What general film/series have you just seen.. marks out of 5

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

I should most def check out more 30's horror. Gonna use your 10 faves list to check some off. Unless you were up for doing a quick rec list of the best of 30's horror gems

Now that you mention it (I had already done this for a previous site; this is a few years old so I made a few updates to it; I also found my top 10 horror list for the 1920s). I need to rewatch White Zombie since there is a Kino release out now. But I still think this is a nice 30s horror starter list at least the basics are there.

Top 10 1930s Horror:

Bride of Frankenstein (1935):
Not only one of the best horror films of the early Universal age, one of the best all-time movies. A great classic directed by auteur James Whale (the movie Gods and Monsters is about his life) and starring a speaking Boris Karloff and Colin Clive as Dr. Frankenstein.
Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (1931: Rouben Mamoulian): Thoughts here.
Mad Love (1935: Karl Freund): Karl Freund should have had more films after this.
Black Cat (1934: Edgar G. Ulmer): What? We root for Bela? Hee, hee Satan worshiping Hungarians.
Invisible Man (1933: James Whale): The combo of Claude Rains and James Whale makes an excellent film.
Freaks (1932: Tod Browning): A film that killed the career of Browning. Can you believe there is a reference to this in Martin Scorsese's The Wolf of Wall Street? "One of Us! One of Us! Gobble, Gobble ..."
Dracula (1931: Tod Browning):
One of Bela Lugosi’s best performances and one that has influenced film forevermore. “Listen to the children of the night…” I like it better than the Hammer vampires and well the rest (though Gary Oldman is a great vampire.) Loosely, very loosely based on the Stoker novel -- which I recommend to read as well.
Island of Lost Souls (1932: Erle C. Kenton): Are we not men? A film that has inspired much including such groups as House of Pain, Devo and Oingo Boingo. The Criterion release is excellent -- seriously. Read the H.G. Wells book too, though all movie versions differ from it.
White Zombie (1932: Victor Halperin): I need to rewatch this on the Kino release.
Frankenstein (1931: James Whale): While it is certainly one of the most imporant horror films of all time it is also one of the best. Some hammy performances tempor some of the effectivness. However the leads of both Clive and Boris are excellent.

oh so close:
The Mummy (1932: Karl Freund): Excellent make-up for Boris. Freund's films always look fantastic in black and white.
The Old Dark House (1932: James Whale):
The Black Room (1935: Roy William Neill): Actually this is easily top 10 material. When Boris Karloff wanted to he could give performances that equal any actor.
Son of Frankenstein (1939: Rowland V. Lee): Vastly underrated sequel that has a big influence on Young Frankenstein.
Vampyr (1932: Carl Dreyer): Seriously, get the Criterion release. This or The Black Room might end up in the top 10 depending how I feel on the rewach of White Zombie.

EDIT: I am not sure if this is considered horror, but a worth watch anyways:
The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1939: William Dieterle)

[grim_tales]

The Invisible Man was really good actually with an excellent performance by Rains, freaky in places with effects that are way ahead of their time. 8/10
I like The Mummy too, reportedly the make up was a nightmare to wear for Karloff and very painful.

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

The Invisible Man was really good actually with an excellent performance by Rains, freaky in places with effects that are way ahead of their time. 8/10
I like The Mummy too, reportedly the make up was a nightmare to wear for Karloff and very painful.

I'm looking forward to reading the original book soon (H.G. Wells). The make-up for that era was certainly a pain, but pretty effective looking just like the first couple of make-up jobs for Frankenstein (the first one especially because Boris was so skinny, with success came a few extra pounds.) For me it was kind of surprising seeing Claude Rains in that role (Bogart did a few early horrors, but he was not known yet so he was taking any kind of work in the early 30s.)

Both of these are in the Universal Legacy sets (reportedly some DVD players have had trouble playing them, I have not) which have several sequels for each if you guys are interested (and if you do not own them.) Unfortunately it looks like they are all OOP though (pick them up if you find them used.) The first films are both on BD as well, but I do not have that set yet.

