Connect with us

Published

on

Welcome to “Notes from the Last Drive-In,” Haunted MTL’s review and recap series of The Last Drive-In with Joe Bob Briggs on Shudder. This time we cover the “Halloween Hoedown” which brought us 1983’s Angel, and 1980’s Terror Train. We also were given two pretty important guests when it comes to modern horror – director David Gordon Green and mega-producer Jason Blum of Blumhouse Productions. They stopped by the trailer (yay, back at the trailer!) and talked a bit about the upcoming Halloween Kills, horror as a whole, and even joined in on some light Halloween fun.

But, looking at the movie selection – it doesn’t feel very Halloweeny, does it? Let’s get into it, shall we?

Angel (1983)

Angel (1983) is Roger Vincent O’Neil’s exploitation revenge thriller about teenage Molly, who by day is a sweet honors student, but by night is Angel, a sex worker on the streets of Hollywood Boulevarde, living with an eclectic community of sex workers and outcasts. However, Angel soon finds herself in the midst of a serial killer’s spree who targets people in her line of work.

The movie is not exactly horror but certainly delves into horror themes of predation, loss of innocence, poverty. It is a very tense film and at times it can be absolutely gutwrenching. In lesser hands, the film may have come off as cloying and preachy, but the approach here is excellent and ultimately becomes a rousing story by the final act. It may seem strange to read, but a film about a 15-year-old sex worker is quite an empowering film, arguably feminist to a great degree.

Advertisement
The Last Drive-In Halloween Hoedown Angel (1983) poster
The poster does a terrible job of selling this movie.

It is the brainchild of Robert Vincent O’Neil who directed and co-wrote the film with Joseph Michael Cala. The film was produced by Donald P. Borchers and distributed by 80s genre-powerhouse New World Pictures. The cast is led by then 21-year old Donna Wilkes playing Molly/Angel, with Dick Shawn, Rory Calhoun, and Susan Tyrell rounding out the oddballs she associates with. Cliff Gorman plays Lieutenant Andrews, the copy who keeps an eye out for Molly, and John Diehl plays the nameless killer.

As a whole, the performances are fantastic across the board. The film uses its veteran and character actors to a great degree of effectiveness. Particularly those in Molly’s street family. Dick Shawn and Susan Tyrell have some utterly fantastic exchanges, and Rory Calhoun, the western veteran, ends up as the coolest gun-slinging street uncle anyone could ask for. Gorman’s portrayal of a hard-working cop is good and actually results in a cop who does good things – though some of his methods may be questionable. It is especially helpful that there is no sign that he wants to help Molly beyond the fact he genuinely is worried about this kid. In a lesser movie, it might play up some sort of cringe-inducing romantic element.

The two performances I would focus on here are Donna Wilkes’ and John Diehl’s. Wilkes is good, even as a relative unknown, to keep up with actors like Shawn, Calhoun, and Tyrell. She is completely charming and does some fantastic emoting with her eyes. Her work as Molly crafts an incredibly sympathetic and strong character. This is especially true as her character changes and grows, becoming the hunter by the film’s final act. Her rich characterization and growth are complemented by John Diehl’s enigmatic and unstable killer who remains unnamed, with only a single line of dialogue after he has been chased down by a 15-year-old girl wielding a revolver in her canary-yellow sundress. True to his skill here, he eats an egg in the most disgusting and horrifying way ever seen and it is a wonderful, stomach-turning bit of characterization.

As for the more technical elements of the film, the cinematography of Andrew Davis is excellent. Using some clever camera tricks and B-roll he manages to really populate the scenes during a time when crowds weren’t as heavy. His photographic eye would serve him well as a director of action thrillers like Under Siege and The Fugitive. Also, he directed Holes, oddly enough. Charles Bornstein’s editing, particularly during the final “chase” of the film is also excellent and combined with Davis’ framing goes a long way toward making the role reversal work.

Also of note, the score by Craig Safan utilized heavy synthesizers and gives the film the aural landscape of the 1980s without diving too deep into what would become the cliche 1980s sound. Even more impressive is that the score was written in less than a week.

Joe Bob-servations

Joe Bob’s observations about the film are about what you would expect: funny and educational. Many of his observations and facts about the production naturally work their way into my review for context. What I want to talk about is a bit of fun during the segments. The prevailing theme of the night was a level of cantankerousness regarding the fandom and the previous Halloween special. It was fun and the grouchy Joe Bob character was quite welcome but also felt a little too defensive at times.

Advertisement

But the main draw of the evening was our venerable host sitting down with David Gordon Green, director of Halloween (2018), and the upcoming Halloween Kills. Green was a great guest for the show, showing his chops when it came to discussing the film. One of the more interesting discussions was on the state of horror, particularly in the streaming world, and what was ahead for David Gordon Green, including an upcoming Hellraiser show.

Final Thoughts on Angel (1983)

Angel was surprisingly good. This was my first time seeing it and I was floored by how complex of a film it was. While I am not sure how well it worked as a Halloween film for a Halloween special, it is definitely a portrait of drive-in excellence. It seems that the series it spawned, of four films, is a case of diminishing returns, but the first movie was so good I wouldn’t mind seeing what happens to Molly going forward. I also didn’t mention this much, but the more progressive streak in the film also proved interesting and worthy of future exploration. 5 out of 5 stars (5 / 5)

Best Line: “Well, we better get over there before she ends up in the tomb for the unknown hooker.” – Mae

The Last Drive-In Halloween Hoedown screencap of Angel (1983)
Molly’s got a gun!

