Corruption – The Fade of a Fad
Between Les Yeux Sans Visage and The Brain That Wouldn’t Die there is Corruption. Not chronologically of course; Les Yeux came out in 1960 and the brain hit the screen two years later while Corruption premiered on the tail end of the sixties. Corruption is an English exploitation film following in the footsteps of the previously mentioned films. Starring Peter Cushing, Sue Lloyd, Kate O’Mara, and Noel Trevarthen. Writing credits to Donald and Derek Ford, and directed by Robert Hartford-Davis; all of whom stayed in the vein of exploitation and low budget films.
History Lesson
In the 1920 as the Theatre Grotesque jumped over to celluloid and a new form of horror began in the European art cinema subgenre. Experimental. Surreal. Unusual. Taboo. The terror was not the monster or the ghoul but the man, or the illness be that physical or mental. Franju’s classic Les Yeux is a tale about guilt and obsession. Genessier having the tools and knowledge, in theory at least, to fix his daughters disfigurement that he caused. We identify with Genessier. In his shoes, with his talents, under that pressure, we all know a part of us would at least toy with the idea of doing anything in the name of someone we love. It’s a touching and personal story, which is why it was so easy to rip it off.
The other film I mentioned, The Brain That Wouldn’t Die, similar set up except make it a fiancée instead of a daughter and her face is the only thing that isn’t destroyed, this though meant to be serious comes off significantly more comical. Americans and their lack of subtly, there needs to be a big bad monster in the basement or else it’s not a real horror show, and the talking head is just hilarious. If Les Yeux is art and The Brain is schlock then what is Corruption?
Set Up
It’s Frankenstein, it’s Jurassic Park, it’s the battle of Could V. Should. The morality of our choices and the lengths we’ll go to see our visons realized. Our Hammer Horror Alumn Peter Cushing, who you might know from Screamqueen’s review of Asylum. Peter is in the role of John Rowan, a brilliant surgeon light-year ahead of his peers like Steve Harris, played by Noel Trevarthen. Sue Lloyd is cast as Johns soon-to-retire-model-fiancée Lynn.
Lynn invites John to a party being held by her photographer. It’s funny, only Peter Cushing could look like a narc at a party where everyone else is in their mid-forties playing some one in their twenties. Either due to his jealousy or his sense of modesty John starts a fight with the cameraman resulting in a floodlamp falling on the Lynn’s face. His love is disfigured and she falls into a deep depression.
John in classic Cushing Frankenstein fashion falls into an obsessive binge of medical esoterica, quoting tricks of the ancients, like you do. The doctor steals a pituitary gland from the morgue. An injection here, a laser blast there, bippady-boppady-boo face reclaimed.
After a few days the scar returns, otherwise there wouldn’t be conflict. Much like to decision on what in my fridge I shoe eat the answer is obvious, fresher is better. In a montage ripped directly from the The Brain the good doctor takes to the streets to find a fresher sample. After the murder and Lynn is looking better and the two head to the country to hide out the heat. As times arrow marches ever onward they realized that no mater what they do, it will just be a temporary fix but that isn’t good enough for the future Mrs. Rowan.
Another body found headless on a train and surgeon-detective Steve is on to them. John wants to call it quits as it become obvious that Lynn is more infatuated with her own image than him. Lynn to ensure that she gets what she wants sells her fiancée out to some hoodlums to ensure he will continue, and through psychotic shenanigans and lasers everyone dies.
The Good
The music score is phenomenal, Bill McGuffie has excellent taste. The camera work during the party or the kills are great at conveying the sense of panic and disorientation the character feel. I enjoyed the costume destines miss that 60’s chic look. Though things seem to jump out of nowhere the plot is relatively solid for the most part, even the more absurd instances have an explanatory follow up.
