Since I reviewed Robert Bloch’s novel, The Night of the Ripper, earlier today, it seems only appropriate that tonight’s excursion into televised horror should be based on another Robert Bloch story about Jack the Ripper!
Yours Truly, Jack The Ripper is a classic episode of the 60s anthology series, Thiller. This episode aired on April 11th, 1961 and it was directed by the Oscar-winning actor, Ray Milland!
Enjoy!
You’re sitting down and you’re watching the 1985 slasher film Bits and Pieces on YouTube.
“The Bits and Pieces Murderer has struck again!” a television news reporter solemnly intones after a homeless woman finds a dismembered body in a trash bag.
Meanwhile, in a dark bedroom, a phone rings and wakes up Lt. Carter (Brian Burt), a balding man with a mustache. He answers it and is told that the murderer has struck again. “SHIT!” he yells….
A few blocks away, a sweaty man named Arthur (S.E. Zygmont) sits in a filthy basement, surrounded by plastic mannequin heads, half-eaten breakfasts, and flies. He hears a voice telling him to kill and he says, “Yes, mommy…”
Down the street, in a club that appears to be populated largely by elderly woman, the world’s greasiest male strippers perform while a deathless song plays in the background. Do you want/want my body/do you like it like that....
The next morning, college student Rosie Talbot (Suzanne Snyder) tells her mother about the strip club. “I was surprised by the wide variety of the routines,” she says as her mom nods along. Rosie says she never would have had the courage to go to the club if not for her best friend, Tanya (Sheila Lussier). However, for some reason, Tanya is not answering her phone….
That night, Arthur has flashbacks to being abused by his mother so he kills again. When the latest body is found, Lt. Carter receives that call. “SHIT!” Lt. Carter yells….
The next morning, Rosie looks at the newspaper and sees a drawing of the girl who was found in the trash bag and she immediately screams because it looks just like Tanya! She meets Lt. Carter who asks her if Tanya had any strange sexual proclivities. “What type of sexist question is that!?” Rosie shouts….
Later, Rosie walks through a strip mall and runs into her friend Jennifer (Tally Chanel). Rosie tells Jennifer about Tanya but then mentions that she did meet a really handsome policeman and that’s been the only good thing about her day. “That sounds promising!” Jennifer says….
Meanwhile, Arthur lurks behind them, unnoticed despite his unwashed hair, his skinny black tie, and the look on his face that practically screams, “I am a psychopathic murderer and I’m stalking you.” A random man bumps into Arthur and Arthur falls to the ground. “Watch it, apple ass,” the man snaps….
A few hours later and Lt. Carter calls Rosie at home. Carter tells her that this is a social call. Would she like to spend the day at the beach with him? That seems like a great way to forget about all the dead people who are piling up around the city. “I’m really looking forward to it!” Rosie says….
Meanwhile, Arthur flashes back to his mother’s boyfriend forcing him to put on lipstick….
And so it goes.
There’s actually a pretty charming little story about this film. It was told by a student who had just completed a film class. On the last day of class, the professor announced that he was going to show the class an example of how “not to make a good movie.” The movie that he showed was Bits and Pieces and the professor was the also the film’s director. (For the record, the director also appears in the film, as the guy who calls Arthur an apple ass.)
Bits and Pieces may be a bad movie but it’s so amazingly inept that it becomes oddly fascinating. The night scenes were clearly filmed at night, meaning that it’s often next to impossible to see what anyone’s actually doing for at least 10% of the movie. In the role of Arthur, S.E. Zygmont gives a performance that’s so over-the-top that it bring to mind the “Egyptian feast” scene in Herschell Gordon Lewis’s Blood Feast. (“You waaaaaaant to plaaaaaay….” Arthur hisses, at one point.) As well, I don’t know if there’s many other movies out there that mix scenes of brutal murder with scenes of a middle-aged police detective and a young college student happily frolicking on the beach. I guess brutal murder and intense emotional pain brings out the romantic side in some people. The fact that the blood and gore looks real while everything else feels fake gives the film a strangely surreal feel.
