some more watching

heya


yes indeed. i have watched a few more films of late, look you see, and so i thought that i would pass some sort of comments, or observations on.

something of an unusual approach here, at least in terms of recent similar posts. rather than simply revisiting dearly loved or fondly remembered films that i have not seen for a while, in this instance i have kind of taken the time to watch that which i have not seen before. well, sort of. of the 8 (eight) films i shall write of, it is so that 50% i had seen before, 50% i had not.

what films, exactly or if you are of a mind to be so precisely? well, here's a quick gander at some of them.

indeed, with one notable exception the above may well indicate that once again i have been drawn to the realms of gratuitous sex and violence, or at the least scary horror stuff. this is indeed so, for it would appear that i am most interested in stuff of this nature for entertainment. many are, as point of fact. perhaps the world would be somewhat better if the people were honest of such, rather than feeling a need to hide it away.

anyway, on with the show, or if you like "the show must go on", to make a light and certainly cringe worthy reference to one of the films shown in the above.

no, i am not doing these in the order i watched them, just mostly or for the most part as the images uploaded. except for the last one, which by a quirk of fate was the one i had watched most recently at time or writing.

but, anyway, Sinister is first. perhaps the most direct thing i can say of it is that my awareness of it existing comes down to the power of advertising; i had not heard of it and only became aware of it off the trailer of another film i watched.

provenance of my copy? that rather smart Music Magpie website, where i bought this and one other below for a combined fee of £3, no questions asked, delivered. not at all bad, especially considering this one is one of them fancy blu ray discs.

the plot? it features that rather smart Ethan Hawke as a lecturer / writer. he has a chequered past, having written one celebrated book about a real life crime but writing one which got some facts wrong and caused a good deal of trouble. anyway, here he is, researching and writing another one. something of a twist is that he has moved his family, unbeknownst to them, into the actual house where the crime he intends to write of was committed. with the local constabulary divided over how interested they are in him being there, things take a most curious turn when he (Hawke) discovers a bunch of 8mm films and a projector in the house......

a superb film, in truth. yes, ostensibly a horror, but for the most part one which relies on great filmmaking to create shocks and suspense, rather than any overtly graphic images (although there are one or two). this has a suitable number of twists and turns on the kind of plot seen before, and was overall very refreshing and very enjoyable. excellent performances from all, in particular Mr Hawke, helped a great deal. it's possibly one to avoid if you are steadfastly against horror, but one to tinker with if you think you "might" want to try the genre.

another blu ray, then, and one that is pretty much suitable for all. one that could be argued should be viewing for all, in the form of the award winning, celebrated presentation of the life of Freddie Mercury and his band Queen, Bohemian Rhapsody.

provenance? actually full price, which i believe was £15 on the nose rather than the token £14.99, but a fee that i offset with some vouchers off of one store. i think it worked out that only £5 in real money was used to obtain it.

but what about the plot? i think i covered that earlier.

is it any good? oh, hell, yes. well, mostly. the lad playing Freddie is full worthy of all the awards and accolades, giving not just an impersonation but a solid, sound performance. i will go further and say that all the actors playing the band members absolutely nail what is at the least the public perception of them. credit in particular goes to the portrayal and presentation of one John Deacon, who would appear to have stepped aside from all things Queen in the last few years. the band appears to have gone to great lengths to show that, no matter, he is held with love and affection and remains just as important as all of them.

the only real "problem" with the film is the well documented "creation" of drama in an effort to give something of a compelling narrative to the movie. yes, the bit where they "distort" facts, as such. for all the wild and wonderful tales of sex, drugs, rock, roll and the very finest of excesses of fame and fortune, essentially they were, as people, as boring as, say, Coldplay. no tension, no inner fights, no creative differences, no (real) "Yoko" figure. and so, for the sake of making a two hour movie that audiences might expect, we get entirely made up things like that band splitting up, and distortions, such as when Freddie learned he had contracted AIDS.

a consequence of the above is that history will be distorted forever. not as badly as, say, Braveheart wildly made people believe an inaccurate (and plain wrong) version of the past, but in the same area. what one has to ask is, does it really matter? the people whose story it is have elected and readily agreed to change things for the film. if not them that can do so, then who?

