AMICUS: HOUSE OF HORRORS (2012) - heartfelt fan-made documentary

AMICUS: HOUSE OF HORRORS

(2012, UK)

Attempting to document the famous horror studio

For British horror films of the 1960s and 1970s, Amicus Productions rivalled Hammer films by taking a different approach with considerable success. Amicus brought horror to mostly modern day settings, like the living rooms of The Skull, the film studios of Madhouse, the high-tech werewolf hunt of The Beast Must Die... They also monopolised on the 'portmanteau' horror, a film made up of short sharp shocks, held together by a linking story - Dr Terror's House of Horror's lead to the first EC Comics adaptions of Tales From The Crypt, Vault of Horror and beyond to Tales That Witness Madness and The Monster Club.

Strangely, the company started and ended with child-scary family adventures, from Dr Who and the Daleks to Warlords of Atlantis. Amicus made a lasting impression on several generations of filmgoers and late night TV horror fans.

Geoffrey Whitehead from And Now The Screaming Starts

On a limited budget, writer and director Derek Pykett has made dozens of interviews on home video around England. But looks like he was unable to pay for any expensive archive materials to portray a more complete story with behind the scenes footage, movie clips or old interviews. Instead he gives us some valuable time with many surviving cast and crew members who worked on the films.

I wish he'd spent a little more time on editing and deciding on a target audience. The running time is unnecessarily inflated by introducing many extremely familiar plots and people. Worse still, by repeating facts and introductions as if we've not been paying attention. His pieces to camera are also very downbeat, as he repeatedly reminds us who's dead, in stark contrast to the many chirpy interviewees who remember the good times they had while they colleagues were alive.

The variable sound levels also make this contrast with the flashy DVD extras that we're used to on special editions.

But.

No-one else has got these interviews or even some of the interviewees that he has here. No one's bothered to go this far down the cast list and persuaded the directors and cameramen to talk about these almost forgotten films.

This could have been slicker, and a bigger budget could have pulled in better interviews and bigger names, Christopher Lee and Stephanie Beacham are absent. But there are no other Amicus documentaries out there anywhere!

It starts a little confusingly by introducing Milton Subotsky and Max Rosenberg, the two producers who started Amicus. But then fast-forwards through the whole story of Amicus by telling us their entire life stories upto their deaths. Making me think the whole documentary was going to be a series of biographies all told in voiceover...

The style then settles down with a great remembrance from Milton Subotsky's widow who thankfully has great recall about his heyday. Then we get into the main meat of the programme, split over two discs, an exhaustive film-by-film account of the entire Amicus filmography, related by an impressive roster of surviving cast and crew members.

Angela Pleasence and father in From Beyond The Grave

I was particularly pleased to see interviews with Geoffrey Bayldon (Asylum, Tales From The Crypt, The House That Dripped Blood), indeed he introduces it. Also a pleasure to see Angela Pleasence (a stark presence in From Beyond The Grave) who's still out there working!

Actors who only appeared in one scene in one Amicus film are also delightful, partly because someone else remembers their characters as vividly as I do. Angela Grant as Ian Hendry's girlfriend in Tales From The Crypt is famous (to me) because I've seen it so often, and the shocking scenes that she's in. It's surprising just how much insightful material can come from someone who worked with Amicus so briefly.

Some are character actors who were more famous for their non-horror roles, like Jeremy Kemp (Dr Terror's House of Horrors) who regularly appeared as German commanders. Kenny Lynch (also Dr Terror) and Geoffrey Davies (Vault of Horror, above) were far better known for light entertainment and will only otherwise be recognised by those who remember 1970s' TV.

Crew members include production designers, cameramen and a couple of directors, like Kevin Connor (From Beyond The Grave, The Land That Time Forgot) and Stephen Weeks (I, Monster). There are of course many other interviewees and even a couple of visits to filming locations.

Director and voiceover Derek Pykett keeps appearing to fill in gaps in the timeline where he has no relevant interviewees, most annoyingly on my favourite, Tales From The Crypt, giving the first of a seemingly endless, dour reminder of how wonderful Peter Cushing was and reminding us that he's dead. I'll forgive him all this because Derek also wrote this invaluable paperback guide, British Horror Film Locations.

