Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Jay Raskin This movie looks back to "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane," and forward to "Carrie." It is nowhere near as good as either of them, but does manage to keep the viewer involved and caring what happens.Debbie Reynolds looks great as a cheap Jean Harlow imitator. Even pushing 40, she was as beautiful as ever. Shelley Winters was still cute, but was nowhere near as beautiful as she had been in her 20's. Reynolds plays Bettie Davis to Winters' Joan Crawford in this. Unfortunately, Reynolds is just too sweet and can't really get nasty with Winters, like Davis did with Crawford in the earlier flick. It is really sad that Hollywood musicals were over by the time this movie was made because Debbie Reynolds was just made for them and manages to make even this material sweet and tasty. Winters is quite restrained in her role. Its a good choice. The viewer is not quite sure whose side to be on a good portion of the movie.Dennis Weaver does a great job as Reynold's boyfriend who brings out Winters' insecurity. This allows us to see hints of the lesbian attraction that Winters has for Reynolds. This was 1971 and gays were not out of the closet yet, so we're just getting slight suggestions here. Weaver and Reynolds really make a great screen couple. It is too bad that Weaver never really showed his romantic side again, as far as I know. He could have been a good romantic leading man, as he does fine here seducing Reynolds.This movie is light on horror, but it is heavy on suspense. I think fans of gore and shock will be disappointed. However detective and mystery fans will enjoy it.

MARIO GAUCI I had watched (and recorded) this a few years back on local TV and, having been underwhelmed by it, I subsequently erased the tape; however, when it was released by MGM as part of a "Midnite Movie" double-feature DVD of Curtis Harrington/Shelley Winters films for a very affordable price, I couldn't resist giving it a second look (this has since gone out-of-print). Actually, I received the DVD a few months ago but only now, with Harrington's passing, did I get to it; thankfully, this time around I was more receptive to the film and, in fact, now consider it one of the more satisfying WHATEVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE? (1962) imitations (with whom, incidentally, it shared screenwriter Henry Farrell).The film offers a splendid evocation of 1930s Depression America - with its child-star craze and sensational murders (exploited during the fake newsreel opening); it's stylishly made (kudos to Lucien Ballard's cinematography and the set design by Eugene Lourie') and boasts an effective David Raksin score. Shelley Winters, Debbie Reynolds and Michael MacLiammoir deliver excellent performances; the latter is especially impressive as the larger-than-life and vaguely sinister diction coach (though he ultimately proves a mere red herring!). Also featured are Dennis Weaver and Agnes Moorehead (hers is only a cameo, really, as the evangelist she plays is mostly heard over the radio).Many seemed to regret the inclusion of musical numbers by the kids (including an amusing Mae West imitation), but I personally wasn't bothered by them; the film does slightly overstay its welcome due to an unhurried pace and (perhaps needlessly) convoluted plot. Reynolds - a musical star herself - is ideally cast as the dancing-school owner and, despite their on-set rivalry, she and Winters work well together. The latter, in fact, gives a more balanced depiction of paranoia and insanity than in WHOEVER SLEW AUNTIE ROO? (1971); the narrative, then, comes up with a number of ironic twists that lead up to the expected Grand Guignol-type denouement. Apparently, the film was toned down (it originally contained more gore and even a suggestion of lesbianism!) by producer Martin Ransohoff - against Harrington's wishes - in order to get a PG rating...

Neil Doyle DEBBIE REYNOLDS and SHELLEY WINTERS try to escape their sordid past (their sons were convicted of a brutal killing), so they flee to Hollywood in the 1930s and open a talent school for kiddies who want to become the next Shirley Temple.It's a fun idea for a black comedy, and director Curtis Harrington makes the most of a story by Henry Farrell that pretty much adapts some of the same material he used in other thrillers written exclusively to give aging divas the chance to do some melodramatic emoting. While this doesn't reach the heights (or depths) of BABY JANE or CHARLOTTE, it does provide a lot of camp fun for film addicts familiar with the '30s scene.DENNIS WEAVER has the only interesting male role, but the film belongs to Debbie (she sings and dances, too) and Shelley (who has a madcap time going insane) and there's even a shocking ending to keep the horror fans happy.If you enjoy this sort of thing, done previously in similar films like WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO AUNT ALICE?, this one is easy to take.

bensonmum2 After their sons are sentenced to life in prison, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shirley Winters) begin receiving threatening phone calls because someone fells their sons got off easy. The pair decides to move to California to escape the publicity of the trial and to start a new life. They start a dance school that is soon very successful. One of the students has a rich unmarried father with whom Adelle quickly falls in love. In the meantime, Helen is busy raising rabbits and becoming a little too infatuated with an evangelist on the radio. It's only a mater of time before everything falls apart and the women enter a world of madness and murder.I can't help but compare What's the Matter with Helen? to Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?, also starring Shelly Winters. Where that movie seemed almost restrained in its presentation of Auntie Roo's madness, there's nothing holding Helen back in this movie. It may take a good deal of the movie's running time, but once she snaps, Helen is one Bad Mad Mutha. You don't want to mess with her. Winters is so delightfully demented that it was impossible for me not to enjoy her performance. I'm not going to spoil the movie, but the things Helen is capable of are totally over-the-top.As good as Winters is, Reynolds is totally ridiculous in her role as the gold-digging tap dancer. I got the impression that she thought she was in a movie that would get her nominated for some award. This ain't Citizen Kane! Quit acting so serious. Hey, Debbie, don't you realize that you're main purpose is to be a victim of Winters' insanity.I just love these former-female-stars-in-the-twilight-of-their-career horror movies. What's the Matter with Helen? is as fun as any.