Movie review - "The Man Who Loved Women" (1977) ***

When Aussies/Poms/Yanks think of French studs they normally imagine smooth-talking Charles Boyer types, dinner jackets, strong knowledge of wine and good dancing. The French take another view - studs in their films look world weary, as if they smoke a pack of cigarettes a day and drink wine for breakfast, look very tragic and well-read, as if they saw someone killed in Marseilles once and are on first name terms with several prostitutes. 50 year old Charles Dennard is the man who can't help himself when it comes to women - the first encounter we see him in engaged in borders on stalking (actually it is stalking - he uses deception to get a woman's phone number) but his success rate is fairly high.

This goes along briskly enough with that seemingly effortless Truffaut style, where the charm gradually creeps up on you. Truffaut seems a little uneasy at the criticism a sympathetic film about a womaniser would receive, so there is a scene after Dennard writes his memoirs where people at a publishing house sit around and chat about his character - is he good/bad, is he playing for sympathy (some pre-emptive criticisms - Woody Allen and David Williamson use the same technique). I wish the role of Brigitte Fossey, who is charming as Dennard's editor, were a bit bigger, she doesn't come in until the last 15-20 minutes. I really enjoyed the subplot about his crazy married girlfriend - I kept expecting her to be the one who killed him, but it doesn't happen (hey, she even takes part in a threesome). It is a bit pat in that the Reason For His Behaviour is Leslie Caron (though to be fair the film doesn't explicity say this).

Book review - "Clark Gable" by Warren Harris

Everyone seems to like Clark Gable, movie star. Even those who didn't think he could act (which I think he could, he learned his trade on stage, its just he was encouraged to stay within his star persona and was burnt when stepping outside it, eg Parnell) recognise he had potent charisma. 

A real man's man, he fitted in perfectly in the macho 30s (depression era toughness) after the cashed up metrosexuality of the 1920s. While I think he would have fitted in at any studio (its easy to imagine him particularly at Warnes), he blossomed at MGM - that studio had few potent male stars when he came along but an abundance of female talent, enabling him to come up the ranks with protection (he soon outsripped them). MGM also knew how to handle talent - at least while Leo B Mayer was there. He suited being the King of Hollywood - you can imagine if there'd been some Sept 11-type tribute when he was around, he would have been the most appropriate figurehead. (Occasionally this happens - Harrison Ford had it for a while, maybe Clint Eastwood, John Wayne, Tom Hanks: real blue chip stars).

Gable the person doesn't seem to be as admirable. He gets our sympathy at first - dead mother, mostly absent affectionless father, growing up a bit wild. Once he decided to become an actor he persued it with determination - he fairly whored himself around and was very much a gigolo, marrying two elder women mostly for what they could do for him, paying for his appearance to change. He isn't very likeable around this stage - a classic gold digger. 

Harris mentions the rumour that Gable got George Cukor fired from GWTW because he knew Gable once serviced William Haines - I don't think Gable had enough pull to get Cukor fired (he may have sulked enough to make the decision easy for Cukor), but I believe the servicing rumour, on this evidence Gable was capable of it.

Harris argues Gable's personality didn't even really become fixed until he was told what to do by Howard Strickling - hunt, fish, etc - but he liked that role he had to play, and played it for the rest of his life. His affection for Carole Lombard seems to have been genuine (he was unfaithful to her but never seriously which in Hollywood is pretty good; when she says he wasn't a great lay, Harris is careful to point out it wasn't a dig at the size of his equipment, but just his poor technique - after not having to try for so long, I guess he didn't pick up many new tricks). 

He had decent war service (trained as a gunner he ended up making films, like most Hollywood types - but he actually went on missions, he could have been killed). He was one of those alcoholics people seem loathe to call alcoholics, but honestly reading this it seems no doubt - drinking like a fish his whole life - so when people say The Misfits killed him, I think it just brought forward the inevitable maybe a few months. 

His standing became shakier after WW2 - MGM's handling of him became less sure, though they tried; he was older, less romantic, though the industry was geared for major stars (he turned down Home from the Hill towards the end of his life and was considering Diamond Head when he died, both big hits, so I think he would have remained a star through the 60s - Spencer Tracey did). His last marriage seems to have been very happy.

This is a decent bio, which covers the main affairs (Jean Harlow and Grace Kelly yes, Lana Turner no - very surprising - maybe he was too nice a guy), his illegitimate daughter with Loretta Young; no footnotes, though, which is annoying. I was surprised what made money - Homecoming did, Command Decision and Across the Missouri didn't. Not the definitive work but still pretty good.

