World War One in Classic Film Blogathon: Pack Up Your Troubles (1932)

Introduction

When trying to decide what film to cover for the World War I Blogathon I wasn’t surprised either by the number of films, or by the number of films I have yet to see. The reason that is so is that there are things about World War I that make it, to an extent, less conducive to cinematic representation than other artforms.

The complexities of the causality of World War I as well as the carnage make it such that there are not as many treatments of it on celluloid. Clearly, World War II was rife with atrocity and death, but the sides and aims were far more clear there. It makes archetypal depictions, and now an exploration of gray areas, far easier. The Movies, Silently comparison of the war to a barroom brawl is a good one; for further detail you could look at it as an inevitable endgame of the last era of imperial expansion and over-zealous treaty-drafting. It puts it into understandable context and shows what unbridled chaos existed. Such chaos on film is better as a detailed snapshot rather than an overview, in novels more detail could be explored.

Pack Up Your Trouble (1932, MGM)

Therefore, films typically focus on the fighters not the fight because it’s just too much obfuscated politics for audiences, then or now, to care about.

So with all that in mind I started looking through options as the few titles I’d seen were taken. There were other new-to-me options that were taken but I settled on Pack up Your Troubles starring Laurel and Hardy. It’s interesting also to pick a comedy because the fallout from World War I included the birth of existentialism and change in the kinds of entertainment people wanted, at least for a time. During, and especially after the war, silent cinema came of age. Subject matters became more serious and features became predominant. However, this feature coming at the start of the Golden Age, and sound, escapism was coming back.

Interestingly the film in question here is one that was made in 1932 the very year in which Adolf Hitler became chancellor of Germany and events would unfold leading to World War II. But enough history, well strictly history, let’s get into the film.

Pack Up Your Troubles (1932)

Pack Up Your Troubles (1932, MGM)

Now to the present-day audience the title itself was an allusion to the Great War and a hint as to what the adventures of Laurel and Hardy may entail. Pack Up Your Troubles references a war time tune that you can hear here.

What my precise viewing filmography with Laurel and Hardy is remains uncertain because I remember as I was growing up there was a time I’d find their films on TV on Saturday mornings (Probably on TCM) and watch them, sometimes from the middle, and not have any notion of what the title was. I cannot even recall how many of these titles were features.

I did see one of their features for 31 Days of Oscar not too long ago and really enjoyed it. As for Pack Up Your Troubles it starts out similar to their other titles. The war has started and and Ollie is looking to get out of service by claiming disability. As expected, Stan blows their cover without meaning to and they’re off to basic training and eventually the trenches.

Pack Up Your Troubles (1932, MGM)

There are some slapstick scenarios built-in that are moderately funny, but not among their best. This is without even taking into account the fact that jokes in a war film can only be so funny due to the cacophonous nature of battle and the lives at stake, see 1941 as an example.

To this film’s credit, despite the fact that it’s not that great, it realizes there’s only so much to do there and the thrust of the film has a heartwarming element where they’re trying to unite a little girl (Jacquie Lynn) with her grandparents after their friend, Eddie (Donald Dillaway), dies in battle. In essence, it’s a bit like Ollie and Stan’s version of The Kid, except true to their character they will not keep the kid, but do want to do right by her.

What this creates for the remainder of the hour-long tale is quite a few skits where they are looking for a Smith family and finding the wrong one. There is, of course, follow-through and a central plot, but it’s a narrative structure that allows the pair of foils to play in a milieu that is not unfamiliar to them in the least.

Pack Up Your Troubles (1932, MGM)

Having said that with the stakes being raised, and somewhat serious, and with the gags being not as frequent or as memorable as in many of their other titles it makes it a bit of a tepid affair.

While the war itself is left by the wayside in the story the effects, and collateral damage does follow into peacetime just as it did in reality so that much is fine and works effectively. The resolution the film reaches is also very satisfactory, funny and well handled despite its convenience.