Terror Train (1980)

The more traditionally “Halloween” film of the night was Roger Spottiswoode’s Terror Train – though that is more in spirit than setting as this movie takes place on New Year’s Eve. The film follows a group of pre-med students after a tragic prank three years prior as they board a train for a New Year’s Eve party. Unbeknownst to the partygoers, the consequences of their actions are fast approaching in the form of a mysterious, masked killer.

The film, early enough into the formation of key slasher tropes, is novel enough. It isn’t as meticulously approached as John Carpenter’s Halloween, nor as satirical as The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, not as groundbreaking as Bob Clark’s Black Christmas. However, it is still a very solid slasher with some fun spins on what would become hallmarks of the genre. It also helps that the solid direction of the film by Roger Spottiswoode makes use of the claustrophobic setting quite well. How can a killer move so unimpeded in a commuter train? Spottiswoode does a good job at making the space itself a threat.

Advertisement
The Last Drive-In Halloween Hoedown poster for Terror Train (1980)
This train ride is no laughing matter.

Rounding out the production side of the film, the screenplay was crafted by T. Y. Drake and the overall producer was Harold Greenberg. The movie is a great example of that “Canadian Funny Money” period Joe Bob Briggs has mentioned before – where productions were given heavy tax rebates for shooting in Canada. Terror Train was specially filmed in Montreal during the coldest months of the year, and just after Prom Night had wrapped. It is an independent film, but found a distributor in 20th Century Fox.

As for the performances, the film features Jamie Lee Curtis as Alana Maxwell, who represents the final girl trope quite elegantly. The film also features veteran actor and rodeo cowboy Ben Johnson as Carne, the train’s conductor. Rounding out the cast, are Hart Bochner as “Doc,” Timothy Webber as “Mo,” Sandee Currie, Vanity (yes, that Vanity), and drag artist Derek MacKinnon. Also, for some reason, David Copperfield is in the movie – yes, the magician.

Jamie Lee Curtis is pretty understated here. She doesn’t have quite the type of leading lady role she did in Halloween and Prom Night and the character succeeds as likable through the sheer force of her charisma alone. Derek MacKinnon is interesting, though largely relegated to being disguised. Despite this, MacKinnon chews the scenery pretty well, particularly given the surprising reveal at the climax as to who the killer is. The best performance of the film is from Ben Johnson, but he plays a sort of stock character in over his head and trying to solve a mystery far above his paygrade, but goddamn does he give it his all. Also, David Copperfield does some magic tricks that just feel fake because we’re seeing them in a film. That is why you only see magicians do their craft in person.

Technically speaking, the movie is quite effective and doesn’t feel like a quick cash-in that some might assume. The cinematography of John Alcott is particularly effective given the relatively small spaces on the train. It also helps the effects team were able to make the train seem mobile when it was parked for the entire shoot. If Alcott sounds familiar it is because he was Stanley Kubrick’s most trusted cinematographer, working with him on 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, and The Shining. He won an Oscar for Barry Lyndon. One of Alcott’s innovations on the set was to rewire the lighting on the train and use dimmers outside of the train cars to help simulate the movement of a train.

Anne Henderson’s editing is great, giving the film enough angles per scene to give viewers a sense of space. As for the score, I didn’t find the film to have a particularly memorable soundscape. The music is just sort of there.

Joe Bob-servations

Naturally, there was a lot to say on Terror Train, a true slashic, but it seemed the real draw for the night was getting to hear Jason Blum, David Gordon Green, and Joe Bob Briggs talk all things horror, past and present. While Jason Blum’s energy felt a bit too “producer” at times, especially compared to Green and Briggs, his presence was quite insightful. Especially because he is perhaps one of the biggest names in horror production in history, let alone now. It was interesting to hear the trio talk about how movies come about and how modern-day creative partnerships work, and it was also rather reassuring. You get the sense that Blum understands the influence and precariousness of his company and he is quite keen to foster and empower relationships with creators, with Green seeming particularly close. It’s rather pleasant to see.

Advertisement

There was, of course, plenty of talk on Terror Train and classic horror. Particularly fun was the revelation that David Gordon Green’s Frankenhooker t-shirt came from Joe Bob Briggs himself. Green was a fan and sent in for it. An interesting discussion revolved around Green’s education at the University of North Carolina School of the Arts – a smaller school that has provided some great alternative voices in the film industry.

Final Thoughts on Terror Train (1980)

Terror Train is most certainly a classic slasher for a reason. it came out early enough to where the novelty of putting a masked killer in a different scenario or set-up didn’t feel like as big a shortcut as it does now, it had in-her-prime scream queen Jamie Lee Curtis, and did something very interesting with the killer swapping costumes from kill to kill, servicing as a codifier of that trend early on. The film was also fairly progressive in casting a drag performer, Derek MacKinnon, as the killer without necessarily commentating or making a value judgment on drag. It is not the drag that is the problem here, it’s the killing! 4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

Best Line: Alana Maxwell: “No. Kenny, you’re better than he is. I’m sure you’re better than he is.”

