A not very exciting sounding concept - the story of the captain of Enola Gay - results in a surprisingly engrossing film. I've never been a big Robert Taylor fan but in the right role I find him effective, and he gives one of his best performances here in the lead. It helps I think knowing that Taylor in real life was a pilot in the war - he looks like a pilot here.
It's always a pleasure, too, to watch the beautiful Eleanor Parker in something. She makes the best of what is a fairly thankless task - the long suffering wife who is always having to say goodbye to Taylor. For a while the filmmakers manage to keep their interactions entertaining - it was written and directed by Melvin Frank and Norman Panama, who specialised in comedy... they treat the material here straight, but do add humour and warmth to the domestic scenes.
However the shape of it is too repetitive - "you're never home", "you're never home" - and by the end of the movie you're hoping for a divorce (which the real couple did in real life, after this movie came out). Towards the end it's especially hard going with the head of security (James Whitmore,very effective) telling Taylor that everyone can bring their wives on base except Taylor, and then pretty much telling Taylor he should act as if his marriage is over... what a sadistic prick. And Taylor goes along with it! It's the Taylor-Parker scenes in the second half where I really felt the film's two hour plus running time.
More consistently effective is the semi documentary side of things - Taylor being recruited for his mission, training people, testing the new plane, dealing with security risks, and flying the final mission. It's clear he's on a grim task - when recruited the officer points out he'll kill thousands of people but it might shorten the war. The moment where they drop the bomb is extremely chilling, and it has a downbeat-ish ending with a journalist pestering Taylor how he felt. "How would you feel?" he replies.
The original story was by Bernie Lay, a filmmaker and pilot who specialised in tales of driven men of command. But unlike the later Gathering of Eagles, which focused on peace time Strategic Air Command, you understand why Taylor is driven - there is a real "hot" war on, lives are at stake.
There's a number of memorable scenes: Taylor telling Parker that scientists are maintenance men, Parker inviting one over to fix her sink, Jim Backus playing Curtis Le May in a scene, the dropping of the bomb.
You think the movie would be better known, especially as it was a hit on release. But then again - maybe people were uncomfortable with such a sympathetic depiction of the captain of the Enola Gay. And also there are some uncomfortable parallels to McCarthyism, with its paranoia about security and determined to kill a lot to save even more. Still, an effective and gripping movie.
Tuesday, April 28, 2015
Movie review - "Rogue's March" (1952) **
You would have thought that pro British Empire takes would have gone out of fashion after World War two, and for the most part they did, but there was a brief up-surge in the 1950s - in part because of the box office success of Kim, British Empire tales offering opportunities for colourful adventure tales in cinemascope, but also because the rise of communism I think made the US regard British Imperialism more fondly - at least, historical imperalism. So you had Bengal Brigade, King of the Khyber Rifles and this effort, which was written and produced by Leo Gordon, who worked on Kim.
Unfortunately it's not as good (even though Kim was hardly a classic) - despite a solid story: a British officer from a good family and with a taste for gambling is falsely accused of selling secrets to the Russians. He gets the boot from his regiment and is sentenced to prison, but escapes, re-enlists as a private in another regiment, and redeems himself on the Khyber Pass.
Now that's a great set up - a knock off of The Four Feathers, with opportunities to revenge, action, redemption, etc. But its' done in by several things - low budget, black and white photography, Peter Lawford in the lead (he was no leading man at the best of times and is hopelessly out of his depth in a role that cries out for Steward Granger or Errol Flynn, or even Robert Taylor/Jeff Chandler/Rock Hudson... someone who doesn't look like a lounge lizard), slack handling. Janice Rule is a dud as the girl who loves Lawford and Richard Greene blends into the scenery as Lawford's best friend/rival.
So many moments you think would be key are missed: establishing strongly that Lawford is a wastrel, a sense of progression from playboy for real soldier, the escape sequence, a sense of suspense. Lawford is given a potentially interesting character but it isn't developed; everyone else is a stock type.
There is a decent battle at the end and Leo G. Carroll is excellent as Lawford's unforgiving father. And the story works.
Unfortunately it's not as good (even though Kim was hardly a classic) - despite a solid story: a British officer from a good family and with a taste for gambling is falsely accused of selling secrets to the Russians. He gets the boot from his regiment and is sentenced to prison, but escapes, re-enlists as a private in another regiment, and redeems himself on the Khyber Pass.
Now that's a great set up - a knock off of The Four Feathers, with opportunities to revenge, action, redemption, etc. But its' done in by several things - low budget, black and white photography, Peter Lawford in the lead (he was no leading man at the best of times and is hopelessly out of his depth in a role that cries out for Steward Granger or Errol Flynn, or even Robert Taylor/Jeff Chandler/Rock Hudson... someone who doesn't look like a lounge lizard), slack handling. Janice Rule is a dud as the girl who loves Lawford and Richard Greene blends into the scenery as Lawford's best friend/rival.
So many moments you think would be key are missed: establishing strongly that Lawford is a wastrel, a sense of progression from playboy for real soldier, the escape sequence, a sense of suspense. Lawford is given a potentially interesting character but it isn't developed; everyone else is a stock type.
There is a decent battle at the end and Leo G. Carroll is excellent as Lawford's unforgiving father. And the story works.
Sunday, April 26, 2015
Movie review - "A Bullet to the Head" (2013) **
Two icons of 70s and 80s action, Sylvester Stallone and Walter Hill, finally team up in a rather flat version of a graphic novel. I haven't read the novel but the film has some of the simplistic plotting and stock nihilism found in works of that genre... though, to be fair, they're also found in too many straight to DVD action movies of the 90s. There's the assassin teaming up with the hit man, some corrupt cops (yawn), and corrupt politicians.
Stallone is in decent form in the lead, although his hair was annoying - it looks like a wig (I'm not saying it is, it just looks like it). The problem is the movie is crafted for a co star - a buddy movie (or as Hill says anti-buddy movie) and it's interesting that they give it to an Asian, Sung Kang (and he's a cop too).... but Kang doesn't have the chops to go against Stallone. He's handsome but is bland and uncharismatic and never remotely convincing as a tough guy - he's like an accountant or something. In his defence, he's not helped by the fact that his character is constantly having his metaphorical balls cut off - he is forever losing in encounters with Stallone, or getting knocked out, or being slow. What should have been the story of two equals is one of a star and a dull sidekick. Kang's casting and watered down role is the biggest flaw in the movie. Another is the dopey plot, which involves too many easy killings and falls apart at the first sight of logic.
On the plus side, the New Orleans setting is great (setting something in New Orleans always improves a movie for me), Sarah Shahi is fantastically sexy as Stallone's daughter (a very undercooked, off screen romance with Kang, though), and Jason Momoa makes a wonderful villain - tough, smart, charismatic. They should have given Kang's part to him. (Admittedly his character is better. Although there is this weird plot where the head baddy wants to Momoa because he's beloved by his fellow mercenaries or something... which is a story mistake because it splits the baddies and lessens the pressure on our hero.) There is plenty of action though not much of it is memorable.
There are some throwbacks to earlier Hill works which will please his fans: Cajun music a la Southern Comfort and Johnny Handsome; some dull racial baiting between the leads a la 48 Hours; a finale where the two leads decide to slug it out instead of shoot, a la Streets of Fire (this was kind of sweet... they didn't have the baddy turn down the opportunity to cheat though which was used in Streets and 48 Hours.) Just thinking about it, this movie really should have been about the relationship between Momoa and Stallone - that's the true emotional heart of the film, two warriors in their cause.
Stallone is in decent form in the lead, although his hair was annoying - it looks like a wig (I'm not saying it is, it just looks like it). The problem is the movie is crafted for a co star - a buddy movie (or as Hill says anti-buddy movie) and it's interesting that they give it to an Asian, Sung Kang (and he's a cop too).... but Kang doesn't have the chops to go against Stallone. He's handsome but is bland and uncharismatic and never remotely convincing as a tough guy - he's like an accountant or something. In his defence, he's not helped by the fact that his character is constantly having his metaphorical balls cut off - he is forever losing in encounters with Stallone, or getting knocked out, or being slow. What should have been the story of two equals is one of a star and a dull sidekick. Kang's casting and watered down role is the biggest flaw in the movie. Another is the dopey plot, which involves too many easy killings and falls apart at the first sight of logic.
On the plus side, the New Orleans setting is great (setting something in New Orleans always improves a movie for me), Sarah Shahi is fantastically sexy as Stallone's daughter (a very undercooked, off screen romance with Kang, though), and Jason Momoa makes a wonderful villain - tough, smart, charismatic. They should have given Kang's part to him. (Admittedly his character is better. Although there is this weird plot where the head baddy wants to Momoa because he's beloved by his fellow mercenaries or something... which is a story mistake because it splits the baddies and lessens the pressure on our hero.) There is plenty of action though not much of it is memorable.
There are some throwbacks to earlier Hill works which will please his fans: Cajun music a la Southern Comfort and Johnny Handsome; some dull racial baiting between the leads a la 48 Hours; a finale where the two leads decide to slug it out instead of shoot, a la Streets of Fire (this was kind of sweet... they didn't have the baddy turn down the opportunity to cheat though which was used in Streets and 48 Hours.) Just thinking about it, this movie really should have been about the relationship between Momoa and Stallone - that's the true emotional heart of the film, two warriors in their cause.
Movie review - "Johnny Handsome" (1989) ***
This could have been regarded as a top level B classic - one of those genuine hidden gems. As it is, it's half way there.
It has so much going for it - a pulpy, but simple set up with great emotion underpinning it (hideously disfigured gangster has operation turning him good-looking but he still seeks vengeance on those who put him in jail); a well-cast star in Mickey Rourke (who, as has been pointed out several times by others, has turned into how Johnny Handsome looks at the beginning of this film); Ry Cooder's brilliant score; superb work as villains from Ellen Barkin and Lance Henrickson, plus Morgan Freeman as the bastard-but-not-wrong cop (you forget what a great prick Freeman can be, because so often he plays saintly creatures); Forest Whittaker is warm and sympathetic as the doctor; Elizabeth McGovern is pretty at least (despite her distracting southern accent); New Orleans location work; an ending with integrity.
And there are some scenes that have stayed with me for years: the opening shot; Handsome talking about beating up Carlyle; telling the speech therapist nun to stick with the program for other people, knowing that he's going to seek revenge; Handsome seeing his new face.
But it doesn't quite hit the top mark. It goes far too long - all the way through there are bits were you go "why not cut that out?". For instance, why have a long transformation sequence? It doesn't make the story less silly - just cut to, and have him transformed. (That's what a 40s Warner Bros movie - this film's spiritual godfather - would have done). Also, Johnny Handsome's plan isn't that clever - I guess he's going through all this to make some money as well as get revenge, am I right? Elizabeth McGovern's character would have probably been more effective if she'd had been the doctor or speech therapist. And the last act never quite works - it felt as though it needed another complication or something.
More surprisingly, considering it was directed by Walter Hill, the action sequences aren't that great - there's two robberies, both of which seem stock - I felt his direction got bloated in the late 1980s. His handling of actors and atmosphere remains strong, though. It just needed to have more of the stripped back quality of old Bogie, Garfield movies.
It has so much going for it - a pulpy, but simple set up with great emotion underpinning it (hideously disfigured gangster has operation turning him good-looking but he still seeks vengeance on those who put him in jail); a well-cast star in Mickey Rourke (who, as has been pointed out several times by others, has turned into how Johnny Handsome looks at the beginning of this film); Ry Cooder's brilliant score; superb work as villains from Ellen Barkin and Lance Henrickson, plus Morgan Freeman as the bastard-but-not-wrong cop (you forget what a great prick Freeman can be, because so often he plays saintly creatures); Forest Whittaker is warm and sympathetic as the doctor; Elizabeth McGovern is pretty at least (despite her distracting southern accent); New Orleans location work; an ending with integrity.
