I saw Martin at the 2006 Karlovy Vary film festival, and I must say that its rare that I see a film that I enjoy so much.

First of all, it should be noted that this film is a b-horror film, though there is little horror in the entire movie. We can call it b-horror without worries, essentially because it is quite funny, and it has vampires in it (kinda). The plot centers on a young man who claims to be a vampire. He gets sent off to live with his uncle, because he's been causing too many problems for his parents (he occasionally has to kill people for their blood). It seems his entire family says he is a vampire as well, and he occasionally has flashbacks to a very typical, "vampire being run out of eastern european town" situation. He has one cousin who thinks the whole thing is ridiculous and that her family just has this poor kid convinced that he is a vampire. It is never really clarified whether he is a vampire or just a confused kid, though he acts like a confused kid all the time. The murders are beautifully choreographed, and the acting is wonderful (you actually believe he isn't going to kill her when he says he isn't going to kill her). You always feel sorry for the poor vampire boy, even though he is regularly murdering people.

The last thing I like about the film is the ending is wonderful.

So, a nice genre mix of a b-horror film and a coming of age film, brilliantly directed, and fun to watch. I can't suggest it highly enough.

Buy Martin here

I like to think of Night of the Living Dead as something approaching the ideal film... if the ideal film had zombies in it. Because of this film, and the Kingdom, I am tempted to believe that the ideal film does have Zombies in it.

This is the most famous film by the legendary George Romero, and might be the most famous b-horror film of all time. The plot is rather simple... there are zombies, and there are people, people want to stop zombies, zombies want to eat people (mainly their delicious brains).

One should remember that a b-horror movie is very different from a horror movie, or a slasher film (I'm misusing terminology here). While a slasher film is about giving you shocks (any Halloween), and a horror film actually frightens you (the exorcist), a b-horror is meant not to be taken seriously in the least. A b-horror uses certain conventions either for the purpose of humor (most cannibal films) or conceptual play (Invasion of the Body Snatchers wasn't very funny, but it was quite definitely about Communism), more often then not the aim is a bit of comedy and a bit of conceptual play.

I think when that is pointed out, the conceptual play should be fairly obvious (mobs of un-thinking people going after the few with their brains intact... the main one happens to be black... the film is made in 1968 if that helps you), and the humor should be pretty obvious (zombies are by nature funny), what really makes this film stand out from all the other b-horror films is a few moments of directorial genius. Though I shouldn't go into detail, the way he introduces the zombies is beautiful, and the ending has aspects of a Shakespearian tragedy (the only other film I usually say that about is Lawrence of Arabia, and I honestly wonder what David Lean would think about being put in a category with Night of the Living Dead).

I'm guessing my readers are not sure whether to take me seriously or not at this point, but I would encourage people to take my Shakespeare comparison as far as possible (unless you take Shakespeare too seriously). Shakespeare had a certain obsession with theatrical structure, the beginning, middle and end of a story that can all be wrapped up in a predictable amount of time, took on beautiful dimensions to him, and he constantly loved to make metaphors based on it ("who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard from no more"). The real components of a Shakespearean tragedy is the inevitability of it, and the fundamental feature of tragedy, both Shakespearean and Greek, is an overwhelming feeling of waste.

Conceptually, Night of the Living Dead is doing a lot with these ideas, and its doing so beautifully. The ending of the film is inevitable in the same way the ending of our film is inevitable. We either get swallowed by society, or we simply die.

If you don't like that reading of the film, just watch it for the zombies and you won't be disappointed (I freakin' love zombies).

Buy Night of the Living Dead here

One of the great things about all of the Universal Horror films (or essentially all the horror films made before Hitchcock popularized surprise effects), is the way they manage to combine really superb conceptual work with a complete disregard for anything resembling a coherent style. While Dracula and Frankenstein are much more stylistically intense film, conceptually nothing can surpass The Mummy.

(I should note at this point that the film was directed by Karl Freund, who is known to be one of the best cinematographers ever. Leave it to be said though that I don't remember the style as much as I remember the conceptual work.)

The film centers on one of those strikingly good looking Eastern European actresses who seemed to have flocked over to America around this time just to enliven Hollywood productions. In this film she is a lovely English woman with a tendency to wear thick eyeliner. Two men are in love with her, some haughty Englishman, whose father is the archaeologist that uncovered the Mummy's tomb, and the Mummy himself, who was mysteriously brought to life several years earlier. The woman it seems is a reincarnation of the Mummy's ancient love, and he desires to have her back.

Both men face hurdles in their desire to obtain the woman, the Englishman because he is a pompous asshole who is continually proposing sex to her (yay pre-code movies!), and the Mummy because in order to have her he must first kill her. She eventually chooses the Englishman, and we are all disappointed (unless she is still possessed by the princess!!!).

The mummy of course is secretly the good guy in the film. He has been in love with a woman for over 2000 years, and the young Englishman is only interested in a quick screw, but because the poor mummy is 'living impaired,' he has to kill the woman to really be with her, and of course the woman doesn't really love him that much, and would much rather have a toss in the hay with the British guy then eternal love after death.

There are so many ideas running around in that plot that I really don't know where to start. The first noticable thing is the direct connection between death and love, which can be turned wildeian without much of a stretch (' Yet each man kills the thing he loves/By each let this be heard,/Some do it with a bitter look,/Some with a flattering word,/The coward does it with a kiss,/The brave man with a sword!). The idea of death as a marital consumation has been around for a long time, and it can be seen in Double Suicide, and In the Realm of the Senses (I know I chose two Japanese films, just a coincidence).

When the love-death proposal is rejected then the woman is instead given the opportunity of life-sex. A juxtaposition that really would not have been allowed in a film between 1934 and 1960. It is a pleasent juxtaposition too, the idea that the sex act really proves that we are still alive, and that we need to somehow prove that we still exist before our flesh begins to rot in the grave endlessly.

I like this movie, its fun to watch, and it is really about how love consumes you.

Buy the Mummy here