Thee Hats for Lisa (1965)

Cockney youths Johnny Howjego, Sammy, and Flora, are just milling along with their day to day lives at work, until they hear of the exciting arrival of film star Lisa Milan to London. They fob off work and race to meet her at the airport, and due to a mix-up end up face to face with the star, who takes an instant liking to the trio. Deciding to have some fun for her day off, Lisa runs away from her minders and enlists the help of the gang (along with flippant taxi driver Sid) to help her steal three hats before the end of the day...

Three Hats for Lisa is a jovial musical from the 60s, and is a surprisingly good time! I got everything I expected, and more. The film is not only entertaining, and innocent, but it captures London in such a good way.

The story here is like wish fulfillment, and always in a believable way too. It really makes you feel like you're only this far away from meeting a celebrity yourself and having your own adventure.

There are many setpieces throughout, with each attempt at stealing a hat feeling different, and the comedy consistently earns laughs. Everything culminates in a hilarious and perfectly fitting climax, and is followed by a melancholy but happy ending. It really captures well the difficulty of long goodbyes.

Three Hats for Lisa is a perfect time capsule of 1960s London. From the fashions, to the attitude, the slang, and all the hangouts, there is so much on display here, and the city feels truly fleshed out. What struck me most was the infectious aura of fun. The living conditions might not have been the best, and these people would have to work their fingers to the bone every day just for a couple of bob, but goodness knows they knew how to have fun!

The characters here are all lots of fun, and cut a memorable bunch. The film sets all three up quickly and efficiently, and each feel distinct. Sid the cabby is a great foil for the others. He's also your typical Londoner, but of an older sort, and is very keen on getting his money, which becomes a progressively distant prospect for him as the movie goes on.

Lisa is very much your bombshell celebrity, but she comes across as equally grounded, and she fits in surprisingly well with these cockney kids. She's very earnest and genuine, and really, who could deny her a police helmet? It's not that hard to steal!

There is a little romance present, with Johnny's crush on Lisa, and Flora's crush on Johnny. Thankfully Lisa is smart about the whole thing, and can see what's going on. She doesn't wanna step on Flora's toes, and knows what will really be best for Johnny, so she helps the two young dopes into each-other's arms. We never actually get a proper romantic resolution (i. a big kiss) with Johnny and Flora, but the implication is enough to leave you satisfied

The film doesn't have any villains, per se, but Lisa's meddling minder Mr. Pepper is the closest. He's understandably on edge about his big star pulling a disappearing act on him only a day before a big event, but he needs to stop crowding her! It's her day off, man, and all she wants to do is steal some hats. Let her be! His final scene is hilarious, and a perfect way of resolving the drama.

As a musical, this is an unequivocal success. If it had've just had a few song sprinkled throughout it would've been fine, but the creators went the extra mile and really packed the movie densely with songs! There's at least one every 10 minutes, and they're generally short ditties, but never lazy or intrusive. They often come with great song and dance routines too, which are elaborate, highly choreographed productions, and work great in the urban atmosphere. There's a sheer level of effort here that I really applaud.

The three lead actors here, Joe Brown, Dave Nelson, and Una Stubbs work great together, and have plenty of chemistry. It's quite a shame they never got more to do as a trio. Working equally well with them is ever cheerful and humorous Sid James, and foreign beauty Sophie Hardy. She's actually French, not Italian, but same thing. At least they cast a European. She has a sultry presence, but also enough down-to-earth charm to keep her relatable.

Una Stubbs in particular was my favourite of the main trio. She's so impishly cute, pronounces some words with such a hilarious cadence, and is a gorgeous talent. It's such a surprise seeing her so young, after growing up with her as lovably daffy old Miss Bat from The Worst Witch!

On a side note, like 70% of the earth's population, I pronounced her name like Oona, but the other day I discovered you actually say it like Yuna! This probably only means anything to those of you who've played Final Fantasy X, but now she's coming across like a magical heroine!

The supporting cast is great too, including Peter Bowles, surprisingly without his moustache! Eric Barker does a funny job too. There are also a few familiar faces I didn't recognise, such as Pepper's bespectacled assistant, who looks and sounds like Connie Booth (even down to the slightly American intonations), and the man whose hat is stolen resembles Kenneth Williams (which would make an amusing Carry On connection, with the presence of Sid James).

