Should you see it? Sure.
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds."
Friday, April 10, 2015
The Cape Canaveral Monsters (1960)
How bad is it? It's better than other Phil Tucker films, i.e. bad.
Should you see it? Sure.
Aliens take over the bodies of two people who died in a car crash and then try to shoot down missiles from Cape Canaveral from their cave bunker - the fact that there are no caves in Florida notwithstanding. The special effects involve beams of light (as cheap as imaginable) and a hollowed out television with something floating in it, plus weaponry and devices made from left-over household plumbing and electrical fixtures. One of the aliens keeps losing his arm, which suggests that Tucker meant this to be silly, as opposed to his "serious" Robot Monster and Dance Hall Racket. There's no real plot continuity and it's up to teenagers to foil the alien plot. The film has some exploitation elements, nudity (not explicit) and violence (decapitation, torture), and the female alien seems to be into it. There's a cliffhanger ending, with a car crash and a scream.
Should you see it? Sure.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment