User Reviews

A young man returns to his home city of Pittsburgh and moves in with an older woman whom he begins to rely on for emotional and financial support.

Following the international success of George Romero's "Night of the Living Dead", it was only a matter of time before Romero and his production company (Latent Image) made a follow-up. Though, as Romero would later concede, "Vanilla" is the worst film of his career and not surprisingly was never released on VHS and thus rarely seen before the DVD era.

Latent Image, which involved most of the people from "night", was largely doing commercial work, as well as some segments of "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood". The profits from "Night" should have made Romero and friends millionaires and kicked off huge Hollywood careers, but as we know today, the distributor botched the copyright and the millions in profits never mad it back to the filmmakers. Thus, Latent Image continued on as a low-budget production company rather than the sought-after company it should have been.

"Vanilla" was a miserable experience for all involved. Rudy Ricci never finished the script by the time shooting began, dragging what should have been four weeks to over a year of filming. Ultimately, the "finished" product did not even amount to feature-length and the Ray Laine monologues had to be tagged on after the fact. (Ricci played an important role in "Night"; he was college roommates with Romero in 1957 and introduced Romero to Russo, thus uniting the two primary figures behind "Night".) Although Romero more or less disowned this film, he is largely responsible for it. Not only the director, he worked as his own cinematographer and editor. Writing came from Rudy Ricci (as mentioned) expanding on a short film he penned, with production officially handled by "Night" veterans John Russo and Russ Streiner. Tackling the score was Steve Gorn.

Bill Hinzman, George Kosana and Judith Ridley (wife of Russ Streiner) are in the cast, as they had been in "Night". Hinzman would handle much work for Romero both behind and in front of the camera as the years went on. Others, such as assistant cameraman Paul McCollough went with Russo following the Romero-Russo split. McCollough would be editor and composer for much of Russo's work between 1976 and 1996.

Originally distributed (poorly) by Cambist Films, it was later picked up by Anchor Bay on DVD, tacked on as a bonus feature to "Season the Witch". In 2017, we finally get a proper Blu-ray release through Arrow Video. A cleaner picture obviously does not magically turn a bad film into a good one, but thanks to the audio commentary and special features (including a 30-minute making-of with Russo and Streiner), we get an in-depth look at the world of Romero and Latent Image. Like it or not, this film is the bridge between "Night of the Living Dead" and Romero's later work, thus making it a crucial watch for any student of his films.

Well, it's obvious that Romero has talent outside of the limited confines of a single farmhouse in the remote inner country of Pennsylvania, but he's also entirely reliant on a script being written for him to apply that skills effectively. The script by Rudolph Ricci is a half-formed idea about the younger generation wanting more and the idea of settling (the title comes from a line late in the film), but characterization is way too thin, it meanders for long stretches, and the final point isn't really supported by much of what came before it. Performances aren't great, but Romero's camera is allowed interesting compositions from time to time while the finale's efforts to bring everything together (what little there is) feels genuine, if empty.

Chris (Raymond Laine) is something of a drifter who comes to Pittsburgh, near his parent's house, just because he kind of wants to. He meets with an old flame at a strip club, Terri (Johanna Lawrence), who tells him that she has a kid that may be his. He also brought his dad, Roger (Roger McGovern) along. At the same time, the movie introduces us to Lynn (Judith Streiner), a model and star of local commercials who is dealing with the end of a relationship. The movie takes a little bit of time to establish these two away from each other, and it's a surprisingly decent effort. It's just the beginning of creating characters, but they're distinctive enough in their broad strokes that it feels like the movie may be going somewhere.

They meet in a bit of a meet cute where she accidentally hits him with a bus station turnstile. She takes him home. They immediately have unprotected sex. He moves in, and that's kind of it for at least half an hour. They mill about. There's some talk about how she might be pregnant. He decides that he wants to write a book. It honestly just meanders around no place for a while. There's a line when Chris is describing what his book is supposed to be about. It's about everything, and nothing. It's a book! That was pretty much what I was thinking a good description of the film could be. After an opening that showed some decent skill and potential, it had just fallen into the squalor of showing "real" stuff.

Romero went on to say that this was his worst film (I still haven't seen his final two dead films, so we'll see if I agree), and he laid blame on the writer, Ricci, abandoning the project part of the way through, not allowing them any rewrites. It would surprise me none at all if much of this film was purely improvised, it feels so loose and pointless.

Chris ends up deciding to get a job, using Lynn's father's name as a reference (did people just not check references in the 70s? I dunno), and getting a job as a copywriter for an advertising firm. He holds it for about a day before quitting because he can't take the monotony and being tied down (though he's been tied down with Lynn for three months by this point, but whatever). She's feeling frustrated because his frustrations are building up on her, and she decides to go and take part in a medical procedure that must be done through back alleys and such.

Now, Romero didn't have a whole lot of ground to play creatively with visually (emphasis on editing more than extreme compositions). I get the sense that it was a bigger, more complicated production than Night of the Living Dead, using far more locations, implying a more ambitious film which, when combined with the need to economize and use less film and time, probably meant that he had less time to try new things. He needed to operate efficiently. That comes out reasonably well with a decently looking picture that even allows for good application of longer takes in some conversations. He manages the shoe-string production well, even if the script is simply too wane to carry much interest.

The one place where Romero gets to shine is near the end with a montage of Chris sitting in the apartment and Lynn going to the procedure that's surprisingly taut. It's good stuff even if, again, it's not really supported by much narratively because the characters are so thin.

So, it's not good. It's really not. The script is mostly a non-entity with actors left largely flagging in the wind, looking for something to do while Romero can't give them much. However, the opening is decent, is finely shot, and Romero gets to flex once late. It's really not good, but it's not completely terrible. There are a couple of small bright spots, and everything in between is more just dull rather than bad.

This film reminded me of nothing so much as a John Cassavettes movie. Yes, I mean that as the sincerest of compliments, but whether or not you like it will probably depend upon your feelings about ol' John C. He's a controversial figure even twenty years after his death.

Anyway, despite the video notes from Something Weird, Ray Laine looks and acts just like Russell Crowe. It's almost frightening. While Judith Ridley (here billed as Streiner) is just as lovely as ever and, surprisingly enough in light of her unimpressive turn in "Night of the Living Dead," can actually act.

Okay, so the flick is full of standard issue seventies lingo and some of the most godawful fashion statements since Mrs. Roper, but the writing and direction make up for it. Romero's editing and shot compositions are, perhaps, the best I've seen from him to date. It is odd that George should have excised this piece of work so completely from his opus. Despite its timeliness, it is actually a very accomplished film. The dialogue is crisp and witty. The performances are well delivered across the board. I truly didn't have a problem in the world with this little diamond in the rough. I admit that a few scenes within the first third of the picture were just a bit gag inducing. (Why is it that all these "Love Stories" have to feature a musical montage of the two doe-eyed young lovers going to a play ground, going on a picnic, eating ice cream, etc.?) The final third of the film, as the relationship hits the rocks, however, more than makes up for it with moments truly disturbing. The abortionist sequence in particular was everything I expected it to be and then some. Without resorting to hard core gore or exploitation techniques, Romero manages to provide a real wince inducing air of suspense and danger that will probably be remembered long after the cutesy-poo stuff is forgotten.

All in all, I must say that Romero needs to take stock of his film output over the last few years. Is "There's Always Vanilla" perfect? No, of course not. Is it worlds better than the drek Georgie-Boy's been churning out ever since "Creepshow"? Absolutely! If I were him, I'd bring back "TAV" on a deluxe package DVD replete with audio commentary and plenty of extras and start issuing some damning (or, at least, distancing) statements about "Monkey Shines", "Two Evil Eyes" and "The Dark Half."

