Country: CANADA
Beset
by production difficulties, the 1983 Canadian slasher flick Curtains, emerges from the early 80’s
effluent as a quite thoughtful, intelligent, and at times lyrical contribution
to the horror genre. The slasher film is the horror sub-genre that I have the
lowest regard for, so when one comes across my screen that is a little bit
different I tend towards generosity. In the case of Curtains I’m willing to overlook the myriad plot deficiencies; the only
partially developed characters, and the patchy performances, because the film
has a fairly original premise, and an offbeat tone that is most welcome. The
producer of Curtains was Peter R.
Simpson, who a few years before had scored a major commercial success with Prom Night (1980), and clearly sought to
replicate that feat. Simpson evidently knew what ingredients were required to
make a successful horror picture in a market place that was obese with
derivative product. The first time director was Robert Ciupka, a
cinematographer, who brought with him a wealth of visual artistry. Therein lies
the tragedy of Curtains, the reason
why there is a push and pull between the market and art, why the film only
partially succeeds, why the film suffers from an uneven style and a number of
structural weaknesses. It is also the reason the film, which commenced shooting
in late 1980, didn’t see the light of day until 1983. A clash of philosophies
between producer and director would ultimately be the films undoing and lead to
marginalisation, commercial failure, and for fans of horror, badly distributed
and poor quality releases.
In
our more enlightened age however such grievances are quickly becoming a thing
of the past. Curtains is not the
mostly likely candidate for high definition treatment, but that hasn’t stopped
progressive US distributor Synapse from distributing the film on blu-ray. The
film can now be enjoyed in a pristine transfer, and the artistic ambitions for
the film begin to shine through. Much of the films slightly off kilter approach
to the genre can be attributed to a screenplay by Robert Guza Jr. which offers
no characters to identify with (these are not pot smoking, sex obsessed teens,
but psychologically fragile adults), there isn’t even an asshole lurking on the
sidelines to play practical jokes, and create false scares. Though an early
false rape sequence is a mistake the film could have down without. The lack of
sympathetic identification figures means the audience literally has no idea who
is likely to survive, and although red herrings are set up, the identity of the
killer is difficult to predict as well. This is a good first time effort from
Guza Jr. a man who would spend much of his career writing for television (Santa Barbara, General Hospital).
English actress Samantha Eggar (who had impressed in another Canadian
production; David Cronenberg’s The Brood
[1979]) plays Samantha Sherwood, a veteran actress who has been promised the
lead role in the troubled film production Audra
by egotistical director Jonathan Stryker (John Vernon). Such is Sherwood’s
devotion to her craft she and Stryker hatch a plan to have her committed to an
asylum, so she can better prepare for the role of the insane Audra. This is
method acting in extremis, and while Sherwood stares into the vacant eyes of
mouthing imbeciles, Stryker intends to leave her to rot there so he can cast
younger hopefuls.
This
act of deceit gives the film its motivating force in the first half as Sherwood
emerges as the likeliest candidate for murder once she escapes from the spastic
surrounds of bedlam. One of the keys to a successful horror film is being able
to assemble a bunch of characters in an isolated setting, and Curtains success rests in the premise of
six actresses travelling to the snowy countryside of Ontario for a period of
intensive auditions. We immediately have jealous rivalry as a unifying force as
Stryker struts around in a leather jacket enjoying the power trip. Somewhat
surprisingly John Vernon doesn’t really invest Stryker with the necessary force
required; he is obnoxious and ruthless, but Vernon tends to downplay the
character, and the film which generally has a muted or downplayed feel, may
have benefited from a little more emotional force from the egotistical
director. But Stryker is not above psychological torment, and delights
especially in putting Sherwood through the mill. The interplay between the
characters succeeds, and at times the film is more enjoyable when Stryker
presides over the insecurities of the emotionally damaged sextet. Indeed on
occasion one forgets that there is a masked killer (the old hag mask is
particularly distinctive) stalking the troupe.
Perhaps
the most important question then is whether Curtains
works as a horror film; the answer is partially. There is a recurrent motif of
dolls to preface murder, this not only works due to the uncanny nature of dolls
themselves, but also adds to the theme of the childish, immature, and dependent
nature of the actresses. The set pieces themselves lack the stylisation, and
exaggerated absurdity of contemporaneous examples, meaning that Curtains emerges as a curiously bloodless
slasher film. A few moments do work however; a head in a toilet is a notable
jolt, the sudden throat slashing of a victim against a tree is unexpected, and
then there is the ice skating sequence. The distinctive sight of the mask
wearing, sickle wielding killer, skating in slow motion towards their intended
victim is alarming, stylish, and ridiculous in equal measure. But it does give
veteran DOP Robert Paynter, whose previous outing behind the camera was An American Werewolf in London (1981),
the opportunity to show the wonderfully icy Ontario countryside in all its
wintry glory. As a psychological drama Curtains
works well; divested of its horror elements, the film could have been a really
intriguing art movie; as a slasher movie Curtains
is tame, quaint, and at times clueless – the result is a fascinating hotchpotch
that is well worth a look.
©
Shaun Anderson 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment