Frank Moraes is a freelance writer and editor online and in print. He is educated as a scientist with a PhD in Atmospheric Physics. He has worked in climate science, remote sensing, throughout the computer industry, and as a college physics instructor. Find out more at About Frank Moraes.
I love Samuel Fuller’s work. And it occurred to me that, in terms of cinematic technique, he’s very similar to Alfred Hitchcock. And it’s interesting that he doesn’t get more attention. It seems that every master’s student in film studies wants to write a thesis about Hitchcock. But not so much Fuller.
That’s not to say that Fuller isn’t also a darling of critics. But there is much less of that sort of thing. And what’s really weird is that Fuller has a far stronger case to being an auteur. After all, he wrote most of his own films. He had a clear vision — both artistically and philosophically. The man had things to say!
Hitchcock? He really didn’t have anything to say. Of course, that does work to his advantage. I don’t re-watch Fuller’s films nearly as much as I do Hitchcock’s. Frankly, Fuller asks so much more of me as a viewer! The Big Red One is a great film. But it ain’t easy!
The Look of a Fuller Film
But look at the films of the two men! They look very much the same. And why not? The truth is that most directors create films with a fairly general look. When people think of Stanley Kubrick, they mostly think of his later films — after he had made something of a fetish of a couple of techniques.
There really isn’t much of that in the films of Alfred Hitchcock and Samuel Fuller. They were both just trying to tell stories in an effective way. And they were both very successful at it! But really: critics should be embracing Fuller and leaving Hitchcock to me! Because Hitchcock wasn’t an auteur. And Fuller was.
Just the same, Fuller’s work is so raw! I always care about what’s going on. I care about the characters. There’s something very base about the stories he tells. But I find myself consistently outraged by the injustices that he presents.
A great example of what I’m talking about is Fuller’s 1969 film, Shark! It’s a wonderful bit of genre filmmaking. But Fuller just can’t help himself and not make it about something. Hitchcock is purer. But I can’t think of a time when he matched Fuller’s heart. So if you’re not feeling up to emotion but you want a fun film, watch Family Plot. But if you want that with some emotional depth and moral clarity, watch anything from Fuller. Today, let it be Shark!
But before you do, notice that the plot setup is as clear as anything you will find in Hitchcock.
Afterword: Burt Reynolds stars in this film. He really is great. He doesn’t get enough respect as an actor. And I say that as someone who doesn’t especially like the films he’s best known for. But everybody’s got to pay the bills. It speaks well of a man who doesn’t just sleep in the rest of the time.
Finley is a 2019 short horror-comedy produced and directed by J Zachary Thurman. He co-wrote it with Maddison (Maddie) Stroud. It’s a pretty well-known film with 17 million views on YouTube. And I have yet to meet someone who doesn’t love it. If you haven’t seen it, scroll down to the link below and watch it.
Finley is one of many examples of how short films are more consistently good than features. And that’s especially true when it comes to horror. There are many reasons for this. But this little masterpiece highlights one of the more obscure reasons: simplicity.
One Great Idea
A short film can have one idea and work beautifully. Finley is very simple: Evil ventriloquist dummy is incompetent. Finley himself isn’t deep: he likes the cat and wants to kill everyone else. The three human principals could easily be interchanged. They have no defining characteristics. The film works because the idea is brilliant.
Of course, Finley could be so much less! But the plot is outstanding. The first part establishes Finley as incompetent as he tries to kill the main characters. The second part shows Finley finally able to use those skills successfully against home invaders. And the third part finds Finley finally accepted by the family but still being homicidal and killing everyone.
Lesser storytellers (like the writers at SNL) wouldn’t have moved past the first part. So it’s more than just a good idea. It’s working that idea for all it’s worth.
