Film Reviews by NP

I'm a huge devotee of Jess Franco and will always defend his work. Well, nearly always.

This offering is a dud, sadly. A few familiar faces - Alice Arno, Antonio Mayans, Lina Romay, Paul Muller and Olivier Mathot amongst them - slip and slide in and out of a seemingly endless storyline that goes nowhere. The challenge is keeping engaged with it, a challenge not helped by the distractingly bad dubbing. Something about a private eye, a stripper, some gangsters and Lina and Alice in a continuing state of undress. It seems to have been made up as it goes along, but the insertion of some actors in cameos at various points indicates some apparent level of planning and production. Unfortunately, I didn't know what was going on and was not inspired to find out.

Sorry, Jess. Can't like everything.

Just over ten years before 'Christiane F.' was released, there was a British film called 'Permissive'; both films feature amateur non-actors, a flawed but fascinating central female character, paint a pretty grizzly, drug-fuelled picture of a bygone era, and both are relentlessly grim. The two films could be companion pieces.

Of the two, 'Christiane F.' is the bleakest. What begins as a descent into the unforgiving world of drug use, soon becomes a horrifying and relentless series of self-punishment instigated by the characters; here, everyone is addicted to one thing or another. It's a messy, bloody spiral and first-time Director Uli Edel spares us nothing. No matter how many times a needle is carefully (or not so much) inserted, the wincing effect does not lessen. That these characters, often little more than children, succumb so fully to the casual yet deadly nature of their new pasttime, is heartbreaking to see; their regular half-hearted promises to stop the habit cut no ice with each other or the audience.

Only the parental involvement doesn't ring so true. On the odd occasions Christiane's mother sees her, she seems shocked and oblivious to her daughter's deterioration, despite it being blatantly obvious Christiane has a deadly problem. This doesn't convince. Also, the abruptness of the finale is jarring. Blink and you'll miss the end of the film. After such a build-up of Christiane's plight, we all deserve more of a payoff; it's as if Edel is not interested in any kind of happy ending.

Edel is a hugely effective director, however, often letting the actors and the harrowing events speak for themselves - and what actors they are. Often, real-life users are featured, their fate every bit as precarious as Christiane's.

Natja Brunckhorst is *extraordinarily* good as the titular character. At the time of filming, she was the same age as her character - 13 years old. And yet, in a performance that would never be allowed today, she is frighteningly compelling as the yougster caught up in a true nightmare.

Not an easy film to enjoy, this is nevertheless a showcase for unsophisticated, unglamorous and compelling drama. Is it exploitation, as the late film critic Barry Norman suggested at the time? I can't answer that, but it is a very powerful 138 minutes of anyone's time.

David Bowie boosts 'Christiane F.'s commercial appeal by providing the incidental score (songs that you'll never listen to in the same way again, often taken from his 'Berlin' period) and appearing both in person and as the focus of Christiane's idolisation. My score is 9 out of 10.

The Adams Family (just the one 'D') strikes again. Everything we see here is what they have created - as Zelda Adams has said in interviews, one minute they're deciding what groceries to buy, the next, they're planning on shooting another scene for their latest melancholy horror project.

The results are highly individual and absolutely have no need for a higher budget. Unsettling atmospherics are bled from the weather and locations, all shot in the most immersive way - directed, naturally, by Zelda, John Adams and Toby Poser.

This won't be to everyone's tastes. Even I have to admit I felt things drag a little (perhaps pruning ten minutes from the running time would have helped), but ultimately, I had a wonderful time with this story, which flirts with possession, reincarnation, losing one's mind and life beyond death. The acting is great, but so is the cold, uncompromising small-town location.

I liked that nothing is over-explained. I like that there is no real closure, just the suggestion of a continuation of events, and the irony of the fate of the antagonist. It's not happy, but it's not quite sad either - just strange and unnerving. My score is 9 out of 10.

Some complain about there being too many Dracula films released recently. Some complain about anything. If you happen to like horror, this is a golden time for the old Count.