And there are some scenes that have stayed with me for years: the opening shot; Handsome talking about beating up Carlyle; telling the speech therapist nun to stick with the program for other people, knowing that he's going to seek revenge; Handsome seeing his new face.
But it doesn't quite hit the top mark. It goes far too long - all the way through there are bits were you go "why not cut that out?". For instance, why have a long transformation sequence? It doesn't make the story less silly - just cut to, and have him transformed. (That's what a 40s Warner Bros movie - this film's spiritual godfather - would have done). Also, Johnny Handsome's plan isn't that clever - I guess he's going through all this to make some money as well as get revenge, am I right? Elizabeth McGovern's character would have probably been more effective if she'd had been the doctor or speech therapist. And the last act never quite works - it felt as though it needed another complication or something.
More surprisingly, considering it was directed by Walter Hill, the action sequences aren't that great - there's two robberies, both of which seem stock - I felt his direction got bloated in the late 1980s. His handling of actors and atmosphere remains strong, though. It just needed to have more of the stripped back quality of old Bogie, Garfield movies.
Friday, April 24, 2015
Movie review - "Vengeance of the Deep" (1937) *** (aka "Lovers and Luggers")
Ken G Hall once said this was his favourite of all his movies - although I'm sure On Our Selection must have been a sentimental favourite - because it was set in the tropics. I wonder what sort of movies Hall would have made had he been able to film whatever he wanted - Robbery Under Arms of course, but he didn't mention many others in his memoirs... he probably didn't think it was appropriate to even think of something super personal.
But I also get the feeling he liked this one because it was a very Hollywood-like story, and Hall admired Hollywood so much. Many of his other Cinesound movies could only have been made in Australia - this feels like it could have been shot by Universal with Maria Montez and Jon Hall. (The Broken Melody and Tall Timbers are two other of his films like that.)
Not that it doesn't feel Australian, just less "could only be Australian". It's set in Thursday Island, with the benefit of some superb location second unit. The back projection and incorporation between studio and location footage isn't always the best - sometimes it really jars - but I did enjoy the movie's ambition.
The version I watched was the US one which only ran at 65 minutes - half an hour less than the proper Australian version. The editing job was poor, too, particularly in the early scenes which feel choppy - and Campbell Copelin's part of silly ass Archie seems very truncated.
Still, you can't blame this for the dodgy story. Lloyd Hughes is a top level musician who is bored with life so he accepts a challenge from Elaine Hamill to retrieve a pearl from an exotic corner of the globe. It's such a silly idea that it took a while for the film to work with me, not helped by the American edit hatchet job.
But once Hughes arrived on Thursday Island things got better and I really liked the sense of community and friendship on the island: shonky boat captain Sidney Wheeler, mysterious James Raglan, spirited Shirley Ann Richards who likes to walk around the island in men's clothes, drunken Alec Kellaway (the first of many excellent character turns for Hall). All these people help each other out and get along - so it has heart (which popped up in Dad and Dave Come to Town.) The underwater photography wasn't bad either.
Hughes isn't a particularly likeable or inspiring lead, Frank Harvey's dialogue is particularly over-flowery heere, there is some racism common to movies of the time - the villain is called Mendoza, and he works for a person called Kishimuni - and it is creaky in places. But it's an entertaining film and one of Hall's best movies.
But I also get the feeling he liked this one because it was a very Hollywood-like story, and Hall admired Hollywood so much. Many of his other Cinesound movies could only have been made in Australia - this feels like it could have been shot by Universal with Maria Montez and Jon Hall. (The Broken Melody and Tall Timbers are two other of his films like that.)
Not that it doesn't feel Australian, just less "could only be Australian". It's set in Thursday Island, with the benefit of some superb location second unit. The back projection and incorporation between studio and location footage isn't always the best - sometimes it really jars - but I did enjoy the movie's ambition.
