Dear Frankie: Spoiler Edition!

Dear Frankie, The Spoiler Fest!

By Kristin Battestella

Are you ready for a new spoiled filled and conjecture laden analysis on the 2004 charmer Dear Frankie? 

 

This is your last call to stay with my straight laced review here before getting down and deep with the lingering juicy and thought provoking this lovely little film provides! 

1. When does Frankie know The Stranger isn’t his Father?

Young Frankie seems to immediately know something isn’t right when he reads and crumbles the newspaper in his pocket, and most likely has his suspicions confirmed when he gets home and checks his now unrealistic map. He has to make the bet with his friends to save face, but he’s angry on his way home, running up the stairs and tracing the boat motif on the wall as he goes up in physical representation of his silent realization – they have been the ones on the move, not the Accra ship he’s read about in his letters. He later writes a letter, perhaps coming to terms with it by saying he understands if his dad can’t get shore leave but hopes he’ll be at the soccer trials nonetheless. Is this Frankie’s way of asking for his mother’s help? He knows the truth, but not the why and is reluctant to look in his mother’s locked closet for answers.  She’s loves him and has gone through so much trouble – Frankie wants an explanation, but doesn’t want to hurt her. He even says right from the beginning that he knows about the boat and thinks that his dad just doesn’t want to see him. Later, Frankie also writes that he suspected his dad may have been sick a long time already and either can’t or won’t see them. He also suspects that they moved there because his mom wanted to have his dad find them, suggesting that he has already let go and now it’s her turn to leave the past. He writes his shortest letter to accompany the drawing he knows is going to his real dying father. At that point he has apparently known for awhile, and has already forgiven his dad.

It’s also possible that Marie tells Frankie everything when he runs out on the morning before the Stranger’s arrival, or he may tell her he knows and they all go along with it for Lizzie’s sake. Either way, Frankie knows all along the Stranger is not his dad, but he loves the book and is impressed with the lengths taken for this new charade. The Stranger has taken the time to read his letters, doesn’t eat fish at Frankie’s behest, and willingly helps win his bets. The dear boy wants to enjoy the illusion for the day, and writes to Marie on her order pad that this is his dad, perhaps telling her he is pleased with the Stranger and agrees with the matchmaking possibility. We don’t hear their conversation, but Frankie was probably the one who wanted the Stranger to take him the dock and as close to the ship as he would get. The Stranger gives himself away as a non-seaman by saying “go on” instead of ‘onboard,’ but is also implying he would break the ship’s rules and take Frankie aboard if he so desired. Frankie in turn, keeps the skipping rock rather than tossing it in new appreciation of the Stranger’s devoted efforts.  Honestly, it’s not a case of when Frankie knew, it’s why we ever thought he was so fooled because the charm of Dear Frankie had us fooled.

2. Why do they have the second day with The Stranger?

It is the Stranger, not Frankie who suggests the idea of a second day with all three of them, and Frankie looks over their stair railing while the Stranger talks to his grandmother – knowing Lizzie was not at home because she was following them throughout their day. The Stranger has asked Frankie to chaperone a new date – they have had their day to resolve his bet and now it is her turn. This notion certainly confirms Frankie has known all along, for his mother said his father would see him, but not her. Now, however, the Stranger has asked for more time for all of them together and she is dressing up and wearing make up for their afternoon. Where Nell had always spoken ill of his father before, she now sits on the bed with Frankie and compliments the skipping rock his “daddy” gave him. She wears her hair in rollers, puts on nail polish, and has a girl’s moment with her daughter as if all is well again. Until the ill news about the real dad Davey has her symbolically wiping off that polish thereafter.

The Stranger also tells Frankie he is in charge for the second day, and the boy sits the adults next to each other whenever possible, runs ahead as they walk together, has them eat from the same snack bag, and even rolls his eyes at the way they are looking but not looking at each other. He nudges Marie into making them stay for the dance, and Lizzie plays with her wedding ring several times. She is definitely thinking about the possibilities of the Stranger despite her insistence to the contrary. Frankie also seems to pick up on the fact that Marie’s boyfriend and the Stranger have already met – he gives a thumbs up when the men comment about all the beers they can drink. Is it a coincidence that they sing Lizzie’s favorite song at the dance? Of course not, and the music fades out because we are seeing and hearing Frankie’s perspective of his ‘parents’ dancing and falling in love.

Frankie may even pretend to be asleep so he can be carried by the Stranger. He stresses that he wants him to come back, not his real dad, and gives him the sea horse to remember their moment at the aquarium together. The Stranger answers he doesn’t know if he’s coming back – not because he and Frankie haven’t bonded or that the Stranger doesn’t want to, but because Lizzie has to make the call. She has to make the first romantic strides. Rather than saying something like ‘I love you, son,’ the Stranger says, “We are all connected,” confirming if Frankie had any doubts about him not being he real father. They both know they are not united by blood or law but have connected over this time, and hopefully that will be enough for her, too. That unforgettable doorway minute, the way the Stranger waves goodbye at the window, even Nell seems sad over her cigarette the next morning – it’s clear no one wants the Stranger to leave but not the week before they had been running from Frankie’s dad. Clearly, a new page has been turned for not just Frankie, but now Lizzie as well.

3. What did the Stranger actually do?

Was the Stranger truly a sailor with a ship soon departing? Probably not, although he does claim to have business at the docks. Is it some nefarious cargo perhaps? He repeatedly claims that his ship sails on Monday, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he is setting sail. The Stranger drinks Americano coffee and doesn’t quite dress like a sailor or merchant man either. He obviously pays the man to stand on the ship, for though it’s not subtitled, you can hear someone yell something like ‘Hey! Who’s that?’ when the Stranger waves from the Accra. He maintains he’s not a betting man, but he makes several bets just like Frankie and insists on not revealing his own history even when Lizzie says their arrangement has changed. He seems to agree on the change as well, even though he initially only expected a paying job for a day. He picks up the baby photo of Frankie, is almost overcome by Frankie’s reaction to his gift book, and feels uncomfortable fully embracing him despite his apparent success at the fatherly ruse. Did he loose a child perhaps? How did Marie know to set up her brother with Lizzie unless she knew they might share a similar pain and healing need? The Stranger stares at Frankie, studies his face against the fish tank, and enjoys experiencing these childhood races and simplicities. Were these opportunities previously taken from him? Marie says Lizzie need not fear that the Stranger will take Frankie from her, but he has no problem interacting with the boy. Yes, the Stranger forgets Frankie is deaf from time to time but he doesn’t go out of his way to treat him differently, either. The Stranger also doesn’t seem to need the money, as he buys the book, tips the dock man, and pays for all the food and beers before he secretly gives Lizzie back her unopened money envelopes. Why does he let her think he was doing it for the pay alone, to keep up the pretense that her ruse is a success? He and Marie cover up on the beer and cigarettes mistake and tell Lizzie what she wants to hear. In the end, does it matter who he was before? Now he is everything Lizzie and Frankie want him to be.

4. Does the Stranger come back to Lizzie and Frankie?

Frankie takes down his map and throws the skipping stone away after his last letter, meaning they are all starting fresh without the previous charade. Why does the Stranger even go at all? Lizzie was still technically married, and perhaps the Stranger did have business that needed to be attended to, but these are small hurdles compared to what Lizzie and Frankie have already overcome. They need to grieve for Davey briefly, close the final chapter on the bleak past before facing the bright future. When the Stranger returns, he will do so as himself totally, without Frankie’s real father overshadowing them. Lizzie tells the dying Davey that Frankie has a new father and waits until he is dead before asking Marie who the Stranger was. She closes her post office box thereafter, and is surprised to find Frankie’s letter to the Stranger there. How else was the boy to share his thoughts on the matter? He wanted his mom to know and sends the picture for her – he also posted the letter on his own, proving he knew she was the one who handled them previously. Frankie addresses the last letter with “thanks for the book…Ma and I had a shock… Your friend, Frankie.” He has let go of his real father, the Accra illusion, and now remains open to a future with the Stranger. Mother and son now sit hopefully in wait, with Lizzie having accepted that she doesn’t have to be both parents any longer.  Sniff sniff.

5. Why, why have the director and writer not done a sequel to Dear Frankie or made more films?

Beat the $%^@ out of me but I wish they would! 

Horror Documentaries, Again!

Horror Documentaries, Again!

By Kristin Battestella

Well I suppose we can’t watch horror all the time, so this is the next best thing – a whiff of askew non-fiction, horror informatives, and otherwise macabre programming to tide over our terrible little minds.

Biography: Stephen King – This 2000 television hour chronicling the best selling horror author details his quiet, poor early life in Maine, the abandonment of his father, awkward school years, and his initial love of reading, making primitive newsletters, and adoring horror movies. Although fans of the man himself probably feel this profile could have been longer – heck, just a full forty-five minutes of talking to King would be delightful – anyone who has delusions of grandeur about being an author can learn something here. Interviews with King, his wife Tabitha, and other family and friends keep the presentation from getting into the entertainment hyperbole style that so many of the more recent Biography episodes unfortunately offer – however some of the New England accents might be amusing or tough to distinguish for broader viewers. Thankfully, the natural, honest conversations and smooth narration focus on King’s efforts as a struggling young writer and family man, and it’s refreshing to see these behind the scenes difficulties discussed so candidly by the man we so often raise as the twisted and macabre industry standard. Newer King readers can have a thoughtful, pensive introduction here along with longtime horror audiences interested in the spooky King craft. 

Corman’s World: Exploits of a Hollywood Rebel – “By mistake he made a good picture every once in awhile,” a tearful Jack Nicholson sums up the campy but beloved tone of this 90 minutes plus with extras spotlight on Roger Corman featuring interviews with Martin Scorsese, Robert DeNiro, Ron Howard, Dick Miller, Joe Dante, Bruce Dern, Peter Fonda, Pam Grier, William Shatner, brother Gene Corman, and many more. Frank conversations on the cheap, trashy, tastelessness of Corman’s low budget style are counterbalanced with insights from the unassuming gentleman himself, and time is well spent on his early Hollywood dissatisfaction before becoming a one man movie making team for American International Pictures. Interesting retrospectives on the current outrageous blockbuster obsession and Corman’s under appreciated legacy also harken back to then radical perspectives about leaving the Golden Age studio system to develop the new wave of teen cinema and social commentaries thru lesser known, controversial work such as The Intruder and favorites like Easy Rider. There’s not a major horror focus here beyond mentions of the offbeat A Bucket of Blood and The Little Shop of Horrors or House of Usher and the success of the Price and Poe cycle, and exploitation film clips, language, nudity, gore, and LSD talk make this tough for a classroom viewing. Sadly, the references and politics of the time may also not be fully understood by today’s younger audience. However, film school aficionados and cult geeks will love seeing how many Hollywood stars and styles have a Corman independent film touch.

The Frankenstein Files: How Hollywood Created a Monster – Found on the 1931 Frankenstein video releases, this bemusing and self-referential 45 minutes begins with the Mary Shelley source and continues with the still standing film iconography. Interviews with Sara Karloff, film historians, and modern filmmakers discuss the early stage presentations, make up designs, difficulties in going from page to screen, and the long lasting sympathy of the monster and his childlike innocence. These scholars, family, and film friends have a lot to say and the presentation may seem too fast paced or all over the place to some – a little bit of everything including German expressionism, James Whale influences, clips from Gods and Monsters, Dwight Frye typecasting, and Karloff opinions is covered in the time here. Most of the time is also spent on the first Universal film before touching on Bride of Frankenstein and other sequels, the monster mash ups films, and Hammer retellings in the final ten minutes, but increasing plot implausibilities and film flaws are also frankly discussed. A lot of the material is second hand reminiscing, too. However, the anecdotes will be charming for horror fans and classic film lovers alike.

The Road to Dracula – The recently late Dracula co-star Carla Laemmle – niece of Universal head Carl Laemmle – hosts this half hour look at the Stoker phenomenon’s rise from page to screen. Film historians, museum curators, and interviews with Clive Barker, Bela Lugosi Jr, and Dwight Frye’s son anchor comparisons to the 1931 Spanish version of Dracula and clips of the Universal 1979 adaptation. Laemmle’s narration is understandably a bit wobbly and sprinkled with a few old lady saucy quips, but the wealth of insights shared is too much fun for a horror enthusiast. The discussion could certainly have been longer as well, with an all encompassing look at Dracula films and adaptations, but talk on Stoker’s genesis, silent film interpretations, Lugosi casting gold, and long lasting capes and widow’s peaks setting the vampire standards are more than enough to chew on here. Intimate, nostalgic insights accentuate the behind the scenes points, making this retrospective perfect for the classroom and horror or classic movie buffs.

Bela, Boris, Lon, and John

Bela and Boris and Lon and John

By Kristin Battestella

Well it’s no Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice. However, what horror fan doesn’t want a night in with any of these terrifically terrifying gents? 

Gallery of Horrors – It’s known by numerous titles and there are certainly better anthologies, but host John Carradine classes up “The Witch’s Clock,” the first tale in this 1967 amalgam. Colorful mists and ominous music over the opening credits set the mood along with old décor, cobwebs, and typewriters, but the low budget production shows in the hasty editing, rushed plots, and cliché spooky double talk. This hokey scripting and telling instead of showing doesn’t help the mostly wooden second tier cast either, and the period “King Vampire” story serves up commonplace crime theories instead of capitalizing on its small town suspicion and hysteria. “Monster Raid” also goes for a nonsensical over the top narration instead of its intriguing mad scientist experiments, but Lon Chaney Jr. gets his Dr. Frankenstein on in “Spark of Life.” Despite heavy possibilities, fun performances, and an intriguing one room laboratory setting, this leg moves entirely too fast. I’d love to have seen Our Man Creighton tackle this in his prime! The fifth and final “Alucard” tale has better scripting and delivery, and the twist makes up for any confusing action. The film as a whole isn’t bad – in fact, it can be fun to spot the reused backgrounds and footage from the Corman/Poe cycle films in some sort of mash up drinking game. However, the video is dark and tough to see at times with some innate flaws, and the fast, harmless fun feels designed for juveniles or short attention spans. Maybe that wasn’t the intention at the time, but the none too scary, moody, and atmospheric fun is perfect for a kid’s sleepover or family movie night. 

