THE DYNAMITE SHAOLIN HEROES (1977)

 


 






PHENOMENALITY: *uncanny*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTIONS: *sociological*

Two surprises about this low-budget chopsocky: that it's an early directorial effort by Godfrey Ho, who would become infamous in the eighties for churning out dozens of incoherent ninja-films, and that by comparison HEROES is fairly comprehensible, though the plot is still not easy to follow and it's easy to confuse the characters, since the only "name" actor in the film is Lo Lieh. 

In fact, I rather lost track as to whether Lo Lieh's character was or was not the secret identity of the film's only real hero, "the Lotus Man." In fact, the oddly named mystery-man seems to have borrowed a few tropes from Western superheroes. Though attired in regular Chinese clothes for the most part, Lotus Man's identity is masked by the basket-like hat known in Japan as the Komuso. And whenever the Lotus Man foils a crime, he leaves behind a dart with a lotus-flower attached, not unlike the spider-sigil left behind by the American pulp crusader The Spider.

To be sure, the "crimes" with which Lotus Man is concerned are sociological in nature. The historical setting is hazy, but I presume it must take place during the Qing Dynasty, because all the bad guys are looking for loyalists who supported the earlier Ming Dynasty. Lotus Man frequently shows up to help out Ming patriots, rather like the Scarlet Pimpernel succoring French royalists, but with more bare-handed fighting. (Lotus Man, unlike his enemies, uses no weapons.) 

Early on the plot also introduces what seems to be a B-plot, though it eventually takes over the film. Young Chinese aristocrat Ching Ching, daughter of Ming patriot Kang, is subjected to an arranged marriage to a prince, presumably a Qing (Lo Lieh). Ching Ching thinks the prince is a wimp and admires the heroic Lotus Man (Lois and Clark, anyone?) Then a second Lotus Man appears to confuse matters, though in due time the copycat is revealed to be one of the Qing enforcers, who's also in love with Ching Ching. 

The film's lively fight-scenes are mostly in the middle, while those at the climax prove forgettable. As noted there are no other central heroes but Lotus Man, though strangely, even though Kang and Ching Ching are not martial artists, they have a maid who fights the Qing henchmen about a minute before she's killed. The "dynamite" of the title is just more hyperbole, and no one is referred to in the English translation as a Shaolin. There is one Buddhist guy who doesn't like seeing the lotus, a symbol of peace, corrupted by the violent acts of a vigilante, but I don't think he was supposed to be any sort of "Shaolin."

PHOENIX THE WARRIOR (1988)

 






PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *cosmological, sociological*


One interesting trivium about the home video marketing of this 1988 flick: most of the covers I've seen feature Amazon-artworks that don't especially resemble the actress who plays Phoenix, Kathleen Kinmont. I realize that in 1988 she didn't have much "TVQ," having not yet played her best-known role on the 1992 show RENEGADE, but SF-Amazon films usually don't worry about how well known the main actress is. On top of not getting that exposure, in the film's opening credits Persis "STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE" Khambatta gets top billing, despite being the villain. 

I have a mild recollection of enjoyment from seeing this film on commercial TV in the nineties, but it's really not especially good even for a trash film. It's as if director/co-writer Robert Hayes-- most of whose cinematic work was as a cinematographer-- was basing his film on Cormanology 101: lots of babes, bullets and blazing fast cars. Granted, most post-apoc movies are just loose assemblages of whatever rubbish the filmmakers thought they could use to sell a movie. But Hayes approaches even the undemanding material with a clumsy, ham-fisted approach, taking any and all guilty pleasures out of the picture.

Once more, we have a gender-discriminatory apocalypse that kills off most of the men but leaves alive a lot of women who just happen to have really big eighties hair, and as usual, everyone's reverted to barbarism and lives in the desert far from sheltering cityscapes-- though these "she wolves" have enough technical know-how that they never run short of bullets for their machine pistols. One particular Amazon-leader, the wizened Reverend Mother, still possesses enough tech that, when she locates a rare pregnant woman, she plots to spawn some unholy hybrid creation that she can control for the next millennium.

However, the pregnant girl, name of Keela, finds a protector in a solitary animal-trapper, Phoenix (Kinmont). After fighting off diverse henchwomen of the Reverend Mother, including the aforementioned Khambatta, Phoenix takes Keela to a lonely refuge, where the latter births a male child. The two of them live together more or less as "daddy and mommy" to the kid, despite having no romantic entanglements as such, which won't win PHOENIX any prizes at any Lesbian film-festivals. However, the day comes that the Mother's agents find the refuge, wipe out most of the residents, and abduct Keela's kid to serve in the villain's vile experiment. While Phoenix and Keela go looking for the Reverend, she stumbles across a guy named Guy, one of the few surviving adult males. Eventually, after a lot of gunfights and swordfights, Phoenix vanquishes the forces of the Reverend Mother. Then she fades into the sunset as Guy, Keela and Keela's boy become a traditional nuclear family-- another black mark against the film at any Sapphic celebrations. 

There are a few decent fights and a few decent jokes, particularly playing on the Amazons' unfamiliarity with male anatomy. But the biggest problem is that Phoenix is a very one-dimensional heroine. Some of the character's dullness may stem from Kinmont's relative inexperience as an actress-- she's certainly better both in RENEGADE and in her two "CODENAME ALEXA" films-- but mostly I think the script fails to give the heroine any personal motivations for her noble deeds. And even a junky SF-Amazon film needs to give audiences a reason to root for the hero.

FAIRY TALE THE MOVIE: PHOENIX PRINCESS (2012)

 





PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *fair*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *metaphysical*


I've read assorted collections of the 2006-2017 manga series FAIRY TAIL and its television episodes. I found the series a fairly imaginative if rather chaotic "shonen manga," with lots of antic violence but not much characterization. Like a number of other fantasy-adventures, this one takes place in a vaguely medieval otherworld where magic works. "Fairy tale" refers not to a type of story but to a group of heroes who hire out their mystic powers for deserving clients. 

The "phoenix princess" of the film's title is one Eclair. Her tribe is raided by unknown marauders, and Eclair flees to a nearby city with half of the tribe's precious "phoenix stone." In the city Eclair contacts the five members of Fairy Tail--  Lucy, Natsu, Gray, Wendy and Erza-- and they volunteer to help her protect her artifact. 

Eclair gets one of those rare cases of selective amnesia, in that she does remember just enough to keep the plot moving. The group seeks out a wizard in a forbidding forest, but finds that some enemy, presumably allied to the raiders, has slain him. The wizard leaves behind a hologram that gives Eclair and her friends further guidance. Soon the villain, who bears the risible name Duke Cream, sends his super-powered agents to fight the super-powered members of Fairy Tail, and despite the heroes' efforts, Eclair is kidnapped. One of the Fairy Tail mentors informs the heroes that if the Duke can acquire Eclair's half of the stone and combine it with the half he possesses, the villain will acquire immortality.

