Completed Collection: Psychotic Connections

This set features three horror movies on a single disk. The films are united by a shared theme of psycho killers and psychic phenomenon (or, at least, the appearance of psychic phenomenon). The quality varies widely with "Gothic" being the only picture here that is truly worthwhile (and even it might not be to the liking of many dedicated horror fans).

Click on the titles of the included movies to read reviews of each.

Psychotic Connections: 4/10 Overall Rating
Chiller (1985) 3/10
Gothic (1986) (7/10)
Maniac (1934) 3/10





When I got my copy of this set several years ago, I paid $3.95. That price is far closer to the right one than the present going rate. "Gothic" is the only worthwhile film here--aside from the curiosity value that "Maniac" has for those with an interest in the horror genre--and it's available in other, far more worthwhile collections.

'Almost Hollywood' is almost funny

Almost Hollywood (1994)
Starring: Don Shot, Greg Scott, Rachel Dyer, India Allen, and Scott Apel
Director: Mike Weaver
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Tony (Shot), a sleazy producer of direct-to-video "erotic thrillers", finds himself under increasing pressure when an angry starlet (Dyer) reveals their affair to his wife, and the owners of his studio decide they want to make "classy" movies and hire a Playboy Bunny with pretensions (Allen) to be the lead in their next three pictures. Things go from bad to worse when the starlet is murdered after a wrap-party, and everyone is willing to believe Tony killed her because they all dislike him so much.

This film is a misfire from beginning to end. While it's conceptually a decent satire about low-budget exploitation film-making in 1990s L.A., with the expected assortment of stereotypes and all the usual digs and truisms about the industry you find whenever low-budget filmmakers turn the a fictitious and satirical eye on themselves, it's not funny enough during the humorous bits, its not suspenseful enough during the scary bits, and it unfolds at a pace that is for the most part far too slow. Frankly, there's nothing here that's all that good; the film is mostly a collection of jokes and characters that are used to much greater effect in other movies (like in "Hollywood Boulevard" and the more recent "Shoot or Be Shot"), and by the time the film reaches its conclusion and offers up a curious little coda, you get the feeling that the creators of the movie knew there was nothing here that's all that good.

The only thing that makes this movie interesting to watch is the character of Tony, the sleazy producer. This character is usually the villain in pictures like this, and he starts out that way here, but as the film progresses, I found myself rooting increasingly for him. He is the only character in the film who is honest with himself and others about who he is (excluding any actor he happens to be talking to--he considers lying to actors just part of the job, something he's not shy about explaining to any non-actor who will listen), and he's the only character who is happy with what he does in the movie business. "I like my movies," is a line he says several times during the film, not to convince himself that they're good, but just stating the fact that he likes them and that he enjoys his role in making them together and getting them to market. Every other character in the film is either a hypocrite or a self-deluded windbag and/or hack... Tony, in the end, emerges as perhaps the most moral character of them all. A desire to learn his ultimate fate was the only thing that kept me engaged with this movie, because, even though he was the creator of the mess he was in, I wanted to see him get out of it. (The identity of the killer became obvious early on, and it will be to all but the most dense viewer; and director Weaver must have thought he was making a movie for some REALLY dense viewers, because he telegraphs the killer's identity even before the second murder happens. And if anyone but me cares why I put reviews on the blogs I do, this approach to the film's murder mystery aspect of the film is why I'm covering it here instead of at Watching the Detectives.)

As the low rating implies, I can't give this movie a strong recommendation. It is carried almost entirely by the fact that Tony is a different sort of character for this type of movie, with even the funniest of jokes being predictable and the plodding pace at which it unfolds making it even harder to sit through. However, if you can't get enough of filmmakers and actors making fun of themselves of the public's perception of them, or if you have REALLY fond memories of the kind of fare that was typical on "USA Up All Night", it might be worth seeking out. If nothing else, you can consider it a "bonus feature" if you pick up one of the several DVD multi-movie packs in which it is present.

Xtro: The Complete 'Trilogy'

When is a movie trilogy NOT a movie trilogy? When it's the "Xtro" series!

"Xtro" is a series of sci-fi/horror films that are linked only by the presence of killer creatures from other worlds, the same director, and the word "Xtro" in the titles. There are no story links and the killer aliens are vastly different in each film. One really has to wonder why they chose to make the second two films "sequels" to the original; was the title "Xtro" really such a draw in the early 1990s? I understand that the first film achieved some minor legendary status by being included on the British list of "Video Nasties", but was that really enough to drive viewers to sequels made as long as ten years after the original? Especially given how bad the sequels were?


Xtro (1983)
Starring: Bernice Steger, Phillip Seyer, Maryam D'Abo, and Simon Nash
Director: Harry Bromley Davenport
Rating: Five of Ten Stars

Three years after being abducted by aliens, Sam (Seyer) returns a very different man, and he passes his gooey, gory alien powers onto his young son (Nash).


When I first saw this movie as a kid, it freaked the heck out of me. The father coming back and spreading alien corruption throughout the household, the way the son was transformed, and the way he in turn went after the horny au-paire (D'Abo)... even the creepy way he made deadly things appear with his mental powers. It all seemed very, very scary.

I suspect someone watching the film with less jaded eyes than mine could still find "Xtro" scary. At this point, I find still find some of the movie quite disturbing--Sam's method of returning to human form was not something I recalled, and it is definitely creepy; the alien egg-laying scene; and the final scene with the mother... well, up to a point with that one--but in general, I now view this film mostly with a sense of frustration because there are two fundamental things that spoil it for me.

First, there's the fact that there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of rhyme or reason to what the characters do, alien or otherwise. In fact, some of the things that happen are pure "Stupid Character Syndrom"--a character does something just to make sure the plot doesn't come to screeching halt, even if a vaguely intelligent person would take any one of numerous different options.

Second, the director and/or scriptwriter simply doesn't know when enough is enough, and this spoils a number of what otherwise would have been excellent, very scary moments. The movie's ending is the ultimate example of this. I won't go into details, because I would spoil it, but suffice to say, the filmmakers ruin a perfectly good ending. If they had been smart, the film would be about 5-10 seconds shorter.

On the upside, we do get to see D'Abo prance around in absolutely nothing, and the acting is uniformly bland (not quite bad... just flat) so no one stands out as good or bad. Gorehounds might also be impressed with a number of scenes in film. The "Return of Sam" scene is a standout in that sense. "Xtro" also features a well-done electronic score, and those are few and far between.

Nonethless, this is a film that clocks in at the low end of average... although I admit my reaction may partially be due to it not living up to my memories of it. (Maybe I'll get the courage to watch "The Exorcist" again. It's the only movie I walked out because it scared me too badly.)