I speak without hyperbole when I say that Three Hats for Lisa is a real unsung classic of 60s British cinema! I definitely recommend checking it out...

Do You Like Hitchcock? (2005)

Italian horror director Dario Argento has long been compared to Alfred Hitchcock. To quote a hilarious TV interviewer, "He's been compared to Hitchcock, which he doesn't like, Brian de Palma, and occasionally Ed Wood." True in so many ways! In 2005 Argento decided to embrace the connection, and made the TV movie Do you like Hitchcock?...

Giulio is a young film student working on his thesis, and peeping on his neighbour Sasha. One day he witnesses a few little things that make him suspicious, and this culminates when Sasha's domineering mother is brutally murdered. Giulio believes Sasha and her new friend Federica have been inspired by Strangers on a Train, and are committing each-other's murders and providing concrete alibis. Despite others thinking he's crazy, Giulio continues investigating, and may be in danger himself...

Do You Like Hitchcock is fairly decent as far as homages go. It's nothing all that special, and if you were told who created it you probably wouldn't believe. It's kinda like one of these cheesy daytime movies you see all the same, though mercifully better than those at least. The film's worst crime is that it's just unremarkable, and a little boring. By the halfway mark you'll probably be surprised by how little has actually happened.

The whole film I expected there to be a twist, with the Strangers on a Train element being a smokescreen for the true killer(s) and motivations. After all, the movie's not going to actually feature such an obvious hook, when the hero figured it out immediately, right?...Yeah actually, it is. There is a little extra, which I was very pleased to have seen coming (though admittedly it's not much of a leap, when there really aren't that many characters), but otherwise the story is played pretty safe.

I think if the film had [embraced/accepted the format] and only been an hour or so long, it could have solved both of these problems. Slow pace? Gone! Unsatisfying plot? Not if it's only across 60 minutes!

As you can tell even from the nifty title, this movie wears its inspiration from Hitchcock and classic cinema as a whole on its sleeve. By which I mean it references them constantly, and posters or DVD's litter the backgrounds of just about every scene. As if that wasn't subtle enough/was too subtle, the plot is cribbed from Strangers on a Train [[[(acknowledging it doesn't make it feel any less lazy)]]], there's a shower scene that's made to resemble Psycho, the lead is a peeping tom, and has a leg injury later on that renders him stuck in his apartment. Some of these work as homages, but others not so much, especially when there's such a high concentration all in one place.

The last act goes on a little too long. We already have a climax  but since there's still a loose end to tie up, we're treated to a second climax that didn't feel necessary, and just overcomplicated things. At least it ends with a tense sequence, and pretty against type, considering who the hero and police are putting so much effort in to save.

Do You Like Hitchcock has its share of suspenseful sequences, with the most notable being a motorcycle getaway after a leg injury It's lessened a bit because it's not the killer chasing him, just some asshole lecher who's pissed that his 'lovemaking' session was interrupted, but still, little quibble with a great scene.

The movie is normal for the most part, but it has some weird touches, like the completely bizarre and over-the-top prologue! I was so confused (not to mention amused) by this scene. I waited the whole movie for this flashback to be explained, or become relevant, bu it never is and never does. Funnily enough, this scene is probably the most Argento-ish out of the whole movie, albeit bringing to mind such entries as Phantom of the Opera, and Dracula 3D.

The characters are a bit weak here. Giulio is a fine lead, though he loses points for peeping on women getting totally nude, when he's already got a girlfriend! They totally have sex too, so it's not like he's starved of attention! Besides this he's a pretty decent lead, and his interactions with his mother are amusing. I liked her, and she plays a good part later on, with her new fiance.

Giulio's girlfriend Arianna is nice enough some of the time, though never believes his claims until the last act. I'd say she wasn't/isn't the best girlfriend as a result, but considering how he acts (especially throwing out her stuff!), I'm inclined more in her favour.  The icing on the cake with their relationship was the embarrassing exchange "You're getting worse"-"No, you're getting worse."-"No, you're getting worse"-"No, you're getting worse.". This is followed by the thrilling "Stop it"-"You stop it"-"No, you stop it"-"You stop it"-"Stop it". Rousing stuff!