Bits and Pieces is currently on YouTube, proving that even inept movies will live forever.
Since I reviewed Robert Bloch’s Night of the Ripper earlier today, it only seems appropriate that Jack the Ripper should play a role in today’s horror scene that I love.
In the 1929 silent German film, Pandora’s Box, Louise Brooks plays Lulu who, through a series of misfortunes, goes from being the mistress of an upper middle class newspaper publisher to living in squalor in London. Reduced to working as a prostitute, Lulu picks up her first client on Christmas Eve. Little does she know that her client is actually the infamous murderer known as Jack the Ripper. At first, Jack attempts to resist his urges by throwing away his knife but once they reach Lulu’s apartment, he discovers another.
This scene, which served as the film’s finale, was considered to be so controversial in 1929 that it was edited out of some prints, which had the effect of turning a tragic story about a woman forced into prostitution into a story about a woman who, following some bad luck, moves to London and is redeemed by volunteering for the Salvation Army.
Here is the original conclusion of Pandora’s Box:
As you might guess from the title, Night of the Ripper is set in London in 1888. A shadowy figure is haunting the foggy alleyways of Whitechapel, savagely murdering prostitutes, terrifying the public, and leaving the police baffled. In the taunting letters that he writes to the authorities, he says that his name is Jack.
Jack the Ripper, to be exact.
With both high and low society demanding an end to the murders, can the respected and determined Inspector Abberline discover the true identity of Jack the Ripper and bring his reign of terror to an end? Helping him out will be an American doctor named Mark Robinson. Robinson is an expert in a developing science called psychology but will that be enough?
*sigh*
This 1984 novel from Robert Bloch is an unfortunate misfire. I say that as someone who has spent a countless amount of time reading about the murders and all of the identified suspects. (Back in March, when Jeff and I were in London, we went on one of those Jack the Ripper walking tours. It was wonderfully creepy!) A century after his crimes, Jack the Ripper continues to fascinate us because, not only was he the first widely identified serial killer, but it also appears that he got away with it. The police may have speculated that Jack was a disgraced lawyer who committed suicide after the murder of Mary Kelly but they never actually presented any evidence to back that up. Over the last 130 years, countless people have been accused of being Jack the Ripper, everyone from an anonymous Russian doctor to Lewis Carroll to the son of Queen Victoria. Solely based on the fact that she didn’t care much for his paintings, Patricia Cornwell wrote an entire book arguing that the artist Walter Sickert was the murderer. In all probability, Jack the Ripper was an anonymous nobody but he’s become such a huge figure in the popular imagination that it’s difficult for many to accept that he was probably just a sexually dysfunctional loser who hated women. Instead, elaborate conspiracy theories are pursued and films like Murder by Decree and From Hell are produced.
Bloch’s novel features plenty of prominent Victorians, though none of them are identified as suspects. Oscar Wilde, Joseph Merrick, Conan Doyle, and Robert Lees all show up and then quickly disappear from the story. When Bloch does eventually reveal the identity of Jack the Ripper, he turns out to be a minor character who was first introduced just a few chapters previously. It’s a bit of a letdown.
Actually, the whole book is a letdown. It comes across as if it was written in haste and Bloch’s attempt to give the story some gravitas by opening the final few chapters be describing ancient torture methods doesn’t really have the effect that I presume he was going for. It’s a disappointment because, after all, this is Robert Bloch that we’re talking about. Bloch not only wrote Psycho but he also wrote Yours Truly, Jack the Ripper, one of the best short stories ever written about Jack.
Read the short story but avoid the novel. And if you ever get a chance to take a Jack the Ripper walking tour, do it!
Did you know that today is World James Bond Day?
It certainly is! Today is the 55th anniversary of Dr. No and therefore, it’s the day when we celebrate all things Bond!