All of the above is a serviceable if unremarkable plot for a fantasy-adventure, but the animation is cheap compared to that of the teleseries, so that I found all of the action-scenes underwhelming. In addition, the heroes of Fairy Tail are usually notable for being loud and extreme in their passions, but here they all seem rather laid back by comparison. The only exception is a "guest-heroine," Juvia, who nurtures a daffy love for Gray and becomes jealous of anyone who gets near him-- so much so that when a murderous gunman threatens to mow Gray down, Juvia thinks the man is flirting with her special love.

The unambitious nature of PHOENIX reminds me of some of the animated features based on the DRAGONBALL franchise, where it looks like the animators knew that they had a sure thing and didn't really go out of their way to excel. Anyone curious about the series would do better checking out the TV episodes.

THE EXTERMINATOR (1980), EXTERMINATOR 2 (1984)

 


 




PHENOMENALITY: *uncanny*
MYTHICITY: *fair*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTIONS: *psychological, sociological*









Most “urban vigilante” films of the seventies and eighties don’t venture into the realm of the metaphenomenal, given that they’re dealing with grim-faced men and women meting out vengeance upon the criminal scum of the big cities. EXTERMINATOR and its sequel, however, manage to edge their way into the domain of the uncanny, though not in precisely the same ways.


The first film, an early writer-director effort by action-film specialist James Glickenhaus, focuses upon the travails of traumatized Vietnam vet John Eastland (Robert Ginty) as he seeks to cope with his return to blue-collar employment in New York. He and his fellow vet Jefferson work at a meat-packing plant, but both of them soon find themselves facing a new kind of war, caught (to recycle a phrase I used elsewhere recently) between callous “haves” and brutal “have nots.” Noxious gang-punks attack Eastland and Jefferson, and in the melee Jefferson is crippled. Eastland then decides to avenge Jefferson by hunting down all the members of the gang. In addition, to pay for Jefferson’s hospital care and for his expenses as “the Exterminator,” Eastland also begins robbing more affluent mobsters as well. By the end of the film he’s even an implicit threat to corruption in high places.


Since the successful paperback series “The Executioner” had been booming since 1969, it’s not unlikely that Glickenhaus and his team sought to capture some of the same “men’s adventure” vibe, crossbred with the “crazed Vietnam vet in dog-eat-dog New York” trope popularized by 1976’s TAXI DRIVER. The first two-thirds of EXTERMINATOR succeed in this synthesis, though the story loses some steam when Eastland finds himself pursued by a CIA investigator (Christopher George). Usually in serials devoted to similar urban avengers, the protagonists must face off against exceptional opponents from the underworld. If the producers intended some political statement with the CIA plot-thread, it didn’t work well.


As bad as New York is, the Exterminator proves a greater scourge. In the film’s standout scene, Eastland chains a mob-boss so as to suspend him over a huge meat-grinding machine to get information—and when the mobster gives Eastland false intel, the criminal gets turned into dog chow. Surprisingly, an image from the film’s marketing—that of the hero brandishing a flamethrower to incinerate criminals—disturbed countess liberals with its implication that the lower classes deserved to be wiped out like insects, but this never occurs in the film proper. Eastland threatens to torture a gang-member with an acetylene torch, but he never actually turns the weapon on that man or anyone else. Once or twice, the script equivocates about whether the Exterminator is a proper hero. After a grueling scene in which three punks rob and abuse an elderly woman, the punks run off, and the Exterminator only arrives in time to see a passerby trying to help the old lady. Eastland threatens the hapless fellow with his pistol, but rather conveniently, doesn’t lose audience support by rashly blowing the innocent man away. Throughout the film Eastland wears only ordinary clothes and never hides his face, but his more extreme actions mark him as a “perilous psycho” of the uncanny variety.



EXTERMINATOR 2 falls more squarely into the superhero idiom, insofar as Eastland is often seen stalking the streets, wearing a heavy work-suit and concealing his face behind a welding-mask, while wielding his flamethrower against criminal scum. (It would seem that the objections of liberal viewers only encouraged the producers to make greater use of the offending weapon.) This time the film was directed by the first entry’s producer Mark Buntzman and co-written by Buntzman and William Sachs. The latter alleged that he and Buntzman made greater use of the welding-mask because star Robert Ginty wasn’t available for reshoots. Whatever the reason, the use of the “costume” does place more emphasis on Eastland as “urban superhero” and less on his status as “crazed Vietnam vet.”


Fittingly enough, the Exterminator gets his own “super-villain” this time, in the form of gang-leader X (Mario Van Peebles). In an early scene, the flame-throwing vigilante executes a gangbanger who happens to be X’s brother. From then on, X and his motley crew devote themselves to hunting down the Exterminator and anyone aiding him. Buntzman and Sachs place far less emphasis on urban blight than did Glickenhaus, so that the effect is somewhat closer to a wild romp like THE WARRIORS, particularly in the climactic scene, pitting the voluble, athletic X against the heavily-clad, slow-moving spawn of the Vietnam conflict. As Ginty gets far fewer strong acting scenes in this installment, the villain’s charisma usually exceeds the hero’s—though I should remark that in most of his later works I’ve had no high opinion of Van Peebles’ thespian abilities.

The sequel didn’t make as much money as the original, and that, rather than any liberal rage, resulted in the swift extermination of this series.


FREEJACK (1992)

 





PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *fair*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *cosmological, sociological*


I read this movie's source novel-- Robert Sheckley's 1959 IMMORTALITY INC.-- many years before three writers, including Ronald "ALIEN" Shusett, adapted it into FREEJACK. Thus I have no observations about resemblances between the book and the movie. I think it's interesting that another SF-writer of the period, James E. Gunn, wrote THE IMMORTALS three years later-- the source for the IMMORTAL teleseries-- and that this echoes some of the same concerns about the tendency of nasty rich people to monopolize new discoveries about health improvement.

Most of FREEJACK takes place in the far-off future of 2009, but the story of protagonist Alex Furlong (Emilio Estevez) commences in 1992. Furlong is a skilled race-car driver, but though he seems set for a major win-- not to mention romantic success with his girlfriend Julie (Rene Russo)-- he crashes and supposedly dies to all living in 1992.

However, Furlong's body has actually been pulled into the future of 2009. (How come the 1992 coroners didn't remark on the absence of the body in the burned automobile?) Evil body thieves known as "bonejackers" want to take Furlong's body and sell it to the rich people who rule this irredeemably scuzzy future-America. The bonejackers are attacked by a team of mercenaries led by Victor Vacendak (Mick Jagger), but despite all the shooting and car-ramming, Furlong gets away, thus becoming a "Freejack" and thus giving the movie its title.

