52 Pick-Up #6 – Marjoe (1972)

Welcome back and praise the Lord for another round of 52 Pick-Up.

Okay, sorry, had to get that one out of my system. I can't really say I've found that old time religion here.

In fact, given what this movie goes into and shows, I'd say if I did you should all be very deeply concerned.

This is a movie that has been blipping on and off of my radar for a while leading up to this entry. I had first heard about Marjoe Gortner the person some years back and mentally backpocketed this documentary. Recently a friend discussed it for her podcast on Oscar-winning cinema and it put the movie back on my radar.

From the radar, to my list, to here.

So I have to thank her in part for reminding me of this, cause Marjoe is one Hell of a hidden gem from this project and one I would recommend seeking out, both as a documentary and just in general.

The premise such as it is concerns the above mentioned Marjoe Gortner – a child preacher who became something of a sensation in the evangelist circles in the 1950s. The film actually starts with a collection of some of his greatest hits as a child preacher, clips that start from almost cute and veer into the genuinely strange (there is a scene were a pre-teen Gortner officiates a wedding between two grown adults that I still find myself unsettled by in the sense no adults found any issue with this.) After the montage, we are introduced to Gortner as an adult, affable, outgoing, and considerably more clear-eyed about his past exploits. While he has ostensibly given up as a revival preacher, he decides in his 20s to go back on the circuit with a documentary crew in tow. His mission: to take them behind the curtain and show them the business of preaching, interspersing some of his own song and dance sermons with scenes of explaining the tricks of the trade and conversations with some of his peers.

Put in plain text like this, one would almost expect Marjoe to be an angrier movie than it is. One could see this as a movie by the former child star who has decided to burn it all down, but that is one of the interesting things about Gortner as a subject – he definitely does seem to feel some remorse over what he's done, but he's not looking to send the whole apparatus crashing down. Early on, we hear him discussing his approach and there is no active sense of disdain for other preachers or the believers in the way he talks about them, rather he simply just wants to show what this is all about and hopes maybe some people will come around as a result.

The result is a movie that strikes a curious tone – the genial Gortner gives the movie an overall disarming feeling that, rather than robbing the movie of its impact, causes some of the quieter revelations to land even harder. Whether it's seeing Gortner's performances preceded or intercut with footage of him explaining the play-by-play of acts of religious fervor leading to collecting money or scenes of him meeting with other evangelists behind closed doors (the first of these being especially telling as the other preacher sits counting a stack of money at his desk) the movie actually makes the revelations hit harder for how matter of fact they are. Instead of being shocking insights, they are the day to day nature of the business and treated as such.

Amid the 'banality of evil' looks at the evangelist industry (which, yes, did generate some controversy at the time of release), there is an additional emotional through line that hits harder for the way it's presented, and that's the way the movie presents Gortner's relationship with his parents. Again, the movie's introduction doesn't shy away from the fact his parents were more than happy to cash in on their child's stage presence, and one could expect a genuinely angry look back at them. Instead, Gortner's reflections on his parent as an adult are more saddened than angry. One conversation in particular standing out where he reflects on his relationship with his father. Gortner can't find it in himself to be angry with him simply because he feels like he doesn't really know him especially deeply as a person – even their conversations are more surface level than any sort of emotional connections.

This last part leads to probably the closest thing to a genuine beat of happiness in the movie – the presentation that Gortner has, since distancing himself from that past, found himself in a happier place personally with someone completely outside of the church scene. Like the earlier revelations, it's presented not as a grand triumph, but genuine happiness for a man whose smiles we have seen to this point as paired with an empty, exploitative industry and an empty family life. Again, instead of a grand gesture, it's the quieter change that lands better as a result.

If you're looking for something that's going to be a full-throated shock of a documentary about the darker side of faith, there are other documentaries I could recommend (Jesus Camp comes to mind as a genuinely disturbing movie.) That said, Marjoe is still a strong recommend in its own right as a look at a man whose experiences with faith proved hollow and unfulfilling compared to the life he found for himself after, as well as a very matter of fact look at the bald-faced cynicism and greed running throughout that life of faith.

The movie is available to watch on Tubi – I bring this up not as something I intend to do all the time, but in this case because I really do think this one's worth seeking out if this got you interested.

Okay, that concludes this week's 52 Pick-Up. You may go in peace.

