Bloodlust is one of the few Australian vampire films we have watched, so we'd like to be able to recommend it. But we can't, because it is dreadful. So bad that it almost makes it into the Sandpaper Your Eyeballs, or ... category.
It contains some of the worst acting we have seen and the worst fake-American accents we have heard; and the appalling acting is made even worse by an awful script. Then there is the obviously very low-budget production values. If it wasn’t for Thirst (1979) this film would be enough to turn us off Australian vampire films forever.
We have endured already, and to some extent enjoyed, quite low-budget films like Mrs. Amworth (2006) and Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter (2001). But these films are engaging while Blood Lust just falls flat on its fangs.
Part of what makes the film so unenjoyable to watch is the systematic misogyny of the men in the film: the cops, the gangsters, the rapist petrol-bowser boy! The good news is that they do all meet very bad ends: divine justice is served, but the justice is neither adequately detailed or gruesome for us—or in true rape/revenge form—to be truly satisfied.
The general plot is that three vampire buddies, two chicks and a guy, are bored with living in Melbourne, so they decide to leave. Before going they plan an all-guns-blazing heist of the local illegal casino. Having got away with the money they are relentlessly pursed by the gangsters, two cops (who single-handily make this film the dross it is!) and a mad priest and his minions wielding stakes and crosses.
The film does have some interesting features. The curvaceous blonde vamp ("Frank," played by Kelly Chapman), for one, whose acting is almost as good as her latex costume, despite the awful script. And the rampaging mad priest ("Brother Bem," played by Phil Motherwell) is also quite disturbing, and convincing in his frenzied way.
The treatment of vampire conventions in this otherwise worthless film is mildly interesting. Vamps have no thrall or super strength and, it seems, no wealth. They fight with guns, and they steal money when they need it. More commonly vamps either don’t have to fight, because they have minions do it for them, or they have such wonderful magical/supernatural abilities that they simply crush/destroy their human opponents. Also, vamps are either very rich or seemingly unconcerned about such mundane matters as money. Here, they steal guns, money etc., just like poor, petty criminals.
Fangs are also absent from this vamps, although this not so uncommon for the genre. And crosses and sunlight don't seem to be a problem either for these inner-city dwelling fang-masters.
A review of this film, and screen caps, appears on Taleisin's Vamp Movie Reviews. Taleisin rated it 2.5 out of 10. Seems generous to us.
Wednesday, 17 March 2010
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
Blood & Roses, 1960 [77 minute version]
We did a post on Blood & Roses aka Et mourir de plaisir (1960) over a year ago. At the time we said
the only version of the film available today is a DVD rip of a 1990s VHS tape, a tape that is of the mutilated US version of the film. The original version was 87 minutes; but this was cut to 74 minutes by Paramount for the US market by chopping out all of the naughty lesbian scenes and adding a Blade Runner-esque voiceover at the start to explain the story. In the version we watched, the colours were washed out and the image and the sound were ‘soft’, but the film was still brilliant!
Well, last week we received an "upgrade" from VideoScreams: a 77 minute version, in French with English subtitles, in letterbox. It is a cleaner print, with a different start and finish, and includes scenes that are missing from the 74 minute version (it also cuts some scenes that are included at length in the 74 minute version). By my calculation it includes about 9 minutes of footage missing from the 74 minute cut and duplicates another 2 mins of footage using a different voice-over. If the two films were spliced together I think there would be a total between them of ca. 83 minutes. If I had the first idea about video-editing I'd do this immediately!
This new material is very exciting, especially for a film I still consider a "wonderful film, surely one of the best vampire films ever." But it does suggest that the 15 minutes of "naughty lesbian scenes" is a myth, as I'll explain.
As, I assume, I am not the only person interested in this film, I thought I'd give a summary of the differences between the two versions. I will refer to each version as A (74 min) & B (77 min).
Version A starts (after the credits) with a voiceover by Carmilla during which we see a plane take off (from inside the cockpit) and a plane cruising in the sky. The film cuts straight from these scenes (2.00–3.50 min) to a get-together at which a pyrotechnician elaborates on his plan for a fireworks display around some ruins (which turn out to contain the grave of Millarca).
Version B starts with the same cockpit footage, but we then see inside the plane and are introduced to the Doctor (who plays a minor role in the story). The doctor starts telling a story to a group of friends about Carmilla (2.00–3.45 min) and his voice-over fades away as we see four scenes missing from Version A. These are
[1] one of two girls strays into a graveyard to retrieve a ball and is warned by the other that she will get bitten by a vampire (3.45–4.20 min);
[2] the pyrotechnician taking sightings of the property in a car (4.20–4.45 min);
[3] Carmilla & Georgia riding a horse together, laughing (4.45–5.45 min);
[4] the two girls saying their prayers but, simultaneously, threatening each other. Vampires are again mentioned (5.45–6.45 min).