The Bad
As good as the editing can be during the disorienting scenes, the rest of the film is quite jarring. Terrible pacing. There is no metric denoting the passage of time; I often found myself wondering if it was the same day, week or month, What? Steve and Lynn’s sister are getting married? How long have they known each other? We don’t have any idea how long the operations effects last, long enough to give false hope and short enough to need a steady supply of bodies. The first half of the film is a slog to get through. The first fifteen minutes had me questioning my watch and the ending comes out of nowhere and hits like a bullet train.
Character motivation is my biggest gripe, specifically that of Lynn. At the start she makes it clear that she doesn’t care about modeling, stating that she was going to retire once married because she found someone that truly loves her. Then the accident happens and her image becomes her only focus; she becomes vapid and narcissistic, trading lives for looks. Steve seems only to show up for exposition or to be superman. John is little more than a whipped Frankenstein wannabee with a laser, Val (Lynn’s sister) has such little agency I genuinely forgot her name for the most part of this review.
The Ugly- my opinion
Apropos considering the plot of the film. Corruption is a short film but it feels like a marathon. The effects aren’t terrible but not astounding. Flat characters which is odd considering the power house that is Peter Cushing. This is not a good film. It’s not a so bad it’s good film either. It’s dry, convoluted, and insulting.
Typically, when I watch an old movie I suspend modern sensitivities and try to frame it in the cultural minds set of the period, but the depiction of women in this film is detestable; vain, fragile, single minded shrew that use men to do there bidding. The marketing too was grotesque, and not in the macabre way, ‘Corruption is not a woman’s picture!… Therefore: no woman will be admitted alone to see this super-shock film!’ alone or not, if you respect yourself and your time forget admittance all together.
(2 / 5)
Movies n TV
Returning to the Soothing World of Evil with “The Demon of Death”
“The Demon of Death” is the season 3 premiere of the supernatural drama Evil, created by Michelle King and Robert King.
“The Demon of Death” is the season 3 premiere of the supernatural drama Evil, created by Michelle King and Robert King. The central cast includes Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi, Michael Emerson, Christine Lahti, and Andrea Martin. As of this review, it’s available through Netflix and Paramount+ and its add-ons.
The assessors investigate the weight of a soul. Father Frank Ignatius (Wallace Shawn) agrees to participate in this test despite his growing disillusionment. David (Mike Colter) and Kristen (Katja Herbers) deal with the ramifications of their confessions. Kristen’s girls go on the warpath with Leland (Michael Emerson). Andy (Patrick Brammall) signs his death warrant.
What I Like about “The Demon of Death”
As season 2 ended with a cliffhanger, “The Demon of Death” picks back up with an interesting addition. The episode provides a more obvious stopping point that Season 2 should have taken advantage of. It dumbfounds me because this addition makes for a more interesting and darker cliffhanger. The added context would have made the cliffhanger more palatable. However, it’s a nice twist for the episode.
Dr. Boggs (Kurt Fuller) and Sister Andrea (Andrea Martin) make an interesting pair that adds complexity to both. We even explore some of Sister Andrea’s character flaws, best displayed by her interaction with Kristen in the next scene. Few wise sage characters that display flaws, making this addition appreciated.
Father Ignatius’ introduction adds layers of interest for a character who will play a recurring role, tying into Monsignor Korecki directly. The yet-to-be-explored relationship between Father Ignatius and Monsignor Korecki (Boris McGiver) evokes an interest.
While “The Demon of Death” isn’t a haunting episode, but explores the mysteries and terror of death through science to provide an interesting environment for an episode. It introduces a new character that adds to the cast.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
There’s not much to report here that particularly crosses the line and what teeters on the line holds a dark comedic tone.
Perhaps Sister Andrea’s flaw might rub some the wrong way, as it deals with her overwhelming faith. However, it’s a minor point at the moment. Again, I lean on liking some complexity for the wise sage archetype.
What I Dislike about “The Demon of Death”
“The Demon of Death” still plays it safe with its supernatural elements, but that does seem to be Evil’s standard. At this point of the series, it seems a strange restraint. However, the new normal remains functionally paranormal.
