Movie review - Elvis #13 - "Fun in Acapulco" (1963) ***

A bright fun Elvis travelogue movie with the advantage of an interesting location (complete with location photography though Elvis never went there), a strong female co-star (the stunning Ursula Andress - though the ending its not clear if he winds up with her or the female bull fighter), perhaps a few too many songs, but some excellent handling.

Costumes by Edith Head, direction from Richard Thorpe and star who is on fire, shaking his tail feather, etc - there are some terrific numbers.

Andress wasn't the best actor in the world but she had charisma and looked great in a swimsuit - it was always a good idea for Elvis to have a decent co-star.

This is another Elvis movie where his manager (in this case a little kid) shown to be a positive influence.

Movie review - Elvis #28 - "Live a Little Love a Little" (1968) **

The swinging 60s infiltrated even Elvis movies - he wears what looks to be mascara and Norman Taurog's direction throws in a few New Wave-esque freeze frames. Confused story with Elvis losing his job and going to work as a photographer for an ad agency and a girlie magazine. And the stakes are? (Micki and Maude a person had to live two lives for strong reasons - not here.) Why didn't they spend a little time and effort on these stories?

Michelle Carey is one of Elvis' better co-stars - her sing song voice does get on the nerves every now and then but she's very fresh and pretty. It is a bit more adult - Elvis and she go to bed together, and he is a photographer for a girlie magazine. And the film features two very strong songs, 'A Little Less Conversation' and 'Edge of Reality'. But its generally a weak and lazy film with that pathetic paper thin story.

Movie review - "Streets of Fire" (1984) ****

Cult film which marked something of a pinnacle for Walter Hill movies. It's a real one of a kind experience, though full of clichéd situations. Set in a weird sort of 50s rock and roll world, shot on a soundstage, Diane Lane lip synchs to Jim Steidman films in MTV snazzy rock video montage performances (very well done with excellent editing and carefully composed frames), then is kidnapped by bikie Willem da foe and ex-boyfriend Michael Pare comes to the rescue.
I love so much of this - the opening attack scene, then Pare's arrival with Ry Cooder's thumping guitar, the jagged editing/jump cuts as the credits go past, arriving in a café and a random gang appear to be beaten up (but why do they change the music), meeting Rick Moranis and Amy Madigan, going into the Battery, rescuing Lane.
After that the story becomes less sure - did we really need that blonde girl with unmistakably 80s hair joining the group? What does she add?
And then at the end it makes sense the bikies would go after them - but sitting around watching while da foe and Pare fight it out doesn't make sense. It needed to be something more spectacular.
I think it was a mistake to have da foe kidnap Lane just for a couple of weeks to have fun - he should have wanted money as well. And the stuff about "the town" that Pare and company are from is undeveloped. Still, love that romantic ending, Lane is beautiful, Pare a charismatic star like a young Bob Mitchum (he had a decent career Pare, but never became a big name), Madigan and Moranis offer excellent support

Movie review - "Hotel de Love" (1996) **

A film that holds a special place in my heart, because I saw it in an odd time, newly single and just about to start articles. Apparently this brought the house down at the Toronto Festival, a screening that helped ensure the film got a US release but it chalked up under a million at the box office. The film has a lot going for it but never quite seems to work.

The opening sequence is promising, establishing the rivalry between two brothers over a girl, plus some pleasant albeit gratuitous n*dity from Raelee Hill, then going to the hotel... whereupon it starts to run out of puff. 

There's no real drive and the tone doesn't seem to work - Simon Bossell is established as this kind of hard working romantic but then goes over the top mad stalking Saffron Burrowes; there's scenes like where Saffron Burrowes is reading on a bench and a couple is kissing - Aden Young sits down right in the middle of the couple and they touch his face, etc - which is funny but not realistic at all, he wouldn't have sat down there. 

None of the three leads is quite right - Aden Young is charismatic but has never been that good with straight man comedy (he was good in Cosi), Bossell goes over the top and Burrowes is wooden (not a terribly likeable character either); Peter O'Brien occasionally overdoes his Ralph Bellamy part, too. 

The stand out is Pippa Grandison, who is totally spot on and very winning; her scenes with Bossell are genuinely charming and the ending is lovely; Ray Barrett and Julia Blake are strong too and the film looks good. I liked the twist with the secret of the party revealed.

Movie review - "Strummer: The Future is Unwritten" (2007) ***

People who become rebel heroes tend to be wankers: Che Guevera, Joe Strummer. I think a lack of sense of humour and bloated feeling of self-importance help you spread the gospel. Strummer is an all too familiar type - public school educated, spent time as a kid in exotic countries (dad was a diplomat), went to art school and became too cool for school, was in a punk band which he dropped at the request of a manager and joined the clash.

Strummer was a charismatic fella - he looks like a tough prick and was imposing, especially when he had a mohawk. His politics and beliefs seem to be mainly "stuff youse all" rather than a definite philosophy - even later on in life when he matured you still feel as though it was a lot of hot air being pumped out. So his company gets a bit wearying at times - there were more laughs with the Sex Pistols. The footage assembled is amazing - on stage, home movies all through his life, audio interviews. It's a bit annoying to have people around the campfire talk about Strummer who are not identified - it just would have been a bit easier to follow.