As goofy and pervy as these two can be, at least they get the lion's share of screentime. The characters who suffer are the two women, Sasha and Federica. On one hand I get why we don't see any scenes exploring their character, because the whole film is strictly from Giulio's point of view, but still, a little something woulda been nice! We get just barely enough, and a lot of their personalities I feel would've been interesting to explore more The shop owner Andrea is a fun dude, and provides levity with his presence, as well as something else later on.

Given that Do You Like Hitchcock is a TV film, I went into it expecting the violence to be toned down, and had heard as much, so I was surprised to see how violent it is! The movie only has one murder (and one interrupted attack), so it's certainly not on par with Argento's earlier efforts in terms of bloodshed, but what there is is pretty grisly! I approve.

The acting here is ok. Because this isn't a big cinema production, I guess American distributors weren't as keen on it, so the dubbing is all done by Brits, and if my ears didn't deceive me, Giulio's dub actor is an Aussie! Oy oy oy! Sadly I heard wrong, as he sounds British for the rest of the film. *sigh* While the voice actors to a reasonable job for what this is, the dubbing itself is pretty bad, with no attempt made to sync the voices up with the lip movements]].

There's some good music here. Nothing matching the soundtrack of anything Argento's staple collaborators Goblin would put out, but perfectly fine.

Do You Like Hitchcock is least effective when viewed as a whole, but it's not a bad movie, just unremarkable. If you're not an Argento fan you have no reason to check this out, but if you are, it won't hurt like some of his other later fare will...

The Stendhal Syndrome (1996) and The Card Player (2004)

Anna Manni is a cop working a special case in Florence, tracking a rapist and now murderer to a museum. While there she is suddenly and unexpectedly overtaken by the beauty of the art, to the point of passing out into a strange hallucination, and suffering a loss of memory. A witness to this is the rapist Alfredo, who kidnaps and assaults Anna. She is able to escape, but is traumatised from the experience, and begins to change... 

The Stendhal Syndrome is one of the odder entries in Dario Argento's canon, which is certainly saying something! Both applauded and criticised for this same reason, it's a departure from the Giallos he usually made. The film is a dark portrayal of rape and trauma, and we follow the psychological journey of Anna Manni after her assault.

The film's structure is where my problems began with it. We start off partway through the story, with zero context at all, and before we even know what's going on Anna is already fainting from the artwork. Things do become clear, and we understand the backstory before too long, making this a pretty effective, albeit extremely abrupt, introduction.

What's harder to look past is what comes after. Anna is kidnapped and assaulted, and then gets away. We focus on her getting psychological help, working on the case, visiting home, etc. Then she is kidnapped and assaulted again. This time she actually turns the tables and gets her revenge. It's a great scene, but I did wonder why it didn't happen earlier. It feels like the film reels got mixed up, and the first half of the film was gonna be the capture, then the revenge, with the second half being the psychological journey.

The film's connection with the titular syndrome is tenuous at best. It's integral to the first scene, and the motel ambush, but after that first attack it really has no business coming up again and again how it does. It felt like the movie was desperately trying to justify the name by dropping it every few minutes. Then in the second half it's almost completely dropped.

A highlight of the film are the hallucinatory 'fantasy' sequences. When Anna is overtaken by the art, we see her walk inside the paintings, making for some unique imagery. Sure, it's not the best CGI in the world (and the scene where Anna makes out with a giant fake fish will either make or break the film for you), but for its time, for the kind of film this is, and for Italy's first computer effects, it's not bad by any stretch. The other scenes though? They're bizarrely terrible, not to mention random!

The Stendhal Syndrome is by and large a character portrait, so it's important that Anna Manni be a well-written character. Whether she is or not depends. Some viewers might find her a strong portrayal of trauma, while others might find her flat, uninteresting, or unlikeable. She's a mix of everything for me, changing from scene to scene.