How to Ruin Finley
But imagine turning Finley into a feature film. Now the humans would have to be better defined. But why? There is nothing in the plot that requires we know or care about them — other than the fact we have to put up with them for an hour and a half. A feature would almost certainly provide a backstory for Finley, which would make his character less interesting. And now that I think about it, why did those criminals pick this particular house?! There is so much that could be explained!
But Finley is pure. It has one idea. It mines it exquisitely. And it is over. To be frank, I’m shocked they get 25 minutes out of it. It speaks very well of the filmmakers that they get that much time out of this material. But any longer, and the film would suffer.
And this is one of the big reasons that shorts tend to be better than features. Most ideas don’t lend themselves to feature length. And so the ideas need to be expanded. But most ideas don’t lend themselves to expansion. And other things features require (like complex characters) can hurt an impactful story.
What this all means is that you should watch more short films. They will reward you!
J Zachary Thurman is not a one-trick pony. He has made a handful of excellent short films. They don’t have the broad appeal of Finley, but most will appeal to horror fans:
Lik Daddy: A heartwarming film about a father teaching his son how to be just like him!
Don’t Feed the Cat: The granddaughter of a man with dementia comes to put his house in order. He leaves a list of things to do. The last is “Don’t Feed the Cat!” But does she listen?
The Demon Core: This is a drama about Louis Slotin. It is horrifying! But not horror. It’s also true, even if it romanticizes Slotin and presents him as far less reckless than he actually was. If you liked Oppenheimer, check this one out. It’s excellent!
He’s made other films, but I haven’t seen them. I assume he will eventually be scooped up by TV. Or maybe be given a feature. Or maybe he’ll go into academia. The last seems reasonable because he makes extremely well-crafted films, and I suspect he would be great in an educational environment.
Dig Your Own Grave is a comedy short release 6 March 2019 at the Sarasota Film Festival, followed a week later at the Riverrun Film Festival. Greg Kindra produced it. Kirk Larsen directed and co-wrote it. And it stars Amos Vernon and Henry Zebrowski. Vernon co-wrote the script. It’s one of a surprising number of short films I see that are as professionally made as anything you will see in the multiplex. But that are also generally a lot more interesting. (Some day soon, I will write about why short films are more consistently good compared to features.)
“Dig Your Own Grave” Trop
The idea is very simple: digging a grave is hard work, but films make it out to be trivial. Screenwriters throw it into stories because it seems very badass. But would a murderer actually hang around for hours while their victim digs a grave? (Under the best of circumstances, professional grave diggers take between one and two hours!) In addition to the bordom, you might get caught.
In the film, the first sign that something is wrong is that the hitman brought a square shovel. That would be fine in some soils but not the rocky ground where this takes place. The joke for the first part of the film is that this is an unreasonable task. Even asking professionals to do it is unreasonable. There? You really want a backhoe.
Moving on, the film plays with different ideas of kindness. I’m with the hitman: making someone dig their own grave is much worse than murdering alone. I’d rather just be murdered than tortured and then murdered.
Watch It!
Dig Your Own Grave reminds me a lot of the work of Chris and Jack. They too deconstruct common film tropes like selling your soul to Satan and the ridiculous future dates in science fiction. (I was just watching Johnny Mnemonic, which hilariously takes place in 2021!)
I don’t mind movie tropes. In fact, they are necessary because there just isn’t time to do otherwise. But it is always welcome when talented people go after them in an insightful way. Check out Dig Your Own Grave!
Dig Your Own Grave (2019) poster via IMDb under Fair Use.
When I talk about “pure horror,” I’m talking about horror that includes nothing else. It is pure terror. Think of the final sequence of The Texas Chain Saw Massacreas Sally runs from Leatherface as he waves his chainsaw. The context doesn’t matter. It just is horrific. But I don’t think a feature film could maintain this. As it is, first-time viewers of Chain Saw are generally worn out. (In fairness, you could justify moving the pure horror all the way back to the dinner sequence.)
