People may ask “what, another version?” but the basic story is so strong you can always come up with a fresh twist. This one shoves in a lot more Buchan but still makes a fair few changes.
Instead of smooth talking a milkman he smooth-talks a nurse (without doing the set up to the gag of first saying “people are trying to kill me”). There’s no brassiere salesman and the film uses narration, which doesn’t quite work (especially as it’s dropped after a while) – nor does the plane scene (a bit too close to North by Northwest) and political meeting.
However there is a bit with a ventriloquist and a dummy on a train which is quite effective, worthy of Hitchcock himself. Also it’s a bright idea to have the female lead as a suffragette who gets offended by Hannay’s speech at the political meeting – it gives them a reason to squabble without the dodgy undercurrents of Hannay abducting her. Also, when she joins in the action, Rupert Penry-Jones’s performance as Hannay (a little stiff) takes on an extra energy and the film becomes a lot more enjoyable.
Hannay doesn’t stumble into the baddy’s den he is caught and taken there – but he does blast his way out like he does in the book. Although the direction lacks energy or flair, and (like the 1978 film) it lacks a sense of humour, the final fight is quite good and the Scottish locations are enjoyable.
Watching all these versions of 39 Steps it's clear that when something really works they all have the same thing in common - the filmmakers own it. Whether its adapting Buchan or Hitchcock or coming up with something new - they're in with a chance provided they back themselves and make their own version of it. Eg The 1959 version worked best when it used Rank style comedy, and let its stars do their thing - but when they tried to copy Hitchcock shot structure it didn't work.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Script Review – “Body Heat” by Lawrence Kasdan ****1/2
Wonderful modern day version of film noir. It takes all the old elements – loser protagonist, femme fetale, the husband, infidelity, plot to kill which goes horribly wrong, support characters who at first seem nothing but turn out to be very important – and adds fresh twists: constant sex, legal stuff, bombs. The first half is fine – it helps a lot reading to envision Kathleen Turner and William Hurt. When it really kicks into classic mode is the moment after Richard Crenna is killed and Hurt gets the phone call about a new will. Then it spins a fantastic web and it’s truly thrilling. Great supporting roles too: the arsonist, the husband, the tap dancing prosecutor, etc.
Movie review – “Man in the Net” (1959) **
Some very strong names on the credit list of this Alan Ladd film: Michael Curtiz directed, Reginald Rose wrote the script, Walter Mirisch produced. Ladd plays a former ad guy turned creative artist who lives in the sticks; he enjoys it but his nagging bitch of a wife is bored and wants to move back to New York. She yells at him, boozes and his probably cheating – it’s that old standby, the old shrew. She goes missing and everyone thinks Ladd did it.
It’s a similar set up to one of Ladd’s best films – The Blue Dahlia – and even has a similar noir tone. Yes its set in suburbia, but its suburbia full of dissatisfied wives and drunken afternoons and so you’re hopeful for a bit. Ladd is a tired and puffy as usual in this part of his career – they could have used this a bit more (maybe had him as a tired ad exec/recovering alcoholic) but this aspect of Ladd’s persona was never explored.
Then the film goes in this different direction when Ladd goes on the run and is looked after by the neighbourhood kids. It shifts in tone – it’s also a bit dodgy having this middle aged man hang out in a cave with all these children. (One of them is black, but just so we don’t think it’s too liberal it’s established his father is a servant.)
It’s an OK mystery, but no more than that. The whole dark-underbelly-of-small-town life is raised, then ignored. And the bland blonde convenienty there to offer Ladd solace is irritating.
It’s a similar set up to one of Ladd’s best films – The Blue Dahlia – and even has a similar noir tone. Yes its set in suburbia, but its suburbia full of dissatisfied wives and drunken afternoons and so you’re hopeful for a bit. Ladd is a tired and puffy as usual in this part of his career – they could have used this a bit more (maybe had him as a tired ad exec/recovering alcoholic) but this aspect of Ladd’s persona was never explored.
Then the film goes in this different direction when Ladd goes on the run and is looked after by the neighbourhood kids. It shifts in tone – it’s also a bit dodgy having this middle aged man hang out in a cave with all these children. (One of them is black, but just so we don’t think it’s too liberal it’s established his father is a servant.)
It’s an OK mystery, but no more than that. The whole dark-underbelly-of-small-town life is raised, then ignored. And the bland blonde convenienty there to offer Ladd solace is irritating.
Movie review – “One Foot in Hell” (1960) **
For someone who became a star playing a villain, albeit a very sympathetic one, Alan Ladd hardly played any in his career. This is one of the few times he played a genuinely dark character – although like Raven in This Gun for Hire, he’s well motivated: a couple of tight-arsed townspeople help cause the death of his wife. They apologise, and give Ladd the job of deputy sheriff… but he bides his time for revenge. It’s a very convoluted revenge – even though he really should just shoot the two nasty people, he also decides to rob a bank, so he gets together a gang with the goal of killing them one he’s done.
It’s a real jolt to see Ladd shoot someone in cold blood after said person has apologised to Ladd for the umpteenth time. I think the Ladd of This Gun for Hire could have made it work – but this is pudgy, alcoholic, one foot in the grave Ladd. (He’s certainly no Randolph Scott or James Stewart, both of whom made a lot of revenge Westerns around this time.) It also doesn’t help that Ladd’s plan for revenge is so long-winded and takes forever. It’s a full on plan – creating a gang and then killing him. What a psycho – on page, though – it doesn’t come across on screen.
Another debit is the fact we don’t have a nice character to relate to – towards the end of the movie we’re supposed to like Don Murray but he’s spent the first hour being a boozy idiot and it’s a little too late. They shove all this romance between him and the girl in the last 15 minutes which is also too late.
(You know, thinking about it, Ladd should have played Murray’s role – a struggling alcoholic looking for redemption, I think he would have pulled it off. And Murray would have been more effective as the ruthless avenger.)
NB Trivia note – Aaron Spelling wrote the script. He met Ladd via his then-wife Carolyn Jones when she played Ladd’s wife in Man in the Net and worked on a TV pilot for Ladd’s company; he later wrote this and Guns of the Timberland for Ladd, but neither turned his career around.
It’s a real jolt to see Ladd shoot someone in cold blood after said person has apologised to Ladd for the umpteenth time. I think the Ladd of This Gun for Hire could have made it work – but this is pudgy, alcoholic, one foot in the grave Ladd. (He’s certainly no Randolph Scott or James Stewart, both of whom made a lot of revenge Westerns around this time.) It also doesn’t help that Ladd’s plan for revenge is so long-winded and takes forever. It’s a full on plan – creating a gang and then killing him. What a psycho – on page, though – it doesn’t come across on screen.
Another debit is the fact we don’t have a nice character to relate to – towards the end of the movie we’re supposed to like Don Murray but he’s spent the first hour being a boozy idiot and it’s a little too late. They shove all this romance between him and the girl in the last 15 minutes which is also too late.
(You know, thinking about it, Ladd should have played Murray’s role – a struggling alcoholic looking for redemption, I think he would have pulled it off. And Murray would have been more effective as the ruthless avenger.)
NB Trivia note – Aaron Spelling wrote the script. He met Ladd via his then-wife Carolyn Jones when she played Ladd’s wife in Man in the Net and worked on a TV pilot for Ladd’s company; he later wrote this and Guns of the Timberland for Ladd, but neither turned his career around.
Radio review – MT#8 - “Count of Monte Cristo” (1938) ***
As an actor, Orson Welles is best known for playing parts with bored aplomb, so its an interesting change to hear him panic and squirm as the young Edmond Dantes. He’s pretty good – you wish he’d stretch his wings as an actor a bit more like this in his movie career. Once he goes to gaol and becomes the Count of Monte Cristo it’s the old Orson again. This is a decent version of the tale which suffers from unavoidable shortening (45 minutes); Dantes’ arrest, imprisonment and escape remains excitement, but the complexities of his revenge are avoided. He just collapses the bank and that’s it really. But generally this is a good adaptation.
Friday, March 27, 2009
TV review – “Battlestar Galactica: Season 3” ****1/2
One of the great things about the new Battlestar Galactica is it tackles all those hypotheticals you find yourself thinking when you imagine the concept – in particular for Season 3, what would it be like if the Cylons ruled the humans instead of just trying to kill them?
On the negative side the series has two of my least favourite characters: Anders, the cool former football star turned war hero (he’s like this 80s action hero character in an otherwise relatively believable cast of characters), and Lucy Lawless, the Cylon with a Kiwi accent. Having said that Lawless’ character has some real meat here – it’s just that bloody accent that’s all.
Some fanboy musings – I think it was wrong for Helo not to be part of biological warfare against the cyclones. It wouldn’t have killed all of them and militarily it was entirely justifiable. (What was myxomatosis if not biological warfare?) Also the prosecution case against Baltar was run really badly – I know Ron D Moore likes to argue that he writes characters who are imperfect and make mistakes (eg Adama) – but I wish someone would tell the directors and actors because that prosecutor acts all cocky like an idiot.
Best things about the series: the terrifically exciting escape off New Caprica, the brilliant boxing episode, the exploration of inter-planetary culture of the colonies. The combat sequences are consistently strong. I wasn’t as wild about all the religious mumbo-jumbo. (You can’t tell me the writing team of season 3 didn’t get stuck into the shrooms at some stage or another). Also the use of ‘All Along the Watchtower’ towards the end was really jarring.
