Category: Review

Cold Hell

  By

★★★
“Hell is other people.”

This an interesting entry, with a complex lead character who is quite some way from being conventionally “likeable”. Özge Dogruol (Schurawlow) is a Viennese taxi driver, who is harsh, abrasive and has severe anger issues. Indeed, anger is arguably among the least of her issues. She practices Thai boxing as an outlet. Or did, until a sparring session goes wrong, and she ends up breaking her partner’s nose in two places. One night, from her apartment, she sees the dead body of a woman in the opposite building, and the killer (Sheik) standing over the corpse. Unfortunately, he also sees Özge. The police won’t provide protection, and soon after, her cousin is murdered, in an apparent case of mistaken identity.

For a variety of reasons – some valid, such as her abusive father, others more self-inflicted – Özge has burned all her other bridges, both with friends and family. Having nowhere else to turn, she consequently ends up staying with Christian Steiner (Moretti), one of the detectives working on the case, which spans killings in several different countries. He has problems of his own, having to take of his elderly father (von Thun), who has dementia. Özge and Christian begin a relationship (which seems a bit of a violation of police ethics – maybe things are different in Austria), and she vows to kill the killer. But will Özge be able to carry out her goal before he gets to her?

There’s a saying: you will meet assholes in your life, but if everyone you meet is an asshole… you’re the asshole. I kept being reminded of this by Özge, who definitely has an asshole problem. Yet, despite having so many characteristics which would, in reality, make her someone I would actively avoid, I still found myself somewhat rooting for her, in a Dragon Tattoo kind of way. Partly, this is because there aren’t many better people in the film. Christian is likely the closest. But even he is far from perfect – even discounting the whole “sleeping with the main witness in a case of multiple murder” thing. It does end up relying on some fortuitous coincidence, and as heroines go, Özge is remarkably flame-resistant, shall we say.

This plays into the killer’s philosophy. He skins and burns alive Muslim prostitutes because he wants them to experience what hell will be like. Özge has a Muslim background, though is hardly devout, and the film does lean a little heavily into the sexism, racism and anti-police angles, especially in the early going. It gets more nuanced in some areas as we get deeper in, though I’d be quite surprised if Özge actually learns any valuable life lessons. Although not all the choices here are successful, I do have to respect the effort to try and do something a bit different in the genre. I certainly won’t deny I found the ending highly satisfying, and appropriately fiery.

Dir: Stefan Ruzowitzky
Star: Violetta Schurawlow, Tobias Moretti, Sammy Sheik, Friedrich von Thun
a.k.a. Die Hölle

Agent Zero

  By

★★½
“Shaky, in a number of ways.”

Alma Siracine (Vacth) was a black ops agent for the French government, until an assignment in Syria went pear-shaped, and she resigned her position. Seven years later, she’s living quietly with her policeman husband in Morocco, until he’s the victim of a drive-by shooting. She finds the attackers and terminates them. Unfortunately, they are the sons of local arms dealer Manour Khoury (Dazi). Not helping, he is under the protection of the French government, being allowed to operate in exchange for funneling information to them about terrorist attacks. Spymaster Joanna Walter (Bercot) decides Alma is a loose end in need of tidying. Alma, naturally, is of a different opinion, and won’t be easy to clean up.

The main problem here is de Fontenay’s fondness for shakycam in the action sequences. Not just one or two. It feels like every time anyone moves at a pace quicker a walk, the camera immediately starts to have some kind of seizure. It’s clearly a tactic designed to instill a sense of immediacy. Paul Greengrass used it to great effect in the Bourne movies. But it isn’t just a case of taking a handheld camera and waving it around. You need an editor who can assemble the footage into a coherent format. Sadly, that’s what is absent here, and the results are usually difficult to follow, and on occasion liable to induce a headache. 

Consequently, I found myself almost dreading the appearance of an action sequence. Not exactly a good thing to experience during an action movie. Whether it was her brutally efficient dispatch of Khoury’s sons, a motorcycle chase through the streets of the seaside town where she lives, or the final battle with Khoury’s men at the port in Casablanca, the approach is the same. It feels like a throwback – and a most unwelcome one at that – to the style of action cinema popular twenty years ago. I thought we had moved on. Apparently not. The film is (literally) on more solid ground when depicting the murky world of international espionage, where pragmatic decisions are made without consideration of the moral concerns. I actually have some sympathy for Walter and her almost impossible situation. 

