Play review - "The Petrified Forest" (1934) by Robert Sherwood

Some of the language waffles a bit but the central situation so strong, and the characters too, that it doesn't matter. This film helped establish a classic template much used in subsequent years - to wit, a group of people get stuck at a Diner when an escaped criminal and his gang arrive.

I haven't seen the film but it's easy to see Leslie Howard and Humphrey Bogart play their characters - and they are great roles too, the self-loathing former gigolo who tries to arrange his own death and the honorable thief; the girl would take clever casting to make all that fussing over her worth while. There are some strong support roles, such as the anecdote-happy grandpa and the unhappily married rich couple.

There's an awful lot of gunplay for a stage play - I wonder how this worked in the theatre.

Radio review – Suspense - “Sorry Wrong Number” (1943) **** by Lucille Fletcher

Larry Cohen once said that this was one of his favourite scripts – I’m not surprised from the writer of Phone Booth and Cellular. It’s a classic radio play, right up there with War of the Worlds.

Agnes Moorehead is brilliant as the jittery, paranoid sickly woman whom we are quite happy to see killed. The technology crucial to the plot (i.e. talking to operators) means this is very much of its time, but the structure, characterisation and mood have hardly dated at all. I love the line where she explains her husband has adored her, he's looked after her since she took sick 12 years ago. Moorehead does this beautifully. A copy of the script is here.

Radio review – BBC - “The 39 Steps” (2001) *** by John Buchan

The first in a series of radio adaptations by the BBC of Buchan’s Richard Hannay series with David Robb an excellent Hannay. This one also has Tom Baker as Sir Walter Bullivant – perhaps this is why the story is told in flashback by Hannay to Bullivant, to give Baker a bigger part. Or maybe it’s just because it works well. This one includes a Mr Memory scene at the beginning but that’s about it for things from the Hitchcock version, the rest of it is fairly Buchan (Memory isn’t paid off at the end either – maybe it was a kind of homage); however they have converted the inn keeper to a woman instead of a young man, and that works well. The adaptation doesn’t shy away from some of Buchan’s less pleasant features, such as Scudder’s anti-Semitism. Very good version.

Radio review – BBC “Rogue Male” (1989) ***1/2 by Geoffrey Household

Excellent adaptation of the classic book. It works well for radio since so much of it takes place in the head of the protagonist (although he mumbles at times). Taunt and gripping. It's in three parts and the last part is almost entirely underground.

Movie review – “Duel of Champions” (1964) **

Alan Ladd’s biographer claimed this was the worst film he ever made. Like many a fading star, Ladd was enticed over to Italy to make a sword and sandal film. (Helping sweeten the pot was the fact that the director would be Terence Young, with whom Ladd had made The Red Beret.) Too fat and puffy to play a gladiator, Ladd plays a Roman officer fighting the Barbarians – and you know something he seems a lot more animated than he does in several of his final films. Maybe it’s the period setting. And his blonde looks suit being a Roman general. (cf The Black Knight)

This has impressive production values and some decent action sequences, particularly Ladd being thrown down a pit with a dog. It also has a good story – Rome and Alba keep fighting so they decide to sort things out by getting a couple of key soldiers duel. Alan Ladd is the hero Horatio (I assume the same guy who defended the bridge but we don’t see that here); he is thought to have abandoned his troops in a battle, causing his fiancée to marry someone else – so when he comes back he gets to be bitter at a woman in typical Ladd style.

There are a number of key supporting characters played by unknowns and at times it’s a bit hard to remember who is who. (Ladd’s daughter Alana has a small role.) There is a really off subplot about Ladd’s sister who is kidnapped and raped by an Alban – then falls in love with him. Still, I don't know if it's the worst film Ladd ever made - at least he's well cast and it doesn't feel as depressing as his later Hollywood films.

Movie review – “Zontar the Thing from Venus” (1967) *1/2

Larry Buchanan does It Conquered the World, which had one of the stronger plots of AIP’s 50s output. Two scientists become aware about a possible invasion from overseas; one of them comes under the thrall of the aliens and as a Quisling, much to the consternation of his wife.
There are some typically laughable Buchanan moments: crappy special effects (no worse than the Roger Corman version to be honest), erratic acting, crowds of people rushing around in a panic sequence (those Dallas amateur theatre societies must have loved Buchanan), pretentious narration, lousy photography
John Agar adds a touch of class and much needed professionalism as the sensible scientist, the one played by Peter Graves in the Corman version. He’s as bloodthirsty as Graves – not only does he kill his own wife, he runs in and shoots two scientists and a general.

Radio review – BBC - “The John Buchan Weekend” (1999) by Robin Brooks

Enjoyable pastiche of Buchan, which actually leans more on Hitchcock than the author himself (it even uses themes from Vertigo and North by Northwest). There’s even a touch of Total Recall – the plot involves a Buchan fan living out a fantasy Buchan weekend, only to find out that he’s in genuine danger. It’s a decent plot and there are some funny moments like the paintballers, and good acting; I wish there had been more Buchan – at least the writer acknowledges this by having the characters talk about the difference between the book and the Hitchcock film, and mentioning the women in later Hannay novels (“he liked them boyish” “oh, he was gay” etc).

Book review – “The Big Love” by Florence Aadland

Fascinating book written by the mother of Beverly Aadland, famed in Hollywood lore as the last lover of Errol Flynn – she started going out with him when she was 15. The book became something of a camp classic – William Styron wrote the introduction to the 1961 edition, acclaiming it as a comic masterpiece. 

It’s a hard book to describe, because Florence Aadland is so weird – the first sentence of the book is “there’s one thing I want to make clear my baby was a virgin the day she met Errol Flynn”. She wasn’t a virgin for long – Errol raped her the first time. (Something Beverly herself later confirmed) Well, not "real" rape apparently because she didn’t know what she was doing or something. Anyway, he was apologetic when he found out and they started going out. 

Florence’s adoration of her daughter is touching – we hear that she was a special baby, and that she was always talented and admired by people, especially men; we also hear about her talent (something not evident in Cuban Rebel Girls) and her nightclub act, and her habit of escorting young men out – but she wasn’t a hooker no sir-ee. Apparently when Aadland met Errol he was in his “prime” (Florence Aadland became an alcoholic maybe her eyesight wasn’t the best). 

The poor Aadlands had a hard time of it after Errol's death - Florence wound up in prison for helping corrupt the morals of her own daughter, then became an alcoholic and died (she sounds fairly boozy already in the book); Beverly was raped an almost killed - she's a housewife now I believe.

Reading this I thought "gee this would make a good movie or play" - and it was turned into a one woman show. Back in 1991 with Tracey Ullman.

Movie review - "The Bicycle Thief" (1948) *****

Gorgeous, simple tale about a man trying to get work and embarrassing himself in front of his son. It looks wonderful and it is heartbreaking. The film speaks for itself really. The best known of the neo-realist movement, which captivated the world's attention - but, significantly, everyone got sick of realism after a while and wanted white telephone movies again.

Movie review - "The Searchers" (1956) ****1/2

David Shipman once wrote that all the things John Ford did, he did better in this film. And he's right - you've got John Wayne and his stock company, some comic relief that is actually funny, brilliant action sequences including that terrifying initial Indian attack, a real exploration of race and the question of civilisation, and that classic final shot of Wayne walking away. You've also got some good old fashioned Ford insensitivity (making fun of the fat Indian who is in love with Jeffrey Hunter - although the sting is taken out of this when she dies). You've also got two endings, something no one ever seems to bring up when they gush about the film. This has perhaps been over-praised - maybe you had to have seen it as kid when you were a baby boomer - but still an excellent film.

Movie review - "Battleship Potemkin" (1925) ***

One of those movies every film student should see. I'm confident enough in my film tastes now to admit that I find it boring and wish there were some characters I could follow. Also, the ship looks too bright and clean to want to inspire mutiny (apart from the maggots in the meat of course). Clearly the work of a director of awesome talent, and the Odessa Steps sequence is great but yeah, whatever.

Movie review - "The Cabinet of Dr Caligari" (1919) ***

Horror classic which was highly influential in the development of expressionism - many of Universal's classic horror films of the 1930s were inspired by it. This helped popularise the idea that you didn't have to be "real" when making a film - indeed, expressionism accessed an entirely new range of stories to tell. Far out sets, enjoyable performances. It's not a bad story either, but I didn't like the "it was all a dream" ending.

Movie review - "Birth of a Nation" (1914) *1/2

I get that it's important. I know DW Griffith was crucial to film history, popularising the close up, the flashback, moving shots, etc. I know this was massively popular. And some of the story isn't bad - two families split apart by war...that sort of stuff is bread and butter for Civil War tales. But it's long. It's boring. It's racially offensive. It endorses terrorism over democracy. The first half is ok but the second half is an anti-black diatrabe and there are few images more chilling than blacks coming out of the voting booth to be met by KKK riders, then going back inside.

Movie review - "The Third Man" (1949) *****

It takes a brave man to drench his film in zither music, which is what Carol Reed does in this brilliant example of post-war noir. I was always fascinated by this film even before seeing it because of the evocativeness of the name "Harry Lime" - Lime is such a cool surname (I remember being excited by the thought of the TV series Lime Street). Joseph Cotten is effective as the well-meaning slightly bewildered American who gets over his head in Vienna; he is a bit wet, but I guess if he wasn't the ending wouldn't work as well.

Trevor Howard is excellent, as is poor old Bernard Miles (he's such a nice chap, reading Westerns - it's a real shame he is killed).

But the star turn is Orson Welles, who has one of the great introductions in all of cinema. He's perfect - it helps that Cotten was cast, because they were friends in real life, and it comes across on screen. Pauline Kael points out that the visiting-the-disabled-children scene adds a touch of slightly unwelcome nasty realism for the movie, but you needed something, and its done very cleverly (we never see them it's done all through Cotten's reactions). The ending is a cack.

Movie review - "The Great Train Robbery" (1903) ***

An important milestone in film history, because it showed that action did not need to be continuous, aspects of story could be inter cut – you could cut from one story strand to another, movie audiences could follow a complex story, and you could incorporate both scenes shot in a studio and scenes shot outdoors. It remains a good looking film that helped established the appetite for Westerns.

Movie review - "A Trip to the Moon" (1902) ***

The rating really is irrelevant - what's more important is the influence this film had. One of the first science fiction films, it really showed what you could do with the new medium of cinema. Heavily influenced by stage, but a crucial evolution from the Lumieres – the Lumieres photographed nature, Melies offered audiences a reconstructed life. The sets remain impressive and it's still good fun. The film was hugely successful, but not as profitable as it should have been because it was frequently illegally pirated.

Melies continued to produce films, but his filmmaking style did not progress much past the groundbreaking work of 1899 to 1902. His films began to seem old fashioned compared to the work done by other filmmakers such as Edwin S Porter and D W Griffith. (They would compose scenes out of separate shots rather than just one shot, change the camera's point of view, employ a close-up in addition to medium and long shots.)

Book review – “She” by H Rider Haggard

Always loved this book, Haggard’s most famous work after King Solomon’s Mines, and have never been able to understand why it’s never been filmed faithfully. I know you’ve got to compress and condense – but the novel’s got this great start, with a dying man asking Holly to look after his kid, the beautiful Vincent, descended from an ancient Egyptian prince, with a family curse. And it gives their expedition a stronger basis – Leo called from beyond the grave by Kyllikratis’ widow to avenge her husband’s death at the hands of She. The character of Holly is so interesting in the book – a lonely, truly ugly man with great strength and a big heart. On the negative side, Job is a wimpy lower-class cliché, all obedience and fear of women – Bernard Cribbins’ performance in the 1965 film was a great improvement on Haggard.

The journey to She is enjoyable, if standard stuff – a storm knocks out the boat, there is some hunting. Haggard shows some feminism albeit 19th century style – there is female equality in his secret kingdom with the local gals being quite forward.

But it really kicks up when we meet Ayesha – the stunning woman, fond of taking her top off (you dirty dog, Haggard), but who is lonely for love and good conversation; she is also guilty, because she killed the love her life. Ayesha kills Leo’s self-appointed girlfriend but Leo doesn’t mind that much because he can’t resist the lure of Ayesha. However, she doesn’t realise that she shouldn’t walk into the flame of life twice

Great things that weren’t used in film versions: Ayesha showing Holly the caves of perfectly preserved dead people; Ayesha falling for Holly’s mind and having some funny conversations about the modern world (when Ayesha hears about England having a Queen she says “no worries she can be deposed); Ayesha slapping Ustane and making a permanent mark; the cave of torture and caves of preserved dead people; the atmosphere of Ayesha and the others walking through the dead civilisation; the thrilling journey over to the chasm to the flame of life and back again. All these things would have been cheap to film but they weren’t used

(The 1965 film did make some good additions, though: having the natives revolt because of the death of Ustane, and having Leo walk into the fire, thereby sentencing himself to eternity without Ayesha.) It’s a very smart adventure novel with lots of chatting about philosophy and religion, plus some great sequences.

Play review – “Boys in the Band” by Mart Crowley

Picked a paperback novel copy of this play – how cool is that? Plays as paperback novels. (I know they publish plays as soft covers now, but this one is the size of a book – more pages, like a pulpy novel.) One of the reviews quoted on the back says that up until this play homosexuals were treated like clichés; this play established what would become clichés as the “gay play” became a fixture on Broadway: the bitchy queens; the references to Maria Montez, Carmen Miranda, etc; the dumb hustler who is just so gorgeous; the married man in denial; the token black. But it remains very funny with lots of great roles. It’s also dramatically very sound – taking place on the night of a birthday party; the late arrival of the birthday boy, the early arrival of the married man who claims his straight, the phone call game (this must be incredibly effective on stage).

Movie review – “The Eye Creatures” (1965) *

AIP were sufficiently impressed by the job Larry Buchanan did on Free, White and 21 to commission him to make a number of low-budget films for television. Made for very little money in Texas, they were often remakes of earlier AIP films and used AIP stars in lead roles. (This one has John Ashley.) It was followed by Zontar, The Thing from Venus, Creature of Destruction, Mars Needs Women, In the Year 2889, Curse of the Swamp Creature, Hell Raiders, and It's Alive!

This is fairly dreadful, not much fun to watch. An alien ship lands in the countryside, near a lot of necking teenagers (who are perved on by some military men in an awful “comic” scene). At first I thought the inspiration seems to be The Blob more than anything else – John Ashley as an overage teenager out with his girlfriend (Dad doesn’t approve of her going out with him – and you know I wouldn’t like my daughter going out with a 30-something man pretending to be a teenager either); they encounter aliens but no one believes them. The aliens go on a rampage but turn out to be killable by something seemingly innocuous. But after reading Mark McGee’s book on AIP, apparently this was based on Invasion of the Saucer Men – which had this plot, and was before The Blob, so there.

This has the hallmarks of many Buchanan films: lousy day for night photography, crappy special effect, poor acting, even worse comic relief, and a hilarious costume. Still, it’s a hard slog for the most part, lacking the delirious (if occasional) brilliance of Mars Needs Women. One or two quiet moments are actually spooky and indicate that Buchanan had some talent, even if a very well hidden one.

