Looking at some of Umberto Lenzi’s early movies, the pre-gialli specifically - Orgasmo 1969, Cosi Dolce... Cosi Perversa (So Sweet… So Perverse) 1969 and Paranoia (aka A Quite Place to Kill ) 1970), I have come to find a recurrent use of mirrors… seriously mate, it’s not possible to miss them. They are a huge part of early Lenzi cinema, and are an effective way to send signals to the audience. Perhaps this was an influence of Lenzi on set, possibly somewhere jotted down in the scripts, may be a little notes of how to use mirrors in the shot. Maybe it was a set designer who had an ingenious moment… on several occasions, or perhaps it is all the work of cinematographer Guglielmo Mancori who shot at least eight movies for Lenzi. Well for whatever reason there’s a clear mirror fetish going on in the films of Umberto Lenzi.
Watching these movies I’ve noticed how key moments in several of Lenzis’ films have an intriguing use of mirrors. Sometimes they merely deepen the composition, open up the room and show the orientation of other characters. At times it’s to create a shock moment, or similar effect, other times it’s pure symbolic value, but almost every time a mirror figures, it marks an important moment. Let’s look at a couple of examples.
Starting off on an easy foot, the mirrors open up the room. They give a depth to the shots, establish the location, and rather frequently a reflected character will be out of frame. It creates an excitement when we are allowed a peek into the off-screen space and see stuff outside of the frame.
Other times characters are placed with their backs towards the camera. The mirror reflection shows us their face – where we can read their emotions - and brings them into the piece, and at the same time their true feelings can be projected.
Lurking in the background is a clear favorite composition of Umberto Lenzi’s. It’s featured in a majority of his movies, and I can’t help but think of the Medusa, who with her fatal stare, kills her victims as they turn to stone. The only way to avoid death was to look upon her reflection, which disarmed her lethal stare. One could see these mirror compositions as metaphors for the deadly gaze, as the people staring at each others reflections frequently have sinister motifs in their game of deception. Instead of talking directly to each other they talk via the mirror, or in the worst case not at all, it’s the all said through mimicry and body language reflected through the mirror.
Nudity is rarely shot straight on when not in scenes of intimacy. For a voyeuristic – exploitative – approach, the camera merely pulls back, and shows us nudity through reflection instead. It works, and the nudity becomes more tantalizing, as if we the audience where seeing something we weren’t supposed to, sneaking a peak instead of staring at the naked flesh.
Take a look at these two scenes from Paranoia and Orgasmo. Both of them feature Carroll Baker’s character taking a shower, and in both scenes her love interest watches her safely hidden away in the off-screen space. We can only see him through the mirror. With the story plot in mind, it’s fair to say that the mirror in these cases acts as a metaphor for deception. Unlike the lurker who stands in the background, this is more of a threatening use, as this time only we know what’s lurking outside the frame. It’s a perfect metaphor and one Lenzi used on several occasions.
Ironically, there is no reflection in the mirror of the blind Martha Caldwell [Carroll Baker again] in Il cotello di ghiaccio (Knife of Ice) 1972.
After the pre-gilli thrillers, Lenzi worked with D.P. Alfio Contini – know for his work on Lilliana Cavani on Il portiere di note (The Night Porter) 1974, Antonioni’sZabriskie Point 1970, and awarded for his cinematography on the Antonioni/Wim Wenders co-production Beyond the Clouds 1995. Un posto ideale per uccidere (aka Oasis of Fear) 1971, tells the story of two youths, Dick Butler [Ray Lovelock] and Ingrid Sjöman [Ornella Mutti] who scam their was across the country peddling dirty photographs and sordid materials. By chance they come across the seemingly wealthy Barbara Slater [Irene Papas] who lives all alone in her huge mansion… a potential gold mine the two conartist can’t walk away from. With the theme of pornographic images and selling smut as one of the image systems of the movie, Lenzi uses the mirrors as a confirmation of the leading characters vanity. Almost every mirror is used for the lead characters to gaze upon themselves. The Greek myth of Narcissus comes to mind. Blinded by his own beauty he was completely unaware of his own pending doom, and walks right into his own demise. Just like Dick and Ingrid do in Oasis of Fear.
A cherished moment can be found in the 1975 Gialli Gatti rossi in un labirinto di ventro (Eyeball), where Lisa Sanders [Mirta Miller] stands smoking in her bathroom/makeshift darkroom. With the mirrors position declared, one to the left of the screen, and one in front of her, this makes for a haunting insight when she has her throat slashed moments later. Although the camera never takes position so that we see what she sees reflected in the mirror – instead we are treated to Mario Di Salvio and Alfredo Tiberi’s violent neck gash effect – we understand that what Sanders sees is her own death reflected in the mirror. A moment that definitely resonates Michael Powell’s influential Peeping Tom 1960.
Perhaps the finest example of this mirror fetish can be found in the masterpiece Paranoia (aka A Quiet Place to Kill) 1970. This movie bookends the pre-gialli thriller series, which all have strong influences of Boileau-Narcejac’s novel Celle qui n’était plus (The Woman who Was), Henri-George Clouzot’sLes Diabolique 1955 and Hitchcock’sVertigo 1958 – stories that all focus on trickery, deception and foul play between a complex constellation of characters.
Introductions of Characters.
An unnerving moment when reflection and reality don't match up
Unfaithfulness is revealed... and confronted via mirrors.
Almost every lie, or moment of deception is introduced, or revealed through a mirror. The mirrors almost work as portals into an alternative universe where the truth is projected for the audience to see.
Off-screen secrets, nudity, tension builders and shocking reveals, almost every one of the areas discussed above come into play in Paranoia, and at times in several layers.
So there you have it, the mirror fetish of Umberto Lenzi, finally revealed and exposed … now it’s up to you to find the cracks that reflect his mind in the mirrors of his movies. I promise you that you will look and reflect upon Lenzi’s movies in a whole new way from now on.
Doctor of Doom Original Title: Las luchadoras contra el medico asesino Directed by: René Cardona Mexico, 1963 Lucha Libre, 75min
René Cardona, director of such classics as the award winning fantasy/family movie Santa Claus 1959 (which sees Old Whitey team up with Merlin to take on the devil who wants to wreck X-mas) and the harrowing Supervivietes de los Andes (Survive!) 1976, and father of René Cardona Jr., actor, director, writer of stuff like ¡Tintorera! (Tintorera: Killer Shark) 1977, and Guyana: Cult of the Damned 1979. For the magnificent female wrestler fun fest Doctor of Doom, Cardona Snr. joins forces with writer Alfredo Salazar for a dynamic tag team, and the results are once again pure fucking magic. Together the team of Salazar and Cardona made some of the best mexploitation flicks ever… try La horripilante bestia humana (Night of the Bloody Apes) 1969 and La mujer murciélago (The Batwoman) 1968 and Santo en El tesoro Drácula 1969, on for size and then tell me that these guys didn’t have some magic going.
An enigmatic Doctor R., [Roberto Cañedo] is determined to complete the first brain transplant, and goes about kidnapping young busty women with the help of his goon Gomar [Gerardo Zepeda – a big buff guy who starred in several other Cardona flicks as well as Alejandro Jodorowsky’sEl Topo 1970, Alex Cox masterpiece Highway Patrolman 1991 and Alex de la Iglesia’sPerdito Durango 1997]. Gomar is a brutish beast with the body of a wrestler, and the brain of a gorilla, the tragic result of a previous experiment… After yet another failed brain transplant Dr. R. decides that he needs to stop experimenting with common street girls and go for someone with higher intelligence so that they can appreciate the experiments and not die of the shock following surgery. Hot hellcat, luchadoras, Gloria Venus [Lorena Velázquez – one of the essential female Mexploitation actresses, who played anything from bad girl, to luchadora to evil vampire queen] get’s drawn into the mystery when her friend Alicia goes missing, leading her right into the stern flirtation of Detective Arturo [another Cardona regular; Armando Silvestre]. There’s been a string of dead women found during the last couple of months, and the detectives suspect that there might be foul play at hand… you don’t say.
Back at the gym, Venus is introduced to a “new girl” who has come to train with them, none other than Golden Rubi [American Elizabeth Campbell in her first of a string of Mexican Luchadora films. She’d star as Golden Rubi in at least three other movies after this initial one, before disappearing from the movie scene in 1970]. The Doctor’s experiments on the “intelligent” girl fails too, which has him set his sights on a woman with a strong physique.You guessed it, he goes after the two fighting females and this starts off a series of fights, flights and dramatic meetings where acid is thrown in faces, characters are set on fire, scarred for life, and after a shocking reveal of the Mad Doctors identity, he creates his masterpiece female wrestler Vendetta, and true to the genre’s formula they all end up climaxing in one final fight.
Mexican wrestling movies hold a special place in my heart – hey, I don’t have a half sleeve tattoo of Blue Demon for nothing – I love everything about them, the fights, the semi-tame acting, the quasi effective monsters and foes, their great pulpy soundtracks and the ever repetitive structure that comes with these movies. It’s just like watching a Giallo, an generic slasher or even a Godzilla flick – they all follow the same path, the structure is the same no matter what and if you’ve seen one, you are prepared for the rest of them.
Doctor of Doom is no exception. Being the first in a string of Cardona/Salazar wrestling flicks featuring Gloria Venus and Golden Rubi, it kick starts from the first scene. The initial attack sees Gomar jump out of the shadows and lay his hairy hands on a woman who screams as the movie shifts into the credits. Staying true the subgenre’s formula, the credits take place over a fight, it’s Gloria Venus beating the living crap out of her foes in the ring. Now this print being an Americanized version produced by K. Gordon Murray - you know the drill, buy something cheap outside of the US, redub it and sell it again rehashed for an American audience - the US titles are superimposed over the fight. Normally there would be some arty illustrated titles followed by this fight. Because this is all formula, as these fights are to establish the protagonists of the movies. They always win despite faux danger of facing defeat in the ring. Antagonists be aware, these hellcats kick ass.
Generally Lucha libre, or as in this case luchadora movies, are firmly built around an investigation plot, the most important ingredient is obviously the wrestling – as proven with the bookend fights and frequent bouts with foes throughout the movies. But what makes the genre so unique is the concentrate of genre traits that always form the movie - there’s three legs the genre relies upon – the investigation plot and the wrestling, then the third is the blending of other genre trait such as the horror themes, the science fiction traits, the supernatural, folklore, mad scientists, space invaders, living dead conquistadors and Aztec mummies. There’s almost nothing that these wrestling heroes haven’t faced, fought and defeated.
Just like the films of Santo, Blue Demon, Mil Mascaras and others the Luchadores take on the part of the amateur sleuths or helping the police. In the Golden Venus series, Venus and Rubi are something like girlfriends to the two detectives Arturo and Chema [Chucho Salinas] but also kick ass and help to solve the mystery of Doctor of Doom.
Something else found in Doctor of Doom that Salazar later recycled for the Santo y Blue Demon vs. Drácula y el Hombre lobo (Santo and Blue Demon vs. Dracula and the Wolfman) 1973 and Santo y Blue Demon contra el doctor Frankenstein (Santo and Blue Demon vs. Doctor Frankenstein) 1974 movies, is the wristwatch intercom, which is used at least once in all the movies mentioned. In Doctor of Doom it’s used to save Chem and Arturo from a classic gothic slow moving wall of spikes, on the other end, the angered Gomar waiting behind bars to tear off their heads. The overall plot and structure is not too far from the one later reused in Miguel M. Delgado’sSanto and Blue Demon vs. Dr. Frankenstein 1974, one of the masked duo’s absolute finest moments. A mad scientist experiments on poor victims, kidnaps a friend of the hero character, and after a series of bouts the whole thing culminates with a wrestling match. What connects Doctor of Doom and Santo and Blue Demon vs. Dr. Frankenstein on a deeper structural level is the fact that the Mad Scientist creates a wrestler foe for the protagonists to fight against, in this case and both movies end when antagonists fall to their deaths from extreme heights.
It’s always the directors of these cheap exploitation films that we remember. Say the name René Cardona to a genre enthusiast and they will more than likely have at least one reference point or two. Although I’m still pushing for writer recognition, and Alfredo Salazar needs to be hailed as the one of the important Mexploitation screenwriter he really was. Not only did he write close to a hundred movie scripts, but he also directed a bunch of pulpy rock’n’roll comedies/dramas, and did a lot to lay the foundation from which most future Luchadora movies would be told. The formula or structure I discussed above. Just as I always see Gustavo César Carrión’s soundtracks as a verification of quality, I look for Salazar’s name in the credits, as this also is a confirmation that I’m not going to be disappointed. Alfredo’s brother, Abel Salazar, was an actor, and can be seen in many of Fernando Méndez movies. Movies often penned by that other master of Mexican genre cinema, Ramón Obón.
Perhaps one of, if not the, least accessible of Dario Argento titles, Le cinque giornate (Five Days of Milan), is something of an antithesis of everything one has come to associate his name with. No, you won’t find a single razor wielding leather-gloved maniac here. Nor will you find the gothic horror of his Three Mothers series… Instead you will find a historic comedy about two accidental compadres, Cainazzo [Adriano Celentano – An Italian singer/actor who also starred in three of Lucio Fulci’s early musical dramas) and Romolo Marcelli [Enzo Ceruscio] who find themselves caught up in the midst of the Italian revolution of 1848.
After completing the classic Animal trilogy, Argento wanted to explore other areas as he felt that the Giallo as a genre had peaked. A daring, but kind of odd move as the three previous Gialli had been reasonable successes. So the choice of comedic period piece doesn’t really make sense. Although taking into mind that Argento had previously – and during the time he directed his first three Gialli - written period pieces for other directors, the choice may not be so far fetched. These movies where primarily Second World War, and Spaghetti Westerns – the most famous being his minor part on Sergio Leone’sOnce Upon A Time In The West 1968 – so setting Five Days of Milan in a past time can be understood. But the choice of the comedic elements… well, to be honest, I’m convinced that Argento tried his best to script a satirical piece, and that along the way – perhaps through producer pressure - added certain elements to lighten up the script with some half hearted eroticism, some tame slapstick effects and synthesizer renditions of classical music pieces. Something Kubrick would do a few years later too, but then it was Kubrick and considered innovative and genius. Never the less, Five Days of Milan may be a shambles of a film, but it definitely is a unique one off in the career of Dario Argento.
I really beg you to stop relying on the shoddy reviews that compare Five Days to stuff like the Morricone movies and even The Wild Bunch, because it has fuck all to do with those movies and is nowhere near trying to plagiarize or copy them. In my eye’s they either didn’t see the movie at all, or they simply goggled it up and copied notes from each other. What Argento, with co-writers Luigi Cozzi, and Enzo Ungari did was script a satirical piece that polarizes the characters and events all the way through – and makes a comment on the politics of Italy. Keep in mind that the same political corruption and dissatisfaction that saturated the Poliziotteschi genre was already there and Argento has always had a political undertone to a lot of his early movies. Five Days of Milan, is a satire, nothing else.
Also, there are scenes of children dying, violent killings, executions, gang rape and the shocking death of a lead character - none of them themes for a comedy.
Early on the two “accidental hero’s” help a woman in labour, later they can only stand a look on as the armies muskets shoot down a child and mother – in a scene which obviously is Argento’s "Odessa staircase" moment. The revolutionaries are rewarded with consensus sex, where they later rape and abuse their “Italian women”. A string of accidental chance meetings connect the characters and the narrative – almost like in a Buñuel movie – Caniazzo is freed from his prison, by chance/accident. He becomes drawn into the revolution, by chance/accident. He teams up with Romulo, by chance/accident.They become part of Zampino’s [Glauco Onorato] small army, by chance/accident. Romulo seals his fate by chance/accident. I’m almost provoked by the lack of action taken by the lead characters, they are terribly passive and things just happen by chance. It’s not really satisfying. Life turns to death; freedom becomes captivation, and the cynical last minute twist shows that nothing really changes. A stunning metaphor when looking at Italy of today proves to be terrifyingly accurate.
None of the two lead characters are destined to be heroic characters; instead they are accidental protagonists – and weak protagonists at that. In the same random chance of events that make them our protagonists, the same random chance seals the fate of the two characters. It brings a sad and tragic mood to the movie, which again goes to show that the intention can’t have been to make a comedy.
If I where to pick out a few moments to share I’d first and foremost say that the fast motion chases, and slow motion fist fights kind of offend me as they go against everything that Dario Argento stands for in my book.
Argento regular Fulvio Mingozzi makes a brief appearance and there’s supposed to be a rare Argento cameo in the movie too, but two viewings on and I still haven’t seen it. The bandaged character referred to as Argento on the web is not Dario Argento.Cinematography is stunning- Luigi Kuveiller creates some moments that certainly mimic his best Gialli work and one can see why Argento wanted him to shoot the masterpiece to follow, Profondo Rosso.
I really laughed at the scenes with The Countess [Marilù Tolo] who becomes aroused by the blood which squirts over her breasts as one poor revolutionary is shot dead. Se seduces the soldiers, she's raised above the victorious crowd, who shamelessly grope her buttocks and she steers them towards her apartment where she invites them all to celebrate the victory by shagging her. This entire sequence oozes Fellini/Pasolini, and is amongst one of the few highlights of the movie.
During the same year, 1973, Marilù Tolo starred in the Roberto Pariante episode of the TV Series La porta sul buio (Door into Darkness), Testimone Oculare. Supposedly Argento stepped in and took over the episode and directed parts of it uncredited. Perhaps this dabbling in genre themes and the failure of The Five Days where what made him set his sights on the Giallo genre once again. The next movie to come from the pen and direction of Dario Argento, was the legendary Profondo Rosso (Deep Red) 1975, and despite being a somewhat mid/late entry into the genre, this is the one that most connoisseurs consider to be one of the very best Gialli ever put on film.
Pig Directed by: Adam Mason USA, 2010 Horror/Drama, 93Min.
You know when a serial killer, or a mass murderer, gets caught, and despite the fact that they raped co-ed’s, ate babies and smashed in the heads of their victims, there is always a neighbour or two who comes forth with the age old “Oh, But he was such a nice and quite person, I’d have never have guessed it…” statement. Well in a pretty harsh way, Adam Mason’sPig comes off as a video journal of the dark events those blissfully unaware neighbours, never could have imagined their nice friendly neighbor had taken part of.
A woman runs screaming towards the camera… behind her, a truck pulls up and grinds to a screeching halt. Out stumbles a bloke wearing a trucker cap and bloodied wife beater. He stomps up to the woman, punches her so hard that she falls to the ground… he moans that he “doesn’t want to do this” before he returns to beating her to a pulp. He tosses her onto the back of his truck and takes off back to his trailer where a second woman lies on the ground, chained to a pole.He parks the car, flips down the hatch and brutally strangles the woman in the back of the jeep to death... This is the start of a seventy-minute one take that will take you on one sincerely dark journey.
With a tone and atmosphere close to the old grindhouse flicks, and roughies of the early seventies – seriously, if Pig was shot in the seventies when the likes of Shaun Costello, Doris Wishman, and why not, Bo A. Vibenius, where mucking about with their provocative rough and ground-breaking movies there’s a no doubt about it that there would have been graphic sex inserted into PIG, at least in the European version. Anyway, with that kind of tone set, contemporary films that dabble in themes of prolonged sadism, and the zing of white trash redneck – as that’s the first impression the introduction of lead character Andrew Howard gives - this is really the horror version of Guerrilla Filmmaking – Rough, gritty and harsh, Pig get’s right in there, picks at scabs and rams a provocative finger deep into the yet unhealed and septic gash.
Story wise – which I’ll return to in a moment – I at first found Pig somewhat lacking. But there’s a crack of the whip ending that turns everything head over heels and does some great things for the movie. But technically – and performance wise – this is a great movie, impressive and intrusive. Shot in merely four days and seemingly one seventy minute long take, shot – although I do have a few idea’s of where the edits, if there actually where any, may have been placed – the movie passes no judgment or value in the actions portrayed, the camera merely observes rape, murder, torture, abuse, screwdriver sodomy and dinner preparations, where onions and blood of a pregnant woman are vital ingredients to the sauce being is cooked.
Pig is nothing less than a superbly choreographed dance of death, as I can almost sense the minimal crew and effects people stepping in to rig stuff each time the camera leaves them outside it’s gaze. I’m not saying that this is how they actually went about making Pig, but that’s the sensation I get. When the camera moves back – changing focus from a specific character, then you almost know that something bad is going to happen when the camera returns to that person.
The movie, which again, is said to lack any plot or story – which I can’t really agree with – because there are moments that seep through where Andrew shares some moments of tenderness with his just as psychotic partner Molly Black – like removing the contact lens that frightens her, or the patting of her stomach where his yet unborn child lies, and boasting about this same baby later on. There are moments of tenderness there if you look for it. The natural narrative becomes trying to puzzle the constellation together – who goes where, how long have they been there, what who why… And when Black takes the position she does, a backstory comes into play. Who is she? Is she an earlier victim, or an old girlfriend? She’s still caged, but obviously holds some special place in Andrew’s dangerous life. This is just one of the many questions that will stick with you after the last act twist.
The weird rant on radio, which reminds of generic horror’s use of the Southern Religious nut broadcasting to the masses a sermon, filled with fear and hatred for sin and the Devil. Although here it’s a beguiling broadcast of Misogynist talk show where even the female callers are reduced to objects of desire by the chauvinistic show host. It brings a fascinating unease to the scenes and in the same way that the religious chants in generic films warn of evil to come, the radio show in Pig says a lot about the characters who listen to this specific show, it sublimely sends the signal that women hold no value here at all, and is the agenda for the day.
