I apologize in advance. This is even longer than usual.
The Stuff:
Author Blake Callens wrote this book in response to The Case for Christan Nationalism by Stephen Wolfe. It is information-dense and appears intended for a Christian audience—perhaps clergy?—who understands theology and American and European history.
All is not lost, however. Even an old heathen like me can read it and digest it. I detest anything that smells of fascism, especially when dressed in its Sunday best, and Christian nationalism is the latest flavor of fascism.
A few quick definitions: Christian nationalism views the United States as a Christian nation, usually because it was founded as a Christian nation. It isn’t, and it wasn’t.
Christian nationalists claim that it follows (it doesn’t) that Christians—the right kind of Christians (TRKoC), at any rate—should enjoy privileged places in American society and government.
No, they shouldn’t. Pretty damn cheeky to think professing a religion—even the right kind of the right religion—makes anyone special.
Author Callens answers Wolfe point by point, showing logical fallacies and revealing Wolfe’s misogyny, racism, and xenophobia. Wolfe argues that (in short) if (TRKoC) ran things, the world would shape up and fly the way God wants it to. TRKoC are justified in the violent overthrow of the present order and setting up their own Christian state with their own “Christian Prince” to manage things. Blasphemy should be a criminally chargeable offense, for instance.
Callens’s broad answer is that Wolfe’s utopia is fascism cloaked in Christian terminology. His assessment of the whole plan is summed up in the word at the end: “anathema, “that is, “cursed,” and worthy of excommunication.
I rather agree with Callens on these points.
Stephen Wolfe is not an idiot. He holds master’s degrees in philosophy and political science and a doctorate in political theory. And he wants Christian Prince…?
Thoughts:
Once upon a time, long ago, when I was young and innocent, I read Plato’s Republic out of curiosity. I really will read nearly anything out of curiosity.
“What is justice?” Socrates asks. His answer is, in part, that “justice” is a matter of staying in your place, minding your business, and not getting in the way of your betters.
Yeah, and the philosopher-king will arise, quizzed by learned men and women—at least Plato includes women. Wolfe has them at home baking cookies or something, you know, womanly—godly. According to Wolfe, once society is ordered the way he believes god wants it to be, an aristocracy will arise and, with it, a Christian Prince.
It set alarm bells off in my head. History has seen this before. Hitler—Il Duce—Dear Leader. It’s never turned out well but usually involved the miserable deaths of millions of innocents.
The parallel Callens draws is Franciso Franco of Spain, who called himself Caudillo (“chieftain”). Simply because the Christian Prince calls himself (it’s got to be a guy, according to Wolfe) TRKoC, will it be different this time? And you’re investing him with the power to punish thought crimes like “blasphemy”? And to execute those who refuse to stop proselytizing for “false religions”? I’m not taking that bet.
A lot of this book is two Christians arguing about Christian doctrine. What would human nature be like if Adam hadn’t fallen? I don’t have a dog in that race, so once I understood what Callens was saying, I more or less tuned it out. I care little about whether Wolfe’s stance is Christian. More important to me is whether it is humane, just (and not in Plato’s sense), and practical.
Callens describes his experiences of war in Afghanistan in often graphic terms. These are extremely difficult to read, but he recounts them for a purpose. He doesn’t want civil war in the United States. There is nothing grand or glorious about combat. It extracts a horrible toll, not only on the victims but also on the survivors.
Yet he states:
“There are very few things in the world that would cause me to advocate for, and personally return to, proactive violence. Stephen Wolfe and his compatriots attempting violent revolution to enact his vision would be one of them.” (p. 370)
There are several points on which I disagree with Callens. For example, “infanticide” is not legal in any state in the union. Infanticide is murder, which is illegal everywhere. Nor is it legal to abort a fully viable fetus. (p.83). Abortions taking place after viability (22 weeks or so) occur if an abnormality is discovered or if there is a danger to the mother’s life or well-being. These are often very much wanted babies, and their deaths are tragedies.
Get a grip, man.
I will warn the reader that this is not the most leisurely read. First, it is long, weighing in just short of 500 pages.
Second, it is dense. Callens writes in clear, understandable prose, but there is a lot of information to wade through. I have to hand it to him for making abstract topics comprehensible. He clarifies obscure subjects.
Third, he uses terms like “prelapsarian” (pertaining to the time before the fall in the Garden of Eden) and makes at least one passing reference to the Holodomor (the Ukrainian Famine of the 1930s, caused—perhaps deliberately—by the rapid industrialization and collectivization of the Soviet Union) without defining them.
Fourth, as mentioned above, the Gulf War scenes are graphic and extremely difficult to read. However, I did not find them exploitative or melodramatic. He wants to make the point that maybe war—and dying in one—is not so dulce et decorum.
Having said all that, I still think this is an important book. The extreme right-wing will always be there. These people think they’re doing god a favor. They’re not going to stop.