It takes a good while for Furlong to figure out that he's stuck in the future, but he also finds out that his girlfriend Julie is still around. Moreover, she works for the same corporation that employs Vacendak, and that multinational monster is divided between its aging owner McCandless (a pre-Hannibal Anthony Hopkins) and a scheming subordinate (Jonathan Banks). Furlong finds Julie but she thinks that some 2009 body-thief has hijacked her dead lover's body, so it takes some time to convince her. Then, given that the two lovers don't have any way to resist the vast forces of the McCandless Corporation, they have to resort to some means of trickery in order to triumph.

FREEJACK is generally derided, but for its first half, it does a decent job of showing Furlong's confusion as he's thrust into a nightmare future. However, the latter half of the film descends into a farrago of routine cliches, with the characters played by Banks and McCandless proving particularly tedious. I suspect the reason this merely average piece of SF-action gets such bad press is that the mercenary Vacendak, who's supposed to be an honorable warrior, is essayed by Jagger, who is unquestionably terrible in the role. FWIW, Estevez does have decent chemistry with Russo, so their upbeat ending is one of the movie's few charms.

LUCY (2014)

 



PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY:  *poor* 
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure *
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *cosmological, metaphysical* 


I won't spend a lot of time on Luc Besson's disappointing LUCY except to say that it might have helped had he gone back and read more mind-blowing French comic books, the same type that inspired him to his signature work, 1997's FIFTH ELEMENT.

The set-up for LUCY has potential. The title character (Scarlet Johanssen), a young girl going to school in Taiwan, is inveigled into making a delivery to a clique of Korean gangsters. They subject Lucy to an operation and place a packet of rare drugs in her abdomen in order to sneak the forbidden substances past customs; then she and some other unwilling drug-mules are scheduled to be flown out of Taiwan to the gangsters' confederates. The young woman seems to have no way to go but down.

As it happens, a few of the handlers charged with getting Lucy out of Taiwan decide to take advantage of her, and when she resists, she earns a kick in the stomach. The blow bursts the packet and her system is infused with the drugs, an artificial version of a natural growth-hormone. Besson's script hypothesizes that the designer-drug unleashes a level of brain-capacity that most humans never use, so that Lucy acquires phenomenal psychic powers. She gets free of her captors and sows a little vengeance on gang-boss Mr. Jang, though she lets him live-- apparently for no good reason but because the script needs a villain to continue providing resistance.  Her main project, however, is to overtake the other drug-mules and harvest the drugs they carry, in order to (a) keep the hormone from killing her, and (b) to boost herself to the full 100% capacity, so that she can implicitly transcend time and space.

As an action-thriller, LUCY is adequate. Unfortunately, despite a script that gives scientist Professor Norman (Morgan Freeman) a lot of ponderous dialogue about evolution and the time-space continuum, Besson's rendering of these profundities is merely banal.  Besson's idea of deep meaning is to show assorted shots of animals in the wild, perhaps with the intention of illustrating the vast complexity of the ecosphere. But frankly, I've seen Disney nature programs that provided better illustration of life's impressive variations. Besson's understanding of metaphysical issues is similarly derivative and undermines the potential of the basic idea.

HONOR ROLL #145, AUGUST 28

CHU MIN-SIK is the villain out to control a monster named Lucy, though not the one with the football.



No future for EMILIO ESTEVEZ in films of the future.



"Exterminate! Exterminate!" Sorry, ROBERT GINTY, someone else got the catchphrase first.



With a name like LUCY HEARTFILLA, I'm surprised the girl comes out to face the light of day.



KATHLEEN KINMONT's "Phoenix" never rose again from the ashes of obscurity.



LO LIEH plays an archaic Chinese superhero addicted to big hats.



TERROR OF THE BLACK MASK, ZORRO VS. MACISTE (both 1963)

 


 





PHENOMENALITY: *uncanny*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTIONS: *sociological*


Director/co-writer Umberto Lenzi, later famous for horror and suspense films, some of which I reviewed here, originally made his bones directing historical spectacles, among them two Zorro-like films made back-to-back with headliner Pierre Brice and various other personnel in common.

The first film, styled THE INVINCIBLE MASKED RIDER in Italy and TERROR OF THE BLACK MASK in the U.S., never actually calls the black-clad protagonist "Zorro," though in his regular ID he sports the name "Don Diego." However, both this adventure and the next one are set in something like 17th-century Spain, so the Old West associations of Zorro are abandoned. (As it happened, star Brice became less famous for his European Zorro than for playing a character adapted from the Old West novels of German author Karl May.)

The Black Plague threatens the Spanish province ruled by tyrannical Don Luis (Daniele Vargas), but Luis doesn't let a little thing like rampant disease stop his quest for power. He decides that he wants to consolidate his control over the local nobility, and to do that, he wants to bring young Carmencita (Helene Chanel), sole daughter of the wealthy Gomez family, under his aegis. His first step is to hire assassins to slay Carmencita's father before her very eyes, which makes it possible for Luis to make the young woman his ward. There are a couple of lines in which the older don considers marrying Carmencita himself, but he tells his associate that he thinks it better to marry the woman off to his "foster son" Diego. Nothing is said about the circumstances under which Luis adopted Diego, but the two of them haven't seen each other in many years, so it's likely that Luis's foster-father status was also set up to yield a political advantage. 

Like the Don Diego of the ZORRO stories, the young man comes to court pretending to be a harmless fop. Naturally, that's because he plans to don an all-concealing black costume and work to overthrow his foster father's evil reign. As in most Zorro iterations, the lead female scorns the fop but becomes infatuated with the virile masked man who fights injustice. The script does come up with a minor twist, for at the climax Diego reveals that he's not the foster son of Luis. That individual died of the plague, and the Masked Rider, who was seeking some way to unseat the evil Luis, took the place of the foster son with the help of his underground of freedom fighters. 

The menace of the plague provides the only element that doesn't seem lifted from a standard Zorro adventure, and it's interesting that in one scene some citizens briefly call the unnamed cavalier "the Black Death." A possible derivation from the tropes of Poe's "Red Death," translated into swashbuckler terms? However, later on he's usually called just "the Masked Rider," so if that idea occurred to anyone, it was not sustained.



The second film takes place in the same basic setting, and the script does call its hero Zorro in the subtitled version I saw, though in some markets he was renamed "El Toro." This time there's not much attention to how Zorro came into being, and his secret ID is Ramon, a poet but not specifically a fop. Both of his identities are in love with a totally different woman, Princess Isabella (Maria Grazia Spina). Isabella and her cousin Malva (Moira Orfei) are both potential heirs to the rulership of the realm after the natural passing of their uncle, the previous lord. But Malva is as villainous as Isabella is virtuous, and she plots with her aides to intercept the will of the former lord, so as to manipulate her ascension to the throne. To this end, Malva hires a passing strongman, Maciste (Alan Steel), to do some of her dirty work. This leads to a contretemps between Zorro and Maciste, though their enmity is short-lived when the fundamentally good-hearted Maciste finds out that Malva is an evil schemer.

