Movie review - "Any Questions for Ben?" (2011) *** (warning: spoilers)

The most frustrating Australian film in recent years, because it should (and could) have been our Four Weddings and a Funeral or Notting Hill. So much of this is perfect - brisk handling, stylish photography, terrific locations (Melbourne has never looked better: cruises on the Yarra, open air cinemas, restaurants, bars, mansions, Myer Music Bowl, etc), wonderful costumes (Melbournians have never looked more stylish), perfect casting (Jane Kennedy is one of the best in the business), excellent cast who have a real sense of camaraderie, lovely jokes, charismatic leads. And yet...

It's bewildering how a team as experienced and clever as Working Dog, who have such a great track record, could make such a fundamental, basic error as the one they have here: a passive lead who does nothing, resulting in nil story. It starts off great - young man with the world at his feet has a quarter life crisis and wonders what he's going with his life. That's the basis of Jerry Maguire, even High Fidelity. But the thing is those guys then went and did something - set up a new business, track down ex girlfriends. Here it's the plot of the whole movie. We see Josh Lawson party, hang out with his mates and date a moron; he has his crisis of confidence, sees Rachael Taylor, who asks him out... then turns her down; he parties, hangs out with his mates, and dates another moron; then another moron; then sees Rachael Taylor and they get along but he lets her go; then he parties and hangs out. It's maddening.

I mean the vignettes are funny - but they're repetitive. We didn't need Jodi Gordon, or the Russian tennis player, or the girl he has a fling with at work (all are great, funny and all that but we didn't need them - they repeat what we see with the wonderful Fleur character). Lawson rejects Taylor not once but three times, knocks back job offers several times. Everything is here is except a story.

And it's a damn shame. Josh Lawson is a potential star (he reminded me of a young Rob Sitch in the way he talked), Taylor is luminous in what really isn't much of a role but she looks great, Christian Clark and Dan Henshall are a lot of fun, Felicity Ward is divine (I know so many girls like her), Lachy Hume a delight... every bit part is well cast. The ending is touching and clever, and I loved the end credits sequence. But romantic comedies are harder to write than they look, and there's no better example to that than here.

Script review - Three screenplays by Ed Burns

At one stage Ed Burns was a real star of indie cinema - good looking, charismatic, gravelly voice and with something to stay. He's still around, still good looking and charismatic with a gravelly voice (he's carved himself a niche as the wrong man in romantic comedies), but he seems to have said all he has to say - a progression you can see from this collection.

"The Brothers McMullen" is terrific - warm and funny look at some Irish American brothers on Long Island, battling with the ghost of their father, commitment issues with women, temptations from the wrong girl. It's very well done, with a lot of heart, and the magic is on the page.

"She's the One" is pretty good too. It's about Irish brothers, only two of them, with the key difference of seeing Dad. We don't see Mum, which might be a mistake - or maybe it was the lack of a third brother, because it does feel "padded" in places, with too many jokes about one of the brothers possibly being gay. But it has a great romantic plot with the cab driver and his customer, and a good theme (i.e. the importance of compromise).

"No Looking Back" is bad. Dull, sluggish, devoid of humour or warmth. It consists of a bunch of working class people sitting around being working class drinking beer. The plot would gobble up maybe five minutes of TV drama - girl unsure of marrying current beau is tempted by old flame. There's no decent reveal (she had an abortion! Can't have kids), no particularly memorable capturing of a time and place. You keep waiting for someone to rob a bank, fall pregnant, come out of the closet, anything. But it doesn't. It's as if Burns said everything he wanted to say with his first two films - maybe his first, but reheated it for his second - then completely and utterly ran out. Still, that may be unfair and I will try to check out some of his subsequent films to find out.

Movie review - "Broken Arrow" (1950) **** (warning: spoilers)

To be blunt, Jeff Chandler often acted like a wooden Indian - all sculpted physique and nobility, with a deep voice and stilted nature, so the role of Cochise, in hindsight, was a Godsend for him. He's extremely effective here, because the action is driven by James Stewart, as the cowboy determined to bring peace between Indians and whites. Chandler gets to be regal and charismatic, which he can do, but not act too much, which is good because he struggles.

This Western has aged very well, in part because it doesn't hide from the viciousness of both sides - the Apaches aren't cuddly: they have internal intrigues, they torture their prisoners by having them eaten alive by ants; the whites scalp Indians and are treacherous, greedy and out for revenge. Everyone's human, in other words.

The romance between Stewart and Debra Paget is more traditional - she's a bit bland, but it's vital dramatically, and gives the climax tremendous kick. (John Milius must have been greatly influenced by this - many of his screenplays feature a native girl lover of the white hero who kicks the bucket. Of course Broken Arrow didn't invent this but they popularised it after World War Two.)

The story is strong and tackles an important issue - the necessary of holding the line when it comes to keeping peace. The screenplay excellent and director Delmer Daves handles things pretty well. Only occasionally does it hit a bung note, such as the studio setting for a few scenes which really jar. This wasn't a massive hit on release but it was a solid one and the movie was extremely influential in treatment of Indians - Westerns with liberal cowboys trying to keep the peace became all the rage in the 50s. Deservedly so because it's a really good film.

Movie review - "40 Guns to Apache Pass" (1967) **

Audie Murphy's last movie as a lead is the story of story he was making in 1951 but it's not a bad set up - he's a calvary captain at an Arizona town  surrounded by Apaches, who leads a mission to retrieve a wagon containing forty rifles. There's some troublesome dudes in the posse, including a cowardly soldier who lets his brother get killed, and a rebellious Southerner.

There's some irritating (and unnecessary) voice over, something which featured in a few Audie Murphy westerns, Kenneth Tobey and Michael Blodgett in the support cast, a decent amount of action, an underdeveloped love interest who just pops up and at the end. William Witney wasn't the best director in the world. The story holds and keeps this solid. Not awesome but not bad, and suitable in a way for it to be a Murphy swan song as it's typical of far too much of his output.

Theatre review - "A Chorus Line" July 21, 2012

I remember the movie version with Michael Douglas - the sort of casting that they would have argued to themselves was minor but sunk it because he's so obviously not a dancer. I also recall a critic saying the film was up against it because the story was a front stage story, not a back stage one, which work better in movies. And there's the fact the story is an ensemble piece really - the Zac-Cassie "romance" is just one of several subplots. Zac is a bit sadistic isn't he with a Big Brother vote off.

Anyway, it was great to see - terrific dancing. Some of the songs were a bit "whatever" but it's a spectacle, well performed by the cast. I laugh how all these dancers regard acting as a back up plan.

Movie review - "Trunk to Cairo" (1966) **

One for all those Audie Murphy fans (myself included) who keep wishing they could see him in something other than Westerns... Well, serves us right, because little old Aud is hilariously miscast as a James Bond type agent in this cheapie 60s thriller set in Egypt. He doesn't look comfortable in nightclubs, swigging back liquor while in a suit, or making out with sexy dames on the beach. As a matter of fact, he doesn't look comfortable doing anything much in this film, even the action stuff because it seems so sneaky (e.g. breaking into compounds, dressing up in disguise as an Arab) whereas Audie's persona was always more up front.

But what they hey it's only a cheap Bond knock off and the fact it stars Audie gives it a certain odd charm (as does the fact its an Israeli-West German production, which may explain a certain anti-Arab mood). George Sanders, by then firmly in the where's-the-paycheck stage of his career, pops in the support cast, the colour is bright, it has wacky 60s music. It's crap but endearing crap.

Movie review - "Brittania Hospital" (1982) ***

The third in the Lindsay Anderson-Malcolm McDowell "Mick Travis" trilogy isn't as good as if or O Lucky Man but has a similar zany spirit - I know the word "zany" is considered old fashioned these days but it's true. Maybe "anarchic" as well. 

This is very much of it's time - I don't think we'd buy a movie today about unions being able to bring a hospital to a crushing stop. It's England in decline, something they seem to constantly worry about - nothing works, hospitals, public transport, royal visits. There are digs against Africans which could be interpreted as racist (dictators, radicals, chickens in the hospital) but to be fair the movie mocks everyone with equal savagery - royals, establishment, union officials, etc. I really liked the Frankenstein subplot. 

But it's not hard to see why this wasn't a hit. That has been blamed on the Falklands factor but the fact there is no sympathetic or at least empathetic lead I think counted more.