I won't forgive that Derek skips over the Amicus monster movies far too quickly, even though he's interviewed their director, Kevin Connor. The Land That Time Forgot, The People That Time Forgot, At The Earth's Core, and Warlords of Atlantis are scarcely covered. They were the few Amicus films that I saw at the cinema and indeed the only ones I was allowed to see at the time. They were also a large part of Amicus' success in the 1970s, and just as much a part of producer Milton Subotsky's love affair with fantastic literature.

So, after the extended run through most of the Amicus filmography, it then circles a little randomly for a while with another downbeat Cushing tribute and some leftover bits of interviews to try and sum up.

For enthusiasts who know these films and recognise these actors from relatively small roles, this is a treat. But it's a rough introduction to the subject, with not enough enticingly presented clips (just trailers) or thorough enough background, to please newcomers.

But there's more good stuff in the DVD extras! Also included are two rare archive interviews with Peter Cushing! The first is from 1990, and both are introduced by the interviewers as they are today.

While many of us are more than aware of how the death of his wife severely affected him, it's rare to see Peter talking about it at any length. And rather than being overly sentimental, he remains composed, self-deprecating and even humorous about what was a disastrous and prolonged grieving process of nearly thirteen years! He admits he tried to kill himself. Too cowardly to throw himself into the sea, he ran back home and tried to bring on a heart attack by running up and down the stairs! Which is quite an admission, that he treats with a smile. To slowly get over Helen's death, he threw himself into work and said yes to any and all offers. 

The second is a 1983 interview, with a young inexperienced interviewer who Peter politely but occasionally catches out. This was crucially filmed just at the end of his 13-year exile from the public. Perhaps it's Peter easing himself back into talking about things. This is a slightly more guarded interview, but reveals he actually doesn't like watching horror films! He prefers war, drama, comedy, westerns. Though he makes a point of gratefully acknowledging the horror fans who enjoy his work. He only watches his rushes but not his films.

Amicus: House of Horrors is only sold in the US, but the DVDs aren't region-coded. They can be bought direct from Oldies.com in the US, or you can easily get them via Amazon.co.uk, if you're in Britain.

The DVD set makes a great companion to this similarly covered Little Shoppe of Horrors' magazine recent Amicus special.

See many more of the classic Amicus movie posters here at The Wrong Side of the Art.

THE AMITYVILLE HORRORs - based on a true story?

The most shocking aspect is that it's still presented as a true story...

A great premise for a horror film... A young family find a dream house but they've barely got enough money for it. Huge rooms, sea view, boat house... too good to be true. Then the estate agent tells them why it's all so cheap. A year earlier, six members of the same family were killed inside. But despite this, they can't pass up such a bargain and move in.

But the Lutzs' new home has starts to effect them all, especially the father (James Brolin) who can't get warm and gets very attached to his axe. Their priest (Rod Steiger) can't sanitise the house, warned off by a swarm of flies and then a mysterious illness. Their little girl tells them of an imaginary friend, a red-eyed pig. Visions and window-slamming become increasingly ferocious until they can't stay in the house any longer...

I first saw this around February 1980 in a suburban London cinema. But. The Amityville Horror really didn't work for me. I jumped when the cat leapt up at the window and that's all. It would have been cheaper to get someone to burst a paper bag behind me.
Even as a teenager, I needed (what I now know to be called) internal logic, even in a supernatural horror film. I just couldn't work out what I was supposed to be frightened of. A haunting? Poltergeists? Demonic possession? The mysterious events each hint at a different supernatural problem. 

James Brolin and Margot Kidder

After seeing Suspiria, The Omen, Carrie and The Exorcist, maybe my expectations were set too high. Maybe that's why the hype had stressed that this was all based on a true story. The only real edge The Amityville Horror has is if the audience believes that they're witnessing a reconstruction of some scary shit that actually happened. If any of this happened to you or me, it would be scary. 

This is now an extremely common way of unsettling audiences while inviting their curiosity. To say the film is based on a true story. Leading our imaginations to believe that every event we witness actually happened.

