By Nicholas Anez
The
incentive for this 4th volume in my Celluloid Adventures series was a dismissive review in a reference
book of the 1956 film version of George Orwell’s novel, 1984, calling it “a great disappointment and a lackluster
adaptation of the briliant novel.” This derogatory opinion remains the general
consensus among many critics. I disagree with this assessment, in part
because
the movie remained in my memory long after I first saw it. Furthermore, I had
read the novel so I knew that, though the adaptation was definitely a loose
one, it was actually faithful to Orwell’s ideas. So I wanted to redress this
negative opinion of the movie and proceeded to write about it. This led to my
considering other movies in the science fiction and horror genres that, I
believe, are also underrated. Thus was born the concept for Celluloid Adventures 4: Science Fiction Thrills….Horror Chills.
I
should state at this point that I became a fan of science fiction and horror
movies in my adolescence. I also loved Westerns (Shane is my all-time favorite movie) and it has always upset me
when a good movie, particularly in my favorite genres, fails at the box-office.
Thus, my objective in the first three volumes was to bring overdue attention to
some of these movies. In these books, I discuss films within several genres
while I devote individual chapters to science fiction and/or horror movies. For
this fourth book, I decided to focus only on science fiction and horror because
the ascendancy of these genres that began with Star Wars (1977) and The
Exorcist (1973) relegated to relative obscurity many fine movies that
preceded this dominance along with a few that followed. And it is some of these
films that I wanted to retrieve from anonymity for this book. (Not
coincidentally, my devotion to the genres more or less ended in the late 70s,
coinciding with this ascendancy, but that’s another story.)
It
was very rewarding for me to research the movies in Celluloid Adventures 4 because I discovered numerous interesting details
about their development and production that I hope will make this book equally
interesting. For instance, here are just a few of the many intriguing facts
that I learned:
The director of one movie fired his own
brother who had written the screenplay.
One movie is based upon a legend of the
birth of a deformed monster.
One movie was made by a married couple
that later engaged in an acrimonious divorce.
One movie failed upon its original
release but played to enthusiastic audiences in New York
and Los Angeles 65 years later.
The
screenplay for one movie is based upon actual inhumane experiments conducted in
prestigious universities.
The producer of one movie was forced to
cast the actor who starred in it.
The director of one movie considers it among
his worst.
One serious movie suffered because its
studio promoted it as an exploitation movie.
The
14 movies that I highlight cover a period of three and one-half decades, from
1943 to 1978, and I would speculate that the average moviegoer today has not
heard of most of them. With one exception, they were financial failures or
disappointments, a fact that contributes to their obscurity. However, I believe
that they still deserve the recognition and praise that they did not receive
upon their original release. In my estimation, these are all excellent films
but yet most of them did not attract wide audiences.
These
movies include a wide variety of subjects. In Son of Dracula (1943), the main character is a woman who is not
only eager to die but is also willing to kill the man that loves her. In Alias Nick Beal (1949), Lucifer is
determined to condemn an innocent man him to eternal suffering. Both The Power (1968) and The Medusa Touch (1978) portray men with
superior brains that have the capability to either save or destroy the entire world.
One of them will choose destruction because he hates humanity with a passion.
Very
few people have heard of the movie, Who?
(1974), and those who have heard of it were probably confused by the title. And
yet it is a poignant story of an altruistic man who is victimized by futuristic
technology. The protagonist of The Groundstar
Conspiracy (1972) also endures tremendous suffering from another type of
futuristic technology. The future of the aforementioned 1984 (1956) is extremely frightening because it depicts a world in
which a sweet-looking child will betray her own father to be tortured and
perhaps killed.
I
am hoping that this book will encourage people, including some of you who are
reading this, to view these movies. They are all entertaining and, in some
respects, provocative. For instance, after seeing The Maze (1953), you might actually sympathize with a monstrous amphibian.
If you believe that a brain is lifeless once it is removed from its body, Donovan’s Brain (1953) may change your
mind. You might also discover how fragile our brains are after viewing The Mind Benders (1963), a story about the
cruelty of pitiless scientists. If you view Crack
in the World (1965), you will witness how the earth is almost destroyed by
a scientist with abundant hubris. Upon viewing Journey to the far Side of the Sun (1969), you will witness a benevolent
scientist lose his sanity because of his extraordinary discovery.
There
are moments of pure excitement and suspense as well as pure terror in these
movies. Viewers of Capricorn One
(1977) will inevitably break out in ecstatic applause at the sight of a rickety
biplane suddenly appearing on an isolated desert road. This is the only movie
among the 14 in this book that was a success – with the public if not the
critics. In contrast, The Mummy’s Shroud
(1967) played the bottom-of-the-bill of double features and was unnoticed upon
its release. But I believe it deserves some kind of awareness.
So
I hope that I have piqued your curiosity enough to encourage you to read about
the making of these movies. But even if you choose not to buy the book, for
your own safety, I implore you to please heed this warning: Beware the beat of
the cloth-wrapped feet!
Click here to order from Amazon