Movie review – “Mars Needs Women” (1967) *

Classic bad movie which is heavy going at times but still has some bright moments of crap camp. Tommy Kirk was usually professional but looks spectacularly silly in his Martian outfit. He’s better once he changes into a suit to hang out with the humans but still looks doped out a fair bit of the time. The presence of Yvonne Craig has the female lead interest

One or two moments are reasonably effective – for instance when Kirk and Craig visit a planetarium about Mars and the machine conks out, and Kirk finishes the talk. It also makes no bones about the sexism that Craig’s character encounters, and the ending is not without emotion – Kirk deciding to abort the mission because it involves abducting girls, and falling in love with Craig.

However the bulk of the film is very ordinary. There is little actual action and the story is padded with things like stock footage, scenes of a football game and homecoming queen parade, and a strip club.

Radio review – BBC - “The Riddle of the Sands” (1994) *** by Erskine Childers

A very good adaptation of the famous novel, which I remember being disappointed by when I first read it – lots of mucking around on boats and very little hard core plot or action. But I’m guessing that was why the novel was so influential – it took an outlandish idea and made it believable. Amateur sailor Davies asks his pal Caruthers (what a great name for a British novel hero) for a yachting trip around the North Sea; Davies hasn’t told Caruthers that he thinks a German sailor tried to kill him and is wondering why. Enjoyable tale, with a genuinely clever plan by the Germans to invade Britain and a moving ending.

Movie review – “Spider Baby” (1964) ***

There’s something quite lovely that all the great Universal horror stars all made cult classics towards the end of their careers – Karloff had Targets and The Sorcerers (if you go back a few more years you could add The Terror and The Raven to the list), Lugosi had the Ed Wood movies, and Lon Chaney Jnr had this. It's an enjoyable wacked-out low-budget film with fresh handling and a neat idea: old Lon plays the chauffeur who looks after a family who suffer from a degenerative condition. That’s the angle – the plot is a solid, old-fashioned will dispute.

The acting is very strong across the board; Chaney is effective in a role that suits his gentle, sad eyes (as an added bonus for Chaney fans there’s a reference to the mummy and the wolf man). There’s a very good performance from Sid Haig as the most visually interesting of the children. The downside is that once these weird and wonderful characters are set up the film doesn’t seem to have any really good ideas to top it. Still, the ones that it has are easily enough to keep things engaging and interesting.

Serial review – “The Return of Chandu” (1934) **

Bela Lugosi appeared in arguably more serials than any other top star – he made several during the 30s, usually as a villain or red herring. In this one though, he plays a hero – not an anti-hero like Dracula, or the doctor in The Black Cat, but an out-and-out brave leading man. I mean he’s not Gary Cooper, he is a magician, Chandu – but the plot has him coming to the rescue of a girl who has been kidnapped. And he gets the girl at the end, too.

This was presumably low budget but it looks pretty impressive – some snazzy sets of devil worshippers. There’s plenty of Indiana Jones type action – pits with tigers, hypnotism, boats sinking, vicious native islanders. It doesn’t quite cover the fact that much of said action is repetitive – kidnap, rescue, in danger, rescue, kidnap, rescue.

Jon Cleary

One of the most enjoyable afternoons in my life was spent interviewing the Australian author Jon Cleary for the National Film and Sound Archive. He was a wonderful raconteur and very good company; I think it helped I’d also done my research (his papers were at the Mitchell Library) so I could ask him decent questions. I remember he had a spectacular view of Sydney harbour from his Kirribilli house – he would write with his back to it. He also wore sunglasses because he’d had trouble with one of his eyes – they were bleeding.

I have to admit that at that stage I’d only read one of Cleary’s novels, The High Commissioner, a very enjoyable thriller which was poorly adapted for the screen in 1968. The meeting prompted me to read a number of his books.

Cleary says he wrote his first novel, You Can’t See Around Corners, based on instinct. And you can tell – it feels like it was written without planning (that’s not a criticism, just an observation). The lead character is a bit of a dead beat – he’s never going to get better, although he seems to have no problem with women. It is a bit of a shock when he turns murderer, especially of such a nice girl. I didn’t quite believe that, actually. But the atmosphere of wartime Sydney is wonderfully evoked. The 1969 adaptation looks dreadful – look at clips here - http://australianscreen.com.au/titles/you-cant-see-round-corners/clip2/

I remember reading his collection of small stories These Small Glories, but don’t remember much about them except that they dealt with the war. The next novel of his I read was The Long Shadow, a man on the run thriller – John Buchan in the Australian bush; it was workman like more than anything else although it did have a particularly good sequence where the hero is at a campfire with a tramp and both think the other one is a murderer.

The Sundowners was his next novel of note and it’s really good – a tale of a hopeless drifter who can’t settle down and his family. Cleary’s books often have pace because they are about people who move – the deserter in Corners, the man on the run in Shadow. Sundowners is about a man who can’t stop moving.

