Web of the Spider

I recently found myself an original Italian widescreen print of this film that is gorgeous, and helps explain some of the negative user comments about it. Nella stretta morsa del ragno, as I have been taught to call it, is more than just a technicolor revisitation of Antonio Marghetti's CASTLE OF BLOOD. The problem is that he tried to make it much too more -- to explore the period detail in particular -- and in doing so the focus of the film became muddled.

One of the aspects that made CASTLE OF BLOOD so remarkable was Marghetti's use of light and dark in such a calculated manner -- whenever Alan Foster strikes a match or lights a candle, it is an EVENT within the framework of the shot. In NELLA STRETTA, candles and matches become props to be carried around by characters to establish the sense of place & setting.

Marghetti's greatest miscalculation, though, was in lighting his sets to show off the rich, exquisite detail his larger budget could afford. The result is a series of events that look like they were filmed on a movie set, not a nightmare playing out in front of our eyes in living black and white. On that plane of reasoning, NELLA STRETTA has more in common with Marghetti's VIRGIN OF NUREMBERG with Christopher Lee, which is all about color picture texture and the musical score. NELLA STRETTA also amps up the music, with a Robert Fripp-ish atonal guitar riff that pops up whenever something weird is about to happen. The film this becomes almost formulaic, and the suspense generated in CASTLE OF BLOOD becomes more of a slog to get to the good parts.

And there is one really, REALLY good part: I still remember it scaring me so much as a kid I refused to go into our basement for weeks afterwards ... It is the segment when Dr. Carmus takes his little trip down into the Blackwood family crypt and finds something that should probably have best gone undisturbed.

'Tis a pity, though, that an adventurous company like Blue Underground or Anchor Bay Entertainment doesn't resurrect and "restore" this bizarre, flawed but interesting bit of Eurohorror; With his widescreen shot compositions and color schemes intact, the Italian cut I found not only runs circles around the prints turning up on the Brentwood and Diamond DVD sets, but it does away with the "another film where every shot is a closeup" charge -- those closeups are the result of a widescreen image being chopped, reformatted and blown up to play back on television sets. And, as is evident in the latest DVD release by Diamond, some of the distributors looped, slowed down or even froze individual frames to cover up what little graphic luridness that Marghetti used and was deemed unacceptable.

Yet right there we come to the meat of the thesis on why NELLA STRETTA MORSA DEL RAGNO will always be looked upon as less than a success -- it is too tame for the time period it was made in. The Italian print does include some very brief nudity and, like the Synapse DVD release of CASTLE OF BLOOD, spends more time establishing the illicit lesbian relationship between Elizabeth and Julia ... But it's nothing too thrilling, and by today's standards the whole affair has the shock effect of a good DARK SHADOWS episode.

Yet it is worth checking out, especially if you are a fan of atmospheric 1970's period Eurohorror with a touch of the erotic. Timeless Video's VHS runs 94 minutes but has really awful color rot to the print. Brentwood's print from the CIRCUS OF DEATH and TALES OF TERROR box sets runs about 96 minutes and looks a bit better, but not much. For the present, the version to go with for US buyers is to be found on Diamond's double bill DVD with CIRCUS OF FEAR, runs about 98 minutes, has a somewhat richer color range and much better quality audio, and for it's budget line price you really can't beat it.

I give WEB OF THE SPIDER/NELLA STRETTA MORSA DEL RAGNO *** out of ****, but only because I have a soft spot for it, and still feel the hair rise up on my neck whenever Dr. Carmus lights his candle and goes looking for that breathing sound .... shiver!

Seven years after giving us the very enjoyable Castle of Blood (1964), one of the most gothic of '60s gothic Euro horrors, director Antonio Margheriti decided to tell the exact same tale again, only this time in colour and without cult favourite Barbara Steele. The result is entertaining enough but also rather redundant if you've already seen his earlier, better movie.

The promise of Klaus Kinski as Edgar Allen Poe is undoubtedly a draw, and sure enough the actor chews up the scenery with a typically wild-eyed performance, but his appearance is little more than an extended cameo to kick off proceedings. The majority of the film follows American reporter Alan Foster (Anthony Franciosa) as he endeavours to spend an entire night in a haunted castle for a wager. As in Castle of Blood, he meets several mysterious characters, all of whom turn out to be ghosts who feed on the blood of the living to ensure their existence.

The film is atmospheric enough and the performances adequate, but I had hoped that Margheriti would have moved with the times, opting for a more exploitative approach this time around, just to make the film a little different from its predecessor (I'd have happily seen more of Michèle Mercier and Karin Field, who play ghostly babes Elizabeth and Julia). It's not to be: Web of the Spider is remarkably reserved, aiming for style over sleaze. Oh well...

First, I really liked the Gothic setting and the look of everything, it was done really well.

I liked the beginning where Kinski as Poe was completely captivating his audience in the tavern with one of his stories, thus setting up the meeting between him and the American journalist.

All that was great, and actually up until about 1/3 to 1/2 way through I was fairly engaged in the excellent atmosphere and the Gothic mood of the story. I really liked the Bava-esque lighting which added to the dark atmosphere.

The acting was pretty decent, I liked the way our lead gentleman came across as very likable and believable. But unfortunately after the very good intro and buildup of him going to spend the night in the 'Castle' and some good moody camerawork and Creepy atmospheric happenings, when additional characters were introduced, to me, it really seemed to lose its way in the story.

Like another reviewer here stated in his/her review, it was the 'Castle of Flashbacks' and I really felt that all the excellent mood and tension that had been created up to that point just kind of dissipated rather quickly, losing whatever good momentum that it had.