House of Frankenstein – Before House of Dracula (already reviewed here), sad wolfy Lon Chaney Jr., slick wannabe mad scientist Boris Karloff, and seductive vamp John Carradine ganged up for this 1944 70 minutes along with Universal horror company hunchback J. Carrol Naish, carnival showman George Zucco, and inspector Lionel Atwill. Yes, there are loose connections to the titular tellings – a brother who was supposedly an assistant in the monster raising – and even more timeline questions and canon fodder from Frankenstein meets the Wolfman. However, great lightning, storms, prison escapes, macabre atmosphere, shadows, and fun plot twists keep up the intensity. All these monsters somehow afoot on the continent! Though hokey at times today, the moody sets, contemporary dressings, carriage chases, ice caverns, and neat effects for Dracula’s resurrection, trick rings, and bats must have been wartime wild to see. The whiff of romances and young couples are dated as well, and Anne Gwynne (The Black Cat) is more fun under Dracula’s brief spell. Some of this monster action feels like mini vignettes moving from one spooky segment to the next rather than concurrent interwoven plots, but everyone has his scene of ominous and there’s plenty of conflict for this Universal monster road trip. Longtime fans can wing it with the rally fun, but younger audiences interested in classic horror might find this to be a bemusing starter piece, too. 

The Human Monster –A poor print, primitive video release, and woeful audio mar this 1939 75 minutes also called The Dark Eyes of London. It’s tough to tell what’s happening at times, and the usual cop colloquialisms litter the plodding pace along with unnecessary transitions featuring people walking to and fro or telephoning up for tea. Fortunately, Bela Lugosi is looking suave in a pre-war stylish suit and belying his nefarious doctoring swindles. His switcharoo subtlety between a generous façade and the slick power of suggestion is disturbingly entertaining. Though the creepy organ music and destitute conditions add to the eerie portrayal of the blind, there’s isn’t a lot of macabre or enough Bela onscreen – most of the focus is on the generic cops and their one step behind antics or the amiss humor. Screaming damsels in straight jackets and the shootout finale, however, make up for some of the obvious crimes. And did I mention the fashion nostalgia and spinning newspaper montage? Today’s audiences won’t find this one that scary and a proper restoration would do wonders, but Lugosi fans can enjoy this fun in a marathon with other lesser known Bela treats.

The Old Dark House – Bride of Frankenstein director James Whale opens this 1932 70 minutes with a bemusing Karloff disclaimer insisting that this is the same versatile actor from Frankenstein before serving up Oscar nominee Gloria Stuart (Titanic), winners Melvin Douglas (Hud) and Charles Laughton (The Private Life of Henry VIII), and more over the top character archetypes and cliché family crazy. Yes, Douglas’ playboy hero is too flippant to start, the of the time delivery is a bit much, and some of the song and dance mannerisms, humor, and Jazz Age attitudes won’t be appreciated by today’s viewers. I wouldn’t call this a black comedy per se either, but the self-aware wit is wonderfully conscious of the contrived circumstances, each one thing after another situation, and every suspense increasing psychotic family member. That lovely roadster and more vintage style anchor the firelight, shadowy reflections, and dark framing – this is a well-filmed picture with no hokey stunts or action speed. Thunder, lightning, rumbling mudslides, and a creepy Welsh manor match the off kilter camerawork, shock moments, and near brow beating harshness of the titular owners. There are only a few sets, but the stage-like atmosphere builds its mood through character reveals. While it may be tough to hear or understand without subtitles, interesting personal dialogue, awkward interwar conversations, and religious arguments add intellectual substance to the family secrets and romantic tiffs. Expected Whale suggestions and a whiff of scandalous pre-code lingerie add some juicy, too – not to mention our simpleton but drunk, touchy, and menacing butler Karloff! Despite a somewhat quick resolution and a few innate flaws in this once lost film, the surprisingly fun but creepy old age make up, unexpected twists, and horror smarts hold up delightfully for today’s gothic thriller audiences. 

And Two Documentaries!

Karloff: The Gentle Monster – This 2006 38 minute documentary is not the hour long Biography episode of the same name but rather a lovely little retrospective found on the Frankenstein blu-ray releases. Although the beginning briefly mentions Karloff’s pre-Universal film appearances, the focus here is with the subtle, silent sympathy of Karloff’s monstrous characters and his long lasting horror appeal. From Frankenstein to later stage work beyond horror such as Arsenic and Old Lace, film scholars and historians discuss early comparisons to Lon Chaney, difficulties with horror make up’s infancy, and more scary film glory with classics such as The Mummy and The Black Cat. Attention is given to Karloff’s quiet success as a character actor thanks to his physicality and ability to be both frightening and sensual at the same time along with his spooky television series and his tireless work across mediums and generations. This is the voice of How the Grinch Stole Christmas, people! It’s also interesting to see movie buffs theorizing on the over reaching and decreasing quality of the studio’s Frankenstein series, beating it into the ground as the franchises, sequels, and remakes do today. Boris fans and horror lovers can eat up the clips and nostalgia here, for sure.

Lugosi: The Dark Prince – Like Karloff, Bela Lugosi’s early life and acting career before Dracula go unnoticed in this 36 minute documentary accompanying the 1931 Dracula blu-ray video. Interviews with genre directors Joe Dante, Jimmy Sangster, and other film scholars and authors instead spend the majority of time here on Lugosi’s quintessential appearance in the budding horror cinema and discuss how his phonetic learning of lines accentuated his hypnotic, handsome, somewhat scandalous and always sensual acting style. This masterful paranormal charisma of course unfortunately typecast him, but clips and analysis on Murders in the Rue Morgue, White Zombie, Son of Frankenstein, and The Raven will be a treat for those interested in the irony of Lugosi’s long lasting iconography but relatively short-lived success and underatedness as an actor. Even if the talk isn’t about the man’s personal life per se, there are great insights into the craft here, making for a lovely little bittersweet study on the quick rise and fall of a horror icon.

Recent Horror Goods

More Recent Horror Goods!

By Kristin Battestella

Yes, these new millennium scares have some flaws and bumps in their dark, scary roads. However, most of the spooky here is a fun, creepy good time perfect for a quick contemporary fix or a marathon movie night with genre friends.