Kenny Hampson: “I am. He didn’t know how to cut a woman into pieces.”

The Last Drive-In Halloween Hoedown screencap from Terror Train (1980)
Peek-a-boo!

Haunted MTL Drive-In Totals

As always, let’s take a look at the official Drive-In Totals:

As for our totals:

Advertisement
  • 0 Yuki (rectify this next time, Shudder)
  • 2 Street Dads
  • 2 Time Horror Hottie
  • 2 Guests
  • 3 1/2 Minutes of film to shoot with
  • Gratuitous Halloween discussion without showing Halloween
  • Gratuitous 70s Stage Magic
  • Gratuituous Samhain History Lecture
  • Gratuitous dissection of the term “microbudget”
  • Suprise Drag Night
  • Pumpkin Censoring
  • Halloween Joking
  • Abrubt Ending Fu
  • Half-assed Costume Fu
  • Joe Bob Fan Club T-Shirt Fu
  • Slumber Party Horror Movie Fu
  • Krishna Assault Fu
  • No Silver Bolo Award!
  • Cosplay: Taco Joe Bob, Caultiflower Pizza Darcy, Angel/Molly Darcy
The Last Drive-In Halloween Hoedown screenshot of Jason Blum and David Gordon Green
Blum and Green are game to chat with Briggs.

Episode Score

As a whole, the evening was fun but also felt unusually loose in concept compared to other specials. If it weren’t for a couple of the Halloween accouterments and a visit from some of the team behind the upcoming Halloween Kills, you’d be able to mistake this for a general night at the Drive-In. With that being said, an general night on the Drive-In is perfectly fine and if this were a midseason episode it would be great.

So no, Joe Bob, you didn’t “ruin Halloween again,” nor have you ever, but as entertaining as this was there is an expectation of something a little more thematically appropriate. One cannot necessarily fault the fans for thinking so – especially given the guests. All in all, a fun episode with a great double feature – but as far as a Halloween show goes, a little too far outside the margins. 4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

I hope you enjoyed this recap and review of Shudder’s The Last Drive-In with Joe Bob Briggs. We don’t have a date for the return of the show for a full season, but we do know some more specials are on the way. Naturally, we are going to cover them as they release.

In the meantime, please share your thoughts with us about the show, the review, or the movies from the special. We’re dying to hear from you.

Advertisement

Movies n TV

The Last Drive-In Live: A Tribute to Roger Corman

Published

on

By

The Last Drive-In with Joe Bob Briggs returned March 15th for a special tribute to Roger Corman. Filmed live in Las Vegas during Joe Bob’s Jamboree last October, fans who were unable to attend can finally see what they missed. The Drive-In is available on AMC+ and Shudder.

This week on The Last Drive-In, Joe Bob and Darcy return to pay tribute to Roger Corman’s first 70 years in Hollywood. Roger and Julie Corman join the hosts between films at the West Wind Drive-In for an incredible interview on stage. Legendary actor Bruce Dern is also part of the conversation. Spanning the decades, Joe Bob presents Corman’s A Bucket of Blood (1959) and Deathstalker (1983).

Live from Las Vegas

A Tribute to Roger Corman begins with a live rendition of the show’s theme song in front of the cheering audience. The stage brings the trailer park to Vegas with its familiar set-up of chairs and a cooler. John Brennan croons as Yuki Nakamura beats a colander with a stick before introducing the show’s hosts. Joe Bob gives a special shout-out to the Las Vegas Chamber of Cannabis before introducing Darcy the Mailgirl.

In place of a tangentially related rant, Joe Bob opens with focused praise of Corman. He lauds Corman’s ability to fully meld the business and art halves of producing. Bringing attention to how “cheap” Corman is, Joe Bob highlights the smart decisions that sustained Corman’s long career. He calls them “the decisions of a producer who is being an artist.” Corman’s ability to spot talent and negotiate deals connects him to the beating heart of Hollywood, and leaves Joe Bob “truly in awe” of him.

Beatnik City

Part of what makes Corman special is his fascination with new and culturally relevant ideas. A Bucket of Blood (1959), is perhaps the best example of his ability to take real life and turn it into art. Corman together with writer Charles B. Griffith spent time in beatnik coffeehouses to create what Joe Bob calls “the ultimate parody of the whole beat generation.”

Advertisement
A poster for Roger Corman's A Bucket of Blood.
A poster for Roger Corman’s A Bucket of Blood

Bucket tells the story of Walter Paisley (Dick Miller), an impressionable busboy who is determined to impress the customers he serves. Jealous of the attention poet Maxwell H. Brock (Julian Burton) commands; Walter decides to become a sculptor. While attempting to sculpt the face of the coffeehouse’s hostess Carla (Barboura Morris), Walter inadvertently kills his pet cat. Seizing the opportunity, he covers the cat in clay and passes it off as original work. When the sculpture gives him a taste of the adoration he seeks, Walter continues down the dark path of melding murder with art.

The Drive-In Totals include but are not limited to: 4 dead bodies, 1 dead-cat sculpture, attempted busboy seduction with heroin, skillet fu, and gratuitous beatnik poetry. “Four stars. Joe Bob says, ‘Check it out.’”

