The Stepford Wives

Year: 1975
Director: Bryan Forbes
Writer: Ira Levin, William Goldman
Genre: Thriller

I went into The Stepford Wives with little interest or knowledge of the film. I knew that there was something wrong with the Stepford women, of course, but that's all. Beyond that I've managed to avoid most analysis or spoilers of the story all this time.

Basically the story starts off with a husband and wife who are moving to the small, kindly town Stepford. It seems like a real taste of the country when they speak to neighbors who seem completely radiant, polite, and proper. Joanna quickly makes friends with a couple of the women but finds the others are wholly impenetrable. All they seem to want to talk about is housework or other simple things.

Joanna and her newfound friend Bobbie attempt to start a consciousness raising group because there is obviously something a little dated about the women inhabitants. From there, things slowly become more chilling and weirder. The story is wound tight and as it continues you can almost taste the tension getting tighter and tighter until it finally snaps.

I absolutely adored this movie. It isn't technically horror but it honestly might as well be for anyone sitting down and watching it today. While we have come pretty far thanks to the feminists movements of the past The Stepford Wives is still insanely pertinent. While the "truth" behind the story may be goofball, it certainly doesn't diminish the point of the film (although it does diffuse a lot of the tension of the climax). There's something about Ira Levin that I really appreciate. He might not have a knack for believable endings, but he seems to really have an interest in women and the world and rights they have.

Definitely check this one out. Now I need to hurry up and read the book so I can see if that's even more enthralling than this brief film affair.

Deep Red

Year: 1975
Director: Dario Argento
Writer: Dario Argento, Bernadino Zapponi
Genre: Horror: Thriller

First off, Dario Argento is one of my favorite horror directors out there. It was through his films that I sort of discovered my taste for more "modern" horror as opposed to classic Hitchcock drama. I always felt like I had already watched this movie but apparently not because it seemed a wholly new experience.

The story starts off with a psychic who is at an event and suddenly becomes overcome with the dreadful thoughts and feelings of a murderer in the crowd. Shortly after her premonition, she is murdered. From there a man who caught a glimpse of the killer is determined to find him. With an intrepid journalist beside him the two attempt to uncover what's going on.

The story isn't the most creative out there but the characters are likable enough and it's easy to get invested. The murder scenes are done quite well and excellently tense. There is not a huge focus on gore but most injuries are shown straight on with the camera, which might not be the best idea with 70s era special effects. Regardless, it works very well and I liked it. I especially have always enjoyed what looks like bright red paint they use for blood. It's obviously fake but something about it makes everything seem a bit more artistic somehow.

It's a nice little film. What I find odd is just how much content was cut for the US release (which I watched). The film is nearly 130 minutes in original form but clocks in a little under 100 for the US theatrical release. What exactly was lost? I'm not sure. However, near the end the film feels slightly schizophrenic so I'm assuming that's where content was lost. Aside from that though this is actually one of the more linear stories that has come from Argento.

Dog Day Afternoon

Year: 1975
Director: Sidney Lumet
Writer: Frank Pierson
Genre: Crime

I've had Dog Day Afternoon on my list of things to watch for a while now. Owning a copy of the VHS I just kept staring it at it and thinking it might be fun. One fine evening of browsing Netflix and I came to realize the film is available for streaming! So, I sat down and watched the whole two hour feature.

This is a movie I thoroughly enjoyed. Typical crime drama stories are not my thing but this isn't one of those stories. For one, the main character may be a bank robber but he's exceedingly entertaining. Played by Al Pacino, I wasn't expecting such a lovable guy. He robs a bank with a friend of his and all the bank staff are stuck in there with him. There's the manager, a security guard, and a flock of tellers.

The police catch on to the scheme rather quickly and surround the bank. However, due to the hostages, the situation gets drawn out for a long time. During that time frame the hostages mostly lose their fear of the robbers and discuss and pal around with them. It's really unexpected and makes things a lot of fun. It's also fun when the ever-growing crowd of spectators begin to take the robber's side and see him as sticking it to the man.

One of the most interesting things in the film to me was why the Pacino character wanted the money. I won't spoil it because the reasons don't come to light until later, but it's really quite unexpected (especially for the time period the film was produced). I suppose the reason the story is so outlandish is because it is based on a true story. And you know how that goes... true life is stranger than fiction and whatnot. I'd really suggest checking this film out if you've ever got a lot of time to spare and want to see one of Al Pacino's first big works.