Play review - "The Three Sisters" by Chekov

I've finally figured it out with me and Chekov plays - read them twice. That way, I can get over all those Russian names and confusion about who is who and what they do and how they are related, and the slight plots (the big reason I think why Chekov's never been as popular as Shakespeare) and visions of actresses standing in drawing rooms with 1900s Russian outfits and concentrate on the wonderful characters, insights into the human condition, perennial questions about where we are and what we are doing. Some of it is so beautiful - funny/sad (more sad - I know Chekov thought he was writing comedies but I don't think so). Many memorable characters: irritating smug mum Natasha, last chance Masha, the dopey school teacher who gives people his boring self published books as a present, the under-achieveing brother. Dont' let bad student presentations put you off (he said to himself).

Movie review - "Mean Girls" (2002) ****1/2

Not just a brilliant teen film, but a brilliant film full stop - clever idea (home schooled girl arrives from Africa to an American high school), vivacious characters, top script, bright handling. Lindsay Lohan is perfect in the lead - it's a bit worrying for her career that she wanted to play the Rachel McAdams part (Lohan-star, don't you know what's good for you?). The three bitch girls are all perfectly cast, too - Lucy Chabert is a comic genius, McAdam brilliant and so is the other girl; everyone else is good - McAdams' "cool" mom, the stressed headmaster, the fat girl who wants to be cool, the Indian rapper, Lohan's friend (it took some time but the gay best friend is now established in teen land). The love interest is a bit bland but I guess that comes with the territory. Continually inventive, a genuinely happy ending, and as an extra cherry on top the final credits uses a kick arse version of 'Dancing with Myself''. Listening to the audio commentary, the film hasn't come out yet but the writer and director know they've done a great job - they have.

Play review – “Cyrano de Bergerac” by Edmond Rostand

Why isn’t this play revived more in English-speaking Western countries? It’s got name recognition, a terrific story, a wonderful lead part – better this than another Shakespeare. Maybe it’s too expensive to produce. I was surprised reading it how faithful the film Roxanne was to it (at least up until the "writing lots of letters" moment) – the “making lots of jokes about the nose” scene is straight from the play, as is the wooing scene and Cyrano mistakenly thinking Roxanne likes him for a time. Some things Roxanne was superior, to be honest – Roxanne in the play is a bit shallow and overly keen on male beauty (Daryl Hannah was nicer), and Christian in this play is a real prick (when he first meets Cyrano he teases him). However, this play has a stronger ending – plenty of powerful dramatic scenes as Roxanne arrives at the battle field, Christian carks it, Roxanne goes into a convent, years pass, she finds out the truth… oh, its powerful, tragic stuff. But there is humour, too – plus the threat of a nasty person who wants to marry Roxanne.

Movie review – “Alice Adams” (1935) ***

Famous for two things: Katherine Hepburn’s performance and the climactic scene where Hepburn invites Fred MacMurray over to her house and pretends to be posh but it all goes horribly wrong. The scene is funny, but not that funny (I felt a similar way about the final scene in Woman of the Year).
The film is based on a novel by Booth Tarkington who also wrote The Magnificent Ambersons, and similarly explores the importance of class, money and position in small town America. Alice is not a bad person but watching her blab away – I’ve known women like this – it’s like watching a train wreck. Very good acting.
I didn’t quite believe MacMurray would go for her – yes, his actual fiancée is a snob but it’s like she needed a pat the dog scene or something.
The ending seems to set up for a believable unhappy moment: brother going to gaol for embezzling, Alice dumped – then goes Hollywood.
The film obviously influenced the Australian Mr Chedworth Steps Out, as it features many of the same elements: hopeless father who is loyal to a kindly long-term employer, ambitious nagging mother (though in mum’s defence – she can’t work, and dad is hopeless), loving daughter, wastrel son who embezzles money. Snobs.

Movie review – “Music and Lyrics” (2007) **1/2

Enjoyable, due mostly to the charm of its stars. The film feels like a first draft rushed into production – it has a lazy meeting and set up, low stakes, and introduces heaps of promising characters and does nothing with them (why not use Hugh Grant’s former songwriting partner? Or someone else from his old band? Why don’t we see Battle of the Has Beens – it would be hilarious? Why not use Campbell Scott more? Or give Kirsten Johnson and Brad Garrett something more to do? Why not use the movie made from the book?) The role of the Britney-like singer who wants Grant to write for her is a gift role (Anna Farris did wonderfully in a similar part in Just Friends) – but the actor they cast here is blank, flat and doesn’t do anything with it. Hugh Grant’s character is a bit sketchy, they don’t seem to know whether to go in a Two Weeks Notice direction or Four Weddings (what it really needed was a bit of American Dreamz/Bridget Jones Diary). OK, let’s walk on the sunny side: the stars are likeable, Drew Barrymore is well costumed, the songs are well song (the ditty that Grant’s bang sing at the beginning is irritatingly catchy – I’m still humming it now), the “meaty” drama stuff about struggling with your art surprisingly effective (presumably the screenwriter related to a lot of stuff eg writing something “commercial”, the pressures of collaboration, using your life in your art), the climax at Madison Square Garden really captures the excitement of those concerts.

