S.P. Oldham's Blog, page 41

Film Review - Psycho - 1960

I just watched another of the films listed in Wednesday Lee Friday’s ’15 Black and White Horror Movies That Are Scary as Hell,’ posted on ScreenRant on 2oth August 2016. Find it here: https://screenrant.com/scariest-black-and-white-horror-movies-ever-all-time/

SPOILER ALERT

I have just watched Alfred Hitchcock’s ‘Psycho’ – starring Anthony Perkins and Janet Leigh. This is the last film on Wednesday Lee Friday’s list. It is ranked at Number 1 and quite right too!

It is hard to believe that there is anyone out there who has not heard of this film, even if they haven’t seen it. It is an enduring classic, the infamous ‘shower scene’ parodied, replicated and referred to on countless occasions by numerous people over the years. But just in case you haven’t seen it, haven’t seen all of it before (like me, until last night) or watched it so long ago you have forgotten it, I include this spoiler alert. If you genuinely don’t know the plot-line or the twist then stop reading right here and go watch the film!

In my humble opinion, this film is the best on this list by a country mile. The acting is great, the dialogue natural and realistic. As has been said many times before, by people far more qualified than me, Anthony Perkins is perfect for the part of Norman Bates. He is very likeable, with an innocent quality to him when playing the role of the beleaguered son.

I like that young secretary Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) has a change of heart after stealing $40,000 from a client of her boss and going on the run. She decides to go home, face the music and put things right. I like that she spent some of the money on a car, checking into Bates Motel before experiencing this change of heart, and is faced with the challenge of paying back the deficit, writing down the finances on a piece of paper. I also like that it was due to a seemingly innocuous conversation she had with Norman, of all people, that this epiphany takes place. All of this, to me, is realistic, things a ‘real’ person might do. A pity, of course, that she doesn’t make it out of the hotel alive.

The way the private investigator gently interrogates Norman, not really believing him, is also done well, in my view. Nothing heavy, nothing stereotyped about his approach, all perfectly feasible. I suppose what I am trying to say is I respect the fact that this film was extremely well done, making it all the more watchable and absorbing,

There are no annoying loose ends either. Everything comes together nicely, the penultimate scene in which the psychiatrist explains the mentality of Norman Bates being perhaps an obvious device, but nonetheless it works. At the time, the workings of such twisted minds were not as well known nor as understood as they are today, so I understood the need to explain explicitly in that scene.

I am really glad that the last word was given to Norman Bates – except of course he is not Norman Bates by the end of the film. His dead mother being the dominant personality, it is his mother’s thoughts we hear right at the end, her reasoning and defiance. Again, extremely well done.

This film is more a thriller than a horror, but the true story on which it is based is real-life horror in the extreme.

The character Norman Bates is based upon Ed Gein. This extremely disturbed individual made clothing, household items and accessories out of the body parts of dead people. Some of these body parts were from graverobbing, but Gein also committed at least two murders, and was suspected of killing his own brother.

He was raised in a radically repressive household, his father an alcoholic, his mother the dominant parent (just like Mrs Bates.) was a puritan with extreme views on lust and desire, amongst other things

For all that the reality was twisted and horrific, it is also fascinating. There is a wealth of information about Ed Gein online, but for starters, try this: https://www.biography.com/people/ed-gein-11291338

All in all, this film deserves the number one spot on this list. There is a reason why it is a classic movie. If you haven’t seen it, make sure you do, and if you have seen it, watch it again – it is well worth it.

S P Oldham

The Thief in the Wreath

The Thief in the Wreath

There’s a thief in the wreath, all dark and devious

Hiding behind the berries and holly

If caught, he’ll pretend he’s something mischievous

But he is not merry, he is not jolly

He’s sly of nature, his purpose all lowly

With always an eye on the treasures around

Impish of features, he’s something unholy

Just waiting to confuse, connive and confound

When all is quiet, all is peaceful and calm

Stealthy, he creeps from his hiding place

Uncaring of whether he does any harm

His greed and his wickedness clear in his face

He takes what he fancies; those bracelets, that penny

That watch, a gift this past Christmas Day

As for shame, this Thief doesn’t have any

He grabs all his loot, and stuffs it away

Then, pockets bulging, he starts on the liquor

Swigging and gulping, with a belch here and there

Until appetite sated, he leaves with a snicker

To burrow back into his prickly lair

So, this year, before you shout for your earrings

Before you accuse others in mistaken belief

Listen out for laughter, just beyond hearing

Look, without seeing, for the Thief in the Wreath…

S P Oldham

Thank you to my son Rhys Oldham for the great title, sorry it took me two years plus to do something with it! 

Film Review - The Incredible Shrinking Man - 1957

I just watched another of the films listed in Wednesday Lee Friday’s ’15 Black and White Horror Movies That Are Scary as Hell,’ posted on ScreenRant on 2oth August 2016. Find it here: https://screenrant.com/scariest-black-and-white-horror-movies-ever-all-time/

The penultimate film (for me, since I watched them out of order so to speak) is ‘The Incredible Shrinking Man,’ released in 1957 and starring Grant Williams, Randy Stuart and April Kent.

SPOILER ALERT

Throughout the film, the principle character acts also as narrator, giving voice to his inner thoughts. It is another film, like one or two others on the list, which gets its inspiration from the very real fear of nuclear and chemical attack at the time, understandably so.

This film goes to great lengths from the outset to explain the reason behind Scott Carey’s shrinking. In order to justify it presumably, so the story can move on with all that troublesome explaining out of the way. Scott undergoes a barrage of scientific and medical tests, all of which were probably ground-breaking at the time, which prove he is indeed becoming smaller, though they can’t find any reason for it.

The blame is eventually laid on a mysterious fog which washed over Scott whilst holidaying with his wife, Louise. This is in fact how the film begins. The couple have been sunbathing out at sea on a small boat. Louise goes down to the cabin to get a cold beer, but Scott takes the full force of this strange and sudden fog, which leaves moisture on his bare chest, before quickly passing over them with no other obvious effect. Note that, once the fog has been deemed the likely culprit, there is no further reference to it and not even any pretence at finding out what caused it. 

Definitely a few references in this film that they wouldn’t get away with today. There is a fairground scene where a man introduces ‘curiosities’ to the watching public. He refers to these people as ‘exhibits’ and ‘unusual apparitions consigned by a tricky Mother Nature,’ and makes remarks people would be up in arms about today, such as comments about an obese woman and how she wobbles as she sits, and referring to a woman who has dwarfism as ‘Tiny Tina.’ There is also a bearded lady and an extremely tall man on stage. Scott, who has ventured out of his home for the first time in weeks, without Louise’s knowledge, is looking on and, unable to bear it, runs away. It should be remembered that it is not so long ago that such people would indeed have been paraded as entertainment to the public and, as I have said ad nauseum whilst writing these reviews, it is of its time. Pointless taking offence to it now, however much we might dislike the terms used. It was what it was, so to speak.

Anyway, on with the plot. Whilst out, Scott meets a woman named Clarice, one of the midgets (their word, not mine) from the show. Through her, he feels he has a new lease of life. He completes the book he is writing about his experiences and is beginning to feel better when he suddenly realises he has begun to shrink again. He is now shorter than Clarice.

His problems really start when he is so small he has to live in a doll’s house in the living room, and his wife accidentally lets the cat in to the house…

This is where the adventures really begin. And adventures they are. Of all the films that do not deserve to be on a list of ‘horror’ films, this one is tops. I vaguely remember watching this as a kid and thinking it was thrilling. Kids today of course, wouldn’t be too impressed with the special effects, which were undoubtedly good at the time. They certainly wouldn’t be thrilled. I won’t bore you with what form these adventures take. Suffice to say it includes spiders, a mousetrap, climbing a box and almost being washed down a drain.

The ending has the most blatant and obvious allusions to the fear of nuclear war at the time, and man’s role in the world and the greater universe. It is perhaps the most serious and ‘grown-up’ part of the whole film.

