Connect with us

Reviews

[REVIEW] Fantastic Fest 2024: One Unfortunate Artistic Choice Sours Otherwise Strong Doc ‘The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee’

The use of a marionette to represent Lee is by far the most compelling choice that the documentary makes, with actor Peter Serafinowicz lending his dulcet tones to bring the puppet to life. The doc imbues the wooden Lee with severity and softness, wit and woe, capturing the many sides of the often conflicted and restless actor. Lee wrote and spoke enough about his life and career that this portrayal doesn’t come across as tasteless in the way that some posthumous reanimations do, such as the CGI rendering of the aforementioned Cushing in 2016’s Rogue One. But it is noticeable that the documentary rarely includes footage of the real Lee talking, when plenty of archival interview footage certainly exists.

Published

on

I’ve made no secret of my love for Sir Christopher Lee over the years. I cried for hours when the actor died in 2015. I’ve got his iconic visage as Dracula tattooed on my leg, something I’m sure he would have hated. So when I saw that writer-director Jon Spira’s new documentary about the man, The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee, was playing at Fantastic Fest, my finger was poised to snag a ticket the moment they dropped. And while I certainly enjoyed the doc (and cried again… twice), it’s not without its faults — one of which some fans may struggle to overlook.

Lee lived an extraordinary life, and The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee manages to cover an awful lot of that life in under two hours. From Lee’s still-secretive military service during World War II to his early struggles as a too-tall actor and his bristly attitude toward being labeled the King of Horror, the documentary moves quickly yet comprehensively through Lee’s life in a mostly linear fashion, pausing to flesh out certain details like his long-time friendship with the late Peter Cushing (pass the tissues, please).

If you’ve read Lee’s autobiography, Tall, Dark and Gruesome (later re-released as Lord of Misrule), much of this information won’t be new. Yet The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee finds ways to keep the material fresh, leveraging a blend of puppetry, animation, and talking head interviews with Lee’s friends, biographers, and peers.

The use of a marionette to represent Lee is by far the most compelling choice that the documentary makes, with actor Peter Serafinowicz lending his dulcet tones to bring the puppet to life. The doc imbues the wooden Lee with severity and softness, wit and woe, capturing the many sides of the often conflicted and restless actor. Lee wrote and spoke enough about his life and career that this portrayal doesn’t come across as tasteless in the way that some posthumous reanimations do, such as the CGI rendering of the aforementioned Cushing in 2016’s Rogue One. But it is noticeable that the documentary rarely includes footage of the real Lee talking, when plenty of archival interview footage certainly exists.

Several other people talk about Lee, however, including Lee’s niece, Harriet Walter, and directors Joe Dante and Peter Jackson, who worked with Lee on Gremlins 2 and The Lord of the Rings Trilogy respectively. Lee’s friend John Landis also appears repeatedly and rather outstays his welcome, telling stories about Lee that largely revolve around himself. Meanwhile, Lee’s biographer, Jonathan Rigby, provides some interesting nuance around the actor’s rocky relationship with the horror genre and his inadvertent habit of pushing fans away.

Advertisement

These interviews and puppet interludes are spliced with footage from some of Lee’s films (though they’re rarely labeled), still photographs, and a variety of animated segments, and it’s the latter that will likely leave a sour taste in the mouth. Because, for all its use of practical puppetry, The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee can’t help but dip into AI’s bag of tricks to fill some screen time. And where other films have at least edited the work that AI produced (looking at you, Late Night with the Devil), Spira seems content to leave it obviously unfinished and, frankly, ugly.

There’s a moment in The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee when one of the talking heads comments flippantly that Hammer Film Productions — where Lee shot to fame — was not in the business of creating art. Hammer was certainly thrifty and business minded, always quick to churn out a sequel or flash a bare breast to make a quick buck, but it also had an immensely talented and hardworking crew behind the scenes who frequently spun gold out of straw. That’s why Hammer and Lee’s legacy with the company have lived on long after the horror genre at large left their brand of cozy Gothic terror behind. You can feel all the fingerprints on film, and they’re beautiful.

It’s hard to imagine something that leans so heavily on AI having as much staying power.

The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee had its North American premiere at Fantastic Fest 2024.

Advertisement

 

Samantha McLaren is a queer Scottish writer, artist, and horror fanatic living in NYC. Her writing has appeared in publications like Fangoria, Scream the Horror Magazine, and Bloody Disgusting, as well as on her own blog, Terror in Tartan. If she's not talking about Bryan Fuller's Hannibal or Peter Cushing, she's probably asleep.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Reviews

[REVIEW] The Unconventional Extremity of ‘Demonlover’ (2002)

Demonlover (2002) follows a French-based company, Volf Corporation, which is in the process of acquiring a Japanese animation studio. Diane (Connie Nielsen) is leading the acquisition after successful corporate espionage takes her boss Karen (Dominique Reymond) out of commission. Karen’s assistant, Elise Lipsky (Chloë Sevigny), vows to make sure Diane doesn’t have an easy go with any of this. Once Volf Corporation takes control of the Japanese anime studio, they try to set up a deal with an American distribution company called Demonlover, which is run by Elise Si Gibril (Gina Gershon). It soon comes to light that Demonlover is nothing more than a front for an extreme interactive torture website called the Hellfire Club.

Published

on

As a horror-centric publication, how do you follow up the month of October? It’s our Super Bowl, our Grand Prix! Curator of all things Horror Press, James-Micael Fleites had the best possible idea for the month of November: New French Extremity. New French Extremity has a few films that always come to mind when discussed with films like Martyrs, Frontier(s), and Haute Tension. But many great New French Extremity films don’t get the recognition they deserve–and the ones that don’t deserve it still need to be discussed.

The first one I think is necessary to discuss is one that teeters on the idea of horror: Demonlover.

Demonlover (2002) follows a French-based company, Volf Corporation, which is in the process of acquiring a Japanese animation studio. Diane (Connie Nielsen) is leading the acquisition after successful corporate espionage takes her boss Karen (Dominique Reymond) out of commission. Karen’s assistant, Elise Lipsky (Chloë Sevigny), vows to make sure Diane doesn’t have an easy go with any of this. Once Volf Corporation takes control of the Japanese anime studio, they try to set up a deal with an American distribution company called Demonlover, which is run by Elise Si Gibril (Gina Gershon). It soon comes to light that Demonlover is nothing more than a front for an extreme interactive torture website called the Hellfire Club. (If you thought reading that was tedious, you can only imagine how long it took me to write that.)

Let’s get the two positives out of the way first. At its soul, Demonlover tries to exist as a commentary on our extreme desensitization of violence in the modern age. Much of this desensitization started in the late ’60s when the Vietnam War was televised into people’s homes and furthered by Ted Turner’s obsession with money and the creation of the 24-hour news cycle. That was all the catalyst. When Al Gore invented the internet, that’s a joke, we had no clue just how awful the outcome would be. Demonlover’s commentary on violence in consumed media is important, but that’s really all it has going for it. Is that one piece of commentary worth an over two-hour-long student film? (More on that later.) There’s also the commentary on corporate espionage, but it falls flat compared to the rest of the film’s commentary.

The second, and final, positive aspect of Demonlover is the acting and specifically Connie Nielsen, Chloë Sevigny, and Gina Gershon. Simply put, they are bad bitches and I love them. The ‘extremity’ of this film (I watched the unrated director’s cut) wasn’t really anything to write home about, leaving the majority of carrying to these three women. It’s hard to say I didn’t like this film when the performances were as powerful as theirs were.

Advertisement

And that’s it. The film as a whole feels like a first-draft freshman film school drivel. It’s unfocused when it needs to be focused and focused when it doesn’t. The only other film I’ve seen by writer/director Olivier Assayas is his segment in Paris, Je T’aime so I can’t effectively comment on his overall style. But Demonlover feels like Assayas had an overall grand idea that became bogged down by personal preference, kinks, and an overinflated ego.

If I had a friend who said they wanted to watch a real art film, there is no way I would show them this. Because that’s all Demonlover is: an attempt to make an art film with some commentary. Assayas tries to assault your senses with sex, blood, and “authentic” violence but fails at nearly every aspect. Demonlover feels nothing more than self-masturbation; a film that proves he’s holier than thou. And let me tell you, he is far from that. At its core, Demonloveris a two-hour-long horror-adjacent exercise in futility.

Continue Reading

Reviews

[REVIEW] BHFF 2024: ‘Timestalker’ Is Timeless

Timestalker follows Agnes (Alice Lowe) through multiple decades throughout her shared life; from the 1800s to the present day, to the 1980s, and countless other decades. Agnes happens to run across the same guy in each life: Alex (Aneurin Barnard). Their strained, often one-sided love, spans their respective lifetimes in fascinating ways. While Agnes searches for her love she finds herself on the receiving end of a scorned lover by way of Nick Frost. Can Agnes and Alex find the love they are seemingly destined for?

Published

on

As someone who reviews horror content, I tend to be picky about what I decide to watch. I know what I like and what I don’t like. I cannot stand time loop films. They just don’t work for me, from Groundhog Day to Happy Death Day. And time difference love films like The Lake House? Don’t even get me started. That being said, if I stumble upon one of these types of films that pique my interest, I will go out of my way to check it out. When I read about Alice Lowe’s directorial follow-up to Prevenge, I was excited but still skeptical. Prevenge was an exciting and well-put-together horror film that caught me off guard and I knew I had to watch whatever Alice Lowe made next.

Timestalker follows Agnes (Alice Lowe) through multiple decades throughout her shared life; from the 1800s to the present day, to the 1980s, and countless other decades. Agnes happens to run across the same guy in each life: Alex (Aneurin Barnard). Their strained, often one-sided love, spans their respective lifetimes in fascinating ways. While Agnes searches for her love she finds herself on the receiving end of a scorned lover by way of Nick Frost. Can Agnes and Alex find the love they are seemingly destined for?

Since I mentioned it at the top, let’s discuss the time aspect. It should be noted that this is definitely not a time-loop movie in the typical sense. Writer/director Alice Lowe handles the time-jumping aspect of Timestalker with ease and class. Rather than trying to find some overcomplicated and underdeveloped explanation for the film’s timeframe, Lowe does something rarely seen. You can take what Lowe tells you in the third act at face value. Do you believe it or not? There’s probably no wrong answer. But if you dig a bit deeper, and believe in love and whimsy, there’s a whole other element to Lowe’s craft. (Getting into it would be too much of a spoiler.)

Honestly, I’m happy to say this is one of the very few time-based films that works incredibly well for me.

Lowe struck gold with her casting and brought multiple A-list British actors on board. First, and foremost, Alice Lowe. Lowe stuns with her lead portrayal of a character I’m pretty sure she wrote for herself. And rightfully so. Lowe’s comedic timing is unparalleled, and she’s not afraid to make herself the butt of the joke.

Advertisement

Scipio (Jacob Anderson) is an intricately written character and almost a mouthpiece for the audience. Jacob Anderson is, aside from devilishly handsome, a thrill to watch. He blends into the background when necessary and chews up the scenery when needed. But it’s Nick Frost who steals the show. Whether he’s huffing and puffing after Agnes or literally barking like a dog, you can’t help but giggle (and sometimes gasp in shock) at his performance. Also, it’s always a blast to see Kate Dickie in anything.

Timestalker was introduced by a couple of people. Caryn Coleman, of The Future of Film is Female, said something incredibly interesting about Timestalker. There will be discussions about whether or not this film is considered horror or sci-fi but according to Coleman, “It’s a horror film about love.” I couldn’t say it any better myself.

This film is not your typical horror film. It’s a deconstruction of what horror means to people. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to love or be loved. In this modern age where Vice President nominees tell you you’re less of a person for not having kids or being married by a certain age, the idea of love is being retconned. If your love isn’t the way it’s “supposed to be” then you’re wrong. And that’s bullshit.

Timestalker is a fun and fascinating breakdown of what is. I don’t think this film will work for everyone, and I’m about 80% sure a particular group of people (looking at you, Vice President nominee, and fans) will take away the wrong message from this film. Those who get this film will get it. Those are the people Alice Lowe made this film for.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Horror Press Mailing List

Fangoria
Advertisement
Advertisement