His next novel was the point at which I think Cleary sold out. This was highlighted by another writer, I can’t remember who, I think it was in the Australian Oxford Guide to Literature or something. Climate of Courage is an excellent war novel, reminiscent of the 20th Century Fox film In Love and War (which came later) – half the action is about soldiers on sure leave and their romantic entanglements, then the second half is the men on a disastrous patrol in New Guinea. There is some brilliant writing, and you’re going to yourself “but one of our heroes is going to die” – but the three heroes all live. Cleary couldn’t bring himself to kill them, and I think he crossed a line. Corners and Sundowners were inherently dark stories – the lead characters weren’t going to get better. Climate of Courage should have been the same – people you like die in war. It probably did wonders for his sales and sanity, but I think this is where Cleary decided to become a good commercial author rather than a great writer.

Back of Sunset is about a city doctor who works out bush as a Flying Doctor and was quite enjoyable. You could easily see how it could have been adapted for a movie in the style of say Doc Hollywood or the Crawfords TV series Flying Doctors. Noon from Thursday is about Australian colonial officers in New Guinea – the late father of a friend of mine is thanked in the introduction. Like many Cleary novels the bulks of the action involves a small group travelling across the country. The Pulse of Danger was like this – set on the Indian border (sometimes it seems Cleary took a trip, then wrote it up to claim it on tax). Ditto A Very Private War, about coast watchers, where the hero gets a chance to get revenge a bit too conveniently. High Road to China is an enjoyable adventure tale, very different to the film version, although I liked the film version.

Book review – “Remembering Somerset Maugham” by Garson Kanin

Wonderful, warm book of remembrances by Kanin about the great writer, with whom he was friendly for 20 years r so. It’s done out of chronological order but seems to flow effortlessly Kanin creates a real picture of the man – very English despite spending so much time away, adventurous, good company, prone to sookiness. Ironically, Kanin’s attempts to work with Maugham never quite came off (proposing Larry and Viv to make Cakes and Ale, trying to get up an anthology with Renee Clair). Maugham is full of good tips for writers – write for four hours every day 9am to 1pm then you have the rest of the day off; if you can’t think of anything to write just write your name; get out and see the world so you have something to write about. Also enjoyed the reminisce where Dwight D Eisenhower watched The True Glory with Kanin and Eisenhower chuckled patronisingly every time he saw a black soldier.

Book review – “Killing of the Unicorn” by Peter Bogdanovich

Uncomfortably personal but fascinating account by Bogdanovich of his relationship with Dorothy Stratten. Reading it is like listening to an old friend who has been through this horrible experience unburden himself on you – he goes on too long, waffles, tells you things you didn’t really need to know – but you feel as though you can’t interrupt or say anything because he is a grieving widower. Because it involves famous people and a notorious event you find yourself gripped; but it also makes you uneasy since some of the information feels too personal.

We hear about Bogdanovich and Stratten’s courtship and love making; there are long descriptions of their kisses and what she wore on certain days; Bogdanovich’s theories about what happened to Stratten (rape and torture); frequent comments about how lovely and wonderful Stratten was, including lots of her poetry, the wise things she said, and number of times people commented on her large breasts (apparently one was bigger than the other). I hope this isn’t coming across as mean, that’s not the intention – it’s just this is a very raw and personal work.

Interestingly, Bogdanovich doesn’t just blame Paul Snider for Stratten’s death, he also indicts Hugh Hefner and the whole playboy philosophy. He certainly has an arguable case (he quotes Molly Haskell, among others) – but I couldn’t help thinking that it was a bit unfair and hypocritical of Bogdanovich, since Hefner had showed him so much hospitality over the years (including introducing him to Stratten and co-financing Saint Jack). And Bogdanovich was a wealthy film director and Stratten an aspiring actor – isn’t there some sort of exploitation and power imbalance going on there? I know, nude photography is different from filmmaking and all that - I just felt it was a bit rich of Bogdanovich to exploit Playboy and Hefner for his own ends (not to mention his position as a film director), then get high and mighty about it. 

He also gets stuck into Bob Fosse’s Star 80 for its flaws (including complaining that Mariel Hemingway’s breasts weren’t as big as Dorothy’s) – without mentioning that Star 80 shows the director based on Bogdanovich to have some manipulative traits similar to Paul Snider. But I can understand his need to blame someone.

Stratten was a beautiful person and her performance in They All Laughed is very likeable. This is a loving tribute – too loving to get a really accurate picture of her, it’s through soft focus, but would such a thing be possible for someone who lived such a short period of time? What did she really feel about Bogdanovich? Was it love – was she just swept up in the romance and glamour of going out with a rich and successful elder man who wasn’t a scungy pimp like her husband? I know that’s a very personal question to ask, but this is the sort of book that invites these questions.

Gripping, if unsettling reading, very much admired for those interested in Bogdanovich.

Radio review – BBC - “The Lady Vanishes” (2000) **1/2

More accurately this is an adaptation of The Wheel Spins which was adapted by Launder and Gilliat for the famous Hitchcock film. Assuming the adaptation is reasonably faithful, it’s fascinating to see the differences – no cricket loving; there is an extra English male character, a doctor; Mrs Froy isn’t a spy; there’s no final shoot out. Still very entertaining.

