Change Your Image
SlinkyVamp
Reviews
The Company of Wolves (1984)
Go on, stray off the path a little.
I'm the only person I know who's actually seen this film, let alone loved it, so it's nice to be able to share my enthusiasm for this rich little gem.
Why do I love this film? Well, let's start at the very beginning. I adore it when a movie's title is open to interpretation and could be taken in any number of differing ways. Is this about wolves in various guises as companions, whether literal or metaphorical, or are they merely playing a role in some elaborate scenario in our personal fabrication of reality? As it turns out, both. This flick is BIG on the symbolism and the worst wolves are, to quote, "hairy on the inside."
Secondly, and let's not beat about the bush ( pun entirely intentional ) the movie is positively dripping dark Gothic sexuality. Not that is has any sex scenes per se ( though there is the least erotic lovemaking scene between the heroine, Rosaleen's, parents at one point ), but it's a Freudian orgy. Sensuality swamps practically every scene, and though it has been known for me to over-analyse a tad ;) it's hard to resist the urge to intermittently shout out "ooh, lipstick as a labia metaphor!" or "That tree has a phallus!" ( which is why I stopped watching films with my parents decades ago... I think I was embarrassing them.)
"Oh come ON Mum !!!! The tree quite obviously has a penis!!" "I think I'll go make a pot of tea now..."
Like the much later "Ginger Snaps" lycanthropy is pretty much a metaphor for sexual awakening, however, here the nature of the beast is firmly rooted in seduction. Even the walks in the mist-shrouded forests bring a quickening of the pulse that can't always be attributed to unease.
Possibly my fascination for this collection of stories within a story comes from seeing it for the first time when sexuality was foremost in my own mind. That said, it is classified as a horror movie and has a couple of impressive wolf transformations that haven't aged too badly, though they distracted me from my preferred focus of the Gothic ambiance. In my world Beauty and the Beast wouldn't have been totally ruined by the Beast becoming yet another bland Prince, and the happy couple would have embraced their attraction and maybe popped out a few puppies or something. But then I would have preferred Beauty to have not been put off by her beau having a bit of extra fur on him. Likewise, when the wronged 'witch' in one of the tales exposes the vile aristocracy for the savage beasts they truly are, and thereby commanding the respect she deserved, then I, for one, cheered her on.
If I were to have one criticism it would be this : the movie is often interpreted as having a feminist bias, with the men all being portrayed as beasts in disguise, cruel brutes, or seducers. Whilst I can see why a confused and blossoming pubescent girl may see things this way it's only balanced by a quote from Rosaleen's mother that goes, "It there's a beast in men it meets it's match in women too."
Things this film has taught me? 1) If his eyebrows meet in the middle and he speaks with an accent then he wants in her pants. And 2) "My, what big teeth......." leads exactly where you'd expect it to.
Some fabulous little performances all round, but you don't really watch it for the Oscar winning acting. Give it a go, you might actually like it if you have a taste for the quirky with a slight under-taste of perverse.
True Bloodthirst (2012)
Like 90 minutes of poking yourself in the eyes with a sharp stick.
Maybe I went into watching this movie for entirely the wrong reasons. Primarily those were that a) I like a good vampire flick, heck... sometimes I even like a very bad vampire flick ( but not this one ) and b) I like Andrew Lee Potts. I had a bit of a soft spot for him after totally falling for Hatter in Alice that I then followed him to Primeval where that cheeky little chipmunk face just made me want to hug a pillow. So during a late night bed-avoidance TV channel surf I came across this little nugget of mucus on the SyFy channel... which incidentally should stop changing it's title cos we all know that a rose by any other name will still smell of horse manure at it's base. There are some moderate performances, but no real character depth to speak of. The best of the bunch, in my opinion, was probably Neil Jackson who came across best when he was being a bit angsty, but as for Andrew...dear sweet Andrew... no. Just.. no. Awful. He slide in and out of his accent so often I'd swear he was lubricated. The Assorted Girls With Long Hair ran around and looked pretty and there was so much clichéd sci-fi posturing I wish I'd turned it into a drinking game.
So in summary, it was never ever going to win an Oscar. The script was underwhelming, the effects look like they were funded with someone's lunch money, acting didn't overwhelmingly stink .. but you wouldn't want to sit next to it on the bus either. I gave it a 3 because sucky as this may be it's still a vampire movie, and Andrew is still gerbilishously adorable. That said, when my daughter vomited all over her bed just after the ending credits due to a particularly nasty gastric flu I can't say I wasn't relieved to have something less dire than this film to focus on as I climbed into bed.