Tag: 1967

Inn of the Gruesome Dolls

  By

★★★
“Edgar Wallace meets Russ Meyer”

I’m usually not a too big fan of trash movies, because a lot of them are not so much trashy, as they are boring. Nevertheless, I’m always in for a good, entertaining bit of trash, as long as I don’t find it too excessive. There is no doubt that German movie history is full of it: just think of all those Schoolgirl- and Housewife-Report films of the 1970’s. Though most of these movies can be ignored, since very often, they are just no fun at all.

Not so this jewel, stumbled upon when going through the extensive selection of German Amazon Prime. Made during a time when German movie entertainment found itself at a crossroads, with “Papas Kino” (Dad’s cinema) still running in cinemas, but the new German cinema not having arrived yet, some strange movies found their way on the big screen. 1967 was a year when German Edgar Wallace movies (having been made in colour for about two years) were still finding audiences before the students’ revolts, yet movies in general outside the countrt, became kind of “wilder”. A little bit more erotic titillation found its way in, but the wave of German softcore comedies hadn’t started yet. This movie therefore falls in this very narrow time frame between “older” and “newer” German film styles, which makes it very difficult to define. Though, let me have a try!

The story: Bob (Schumann) and Betty (Persson) try to break into a jewelry store. Unfortunately, the robbery goes wrong, and when trying to escape, Bob kills a policeman with his car. He escapes, leaving the unconscious Betty to pay the price, and she is sent to prison. There, terrible conditions rule. Girls are mistreated in order to keep them in line. Some girls have turned – you’ll be shocked! – to lesbianism. And the female chief warden, with the remarkable name of Francis Nipple (!!), wants to force Betty to have sex with her. Betty instead takes her chance, killing Nipple and breaking out with 4 other girls.

They flee into the Scottish Highlands (though this was filmed in Trieste, Italy), where Bob now works as a waiter in an inn. Betty’s idea is to kidnap the psychologically deranged wife (Trooger) of rich factory owner Oland, blackmail him, get to the coast with the money, and head abroad for a happy life with Bob. Unfortunately, Bob has a taste for one of Betty’s pals. Meanwhile, the factory owner has an affair with his female assistant and is already figuring out how to get rid of his wife. You can probably imagine, things don’t go as planned and… well, go a bit haywire!

Inn is one of the weirdest and trashiest movies from Germany I’ve seen in some time. Part of the fun is, you see a movie that basically comes across as the mad love-child offspring of a typical black and white, Edgar Wallace “krimi“, and something close to Russ Meyer’s Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! – what a crazy genre mix! The weirdest thing is: it is wholeheartedly entertaining, though you can never take it seriously for a single moment. It comes off as wanting to be cool but not really being able to. This is in contrast to Faster, Pussycat!, which is very cool and embraces its trashiness. This constantly tries, but cannot escape that it is, in the end, a German movie. When local film makers tried to “rebuild” successful foreign recipes such as spaghetti Westerns or the Hammer Horror movies, the results always left an impression of amateur dabbling.

The setting and style – production design, costumes, cars – reminded me strongly of the Edgar Wallace movies. At the same time, you see women appearing as erotically as they could without ever being nude. Add to that the typical wooden acting of an Edgar Wallace movie, and you have an involuntary comedy of the highest order. I was screaming my head off because I found it hilariously stupid, especially when some of the actors tried to be “very emotional” and over-acted, without being able to be convincing. Also, I had to laugh at Betty killing off nearly everyone who has the misfortune to be in her line of fire. She is very trigger-happy and has a tendency to shoot first and ask questions… never.