Hot on the heels of 2024’s mighty Nosferatu, a superb production in which the only weak link was the depiction of the titular character, there’s this French-produced epic. As the title suggests, Dracula: A Love Tale concentrates on the more romantic nature of draining young people of their lifeblood, much as Francis Ford Coppola’s overblown Dracula 1992 film did; and that’s not the only similarity between the productions. The look of Caleb Landry Jones’ main character, both young and ancient, is similar too Gary Oldman’s version, as is his brooding ancestral castle. However, whereas Coppola’s film was unnecessarily overblown and – strangely, considering the star-studded cast – very poorly acted in places, A Love Tale features exemplary performances and just the right mix of spectacle and effects. A wronged monster in search of a reincarnated long-lost love was never exclusive to Coppola anyway – the Mummy films have been doing it since the 1940s.

There are no bloodsucking bats here. Instead, we have living CGI gargoyles. They’re impressive mostly, but as a new addition to vampire lore, they’re bizarre. Only in the finale do they assume an air of reality and even poignancy. Humour – not a comforting bedfellow of bloodsuckers – runs a vein through proceedings, and not unsuccessfully. More subjective even than horror, comedy is a risky thing to include, but it is morbid and dry enough to impress me, and I’m extremely hard to please. Jonathan Harker, here, comes across as rather clumsy and oafish – he then becomes a thorn in Dracula’s side at a time when the story invites us to empathise with the vampire. It all works surprisingly well.

I thoroughly enjoyed this and recommend it as a welcome addition to the huge amount of Dracula variations already available to feast upon. Of the impressive actors, Landry Jones is consistent and compelling: not a typical Drac figure, but unusual and very watchable. Zoë Bleu is idiosyncratic and wonderful as Mina, a character who never catches a break. My favourite performer might well be Matilda De Angelis as the flamboyant Maria; her first scene as the captured vampire is exquisitely played in particular – a mix of feral defiance, seduction, playfulness and angst as she is reminded that at this stage of the tale, she is entirely at the mercy of the ‘good guys’. As is sometimes the case, the antagonists are so fascinating and extravagant that those on the side of good are comparatively bland.

A terrific take on the Bram Stoker favourite.

My score is 9 out of 10.

Robert Eggars has proven a divisive director. Some hail him as a true visionary whereas others, myself included, often find little to enjoy in his often overblown, over-produced films. My favourite up until now, has been 2015’s ‘The VVitch’ – his others have left me pretty cold. Eggars expressed an interest in adapting ‘Nosferatu’ many years ago, and I enjoyed the results a lot.

From his impressive build-up, swathed in dark shadow, Bill Skarsgård as Nosferatu is the film’s weakest link. As played by Max Schreck and Klaus Kinski before him, Nosferatu was always a very physical performance, and displayed odd, often lizard-like mannerisms via eccentric contortions of the body. This version is so bunged up with prosthetics, often utilising a full body suit, that there’s very little natural (or unnatural) physicality on display. Therefore, our vampire here is very static and brooding, relying mainly on the face to accentuate the strangeness vital to any blood-sucker; even that is a prosthetic that surprisingly doesn’t include the trademark rat-like ears or pointed incisors. To that end, the titular character is more of an effect than a character, albeit in impressive one. Unlike earlier unearthly vampires, this thin-nosed, heavily moustachioed incarnation looks like a malevolent geography teacher.

To me, the film belongs to Lily-Rose Depp. Her playing of Elen Hutter requires several varied extremes of emotion, and she is utterly convincing playing them all. As far as I can tell, her performance is mostly natural and unencumbered by much in the way of effects work.

The score, by Robin Carolan, is standard for a horror film – lots of doomy, swirling strings and jump-scares. It’s bombastic and adds weight to some more frightening scenes, but is never a character in its own right like Popol Vuh’s extraordinary music for Werner Herzog’s 1979 film.

I’ve been honest in my criticisms here, but it is my favourite Robert Eggers film by far, and has clearly been a labour of love for him. Everything about the production shines – the locations are immersive stunning, the CGI work subtle and natural looking and the thinned-down colours (cold, cold blues and warming reds) are a skilful homage, it seems, to the monochrome original. It just surprises me that Eggar has chosen to deviate from the more traditional look of Count Orlok.

