The Snow Creature Reviews
Here, in 'The Snow Creature', we have at several different times and places in the film the EXACT SAME shots of the yeti lurching forward and retreating. There is nothing even remotely approaching the buildup of suspense, or plot credibility. Yes, lesser budgets meant that W. Lee had to work with far lesser talent, both in terms of cast and crew, than his legendary, award-winning sibling. Also, depending on scripts from his son was definitely a step down from the likes of I.A.L. Diamond, Billy's long-time very gifted collaborator. Yet other no-budget directors did great work--there is no credible excuse. And if you're interested, the film is a fun WTF watch--just don't have any preconceptions of filmic brilliance, or even credibility, from this portion of the Wilder family. Billy was estranged from his older brother and considered him 'a dull son of a bitch'. If any of the films I have seen of W. Lee are to be considered 'Exhibit A', then Billy was absolutely and sadly correct in this assertion.
"The whole thing sounds fantastic."-Peter Wells (Leslie Denison)
Could you blast Bigfoot or a Yeti who just wants to get back home to his family?
The Snow Creature borrows story elements from King Kong. A beast is captured, taken to the city, escapes and causes mayhem, blah blah blah, you get the idea. The plot isn't the only thing Wilder decided to recycle. There is a few seconds of footage that is used and reused to the point of becoming a joke. It's a creepy shot of the Yeti appearing out of the darkness. Its features are barely lit and heavily contrasted against the negative space behind him. The shot is then reversed and the Yeti returns into the darkness. Sometimes we'll see this same footage repeated within an interval of just a few seconds. Once or twice would have been fine in separate scenes, but 20+ times is ridiculous. Obviously, this was the scariest image they had to work with and needed to use it to build suspense in key moments. It's either lazy filmmaking or Wilder exceeded his budget and couldn't get the shots needed to complete these scenes.
In all, it was an okay B-movie with one cool but annoyingly repetitive Yeti shot. I only wish I could watch it in a better resolution.
An expedition of two americans, one racist botanist and one alcoholic (The doctor brings 12 bottles of scotch for personal use on a 7 day course) and 10 native sherpas set out to collect moss on a himalayan mountain.
Things were diffrent in 1954, the two americans comment on the sherpas in the line of animals. "The're like human mules" is one example.
The story changes however when the english speaking sherpa gets his wife abducted by a furry big Yeti-like guy and takes control of the group and changes the project to a Yeti-hunt.
The Americans want nothing to do with it and tries to rebel and go back to sample plants and it's not until they make out the prosper of the idea to actually catch one alive and bring it back to the states as they make themselves useful in the hunt.
They find the Yeti and without any remorse they kill the Yetis female compaion and their Yeti child. Then they drug the Yeti and bring him to Los Angeles where he of course gets free and brings havoc to the city.
Biological horrordrama mostly (even the ones from the 50's) brings the story to a logical point in which it reflects over mankind and its behavoiur to nature, not in this one really. Yetis are evil and should just be killed or possible put in a Zoo. A sad racist movie, but still interesting.