THE BEST OF ENEMIES (1961)

Set in 1941 during World War II’s East African campaign, THE BEST OF ENEMIES tells the (not even remotely funny) comedic story of a British officer (David Niven) and an Italian officer (Alberto Sordi) who, in between people dying and other war horrors, end up taking turns being each other’s prisoner. Hahahahaha! Oh man, that’s funny! I just broke my fuckin’ knee from slapping it so hard. I’m sure the families of the soldiers killed during the various small battles will see the humor in the situation. You see, the one guy would capture the other guy, then…he’d escape and in turn capture the other guy!!! Hardy-har-fucking-har. As the newspaper ad tagline says: “This is war? No! This is fun!!” In fact, if you turn up the volume at 26:08, right as that one guy gets shot in the back, you’ll hear him scream “This is fun!” as he dies.

I’ve always been a fan of David Niven and while I don’t know much about Alberto Sordi, his performance was perfectly fine. The problem with THE BEST OF ENEMIES isn’t the acting or the production values, it’s the shit script. The shit isn’t funny. Like at all. And it’s not just because it’s set during WWII. I have nothing wrong with that. MISTER ROBERTS is one of my favorite movies and it’s very funny. THE BEST OF ENEMIES just isn’t funny. The entire film is two groups of soldiers walking around in the desert accomplishing nothing. Besides capturing each other.

Okay pace, shit story that goes nowhere, dumb ending that resolves nothing, a few boring battle scenes, lots of boring desert scenery, not one single person saying that if they had announced Krys Marshall as the next James Bond immediately after Daniel Craig left the role then we'd probably have another James Bond movie by now if not two, an 100% all-male cast, okay acting, zero gore, zero zombies, a fly landing on David Niven's face.

Negative comments aside, I would be interested in seeing an article or something about the making of the film and some details about the cast. I know almost nothing about early 1960's Italian (or British) Cinema, so I expect the cast was more impressive than I realized. That said, it's still barely worth watching.

[Shout out to the one newspaper ad below that misspelled the word "enemies".]

SPOOKIES (1986)

Two carloads of partygoers show up to a mansion in the woods and walk in like they own the joint. They don’t. The mansion belongs to an old wizard dude who likes to talk a lot and occasionally send one of his minions (werecat, zombies, farting muck men, a spider woman, etc.) to kill people. The End.

Every movie ever made, no matter how “bad” it is, has its fans. Especially horror movies. (For example: AX ’EM has a 1.4 score on IMDb, but I gave it a 6 because, to me, it’s a lot of fun and definitely unique.) So, with that in mind, I’m sure that SPOOKIES has its fair share of fans. I’m just not one of them. Slow pace, below average to average acting, mildly interesting special effects, terrible story with even worse dialogue, predictable ending, boring camerawork, zero nudity, zero gore, very little blood…honestly, I don’t what there is to like about this movie. The story is shit and the execution of the shit story is shit. I guess if I was forced to mention something positive, I'd say that the lighting was good.

The only real thing that I found interesting about SPOOKIES is the appearance of Charlotte Alexandra from A REAL YOUNG GIRL! Like, what the fuck? A REAL YOUNG GIRL is a solid 1970’s French arthouse film with Charlotte Alexandra as the lead and here she is 10 years later co-starring in the low budget horror movie that's so weak that I'm not even sure it can really be considered an actual Horror movie.

Skip it with a vengeance and never look back. If you need me, I’ll be in my room watching the original NIGHT OF THE DEMONS. While eating a bowl of fuck. Naturally.