After Warner Oland's death, 20th Century Fox wanted to keep the Charlie Chan series going so Sidney Toler slotted in instead. He was less warm than Oland, more like a wax figure, and no more authentically Chinese. His sidekick, number Two son, played by Victor Sen Yung, was less good than Keye Luke too.
However this is actually one of the best in the series - bright, energetic, and off the wall. Its set in Honolulu with Chan awaiting the birth of his first grandson (a good idea to introduce Toler because he's established as a family man and is on his home turf). A boat arrives with a dead body - Number Two Son amusingly pretends to be dad and tries to solve the case as him while Dad's at hospital; eventually Charlie figures out what is up and heads over.
I wonder why they used the pretending-to-be-Charlie Chan plot here... was Fox worried audiences would take to Toler and wanted to limit his time on screen? Anyway it actually suits the tone of the rest of the movie which throws in everything - it's mostly set on ship but feels like a haunted house story at times; there's an escaped lion and his comic relief tamer, George Zucco as a mad scientist experimenting on brains, a gruff sea captain, ever presence 30s gangster Marc Lawrence, a younger Chan son as well, constant cutting back to Charlie's son in law at the hospital.
It is a decent mystery, the finale has the suspects gathered, I didn't pick the killer (the young lovers are reasonable suspect) and the handling is vigorous. Lots of fun. I wish it had Oland instead of Toler but you can't have everything.
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
Monday, July 29, 2013
Movie review - Chan#8 - "Charlie Chan in Egypt" (1935) ***
One of the best Fox Charlie Chans, though almost completely ruined by the presence of Stephin Fetchit, with his agonisingly painful slow drawl. Thankfully he's only in the movie a small bit so you can enjoy it. For the most part this is a lot of fun, with Charlie Chan entering on a donkey and investigating deaths associated with an archeological dig.
Pat Paterson and Thomas Beck are the inevitable dull couple who Chan helps out (thus limiting the pool of suspects), a young (and chubbier) Rita Hayworth (dubbed Rita Cansino) is a local girl, there are some colourful supporting characters, pretty much all of whom look to be up to no good. Louis King does a fine job of directing, getting plenty of spookiness out of the various tombs and darkened museum corridors - it's slower paced than others in the series (which had lots of running around) but that's not a bad thing as they go for the spookiness.
Pat Paterson and Thomas Beck are the inevitable dull couple who Chan helps out (thus limiting the pool of suspects), a young (and chubbier) Rita Hayworth (dubbed Rita Cansino) is a local girl, there are some colourful supporting characters, pretty much all of whom look to be up to no good. Louis King does a fine job of directing, getting plenty of spookiness out of the various tombs and darkened museum corridors - it's slower paced than others in the series (which had lots of running around) but that's not a bad thing as they go for the spookiness.
Sunday, July 28, 2013
Movie review - "Kiss and Tell" (1945) **1/2
Shirley Temple enjoyed some success in the mid 1940s playing a series of lively, boy-crazy teenagers, often in support of adult stars (eg Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer, I'll Be Seeing You). Audiences seemed to enjoy her less when she was the actual star, but this was popular enough to lead to a sequel. I think this was in part due to the fact it was based on a popular Broadway hit, Kiss and Tell - which in turn was part of a highly popular genre: I guess you'd call it small-town-girls-and-GIs-rom-com, funny tales set in small towns where GIs on leave have romantic misunderstandings with teenage girls while flustered parents and jealous rivals interfere and everyone worries about sex and getting married (Dear Ruth was another one).
The plot has Temple and best friend Virginia Welles selling kisses and being romanced; Temple's brother Scott Elliot loves Welles and they get married in secret; Temple chases after another soldier despite being loved by the boy next door.
It's amiable enough with some funny lines, expert playing by Robert Benchley and Temple well cast. My main gripe was the parents were really annoying and pompous, worried about their kids' purity. It really got on my nerves and they became unpleasant to be around.
The plot has Temple and best friend Virginia Welles selling kisses and being romanced; Temple's brother Scott Elliot loves Welles and they get married in secret; Temple chases after another soldier despite being loved by the boy next door.
It's amiable enough with some funny lines, expert playing by Robert Benchley and Temple well cast. My main gripe was the parents were really annoying and pompous, worried about their kids' purity. It really got on my nerves and they became unpleasant to be around.
Movie review - Chan#20 - "City in Darkness" (1939) **
An opening montage talks about the Munich Crisis, which gives this some real uniqueness. It's set during an air raid drill in Paris in 1938 - Paris is the City of Darkness. Charlie is attending a conference of crime fighters and someone is inevitably kid.
There is a strong support cast including Douglas Dumbrille, Leo G. Carroll, a young Lyn Bari... and Lon Chaney Jnr (in a very small role as an associate of Carroll's)! Sidney Toler is dull as usual but most of the detecting is actually Harold Huber as another cop - he fills the sort of Number One son role, constantly getting into trouble. There's a femme fetale and a killer who gets out of trouble because he kills someone in the name of France to avoid war! Also the ending has the characters hoping the Munich Crisis will mean peace, and Charlie not looking enthusiastic,
There is a strong support cast including Douglas Dumbrille, Leo G. Carroll, a young Lyn Bari... and Lon Chaney Jnr (in a very small role as an associate of Carroll's)! Sidney Toler is dull as usual but most of the detecting is actually Harold Huber as another cop - he fills the sort of Number One son role, constantly getting into trouble. There's a femme fetale and a killer who gets out of trouble because he kills someone in the name of France to avoid war! Also the ending has the characters hoping the Munich Crisis will mean peace, and Charlie not looking enthusiastic,
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Movie review - "Through a Glass Darkly" (1961) ****
Not for the faint hearted: four people are on an island, while one of them (Harriett Andersson) goes insane. She possibly seduces her 17 year old brother, is coldly observed by her writer father, and is tolerated by her loving husband. You could do a misogynist reading of this - poor old men tormented by crazy women - but its done incredibly well, with some remarkable performances.
There are a lot of familiar Bergman themes: insanity, the role of the artist, feeling vs unfeeling, God, life and death; an island. Strong drama plus some very spooky moments when Andersson loses it that reminded me of Repulsion. An excellent movie.
There are a lot of familiar Bergman themes: insanity, the role of the artist, feeling vs unfeeling, God, life and death; an island. Strong drama plus some very spooky moments when Andersson loses it that reminded me of Repulsion. An excellent movie.
Movie review - "Eureka Stockade" (1949) ***
Ealing Studios were on a high after the success of The Overlanders and wanted to make more Australian films, of which this was the first... however the shooting was extremely problematic (rain, government interference, union troubles, the British quota wars of the time), the budget blew out and the resulting movie was a critical and commercial disappointment. So it has this bad reputation. Yet it was surprisingly enjoyable.
The flaws are obvious - there are far (far) too many speeches, and scenes of miners going "hooray" and some such; there's no real characterisation, just actors in beards and period costume yelling at each other. The villains (the government) aren't that villainous - we meed the Commissioner very early but never get to know him; he doesn't even seem that bad (was this because the English filmmakers had an instinctive sympathy for these English characters as opposed to the Irish and Europeans who comprised the bulk of the miners?).
Chips Rafferty is embarassingly and destructively miscast as Peter Lalor - I know he had just appeared in The Overlanders but surely they must have guessed the part was beyond his capabilities. Apparently there was a push to cast Peter Finch (who plays a more peace loving leader of the miners pushed aside for Lalor) in the lead - one wonders what would have happened if this had occured, with Rafferty shunted to a "best friend" role (i.e. like the one Gordon Jackson plays). There would have definitely been more fire in Lalor's speeches and at least some chemistry in the romance subplot (with bland Jane Barrett being cast).
Yet there are pleasures - it looks spectacular, with some great production design (tents, miners, troopers over the hills), and plenty of extras. I know this cost a bomb, and much of the money was wasted, but a lot of its up on screen. The action sequences are very good too, such as the burning down of the hotel and the final attack on the Stockade. These provide solid "end of acts one and two". It's quite historically accurate (maybe even at the expense of the drama) and fair.