we are, of course, about to get a wave of similar "biopics" due to the success of this. so much for "physical media being dead", by the way - north of 800,000 people here in the UK bought, like me, either the DVD or blu ray on the week of release. i am not convinced the ones coming in the wake of this will do well. the next "big" one is Rocketman, about Elton John. hmn. whereas there is no faulting his music or his talent, it is with interest i will see if he as a person is embraced by audiences quite like Freddie. a suspicion would be no.

a film that is absolutely, positively not for all, and one that i would never ever recommend (people have to decide for themselves) is Cannibal Holocaust. quite a peculiar place in history this one has, for many people have heard of it, what with it being the "poster boy" for the "video nasty" witch hunts in 80s England and its general notoriety. a notoriety well earned.

provenance of my copy, a shiny blu ray disc of Danish origin? that flea market or car boot sale of the 21st century which is known as "facebook marketplace". despite having the claimed to be uncut version on DVD (a couple of copies, i think), the lure of it in blu ray glory for £10 was not to be overlooked.

does this film have a plot? yes, as point of fact - a really good one, with just how good it is being seen in how frequently it has been copied over the years. a gentleman is tasked with going off to South America to try and find out what happened to a team of renowned, celebrated film makers that set off to make a documentary about isolated Amazonian tribes but disappeared without a trace. off he goes, finding as he does the footage they made. footage which, when watched, leads to a most shocking discovery.....

make absolutely no mistake. some of the scenes in this film are tough to tolerate. having seen it a couple of times before, there are one or two moments when i turned away from the screen because i knew what was coming. yes, for those familiar with it, the "turtle" scene is at the top of that list. but, also, this is not simplistic exploitation. far from it. the film was way ahead of the game in terms of subject, looking as it does as "fake news" and our perceptions of it, not to mention the idea of the dangers of the Western world looking at other parts of the planet and trying to hold them to account, measured by some wonky standards.

it is probably so that there are films which contain more graphic, intense and explicit scenes than are featured in Cannibal Holocaust. the difference would be few, if any, would be so disturbing, shocking or haunting as little within this genre has ever been made so well. use extreme caution when approaching this film, and if you are not sure that you can handle observing images that you will never be able to shake from your mind, just plain avoid it.

so, on to another film i had watched before, then, and one which is also laced with some high levels of graphic violence. little of it in Hobo With A Shotgun is done for artistic or observational reasons, though, just for fun.

are you really all that interested in the provenance of my discs? if so, a rather smart shop that was around about town for a while but has now sadly gone. they sold DVDs and blu rays for £1 or £2 a go, this was one of them but i cannot recall exactly which i paid. either was fine.

plot? one sellotaped together due to "public demand" after the fake trailer for this film proved to be popular when screened with Grindhouse, that double bill of Planet Terror and Death Proof in which i turned out the fake trailers were better. anyway, yes, a hobo, or if English a tramp, gets fed up with a local family being crime bosses, so goes on a violent rampage to bring an end to their reign. very violent.

it's ok, really. that is about the best i can say. no way was it as good as it seemed the first time i watched  it, but maybe that is more me and my perceptions rather than the film not ageing well. no way is it anywhere near as good as the one other film which stemmed from the fake Grindhouse trailers, the magnificent Machete. but, you know, a lot of people think rather fondly of Rutger Hauer, and so seeing him do stuff is always splendid. basically, or essentially, there are many films a lot worse than Hobo With A Shotgun, but also there are many what are better. think Snakes On A Plane, or even Four Weddings And A Funeral - if not so much as the plot but the entire premise is right there in the title, give consideration to how you now already know pretty much all that is required by the film.

to say that i re-watched Hobo With A Shotgun purely "on a whim" is fair, and the same is true of my reasons for opting to have another look at V/H/S, a film i do not believe i looked at since it first came out. yes, i watched the "first sequel", which i think was imaginatively called 2, but not the third, yet, which i believe is called Viral. one day, maybe.