The rest of the 'Story', such as it is just seems to meander without much purpose and I feel completely loses the interest of the audience, leading sadly to a very anticlimactic and tepid ending. I honestly think that if more thought had been put into the development of the 2nd half of the story, AND most definitely in this case, if the running time had been Greatly shortened and the storyline really tightened up, yes, then I think the 2nd half would have followed nicely and kept the same intriguing and engrossing hold of its audience.

However, this is a good example of a really effective idea and good beginning pretty much ruined by a lackluster and poorly thought out 2nd and 3rd act. A shame too considering the strong and engaging beginning.

So, some good stuff here, mainly all in the first act or so, but if you can put up with the overly drawn out, aimless rest of the film, then you might get some enjoyment out of it. Definitely a mid '5' rating at best...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Just a note as to how I do my reviews... I usually don't repeat the basic plot since almost everyone else does that (Claudio Carvalho is an excellent example of this. He writes about 6 paragraphs of a synopsis, and then adds maybe 2 sentences as an actual review... :/ ) and you can get the basic synopsis from a bunch of other places, to me that is a waste of time, and I feel honestly just doesn't really tell you anything that helpful. So, what I concentrate on in my reviews is hopefully putting across whether I think it is a Good film, or if I think that it is an Entertaining movie and what I feel it's strengths and weaknesses are in the way it is made.

That way, Hopefully it will be of more benefit and actual help to others as to whether I feel it is worth watching (and also perhaps what 'Type' of film it is and what type of people may enjoy it)

My Particular Way of Rating:

5 - Flawed, but perhaps with a little entertainment value here and there for some.

6. A decently passable story maybe worth a watch.

7. A solid film, well made, effective, and entertaining.

And, obviously, you can probably figure out what above and below these would mean... : )

In comparing this 1971 remake with its 1964 original, one immediately misses the presence of Barbara Steele, although in both titles the 'heroine' only makes her first appearance at the half hour mark. Director Antonio Margheriti must have felt the absence of color in "Castle of Blood," and really adds little else to this new version, with Michele Mercier's Elisabeth fleshed out to some degree, as we see more of her absent husband, barely seen in the original. All the plot elements are virtually identical, right down to the lesbian love scene, resulting in three corpses lying on the floor in roughly two minutes of lustful activity. It was definitely daring in 1964, but here is treated in such timid, predictable fashion that it loses all the bite of the original. The guest filled ball is the one sequence that adds more running time here, 106 minutes over 1964's 89, Elisabeth juggling multiple affairs while her husband is away in America, and both male and female lovers equally jealous to the point of murder. The main weakness in both versions remains the same, a skeptical journalist who doesn't engender audience empathy with his failure to discover what the audience already knows. I would recommend the black and white version with Barbara Steele over the color one, both of which aired twice on Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater, between 1976-1982.

Some people really suck at negotiating business deals. "In the Grip of the Spider" revolves on a guy who accepts a bet to spend the night in a secluded and reputedly haunted castle and if he survives the ordeal, he receives the astonishing, stupendous and exhilarating reward of … 10 pounds! Ten pounds?!? Even in the 19th century this probably wasn't even enough to pay the coachman to drive you back to civilization! At least the eccentric Vincent Price offered his guests $10.000 to spend one night in his house on haunted hill; now there's a guy you can do business with! "In the Grip of the Spider" is an accomplishment of the hugely underrated Italian director Antonio Margheriti (better known under his international alias Anthony M. Dawson) and apparently a remake of his very own Gothic horror classic "Castle of Blood" starring Barbara Steele. By doing this Margheriti was far ahead of his time, as it's extremely popular among directors nowadays to remake their own earlier movies. Unfortunately I haven't seen "Castle of Blood" (or at least not yet), so I can't compare, but reliable sources tell me this early 70's version can't hold a candle to the original. This may be so, but I still wouldn't call "In the Grip of the Spider" a bad film – especially not if you're a sucker for Gothic atmospheres. Admittedly the storyline is a little flimsy and unspectacular, but the film nevertheless has several things going for it, like the presence of Klaus Kinski (depicting no less than Edgar Allen Poe), lovely luscious ladies and a downright sardonic finale. The American journalist Alan Foster is desperate to get an interview from the notorious novelist Edgar Allen Poe, but he gets more than he bargained for when Poe and his friend challenge him to spend the night at Blackwood castle. Convinced that ghosts and vampires don't exist, Foster accepts and remains alone in the dark and ominous castle. Things start out great for him, as the lucky bastard even has sex with the perplexing beauty who appears out of nowhere. Several more suspicious individuals make their appearance and, through flashback, Alan gradually learns they're all ghosts trapped inside the castle for all eternity. "In the Grip of the Spider" is slightly overlong (110min) and a lot of footage easily could have been cut. There's a lot of ballroom dancing and painting observing going on, which is quite unnecessary and in fact only undermines the atmosphere of Gothic morbidity. The scenes where random characters dwell through the castle's catacombs and stumble upon ancient tombs are irrelevant to the plot at well, but at least they fit the Gothic concept. The rare moments when Kinski appears on screen are sublime – even though he doesn't even remotely resemble the real Edgar Allan Poe – since there is no other actor more suitable to play a neurotic and lightly inflammable genius than him. Michèle Mercier (as Elizabeth) and Karin Field (as Julia) are both extremely beautiful and sexy starlets, but I'm sort of convinced that Barbara Steele was even better than the two of them combined in the original. I guess I'll have to track that one down as soon as possible. Overall this is a flawed but interesting film, recommend to fans of vintage Italian Goth-horror.