"Django Unchained" Could Have Used More Restraint

 It didn’t help that Newtown happened. It didn’t help that the movie theater shootings in Colorado happened. In the past, I probably would have liked Quentin Tarantino’s new film, “Django Unchained,” a little more than I did, however, with our society able to access more information about the day’s news, hearing about random acts of violence that happen in real life seems to make films with an overuse of violence more and more unwelcome, or at least scenes in such films more and more unwelcome. I have cringed more than once while watching the trailer for the upcoming film, “Gangster Squad,” even the post-Colorado version of that film’s trailer sans gangsters shooting up a theater full of people portion.

Having said all of this, I think “Django Unchained” is a good film, with the exception of about twenty minutes that occur in the film’s third hour.

As in his 2010 film, “Inglorious Basterds,” Tarantino sets up the main characters of the film perfectly. As in “Inglorious Basterds,” Christoph Waltz plays the main character we initially encounter. As in “Inglorious Basterds,” Waltz gives a flawless performance, though in “Django Unchained,” his character is much more likable. Tarantino does not build the same high level of tension in the first reel of “Django” as he did in the first reel of “Basterds,” however, he does prove once again that he certainly knows how to engage the audience in the first reel of his films. Tarantino is an expert storyteller. He sets up who the main characters are going to be and why they are in the situation they are in early on and he is able to keep an audience interested in his films which tend to run around the 150 minute mark, and in the case of “Django,” a film that runs 170 minutes. I love long movies, especially if the filmmakers can hold my interest for the entirety of the running time. Even if for a few minutes my mind wanders,  if a long film is interesting, I enjoy it quite a bit.

 I do not know if it was Tarantino’s intention, but one of the aspects of “Django Unchained” I enjoyed was the spacing out of cast members I was looking forward to seeing. As you watch the opening credits, you know that you will see Jamie Foxx as Django and Christoph Waltz as Dr. King Shultz, a dentist who we learn wants to help Django become a free man and help Django find his wife. The opening credits also reveal that we will see Don Johnson, Leonardo DiCaprio (in a Tarantino film!), Samuel L. Jackson, and Franco Nero (!!), the original Django from the 1966 Italian film. The original Django was not about a slave as is “Django Unchained.” In the 1966 “Django, “ the title character is a man who enters a town overrun by bandits. The original “Django” is a fantastic film. It is available on dvd in it’s original Italian language. You may also enjoy Franco Nero in one of the many other films in which he as appeared such as “Enter the Ninja,” the brilliance of "Shark Hunter," or in Giulio Paradisi’s 1979 film, “The Visitor,” in which Nero has a few scenes in which he plays Jesus. You can’t beat that!

As another additional homage to the original film, Tarantino uses the theme song from the 1966 film in the opening credits. That was a great touch. 

The performances in “Django Unchained” are great. As mentioned, Christoph Waltz gives a wonderful performance. Leonardo DiCaprio is excellent as the plantation and slave owner, Calvin Candie. Kerry Washington is great as Django’s wife, Broomhilda, one of Candie’s slaves. Her elegance does not seem at all out of place for her character. Jamie Foxx is very good as Django. His performance is understated even in the violent scenes. I could sense in the character of Django that he did not particularly enjoy what he must do but he knew that such an outcome is, for the purposes of this story, inevitable.

I have two issues with “Django Unchained.” While I stated that I enjoy films that are 2 ½-3 hours long, in the case of this film, I wish it would have been a bit shorter. I began to feel the length of the film during the third hour. It probably could have been shortened by about ten or fifteen minutes and felt more satisfying, creating a more impactful ending. My other issue is that, though it is expected in a Tarantino film, the overuse of violence in “Django” was more cringe-inducing than exciting. One problem is that you know what you are rooting against before you sit down in your seat in the theater. Slavery is horrible and you know that revenge will be enacted in some way in some fashion during the film. There are not many incidents during the course of the film that are surprising or that make you any angrier as a viewer at a character and start your blood boiling,creating an emotional spark that make you more interested in the film than you might already have been. In other words, Tarantino lays down for you, by the very nature of the subject matter, what you are going to see. Samuel L. Jackson’s character, we discover, is more than we think, however, as played by Jackson, his character, Steven, is more funny than anything else. Steven is intended to be funny, however, as events unfold in the film, we do learn more about Steven.

