Errol Flynn Collection (The Adventures of Robin Hood, The Sea Hawk, Santa Fe Trail, Edge of Darkness, Objective Burma, Adventures of Don Juan) Blu-ray Review

errol flynn

When I was a kid in the 1980s, I listened to The Beatles and Jerry Lee Lewis, and I watched shows like The Monkees and Father Knows Best. I knew who Humphrey Bogart and Peter Lorre were. I had at least a cursory knowledge of artists who were popular decades before I was born.

I often wonder if kids today have that same sort of knowledge. It isn’t fair to expect teenagers today to know who The Beatles are, or Bogart. They existed not a couple of decades before teenagers today were born, but more than half a century ago. But do they know Nirvana and Alanis Morissette, Jennifer Love Hewitt and Demi Moore? Maybe. I see kids wearing Nirvana shirts all the time, and we’ve shown my daughter lots of films from the 1980s.

I don’t know if any of this is important. I do know that I love classic cinema, and I’m always thrilled to see old films get nice new releases. I did know who Errol Flynn was as a kid, but until this set came out I’d only seen one or two of his movies.  I really enjoyed getting to know him better. You can read my full review of the set here.

Joan Crawford Collection (Grand Hotel, The Damned Don’t Cry, Possessed, The Women) Blu-ray Review

image host

DVD collecting is a fun, but frustrating hobby. Frustrating because movies come in so many different cases. There are DVDs, Blu-rays, and 4K UHD formats. There are boxed sets, special editions, steelbooks, anniversary sets, and more. It is hard to keep up. I write a weekly column about new releases, and I can’t keep up with everything. 

I want to own a physical copy of my favorite films. That’s the first consideration. But then I want the best quality copy, so maybe I need to upgrade to Blu-ray or 4K. But as a collector, I also like fancy sets with gifts like posters, lobby cards, and boxes that I can show off.  Then I have to consider the special features like commentaries, interviews, etc. It can get overwhelming and expensive trying to get the best stuff. 

There is also shelf space to consider. I have half a dozen bookcases filled to the brim with DVDs and an increasingly large stack of unsorted things I don’t have the space for. I’ve come to love little boxed sets of several movies. You have to be careful with them because sometimes the quality is poor and all too often the cases are cheap, but a good set gives you lots of movies with good quality, lots of extras but keeps the space down to a minimum.

I really enjoyed this set of Joan Crawford movies, as you can see from my review over at Cinema Sentries.

Now Watching: The Maltese Falcon (1941)

image host

The Maltese Falcon (1941)
Directed and written by John Huston
Based on the novel by Dashiell Hammett

Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Mary Astor, Sydney Greenstreet, and Peter Lorre

San Francisco private detective Sam Spade takes on a case that involves him with three eccentric criminals, a gorgeous liar, and their quest for a priceless statuette, with the stakes rising after his partner is murdered.

Rating: 9/10

An absolute classic. I love this film. I’ve seen it many times. I’m hoping to do a Top Five Bogart in Film Noir list this month, so I’m watching as many of those as I can. This is often considered the very first film noir, and it is one of the very best. I don’t really have the bandwidth right now to do a full review, but since I watched it, I wanted to at least mention it.

It was the first film directed by John Huston and the first film Sydney Greenstreet ever played in.  It made Bogart a star and set the template for untold detective stories to come. It is a terrific film and I higly recommend it.

Hard Boiled 4K UHD is the Pick of the Week

hard boiled

October was an incredible month for new releases. We will most likely get even more great stuff in a few weeks as Christmas gets a little closer, but this week is a little slim. My pick is a nice looking set of John Woo’s seminal action flick Hard Boiled, but there are also 4K releases of a Sean Connery sci-fi adventure, a classic 1980s teen comedy, and a not so amazing John Carpenter vampire movie. Click here to read all about it.

Midnight (1934)

midnight movie poster

I’m thinking about doing a Top Five noir films starring Humphrey Bogart, so I did a little searching. The trouble with film noir is there are no real clear definitions. Unlike westerns or action films, the dividing lines between, say, a crime thriller and a film noir are pretty nebulous. So I wanted to make a list of all the noirs Bogart had starred in. One of the sites I found mentioned this film, so I gave it a watch.

I definitely would not call it a noir, so I’m not counting it for Noirvember, but I thought I’d talk about it a little bit anyway. Bogart was originally credited in eighth place, but the film was rereleased in 1949 as Call It Murder, after he’d become a star, and he then received top billing. 

It is more of a morality play than a film noir or even a good movie. A woman kills her husband and is caught and convicted for it. There is speculation she’ll get off as she’s a woman and it was a crime of passion, but the foreman of the jury, Edward Weldon (OP Heggie), pushes for a guilty verdict and gets it. She’s sentenced to die. 