XTRO II: The Second Encounter (1991)
Starring: Jan-Michael Vincent, Tara Buckman, and Paul Koslo
Director: Harry Bromley Davenport
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

Deep underground, American scientists discover how to open a portal to another world...but, surprise-surprise, something goes wrong and murderous critters come across the dimensional void to run amuk. How will the best-and-brightest of the Mad Science Set stop the invasion and save themselves?!

Picture a bad "Aliens" rip-off and cross it with some of the lamest plot elements of a bad "Stargate SG-1" episode, and you have "XTRO: The Second Encounter."


Not only does this "sequel" have absolutely nothing in common with the first movie--the creatures don't even seem to be related--but it's also devoid of good acting, competent direction, and anything that even approaches originality.

For all its faults, the original XTRO at least delivered some genuine weirdness and horror, and it did so with a certain flair. This "sequel" brings absolutely nothing worthwhile to the table. It is a study in complete mediocrity and unoriginality.


Xtro 3: Watch the Skies (1994)
Starring: Sal Landi, Andrew Divoff, Andrea Lauren Hertz, and Robert Kulp
Director: Director: Harry Bromley Davenport
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

A group of Marine demolitions experts are sent to a remote, deserted island to disarm explosives left over from WW2. As will happen, something goes wrong and they unleash an alien that has been trapped in a bunker for several decades. Gory mayhem ensues.

I've read in several places that director Harry Bromley Davenport says this is his favorite entry in the "Xtro" series. I can't for the life of me figure out why. As flawed as it was, the original "Xtro" is far more interesting on every level than this one... and far more competently made.

It's actually a shame that "Xtro 3" turned out as a textbook example of what happens when a low-budget film is made with a slip-shod attitude, because there was a lot of potential here.

The setting--a deserted jungle island that once housed interned Japanese and a secret research facility could have been a character unto itself and filled the movie with atmosphere if the cinematography and direction hadn't been as lifeless as an instructional video on how to navigate the Dewey Decimal System. The story of Marines stalked by a murderous alien creature could have been engaging if the script writer had taken time to research actual military protocols and behaviors, had spent some time making the characters interesting and distinct, and bothered to actually bothered to do more than one draft so the dialogue didn't sound like something written for a cheap voice-over of a Japanese sci-fi movie.

And speaking of characters, perhaps if the actors all didn't seem like they had been handed the script pages right before cameras started to roll but instead seemed like they were in character instead of simply delivering the bad lines, the audience could perhaps develop attachment to one or more of them. Although decent acting would not make up for the fact that illogical, plot-dictated behavior governs every action they take, because no one seems to have bothered to think scenes through.

Similarly, if someone had paid attention to costuming and continuity on the production, maybe generous-minded or entertainment-starved viewers would be able to suspend disbelief and engage with the film, despite the incompetent direction and script. However, the appearing and disappearing gear on characters and less effort put into costuming than you might put into getting dressed for lounging around the house on a Saturday when your friends are all out of town, make that impossible.

Finally, although the alien has possibilities to rival the creepy creature of the original "Xtro," it ends up more laughable than scary due to badly executed special effects and the aforementioned illogical, plot-dictated character behavior. Is there anyone reading this who has seen this film who didn't think like I did: "Why run when you can just kick it really hard?"

"Xtro 3" continues the decline of this series into crapitude. The only thing that keeps it from sinking to a Two Rating (and thus earning a place over at Movies You Should [Die Before You] See) is the alien's back story. It's a cool idea... and it's too bad that it is wasted in a movie like this one. (I won't give it away here, because it is one of the few decent story elements in the film.)

If your looking for something to round out a Bad Movie Night line-up, "Xtro 3: Watch the Skies" might be what you're looking for. You might, however, be better off actually watching the skies and identifying shapes in the clouds.







Trivia: Harry Bromley Davenport stated in a 2010 interview that "Xtro 4" was in the works, which he confirmed in March 2011, in this interview. It remains to be seen if he continues to trend of making each installment in the series worse than the one that went before. It's already a given that this film will have no connection to the others, save for the word "Xtro". (And the fact that a fourth Xtro film is in production puts a lie to the claim that this post covers the complete series/trilogy. Although that may be kind of fitting, given how this "series" isn't one.

Infidelity always leads to disaster... and yet they still do it!

Maybe it's because I've never met anyone that I could imagine spending the rest of my life with for a very, very long (and I gave up on the notion over a decade ago), but I can't understand the type of person who would get married and then turn around and cheat on that person. I guess if one is a sociopath such behavior could be expected, but are there really that many sociopaths in the world?

I hope I never understand the sort of impulse that would cause someone to betray another person like that. But what I WOULD like to understand is why anyone would turn around and marry the person that cheated with them on their spouse. Why would you ever want to enter into any sort of permanent arrangement with someone who has proven themselves to be scummy and untrustworthy? Even if you are kindred spirits?

Much talk is spewed about how movies and other popular culture items shame people's behavior. If that was indeed true, wouldn't there be LESS infidelity in the world than more? After all, cheaters NEVER prosper in the movies... they end up framed for murder, stalked by psychos, or just find their lives in ruins in the aftermath.

And real-life cheaters usually don't have fates more impressive than their fictional counterparts... take John Edwards for example. Since he was caught sleeping around on his dying wife, he has not only been exposed as a corrupt weasel, but as a cry-baby coward as well. If people contemplating cheating on their husbands or wives doesn't care about the spouse's feelings, you'd think they'd at least care about what might happen to themselves and their own reputations.

Then again, stupid is as stupid does. Rather like the cheating characters in "Point of Terror" (and thus I segue into a review to keep the blog on track).


Point of Terror (1971)
Starring: Peter Carpenter, Dyanne Thorne, Leslie Sims, Joel Marsten, Paula Mitchell, and Lory Hansen
Director: Alex Nicol
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

Lounge singer Tony Trelos (Carpenter) thinks his dreams of stardom are at hand when he becomes the latest boy-toy for the oversexed wife of a record executive (Thorne) and she promises him a record contract. But things get dangerously complicated when her husband (Marsten) turns up dead and Tony falls in love/lust with her stepdaughter (Hansen).

"Point of Terror" is a messy movie that meanders through a predictable "Pride Goeth Before a Fall" story. The tone varies widely from comedy to thriller to horror, but it never stays with one atmosphere long enough to establish whether writer/producer/star Peter Carpenter failed at making an erotic thriller, a horror movie, or a dark comedy. Although the demise of the abusive husband, some of the revelations around Dyanne Thorne's character, and the fact that Tony Trelos is about as dumb as a box of rocks make me wonder if this is a REALLY dry comedy, I THINK Carpenter and director Alex Nicol were trying to make a thriller in the Italian "gaillo" vein. Unfortunately, while they captured the incoherence so dominant in many Italian mysteries and thrillers, they captured none of the style. Worse, scenes with flourishes that were intended to be artistic drag on and on and on and feel more like padding than anything else. (You know you're watching an erotic thriller gone wrong when you are reaching for the remote to fast-forward through the sex scenes because they are boring and the music score under them is nerve-gratingly bad).