Though flawed, I did like “Django Unchained,” however, it would not be among a group of films I would want to see again soon. I appreciate Tarantino’s style of filmmaking. He is a brilliant filmmaker who sometimes, can use a bit of restraint. As his films become more and more mainstream and are under consideration for major awards as is this one and was “Inglorious Basterds,” I hope he will be able to use violence in his films as more than a sideshow attraction, as if he is asking us to come inside and watch the guys get the guts shot out of them in slow motion. I am not sickened by this. I just roll my eyes a little bit as it seems he can graduate from this usage of violence. I am not saying he should abandon using violence in his films, but rather, use violence to make stronger points as Sam Peckinpah did in some of his films. Sure, show us the violence, but have better reasons for doing so. Make a political statement, make a statement about the state of our nation, etc. As well, as I stated earlier, violence in the real world has made me feel a bit more resistant to films that contain a high level of violence. Gun violence, in particular, seems to be more prevalent in real life, so films depicting gun violence for no reason other than to titillate whoever may be titillated by extreme violence have become of lesser value to my movie-watching desire. Maybe I am just becoming more prudish. I do not think so, as I know I still enjoy action films and horror films as much as I always have. It is likely just bad timing for me to be as interested in Tarantino’s film or any other film with as much violence as is contained in “Django Unchained" as I once may have been. I enjoyed the film, but with more restraint, it could have been a lot better.

Video Holy Grail #1: The Day Santa Claus Cried

There are some films that one learns about and wants very much to find. Such searches and eventual discoveries make movie collecting fun. In the same way, those who collect records and books enjoy the same kind of quest. Over the last 10-15 years, more and more once rare or obscure films have been released to dvd and even blu-ray. Such films include Al Adamson's masterpiece of craziness, "Carnival Magic," the 1977 Japanese horror film, "Hausu," and Sam Fuller's controversial 1982 film, "White Dog." Sometimes these rare films even make it onto an American cable network such as Turner Classic Movies. Such was the case of the 1974 Marcel Marceau film, "Shanks" and the 1973 film, "Wicked, Wicked," originally filmed in an all split-screen format called Duovision.

The 1978 film, "Questo Si Che e Amore," or "The Day Santa Claus Cried," or "Last Touch of Love," has not made it yet to dvd in any country and I am not aware of it's play on television in the U.S. at any time. The film appeals to me as it contains some elements that would seem to go well together. It appears to be about a dying boy whose parents are having marital problems. The parents of the child both work in the children's television industry, hence star, Christopher George, holding a puppet in the clip included in this blog post. Thank you, You Tube. The aforementioned presence of Christopher George, a regular in Italian films of the late 1970's and early 1980's holds some interest as well. From 1969-1971, George starred on a tv show called "The Immortal" about a man who could not die, hence the name of the series.
A search on Amazon, Ebay, and various websites specializing in aiding one to find hard-to-find films has proved fruitless. Ten years ago, I thought that finding "Carnival Magic" would be a difficult proposition, however, it not only eventually aired on Turner Classic Movies, but also, a few months later, was released on dvd and the greatness of blu-ray. At one time, only one print of "Carnival Magic" was thought to exist, that being in the possession of the Alamo Drafthouse in Austin, Texas. I, along with a friend, attended a screening of this film and had a great time. It was a treat to see it on film in a theater. It was a bonus to learn of it's eventual dvd release thanks to discovery of camera negatives.
So there is hope that "The Day Santa Claus Cried" may be released on dvd or I may discover an oddball vhs copy of it that nobody online knew existed. That is known to happen. I have a copy of Al Adamson's "Sunset Cove" on vhs from an early 80's Canadian video release. The search for rare films is an exciting pursuit to engage oneself in and finding films you thought were impossible to find makes said pursuit even more interesting.