Pack Up Your Troubles (1932, MGM)

In fashion not dissimilar to World War II it seems there was an “We all have to pitch in” and tell a tale dealing with the War to End All Wars. Laurel and Hardy weren’t the only renowned comedians to handle it. If you know them they bring the film to a conclusion you’d expect. It’s mild escapist fare, but certainly not the best evidence of their comedic genius as a tandem. In fact, the film probably works best as a humorous fable of the reconstituting of families after the war that occurred the world over.

Short Film Saturday: The Strange and Eerie Memoirs of Billy Wuthergloom

This is a funny and off-beat horror short that is a perfect light start to 61 Days of Halloween. It feels like it could be the prelude to a series or teaser for a a feature but still works on its own. It features BAM-Award nominee Peter DaCunha and Jake Goodman, probably best known for his role on Life with Boys. Enjoy!

Mini-Review: 11/11/11

Introduction

This is a post that is a repurposing of an old-school Mini-Review Round-Up post. As stated here I am essentially done with running multi-film review posts. Each film deserves its own review. Therefore I will repost, and at times add to, old reviews periodically. Enjoy!

11/11/11

This is a film that was completely unknown to me until it landed on Netflix recently. While it wasn’t very well distributed either I did manage to seek out and find Darren Lynn Bousman’s synonymous film last year. This film does benefit from the fact that it’s less oblique and let’s face it cutesy about its prophecy. However, what it lacks in pretentions it makes up for with overly transparent redundancies. However, I do have to hand it to this film for choosing to keep the proper thing clandestine and having a successful climactic sequence and a satisfying albeit somewhat confounding final twist and a good one before that. The success of the third act isn’t enough to make it good or something I’d recommend to a general audience, but it’s worth a watch for open-minded genre fans for sure.

4/10

Mini-Review: Red State

Introduction

This is a post that is a repurposing of an old-school Mini-Review Round-Up post. As stated here I am essentially done with running multi-film review posts. Each film deserves its own review. Therefore I will repost, and at times add to, old reviews periodically. Enjoy!

Red State

I’m sorry but I just do not understand all the vitriol about Kevin Smith. You can say what you like about his P.T. Barnum act with taking this film on the road and the rest of it but I think this is solid stuff and very different than all his prior works. It has a horror aspect, occasional laughs, political overtones and some darn solid acting from James Parks, Kyle Gallner and Michael Angarano. Most of them being involved plus hockey makes Hit Somebody something to look forward to indeed.

9/10

Mini-Review: Bereavement

Introduction

This is a post that is a repurposing of an old-school Mini-Review Round-Up post. As stated here I am essentially done with running multi-film review posts. Each film deserves its own review. Therefore I will repost, and at times add to, old reviews periodically. Enjoy!

Bereavement

This is a post that will cull from many sources on this site.

It’s hard to know where to start (or to stop) talking about Bereavement. It is quite simply a symphony of horror. Though I take back nothing I said about Insidious or Hatchet on Twitter this is the most blown away by a horror film that I’ve been since I first saw Frailty. Spencer List’s dialogueless but significant role in this film is strong enough to make me reconsider my Creepiest Kids in Supporting Roles list. For Stevan Mena as an auteur this is a true tour-de-force as he directs, writes and scores this film brilliantly. It’s one of the deepest casts in a horror film I’ve seen in a long time and one of the few I’ve seen after reaching my Age of Cynicism regarding horror were nothing feels safe or sacred.

Bereavement was nominated for 3 BAM Awards.

It was one of the best horror movies of the year and one of the best films of the year in general.

However, its impact on me is already fairly long-lasting as evidenced by this list

10/10

2014 BAM Award Considerations – August

I decided that with the plethora of BAM Awards-related post towards the end of 2013 and the start of this year it was best to wait to the end of this month before officially recommencing the process.

I will post these lists towards the end of the month to allow for minimal updates. By creating a new post monthly, and creating massive combo files offline, it should make the process easier for me and more user-friendly for you, the esteemed reader. Enjoy.

