Optic Film Screenings

Good horror at its most basic should do one of two things, scare you or disgust you. If you can’t do one then you should exceed at the other. If one film follows this it’s ‘Braindead’, to describe it as scary would be at best a lie. Peter Jackson’s third film won’t scare you but it will disgust you. It’s easily the bloodiest film ever made and anyone who’s seen it will agree and any doubters will be converted by the final scene involving a room full of zombies, a lawnmower and 300 liters of blood.

This isn’t it’s only high point of violence throughout flesh is torn, heads are severed, necks are bitten. “Boring” I hear you cry “this is 2012 we’ve had about a dozen ‘Saw’ and ‘Hostel’ films we can’t be shocked by your crappy early 90’s stuff”. All this will be proved wrong by a fat man eating custard, and a couple of drops of blood. This is where ‘Braindead’ excels and where your newer gore films fail. The little details. Not only is the violence disgusting but so is everyday life, Peter Jackson manages to turn everyday 50’s New Zealand into a grotesque spectacle of repression and repulsive characters. I’m still undecided as to whether the mother being turned into a zombie is an improvement on her character. It’s almost a relief when rabid monkey/rats and zombies turn up, at least the lead Lionel can start to lead a normal life.

 ‘Braindead’ never did great at the cinema and like most films of it type only really got noticed on VHS. Surprisingly the UK was one of the few countries that didn’t cut the film or ban it outright. In truth it’s hard to be genuinely offended by ‘Braindead’, the disgust and violence is extreme but always has an element of fun to it. More ‘Evil Dead’ than ‘Cannibal Holocaust’. The German censors weren’t a fan trimming the film by nearly 10 minutes and for some reason the Americans even changed the title to ‘Dead Alive’ and gave it a really weird cover.  Again I don’t think all that blood helped.

It’s been said a few times and it’s not an argument some people take seriously but I ask again is Peter Jackson best work his early work? His first ‘Bad Taste’ was rough but inventive and ‘Braindead’ is obviously more of the same but better polished. We’re soon to see the huge spectacle of ‘The Hobbit’ which I’m sure will be technically flawless and break all sorts of box office records. Where is the fun? Where are the exploding sheep? Where’s the Kung Fu Priests? He’s refined his skill but is he as entertaining? It’s for you to decide but all I’m saying is there won’t be 300 liters of blood in ‘The Hobbit’.

What’s my name?

He’s made over 180 films most of which are terrible; he shares a name with both a deceased dictator and a deceased son of a god; the pope hates the guy and he’s joint top with Lucio Fulci for most hits in the Video Nastie list.

Who he? You ask.

 Jesus Franco that’s who.

Were not even going to start doing a biography on the guy as we said he’s done over 180 films. Most of them are terrible too, but to be fair to Franco even if one tenth of his output was only average that still means he’s made 18 decent films. Vincent Gallo couldn’t even manage 2. The main point to make is he’s got staying power, put it this way when he started out in film Frankenstein was still scaring the shit out of people. All the trends in horror you can think of he’s been there and done it, perhaps not the best examples but he was still around. People might say were beating on him but the vast majority of his stuff is typical euro trash soft core like ‘Vampiros Lesbos’ which really couldn’t be more 70’s if it tried (soft focus naked ladies with huge bush’s frolic around whilst the bassist from ‘Seinfeld’ has a practice session).  The guys made that much stuff it’s impossible for it all to be good, at one stage he was making 12 films a year not including porn movies he did on the side. He was like Woody Allen on speed. Some people are really into his stuff and try to collect every film he’s ever made. If ever there was a pointless exercise that would be it. Jesus Franco would probably think you’re stupid for doing it. You could just lie and say you’ve got every Jesus Franco film; nobody’s ever going to pull you up about it just in case they have to watch one of the damn things to settle the argument.  How many times can you watch Klaus Kinski pretend to be Jack the ripper anyway?

 The last 20 years haven’t been kind to Franco and most of his output is poor by straight to video standards which is where it inevitably ends up. Again though to be fair to Franco he’s continued making films for the last twenty years and had more output over that period then most directors make in a life time. The devious old bastard even reuses old footage from his better days. The 80’s was the last time he made anything interesting.  

Oh if you were wondering about the pope thing he and Luis Bunel got declared enemies of the catholic church. This was years ago though the current pope (the nazi dude) probably doesn’t give a shit.