Play review – “The Lion in Winter” by James Goldman

Crackerjack play about Christmas at the house of Henry II – it was not very successful in its original run despite theatre draws Robert Preston and Rosemary Harris in the lead, but was turned into a film which did well and has run ever since. I can’t believe this didn’t do better on Broadway – maybe Americans were uncomfortable with an American view of history (the language is very contemporary, though it seems highly appropriate). It’s a fascinating period of time, if Henry II isn’t that well known outside of England (though he clashed with Becket), his sons, Richard and John were, because of Robin Hood. Goldman writes in his introduction he’s not sure why the play has proved so popular – he guesses it’s a family play (sons squabbling over succession of the family business, in this case England and bits of France); it also has the historical stuff, plenty of great lines and twists and turns (everyone betrays everyone else – just when you think Henry’s down he comes back with a win), subtext of family. Perhaps a bit too cruel and harsh at times – this gives scope to the directors and cast. Wonderful.

Book review – “In and Out of Character” by Basil Rathbone

The British acting generation who fought WWI were an odd one – Ronald Colman, Herbert Marshall, and Rathbone. Old school actors, who were devoted to empire, fought for it in the trenches, were fond of flowery prose. Rathbone was born in Sth Africa, dad was involved in the Jameson Raid, encouraging him to get his family out of the country, education at a public school (which he picked for sports – Rathbone was a jock), war service which involved Rathbone actually killing people, a successful stage career which took him to Hollywood and famous (well paid) villainy, then Sherlock Holmes, typecasting, and back to stage, then TV work.

Rathbone writes in a flowery style, not untypical of his generation, going off on all sort of tangents: he devotes one line to his son from a first marriage, a few paragraphs to Errol Flynn, around six pages to one of his dogs, a chapter to an episode involving a married couple. Rathbone is sort of intelligent but a bit dopey – well read, but a bit pompous, he slags off television (which he surprisingly says he made some money writing for – had no idea), is clearly more devoted to the stage than film (there is depressingly little on the film work and almost nothing on the tremendous parties he and his wife threw in Hollywood, but we get pages on The Heiress and JB; this was written in 1962 so no mention of his AIP films).

I think it was a mistake for Rathbone to leave the Holmes series, at least financially – he did, too, later on, I think, unsuccessfully trying to revive the role on stage. Worth a read if you are a Rathbone fan, but you always feel as though you need to read a biography to follow up.

Movie review – “Night of Fear” (1972) **1/2

A real curio from the early days of the Aussie revival: a proposed pilot for a tv series which runs at a TV hour, features no dialogue, and is a chase horror film – a killer (Norman Yemm!) living in the bush with rats who chases women who pass through: Briony Behets in a pre credit sequence (she was also terrorised in The Long Weekend) and Carla Hoogeveen.
Hoogeveen is very sexy in that 70s Australian film way, totally objectified, showing lots of leg and cleavage, and she does well enough in a part that mostly consists of her being chased. Yemm gets to act insane, there is a yucky dream sequence where Hoogeveen is tied up naked while Yemm comes into the room naked with a skull over his privates – and a genuinely shocking scene where Hoogeveen is eaten by rats.
Director Terry Bourke sounds from the commentary to have been a little bundle of energy, a current affairs reported turned filmmaker whose ability to do deals was greater than his filmmaking ability. And from all accounts most of his films were crap, but this film is surprisingly good – he deserves some points for making a film without dialogue, which does have effective moments and a relentless feeling of terror, thirty years before Wolf Creek.

Book review – “The Lost One: The Life of Peter Lorre” by Stephen Youngkin

Peter Lorre was a total original – bug eyed, pudgy cheeks, weird speaking voice, he illuminated scores of films, from being leads to support actors. He famously was forever dissatisfied with the roles he wanted to play – many actors who become stars are, but Lorre earned his chops on the stage in the 20s before being shanghaied into horror and thrillers – but films did give him a chance to show his wares: he recovered from one of many dips in his career playing the Japanese hero Mr Moto for instance, and he played comic as often if not more than horror as well as films like Crime and Punishment.

I think Lorre’s real beef was he never played romantic leads – but even then there were exceptions eg The Mask of Dimitrious. Lorre did like to complain – when under contract to Warners in the 40s he made lots of good movies, was well paid and got to hang out with mates like Bogarts, but he still liked to complain – but when given his freedom in the late 40s his career really suffered.

It is confusing in one respect that people didn’t use Lorre more – he was charismatic, a scene stealer. I thought he would have been a natural for the lead in a TV show, maybe a detective. He could have livened up countless films, even in small parts – it wasn’t as though he was choosy. Maybe directors were threatened by his scene stealing or his drug addiction (though he seems to have always been professional). At least he died while still in demand, albeit as an AIP star. Maybe he should have made more horror films – he would have kept in leads, that way, at least.

Youngkin’s book is written with tremendous enthusiasm, love and affection – it really is the definitive work, exhaustive in its research, devoting large slabs to Lorre’s acting talent, plus a chapter on his relationship with Brecht (they worked together in the 20s and almost together several times in the late 40s when Brecht came to Hollywood – a great missed chance), a chapter on making of The Lost One, a post WW2 German film Lorre starred in and directed (a fascinating account). It also discusses his drug problem and the issues of German emigrants, and much much more.

I got a real understanding of Lorre – he seems to be forever un- satisfied, one of those actors who are talented, charming and loved but are a bit hopeless, always living beyond their means, getting in a tight spot, very child like although being highly intelligent. He had a wonderful career and this book does him justice.

Movie review – “M” (1931) ****

What a good movie! A classic that really holds up and deserves its reputation. Its about a child killer terrorising a city – but the real gimmick is the investigation is mostly done by the underworld, upset the investigating are disrupting their business. Peter Lorre is wonderful as the killer – he actually doesn’t get that much screen time, only seen sporadically at first, but comes in about an hour in as he’s spotted and chased (a scene that goes on a bit too long) – and at the end he greats a great moment when he’s on trial. Few actors could combine menace and sympathy like Lorre – you know he should be captured but you feel sorry for him at the same time. Considering it was 1931 the smoothness of shot composition, documentary like realism (though the criminals union is a bit “fiction”), and skill are remarkable. The acting is extremely good, too, not a dud performance – no love subplot, great faces. Note how the leader of the criminals is a classic Nazi type, all close cropped bald head and ferociousness. The film also gives you something to mull over, too, about capital punishment.

Movie review – “Drag Strip Girl” (1957) **

Never as much fun as the title and central premise promise: a thrill seeking girl comes between two drag racing buddies, one rich, one poor, climaxing in a drag race, with a hit and run investigation thrown in. The cars are sort of souped up jalopies, not that sexy looking but there is some decent racing footage.

It’s OK late 50s JD AIP exploitation – I couldn’t help wish it was made by New World in the 70s though, when maybe there would be a bit more sex and nudity to liven it up.

Fay Spain does little as the wild girl – she turns good very quickly, though John Ashley is fine as the bad rich kid. Steve Terrell is the good poor kid is a bit of a charisma by-pass The girl takes part in the drag race at the end – Roger Corman wasn’t the only director who did exploitation feminism. Frank Gorshin plays a support role – he does a sort of beat poet song number about drag strip girls which were so popular in 50s exploitation.

Book review – “The Prisoner of Zenda” by Anthony Hope

Marvellous adventure tale which still holds up well just like King Solomon’s Mines, primarily because of its central idea (man impersonates king), plus the creation of Ruritania, some clever plotting, galaxy of support characters (especially the great villain Rupert of Hentzau, beautiful Flavia and the devoted Sapt), brisk pace, dash of romance and royalty. Re-reading it I was surprised that Rupert doesn’t appear til halfway through (though he makes up for lost time); also it would be better to have one attack on the castle instead of two and have Rupert duel Randolf at the end (an error the excellent 1937 film version rectified). Still, glorious romantic fun.

Play review - "Beyond the Horizon" by Eugene O'Neill

O'Neill won his first Pulitzer with this effort. Not as deep as his later masterpieces, but still highly readable. I think this along with Anna Christie show O'Neill's craftmanship at full strength: there's a solid beginning, middle and end, a strong basic situation (love triangle between two brothers and a girl), plenty of melodrama and story. Not that it's predictable or stock - you keep wondering how it's going to turn out. You know it's a bad decision for the bookish brother to decide to stay - but you don't know just how bad it's going to be. I related to that character - someone who was never going to make a go of farming, not a bad person just not cut out for a tough life (does O'Neill ever say anything nice about farming?). You wonder if the farm brother is going to make a go of it at sea - well, he does and he doesn't, which is O'Neill all over. Not as expressionistic as his later works, but still powerful - especially effective are the characters of Ruth, the wife who changes her mind about who she loves, her bitch of a mother, never happy about anything, and the boys' mother, never doing the right thing by her sons.

Movie review - JL#4 - "The Geisha Boy" (1958) **1/2

Chaplin's disease hits most comedians sooner or later, and it walloped Lewis hard. This film jumps on the late 50s fascinated-with-Japan craze (Teahouse of the August Moon, Bridge on the River Kwai, Sayoonara) and has Jerry play a magician who heads off to the orient because he can't get gig stateside.

A lot of this is very funny: Jerry's shenanigans with his pet rabbit (he was obviously still weaning himself off Dean Martin at this stage, though by now the sidekick was reduced to being a rabbit), Jerry performing on the front lines of Korea (this would have made a film in itself), Jerry making life miserable for a film star (Marie MacDonald - who really could have been so much better, egomaniacal movie stars are easy roles to play but she misses it), Sessue Hayakawa spoofing(slightly overlong) his River Kwai role, Jerry at a baseball game.

