SHOCK CINEMA VOLUME 2 (1991) ***

The second installment in Scream Queen Brinke Stevens’ Shock Cinema series is even better than the first.  The format varies slightly from the template of its predecessor.  This time, Brinke interviews an eclectic pool of subjects known for their work in front of and behind the camera.  The range of talent runs from Scream Queens (Melissa Moore) to screenwriters (Ted Newsom) and special effects artists (Michael Burnett).  

Brinke gets more screen time in this volume, which is always a good thing.  I especially liked her intro, which takes place in a video store (where several of her films are prominently displayed).  The highlight is her face to face interview with Forrest J. Ackerman in his Ackermansion.  Some might be disappointed that Ackerman talks more about his film appearances than the creation of his Famous Monsters of Filmland magazine, but I’m sure he got a kick out of it.  Not only is the interview (which occurs about halfway through) fun, it also helps to break up the talking head format a bit.

There is a wealth of interesting stories here.  Director Gary Graver talks about getting cheated out of money from distributors, Robert Quarry has some good anecdotes about the making of Count Yorga, and Deanna Lund bemoans the use of body doubles.  (She doesn’t mention the title by name, but I can only assume she was talking about her role in the immortal Elves.)  The most flabbergasting tidbit:  Hearing Newsom being touted as the screenwriter for “the upcoming Spider-Man movie” (although he claims he blew all his Spider-Man money making his own film). 

DIABOLIK (1968) ** ½

Mario Bava’s eye-popping, colorful, mod, but frustratingly uneven psychedelic adventure plays like a mash-up of Batman and James Bond.  Both franchises were ultra-hip at the time, and fans of their respective series will probably have fun spotting how Bava liberally sprinkles their influences about the screen.  It’s nowhere near as good as some of Bava’s horror films of the decade, however, it’s neat to see what he could accomplish with a broader canvas and a bigger budget.

John Philip Law (who appeared in producer Dino De Laurentiis’ other big budget comic book movie of 1968, Barbarella) stars as Diabolik, a daring thief who lives in an underground lair with his sexy girlfriend/assistant (Marisa Mell).  The cops try to entrap him by putting a valuable emerald necklace on display.  Diabolik easily snatches it but finds himself behind a rock and a hard place when the leader of a criminal syndicate (Adolfo Celi) kidnaps his girlfriend, hoping to make a switch for the necklace.

Diabolik is fun in fits and starts.  It’s at its best during the sequences when Law dons a skintight outfit and dangles perilously from rooftops and castle walls.  I also dug the parts that shamelessly rip off Batman, such as the scene where Diabolik sabotages a press conference by using “Exhilarating Gas”, as well as his Batcave-inspired hideout (where he makes love to Mell in a pile full of money).

The biggest stumbling block is the character of Diabolik himself.  As portrayed by Law, he’s more or less an emotionless cypher that draws no sympathy from the audience.  I guess they were trying to make him into a badass antihero, but Law’s wooden performance does very little to make you root for him.  

AKA:  Danger:  Diabolik.  

SHOCK CINEMA VOLUME 1 (1991) ***

Scream Queen Brinke Stevens produced and hosts this entertaining look at low budget horror filmmaking.  Some of the hardest working horror directors of the '80s and '90s are interviewed and they all give informative and insight commentary on the perils and pitfalls of low budget moviemaking.  Some of the interviewees have more prominent credits than others, but nearly all of them have entertaining stories to tell.  

Fred Olen (Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers) Ray is the most fun to listen to.  He’s very forthright about his career and makes several interesting points about the logistics of low budget filmmaking.  He probably deserves his own documentary.  Some directors, like Jeff (Leatherface:  The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3) Burr have experience working with bigger budgets and high-profile studios and mostly hate it.  The more DIY type of directors like J.R. (The Dead Next Door) Bookwalter are engaging too, mostly because they’re working with even less time and money.

One thing connects them, and that’s their passion for film.  They are all uniform on their advice to young filmmakers:  Grab a camera and make your own movie, which is heartening.  

If there is a fault, it’s that Brinke pretty much disappears after her intro.  While I do wish shee had more of a presence throughout the documentary (which only runs about an hour), the directors are entertaining enough on their own to sustain your interest.  

Other volumes in the series followed.

JAILBAIT BABYSITTER (1977) **

Therese Pare stars as a teenager who likes to do a lot of heavy petting with her boyfriend while babysitting.  Naturally, he gets steamed when she doesn’t go all the way.  One night while babysitting, her friends crash the place and throw an impromptu toga party.  When her employers find out, she runs off into the night and stumbles upon a high-priced hooker (Lydia Wagner) who lets her stay with her in her luxurious mansion.  She then tries to take Therese under her wing and turn her into a prostitute, much to the chagrin of her boyfriend.

Directed by John (Grave of the Vampire) Hayes, Jailbait Babysitter is one of those ‘70s sexploitation films that offers up more tease than please.  The nude scenes and sensual depictions of the sexual acts are few and far between, and when they do occur, they aren't especially scintillating.  Despite the lurid title, it rarely, if ever delivers on the promise of lowbrow drive-in thrills.  I mean her first john winds up having a heart attack before he can even ball her.  

The pacing is lethargic to say the least.  The stuff in between the bumping and grinding is unevenly acted and mostly boring.  It also doesn’t help that just when you think the film’s wrapping itself up, it continues on for another unnecessary reel with a disco Halloween party sequence and a needless attempted rape.

As a fan of Hayes’ previous work, I was sort of hoping Jailbait Babysitter would be some sort of minor classic.  Maybe that’s what I get for raising my expectations hopelessly too high.  At least you can enjoy it for its time capsule qualities.  I mean, it’s hard to completely hate any movie with this many detailed vans.

Frequent Hayes leading man Michael Pataki appears briefly in the uncredited role of Pare’s employer.

SHADOW OF THE THIN MAN (1941) ** ½

Lush married detectives Nick and Nora Charles (William Powell and Myrna Loy) go to the race track to play the ponies and wind up investigating the death of a jockey.  A young reporter named Paul (Barry Nelson from The Shining making his screen debut), eager for a scoop, sticks his nose in the matter and winds up getting framed for another murder.  Mr. and Mrs. Charles then set out to clear Paul’s name and nab the killer.

The fourth Thin Man mystery is a slight improvement over the last one, Another Thin Man.  The scenes of the Charles’ domestic bliss, wrangling their dog Asta, and rearing their son Nick Jr. (Dickie Hall) are a lot of fun (I liked the part where Nick reads his son a racing form he has hidden inside a storybook), but the mystery itself is considerably less involving.  While it’s a little more interesting than the previous entries, the pacing has a tendency to drag whenever Powell is sleuthing.  Luckily, his charm helps keep these overwritten scenes afloat. 

Powell and Loy’s breezy chemistry is as entertaining as ever and their banter is snappier than the previous entries.  The supporting cast is fine too.  We have Donna Reed as Nelson’s loyal girlfriend who helps him in his quest for a story, famed acting teacher Stella Adler plays a socialite with a motive for murder, and Sam Levene has some good moments the investigator on the case.  In addition to Nelson, Ava Gardner and Sid Melton were also making their film debuts.

It’s Loy who gets the best line of the movie when she tells Powell, “I’ll be with you in two shakes of a cocktail.”

THE STING (1973) ****

The Sting is simply one of the greatest films of all time.  It is the product of the best talent in all areas of the medium at that time coming together and creating one of the finest masterpieces in movie history.  It was director George Roy Hill’s love letter to the early days of cinema.  Using various old school techniques to echo the Golden Age of Hollywood, he gave The Sting’s ‘30s period detail an authentic feel, while simultaneously giving audiences something new and refreshing.  Everything from the acting of Paul Newman and Robert Redford (both of whom have never been better) to the superior set design, and impeccable costumes represents the best talent in their particular field firing on all cylinders.  

The script by David S. Ward is the blueprint for all con men movies.  It is one of the most intricately plotted scripts ever written and Hill, not to mention the actors, do it justice at every turn.  The use of Scott Joplin’s ragtime music (arranged by Marvin Hamlisch) adds to the lightweight tone of the movie and is a perfect cherry on top.

Redford plays Johnny Hooker, a small-time grifter who unknowingly heists a bunch of money from feared gangster Lonnegan (Robert Shaw).  He retaliates by killing one of Redford’s associates, which sends him out for revenge.  He looks up master con man Henry Gondorff (Newman) and together they plot a major scam to bilk Lonnegan out of a half a million dollars. 

I’ve seen The Sting several times over the years, but I was lucky enough to see it for the first time in a theater on the big screen, where it was meant to be seen.  It plays just fine on the small screen, but when you see the film in a theater with a mostly full house, it really pops.  Seeing Newman and Redford in their prime, projected larger than life, you can fully appreciate their talents and effortless chemistry together.  

That’s really the word that best describes The Sting, effortless.  There are a lot of moving parts, many vital supporting characters, schemes within schemes, and twists within twists.  Together, Hill and Ward pull it off with style, charm, and élan, making the whole thing look easy.  Likewise, Newman and Redford are a tailor-made team who never once break a sweat.  As good as they were in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (which was also directed by Hill), they’re even better here.  

THE EVICTORS (1979) **

The Evictors comes to us courtesy of Charles B. Pierce, and it’s a lot like his Legend of Boggy Creek and The Town That Dreaded Sundown.  Purporting to be based on a true-life incident, Pierce takes the pseudo-documentary approach he enjoys so well and applies it yet again, giving himself another opportunity to indulge his penchant for local legends and small-town gossip.  While this is arguably his most atmospheric and accomplished work (which honestly, isn’t saying much), it still leaves much to be desired.

He did assemble himself a good cast at least.  Vic Morrow is top-billed, but his role isn’t all that sizeable.  He’s the real estate agent who sells a couple played by Michael Parks and Jessica Harper a house secluded in the countryside during WWII.  Naturally, they’re blissfully unaware of the multiple violent incidents that occurred in the home years before.  Soon after getting settled in, they begin receiving threatening messages in their mailbox and are subject to a shadowy prowler that likes to lurk about the property.

Most of Pierce’s films have an amateurish feel to them, but this one is a serviceable enough attempt to elicit chills.  If anything, it shows what he could accomplish with a capable cast and a decent-sized budget at his disposable.  The black and white flashbacks are marginally effective, although their placement in the narrative often brings the present-day action to a screeching halt.  I’ll admit, Pierce gives the old-timey scenes a nice attention to detail.  It’s just that all the back-and-forth between the timelines prevents the movie from gaining any momentum.  

I liked the scenes where Harper is stalked by the creep while she’s all alone in the house.  Whenever she’s on screen, her presence alone is enough to make you want to watch it.  Unfortunately, the usually weird Parks doesn’t bring anything to the table as he plays things far too low key to leave much of an impression.  I mean, who wants to see Michael Parks play a “normal” guy?  Morrow does a fine job, but his very presence in the role sort of gives away the twist ending.  I mean, would YOU buy a house from Vic Morrow?