Police states exist. A certain confident naivete convinces us that it can’t happen here, even if the chances are low that it will happen next week.
Eternal vigilance.
As for recommending the book, I think the audience is small. It is not a casual read. But if the topic interests you, by all means, check it out.
Title: The Case Against Christian Nationalism: An Expository Commentary on Stephen Wolfe’s Book
Author: Blake Callens
First published: 2024
Review of “Reunion: A Story: A Novella” by Alex Diaz-Granados
Full disclosure: author Alex Diaz-Granados and I have been net buddies for (is it possible?) nearly twenty years, first becoming acquainted at the now-defunct site Epinions, lo, these many years ago.
Plot:
Jim Garraty’s dream of becoming a history professor at a prestigious university has come true. He has some well-regarded publications under his belt and is working on the next one.
However, he’s still hurting from his recent divorce. And then comes the phone call from his old high school pal. Marty—the girl he loved back in the day—has died in a car crash. One of Jim’s greatest regrets is that he never told Marty he cared for her. Would romance have come of it? Or even friendship? It’s too late to know now.
Thoughts:
Jim’s story is told in a series of flashbacks and returns to the present. The reader follows him through the last few days of high school when he had the chance to speak to Marty— but didn’t.
It’s a lyrical tale of regret for chances not taken, told in dreams and memories. It speaks to anyone who has been to high school and anyone who remembers the one who got away.
This pleasant, if bittersweet, novella is short enough to read in one sitting.
It is available here.

Title: “Reunion: A Story: A Novella”
Author: Alex Diaz-Granados
First published: 2018
Review of “The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus” 2009
Our Saturday pizza and bad movie night was a bit different.
Plot:
Dr. Parnassus (Christopher Plummer) runs a strapped-for-cash traveling acting troupe. The troupe consists of Parnassus’s daughter, Valentina (Lily Cole), the barker Anton (Andrew Garfield), and Percy (Verne Troyer), Parnassus’s assistant. They live and travel in a horse-drawn carriage that is a mash-up of an old-fashioned London double-decker bus and a wooden sailing ship.
Aside from acrobatic and sleight-of-hand performances, the great attraction in their show is the “imaginarium,” a magic place accessed through a mirror at the back of the stage where dreams come true. The person must make a choice: the easy road of indulgence or the hard road.
Dr. Parnanssus has made a deal with the Devil, known as Mr. Nick (Tom Waits). In fact, he’s made several. He can’t stop making deals. His first was to become immortal. After a thousand years, he fell in love with a woman and wished to be mortal again. The price he paid was that any child he fathered would belong to Mr. Nick on their sixteenth birthday.
Valentina will be sixteen in a couple of days.
While the troupe is traveling over a bridge in their wagon/ship/bus, Valentina sees a shadow on the water of a hanged man. Dr. Parnassus has drawn a tarot card of a hanged man; he knows this is a sign, but of what?
They are able to release the man and revive him. He remembers nothing. Valentina decides to call him George (Heath Ledger).
Mr. Nick approaches Dr. Parnassus with George’s real identity, Tony Shepherd (but withholds relevant information). He offers the doctor another bargain: he who can win five new souls by Valentina’s birthday gets to keep her.
Has Dr. Parnassus ever said no?
Thoughts:
The visuals in this were stunning, from start to finish. As with so many of Terry Gilliam’s films, it provides a rich fantasyland of things that can’t be but nevertheless are. It’s not all pretty. There are some dark and blighted scenes. Of course, a bird takes a sizeable dump on the impeccably dressed Mr. Nick.
The movie is primarily about storytelling, however. Storytelling is what makes us human. It allows us to preserve and adapt culture. Early in his life, Dr. Parnassus led a group of monks in chanting. Mr. Nick sought to interrupt the story by silencing the individual monks. Dr. Parnassus laughed. Even if the monks are silent, someone somewhere is telling a story. Not even Mr. Nick can stop that.
And so begins the story of Dr. Parnassus and Mr. Nick.
There is a great deal of sadness in the story of the movie. It’s not a Greek tragedy, but it’s still sad. Very little is what it appears to be. When we leave the stage, the story goes on.
There was sadness in real life, also. Heath Ledger, who played Tony Shepherd, died of an overdose during filming. Three other actors—Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell—stepped in to finish the filming.
It’s hard to say how I felt about this film other than awed and saddened at the same time. If you like dark fantasy, this should work for you.
The film was nominated for twenty-three awards, including two Oscar nominations. It received two awards: one for the 2009 Best Costume Design from the Satellite Awards (Los Angeles) and one for Best Costume Design in a Feature Length film from the Leo Awards (Vancouver, BC, Canada).
According to Justwatch, this is only available for rent or to buy from places like Amazon or Apple TV, among other places.
