Nosferatu - Will's Review

Right off the bat I think it's only fair to point out that silent movies aren't really my thing; I don't have the experience necessarily to compare one to another, or to know which of my complaints or comments apply to any particular movie, rather than being typical of the time.

What I will say, is that in the print I watched the tinting had been preserved (it was not uncommon for silent film to be tinted on a scene by scene basis to show mood or time of day), and the image was sharp and crisp; a vast improvement over last time I attempted to watch this in a poor quality grayscale transfer.

Dracula (1958) - Lisa's Review

There have been many, many re-imaginings of the story 'Dracula', so I think it would be a little pointless for me to start going over the storyline.  This 1958 Hammer Horror version is far from the first, but it is probably one of the best known.

In the movie we have Christopher Lee as Dracula, Peter Cushing as Doctor Van Helsing and the relatively little known John Van Eyssen as Jonathon Harker.

It's the pretty straight forward Dracula story and is something it's very hard to get excited about if Hammer movies are not really your thing (as is the case with me).  I've always thought they were vastly overrated.  Ok, there are maybe a few I don't mind, but they're the kind of movies that as best 'I don't mind', but at worst 'bore the tits off me'.  This one was somewhere in the middle.

Ok, so I can hear the cries of "Are you mad?", "This girl knows nothing!".  I care not a jot.  These kind of over dramatic, grand technicolor extravaganzas just don't appeal to me at all.  Sure I can appreciate the grandeur and opulence of the set and the costumes, but it just doesn't float my boat.

The hubby had told me the story of how difficult Christopher Lee had found it to wear the famous contact lenses he wears whilst playing the count and he does an admirable job it has to be said.  I can totally see why some people love this kind of movie.  It just isn't for me.

My failure for any kind of excitement about the movie or any real dislike leaves me a little short of words for the review.  I figure Will loves this kind of thing so will give you a completely contrary view if you are a Hammer fan.  Neither suggesting you should avoid this nor recommending it this week.  Watch if it's your thing, don't if it isn't.

Black Sunday - Lisa's Review

So another 'old' movie this week.  We're transported back to 1960 to a movie set eons earlier for this Italian Gothic Horror Fest that is Black Sunday.  The movies alternative name is 'The Mask of Satan', which as far as I'm concerned is a much better name having watched the movie.  Anyway....

The movie is set in Moldavia and sees a beautiful young witch, Asa be put to death courtesy of a spiked mask which is hammered into her beautiful face by a mahoosive sledgehammer.  Not before she places a curse on her brother (who ordered her murder) and all his (their) descendants.  We find out as the movie progresses that her lover, Javuto was also put to death along with her.

200 years later, we follow 2 doctors as they travel through Moldavia for a medical conference.  Shock, horror they experience a problem with the wheel on their carraige and get stuck in the middle of Moldavia, as it happens right beside the crypt where Asa is buried.  As you can imagine, they don't simply go and have a peek and exit again without any happenings.  The older of the 2 doctors, Kruvajan manages to break the glass on the coffin which enables him to remove the mask from the body (why you would want to do this is anyones guess).  We see that Asa is pretty well preserved apart from her eyeballs, which are full of spiders.  Kruvajan cuts his hand on the glass and the blood drips off a shard of glass after he has gone and onto Asas face.   Of course any horror fan amongst us will know what this means.

Asa is back for vengeance and is bringing her old boyfriend with her.  I won't go into any more detail as quite honestly the movie bored me to tears.  If you want to see it, to be honest what I've told you is probably enough.  Any more would be spoilerific (if that's possible in this movie).

Dull, preditable plot asides, this movie looked great.  It was very reminiscent of Hammer with its style and leading ladies makeup and couture.   I can imagine that in 1960 it was a smash hit, but in these days where we've seen pretty much everything there is to see, it is a bit staid and dull.   Is great use of light and beautiful scenes enough to keep you interested?  Sadly for me it isn't.

I certainly wouldn't stick an avoid on this as it had a quaint charm but it certainly was nowhere near to getting a recommended.

Martin (1978) Review - Lisa's Review

I've had a veritable plethora of emotions surrounding this movie.  First off, I read the title and the year and was resigned that we were back to the old days of dated, old rubbish.  I looked a bit closer and saw it was a Romero movie.  It also has a part for Tom Savini, which seems to be a given in Romero movies.  I thought it was maybe a good omen as most other movies which have similar statistics were quite good.

After I watched the movie I had a look at some reviews to see how my viewpoint rated.  Seems like I was watching something entirely different than the vast majority of reviewers.  I read everything from "It's my favourite vampire movie" to "A wonderful modern day vampire story" to "One of Romeros best".

So I come right out and say it, I thought this movie was terrible.  The lead actor who played Martin (John Amplas) was repugnant in his attitude, expressions, way he carried himself... he just felt repellant to me.  Surely this character should have had some kind of sexual pull on females given his role in the movie.

Our basic premise centers around Martin drugging young women and either slicing them with razors and drinking their blood (which is clearly portrayed as a sexual thing) or raping them.  Where the comparison to classic vampires is here, I have no idea.  The movie, to me just seemed like a poorly made excuse to show some young attractive flesh and a bit of blood.

I found the storyline lacking and the other actors in the farce to be laughable, especially a male relative of his who is convinced he is evil, a vampire who can be repelled by garlic, crucifixes and holy water.

Martin goes through the movie doing much of the same until he finally relents to the advances of a bored middle-aged housewife.  Yawn.....

Some may say the ending is a bit of a surprise, but to be honest, following the usual direction of these kind of movies, I saw it coming a mile off.

So in short, I am definately not a fan of this movie.  In actual fact, I would advise anyone to avoid it.  Maybe had Martin been cast as someone else and had he been a bit older, it would have been palatable, but in its current state - No Thankyou.

Daughters of Darkness (1971) - Lisa's Review

I'm kind of torn this week with 'Daughters of Darkness'.  I thought when we entered the Time Out Top 100, we would be moving away from these kind of movies.  When I say 'these kind of movies' I mean dated, supposedly erotic, weak horrors.  The reason I am torn is, while watching the movie, I could see many reasons to give it a decent review - it has an impressive set, is beautifully shot, the 4 main players in the movie are all incredibly attractive, the colours jump off the screen at you.  It is beautiful to look at, but that's where I draw a line with compliments.

This movie is very highly rated, but it just isn't the sort of movie I enjoy or would choose to watch.  I suppose I've kind of had it with dated horrors with casual lesbianism thrown in.

In the movie, a young couple, Stefan and Valerie, stop off at a very large, very impressive and very empty hotel.  We are given an idea of their characters and it seems Stefan is a bit of an arse and the impossibly beautiful Valerie is very sweet and naive.  The couple are just married, but Stefan seems to have severe reservations about introducing Valerie to his mother.

Enter the very sophisticated, alluring Elizabeth Bathory (yes, that one) and her pretty maid Iona.   The hotel concierge is sure he remembers Elizabeth from many years ago when he was a young boy, but she hasn't changed at all in these years.  We learn that the secret to her beauty lies in the blood of young virgins... you know the story....

Elizabeth attempts to get closer to the attractive young couple by first seducing Stefan (not at all difficult it seems), then she moves on to her main interest, the beautiful Valerie.  Iona also makes her move on Stefan (who isn't winning any awards for husband of the year) and he succumbs again.

The movie is basically a mix of arthouse (which is what I think put me off) and seduction.  I wouldn't think I was giving anything away by telling you that Elizabeth Bathory is a vampire.  We know she is seeking the blood of young virgins.  Stefan is hardly a virgin, so we can see where the movie is headed.  I wouldn't categorize the movie as horror at all.  There is very little in the way of horror here.  It wouldn't even be considered as particularly erotic these days.

I can see why men would love this movie.  It is after all the stuff of fantasies, but there was very little here for me to get excited about.

One plus with the movie is that it doesn't end as you would imagine.  That was what had me torn.  It lost its element of predictability.  As fellow blogger Will often says, the presence of an unexpected and cool ending sometimes saves a mediocre movie.  Well this is the case for me.

Would I recommend it?  To guys who like older, classic or Hammer movies, yea sure.  This is where I feel it's appeal ends though.  It's not an avoid by any means, but it just didn't float my boat.

Cronos - Will's Review

A good movie! That's actually horror!!! (Or deals horror themes at least - it doesn't induce fear, nor is it intended to). 

I'm showing my hand early again; I'm re commending this one, and I suggest you stop reading and go in cold. The only thing I will warn you about upfront is that it's a foreign language film (Spanish, on account of it being a Mexican movie) so give it a miss if you don't do subtitles. 

It gets labeled as a Vampire movie, and it's easy to see why, it deals with immortals who must drink human blood, get burned by sunlight, and can only be killed by destroying their heart; but I don't think it's strictly fair to label them 'vampires' as such - certainly it's like no version of the vampire mythos you've seen before. 

Jesus (no, not THAT Jesus; he's Mexican so it's pronounced Hayzuze) is an older chap, who lives with his wife and granddaughter, and owns an antique shop. One day he finds a strange clockwork device in the base of an angel statuette in his shop. 

