There are times I will run across a movie that I had no idea was made. Mostly I mean movies that maybe I had thought would make a good movie, from comics or TV shows or whatever else my mind thinks of. Mostly I mean sequels though. Take the movie The Blob for example. I knew there was a remake to the film but I didn't know there was once a sequel made to the originaly film. One day I was just clicking at random on horror movies on Netfilx, I ran across a movie called Beware! The Blob (1972) and thought "What's this?" I almost bumped it up in the queue but figured I would just get around to it eventually. That time is now and I can't say, after watching it, that I am glad for that.As you can tell from the picture, Beware! The Blob was directed by Larry Hagman. He was also in the movie somewhere but I managed to miss him because he plays a hobo. What I did see for the opening credits was a kitten. It was walking around, rolling around, basicly just being a kitten out in a field. Believe it or not, this does play into the actual plot of the movie...kinda sorta. The kitten ends up being food for the blob you see. Chester (Godfrey Cambridge) has a frozen sample of the blob in his freezer. When his wife leaves it sitting out it thaws out and once again, the blob is on the rampage. The first person to see it, and live, is Lisa Clark (Gwynne Gilford). She sees Chester covered by the blob and somehow knows he is being desolved by it. She jumps in her track and races over to her boyfriend's place and runs Edward Fazio (Richard Stahl) who becomes a somewhat important character later on in the movie. Bobby (Robert Walker Jr.) heads back to Chester's with Lisa. As they pass Edward, who is now agrueing with the Sheriff (Richard Webb), he points out Lisa to the Sheriff and they both go see what is going on. Of course they aren't believed until it almost to late!
Beware! The Blob has very few effects in it. Mostly they just envolve the blob being in front of the camera. There are only a couple of shots that try and give us an idea of how big the blob is getting with each feeding. One of the nice things about the remake was that they actually tried to show what the blob did to people. You will find nothing like that, not even a suggestion outside of what someone says, here in this movie. The acting is ok, not great but not bad either. I will get into what I thought was wrong with the acting here in just a little bit further into the review. From what I was reading, this movie features a lot of people from 70's TV. This is a bit before my time so I don't really know if this is true or not. I do remember Richard Stahl from a couple of different shows that came later. Robert Walker Jr. I think I know from somewhere but can't place him. The one person that I knew right away though was Dick Van Patten who plays a scoutmaster. Acording to his troup, something happens to their scoutmaster but we never see that.
As much as I wanted to like this sequel, I just couldn't. The acting was playing it off as a somewhat serious movie for the most part. There was some acting that played it off like the camp movie that it is but the lead actors were treating it a little more serious and it is the contradiction that spoils Beware! The Blob for me. If you want to make a campy movie then that is fine by me but go all out with it. I did enjoy some parts. How they finished off the blob and what happened right after I have to admit was pretty good but the ending alone doesn't save this one. If you like campy movies then you might give this a try but I know I will stear clear of it from now on.
2 out of 5 Wondering if my older readers had any "clackers"
4 comments:
I know of this film and that J.R. Ewing himself directed it, but I've never seen it.
Although, my impression of it always was it was pretty bad AND low-budget.
Re: "clankers"... don't know what that is. Unless you meant "clackers", that goofy toy where you have two glass balls connected by a rope and you swing it up and down so the balls "clack" together when they hit each other.
THAT I remember although I never played with any.
For a period of time there, man! they were everywhere!
And boy, they were annoying!
I never played with them because I was always nervous that the balls would eventually shatter into my face.
And I'm curious about your comments about the acting.
If I understand it right, it seems you're criticizing those actors who are acting straight or serious, versus those who act as if it were campy.
Now, acting campy can go two ways: you can act broadly but stay in character, or you can act like you're in on the joke.
The latter type I usually dislike... I think that works against a film, even if it's intentionally campy, funny or a parody.
Usually, acting straight or serious in a preposterous scenario works much better. Like Leslie Nielson's performance in AIRPLANE!
So, I'm wondering what style of acting you were actually criticizing. I may agree with you, but for the opposite reason: I dislike those actors who act like they're in a campy movie, not the ones being serious.
Some day I may see this out of interest in cheesy film fare, but a lot of me ain't rushing to do so.
I understand what you are saying Cattleworks. I though Nielson's performance was funny even though it was delivered in a very straight forward manner. He was being serious but it still came across as being funny but that wasn't the case here. It wasn't funny to me at all so I didn't like the approach. Then again I also think if you are going to do a campy horror movie it should be listed as a comedy and not horror, after all horror movies are meant to scare you, not make you laugh the entire time.
There was something else I noticed in this movie. I didn't put it in the review just because I didn't think of it at the time I was writing it. A problem for me at times that is. Anyways, I noticed the blob would seem to be able to get through glass with no problem at all. It went through a screen door at one point. I didn't think anything of at first until in a later scene you can clearly see there is glass there.
Then later on I noticed it again. The blob getting through a closed window with no problem. But there was also times when it couldn't get through glass. When the main characters are traped in their truck (as you see in the picture on the review) and another time when they are traped in a building. It was a bit strange to say the least. Just bugs me when things work one way but only for the "heros" or whoever is the main characters.
Well yes maam, I know what they is. But like my esteemed co-hort in horror reviews appreciation, Mr. Cattleworks, I never owned any either. But I think my problem was sort of the reverse. I was afraid I would let myself use mine to smash the head of idiots playing with theirs (grinning).
I have never seen this one Miss Heather, and I am not sure that is going to change either, lol. I have to agree, the fact the blob could do some things at times, and then not be able to duplicate those feats later makes no sense at all. Besides if it could move through glass (a screen I could almost buy, but not the glass), then I have to ask - why didn't it just open or move through the freezer door to begin with before being frozen? Things that make me go hmmmmm. Of course it helps if you are a bit crazy, but still, lol, I think you can follow my perverse logic.
I also have to agree with both of you that Leslie was fantastic in how he approached his role in Airplane. But I have to agree with you Miss Heather, different actors being serious and camp would not work well for me either. One or the other but not both.
I also agree with you, if you are going to call it a horror, then make it a horror. It really irritates me more than a little how some folks seem to intentionally mislabel a movie simply to draw a segment of the viewing audience (like horror fans) into buying the ticket or renting/buying the movie.
The lack of effects don't really hurt a movie for me, at least if they are suggested in a logical way. Especially in earlier movies when the craft really had not been well developed yet, I tend to be more forgiving. I can even accept it in low budget films, as long as the suggestions are logical anyway.
But as a major pet lover, and a guy with 3 cats - all of whom were typical kittens at one point - shame on Hagman for letting them pick on a poor, defenseless, playful, sweet kitten like that (angry and looking for a gun to load. Oh wait, someone already shot him didn't they (rolling my eyes)). I reckon it was too bad they used blanks, maybe they could have avoided this one is they had used live rounds (grinning).
I do value your judgment Miss Heather, so I simply think I will steer clear of this one sweet lady. So thanks for tolerating it so that I won't have to (tips my hat).
Post a Comment