Paul Naschy 1934-2009

by Kimberly Lindbergs | December 1, 2009

Categories | Movie Reviews, News, Actors, Directors, Horror, Spanish Cinema, Paul Naschy

I was gutted by the news of Paul Naschy’s death today due to complications from cancer. He was 75 years old and had a very full and productive life but I didn’t realize he was so ill. Naschy directed and appeared in some of my favorite Spanish horror films and as I’ve mentioned before, I came up with the name for my blog thanks to one of the movies he directed and starred in. I had been going over blog names in my mind for a week back in 2006 and suddenly after watching Paul Naschy’s gothic horror extravaganza Panic Beats I was inspired to come up with the name for Cinebeats and the rest, as they say, is history.

If I wasn’t feeling so awful I’d write something more in-depth about the director and actor who I admired a lot. But after a year of notable deaths I’m more than a little burnt out and not all that motivated to write another obituary. Instead I’ll just share a clip from Paul Naschy’s last interview done for the DVD release of The Hanging Woman (1973), which was recently released by Troma.

To learn more about Paul Naschy visit The Mark of Naschy.

Comments (8)

She Who Must Be Obeyed

by Kimberly Lindbergs | November 30, 2009

Categories | Movie Reviews, British Cinema, Actresses, Hammer Horror, Ursula Andress

Ursula Andress in She (1965)

My favorite moment in She (1965) occurs about 90 minutes into the movie when Ursula Andress glides by Peter Cushing playing Professor Holy and Bernard Cribbins as his aspiring man servant Job. Cushing declares “By Jove!” at the sight of Ursula and Cribbins turns to his costar and utters the line, “They just don’t make them like that anymore, sir.” It’s a funny toss away line but it sums up the way I feel about all the women who populated Hammer films throughout the studio’s history. They just don’t make them like that anymore.

In Marcus Hearn’s new Hammer Glamour book he quotes the chairman of Hammer studio James Carreras from an old interview. In the interview Carreras is asked what he looks for when hiring an actress for a role. He answered that she needed “A good face and figure, of course. But it’s more than that; she has to have a special kind of magnetism. I can’t describe it, but I know it when I see it.”

I think that certain “je ne sais quoi” is what really separates the stable of Hammer actresses from today’s aspiring scream queens. The glamourous women that populated Hammer films seemed to have a kind of natural charisma that’s hard to come by. Many of the women were conventionally beautiful but they often had an original look, a sincerity, charm or acting skills that separated them from the pack. Ursula Andress had power and intensity. She was a stunning beauty but she appeared to be unafraid, independent, confident and a little dangerous in ways that can be both intimidating and incredibly alluring. These qualities made Ursula the perfect candidate to play Ayesha or “She That Must Be Obeyed” in Hammer’s fantasy epic.

She was Hammer’s big-budget adaptation of H. Rider Haggard classic novel of the same name. It tells the strange tale of three British travelers, Professor Holy (Peter Cushing), Job (Bernard Cribbins) and Leo (John Richardson) who come in contact with an immortal Queen called Ayesha (Ursula Andress) or “She That Must Be Obeyed.” Ayesha ruthlessly rules over her subjects and she believes Leo is the reincarnation of her long dead lover Kallikrates that she killed in a jealous rage centuries ago. After luring the three men to her kingdom with the help of her servant Billali (Christopher Lee), Ayesha tries to convince Leo to become immortal and rule by her side. Things get complicated when a rebellious uprising threatens to destroy everything that Ayesha holds dear.

H. Rider Haggard’s 1886 novel was filmed twice before in 1925 as a silent movie and in 1935. The 1935 film adaptation of She was nominated for an Oscar and apparently inspired many other adventure films with it’s striking set designs. Hammer’s 1965 film version of She was not nominated for any Oscars but it was one of the studios most expensive productions and it was also the first Hammer film built around a female star. The movie is rather faithful to H. Rider Haggard’s original story but it seems to lack the esoteric undertones that I personally found so interesting in the book as well as the emotional punch and character development. Hammer’s film also suffers from the dull performance of it’s male lead John Richardson who is never able to make the character of Leo convincing. Director Robert Day does a good job with the material and makes some smart directing and editing choices but the film seems a bit erratic at times. The exciting moments and inspired direction in one scene can become diminished by the static look of the next. The film also doesn’t shy away from ethnic stereotypes that can be found in the original novel but the “noble savages” in She do an admirable job with their limited roles. The movie does boast some impressive special effects and sets for the time that really help make She one of Hammer’s best looking and most enjoyable adventure movies.

