Double Feature: The Awakening (1980)/The Lair of the White Worm (1988)

Bram Stoker has achieved literary immortality, but his other supernatural novels are frequently forgotten or ignored. This is understandable, as none can touch the greatness of Dracula; yet I have a certain soft spot for The Jewel of Seven Stars, his 1903 novella of Egyptian mysticism, reincarnation, and murder, which was a precursor to Universal’s The Mummy (1932) and its series of spin-offs and rip-offs. The story is occasionally adapted for the screen by those who desire to toss Bram Stoker’s name into the advertising, but any link to the Count is misleading, at least on the basis of the somewhat staid source material. Mystery and Imagination, a British series adapting classic literary horror stories, took on the book in 1970 (they also adapted Dracula, and the series is available on DVD in the U.K.). It was inevitable that Hammer take a swing, but it’s surprising that it took the studio so long: it wasn’t until 1971 that they gave us Blood from the Mummy’s Tomb, begun by Seth Holt (The Nanny) and completed by Michael Carreras, offering a suitably dream-like version as well as the voluptuous Valerie Leon, in varying degrees of cleavage. In 1979 Universal revisited Dracula, ostensibly to adapt the hit stage revival with its star, Frank Langella; a big-budget production directed by John Badham, with Sir Laurence Olivier as Van Helsing, a score by John Williams, and some stylized sequences overseen by Maurice Binder of the Bond series, the film was hastily followed by a big studio Jewel of the Seven Stars adaptation that also involved Binder’s participation, plus Jack Cardiff (Black Narcissus) as cinematographer and a major star at the helm. That film was The Awakening (1980), but it was no monster mash.

"The Awakening": Egyptologists Matthew Corbeck (Charlton Heston) and Jane Turner (Susannah York) uncover the resting place of Queen Kara.

The poster for the film featured a wrapped-up mummy with glowing eyes and crossed arms below the tagline “They Thought They Had Buried Her Forever!” Anyone entering the theater expecting to see a female version of Christopher Lee’s stalking and strangling mummy would be disappointed. Instead, the film deploys its death scenes with stinginess – most occur in the last twenty minutes – and the traditional mummy icon makes barely a cameo. No, this is an adaptation of the Stoker story, reasonably faithful and what critics call “deliberately paced.” Director Mike Newell was graduating to the big screen after more than a decade in British television, with Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994), Donnie Brasco (1997), and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) yet to come. He was given a major Hollywood star – albeit a waning one – with Charlton Heston in the role of Egyptologist Matthew Corbeck, obsessed with a dead queen named Kara, unaware that the woman’s spirit has occupied the body of his eighteen-year-old daughter Margaret (Stephanie Zimbalist, later of Remington Steele). The Awakening is heavy on omens and short on events; much of the film is simply Corbeck searching for the tomb, raiding it, and conniving to take as many of its artifacts as possible back to England. Stoker’s novel doesn’t follow the mummy-on-the-rampage plot dynamics of Universal or Hammer mummy sequels, and Newell doesn’t pander to those urges. When the deaths do commence, they are brutal but brief. It’s satisfying to see Margaret slowly overtaken by the spirit of the vengeful Queen Kara – a transformation the audience has been anticipating for a long while – but the ending is so abrupt that it’s likely to elicit nothing but frustration.

Heston prepares a ritual to resurrect Kara, while his possessed daughter Margaret (Stephanie Zimbalist) looks on.

