That nutshell encapsulation won't seem particularly odd to film fanatics for whom the dregs of underground and exploitation films of the 60s and 70s bring rapture. In some respects, Seeds of Evil suffered from a waffling of intentions and lack of vision. It isn’t bizarre, intelligent or offbeat enough to appeal to an arthouse crowd (the kind that embraced Carnival of Souls and Night of the Living Dead, for example) nor is it sexy, gory, or wild enough to play as pure exploitation.

It was then, and remains, rather dull, a curio unimproved by sober reassessment, but teetering on camp possibilities. Talky, overlong, slow-moving, and inexplicable, it might just be the kind of film Andy Warhol would have liked. The mythological pretensions and Persephone parallels seem a bit more explicit this time out, but maybe that's because we’re trying to find something deeper here thirty years later.

So what to make of it then? It would be easy to re-hash the “awfuls” of the film, but I’m inclined to champion the spirit of Subversive Cinema’s resurrection, a desire to celebrate films that might otherwise end up buried in the trash heap, the former victims of ugly VHS/Beta transfers long vanished from the shelves of 1980s mom and pop video joints or once-upon-a-time late night TV broadcasts.

It’s astonishing the care that Subversive has put into presenting the film. The print is the best I’ve ever seen, the letterbox presentation a plus, and the running time is now 86 minutes, about five minutes longer than the Seeds of Evil cut. And though director Kay repeatedly admits the film is too slow, over-written, and “this is not the movie I’d make today,” I think it’s important that we finally have The Gardener as it was intended to be seen back in 1974. Joe fans won't want to pass up the opportunity to own it.

None of the “extra” footage involves Joe, unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately for him. His performance here is a convenient target for those who persist in the belief that he was never much of an actor anyway. Combine it with his deadpan delivery in Frankenstein and Dracula and the criticism nearly sticks for those whose only exposure to him is in the horror genre. Of course, Morrissey was able to use Joe’s delivery to great comic effect in the Italian films, something I admit not comprehending when I first saw them as a teenager.

Norm Hill, in his casual and friendly interview/conversation with Joe throughout the film’s full running time, asks the actor what director Kay spoke to him about in terms of developing the character and Joe remembers little of any specific direction. For his part, on Kay’s commentary track, the director admits he didn’t really direct Joe, that he didn’t want to change him, and so basically left him to his own devices. Kay says that Joe was open to anything, and Joe says so, too, a comment that contradicts issues about Joe’s reluctance to do nudity brought up by Katherine Houghton elsewhere, but then it’s also clear that Kay’s lack of direction is largely to blame for the end result.

Kay describes Joe as “not much of an actor, but “fairly good-looking,” comments that sound harsher on their own than is evident from his tone. Still, in what adds a remarkable dimension to my own take on Joe’s acting, and what may strike most others as simply the justification of a fan, I’m newly appreciative of the serendipity of his approach. I joked in the Little Joe book that the performance makes sense when you consider his character turns into a tree. Without any assistance from his director, Joe, on his first scripted film playing an otherwordly character completely outside of himself, seems to have instinctually played it “right.”

Perhaps Joe himself sums it up best on the commentary track: “When I first saw the movie, I thought that I was real wooden during anytime I spoke, so it was kind of weird.” And then, “But I walked through the garden kind of nice. Just walking along, doh-dee-doh-dee-doh.”

Feature Length Commentary with Jim Kay – Director Kay goes solo talking about the film and its cast, finding himself good-naturedly criticizing his single feature credit for being too slow and over-written.

Planting the Seeds of Evil – An enjoyable 36-minute featurette with contemporary interviews with Joe, Katherine Houghton, and director Kay.  Highlights include: Kay trying to explain how the film is a dream within a dream, faulting his loss of creativity to the more practical role as a fledgling director needing to finish on budget, and avoiding the sexual aspects of the story in his “blue-nose, Jesuit way”; Joe talking about how the role came to him, then differing with Ms. Houghton on his willingness to do nudity; and Katherine Houghton making a case for the original script and its intelligent, mythological aspects vs. the finished film and its thematic sidetracking involving “the homoerotic” and “exploiting Joe’s sexuality.” Story, financing, casting, location, relationships, shooting the ending and the film’s aftermath are all discussed, with Mr. Kay admitting “no regrets” and Ms. Houghton acknowledging it as “a disappointment,” but a well-intentioned one.

Million Dollar Dream – A 29-minute video documentary from 1980 made by producer Chalmer Kirkbride, Jr., as his Master’s Thesis in Public Relations at American University in Washington, D.C. Subtitled “The Distribution of Low Budget Films or The Gardener’s Seeds of Evil Killed My Million Dollar Dream,” it’s a cheeky, half-hearted attempt to consider the trappings of producing and distributing a low budget film, interviewing his father (one of the film’s money men, who was sure he would make a sizable return quickly), Jack Valenti (on MPAA ratings issues involving the sickle murder), Bob Rehme (President of Avco-Embassy), and a movie critic who has to be seen to be believed. We do, however, learn that The Gardener cost $800,000 to make and “recovered $50,000.”

Talent Bios – Scroll through text versions.

Stills and Poster Gallery – an animated montage.

Trailers to other Subversive Cinema titles.

*The film’s release date has been variously reported because of the spotty distribution. As well, Joe says he made the film in 1970. The length of his hair, which is even longer than it was in Heat (1972), shot in the summer of 1971, indicates otherwise. He mentions that he came back from this film and went directly to Europe to do the Frankenstein and Dracula films, which began shooting in March of 1973. I believe the film was shot in 1972.

--Michael Ferguson