Peter Cushing is very good as Professor Holy and he brings his usual gravitas and class to the film. I also think Christopher Lee is effective as the devious Billali and Bernard Cribbins is great in his small but very funny role as Job. Rosenda Monteros also appears in the movie but she’s rather forgettable as the “other woman” trying to win Leo’s affection. The star of She is Ursula Andress but her seductive, cold and unearthly performance in the film occasionally seems at odds with her character. She doesn’t have a lot of chemistry with her male love interest in the movie (the bland John Richardson) and the script lacks passion. Ursula was reluctant to play Ayesha and has often complained about her role in the movie over the years. Her dissatisfaction seems to come across on screen but I think Andress should be credited for helping to keep the movie interesting. She subtly embodies the character of Ayesha in a way that a lessor actress could never manage. Her performance also benefits from the talented cinematographer Harry Waxman who photographed the actress beautifully throughout the film. Ursula seems to glow and shimmer on screen thanks to Waxman’s camera work.

Ursula Andress’ first real break out role was in the hugely popular James Bond feature Dr. No (1962). Her infamous bikini scene as Honey Ryder in Dr. No made the 25-year-old actress a household name. When Hammer decided to adapt H. Rider Haggard’s novel for the screen they needed an actress who could generate ticket sales and bring an otherworldly beauty and glamour to their film. Ursula fit the bill perfectly. The statuesque beauty was born to German and Swiss parents and raised in Europe. Her international appeal has made her a lot of fans all over the world but her thick accent seemed to get in the way of her career. Directors and studio executives often thought her speaking voice was just too exotic to appeal to an English speaking audience so Ursula’s voice was dubbed in Dr. No as well as She. I think Hammer made a wise decision to cast Ursula Andress in She but their choice to dub the actress is questionable and may be part of the film’s problem. Her natural voice could have brought a little more flair to the character of Ayesha and we wouldn’t have to second guess her performance in the film. While I was recently watching She again I kept getting distracted by the occasionally awkward dub job.

After Ursula Andress made She the actress appeared in many terrific movies including What’s New Pussycat (1965), La decima vittima aka The 10th Victim (1965), Les tribulations d’un chinois en Chine aka Up to His Ears (1965), The Blue Max (1966), Casino Royale (1967), Soleil Rouge aka Red Sun (1971) and The Fifth Musketeer (1979). Outside of the amazing La decima vittima, these movies usually only provided Ursula with secondary roles and they weren’t very demanding films but they were all a lot of fun to watch. She also appeared in some very bad movies throughout her career and I think this probably tarnished Ursula’s appeal over time. After appearing in Clash of the Titans (1981) as the goddess Aphrodite Ursula seemed to take fewer and fewer roles.

In 2000 Ursula Andress was diagnosed with osteoporosis and in recent years her condition has gotten much worse but the 73-year-old actress hasn’t let the disease slow her down. She recently became an international ambassador for woman’s health and is currently working with the Timeless Women campaign in an effort to help educate women about osteoporosis. Mattel has also recently turned Ursula’s iconic character Honey Ryder into a Barbie for a series of classic Bond Girl dolls that are scheduled to be released early next year. At age 73 Ursula continues to gain new fans of all ages. Her timeless appeal obviously still resonates with the public. She seems destined to remain an ageless and glamourous beauty in our imaginations much like her character in Hammer’s She.

She is only available for sale at the Warner Brother Archives Shop. While I appreciate Warner’s efforts to make their film archives available to the public, it’s unfortunate that online rental companies like Netflix, Greencine and Blockbuster aren’t stocking these films. If you want to see She you’re going to have to buy it.

If you’d like to see more images from the film you can find them in my Flickr She Gallery.

Comments (9)

Me Loana. You Tumak.

by Kimberly Lindbergs | November 25, 2009

Categories | Movie Reviews, Books, British Cinema, Actresses, Hammer Horror

Raquel Welch in One Million Years B.C. (1966)

I love Raquel Welch. She’s not a great actress but she did appear in some good films and when she’s given the right material to work with she can be very funny. I’ve always thought that Raquel’s natural appeal as a comedic actress had been overlooked due to her overwhelming sex appeal. There’s just no getting around the fact that Raquel Welch is gorgeous but she also has a great sense of humor that often seemed to be ignored by critics who couldn’t see past her incredible beauty. Of course Raquel Welch never let them. Her publicity stills continually presented the actress as a sexy film siren. Glamour (or glamor!) was obviously in Raquel’s blood and she had no intention of letting anyone forget it. And although she showed some dramatic skill in films such as Hannie Caulder (1972) and The Last of Sheila (1973), I personally think she really shined in comedies like Bedazzled (1967), Fathom (1967), Myra Breckinridge (1970) and The Three Musketeers (1973). Could she have become the Lucille Ball of her day? That’s doubtful but I often wonder what direction Raquel’s career would have taken if she had focused her attention on making funny movies and developing her comedic abilities.