On the negative side the series has two of my least favourite characters: Anders, the cool former football star turned war hero (he’s like this 80s action hero character in an otherwise relatively believable cast of characters), and Lucy Lawless, the Cylon with a Kiwi accent. Having said that Lawless’ character has some real meat here – it’s just that bloody accent that’s all.
Some fanboy musings – I think it was wrong for Helo not to be part of biological warfare against the cyclones. It wouldn’t have killed all of them and militarily it was entirely justifiable. (What was myxomatosis if not biological warfare?) Also the prosecution case against Baltar was run really badly – I know Ron D Moore likes to argue that he writes characters who are imperfect and make mistakes (eg Adama) – but I wish someone would tell the directors and actors because that prosecutor acts all cocky like an idiot.
Best things about the series: the terrifically exciting escape off New Caprica, the brilliant boxing episode, the exploration of inter-planetary culture of the colonies. The combat sequences are consistently strong. I wasn’t as wild about all the religious mumbo-jumbo. (You can’t tell me the writing team of season 3 didn’t get stuck into the shrooms at some stage or another). Also the use of ‘All Along the Watchtower’ towards the end was really jarring.
Radio – Orson Chucks a Na-Na
Hilarious clip of Orson Welles getting irritated while doing a voice over – a different glimpse of the man. http://www.archive.org/details/BobCautteroFrozenPeas1
Movie review – “The 39 Steps” (1935) *****
I love this film, never get sick of it. It starts wonderfully with the excellent music hall sequence – plenty of laughs, quick dialogue and atmosphere (I love the squabbling couple and how everyone claps when Robert Donat says he’s from Canada). Then it goes sexy, with the female spy asking to go home with Hannay, and spooky, in Hannay’s dimly lit expressionism flat where he’s brought up to speed about some of the shenanigans going on, followed by the jolt of the spy’s murder.
The great scenes keep coming – the hilarious encounter with the milkman (an excellent example of comedy writing and playing); fleeing on the train; the funny brassiere salesmen (including an early example of Hitchcock POV paranoia); the chase on the train including the memorable encounter with Madeleine Carroll; the marvellous and touching scene between the farmer and his wife (so brilliantly performed, full of tension, humour, sadness and sexual attraction); another chase over the moors; accidentally stumbling into the lion’s den (I loved the wife of the baddie – “will Mr Hannay be joining us for dinner?”).
Maybe it’s a bit convenient to be saved by a bullet in the hymn book – a sort of deux ex machine rather than the hero ingenuity (in Buchan’s book, Hannay gets locked in a closet and blows his way out using his engineer experience) – but then they recover with the hilarious political meeting.
When Donat hooks up with Madeleine Carroll and they escape together, the action does slow down. There’s an extended sequence with the two of them in an inn, which is charming and sexy (love the handcuffs as she gets off her stocking). And although it’s a nice sense of completeness to have Mr Memory involved in the scheme, it does feel a little bit silly. (Just the bit where Memory nods to the baddy – that’s a bridge too far.) But I do love the ending with Memory expiring reciting the formula while dancers are in the background
Donat is a wonderful, charismatic star (he soon became a character actor star instead) – Hannay is Canadian, perhaps to make it more familiar to the American market. Carroll is also lovely and the support cast is excellent; one can only wish Geoffrey Teane’s part (he plays the head baddy) was bigger. Some of the female spy stuff is a bit laughable (the flashbacks). But marvellous entertainment whose ability to vault the years is demonstrated by its recent success as a stage play.
The great scenes keep coming – the hilarious encounter with the milkman (an excellent example of comedy writing and playing); fleeing on the train; the funny brassiere salesmen (including an early example of Hitchcock POV paranoia); the chase on the train including the memorable encounter with Madeleine Carroll; the marvellous and touching scene between the farmer and his wife (so brilliantly performed, full of tension, humour, sadness and sexual attraction); another chase over the moors; accidentally stumbling into the lion’s den (I loved the wife of the baddie – “will Mr Hannay be joining us for dinner?”).
Maybe it’s a bit convenient to be saved by a bullet in the hymn book – a sort of deux ex machine rather than the hero ingenuity (in Buchan’s book, Hannay gets locked in a closet and blows his way out using his engineer experience) – but then they recover with the hilarious political meeting.
When Donat hooks up with Madeleine Carroll and they escape together, the action does slow down. There’s an extended sequence with the two of them in an inn, which is charming and sexy (love the handcuffs as she gets off her stocking). And although it’s a nice sense of completeness to have Mr Memory involved in the scheme, it does feel a little bit silly. (Just the bit where Memory nods to the baddy – that’s a bridge too far.) But I do love the ending with Memory expiring reciting the formula while dancers are in the background
Donat is a wonderful, charismatic star (he soon became a character actor star instead) – Hannay is Canadian, perhaps to make it more familiar to the American market. Carroll is also lovely and the support cast is excellent; one can only wish Geoffrey Teane’s part (he plays the head baddy) was bigger. Some of the female spy stuff is a bit laughable (the flashbacks). But marvellous entertainment whose ability to vault the years is demonstrated by its recent success as a stage play.
Movie review – “The Thirty Nine Steps” (1978) **1/2
The relationship between Hannay and Scudder is as per the book – but Scudder’s murder is close to the UN murder in North by Northwest. Instead of Hannay taking off on the run, which would have kept the pace up, he finds himself taken into custody and thrown in gaol – then is busted out by the baddies, who are trying to find the notebook. The baddies then let him escape – which means half an hour in and Hannay has been fairly passive, swept up in events. But then he starts to become more active. He conks out a priest in a men’s room to use the priest’s clothes, something you can’t imagine Robert Donat or Kenneth More doing, then escapes on train and hangs out in the Scottish countryside.
Some good moments – the two henchman shooting at Hannay in the fields, the final climb on Big Ben – and Powell gets better as he goes on. Don Sharp’s direction is workmanlike rather than inspired, although you don’t notice the difference with Hitchcock as much as in the 1959 film because there are so many different scenes. Karen Dotrice is very pretty but her romance with Hannay is shamefully undeveloped – and it’s a bit yuck she’s got this perfectly decent, brave fiancée who gets shot trying to help for whom she seems to feel no sadness.
Too often the writer seems interested in draining excitement from the story – why have a scene half way in where the police realise that Hannay is innocent? Why have Dotrice instantly like him instead of wanting to put him in gaol? Why drag out the speaking to the crowd of strangers scene? Why not get a bit of conflict out of the fact Dotrice is helping with her fiancé? Why don’t the baddies kill him when they have the chance but instead drug him?
Buchan fans will enjoy some of the touches – the appearance of Sir Walter Bullivant, the fact the baddies and Hannay are into disguise, the last act which has Hannay and the cops trying to figure out what’s going on. The climax isn’t Buchan – it’s Hannay clambering over Big Ben trying to stop the hands reach 11:45 (good thing it wasn’t 11:15 or 11:30, he would have been stuffed).
But generally this is TV movie stuff rather than a feature, with its uninspired music and TV drama period detail. (Indeed, Sharp and Powell had just remade another classic, The Four Feathers, for television)
Radio review – Suspense – "Rogue Male” (1951) **
Herbert Marshall plays the hero who is busted trying to kill Hitler and suffers a lot for it. It’s a great yarn though probably doesn’t adapt that well to radio since one of the set pieces – namely how the hero kills the baddie at the end – adapts better to visual than audio. It’s also feels choppy and the flashbacks to the love interest aren’t that well done. Marshall is ideally cast, though.
Movie review – “The 39 Steps” (1959) **1/2
The 1935 film version casts a long shadow, but why should Hitchcock have the field to himself, especially as the source novel is so well known and you could approach the material in an entirely different way? Rank’s team of Betty Box and Ralph Thomas decided to make very much their version – namely, closer to Doctor in the House than Hitchcock’s expressionism. But they pull their punches and copy several sequences wholesale, and the film suffers from comparison.
More’s Hannay is a chirpy fellow who is drawn into the mystery, not through sex appeal, but by trying to be nice to a nanny in Regents Park. Said nanny is run over by a driver, witnessed by More – who finds a gun in her babyless pram, plus a book and theatre tickets. For no really good reason he starts investigating and visits the theatre – where the nanny turns up. So the first bad decision is made – Hannay actively gets involved, whereas normally men on the run do a good deed then get drawn in. Also he’s involved in the government, so knows about the McGuffin (a missile) – which is less fun that someone for whom this is all new.
We have Mr Memory, the nanny goes home with Hannay. Then there’s the second bad decision – the milkman scene. Hannay just tells the milkman he is seeing a married woman straight away. The joke is he tries the spy story, but the milkman doesn’t believe him – so he gives a false story. If you don’t have him trying to spy story, it doesn’t work.
Hannay hops on the train to Scotland. Instead of brassiere salesmen he’s in a cabin with school girls. There’s no building of paranoia but he goes the pash with a beautiful girl (Tania Elg) who tries to turn him in. It was a bit dodgy enough Donat going the pash, but you went with it because he was so dashing – More is like a slightly drunk businessman.
