Planet of the Apes (1968)

Planet of the Apes (the 1968 original of course, not the Tim Burton remake) is one of the most beloved science fiction movies of its era. While it’s certainly fun, it’s also a movie that shows its age rather badly.

Charlton Heston had mixed luck with science fiction movies. In the late 60s and early 70s he made quite a few and they were quite successful and pretty well thought of at the time. Sadly they haven’t stood the test of time very well. Soylent Green now seems embarrassing, and while The Omega Man is still a good deal of fun it’s definitely fun with an emphasis on camp.

All of Heston’s sci-fi movies of that period have this in common, that they captured the zeitgeist of the era remarkably well. And that’s their problem. They’re all imbued with that counter-culture radical-chic gloom-and-doom ethos. The world is always suffering some dreadful calamity, and you can bet It’s All Our Fault.

Planet of the Apes has an even bigger problem. Much of its impact comes from the Shock Ending, and by their nature such tricks only work once. Even worse the posters for the movie, and many of the video and DVD covers, revealed the Shock Ending. Of course it’s possible that we’re meant to know the secret while the protagonists don’t, so as to Heighten the Irony. It still doesn’t pack the same punch the second time you see it (and I think this is at least the third time I’ve seen this movie).

Everyone probably knows the plot, but here goes anyway. A spacecraft was launched from Earth in the early 1970s. Travelling at almost the speed of light the journey has taken just a few years for the crew, but on Earth two thousand years have elapsed. They’re on what they think is the return journey when they crash-land on an unknown planet. At first it seems to be desolate and uninhabited, but eventually they find life. But not quite as they expect it. The planet is inhabited by humans and by apes, but the apes are in charge and the humans are regarded as mere animals without intelligence. And without any rights. They’re basically livestock.

That offers the opportunity for lots of heavy-handed satire about our treatment of lesser species and our intellectual arrogance, etc, etc. And even more heavy-handed satire about religion, morality, etc, etc.

The spacecraft commander, Taylor (Charlton Heston), finds himself a captive of the apes. Luckily he’s in the custody of two idealistic and kindly scientists, Cornelius (Roddy McDowall) and Zira (Kim Hunter). They’re surprised to find themselves in possession of a talking animal, and even more surprised when he tells them he arrived on their planet in a spaceship, given that the ape scientists of this planet are convinced that flight is impossible, for men or apes.

The planet’s head scientist is also their guardian of religious truth (more opportunities here for heavy-handed satire) and he’s not happy at all about men who can talk. He plans to solve that little problem by firstly gelding and then lobotomising Taylor, but he forgets that if Taylor can talk he can also understand.

It probably sounds like I didn’t like this movie but in fact I’m quite fond of it. The 60s vibe is quite amusing, the makeup effects were dazzling in 1968 and are still quite impressive. This was no low-budget affair and there’s some spectacular location shooting.

It’s the acting that makes this picture work however. There’s nothing half-hearted about the performances. Roddy McDowall and Kim Hunter play the chimpanzee scientists as if they really believed in the roles and it pays off. The performances are good enough to achieve the necessary suspension of disbelief.

And then of course there’s Charlton Heston. It’s easy to mock Heston for his outrageous over-acting but more often than not in his movies when Heston chewed the scenery that scenery needed to be chewed. There were certain roles that were just not going to work with anything less than a comprehensively over-the-top acting approach and this is one such role. It works, and Heston in full cry is a joy to behold.

This is the first movie I’ve ever seen in Blu-Ray. The British Blu-Ray release looks good although I’m still not sure Blu-Ray is worth the money or the hassle.

Queen of the Amazons (1947)

Queen of the Amazons is one of those jungle adventure combined with exotic women movies that remained popular from the 1920s right through to the 60s, with a couple of late entries as recently as the 80s. The appeal was obvious - there was the promise of scantily clad women and “forbidden love” plus action and adventure. In fact they rarely delivered on most of these promises, but hope springs eternal in the hearts of movie-goers. And for the studios there was the advantage of being able to use huge amounts of stock footage, so they could be churned out for next to nothing.

This particular example dates from 1947 and was made by one of the Poverty Row studios that existed mainly to fill the insatiable demand for cheap B-movies. A young man has disappeared whilst on safari and since he was working undercover investigating ivory smuggling there is the suspicion he may have met with foul play. The usual miscellaneous group of adventurers - his girlfriend, his pal, his dad, a dotty scientist and a comic relief cook - set off to find him. There seems to be some confusion as to where this ill-fated safari took place they start their search in India but the action soon moves to Africa. Which gives the producers the chance to use stock footage of India as well as Africa!