In this film Lenzi takes full advantage of all the brawl-happy tropes of the muscleman film, making for a more enjoyable romp, not only with the usual scenes of Maciste tossing guys around, but a face-off between the two heroes, in which Maciste tries to clobber the sword-wielding swashbuckler with a big club. On the minus side, Orfei doesn't get any really good scenes; like her good-girl cousin, she's mostly seen just standing around in ornate gowns. Orfei does get one moment in which she fantasizes about punishing the turncoat Maciste with torture, but that's about it. 

As with most films centered upon Italy's popular Maciste character, this one had the muscleman character renamed for the American market. The new title was "Samson and the Slave Queen," but not only does Maciste have nothing "Samson-like" about him, neither of the candidates for queen-dom are involved in enslaving anyone. I assume that this cool little crossover flick made some money, for a few months later, another film with similar elements made it to screens a few months after ZORRO/MACISTE. As I noted in this review, HERCULES AND THE MASKED RIDER again brought together a Zorro-like crusader (not surprisingly, with yet another separate background) and a strongman. However, this time the swordsman-- reverting to the name "Masked Rider" in the dubbed version-- becomes the center of the story, and the strongman-- called "Goliath" in the Italian original and re-dubbed "Hercules" for the English speaking market-- plays the stooge to the costumed cavalier. Alan Steel once more played a strongman figure here, but neither Lenzi nor Brice were involved, and the film is poorer for their absence.



THE DOLL SQUAD (1973)

 






PHENOMENALITY: *uncanny*
MYTHICITY: *fair*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *sociological*

THE DOLL SQUAD is definitely the best movie from the directorial chair of Ted V. Mikels. Of course, even the best Mikels is primarily enjoyable for its absurd cheesiness, though I give him sociological points for jumping on to the bandwagon of feminist heroism at the height of its seventies manifestations.

Everyone with an interest in cult film has probably heard the theory that SQUAD may have some marginal influence upon Aaron Spelling's CHARLIE'S ANGELS, which debuted three years after SQUAD hit theaters and which, like SQUAD, featured a heroine named Sabrina. If it's true that Spelling saw SQUAD, though, he probably saw it only as one of many grindhouse flicks that focused on kick-butt heroines, and so encouraged the producer to put forth his own take on the subgenre.

Anyway, SQUAD is very much a cheapjack "female James Bond" film, and the aforementioned Sabrina (Francine York) is the central heroine, while the other members of the Squad are really just her subordinates, distinguished only by their specialties-- sometimes combat-oriented, which others are of more questionable application to spy-missions, like psychiatry. The girls make use of a few spy-gimmicks, such as a lighter that spews flame, but most of them are unimpressive due to the budget. Of the other five Squad-sisters, only Tura (FASTER PUSSYCAT KILL KILL) Satana has garnered any grindhouse fame, though Lisa (HEE HAW) Todd shows up for a brief role as the villain's moll.

Said villain is former espionage agent Eamon O'Reilly (Michael Ansara). He starts off his campaign of evil by blowing up a US space rocket, and a government official (Anthony Eisley, third-billed despite a very brief presence on-camera) calls on Sabrina and her Doll Squad to investigate. However, O'Reilly anticipates the Squad's response and goes proactive, knocking off some of the group's ancillary members. This does nothing to stop Sabrina from figuring out his identity, whereon she reveals that she and O'Reilly were once lovers when he was on the side of right. In jig time Sabrina and her aides figure out where O'Reilly makes his base, and they plan to assault his island home. When Sabrina does invade and question her former squeeze, she learns that he plans to dominate the world with a plague of rats with bubonic plague-- apparently distributed from satellites, though Mikels had no budget for spacecraft models.

Given that Mikels films are notorious for their poor pacing, in which characters either stand around talking or walking around on low-energy errands, he actually gives SQUAD a little visual oomph. He gets a lot of health from the jazzy score of Nicholas Carras, whose tunes make the on-screen action more compelling than it would have been sans music. The first half of the film is still slow for all that, but at least it doesn't put you to sleep while waiting for the main set-pieces of the last half, the invasion of the base. This consists of Sabrina and her five subordinates, all clad in polyester leotards, infiltrating the poorly guarded island and taking out numerous guards with gunshots, high kicks and karate chops. The girls are clearly not real martial artists, but they look OK, though Mikels missed a bet by not allowing former PUSSYCAT Satana, the only one with a history of cinematic fighting, to strut her stuff. 

Mikels even delivers moderately well on the frustrated romance trope, having Sabrina captured by O'Reilly. They talk over old times, he tries to talk her into becoming his queen when he rules the world, and when she refuses, he claims he planned to kill her anyway. She gets the upper hand, albeit more through trickery than combat, and then the Squad gets away after blowing up the installation for a big finish (though I think they pretty much shot up all the guards). The ladies do lose one of their own in the conflict, but they show about as much reaction to the loss as if they'd smudged their mascara. 

Only once does the script, partly credited to the director, move into Ed Wood territory. Out of nowhere, the psychiatrist member claims that she thinks O'Reilly wants to conquer the world because he suffers from a castration complex brought on his mother not loving him. I hypothesize that whoever wrote this speech was imitating the sort of pop-Freudianism used by Ian Fleming to motivate his villains. But not only does the script not give the assertion even minor logic, there's no follow-up to the idea-- unless we're supposed to think that the Squad's assault on the villain's base mirrors the villain's fear of being destroyed by rampaging femininity...


HAWK THE SLAYER (1980)

 






PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *good*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *metaphysical, psychological*

I'm amazed that anyone would consider HAWK THE SLAYER a "bad" movie. It's certainly a cheaply made film, and it does have a glaring disadvantage in that its one "name" actor, Jack Palance, horribly chews the scenery in his role as the villain. But it's a well made film, which unlike most sword and sorcery films has strong plot-momentum and memorable characters.

(Side-note: I kept wondering why the filmmakers gave the bad guy the name "Voltan," which sounds like a combination of "volt" and the name of the Greek blacksmith-god. Then I realized that his name, and that of his heroic brother the titular Hawk, had very possibly been borrowed from the world of Alex Raymond's FLASH GORDON, whose adventures included a sojourn among the HAWKmen, who were ruled by Prince VULTAN. The association, conscious or not, may stem from the fact that in the comic strip, Vultan ends up rebelling against the reigning emperor of Mongo.)

The core conflict between Hawk (John Terry) and Voltan begins years before the action of the film proper. Voltan, the elder son of a king in some fantasy-realm, goes to war while Hawk remains behind. Voltan incorrectly believes that the Lady Eliane loves him, and in his absence Hawk and Eliane are married. Voltan believes that Hawk stole Eliane, and he kidnaps Hawk with the idea of forcing Eliane to surrender to him. When Voltan tortures his younger brother, Eliane strikes back by shoving a blazing firebrand into Voltan's face. Hawk and Eliane try to escape, but Voltan shoots Eliane dead with an arrow. For years thereafter, Hawk devotes himself to finding and killing his brother, but (in one of the less praiseworthy conventions) can't seem to find him. 

