" Say, do you know what in means to get The Ding?"

Another Dwain Esper and Hildegarde Stadie collaboration and production, the 1933 film Narcotic explores various drugs, mainly opium, marijuana, and heroin. Like their film Maniac, sometimes styled as Sex Maniac, this film is also based on the short story "The Black Cat" by Edgar Allen Poe. This exploitation film has just about all the ingredients for an early b-movie: drugs, sex, a crazy husband/wife director/writer duo, less than stellar acting, stock footage that doesn't exactly fit in, bodysnatching, a mad scientist, silly Jazz Age lingo, very politically incorrect racial and ethinic stereotyping, as well as a lost of misinformation meant to scare the audience into good behavior. This, like is other film's, do not measure up to Esper's masterpiece of Reefer Madness, but it is films like Narcotic and Marihuana that earned him the title of "The Father of Exploitation Films". For those of you that want, a grainy but public domain version of Narcotic can be viewed here.

The film begins with a Frankenstein-esque opening scene where Dr. William G. Davis (Harry Cording) ordering his assistant to get the necessary ingredients to help create his life serum. Davis was once a promising medical student, but a life of drugs and sordid dealings led him into the snake oil business. His downfall begins after a heroic act leads him to crave opium. He goes to an opium den in, where else, Chinatown, which is run by Gee Wu (played by the not Asian J. Stuart Blackton Jr.) and ends up hooked for life after one night. Davis's wife (Joan Dix) tries to help him, but to no avail. Slowly, Davis's fast, drug-addicted friends and their hard partying ways lead him to become a shadow of his former self and a victim of drug addiction.

I've compiled a list of resources for those of you who want more information, insight, and analysis of this movie. First and foremost, you can explore the various categories about the movie on the page created for it by Turner Classic Movies, which you can find here. Allmovie.com does a brief synopsis and background of the movie, which can be read here. Mondodigital.com goes more in depth into the background and analysis as written here. Just like Esper's other films, this one provides a lot of misinformation, laughs, and self-parody.

Just Say 'No'?

How does an actress deal with being convicted of marijuana possession? She uses the story of being set up, exaggerates it, and turns it into a B-film of course! Such is the movie know by many names: She Shoulda Said 'No'!, Wild Weed, Marijuana The Devil's Weed, The Story of Lila Leeds and Her Exposé of the Marijuana Racket and The Devil's Weed. For the sake of space, I will refer to his film by its most popular name She Shoulda Said 'No'! The 1949 film followed in the trend of marijuana exploitation films such as Marihuana and Reefer Madness.

The story was loosely based on lead actress Lila Leeds and Robert Mitchum's arrest for possession as part of a Hollywood wide sting. Most were tipped off before the cops came, but such wasn't the case for Leeds and Mitchum. In fact, Leeds was cast in the film because of her widely known arrest for being involved with drugs and it was suggested the film could be a way for her to tell "her side" of the story.

The story is of Anne Lester (Leeds) who goes to work for a drug dealer named Markey in order to help pay her brother's college tuition. Lester gets sucked into the world of drugs very quickly and then unbelievable and unrealistic portrays of marijuana addicts and drug users ending up in psych wards after a few puffs cause her to reform her ways and help the police. Its your basic story of good girl goes bad and then gets redemption at the last second.

This movie is the reason why marijuana is refered to as the "gateway drug", since the movie introduces the theory, though little of the "facts" in the movie are actually correct. The film was shot in eight days and the producer Kroger Babb knew the quality was so bad that he tried to cash in on it as quickly as possible and then distance himself from the film.

If you want to know more about the film, you can check out a few of these sources. The Cult Movie Review blog has an entry about the film, which can be read here. The homepage for the cult hit Reefer Madness talks about this film and others used for drug propaganda on the propaganda section of its site and the article about She Shoulda Said 'No'! is here. Also, the site somethingweird.com has done a nice piece on She Shoulda Said 'No'! and has the trailer for the film, which those of you who want can watch below:

"If you're trying to create an impression, I'm unimpressed."

Titled after the song by Jerry Lee Lewis and featuring a cameo of him singing the song, 1958's High School Confidential! is a campy teen drug exploitation film where any good intentions are completely skewed by the film itself. The film is pretty horrible, using teen slang that was dated even when the movie came out, naivete about drug use, bad beat poetry, and a camptastic morality play only the Fifties could produce.

Not even the big names of the cast could save this movie. A drug epidemic has hit Santa Bellow High just as troublemaker transfer student Tony Baker (Russ Tamblyn) after being kicked out of his last school. English teacher Arlene Williams (Jan Sterling) hopes to be the positive influence that will calm Baker’s wild ways. Tony becomes a member of local the local teenage drug ring, known as the Wheeler-Dealers, making friends such as J.I. Coleridge (John Drew Barrymore) and marijuana addict – yes addict – Joan Staples (Diane Jergens) who he ends up stealing from J.I. Baker lives with his nymphomaniac aunt (Mamie Van Doren) who wants him badly. Tony gradually works his way up to the top of the drug supply chain, but his true intentions aren’t revealed until the supposed to be climactic end of the film. Michael Landon and Charlie Chaplin, Jr. also have roles in this film.

The idiocy and naivete that went in to making this film is entirely apparent. Drugs and drug dealers are the ultimate villains, worse than any murderer or rapist, while as the DEA agents are the ultimate heroes. Parents are completely stupid when it comes to drugs and the message that even good kids can get into drugs misses its mark. The overall message though is that if "you flake around with the weed and you're gonna end up using the harder stuff". The "teenagers" are in their mid-twenties at the earliest and the plot is not only unrealistic but completely implausible.

For more on this film, if you really want to know more, I have two sites for you to check out. The first is a series of reviews and opinions other viewers have about the film which you can find here, courtesy of filmfanatic.org. Also, the blog Desukomoviespot has further exploration and does an amazing job of poking fun at the film here, for those of you who want to check it out. As it is, High School Confidential probably should have remained that way.

Propaganda, Exploitation, and Cult Classics

Over the next week or so, I want to do a short series focusing on a genre of film that has always interested me: the anti-drug propaganda film. The films in this genre are one of two types: educational videos intended to be used in health classrooms that get out of hand with their scare tactics or exploitation films falling into the b-movie category that also use scare tactics to make a horror-type film. Usually, the serious intentions of both types of film belie hilarity to modern audiences, who know better than believe that one puff of pot addicts you to heroin or makes you believe all of your friends have turned into giant spiders that need to be shot with your dad's rifle. It is the humor modern audiences find in these films that have made them rise to cult status.

What is an exploitation film exactly? Well, it is a film designed to exploit a subject, usually something lurid such as sex, drugs, or sociocultural fears (i.e. race, gender roles, etc.). Most of these films are poorly made, sensationalized with advertising and in plot, low budget, have suggestive or explicit subject matter. Though they have been made since the early days of film, the Sixties was the height of exploitation film and pushing boundaries. There are various sub-genres within the exploitation genre itself. Some films are designed to teach or scare the audience into behavior whereas others are just graphic (such as those in the grindhouse or splatter genres).

Exploitation film is a widely explored subject and has gained a considerable cult following, especially as these films became very easy to access on the internet. For a list of some of the most popular exploitation films, you can find this list on Amazon.com. The website brightlightsfilm.com offers various articles on exploitation film, which can be found here, and another focusing especially on drug exploitation films here. More information and interviews with directors and others involved with the making of these films can be found here, by imagesjournal.com. Two great references and guides to what exploitation is and its history can be found here, by filmreference.com, and here, by allmovie.com. Finally, there is even a blog devoted to the exploration and analysis of exploitation film which can be found here at the Exploitation Film blog.

I'm going to profile several films I have seen over the next several days, talking about why they were made, what their message is, and how sometimes the message doesn't always get across to the audience. Since these films started being made, they still remain culturally relevant, propagating and encouraging drug myths, spreading false education and fears, and overall contributing to our current culture and the American War on Drugs. So sit back, chill out, and try to ignore the fact that most of the highschoolers in these movies look to be about thirty.