As their journey progresses they hear rumours of a mysterious white woman ruling a lost kingdom of amazon women, and the rumours hint that she practises voodoo and possibly other wickedness as well. This amazon queen turns out to be not quite what they expected.

Surprisingly enough in the African sequences the stock footage actually features African animals. No tigers stalking the African plains in this one! Even more surprisingly the stock footage is generally at least vaguely relevant to the plot, and is integrated moderately well into the action. The acting is average B-movie standard, and the comic relief is less annoying than in most such movies.

In fact it’s a reasonably competent B-picture, with a fairly coherent plot. There’s some glamour and some action, and at only 61 minutes it feels less padded and better paced than most features of its type. If you’re a fan of this sort of thing (and I admit to having a bit of a soft spot for such movies) it provides adequate mounts of fun and enjoyment with a definite camp tinge to it.

The public domain print that I saw was actually quite decent, with perfectly acceptable image and sound quality.

Strip-Tease (1963)

Strip-Tease (Sweet Skin) is a movie totally dominated by its star. Nico (billed in this movie as Krista Nico) had already achieved international success as a model and has appeared in several movies, most notably playing herself in Fellini’s La Dolce Vita. She would of course achieve much greater fame a few years later singing with the Velvet Underground and would become a somewhat legendary figure before her death in 1988.

Most of her movie appearances were in experimental features such as Andy Warhol’s Chelsea Girls. Strip-Tease was by comparison much closer to being a mainstream movie. While the title suggests an exploitation movie this is a movie that takes itself fairly seriously.

Ariane (Nico) is a dancer in Paris who has finally got her big break, only to see it snatched away from her when a big name dancer is brought in at the last moment. Disillusioned, she abandons ballet. She is broke when she runs into an old acquaintance. Berthe, after changing her name to Dodo Voluptuous, has been making big money as a stripper. She suggests that Ariane might consider this as a career. Dodo has now married strip club owner Paul and he is willing to give Ariane her opportunity.

Paul comes up with an act for her. Since she’s so stiff and nervous she will play the part of a wooden puppet, stripping along with an actual puppet. Ariane’s first performance is almost a disaster when she loses her nerve but luckily Paul’s strip club is rather up-market and arty and the audience thinks her reluctance to shed her clothes is part of the act. She is hailed as a kind of genius of avant-garde performance-art strip-tease (this is Paris after all).

She is still not entirely comfortable in her new life. Her best friend is a black jazz/blues musician who runs a club named Sam’s. He is played by Big Joe Turner, in real life a legendary blues singer. He’s a kind of father figure to her, and tries to persuade her that the price for hew new-found success is too high.

When an old boyfriend is shocked to discover her new profession she defends herself by saying that she doesn’t take much off. He accuses her of hypocrisy, and after thinking about it she decides he’s right. That night she does her first full-fledged strip.

Ariane has meanwhile attracted the attention of wealthy playboy Jean-Loup. He is idle, fabulously wealthy, extravagant, pretentious and good-looking. She is drawn into an affair with him, but she will soon find out what he really thinks of her and she will have to decide what she now thinks of herself.

This is one of those sexy arty rather serious French films of that era that could easily end up taking itself too seriously for its own good. Surprisingly though it works rather well. The moody black-and-white cinematography and the atmosphere of sin, glamour, decadence, art and style makes for a fairly entertaining movie.

Even more surprisingly perhaps, its biggest strength is Nico’s acting. As you’d expect, given her later image, she’s mysterious and oddly detached but this works in her favour. She is playing an outsider, a woman who feels rather detached from her own life. She is of course a foreigner as well, a German in Paris, a kind of exile.

And of course she has that extraordinary exotic beauty.

The music is a highlight as well. Serge Gainsbourg not only wrote the music but also makes a cameo appearance. The title song was originally recorded by Nico herself, being in fact her first ever recording, but at the last moment it was decided to substitute a version sung by Juliette Greco.

This was the early 60s so there isn’t a huge amount of flesh on display although by 1963 standards it was pretty racy.

Mondo Macabro have done a fine job with the widescreen transfer and as usual they have provided some worthwhile extras.

A well-made movie, worth seeing for the atmosphere of early 60s Paris, for the music, and for Nico’s odd but effective performance.

Payment In Blood (1967)

Payment In Blood (Sette winchester per un massacro) may not be one of the great spaghetti westerns but fans of the genre will still find plenty to enjoy.