In the film's present-- also the first scene-- Hawk has returned to the side of his (unnamed) sire, but the younger brother is off to one side when Voltan, now wearing a half-helmet to hide his disfigured features,  ambushes their father, demanding a prized "elfen mind stone." The sire won't yield the stone to Voltan, and Voltan kills the old fellow and escapes before Hawk makes the scene. The sire then rejects primogeniture in favor of ultimogeniture, causing the mind-stone to imbed itself in the pommel of Hawk's sword. (Curiously, the pommel of Hawk's sword looks like a human hand, and a little later, one of Hawk's minor allies loses a hand.)

Voltan doesn't really seem to have any specific need for any magical stones, for he's in no way a sorcerer, though there's a mysterious unnamed mage who tends the warlord's wounds and who may be manipulating Voltan to covert ends. Voltan assembles an army of raiders and begins seeking the brother who stole Voltan's bride and his patrimony. But Voltan also needs money-- implicitly to pay the raiders-- so he raids a convent, kidnaps the revered Abbess, and holds her for a huge ransom. A swordsman named Ranulf (the guy who loses his hand) reaches the convent after this has happened, and the nuns direct him to a high priest, who in turn tells the guy to go looking for Hawk. Once Ranulf finds Hawk and lets him know what Voltan's doing, Hawk gets some help from a sorceress in order to assemble a small coterie of warriors with whom Hawk served in other adventures. Ranulf fades into the background as these more colorful allies join Hawk: a grim elf who (like Tolkien's Legolas) is a master archer, a dwarf who can use a whip really well, and a giant (actually just a really tall man) who wields a war-hammer. These three characters serve to give the film a little more human characterization, given that Hawk remains largely defined by his obsession to have revenge. (For instance, Hawk himself is humorless, so the script has the cunning dwarf pull some fast ones on the bluff, none-too-witty giant.) 

Most sword and sorcery flicks depend either on the location of some magical talisman to defeat some menace or on the rescue of some innocent from a tyrant. HAWK follows the latter pattern, but this time the innocent is a mature priestess rather than a sexy princess, so there's no suggestion that the hero is ever going to find a replacement for his lost wife. Indeed, Hawk's only payoff for his heroic action is his reunion with his fellow war-buddies, some of whom perish in the course of the adventure. The saving of the Abbess does not change anything about the fantasy-world; it's just presented as the right thing for heroes to do. However, Hawk still has a better outcome than Voltan, for his disfigurement prevents him from continuing his line (or at least he makes that claim). So he adopts a son, one Drogo, whose only action in the film is the attempt to betray his adoptive father-- showing that Voltan was not exactly good father-material no matter where he got his offspring from. The film of course ends with Voltan's defeat-- though the unnamed sorcerer makes noises about reviving the warlord-- while Hawk and his surviving friend (the "giant") depart for further adventures.

The biggest surprise about all the fights between Hawk, Voltan and their respective allies is how little the "mind-sword" affects the plot, though it does set Hawk free at a vital moment. Director/co-scripter Terry Marcel doesn't really expand on any of the magical aspects of his world, least of all the unnamed sorceress who is in part responsible for the good guys' triumph. But I grade the movie's mythicity high because the script maintains an interesting parallel between Voltan's losing out on both his bride and the mind-stone, which lack puts him in his own private hell. Despite Palace's over-acting, the sibling rivalry gives this film more psychological content than one usually finds in the cinema's attempts at sword and sorcery. HAWK THE SLAYER can't touch a deeply mythopoeic film like 1985's LEGEND, but it represents a decent "stab" (so to speak) at the genre.


DANGER! DEATH RAY! (1967)

 


 





PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *sociological*


Though this boring Eurospy made for a better-than-average episode of MST3K, by itself DEATH RAY isn't nearly as exciting as the above poster makes it look.

The routine setup shows us a good mad scientist who invents a death-ray in the hope of advancing world peace. A spy-ring abducts the scientist, in the hope of forcing him into re-creating the weapon for their dastardly uses. It's up to the risibly named "Bart Fargo" (Gordon Scott) to save the world from the barely described evil spy organization.

Though Scott is suitably dashing, even he can't inject much interest into the rambling plot, which mostly consists of Fargo walking into various settings and pissing off locals so that he can beat them up and get info from them. This incidents are broken up with a few liaisons with beautiful women, no better or worse than a billion others. 

In addition to a bouncy musical score, which seems to be one of the few merits everyone agrees upon, I'm at least gratified that since the opening displays a death-ray test, the movie concludes with a duel between the hero's machine gun and the villain's big but unwieldly death-ray cannon. That's about it.

ALIEN RESURRECTION (1997)

 






PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *fair*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *drama*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *cosmological, sociological*

Though ALIEN RESURRECTION was the least successful of the "Ellen Ripley series" at the box office, director Jean-Pierre Jeunet and writer Joss Whedon put together a film far superior to ALIEN 3, albeit nowhere good enough to rate with ALIEN or ALIENS. Though Whedon leaves open the possibility that the reborn Ripley might have gone on to further exploits, the lack of direct cinematic sequels had the effect of giving the tortured heroine a "happy ending" of sorts. To date Weaver has not reprised the role except in a few video games, and RESURRECTION certainly brings her association with the Xenomorphs full circle.

Two hundred years pass following the events of ALIEN 3, in which Ripley and her Alien spawn perished together in a smelting furnace. I'm not sure why Whedon thought that such a long interval was necessary, given that Ripley was already alienated from the Earth-culture into which she was delivered at the onset of ALIENS. Was the interval needed for Earth-people to perfect a form of cloning so radical that it could clone new Aliens from the bio-matter left behind in the foundry? Moreover, for some reason the scientists-- who are still working for the same corporation that menaced Ripley in ALIEN 3-- couldn't separate the genetic material of Ripley from the genetic material of the Xenomorph inside her. This selective expertise results in Clone-Ripley-- who possesses many memories of the dead original-- being a hybrid of a human and an Alien. Thus Clone-Ripley has greater physical strength and an intuitive awareness of the Xenomorphs.

Clone-Ripley receives a deliverance of sorts when a gang of space mercenaries dock their ship with the scientists' own experimental vessel, dropping off a quantity of abducted humans in whom the technicians breed new Aliens. The mercenaries recall the raffish marines of ALIENS, even to the extent of having a synthetic member in their group, Call (Winona Ryder). When the captive Aliens break free and decimate the scientific team, Clone-Ripely convinces the mercenaries to help her destroy the vessel with the Aliens aboard. To further complicate things, the Alien whose genetic info was taken from Ripley's body cells is another Queen, though when the Queen gives birth, she spawns a human-Alien hybrid in whom the Alien aspects are dominant. For reasons I did not follow, this new being does not represent its real mother as its sire, but bonds with Ripley as its maternal unit. 

The convolutions of the Alien plot interested me less than Whedon's ability to give a little personality to the mercenaries, which I found as effective as the cannon fodder from the 1979 original. To be sure, there is one dull doll in the group: the aforementioned Call, played listlessly by Winona Ryder. But Ron Perlman and Michael Wincott provide some good moments, particularly the basketball duel between Clone-Ripley and Perlman's character.

Once again, since the Xenomorphs are nearly invulnerable, the plot-thrust once more consists of "get out and blow up the ship behind us." Jeunet's direction is more sensitive to the mythic potential of the Alien franchise, but RESURRECTION never quite brings the potential into the actual. In one scene, Clone-Ripley and her Xenomorph "son" are loosely intertwined, which may remind one of the perverse sexuality seen in the original 1979 film. But this level of resonance is not sustained, and so what we have is just a decent thriller, noteworthy largely for the redemption of Ripley, who's at least able to put the vile E.T.'s behind her and seek a new life.


ALIEN VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM (2007)

 


 




PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *drama*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *cosmological*

For once, the largely meaningless subtitle of a high-profile franchise film received meaning after the movie came out, for AVPR did indeed provide a "requiem" for this short crossover series by killing it dead. The previous film had only a few entertaining sequences, and its decision to bring the two ETs together on modern-day Earth was a mistake that had even worse results for the sequel. But at least it told its simple story with formulaic efficiency.

While there have been special-effects technicians who went on to other creative endeavors, the Brothers Sprouse may have been a textbook example of the almost forgotten Peter Principle, having been advanced to a level far beyond their capacity. I've seen various FX-people who made competent but unexceptional film directors, but the Sprouses couldn't tell a story to save their lives. 

For instance, it's more than a little important that the Predators' experiments with the Aliens lead to the creation of a combination of their species, a creature termed "the Predalien" by the film's marketing. This idea of the Aliens as genetically metamorphic was an idea thrown out by ALIEN RESURRECTION, and it was a very bad one in that it contradicts the biological conceit of the original ALIEN film, in which the ET is laying its progeny in its victims purely as a food-source, not as a gene-splicing endeavor. But the Sprouses couldn't make even a bad idea clear with their fuzzy direction and their overdependence on quick-cuts. 

I never saw AVPR on a large screen, so maybe a viewer could make more sense of events if they were on theatrically sized. But on DVD I could hardly see what was happening in the night-time scenes, of which there were far too many. I suspect that the prevalence of shadowy scenes may have something to do with someone's decision to shoot the film in Vancouver, for in the commentary the Sprouses complained about the recurrent raininess of their venue. But other filmmakers have managed to make competent films under arduous circumstances. The Sprouses aren't among them.

The script is equally at fault. At least in the previous film, a few characters had some ideas about what the rival races of extraterrestrials were doing on Earth. Here, the Predalien gets loose in rural Colorado, and is pursued by a noble Predator-- but the workaday humans have no idea what they're dealing with. In addition, none of them, least of all the ex-con viewpoint character, are any more interesting than the ciphers of a SYFY channel critter-film. 

Lacking good characters or effects that one can actually see, AVPR is a total washout.


HONOR ROLL #144, AUGUST 28

 "You got your Alien in my Predator," complains the so-called PREDALIEN.



"When you comin' back, WINONA RYDER?"



SILVIA SOLAR reveals her sunny personality.



Nobody could be more hawkish than the slayer known as JOHN TERRY.



Don't ask FRANCINE YORK if her squad goes around playing with dolls.



Thanks to PIERRE BRICE, this time Zorro stayed in Europe so he could cross paths with Maciste.







DARKMAN (1990)

 


 




PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *fair*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *psychological*

I had wondered if Sam Raimi's DARKMAN, with its over-the-top rendition of a face-shifting superhero, had received any inspiration from the Batman film-franchise. This may never be fully known, for though Raimi presented his "Darkman" script (in the form of a short story) to Universal Pictures roughly a year before the 1989 movie went into pre-production, the Batman property had been been cycling through development hell since 1983. Raimi has said that he'd wanted to do a "Shadow" film but he couldn't secure the rights. So it's possible that, being a comics fan, he thought he had as good a chance as anyone with the genre, given how poorly Hollywood had treated superhero-adjacent franchises from 1984 until 1989.

Had Raimi done a Shadow film, it seems likely that he would emphasizes the crusader's facility with disguises, given how large a part this stratagem plays in DARKMAN. Once he was no longer modeling his character on the pulp-hero, Raimi took further inspiration from the concept of the Phantom of the Opera. Unlike most of the movie versions, the Phantom from Gaston Leroux's 1910 novel is like the later Shadow a disguise-master. Given the character's disfigurement. he necessarily has to be able to don disguises just to interact with regular people in order to obtain the items he needs for his lair beneath the opera house. Whether Raimi read the source novel or not, he definitely crossbred the idea of a scarred "monster" with that of a crusader fighting crime with the help of disguises, though Darkman is only concerned with the crooks who caused his disfigurement. Since Darkman comes into being when ruthless gangsters blow up the laboratory of researcher Peyton Westlake, there might also be some inspiration from DC's Swamp Thing, who first appeared in comics in 1971 and in a live-action film in 1982.

So much for all of the inspirations for Darkman. But is his initial movie, the only outing to get a theatrical release, good in itself?

When I saw DARKMAN back in the day, I appreciated its hell-bent-for-leather style, but I didn't think Raimi made any his characters-- scientist Westlake (Liam Neeson), his girlfriend Julie (Frances McDormand), or Darkman's nemesis Robert Durant (Larry Drake)-- particularly interesting. It's certainly an impressive coincidence that Westlake happens to be researching new ways of creating artificial skin for grafting operations, and after being burned horribly by the gangsters, this is just the thing he needs to generate the disguises the hero needs to gain vengeance. But Raimi doesn't really come up with a rationale for the scientist's sudden ascension to the role of action-hero. After the burned scientist is admitted into a hospital, a doctor tells her subordinates about how the unidentified burn victims had had all of his nerve endings damaged, so that he can't feel pain. Okay, but that doesn't account for his apparent increases in strength (late in the film Westlake seizes a grown man and flings him like a toy) and in athleticism. In addition, Darkman is sometimes more monster than hero, being fully willing to torture one of Durant's thugs for information. 

While girlfriend Julie believes Westlake dead, smarmy land developer Louis Strack puts the moves on her. The viewer never sees Darkman tempted to murder the businessman, though in due time it's revealed that Strack is the man who hired Durant to do his dirty work, so Strack becomes part of the hero's campaign for vengeance. Though Raimi's script constantly sells Durant-- the enforcer who dominates the film-- as a ruthless criminal who projects the appearance of urbane wit, I found Drake unimpressive as a formidable villain.

The aborted romance of Neeson and McDormand provides the film's only dramatic element, and the actors carry these scenes off with creditable panache. But both the romantic and the adventure elements are fairly predictable, and since I never found the rationale of Darkman resonant, I for one was not looking forward to any revivals of the character, even in DTV movies.