The actors who talk about Strummer are the ones you'd expect - the studious, smart, serious ones like John Cusack, Johnny Depp and Steve Buscemi (no Ethan Hawke though, surprisingly - maybe because he, unlike the others, hasn't yet made a film for Jerry Bruckheimer). And it goes on too long - the stuff about his 90s band isn't that interesting. But visually dynamic, with that Julien Temple thing of raiding other films for inspiration (If, Animal Farm, Cushing's 1984), and all the old aging rockers are good talent.

Movie review - Elvis #26 - "Stay Away Joe" (1968) **

Elvis turned in an excellent performance as an Indian in Flaming Star but his return to that race in this film didn't seem to please anyone. It's an odd piece which falls within the "hillbilly comedy" genre of Elvis films. It's a knockabout tale of a modern day Indian family in Arizona who are always short of money. On screen depictions of Indians had shifted over the years - from savages to noble persecuted creatures, etc - but their depiction here remains an anomaly. The Indians are all basically lazy and untrustworthy, keen to brawl and hop into each other's beds, high spirited and raucous, with strong family bonds. They are the main characters of the film - the Indians aren't shoved to the side in supporting roles, it's an Indian story. I don't think there is anything wrong with these sort of films - I've no doubt there are Indians like this, and why shouldn't they make comedies along this line? (If it was about white hillbillies it would pass the PC test). I think the main problem people would have with it is there aren't many other sort of films with Indians as main characters to counterbalance it. Also the Indians here are played by white actors - Elvis you can understand because he was a star, but also Burgess Meredith, Katy Juarando, Thomas Gomez... 1968 was too late to have everyone black up. Having said that I enjoyed the film a lot more on second viewing, once I knew what it was. Elvis is perfectly at home playing a yokel with a taste for brawling, fast cars and women - his performance is energetic, the title song is catchy. He doesn't have a love interest in this one, really - he tangles with an underage girl (who, in typically hillbilly comedy style, wants it badly) and also her mother (Joan Blondell - a return to the "older women" characters who populated earlier Elvis movies). There's lots of brawls, a house that collapses, over-frantic direction, not much plot, plenty of frantic movement. It's a real "yee haw" sort of movie where actors often go over the top - I was reminded of the super broad comedies John Wayne sometimes made e.g. McLintock. You just wish they had some actual Indian actors in it.

Movie review - Elvis# 20 - "Frankie and Johnny" (1966) **1/2

An unexpected delight. A bit of an oddity from the King - it doesn't fall into one of Elvis' usual categories (e.g. crappy musical where he plays a speed car racer, a hillbilly comedy, a JD film). It's a period movie, with Elvis as a gambler on the riverboat who gets caught between two women.

Its stressful watching Elvis play a compulsive gambler because you know it's an illness and one that will cause him pain down the track even if its treated comically here (normally in his movies it was his best friends who were the gamblers) and the story could have done with a bit more plot - its mostly a catfight between two women over Elvis. That's not a story without its charms, especially as Elvis is faced with the same perennial Betty vs. Veronica dilemma as Archie in the "Archie" comics - to wit, to chose between loyal Donna Douglas and enticing Nancy Kovacs. Depends on your taste, really (of course the solution is to have both - you could cheat on Betty til your heart's content, she'd always take you back).

Douglas, who looked so fetching in jeans in The Beverly Hillbillies, loses a little something when dolled up; Kovacs is quite captivating as the liberated Nelly Bly. There is a strong support cast, really excellent colourful production values and some bright numbers, not typically Elvis (including "When the Saints Go Marching In" - appropriate for Elvis because his common method of singing in his films was to walk up and down on the spot with shoulders slightly hunched). Edward Small's B movies often had a bit of extra sparkle in them and this is no exception.

But the lack of story is frustrating - the real Frankie and Johnny song was about a cheating man who was shot to death, but they don't follow that here. I can understand why (its an Elvis film after all) but what they use instead is a bit lame - Elvis' rival gets jealous, but not really jealous, and its only misunderstanding which means he gets shot at the end and blah blah blah.

Movie review - "Hairspray" (2007) ****1/2

Sometimes they just do it right: brilliantly entertaining adaptation of the stage musical, in turn based on the 1988 John Waters film. The property was strong: a solid book which combined wit, romance, satire and a point (integration and discrimination against fat people), but you could say the same thing about The Producers and that didn't work. Final credit must go to the director/choreographer who makes a movie out of the story - dance numbers use cinematic devices e.g. singing posters, cuts to different locations - but he keeps the camera still most of the time, enabling the dancers to actually do their stuff.

The wonderful thing about this film is it is so inclusive - it's all about "hey, you can join in, too" - the daughter of a manic Catholic can come out of the house and date a black boy, the chubby girl can be a dancing star and get a dreamboat boyfriend, the dreamboat boyfriend can discover his courage, the fat mother can step out of the house, the father can declare love for his wife, the little black girl can get on television, more black people can get on television. Its summed up by the final number where everyone takes their turn at doing a piece on television - and also by including cameos from John Waters, Rikki Lake, the composer, etc. When John Travolta talks about not wanting to get out of the house it's really touching.

The best numbers in the show - "You Can't Stop the Beat", "Good Morning Baltimore", "Welcome to the 60s" - are the best in the film (though why no background dancing in "Good Morning Baltimore"?). Around the two thirds mark this slowed a little, I couldn't figure out why (why so long with Michelle Pfeiffer in the joke shop?), but it recovers for a marvellous finale. James Marsden is a bit of a nothing in an admittedly nothing part - but why not give it to someone who at least is interesting just standing there, e.g. a SNL comedian or something?

Movie review - Elvis #6 - "Flaming Star" (1960) ***1/2 (warning: spoilers in review)

Elvis has a decent director (Don Siegel) and screenwriter (Nunally Johnson) and rises to the occasion, delivering a very strong performance. The role was originally intended for Marlon Brando - who would have loved acting in it, as he gets to play an Indian half breed and the film is about racial prejudice - but Presley does very well, and makes one genuinely wish he'd done a bit more drama in his movie career.

It helps that his character is not that far from the types he played in Jailhouse Rock and his other JD films - to wit, a snarling sexy youngster, pining after a girl, devoted to his mother but who goes off the rails when she's not around (the difference is in the JD films mom is dead before the story starts), but who at bottom is a decent person who turns good when it counts.

The story pulls no punches when it comes to racial prejudice, and its equal opportunity stuff, too - the Indians are no shrinking violets, led by a fanatic warrior (the opening massacre sequence is reminiscent of the one in The Searchers and doesn't suffer in comparison), but the whites are little better, full of bigots and hate, driving Elvis to extremism. 

 

The film has a lot of similarities with Love Me Tender - Elvis has an elder brother (Steve Forrest, who isn't that much - it would have been a better movie with a stronger actor, at times you almost long for Richard Egan) who has captured the heart of the woman Elvis loves (Barbara Eden - this subplot could have developed more), Elvis kicks the bucket at the end (sorry half-breed but you have to die tragically).

Dolores Del Rio adds charisma if not necessarily a great performance as Elvis' Indian mother; the scenes involving her husband and Elvis' dad, who acknowledges their family is different and will got its own way if need be, are really touching. Some good action sequences and its an all-round very solid film.

Movie review - Elvis #12 - "It Happened at the World's Fair" (1963) **

Elvis visiting the 1962 Seattle Fair sounds like a really fun idea, but this is a flat Elvis movie. Expos don't really have the production value of somewhere like Hawaii - when you think about it, its mostly just a lot of queues, really, though the final bit with Elvis walking in front of a marching band is effective, as is a romantic sequence on top of the tower.

This film is certainly a long way from State Fair or Meet Me in St Louis which used fairs very well - it probably helped those films being more ensemble pieces about families, so you could go to a variety of different locations with a variety of characters, whereas here we're stuck with Elvis most of the time.

The weak story has Elvis as a pilot trying to raise money to get his plane back - only the filmmakers dump that plot for large slabs of time, instead having our star romance a nurse and look after a Chinese orphan.

The main debit of the film is Joan O'Brien who is the female lead - its an easy role, a haughty ice maiden who melts under the withering glare of the star's charms, but she muffs it; O'Brien played the big boobed girl in Operation Petticoat and without her boobs emphasised here, she's a nothing.

The best bit is when Elvis pays a kid (a young Kurt Russell) to kick him; the finale, singing "Happy Ending", isn't bad either. Gary Lockwood, who played a villain in Wild in the Country is Elvis' best friend here; later on, Bill Bixby played a villain in Clambake and a best friend in Speedway.

Movie review - Elvis #27 - "Speedway" (1968) **1/2

The common perception is that the quality of Elvis movies really dropped away in the second half of the sixties - I'd agree that that's true as an overall average, because he stopped making the odd really good movie after 1965, but the standards of his staple picture (i.e. the crappy musical) never really dipped.

I watched this just after It Happened at the World's Fair which was made five years earlier and thought the later film had far more energy and life - even if, surprisingly, it had a similar plot: Elvis gets into financial hock because of the gambling problems of his best friend (Bill Bixby), looks after some cute kids (a whole tribe here instead of just one), and romances a haughty dame.

Nancy Sinatra is the love interest; she's a bit awkward on camera, but has a charisma and gets to sing a song; she also looks cute, especially at the end when she puts on some nifty boots.

Elvis plays a speed car driver and there is some decent car racing vision; more fun, though, is the groovy night club pad - with its bright colours and go-go dancers it looks like something out of an Austin Powers movie.

The story does sag in spots (we don't find out Sinatra works for the tax office until way too late, they pull back on the conflict, there's no decent villain, no pay off with all those kids), and there are uncomfortable scenes of Bixby forcing himself upon women.

But there are strong moments, too, including an unexpectedly witty number about paying taxes complete with middle aged male dancers ("he's your uncle/ not your dad") and Elvis is having fun (he came a father is Lisa Marie during filming which might explain it). The producer was formerly director of entertainment at a hotel in Las Vegas and sometimes it shows, e.g. the old Borscht Belt comedian. I always get this confused with Spin Out but its far superior.

Movie review - Elvis #25 - "Clambake" (1967) **1/2

A frustrating movie which I kept wanting to be better than it was. The story is perfect for Elvis, a variation on the sort of scripts Norman Krasna used to write - he's a millionaire's son who wants to find a girl who loves him for him so pretends to be poor and falls for a girl who wants to marry a rich man. Will Hutchins is fun as the guy who takes his place and suddenly starts acting like he's really rich, and Bill Bixby is good as the slimy villain - but Shelley Fabares, so good and likeable in Girl Happy is weak here. I don't know what it is - maybe the black wig that they put her in, but she's off form. Elvis doesn't seem too interested in his role.

 

The script is at fault, too - they undevelop the attraction between Fabares and Elvis, so when he proposes at the end we don't get the impression that she really likes him (she should break it off with Bixby partly because she loves Elvis - but as it is she only does it because she decides not to be a gold digger). Also they could have used Hutchins more as a plot wild card - they don't do anything with him.

 

On the sunny side some of the tunes are catchy like the title one - there's a song which Elvis sings to kids called "Confidence" which sounds like a fairly brazen rip off of "High Hopes"; Gary Merrill adds solid support as a sort of father figure (whose belief in Elvis contrasts with Elvis' actual father - more could have been made of this). If Fabares and Elvis had been in better form (strong character, more lively performance, etc) this could have ranked with Girl Happy, but as it is, it's just below.

Movie review - Elvis #14 - "Kissin' Cousins" (1964) **1/2

The one where Elvis plays a double role - an army officer and a hill billy relative. This was produced by notorious cheapskate Sam Katzman (indicating the Colonel was more interested in short term profits than in prolonging Elvis' career by associating him with the best talent), but is actually a lot of fun - the double role thing works (the two Elvises even fight with one another), the star is having a high old time, totally at home with this sort of cracker humour, the script is fairly packed with jokes and yokels and innuendoes about horny hillbilly girls: for a time its implied Elvis is having a comfortable ménage a trois with two cute girls (he even sings a song about being unable to make up his mind between them, kissing them both - eventually he settles for Yvonne Craig) and there are a pack of women called the kitty hawks who run around like bitches on heat and just wanted to be serviced.

The 60s was the golden age of hillbilly comedy - CBS based its ratings dominance on such shows as Green Acres, Beverly Hillbillies and Petticoat Junction - and Elvis made his own contribution to the genre with this and Follow That Dream. Arthur O'Connell, another hillbilly staple (he played a paterfamilias in Hound Dog Man and April Love), turns up here. In the final number, check out how gay the dancing male soldiers look.

The jokes are obvious, the tunes average, and you wish there was a bit more story (it seems mostly to consist of people running around and Elvis trying to get O'Connell to OK construction of a missile base by buying the women folk nice things) but its bright and utterly lacking in pretension, Elvis is having fun and the motto of "get the most out of life" (as espoused by O'Connell and which results in the finale) is still pertinent. (Indeed they could have made a bit more of this - say, have Elvis' army character as an uptight person who learns to loosen up by being around hillbillies).

NB one of Elvis' numbers is done with him driving a vehicle while someone sits next to him listening - this happened a lot in Elvis movies (off the top of my head I can think of times in Wild in the Country and Blue Hawaii). What sort of direction did the actors get? "Just sit there and listen."

Book review - Television plays of Paddy Chayefsky

In the 50s Chayefsky was the Man - the person who took a medium that wasn't highly regarded, with quiz shows and what-not, and showed what you could do with it, the first acknowledged great writer of television (though Rod Serling and company soon followed). Its ironic looking back that he only considered television a way of making money before he returned to theatre - just goes to show you never know when you find your medium. Chayefsky's inclination towards small stories and working class characters perfectly suited the small screen, as did his flair for dialogue and construction.

"The Holiday Song" is the play that launched him, apparently became something of a sensation in 1952. I'm surprised so Jewish a work made such an impact - but then I suppose in 1952 television wasn't as widely available as it became, and in the US at the time if you took New York you had a big impact. (Or maybe there had been so much crud on, it was great to see something that was fresh and new with quality.)

As an added bonus there is an essay on writing the script, which includes Chayefsky's thought process, how he went about construction the story, problems of adaptations, his thoughts on writing for television, and drama, etc. This alone is worth reading.

"Printer's Measure" is a bit more familiar seeming, though as Chayefsky himself points out it is structurally very sound - a printer mourns the passing of his trade, and there is a battle over the future of a young apprentice. Its well done, though feels as though you've seen it before - the passing of the old days, even the destruction of the new machine. The most effective moment was the scene where the young man's mother tells him he must work so his sister can go to college because its important that women go to college not just get married - something so feminist took me aback (especially as it was the 50s and Hollywood movies of the time are all about shoving women into the kitchen). Again its accompanied by another essay which includes some great concepts

"The Big Deal" is a third tale about an older man in crisis (Chayefsky was only around 30 when he wrote this but obviously he had a great feeling for the generation above him) - a former real estate developer who went broke but who won't accept it and keeps thinking he's in the game. I kept thinking of Alan Bond. Perhaps could have done with a bit more humour. It is still effective. Chayefsky expresses dissatisfaction with the piece in an accompanying essay - says it was "too powerful" for television, which is an interesting concept (not without truth - television's strength is dealing in depth with the everyday, which is why Chayefsky was so good at it - maybe that's the problem people have with shows like Rome and Deadwood, they're too intense)

"Marty" is for my mind the most powerful of the scripts. I am trying not to be too wise after the event but it is easy in hindsight to see why it made a popular film - it's a simple love story, with a genuinely heart warming ending. Some of it is so beautiful - notably the scene where the "dog" girl is left behind and Marty asks her to dance. What a chord. The subplots aren't really gone into in much detail esp. the bit about mom being opposed - meaning this was ideal for expansion. A real classic.