Moments where Betty or other girls seemed to question their acts occasionally made me wonder. Was this movie meant at some point to be a serious crime drama about how social circumstances ruin young women’s lives? But then another nonsensical scene shows up. For example, an innocent witness discovering the dead inn-keeper, running up the stairs, screaming for help (as in an Edgar Wallace movie), screaming more when she met another of the girls, then while shouting “Don’t kill me! I want to live!”, falling out of a window. As they say, “Hilarity ensues…”

You won’t find great German “stars” in this movie. Erik Schumann (Bob) mainly reached my attention by being the German voice of Hollywood star Louis Jourdan, and Margot Trooger was better known for roles in … Edgar Wallace movies, as well as Pippi Longstocking and other Astrid Lindgren series/movies. I don’t know any of the other actors in this German-Italian co-production. The director Rolf Olsen was a very busy Austrian director who seemed to have directed everything that came his way, although not often with well-known German stars.

No, this is to be taken as seriously as long-running German TV series Hinter Gittern (Behind Bars), about a women prison. Which means: not at all! I always thought this genre came into existence in America in the 70s, having seen movies such as Black Mama, White Mama. Jonathan Demme, who would later direct Silence of the Lambs, also contributed to it with Caged Heat. It obviously is older than I imagined, but then I’m no expert on this subgenre! [Jim adds: The women-in-prison film as we know it goes back to 1950 with Caged, starring Eleanor Parker and Agnes Moorehead. I think the earliest we’ve reviewed here was 1955’s Betrayed Women.]

It seems the movie may have originally been longer. The version available today has a running time of 85 minutes, but the original cut is said to have had a running time of 96 minutes. It seems that the German film censorship organization, FSK (Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle = Voluntary Self Control) must have cut the movie extensively at the time. The trailer indicates that a water torture scene in the prison, the attempt by the female prison warden to force herself on Betty and the death of the inn-keeper have been cut. There is also a short clip in the trailer, which seems to indicate some of the five girls meet a bloody end in the inn; again, this is not shown in the version I saw. Instead, that seems to indicate two of them got away, as they never appeared in the movie again.

It’s a strange movie, attempting to marry the old with the new. But while I wonder if director Rolf Olsen might have seen and been inspired by Meyer’s Pussycat, I’m quite sure that this movie was seen by and inspired some Edgar Wallace directors. For the role of the sadistic prison warden would appear again in – you guessed it! – a 1968 Edgar Wallace movie, Der Gorilla von Soho (US title: “Gorilla Gang”),taking care of girls in a prison! Finally, the German title of this 1967 movie is Das Rasthaus der grausamen Puppen. “Rasthaus” being the German word for what the translation program tells me in English is “roadhouse; highway restaurant (am.)”. So I’m not quite sure “inn” is the right word for “Rasthaus”. The title for the dubbed American version was The Devil’s Girls, by the way.

Dir: Rolf Olsen
Star: Essy Persson, Helga Anders, Erik Schumann, Margot Trooger
a.k.a. Das Rasthaus der grausamen Puppen

Wait Until Dark

  By

★★★★★
“The missing link between Psycho and Halloween?”

I’m quite serious about the above. In 1959, Hitchcock’s classic psycho-thriller, which gave an entire genre its name, showed a normal, self-confident woman falling prey to a psychotic serial killer, while John Carpenter’s Halloween, also now a classic, had its heroine fighting off menace Michael Myers. In between these two iconic movies, there is not much that is worth mentioning. Some final girls in Italian gialli maybe managed to survive, I guess – but there’s nothing in big screen thrillers that the average Joe or Jane would be able to name.  Except… This movie, in which blind heroine Susy Hendrix (Hepburn) is able to see through the ruses of three gangsters, fight them off, and even win in a final confrontation against evil-as-evil-can-be psycho Mr. Roat (a very young Arkin – gosh, this guy is now 86 at the time of writing).

The story: gangsters Talman (Crenna – best known as Rambo’s boss) and Carlino (Jack Weston) meet the gangster Roat, previously unknown to them, in an empty apartment. Roat is obviously working for – or may even be the boss of – a drug-smuggling ring. A doll that was used to smuggle drugs had been given, for later collection, by their colleague Lisa (Samantha Jones) to an innocent photographer Sam Hendrix (Zimbalist). Sam lives in this apartment, with his blind wife Suzy (Hepburn). As a quick inspection of the flat didn’t lead to the doll, Roat recruits, or more accurately. blackmails the two men into helping him.