I wonder even with Peter Finch in the lead if audiences would have gone for the movie though. The story mightn't resonate as well as filmmakers think (I have an untested theory Australian audiences aren't that interested in revolution). The 1980s Eureka Stockade mini series didn't rate that well, Peter Lalor is a firebrand. I know why they always make Lalor the hero - he was the leader, he lost an arm, he found a girl... but maybe he would work better as a supporting character, with the hero being a fictitious person who was more emotionally engaging (or something).
Anyway I'm getting off topic. And maybe being over critical. For the point is, the film was surprisingly watchable, with plenty of action and movement and historical interest. No masterpiece, but a long way from being the dog its often accused of being.
The flaws are obvious - there are far (far) too many speeches, and scenes of miners going "hooray" and some such; there's no real characterisation, just actors in beards and period costume yelling at each other. The villains (the government) aren't that villainous - we meed the Commissioner very early but never get to know him; he doesn't even seem that bad (was this because the English filmmakers had an instinctive sympathy for these English characters as opposed to the Irish and Europeans who comprised the bulk of the miners?).
Chips Rafferty is embarassingly and destructively miscast as Peter Lalor - I know he had just appeared in The Overlanders but surely they must have guessed the part was beyond his capabilities. Apparently there was a push to cast Peter Finch (who plays a more peace loving leader of the miners pushed aside for Lalor) in the lead - one wonders what would have happened if this had occured, with Rafferty shunted to a "best friend" role (i.e. like the one Gordon Jackson plays). There would have definitely been more fire in Lalor's speeches and at least some chemistry in the romance subplot (with bland Jane Barrett being cast).
Yet there are pleasures - it looks spectacular, with some great production design (tents, miners, troopers over the hills), and plenty of extras. I know this cost a bomb, and much of the money was wasted, but a lot of its up on screen. The action sequences are very good too, such as the burning down of the hotel and the final attack on the Stockade. These provide solid "end of acts one and two". It's quite historically accurate (maybe even at the expense of the drama) and fair.
I wonder even with Peter Finch in the lead if audiences would have gone for the movie though. The story mightn't resonate as well as filmmakers think (I have an untested theory Australian audiences aren't that interested in revolution). The 1980s Eureka Stockade mini series didn't rate that well, Peter Lalor is a firebrand. I know why they always make Lalor the hero - he was the leader, he lost an arm, he found a girl... but maybe he would work better as a supporting character, with the hero being a fictitious person who was more emotionally engaging (or something).
Anyway I'm getting off topic. And maybe being over critical. For the point is, the film was surprisingly watchable, with plenty of action and movement and historical interest. No masterpiece, but a long way from being the dog its often accused of being.
Movie review - "Patrick" (2013) ***
Remake of the 1970s ozspolitation semi classic improves on the original in some ways, but in others is a step back. It looks terrific with some brilliant production design (creepy hospital, dark corridors), and stylish photography; there is some top notch acting with Sharni Vinson a likeable heroine, Rachel Griffiths taking to horror like a duck to water, and Charles Dance providing gravitas. Jackson Gallagher is a suitably enigmatic Patrick, Simone Buchanan an effective scrubber mum, and Peta Sergeant does her cheery flirt thing well. I also enjoyed seeing Rod Mullinar pop up in one scene. The central concept remains a strong one and there are some decent shocks. It also moves at a decent pace.
But the story is needlessly complicated, especially in the second half. It should be enough that Patrick is in love with the nurse (although this is undeveloped), but instead Patrick has this other agenda involving Dance which is never really made clear; the why-doesn't-anyone-call-the-police logic really grates towards the end; there were unsatisfactory resolutions involving the fluid, and electric shocks and Dance's secret plans, and the missing nurse. Vinson's relationship with Damon Gameau (who is fine in the thankless Michael Douglas in Coma role) was also sketchy. And Martin Crewes gives a poor performance as a shrink.
The action felt jumped around at times with odd continuity. And while the music score was excellent there was too much of it, when it may have been more effective to hold on a scene and use silence. It's an enjoyable movie, with much to admire, I just wish they'd simplified and streamlined it a bit more.
But the story is needlessly complicated, especially in the second half. It should be enough that Patrick is in love with the nurse (although this is undeveloped), but instead Patrick has this other agenda involving Dance which is never really made clear; the why-doesn't-anyone-call-the-police logic really grates towards the end; there were unsatisfactory resolutions involving the fluid, and electric shocks and Dance's secret plans, and the missing nurse. Vinson's relationship with Damon Gameau (who is fine in the thankless Michael Douglas in Coma role) was also sketchy. And Martin Crewes gives a poor performance as a shrink.
The action felt jumped around at times with odd continuity. And while the music score was excellent there was too much of it, when it may have been more effective to hold on a scene and use silence. It's an enjoyable movie, with much to admire, I just wish they'd simplified and streamlined it a bit more.
Movie review - "A Field in England" (2013) **
During the English civil war a man goes looking for an Irishman and they hook up with some others and look for treasure. I think. This was a very confusing. There are some effective battle sequences at the beginning, some trippy visuals (the characters eat magic mushrooms), intriguing use of sound, solid acting. There is a funny death bed confession.
But it was hard to get a grip on what was going on and to be involved in the characters. I began to long for some violent scenes to wake up. It didn't need to be that confusing did it? It's a bunch of guys looking for treasure - you can create something easy to follow about that, can't you?
But it was hard to get a grip on what was going on and to be involved in the characters. I began to long for some violent scenes to wake up. It didn't need to be that confusing did it? It's a bunch of guys looking for treasure - you can create something easy to follow about that, can't you?
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Movie review - "Kathleen" (1941) *1/2
MGM were famed as the studio who knew how to handle stars more than any other - they're the ones who discovered Mario Lanza and Esther Williams, and could treat Spencer Tracy, Jean Harlow and William Powell properly. But they had deliberately set out to sabotage Shirley Temple's career they couldn't have done better with this film than if they'd tried.
It's a really awkward, uncomfortable movie with Shirley as a day dreaming fantasist teen. She's the daughter of a widowed man (Herbert Marshall), which is par for the course; she's got a crush on him and is kind of love with him, which is also usual, although with her being older its a bit uncomfortable; she squabbles with her housekeeper, which is less effective when dad's around and she's older, and sets off firecrackers. This prompts dad to send in a shrink, which to be honest doesn't make me like Dad (especially as he's so neglectful). The shrink is Laraine Day and Shirley gets a kind of crush on her and tries to match make.
I just found this yuck - unfunny dream sequences, a lead character who is clearly traumatised about (instead of the plucky thing of her 30s movies she's whiny, vague, and suffering severe emotional trauma which is not fun); songs are awkwardly put in; dad and her have a weird relationship as does dad and the shrink. There is some nice vaguely feminist stuff ("why can't a woman chase a man"), a very unconvincing happy ending. This movie just gave me the creeps.
It's a really awkward, uncomfortable movie with Shirley as a day dreaming fantasist teen. She's the daughter of a widowed man (Herbert Marshall), which is par for the course; she's got a crush on him and is kind of love with him, which is also usual, although with her being older its a bit uncomfortable; she squabbles with her housekeeper, which is less effective when dad's around and she's older, and sets off firecrackers. This prompts dad to send in a shrink, which to be honest doesn't make me like Dad (especially as he's so neglectful). The shrink is Laraine Day and Shirley gets a kind of crush on her and tries to match make.
I just found this yuck - unfunny dream sequences, a lead character who is clearly traumatised about (instead of the plucky thing of her 30s movies she's whiny, vague, and suffering severe emotional trauma which is not fun); songs are awkwardly put in; dad and her have a weird relationship as does dad and the shrink. There is some nice vaguely feminist stuff ("why can't a woman chase a man"), a very unconvincing happy ending. This movie just gave me the creeps.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Movie review - "Young People" (1940) ** (warning: spoilers)
Historically significant in a way: this was Shirley Temple's last movie under her contract with Fox, a studio for whom she had made a lot of money. It's an odd piece - I'm not quite sure they made it: were they genuinely trying to change her image or were they just finishing the contract?
It's not really a Temple vehicle - she shares the lead duties with two others (Jack Oakie and Charlotte Greenwood) and the film is about three of them equally. They are vaudevillians who retire to a stuffy town, which I guess is an okay concept for a fish out of water comedy, only the filmmakers don't have that much fun with it. Temple does a slightly race school dance but it's only slightly racy - the others say a few outrageous things, but the main problem never seems to be them it's the stuff townsfolk. So the town is an unpleasant place to live, and we kind of wish they'd go back to vaudeville. That's what they intend to do too until a deux ex machina storm comes along and makes them heroes so they stay. (They only want to live in a town where people like you if you're heroes... great).
George Montgomery is handsome and confident in an early leading man role as the nice editor of the local paper. There are some decent dance routines and a potentially intriguing theme about the importance of embracing change (which could have had terrific resonance for the showbusiness backgrounds of the three leads) is completely ignored. A potentially big dramatic moment where Shirley finds out she's adopted is just thrown away too. At a time when Temple's career needed careful handling it was like Fox couldn't really be bothered (I get the feeling they always feared the day would come when she grew up and became unpopular, and when they did they gave up in advance).
It's not really a Temple vehicle - she shares the lead duties with two others (Jack Oakie and Charlotte Greenwood) and the film is about three of them equally. They are vaudevillians who retire to a stuffy town, which I guess is an okay concept for a fish out of water comedy, only the filmmakers don't have that much fun with it. Temple does a slightly race school dance but it's only slightly racy - the others say a few outrageous things, but the main problem never seems to be them it's the stuff townsfolk. So the town is an unpleasant place to live, and we kind of wish they'd go back to vaudeville. That's what they intend to do too until a deux ex machina storm comes along and makes them heroes so they stay. (They only want to live in a town where people like you if you're heroes... great).
George Montgomery is handsome and confident in an early leading man role as the nice editor of the local paper. There are some decent dance routines and a potentially intriguing theme about the importance of embracing change (which could have had terrific resonance for the showbusiness backgrounds of the three leads) is completely ignored. A potentially big dramatic moment where Shirley finds out she's adopted is just thrown away too. At a time when Temple's career needed careful handling it was like Fox couldn't really be bothered (I get the feeling they always feared the day would come when she grew up and became unpopular, and when they did they gave up in advance).
Movie review - "The Blue Bird" (1940) **1/2
The film that effectively killed Shirley Temple's career as a star - a big budget attempt to match the success of The Wizard of Oz, it was the victim of what can be seen in hindsight to be an astonishing miscalculation. After a highly successful career playing plucky orphans, Fox turned her into the bratty daughter of two hard working parents. It gets this movie off to a dodgy start from which it never quite recovers - Shirley being a selfish little brat who needs a comeuppance goes completely against every role she'd played before them.
Good on Fox for trying to expand her range, and it does give her character somewhere to go - but Shirley had never played a character which had any sort of development before. I can't understand why the studio risked such an expensive project on a new template when they so easily could have made her character likeable, poor and struggling at the beginning. I guess they figured that would rob the piece of its point - but it meant we had to spend over half the running time in the company of bratty Shirley. She doesn't even sing any songs.
It's a shame because the movie has much to admire - colour photography, impressive sets, a support cast that includes such reliables as Gale Sondergaard and Nigel Bruce, a genuine sense of magic and some really moving scenes, such as reviving her grandparents.
I know studio executives were worried about Shirley Temple growing up but her transformation to teenager could have been achieved with better handling - Deanna Durbin and Judy Garland pulled it off, and Temple grew up quite pretty. A Hollywood hypothetical: had this been changed into a musical about Shirley the plucky orphan and her adventures in this colourful land, then I believe it would have been a hit.
Admittedly event then it wouldn't have been perfect - that weird sequence with the unborn children is creepy, the plot seems to start and stop. But it deserved better.
Good on Fox for trying to expand her range, and it does give her character somewhere to go - but Shirley had never played a character which had any sort of development before. I can't understand why the studio risked such an expensive project on a new template when they so easily could have made her character likeable, poor and struggling at the beginning. I guess they figured that would rob the piece of its point - but it meant we had to spend over half the running time in the company of bratty Shirley. She doesn't even sing any songs.
It's a shame because the movie has much to admire - colour photography, impressive sets, a support cast that includes such reliables as Gale Sondergaard and Nigel Bruce, a genuine sense of magic and some really moving scenes, such as reviving her grandparents.
I know studio executives were worried about Shirley Temple growing up but her transformation to teenager could have been achieved with better handling - Deanna Durbin and Judy Garland pulled it off, and Temple grew up quite pretty. A Hollywood hypothetical: had this been changed into a musical about Shirley the plucky orphan and her adventures in this colourful land, then I believe it would have been a hit.
Admittedly event then it wouldn't have been perfect - that weird sequence with the unborn children is creepy, the plot seems to start and stop. But it deserved better.
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Movie review - "Susannah of the Mounties" (1939) ***
Kids who were the sole survivor of an Indian massacre were an old Western standby so in a way its kind of surprising it took 20th Century Fox a while to get around to using that as a plot for a Shirley Temple film. Or maybe not... it does mean this is a more serious vehicle for the moppet, beginning with her severely traumatised after her family and friends have been wiped out.
But this enables her to be an orphan and charm a military outpost, something she was very experienced at doing. For variety it's set in Canada and the cowboys are mounties; there is Randolph Scott wearing a mustache that makes him look really old as the main mountie dude, whom Temple kind of seems romantically keen on; a young Indian is held hostage for Shirley to have tween urst with; Margaret Lockwood (looking not very comfortable) pops up as Scott's love interest, who Temple spends most of her time trying to separate; the Indians are extremely whimpy except Victor Jory and a few firebrands; Shirley puts her head into the lion's den by visiting the Indian camp at the end to save the day. Shirley also takes a few drags on a peace pipe and gets a head ache.
There are many echoes of Wee Willie Winkie; it isn't as good but there's action and novelty.
But this enables her to be an orphan and charm a military outpost, something she was very experienced at doing. For variety it's set in Canada and the cowboys are mounties; there is Randolph Scott wearing a mustache that makes him look really old as the main mountie dude, whom Temple kind of seems romantically keen on; a young Indian is held hostage for Shirley to have tween urst with; Margaret Lockwood (looking not very comfortable) pops up as Scott's love interest, who Temple spends most of her time trying to separate; the Indians are extremely whimpy except Victor Jory and a few firebrands; Shirley puts her head into the lion's den by visiting the Indian camp at the end to save the day. Shirley also takes a few drags on a peace pipe and gets a head ache.
There are many echoes of Wee Willie Winkie; it isn't as good but there's action and novelty.
Monday, July 15, 2013
Movie review - "Mysterious Island" (1961) **1/2
Part of the late 50s-early 60s Jules Verne craze, this time with help from Ray Harryhausen and several Brits pretending to be Americans. Michael Craig is the lead - he's butched himself up with some three day growth but still can't quite carry a film as star; Michael Callan is the handsome juvenile in the Pat Boone/Fabian mode, and Gary Merrill, Percy Herbert and Joan Greenwood add some support; there is also a starlet called Beth Rogan who I got confused with Janet Munro and who looks fetching in a fur bikini. (For variety the guys walk around in tight shorts).
There is some nice colour photography and decent enough Ray Harryhausen effects but this movie seemed to lack flair and energy. Maybe its the fact Captain Nemo's appearance is held off so long - until then it's just a bunch of people arriving on an island, then another bunch of people (two overly convenient women) arriving, then a few encounters, then Nemo. There are some wacky creatures and a large comic geese and castaway antics - surely the filmmakers had seen Disney's Swiss Family Robinson. I had trouble telling the characters apart and never felt that excited or thrilled. Kids may like it though.
There is some nice colour photography and decent enough Ray Harryhausen effects but this movie seemed to lack flair and energy. Maybe its the fact Captain Nemo's appearance is held off so long - until then it's just a bunch of people arriving on an island, then another bunch of people (two overly convenient women) arriving, then a few encounters, then Nemo. There are some wacky creatures and a large comic geese and castaway antics - surely the filmmakers had seen Disney's Swiss Family Robinson. I had trouble telling the characters apart and never felt that excited or thrilled. Kids may like it though.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Movie review - "King Kong" (1933) ****
It has, inevitably, dated, with 1933 attitudes towards women, race, and Imperialism; also not all the special effects have aged well. But it retains it's magic: the adventure of going to Skull Island, the mysterious old walls created by a former civiliasation (has anyone thought of using this notion for a prequel), the villagers and their ceremonies, the exotic eco system of the island with its wide variety of dinosaurs, the fights which are bloody and to my untrained eye appear realistic (eg Kong ripping apart the jaws of a dinosaur, reaching under cliffs, biting heads off humans), the cynicism of exploiting Kong for money.
