Movie review - "Campbell's Kingdom" (1957) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

In the late 50s the British film industry, in particular the Rank organisation, went on a Commonwealth countries kick - you had films shot in Australia (Robbery Under Arms), South Africa (Nor the Moon by Night), India (The Wind Cannot Read, North West Frontier) etc. This was Canada's turn, so you've got lots of British actors wearing flannos talking in vaguely American accents.

This has been called Rank's attempt at a Western which it isn't really, although it's set outside in North America, has a couple of scenes set in a saloon and is about a mystery man who comes into town to beat the baddies, avenge a problem and save the day. For one thing it's set in the present day, it's about digging for oil rather than gold or the railways, Dirk Bogarde isn't a gunslinger (there are no guns) but rather a doomed Byronic man who has six months to live, and he doesn't do all the heroic work himself but rather gathers a group of friends around him: an engineer (Michael Craig), driller (James Robertson Justice), pretty girl (Barbara Murray), friendly driver (Sid James). This ensemble, everyone-pitch-in-to-help teamwork ethos marks the movie as very different from Hollywood, with its lone-man-against-the-elements ethos.

It isn't a great movie - Ralph Thomas never made a great movie, he was too much of a hack - but it's not bad. It's from a Hammond Innes novel so there's always plenty of action, there's some spectacular location work (mountains, dams, rivers), the setting is novel, a couple of good action sequences (blowing things up, a dam collapse at the end). Bogarde is effective with a terminal illness (it does kind of cheat that at the end he's miraculously better), Michael Craig lends handsome support, Stanley Baker could play this sort of villain role in his sleep. No one seems vaguely Canadian but at least it's in Canada.

Movie review - "An American Romance" (1944) **

Such was King Vidor's prestige in 1944 that MGM let him spend $3 million on this dull epic without insisting on stars or conflict on the plot. I know he wanted Spencer Tracy but surely there was someone more interesting on the payroll rather than Brian Donlevy - who is not only dull but embarrassing at times as the migrant who moves to America and rises up the industrial ladder. His rise is very slow at first - he's dim, becomes obsessed with steel - and also lacking much interest. He romances a teacher (Ann Richards - formerly Shirley Ann Richards, Aussie actor), they fall in love pretty quick and although he's obsessed with work and they lose a son to the inevitable war, their marriage is pretty good. Then when he's middle aged he becomes rich making cars.

You wait for something to happen - infidelity, Donlevy to go drunk on power, his son to go off the rails, a daughter turning into a slut, divorce... something. But it doesn't. There's an exciting scene where Donlevy nearly falls in some malten liquid and some conflict in the last half hour when his son tries to unionise the workers (they are very polite about it but it's still striking to see some vague pro-union propaganda in an MGM film) but that's about it. Donlevy retires, gets bored, but luckily Pearl Harbour comes along and he has to go back to work... is that supposed to be interesting? Did MGM really think Joe Public would be so patriotic they'd want to see this?

The Power and the Glory covered similar territory but a lot more things happened - marriages busted off, Spencer Tracy went crazy, there was a suicide. None of that here. All we get is some indifferent acting, bad European accents, a flat cast (hardly anyone is in familiar in this - the guys who plays the sons are all dull ditto Donley's daughter), and lots and lots of shots of industrial production. Richards, so engaging and spritely in her Australian films, isn't very good here - but then she doesn't have a character to play. (Why does she like Donlevy? Doesn't she have an opinion about anything?)

This was apparently cut down greatly by the studio - half an hour lopped off. I shudder to think of the long version.

Movie review - "The Sundowners" (1960) ****

There was a time at the beginning of his writing career when Jon Cleary was known as a really top rank writer, before he stuck to commercial thrillers. It was on the basis of You Can't See 'Round Corners and this, which was a beautiful book - well evoked, a rich character study about a man who can't change despite the wishes of his wife and son. He loves them, and they love him - which is the strength of this because they can't leave, and don't want to, but he can't change, so it's sad and happy and human.

The Australian accents of Deborah Kerr and Robert Mitchum have been much mocked, and the truth is they aren't very good, but that aside both of them give excellent performances. Mitchum is very good as the eternal drifter, keen to keep moving on, not wanting to be tied down, fond of fighting and drinking - this was so much like Mitchum himself. I think it's one of the best Hollywood star performances that capture the essence of the Russell Ward Australian (no matter how he sounds). Deborah Kerr is good too as the tired, weary woman. These two have a very strong bond - they clearly have a great sex like - which makes their conflict strong and real. Michael Anderson is engaging as their son.

They are backed with some other imports who are at least English - Glynis Johns, Peter Ustinov and Ronald Fraser (who has a mashed in face of an Aussie shearer) - plus several locals: Chips Rafferty, Leonard Teale, John Meillion.

There's an overall plot of Kerr wanting Mitchum to buy a farm but really it's a series of episodes: a bushfire while droving sheep, a two-up game, a shearer's wife giving birth, a sing-a-long around the piano, meeting colourful Peter Ustinov who romances barmaid Glynis Johns, Anderson being flirted with by a young girl, a fight, a booze up, a shearing competition, Kerr cooking for shearers, the shearers having a union meeting, Mitchum singing 'Wild Colonial Boy', not one but two horse races. There's also lots of shots of Australian wildlife - koalas, sheep, etc - and slang which is a bit distracting at times to be honest. But it's made with honesty and love and is further evidence of Fred Zinnemann's brilliance. Probably the best Hollywood movie about Australia.

Movie review - "Light in the Piazza" (1962) ***

What sounds like an unpromising subject matter - a slightly retarded girl falls for a rich Italian - is given sensitive and intelligent treatment resulting in a smart film. It's helped by Olivia de Havilland's performance as the girls' mother and Yvette Mimieux's beauty as the girl. Mimieux wasn't the best actor in the world but she suits the part of a pretty dumb thing. De Havilland's dilemma is well done - does she keep watching over her daughter, join her husband (Barry Sullivan) or let her get married and not tell the in-laws, so she can live life in spoilt happiness, chatting inanely with dumb friends... I don't think I've ever seen a film which put forward this as a genuine option. But then - is it so wrong?

George Hamilton is believable Italian. I didn't quite buy Rosanno Brazzi cracking on to de Havilland - she's too much an American matron. There are some pleasing views of Rome and it's never predictable - they keep throwing in weird curve balls, like Hamilton being too young, and de Havilland basically paying off the family. Worth watching.

Movie review - "Home from the Hill" (1960) ***

Popular melodrama from the time which appealed to two generations - adults interested in the antics of the parents (Robert Mitchum and Eleanor Parker) and teens keen on the young people (George Peppard, George Hamilton). It's a good old fashioned melodrama of the Tennesse Williams/Erskine Childers/William Faulkner school - lots of Southern accents, sweat, family, and sex.

The plot has rich man Mitchum run around town sleeping with anything that moves, being shot at occasionally by irate husbands/fathers, showing more affection for his hunting dogs and bastard son (Peppard) than his wife who won't sleep with him (Parker) and whimpy legitimate son (Hamilton). Mitchum is effective and very believable as a boozy basically useless rich man mainly interested in hedonism - his death is no real tragedy in my book. (Okay, they hint at a reconciliation with Parker but how long does anyone think that will last?) Parker looks too young to be Hamilton's mother but this was Hollywood; she gets a big monologue with goes on for far too long.

The two young man parts are dreams. Peppard comes off the better of the two as the tough, brave, smart but poor bastard son - he's not bitter about his upbringing and actually bonds well with Hamilton. He marries the cute girl Hamilton has knocked up, doesn't seem to resent Mitchum and invites Parker to help him raise Hamilton's child. Actually writing that he seems too good to be true but Peppard's playing doesn't make it seem that way. (I like the scene where Peppard visits his wife in bed and he's in pyjamas with a cigarette hanging out of his mouth).

Hamilton is less impressive - his inexperience is all too evident in what is a challenging role - but the role carries him along: highly strung, spoilt, neurotic, but also basically decent (once he finds out about Peppard he insists Mitchum take him in) with a strong motivation for this actions (he loathes his upbringing so doesn't want a wife or kids... which is why he abandons his girlfriend). And he has some good moments. As if to compensate, Hamilton walks around bare-chested a lot.

This goes on too long - two and a half hours - and is at it's core a soapy story but it's an effective one, and a good example that MGM knew how to make films for the teen audience.

Movie review - "David and Bathsheba" (1951) ***1/2

Gregory Peck isn't the first actor you'd think to appear in a Bible epic - Tyrone Power, his fellow big name at 20th Century Fox, probably would have suited it more. But he's handsome and has authority and does his best as the King who gets the hots for Bathsheba after seeing her take a bath on her roof (they hint at nudity but I'm pretty sure when she gets in she's got underwear on).

The main attribute of this is it's first rate script from Philip Dunne. It's a real character study - don't laugh: David is a torn man, tired from war, in a bad marriage with a wife he's only with for political reasons. He's drawn to Bathsheba for her sexiness, seduces her out of wedlock, and has hell to pay, constantly agonises over religious stuff. There's some great scenes with the prophet Nathan (Raymond Massey), the local religious lunatic - lots of interesting stuff about God and being a ruler.

Bathsheba isn't much of a character - she's hot but not super hot (Susan Hayward), just seems to drift along. She's no temptress, but is more a victim of fate/circumstance. Maybe this was a censor issue. Keiron Moore play Uriah who displays so little interest in his wife (always running off to battle and not having sex with her) that it makes your eyebrows raise.

 

Structure wise this is kind of odd - Dunne was faced with the challenge of padding out a very short section of the Bible, and most the drama is done by the time the affair is exposed. So the climax of the film is a flashback to the time David fought Goliath, which doesn't really have anything to do with Bathsheba. Yet it worked.

 

Henry King directs with sensitivity and the support cast are strong, including James Robertson Justice. It's not a big spectacle - most of the action takes place indoors, there aren't teems of extras. Perhaps the most thoughtful of the epics.

Movie review - "Hunted" (1952) ***

Charming British film which made a splash for Dirk Bogarde. It's the sort of role that always works - he's a murderer, but only of the rich nasty man who cuckolded him with his wife (Elizabeth Sellars, whose pointy nose seemed to always cast her in the role of sluts - she was one in The Shiralee); he goes on the run, having to take a boy witness with him. The two of them form a bond - the kid's from a nasty home and loves Bogarde. Jon Whiteley is the kid and he and Bogarde are excellent together.

There's no surprises or twists in the story - Bogarde's wife is a tramp, his brother is caught between a rock and a hard place, Bogarde is basically good - but it's very well done, briskly directed by Charles Crichton.

Movie review - "21 Jump Street" (2012) *** (warning: spoilers)

A throwback to the 80s in more ways than one - it's reminiscent of those buddy cop films from the time, such as Tango and Cash - only here the emphasis is on comedy more than action. It's self referential and doesn't take itself seriously at all - although it does explore some aspects like fear of high school, fear of shooting someone (like Die Hard), and bromance. Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill are a really good team - they seem to genuinely get along, like Hope and Crosby, and play well off each other. They probably could have done more with the supporting characters - I wish we'd seen more of the gorgeous Ellie Kempel. She's one of many TV faces who pop up in the support cast. It's a shame they didn't get Peter de Luise a proper close up at the end - they make it seem more about Johnny Depp.

Movie review - "Any Second Now" (1969) **

By the late 1960s Stewart Granger's time as a movie star had come to an end - too many obscure films in Europe - but he was still handsome with a full head of hair (even if the hair was white) and he was still a leading man (which restricted the sort of roles he was offered). So he headed to Universal for some TV.

He's playing a variation on the sort of role essayed by Ray Milland in Dial M for Murder - a photographer married to a rich woman that he's cheating on (with Diana Wynter - they have a racy lovemaking scene together which results in him having a bare chested cigarette afterwards). He tries to kill his wife and is semi-successful: the wife winds up with amnesia.

Up until then this isn't bad - quite pacy, and the direction tries to do something different with all these photographic jump cuts. But then it bogs down with a will-she-remember-in-time story - Granger has plenty of opportunities to off his wife but doesn't take them, a rich uncle appears then disappears, the climax is silly, you keep expecting Katy Juarando (as the amnesiac's nurse) to do something interesting but she doesn't. Joseph Campanella has the "John Williams" part of the doctor.

It's a shame because Granger makes a good villain.

Movie review - "The Thing" (2011) **

Full marks for them trying to do something different by making this a prequel to the 1982 - but really it's the same old ingredients just less well done. We have another group of people on an isolated station in Antarctica who discover a mysterious creature that knocks them off one by one, there's an older scientist who is a bit creepy, and plenty of gross out make up effects. It even copies the best scene of the 1982 version - to wit, the one where the lead insists on testing all the characters.

There's no John Carpenter music, and they use a score which isn't as good - just to remind us of that they reprise the 1982 tune at the end, which was so much better. There's also two women in the cast which on one hand is good but I felt lessens the tension - having women around feels as though it would civilise everyone when we want them turning on each other and getting hysterical. The direction isn't as good, with not enough suspense or atmosphere. We have more make up and special effects (including the space ship) which is impressive - but what you want is mood and suspense. Well, that's what I want, anyway.

The acting is okay - I liked the Norwegian actors, it gave the film a point of difference. The lead female tries to be tough and Sigourney Weaver but I had trouble buying her as a scientist. Joel Edgerton suits a beanie but lacks the laid back charisma of Kurt Russell. The fact it's set in the 1980s is barely used at all apart from the occasional line of dialogue (e.g. "do you know what the football score is" in those pre internet days).

