Weekly Witch Hunt: Scream Queens & Free State of Jones

We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...

It feels like I keep bringing up Western's in this section, both good and bad!
I was tempted to include the Absolutely Fabulous movie but realised it would have been for purely sentimental reasons.  It really isn't that great a film but it did bring back a lot of nostalgia for a much loved British comedy.  Instead we do have something darkly humorous tickling my fancy this week.

The Scorcher

Finding the right balance in a horror comedy is not an easy task.  Too much comedy and it can become parody.  Too much horror and the comedy can feel like it has been shoehorned in.  Having just watched season one of Scream Queens I can confidently say that Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk and Ian Brennan have found the right combination.
This show has some great comic moments spread through every episode.  The horror doesn't go for gore but instead shoots for the Scream film franchise level of surprise horror.  In fact I would bet that particular film franchise heavily influenced the tone of this series.
The Red Devil killer definitely shares some of the same traits as the Ghostface killer from Scream as they are both equally inept when it comes to attacking their victim.  I would also suggest that the costume of the Red Devil killer took a little inspiration from Ghostface too; both using a mask to conceal the identity of the murderer.
Emma Roberts is particularly nasty in her role as the leader of the Chanel's.  This is an obvious tribute to Heathers; naming the four sorority girls of Kappa Kappa Tau all Chanel.  The overall tone of the show shares so much in common with Heathers actually, in a good way.  In Roberts they couldn't have picked a better leading lady; she seems so genuine when dishing out her brutal lines. 
Snagging Jamie Lee Curtis who is truly one of the original iconic Scream Queens is a real coup.  She is terrific as the bitchy dean of the campus.  She shows her comic chops, as well as returning to her horror roots, although this time around she isn't the type of girl to run away in high heels!
If there is one character that I could pick out who has the best lines it would have to be the completely naïve, sexually perverted: Chad Radwell.  Nearly everything that comes out of his mouth is comedy gold and Glen Powell nails his performance.  Equally amusing and just as welcome every time she appears is Niecy Nash as Denise Hemphill; the security guard out to protect the members of Kappa Kappa Tau.
I will say that this isn't a show that you should binge watch.  To get the most benefit I feel it is a show where you need to view one, possibly two episodes at a time; otherwise it loses some of its appeal.  The humour is great but in smaller doses and watching them one after another kind of dulls your senses and some of the smarter, quick witted jokes will pass you by.
The story itself keeps you guessing as to who the murderer is.  This is one busy killer; barely an episode goes by without someone being done away with; and in some rather inventive ways.  I have a confession to make: I was unable to solve the mystery of who was the main culprit.  Yes I failed as an Inquisitor in this instance and I have dutifully been punishing myself with self-flagellation since!

The Torture
 

Well a second entry in the Torture category for a Matthew McConaughey film!  I like Mr McConaughey but I am afraid that Free State of Jones did not live up to my expectations.  Being a fan of the Western I was looking forward to this with eager anticipation.  I especially love films about the American Civil War and the premise of this intrigued me.
This film ended up being just so flat and underwhelming; I was left feeling really disappointed with the final outcome.  It is such a shame because I am sure that the source material is worthy of a movie adaptation but this does not do justice to the story.  A quick look at the history of Newton Knight shows that there are at least four books on the subject, so how they didn't manage to come up with a more cohesive script is somewhat of a surprise.
There may be a lot of conjecture across these books but with a bit of research they should have been able to decide on the story that they wanted to tell.  Instead what we get is a film that goes too big on scope; whereas it would have been better served by narrowing the focus to possibly just the war years.  I think they lost the core of the story which should have been about Jones County and instead made it more of a biography of Newton Knight.
The film is interspersed with historical photos from the Civil War detailing what events were occurring to help move the narrative along; this is used in place of a narrator.  While this is a different way of showing the passage of time it does give the film a television movie of the week feel.  There is generally no lead up to any of these time jumps either, they just seem to be thrown in at random when the director feels it is time to move to the next stage in Knight's life he wants us to see.
To confuse matters there is the completely unnecessary inclusion of a court case involving one of Knight's descendants Davis Knight.  He is fighting for his marriage to be recognised as he is considered to be of African-American descent and at the time interracial marriage is still not recognised in the state of Mississippi.  The scenes of this trial are also strewn in at irregular intervals throughout.
They have no effect on the main plot and only serve as a distraction to the story you want to see unfold.  If I was editing this, these scenes would have ended up on the cutting room floor.  It is merely an interesting footnote and could have been included as such in the end credits if they felt it necessary to bring the audience's attention to this matter.
As you can see there are a few gripes in regards to how disjointed the whole thing feels.  On top of that we have the length of time the director wants to cover.  It starts in 1862 and finishes, if you include Davis' story, in 1947!  Of course it doesn't include all events during this period and I am exaggerating but it does show that they try to incorporate too many parts of the Knight family story.
The concentration should have stayed on the fourteen skirmishes Knight and his followers had with the Confederate forces in Jones County.  Instead we have Knight establishing a farm after the war has finished; Knight's fight alongside his African-American friends to establish their right to vote; Knight's estranged wife returning to his farm; Knight rescuing Moses' son from a new form of slavery after abolition and finally Knight and the freedmen practicing their right to vote.  It is just too much to fit in and makes the film just drag on and on, testing ones endurance.
Disappointed is the word that best sums up my feelings towards this, I hope that one day this interesting story gets a much better telling than what was on offer here.

Film: "Sherlock Holmes and the Voice of Terror"

The Witch Trial:
How well does Sherlock Holmes transition from early 1900's to the middle of WWII?

Who:
Director: John Rawlins
Starring: Basil Rathbone, Nigel Bruce, Evelyn Ankers, Mary Gordon, Dennis Hoey
What:
Mystery/Thriller
Why:
Adaptation of one of the Sherlock Holmes tales
When:
Released 1942
Where:
London during World War II

The Case For:
The Voice of Terror is the third entry of an incredible fourteen movie series starring Basil Rathbone as Holmes and Nigel Bruce as Dr. Watson.
The previous two entries were both productions for 20th Century Fox but they ran into problems negotiating with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's estate and passed on making any further films.  Universal were only too happy to acquire the rights and, keeping the two stars on board, were responsible for the remaining twelve entries.
Whereas Fox had firmly set their films in the source materials era of the late 1800's and early 1900's, Universal chose to take a different path and bring Holmes and Watson right into the modern era of the time.  By way of explanation for this change at the beginning of each film we have a title sequence stating how Holmes is "ageless".  I can't help wondering if this statement triggered something in the thought process of both Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat when it came to creating the hugely successful TV series Sherlock starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman.  This too brings Baker Street's most famous resident into the modern age.
By choosing to have events take place at the current point in history helped reduce costs for things like costumes and props.  Each production was therefore able to be made on much smaller budgets.  The films were also shorter; most just running slightly longer than an hour as they were released as 'B' movie pictures.
It is ironic that for their first foray into the Sherlock Holmes back catalogue that, chronologically at least; they should choose to do a loose adaptation of the last Holmes story "His Last Bow".  However the basis of the plot is completely appropriate for the setting.  Originally printed in 1917 it focusses on the machinations of a German spy trying to smuggle important information back to Germany at the outbreak of the First World War but is foiled by Holmes.
The Voice of Terror updates this premise to the Second World War and retains the German spy and also keeps the name Von Bock who proves to be the antagonist.  Instead of trying to escape with secret documents the clever twist here is that the 'Voice' is releasing radio broadcast propaganda from Germany designed to sow fear and dread in the British population and thus crushing their collective spirit.
What is incredible is that the producers used the actual events taking place at the time for the basis of the plot.  Coming out in 1942 this was smack bang in the middle of WWII.  But what is even more impressive is that Germany was actually making the type of radio programs depicted in this film with the exact intentions of scaring the Allies into submission.
Germany Calling was the true programme going out over the airwaves.  They started recording at the beginning of the conflict in 1939 and ran until 1945 when the British took control of Hamburg where the radio transmissions were broadcast from.  Lord Haw-Haw was the name given to the announcers; the nickname is rumoured to have come about due to the "Haw-Haw" laughter that could be heard at times throughout the airings.  I am sure this has had some influence on cinema bad guys ever since, especially those of Germanic origin, to indicate the moustache twirling sinister nature that inevitably gets depicted by movie villains.

Of course there is a certain element of propaganda on the Allies behalf by choosing to set the events in WWII.  Having the world's most famous detective foiling the Axis powers carefully laid out plans would have had wide appeal amongst the Allied nations.  No doubt the war office welcomed the Universal's interpretation as a welcome morale booster.  Likewise Universal would also look at it as a box office guarantee on their investment too.
I find it very inspiring when I consider the pressure and tension that must have been felt by everyone at the time this was being made.  How do you cope with making a film about a war when you have no idea how it will end?  Of course this isn't the only film made at the time to have WWII as part of the plot; Casablanca is probably the most famous example.  But I was impressed at the way they incorporated the Germany Calling broadcasts and tie it into The Last Bow story.  It really is a very clever adaptation or reimagining if you like.
Basil Rathbone was born to play Sherlock Holmes.  When I think of Holmes, Rathbone is the actor that comes to mind as I am sure he is with many other people.  He is in top form here and it isn't too far from the truth to say that in all fourteen appearances he hardly puts a foot wrong.
He is ably supported by Nigel Bruce who proved the perfect foil as Dr. Watson to Rathbone's Holmes.  Bruce has many detractors, which I will get too, but when kept in context to this series of films I find him quite enjoyable.  These are serious takes on the Holmes story and Watson provides the light relief.
One of the early Scream Queens from Hollywood, Evelyn Ankers, plays Kitty who has a prominent role throughout this film.  She is imperative to helping uncover the plot and in the apprehension of the spy.  Kitty's part is acknowledged by the men around her as well; her role is not just put aside as a minor aide to the more celebrated private detective.  Ankers portrays the heroine most admirably.  She gives a stirring speech when calling the patrons of a seedy bar to arms.  It is quite refreshing to see a film of such age having a strong female character and one who becomes very prominent once we are introduced to her character.
In what is a really tight running time, there is a lot crammed in for good effect.  We have murder, intrigue, a showdown, a daring escape and much more.  It is a credit to the writers that they manage to fit all this in and the action and intrigue keeps the film going at a cracking pace.  All the while Holmes is using his uncanny abilities to get to the bottom of who is behind this espionage plot.
The movie closes with a rousing monologue from Holmes taken directly from The Last Bow and is printed here:
    "Good old Watson! You are the one fixed point in a changing age. There's an
    east wind coming all the same, such a wind as never blew on England yet. It
    will be cold and bitter, Watson, and a good many of us may wither before its
    blast. But it's God's own wind none the less, and a cleaner, better, stronger
    land will lie in the sunshine when the storm has cleared."
Originally written in 1917 to refer to the approaching conclusion to The Great War; it has just as much, if not more, relevance to the conflict taking place at the time of filming.  America had entered the war at the end of 1941 coming to the aid of the embattled Allied forces.  Knowing that this went into production and was released in 1942 I can't help but feel the script writers knew how poignant this monologue would feel.  Again it demonstrates how appropriate the material was for the current times.  Hearing it and relating it back to these historic events, had a profound effect on my appreciation for this movie.

The Case Against:
A film that is over seventy years old is not going to appeal to everyone in this day and age.  I am sure there will be plenty put off watching it simply because it is a black & white production.  There are also certain sensibilities and mannerisms that were adhered to by a studio which are what make these movies from a bygone era appear far too tame for modern audiences.
It would be a shame if these are the sole reasons people would choose for not viewing something of this nature, but alas there would be many that do.  I admit I have a certain fondness for older films, not so many as old as this, but certainly ones created before I was even born.  Sherlock Holmes has always been a firm favourite of mine, both in print and the screen adaptations.  The Charlie Chan series that are of a similar age are also fondly remembered and I hope to cover one of those in a future article.
So setting aside any bias based on the age of the film, what else goes against enjoying this story?  Well not too much in my opinion.
As with any Sherlock Holmes tale you have to have a certain amount of suspension of belief.  Some of the deductions that Holmes comes too, based on the evidence he has at hand, often has you thinking how on earth you would arrive at that conclusion.  There is always something that will take place where you go "Oh come on!"
I touched upon people being critical of Nigel Bruce's portrayal of Watson.  Bruce did play him as a bit of a bumbling buffoon.  Often he comes across as confused by what is going on around him and would tend to mess up whenever Holmes was relying on him for some important task.  At least it would appear that Holmes would be relying on him; generally it was his intention for Watson to make a mess of things to help ensnare the culprit.
I think Bruce is a victim of circumstance.  As I stated he is a bit of comic relief and you couldn't have Holmes lightening the mood as it is not part of his personality.  It would have been nice to see Bruce play him as a straight character just once though, just to see how that would have played out.
Kitty infiltrates the spy ring far too easily for my liking.  It is needed to move the plot along but in all seriousness nothing of this nature would happen so quickly.  I felt it was a rather unconvincing way of moving the saga along to the next set piece.
Holmes is actually made a bit redundant when it boils down to solving the mystery and has to rely on others more than usual to get to the bottom of what is going on.  This does however make the story a bit more complex than your average Holmes tale.  As far as wanting to see Sherlock Holmes solving a mystery though and all the elementary deductions that come with it, this is not the perfect entry to provide that scenario.
The main thing that was annoying but required for where the story went was the German character Meade still managed to find access to a gun after his capture.  Why are the prisoners not searched and disarmed immediately by the armed forces apprehending them?  But it is an old cliché, especially from this era that a bad guy has to go down in a hail of bullets.

Verdict:
Even though the Nazi's deserve a flogging; this film certainly gets to go free.
Enjoy the full movie in the YouTube link below...

Evidence:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_Holmes_(1939_film_series)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_Holmes_and_the_Voice_of_Terror
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0035318/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Last_Bow_(short_story)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany_Calling