Eligible Titles

Guardians of the Galaxy
The November Man
As Above, So Below
Into the Storm
Expendables 3
The Giver
Step Up All In
The Hundred Foot Journey
Locke
The Custody

Best Picture

The Giver
The Custody

Best Foreign Film

The Custody

Best Documentary

Most Overlooked Film

As intimated in my Most Underrated announcement this year, I’ve decided to make a change here. Rather than get caught up in me vs. the world nonsense and what a film’s rating is on an aggregate site, the IMDb or anywhere else, I want to champion smaller, lesser-known films. In 2011 with the selection of Toast this move was really in the offing. The nominees from this past year echo that fact. So here, regardless of how well-received something is by those who’ve seen it, I’ll be championing indies and foreign films, and the occasional financial flop from a bigger entity.

Locke

Best Director

Locke

Best Actress

Best Actor

Tom Hardy Locke
Phillippe Doucet The Custody

Best Supporting Actress

Best Supporting Actor

Jeff Bridges The Giver

Best Performance by a Young Actress in a Leading Role

Best Performance by a Young Actor in a Leading Role

Antoine L’Écuyer The Custody

Best Performance by a Young Actress in a Supporting Role

Best Performance by a Young Actor in a Supporting Role

Best Cast

Guardians of the Galaxy
Locke
The Custody

Best Youth Ensemble

Best Original Screenplay

Locke
The Custody

Best Adapted Screenplay

Guardians of the Galaxy

Best Score

Locke
The Hundred Foot Journey

Best Editing

Guardians of the Galaxy
The Custody

Best Sound Editing/Mixing

Guardians of the Galaxy
Expendables 3
The Giver
Locke

Best Cinematography

The Giver
Locke
The Custody

Best Art Direction

Guardians of the Galaxy
The Hundred Foot Journey

Best Costume Design

Guardians of the Galaxy
The Giver

Best Makeup

Guardians of the Galaxy
The Giver

Best Visual Effects

Guardians of the Galaxy
The Giver

Best (Original) Song

Mini-Review: Stake Land

Introduction

This is a post that is a repurposing of an old-school Mini-Review Round-Up post. As stated here I am essentially done with running multi-film review posts. Each film deserves its own review. Therefore I will repost, and at times add to, old reviews periodically. Enjoy!

Stake Land

A post-apocalyptic world wherein vampires rule and it’s kill or be killed.

There is a lot going for this film from cinematography to score to a well-delivered, at times poetic, at times humorous narration by the lead Connor Paolo. Where Stake Land struggles some is in its pace. There are some potentially rather huge situations glossed over and a lot of time is dedicated to roaming the abandoned countryside. There is also a lot of great acting in this film. While it is recommended viewing it’s also nowhere near as good as it could’ve been.

7/10

Mini-Review: Super

Introduction

This is a post that is a repurposing of an old-school Mini-Review Round-Up post. As stated here I am essentially done with running multi-film review posts. Each film deserves its own review. Therefore I will repost, and at times add to, old reviews periodically. Enjoy!

Super

A truly odd little film that can’t escape comparisons to Kick-Ass. While it never does metamorphose fully into a superhero film (and that’s fine) its quirk never really clicks as well as it should and the resolution (meaning the denouement not the climax) is a bit unsatisfying. A very good performance by Rainn Wilson but the film could’ve been much better.

6/10

1984 Blogathon: Devil Fish

Introduction

When deciding what to pick for a 1984-themed blogathon there were many great options. It was a great year. However, many of those were taken so I thought it’d be fun to go off the beaten path. At first I considered something foreign or very obscure. What ended up happening was that it turns out I had written about many of my favorites already. So that introduced a new possibility: something memorably bad; the only debate was “Do I want to write about two bad movies in a row?”

When I decided I did I was instantly surprised. Little did I know that when I chose Devil Fish there would be quite a few things about it to uncover that I had not known prior to starting on this post.

In the beginning, when I first saw it it was just another in the myriad of unfortunate works of cinema that Mystery Science Theatre 3000 introduced me to. Having revisited the film and asking myself questions like “Who wrote this?” and “Who directed this?” I came across some interesting answers that with more experience allowed me to better understand one of the eternal questions about bad films which is “What the hell happened there?”

So the first and most significant discovery I made regarding this film was that the director behind the credit of John Old, Jr. is in fact Lamberto Bava. This being the same Lamberto Bava of Macabre, and a film I have come to love when I just had to see it (as I wrote a short script in the same milieu) Demons. As it turns out he slapped a pseudonymous credit on a few of his works that were in the Italian low-budget rip-off arena. Fashioning this nom de plume after his father’s. Legendary Italian director Mario Bava had many great films but he did the occasional film he felt the need to take a John Old credit for.

Devil Fish is one of countless titles that have sought to cheaply gain an audience by playing off the popularity of Jaws, which will be eternal. I’m not one who tosses about the rip-off phrase about lightly. However, one can scarcely find a shark movie made after 1975 that doesn’t pattern itself after Jaws in some way, shape or form. This doesn’t have the failed tongue-in-cheek homages that say Sharknado has, but it definitely borrows liberally and was produced less than a decade after the original while Universal was still littering the landscape with subpar sequels.

Behind-The-Scenes

Devil Fish (1984, Cinema Shares International)

So that was one thing, but wait there’s more! As it turns out most of the behind-the-scenes talent took on pseudonyms as well. Usually in this case they are somewhat anglicized versions of their given names. For example, cinematographer Giancarlo Ferrando became John McFerrand. Now, one could try to argue that part of the attempt is to make the film seem more genuinely American-made. However, all of the cast doesn’t play ball and one of the go-to jokes for the MST3K crew was “We’re from Europe!” so no one was being fooled.

Beyond the names there are plenty of things to scratch your head about in wonder, or to at least note. Firstly, is that much in the Italian tradition actors came from all over the place and spoke several different languages while the camera rolled and then the dialogue was dubbed to create a uniform soundtrack. That by itself does not guarantee a bad film. I’ve seen well-dubbed works and many of the better low-budget Italian films were made the same way.

Getting back to the Jaws rip-off angle leads to one of the most infuriating parts of this film. There are several underwater shots that are supposed to tease the creature much like Bruce was scarcely seen. The problem here is that it is very difficult to decipher, at times, exactly what you are looking at. Instead of suspense all this builds is confusion, sighs and unintended humor.

The aforementioned John McFerrand’s score is one of the facets that heavily confuses the issue in this film. It sounds like the kind of antithetical music that makes a lot of giallo and Italian horror work but here it just seems to be terribly out of place, drown things out and distract from what the film is trying to accomplish. Just what that is at times is also confused, but you know what I mean.

Dialogue

Devil Fish (1984, Cinema Shares International)

What would a bad movie be without bad dialogue? It’s almost impossible. Much as great movies have memorable lines, bad movies do as well. A few gems that really stand out. Here are a few of those notable exchanges:

“Full of hate?”
“Hate.”
“Yes…That’s it….hate.”

“Do you think it was an accident or that she committed suicide?”
“I don’t know I think that’s for you to decide.”
“Yeah, right on. I think I’ll decide on suicide.”

“Lots of new things in this town lately waitresses, sharks, and ladies who call a taxi and take a bath.”

“A million years of solitude is a long time. I bet it’s just dying to boff something.”

Editing

Devil Fish (1984, Cinema Shares International)

In continuing the laundry list there is also a fair deal of editorial redundancy in this film. The uninspired editing is due to a number of factors namely the script and budget (which influences the tight schedule this film was made on). Aside from the vague shots of the fish that are supposed induce suspense there are also several shots cutting to Peter drinking repeatedly.

Those motifs aside there are mysterious individual cuts like a cutaway to slow-motion pan up phone line to a clock.

