cinema history class: the brute man (1946)

The session: "Give Me My Rondo!"
Four weeks of films starring the unique Rondo Hatton

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL.

Week 5 (Bobbo): The Brute Man (1946)
Directed by Jean Yarbrough

My Level of Prior Knowledge
Never heard of it.

Plot:
A disfigured athlete seeks retribution against those he blames for his condition. In his quest for revenge, he is aided by a blind woman who sees him for who he truly is.

Reaction and Other Folderol:
As a bit of background, it's important to know (and I didn't know until Keith explained it in his introduction, Rondo Hatton's life began normally enough. But after he was exposed to mustard gas during World War I, he developed acromegaly. As an aside, I didn't know that you could develop the condition as a result of chemical exposure, but I guess it kind of makes sense.

The thing I find most interesting about The Brute Man is the physical appearance of its star, Rondo Hatton. Because of his acromegaly (and, I think, creative lighting), he had a monstrous appearance that other actors would have achieved with makeup and prosthetics. He was not a well-trained actor, often barking very simple lines in a monotone. That fact was actually mentioned in a documentary that Keith showed us after the movie. The thing is, the way he gruffly barked his lines worked perfectly for his character. What's also interesting is the fact that Hatton's character developed acromegaly as a result of chemical exposure. I don't know if it was done on purpose, but the resemblance to Hatton's own life is obvious.

The movie itself is quite good, even if it's not particularly ambitious. It's an interesting and entertaining B movie. And it succeeds very well on that level. I probably would have been able to appreciate it better if I had seen some of the other movies Hatton had been in. Keith explained that this was, in a way, meant as an origin story movie for Hatton's "Creeper" character. Had I been familiar with some of the other movies, I might have been able to appreciate it more.

cinema history class: devil doll (1964)

The session: "Bring Your Own Movie Month"
As in past years, we each take turns bring a movie and presenting it.

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL.

Week 5 (Bobbo): Devil Doll (1964)
Directed by Lindsay Shonteff

My Level of Prior Knowledge
Never heard of it.

Plot:
A sinister ventriloquist uses his eerily lifelike dummy and hypnotic powers to manipulate a wealthy heiress. Meanwhile, a reporter uncovers the ventriloquist's dark secret.

Reaction and Other Folderol:
The Doll immediately reminded me of an episode of Twilight Zone that involved a ventriloquists' dummy come to life. That set my expectation for the direction this film would take. Of course, my expectations were wrong -- in fact, they wdere a complete inversion. Which is fine, since the story itself held up pretty well.

This had a very small-time feel, though it did a very good job of building tension and making the viewer guess. In fact, if you you ignore the nudity, it would have done well has a long Twilight Zone episode.
 

cinema history class: the trial (1962)

The session: "Bring Your Own Movie Month"
As in past years, we each take turns bring a movie and presenting it.

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL.

Week 4 (Ethan): The Trial (1962)
Directed by Ronald Neame

My Level of Prior Knowledge
I'd seen this once before, a year or two ago. So I was reasonably familiar with it.

Plot:
A mild-mannered bank clerk is arrested on charges that are never revealed to him (or to the audience), and finds himself trapped in a nightmarish and insane legal system.

Reaction and Other Folderol:.
The Trial is full of stunningly nightmarish imagery. At times it's intensely claustrophobic, while at other times it's expansive. It's dark and it's light. The dialogue is verbose and concise. The whole thing is an exercise in contradictions, and itkeeps the viewer  on his heals, confused and discombobulated. I'd say that the protagonist, Josef K, is living a Kafka-esque nightmare, except that the movie is based on a Kafka novel. I'd say it's Orwellian, except that that seems trite given the Kafka connection. But it is dizzying, confusing and surreal.

The one problem with this film is director, Orson Welles himself. There are times that it drags, as Welle's couldn't seem to remove extraneous footage. I'm told that that was a thing with him -- that he was too enamored of his own dialogue that his films were too long. And this one could have been 15 minutes or a half hour shorter. Still, however, a really good intense film.

cinema history class: the poseidon adventure (1972)

The session: "Bring Your Own Movie Month"
As in past years, we each take turns bring a movie and presenting it.

