Thursday, December 24, 2020

TV movies we have known and (sometimes) loved

We're creatures of habit here at the Umbrellahead Review, and two of them are in full effect this Christmas: first, our penchant for posting right before major holidays; and second, our tendency to build up rather large backlogs.

After all, our site's main raison d'être is working through these large Mill Creek (and Mill Creek-esque) box sets, and with the 250 Pack long since under our belt, we're well into Drive-In Movie Classics -- and a few other things besides -- so we have plenty of movies in the queue waiting for reviews.

Even so, we thought we'd offer up something a bit different from our usual fare: namely, a homage of sorts to a form of entertainment whose origins may be humble, yet whose influence on us has been long-lasting.


We mean, of course, the TV movie -- a term that's come to mean something different in the era of the Hallmark Channel, not to mention Syfy and the "Lifetime original", though here we refer to the original concept of a movie made specifically for free over-the-air broadcast.

Neither of us are really old enough to grasp the full arc of the TV-movie phenomenon. At some point, we don't know when, it became vaguely comical: a trashy, defanged version of what one could get in the real cinema, featuring plots "ripped from the headlines" in an effort to make a quick buck. Think, for example, of how -- in the wake of the incident that made it socially acceptable to say "Buttafuoco" -- there were three competing versions of the Amy Fisher story that hit the airwaves. Maybe it was around then that TV movies lost their last traces of dignity.

Yet the TV-movie form seemed to oscillate in and out of respectability, partly because there was a real need for the format. For one, it was a forum to tell stories too modest for the cinema (or paradoxically, too long, as with the miniseries). Where else would such things fit?

From the beginning, the TV movie seemed to be a way of talking about the world as it is: not a medium for purely escapist entertainment on a grand scale, but one perfectly suited for discussing current issues. And the limitations of the form meant that TV movies could focus narrowly on telling a specific kind of story: they needed to sell advertising, not tickets; they were watched by people in the comfort of their homes, not families cringing at the thought of their bored kid throwing a tantrum halfway through Terms of Endearment.

If the plots were sometimes cribbed from recent news stories, with the addition of some fudged events or composite characters...well, Shakespeare did much the same thing, didn't he? It's not for nothing that we use the term "teleplays" for self-contained scripts meant for broadcast; they retain an element of the stage, or community theater.


All that said, the first TV movie we'll discuss, I, Desire (1982), doesn't really fit any of the above criteria -- though it does fit perfectly with the sort of material the Umbrellahead Review usually covers. In fact it's cut from the same cloth as a movie like Moon of the Wolf, in that it's a horror film shaped for (and bounded by) the necessities of television.

However I, Desire (aka Desire, the Vampire) is a far grittier, creepier affair. Many big-budget theatrical releases don't come close to conjuring the genuinely disturbing air that hovers over this film -- right from the beginning it radiates a kind of overripe, seedy quality that some directors would give their left arm to capture. (That's some unfortunate foreshadowing there...)

This is thanks in part to the brilliant opening credits, which simply show a series of portrait paintings (almost all of women) while slow harpsichord music plays underneath. Yet all the portraits are in some way a bit off, a tad disturbing, as if the women depicted are somehow in a state of distress, decay, or degradation --

-- while the harpsichord music fades in, mid-phrase, as if one has entered in medias res with a story already underway before we even got there.

From that we go directly into the opening sequence, in which we see:

  • a sordid scene on Hollywood Boulevard, with a street preacher using a bullhorn to praise the Lord from his VW Bus, while party people flock hither and yon, and a line of prostitutes ply their wares;
  • the slow crawl of a red sedan, driven by the kind of balding, mustachioed man who hires a prostitute in the movies...
  • ...which is exactly what he does ("I've got a little personal matter I'd like to discuss with you. Get in!"), while two slow minor chords a third apart give us that well-worn trope of "something bad's a-comin'"; 
  • and the neon of a MOTEL sign, followed not too long afterward by the prim white paint of a CORONER sign, whereupon unzipping a body bag reveals Mr. Mustache, his body drained of blood.
Heavy duty.

And this is about where, back in 1982, P.'s parents promptly (and correctly) decided that this was a bit too much for him to handle, and whisked him off to bed. But the haunting images of that opening sequence stuck with him for decades...

...about 25 years, to be precise, since it was around a quarter-century later that he found someone willing to send him a DVD-R of I, Desire, and a few other things besides.

It's no exaggeration to say that I, Desire was, along with Warriors of the Wasteland, more or less the genesis of The Umbrellahead Review -- in that the impulse to go back and follow up on those forgotten images of yesteryear led us, in 2008, to the Mill Creek box and everything else besides. And that's really the point...

...which leaves us with no particular need to recap a dozen other reviews, or to note the presence of David Naughton (who had recently starred in An American Werewolf in London) or Brad Dourif (charismatic, even handsome, as a fallen priest).

I, Desire isn't a masterpiece, and now and then it flirts with silliness: the overdubbed panther growls get downright goofy. But if we borrow Leonard Maltin's old three-tier scale for rating TV movies, this one would definitely get an Above Average.


It was almost a full decade later, in April 2018, that we watched Long Journey Back (1978) -- another TV movie that stuck with P. all this time.

Or, more accurately, one particular scene stuck with him: as you might expect from a film that dramatizes the Nyack accident of 1972, the sequence in which the train plows into a school bus full of teenagers is harrowing, brutal stuff.

Pretty sure that this was another case where P. was whisked off to bed a bit too late. (It'd be interesting to know how many times Long Journey Back was screened on TV: if P. saw it on the premiere, he'd have been very, very young. More likely, it was a rebroadcast in 1979 or 1980.)

Yet the core of Long Journey Back isn't really the accident, which happens only 6 minutes into the film, but the "journey" (ahem) of teenager Celia as she recuperates from her injuries (amputated leg + brain damage = no fun).

Here we get a double whammy of nostalgia, as Celia is played by none other than Stephanie Zimbalist, whom we know well from her role as Laura Holt in Remington Steele. Not only was that show a fixture of P.'s childhood, but -- once again, decades later! -- the two of us watched the first season together in the early days of Hulu.

(We also know Stephanie Z. from the title role of The Babysitter, a silly-but-entertaining cautionary tale starring William Shatner and Patty Duke. Dunno why we didn't review that campy flick, which we watched back in 2012, but its core message was "she who balls the Shat is probably a nut".)

In any event Long Journey Back acquits itself well, and has to be an early example of a (relatively) realistic depiction of recovery from a TBI. And with its judicious use of seafront panoramas and flute solos, it pushes our days-gone-by, '70s nostalgia buttons perfectly. (They even sing freakin' "Day By Day"!)

Above Average once again.


P. can also recall, quite precisely, when he first saw the third of these films, the luridly-titled Sin of Innocence (1986). Thing is, he spent the bulk of his childhood with only broadcast TV to watch, and only a bare handful of fuzzy channels at that -- so when cable TV finally came to the boonies, it was something of a revelation.

Yet, great as it was to be able to watch The Simpsons or MTV or whatever else, his most striking memory is of turning on the Lifetime channel and seeing the very end of a TV movie starring Angie Dickinson, which was immediately followed by Sin of Innocence.

And suddenly he realized: I could sit here all day and do nothing but watch old TV movies. Where once these things were ephemeral, seen once and then gone for good, now they were potentially available at any time. It's a morphine drip, on tap, any time you want it. Dangerous business -- one could drown in a sea of nostalgia and never look back.

The other thing he realized: it's one thing to see Megan Follows play the smart, headstrong, pigtailed Anne of Green Gables; quite another to see her in this, as a smart, headstrong, ponytailed young woman who unexpectedly falls in love with her stepbrother (Dermot Mulroney) -- and vice versa.

You know that "I just want someone to look at me the way that X looks at Y" meme? Yeah, when she gives those bedroom eyes, it hits you like a freight...

...OK, maybe not the best timing on that analogy. But seriously, it's hard to imagine the teenage boy who sees Sin of Innocence and doesn't fall a little bit in love with Megan Follows. (Assuming intelligence and self-possession are your kink, and if they're not, they damn well should be, even at age 16!)

She simply lights up the screen, even in the crappy 360p YouTube capture that was all we had to work with.

The bravery of Sin of Innocence -- gosh, isn't that title the absolute pits? -- is that it doesn't engage in some sort of karmic-retribution routine to keep the stepsiblings of the world from banging (and, spoiler alert, they already are anyway). Instead it just follows the plot to a fairly reasonable, real-world conclusion.

So once again, Above Average, at least if you have a heart. 


A very different kind of redhead takes center stage in Stone Pillow (1985). P. didn't see this one back in the day, but certainly remembers the TV Guide hype surrounding Lucille Ball's dramatic turn as a homeless woman.

So when it showed up for free on Amazon Prime we thought, why not?

The usual line on Stone Pillow is that it's impossible to watch Ball's performance and not see wacky old Lucy, mugging for the camera as always. That criticism -- made by Maltin among others -- isn't without a grain of truth, but for the most part we found Ball fairly credible, and never embarrassing, as the homeless Florabelle. Only once or twice did we start feeling like a request for some splainin' was in danger of being made from offscreen.



What sinks Stone Pillow somewhat is Daphne Zuniga, better known as Princess Vespa ("Funny, she doesn't look Druish") from Spaceballs. As the well-meaning nudnik who tries to "save" Florabelle, Zuniga does her best but she's just out of her league here. Her line readings run the gamut from "petulant" to "somewhat more petulant", and her attempts to emote are high-school-drama-club-tier stuff.

Otherwise the film is quintessential TV-movie fare, and inevitably a pleasure to watch thanks to nostalgia for places, faces, styles, and sounds of the past. But honesty requires us to give it an Average.




No such nostalgia attaches to The Failing of Raymond (1971), though our disappointment at this one might not be entirely fair. Somehow we picked up the idea that it was a gritty, angry film about a school shooting and hostage situation -- a bit like Stephen King's novella "Rage", which by the way he should never have disavowed!

So it's not Raymond's fault that it's actually about a mentally ill high school dropout (Dean Stockwell) who fixates on a teacher he blames for his subsequent failures in life (Jane Wyman).

Still, next to four movies that all hit home in varying degrees, The Failing of Raymond feels preachy and toothless -- in other words, the vices that pretty much epitomize the TV movie in its most stereotyped form. Its attempts at social consciousness are pro forma, while its pacing is anything but taut.


Worst of all, the denouement is totally unconvincing. In other words, it's just not very good, and gets a Below Average from us.

The one fun twist -- and the reason that we or anyone else would seek out this movie -- is that it features the 17-year-old Katey Sagal as a spaced-out, hebephrenic teen who holds the key to stopping Raymond's plans.

Her role is minor and relatively brief (and comes courtesy of Dad, aka the director Boris Sagal) -- but it's a trip to see the future Peg Bundy looking like she just got her first retainer.


So here's to the TV movie. Too lowbrow for some, too outdated for others, but there can be a wonderful understatement to the form: small stories in small containers, told in ways that the big screen can't do. For every hyped film like Stone Pillow, there are a dozen others that told a story like a breath on the wind, here one moment, forgotten the next.

And yet they stick with you, somehow.

Thursday, August 20, 2020

On pumpkins and their hue, varying with time of day

As you might expect from our lengthy silence, we fell a bit behind here at the Umbrellahead Review. But only a bit, for the past 18 months or so have largely been spent watching films outside our bailiwick: we certainly won't be reviewing The Exorcist or Manhunter on this site, let alone Star Trek: Generations or Blazing Saddles.

Still, if you were to take a look through our list of watched movies (and we do keep one), you might have eager expectations for an upcoming review of, say, Troll 2. The Internet needs yet another commentary on that one, am I right?

Or maybe you've been waiting with bated breath for our take on Samurai Cop or Miami Connection. Hey, we're "against the ninja" as much as anyone, and enjoyed all these infamous films quite a bit -- but nope, no reviews from us.

We're just not that keen on rehashing things others have already said a dozen times, or adding our voice to a well-established chorus. Give us an opportunity to shed light on something that's been overlooked, however, and we're all ears. (Or eyes, or fingers, or whatever the metaphor should be.)

And if that something has received almost no coverage, but the coverage it's gotten has been (in our opinion) unjustly negative? Then game on, friends, game on.



Pink Pumpkins at Dawn (1997)

Grade: B-

Do you like going to flea markets? (Or rather, did you, before this whole pandemic thing?)

Because we do, you see. Thrift stores and yard sales can be great, but a well-run flea market on a good day is a treasure trove of possibilities, worth driving hours to visit. You never know what you might find there: turn a corner and suddenly, the exact thing you've been looking for is sitting right on someone's table, staring you in the face. (That's happened to us twice so far.)