Some support for the effects of the schedule and budget can be found in a Michael Skopkiw online interview here:

I would love to know the definition or formula for a “cult classic”. Lamberto was a very nice, gentle guy as most of the Italians are. But you know, the budget on these films would prohibit a Ron Howard from making anything great! These directors are working with a cast from at least three different countries speaking diverse languages and a mixed crew of Italian /American production team on a very tight budget. Lamberto , like most of the foreign crew, loved coming to the States and drinking in as much of our culture as they could get. (The hills of Georgia have a unique personality somewhat portryed [sic] in this film.) We had a crisis one day as a holiday was approaching and the Iataian [sic] film crew wanted to get back to their families. We had been working for 13, I think, long consecutive days in freezing mountain water and adverse conditions and both the cast and Lamberto were wearing thin. The crew wanted to plow right through but I had a good talk with Lamberto and pointed out how the film suffered further if we just continued. He finally went to the producers and they gave us a day off (which they were contractually obliged to anyway). So he did have a heart and tried to do what he could with what he had.

However, the decisions are the decisions regardless of what forced them and many films have succeeded with small budgets and tight schedules, myriad examples of both exist running the gamut of genres.

Even when cuts aren’t technically awkward the narrative makes them aesthetically unintentionally comedic or uncomfortable like a cut from a dolphin to a legless corpse and a cross-cutting sequence between a sex scene (that’s fairly gratuitous) and a murder.

Blame

Devil Fish (1984, Cinema Shares International)

In terms of writing it could be the speed and the number of chefs in the kitchen that lead to a film that referring to as half-baked would be greatly generous.

As I’ve intimated before one cannot blame the inspiration for what the inspired do with it. Meaning that you can’t hold it against Psycho for the rash of slasher films that eventually took their cue from it. Similarly, Jaws cannot be held accountable for the rash of pale imitations telling tales of terrors from the deep.

Characterization

Devil Fish (1984, Cinema Shares International)

In this film the characters don’t really get established, they just are. If you need further evidence of this it gets reinforced later on when there’s a climactic scene, where the stakes should be high and the revelation is large and to an extent you’re confused as to who the parties are; therefore, you haven’t time to care about what they have to hide and what they have to gain.

Part of that has to do with how many characters there are and another part of it has to do with the dubbing. I’ve written on dubbing a few times. In short, my stance is that it can be an artform, there is a technique to it and it can be well done, but all too often it is not. In this film is most definitely a detriment. It’s not just about matching, but about performance, but when the same language is not being spoken on set you have a harder time creating a unified vision on film.

Backfiring

Devil Fish (1984, Cinema Shares International)

It seems almost impossible to say after all of this, however, all is not entirely lost in this film. However, in the true nature of this film that adds to the frustration instead of just imbuing a modicum of appreciation. There are themes that excised from the narratives are fine. There are permutations of the giant, monstrous fish tale that aren’t terrible.The isolated concept of manipulating science, the twists employed, underwater knife fights and not seeing the monster are fine when all has not already been lost. When the movie has already lost hope then these things just make it longer, more boring, unintentionally comedic and worse.

As if you needed further proof that there are things worth working with here this film was remade as Sharktopus on Syfy a few years back. Likely another wasteful effort, but there was something to mine there indeed.

Furthermore, touching on the aforementioned twist again, the mysteries this film plays hurt it. It’s a case where perhaps further, quicker revelation would have elevated it.

Conclusion

Devil Fish (1984, Cinema Shares International)

What is there to conclude about a film such as this? Not much different than other terrible movies that are of the MST3K ilk. I recall reading about The Beast of Yucca Flats and its making, or watching the special features on their take of Manos: Hands of Fate; what I got there was there’s always a story and that was the spirit I undertook this venture in. What was surprising was that I found more of a story than I expected. Having said all this, can I, as I did with Reefer Madness, recommend you watch this anyway? I can’t do so without aid from the Satellite of Love. Your tolerance for cheese has to be really high. If you want to see either Bava at their best I suggest you stray from titles where they were credited as being “Old,” unless you want to end up prematurely in that state yourself.