As Sam is away for the week-end, the three men are going to put on a kind of play for Suzy. The intention is making her believe Sam is suspected of murder of (the already dead) Lisa, putting psychological pressure on Suzy to reveal the whereabouts of the doll. Fortunately, Suzy may be blind but she is not stupid. Very soon, she notices little things in the behaviour of the men that suggest something else is going on. With help from a young girl who lives in the flat above (Julie Herrod), her suspicions are confirmed and she suddenly realizes she is on her own against three men. The worst of whom is Roat, not just a normal criminal, but who enjoys killing – and from the get-go had planned to kill everyone off, once he gets what he wanted.

Oh, my… ! This movie was (and IMHO still is) a real nail-biter. Based on a play by Frederick Knott who also provided the basis for Hitchcock’s Dial M for Murder (1953), the movie very much breathes Hitchcock’s air and makes good use of the master’s famous “suspense” techniques, in which the audience knows more than the movie’s protagonist. By this method, very special tension arises, as the viewer constantly wonders what will happen when the hero/ine finds out, and how s/he will escape the situation. Of course, this works much better when you have real danger imperilling the central character, so you can worry about them, and get caught up in the web of “suspense”.

For this to work, you need a character the audience likes, feels for and identifies with. In a Hitchcock movie, that might be your average, normal guys like James Stewart or Cary Grant, or later, much less lucky female characters like Janet Leigh or Tippi Hedren. There is no doubt that Audrey Hepburn’s casting here was a stroke of genius; she was at that time probably the most likable and beloved Hollywood star. Having her play a blind woman even contributed to the sympathy and fear felt for her, in a movie that was a very unusual genre for Hepburn.

Until then, she had been seen mainly in sweet love stories like Roman Holiday (1953) and Sabrina (1954), or comedy-thrillers like Charade (1963) with Cary Grant, or How to Steal a million (1966) with Peter O’Toole. She had broken through as a serious actress with The Nun’s Story (1959) and Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961). She had even been cast by Hitchcock in an adaptation of Henry Cecil’s novel, No Bail for the Judge. But other commitments, qualms about a rape scene in the script, and a pregnancy combined to scupper her involvement and, eventually, the movie itself, which infuriated the master of suspense. So Hepburn had never previously played in a movie like this one.

Wait Until Dark is a dark, almost nihilistic thriller. This time, Hepburn’s heroine is all on her own, and if she isn’t able to put the puzzle pieces together and use her own wits, she will end up dead like poor Suzy in her cupboard. There is no Cary Grant or George Peppard coming to the heroine’s rescue. Even the not unsympathetic Crenna isn’t able to help. The gloves are truly off this time. It was kind of a gamble. There is a tradition of blind people in thrillers now; to name just some, Jennifer 8 (1992), Blink (1993), In Darkness (2018), or home-invasion thrillers e. g. Jodie Foster in Panic Room (2002). But these genres are relatively new, and not that often used then: 23 Paces To Baker Street (1956) and The Spiral Staircase (1945) with its deaf-mute heroine come to mind.

Also, would fans of Hepburn accept her in such a role? A cold, chilling thriller? Her husband, and producer of the movie, Mel Ferrer (himself a former film star whose fame was fading, though he stayed in the business as a successful producer) wasn’t quite sure it would work. But he convinced Audrey, who wasn’t nearly as confident as many believed her to be, to accept the part. But it worked really well. Director Terence Young was a great admirer of Hitchcock’s techniques and had already successful applied them to his James Bond movies Dr. No (1962), From Russia with Love (1963) and Thunderball as well as WWII thriller Triple Cross (1966). Together with Henry Mancini’s highly effective soundtrack, the movie creates an atmosphere of claustrophobic doom around the sympathetic heroine.