Raquel Welch became an international star after appearing in the Hammer film One Million Years B.C. (1966). The movie was a remake of the 1940 Hal Roach film One Million B.C. that was nominated for two Oscars for its special effects and musical score. Hammer’s remake didn’t get any Oscar nominations but it was the studio’s most commercially successful film and featured some terrific special effects by Ray Harryhausen and a good score composed by Mario Nascimbene. But a large part of the film’s success was due to its female star. Hammer launched one of the most widely seen ad campaigns in the studio’s history for One Million Years B.C. and it paid off. Posters and publicity stills from the film featuring a fur bikini clad Raquel circulated around the globe appearing in countless magazines and newspapers. To this day Raquel Welch is one of the most widely recognized film stars in the world thanks to Hammer’s publicity blitz.

One Million Years B.C. is a highly entertaining fantasy film that takes place in a prehistoric world inhabited by dinosaur monsters and cave people. In the film Raquel Welch plays a young woman named “Loana the Fair One” who is part of the Shell People tribe. Loana falls in love with a man called Tumak (John Richardson) from the Rock People tribe and together the two would-be lovebirds are forced to fight for the survival of themselves and their love in a harsh world that seems determined to destroy them both. The film plays out like some kind of prehistoric retelling of Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet but the great special effects and nonstop action help make One Million Years B.C. one of Hammer’s most exciting and enjoyable movies.

Raquel Welch was given very little dialogue in One Million Years B.C. so she’s forced to use her body language and facial expressions to let the audience know what her character is feeling throughout the course of the film. This may sound like an easy task but it’s not and Raquel does a nice job of working with a limited vocabulary. She’s commendable in a film that doesn’t require much from her and she brings a warm sensitivity to a role that could have easily become forgettable in another actresses’ hands. Of course she also looks amazing in the movie and manages to inject lots of glamour into the rocky barren landscape of One Million Years B.C..

In 2010 Raquel Welch will be celebrating her 70th birthday and she’s kick-starting the year with the publication of her self-penned memoirs titled The Secrets of Timeless Appeal. The book is currently scheduled to be released in January of next year and focuses on her struggle to age gracefully in Hollywood where actresses are often put out to pasture before age 40. In the book Raquel supposedly opens up about being typecast as a “sex symbol” as well as her plastic surgery, struggles with aging and menopause. She also offers up beauty tips and health advice. It’s rumored that the actress might divulge intimate details about her romantic flings with other actors including Warren Beatty and Richard Burton as well as musician Alice Cooper but we’ll have to wait until January 2010 to find out.

One Million Years B.C. is available on DVD and currently selling at Amazon for just $6.99. You can also pre-order Raquel Welch’s upcoming autobiography The Secrets of Timeless Appeal at Amazon for $17.79.

Comments (6)

Die, Monster, Die! (1965)

by Kimberly Lindbergs | November 22, 2009

Categories | Movie Reviews, Horror, American Cinema, Blogathons, Roger Corman

Frankenstenia is celebrating the life and career of one of my favorite actors with The Boris Karloff Blogathon taking place Nov. 23-29th. I didn’t sign-up to participate because I couldn’t commit to anything. My current blogging schedule is sporadic and a bit crazy because at the moment most of my attention is focused on trying to buy my first home. But I did mange to find some time to write a little something about one of my favorite ’60s era Karloff films, Die, Monster, Die!

Die, Monster, Die! was produced by Samuel Z. Arkoff for AIP (American International Picture) and directed by horror film veteran Daniel Haller. Haller started his career as an art director and production designer and he worked with AIP for many years before he began directing films for the company. Haller’s early work with Roger Corman is especially noteworthy since he helped give Corman’s Edgar Allen Poe adaptations a distinct look and feel. During the ’60s Daniel Haller collaborated with Roger Corman on some of his best films including Pit and the Pendulum (1961), Premature Burial (1962), The Raven (1963), The Haunted Palace (1963) and The Tomb of Ligeia (1964) before directing his first film; the Karloff feature Die, Monster, Die! in 1965.

In the film Boris Karloff plays a crazy old curmudgeon named Nahum Witley who is keeping a dark secret from his family in an attempt to better their fortune and bring honor to the family name. The plot of Die, Monster, Die! is based on H.P. Lovecraft’s short story The Colour Out of Space which was originally published in 1927. Haller’s film plays fast and loose with Lovecraft’s original tale but it’s an entertaining mess of a movie that benefit’s greatly from Karloff’s demanding presence and low key performance. Die, Monster, Die! is notable because it gave the 78 year-old Karloff one of his last opportunities to play a monster in a horror film. Although Karloff’s transformation from stately Nahum Witley to a radioactive zombie in Die, Monster, Die! is all too brief and a far, far cry from his amazing and better known performance as Frankenstein’s monster in the classic Universal horror films, Karloff did seem to have some fun with his role. Die, Monster, Die! isn’t one of Karloff’s best movies but it does hold some appeal if you happen to to be a Karloff fan and appreciate gothic horror films as well as creative adaptations of Lovecraft’s stories as much as I do.

I happen to own the 1966 Dell comic book adaptation of Die, Monster, Die! and I thought it would be fun to share some pages of it with my readers as well as other comic book fans. I’m afraid that I don’t know who the original artist is and an extensive online search didn’t provide me with any clues* but I like the artwork and figured other Karloff fans might appreciate it too. I’ve posted a small sample of the comic book below but if you want to see more (and larger) pages from the Die, Monster, Die! comic book you’re going to have to visit Curt Purcell’s always fabulous Groovy Age of Horror blog.

READ MORE

Comments (6)

Modern Mondays: Gus Van Sant’s “Death Trilogy” 2002-2005

by Kimberly Lindbergs | November 16, 2009

Categories | Movie Reviews, American Cinema, Modern Mondays, Gay Interest

“Ours is a culture notoriously uncomfortable with death. We’ve minimized and sterilized our rituals for processing it; we pack it away in Styrofoam and plastic wrap at the grocery store; we worship our children and pour our resources into the fantasy of postponing old age. Yet it courses into our collective consciousness with renewed insistence every day. Death in Iraq, death in New Orleans, death in Sudan, Afghanistan, Israel, Indonesia. Death on local streetcorners and in apartment buildings down the block. More death than it seems possible to comprehend.”
- Holly Myers

I’ve admired Gus Van Sant’s films since first seeing Drugstore Cowboy (1989) and My Own Private Idaho (1991) in the early ’90s but my relationship with the director’s work has occasionally been strained. I still don’t understand why Gus Van Sant thought remaking Hitchcock’s Psycho (1998) was a good idea and I’ve found some of his films such as Even Cowgirls Get the Blues (1993) unwatchable but I keep coming back to his work. Van Sant has been very active in the last 10 years and his films have received a lot of critical attention but I think his “Death Trilogy” which included the movies Gerry (2002), Elephant (2003) and Last Days (2005) are the director’s most interesting recent films. They’re good movies on their own but together they make up one of the most compelling cinematic experiences I’ve had in the last 10 years.

The three movies that form Van Sant’s “Death Trilogy” are not easy viewing and demand a lot from their audience. They also deserve more attention than I can give them at the moment so I thought I’d share some excerpts from one of my favorite pieces written about the films by the Los Angeles based critic Holly Myers for n+1. In Myers’ lengthy piece called Nothing Happens to No One: The Death Trilogy of Gus Van Sant she brilliantly explains exactly why I find the director’s “Death Trilogy” so intriguing. She also does a terrific job of pointing out the importance of these American films and why they’ve made such a lasting impression on me.

“Like the two subsequent films—Elephant (2003), based on the 1999 Columbine High School shootings, and Last Days (2005), a fictionalized account of the death of Kurt Cobain—Gerry cuts through the shock, the bafflement, the extravagant displays of empathy and moralistic hand-wringing that invariably characterizes Hollywood and the media’s treatment of death-stories by dispensing with the basic conventions of narrative and character. Van Sant does not sensationalize. Instead, in each film we see plot distilled to a single, profound arc: the slow, strange transition of a body from being alive to not being alive. Taking the silence, the mystery, the essential unknowability of death as a given, Van Sant makes no attempt to interrogate or explain. He simply enacts this transition and encourages his viewers to watch.

The result is closer to meditation than to storytelling, and the films are difficult in the way that meditation is difficult, which has made them—Gerry in particular—a hard sell.”

READ MORE

Comments (2)

Modern Mondays: OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies (2006)

by Kimberly Lindbergs | November 9, 2009

Categories | Movie Reviews, French Cinema, Spies & Secret Agents, Comedies, Modern Mondays

If you’ve been reading Cinebeats for awhile you’re probably well aware of my fascination and fondness for spies. From the smart and exceptional Prisoner to the ridiculously silly Last of the Secret Agents?, I never seem to get tired of watching spy movies or television shows as long as they have a good soundtrack accompanying them. So it should come as no surprise that I think the recent French spy spoof OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies aka OSS 117: Le Caire, Nid d’Espions (2006) is one of the funniest films of the last decade.

