Review: Mark of the Devil

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2013

Images from the Internet

Mark of the Devil: Yack Pack
Directed by Michael Armstrong
Cheezy Flicks Entertainment
96 minutes, 1970 / 2006 / 2012
Cheezyflicks.com
MVDvisual.com

This German film, originally known as Hexen bis aufs Blut gequält, is a classic in early torture porn. Obviously modeled after the increasingly sexualized Hammer Films of the time, it incorporated the ethos of the graphic violence of likes of Hershell Gordon Lewis.

Taking place in some European country - supposedly England, I believe, considering one of the characters played by Herbert Lom (d. 2012), is named Lord Chamberlain - it takes place around the 17th Century, a time of witch hunters (a role both Vincent Price and Peter Cushing played for Hammer).

Reggie Nalder

The small town that is the focal point of the film is under the thumb of the despotic local hunter, who uses his power to get what he wants, be it money, power, or sex. He needs to keep this control because he is one ugly dude. Named Albino, which strangely he is not, he has a face that was ravaged by fire (in real life) channeled by the underrated Reggie Nalder, (d. 1991), who made a career playing the heavy.

While Albino is supposed to follow Church law and have indictments and trials before the torture and executions, he just takes what he wants, and then burns anyone who he wants out of the way in an auto da fe (look it up). But his power comes under scrutiny with the arrival of said Lord Chamberlain, the governing Church-appointed witch hunter, as well as his student and an underling (who has as much morals as Albino).

Udo Kier

The student and hero of the piece, Christian (of course), is played by now-cult actor, Udo Kier, who would rise to fame just a few short years later as the star of such classics of bad cinema, Andy Warhol’s Frankenstein (1973) and Andy Warhol’s Dracula (1974). He looks much younger in this film; he was quite handsome in the two latter releases, but his blue eyes and baby face are stunningly handsome. I’m not attracted, I’m jealous.



Olivera Katarina

Catching the fancy of Albino and Christian is Vanessa, played by the very heavingly-buxomed, and actually not as pretty as Kier, the Serbian actor Olivera Katarina (last name credited as Vuco here). When Albino can’t have her, she’s declared a witch, and love-interest Christian is out to save her.

The secondary plot, which has some historical truth to it from what I remember, is that the Church gave the landed gentry who opposed the high taxes or balked at oppressive religious laws a choice: turn over their money and land to the Church, or be tortured and condemned to be killed and the Church would get their holdings anyway. That is Chamberlain’s purpose, apparently, which is a turn because at first you are led to believe that he is a savior, rather than an every worse criminal than what we are introduced to in the beginning. Whether he is out for himself or as a direct edict from the Vatican is something unexplained). This is also part of why the US Constitution has a separation of Church and State (the first government to ever do so).

It is sort of like the 1975 James Clavell novel Shogun, where the reader is introduced to the local government which has power of life and death, and then as you work your way through the society with the main occidental character, you find that they were just minuscule in reality to the larger hierarchy. The Church of those times was like that, with those in charge with absolute power (i.e., as Lord John Acton correctly posited in 1887, “…absolute power corrupts absolutely), and yet there were those more powerful above them.

I believe that while this is true, it is especially accurate when embodied by a religious order, who can justify it in their own minds as God makes right. The nastiest person I ever met was a born-again Christian who firmly believe that God wanted her to have what she wanted by any means necessary, even if it meant stabbing co-workers she didn’t like in the back (as she tried and failed with me; I guess God wanted her so bad, He had her join Him in her mid-20s via cancer – note that I believe if there is a God, there is no gender involved, so I’m just using her terminology). The Judeo-Christian West believes that Muslims are alone in their “God is Great” jihads, but Christianity (and Judaism in pre-Roman times) was just as fierce and cruel. There is a lot of injustice in the Bible, for example. Comedian Jackie Mason once stated that according to the Bible, the punishment is the same for adultery and eating non-Kosher food, to which he quipped, “I tried them both and don’t see the comparison.”