Bruce Cabot is probably not handsome enough for his role (imagine Joel McCrea, who often worked for RKO around this time); Fay Wray is alright in what's a thankless part really but she looks good in some clinging outfits (am I mistaking things or can you see her nipple in one scene?) and screams brilliantly; Robert Armstrong adds gravitas to his part.
None of these are exactly liberals - in later films, the girl and her lover would become concerned about the ape but here they don't, they are just terrified, and they don't seem to blink an eye with his later exploitation (indeed, they line up for photos). The sailors blast away ruthlessly at the animals - but are killed by Kong ruthlessly in turn. There seem to be no consequences for Armstrong's character, even though he's indirectly caused the destruction of half of New York.
The action sequences still impress with their pace, air of realism and sheer violence (Kong munches on several, throws an innocent woman sleeping in bed to her death). And there's a scale of it. Remains a classic.
Bruce Cabot is probably not handsome enough for his role (imagine Joel McCrea, who often worked for RKO around this time); Fay Wray is alright in what's a thankless part really but she looks good in some clinging outfits (am I mistaking things or can you see her nipple in one scene?) and screams brilliantly; Robert Armstrong adds gravitas to his part.
None of these are exactly liberals - in later films, the girl and her lover would become concerned about the ape but here they don't, they are just terrified, and they don't seem to blink an eye with his later exploitation (indeed, they line up for photos). The sailors blast away ruthlessly at the animals - but are killed by Kong ruthlessly in turn. There seem to be no consequences for Armstrong's character, even though he's indirectly caused the destruction of half of New York.
The action sequences still impress with their pace, air of realism and sheer violence (Kong munches on several, throws an innocent woman sleeping in bed to her death). And there's a scale of it. Remains a classic.
Movie review - "The Little Princess" (1939) ***1/2
A schizophrenic Shirley Temple film, as if Daryl F Zanuck was trying to cover his bets - its an adaptation of a classic children's novel, which is very British in its nature. Indeed, I was surprised how British it was - set during the Boer War, with talk of sorting out the Boers, celebrations on Mafeking night, Indian colonial subjects and cameos from Queen Victoria; there's also lots of costumes and set design (as in you really notice it). The drama is mostly treated straight and quite seriously; there's several intense moments such as Shirley talking to severely traumatised war veterans in hospital, and going into hysterics over her father.
To make sure all this pro British sentiment and full on drama isn't too much, they also throw in some poorly motivated song and dance numbers (one of the people who work at the girls school is a former song and dance man) and a dream ballet sequence. The latter is reminiscent of the dream sequence in Heidi; other features from previous Shirley Temple films include Marcia Mae Jones (here a bitch instead of a friend), Cesar Romero as an Indian friend, plus mean girls and little old ladies as well as kind friends (working class girl).
It is odd to see Shirley playing a Pom and a rich girl, although the latter is soon fixed up. There's a terrific cast - Anita Louise and Richard Greene are engaging lovers, Sybil Jason is a likeable cockney girl, Jones is a great bitch and Mary Nash a wonderful villain. It's all a little bit inconsistent (and how happy is the ending when her dad is clearly still brain injured from his war experiences) but this is easily one of her best movies.
To make sure all this pro British sentiment and full on drama isn't too much, they also throw in some poorly motivated song and dance numbers (one of the people who work at the girls school is a former song and dance man) and a dream ballet sequence. The latter is reminiscent of the dream sequence in Heidi; other features from previous Shirley Temple films include Marcia Mae Jones (here a bitch instead of a friend), Cesar Romero as an Indian friend, plus mean girls and little old ladies as well as kind friends (working class girl).
It is odd to see Shirley playing a Pom and a rich girl, although the latter is soon fixed up. There's a terrific cast - Anita Louise and Richard Greene are engaging lovers, Sybil Jason is a likeable cockney girl, Jones is a great bitch and Mary Nash a wonderful villain. It's all a little bit inconsistent (and how happy is the ending when her dad is clearly still brain injured from his war experiences) but this is easily one of her best movies.
Theatre review - "Gypsy" at Melbourne Arts Centre 14 July 2013
Why hasn't someone put Caroline O'Connor in a movie yet? Maybe she's not considered conventionally pretty - but she's sensational. And perfect in the lead of this famous musical, which was given a brilliant treatment.
Part of the reason this has done so well is its archetypal situation... we all know a Mama Rose, and a situation where there's a favoured older sibling and ignored younger one (The Coolangatta Gold had the same set up). Mama Rose isn't a monster, she gives her daughter a cake, but she has more energy than is good for her. First rate music, lyrics, book and emotion. Sexy strip tease stuff - the part of the youngest daughter is good too. Terrific.
Part of the reason this has done so well is its archetypal situation... we all know a Mama Rose, and a situation where there's a favoured older sibling and ignored younger one (The Coolangatta Gold had the same set up). Mama Rose isn't a monster, she gives her daughter a cake, but she has more energy than is good for her. First rate music, lyrics, book and emotion. Sexy strip tease stuff - the part of the youngest daughter is good too. Terrific.
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Movie review - "Seven Keys to Baldpate" (1935) **
RKO cranked out several versions of the George Cohan play, no doubt attracted to its limited sets and opportunities to use character actors. Some notable names pop up in this - Walter Brennan and Henry Travers - and they are the best thing about it. Gene Raymond doesn't have the chops as a star to carry this movie, but he's not helped by a slugging pace.
This isn't terrible, the story does ensure it moves along and there are a few spooky bits (I would have loved for them to be more), and some of the cast really get into it. But it is too dull.
This isn't terrible, the story does ensure it moves along and there are a few spooky bits (I would have loved for them to be more), and some of the cast really get into it. But it is too dull.
Movie review - "Just Around the Corner" (1938) ***
Shirley Temple later became a Republican - as most child stars seem to do in Hollywood - so it's fun to see scenes between her and her father (Charles Farrell) where he explains about the Depression to her: people are nagging Uncle Sam, he's giving out too much money, they've got to help him for a change. No doubt Daryl F Zanuck would approve!
It does provide the plot for the movie - Shirley gets inspired, but thinks a crochety old millionaire called Sam is the Uncle Sam and sets about arranging a benefit concert for him. This is a fun idea and this was a fun movie, with Shirley getting up to escapades around a hotel (her father is a now impoverished architect working as a tradie at a hotel), playing pranks on a butler and having urst with a young rich kid.
None of it is original but its high spirits with an excellent support cast (including Joan Davis, Bert Lahr, Claude Gillingwater and Bill Robinson who dances with Shirley). Amanda Duff is an engaging love interest, Farrell impressed me in a thankless role and there's some cute stuff with Shirley mucking around with the equivalent of the Dead End Kids (she pretends to be a G-woman).
It does provide the plot for the movie - Shirley gets inspired, but thinks a crochety old millionaire called Sam is the Uncle Sam and sets about arranging a benefit concert for him. This is a fun idea and this was a fun movie, with Shirley getting up to escapades around a hotel (her father is a now impoverished architect working as a tradie at a hotel), playing pranks on a butler and having urst with a young rich kid.
None of it is original but its high spirits with an excellent support cast (including Joan Davis, Bert Lahr, Claude Gillingwater and Bill Robinson who dances with Shirley). Amanda Duff is an engaging love interest, Farrell impressed me in a thankless role and there's some cute stuff with Shirley mucking around with the equivalent of the Dead End Kids (she pretends to be a G-woman).
Friday, July 12, 2013
Movie review - "Young Frankenstein" (1974) ***1/2
Full disclosure: I wasn't a massive fan of this when I was a kid for a number of reasons: the pace was a lot slower than say Monty Python or Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker, the famous 'Putting on the Ritz' number seemed to mock the disabled, the blindman sequence was too painful, it was in black and white. But as time has gone on and I discovered the 30s/40s Universal horrors and came to appreciate the brilliance of its cast, my appreciation has improved.
Gene Wilder is one of the all time great Frankensteins/mad doctors, with a genuine grasp of insanity and flair - as good in his way as Colin Clive or Lionel Atwill, better than say Patrick Knowles; Madeline Khan is incredibly funny as his fiancee (it's a delicate line to depict someone who basically enjoys being raped but she manages to pull it off); Marty Feldman is a perfect Igor (up there with Bela Lugosi); Teri Garr his hilarious and sexy as the blonde bombshell; Cloris Leachman is perfect as the housekeeper (I'm surprised she wasn't given more to do).
I wasn't that wild about Kenneth Mars as the Lionel Atwill character but many of the jokes work well even if they are repeated too often eg pronunciation of the name. The story is solid - a lot more logical than many of the Universal Frankenstein sequels - the sets and photography is divine.
Gene Wilder is one of the all time great Frankensteins/mad doctors, with a genuine grasp of insanity and flair - as good in his way as Colin Clive or Lionel Atwill, better than say Patrick Knowles; Madeline Khan is incredibly funny as his fiancee (it's a delicate line to depict someone who basically enjoys being raped but she manages to pull it off); Marty Feldman is a perfect Igor (up there with Bela Lugosi); Teri Garr his hilarious and sexy as the blonde bombshell; Cloris Leachman is perfect as the housekeeper (I'm surprised she wasn't given more to do).
I wasn't that wild about Kenneth Mars as the Lionel Atwill character but many of the jokes work well even if they are repeated too often eg pronunciation of the name. The story is solid - a lot more logical than many of the Universal Frankenstein sequels - the sets and photography is divine.
Movie review - "Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm" (1938) **1/2
A surprising number of Western stars wound up supporting/co-starring with Shirley Temple: Gary Cooper, Joel McCrea, and here Randolph Scott. They actually worked a lot better than some of the whimpier male leads because they seemed less dodgy.
Like Poor Little Rich Girl this is a remake of an old Mary Pickford movie with a show biz subplot shoved in. Even with that the movie feels padded - Shirley wins a radio singing competition but doesn't know it, goes to live on a farm with an aunt who doesn't want her to sing, the singing comp organiser (Randolph Scott) happens to be a neighbour and recognises her, but she does it on the sly to not upset the aunt.
It's a dodgy flimsy script stuffed with musical numbers - Shirley even does a medley of her old hits from earlier films as well as a dance with Bill Robinson (in his last appearance with her - he's a servant but this is the least racist Temple movie to feature blacks). It kind of feels lazy story wise, with nasty relatives turning up to take her away (including William Demarest who is too likeable for his role - he should have played a Shirley ally), and a romance, and a kindly aunt whose heart is melted.
But the cast is excellent (including players like Helen Westley and Slim Summerville), Jack Haley adds some comedy, Scott has a fun romance with Gloria Stuart, Phyllis Brooks is a pretty rival love interest.
Like Poor Little Rich Girl this is a remake of an old Mary Pickford movie with a show biz subplot shoved in. Even with that the movie feels padded - Shirley wins a radio singing competition but doesn't know it, goes to live on a farm with an aunt who doesn't want her to sing, the singing comp organiser (Randolph Scott) happens to be a neighbour and recognises her, but she does it on the sly to not upset the aunt.
It's a dodgy flimsy script stuffed with musical numbers - Shirley even does a medley of her old hits from earlier films as well as a dance with Bill Robinson (in his last appearance with her - he's a servant but this is the least racist Temple movie to feature blacks). It kind of feels lazy story wise, with nasty relatives turning up to take her away (including William Demarest who is too likeable for his role - he should have played a Shirley ally), and a romance, and a kindly aunt whose heart is melted.
But the cast is excellent (including players like Helen Westley and Slim Summerville), Jack Haley adds some comedy, Scott has a fun romance with Gloria Stuart, Phyllis Brooks is a pretty rival love interest.
Movie review - "Heidi" (1937) ***1/2
It is to the great credit of Daryl F Zanuck that although he made millions cranking out crappy Shirley Temple films, he then tried to improve them - basing them on stronger source material, working on the scripts, hiring better writers and directors, etc. The result is the quality of her vehicles actually improved as they went along, and the 1937/38 period saw her hitting her peak.
This isn't as good as Wee Willie Winkie (Allan Dwan was good but no John Ford) but still holds up well, especially in the second half. The first bit is solid rather than sensational, with Shirley's Heidi arriving in a little village and melting the heart of her gruff grandpa (Jean Hersholt). Then Heidi gets kidnapped by a nasty lady and is forced to be a slave for a rich crippled girl... then the climax involves an attempt to sell her to the gypsies.
There's lots of emotional, heart wringing scenes - Shirley really going for it, screaming as she's separated from her grandfather; the little crippled girl learning to walk (yeah yeah, I know, but it works); singing "Silent Night". Mary Nash goes all out as the villain, Marcia Mae Jones is good value as the crippled girl and Arthur Treacher fun as a butler. There is a silly fantasy song number and a bit too much God, but even that has camp value.
This isn't as good as Wee Willie Winkie (Allan Dwan was good but no John Ford) but still holds up well, especially in the second half. The first bit is solid rather than sensational, with Shirley's Heidi arriving in a little village and melting the heart of her gruff grandpa (Jean Hersholt). Then Heidi gets kidnapped by a nasty lady and is forced to be a slave for a rich crippled girl... then the climax involves an attempt to sell her to the gypsies.
There's lots of emotional, heart wringing scenes - Shirley really going for it, screaming as she's separated from her grandfather; the little crippled girl learning to walk (yeah yeah, I know, but it works); singing "Silent Night". Mary Nash goes all out as the villain, Marcia Mae Jones is good value as the crippled girl and Arthur Treacher fun as a butler. There is a silly fantasy song number and a bit too much God, but even that has camp value.
Movie review - "Wee Willie Winkie" (1937) ****1/2
An absolutely first rate picture - easily one of Shirley Temple's best and it ranks surprisingly high in John Ford's output too, although common critical perception does not seem to treat it so. My own feeling is that having to make a Shirley Temple vehicle helped the director pull back on his indulgences - he was given limitations (all Shirley Temple vehicles had inherent limitations) but rose to them magnificently.
I was surprised how Fordian this was given it starred little Shirley - it's very much also a life-at-an-outpost movie in the vein of Fort Apache, They Were Expendable or She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, with the difference being it's Imperial India 1897, the soldiers are British and the "Indians" are Pathans. There's Victor McLaglen (excellent form) as a sergeant, details of fort life (drills, routine, comic relief, funerals, outbursts of action, ritual, parades, waltzes), the women are part of people's lives, there is much talk of duty.
There are still familiar Shirley Temple elements - she melts hearts of common soldiers, gruff sergeants, natives and crusty superiors, battles snobs, helps matchmake - but it's done incredibly well. Shirley is a very positive role model here - sensible, smart, questioning the bloodthirsty ways of British and Indian, brave, fun, always up for a laugh, keeping things in perspective. She doesn't brook any nonsense from Victor McLaglen or C Aubrey Smith, both of whom adore her and with whom she has great chemistry. There are also some lovely moments with Cesar Romero, as a local chieftan - none of it has the whiff of dodginess that hung over other Shirley films. (Shirley even has her first kind of romance, via a bantering relationship with a cocky drummer boy).
The actors who play Shirley's widowed mother and mother's lover aren't that great, but their scenes are handled well and it's actually a decent sub plot - he romances mum at the dance while there's an attack, and C Aubrey Smith rouses on him about duty. (From what I recall the love interest isn't reall redeemed, either - he's arrested and that's that.)
There is some British Imperial propaganda, but its mostly about keeping the peace, doing duty and encouraging tribespeople to settle down and make money rather than fight, and why can't we talk instead of shoot each other. The ending isn't that realistic, with Shirley brokering a peace treaty, but is enjoyable wish fulfilment and is a lot more positive than many Hollywood movies from this (or any) area.
Superb photography, vigorously shot action, a wonderful death scene from McLaglen, with Shirley unaware he is dying, and a fellow soldier playing the bagpipes (the movie does struggle to recover from this, but the death serves to motivate her action in the third act). Temple regarded this as her best movie and she was probably right.