In the aftermath of the American Civil War former Confederate officer Colonel Blake leads a gang of brigands in Texas just north of the Mexican border. They operate on both sides of the border and both the US and Mexican governments have put a price on their heads. Blake and his men like to give the impression they’re Confederate loyalists continuing the good fight against the damned Yankees but in reality they’re murdering cut-throats.

It seems as if time has run out for one of these bandits. Chamaco is about to be executed by a firing squad. Just in time a Mysterious Stranger appears and Chamaco is rescued. The Mysterious Stranger is named Stuart and he says he wants to join Blake’s gang. To take a stranger to Blake’s secret headquarters is against all the rules but then Stuart mentions that he just happens to know where the treasure of General P. G. T. Beauregard is buried. This much-rumoured fortune in gold disappeared in the closing days of the Clvil War and Blake has long cherished a desire to find it.

So Stuart gets to join Blake’s bandit gang. Blake doesn’t entirely trust him but he wants that gold. A plan is hatched. It will require the gang to get through a pass heavily guarded by US soldiers and then through the nearby town to reach the Indian cemetery where the treasure is hidden.

Of course there has to be a double-cross in there somewhere, and along the way there are ample opportunities for mayhem. There’s also a touch of romance, not something you necessarily expect in a spaghetti western. The beautiful Manuela claims to be as loyal to the Confederate cause as Blake but she causes considerable dissension. The other bandits believe that women and loot should be equally shared while Colonel Blake has decided that Manuela should be exclusively his. Manuela has ideas of her own as will soon become apparent.

As you expect from a spaghetti western there’s a great deal of violence. Everyone has unlimited ammunition which they expend lavishly, no-one ever has to stop to reload and the body count mounts steadily culminating in a huge gunfight which turns into a massacre.

Guy Madison walks off with the acting honours as Blake, giving a wonderfully cynical and vicious performance. Luisa Baratto is fiery and memorable as Manuela. Edd Byrnes as Stuart is the weak link - he just doesn’t seem mean enough or grungy enough.

Enzo G. Castellari’s energetic direction isn’t brilliant but it gets the job done. The climactic set-piece in the Indian tomb is certainly impressive.

This is another of the spaghetti western mystery DVDs I picked up recently in a bargain bin recently. There’s nothing on the discs or the cases to identify the company that released them but they’re NTSC discs so they’re obviously American imports. I assume they’re from Wild East productions since that company seems to be the only possibility. In any case they’re all, including this one, quite reasonable widescreen transfers. No extras, but appealingly cheap.

Don’t set your expectations too high for this one. Castellari is no Sergio Leone. If you approach it with that caveat in mind and you’re in the mood for a spaghetti western then you could do a lot worse.

Dracula A. D. 1972 (1972)

By the early 60s it was becoming obvious that the traditional vampire movie had been to death, so to speak. A new twist was needed to keep audiences interested, and the obvious move was to transplant the vampire into the modern world. Hence’s Hammer’s Dracula A.D. 1972.

In fact there had already been several vampires in the modern world movies. AIP’s Count Yorga, Vampire and Jess Franco’s Vampyros Lesbos being the obvious examples. These movies had dealt with modern vampires, vampires who were quite comfortable in the modern world. There was another way to approach this problem, however, which was to have a traditional gothic vampire suddenly transported into a modern world that he understands nothing of. Since Hammer were unwilling to abandon their Dracula cycle and the proven box-office appeal of Christopher Lee as the Count this was the approach they were always going to take.

So we have Dracula resurrected in London in 1972 by an occult-obsessed hippie and vampire fanboy named Johnny Alucard. Johnny and his friends are looking for new thrills. So a black mass in a conveniently deconsecrated church seems like it might be groovy fun. Unfortunately Johnny’s friends don’t realise he’s serious about this stuff, and he just happens to have everything needed to bring the dreaded Count Dracula back to life (one of his ancestors was present when the Count was staked in 1872). All he needs now is some blood. And a beautiful young woman for Dracula to snack on when he’s brought back to life. Laura (Caroline Munro) is a fun-loving girl and eagerly volunteers, thinking it will be kinky fun.

Now Dracula is on the loose in London. Except he isn’t on the loose at all. He’s holed up in the abandoned church and can’t leave it. The reason he can’t leave the church is never stated but it’s obvious it’s because he knows nothing about this strange new world. He has no idea how to operate in such a world.