Now, it may seem strange to start a review of a classic giallo like 1972’s Who Saw Her Die? by talking about the James Bond franchise but the two do have something in common.
George Lazenby.
George Lazenby was the Australian model who was selected to replace Sean Connery in the role of 007. It was Lazenby’s first big break and it also nearly destroyed his career. Lazenby played the role only once, in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Though many modern critics have come to recognize that film as one of the best installments in the franchise, contemporary critics were far less impressed. After the disappointing reception of OHMSS, it was announced that Lazenby would be leaving the role and, in Diamonds Are Forever, Connery returned to the role.
What happened? Why did George Lazenby exit one of the biggest film franchises in the world? In my research, I’ve come across several different theories. Some say that Lazenby voluntarily quit because he either wasn’t happy with the direction of the franchise or he didn’t get want to get typecast. Others say that Lazenby was fired from the role because he was difficult to work with and was viewed as being a diva. Others have said that Lazenby was viewed as being too stiff of an actor to continue in the role of James Bond.
Obviously, I can’t say whether Lazaneby was difficult to work with or not. Nor can I even begin to speculate on what he thought of the franchise’s direction. But, as far as this idea that Lazenby wasn’t a good actor goes … well, all I can say is have you even seen Who Saw Her Die?
As you can probably tell from the trailer, Who Saw Her Die? might as well take place on a totally different planet from the Bond films. Who Saw Her Die? is an atmospheric and, at times, nightmarish giallo. A murderer of children — complete with black gloves and a black veil, because this is a giallo film, after all — is stalking Venice. When the daughter of architect Franco Serpieri (George Lazenby) is murdered, Franco and his ex-wife (Anita Strinberg) search for the murderer and discover a connection to a previous murder that occurred, years before, at a French ski resort.
It’s a dark and disturbing film, perhaps the most emotionally intense giallo film that I’ve ever seen. A year before Nicolas Roeg did the same thing with Don’t Look Now, director Aldo Lado captures Venice as a city of both great beauty and great decay. Every scene features the ominous shadow of death hanging over it and, after the murder of Roberta Serpieri (Nicolette Elmi), the viewer is painfully aware that everyone that we see is a potential child murderer. Is it the artist? Is it the priest? Or is it some random passerby? This film keeps you guessing.
And holding the entire film together is George Lazenby. At the time, I’m sure that some said it was a step down to go from playing James Bond to appearing in a low-budget Italian thriller but Lazenby gives such an emotional and empathetic performance that it should silence anyone who has ever said that Lazenby was a stiff actor. It’s not just that Franco wants justice for his daughter. It’s also that he’s haunted by his own guilt. Franco abandoned his daughter, leaving her on the streets of Venice, so that he could get laid. If he had been with there, the killer never would have targeted her. As played by Lazenby, Franco is motivated not just by rage but also by a need to redeem himself. He is equally matched by Anita Strindberg, who perfectly captures the raw pain and rage of a mother who has lost her child. Perhaps the film’s strongest moment features Franco and his ex-wife making love after their daughter’s funeral. The scenes of their love-making are intercut with scenes of them crying in bed afterwards, a technique that, a year later, Nicolas Roeg would also use for Don’t Look Now‘s famous sex scene. Together, Stindberg and Lazenby make Who Saw Her Die? into the rare whodunit where you care as much about the future of the characters as you do the solution to the mystery.
Who Saw Her Die? is an excellent and powerful giallo and proof that George Lazenby was more than just someone who once played James Bond.
George Lazenby (center) in Who Saw Her Die?
4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking.
Today, we celebrate the horrors of the London Fog!
4 Shots From 4 Films About The London Fog
The Lodger (1927, dir by Alfred Hitchcock)
The Lodger (1944, dir by John Brahm)
A Study in Terror (1965, dir by James Hill)
Murder By Decree (1979, dir by Bob Clark)
Oh, Steven Soderbergh.
Seriously, I know that everyone in the world is always going on about how brilliant he is but I have to admit that I always approach his film with a bit of trepidation.