Off the train it departs a little and is a lot better – Sid James is a truck driver who gives him a lift (and seems to have no problem helping a wanted killer – something, incidentally found a lot in the original novel); they run into the farmer and wife…but they play this for comedy. (They’re both eccentric; the wife is an astrologist). And watching this you go “that’s the tone they should have gone for all the way through” – really adapted it for the Rank/More persona. The scene of meeting the head baddie is similar, but they throw in a little kid who is related to the baddie who discovers Hannay in a shed, and the chief baddie is a chirpy bald type, who plays it in a different mode. Also Hannay gets out of strife by pulling a gun. Later on when Hannay has to do a speech its in front of a lot of giggling school girls – another comic opportunity missed.
And the second half of the film it hums along and gets in its stride – you notice less that the pacing is slower and the shot composition less imaginative. This actually means that when Hannay hooks up with the woman and the story slows, you don’t notice it as much as the 35 version.
More and Tania Elg make an alright team – his brash breeziness contrasts well with her shy Germanic school teacher. She’s not as pretty as Madeleine Carroll and he’s not as handsome as Robert Donat – you could imagine these two working it out. And she has great legs for the handcuffs scene. So this copying is OK.
But then it falls over at the end by doing a direct copy of the Mr Memory shooting – and its really obvious Ralph Thomas is no Hitchcock. Why didn’t they try to change it a little? So it’s a frustrating film. Not as bad as you might have heard – not as good as it could have been. Just needed to get outside Hitchcock’s shadow a bit more, have faith in its own talent. The Scottish locations are pleasing, especially in colour.
More’s Hannay is a chirpy fellow who is drawn into the mystery, not through sex appeal, but by trying to be nice to a nanny in Regents Park. Said nanny is run over by a driver, witnessed by More – who finds a gun in her babyless pram, plus a book and theatre tickets. For no really good reason he starts investigating and visits the theatre – where the nanny turns up. So the first bad decision is made – Hannay actively gets involved, whereas normally men on the run do a good deed then get drawn in. Also he’s involved in the government, so knows about the McGuffin (a missile) – which is less fun that someone for whom this is all new.
We have Mr Memory, the nanny goes home with Hannay. Then there’s the second bad decision – the milkman scene. Hannay just tells the milkman he is seeing a married woman straight away. The joke is he tries the spy story, but the milkman doesn’t believe him – so he gives a false story. If you don’t have him trying to spy story, it doesn’t work.
Hannay hops on the train to Scotland. Instead of brassiere salesmen he’s in a cabin with school girls. There’s no building of paranoia but he goes the pash with a beautiful girl (Tania Elg) who tries to turn him in. It was a bit dodgy enough Donat going the pash, but you went with it because he was so dashing – More is like a slightly drunk businessman.
Off the train it departs a little and is a lot better – Sid James is a truck driver who gives him a lift (and seems to have no problem helping a wanted killer – something, incidentally found a lot in the original novel); they run into the farmer and wife…but they play this for comedy. (They’re both eccentric; the wife is an astrologist). And watching this you go “that’s the tone they should have gone for all the way through” – really adapted it for the Rank/More persona. The scene of meeting the head baddie is similar, but they throw in a little kid who is related to the baddie who discovers Hannay in a shed, and the chief baddie is a chirpy bald type, who plays it in a different mode. Also Hannay gets out of strife by pulling a gun. Later on when Hannay has to do a speech its in front of a lot of giggling school girls – another comic opportunity missed.
And the second half of the film it hums along and gets in its stride – you notice less that the pacing is slower and the shot composition less imaginative. This actually means that when Hannay hooks up with the woman and the story slows, you don’t notice it as much as the 35 version.
More and Tania Elg make an alright team – his brash breeziness contrasts well with her shy Germanic school teacher. She’s not as pretty as Madeleine Carroll and he’s not as handsome as Robert Donat – you could imagine these two working it out. And she has great legs for the handcuffs scene. So this copying is OK.
But then it falls over at the end by doing a direct copy of the Mr Memory shooting – and its really obvious Ralph Thomas is no Hitchcock. Why didn’t they try to change it a little? So it’s a frustrating film. Not as bad as you might have heard – not as good as it could have been. Just needed to get outside Hitchcock’s shadow a bit more, have faith in its own talent. The Scottish locations are pleasing, especially in colour.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Book review – “Undressing Emmanuelle” by Sylvia Kristel
The success of Emmanuelle owed a great debt to Sylvia Kristel’s performance in the lead – although she’s not much of an actress, she’s a great erotic star (up there with Brigitte Bardot), very effective, and if you don’t believe me look at her lack of competition, despite the countless sequels to Emmanuelle made without her. Kristel never enjoyed success with her clothes on afterwards (I was surprised to learn straight after her first hit she made a couple of legitimate films with people like Depardieu and Chabrol, but they all flopped), but had some nude hits later, including two Emmanuelle sequels, Lady Chatterly’s Lover and Private Lessons. She made a pile of money, but unfortunately blew it on coke, booze and bad business decisions. The stroke of luck that brought her world wide fame later turned on her – she got cancer twice, lost her money, had a series of dud relationships and marriages, a turbulent family life, etc.
From reading this memoir Kristel comes across as a bit of a space cadet (a few actor’s autobiographies are like this – lots of philosophical musings about life the universe and everything, wafting descriptions of relatives, etc). Despite her great on screen erotic presence, Dutch Kristel says she was awkward with nudity but I’ve got to say she hid it well. She also managed to pack in a reasonably action packed love life – a long term fling with the writer Hugo Claus (who left his wife for her), a turbulent Private Lives-esque relationship with Ian McShane (both would thump each other; he comes across as a petulant idiot here), flings with – surprise – Warren Beatty and Roger Vadim, a weird voyeuristic experience with Alain Delon, a dodgy producer husband who got her into debt, a partner who died of cancer.
A really interesting book from a very damaged woman who nonetheless seems to have a great knack for survival; judging by recent documentary appearances she also doesn’t look too bad these days, quite classy, despite all the abuse she did to her body. I would have perhaps liked to know a little more about the making of films other than Emmanuelle but maybe she was too wacked out of her brain to remember.
From reading this memoir Kristel comes across as a bit of a space cadet (a few actor’s autobiographies are like this – lots of philosophical musings about life the universe and everything, wafting descriptions of relatives, etc). Despite her great on screen erotic presence, Dutch Kristel says she was awkward with nudity but I’ve got to say she hid it well. She also managed to pack in a reasonably action packed love life – a long term fling with the writer Hugo Claus (who left his wife for her), a turbulent Private Lives-esque relationship with Ian McShane (both would thump each other; he comes across as a petulant idiot here), flings with – surprise – Warren Beatty and Roger Vadim, a weird voyeuristic experience with Alain Delon, a dodgy producer husband who got her into debt, a partner who died of cancer.
A really interesting book from a very damaged woman who nonetheless seems to have a great knack for survival; judging by recent documentary appearances she also doesn’t look too bad these days, quite classy, despite all the abuse she did to her body. I would have perhaps liked to know a little more about the making of films other than Emmanuelle but maybe she was too wacked out of her brain to remember.
Radio review – CP#15 - “Beau Geste” (1939) ***
Orson Welles overshadowed his co-stars in his films so often, even the ones that centred around male friendship (eg Joseph Cotten, Ray Collins) it’s a nice change to see him matched with an actor of equal stature – Laurence Oliver, who plays John Geste to Welles’ Beau. This is an enjoyable 45 minute version of the classic tale. It doesn’t have any time to breathe or even really evoke the atmosphere and mystery which are always the best things about the book and film version. The final Arab attack is effective and Welles has a good scene; the character of Digby is thrown away (he’s given a “ps Digby died” ending). Noah Beery is effective as the villainous sergeant.
Movie review – “13 West Street” (1962) **
A film made for those scared of juvenile delinquents – Alan Ladd is an engineer who runs out of petrol one night and is beaten up by a bunch of teenagers (led by Michael Callan). The gang keep hassling him, throwing bricks through windows and calling up his wife. It’s time for Ladd to kick arse.
Only now he’s fat, alcoholic Ladd – puffy faced, seemingly slurring in some speeches. And he doesn’t ever kick arse except for a bit at the end. This actually makes it a more interesting film – this washed up pathetic looking middle aged man. It’s a shame they couldn’t have gone with this a bit more – made the character alcoholic, etc. Ladd can’t convey rage but he does do frustration quite well.
It’s not an uninteresting film. There’s Ladd’s appearance; Michel Callan is effective and has an intriguing relationship with his apathetic mother; the film noir black and white photography works well; and there’s some good work from Rod Steiger as a weary cop who specialises in juveniles and tries to get Ladd not to do anything rash.
To be honest, he’s entitled to do stuff rashly the way these kids hassle him – maybe Steiger is just being a public servant not wanting anyone to show him up. It’s a potentially interesting issue, one that’s not really explored. You could say this for most of the script.
Only now he’s fat, alcoholic Ladd – puffy faced, seemingly slurring in some speeches. And he doesn’t ever kick arse except for a bit at the end. This actually makes it a more interesting film – this washed up pathetic looking middle aged man. It’s a shame they couldn’t have gone with this a bit more – made the character alcoholic, etc. Ladd can’t convey rage but he does do frustration quite well.