There is plenty of torture laid out for the viewer here (which is shown in the trailer, and why it is not included, as I don’t want this to be an “adult” site), including tar and feathering, burning at the stake, various mechanisms designed purely for cruelty (e.g., the thumbscrew), and in the most infamous scene, the removal of a tongue by pincers. The thing rarely talked about is that every one of the implements used is based on reality. The whole Church R&D team of that era was focused on finding ways to help the sinner confess and find God through the most gruesome means. Many are shown here. In college, I did a paper on the Spanish Inquisition, which no one unexpected, and many of the tools shown here are mentioned in detail in books about the period.

And with all this going on, there is an incredulous sappy love story that happens with gooey and tinny music played over and over as a lover’s theme, in typical European films of the time.

This is an absolute benchmark for what would become a genre that includes the likes of Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS (1975), Thriller – A Cruel Picture (1973), the whole Italian giallo (e.g., the zombie films by Fulci, and demon ones by Lamberto Bava), the abovementioned Warhol pix, and even continuing to today with the likes of the Saw and Hostel franchises, and A Serbian Film (2010). If you enjoy the genre, then this is a must for you.

There is one complaint I do have, and that’s more about the company that puts this out. Don’t get me wrong, Cheezy Flicks Entertainment re-releases some amazing period exploitative films, and I have never been sorry to see anything they’ve released. I mean, even this one actually has a replica vomit bag that was distributed when it was first released (kudos to Cheezy). However, I often find that my player had trouble reading the discs, and it tends to skip, much as it does with DVD-R recordings. I’m not sure if they’re going the cheap route or what, but it is annoying to have to keep going back to see the parts that were skipped, or to get the digital noise and stalling as the player tries to make sense of it all.

There are some cool extras here, including some retro-trailers and intermission ads that are on many of the Cheezy releases.

Review: Headspace: Director’s Cut

Text © Richard Gary/Indie Horror Films, 2012

Images from the Internet

                            

Headspace: Director’s Cut

Directed by Andrew van den Houten                    

Modern Cine, 2005 / 2012

84 minutes, USD $14.95   

moderncine.com

MVDvisual.com

As this film shows, it’s not who you know, it’s where you go to film school. Put together by recent New York University film school grads, it is absolutely astounding the sheer level of talent that is present in this production.

But first, let me step back. The director is one Andrew van den Houten (I thought the Dutch were chased outta New York in 1674?*), who started as a director (he looks like he’s about 12 in his cameo as an EMT), and is currently a producer who runs Modern Cine, helping others who choose to direct (including some of the actors here).

Starting in a small-town, we see an idyllic family as they celebrate one of two pre-tween brothers’ birthday. From here, thing turn strange to ugly very quickly, resulting in one of the best effects in the film, and there are many.

From there we head off to New Amsterda… I mean New York in the present (well, 2005, anyway), where we meet handsome and shy Alex, the protagonist of the story (not counting in a brief prologue, making all of this either a backflash, or a backflash within a backflash). Alex’s job is house-sitting (in my head, I hear a Yiddish accent asking, “Nu? From this he makes a living?”), giving him time to roam around the city. Newcomer Christopher Denham (who has since appeared in the likes of Shutter Island and Sound of My Voice) plays Alex at first with a bit of awe and shyness, and then towards the end of the film with, well, some froth and madness. He’ll really powerful as an actor, with a wide range.

Also strong and a newcomer as well, is Erick Kastel, as Harry, who uses the money the makes as a chess shark to fund his paintings. As with Alex, who he casually meets in a park while playing the master’s game, he goes from a bit bitter yet together, to completely manic as time and events progress. When Erick and Christopher work together, they feed off each other’s energies and make a really powerful team. Their scenes together are especially fun.

One of the main motifs of this film is whether it is monsters of the mind (they play with possible substance abuse or schizophrenia) or demons of the pit , making them both possible or improbably. This also leads to one of the questions I have about the film, being does bleeding lead to you being attacked by creatures, or does it turn you into one? Or perhaps it could go either way, and if so, what makes the choice? This comes across as a hole in the story for me, but it is not enough to put a dent in its strength. Though I also need to say I say that while the final “shock” came as no surprise at all, it was fun nonetheless.

Now, about those guest stars… One of the first scenes (though the last one filmed, apparently) has Catwoman wannabe Sean Young as the nice mom of the brothers. Yep, the Blade Runner’s squeeze (1982). And, of course, she does a great job with the little time she’s onscreen. Glad she’s back in action.

In the story, for some reason, a page is taken from Phenomenon (1996), and Alex gets headaches and starts becoming smarter in increasing degrees. After passing out, he is sent to a series of doctors, each with their own increasingly physical to metaphysical agendas. We start of with the first pair of neurologists in a hospital: one is played by Dee Wallace (Stone), more famously known as the lead in the classic The Howling (1981; a publicity still of her and real-life late husband Christopher Stone from that film is framed on the wall of her character’s office) and as E.T.’s “mom” (1982). It’s always good to see her as she has such a naturalistic acting style. The other doctor is William Atherton, most famously (infamously?) known as Walter Peck, the officious idjit-stick who shuts down the grid in Ghostbusters (1984; I do hope he embraces the often-used reference, because he helped make that movie the hit it was). They both bring a level of legitimacy to this nearly-student film.

When nothing can be found with the neurologists, Alex then gets directed to a spiritualist-based psychiatrist played by Olivia Hussey. Now, any straight male my age most likely had some level of crush on her when she starred as the lead in Romeo and Juliet (1968).  Sadly, she goes through the film looking like she’s in a confused daze, with eyebrows knit and a blank expression on her face. She’s a much better actor than she lets on here, but it’s still great to see her and I am certainly glad she accepted the role.

Then, of course, there is Udo Kier as a priest in a small, yet pivotal role. Supposedly, he was asked to play one of the neurologists, but thought the priest would be more fun, and he was right. Now, Kier is – and never has been – a great actor, but he is always fun to watch, even going back to the Andy Warhol versions of Frankenstein (1973) and Dracula (1974). I think I can say quite honestly that I would rather watch Udo do some scenery chewing than, say, Leonardo DeCaprio’s arguably top-notch acting. And Udo’s in fine, bloody form here. I stand to salute you.

Now that I’m sitting again, I’d also like to mention, while we’re talking talent, Pollyanna McIntosh, who plays an incidental role (and the only female nudity, which is stunning), but shows she has some chops by stealing many of the scenes she’s in; I’m looking forward to see her star turn in another Modern Cine release, The Woman (2012) at some point. The trailer for this film and others from this company is included in the extras.

Let’s get back to Headspace. It isn’t just the star power that makes this such a watchable film, it’s the entire zeitgeist. But you’re asking yourself, how are the effects? Nearly all of them are prosthetics (there are exactly two quick CGI shots), and the feature is certainly the better for it. Sure the blood is juuuuust a bit too thick and dark, and the creatures look a bit like people in rubber suits (something I know they were trying to avoid by the commentary) covered in slime, but most of the look of gore, make-up and FX is totally enjoyable, especially the first big set piece, as I said earlier.

 There are a number of good extra features here. Usually when there is more than one commentary track, I think, oh, great, that’s 4 hours I have to spend with a film. However, they are both worthwhile, I’m happy to say, to hear process, some exposition, and many other annecdotes of dealing with the star cast. Then there is the choice of captioning (I usually like to turn it on, for some reason), an Edited, Extended Scenes and Alternate Takes segment (though I understand why most of it was removed, it helped clear up some storyline questions), and a selection of FX photos. And…

There are two documentary featurettes attached, at about 20 minutes each. The first is called “Fractured Skulls: The Making of Headspace,” which was filmed at the time of creation and is enjoyable from beginning to end. The second is “Headspace Revisited,” where director van den Houten and star Christopher Denham meet up in 2012 and sit in a park on the Upper West Side of Manhattan where some scenes were shot. They discuss windmills… I mean reminisce about the shoot through a rearview mirror, with hindsight. While not as appealing as the first feature, it is still interesting enough to sit all the way through it.

Usually when graduate film students try to take themselves seriously, they fall flat on their faces (though sometimes it’s worse when they try to do a comedy). Not this troupe. This film has rightfully won a bunch of film festival awards, and it’s no doubt in my mind why.

* That’s a joke