Alfredo is a great villain. Charming at first, before revealing himself to be sleazy, degenerate, and cruel. One weird touch is a distorted voice he's sometimes given, that brings to mind the trombone parents from Peanuts. It's already strange on its own, but making it even more so is that we know who this guy is! We've seen his face, and heard his voice.

Alfredo's end comes at the halfway point, in a spectacular revenge by Anna. She even gets a cheesy one-liner-"You have the right to shut up!". There's some grisly moments here, making for an effective sequence. Alfredo becomes a bit of a dope, like when Anna's gun clicks empty and he starts laughing. I don't know what he's so happy about, he's been stabbed twice, shot once, and is missing an eye! Just cause she's out of ammo doesn't mean he's got the upper hand!

I feel like the movie tries to have its cake and eat it too. It wants to push this whole idea that Alfredo could still be alive, but since Argento clearly wanted his table turning to be the violent setpiece of the movie, it erases any possibility that he could be. We know the fucker's dead! And we also know that Anna's off her rocker, so when people start turning up dead while she creepily stares at people, it's really not that much of a leap. It makes for a fairly tedious 50 minutes.

The film suffers from the main villain's absence. I understand that he's dead, but since Anna is going crazy we could at least continue seeing Alfredo in hallucinations and hauntings. Instead the movie's main antagonist dies at the hour mark, leaving a whole other hour with no-one.

Anna has two love interests in the film. A colleague who has the hots for her, but no success, and a Frenchman by the name of Marie. From seeing that name in the cast list, I was under the impression Anna would suddenly begin prowling after a woman, to psychologically emulate Alfredo, but instead it's just a random dude. Still, it's handled decently so I can't complain. He's amusingly French, and instead of going "I love you"-"You too", it's "I want to make love to you"-"You too".

Alfredo's wife is an interesting character, not because of what she does, but what she could've been. There has to be a reason for including her, so you naturally expect something. Like did she know or suspect about her husband? If she did know, was she a party to anything, or somehow supporting him? Or maybe she's hopelessly devoted to him and blames Anna for killing an 'innocent man', and she could be the real killer of the second half in a crazy twist! I think that could've saved the last act. But instead she's never seen or heard of again. Anna's family likewise doesn't appear enough, which a shame considering how important they might be to her psychology.

The acting is mixed. Asia Argento is good in places, and I applaud her for taking on a role like this. But she acts strangely half the time. I understand that a rape victim might be erratic, but her performance is downright unhinged! Thomas Kretschmann delivers a great performance as the deranged Alfredo, and is missed in the second half. Italian genre stalwarts Veronica Lazar and Cinzia Monreal are a welcome presence, despite all too short screentimes.

Direction-wise, this looks good, but it notably doesn't resemble any of Argento's previous works. All his familiar motifs are for the most part absent, and the film has a very singular style not shared by anything else in filmography. The colour scheme is very naturalistic too.

The focus on art here is done well. Classical paintings are scene all over the place, regardless of how strange (why does the police chief have an enormous painting in his office waiting room?), and they are often neat choices. It's also interesting seeing the art that Anna paints, and what her mental state draws.

The music by Ennio Morricone is good, giving an ethereal and eerie note to events. The audio is a bit weird at times though. In one scene it's like trying to watch a movie when someone's got a TV or radio playing something in the next room

The Stendhal Syndrome is a mixed bag. It's very easy to see how it can be so divisive. Some love it, some hate it, and I was in-between. Because of its good qualities, I'd say it's still a must watch if you're an Argento fan, even if you may have many of the same criticisms I had.

The Card Player

The city of Rome is shocked when a serial killer calling himself The Card Player emerges, kidnapping women and livestreaming their murders if the police fail to beat him in an online game of poker. Detective Anna Mari heads the investigation to catch him, together with foreign officer John Brennan, and young card expert Remo...

Before we get into the actual movie, The Card Player was originally intended to be a sequel to The Stendhal Syndrome, featuring Anna Manni's next case. This fell through for a few reasons, such as Asia Argento choosing not to reprise the role, busy elsewhere. This framework can still be detected though, such as the lead's name-Anna Mari. So how does this stack up as a theoretical sequel? Oh, not at all. Anna Manni could never be in a sequel. She killed people! Even if she only targeted rapists or murderers, and was found innocent by insanity and eventually rehabilitated, I doubt she'd get her job back. But she brutally murdered three completely innocent people! She ain't gettin' no more cases!