Decisions, Decisions

Despite the film only being 67 minutes long, Joe Bob emphasizes how its length in no way limits the complete and complex story. Corman cuts down film times as a production decision. According to Corman, 78 minutes is the perfect length for a movie because it lowers distribution costs. Low run-times also make movies more likely to receive a television sale as it allows for more commercials.

Joe Bob credits Bucket with defining the acting style of Dick Miller and kicking off his career of playing oddball characters. The film also shows the strengths of Julian Burton as a character actor. Corman expected those in his films to continue in the industry, but not necessarily with him. Speaking about a conversation he had with Corman once, Joe Bob recounts him saying, “If you make a third movie for me, I tend to lose all respect for you.”

Budgeting

Bemoaning that a producer like Corman doesn’t exist for the modern age, Joe Bob asks the audience who they think could be analogous. Eric Butts gleefully shouts out “Lloyd Kaufman!” Darcy agrees with Butts, but Joe Bob doesn’t seem to think one truly exists. If one does, I agree that Kaufman is the closest thing. Joe Bob seems to think Blumhouse might be it, but concedes “they make expensive movies now.” Corman was not one to make expensive films even if it was within the budget.

Utilizing cost-saving measures, Little Shop of Horrors (1960) was filmed shortly after Bucket and utilized the same sets. Little Shop is the only Corman film in the National Film Registry. Joe Bob seems perplexed by this as Bucket and Little Shop are “identically structured movies.” Between the two, he believes Bucket to be the superior film.

Advertisement

When Darcy asks Joe Bob what he would do with $10 million in production funding, he says he would make 40 movies. Bucket of Blood 2, Gatorbait 3, and Hogzilla 2 are all thrown out as options. As soon as hogzilla is mentioned, the crowd bursts out in the now-familiar “Hogzilla! Hogzilla! Hogzilla!” chant. Being there, it felt good to be able to join in on the chant live instead of yelling it at my screen.

My rating for Bucket of Blood: 4.7 out of 5 stars (4.7 / 5)

Crowd Pleaser

Due to the live format, there is no mail break between movies. Instead, Joe Bob announces that Darcy will be going through the crowd to collect their letters. This appears to be news to Darcy and she responds with a startled look on her face, “Oh, I will not be moving amongst them!” She may have become more confident with her place on The Last Drive-In, but sending her out into the dark among the masses is too far. We’ll try to not take it personally, Darcy.

Joe Bob sits on stage next to Darcy the Mailgirl
Joe Bob attempts to convince Darcy

Instead of leaving the stage, she asks Joe Bob if he has his questions ready for Corman. She braces again when he replies that he is going for spontaneity tonight. Joe Bob says he’s already asked all of his questions in previous Corman interviews, so he’s left with no choice but to wing it. “Whenever you say something off the top of your head, you make everyone mad, and I defend you,” she reminds him. 

Welcome to the Stage

A sense of joy and reverence overtakes the stage as Roger and Julie Corman join the hosts. It is easy to tell from Joe Bob’s face how much love and reverence he holds for Corman. Their relationship/friendship has lasted since Joe Bob presented Corman with a lifetime achievement award 40 years ago. Of course, the award was inscribed on a Chevy hubcap. And of course, it’s presentation took place at a drive-in theater.

Joe Bob Briggs interviews Roger Corman on stage.
Joe Bob interviewing Roger Corman

Noting that a Chevy hubcap just wouldn’t cut it this time, Joe Bob gives both Roger and Julie lifetime achievement awards inscribed on Cadillac hubcaps. When Darcy hands Corman his award, he smiles in delight. “That’s great, that’s great! I love it!” The synchronicity of the moment is a beautiful thing to behold.

Always Prepared

Although Joe Bob told Darcy he did not have questions planned, he dives into the interview. “You were the man who brought Ingmar Bergman to the drive-in,” he starts. Corman reveals part of his distribution strategy and notes that drive-ins typically suffer in the fall from a lack of pictures. He says they decided to put Bergman’s film Cries and Whispers (1972) into drive-ins and see what happened. “We were delighted to find we had done average business.”

Advertisement

Corman is just as endearing and affable throughout the remainder of the interview. As Joe Bob delves into his genre-spanning career, Corman’s answers are a wealth of institutional knowledge and personal stories. This is an interview that anyone and everyone planning on going into film should watch. Going through the multiple genres reveals how much of a finger Corman kept on the pulse of culture as well as his chameleon-like ability to fit himself into any situation.

What a Trip

Genres he has worked in include (but are not limited to): westerns, redneck action, film-noir, rock-and-roll musicals, historical action, ripped from the headlines exploitation, gangster, comedy, pure action, costume drama, women in prison, sword and sorcery, and motorcycle movies. Corman reveals he holds an affinity for the science-fiction genre in particular. “[It] is laid in fantastic areas, but to a large extent, it can be a comment on the present day.” Julie chimes in to reveal the first story Corman ever wrote was a science-fiction piece, and Corman looks wistful as he remembers failing to sell it.

When asked about his art-film period, Corman talks about dropping acid with the cast of The Trip (1967). Intending to draw from the experience while filming, Corman says the experience didn’t go entirely to plan. “I had such a great trip.” He remembers worrying it was “going to end up as an ad for LSD.”