Book review – “And now… Here’s Johnny” by Nora Ephron

I picked this up at a second hand book store only because it was (a) cheap and (b) written by Ephron, presumably as a quickie during her journo years. I say “presumably” because it’s actually a very good book, well written and entertaining, and it seems to be fair. Published in 1967, it’s a bio of the famous American Tonight Show host, about whom I have heard a lot about but never seen more than a minute’s footage of. Ephron gives background to the show, Carson’s life and early career, the false dawn of stardom (he was given his own show in the 50s but it flopped – but then he came back hosting a day time quiz show), and success on the Tonight Show. Space is also given to Jack Paar, who comes across as a more complex and interesting creature than Carson – but Carson is not without interest too: a driven, talented man, seemingly stand offish but probably just Protestant. It doesn’t shy away from his less appealing straights eg greed, sacking his manager and producer. And like a good journo Ephron lets Carson’s idiotic-sounding second wife hang herself merely by quoting her. (He eventually got rid of her a few years after this book came out.)

Movie review – “Red Mountain” (1953) **1/2

Little known Alan Ladd Western set in the dying days of the Civil War out west. He’s a Confederate officer who hooks up with Quantrill’s Raiders (led by John Ireland), who are trying to whip up a Western rebellion against the Union – a similar plot to the Errol Flynn actioner Rocky Mountain. 

Ladd also comes across a couple, a dodgy former Confederate (Arthur Kennedy) and his Southern-hating girlfriend (Lizabeth Scott), with whom Ladd falls in love. Ladd is torn between duty to the Confederacy and Ireland’s increasingly vicious tactics; fortunately Ireland indicates he considers the Confederacy is dead and he wants to make an Empire of his own, thereby letting Ladd off the moral hook. Ladd finally admits that a Yankee victory is better than the Indians. (Earlier in the film when Scott calls Ladd on the South’s slavery he says “we were working on it”).

Lizabeth Scott has harsh features; she’s an interesting team with Ladd. Ladd is in good form as a sort of anti-hero. He really did have a beautiful speaking voice; I particularly noticed it with this one. Ireland is a very strong villain, as he often was, when you think about it (eg Red River).

William Dieterle tries some interesting things with the direction (apparently John Farrow also worked on this uncredited) and it’s a Hal Wallis production so it looks good. But there’s not a lot of action and the film whimps out with it’s moral choices, conveniently killing Kennedy so Ladd can go off with Scott and having Ireland turn overly evil to reduce Ladd’s moral quandary.

TV review – “Tales of Tomorrow – Frankenstein”

The Frankenstein story condensed to 30 minutes – the doctor has dinner, brings the creature to life, the creature goes for a rampage, falls out window, comes back lured by kid and is electrocuted. The most notable thing about it is Lon Chaney’s performance as the monster – he’s got a bald smooth head as opposed to Universal’s make up, enabling him to be a lot more expressive than in Ghost of Frankenstein.

Dr Frankenstein has this really bratty annoying kid and there’s a satisfactory scene where the monster flings him around the room and forces him to go on his rocking horse. There’s also a famous live TV moment where Chaney picks up a chair as if to smash it then puts it down again – apparently he was so drunk he thought it was a rehearsal and didn’t want to smash the furniture (the camera quickly cuts away from him.)

Book review – “Greenmantle” by John Buchan

The second Hannay differs markedly from The 39 Steps for two reasons (a) Hannay volunteers for the mission as opposed to being thrust into it (he’s an officer in the British army by now and a lot more confident about derring-do), and (b) he goes on the mission with several of his mates. For sure, he performs the first bit on his own (going undercover then fleeing from the Germans) but eventually teams up with his friends for the final bit. He has three main allies in this one – Sandy Arbuthnot, the friendly Boer Peter and a fat American, John. Sandy is actually more heroic than Hannay, but is such a flashy improbably character it’s probably best the more sensible Hannay take care of narration duties.

The mission involves Hannay going to the near East to investigate a possible Islamic uprising. Hannay points out he’s not really qualified, most of his experience being in Africa – Sir Walter Bullivant not very convincingly says he gets the gig because he can sniff out gold.

Buchan’s attitude to the Germans is interesting – they are the enemy, no doubt about that, but he admires them. Some are burly thugs like Stumm with his massive neck, others are “white men” like the engineer, but they are smart and brave, if all touched with a whiff of the fanatic. He’s even sympathetic for the dopey, nice woman in the cottage who helps him. He also doesn’t mind Turks as fighting men, although the country is lazy and corrupt.

Hannay’s not much of a spy. He blows cover because Stumm is mean to him, causing him to thump the German; after he does he doesn’t kill Stumm like he should but walks away. Later on when going undercover as an engineer he refuses to damage munitions meant to be used against the British because of personal pride.

Like 39 Steps, the novel has brisk pace and Buchan has a flair for description. There’s a few too many moments of luck to benefit Hannay – he comes across a ship that needs an engineer enabling him to escape, he runs into Peter, etc. But the novel has a real feeling of adventure and gets better as it goes along; there are some excellent action pieces such as an attack in Constantinople and Peter Pienaar trying to cross over to the Russian lines. Also, there’s a strong villain with the femme fetale who almost tempts poor Sandy into betraying his country (she does offer him a kingdom, riches, herself – I felt sorry for her at the end when he reveals he’s a British officer; this has more emotional kick than many Buchan works – helping this is the scene which I always remembered since reading this as a teenager of our heroes surrounded by the enemy talking about how good their lives had been and how they didn’t fear death). Indeed, the action/adventure stuff is better than the spy/thriller stuff.