It’s not an uninteresting film. There’s Ladd’s appearance; Michel Callan is effective and has an intriguing relationship with his apathetic mother; the film noir black and white photography works well; and there’s some good work from Rod Steiger as a weary cop who specialises in juveniles and tries to get Ladd not to do anything rash.
To be honest, he’s entitled to do stuff rashly the way these kids hassle him – maybe Steiger is just being a public servant not wanting anyone to show him up. It’s a potentially interesting issue, one that’s not really explored. You could say this for most of the script.
Movie review – “Drum Beat” (1954) **1/2
Alan Ladd’s best remembered films for Paramount were black and white noirs; at Warner Bros, where he set up his own shingle, Jaguar, he specialised in CinemaScope actioners in colour.This was his first film effort as producer. (He'd already produced a radio show Box 13). He plays an Indian fighter who is requested by President Grant to try and initiate peace with the Indians.
The film was written and directed by Delmer Daves, who’d enjoyed a big success with sympathetic treatment of Indians in Broken Arrow, so it’s no surprise to see a similar liberal approach here.
It’s not overly liberal, though – there’s a good Indian girl who loves Ladd, but she’s killed off so he can marry a dull white woman (indeed, Ladd never seems interested in the Indian girl); the reverend who preaches peace to the Indians is killed by an Indian; the racist cowboy who stirs up trouble is redeemed, and the Indians go berserk at the end enabling Ladd to kick some righteous butt (although he brings Charles Bronson into trial rather than killing him – is this the moral of the film?). There’s a decent amount of action and Charles Bronson is effective as the hot headed Indian cynical about white men; he has a particularly good scene before being hanged at the end. Elisha Cook Jnr plays a (surprise) coward.
TV review – “Band of Brothers” (2001) *****
Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg executive produced this epic mini series, which I guess was their follow up to Saving Private Ryan (of which today everyone seems to remember the first section but none of the rest). It follows the adventures of a troop of airborne soldiers from D-Day to the end of the war in Europe.
The first episode deals with basic training, with David Schwimmer as a bastard training instructor who is lousy in the field. Schwimmer is obviously a talented actor and his performance is fine, it’s just his mannerisms and voice are so distinctive it takes a while to forget Ross Geller.
Second episode is D Day, emphasising the confusion and sheer hard yakka that went into the battle. The big set piece is a raid on a series of German guns – this is terrifically exciting.
Episode three deals with attacks and counterattacks after D Day. The battle sequences are even better here. There is a subplot about a psychologically affected private, who really go through the gamut.
Episode four is Operation Market Garden, the battle that featured in A Bridge Too Far, and concentrates on new recruits joining the company. This was is less good, although the sequence where the Germans counter attack is very strong; all the new faces make this one particularly hard to follow. Also I don’t think Americans are that good on defeat (a reason why Operation Market Garden has rarely been covered by Hollywood).
Episode five involves a skirmish in Holland, focusing on the decent, brave officer of easy company. This was directed by Tom Hanks – was he attracted to this episode in particular by the Hanksian lead character?
Episode six is Bastogne. A strong episode – stunning snow-drenched visuals - where the famous Battle of the Bulge is given a fresh twist by being seen through the eyes of a medic. (Cue lots of bloody scenes in hospitals; as pointed out by Flashman, it’s hospitals which really remind you how horrible war is.)
Episode seven is the Ardennes – a follow up to Bastogne, involving the effect that shelling had on the men. (A morale low point for the men.) Its scene through the eyes of Don Wahlberg, whose sad eyes gives the drama extra resonance.
Episode eight is after Bastogne, when the end of the war is in sight, but the danger still great. It involves two newcomers to Easy Company – well one, really, a green lieutenant (Colin Hanks, who I don’t think I’ve liked in anything I’ve ever seen him in) and one who is coming back from a long stint in hospital and is resented by the men. The guts of the action centers around a patrol. It’s moving, exciting and depressing – reminiscent of Journey’s End in a good way.
Episode nine has Easy Company enter Germany. Ron Livingstone gets a chance to shine in this one after being a supporting character for the most part – he is about to have a nervous breakdown. This is also the first episode to have some breasts in it, which is reticent for HBO. But that’s early on – the guts of the story concerns a liberation of a concentration camp, which is incredibly powerful.
The final episode concerns the end of the war – visiting Hitler’s beautiful Eagle's Nest and occupation is over. Even though the Germans aren’t shooting you’re still on tenterhooks because you go “oh there’s going to be accidents” and there are. (One shocking moment a drunk Allied soldier shoots a member of Easy). However there are so many different characters you can’t help thinking “who is that guy” at times. Still, they keep coming up with great twists – like having a farewell speech spoken by a German officer to his troops, translated with our guys watching on.
The cast are full of vaguely familiar actors like Ron Livingstone and Dexter Fletcher, plus some future stars (James McEvoy, Simon Pegg, Jamie Bamber; Jimmy Fallon has a cameo). Sometimes it’s hard to tell who is who, especially with all those helmets, but the actors do a good job – they succeed in looking like 1940s kids, to my eyes anyway, and that’s something lacking in many modern day war films.
The first episode deals with basic training, with David Schwimmer as a bastard training instructor who is lousy in the field. Schwimmer is obviously a talented actor and his performance is fine, it’s just his mannerisms and voice are so distinctive it takes a while to forget Ross Geller.
Second episode is D Day, emphasising the confusion and sheer hard yakka that went into the battle. The big set piece is a raid on a series of German guns – this is terrifically exciting.
Episode three deals with attacks and counterattacks after D Day. The battle sequences are even better here. There is a subplot about a psychologically affected private, who really go through the gamut.
Episode four is Operation Market Garden, the battle that featured in A Bridge Too Far, and concentrates on new recruits joining the company. This was is less good, although the sequence where the Germans counter attack is very strong; all the new faces make this one particularly hard to follow. Also I don’t think Americans are that good on defeat (a reason why Operation Market Garden has rarely been covered by Hollywood).
Episode five involves a skirmish in Holland, focusing on the decent, brave officer of easy company. This was directed by Tom Hanks – was he attracted to this episode in particular by the Hanksian lead character?
Episode six is Bastogne. A strong episode – stunning snow-drenched visuals - where the famous Battle of the Bulge is given a fresh twist by being seen through the eyes of a medic. (Cue lots of bloody scenes in hospitals; as pointed out by Flashman, it’s hospitals which really remind you how horrible war is.)
Episode seven is the Ardennes – a follow up to Bastogne, involving the effect that shelling had on the men. (A morale low point for the men.) Its scene through the eyes of Don Wahlberg, whose sad eyes gives the drama extra resonance.
Episode eight is after Bastogne, when the end of the war is in sight, but the danger still great. It involves two newcomers to Easy Company – well one, really, a green lieutenant (Colin Hanks, who I don’t think I’ve liked in anything I’ve ever seen him in) and one who is coming back from a long stint in hospital and is resented by the men. The guts of the action centers around a patrol. It’s moving, exciting and depressing – reminiscent of Journey’s End in a good way.
Episode nine has Easy Company enter Germany. Ron Livingstone gets a chance to shine in this one after being a supporting character for the most part – he is about to have a nervous breakdown. This is also the first episode to have some breasts in it, which is reticent for HBO. But that’s early on – the guts of the story concerns a liberation of a concentration camp, which is incredibly powerful.
The final episode concerns the end of the war – visiting Hitler’s beautiful Eagle's Nest and occupation is over. Even though the Germans aren’t shooting you’re still on tenterhooks because you go “oh there’s going to be accidents” and there are. (One shocking moment a drunk Allied soldier shoots a member of Easy). However there are so many different characters you can’t help thinking “who is that guy” at times. Still, they keep coming up with great twists – like having a farewell speech spoken by a German officer to his troops, translated with our guys watching on.
The cast are full of vaguely familiar actors like Ron Livingstone and Dexter Fletcher, plus some future stars (James McEvoy, Simon Pegg, Jamie Bamber; Jimmy Fallon has a cameo). Sometimes it’s hard to tell who is who, especially with all those helmets, but the actors do a good job – they succeed in looking like 1940s kids, to my eyes anyway, and that’s something lacking in many modern day war films.
Book review – “Burr” by Gore Vidal
Vidal reignited his career as a novelist with a historical opus – Julian. Then he tackled American politics with Washington DC, then (after the Myra Breckinridge detour) combined the two genres with this one. It’s about the career of America’s most random politician – a vice president who killed another politician in a duel and went on trial for treason. (Why don’t they still do this? Would save a lot of hassle.)
Burr himself turns out to be a surprisingly dull character – and his famous daughter is also a hazy concoction. More fun is had with the incompetent Washington and unscrupulous Jefferson. Got to say I didn’t enjoy this as much as Julian – it lacked the protagonist having a strong goal. Too much time is spent on the dull journalist rather than Burr. Also it lacks the bright voice of Vidal which features in his essays.
Burr himself turns out to be a surprisingly dull character – and his famous daughter is also a hazy concoction. More fun is had with the incompetent Washington and unscrupulous Jefferson. Got to say I didn’t enjoy this as much as Julian – it lacked the protagonist having a strong goal. Too much time is spent on the dull journalist rather than Burr. Also it lacks the bright voice of Vidal which features in his essays.