of provenance? actually it might be from the shop mentioned above, but my current thinking is that it was off no less than Pounland, for £1, the one October when they were selling loads and loads of DVDs and, as is the case here, blu ray discs in celebration of Halloween. should that be so, not at all bad for a blu ray copy with one of them slipcase covers that collectors seem excited about.

plot? a bunch of hoodlums make (small) coins of money by setting up and recording pranks to put on "the internet" or similar, usually very unpleasant ones degrading ladies. when they are offered the chance of more money, they take a job breaking into a house to obtain a rare VHS tape. this leads to them watching a number of tapes (i think 3 or 4) to try and find the right one, whilst all sorts of mysterious, spooky and scary things appear to be going on around them......

this one has held up really rather well. in this century where the focus of the majority appears to be to make things that are instantly forgettable and readily disposable, V/H/S deserves a lot of credit for being good after a few years and remaining entertaining on repeat viewing. if, say, Blair Witch Project was responsible for reviving the "lost / found footage" genre pretty much kicked off by Cannibal Holocaust, it is reasonable and fair to say that V/H/S better understood the concept, and knew how to make an entertaining film on the basis of the premise.

my recollection was that 2 was somehow better. if that is so, i need to dig that out and watch again, as this first one seemed a good deal better than i had recalled it being. and, yes, i shall probably go and have a look for the third one at a reasonable price, see what i have been missing out on.

oh yes, another one i had had very much, well and truly watched before - a few times - in the form of Who Dares Wins. the version, as you can see, that was the film what has Lewis Collins in it, and not the much loved Channel 4 series. although if i could get my hands on that i would watch it all again.

maybe something of a noble or at the least notable provenance with this one, for it cost me all of 49p at one of them charity shops. should you wish to be pedantic, 50p, for i saw no reason to trouble the charity shop for 1p change.

plot? here goes. British Intelligence, back in the days when they could be relied on and didn't just "sex up" stuff, has become aware of a plot by a militant, left-wing anti-nuclear group to kill ambassadors, viscounts and what have you. in a well staged set up, Captain Peter Skellen (Collins) of the SAS is sent undercover to infiltrate the gang, work out what is going on and take whatever actions necessary to stop it all. as events unfold, Skellen finds himself quite trapped, and the plan turns out to be far more ambitious and dangerous than first suspected.......

if i recall this was made in the wake of, or indeed a celebration of, the infamous "Iran Embassy Siege", where the world first saw the SAS in action. when was that, 80 or 81 or similar. as for the long term intent, i am uncertain if the main pitch was to either "suggest" Lewis Collins would "make a good new Bond", or if it was that Skellen would "make a good replacement" for the Bond films, which were, in the views of some, getting quite tired and stale then. well, neither happened.

this isn't half bad. preposterous and contrived, yes, but it comes from a far simpler time when "good" and "bad" was very clear cut, thanks to the cold war. it has a plot which does not over-complicate itself for no reason, lags a bit in the middle but overall offers solid enough entertainment, even on repeat viewing over the course of 30+ years. plus, really decent cast. Who Dares Wins used to get a fair few screenings on TV, and as i recall the newspapers gave copies away when - briefly - giving away free DVDs was a thing for newspapers. should for some reason you have missed those incidents and have not ever seen it, then yes, it probably is a film worth having a gander of.

now, then, one that i am going to slightly censor the title of, for the benefit of filters, because the stated name on the cover, Mutanterres Blodige O or something, is better known in the English language speaking world as P0rn0 Holocaust.

provenance? the modern day equivalent of "won it in a game of cards", which is to say one of them ebay auction things. not 100% sure of what i paid in the end, but it was south of £10, for with very rare exceptions that is the max i pay on that market place for any disc.

the plot? well, hard to say really. this Danish copy (i think it is Danish) offers no English soundtrack or subtitles, but i did my best to follow it ok. according to imdb, who i have linked to here as a thank you, the plot is a group of castaways wash ashore on a deserted island in this Italian sex/gore movie. They are unaware that a sex-crazed radioactive monster is also on the island. that sounds more or less like i watched, yes, so i suppose that is the plot. not that i am at all aware of anyone who would pick up a film with this title and have the slightest bit of interest in what the plot is, or if you can understand what anyone in it is actually saying.