Movie review - "The Tall Target" (1951) ***

One of a series of unpretentious movies Anthony Mann made early in his career - a highly enjoyable train thriller, with a great idea: Dick Powell (as John Kennedy!) tries to prevent the assassination of Abraham Lincoln in 1861 just prior to his inauguration. It's brisk and quick - I did laugh when Powell talked lovingly about how he met Abe for 48 hours and thought he was awesome. Americans do have to put their presidents on pedestals.

There's some decent twists and an interesting array of characters: a Southern belle, mysterious officer, Southern idiot, slave, anti-slavery campaigner. And train movies always have a solid in-built tension. Worth seeking out.

Movie review - "Fifty Fifty" (2011) ***1/2

The Apatow cool group take on cancer, with results that are warm and funny, as befitting something based on a true story - the screenwriter's. Since he went on to write a movie you can guess it has a happy ending (although apparently originally the character based on him was going to die) but it still has an honesty you only get from personal experience: people who he tells making the news all about then; the strains it puts on a bad relationship; a friend trying to use it to pick up chicks; unexpected perks (e.g. being able to buy marijuana, instant sympathy).

Occasionally it falls into cliche - once his patient friend introduces his wife you know she's going to be a dead duck - but it's full of warmth and humour and very good acting. It's also well structured - the makers of Not Suitable Children ought to take note. I'm not convinced Joseph Gordon Levitt is a film star, he's too introverted and passive, but he is a good actor, and Seth Gordon is a delight as his friend.

Movie review - "J Edgar" (2011) **1/2

Props to Clint Eastwood and writer Duncan Lance Black for trying to give an empathetic depiction of perhaps the 20th century's most famous law enforcement official but this really should have been a mini series, or else it should have focused on one story instead of going all over the shop - not only do we get gay romance with Clyde (sensitively handled), there are the 1919 anarchist bombings, the Lindbergh kidnappings, chasing down gangsters, dealing with the Kennedys and Nixon etc in the 60s and 70s. It bites off more than it can chew. It's kind of like one person wanted to make a movie about the Lindbergh kidnapping, then another wanted to do the gay love story, so they decided to combine them and throw a few other things in the mix - casserole filmmaking.

Also Leonard di Caprio's voice got on my nerves - he gives a good performance but we hear him talk too much. More people needed dialogue. Naomi Watts' role is rather thankless, but she's professional - as is everyone really. Period detail etc is strong - it just needed more time.

Movie review - "The Long and the Short and the Tall" (1961) **

There was a brief period when Japanese-themed war films were popular in British cinema - due, I guess, to Bridge on the River Kwai: Camp on Blood Island, Yesterday's Enemy (also about a patrol in Burma) and this. 

George MacDonald Fraser took this film to task in his book about Hollywood historical movies because of its inaccuracies. He had served in Burma - I've never been near the place, let alone had any sort of military service, but it didn't feel that real to me either: carrying on about cigarettes, agonising ceaselessly over shooting prisoners, arguing constantly in front of the enemy, being unable to stab a soldier on patrol, etc, etc.

It was originally a play a maybe it worked on stage, with cramped intensity, but it doesn't here. It feels stagey - a bunch of actors standing around yelling at each other most of the time (although there is some action at the end). Richard Harris looks impressive but isn't really; I felt the best performances were from Richard Todd (whose underplaying is a relief next to Laurence Harvey), Australia's own John Meillon, and Ronald Fraser.

Laurence Harvey is spectacularly bad, mugging all over the shop with an outrageous accent - it really is appalling work, and you could weep when you hear that Peter O'Toole played the role on stage and was available for the film, but the producers wanted a bigger name. Not that I think he would have saved the film. 

It was heavy going.

Movie review - "The Real Glory" (1939) ***

America doesn't like to think of itself as an Imperial power, even when it had an Empire (they like to think of themselves as throwing off the Empire's shackles) but the success of Life of a Bengal Lancer was such that Hollywood went through a five year cycle of pumping out Imperial action films that centred around three male heroes: The Charge of the Light Brigade, Gunga Din.

For variety, Henry Hathaway decided to do this, set in the Philippines before World War I, with American troops fighting Moros who are picking on the poor little locals. There are some interesting parallels with the Iraq war - the aim of the Yank troops is to train the locals well enough to defend themselves against Muslim extremists. So this isn't a "how awesome is this Empire on which the sun never sets" story it's more of a "aren't we nice Americans helping the Philippines and we won't be forever" story (this would make an interesting double bill with John Sayles' Amigo). Significantly, hero Gary Cooper is an army doctor rather than a straight up action hero.

Politics aside, this is actually an enjoyable adventure film, beautifully shot and well directed by Hathaway. I didn't find Cooper as annoying as I often do because his character didn't sulk and was more heroic. It's really his film; David Niven, then during the hero's-best-friend phase of his career, has a decent supporting role as a fellow officer (the Franchot Tone part) - he's not really convincing as an American, but that's part of the fun. Broderick Crawford is the third friend, who is a keen botanist.

My favourite bit: the Moros tying themselves to trees and catapulting them over the walls into the fort.

Movie review - "Star Trek" (2009) ***1/2

A tricky job considering the franchise is so beloved, but J.J. Abrams pulled it off. It's more of an action movie but there is a chunk of sci fi in the middle with some complicated, clever business about time travel that covers their backside in case of space continuity. I'm not a Trekkie, but recognised many of the tropes from things like Star Wars (not one but two planets are wiped out) and Tom Cruise movies (the character of young Kirk is just like Cruise).

Very slick and clever - it did feel overlong and loud towards the end (another big bang action sequence). I seem to be saying that a lot about recent action movies which everyone loves - I'm showing my age, no doubt.  Impressive cast - Simon Pegg doesn't appear for a surprisingly long time, Karl Urban is good as McCoy... actually everyone is good. I love it how they gave Spock a sex life! And there's a galaxy of cute cameos: Tyler Perry, Winona Ryder, Leonard Nimoy.

Movie review - "Tammy and the Bachelor" (1957) **1/2

Easy to mock, so let's mock it - Debbie Reynolds is a 17 year old cracker who has lived an isolated life and comes to stay with Leslie Nielson, who had crashed in her back yard. He plays a standard 50s heartthrob, brylcreamed and dreamy, channelling Rory/Tab/Troy/George/Rock and all the rest - which is part of this film's appeal today. Walter Brennan does his ol' pappy schtick - this sort of role would usually be played by Arthur O'Connell in 50s/60s teen films - and there are too many scenes of Tammy revealing he's in gaol to the shock of all, although there is a funny moment when people thinks he's dead and Tammy talks about him.

There's some uncomfortable racial politics - Nielsen and his family like to dress up as old Southern types to raise money for their former plantation house, and they have a black maid who of course adores Tammy. A lot of it is dopey, with Tammy charming everyone with her simpleton ways. And there are all these unresolved subplots, such as what happens to Nielsen's father and mother.

Yet there is a solid subplot about the importance of following your dreams - Nielsen is scared to be a farmer, his father scared of engaging with the world, his mother scared of dying. This had surprising depth and makes the movie harder to dismiss. Not impossible, just harder!

Movie review - "Not Suitable for Children" (2012) **

I wanted to like this more than I did - it's got a central idea that's at least different and had real potential; it's set in the inner west of Sydney, which is a good location; there are some likeable actors - everyone is strong; it has a lovely atmosphere (share houses, coffee shops, parties, dull jobs).

But it's not that funny (it cries out for laugh out loud moments - just a few would do, but there are none); opportunities feel as though they are missed wholesale (why not use the ex girlfriend Bojana a bit more? why not use Ryan Corr and his two mates, all of whom seem funny? why not give his sister and brother-in-law characters to play? why not flesh out his relationships with characters other than Sarah Snook); it's a little confusing (can you really make money out of throwing parties in your own house? why does he tell everyone about his cancer but not Bojana?); it felt as though Ryan Kwanten needed a sidekick and also like they didn't really give that much thought as to what his plan would be until he hooks up with Sarah Snook. A lot of scenes feel pointless (e.g. someone saying "let's talk" and that's it) and it's tone varies: it's kind of raunchy (sex scenes, including a semen slapstick moment) but if you came to it expecting to see a raunchy comedy you'd probably be disappointed; it's sweet too but if you wanted something sweet and romantic you'd probably be disappointed as well.

Let's take a walk on the sunny side for a bit: Snook is charming, a new star; Kwanten is good too, and the sex scenes between them were hot (and the best thing about the movie); Corr looks as though he'd knock it out of the park if he was just given something to do; a lot of care has clearly been taken with the design. The whole movie has a sort of shaggy dog charm. Michael Lucas is a really talented writer, you can see that on Offspring, I just wish he'd done another big redraft of the script.

Movie review - "The Quick Gun" (1964) **

This low budget Audie Murphy western actually has a pretty decent story - not too original, to be sure, but full of action and suspense. Which makes it frustrating that it was so poorly handled. Audie is fine, but Merry Anders comes across bland as his ex girlfriend, the villainous ex rancher out for revenge is too fat to be a threat, his nephew over acts too much to be scary, and so does the guy who plays the outlaw wanting to hold up a town. There's odd sets like the weirdly semi-pink saloon, a sexist tone with characters constantly worried how the women will take it and a concern for rape, plus general uninspired direction and an overlong running time (it's only 90 minutes but it feels longer - besides, the best Audie Murphy Westerns clocked in under 80 minutes).

But the story does keep you watching - it has effective melodrama, such as the man determined to avenge his useless son (who Murphy killed), and the fact the gang are so evil: they don't just rob, they rape, and kill everyone. When the town is attacked, almost all the men are wiped out, which is full on. It's a shame it wasn't done better justice.

Book review - "Child of Storm" by H Rider Haggard

Part 2 in Haggard's Zulu trilogy, this centres around a civil war between two sons of the Zulu Chief, Panda, in which Quatermain is involved. He's mostly an observer in this story though, not it's not as good as Marie, where he was centre stage. Quatermain doesn't really have any stakes in it - he likes one brother more than the other, but he's not really involved.

The cause of the civil war is a woman, the sexy Mameena - another in Haggard's long line of hot, mischievous African babes. She has the hots for Quatermain at one stage but he doesn't go there - it's a shame, the poor guy could have used some release other than with a gun (and prevented a civil war in the meantime). But actually Mameena's role is surprisingly small - she's set up to do all this manipulative stuff, but we hear about it mostly through reportage, which isn't as fun. Also you never really buy she's into Quatermain.

There are some good action scenes, some interesting African characters, I like how Mameena keeps twisting these guys around her finger. But it's not top-rank Haggard.

Movie review - "Song without End" (1960) **

Fairly dreadful biopic of Liszt, with its title meant to evoke memories of A Song to Remember. If you're a Liszt fan you might enjoy the piano playing, which Dirk Bogarde does very well. It's the best thing about his performance, which is poor - all flaring nostrils and haughty indignation. He was probably annoyed at the quality of the script, which requires him to gnash his teeth and agonise over fame and music and... something or other. However he plays the piano extremely convincingly.

The plot mostly concerns him touring Europe and falling in love with married Capucine, neither of which you're likely to care about, especially as it goes for over two hours. 

Capucine gets a bad wrap a lot of the time but I really like her in comedy (North to Alaska, The Pink Panther) - this is the first drama I've seen her in and she is, er, a lot less effective. Her scenes with Bogarde are pretty bad - it's like both are sending them up.

The supporting cast isn't anything to write home about - lots of European actors being undercast, plus stock types (e.g. greedy, wacky writer; jealous partner). There is lots of piano playing and music, though - if you like Liszt and/or classical music you'll at least get that.

Movie review - "World in My Corner" (1956) **1/2

It's such a delight to see Audie Murphy in a non Western, and in a genre that should have suited him - a boxing flick - which is enough to carry you along for half the running time, but after a while it sinks in that this isn't really a very good movie. He's the usual young kid with a rough upbringing who is tempted to throw matches. There's a dodgy, rich gangster who wants to corrupt him; a sexy dame from a higher social class who he becomes obsessed with; a poor but honest trainer; some gangsters; a colourful promoter who is morally ambitious and provides comic relief.

We've seen it all before - I'm sure even in 1956 people had seen it all before. Audie convinces in fight scenes despite his height and he's okay, but his limitations are exposed in a few scenes. Barbara Rush is a pretty, competent actor but she needed to be better. Jeff Morrow is really good though as her dodgy rich father - the fact he's driven his wife into a blithering wreck and is trying to do the same with his daughter (his wife reminded me of Ma Hardy from the Hardy family movies) is the most original thing about the move.

Oh I should mention there are some clever credits - in the form of newspaper articles. The jazzy music score (co written by Henry Mancini) got on my nerves after a while, it reminded me of cheap Roger Corman movies.

Movie review - "The Dark Knight Rises" (2012) ****

A bit of a mess but mostly great - they've pulled back on the Hans Zimmer, which I found I missed, and there's some very poor casting of the smaller roles - like the guy who plays the CIA agent at the beginning, the unmemorable mayor, the chubby cop, and Bane's soldiers, who all seem like chubby dudes who've strolled in from the pub.

Stuff you think they'd easily ace is poor - Michael Caine overacts in his emotional scenes (is Chris Nolan too intimidated/tired to give him direction?), the continuity is poor, there are big gaps in logic (e.g. unarmed policeman rushing and overpowering men with semi automatics, people are hostages one minute walking free the next) and really lazy screenwriting (an incredibly convenient speech left in a jacket, a foreshadowing-the-ending-scene that would have been laughed at by the writers of Point Break). This is one of the few movies where you feel it might have been better if it ran ten or twenty minutes longer

But it's a great spectacle: plenty of terrific stunts and action sequences; the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman is actually a good one here (this and Batman Begins are the only films in his series you can really say that about). It's ambition is very endearing: a whole city is shut down, parallels are drawn with the French and Russian revolutions, there is an intriguing political subtext. There's some very satisfying emotion - the drive of Bane, comeback of Batman, redemption of Selina Kyle.

Anne Hathaway, who I thought would be lame as Catwoman, is terrific - lithe, sexy, complex. Marion Cotillard is good too, ditto Bale and Freeman, with Thomas Hardy making an excellent villain. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is okay - I don't know if I want to see him as an action hero in anything. The audience applauded spontaneously at the end and for all the movie's faults, it deserved it.

Movie review - "Knight Without Armour" (1937) ***

"I say old chap have you ever thought about joining the secret service?"Paraphrased, that's how Robert Donat gets involved in spy work for the Brits in pre-revolutionary Russia. Unfortunately for him he goes undercover in a revolutionary organisation and after a botched assassination attempt winds up in Siberia. Don't worry, Donat - World War I comes along, then the revolution, so he's out in time to help beautiful noble Marlene Dietrich. (NB he's actually not much of a spy - helping her is all he seems to do)

Every scene involving Dietrich is choreographed so she can be as beautiful as possible - she's always striking a pose, looking off into the middle distance, whether on a train, in a forest, or walking down stairs. Donat remains an excellent adventure hero - handsome, cheery, heroic in an unshowy way... no wonder he was so in demand in the 1930s and its a shame asthma limited his appearances.

This steers a mostly neutral course politically - it is sympathetic to aristocrat Dietrich, but the White Russians are depicted as just execution-happy as the Reds. (The Whites are cleaner and slightly more disciplined, though whereas the Reds are all dirty and scowly). No one looks remotely Russian but there are good performances from Peter Bull as a scowling Red (it's a shame his part isn't bigger) and John Clemens is very effective as a shrewd young Red who is captivated by Dietrich (it's a showy part and helped him be cast in The Four Feathers).

It is most memorable for its images: Dietrich waking up to find her mansion deserted, then stumbling upon a mass of Reds; the train station conductor who has gone insane and keeps announcing that the trains have arrived; Donat and Dietrich's ridiculous fur hats in the forest. The finale seems to have been short separately out of sequence by Donat and Dietrich, which is really annoying when you want a final clinch. But its an entertaining adventure tale.

Play review - "Top Girls" by Carol Churchill

Very second wave but its aged well with that marvellously clever opening sequence with famous women from history all talking, and that emotional ending. Clever and witty although reading it I admit I got lost here and there and you can smell the whiff of 1982 on it every now and again.