Movie review – “Muggers” (1999) **

Black Aussie comedy which reminded me in an odd way of The Honourable Wally Norman – like that, it has a well-structured script with all the stuff you’re supposed to have (protagonists, antagonists, complications, romance, set up, pay off, different acts) but you don’t care. It just sort of lies there. Maybe it’s because black comedy needs a whiff of madness about it to work and this doesn’t have it. Maybe it doesn’t push the envelope in the way, say, Little Shop of Horrors does. Maybe the twists are a bit flat: love interest turns out to be a hooker, the uni nurse is involved in an opposing racket, etc. Decent cast; Nicola Charles goes topless for a sex scene, which is a bit of a thrill for those Neighbours fans from the 90s (actually she’s quite funny - it’s a shame her part isn’t bigger).

Movie review – “Santiago” (1956) **1/2

Most of Alan Ladd’s films for his company Jaguar were undistinguished but this at least had the benefit of a novel setting – to wit, Cuba in the late 19th century, when they were battling for independence against Spain. It also helps in that it’s got a strong support casting, including Chill Wills, Lloyd Nolan, Paul Fix and Royal Dano. Ladd always did especially well in films where he had a bloke to bounce off, eg William Bendix, and he and Nolan have good by-play here.

Wills has a nice death scene involving his former black slave; getting dressed up in his old South uniform and blowing himself up. (Yeah, I know it’s both hokey and dodgy to have the former slave stay with him, but it’s still quite moving.) Other effective bits include a final shoot out in a storm (director Gordon Douglas likes storms, he used one in The Iron Mistress) and a clever bit of business where Ladd and Nolan get two dead Spaniards and use them to drive a coach load of dynamite into a fort.

Rosanna Podesta is poor as annoying the female lead, and check out the deep dubbed voice of that irritating little kid. It is for these two that Ladd eventually changes sides – he falls in love with the kid as much as Podesta. Despite the 1898 setting it’s very much a Western: there’s an opening ambush shoot-out, a chase scene on a coach and a final gun duel between Ladd and Nolan. I was expecting a big battle at the end, or at least American soldiers, but there is just a shoot out – maybe they ran out of money. Ladd’s performance is Ok.

Radio review – CP#35 - “The Hurricane” (1939) *** by Mercury Players

Perhaps not the most obvious choice for radio adaptation because storms would seem to be visual – but actually storm sounds are quite effective and most of the story anyway is a saga of injustice. Wells is strong as the hard-arse governor who refuses to bend in a case of wrongful imprisonment – the poor native guy suffers years in gaol and has his home wiped out at the end. So it’s not a cop out by any means. Mary Astor reprises her film performance as the governor’s wife.

Radio review – BBC - “Three Hostages” (2003) ** by John Buchan

Hitchcock considered adapting this in the 60s but decided against it, partly because it is said he was worried about making hypnotism believable on the screen. It’s not a problem on radio – the voice of the hypnotiser is freakily effective and one of the best things about this adaptation. It involves Hannay trying to rescue three hostages of a gang; his wife helps out as does deux ex machina Sandy.

Radio review – BBC - “Mr Standfast” (2008) ** by John Buchan

Decent enough version of one of Buchan’s weaker Hannay novels. The actors do good work, but it suffers a little from cutting away from the scene at times, eg a moment where Hannay asks what happens to a character and they cut to sounds of an execution. I get what they were getting at but it’s a bit jarring. Not as much fun as Greenmantle.

Radio review – BBC - “Greenmantle” (2005) *** by John Buchan – BBC version

Enjoyable, faithful adaptation of the second Richard Hannay novel, with the actors seeming to have a particular good time with the various accents – German, Afrikaans, American, Turkish. The adaptation doesn’t shy away from some of Buchan’s (Hannay’s) judgements about Germans and so on. It captures the pace and adventure of the story, and the acting is very strong.

Book review – “The Eternal Male” by Omar Sharif

Sharif is an interesting movie star, still the only Arab to make it big in Hollywood. He only really had three hits but since they were three of the biggest films in the 60s (and remain classics today) he made a lot of money out of it. These are his memoirs and even though I admit I rarely give much thought to Omar Sharif, this reads exactly like you’d imagine – suave, prone to waffling when justifying his womanising, egotistical but self aware, a nice line in humour and charm, old fashioned values (not a big fan of democracy in the Arab world, a woman’s place is in the home, etc) but aware they’re old fashioned.

You need movie stars like Omar Sharif, who are citizens of the world, represent Egypt in bridge at the Olympics, appear in silly projects for the money, devote their spare time to money-wasting hobbies like horse breeding and gambling, who sleep with heaps of women.

Sharif says he doesn’t want a kiss and tell memoir but then goes to write at length about his flings with Barbra Streisand and Anouk Aimee, as well as the Egyptian star who became his wife. Sharif had a blessed run in many ways – son of a rich timber merchant he developed an enthusiasm for acting, became a star in his first film due to his looks and marrying his co-star (a big name at the time), spotted by an agent for David Lean, having Lawrence of Arabia as his first Hollywood film. (How bad do you feel for poor Maurice Ronet, cast in the role but substituted, partly because his eyes were the same colour as Peter O’Toole's?).

The book is light on anecdotes. It starts with a great one, which has him, Peter O’Toole and Lenny Bruce in gaol the night he arrived in Hollywood for the Lawrence premiere (they went to see Bruce in concert then later on Bruce shot up). It’s a shame there aren’t more like this – he talks of roistering with O’Toole on “leave” in Beirut during filming, but the details are sketchy.

I would also have liked to hear a bit more about the films, because we get tantalising glimpses: Zanuck and Fleischer pursued him ferociously to play Che Guevera, he loved being in The Horsemen, his casting in Funny Girl partly came about because of a joke (they’d ask “Why not Omar Sharif” as a joke until eventually deciding to give it a go). It’s also interesting to read about a man who was Christian in Egypt, then converted to Islam, and got in trouble for kissing known Israel supporter Streisand in Funny Girl. It goes up to 1977 but he skims over his 70s movies.

Still, I enjoyed the book; it is light brisk reading and Sharif is entertaining company on the page.

Movie review – “It’s Alive” (1969) **

Larry Buchanan doesn’t have the best reputation in the world but I quite enjoyed this little piece of low budget horror sci-fi. It starts with quite a creepy sequence, a narrator talking as a car drives along in the rain. And the ensuring plot is serviceable – a squabbling husband and wife get lost and run out of gas; they wind up at an isolated house inhabited by a married couple who turn out to be keeping a prehistoric creature in a cave in the backyard. Tommy Kirk is a guy they run into who turns out to be a palaeontologist (there’s a touch of the Ross Geller about him). If you’re wondering how Buchanan gets a feature out of three people stuck in a cave, the answer is he doesn’t really – there’s around half an hour of flashback explaining how the woman half of the dinosaur-owning couple winds up there. In fact, this sequence is fairly full on.

Some erratic acting, flat moments and a laughable monster but it’s not bad, and the use of narration, although presumably inspired by budget more than anything else, is effective. Kirk is professional if pasty-faced there’s a scene where he’s been stuck in the cave for a while and he looks poorly and you can’t help wondering if that’s what he looked like when he was on drugs.

Script Review – “Year of the Comet” by William Goldman

In his memoirs Goldman tries to blame the failure of this film on the fact its about red wine and today’s kids don’t really care about red wine. It’s an ingenious way of masking the script’s real problems, most notably a lack of decent jokes and a really silly ending involving the effects of an aging formula. The film also suffered from undercasting – I think with Robert Redford and Glenda Jackson in the leads in the 70s (as Joe Levine originally wanted) it would have been enjoyable breezy fun, even with the silly ending. But Timothy Daly and Penelope Ann Miller lacked the charisma to make this work. Romantic comedy-thrillers need stars. They rolled the dice on Daly and Miller and it didn’t work out.

TV review – “Suspense – A Case of Amontillado” (1949)

Rare TV appearance by Bela Lugosi. It’s an updating of an Edgar Allan Poe story to World War II Italy. He plays a nasty fascist officer who torments the noble who is married to a woman he covets. Lugosi winds up chained in a dungeon that gets bricked up.

Poe was never that plot heavy but he’d adapted surprisingly well to the screen over the years, chiefly I would suppose because they offer scope for great roles and atmosphere. (Also being buried alive is always a good climax.) This lacks atmosphere, with its crappy sets and wartime setting. It’s basically a two hander between Lugosi and Romney Brent, neither of whom are that great. Lugosi looks a bit dishevelled and drunk, but that is required by the story. This is really for Lugosi completists only

Movie review – “Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla” (1952) **

A fascinating curio, a vehicle for two Martin and Lewis impersonators, Duke Mitchell and Sammy Petrillo, plus Bela Lugosi. Herman Cohen was associate producer and William Beaudine directed; both men have been associated with a fair few stinkers in their careers, as has Lugosi.

The plot is familiar stuff for all those who enjoy Martin and Lewis (and Abbott and Costello) – Mitchell and Petrillo wind up on a tropic island and romance some local ladies (hot one for Mitchell, fatty for Petrillo). The one European on the island is a Moreau-like doctor who is performing nefarious experiments to change humans into monkeys. Lugosi lusts after the attractive American-educated chief’s daughter, who serves as his assistant – which results in him transforming Mitchell into an ape.

I’ve got to say I enjoyed this film a fair bit, a lot more than I thought I would. I found it genuinely interesting to see Mitchell and Petrillo ape Martin and Lewis – Petrillo especially has the voice and gestures down pat (apparently Lewis sued him). Lugosi looks drug addicted and haggard – his head now too big for his body – but the voice is still there and he’s still Bela Lugosi and he delivers the scientific mumbo jumbo for the umpteenth time with conviction. Some of it’s quite funny, especially when Mitchell is turned into an ape and Petrillo does shtick with him. But the ending is awful – it turns out to be all a dream of Petrillo’s. Why do they do this? There was no need for it.