Allow Me to Point You in the Direction of "Cloud Atlas"

I had read about 60 percent of “Cloud Atlas” before seeing the film based on said book, written by David Mitchell. I believe reading what I read of the book helped me to follow what was going on in the film. It is difficult for me to imagine watching this film without prior knowledge of the characters and events of the book. The film, directed by Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski, and Lana Wachowski, is a wonderment of imagery and storytelling, though, by the end of the film, the point of the film seemed, unless I am much shallower than I think, to be quite a simple one.

Our lives connect with those of other people in the past and will connect to other people in the future. These connections may be perfectly random, not necessarily familial connections, but connections to people we may know of because of a random mention of a name or discovery of something said person did or wrote. “Cloud Atlas” would be a great film to discuss over numerous cups of coffee and try to comprehend what it all means. At the same time, however, the point of the film, as I mentioned, does not appear to be too terribly deep, but I do not imply in saying that, that the point of the film is simplistic. “Cloud Atlas” is very successful in that it weaves together six stories from six different time periods and connects them through the fact that the characters in the stories intertwine throughout the course of time, whether it be through chance or through reincarnation, however, I do not think the point of the film is that reincarnation exists. I suppose it could be surmised that this is the point of the film, however, it did not appear to be so. I believe the point of the film is that the lives of others, even if those others exist many years before us or many years after us, effect us in some way. It is a complex film and the meaning of it can be debated, which is one of the strengths of the film. Again, I try to imagine what it would have been like to watch the film without having read more than half of the book and I wonder if my grasp of the film would have been weaker without prior knowledge of the plot of the book.

The stories in the film are intercut with each other throughout the course of the 175 minute running time. The film goes back and forth from one story to the other. The six stories take place in 1849, 1936, 1973, 2012, 2144, and “106 Years After the Fall.” Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Susan Sarandon, and Hugh Grant play multiple roles in the film, all of which are performed very well by all. There is some fantastic makeup work in the film, some of which should be nominated for an Oscar, however, I believe the reception of the film will be lukewarm in the end, so it seems that a film such as “Cloud Atlas” will be ignored come nomination time, even for awards that have nothing to do with story or comprehension of the film. At the end of the film, all of the actors are shown in brief shots as the characters they played. I admit to being surprised a few times at who played what characters. I was surprised to find out who played a Kona warrior in the "106 Years After the Fall" story. "Tom Hanks was recognizable in all of his roles, however, and he did a wonderful job at playing all of them.

In the same way, Halle Berry was fantastic in her many roles. All of the performances, the many characters played by each actor, are very well done. The only character miscast was Tom Hanks as Zachry, the, as presented in the book, young Hawaiian man who appears in the story that takes place “106 Years After the Fall.” Though Hanks'performance as Zachry is good, in the book, this is clearly a young Hawaiian man, something Hanks is not. Sometimes I enjoy films that are not easily comprehended, but, at the same time, are not so perplexing that I lose interest. “Cloud Atlas” skillfully weaves it’s stories together in a very well-edited and well-paced way. Again, I believe having read a good deal of the book allowed me to follow the stories and never get lost in the proceedings. I would still recommend the film to those who have not read the book, which I imagine would be quite a few people. The film reminded me of films like “Grand Canyon,” (1992),a film which featured the lives of several people being intertwined with the purpose of trying to make a connection involving a meeting at the Grand Canyon. For a different reason, Wim Wenders’ “Until the End of the World” (1991) also comes to mind as I think about “Cloud Atlas.” Wenders’ film told a straight-forward narrative, however, it was also slowly paced sci-fi film, the uncut version of the film running a long, but never boring 280 minutes. Both “Grand Canyon” and “Until the End of the World” are challenging films, challenging in the sense that they require patience on the part of the viewer, not because they were poorly made, but because the themes of both films are somewhat ethereal and not simplistic screenplays. “Cloud Atlas” has more in common with “Until the End of the World,” however, they are clearly different kinds of films. What does this write-up about “Cloud Atlas” mean? Did I like the film? Did I like the book? Isn’t everything in life up for debate, up for discussion? Aren’t all of our lives intertwined in some way? Isn’t there some composer from the past or clone from the future that we are connected to in some way? It is all difficult to say, however, it is easy to say that I greatly enjoyed the film, “Cloud Atlas.” The performances are great, the pacing is brisk without being too fast or too forced. The set design, throughout the film, is awesome to look at. The stories and the thread that I do not pretend to fully comprehend at this point, are interesting and not at all pretentious, as it easily could have taken a pretentious turn, but never does so. I purposefully did not read any reviews for “Cloud Atlas” before I saw the film or before I wrote this thrilling and impeccably well-written write-up about it. I suspect the film was not met with a terribly warm reception as it seems like a film that may be too difficult to digest. I can see the words “confusing,” “mess,” and “ too long,” being used to describe the film. Because I predict this kind of reception does not mean I agree. Perhaps reading most of the book did help me embrace the film and welcome it into my brain. I liked the film so much that I would not be adverse to seeing it again soon and buying the blu-ray when it is released. I enjoy challenging sci-fi films that do not have an air of pretentiousness. Such unpretentious sci-fi films include the aforementioned “Until the End of the World,” the original Russian version of “Solaris,” “Blade Runner,” and “Prometheus.” Though Cloud Atlas may not be classified as sci-fi, I feel it belongs in that genre. I did not find any of the six stories or sets of characters to be dull, however, the story of the Korean clones in the year 2144 was my favorite, though this story contains the most action movie scenes, incorporating sci-fi gunfire, but thankfully these scenes are brief and do not bog down the film.