Movie review - "A Prize of Arms" (1962) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

Although Stanley Baker was best known for his role in Zulu it wasn't a typical Stanley Baker film - there was such a thing, it flourished 1957-63 when Baker was a genuine draw at the British box office. He would typically play a tough anti-hero, a crook or a cop, who was involved in a heist, either committing it or tracking down the culprits. The films would be medium budget, in black and white, heavily male focused, gritty and generally downbeat.

He's a crook in this one - an ex-army officer who decides to rob the army payroll during the Suez Crisis when the army was cashed up, which is a pretty good idea. (And makes this one of the few English movies to touch on Suez - The Entertainer was another.) The plan is quite clever, too - pretend to be maintenance men, start some fires, use a fake casualty, then pretend to leave but actually stay (years before Silence of the Lambs and The Inside Man). Baker and his men rely on the public service aspect of the army - being used to poor paperwork, bluffing their way past little penny pinchers, etc.

Indeed, they're so switched on it's frustrating at the end when the crooks start acting like idiots - it feels too convenient. And the movie feels as though it lacks something - I think it's a subplot, or some variety, or maybe stronger characters or more humour, or something. Probably the subplot - it's very linear. And bleak. But it's unpretentious (apart from the take-whatever-you-want cynicism which seems de rigeur for this period) and the final escape scene is mostly very exciting.

Play review - "The Seafarer" by Connor MacPherson

Irish plays seem to be the rage at the moment on Sydney stages - this isn't a bad one, a sort of combination of kitchen sink and The Seventh Seal/The Devil and Daniel Webster. It's got about a one act play's worth of story, and feels padded. There's some skilled dialogue and the performance I saw at the Darlinghurst Theatre had some terrific acting. I couldn't help wishing it was done by Irish actors in Ireland - some plays feel as though they need to be seen in their natural habitat (e.g. ones that aren't strong on story) and this is one of them.

Movie review - "Performance" (1970) ***1/2

Remarkable film, which at one stage probably seemed self indulgent and wanky - and there are probably still audiences who see it like that - but for my money at least has aged remarkably well. It's combination of fame, gangsters, androgyny, sex, thriller and music is intoxication.

For those such as myself only really familiar with James Fox playing frightfully decent, weak members of the upper class, his performance here as the gangster is remarkable: tough, vicious, kinky (he likes rough stuff), snobby, homophobic, ruthless, and not as smart as he thinks he is. The plot has him get in trouble at work, forcing him to go on the run - it takes 30 minutes for him to arrive at the house, but it's gripping stuff, full of interesting direction (flash cuts, a victim of Fox's covering his face with a sheet before he's shot, etc). He ranks up there with Richard Burton in Villain and Michael Caine in Get Carter.

At the house there are two excellent performances from Mick Jagger and Anita Pallenberg. We all know now that Jagger is a cricket-loving, highly fertile member of the establishment but in the late 60s he did seem at times to be a bit satanic and strange (look at the Stones in Gimme Shelter) and that's played off well here. He's obviously inexperienced but he does have presence which us used well.

Pallenberg seems to come straight out of a witches coven in the Middle Ages - beautiful, sexy, charismatic as hell. She's extremely effective and really hot. No wonder so many people flipped over her.

This isn't a perfect film. The extended musical video sequence with Jagger singing feels as though it jars, and a lot of the stuff in the house is repeating the same story beat - it's as though the movie needed a subplot, like the one Wendy Craig provided in The Servant, i.e. a dash of the outside world. But its imaginative and still very different. Would make a great double bill with The Servant.

Movie review - "Villain" (1971) ***1/2

This was one of two British gangster films that appeared in 1971 with big stars - Get Carter, with Michael Caine, has since gone on to be one of the Bibles of the New Lad movement, while Villain, with Richard Burton, is mostly forgotten. I think its partly because Burton plays a gay gangster who still lives with his mother and is hopelessly in love with Ian MacShane - he's not going about having phone sex with Britt Ekland on the phone and being right on straight. Also Burton is a really nasty piece of work here - so is Caine in Carter, but that film takes place in a world with him surrounded by other gangsters and crooked businessman, here Burton comes up against two tough but honest cops (Nigel Davenport and Colin Welland) who give the film more of a moral counterpoint.

There's some tough talking dialogue, an exciting heist sequence (the plot revolves around Burton and his gang robbing a payroll), excellent support actors, and a particularly fine starring turn from Burton. The risks and chances this man took in his career are remarkable, especially for someone so often accused of selling out his talent (because he wouldn't appear in theatre? As if theatre is so strong). One of the most famous actors in the world, he plays a gangster who is gay, sadomasochistic, vicious, ageing, loves his mummy and MacShane - would say Brad Pitt do that today? Actually, come to think of it Brad Pitt probably would, which is partly why he's lasted - like Burton did, despite all his drinking.

The gangsters here get stuck in traffic jams, bitch about the state of the country and the youth of today, talk about what's on TV tonight. The outbursts of violence are sudden and extreme. It's not exactly a laugh a minute and has been superseded in many ways by TV but is a tough well made gangster flick.

Script review - "Lion in Winter" by James Goldman

Not many writers conquer the Middle Ages but Goldman did with this bright, clever look at Christmas time at the house of Henry II with his wife (out of prison temporarily), mistress (who's going to marry one of his sons), King of France (who wants him out of the country), and three sons (all of whom want to knock his block off - gay, war-loving Richard; weaselly, smart John; and was-there-another-son Geoffrey). There's twist upon twist, everyone is pulling a fast one, which makes it unpredictable - the emotion never seems genuine. Or is it.

After a while it does get a bit too bewildering though and you wish it calmed down a little so we could feel. Maybe that's just me being soft. The character of Alais is a bit of a ninny - you saw it a bit in late 60s pop culture, a beautiful flower child who just wants to adore her middle aged man. But gripping, fascinating stuff. As Goldman himself once commented, everyone can relate to a family squabble where business is involved.

Movie review - "Cast a Long Shadow" (1959) **

After making a bunch of Westerns for Universal, Audie Murphy turned producer a few times - but made basically the same sort of film. This was one, despite having Walter Mirisch producing as well. It's not even in colour.

The premise isn't bad, and it gives Audie the chance to play something slightly different - a bitter, drunken outcast, who discovers he's inherited a ranch. People who live on the ranch want to buy it off him, but it's in debt so that prompts a cattle ride. But the cattle ride doesn't begin until almost an hour in, which is one of many problems of this movie - another is they reconcile Murphy and his ex (Terry Moore) too soon. And it's a muddled story.

The best thing about it is the revelation of Murphy's true paternity. There's some okay action and a decent support cast including John Dehner, and Uncle Jesse and Deputy Roscoe from The Dukes of Hazzard. But its very flat and unfortunately gave an indication of the quality of Murphy's 60s films.

Movie review - "Cover Girl Models" (1975) *1/2

Another disappointing three girls film from New World, along with Fly Me, which had the same director, star and was also about three girls who go from Los Angeles to Hong Kong and then Manila. In this case the girls are models, which means we have lots of scenes of them trying on dresses. 

Being a model doesn't normally produce a lot of stories, as any viewer of Models Inc will be able to tell you, and the ones here are particular dim: accidentally getting some microfilm in a dress, being mistaken for the daughter of the American ambassador and kidnapped, trying to make it as a model, trying to get a role in the film.

Too many of the stories are dumb and have the leads being passive. You'll laugh at the scenes with one of the models continually being attacked and saved by a kung fu rescuer. Also too much screen time is given to men, such as the sleazy photographer, and it's men saving the day all the time. There's none of the fun and camaraderie found in the best of these movies, and few genuinely sexy scenes.

And it's a shame because the leads include Pat Anderson, the leggy, likeable star of many movies around this time (who then disappeared from screens) and Tara Stromeiher, the gangly frizzy-haired star of Hollywood Boulevard who has genuine comic talent, and is fun as a klutzy model. Mary Woronov appears at the beginning as their agent and it's a shame she doesn't have a bigger part.

 It only goes for 70 minutes but still feels padded out with scenes of the girls trying on clothes and travelogue shots. Dim, poor and only for New World completists.

