitation. For Hussey, films like this were a far cry from the Bard but you take work where you can get it, I suppose. 

Once again, global instability has led to an authoritarian regime seizing control of all of Earth's most powerful nations.  Political undesirables, referred to as "deviants," are placed in prison camps and subjected to inhuman tortures. An especially brutal example is located near the Queensland coast of Australia. At Camp 47, Camp Master Thatcher invite the rich and powerful members of society to hunt the prisoners in what he calls a "turkey shoot." New arrivals at the camp include Paul Anders, a political activist arrested for broadcasting anti-government messages. He is joined by Chris Walters, an innocent young woman who merely stood up officers who were beating a man. Together with former sex worker Rita, the escape artist Griffin, and the visibly insane Dodge, the two are set loose in the near-by jungle. Over the next twelve hours, they will be hunted like animals by senators and millionaires armed with rifles, explosive crossbows, all-terrain vehicles, and at least one werewolf. Paul doesn't simply plan on surviving the turkey shoot. He plans on escaping and turning the tides against the fascist tormentors in power. 

“Turkey Shoot” had a troubled production, its shooting schedule halved at the last minute. As a result, Trenchard-Smith cut the script down to the bare essentials. The result is a movie that wastes little time. Within minutes of meeting our heroes, everything we need to know about them is explained. The concept is quickly established. After a little torture and shower stall abuse, we are off to the man hunt. In order to make things as expedient as possible, the characters are simple. By which I mean they have one or two bizarre quirks. Steve Railsback is a never-say-die hero, Hussey is virginal in her innocence. John Ley makes Dodge an exceedingly bizarre, twitchy presence that adds a nervous energy to every scene he's in. Among the villains are Carmen Duncan as a sexually predatory lesbian who prefers to travel by horseback, a lunatic in a dune buggy named Tito, and Alph. Alph is some sort of evolutionary throw-back, with pointed teeth and claws, a hairy body, and yellow animalistic eyes. He likes to eat people's toes. Despite his beastly appearance and behavior, he's introduced wearing a top hat and bow tie. Why is there some sort of a dapper beast-man in this movie? Is he a result of post-nuclear war  mutations of another sort? Tito says he's a “freak, found in a freak show.” No time is wasted on explaining why a wolfman is among the cast. You must simply accept that he is there. 

This is the kind of motion picture “Turkey Shoot” is, a thoroughly outrageous experience much more interested in being memorable than being sensible. To fulfill that goal, Trenchard-Smith and his team fill the film with over-the-top violence. A machete to the head nearly splits a skull in half. A man is bisected at the waist with a shovel trowel. Bodies explode in a theatrical downpour of blood and brain matter. This is a film that decides its rape-y she-bitch villainess carrying a crossbow is insufficiently ridiculous. Instead, her arrows explode upon impact, to add an extra layer of pyrotechnics. To complete this tone of comic book-like silliness and excess, goofy looking vehicles and set designs are prominent throughout. Such campy looking costumes and props removes any doubt that “Turkey Shoot” knows exactly how ridiculous it is. The film is absolutely in on the joke. 

The hit-the-ground-running pace and desire to always feature some silly, sleazy, or violent thing on screen means “Turkey Shoot” is thoroughly entertaining. That goes a long way to disguising that it's a movie widely made up of familiar pieces. The excessively sadistic prison guards, evil lesbian, and communal shower scenes all recall women-in-prison movies of years past. The sci-fi set-up is recycled from any number of familiar stories, freely mixing bits and pieces of “1984,” “Logan's Run,” “Rollerball,” and “Death Race 2000” with “The Most Dangerous Game” and “The Great Escape.” In its last third, the film gives into the demands of action movie theatrics. By which I mean it becomes a repetitive series of shoot-outs and explosions, “Turkey Shoot” turning into a mini-war movie. The film goes fiery and large, when it should've been tightening up and focusing more on its “hunting humans” set-up. 

