'The Screaming Skull' is a failed thriller

The Screaming Skull (1958)
Starring: John Hudson and Peggy Webber
Director: Alex Nicol
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

"The Screaming Skull" is at its best before the movie actually starts. There is a gimmicky bit where the producers promise to pay the funeral costs for anyone who dies of fright during the movie's climax. It's far more likely that a captive audience member will die of boredom or irritation before the movie runs its course, so the producers will never have to deliver on their promis, as that little bit is more chilling in a corny sort of way than most of what follows.

This is a would-be thriller with the now well-worn backdrop of a widower marrying a one-time institutionalized (but very rich) woman, moving back to the isolated old mansion he shared with his first love, and the fragile psyche of the new wife either starts unraveling, or perhaps she is really being haunted by the jealous ghost of the original lady of the house... or maybe someone is trying to drive her insane again.

I can't fault the film for its I've-seen-this-a-hundred-times-before plot, because it dates from 1958, but I do fault it for being just plain bad. The script is awful, and the acting is worse. There are only two things the filmmakers do right--first, they reveal the source of Jenni's (the mentally frazzled rich wife) terror at just the right moment in the film; second, they successfully manage to convey the woman's deteriorating sanity and growing sense of isolation).he acting is worse. In fact, the only actor who delives even close to a passable performance is Russ Conway, who plays Reverend Snow.

I will also grant that the final ten-fifteen minutes of the film are actually not bad in a third-rate horror movie kinda way. But the ending isn't so good that it makes up for suffering through what led up to it. (And the filmmakers back off from making the ending as powerful as it SHOULD be by wimping out when it comes to Jenni's mental health, or lack thereof.)

Other positive notes are that aside from portions of the ending, there are a few other genuinely creepy moments, such as when Jenni is left alone in the house (which is suddenly filled with animated skulls). There are also some very nice shots of her roaming the house, and of the mysterious, shadowhaunted, vegetation-choked grounds that surround the southern mansion where the movie takes place that show some glimmer of talent on the part of the cinematographer and technical crew. Unfortunately, every time the actors open their mouths to deliver badly written dialogue with a level of acting ability that might not even get them into a high school play, whatever gains the movie made it loses. The leading lady, Peggy Webber, is a great screamer, but that's all she's good for (although I suspect the scene of her stripping down to her bra and panties was pretty racey in its day, so maybe we can list stripping among her talents).

'Terror in the Tropics' isn't what I wished

Terror in the Tropics (2005)
Starring: Mark Redfield, Jennifer Rouse, Jonathan Ruckman, Wayne Shipley, Kimberly Hannold, and Bela Lugosi
Director: A. Susan Svehla
Rating: Four of Ten Stars

A group of strangers are summoned to the reading of a will that names them as beneficiaries of a multi-million dollar estate. The trip is dangerous to all, not just because of the murderer and thief hiding in their midst, but because the insane Tesla Brothers (Redfield and Lugosi) await at their destination with murderous intent.


I really, really wanted to like this movie. The idea sounded excellent--taking scenes from Poverty Row movies of the 1930s and 1940s and incorporating them into a new movie by shooting scenes with modern actors. I still think it's an excellent idea... I just think Svehla and the fine folks at Midnight Marquee failed to execute it properly.

The biggest problem with the film is the story, or, more accurately, the stories.

There are two distinct stories here, and they are completely unrelated... we have a thief who stole the real map to Skull Island (King Kong's home) and who launched a failed expedition to it, and then we have the will-reading storyline. Both also feature unnecessarily subplots and characters... the Skull Island story treats us to a unnecessary (and, in context, utterly illogical) flashback to the failed expedition, and the will-reading story sees the shoehorning of a the archetypal fiery girl-reporter and sexist photographer into the going-ons. If the filmmakers had focused EITHER on the Skull Island/detective storyline OR the will-reading/evil Tesla Brothers storyline, the end product would have been far better.

(The filmmakers seemed to have recognized this problem as some point, and they write out a trio of characters in a lame fashion at about the 3/4 mark.)

Another problem is with the actors. For the most part, they aren't bad. They are about what I'd expect in a production like this... if it hadn't been billed as a tribute to the low-budget films of the 30s and 40s.

There's no sign that ANY of the actors here bothered taking the time to examine how actors of that time performed the characters they were playing. I saw no sign that any of the performers were making any attempt to bring the sort of energy to their parts that just about EVERYONE displayed in the films back then... and that includes the two actors who came closest to feeling like they belonged in a Monogram Picture--Jonathan Ruckman (who was playing the typical dishwater love interest) and Mark Redfield.

Then there's the new footage. The incompatibility of the acting styles aside, a number of bad decisions were made when the new footage was filmed. Prime among these was the string of cheap plastic party flags featured prominently on the ship-board set. On the flip-side, however, the first scene with the city editor was very impressive in its use of green-screens. (Later, when a ballroom scene uses similar tricking-in of backgrounds, it's badly done... but old-time office that wasn't actually there looked GREAT.)

Finally, there's the film's main selling point... the re-use of Lugosi, Karloff, and Lon Chaney Jr. footage in new and fun ways. Observant readers may already have noticed that when I listed the stars of the film, I didn't mention Karloff and Chaney, even though they're listed on the DVD case. Well, that's because Karloff is featured in some "Mr. Wong" footage that's incorporated in a very awkward and gratuitous fashion--and the Chaney is featured only in some bits taken from "The Indestructible Man" and it's almost as pointless as the Karloff bits.

Lugosi is used very cleverly in the picture, and his "new" character of Vitus Tesla is incorporated quite nicely. The footage from "The Devil Bat" and "The Invisible Ghost" is put to good and fun use. It's a glimpse into what the entire film could have been like if perhaps the filmmakers had chosen to focus a bit more on story rather than trying to cram as many different B-movie elements as possible into one film with a running-time of just above one hour.

I also contend that the film has too much new footage and not enough old. There's also too many instances of the same bit being used more than once, given how little old material is actually incorporated. More thought and time should have been devoted to using and incorporating the archive footage.

For all my complaining, I do want to mention that the filmmakers did blend old and new footage in a very impressive way during the film's climax as the hero attempts to get his hapless new girlfriend (Hannold) safely away from the Tesla Brothers. If the rest of the film had been this good, you'd be seeing a Fresh Rating instead of the measly Three Tomatoes I've giving it now.

I can't really recommend the film "Terror in the Tropics", and the rating I'm giving it probably on the generous side... a reflection of what I hoped it would be rather than what it is. There is a mostly botched attempt at creating movie in the spirit of the old Monogram and PRC films, but I can't help but appreciate the attempt.

However, while I can't recommend the DVD for the "Terror in the Tropics" film, I can recommend it for the extras. There's a very interesting lecture by an expert on the Poverty Row studios about why great actors like George Zucco, John Carradine, and Bela Lugosi did so much work for them.

Happy Cinco de Mayo (or sumthin')

Mexican Hayride (1948)
Starring: Bud Abbott, Lou Costello, Luba Malina, Tim Powers, Pat Costello, Virginia Grey and John Hubbard
Director: Charles Barton
Rating: Three of Ten Stars

After being framed for a swindle by a greasy conman (Abbott), Joe Bascombe (Costello) follows the scoundrel to Mexico to clear his name. Unfortunately, Joe is tricked into being the fall guy for another scheme.


"Mexican Hayride" is the first truly bad Abbott & Costello picture I've seen. Not only is the storyline illogical (even by Abbott & Costello standards), but the best gags in here will evoke mild chuckles at best. Even if it was included in a DVD multipack titled "The Best of Abbott & Costello Vol. 3", this is one of their worst.

Biggest sign this is a bad movie? The bullfighting sequence is the funniest part in here. Yes, something as repulsive as bullfighting serves as the foundation for the best jokes and routines in the film.

One very strange thing about this film is that it was based on a successful musical from the early 1940s. However, there is only one song in the film and it isn't even by Cole Porter, who wrote the music for the original stage production.

Picture Perfect Wednesday: Liberation Day

Several European nations--including Holland and Denmark--recognize May 5, 1945, as the day they were liberated from occupying Nazi forces. It's also the day when the German U-boat forces formally surrendered and the people of the Czech capitol Prague revolted against the Nazis.



This captioned picture was borrowed from demotivatedphotos.com.

This blog will be part of 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day' on May 20

On May 20, I'll be posting an original piece of art to this blog, a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed himself (may peas be upon him)!

I, along with what I hope will be hundreds (maybe even thousands!) of bloggers and artists, will take a stand that our governments and media-owners have generally not been willing to, to stand up and in our own small way show the freakish, bloodthirsty Muslim terrorists that we're sick of their attempts to quell freedom of expression.

(And I don't really care about the "moderate Muslim" or "good Muslim" and their taking of offense. They should be offended at the psychos who claim to be the "good Muslims" and who want to kill over books, cartoons, or even the presentation of factual information about Islamic culture, history and the Prophet Mohammed (may fleece be upon him)).

For some background on "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" as filtered through me, check out the following links. (In brief, the idea sprang from a cartoon drawn by an artist who had no idea what she was starting.)

From April 22: 'Prophet Muhammad' now a dirty word!

From April 27: May 20th is the first annual Everybody Draw Muhammed Day (well... not really)

From May 4: May 20th IS the first annual Everbody Draw Muhammed Day!

I hope anyone reading this will take part in Everyone Draw Mohammed Day and publish a cartoon of their own.

Evil by Gaslight

Gaslight (aka "Angel Street") (1940)
Starrng: Anton Wallbrook, Diana Wynyard, Frank Pettingell, and Cathleen Cordell
Director: Thorold Dickinson
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

Abusive husband Paul Mallen (Wallbrook) sets about driving his mentally frail (but wealthy) wife insane after she unknowingly discovers a dark secret he is harboring. Will retired police detective B.G. Rough (Pettingell) uncover enough evidence about Paul's intent and true identity before it is too late to save Mrs. Mallen (Wynyard)?


"Gaslight" is a fabulous thriller set in Victorian London. If the modern day equavilients could have scripts this taught, victims this helpless and undeserving of torment, villains so absolutely sininster and intelligently evil, and camerawork and lighting as elegant and creative as is on display here, I wouldn't constantly be lamenting that the thriller is a dead genre.

The two lead actors in this film give astonishing performances. Paul Mallen has got to be among the most dispicable, evil villains to ever appear on film, and Anton Wallbrook plays him with perfect coldness. Diana Wynyard as the pitiable object of his twisted scheming plays Bella Mallen with just enough confusion and gentleness to make the viewer feel sorry for her but never feel irritated because she is too much of a victim. Instead, Paul Mallen's evil simply becomes that much more evident.

According to the IMDB entry for "Gaslight", when MGM acquired the rights to the film and did a remake in 1944, they attemted to destroy all copies of this original film. Fortunately, they did not succeed, and this very stylish, well-done thriller survives to this day in very good condition. It's one of the many forgotten and obscure cinematic gems included in Mill Creek's 100-movie boxed set, Mystery Classics, and it's one of the reasons many a reasons that set will appeal to lovers of thrillers, crime dramas, and film noir.

The Desert Peach takes to the air!

The Desert Peach: Politics, Pilots and Puppies (Mu/Aeon 1991)
Story and Art: Donna Barr
Rating: Ten of Ten Stars



In the second volume of the collected "The Desert Peach" tales, Donna Barr continues to develope the fictitious brother of Field Marshal Rommel, Colonel Pfirsich Rommel, and the misfits that make up his command staff in the Afrika Korps' 169th Support and Gravedigger Battalion. It's the most fun you'll ever have with the German Werhmacht of WW2, and one of the rare times where you'll find yourself on the side of the Germans while reading. Well, for the most part, because even here there are Nazis to dislike and outright hate.

There are three tales in the book, and every page will have you at least smiling and often giggling.

In the first tale, "Is There a Nazi in the House?", Berlin big-wigs are coming to inspect Pfirsich's base camp with the hopes of finding something to hold against his politically unpopular brother. When he tries to find members of the Nazi Party who can meet-and-greet the visitors, he discovers that no one in is command seems to ever have joined, including the battalion's most fervernt Nazi supporter. IT's a hilarious story as the officers of the Gravedigger Battalion grow increasingly paniced... until they find their single Party Member in the most unexpected place. But even once they've accomplished that, their troubles are not over, and the story only gets crazier.

In the second tale, "Flights of Fancy", Pfirsich takes to the air in his peach-colored spotter plane in order visit his brother's command camp. Along the way, he finds himself in a literal dogfight with a British Spitfire and in a metaphorical ethical dogfight with both his pilot and a German Ace intent on shooting down the British plane even if it's not necessary. The ethical quandry that Pfirisch is confronted with becomes all the more frustrating for him as the Ace in question is his long-time gay lover, a man who decidedly does not share the colonel's attitude that suffering and spilled blood should be minimized even in war-time.