"The Mother" is about a 60-something woman determined to keep working, despite her inexperience and the opposition from her smother-with-love daughter. What drove Chayefsky to such feeling for the stories of the older generation? A powerful tale with the mother-daughter dynamic very interesting and a vital topic - to wit, the importance of dignity. This play is accompanied by a piece where Chayefsky talks about the latent homos*xuality of many men, quoting Kinsey - for all this tales of middle aged men finding love with younger women he was a forward thinking person, old Paddy.

"The Bachelor Party" - when turned into a film by HHL in 1957 this piece didn't take the public's fancy, and I think you can tell why from reading it: there is no real story. Man is dissatisfied with life and wife, goes to bachelor party, realises everything's OK. Even Chayefsky admits it wasn't strong on story (his essay for this piece is a loving tribute to actor Eddie Albert and director Delbert Mann, whom he said pushed this piece over the line). The real story I guess is when the groom drunkenly dumps his bride. Could have done maybe with a bit more humour.

Chayefsky's basic rules of drama

Main one - a drama can have only one story. It can have only one leading character.

All other stories and all other characters are used in the script only as they facilitate the main story.
- dramatic construction is a search for reasons (justifying moment of crisis) e.g. given the second act curtain incident, find reasons why characters involved in incident act as they do
- each reason dramatised by one scene and scenes must be laid out as they grow into crisis May start with character or setting
- then go to dramatic significance
- then figure out moment of crisis
- then work back

All you need for good drama is
- good character
- good emotional relationship
- good crisis in that relationship

A standard Chayefsky technique was to always show the motivation for the antagonist by a scene illustrating what the antagonist fears, e.g. "Marty" show why Marty's mother is opposed to him dating by having a scene where mum chats to a woman who was abandoned by her son.

Play review - "Romulus" by Gore Vidal

A bright, witty look at the last days of the last Roman Emperor, a terrific subject with an ideal writer, Vidal liking tales of kings and so on, and at the time had been writing Julian. It didn't meet with public favour - Vidal argues in the intro that this was because the humour contained too many digs at the audience i.e. middle class types; I'd rather think it was because the story's going to have an unhappy ending (Rome will fall - and Romulus's wife, daughter and son-in-law all die after he thinks they've gone off to safety), but also that New York audiences weren't that interested in Rome. I think this would have been a hit in London - the British seem to have a strong connection to Rome, with its monarchs, empire, ruling class, slaves, etc. Strong story and entertaining with an interesting central conceit, i.e. Romulus became Emperor to bring the whole thing crashing down, that reminded me of Messiah at times.

Book review - "Gore Vidal" by Fred Kaplan

Because Vidal writes about himself all the time you might feel "why a bio?" - but on the other hand you also feel, "well, I'd like to know what the untold story is". He deserves a big serious bio and Kaplan does an admirable job. Although drawing heavily on Vidal's own writings and interviews with the subject, this is very well researched and well written, too. It certainly doesn't lack for colourful characters - Vidal's father (though perhaps a bit bland as a person) was a top athlete, aviation pioneer, on the cover of Time, etc; his mother was a beautiful, funny, enigmatic pain (the classic mother-of-a-gay-son, to be honest); grand-dad was a blind Senator (conservative, isolationist, populist, honest, anti-welfare - continually defies "left wing" and "right wing" categorisation); step dad was an amiable wealthy idiot who later became Jackie Kennedy's step dad.

All these are familiar from Vidal's writings but Kaplan's more objective account is great to read. So are stories of the time at school (where Kaplan correctly devotes considerable chunks to the time Vidal spend honing his debating skills - something which contributed to his later genius as an essayist and skill as a television pundit). He was surprisingly straight as a younger man - had a full on and apparently satisfactory relationship with a girl called Rosalind (surely the basis for "Kit" in A Season of Comfort), then later on with Anais Nin before making the switch full time. After the war he was part of what was a pink mafia - running around Europe going cruising with other gay writers like Tennessee Williams and Isherwood, feuding with Truman Capote, etc (William Goldman is right - talent tends to cluster - sometimes the clustering can get really specific, e.g. Vidal went to bed with Jack Kerouac). Had enough cash to live this really nice lifestyle until declining sales of his novels forced him to look elsewhere to make money - an early attempt to write paperbacks didn't hit paydirt, but a move into television did. Then it was Broadway and movies, all of which Gore made a success at, then politics, at which he nearly made a success at, then back to novels, with a string of best sellers. No wonder he was confident and cocky.

The book becomes less interesting once Vidal gets his life in order. I would have liked more on his post 60s adventures in the screen trade, eg Caligula instead of all the pages devoted to his feuds with Buckley and Mailer - in the scheme of things surely they weren't that important. The book ends in the 1990s, before Vidal had what is maybe his final (?) chapter as a public figure: involvement with Tim McVeigh, opponent of Bush and the post Sept 2001 world. Not Kaplan's fault but you feel the book needs another edition.