Overall I prefer the Invisible Man series over the Mummy series for Universal. But the first film in each of the series is my favorite of each series. I do need to rewatch the sequels though.

[Markgway]

Chopping Mall (1986-USA) **
The Dawn of the Dead of Killer Robot movies; silly fun.
Standard 76m version reviewed; I don't think the original 95m version, Killbots, has ever been made available outside its initial theatrical release.

Critters (1986-USA) **
OK Gremlins rip-off, surprisingly stronger on suspense than humour (given the PG-13 rating).

[Killer Meteor]

The Invisible Man was really good actually with an excellent performance by Rains, freaky in places with effects that are way ahead of their time. 8/10
I like The Mummy too, reportedly the make up was a nightmare to wear for Karloff and very painful.

I'm looking forward to reading the original book soon (H.G. Wells). The make-up for that era was certainly a pain, but pretty effective looking just like the first couple of make-up jobs for Frankenstein (the first one especially because Boris was so skinny, with success came a few extra pounds.) For me it was kind of surprising seeing Claude Rains in that role (Bogart did a few early horrors, but he was not known yet so he was taking any kind of work in the early 30s.)

Bogart did Return of Doctor X in 1939 as a punishment for asking for more money! He was certainly established by then, if not quite the big star. He was none too-pleased.

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

... Bogart did Return of Doctor X in 1939 as a punishment for asking for more money! He was certainly established by then, if not quite the big star. He was none too-pleased.

Not a particularly good film. But it is in the Legends of Horror set which is easily worth buying for early horror fans. Mad Love is my favorite film of that set with a great Peter Lorre performance.

I forgot the year of that film (Return of Doctor X) in his ouevre. I kept thinking it was a few years earlier. It does not appear to be true about that as being punishment for asking for more money (it was a lead role and he still was doing mostly supporting roles at that time), but possibly another reason:

Now I've read the quote (the second part of the following; the first part is another possible reason he was in that film) several places, but I am not sure of the origin of the source:

I also read, but am not entirely sure if it's true, that Warner Brothers made him do the film as punishment for acting up in public with his then wife Mayo Methot, a woman who contributed to their popular moniker, "The Battling Bogarts".
Humphrey Bogart reviled the film and said: "This is one of the pictures that made me march in to Jack Warner and ask for more money again. You can't believe what this one was like. I had a part that somebody like Bela Lugosi or Boris Karloff should have played. I was this doctor, brought back to life, and the only thing that nourished this poor bastard was blood. If it had been Jack Warner's blood, or Harry's, or Pop's, maybe I wouldn't have minded as much. The trouble was, they were drinking mine and I was making this stinking movie."

Source for the above

Of course, take all of this with a grain of salt. I have some books on Bogart I will have to read (or reread) so if I come across any of this I'll post later. But if I was to speculate I would think that initially Bogart might have been happy at first to get a lead role, even if he was miscast. It might have been a different story with a different director, but I know he was not happy with the results (and this does lead actors to say things that are not necessarily true that would have been different if the film was a success; this also helps create canards to try to help "explain" and you end up with things like the two punishment stories above.) Sometimes it trying to get the truth of things is like being a detective.

[Killer Meteor]

I love Mad Love. I first saw it on BBC2 when I was 9.

[Markgway]

Dangerously Close (1986-USA) **
Nothing original, but at least Albert Pyun's teen vigilante thriller is close to being a decent movie.

Vacation (1983-USA) *½
Very patchy comedy, frequently obnoxious.
John Hughes wrote this?

Silent House (2011-USA-France) *½
Mostly boring haunted house horror, takes place almost entirely in the dark thanks in part to woefully under lit cinematography; the resolution/revelation is ham-fisted and distasteful. Young lead Elizabeth Olsen deserves better.

Eye of the Tiger (1986-USA) **
Risible action-revenge saga with Gary Busey; just dumb enough to be mindless fun.
(Funny scene)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLCnWtsc6gA

Quiet Cool (1986-USA) **
Adequate rural actioner in which NYC cop James Remar joins forces with a teenage survivalist to wipe out the cannibals growers who murdered the boy's family; resolution is impossible to guess because it's so ridiculous.