TV series – “Dexter – Season 2” ****
Return of the lovable serial killer – funny, nice, only kills bad people. In this one he’s even more human – he tries not to kill, even attends addict meetings (which means he gets a sexy sponsor, played by another sexy, lanky bony dame in the mode of Jennifer Carpenter). I wondered where this series could go for season two but this has two great ideas: Dexter tries recovery, and his Dexter’s dead bodies to be uncovered, so he’s part of the investigation into himself. These easily power it home.
It’s odd to see Keith Carradine, who normally plays laid-back types, as a more up-tight FBI man, but he’s a good actor Carradine, and I enjoyed watching him. There’s still a gay subtext (eg Carpenter picks up and has sex with a guy she barely knows at the gym), but the stronger theme is addiction. And it works really well. The sexy sponsor Lila is a fabulous creature – a sort of monster in her own way like Dexter.
For most of the running of the series Dexter is very much a goody – but then for the last three episodes it really goes back in the dark directions of the initial episodes, with Dexter really battling his demons. (The irritating black cop gets locked up but he’s allowed to show his humanity, which gives the drama a lot of shade.)
Another excellent series. Where will they go for Season 3?
It’s odd to see Keith Carradine, who normally plays laid-back types, as a more up-tight FBI man, but he’s a good actor Carradine, and I enjoyed watching him. There’s still a gay subtext (eg Carpenter picks up and has sex with a guy she barely knows at the gym), but the stronger theme is addiction. And it works really well. The sexy sponsor Lila is a fabulous creature – a sort of monster in her own way like Dexter.
For most of the running of the series Dexter is very much a goody – but then for the last three episodes it really goes back in the dark directions of the initial episodes, with Dexter really battling his demons. (The irritating black cop gets locked up but he’s allowed to show his humanity, which gives the drama a lot of shade.)
Another excellent series. Where will they go for Season 3?
Book review – “Hammer Horror” by Dennis Meikle
All of film genres it are horror and sci fi which seem to inspire the greatest devotion. Heck, I should know, I’m among them – so there are always books about Bela Lugosi and Boris, George Pal, Star Trek, Universal horrors, Roger Corman, etc. England’s leading contributor to this are the Hammer horrors of the 50s and 70s. Meikle’s book is one of a number of works on the subject, but it is probably the best. Excellently researched, well written, with a genuine fondness for the films (though he does criticise them, and the people who made them) and an understanding of how they are made.
The success of Hammer horror had some interesting correlations with most popular cycles - Bonds, Universals, Cormans, Poes, etc – a series of happy accidents. Economic factors combined with the right people at the right time leading to a terrifically successful series of pictures.
Hammer was a small company with off-and-on beginnings which go back to the 30s. It was basically created by two families, Carreras and Hinds, with father-son combos involved. The company was involved in distribution and production and didn’t really get going until after World War Two, when they thrived producing cheapie double features for the British quota market. Some of these had minor American stars eg Lloyd Bridges, and many were adapted from British radio. Both these things were present in The Quartermass Experiment, taken from the BBC radio serial and starring Brian Donlevy. This was a big success and encouraged Hammer to move further into the sci fi/horror genre.
Television started eroding their bread and better B picture market so they rolled the dice with colour and struck gold with Curse of Frankenstein. This film featured a fortuitous group of talent who would form the core of Hammer’s subsequent success – Peter Cushing, Jimmy Sangster, Chris Lee, Terence Fisher, Bernard Robinson (sets), Jack Asher (DOP), etc. (Just like the Bond films it was wonderfully lucky alchemy that Richard Maibaum, Sean Connery, Terence Young, Ken Adams, Maurice Binder, Broccoli and Salztmann all came together on Dr No – and ditto the group that gathered for AIP’s Poe cycle: Corman, Matheson, Price, Crosby, Haller, Baxter).
In hindsight, and only in hindsight, there were many reasons for Hammer’s success – just the right amount of violence and sex at just the right time, the Britishness gave the films a feeling of class many low budgeters lacked, the star performances of Lee and Cushing. Dracula and a second Frankenstein confirmed it, along with Camp on Blood Island (apparently a hit at the time although people don’t seem to talk about it much nowadays).
Hammer tried to expand their range. An attempt to break into US TV failed. Hound of the Baskervilles was a so-so Doyle adaptation. A more mainstream picture, Ten Seconds in Hell, flopped – Michael Carreras blamed Robert Aldrich for taking over and being a pain (although how big a hit was a film starring Jeff Chandler and Jack Palance going to be? Also it was about bomb disposal – those films are always tricky to make exciting eg Blown Away, Small Black Room, Juggernaut). The ambitious Two Faces of Dr Jekyll underperformed, throwing out the ambitions of Michael Carreras (including a plan to adapt The Picture of Dorian Gray). Meikle argues for a reappraisal of Bride of Dracula, says Peter Cushing gave his greatest performance in Captain Clegg, and claims that Losey’s The Damned was the best film ever made by Hammer.
The early 60s were an odd time for Hammer. Films which should have been sure-fire hits like Curse of the Werewolf and Phantom of the Opera actually flopped (Hammer hoped to get Cary Grant for Phantom – it wasn’t a lunatic fancy, Grant expressed interest in being in a Hammer film for a bit – but why then give the role to Herbert Lom over Christopher Lee, who badly wanted to play the role? Ok yes they were irritated Lee didn’t then want to play Dracula again – but surely they could have used the role to bribe him.) But they would have hits with sub-cycle films, like Pirates of Blood River, and psycho thrillers (eg Taste of Fear), and perhaps their most well-known non-horror genre, Hammer Glamour – adventure tales starring shapely women (She, One Million Years BC). They also kept turning out Dracula and Frankenstein sequels as well as other horrors (Meikle is a fan of Plague of Zombies). These films plus American investment saw Hammer get its second wind in the mid 60s, it’s own contribution to the booming English film scene of the time.
One Million Years BC was Hammer’s biggest financial success but attempts to duplicate it (Lost Continent, Slave Girls) didn’t not work as well. Despite respectability with the Queens Industry Award for Exports and the occasional later film of quality – Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed, The Devil Rides Out – the tide had started to run out. The Dracula films got steadily worse, Tony Hinds left the company, they lost their American partners. Lesbian vampires brought in some money and a new star (Ingrid Pitt) but the films just got worse and worse.
James Carreras sold what was left of the company, which wasn’t much (the name, really, and a few properties – the co-producers had most of the back catalogue) to his son Michael, who tried to keep things going, but couldn’t due to a combination of the hostile filmmaking environment and his own shortcomings (he lacked his dad’s salesmanship and connections, and for all his understandings of the nuts and bolts of filmmaking didn’t seem to be that good at creative stuff. Just look at the scoreboard, especially his non-Hammer words).
Hammer ended with To the Devil a Daughter and – irony – the unloved remake of The Lady Vanishes. This last bit makes depressing reading – father and son separated; Dad wound up with cash, lots of mates and a mistress but dissatisfied, as a lot of once-powerful men do when they hit retirement. Michael Carreras seems to have lost all his dough. Depressing ending to an enthralling book.
NB I can’t weep for Hammer’s unrealised 70s projects (including a big budget co-production with Toho, Nessie). But one potential classic that got away – Richard Matheson adapted I am Legend, to be made by Hammer as a follow up to Curse of Frankenstein… but the British censors nixed it!! (Hammer sold the script to Robert Lippert who turned it into the unremarkable Last Man on Earth. But imagine it with those Hammer production values).
The success of Hammer horror had some interesting correlations with most popular cycles - Bonds, Universals, Cormans, Poes, etc – a series of happy accidents. Economic factors combined with the right people at the right time leading to a terrifically successful series of pictures.
Hammer was a small company with off-and-on beginnings which go back to the 30s. It was basically created by two families, Carreras and Hinds, with father-son combos involved. The company was involved in distribution and production and didn’t really get going until after World War Two, when they thrived producing cheapie double features for the British quota market. Some of these had minor American stars eg Lloyd Bridges, and many were adapted from British radio. Both these things were present in The Quartermass Experiment, taken from the BBC radio serial and starring Brian Donlevy. This was a big success and encouraged Hammer to move further into the sci fi/horror genre.
Television started eroding their bread and better B picture market so they rolled the dice with colour and struck gold with Curse of Frankenstein. This film featured a fortuitous group of talent who would form the core of Hammer’s subsequent success – Peter Cushing, Jimmy Sangster, Chris Lee, Terence Fisher, Bernard Robinson (sets), Jack Asher (DOP), etc. (Just like the Bond films it was wonderfully lucky alchemy that Richard Maibaum, Sean Connery, Terence Young, Ken Adams, Maurice Binder, Broccoli and Salztmann all came together on Dr No – and ditto the group that gathered for AIP’s Poe cycle: Corman, Matheson, Price, Crosby, Haller, Baxter).
In hindsight, and only in hindsight, there were many reasons for Hammer’s success – just the right amount of violence and sex at just the right time, the Britishness gave the films a feeling of class many low budgeters lacked, the star performances of Lee and Cushing. Dracula and a second Frankenstein confirmed it, along with Camp on Blood Island (apparently a hit at the time although people don’t seem to talk about it much nowadays).