GOLIATH AGAINST THE GIANTS (1961)

 


 





PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *sociological*

So finally here's a sword-and-sandal that takes place back in ancient Greece-- at least insofar as "the Acropolis" is mentioned in the prologue-- but do the writers give the hero a Greek name? No, he's "Goliath," despite having no similarity to the Biblical character. In fact, not only is this Goliath (Brad Harris) not especially tall, neither are the so-called "giants" with whom he fights at the film's end. 

There are, however, a couple of reptilian monsters bookending this film, putting the story firmly in the marvelous domain. To be sure, most of the film only shows Goliath performing uncanny feats of strength, there is one problematic moment. The hero falls off a cliff and into a crevice directly under the cliff, on which his "giant" enemies are standing. Goliath then lifts the cliff straight up and knocks the big guys off like tenpins-- a feat that ought to fall into Hercules-territory.

On to the story: Goliath is the entirely mortal leader of a group of soldiers from a city called Bayrath (Beirut?) He and his soldier buddies have finished a foreign campaign and are journeying back home for the first time in five years-- but not for a good rest, because they've also learned that the rightful ruler has been overthrown by a tyrant, Bokan (Fernando Rey). On the way back, they pick up a shapely blonde lady, Elea (Gloria Milland), and Goliath finds her more than a little attractive. However, their ship is whelmed by a sea monster, and though Goliath kills the monster, the voyagers-- principally Goliath, Elea and Goliath's faithful companion Namath-- are forced to swim to the nearest land.

Meanwhile, back in Bayrath, Bokan frets about the possible return of Goliath while he's busy exploiting the people, He gets some reassurance from his main squeeze, whose name I didn't catch but who may be the same as the character IMDB calls "Diamira." Bokan makes a dire allusion to a valley of "giants" to which he's consigned other enemies-- which is the first justification of the movie's title.

The good guys, unfortunately, have ended up in the domain of a group of hostile Amazons, and they try to take the intruders prisoner. Goliath escapes with Elea. Namath almost gets away by taking one Amazon, Daina, prisoner-- but when the other warriors threaten to riddle both of them with arrows, Namath lets her go. However, Daina switches allegiances because of the youth's chivalry. She locates Goliath and Elea tells them where Namath is being held, after which Goliath and Daina leave to rescue the youth. They do so and come back to the hideout to collect Elea, but she's ghosted them, walking off on her own. 

Goliath and his two allies journey to a friendly town in their own country and learn more about Bokan's depredations. Goliath then infiltrates Bokan's court but learns to his consternation that Elea is Bokan's ally, and that she joined their expedition to spy on the heroes. However, this problem is sorted out quickly. Once Goliath gains access to Elea, he learns that Bokan fed her a false story about Goliath having killed all her relatives, when in fact Bokan done the deed. For her part she left off her spy-games because she was falling in love with the burly hero. Soldiers interrupt the conversation, and as Goliath flees he passes through the dungeon, where he kills a gorilla and keeps a spiked wheel from eviscerating one of Bokan's captives.

Elea turns on Bokan and is sentenced to execution by yet another of those spiky death-devices. Goliath rescues her, which leads to a major battle and the overthrow of Bokan. (I confess I lost track of Namath and Daina in this part.) A secondary villain abducts Elea and unwisely takes her to the Valley of the Giants, where he's slain by what look like spear-wielding cavemen. Goliath shows up and beats all the pseudo-giants, after which he and Elea must flee the second of the film's reptile monsters. They return to Bayrath and live happily ever after.

This is just a decent but unexceptional peplum, and though Brad Harris would go on to star in many Euro-films, here he shows none of his trademark charm, probably because this was his first real movie-role. 

THE DARK POWER (1985)

 



PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTIONS: *metaphysical*


The most interesting thing about writer-director Phil Smoot's THE DARK POWER-- apart from its being one of the last films of B-western hero Lash LaRue-- is that though it cribs from Sam Raimi's 1981 cult success THE EVIL DEAD, it also anticipates the way that franchise would later develop.

Both films are set in isolated rural areas, and provide the audience with a group of irritating young protagonists who occupy a rural house and are promptly victimized by undead predators. However, though LaRue doesn't have as much screen time as the annoying teenagers, in real life he served as one of the film's producers. Thus, while the sixty-something actor certainly knew he wasn't likely to make any significant comeback by whirling the whip he wielded in old B-westerns, the storyline places more emphasis on the victory of his character Ranger Girard over the horrific menaces.

At least Smoot's concept for the horrors isn't a rip-off of Raimi's Sumerian demons. According to the script's heavy exposition-scenes, one of the small-town locals, name of Cody, has for years been guarding against the return of "the Toltecs"-- a quartet of Mexican sorcerers who migrated to the United States back in pre-Columbian times, in order to bury themselves in the ground and someday rise as super-powerful zombies. The exposition doesn't tell us why they wanted to do this, but it's a suitably creepy idea-- unfortunately not pulled off by the sub-par makeup and outfits of the Indian sorcerers.

Girard has a few scenes at the beginning, wielding his whip against malicious dogs, and later telling one of the teens that the deceased Cody gave him the whip, which may have magical efficacy since it was made from materials taken from "the four corners of the world." Again, there's a little metaphysical potential in this, since American Indians made much of the potency of the number four, but the script doesn't exploit this.

There are no surprises after that: the zombie-like Toltecs rise from the earth, wielding weapons like tomahawks, knives, and even a bow-and-arrow. (Would a bowstring, buried under earth for centuries, still hold together?) They make their way to the cabin and attack the obnoxious teens amid a lot of Raimi-imitating zoom-shots, none of which are effective.  Ranger Girard shows up at the climax and whales the hell out of the undead Toltecs, and even engages one in a whip-vs. whip battle before snapping off the zombie's head. That said, some of the teen girls kill at least two of the zombies with artifacts in their cabin, so Girard doesn't get all the fun.

I doubt that Raimi saw this film. However, it's an interesting coincidence that two years later, when he brought forth a higher-budgeted sequel to his first film, he took the emphasis off of the "evil dead" and placed it squarely upon the ballsy character of Ash Williams, who has generally dominated the franchise ever since. For what it's worth, Ranger Girard got there first.

ACE DRUMMOND (1936)

 




PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTIONS: *sociological*

I link these two films simply because both are marginally "science fiction" (ergo, of the "marvelous" phenomenality) due to their inclusion of one of the 1930s favorite gimmicks, the "death ray," used in both films to bring down airplanes. If either film had not used a death ray, however, ACE DRUMMOND would place in my "uncanny" category while Q PLANES placed in the "atypical."

DRUMMOND, directed by both Ford Beebe and Clifford Smith, adapts the short-lived ACE DRUMMOND comic strip of the late 1930s. It's a reasonably efficient adventure-serial, in which Drummond, "G-man of the skies," investigates sinister doings in Mongolia, accompanied by a comic sidekick, a little boy-kid and a young woman looking for her archaeologist father. The scientist has been kidnapped by a mystery mastermind, "The Dragon," who's also developing a death ray with which he can zap airplanes, but the villain's main goal seems to be to force the archaeologist to disclose the location of a fabulous "mountain of jade." (One assumes that building death rays is expensive business.)

