Film Summary DLXXXVIII (Corruption)


Today's special word is 'Disappointment'. Should I use it in a sentence?

 ''This film was a disappointment.''

It's about a surgeon whose fiance was injured in the face and was disfigured.
I mean most of her face looks plenty good and in reality you could put put a little foundation on and cover that scar right up.
But you know 'it's a travesty!'

Anyways this leads to a whole fiasco as our surgeon (played by Peter Cushing) start screwing around with unorthodox forms of plastic surgery in hopes of repairing his wife's face.
Her (nor he's wife) can be bothered just going for conventional plastic surgery. Which although long and arduous would inevitably give out good results.
Yes in 1968 but plastic surgery wasn't the worst thing in the world at the time. It could easily fix this woman's problem.
I mean she didn't look all that bad.

So Peter Cushing designs to look into this weird regenerative skin property that would literally regrow damaged tissue into non damaged tissue.
How the hell that works we will never know.
But the whole thing doesn't work out too well as he has to acquire parts of human organs from other females to make the surgery possible.
So initially he decides to take a chunk of a dead woman's body for the initial surgery and this lands in hot water with his constituents at the hospital.
He ended up breaking several rules. Rules that should have got him in prison but movie decides to ignore all that.

Anyways this experiment fails time and time again and both Peter Cushing and his fiance (who I said was a wife earlier) start to get more and more crazy.
Now there's kind of an excuse for the scarred lady because all these surgeries are screwing with her mental capacity and she's just going through a lot of stress.
But Cushing is just turning into a murderer and really shouldn't go from the start.
I mean it's his fault the scarring happened to begin with.
He got in to a stupid fight with this dumb 1960's hippie photographer and that led to the accident that start as wife.
Oh my God the late 60s hippies.
It's 1968! The hippie movement is over. Take off the horrible plastic clothing. Stop dancing to stupid rock and roll music and become dower like the rest of the world.
We're going to have the up rise of disco and really Kick-Ass Soul music we don't need you dancing trust fund 'I'm not doing anything, but I'm going to pretend like i am a revolutionary anyways idiots'' around anymore.
Yeah I don't like hippies in the late sixties. They just come off as incredibly annoying out-of-date toss-pots*.

Anyways the film goes on the murders start to increase and everybody sanity goes down the drain.
So does my patience and overall enthusiasm for the film. Unfortunately there's no like able characters through out and a chemistry between Peter Cushing and Sue Lloyd is just awful. They're more than 20 years apart in age and they're very different people.
It makes no sense why they're in a relationship and it just comes off as kind of weird.
Yeah I know there's plenty of people out there that marry people far older these but a general rule of thumb is that it doesn't happen too often.
Plus let's just face facts; Older men are always hooking up with really young women in films and it's just queer.
Especially as you never see this in the reverse. We never get Bea Arthur hooking up with a young Tom Cruise.

Anyways I didn't like this movie. I didn't even finish it.
The lack of good chemistry is really what brought it down for me. And that's the same nothing of the god-awful movie poster using a stupid gimmick claiming that; ''it's too harsh for women" or some sort of gibberish.
A whole whack of people on the internet today could have a field day ripping that apart. But I'm more ticked off that they try to use a stupid movie device to cover up for the flaws. If your movie can't stand on its own two feet than you've maybe shouldn't release it.

*Just to keep myself in the clear I'm mainly referring to movie hippies who just come off as obnoxious in just about every film that they've ever been presented in.

Comments