Salome and The Forbidden
I'm a fan of Clive Barker. Ever since
I saw the first 2 Hellraiser movies, I was hooked. I started reading
his books and fell in love with his stories, starting with The Books
of Blood. Over the years I've picked up several of his art books and
went so far as to have one of them tattooed on my back. It wasn't
elaborate, colorful, or 'wicked-awesome'. In fact, it was rather
crude. But I always found it sinister, creepy, and dangerous. That
was 19 years ago, and I still love it. What does this have to do with
tonight's film? Well, they're crude, colorless, and certainly NOT 'wicked-awesome'
Tonight is a double feature of very
early student/indie art films by Clive himself. These simple, grainy
films were produced in the '70s and star a very young Doug Bradley
(Pinhead!), and Peter Atkins who wrote most of the Hellraiser and
Wishmaster films along with that terrible live action Fist of the
Northstar film. I'll start with Salome
ART |
First off, I can't get over how much
the title looks like 'salami'. Infact, that's how I'm going to
pronounce it from here on. I really don't have much to say about it
other than it's black and white, has a couple of people, and they do
things....very....slowly.....as they all do in every art film EVER. I
can't make heads or tails of what the hell is going on or what
they're trying to convey. It most certainly ISN'T horror of any kind,
unless you take into account how horrifying it is to sit through it.
Thankfully, it's short as hell so you won't suffer much. And
naturally, critics panned it because they don't get the fact that
it's over 35 years old, as well as an experimental film done by a bunch
of nobodies. There's no acting because nobody can act. There's no color because nobody has any money. There's no story because nobody can
write very well (yet). I think you get the idea, whereas most
critics are still clueless. Except for Ebert. He was the best. Next up:
FILMS |
The Forbidden
Ok, this is a bit longer joint. It's
all black and white, and to make matters worse, it's done in
negative. There's a lot of the same thing going on in this film, but
there's a little more horror element to it when you see a man skinned
alive. There's also some guy with an erection dancing around like a
fool. I'm not making that part up. In fact, there's a lot of some
dudes junk in this film.
SUCK |
And that's it. Neither film had dialog,
color, story, acting....no ANYTHING. The last 15 minutes are
interviews with Barker, Atkins, and Bradley, all still very young
when this was filmed. Honestly, I wouldn't bother with watching it
unless you're a fan of Barker. And even if you are, you'll notice
it's really just some young men playing with a camera so don't get
your hopes up.
Thursday: Drama! The Undead! My Final Entry!
Did it feel a little like watching The Ring?
ReplyDelete