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL.

Week 3 (Me): The Poseidon Adventure (1972)
Directed by Ronald Neame

My Level of Prior Knowledge
I was already very familiar with this movie -- as I should be, given that I chose it for Bring Your Own Movie Month

Plot:
After their cruise ship capsizes, a small group of passengers struggle stay ahead of the rising water and survive long enough to  

Reaction and Other Folderol:.
I generally have a difficult time choosing a movie for Bring Your Own Movie Month (BYOMM). I have a mental list of possible movies, though it's always changing. And I annoy Keith with texts and emails asking "what about XXX." This year, Poseidon was on my short list of several dozen possibilities. And, truth be told, it would not have been my final choice if not for the fact that its star, Gene Hackman, died in February. He was one of the greats of his generation, but he didn't do a lot of horror or sci-fi movies. But he did do Poseidon.

The first half of the 1970s was kind of a golden age for disaster films, and those were the horror movies that I was into as a kid. I nagged my mom to take me to see Earthquake, which gave me nightmares. I nagged her to take me to see Jaws, which gave me nightmares. Same with Tidal Wave. I still haven't seen The Towering Inferno, but that's another matter. Anyway, I didn't see The Poseidon Adventure when it came out -- I was just a little too young. But over the years I saw it in bits and pieces on TV, and I liked what I saw. I don't remember when I first saw it in its entirety, but it is a longtime favorite.

One of the cool things about BYOMM is that I sometimes come away with new insights about old favorites. That comes about in part because I get to hear everyone else's thoughts about the movie, but also because I am looking at the movie with a more critical eye. One thing I noticed this time is the way Poseidon seems to be draw some inspiration from the Bible. Gene Hackman's character, a rebellious pastor, is a Moses-like figure. He leads his little entourage away from the water, through the ship and toward their rescue. But, like Moses, he never gets to enter the promised land -- dying before they cross over. And it almost seems that his death is the price of his rebellious nature. I also realized for the first time how great this film is as a character study. Something else I had never thought about until Ethan mentioned it is the fact that the rising sea water is a stand-in for a menacing animal that might be the antagonist in a forest-set movie wherein people are trying to find their way to safety.

Now I just have to figure out what to bring for BYOMM next year.

cinema history class: dracula (1931)

The session: "Bring Your Own Movie Month"
As in past years, we each take turns bring a movie and presenting it.

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL.

Week 2 (Dave): Dracula (1931)
Directed by Tod Browning

My Level of Prior Knowledge
I was aware of this movie's existence, and of much of the plot points. But had never seen it.

Plot:
A mysterious Transylvanian nobleman, Count Dracula, travels to England, where he begins to prey on the blood of young women and is pursued by Professor Van Helsing, who suspects his true identity. As Dracula’s influence spreads, Van Helsing races to stop the vampire before he claims more victims.

Reaction and Other Folderol:
This, the first Dracula talkie, set the model -- both for portrayals of the titular vampire and for Bela Lugosi characters. Lugosi's vampire is a well-dressed, well-groomed, polite man of manners. The consummate gentleman, if you'll forgive the whole neck-biting thing. And that has been the dominant portrayal of Dracula since then. As for Bela Lugosi, the Dracula role defined and typecast him. I'm thinking, for example, of his role in 1932's White Zombie. His character, Legendre, was very clearly influenced by Dracula. 

Related to that, one of the most interesting things about seeing this was comparing it to Nosferatu -- the 1922 silent film that was based on the same material. The vampire in the 1922 film couldn't have been presented more differently. He was gangly, and gaunt -- appearing barely human. He had sunken eyes, pointed ears and rat-like teeth. His arms and hands were evocative of spiders. It was a huge leap to the suave gentleman of Dracula. Some of the aspects of the early part of the story bear strong similarities to Nosferatu, though the resemblance is much weaker in the latter half of the film.