Although, I do have somewhat of a problem with Pig, as there’s really no character development… which isn’t entirely true, but I’ll get back to that soon. Unfortunately I start to loose interest after about an hour of the onscreen antics, but when it jumps into the final act, I’m bitch slapped into paying attention again, and the wait has been worth the while. Yes, Pig has a final last act twist that actually makes it a fascinating movie. I love when movies go full 180° and kick you in the bollocks, giving you a rush of insight that puts everything into a new perspective, which is exactly what Pig does. Now, don’t go there expecting a violent mosh pit ending, because that’s not what you get, you get something so much more disturbing and provocative. See a movie that at first seemed to be of one certain kind, twisted over and became something completely different.
Keep your eyes open for a Welsh Dragon flag when Andrew releases Molly Black from her cage. Howard is from Wales, hence the flag being placed in the cage. Little details like that will have me returning to the movie, for despite being very Spartan in it’s design, there’s details looming in the background waiting to be spotted.
Just like Apocalypse Now, Hostel, Cloverfield and Inception, there are no opening titles to the movie. Just two quick logos then, blam, into the action. Even the end credits continue to mock the viewer, as they actually are the end credits from The Devil’s Chair 2007 played in reverse…
In interviews director Mason has said that the movie was the result of a shared frustration with long time collaborator Andrew Howard concerning the movie business where people literally get away with any god damned thing. Together the two stopped talking, decided that no corporate bullshit would stop them, and set plans in motion. The result is an impressive piece that definitely should be seen as a cynical metaphor for the movie industry and what goes on there. I lift my hat to Mason and Howard, as Pig took me down a road I’m starting to loose interest in, only to have an unexpected surprise lurking for me at the end of the movie.
Innovation is a great thing, rush of insight is a fucker of minds, and this film definitely need’s to find it audience right now. Instead of watching mainstream bullshit, and franchise diarrhoea, demand Pig - perhaps one of the most interesting movies you still haven’t seen.
Just as much as I hate that BluRay brings out the flaws in all my favorite movies, I love that BluRay brings out the details in all my favorite movies...
We where sat in the new cinema at the new office watching the new BluRay of George A. Romero's gritty climax to the original Dead trilogy, Day of the Dead 1985, when secrets that have been kept safe from the eye in previous versions - yeah think umpteenth version dupe, as that's how I first was introduced to this movie decades ago - where suddenly unleashed upon the bunch of us who'd gathered for our weekly dose of big screen carnage.
Day of the Dead is riddled with referents to previous installments in the Romero franchise and also several nod to other classic movies and horror related themes. There's the grand opening which sees Sara [Lori Cardille] have something of a recurrent nightmare. It not only set's the theme of pending doom, but it's also an obvious Roman Polanski'sRepulsion 1965 homage. There's the nickname of Dr. Logan [Richard Liberty], Frankenstein - a contemporary spin on the creation of the modern Prometheus, as he tries to tap into the zombies primal "human behavior", and there's referrals to names from previous installments, and the obvious Stephen King'sSalem's Lot nod.
But the minimal scene that caught my attention was the scene at the beginning of the movie - let's call it the ordinary world if you like - after the Repulsion prologue, where Lori and Miguel [Antoné DiLeo] are scouting the town for survivors, but merely awaken the horde...
After the crocodile crawls out of the bank, but before the iconic image of Dr. Tounge and the titles are up on screen, there's two shots of a zombie coming out of the Edison Theatre, and in the background of this wonderful high-defenition print from Arrow, you can make out two great posters on the outside of the theatre...
The images are posters for Lucio Fulci'sConquest 1983 and Enzo G. Castellari'sI guerrieri del Bronx (1990: The Bronx Warriors) 1982. (There's a third poster hidden behind the door that seems to be shark related, but I'll leave the imagining up to you)
Now this may just seem to be random images which one may come to expect outside an old theatre... but these movies where movies that had a couple of years on their neck at the time Day of the Dead was shot. As far as I'm concerned I'm quite sure that this is a deliberate decision made by Romero - who's movies frequently hold nods to other films, filmmakers and writers that he appreciates - and his longtime collaborator production designer Cletus Anderson, art director Bruce Allan Miller and set designer Jan Pascale.
A great little secret, or perhaps homage, that's been hidden in generation loss and inferior quality since 1985, now finally sees the light of day!