…

Oh. Wait. That's right. Church shtick doesn't work for this ending. Still got next week to tee up.

Well, I did say this was coming and now comes the first round of the John Waters round-up – next week we make our first foray into Baltimore with Waters' most overt cinematic foray into musicals with Cry-Baby.

Till then.

52 Pick-Up #5 – Oddity (2024)

Ah, February. First month went off without a hitch.

Posting-wise, anyway. The year itself...thaaaaat's a topic for another day.

Welcome back to 52 Pick-Up, a year-long trip to keep me committed to working through my cinematic to-do list by checking out a movie a week that I have not seen and posting responses here.

Last month, I had mentioned I'd be changing up parts of the formula going forward, so I should probably just address that here.

Starting this month, I will be putting two new adjustments into the mix. One will be temporary, one more of a recurring feature.

So, let's start with the temporary. 

Since 2021, I have gained a particular custom in the fall. For a weekend in September, I join the gathering of lovable freaks, weirdos, and perverts that is known as Camp John Waters – a celebration for fans of the director lovingly known as the Pope of Trash.

It's been a good time and I've made some good friends as a result. But, as is so often the case, all good things must come to an end, and this year will be CJW's big finale. With plans to attend already locked in, I'm dedicating some time in the next few months to addressing the gaps in what I have seen in Waters's filmography. What this means going forward is that I will have something of a thumb on the scale as I make my rolls. Of the titles chosen, one will be selected from the John Waters specific queue (no, I won't say what this month's is yet.)

The more recurring is, itself, something that occurred to me in part after the discussion with my wife regarding Yellow Submarine. I pitched the idea to her, and with each month, after I roll up, I'll have one title I will give her the option to swap out for a title of her choosing that we have established I have not seen. The swapped out title will be returned to the queue where it may be rolled at another time (if it does, I may give it weighted preference/immunity from being a swap-out.)

Okay, that's enough rule jockeying. Let's get back to the movies.

I'd like to tell you that the informal tour of Europe ended with January. Of course, if I did that, I would be a liar. I promise, we'll eventually getting some American film in there, but you're just gonna have to wait for another week cause we're making a stop off in Ireland.

If it helps any, we're changing the decade at least. In fact, this is a fairly recent title I had been curious about since seeing the trailers and missed the theatrical run for – so, time to dig in to Damian McCarthy's Oddity.

This may be one of the titles on this list I went in with the least knowledge of. I had no prior familiarity with anyone attached to the movie and the trailers I had seen were more pitched towards tone and mood than actual story beats (with particular emphasis on the effectively creepy wooden statue.) For as much discourse as there's been over marketing giving too much away in movie advertising, there is something refreshing about when you can get that blank slate experience, even though I'll admit it's paradoxical to these sorts of write ups. So let me just leave it at hopefully this reveals enough to get you interested without giving too much away and press on.

As an 'in a nutshell' summary goes, Oddity tells the story of two sisters – Dani and Darcy (both played by Carolyn Bracken.) Dani is happily married to her psychiatrist husband (Gwilym Lee) while Darcy is a professional medium who runs an antique shop specializing in unique and cursed objects. Despite these two very different backgrounds, the sisters get along well. Which is complicated when Dani is murdered in the house she and her husband are renovating. A year after her death, Darcy arrives at the now largely finished house to mark the anniversary with Dani's husband (and his new girlfriend) with a creepy wooden statue in tow and plans she is keeping to herself.

That's about as much set-up as I can put here without any spoilers. Some of it you might already piece together (and I know there were some beats I keyed in on) but I have to admit, like The Bird With the Crystal Plumage, the overall execution kept that from being a problem to me.

One of the things found particularly interesting in this case is that this movie is, functionally, a mystery more for the audience. The story presents Darcy to us as the de facto 'detective', but we see pretty early on that she has already clocked what happened to her sister and worked out her own plan for what to do about it. As such, the mystery is primarily on the audience to figure out and catch up with the characters (who, if they have any question it's 'How much does * know?')

"...sooooo...aren't you going to ask me about the wooden man?"

I've been trying to think of the last time I saw a movie that did something quite like this – where the burden of the mystery is more on the viewer than the character – and for the life of me, I'm coming up empty (with the possible exception of The Last Broadcast, which, while I enjoy it, I feel like it's far less adept in handling the payoff.) 

Adding to the appeal, this doesn't feel like it loses anything when you know the reveal – especially as parts of it can be picked up on early on. It doesn't fall into the pit of movies that feel like they lose steam when you know where it's going, as the movie makes its reveal with a lot of runway left to instead go into how this knowledge is being acted on.

Another part of that working goes to the overall visual style and tone of the movie. Alongside the above mentioned statue, the movie has a very striking look to it, both in terms of set design and even the way the cast are fashioned (particularly the stark difference in styles Bracken offers between Dani and Darcy, the latter presented as a figure out of a ghost story with her own pale, blind appearance.)

I can't pretend I'm going to be raving about this movie, but at the same time, there needs to be a place for movies like this in the discourse – not a game changer, but a well made, effectively told little ghost story with enough of a sense of style to it that, I will admit, I'm going to be keeping an eye out for some of McCarthy's other work and hope maybe this gets some of you curious enough to see if his movies will work for you.

But, it's time to be moving on here, and, after five weeks, 52 Pick Up finally ends its trip abroad and touches down in the US. Not only that, we're also marking another big first for this project – alongside the first American movie featured, this will mark the first documentary on this list, and one I've been circling for a while now.

So if you plan to be here next time, break out your Sunday best and meet me at the revival tent, cause next up is the 1972 Academy award winning documentary Marjoe.

Till then.

52 Pick-Up #4 – Yellow Submarine (1968)

Once, upon a post...
Or maybe twice.

Welcome back for another draw of 52 Pick-Up. Already one month down and so far, it's been an interesting journey. From cautionary tales of the dangers of authoritarianism, to fever dreams of demonic furniture, to a murder mystery abroad. With January going to a close, where do we go from here?

For starters, as I said last time, we're still tooling around Europe (and will be for just a little bit longer next month), but also we're closing out this month with a title that has been on my 'to do' list for a long time. In fact, of the first four, this has arguably been on here the longest.

It's the movie my wife was surprised to learn I hadn't seen until just this month, it's the animated classic Yellow Submarine.

I should start by saying, I wasn't avoiding this movie. It's one I'd had a general interest in for some time both for its own sake as a movie and just as one of the more colorful creations born out of the Beatles' legacy. Mostly it was just never quite lining up the right pieces of time, access, and opportunity.

As John himself once said it best 'life is what happens when you're busy making other plans.'

Okay, that's a bit of a reach to justify the fact this took me this long, but humor me.

Having now seen this movie? I have two immediate thoughts. The first – this was an incredibly fun experience and one I was pleased to see did not falter under its own reputation.

The second is a call back to the fact my wife was surprised I hadn't seen this (and something I am posting here with her blessing.) In mentioning this was on my to do list, she had mentioned first seeing this when being shown it by a music teacher she had growing up. Said teacher, she added, was very likely at some point in their life a hippie.

On having watched the movie for myself, I immediately sent her the below image with regards to that assessment:

Again, this is not a criticism. I really enjoyed this one.

First, let's get into the customary 'What is this about?' part.

Before I get into the pitch for this movie, I just want to say this – if you're watching Yellow Submarine for the plot, I don't want to say you're watching it wrong, but I am seriously questioning your priorities on this one. The story, such as it is, involves Pepperland, a fantastical fairy tale realm of love, peace, and music under the sea, where the people are all living in harmony. At least, for the first few minutes – enter the Blue Meanies, an outlandish band of villains whose hatred of music is matched only by their desire to stomp out joy (as their boss loudly declares early on “We Meanies only take NO for an answer!” if that gives an idea how committed they are.) The Meanies invade Pepperland, plummeting it into a sadness and disarray in short order. In the chaos, one of the residents, Young Fred, escapes in the titular Yellow Submarine to get help. His journey leads him to Liverpool where he crosses paths with the Beatles (not voiced by themselves, though they appear at the very end) who agree to help him save his homeland. What follows is a free-wheeling, outlandish journey through space, time, and a respectable slice of Beatles discography.

Hmmm...can I still make the 'It's not the real Beatles,
but it is an incredible simulation' joke if the actual Beatles
do still make an appearance at the end of the movie?

Again, don't try to think too hard about the plot unless you want to give yourself a bad time. Just enjoy the ride, because while it's not deeply or tightly plotted, it has a lot to recommend in it.

Up high on the list of things to recommend this for? The animation. I had known about the look of this movie from stills for years, but finally seeing this all in motion, I was pleasantly surprised by how good this looks in general, both in terms of its motion and just the uniquely strange visual styles it plays around with. In fact, this just placed pretty high on the movies I'll be looking for repertory screenings on, because I'd love to see this one in a theater to further just soak it all in.

Of course, this isn't all just music and fun visuals – though that is a lot of it. For as much as I was saying not to expect a deep or involving story, what story there is here is helps keep everything moving, it's breezy, it's funny, and it just keeps you interested and moving in equal parts to keep you from getting too bogged down in 'how did that work?' types of questions. The humor, especially, was one I didn't see coming. I expected this to just be a fun, delightful ride, but I was also pleasantly surprised at the number of times this movie got honest to God laughs out of me – be it with the over the top antics of the Meanies or the often deadpan comedic deliveries of the Beatles themselves. The two make a fun contrast, with the villains played at a constant 11 while the dialed back performances of our heroes read as less 'cool' and more comically oblivious to the situation they've been thrust into and just going with the flow.

Speaking of over-the-top villainy, special shout-out to actor
Paul Angelis, whose performance as the Chief Blue Meanie
is easily the acting MVP of the film. Just pure concentrated
mustache-twirling lunacy, and one was not surprised to learn
Mark Hamill got some inspiration from for his Joker performance.

Okay, score one for chance on this entry. Yes, the year started off on a good, but downright bleak note. As we come to the end of the first month and the temperatures get colder, this made for a welcome light note to close out on and one I'm now glad to have taken off the list.

For a starting four, this is giving me a general good feeling about the year ahead.

Speaking of which, next time something goes live here, it will be a new month, and with it, some new tweaks to the way these are chosen. I'll explain more next time as our informal tour of Europe continues for just a bit longer, though we're finally shifting to a different period in time. So, see you all in February when this project stops in Ireland for the 2024 horror movie Oddity.

Until then.

52 Pick-Up #3 – The Bird With the Crystal Plumage (1970)

Hello all, and welcome back for the third draw in this experiment in first time watches and cinematic shuffling known as 52 Pick Up.

I know I joked about it last week, and I'm surprised it took me as long as it did to realize – but the January tour of Europe continues this week. Once again, we're going back to Italy, though this time the movie itself will be staying in country as opposed to an Italian director telling us a story in Germany.

So, without overplaying this bit any further, let's get into The Bird With the Crystal Plumage.

It occurred to me while watching this – for as many corners as I have gone down with Italian cinema, giallo has been a pretty big blind spot. I was running the numbers going off of what are considered the traditional rules of the genre, and prior to this, I think I've only seen two others – Phenomena and Deep Red. Both of which, like this movie, were also directed by one of the acclaimed names in the genre, Dario Argento.

Like giallo itself, Argento is a director I have a not insignificant number of potential firsts on the list for (besides the above titles, the only others can currently count as watched are Suspiria and Inferno.) So I was pretty happy to see this title get drawn, as it's held in high regard for both the genre and the director.

In keeping with the now informal format for these write-ups, I suppose this is where I give the quick pitch for anyone not familiar with the movie. Fitting with the above jokes about a European tour, this introduces our hero, Sam Dalmas (Tony Musante) as an American abroad in a losing battle with writer's block. Frustrated and ready to pack it in, Sam's plans for a trip back to the states are derailed when he walks by a museum and finds himself witness to a mysterious person in black attacking a woman. After having his plan to leave the country derailed by police questioning, he soon finds himself caught up in the mystery, as it becomes clear this attack may be part of a larger pattern of murder.

"Hmmm...nope. Still not inspired yet."

One thing I appreciated about this movie from the jump – Argento does a great job at grabbing the audience's attention and holding it. Right from Sam's first fateful encounter with the murderer, there are things that seem amiss. Rather than feeling like obvious giveaways, they serve to bait the hook for both protagonist and viewer. The pieces don't add up for Sam, and so, despite his initial reservations, his curiosity draws him into the search. As he goes from reluctantly pressed into the case to an active investigator, the movie draws the viewer with him, piecing together details of his own findings in a way that expands without giving the game away too soon. Further, the tension mounts as it becomes clear the killer knows Sam is on their trail, and they are determined to keep him off of it.