Produced at a time when the industry was still trying to figure out how to do talkies, the movie seemed like it was part of a transitional creature. For example, there was a lot of use of printed narration for exposition. And the staging made it feel like a play -- much of it taken directly from the stage version (which had also starred Lugosi). That, Keith explained, was a big reason for the movie seeming to slow during the second half.

 But this was a visually interesting film -- especially when judged for its time -- with an interesting story and a compelling protagonist. I gave it high marks for all of that.

cinema history class: forbidden planet (1956)

The session: "Bring Your Own Movie Month"

As in past years, we each take turns bring a movie and presenting it.

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL.

Week 1 (Joe): Forbidden Planet (1956)
Directed by Fred M. Wilcox

My Level of Prior Knowledge
Though I'd never seen this film before, I was aware of its reputation as one of the great sci-fi classics. I also knew that Anne Francis was in it -- because that fact is referenced in the theme song from The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Plot:
A starship crew investigate a lost colony, and find a mysterious scientist, his daughter and a mystery.

Reaction and Other Folderol:
It's important to acknowledge how influential Forbidden Planet was on other movies and TV shows. Though I hadn't seen it, I was aware of its place as a cultural influence. And, in case we didn't know, Joe was very clear in pointing out that fact -- both in his remarks before the movie and by sharing with us clips -- one from Lost in Space and one from another movie whose name I don't recall -- to demonstrate. For my part, I noted that the Star Trek episode, "Requiem for Methuselah" borrowed heavily on the premise. So much so that I was convinced that the daughter would turn out to be an android. 

And it's because of that that I really wanted to like the movie more than I did, and why I came away disappointed by it. The special effects were, at times amazing (especially judged for its time). And the premise was kind of interesting. But there wasn't enough story to justify the movie's length. It was too ponderous, and there was too much emphasis paid to spectacle and visuals at the expense of storytelling.

cinema history class: milligan and company

Keith took us for a stroll down 42nd street and some exploitation flicks from the lenses of Milligan and company.

The Trailers:

Torture Dungeon

The Touch of Her Flesh

(sorry -- I couldn't find a trailer on Youtube)

Carnival of Blood

(technically, a trailer for a double feature)

Double Agent 73

Reaction and Other Folderol:

First, some bookkeeping: In the ratings section, I have been including "Bob-O." His real name is Bob, and I'm not sure why we call him Bob-O. At any rate, I have long regretted that I started fashioning his nickname as "Bob-O." I much prefer "Bobbo." So I have made the executive decision to switch.

In this session we got four very different types of movies -- a fairytale (Torture Dungeon), a stag film (The Touch of Her Flesh), a whodunit (Carnival of Blood) and a spy parody (Double Agent 73). But what they have in common is that they were all directed by big names in the world of tiny budgets. And their low budgets were reflected in their low-quality production values.

For the most part, I had a very difficult time appreciating what these films had to offer. The best of the lot was Carnival of Blood, which had an interesting plot, and some decent acting by the principles. Burt Young was really good in it. But the bad music and low production values made it very hard to enjoy. I really wanted to like it more than I did.

That's also true of Double Agent 73, which starred the inimitable Chesty Morgan. Chesty, who boasted a natural 73" bustline, played a spy in this James Bond parody. The key is that she had to take a photo of every enemy spy she killed -- using acamera implanted in her breast. So, throughout the film, she would kill someone, then remove her shirt and bra, and flick her breast. It was surreal. Also surreal, for me at least, was the fact that a lot of exteriors were filmed in Forest Hills -- a neighborhood that I visit frequently. So I kept saying things like "I used to swim in the pool in that building" and "I once dated a woman who lived in that building." That helped me enjoy what was otherwise a bizarrely bad movie.