Despite clearly being derivative of numerous films and stories that come before, and collapsing somewhat in its final reel, “Turkey Shoot” is too enjoyably loopy to be dismissed. The villains are thoroughly absurd. The violence is spectacularly over-the-top. The movie is insanely fast-paced, never having a single boring moment in it. Odd ball or extravagant inclusions tickle the synaptic nerves in my cult movie loving brain. Olivia Hussey reportedly had a dreadful time making the movie, terrified of the Australian wild life. The director was feuding with the producer – who was David Hemmings for some reason – all throughout. Out of such dire situations emerged a wildly entertaining B-movie geek show. “Turkey Shoot” suggests that any worn-out genre set-up can be improved by randomly including a monster-man and some dune buggy related violence. [7/10]



 
The found footage film has existed since at least 1961 but there's a reason the format didn't truly catch on until “The Blair Witch Project” in 1999. That movie was made by a bunch of nobodies, screwing around in the woods of Maryland, and it became a paradigm shifting blockbuster. "Paranormal Activity" had a similar impact. Both proved you didn't need elaborate special effects, recognizable stars, or a massive crew to make a scary flick that was also extremely profitable. That set-up must be especially appealing to filmmakers in countries without much of an established cinematic industry of their own. IMDb lists only 88 titles with the nation of Barbados as their primary hub of production. Locally made motion pictures have little international reach and the island does not seem to be as popular a filming location for Hollywood studios as other places in the Caribbean. Barbadian visual effects artist Stockton Miller had some viral success with a found footage style reel of a werewolf he made. Miller would team up with the Texas-based Thomas Burke – who seems to specialize in found footage and mockumentaries – around 2018 to start work on what would be the island nation's first feature length science fiction movie. Initially entitled "The Land We Call Home," it got picked up by Dread Central's distributing arm in 2022 and was slapped with the more direct title, "The Barbados Project." Well, let's take my Horror Around the World tour to a warmer climate tonight and see how we like this one. 

In 2019, shaky cell phone footage of unidentified creatures lurking in the distance or emerging from the sea went viral around the country of Barbados. The videos prompted debate and skepticism but clearly something was going on. Journalist Reesa Price and her cameraman Alex decided to get to the bottom of these mysterious sightings. "The Barbados Project" compiles the declassified footage concerning their investigation and the surrounding events. The news crew uncovered a connection between the creatures and a local military contractor named Building Six. They interviewed a whistleblower claiming that the company had been doing weird experiments since the eighties. After encountering one of the beasts, Reesa begins to exhibit bizarre physical symptoms. The further into the conspiracy the crew went, the stranger it got.

The effectiveness of the found footage style is highly dependent on if the film can create a sense of realism. The intended illusion, after all, is that you are watching “real” recordings that the viewer has accidentally stumbled upon. “The Barbados Project,” unfortunately, does not pass this particular sniff test. This is largely because of the special effects. Within the opening minutes, we are presented with footage of some sort of giant monster wading through the ocean, off in the distance. It looks far too much like a GIF being dragged across the screen. Near the end, we see similarly shoddy CGI of dragon hovering in the air and breathing fire. It's simply not believable and, worst yet, the movie makes little attempt to disguise what we are looking at. When the primary monsters in the film appear – they look a lot like the Skullcrawlers from “Kong: Skull Island – they are right in the center of the screen, brightly lit. This not only removes any doubt in the viewer's mind that they are looking at a mediocre, computer generated creation. It also spoils the premise of the movie. How are we supposed to believe that there's any debate or skepticism about the existence of these creatures when they are clearly on-camera like this? That takes the idea from cryptozoology to regular zoology, ya know. 

Aside from the deeply unconvincing visual effects, “The Barbados Project” fumbles immersion in other ways. In general, the acting is poor. As our journalist hero, Cerah Belgrave's line-reading is consistently stilted. What are supposed to be off-the-cuff conversations feel anything but, coming across more as awkward attempts to memorize dialogue the actors were given only a few moments to memorize. The actor playing the informant is easily the worst in the film, given reams of exposition to read and monotonously stumbling through it all, visibly glancing off-screen several times at presumed cue cards. In general, the writing in “The Barbados Project” is less than polished. It seems to me the filmmaker had a number of ideas but couldn't find a way to assemble them into a compelling whole. Instead, the film alternate between unexplained events – such as the biological effects encountering the monsters have on people – and flatly explaining story points that involve a lot of fuzzy sci-fi concepts. You get the impression of a script that was made up as filming went along. 