Below – Bruce Greenwood (Thirteen Days), Olivia Williams (The Sixth Sense), Matthew Davis (The Vampire Diaries), and Scott Foley (Felicity) do well in this 2002 World War II set haunt thanks to oceanic isolation, natural trappings, wartime fears, and mechanical failures. Ironically, the submarine secrets and mutiny don’t really need any paranormal or ghostly elements to keep the thriller pace intense – the paranoia and duress of the situation is enough for some boat bound mayhem or maniacal. Fortunately, the crew and company here are also fully aware of the inexplicable in their circumstances. The script smartly has the characters consider the expected horror movie twists on their fate – are they already dead themselves and ghosts hearing the living recovering their watery tomb? Pure horror audiences may dislike Zach Galifianakis (The Hangover) and his moments of humor, but the quirky, ironic wit here isn’t the laugh out loud jokes so often seen in today’s bad blends of comedy and scares. It’s also refreshing to see an unusually set period horror piece today – this isn’t contemporary nor Victorian gothic but has some of the brooding atmosphere of black and white forties horror.  It’s great to have old-fashioned uniforms, see records, and hear Benny Goodman yet the design here also feels a bit too modern. The boys look too all-American chiseled, and the submarine design and effects come across as too CGI laden rather than looking off the past as they should. There are a few questionable moments and some obnoxious shipmates that viewers will be happy to see depart, but this remains an entertaining 100 minutes with an intriguing mystery that needs to be carried through to the end. 

 
Insidious and Insidious: Chapter 2 –Poltergeist meets Inception with these 2011 and 2013 films from director James Wan and writer Leigh Whannell. One interwoven plot of ghosts, possessions, psychic phenomena, séances, and paranormal equipment traverses across these two films; worlds blend together as our in fear family moves from one haunted house to next – be it modern scenery or spooky Victorians. Hypnosis, multiple locations, and activity in both the real world and astral arenas create layers of surreal and conflict while fog, lighting, zooms, odd camera angles, wide lenses, filters, and color photography distinguish dreams, flashbacks, and dimensions. Camera flashes and flashlights for lighting are not nearly as obnoxious as in films that literally resort to all flash and no substance, but the booming music cues and painfully loud sound effects shock for the sake of shock when the eerie soft noises and subtleties do better. Herky-jerky movements, found footage, and abandoned hospital scenes in Chapter 2 also seem like out of place Ghost Hunters add ons and convenient newspaper clippings and laying about medical files too easily replace the traditional research montage. Fortunately, the cast classes this duo up, and Rose Byrne (X-Men: First Class), Patrick Wilson (Phantom of the Opera), Barbara Hershey (Beaches), and mediums Lin Shaye (Dumb and Dumber) and Steve Coulter (Coma) all have something to do even when the script gets convoluted. Whannell and Angus Sampson (Spirited) ease and heighten fears with their love/hate humor and innuendo, but only Ty Simpkins (Little Children) as child in peril Dalton is actually needed – the unnecessary second son and baby are extraneous plot devices used for baby monitor scares and they disappear without explanation in both pictures. Jobs, detectives, doctors, and other realistic expectations also fall off as the tale goes on– neighbors don’t hear this racket? Why did the Lambert family moved to start the tale? Was this haunting there or did the astral abilities disturb the unidentified spirits? The passage of time isn’t always clear – months move but forensic results that should take a few days seem to happen in a few hours. Psychic capabilities, their origins, and rules of the supernatural locations are vague, and the demon of One has no explanation compared to the familial evil and Freudian basics of Two. These questions don’t sink the ship, but the writing and direction feels too assembly line complacent instead of structured and polished. The First film finale will be frustrating as well, for it feels more like an abrupt second act of a play. There’s too much material here for one supersized long form film, but these two halves must be see together in one marathon just to pick up on all the hints, remember the connections, and to truly see all the acts of the piece at work. The character journeys, resolutions, shadows, monsters, and scares tie together well enough that now it is surprising that these films were not written and shot back to back but instead came several years apart. In addition to repeat footage from the first movie and an open ending for the forthcoming third film, knowing Chapter 2 was actually a capitalizing follow up after the fact does cheapen it somewhat, and it’s also apparent that either Wan or Whannell has some unresolved issues with dolls. Saw, The Conjuring, the forthcoming Annabelle spinoff, and Dead Silence don’t immediately seem related in subject matter, yet all have similar creepy lipstick faces, puzzles, toys, and scary toppers. They can’t all be in the same universe thanks to repeat casting and such, but these films are certainly in the same vein with an obvious if you like one, you’ll like another style. This feeling follows these Insidious pictures, and despite intriguing film within a film facets, aha moments, emotion, complexity and action to keep up the surprises and intensity for both films, wise horror viewers can easily solve a few of the mysteries here. Not everything has a tidy coda answer – some of that is intelligent and some of it plot holes – but you have to pay attention for several viewings to get all of the Insidious goodness.

 

Stoker – A cryptic start, bizarre opening credits, distorted visuals, a superficial avant-garde, and CGI that’s a little too noticeable interferes with this 2013 family creeper penned by Prison Break alum Wentworth Miller and starring Mia Wasikowska (Jane Eyre), Nicole Kidman, and Matthew Goode (Brideshead Revisited). Fortunately, the abstract setting, older radios, cool cars, symbolic saddle shoes, retro fashion, cursive ink, and operatic flair create a mid century affluence – the camerawork need not call attention to itself thanks to an already intriguing funeral and awkward relations. Photography placing the dark and red ladies in competition or in suggestive poses with the ominous man of the hour does much better, and quick editing between multiple locations builds criminal suggestion, helping to balance the waiting for something to happen pacing and unevenly kinky and murderous tone. Brief cell phones and flat screen TVs airing obviously parallel animal predator programs spoil the mood a bit, but a solid phone booth appearance makes up the difference. Director Park Chan-wook (Oldboy) does layer too much style over substance, but this is indeed a straightforward first time script too reminiscent of other thrillers. Wasikowska’s India is a pretentious small game hunter turned anti social peas in a pod, and her escalating killer instinct, sexual awakening, and hunter versus prey reflection are no great surprise. Throwaway relatives toppers and a flashback history that could have started the picture are tossed in late despite fine fifties innuendo, familial catalysts, interesting characters, repeat viewing requirements, and the potential to dig deeper. Ironically more Hitchcockian and Grace Kelly-esque than her ill-received Grace of Monaco, Kidman is clearly in saucy pursuit of her brother-in-law, but she’s not as stupid or desperate as she seems. Goode, of course, is the noticeably creepy uncle feigning sexy older cool while being even more skivvy via dialogue laced with subtext and French flavors – gardens with soft soil for digging deep, young wine not ready to be popped, and all that. Though not horror per se or really all that scary, this is worth seeing through to the end thanks to the macabre, old school feeling and quirky, entertaining disturbia.

