For my tastes, the cheesier the horror movie, the better. As a result I'm more of a fan of films within the sensibilities of Creepshow along with the occasional late-90s, early-2000s indie stinker. The unintentionally humorous dialogue helps give the film a bit more charm, along with a break from prior or upcoming bloodshed. Not to mention, but I'm also a fan of horror anthologies, and that goes for many TV shows within the genre.
I covered Terror Tract a few months back, namely because I had access to it for free. Since the following film is also on YouTube, surprisingly, I decided to cover one of the earliest popular horror anthologies and see how well it holds up to today's standards.
Background
Before becoming the rotting pun cackler we know today, the Cryptkeeper entertained many through the equally revered EC Comic series Tales from the Crypt. All you need to know is that it's a series of horror stories that laid the groundwork for horror anthologies today. The comics did so well that in 1972, a movie adaptation was released.
The film was directed by Freddie Francis, a cinematographer who did work on The Elephant Man, but has directed various Hammer horror films. With that in mind, he seemed to be a good pick for this project. He had also done work for Amicus Productions, a company so well into its craft of horror that they are interchangeable with Hammer's works (save for the lack of gothic features in the latter.)
If you didn't know, Amicus was behind this movie. The film was released through Metromedia Producers Corporation, an offshoot of Metromedia Incorporated which would later be overtaken by Fox in 1997. Speaking of, 20th Century Fox distributed the film in the United Kingdom, while American distribution was left to Cinerama Releasing Corporation (and for those not in the know, Cinerama was the name of a widescreen movie screen process from back in the day.)
What's interesting to note is that most of the segments present in the film would later be adapted into episodes of the more familiar HBO series (then again, that could just be them going from the same source the movie did.) Seemingly, whoever owns the movie nowadays isn't so strict on copyright, because I actually found the entire movie online, untampered.
Plot
The framework of this film is that a tour is occurring in the catacombs, and five individuals get separated from their group. They locate a hidden room and they meet who else but...
 |
| The Crypt Keeper |
For those who're more accustomed to the rotting pun-spouting corpse, this may come as a surprise. But remember, this was based on the comics, and, well, this was a UK production. Okay now I have to explain. For many years, the United Kingdom's movie output was in line with the various stereotypes that plagued the country for years, i.e. mass sophistication. What I mean is that their more wacky output is resigned to more rebellious pieces (namely on television and for many comedies), while their dramas and horror films double down on the seriousness.
It boils down to a strong sense of realism, mundane as can be with some occasional bloodshed, and this is amplified in this film. You never noticed it in many Hammer Film productions because of their gothic presentation; the atmosphere rectified the straight forwardness of the premise, while Amicus' output, being set in the present, is a bit more mundane as a result.
Before I get into the segments, I'd like to point out a recurring trend with each. They're going for suspense on many of these. This was the way for many non-monster/serial killer horror movies until Hollywood ruined it. Since this was from the early-70s, a lack of a hold up is to be expected.
Each story begins when one of the five strangers questions the Crypt Keeper or vice versa, and we get the impression that they're getting warnings on how they may expire.
...and All Through the House
I'm sorry to say, but this goes by rather quickly. A woman murders her husband on Christmas Eve. I don't know what led up to this. The husband seemed faithful, heck, the first time we see him he leaves his wife a present and a card. Okay, the immediate go-to suggestion is money, well congratulations the suspense has died and I'm anticipating her death.
 |
| What a dick, amirite? |
The wife, Joanne, learns that a serial killer dressed as Santa Claus is on the loose, and lo and behold, he can apparently smell fresh spilt blood. Obviously she can't call the police while evidence of her crime is out in the open, so she spends her time getting rid of the evidence, which she does, only to be done in by the stupidity of her daughter who lets the killer in. She probably senses evil and hides it with naivety. Guess what happens?
For many horror anthologies, they tend to get the weakest one out of the way first, provide an appetizer to prep you for the rest of the movie. This was certainly a weak offering, the suspense factor was kinda weak, and that really comes into play if you factor in the little kid aspect... or just recall that these stories are, seemingly, mortality warnings.
Reflection of Death
Seems even the writers knew the first one was a bad note to start on, so they tried the couple deal again.