Script review – “Apollo 13” by John Sayles

Sayles was called in to script doctor/rewrite this movie but doesn't get credit. It's a solid, engrossing film, with lots of technical data. No one really has an enthralling character but since most of the people depicted are still alive that was inevitable I guess. People are calm under pressure, all pitching in. It is a good yarn, stuck in that little crate miles from everywhere, and you follow what's going on and it isn't dumbed down. Some great bits which from memory didn't make the movie from memory e.g. Jim Lovell and Neil Armstrong having beers talking about the death of the astronauts in the fire (this feels very John Sayles). All the scenes of Mrs Lovell at home were presumably inserted to keep up the "women's interest" factor but they are dull and repetitive - I mean, the writers do what they can, but what can you do?

Movie review - "Sign of the Pagan" (1954) ***

Most Hollywood films only deal with the Roman Emperors around the Julio-Claudian era, so its wonderful to find one set so late in the piece, with the Empire split in half and Attila the Hun running riot. It's reasonably historically accurate too - there really was a Roman centurion called Marcian who ended up as Emperor, marrying Pulcheria; a cowardly eunuch who encouraged Emperor Theodosius to bribe Attila to stay away, Pope Leo who persuaded Attila to steer clear of Rome.

Jeff Chandler was born to play a Roman, with his sculpted hair and physique - but although the film starts off about Marcian it's really more about Attila, and him grappling with this new thing called Christianity. His daughter converts, one of his "seers" is killed by a bolt of lightning. And it's also about Pulcheria... actually this film is a little all over the shop. Chandler disappears for slabs, I was unsure what it was about sometimes, and there are a lot of scenes of Palance looking upwards.

Palance gives a good performance though - but the girls, Ludmilla Tcherina and Rita Gam are weak. Leggy Allison Hayes pops up as a captive forced to marry Attila. There's colour, action and some good production design - it was directed by Douglas Sirk. No classic but interesting, especially to fans of Roman history.

Movie review - "Fly Me" (1973) *1/2

Pat Anderson was one of the best looking female exploitation stars of the 70s and this movie gets off to a great start with her running out of the surf in a bikini, then getting changed into her stewardess uniform in a cab driven by Dick Miller. Her two co-stars are very pretty, especially Lenore Kasdorf... but that's about as good as it gets.

This is one of the worst of New World's three girls films, due mostly to poor scripting. None of the plots are interesting: Lyllah Torenah is sex mad, which is fine, but also a drug smuggler, which makes her unsympathetic (girls in these movies smoked grass and helped revolutionaries escape from the Man, but they were rarely out-and-out criminals); they also have her kidnapped by baddies early on so she spends most of the movie kidnapped and topless, which is a little uncomfortable. Pat Anderson wants to have sex with a doctor but her mother follows her - she's meant to be Italian but it doesn't work because (a) it's dumb and (b) Anderson doesn't look remotely Italian. Lenore Kasdorf looks around for her boyfriend and romances an Asian guy, which at least is a bit different in a good way.

It's full of dumb scenes and moments - Kasdorf engages in some hilariously unconvincing martial arts with assassins sent to kill her, the girls wind up in a white slave ring and have to be rescued by a man (the doctor) instead of getting out of trouble themselves, too much nudity is tied up with sexual assault. The music is cribbed from other New World films, in particular The Student Nurses, which was much better than this. Pat Anderson deserves better dammit - but she got it with Summer School Teachers.

Movie review - "The Caretaker" (1963) **1/2

I had an itch to watch some Pinter and this scratched it. It's very well done, but it is Pinter, so there's not a lot of story and an awful lot of subtext. There's a dream cast - Robert Shaw, Donald Pleasance and Alan Bates. It was funded by a star studded line up including Peter Sellers and Noel Coward so Pinter was very much in the cool group. (Props to them for doing it this way, though).

I got to admit - I find this dull. Heck, I find Pinter dull - the lack of story and delineated characters just doesn't work for me. I feel this way about most of this plays too so I'm aware that's a personal opinion. If you liked this on stage you'll probably like the film. The best bit is Shaw's great monologue. I also enjoyed the scene where Bates threatens Pleasance. But scenes like that were few and far between.

The acting is exceptional - Pleasance as the wild-eyed, eccentric, just-how-smart-is-he tramp; Shaw as the glowering, possibly brain damaged lodger; Bates as his charismatic, dangerous seeming brother. Clive Donner directs well (it's weird to think at one stage he was considered a groovy cutting edge director).

Script review – “Double Indemnity” by Raymond Chandler and Billy Wilder

Top rate film script probably should be published because a lot of the big ring is worth reading - Billy Wilder and Raymond Chandler made a great team. I never found Barbara Stanwyck that sexy so reading it I could imagine my own version of Phyllis - but Fred MacMurray and Edward G were their in my mind. I always forget about the character of the daughter and her boyfriend, but it means this is always fresh. Great dialogue, good story.

Book review - "J Arthur Rank: the Man Behind the Gong" by Michael Wakefield

Rank deserved a biography - this is actually the second but the first came out in 1952 when the mogul was still very much alive. Death allows freedom and a bit of perspective and Wakefield does a good job - its not a classic biography but its solid, thorough work. Its main problem is that Rank wasn't that interesting. The concept of him is - Methodist flour miller, one of the richest men in England via inheritance, who went into movie making to spread the word of God and wound up dominating the British film trade. But in full length form he's actually not that compelling - devoted family man, fond of a joke and shooting, principled, teetotal chain smoker, feudal in his manner, regular Sunday School teacher, a proud Yorkshireman who never lived there, extremely hard working.

I always got the feeling he was into cinemas because it was a way to differentiate himself from his father (rich men's sons often have a point to prove) but he never really loved movies the way he did God, or flour - so his involvement with the creative side of things was a bit limited, which I guess is where this fell short. I did find a lot of the stuff about his adventures with the Methodist church interesting ditto the details of his daily routine - but the flour industry stuff not so much. The people around Rank e.g. Pascal, John Davis, are a bit more interesting and colourful.

Wakefield was partly motivated to write this to rehabilitate Rank's reputation (which shouldn't have been as bad as it was anyway) - he certainly succeeds.  It's a very good book, just not a top rank one, if you'll excuse the pun.

Theatre review - "Eat, Pray, Laugh" July 8, 2012

It's still bizarre to me that our universally recognised theatre genius has this weird concoction of vulgar humour (farts, belches, vomiting), songs, satire, word play. He's managed to keep Sir Les current because its a way to access the political situation and Edna can talk to celebrities. Sandy Stones aren't around any more but those of us old enough remember their inspiration and his monologue, about losing their child to infantile paralysis, is touching.

Sometimes I swear he vagued out particularly during the Sir Les segment when he was cooking a BBQ but as Edna and Sandy he was spot on - ditto as the pedophile priest. The humour is vicious and broad - he pokes fun of everyone equally. There are some songs and dances to help ease the pain of that one hundred dollar ticket. The night I went the audience included Bob Ellis, a monk and a woman with a baby.

Movie review - "The Red Badge of Courage" (1951) ***1/2

Probably the best movie that Audie Murphy ever made - certainly the most famous, even though it wasn't a box office hit, but it led to the famous showdown between Louis B Mayer and Dore Schary/Nick Schenck at MGM which resulted in Mayer leaving the studio he had helped turn into a giant. Watching this years down the track it's hard not to be impressed by it's quality - the beautiful images of battle and soldiers in camp, the intelligence and sensitivity of its adaptation, the sheer novelty of watching a story that deals with cowardice in war time, the realistic touches (e.g. a general telling the same joke to different groups of troops), quality of the character actors, the photography.

But it's a bit of a mess. I know it was cut down by the studio (the addition of the narration from James Whitmore doesn't help), but you do have to be sympathetic to them - there's no female role, little warmth, it does feel art house-y. We never really get into the Kid's head - I really liked Audie Murphy's performance, he felt authentic with his bravado and nervousness (though with this accent you would expect to find him fighting for the South). A very good picture but commercially you and see Mayer's point. Still, I'm glad it exists and wish that it could be restored somehow.

Movie review - "O Lucky Man" (1973) ***

Lindsay Anderson is an odd figure among British film directors - he's well known, has inspired lots of critical writing, but didn't make many films and doesn't seem to enjoy a unanimously good reputation as a director. I guess he wrote lots about cinema and himself, and films like this gave critics plenty of write about.