There is some publicity and public support for the convicted woman, including from Weldon’s daughter, Stella (Sidney Fox.) She met Gar Boni (Bogart) at the trial, and in the ensuing weeks she’s fallen in love. I think he had some connection to the convicted girl, but I’m honestly not sure. He definitely is supportive of her not dying and convinces Stella to feel the same.

Anyway, the bulk of the film takes place on the day of the execution. Friends and family have gathered at Weldon’s house, and they spend a lot of time talking about the trial. He is unmoved. He stands by his decision to convict and notes that it was not his decision that she get the death penalty, but that is the law. 

Before the film ends, something will happen to challenge that idea. I won’t spoil it, but you’ll probably figure it out before it actually happens. I know I did. There isn’t much to the filmmaking. It very much feels like a filmed play, which is pretty much what it is. There is no style to it. Nothing opens it up cinematically. They don’t even use a musical score, which is really weird. Music really does add so much to a film like this. 

Bogart’s role is small but pivotal. He’s fine in it, but not particularly memorable. At this point in his career, he was playing a lot of heavies who were a long way from getting top billing. He’s really the only reason to watch this. Otherwise it would have been completely forgotten (and it’s hardly remembered despite his presence).

It’s funny because I have this idea of doing what I call “Now Watching” articles. The idea of those being that sometimes I watch a film but don’t really want to do a full review of it, but I would like to at least mention the watching. So I post the title of the film, the director and stars, and then a little synopsis. My review is typically just a couple of paragraphs, and then I’m done. It is a fun, fast way of keeping track of my movie watching while also reminding me of what I thought.

I had intended this to be one of those, and then I just kept writing. So I guess I’m calling this a full review 🙂

Blackout Noir: The Blue Gardenia (1953)

blue gardenia poster

Three women live together in a ridiculously large apartment. Seriously, there is a kitchen, a bathroom, and this massive living area, but no bedrooms. The ladies all sleep on pull-out-style beds in the gigantic living room. A room that could have easily been converted into at least a couple of bedrooms. I think the film wants us to believe these ladies aren’t rich; they can only afford a studio apartment for the three of them. But it also needs to block them in interesting ways. The three of them need to be filmed in different spaces and not be all crowded together. So we get this gigantic living space.  

Sorry, that kind of thing drives me a little crazy. Now where was I?

Oh yes, these three women – Crystal (Ann Southern), Sally (Jeff Donnell), and Norah (Anne Baxter)—all work for a telephone company as operators. They have varying relationships with men. Crystal is dating her ex-husband (because when they were married, he had all the faults of a husband, but now that they’re just dating, he has all the perks of a boyfriend). Sally mostly stays home reading detective novels, (but when the phone rings, she announces – “If that’s for me, I’m in! No matter who it is.”) Norah is in love with a man stationed in Korea. 

All three are constantly hit on by Harry Prebble (Raymond Burr), a skeezy pinup girl artist, who tries his luck with any and all girls. He’s the kind of guy who doesn’t care who he makes it with as long as he’s making it with someone.

When Norah gets a letter from her boyfriend telling her he’s met someone else, she agrees to go out with Harry. He takes her to the titular restaurant and plies her with drinks. She has a good time, and he takes her home.  Before he can make his moves, she passes out on the couch. But he’s not the type of guy to let a little blackout rob him of a good time. She wakes up enough to fight him off. She picks up a fireplace poker, and…the film fades to black. The next morning she finds herself in bed with no memory of what happened. He doesn’t wake up at all. He’s found dead by the maid.

The rest of the film finds Norah trying to figure out just what happened, all the time thinking she must have killed him. This probably counts as a spoiler, but about 40 minutes into the film, I turned to my wife and said, “I don’t think she killed him.” Norah is just too nice. She’s too good of a girl to have killed a man like that. And the fact that the film faded to black before we ever saw her strike a blow made me think there must have been someone else.

At some point Casey May (Richard Conte) enters the picture. He’s a journalist chasing the story. After writing a few front-page stories (and here’s another point of contention for me – all the front pages on his newspaper are just headlines printed in massive type; there are no pictures, no actual story, just headlines. What a waste of space.) But I’m digressing again. Where was I? Oh yes, after writing a few front-page stories, he needs a new angle and decides to write an open letter to “An Unknown Murderess,” where he asks her to turn herself in to him and promises the paper will pay for her defense (as long as she gives him an exclusive interview).