I went into The Card Player optimistic. I've always had the hope that it was an unsung gem, or at least halfway decent, but it took only 5 minutes for that optimism to be crushed. The film is better than Phantom of the Opera, but nowhere near the entertaining but slightly spotty Sleepless.

The Card Player's big hook is its focus on technology, with E-poker playing a large role in events. The film does an alright job of establishing the rules for newcomers, though I'm still mystified by how you can be good at a game based on pure chance. I also find the film's explanation for why the killer isn't cheating to be pretty funny. "It's very complicated to explain, but we can rule it out". Too complicated to explain so we won't bother. Even back then this E-poker game was cheesy, but despite all this I do think at admirable that Argento at least attempted to tackle how modern serial killers might adapt as technology advances.

The games succeed in not being tedious or samey. The film has a sneaky way of changing things up each time. Instead of "The cops play, lose, girl dies, they play, lose, girl dies, etc" , the first time they refuse to play, the second time they lose, and in the third, something completely unpredicted happens.

The film has a few other suspenseful setpieces, including an effective home invasion sequence. It also contains some facepalming levels of idiocy. Anna sees the intruder outside her patio door and goes out to investigate...with the door wide open, and her gun on a coffee table! After a quick scan she concludes that he mustn't exist anymore, and promptly goes back inside, and no surprise what happens next. Be I ever so stupid, I'd at least give myself enough credit to not leave the door *wide open* and unguarded while looking for a home invader outside! At one point she has the drop on him, but for no reason goes and hides behind a couch. Bitch, bop him on the noggin', you'll save everyone a lot of trouble, and end the movie 45 minutes early!

Anna Mari is a decent protagonist, but never makes that strong of an impression. She's strongminded, but also motherly to Remo. There's a resident grumpy police chief, who gets a bit of flack from Anna, like his refusal to allow the first game. She acts like he's a scumbag, but he's totally correct! You shouldn't negotiate with serial killers, or take them at their word. I bet if they had've won that game he still would've slashed her throat.

John is a perceptive and unorthodox cop. He's the first to pipe up in accepting the killer's challenge, yet doesn't put his money where his mouth is, and watches on as other people play. Still, he is a good supporting protagonist. Remo is a fairly likeable guy, and has a nice (if brief) romance with the rescued Chief's daughter. The only thing that disappointed me was his end.

That leads me into a problem I had-The fates of these two characters. I think one dying could have worked. After all, you've got the grizzled old burnout who sacrifices himself. That's good, right? But both dying is a owner, and feels unjustified. Both deaths show a great deal of stupidity too. When John discovers the killer's lair, for some inexplicable reason he chooses to go completely on his own! No warning, no backup, he doesn't even tell anyone where he is. And he's also totally unaware that this might be a trap, despite being obvious, especially considering the other tricks and bluffs John worked out. Dumbass!

I figured out who the killer was immediately. The very first lines of the film are when a coworker approaches Anna with a birthday present, and the declaration of "I know everything about you". The only other suspect is the other coworker who fancies her. I swear, they're like sparrows at this station. When we get the reveal, my reaction was "...Um, ok? Who's he again?". He's some random dude who likes Anna. That's literally it. It's not a spoiler for me to tell you he's the killer, simply because he has no character. He's just some guy who's occasionally in the background, with no exploration or development, hardly any dialogue, and no motive for us to hear.

There's also a twist that really wasn't thought through. The surprise is that the livestreams are pre-recorded, which I figured out only 20 minutes in (I felt very proud of myself!). This didn't make any sense though. I figured it would be explained as the movie progressed, but nope! It only grew and grew in my mind, and was never satisfyingly explained. If these videos are pre-recorded, how did he predict their moves? How did he know they wouldn't play one? How did the girl who escaped sync up? How did he know they'd win one match?

The climax is a reasonably tense sequence. It's a little silly seeing these two play a chintzy E-poker game on the train tracks, and is equally so how much Anna takes his game on faith, but otherwise it's fine, and has enough thrills.

The ending itself is hilarious! As Anna walks home, she gets the most random call imaginable. A doctor we've never seen before rings up to say "Congratulations Anna, you're pregnant!", and she smiles as the movie ends. Whaaaaat? This raises a lot of questions, like why was Anna having unprotected sex with her coworker on the first 'date', and how she could be pregnant after less than a week. I don't mind though, as it's a happy ending, and so hilariously out of left field you're guaranteed to end the movie with a smile on your face.

In terms of visuals, The Card Player never really has any flair. Make no mistake, it's never bad. This is a well directed film, but very by-the-numbers, and never even attempts reaching the heights of Argento's earlier works, and he ambitious direction that would often attempt. There are 3 exceptions to this. The home invasion sequence has a great touch, the chase through the river catacomb is neat, and so is the scene where John goes through the killer's garden, and seeds fly through the air.

The acting in The Card Player is decent to poor. Stefania Rocca is usually a reliable actress, but is pretty bad here, which I blame on the direction. Liam Cunningham fares better, if for no other reason than he actually speaks English as a first language. Claudio Santamaria is over-the-top as the killer, and Silvo Muccino is decent as the young card player.

This might seem like a strange thing to mention, but I liked how much the actors smiled in this movie. Maybe it's because movies like this are all so glum, The Card Player included, so having characters who at least smile helps alleviate that feeling.

The score isn't very good. The main theme is alright, and you've got a few decently suspenseful or spooky tracks, but mostly it's just mediocre and quite dated techno stuff. The climax features the ill-advised decision to have the killer blare crappy techno music during the final game. It sucks all the atmosphere out of the scene! I'm not saying a little techno music would go astray, but my problem with the killer actually setting it up on his radio means it must continue uninterrupted, no matter what. That's no fun! It's even more ludicrous when he says the reason is so she can't hear when the train is coming! Dude, it's a train! Do you seriously think your dinky little radio is gonna drown it out? Also I know Techno music can make a din, but it can't out-vibrate a moving train!

The Card Player is pretty lousy stuff. It's not the worst film I've ever seen, and not the worst Argento film, but not by much. This is definitely one of his skippable entries, unless you're a completionist or a glutton for punishment...

Deep Red (1975)

Inspired by the lurid murder-mystery novels, the Giallo genre began with Mario Bava in the 1960s and stayed strong well into the next decade, when new director Dario Argento would tip his hat into the ring, ultimately leading to the creation of Deep Red, considered the genre's finest hour...

At a parapsychology conference, psychic Helga Ulmann suddenly read the mind of a murderer in the audience. After she goes home that night she is butchered, and jazz pianist Marcus Daly is the eyewitness. Plagued by a sense of something missing, something that could crack the case, he begins to investigate. As Marcus discovers more clues, more people are picked off one by one, and his life is in extreme danger unless he discovers the truth...

Deep Red (Profondo Rosso) is one of those rare films that lives up to the sensational taglines. Its unique atmosphere, memorable kills, and Hitchhockian levels of suspense really make it stand out as one of Italy's greatest horror films.

The film is a stylistic marvel, with only a small number of locations, but each look vibrant and distinctive, in their on unique ways. These range from the lavish red-curtained psychic conference (which for some reason has the absolute grottiest bathrooms! Typical), to Helga's spooky apartment gallery, the mysterious 'haunted' house. Even the simple streets of Rome are shot like paintings. But then again it is Rome, so I think we could all easily chalk that up to happenstance.

One complaint I do have is that the story is disappointingly minimal. Giallos are often loaded with story and suspects, but here there's a pretty small story and only 3 victims. The movie feels at times like it could've had a bit more meat on its bones, as all the plot really amounts to is "Marcus witnesses a murder and looks for a clue. This leads hm to a song, which leads him to a book, which leads him to a house, which leads him to a school.". All stories are bound by a chain of progression, but here it feels like the lack of story made this all the more noticeable.

The way the mystery in Deep Red all comes together is nothing short of genius, and really has to make you applaud Argento for actually doing it! This all culminates in a slightly rushed ending (mainly because there's no real denouement) but a spectacular one nonetheless, with an unforgettable end for the killer. Whoever designed that accessory needs a raise!

