I'm kind of kicking myself. Behind the scenes, I'm often pressed to find new blog post ideas, week after week. Alert readers may notice that, especially when I'm forced to write about things that are only marginally gross and/or exotic. Being on the road so much helps, as I'm able to visit many different groceries or specialty stores. Recently though, I did what I should have done years ago, and investigated local exotic grocery stores here in Southern New Jersey. I discovered several that weren't too far away. Today's topic came from the India Bazaar supermarket, based out of Stratford, NJ. You'll be hearing about a lot of products that came from this place in the coming weeks and months, since it was a fruitful visit (for one example, literally). Today's focus in on the nankhatai biscuit/cookie, one from Rehmat-e-Shereen, and the other from United King Foods (pvt.) Ltd., both located in Karachi, Pakistan.
Nankhatai, sometimes spelled nankhataee, or as two words, and sometimes capitalized, and sometimes not, is a type of shortbread cookie. The derivation of the name is disputed. Some say it's from the Persian word for "bread" (naan), combined with the Afghan word for "biscuit" (khatai). Others claim the "khat" part is from the word for "six," because the original recipe for the biscuit had six ingredients. And others say it's Nan Catai, meaning "bread of Cathay"--Cathay being an older name for China. Moving on, the history of the cookie is both vague and detailed. Most websites tell the tale that in the 16th century, some Dutch men owned a bakery in Surat, India. When the Dutch largely left India, the establishment was transferred to a man from what's now Iran. Alas, the local customers didn't like this man's wares, so the business was struggling. In desperation, the new owner sold some dried bread, twice baked to preserve it. Fortunately for him, this proved to be a big hit. So, the baker starting sell more twice baked goods, including an invented new biscuit, nankhatai. Other sources flesh out the story a little. Mainly, that the inventor was named Faramji Pestonji Dotivala, and that the nankhatai was inspired by the local Dal sweet combined with some traditional Dutch and Iranian baking techniques. But, oddly, no source I could find provides even the exact decade when the biscuit was invented, or what the names of the Dutch bakers were. However, given that all this occurred over 500 years ago, I suppose we should be grateful for the information we do have. Because of its nature, nankhatai can be seen as a sweeter, dessert-ish cousin of other
twice-baked goods, such as Brazilian toast (see my May 11, 2019 post), zwieback (see the April 13, 2019 post), and Finnish crispbread (see the November 3, 2018 post). And, this cookie is clearly enjoyed not just in India, but in several of the surrounding countries, such as Pakistan.
There wasn't a whole lot of data about the companies who made the biscuits I tried. Both websites were essentially product lists, and not much more. United King Food's site had a "video" and an "events" selection, but nothing had been posted to date. I can report that Rehmat-e-Shereen was started in 1990 by Haji Muhammad, and it markets various sweets, desserts, snacks, and one dairy product (clarified butter). United King Foods (pvt.) Ltd. was established in 1984, and pretty much sells the same types of food as Rehmat-e-Shereen. United King Foods also exports to South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, the UK, and the U.S.
1) Rehmat-e-Shereen Nan Khatai biscuits/cookies: These were round, and about 6 cm. (about 2.25 inches) in diameter, with a yellowish white color topped off with a yellowish-brown smear of nuts and stuff. They were powdery, and very short bread-y. I'm not usually that enthusiastic about almonds, but they were good here. Overall the biscuit was sweetish, and pretty good.
2) United King Foods Nan Khataee biscuits/cookies: These were about the same size, color, and shape as the Rehmat-e-Shereen kind. The only major difference was that the smear on top was more brownish. These were also short bread-y and powdery. However, the taste wasn't as strong--these were more bland and boring. So just "meh" in total. (I should point out that my parents sampled both, and had the exact opposite opinion, as they preferred the United King kind to the Rehmat-e-Shereen type.)
Saturday, August 31, 2019
Saturday, August 24, 2019
Writing Announcement and a Brief Rant
I recently got good news from a writing standpoint: I just signed a contract with Blood Bound Books for a story of mine. "23 to 46" will be part of their "Welcome to the Splatter Club" anthology. They informed me that there will be an official announcement and roll out in September, and the tentative publication date is Summer of 2020. I will, of course, include updates as I receive them, such as the contributor/title list, any story blurbs, and the cover reveal.
I looked over my records, and learned that I wrote "23 to 46" 20 years ago. And it took until its 40th submission before it was accepted. So to all those frustrated authors and would-be authors, take this as a bit of inspiration. It's unwise to give up on a story--you never know when it can be accepted, and published.
For the rest of this post, I thought I'd touch on some things that I just don't understand. For older readers, think of this as my take on Andy Rooney's segment on "60 Minutes." Anyway, first off there's non-alcoholic beer, from here on out abbreviated to "NA beer." It's existed since at least the Prohibition years in the U.S., when it did make sense, since the kind with alcohol was illegal. But recently it's beginning to become a little more popular--even craft breweries are starting to make NA versions, some using more creative styles. Traditionally, NA beer starts out as regular beer, and then has its alcohol heated off. This generally affects the taste, resulting in a sweeter, syrup-y like taste. Modern brewers try to combat this by adding more hops, or other flavoring agents. I should say up front that I'm not trying to tell other drinkers what to do--if they want to drink NA beer, or light beer, or any other beverage I don't care for, that's up to them. But I don't personally get it, with a few exceptions. If you're pregnant, or diabetic, or belong to a religious group that forbids the consumption of alcohol, then I understand it. But if you're not part of these groups, why? The usual rationale is that it's for beer drinkers who want to have some drinks but not have a hangover the next day, or who want to hang out with drinking friends but not imbibe, say if they're the designated driver or something. I've served as the designated driver many times, and I certainly respect that practice, but when I do I'd rather drink water, or soft drinks or something, not a pale imitation of a real beer. As for the hangovers, if you get one after having say, a couple of beers, I think you have some allergy to alcohol, or weigh like 70 pounds. (Plus if you're regularly getting hangovers from nights out with friends, you might want to cut back a bit, I think, for health reasons.) Moving on, I've tried some NA beers in the past, and came away unimpressed. And I tried another one, Heineken's 0.0 kind, just the other day. It was vaguely beerish, but ultimately hollow, and missing something. It started out okay but ended badly. Not a very positive experience. (Although part of me wants to do a proper, double blind scientific study wherein I try a bunch of beers, and see if I can pick out the NA ones. I think I could, but who knows for sure?) Finally, if you're thinking, as I once did, that NA beer is designed for recovering alcoholics, apparently experts recommend against this. Evidently the familiar-ish taste, odor, etc. can lead to a backslide to the real thing, so it's probably a bad idea.