The movie was directed and co-written by Michel Hazanavicius who based it on the original OSS 117 spy novels by the prolific French author Jean Bruce. The original books featured an American born spy with French roots named Hubert Bonisseur de La Bath who worked for the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). OSS 117 predated Ian Flemming’s more well-known spy James Bond, alias 007, by 4 years, but both characters seem to share a lot of similarities. I haven’t read any of the original Jean Bruce novels myself or seen the early French films based on the books but according to director Michel Hazanavicius OSS 117 isn’t as ironic or clever as James Bond.

Hubert Bonisseur de La Bath, alias OSS 117, is played brilliantly by the handsome and very funny French actor Jean Dujardin. Dujardin has clearly based his character on Sean Connery’s Bond from the early ’60s as well as other self-assured male spies from the same period and he does a terrific job of mimicking their best and worst qualities. In the film agent OSS 117 is sent to Cairo to investigate the disappearance of his close friend and fellow OSS operative Jack Jefferson (Philippe Lefebvre). Finding his friend won’t be easy and over the course of the film OSS 117 becomes entangled in a web of international espionage involving Nazis, a fundamentalist uprising and two beautiful but dangerous women played by the lovely Bérénice Bejo and Aure Atika.

OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies takes place in 1955 and the film beautifully replicates the decade it’s boldly taking a jab at. Director Michel Hazanavicius clearly loves the movies he’s emulating and OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies comes across as a thoughtful homage as well as a clever parody. From the detailed set designs, to the stylized fashions and incredible soundtrack, OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies is a film that knows exactly what it’s doing while delivering a lot of laughs. The humor in OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies is slightly more sophisticated than the Austin Power films but the movie should appeal to Pink Panther fans and anyone who enjoys television shows like Get Smart.

READ MORE

Comments (10)

Freddie Francis’ Girly (1969)

by Kimberly Lindbergs | October 30, 2009

Categories | Movie Reviews, Horror, British Cinema, Comedies, Freddie Francis

Howard Trevor, Ursula Howells, Vanessa Howard & Pat Heywood
in Freddie Francis’ Girly (1969)

Creepy families with murderous intentions have become a staple of horror cinema. Most recently directors like Rob Zombie have attempted to cash in on this long standing tradition with films like House of 1000 Corpses (2003) and The Devil’s Rejects (2005), but long before Rob ever stood behind a camera other directors such as Jack Hill (Spider Baby; 1968), Tobe Hooper (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre; 1974), Pete Walker (Frightmare; 1974) and Wes Craven (The Hills Have Eyes; 1977) were plotting out similar scenarios with more worthwhile results.

One of the earliest and most interesting films in this tradition is Freddie Francis’ Girly aka Mumsy, Nanny, Sonny and Girly (1969). The plot of Girly is rather simple and involves a strange wealthy family that live on an isolated British estate. The family consists of Mumsy (Ursula Howells) and her two children Girly (Vanessa Howard) and Sonny (Howard Trevor) who are cared for by their doting Nanny (Pat Heywood). Girly and Sonny act like two naughty schoolchildren and Mumsy and Nanny enjoy babying them both. They sleep in cribs and play with toys as if they were infants, but the siblings are actually much older and enjoy spending their time luring adult men or new “friends” home to play “games” that revolve around torture and death.

Girly isn’t one of Francis’ best looking films, but it is one of his funniest and most unusual movies. This blacker than black horror comedy offers plenty of uncomfortable laughs along with a few chills and thrills. The script by author Brian Comport is smart and surprising. It was based on a play called Happy Family written by Maisie Mosco in 1966. I don’t know much about the original play, but with the script’s obvious swipes at the British upper-class and its timely take on the era’s sexual politics, Girly seems to distantly echo some of the social themes found in “kitchen sink dramas” that were popular in Britain throughout the ‘60s.

Before Freddie Francis started directing horror films he worked as a cinematographer on celebrated British dramas such as Room at the Top (1959) and Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (1960). His unique talents helped give birth to the British New Wave and he was partially responsible for ushering in a new era of British cinema. Francis considered Girly to be one of his best films and I think it’s fascinating to view the movie as an extension of his previous work as a cinematographer. In some ways Girly could be seen as a seamless blend of Francis’ early beginnings as a member of the British New Wave along with his bleak sense of humor and macabre sensibilities.

READ MORE

Comments (6)