So is The Incredible Shrinking Man scary? No, not even remotely. Slightly ridiculous if anything, but I suppose if you think about it, a whole host of modern horror could be deemed ridiculous, too.

I deliberately put this one off until now as I knew it would be my least favourite, and I was right. Saved the best until last though. I recall (vaguely) watching Psycho years ago. It is the last film on the list and I will be watching and reviewing it sometime very soon. Watch this space…

S P Oldham

Ramasbat and the Beast - Ekphrastic Fiction Competition Winner

Thrilled to be chosen as winner of the Ekphrastic Fiction Competition run by tcstu on tumblr! 

To read my short piece to go along with this fantastic piece of fantasy art by Ignisopitus on tumbl, click the link.

 Ramasbat and the Beast

I hope you enjoy both the art and the writing, and as always feel free to leave a comment and share your thoughts.

My Interview with Indie Writers Review

I was privileged to be interviewed by the Indie Writers Review recently. The interview to be included in this edition. UK and US links below. Thank you, Indie Writers Review.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Indie-Writer...

https://www.amazon.com/Indie-Writers-...

The House on Haunted Hill - 1959

I just watched another of the films listed in Wednesday Lee Friday’s ’15 Black and White Horror Movies That Are Scary as Hell,’ posted on ScreenRant on 2oth August 2016. Find it here: https://screenrant.com/scariest-black-and-white-horror-movies-ever-all-time/

SPOILER ALERT

Today I watched the original 1959 version of The House on Haunted Hill, starring the inimitable Vincent Price. Carol Ohmart played his wife, and what a stunningly beautiful and elegant woman she was.

From the very beginning, literally, the film sets out to scare, with classic ‘ghost noises’ and screams coming from the dark before we meet a single character. The ‘disembodied’ heads (actors talking straight to camera whilst wearing black t-shirts against a black background) add to the spooky ambience and it is entirely fitting – the premise of the film is that a man hires a house known to be haunted so that his wife can host a Haunted House Party. All of the guests have one thing in common; the need, or greed, to get their hands on the ten thousand dollars up on offer to anyone who can spend the night (12 hours) in the house.

Within the first 20 minutes or so the beautiful young woman’s life has been saved twice by the handsome and assertive young man, a trope I found a little tiresome in a film so relatively recently made. There again, less even than 60 years ago, attitudes were so very different from today. Ah well, moving on.

The scene where the rope wraps itself around Nora’s feet just made me think that I used to own a pair of shoes very similar to the ones she is wearing, and how fashions go round in circles. This should be a clue to the fact that this particular scene was in no way ‘scary as hell…’

A couple of genuine jump scares, at least I wasn’t expecting them, and although less realistic than modern horror, they at least make the film more deserving of the title ‘horror’ than most others on this list. You can even forgive the director the very timely thunderstorm outside.

It definitely has a very creepy feel and a dark atmosphere. It is sad that, in these modern times, we are so used to all the modes of haunting and scary tricks this film employs, that now they cause us to raise our eyebrows rather than our pulse rates. I imagine that in its day (a phrase I think I have used in each and every one of these reviews) the film would have had much more impact, seen to have been far scarier. Even so, as I said, it still carries a creepy vibe.

There are a couple of nice little twists to the tale. I saw one coming a mile off, but I have to admit, not the other (though I worked it out as we went along.) As a kid, I was terrified of the squeaky door noises to be found in just about any remotely scary film, so one of the last scenes would have truly terrified me, with no less than three doors swinging squeakily shut by the agency of an unseen hand! I admit it gave me shivers, remembering how my younger self used to respond to that sound.

I wish they had ended the film on Vincent Price. That would have been far more effective. Instead, there was an overly-dramatic, doom-laden prophetic last line, followed by the maniacal laughter, which was gilding the lily in my view. Mind you, that wasn’t the only thing that was overdone in this film – Nora’s incessant screaming drove me up the wall, for a start.

A bit of fun and yes, this is one of the movies on the list of 15 that qualifies as being scary (by which I mean spooky, not gory or graphic; there is a difference, as I have discussed before,) unlike some of its companions. I hadn’t seen this one before. I enjoyed it, but now that I have seen it once, I won’t rush to watch it again.