The Touch of Her Flesh was, for the most part, a stag film featuring Angelique Pettyjohn (whom Star Trek fans will remember as Captain Kirk's drill thrall). If I want to be charitable, I can frame it as an interesting character study. But no amount of charity can frame Torture Dungeon as anything worthwhile.

I just had to keep reminding myself that these are movies I would never see otherwise...

cinema history class: the fly saga

Keith treated us to all three installments of The Fly franchise, as well as the remake of the original movie.

Reaction and Other Folderol:

Writing in the book, Giant Bug Cinema, Joe said: "Sequels, by nature, are derivative but they must walk a fine line between 'being comfortably familiar' and 'being a superfluous duplicate of what has come before.'" He got it exacrtly right, and so did the sequels to 1958's The Fly. I would argue that, what Joe said about sequels can also be said about remakes. And the 1986 remake of The Fly also succeeded.*

The premise behind the original movie is simple: a scientist, experimenting with teleportation, gets merged with a fly. The two sequels stay true to that basic premise, but they each chart new territory while still staying faithful to the original idea. The first movie is pretty much a straight up 1950's-style sci-fi/horror film. The second is all that, but also manages to be a caper film with strong elements of film noir. And the third is in some ways a complete reinvention, extending the story out in unexpected ways -- unexpected but completely logical. And, importantly, the second and third films are set in the same universe -- extending the original story rather than reinventing it. The fact is, the first movie is definitely the best of the three -- featuring the haunting image of a fly with a human head plaintively crying "help me!" In the second, the producers tried to come up with an image to top  that. And their attempt -- a rat with human hands -- is disturbing. But it doesn't measure up.

The 1986 remake manages to reboot the original film, staying true to the premise while updating it with a 1980's science fiction feel and 1980's movie aesthetics. I think that's why I liked it more -- the 1980's movie feel appeals to me more than does the 1950's. The film is grittier, and the depiction of the technology is more modern, high-tech and (to my eyes) believable. Of course, the human interactions are updated from the Hays Code era to the 1980s. There's also a rom-com element to the plot. Take all of that for what it's worth. If you like that stuff, great! If not, well, be advised. But most significant is the change in the depiction of the fly itself. In the original movie, Andre is the man-fly hybrid as soon as he leaves the teleportation booth. In the remake, Brundle comes out of the machine seemingly fine -- and a good bit of the movie is devoted to portraying his gradual transformation -- including the slow realization that something is wrong. And that illustrates an important point: it's more a modern adaptation** of the premise than a "remake" the original movie, and the story is definitely more complicated. One can argue, in the original's favor, that some of the human element of the plot has been replaced by computer/tech geekistry, though I still prefer the remake.

One thing that's important to note in comparing the two movies is that the remake never managed to come up with an iconic visual to rival the aforementioned human head on a fly body. That said, it did a good job, near the end, of coming up with a great sequence of unparallelled pathos. Brundle (fused with a fly and a machine) has been reduced to a bloody, revolting blob with eyes and arms. And he manages the most pitiful expression as he begs with his eyes for Ronnie to shoot him and end his misery. It's remarkable how good a job was done to get such a vile blob to look so sympathetic. It's a sequence rather than a momentary image, but it's worth noting.

This was among the best sessions we've had -- for two reasons. Most obvious is that these were four great movies that I had never seen. It's not really important to me to see great movies -- I can easily go to Google to find lists of great movies to watch. So, in a sense it's better to see movies that I otherwise wouldn't. However, if they are great, so much the better. The second reason that this was a great session is that it had more coherence than most. Most sessions are four movies with something in common -- something thematic, or stylistic. But this set of four movies held together more than most do.