After the opening there are five more places where there is more footage or extra scenes. Some of the cuts of other scenes may be longer too, but I haven't done a side-by-side comparison of the two versions.* Anyway, these five extra scenes I noticed in Version B are:
[5] a thirty-second scene of Carmilla and the maid laughing together (32.00–32.30min);
[6] a minute of extra footage in the scene where Carmilla chases the maid (before killing her) (46.40–47.40 min);
[7] a minute of extra footage in the scene where Carmilla and Georgia are in the glasshouse, talking, during the storm;
[8] a thirty-second scene of Georgia's father arriving, prior to his conversation with Leopoldo about the timing and location of the wedding (65.30–66.00 min);
[9] at least thirty-seconds extra in short bits added to many cuts in the frantic scenes that follow Carmilla fleeing the house (and before her death) (71.30–72.30 min);
Missing from Version B is most of the scene in which Leopoldo and Georgia's father discuss the timing and location of the wedding; and most of the wacky Carmilla/Georgie dream-sequence.
Readers of this blog who are familiar with the film will realise, looking at the above, that the ca. 83 minutes now known to exist do not leave much space for the mythical "naughty lesbian scenes": none of the Carmilla/Georgie interactions really have much scope for grill-on-grill action, and new extra minute recovered of the glass-house scene increases the tension, not the eroticism of the only scene in which they kiss.
The extra scenes do make for a better film: the scene in which Carmilla chases down the maid is much more eerie and disturbing the more you see of it, and with more of their previous interactions.
But the biggest difference between the two versions is the result of one film being Carmilla's/Millarca's story and the other being the doctors. Carmilla's/Millarca's version (Version A) is definitely better; the extra exposition in Version B removes much of the mystery of the story, which is so much a part of the appeal of the film.
So, if I can get someone to edit a version for me, I'll be keeping the Version A intro!
*There is, for instance, about one extra second in the scene where Carmilla, having caught sight of blood over her heart in a mirror and having run from Leopoldo to her room, tears open her dress to see where the blood is coming from. In Version B the extra second allows the viewer to see one blood-smeared breast long enough to recognise it as such before Carmilla collapses in horror at what she has discovered. Version A cuts this second of footage: you see Carmilla tear at her dress and then collapse (and it is never really clear why). This is a particularly notable second of footage; there may be more that made less of an impact.
the only version of the film available today is a DVD rip of a 1990s VHS tape, a tape that is of the mutilated US version of the film. The original version was 87 minutes; but this was cut to 74 minutes by Paramount for the US market by chopping out all of the naughty lesbian scenes and adding a Blade Runner-esque voiceover at the start to explain the story. In the version we watched, the colours were washed out and the image and the sound were ‘soft’, but the film was still brilliant!
Well, last week we received an "upgrade" from VideoScreams: a 77 minute version, in French with English subtitles, in letterbox. It is a cleaner print, with a different start and finish, and includes scenes that are missing from the 74 minute version (it also cuts some scenes that are included at length in the 74 minute version). By my calculation it includes about 9 minutes of footage missing from the 74 minute cut and duplicates another 2 mins of footage using a different voice-over. If the two films were spliced together I think there would be a total between them of ca. 83 minutes. If I had the first idea about video-editing I'd do this immediately!
This new material is very exciting, especially for a film I still consider a "wonderful film, surely one of the best vampire films ever." But it does suggest that the 15 minutes of "naughty lesbian scenes" is a myth, as I'll explain.
As, I assume, I am not the only person interested in this film, I thought I'd give a summary of the differences between the two versions. I will refer to each version as A (74 min) & B (77 min).
Version A starts (after the credits) with a voiceover by Carmilla during which we see a plane take off (from inside the cockpit) and a plane cruising in the sky. The film cuts straight from these scenes (2.00–3.50 min) to a get-together at which a pyrotechnician elaborates on his plan for a fireworks display around some ruins (which turn out to contain the grave of Millarca).
Version B starts with the same cockpit footage, but we then see inside the plane and are introduced to the Doctor (who plays a minor role in the story). The doctor starts telling a story to a group of friends about Carmilla (2.00–3.45 min) and his voice-over fades away as we see four scenes missing from Version A. These are
[1] one of two girls strays into a graveyard to retrieve a ball and is warned by the other that she will get bitten by a vampire (3.45–4.20 min);
[2] the pyrotechnician taking sightings of the property in a car (4.20–4.45 min);
[3] Carmilla & Georgia riding a horse together, laughing (4.45–5.45 min);
[4] the two girls saying their prayers but, simultaneously, threatening each other. Vampires are again mentioned (5.45–6.45 min).
After the opening there are five more places where there is more footage or extra scenes. Some of the cuts of other scenes may be longer too, but I haven't done a side-by-side comparison of the two versions.* Anyway, these five extra scenes I noticed in Version B are:
[5] a thirty-second scene of Carmilla and the maid laughing together (32.00–32.30min);
[6] a minute of extra footage in the scene where Carmilla chases the maid (before killing her) (46.40–47.40 min);
[7] a minute of extra footage in the scene where Carmilla and Georgia are in the glasshouse, talking, during the storm;
[8] a thirty-second scene of Georgia's father arriving, prior to his conversation with Leopoldo about the timing and location of the wedding (65.30–66.00 min);
[9] at least thirty-seconds extra in short bits added to many cuts in the frantic scenes that follow Carmilla fleeing the house (and before her death) (71.30–72.30 min);
Missing from Version B is most of the scene in which Leopoldo and Georgia's father discuss the timing and location of the wedding; and most of the wacky Carmilla/Georgie dream-sequence.