In a way, the film somewhat ended the career of Hepburn, as at the same time it started the career of Arkin – though he had some way to go before achieving the status he has nowadays. After this movie, the already rocky marriage between Hepburn and Ferrer came to a quick, unhappy ending. She stayed away from movies for the next eight years until she played opposite Sean Connery in Robin and Marian (1976). But none of her later movies would achieve the iconic status of the string of classics she did in the 1950’s and ’60’s.

She plays Suzy as a sympathetic, sweet woman who tries to be the best she can, even though she complains to her husband about whether she really has to be “the queen of the blind”. It’s nice to see a movie where a man isn’t the big saviour of the damsel in distress, but instead supports her in doing things by herself. Suzy is not without flaws; she insults and hurts the girl neighbour, though more by lashing out, regretted the next moment. It’s a more modern version of the classic Hepburn film persona. But Arkin leaves the strongest impression. His Roat comes off as evil incarnate. Wearing dark glasses throughout – you don’t see his eyes until the finale – and with the typical ‘bowl’ haircut of the time, he looks like an evil version of one of the Beatles! His cold, precise speaking style and efficient, smart handling of things give us the feeling that guy is a terrible wild-card.

The film was a great success. On a budget of $3 million, it made $17 million at the North American box office alone, and earned Audrey Hepburn her fifth and final Academy Award nomination. The plot may seem overly complicated, in how much trouble the gangsters go through for a few grams of drugs, knowing on what scale drug-dealing is executed today (I refer you to the James Bond movie Licence to Kill). But the film is extremely effective, delivering the kind of Hitchcockian experience that, at the end of the decade, Hitchcock himself wasn’t able to provide anymore, experiencing a creative trough at that time.

Arkin was watching the movie at the time with a studio executive and when the audience jumped out of their seats at the final moments of the film, when he came out of the shadows, the exec leaned over to him and said: “Do you realize that’s because of you? You scared them to death!” I think I rest my case there. Wait Until Dark makes a fine link between Psycho and Halloween, making Hepburn probably the most famous “final girl” of all!

Dir: Terence Young
Star: Audrey Hepburn, Alan Arkin, Richard Crenna, Efrem Zimbalist Jr.

Operation Lipstick

  By

★★★
“I have a knack for stealing hearts, just like the way I steal your wallet.”

So warbles Li Bing (Cheng), a second-generation thief who has abandoned the criminal life and now performs a cabaret turn which is part song-and-dance, part magic act. These efforts to go straight are derailed when her former partner (Lee) shows up, demanding shelter due to being pursued for a wallet he lifted. She agrees to help, only if he returns the stolen property: when they try to do so, they find the owner now lacking a pulse.

It’s all part of a convoluted caper involving a dead nuclear scientist, and the microfilm containing the secrets of the atomic engine on which he was working. Various parties want said data, including: a Triad gang specializing in espionage, who operate out of a rival nightclub; the local counter-intelligence authorities, who recruit Li to their cause; and freelance operative Zhang Yee (Chung), who reluctantly partners up with Li and provides the romantic interest. The trail involves the key to a locker in a Turkish bath-house, which in turn leads to a hollow statue that does NOT contain the microfilm. So, where is it?

I would likely have appreciated some kind of scorecard, to help me figure out who was part of which faction, and perhaps with a chart indicating the McGuffin in play at this particular point. The key? The statue? The fake copy of the key, which I may have forgotten to mention earlier? It’s all rather confusing, a cinematic version of three-card monte, in which the elements are swirled around at a dizzying speed, apparently designed to perplex, rather than enlighten. Yet, it remains entertaining, in the way only a Cantonese cover-version of James Bond could be.