The Trailers:

The Fly (1958)

Return of the Fly (1959)

Curse of the Fly (1965)

The Fly (1986)

*In fairness, I never saw The Fly II, which is the sequel to the remake. So I can't fairly comment on whether that succeeds. I think not, but that's based on hearsay.
**Though it may be important to note that the remake is now older than the original was when the remake was made.

a demon banished

 

A childhood demon has been banished after 45 years.*

After my freshman year of high school, I spent part of the summer at the Hebrew Theological College in Skokie, Illinois. As I was waiting at the gate before my flight, airline personnel announced that the flight was overbooked, and they were seeking volunteers to be get bumped and wait for another flight a couple hours later. They were offering $100 (I think). According to Google, that’s the equivalent of $359 today – not life changing money, but nice. My parents, who were at the gate with me (yes, you could do that then) talked it over, but decided against having me volunteer -- this was my first time flying alone without anyone to meet me at the destination, and I was nervous enough without a change in plan.

I remember thinking that it would have been great to get that extra money for doing nothing other than waiting. I understood my parents’ logic, but part of me felt bad about missing out on the cash.** And I thought that, if I ever had another opportunity, I would volunteer my spot in exchange for cash. And in the decades since, I have never been in that situation again. I have had delayed flights. And I have had canceled flights. But I have never been bumped from a flight. And I have never been on a flight where they were seeking volunteers to get bumped in exchange for cash. Not that I’ve lost sleep over it, but I’ve thought about it every so often.

But a week ago, Blair had the experience. She had been in Vermont for a relative’s graduation. On Monday morning, her flight was oversold. And she volunteered to stay behind – in exchange for $1900, meal vouchers and a hotel voucher for the night. Technically, the money went to Blair and not to me. But it’s all the same, so I think of it as a victory for both of us. And now the monkey’s off my back.

_______________
*In fairness, calling it a “demon” is too strong, as is saying it’s been “banished.” But drama requires me to use such words. And technically I wasn’t really a child. Stop being such a stickler.

**It’s worth noting that my parents would have likely kept the cash, since they were paying for my airfare. But that’s beside the point.

cinema history class: walpurgisnacht

In honor of Walpurgisnacht, the eve of May Day, Keith chose four films about demons, witches, werewolves and vampires.

Reaction and Other Folderol:

The third and fourth movies were much more to my liking than the first two. Demon Witch Child tells the story of a teenage girl possessed by a demon. It borrows heavily from The Exorcist and, if I recall correctly, Keith said that it has been called the Spanish Exorcist. The elements that it borrows are hard to miss. But, in some ways, it exceeds The Exorcist in that it's much more expansive. In Vampire's Night Orgy, stranded travelers are stuck in a little mystery town. Everything seems fine, at first, but eventually things turn south. It borrows heavily from Night of the Living Dead. The ending -- practically an epilogue -- reminded me of 2000 Maniacs! -- though Blair pointed out to me that that's a common trope. I guess I need to see more movies, since I don't recall seeing the device elsewhere. Damn, was it creepy!

The first two movies in this session were good films for what they are, but neither one really grabbed me. Strange Love of the Vampires had a lot of good elements, and it was a good, original take on the vampire legend. But it was another vampires-in-castles movie, and I've kind of had overload on those. Curse of the Devil stars Paul Naschy as a werewolf. Where have I seen that before? Others in the class love Paul Naschy, but I just haven't been able to get into him. These two were good movies, but just not my thing. And my ratings for them reflect that.

The Trailers:

Strange Love of the Vampires (1975)

Curse of the Devil (1973)

Demon Witch Child (1974)

Note: I don't think this is an actual trailer. But it's what I could find.

Vampire's Night Orgy (1973)

cinema history class: monsters in the snow

To say a group goodbye to winter, Keith decided we should screen four films set in the wintery cold. Films to make us feel as if we were still freezing.

Reaction and Other Folderol:
In some ways this seemed like two distinct mini-sessions to me. The first two films were distinctly out of my wheelhouse. The Werewolf and the Yeti was a Spanish Production starring Paul Naschy. While Naschy is a favorite of some -- often ranking right up there with Peter Cushing or Lon Chaney Jr. -- I have never really warmed up to him. And this, a story about a Yeti expedition gone awry, just kind of left me cold. The Abominable Snowman of the Himalayas was a much better film. And it benefitted from starring Peter Cushing and (pre F-Troop) Forest Tucker. It could almost have been called a buddy movie as the mismatched pair lead an expedition into the Himalayas. It's better thought out than the first film, though the anti-Western message hits with all the subtlety of a flying mallet. It was a very well-done movie even though it was, in many ways, not my cup of tea. I gave it a reasonably high grade on that basis.

The last two weeks were much more along the lines of what I like -- American-made (admittedly, one was Canadian, but in this realm, that's largely the same) horror from the '70s and '80s. I saw The Brood some (ten?) years ago at an all-night horror festival. It's a deeply creepy story with mutant kids running amok. It really gets under the skin. And, surprisingly, it kind of all makes sense by the end. But my favorite of the session was The Thing, a remake of a 1951 classic. It tells the story of researchers in the Antarctic trying to survive with a shape-shifting space alien on the loose. That was really good stuff, and it allowed this session to end on a high note.

The Trailers:

The Werewolf and The Yeti (1976)

The Abominable Snowman of the Himalayas (1957)

The Brood (1979)

The Thing (1982)

cinema history class: they're not horror films, but they may as well be

 For this session, Keith chose four movies that weren't technically horror films, but that may have been. These all told stories that were miserable, depressing, and/or scary. They were, effectively, horror-adjacent.

Reaction and Other Folderol
This may have been the best session Keith has ever put together. There's usually one movie that I doesn't really catch me. But this? Wow! I could easily have justified rating any or all of these a 10. And yet I likely would never have heard of any of these movies if Keith hadn't chosen them for us.

The movies were all very different from each other, both in subject matter and feel. But there are some elements they all share in common. All four films involve people caught up in a hellish nightmare scenario beyond their control. All four films are at that stage of being almost-epics; They have, in some ways, almost the feel of an epic, but don't quite get there. And, of course, all four build that edge-of your seat tension that can leave you breathless. Which, of course, is why Keith said they may as well be horror films.

The Music Lovers is a sort-of biopic of famed composer, Peter Tchaikovsky. It focuses on sexuality -- specifically his homosexuality and his unhappy marriage to asexual enthusiast. There's glorious music playing in counterpoint to the scenes of abject misery and no one escapes happy. I don't know how much of the presentation is established fact, how much is consensus, and how much is simply purely speculative fiction. And, honestly, I don't care.

Fraulein Doktor was also based (loosely, I presume) on true-life events. This one, a joint Italian/Yugoslavian production, was about the exploits of German spy, Elsbeth Schragmuller, during World War I. This was an excellent blending of spy thriller, war film and caper movie. Not a whole lot is known about Schragmuller, so a lot of the movie is necesarilly speculative. I will note that there were some breathtaking battlefront scenes, including horrifying visualizations of combat with mustard gas. The cathartic, tensive-reducing ending was perfect.

Sorcerer tells the story of four men trying to stay alive while driving trucks of nitroglycerine through the jungles of South America. The movie starts with four vignettes, each telling the backstory of one of the men. After that, it turns to their existence in South America before signing up for their dangerous mission. Throughout, there are great visuals, and tension. It is a little long, clocking in at two hours. But it never feels slow. There were times, especially midway through the film, that I had trouble following certain specifics, but ultimately that didn't matter.

Wake in Fright is an Australian production, telling the story of a seemingly mild-mannered teacher who, goes on vacation and finds himself stuck in an outback town (admittedly, he teaches in what seems to be too small and rural to be called an outback town) where life seems to center on beer and violence. So much of this movie portrayed events that were both inconsequential and fascinating. It was exciting and horrifying. I kept guessing at what would happen, and I kept being wrong, which was good.

In the end, I only rated one of these movies a ten, but the fact is that, had I been in a slightly different mood, I could have rated any or all of them as 10's. It's not the purpose of the class to just watch great movies -- Keith has shown us things like Snuff, Blood Freak and Russ Myers' Vixen!. But I have to acknowledge how greatb it is when a session involves four absolute gems -- especially when they're gems that I never would have heard of if not for the class.