Unfortunately, far too much of the film is spent on the relationship between Jerry and a cute Japanese orphan whom only Jerry can make smile (Chaplin's disease!) This goes on and on and is like "come on, get over it" - one wishes more time was spent on making fun of the film star or playing the front lines. Suzanne Pleshette is cute in her first film; they seem to be setting her up as a love interest but then she just sort of becomes a friend to Jerry - there is an awful moment at the end where she says she's going to forget to be liberated and learn to treat men like Japanese girls do.

Director Frank Tashlin shows some of his usual bright gags, colours and satire (Bob Hope speaking Japanese on TV, a subtitles battle) - plus a fondness for female legs: we see not only MacDonald's but Nobu McCarthy's (who is a potential love interest, too, but never becomes one - it was as though they were keen to keep Lewis' character sexless).

Play review – “The Hairy Ape” by Eugene O’Neill

One of O’Neill’s most memorable creations: Yank the stoker who is happy with his lot, shovelling coal and being an ape. His life is affected by a visit from a bored rich girl. I’d read synopsis of this before and thought “oh the girl is going to seduce him or something and ruin his life” and it seems for a while that this is going to happen – but once the girl sees Yank we never see her again, the play deals with the effect that one visit has on Yank, his world violated – he visits park avenue, winds up in gaol, then a Wobblies meeting, in a zoo. I couldn’t spot the end – bonding with a gorilla… and the gorilla kills him. How would you show it on stage? (Very expressionistic play). Lots of monologues, railing at capitalism, socialists, waterfront bars, choice dialogue, etc.

Movie review – “Detective Story” (1951) ***

A forerunner to NYPD Blue and Hill Street Blues – a more realistic than usual look at life in a New York precinct, a day in the life story, with officers having to deal with various nutcases, druggies and more serious cases: there’s an eccentric shoplifter (Lee Grant), a drugged pair of crims (one played by later Dr No Joseph Wiseman), an embezzler, and most of all an abortionist, who particularly raises the ire of tough cop Kirk Douglas.

One of the big pluses of the film is many of the actors are unfamiliar – they seem like real people, not Hollywood types, even the cops (apart from the two leads the big exception is William Bendix but he fits right in). Watching Douglas at times I couldn’t help wish that a Dennis Franz type was cast instead, maybe someone a bit more obviously battered about – but presumably they needed a star, and Douglas’ intensity works very well. (Who else could they have cast? Jimmy Cagney and Edward G Robinson would be good – maybe an older star, Bogie, Tracey, even Clark Gable, someone who’s been around the block. Charlton Heston was apparently up for it – I can imagine exactly what his performance would have been like, all tormented suffering, I don’t think we missed much. Apparently Alan Ladd was hurt he missed out but I think the nuances were beyond him, and I like Alan Ladd.)

Eleanor Parker is pretty and accomplished – she was a good actor, Parker, maybe more of an actor than a star – as his wife; note the scene they have in the cab together, look at her eyes responding – that’s good acting. The abortion subplot gives it power, but to be honest is a bit yucky. The sweet couple subplot get progressively more irritating as the film goes on – I was on their side at first, too, but by the end they get on nerves (it’s also a bit too obvious the embezzler is only pretending to fall in love with the sweet girl because she’s going to get him out of a jam).

Movie review – “Tudawali” (1988) ***

It’s not fashionable to say so, but I think Ken G Hall was a better all-round filmmaker than Charles Chauvel (he had a better scriptwriter in Frank Harvey) – but Chauvel was better at spotting stars. Hall preferred to use stars already established: Bert Bailey, Cecil Kellaway, John Longden, George Wallace; he could claim Peter Finch and definitely Shirley Ann Richards, Jocelyn Howarth. But I think Chauvel pips him, despite less films: Errol Flynn, Chips Rafferty, Michael Pate, and Robert Tudawali.
For Tudawali, despite his tragically short life and career, was a gold-plated star, charisma fairly dripping from every pore, and in a great role. Doesn’t look much like Ernie Dingo, who has a more contemporary “feel” – the better choice would have been Gulpilil, who like Tudawali really gives the impression of timelessness, someone who stepped straight out of the desert – but Dingo is a highly charismatic, talented actor, who is excellent in the role.

The script jumps forward and back in time, starting with the accident that eventually killed him, going back to his casting in Jedda. It focuses on his friendship with a (fictional?) white journo, a character who is a little too baby boomer (making docos about aboriginal land rights that talk about white imperialism, unhappy marriage, worried about selling out by working in television, he really cares about Tudawali – I’m sorry, but it’s hard to care if he’s fictional). (It’s also a little irritating the white person who isn’t mean to Tudawail in a Sydney pub is a Greek – right on).

A stronger relationship is the one between Tudawali and Charles Tingwell, who plays a concerned doctor. Tudawali’s wife unfortunately falls into the “why are you never home” category of nagging wives commonly found in biopics.