Title: The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus (2009)
Directed by
Terry Gilliam
Writing Credits
Terry Gilliam…(written by) &
Charles McKeown… (written by)
Cast (in credits order)
Andrew Garfield…Anton
Christopher Plummer…Doctor Parnassus
Richard Riddell…Martin
Katie Lyons…Martin’s Girlfriend
Richard Shanks…Friend of Martin
Lily Cole…Valentina
Verne Troyer…Percy
Released: 2009
Length: 2 hours, 3 minutes
Rated: PG-13
Review of “The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!” (1988)
We were in the mood for silliness for our Saturday pizza and bad movie night. We got it.
Plot:
In Beirut (where else?) Idi Amin, Muammar Gaddafi, Ayatollah Khomeini, Yasser Arafat, and Mikhail Gorbachev (Prince Hughes, Robert LuJane, Charles Gherardi, David Katz, David Lloyd Austin), among others, sit around a conference table trying to come up with a scheme to humiliate the United States.
“They believe I’m a nice guy,” Gorbachev says.
The guy pouring hot tea attacks and subdues the group, throwing Idi Amin out the window. He knocks off Khomeini’s turban, revealing that Iran’s supreme leader wears an orange mohawk.
“Who are you?” someone off-camera asks while most of the perceived greatest enemies of the United States lie around the room, moaning.
“I’m Lieutenant Frank Drebin, Police Squad,” the vanquisher (Leslie Nielsen) says. “And don’t ever let me catch you guys in America.” He makes a grand exit then, slamming into a swinging door.
(So, Police Squad has jurisdiction in Beirut…?)
This sums up the spirit of the whole movie.
At the same time, Drebin’s partner and friend, Det. Nordberg (O.J. Simpson) investigates a heroin smuggling operation aboard a boat called I Love You. He’s shot repeatedly by a room full of bad’uns and tossed into the ocean. Later, while he’s recovering in the hospital, the viewer is told that, luckily, those shots missed every vital organ.
Frank questions the ship’s owner, the uber-wealthy Vincent Ludwig (Ricardo Montalbán), wreaks a little havoc, and falls for Ludwig’s gorgeous secretary, Jane Spencer (Priscilla Presley).
The viewer later learns that Ludwig has perfected a technique for making trained assassins out of anyone by post-hypnotic suggestion invoked by a clicker—not some cool code word, but a clicker. This is important because Queen Elizabeth of Great Britain (Jeannette Charles) is coming to town and will attend a baseball game in Los Angeles. It will be the duty of the Police Squad to protect her.
What could go wrong?
Thoughts:
This is the first of now four movies made from a short-lived TV series, Police Squad, a parody of police procedures, that aired in 1982. The cops are incompetent but somehow always get their man. The film relies on slapstick, non sequitur dialogue, and juvenile sexual innuendo for humor. Mostly, it’s just silly.
When Frank visits Nordberg in the hospital, he finds him banged up and loaded with painkillers. Nordberg mumbles, “I Love You”—the name of the ship where he was attacked.
“I love you too,” Frank tells him.
Curt Gowdy, Jim Palmer, Tim McCarver, Mel Allen, Dick Enberg, and Dick Vitale appear as play-by-play as themselves as commentators along with Dr. Joyce Brothers. Other cameos include Reggie Jackson and Weird Al Yankovic.
The bad guy meets a fitting end. Without giving away the details, I’ll say it involves the USC Trojan marching band playing “Louie, Louie.”
This is not a film to watch if you’re in the mood for something deep or intellectual. If you don’t want to think for an hour or so, this is your movie.
And it serves to remind those of us who remember just how long ago 1988 was.
Leslie Nielsen was nominated for the 1989 Funniest Actor in a Motion Picture Award by the American Comedy Award. The movie was nominated for 1990 Best International Film by the Jupiter Awards (Germany).
I could not find this anywhere to stream for free without a subscription. According to Justwatch, it’s available from places like Max, Apple TV, and Amazon TV for rent or to buy.
Title: The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! (1988)
Directed by
David Zucker
Writing Credits (WGA)
Jerry Zucker…(written by) &
Jim Abrahams…(written by) &
David Zucker…(written by) &
Pat Proft…(written by)
Jim Abrahams…(television series: “Police Squad”)
&David Zucker…(television series “Police Squad”) &
Jerry Zucker…(television series “Police Squad”)
Cast (in credits order)
Leslie Nielsen…Lt. Frank Drebin
Priscilla Presley…Jane Spencer
Ricardo Montalban…Vincent Ludwig
George Kennedy…Capt. Ed Hocken
O.J. Simpson…Det. Nordberg
Released: 1988
Length: 1 hour, 25 minutes
Rated: PG-13
Review of “The Pit and the Pendulum” (1961)
The past Saturday pizza and bad movie night was a return to the schlock of yesteryear.