Carl leaves his family for a tryst with an acquaintance, Susan. Whether it's karma or not, they get into an accident trying to avoid an oncoming car. This is where this segment's gimmick comes into play. It's shot from the perspective of Carl, he sees Susan is gone, and every person he comes into contact with is scared shitless, even his wife who has found another man.
Alright I know this is going to be a low shot given that this is an early entry into the horror anthology lineup, but this is kinda predictable. We know that Carl would've gone through some kind of disfigurement in the crash, there was nothing implying it was anything more. We know something happened to him. This would've worked better if it were a horror-comedy, the comedy coming in the reactions of the people and Carl and the horror in the revelation of how bad his issue is.
Anyway, our revelation here is that Carl returns to Susan, who had been blinded in the accident (and seemingly didn't break or lose any body parts, go figure.) We get a slew of exposition namely that Carl had died two years ago, and now... how bad does Carl look?
 |
| Eh... |
I understand what they're going for, a sense of realism. But for the execution... I dunno. I want to respect their attempt at suspense, but in order for suspense to work, there needs to be a good conclusion. All I got out of this was a mild sense of surprise, but even that was ruined by the fact that it was mentioned that he died (meaning some form of disfigurement had occured), and that he was moving toward something with a reflection, meaning that we knew we would see his face.
But the worst part is, that wasn't the end of this segment. What's the worlds greatest cliche folks? This was all just a dream. Early on Carl awoke from a dream, and they did the equivalent of playing that scene again. This would've been fine if it led to the events from before, this time with a sense of awareness, or perhaps make it a twist where Susan goes through what Carl did.
I think a reason many horror movies from here on out put in some cheesy and often times comedic elements was because they knew they couldn't provide any suspense, people would see the resolution a mile away.
Poetic Justice
This is one of two highlights from the film, no joke.
So two snobs live across the street from a nice guy who plays with children (and not in a sexual way.) They see him as a depreciative threat to the neighborhood and want nothing more than to get him to leave, well, one of them wants him to leave, that being the son James, cuz his father don't give a shit.
One aspect to note is that Peter Cushing, who played Arthur Grimsdyke, the Hitler to the snobs, lost his wife around the time the film was made. A portrait of her is present throughout the story and it aids in the emotional turmoil Cushing goes through. He is frankly the best actor in this segment. Let me tell you though, James really helped push Arthur to that point, he cost him his dogs, his job his relationship with the kids, broke his heart through poison pen valentines and he gave us the worst actor in the entire movie.
Broken to the point of no repair, Arthur hangs himself, and perhaps saving the best for the middle, he returns from the dead a year later to exact revenge on the pain in the ass.
 |
| I'm sold. |
I shat on Carl's dead face, but this one is better in terms of execution. The build up is better and the face is kinda creepier looking.
Seemingly even James' father had enough of his son because he doesn't even scream when he finds his son's corpse (they could've put in a generic orchestrated sting when his body was revealed, but maybe they had a case of future shock and saved themselves from a cliche.)
 |
| 'ello son, karma made you its bitch hasn't it? |
Basically he tore James' heart out and made it part of a final valentine's day card.
Wish You Were Here
I'm just gonna say right off the bat, this one kinda pissed me off.
Ever hear the tale of the Monkey's Paw? Well this applies here. Ralph is in danger of losing all of his money. Here, you'd expect him to be some miser or a penny-pinching douche who'd kill to have a dollar burning a hole in his pocket, however... that's not so. The man takes the news like anyone else would, heck, he's unwilling to sell treasures he found around the world for some quick cash.
The Monkey's Paw gimmick comes in the form of a magic figurine, one that can grant three wishes. You'd expect Ralph to make those wishes, but... he doesn't. In fact he actually recalls the Monkey's Paw tale and goes in with skepticism. It's his wife Enid that gets the plot rolling when she wishes for a fortune.
It comes true and Ralph is sent to claim it, where he comes across a vision of death along the way. News of Ralph dying on the road reaches his boss and he delivers the news to Enid. Predictably, Enid uses her next wish to bring him back to life, albeit as he was before the crash. Obviously this backfires, because Ralph actually died before he crashed due to the aforementioned vision. In her infinite ignorance, Enid wishes for Ralph to return to life and remain so forever. But there's a hitch, he had been embalmed and now he has to live a life of pain forever, nice going idiot.