Tellingly, two of the three credited screenwriters authored the Daphne Du Maurier adaptation Don’t Look Now (1973); it’s easy to imagine that Newell was going for a similar effect. Like that (superior) film, the focus is as much on the psychic turmoil of its central characters as it is the genre horror elements. The discovery of Kara’s tomb is told parallel to the dissolution of Corbeck’s marriage. The striking of the excavator’s pickaxe against the face of a cliff is cross-cut with the sharp birth pangs suffered by Corbeck’s wife; his entry into the hidden tomb occurs simultaneous to the birth of his daughter – which, significantly, he does not attend. It is made clear, visually and aurally, that the discovery of Kara’s sarcophagus draws her spirit out into the modern world, reanimating his stillborn daughter. When Margaret is grown, she exists such in Corbeck’s fearsome shadow that it seems natural she should transform into the object of his fixation, the dead queen. Though we know the history – that Kara was forced to marry her pharaoh father –  it’s still unnerving to see Margaret plant an incestuous kiss on her old man’s lips. Incest and sins of the father become the main themes of The Awakening, though Stoker had other things on his mind. I enjoyed the atmosphere, Egyptian locations, and self-seriousness, but self-seriousness can only go so far. Stoker’s novel had a severed hand that killed, a sensationalistic detail that the 1980 version won’t touch. But sometimes a movie could use a severed murderous hand. For all the rigorous intellectualism on display in The Awakening (tomb = womb!), I’ll revisit the more shamelessly entertaining Blood from the Mummy’s Tomb more often.

The Lady Marsh (Amanda Donohoe) tempts Eve (Catherine Oxenberg) from a tree, in one of the many sly scenes in Ken Russell's "The Lair of the White Worm."

A completely different approach was taken for The Lair of the White Worm (1988), but one shouldn’t be surprised: Ken Russell was at the helm. Back in England after a brief attempt at working within the Hollywood machine (Altered States), he had lower budgets but as expansive an imagination as ever, as can be judged by this film and the same year’s delirious and wonderful Oscar Wilde tribute Salome’s Last Dance (1988). The Stoker source material was a 1911 novel in which the woman who moves in next door is revealed to be of an ancient race of giant shapeshifting snakes. In the book, a terrifically promising setup – an ensemble cast and a tactile sense of the eerie, a la Dracula – is undercut by an absurd and deflated ending. Russell seems to acknowledge the weaknesses. His Lair of the White Worm is a horror comedy that exists somewhere between Fright Night (1985) and Lisztomania (1975). He doesn’t try to convince the audience to believe in the reality of the supernatural elements, as Newell attempted; he wholeheartedly embraces the story’s ridiculousness with a very British wit.

Lord D'Ampton (Hugh Grant) and Angus Flint (Peter Capaldi) discuss the matter of the local snake cult.

Amanda Donohoe (of Nicolas Roeg’s Castaway) is ideally cast as Lady Sylvia Marsh, a literal man-eater whose tight dresses accentuate her slinky wormishness. Investigating her suspicious behaviors are a group of young friends: Angus Flint (Peter Capaldi), Lord James D’Ampton (Hugh Grant), and Eve (Catherine Oxenberg) and Mary (Sammi Davis) Trent. The film opens with Angus’s discovery of a dragon-like skeleton in the ground – establishing the story’s connection between Russell’s blood-drinking villainess and the “worms” of old – and soon enough his cast are having blasphemous hallucinations using the kind of overheated Catholic/sexual symbolism Russell mined to such upsetting effect in The Devils (1971). Yet nothing is quite so serious here, as becomes evident by the time Marsh prepares to feast on a boy scout. While the boy is paralyzed by her venomous bite, trapped in her hot tub, she holds a dragon-skull above her head and launches into a speech about human sacrifice, only to be interrupted by a ringing doorbell and a muttered “Shit.” Snake references abound, from Donohoe’s stuffed mongoose to a scene in which she plays a game of Snakes and Ladders. While his friends go to investigate Marsh’s mansion, Grant blares snake charmer music from a record player to keep Donohoe mesmerized – which works, until the power goes out; a moment later Grant’s slicing of a vampire in two with his sword – meant to evoke his kinship with Sir George (and his dragon) – ends with him toppling over backward into a drumkit. Ultimately the film is a giddy romp – which is surprising, considering Russell’s pedigree of the defiantly unpalatable. Still, when he can’t resist costuming a topless Donohoe with a horn about her torso like a mock phallus during the climactic sacrifice sequence, it’s clear that he’s keeping obscene outrageousness within easy reach. This may not be Stoker, but as a midnight-movie cover of one of the author’s deeper cuts, it’s borderline brilliant.