But Tudawali’s story is one that should be told – moving, sad, frustrating, a bit of showbiz, politics. Although he died young he did take part in an important battle for aboriginal rights (ever-reliable slimebag Michael Carmen makes a good slimebag again).

Movie review – “Bed and Board” (1970) **1/2

There is a sort of masochistic school among some auteurs when illuminating their lives to have their re-created selves be these “oh I’m such a bad person, I have affairs and my wife she’s so perfect and isn’t life sad”. The first half of this involves newly married life between Antoine and his new wife, and it ambles along charmingly enough, with little plot (Antoine goes job hunting again and gets another wacky job – parking model boats), set in a neo family of an apartment block with some colourful neighbours, and plenty of shots of Claudette Jane’s legs. It gets more serious in the second half, when the wife has a baby (powerful scene where she says she doesn’t want him to stay with her the night after she’s given birth), and Antoine has an affair with a Japanese lady (another powerful scene when the wife finds out – I didn’t think that sort of thing bothered the French?). Antoine acts like such a prick (he even goes back to prostitutes again) that even considerable charm of Jean-Pierre Leaud starts to fade. I can’t help wish Truffaut had based the character a bit more on himself – at least he’d be doing something interesting like making films or being a critic instead of moping around like a loser (he does start to write a novel).

Movie review – “Rumour Has It” (2006) **

Comedy with some bright moments and a clever idea but it never seems to get going. I think the problems are structural – maybe it should have been a play. Jennifer Aniston worries that her mother might have been the Katherine Ross character in The Graduate, and when you see Shirley MacLaine is cast as the inspiration for Mrs Robinson you think “this is going to be great”. 

It starts brightly, with Aniston finding out the family history at a wedding, with strong support performances from Mark Ruffalo (her fiancée), Mena Survini (her blonde bimbo sister), Kathy Bates (a lush-y Pasadena type) and of course MacLaine. 

It starts to go a bit downhill when Aniston (in pretty good form actually) then tracks down Dustin Hoffman, who is Kevin Costner (who hasn’t aged that well but conversely is ten years too young for the role – it needed Robert Redford or Dustin Hoffman or someone). Once we find out he’s not dad, it becomes a case of their romance, which isn’t terribly involving. 

They don’t really use The Graduate stuff – if they were, it would be about Aniston, Costner and MacLaine – and they would have the Katherine Ross character still alive, and also deal more with Aniston’s father. Instead they concentrate on Aniston wondering why she feels as though she can’t fit in to her family and why she can’t commit to Ruffalo, which is a fine sub text thing or B plot but not enough for a film. So the last 15 minutes of so it’s like “alright, who cares?” Rob Reiner used to be so strong on story but he keeps making errors lately – like for Alex and Emma and this.

Movie review – “Singles” (1992) ***

A kind of fore-runner to Friends which has a lot going for it: bright Cameron Crowe dialogue, Seattle setting, music (accidentally got the grunge soundtrack stuff), likeable cast (why didn’t Campbell Scott and Bridget Fonda become bigger stars? What happened to the girl who plays Debbie? She was really good. Matt Dillon established his character actor credentials here – he still went for “star” parts for the next decade. Kyra Sedgwick not quite right, though not helped by the yawn snore “I’m afraid of getting hurt” factor in her character.) Doesn’t quite get there, though. I couldn’t figure out why: Crowe once said he wanted to make a film like an album, maybe that was part of the problem. Also the incorporation of the stories doesn’t quite work – when the leads living in the apartment turn out to be friends it clunks when it should be warm and fuzzy. I remember watching Four Weddings and a Funeral and going “I think that’s what Crowe was trying for in Singles – that sense of friendship and community”.

Movie review – “John Tucker Must Die” (2006) **

One of the brightest concepts for a teen comedy in recent years – several girls decide to get revenge on the local stud who has wronged them – and it is packed with great ideas: the girls all belong to different social groups, the ugly duckling lead is motivated to become involved because her mother (Jenny McCarthy, another good idea) has a history of being taken advantage of by similar men, the stud’s slacker brother becomes an alternative love interest. And the first ten minutes are brilliant – fast paced, full of funny dialogue, bright situations, and you think this is going to be great.
But something goes wrong.

It’s partly the casting: the lead girl is great, and Jesse Metcalfe is fine as John Tucker, but the other three girls are wrong – Sophia Bush has at least a twinkle in the eye but isn’t quite right, the other two are just dead eyes (especially the one who plays the Reese Witherspoon type). They help weigh down the film.

Another problem is they don’t think of anything interesting to get back at Tucker – and the whole “get back at him but it only makes him more popular” was used in the superior Mean Girls (this even reuses the thing about switching his underwear). Maybe all the three girls should have been unpopular or unsocial in some ways themselves – so they could “grow” somehow. 