Movie review - "On Our Selection" (1932) **

I remember not looking this movie much when I first saw it - it's so hokey and stage bound and melodramatic. It's certainly not as slick as the latter Dad Rudd films made by Ken G Hall. But as the years have gone on I quite enjoy it - it's certainly a useful capturing of a classic play which is one of the most popular this country ever saw.

The plot is really a series of various subplots centered around a "selection" in South West Queensland owned by Dad Rudd (Bert Bailey): he owes some money to his rich neighbour, old Carey (Len Budrick), who is determined to break Dad financially; his educated daughter Kate is pursued by two men, the poor but devoted Sandy (Dick Fair) and Carey's villainous son, Jim (John Warwick); one of his workers, Cranky Jack (Fred Kerry), has a mysterious background; comic visits from a parson (Arthur Dodds) and country dentist who removes Dad's tooth; his dim son Dave (Fred MacDonald) proposes to his girlfriend, Lily (Lilias Adeson); his other son, Joe (Ossie Wenban), causes slapstick havoc; Dave gets married and moves out with his wife and tries to borrow money from his father; Dad's daughter Sarah (Bobbie Beaumont) is pursued by the high-voiced Billy (Fred Browne), who Dad doesn't like; Dad Rudd runs for parliament opposite Carey; and his horse wins a race.

The main story concerns a murder mystery. Jim Carey attempts to blackmail Kate into being with him by lying about what she did in the city, and Sandy knocks him out. Carey later turns up dead and Sandy is suspected of the murder. The Rudds hold a dance and a police officer turns up to arrest Sandy when Cranky Jack confesses he killed Carey because the dead man stole his wife. The film ends with Dad and Mum happily watching the sun come up.

The melodrama murder was added to the Steele Rudd stories and I think it was a good idea as it gives the piece some heavy meat. Structure-wise it's still iffy - they resolve the drought by act one, the subplots sort of come and go, it feels weird that Sandy heads off, nothing much is made of Dad running for Parliament really. It's a shame Hall never got to remake this in say the 40s or 50s - but then I guess Bailey was too old and no one else could have played the role.

You can tell the actors are stage experienced - they're pretty good if broad. It's not amateur hour just amateur filmmaking hour.

Movie review - "Is There Anybody There?" (1976) ** (warning: spoilers)

A beautiful woman, Kate (Tina Grenville), is released from a sanatorium unaware that while she was away her husband John (George Lazenby) has begun an affair with her sister Marianne (Wendy Hughes). The two sisters live together in a creepy apartment block while John is away, and find themselves stalked by some mysterious strangers, Rosa (Chantal Contouri) and Duncan (Patrick Ward). Marianne believes that she is being confused with Kate - but it turns out the whole thing is a plot by Kate to revenge herself on Marianne and John. Marianne accidentally shoots John to death and then Kate shoots Marianne and escapes with John's money and her lover, Duncan - who has murdered Rosa.

This is one of a series of TV movies made by Robert Bruning in the 1970s. Lazenby isn't in it very much - it's more a vehicle for Grenville (very much a gas lighting plot). Some decent scary shock scenes such as Lazenby being killed but they are few and far between and it's a bit crappy.

Movie review - "The Sun Also Rises" (1957) **

One of Daryl Zanuck's super productions when he was an independent producer - an all star cast, literary background, CinemaScope, racy subject matter, exotic locations, expensive look, one of his mistresses in a prominent role. For the most part the handling is all wrong in this version of Hemmingway's famous early novel - it's not really a Cinemascope story, even if the Paris and Spanish locations are pretty. It's not an epic tale rather one of a group of friends.

Some of this is hideous - the awful exposition of Power's first scene with a soldier, Power and Mel Ferrer's first scene. It's too reverential and important when these people are not really important. A lot of the casting is weak - Mel Ferrer is a poor actor, Tyrone Power does his best in what is a horrible role (how do you make impotence interesting?), Eddie Albert is whatever, Robert Evans is spectacularly bad (he has this laughable goofy look on his face - I can't believe they didn't cast a European in this time when European heartthrobs were emerging on the Continent). Juliette Greco is fine but she comes on with this big entrance and you think she's going to be a major character then she disappears. No one looks like a writer except maybe Albert, and he just looks like a cheerful newspaper reporter.

Ava Gardner is perfect as Brett - well, not exactly perfect, she's not vaguely English, but she's got the earthy, love hungry quality of the part down pat. (In real life she would develop a taste for bull fighters). I believed her love for Tyrone Power - and his for her. (Didn't quite buy her as a nurse, though).