Third, in "A Day Like Any Other", we are introduced to the entirety of Pfirshich's command staff, including his radio operator who has a most unusual disability, through the eyes of the battalion's new chief medical officer. (The new prisoner of war that the unit aquires also serves as yet another way for Barr to showcase the universal respect that her character has for life and human deeceny and the way he approaches everyone with the initial assumption that they share his refined and civilized values.

The book is rounded out by a short story loosely based on real events in Erwin Rommel's homelife, as well as his relationship with his wife and son Manfred. It's a cute tale that infuses a historical figure with a humanity that he is rarely credited with in ficitonal portrayls.

Some of the humor in "Desert Peach" does come from the fact that the younger brother of the more-macho-than-macho legendary Field Marshal Rommel is as flamingly gay as they come, but far more of it comes from the fact that he's a man of honor and sensitivity surrounded by brutes. A very appealing aspect of these tales is also that his high moral character rubs off on nearly everyone he meets.

It makes one wish that reality functioned as it does in "The Desert Peach," because if we were all like Pfirsich Rommel, we all would be living in peace, harmony and absolute tolerance of our differences.

While the book reviewed in this post is long out of print, you can read the stories it contains, as well as many others, by clicking here. (I don't know how long the stories will be available, though.)

Wrongfully accused man vs the 5th Column

Saboteur (1942)
Starring: Robert Cummings, Priscilla Lane, Otto Kruger, Alan Baxter and Normal Lloyd
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Rating: Eight of Ten Stars

A factory worker (Cummings) is wrongfully accused of an act of sabotage at an aircraft assembly plant that claimed the life of his best friend. When no one believes that he saw the real saboteur (Lloyd), he sets out to follow the only lead he has to clear his name before the police can catch him. His investigation and deseperate flight takes him clear across the United States and brings him face-to-face with Nazi agents at the very top of American society.


"Saboteur" was Alfred Hitchcock's first all-American production, and for anyone who has watched his British pictures from the 1930s there are a number of elements that will seem awfully familiar.

Like in "Young and Innocent," the hero in this picture must locate a man that only he knows to exist in order to clear his name. Like in "The 39 Steps," the destructive agents of a foreign, fascist power are hiding behind the veneer of wealth and respectability. And like in both movies, the hero has to rely on the assistance of a young lady (here played by Priscilla Lane) who believes him guilty and is initially trying to see that he gets captured by the authories.

While the three films share similar elements, they are utilized more effectively here, almost as if Hitchcock recognized what was best about those two previous movies and refined those aspects for use here. The pace is brisker and the tension is far higher throughout, until the end where the final few minutes are slightly mishandled.

Basically, our hero is cleared of all suspicion well before the film's famous show piece encounter high atop the Statue of Liberty. I suspect the logic Hitchcock and his screenwriters were using when they decided to put the hero in a position where he would have to save the life of the man who ruined his (and who wanted to ruin the whole country) was that they would underscore his basic decency, However, that climax would have been far more suspenseful if he had to save him or never see his name cleared.


But, letting the factory worker be heroic for the sake of being heroic and for plain respect for another human being's life fits with a theme that runs through the whole movie.

The most fascinating aspect of the film is the portrayal of the common American versus our country's elite. Throughout the film, the fugitive meets and is helped by everyday Americans who are more than willing to lend a hand to someone in trouble., even if it means risk to themselves. But whenever he encounters the rich, powerful or famous, they are either traitors who want to destroy the country they should be thanking for their good fortune, or they are dupes of those who want to destroy the country. Even the film's heroine falls into this category, as she starts the movie out as a typical celebretard who believes herself to be patriotic but who doesn't realize that "her people" are harboring enemies of America.

It seems either very little has changed since 1942, as America's elite still seems to be the place where those with the strongest hate for America and deepest love for its enemies can be found. How many rich and powerful and famous Americans are merely too stupid to see they are pawns of those who want to see America torn down once and for all instead of being actual evil and ungrateful traitors? Are Sean Penn and Danny Glover merely stupid, or are they Fifth Columnists on the magnitude of the villains at the top of the organizations in this film, just lacking in the logistical support from their buddies in Venezuela and Iran to fully bring their dreams to fruition? I hope we'll never know, but I would still wish fewer of American's elite would devote so much time and energy to tearing the country down.

This aspect of "Saboteur" makes it a film that still has something to offer modern audiences even beyond its expert pacing and well-orchestrated final confrontation on the Statue of Liberty (even if it could have been better with a slightly different structure to the overall ending).