Customer Reviews

Deluxe Ed Wood Angora Box Set [VHS]

5 star:		(33)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(13)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

If you like well-directed action scenes with plenty of sfx, maybe mixed with intelligent comedy and some drama, acted out by capable performers, then you won't want to see "Glen or Glenda". However; if you're one of those strange people who take joy in marvelling at just how bad it is possible to make movies, then this is for you.

Let me tell you: This is weird. Almost worse than Wood's masterpiece, "Plan 9 from Outer Space", it had me actually gaping in amazement for close to 70 minutes. Originally Wood's attempt at social commentary, trying to open people's eyes to the plight of the closet transvestites of the world (of which he himself was one, and played one in the film), this film has it all: an almost incoherent and incomprehensible story within a story within a story, narrated on several levels. Stock footage galore, among other things, a buffalo herd having, well - nothing to do with the film, and a lot of sweaty soldiers loading shells into cannons and shooting them off for close to 5 minutes, to sorta symbolise WW2 ("And just as quickly as the war had started... it was over!"). Lousy lines, lousy cast (Probably just picked'em up in the bar on his way over to the studio), lousy props (VERY obviously pasted-together newspaper front pages), a positively ludicrous explanation as to why it's so nice to wear women's clothing, a close to 15-minutes long, totally unrelated, episodic dream sequence containing lots of women wearing lingerie while performing various acts (like one woman pouncing upon another woman, binding and gagging her), all to the tune of "Czardas", the most rushed piece of violin music ever, while Wood's dream ego looks horrifiedly at the proceedings. And all under the watchful eye of the overseer Bela Lugosi, sitting in his mad scientist-laboratory and spouting totally wigged-out lines. PULL THE SKRINKS !

If you think this review was incoherent, it is because the film itself is incoherent. And if what I've described is your idea of fun, then you'll enjoy it as much as I did. If it isn't, well... "Bevare!"

As a connoisseur of cult/bizarre films, I've seen some bad movies. If they're interesting enough, bad movies can be incredibly entertaining (i.e. Mystery Science Theater 3000). Even being familiar with Edward D. Wood's work (Plan 9 From Outer Space, Bride of the Monster) did not prepare for the experience of viewing his debut film, Glen or Glenda. Partially based on Wood's own life, the film was a serious attempt to dramatize the lifestyle of a man who is compelled to wear women's clothing. A disclaimer at the beginning proclaims it a film of "stark realism". What follows is 80 minutes of cinematic ineptitude, the likes of which I have never seen. There are plenty of bad films, but this movie is in a class by itself! Even Ed Wood's "classic" Plan 9 From Outer Space, often called the worst movie of all time, looks great in comparison to Glen or Glenda.

The film follows (occasionally) a man named Glen (Wood himself) who likes to wear women's clothing. He is engaged to a girl named Barbara (Dolores Fuller, Wood's girlfriend), but is distraught over whether to reveal his secret to her.
Wood's attempt at "stark realism" is destroyed immediately as soon as we see Bela Lugosi in a chair spouting incoherent nonsense ("Pull de string!", "Beware of the big green dragon that sits on your doorstep. He eats little boys, puppy-dog tails and big fat snails".)

Half the film consists of random stock footage that has no relevance to the material whatsoever. No to mention the absurd dream sequence that, I think, is supposed to represent Glen's confused state of mind, but it really makes no sense at all. It features half-clothed women dancing around for no reason, a torture scene (!!) and even an appearance by the devil (!!!). By this point, the audience is scratching their heads and wondering what the heck is going on. It really must be seen to be believed.

For fans of the director's work, Glen or Glenda is a must-see. Even though it's unbelievably terrible, the film is not without entertainment value. It has many laugh-out-loud moments, and the film overall is so bizarre that is should not be missed by cult movie fanatics.