As for Errol Flynn... Well, his presence is striking and he gives a good performance, all elegant wastrel, a drunken gentleman. I'm not sure he gives the right performance though - it doesn't make sense that Garner would want to marry him, he looks so wrecked and drunk and awful, no sexual threat (especially once we know he's broke). It's fascinating work, he has a few good moments - drunken self-pitying scenes - but for me he threw the film off balance. He fitted in a lot better in The Roots of Heaven.

Occasionally this does hit the mark - when the friends are walking around, talking to each other, having drinks, deciding which party or club to go to, running into old acquaintances, squabbling, falling in love with the one girl, etc. It was then the film created that vibe of schoolies, or ending exams, or just a big Friday or Saturday night - guys cruising on the town, looking for something and never quite finding it. And I couldn't help feeling it's a shame this novel was never filmed by someone like say John Cassevetes or Peter Bogdanovich - someone good with male ensembles and actors and atmosphere, something this lacks.

It's worth seeing if you're a fan of Flynn or Garner, or Hemmingway and don't mind seeing what they did to his novel. All others better skip it.

Movie review - "The Nun's Story" (1959) *****

A beautiful film made with much love and care - Fred Zinneman and Audrey Hepburn at the height of their powers. The film takes it's time telling the story with (seeming) accuracy and sympathy as Hepburn joins the convent, goes through basic training, then specialist training, and out to her first gig (at a mental hospital)... before going to the Congo. It's a lot like military movies, come to think of it.

Personal opinions are inevitable in movies about religion and for my mind few films have been more effective in demonstrating the oppressiveness of the Catholic Church - Hepburn is told to give up herself, any dreams and ambitions. One nun encourages her to fail a test because she's too smart (her father is a doctor and she's great with medicine), she gets in trouble for being applauded by patients, any ambition is crushed, religion is meant to come before her work at the hospital, she can't take sides in World War Two. Maybe I loved this in part because it sort of confirmed with views I had about the church - but it's still magnificent filmmaking.

It's just so well done - all the acting is sensitive and the scenes are so well evoked. Actors who I've seen ham it up such as Lionel Jeffries and Dean Jagger are restrained and wonderful. I love the relationship between Hepburn and her father - he loves her, thinks she's making a mistake, but is there for her. Electric cameo from Colleen Dewhurst as a crazy lady - but even this is handled with discretion. All the nun actors are good too.

 

Peter Finch is terrific in what could have been a cliche part (a hard drinking, tough colonial doctor) but he's really superb - the right combination of intelligence and anger. It's a very "Aussie" performance - he feels Australian here, sunburnt and weather-beaten, fond of a drink and fishing, a bit misogynist. The relationship between he and Hepburn is spot on - a sprinkling of urst (checking her bare back with a stethoscope) but mostly respect and intelligence.

 

Only once or twice did the movie strike a bung note for me: the conversion of the Congolese felt a bit fuzzy and I wasn't wild about the war montage. But they are minor flaws in a masterpiece. It feels so real - the churches, the African setting, the hospitals, etc.

 

So many great bits: the ceremonial activity, Hepburn cutting her hair; the bit of one of the novices sneezing as she walks off to her new life; the patients applauding Hepburn after she graduates; the shocking murder of a nun by a man in a Congo (this made me literally gasp - especially as it takes place in a hospital ward and involves several strikes by the man in between pauses); the final, stunning image of Hepburn walking off to her new life. It's awesome.

Movie review - "Hound of the Baskervilles" (1972) *1/2

The story is solid - it's treatment proof really, if done faithfully - and it's interested to see Stewart Granger play Holmes. Granger is professional enough, he was still handsome after all these years, but it's a shame he wasn't allowed (or didn't want to access) Holmes' arrogance - Granger was such an arrogant prat at times, I think he could have made a marvellously self-satisfied, egotistical Holmes. He didn't "Stewart Granger" it up enough but plays it way too safe (as he did too often).

This was made by Universal and the treatment is done in that crappy early 70s Universal TV style - ugly photography, laughable paintings to indicate the Baskerville estate, run of the mill sets (Baskerville is all on a sound stage) and music. 

 

Anthony Zerbe adds some dash as the doctor, Bernard Fox is okay as Watson, and William Shatner pretty good as George Stapleton. But everyone is defeated by uninspired, bland handling and this is really only for completists.

Movie review - "Among Vultures" (1964) **

My first experience of a German Western - a massively popular genre in Europe based on the success of the novels of Karl May. Pierre Brice became a star playing the Uncle Tom Indian Winnetou who usually teamed up with Lex Barker as the cowboy Shatterhand.

Apparently in 1964 the producers realised they could get Stewart Granger, whose career was on the slide but was a bigger name than Barker, and hired hum to play another cowboy from May, Surehand, for three movies. Surehand is an old gunslinger, quick on the draw.

The plot has some outlaws committing crimes and blaming them on Indians. A posse of goodies get together to help, including the son of the murder victims, Winnetou and Surehand - plus Elke Sommer, who shows off her cleavage a few times leaning out of windows. 

 

It's not really a star vehicle - everyone takes turns at doing something heroic. Granger's voice is dubbed but is authentic enough as a cowboy hero and has a jaunty air about him - his old star appeal is welcome in a movie where I only recognised Sommer and him.

The best sequence is when some Indians fire arrows at Surehand and he has to shoot the arrows - a version of the William Tell legend. The rest of it isn't as good - I didn't buy how the head baddy whimpered like a coward at the end (it felt too pat), the dubbing was distracting, the acting poor. 

 

There is some action and the locations (snow capped mountains, greed fields, forests) are pretty. And it was fascinating to watch.

Movie review - "Our Idiot Brother" (2011) ***1/2

The face of new indie cinema, just like The Kids Are Alright - an all-star cast, emphasis on story about family, gay characters, pleasant rather than confronting. This is a reassuring movie but it succeeds because it's based in truth - Paul Rudd is a sweet drop kick, the sort of under achiever everyone knows. He gets out of gaol for selling drugs to a uniformed cop and then accidentally creates havoc by telling too much of the truth - about his brother in law's (Steve Coogan's) infidelity, his tough sister's (Elizabeth Banks') lack of journalistic scruples and feelings for the neighbour (Adam Scott), his bisexual sister's (Zoe Deschanel's) infidelity to her lesbian partner (Rashida Jones). It all works out as nicely as any Hollywood movie.

I thought at first all these names agreed to do it out of their obligation to the cool group but having watched it, I think they were just glad to play a decent role - especially the girls, who are often sidelined into girlfriend parts. I loved the bromance between Rudd and the guy who replaced him with his girlfriend - that "aw gee yeah we could do this" mentality that teenage boys have but most of them grow out of. Very sweet and engaging.

Movie review - "Secret Mission" (1942) **

A bunch of guys on a mission to blow something up - in this case it's World War 2 and some Poms and a Free Frenchman (James Mason in an outrageous accent) go to Normandy. 

The cast includes two other who would become stars - Michael Wilding (as a member of the lower orders) and Stewart Granger (a small role as a submarine captain who drops them off). But the leading actor here is Hugh Williams, a bland type who looks like he'd be happier working in an insurance office, which was no doubt part of his appeal. Some other future famous names worked on it behind the camera - Anatole de Grunwald worked on the script, from a story by Terence Young.

It's an exciting story but not very excitingly done. After the troops hit France it all tends to be a bit of a lark - rather like other "Allied troops in Occupied Europe tales" in that year, such as One of Our Aircraft is Missing and Desperate Journey. (Did the movie industry think the war was a joke in 1942 or something?)

The Germans are comic idiots, our heroes have jolly japes and easily get access to top secret bases and/or information, there's a beautiful local girl who is a bit tragic and who can't be with the hero. There are no particularly memorable suspense and or action sequences. It's a shame really.

Movie review - "The Lamp Still Burns" (1943) ***

You learn something new every day - I'd never heard of Rosamund Johns but apparently in 1944 she was the second most popular British female star after Margaret Lockwood. It's not hard to see how her terribly sensible attitude and non-threatening prettiness were so liked - she's a much better actor than, say, Phyllis Calvert, who specialised in good girls.

She's the no-nonsense star of this no-nonsense look at nursing - she plays an architect who decides to give up her trade and go into nursing. There's some semi-documentary training sequences (I'm assuming it's all authentic) and a soapier plot where she falls in love with her old boss, Stewart Granger (looking very young and dashing), who becomes a patient after an air raid and suffers a bit of amnesia. This gives rise to lots of talk about whether a woman can have a man and career, etc.

It's World War Two feminism - we see lots of women in positions of power (the sister, a doctor, the lead has one career and swaps it for another). Even when Johns tends Granger she's got the power - he lies on his back and has his forehead tended. But the girls can't have it all.

This is political in other ways - it's pointed out that the hospital depends on charity, nurses are badly paid and the whole system needs reform. Indeed the last five minutes or so contain more speeches than you get in Parliament. But they're all good points, even if laid on with a trowel. And the ending is kind of open - Johns doesn't say she can never marry Granger, just not while conditions are the way they are. Fascinating as a piece of history rather than drama, but still gripping.

Performances are all fine - Granger already had authority, even if his inexperience does show; there's an excellent catalogue of elder character actors, particularly the men playing the hospital board.

Radio review - Lux - "Little Women" (1950) ***

Several of the cast from MGM's film repeat their screen performances - June Allyson, Peter Lawford, Margaret O'Brien and Janet Leigh, but no Elizabeth Taylor, which is presumably why the part of Amy is so truncated. It's serviceable enough, with everyone trying - the only one really out of his league is Lawford, who doesn't have a strong enough voice for radio. Even though this is a story for kids it's very adult - Allyson and Lawford may be childhood soul mates but don't get together and he winds up with someone better looking and shallower, which happens; O'Brien dies; it's set against the background of war.

At the end O'Brien makes a crack about hoping the fact she and Lawford came out to Hollywood together from New York "doesn't wind up in the columns" - she was 13 at the time but knowing Lawford that didn't make her necessarily safe. Allyson jokes about her upcoming movie with husband Dick Powell.

Movie review - "The Secret Partner" (1961) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

Entertaining, unpretentious thriller from MGM's British arm with Stewart Granger in solid form as a shipping tycoon who is being blackmailed by his dentist - who is being blackmailed in turn by a mystery man (in a hooded mask and with a weird voice thingy, a little like Midnight Lace). There are some decent twists in this, even though at the end you kind of think "gee Granger went to an awful lot of trouble".

Granger is ideally cast as the cuckolded tycoon - he's kind of a weak character despite his wealth (blackmail victim, persecuted by police, wife cheating on him) and it's interesting to see Granger play this. 

 

Bernard Lee is excellent as the seen-it-all-befire investigating officer who is about to retire. There's lots of vaguely familiar British actors in the support cast and the female lead is the not very good Haya Harareet from Ben Hur.

It could have done with a bit more atmosphere and scenes like the dentist extracting information from Granger - this was creepy - and a little less TV feel. But it will play well on TV. 

 

It was made by the team of Basil Dearden and Michael Relph who usually threw in a bit of social consciousness in their movies around this time but there's none to be had.

Movie review - "The Rum Diary" (2011) **1/2

A shaggy dog movie - it sort of ambles along the beach, occasionally dunks in the water, and shakes itself off. It's always a pleasure to renew acquaintance with Johnny Depp even if he is starting to get a little old (yes even Dorian Depp) and there are some engaging rogues he encounters down Puerto Rico way: a shaggy bearded photographer slash cockfighter, the pyjama wearing religious correspondent whose intake of drugs and drink makes Depp's character look tame, Aaron Erkhardt's charismatic gangster, the toupee wearing angry editor. It was shot in Puerto Rico and looks fantastic - they spent too much money really to justify the story but it's all there: yachts, carnivals full of people, newspaper offices, street riots, cockfights, dingy bars, nightclubs. I think as a result this movie won't make a profit which is a shame because it's got an independent spirit, which cinema needs more of.

Amber Heard is a stunner and has the 50s look but isn't much of a character: she's really hot, likes fast cars and dancing, and bangs Erkhart in the sea and Depp in the shower. And that's it - it's kind of a shock to hear that she married Depp at the end because that makes her more of a real person, which she isn't on screen.

And another thing - the evil thing that the evil people want to do is built a resort on an empty island. I mean, that's capitalist but not really evil - not say like overthrowing the government like United Fruit used to do. And Depp kind of should go to gaol for a bit for setting fire to a policeman - that is kind of nasty.

Best scenes for me (apart from the production value): a tense moment where Depp and his mate are at a cafe and realise the locals might want to kill them; the production spectacle of the carnival; the LSD sequence.

Movie review -"Moonfleet" (1955) ***1/2

This MGM boys own swashbuckler was not popular with audiences or critics on release - indeed, it probably helped with the decline of both Stewart Granger and Fritz Lang's careers in Hollywood - but it has enthusiastic backing among some critics such as David Shipman.

It's one of those adventure tales told through the eyes of a child e.g. The Fallen Idol, Kidnapped, Treasure Island, High Wind in Jamaica. Jon Whiteley is the young boy sent to live with relative Stewart Granger in a small coastal town in England. He soon comes to (a) idolise Granger and (b) realise his guardian is a smuggler.

It's not a feel good movie - the coast is a mostly treacherous place, full of jagged rocks and waves that crash up against them; towns are deserted and/or full of empty mansions; random people are left hung by the side of the road; local law enforcement and nobility are corrupt and/or incompetent. Some only real "good" people are a nice squire and a little girl who befriends Whiteley.