Readers of this blog who are familiar with the film will realise, looking at the above, that the ca. 83 minutes now known to exist do not leave much space for the mythical "naughty lesbian scenes": none of the Carmilla/Georgie interactions really have much scope for grill-on-grill action, and new extra minute recovered of the glass-house scene increases the tension, not the eroticism of the only scene in which they kiss.
The extra scenes do make for a better film: the scene in which Carmilla chases down the maid is much more eerie and disturbing the more you see of it, and with more of their previous interactions.
But the biggest difference between the two versions is the result of one film being Carmilla's/Millarca's story and the other being the doctors. Carmilla's/Millarca's version (Version A) is definitely better; the extra exposition in Version B removes much of the mystery of the story, which is so much a part of the appeal of the film.
So, if I can get someone to edit a version for me, I'll be keeping the Version A intro!
*There is, for instance, about one extra second in the scene where Carmilla, having caught sight of blood over her heart in a mirror and having run from Leopoldo to her room, tears open her dress to see where the blood is coming from. In Version B the extra second allows the viewer to see one blood-smeared breast long enough to recognise it as such before Carmilla collapses in horror at what she has discovered. Version A cuts this second of footage: you see Carmilla tear at her dress and then collapse (and it is never really clear why). This is a particularly notable second of footage; there may be more that made less of an impact.
Sunday, 17 January 2010
Nocturna, 1979
What a lot of crap! This film goes straight onto our Sandpaper Your Eyeballs List.
This vampire-dancing-queen film is just like a porno. The structure is just the same, it has just as little dialogue and plot as a porn film, the music is also just as bad. The sex scene is so appalling that it makes a porno look good. Nocturna’s departure from the porno genre is the early adoption of sparkle vision (a precursor to Twilight perhaps?), a uniquely 80s-ish feature; think music clips of the likes of Bonny Tyler and Roxy Music with a constant stream of soft-focus back-lighting, sparkling, twirling girls, namely the shapely female vamp Nocturna played by Nai Bonet.
The IMDB reviews are far too generous. Perhaps these reviewers saw a different version of the film, because in the version we saw there was not much to recommend it. Perhaps the reviewers are into meaningless dialogue interspersed between endless footage of Nocturna, prancing around to an appalling and interminable soundtrack, while bathing, striding along corridors, walking the streets of Manhattan, basically every thing she does is gratuitous self-promotion for Nai Bonet. The vamp wrote the script (with Harry Wurtz) which propels this film into a whole new world of nasty. These coma-inducing scenes are cut with snippets of a blossoming romance with a blonde haired, snappy dancing, Aussie bloke, who also happens to be mortal; something her ancient grandfather disapproves of.
And this is the plot, such as it is. Vamp girl falls for musician boy, grandfather (Dracula of course) disapproves. Vamp and human elope to Manhattan, Drac goes in pursuit, but is pursued in turn by an old lover who convinces him, in the end, to leave the youngsters to have some fun. This being 1979 much of the action happens at the DISCO making it a kind of Vampire Saturday Night Fever.
There is only one interesting aspect of this film, an unexpected fairy-tale element that is totally unexplored here and not seen in any other vampire film that we can remember. Like the story of the Little Mermaid who gives up her fishiness for a mortal lover, Nocturna also undergoes changes to her supernatural qualities as a result of her love for the muso. During one of Nocturna’s many and endless porn-like dance scenes, she begins to appear in the mirrors around the dance floor. There is no way to tell whether the dancing or the love-affair-with-a-mortal is the active agent in this transformation. The film’s makers were so gormless they do nothing more with this really interesting plot twist and so the viewer will never know.
So, this might be an inoffensive little salute to the disco era, it might be kind of entertaining if you love disco culture, but there is one element to this film that all the reviews we have looked at have omitted mentioning. The creepy little man, played so convincingly by Theodore Gottlieb, who pursues Nocturna from the beginning of the film until she leaves for Manhattan, is truly horrifying.
During Noctura’s bath scene (it seems to be a large part of the appeal of this film) Theodore spits out a monologue about how wants to rape her, kidnap her and force her to stay with him in Transylvania and conspires with her grandfather to bring her back home. Nocturna deals with him like you might deal with an annoying child; she basically dismisses his attentions out of hand which only serves to fuel his rage, in much the same way that a disco enthusiast blogger does in his review of the soundtrack.
Seriously, this script was written by a woman, perhaps the 70s women’s movement hadn’t penetrated Nai’s part of the world 'cause this is really so distasteful that any fun that might be had with the disco camp is totally lost on this humorless woman M!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
