The Bloody Pit #74 - AND GOD SAID TO CAIN (1970)

John Hudson and I return to the films of Antonio Margheriti! This time we stick to the spaghetti western theme of our last episode together with 1970's AND GOD SAID TO CAIN, but it is important to note that this movie is a bit of a hybrid. It incorporates elements of horror films to give it's tale of revenge some added kick. In fact, there are several sequences that look very much like something that could have been lifted from one of the director's Gothic tales from the 1960's. The majority of the story takes place over a single stormy night in which death visits dozens of six-gun carrying bad guys as they end up on the wrong side of a bullet or two. Add to that a lead performance from the amazing Klaus Kinski and you have the makings of some western tinged nightmare fuel!

I've included in the show the excellent theme song for the film called Rocks, Blood and Sand. It's sung by Don Powell who also wrote the lyrics with Carlo Savina's incredible music making this a real classic. It's one of my favorite western themes of all time and I think you'll agree. As Mr. Hudson and I discuss this one we take note of the script's smart timeline, the interesting choice of hair color, the odd use of red wardrobe for one particular character and how using men's fear against them is often the easiest way to prevail in a fight. I then take the time to put forth my pet theory about the nature of Kinski's character while John again finds a place for an invisible chimp. Sometimes I hate that man! 

If you have any comments or question we can be reached at thebloodypit@gmail.com or over on the Bloody Pit FaceBook page. Thank you for downloading and listening to the show. Have a happy Halloween!

iTunes LINK

Direct Download LINK

The Bloody Pit #26 - CASTLE OF BLOOD and WEB OF THE SPIDER

After a short delay John Hudson and I finally sit down to discuss two of director Antonio Margheriti's scary films. This time out we delve into his Gothic Horror output with the Barbara Steele featuring CASTLE OF BLOOD (1964) and Margheriti's remake of that film WEB OF THE SPIDER (1971). Yes, you read that correctly - much like about a dozen other filmmakers Margheriti remade his own film and in this case seems to have used the same script. And the same score too! But since the score is by Riz Ortolani that might be considered a mark of brilliance instead of a cost cutting measure. There are some striking differences though starting with the fact that the first film was made in glorious, shadow-filled black & white while the remake was filmed in color. Does this visual choice end up making or breaking the story? 

As you might expect when discussing two separate but very similar films we speak about the points of departure the later film makes from the first incarnation while trying to determine which is a better version of this ghostly tale. There is much to discuss when comparing the legendary Barbara Steele to the beautiful blonde lady that took on her role seven years later. It turns out that French actress Michèle Mercier had quite an interesting career and serving as a replacement for a horror icon might have been a step down for her. In another casting coup, WEB OF THE SPIDER also has the amazing Klaus Kinski adding his thespian skills in a small but pivotal role as Edgar Allan Poe. Yeah- no matter which version you watch this is an interesting story.  

If you have any comments or suggestions for future podcasts you can drop us an email at thebloodypit@gmail.com and we'll take your thoughts under advisement. Mr. Hudson and I will be continuing our trip through Margheriti-ville soon by dipping into his westerns so we hope you'll come back for that. Thank you so much for downloading and listening. 

iTunes LINK 

MP3 LINK 

WEB OF THE SPIDER (1971) on YouTube!

I am always stunned by the number of obscure cult films that are so easily available for free. This is one of the Antonio Margheriti film's we'll be covering next month in the Bloody Pit podcast. It's the director's remake of his own earlier film CASTLE OF BLOOD (1964) making it one of the very few times such a thing has happened. We plan to compare and contrast the two movies so if you want to play along here is your chance to get started.

Jess Franco poster art - Part 11!

Nice art work for VENUS IN FURS playing up Klaus Kinski's small role. Wish I liked this film more than I do. I really found it to be dull.

COMMANDO LEOPARD (1985)

I watched this Antonio Margheriti action flick the other night and was stunned by how damned good it was. Not that Mr. Dawson doesn't usually entertain the hell out of me but this sucker rocked more than I expected. Tight, well structured and strongly cast it moves along at a good clip but never feels rushed. There is a lot of story and some good characters that I actually began to care about so that the ending had a real effect on me.

Of course, Margheriti always brings the action chops to bear in these movies with every battle being suspenseful and exciting. This apparently had a good sized budget and it really shows in the well staged gunfights and action set pieces. The usual Margheriti use of very good miniatures is in evidence and are better than average even though I think they are always pretty damned good. The explosive destruction of a fuel train is absolutely fantastic and a highlight. Margheriti knew how to stage, light and coordinate scenes to take maximum advantage of his old style special effects and personally I prefer such work to the stiff plastic CGI we are used to today.

This was the second of three action movies Margheriti made with British actor Lewis Collins. He's a very good as the hero with the great Klaus Kinski digging his talons into the main villain role. If I had a disappointment with the film it would be that these two never have a climactic clash but the end Kinski's character meets is far too satisfying to seriously complain. Hell! The movie even has the Italian Peter Lorre in a prominent role and any film with Luciano Pigozzi is worth a look!

EVIL FACE (1974)

I watched the Euro-trash film EVIL FACE (a.k.a. The Hand That Feeds the Dead) tonight and found it to be a really mixed bag. A fairly standard riff on EYES WITHOUT A FACE (a sub-genre with more entries than you might think) it has several points of interest but still can’t completely score.