On a similar note, there's the practice of condensing books. For those that don't know, these are regular books, usually novel-length, that are shortened, and then often put with other shortened books in a type of anthology. Reader's Digest, which also produces a magazine consisting of sometimes shortened articles, is a major publisher of these. The company has put these out since 1950, and continues to do so up to the present. Anyway, I don't see the point. The usual rationale for this is that people don't have the time to read an entire book. But this makes no sense to me. A book isn't like a piece of fruit--you can take weeks, or months even to finish one if necessary. Also, as I mentioned, the usual allotment is 3-5 shortened novels within the overall condensed collection. So if a reader has time to read, say, 300-500 pages consisting of several stories, why can't they just read one 300-500 page novel?! I get that some books are long winded, and could have been edited down. But these are inferior books, written by inferior authors, and put out by inferior publishers. I would recommend reading a good novel or long piece of nonfiction, beginning to end. Or, if you like shorter stories, why not read a regular anthology, consisting of many stories that are shorter, but complete? I've since learned that many audio books are shortened, too, because reading aloud obviously takes longer, so a long novel might require an inordinate number of tapes or CD's, etc., and take too long to listen to. I guess I can grudgingly concede the logic behind this, but I still don't really approve. To me it's the equivalent of watching an edited and shortened movie on television or on a plane--a watered down and disappointing imitation of the real thing.
To end on a positive note, I recently saw a guy wearing an amusing t-shirt. It read, "World's Okayest Dad." I think that's pretty awesome. It shows good self-awareness, and is sarcastically funny. They're basically admitting, "Sure, mathematically, in a world of billions, I'm almost certainly not the very best father that there is, but I'm clearly not the worst, either. I'm alright. Decent even." A little bit of online research revealed that you can also buy mugs and hats with this message on them, as well as a version for mothers. Maybe there's a "boss" one too, to keep the Michael Scotts of the world in check.
Also, for those that prefer my posts about odd food and drinks, don't fret. I located two exotic groceries in my area in the past couple of weeks, so many articles featuring their products are forthcoming.
I looked over my records, and learned that I wrote "23 to 46" 20 years ago. And it took until its 40th submission before it was accepted. So to all those frustrated authors and would-be authors, take this as a bit of inspiration. It's unwise to give up on a story--you never know when it can be accepted, and published.
For the rest of this post, I thought I'd touch on some things that I just don't understand. For older readers, think of this as my take on Andy Rooney's segment on "60 Minutes." Anyway, first off there's non-alcoholic beer, from here on out abbreviated to "NA beer." It's existed since at least the Prohibition years in the U.S., when it did make sense, since the kind with alcohol was illegal. But recently it's beginning to become a little more popular--even craft breweries are starting to make NA versions, some using more creative styles. Traditionally, NA beer starts out as regular beer, and then has its alcohol heated off. This generally affects the taste, resulting in a sweeter, syrup-y like taste. Modern brewers try to combat this by adding more hops, or other flavoring agents. I should say up front that I'm not trying to tell other drinkers what to do--if they want to drink NA beer, or light beer, or any other beverage I don't care for, that's up to them. But I don't personally get it, with a few exceptions. If you're pregnant, or diabetic, or belong to a religious group that forbids the consumption of alcohol, then I understand it. But if you're not part of these groups, why? The usual rationale is that it's for beer drinkers who want to have some drinks but not have a hangover the next day, or who want to hang out with drinking friends but not imbibe, say if they're the designated driver or something. I've served as the designated driver many times, and I certainly respect that practice, but when I do I'd rather drink water, or soft drinks or something, not a pale imitation of a real beer. As for the hangovers, if you get one after having say, a couple of beers, I think you have some allergy to alcohol, or weigh like 70 pounds. (Plus if you're regularly getting hangovers from nights out with friends, you might want to cut back a bit, I think, for health reasons.) Moving on, I've tried some NA beers in the past, and came away unimpressed. And I tried another one, Heineken's 0.0 kind, just the other day. It was vaguely beerish, but ultimately hollow, and missing something. It started out okay but ended badly. Not a very positive experience. (Although part of me wants to do a proper, double blind scientific study wherein I try a bunch of beers, and see if I can pick out the NA ones. I think I could, but who knows for sure?) Finally, if you're thinking, as I once did, that NA beer is designed for recovering alcoholics, apparently experts recommend against this. Evidently the familiar-ish taste, odor, etc. can lead to a backslide to the real thing, so it's probably a bad idea.
On a similar note, there's the practice of condensing books. For those that don't know, these are regular books, usually novel-length, that are shortened, and then often put with other shortened books in a type of anthology. Reader's Digest, which also produces a magazine consisting of sometimes shortened articles, is a major publisher of these. The company has put these out since 1950, and continues to do so up to the present. Anyway, I don't see the point. The usual rationale for this is that people don't have the time to read an entire book. But this makes no sense to me. A book isn't like a piece of fruit--you can take weeks, or months even to finish one if necessary. Also, as I mentioned, the usual allotment is 3-5 shortened novels within the overall condensed collection. So if a reader has time to read, say, 300-500 pages consisting of several stories, why can't they just read one 300-500 page novel?! I get that some books are long winded, and could have been edited down. But these are inferior books, written by inferior authors, and put out by inferior publishers. I would recommend reading a good novel or long piece of nonfiction, beginning to end. Or, if you like shorter stories, why not read a regular anthology, consisting of many stories that are shorter, but complete? I've since learned that many audio books are shortened, too, because reading aloud obviously takes longer, so a long novel might require an inordinate number of tapes or CD's, etc., and take too long to listen to. I guess I can grudgingly concede the logic behind this, but I still don't really approve. To me it's the equivalent of watching an edited and shortened movie on television or on a plane--a watered down and disappointing imitation of the real thing.
To end on a positive note, I recently saw a guy wearing an amusing t-shirt. It read, "World's Okayest Dad." I think that's pretty awesome. It shows good self-awareness, and is sarcastically funny. They're basically admitting, "Sure, mathematically, in a world of billions, I'm almost certainly not the very best father that there is, but I'm clearly not the worst, either. I'm alright. Decent even." A little bit of online research revealed that you can also buy mugs and hats with this message on them, as well as a version for mothers. Maybe there's a "boss" one too, to keep the Michael Scotts of the world in check.
Also, for those that prefer my posts about odd food and drinks, don't fret. I located two exotic groceries in my area in the past couple of weeks, so many articles featuring their products are forthcoming.
Saturday, August 17, 2019
Underrated Horror Gems--"Dead of Night" (aka "Deathdream")
Many years ago, on June 16, 2013, I wrote about an underrated horror film called "Deranged," which came out in 1974. That one was co-directed by Alan Ormsby and Jeff Gillen, and produced by Bob Clark. Today I'd like to discuss a related movie, "Dead of Night," which was created in 1972, but didn't get released until 1974. The same folks were involved, only in this new case Clark directed, Ormsby wrote it, and Jeff Gillen was the assistant director. And all three had small acting roles. I'll structure this article in my usual way, starting with a brief, spoiler-free synopsis, followed by a longer, spoiler-saturated recap, then with a discussion of some of the film's themes and positive aspects, and ending with some info about the cast and crew.
The Brooks family--father Charles, mother Christine, and daughter Cathy--are surprised in the night by an army officer, bearing terrible news. Charles and Christine's son, Andy, has been killed in Vietnam. However, there's been a mistake, as later that night Andy's back. But he's different. He's very quiet, and antisocial. Mostly he stays by himself, sitting in a rocking chair. His family starts fighting with each other as his behavior gets stranger. Several murders take place in their small town--is Andy involved? It all leads to a harrowing climax, in which we find out just how much Andy has changed.
