Bay of Blood (1971)

Time for this years first trip into the world of Italian horror. This is a movie from Gialo legend Mario Bava. If you’ve been following my reviews, you may recall me waxing lyrical about “Blood and Black Lace” (1964). After that I always planned to watch more of his work. I’ve actually only seen three of Bava’s movies, but I always intended to increase that number. This particular movie was recommended to me on X, specifically as a movie that heavily influenced the slasher genre. Too much to pass up here and so I squeezed it in to my October viewing list. The screenplay is from Bava, Giuseppe Zaccariello and Filippo Ottoni. Bava does cinematography here and Stelvio Cipriani provides the music.

one night, at a bayside mansion, Countess “Federica Donati” is murdered. A short while later, the woman’s husband and apparent killer is stabbed to death. A suicide note is left behind for the countess, but the husbands body is missing by the time the police investigate. His daughter “Renata” and her husband “Albert” arrive at the bay to investigate her fathers disappearance. She has an ulterior motive though as the bay was owned by the Countess and she plans to inherit. They aren’t the only people after the bay though as real estate broker Frank Ventura and his lover, Laura are also scheming to buy the land cheap. Then there is the countess’ son (Renata’s step brother), who has been hidden from the world, living in a shack by the bay. As more murders start to happen the question becomes who is hunting who?

Thirteen Corpses

I can definitely see how this was an influence on the slasher genre. Most specifically thought, Friday the 13th (Part one). There is a whole section that is sort of a footnote to the main story, but is straight out of 80’s slasher movies. It’s almost the template for the first four Friday the 13th films, yet it’s only a 20 minute segment of the movie. It’s like other directors watched this and decide it would be even better if this was the entire movie. There’s even a bit of nudity and pre-marital sex in the mix. The rest of the movie has plenty of elements that I can see influenced future slashers, but this particular section stands out.

Of course being Giallo there is no shortage of gore. What makes this different is the faster pace and sheer number of kills. There are thirteen kills, a deliberate number (The kills were written before the story). Friday the 13th didn’t reach that body count until part IV (Exceeding it if you include Jason’s own death). Some of the kills are pretty graphic too, including a beheading that pushed the gore a little bit into the unbelievable territory. Several of these could be seen as direct influences on similar deaths within the Friday the 13th franchise. Speaking of that number (Thirteen), it’s especially relevant here as the events all kick off on the 13th. The day isn’t specified, but it could well be a Friday.

The Art of the Slasher

Bava is his own cinematographer here, and so he gets the credit for the creative filming. I especially took note of his use taking the camera out-of-focus. Bava does this throughout, sometimes through zooming, but not always. Many times this is used for a transitions. The technique helps to give the film as smooth flow instead of making hard cuts. This makes the film seem both artistic, but also a little like found footage. Another slasher element on display here is the occasional use of the first person. It is used sparingly, but effectively. Bava was forced to finish the film with a minimal budget and so it’s no surprise a lot of what he came up with ended up as standard techniques for low budget slashers.

There’s plenty of jump scares too, usually the kills come out of nowhere. Being the first of it’s kind it’s not a surprise that there aren’t any false jumps (Something that would become a mainstay of future slashers). The main difference between Bay and most slashers is (Spoiler) there are multiple killers. I won’t elaborate too much on that since that would be major spoilers, but this isn’t a folk law killer wiping everyone out. Perhaps the most interesting thing here is that visually this is a step away from what you expect from giallo. Indeed, I’m not sure it can even be classified as such. This truly is a slasher film or at least half way between the two.

Conclusion

There are however, flaws. Most of which involve the plot. The ending is frankly a bit silly and there is at least one murder that doesn’t seem to make much sense logistically. Honestly, I think this has a plot that falls apart the more you think about it. But then, this is a slasher, what did I expect? In regards to the characters, they all seemed to have personalities. Even those doomed to a short life expectancy. I wouldn’t really call it depth, but Bava at least attempts to make them seem human, which is more than I can say for some modern slashers. The acting too is decent and despite being an Italian horror, I didn’t notice any awkward dubbing.

It’s not necessarily by design that this is a proto-slasher, instead, it’s likely a result of production issues. As a slasher, the overly convoluted plots means it lacks focus. But as a giallo it lacks flair. Overall though, while not as visually stunning as Blood and Black lace, this is a groundbreaking movie. It still stands the test of time as a solid and unique slasher film, even by modern standards. It is worthy of a strong 6.5/10. This is a must see for slasher and giallo fans alike. If you aren’t a fan of either sub-genre, then it’s a mild recommendation instead.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

10 Rillington Place (1971)

Many horror films have been made based on true stories. Usually these are embellished and sometimes end up having very little in common with the true story. In the case of 10 Rillington Place from 1971, an attempt was made to present the story of serial killer John Christie as accurately as possible. The focus of the story though isn’t so much on the horrendous crimes of Christie but on the travesty of justice that saw an innocent man hanged for some of his crimes. The movie was directed by legendary director Richard Fleischer, with a screenplay by Clive Exton. It is based on the novel by the same name by Ludovic Kennedy. Screen legend Richard Attenborough takes on the role of serial killer Christie and John Hurt plays unfortunate scapegoat Timothy Evans.

10 Rillington Place is part psychological thriller and part court room drama. The primary purpose of the movie is not to scare the audience so much as to lay bare the travesty of justice of the real life case involved in the story. It is effectively a drama designed to expose the great flaw of capital punishment. Despite that, there are definitely horror elements to the story. It is after all about real life serial killer and rapist John Christie, that murdered at least 8 people including his own wife and one baby. The film shows a few of those murders and while they are not especially graphic they didn’t need to be.

The Case That Shocked A Nation

The story starts when Timothy Evans, his wife Beryl and their baby move in to one of the apartments in Rillington Place. By this point Christie has already actively murdering women and burying them in his garden. It’s not clear how many he has killed, but we see one murder at the start of the film. Christie sets his sights on adding Beryl to his collection. Here I’m torn between not spoiling too much of the film and recognizing this is all real life events so a lot of people will already know what happens next. Suffice to say Christie ends up framing Timothy not just for Bery’s murder but also for their baby’s. However Christie’s bloodlust means he doesn’t have the sense to quit while he is ahead.

The movie doesn’t really have a main character though since it is more concerned with showing the historic events. At times this can make the film seem a little dry. There’s no mystery to it either, but then when dealing with a real life killer any attempt at mystery would be futile. Instead the film needs to build the suspense of impending doom for those living under the roof of 10 Rillington Place and it doesn’t always manage this. This is probably intentional though since the movie wasn’t meant to be a horror as such. It’s hard to dramatize these characters without delving into horror a little though and that is largely down to some impressive performances from the two leads.

Star Performances

Richard Attenborough plays murderer Christie and he plays it with cold calculating calmness that makes the character that much more terrifying. He rarely seems flustered and even when he is, he still has a coldness about him and a politeness. I can’t help but see an element of Attenborough’s performance in Anthony Hopkin’s portrayal of Hannibal Lecter 20 years later. Of course Hopkins was playing a fantasy character and so could ham it up a little and have a bit of fun with it, but underneath that you can definitely see Attenborough’s Christie. The two were friends and collaborated many times, so it makes sense.

Attenborough wasn’t the only big name actor in this movie, we also have John Hurt showing his flexibility as the somewhat simple minded man scapegoat, way out of his depth, Timothy Evans. Hurt won a BAFTA nomination for his role and it was well earned. Evans is a man with a certain amount of pride and an equal amount of hubris and yet is played the most tragic of hands. His wife and child murdered and he takes the blame. It is too much to deal with and Hurt puts it all into his performance without overdoing it.

The Verdict

Overall this is a pretty strong telling of a tragic and horrifying series of events. It makes a good argument against capital punishment as well as the failure of a police to spot a killer with no clear motivation. It is however a little too dry for my liking, even for something based on real events. That leaves it a little short of a 7 for me but it’s still a recommendation. This is a strong 6.5/10.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.