I mean how could another scientist, playing around with teleportation, somehow get mixed with fly genes and become a walking embodiment of manfly terror. What kind of story would warrant a reaction from the audience that wasn't boredom and didn't feel derivative of the last two films. As well, the budget for Return of the Fly was minuscule compared with The Fly so I was positive the budget for this one would be even less.
Well lo and behold was I surprised by this film. It was much better than expected and in fact was intrigued and interesting and captivating from start to finish. Unlike the first two films in the series, Curse of the Fly is a straight out horror film. It still has a few elements of science fiction but the tone and story is outright horror. The story is original and somewhat clever and the acting is universally better than the acting in the previous films.
The story takes place about two or three generations later than Return of the Fly. (I wasn't sure if the main character was the grandson or great grandson of the manfly from Return. It is a little loose and a little confusing chronologically speaking and there are a few plot holes that make connecting the dots to the previous entry rather difficult.) Martin Delambre is our titular hero this time out. Working with his brother Albert and his father Henri, they have almost perfected the teleportation device. Almost! Henri, is obsessive and hides errors with the machine from Martin. Martin falls in love, gets married and hides a terrible secret from his new wife. No one turns into a fly here, rather, as the title suggests, there is a 'curse' that has been set upon the Delambre family.
That's all I'll say about the story as I don't want to give away the surprises the story lays out but I will say I was hooked from the get go with this film. It has a very modern sensibility to it and seems to have many elements that are prevalent in today's horror films. First off the film opens with a women escaping from a mental hospital. She escapes in nothing but her underwear. Had this film been made today she would have been at the very least topless, but don't forget this is 1965 we are talking about. Secondly, there is lots of murder and death and grotesque imagery within the film, more so than the first two films put together.
As I said earlier the acting is by far much better than the first two films (expect for Vincent Price). There are no wooden actors surrounding the leads and no annoying child actors to deliver terrible stilted dialogue. There script is fairly well written, with most of the dialogue seemingly real (very little expositionary speeches). The editing is tight and taught and the cinematography is nice to look at with strong shadows and lighting that makes the film all the more eerie. Again, as I said earlier, the audience is a little jarred at first and is at a lose to explain how this film connects to the last one but by about 15 minutes in you are to engrossed to care.
This film is so engrossing, titillating and more original than it deserves. It is destined for tragedy and ends, like the first one, with a downbeat and horrific ending. There are no happy endings here and the film from the start sets up the tragic fates of all involved.
So why, you are probably wondering, do I give this film such praise but only a 69%? The answer lies in the effects of the film. Sadly, the effects are piss poor here. The teleporting doesn't look as good as the original two films and the mutant creatures look like humans with either really bad make-up or bandages. There are lots of mutant creatures and each one looks worse than the next. These creatures, like the manfly, are mistakes made when various insects, not just flies, got caught in the teleporter. The make-up effects are so bad and so cheap they bring down the film. Had they been better, this film would be as good if not better than the original. With that said though, it is a 47 year old low budget movie movie and it stills works tremendously well regardless of the ill advised effects.
Curse of the Fly comes highly recommended, especially to those who like horror. It's an original and unique film that takes the story set up in the last films to new and unexpected places. It is eerie and seems more modern than most horror films from the same era. Don't believe the internet, this film is great. Unfortunately the effects are no good and bring it down a notch or two but in 1986 David Cronenberg would fix that (using the same approach as this film--straight out horror and grotesque imagery) when he remade The Fly...
Film Rating: 69%
Breakdown (How The Curse of the Fly scored 69%):
Production Design: 3 out of 10
Cinematography: 8 out of 10
Re-playability: 8 out of 10
Originality: 8 out of 10
Costumes: 5 out of 10
Directing: 7 out of 10
Editing: 7 out of 10
Acting: 7 out of 10
Music: 8 out of 10
No comments:
Post a Comment