Hammer tried to expand their range. An attempt to break into US TV failed. Hound of the Baskervilles was a so-so Doyle adaptation. A more mainstream picture, Ten Seconds in Hell, flopped – Michael Carreras blamed Robert Aldrich for taking over and being a pain (although how big a hit was a film starring Jeff Chandler and Jack Palance going to be? Also it was about bomb disposal – those films are always tricky to make exciting eg Blown Away, Small Black Room, Juggernaut). The ambitious Two Faces of Dr Jekyll underperformed, throwing out the ambitions of Michael Carreras (including a plan to adapt The Picture of Dorian Gray). Meikle argues for a reappraisal of Bride of Dracula, says Peter Cushing gave his greatest performance in Captain Clegg, and claims that Losey’s The Damned was the best film ever made by Hammer.
The early 60s were an odd time for Hammer. Films which should have been sure-fire hits like Curse of the Werewolf and Phantom of the Opera actually flopped (Hammer hoped to get Cary Grant for Phantom – it wasn’t a lunatic fancy, Grant expressed interest in being in a Hammer film for a bit – but why then give the role to Herbert Lom over Christopher Lee, who badly wanted to play the role? Ok yes they were irritated Lee didn’t then want to play Dracula again – but surely they could have used the role to bribe him.) But they would have hits with sub-cycle films, like Pirates of Blood River, and psycho thrillers (eg Taste of Fear), and perhaps their most well-known non-horror genre, Hammer Glamour – adventure tales starring shapely women (She, One Million Years BC). They also kept turning out Dracula and Frankenstein sequels as well as other horrors (Meikle is a fan of Plague of Zombies). These films plus American investment saw Hammer get its second wind in the mid 60s, it’s own contribution to the booming English film scene of the time.
One Million Years BC was Hammer’s biggest financial success but attempts to duplicate it (Lost Continent, Slave Girls) didn’t not work as well. Despite respectability with the Queens Industry Award for Exports and the occasional later film of quality – Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed, The Devil Rides Out – the tide had started to run out. The Dracula films got steadily worse, Tony Hinds left the company, they lost their American partners. Lesbian vampires brought in some money and a new star (Ingrid Pitt) but the films just got worse and worse.
James Carreras sold what was left of the company, which wasn’t much (the name, really, and a few properties – the co-producers had most of the back catalogue) to his son Michael, who tried to keep things going, but couldn’t due to a combination of the hostile filmmaking environment and his own shortcomings (he lacked his dad’s salesmanship and connections, and for all his understandings of the nuts and bolts of filmmaking didn’t seem to be that good at creative stuff. Just look at the scoreboard, especially his non-Hammer words).
Hammer ended with To the Devil a Daughter and – irony – the unloved remake of The Lady Vanishes. This last bit makes depressing reading – father and son separated; Dad wound up with cash, lots of mates and a mistress but dissatisfied, as a lot of once-powerful men do when they hit retirement. Michael Carreras seems to have lost all his dough. Depressing ending to an enthralling book.
NB I can’t weep for Hammer’s unrealised 70s projects (including a big budget co-production with Toho, Nessie). But one potential classic that got away – Richard Matheson adapted I am Legend, to be made by Hammer as a follow up to Curse of Frankenstein… but the British censors nixed it!! (Hammer sold the script to Robert Lippert who turned it into the unremarkable Last Man on Earth. But imagine it with those Hammer production values).
Script review – “Absolute Power” by William Goldman
Goldman goes into detail in “Which Lie Did I Tell?” about the adaptation of this, and while you can understand all his decisions and agree with his judgements (except for the ending, which he never could make work – but bugger if I can think of a better one) but this still isn’t that good. The big twist of the killer being the President isn’t that much of a twist – we’re going to know it going in. And also it’s not much fun watching films where the villain is the President. I mean, I really dyed-in-the-wool fully evil President who orders the execution of Clint Eastwood (it would seem more believable to have the chief of staff do this – instead of having the chief of staff just being a bitch who gets snarled at by Scott Glenn). As Goldman points out he can’t write a bad screenplay – the scenes are taunt, it has a structure, etc. But it doesn’t quite work. The Clint Eastwood character died in the original book and I think you needed that emotional power to push it forward. Having made the Clint Eastwood character the hero I don’t know what you’d do… it would be too many to kill Laura Linney, maybe have them kill the cop (Ed Harris character?) Minor Goldman which became minor Clint Eastwood.
Radio review – MT#12 - “The Immortal Sherlock Holmes” (1938) **
Welles explains the Mercury got the idea to perform this when doing Too Much Johnson by William Gillette, who also wrote a Holmes play (basically Holmes vs Moriarty). This is a radio version of the play, sometimes too obviously so – there’s lots of scenes of people fighting, which doesn’t always work well on radio. An adaptation of the stories might have been more effective.
Welles does Holmes of course – he’s got such a great voice for radio, with that casual aplomb so familiar from Charles Foster Kane, that you can see why Welles never really became a really great actor. He didn’t have to – he was a great presence, with the fantastic voice.
Welles does Holmes of course – he’s got such a great voice for radio, with that casual aplomb so familiar from Charles Foster Kane, that you can see why Welles never really became a really great actor. He didn’t have to – he was a great presence, with the fantastic voice.
Radio review – MT#1 - “Dracula” (1938) ***
Orson Welles inspires a lot of “isn’t it a shame he never made/finished X” among film buffs –the unmade King Lear and Heart of Darkness, all the incomplete films. My own personal “isn’t it a shame” was isn’t it a shame he never made Dracula. Welles had a taste for thrillers, they weren’t just ways to pay the rent for him, and his adaptation of Dracula was the first work for Mercury’s radio show.Because Dracula was written in diary form it adapts very well to radio. This is a passionate, full blooded production; it would have made a terrific movie, very much in line with Coppola’s Dracula (which was surely influenced by Welles – maybe even this production). The bond between Mina and Dracula is well evoked, Welles gives a strong performance in the lead (you could imagine him playing Van Helsing just as well). Welles also plays Jonathan Seward. The silly music sting is laughable but they stop doing it after a while (maybe they realised it).
Book review – “The 39 Steps” by John Buchan
Buchan’s classic tale of a man on the run, was enormously influential, especially for Alfred Hitchcock, who not only adapted it into a classic film, but made several variations on it (Young and Innocent, Saboteur, North by Northwest). It is written by an author with the prejudices of his time (eg reference to Jewish conspiracy) but is pacy and not very long. Richard Hannay is drawn into the conspiracy by his neighbour who is murdered, after which Hannay goes into hiding. He doesn’t have any particular destination in mind (unlike the film) but elects to go to Scotland.
It’s fascinating to read it after the movie to see how Charles Bennett improved it. The encounter with the milkman is there – Bennett made it comic. Ditto the Scottish farmer and wife, who in Buchan aren’t much. The literary-aspiring inn keeper who helps out in the novel was cut. The bit where Hannay pretends to be a politician is in the book – Bennett cut it down, made it short and punchy. The great moment where Hannay accidentally finds himself in the lion’s den (the baddy’s house) is in Buchan, and is effective here, though Hitchcock (or Bennett) added the finger and brought it earlier. (Although to be honest the way Buchan gets Hannay out of trouble – locking him in a closet, whereupon he makes a home made bomb – is cleverer that Hitchcock, with the all too convenient hymn book.)
I’d forgotten how well Buchan could describe the countryside and movement, and how much time Hannay spent in disguise. Also how much of a script edit he needed – three times he has one character go to another: “I didn’t know if I should help you – but what the hell I will”.
There’s one scene I’m surprised was never used in the film versions – Hannay runs into a horrible fat stock broker that he knew as Hannay and enjoys tormenting him. It’s a great twist that just when Hanny is told the Greek premier is saved he finds out he’s dead – it’s odd this was never used either. As in the films, the excitement lessens once Hannay’s not in danger from the police or assassins, but it’s good that he figures out the British ministers have met the baddy and how deduces where they are leaving England. The climax isn’t that exciting – Hannay isn’t in danger, and there’s perhaps too much of putting on a disguise by “feeling the part” (John Buchan on method acting!), which never quite convinces.
It’s fascinating to read it after the movie to see how Charles Bennett improved it. The encounter with the milkman is there – Bennett made it comic. Ditto the Scottish farmer and wife, who in Buchan aren’t much. The literary-aspiring inn keeper who helps out in the novel was cut. The bit where Hannay pretends to be a politician is in the book – Bennett cut it down, made it short and punchy. The great moment where Hannay accidentally finds himself in the lion’s den (the baddy’s house) is in Buchan, and is effective here, though Hitchcock (or Bennett) added the finger and brought it earlier. (Although to be honest the way Buchan gets Hannay out of trouble – locking him in a closet, whereupon he makes a home made bomb – is cleverer that Hitchcock, with the all too convenient hymn book.)
I’d forgotten how well Buchan could describe the countryside and movement, and how much time Hannay spent in disguise. Also how much of a script edit he needed – three times he has one character go to another: “I didn’t know if I should help you – but what the hell I will”.
There’s one scene I’m surprised was never used in the film versions – Hannay runs into a horrible fat stock broker that he knew as Hannay and enjoys tormenting him. It’s a great twist that just when Hanny is told the Greek premier is saved he finds out he’s dead – it’s odd this was never used either. As in the films, the excitement lessens once Hannay’s not in danger from the police or assassins, but it’s good that he figures out the British ministers have met the baddy and how deduces where they are leaving England. The climax isn’t that exciting – Hannay isn’t in danger, and there’s perhaps too much of putting on a disguise by “feeling the part” (John Buchan on method acting!), which never quite convinces.
Radio review – MT#4 - “The 39 Steps” (1938) **
Faithful adaptation of John Buchan’s famous novel – which means no blonde love interest (something for which Welles apologises for in the coda at the end). Like the original story, the best bit is the first half – but it does lack a good love interest, and the ending, with Hannay finding allies who believe him a bit too easily, then playing pool with the baddies and waiting to blow its whistle, is a bit anti-climactic. Problem with these man-on-a-run tales is that they always run out of puff when the man gets to safety with the authorities eg North by Northwest. Welles in excellent vocal form as Hannay (of course). The other main problem of this adaptation is it starts with the chase, then flashes back to Hannay living a quiet life and getting involved in murder. This is an odd decision, one that doesn’t quite work, because we don’t have anything invested in the character who is on the run.
Radio review – MT#17 - “War of the Worlds” (1938) ****
Perhaps the best remembered radio dramatisation of all time (I can’t even think of what would be number two) – and even now it’s not hard to see why it was so impressive. The verisimilitude of the piece, mixing news updates and reports with “our regular programming” remains very effective. It’s still a jolt to realise that the reporter who we have been following is killed – and the ensuing disaster and terror is well conveyed, particularly the final cry for help. It’s actually Orson’s bits (he plays a scientist) which are least effective – I mean, he’s got the great radio voice, it’s just he seems a bit flowery and “radio adaptation”, whereas the other stuff is more realistic.Welles’ scientist has an encounter with a crazy military human who seems more interested in wishing he had Martian machines than the tragedy of it all – this seems to have inspired the Tom Robbins’ scenes in the Spielberg version – was it in the original novel? It has an anti-fascist bent to it which was presumably the work of Howard Koch, who wrote the script.
Structure wise the piece has the problem of the original novel – no real third act, just a deux ex machina. But there’s not much you can do about it with this because it’s such a famous deux ex machina.
NB Before anyone laughs at those ignoramuses of 1938 there were plenty of people who thought Blair Witch Project was real, and if they ever remade it on television with real life news broadcasts etc I think some people would be suckered in.
NNB A copy of the script is here.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Script review – “Broadcast News” by James Brooks (1987) ****
That rarest of beasts – a realistic rom com. Brooks spend a lot of time researching and writing his script but the end result was worth it – three terrific characters, a logical story, a realistic ending. You could make the film today – maybe you’d have to update the tv stuff a little but the emotion hasn’t dated a jot. Having seen the film you can envision the actors who played it in the film – Holly Hunter, William Hurt and especially Albert Brooks. I loved the Hunter-Brooks relationship and the way the Hurt character isn’t demonised. Wonderful, bittersweet stuff. Guys like Tom (Hurt) simply don’t marry Jane’s (Hunter) nor do guys like Alan (Brooks); Toms marry people like Lila, nerds like Alan do tend to fine a nice wife with whom they squabble, and Janes become perennially single.
Movie review – “The Longest Yard” (1974) ***
Broad, bawdy, flabby comedy which gave Robert Aldrich his first hit in a long while. Burt Reynolds is perfectly cast as the former football player who winds up in prison and is forced to play against the guards. Aldrich always loved football and excels with masculine stories so he’s perfectly at home here. There’s not a lot of actual jokes – the funniest bit is when Richard Kiel bursts out crying – so may perhaps be more accurately described as an inspirational sports movie.
Book review – “Not Quite Hollywood” by Paul Harris
Companion piece to the documentary is disappointingly slight – only 81 pages. Mark Hartley has gone on record as complaining that there is little written about Aussie exploitation films, which wasn’t exactly true – David Stratton in his books on the industry devotes many pages to the work of Ginnane, and especially the ocker comedies. They’re still a lot better source of information than this book – which doesn’t even feature all the anecdotes in Hartley’s film. It’s colourfully designed with lots of bright pictures and posters but you can’t help longing for a proper history of the industry. One that can tell the real story.
Maybe I’m being unfair here – I’m sure Harris wrote this to a brief – it’s just that I know Hartley and his team did so much research on the subject, I would have loved to see it. Especially since I got the feeling Hartley was a little compromised by his closeness to the filmmakers and his desire to celebrate genre films in Hollywood to give a fuller picture; maybe in a few years such a book will ensue.
Maybe I’m being unfair here – I’m sure Harris wrote this to a brief – it’s just that I know Hartley and his team did so much research on the subject, I would have loved to see it. Especially since I got the feeling Hartley was a little compromised by his closeness to the filmmakers and his desire to celebrate genre films in Hollywood to give a fuller picture; maybe in a few years such a book will ensue.
Movie review – “Overboard” (1987) ***
Sweet corny romantic comedy complete with a silly concept and two likeable stars in Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell. (This is the sort of film that only works with stars.) Goldie flaunts her body like its going out of style, and since it’s excellent good on her.
The film has a lovely family feeling and it passes the time just fine. You could imagine this being made from a Norman Krasna screenplay in the 30s with Claudette Colbert and Joel McCrea. (Adding to the old Hollywood feel is the presence of Roddy McDowall in the support cast.)
Like many Gary Marshall films it goes on too long and has a dragged out climax.
TV series – “Over There” (2005) ***1/2
This series apparently didn’t meet with much public enthusiasm when it came out, in common with many of the films about the Iraq War, despite the involvement of Steve Bochco. But after an awkward beginning (characters having sex who you don’t really want to see having sex) and some iffy acting and handling, it calms down and you start enjoying it. Maybe it would have been better had someone other than the writer directed the pilot – or maybe not, you never know. But what certainly works is focusing episodes on a specific duty – manning a roadblock, taking a house, trying to get a mine spotter, taking over a gaol, discovering a rich man’s house.
It’s definitely not a rah-rah treatment of the war – one of the leads has their leg blown off in the first episode, episode three has an intelligence operative being a real pick including lying to soldiers to get what he wants. It was also totally unexpected to follow the rehabilitation of one soldier as a major story strand (the other one follows the lives of the other halves back home).
Sometimes I felt it needed a strand involving higher level members of the army – for instance a regular officer character, to give things a bit of back ground. I get that they want to show things from the grunts point of view but occasionally it’s nice to hear a larger perspective. We do a bit, with the intelligence officer in Ep three and the Arabic soldier – but I guess I wanted a bit more.
Also sometimes the dialogue clunks. Maybe soldiers do talk at times about being afraid of death, but it just doesn’t feel real. It also proves that scenes of actors talking to the camera hardly ever works, especially when they’re talking to webcam. Also what’s with the same theme song played over at the end of every episode? (The writer wrote it – I’m all for writer power but sometimes it goes a bit overboard. It’s like having to listen to an album by your in laws. Don’t get me wrong, the song is ok, but in every episode…)
The best thing about it is the combat stuff – an insurgent being blown in half by a missile launcher, an attack with night vision glasses. This is extremely well done. It also has an exciting climax because you know the series was cancelled so you don’t know if the makers are going to bump off any of the regulars. The drama is strong, the acting pretty good. I don’t know why this didn’t take off in America – maybe it was too raw, too depressing. (A series about the Vietnam War might have done better.)
(NB Is it just me or does Doublewise remind you of Officer Hooks from the Police Academy movies.)
The DVD has an interesting making of doco – despite Steve Bochco’s participation, the big creative kahuna was Chris Gerolmo, obviously an excellent writer – although not, I was surprised to find, an ex-serviceman. His wife was on hand as a kind of co-director. I do feel the steamy lesbian shower scene was more Bochco – but who knows? The adviser admits that at times reality was put aside for the sake of drama or a cool effect – you know for a show like this I think the better thing would have been gone for reality over drama.
It’s definitely not a rah-rah treatment of the war – one of the leads has their leg blown off in the first episode, episode three has an intelligence operative being a real pick including lying to soldiers to get what he wants. It was also totally unexpected to follow the rehabilitation of one soldier as a major story strand (the other one follows the lives of the other halves back home).
Sometimes I felt it needed a strand involving higher level members of the army – for instance a regular officer character, to give things a bit of back ground. I get that they want to show things from the grunts point of view but occasionally it’s nice to hear a larger perspective. We do a bit, with the intelligence officer in Ep three and the Arabic soldier – but I guess I wanted a bit more.
Also sometimes the dialogue clunks. Maybe soldiers do talk at times about being afraid of death, but it just doesn’t feel real. It also proves that scenes of actors talking to the camera hardly ever works, especially when they’re talking to webcam. Also what’s with the same theme song played over at the end of every episode? (The writer wrote it – I’m all for writer power but sometimes it goes a bit overboard. It’s like having to listen to an album by your in laws. Don’t get me wrong, the song is ok, but in every episode…)
The best thing about it is the combat stuff – an insurgent being blown in half by a missile launcher, an attack with night vision glasses. This is extremely well done. It also has an exciting climax because you know the series was cancelled so you don’t know if the makers are going to bump off any of the regulars. The drama is strong, the acting pretty good. I don’t know why this didn’t take off in America – maybe it was too raw, too depressing. (A series about the Vietnam War might have done better.)