First the good- it stars Klaus Kinski doing his typical great job with what little he is given. He plays the tragic doctor trying to return his scarred wife’s beauty by slicing flesh from unwilling donors. Strangely these transplants seem to go very well which isn’t the norm for the genre but the doc’s been at it for ten years so I guess he’s ironed out the problems. The ladies on display are all lovely and have just enough personality to make each interesting. My old friend Frank used to joke that ALL films have a lesbian scene but most get cut out in the final edit. Well EVIL FACE keeps its Sapphic Scene intact and it is nicely erotic- if you like that sort of thing. I enjoyed the period setting and location shooting which gave the picture some real flavor. The story moves pretty well and I was rarely bored by it but....

...it never really jells either. The story is a mess with the focus shifting from one character to the next with little reason. The person we are lead to think is the main character is very often shunted off screen (or into a lesbian embrace) while we watch scenes of everyone else mill about and do things. Too much time is spent on the tedious surgery sequences in which it is obvious Kinski is not the man behind the scalpel. I’ve no idea why he didn’t do these scenes but its clearly not him and the film suffers because of it. I kept waiting for the close-ups of Klaus giving an intense look at his handy work that would indicate his satisfaction, fear or anything at all. Not having these kinds of emotional touches make the laborious, gory grafting scenes get old quite fast. It’s a shame as Kinski could have really enlivened this stuff as he ably demonstrates in his surprisingly short time onscreen. His weepy breakdown near the end is highly effective and shows exactly why you hire someone like him.

In the end it’s the unfocused nature of the narrative that keeps the film from being very good. While it’s possible to move from character to character in the course of a film and retain a connection with the audience (think PSYCHO) it takes more scripting skill than is evident here. In the end, although it isn’t a terrible film it also isn’t good. As for the MYA DVD the less said the better. If I had paid for this disc instead of renting I would be furious. Taken from a videotape source it looks washed out and generally crappy while the English subtitles are pathetic in their laziness. That they want more than $20 for this is a joke of the bad kind.

Kinski's PAGANINI (1989)

One of the best things about the various Yahoo Groups I belong to is that the members often push me to read, listen to and see things I might never have tried otherwise. Such is definitely the case with the EuroTrash Paradise. The list of books and movies these guys have turned me onto would fill a notebook! Returning to a fine tradition of the group this past week was the Twisted Video Book Club in which we watch a particular film and discuss it. Dan Taylor of Exploitation Retrospect provided this crazed film that appears to have been Klaus Kinski's last. Here are the comments I added to the very long, all day talk. I'm one of the few that found something to like about this movie. Enjoy- and if you're so inclined- pop over and join in the discussions with the rest of us. We're always happy for more!

Madness!
That seems to be the theme of Kinski’s PAGANINI. But then when a film is written, edited and directed by the mad man that is K2 then I guess that would have been the theme no matter what. I assume Klaus felt a strong kinship to Paganini as he throws himself into the role completely. Not that Kinski ever half-assed his way through anything but he seems especially invested in this man’s life. I wonder if he saw his own life as reflected in some of the sad events depicted here.

I have no idea of the historical veracity of this crazed film but it is at least visually arresting- not so much for its photography, although that might be judged fine if a better print could ever be found. It’s more an arresting kaleidoscope of images and partial scenes edited together to push the viewer into Paganini’s life. As laid out by Kinski the man was a rock star of his time as we are shown dozens of women swooning over him in ways that reminded me of reactions to The Beatles. Playing to sold out crowds, tearing through bows, abusing his violin as if possessed by a musical demon the man’s genius was unquestionable. But also undeniable was his sexual obsession with under age girls and by the 25 minute mark we are introduced to Paganini’s terrible treatment of a young girl whom he seduced and promised to marry. Once she became pregnant he tried to induce an abortion and nearly killed the poor child. Then we jump into his marriage, his mistreatment and neglect of his wife, her eventual suicide and this loving relationship with his son. Sadly, all of this is played out in a confusion of images, slow motion photography and pointless scenes of Kinski eating food, riding in carriages and walking across courtyards.

And yet- and yet… I was not actually bored! The film has no real story or plot and nearly no coherent through line at all, but I was kind of mesmerized. It’s not that I was unaware of time passing but even as I became occasionally frustrated with a pointless sequence I found myself caught up in wondering where things were going and what mad thing was going to play across the screen next. A constant jumble of often disconnected things the film begins to take on the feel of a dream. Perhaps a fever dream? Could this be KInski’s ideas of the imaginings of Paganini on his deathbed? A rush of memories pulled and stretched, chopped and misaligned in a brain wracked with both disease, hatred and guilt?

While it doesn’t have a plot it does have a point- and sometimes that’s enough. When something tries hard to be both about art and a piece of art simultaneously pretensions creep in. I don’t find that to be the case with PAGANINI- well –not all the time. It is far from perfect but it is unarguably alive, vital and fascinating. One could argue over the necessity of multiple scenes of beautiful women masturbating because of an unhealthy need for Paganini and question if the man was as obsessed by asses as Kinski portrays him- but why bother! This is a mad disaster and an often lyrical rumination on a life spent rolling in beauty and filth. Amazing.