Modern Girls (1986-USA) *½
Vapid comedy wastes its talented and attractive leads.

Bait (2000-USA-Australia-Canada) **½
Slick, if longish action comedy; Jamie Foxx is no Eddie Murphy though...

Wildcats (1986-USA) **½
Not bad sports comedy/drama/vehicle for Goldie Hawn.

Jumpin' Jack Flash (1986-USA) **½
Amusing debut vehicle for Whoopi Goldberg.

Tuff Turf (1984-USA) *½
Wasn't expecting a lame R-rated rip-off of The Karate Kid. Tonally very uneven, too, with wild swings from Ferris Bueller-like music-com skits to brutal violence and rape. Hero James Spader is introduced as tough and cool (and reportedly has a backstory reputation) but spends most of the film acting like a wimp and getting his ass kicked. Who knew that Precinct 13's ice-cream girl would grow up to be a hottie? (and sadly those are not her nipples).

[saltysam]

Sorcerer 3.5/5 Very well done Friedkin remake of Wages Of Fear finally gets a decent Home Video release. Roy Scheider is excellent as usual and the film has some brilliant cinematography.The BD digibook has zilch extras.

[RetroRobot]

Lone Wolf McQuade and Extreme Prejudice.... a more mucho macho double bill is hard to come by. Damn I miss this style of filmmaking. The pussification of Hollywood continues, and good ole' sweaty, hairy manly action flicks like these are laughed at today. Maybe one day American cinema will grow its balls back, though im not holding my breath.

[Markgway]

My last post had ten quick takes... am I watching too many movies...?? lol

[RetroRobot]

Too bad you didn't like Tuff Turf. I pretty much agree with everything you said, but I guess I like it in spite and beacuse of those things. Yes, the musical bits could have been scaled back, but the synth score kicks ass, and I love the Marianne Faithful intro song. To me, the flick is just a nice piece of 80's cheese that I really enjoy... flaws and all.

[Killer Meteor]

Sorcerer 3.5/5 Very well done Friedkin remake of Wages Of Fear finally gets a decent Home Video release. Roy Scheider is excellent as usual and the film has some brilliant cinematography.The BD digibook has zilch extras.

I'm looking forward to seeing this. I've had the soundtrack album (yet another one I discovered through kung fu movies!) for nearly 10 years now!

[Markgway]

Reform School Girls (1986-USA) **
Bizarre WIP trash alternates between parody (30-something 'teens' and ultra-camp performances) and straight-up exploitation drama (sexual and emotional abuse); more entertaining than it should be.

[saltysam]

Sorcerer 3.5/5 Very well done Friedkin remake of Wages Of Fear finally gets a decent Home Video release. Roy Scheider is excellent as usual and the film has some brilliant cinematography.The BD digibook has zilch extras.

I'm looking forward to seeing this. I've had the soundtrack album (yet another one I discovered through kung fu movies!) for nearly 10 years now!

Tangerine Dream...yes great soundtrack.

[RetroRobot]

Kinjite- Forbidden Subjects 1989

Hadn't seen this in a while. Oh boy.... now I like me some Cannon schlock, but this is on a whole other level of bad. You know it's gonna be trashy when the credit sequence involves shots of a young Nicole Eggert being tied to a bed while a pair of unidentified man hands pulls a dildo and a jar of lube out of a suitcase. But when Charlie Bronson then interrupts that impending kink session, beats the guy up, and ass rapes him with his own dildo (off camera, but still) well, now we got a film. Sadly, it all devolves into a misguided and absolutely rudderless piece of crap, that tries to say something about culture clash, sex traffic and morality but fails miserably at all of them.

Im usually the least pc person in the room, but this flick is just straight up racist. Not so much in an intentional and malicious way, but culturally ignorant and insensitive to the point where you start questioning whether it was actually made by adults with a functioning brain. The way the Japanese characters (James Pax in particular) and Japanese culture as a whole is portrayed here is laughable. I bet you a million bucks that some hack writer or studio exec stumbled onto some article about Japanese sexual culture, or indeed the fringes thereof, and thought it would make a nice sleazy premise for a Cannon flick.