Posted in Double Feature, Theater Caligari | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Double Feature: The Awakening (1980)/The Lair of the White Worm (1988)

Killer Party (1986)

It’s April Fool’s Day, and the girls of Sigma Alpha Pi are celebrating with a costume party shared with the boys of Beta Tau. It’s to be held in a frat house that was shuttered following the accidental death by guillotine of some lad named Alan. These things happen. Among the attendees are best pals Jennifer (Joanna Johnson), Vivia (Sherry Willis-Burch), and Phoebe (Elaine Wilkes), newly initiated into their sorority via severe hazing rituals that christen them “Goats” (during their secret ceremonies, they dress in togas and chant baaaa). The girls hope to use the party to hook up with some of the rowdy boys from Beta Tau, but interrupting the festivities are some morbid April Fool’s pranks, including a faked stabbing and beheading. While these carefully-orchestrated gags play out in the party’s center stage, in the darker corners of the frat house a trident-wielding killer in a diving suit stalks the guests. Could this be the spirit of the murdered fraternity brother come to wreak his vengeance on the college kids of 1986? Or is this just another elaborate joke?

Phoebe (Elaine Wilkes), Vivia (Sherry Willis-Burch), and Jennifer (Joanna Johnson) anticipate pledging to Sigma Alpha Pi.

Killer Party (1986), filmed in Toronto, is one odd little bit of Canuxploitation, drawing from mismatched inspirations and tossing them into a blender: the slasher film, the teen sex comedy, a haunted house, demonic possession, 80’s hair band music video. The plot is similar to that of April Fool’s Day, released the same year; the stars in the sky must have demanded that slasher cinema tackle this particular holiday posthaste. Both films involve a series of sophisticated (and not-so-sophisticated) gags that escalate until the audience becomes skeptical of what is unfolding – and that’s when Killer Party, in its last fifteen minutes, takes a sharp turn into the realm of The Evil Dead (1981). And the idea of a killer targeting sorority girls on a holiday derives from a classic Canadian horror film, Bob Clark’s Black Christmas (1974) – one of the high watermarks of the slasher genre. The majority of the film, however, plays not like a horror film but another riff on Animal House (1978) with a dash of the cartoonish (and also Canadian) Screwballs (1983). Journeyman director William Fruet (Spasms, Blue Monkey) seems more interested in the hazing of the sorority girls and the shenanigans of the frat boys than in the actual horror – which, when it finally comes, is relatively bloodless, as the camera cuts before we witness any gore. All this makes the film’s final lunges into wall-crawling spirit possession that much more bizarre and unexpected, and not necessarily in a good way.

White Sister performs "April (You're No Fool)."

Killer Party is perhaps most memorable for its time-padding, rug-pulling opening sequences. The film begins with a funeral led by a cheerful priest (introducing us to one of the movie’s defining characteristics: broad overacting). The man quotes The Wizard of Oz, then elaborately introduces each of the attendees – as though this is the main cast, and the audience is supposed to be taking notes. One of the women waits until the chapel is vacated, then hurls insults at the coffin. The coffin opens, the dead man drags her inside, and they are lowered through the floor so both can be cremated on a conveyer belt, Diamonds Are Forever-style. This, we learn, is just a horror film playing at a drive-in, as Fruet cuts to a very 80’s teenager making out with her boyfriend in a car. Her journey to get some popcorn suddenly becomes a zombie-laden, “Thriller”-themed music video for the band White Sister, seen enthusiastically performing their song “April (You’re No Fool).” The music video credits appear in the corner of the screen, a la MTV, as again we pull back to see the girls who will be the main characters of this film. One can take this as being a clever riff on the April Fool’s theme – or that the film ran short by ten minutes and needed something to bring it to a solid ninety. I’m inclined to think both are true.

Professor Z. (B-movie icon Paul Bartel) meets his shocking demise.