Is the final payoff worth it? Personally, I'd say it is.

Once the details are laid out and the reveal is made, the nature of the mystery could be seen as straightforward. That said, for foregoing the wilder twists and turns of other mystery stories, it carries itself from being well made all around with its internal logic holding up well. This last turn was a pleasant surprise, as there is often an element credited to giallo in which the main reveal is some outlandish turn of the plot to wrong-foot the audience that often leaves them wondering how it even works with the internal consistency of the movie. I went into this expecting a strange swerve of this type, even as I started seeing the clues pointing to the identity of the killer (which, to my pleasant surprise, I mostly caught – missed the significance of two pieces, but had the right person.)

The visit to this man might be the strangest part of this movie,
and that still makes sense in the larger context.

There's something endearing about this movie in its traditional execution. Taken as a mystery, it's not an elaborate head-trip designed to leave you utterly bowled over as one comes to expect in some modern mysteries, and that's honestly fine. Taken in hindsight, particularly seeing the movies that become overshadowed just by the audacity (or absurdity) of their twist endings, there's something refreshing about how grounded this movie is in the nature of its reveal. Like I said above, the movie seems draw its viewer in like Sam with the fact the pieces are all there for you to notice along with him. Looking back, it never feels like Argento is keeping that one critical clue deliberately out of sight where our hero would see it but the audience won't so he can pull the rug out. 

I'm not sure I can say this is the best movie I have seen of this run (for as rough a watch as it is, The Damned is still holding the edge for quality) but I do feel like right now is the most satisfying watch I've had. To the point where I actually feel bad it's taken me this long to also give a shout-out to the fact this movie's score is by the legendary Ennio Morricone, a reveal that also surprised me as someone used to some of Argento's later synth and prog-rock inspired scores. Learning he would go on to work with Argento again has me looking forward to keeping an eye out for the other times they crossed paths after this.

Honestly? It feels fitting to get a movie like this in January, given it now feels like this has perked my interest in a number of directions to populate the future draws.

Of course, that is for later. For now, we're about wrapping up here but there's still one week left of January. For the final week of the month, or impromptu European tour continues as once again we slingshot back over to Britain, this time by way of a visually striking little place called Pepperland.

That's right – I'm taking care of another long time cinematic blind spot next week with the Beatles' animated classic Yellow Submarine. I'm going into this with minimal advance knowledge or expectations, so this should be fun.

Hopefully will see you all then.

52 Pick-Up # 2 – Death Bed: The Bed That Eats (1977)

Welcome back for the second round of 52 Pick-Up.

Wow, last week was a real chipper start to this whole project, huh?

In my defense, I did say these were going to be chosen at random, so there was always the chance I could start with a downer. It's part of the fun (if you will) of leaving this up to chance. You reduce the likelihood of getting into a rut where you're favoring certain titles or genres over others.

I will be doing some slight modifications to the formula going forward – more to come on that next month as I've already slotted out January – but I'm still going to do my best to keep that level of sheer chance at play.

Speaking of which, I did promise you guys lighter last week, and I'd like to think I've delivered this time around. Perhaps not a happy, lively romp, but at least far less emotionally heavy.

So, without further ado, here's Death Bed: The Bed That Eats.

I have to start by asking this – and this is normally something I am loathe to do cause it kind of feels like a cheap way to farm engagement, but here we go. For those of you already familiar with this movie before this article or it being brought up last week – how many of you first learned this movie existed from the Patton Oswalt stand-up album Werewolves and Lollipops?

No real reason for asking beyond being curious to see how much that helped boost this movie to people by making them aware it existed. I'll admit I am part of that camp, and in a way, Patton's not wrong – there is something truly impressive about the fact a movie like this exists in the form that it does.

First, there's the premise – this movie is exactly what it advertises on the tin. No, really. The movie is literally about a bed that eats. Food, objects, people. The bed just absorbs them and eats them. Yes, there's a backstory of the film involving a demon that fell in love with a human and how the bed is a byproduct of their cursed union, but really – odds are if you're seeking this out, that's taking a backseat to the fact you're watching a horror movie about people being eaten by a bed.

Our monster, ladies and gentlemen.

Which you do see happen. Quite a few times within the trim 70~ minute run time.

Part of why this is so impressive to see and realize someone made happen? It takes itself completely seriously. This isn't presented as a comedy or a spoof of shlocky monster movies. It takes its premise dead serious (which, granted, one could choose to take for comedy depending how they define camp) and that adds to its charm, in a weird way. At no point does anyone stop to reflect on how goofy the idea of a killer bed is. No one snarks about how silly this all is. Everyone is invested and, if they think it's ridiculous, they're leaving it behind the scenes.

Which goes to one of the other reasons this movie is memorable (I'd feel weird saying it works, because this is a VERY 'your mileage may vary' experience.) It's a term that feels like it gets overused to describe movies, but Death Bed is one I would say can be described as 'dreamlike' in its execution. The structure (and I promise, there is one) is told over three vignettes, largely only linked by a voiceover narration from the spirit of one of the bed's victims. The narration, as well as the people involved, all played into this feeling – probably best embodied in the case of one man (played by William Russ – incidentally, I should also note that, strictly speaking, this movie doesn't have a protagonist per se, but his character is the brother of the two characters who arguably comes closest) who survives an attack by the bed. Said attack leaves his hands stripped of flesh and reduced just to the bones. There is no excessive blood or writhing pain, instead he watches as his skeletonized hands slowly fall apart before finally asking his sister to break them off rather than let them finish decaying on their own. It's presented as so matter of fact by the man that it feels like dream logic perfectly in tone with the rest of the movie.

"I know I say it every year, but I think this should be
the last time we go to Spirit Halloween."

The same can be said for the actual eating as it's presented. To hear the title, one would not be surprised to envision a bed with a mouth and teeth, actively chomping its victims in a gory display. Not so here – instead the bed is seen to absorb things, usually matched by a visual of foam rising up from the mattress into which the object of its consumption is absorbed or pulled in. From there, the movie cuts to scenes of the object (or person) floating around in the bed's digestive fluids – often just a person submerged in yellow liquid that occasionally gets tinted with blood.

Exhibits A and B

Everything about this is conducted not with an instinct to shock, but with a slow, careful manner that makes the whole thing feel like a weird dream to watch unfold. So much so that a part of me almost wants to dock it some points for the voiceover narration. Taken on its own, it's not bad – it's not like, say, the infamous Blade Runner narration where you can tell just from watching that it was put in at a producer's insistence. In this case, the narration feels like it's part of the intended arc, especially as it plays into the ending. I recognize why it's here and it doesn't feel out of step with the movie. At the same time, a part of me would be interested in seeing an alternate cut where the narration isn't there and the audience is just left to parse out this strange pastiche of dreamlike actions, as in the dark to the past and motives of the bed as its victims are.

Of course, even if such a cut did exist, I'd still know the backstory from having seen the first, so the whole thought exercise is kind of meaningless until someone figures out a way to selectively wipe memory.

Ah well.

In any case, this was a fun one to check off the list. I'm not going to say everyone should see this, because it is definitely NOT a movie everyone's gonna gel with. That said, it's also a movie where you'll probably figure out in the first ten minutes if this is working for you or not. If I had to sum it up in a single phrase, it's 'seeing is believing.' Even beyond its elevator pitch, this is a movie that, if you're curious, I would recommend experiencing at least once just to see how genuinely strange it is in what it is and what it does.

So, one well made, if bleak movie and one enjoyably strange oddity. Not a bad start.

I hope you guys are liking the European start to things, cause we're staying abroad next week. In fact, we're going back to Italy next week (and again, I promise, less bleak) for one that has been on my to do list for years. Hope to see you back here next time for Dario Argento's seminal giallo, The Bird With the Crystal Plumage.

Till then.

52 Pick-Up #1 – The Damned (1969)

Hello and welcome back for the first entry in this year's attempt to get myself writing at a regular pace again – a dive through my cinematic 'To Do' list I have taken to christening 52 Pick Up.

As I said last time, we're kicking this project off with a title I've been circling for a bit now and one I hope hasn't just doomed this year from a tonal standpoint – Luchino Visconti's grim Nazi-era cautionary tale, The Damned.

Gonna be honest with you all - normally, I'd be trying to do cheeky
captions with the screencaps. For this one? I don't think I can
really riff this in good conscience. Maybe next time.

This is a title that has been on the list for a couple of years now. There are some here that will have been in place longer, but, as I said before, these are chosen at random. This crossed my cinematic radar a few years back when it was announced as an addition to the Criterion Collection. The premise had potential to spike my curiosity, but also reading up left me debating if I wanted to make this a Criterion blind buy or not.

Having drawn this first, let me take this moment to remind you – to the aspiring cinephile on a budget, a good library system is a reliable accomplice.

Now that I've watched the film, I'll start by saying, it's a very good movie and I'm glad I watched it. I'm not sure I'm gonna be running out to own it, but damn, I'm gonna be thinking of this one for a while.

For anyone not familiar with the movie, I'll keep the pitch brief. Set in Weimar Germany, we are introduced to the wealthy Essenbeck family (loosely inspired by the real life Krupps), a line of old nobility with a prominent steelworks to their name. They have all gathered for the birthday celebration of their wealthy patriarch – an innocent enough event that, by chance, happens to coincide with the Reichstag fire. Suddenly, the Essenbecks find themselves at a crossroads – power is shifting in Germany, and the fate of the family may depend on where it settles. Individual members waste no time drawing lines for their parts of the estate and casting their lots in with whichever faction they think will come out on top, and for many, benefit them personally.

As you can probably already guess, this does not end well for...anyone, really. One by one, the members of the family are either betrayed, corrupted, or sometimes both, as their legacy is rolled up and ground into the Nazi war machine.

So if you're looking for something bright and optimistic to start the new year with, maybe table this one for a later date, though I would still say to seek it out if you think you're up for it.

(Spoiler heads-up here, feel free to highlight and read or ignore, but again, if you're not sure, this may be a deal breaker: besides the obvious themes of Nazism, another risky point in this may come in the character of Martin, a hedonistic member of the Essenbecks who is brought under the thumb of the Reich as a result of his predilection for young girls. This thankfully isn't presented in a particularly graphic fashion, but the movie still makes it clear he's a predator. Something to keep in mind, cause I know that can be a lot to get blindsided by.)

As I write this, it's been a few days since I finished the movie and, like I said, I've had it rolling around in my head. In particular, the theme of complicity and how it's presented across many members of the family and to what ends.

Okay, more spoilers ahead, less for 'this content may be a bit much' and more 'I can't really discuss this point without addressing what it leads to.'

There's no question where Visconti comes down on the topic based on what's presented – like I said at the start, this whole film is a cautionary tale on the dangers of complicity and how, in the face of such authoritarian movements, there is no such thing as a 'safe' place. Even those who willingly cast in their lots with it aren't guaranteed protection. To the point where I think the first thought I had on finishing was you could put this in a killer double feature alongside Cabaret or Mephisto (or make a triple play to really get an audience in a grim state of mind.)

It's also something it's hard not to think about nowadays in light of – well, everything going on.

Yes, this one's gonna get a little political, folks. It's kind of hard not to with a movie like this. It's fine if you'd rather come back next time, I promise, it will be a much lighter title.

I didn't go into this one looking to explicitly draw the connections, but it's hard not to as one sees how the movie unfolds. Every member of the family has their way of trying to address the situation – be it the staunch anti-Nazi Herbert who attempts to flee the country, the brash partisan Konstantin who believes the SA will come out on top and intends to put his part of the family's trust in them, or the calculating Friedrich, a relative outsider in the family who allies himself with the Nazis to try and secure his hold in the family and company. Each of these characters responds to the growing threat in their own way, either by convincing themselves it will blow over or that they can manipulate it to their own gain.

One by one, they find themselves either outmaneuvered (Herbert), having chosen the wrong side (Konstantin), or ultimately undone when they discovered the party didn't feel they were sufficiently loyal (Friedrich). When the dust settles, the only family members left standing are the ones who have effectively cast aside their identities as members of the Essenbeck family and instead become uniformed officers of the Nazi party, with their steelworks now dedicated to the war machine.

All the while, only one member of the family even remotely seems to realize the danger they're in – and because of that, Herbert is absent for much of the movie, only returning in the third act under duress and knowing he will be arrested and executed for doing so. The others, one by one, continue to try and play their games of power, never realizing just how perilous their positions truly are.

Actually, there is one other besides Herbert who has any sort of inkling of the situation – that would be Aschenbach, a cousin of the family who starts the movie already a uniformed member of the party. With loyalties already firmly with the Reich over blood, he is quick to advise and manipulate his kin towards activities that will either weaken their holds over the family's steelworks or strengthen the party's hold over the family member in question.

Even more striking is, Aschenbach never actively tries to hide what he's doing – there are several moments where he talks with family members about things like the growing complicity of the German people (“Every German is a potential informant” he declares at one point) and openly tells one member of the family that the powerful people the Nazis desire are those who understand how quickly that power can be taken away from them if they fail to toe the line.

Of course, this is the tragedy of both the story and history itself – even as it becomes clearer the way the winds are blowing, the Essenbecks assume it won't effect them – that either they will overcome it or at least it will blow past. A refrain that echoes painfully clearly in history to this day, as so many tragedies get foreshadowed by 'well it won't happen to me' or 'that won't happen this time.'

In wrapping this up, I find myself thinking about the visual bookends of the movie – its opening titles unfold over shots of a steelworks, specifically in full view of the heat and smoke (and an opening title scored effectively by Maurice Jarre.) This is one of only two times we actually see the company, though it is spoken of often. The only other time comes after the family has been effectively gutted and subsumed by the Nazis, cutting from a final shot of newly appointed patriarch Martin (clad in black uniform and armband), back to the fire and smoke of the steelworks. Besides the obvious Hellish imagery that would suggest, it drives the final point home for the message that the movie is conveying – the family was never of any value to the Nazis, only the steel they could provide. In the end, the people have been eradicated or repurposed, all that remains is the resources.

It's a grim note, but also one it's hard not to ponder at a time where more and more people are questioning how to react to increasingly more alarming grabs for power – will they acknowledge and try to stop it, try to mitigate it, or pretend it's not a concern until it comes for them personally, if they even acknowledge it then? It's not an easy question, and frankly, I feel like no one can truly give a definite clear answer until they're in the moment – but it's hard not to find myself wondering at my own choices watching others play out theirs in a narrative like this.

...well, that was a cheery note to kick this year off. Once again, I hope this being shuffled first wasn't foreshadowing.

As I said before, we'll be going somewhere lighter next week, if not also a little stranger. It's a movie that has been on my to do list since first learning of it as many did in the punchline of a stand-up comic.

Feel free to come back next week for the 1977 weirdo cult favorite Death Bed: The Bed That Eats.

Until then.

New Year, New...You Get the Idea

 

Ah, New Years. A time of new starts, resolutions, and settling the matters of the previous year.

Which means I should probably start with addressing the elephant in the room of what the Hell happened in October.

There's no polite way to say it – the back half of 2025 was a mess for me. Some good moments, but also a whole lotta crap. I won't divulge too much in the details because hey, that's not what you come here for.

At least, I hope that's not what you come here for, because otherwise I've really gotta re-evaluate who I'm writing for.

But yes, the back half of last year was a mix of being just busy enough and having enough other personal issues going on that I will just say it – for my initial enthusiasm with the Night Shift idea, ultimately my heart wasn't really in it to the extent I had hoped for.

For the record, two other things I will give from what I did do for viewing on that project:

-Having now seen the made for TV version of Trucks, I can honestly say that movie will give you a whole new appreciation for Maximum Overdrive's cocaine-fueled momentum and batcrap lunacy

-Having put it off for decades now, I was pleasantly surprised by how much I liked the made for TV movie of Sometimes They Come Back. It lightens up the tone a little, but in general, it made a welcome surprise from this kind of lackluster experiment.

Perhaps I'll come back to King country somewhere down the line, but not just now.

In the meantime, I do admit, this did make me realize part of the problem here is I keep going for sprints rather than just trying to commit to consistent work.

And so, with the new year, I'm announcing a new attempt to get my arse back in gear.

I have compiled a list of movies that have, to one extent or another, been hovering on my to do list – be they films I have not seen at all, or only seen partially. I will be selecting films from this list at random and each week will offer up some writing on what I have seen. These may not all be carefully researched or thought out, they may not all be deep dives. Ultimately, my main goal is to get writing - keeping to general first impressions and seeing where that takes me.

In short, I'm trying to stop overthinking these ideas and just let them go.

So, here we are.

The first entry has been viewed and is being slated to go live for this Wednesday, as I hope to God I didn't just accidentally set the tone for this year by drawing Luchino Visconti's The Damned.

We'll just have to wait and see, won't we?

Till then!