(SPOILERS AHEAD UNTIL MARKED) "Dead of Night" opens in the jungles of Vietnam. A pair of soldiers are mortally shot. As one dies, he hears his mother's voice saying that he can't die, that he promised to come back. Then the scene shifts to the Brooks family dinner, back in the U.S. Father Charles, mother Christine, and daughter Cathy are interrupted by a army officer. The telegram he gives them reveals that their son Andy has died in battle. Christine is hysterical, saying it's a lie. Later, Charles wakes up and discovers her sitting in Andy's room, imploring/ordering him to return home. Simultaneously we see a trucker picking up a hitchhiking soldier. At a diner the trucker picks up some coffee and cigarettes, complaining to the staff that the soldier is quiet and freakish. Then we see someone leaving the stopped truck.
Back at the house Cathy is awakened by noises coming from downstairs. The family investigates, and after a false scare, discovers that Andy is home. He seems odd, rather confused and taciturn. In the morning the police are investigating the truck. The trucker has been brutally murdered, with a slashed throat and weird marks on his wrist. At a Brooks family picnic, Andy continues to be nearly silent, and reacts angrily to the postman's talk about war. The police discover some information about the apparent murderer from the diner employees.
Andy, still acting strangely, prefers to sit in a rocking chair by himself,most of the time. He's still quiet, and refuses to eat with the family. Charles is irritated, but Christine defends her son. Andy goes out at night. He watches his former girlfriend, Joanne, from the street, and then visits the local cemetery. The next day there's more alarming behavior. The local kids who used to play sports with Andy stop by. Andy inexplicably attacks one, and then viciously strangles the family dog when it tries to defend the boy. Charles is appalled, and drinks his sorrow away at the local bar. After hearing about Andy's alarming antics Doctor Allman takes Charles home. After a brief, tense conversation with Andy, Allman invites Andy to visit his office for a free checkup. Outside, Allman tells Charles that he's required to reveal his suspicions that Andy killed the trucker to the police. But he agrees to wait one more day. Andy then follows Dr. Allman back to this office, and demands the checkup. After an examination reveals no pulse, or heartbeat, Andy kills Allman, and injects himself with the doctor's blood.
The following morning Andy looks better. He learns that Cathy has tentatively planned a double date--she with her boyfriend Bob, and Andy with his former girlfriend Joanne. After a moment, Andy agrees. Joanne also agrees, and is excited that Andy is back. At Allman's office Charles discovers that the doctor is dead, and the police are investigating. Andy's skin flakes off on his hand, and he acts cold and distant with Joanne and Bob. Charles goes to the police station, and lies to protect Andy. Christine watches the news, and learns about Allman's murder. Charles comes home and confirms her suspicions that Andy committed both murders. She says that they'll have to flee with their son. On the double date, Andy refuses to eat, as usual. At the drive in movie, Cathy and Bob go to the snack bar to leave Andy and Joanne alone. After Andy's face drips some unpleasant substance Joanne recoils, and tries to leave the backseat of the car. When Bob and Cathy get back, they initially think Joanne and Andy are making out. But they quickly realize that Andy has just killed Joanne. He also strangles Bob to death, and runs over a passerby who's helping the fleeing Cathy. Andy drives home. There an upset Charles confronts his bloody, visibly decomposing son with a gun. But he's unable to shoot Andy, and instead commits suicide as Christine leads Andy to the car. The police are outside, although their gunshots are unable to stop Andy and Christine from driving away, and killing a cop along the way. Andy directs Christine to the cemetery, where she crashes the car at the gate, just ahead of the pursuing police. The police enter the cemetery, and see a badly decayed Andy lying in a shallow grave, trying to bury himself. He's scratched his name and birth/death dates on the adjacent headstone. Andy lies still, as his mom sobs uncontrollably.
"Dead of Night" had a depressing release story, to go along with its depressing subject matter. It wasn't released at all for two years, and even when it was, in August of 1974, the release was limited. It was mostly shown in the Southern U.S., near where it was made, not coincidentally. Actor Richard Backus (Andy), said it wasn't shown on a screen in New York until a film festival like 25 years later. Therefore, despite its modest budget (about $235, 000), it wasn't a big financial hit. (Although I couldn't find a definite box office take anywhere online.) The reviews were mixed. These are some of the reasons why I think it hasn't gotten its due, even as a cult movie.
I'll start by getting the negatives out of the way. "Dead of Night" is a bit slow in parts, and doesn't have much action, or elaborate kills. So if you're an impatient horror movie fan, you might be a little disappointed. There also aren't many jump scares, if that's your bag. The explanation for why Andy is reanimated isn't that strong, either. There's no cursed graveyard, or magical item, or even a quasi-scientific reason for his return: Instead, his mother basically wishes him back, wants it so bad that somehow it happens. I could overlook this, but some horror fans might not. Then there's the humor. On the DVD commentary, even the writer, Alan Ormsby, admitted that the attempts at being funny were weak, and didn't work that well. I can understand why they were included, to break the tension of what's an extremely grim and depressing tale, but they were overly broad, and rather dated and lame.
The major theme of the film is the same as its main inspiration, "The Monkey's Paw," a short story first published in 1902 by W.W. Jacobs. Or, put succinctly by another "Monkey's Paw" influenced book and movie, Stephen King's "Pet Sematary," "Sometimes, dead is better." Put less succinctly, the death of a loved one is awful, but you have to learn to grieve, let go, and proceed with your life. Christine Brooks obviously can't do this, and what are the results? Her son has a miserable 4-6 days as an unhappy, undead creature, during which time he murders six innocent people, including his former girlfriend and another friend. His new existence is joyless, as he spends it mostly rocking in a chair, alone, sometimes in the dark. By the end he's desperate to fully die again, and be buried. The Brooks family is torn asunder, though--his father has committed suicide out of grief and guilt, and his sister is in shock, and perhaps permanently mentally damaged. Christine gets to witness some of these tragic events, and the eventual result was the same as it would have been, only much, much worse.
"Dead of Night" was also one of the first, if not the first, horror movies to explore the Vietnam War as a direct plot point. It was even completed (but not released) while the U.S. was still actually fighting in it. Some of the best, most long lasting horror movies get power from dealing with real life controversies, and cultural divides. They can get away with this easier, since it's often hidden, more a subtext, or is obscured by unrealistic things and supernatural events. It's not difficult to read more into the happenings of "Dead of Night." Some of Andy's symptoms are similar to ones experienced by real war veterans suffering from PTSD. Then there's Andy's habit of injecting himself with the blood of his victims. This seems like a clear comment on the real life problem of Vietnam War vets coming home addicted to shooting up heroin. The anger and grief felt by families and friends about their loved ones dying in such an unpopular war was intense, and lent itself effectively to a horror movie with a dead soldier as its focal point. Although, while the government was responsible for Andy's initial death, it wasn't to blame for his returning back home "alive."
Charles and Christine's parenting styles are also explored in the movie. The two apparently had their definite favorite child, with the father liking Cathy more, and the mother Andy. Christine accuses Charles of being unsupportive and unloving towards Andy, and of bullying him into enlisting in the army. Charles, conversely, accuses Christine of being too smothering, and of turning Andy into a Mama's boy. Christine is so unconditionally loving that she's even willing to overlook Andy's multiple murders. (She may be at least partially insane by this point, but still.) Clearly, there are problems within the Brooks' marriage, and the overall family dynamic, and their undead, murderous son just brings these to the forefront in a major, devastating way.