Drummond's adventures follow the roughly "sociological" pattern of the period's "soldier-of-fortune" stories, in that at times the American hero must navigate the customs of the Mongolian natives: in fact, the serial's first chapter is entitled "Where East Meets West." However, DRUMMOND doesn't develop interesting from the potential clash of cultures. The most one can say is that if DRUMMOND doesn't capture any of the allure of exotic cultures, as does 1940's THE DRUMS OF FU MANCHU, at least DRUMMOND doesn't go the other way and give us bad Asian stereotypes, as does 1943's BATMAN serial. Admittedly most of the "Asians" are played by Caucasian actors, notably Lon Chaney Jr before he rose to starring status.

Unlike HAWK OF THE WILDERNESS, a serial I rated as "atypical" because it lacked any metaphenomenal content, DRUMMOND does have a couple of "uncanny" devices, as the Dragon springs on the hero a few unusual gas-attacks and, most notably, the Old Room-with-the-Crushing-Walls Trick. But as with the death-ray, these don't occupy a lot of time and most of the action is efficient but mundane. The villain is never seen in costume like some of the more noteworthy serial villains.

GOLDEN TEMPLE AMAZONS (1986)

 


 






PHENOMENALITY: *uncanny*
MYTHICITY: *poor*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *adventure*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTION: *sociological*


Compared to the majority of Jesus Franco films I've seen, this throwback to old Tarzan films-- albeit with an increase of nudity and sadism-- distinguishes itself in that it actually has a plot, however simple.

Like other European jungle-girls of the period, Liana (Analia Ivars, billed as "Joan Virly") wears savage attire that allows the lubricious viewer a few peeks at her secondary sex characteristics, though not much more. Liana's origin actually has some broad similarity to that of the quintessential jungle-girl Sheena, in that both girls lose their parental figures to violence and are raised by African tribesmen, which apparently accounts for their aggressive tendencies. However, whereas Sheena's dad is a noble explorer killed for no good reason, Liana's is murdered for having stolen nuggets of gold from the sacred caves of the local chapter of the Blonde White Amazons.

From what one sees in the opening scenes, Liana enjoys a stress-free existence, bumming around the jungle with friendly elephants and chimps. However, once she's reminded that she witnessed her father's (rather timely) death, she becomes hot to gain vengeance on the Amazons and their evil leader Uruck (William Berger). She and her buddies-- a chimp and a comedy relief fat guy-- joins a European expedition that just happens to be going to the same legendary "golden temple." No tolerance for the Amazons' right to protect their own territory, I guess.

Since Franco's rarely interested in cinematic fight-choreography, the whole expedition is captured by the Amazons pretty easily. Evil Uruck, who was directly responsible for having Liana's father killed, decides that he'd like to make the jungle waif his queen. However, first Liana has to fight the current queen Rena (Eva Leon) for that privilege, which Liana is glad to do. Liana wins the fight-- better than average for Franco-- but she refuses Uruck and remains a prisoner. While Uruck plots Liana's demise, he kills time by allowing Rena to torture two of the Europeans. The torture-scene is actually rather imaginative: Rena positions two victims, bound back to back, within a field of pointed stakes and then hits both of them with her whip. The game is to see which of the two victims will weaken first, so that he or she accidentally precipitates the other captive onto the stakes. Since Franco isn't a particularly imaginative filmmaker, I tend to wonder if he stole the idea from Sade or some more creative individual.

Almost needless to say, Liana's chimp helps the heroine escape for the low-energy finish. After Uruck's death, Liana callously expels the Amazons from their own mountain, as if she still feels herself aggrieved for the raids both she and her father made on the Amazon domain. This jungle-film doesn't need any "exploitative white guys," since the heroine fills in that blank all by herself.


THE GIANT BEHEMOTH (1959)

 



PHENOMENALITY: *marvelous*
MYTHICITY: *fair*
FRYEAN MYTHOS: *drama*
CAMPBELLIAN FUNCTIONS: *cosmological, sociological*


1959's BEHEMOTH--THE SEA MONSTER, as the film was originally titled, was Eugene Lourie's return (albeit as co-director with Douglas Hickox) to the giant-monster genre he helped birth in America, THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS.

In my review of BEAST, I noted that its script strenuously avoided placing any bad light on the nuclear technology developed in the United States. Perhaps because BEHEMOTH was initiated by an English production company, the film opens by stating the dangers of nuclear-waste pollution, resulting in schools of dead fish being washed up on English shores.  As if to make this more adversarial viewpoint go down more smoothly in the States, this marine peril is forecast by two leading scientists: Karnes, a young American, and Bickford, an older Englishman. The film even starts with a warning note, as the film's narrator shows men in radiation suits walking eerily through a nuclear test-site.

Religious motifs are worked into the story at an early point: the titular behemoth comes ashore in Cornwall with all the dead fish, and kills a Cornish fisherman with its radiation.  Before the man dies he gives the beast its name, drawing on the Bible. Interestingly, at his funeral the officiating priest invokes the topic of the Biblical Behemoth in connection with Job. It may be worth remembering that in the Book of Job that "upright man" is arbitrarily cursed by God.  This is not a point that the priest dwells upon, but it is one relevant to the notion of nuclear devastation as a figurative "wrath of God."
Like BEAST and many films of similar stripe, BEHEMOTH avoids showing the monster in its earliest sequences.

There are some aspects of the film's narrative that suggest that Lourie or other filmmakers had screened GODZILLA, and that in response they sought to make the Behemoth more mythic in an European sense-- and not only because of the Biblical references.  The monster "paleosaurus," unlike the 20,000 fathoms-fiend, has been mutated by the atomic bomb that woke him, so that where he once possessed only a simple biological ability to discharge electric shocks, now he can emit energy-waves laced with radiation. The image isn't as dramatic as Godzilla's fire-breath, but the extra power means that the Behemoth is able to put up a pretty good fight against the armies of menwhen it invades London, thus making this a "combative drama."  The creature even has a contest with a group of electrical towers (see above), a scene which somewhat resembling Godzilla's original contention with an electrical barrier.  But even saying all this, once the Behemoth begins its rampage it loses most of the mythic resonances suggested by the early parts of the film. It soon becomes, unlike Godzilla, just a big quarrelsome animal.  Even Karnes and Bickford, critical of the consequences of nuclear brinksmanship, just want to see the big beast snuffed.

Only BEHEMOTH's conclusion returns to the tone of the opening moments.  Unlike the basically optimistic endings of most American big-monster flicks, BEHEMOTH ends with the warning that the whole beastly process may begin all over again-- possibly yet another story-trope cadged from the monsterpiece known as GODZILLA.