I mean, yes, Soderbergh can be brilliant. He’s made some legitimately great films, some of the best that I’ve seen. The Informer! holds up brilliantly. So does Traffic and The Girlfriend Experience. Even a film like Logan Lucky remains amusing on a second viewing.
And yet, at the same time, he can be one of the most annoyingly pretentious directors around. Contagion was a raging bore and, with Haywire, Soderbergh squandered the potential of Gina Carano. Che started out strong before turning into a dull Marxist tract. With the exception of Out of Sight, his friendship with George Clooney always seems to bring out the worst instincts in both men. And don’t even start with me about the Ocean’s films. Have you tried to rewatch any of them lately?
Whenever I start a new Soderbergh film, I find myself wondering which Stephen Soderbergh am I going to get. Am I going to get the Soderbergh who is a crafty storyteller and a good director of actors? Or am I going to get the pretentious Soderbergh who always seems to think that he’s doing all of us favor by lowering himself to make a genre film?
With Unsane, which was released way back in March, I got both.
Claire Foy plays Sawyer Valentini. A year ago, Sawyer was working at a hospice when the son of one of her patients became obsessed with and started stalking her. Fearing for her life and realizing that the police weren’t going to be much help, Sawyer moved away from home and tried to restart her life.
Seeking help for dealing with her trauma, Sawyer makes an appointment with a counselor at the Highland Creek Behavioral Center. What she doesn’t realize is that Highland Creek is a scam. The papers that she signed at her appointment allow her therapist to hold her for a 24-hour evaluation. When Sawyer resists and attempts to call the police, her stay is extended by seven more days. Every time that Sawyer demands to be released, she’s judged to be a threat to herself and others and more days are added to her stay. As another patient explains it, Highland Creek basically holds onto its patients until their insurance runs out.
If that wasn’t bad enough, things get worse when Sawyer meets the new orderly (Joshua Leonard). He says that his name is George Shaw but Sawyer swears that he’s David, the man who has been stalking her. Of course, no one listens to her when she tries to tell them. After all, she voluntarily committed herself to Highland Creek….
Unsane received a lot of attention because Soderbergh shot the film in secret with an iPhone. The end results of Soderbergh’s experiment were mixed. At its best, this technique gives the film a gritty look and it visually captures the shaky state of Sawyer’s sanity. At its worse, it’s a distraction that leaves you feeling that you’re supposed to be more impressed by how Soderbergh made the film than by the story being told.
Fortunately, Soderbergh gets two wonderful performances from Claire Foy and the reliably creepy Joshua Leonard. Foy brings just the right combination of fragility and strength to the role of Sawyer and she gives such an empathetic performance that you get involved in her story even if Soderbergh’s style is often distracting. As for Leonard, you’ll recognize him as soon as you see him. He’s a character actor who specializes in playing off-balance people and he’s memorably menacing in this film.
I probably would have liked Unsane more if I didn’t always have the feeling that the movie was mostly made so that Soderbergh could show off. Whenever I see one of Soderbergh’s “genre” films, I get the feeling that he’s looking down on the material and that my reaction is supposed to be one of, “Soderbergh’s such a genius that he can even make crap like this entertaining!” (You get the feeling that Soderbergh might be willing to make a B-movie but he’d never be caught dead actually watching one.) That said, regardless of the motives behind it, Unsane was actually an effective and twisty psychological thriller.
If nothing else, it was better than Haywire….
A serial killer known as “The Avenger” is murdering blonde women in London (which, once again, proves that its better to be a redhead). And while nobody knows the identity of the Avenger, they do know that the enigmatic stranger (Ivor Novello), who has just recently rented a room at boarding house, happens to fit his description. They also know that the lodger’s landlord’s daughter happens to be a blonde…
Released in 1927, the silent The Lodger was Alfred Hitchcock’s third film but, according to the director, this was the first true “Hitchcock film.” Certainly it shows that even at the start of his career, Hitchcock’s famous obsessions were already present — the stranger accused of a crime, the blonde victims, and the link between sex and violence.
