splittter Reviews

Neighbours (1985– )

Brilliant

[7 March 2001]

That Neighbours is not recognised as the finest Soap Opera ever is quite simply a tragedy. Routinely attacked for poor acting and sets (even though neither of these allegations are more or less accurate than if they were made against any other Soap) it continues to be viewed with disdain by most 'critics', and yet after 17 years routinely manages to pull in up to 10 million people in quite crappy time slots.

Its brilliance lies in in it being the only Soap Opera that fully embraces the fact that the form can capture almost no realism whatsoever, and any attempts by the more 'serious' soaps just end up being faintly laughable. As such, neighbours doesn't bother to attempt it, and routinely elevates piddling story lines to the major focus for a few episodes, and *never* puts any of the plots above the individual characters.

Say what you like about the acting skill, but it's the simple truth that some of the characters in Neighbours are the most fully realised in Soap Land. Neighbours couldn't give a crap about realism, or making a point, or controversy, and is all the better without these common soap devices, which are, at the end of the day, just cheap tricks.

It doesn't have to lurch from major crisis to major crisis, desperately trying to hang onto viewers by forcing their characters through ever more harrowing story lines. People watch Neighbours because, in its unassuming, way it provides 20 minutes of comedic entertainment practically every day. This may sound unambitious, small-hat and simple, but no one else has ever managed it, and for this alone Neighbours is brilliant.

Deported Women of the SS Special Section (1976)

Routine, nasty Italian exploitation

[5/10 · 24 September 1999]

As I've seen this film, and no-one else has written anything about it I thought I'd say a few words, not that it is particularly remarkable. If you're even looking at this page you're probably a fan of Italian Exploitation (god help you) and this film is certainly that. It's about women in a Nazi prison, featuring such classic situations as the odd lesbian encounter, sadistic guards, and a lengthy bit of pubic hair shaving.

The plot is handled decently, I guess, being a rare film of this sort that actually provides some interest in the individual characters. This may come from the ridiculously over the top acting (especially from the camp commandant), but at least there is an air of some competence in the production.

In terms of deranged innovation, this film features an eye-opening razor-blade-in-a cork-up-the-vagina manoeuvre to thwart the amorous commandant. That scene, amongst others, contributing to the fact that it was apparently rejected for even Cinema exhibition in Britain. Tragically it occurs quite far into the film, and is not particularly gory or amusing or otherwise of interest. The fact that it is banned probably means more people will seek it out than otherwise would (I know I did).

There are a few scenes like the above, catapulting this film from a routine exploitation movie into something that leaves a bit of a nasty taste in the mouth. Moving from the sort of obviously fake nonsense most films of this kind have, to a seeming attempt to present degrading experiences realistically, for no reason other than whatever kicks viewers can get out of that. Not very many for most people I would expect.

Nonetheless worth seeing if you like the genre I imagine, especially the scene where, in an effort to impress the heroine, the commandant makes two women give him a blow-job (interesting seduction technique, certainly, but then the guy is a Nazi); his facial expression is great. However there's really nothing here that is particularly original, and (as above) will probably leave most feeling a little dirty. Still, no particular reason for it to be banned.

The Curious Dr. Humpp (1969)

Strange, somehow effective soft-core horror

[5 September 1999]

An extremely strange film in that it is ten times better than it had any right to be. The script and story is usual b-movie rubbish, and the acting is adequate at best (the dubbing is of course terrible), however some genuine talent behind the camera make this watchable throughout. Eschewing the usual b-movie tricks like ludicrous music, fast zooms and an indulgence of s**t acting to advance the story, the director concentrates instead on extended set pieces (in one case a strange lute playing sequence) which he stages extremely well. It reminded me of the French horror movies of Rollin, where extended scenes, slow, languid camera work and a healthy dollop of sex play a large part.

Obviously this is still a b-movie, and when the plot has to kick in at the end it is predictably terrible. They do have a dig at their own crap effects with someone mistaking the monster for a man in a mask, but it's not clear if this was deliberate or just a case of bad scriptwriting. Not good by any stretch of the imagination, but significantly better than the average, usually unwatchable, exploitation film.

Enemy of the State (1998)

not bad, Jason Lee rules

[7/10 · 4 January 1999]

Firstly this was the finest mainstream Hollywood action film of the year, not a great feat considering Godzilla et al, but something to be proud of. The plot managed to be both complicated, and plausible, taking a few nice twists, and Will Smith put in a great performance as the lead. I don't think it's a a big step from his earlier, more comedic turns in Bad Boys and Independence Day, but he's certainly one of the more charismatic of young Hollywood's actors. The direction was pure testosterone from Tony Scott as usual, and can get a little tiresome, but he uses the surveillance cameras and team of watchers well, giving a nice spin on what are fairly conventional chase scenes. It could do with being 20 minutes or so shorter, like most films these days, and Jason Lee dies too early (when will anyone but Kevin Smith give this man the lead role he so clearly deserves?). I'd give it a commendable 7.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

So near, yet so far.

[5/10 · 24 September 1998]

After all the hype it is fair to say that the first 25 minutes are the finest, most brutal depiction of warfare the screen has seen yet. It is also clear that after years of having the ridiculous notion of war as cool thrust down our throats, such a horrifying depiction in a genuinely mainstream picture was needed. However after such a dazzlingly brilliant start, when the story kicks in we find Spielberg merely trotting out the old clichés we've seen so many times before. Again we're told how glorious, noble and almost desirable it is to die for our country, how the Germans were little more than cartoon villains, and most sickeningly, through the character of the young interpreter, how the correct response to the horrors of war is to lose your innocent disbelief that this could happen and join in. What makes this so sad is the fact that in the accurate depiction of the battles Spielberg has already shown how hollow these notions are. Death in war is as empty and disgusting as any other painful, violent death; at the level of the ordinary soldier the Allies were as scared and selfish as the Germans; and surely the reaction of the interpreter, as he lay sobbing on the battlefield, out of his mind with fear, is the most honest and sane reaction to mass slaughter one could have.