Curve
No film to my memory is as good an example of pure horror as the short film Curve. It premiered at the 2016 Tribeca Film Festival. It is the product of three principals: writer-director Tim Egan; producer Ahren Morris; and actor Laura Jane Turner. And it runs about nine minutes.
You should watch it! But I’ll provide the overview here. Basically, nothing happens. A woman awakens on the curved edge of a concrete wall. As soon as she gets her bearings, she slides down. She stops her slide and moves back up. We see blood on her fingers. She is used to being in this position. But there is literally nothing she can do except maintain her position. Up is impossible; the further up she goes, the steeper the wall. And down is death. That goes on for eight more minutes — only interrupted by mounting evidence of unseen others who have fallen.
Avoiding Meaning
The whole thing reminds me of a Samuel Beckett play in its unrelenting bleakness. But also in how it almost dares the viewer to find some concrete meaning in it. And if you look around the internet, you will find a lot of people trying to understand it. But I think that is a mistake.
It is much like the ending of The Conversation. You know the scene where Harry Caul (Gene Hackman) goes mad looking for the bug that he thinks is in his apartment? People love discussing where the bug must be. But it just doesn’t matter. It isn’t the point of that scene.
And here, there is no point to this woman on a ledge. What is this ledge for? Who is she? How did she get there? I don’t care; I simply empathize; I share her terror!
If you want meaning, you can certainly see it as a modern version of Sisyphus. But I think that tells us a lot! After all, pretty much everyone knows who he is: the guy who pushes a rock up a hill over and over. What few know is why he was cursed to do this. Why? Because no one cares. What matters is his punishment, which we all identify with.
And so it is with pure horror and Curve. We are affected in a deep and powerful way. Go read Schopenhauer if you want to think about it. Otherwise, go watch a great horror film!
Image cropped from a frame of Curve via YouTube under Fair Use.
The War of the Worlds (1953) is a great film. The story is engaging from start to finish and it looks great — especially the special effects. Gene Barry and Ann Robinson make a nice couple and have great chemistry.
There are even politics in the film that I quite like. The politicians, military leaders, and scientists are all presented as serious people who are trying their best to solve the problem at hand. It’s the mob that gets in the way and stops any possibility of the scientists finding a solution.
This is so refreshing for a viewer in 2026 where the mob has taken over, done its own research, and decided it is best to put people in charge who are as unqualified, foolish, and uncaring as they are.
Pastor Collins
But the film’s use of religion is anywhere from problematic to repulsive. Consider Pastor Collins. To start with, he is a complete reverse of the curate in the book. The curate is hysterical and ultimately self-destructive. He is very much a “pray to God and do NOT row to shore” type.
In contrast, Collins is rational and calm in his faith. He is presented as Christlike with a martyr’s death. On one hand, that’s fine. The film presents all the major characters as faultless. But there is a contrast here to other films of this time (eg, The Thing from Another World) in which the idealist is a scientist. Those characters are presented as naive if not evil. But Collins is presented heroically, shot from above as if God himself were looking down lovingly.
None of this would matter without context. I have nothing against heroic depictions of the religious. And I admire Collins. I can see myself doing the same thing for different reasons. But any science fiction film of that time would present me in a negative light. Sacrifice for traditional religious reasons is good. But sacrifice for idiosyncratic beliefs or idealism is bad.
But Pastor Collins’ death is in a very specific context — one where humans are useless and only saved by prayer. So acording to the film, he was not only heroic; he was right!
The War of the Worlds (1953) scene: Pastor Collins (Lewis Martin) heroically faces down the Martian invaders and dies. The film wants you to know he was right! Taken from the film under Fair Use.
Christian Nationalism
There is no deep theology here. This is Cold War Christianity: 99% anti-communist, 1% primitive “Jesus Loves Me” theology. It is, in fact, Christian Nationalism.