I was surprised how Fordian this was given it starred little Shirley - it's very much also a life-at-an-outpost movie in the vein of Fort Apache, They Were Expendable or She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, with the difference being it's Imperial India 1897, the soldiers are British and the "Indians" are Pathans. There's Victor McLaglen (excellent form) as a sergeant, details of fort life (drills, routine, comic relief, funerals, outbursts of action, ritual, parades, waltzes), the women are part of people's lives, there is much talk of duty.
There are still familiar Shirley Temple elements - she melts hearts of common soldiers, gruff sergeants, natives and crusty superiors, battles snobs, helps matchmake - but it's done incredibly well. Shirley is a very positive role model here - sensible, smart, questioning the bloodthirsty ways of British and Indian, brave, fun, always up for a laugh, keeping things in perspective. She doesn't brook any nonsense from Victor McLaglen or C Aubrey Smith, both of whom adore her and with whom she has great chemistry. There are also some lovely moments with Cesar Romero, as a local chieftan - none of it has the whiff of dodginess that hung over other Shirley films. (Shirley even has her first kind of romance, via a bantering relationship with a cocky drummer boy).
The actors who play Shirley's widowed mother and mother's lover aren't that great, but their scenes are handled well and it's actually a decent sub plot - he romances mum at the dance while there's an attack, and C Aubrey Smith rouses on him about duty. (From what I recall the love interest isn't reall redeemed, either - he's arrested and that's that.)
There is some British Imperial propaganda, but its mostly about keeping the peace, doing duty and encouraging tribespeople to settle down and make money rather than fight, and why can't we talk instead of shoot each other. The ending isn't that realistic, with Shirley brokering a peace treaty, but is enjoyable wish fulfilment and is a lot more positive than many Hollywood movies from this (or any) area.
Superb photography, vigorously shot action, a wonderful death scene from McLaglen, with Shirley unaware he is dying, and a fellow soldier playing the bagpipes (the movie does struggle to recover from this, but the death serves to motivate her action in the third act). Temple regarded this as her best movie and she was probably right.
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Movie review - "Stowaway" (1936) ***
An actually really decent Shirley Temple film, helped by the novelty of the setting - war-torn China, where little Shirley is an orphan (missionary parents were killed) who winds up in Shanghai fleeing a warlord attack. She hooks up with millionaire Robert Young, who adds some badly needed professional polish - male leads were often weak and/or creepy in Temple films and Young achieves the no mean feat of not looking like a kiddie fiddler. He's helped by the fact he has a bit of a character and emotional journey to play - to wit, a spoilt playboy who matures by looking after Shirley - and has a nice romantic subplot where he falls for Alice Faye, who is engaged to someone else.
I did feel for that someone else at times - while a dull stick obsessed with his mother and working in Bangkok (I wonder what happened to him in World War Two?) he didn't really deserve Faye leading him on.
Still, there is lots of colourful 20th Century Fox backlot production value, Shirley speaking Chinese, singing a few good songs, imitating Al Jolson (there's also a Chinese guy imitating Bing Crosby), shipboard shenanigans, a kindly judge and a bossy old lady.
I did feel for that someone else at times - while a dull stick obsessed with his mother and working in Bangkok (I wonder what happened to him in World War Two?) he didn't really deserve Faye leading him on.
Still, there is lots of colourful 20th Century Fox backlot production value, Shirley speaking Chinese, singing a few good songs, imitating Al Jolson (there's also a Chinese guy imitating Bing Crosby), shipboard shenanigans, a kindly judge and a bossy old lady.
Monday, July 08, 2013
Movie review - "Jet Storm" (1959) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)
The least well known of the collaborations between Stanley Baker and Cy Endfield, who also gave us Hell Drivers and Zulu. This is a quite enjoyable British disaster movie, with a fast pace, great cast and silly plot - Baker is the pilot on a flight across the Atlantic, when he discovers passenger Richard Attenborough wants to blow up the plane in revenge for his kid being run over.
How this is revealed is, to be honest, quite dumb - Attenborough threatens the person he thinks killed his kid, then his wife figures out he's got a bomb, and Baker tries to get it out of him, he won't tell, so Baker tells the passengers and they get worried, but sit in their chairs and worry.
It's really bizarre and British with everyone obeying the captain (some are reluctant) and acting in their subplots. There's mad Attenborough, his bewildered wife, a Jewish holocaust survivor, a politely sexy air hostesses romancing the co-pilot, a separated couple who rediscover their love playing cards, a fat Welsh comic (Harry Secombe!), a drunken loud widow (Hermione Baddeley), a pop singer who gets stressed out (Marty Wilde, who sings the title tune), a socialite, a sexy flirt (Diane Cilento), a little kid, and a lynching. Something for everyone really - notably a climax where the captain sends an eight year old kid to sweet talk the psychotic bomber!
A great cast - in addition to the well known leads (who turn in good performances), Secombe and Wilde, there's Mai Zetterling, George Rose, Virginia Maskell, Elizabeth Sellars, Patrick Allen, Sybil Thorndyke, Neil McCallum, Megs Jenkins, Paul Eddington, David Kossoff, Cec Linder, Jocelyn Lane, Bernard Braden, Barbara Kelly, Lana Morris and Jeremy Judge. It's a movie that is often stupid but never dull and I liked it a lot.
How this is revealed is, to be honest, quite dumb - Attenborough threatens the person he thinks killed his kid, then his wife figures out he's got a bomb, and Baker tries to get it out of him, he won't tell, so Baker tells the passengers and they get worried, but sit in their chairs and worry.
It's really bizarre and British with everyone obeying the captain (some are reluctant) and acting in their subplots. There's mad Attenborough, his bewildered wife, a Jewish holocaust survivor, a politely sexy air hostesses romancing the co-pilot, a separated couple who rediscover their love playing cards, a fat Welsh comic (Harry Secombe!), a drunken loud widow (Hermione Baddeley), a pop singer who gets stressed out (Marty Wilde, who sings the title tune), a socialite, a sexy flirt (Diane Cilento), a little kid, and a lynching. Something for everyone really - notably a climax where the captain sends an eight year old kid to sweet talk the psychotic bomber!
A great cast - in addition to the well known leads (who turn in good performances), Secombe and Wilde, there's Mai Zetterling, George Rose, Virginia Maskell, Elizabeth Sellars, Patrick Allen, Sybil Thorndyke, Neil McCallum, Megs Jenkins, Paul Eddington, David Kossoff, Cec Linder, Jocelyn Lane, Bernard Braden, Barbara Kelly, Lana Morris and Jeremy Judge. It's a movie that is often stupid but never dull and I liked it a lot.
Movie review - "Checkpoint" (1956) **
Not a very well known movie but full of familiar elements of British films of the 50s made by Rank - directed by Ralph Thomas, produced by Betty Box, Anthony Steel as star and Stanley Baker as villain, James Robertson Justice as a tycoon, colour photography, some location shooting in an exotic locale (here Italy).
It's a car racing movie only not really - more car industrial espionage, with Baker working for Justice, trying to obtain plans for a car... which results in him killing some people, which gets this off to a very serious start.
The tone for the film never seems to work - Steel is a car designer/racer envied by Justice, Baker is holed up in an apartment but then escapes, there is lots of driving, some comic relief by support actors. Steel has a romance with Odile Versois, only they used to go out back in the day so we miss out on any wooing, just cut into them kissing, so this feels shallow. And its a convoluted set up to get Baker in the car with Steel.
There are some terrific cars, pleasing scenery and professional work from old hands such as Baker and Justice. Steel does his handsome leading man thing, in a part that could have easily been essayed by Dirk Bogarde - at least playing a racing car driver was different. Pleasing enough entertainment.
Sunday, July 07, 2013
Play review - "Before You Go" by Lawrence Holofcener
In the late 50s to 60s, a popular genre of Broadway entertainment was "man meets sexually active manic pixie dream girl and falls in love" - Two for the Seasaw, There's a Girl in My Soup, Cactus Flower, Mary Mary, Any Wednesday, Butterflies Are Free, The Owl and the Pussycat. This falls into that category and is a very sweet, lovely story about two people falling in love - a sculptor and an out of work actress. It wasn't a hit, and I think that's to do with the concept - it isn't strong. There's no hook, like the guy is blind, or the girl is a hooker, or he's an out of town lawyer and she's a beatnik, or she's a mistress turning 30. And it's a little creepy how the guy paws her. Still, it has great charm and it would be interesting to see it revived.
Movie review - "Dimples" (1936) **
Charles Dickens was famous for tales of orphans, colourful characters and poverty, so it's surprising in a way that he was never adapted into a Shirley Temple film (maybe they were afraid of making Oliver Twist a girl)... but his influence is all over this vehicle, set in 1850s New York.
Shirley is living with Dickensian pickpocket grandfather, Frank Morgan, and a loyal dopey black servant (Stepin Fetchit). She charms a rich old lady (Jane Darwell) and winds up in an early production of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" then in a minstrel show. There's a subplot about a young theatre producer dumping his honest fiancee.
Like all too many Shirley films of the 30s it is full of racist moments - Stepin Fetchit's performance, various actors in blackface. (Associate producer was Southerner Nunnally Johnson whose other 30s movies have similar racist bits eg Prisoner of Shark Island.) But when it steers clear of that this is quite enjoyable, with the Dickens flavour suiting Shirley, the star in good form (her dancing kept getting better and better) and Frank Morgan offering excellent support.
Shirley is living with Dickensian pickpocket grandfather, Frank Morgan, and a loyal dopey black servant (Stepin Fetchit). She charms a rich old lady (Jane Darwell) and winds up in an early production of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" then in a minstrel show. There's a subplot about a young theatre producer dumping his honest fiancee.
Like all too many Shirley films of the 30s it is full of racist moments - Stepin Fetchit's performance, various actors in blackface. (Associate producer was Southerner Nunnally Johnson whose other 30s movies have similar racist bits eg Prisoner of Shark Island.) But when it steers clear of that this is quite enjoyable, with the Dickens flavour suiting Shirley, the star in good form (her dancing kept getting better and better) and Frank Morgan offering excellent support.
Book review - "For the Term of His Natural Life" (1870-72) by Marcus Clarke (warning: spoilers)
One of the most famous early Australian novels, this holds up really well. There is some outrageously florid Victorian dialogue, far too many coincidences (few of which are needed for the plot), lots of repetition (it's full of escape attempts and mutinies), and occasional bouts of silliness... but it's a great yarn that kept me gripped. Clarke researched his piece well, and it all feels tremendously authentic, especially the description of Port Arthur (which is the focus of the third part, easily the best).
There are some quite brilliant sequences - the breathtaking escape of John Rex, the fate of the cannibal convicts (based on the Alexander Pearce story), the treatment of the soft convict (who, it is implied, gets raped), being marooned at Macquarie Harbour, the suicide of the two little boys, the death of Blind Mooney, the final escape and storm.
It's also full of memorable characterisations - the tormented alcoholic Reverend North, cool gentleman con man John Rex (who is actually very brave and I found myself enjoying his company more than Rufus Dawes at times), ferociously vicious Maurice Frere, devoted femme fetale Sarah Purfoy (who knows Rex is bad for her but can't resist a bad boy), vicious Gabbett, and various shonky convicts and guards.
The lead duo of Rufus Dawes and Sylvia aren't as compelling. It's not entirely there fault - by virtue of plot poor old Dawes has to spend 20 years mostly locked up getting flogged and tormented, which isn't as compelling as what the others get up to. I always felt he was a bit of a dill getting convicted so long in the first place - I guess he didn't want his mother to be disgraced with that out of wedlock thing, but after say the fifth year in irons wouldn't you be blabbing to anyone you could using whatever angle you could come up with, to get out of there? I did feel for him after his betrayal by Frere after helping him and the Vickers girls near Macquarie Harbour... that had more impact for me. Even then though he kept silent a lot, and let lots of things happen to him.
Sylvia Vickers is a 19th century novel heroine, so she has pretty curls and is dainty. However Clarke gets points by having her psychologically messed up from the get go - reading violent books, being traumatised by childhood experiences and mentally destroyed by her husband. It is very sad that her and Dawes die in the storm (a real downer of an ending)... but after all these two have been through I can't imagine that their life together would have been a bed of roses. (NB I'd love to track down the American edition of the story, which had a happy ending - I feel this would have been more satisfactory.)
Some other debits that any person adapting would have to fix up: we don't get an ending for Maurice Frere (convicts rising up and killing him would be perfect) or Reverend North; it's a bit silly for Frere to be Dawes' cousin and North to be the one responsible for the theft of Lord Bellasis. But it's a really terrific yarn.
There are some quite brilliant sequences - the breathtaking escape of John Rex, the fate of the cannibal convicts (based on the Alexander Pearce story), the treatment of the soft convict (who, it is implied, gets raped), being marooned at Macquarie Harbour, the suicide of the two little boys, the death of Blind Mooney, the final escape and storm.
It's also full of memorable characterisations - the tormented alcoholic Reverend North, cool gentleman con man John Rex (who is actually very brave and I found myself enjoying his company more than Rufus Dawes at times), ferociously vicious Maurice Frere, devoted femme fetale Sarah Purfoy (who knows Rex is bad for her but can't resist a bad boy), vicious Gabbett, and various shonky convicts and guards.
The lead duo of Rufus Dawes and Sylvia aren't as compelling. It's not entirely there fault - by virtue of plot poor old Dawes has to spend 20 years mostly locked up getting flogged and tormented, which isn't as compelling as what the others get up to. I always felt he was a bit of a dill getting convicted so long in the first place - I guess he didn't want his mother to be disgraced with that out of wedlock thing, but after say the fifth year in irons wouldn't you be blabbing to anyone you could using whatever angle you could come up with, to get out of there? I did feel for him after his betrayal by Frere after helping him and the Vickers girls near Macquarie Harbour... that had more impact for me. Even then though he kept silent a lot, and let lots of things happen to him.
Sylvia Vickers is a 19th century novel heroine, so she has pretty curls and is dainty. However Clarke gets points by having her psychologically messed up from the get go - reading violent books, being traumatised by childhood experiences and mentally destroyed by her husband. It is very sad that her and Dawes die in the storm (a real downer of an ending)... but after all these two have been through I can't imagine that their life together would have been a bed of roses. (NB I'd love to track down the American edition of the story, which had a happy ending - I feel this would have been more satisfactory.)
Some other debits that any person adapting would have to fix up: we don't get an ending for Maurice Frere (convicts rising up and killing him would be perfect) or Reverend North; it's a bit silly for Frere to be Dawes' cousin and North to be the one responsible for the theft of Lord Bellasis. But it's a really terrific yarn.
Movie review - "Slattery's Hurricane" (1949) **1/2
Herman Wouk's disapproval of those who engage in sex outside marriage is well know to those familiar with his novels, so it's no surprise to see a heavy tsk-tsk-ing of adultery in this romantic-action-drama set in Florida after World War Two.
It stars Richard Widmark in one of his earliest hero roles, although he's very much an anti-hero, as a tormented pilot who has a steady girlfriend (Veronica Lake) but can't resist the lure of his ex (Linda Darnell), despite the fact she's married to an old mate (John Russell, who I was not familiar with but he's not bad). If this were a trashier film Darnell would be up for it, but she's dragged into an affair and everyone goes tsk tsk to Widmark.
It's kind of a shame there's this moralising because it's a decent movie inside here - the action moves along at a fair clip, there's some impressive plane and hurricane footage, a strong cast (Gary Merrill pops up as man at air control tower, a position he'd often be seen in), an intriguing subplot about Widmark's employer being involved in drug smuggling. But too much of it is watered down - Widmark being all regretful, and Lake meant to be having a drug addiction but we don't see much of it (it's hinted at).
Widmark is okay in a role that seems more made for Dana Andrews; Darnell is good (if only she'd been given more to do) but Lake is poor. The sexy bombshell of Alan Ladd movies here looks like a dull doormat wallflower - she's got no spunk or life, she's a bland nothing. And this film was directed by her then husband, Andre de Toth. This needed a bit more trash.
It stars Richard Widmark in one of his earliest hero roles, although he's very much an anti-hero, as a tormented pilot who has a steady girlfriend (Veronica Lake) but can't resist the lure of his ex (Linda Darnell), despite the fact she's married to an old mate (John Russell, who I was not familiar with but he's not bad). If this were a trashier film Darnell would be up for it, but she's dragged into an affair and everyone goes tsk tsk to Widmark.
It's kind of a shame there's this moralising because it's a decent movie inside here - the action moves along at a fair clip, there's some impressive plane and hurricane footage, a strong cast (Gary Merrill pops up as man at air control tower, a position he'd often be seen in), an intriguing subplot about Widmark's employer being involved in drug smuggling. But too much of it is watered down - Widmark being all regretful, and Lake meant to be having a drug addiction but we don't see much of it (it's hinted at).
Widmark is okay in a role that seems more made for Dana Andrews; Darnell is good (if only she'd been given more to do) but Lake is poor. The sexy bombshell of Alan Ladd movies here looks like a dull doormat wallflower - she's got no spunk or life, she's a bland nothing. And this film was directed by her then husband, Andre de Toth. This needed a bit more trash.
Book review - "Bring on the Empty Horses" (1975) by David Niven
John Mortimer once wrote that David Niven never quite acted as well on screen as he did after dinner telling anecdotes - but this collection of stories, his second volume of memoirs, gives some idea. It's a different shape to The Moon's a Balloon, consisting of a series of stories rather than an overall narrative - but this allows Niven to go into greater depth and detail for said stories.
There are illuminating, entertaining sketches of other famous people he knew - Clark Gable, Bogart, Errol Flynn (one of the best pieces of writing on Flynn ever done), Ronald Colman, Cary Grant, Greta Garbo, Vivien Leigh (disguised), Mike Romanoff, Fred Astaire, Hedda and Louella, Marion Davies. There are some less famous people too, such as a prostitute Niven knew. He can go into more detail on the dead rather than the living (so Cary Grant and Garbo are more sketchy than say Errol or Bogie).
Niven appears too, as a happy go lucky soul who got along with everyone, was polite and sensible, but also knew great tragedy (he and Gable bond over dead wives). However the focus really is on other people and the result is one of the best memoirs on Hollywood's golden age ever written.
Movie short review - "War Babies" (1932) *
Early Shirley Temple short (it runs just under 10 minutes) was one of a series of spoofs of adult movies with little kids in them. They are really little. This one sends up What Price Glory with two soldiers arguing over a girl - Shirley, who shakes her tush and can barely stand up. The jokes are clunky and its borderline embarrassing at times - like watching a home movie of someone's kids.
Book review - "Roman History" by Cassius Dio
Dio always seems to rank below Tactitus, Plutarch and Seutonius whenever people discuss Roman historians, but he had his own niche and his work remains enjoyable to read. He had the advantage of being an eye witness to certain key periods, such as the reign of Commodus and Septimus Severus, winding up with Caracalla, Elegabulus and Alexander Severus.
Play review - "Waiting for Lefty" (1935) by Clifford Odets
Famous 30s Depression era play, with a wonderful central idea, fabulously theatrical - it's a union meeting where the members are discussing whether to strike or not, and we flash back to different vignettes about capitalist exploitation. It's not subtle, and is certainly naive (eg praise of the Communist Party) but it's passionate and energetic, and you're swept along with it's bombast. Also Odets' way with language is entertaining. Must have been wonderful to see it during it's original production.
Play review - "The Front Page" (1928) by Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur
The most famous depiction of American journalism, except maybe All the Presidents Men, of which this would make an interesting double bill. Very fast paced and excellently structured, full of colourful characters; there's a terrific setting and ticking clock, with plenty of situations piled on top of each other - the press room near the gallows, Earl Williams about to be killed, Hildy Johnson about to leave to be married, the delay of Walter Burns (which I used to think odd but now realise makes sense because once he arrives problems tend to be solved).
The cynicism of the piece helps it age well; the constant racism of the characters does not. Also the heroes get out of all their trouble with a deux ex machina (something people tend to forget when discussing it). I prefer His Girl Friday because it gives an extra tang to the Hildy-Walter relationship but this remains on the most part really impressive theatre.
The cynicism of the piece helps it age well; the constant racism of the characters does not. Also the heroes get out of all their trouble with a deux ex machina (something people tend to forget when discussing it). I prefer His Girl Friday because it gives an extra tang to the Hildy-Walter relationship but this remains on the most part really impressive theatre.
Movie review - "Flashdance" (1983) ***
I was never that much of a fan of this early 80s quasi musical - too gritty, too girly, a muffed climax - but it ages surprisingly well. This is due in part to the visuals - every frame is fresh and interesting, there's terrific production design (warehouses, smoke stacks) and clothes (all the sexy outfits Jennifer Beals wears) - but also the endearingly over the top ridiculousness of the concept (welder by day, dancer by night), music, constant cutting to a dog, and Jennifer Beals star performance. She's wonderful, with that million dollar smile and winning personality... it's incredible she didn't become a star (by her own choice, apparently, chosing to study instead).
It's kind of feminist, with Beals being the hero, making decisions and having wish fulfillment, but no movie written by Joe Eszterhas was ever going to win a Gloria Steinem award, so she still falls for her middle aged lecherous boss (Michael Nouri) and snubs his snobby ex (take that, middle aged woman!). Some of the doubling of Beals in the dance sequences is ridiculously bad and did her comic friend have to have such racist anti-Polack material? And was there ever a movie so successful where almost the entire cast remain unknown?
It's kind of feminist, with Beals being the hero, making decisions and having wish fulfillment, but no movie written by Joe Eszterhas was ever going to win a Gloria Steinem award, so she still falls for her middle aged lecherous boss (Michael Nouri) and snubs his snobby ex (take that, middle aged woman!). Some of the doubling of Beals in the dance sequences is ridiculously bad and did her comic friend have to have such racist anti-Polack material? And was there ever a movie so successful where almost the entire cast remain unknown?
Saturday, July 06, 2013
Play review - "Moby Dick Rehearsed" (1955) by Orson Welles
Welles is best known for his theatre work prior to Hollywood (Mercury of the late 30s) but he did some really interesting stuff afterwards, including this. Originally written in 1955, it had a short run on Broadway in 1962. It's a terrific adaptation of the Melville novel, in the form of a late 19th century theatre troupe who are adapting the novel - which sounds a little wanky but helps set up the scene and shows Orson's love of actors and old acting; anyway, soon you forget the artifice and totally get into it. The combination of Melville, Welles and theatre result in a grand old time - you'd need to cast the part of the actor manager well, but that shouldn't be hard (its a wonderful star vehicle).
Movie review - "Poor Little Rich Girl" (1936) **
Even by the standards of Shirley Temple vehicles, this is a weird one: our hero is the neglected daughter of some rich radio mogul widower (someone called Michael Whalen), who is looked after by a mean (Sara Haden) and nice (Jane Darwell) maid. Shirley snuggles into dad's lap as a wife substitute, which is a little uncomfortable, then the nice maid suggests to dad that Shirley is being neglected; instead of spending more time with her or anything he bundles her off to camp to mix with other kids. But the maid taking her to the station (that's right, dad doesn't even take her to the station) is run over by a car (!) so Shirley doesn't go to camp. She goes walkabout, and winds up being looked after by a vaudevillian couple.
At this stage the film gives up on the poor little rich girl plot, not that they ever used it that much (Shirley was best playing orphans and poor girls, not rich brats), and becomes a rise to fame story. Shirley and the two vaudevillians (Jack Haley and Alice Faye) become a trio and rise to fame. Dad doesn't even realise that she's missing until the very end!! (He spends his running time in the film romancing some girl.) Then the movie throws in a creepy pedophile/ child kidnapper, whose attempt to kidnap Shirley gives the ending its climax - really full on.
The star does her schtick expertly and there are some first rate numbers, particularly the one at the end, with the little moppet madly tap dancing away with Haley and Faye. But it's just too confusing and weird to be an entertaining movie.
At this stage the film gives up on the poor little rich girl plot, not that they ever used it that much (Shirley was best playing orphans and poor girls, not rich brats), and becomes a rise to fame story. Shirley and the two vaudevillians (Jack Haley and Alice Faye) become a trio and rise to fame. Dad doesn't even realise that she's missing until the very end!! (He spends his running time in the film romancing some girl.) Then the movie throws in a creepy pedophile/ child kidnapper, whose attempt to kidnap Shirley gives the ending its climax - really full on.
The star does her schtick expertly and there are some first rate numbers, particularly the one at the end, with the little moppet madly tap dancing away with Haley and Faye. But it's just too confusing and weird to be an entertaining movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)