(NB Is it just me or does Doublewise remind you of Officer Hooks from the Police Academy movies.)
The DVD has an interesting making of doco – despite Steve Bochco’s participation, the big creative kahuna was Chris Gerolmo, obviously an excellent writer – although not, I was surprised to find, an ex-serviceman. His wife was on hand as a kind of co-director. I do feel the steamy lesbian shower scene was more Bochco – but who knows? The adviser admits that at times reality was put aside for the sake of drama or a cool effect – you know for a show like this I think the better thing would have been gone for reality over drama.
TV review – “Colgate Comedy Hour” – Martin and Lewis
It is said that the magic of Martin and Lewis was never captured by their films, and that to get an impression of what they were like live you had to see them on television. Colgate Comedy Hour was a show from the early 50s that revolved hosts; Martin and Lewis were only one but perhaps the most popular. It was broadcast live and Martin and Lewis would perform in a way similar to their night club act – lots of talking to the audience, doing “bits” and routines, breaking into song. They weren’t hampered by plot of the restrictions of the fourth wall and it is very enjoyable although the technical quality is of course a little murky. Episode one features Bob Fosse, and was co-written by Norman Lear.
Movie review – “One Million Years BC” (1966) ***
There are few more splendid sights in 60s cinema than Raquel Welch in a fur bikini playing a cavewoman. It is the main attraction of this Hammer adventure tale, an attempt to depart from formula and a reasonably successful one (indeed, it was one of Welch’s few actual hits as a leading lady, despite all the publicity she used to attract); it prompted a string of follow up caveman tales, which did not do as well.
The production values are pretty impressive – Hammer films always had strong art design, and there are great rocky locations and caves, and furry outfits. The cast throw themselves into caveman acting with a flourish – lots of ughs and ahs and screaming. I agree with George MacDonald Fraser that John Richardson’s features are far too classical to make a believable caveman, but he does have presence (what happened to him? With this and She it seemed he was in line for a big future – maybe he was far too overshadowed by his leading ladies in both films.)
The plot has Richardson kicked out of his tribe (well, falling off a cliff and they don’t care) after a dinnertime argument with his dad. He goes out into the world and has adventures, including an encounter with a blow up lizard, a cave full of human skulls and running to the sea, where he meets Raquel’s blonde tribe - and a giant tortoise. There he gets along well with the locals, fighting off a dinosaur in an exciting sequence, but he gets kicked out of there too when he tries to pinch the spear he used to kill the dinosaur. Raquel goes with him – even then, clearly it was sexy to have an out of town boyfriend.
They go back to visit Richardson’s family, where Raquel has a great cat fight with Martine Beswick, then Raquel teaches the girls to swim (if I’m not mistaken) before being picked up by a tetradactyl and being dropped in the ocean. Then she goes back to her family and the film starts to get a bit confusing – Richardson turns up and then him, Raquel and her blonde tribe attack Richardson’s tribe (what for?) then a volcano comes along. And some survive and they walk off into the distance. Huh? I was hoping for a battle where the two tribes would team up and defeat the Neanderthals who live in that creepy cave – but it’s not to be. Instead there’s this deux ex machina volcano, just like in a Maria Montez film.
Until the weird ending this is quite entertaining. It’s really like a silent movie, the only sounds being ugs and arghs, plus a bit of screaming and dinosaur noises. Ray Harryhausen’s effects are fine and the volcanic landscapes impressive. To be honest Raquel isn’t very good but she looks great and Richardson is fine.
The production values are pretty impressive – Hammer films always had strong art design, and there are great rocky locations and caves, and furry outfits. The cast throw themselves into caveman acting with a flourish – lots of ughs and ahs and screaming. I agree with George MacDonald Fraser that John Richardson’s features are far too classical to make a believable caveman, but he does have presence (what happened to him? With this and She it seemed he was in line for a big future – maybe he was far too overshadowed by his leading ladies in both films.)
The plot has Richardson kicked out of his tribe (well, falling off a cliff and they don’t care) after a dinnertime argument with his dad. He goes out into the world and has adventures, including an encounter with a blow up lizard, a cave full of human skulls and running to the sea, where he meets Raquel’s blonde tribe - and a giant tortoise. There he gets along well with the locals, fighting off a dinosaur in an exciting sequence, but he gets kicked out of there too when he tries to pinch the spear he used to kill the dinosaur. Raquel goes with him – even then, clearly it was sexy to have an out of town boyfriend.
They go back to visit Richardson’s family, where Raquel has a great cat fight with Martine Beswick, then Raquel teaches the girls to swim (if I’m not mistaken) before being picked up by a tetradactyl and being dropped in the ocean. Then she goes back to her family and the film starts to get a bit confusing – Richardson turns up and then him, Raquel and her blonde tribe attack Richardson’s tribe (what for?) then a volcano comes along. And some survive and they walk off into the distance. Huh? I was hoping for a battle where the two tribes would team up and defeat the Neanderthals who live in that creepy cave – but it’s not to be. Instead there’s this deux ex machina volcano, just like in a Maria Montez film.
Until the weird ending this is quite entertaining. It’s really like a silent movie, the only sounds being ugs and arghs, plus a bit of screaming and dinosaur noises. Ray Harryhausen’s effects are fine and the volcanic landscapes impressive. To be honest Raquel isn’t very good but she looks great and Richardson is fine.
Movie review – “Night at the Roxbury” (1999) **
Early Will Ferrell vehicle has some good laughs but doesn’t quite work as they didn’t get the dramatic subtext right, crucial for a comedy. Also Ferrell doesn’t own the screen like he later would –Chris Katten, his partner is a lot more confident. Molly Shannon is fun as is the soundtrack (including Haddaway’s immortal ‘What is Love’) and Richard Grieco in the support cast..
Movie review – “Goal” (2005) **1/2
Dopey sports movie which succeeds in being enormously likeable by virtue of its dopiness. A Mexican living in LA makes his name as a player for Newcastle United (who surely must have a feature film division – they also appeared in Purely Belter). Along the way he receives support from his loving grandma and kid brother, kindly former player who spots him (Stephen Dillane), gruff coach, pretty nurse, even the team mega star and a player who is nasty to him for a bit. The only baddies are his Billy Elliot type dad (“you can’t play football you should join the family business”). Sweet and unpretentious with some engaging actors.
Movie review – Rocky #6 - “Rocky Balboa” (2006) ***1/2
An unexpected delight – the heart sunk with the thought of Sly Stallone trying to rehash his most famous character but Sly, like Rocky, rose to the challenge. It was totally the right decision to kill Adrian – Rocky would have been content in retirement otherwise. Indeed, I was expecting him to die happy in the ring (a fate apparently considered for Rocky V) but they probably figured that would have been too depressing, not to mention wrecking the lives of the opposing boxer (who is a nice chap, the most sympathetic depiction of a Rocky opponent I think ever – he’s not even cocky like Apollo Creed) and the boxing commission.
It also would have sent a message “don’t box oldies” which is counter to the film’s actual message of “you’re never too old”. (The DVD has an alternate ending where Rocky actually wins the fight – far better to have him just go the distance like in the original film.)
A good hearted film – Sly has a lovely monologue to his son about not giving up, the platonic relationship with the broken down bar girl really works, even Burt Young is a bit warm and cuddly. They do set up this half-black son of the bar girl as a character but he doesn’t end up doing much.
It also would have sent a message “don’t box oldies” which is counter to the film’s actual message of “you’re never too old”. (The DVD has an alternate ending where Rocky actually wins the fight – far better to have him just go the distance like in the original film.)
A good hearted film – Sly has a lovely monologue to his son about not giving up, the platonic relationship with the broken down bar girl really works, even Burt Young is a bit warm and cuddly. They do set up this half-black son of the bar girl as a character but he doesn’t end up doing much.
Movie review – “He’s Just Not That Into You” (2009) ****
Sweet, well made romantic comedy which benefits from being an ensemble piece, thus can be a bit less predictable in its final couplings. This takes on lots of aspects of male-female relationships – what men really mean when they’re talking to women, adultery and compromise within marriage, the role of urban legends in creating female expectations.
A very likable all-star cast – Kevin Connolly could have a real career ahead of him as a character lead, and Justin Long continues to impress with every performance he gives. Ben Affleck is a little irritating but he’s not in it very long; it’s nice to see Jennifer Aniston play a role that suits her age for a change; Bradley Cooper is a bit creepy but that suits his part; Drew Barrymore doesn’t have a very big role – I was wondering why she didn’t play the one taken by Gennifer Godwin, maybe she felt she was too old.
The film could have explored the “she’s just not into you” dynamic as well – the phenomenon of guys chasing after woman; they touch on it a little with the Connolly-Scarlett Johansson relationship but it’s far more weighted towards the martyrdom of women. But then, the film knows its demographic. Great to see a rom com not set in frigging New York City.
NB Godwin does a tremendous bit of acting – when Long tells her some hard fact of life about men she does this wonderful double take, her eyes bugging out. A good female friend of mine does just the same thing – wonderful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)