My mother’s side of the family are part of this movement. I’m no longer in contact with them, but I have no doubt that they are big MAGA supporters. Even when I was a kid, I marveled at the fact that beyond their constant claims of Jesus’ love (often used as a threat), they really only cared about the right-wing politics their pastors had fed them.
And they see the world as being divided into the good people (right-wing Christians) and the bad people (everyone else).
In the third act, we see all the bad people panicked and behaving very badly. (Interestingly, this is a reflection of the curate in the novel.) All the good people are in churches. And this includes all the scientists! Because even they know that ultimately, it’s all about God. No atheists in a Martian Invasion, am I right?!
Antisemitism
But consider all the bad people. There is only one of them whom we see for more than a second. It is the man who is trying to buy his way onto a truck out of town. He has a suitcase full of cash and valuables. He is coded Jewish and played by the great character actor Ned Glass, who just happens to be Jewish himself.
(To make matters worse, the character — not in the credits — is referred to on IMDb as Well-Dressed Looter. There is no indication he is a looter. Rather, he looks like a man fleeing the Holocaust with as many of his valuables as he could carry.)
I’m not suggesting that the filmmakers intended to be antisemitic. I just think these kinds of stereotypes are so deeply wired in the culture that they just show up. But it is telling that this scene is in a film that places all the good people in church. See?! Even the Jews are godless, which is why they are outside church with the bad people!
The War of the Worlds (1953) scene: Ned Glass as a negative Jewish stereotype weakly on the ground, surrounded by garbage, clutching his money. Taken from the film under Fair Use.
God vs Evolution
The 1953 filmed version The War of the Worlds reverses the ending. The final narration reads:
After all that men could do had failed, the Martians were destroyed, and humanity was saved by the littlest things, which God, in his wisdom, had put upon this Earth.
This is more or less what Wells wrote in the novel. But it takes an idiom and turns it into meaning. After this line in the book, Wells explains what he means:
These germs of disease have taken toll of humanity since the beginning of things — taken toll of our prehuman ancestors since life began here. But by virtue of this natural selection of our kind we have developed resisting power; to no germs do we succumb without a struggle, and to many — those that cause putrefaction in dead matter, for instance — our living frames are altogether immune. But there are no bacteria in Mars, and directly these invaders arrived, directly they drank and fed, our microscopic allies began to work their overthrow.
So it was evolution in the book. But in the movie, the final line of dialogue explains that it was a miracle from God. The great scientist says, “We were all praying for a miracle!”
The War of the Worlds in Modern America
And this, I suppose, brings us back to today. The War of the Worlds tells the viewer
Ordinary godless people are horrible.
Elites are well-meaning but impotent.
Our only hope is God.
This is not what people believe today, of course. They’ve kind of flipped the first two. Now it’s the ordinary people who are well-meaning but impotent. And the reason for that is because of the godless elites. Of course, they do believe in elites. It’s just that they are arbitrary. Since no one is trustworthy, they can elect any yahoo with a spray-on tan to lead the most powerful nation on Earth.
But the modern world has largely given up on God too. He really isn’t too evident. But the Abrahamic faiths are really authoritarian. And if they can’t get input from the strong father in the sky, they will get him with despots here on Earth. So they can throw out all the scientists, and military leaders, and politicians — at least the ones who don’t follow the Dictator.
But today, even a dictator has to watch out. Remember how Trump had one big success during his first term: Operation Warp Speed. But when Trump took credit for it, his followers hated it. So he just stopped talking about it. When your power depends upon the ignorance of your followers, your power depends on the ignorance of your followers.
I don’t think any of this is surprising. Tell people that “others” are monsters and elites are useless. And you get ignorant, hateful people who think they are knowledgeable and good. And all they think they need is an authoritarian “leader” who is as ignorant and hateful as they are.
We can see The War of the Worlds as a Cold War allegory. But I think even at the time, we missed it. We thought the Soviets were bad because they were godless and, well, bad. We didn’t learn the real lesson that authoritarianism itself is bad. But you can’t exactly blame us. We were poorly educated by every conceivable information source. Including The War of the Worlds.
See also:Library DVD Love for a review of the film with a lot of interesting background material.
The War of the Worlds (1953) poster via Wikimedia. It is in the public domain.
“Plastic Bones” is a short film by comedian/actor Simon Gissler. He’s apparently one of the many talented artists struggling down in the Los Angeles area. I really don’t know much about him. He has a handful of credits on IMDb. And his bio on the Hollywood Fringe website says that he makes “high concept comedy shows with his sketch team Fish Licks.”
My sister introduced me to this short (6-minute) film that he wrote, produced, and co-directed. It’s shockingly effective, especially for something literally produced with pocket change.
About “Plastic Bones”
It tells the story of Human, who made the mistake of renting a place close to the cemetery. This has caused a local skeleton to begin stalking him. But it has anything but ill intentions. And thus begins a wild ride of comedy, romance, and murder. It also presents an object lesson in the importance of tipping. (See also: Michael Kallio‘s “The Texas Chainsaw Manicure.”)
The film is produced efficiently. It is shot entirely without a lighting kit. The coverage provides enough variety without getting cute. And it is combined with perfectly coordinated sound editing. It and Gissler’s goofy performance are what make it all work so well. But that shouldn’t take away from its solid script that takes the narrative in places that aren’t obvious. And Gregory Dean is excellent as all the other non-skeletons.
“Plastic Bones” is a good example of my belief that all major productions should be made with half as much money. The savings could then be given to poor filmmakers. And then we’d get a lot more films worth watching. First, I think big-budget producers would be more creative with less money. Second, no-budget producers would be more creative with some money.
But I can’t say that “Plastic Bones” would be better with more money. A lot of its charm comes from its lack of resources. And it shows just how powerful one unique idea is when it is well executed.
Watch “Plastic Bones”
Have a watch! It’s short and almost no one has seen it!
He was more what we consider a serious British actor. Had he lived longer, he certainly would have starred in Hot Fuzzand the Harry Potter films. Today, people remember him best for the Merchant-Ivory film A Room with a View. In it, he plays the sweet and liberal Mr Emerson. But I know him best for the brilliant comedy A Private Function. In it, he plays the vicious and snobby Dr Swaby.
But Denholm Elliott is widely known for many American films like Trading Places where he was the very proper and helpful butler Coleman. And, of course, he was the museum curator Marcus Brody in Raiders of the Lost Ark and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.
This would be enough to mention him today. But I’m most interested in him because of two Amicus films and another with Hammer. These were: The House That Dripped Blood, The Vault of Horror, and To the Devil a Daughter. The first two are anthology films. In the first, he plays a horror writer who thinks his psychopathic strangler character has come to life. In the second, he plays a dishonest art dealer who gets his due.
To the Devil a Daughter was the last Hammer horror film. It is along the lines of The Devil Rides Out. I’m not that fond of these films, but they’re fine. Elliott plays a father trying to save his daughter from a Satanic cult.
The House That Dripped Blood is by far my favorite of these three films. And I most like Denholm Elliott when he plays a nice guy — as good as he is at playing a terrible guy! So let’s watch it now to celebrate Elliott’s birthday!
Jim Hutton (1934-1979): Star of the Ellery Queen TV show.
Gregory Harrison (1950-): Star of the short-lived Logan’s Run TV series. He was also the star of Don Coscarelli’s first film, Jim, the World’s Greatest.
Jonathan Tucker (1982-): Actor known for The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Ruins, and more.
Colin Farrell (1976-): Actor known for Seven Psychopaths, some superhero films, and lots more.
Michael J Pollard was born on 30 May 1939 in beautiful Passaic, New Jersey. He died at the age of 80 in 2019 in equally beautiful Los Angeles, California.
Pollard is a great actor and he has been in a lot of great films. I will get to that shortly. But there is one role I most associate him with. He’s great in it. But it really is almost insulting. I always think of the Star Trek episode “Miri.” Despite being 27 years old, he plays a (barely) prepubescent boy. And he steals the whole episode. But nothing new there! He tends to steal every scene he’s in everywhere!
Right around this same time, he guest-starred as another boy on an episode of Lost in Space, “The Magic Mirror.” If you get a chance, check it out. It is poignant in a way the show was rarely.
Pollard had an excellent career in TV up to that point. But he had a breakthrough the following year in the 1967 feature film Bonnie and Clyde. It was a pretty typical role for him. He tended to be typecast as a likeable idiot.
He next starred in the motorcycle film Little Fauss and Big Halsy. But he mostly provided spice as odd characters for films he was in. He did this in a number of notable films: Melvin and Howard, Roxanne, Scrooged, and many more — including House of 1000 Corpses.
But my favorite Pollard film is Four of the Apocalypse. It is also probably my favorite Western. He plays a weak drunk who can’t be counted on. But he’s ultimately a good guy. You can watch the whole thing at the link. If you haven’t seen it, I hope you do!
I know of only one film that Michael J Pollard starred in. But it’s a good one! Dirty Little Billy. It tells the story of the early days of Billy the Kid. Leslie Halliwell hated it (of course), but rightly noted that “it presents its hero as the mentally retarded delinquent which history says he was.”
So let’s celebrate Michael J Pollard’s birthday by watching Dirty Little Billy.
Other 30 May Anniversaries
Filmmakers
Howard Hawks (1896-1977): Director of tons of notable films. He directed one of my favorite non-psychotronic films, His Girl Friday. And, of course, he directed the classic The Thing From Another World.
Mel Blanc (1908-1989): Voice actor known for voicing most of the iconic Warner Bros characters like Bugs Bunny.
Clint Walker (1927-2018): Actor who worked a lot and played the title character in the long-running TV western Cheyenne.
Keir Dullea (1936-): Actor known most as Dave in 2001: A Space Odyssey. He also starred in Black Christmas.
Mark Sheppard (1964-): Actor best known to me as Badger, the ruthless but insecure crime boss with a Cockney accent on Firefly.
Films
Undersea Kingdom (1936): Atlantis-based serial.
Fright (1972): A babysitter is attacked by the child’s insane father.
Embrace of the Vampire (1995): Vampire romance.
Wrong Turn (2003): College students get stranded in the woods and attacked.
El Chupacabra (2003): Animal control officers find a gored dog and figure it is the title monster.
Cemetery Gates (2006): A genetically modified Tasmanian Devil is on the loose.
The Strangers (2008): Home invasion film.
The Italian Job (2003): Heist film with none of the charm of the original.
Michael J Pollard via Wikimedia. It is in the public domain.
Empire Pictures released Dolls throughout the United States on 29 May 1987.
It was the third of the Brian Yuzna and Stuart Gordon films. The first, of course, was Re-Animator. Then they made From Beyond. Both of those films were loosely based on HP Lovecraft short stories, although the latter at least maintains the tone.
Dolls is a departure. I wouldn’t say that it was better than Re-Animator. But I watch it a lot more. Because I enjoy it more.
As I recall based on the writer-director commentary on the Shout Factory Blu-ray (now ridiculously expensive), Charles Band had the poster made first. This was incredibly common in those days. He then asked Ed Naha to write a script for it. And he wrote a perfect script!
But the film is more than the script. Everything works in this production. The casting is great. The production design and art direction create the perfect old dark house. David W Allen’s stop-motion animation is as good as anything he ever did. And the filming and editing are energetic enough to keep things interesting. It is, after all, a single-location story.
Of course, the film could be rendered much worse and I’d still like it. Over the years I’ve come to see the world as utterly devoid of justice. Evel Knievel died at 69 from breathing problems and not one of his many stupid (some would say calculated) stunts. Children commonly drown because of tsunamis. People can increase their chances but that’s all: increase their chances.
So I love Dolls because everyone gets what they deserve. The horrible people become dolls (and that doesn’t seem like such a bad life). And the good people live happily ever after. And the “gods” in this case (really a witch and a warlock) are simply beyond charming. What’s not to like?
This is, of course, why a lot of horror works!
If you haven’t seen it, you must. Right now! Here it is!
Other 29 May Anniversaries
Filmmakers
Bob Hope (1903-2003): The best part in all those road pictures.
Danny Elfman (1953-): Lead singer of Oingo Boingo and composer of all the films you already know.
Tony Randel (1956-): Director of a number of horror films including the second and third Hellraiser films.
Ted Levine (1957-): Actor best known for Monk but also the films The Silence of the Lambs, The Fast and the Furious, and The Hills Have Eyes.
Rupert Everett (1959-): Actor who starred in Cemetery Man.
John D LeMay (1962-): Star of Friday the 13th: The Series.
Ashley Laurence (1966-): Actor known mostly for the Hellraiser films.
Films
Dial M For Murder (1954): Hitchcock film about a man trying to murder his unfaithful wife.
King Kung Fu (1976): Hilarious combination of King Kong and the Kung Fu TV show.
Witchcraft IX: Bitter Flesh (1997): The sequel to Witchcraft VII. Really! Witchcraft VIII was a one-off. Here, the ghost of William Spanner (played a second and final time by David Bynres) must protect his girlfriend.Witchcraft X will again not feature the series’ main character.
20th Century Fox released Visiting Hours in the United States on 28 May 1982. Astral Films released it in Canada the week before. Normally, I would have picked the earlier date, given that it was a Canadian production. But today is such a terrible day for anniversaries! So I’m putting it here.
The year 1981 brought us two notable hospital-based slasher films: Hospital Massacre and Halloween II. So Visiting Hours came late in this trend. But I think it’s the best of the lot. It at least offers a more interesting plot. Critics did right by Hospital Massacre. They ignored it. Had they bothered to watch it, they would have hated it. And that is the problem with “critic as ombudsman.” Too many of these professional trolls watch films that aren’t made for them.
Critics had to review Halloween II given how much they praised the original (which is just okay). And, of course, they found it wanting. It was too violent. Too bloody. Too mean. I know many people will disagree, but I think it was also less boring. I’m not a big slasher fan. And there is much to admire in the original film. But it’s mostly a bunch of waiting around.
But the critics had their knives out going in to see Visiting Hours. It had a fairly big budget. And it featured two bona fide stars and psychotronic favorite Michael Ironside — just off his success in Scanners. And what were its problems? Leslie Halliwell, always the open-minded viewer, wrote, “Tedious shocker wasting a reliable idea.” Leonard Maltin called it an “extremely unpleasant and distasteful shocker,” which was “needlessly sadistic.”
More recent (almost exclusively negative) reviews highlight Michael Ironside’s performance. This wasn’t true of contemporary reviews since Ironside wasn’t the icon he later became. But this is unfair. All the actors in Visiting Hours are terrific. But this is an old critic’s trick: highlight one performance over the rest so that readers think you are knowledgeable and were paying attention.
Not that I don’t have my own criticisms. I think the plot is needlessly complicated. And (as usual) I think the film could be cut down by at least 15 minutes. I do, however, think it is one of the better slasher films. But who cares what I think? As I said, I’m not that into them. But I think Visiting Hours is worth checking out — for slasher and non-slasher fans!
Other 28 May Anniversaries
Filmmakers
Ian Fleming (1908-1964): The creator of James Bond.
Edith Massey (1918-1984): Actor known for her work with John Waters.
Zelda Rubinstein (1933-2010): Actor known especially for playing the medium in Poltergeist.
Sondra Locke (1944-2018): Actor in Willardand many of her husband’s films.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