Book review - Vidal novel #7 - "Messiah" by Gore Vidal

Vidal's last completed published novel before a considerable hiatus is a spoof on religion - specifically, the Jesus Christ story. Once it started in that I was fine with it, but it took a while to get going - excessively wordy at the start, too, as opposed to the relatively uncomplicated prose of his earlier novels, and with all these segues like a person ravishing a garden. But once the character of John Cave came along it was fine, and kept getting better and better. The satire is sharp and believable - I agree with the writer that it would make a good movie (A Face in the Crowd wasn't dissimilar). It remains clever until the end - the philosophy of Cave is kind of like a warped version of Vidal's own philosophy, the idea of having it told from a POV of Cave's ghost writer is a good one, there is excitement, the scene of Cave's death is well done, there is an unexpected twist in the battle within the religion following Cave's death. Vidal could have gotten a bit more excitement over his character fleeing into exile at the end (I guess he figured that there wasn't much point since we know from the beginning he got out OK), and also, again, he falls a bit short in the emotional stakes - his narrator is so superior and detached we never really feel he's in love with Iris... or Cave, for that matter. But a very strong book. Some of the dialogues are reminiscent of the best of G B Shaw.

Movie review - "Moonlighting - the Pilot" (1986) ****

One of the delights of television in the 80s, brilliantly updating screwball comedy using The Main Event device of a rich woman whose accountant has taken all her money, leaving her with some assets, including a detective agency that was a tax write off.

Cybil Shepherd's career received a major leap from playing the lead- her specialty had been playing sullen eyed stunners in Last Picture Show and Heartbreak Kid then she became something of a joke as Peter Bogdanovich tried to build her into a star with Daisy Miller and At Long Last Love. By the early 80s she must have been washed up - in the pilot for Masquerade she has dull eyes, the sign of a nothing. But here she sparkles and shines, and finally became the star (albeit a small screen one) that Bogdanovich always thought. (She's still very good looking too and in the opening scene flashes a lot of leg).

She's perfectly matched by Bruce Willis' star making turn as the naughty boy David Addison -while in some spots he's a bit rough in this episode he's charismatic and full of energy and life - so funny (he's stopped being funny now,hasn't he, Bruce Willis?). The plot is effective with a memorable assassination sequence involving a jogger, guns and a Mohawk.
Bright, tangy dialogue. They really did it right with this one.

Book review - "Whatever Happened to Orson Welles" by Joe McBride

Another book on Welles? At this stage in the game? But one pauses -McBride is one of the best movie biographers ever, he wouldn't waste our time. And so it proves. This is an unusual sort of book - I'd call it a "personal biography", because it is very much based on McBride's experience as a young writer doing pieces on Welles and working with him on The Other Side of the Wind.

The first section of the book covers Welles' career up to that movie - radio, Kane, Rita, Chimes etc. It is brightly done, but familiar and McBride's tendency to criticise writers who are critical of Welles (e.g. David Thomson, Charles Higham) gets a bit irritating at times - its like being caught in a vicious academic debate about post-modernism. But when he gets on to Other Side of the Wind and Welles's last decade and a half its really interesting; McBride offers a fascinating sketch of Welles and his methods, his collaborators in the last years of his life (especially Gary Graver and his mistress), how his methods changed (a younger mistress = more sexy topics), the staggering array of unfinished projects, his endless struggles to make films, his at times difficult relationship with Peter Bogdanovich and with McBride (despite the young man's passion for Welles' work the director was a real prat at times).

Because Welles' final years were full of so many "if only"s and "wouldn't have been good if he'd been given the support to finish X"s (one of the reasons that he will always be fascinating to film buffs, because his career is so rich in hypotheticals), it can't help but being sad. But there are moments of triumph, too - his various friendships, making F For Fake, his continual ability to remain at the cutting edge with creative powers undimmed, his lust for life.

I was also delighted to read that his final decade was among his most rewarding financially - voice over and commercials work kept him in cigars and food, so he wasn't poor. (NB good on McBride for chiding those who point to his 70s wine ads as some sort of low point in his career - he points out that Welles did heaps of ads back in his 30s glory days, he was always a bit of a huckster). Even better is the fact that Welles at one stage EDITED A PORN MOVIE - Graver worked on the less glamorous fringes of the film industry from time to time, and Welles one day asked if he could help out on something his DOP was doing... hence a Welles touch where you least expect it? (Wonder if they'll start showing it in retrospectives).

The book is (unavoidably) frustrating in one respect in that McBride describes so many of Welles' films from this time but you know its nothing quite like the experience of watching the movie - you kept wishing you could click on a link to watch what he was talking about.(I'd love to watch the Orson Welles talk show). For all the status of The Other Side of the Wind as a lost masterpiece, the story doesn't sound very interesting - I'm sure it would be visually dazzling but Welles running loose without the structure of either a strong co-writer or source material often resulted in a bit of a mess. The heart doesn't beat too fast at the thought of Cradle Will Rock or Big Brass Ring either. However, King Lear - that would have been magnificent, and the fact that didn't get made really upsets me.