The characters are an interesting and amusing bunch. Marcus Daly is a good protagonist with a strong sense of justice, and curiosity. Although I don't appreciate him being a library vandal! He also sees himself as a bit of a man's man, leading to some amusing banter between him and his feminist love interest.

Gianna is a spunky dame. She's a dogged journalist who'll go to any length for a story. She and Marcus have plenty of chemistry, as they argue over who gets to take charge, arm wrestle over who's the better sex, and both struggle with her cramped and malfunctioning car. Gianna is also a potential suspect, which keeps us on our toes.

Carlo is a hopeless drunk, who has his moments of humour and pathos. There's clearly something eating the poor guy up, and the way his arc concludes feels very unlucky and tragic.

Onto the victims. Helga is one cool lady! So cool, confident, and genuinely talented (at no point do the cast doubt her psychic powers) that it's a shame she dies! Couldn't there have been a room number mix-up?

The professor is an ok dude, and is a little proactive. I'm glad, as I wouldn't wanna see Helga's friends just sit back and do nothing while a random stranger hunts down all the clues. I am a little confused how the killer knew he'd found something. Come to think of it I'm also wondering what was that message on the bathroom wall! The films acts like it's of extreme importance, but it's never explained or mentioned again.

Author Amanda Righetti is maybe the film's biggest missed opportunity, as she dies without ever having accomplished much. She never actually appears until her death scene, and we never know why the killer -, because she's not even connected to the case directly! All these unexplainable touches do help bring a sense of the supernatural into the film for some, which can be hard to see in some places, but definitely in others.

Last up are just the supporting characters. These include a creepy little girl, who I found cute! She may have a cavalier attitude with the lives of lizards, but hey, at least she shows concern for Marcus. So who knows, maybe she'll grow up to be the next plucky detective, and not a new serial killer.

The death scenes in Deep Red are each iconic, as well as gruesome. It was important to Argento that the attacks be relatable. Few people know what it's like to be shot or stabbed, but just about everyone has been scalded with hot water, or bumped their head on a corner. He takes these sensations to their most extreme forms, resulting in some nauseating kills. These effects are brought to life marvellously by Carlo Rambaldi, and there's more than enough to live up to the title.

Deep Red's runtime has always varied. The Italian version runs at over 2 hours, while the U.S. Version was only 100, or sometimes even shorter if it was censored. The extended version isn't bad, and I do appreciate the greater expansion of certain elements and characters, but this is not a complicated story, and it really has no business being 126 minutes. The whittled down version still might drag here and there but it's much more streamlined. The thing that affects the film the most is that the added scenes often dilute the macabre otherworldly atmosphere. The section that really drags on is Marcus's two inspections of the house, which can be punishingly slow at times, like when he hears a noise outside, so we follow him as he goes ll the way out, only to see nothing then go all the way back in.

The soundtrack here is classic. It was Argento's first collaboration with synth-rock band Goblin, who would go on to play a bi part in his career. The main theme is neat, though a little screechy and high pitched in places. The weird thing is we actually get two versions! One is more naturalistic, and is my preferred version.

The other noteworthy tune is the child's song that keeps playing. It's just innocent enough that it sounds creepy as hell when playing. As soon as you hear that song it's like a shiver goes through you, as you know that something is just off.

There are a couple of really weird tracks later on, which verge on the ill-fitting, or just plain ridiculous. You can really see where Inferno gets it from! Scenes of characters sneaking around usually subtle music for a reason, Dario!

The actors all do fine jobs. David Hemmings is a likeable everyman as the lead, and Daria Nicolodi has humour and mystery to her performance. The two have good chemistry together, and this helps their romance feel like a fun component, rather than unnecessary baggage. Gabriele Lavia does well as the burnt-out Carlo, sympathetic but not without moments of levity. Macha Méril and Glauco Mauri do well in their roles. Clara Calamai is absolutely adorable. Ditto for Nicoletta Elmi, who will entrance all weird little boys in the audience.

Deep Red is a classic of the genre, and while it may have a few flaws, some of which will be more noticeable depending on your preference, or which version you watch, you'll still be glad you saw it.