#1973Films

[edpor68]

Happy Monday! A short clip from “Cry Rape” (1973); this was one of the first movies that dealt with the crime of rape. Pattye was awesome as Jenny Coleman, the sister of accused man, Andy Coleman (Peter Coffield) #patriciamattick #adorable #CryRape #1973films #petercoffield #lesleywoods #venusinbluejeans #youtube #gregmullavey👩🏻‍🦰👓👖💐📺 https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxEhaSinrLu7YHuXHxH_4GGu27oh7GI5Dc?si=nOY_a8hzrZtwweQL

[adamwatchesmovies]

Jesus Christ Superstar (1973)

The more Jesus Christ Superstar plays back in my head, the more I recognize it as an emotional, thought-provoking, and intelligently-made film. It also features powerhouse performances from the leads, memorable scenes, and a terrific soundtrack.

Based on the musical rock opera by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice, it’s the story of Jesus’ passion told from the viewpoint of Judas Iscariot (Carl Anderson) and focuses on the conflict between the disciple and his master leading up to the crucifixion.

Told in a quasi-meta fashion, the film begins with all of the characters, save Jesus (Ted Neeley) arriving by bus. What we see is like a retelling and a spiritual retreat for all of the participants as they act out the familiar story through song.

Certain elements left me feeling uneasy. The characters move among ruins and modern constructs built around them. Guns, tanks, and modern clothes are seen throughout. It’s as if a theatre troupe stumbled upon a script titled “Jesus Christ Superstar” and, having no idea what it was about decided to spontaneously put on a show that turned out to be a life-altering experience. They didn't have auditions, the right costumes, or even someone in mind to play Jesus (explaining why the actor's not on the bus with the rest) but once they began, the story took a life of its own. It suggests Ted Neeley isn't even an actor as much as a figure bound to the story of the passion.

This is the kind of movie that demands to be seen multiple times and discussed in length. It wants to be more than just a straightforward retelling, it aims to embody the religious experience you get hearing the biblical passages for the first time. Norman Jewison seeks to challenge the way you perceive this tale and make you rethink the roles these people play in it. As a musical, it's the perfect choice. You already want to watch the film over and over to memorize the soundtrack. Asked ten different people about their favorite number. You'll get ten different answers. More than featuring pleasant melodies and well-written lyrics, the songs are cleverly utilized. They set the tone once and then, depending on the pace, or slight tweaks in the lyrics, key numbers drastically change in their reprises.

The film you want to compare Jesus Christ Superstar to is Godspell. While the former feels dated, this interpretation is fresh despite the years. Its choices are certainly controversial but its ability to challenge the viewer is one of its strongest assets. The soundtrack is dynamic and memorable. The characters feel like more than simply names on a page read every easter. Instead, they're living, breathing people. The more I think about this movie, about how it makes me feel and how elegantly the lyrics and the music are handled, the more I fall in love with Jesus Christ Superstar. (On DVD, April 10, 2015)

[teavalbooksinmoviesblog]

The Holy Mountain (1973)

dir. Alejandro Jodorowsky

[tlbodine]

1970s Folk Horror: The Wicker Man

Folk horror is a genre currently enjoying a bit of a comeback. It’s also a little nebulous to define, and there’s a lot of debate about what does and doesn’t qualify -- but one thing most everyone can agree on is that Robin Hardy’s 1973film, The Wicker Man, is a shining example and, perhaps, the progenitor of all folk horror to follow. 

The Wicker Man introduces us to the remote Scottish island of Summerisle, where a mainland police sergeant lands in search of a missing girl. But the investigation takes a strange turn as the devoutly Christian police officer learns more about the islanders. For one thing, no one is very helpful or forthcoming with information, and the facts of the case don’t make sense. For another, the island’s residents practice a blasphemous form of paganism worshipping their old gods in rituals invoking sex, nudity, and maybe a little blood sacrifice. 

The film is based on a 1967 novel called Ritual by David Pinner, which was itself originally conceived as a screenplay. Funny how things come full circle like that. 