Moving on, there's the generation gap that existed during the Vietnam War era. Charles notes that he was a veteran, of World War II, and didn't become as strange and withdrawn as Andy was. (Before he finds out the truth about Andy's condition, of course.) This was a common comment during this time, with the implication being that the younger generation of soldiers, and men in general, weren't tough enough, or mentally as strong as their father's generation. (Going into the reasons for these apparent differences would take way too long to explain, but it was obviously a real argument.) Parents during this time often felt that their young adult children were becoming strangers, caring about different things, and having different values and politics. So again, "Dead of Night" took these stresses and fears and exaggerated them for plot purposes. And undead, blood drinking, nearly mute person would be the ultimate "Turn on, tune in, and drop out" nightmare for a parent to deal with and try to understand.
A question remains about Andy, though--what was he? Most accounts of the film describe him as being a zombie, but I think this label doesn't really work. He's certainly not a classic Caribbean slave zombie, born of evil magic, and a mindless worker. And he's not a post-Romero type of zombie, either. His personality is different from what it was like before he died, since he's antisocial, nearly emotion-less, and seems to have some memory loss. But overall he's intelligent, and has self control. For most of the movie he covers up his crimes, and he kills Dr. Allman specifically to avoid detection of his first murder. In this way he's much more like a vampire, especially combined with his need for blood, but not flesh. Granted, he's an atypical vampire in that he wasn't bitten by another vampire to become undead, he's not repelled by religious symbols that we can see, and he can tolerate sunlight. Also, he doesn't consume blood into his stomach that we see, but injects it directly into his veins. So it's not a perfect fit, but he seems to be closer to a vampire than a zombie.
As I mentioned before, the action scenes and violence were quite rare and subdued in the film. Much of it happens off screen, even. But the special effects and makeup were done quite well. The wounds on the trucker were suitably grisly. And Andy's transformation was very convincing. These effects were subtle at first, but as the movie progresses they get more elaborate, gory, and disturbing. His final look, in the graveyard, is revoltingly realistic, and very frightening. Which makes sense, because Alan Ormsby had done quality work in other films, and he was assisted on "Dead of Night" by Tom Savini. Savini, of course, became a superstar in the special effects/makeup world. I'll go into some of his career highlight later.
I'll even include some very obscure trivia, of admittedly limited interest. When the kids go on their double date to the drive in movie theater, three movies are referenced. The theater marquee lists two movies--"Death in Space" and "The Spacenauts." I was unable to find any movie called "The Spacenauts," even as an alternate title. There was a movie called "Death in Space," but it was only a television movie, not a theatrical release, and it came out over a year after "Dead of Night" was created. Meaning I think this was a coincidence, because the title was generic. So those two were almost certainly made up titles. However, when Cathy is sitting in the theater snack bar or office, there's a movie poster visible behind her. That one was real--"The Deathmaster," a 1972 movie directed by Ray Danton, starring Robert Quarry, John Fiedler, and Bob Pickett.
All in all, this movie was grim, and depressing. And very, very sad. I think it would be a poor choice for a night in which a group of friends get together to drink some beers and enjoy a fun horror flick. The pathos in it is heavy. No happy endings for anyone. Good people die, and a formerly good person is the reluctant perpetrator of these murders. Tears will probably be more forthcoming than cheers and laughs at the film's conclusion. Which, obviously is okay. Movies affect us in different ways, evoke different emotions. A disturbing, depressing movie can still be worth watching, and will probably stay with you longer than something lighthearted or shallow.
(END OF SPOILERS) I discussed the careers of Bob Clark, Alan Ormsby, and Jeff Gillen a bit in the "Deranged" post, so forgive the repetition. Anyway, director Bob Clark had a long and diverse career. Included were other horror movies, such as "Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things" (1972, from here on out abbreviated to "Children") and the proto-slasher "Black Christmas" (1974). He also directed "Murder by Decree" (1979) and comedies like "Porky's" (1981), "A Christmas Story" (1983), and "From the Hip" (1987). He co-wrote and produced many of these, too. Alas, his career ended badly, as his "Baby Geniuses" (1999) and its 2004 sequel are considered to be among the worst movies ever, often on the Bottom 100 on IMDB, for example. "Dead of Night" writer Alan Ormsby did a bit of everything in his career. He wrote "Children" (1972), "Deranged" (1974), "My Bodyguard" (1980), "Cat People" (1982), "Popcorn" (1991), and "The Substitute" (1996), among others. He also co-directed "Deranged" (1974), and "Popcorn" (1991), directed "The Great Masquerade" (1974), and did the makeup on several early 1970's movies. Jeff Gillen was the assistant director for "Dead of Night," and he was involved in several others, often with Clark and Ormsby. He was the co-director for "Deranged" (1974), and acted in films like "Children" (1972), "The Great Masquerade" (1974), "Absence of Malice" (1981), "Easty Money" (1983), and "A Christmas Story" (1983). Highlights of Tom Savini's makeup/special effects career include "Martin" (1977), "Dawn of the Dead" (1979), "The Burning" (1981), "Creepshow" (1982), "Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter" (1984), "Day of the Dead" (1985), "Necronomicon" (1993), and "Killing Zoe" (1993). Acting highlights include roles in "Knightriders" (1981), "From Dusk Till Dawn" (1996), "Dawn of the Dead" (2004), "Zach and Miri Make a Porno" (2008), "Machete" (2010), and "Django Unchained" (2012). He also directed the 1990 remake of "Night of the Living Dead," and is slated to be directing "Nightmare City" soon, which may be a zombie movie remake (?).
Andy Brooks was played by Richard Backus. After "Dead of Night" he was in "The First Deadly Sin" (1980), and on the television show "Ryan's Hope" and "Law & Order," among others. He also wrote for television, such as for "As the World Turns" and "One Life to Live," mostly in the 1980's and 1990's. John Marley (Charles Brooks), had an extensive career. Highlights include "The Naked City" (1948), "Cat Ballou" (1965), "Faces" (1968), "Love Story (1970, for which he was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Academy Award), "The Godfather" (1972), and "It Lives Again" (1978). Christine Brooks was portrayed by Lynn Carlin, probably best known for appearing in "Faces" (1968, for which she was nominated for a Best Supporting Oscar), "...tick...tick...tick" (1970), "French Postcards" (1979), and "Superstition" (1982, which in my opinion is an underrated giallo-like horror movie). Henderson Forsythe (Dr. Allman) was in such films as "The Private Files of J. Edgar Hoover" (1977), "Silkwood" (1983), "Species II" (1998), and spent 30 years on the television show "As the World Turns." Jane Daly (Joanne) was in "Children" (1972) and "North Dallas Forty" (1979), and in such television shows as "The X Files" (2001), and "Grey's Anatomy" (2012), among others. Anya Ormsby (Cathy Brooks) had a brief career, but she was yet another person in "Children" (1972), along with roles in such films as "Thunder Country" (1974), and "The Great Masquerade" (1974).
So, if you enjoy slow-burn, introspective, and darkly disturbing and depressing horror movies, you'll probably want to check out "Dead of Night."