let us, as always, be honest here. this film was made with absolutely no ambitions other than to be entertainment for those who want it; those enthralled with the extreme, or who quite like shock, titillation and so forth. it is all the film has to offer anyone, so if you want it you will find it here in abundance. whereas i kind of appreciated watching a very blatantly complete and uncensored, cleaned up DVD, one really can't help think that it is a film one was always supposed to watch on a murky, dirty VHS, handed over or passed around in a relatively discreet way.

more horror stuff? sure, a bit more (closer to) mainstream this time, then, with The House Of The Devil, which is another film i had not even heard of prior to ordering it.

provenance? bought same time as i picked up Sinister. as that one would have been £1.99 on its own i figured that i might as well have a look at what else they had to take advantage of 2 for £3, saw this and figured why not. if nothing else, everything about the title and the cover reviews suggested there would at least be some decent sex and violence.

not so much, as it turns out, not so much. plot? set in the early 80s, a student struggling with bills takes on a well paying job to babysit. it turns out that not all is as it seems, and she may well be made a sacrifice in a ritual which is sort of explicitly hinted at in the title.....

i am not sure if it is correct to say this is "not bad" or just "boring". the plot, pacing and that are been there, done it all before - slow build up for an hour with one or two bursts of action, then shoving all the "decent stuff" the audience came for in the last 20 minutes or so. a nice touch was filming it in "soft focus VHS or US TV broadcast quality" to give it a feel for the era in which it was set, but that is about all.

the film contains zero nudies and limited bursts of violence or graphic images, so basically it failed to deliver what i reasonably expected. a nice touch, though, was that him who played Tooth Fairy in Manhunter and Cain in RoboCop 2 was in it. it is a film which was made quite clearly on the cheap, set out with low aspirations of success and apparently nearly met them. not a great deal i can say other than it is not good, not bad, not too disappointing if you elect to watch and yet your life is no worse of should you give it a miss.

so, finally, then, the most recent one what i have watched prior to writing all of this. it is Videoman, and it is in Swedish with unavoidable yet quite welcome English subtitles.

provenance? that facebook place again. i just happened to notice it, the title caught my eye and i figured for £5 it had to be worth a go, especially as nowhere else seemed to have it at such a low cost.

the plot? interesting. whilst the description says one thing (a thriller, possible horror), the BBFC certificate ("strong sex") quite another, what i experienced was neither. so, let me give you my variation of it.

a chap - Italian but in Sweden - who became king of the video stores in the 80s and 90s is rather washed up in the 00s and the 10s, but the current "VHS revival" gives him hope. whilst brokering a deal for a lot of money for a rare VHS tape and facing several mishaps, he accidentally befriends a lonely, alcoholic lady who clutches at the memories she has of the 80s, seemingly because that is what she recalls as being her happiest time.

essentially this is a really good drama, with some decent suspenseful "whodunnit" moments, one or two genuine scares and one tame yet explicit scene (not really "strong sex" but that is the BBFC for you) which is pure comedy gold in context. you get a lot of metaphor stuff - clutching to the past via VHS and fashion because you are uncertain or unhappy with the present - and some inspired comments on just how damaging we have allowed how many "likes" we get on social media as a measure of our place in the world. there's some really, really good dialogue in this one.

drama is the best i can do for you. maybe thriller is closer, or "thriller drama" if such a category exists. no, not a unique film which one cannot describe. yes, as hinted above, it is also very funny in places. just a really good film indeed, and further one that i would wholeheartedly recommend to pretty much anyone. to be honest, prior to this my knowledge of Swedish cinema pretty much started with Swedish Erotica and never particularly moved on, bar the original adaptation of Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, etc. if they have done more stuff like Videoman, then i am keen to see.

and wow. phew. that's that, then.

no, as usual i have no idea at all if any, many, some, a few, most or none of the comments above have been of the slightest interest, never mind use. but hey, thanks for reading anyhow.



be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!