Its biggest redeeming feature? Vincent Price, obviously, and his unmistakable voice.

Lines I loved:

“Don’t you think you can be much braver, if you’re paid for it?”

“Darling, the only ghoul in the house is you.”

Nice little touch of humour in the credits, where it tells us that Skeleton was played by Himself. A bit tongue in cheek and I love that!

S P Oldham

FREE Christmas Story 2018 - Sign Up Required

So Lost in Words - Horror & Dark Fiction by S P Oldham
Yesterday at 14:47 ·
As a little extra sign up gift for Christmas 2018, I will send you a link to my NEW short story 'Glow.' Just let me know you have signed up to the So Lost in Words Website and as soon as it is confirmed I will send you a link to the story.

This is my small contribution to the 'Make a Christmas Ghost Story a Tradition Again' 'campaign' by Smithsonian - A Plea to Resurrect the Christmas Tradition Telling Ghost Stories

I hope you enjoy it enough to tell it to your loved ones on Christmas Eve!

What's your favourite traditional Ghost Story? Classical, or modern, old or new, feel free to share your favourites in the comments section in the Blog.

https://solostinwords.com/…/free-chri...…

https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/...

Mar Garcia - You Are Not Alone

I was gifted this stunning drawing from the incredibly generous and talented Mar Garcia/ The Bold Mom/ Disturbing Drawings and I just love it! I love how it (and all her work) is simultaneously beautiful and sinister. This is my kind of horror - and it is a mirror to the world if you think about it long enough. I love it! Thank you Mar Garcia xx This is NOT my work and I do not have any copyright. If you are interested in Mar and her work please go to Facebook The Bold Mom and find out more. Enjoy, everyone x

Dementia 13 - Review

I just watched another of the films listed in Wednesday Lee Friday’s ’15 Black and White Horror Movies That Are Scary as Hell,’ posted on ScreenRant on 2oth August 2016. Find it here: https://screenrant.com/scariest-black-and-white-horror-movies-ever-all-time/

SPOILER ALERT

Today’s offering was Dementia 13, the 1963 version starring Luana Anders, Patrick Magee and William Campbell, and was I believe the first film written and directed by Francis Ford Coppola.

It opens with an intriguing setting – a man and woman about to board a rowing boat at night, rock and roll music playing on the radio. In this scene we learn who the couple are, what the woman’s motives might be and how the story is to begin, for us the viewer that is. Truth be told, we are stepping into a story that has been some years in the making…

The story centres around the tragic death of Kathleen, the younger sister to older brothers Richard and Billy. Kathleen drowned in the pond at the front of Halloran Castle several years ago. Consequently, their mother has suffered depression and an all-consuming guilt ever since, looking for people to blame for the girl’s death. The older brother Richard works with iron. It is implied that he has issues with anger early on in the film. Likewise, the younger brother Billy is forced to occupy a bedroom in a remote, supposedly haunted part of the castle. He has suffered strange and frightening nightmares since his sibling’s death.

Louise is possibly the most interesting character of them all, yet she is not in the film for long (she is probably the best actor, too.) Louise is one of the characters in the boat in the opening scene. The man is her husband, John. We learn from the outset that John has a heart defect and that he is aware his wife only wants him for his money. He points out that if anything happens to him, Louise gets nothing. We learn that the mother has penned a 'ridiculous will' which Louise means to persuade her to change. Right on cue,  John keels over and dies of a heart attack. Louise, being the devious money grabber she is, tips him out of the boat along with the radio (she remarks that the music he is playing is ‘terrible’ beforehand,) because she knows he is right about her getting nothing if he is gone. Once back at the castle, she pens a note, forging his signature, explaining his disappearance as a sudden business trip. She then tries to ingratiate herself with mother, the cold, distant matriarch of the house. Once she learns the story of Kathleen, she assures the mother that the dead child will ;give her a sign,' one which she will share, in order to gain the older woman’s confidence. To add credence to her ‘powers’ she sets out to steal some of the dead child’s toys as proof of her communication with her.

I enjoyed the scene where Louise breaks into the girl's bedroom, presumably left as it was when she died. We see Louise is observed breaking in, though she doesn’t know she is being watched. These days, we are used to the idea of the trope whereby children’s toys are creepy and scary. This scene uses that devise shamelessly, but I have to say, it works. Perhaps it wasn’t as hackneyed then as it is now. There was one thing that jarred with me. The crawling wind-up doll made me jump (yes I know I just called it ‘hackneyed’ but I really wasn’t expecting it) yet it had no effect on Louise whatsoever. She barely even acknowledged it had moved. I'm sorry but whether you believed in ghosts or not, I think anyone would have jumped at this sudden and unexpected movement in the circumstances. But even so, this fairly brief scene is quite suspenseful. I didn’t fully understand why she tied ropes to the toys and then dived into the pool with them. They later bob to the surface, though she is no longer around to see it, so perhaps that was the plan. Maybe she meant them to surface in full view of the family, especially the mother, as one of these 'signs.' I wondered if she meant to retrieve them one at a time to add weight to the lies she planned to tell the mother. They would have been dripping wet from the pond, and the child drowned, after all…

The scene where Louise is attacked at the pool, whilst not at all graphic beyond a faceless man swinging an axe repeatedly, (the number and ferocity of blows she supposedly sustained would have resulted in far more than the few trails of blood down her face we are shown) together with a later scene involving a sudden but brief decapitation, and later still, a body hanging in an outhouse, makes this, of all the films on the list, the nearest to true horror that any of them come, with the possible exception of Night of the Living Dead.

I reiterate here that we must bear in mind that all of these films are of their time. None of them would stand up as horror in today’s modern, graphic sense. That being understood, Dementia 13 can be more properly referred to as ‘horror’ than most of the others, in my view. I had been expecting the film to continue in its ‘spooky,’ ghost-story vein, so these elements of violent horror surprised me when they occurred.

The film is meant to be mysterious and intriguing, but at points I simply found it confusing. All is eventually explained of course, though not as fully nor as effectively as I would have liked. Doctor Caleb’s final action, the one which ends the film, seems unnecessary to me. He viciously swings and embeds an axe into the face of the wax doll made in the likeness of the dead child, Kathleen. A final act of ‘violence’ meant to put an end to the sinister depression that hung over the house and the family, it seemed gratuitous to me (not graphically so, just that it was needless and overly dramatic.He had just shot and killed Billy. Mutilating the doll was perhaps a very visual end to it all.

We are used to Coppola’s slick style these days. If you are expecting that from this film, you will be disappointed. I still found it enjoyable in a sense – it has a genuinely unsettling aspect – but if I am honest, I will say that after a promising start, this film became confusing, mildly annoying and then became a somewhat predictable story-line about guilt, grief, loss and insanity.

A lot of things don’t add up here. What was the plan with the stolen toys? Why did she scream when she saw the headstone? (Was that a hand or just some underwater plant? If it was a hand (or a head) then I understand the scream. Otherwise not.) How did the doctor know there were three wheels to empty the pond and why did he have the authority to order it drained? How did Billy have the means to make such a detailed wax doll? Had his mother seen it before she entered the play house? If not, why did she not react to it with more shock? If she had seen it before. why did Billy try to attack her, if she was meant to see it? Why is there barely even a mention of the missing brother John after the early part of the film? Obviously, these are all points we are meant to overlook in order to allow the film to move along, but they niggled me. Oh, and given that it is supposedly set in Ireland, how come there wasn’t an Irish accent to be heard? (A bit tongue in cheek, that one.)

Scary as hell? No, but it definitely has scary elements and one or two moments which would have no doubt qualified as ‘jump scares’ at the time. Worth the watch to see the result of Coppola’s early work, and if you are prepared to take it with a pinch of salt it is a good, spooky film. 

I have three films left on this list. I intend to complete my self-imposed challenge to watch and review all fifteen of them.by Christmas, so keep coming back for more and feel free to add your own opinions!

Clare Monument - Winner Post