The Brooks family--father Charles, mother Christine, and daughter Cathy--are surprised in the night by an army officer, bearing terrible news. Charles and Christine's son, Andy, has been killed in Vietnam. However, there's been a mistake, as later that night Andy's back. But he's different. He's very quiet, and antisocial. Mostly he stays by himself, sitting in a rocking chair. His family starts fighting with each other as his behavior gets stranger. Several murders take place in their small town--is Andy involved? It all leads to a harrowing climax, in which we find out just how much Andy has changed.
(SPOILERS AHEAD UNTIL MARKED) "Dead of Night" opens in the jungles of Vietnam. A pair of soldiers are mortally shot. As one dies, he hears his mother's voice saying that he can't die, that he promised to come back. Then the scene shifts to the Brooks family dinner, back in the U.S. Father Charles, mother Christine, and daughter Cathy are interrupted by a army officer. The telegram he gives them reveals that their son Andy has died in battle. Christine is hysterical, saying it's a lie. Later, Charles wakes up and discovers her sitting in Andy's room, imploring/ordering him to return home. Simultaneously we see a trucker picking up a hitchhiking soldier. At a diner the trucker picks up some coffee and cigarettes, complaining to the staff that the soldier is quiet and freakish. Then we see someone leaving the stopped truck.
Back at the house Cathy is awakened by noises coming from downstairs. The family investigates, and after a false scare, discovers that Andy is home. He seems odd, rather confused and taciturn. In the morning the police are investigating the truck. The trucker has been brutally murdered, with a slashed throat and weird marks on his wrist. At a Brooks family picnic, Andy continues to be nearly silent, and reacts angrily to the postman's talk about war. The police discover some information about the apparent murderer from the diner employees.
Andy, still acting strangely, prefers to sit in a rocking chair by himself,most of the time. He's still quiet, and refuses to eat with the family. Charles is irritated, but Christine defends her son. Andy goes out at night. He watches his former girlfriend, Joanne, from the street, and then visits the local cemetery. The next day there's more alarming behavior. The local kids who used to play sports with Andy stop by. Andy inexplicably attacks one, and then viciously strangles the family dog when it tries to defend the boy. Charles is appalled, and drinks his sorrow away at the local bar. After hearing about Andy's alarming antics Doctor Allman takes Charles home. After a brief, tense conversation with Andy, Allman invites Andy to visit his office for a free checkup. Outside, Allman tells Charles that he's required to reveal his suspicions that Andy killed the trucker to the police. But he agrees to wait one more day. Andy then follows Dr. Allman back to this office, and demands the checkup. After an examination reveals no pulse, or heartbeat, Andy kills Allman, and injects himself with the doctor's blood.
The following morning Andy looks better. He learns that Cathy has tentatively planned a double date--she with her boyfriend Bob, and Andy with his former girlfriend Joanne. After a moment, Andy agrees. Joanne also agrees, and is excited that Andy is back. At Allman's office Charles discovers that the doctor is dead, and the police are investigating. Andy's skin flakes off on his hand, and he acts cold and distant with Joanne and Bob. Charles goes to the police station, and lies to protect Andy. Christine watches the news, and learns about Allman's murder. Charles comes home and confirms her suspicions that Andy committed both murders. She says that they'll have to flee with their son. On the double date, Andy refuses to eat, as usual. At the drive in movie, Cathy and Bob go to the snack bar to leave Andy and Joanne alone. After Andy's face drips some unpleasant substance Joanne recoils, and tries to leave the backseat of the car. When Bob and Cathy get back, they initially think Joanne and Andy are making out. But they quickly realize that Andy has just killed Joanne. He also strangles Bob to death, and runs over a passerby who's helping the fleeing Cathy. Andy drives home. There an upset Charles confronts his bloody, visibly decomposing son with a gun. But he's unable to shoot Andy, and instead commits suicide as Christine leads Andy to the car. The police are outside, although their gunshots are unable to stop Andy and Christine from driving away, and killing a cop along the way. Andy directs Christine to the cemetery, where she crashes the car at the gate, just ahead of the pursuing police. The police enter the cemetery, and see a badly decayed Andy lying in a shallow grave, trying to bury himself. He's scratched his name and birth/death dates on the adjacent headstone. Andy lies still, as his mom sobs uncontrollably.
"Dead of Night" had a depressing release story, to go along with its depressing subject matter. It wasn't released at all for two years, and even when it was, in August of 1974, the release was limited. It was mostly shown in the Southern U.S., near where it was made, not coincidentally. Actor Richard Backus (Andy), said it wasn't shown on a screen in New York until a film festival like 25 years later. Therefore, despite its modest budget (about $235, 000), it wasn't a big financial hit. (Although I couldn't find a definite box office take anywhere online.) The reviews were mixed. These are some of the reasons why I think it hasn't gotten its due, even as a cult movie.
I'll start by getting the negatives out of the way. "Dead of Night" is a bit slow in parts, and doesn't have much action, or elaborate kills. So if you're an impatient horror movie fan, you might be a little disappointed. There also aren't many jump scares, if that's your bag. The explanation for why Andy is reanimated isn't that strong, either. There's no cursed graveyard, or magical item, or even a quasi-scientific reason for his return: Instead, his mother basically wishes him back, wants it so bad that somehow it happens. I could overlook this, but some horror fans might not. Then there's the humor. On the DVD commentary, even the writer, Alan Ormsby, admitted that the attempts at being funny were weak, and didn't work that well. I can understand why they were included, to break the tension of what's an extremely grim and depressing tale, but they were overly broad, and rather dated and lame.
The major theme of the film is the same as its main inspiration, "The Monkey's Paw," a short story first published in 1902 by W.W. Jacobs. Or, put succinctly by another "Monkey's Paw" influenced book and movie, Stephen King's "Pet Sematary," "Sometimes, dead is better." Put less succinctly, the death of a loved one is awful, but you have to learn to grieve, let go, and proceed with your life. Christine Brooks obviously can't do this, and what are the results? Her son has a miserable 4-6 days as an unhappy, undead creature, during which time he murders six innocent people, including his former girlfriend and another friend. His new existence is joyless, as he spends it mostly rocking in a chair, alone, sometimes in the dark. By the end he's desperate to fully die again, and be buried. The Brooks family is torn asunder, though--his father has committed suicide out of grief and guilt, and his sister is in shock, and perhaps permanently mentally damaged. Christine gets to witness some of these tragic events, and the eventual result was the same as it would have been, only much, much worse.
"Dead of Night" was also one of the first, if not the first, horror movies to explore the Vietnam War as a direct plot point. It was even completed (but not released) while the U.S. was still actually fighting in it. Some of the best, most long lasting horror movies get power from dealing with real life controversies, and cultural divides. They can get away with this easier, since it's often hidden, more a subtext, or is obscured by unrealistic things and supernatural events. It's not difficult to read more into the happenings of "Dead of Night." Some of Andy's symptoms are similar to ones experienced by real war veterans suffering from PTSD. Then there's Andy's habit of injecting himself with the blood of his victims. This seems like a clear comment on the real life problem of Vietnam War vets coming home addicted to shooting up heroin. The anger and grief felt by families and friends about their loved ones dying in such an unpopular war was intense, and lent itself effectively to a horror movie with a dead soldier as its focal point. Although, while the government was responsible for Andy's initial death, it wasn't to blame for his returning back home "alive."