The film throws away two great subplots: the role of Tucker’s brother (gets wasted in a series of repetitive moments – why not have him motivated by revenge, too?) and the mother character (what resolution?).

Movie review – JL#9 - “The Ladies Man” (1961) ***

Maybe Jerry Lewis wasn’t a genius but he was incredibly talented and this work is really imaginative: OK very influenced by Frank Tashlin but its consistently impressive. It helps Lewis plays a slightly different character to his normal “spastic” – an energetic genius, closer to the Nutty Professor, who swears off women after the object of his affection dumps him for another, only to wind up at a boarding house for women in Hollywood.

Lewis was at the height of his fame and confidence here – Paramount gave him a healthy contract, artistic freedom and impressive budgets. The boarding house set is deservedly famous: you can see inside like a massive dolls house, and there is a dancing number where you see several levels, the inspiration for a scene in Absolute Beginners. It gets less inspired as the film goes on, feels as though it should end after the television program; there is an annoying scene where Lewis has to cheer up a dying swan aspiring actress whining about having a bad audition (get used to it, kid). But its bold, talented and funny, one of Lewis’ best films.

Play review – “Anna Christie” by Eugene O’Neill

Hookers, sailors, waterfront bars – its Eugene O’Neill of course, a very influential play whose situations are now stock. It holds up well, due to the drama and the wonderful writing, the flowing words, the way O’Neill phrases things: Chris the Swede going on about “dat ole devil sea”, hard arsed Anna, the luggish but also kind muscly Irishman. Its Anna and Chris then act two is Anna and the Irish guy.

Play review – “The Emperor Jones” by Eugene O’Neill

Starts with a thrilling scene. A white trader arrives at a village in the West Indies, he meets “Emperor Jones” – an African American ex-prisoner who has bluffed his way into being a ruler of the village, has fleeced the local population and is prepared to leave. But everyone has gone, fled to the hills and a local tribesman out for his head, and its time for Jones to make tracks. Other O’Neill plays amble along a bit more but here throws you right into it. The play never really builds on this high level of excitement but its always interesting: the second section is mainly Jones being lost in the jungle, going bonkers (visions, expressionism), and the final bit involves the local tribesman. It’s a fascinating subject: a black American ripping off black West Indians, discovering his dignity, a bit reminiscent of The Man Who Would Be King. Is it racist? Well, Jones is a kind of negative character but so is the white trader – but he does panic and go mad in the jungle, a “darkie” reverting to savage. This presumably explains why the play is rarely revived despite its action, excitement and great lead role. I would love for Spike Lee to have a go at remaking this (his Bamboozled touched on a similar sort of story: black man rises to success by using white man like methods of exploitation against black men, is brought undone by extremist black man.)

Movie review – Corman #11 - “Rock All Night” (1957) **

Odd low budget curio: the first half is typical of those 50s rock films where a bunch of artists perform at a venue amidst a loosely assembled storyline (and this case the acts include the Platters), then it turns into a rehash of The Desperate Hours – actually it was a rewrite of a 30 min TV episode, stretched out to feature length. It feels like it, despite brisk Corman handling this is minor Corman.

Charles Griffith wrote the script and his hands are all over the Mel Welles hipster character, probably the most memorable aspect of the film. There’s a cast of Roger Corman favourites including Jonathan Haze and Russell Johnson as gangsters, Abby Dalton, Dick Miller (the bar fly who becomes a hero – not terribly convincingly when he intimidates the gangsters with his personality).

Movie review - "That Lady from Peking" (1969) *

There's a special place in Australian film heaven for those films made here in the late 60s -all of them flops except They're a Weird Mob (even that didn't make a profit), but fascinating historical documents, showing an Australia that was (generally) clean, healthy, simple, quietly prosperous. This was one of three movies made by Reg Goldsworthy for Commonwealth United, all with an eye on the international market (imported stars, 'commercial' genres, etc).

Carl Betz, apparently a TV star way back, plays the lead, a writer who comes across a diary that will "tell the truth about Red China". He goes from Hong Kong to Australia, chased by Chinese Commies (led by Nancy Kwan), Russian commies. the diary writer's daughter; he's helped by his brother, a singer played by singer Bobbie Rydell in a part that seems to have been motivated by a desire to give Bobbie Rydell a part (they incorporate it by having the Rydell character able to do things without the scrutiny given to Betz which kind of works).

Hitchcock gave the world the term the Macguffin - the item that is the object of the chase, the thing being we don't really care about it, it's the chase we care about. That doesn't work when the Macguffin is something naff (as it was in Thunderstruck eg the ashes) - a diary to expose Red China is pretty weak, esp so that a writer can write a book on it - big deal! (I'm guessing that they didn't go for microfilm because then the CIA would get involved - which they kind of do here but it should be more). There is no real sense of urgency or danger, despite a corpse or two, it is all quite jokey. It would have done service in an episode of a TV drama (eg Hong Kong, of which it is similar) - maybe it was meant to be a pilot for one. As a film it is poor.