She’ll eventually call him, and naturally there will be a romance angle that enters the picture. The film concludes abruptly and all too neatly. It is rare that I complain about a film being too short, but this one really could have used an extra half hour. I mentioned earlier about how I thought she didn’t do it; I could have gotten behind Casey and Norah doing a little investigating trying to find out who the real murderer was. Instead they just throw a solution at us and roll credits. It’s too bad too, because up until then I was really enjoying the film.

Blackout Noir on the Criterion Channel

blackout noir

I had an enormous amount of fun watching and talking about all the Giallos on the Criterion Channel last year, so I thought it would be fun to do another series like that.

Today is thh start Noirvember, which brings together one of my favorite film genres with my favorite season. To celebrate, the Criterion Channel has put together what they are calling Blackout Noir. These are film noirs in which the main character has blacked out due to too much drink, amnesia, or some other thing, and awakens to find something terrible has happened. Or, as they put it:

Among the most agonizingly intense films in the history of film noir are those that adopt the point of view of characters tormented by amnesia, memory holes, and drunken blackouts, leaving them to grasp in the dark in search of an often terrifying truth. Waking up unexpectedly in a stranger’s bed is one thing . . . putting on your coat to leave and discovering a bloodstain on it is another

I was going to be watching lots of film noirs this month anyway, so I thought it would be fun to watch and review all of these films. I’ve actually not seen most of these films, so that should be doubly fun.

Here’s the full list:

The Blue Gardenia (1953)
Black Angel (1946)
Blackout (1954)
Guilty Bystander (1950)
Framed (1947)
In a Lonely Place (1950)
Crossfire (1947)
Deadline by Dawn (1946)

The Movie Journal: October 2025

image host

I watched 48 movies in October. 29 of them were new to me. 19 of them were made before I was born. It was scary month, and I watched 27 horror movies.

It was a good movie month for me. The best of the year in terms of number of movies watched. Over the last few years I’ve gotten to where I watch most of my movies on the weekend, and then weekdays are spent watching TV or doing other things. But this month I had three boxed sets of films to get through (Seven Nightmare on Elm Streets, Six starring Errol Flynn and Four starring Joan Crawford) and review, so I wound up watching a lot of films through the week and then even more on the weekend.

While I did watch a lot of horror movies, I didn’t write about them nearly as much as I usually do for 31 Days of Horror. Partially this was due to all the other writing duties I had – reviewing those boxed sets plus 5 Cool Things and Picks of the Week. But I also intentionally slowed down my horror writing. When I decided to come back to writing after a long break, I did so with the intention of keeping it fun. I don’t want to ever feel like I have to write something in order to keep up this blog. I’ve settled into the realization that this blog will never really take off, so it has to be enjoyable to do. I want to have fun with this, and pressuring myself to write more articles is a fast way to make it feel like work. I figure writing about my movie theme at least once a month is plenty.

Those boxed sets also had a good effect on my most watched stats.

imgbox

The directors list is almost entirely different from last month. There is now a six way tie for first place, with the leaders having only four films watched. I feel like by this point I usually have one or two directors who have taken a clear lead with many more films on the chart than this.

The tie for second place goes on to eight people with just three films watched. With only two more months to go until the end of the year it will be interesting to see if anybody reaches the double digits.

imgbox

The most watched actors list has seen some changes as well. This is mostly due to the boxed sets. Robert Englund jumps up to a tie for first place at eight films, which is entirely due to the Nightmare set. Peter Cushing was on the list last month, but he pushes forward to that first place tie. This is due to all the Hammer Horror films I watched this month. That’s the same reason Christopher Lee is now in second place. I fully expect I’ll watch more Hammer before the year is out, so you can expect both of them to rise even higher. Joan Crawford and Errol Flynn both make their debuts entirely due to boxed sets.

Anyway, here’s the full list.

Dracula’s Daughter (1936) – ****
The Evil of Frankenstein (1964) ****
Halloween (1978) *****
Trick ‘r Treat (2007) **
The Terror of the Tongs (1961) ***1/2
The Women (1939) ****
Possessed (1947) ***
Grand Hotel (1932) ****1/2
The Damned Don’t Cry (1950) ***1/2
Aliens (1986) ****1/2
Lou Reed and John Cale: Songs for Drella (1990) ***
The Shrouds (2024) ****
The Thing (1982) *****
The Thing from Another World (1951) ****
Triangle (2009) ***1/2
Rogue (2007) ***1/2
The Cat and the Canary (1927) ****1/2
OSS 117: Mission for a Killer (1965) **
The Phoenician Scheme (2025) ****
Only the River Flows (2023) ***1/2
Cloud (2024) ****
A Better Tomorrow (1986) ***1/2
The Revenge of Frankenstein (1958) ****
New Nightmare (1994) ****
Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991) **
A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child (1989) ***
A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988) ***1/2
A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) ****
A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985) **1/2
Objective, Burma! (1945) ***1/2
Edge of Darkness (1943) ****
The Sea Hawk (1940) ****
City on Fire (1987) ***1/2
Santa Fe Trail (1940) **
The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) ****
Radioland Murders (1994) ***1/2
A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) ****1/2
The Hard Way (1943) ***
The Strange Woman (1946) ***
Last Known Address (1970) ***1/2
The Forever Purge (2021) **
Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) ****1/2
Heretic (2024) ***1/2
for The Mummy (1959) ***1/2
Body Puzzle (1992) ***
The Descent (2005) ****
What Lies Beneath (2000) ***
One Battle After Another (2025) ****

The Friday Night Horror Movie: Halloween (1978)

halloween poster

I don’t remember the first time I watched John Carpenter’s Halloween. I don’t think I saw it while in high school; it was probably college that found me first seeing it. Whenever it was, I’ve seen it many times since. It has become part of my DNA. I love it deep down in my bones. So I was surprised to realize that I’ve never actually written about it. I’ve written about several of the sequels and the remakes, but never the original. I’ve gotten into the habit over the last several years of watching one of the Halloween movies on Halloween, so I decided it was high time I watched the original on this, the spookiest of evenings, and then finally wrote something about it.

Reading some of my other Halloween reviews, I find that I’ve talked quite a lot about Carpenter’s film and its place in popular culture, so I don’t want to go too heavy in that direction here. Though it is often cited as the first slasher, you can actually go back as far as Psycho and Peeping Tom (both released in 1960) to find films that fit the mold. Italian giallos certainly had a lot of influence over the slasher genre and could even be considered slashers themselves. Technically Black Christmas, a very good slasher itself, was released a few years before Halloween. But it was Carpenter’s film that popularized the genre and solidified the tropes.

While this is true, I would argue that Friday the 13th (1980) truly solidified everything the slasher would become over the remaining decade. Sean S. Cunningham was clearly inspired by Halloween‘s success, and he distilled the Carpenter film down to its very essence. It has a group of sexy teens getting killed off one by one by a blade-wielding maniac. The final girl is virginal and thus pure in the film’s point of view. The killings all stem from something in the killers’ past. Etc. Even the title is taking the holiday premise from Carpenter. Friday the 13th takes the tropes established in Halloween and grinds them down, then exploits the hell out of them. The sex and nudity are more gratuitous, the violence more gore-filled. 

Carpenter is on record stating that the notion that Laurie Strode survives Halloween due to her “purity” was purely accidental. And it’s true, Laurie isn’t some paragon of virtue. We see her smoking in one scene, and she doesn’t seem opposed to drinking or the fact that her friends are screwing their boyfriends at the drop of a hat. Her virginity seems to be more of a product of her own shyness and lack of confidence than any sense of morality. She is a “good girl” in the sense that she tries hard at school and genuinely seems to care about the kids she’s sitting with (unlike one of her friends who constantly yells at her charge and dumps her off at Laurie’s as soon as possible.)

Friday the 13th doubles down on the tropes. Its success led to many more slashers in the ensuing years, and most of them kept the distilled versions of these ideas and codified them.

It is always surprising to me how much Halloween takes its time getting to the killing.  There is a murder in the opening flashback and then a long period of nothing. After a fantastic credit sequence (featuring a beautifully lit jack-o’-lantern and that iconic score), we open in 1963. A long POV shot shows us Michael Myers stabbing his sister to death (after she’s had some sexy fun times with her boyfriend). But the sex is off-screen, and the violence is fairly tame. Even the nudity feels not particularly gratuitous.

Then we move to the present day (1978) and find Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) for some reason driving to the asylum where Michael Myers is kept with a nurse in the middle of the night. Michael has escaped, attacks the nurse, and gets away. Dr. Loomis tracks him to his hometown of Haddonfield, IL. Loomis is our expositional bank. He keeps finding people to talk to about how Michael Myers isn’t human, he’s evil incarnate, he’s an unstoppable killing machine. Intercut with his hunt for Michael, we find Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) going to school and hanging out with her friends Annie (Nancy Loomis) and Lynda (PJ Soles.) They are typical teenagers. They smoke, they drive around town, and they talk about boys. Laurie gets teased because she cares about her grades and she’s shy around boys, but they genuinely seem to like each other.

In the background is Michael Myers. Standing tall, dressed in coveralls with that weird mask on, just stalking them. We’ll see him driving around, following Laurie. He’s standing outside her bedroom window or her classroom or down the road, but then he’ll quickly disappear. Because Loomis is constantly telling us about how evil Myers is, we feel that tension. Even when Laurie is doing something perfectly boring like making popcorn for the little boy she’s sitting, we know Michael is out there, just waiting to kill her. 

The sequels will give Michael Myers a connection to Laurie. This will give him a reason to constantly be coming after her, but in this first film that connection hasn’t been made. His obsession with her is random, and all the more terrifying for it.

When the killings do come, they are fairly tame. There is very little bloodletting or gore. Michael does stab one guy so hard the knife pins him to a wall, and there is another scene in which a body is staged on a bed, and others fall out of closets, but they’d pass a TV edit these days.

But they work because they are so well staged by Carpenter. The way he sets them up and films them, the way he has spent the first 45 minutes setting up Michael Myers as this merciless killer, makes them incredibly effective. Dean Cundey’s cinematography is evocative. A lot of the scenes happen in darkness, but he finds a way to let just enough light in to shine across Michael’s face, or his victims as they flee in terror.

It isn’t a perfect film. There are times when it’s a very small-budget show. You can see some of the seems, but I don’t care. I just love every loving minute of it. It doesn’t get better than Halloween in terms of slashers.

31 Days of Horror: Trick ‘r Treat (2007)

trick r treat poster

Time is a flat circle, but I can’t remember where I put my reading glasses. I look at Trick ‘r Treat, and I see that it came out in 2007, but I can’t place that within my own timeline. It is a film I had not previously watched, but I don’t ‘remember it coming out either. I don’t recall people talking about it back then or me having any desire to watch it. The poster with the kid in a scarecrow outfit is familiar, but that’s about it.

In the years since, I’ve seen it around, but something about it gave me the feeling that I wouldn’t like it, so I’ve always ignored it. I was probably living in China when it came out, and I wasn’t paying much attention to what movies were hitting the theater then (because there weren’t any theaters to go to – that I knew of anyhow), so it probably just came and went without me really knowing it existed. 

For reasons I can’t begin to understand, the film has been popping up in my feed a lot this year. People have been talking about it and mostly saying good things about it, so against my better judgement, I gave it a watch this afternoon. I should have listened to my internal judges. This movie is not good.

It is a movie that, had I watched it at just the right time in my life, (though I’m not sure when that would have been, probably not 2007, for I was far too into J-horror at that moment, but maybe when I was a teenager had I been a teenager in 2007 or if this film had somehow been released in 1993), I would have loved it. I would have considered it dumb, but fun. Now it just seems dumb.

It is an anthology film, and I have to admit from the start that I don’t generally like anthology films. In the same way I don’t like short films or short stories even, anthologies rarely give their individual stories enough time to really tell their tale or develop their characters. They often rely on gags or tricks at the end to punch you with emotion. This one does better than most, interweaving its stories in interesting ways. It bounces back and forth in time, allowing you to see characters that just died in a previous story once again – like Pulp Fiction, only dumber and with more teenaged killing. 

What’s weird is that kid on the cover with the burlap sack on his head, looking like a scarecrow; he feels like our guide, our cryptkeeper to these stories, but he’s not really. Except for the final story, he doesn’t really do anything. At some point during each story, usually at the end, we’ll see him just kind of standing there. At one point I thought he might be a demon, possessing others to do his evil deeds.

Actually, according to Wikipedia, that kid is named Sam, and he is a demon who punishes people for breaking the “rules” of Halloween. I’m not entirely sure what the rules are or how they all broke them. They certainly aren’t explained in any clear way through the film.

But whatever, it doesn’t matter. This is a film that clearly hasn’t spent a lot of time thinking things through or taking itself too seriously. It is a film where a horror hound could take his not fond of scary movies date and still get to make out afterward. It is a film practically designed to watch with a bunch of friends. It has enough violence, jump scares, and just a little bit of gore to satisfy horror hounds, while not making those who are a little more squeamish run away.

Like I said, it is a film that I really would have liked earlier in my life. If you can turn your brain off and not think too hard about it, there is fun to be had in it. I just couldn’t do that. Within fifteen minutes I was annoyed. 

None of the stories are bad. There are some fun kills and some fun allusions to other horror films (I caught nods to Halloween Parts 1 & 2 and A Nightmare on Elm Street 2). But it just didn’t really do it for me. I started to break down all the parts that got on my nerves, the plot points that didn’t make sense, etc., but this is already long. I will say the one segment I did enjoy was the last one with Brian Cox as a crotchety old man, and that was mainly because Brian Cox is awesome.

So, yeah, this was definitely a not for me at this stage of my life kind of film.