Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Corruption (Peter Cushing)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Lalala76
    Senior Member

  • Lalala76
    replied
    I'm hitting the order button on this today
    Where you ordering this from Paul?

    Btw. The terror (german bd) arrived today. Initial skim as always. picture looks ok, clean but a little soft, sounds a little muffled though. I suspect its exactly the same as the US release print and audio wise. It has English lang option, without forced subs.
    Lalala76
    Senior Member
    Last edited by Lalala76; 09-27-2013, 09:58 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Paul L
    Scholar of Sleaze

  • Paul L
    replied
    This always gets lumped together with Hitchcock's FRENZY in my mind: I guess because they're both two slightly scuzzy films from respected figures within British film culture.

    I'm hitting the order button on this today!

    Leave a comment:

  • Clive Smith
    noodle doodle

  • Clive Smith
    replied
    Originally posted by Richard--W View Post
    Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed, for example. He deserved the BAFTA for Best Actor for that one. Instead they gave it to who's-his-face in the USA.
    How utterly true.

    Leave a comment:

  • Paul L
    Scholar of Sleaze

  • Paul L
    replied
    Originally posted by Richard--W View Post
    Is that Sue Lloyd holding the twin-lens reflex? It loaded a roll of 120 sheet film. Think VistaVision. Delivered the highest quality negative, even better than 35mm, wonderful for portraits and landscapes. Plus you could see the image in the viewfinder, large but upside down. That was real photography.
    Yep, that's Sue Lloyd, like Ian said. The TLR she's holding is a Yashica 24, if my eyes are working correctly. Cushing's 35mm SLR is a Yashica too (looks like the Yashica Electro X to me, which I think was new on the market in 1968). Must have been some sort of promotional shot.

    I recently gave a couple of rolls of 120 film away to one of my officemates. I had them left over but no longer have a medium format camera. I've been thinking of buying a Rolleiflex or similar, however, just because they're such lovely devices to operate. The viewfinder gives a different perspective on the world that leads to more formal compositions, and like you say, medium format film can produce some amazing portraits.

    I haven't seen CORRUPTION in a decade or more, but I remember on my last viewing, finding it to be an unexpectedly nasty little film. I think the scene Ian's alluding to was shot in a stronger 'continental' version (with a different actress playing the 'girl in the flat', as she's credited), wasn't it?

    I'm going to order this when I get paid.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ian Jane
    Administrator

  • Ian Jane
    replied
    Originally posted by Richard--W View Post
    How nice. Am I wrong in thinking Peter might prefer that banner on some other film?
    You're not wrong. But as far as domestic releases of his movies happening this year, I'm not sure that there are any more.

    Leave a comment:

  • Richard--W
    a straight arrow

  • Richard--W
    replied
    How nice. Am I wrong in thinking Peter might prefer that banner on some other film?

    Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed, for example. He deserved the BAFTA for Best Actor for that one. Instead they gave it to who's-his-face in the USA.
    Richard--W
    a straight arrow
    Last edited by Richard--W; 09-26-2013, 05:26 PM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ian Jane
    Administrator

  • Ian Jane
    replied
    The disc actually has a banner across the top front that says "Grindhouse Releasing presents: Peter Cushing 100th Birthday Special Edition" on it.

    Leave a comment:

  • Richard--W
    a straight arrow

  • Richard--W
    replied
    Well ... I'll read the review. Be sure to include lots of frame captures, Ian.

    This year would be Peter Cushing's 100th birthday.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ian Jane
    Administrator

  • Ian Jane
    replied
    I won't go too far into spoiler territory here, Richard. Review will be up tomorrow. Let it suffice to say that there's on key scene where he's 'on the prowl' for the young flesh he needs for his wife's operation and that he gets it in a surprisingly nasty way, at least by the standards of late 60s British cinema. If you want me to PM you actual details, let me know.

    And yep, that's Sue Lloyd, she plays his fiance in the movie.

    Leave a comment:

  • Richard--W
    a straight arrow

  • Richard--W
    replied
    Originally posted by Ian Jane View Post
    Watched this last night, the transfer is excellent. Full review soon. I can see why Cushing might have distanced himself from this one, as there is one scene in particular in the full strength version in which he goes further than he did in anything else I've ever seen him in and by quite a margin at that.
    I wasn't curious before but now you've made me curious to see it. What does Cushing do in this film that he doesn't do in other films? I gots to know, man.



    Originally posted by Paul L View Post
    I've never seen that photograph before, and it's seriously one of the nicest pictures I've seen in a long while - the composition's perfect, the gaze, the way the positioning of the pair is mirrored by the cameras they're holding. What a lovely image!
    Is that Sue Lloyd holding the twin-lens reflex? It loaded a roll of 120 sheet film. Think VistaVision. Delivered the highest quality negative, even better than 35mm, wonderful for portraits and landscapes. Plus you could see the image in the viewfinder, large but upside down. That was real photography.

    Leave a comment:

  • Horace Cordier
    Senior Member

  • Horace Cordier
    replied
    Personally I love unpleasant films.

    This would appear to be the closest Cushing ever got to out and out exploitation. I've never seen it but it looks quite sleazy.

    I wait await it eagerly!

    Leave a comment:

  • Wllm Clys
    Senior Member

  • Wllm Clys
    replied
    Films don't always have to be pleasant :)

    Leave a comment:

  • bgart13
    Senior Member

  • bgart13
    replied
    It's not a pleasant movie in any way, really. Really ridiculous, with Cushing being the best (and somewhat misused) thing about it.

    Leave a comment:

  • Lalala76
    Senior Member

  • Lalala76
    replied
    Intruiging

    Leave a comment:

  • Ian Jane
    Administrator

  • Ian Jane
    replied
    Watched this last night, the transfer is excellent. Full review soon. I can see why Cushing might have distanced himself from this one, as there is one scene in particular in the full strength version in which he goes further than he did in anything else I've ever seen him in and by quite a margin at that.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X