Depite the poster, the talents  of Cheng that are put to use here are more towards the musical end, rather than the martial side. Indeed, save for a battle around the bath-house against a pair of enemy agents, and a roof-top face-off against the head of the Triad gang, it’s light on the meaningful action for her. Despite this, it certainly qualifies for inclusion, with Li demonstrating a persistent level of smart feistiness that is not out of line with her more fisticuff-oriented roles. [I’d love to have seen a prequel depicting her thieving days, and explaining how she ended up becoming a nightclub act!]

The best parts are when the film is at its most inventive, such as the trio of singing assassins with their lethal musical instruments, also a nightclub act. Bit of a giveaway that the lyrics to their song go, “We are world-famous for assassination, a few notes and you’re dead”! And if I ever become an evil overlord, who has access to a fiendish death machine, I will always check who is in said machine before I activate it, even if I am sure I placed my prisoner in there a few minutes earlier… Although sporadic, I found those fun moments did provide enough entertainment to repay my investment of time.

Dir: Umetsugu Inouye
Star: Cheng Pei Pei, Paul Chang Chung, Pang Pang, Lee Kwan

Angel With the Iron Fists

  By

★★½
“From Hong Kong With Love.”

Swinging wildly between the surprisingly smart and the brain-numbingly stupid, this 1967 Hong Kong film is, in the end, not much more than a bad James Bond knock-off, despite its female lead. The heroine, Luo Na (Ho), is unsubtly named Agent 009, and goes to Hong Kong, posing as the mistress of an imprisoned gangster, who supposedly knows where he hid his ill-gotten gains. This brings her to the attention of the Dark Angels, whose leader is played by Tina Chin-Fei. This is a surprisingly gynocentric organization, owning both a vast, sprawling, underground lair and fetching two-piece uniforms. Keen to find out what Lona knows, they recruit her – which was 009’s cunning plan all along.

As well as straight out lifting some Bond musical cues, the makers go with the same kind of gadgets, Luo Na being given an entire arsenal of lethal purses, perfume and jewels before entering the Dark Angels’ lair. She also has some nifty sunglasses which allow her to tell when someone has been in her room, and Ho plays her as smartly competent, not relying on her sex appeal to get the job done. Or, at least, not relying entirely on her sex appeal, for she has to lure in high-level minion, Tieh Hu (Ching), which doesn’t sit well with his girlfriend, nightclub singer Dolly (Fan). If you can detect the faint whiff of Eau de Imminent Catfight, you’re not wrong.

The problem is mostly the villains, who appear to have strayed in from Austin Powers. For instance, there’s one scene where Luo Na is on a reconnaissance mission. Surprised by three guards, she engages in fisticuffs with them for while, and only then pulls a gun on them. They simply slouch off, shame-faced, and she continues reconnaissancing. Perhaps they were too embarrassed at being beaten by a woman to, oh, RAISE THE GODDAMN ALARM? And if ever I become an Evil Overlord, I will be sure not to discuss specific details, down to the flight numbers, of my top-secret plan to flood the world with a new, powerful drug, in front of the most recent recruit, immediately following her initiation.

But there’s one thing I have to say: in terms of dealing with any treachery, the Dark Angels get the full 10/10 for style. Here’s what happens after the leader discovers one of her “branch managers” skimmed $100,000 off the takings. I laughed like a drain, at this hip sixties update to the staple of classical kung-fu film, the flying guillotine. Just a shame this kind of goofy invention is rarely found outside the lair of Evil, Inc., such as the leader’s Rosa Klebb-inspired footwear. It doesn’t help that Ho’s action talents are clearly limited – the lengthy “swimsuit show” of no purpose was particularly aggravating. The movie did prove successful enough to merit a sequel the following year, Angel Strikes Again. I’ll be tracking that down because, for all its flaws, if it contains one moment like the flying guillotine one here, it’ll be worth the investment.

Dir: Lo Wei
Star: Lily Ho, Tang Ching, Tina Chin Fei, Fanny Fan