Doona Bae is excellent as the clone, Sonmi-451 and Jim Sturgess is good as Hae-Joo Chang, Sonmi-451’s protector. Jim Broadbent is also very good in the story of Timothy Cavendish, an elderly gentleman who writes a book about the murder of a book critic, only to be sent to a less than favorable fate through various circumstances. I recommend “Cloud Atlas” highly. It is not my favorite film of the year, however, it is well worth 175 minutes of your time if you choose to map out a time to see it.

Pocky Plus: A Look at Jiro Dreams of Sushi

Pocky Kitty has been practicing his writing. He recently watched the 2012 documentary, "Jiro Dreams of Sushi." Here are his thoughts:

If you decide to watch “Jiro Dreams of Sushi,” do one of two things. Eat first or get some Japanese food to go and eat it while you are watching the movie. “Jiro Dreams of Sushi” is a 2012 documentary about Jiro Ono, an 85 year old Japanese gentleman who owns a small sushi restaurant in Tokyo. Jiro has been a sushi chef for 70 years and has perfected the fine art of preparing sushi. We learn that, at his restaurant, only sushi is served. As the film progresses, the audience learns why this is so. Jiro employs only seven people and his restaurant only seats ten. Jiro is a perfectionist who has trained his two sons to prepare sushi perfectly as well. His older son, Yoshikazu, now prepares a lot of the sushi himself and could be considered a co-owner of the restaurant. Takashi, Jiro’s younger son, has his own restaurant, one which is quite similar to Jiro’s except it is said in the film to be less intimidating.

“Jiro Dreams of Sushi” is a wonderful documentary. It follows the primary rule of documentary filmmaking: Tell the audience about a subject they did not know about before. “Jiro Dreams of Sushi” is not political, it does not have an agenda, it contains no fake drama such as one would see on a reality tv show, and the film is entirely in Japanese. The film is directed by David Gelb, an American filmmaker. There is no English or Japanese narration in the film. The information imparted in the film is from interviews with and observations of the main subjects of the film. This was a very effective way of documenting Gelb’s subject. I loved the fact that the subjects of the film were telling their own story and that they were allowed to do so in Japanese. Of course, they may speak only Japanese, however, the fact that we got to hear the language and the film did not use English voiceover narration for translation was very much appreciated. I learned a lot about the subject of the film in the brief 81 minute running time. Not only did I learn a lot about Jiro and his sons, but I also learned quite a bit about the preparation and proper way to serve sushi. I recommend this film highly, especially to documentary film fans. It was available to rent from Netflix, but I eated it. They have more, though. You can still see it there. Bye!