The quality slips away in the last bit of the book, as McBride starts to get stuck into other people over Welles - daughter Beatrice for stopping people seeing his father's work (though Beatrice does sound like again), Bogdanovich for wanting money to complete projects, George Lucas and Henry Jaglom for not financing Welles restoration projects out of their personal fortunes (which is a bit unfair, it is their money), slagging off Tim Robbins for Cradle Will Rock.

But on the whole this is a passionate, personal book about Orson Welles, well work reading and invaluable on the last decade and a half of his life.

Book review - "Lugosi" by Gary Rhodes

If you thought previous books on Lugosi were definitive, well guess again -Rhodes has come up with a true "must" for a Lugosi fan. It's a great idea - a sort of encyclopedia on Lugosi with different chapters a bio, film descriptions, stage appearances, vaudeville, television,quotes by Lugosi, quotes about him. It allowed Rhodes to shove in heaps of information without the confines of a narrative bio and it works brilliantly - they should do it for every movie star. I was especially impressed with the emphasis on stage and vaudeville - these were major components of Lugosi's career but are often treated as mere lead-up-to-becoming-a-movie-star; here they get appropriate weight. And its wonderful to hear Lugosi in his own words. Rhodes also pays tribute to Lugosi's status as a cult icon, and the great urban legends of his career (i.e. missing Frankenstein test footage, lost White Zombie footage). The essential tragedy of Lugosi's life is still evoked - one of the most appealing things about him for film fans, I've always thought - but he still had an amazingly rich, diverse life.

Movie review - "Dark Eyes of London" (1939) **

Bela Lugosi made a few films in England, including this enjoyable minor piece based on an Edgar Wallace story. Insurance investigators, bodies in the Thames and Bela as a mad doctor, mad assistants, a damsel in distress, plus an American detective included for the American market (obviously Bela was not enough). A bit more polished than Bela's later films for Monogram, less tacky.

Movie review - "Girl on a Motorcycle" (1968) **

This piece of late 60s groovy cinema has its pleasures, chiefly Marianne Faithful getting up with no clothes on and putting on a leather outfit and driving around to visit Alain Delon. We flashback to their relationship and get Faithful in a variety of stages of undress, plus a lot of interior monologuing.
Despite pleasing shots of a motorbike driving across the roads, one gets the feeling that this would work better as a novel than a movie. Or better in French where some of the dialogue might seem less laughable. It is nice to see a film which deals with the sexual obsession of a woman rather than a man.

Movie review - "Lagaan" (2001) ****

Bollywood movies really are the modern day equivalent to 60s beach party films - wholesome, predictable musicals that are a lot of fun. Curiously, both genres place a lot of emphasis on the group, though they have heroes. This goes for three and a half hours though it didn't need to be. It has a strong Syd Field plot, with its set up, hero, overcoming obstacles, complications etc. The hero has a great intro scene trying tosave deer from hunting Britishers; the baddy gets to show how evil he is forcing a vegetarian Raja to eat meat and also killing a bunny rabbit.Although the baddy is really evil his sister is nice - she falls in love with the Indian and teaches him cricket. Jolly good. And the head Britishers aren't bad, even though many of the Indian cricket team are very anti-British (the British umpires make several decisions in favour of the Indians - there's no implication of bias).
What's nicest about the movie is its sense of inclusion - the Indian team comprises of a crazy fortune teller (the most Aussie of the cricketers, like a cross between Rod Hogg, Dennis Lille and Ian Callen - I love his send offs of the British players), an older doctor, a Muslim, a combative fast bowler, and most touching of all an untouchable with a withered arm who is a hopeless batter and fielder but an at times unplayable spin bowler(what makes it especially moving is that there was a player like that,Chandra - only I don't think he was an untouchable).
The final cricket game is a joy, very gripping, and shows how well cricket adapts to cinema - there is sledging, a beamer, dropped catches, fours and sixes,a dramatic last wicket stand, a runner (NB who is Mankadded and because he's a small boy I think we're supposed to feel sorry for him - but he deserved it, really, he was out of his crease a long way, its cheating),he's and hitting a six off the last ball. Entertaining tunes and production numbers.

Movie review - "The Kingdom" (2007) ** (warning: spoilers)

So wanted this thriller to be better than it was because the trailer was so good and it's a great idea for a film: an FBI team investigating a bombing of a US compound in Saudi Arabia. Great format to explore Middle East-West relations.

But they muff it with far too many "movie scenes" that feel as though they've been "punched up" by script doctor hacks. Like introducing Jamie Foxx talking to a group of kindergarten kids where he talks about his son's birth ("you know, we need a scene where we establish what a good dad Jamie is" - but would kids care?); and these awful scenes where the FBI agents are in Saudi Arabia swearing and carrying on and being frustrated ("like, we need a scene to show them butting heads so then we can have a HERO'S JOURNEY where they come to respect the Saudis"). The sheer fact Americans are in Saudi Arabia is conflict enough without shoving in this crappy 90s cop movie garbage about "hey man let us do our job". They're in Saudi Arabia and they're being obnoxious. To make matters worse they bring a woman, Jennifer Garner, without even the courtesy of an explanatory line like "she's the only person we can get at short notice" - and she wears T shirts and singlet tops. I kept thinking, "cover up, Jen".

The film picks up once everyone starts co-operating and there's a nice scene between Foxx and the nice Arab (a like able character and the best performance in the film) and you think "that's what this movie should have been - a buddy flick in Saudi Arabia, instead of having these four not very likeable or -even less forgivable - different characters".