Despite being advertised as the first feature length monster movie made in the titular country, “The Barbados Project” is barely over an hour long. Meaning it meets the Academy standard for a “feature film” by exactly one minute. Furthering my belief that the story was largely improvised, the plot line involving Reesa Price wraps up with about twenty minutes to go. The film then leaps into the future, to depict a TikTok video of a totally unrelated character resolving the narrative in his back yard. It's a moment that seems to be taking shot at internet content creators concerned only with upping their following count, totally at odds with a premise treated seriously up to that point. The movie leaps around formats like that a lot. Prior recordings, declassified government footage, and lots of flashy computerized menus appear around the primary footage telling the story. That goes hand-in-hand with an abuse of on-screen pixelization and scrambled footage. It's an interesting idea, a movie composed of snippets of different mediums like this. When combined with a haphazard script and shifty acting, it only furthers the impression that the filmmakers couldn't focus on one idea for very long. 

One is tempted to take it easy on “The Barbados Project.” Clearly much of the team were amateurs getting their big break. One assumes that resources were limited, given the lack of support for film productions in their country. Considering Stockton Miller's background in special effects, I imagine he did most of the digital work himself. Getting a movie finished and released is hard work and many factor determine the outcome. There were clear ambitions here but whatever resources were available fell far short of them. The truth of the matter is that there's simply nothing much effective about what we see here. The result is less thrills and chills and more secondhand harassment for everyone involved. The feeling is more akin to watching a randomly assembled YouTube video than a professional production, thoroughly ineffective and underwhelming in every way. Best of luck to everybody who worked on this on all their future endeavors though. I know it's hard out there. [3/10]



The Ray Bradbury Theater: Usher II

 
Ray Bradbury was rather stuck on the idea of the government banning and burning books. Aside from “Fahrenheit 451,” he also explored the idea in “The Exiles” – in which the ghosts of banned authors manifest on Mars – and “Usher II.” The latter was adapted into a season four episode of “The Ray Bradbury Theater.” In the future, a government agency known as the Moral Climates has banned all tales of the fantastic and macabre. An eccentric millionaire named William Stendahl has spent most of his fortune constructing a replica of the House of Usher, as described in Edgar Allan Poe's story. He has populated it with life-like androids, playing the roles of witches and monsters. Moral Climates' Mr. Garrett sends a robot doppelganger of himself to investigate, which Stendahl replaces with his own. This copy invites the head council of the Moral Climates to a costume party at the new House of Usher. There, they watch as apparent robotic copies of themselves fall victim to grisly scenarios from Poe's stories. That's when Stendahl invites the real Garrett, who has already ordered the destruction of this new House of Usher, down into the wine cellar to taste some fine amontilado sherry... 

At various points in his dotage, Mr. Bradbury would bitch about political correctness or claim “Fahrenheit 451” was actually about how bad television is. There are signs of this in “Usher II.” Stendahl claims that the roots of the current oppressive government were civil rights organizations demanding the censoring of “offensive” content. Great futurist though he was, Bradbury couldn't imagine the current state of affairs. Where knowledge is not control by information being limited but rather by the public being inundated with it, a deluge of non-stop distraction and insincere lies burying actual truths. That timelines would pile horrors upon horrors, in-between mindless advertisements, to deaden our drive to pursue what was right. That corporations would further the destruction of true wisdom not by burning books but by burning forests, to replace actual imagination with dead-eyed simulacra vomited out by mindless machines. I know we've all had fun dunking on pearl-clutching fuddy-duddies from time to time but it gulls me a bit that someone as clearly intelligent and observant of the human condition as Ray Bradbury would blame “political correction” for the denigration of actual knowledge than the businessmen and billionaires. 