1980 UK poster 

But why did I think it was a factual account back then? When I first saw the film, I was already under that impression. Checking back through the adverts (posters, print and radio), only the book actually used the 'true story' claim. The movie advertising cautiously held back on such claims, while not dissuading the many magazine articles that repeated the claims that the book made were true.

The book had previously been a huge bestseller before the film was made, and had "a true story" printed clearly on the cover. Despite scepticism from serious newspapers, it made a great story for less fussy news outlets and magazine coverage.

This elaborate radio advert from 1979 (broadcast across London) really pushed the fact that the story is all true. I found this scarier than the film...

Despite such shaky foundations, this movie house of horror became a huge hit and spawned more books, many movie sequels and some truly awful TV movies.

After being so disappointed with the first film, I avoided most sequels, except one on TV. The continuing spin-offs indicated that it all still worked for many other people.


For me, Poltergeist (1982) presented a family in a very haunted house far better (a burial ground was also one of the many possible causes mentioned in the Lutz's book). Of course Tobe Hooper's film had well-realised scares, the full weight of Industrial Light and Magic behind the visual effects, and a story with far more consistent internal logic. And no silly stories about it being based on fact. I loved it.

Decades later, I actually got angry to find that I'd been duped. When I heard of a more concrete account of the Lutz's haunting, that it was an orchestrated hoax. Stephen Kaplan's book, The Amityville Horror Conspiracy. Himself a serious paranormal investigator, Kaplan was invited to check the Long Island house for paranormal activity when the Lutzs moved in. He agreed but then had his appointment cancelled. He became suspicious, and continued monitoring news reports and the many accounts of what happened presented by the Lutzs.

Yes, George Lutz bought the house. Yes, the family before them were murdered. But everything that happened to them in the house has many other explanations (smells, cold, changes in behaviour). Some of it was probably from their little girl's nightmares (the pig-demon). Kaplan notes how the details of how the Lutz's story changes in various news articles at the time, and even in various early editions of their famous book! he also fails to find any consistency in the timeline they describe.

Kaplan was concerned that stories like the Lutzs' gave paranormal research a bad name, being investigated and presented with such little care. Crucially, the late Stephen Kaplan's book is out of print, while the many other Amityville books continue to spread. There's more money in ghost stories.

2005 remake poster

After reading it, I was confident that the The Amityville Horror had been well and truly debunked. I was beyond astonished when the Ryan Reynolds remake appeared in 2005, and even had "based on the true story" on the movie posters. How could they say that? Changing "a" true story to "the" true story makes it all better? Not even the original movie poster had "true story" on it.

The remake is certainly scarier, half naked Ryan Reynolds is certainly sexier, and Chloe Moretz outacts the rest of the cast, even aged 8. The film adds many events that were never in the Lutzs' book. And after seeing Kaplan's evidence, such as a floor plan of the house, I laughed out loud when the cupboard under the stairs became a gigantic mausoleum. Who knew the Lutz's had their own Tardis in the basement?

My latest hope for truth was this new documentary in 2012, My Amityville Horror, a feature-length interview with the eldest of the Lutz children who was there when it all happened. Daniel Lutz's mum and step-dad have now passed away, and I'd hoped that this would leave him clear to disavow what I'd assumed was a money-making publicity scheme to get the family out of financial difficulty.

I was seeking closure, but instead, Daniel confirms that the unexplained events all occurred, with an intense and convincing ferocity. Or is it violent desperation? 



In conclusion, my remaining interest is in the original DaFeo murders and the actual mysteries around that case. In one horrendous night, six members of the same family were shot dead in their bedrooms. But surely after the first shot, the others would wake up and move around? And how did the neighbours not hear it all happening? 

An entire family being murdered was a rare crime then. I wonder if this case inspired Thomas Harris' Red Dragon (first filmed as Manhunter in 1986). While Harris did intensive research to portray police work so accurately, what real-life murders did he also study?

As for the Lutzs' story, my remaining interest is the psychological health of Daniel. If something supernatural didn't happen to him, what did? Did his father throw him up the stairs, and not a ghost? This is what makes My Amityville Horror a very tense and interesting watch.

My full review of the documentary My Amityville Horror (2012) is here.

ALL THIS AND WORLD WAR II (1976) - a history lesson with The Beatles

ALL THIS AND WORLD WAR II

(1976, USA)

A 90-minute documentary feature attempting to cover the whole of World War II, all set to songs of The Beatles.

Not a completely crazy idea after the acclaimed documentary Buddy Can You Spare A Dime? (1975) had taken a similar approach to America's Great Depression. But closer comparison could be the That's Entertainment compilations that made use of studio archives to create new movies - the cinematic equivalent of a TV 'clip show'.

In the UK in 1977, I only knew the movie because of the vinyl double-album cluttering up the soundtrack section of the record shops. Being at school, I wasn't about to be tempted into the cinema for a history lesson, not that I ever noticed it playing anywhere locally. Ironically, this was around the same year that I'd stop studying history. At my school, the only way to learn about 20th century history was to take the 'A' level, which I didn't. Decades later, I decided to fill in some of the vast gaps in my education, particularly the World Wars, by watching two extensive documentary series (The World At War and The Great War).

Despite a generous budget, All This and World War II wasn't at all popular, with no known home video release and only a few TV showings. Luckily a truncated version recently appeared on YouTube, otherwise I'd never have seen it. For this to get a DVD release would require a huge outlay for music rights from a wide range of record companies, not to mention clearance of the movie clips.

I was mainly curious about the music, all Beatles songs, but cover versions from a wide range of rockers. The results are far more successful than the hideous treatments trotted out in Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (which I narrowly avoided in 1978 and, again, only caught recently). So many good tunes murdered... it was a musical massacre.

Again, The Bee Gees are in there, but there are also great covers by Elton John (Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds), Helen Reddy (The Fool on the Hill), Bryan Ferry (She's Leaving Home), Jeff Lynne (of ELO), Tina Turner, Frankie Valli and many more! The soundtrack album made more money than the movie...

With a backdrop of Beatles' songs, the entire film is made up of newsreel and movie clips, at a time when music video had hardly started as a form. Synching footage to existing music was still a novelty or an interlude. The cover versions are given a cinematic boost by being backed by the London Symphony Orchestra.

The opening reel worked best for me, with the grim descent into war portrayed without commentary as Nazi Germany sweeps across Europe invading country after country, poignantly set to 'The Long And Winding road'. The editing complements both the music and lyrics, the choice of newsreel footage pertinent and often fascinating.

But after a great start, there's more and more use of spoken word, with Presidential speeches, lightweight interviews and movie stars enlisting. What I wasn't expecting was the extensive use of clips from wartime movies, blurring the difference between real and recreation. The cutting speed also slows down and the flow of music is interrupted. worse still by funny clips and an over-reliance on excitement from epic movies like Tora Tora Tora and The Longest Day. Hollywood spectacle and propaganda at odds with the reality of the war. I'm also very confused by the use of 'I Am The Walrus' over the attack on Pearl Harbor...

The lyrical juxtaposition could have been weightier. Simply portraying Hitler as a 'Fool on the Hill' is consistent with him being a figure of fun at the time, with most TV comedians. For the dictator to be used for comedy nowadays is seen as risk-taking and edgey, as in South Park. I prefer it when filmmakers attack Hitler with more enthusiasm, like Quentin Tarantino did in Inglourious Basterds.

But I guess this was a family-friendly lesson in who-invaded-who. Despite The Beatles involvement and playing out with 'Give Peace a Chance', this is less anti-war than most dramas of the time. Peace also wasn't an option with the Axis forces set on world domination. In the end the most stirring passages are the propaganda and heroism from the movie clips, especially Dana Andrew's terrific climactic speech from The Purple Heart. I don't even think you can spot any dead bodies. Some war.

In contrast, TV documentary The World At War (1973) had already shown dead bodies, horrific piles of them, many of the diverse horrors of war from the testaments of eyewitnesses. The difference in approach is obviously stark. Showing soldiers marching to war, but not what can happen to them? Hearing about the war from a Prime-Minister rather than a footsoldier.

Still, the film might have held a few surprises for mid-seventies audiences, like the vintage colour footage. Had I gone to see it, I'd have also been unaware about the female workforce called into munitions factories and heavy manufacturing. There's footage of squads of all-African-American troops that counters most war movies' all-white casts. And I'd not seen any newsreel of the Japanese-American citizens being moved to internment camps, before even now.