Though it grasps in all directions, Killer Party fails to meet the basic standards of the subgenres that it references – not bloody enough for a slasher film, not funny enough for a comedy. The killings don’t begin in earnest until almost a full hour into the film. Still, with the script’s crazy-quilt assembly of tropes, 80’s fashions, and Canuck enthusiasm, the hapless Killer Party somehow manages to be entertaining. The late great Paul Bartel, director of Death Race 2000 (1975) and veteran of countless cult movies including Hollywood Boulevard (1976), Rock ‘n’ Roll High School (1979), and Eating Raoul (1982), livens the proceedings as the straight-laced Professor Zito, who meets his end via electrocution. Martin Hewitt is top-billed, but fellow frat boy Ralph Seymour, as “Martin,” gets more screen time, playing a truly bizarre misfit who is inexplicably obsessed with Flaubert’s Madame Bovary, hits on every girl in sight, and panics at the sight of a severed head – long after it’s been revealed to him to be a fake. Joanna Johnson, who gets to climb the walls and throw a girl off a roof in her demonic rage, joined The Bold and the Beautiful the following year, to which she’s remained loyal ever since. Director Fruet spent many years in television, directing for syndicated shows like Friday the 13th, War of the Worlds, and Poltergeist: The Legacy. An attractive, remastered Killer Party is available on DVD from Warner Archive.

Posted in Theater Caligari | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Killer Party (1986)

Rosemary’s Baby (1968)

There is a key scene which sums up the whole of Rosemary’s Baby (1968). We are just over halfway through the film. Rosemary Woodhouse (Mia Farrow), who has been chalk-white, ruddy-eyed, and in physical pain since the start of her pregnancy, is upset that something is wrong with her child. She has just held a party with her friends, and in confiding to them, is more resolute than ever that she needs to get a second opinion from a doctor who was not recommended by her nosy next-door neighbors, the Castevets. In the aftermath of the party, she sits in a chair in the middle of a room, dirty dishes on the table behind her, the floor such a mess that it looks like a bomb has detonated, and her husband Guy (John Cassavetes), who was against the idea of the party from the start, paces angrily; “The thing to do now is move,” he mutters.  “Guy,” Rosemary says, “I’m going to Dr. Hill Monday morning.” She repeats the concerns voiced to her by her friends, as though carefully recited; picking up on this, her husband calls those women “not very bright bitches,” and the argument quickly escalates to shouting. Guy has become strangely loyal to the Castevets, and Rosemary’s incredulity peaks when he offers a lame excuse for why she shouldn’t consult a different doctor than Sapirstein. “I won’t let you do it, Ro, because, uh – because it’s not fair to Sapirstein.” He can’t even look her in the eye as he says this. She suddenly rises and hovers over him, pencil-thin, blonde hair and white face and red eyes, as he cowers in his chair, the power suddenly shifted: “What are you talking about? What about what’s fair to me?” The argument continues, the struggle moves across the room. And finally she stops. The pain has subsided for the first time in months. She feels her baby kicking, and she is suddenly overcome with the wonder of carrying a life inside her, of being a mother. She knows her own body. The baby is okay. “It’s alive,” she says happily, in an eerie echo of another film’s famous line. She draws Guy’s hand to her belly to feel his unborn child, and he recoils and nervously retreats, his pitiful excuses now almost incoherent little phrases; “Don’t be scared, it won’t bite you,” she says.

Guy (John Cassavetes) and Rosemary (Mia Farrow): "It's alive, Guy, it's moving."

Famously, Cassavetes had a few rows with the film’s writer and director, Roman Polanski, whose first American film this was. Of course, Cassavetes was a groundbreaking filmmaker in his own right; his independent films were more freeform and improvisational, and one of his most influential films, Faces, would be released the same year. (I read an interview with Polanski some years ago in a magazine that was reprinting the script to Rosemary’s Baby. When asked what he thought of the then-recent The Blair Witch Project, the director responded that he liked the film, but that it was evidence of why you shouldn’t let actors write their own dialogue.) It is easy to see why the two directors would be at odds – and, poor Polanski, he had producer William Castle, originally slated to direct the film, hovering over his shoulder too, though he states they got on fine. Polanski plots his films painstakingly, much as Hitchcock did. Details are important. Blocking is important, and so is placement of the camera – what the camera sees and what it almost sees, like those famous shots in the film in which we peer around doorways to eavesdrop on conversations. His camera, in Rosemary’s Baby, is intensely subjective; it represents Rosemary’s gaze. With that gaze he likes to plant details that will pay off later. Just look at the initial elevator ride at the start of the film, as Elisha Cook Jr. takes newlyweds Farrow and Cassavetes to see the apartment on offer: Polanski’s camera takes particular note of the elevator operator, and then swings downward to mark that the elevator doesn’t stop evenly with the floor – the man has to manually adjust until they’re aligned. Unnecessary detail? No: later, in the film’s centerpiece dream sequence, we see the elevator operator steering Rosemary’s boat into a typhoon (“You’d better get below, Miss”); and in the climactic moment when she is being chased through the apartment building, she guides the elevator herself up to her floor, misses aligning it properly, and stumbles out face-first into the hallway as though that little gap were a steep cliff. Both of these moments emphasize the film’s nightmarish style.