A Split Decision

Bag of Bones – I want to like this 2011 ghostly family tale for the fine cast, including Pierce Brosnan (GoldenEye), Annabeth Gish (The X-Files), and Melissa George (Triangle). The performances are enjoyable along with the rural, upstate setting, water scenery, and cool cabins. Some of the obligatory writing aspects are fun, too. However, even having not read the Stephen King source, one can tell this is poorly adapted, borrowed material that confusingly tries to endear whilst also using scary dreams for shockers, confusion, and audience mistrust. Despite the King of Horror pedigree, the slow pace often takes too long to get to the ghostly shenanigans, and though atmospheric, none of it is horrific. This didn’t need to be two parts, and every scene feels like it has its own unnecessary establishing scene before it. Other films have done this same type of paranormal resolution in a taught ninety minutes, and the plot here is surprisingly similar to the 1981Ghost Story adaptation – a Jazz era indiscretion, a familial curse, a female haunting, and an attempt at bodily appeasement. Prophetic connections aren’t fully explained, and too many questions are left unanswered – did he do the final revisions for his book or not? A few spiritual confrontations are downright laughable, too, like ghosts tossing records to deter people back up the stairs. Hit 007, you possessed tree, smack him with your leafy branches! These action missteps become hokey wastes of time in what should be a straightforward town mystery. King references may be fun for some viewers but too on the nose obvious or annoyingly pointless for others. This is entertaining to watch, even bemusing, but it’s also yelling at the TV frustrating thanks to convenient technological uses and contrived clues. All in all, I remember the bad more than the good, and that’s not the best way to do a memorable adaptation. 

Apparitions

Apparitions is a Fine Spiritual Thriller

By Kristin Battestella

What if Mother Teresa was possessed and died during an exorcism? So begins Apparitions, a 2008 6-part British tale chronicling a modern day exorcist caught between the bureaucracy of Rome and the demons running amok in London. Who knew?

Father Jacob (Martin Shaw) tries to help a young family in fear of demonic possession, despite Cardinal Bukovak’s (John Shrapnel) insistence that Father Jacob is over stepping the bounds of his archaic exorcism office. Sister Ruth (Siobhan Finneran) is placed as Father Jacob’s secretary to keep an eye on him, but she begins to question the strange goings on around their parish – and their mysterious patient Michael (Rick Warden), himself a victim of possession in Satan’s master plan to birth new and powerful evil on earth. Can Father Jacob unravel these demonic intentions and save the lives and souls of those around him, or will his own institution and the non-believers inside and out inadvertently allow evil to triumph?

Blasphemous suggestions, debates on canonization, and behind the scenes church happenings are immediately intriguing to start Episode 1 of Apparitions. However, series writer and director Joe Ahearne (Ultraviolet, Doctor Who) and co-creator Nick Collins (Murder in Suburbia) also smartly endear the cast and plots with quickly relatable young girls with possessed dads and seemingly inspired Leprosy healings. There’s a pleasing attention to detail as well through battle of wits dialogue, historical dates, and specific examinations. Are the saints as active in earthly work as demons – even in prisons and with rapists seeking repentance? Perfumes versus foul scents, appearing and disappearing eerie figures, and more devilish implications create a paranormal but religious CSI design with no need to resort to nasty priesthood innuendo. The flaws of the church, however, are certainly acknowledged; exorcisms are recognized as medieval hokey, and the misbelieving even make some Hammer Horror jokes. Are such non-believers all possessed by evil? Of course not, but are all men of the cloth touched by grace? Nope. Apparitions confronts the whole lot of grey in between thanks to multiple storylines and layers of legion; the longer serial format gives room for deeper demonology dimensions, legal issues, social services, church hierarchy, government battles, and family debates by Episode 2. A film would have one monstrosity excised with the confrontation against evil resolved in several hours, but Apparitions offers a possession infrastructure to mirror the church’s chain of command. Who knew being a priest was such dangerous work? Apparitions remains self aware with quips – “Don’t make many enemies in your line of work?” “Only Satan.” – and provides fantastical but honest discussion on humanity being the battleground between good and evil where our flaws, temptations, and those to which we would or would not do harm are used against us. Casualties and sacrifices happen in this spiritual warfare, and Episode 3 raises the stakes as Apparitions uses its individual hours or multi part arcs to tie its larger plot together. It was probably tough to watch Apparitions from week to week thanks to the somewhat rolling cast and changing righteous or evil affiliations, but binging several episodes at a time keeps the soulful character dilemmas in focus.

Demonic pregnancies and abortions gone awry push the exorcism twists further in Episode 4, but these upsetting, controversial themes remain delicate and compelling. Where is the line between deformity or evil showing upon one’s person, disability, mental illness, and possession? Do we encounter demons daily but remain unaware as we argue the fine line between medical rights, patient privacy, and religious need? No one wants a priest interfering with healthcare, but interesting commentary on how medicine was once thought of as superstition helps plead the spiritual case. Demons, of course, thrive on perversion and seek to be born in emulation of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. Even people who think they believe are shocked when they encounter the possessed on Apparitions. Episode 5 mixes Islam and supposed visions of the Blessed Mother with hopeful, miraculous moments, and this good standing tall balance keeps Apparitions from being too somber or serious. Can we recognize these good or ills among us? Do we invite the devil in while supposedly differing religions recognize our common evil enemy? Apparitions poses a lot of questions and can be lofty at times in hypothesizing whether humanity is inherently bad or good, and some secondary people or plots end up forgotten and unresolved by the Episode 6 finale. Several excellent supporting players don’t have any follow up time, and this one series could have perhaps been 8 or 10 hours instead of 6. Fortunately, great guest stars and core characters facing their own demons provide more thought provoking muster. Could you work for evil just once to save millions? The needs of the masses certainly outweigh the cost of one’s own life – or soul. The finale pieces together all the significant dates, anniversaries, and births to up Apparitions’ ante, testing its faithless by having them perform exorcisms and face their own catastrophes. Once you open the door to hell, can it be closed? Does God let evil in only to prove good’s triumph? For all its doom and gloom on evil and possession, Apparitions is a powerful spiritual show about the underlining good needed for the job, cloth or no cloth.

Apparitions producer and star Martin Shaw (Judge John Deed, Inspector George Gently, The Professionals) looks the mature, priestly part as Father Jacob and is certainly up to the credible, experienced, and soft spoken but kick ass task. His rapport with young Romy Irving (Public Enemies) overcomes her fear and ours as Father Jacob puts pressure on and pursues his investigation for the true cause – there’s no time to pussyfoot around when souls are at stake! Father Jacob firmly believes Satan is amidst our daily lives but must continually defend his exorcism office even to fellow church members who think he is relic of the past. Father Jacob embodies an interesting debate – he doesn’t want people to suffer to prove his point, but the possessed are the exact people he must excise. How much pain is saving the world going to take? You don’t need to believe to enjoy Apparitions thanks to Shaw’s everyman alone style and the doubts cast upon him by others. Why do so many immediately resist the opportunity for his help or take extremes to spit in his face? Is it easier for people to run from faith when they should fight evil or help good to happen? Father Jacob is an anchor for his office, yet Shaw also provides excellent internal conflict and silent reflection. His line of work always leads to death, but Father Jacob must continue to fight the good fight. A very strong script also helps Shaw take it to the next level – he always has a good comeback or the right thing to say to the possessed, the believer, or the church that is both for and against him. Father Jacob has to break the rules and does what he has to do, and Apparitions is a worthy ride because we want to see Father Jacob succeed against all this dang earthly red tape just as much as we root for his quest against supernatural evil.  