There's one flea market in particular, a really big outdoor one, that's given us some of our most cherished possessions. We've been there well over 20 times, though over the years it's gone a bit downhill -- at least for us -- through no fault of its own: things change, and the LPs people were once practically giving away for 50 cents apiece are now $5 each.

So it was on a spring day -- sometime in June, most likely -- that we found ourselves at loose ends, having combed through the tables and found little of interest. Having traveled many miles to get there, though, we weren't inclined to leave empty-handed.

One of us hit up a vendor selling DVDs, and grabbed a few random cheap discs that looked interesting. (Incidentally this may well have been the same table that, years before, gave us Grit 'n Perseverance and thereby our beloved Beartooh.)

Among those cheapies was a film we'd never ever heard of, called Pink Pumpkins at Dawn. Normally we don't go for recent productions, and odds seemed high that this was some sort of Hallmark Channel, straight-to-video, Christian-themed, "family-friendly entertainment"...

...but then again, the cover does have a guy (Chris Gunn) sporting a teenstache, jean jacket, and baseball cap, holding a gun to his own head. So you never know, right?

And so Pink Pumpkins sat on our shelf month after month, unopened -- another entry on that long list of "movies we might watch someday". That is, if we could get the name right: even though the oddball title was a big part of what attracted P. in the first place, he kept misremembering it as Pink Peppercorns at Dawn.

(That would probably be a very different film -- starring an officious Geoffrey Zakarian as the only thing standing between us and a world of truffle oil, balsamic vinegar, and fair pay.)


But after a couple years, "someday" came at last, the shrinkwrap was removed, and we sat down to watch Pink Pumpkins at Dawn. It's always refreshing to watch a film or read a book you know nothing about -- no plot summary, no ordained spot in the cultural zeitgeist, no sense of the film's Importance or lack thereof.

If you were a precocious child, you might have had the experience of cracking open a book from your parents' library, something right at the edge of your ability to comprehend, and just reading without the feeling of that inner critic perennially observing over your shoulder:

"Is this good or bad? Is this just a bunch of clichés? Am I supposed to respond in a certain, knowing way, aware of the work's shortcomings and therefore unmoved by it? How does my response to this work affect my social standing and sense of self?"

Maybe you liked it, maybe you didn't, but you trusted the author to be doing something of value to someone. You were, in short, a sponge, not a judge -- just as a kid should be.

(Kudos to Penn and Teller for retaining -- or appearing to retain, but we think it's genuine -- their childlike enthusiasm for magic despite knowing so much about what the men and women behind the curtain are up to.)


Pink Pumpkins at Dawn is a hard film to talk about because there isn't much plot, and yet almost anything concrete we might say is likely to tread in spoiler territory. (We strongly recommend against reading the blurb on the back of the DVD, or even watching through the footage that plays underneath the menu at the beginning.)

We suppose the first thing that struck us was the unexpectedly poor quality of the DVD transfer. It's certainly watchable but was clearly taken from VHS, and not an especially good one at that, with washed-out colors and general fuzziness. We're used to that kind of thing from Mill Creek, but weren't expecting it from what appears to be an authorized release.


(Bizarrely, the footage underneath the menu looks dramatically cleaner and brighter -- as though it was taken from the original film elements, while the main feature was just lifted from VHS. Here's a comparison, which leaves unanswered the obvious question: why on earth?)

We have a fondness for movies where very little happens, because movies like that tend to lavish their attention instead on atmosphere, character, and conjuring a sense of time and place. Pink Pumpkins at Dawn is one of those -- and boy, does it capture what it was like to be a certain kind of teenager in the northeastern U.S. in the late 20th century. (Maybe the 21st, too.)

The anger, alienation, and aimlessness of its characters is intensely familiar to us -- not just the bare facts of those things, but the way the characters express them, the choices they make, and the seeming inevitability with which they're drawn toward disaster.

And there's also the Peter Pan bus. If you've got Peter Pan in your movie, you've got the Northeast.

In the vanishingly small amount of coverage that Pink Pumpkins at Dawn received, the main criticism seems to be the psychological implausibility of a key part of its storyline. We won't deny that we had trouble with this too, and even audibly objected to it.

On the other hand, life is full of little rabbit holes, moments where time seems suspended and everything can turn unexpectedly -- and whose very departure from the expected makes us act in unexpected ways, because instead of living in long predictable arcs, we're responding solely to the gravity of the present moment.