In fact things are even worse for the Count than he thinks. What he hasn’t yet realised is that this time he is the hunted. The grand-daughter of the famed authority on all things occult, Professor van Helsing (Peter Cushing), is one of Johnny Alucard’s little friends and now the professor knows that the ancient vampire has returned once more and being a van Helsing he knows his duty. And this time all the advantages are on van Helsing’s side. Dracula doesn’t yet know it but he’s a trapped animal, a gothic monster in a world that is much more scary than he is, a world in which he cannot hope to survive.

This is the least terrifying incarnation of Dracula ever. He is utterly ineffectual. He is in the unpleasant position of needing his disciple Johnny Alucard more than Johnny needs him. When Johnny demands to be made a vampire Dracula has little choice but to acquiesce. It would obviously be far more advantageous to keep Johnny under control by constantly promising him this gift without ever actually giving it but it’s Johnny who has the whip hand. Johnny (played with considerable elan by Christopher Neame) is the real monster here. With both vampiric powers and an understanding of how the world of 1972 works he is potentially far more formidable and far more dangerous than a Dracula cowering in his lair in the abandoned church.

I don’t know if writer Don Houghton intended Dracula to be so helpless or if he was even aware that he had made the Count into a victim. If so he may well have considered it to be a weakness in the script. And most viewers of the movie have seen the fairly minor and less than terrifying role played by Dracula to be a major weakness. I think it’s the most interesting thing about the movie. You almost feel sorry for Dracula - he never seems to have a chance.

The movie itself is in a similar situation to the Count - it’s a traditional vampire movie transplanted into a world it doesn’t comprehend. Screenwriter Don Houghton (who was in his early 40s at the time) is clearly as mystified and as horrified by 1970s youth culture as Dracula is. Director Alan Gibson was somewhat younger (he was 34) but also just a little too old to understand the hippie culture. Their attempts to give the movie a with-it contemporary feel are ludicrously wide of the mark but this is a key part of the movie’s campy charm.

Mention must be made of the music. Not the songs performed by the rock group Stoneground in the beginning, but the music composed by Michael Vickers for the movie. The music is always intrusive, almost always inappropriate, and at times it almost sees designed to actively work against the movie.

Christopher Lee has very little screen time. The film is dominated by Peter Cushing as van Helsing and Christopher Neame as Johnny Alucard and they’re both intense and charismatic and generally extremely good. Stephanie Beacham is van Helsing’s grand-daughter and shows considerable spirit in delivering some extraordinarily cringe-inducing dialogue. Caroline Munro’s role is small but memorable for her ecstatic facial expression when Dracula puts the bite on her. Munro always manages to make an impression even in a minor and fairly thankless role such as this one.

It’s very tame by early 70s standards - you can’t help feeling it might have done better with just a bit more in the sex and violence department.

I would never be rash enough to claim this is a good movie but if you’re prepared to accept it as a piece of silly high camp nonsense then it’s remarkably entertaining.

The Reptile (1966)

I’m going to be revisiting some lesser known Hammer movies in the next few weeks. First up is one of my favourites, The Reptile.

In 1966 John Gilling directed two movies for Hammer, both making good use of their Cornish settings and with a considerable overlap of cast and crew. Plague of the Zombies is the more highly regarded of this Cornwall duology (and it’s a great movie) but I have a definite soft spot for The Reptile.

Captain Harry Spalding (Ray Barrett) arrives in Cornwall with his new wife to take possession of his late brother’s cottage, Larkrise. Charles Spalding had died suddenly of a heart attack despite having no history of heart problems.

The locals seem not just sullen and unfriendly but also very uncomfortable in the presence of their new neighbours. Perhaps more than uncomfortable, perhaps even afraid. No-one is willing to talk to him, apart from the publican Tom Bailey (Michael Ripper). From Tom he discovers the story of the series of mysterious and terrifying deaths that have occurred in the village. Mr and Mrs Spalding also make the acquaintance of Mad Peter (John Laurie). When Mad Peter turns up at the cottage obviously dying and displaying horrifying symptoms they realise that the stories of mysterious deaths are more than just stories.

Even more disturbing are the inhabitants of the big house not far from the cottage, Dr Franklyn (Noel Willman) and his daughter Anna (Jacqueline Pearce). Dr Franklyn is a theologian who has spent years travelling through the east researching obscure religious cults. The atmosphere between Dr Franklyn and his daughter seems extremely tense and he seems to be excessively strict with her although he assures Mr and Mrs Spalding that he has very good reasons for his actions. Anna is an exotic beauty who seems oddly child-like and yet at the same time possessing a disturbing erotic quality, and is very fond of animals (although in a way that makes us just a little uneasy).

Anna seems keen to befriend the Spaldings while her father seems anxious not to allow any intimacy to grow up between them. Things come to a head when Captain Spalding receives a plaintive note from Anna and decides he must rescue her. He will find that things are not quite as they appear.

Mad scientist movies in which the mad scientist isn’t really evil but has simply succumbed to the temptation of pursuing scientific knowledge of things That Should Not Be Known are fun but commonplace. This is an interesting variation - a mad theologian who has fallen prey to the temptation of pursuing religious knowledge of things That Should Not Be Known. I’m especially fond of stories of strange evils brought back from the Mysterious East and this is a particularly good example of the breed.

While there isn’t much in the way of visceral horror in this movie it scores highly when it comes to the atmosphere which is nicely overheated, with suggestions of forbidden things.

Jacqueline Pearce doesn’t get enough screen time but she makes good use of what she gets, especially in her little musical entertainment for her dinner guests where she hints at a subtly perverse eroticism. Of course a few years later as Servalan in Blake's 7 she would show just how perversely erotic she could be. Her performance is one of the strengths of The Reptile.

The acting is in fact generally good. Ray Barrett makes a perfectly acceptable baffled but noble hero while Jennifer Daniel shows plenty of spirit as his wife Valerie. Noel Willman is creepy but not entirely unsympathetic. Dr Franklyn is not evil but he’s made one huge mistake and he’s never going to be able to escape the consequences. Michel Ripper gets a more substantial part than usual and as always he’s great fun.

The makeup effects are often regarded as the film’s weak point but I think they’re reasonably effective.

All in all it’s an underrated Hammer offering and well worth seeking out. The DVD release is still in print and it’s a solid transfer.

Octopussy (1983)

Octopussy was Roger Moore’s sixth outing as James Bond. But this time he was clearly too old for the role, but it scarcely matters. He has enough self-confidence, and sheer bravado, to carry him through.

This time Bond is up against three different enemies, all with very different agendas.

Initially what we have is a mystery involving a Fabergé egg, presumed to have belonged to the Russian Imperial family and now being offered for auction at Sotheby’s. But a fake Fabergé egg, an exact replica of this one, has just turned up in the hands of a dead British secret agent. And an exiled Afghan prince, Kamal Khan, is for some reason prepared to pay much much more than the egg is actually worth. He obviously must have the egg, but why?

Bond is off to India, where Prince Kamal Khan (Louis Jourdan) now lives in considerable slendour. The trail will lead Bond to the mysterious and beautiful Octopussy (Maud Adams), a fabulously wealthy woman who has what is effectively her own island queendom, inhabited entirely by gorgeous women. As you might expect, Bond is not displeased at the idea of infiltrating Octopussy’s island realm.

Octopussy has varied business interests, some of them legal. They range from diamond smuggling to circuses. Her circus is perhaps more of a hobby, but it will prove to be important.

But Kamal Khan and Octopussy are just two of the three players in this game. The third is an insane Russian general who believes the Soviet Union still has a chance of turning the Cold War into a hot war and winning. He has a scheme to do just that, and that’s where Octopussy’s circus comes in.

If you think it sounds like the plot has a bit too much going on you’re probably right but in the end it works pretty well. As usual in a Bond film there are exotic locations and they’re used extremely well. The Indian sequences are splendid, with a wonderful rickshaw case and then the piece de resistance, with Kamal Khan and his cronies mounted on elephants hunting Bond through the jungle.

And of course circuses always work in movies, and so do trains, and this one has both. In fact it has more than enough to keep any reasonable viewer entertained.

Casting Louis Jourdan as an Agfhan prince might have seemed a bit of a stretch but while he doesn’t look very much like an Agfhan prince he’s still perfect for the role. Although best known as a suave romantic leading man Jourdan was in fact rather good at playing charming evil (he was an excellent Dracula in the 1977 BBC -TV adaptation). He has a lot of fun with his role as a Bond villain.

This was the second appearance by Maud Adams as a Bond girl. She’s suitably glamorous. By this time Desmond Llewelynn as Q had become an institution in the Bond films and despite being nearly 70 he gets a fairly active role this time around, even getting to pilot a hot air balloon.

This was the first Bond movie made after Bernard Lee’s death so we get a new actor as M, Robert Brown. Sadly he makes very little impression.

Octopussy is not my favourite of the Moore Bond films but it’s still a delightfully entertaining movie, and it’s still classic Bond.