Trailers

The Music Lovers

\

Fraulein Doktor

Sorcerer

Wake In Fright

cinema history class: allan kupfer spaghetti western tribute month

 By tradition, the first session of the year consists of Spaghetti Westerns (or some movies connected in some way to them). This year, Keith decided to open with Spaghetti Westerns, but made his choices based on his memories of his long-time friend, Allan Kupfer, who passed away late last year.

Reaction and Other Folderol:

The selections puzzled me at first; it would be hard to argue that these are the best Spaghetti Westerns, and I would be surprised to learn that they were Allan's favorites. Keith explained to me that he wasn't trying to show Allan's favorites. Rather, he chose movies that he thinks of in connection with Allan, given the many conversations they had on the topic and their abortive attempt to write a book about Spaghetti Westerns.

I feel kind of bad about the first movie, Comin' At Ya! (which Keith presented in 3-D). The image seemed off, which hampered my appreciation of the film. Only afterwards, when we were discussing it, did it come to light that I was probably wearing them backwaards. And there was a lot of humor that I missed. The 3-D effects were used a lot, often for comedic effect (for example, in one scene where a gunslinger is playing with a yo-yo). But somehow I didn't recognize the humorous intent and just got annoyed by a lot of it. Which was my loss.

Other than that, this session inluded a good deal of humor mixed in with the cruelty that marks so many Spaghetti Westerns. At times, especially during The Grand Duel (which starred a notably aging Lee Van Cleef), I was reminded of Keith having told us about how the Spaghetti Western genre had come to embrace comedy.

On the other hand, these were serious entries in the genre, even if none of them reached the heights of the Leone- or Corbucci-directed classics. Notably, Ringo: The Face of Revenge seemed like an attempt to reproduce the magic of Leone's The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. It even reproduced the plot element of enemies having to work together because each one had half of a map. But, while it tried to be an epic, it fell short. It was a good movie in its own right, but it suffered for inviting comparisons to an obviously superior production.

The Trailers:

Comin' At Ya!

The Grand Duel

Fast Hand is Still My Name

Ringo: The Face of Revenge

tuli, rip

I hate to write obituaries for our cats. And it's especially painful when the cat dies young. Very young.

We got Tuli for Asher last summer after Eighteen died. He was born last April, so he was only about ten months old when he passed. Based on our conversation with the vet, Tuli probably had a heart attack in his sleep, and passed away without suffering. So at least there's that.

Tuli was a charmer. He was always curious about whoever came through the door, and I don't recall anyone being immune to his charms. Alla, the lay who comes to clean once a week would tell me about how Tuli was her little buddy, following her around the house as she went about her cleaning. And, as much as he kept himself busty with his cat activities, he always made sure to do them in a room where he could be near his people, keeping an eye on them and making sure to be a part of the pack.

But he gave his most ardent devotion to Asher. He had his special chair in Asher's room, where he would sit for hours watching Asher sleep, or do stuff on his computer.

We will miss Tuli. 

stoopidstats 2024: baseball's cumulative win totals

 Before I start, a couple housekeeping items:

1) This post is very late. There are various reasons for this that I'm not going to get into.
2) When presenting information of this sort, it would be good form for me to make my file accessible to the reader. I have been trying to figure out how to do that, but I have not been successful yet. Sorry. If anyone wants to see my data file, please contact me and I can email it.

That having been said, here are the relevant changes in terms of wins/losses and games over .500.

New Wins Plateaus

Several franchises, locations, states and nicknames reached new win plateaus in 2024. These are summarized below:

Ranks

The Philadelphia Phillies had 95 wins in 2024, as compared to the Boston Red Sox' 81. On the strength of that, Philadelphia moved up to the fourth-highest ranking location and Boston moved down to fifth. 