This is an insane movie which is unlike any I've seen. It goes for three hours, is full of theatrical devices (actors doubling up, a Greek chorus), in jokes (Anderson appears as himself at the end and casts Malcolm McDowell in a movie "O Lucky Man"), stylistic devices (use of titles, black and white and silent sequences, a white actor "blacks up" to play an African), story shifts (one minute McDowell is a coffee salesman, then a prisoner, then a patient, then an assistant to a rich man), broad satire (judges being spanked, people turning into sheep), endless targets (big business, dictators, medicine, capitalism).

It's a big, sprawling, indulgent, ambitious mess. I can understand why people hated it but its ambition and novelty is endearing in an era of homogenised theatre. The jokes could have been better - heck, the whole script could have been better, and in no universe is the idea of Alan Price singing songs that spell out the subtext a good idea. But I took to the film - I went with it and enjoyed it. Wonderful support cast including Rachel Roberts, Helen Mirren (young and lovely), Ralph Richardson. Might have felt different if I'd plucked money down in the cinema, though.

Movie review - "if... " (1968) ****

Terrific film which combines documentary realism with 60s anarchy. People who want to send their kids to boarding school after seeing Harry Potter would do well to see this - of course I'm sure some things have changed but maybe not more than you think: petty tyrannies (of senior students as well as teachers), oppressive environment, freezing cold showers and beds, camaraderie, the stench and crappy items, lecherous staff members, obsession with sex, etc. Throw in the fantasies and surrealistic sequences and you've got something special.

Malcolm McDowell is excellent as an insolent student and the support cast are good too - although I'm confused that the girl is there for five seconds during the film then appears at the end. Wonderful anarchic climax though. An incredibly influential movie and deservedly so.

Movie review - "Albert RN" (1953) **

The Wooden Horse had been a smash hit so here is Anthony Steel in another POW tale based on truth about some Brits who busted out due to using a wacky gimmick - here the gimmick is a dummy, who they used to confuse the Germans at roll call. That's not a bad idea, although not enough to justify a feature film so they pad out the running time with a mystery over whether there is a traitor among the prisoners giving information to the Germans (leading to comparisons to Stalag 13 which aren't flattering to this), one prisoner worried that his wife has had an affair with another one of the prisoners, some squabbling, an inevitable American/Canadian character, a nice German to contrast with a nasty one (Anton Diffring).

It's not particularly interesting. Jack Warner isn't in good form, but then he doesn't have much to do; Steel is actually quite good, getting to make the dummy and flare up in an argument or two (what do you know? He can flare up!). Some very ordinary acting from the support cast and a surprising lack of suspense despite some scenes which on paper should have worked e.g. shooting some escaping prisoners. And it falls into the trap that a lot of British POW films fell into of making things seem like a jolly school jape.

Movie review - "The Cruel Sea" (1953) ****

One of the best British war films ever - surely no other country could have made it, with its emphasis on realism, stiff upper lips, tragedy, stoicism. It's a tough, quite grim movie, rather down beat (the war really takes a toil on the characters - they lose loved ones, take solace in booze and bills). Yet it was the most popular movie of the year. Audiences don't mind a tough story if its done well and this is done extremely well. (And of course if it's based on a best seller).

Many memorable moments: sailors finding out one their sisters has been killed in a bombing raid, a sailor going crazy on a life raft, Jack Hawkins steaming through some British survivors to get a U boat, Denholm Elliot's wife not caring that he's going to sea, Donald Sinden's sweet romance with Virgina McKenna in the blackout, tears going down Hawkins' face, tense battle scenes.

The film made Jack Hawkins' the biggest star in British cinema and was a boon to the career of Virginia McKenna, Donald Sinden, Denholm Elliott, and Stanley Baker (who makes an instant impression even though he's only in the film for about ten minutes - they get rid of his character pretty quick). Extremely well done - the sort of movie that threatens to give 50s British cinema a good name.

Movie review - "Squeeze a Flower" (1970) **

They're a Weird Mob was a big hit so Walter Chiari was hired to play another Italian newcomer to Australia. But whereas Mob was full of charm and accuracy, this takes place in a la-la land Australia. Chiari's a monk who has a recipe for wine, and gets a job with Jack Albertson (as an Italian immigrant!), who tries to get the recipe off him in cahoots with his son in law (Dave Allen!). So they try to get ad girl Rowena Wallace to seduce him, unaware he's a monk.

Chiari does what he can but anyone would struggle in a role which requires him to talk to God a lot. Its interesting to see some glimpses of Sydney at the time and hear the odd Aussie accent, but you don't hear a lot, what with Albertson, Allen and Chiari taking centre stage. The girls have some crazy hair cuts. It's a really stupid story - I think wacky monk films were big in Italy in the fifties or something, maybe that's why they made it. But it doesn't work.

Bobby Limb and Dawn Lake make cameo appearances. There's a lot of Italian accents. Amateurish direction. It isn't even well shot.

Theatre review - "All the Rage" July 12, 20012

A fine production of a good play -  clocking in at not longer than an hour it fairly spanks along due to some tight writing and being in continuous time and the one set. Some clever lines, solid plotting - it kept me guessing. Occasionally you felt they went for the gag over the reality of the situation and sometimes I had a few logic problems (maybe I didn't follow) but it was well done and even stage violence (which can be bad) was effective. Duncan Fellows is particularly good as a former terrorist.

Movie review - "Showdown" (1963) **

Dull, even by the standards of Audie Murphy 60s Westerns - the only thing that makes it stand out is that its in black and white (to save money). Oh and I guess there's a bit near the beginning where he's chained up in an iron collar. Again he has a sort of bromance with a weak person - Charles Drake - that leads him into trouble when he gets chained to a killer. The part of the killer is undercooked, Drake's character isn't that interesting, or is his girl - a saloon singer (Drake is conveniently a gambling drunken loser so it's okay Audie makes a move on her). Flat action, indifferent handling and one ending too many. Very ordinary.

Script review – “The Accidental Tourist” by Lawrence Kasdan

Lovely, warm script from Kasdan when he was at his peak. The material isn't super strong - it feels as though it goes too long. But it's always fresh and interesting, good characters. I'm sorry if that's a contradictory statement, its just how I felt about it. It still has a freshness to it.

Movie review - "Oliver Twist" (1948) *****

The team that made Great Expectations reunite for an even better movie - I think I like it more because Oliver is more active than Pip, whether running away from home, asking for more gruel at the orphanage, picking pockets, etc. It's beautifully shot and done, playing up the horrific elements, like Expectations  - the opening shots of the arrival at the orphanage is out of a Frankenstein film, and few murders are more effective than Sykes killing Nancy, with the dog scrambling frantic at the door.

You could argue Alec Guiness' Fagin is a Jewish caricature but plenty of other people are caricatures including Robert Newton, Anthony Newley (Artful Dodger) and Francis Sullivan (Bumble). Henry Stephenson is warm and sympathetic - I didn't recognise Diana Dors as Charlotte. John Howard Davies very likeable and sympathetic in the difficult role of Oliver. A masterpiece.

Radio review - Suspense - "Odd Man Out" (1952) **1/2

One of James Mason's most famous roles has the added benefit of his then wife Pamela playing his love interest but while interesting it doesn't make for great radio - the 25 minute running time means the loss of key encounters, such as with the painter who wants to capture his dying expression and the treacherous woman, so what we've got is a lot of plunking around in alley ways and speaking in Irish accents. Dan O'Herlihy is on hand for the support cast.

Movie review - "The Italian Job" (1969) ***1/2

If you ever want to know what the "New Lad" movement was about, show them this - cockney Michael Caine gets out of prison and has it off with a series of hot birds, then plans a heist in Italy. There's a Matt Munro credits tune, gorgeous Italian scenery, sideburns, women in knee high boots and mini skirts, wacky crooks, the mafia, training sequences, colourful clothes. The chant the prisoners give Noel Coward at the end is just like one at a football ground - so too is the song "The Self Preservation Society".

There are plenty of endearing references to England's declining position as a world power - getting revenge on those Europeans, the poor balance of payments, the power of the Americans, Noel Coward's worship of the queen, digs at obnoxious Pommy tourists abroad.

The first half of this I found a little bit of a strain, to be honest, despite Caine's charm. But once they get to Italy it improves and the heist itself is sublime. Cute minis driving up and down stairs and down sewerage pipes and on to the back of the bus accompanied by Quincy Jones' theme song - what's not to like about that? And "you were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off" is a funny line in the context of the movie.

Movie review - "Shout at the Devil" (1976) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

The novels of Wilbur Smith have plenty of action, romance, sex, adventure and historical interest, but they often have a South African background, so have been problematic for film producers since the 1960s.

This was presumably thought safe because its set in World War I Zanzibar, and is a cross between Donovan's Reef and The African Queen: Roger Moore and Lee Marvin squabble and bicker as partners in Africa who poach ivory and one up a local German commander. Moore has an affair with Marvin's daughter, Barbara Perkins (beautiful but a bit too old - I felt someone that hot would have gotten married beforehand), then war comes and they team up to sink a German ship.

Smith's original novel was tricky in that it started as a comic romp but then half way through the Germans kill the baby belonging to the lead couple then it gets dark, and all the leads died at the end. They keep the baby killing here (an extremely harrowing sequence) but Moore and Perkins are allowed to live.

Roger Moore is very good - he's perfectly cast, does action and handles the serious stuff too. Marvin does his Marvin thing - he's a charismatic actor and the two are a good odd couple. The material isn't the strongest - the story is kind of all over the place, consisting of sequences rather than a coherent tale (i.e. this is where they meet sequence, this is a raid sequence, this is an aeroplane sequence).

It goes for over two hours, and sorry to be PC but sometimes is a bit racist: the black African characters are just background figures, porters, servants or slave victims; the only time they do much is when soldiers who are depicted as grinning savages kill Perkins baby by tossing it into the fire (I'm not saying such things would never happen but they don't have any decent non savage African characters in this movie, or even someone with three dimensions); also Moore blacks it up for the final attack.

Still there is plenty of action and production value; the final attack on the ship is genuinely exciting; the locations are terrific.

Movie review - "Valerie" (1957) **1/2

My expectation couldn't have been lower for this Western - it's obscurity, the fact it was the only film made during Anthony Steel's Hollywood sojourn that produced all those drink driving arrests, its the only teaming of Steel and then wife Anita Ekberg. It's also shot very much like an episode of a TV show. But I found it surprisingly engrossing.

It starts with a bang, literally: Sterling Hayden entering a homestead, a shoot out eventuating; later on it turns out his ex wife Ekberg is gravely wounded and her parents are dead. We hear about events leading up to it: Anthony Steel is a local reverend fresh off the boat who may or may not have been having an affair with Ekberg who may or may not be a slut and Hayden may or may not have been a devoted husband and/or tortured people in the Civil War. Plus there's Hayden's dodgy brother and assistant.

It's not a classic: any movie which ends with a convenient confession-by-taking-someone-hostage loses points (a device used a lot in Westerns); the acting is a bit iffy (they don't give Steel too much to do - he was the perennial "second male lead", Ekberg is beautiful but simply wasn't much of an actor, Sterling Hayden glowers); it looks cheap. But it had ambition and at least tries.

Movie review - "Bonnie Prince Charlie" (1948) **

A famous flop at the time, this isn't that bad - it's just dull. And it's a shame because it needn't be - the historical story is a very exciting one, there is money to spare, the colour is gorgeous, there's some great Scottish locations, the cast impresses.

And for the first half I didn't mind this that much. David Niven is admittedly disastrously miscast in the title role - as George MacDonald Fraser pointed out, it must have been thought that as a charming Scot he was a natural but he isn't. Because Niven's persona was that of an officer and a gentleman, a decent stick who was brave and good with an anecdote. He's not good at conveying being an adventurer, Italian, full of passion, impetuosity... or anything that would make this role work. Who else could've done it who was a star? Stewart Granger? James Mason? Not John Mills. Maybe it was impossible, in a film where Bonnie Prince was a lead - these sort of erratic ruler roles are best in support parts.

But it has pace because the rebellion shouldn't have even got off the ground, but enjoyed tremendous success. Jack Hawkins is a believable Lord Murray, there's a good Battle of Prestonpans, some romance for the Bonnie Prince. With its heavily accented King George II and Duke of Cumberland, it seems Alex Korda was getting audiences on the side of the Prince.

Then at the retreat from Derby things start to get wonky - long romantic scene with the Prince and Clementine, who then disappears from the story; we aren't shown the Battle of Culloden; then almost half the movie - half! - consists of Charlie's flight from the British. So there's endless trudging over the glens with Margaret Leighton, with endless talk, and I'm never sure what they're getting at - a romance between the two? The rebellion was a good thing? A bad thing? It's all a hopeless muddle. Also, like An Ideal Husband the sets are too rich and opulent at times.

Korda made some classics but also some duds and this is a dud. It's not awful, you don't hate yourself for watching or Korda or cinema, but it's a misfire.

Movie review - "Tower Heist" (2012) **1/2

Very commercial but enjoyable Brett Ratner film which has plenty of stars and a decent story. The first half hour feels overly mechanical as they set it up - but half an hour in it improves a lot when Eddie Murphy becomes involved in the heist. Matthew Broderick is fun but I wish he'd been given more to do; Casey Affleck's voice is really annoying; it's a shame the relationship between Ben Stiller and Tea Leoni couldn't have been more developed, or that the movie couldn't have gone in harder on the judicial system and/or government who let crooks like Alan Alda get away with near murder. It feels like its been overly developed to death but it chugs along well enough.

Movie review - "This Sporting Life" (1963) **1/2

Every actor should get a vehicle like Richard Harris got with this when they are young, strong and spunky - in it's way it's as great a launch pad as Tom Cruise had with Risky Business or Errol Flynn with Captain Blood: Harris gets to glower and swagger, thump around on the rugby league field, kiss and roger (and slap) women, suffer unrequited love, have people lust after him (even his male manager squeezes his leg), rail at the unfairness of life like the Hairy Ape, be nice to kids, have tormented relationships with everyone.

It's very 60s New Wave - black and white, Northern England setting, non-linear narrative, frank depiction of sex, working class heroes, etc. Lindsay Anderson directs with verve - it feels real and authentic, great atmosphere of the clubs, on the field, back grooms, dingy boarding houses. Harris is a charismatic star with his bulk and glowering presence.

But it goes for too long - it's over two hours - and is depressing and lacking in warmth. Harris is meant to love Rachel Roberts but he seems to rape her in one scene and slaps her in another and she's a miserable git too. There's an awful lot of Acting (yell! I want to love! yell!) which is easy to mock but it does have power. There's a strong line up of character actors (people like Colin Blakely) and it's probably the best movie ever made about rugby league.

Movie review - "After the Fox" (1966) **

Ah, the sixties - when you'd get caper films written by top Broadway playwrights, with faded Hollywood stars playing faded Hollywood stars, directed by Italians with great art house reputations in Italy, climactic chase scenes, lazy satire. This has a pretty good idea - crooks need super cook Peter Sellars to smuggle some gold into the country so he covers for it by making a movie. There's location footage, Britt Ekland as an Italian (Sellars' sister), a jaunty theme song penned by Burt Bacharach warbled by Sellars and the Hollies.

It's silly and fun enough - I wasn't wild about it. The pace never seems right, it takes too long to get going, and Sellars mugs ceaselessly. It feels weird Ekland and Sellars playing brother and sister when they should play lovers. Maybe the digs about Italian art house cinema were fresher in 1966. I did like the sexy woman who mimed the voice of her Italian cohort, and Victor Mature as a washed up Hollywood star.

Movie review - "Marley" (2012) *****

Excellent doco about one of the most fascinating musical figures of the late 20th century. It reminded me in some ways of that doco on Joe Strummer (though this is superior filmmaking) as we see the evolution of someone becoming the coolest dude on the planet. He starts as a gawky half caste kid growing up in rural poverty, then urban poverty, singing not-very-popular records, an outsider because of his background... but then discovering women, his talent, fame, marijuana, politics and turning into a legend, complete with an early death.

My knowledge of Marley was sketchy so this was illuminating - the white father, the relatives who snubbed him (and caused him hurt), the sheer amount of women (one of whom was Miss Jamaica) and illegitimate children (several of whom are pop stars), his overwhelming popularity with white audiences - and failure to cross over to black Americans which annoyed him no end (is there anything whiter than a white raggae fan?), having an affair with the daughter of an African dictator, the silly elements of Rastafarianism (the Ethiopian Emperor as the descendant of Christ), bringing up two opposing Jamaican leaders at a concert, being shot by political elements prior to a concert, ignoring the melanoma on his toe which led to his death, final days in Germany (Bob Marley in a white snowy Europe), his party house, having countless affairs on tour while his wife was a back up singer, being competitive with his kids, his devotion to physical fitness despite sucking back the cones, old school band intrigues, his anger and fury at being told he wasn't going to live.

There are some great talking heads like Bunny Wailer, plus the charisma of Chris Blackwell, the hurt of his kids and wife, stunning Jamaican photography. It's a superb doco and a credit to all who worked on it.

Movie review - "John Carter" (2012) **

It's a Hollywood mystery that people who gave us films as perfectly written as Wall E and Finding Nemo could have made so many story errors. Maybe this is being wise after the event, but why didn't they just follow the standard template of countless sci fi films about Earthlings helping oppressed people rise up and overthrow their rulers... (Flash Gordon, Stargate, The Time Machine)? I.e. show the whole story through the eyes of a time traveller, instead of opening it with a big battle sequence about people and aliens we don't know, then cutting away to other characters we have no investment in (e.g. Burroughs), and continually cutting to political intrigue on Mars. As if anyone cares. Why not make it clearer who the baddies are? Why not have some humour and warmth? Why not use the pursuing Colonel played by Bryan Cranston after all this set up? Why not have a comic relief? Why not make the female lead more independent?

There are other errors too - Taylor Kitsch is atrocious, playing it in the mode of a Valley Boy, and Lynn Collins is bad too. The English actors do their I'm-an-English-actor-in-a-fantasy-film thing, with Dominic West and James Purefoy both must have been aware they would have been better in the lead. Plenty of action and and some impressive special effects but it drags and drowns in noise. I feel bad on one hand that this film lost so much money so publicly but I understand why it happened.

TV review - Suspense - "The Flight" (1957) ** (warning: spoilers)

Suspense felt padded on radio when it went from 30 mins to an hour and an hour feels too long on TV as well. This stars Audie Murphy in a story with similarities to The Gun Runners - instead of being a skipper here he's a pilot who has to smuggle someone into a fictitious South American country. Well, he doesn't realise that at first but that's what it turns out to be. The person is actually a dissident for the regime, but a lot of this doesn't make sense - namely, why don't the locals just kill Murphy instead of just keeping him sort of under house arrest?

Good support cast including Jack Warden (Yank expat who may or may not be a baddie), Everett Sloane (sleazy South American) and Susan Kohner (a girl he meets who may or may not be a baddie). Murphy isn't bad - it's good to see him in a different profession, ie. a flyer - but his character is a real dill because the whole thing is so obviously dodgy.

Movie review - "The Servant" (1963) ****

Sometimes it just all comes together - Dirk Bogarde expressed the desire to give a great performance in a great film, and Joe Losey came through for him, with the considerable help of Harold Pinter. It all works - the claustrophobic setting, black and white photography, music score, Sarah Miles electric performance as Bogarde's mysterious and extremely sexy (and leggy) "sister", James Fox as the weak aristocrat, Wendy Craig as the sensible girlfriend (probably the most thankless role as she is a bit of killjoy but important because she's the antagonist).

Maybe I didn't quite buy that someone like Fox would have a manservant in the first place but that's probably just me and my cultural biases. And it did feel as though it went on a bit long - maybe 20 minutes could have been cut (or maybe it's just I got weary with descent-descent-descent - Fox's weakness is hardly a challenge).

Losey's stylish direction is spot on: reflections through mirrors, careful framing, the whole "smell" of decadence. Bogarde had played rotten charmers a few times by now but never better here, with his crooked smile, superior air, lower class accent, homoerotic air around Fox, kinky relationship with Miles. One of the best things Pinter ever did.

Movie review - "Great Expectations" (1946) ****

Excellent version of the Dickens novel, brilliantly directed by David Lean. It starts wonderfully, almost like a horror movie, with Pip visiting his parent's grave in a creepy, wind-swept cemetery, and being scared by Felix Aylmer; the spooky mansion of Miss Havisham and the imposing Jean Simmons (a brilliant child star debut). Estella, Miss Havisham and Magwitch are all deservedly famous creations.

As it went along I found it became less effective - though clearly made with love, skill and care, with superb acting and all that... I don't know, I just found it a little flat. Part of the problem is Pip is so passive - he just sort of ambles along, inherits money, spends it, is pussywhipped by Estella. The only thing he actively does is try to to smuggle Magwitch out of the country but he fails. Dickens' fault I suppose - but I can't help the way I feel.

Also Valerie Hobson, as the grown up Estella, isn't as effective as Jean Simmons, who is amazing. John Mills at first comes across as much too old for the role but he grows into it, and he does well in what is a tricky part. The elder supporting cast are all excellent: Martita Hunt as Miss Havisham, Francis Sullivan as the imposing fat lawyer with his dead client's faces on the wall. I liked Alex Guiness although I kept expecting his character to do more than he did. 

Didn't buy the "happy" ending - Estella is going to make Pip's life hell. (I know why they did it but they would have been better off using Dickens' original ending - the one before he re-drafted.)

TV review - Ford Startime Theatre - "The Man" (1960) ** (warning: spoilers)

It's a real shame they no longer make anthology drama, because it gave movie stars the chance to stretch their wings and try different things. Audie Murphy, stuck in Westerns for the majority of his career, plays something genuinely different - a psycho in a contemporary thriller. He's a young man who attaches himself as a home handyman to elderly Thelma Ritter. He torments her, isolates her, and winds up killing her dog. (It's kind of like a cheap version of The Servant).

Since Murphy was reputed in life to be something of a psycho, it's not surprising to find him all too believable. But he needed more careful handling, I think - he's allowed to go too crazy too soon. Maybe people were more trusting back then, and they kind of cover it by having him claim to have known Ritter's dead son, but he is very wacko very early. The material lets him down, although it has pedigree - it's based on a play by Mel Dinelli which had been filmed. It feels as though it lacks logic.

It's really weird to see Murphy appearing as himself at the end smiling, saying goodnight and nice words about Ritter and Ford after just having murdered Ritter in the show (albeit off screen). Ritter is good as always and Michael J Pollard pops up in the support cast.

Movie review - "Bad Boy" (1949) **

Juvenile delinquents were all the rage in Hollywood in the late 40s and early 50s - Knock on Any Door, Rebel without a Cause. They were liked in Britain too - there was a film called The Boys in Brown about decent reformist juvenile wardens and crusading judges, plus female equivalents in Good Time Girl. This feels heavily influenced by Boys Town, which like that was about a real life reformist institution - here it's the Variety Boys Club of America (which sounds like a pedophiles paradise, but that's just my biased 2012 eyes - I'm sure they do a lot of good work). A young gangster comes into the institution with a massive chip on his shoulder, causes a lot of trouble, but eventually sees the error of his ways, turning down the chance to go off with a real bad egg.

Here the warden is Lloyd Nolan and his most troubled charge is none other than Audie Murphy. Murphy got stuck in Westerns for the majority of his career - from this performance, his first lead, it's a shame he never got the chance to play a gangster, because he was a baby faced psychotic (he could have made a great Pretty Boy Floyd or Clyde Parker). It's a great introduction for him because his dialogue is kept to a minimum (his final speech to the judge is given to Nolan rather than Murphy - he says "isn't that what you wanted to say, son" and Murphy says "yes"), he has a good character (chip on his shoulder juvenile delinquent with a mean step dad), and has to perform several scenes with experienced actors like Nolan, Jane Wyatt and James Gleason. The one thing they might have done better is we don't have much sympathy for Murphy for a long time - we don't find out his "they took my red fire truck away" story until about two thirds of the way in. Murphy is very effective - he didn't progress too much as an actor but he was a lot better than he got credit for.

Nolan is professional as ever - these "decent warden" roles are thankless parts, really, though not as thankless as Wyatt's, who plays his supportive, loving wife. If they remade this for pay TV today she'd be having sex with prisoners and/or having a drug problem, but in 1949 she just makes cups of tea and cooks - she may as well not be in the film. There's also quite a silly story about the root of Murphy's troubles - he only went bad because he thinks he killed his mother accidentally with pills. It gives this some narrative drive, but it's still silly. (They would have been better off using Murphy's gangster mate more, like they did in Boy's Town). So this isn't much of a movie, really, but it is interesting, and Murphy fans will get a lot out of it.