Outside of the camerawork, the technical elements are generally fine. The film makes decent use of its Moroccan and Middle East locations, and Dazi makes for a decent villain, believing himself untouchable, regardless of what he does. However, the overall structure feels off in some way, and the film just seems to end in a way likely to provoke a “Well, that happened” reaction in the viewer. Vacth has some effective moments, and the film never totally lost my attention. But it did teeter on the edge more than once, especially when it made me feel like I had contracted an inner-ear disorder. Those with a stronger stomach than I might find more to enjoy here. Wouldn’t necessarily bet on it though.

Dir: Guillaume de Fontenay
Star: Marine Vacth, Emmanuelle Bercot, Slimane Dazi, Niels Schneider
a.k.a. Badh

Gone (2011)

  By

★★
“…and quickly forgotten”

If this seems familiar, it’s because we already reviewed the American remake of this Swedish film, Alone, made in 2020. It’s quite rare, in that I don’t often see the remake before the original. It’s usually the other way round, and the remake tends to suffer as a result, often seeming superfluous e.g. Point of No Return. I  carefully avoided reading my opinion of the remake before viewing this, but on a post-watch comparison… it appears I didn’t like either of them very much. They both ended up with the same grade – perhaps for slightly different reasons though. I guess that consistency is slightly better than most remakes, even if it is consistent mediocrity.

Malin (Ledarp) is moving away from the rest of her family after an incident for which she feels responsible, and is driving North, out of the city, with her possessions loaded up in a trailer behind her. However, she finds herself encountering the same driver (Bergqvist) on multiple occasions and gets a bad vibe from him. This feeling is 100% correct, because the man ends up chloroforming Malin. She wakes up in the basement of his very isolated house, in the middle of a Scandinavian forest. Quite what his intentions are is a little vague. But that he says she’s not the first woman to have been there, and that his family thinks he’s on a business trip to the UK, do not bode well for her long-term prospects.

To this point, the film was more or less holding its own. However, the ease with which Malin escaped her captor’s cell, using nothing more than a rusty nail, is likely the point at which the movie jumped the shark. Part of the problem is, it sets a standard of competence, which her subsequent actions – mostly filed under “running round the forest like a headless chicken” – are unable to meet. This is an area where the remake did rather better, it seems, though both films end up going in directions which certainly merited a raised eyebrow or two. Here, she ends up teaming with a passer-by and a hunter in the forest. Nobody’s behaviour makes a great deal of sense.

After so much roaming in the woods, this begins to feel more like an orienteering video, we eventually get to the expected, and long-awaited, confrontation between Malin and the evil patriarchy. She has, by this point, managed to get a message to the outside world, where her absence has been noticed, and the authorities do now have at least an idea of the area in which she’s located. It’s just a question of surviving until they find her. This does a ticking clock to proceedings, which I don’t recall quite being as present in the remake. When it happens, the ending comes with a bang rather than a whimper. Though in this case, that’s not a good thing, as the credits role almost immediately, leaving me once more, largely unimpressed.

Dir: Mattias Olsson, Henrik JP Åkesson
Star: Sofia Ledarp, Kjell Bergqvist, Björn Kjellman, Dietrich Hollinderbäumer
a.k.a. Försvunnen

Pink

  By

★½
“Too many episodes, spoil the broth.”

This has something of an interesting history. It was originally 35 episodes of a short-form web series, shown on Hulu, beginning back in 2007, at the time when they were just starting out. That may seem like a lot of content, but each episode was only three to five minutes long. So what you have here is a compilation of all those episodes into a single movie, running about two hours. And… unfortunately, the result is a complete mess, bouncing around in time without rhyme, reason or purpose. It spends too much time on things which don’t matter much, like silly college shenanigans, while galloping past – if addressing at all – matters which feel more important to the plot.

From what I could figure out (and I can by no means swear to any of this), the basic plot involves Natalie Cross (Raitano). She was brought up by her single father (Tompkins), who was a special forces operative. Or maybe black ops. It’s all very murky. As a result, she basically got Hanna‘d, learning all the skills necessary to follow in her father’s footsteps. Initially, she tries to be her own person, but while at college was recruited to work for a BLOC: a black ops corporation, private military who handle jobs governments want done with clean hands. After quitting, Nate found herself in prison, but is now back on the outside, having been promised freedom if she completes ten assignments.