While the premiere starts with an interesting procedural plot, it doesn’t direct the season like prior premieres. This episode doesn’t deliver a massive refocus as season 2’s premiere, but that’s because its conclusion doesn’t deliver as focused of a direction. Regardless, “The Demon of Death” is still an episode that slips away despite its premiere status.
Ben (Aasif Mandvi) seems needlessly hostile as they investigate a soul’s potential weight. The study delivers a thorough scientific process, which makes his resistance linger on the “angry atheist” archetype.
The demon shown on screen certainly isn’t the demon of death the title suggests. While the plot revolves around the mystery of death, there is a demon with a more carnal domain. As future episodes dive into their respective demons, it does seem to be an inaccurate title. However, the demon of the episode will get further focus in a different episode.
Final Thoughts
“The Demon of Death” doesn’t stand out as a premiere but provides an interesting procedural episode. As Father Ignatius will become another key character in the series, giving him an entire episode to introduce him is a nice strategy. While it’s not a haunting episode, it still provides a level of camp with interesting characters to pull it off.
(3 / 5)
Released in 2010, Rare Exports asks an important holiday question. One that no one else has dared to ask.
What if Santa was a ten-story-tall monster buried under the ice for centuries?
The story
Rare Exports is the story of a little boy named Pietari. After doing what is frankly too much research for a little boy, he realizes that Santa is not the jolly old elf we all think of. He is, in fact, a monster who eats bad children. And it turns out that Santa was trapped in the ice near Pietari’s little town. All this would be well and good if a Russian mining team weren’t in the process of cutting him out of the ice. So it’s up to Pietari to convince everyone of the dark, horrific truth.
Santa Claus is coming to town.
What worked
Some movies need to make sense. Some don’t. Rare Exports is one of the latter.
Why were the Russians digging in the snow to find Santa? What was the plan there? What happened to Pietari’s mom? And who did they sell the elves to? Do the elves need air or water to live?
We don’t get answers to any of those questions. And frankly, we don’t need them to enjoy Rare Exports.
This is a wild story about a little boy who discovers that Santa is a mythical monster with a bunch of scrawny old men with big white beards to do his evil bidding and eats bad children who haven’t been beaten by their parents enough. What sort of explanation would help this story in any way?
I mean, we could pick apart why it’s suddenly legal to sell people, or at least mythical creatures that look like naked old men, or why this all happened right next to the only little kid who had the exact knowledge needed. But in the end, wouldn’t that be like asking how Santa gets into people’s homes when they don’t have fireplaces? Doesn’t that objective reasoning just piss on the Christmas magic?
What didn’t work
While Rare Exports was fun, there were parts that I did not appreciate. For one thing, there wasn’t a single woman or person of any color in this film. Literally not one. Not an extra, not in the background. This little Finnish town is populated entirely by white men. And yes, it is Finland and there isn’t a hugely diverse population. But it’s also 2010. People move. Also, women exist.
On the subject of seeing too many white men, we also saw too much of the white men. Specifically, we saw far too many old white male actors entirely nude. There was just no reason for this. These men were portraying elves. They didn’t have to be naked. If they were naked, they didn’t have to have, um, yule logs. Maybe elves are like Ken dolls. There were so many options that didn’t include so much old man wang.
Finally, I wish we’d seen Santa Claus. Not to spoil the ending, but he never actually emerges to attack anyone. And that feels like a cop-out. If we’re going to be teased the whole movie with this depiction of monster Santa, we should at least get to see monster Santa.
Though, after what they did with the elves, maybe it’s a blessing we didn’t see him.
In the end, Rare Exports was well worth watching. It was hilarious, creepy and bloody. And while it wasn’t perfect, it was a delightful holiday horror comedy.
(4 / 5)
Released in 2016, Christmas Crime Story is about a disastrous robbery on Christmas Eve, and all the many lives impacted by the selfish decisions of one person.