The version I saw on YouTube is ten minutes short of the (default) 90 minutes running time mentioned on IMDB, and I'm curious if there's any mention of the concentration camps in the original. Another huge difference from the portrayal of the war nowadays. The bombing of Hiroshima is also reduced to one distant shot. Instead, you learn more about which movie stars went to war...

So... All This and World War II works as a quick overview of what happened, for the impatient, and many of the songs interplay well with the images - the allies landing at Normandy against 'Life In A Day' is tremendous. This also teases up some of the great war movies, and the cover versions hold a great many surprises for fans of 70s rock and pop.

But 'I Am The Walrus'. Really? Ask if they'll play that at the U.S.S. Arizona Memorial and see what happens to you...


Here's an original trailer...

MY AMITYVILLE HORROR (2012) - a documentary about Daniel Lutz

The legend continues...

The London Film Festival screened this smartly-produced new documentary at NFT3 last night. I went in almost completely 'cold', knowing only that one of the Lutz family children was interviewed. Hoping that it would expose the original Amityville horror as a hoax, once and for all, I was in for a few surprises.

If you haven't seen the The Amityville Horror (1979) or remake (2005), here's the story so far... In 1974, Ronald DeFeo Jr. murdered the six members of his family that he lived with. The following year, George and Kathy Lutz and their three children moved into the same house in Amityville, Long Island. There, loud noises, swarms of flies, eerie figures (and much, much more) disrupted their lives. They only stayed a few weeks, before fleeing in the middle of the night, leaving all their belongings behind. Their short stay became national news, selling magazines, books and then a series of films - all of which blurred the real events with constant retellings. Throughout it all, George and Kathy Lutz stood behind their original story until they both passed away.

Daniel (left), George and Kathy Lutz

With interviews old and new, relevant video and audio archives interviews and carefully chosen photographs, we now hear the story from the perspective of the eldest of the three children.

Daniel Lutz, now in his forties, confirmed many of the famous supernatural events from the original book. He'd the seen the swarms of flies, he'd been thrown up a flight of stairs, he'd seen the fanged pig with glowing eyes, his bed had levitated... I was immediately confused. I'd assumed the parents had concocted the stories to get out of debt, and kept the children away from the press to leave the story-telling to the adults.

Once again, we're presented with an enigma. Someone deadly convincing that they're telling the truth. This time, with seemingly nothing to gain, no movie rights, no book to sell. Living a life where the continuing attention has only made his life harder.

With no hard evidence, we only have the witnesses. The other two children wouldn't be interviewed for this film. Every supernatural event in the house left no useful trace and no convincing photographs. As he tells it, even the dead flies conveniently, immediately disappeared.

But Daniel also has further twists and revelations to add to the tale - events from before and after he moved into the house with the spooky eyes...

Eric Walter - writer, director and courageous interviewer

Young filmmaker Eric Walter was at the screening, telling us how he'd always been fascinated by the Amityville horror story, and extensively studying the evidence of it as a genuine paranormal event, particularly in online forums. He talked about the huge divide between the believers and disbelievers that still exists today. An insightful parallel is the divide between Christians and atheists - and this viewpoint is particularly relevant in one scene in the documentary.

Walter, describes himself as an agnostic with regards to religion and takes the same stance with his approach to the Amityville house. I don't think Daniel, who contacted him through the website, would have agreed to be interviewed and filmed if Walter was a firm disbeliever. But who in their right mind would tell Daniel to his face that they didn't believe him? He's very intense and intimidating, to say the least.

Daniel Lutz as he appears in My Amityville Horror

From the moment that George Lutz entered his life as a stepfather and forced his surname on the whole family, Daniel disliked him. Arguing with and antagonising him, even running away from home. If half the things in the book are true about George's behaviour in 'that' house, being possessed and acting erratically, forcing the family to march around, ten-year old Daniel would have reason to be scared as well as angry.

My own take can only be based on intuition - Daniel may have been thrown up the stairs, smacked across the hands and knocked around his bedroom, but by George, not by demons...