Yet in it's way this is a touching, warm film, as it is based around the relationship between Whiteley and Granger. The little kid adores him and he comes to love the kid - sticking up for him when his men want the kid's throat slit, making a sacrifice with his life. The ending, with a dying Granger telling Whiteley that he'll be along soon, is very moving. I count myself on the side of fans of this movie.

Movie review - "Blanche Fury" (1948) ***

In the late 1940s Stewart Granger took the box office appeal he had developed starring in Gainsborough melodramas and made several movies that clearly aimed to be "just like Gainsborough melodramas, only good". They were made with big budgets, all based on historical record, and a lot more intelligence - they included this, Saraband for Dead Lovers and Captain Boycott. Neither are remembered with as much affection as The Man in Grey or Madonna of the Seven Moons, even if they are better movies.

This gives Granger one of this best parts - a moody, bitter illegitimate off spring of a rich family. Valerie Hobson comes to stay with them and marries the weak legitimate son (Michael Gough) but has it off with Granger (they clearly have sex - they kiss and he kicks the door shut). Granger is really good, there are some solid supporting parts - Hobson less so. I've never been much of a fan - kind of a prissy girl but not really, much of a muchness, really... She lacks the flair of Margaret Lockwood or sexiness of Joan Greenwood or Deborah Kerr, or presence of Kathleen Byron. For me, she's the one who stopped this reaching the top rank.

There are some great scenes - Granger shooting the two men in particular - beautiful sets and technicolour photography. A little girl dies while galloping on a horse and trying to ride over a jump, just like in Gone with the Wind. Maybe it was too restrained to take fire. It's very good - just not a classic.

Movie review - "Steamboat Bill Jr" (1928) ***

For the most part I didn’t find this that amazing - Buster Keaton as the college-educated son of a steamboat captain who finds his kid a bit whimpy. But then the last act kicks in - it's a storm that hits the town, resulting in houses falling down everywhere, boats flying about, and Buster struggling against the elements. This is the film which features the famous stunt of a house collapsing all around him, but him surviving by standing in an open window. There's plenty of it and it's all terrific - one of the great all time physical performers was Keaton,

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

Beautiful to look at and made with a lot of love but Martin Scorsese is clearly awkward with a story set in Paris, which is probably why everyone acts in English accents. He's also not that skilled telling stuff through the eyes of a child, which is presumably why this gets off to such an awkward start - it shouldn't because the set up is simple (orphan lives in train station repairing clock) but it proceeds in fits and starts, awkward visual gags, and too many scenes where the characters say the word "notebook". I think they miscast the kid who plays Hugo, too - he's got piercing eyes (was this why he got the gig?) but he just feels all wrong - whereas his puppy love interest is spot on.

For a while I really struggled with this - I tuned out and started to nod off. Two terrific moments - a train smash and Hugo discovering he's a robot - just turn out to be dreams, which is cheating. It picked up once we found out that Kingsley was George Melies and we saw some flashbacks - at least he did interesting stuff with his life, and we get into the magic of it all. (Only if films are the most important thing in Melies life... then why is the automaton so important? That doesn't really have anything to do with cinema.)

I can see why the elderly Academy voters liked it - it's about a man who is old and forgotten, yet still has a wife and god-daughter who love him, an academic who rediscovers him and gives him a retrospective, a little kid who thinks he's really cool. It's also full of loving recreations of 1920s Paris and early silent cinema.

Movie review – “Foolish Wives” (1922) ***1/2

Eric Von Stroheim may have spent money like a druken sailor but he got a hell of it up on screen – this is full of stunning sets and images, and is clearly the work of a great director. It’s Dirty Rotten Scoundrels on the French Riviera – Von Stroheim and his two “cousins” try to bag rich partners – well actually on he seems to be the one who tries to get one, the others sort of hang around. He chases after the married wife of the American representative to Monte Carlo – she’s not very good looking (a bit chunky in the face) and is up for romance.

A lot of it is really sexy too like the American wife getting changed after a storm in a little out of the way place while Von Stroheim perves at her through a mirror, and the whole concept of Von Stroheim living with his two cousins (and a maid who he’s also tupping) is hot – JackThompson esque, really. There’s a touching suicide form the maid who loves von Stroheim.

Spectacular action sequences inclide a storm and fire, both brilliantly done, and I was knocked out to learn this wasn't actually shot in Monte Carlo. It looks like it was done on location, with teaming extras (sailors on the boat dropping off the Americans, all the people on the promenade, the packed casinos). Von Stroheim gets his comeuppance - killed by the crazed father of a woman he molests - so it is moral in a way.