"The name is an anagram." Rosemary tries to decode Hutch's final message.

I find it easy to imagine this film as directed by either Castle or Cassavetes. Both directors had distinctive styles of their own. (Although thank God this film doesn’t have a “Fright Break.”) Castle wasn’t a bad director, and many of his films have genuine wit to them, but by as late as 1968 he was irretrievably typecast as a showman whose films leaned heavily on their gimmicks. He hadn’t the subtlety this film needed, and Robert Evans, newly appointed as Paramount’s head of production, insisted that Polanski would direct, impressed by his European thrillers such as Knife in the Water (1962) and Repulsion (1965), the latter another intensely subjective, hallucinatory horror film. Cassavetes would have been a more interesting choice than Castle. He had greater claims than Castle to being part of the New Hollywood, and though he seemed to despise this kind of pulpy genre material, perhaps at this stage of his career he might have invested himself fully in the project. There would be more hand-held shots, more exploration on the set, more input from the actors. It would have been a looser film, to be sure, and more raw. It may not have been superior to what Polanski pulled off – I strongly doubt that – but a Cassavetes-led horror film in the pivotal year of 1968 would have been a touchstone film of some kind, and is worth considering, even though we can’t be certain that Cassavetes ever would have considered it himself; he was never offered. It was only when he was on set that he began inserting his opinions, much to Polanski’s frustration.

Rosemary on the prowl.

The after-party sequence I described is done in a single take, a virtuoso moment for both the director and the actors. It’s precisely designed and beautifully executed, but it’s easy to see why Cassavetes might have found Polanski’s style claustrophobic, his opportunities for exploration as an actor limited. Still, the confrontation between Guy and Rosemary Woodhouse is one of a handful of scenes in the film which can remind the viewer of a Cassavetes picture. Both he and Farrow let loose at one another in a way that we haven’t seen in the previous hour-and-twenty minutes; the film has been building toward this, as the newlyweds’ playful chatter and bedroom eyes have slowly given way to paranoia, isolation, and poisonous distrust. Later in the film, as Rosemary stumbles out of that elevator and locks herself in her apartment, frantically calling a friend for help while the barbarians are at the gate, we reach another moment than recalls the emotionally harrowing style of Cassavetes: suddenly Guy, Dr. Sapirstein, and friends of the Castevets are somehow inside her bedroom, and as the doctor prepares to inject her with a sedative, she explodes, screaming and raving, and they are forced to hold her down. Simultaneously, Sapirstein discovers she’s in labor. Here I cannot imagine Polanski directing very differently than Cassavetes. The horror in this horror film is never more clear, but it is rooted in the emotional betrayal of a loved one. Yet it took Polanski’s approach to give this moment such an impact: the rules, the structure, the fussiness and precision of his style are all shattered, such that the viewer can feel that a trap door has suddenly opened from below. Polanski – whose early shorts are every bit as jazzy as Cassavetes’ first film, Shadows (1959) – might be a controlling director, but he knows when to let go and unleash chaotic energy. That contrast lends the film much of its emotional force, and is part of the reason why the film has endured as a classic.

Rosemary’s Baby was issued on Blu-Ray last October as a spiffy Criterion edition. Extras are not carried over from Paramount’s prior DVD release – I’ll hang onto that, so I can keep the 1968 “Mia and Roman” featurette – but a new hour-long retrospective from Polanski, Farrow, and Evans is thorough and invaluable.

Posted in Theater Caligari | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Rosemary’s Baby (1968)