This plays as a Polish fusion of David Lynch and Guillermo del Toro; it starts weird and stays there. The ending succeeds in being quite touching despite the bizarre run of events leading up to it, but the one-note eccentricities and the endless musical pieces soon become a series of more of the same unorthodox story-telling – although the soundtrack is very good.

Robert Bolesto’s plot is adult fairy-tale and wafer-thin, but as is the way with art films of this nature, the visuals and the direction are key; Agnieszka Smoczynska ensures the production looks lavish and epic throughout. Set in the 1980’s, it’s a real case of style over content – events rarely draw you in, but are pleasing on a superficial scale. My score is 6 out of 10.

Very much in the style of its time, this 1972 production – very much in the style of a TV Movie although it did have a cinematic release – features Patty Duke as Francesca, a very appealing lead and Rosemary Murphy as the dreaded mother-in-law. Richard Thomas, famous as John-Boy from wholesome American TV series ‘The Waltons’ is effective as Kenny. Completing the quartet of central actors is familiar ‘70s television actor Sian Barbara Allen as Kathleen. What a family they turn out to be.

The story is a somewhat silly one, and it’s difficult to explain why without including spoilers. That Francesca is heavily pregnant from the outset is a strong indicator that a baby will feature somewhere in this story. It’s the infant’s implausibly exemplary behaviour that allows the tale to roll on and remains a major stumbling point in going along with it.

But it’s worth your time. The acting is terrific, and the production displays much of the style of television drama we really don’t see these days. My score is 7 out of 10.

You may think your Blu-ray has skipped to the halfway mark of this zippy and atmospheric Mexican horror film, for the first scene dives headlong into a sea of horrors involving a blank-eyed woman and her violent ward who set upon a group of travellers. After the credits have rolled, we only then focus on the origins of the characters, all shot in splendidly stark monochrome.

The story is simple. Married couple Amelia (Rosita Arenas) and Jaime (Abel Salazar) travel to a vast country house owned by Selma (Rita Macedo), Amelia’s aunt. Selma is a witch who uses the couple to resurrect ‘la Llorona’ (the crying woman). That’s all you need to know.

This is a good, solid, spooky film, very carefully made and impressive, especially for its time. Horror and destruction come to an impressively realised head toward the climactic moments, and director Rafael Baledón is in no rush to spare the audience a moment. My score is 7 out of 10.

This 1970 film is one of many from that period I have only just got around to seeing. On reflection, there’s a chance I might have watched it a few years ago and put it out of my mind. It’s a meandering, overlong, frequently incomprehensible, disjointed jumble with one saving grace – Alfred Marks as Detective Supt. Bellaver.

Apparently, Marks added a few ad-libs throughout many of his scenes, raising the interest level with his witticisms. Probably better remembered as a comedian, he steals the show here, his character providing the glue that brings the many varied set pieces together. Despite this, it’s near impossible to get swept up in this.

Securing the talents of Vincent Price, Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and various other well-known faces, the characters they play only feature sporadically, as if they were only available for a day or so for shooting.

Although it has its moments, I can’t really recommend this. It’s a time-filler rather than delivering the goods and puts me in mind of the hastily made ‘Doctor Phibes Rises Again’ from a couple of years later. The thread running through this barely qualifies as a storyline and, despite Marks, seems to last a lot longer than its 95-minute runtime.

Olivia (played by Holly Kenney, who also wrote this) and her friends go on vacation, mainly to allow Olivia some respite after an apparent suicide attempt. They’re a fairly likeable bunch, although liable to be annoying from time to time, but they mean well. The problem is, that although her friends think she tried to end her own life, Olivia believes someone attacked her.

This is a fairly low-budget venture. It doesn’t try to revolutionise cinema as we know it. It does, however, present a solid and mainly well-played thriller/horror, with some convincing moments of jeopardy and a nice, subtly signposted twist at the end. Kenney is talented both as a writer and an actress; Adam Newacheck impresses as director too – there are some nice scene-setting flourishes and the tension is certainly ramped up.

Once again, there are several online reviews attacking this film for not being a higher-budgeted venture, which is a depressingly common occurrence. I’m not sure what some people want from a film that hasn’t had multi-million dollars spent on it. I had a great time with ‘Stranger in the Woods’, and my score is 7 out of 10.

John Le Care’s not-so-simple love story concerns washed-up writer/publisher Barley Blair and Russian book editor Katya Orlova, set amidst a backdrop of political types falling over themselves to double-cross each other. When you have a cast of this calibre, it’s difficult initially to separate well-known actors such as Sean Connery and Michele Pfeiffer from the characters – but the performances ensure that doesn’t last long.

Fred Schepisi’s adaption is a languid affair. There could be more tension here, but ultimately, the story shines through. What emerges is a gradually heart-warming production set amidst magnificent but grey surroundings. It’s impossible to resist the two leads, and the ever-flustered officials tracking their every move (including Roy Scheider, Ken Russell, Martin Clunes and John Mahoney) are compelling in lesser roles. Two disheartened human beings amid the machinations of cold manipulation – irresistible.

Pfeiffer has a scene – possibly a contractual obligation – where she is in full glamorous make-up and looks customarily stunning; for me, she works better when Orlova is dressed down and unassuming, because the character is more real, and it is easier to appreciate her actual acting.

My previous and first experience of this story is a 1995 audio version, produced for BBC Radio 4, starring Tom Baker and Valentina Yakunina, which is excellent. Of the two (different) endings, I prefer this filmed version. My score is 9 out of 10.

This sumptuous film has received mixed reviews. The grievances viewers have is that it is set up as a horror film and fails to deliver. I’d respectfully disagree. I think it delivers in spades, but not in jump scares or special effects, but in atmosphere, and the crushing desperation of loneliness.

I can understand why some have been frustrated by this – the location, atmosphere, and superbly cold direction have all the hallmarks of a horror film, but it’s much more about the relationship between a mother and daughter, both played by the wonderful Tilda Swindon. I adored this.

I’ll go further - so low-key is the production, I almost feel as if the twist at the end is too obvious. But it’s beautifully done, and again, the acting shines.

The small cast is laden with superlative performances, especially from Carly-Sophia Davies as the abrasive and apparently tactless unnamed Hotel Receptionist. Louis the dog is top-billed Tilda Swinton’s dog.

A lot is happening in this Jess Franco film. Set in an unnamed vicinity, Dennis Price (in his final film for Franco, and looking sun-burnt but looking healthier than he had in Franco’s two recent Frankenstein films) plays lawyer L'avocat Linsday, who – describing himself as aged and alcoholic – discovers that a young couple has been unfairly convicted of murder. He is told of this injustice by former governor Mendoza (Jean Guedes); travelling to the austere and corrupt institution in which they are being held, he attempts to sort the matter out.

Although this is primarily a ‘women in prison’ drama, the incarceration element only makes up part of the story. Naturally, such scenes are wonderfully bleak and adorned with much wailing and sobbing. Apart from Price, other Franco regulars on hand are a suitably cruel-looking Luis Barboo as Lenz, the always brilliant Howard Vernon as Colonel Ford, and Anne Libert, who had been so effective as bizarre bird-woman Melisa in ‘The Erotic Rites of Frankenstein’ is reduced to an unnamed thumb-sucking peripheral prisoner. I believe this is also her final film for Franco.

Usual humiliations, often involving fighting, torture and cruelty ensue. Raymond (Andrés Resino) and Beatriz (Geneviève Robert), the two lovers of the title, are each led to believe their partner is dead. Beatriz’s naïve goodness puts her at loggerheads with the other inmates, whereas Raymond flirts with exhaustion and near death as his work pattern becomes intolerable. There’s a pretty twisted love angle involving Raymond’s affair with his godmother Emilia (Danielle Godet), which fuels her vendetta against Beatriz, whom Governor Mendoza desires. Have you got all that?

Having established Raymond and Beatriz’s incarceration as a cruel injustice, Franco’s script doesn’t seem concerned with any urgency regarding Lindsay’s mission in getting them released. Instead, we dwell more on the actions and interactions of the characters, which exploits the various layers of occasionally pantomime sadism that is part of the routine (incongruously involving a laser gun at one point). The finale is as low-key as you could imagine and appallingly effective. The last shot we see is of Price’s face, crumpled with disgust as he turns and walks away. Price, who died the year this film was released, is in fine form here. His performances in Franco’s more bizarre films were heightened accordingly, but here, he reminds us he still has the talent that made him one of the most popular performers at the earlier stage of his career. Here’s to you, Dennis.

Interestingly, the other version of this film, known as ‘Quarter des femmes’ rejects the flashback sequences and inserts instead scenes of extra sex and cruelty, in which Libert enjoys her most substantial scene. It also adds a little extra to Lindsay’s final departure, which ends this version of the film less abruptly than the version more widely available.

It’s a familiar story. Not this tale of Tony, who is apparently mentally handicapped, and his mother Mudi (Maud de Belleroche) and friends’ attempts to rid him of his virginity, amidst exotic, sun-kissed locations. I mean the story of a film with a certain reputation presumed lost – or woefully incomplete – found and meticulously reconstructed, proving to be … mostly unspectacular.

Not since Godzilla trudged out of the water to confront a shabby Japanese King Kong back in 1962 have two more mighty icons shared screen time. Seeing two giants of giallo films – Rosalba Neri (Paola) and Edwige Fenech (Ulla) – appearing together is an almost surreal scene, and it is this pairing that probably ensures interest in ‘Top Sensation’. The result spends vast amounts of its running time exploring the tremendous environment and the equally tremendous star players.

Visually, it is great. The locations are incredible and lend themselves entirely to the casual paradise in which these rich layabouts live their lives. Fenech and Neri are masters of their craft: naturally beautiful and exuding casual confidence and a sense of presence, it is a pity this is the only time they are billed together. There’s a scene featuring Fenech and a goat that is as mind-boggling as it sounds.

Mudi is pretty fixated on her son’s plight, going to the lengths of implanting hidden cameras in the yacht and copping off with Paola’s husband Aldo (Maurizio Bonuglia). The stinger here is that Tony, despite being surrounded by such wanton temptation, falls for uncorrupted local farm girl Beba (Ewa Thulin). Only then do events turn particularly strange and nasty, and the shift from mild sex-romp to drama becomes apparent. This interesting development almost feels tacked on, it arrives so late but is still very effective and unexpected.

The final scene leaves things open-ended but fairly gloomy, which is a good contrast to the sunny, carefree hi-jinks earlier on.

This remains a curious horror piece. After watching, it impresses as a fairly gruelling, mean-spirited showcase from director/writer Brian Bertino – but when you are actually watching, it is apparent that not a lot happens.

Liv Tyler and Scott Speedman play Kristen and James, an inexplicably annoying couple who are both awkward and unhappy when we first meet them (Kristen has just turned down James’ wedding proposal). A small group of nameless masked characters invade their home and subject them to torture. That fills the 85-minute runtime.

Locations are all bathed in a uniform washed-out beige throughout, making the film a rather bland affair visually. Kristen is sullen and needy, while James does everything with a swagger, and I found it hard to warm to them. His friend, equally self-assured Mike (Glenn Howerton) joins the luckless ensemble for a time.

We get to know nothing about the aggressors, which is fine, not even what they really look like. “Next time will be easier,” they say toward the climax, and that’s as much explanation as we get.

Thinking back over the film as the final credits roll, I found that I quite enjoyed ‘The Strangers’, and I can’t quite work out why. It’s slickly made and features some moderately gory moments, but doesn’t do anything other home invasion films haven’t done. It became a sleeper hit and earned a sequel ‘Prey at Night’ ten years later and a film trilogy that began in 2024.