|
Post by helrunar on Aug 15, 2019 15:41:07 GMT
Yes, that was the one. I did think about trying to get a copy but was so disappointed by Satan's Slave that I figured all the good bits were in the trailer.
H.
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Aug 15, 2019 21:43:46 GMT
I found Satan's Slave really disappointing. I'd never heard of the director but saw a still of Michael Gough in his ritual regalia, and that was what made me order the DVD (it was part of a set and was quite cheap). The script was kind of dull and there wasn't nearly enough Gough. There was a lot of female nudity and at least one softcore lesbian ritual scene but I am not the intended audience for such things. The "twist" ending struck me as banal. I have a soft spot for Satan's Slave. No doubt the "twist" worked better in 76 than today and it is really no big deal. But for a low budget movie it isn't bad. On the other hand, I really like movies like Virgin Witch, the wacky Polselli movies or Giallo. So I guess I am prejudiced. I am kind of looking forward for the rest of Warren's work. Most of them are new to me, I even missed Insemnoid, as I discovered to my surprise.
|
|
|
Post by helrunar on Aug 16, 2019 1:45:26 GMT
Hi Andreas, I've probably mentioned this before, but I enjoyed The Virgin Witch very much, and I might buy a copy of the disc someday. I'm a huge fan of Patricia Haines, and I thought the mansion where they shot the film brought some unusual character to the proceedings. There's a link to The Avengers, as well--the director of Virgin Witch, Ray Austin, was the fight director on the Sixties series.
I've never seen Inseminoid and have no idea whether there's anything in that I'd find very entertaining.
cheers, Steve
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Aug 16, 2019 18:57:10 GMT
Hi Andreas, I've probably mentioned this before, but I enjoyed The Virgin Witch very much, and I might buy a copy of the disc someday. I'm a huge fan of Patricia Haines, and I thought the mansion where they shot the film brought some unusual character to the proceedings. Both movies are remarkably similar. An old house in the country, a coven, power play among the chosen, a black mass, beautiful girls, sex. The only difference is that Christine in Virgin Witch is a villian while Catherine in Satan's Slave is a victim.
|
|
|
Post by helrunar on Aug 16, 2019 19:38:45 GMT
I thought there was a considerable difference of style and atmosphere between the two films--but I only saw each of them once (albeit in recent years), so no doubt my impressions are quite subjective. I simply thought that there were touches of wit and fun in Virgin Witch that made it quite entertaining for me. Slave started out promisingly but really dragged. I just did not think it was very well written, directed or acted (with the exception of Michael Gough).
Again, there's a lot of subjective impression going on here--and I don't take either of the films very seriously. If you find fun in Satan's Slave, that's marvelous! The world we live in is such a horrible, banal place by and large, so take the moments of fun and diversion where you are able to do so.
cheers, Steve
|
|
|
Post by bluetomb on Aug 16, 2019 19:49:16 GMT
Hi Andreas, I've probably mentioned this before, but I enjoyed The Virgin Witch very much, and I might buy a copy of the disc someday. I'm a huge fan of Patricia Haines, and I thought the mansion where they shot the film brought some unusual character to the proceedings. There's a link to The Avengers, as well--the director of Virgin Witch, Ray Austin, was the fight director on the Sixties series. I've never seen Inseminoid and have no idea whether there's anything in that I'd find very entertaining. cheers, Steve My main memory of Inseminoid other than cheap gore 'n sleaze and cave bound sets is Judy Geeson screaming so loud you can see her fillings, if that interests you at all.
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Aug 16, 2019 22:28:35 GMT
I thought there was a considerable difference of style and atmosphere between the two films-- Absolutly. I meant this in terms of the story elements. Virgin Witch was made a few years before Slave, so Slave seems to be very inspired by it. Slave takes itself too seriously and is leaden in parts.
|
|
|
Post by helrunar on Aug 17, 2019 4:37:19 GMT
Tonight, I'm watching this very theatrical (which means I love it) 1956 US TV adaptation of Fall of the House of Usher with matinee idol Tom Tryon shredding the scenery as the doomed Roderick. I actually really like Tryon's performance--I find it poetic and evocative. I'm a huge fan of the original 1960s Dark Shadows as well as things such as Mystery and Imagination (which did a very beautifully mounted version of "Usher" in around 1966). This "Usher" from '56 seems like a forerunner of such things. www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEOl6kaZ8RE&t=805sH.
|
|
|
Post by helrunar on Aug 17, 2019 18:11:30 GMT
That's hilarious, bluetomb. Poor Judy Geeson. I liked her in various things she did back in the Sixties.
H.
|
|
|
Post by cromagnonman on Aug 17, 2019 21:33:30 GMT
That's hilarious, bluetomb. Poor Judy Geeson. I liked her in various things she did back in the Sixties. H. Her equally lovely sister Sally once shared a bed scene with Norman Wisdom of all people. And I'm willing to bet not many actresses can boast that on their cv. Phwoar Mr Grimsdale!
|
|
|
Post by Michael Connolly on Aug 19, 2019 10:51:33 GMT
You can watch a good print of House of Dark Shadows (1970) here: ok.ru/video/83280005768It's the first time I've watched anything to do with Dark Shadows. While it's basically hackwork, with nothing new in it even by 1970, it is effective apart from some clunky editing.
|
|
|
Post by ramseycampbell on Aug 21, 2019 13:03:45 GMT
It is worth remembering that to date there have been no good Lovecraft adaptations. My favorite, Roger Corman's EDGAR ALLAN POE'S THE HAUNTED PALACE is ok, but nothing more. There have been faithful adaptations, in the sense of faithful to the plots of the sources, by the H P Lovecraft Historical Society, but they are ultimately just fannish in-jokes. I should say - indeed, did say in two columns in Video Watchdog - that both HPLHS films are considerably more than that, and I recommend them to anyone who hasn't seen them.
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Aug 21, 2019 15:29:27 GMT
It is worth remembering that to date there have been no good Lovecraft adaptations. My favorite, Roger Corman's EDGAR ALLAN POE'S THE HAUNTED PALACE is ok, but nothing more. There have been faithful adaptations, in the sense of faithful to the plots of the sources, by the H P Lovecraft Historical Society, but they are ultimately just fannish in-jokes. I should say - indeed, did say in two columns in Video Watchdog - that both HPLHS films are considerably more than that, and I recommend them to anyone who hasn't seen them. I've only seen "The Call of Cthulhu", but I agree with you on that, Ramsey. I thought it was excellent, and definitely not just a fannish in-joke (not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that!).
|
|
|
Post by Jojo Lapin X on Aug 21, 2019 16:23:50 GMT
I should say - indeed, did say in two columns in Video Watchdog - that both HPLHS films are considerably more than that, and I recommend them to anyone who hasn't seen them. I've only seen "The Call of Cthulhu", but I agree with you on that, Ramsey. I thought it was excellent, and definitely not just a fannish in-joke (not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that!). Yes, that is right, just gang up on me! I can take it.
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Aug 21, 2019 17:55:26 GMT
I've only seen "The Call of Cthulhu", but I agree with you on that, Ramsey. I thought it was excellent, and definitely not just a fannish in-joke (not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that!). Yes, that is right, just gang up on me! I can take it. See, now you've made me feel bad. Still, I'll hide behind Ramsey: I'm only little (just had to have an extension cord put on our new blind because I couldn't reach the toggles), so you won't even notice me.
|
|