The actual plot of The Wicker Man is pretty thin and predictable, at least by modern standards. It’s very possible that contemporary audiences in the 1970s would not have been able to guess, but the tropes it invokes are by this point so played out that you pretty much know from the beginning what you’ll be getting into. Despite this, it’s....quite an experience, and one worth having. 

Some highlights: 

Christopher Lee plays the primary antagonist, and he brings a level of simultaneous gravitas and Extra(tm) that is an absolute scene stealer. At one point he is dressed in drag wearing a Cher wig and literally skipping across the countryside, and it is played with total earnestness. 

Some really excellent cutting dialogue, especially from Christopher Lee but from various other townfolk as well. 

The film is....kind of a musical? Like maybe not exactly a musical, but there is a lot of singing in it. Several musical interludes. Because folk music. 

Tits. So much nudity. At one point the inn-keeper’s daughter nakedly dry-humps a door while singing seductively to the cop the next room over.

Wonderfully unsettling ritual animal masks and just, like, a great overall aesthetic.

The effect of the film might be a bit more frightening to someone with a religious background. For me, I couldn’t help rooting for the islanders the whole time. They seem like a fun crowd, and I think I’d like to hang out with them. 

But the movie does tap into some themes we’ve seen cropping up time and again in 1970s horror -- from the xenophobia toward quaint rural communities (killer hillbillies), to the religious anxieties of Christianity struggling against older forces, to the concerns about sexual revolution and empowerment, to the rampant sex and nudity, to the “mockumentary” style of “no, this is very much a real thing that is definitely happening wink wink”. It is a thoroughly 1970s film that utterly embodies the decade and could not really have been made in precisely the same way at any time earlier or since. 

* There was a disastrous reboot in 2006 starring Nicolas Cage. It puts a pseudo-feminist spin on the plot, which might have possibly been interesting except for the largely incomprehensible script and the poor acting throughout. Total snooze-fest, feel free to skip it. You’re not missing anything. 

[edpor68]

Happy Wednesday! Another short clip from “Cry Rape” (1973); the CBS tv movie aired on 11/27/1973, and it was one of the first movies that dealt with the crime of rape. Pattye was awesome as Jenny Coleman, the sister of accused man, Andy Coleman (Peter Coffield) #patriciamattick #adorable #CryRape #1973films #petercoffield #lesleywoods #venusinbluejeans #youtube 👩🏻‍🦰👓👖💐📺 https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx6Lzu3gFyB-Z4p24VSQIdJtkr7pgdVKYK?si=RTzdh6zVWr5hZD-R

[edpor68]

Happy Tuesday! A short clip from “Cry Rape” (1973) Awesome as Jenny Coleman, her 10th credit; the movie aired on 11/27/1973; one of the first movies that dealt with the crime of rape. Pattye was awesome as Jenny Coleman. #patriciamattick #adorable #CryRape #1973films #venusinbluejeans #youtube 👩🏻‍🦰👓👖💐📺 https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxFi6Yk-W-8SXZJn_t5qXzadVLVybtccvM?si=-JOanwHrMXtWW2IW

[edpor68]

Happy Tuesday! A few more screenshots of Cry Rape (1973) Awesome as Jenny Coleman, her 10th credit. #pattyemattick #patriciamattick #adorable #CryRape #1973films 👩🏻‍🦰👓👖💐

[adamwatchesmovies]

Godspell (1973)

I’m willing to give Godspell the benefit of the doubt. This musical is not entirely successful. The elements that work do add up to enough to make it worth seeing for a certain target audience. What we have on our hands may be a cheap knockoff of Jesus Christ Superstar (which came out the same year and deals with similar subject matter) but then again, it feels earnest.

Based on the Gospel of St. Matthew but set in New York, John the Baptist (David Haskell) gathers a diverse band of young citizens to follow and learn from the prophecized Messiah, Jesus Christ (Victor Garber). The film takes a humorous tone and describes through skits, songs and mime several Parables such as The Good Samaritan, The Prodigal Son, the Beatitudes, and others.

This film is very much a product of its time, to a fault. It’s unclear why Jesus has an almost clown-like look with makeup on his face (a big heart on his forehead and tear marks below his eyes), or why the abundance of rainbows and goofy voices. To contrast the New York setting? I wouldn't consider these choices, the way the musicals are handled or the fashion and hairstyles evergreen.

The film is more intelligent than it initially seems. The bright colors, miming, singing and exaggerated dances are deliberate choices. At the beginning of the film, everyone looks very formal with their briefcases and such. No one is having any fun. Even the ballerina looks like she’s working, not dancing. When Jesus appears though, formality vanishes. The only people left are the ones having fun, those who dress in colorful, outlandish clothes and paint their faces. These visual clues, the songs, and silly, simplistic interpretations of the parables are meant to appeal to children and child-like audiences. Matthew 18:3 reads “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” The intent is clear. The look is meant to be jarring and to be only fully understood upon further reflection.

Other elements also show some profundity, like the choice to cast one actor for both John the Baptist and Judas. We're not given a clear definition of when one character ends the other begins. The depiction of the Pharisee is another strong scene for the way it makes a point without demonizing or criticizing any specific group of people and for the special effects utilized.

The scenes that work are often matched with others that frustrate. The crucifixion is portrayed in a way that's confusing rather than heart-wrenching. Another letdown is the songs, which are not particularly memorable. The vaudeville-like dances in Times Square are iconic and charming, but there’s only maybe one song that I would recognize from the soundtrack. Lastly, the limited cast does make for some interesting choices but not always. A max of 9 people on-screen at a time is too few.

You probably didn't know what to make of Godspell when you saw it. Give it another chance and think about the choices made throughout by director David Greene. Its approach to the biblical passages is unusual. In this case, this translates to "unique" and "original". Think about what I said about children and the way they approach these stories. You'll see that Godspell is flawed and dated but quite inspired. (On VHS, April 10, 2015)

[adamwatchesmovies]

The Satanic Rites of Dracula (1973)

If you’re interested in exploring the Hammer Dracula series, please, PLEASE begin with 1958's Dracula. I chose the easily available The Satanic Rites of Dracula (it’s in the public domain) instead. After this dreadful, boring, and near-incomprehensible mess, I've pre-emptively given up on the franchise. It hardly feels like a Dracula movie; more like the Count was tacked onto a shoddy spy thriller about satanic cults.

When England's Secret Service learns several prominent members of society are involved in a satanic cult, Colonel Mathews (Richard Vernon) and Inspector Murray (Michael Coles) don't know who they can trust anymore. Occult expert Professor Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) is brought to help. As he investigates, Van Helsing discovers the Satanists are led by the legendary Dracula (Christopher Lee) himself!

Even if I had obtained a decent print of the film with better sound, or subtitles, I would've been bored out of my skull while watching. On paper, it sounds interesting. Naked women sacrificed, murderous cultists, secret agents, people being turned into vampires, Dracula, plots to destroy the world... but I can hardly recall any of it because I was trying to keep myself awake by thinking of anything other than what was happening on-screen. The plot makes no sense. At one point, Dracula murders one of his followers to prevent Van Helsing from interrogating him. Why not murder Van Helsing? They were in the same room! Bigger, more important plot points make just as little sense. We’re given a tentative explanation for why Dracula is doing what he's doing but I don’t buy it. The whole thing's too contrived. And it must be Van Helsing’s lucky day because at the end of this movie he just happens to bump into the most convenient object ever. I won’t say what it is, but it’d be like if you were running away from a Werewolf and the monster just happened to chase you into a “Silver Bullet and Wolfbane” Factory.

I'll credit this movie credit for one scene during the incredibly forced climax. The visuals are cool. I can't tell you why but let's say it’s a creative reference to religious imagery. It earns the film a half star more than it deserves.

The Satanic Rites of Dracula is bad. Not even in a way that’s worth mentioning. Mostly, it’s dull. If I took the time to inspect the film thoroughly I could probably find more insightful flaws but there's no need. Anyone watching would be unlikely to notice; they'll be much more concerned trying to stay awake or to figure out who thought it was a good idea to mix a spy thriller and a vampire movie. I doubt being familiar with and loving the previous installments could make this chapter good. Even if you have the opportunity to see it for free, don't. (On DVD, April 9, 2015)