| |
|||
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|
Tombs of the Blind Dead (the European Cut)
In my first veiwing of Amando de Ossorio’s Tombs of the Blind Dead, I was unaware that I was watching the cut that had been shipped over to America in order to attract a United States audience. That version included a some moments featuring graphic displays of violence against women, and I found the scenes completely offensive and against the restrained tone that Ossorio had demonstrated in previous scenes. The scenes, which included a detailed rape sequence, marred Tombs to the point that I could no longer approach it as anything but typical Euro-trash. In addition, I felt that the plot and the characters were underdeveloped, and the film-making was heavy handed and ineffective. All of these faults stacked together resulted in a pretty damning review. I soon came to realize that the late Ossorio was likely to have given the cut I watched a bad review himself. For a complete breakdown of the artistic goals that Ossorio was trying to achieve with the film, please see my review of the first cut. For purposes here, I’ll make a long story short: Ossorio was attempting to make a film that parodied and challenged his fellow Spaniard Jesse Franco’s style of filmmaking, which included gratuitous scenes of gore, sexuality, and violence against women. He wanted to create a visual parable depicting ancient evil resurrected and overcoming modern society, indicating that the popular entertainment of his day would only reap violence and destruction. Thus, sex in the film was toned down and restrained, the violence was kept to a minimal, and an emphasis was placed on the surreal, creepy images of zombified Templar Knights on their horses, chasing their victims and chanting ancient rites. The studio (or some bigwig in an office smoking a fat cigar) didn’t think that this type of film was good enough for an American audience, and thus, graphic sexual images were painfully inserted into the film for its release in the Western World. It is a pity that the American version is the only cut widely available here in the states, because I realize in retrospect that when these scenes are taken out, you are left with a film with a film far more effective in establishing its morality tale. Unfortunately, it appears that European studios know as much about filmmaking as the “professionals” here in the states. Perhaps they don’t even need directors with any talent, if they really think they know what the public really wants. They should just give any clown a camera and tell them to shoot lots of gore and sex (and while they’re at it, they should leave Paul Schrader’s cut of the Exorcist prequel alone). But I digress. In any case, with the graphic scenes taken out of Tombs, Ossorio’s vision is much more realized, because we understand exactly what he is trying to do and what statement he is trying to make: By supporting the graphic displays of violence and sexuality from the Franco-era of filmmaking, Ossorio is arguing, Europeans are destroying their innocence, and evil will catch up to them and destroy them (and probably Americans for that matter, considering the studio’s decision to include nudity and sadism in our version). I realize the director’s point more fully when considering the film without the added offensive material, especially with the bleak final moments in which the Templar murder everyone on a train, and a child is shown weeping over her dead mother as a ghostly Templar hand strokes her head. The message is clear: Even Europe’s innocent children will be affected by the decline of society’s morals. Watching this moment without thinking of Ossorio as a filmmaker with no better moral standard than Franco heightens its effect and makes it just as heartbreaking as it is horrifying. What of the scenes that drag, and the characters that have no personalities, and the subplots that go nowhere? Well, they’re still there, and they’re still something of a problem. But considering Ossorio's intentions, context, and target audience, I am forced to reconsider their merit. I'll explain it this way: I took a class once on biblical history that taught that the best approach for modern-day believers to look at the scriptures is to consider that they originally weren’t written for present-day Christians, but for persons living in a completely different time, with a completely different mentality. Therefore, to escape from legalism and to fully appreciate the message of the text, one needs to understand not just the words themselves, but what they were saying to the people who they were written for. When I apply this logic to films, there is more that is right about Tombs of the Blind Dead then there is wrong. European filmmakers, especially the Spanish, have always downplayed characters and stories and emphasized on mood and images. Their films are meant to present moving pictures that provoke thought and stimulate imagination; their makers do not necessarily see the need to create complete, three-arc stories and characters like what American audiences are used to. In that context, Tombs is extremely effective filmmaking, using powerful images of horror and surrealism that pack an artistic punch different from any other film of its kind. The Templars remain Ossorio's own, unique creation: Their faces are emotionless death heads that are hideous to behold, and their movements are slow, silent, and visually more terrifying than the typical, limb-dragging zombie-from-next-door that we're used to seeing. That the creatures are based on depictions of the four horseman of the apocalypse from ancient, purer European art also adds to their appeal and reminds the target audience of Ossorio's intention. In addition, Ossorio’s use of sexual restrain and limited violence had to have both challenged and played sharply against the grotesque and sadistic images that Jesse Franco gave European audiences. Yes, the American film critic in me wishes that more time had been spent on the characters and the story, but Ossorio didn’t make this film for me, or for Americans. He made it for his continent, for his country, and, more specifically, for Jesse Franco, and he was begging them all to reconsider the depravity of their society. His purpose was not unlike a young American filmmaker who made a movie around the same time about a few people trapped in a farmhouse as the hungry dead grew in number outside. As an American critic writing for an American audience, I cannot give the European cut of Tombs of the Blind Dead a four-star rating. That job is for whom the film was made for, on the other side of the world. I remain distracted by the lack of resolution with the subplots, and I would have liked to have had at least one character that I actually cared about. However, having considered this sadism-free version of Tombs, I believe that Ossorio’s intentions with this film are pure, and I must admit that he has crafted a film loaded with startling images, important themes, and true imagination. American viewers should try to locate the European cut, and with the European-style of filmmaking in context, they should appreciate the film as an important piece of Spanish horror cinema that is much higher in quality than its genre is often given credit for. All
this to say: Here’s to you, Amando de Ossorio. You might
have been the European George Romero after all.
Questions? Comments? E-mail me: danel_the_tinman@hotmail.com |
||