Charles and Christine's parenting styles are also explored in the movie. The two apparently had their definite favorite child, with the father liking Cathy more, and the mother Andy. Christine accuses Charles of being unsupportive and unloving towards Andy, and of bullying him into enlisting in the army. Charles, conversely, accuses Christine of being too smothering, and of turning Andy into a Mama's boy. Christine is so unconditionally loving that she's even willing to overlook Andy's multiple murders. (She may be at least partially insane by this point, but still.) Clearly, there are problems within the Brooks' marriage, and the overall family dynamic, and their undead, murderous son just brings these to the forefront in a major, devastating way.
Moving on, there's the generation gap that existed during the Vietnam War era. Charles notes that he was a veteran, of World War II, and didn't become as strange and withdrawn as Andy was. (Before he finds out the truth about Andy's condition, of course.) This was a common comment during this time, with the implication being that the younger generation of soldiers, and men in general, weren't tough enough, or mentally as strong as their father's generation. (Going into the reasons for these apparent differences would take way too long to explain, but it was obviously a real argument.) Parents during this time often felt that their young adult children were becoming strangers, caring about different things, and having different values and politics. So again, "Dead of Night" took these stresses and fears and exaggerated them for plot purposes. And undead, blood drinking, nearly mute person would be the ultimate "Turn on, tune in, and drop out" nightmare for a parent to deal with and try to understand.
A question remains about Andy, though--what was he? Most accounts of the film describe him as being a zombie, but I think this label doesn't really work. He's certainly not a classic Caribbean slave zombie, born of evil magic, and a mindless worker. And he's not a post-Romero type of zombie, either. His personality is different from what it was like before he died, since he's antisocial, nearly emotion-less, and seems to have some memory loss. But overall he's intelligent, and has self control. For most of the movie he covers up his crimes, and he kills Dr. Allman specifically to avoid detection of his first murder. In this way he's much more like a vampire, especially combined with his need for blood, but not flesh. Granted, he's an atypical vampire in that he wasn't bitten by another vampire to become undead, he's not repelled by religious symbols that we can see, and he can tolerate sunlight. Also, he doesn't consume blood into his stomach that we see, but injects it directly into his veins. So it's not a perfect fit, but he seems to be closer to a vampire than a zombie.
As I mentioned before, the action scenes and violence were quite rare and subdued in the film. Much of it happens off screen, even. But the special effects and makeup were done quite well. The wounds on the trucker were suitably grisly. And Andy's transformation was very convincing. These effects were subtle at first, but as the movie progresses they get more elaborate, gory, and disturbing. His final look, in the graveyard, is revoltingly realistic, and very frightening. Which makes sense, because Alan Ormsby had done quality work in other films, and he was assisted on "Dead of Night" by Tom Savini. Savini, of course, became a superstar in the special effects/makeup world. I'll go into some of his career highlight later.
I'll even include some very obscure trivia, of admittedly limited interest. When the kids go on their double date to the drive in movie theater, three movies are referenced. The theater marquee lists two movies--"Death in Space" and "The Spacenauts." I was unable to find any movie called "The Spacenauts," even as an alternate title. There was a movie called "Death in Space," but it was only a television movie, not a theatrical release, and it came out over a year after "Dead of Night" was created. Meaning I think this was a coincidence, because the title was generic. So those two were almost certainly made up titles. However, when Cathy is sitting in the theater snack bar or office, there's a movie poster visible behind her. That one was real--"The Deathmaster," a 1972 movie directed by Ray Danton, starring Robert Quarry, John Fiedler, and Bob Pickett.
All in all, this movie was grim, and depressing. And very, very sad. I think it would be a poor choice for a night in which a group of friends get together to drink some beers and enjoy a fun horror flick. The pathos in it is heavy. No happy endings for anyone. Good people die, and a formerly good person is the reluctant perpetrator of these murders. Tears will probably be more forthcoming than cheers and laughs at the film's conclusion. Which, obviously is okay. Movies affect us in different ways, evoke different emotions. A disturbing, depressing movie can still be worth watching, and will probably stay with you longer than something lighthearted or shallow.
(END OF SPOILERS) I discussed the careers of Bob Clark, Alan Ormsby, and Jeff Gillen a bit in the "Deranged" post, so forgive the repetition. Anyway, director Bob Clark had a long and diverse career. Included were other horror movies, such as "Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things" (1972, from here on out abbreviated to "Children") and the proto-slasher "Black Christmas" (1974). He also directed "Murder by Decree" (1979) and comedies like "Porky's" (1981), "A Christmas Story" (1983), and "From the Hip" (1987). He co-wrote and produced many of these, too. Alas, his career ended badly, as his "Baby Geniuses" (1999) and its 2004 sequel are considered to be among the worst movies ever, often on the Bottom 100 on IMDB, for example. "Dead of Night" writer Alan Ormsby did a bit of everything in his career. He wrote "Children" (1972), "Deranged" (1974), "My Bodyguard" (1980), "Cat People" (1982), "Popcorn" (1991), and "The Substitute" (1996), among others. He also co-directed "Deranged" (1974), and "Popcorn" (1991), directed "The Great Masquerade" (1974), and did the makeup on several early 1970's movies. Jeff Gillen was the assistant director for "Dead of Night," and he was involved in several others, often with Clark and Ormsby. He was the co-director for "Deranged" (1974), and acted in films like "Children" (1972), "The Great Masquerade" (1974), "Absence of Malice" (1981), "Easty Money" (1983), and "A Christmas Story" (1983). Highlights of Tom Savini's makeup/special effects career include "Martin" (1977), "Dawn of the Dead" (1979), "The Burning" (1981), "Creepshow" (1982), "Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter" (1984), "Day of the Dead" (1985), "Necronomicon" (1993), and "Killing Zoe" (1993). Acting highlights include roles in "Knightriders" (1981), "From Dusk Till Dawn" (1996), "Dawn of the Dead" (2004), "Zach and Miri Make a Porno" (2008), "Machete" (2010), and "Django Unchained" (2012). He also directed the 1990 remake of "Night of the Living Dead," and is slated to be directing "Nightmare City" soon, which may be a zombie movie remake (?).
Andy Brooks was played by Richard Backus. After "Dead of Night" he was in "The First Deadly Sin" (1980), and on the television show "Ryan's Hope" and "Law & Order," among others. He also wrote for television, such as for "As the World Turns" and "One Life to Live," mostly in the 1980's and 1990's. John Marley (Charles Brooks), had an extensive career. Highlights include "The Naked City" (1948), "Cat Ballou" (1965), "Faces" (1968), "Love Story (1970, for which he was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Academy Award), "The Godfather" (1972), and "It Lives Again" (1978). Christine Brooks was portrayed by Lynn Carlin, probably best known for appearing in "Faces" (1968, for which she was nominated for a Best Supporting Oscar), "...tick...tick...tick" (1970), "French Postcards" (1979), and "Superstition" (1982, which in my opinion is an underrated giallo-like horror movie). Henderson Forsythe (Dr. Allman) was in such films as "The Private Files of J. Edgar Hoover" (1977), "Silkwood" (1983), "Species II" (1998), and spent 30 years on the television show "As the World Turns." Jane Daly (Joanne) was in "Children" (1972) and "North Dallas Forty" (1979), and in such television shows as "The X Files" (2001), and "Grey's Anatomy" (2012), among others. Anya Ormsby (Cathy Brooks) had a brief career, but she was yet another person in "Children" (1972), along with roles in such films as "Thunder Country" (1974), and "The Great Masquerade" (1974).