At first the device seems dangerous, damaging his hand when it it activated, but he soon starts to look and feel younger. 

Things start to go badly wrong for Jesus however, when he gets mixed up with a death-fearing millionaire who wants the device for his own, and has been collecting angel statues in the hope of finding it, and only get worse when he finds that he has inadvertently made himself immortal. 

I really like Jesus' slow realisation that he was craving blood... None of that 'I've turned and shall go straight for the jugular of the first person I see' stuff here. 

Brilliantly filmed and acted, the only criticism you could level at the movie is that it's slow; however I found it to be an interesting, simple, slow-burn story, rather than the dull type of slow. 

I don't want to say too much more - if you've seen it, you already know, and if you haven't seen it (and ignored my warning to go in cold) I've said far too much already; so I'll mark this with my recommendation tag, and leave you to go rent a copy. 

Cronos (1993) - Lisa's Review

*** BIG FAT SPOILERS ***

Let me start by saying, if you haven't seen Cronos, stop right now!!  Go watch it and don't read this.  I wouldn't want to spoil your viewing experience by giving anything away.

So, with that out of the way, a good movie to watch and review!! Whooooooooooo!  It seems like it's been so long!  I originally saw Cronos a few years ago.  Like most other people, I was alerted to it when I watched the wonderful 'Pans Labyrinth' and discovered it was part of a movie trilogy (although the movies are completely unrelated) by Guillermo Del Toro alongside Cronos and The Devils Backbone.  What can I say?  I loved all 3.  The guy knows what he's doing.

This movie has at its heart a story about immortality and vampires, although it is told in a very different manner to what we're used to.  I should perhaps point out that this movie is in Spanish with English subtitles.  I often forget to point this out to people when I recommend a movie and it doesn't tend to go down too well.

It's quite hard to give an idea about this movie without giving a lot away, hence the 'big fat spoilers' warning.   We start the movie in a scene from many years previous where an alchemist has created a device which is capable of granting immortality to its owner.  Many years later we see him laying dead underneath a pile of rubble from a collapsed building with inhuman marble-white skin.

Fast Forward to the present day and we meet the star of the movie - Jesus, an antique store owner.  He comes into possession of a statue of archangel.  He notices that the base is hollow and comes upon an ancient device inside.  I can only describe it as having the appearance of a large Scarab Beetle without legs.  However, when it is held, metal legs emerge and wrap themselves around the hand of the holder, holding it fast.  The skin is pierced and it appears to inject them with something.

From then on, Jesus is driven to return to the object as he discovers it makes him appear younger, feel more energetic, he feels better than he has in years.  As is usually the case however, something good always comes with something bad.   He has an insatiable thirst for blood and even resorts to lying on a bathroom floor, ready to lick up some from the floor.  This is the first sign that rather than a secret of immortality, Jesus has actually inadvertently become a vampire.

We always have a villain alongside our hero and here it comes as a dying millionaire who has heard of the device and is willing to go to any lengths to get it.  His rather brutish nephew Angel (played by Ron Perlman) is tasked with going after it.   Angel attempts to kill Jesus by pushing his car over a cliff, while he is unconscious inside it.    It becomes clear to us that it is going to take something very big to do away with Jesus.  We witness him lying on a mortuary slab waiting to be cremated and witness his resurrection, complete with the opening of his gruesomely sewn shut mouth.

He returns home to his granddaughter who has been in on everything all along and sets to writing a letter explaining the situation to his wife.  We find out more evidence of his vampiric state in that sunlight burns his skin and he has to sleep in a box.

Needing to know a 'way out' of his situation, Jesus goes with his granddaughter to see the millionaire who is so desperate for the device and agrees to hand it over in return for answers and an escape.  I won't give away any more or how the movie ends, but this movie is well worth a watch.  If you don't mind subtitles and want to watch something a little different from usual run-of-the-mill movies, this is for you.

There is A LOT more to the movie than I have detailed, but I honestly don't want to give too much away about the storyline as I think if anyone is reading this that hasn't seen it, it is well worth watching.

I heartilly recommend it.

Blood For Dracula - Will's Review

When the Andy Warhol produced Flesh for Frankenstein came in under time and under budget. The same cast and crew (and remaining money) were utilised to produce this follow-up, which attempts to give a similar off-kilter treatment to the worlds most famous vampire.



In this version, the Count (Udo Kier) can only sustain himself by drinking the blood of virgins (pronounced 'wirgins').