Surprise Guest

Unbeknownst to everyone in the audience, Joe Bob arranged for a member of The Trip’s cast as a surprise guest. Bruce Dern enters the stage clad in a leather jacket. I’m not sure if this is his normal garb, or if he is making a nod to another Corman film he starred in – The Wild Angels (1966).

Dern is bursting with praise for Corman and his impact on the film industry. When Joe Bob asks about working with Jack Nicholson, Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper, Dern asserts “We went to the University of Corman.” I immediately wish I could buy merch emblazoned with that. He summarizes Corman’s career succinctly, “You do shit that’s never been done.”

Advertisement

Dern acknowledges that the pay wasn’t always fantastic, but that Corman always made sure his stars received the proper billing. “He put our names above the title.” Dern recalls being offended on Corman’s behalf for the lack of proper recognition throughout the years. “It was always fun to be with him and be able to say this kind of stuff about a guy, who God damnit deserves it.”

Lifetime Achievement

The interview ends with three incredible moments. First, Corman recalls receiving a death threat from Big Otto Friedli (a former President of the Hells Angels). Friedli was suing Corman in regards to The Wild Angels. His response to the threat leaves the audience in laughter. “My advice to you is forget the momentary pleasure of killing me and go for the million dollars.”

Next, the audience learns from Corman that a remake of Little Shop is coming in conjunction with Brad Krevoy. Joe Dante is directing the film, which is called The Little Shop of Halloween Horrors.

To end, Corman reveals that not only does he still have his original Chevy hubcap given to him 40 years ago, but that he brought it with him. In an incredibly touching moment, Corman bestows the award back to Joe Bob. “It’s my pleasure to give you the lifetime achievement award.” I cannot think of a higher honor.

You’ve Been Warned

Content warning: The second film of the night contains multiple depictions of sexual violence. Consequently, Joe Bob refers to it within his discussions of the film.

Advertisement

Despite there being literally hundreds of Corman films to choose from, Joe Bob selects Deathstalker (1983) as the second movie. He breaks his decision down to three factors. First, he wants to present a sword and sorcery movie. Second, he wants to highlight Corman’s use of foreign countries to “make movies that otherwise would not be made.” Third, the movie has a lot of naked women in it and is “loincloth city.”

A poster for Roger Corman's Deathstalker.
A poster for Roger Corman’s Deathstalker

Deathstalker tells the story of, well, Deathstalker (Rick Hill) and his quest to acquire three magical items in order to defeat the evil sorcerer Munkar (Bernard Erhard). As Joe Bob puts it, “There’s rape and there’s pillage and there’s magic swords and there’s castles and there’s peasant hoards…”

The drive-in totals include but are not limited to: 30 breasts, 24 buttocks, limb ripping, spears through the gizzards, heads roll, leprosy fu. “Four stars. Joe Bob says, ‘Check it out!’”

Parental Advisory

This film has an almost absurd amount of sexual violence in it. It is rare for a woman to be on screen without there being sexual violence. If you are uncomfortable with watching that take place, Joe Bob does an accurate summation at each break. If you don’t want to hear about it, skip the second film entirely. As Darcy says, “This movie is very rapey.” 

Thankfully, Joe Bob does also delve more into Corman’s history during the breaks. Corman struck a 10-picture deal with Héctor Olivera and Aries Films based out of Buenos Aires. Joe Bob credits this deal with saving Aries Film during a time of hyperinflation in Argentina. Apparently, The Argentine film industry wasn’t a fan of Deathstalker and criticized the exploitation inherent in its production.

The stunt-work in the film is impressive. While the stunts are fun to watch, it’s hard to forget that the performers were risking bodily harm at a pay-rate that was only acceptable because of Argentina’s economic situation. Joe Bob highlights the work of José Luis Arévalo as the character Pig-Face specifically as deserving praise and recognition.

Advertisement

A New World Order

Moving away from the film, Joe Bob goes deeper into Corman’s film distribution history. Starting with New World Pictures in 1970, Corman went on to create and sell various distribution companies. In the process, he created numerous sub-genres and launched the careers of several successful filmmakers. Martin Scorsese and Ron Howard are included in the list.

Corman would not allow someone to direct a film for him until they had editing experience. According to Joe Bob, Corman believes “editing is the key to great movies.” This calls back to his idea that 78 minutes is the perfect length for a movie. 

Lack of Defense

The film performed well in America but was a dud in its production home of Argentina. Joe Bob notes early into the film, “I am, by the way, one of the few defenders of this movie.” Darcy agrees that she is also a defender of the film. I am not.

My rating for Deathstalker: 1.3 out of 5 stars (1.3 / 5)

Wrap it Up

Although Darcy never waded into the crowd to collect letters, fans still wrote on whatever scraps they had and threw them in the collection box. Darcy chooses four letters, but my favorite comes from Victoria from Virgina. She writes in with a topical blonde joke: “Why did the two blonds freeze to death at the drive-in? They went to see ‘closed for the winter.’”