I think it would be in Daniel's greater interest to expose it all as a hoax. To finally unveil the mysteries of the Amityville horror. That would be a better, more saleable story than supporting the same events over again. The mystery here is as strong as ever. He's a very convincing spokesman. But that makes no sense to me.

He's interviewed by a psychologist, a reporter who has followed the story since the beginning, and by the director (Daniel looking straight to camera), an approach that made me feel quite uncomfortable, like I'd been locked in a room with him for two hours.

After over thirty years of Amityville horror books and films, the documentary assumes that the audience knows a little about the basis for the story. It doesn't waste time telling it all over again, but may confuse newcomers a little. 

Currently appearing in festivals - it's too early to know what kind of wider release this will get in cinemas or on video. So keep following their updates...

http://www.amityvillemovie.com/

I'll talk more about my own take on The Amityville Horror phenomenon, starting back when I first saw it in the cinema in 1980, and looking at how it's been sold as "a true story"...

CORMAN'S WORLD: EXPLOITS OF A HOLLYWOOD REBEL (2011)

CORMAN'S WORLD:

EXPLOITS OF A HOLLYWOOD REBEL

(2011, USA)

Who's Roger Corman? You're kidding me...

The name Roger Corman no longer ignites the interest of young moviegoers that it used to. His name can now easily draw a blank expression. Casual film fans remember directors' names rather than producers, and Roger Corman hasn't directed since 1990 (an adaption of Brian Aldiss' Frankenstein Unbound). His recent regular producing credits are on such products as Sharktopus, which probably wouldn't inspire anyone to even read the credits...

Roger Corman, shooting on the run

But his legacy includes the Death Race and Piranha franchises. He produced the original templates in the 1970s. His direction hasn't an auteur's style, he's more dedicated to the script and the players. His Edgar Allen Poe adaptions are still highly regarded enough to stay in circulation, but these hits are just snapshots from his fifty years of movie-making.

Attack of the Crab Monsters (1957) - not as simple as it sounds

This documentary takes us through his life story using a fantastic roll-call of interviewees and choice clips. Starting young in a big studio, he soon had his work taken away from him and he quit, instead making his own films independently. Not easy, back in the 1950s, but he hasn't looked back.

The hugely popular Edgar Allen Poe cycle, directed by Corman (1961)

Most of his films are entertaining exploitation, honing a formula that have kept him working far longer than so many others in the industry, and always profitable (with one noble exception, The Intruder, which has surely made its money back by now). Once again always making a profit. In this business! His films, even their titles and posters, may be scoffed at, but his finely-honed formula has taken him through every shift in taste and technology.

Roger Corman directs, William Shatner stars (1962)

He keeps budgets down by not having big stars, but by recognising new talent. Or by using names that used to be big. If there are good-looking sets somewhere, write a script around them. Can't afford a camera truck for road shoots? Just find a car with a big boot! Not sure if the audience is interested? Choose the name and have a poster painted before you make the movie!

Directed by Corman in 1967, written by Jack Nicholson

He gets his ideas from current events and trends, but gets productions into action within months, before Hollywood has time to react. Like Asylum Studios do now, but with far more panache. Well at least he used to have panache - I can't say I've seen too much of his recent work.

Jack Nicholson in The Terror (1963)

But even if you don't like his low budgets and sensationalist concepts, his story is still astonishing as he became an extraordinary springboard for so many major Hollywood players. A place for young filmmakers and artists to get a start in an old man's industry. Hence the extensive interviews with Jack Nicholson, Ron Howard, Jonathan Demme... A pity that Francis Ford Coppola isn't in there too.

Jack Nicholson bares all in Corman's World

This short documentary is a great introduction to Corman's world and could have been twice as long for my money. For established Corman fans, some of the stories are very familiar, but given a boost by the impressive interviewees who tell them.

Sylvester Stallone in Death Race 2000 (1975)

Currently on blu-ray and DVD in the US and UK. My only complaint is that I'd have loved a trailer reel, in order to revel in his back catalogue...

More Roger Corman in Black Hole Reviews...


The Haunted Palace (1963)

Masque of the Red Death (1964)

Death Race 2000 (1975)

Dinocroc (2005) 

VIDEO NASTIES - THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE (2011) - when slashers were slashed

VIDEO NASTIES - THE DEFINITIVE GUIDE

(2011, UK)

A monumental entry point into the VHS era of extreme movies

As you may have seen from the earlier post on my many encounters with Lucio Fulci's Zombie Flesh Eaters (1979), I survived being a horror fan in the era of the 'Video Nasty'.

But even after reading many articles and books on the phenomenon, this new documentary is the ideal guide to it all. Unpleasant memories, new revelations, expert reminiscences and a lot of laughs! This is all assuming you have a stomach for the excesses of 1970s and 1980s exploitation, which pushed the boundaries of taste as far as they could. It's fascinating to see which classics got sucked into the debate and what pushed society's buttons then, compared to now.

The documentary (72 minutes) on the first of three DVDs in the set, begins with the most outrageous, bloodiest montage I've ever seen. A joyous parade of the most notorious censored footage of the time, all in one glorious extended sequence, a celebration of most of it now being legally available. It's like one of those respectful sequences you get in Oscar ceremonies, but with boobs, blood and, ahem, swastikas.

Kim Newman - author of Nightmare Movies

The style settles down a little after that, and we're guided by many of the movie experts who were out there on the front line watching and writing. We also hear from new horror directors inspired by the era, and meet the defiant opponents of nastiness, concerned viewers who speak for the masses, film censors and even MPs involved at the time. Media professor Julian Petley emerges as an unlikely hero, bravely slating censorship in a TV debate at a time when newspapers were attacking video dealers with the same level of venom now reserved for child-murderers. A voice of reason then and now, he signals the more underhand aspects of the whole affair.

One of the faked Faces of Death

Today, talking about swearing, sex and zombies might seem silly in retrospect, but this was all taken very seriously, with hefty fines, imprisonment and press hysteria driving dozens of the named 'nasty' movies underground. The madness is described and illustrated, as well as the tortured and underhand passage of the law getting through Parliament. I'm of the opinion that government and press enjoy these issues that distract the public from more important and complex societal problems (war, unemployment, corruption). They can scapegoat something (video games are copping it at the moment), demonise it, then be seen to solve it. BAN IT! Once banned, many of the films weren't legally available for the next ten years or more.

Watching the whole story in one hit, I was appalled by the lack of research sought by Parliament ministers, the arbitrary application of the law and the carelessness with which it was passed. It occurred to me that this was an example of maybe how all laws in this country are slapped together. It also implies a wider question on what other information is censored.

Dr Patricia MacCormack adding an Australian feminist perspective with a sense of humour

But it's not nearly that heavy and mostly debauched fun, with dismay and shock at the ridiculousness of the phenomenon. Though these horror experts occasionally appear unable to defend the scenes of rape, evisceration, and zombie pest control in their entertainment, and rarely talk seriously about the relation to nastier subjects in the real world.

Movie censorship is now relatively relaxed, and modern horror has moved up a notch to challenge what's acceptable. This remains is a thorough guide to the excessive censorship of the 1980s, its specific obsessions, and the key exploitation hits of the era.

In the rush to prosecute, classics by George Romero, Tobe Hooper, Dario Argento, Lucio Fulci and Sam Raimi were also on the banned list. Completely obscure movies that were included got given a boost in notoriety. Kim Newman observes that the behind-the-scenes story of their censor cuts are often more interesting than some of the movies themselves.

I didn't enjoy the opening assassination of the VHS format, accompanied by a digital approximation of what faults looked like. I was surprised at director Neil Marshall (Dog Soldiers, The Descent) berating videotapes at such length. The many faults highlighted were mostly the results of bootlegging, caused by incompetent copying and tape damage. It's an outburst at odds with the rising current nostalgia for the format. Other horror directors like Chris Smith (Creep, Black Death) also remember the influence of these films on theirs.

Alan Jones - is that his lounge or the Psychotronic video store?

Despite the controversies, writer and author Kim Newman always manages to find a humorous angle to the proceedings, keeping it in perspective. He's also far more enthusiastic about his favourites than fellow reviewer and Argento-biographer Alan Jones, who seems to assume that everyone's seen them all by now. Allan Bryce is similarly laidback but occasionally amusing, though I'm surprised he's actually involved here, considering the controversy that shut down publication of his magazine The Dark Side for six years.

