Curse of the Crimson Alter

Curse of the Crimson Alter

1968

Director- Vernon Sewell

Cast- Christopher Lee, Borris Karloff, Barbara Steele, Mark Eden, Michael Gough, Virginia Wetherell, Rupert Davies

            

      So the first thing you notice is Holy Crap Look at That Cast! Boris Karloff, Christopher Lee and Barbara Steele, all horror legends in their own right, sharing the screen together! And then as an added bonus, Hammer stars Michael Gough and Rupert Davies to boot! How can this go wrong? Well to be honest, this stellar cast is not utilized to full effect and the movie doesn’t live up to its potential. That is not to say that it doesn’t have some things to love.

           

   

  Robert  (Mark Eden) is an antique dealer who is looking for his missing brother, who was procuring antiques for him in the quaint old village of Greymarsh. Now, we the viewer know, from the start of the film, that his brother met his end at the hands of an ancient witch (Barbara Steele) but Robert doesn’t know that.

           

      Upon reaching Greymarsh, he meets the town’s aristocratic land lord (Christopher Lee) and the town elder and resident folklorist (Karloff). Robert finds out that the town' history includes  an ancient witch, who was burned a few hundred years ago. Since then, her spirit has taken revenge on the ancestors of those who killed her.

            

      The film was obviously influenced by, or was trying to pander to, the hippie culture of the day. References to mind altering drugs and a drunken, hedonistic party with barely veiled sexuality, and some psychedelic visuals are all present. However, the film doesn’t really push these things far enough to make any real impact on the film and are more of a distraction.

            

      Seeing Lee and Karloff is always a treat and seeing them share several scenes together is a reward in itself. The real attraction though is Barbara Steele. Her witch is green skinned and horned, like a Ray Harryhausen creature come to life. I could have used a whole movie just of her.

           

The Love Witch

 The Love Witch

2016

Director- Anna Biller

Cast- Samantha Robinson, Gian Keys, Laura Waddell, Jeffrey Vincent Parise, Jared Sanford, Robert Seeley, Jennifer Ingrum, Clive Ashborn, Stephen Wozniak, Elle Evans, Fair Micaela Griffin, April Showers

            

     Elaine has serious man troubles. She wants more than anything to have true love and a husband. She has created, in her mind, a Prince Charming fantasy. The problem is that she can’t seem to keep a man, so she turns to witchcraft. She devotes her time to learning sex magic and brewing love potions. The movie begins with her relocating from San Francisco to a small town after she killed a would be lover with a potion.

           

     Elaine doesn’t learn her lesson and she continues her search for love, drugging the men with psychedelics and indulging their sexual fantasies in order to seduce them. The problem is, her magic is too potent and the relationships always end in disaster.

            

    The first thing you’ll notice about the film is how it looks. The director, Anna Biller took great pains to create a period look. The film doesn’t take place in the 60’s but it looks very much like it was made then. The lighting, make up, wardrobe, camera angles, lighting, filters, even being shot on film rather than digitally , all contribute to this feeling of watching a higher end Hammer film. The film is worth watching a second time just to soak in the look of it.

            

     I’ve seen the film categorized as a comedy but I just don’t get it. I think the camp 60’s look maybe keeps some folks from taking it completely seriously, but its every bit a tragedy. I think the closest analog to me is American Psycho (the movie not the book).

Elaine (like Patrick Bateman) lives in a series of fantasies in her head. Whereas Patrick Bateman lives in a male fantasy where he is the star of his own porno, Elaine lives in a female fairy tale where a man will sweep her off her feet. Likewise, both Patrick and Elaine are utterly incapable of empathy. Elaine is never genuine when she is with a man. She is always playing a character, the character that she thinks the man wants her to play. Christian Bale’s Patrick Bateman had an immaculate, utterly constructed appearance. Elaine is likewise immaculate. Her hair and make-up are always on point; eye shadow bold, lip stick glossy, posture seductively poised. She is glamorous like a starlet from a bygone Hollywood heyday. And if you think about the origins of the word glamour, this is appropriate. She wears a mask and never takes it off. Some of the more charming scenes in the movie is when Elaine’s mask slips, ever so briefly, as in one scene where is stabbing her fork into a piece of cake, trying to cope with stress.

            

   

    To be clear, Elaine is not vacant. She is actually plagued with loneliness and doubt. She believes that men want a vacant sex doll, so she forces herself be the that way. Elaine wants love and wants a man to love her for herself but refuses to be herself. This conflict of expectations and messages is a common theme throughout the film. Just as she creates an unrealistic idea of herself, she creates an unrealistic idea for the men in her life. Her love potions turn them into utterly devoted slaves who would do anything for her and this only serves to disgust her. Elaine’s coven likewise dishes out conflicting advice, telling two young girls that they must be powerful and independent while at the same time telling them that they must turn themselves into sex dolls with the rationale that they can use their sexuality to gain power over men.

            

    Feminine power, sexuality, fantasy and self-image are all themes explored over and again in the film. Using a witch and witchcraft to explore these themes makes perfect sense. Throughout history women (some real witches, most not) have been persecuted for witchcraft.  Witchcraft and femininity are interconnected.  Witches have received very different portrayals in fiction in general and movies in particular. The 1960s and early 70s were the heyday of witch cult movies and a lot of them came with a fair dose of sex and nudity. The witch is a symbol of terror but also a symbol of eroticism. Sex and death, all rolled into one (usually female) image.

            

     Samantha Robinson does a great job of playing Elaine. She portrays the perfect borderline personality disorder. There is a stereotype joke about borderlines; “I hate you, don’t leave me. I love you, I’ll kill you.” Samantha’s Elaine encapsulates this paradox perfectly. She is a killer. But rather than using the implements of a slasher film she uses love, smothers them in love, and immerses the men so deeply in love that they can’t take it. Robinson was only in her early 20s when the film was made but she showed a remarkable maturity in her ability to capture this.

            

    This is not a scary film, not in the usual sense of horror. It is a tragedy that uses the imagery of a horror film. It is study of a complex,lonely character but it’s also very fun, which I suppose is a paradox. Samantha Robinson looks so glamorous that just seeing her on the screen is a reward in itself and the period look is equally rewarding. Rather than these being the sugar that helps the medicine go down, I’d say more it creates a tasty candy coating that hides the much more substantial meal that awaits you.

 

Drive Angry

Drive Angry

2011

Director- Patrick Lussier

Cast- Nicolas Cage, Amber Heard, William Fichtner, Billy Burke, Tom Atkins, David Morse, Charlotte Ross, Christa Campbell, Katy Mixon, Pruitt Taylor Vince

            Milton (Nic Cage) has just escaped from Hell and is trying to rescue his infant granddaughter from the clutches of a Satanic cult that means to use her for a sacrifice. He enlists the help of Piper, a bad girl who seems to be pretty much on the highway to hell herself (played by vixen Amber Heard). Along the way they are chased by “The Accountant”(William Fitchner) whose job is to round up escapees from the infernal regions.

            This movie is pure entertainment and not meant to scare or be taken seriously. It feels more like a Robert Rodriguez film than a horror movie. In place of chills you get some decent gore and lots of gratuitous nudity, which is, I guess, a fair trade. Although its superficially a car chase film, I can’t really call it that as the car crashes are so outlandish they are obviously CGI. It’s more like a trip through the South with occasional headshots and boobs.

            The movie is helped by a strong cast. William Fitchner, Tom Atkins and David Morse are all genre veterans. Also, of a note is a really nice musical score by Michael Wandmacher. The film was written, directed, and edited by Patrick Lussier who has worked on a ton of horror movies so you can trust you are getting a competently put together film.

            Don’t watch it if you are wanting something somber and scary. However, if you are looking for a nice companion piece to, say, Demon Knight, this movie will provide an entertaining, fun, distraction.

Eyes of Fire

 Eyes of Fire

1983

Director- Avery Crounse

Cast- Dennis Lipscomb, Karlene Crockett, Guy Boyd, Rebecca Stanley, Sally Klein, Kerry Sherman

            In colonial America, a family has to flee persecution into Shawnee indian territory. While the father was away, the mother was having an affair with a less than holy preacher, Will Smyth. Will also has with him a companion, Leah, who seems insane but also seems to have some special gifts. When the father, Marion, returns, he gets news of his wife’s infidelity and tracks them down. Surrounded by Shawnee, Marion leads them into a valley that the Shawnee seem to be scared of.

            Though they thought the valley was uninhabited they find evidenced of that they are not alone. The devil lives in the valley and is served by a group of wildlings that seem to be able to vanish at will. They capture people’s spirits in trees and generally harass the refugee colonists. The group welcomes into their midst a little girl that seems to have been left for them as a present. Leah, though, is having disturbing visions telling her that all is not as it seems. She tries to keep the evil forces at bay as those around her are killed or driven mad.

            This is an unusual film combining elements of folk horror with the American west. The narrative is straightforward but is told with surreal, sometimes disjointed, visuals.  The nature of things is never explicitly spelled out. Is Leah a witch? Psychic? Something else? It’s not the kind of movie that you can watch again and again. However, it does  provide a unique, often dreamlike, experience.

 

Something Wicked This Way Comes

Something Wicked This Way Comes

1983

Director- Jack Clayton

Cast- Vidal Peterson, Shawn Carson, Jason Robards, Jonathan Pryce, Royal Dano, Mary Grace Canfield, Diane Ladd, Pam Grier, Angelo Rossitto

      

      This movie, adapted for the screen by Ray Bradbury from his own book is surprisingly dark for a Disney film. The 2000s saw a big push to market kid friendly fantasy films, motivated mainly by the success of the Harry Potter franchise, but the 1980s saw several good fantasy films that were superficially aimed at kids but were also very mature and dark. Labyrinth, The Dark Crystal, The Black Cauldron and Time Bandits are probably the best examples. Something Wicked this Way Comes isn’t as good as those films (probably owing to problems in its production) but is definitely darker than those other films and has some scary memorable moments.

         

    It centers on two young boys, Will Holloway and Jim Nightshade (how’s that for a name). Jim’s father left him years ago and Will’s father (played by Jason Robards) is much too old to be a young boy’s father. They are best friends and do everything together. One dark October night a carnival comes to town led by the evil Mr. Dark (played by a young Jonathan Pryce, who would have many villainous roles later in life, most recently as the High Sparrow in Game of Thrones). The carnival lures people in and transforms them by granting their deepest wishes (often rather ironically).  Will’s father, who is the town librarian, discovers the carnival has been to the town before, many years ago, and tragedy followed its visit.

          

    Mr. Dark is an obvious Satanic figure and the analogy is spelled out in the movie. “It seems they destroy people by granting their dearest wishes, as has been the way of the Devil, since God created the world.” Mr. Dark has a band of followers as well; the exotic Dust Witch (played by the beautiful Pam Grier), Mr. Cooger, who is made younger or older by a magical carousel so that he can wreak havoc, a little person (played by Angelo Rossitto who you may recognize as the smaller half of Master Blaster in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome )and others. The carnival travels the world, feeding off of people’s misery and their unfulfilled desires.

           

   The story plays on two themes. First is the pervasive nature of evil as it is able to get a foothold in so many people through their unfulfilled desires. Second is the eternal nature of evil shown in the fact that carnival has been around so long and continues to return. The film is not a deep meditation on evil, but it is a surprising one.

 

 

The Hearse

The Hearse

1980

Director- George Bowers

Cast- Trish Van Devere, Joseph Cotton, David Gautreaux, Donald Hotton, Med Flory

           

   Despite the name, this is not another movie about a killer car. The titular hearse, rather than being the antagonist is simply a creepy plot device.

            Jane (Trish Van Devere, best known to horror fans from The Changeling) is a big city girl trying to escape her old life and move into a house she inherited from her deceased aunt. However, her dream of small town relaxation is not to be. Not only do the townsfolk not welcome her, some are downright hostile. In addition she is visited with visions of her dead aunt and close calls with a hearse driven by a sinister looking chauffer.

            Reading her aunt’s diary, Jane finds out that her aunt had fallen in love with a Satanist and married him. Apparently Satanic rituals had taken place in the home and Jane assumes this is the cause of her cold reception from the townsfolk.

            She begins to have increasingly realistic nightmares, one in which she is carried away by the hearse. The only thing helping her preserve her sanity is a budding relationship with a too-good-to-be-true gentleman, Tom, who is not bothered in the least by all the talk of devil worship. She of course falls in love with him. I’ll give you three guesses who he really is and the first two don’t count.

            The movie is not just typical of low budget horror movies from the late 70s to early 80s, it’s almost the blueprint. It has every device; the POV stalker peering through the window, the rude townsfolk, the phone line that goes dead. The lighting, especially the outdoor lighting, is almost nonexistent.  The musical score even sounds like a hundred other films. So given all that, why watch the it? Despite its utter typicalness the film does maintain a consistent sense of dread. Also, despite some predictable plot twists, it’s not clear until the end of the film how, or if, the heroine will overcome her small town Satanic nightmare.

Exorcism (Paul Naschy)

 

Exorcism

1975

Director- Juan Bosch

Cast- Paul Naschy, Maria Perschy, Maria Kosti,   Mercedes Molina (as Grace Mills)

From Spain

            Not to be confused the with the Jess Franco movie of the same name, which came out around the same time. Given that this movie came out a few years after the Exorcist, it would be tempting to label it as an Exorcist rip off, but the only thing the movies have in common is a climactic battle between a priest and a possessed victim.

            Starring Spanish horror legend Paul Naschy, this is a murder mystery involving a young girl who has been dabbling with a Satanic cult. Like other Italian and Spanish horror films of this time, the movie is more fun than a lot of American films.  It gets to the point quicker ups the sensationalism.

            Paul Naschy is (as always) good as well as Mercedes Molina as the possessed girl.  The possession doesn’t become obvious until near the end of the film, which is too bad because the make-up (especially the milky, marbled eyes) was pretty good.

            Compared to most of the other exorcism movies out there, this one isn’t very scary. The possession almost takes backseat to the murder storyline. So why watch it? Because it has Paul Naschy! You should always take the chance to watch Paul at work, especially when he is out of his trademark wolfman make-up.

 

The Devil in Miss Jones Saga

 

The Devil in Miss Jones

            

    Not to be confused with the 1943 comedy The Devil and Miss Jones, this was a series of mostly unrelated films that were quite important in the porn world of the 70s and 80s and also achieved a significant degree of pop culture awareness in that same era.

            

   Art and porn, when placed on extreme ends, are easy to tell apart. No one is going to confuse Michelangelo’s David with porn any more than they would confuse Buttslammers with art. However, the closer to the center you get, the harder it is tell the two apart. Many big budget Hollywood films have centered on sex and brought in huge audiences. Often the only difference between art and porn is visible penetration and even that line gets blurred with certain films featuring what is colloquially known as “unsimulated sex”.

            

   In the 70s and 80s many exploitation films featured nudity and sex in gratuitous proportions and were available to one and all. Some of these films were even released in multiple versions with penetrative sex in the versions marketed for certain audiences. Jess Franco’s career features several examples of this.

            

    There was also a pop culture interest in porn that really doesn’t exist today, even though porn is more easily accessible and consumed by millions more people. These films were made before digital downloads and the internet, before every house had cable and before home movie libraries were common. Especially in the case of the first film, the only way to see it was to go to a theatre. I suppose its rarity generated interest.

            

     The Devil in Miss Jones 1 and 2 were pretty big budget films, relatively speaking, featuring production values that were on par with any of Hollywood’s better B-movies. The first installment was particularly successful. The 3^rd and 4^th films, while not as influential on pop culture, were influential on porn culture.  Other installments, both sequels and reboots, would come along several years later, but none were as important as the first 4 and none have maintained people’s interests.

 Probably the best endorsement for the importance of these films is that they are still easy to find. You see, porn is typically a first run business. Porn is all about the next new thing; the next hot girl, the next hot trend, the next new fetish etc. Unlike Disney which puts its films “in the vault” and re-releases them every few years, in porn, movies are done, released and forgotten about once the next new thing comes alone. All four of these films have stayed in print over the years, transitioning from the porn theatres to VHS cassettes to DVD.

The Devil in Miss Jones

1973

Director- Gerard Damiano

Cast- Georgina Spelvin, John Clemens, Harry Reems, Judith Hamilton

            

    This was an insanely popular film when it came out, being one of the highest grossing films of the year. Not highest grossing porno films, mind you, highest grossing period. People were turning out in droves to see this on the big screen.

            

    Justine Jones is a lonely, middle aged, virgin. Suffering from depression, she takes her own life. Even though she has led an upstanding virtuous life, her sin of suicide condemns her to Hell. She repents her life well lived seeing that despite it, she is still condemned. She postulates that an eternity in Hell wouldn’t be so bad if she had done something to deserve it. She vows that if she is given a second chance she will be consumed by lust and depravity so as to at least warrant her punishment.

            

    She is granted her request and what follows is an hour of some surprisingly dirty sex. I say surprisingly, because the porn world had become a little tamer by the 80s and not until the 90s “gonzo” era did it start to ramp up the nastiness again. Justine begins her journey shy and afraid, but with each encounter is more lustful and greedy. She becomes a hardened sex addict, and by the time she finally reaches the Inferno, she is little more than a fiend, looking for her next fix.

           

   

    In addition to its nastiness, the movie breaks the mold in other ways too. Georgina Spelvin was an unknown in porn and, already in her mid-30s, doesn’t seem a likely choice for the leading role in a porno film. And she isn’t just the star attraction; she’s almost the entire attraction. Typically, in the era of plot-porn, the lead starlet might star in 2, possibly 3 scenes, but the entire film is a showcase for Georgina. 

            

     The scene where Justine commits suicide, cutting her wrists in the bathtub, puts the viewer in a conundrum. The scene is well done with a real feeling of hopelessness. However, Justine is completely naked. As the viewer, can you be empathetic and feel sad while at the same time feeling aroused? I don’t think modern porn, which has sought (wisely) to distance itself from anything illegal like snuff, would take the chance of a scene like this.

            

   The sex scenes run the gamut and hit all of the basic perversions, and come up with a few new ones (most disturbingly when she performs fellatio on the head of a live snake, no thanks!). Folks who’ve only been exposed to 21^st century porn may find the scenes boring or at least quaint. Modern porn with its muscled, Viagra enhanced studs and immaculate, surgically sculpted vixens give the viewer a fantasy that has no chance of existing in the real world. Porn of the 70s featured people that were, in many ways, unremarkable except for their willingness to have sex on camera. And of course, the sheer amount of body hair takes some getting used to as well.

 

The Devil in Miss Jones 2

1982

Director- Henri Pachard

Cast- Georgina Spelvin, Jack Wrangler, Robert Kerman, Jacqueline Lorians, Joanna Storm, Anna Ventura, Samantha Fox, Ron Jeremy, Sharon Kane, Sharon Mitchell

           

   This sequel, which brings back Georgina Spelvin as Justine, takes a very different approach than the original, being very much a satire and not to be taken seriously.  They must have also expected a pretty literate audience given that it make references to Cyrano de Bergerac (who receives a “nose job”), the Marquis de Sade and Dorian Gray.

           

   The story picks up with Justine in Hell where you can have all the sex you want but no one is allowed to orgasm. Justine, however, makes a deal with the Devil that if she can bring him to climax he’ll set her free.

            

   Of course Justine wins the bet and she is released from Hell and put in the body of a high priced escort played by the young, voluptuous, Jacqueline Lorians. She makes good use of the body and Satan gets jealous, especially when she has sex with a schmuck in a devil costume.

  In an effort to get revenge, Satan puts her in another body, this time an Army private (Joanna Storm), who marches her way straight to the men’s barracks for a predictable outcome. Satan tries one more time, putting her into the body of a Tupperware seller (Ava Ventura) who quickly converts from plastic bowls to sex toys.

Satan can’t stand it anymore and sticks Justine in the body of a nun (Samantha Fox). This upsets the Man Upstairs who intervenes and Justine ends up back in the beautiful Jacqueline Lorians. She takes the body for another spin with a very young Joey Silvera (before he grew his trademark mustache.)

            

As a lust inducing film, it’s a little lacking. It’s mainly concerned with interesting visuals, like the devil shooting fire out of his penis, for instance. There are lots of interesting costumes in hell including some rather silly penis-headed guards. All of these bizarre visuals, while memorable, get in the way of the eroticism. On the other hand, I don’t think the point of this movie was necessarily to be as nasty as possible as it was to be interesting and funny.

The Devil in Miss Jones 3:A New Beginning

1986

Director- Gregory Dark

Cast- Lois Ayres, Jack Baker, Paul Thomas, Amber Lynn, Vanessa Del Rio, Tom Byron, Careena Collins, Kari Foxx, Marc Wallace, Jennifer Noxt, Chanel Price

The Devil in Miss Jones 4: The Final Outrage

1986

Director- Gregory Dark

Cast- Lois Ayres, Jack Baker, Paul Thomas Erica Boyer, Krista Lane ,Kristarra Barrington, Tom Byron, Ron Jeremy

        

    Parts 3 and 4 were a reboot of the franchise and filmed together to form one story. Justine is played by Lois Ayres who, rather than a virginal spinster is a sexy vixen whose pissed off at her cheating boyfriend. She dies in a freak accident during rebound sex and ends up in Hell. Rather than meeting Virgil as her guide she gets Jack Baker, playing every jive talking stereotype you’ve ever seen all rolled into one.

            

     

   She travels a road through hell, trying to find the exit. Along the way, like Dante, she witnesses the punishments of various sinners. A reoccurring theme throughout the film was race and racism. Jack Baker plays a black stereotype, racism is discussed as a topic as well as the taboo of inter-racial sex. I’m not sure if this was Gregory Dark’s attempt at making a statement or if he was just trying to be provocative. Justine’s journey comes to an end when she sees the final sinner, herself, and witnesses herself having sex with her own father!

            

    The production levels of this saga are not as high as the first two, being on the level of a Troma film. The sex is certainly more erotic than part 2. Gregory Dark was never a prolific director (by porn standards) but most of his films were in high demand and several became classics, starting with New Wave Hookers. The cast of the 2 films is like a who’s who of 80s porn stars.

            

     The main attraction of course is Lois Ayres. Unfortunately, she doesn’t star in every scene like Georgina did in the first film. Lois stars in only 2 scenes in each film, typical for the time, which is a shame because she could carry a movie. Although she had a long career, she never achieved the ranks of Tier 1 status like Ginger Lynn or Jenna Jameson. Girls of that level always have a broad appeal and Lois was always unique. Looking more like a character from Liquid Sky, Lois had a punk rock sensibility with her shock of platinum hair, torn mesh top, fingerless gloves and most especially her attitude. She was not the demure type at all. Lois seemed like she would have been just as at home at a Sex Pistols concert as a porn set. Lois Ayres pre-figured later girls with the same vibe like Madison Stone and Bonnie Rotten. Had her career taken place a decade later, she probably would have found a larger audience.

The Nine Gates of the Kingdom of Shadows

It: A (reasonably) objective and (mostly) spoiler free review of the franchise.

It

     

   Stephen King has created too many memorable horror stories to list, and many of them have entered into public consciousness. I think it’s safe to say that his two most popular are The Stand and It. Pennywise the Clown has reached a level of public awareness just below that of the Universal Monsters. Both versions are good and offer different things to enjoy for fans of the book.

            

   For those unacquainted with the book, Pennywise is a supernatural creature that takes the form of (amongst many other things) a clown. He surfaces every few decades in the town of Derry to feed, and his favorite delicacy is scared children. He can take the form of whatever scares you most so he appears in many different guises (a mummy, a werewolf, a rotting leper, a giant prehistoric bird etc).

            

    Seven children, who have encountered Pennywise and lived, ban together to stop him. They are led by Bill, who lost his brother to the evil clown. They stop the clown but are unable to kill him and thirty years later return to the town to finish what they started.  The book alternates back and forth between the two time periods; their childhood and their adult lives. The true nature of Pennywise is hinted at but not fully revealed until the end, and even then It doesn’t fit into any easy classification. Pennywise defies classification, hence the nomenclature of It.

It (television mini-series)

1990

Director- Tommy Lee Wallace

Cast- Richard Thomas, John Ritter, Harry Anderson, Tim Reid, Annette O'Toole, Dennis Christopher, Richard Masur, Jonathan Brandis, Brandon Crane, Emily Perkins, Adam Faraizl, Marlon Taylor, Ben Heller, Olivia Hussey, Tim Curry

            

    Prior to the 21^st Century, TV and movies were very separate entities. Maybe it’s not accurate to say that TV stars were the step-siblings of the movie stars but there certainly wasn’t a lot of movement between the two mediums like there is today. It has a cast of the best TV talent from its time; Richard Thomas (John-Boy on The Waltons and also the Roger Corman sci-fi film Battle Beyond the Stars), Harry Anderson (Night Court), John Ritter (Three’s Company) and Tim Reid (WKRP in Cincinnati). I think the fact that three of those four are known for comedic roles is interesting.  Generation Xers will recognize Jonathan Brandis , as young Bill, who seemed to be everywhere in the 90’s and sadly died of suicide. Horror fans may recognize Emily Perkins as young Beverly Marsh. She went on to star in the Ginger Snaps werewolf trilogy. Director Tommy Lee Wallace was no novice when it came to horror. He directed Halloween 3: Season of the Witch and Fright Night 2 (the star of which ,Roddy McDowell, was considered for the Pennywise part). He also edited The Fog and Halloween.

The crown jewel of the cast and crew is of course, Tim Curry. Tim Curry came to fame in the horror themed musical Rocky Horror Picture Show and his list of TV, movie and theatre credits would be a book unto themselves. He had experience with both the horror genre and working through make-up, having played the Satanic figure of Darkness in Ridley Scott’s Legend. Curry’s Pennywise is iconic. He seems to be bubbling with menace and cheer in equal parts. It’s Curry’s voice though, a deep jovial baritone, that gives the performance character. It’s a testament to his performance that images of his clown still circle social media and horror outlets and merchandise three decades later.

            

     The whole series, without the originally aired commercials of course, is right over three hours. I think ABC took a lot of big chances for the time. Not only does it feature the murder of children, it uses the “N word”, and was depending on an audience that probably hadn’t read the book to tune in for two nights. As for faithfulness to the book, it does as good of a job as it could for three hours (It is a 1,000 page tome after all). It gets the adult half of the story pretty close but cuts a lot out of the childhood end of things. Like the book it alternates back and forth between the two.

           

   I would say that diehard fans of the book might be disappointed with what gets left out, but I can’t imagine there are any diehard fans that haven’t already seen it. In fact I would say that this mini-series, and Curry’s performance , probably created a lot of fans of the book.

It: Chapter 1

2017

Director- Andy Muschietti

Cast- Jaeden Martell, Sophia Lillis, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Finn Wolfhard, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer, Nicholas Hamilton, Bill Skarsgård

It: Chapter 2

2019

Director- Andy Muschietti

Cast- James McAvoy, Jessica Chastain, Bill Hader, Isaiah Mustafa, Jay Ryan, James Ransone, Teach Grant, Andy Bean, Jaeden Martell, Sophia Lillis, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Finn Wolfhard, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer, Nicholas Hamilton, Bill Skarsgård

           

      Coming in at a combined total of 5 hours, the theatrical releases had a lot more time for storytelling and character development. The first film focuses entirely on the childhood storyline. The second film focuses mostly on the adults but with a fair amount of flashbacks to childhood. Though both films were directed by the same person, they feel very different. I suppose this is appropriate as the films are focusing on different time periods. However, I don’t chalk this difference in feel up to intentional choice.

  

   Interestingly (bizarrely?) the production of the 2^nd chapter didn’t begin until well after the first film. Filming for chapter began almost 2 years after chapter 1!. I could understand a nervous Hollywood exec not wanting to spend too much money on an unproven property, but Chapter 1 was so good, I have to assume its quality was evident early on. Did they not realize they had a hit on their hands? And a hit it was. Part 1 was made for $35 million and made $700 million. It was in the top 10 of the highest grossing movies of that year, rubbing shoulders with giant budgeted super-hero event films. The second chapter has twice the budget but just doesn’t deliver the goods as effectively.

      

       Chapter 1 was a surprise hit, but this was no fluke. It’s a quality film in every respect. The cast of child actors deliver. Finn Wolfhard (Stranger Things) is funny as the foul mouthed Richie. The stand out though was Sophia Lillis as tomboy Beverly Marsh. Her performance was the kind that can make a career, and I think it may have. The film is also scary! It has some really creepy moments and Skarsgård (in both films) delivers a creepy Pennywise that is unlike Curry’s iconic performance in any way. Given that It is really about kids, I suppose it’s appropriate that the first film is the standout.

    This is not to say that Chapter 2 is without merit. It also has a fine cast (which, I assume,

accounted for most of its bigger budget). It has some creepy moments but doesn’t capitalize on mood as much as Chapter 1. It also seems to spend a lot of energy creating story from thin air. Rather than using their spacious 2 and half hour running time to adapt parts of the book, they spend their time creating things that add nothing and still end up leaving things out.           

    If you are a real fan of the book or a hardcore fan of Chapter 1, you have already seen Chapter 2. However, for casual viewers, Chapter 1 can be watched and enjoyed all by itself.

   

Comparison to the Book

   

   The easiest criticism leveled against any book to movie adaptation is “The book was better.” I’ve never been a fan of this mantra as books and movies are completely different story telling mediums.  Personally, there are a few books for which I liked the movie BETTER. I like Hellraiser the film much more than the book (The Hellbound Heart). The written description of the cenobites just doesn’t have the visceral punch of their appearance in the movies.  And regardless of how good the books are, is anyone going to say Tobe Hooper’s Salem’s Lot and Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining aren’t excellent?

            

    Both the 1990 version and the 21^st century version do a decent job of adapting the overall plot. Neither veers off too far from the overall direction of the story, though both leave out a lot of enjoyable details. The 1990 version had to leave things out due to time constraints. The 21^st century version squandered some of its time (especially in Chapter 2) creating all new elements. Of course, there is ONE scene from the book that doesn’t make it into either version (and never will). I want say what it is, but fans of the book know which scene I’m talking about.

            

    Both versions do the characters justice. The 1990 version does a better job telling the story of the adult characters; the 21^st century version does better with the kids.

            

     As far as the depiction of Pennywise, well, it wouldn’t be fair to say one is better or worse. Every actor who ever plays Dracula will be compared to Bela Lugosi. Bela is the measuring stick. Some actors make better Dracula’s some don’t, but they are all compared to Bela. Likewise with Tim Curry. He is an iconic actor who turned Pennywise into an iconic character. In 20 years when another It adaptation is in the works, Tim will still be the measuring stick for this character. Skarsgård’s performance is creepy. Curry’s performance is menacing.