In the words of Harvey Keitel's xenophobic cop character in Rising Sun "These guys are known world class pervesion freaks", which seems to be the mindset here. Also, Bronson's character is overtly racist, but we still have to root for this guy cuz he brings down the badguys? It's not like he goes on some kind of journey, or that the movie is smart enough to set him up as some sort of anti hero struggling with his own demons. Nope, he's just a racist douchebag going after even bigger douchebags. So who the fuck am I suposed to invest in here?

As a character study, this is beyond pathetic. The James Pax character arc is nonsensical at best, and doesn't gel at all with the Bronson arc. Structurally, this film is a cock-up from beginning to end. They obviously just had a whole bunch of sleaze material, and tried to justify it with some lame points on morality and supposed insights into the pervy minds of Japanese business men and Latino pimps. I like sleaze, I dig schlock and im a big apologist for most of Cannon films' output. But this is just a piece of shit.

J. Lee Thompson as a director had clearly lost his touch by the time of this flick... and long before. I mean, this was the guy who directed Guns of Navarone, Cape Fear, Kings of the Sun etc. And I even enjoy earlier Cannon efforts like Ten to Midnight (sleaze done right) King Solomon's Mines (hackneyed but fun Indy rip-off) and others. But this..... this is fucking atrocious. It was also his last film, and what a shit stain of a swan song it is. There are tons of other things to pick at here that I didn't even mention. Suffice to say that while I actually have this film in my collection, and have watched it before.... I probably won't be watching again (glad I took screencaps and review notes so that I never have to) cuz this is just an inexcusable fucking mess of a movie that no amount of Bronson street justice or 80's Cannon vibe could have saved.

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

Well thanks to your review, I will put this even further down in the Bronson (and Cannon) films I need to watch. I've done a few reviews like that where I just do not want to watch the film again (Laughing Times for example.) The annoyance about films like that is that you could have spent your valuable time elsewhere with another film (or book or gym or pulling nose hairs.)

[RetroRobot]

I'd seen it before, so I knew it would be a bit of a chore. But I want to review it and do screen caps for my future site, so hey, let's get through it. I just didn't remember it as THIS awful. But then again, watching a film for review purposes is very different that just throwing it on as a time waster or random entertainment. You put your critical specs on, and every flaw becomes more glaring, at least to me. Though by the same token, the positive aspects also become more clear..... this film just didn't have any positive aspects whatsoever. And im extremely forgiving when it comes to 80's trash.... but not blind. When I actually review it for real, I will skewer it in a more eloquent and intricate way, this was just my off the cuff thoughts. But yeah, you can easily put it at the bottom of the watch pile.

[Markgway]

I saw KINJITE years ago... don't remember it being that bad.

Nicole Eggert. Bed. Dildo.

Might have to rewatch this.

Oh, and surely there is a sub-culture of perversion in Japan?
Hung Fist is forever posting about it!

[RetroRobot]

There is a sub culture of pervesion in every country, and there are ways of depicting that which can be interesting, this was not one.

[HungFist]

I haven't seen the film so can't comment on it, but yes, Japan has more subcultures of perversion than most other countries combined. For example groping girls in trains is a popular passtime here.

[RetroRobot]

That's in the film:)

[Markgway]

I haven't seen the film so can't comment on it, but yes, Japan has more subcultures of perversion than most other countries combined. For example groping girls in trains is a popular passtime here.

You should check it out and let us know how accurate it is!

[HungFist]

Sounds accurate then

edit: I didn't notice Mark was posting at the same time...

[Shingster]

You just described the first scene of the film Hung IIRC! I saw it back on VHS rental back in 91 and even as a 12yr old I thought it was utterly ridiculous!
Subculture of perversion of Japan? Surely if there's one country where perversion is less a subculture and more a notoriety it's Japan!