We often expect a film to feel orchestrated, as if every thread is not just purposeful but inevitable, and every event the relentless outcome of preordained elements and character traits. In some ways, that's a very childlike expectation -- asking the movie to reaffirm for us not just the purposefulness of the universe, but that of our own sense of self.

And yet, everything in our lives, good and bad, is the product of chance meetings: a corner turned, an Internet ad answered, brakes hit in time or a moment too late. And every day people who X, a quality that would seem to exclude Y, nevertheless do Y. Are we ourselves so far behind?

From what we can tell, Pink Pumpkins at Dawn began filming in 1996, may have been complete by 1997 or 1998, got shopped around to film festivals in 2000 (getting a terrible and spoiler-heavy review from Variety), and made it to VHS in 2001. Our DVD gives the release year as 2002 but also has an art and design credit for 2004, which is when the disc came out on the IFDP label.

IFDP stands for "Interesting Films, Different Perspectives", and seems to be a sub-brand of Ariztical Entertainment, which describes itself as "one of the leading names in quality LGBT, independent and art house films". Their current content seems almost exclusively LGBT-oriented, making Pink Pumpkins at Dawn, with no LGBT aspect at all, seem like an odd fit. Indeed it now seems to have vanished from their site (though Archive.org has its catalog page from 2012).

(Ergo: Ariztical chose, in the most literal sense, to "give up the pumpkins". Put that on somethin'.)

All this leads us to a very odd connection, one that we wouldn't otherwise have made if we hadn't watched River's Edge recently. Both Pink Pumpkins and River's Edge depict working-class teenagers and their anomie, and it's hard to imagine that the 1986 film wasn't an influence on Pink Pumpkins.

One weird coincidence, though, is that both films prominently feature a foul-mouthed kid wearing a Canadian tuxedo, brandishing a pistol, and on the brink of shooting someone. And both were played by an actor who -- if we're not mistaken -- later came out as gay. (We can't seem to find the link, but feel 99% sure that we read something to that effect about Mr. Gunn; if we're incorrect, please let us know.)

Of course that's why they call it "acting", but still, it's impressive to see Chris Gunn so completely inhabit the character of a pissed-off, grungy, rednecky (in the Northeastern U.S. sense of the word), sexually frustrated teenage boy of the stereotypically hetero sort.


Another, far freakier coincidence: as you might expect from a film involving teenage boys and guns, the possibility of a school shooting is floated pretty hard at one point -- as, for example, in this dialogue between two minor characters, which surely establishes that Pink Pumpkins ain't family-friendly entertainment:

"I was watching this talk show. There was this kid on there, went to school one day. Leaves, gets a gun, comes back and blows away like three people...He said he just got so pissed off at everyone. No one was listening. He's famous now!"

"That's it, man! I mean, you can spend your whole life being good and no one will even know you were on the fuckin' planet. But you fuck up royally, man, you are set for life."

Nothing too unusual there, except that Pink Pumpkins at Dawn is set in western Connecticut, with much of it filmed in Newtown -- which, after all, is where Sandy Hook Elementary is.

We don't hold up Pink Pumpkins at Dawn up as a masterpiece; it's hard to imagine that the director himself (Rick Oronato) would do so. It's simply a moment in time -- if you can call 90 minutes a "moment in time" -- that held us fast and gave us something we didn't expect. It's independent, regional filmmaking of a kind that's probably gone for good (and ought to be mourned), and it was only through the happy accident of a chance meeting that we got to see it at all.

It's a film that deserves to be remembered as more than the sum of its plot points, even if few will have the patient, forgiving attitude -- or attention span -- necessary to appreciate its virtues. And it at least deserves to get a real transfer from the original 16mm film elements, not just this criminally lazy VHS dump.

Wednesday, August 19, 2020

Have a little Faith: or, here comes the choo choo anew

If The Umbrellahead Review had to be represented by just one actress -- if our reasons for doing this could be summed up by one woman's cinematic oeuvre and its lasting effect on us -- then, naturally, that divine emissary would be Faith Clift, aka Faith Yordan.

True, we haven't seen much of her work, but films like The Nightmare Never Ends and Savage Journey are the epitome of why we love to watch movies "from the wrong side of the tracks", so to speak. And her marriage to screenwriter Philip Yordan, why, how felicitous that it offered recurring opportunities to practice her craft!

Now, we find ourselves here once more, summoned back to her warm and apple-cheeked embrace. And -- speaking of tracks -- it's all thanks to that steamiest form of transportation, the locomotive.



Horror Express (1972)

Grade: C+

It's a lazy cliché to point it out, but lazy clichés are often true: the presence of actors like Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing pretty much ensures this tale of glowing eyes, smooth brains, and hairy hands will be at least watchable.


In fact, the equation cuts both ways: having those two legends on board probably encouraged the film's screenwriters to make an extra effort beyond just saying "Hey, let's put a monster on a train!" 

The extra drafts were worth it, as from the beginning, the script is noticeably more crisp and intelligent than your average, brainless horror fodder.

True, there are occasional dud lines, as when the striking Countess Petrovska (Silvia Tortosa) greets Lee's character, Prof. Saxton, by reeling off a series of banalities about his home country:

"Ah, yes, England. Queen Victoria, crumpets, Shakespeare."

And Shakespeare this ain't.

On the other hand, take the scene where Dr. Wells (Cushing) is enjoying the dining car's services with the mysterious Natasha (Helga Liné), who looks a bit too much like the Countess for the film's own good.

(Things got confusing as hell when one of them got killed off: only then did we realize they were two separate characters. Isn't it a casting director's job to foresee this kind of thing?)

When his pleasant meal is interrupted by a request for his medical services, he asks his colleague and assistant Miss Jones (Alice Reinheart) for help, and she gets off a nice one-liner at his expense:

Wells: "Miss Jones, I shall need your assistance."
Jones (glances at Natasha, then smirks): "Yes, well, at your age I'm not surprised."
Wells (indignantly): "With an autopsy!" 
Jones: "Oh, well, that's different."

That said, at least one review of Horror Express describes the first half as banal, the second as riveting. We found it rather the other way around: the first half was intriguing, but after the all-important halfway point, the film's plot began to get mired in silliness.

The second half is also marred by the abrupt arrival of a character who gets shoehorned in, hogging the spotlight for several minutes while adding little to the proceedings...

...but we don't mean Faith Clift! She does make her first appearance in the second half, true, as an American traveler. However she only gets a few lines of dialogue over the course of a few scattered scenes, and her delivery of those lines is -- dare we say it? -- utterly unremarkable. Competent, even.

The only odd thing about Ms. Clift's performance is that she blinks so frequently that it's hard to get a screenshot that doesn't look like she's drugged, or half-asleep.

Then again, in one of her scenes, she actually is asleep -- which is a very effective way to minimize awkward line readings.

No, the unwelcome interloper is Telly Savalas as Captain Kazan -- an irreverent, sadistic martinet who spends most of his limited screen time chewing the scenery. Some reviewers seem to have thought highly of Savalas's work in Horror Express, but from our point of view, he's an annoyance whose boorish screen presence breaks the movie's spell.

And -- speaking of irreverence -- Horror Express continues the trope, seemingly inevitable in Yordan-related films, of featuring a conflict between science/atheism and piety/religion. Our spokesperson for the latter group is mad monk Father Pujardov (Alberto de Mendoza), who bears a vague resemblance to the perennially put-upon Spanish tennis ace, David Ferrer.

For further background on Horror Express, and all things Yordan, we warmly recommend Bernard Gordon's book Hollywood Exile: or How I Learned to Love the Blacklist. Many of the stories Gordon tells are illuminating or funny, but at least one is rather sad: apparently this was Peter Cushing's first film after the death of his wife Helen. Cushing always struggled with nerves right up until the start of shooting (after which he was fine), but in this case his depression was so crushing that he was determined to back out at the last minute.

Some clever tactics from Christopher Lee rescued the situation, and shooting began the next day as scheduled. Still, one hopes that Cushing -- who outlived his wife by two decades, but once said that "the heart, quite simply, [had] gone out of everything" after Helen's death -- took some comfort, or at least found temporary relief, in his work and the company of his colleagues.

Oh, and a word to the wise: if sharp things going into eyes make you uncomfortable, you might want to skip this one.

You also might want to avoid ordering the whole fish, just in case the knife slips. (Pop!)




Night Train to Terror (1985)

Grade: F
Variety Is the Spice of Life Bonus: D-


And now the Class-O-Meter takes a precipitous dive -- which (once again) could be foreseen if you knew in advance that Night Train to Terror is essentially a salvage job. It takes two movies that had already been released, plus one unfinished project sitting on the shelf, and mashes them all together into a 90-minute anthology film.


And how does it accomplish this? Why, with that freshest of devices, the wraparound story -- though at first it seems like a wraparound song, since Night Train to Terror starts proceedings by offering up this troupe of fresh-faced youngsters:

You see, this is a family affair in more ways than one: young Byron Yordan (front and center above), son of Philip and Faith, is the leader of the "rock band" riding Night Train to Terror's titular locomotive.

The band pops up again after each segment, gamely dancing and lip-synching their way in piecemeal fashion -- one verse at a time -- through the only song they know how to play, "Everybody But You".

This number, a kind of 1950s throwback using 1980s instruments, deserves to have its lyrics documented in full somewhere on the Internet:

Daddy's in the dining room, sorting through the news
Mama's at the shopping mall, buying new shoes
Everybody's got something to do -- everybody but you!

Come on and dance with me, dance with me, dance with me, dance with me [x2]
Everybody's got something to do -- everybody but you!

Sister's on the telephone, gossiping again
Junior's at the arcade, smoking with his friends
Everybody's got something to do -- everybody but you!

(chorus)

Johnny's been a bad boy, staying after school
Principal is working hard, making new rules
Everybody's got something to do -- everybody but you!

(chorus)

It pretty much defines "incessant repetition". And splitting it up into a total of four discrete appearances over the course of the film? Not such a clever idea.

His costuming may have zero continuity, but at least Byron Yordan is handsome enough in a clean-cut way -- and a passable enough breakdancer -- that he doesn't make an ass of himself.

Anyway, the VIPs on this train ride are God and Satan, credited as "Himself" and "Lu Sifer" onscreen, but actually played by Ferdy Mayne and Tony Giorgio, respectively. They spend the ride arguing over the characters in the recycled segments, and whether their souls should go to Heaven, Hell, or Purgatory.

All setup for an "As I watched..." routine, naturally.

We've read that Mayne was, justifiably, embarrassed when he saw the finished film. No word on whether it was because the script required him to describe the band's music as "quite touching".


We also get a serenely imperturbable and impeccably polite black conductor (Gabriel Whitehouse), which vaguely feels like a lazy racist trope, though it's hard to pin down exactly why.

Then again, given that the only other black character in Night Train to Terror is named "Prince Flubutu" (Mark E. Ridley), maybe it's not that hard to figure out.

He shows up in the second segment -- adapted from the 1984 film Gretta aka The Death Wish Club, which pretty much tells you the plot of that one -- and they don't even get his exit line right: "Excuse me while I smoke!" should clearly have been "I hope you don't mind if I smoke!", don't you agree?

Some of the decisions that went into compiling Night Train to Terror go well beyond the bizarre. One of them is the inclusion of two different segments in which Richard Moll (here billed as "Charles") is a major character. Did they think we wouldn't notice that the murderous orderly in the first segment --


-- is the same, incredibly distinctive-looking man who plays a strident atheist in The Nightmare Never Ends?

Yes, we're blissfully reunited with that watershed film, though here it gets hacked down to about a third of its original length -- which still gives it a higher percentage of Night Train's running time than any other segment.

As a result, the Nightmare narrative is largely undamaged, with all our favorite Papini moments intact. (Brigham Young sure is looking rough these days.)

In fact, we get bonus content of a sort, as The Nightmare Never Ends has now been augmented by some seriously off-the-wall claymation sequences. They showed up earlier in Gretta, and we don't know if that film already had 'em, though it's hard to imagine how the scene with the killer fly played out otherwise.

But they sure do add an odd twist to Nightmare -- even if the net effect is to make us expect a California Raisins cameo.

The other weird thing about Nightmare is that several characters' lines have clearly been overdubbed by a different voice actor. Once again, this had already happened in Gretta, as whenever the loony Mr. Schmidt (William Charles) speaks, it's with a thick pseudo-Russian accent and a totally different acoustic from the other characters.

But things strike much closer to home, for -- brace yourselves -- Faith Clift has had all her lines replaced by another actress! We were wondering why her performance seemed so un-cervine and cortically intact.

Given that a few tweaks were made to the Nightmare plot, maybe it was necessary for continuity purposes. But still, is there no justice? Is there no exemption for family?

Comfort her, "Charles". Comfort your apple-cheeked truelove.