There is no trick to making a normal bad movie. Most of the movies out there are bad or boring, or both. The people involved generally know the movie isn't very good. They are film professionals who realize they haven't brought what is necessary to create a quality movie. It may be due to time or a lack of money to hire the best actors and script writers. It may be pressure to clone the latest box office smash and capitalize on it's success. Whatever the reason it isn't because the director is so inept, incompetent, foolish, and inexperienced that they think incoherent rambling makes a fine picture.
That is precisely why "Glen or Glenda" is a priceless gem. Ed Wood poured his heart and soul into what he considered a hard hitting drama to enlighten the masses about cross dressing men. A cross dresser himself, Wood even wore women's underwear under his uniform while in the military. He felt this movie would educate, inform, and bring a better understanding about cross dressing. He actually thought it was a great movie.
Of course what he made was a wildly incoherent mess, full of unrelated scenes and crazy dialog. The Bela Lagosi character, who is playing God, rambles about "Pulling skrings" while buffalos stampede across the screen. There are dream sequences where scantily clad women slink about while Wood stands offstage and looks "Horrified". It simply cannot be described and has nothing to do with the plot. In fact, nothing in the movie has anything to do with the plot. That in itself is a remarkable achievement.
"Glen or Glenda" is a high water mark in bad movies. Along with "Robot Monster" and his own "Plan 9 from Outer Space", it has stood the test of time to become an icon. Watch it and be amazed.

I'll try not to repeat what Amazon reviewers have already said about this film. Were it a minute longer, it would be unbearable for even a single viewing. But as it stands, "Glen or Glenda" is worse than "Plan 9 From Outer Space" and consequently more enjoyable (it's also shorter). Three additional points about the film:

1. Ed Wood has the magnified "didactic" sensibility of a preacher or compulsive rhetorician. His primary mode of development is repetition. The story never gets under way because Ed keeps announcing the "premise" of his movie, postponing the impossible challenge of telling a story on film. In effect, we never get beyond the title. Not only his voice-over narration but his manipulation of stock footage and use of non-narrative montage mark him as the ultimate cinematic huckster or pitch man.

2. Ed's choice of scenes tells us virtually nothing about "Glen" but probably reveals a lot about Ed. From the World War II footage to strip-tease and B&D scenes (mild) Ed shows that he's a "slightly" deviant, cross-dressing heterosexual but sufficiently "alternative" to have empathy for transsexuals. He's also clearly an individual who has struggled with his share of desires and demons.

3. However bad, the film must be judged daring for a 1953 film, a time when the word "virgin" and even "sex" was taboo on the screen. (The film even discusses and represents homosexuality.) Moreover, apart from the treatment, Ed's choice of subject matter insures the film will be taken with more than a little seriousness by viewers who share Ed's urges and interests. In that respect, "Glen or Glenda?" is more "relevant" than ever, since I can't think of any other commercial movie that approaches the same subject as head-on as this one. In fact, most gender-bender movies, from "Some Like It Hot" to "The Bird Cage," are far more exploitive of their subject matter than is Ed Wood. Make no mistake: he's clearly a man on a mission.

If you've ever heard someone describe a film as being so bad it's good, there's a good chance they're talking about the "masterpieces" of the immortal Edward D. Wood, Jr. And if you want to see just how bad "bad" can get, watch "Glen or Glenda." It's so bad you'll alternate between uncontrollable laughter and mind-numbing, jaw-dropping amazement.

Bless him, his heart was in the right place, but his brain must have been orbiting Pluto. (Where on earth did he get the idea that wearing hats makes men bald, anyway?) Wildly incongruous montage sequences, dialogue (and acting) that wouldn't pass muster in a junior-high school Christmas pageant, and Bela Lugosi's somber ranting make this film a unique experience, if nothing else. Add to that an out-of-nowhere sadomasochistic dream sequence set to frenetic violin music, and you're off on a chaotic (and scary) journey through Ed Wood's mind. At times, the trip has the morbid appeal one gets from viewing a train wreck.

So why do I love this film? Well, being a transsexual, I have to look for sympathy where I can find it, and Wood is indeed sympathetic in his own ham-fisted way. I could have done without the loopy psychoanalysis (featuring the most implausible movie shrink in history). Did Wood, a crossdresser himself, really think that the love of a good woman was all someone like him needed, or was he simply trying to make this mess more palatable to 1953 audiences? I get the feeling even HE wasn't sure.

An interesting side note--Wood was "inspired" to produce his magnum opus at the urging of grade-Z movie schlockmeister George Weiss, who wanted to cash in on Christine Jorgenson's recent sex change (but couldn't get Jorgenson to appear). Not to be outdone, Wood replaces Christine's story with the story of Glen, a crossdresser about to be married, living in terror of what his fiancee might think if she knew his secret. Before we even get to this part of the story, we are treated to lengthy narration on the tightness and roughness of men's clothing. (Which makes me wonder how much time Wood really spent in women's clothes--he apparently never wore a bra for any length of time). In what was obviously a move to keep Weiss from strangling him, Wood does devote the last ten minutes or so of the film to an actual transsexual, (I think?) Alan/Ann. Miraculously, this is probably the most coherent part of the entire film, and does indeed give the audience a glimpse of what a transsexual must go through (it hasn't gotten that much easier in half a century).

Still, looking at this film, I'm not sure if it actually helped transgendered people--or set us back a decade or two.

Glen or Glenda is, of course, Edward D. Wood Jr.'s autobiographical exploitation anti-masterpiece. If you've already seen it and you're reading this, you're no doubt a fan. If you haven't seen it, let me try to describe the indescribable: imagine one of those creaky old 16mm Coronet instructional grade-school films, only about transvestism, featuring Bela Lugosi, and codirected by Bunuel and Warhol. When they were both twelve years old. Dizzingly absurd dialogue and imagery abound, intercut with dry clinical discussions of transvestism, transsexuality, and hermaphroditism, delivered in tones of heartfelt tolerence. What really amazes me is the guts it must have taken for Ed Wood to make this movie at all in the moral and political climate of the early 50s. Wow! I love the (autobiographical) part about the TV soldier going into battle with his ladies' undies on underneath his uniform! As noted by others, the "lost" scenes of bondage although they serve no real purpose and just slow the film down). This is one that really has to be seen to be believed; every bad film fan needs a copy of this in their collection.
Of course the question on every GoG fan's mind is: how's the print quality? I was curious myself, but wary of buying after reading a very negative review in Scarlet Street last year complaining about the quality of the source print. After viewing the disc, I am glad to report that overall it's quite acceptable, if not pristine. The worst of the damage amounts to a half dozen or so noticeable jump cuts, some sporadic scratching, and the usual light speckling throughout. Tonal values and detail range from very good to excellent throughout and the print is fairly sharp (if not as crisp as Image's Bride of the Monster transfer). The original "Glen or Glenda" title card has been cobbled together from freeze-frames (does no intact high-quality footage exist?), though Wade Williams has this time tastefully placed his copyright notice elsewhere. Despite the SS reviewer's claims that much better prints of the film are widely available on video, I've yet to run across one. This DVD easily blows away the numerous TV prints and VHS pre-records I've watched, owned, and rented over the years, including Rhino and Video Yesteryear's VHS editions. Large sections of the DVD are nearly blemish-free and the audio is clear. Extras include 16 chapter stops and a longer, cleaner trailer than I've seen before. Unless you're holding out for a truly flawless copy, I think this will do nicely for most viewers; I am not at all unhappy with the purchase.

You know, I thought this was a very good movie. Sure, it was utterly, and I mean the word utterly, horrible in the sense of production, acting, and even direction, but the mind of Ed Wood Jr. was not meant to be understood in the 1950s, but for some strange reason really worked well in today's society. I mean, look at this film. Glen and Glenda was not a huge success in the 50s causing Ed Wood to be considered one of the worst directors out there at the time, but look at this film. It is about transsexuals, transvestites, and sex change operations. These were topics not discussed in modern cinema at the time. In fact, I don't know of any that dealt with this issue. Wood opened the door. He talks, he thinks, he expresses his feelings into this film, and the final result may seem a bit Mystery Science Theater 3000-ish, but the honest truth is that it works so well in today's society. Throughout this entire film I couldn't help laughing, not just at the poor production and the scene where Glen's fiancée gives him her sweater, but also that this type of story is happening today. There are people that deal with situations like this all the time in our modern society.