My main quibble is that it's too short. I'd happily watch them all talk for longer, especially about something I've devoted so much time, money and energy on - collecting my favourite movies.

Many movies were judged by their covers

One aspect I'd like to have heard more about were the video covers. They briefly theorise that's why some films were banned (we aren't allowed to know the actual legal reasons for being on the list). But the covers were a key part of the problem and no-one mentions they ended up having to be approved as well as the content. If the sleeves had simply been cleaned up, more films might have escaped banishment. The industry even tried to pre-empt trouble by offering the famous double-sided insert sleeves for each video box, leaving the dealers the dilemma of which way to display each film.

Discs 2 and 3 impressively collects a trailer for every last film that was on 'the list', together with an optional informed introduction from the experts who appear in the documentary. All lovingly presented in anamorphic 16:9, in line with the rest of the set. These two discs are much longer than the documentary itself.

The term 'video nasties' always made them sound like a tempting challenge. This lengthy experience helps sort out which were dull, unscary, zero-budget or genuinely tasteless. Do you really want to see that?

Hours of entertainment, a very adult Halloween party tape, a cautionary tale, and a great round-up of what to pursue and what to avoid with a wide bargepole.

Video Nasties - The Definitive Guide is on DVD in the UK, region 2 PAL.


An extended interview with director Jake West about the project, here on Cinemart.

Very thorough review of the boxset and its extra contents, here on DVD Outsider.

A brief review that lists all of the movie trailers in this collection, on MyReviewer.

AMERICAN - THE BILL HICKS STORY (2009) - the fearless, insightful, dead comedian

AMERICAN - THE BILL HICKS STORY

(2009, USA)

This recent documentary encouraged me to again soak up a load of Bill Hicks' wit and wisdom. I listened to the CD of his Shock And Awe performance for the first time. Particularly great for me because there was so much material about his visits to England. I was crying with laughter for the first time in ages. Maybe not the ideal thing to listen to in the car.

I've revered his stand-up routines ever since we were lucky enough to see two of his performances on TV in the UK. But despite being one of the most acclaimed comedians ever, his material was too fearless and angry for American TV. Besides the swearing and subject matter, he was critical of much about modern society, particularly America. He was talked about in all the press, but you could only really get to see him on stage as he toured endlessly around the States, and occasionally abroad in Britain (where he enjoyed huge audiences) and Australia.

Despite performing stand-up comedy for 16 years before his cruelly premature death at 32, there wasn't much of his work to see on home video or hear on record. Only when we realised what we'd lost, did more DVDs and CDs get released, not all of them professionally recorded. His routines are treasured by fans, studied with awe by other comedians, documented in several biographies and celebrated in a recent documentary, American - The Bill Hicks Story (2009).

The evolution of his career started early as he sneaks out of the house to perform comedy at an 'open mike' comedy club on a school night. An instant hit, his work evolves as he moves around the States and lurched in and out of excessive drug-taking and drinking.

But what makes his comedy funnier, angrier and unique is the research, attempting to educate and encourage his audiences to think. He regularly offers up examples of disparity, how we are manipulated by politicians, media and marketing for their own profit. My first thought on hearing about his death was that he had been assassinated. I actually thought that he was getting through to people so successfully, that he had been taken out.

Something the documentary misses entirely was his appetite for books and newspapers, and how he tried to rationalise injustice, greed and bad logic in the world. Coupled with a fearless attitude to taboo subjects and a confessional honesty about himself, he's as thought-provoking as he is funny. His concise, intelligent, shocking satire prefigured South Park and was often more controversial.

While I enjoyed learning more about his life, as told by his friends, family and fellow stand-up comedians, I wouldn't recommend American as an introduction to his work. It's great for finding out about the man behind the comedy, but first treat yourself to one of his shows. I didn't feel that any of his best routines were showcased, they were used to illustrate the story. Fine if you're familiar with his comedy, but not the best way to start with Bill.

He was passionate about musicians passionate about music. He contrasted his hatred of manufactured pop with his admiration of Hendrix, who played with supreme skill, emotionally involved and enjoying what his craft. Bill Hicks was and is the Jimi Hendrix of stand-up comedy.