Are these miracles on Apparitions done for good or ill? Guest priest Elyes Gabel (Game of Thrones) adds more conflict and temptation while addressing homosexual ideologies within the Catholic Church. Are the ones concerned with what is thought to be the unclean or questioning their faith and role in the church the ones closest to God that the demons seek to trick and enter in? David Gyasi (Interstellar) as prison chaplain Father Daniel wants to take action and is a resourceful ally for Father Jacob, but doubts what he witnesses during exorcisms. Wouldn’t you? Shaun Dooley (Red Riding) also represents a realistic father trying to handle divorce and parenting before possession becomes a factor. Why does he have to justify his family to the church, indeed? Rounding out the ensemble is Rick Warden (Band of Brothers) as the perfectly disturbing, demonic, and desperate Michael. His Holocaust parallels and waxing on why God allows evil to happen are sickly good television. The devil is, after all, a master wordsmith and persuasive little fellow who exploits our fears and weaknesses. Michael’s struggles with his possession are eerily correct in many aspects – cast out one demon on Apparitions, and another takes his place. Ultimately, Satan wants your soul, or better yet, the best soul he can find. The higher evil can climb, all the better. Thus is the battle on Apparitions.

Some of the female characters on Apparitions, however, are somewhat under written as either helpful, bitchy, or obstacles as needed and could have stayed around much, much longer. Sassy nun Michelle Joseph (Eastenders) feels under utilized as the good counterbalance to numerous cliché non-believing beotches, but detective Stephanie Street (20 Things to Do before You’re 30) does better as a strong sensible lady seeking answers to these crimes. Can justice be served legally and spiritually or does one office trump the other? Likewise, abortion clinic doctor Claudia Harrison (Murphy’s Law) is willing to consider Father Jacob’s theories whilst also seeing to her patients needs, and psychologist Claire Price (Rebus) seems objective but her atheist stance and evaluations for the church clash just a bit. Cherie Lunghi (Excalibur) also provides a very interesting debate on the devil as seduction, and it is such a loss that Apparitions didn’t continue for a second season. Just seeing Lunghi and Shaw go toe to toe in this ongoing good versus evil war would have been delightful enough! Thankfully, Siobhan Finneran (Downton Abbey) is a strict but fun Sister Ruth with worthy wit to match Shaw as Father Jacob. She starts out an unofficial spy for the suspicious, jerky but juicy, and career advancement seeking John Shrapnel (Gladiator) as Cardinal Bukovak, but Sister Ruth is wise enough to make up her own mind in whether she is for or against what’s happening. She certainly plays with that vow of obedience as needed! Again, this evil fighting priest and nun tag team antagonism would have been fun to see in a Series Two. Pity.   

The look and feel of Apparitions is appropriately foreign and ecclesiastical, too, with plenty of priestly robes, aged buildings, and inspiring or brooding locales from London to Rome. Smart uses of Latin prayers and Italian dialogue also accent the drama, which doesn’t go for shocking full on horror in its solid 55-minute shows. Of course, there are disconcerting touches of gore, blood, and skin – and not as in nudity skin, either – and subtitles will be necessary for these soft-spoken accents and multiple languages during the tense moments of exorcism, violence, and surprises. Despite old world candles, chapels, and rituals, the medieval rite in the modern realm also makes amusing appearances. Oh, a second priest isn’t handy for an exorcism? Let’s just call him up and put on the speakerphone! Excellent intercutting, uses of light and dark photography, colored lighting, and zooms up the intensity, and music, prayers, and near chanting rhythms heighten simultaneous action. People do shout or talk over each other, but this works when the languages or prayers are being translated – or when taunting demons are causing mayhem while those unseeing speak on, unaware. Fiery fantastics and walking on water spectacles do have their moments in the final two episodes, but most of Apparitions relies on the cast in action or reaction before special effects. Sometimes the imagery of the possessed tapping on the church gates waiting to enter in is really all you need to send your demonic tale home.  

Some audiences may be put off by the totally steeped in religion setting of Apparitions, and the variously heavy subject matter is obviously polarizing. This is however an intelligent presentation of a frightening implication, a word of warning on the dilemmas both internal and external akin to the classic “The Howling Man” episode of The Twilight Zone. Despite sensational topics and a dabble in the supernatural realm, Apparitions does not go for the scandalous or shocking but remains a mature analysis on body, mind, and soul – you won’t find everything wrapped in a pretty bow here like other exorcism films that declare all is well. The plots remain personal with small people amid the institutional framework solving mysteries and using clues in this tormenting game against evil – a game evil wants to play with you. Mainstream sophisticated viewers, casual horror fans, and even the non uber religious can enjoy the good versus evil drama of Apparitions.

Just Vamps 3!

Just Vamps III!

By Kristin Battestella

Uno, dos, tres – we are rounding up another batch of saucy and classic vampire delights to whet your appetite! 

Captain Kronos Vampire Hunter – The titular Horst Janson (Murphy’s War) certainly looks suave in his period frocks and frills for this 1972 later day Hammer romp co-starring Caroline Munro (The Spy Who Loved Me). Though perhaps tame compared to its vampire film compatriots, writer and director Brian Clemens (The Avengers) provides a nonetheless edgy mythos with anti-vamp forged swords, hints of blood, bats, creepy mirrors, a whiff of nudity, kinky innuendo, hypnosis, swordfights, horses, and dark, hooded figures running amok in the idyllic countryside. Sweeping music or silent approaches accent the religious and righteous suggestions, and the vampire mystery and family intrigue remain unique thanks to a Scarlet Pimpernel–esque twist and a fun, hunchbacked John Cater (The Duchess of Duke Street) sidekick. Some modern viewers may find the vampire revelation obvious or the opening to slow to get rolling. However, the moody moments and supernatural atmosphere make for a few intense scenes, and some running dry wit adds brevity along with a surprise or two. Astute Hammer fans may also notice a Karstein connection, and I wish a Kronos series would have continued as planned. Why wasn’t this the successful outing needed to save Hammer Films? A bigger name star may be lacking, perhaps someone like Michael York would have brought a cashing in wink or zing. However, Kronos is meant to be a somewhat unlikable anti-hero, and his tormented hunting style feels like a precursor to some of the darker vampire fighters to come. Ironically, studios today would milk a property like this dry. C’est la vie. 