I Recommend Klowning Around

“Klown” is like an extended episode of “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” “Klown” is less bitter than “Curb,” however “Klown” is structured in the familiar template that involves two or three set-up scenes setting up a payoff scene near the end. I believe this sort of structure in comedy may have begun on “Seinfeld.” Jerry or George would do or say something which would set up disastrous repercussions at the end of an episode. “Curb Your Enthusiasm” uses the same structure. This is not to say that I am tired of this structure. It usually works very well. It is just a familiar structure on some sitcoms and it is used in “Klown.” Two or three events occur, some of them just hinted at with a single camera shot, but mostly they occur as brief scenes during the course of the film.

It seems as though this kind of structure would be difficult to write, as it is evident that careful planning must occur for events to progress in such a fashion so as to result in a comedic end. The basic story in the film,“Klown,” which is based on a six-season, 60 episode Danish television series, is that a man named Frank Hvam (the actor’s real name and character name are the same) is assigned the duty of babysitting his nephew, Bo (Marcuz Jess Petersen). Frank has promised and wants to go on a canoe trip with his friend, Casper (Casper Christensen). Casper does not just want to go canoeing, however. The purpose of this trip for Casper is to row to a remote brothel and spend a night with the world’s best prostitutes. Casper calls this trip the “Tour de Pussy.” It is evident what Casper is looking for. Frank wants to go on this trip, but does not, obviously, want to haul a 12 year-old boy along. Well…stuff happens and more stuff happens. I am not going to go into how it all plays out since I am encouraging you to see the film. I do not like to divulge spoilers. The film works very well, as do most episodes of “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” I get the impression, even though I don’t do impressions, that the tv show, “Klovn,” (with a “v”), is a lot like Larry David’s HBO series. The guys do harmless, sometimes foolish, things which lead to bigger, worse things happening as a result. Their wives are nonplussed by their actions, as are those who are victims of their foolishness. Having seen the movie, I am very interested in watching the television series.

I do not think comedy like this is easy to write and it takes skill to organize events and plot points carefully so as to lead the audience to those funny things that result. This is why I champion “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” It may seem like a show about a grumpy, unpleasant guy who hates everybody. The character of Larry has evolved throughout the course of the series and about 75% of the time, he is right about what he is ranting about. The way he goes about things is usually wrong. So, “Klown” appears to the a film-length version of a tv show which is similar to and probably influenced by Larry David’s “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The script is well-planned and well-organized, leading the viewer through Hvam and Casper’s journey of uncomfortableness which is very amusing. If you enjoy uncomfortable humor such as what one would find on “Curb Your Enthusiasm” or Lisa Kudrow’s shamefully underrated, short-lived HBO series, “The Comeback,” you will likely enjoy “Klown.” So, no more clowning around. Find “Klown” and enjoy it

How Can You Love "Argo" Not?

“Argo” begins with the 1970’s era Warner Brothers logo, the one in which the white “W” comes towards you then another one comes towards you over a red background. Even though, in the 70's, Warner Brothers was a Warner Communications Company and not a Time Warner Company as it is today, I still loved seeing the old logo. Yep, I am a big dork. Let’s go!

“Argo” is the best film I have seen so far this year. Ben Affleck’s film is a tense thriller based on true events that occurred in January, 1980. In 1979, Iranian militants had taken over the American Embassy in Tehran and had taken 50 Americans hostage. The film does a great job of outlining the history of what had happened up to the point of the action in the film. Six of the people who worked at the office were able to get to the home of the Canadian ambassador for temporary safety. The story of “Argo” surrounds American efforts to sneak these six people out of Iran and back to the United States. Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) is given the task of coming up with a plan that will bring home these six. As the trailer for the film suggests, so it is no secret, Mendez devises a plan of setting up production of a fake movie that will necessitate desert-like locations. Mendez is given permission to go to Hollywood where the U.S. government has a contact in make-up artist, John Chambers (John Goodman). Chambers and Mendez convince Hollywood producer, Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin) to go along with the idea, giving Mendez everything he needs to set up a hopefully perfect ruse. Ads are printed in Variety for the upcoming film, actors are hired for a table read, papers are produced to present to the Iranian government stating that said film will be filmed in Iran. “Argo” is the name of the fake movie. It is to be a science fiction film. At the time, in the late 70’s, there were many low budget sci-fi films being made to cash in on the popularity of “Star Wars.” Remember “Battle Beyond the Stars” and the greatness of “Star Crash” starring Marjoe Gortner? So everything is in order for Mendez to go to Iran and meet the six Americans who are living at the Canadian ambassador’s home. The plan developed by Mendez, Chambers, and Siegel is a very risky one. As noted by Jack O’Donnell (Bryan Cranston), Mendez’s boss, when presenting the idea to the Secretary of State, “This is the best bad idea we have, sir.” This is one of many great lines in the film. I am glad I did not know anything about this particular story. It is based on true events, however, my knowledge of the “Argo” story was non-existent. This made the film even more tense, a tenseness of the good variety.