Plot:
In the sixteenth-century, Englishman Francis Barnard (John Kerr) arrives at a foreboding castle seeking news about his sister Elizabeth’s (Barbara Steele) recent death. His sister’s widower, Nicholas Medina (Vincent Price), and his younger sister, Catherine (Luana Anders), give him a chilly reception. The only explanation they offer him for his sister’s death was something about “blood disease.”
While Barnard accepts that Nicholas is indeed mourning Elizabeth, there’s something rotten in Spain. He wishes to see where she’s buried.
A visit from Nicholas’ friend, Dr. Leon (Antony Carbone), brings the news that Elizabeth died of heart failure. She was scared to death.
Thoughts:
The movie has barely a nodding acquaintance with Poe’s story of the same name, which is about a prisoner of the Spanish Inquisition undergoing a fantastic series of tortures, including being strapped to a table while a blade swings ever so lower over him. It scared the daylights out of me when I first read it at about eleven.
The movie adds characters and a whole story not in Poe’s work. The old castle, the torture chamber, the memories of past agonies the Medinas’ father Sebastian (also played by Vincent Price) inflicted on his victims, and the depictions of an angry sea pounding against the rocky shoreline surrounding the castle give the tale a heavy, gothic air.
Nicholas comes to believe his dead wife is haunting him. Barnard comes to believe Nicholas is a few sandwiches short of a picnic. What is he hiding? Is this ghost business some elaborate ruse? Why does he keep those torture devices beneath the castle?
(Note to the history buffs: the Spanish Inquisition did not use the instruments shown in the movie. They had much simpler ways of torturing, maiming, and killing people. But the reader has probably figured this movie isn’t a documentary.)
Vincent Price is enjoyable to watch in his overacting, first as the loving, grieving husband, then as the nut, then—while screws continue to come loose and fall away—as the dangerous nut.
Yet true vengeance is reserved not for him but for another and arrives straight from the Department of Ironic Punishments.
This is over-the-top from beginning to end in a way that one can imagine Poe thinking, “Hmmm. Yes. Wish I’d written that.”
The Roger Corman/Vincent Price movies are not for everyone, but I find them a delightful guilty pleasure not to be taken seriously.
This can be watched with a whole slew of ads on Tubi:
Or on the Internet Archive:
It can also be rented on places like Amazon TV, YouTube, and Apple TV.
Title: The Pit and the Pendulum (1961)
Directed by
Roger Corman
Writing Credits
Richard Matheson…(screenplay)
Edgar Allan Poe…(story “The Pit and the Pendulum”)
Cast (in credits order)
Vincent Price…Nicholas Medina / Sebastian Medina
John Kerr…Francis Barnard
Barbara Steele…Elizabeth Barnard Medina
Luana Anders…Catherine Medina
Antony Carbone…Doctor Charles Leon
Released: 1961
Length: 1 hour, 20 minutes
Review of “Godzilla” (1954) and “Godzilla King of the Monsters” (1956)
I. Godzilla (1954)
In 1954, a Japanese film appeared with a monster named Gojira—Angelized as Godzilla—that terrorized people near the (fictional) island of Odo near the Japanese coast, destroying ships before taking on Tokyo. Survivors describe their disasters: “It was like the sea exploded.”
The people of Odo Island see their fishing nets come back empty. The elders say Godzilla is eating the catch, though younger people laugh at such tales.
A traditional dance takes place. An elder says that in the old days, when the fish disappeared, they would put a young girl on a raft for Godzilla.
ICK.
That night, a storm hits and wreaks terrible damage, more than one would expect from a storm. Something moves out there.
And viewers get their first glimpse of a huge dinosaur-like tail in the dark disappearing around a corner.
After the islanders apply to the authorities for disaster relief, a research team arrives from the mainland: Professor Kyohei Yamane (Takashi Shimura), his daughter Emiko Yamane (Momoko Kôchi), and Ogata (Akira Takarada), a Marine Salvage specialist with the Coast Guard, romantically attached to Emiko. This last bit is a wrinkle for her fiancé, the research scientist Dr. Daisuke Serizawa (Akihiko Hirata), to whom she has been engaged since she was a child.
Um, ICK.
Serizawa saw the party off at the dock. He wears an eyepatch—a war wound—but even with one eye, he sees what’s going on with Emiko and Ogata. Mrs. Serizawa didn’t raise no fool.
On the island, they find footprints big enough for humans to stand in. Their Geiger counters go nuts. Godzilla puts in an appears, poking his head over a hilltop the islanders have fled to.
In Tokyo, there is discussion: how do the people prepare for Godzilla’s arrival? Soon, the old lizard himself emerges from Tokyo Bay, ripping through the defenses, stomping on trains, smashing buildings, and sending people running.
Dr. Serizawa has developed a terrible weapon that can be used to defeat Godzilla, but he is reluctant to do so. What if it falls into the wrong hands? Dr. Yamane, on the other hand, wants to study Godzilla. What makes him immune to radiation?
For a monster flick, the themes are surprisingly profound, and the ending poignant. The monster is something humans have been able to live with more or less but supercharged with the blasts of nuclear experimentation, it can now ravage whole cities. And the cure may prove worse than the disease.
II. Godzilla: King of the Monsters (1956)
The anti-nuke message of the original Gojira was deemed too strong for an American audience in 1956, so it was toned down. Much of it was cut, and a Western actor, Raymond Burr (before he took up law), was added to the film, playing the part of journalist Steve Martin who happens to be in Tokyo at the time of Godzilla’s attacks.
Instead of the attack on the Japanese freighter, the movie opens with scenes of destruction in Tokyo and Martin recovering enough to stumble to a hospital, where he meets Emiko Yamane. He travels with her and her father to Odo Island, sleeping in a tent when the storm and Godzilla hit.
He spends a lot of the movie observing things, often against backgrounds different from the rest of the actors. For example, in the scene where the Yamanes and Ogata depart for Odo Island, everyone stands at the ship’s railing, waving to those on the dock—everyone except Steve Martin, who stands in front of what might be a white bulkhead by himself, observing.
The damage to the village on Odo Island and the destruction of Tokyo still figure large in this movie, as do the love triangle and the poignant ending. Both feature Japanese high school girls singing “A Prayer for Peace.”
The American version is still a powerful movie, but it lacks some of the wrinkles of the Japanese version. For example, Professor Yamane’s wish to study rather than kill Godzilla does not appear in the American version that I could see. American audiences at the time were probably also unaware of the 1954 tragedy of the tuna-fishing vessel Daigo Fukuryū Maru (Lucky Dragon No. 5), whose crew was exposed to fallout from an unexpectedly large blast from the Bikini Atoll experiments (Castle Bravo). The scenes depicting a blinding light and a churning ocean would recall the incident to 1950s Japanese.
While the dubbing in the American version is great, there are passages of Japanese spoken by minor characters that remain untranslated. For example, while Godzilla makes mincemeat out of Tokyo, there is a shot of a woman crouching, holding her small children close. What she says to them is not translated. In the Japanese version, the subtitles read, “It’s okay, children. We’ll be with Daddy soon.”
Which movie is “better”? Hard to say. But certainly, the Japanese version has elements the American version left out. I enjoyed both of them. I enjoyed watching Raymond Burr observe stuff. Yet the Japanese version offered more food for thought.
Review of “The Lady Vanishes” (1938)
The Lady Vanishes is a British mystery thriller directed by Alfred Hitchcock on the eve of the outbreak of World War II.
Plot:
In the fictional European Alpine country of Bandrika, an avalanche has delayed a train and forced a varied group of people to find rooms in a small local hotel. Wealthy English Iris Henderson (Margaret Lockwood) is vacationing with a couple of friends before returning to England to get married. Caldicott and Charters (Naunton Wayne and Basil Radford) are two British gentlemen concerned about making their connection on time so they can go to a cricket match. Another guest, Miss Froy (May Whitty), is returning to England after working as a governess in the country for some years. She speaks the local (fictional) Bandrikan language and loves its music.
The hotel and the area appear very much like a Swiss Alpine skiing resort, with mountains, snow, and skiers. The hotel manager, Boris (Emile Boreo), easily switches from Bandrikan to Italian, French, German, and English.
Miss Froy and Iris have rooms next to each other and find their sleep disturbed by Gilbert Redman (Michael Redgrave), a musicologist on the floor above playing the clarinet and studying local folk dances, complete with folk dancers. Iris bribes the manager into throwing him out.
Miss Froy listens to a singer playing a guitar. Hands appear to grab the songster by the neck and strangle him. Not seeing this, Miss Froy throws a coin to the musician.
The next morning, when Iris stands at the platform, chatting with her friends about to board the train, Miss Froy approaches them and asks for help finding her carry-on. While they look over the luggage from the hotel, a hand pushes a potted plant off the roof. Though clearly intended for Miss Froy, it lands on Iris’s noggin. She’s stunned but insists on getting the train. Miss Froy assures her friends she’ll look after her. Iris passes out.
When she comes to, she’s sitting in a compartment opposite Miss Froy. Four other people who don’t speak English also occupy the compartment. Iris and Miss Froy go to the dining car for tea. Miss Froy brings her own brand.
When they return to the compartment, Miss Froy encourages Iris to take a nap. She does so and wakes up to find her new friend gone. The others tell her there was no English lady. She went to the dining car by herself.
Why would someone disappear a harmless old governess?
Thoughts:
What follows is a nice little mystery. When Dr. Egon Hartz (Paul Lukas), a brain specialist, comes along, he has Iris all but convinced the bump on her head made her hallucinate Miss Froy. But then Miss Froy reappears in her proper tweeds. But it’s a different woman (Josephine Wilson).
Is Iris losing her mind?
In her search, she comes across Gilbert Redman of the squeaking clarinet. He’s not convinced there was a governess, but he can see that Iris is distressed and agrees to help her. In their poking around, they come across real danger.
Things get even more out of control near the end of the film, with soldiers lined up along the road offering to be of service.
Hitchcock makes his trademark cameo, but I missed it.
This was a fun movie with an intriguing mystery and genuine menace. There are a few see-it-comings and one obvious blunder—nothing suspicious about a nun wearing high heels. Geez, some poor planning there, doncha think?
We got our copy from the library. The audio and visual were nice and clear especially for a film of this age. I don’t know if it’s been restored or whether we were just lucky.
Overall, this was a fun flick.
The movie was adapted from a 1936 mystery thriller novel, The Wheel Spins, by British crime writer Ethel Lina White. It was remade in 1979 and again in 2013.
Hitchcock won the Best Director Award from the 1938 New York Film Critics Circle. The film was nominated for Best Film.
The movie can be watched here or on many subscription services.
Title: The Lady Vanishes (1938)
Directed by
Alfred Hitchcock
Writing Credits
Ethel Lina White…(based upon the story by: “The Wheel Spins”)
Sidney Gilliat…(screenplay) (as Sidney Gilliatt) and
Frank Launder…(screenplay)
Cast (in credits order)
Margaret Lockwood…Iris Matilda Henderson
Michael Redgrave…Gilbert Redman
Paul Lukas…Dr. Egon Hartz
May Whitty…Miss Froy (as Dame May Whitty)
Cecil Parker…Mr. Todhunter
Linden Travers…”Mrs.” Todhunter
Released: 1938
Length: 1 hour, 36 minutes
Review of “Godzilla Minus One” (2023)
I’d been waiting to see this one for a long time. Everyone I know who’d seen it told me it was a great movie. Long story short, it did not disappoint. It is more than a Godzilla movie.
Plot:
Near the end of World War II, kamikaze pilot Kōichi Shikishima (Ryunosuke Kamiki) lands his plane at the repair base on (fictional) Odo Island. Lead Mechanic Sosaku Tachibana (Munetaka Aoki) tells him the crew can find nothing wrong.
“What are you implying?” Shikishima asks and storms off to sit by the beach. He notices deep-water fish rising to the surface.
Tachibana approaches. “I’m on your side,” he says. “Why die honorably when the outcome [of the war] is already clear?”
OUCH.
That night, Godzilla comes ashore and attacks the installation. Tachibana tells Shikishima to fire on the monster with the 20mm guns in his plane. Shikishima runs to his plane but freezes. He and Tachibana are the only survivors. Tachibana understandably is furious. He later gives Shikishima a packet containing the personal pictures belonging to all the lost men.
Shikishima returns to a devastated Tokyo, where he learns his parents were killed in the bombings. Upon recognizing him, a neighbor, Sumiko Ota (Sakura Andô), tells him, “Weren’t you a kamikaze? If you had done your job, my children wouldn’t have been killed.”
Almost accidentally, Shikishima finds himself setting up a household with a woman, Noriko Oishi (Minami Hamabe), and a baby she rescued. The neighbor who yelled at him now helps them raise the child because they are helpless.
After working several low-paying jobs, Shikishima comes home to say he’s found a good one with good pay—aboard a wooden minesweeper. What could go wrong?
Thoughts:
Many years ago, I read a science fiction story whose main character came to believe—however reluctantly—a god had been born of the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I will never remember the title or the author’s name.
The movie doesn’t claim that, but it speaks to how fundamentally the bombs rocked Japanese society. The locals around out-of-the-way Odo Island know Godzilla. When they see deep-sea fish come to the surface, they know Godzilla will follow. Radiation from American experimentation with nuclear power after WWII supercharges him to the point where he can overturn aircraft carriers. His fire-breath sets off explosions that look very much like atomic mushroom cloud. Conventional weapons are useless against him.
The devastation at Odo Island haunts Shikishima. He wakes screaming from nightmares. The theme of his personal redemption runs through the movie, beginning with the unconventional family that just sorta happens. He cares for them but cannot let himself show affection to them. He tells the child not to call him “Daddy,” for example. Later, he has a chance to face Godzilla.
Another theme is that of the common people, G. I. Takao war vets (so to speak), redeeming themselves and saving Japan from destruction when Godzilla strikes. Neither the Japanese nor foreign governments offer much help, so the people must go it alone. The people’s army also cares for its members. Unlike those under the Imperial Army, no one is expendable.
This is a different Godzilla movie, but it pays homage to history. Odo Island was Godzilla’s home turf since the original in 1954. Generally, the movies are about the monsters. Human stories are minimal. Like the original (particularly the Japanese version of the original), it offers anti-war and anti-nuke messages.
It garnered fifty-four nominations and thirty-eight wins, including 2024 Best Film and Best Screenplay from the Japanese Academy.
We watched it on Netflix. The English dubbing was excellent. There are also English subtitles. It’s available to rent or buy on places like Google TV or YouTube. Some services may not have the English dubbing, however.
All in all, a fine flick.
Title: Godzilla Minus One (2023)
Directed by
Takashi Yamazaki
Writing Credits (in alphabetical order)
Ishirô Honda…(original creator) (uncredited)
Takeo Murata…(original creator) (uncredited)
Takashi Yamazaki…(screenplay)
Cast
Darren Barnet…Koichi Shikishima (voice)
Nelson Lee…(voice)
Ell…Noriko Oishi (voice)
Minami Hamabe…Noriko Oishi
Ashley Peldon…(voice)
Ryunosuke Kamiki…Koichi Shikishima
Zeno Robinson…(voice)
Kagga Jayson…Boy #5
Sakura Andô…Sumiko Ota (as Sakura Ando)
Greg Chun…Tachibana (voice)
Released: 2023
Length: 2 hours, 4 minutes
Review of “Scream Blacula Scream” (1973)
This week’s Saturday pizza and bad movie was a return to the cheesy flick of yesteryear—a vampire pic to boot.
Plot:
The film opens with the death of voodoo adept Mama Loa. Her son Willis Daniels (Richard Lawson) then claims her place. Others tell him it’s a matter of voting. A favorite is Mama Loa’s adopted daughter, Lisa Fortier (Pam Grier). Willis leaves, furious, and buys bones he intends to resurrect for revenge like a golem or a zombie, except it’s a vampire.
Silly boy. He has to know something’s going to bite him in the rear end, maybe not literally.
At first, nothing seems to be working, so he sits in the living room and drinks a beer, the brand label fully visible. (product placement?)
While he’s going over in his mind what went wrong, a shadow moves in the other room. A hand grasps the back of his neck, and soon, two fangs sink into poor Willis’ neck.
Oh, bummer. Looks like that revenge thing’s a bust.
Later, Willis, in a suit my mother would describe as “wearing colors,” asks Blacula/Prince Mamuwalde (William Marshall) why he can’t see himself in the mirror. A man has to see his face. He explains that he is going to a party. His girl is coming. His friend Justin Carter (Don Mitchell) will be displaying his African artifacts. Willis doesn’t mind being a vampire and all, but he’s still gotta go out, right?
Blacula explains a few things. Willis doesn’t leave the house without his permission. And what’s this about African artifacts…?
In a surprise to no viewer, Blacula crashes Justin’s party and proves himself the expert on the artifacts on display—first-hand knowledge. As the partygoers start dropping like flies, Blacula meets Pam. He realizes she’s powerful in voodoo and charms her. He has a plan. Could she, you know, maybe unvampire him? She agrees to try.
Thoughts:
This is a sequel to 1972’s Blacula (reviewed here). In the 18th century, African prince Mamuwalde fell victim to the vampire Dracula, who cursed him to always hunger for human blood. The prince’s wife was cursed with him. He was uppity enough to demand an end to the slave trade.
Like the earlier film, the is a blaxploitation flick. While these films provided expanding roles for black actors, they often came with their own set of stereotypes.
The first movie had Blacula trying to win over his reincarnated love, his wife. This one has him conflicted about his vampirism while, at the same time, killing people with seeming abandon, including the guy who brought him back to life. He soon has his own little army of the undead, dressed in the flower garden colors of early 1970s style.
In one odd, amusing scene, a lady of the evening walks up to Blacula and asks if he wants some company. When he doesn’t answer immediately, she gets frustrated and stomps off. Hey, time is money, ya know? Her two pimps then walk up to Blacula, insult his cape, and then things get ugly. He lectures them on enslaving a sister and instantly makes the sister a free agent.
I wouldn’t call this film Academy Award material, but it was fun. The first movie was, in my seldom humble opinion, superior, but this is still worth a view.
Its strength lies in the acting chops of the actor playing the main character, William Marshall. He’s tall with a deep voice and a commanding presence. With a background on stage—including Shakespeare—he can come across as suave and sophisticated or menacing with equal force.
The ending is ambiguous. Clearly, the producers planned a sequel that never came to pass.
Scream Blacula Scream was nominated for a 1975 Golden Scroll Award for Best Horror Filmby the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films.
This movie can be watched here with a whole lot of ads.
It’s also available to rent or buy on subscription services like amazon or Apple TV.
Title: Scream Blacula Scream (1973)
Directed by
Bob Kelljan
Writing Credits
Joan Torres…(screenplay) &
Raymond Koenig…(screenplay) and
Maurice Jules…(screenplay)
Joan Torres…(story) &
Raymond Koenig…(story)
Cast (in credits order)
William Marshall…Blacula / Prince Mamuwalde
Don Mitchell…Justin Carter
Pam Grier…Lisa Fortier
Michael Conrad…Sheriff Harley Dunlop
Richard Lawson…Willis Daniels
Released: 1973
Length: 1 hour, 36 minutes
Rated: PG
Review of “The Philadelphia Story” (1940)
Back home and back to our Saturday pizza and bad movie. We gave the usual monster movies a break and watched the classic The Philadelphia Story, a movie neither of us could remember seeing before.
Plot:
C. K. Dexter Haven (Cary Grant) is packing the car with his worldly goods. Tracy—Mrs. C. K. Dexter Haven (Katharine Hepburn) has asked him to leave. She’s had enough of his drinking. While “helping” him, she hands him his pipe caddy, complete with pipes. It somehow lands forcefully on the ground. She sends his golf bag flying and breaks a club over her knee. Irritated at the petty destruction, Dexter pushes her back through the front door and onto the floor.
Two years later, Tracy, of the fabulously wealthy Lord family, is planning her wedding to nouveau-riche George Kittredge (John Howard). Her father (John Halliday) won’t be there. Her parents separated unofficially over the matter of a dancer. But then he does show up.
However, through the machinations of the owner of the gossip magazine Spy, reporter Macaulay “Mike” Connor (James Stewart) and photographer Elizabeth “Liz” Imbrie (Ruth Hussey) will be attending the wedding, posing as friends of Tracy’s brother, who lives in Argentina.
Providing cover for Mike and Liz is Dexter, Tracy’s ex-husband, who will also be attending.
Tracy’s little sister Dinah (Virginia Weidler) looks forward to seeing Dexter, as does their mother (Mary Nash). Dexter even refers to Mrs. Lord as “Mother Lord,” as if she were still his mother-in-law. Woah. Support much?
Tracy realizes “her brother’s friends” are reporters, which she only tolerates after a threat to expose her father’s indiscretions. Yet she sees that Mike is a serious writer, only taking this job to keep body and soul together. She admires him but accidentally-on-purpose ruins Liz’s camera.
So, the night before the wedding, she has three men circling her: her fiancé, her ex-husband, and the reporter. She gets uncharacteristically drunk after the pre-wedding dinner and goes for an innocent-enough swim with Mike. Both Dexter and George witness Mike carrying the smashed Tracy to her bedroom.
And they aren’t the only ones watching.
Thoughts:
The Philadelphia Story is a romantic comedy adapted from a play of the same name written by Philip Barry. It was remade in 1956 as High Society as a musical with Louis Armstrong providing the music. In 1995, The Philadelphia Story was selected for preservation in the National Film Registry.
Perhaps because of the film registry, the copy we got from the library was clear, and the dialogue was easy to understand, especially for a movie so old.
There are genuinely funny scenes in it. When George tries to mount a horse, the horse walks away while he has one foot in the stirrup and another in the air. He tells “Bessie” she seems worried.
“Maybe that’s because his name is Jack,” quips Dinah.
Also, the awkwardness of husband #1 inviting himself to his ex-wife’s wedding permeates the rest of the action. Cary Grant’s Dexter is so cool. He hasn’t forgotten his pipes or his golf club. He shows no animosity toward the new guy, someone he knows but considers beneath Tracy.
However, he has some unresolved issues with his old flame, and he—the erstwhile drunk who pushed her down—lectures her on how cold and unforgiving toward imperfection in herself or another human being she is. She wants to be worshipped from afar.
Hmm…. Is there a reason anyone, man or woman, must accept a physically abusive person who has an addiction—even if that abuse was “minor”? One might choose to do so for various reasons, but where does it say that it is a requirement?
Her father lectures her on how having an affectionate daughter keeps a man feeling young and, therefore, without a need for philandering. Huh? So her father’s stepping out with the dancer was her fault?
Tracy eventually sees the light and makes the right choice. Or something.
If I’d been writing the movie, the ending would be something like having Tracy cancel the wedding, but hey—we’ve got everyone here. The caterer and the staff have worked hard. Let’s have a non-reception party. The next day, Tracy can start looking for a job.
The movie garnered eight awards and eleven nominations, including a 1941 Academy Award nomination for Best Picture.
I liked a lot about this movie. There was some sheer silliness in it that was just plain fun. But I felt an underlying vein of misogyny that I can’t ignore.
The movie can be watched on Tubi with a whole slew of ads:
or on the Internet Archive:
Part 1:
Part 2:
It can also be rented or bought at places like YouTube, Amazon, and AppleTV.
Title: The Philadelphia Story (1940)
Directed by
George Cukor
Writing Credits
Donald Ogden Stewart…(screenplay)
Philip Barry…(based on the play by)
Waldo Salt…(contributing writer) (uncredited)
Cast (in credits order)
Cary Grant…C. K. Dexter Haven
Katharine Hepburn…Tracy Samantha Lord
James Stewart…Macaulay “Mike” Connor
Ruth Hussey…Elizabeth “Liz” Imbrie
John Howard…George Kittredge
Released: 1940
Length: 1 hour, 52 minutes