Meanwhile, the Cleveland Guardians, in their third year since changing their nickname from "Indians" to "Guardians," won 92 games. "Guardians" as a nickname is now moving up the ranks, passing nicknames that have been long out of use. It gained 15 places in the rankings in 2024.

These changes are summarized below:

Since there is no longer a franchise called the Indians, "Indians" is likely to get passed by "Dodgers" and "Braves" over the next couple of years.

2024 was, apparently, The Athletics' last year in Oakland. They're slated to play in West Sacramento for three years before moving to Las Vegas. While in West Sacramento, they will simply be The Athletics without indicating any location. Not counting the Negro Leagues, the only other time a team franchise did not have a location in front of its name was in 1877, when the team that had (from 1874-1876) been the Hartford Dark Blues became known as the Hartfords of Brooklyn. No other franchise has used the nickname "Hartfords of Brooklyn," though it does remind of "Angels of Anaheim" of recent memory. The Athletics will be the first Major League franchise in Nevada. So it'll be fun watching Nevada climb the ranks.

A Final Note

For something like this, it's necessary to have one source of truth. Mine is Baseball Reference. In their ongoing effort to get things right, they often revise information. What I noticed this year was that a lot of historical information regarding teams' nicknames. I won't try to provide a list of changes. But one example is the franchise now known as the Minnesota Twins. They played in Washington from 1901 through 1960. Until recently, BR indicated that they had been The Senators that whole time. Now, it shows them as having been The Nationals for most of the span. There are other changes, but that seems to be the biggest. 

cinema history class: birthday tribute to mrs. z.

 

Keith and Christina spent a lot of Sunday evenings watching movies with Christina's parents. And then, after the dad died, they watched a lot of movies with Mrs. Z. In honor of Mrs. Z., who passed away in early 2024, Keith showed us four of her favorite movies.

Reaction and other folderol:
Note: There mya be spoilers.

In some ways, this session reminded me of a "Bring Your Own Movie Month," since these were four very different movies, of different genres, with little to tie them together. I'll note, of course, that Keith never grilled Mrs. Z. about what her favorite movies were. Rather, he was going by what movies Mrs. Z. would request he bring for their Sunday night get-togethers.

Laura, starring Gene Tierney, was definitely my favorite of these. I'm always down for a good film noir, and this was definitely a good one. It had the sharp dialogue that the genre is famous for, and it kept me guessing the whole time. It was also a special treat to see Vincent Price (before he was famous) as a leading man. I really enjoy seeing him when he's not camping it up. Of course, one drawback for me is that, whenever I see the name "Dana Andrews" in the credits, I can't help but hear Richard O'Brien singing "Dana Andrews said prunes / Gave him the runs [pronounced runes] / And passing them used lots of skill." But I suppose that's not anything to hold against the movie.

I also really enjoyed Horror of the Zombies (AKA The Ghost Galleon), which was the third in the Blind Dead series. In it, some modern-day models find themselves aboard an old galleon carrying the corpses of the Knights Templar. The setup is convoluted, but it's still a good story with some good scares. It was a low budget film, but the producers did a good job of keeping it from feeling cheap -- for the most part, anyway. It does a good job of building suspense slowly. So, like a lobster in a boiling pot, you hardly realize how you've been sucked in. And you don't even see the zombies until more than an hour into the movie. I have to wonder if some of the inspiration for this movie was the Bermuda Triangle lore that was popular around that time. It also bears noting that this movie had a great ending.

I had a harder time getting into Dracula Has Risen from the Grave and The Pyjama Girl Case. Admittedly, they're both good movies. Dracula, especially. It was Christopher Lee's last portrayal of Dracula, and he does a good job with it. But I've found myself a bit burned out on Dracula movies.  Going into Pyjama, I was expecting a giallo. And while it had giallo elements, it didn't really stay true to the form. Having said that, I'll note that it featured a 100% giallo ending. Still, hard for me to get into.

The trailers:

Dracula has Risen from the Grave:

Horror of the Zombies:

The Pyjama Girl Case:

Laura: