servalansrazor

It took me years to find a VHS copy of this movie, i'd read about it in genre publications, biographies and comics for ages and so was not bothered in parting my hard earned sheckles for said tape. I took tape home, put it in the machine. Viewed. Disappointed, no, not really, excited ? No. Depressed? No, I watched Mark of the Devil instead, that had Herbert lom in it also. The thing about Franco's vision is that, well, he hasn't really got one. The furniture looks dusty, the actors look bored and dusty and I found myself rooting for the stuffed animals at one point. Another selling point of this movie, besides Mr Lee had been Klaus Kinski, I mean Klaus Kocking Kinski!! He made Dr Zhivago! For a few dollars more! Then i noticed he doesn't actually speak! Whats this? I cried (literally) Juicy flies and spiders!? What happened to the script? Was there a script? Would it have helped? A good film is the result of many things, writing, lighting, production even actors have been known to add to the overall effect. Franco's Dracula had the actors but apparently nothing else, shame, its reputation outlives the movie. Try reading the novel, it will never transfer to the screen intact!

The box it came in was very obviously designed to confuse us lesser mortals who were so very aware of the existence of the Kenneth Brannagh/mr Bobby version, and were so eager to lay our hands upon it that we ended up with this superior tv version of the old promethean chestnut. Okay, so it plays around with the ideas in the novel,and has some nice atmospheric sets and moody lighting, although it has suffered inasmuch as it was recorded on video tape rather than film, but it is one of the few versions to give the creature more than a stumbling thug role and some half decent lines. Also, its apparently based upon the stage play, which ran for years and in itself, wasn't half bad. Here we have top brit also rans Robert Powell and David Warner goofing around in some rather nice locations and finally succoming to each other, there are lots of nice hints as to the alter-ego frankenstein/creature link and we have Johnny Geilgud teaching the creature about god. Carrie Fisher doesn't have too much to do, but then this was a tv production after all. What is so nice about this moovie is that it is aware of its restrictions and stays firmly with the story, in an age of special effects based super-blockbusters its nice to harken back to the time when films were shot on the directors lunch money and were actually concerned with plot development and had characters who demand respect.

A fine, if somewhat bananas spaghetti western that cashes in on the Franco Nero/Sergio Corbucci Django of the previous year simply by including Django in the title. What we have here, though, is a marvelous, if somewhat slightly mysterious example of the genre. More interesting than Django is a B***ard, or whatever its called this week, Django Kill really pulls out all the stops in an endless parade of the macabre. From the curious opening scene with Tomas Milian crawling out of a grave to the brutal lynchings and gothic horror drenching of one of many villains in liquid gold- this is a real treat for genre fans. As with many similar movies there are no morals anywhere to be seen, characters turn up, rub their hands together, kill mercilessly and then are shot down or, in this case, killed by an exploding horse. I understand that there are many versions of this movie in existence, which is not surprising in the least. The version i have was shown on uk tv five or six years ago, so i suppose its incompleteness would be down to broadcast quality prints. Its still a real doozer though.