Why are all the FBI agent characters the same? Why not have one have a romance, or another be very anti-US in Saudi Arabia, or very proper, or extremely apathetic or whatever. The complexities of the US-Saudi alliance - our military propping up a dictatorship, moderate opposition forces with Saudi Arabia being pushed towards extremism, religious vs. secular - are raised briefly then mostly ignored. (It's a shame we couldn't have seen more of the Jeremy Piven character - Piven plays him like Ari Gold but you can imagine that's what would be needed out there).

Then there's that awful scene where the husband of a woman killed by terrorists attacks the nearest Muslim - OK, you're upset, but he's in Saudi Arabia and has worked there for a period of time, one would assume he knew there would be some risks or at least learn not to blame people just because they are Muslims, and anyway the fifty worder who plays him isn't much of an actor. (This isn't like the Sept 11 attacks - these Americans are on foreign soil.)

There is a pretty good ambush and race-against-time sequence at the end - even if you think would terrorists really stop to pull out the camera and film Jason Bateman getting his head chopped off with a bunch of Americans in hot pursuit. This sequence is done well.

But then they ruin it with the worst possible choice of endings - making the final battle unrealistic "Hollywood" (no innocent people hit despite being fought in a crowded urban area, no Americans killed, Bateman saved just in time)... but the nice Arab (Ashraf Barhoum) is there blasting away with Foxx kicking butt and taking names and you think "OK its an Arnie movie but at least a positive Arab is joining in the carnage" - then they kill him. The one nice lead character, four irritating Americans - the Americans live and the nice guy dies. So not only is it unrealistic, it's a downer. I ended up leaving the cinema just mad.

Movie review - "Pillow Talk" (1959) ***1/2

The screenplay for this glossy Universal comedy won an Oscar, a fact often held up for derision, but this holds up over the years as a bright, sharp comedy which has dated surprisingly little. Yes, Doris Day is determined to hang on to her virtue: but only to a point. Once she thinks Rock Hudson might be gay she's up for it, even without a wedding ring. And she's a liberated woman who won't marry Tony Randall despite his money, who has a career and isn't determined to be used. Doris and Rock have a real chemistry and Rock is in good form as a likable heel who clashes with Doris' sensible mum-ness. Tony Randall is a laugh, too- though it's a bit uneasy the way the film portrays Thelma Ritter's acute alcoholism as cute.

Movie review - Ladd #12 - "Saigon" (1948) **1/2

Alan Ladd and Veronica Lake made four films together, the first three classics - this fourth one is a very minor entry (and is the one liable to stump you on trivia night - not that I've ever heard an Alan Ladd question on trivia night). I was disappointed with it on first viewing but on a second go I enjoyed it more - in part because my expectations were lower and I could enjoy the good things the film did have, such as it's studio French Indo China setting, Ladd and Lake, some decent support cast, and brisk pace.

Its one of several films that had Alan Ladd as a pilot in the third world (Calcutta, Thunder in the East) - he plays a war veteran with two close mates, one of whom was clearly meant to be played by William Bendix (but who isn't), one of whom is played by a handsome contract actor and who in the film has a terminal illness. At which point you might say "huh?" - there was an earlier film about three pilot friends, one of whom had a terminal illness, called You Came Along, maybe the writers liked it - but most of the time this film forgets about this and has Ladd and his mates get involved transporting some contraband for a shady crook and a shady lady (Veronica Lake).

The Vietnam setting is an interesting one but not really exploited - there is a local French police officer (well played by Luther Adler), indicating the filmmakers probably had dreams about Casablanca but they don't come anywhere near close. Ladd is in pretty decent form but his scenes with Lake here don't sparkle and its really annoying that the sick friend is conveniently killed. (Actually both friends are killed.) Morris Carnovsky is a good crook - even if the heroes aren't that terrific because they are technically ripping him off.

Movie review - Ladd #8 - "The Blue Dahlia" (1946) ****

Raymond Chandler wasn't just a brilliant novelist he was a dab hand at screenplays, too, as this original for the screen producers. In Chandler style everyone talks really tough and is soused most of the time - ordering bourbons with a bourbon chaser, etc. The tone is just right for this tale of a returning war veteran who finds his wife has been playing around.

Chandler once described Alan Ladd as a small boy's idea of a tough guy but he's in excellent form, either being knocked on the head or slapping people around or being tormented over his dead son; William Bendix is excellent value too as Ladd's traumatised mate as is Howard da Silva as a nasty night club boss and Veronica Lake as a femme fetale who as usual isn't a femme fetale, just a nice girl who walks like a femme fetale.

There's a bland handsome male actor who plays Ladd's friend (often in Ladd films he had a comic relief friend and a handsome male friend played by some actor or another e.g. Saigon, Calcutta) - I actually wasn't sure why he was in the movie, he's not even a red herring suspect. He is a lawyer and offers some legal advice... but I think the filmmakers just felt comfortable with the trope.

Good twists, taunt handling from George Marshall - shall we call it a film noir classic? It does get confusing in spots and the plotting is a bit clunky as you'd expect from Chandler but... why not? Love it how when the cops shoot the killer dead at the end no one really seems to care.