“Argo” works perfectly as a thriller. It is also a very funny film, as witty and sometimes, smartass lines of dialogue are spread throughout the film and these lines and the film's sense of humor work perfectly to compliment the drama and tenseness of the film. All of the performances are brilliant, most of note being Ben Affleck. I have never seen a better performance by Affleck. I hope he gets an Oscar nomination for his acting and his direction of the film. Goodman and Arkin are fantastic as the gentlemen from Hollywood. Bryan Cranston, who is beyond brilliant as Walter White on the television drama, “Breaking Bad,” is solid as Tony Mendez’s boss at the CIA. The actors and actresses as the six Americans are wonderful as well. I love this movie!! The final 45 minutes is some of the best, tensest filmmaking I have seen. The story unfolds in a spellbinding fashion. The film is 120 minutes, not overlong, and it speeds by. I cannot recommend this film any more highly! Every section of the film works very well—the set-up of what is to come in the film, the set-up of the plan, the events that follow, and the end of the film is very well done. As well, the look of the film is flawless. The hairstyles, costume design, and set pieces perfectly represent 1979 and 1980. I appreciated the film’s nod to science-fiction film action figures which dorks like me will definitely notice and appreciate. I appreciated the fact that the film is not overrun with music from the era. It is common for films set in a particular era to overuse songs of the day. "Argo" does incorporate a few songs during the Hollywood segment of the film, however, they were songs of which I had a cursory knowledge, songs not heard often in movies. We didn't hear "Car Wash" or "I Will Survive" at any point during the film. I only have one problem with anything in the set design category. At one point, Mendez is eating a McDonald’s hamburger. The burger was wrapped in paper, as it is today. I remember when I was a kid, which would have been in 1979-80, McDonald’s burgers being served in Styrofoam containers. That is my biggest problem with “Argo.” See how perfect it is? Go see it as soon as you can. There will surely be more excellent films released between now and the end of the year, however, I do not anticipate being as highly entertained and emotionally involved in any film this year more than I was with “Argo.”

"Mausoleum" is Full of Life

Thanks to companies such as Code Red, Blue Underground, and Anchor Bay, many of those late 70’s/early 80’s horror/slasher movies that Siskel and Ebert used to delegate to their “Dog of the Week” segment have made their way to dvd over the last 12 years. Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert were two people who influenced my interest in movies during my youth, however, I think they were way too hard on many of the films in the horror and sci-fi genres of that era.

I do not remember if the 1983 film, “Mausoleum,” was ever featured on their PBS Sneak Previews program or on their subsequent syndicated program, however, having now watched it twice, I find “Mausoleum” to be quite an enjoyable, though imperfect, low-budget horror film. The film stars Bobbie Bresee and Marjoe Gortner as a married couple who appear to live quite a nice life in a very nice home somewhere in the U.S. There is one slight problem in the fact that Susan (Bresee) has, as a youth, been possessed by a demon. Susan can summon said demon at any time. This is the most convenient part of being possessed by a demon, I would think. It would be most difficult to have a demon in you that emerges at inopportune times, such as during an important speech one might be making, or while driving, or perhaps during sex, though, for some, this may spice things up a bit. Did I mention that “Mausoleum” features the acting stylings of Marjoe Gortner, one of the most unique personalities of the 1970’s and early 80’s? Prior to “Mausoleum,” Gortner starred in the films, “When You Comin’ Back Red Ryder,” “Star Crash,” “Bobbie Jo and the Outlaw” (in which he shares a sex scene with Lynda Carter—if you’re going to get something good, you sometimes have to accept something bad) and the classic made-for-tv film, “Pray For the Wildcats” in which he co-starred with William Shatner and Andy Griffith. For more about Marjoe, I encourage readers to seek out the 1973 documentary entitled, “Marjoe,” in which he is interviewed and gives his full participation documenting his life up to that point. When I see that Marjoe Gortner is in any given film or episode of a tv show, I watch said movie or episode. His work is always worth the time. So, in “Mausoleum,” Susan and Oliver (Marjoe!) Farrell live comfortably, except for the previously mentioned demon which Susan can summon whenever she wants. Throughout the course of the film, Susan disposes of some people whom she does not favor. Dr. Simon Andrews (Norman Burton) has been Susan’s psychiatrist since she was a child and knows of her condition. Oliver contacts Dr. Andrews and reports that Susan has been doing some strange things (like killing people) and arranges a meeting with the doctor. Things transpire and Susan, at the end of the film, returns to the scene of where she became the object of possession, which is presented at the beginning of the film. I am intentionally vague about details of the film should any reader, at some point, wish to endeavor to rent or buy this film and watch it.

I encourage anyone so inclined to do so for a few reasons. First, as discussed earlier, you really cannot go wrong with Marjoe Gortner. His acting style is not bad, it is simply different. It is not Shatnerian or Walkenian, however, it does contain a certain non-genericness that is always welcome. Let’s call his style the Gortnerian Style. Second, there are several instances of interesting framing in which a character’s head will be off to the side a bit too much or too much space above a character’s head will be present. These are welcome imperfections which set films such as “Mausoleum” apart from the current slick-looking, but still bad horror films. Third, the print of the film, as presented by Code Red DVD, is wonderfully scratchy! This is great! Reel changes and the scratchiness and bits of film that get cut off before and after reel changes are present! It is as if one is watching an original theatrical print of the film. If you like to watch films that have been remastered, this may leave you disappointed. I love watching old prints of movies with all the scratch marks and missing frames. This is the love of nostalgia in me, I suppose. It is a lot of fun watching these films in an imperfect condition, such as watching the prints of the films presented when Quentin Tarantino was hosting is QT film festivals in Austin, Texas. The films he showed were on 35 MM film, not digitally presented. Of course, some of the films he presented were not on dvd and the prints he had may have been one of only a few prints of those films. Whatever the reason, it was a great experience to watch these films with all of their imperfections. Code Red has released, in the past few years, several films in which an original print was used as a source, three other ones being the 1978 Hal Holbrook film, “Rituals,” Romano Scavolini’s 1981 horror film, “Nightmare,” and the 1974 film, “Horror High.” My interest in watching films that are in imperfect condition hightens my interest in films such as “Mausoleum,” a film which, by some, may be dismissed as “just another bad 80’s slasher film.” For the reasons outlined here, “Mausoleum” places itself among some of the better of these kind of films. The story is well laid out. It is not a terribly complicated story. There are several oddball scenes, most of which, feature the greatness of Marjoe, and there are some interesting looking low-budget, early 80’s special effects to enjoy as well. I suspect that the intention of the filmmakers may have been to release “Mausoleum” in 3-D, as the early 80’s also enjoyed a resurgence of 3-D films such as “Jaws 3-D,” “Amityville 3-D,” “Parasite,” “Metalstorm,” and “The Man Who Wasn’t There.” There are a few scenes that are shot for, what appears to be, the sole purpose of thrusting or throwing things at the audience. It was not officially released in 3-D, but my guess is that that was the original idea. I encourage you all to find a copy of “Mausoleum” and enjoy an evening of Gortnerian acting. I believe you will have found the 95 minutes spent with Marjoe to be well worth the time. “Mausoleum” is full of life so I do not feel I am dead wrong in recommending it to anybody.