Dracula – Many others have already written about this 1931 classic – myself included briefly here. However, I simply must take a moment to talk about the superior blu-ray restoration of Tod Browning’s widow’s peak trendsetter now preserved in the Universal Classic Monsters: The Essential Collection. What’s this, no jumping print, damaged frames, hissing noise, or flat, barely visible dark scenery the likes of a worn VHS? The black and white photography is crisp, the sound smooth – even soft focus up close shots and foggy, hazy forests look of depth. Background matte paintings blend seamlessly along with decrepit castle cobwebs, coffin-laden basements, and silver screen candlelight. All the smoke and mirrors classic effects have been dusted off and shined anew here, and Bela’s hypnotic eyes have never looked so good along side the polished Demeter footage, and well dressed stage interiors. Yes, the bobs and women’s frocks are more twenties that Victorian, but the atmosphere is nonetheless period gothic effective. Zooms, decadence, and the decrepit are still captivating thanks to this revitalized distinction and dimension. In addition to commentaries, alternate scores, trivia, and more than an hour of behind the scenes featurettes, once again, blu-ray makes the vintage vogue, and longtime fans should upgrade ASAP. 

 

Dracula (Spanish Version) – Luckily, one of the features accompanying the Bela Lugosi essential on blu-ray is this once lost and found 1931 Spanish edition. The introduction from star Lupita Tavar sheds light on this brief, early talkie trend of producing foreign language movies during the off hours of the English filmmaking using the same script, sets, and designs. The result certainly looks crisp in high definition yet it’s quite bizarre to watch two such similar films – those lookalike opening carriage scenes and some word for word exchanges accentuate the eerie mood and gothic feeling. Extra smoke, cobwebs, spooky sound effects, and music also add more flair than its sire, and though still stage like in its presentation, there’s more camera movement, risks with cinematic design, and smart shadow usage. Carlos Villar, however, takes getting used to as the titular conde thanks to his near comical London After Midnight expressions amid the otherwise serious cast. While not Lugosi, Villar benefits from the flashy filmmaking and stays creepy with more up close shots and spooky zooms. This Dracula is not suave but intentionally stilted like a corpse and more ogle predatory. Pablo Alvarez Rubio as Renfield, fortunately, is much more subdued in his maniacal, and the anachronistically divine silks, scandalous furs, and seductive frills keep the ladies saucy. Indeed, this edition feels more about the frightful ensemble and their explaining dialogue rather than the vamp himself. We look at this production in comparison to its English neighbor, but it truly comes together as an entirely separate film. Hopefully more Dracula and vampire fans will see and study this edition now – movie scholars can have a glorious time with scene by scene comparisons and analysis!

Innocent Blood – Netflix very long waited the full screen DVD of this 1992 mob meets vampires thriller – there are no subtitles, it wouldn’t play in our PS3, and the violent action sounds are ridiculously loud compared to soft-spoken dialogue. Not to mention most of the picture is too damn dark to see all the city smoke, candles, old time noir ambiance, and nudity. Suffice to say, this movie totally needs a proper video release! Thankfully, the cast – including Robert Loggia (Necessary Roughness), Anthony LaPaglia (Without a Trace), Angela Bassett (Strange Days), Chazz Palminteri (A Bronx Tale), Luiz Guzman (Boogie Nights), and Don Rickles (Casino) – is having a good time with director John Landis (An American Werewolf in London) and this tongue in cheek atmosphere accented by swanky Sinatra tunes. Anne Parillaud’s (Nikita) French accent will be tough for some but her unconventional sensuality does wonders. Her opening narration isn’t really necessary, but she’s a vamp in both senses of the word, subtle and unassuming yet deadly and over the top. Sassy Italian elements also provide a mid century gangster feeling – there are classic horror movies on the boob tube TVs, too – and Loggia is totally having a good time with this eccentric mash up. Word to the skinny dames out there, “A little meat on the bones never goes out of style!” Snappy dialogue, colorful metaphors, and badass quips contrast the red eyes, bloody feedings, and one gory but hysterical morgue. The intersecting crime, cops, and chicks add complexity amid the comedic moments and humorous circumstances, and I don’t know why audiences don’t like the camp horror blend of this picture more, as it’s done much better than today’s attempts. Some horror fans may not like the intrusion of crime plots and action fans may not like the vampire contrivances, but this deserves a look for its uniqueness and winking good time.

Anastasia (1956)

Anastasia Remains a Lovely Little Tale

By Kristin Battestella

Granted, we know the fate of the Romanovs was not as hopeful or romantic as the award winning 1956 classic Anastasia makes it out to be – complete with fifties splendor, dashing intrigue, and a whole lot of Cinemascope. However, the what ifs, period charm, and excellent performances here shine nonetheless into the new millennium.

Expatriate Russian General Bounine (Yul Brynner) and his cohorts Petrovin (Sacha Pitoeff) and Chernov (Akim Tamiroff) rescue Anna Koreff (Ingrid Bergman) from the edge of the Seine after her escape from an asylum. Together, the trio intends to capture the inheritance of the rumored to still be alive Grand Duchess Anastasia by presenting an impersonator as the lost survivor. Anna – her past unknown – is likeness enough to the Grand Duchess to proceed, and Bounine educates her to play the part in hopes of impressing the exiled Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna (Helen Hayes). Only her approval of this Anastasia will legitimize Bounine’s claim and release the inheritance. Anna’s memories about who she really is, however, shows signs that she may indeed be the lost Romanov heir – and Bounine is no longer certain of his mercenary intentions once Anastasia’s former betrothed Prince Paul (Ivan Desny) renews his marital pursuit of the would be Grand Duchess.

Based upon Marcelle Maurette’s play about real life Anastasia pretender Anna Anderson, opening scrolls fill in the back-story on the 1917 Revolution and establish the possibility for Anastasia’s Paris 1928 tale from director Anatole Litvak (The Snake Pit) and writers Arthur Laurents (Rope) and Guy Bolton (Easter Parade). Today we’re tainted by knowing how the history actually turned out, however, Anastasia almost makes you believe. The filming is closer to the interwar period than to us in the in 21^st century, further inspiring our suspension of belief and realizations that Grand Duchess or not it may not even really matter who Anna is. From the proverbial princess training to the limited time window of acceptance, Anastasia tells its story in fine progression but doesn’t give the audience everything. Contemporary spoon fed viewers may not like this opportunity to make up their own minds, and when viewing as kids in the eighties, my sister and I always argued as to whether she isn’t or isn’t the titular Grand Duchess. I’m still not so sure we have a definitive answer, yet the nuanced performances, subtle style, and romantic possibilities make for ongoing rewatchability in spite of the real world facts.  

Sure, the tender old ladies and the swelling music accenting their believing will be overly sentimental for some; perhaps too many grumpy old men contest Anastasia just to make a proving point for her. The audience is quickly caught up in each leg of the approve or disprove, however, and thanks to an appropriately regal European cast, we go along with the unforced chemistry. Anna and Bounine have a rocky start and different motives, but scenes with them shouting at each other from opposite rooms are a headstrong treat. The camera remains focused on the common living room with their open doors on either side, and the wit is allowed to blossom with a play within a play wink. This is, after all, an actress hired for the role, people are pretending to endorse her, and when is their show really over? Anastasia’s conclusion may upset some with its was she or wasn’t she, but this is perhaps one of the most memorable classic film endings. It’s totally fitting and could not have been done any other way.  