That would be fine. Except, for whatever reason, the show spends far too much time and effort with college-aged Nate (Matula), which is very much the least interesting thing the show has to offer. Except possibly her “Gother than thou” room-mate, Rhonda, who naturally is the person to show the sheltered Nate the ways of the world. Well, the ones that don’t involve hunting and skinning deer, anyway. But who cares? If I wanted to watch that kind of thing, I would… Well, I guess I would watch that kind of thing. You get the idea. The series only achieves energy after Nate goes to work full-time for her BLOC, and is given a little apprentice, Bunny (a nice nod back to Nate’s childhood pet).

I get that the show was made in bite-sized episodes, and it might have worked better in that format. Or, alternatively, if they had shuffled them around for this feature version, into something closer to chronological order. Instead, the results here resemble somebody having fed the footage through a shredder, and then arbitrarily assembled it back together. It means on occasion, you’ll have adjacent scenes taking place decades apart, and on different continents. There was a time, fifteen or more years ago, when this kind of thing was seen as the future of entertainment on the Internet. The failure of things like Quibi proved otherwise. Based on the evidence here, it’s a mercy that never came to pass.

Dir: Blake Calhoun
Star: Natalie Raitano, Sheree J. Wilson, Kim Matula, Matthew Tompkins

Cutthroat Island, by John Gregory Betancourt

  By

Literary rating: ★★½
Kick-butt quotient: ☆☆☆☆

Made in 1995, Cutthroat Island was a pirate-themed historical action-adventure movie starring Geena Davis and Matthew Modine. (Before starting my read of this novelization of it, I’d never seen the movie, though I’d long been curious about it; but about 3/4 of the way through the book, after learning that the film could be watched for free on Tubi, I made time to view it so that I could compare it with the book.) The filmmakers didn’t strive for great cinematic art; they didn’t intend to offer anything but undemanding escapist entertainment. But even considering that fact, the widespread negative reaction by both fans and critics, which endures to this day, is remarkable (the film made it into the Guiness Book of World Records — as the worst box office flop in movie history!). I was aware of that going in, but was resolved to make my own assessment. As is sometimes the case, I landed in the minority; I like the movie well enough for what it is

Unlike some people, I don’t view movie novelization as inherently a trashy and illegitimate abuse of the fictional art. To my mind, it can be a perfectly legitimate artistic enterprise, adapting a story told in one medium to the possibilities afforded by a different one, with the intention of producing a retelling that offers genuine rewards to readers. Because it’s an adaptation, I think the adaptor should strive for as much fidelity to the original as possible, just as in the converse situation of novel to film. The novel format, however, offers the possibility of providing more explanation and clarification of areas that may be murky in the film because of the latter’s time (and other) constraints. Unfortunately, I’d have to say that Betancourt didn’t do as well as he could have on either of these points (and this novel generally suffers as a result). Some of its literary flaws and improbabilities, though, are already inherent in the original movie itself.

The tale opens in 1688. In the movie, the opening scenes are on, or just off, the coast of Jamaica; in the book, they’re moved inexplicably to Tortuga, off the northern coast of Haiti, and we then move to Jamaica in one day (which I doubt is actually possible for a wind-driven sailing ship). But we soon learn some crucial backstory. In 1619, a pirate captain named “Fingers” Adams captured a Spanish treasure ship loaded with “the richest cargo ever to leave the Americas;” but his ship was subsequently wrecked on the uncharted titular Cutthroat Island, with Adams as the lone survivor. He secreted the treasure there; but after returning to civilization, instead of mounting a retrieval expedition, he contented himself with making a map to the treasure’s location. (Apparently, pirates didn’t steal their booty to do anything like selfishly spend it; they just liked to leave it for posterity.) He divided the map into three parts, bequeathing one piece each to his three in-wedlock sons, all pirate captains in their own right. A fourth son, pirate captain Douglas Brown, nicknamed Dog or Mad Dog (Betancourt always affects the spelling “Dawg,” though that wouldn’t be pronounced any differently) was left out because he was born out of wedlock.

Brown didn’t appreciate this slight, so when our story begins, he’s embarked on a campaign of tracking down and murdering his half-brothers to get their pieces of the map. (This isn’t a close family.) Why he waited until 1688 is never explained. By now, he’s got one piece, and he’s making captured Adams sibling Black Harry “walk the plank” while simultaneously demanding that he reveal the location of the second piece. (Okay, nobody ever said Brown was intelligent.) But Harry’s 20-something daughter Morgan (her exact age is never given), herself raised as a member of his pirate crew, comes to his rescue amid a slew of murky unexplained details and convenient improbabilities, though he’s mortally wounded in the process. Before he dies, he reveals that he had a copy of his part of the map tattooed to his scalp (where he couldn’t possibly refer to it; so no, intelligence doesn’t run in this clan). Morgan’s mission (whether she chooses to accept it or not) is to get herself elected captain in his stead, join up with her surviving uncle, and beat Brown to the treasure, while staying alive in the process. Oh, and find somebody literate in Latin, since that’s the language used on the map. Swashbuckling action-adventure ensues.

There are some significant historical errors here, one already in the movie script itself: in the 17th century, in English law (which applied in Jamaica the same as in England), the punishment for any theft worth more than 12 pence wasn’t being sold into slavery; it was a mandatory sentence to death by hanging. (And it has to be said that main male character William Shaw’s idea of crashing the governor of Jamaica’s ball uninvited, claiming to be a physician when he’s not, swiping jewels off of his dance partners while they’re distracted by his flattery, and transparently lying about what ship brought him to the colony, while having no exit strategy except trying to casually walk out of the building, puts him in the running for the title of most stupid character here, though the competition is fierce.)

And governors of Jamaica did not serve without pay; they were actually paid quite handsomely by 17th-century standards (though the expenses of their station were also steep, and they generally did resort to wangling extra fees and cuts, and sometimes outright corruption). Betancourt also introduces significantly more bad language, nudity and sexual innuendo into this version; the original movie doesn’t have much of any of these, and no real nudity. (It also doesn’t have any reference to Brown having sexually molested Morgan when she was a child, though that claim is made here.) He drops a character arc for one character that’s in the movie, but rather improbable; but he invents two others that are just as improbable compared to their previous behavior.

On the more positive side, the author does develop Morgan’s character better than the filmmakers do, and shows a bit more growth on her part, and more believable development of romantic feelings on the part of the two main characters, than what’s brought out in the movie. He also inserts a short dialogue between Shaw and teenage pirate Bowen (who’s said here to be an orphan taken in by Harry after his parents died) that offers some explanation for how the pirates view their lifestyle; when Shaw points out that Bowen’s a criminal, the latter replies, “We don’t see it that way, since the whole world is crooked, and we’re making the best of it we can.” Morgan’s an interesting, nuanced character, a strong and athletic woman who’s been raised in a rough, kill-or-be-killed milieu (her mother’s never mentioned, in either the movie or the book), who has no qualms about taking human life in combat or in rescuing endangered shipmates, and doesn’t consider reforming and adopting a different career as an attractive possibility. But she’s also capable of kindness and a protective stance, and has a well-developed sense of duty, courage, loyalty, and fairness. (Unlike Brown, she’s not a murderous psychopath; and when she’s pitted against him, she’s not hard to root for.) This read has a lot of action, and there’s never a dull moment.

In terms of content issues, as noted above, there’s more occasional bad language here (in the form of profanity, cuss words and vulgarisms, though not obscenity) than in the movie, but probably far less than we’d have been apt to hear on an actual pirate ship. Violence is pervasive, and Brown is a sadist, but for the most part, neither the movie nor the book make it more graphic than it has to be. (The book is the more graphic of the two, but that’s mostly just in one place, and stops short of being “pornography of violence.”) No sex acts take place in the book itself, though it’s clear that one took place just before it begins. In order to rescue Harry, Morgan’s rousted out of a bed she’s been sharing with a French naval officer who was planning to arrest her after using her; but she’s way ahead of him, and his subsequent discomfiture doesn’t earn him much pity. (She also later poses briefly as a prostitute.) We can infer that she’s honestly been raised with no conception that sex is anything but casual recreation, and she acts accordingly; though there’s an indication at the end of the tale that she might be on the cusp of discovering what it’s actually intended for.)

I actually did like this yarn (though the enjoyment might be characterized as something of a guilty pleasure). It can be recommended to readers who like action-oriented historical adventure, especially with a pirate mystique, and who aren’t put off by the very real flaws noted above.