And then, suddenly, it isn’t. But we’ll get to that part.
The story
Christmas Crime Story is the tale of a Christmas Eve holdup gone wrong. We see the story from several points of view, starting with Chris, the detective first on the scene.
Chris is having a hard Christmas Eve. So, on his lunch break, he visits his mom at her diner. It appears that they have a contentious relationship. But nothing is solved in this quick visit.
Chris goes on to pull over a man speeding. When the man, named David, pulls over, Chris discovers something in the trunk. That something must have been pretty damn incriminating, because rather than open the trunk, David shoots him dead.
We then switch to David’s pov for the night. Then his girlfriend’s pov. Then, the man his girlfriend has been cheating on him with. And on and on we go, until we see how all of these different stories and people come together for a dark, sordid Christmas Eve.
What worked
The first thing I want to say about Christmas Crime Story is that it’s heartwarming. Like, to a fault, which we will be talking about.
The ending is very sweet, in a Christmasy sort of way. Families come together, people are filled with joy, and all is right in the world for almost everyone. Except for Lena, who deserves to have a bad Christmas, everyone gets a happy ending.
That brings me to my next point. The characters, mostly, are all deeply sympathetic. Even when David or James are killing people, you feel bad for them.
You don’t agree with what they’re doing, but you do feel bad.
You have to feel sympathetic for the man whose girlfriend hired a killer to merk him. Or the woman whose daughter has cancer. Or the guy who just can’t find work, even though he’s trying to make good decisions. You want things to work out for them. You want them to be okay. Even when they do terrible things.
Finally, I always love stories told from so many different points of view. It’s always fun to see a story unfold in a nonlinear way, but in a way that makes more and more sense as we get more points of view. It’s a hard thing to pull off, and I think Christmas Crime Story did it very well.
What didn’t work
Unfortunately, all of the sympathetic characters and clever storytelling methods in the world won’t save a story that doesn’t work. And Christmas Crime Story just does not work.
Let’s begin with the ending. The big twist near the end of the movie. I won’t spoil it, but you will for sure know it if you’ve seen the film. Or, if you waste your time watching the film.
As a rule, twists work when they make sense. Not when it feels like the writers threw up their hands and said, “Okay, but what if everything we just did for the last hour and fifteen minutes didn’t happen, and instead…”
This wasn’t clever. It wasn’t fun. It felt like the writers didn’t know how to end their movie and just decided to cheat.
Finally, I mentioned earlier that Christmas Crime Story was heartwarming. And yes, that is nice.
But is it maybe a little too heartwarming?
I mean, we have an adorable angel of a child with cancer. Her parents don’t have enough money for her treatment. We have two poor guys who are in love with a black-hearted woman. And we have a detective so sweet and kind that he makes you rethink ACAB. And, he’s about to get married to his pregnant girlfriend. And they’re naming the baby after his mom. And his name is literally Chris DeJesus. His mom’s name is Maggie DeJesus. I tried to think of a sillier less subtle name to use as a joke, and I literally couldn’t think of one.
They could have at least named him De La Cruz. That would be more subtle, and I still would have complained.
In the end, Christmas Crime Story just missed the mark. It came very close to being a good movie. But it focused too much on how it wanted you to feel, rather than telling a satisfying story that made sense. Much like that third glass of eggnog, it’s fun in the moment and regretful after. If you’re looking for a satisfying Christmas horror, I’d suggest looking elsewhere.
(2 / 5)
-
Movies n TV6 days agoFreak Out, a Rocky Horror Memoir by Jennifer Weigel
-
Movies n TV5 days agoDexter lives in Original Sin, And In the Beginning
-
Book Reviews6 days agoDepression + Apocalype = ?: This Is Not a Test Book Review
-
Movies n TV4 days ago
Christmas Crime Story, A Nonsensical Holiday Romp