Betz's character smokes, drinks, is expressionless, and all the women want him - Kwan, who he gets drunk (and who has quite a small role), his secretary (who winds up instead with a young though still lecherous looking Tom Oliver), a young Sandy Gore (looking gorgeous, showing a bit of T & A in the bath - it's like seeing a young nude Judi Dench), the diary writer's daughter. Rydell's character is a bit more likeable, although it is irritating how they play wacky comic relief music every time he and his wacky comic relief sidekick appear on screen).

Australian audiences will delight in early appearances from Gore, Oliver and Jack Thompson as a KGB henchman. There are some shots of Luna Park and Sydney Harbour. Tony Buckley edited.

Movie review – “Stolen Kisses” (1968) ***

Truffaut’s alter ego finds love after being dishonourably discharged from the army in Paris in the late 60s. Many critics have written love letters about this film, which I don’t think it deserves – it is sweet and charming and all that and has a wistful atmosphere, but it is episodic and sort of ambles along. There isn’t a real plot apart from the hero going to work at a detective agency.
I think maybe because it’s about a nerd who does pretty good with women all things considered (he gets the girl and she’s gorgeous and also gets to bang his boss’ hot wife and one of his co-workers wants to have it off with him) and most film critics are nerds.
I do have to say I enjoyed the film more as it went along. Claudette Jane is enchanting as the girl, who tries to avoid Antoine except when he’s off chasing someone else whereupon she chases him. But the best performance is from later Bond villain Michael Lonsdale as the boss who wants to know why everyone hates him – this is a great character.
I guess it’s French in that the hero, even though he doesn’t have much money and is mooning over these women, still has funds and the time to have sex with hookers. The lead actor achieves the difficult task of making the lead character likeable.

Play review - "The Seagull" by Chekov

This is philistinic of me to admit, I know, but I didn't like this much when I first read it, the first two acts, anyway - but the third act really started to kick in with Kostya whining at the state of the world and the equiv of baby boomers, I re read it and really liked it. Despite all the Russian names and talk of roubles and country estates and being a civil servant, which turned me off, there is a lot that really hit home: the self centred actress, her writer lover constantly battling his own inadequacies and serving his gift, Nina the aspiring self centered actress, the tormented son, everyone loving everyone else, the lure and problems of life in the performing arts. The symbolism of the seagull is a little irritating.

Play review – “History Boys” by Alan Bennett

Wonderful play about a class of ultra smart students and their teacher – and about lots more. Love, lust, monastic existences, how history is used, the role of education, shaping minds, what impact it has. Most of the PR went to the lead teacher Hector which is the showiest part but perhaps even more depth is the other younger teacher, the one who winds up a media celebrity in a wheelchair (I related to the monastic lifestyle stuff). It’s got power, the students defy clichés – smart, pratty, hungry for love. Good story stuff, too – the mystery of how the young teacher wound up in a wheelchair, what happened to the students later in life. The best new play I’ve read in ages.

Play review – “Honour” by Joanna Murray-Smith

Murray Smith and Hannie Rayson are writers with a particular Melbourne sensibility – I don’t think columnists, journalists and ideas are as big in other cities in Australia, particularly Sydney. They also seem to write about a lot of virile elder left-leaning men who leave a trail of destruction in their wake. This one’s about adultery and the middle classes where a 60 something man leaves his wife for a woman half his age. Some wonderful talk, plenty of cut and thrust and Murray Smith is a skilled writer. Not a lot of story, though – Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf didn’t have much either but that had a bit of freshness which is lacking here. It probably works better on stage with the extra power of Being There.

Movie review - "Funny Things Happen Down Under" (1965) **

Don't know if this properly classifies as a movie, clocking in at around an hour and being a spin off of the TV seris The Adventures of the Terrible Ten, which was a pre-quota Aussie TV series about a 60s p_ssweak kids. It's best known today for an early appearance by Olivia Newton John, who is pretty as you'd expect and sings a song but then kinds of hang around as her friends try to make 200 quid to save their club house. That's a fair wack of change. They find they can make goats with coloured wool and get involved in shenanigans with wool buyers -it's all perfectly acceptible Pugwall stuff.

Never ending moments of interest - Livvy of course, Ian Turpie with uneven teeth as the rich brat who is still a goody (he sings his own song too), a teen girl of the gang who is still mature enough to have Turpie pant after her and she also lures another teen boy (who sings a song on horse Gene Autrey style) to raise money for the gang - a young femme fetale, lots of songs, a look at a time when you could make money from farming, a dance routine from two of the gayest shearers you'll ever see, a visiting Maori shearer who also sings, to counterbalance that example of multiculuralism there's a scene where one of the kids pretends to be a Japanese wool buyer. As important part of our culture as 2000 Weeks - perhaps even more revealing. Livvy had some star factor even then but cardboard factor too even then.