This really got to me. To get the obvious out of the way, the implications were so obvious that the victim, the victim saw it coming, yet he had to suffer for it. I don't know what Ralph has done, but surely it couldn't have been bad enough to warrant such a punishment. Then there's the fact that Enid's not present in the wraparound segments. I don't know if you figured out the twist yet, but once we get there, you'd be questioning how a man who has lost the ability to die could possibly be there and no longer affected by embalming fluid.
Enid got away with this way too easily. I'm just saying, people have given Mabel Pines shit for getting Dipper into shit that'd be resolved anyhow, and heck whether or not you want to admit it, she helped give us a proper finale to an otherwise amazing show. Enid had ignored an obvious red flag, wished blindly before hearing her husband out and didn't think her other wishes through. You may be thinking she couldn't due to pressure, but remember, these are wishes, no matter how long you take to make them, they will happen. In fact, here was a wish that could've saved some trouble.
I wish Ralph was the way he was before he left the house.
See? He died while on the road, so this could've rectified everything.
 |
| Here lies Ralph, he was too smart for this movie. |
Blind Alleys
Hunting for a high note. How high is this one?
William Rogers, oh excuse me, he wants people to refer to him as Major Rogers, is a former army man who's made into the director of a blind housing community. I... don't understand. Having a set designer direct a movie makes more sense, and I maintain The Cat in the Hat isn't as bad as people make it out to be.
As to be expected, he gives little shits about the residence, giving them shit food and usurping them of their heating. He had been thoroughly warned by one of the members, but he was so wrapped up in his major-ness he made an old man succumb to the brutal cold.
To get back at him, they lure the Major's dog to them and starve it, locking the Major in a room and constructing a narrow hallway with razor blades sticking out the walls. The blind have put their other senses to good use, I would never underestimate the abilities of the disabled. The Major ventures through the sharp corridor, but alas it was a trap, as he had been led right to his dog who proceeds to maul him, but that would've been too graphic, so that's where it ends.
This isn't as suspenseful as the previous stories, but it works in a different way. It can technically be considered a morality tale with a statement regarding the treatment of the lower class by high society, or a metaphor for how the government usurps everyone of personal liberties to cater to those they deem worthy. It's not as subtle as "They're Creepin' Up on You" from Creepshow, but I guess this isn't the worst entry on the cutting board.
Resolution
You know how these were seemingly cautionary tales? Well it turns out they actually died and have been led to the gates of hell. They make it like the twist was hinted at with elements like Joanne's brooch, but for a horror film, you always gotta expect the worst. Ralph was the most innocent of the five, so obviously he was the one who'd introduce the twist by plummeting into the fiery abyss. That'll teach him for falling victim to his wife's ignorance.
All of this came about due to a lack of repentance (bear in mind this was before media began openly attacking religious undertones.) For those who may question where I stand, I believe there is a God, even in the biblical sense. I also believe the key to salvation is to take the high road and be willing to own up to your mistakes. If you're truly sorry, it'll show.
Overall
I'm taking a risk here. It isn't fair to judge a low budget film abiding to the sensibilities of British horror. This did lay the groundwork for horror anthologies to come, but this could've been better, not through budget but through making the most of what they had.
For ...And All Through the House, give the wife a clearer motive, maybe have her killer be a revenant in the form of her husband. For Reflection of Death, make it more comedic, that'd make the final revelation more scary because it'd abruptly break the humorous flow. For Poetic Justice... actually it's fine as it is, Peter Cushing did a great job and the story shines through. Obviously for Wish You Were Here we'd have to overhaul the end, or at least add logic to Ralph suddenly being in the gateway to the underworld (or maybe swap casualties, Enid did much worse than Ralph.), as for Blind Alleys, that's also fine as is.
One other aspect I don't like about this film is that, at its core, it's too uptight. It's played straight the entire time. I prefer cheesy aspects in horror movies because, ironically, they give the film more life, we get to see the actors have fun with their roles and our attention could be kept longer. If you're more into straight-up horror/suspense, this could work better for you than it did for me.
I respect this film for being the start to a new era, but on its own nowadays, it's good for curiosity, if you want to know about the origins of the HBO series. But as is, it depends on how you were brought up in horror. You either roll with the Romeros of this world, or... not.
No comments:
Post a Comment