Movie Fun: Try and spot all the actors from "Night of the Living Dead" that also made their way into this film. Something Weird Video helpfully points out Ridley (of course) as well as the first ghoul in the cemetery and Judith's husband (Mr. "They're coming to get you, Barbara!") I also found the sheriff lurking here as the abortionist's front man. His turn makes his "Good shot!" comment from "NotLD" seem positively Alan-Alda sensitive. I'm sure there are more familiar faces to be found, but they'll have to wait for repeat viewings.

Low budget and extremely dated. The only reason to watch this is so that you can say you've seen all of George Romero's movies. It's a totally uninteresting time capsule. It's feels like an hour and a half long student film and about as much fun.

Oh the days when independent films were made and sometimes barely ever seen. That still happens to this day, but at least now there's DVD (matter of fact that was the only way I could get to see There's Always Vanilla- it's next to impossible to find on bootleg). In 1970/1971, George A. Romero and the Latent Image, his production company that previously established itself big-time with Night of the Living Dead, decided to go a more romantic/dramatic route, as there seemed to be a possible small market for it.

Unfortunately, the scriptwriter, Rudy Ricci, was haphazard and scatter-shot with his contributions, and the script was never finished until the end of filming (it came to the filmmakers scene by scene), so even though there are characters to get interested in as a 'character study', Chris Bradley and Lynn Harris (Ray Lane and Judith Streiner respectively), sometimes the dialog and situations become contrived. The main thrust of the story comes from Lynn's relationship to Chris, as Chris is a sort of man-child, who comes into her life suddenly one day after abandoning an older women he may or may not have fathered a kid with, and somehow through his constant sarcasm and lackadaisical charm that gets her into bed. But Chris, as we soon finds out, uses the wit and charms and occasional obnoxious means of talk to mask insecurities. He doesn't work, and when the opportunity comes he backs out. It all leads up to his father relaying a 'meaning': there's always vanilla.

It's not totally incomprehensible to see why Romero, on an interview featured on the DVD, is completely assured with his feelings that it was a low-point in his career where he tried to gain more experience as a filmmaker and fell flat on his face. There is that side to the picture that is unequivocally dated, and the lack of a better budget or a means to a better structure (particularly an ending that feels complete or make sense) is frustrating. But a filmmaker sometimes has to feel that way about certain films, as the experience making it becomes a personal struggle whereas other times it could become a personal triumph (he still considers Day of the Dead a favorite, mostly for the experience making it).

Ironically though it's his own skills as a director and editor and director of photography that rises the material to a level of watchability. It's no Cassavetes- as another reviewer noted- but he treats the material with a control that wavers between late 60s early 70s exploitation film-making (of the period, of course, with some scenes with psychedelia bits and music and pot), and a more grounded tone for the actors to follow. And sometimes Romero's given by Ricci a compelling scene to shoot, like when Lynn has to deal with a certain 'problem' she may need to take care of, but decides at the last moment to run away from it.

Or, of course, when Romero cuts the scenes together, sometimes around Chris's confessions to the audience about his mistakes and own feelings at certain times, which pop in at a good rhythm. Or the way he doesn't putz around with montage- often a high-quality trademark in Romero films- even when dealing with schmaltzy scenes like the quasi courtship of Chris and Lynn in a park or on a boat (I also really liked the one liners each character traded off on one another in the park- marking the shallowness of the period). And the actors do bring qualities of believability to scenes that somehow work almost in spite of the flaws in the material; Laine is actually charming and affable, carrying over similar qualities from the next collaboration with Romero in Season of the Witch, and Streiner is even better here than she was in 'Living Dead', as a woman who has to contend with being the mature one in a relationship where a falsity to it rings true almost every day.

By the time one sees those balloons fly out of the cardboard box to the cheesy singing (and usually there is cheesy music here), it's clear that this isn't Romero's finest dip into a change of pace. But even in a miscalculation there are intriguing, humorous notes touched on, and that no matter what Romero can somehow be pragmatic with his material, and chooses experimental angles in an otherwise typical low-budget effort.

And I don't just mean the movie here. Though I guess I'm quite biased towards George Romero, so make of that what you will. But back to this, the second feature film effort and often times regarded as one of the lost films between Night of the living Dead and Dawn of the Dead. There only seemed to be two (this and another one called Jacks Wife by Romero, but many other titles by others, more on that on its own page), but recently another lost movie has surfaced and everything seems to point that it will be a gem and then some.

But back to this, a movie Romero himself may not have been too happy with the end result overall, but while this has flaws it also shows that he could do more than just horror. This attempt at a romantic movie is testament to that. Really good performances overall and an intriguing story (even if some themes became almost obselete a couple of years later). For all fans Romero and those who like their dramas to be weird. Not an instant classic, but more than decent

It's the only film he created that has no otherworldly elements. Instead, it's very much a view of America — and Pittsburgh, Romero's adoptive hometown — at the start of the 1970s. While Vietnam and the looming Watergate scandal would erode the nation's trust that the world would remain bright and cheerful and expected, Western Pennsylvania always had certainty in the face of uncertainty — surely the mills and mines of our region would constantly offer work, so even after the military was done with you or college didn't fulfill you, you could always come back home, always find a job that paid more than well. I personally remember tales in grade school of the holiday parties for the kids of mill workers — every boy got a train set, every girl an Easy-Bake oven. My grandfather put forty plus years into the blast furnace; his friends all worked there or in other mills, gathered around the bar drinking Pabst or Iron City, telling tale of dealing with foremen or how much they could make off a double or triple shift.

There's more of this erosion to come in Romero's work as the 1970s go on in Season of the Witch and particularly Martin, which is a grisly reminder of how it only took eight years to make the Steel City look like the end of the world.

Also known as The Affair, Romero would say that this film was a "total mess" and that the budget hampered what could have been a better film. He's also claimed that the writer was lazy and left halfway through the process of making the movie. Much like the aforementioned Witch, it concerns how women's roles are changing in society, from providing emotional and monetary support to finally realizing — again in Witch — that their predestined roles are fading away, perhaps never to return.

Vanilla opens on some art that likens America to a machine, as well as the comments of local citizens as they walk past. The gray, dark skies of Pittsburgh — a marked contrast to the post-industrial age clean skies we enjoy now — is noticeable. We meet Chris Bradley, a soldier who's had a variety of jobs, from pimp to guitar player. He feels like he's lost the ability to think from all the noise of rock and roll music, so he's going back home to Pittsburgh.

Read more at http://bit.ly/2l2xIIU

There's Always Vanilla tells the story of Chris, who has recently returned home after serving in the Army in Vietnam. He doesn't have a steady job, instead making money by playing guitar on other people's records and through a variety of other implied methods, eventually moving into the apartment of a young woman he meets and mooching off of her while he tries his hand at writing. His father offers him a secure "vanilla" job at his factory, but Chris rejects the offer as it doesn't suit his lifestyle.

There's not much new and exciting in this film. For the most part, it's all stuff we've already seen a thousand times before. The director, George Romero, called it his worst film, and it is often overlooked even by fans of his work. I would argue, however, that it is well worth watching for two reasons: the dialogue and the lead actor, Ray Laine.

Laine, who plays the sarcastic, apathetic Chris in one of his few film roles, delivers a fun, memorable performance. His acting is leaps and bounds ahead of the other cast members', and even if this film isn't fresh and original, his performance is. The film is never boring and the reason for that is Ray Laine, who dominates almost every scene.

It's hard not to like the character he brings to life and his dry humor and constant sarcasm, even if we almost never agree with his selfish actions and motivations. I must say, however, that the performance is a bit spotty and drags at times, but for the most part it is solid.

Similarly, the dialogue is almost always unrivaled, especially when it comes to nearly every single one of Laine's lines. He delivers most of them flawlessly and nearly all of them are extremely quotable, hilarious, or otherwise memorable. Several of the other characters have some great lines too.

One particularly memorable moment is when Chris appears at his girlfriend's apartment long after she's kicked him out. She asks him what he wants. She wants to know why he's come to bother her and he knows that that's what she's asking, but instead of answering that question he simply shrugs and replies: "A peanut butter sandwich." This film is by no means a masterpiece, but it is entertaining at the very least and watching it would not be a waste of time. And if you're in the mood for a fun, cheesy 70's B movie, you just might end up loving it. Sure, we've seen this same old story a hundred times before, but rarely, if ever, has it come packaged with the wonderful performance and brilliant dialogue found in There's Always Vanilla.

There's Always Vanilla (1971) was a film that I saw a few years ago at a local video store. I was intrigued by the title and the clerk told me it was George A. Romero that was rarely seen. I felt at first that I've give it a try and scan it. I was surprised how good the movie was. Ray Laine is great as the lead in this movie. Judith Streiner (Ridley) plays the model/actress that he falls for with cameos by Russ Streiner, Bill Hinzmen and Richard France. I liked how Ray Laine's character addresses the camera giving the audience a insight into his life and times. Romero's camera work, direction and editing are real good in this flick. I enjoyed the social commentary and the ending. I thought it would be a snooze fest but once again Romero proved me wrong.

The title refers to a line in the movie that Laine's father tells him when he sees him for advice. The actor who plays his father is also great. Try and get a hold of it!!

Highly recommended.

George A. Romeros' follow-up to his legendary zombie film "Night of the Living Dead" is, according to the filmmaker himself, his all-time worst. But this viewer found some merit in it. It's certainly not as bad as some of the later entries in Romeros' "Living Dead" series. It's of some value as a curio, although it might not appeal to rabid horror fans who love some of Romeros' other work.

It's basically a romantic drama with a sense of humour, and a time capsule that takes a look at attitudes and morals in the early 1970s. Raymond Laine, who also appeared in Romeros' next film, "Season of the Witch", stars as Chris Bradley, an easygoing dropout who doesn't really know what he wants to do in life and doesn't much care. He enters into a relationship with Lynn Harris (Judith Ridley, in her only other film role besides Judy in "Night of the Living Dead"), a beautiful model and commercial actress. His approach to life is refreshing to her at first, but his essential lack of seriousness is troubling.

Laine, who also talks straight to the camera, offering Chris' thoughts on what went wrong in the relationship, is engaging. The character could be seen as smug and obnoxious, but he does also have some charisma going for him. Ridley is quite watchable, if not as talented on the acting front. The largely no-name cast of Pennsylvania natives is good in support, including Roger McGovern as Chris' dad and Johanna Lawrence as Chris' ex-girlfriend, who has a son that might have been fathered by Chris. S. William Hinzman, the memorable cemetery zombie of NotLD, appears as a drunken barfly.

The eclectic soundtrack is a mixture of styles, and adds some appeal to this interesting outing for Romero. It does feature some pointed and provocative dialogue as people ruminate on subjects like life goals and the essentials of advertising (an appropriate topic, since the filmmaker had started out doing commercials in addition to short films before gathering together the funds to do NotLD).

This viewer wouldn't consider this a great film by any means, but it is quite watchable, and completists will definitely want to give it a look.

Seven out of 10.

There's Always Vanilla (AKA: The Affair) (1971) was the first of George A. Romero's films after Night of the Living Dead (1968) and probably the least seen. I guess after making Night... Romero feared being pegged as a horror film director and launched himself after the release of Night with this Graduate-type romantic drama, written by his associate Rudi Ricci. But sadly it's not one of his best, and it's quite obvious that the director's heart just wasn't in making it. It does not exist on video or DVD, only on crude bootlegged VHS copies here and there.

As for the plot, it could have been better if done on a higher budget. It opens with a guy named Chris Bradley (Ray Laine who appeared in Jack's Wife (AKA: Season of the Witch)) who returns to his home city in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania a year or more after his discharge from the U.S. Army and serving a tour in Vietnam. Chris has drifted from town to town, and city to city making money from playing his guitar in bars, to pimping for prostitutes. Chris' stern but benevolent father (Roger McGovern) wants him to abandon his new lifestyle and return to the family business of making baby food in a local factory which Mr. Bradley owns. But Chris refuses, wanting to make a new life for himself. On the street, Chris meets a beautiful young woman named Lynn (Judith Steiner) whom is about 10 years older than him and makes a living by modeling in local TV commercials. Chris charms Lynn into letting him move in with her.

For a time, Chris and Lynn's relationship is good with both of them sharing their love of of lovemaking, pot smoking, and rock and roll music. But she is supporting both of them as he plans to write a book based on his life, whereas he just lays around doing nothing. She motivates him to get a steady job and he lands one in a small advertising agency, which he grows not to like it with each passing day. Then Lynn finds out that she's pregnant and keeps the news from Chris knowing that despite his wits and charm, he is not responsible to be a father or a husband to her and her unborn baby. For the rest of the film, it does downhill from there and for Chris heading towards ruin and misery.

If it was restored by Anchor Bay or Blue Underground, it would be an interesting look at late 1960's early 1970's life with lusuous visuals (the grainy color of the aging VHS tapes is the disadvantage). Sad to say that even Romero himself disavowed this film for its not all bad despite the bleak storyline. I hope one day, someone will restore this movie for the public to once again view for themselves.

If you can even get the chance to see this one, you'll be riveted and at the same time shocked at how bloody awful it is! The makers of "Night of the Living Dead" take a stab at early '70s sexually-liberated cool and end up in jaw-dropping oh-my-god-what-the-hell-were-they-thinking territory. Highly recommended.

This film is not as good as not of the living dead but it still has it's merit if not just for the fact that George A. Romero directed this. It is his least favorite film, I don't know why that award should go to Two Evil Eyes. This film has spots where it is heard to understand what is going on but with the narration that Romero wisely added as a wrap around the film comes together and tells a fine story about a misguided man trying to make it in the early 1970's. He has to decide what is important live a life of excess or grow up and become a man for his family. I think the film does a great job of showing his journey and what this man needs to do. For a none horror effort this is superb Romero here. Not for the casual viewer but for the fans.

Sometimes a director is not the best judge of his own work. He's too close. He second-guesses. I think this movie, Romero's follow-up to Night of the Living Dead, compares favorably to The Graduate. Don't laugh. Angst. Freedom. Commitment. These are all central themes and emotional building blocks in both films' major characters' world view. I view Dustin Hoffman's Ben as a failure of sorts, a man who becomes a stalker, harasser, home-wrecker (twice), and road menace. Sad. And a bit dated. However, Ray Laine's drifter has better qualities and only two vices: smoking grass and pecking out his unfinished novel on a manual typewriter. Norman Fell's landlord character calls Ben a pervert. A young Richard Dreyfuss smells trouble, too. Well... I digress, so back to the cinema of George Romero. I liked many things about this dizzy movie. The lead actress, the one in NOLD who had a seat belt problem, is gorgeous and talented. Who knew? Laine is charismatic and commands the screen. The 'Ultimate Machine' sculpture is funny and opens minds. Placed in Pittsburg's Downtown, the symbolism cannot be missed. There's some excellent rock music in the score. Romero's editing is impeccable--a picnic and boat excursion are highlights. Watch for a clown who looks directly into the camera. But there are dark sections. Laine's mother is nuts. He also may have had a child from an old girl fiend. She sleeps with a giant stuffed camel or turtle. I can't make up my mind which it is. And finally the trip Laine's new girlfriend takes to an abortion doctor's pad. Sick. Creepy. And a little disturbing. I feel the movie deserves a second look.

The house seems to be divided on this one, so let me break the deadlock with a rave review: this is one terrific little movie. Funny, surprising, sharply directed, engagingly written (great movie line: "our very existence depends on that beer"), well performed, and absorbing all the way. Great title, too! (Yes, it is explained in the film.) As Jonathan Rosenbaum has pointed out, There's Always Vanilla is highly evocative of the early 70s; and like many timely films of that era, it has been unjustly neglected. A realistic romantic comedy with a deft side-take on television and advertising, it turns interestingly serious in an abortionist sequence that illuminates the era of Roe v. Wade. Lead actor Raymond Laine is a find, charming yet believable. This movie is only screened very occasionally, and the print I saw (with the less memorable alternate title The Affair) is unfortunately color-faded. But if you ever get the chance to see this, it is a must. Romero at his best.

While this film is a bit of a time capsule and wears its date of vintage openly, it is a surprisingly relevant movie in its own right. As in the Romero's "Season of the Witch" and "Martin," we are confronted with a society that is somewhat confused and stunned by the social change taking place. As in those films, the ending does not so much resolve matters or tie up loose ends as leave an impression. (The ending actually links back symbolically to the opening. I won't say more than that.)

The film utilizes a device that I usually find off-putting: the narrator reflecting upon the events that we are about to view. However, in this film, the device ultimately works well to highlight the nature of the relationship between "Chris" and "Lynn": brief and confusing to both of its principal members while it was actually unfolding.

Raymond Laine's "Chris" (a sort of George Clooney type) is the wandering teenager-adult who doesn't quite know what he is about and is desperately trying to avoid discovering any one answer to that question. For her part, Judith Ridley's "Lynn" wears the imprint of the Mary Tyler Moore Show age: the pretty, single woman trying to navigate a career and an uncertain identity amidst the lecherous advances of powerful men and the "fun" but ultimately selfish/aimless Chris. While she encourages Chris to buckle down and make decisions, he is, for reasons that are never entirely clear, unable to do so.

While some of the "Me Generation" themes may seem dated, those themes do service the overall plot (example: Lynn makes an important decision in the last fifteen minutes of the movie that, in turn, explains where she ends up in the last scenes of the movie-- which, in turn, takes us back to the opening scenes and is a play on the title of the movie). And there are a few scenes with the advertising people that could have been easily transplanted into "Seinfeld" episodes. This movie has a 70s vernacular, but it is smart and clever enough to appeal to the present.

Raymond Laine and Judith Ridley give excellent performances, and I can only wish that they had performed more steadily in the years after. I thoroughly enjoyed this one. Definitely recommend.

As said here previously, THERE'S ALWAYS VANILLA is a far better film than its reputation suggests (or director Romero himself apparently believes). As with all his best work, the writing is snappy and original, and quite unlike his best work, it proves that he could have (had?) a career with non-horror pictures if he wished so.

The film is told in flashback, with the main character (played excellently by Raymond Laine) ruminating in seemingly improvised sequences about his failed relationship, as the film illustrates its path. Fascinatingly, it resembles nothing less than Woody Allen's ANNIE HALL from some six years later - and is the far better movie. Where Allen's "see? I'm a lovable schnook" persona made me want to murder him when I revisited the film recently, Laine's portrayal of a sort of anti-hero in emotional turmoil here actually rings true.

Among the many pleasures in the film is seeing various cast members of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (to say nothing of lead actress Judith Steiner) back again in completely different roles. But there are also a host of terrific set pieces, a great, HUSBANDS-like night of stoned debauchery with father and son among them.

It doesn't all work - there are two pretty awful sentimental montages which fail - but there's plenty of spirited jump-cutting, frame flashes and other unique touches which show a thoughtful stylistic hand at play. I wish Romero hadn't stopped with this "failure" - he certainly would have made a more interesting ANNIE HALL.

A free-spirited young man (The late:Ray Laine) comes back home to Pittsburgh trying to make a new life for himself but when he meets a beautiful young model (Judith Ridley) that affects his life and they fall in love. But the two couple are so different from each other and they try to make their relationship work, despite their complicated lifestyle.

Directed by George A. Romero (Creepshow, Knightriders, Martin) made an interesting, bittersweet drama that is a certainly an Unusual film even for director:Romero. Romero made this film, because he feared being typecast as a "Horror Director". Romero claims this film to be his worst, because he felt his heart wasn't in the right place. When he made the film in the early 1970's. But i liked this film, because of Laine and Ridley strong performances. The behind the scenes moments where Ridley makes Television Commercials are the highlight, that's what Romero was doing in his career at that time.

DVD has an fine non-anamorphic widescreen (1.77:1) transfer and an fine-Dolby 2.0 mono sound. DVD has an interview with the filmmaker:Romero, trailer and Romero's biography. This DVD is double feature with "Season of the Witch". Only faults in the film is Romero's use of flash cutting at several moments and an flawed conclusion. The film has amusing moments for Romero's fans, which Romero close friends like John A. Russo, Russell Streiner, Bill Hinzman and the late:Vince Survinski were involved with Romero's first film "Night of the Living Dead". Which his close friends appears in cameos. Written by Rudy Ricci (Who also wrote the story for Dan O'Bannon's 1985 Cult Classic "Return of the Living Dead"). This film is also known as "The Affair". (****/*****).

I am first and foremost a vigilant fan and defender of the horror genre; it's where my heart lies. But this radical departure from the genre Romero has primarily stuck to - is a surprising delight. The previous user comments do a terrible injustice to the director, writer and cast. The sharp, intelligent dialogue is delivered by a talented, lively and very professional group of actors. The story itself is unlike other of its contemporaries in that it has the brains and skill of a true auteur fleshing out what, in the hands of a lesser artist, would have been a mere exploitation flick. Romero's distinct framing of shots and brilliant editing techniques are in full force; and anyone who appreciates Romero as a director (not just horror movies) should definitely see it. Considering Romero is as political a director as he is an artistic one, this is a perfectly logical follow-up to his horror masterpiece, "Night of the Living Dead". " There's Always Vanilla" is funny, artistic, lurid and intelligent. Highly recommended.

There's Always Vanilla (1971)

** (out of 4)

George A. Romero's follow-up to NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD is about as different as you can get but, as the director stated, he didn't want to become known simply for making horror movies so what we got is a romantic- drama. The story follows Chris Bradley (Raymond Laine) who is just returning from Vietnam and spending most of his time with drug dealers and strippers. He eventually meets a model/actress (Judith Ridley) and the two hit it off until she gets pregnant and things start to change. For over thirty years this here was the hardest Romero film to see and it's one that he often calls his very worst when asked during interviews. I think the legendary horror director is being a tad bit harsh because there are a few interesting touches here and there but on the whole it's a pretty forgettable cause except for those who want to see everything the man has done. Of course, one of the biggest reasons for Romero fans to check it out is that Judith Ridley played Judy in NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD and she's actually not too bad here. She's certainly not going to win any awards for this her second and final film but she's still enjoyable to watch as that laid back approach of hers comes across quite nicely. Laine is also pretty good in the movie as long as they're not trying to get any strong emotions out of him. So, where does the film go wrong? Romero has said that the screenwriter was lazy and pretty much gave up on the picture so the director had to work with what he had. As to why he didn't try to do a re-write is anyone's guess but perhaps the low-budget nature just didn't allow the time. The screenplay isn't horrid but it falls well short of what you'd call good. I think the biggest problem is that he never really tries to explain countless things including why on Earth this woman would be involved with this guy. The two are certainly different types and one might say opposites attract but there's never anything here except this guy treating the woman badly and not doing a single thing good. Just check out the long sequence where he's telling her that her butt is too big for TV and you'll see what I mean. Romero's direction keeps the picture moving well enough and there are a couple good shots (including a nice sex scene) but in the end this is a pretty forgettable movie. The 70s were full of movies about drifters and this one can't come close to best so there's not really any point except for die-hard Romero fans.

There is however a common point with NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, his previous film, first the presence of Judith Ridley, this moving female who played in NIGHT...and who died in the explosion of the pick-up, remember? And I almost forgot the zombie character, in NIGHT...whom we see at the beginning, in the cemetery.... So, besides this, there is also something in common with NIGHT...this is the social depiction, more obvious here of course, than in NIGHT...The Vietnam war period and all those uncertainties that concerned folks, and youth in particular. So this is a typical early seventies topic, though not typical Romero, especially if, in 2023, you try to analyze his filmography. There were hundreds of films like this one during that period. It could have been made by a Monte Hellman - between two westerns - or a Hal Hashby...