But there I go being a grousing old man myself. What about “Usher II?” Patrick Macnee, John Steed himself, plays Mr. Stendahl as someone who delights in the theatrical. He invents this elaborate scheme mostly to take revenge on the people he's despised. Because why merely murder someone when you can build an actual House of Usher and have them shoved up the chimney by a mechanical orangutan? (Of which the aftermath we only see here, presumably for budgetary reasons.) As his rival, Stuart Devenie – later seen as the kung-fu fighting priest who shouts “I kick ass for the lord!” in Peter Jackson's “Dead Alive” – is equally despicable. A dead-faced fascist, who takes a cold sadistic pleasure in punishing “immoral” behavior, is probably the kind of people who deserve to get walled up alive. Watching these two bounce off each other, especially once Stendahl goes about recreating “A Cask of Amontilado,” is quite entertaining on its own. The final accusation, that cultural critics blame society's woes on media they don't bother actually reading or watching themselves, sure sounds pointed coming out of Macnee's lips.

“Usher II” was directed by Lee Tamahori, a few years before “Once Were Warriors” and a decent run of thrillers later in the decade. (And long before he pivoted to very loud dreck like “Die Another Day” or “xXx: State of the Union,” the kind of movies ol' Ray probably would've hated.) Alongside cinematographer Warrick Attewell and production designer Rick Kofoed, they make sure the titular haunted abode looks amazing. Lots of gothic arches, shadowy corridors, spider web strewn staircases, and moonlight peering through wide windows. I'm not sure the episode is making nearly as much of a point about the attitudes that make censorship possible as it thinks. It seems much more about Bradbury enacting some suitably ironic revenge on anyone who dares to burn books. All the business with androids and robotic copies seems ultimately unnecessary, in service of a twist ending that is very easy to see coming. I do, however, totally understand the impulse to live out the rest of your life in a dusty old haunted castle. That may, in fact, be my greatest ambition in life. The house of Usher has fallen. Long live the House of Usher. [7/10]


 
The Addams Family: Addams Cum Laude

 
Once more, “The Addams Family” writers' room uses Wednesday and Pugsley as springboards for a story without actually involving them in the plot much. The Addams children report to their parents that a recent incident involving blasting caps has gotten them in trouble at school. Disappointed that an educational facility would stifle their kids' creativity, Gomez and Morticia immediately set out finding a private academy for their offspring. Sam Hillard – last seen running for office after being a truant officer – is now the head administrator at Mockridge Hall. At first, Hillard wants nothing to do with the Addams but Gomez' generous offer has him changing his mind. Pugsley and Wednesday immediately get expelled for bringing their pet octopus and Gila monster to class. Morticia and Gomez' solution to that is to simply buy the school outright, ousting Hillard and bringing their typically eccentric approach to the curriculum. This outrages the parents of the regular students, who demand Hillard's return

“Addams Cum Laude” – a title that sounds less unfortunate than it looks – does exactly what we expect from this show by now. Which is to say it's an episode devoted to the Addams' creepy and kooky antics being more than the average folks can handle. This is most evident in the sequence when Hillard visits 0001 Cemetery Drive and is presented with Addams' plans for the school syllabus. However, I do think the script here cooks up a few good variation on the familiar gags. Uncle Fester supplements his usual light bulb trick with a new ability involving a record player, which is amusingly stretched out. When Gomez hears Morticia speaking French, he accidentally grabs the arm of another woman instead, which is a good bit. In general, there are some inspired silliness here. Gomez practices his polo skills on a stationary bike, which then whinnies like a horse. Lurch pops into the room before Morticia rings the gong, startling her slightly. That made me chuckle, if only because Carolyn Jones' facial expression is priceless. Also, I am more convinced than ever that Thing can teleport, as he appears in Mr. Hilard's desk to comfort him unexpectedly. 

A fairly standard installment of “The Addams Family” but it does present one of the sharper bits of social commentary in this old series. Hillard is reluctant to get involved with the Addams at first, being well aware of their eccentricities by now. The minute Gomez starts counting a huge stack of money, however, the principal changes his mind. Yes, the all mighty dollar sees a member of polite society reconsidering his previously firmly held beliefs. You can read a little deeper into the set-up here too. The Addams devote their lives to pursuing their passions, which makes them happy. The standard American school system tries to force kids down a specific path. When Gomez and Morticia attempt to transform a standard academy in their own vision, the parents who pay the tuitions demand an immediate return to conformity. Despite the Addams' new system actually being far more profitable for the school, as the ending reveals. Oh, if only we were all as rich as the Addams and could spend our days worshiping our hot goth wives and blowing up toy trains... [7/10]