Thriller: A Cruel Picture (1974)

Bo Arne Vibenius’ 1974 revenge-exploitation flick Thriller: A Cruel Picture (A.K.A A Hooker’s Revenge, A.K.A They Call Her One Eye) starts with a young girl playing with an old bum in the park. Before long, a black gruel begins to drip from the side of the man's mouth. I assume this is symbolic for the evil rot within him. Or something. He rapes the little girl. Then things take a turn for the classy.


Sadly, Madeleine is left mute by the attack. The adult Madeleine is played by Swedish Playboy model Christina Lindberg, who was briefly an international sex-symbol, despite (or because of) the fact that she looked about 12 (though, admittedly, a rather stacked 12). I expect the early assault on Madeleine only rendered her mute so as to limit the “acting” Lindberg had to do. This decision probably raised the overall quality of the film.

One day, mute Madeleine misses her bus to the doctor’s office, so she hitches a ride with Tony (Heinz Hopf), a sleazy dude with a mustache and a nice car. Mysteriously, despite her history, Madeleine is entirely comfortable with male strangers. More fool her. Tony drugs her (of course) and gets her hooked on heroin (which is actually salt water that they actually inject, because no one told the film makers that movies aren't real), sentencing her to a life of prostitution in his service. In the scenes where she’s “entertaining” clients, the director deftly cuts in footage of actual hardcore pornography, using a body-double for Lindberg. These scenes are short and, obviously, rather explicit. They’re too short (and jarring) to be sexy, and don't really add anything to the feeling of depravity, which the director has already instilled quite admirably. These hardcore scenes are just there to amp up the sleaze factor.

When Madeleine hurts one of her male clients, Tony, in true pimp style, takes out his scalpel and jabs her in the eye.

Apparently, a real corpse was used for this. No special effects. Perhaps that’s why it’s so skin-crawlingly awful to watch.

Oh, and did I mention that her parents commit suicide when she doesn’t return home? Somehow I missed that. Yeah, her parents totally commit suicide too. Just so you have the full picture.

Anyway, now wearing an eye patch and known as One Eye, Madeleine hatches a revenge scheme. Using her free day, Monday (yes, Tony gives her a day off) she takes lessons in driving, shooting, and ass-kicking. Then she does all of those things in an attempt to bring Tony down, and get the vengeance she (and we) so richly desire.


Thriller is clearly a no-budget film, and so it shouldn’t be surprising that it looks cheap. For a while, it almost seems crassly feminist, since the rape (and many subsequent scenes) are shot almost entirely from One Eye’s POV. Perhaps, I momentarily think, Vibenius is presenting us with some kind of moral pornography. However, the graphic nature of the sex scenes and the scalpel scene--those acts of violence directed towards One Eye--isn’t replicated during One Eye’s revenge. Though most of the violence One Eye inflicts is depicted in super-slow-motion, it is generally nothing more than a shotgun blast or a kick to the face. For all that sleazy build-up, One Eye’s revenge comes off as pretty anti-climatic. One has to wonder how, exactly, the film is situating itself (for lack of a better term), since the depiction of One Eye’s downfall is so elaborate and graphic by comparison to her vengeance.

The Synapse DVD of Thriller comes loaded with extra features, since, presumably, a subsection of the viewing public has been clamoring for them. I suppose that this is due, in no small part, to Quentin Tarantino, who has mentioned his admiration for the film, and made the character of Ellie Driver as a sort of homage to ol’ One Eye (thus the patch). While the extra features are plentiful, I can’t imagine how they’d help your enjoyment or understanding of the picture. Oh well.

Watch it if the synopsis appeals to you. You will probably feel the need to shower afterward, though for exactly which reason will depend entirely on your mindset.

Fiend Without a Face (1958)

The most interesting thing about the DVD release of Fiend Without A Face is, frankly, the company that released it. The Criterion Collection prides itself on releasing "important classic and contemporary films", and indeed the company pioneered "special edition" releases of the most well regarded films, ranging from Citizen Kane to The Seven Samurai.

Their definition of "important" has been criticized as they released films like The Rock, Armageddon and The Blob, however those films have a cultural importance (and fan-base) that justified their releases. Fiend Without A Face has quite a fan-base as well, collected from decades of television showings and blurry memories of the film's creature. That being said, while Fiend remains an entertaining, above average science fiction creature feature, i'm not quite sure it deserves to be among such luminaries.

Taking place on a Canadian based American Air-base (though actually filmed in England), the film centers on a series of mysterious killings that the locals are blaming on nuclear experiments (dealing with cold war missile control) taking place at the base. Faced with growing unrest, Maj. Jeff Cummings (Marshall Thompson) decides to research the incidents, leading him to Professor Walgate (Kynaston Reeves), a scientist with experience researching telekinetic abilities. After forming a relationship with the scientist's assistant (Kim Parker), Cummings discovers that the bodies of those killed have had their brains and spinal cords removed from their bodies. Christening the attackers as "mental vampires", Cummings discovers that Walgate's experiments have gone out of control, and their power is growing thanks to the nuclear tests.

The creatures themselves are truly unforgettable. Disembodied brains with antennae and a wriggling spinal cord behind them must have been an eye-opener for impressionable youth in the 50s, and the stirring, bloody climax of the film was something unheard of at the time. In fact, the film was edited for violence in both England and the United States, and banned outright in several other countries. Compared to films today the violence is certainly tame, but it's not difficult to see why audiences (and reviewers) were disturbed by the content in a pre-Blood Feast world.

The creatures are brought to life through some sub-Harryhausen stop motion effects that still remain effective, though charmingly dated. When shot, the creatures explode with blood and eventually melt gruesomely. However, almost all of these very amusing effects take place in the film's final 15 minutes.

Unfortunately, the creature is mostly what remains worth recommending about the film. The acting ranges from passable (Marshall Thompson in the lead), to laughably bad (Stanley Maxted as Colonel Butler), and the first 50 minutes of this 74 minute film move at a slow pace, the creatures remaining invisible when they attack. The direction by Arthur Crabtree is flat and pedestrian, and while the script (by Herbert J. Leder, director of some notable monster movies himself) throws out some entertaining scientific gobbledygook, the pacing is terminally slow.

There are also strange inconsistencies in the plot, particularly when it comes to the relationship between Cummings and the professor's assistant. She bitterly chides him for upsetting the professor in one scene, and then makes sympathetic eyes at him in the next. Such plotting errors are to be expected in genre films of the era, but one would hope that a film in the Criterion collection would be a cut above. Unfortunately this is not the case.

While I question the choice of releasing the film in the first place, Criterion (as usual) did a great job with the presentation. The film suffers from print damage in the first ten minutes, but after that the print is clear of significant damage and presented in its original 1.66:1 ratio.

They were also able to come up with some interesting special features, the most significant being a full length commentary (actually a conversation) between author Tom Weaver and executive producer Richard Gordon. The track is candid and genial and features some wonderful information regarding the film's production. I'd go as far to say that the commentary is often more entertaining than the film itself, as Gordon's memory remains sharp and Weaver is a good-natured interviewer.

We're also treated to an illustrated essay on British science fiction and horror film written by Bruce Eder, as well as trailers for The Haunted Stranger, Corridors Of Blood and The Atomic Submarine. Finally, there is a photo gallery with commentary from Gordon, as well as a gallery of vintage newspaper advertisements.

I don't mean to be harsh on what is actually a very memorable b-movie, I just feel that its reputation comes more from the messy, exciting climax (said to have inspired Night Of The Living Dead) then the hour or so that comes before it. Worth seeing, but don't go in expecting a science fiction classic.