Also of note, the credited assistant director — Alma Reville — would become Alma Hitchcock shortly before The Lodger was released.
Tonight’s episode of One Step Beyond deals with a bellboy named Gerald Perkins (David Opatoshu). Gerald keeps telling everyone that there’s going to be an earthquake but no one’s willing to listen to him. Everyone knows that Gerald is a recovering alcoholic so they assume that he’s just drinking again. Needless to say, it’s far easier to fire someone than to listen to his insane ramblings, right?
Well, considering that this story takes place in San Francisco in 1906, perhaps they should have listened.
According to host John Newland, this is a true story. It originally aired on January 12th, 1960!
Enjoy!
Once upon a time, when the fascists still controlled Spain, there was a man named Marcos (Vincent Parra) who lived in a tiny house that appeared to be sitting in the middle of trash dump. Marcos worked at a slaughterhouse and had a loving girlfriend named Paula (Emma Cohen). Marcos wasn’t a mean person but he did have a temper. Because he was poor and unedcuated, he was permanently on the outside of Spanish society.
One night, Marcos was out on a date with Paula when he got into an argument with a taxicab driver. The argument escalated until Marcos finally (and accidentally) killed the man. Paula thought that they should go to the police. Marcos disagreed. Eventually, to cover up his crime, Marcos strangled Paula in his tiny house.
Then, Marcos’s brother came by and discovered what had happened. So, Marcos killed him too. Then his brother’s fiancée came by and insisted on knowing what Marcos was hiding in the bedroom so Marcos killed her. Then his brother’s fiancee’s father showed up at the house and started asking too many questions so Marcos killed him.
And soon, Marcos’s house was full of dead people.
Towering over Marcos’s house was an apartment building. Living alone on the 13th floor was the handsome Nestor (Eusebio Poncela). Nestor use to spend his days watching Marcos through a pair of binoculars. Though he never knew what was happening in the house, Nestor still became fascinated with Marcos and his refusal to move out of his crummy house.
Eventually, Nestor befriended Marcos. Though Nestor was wealthy, his status as a gay man in 1970s Spain made him as much of an outsider as Marcos. Both Nestor and Marcos had reason to distrust and fear the police and this created a bond. With Nestor’s help, Marcos got a hint of the life that he could have been living if 1) he hadn’t been born poor, 2) he didn’t live in the middle of a garbage dump, and 3) if his house wasn’t full of dead bodies….
In the late 60s and early 70s, European art films were often disguised as being exploitation films when they were released in the United States. That’s certainly the case with this Spanish film from 1972. The original Spanish title of this film was La semana del asesino. In English, that translates to The Week of the Killer, an appropriate title since the film follows a week in the life of Marcos. However, when the film was released in the U.S., it was retitled Cannibal Man, despite the fact that there’s not any cannibalism to be found in the film.
Regardless of what it’s called, the film itself is a surprisingly sensitive and well-done portrait of two outsiders trying to survive and find some sort of happiness under an authoritarian regime. For all the murders that take place, the film itself is far more concerned with the friendship between Nestor and Marcos. When Nestor takes Marcos to his health club and they share a dip in the pool, it’s a rare chance for both Nestor and Marcos to escape their problems. It’s a nicely done scene, one that’s directed in such a way that you understand that this is one of the few times in Marcos’s life when he hasn’t been angry or scared. Even he’s not sure how to handle it.
Director Eloy de Iglesia combines scenes that have a gritty, documentary feel to them with sequences that seem almost dream-like. When Marcos kills his brother’s fiancee, the sound of the clock ticking in his house becomes almost deafening. Vincent Parra plays Marcos as being an inarticulate man who often seems to be in a daze, as if not even he can believe what he’s done and what his life has become. Eusebio Poncela is equally well-cast as the sympathetic Nestor.
Cannibal Man is a film that definitely deserves to be rediscovered.