The film isn't helped by the fact that the only performer with any screen presence in the whole thing is Dyanne Thorne. As prone as I am to make jokes about her two humongous talents, she actually does have quite a bit of charisma... and it really shows when she's surrounded by the caliber of actors in this film. She pretty much steals the movie from poor Peter Carpenter, although he obviously intended this to be his vehicle of stardom.

Speaking of Carpenter, this is the second of his films that I've watched--the other being "Blood Mania", which he also wrote, produced, and starred in, and which I will be reviewing over at Terror Titans one of these days--and in both cases, I felt that he was an okay actor but simply didn't have much in the way of screen presence... or he simply had the misfortune of always playing against actoresses who outshone him. This was the last of Carpenter's films, and I feel like he was to the 1970s like John King was to the 1940s.

'For Your Consideration' is a shaky mockumentary that can't maintain a tone

With the 2011 Oscar Awards ballots being mailed to members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences today, this seems like the perfect time for a review of this movie.


For Your Consideration (2006)
Starring: Catherine O'Hare, Harry Shearer, Parker Posey, Eugene Levy, Christopher Moynihan, Jim Piddock, and Christopher Guest
Director: Christopher Guest
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

When a rumor gets started that three stars in "Home of Purum", a third-rate, low-budget art film (that is still in production) are going to nominated for an Oscar, the Hollywood dream machine and egoes kick into high gear. Can there be a happy Hollywood ending for once?


"For Your Consideration" is a real step downward for Christopher Guest, a writer/actor/director who has turned in some of the best mockumentaries ever made. But his magic formula--which involves a group of actors he works with on movie after movie ad-libbing scenes based on a story outline and that worked so well in Waiting for Guffman", "Best in Show", and "A Mighty Wind"--doesn't quite click in this case.

The fatal problem with "For Your Consideration" is Guest doesn't seem to have a firm handle on the film's tone and style. The film doesn't have a convincing documentary feel to it, and the story is too loose and rambling to be a good "traditional" movie. It occupies a middleground between Guest's mockumentary style and his 1989 film "The Big Show", a straight movie that spoofed the Hollywood establishment and delivered much the same observatiions and messages as this latest film. But, although "The Big Show" had its problems, it was secure in its style. "For Your Consideration" is not, and it ultimately fails, because it feels phony as it unfolds.

The movie features all the faces we've come to expect in one of Guest's mockumentaries, but no one manages to be quite as funny as they were in "Best in Show" or "Waiting for Guffman". Stand-out cast members are Catherine O'Hare (who portrays a Hollywood has-been who comes to believe "Home for Purum" is her final shot at stardom), but she is remarkable here because her character is more tragic than funny and Parker Posey (who plays an obnoxious up-and-coming actress with devastating perfection).

Despite the good performances, this film is only of interest to the biggest fans of this troupe and Christopher Guest. Because the director failed to create a convincing tone--Guest utterly fails at making the film feel like a documentary--the film is shot through with a sense of fakeness and hollowness.

Not much Christmas for the Grinch to steal here

How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000)
Starring: Jim Carrey, Taylor Momson, and Jeffrey Tambor
Director: Ron Howard
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

In "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" (a movie that has about as much in common with the Dr. Seuss book of the same name as "Bram Stoker's Dracula" had with the book it was supposedly based on), the Grinch (Carrey)--a lifelong outcast from the terribly vicious, self-centered and materialistic Whovian society devises a plan to destroy Christmas and the 1,000th Whovilation after one final insult too many.

When watching "How the Grinch Stole Christmas", I was aghast at by how wide a margin the filmmakers seemed to miss the message of not only Dr. Suess' original book but even the cartoon. (Yes, I can envision some Hollywood types not feeling up to reading even a picture book, but they had the cartoon to go by.) The Whos have got to be the most evil, self-centered species in all of creation--the 10-year-old Grinch gets teased by classmates, vanishes, and no one cares to bring him back into the community, just to mention the worst of the characterizations of the Whos in the film--and where they pretty much lived the Christmas spirit in the Suess' book, with the feasts and the parties being an enhancement to their joy not the source of it, in the live-action film, a tiny minority of one (Cindy-Lou Who) has any Christmas spirit at all.

I was also very annoyed at the way the film was written. It shifted back and forth between a straight adaptation of Suess' story and a bunch of extra stuff, but one didn't seem to have an impact on the other. The most glaring of these was after the Grinch comes down to Whoville and takes part in one of the pre-Christmas celebrations only to be humiliated by the Whoville's mayor and his sycophantic sidekick (extra stuff), he returns to his mountain lair and schemes to destroy Christmas in a direct adaptation (line by line in some cases) of the book... but there is no sense or reflection in what he says that he's already been down to Whoville. It's as if no one bothered to go through the entire script and made sure that all the scenes fed properly into one another. It's as if they decided that all the movie needed was a slip-shod adaptation and Jim Carrey doing schtick in a very well-done Grinch suit.

Speaking of Carrey. I've never been a huge fan of his post "In Living Color" comedy... I find him more annoying than funny. I thought that he'd make a good Grinch--based on memories of the previews I saw when the film was originally released--but unfortunately, all he really does is his standard routines wearing a furry suit. Some of it IS pretty funny, but it would have been nice if someone (Carrey... or maybe even the film's apparently MIA director) had bothered to develop a character for the live-action Grinch, aside from "it's Jim Carrey doing schtick in a very well-done Grinch suit."

On, and I won't get started on the absolute butchery they do to the wonderful "You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch" song.

On the surface, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" seems like a well-done adaptation of Suess' fantastic children's book, and what rating I'm giving it beyond Zero is for the sets and costumes. In actuality, though, it's an embodiment of everything that book was trying to speak AGAINST--empty flash and commercialism that's devoid of heart and true spirit. This Howard-directed abomniation basically takes Suess' message and turns it on its head. In the original story, the Grinch was mean because he had no Christmas spirit... in the movie, he's mean because the Whos neglected him in every possible way and stripped him of all Christmas spirit. The Whos as portrayed in "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" deserved EVERYTHING the Grinch wanted to do them and much more.

The cartoon, although nearly 40 years old now, is still the only good adaptation of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas", and I recommend you avoid this version. I make my recommendation even more strenuously if you have young children. How will you answer the question "Why didn't his mommies and teacher go looking for him?" after the Grinch runs away from home? Do you really want to explain to your child why a Christmas movie casts such a heartless bunch of creatures as the Whos as the sympathetic characters in the film?

'Quark' is a show that should stay lost in space

Quark: The Complete Series (1977)
Starring: Richard Benjamin, Timothy Thomerson, Richard Kelton, Patricia Barnstable, Cyb Barnstable, Conrad Janis, Bobby Porter, Alan Caillou and Ross Martin
Director: Hy Averback
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Some televisions shows die a premature death, undeservedly cancelled because for whatever reason there was no audience for the show. The latest of these is "My Own Worst Enemy", but there are dozens upon dozens of quality shows that died early in the 50-year-plus history of network televison in the U.S.

"Quark", a shortlived 1977 sci-fi comedy show, is not one of these.

Every episode of "Quark", including the pilot--eight in total--is available on DVD. It's a nice-looking package, and it was a decent looking show. The sets were nice, the costumes were nice... the primary target of "Star Trek" was evident throughout--but the scripts simply weren't funny.

The set-up was good--the show followed the adventures of the unfortunate Adam Quark and his bizarre crew of misfits as they traveled the galaxy on a space-faring garbage scow, the bravely collect trash where no-one had collected trash before; the characters had the potential of being sufficiently weird--such as Science Officer Ficus, an overly logical humanoid plant played by Richard Kelton; the all-in-one "transmute" who keeps switching between his/her male and female halves played by Tim Thomerson; the ship's navigator and her clone, played by twins Patricia and Cyb Barnstable; the heroic, dedicated and perpetually unlucky Commander Quark himelf, played by Richard Benjamin--but neither the set-up nor the potential of the characters was never fully realized because of the bad writing.

Hardcore sci-fi fans may find a chuckle or two early on, but it isn't until the last three episodes that anything that a general audience will find remotely funny starts to happen. (The one exception is the "Star Wars" spoof in the second episode, "May the Source Be With You". The whiney superweapon in that episode was pretty good.)

The best part of the show is the interplay between Richard Benjamin and Richard Kelton. There's a goofy Kirk/Spock vibe in the realitionship between these two characters, the actors have a good sense of the comedic, and it helps make even the lamest episodes watchable. But then we've got Tim Thomerson who is so bad that it's hard to imagine that this is the same guy who will go onto be so hilarious in "Trancers" and "Dollman"... of course, it's not entirely Thomerson's fault. The material he's working with is truly awful. The rest of the cast do little more than take up space, and they are neither good enough nor bad enough to really warrant any particular attention.

Don't believe the hype about "Quark"--I did, and I wish I hadn't--and don't rely on fond memories you may have of catching part of an episode as a young kid. This is NOT a show that will stand up to your memory of it.

''Watching the Detectives' not up to legacy

Watching the Detectives (2007)
Starring: Cillian Murphy, Lucy Liu, Michael Panes, and Jason Sudeikis
Director: Paul Soder
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Neil (Murphy), a self-professed film geek and owner of a small video store, has his life turned upside-down when he falls in love with a thrill-seeking woman who may actually be certifiable insane (Liu).

While I was watching "Watching the Detectives", my mind kept flashing back to "Bringing Up Baby", a movie where a decent guy finds his life demolished by a crazed prankster but who finds himself in love with the girl and the excitement she brings to his days. The same dynamic is in effect here, but transplanted to modern-day and set a little bit further down the social latter.

Unfortunately, whenever "Bringing Up Baby" came to mind, this movie was found lacking. Now, it may not be entirely fair to compare anything to one of the greatest romantic comedies ever created, but almost everything that made that movie so great is what's missing in "Watching the Detectives".

"Bringing Up Baby" had a rapid-fire, never-stop-for-breath pace which made the craziness seem even crazier and even the calm moments seem like the characters were running a mile a minute. It was lean with not a second on the screen that was wasted. This movie is nowhere near as swift or trim, and it seems to be jogging from joke to joke rather than sprinting. The pacing of the film is far to languid for the kind of movie it wants to be, which is a modern screwball romantic comedy.

Another bigger problem with the film is that Lucy Liu is no Katherine Hepburn. While Liu is a fun and sexy actress who I've enjoyed even in parts that I felt were badly written (such has her role as the love interest in "Lucky Number Slevin"), she just doesn't have the charisma needed to pull off the sort of character she portrays in this film. She has more energy than a nuclear reactor, tons of sex appeal, and, like always, there seems to be a little bit of crazy lurking just below the surface, but without the charm and grace of a Hepburn, her character comes across as mean-spirited and vicious rather than just a little over-the-top and ultimately loveable. Heck, if Liu had been able to project innocence and naivety like Heather Angel in "Half an Angel" was able to do, she might have worked in the part... but that is even more remote a quality in Liu's bag of acting tricks. While Cillian Murphy is just about perfect in his role, his falling for Liu and tolerating her placing him in real danger just isn't believable, because she doesn't have the "right stuff" for her part.

It also doesn't help that the script never draws back the curtain on the mystery that is Lucy Liu's Violet. She remains as strange and distant to the audience at the end of the film as she was when she first appears in the video store. If the screenwriters had allowed Neil, and the viewers, to get a real glimpse into her world instead of always seeing the results of her lies and manipulations, the character would have seemed a bit more sympathetic and Neil's falling for her a bit more credible. As it stands, the fact Violet remains a cypher makes Liu's lack of charm all the more damaging to the film.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the film is that it's trying to modernize a type of film that simply can't be made today. The more films I watch, the more convinced I become that actors simply aren't trained in ways that allow them to effectively play the sort of characters found in the old Howard Hawkes-type comedies.

"Watching the Detectives" might be worth seeking out if you're a huge fan of Lucy Liu or Cillian Murphy, but if you are attracted to it, because of the promise of a modern-day screwball comedy, you're going to be disappointed.

Bigfoot: The World's Greatest Ninja?

If there's one creature who is more elusive than a Master Ninja, it's Bigfoot. He goes where he wants, when he wants, and no one is ever really able to see him. And this despite the fact that some "Bigfoot scholars" believe he's a migratory animal who moves up and down the northwest coast, passing unseen through some pretty well-inhabited areas.

Movie critic and political commentator Michael Medved believes in Bigfoot, so who am I to question? I wonder if the film I'm reviewing today convinced him. It's probably one of the finest pieces of Bigfoot scholarship, even if they don't address the theory that Bigfoots (Bigfeet?) are big hairy Ninja the likes of which exist nowhere in the world but my home of the American Northwest.

(Although I don't quite get how Bigfoot can be so stealthy when he apparently stinks worse than a Venezuelan garbage dumb in July.)


The Legend of Bigfoot (1976)
Starring: Ivan Marx and Peggy Marx
Director: Harry Winer
Rating: One of Ten Stars

This film is supposedly a documentary that chronicles a ten-year quest by a professional tracker to determine the migratory habits of Bigfoot and to acquire irrefutable film documentation of their existence. It's actually a collection of nature photography that wasn't quite good enough to make it into the PBS and Mutual of Omaha programs, intermingled with out-of-focus shots of guys in fur-suits and rubber feet.


"The Legend of Bigfoot" is crushingly dull unless you're really REALLY into Bigfoot and nature films. And even if you're really REALLY into nature films, you're going to find yourself wishing that Marx would get to some point, or that Bigfoot would rear up and eat him. At the very least, I suspect you're going to find yourself reaching for the remote so you can scan past the boring bits. What do wild pigs have to do with Bigfoot? What do Caribou hunters have to do with Bigfoot? What do "ground squirrels in love" have to do with Bigfoot? While the ground squirrels are damn cute, they have NOTHING do to with Bigfoot, yet we are treated to scenes of all the above that seem as long as the ten years Marx supposedly hunted Bigfoot. (Oh... and what self-respecting tracker drives a red VW Bug, even if it was the Seventies? And drives it into the remote central Washington back country in the middle of winter?)

Will the film make you believe in Bigfoot? Only if you can believe that someone and/or his camera crew is capable of getting crystal clear film of any living animals except the mysterious, stinky Bigfoot. As hoaxes/mocumentaries go, this is very badly done. It's far more likely that, if the film doesn't put you to sleep, it will motivate you to change the station the next time they're discussing the critter on "Coast-to-Coast AM". The theories featured in "Legend" are almost as stupid as the ones they aspouse on that show--Bigfoot as an extra-dimensional visitor is actually almost more believable than Bigfoot as migratory animal that literally moves as fast on the ground as Canada Geese fly through the air.

Supposedly, Ivan Marx--the tracker whose quest is documented in this film, and who supposedly took the blurry images of Bigfoot--was a leader in the field of Bigfoot research. I am definitely in the wrong line of work. The bar for being taken seriously in the field of Bigfoot scholarship must be seriously low, perhaps even lower than that in the field of studying scantily clad women to prove they cause earthquakes.

The people who take Bigfoot research seriously must also be very stupid, if "The Legend of Bigfoot" is the sort of material they consider valid. (Although this essay at www.bigfootencounters.com explains exactly what sort of documentarian Marx is. In brief, he's a fraud who makes Michael Moore look like Ken Burns. If "serious Bigfoot scholars" do web searches, they probably know what a piece of trash this film is.)

--
Why this film was included in the "Chilling Classics" DVD multipack--which is where I came across it--I'll never know. Perhaps someone mistook it for the Bill Rebane film known as "The Legend of Big Foot" (note the space), but never bothered to actually watch it before doing the digital transfer. Or maybe they got so bored they figured it HAD to be a Bill Rebane film. (And I apologize to Mr. Rebane for dumping on him while not even reviewing one of his movies. After all, I plenty of that here.)

When cave men and fire monsters attack!

Fire Monsters Against the Son of Hercules (1962)
Starring: Reg Lewis, Margaret Lee, and Nello Pazzafin
Director: Guido Malatesta
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

During the Ice Age, a peaceful tribe of hunter-gatherers are attacked by and threatened with genocide at the hands of a civilization of evil cave-dwellers, led hy their horny chief (Pazzafin) and his hard-on for the beautiful Moah (Lee). Will Maxus (Lewis), wandering hero and science wiz, be able to save them... and perhaps invent the shirt?

"Fire Monsters Against the Son of Hercules" is quite the misleading title. First off, there are no "fire monsters" in the movie (there are two-three monsters, but none of them have anything to do with fire... heck, the only reason one even menaces anyone is because stupid savages attack it!). Second, how can a film be about a "Son of Hercules" when it is set thousands of years before there ever was a Greece or a Hercules? (Of course, in its original inception, the film wasn't about a "Son of Hercules". That whole bit, along with the jaunty theme song, was added when the film was packaged for broadcast on American television. But, still, there are no fire monsters anywhere in this film.)

The general plotline here is that of just about every other Italian muscle-man/low-fantasy film from the 1950s and 1960s: The good people are menaced by the bad people--particularly the good people's women!--and they seem doomed for cetain until Maciste/Hercules/Ursus/Samson/Atlas/the-hero-of-many-names-and-few-shirts shows up to to flex his pecs, hurl some boulders and save the day. The film even offers not just one but TWO very lame dance numbers, with the extra one perhaps making up for the lack of an evil queen to seduce and trick the hero into captivity. (Every other standard of this sub-genre is present in the flick, however.)

Overall, the film is a relatively dull affair, although I did find the hero (named Maxus in the "Sons of Hercules edit, but Maciste in other versions) to be refreshingly intelligent when compared to some of the other "Sons" (not to mention Hercules himself) and the caveman trappings to be a nice change of pace. I also found the death scene of a couple of minor characters to be oddly moving... although I may just have been in a sappy mood when I watched this flick.

If you're a hardcore fan of Italian fantasy flicks, "Fire Monsters Against the Son of Hercules" might be just the fun bit of nonsense you're looking for. Others might find it a nice addition to a Bad Movie Night line-up... there are countless moments where even the dullest wit will be able to fire off a joke or two ala the robots from "Mystery Science Theater 3000". Everyone else can probably find better things to waste their time on.

(BTW, I do want to warn you about the theme song. It usually takes me about two days to purge it from my head and stop humming it whenever I watch a movie that opens with it.)

Stallone goes over the top!

This review is a spin-off from the week-long celebration of The Expendables at Watching the Detectives.

Over the Top (aka "Meet Me Half Way" (1987))
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, David Mendenhall, and Robert Loggia
Director: Menehen Golan
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

Lincoln Hawk (Stallone), a long haul trucker and semi-pro competitive arm wrestler struggles to reconnect with his son (Mendenhall) after the death of his wife.

Yes... I wrote "semi-pro competitive arm wrestler." There are parts of this movie that play like "Balls of Fury", with its extreme ping-pong matches, yet it's all meant to be taken seriously. And apparently there are enough folks out there who take arm wrestling seriously enough that there are leagues and championships, just like we see in this movie. I wouldn't have thought it possible, but this website is proof that truth is often nearly as strange as fiction.

But why anyone would think that a movie centered on a semi-pro arm wrestler could be profitable with a budget of $25 million is a complete mystery. Perhaps they thought anything vaguely sports related starring Sylvester Stallone would be an instant hit, what with the first three "Rocky" movies having been huge successeses. They were of course wrong, and "Over the Top" lost some $9 million during its theatrical run.

I don't know if this movie bombing is a good thing or a tragedy, because if it had turned a quick profit, I'm sure we would have been treated to Stallone as a semi-pro caber tosser in "Death Logs" and as a semi-pro curling player, squaring off against a team of villains led by Dolph Lundgren in "Clean Sweep."

I do wish I had remembered this movie existed while working on my forthcoming book, 150 Movies You Should (Die Before You) See. It would have been ideal for the chapter titled "It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time." But, featuring it for The Expendables Week is a good second best.


While I remain baffled any executive at Cannon Group, Warner Bros. or Golan-Globus would have thought an idea this lame could earn back a $25 million investment, I can see why this film might have appealed to Sylvester Stallone.

Stallone is an actor, who enjoys acting, and the character he portrays here is different than any other he had played at this time (or since, as far as I know). Lincoln Hawk comes across like a gentle, soft-spoken man for whom confrontation is something he tries to avoid until back into a corner, and for whom violence is usually not even an option to be considered. There is a lot about the Lincoln Hawk character that feels very real, and I think Stallone does a good job at portraying him. I also think this character looked better on paper, because he's the only thing that feels even close to real in this film, as the goofy arm wrestling "action" is laughable, and Hawk's Snidely Whiplash-like millionaire father-in-law (played by Robert Loggia) is so over the top in every way that one might think the title refers to him instead of an arm wrestling move. Hawk's relationship with his son also feels artificial, both because of some weak writing... and because child actor David Mendenhall is an average child actor. And that means that you can tell he is ACTING whenever he is in a scene.

Aside from fans of Sylvester Stallone being able to enjoy him doing something a little different, there really isn't anything particularly exceptional about "Over the Top". All the technical aspects of the film are executed with the level of competence you'd expect for a movie someone spent $25 million on, but there is no making up for the fact that the film's main hook is goofy in the extreme (even if there is a real-world counterpart to it).

Tin foil hats DO work against mind control!

They Came From Beyond Space (1981)
Starring: Robert Hutton, Jennifer Jayne, and Michael Gough
Director: Freddie Francis
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

A group of scientists researching a strange group of meteors fall prey to alien mind-control. They swiftly start spreading their domination to others, as well as start spreading a deadly plague. When they try to dominate astrophysicist Dr. Curtis Temple (Hutton), the metal plate in his head protects him. He launches a one-man battle to figure out what the aliens are up to, and how they can be stopped.


"They Came From Beyond Space" is a sci-fi movie in the "invisible invasion" mode that's got an okay cast and all the components of a great sci-fi thriller, but the stew never quite reaches a boil. The best moments of the film are the unintentional comedic moments, such as when Dr. Temple and a colleague literally create tin-foil hats for protection from the alien mind control.

And aside from unintentional comedy, there's nothing else here worth commenting on. It's about as bland as a movie can be while still offering a little entertainment.

'Dream of a Warrior' is a confused mess

Dream of a Warrior (2002)
Starring: Leon Lai, Park Eun-Hye, and Lee Na-Young
Director: Park Hee-Joon
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

Dean, a Soul police detective (Lai) starts having strange dreams of a beautiful girl being menaced by monsters (Eun-Hye). He is soon assigned by his superiors to help Dr. Jang, a researcher working on time travel experiments. Dean learns that the girl of his dreams is the doctor's daughter, who he, in true mad scientist fashion, used as the test subject in one of his experiments and ended up stranding her in a distant time and place. Dean is the only one who can save her, and soon he too is sent long ago and far, far away, to the world of Dillmoon where the last outpost of civilization is being menaced by evil madmen who wield second-rate computer graphics as their primary weapons!


"Dream of a Warrior" is a fantasy movie that wants to be a sci-fi film. Or maybe it's a sci-fi movie that wants to be a fantasy film. Whatever it is, it's a hodge-podge of ideas that don't mesh very well. Most of the film consists of the story of the final days of Dillmoon and the last incarnations of Lai and Eun-Park as the doomed lovers, Dean and Princess Rose.

In fact, the whole time travel concept is such a small part of what goes on that it's almost extraneous. However, add to the mix a group of cultists that appear early in the film who warn about dire consequences when Jang's experiment links our world to Dillmoon (who then never reappear, and whose predicted dire consequences never pay off), as well as the fact that Dean isn't the only character in the movie that has a counterpart on Dillmoon, and the time travel aspect goes from a ill-fitting add-on to a sword-and-sorcery fantasy film to a convoluted and ill-conceived twist.

There's an average time-travel/eternal-warrior love story that's been smashed together with an average sword-and-sorcery story in "Dream of a Warrior", but the combined total is something that's less than worthwhile. Maybe the 100-minute version that was released in Hong Kong and Korea makes more sense, but the 87-minute international version (the one I viewed) was entertaining but severely lacking in any decent pay-offs from its disparate elements.

Best to keep 'Ali G' out of your house

Ali G Indahouse: The Movie (2004)
Starring: Sacha Baron Cohen, Charles Dance, Michael Gambon, Kate Hedges, and Kellie Bright
Director: Mark Mylod
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

British gansta-rapper wanna-be and village-dwelling moron Ali G (Cohen) becomes the pawn of an evil politician (Dance) who wants to discredit the Prime Minister (Gambon) so he can seize the reins of power.


"Ali G Indahouse" is one of those comedies I have a hard time watching. Its main character is so stupid that I am so embarrassed on his behalf that it pains me to watch the story unfold. I am also embarrassed on the behalf of the people he interacts with. The end result is that the comedy is a bit muted for me, and I suspect that things others are falling off the couch in fits over have me merely chuckling.

However, the fact that the character of Ali G is such a moron that my pity for him overwhelms the fun I might otherwise have with this movie is but a small part of the problems with it.

A far bigger problem is that it's too slow in the wind-up. The first half hour is tortuously slow and the jokes are fairly unfunny (even when allowing for my personality quirks). I understand the film's desire to establish its cast of British "wiggers", but it does so in too languid a pace and it doesn't give quite enough contrast between them and normal society to make this part of the movie entertaining.

Things start picking up when the villains (the evil Deputy Prince Minister and his personal assistant, played with perfect English upper-crust snobbishness by veteran actor Charles Dance and the gorgeous Kate Hedges) are firmly placed in the picture and Ali G. runs his campaign for election to the House of Commons. And by the time Ali G. is dealing with British and global politics, screwing up an audience with the Queen, and proving to be the worst thing for a villain's master plot ever, the film finally obtains the break-neck pace it should have started with. And the jokes are also funnier.

Despite getting better in its second and third acts, the biggest problem with the film is that the character of Ali G. doesn't work very well outside the context it was originally created in. Ali G. originated as a faux reporter who would hold interviews with real politicians and public figures who didn't know they being set up. Ali G. the interviewer generated humor by mocking rap culture stereotypes and confusing people with utter stupidity, a mix that doesn't quite work in this film. Out of his intended context, Ali G. is simply too dumb to be believable or even entertaining, particularly when surrounded by a fairly tame and realistic world.

That said, the actors who belong in that tame and realistic world that Ali G's antics unfold against all perform superbly, and the film works far better for the fact that serious actors like Michael Gambon and the aforementioned Dance and Hedges play their characters straight. But that's still not enough to fully make "Ali G indahouse" worth sitting through. (Check out "Hot Fuzz" for far more effective British satire.)

'Beyond the Law' is not beyond boring

Beyond the Law (aka "Bloodsilver") (1968)
Starring: Lee Van Cleef, Antonio Sabato, Lionel Stander, Bud Spencer, and Gordon Mitchell
Director: Georgio Stegani
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

When master-thief Billy Joe Cudlip (Van Cleef) and his cohorts decide to rob a silver mine of its payroll, a series of events lands Cudlip in the position of town sheriff. As he settles into the job, he develops respect for the honest, townsfolk, and he starts to want more than just life as a thief. But his partners are still bent on committing the heist, and things go from bad to worse when murderous bandits, led by the psychopathic Burton (Mitchell), come to rob a silver shipment.


"Beyond the Law" in an interesting film in that it features actors in types of roles that we're not use to seeing them in. Lee Van Cleef plays a through-and-through good guy in this film (despite his larcenous tendencies as the story starts), and Bud Spenser doesn't throw a single punch during the entire movie; in fact, he's hard to recognize without his beard and usual scruffy appearance.

Unfortunately, the film features from a script that is focused in all the wrong places--for example, Van Cleef's character makes a transformation from ever-scheming thief to a man who feels loyalty and protectiveness toward the citizens of the mining-town, something which would have made for interesting viewing, but which happens between scenes--and the middle section is padded more heavily than the middle-section of a longhaul trucker who loves beer too much.

At a few points in the film--such as when Cudlip and his partners make their presence known in the film for the first time, when Burton takes the town's women and children hostage in order to get the silver shipment, and the shoot-out--gives us glimpses of the excellent movie "Beyond the Law" could have been if the script had gone through another draft or two, and if the director had given the film more substance and less filler. As it stands, however, this is a sub-standard spaghetti western that's more boring than entertaining.

Muscle Man Battles Moon Men!

Hercules Against the Moon Men ("Maciste vs. the Moon Men" and "Hercules and the Queen of Samar") (1964)
Starring: Alan Steel, Anna Maria Polani, Jani Clair, and Delia D'Alberti
Director: Giacomo Gentilomo
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

The mighty Hercules (Steel) endeavors to liberate the city of Samar from its mad queen (Clair) and her bloodthirsty allies--a band of space aliens wishing to revive their queen (who just happens to be spitting image of the queen's virtuous half-sister (D'Aberti)) and make Earth their plaything. Along the way, Hercules breaks free of death traps, bashes many skulls, romances the beautiful daughter of the queen's chief advisor (Polani), and saves the world from destruction.


I love wacky movies. I thought that a film where ancient Greeks are fighting space aliens would be a hoot. I was wrong. While the film does have its moments--most of them interspersed with one of the most tedious end-of-the-world sequences ever put on film--there is too much meandering plot and too little alien-bashing action to make this film truly entertaining.

What I find most interesting about this film is that in the original Italian-language version, "Hercules" is actually named "Maciste", an all-purpose epic hero of Italian creation that has been featured in dozens of different pictures, set in several different time periods and different parts of the world. Few of the English-dubbed versions reported retain the name Maciste, instead rewriting it as Hercules, Samson, Goliath, and other better-known mythological figures.

'Let's Go to Prison' should be locked away

Let's Go to Prison (2006)
Starring: Dax Shepard, Will Arnett, Chi McBride, Dylan Baker, and David Koechner
Director: Bob Odenkirk
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

John (Shepard), a career criminal, plots to gain revenge against the judge who repeatedly sentenced him to prison by first getting Nelson (Arnett), the judge's obnoxious, self-important son sent to prison, and then arranging to have himself incarcerated with him. Although John's goal is to see the object of his hatred destroyed by the prison system and the violent inmates, his plan goes wrong at every turn.


"Let's Go to Prison" is a mostly misfired attempt at a comedy. It features good acting and provides a slew of mild chuckles, but in almost every case, the laughs could have been bigger if the scene had been better staged or if the script had been a bit tighter. In fact, there isn't a part of this film that didn't make me feel like it could have been improved if the script had been taken through an additional draft or two.

The fact this film kept flirting with full-blown farce but never crossed the line ended up harming it more than helping it. While part of me finds it interesting that the script could have been reshot as a "serious" and very scary thriller with only minor tweaks, this aspect also keeps it from being a decent comedy.

'War of the Robots' is an atrocity

War of the Robots (aka "Reactor") (1978)
Starring: Antonio Sabato, Yanti Somer, Mellisa Long, Aldo Canti, Jacques Herlin, Frank Seidlitz, and James R. Stuart
Director: Alfonso Brescia
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

When a scientific genius (Herlin) and his luscious assistant (Long) are abducted by strange, golden-haired aliens, an experimental reactor is left running. Only the professor knows how to shut it down, but if it isn't shut down, it's going to explode. So Captain Boyd (Sabato) and the brave crew of the starship "Trissa" are dispatched to rescue him before Sirius Station is destroyed.


"War of the Robots" is an awful space opera that lifts elements from all sorts of sources ("Star Trek" and "Star Wars" come to mind, but since "Star Wars" itself is an hodge-podge of borrowed fantasy and sci-fi elements, it's hardly fair of accusing someone else of borrowing from it) and mixes them up in a plot that doesn't know when to quit. There were moments toward the end of the movie where I thought it was finally over... only to have another "threat" emerge for our heroes to fight off. If there ever was a case of a movie overstaying its welcome, it's "War of the Robots."

And this is on top of badly choreographed fight scenes, serious sub-standard acting, and overlong, tedious space battles (I can almost hear the producer in the editing room as they unfold: "I paid 250 lire and a Happy Meal for those models--and I'm spending a lot more on animators. I want every second of model footage on the screen. ALL of it!").

Speaking of 250 lire and a Happy Meal.... Even more damaging to the entertainment value of this film--other than for those who like to make mocking commentary as a film unfolds--is the fact that little cleverness the script contains is negated by the fact that the film's ideas overreach its tiny budget. The set requirements and costuming requirements and special effects needs of this film all demanded that a great deal more money be spent than was. If a decent amount of money HAD been available, we might have been treated to a humanoid robot menace a little more awe-inspiring than these guys:


(I suspect they were going for a "Nordic Alien" sort of vibe--based on one of the more-often described types of outer-space visitors who supposedly abduct and anally probe trailer park dwellers in the American southwest--but what they end up with look more like the members of a failed rock band named Lord Fauntleroy's Fanboys.)

In fact, this film was SO low-budget that many of the same sets, costumes, and spaceship models can be spotted in two other sci-fi films featuring the same actors and production staff; together with this film, they are what I have labeled "The Recycling Trilogy." So low were the budgets that they just brought back the same actors to wear the same costumes, so they didn't even have to pay for a seamstress to refit them.

"War of the Robots" is elevated slightly by a couple of clever plot-twists--which I will refrain from revealing; by the delightful Yanti Somer walking around in a uniform that's about one size too small; and some unintentionally comic elements such as the commander of the mighty alien armada being named General Gonad, it's not a movie I can recommend with good conscience to anyone but Osama bin Laden or others I wish the greatest possible suffering upon. (In fact, Somer and her ill-fitting uniform may well be the film's high points.)

Lots of possibilities wasted by lack of focus

Death to the Supermodels (2005)
Starring: Jaime Pressly, Brooke Burns, Matt Winston, Diane Delano, and Kimberly Davies
Director: Joel Silverman
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

When Tiffany (Pressly) the ever-perky and supermodel-wannabe editor of "Merle Magazine" (favorite periodical of transvestites and overweight housewives throughout America) is given the green-light by her boss (Delano) to arrange the ultimate swimsuit issue featuring the world's top five supermodels and the worlds greatest pair of fashion photographers, it's like her fondest dreams have come to life. However, when they all arrive on the isolated tropical island for the shoot, the dream starts to crumble, no matter how hard Tiffany tries to hang onto it. The models are simply too dumb and too bitchy to be around, the photographers too tempremental... and, to add insult to injury, a mysterious killer starts whacking the models one by one, Will Tiffany die with her dream?


"Death to the Supermodels" is bizarre little comedy that keeps zig-zagging back and forth across the middle ground between a dark comedy and a zany bit of nuttiness in the vein of a Zucker/Abrams/Zucker film. Unfortunately, the odd approach does not make for a solid comedy. The nutty characters of the supermodels, the "asexual" photographers, and the never-say-die optimism of Tiffany are humorous enough to keep the viewer watching, but the material the actors have to work with just isn't focused enough to make the movie truly worthwhile. (The actors all do fine jobs, by the way. Everyone's performance are right for this kind of comedy--with Pressly leading the pack at her cartoon-character-come-to-life best).

This is one of those movies that could have been so much better if the filmmakers had spent a little more time defining the type of comedy they wanted to make. It proves that comedies remain among the hardest kind of movies to make. It might be worth catching if it comes around on late-night cable, but it's not worth going out of your way for.

'SS Girls' defies genre classification

Every once in a while, I come across a movie that leaves me absolutely baffled as to what the director was trying to accomplish. One such film has made it into the line up for the "Nazis Quit Mini-Blogathon."

SS Girls (aka "Private House of the SS") (1977)
Starring: Gabriele Carrara, Marina Daunia, Macha Magall and Ivano Staccioli
Director: Bruno Mattei
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

This a film that defies classification beyond "Nazi softcore porn," because I can't figure out whether it's an ineptly made spoof or a VERY ineptly made drama. The only thing I know for sure is that it's ineptly made.

As the tide of WW2 turns against Germany, crazed SS officer and former church organist Hans Schellenberg (Carrara) is charged with creating a brothel where, while in the throes of passion, high-ranking military officers will be tricked revealing whether they are traitors to the Third Reich. To this end, a dozen or so young women are trained to be the ultimate weapons of sexual destruction by Hans' sadistic second-in-command (Daunia) and an expert prostitute (Magall).


Allowing for the bizarre premise--that anyone will be stupid enough to reveal they are planning high treason against a murderous dictator to a prostitute in a brothel run by loyal servants of said murderous dictator--the movie starts out logically enough, if goofy. The training sequences where the girls are trained as sexual soldiers (especially the bits where they are fencing in toga-like outfits) are unintentionally hilarious).

In fact, the first half hour of the film plays like a slightly inept spoof of the "classic" Nazi brothel movie "Salon Kitty" (an influence the director acknowledges in an interview included on the DVD). The intense and creepy Nazi commander from "Salon Kitty" is replaced with Gabriele Carrara's Hans character, who starts out with a strange set-up (the greatest church organist ever, yet sexually perverse enough to count a brothel madame and a dominatrix among his close associates... not to mention the fact that he appears to in love with Hitler and Nazism that all he needs is a picture of The Fuhrer and a free hand to get satisfaction. But Hans is all the more rediculous due to the over-the-top performance delivered by both Carrara and the anonymous voice actor who performed the English-language dub for the picture. It's so bad that it becomes good as he mugs and minces his way through the movie, a performance so ludicrously extreme that I'm amazed that he didn't have a long and successful career as a comic actor starting with this movie. (I suspect it might have a little to do with the fact that he probably wasn't trying to be funny, although it's just as likely that he was a stage actor.)

Carrara's performance is so bizarre that I actually found myself liking Hans as the film unfolded, despite the fact he's absolutely repulsive in every way. Of course, my empathy for the character could arise from the fact that Carrara is the only one of two actors who give anything close to a performance beyond "Hi, I'm here for a small paycheck, and I'm putting forth a comparable effort." (The other noteworthy performance comes from Ivano Staccioli, who, as Hans' commanding officer General Berger, seems like he wandered over from a more serious-minded WW2 drama and isn't aware of the inane nature of the film he's in.)

Carrara and his character are at the most extreme and become fully ensconced as the film's bizarre comedic center when he puts a group of Nazi generals on trial for treason--his "girls" successfully loosening their tongues--while dressed like this:


Hans' "NAzi Pope" outfit is a great bit of mockery of the put-on pomp and circumstance of Hitler's Third Reich and so nonsensical that it would have been more at home in a film like "Airplane" than here.

Unfortunately, Hans' trial is both a comedic highpoint and the moment at which the film stops making any sense. With the generals out of the way, Hans' brothel gets used as a way to execute three extremely brutal officers (which begged the question wny they just weren't taken out and shot) and ultimately Hans himself. Hans' demise, and that of all the characters, take place on the very day Hitler commits suicide, and the closing scenes of the film are as strange as everything that led up to it, but are undermined by a out-of-the-blue conversion of Hans from Nazi worshipper to self-loathing Nazi hater, and a truly out-of-place speech by General Berger that seems designed to evoke the sentiment that "Nazis are people too, and the horrors of war are horrors of war, even for Nazis who are exterminating Jews in concentration camps and specially trained sex soldiers in brothels."

To top off an already bizarre experience, the film ends in the most literally incomprehensible way: The final few lines in the version I screeened were hadn't been dubbed into English but were spoken in Italian.

I've said very little about the sex part of this movie, which, obstensibly is its main selling point. This is because I think only the loneliest and horniest fans of these kinds of Nazi boob-fests will find what this film has to offer engaging. There is nudity throughout and there are plenty of naughty bits during the "sex boot camp" montage early in the picture, but it's mostly badly staged, indifferently filmed, and just plain boring. (Except for the scene where Hans almost gets it on with two ladies in a room lined with Nazi flags and busts of Hitler... but it's once again Gabriele Carrara's extreme over-acting that saves the scene rather than its supposed erotic content.)

In the end, despite my love for Gabriele Carrara in this, his only starring role, I can't recommend this movie.