So, if you enjoy slow-burn, introspective, and darkly disturbing and depressing horror movies, you'll probably want to check out "Dead of Night."
Saturday, August 10, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--8 Treasure Congee
We're headed back to Asia again, this time Taiwan. Today's offering comes from the good folks at Taisun Enterprise Company, Ltd. The food itself was 8 Treasure congee, also known as a mixed congee, which came in a can. And this was yet another Wegman's supermarket find.
Congee is simply the far Eastern take on porridge. (Although the name itself comes from a Tamil word, so it's Ancient Indian in origin.) And "porridge" is closely related to "gruel." Both of these words have negative connotations for many people, including myself. When I hear "porridge" I picture the food served at particularly underfunded Dickensian orphanages. And "gruel" was the gray slop served to Martin Prince and friends at the crappy fat camp in an early episode of "The Simpsons." "Doing porridge" was even a slang term for serving prison time in England, based on the jailhouse cuisine. But, it turns out that this is somewhat exaggerated. Porridge is incredibly common fare across the globe. Just about every area has some version of it, using their own names. Because "porridge" is just a boiled grain, usually served in milk or water, with a thick, soupy or stew-ish texture. "Gruel" is a thinner kind of porridge, so that it can be drunk instead of eaten with a spoon. Although the grains used often vary, the most common ones are oats, rice, barley, corn, millet, sorghum, buckwheat, and peas (ala "pease porridge in the pot, ten days old"). Also, the common breakfasts of oatmeal or cream of wheat are both technically porridges, so many people have eaten it, even if it was called something different. The congee I bought was developed to celebrate the Laba festival, and therefore is often referred to as "Laba congee." Laba is a holiday celebrated on the 8th day of the La month, and is associated with the enlightenment day for Buddha. Presumably the number of treasures is to correspond with the 8th day. The 8 treasures, or ingredients in the congee I tried were glutinous rice, oats, mung beans, pinto beans, red beans, barley, peanuts, and longans (a tropical fruit in the soapberry family, which is also related to lychees (see November 15, 2013 post), rambutan, ackee (see January 16, 2014 post), and guarana (see October 21, 2017 post).
Taisun Enterprise Company Ltd. was started on October 26, 1950, by Chan Yu-Chu and his three unnamed brothers. It began as a (food) oil plant, but eventually expanded into other edibles, such as soybean powders, teas, jellies, waters, energy drinks, soups, and even fish food. The canned 8 Treasure congee (aka mixed congee) was sold starting in 1986. Alternate congee flavors include a red (bean) kind, a black (bean) kind, and a 10 Treasure one. Congee itself is often consumed at breakfast. It's also a popular food for the elderly and infants, since it's believed to be easy to digest.
Taisun Enterprise Company, Ltd., Mixed Congee (8 Treasure Congee) instant cereal: This came in a 13.2 ounce (375 gram) can. I ate this cold, right out of the container. It looked pretty revolting--reddish brown chunks in a thick liquid. But happily the taste was pretty good. It was like a decent breakfast cereal, with enough sweetness to keep things interesting. The beans were a little off-putting at first, since I'm not used to beans in a breakfast-type cereal, but their flavor wasn't too bad. So despite the initial appearance the overall experience was positive.
Therefore, I would get this again, and I would try the other congees if possible. I'm further amused by the numbering of ingredients as "treasures" in the congee titles. I'd like to see a congee made up of all the grain/bean/fruit types in the world--5,738 Treasure Congee, (or however many types there are). Even if the result would most likely be an unholy abomination.
Congee is simply the far Eastern take on porridge. (Although the name itself comes from a Tamil word, so it's Ancient Indian in origin.) And "porridge" is closely related to "gruel." Both of these words have negative connotations for many people, including myself. When I hear "porridge" I picture the food served at particularly underfunded Dickensian orphanages. And "gruel" was the gray slop served to Martin Prince and friends at the crappy fat camp in an early episode of "The Simpsons." "Doing porridge" was even a slang term for serving prison time in England, based on the jailhouse cuisine. But, it turns out that this is somewhat exaggerated. Porridge is incredibly common fare across the globe. Just about every area has some version of it, using their own names. Because "porridge" is just a boiled grain, usually served in milk or water, with a thick, soupy or stew-ish texture. "Gruel" is a thinner kind of porridge, so that it can be drunk instead of eaten with a spoon. Although the grains used often vary, the most common ones are oats, rice, barley, corn, millet, sorghum, buckwheat, and peas (ala "pease porridge in the pot, ten days old"). Also, the common breakfasts of oatmeal or cream of wheat are both technically porridges, so many people have eaten it, even if it was called something different. The congee I bought was developed to celebrate the Laba festival, and therefore is often referred to as "Laba congee." Laba is a holiday celebrated on the 8th day of the La month, and is associated with the enlightenment day for Buddha. Presumably the number of treasures is to correspond with the 8th day. The 8 treasures, or ingredients in the congee I tried were glutinous rice, oats, mung beans, pinto beans, red beans, barley, peanuts, and longans (a tropical fruit in the soapberry family, which is also related to lychees (see November 15, 2013 post), rambutan, ackee (see January 16, 2014 post), and guarana (see October 21, 2017 post).
Taisun Enterprise Company Ltd. was started on October 26, 1950, by Chan Yu-Chu and his three unnamed brothers. It began as a (food) oil plant, but eventually expanded into other edibles, such as soybean powders, teas, jellies, waters, energy drinks, soups, and even fish food. The canned 8 Treasure congee (aka mixed congee) was sold starting in 1986. Alternate congee flavors include a red (bean) kind, a black (bean) kind, and a 10 Treasure one. Congee itself is often consumed at breakfast. It's also a popular food for the elderly and infants, since it's believed to be easy to digest.
Taisun Enterprise Company, Ltd., Mixed Congee (8 Treasure Congee) instant cereal: This came in a 13.2 ounce (375 gram) can. I ate this cold, right out of the container. It looked pretty revolting--reddish brown chunks in a thick liquid. But happily the taste was pretty good. It was like a decent breakfast cereal, with enough sweetness to keep things interesting. The beans were a little off-putting at first, since I'm not used to beans in a breakfast-type cereal, but their flavor wasn't too bad. So despite the initial appearance the overall experience was positive.
Therefore, I would get this again, and I would try the other congees if possible. I'm further amused by the numbering of ingredients as "treasures" in the congee titles. I'd like to see a congee made up of all the grain/bean/fruit types in the world--5,738 Treasure Congee, (or however many types there are). Even if the result would most likely be an unholy abomination.
Saturday, August 3, 2019
Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Two More Cheeses
I haven't done any cheeses for a while, so today I thought I'd return to that lovely food type. The two I'll be discussing are Queso Iberico, from Spain, and Grana Padano, from Italy. Both are relatively common, and popular cheeses. I got both of these from my local Shop-Rite grocery.
Iberico is a hybrid of three kinds of milk. Specifically, milk from cows, goats, and sheep. The minimum percentages of each type are 50%, 30%, and 10%, respectively, with the remaining 10% up to the cheese maker. The cow milk is said to provide Iberico with its acidity and flavor, the goat milk the white color and tartness, and the sheep milk the buttery consistency and richness. Iberico is made in the Valladolid province, located in central Spain. Aside from being prized as a nice snack, the cheese is also often grated or grilled. Obviously, taste depends on the individual consumer, but folks often describe Iberico's texture as being "rich and buttery," and its flavor as "nutty and fruity." This hard cheese is often compared to another Spanish favorite, manchego cheese, which you can read about in my August 29, 2015 post. The Iberico I tried was the El Pastor brand, imported by the Schuman Cheese company. El Pastor also markets a wine soaked goat cheese, manchego, and regular goat cheese. And there are three subtypes of Iberico--the 3 month aged, the 6 month aged (which I had), and the 12 month aged.
Grana Padano is also a hard cheese, and is also from one specific area, in this case the Padania region of Italy, located in the Po Valley of Northern Italy. The "grana" part of the name comes from the Italian word for "grainy," which describes the cheese's texture. Grana Padano is one of the world's oldest hard cheeses, dating back 900 years. The Cistercian monks of the Chiaravalle Abbey were the developers, and the cheese has been famous for at least 500 years, valued for both its taste and ability to resist spoilage over long periods of time. Unlike Iberico, Grana Padano is made only from cow's milk. There are three subtypes, once again based on how long its been aged.
Grana Padano: aged 9-16 months, known for its rice-sized granules, and relatively sticky texture.
Grana Padano Oltre: aged 16-20 months, with a more grainy and crumbly texture.
Grana Padano Riserva: aged over 20 months, very grainy and crumbly, fuller flavored.
And here's what I thought of these cheeses:
El Pastor Queso Iberico, aged 6 months: White color, and hard texture. Mild and sweetish flavor. Very good.
Ambriola Grana Padano: Also has a whitish hue, and hard texture. Flavor reminiscent of its "sister cheese" Parmesan. Some pleasant sour sharpness to it. Also very good.
If you want to know more about the Ambriola cheese company, there's a 18 minute video on the company website. (Even I wasn't obsessive enough to watch this, but it's there if you want.) Also, all the dairy farming in the Padania region had an unexpected, and to my mind, a wonderful result. Gianantonio Locatelli and some of his fellow farmers decided to do something productive with all the copious manure that their cows make. Therefore, they opened the Museo Della Merde in the village of Castelbosco. In English, this translates to the Shit Museum. Some of the exhibits include some fossilized feces (coprolites), art inspired by ordure, and dung beetles. The Museum also promotes eco-friendly recycling of manure. Aside from fertilizer, they also developed a kind of ceramic which is made from a mix of cow excrement and clay, which they use to make tiles, plates, mugs, and bowls. (And you're probably wondering--is this sanitary?! Reportedly the ceramic is fired at unusually high temperatures, to kill off the bacteria from the dung.) So add this to the sights to see on your trip to Italy! If you're also curious, there's at least one other museum dedicated to this topic, at the Isle of Wight's Poo Museum at its zoo. And in Delhi, India, visitors can tour the International Museum of Toilets. Finally, I was further amused to read that in 2016 the Consortium of Cheese sued the makers of the American soap opera "The Bold and the Beautiful," for disparaging Grana Padano as a "poor man's Parmesan" in an episode. I wasn't able to find out the results of this no doubt landmark legal case. Apropos of nothing, if anyone from the Consortium is reading this, you'll note that I gave Grana Padano a very positive review, and I think it would benefit the tables of people from any socioeconomic position.
Iberico is a hybrid of three kinds of milk. Specifically, milk from cows, goats, and sheep. The minimum percentages of each type are 50%, 30%, and 10%, respectively, with the remaining 10% up to the cheese maker. The cow milk is said to provide Iberico with its acidity and flavor, the goat milk the white color and tartness, and the sheep milk the buttery consistency and richness. Iberico is made in the Valladolid province, located in central Spain. Aside from being prized as a nice snack, the cheese is also often grated or grilled. Obviously, taste depends on the individual consumer, but folks often describe Iberico's texture as being "rich and buttery," and its flavor as "nutty and fruity." This hard cheese is often compared to another Spanish favorite, manchego cheese, which you can read about in my August 29, 2015 post. The Iberico I tried was the El Pastor brand, imported by the Schuman Cheese company. El Pastor also markets a wine soaked goat cheese, manchego, and regular goat cheese. And there are three subtypes of Iberico--the 3 month aged, the 6 month aged (which I had), and the 12 month aged.
Grana Padano is also a hard cheese, and is also from one specific area, in this case the Padania region of Italy, located in the Po Valley of Northern Italy. The "grana" part of the name comes from the Italian word for "grainy," which describes the cheese's texture. Grana Padano is one of the world's oldest hard cheeses, dating back 900 years. The Cistercian monks of the Chiaravalle Abbey were the developers, and the cheese has been famous for at least 500 years, valued for both its taste and ability to resist spoilage over long periods of time. Unlike Iberico, Grana Padano is made only from cow's milk. There are three subtypes, once again based on how long its been aged.
Grana Padano: aged 9-16 months, known for its rice-sized granules, and relatively sticky texture.
Grana Padano Oltre: aged 16-20 months, with a more grainy and crumbly texture.
Grana Padano Riserva: aged over 20 months, very grainy and crumbly, fuller flavored.
And here's what I thought of these cheeses:
El Pastor Queso Iberico, aged 6 months: White color, and hard texture. Mild and sweetish flavor. Very good.
Ambriola Grana Padano: Also has a whitish hue, and hard texture. Flavor reminiscent of its "sister cheese" Parmesan. Some pleasant sour sharpness to it. Also very good.
If you want to know more about the Ambriola cheese company, there's a 18 minute video on the company website. (Even I wasn't obsessive enough to watch this, but it's there if you want.) Also, all the dairy farming in the Padania region had an unexpected, and to my mind, a wonderful result. Gianantonio Locatelli and some of his fellow farmers decided to do something productive with all the copious manure that their cows make. Therefore, they opened the Museo Della Merde in the village of Castelbosco. In English, this translates to the Shit Museum. Some of the exhibits include some fossilized feces (coprolites), art inspired by ordure, and dung beetles. The Museum also promotes eco-friendly recycling of manure. Aside from fertilizer, they also developed a kind of ceramic which is made from a mix of cow excrement and clay, which they use to make tiles, plates, mugs, and bowls. (And you're probably wondering--is this sanitary?! Reportedly the ceramic is fired at unusually high temperatures, to kill off the bacteria from the dung.) So add this to the sights to see on your trip to Italy! If you're also curious, there's at least one other museum dedicated to this topic, at the Isle of Wight's Poo Museum at its zoo. And in Delhi, India, visitors can tour the International Museum of Toilets. Finally, I was further amused to read that in 2016 the Consortium of Cheese sued the makers of the American soap opera "The Bold and the Beautiful," for disparaging Grana Padano as a "poor man's Parmesan" in an episode. I wasn't able to find out the results of this no doubt landmark legal case. Apropos of nothing, if anyone from the Consortium is reading this, you'll note that I gave Grana Padano a very positive review, and I think it would benefit the tables of people from any socioeconomic position.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)