The night can’t really end until Joe Bob tells his jokes, and that he does. As the night draws to a close, John Brennan and the Bigfeet come back out with Yuki to sing the mutant oath as a send-off. Appropriately, the night ends with the crowd lovingly chanting Joe Bob’s name.

Advertisement

While I may not be a fan of Deathstalker, the special overall was incredible to experience. Sitting live in the audience (and catching glimpses of myself on TV) is something I will never be able to forget.

It’s fascinating to see how the live experience translated to the screen, but production did a fantastic job making it seamless. The energy of the crowd is really what makes this special. Chanting will never be the same again.

Darcy on stage chanting "loincloth!"
Loincloth! Loincloth!

My rating for A Tribute to Roger Corman: 4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Unraveling the Artistry in Sean Mathias’s Hamlet Film with Ian McKellen

Published

on

2b v ~ 2b

Imagine Sir Ian McKellen, an icon of the stage and screen, diving back into the turbulent waters of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. This isn’t just any adaptation; we’re talking about a cinematic spin on Sean Mathias’s groundbreaking 2021 production, where age is just a number, and McKellen’s Hamlet shatters expectations. This Hamlet film is a feast for the senses and a triumph of storytelling.

Now, I’m not just whistling Dixie here; as someone deeply entrenched in Shakespeare’s rich tapestry and perpetually on the edge of my seat for fresh adaptations, the buzz around this particular version of Hamlet has me all kinds of excited. With IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes ready to chart its journey, and echoes of David Tennant to Helena Bonham Carter reminding us of Hamlet’s storied cinematic past, Sir Ian’s version is primed to stand tall amidst the ghosts of Kenneth Branagh and the tragic echoes of Ophelia. This film isn’t just a recount of Denmark’s doomed prince; it’s a beacon for Shakespeare enthusiasts and cinema buffs alike.

Overview of the Film

Diving headfirst into the heart of this cinematic marvel, “Hamlet” with Ian McKellen at the helm, is like stepping into a Shakespearean whirlwind spun into the modern age. Directed by the visionary Sean Mathias, this film plants its roots in the historic Theatre Royal Windsor, UK, transforming every corner of this iconic space into the brooding world of Elsinore. The cast, oh, the cast! It’s a lineup that reads like a who’s who of the acting world – from Jonathan Hyde’s (Claudius) gravitas to Jenny Seagrove’s (Gertrude) elegance, and let’s not forget the powerhouse that is Alis Wyn Davies (Ophelia). This ensemble, including Ben Allen (Horatio), Ashley D Gayle (basically everyone not named already) and Emmanuella Cole (Laertes), navigates Shakespeare’s complex language with a finesse that’s downright enviable.

Advertisement

This isn’t just any adaptation; we’re talking about a cinematic spin on Sean Mathias’s groundbreaking 2021 production, where age is just a number. McKellen’s Hamlet shatters expectations. Jim Phoenix

Picture, if you will: the world’s been hit with the stillness of the 2020 COVID-19 shutdown, and amidst this, “Hamlet” emerges as a beacon of artistic resilience. It’s not just any adaptation; it’s a modern-dress treatment that speaks to the here and now, pared down to a gripping two hours. The production breathes life into the Theatre Royal Windsor, turning its abandoned nooks and crannies into the very heart of Elsinore. From the safety curtain to the theatre foyer, every scene unfolds with an intimacy that only enhances the drama.

This film isn’t just about showcasing stellar performances; it’s an exploration, a conversation between cinema and theatre. How does one enhance the other? Can the grandeur of theatre translate onto the silver screen? With Neil Oseman’s ingenious cinematography, every frame of this film attempts to answer these questions, offering viewers a Hamlet that’s both familiar and startlingly new. Set your tvs on stun as this version hits shelves and electrons on April 8 coming out on DVD, Blu-ray, and Digital Download, this film is a testament to the timeless allure of Shakespeare, reimagined for a world in pause.

Ian McKellen dressed in a white fencing outfit with the title Hamlet

Ian McKellen’s Performance

Let me tell you, seeing Sir Ian McKellen take on Hamlet again, especially at 84, is like watching a master painter revisit his masterpiece with new colors. This isn’t just any performance; it’s a nuanced, age-blind portrayal that flips the script on traditional casting, making it a must-see for anyone who’s even remotely intrigued by Shakespeare’s work.

  • Age-Blind Brilliance: Let’s face it. Even my first thought was ‘how the hell is McKellen going to play Hamlet at 80??!’ Well, the answer is…brilliantly. McKellen’s casting in an age-blind production adds layers to Hamlet’s character, showcasing a blend of youthful energy with the wisdom of age. This duality brings a fresh perspective to the role, making it relatable across generations.
  • A Masterclass in Delivery: His performance is a quiet storm. It’s meditative, focusing on the weight of Hamlet’s words rather than overt dramatics. McKellen’s command of the language, his ability to find new inflections in well-trodden speeches, is nothing short of a masterclass. Shakespeare aficionados will be hanging on every word, reveling in the masterful delivery of the bard’s intricate verse. For those struggling with the text of the play, this might be the most friendly adaptation to sink your teeth into. McKellen’s delivery hits all the high notes, but his wisdom in holding back where others might push helps newer audiences connect with the material.
  • Physicality and Emotional Depth: Despite the quieter, more reflective approach, McKellen’s physicality and emotional depth do not wane. His portrayal is a testament to his skill, bringing a compelling prince to life who is both vulnerable and unpredictable. The scenes with the players, in particular, highlight his calculated madness, offering a glimpse into the prince’s tormented psyche.