Author: John Gregory Betancourt
Publisher: Tor Forge; used copy available through Amazon, but only as a printed book. It is available to borrow through the Internet Archive. 
A version of this review previously appeared on Goodreads. 

The Partisan

  By

★★★
“Part-ially effective.”

We have written about some of the women who worked behind enemy lines for British intelligence during World War II. Names like Noor Inayat Khan, Virginia Hall and Vera Atkins deserve to be better known that they are. The attempts to tell their stories so far have been laudable attempts, but have left me feeling underwhelmed, with a sense they haven’t done their subjects full justice. This is another which I feel should be filed in the same box. The subject here is Christine Granville (Polanski), born Krystyna Skarbek, a Polish national who originally worked in her native country, organizing a network of spies and couriers, running information to then neutral Budapest. This included early reports foreshadowing Germany’s attack on Russia.

As with so much in the film here, however, the details are left frustratingly vague. The above paragraph tells you more of her time in Poland than the movie, which mentions a microfilm, but seems more concerned with Granville’s efforts to extract her mother out of Warsaw. It does, however, include an incident where she was being questioned by the Nazis, bit her tongue, allowing her to feign coughing up blood and convince the doctor she had TB, leading to her release. Most of the movie, however, is set during her time in southern France, later in the war. There, she worked with the maquis, the local resistance, in preparation for the looming Allied invasion. 

The best thing this has going for it is Polanski – yes, she is the daughter of director Roman Polanski, though has more of the luminous looks of her mother, actress Emmanuelle Seigner. Granville had a reputation as a hothead: Atkins called her “very brave, very attractive, but a loner and a law unto herself,” and Polanski’s performance puts all those aspects across very well. There are occasionally scenes which do capture the relentless tension of operating in a scenario like this too, where a single slip could mean death. For example, she tells a Gestapo officer she’s a teacher seeking employment – only for him to show up at the local school, forcing her to improvise during a conversation with the headmistress. More of this would have been welcome.

Instead, for whatever reason, the makers have opted to make their film at least somewhat non-linear, to no readily apparent purpose. There are points where it becomes impossible to tell when or where you are. A straightforward adaptation of her life would have been perfectly fine, including the several occasions on which she was treated badly by her employers. According to Xan Fielding, an operative she had saved from execution, “a few weeks after the armistice she was dismissed with a month’s salary and left in Cairo to fend for herself.” Even more tragically, she was murdered in 1952 by a lover she had rejected. Again, little of this is mentioned here, beyond being whizzed past in a final caption. Once more, this is a heroine who deserves a great biopic, rather than one merely good enough. 

Dir: James Marquand
Star: Morgane Polanski, Ingvar Sigurdsson, Frederick Schmidt, Piotr Adamczyk

They Will Kill You

  By

★★★
“Ready or Not 3.”

There’s no denying that this is considerably weakened by coming in the wake of Ready or Not 2. There’s just too much similarity for it to be otherwise. A woman having to fight her way through a bunch of Satanists, in order to save her kid sister? Yeah, there’s a strong sense of deja vu, in its most literal meaning. Yet it would be unfair to write this off as some kind of mockbuster. While the “elevator pitch” may be similar, the details and the approach taken are different. This skews considerably more towards the horror elements. Many reviews cite Sam Raimi and Quentin Tarantino as influences, and that’s not wrong. To the point I might have used fewer homages, to be honest. 

The heroine is Asia Reaves (Beetz), who is jailed after trying to protect her sister, Maria (Myha’la) from their abusive father. Ten years later, she gets out of prison, and seeks to be reunited with Maria. The trail leads to The Virgil,  a massive apartment building. Asia gets a job there as a maid, using an assumed identity, under the oversight of building supervisor Lilith Woodhouse (Arquette). It turns out, the building is home to a cult of Satan worshippers, who trade human sacrifices for immortality. But after a decade in the penal system, Asia has the skills to defend herself, and won’t let anyone – or anything – get in the way of her mission to rescue her sister.

Save Kill Bill, I’m not a huge fan of Tarantino. It appears Sokolov is, going by the number of jarring needle-drops and, to be honest, shots of women’s feet. There are points where the style seems to be more important than the substance. However, there are some excellent sequences as well. The use by Asia of a fiery axe is top-tier carnage, and the near-unlimited ability of her opponents to take damage leads to some spectacular gore. They may be immortal: they still spray blood like enthusiastic geysers. When one has her head reduced to the consistency of porridge, one eyeball continues to operate on its own, independent basis.

I do think the immortality thing is a double-edged sword. It robs the fights of much impact, because decapitation is barely an inconvenience. Naturally, there is a solution, and I figured it out, more or less, as soon as it was mentioned. Beetz makes a fierce and unstoppable heroine, no mistake about it. You will also see things you have not witnessed before, especially during a thoroughly unhinged ending. It consequently makes Ready or Not 2 seem positively down to earth and realistic, so the stabs – word chosen advisedly – at social commentary consequently feel misplaced, even more than usual. I note Sokolov’s previous (non-GWG) film was called Why Don’t You Just Die! I’ve a feeling there may be a theme running through his work. Suspect I will still end up checking it out, hoping for the pure and undiluted carnage I didn’t quite get here.

Dir: Kirill Sokolov
Star: Zazie Beetz, Patricia Arquette, Myha’la, Tom Felton

Ready or Not 2: Here I Come

  By

★★★★
“Let the games begi… uh, continue!”

Despite a slightly clunky title, I enjoyed this a little more than the original. It helps that there’s no need for build-up or explanations. We join things immediately after the end of part one, with Grace MacCaullay (Weaving) staggering outside the mansion where she battled and beat the Le Domas family. Understandably, she ends up in hospital and handcuffs, where her sister Faith (Newton) shows up. But it turns out the Le Domas family were just one part – albeit the head – of a larger, Satanic organization, the Council. The remaining families now need to determine a successor. Whoever kills Grace gets to take over, so the siblings are quickly abducted and taken to the Council’s country club complex.

Grace refuses to take part, but using Faith as leverage, they compel her participation. The siblings must battle for survival and, again, try to survive to dawn against a litany of more or less competent adversaries. This was one my main criticisms about part one: the Le Domas members were so inept as to be no threat. While, in some ways, this is true again here, the film does at least lean into the humourous possibilities. The peak is likely reached when Grace has to face off against Francesca, her late husband’s ex. There’s some rocket launcher incompetence, followed by some pepper sprayage, which leaves the two adversaries thrashing about like blind squid, while an 80’s classic tune plays. It’s awesome. 

There is a bit of a lull thereafter, because Faith is again used against her sister. This compels Grace, once more, to don bridal attire, as a means of avoiding further bloodshed. Well, “postponing” might be closer to the truth. The ceremony goes off about as well as a typical wedding held by a professional wrestling federation – though with considerably more blood than even the most hardcore fed. It’s all a lot of fun, with the Council families providing a slew of fun characters, in addition to its lawyer (Wood). It provides an interesting contrast in family dynamics between the MacCaullays and the Danforths, represented by Ursula (Sarah-Michelle Gellar – and, yes, there are some potential Buffy references) and her psycho brother, Titus (Hatosy).

I liked the fact that it kept any actual social commentary very much secondary. What makes the Council evil is not particularly race, class or money. It is that they are freakin’ Satanists. The film’s other main strength is Weaving, who cements her position as perhaps the best of the next generation for action heroines. She runs through the whole gamut of emotions here, and it is extremely easy to root for Grace. But let’s be honest, the actress would be forgiven if she had simply worn a “not this shit again” expression for one hundred and ten minutes. While the poor box-office here means it’s unlikely we’ll see a part three, long may Weaving’s shotgun continue to smoke. 

Dir: Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett
Star: Samara Weaving, Kathryn Newton, Shawn Hatosy, Elijah Wood

The Blind Swordswoman

  By

★½
“Gouge my eyes out, please.”

The rating above might actually be a little charitable, and would be for the film as originally released. The only version in which this is now apparently available, is both badly dubbed and pan-and-scanned to a 4:3 ratio. It certainly doesn’t help the film, when there are points at which all you can see of the participants in a conversation is an elbow, sticking in from one side of the screen. It’s close to unwatchable in this format, although I suspect it would barely pass muster, even in its original language and format. It feels like the Taiwanese makers saw Crimson Bat, The Blind Swordswoman, released the previous year and thought, “That looks easy.” 

In reality? Not so much. It’s the story of the titular, visually challenged practitioner of the fencing arts (Lee), who is called “Elaine” in the dub. The basic plot sees her out for revenge against the evil Mr. Lee, who appears to be responsible for everything bad in the world, from the murder of her father, to her ocular situation. She isn’t the only one, as there’s another woman, similarly deficient in the eye-chart comprehension department, whose family has also suffered at the hands of Lee. She’s called “Sue-Ann” in the dub, and ends up getting sold off to a whorehouse. I suspect Mr. Lee was probably responsible for this too, if you dig deep enough. There’s another swordsman (Kong), who wanders in and out. In a shocking twist, he can see. 

To be blunt, this is the sort of movie which explains why Taiwanese kung-fu films have such a bad reputation. The original Ocean Shores video was titled Zatoichi, the Blind Swordsman: a shameless conceit this version abandoned. As well as being a blatant knock-off (not that Crimson Bat was exactly original, itself being a Zatoichi knock-off of course), it doesn’t feel as if anyone involved in this can do anything more than wave their weapons in the vague direction of each other. This is not helped by the director’s inability to shoot an action sequence: I’m half-convinced he was blind too. The plot is incomprehensibly murky, and there are too many characters, whose purpose often remains frustratingly vague.

Meanwhile, any sense of nuance in the performances is bludgeoned to death by the English language soundtrack. It feels like the voice actors just got fired for incompetence from dubbing porn movies. Or perhaps were homeless people, pulled off the street into the studio at the last minute. Make no mistake though: this does not manage to make it into the “so bad it’s good” category of chop-socky flicks. It’s simply “so bad”. It might be worth trying to track down should you be after a test of cinematic endurance. If you can go longer than any ten minute period in this, without idly scrolling on your phone, you will be doing better than I managed.

Dir: Lung Chien
Star: Lee Shu, Shen Yi, Kong Ban, Yee Yuen
a.k.a. Golden Sword and the Blind Swordswoman

Lola Colt

  By

★★★
“From stage to stage.”

This spaghetti Western sees Lola (Falana) arrive in the town of Santa Ana with her troupe of dancing girls, after one of them falls ill. They need to stay there while she recuperates, under the care of the local not-quite-a-doctor-yet, Rod Strater (Martell). The town has bigger problems, being ruthlessly squeezed for every penny by El Diablo (Cobos). Lola lost her family to a not dissimilar band of outlaws, and is peeved that the menfolk are utterly cowed by El Diablo, even after Rod explains that the villains has taken hostages and is using them to compel the town’s good behaviour. But after a particularly tragic death, Lola has had enough, and rouses the town folk to action.

In many ways, this is a standard Western, with the lone good guy taking on the villains: hence its subtitle, “Face to face with the devil”. Except, of course, in this case, the guy is a gal. Oh, and Lola is black. I have just mentioned this fact more in the review, than the film ever does, being refreshingly colour-blind. It’s especially remarkable given the era, a good few years before Pam Grier would become a trailblazer back in Hollywood. It’s tempting to read race into Lola being greeted with, “We don’t need your kind around here,” when she steps off the coach. Subsequent events show it’s just the local morality police, who are severely unimpressed with her profession, rather than the shade of her skin. 

In another twist, the villain’s real name is actually Larry Stern, which sounds more like an advertising executive. He’s a businessman who got peeved when his plans for a railroad fell through because the locals wouldn’t sell him their land, and decided to take revenge on them. Falana, though born in New Jersey, was already a star on Italian TV, and also performs a few musical numbers here. Though I did wonder where the music, a full-on jazzy production, was coming from in the town’s saloon, where there are no musicians at all. She certainly brings it with her moves, which are much more Vegas than Old West. And she would indeed go on to become the highest-paid performer in Sin City. 

Until the final assault on El Diablo’s compound, where she demonstrates she does know her way around both ends of a firearm, Lola is more a figurehead to the town’s resistance, encouraging them to break free of their fears.  The physical side of things is mostly left to Rod, who gets a couple of lengthy fist-fights, including one with El Diablo, when he’s not dealing with jealous girlfriend Rose (Schürer). It is this middle section where the film struggles a little, being particularly generic in its elements. But Falana is always compelling to watch, and it’s a shame she wasn’t given many further opportunities in our genre: 1975’s Lady Cocoa was perhaps the closest she came, although it doesn’t quite qualify for inclusion here. 

Dir: Siro Marcellini
Star: Lola Falana, Peter Martell, Germán Cobos, Erna Schürer
a.k.a. Black Tigress