This had me thinking, was this just a cheap film for Ed Wood Jr., or was it nothing short of brilliant. Here we have a director who created a film well before its time that was not understood when it was released, but somehow really really works today. Think about it for a second. Here you have this man, who loves to dress as a woman, but is afraid because of what society may think. We have those issues now. There are so many "closeted" homosexuals in our society that are afraid to be themselves because of what others may think. Glen feels this. He experiences it with his own fiancée, a woman that is supposed to love him no matter what issues come across their table. Then there is Alan, a GI for all things, which comes back from the war, and wants to be a woman. This is wild. When I was watching this, my mind was being blown away. Remember the headline news years back about gays in the military? Perhaps everyone should be watching this film. I never knew a film like this existed. It has been a long time since I have seen Tim Burton's film about Ed Wood, but now I want to revisit it.

Now, I will admit, there were some scenes that just screamed cheesy B-rated film. Bela Lugosi's entire part in this film was absurd. The fact that he was a scientist, trying to talk about the changes in our society and how they are affecting people like Glen, was interesting, but difficult to take in noting Lugosi's deep accent. BEEEVAAARE. HA! That still has me laughing two days after watching the film. But, it isn't laughter of disgust. It is laughter of enjoyment. There was a huge level of enjoyment to this film. It is short movie, so Wood gets straight to the point, interrupting for just a brief moment to have this wildly sexual dance in the middle. This film reminded me of some of Christopher Guest's very early styled mocu-mentaries. Sure, Wood didn't have the money to make an elaborate picture. He used stock footage and voice-overs half the time. You could tell that budget was low because he was in it as the title character (I think that also had something to do with his interest in the subject), but for me it worked.

Overall, this was a very humorous and eye opening film. For those that comment on how dated the story is, I don't know. I really think that Wood's film has so much to offer today's society. While not all the facts are correct, he was brave enough to make a film about it. Who else was going to do that in the 50s ... oh, when times were "better"? I stand-up and applaud Wood for this film and really suggest everyone going out and experiencing this one for the first time. It is enjoyable, sinful, and jaw dropping all at the same time. I am surprised that Wood's time machine didn't show up in this film somewhere along the line, because it was as if he was looking directly into our society. It was bizarrely beautiful. I loved it.

Thank you Mr. Wood!

Grade: ***** out of *****

It seems that Ed Wood set out to make a really profound statement with this film, but he succeeded only in producing a film remarkable for its awfulness. Between the dreadful acting, the inane script, and the mismatched stock footage, this one is a mess from beginning to end. In the midst of this hodgepodge is Bela Lugosi, reciting a series of nonsensical vintage Ed Wood phrases. As a drama, it gets no stars, but for pure laughability, it gets three big stars. Just hold your nose and laugh!

This movie is not what most people believe. It is not a romantic comedy with Richard Gere and Jennifer Love Hewitt. Instead it is even better than any of Mr. Gere's movies. It involves love and dignity. It deals with problems in everyday life that we all face almost everyday. The actors portray their roles with such power and an essence of beauty that you cannot look away from the screen for even a second. This movie is by far my favorite movie of all time. Ed Wood, the director/writer/producer/actor is an excellent movie maker who in my opinion should have won an oscar for his spectacular acting job. I know many will agree that this movie is important for young people today to see for it's pure truth and heartfelt message.

Vingettes of men in pain (and lace panties) is thoughtful, provacative, and incredibably stupid. Bela Lugosi occasions to warn, "BE VARE. BE VERY A VERE!" Hidden beneath the filmakings idiocy is a true message: some guys (probably all of them) like fine clothing. Big Deal! So why do we discriminate? We wear suits to work if we work in an office. So why can't men where a nice kilt here and there? My boyfriend has nice legs and I don't get to see them very often; but I know they're there. So I think this is not a bad message film, just a bad film of a message.