Incorporating these elements into his portrayal, McKellen not only honors his past performances but also elevates this Hamlet film to new heights. It’s a celebration of Shakespeare’s timeless language and the psychological complexity of its characters, delivered by a cast led by a titan of the stage and screen.

Supporting Cast and Their Contributions

Alright, diving into the world of Elsinore beyond McKellen’s Hamlet, let’s talk about the squad that brings this Shakespearean drama to life. It’s like assembling a dream team where each player has their unique flair, but instead of dribbling basketballs, they’re slaying lines in iambic pentameter.

McKellen’s Hamlet is a feast for the senses and a triumph of storytelling. Jim Phoenix

  • Jenny Seagrove as Gertrude: Seagrove’s take on the Queen is interesting. I’ve seen Gertrude played a lot of different ways. Mostly, the audience should find some sympathy with Gertrude (enough to make a real connection that she truly loves Hamlet and is, most likely, innocent in most things). There are times where Seagrove approaches this, but the royal mask stays tightly on. Some have suggested her performance as ‘wooden’, but I think they are missing the point. Seagrove does move to emotion when she must, but the excels at keeping the ‘Royal Mask’ intact. In the end, Queen Gertrude is exactly that–Queen. When was the last time you saw England’s former monarch express a lot of emotion in public? This doesn’t suggest either were incapable of emotion, but rather a master of theirs.
  • Jonathan Hyde as Claudius and Emmanuella as Laertes: Hyde’s Claudius is the smooth villain you love to hate, capturing the complexity of the character with finesse. Cole steps into Laertes’ shoes and runs with them, delivering a performance that’s solid, given the big shoes she had to fill.

Mix in the age- and gender-blind casting, and you’ve got a recipe for a Hamlet that’s as fresh as it is classic. From modern-dress Polonius to a female Ghost stirring the pot, this cast turns Shakespeare on its head in the best way possible. And let’s not forget the costumes – or lack thereof, in terms of evocativeness. It’s like everyone decided to raid a very somber, very Shakespearean version of H&M. This works in the movie’s favor. It’s a zero-shits given version of Hamlet casting. They cast the best person for the role, gender, age, color be damned. It’s pretty refreshing to see this cast and they knock it out of the park.

Critical Reception and Audience Response

So, let’s dive into the sea of opinions swirling around this Hamlet film, shall we? I mean, it’s not every day you get to see Sir Ian McKellen give life to one of Shakespeare’s most tormented souls, right? The buzz was real, folks – from critics singing praises to some scratching their heads in puzzlement. Here’s the lowdown:

Let’s face it. Even my first thought was ‘how the hell is McKellen going to play Hamlet at 80??!’ Well, the answer is…brilliantly. Jim Phoenix

  • Praise for McKellen and the Modern Twist:
    • Critics and audiences were all about McKellen’s portrayal. The blend of youthful energy with the wisdom of age? Gorgeously done as we all knew he would.
    • The contemporary take on this classic tragedy had folks intrigued. It’s like Shakespeare met 2024 and they decided to throw a party.
  • But, Not All Was Rosy:
    • The relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia felt like it was on a diet – underdeveloped and leaving us wanting more. I’m not sure where it goes ‘wrong’ here. The acting is spectactular for both Hamlet and Ophelia, but there isn’t a joint spark. Hamlet’s kiss to his mother was more romantic than anything happening between these two (and that kiss was a tad creepy).
  • Production Woes and Wins:
    • Experimental space and tone had its ups and downs. Some decisions had us scratching our heads, wondering if the chaos was part of the charm. This includes some setting (how many flights of stairs did Gertrude run down to nark on her son?) and sometimes the lines either cut or–oddly–added.
    • With all that said, the good far outweigh the bad here. Even the wonky stair run works to show a level of Gertrude’s literal and metaphorical descent. It goes to show space in the madness–a madness that is quite contagious in this play.

Navigating through this mixed bag of reactions, it’s clear this Hamlet wasn’t just another adaptation. It was a conversation starter, a bold experiment in blending theatre with cinema, and a showcase for McKellen’s undiminished talent. As a Shakespeare enthusiast, it’s these daring takes that keep the bard’s work alive and kicking in our hearts.

For those new to Shakespeare…

I know someone who is currently teaching Hamlet in class. After seeing Sir Ian’s vision of Hamlet, we both agreed: This might be the bridge for younger adults to get a greater understanding of Shakespeare. The run time, the choice of words and scenery, and the stellar cast all form a ‘relatable’ version of Hamlet. There are some food for thought with this version that we discussed earlier (e.g., age and gender blind casting; some of the text is from elsewhere, etc), but if you’re new to Shakespeare and want to tip-toe in–this is your jam. Even better–if you love Hamlet and thought you saw it all–this is also your jam.

Conclusion

Through this detailed exploration of the Hamlet film starring Ian McKellen, we’ve navigated the complexities and novelties introduced by a profoundly compelling adaptation. The artistic innovation that underpins this rendition extends from its age-blind casting to the incorporation of modern dress, illustrating Shakespeare’s enduring relevance. McKellen’s portrayal of Hamlet, enriched by his depth of experience and fresh perspectives, alongside a robust supporting cast, fortifies the film’s appeal not only to Shakespeare veterans but also to those who are newly discovering the intricacies of the Bard’s masterpieces. This narrative fervor aligns harmoniously with an audience that is simultaneously well-versed in Shakespearean lore and eager to witness this unique adaptation unfold.

As I conclude, the significance of this adaptation transcends mere entertainment, heralding a vibrant dialogue between traditional theatre and contemporary cinema. The anticipation surrounding its release is a testament to the lasting impact of Shakespeare’s work, ingeniously reimagined for today’s audience. For enthusiasts and scholars alike, the film promises to be a captivating experience, merging the old with the new in a celebration of Shakespearean drama that is not to be missed.

To ensure you don’t miss out on this cinematic feat, make sure to go buy it from Kaleidoscope Home Entertainment when it comes out on Blu-ray, DVD, and streaming April 8. This adaptation not only redefines the parameters of classical theatre in the modern age but also beckons us to revisit the timeless questions and emotions that Shakespeare so masterfully encapsulated.

Final Rating

4.5 out of 5 stars (4.5 / 5)

Short Synopsis: McKellen reprises his lead role as Hamlet, a man who descends into madness as he seeks vengeance against his uncle for the alleged murder of his father. A tale of revenge that has stood the test of time, Shakespeare’s classic tragedy is reimagined for the modern day as a gripping psychological thriller. Kaleidoscope Home Entertainment

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Goosebumps, Night of the Living Dummy: Part 2

Published

on

After last episode’s spectacular ending that honestly felt like a season finale, I was apprehensive about this episode. I was expecting this one to feel slow, tacked on, and a little gimmicky. Fortunately, it was only two of those things.

The story

We begin our story with Nathan, just finishing up the book he’s written about Slappy and the town. He sent it off to a publisher who loves it! Except, for the ending.

Cover for Goosebums Night of the Living Dummy 2

Nathan tries valiantly to write an ending. But in the end, he just can’t come up with one. With his publisher breathing down his neck, Nathan decides the only way to end the book is to bring Slappy back for an encore.

Slappy manages to immediately endear himself to Nathan by bringing Fifi back to life. And I’ll be honest here. I probably wouldn’t have retrieved a homicidal dummy for the perfect ending to a book. But I’d do some shady shit for someone who could bring my dead pets back to life. Even if they did have scary monster teeth.

Advertisement

Of course, this sort of thing never goes to plan. Soon enough Slappy has everything he wants. And the ending of Nathan’s story is the least of his concerns.

Meanwhile, the teens are in Seattle with Margot and her mom. Margot is thinking about moving there, and there are conflicting opinions about this. Lucas realizes he never wants to leave their hometown, which causes conflict. Conflict that I didn’t think was bad enough that he needed to get on a bus and head home alone, but what do I know?

The only real reason why this matters is that the kids, who are clearly the only ones paying any attention in this town, are in fact out of town when Slappy returns.

What worked

A lot of the joy from this episode came from Nathan. It was a really fun episode if you are a fan of R.L. Stine, a fan of Stephen King, or a writer. As I’m all three, this was quite fun for me. At least half the episode was.

Advertisement

First, I loved the generational stupidity of Nathan Bratt. We know that it was his ancestor, Ephraim Biddle, who first found Slappy and locked him up in the Biddle house. It was then, of course, Harold Biddle who was corrupted and eventually killed by Slappy. So when Nathan goes to find Slappy, you can almost hear generations of his family yelling at him.

This episode is littered with jokes about R.L. Stein and Stephen King. King is name-dropped several times, and you can see at least one of his books in the background while Nathan’s talking to his publisher. Also, the publisher’s note that Nathan’s ending is bad could be a reference to King.

Stine also has a wonderful cameo in the form of a writing podcast Nathan is listening to. If that podcast exists, I need to find it. I also appreciated the dig about ‘everyone being dead the whole time’. This episode took shot after shot at my favorite childhood author and my favorite author from adulthood and I loved it.

Justin Long in Goosebumps.

What didn’t work

Sadly the episode couldn’t all be horror writing in-jokes. Sometimes we did have to pay attention to the main characters. And that storyline was, to put it bluntly, boring.

I couldn’t care less that Margot is considering moving. I don’t care that Isaiah and Lucas are both in love with her. I don’t care that Lucas has never heard of long-distance relationships. I don’t care that Isabella has feelings for Isaiah. I tuned into Goosebumps to watch killer dummies and vengeful ghosts. If I wanted to watch teenagers have hormones at each other, I’d have watched Degrassi. None of the teens’ love lives have anything to do with the plot and this portion of the show was so, so very dull.

Advertisement

All in all, this wasn’t the strongest episode of the season. It was one of those dreaded bridge episodes, there more to set the stage for what’s to come than to be enjoyable in its own right. But, it did that. I’m excited to see what the last episode has in store for us. 3.5 out of 5 stars (3.5 / 5)

If you’re a fan of my work, please check out my latest story, Nova, on Paper Beats World. New chapters launch every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending