The Face of Another (1966)

A man loses his face in an industrial accident, and his outlook and relationships are profoundly affected. His psychologist offers to create a lifelike mask, in effect a new identity.

The Face of Another is a horror film with an art house heart. It is an exploration of the self, who you are, how you are perceived, and how you believe you are. The sets of the Doctor’s laboratory are abstract, stripped down to the basic elements, and the dialog is laden with symbolism. The open question is will the mask allow Mr. Okuyama to become himself again and re-enter society or will he become what the mask wants him to be. Trippy stuff.

Emboldened by the mask, he tells his wife he is going on a business trip, and rents an apartment as his new identity. His behavior becomes more troubling.

The story essentially revolves around three characters: Mr. Okuyama, his estranged wife, and his doctor. There are, however, curious characters in the periphery. The Doctor’s nurse, a girl known only as “Yo-Yo Girl”, and the enigmatic “Girl with Scar”. They add texture to the narrative without distracting from it, and their purpose in the story is open for debate.

The Face of Another leaves me with questions. Questions I won’t explore here lest I spoil or influence interpretation. I doubt I will watch it again, but I think it will stick with me for a while. AMRU 3.5.

Blood and Black Lace (1964)

A model at a haute couture fashion house is murdered by a man with a creepily hidden face. When her diary is discovered, the models who take it become the next target of the hidden killer.

Mario Bava's Blood and Black Lace is an early example of the Italian Giallo genre of slasher thrillers, perhaps the first. They tend to focus more on atmosphere and imagery rather than story or character. And they seldom delve into the supernatural and thus fall partially outside of my definition of Horror.

There are plenty of suspects and a bit of a reveal at the end, but this isn’t a who-done-it. It’s a film for people who likes to see great cinematography, excellent sets, and pretty women brutally murdered. And it’s the sexualization of murder I cannot get on board with. Just not my thing. We don’t get to like the victims, don’t get to hate them. We just see them die. It's purely visual.

My problem with Blood and Black Lace, and Giallo in general, is that I feel like I am trying to watch a different film than the one on screen. I want there to be more story, better developed characters, smarter in general, and therefore disappointed. This is entirely a Me problem. With all that said, it wasn’t a hard film to watch. Enough action and detail to keep you interested, and it does look stunning. AMRU 3.

Pitfall (1948)

Middle-aged insurance man Forbes (Dick Powell) is tired of his predictable life. He crosses paths with Mona, a pretty young woman who’s embezzling boyfriend lavished her with gifts, and starts an ill conceived relationship. Unfortunately the company PI (Raymond Burr) already called dibs.

The put-upon wife is played by Jane Wyatt, better known as the mom in Father Knows Best. I’ve never seen an episode. Raymond Burr is compellingly despicable as Mona’s unwanted admirer. He was said to be a nice guy in real life. Go figure.

Lizabeth Scott plays the pretty Mona. She seemed something of a Veronica Lake type. The former understudy of Tallulah Bankhead, it is said she was the model for Eve from All About. Ambitious and difficult, she was often derided for her talent, but her understated performance worked fine here. Producer boyfriends and better roles dried up once north of 30, so she rounded out her career on television.

Independently produced, Pitfall has a snappy script and pretty good performances. It skirted some Hays code conventions that studio productions might not have been able to. Nothing too scandalous, though. This is pretty much still a by-the-books 40’s noir.

Honestly, this won’t be a film that sticks with me. It is a good but not great film, but I had to get the bad taste of that last one out of my mouth. It has some good dialog and a few interesting moments, and is worth a watch. AMRU 3.5.

Tommy: “Dad was a boxer in college!”
Doctor: “I think he was wise to go into insurance.”

Alphaville (1965)

A reporter arrives in Alphaville from the “Outer Countries”, looking for Professor Von Braun and asking a lot of questions. Slowly he learns the true nature of Alphaville and Alpha 60, even if little of it makes much sense to the viewer.

Ostensibly this is Film-Noir, but it reads like a parody of the genre. Our protagonist behaves like a jerk, slapping people, acting misogynistic, and getting into random violence and gun play. I know, but I mean inappropriately so. I sense the director (Jean-Luc Godard) is making a statement about the hard-boiled detective trope and American cinema in general, and it is not a favorable one. Every adherence to the genre felt like an exaggeration to point out its absurdity.

But calling it science fiction is a taller order. It is said to be set in a dystopian future where computers control everyone’s thoughts, but there was no attempt to camouflage present era Paris. 1960’s locations, cars, and other technology are plainly used. Again, I feel the intent of the director. While real sci-fi explores modern society using a fanciful story and out-of-this-world setting, here the director presents his story with nothing more than sci-fi lip service. It’s a dystopian future, and it is today. The Alpha 60 computer is the only technology presented, and it seemed out of place in the world presented.

The unpleasant voice of Alpha 60 was recorded by a man with his voice box removed due to cancer. But this is not by far the most unpleasant aspect. The nonsensical dialog gave it a pretentious air and the herky-jerky editing made it hard to follow the action, principally the fight scenes. And occasionally scenes go reverse negative, because that’s artsy.

I understand that seamful editing was a French New Wave thing, to call attention to the existence of the film. An Intention of Disbelief, if you will. And perhaps the noir genre was more than a little dated by 1965, and deserved criticism. But Alphaville is confoundingly respected in both genres, and I don’t believe it respects them.

The story is tedious and absurd, the edits abrupt and disjointed, the dialog utterly nonsensical, and the character behavior is ridiculous. This was all a conscious decision by the director, but that doesn’t make it an easier watch. If you think French cinema is pompous and pretentious, I present to you exhibit Alpha. AMRU 2.

“Yes, I am afraid of death. But for a humble secret agent, it's an everyday thing, like whiskey. And I've been drinking all my life.”

The Monster that Challenged the World (1957)

A minor earthquake shakes California’s Salton Sea and adjacent Navy base. Shortly thereafter some sailors go strangely missing. I wonder if some prehistoric mollusks were released by the earthquake and affected by radiation. It’s a reasonable hypothesis.

The Salton Sea is a pretty interesting place. An inland saltwater sea was created by accident, became a tourist attraction, then dried up. At the time of this film it was a tourist hot spot and apparently had a naval base.

Anyhow, the navy investigates, discovers the creatures (note, many of them), and fights them with their latest weapons: sticks. And fire extinguishers. Whatever’s handy. The story is essentially an aquatic version of Them! (1954), in that a population of somewhat larger than man-sized creatures, created by radiation, must be destroyed by the military authority, before they escape to (ahem) challenge the world. And if you swap 1950’s radiation with general scientific hubris, some of the Jurassic Park films fit this mold pretty well.

Leading the fight is Commander Twillinger, played by Tim Holt. Old friends will remember him from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948). He was in a bunch of films, mostly westerns, before walking away from Hollywood. He returned after five years for this film then two more spread out over the next fourteen, before retiring for good. Two years after that, bone cancer would take his life. He was 54. So it goes.

The Monster that Challenged the World is unoriginal, low budget, silly nonsense. But despite that, it works. The monsters looked pretty good, and many background characters were fully flushed out. Specifically, some quirky scientists and especially map guy Lewis Clark Dobbs. The script gave them something to do and the actors did it. Not saying I am eager for a rewatch, but it deserves every bit of AMRU 3. But, dude, the ax was right there!

Easy Virtue (1927)

Larita Filton, embroiled in a scandalous divorce, flees to the south of France to avoid the press. There she meets and falls for the young John Whittaker. When back in England and polite society, her new in-laws are suspicious of her past.

Ranked by IMDb as Hitchcock’s fourth worst film, it is a tedious and sometimes visually confusing mess. It does not help that my copy is a poor transfer. The film was thin with very poor contrast, and the score was damaged along with it. While a fully restored edition would have been more pleasant to watch, It would not have saved the film.

This is not to say there weren’t a few creative elements. A long shot of a tennis court starts through a tennis racket then progresses to the first volley. Another scene wordlessly communicates important information by watching the reaction of a telephone operator who is listening in on the phone call. Hitchcock is experimenting in a way we see much more of later in his career.

Based on a Noel Coward play, there is a 2008 version that didn’t fare much better. Prior to this the only Coward adapted film I have seen is 1933’s Cavalcade, which was dull as dishwater. I don’t know much about Coward and theater in general, but it appears he struck the zeitgeist of his time but his works became very dated very quickly. But I’ll leave that to someone’s Theater Philistine blog to explore.

As mentioned, Easy Virtue is ranked pretty low on Hitchcock’s CV, with the bottom three coming up if I continue chronologically. We will see what happens there. But as for this one, I found the characters hard to engage with, some of the action confusing, and the story tedious. But if you must watch it, find a much better copy. AMRU 2.

The Tomb of Ligeia (1964)

A creepy old guy (Vincent Price) laments the death of his wife, The Lady Ligeia (Elizabeth Shepherd). He thinks she isn’t really dead because of something she said, but buries her anyhow. When he meets The Lady Rowena (Elizabeth Shepherd), he mistakes her for his dead wife and treats her terribly. Will love bloom? Anyhow, after the wedding, the dead wife starts to complicate things.

Roger Corman directed eight Edgar Allen Poe adaptations in the early 1960’s and this was the most expensive, elaborate, and the last. It was the only one not to be filmed entirely on a soundstage. The shoot went long because of the British crew’s tea obsession. This is my thirteenth Price film so far, which is fewer than I would have expected.

I’ve dinged Corman over his focus on budget and profit over quality, but a great many industry people credit him with giving them their start and an opportunity to learn the craft. I can’t discount that. But I can say I don’t care much for the films he produces. And boy does he produce. He has over 440 feature film producer credits, including four in pre-production. But he wasn’t credited as producer on this one. A Brit was so he could earn a British subsidy.

As for The Tomb of Ligeia, it is what it is. The sets are on par with Hammer, the period dialog is a bit overdone, and the story, well, it is what it is. It will hold your interest but not capture your imagination. AMRU 3. Being a little generous, for Vincent’s benefit.