Is Anna Koreff merely sick after an asylum stay or delusion that she is the Grand Duchess Anastasia? Ingrid Bergman (Casablanca) makes us care regardless of the truth. Anna’s on the run mentality and flight from authorities is understandably based in the fear of what she doesn’t know and can’t remember. Whether she is a princess or not, this is a troubled woman needing redemption. Her desolate wandering Paris scenes may feel fifties overdone, but they are also stunning snapshots of the time and visually represent her on the edge state of mind. Does Anna latch onto Anastasia’s story and tell so many lies that she believes this identity is true? Mixed uses of both “I” and “she” keep the sense of self in crisis, and Bergman is able to be small, meager, and confused like this woman trapped in her little girl in the cellar nightmare. The wavering between Anna’s supposed train accident and the trauma of the Grand Duchess Anastasia becomes a tormenting inner conflict always brimming at the surface. She coughs, hunches over in longtime illness and burdens, yet Berman has some bemusement at the ruse as her class and grace shine and Anna blossoms into confident, regal poise. Will this act heal Anna or will she cut her puppet strings and ruin their inheritance plot? It’s a bittersweet performance from Bergman, as it is both melancholy on the past yet hopeful on the possibilities of a fresh start. Will Anna find her new life as a princess or as a woman in love – and which does she really want?

Now then, not only was he not even nominated for The Ten Commandments, but Yul Brynner never would have won an Oscar for playing the notorious lead villain Ramses II – though I confess I’ve always preferred him to the heroic Charlton Heston! Likewise, he was never going to win anything for Anastasia after the Academy politics already relented and quote forgave Ingrid Bergman for her perceived scandals and rightly awarded her the Best Actress Oscar. Brynner, of course, did ultimately win Best Actor for The King and I, which was perhaps graciously awarded more for his already longstanding history with the character on stage than for the actual movie musical. I would however like to think his Oscar trophy was awarded for this stunning sum trio of 1956 films, as in my mind, General Bounine in Anastasia is Brynner’s best performance. Initially, Bounine seeks to capitalize on the Grand Duchess returned and collect her lost inheritance and takes pride in this subterfuge. Bounine is fast-talking and claims he’s putting on no pressure and wants you to make up your own mind, yet at the same time, he tells you exactly what you are going to think. Anna’s cleverness, clues, and what ifs, unfortunately, do better than he expected, and Bounine’s thought of everything except the possibility of her really being Anastasia. Is this the wrong woman or just the right one pulling the rug out from under his plans? Bounine has faith in nothing but himself and wants a passable fake, yet he goes on his own journey of self-discovery by falling in love with his charge. Brynner sings and plays guitar in Anastasia as well, bringing a sentimental Old World feeling to Bounine. The General would perhaps have things as they were or thinks more of his lost country than he admits, and with such a mix of hardened and romantic, Bounine is not an easy character to pull off. Fortunately, Brynner presents a surprisingly stern but warm company to match Bergman. Who’s really discovering whom in their charade? Simply put a paragraph too late, I don’t think anyone else could have played this part so wonderfully.

Adding to the Imperial poise in Anastasia is the beautifully refined and much lauded Helen Hayes (A Farewell to Arms) as the exiled Dowager Empress. She’s a dolled up little dame, but also an old lady hanging on to this past grandeur – one who’s lost everything but her acerbic wit. The poor thing is understandably crabby after facing all these pretenders and now a “madwoman with a royal obsession,” but she puts down Bounine and sees right thru him even when he won’t say what’s on his mind. Are he and this pretender using her personal tragedy for vulgar reasons as she says? Can the Dowager Empress open herself to believing she may just yet have her granddaughter returned to her? “Wanting a dream doesn’t make it come true,” she says, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t hoping this is the one. It’s a darling performance by Hayes, yet the sappy isn’t without some sass or humor thanks to the banter with Martita Hunt (Brides of Dracula) as the Dowager’s goofy lady-in-waiting Baroness Livenbaum. I love it when the Empress tells the Baroness that for a woman her age, her fantasies of Bounine are disgusting! Likewise, Akim Tamiroff (For Whom the Bell Tolls) and Sacha Pitoeff (Is Paris Burning) are largely for the brevity and questioning of Bounine’s scheme early on in Anastasia. Ivan Desny (Bon Voyage!) as Prince Paul is also a fictitious character designed for romantic conflict – he’s charmed by the eponymous lady whether she is or isn’t his once lost and former intended. Paul unabashedly admits that women and money are certainly worth all this trouble, and though Desny can’t stand up to Brynner, the prince makes an interesting mercenary counterpoint to Bounine in Anastasia’s final act. And say hey, there’s Natalie Schafer – Mrs. Howe on Gilligan’s Island!

Colorful reds, velvets, Old World objects, and cluttered apartments also accent Anastasia with a bittersweet Russian flavoring while a somber Oscar nominated score from Alfred Newman (State Fair) remains classical and period sweeping. Can I get a cheer for that crank record player, too? Though some of the twenties via fifties looks may be inaccurate, there’s a real sense of lost splendor in the Orthodox Easter opening and concluding ballroom ceremonies. The old cars, hats, cigarettes, and time capsule Paris and Copenhagen locales also look divine along with white frocks, sweeping staircases, and onscreen orchestras touting Tchaikovsky. Subtitles will be necessary to catch all the tough to hear Russian names or now less common upscale French phrases, but this whiff off pre-war Edwardian manners and even earlier Victorian pomp and protocol re-imagined as mid century can’t quite be recreated today. Ironically, the DVD menus are surprisingly plain with no music or crafty designs; however, a brief restoration comparison and an old school Biography episode on the real life Anastasia provide film and real world history balance. Though dated, it’s fantastic to compare the grainy black and white photographs and archive footage of the Romanovs against the vivid fifties grandeur just seen – perfect for the historian or classroom to discuss. Now, someone please tell me there are plans for a 60^th Anniversary blu-ray edition coming soon!

Anastasia waxes nostalgic with exiled royals reminiscing on what was supposedly so splendid a time and this might anger viewers who think differently today. Luckily, the charm of the tale, style of the film, and excellent performances win out against any lingering politics or sense of aristocratic mood. In fact, compared to the tragically identified bodies accounted for nearly 100 years later, Anastasia may be even more revered now as a time capsule of past hopes and romantic escape. The Dowager Empress says she can smell the mothballs but the past remains “sweet and familiar.” Somehow, the film’s self-aware Gone with the Wind reflection and celebration of former luxury still let’s you choose which tale you’d rather believe. Fans of history, period dramas, classic film, and powerhouse performances can delight in the always entertaining and charismatic Anastasia.