The last if his family (save his sister, who is on her last legs) Dracula tavels to Italy on the advise of his manservant; believing that a catholic country will be a good place to find a wirgin who's family won't have geared of his own, and will therefore be happy to marry her off to a titled Romanian such as himself.

Sadly, the film fails on almost every level - it's predecessor was by no means a masterpiece, but this one isn't mad enough to coast by on insanity the way Flesh did.

It tries bless it, Dracula soon happens upon a once well-to-do family who have fallen on hard times, who are eager to get one of their 4 daughters married off; sadly (for the Count) the family only consider two of the daughters to be 'eligible'; unbeknownst to the parents, those two daughters are both having regular sex with the gardener (Joe Dallesandro who played a similar roll in Frankenstein) and occasionally each other.

I have a love/hate relationship with Dracula movies that change the rules, although here the rule changes are interesting; Dracula seemingly needs to eat food, although it doesn't keep him immortal, and any meat must be from virgin animals. Only the blood of a virgin human can restore his youth; without it he will age and die. When he drinks from a Virgin she will become a vampire, a non virgin will make him ill, and fall under his control (although not become a vampire). There's also an interesting opening scene in which Dracula, visibly aged and sick looking, applies made-up and hair die to hide his condition; Something I would have liked to see recur throughout the move, sadly it did not.

Ultimately, aside from the interesting mythology changes, and Udo Kier's wild overacting, this movie has nothing going for it. While FfF's particular brand of craziness was almost enough to make up for the lack of quality, I feel that the rushed nature of this effort shines through, and the silliness is just not well done enough to forgive the flaws.

Blood for Dracula - Lisa's Review

*** SPOILERS ***

From the same guys who brought us 'Flesh for Frankenstein', 'Blood for Dracula' is also a very odd, yet at the same time compelling movie... in that you find it hard to drag your eyes away from it, much as you may want to at times.

My favourite part of this movie is the introduction as the opening credits roll, which show the impossibly beautiful Udo Kier as Dracula making up his face in front of a mirror, ironically to hide his sickly pallor.  The thing is, the count needs to drink virgin blood in order to stay alive and well. Transylvania seems sadly lacking in that area.  For this reason, with the advice of his servant Anton and the blessing of his sister, he sets off for Italy, as Anton figures this is where there should be plethora of young catholic virgin girls.

Their cover story is that he is seeking a wife and custom dictates that he must marry a virgin girl.  Step forward the di Fiore family, who have 4 young daughters, who they claim are virgins.  However, 2 of the 4 girls have already been deflowered thanks to the creepy, sleazy handyman Mario.  Sadly for the count, he discovers one of the subjects of his advances is no virgin and he immediately becomes very ill and treats us to a lovely blood vomitting scene.  Kudos to Udo for the convincing acting in this scene... speaking of acting, asides from him, the acting in this movie is monumentally AWFUL.  The accents are cringe-worthy and sometimes you're not sure if you should be laughing....

Oddly drinking the blood of these 2 girls turns them into droid like creatures who obey his every order.  Now we know there are only 2 daughters left to make the count well again.   The younger one is only 14... that doesn't however matter to our lothario Mario who decides to rape her to save her from the count.  There follows a rather stomach churning scene after this... that's not to say its gorey, but one of those... "OMG Yuck!" scenes.

Anyways.... Udo manages to regain his strength as he drinks the blood of the eldest daughter who is still a virgin, but it's all to no avail.  Our ending comes as the girls mother learns of the counts real identity and plans.  She meets at end at the hands of Draculas servant Anton when she confronts him, but she manages to kill him before she herself dies.   Mario kills the count and dismembers his body and the oldest girl (who is now a vampire) is staked...

So what did I think.  That's a hard one.  It definately isn't a movie I'd watch by choice.  It isn't one I will watch again, but I wouldn't go so far as to give it an 'avoid' tag.  I love Udo Kier and he is the only thing about it worth watching in my opinion.  One for old horror fans only.

The Werewolf and the Yeti - Lisa's Review

I'll start by saying, this is one crazy assed movie.  I could probably do with a second watch to make much sense of it, but my abject lack of enjoyment of any aspect of it, prevents me from doing so.  One thing I have learnt from this 'Nasties' experience is that I'm not a fan of the 'so bad its good' movies.

The Werewolf and The Yeti - Will's Review

This one is a gap in the run for many who have tried to attempt the DPP72, as it has never been re-released in the UK or the US... I'm therefore forgiving myself the late review, instead being great full that there's a review at all, however untimely. I'll give a full (as I can manage) plot summery at the end of the review, because this is a tough one to get hold of, and you may want to read about it, given that its a tough one to get to see.