The version I watched was the US one which only ran at 65 minutes - half an hour less than the proper Australian version. The editing job was poor, too, particularly in the early scenes which feel choppy - and Campbell Copelin's part of silly ass Archie seems very truncated.
Still, you can't blame this for the dodgy story. Lloyd Hughes is a top level musician who is bored with life so he accepts a challenge from Elaine Hamill to retrieve a pearl from an exotic corner of the globe. It's such a silly idea that it took a while for the film to work with me, not helped by the American edit hatchet job.
But once Hughes arrived on Thursday Island things got better and I really liked the sense of community and friendship on the island: shonky boat captain Sidney Wheeler, mysterious James Raglan, spirited Shirley Ann Richards who likes to walk around the island in men's clothes, drunken Alec Kellaway (the first of many excellent character turns for Hall). All these people help each other out and get along - so it has heart (which popped up in Dad and Dave Come to Town.) The underwater photography wasn't bad either.
Hughes isn't a particularly likeable or inspiring lead, Frank Harvey's dialogue is particularly over-flowery heere, there is some racism common to movies of the time - the villain is called Mendoza, and he works for a person called Kishimuni - and it is creaky in places. But it's an entertaining film and one of Hall's best movies.
Movie review - "The Longest Day" (1962) ***
Very long and far too often it falls into self importance with characters sitting around going "this is the most important thing that ever happened ever" (eg Rod Steiger's scene). The Canadians are once again pretty much entirely ignored, although they are mentioned once or twice.
But the use of real locations helps it as does the fact it's performed in German and French as well as English. While it was still filmed like a 50s/60s war movie - with the standard actors gripping their stomach and collapsing when shot, and bland dialogue - you get to see the real beaches, and countryside. The black and white photography was a good decision.
The all-star cast (even though at the time only John Wayne and Robert Mitchum could have been said to be box office draws) helps us follow the action, the music is rousing. It does go for long and I was surprised how large Richard Beymer's part is - he indicates all over the shop, giving a real "I am playing a GI performance" but it's part of the movie's charm.
The most memorable scenes for me: the German officer spotting the massive Allied Armada coming out of the fog, all those pop stars playing US Rangers (Fabian, Paul Anka, Tommy Sands... along with Robert Wagner and George Segal), Jeffrey Hunter being killed on Omaha, Sal Mineo being killed because of the click thing, Kenneth More with his bulldog and beard on the beach, random people like Mark Damon, Tom Tryon, Stuart Whitman and Steve Forrest hanging around in the side of frame, Aussie John Meillion as an admiral (Ron Randell is in it apparently but I must have blinked and missed them), Richard Todd defending a bridge, Red Buttons going deaf.
Sean Connery is pretty embarrassing as an Irish soldier and I wasn't wild about the French stuff - I had trouble telling the characters apart - in part because I didn't recognise the actors as well, but I didn't have that problem with the Germans. Peter Lawford underwhelmed me too in a terrific role (Lord Lovat). And some times the depiction of the action was hokey - not to mention long.
Still, a worthwhile movie with some excellent moments. Daryl F Zanuck made a lot of other better movies, but it's still pretty good.
But the use of real locations helps it as does the fact it's performed in German and French as well as English. While it was still filmed like a 50s/60s war movie - with the standard actors gripping their stomach and collapsing when shot, and bland dialogue - you get to see the real beaches, and countryside. The black and white photography was a good decision.
The all-star cast (even though at the time only John Wayne and Robert Mitchum could have been said to be box office draws) helps us follow the action, the music is rousing. It does go for long and I was surprised how large Richard Beymer's part is - he indicates all over the shop, giving a real "I am playing a GI performance" but it's part of the movie's charm.
The most memorable scenes for me: the German officer spotting the massive Allied Armada coming out of the fog, all those pop stars playing US Rangers (Fabian, Paul Anka, Tommy Sands... along with Robert Wagner and George Segal), Jeffrey Hunter being killed on Omaha, Sal Mineo being killed because of the click thing, Kenneth More with his bulldog and beard on the beach, random people like Mark Damon, Tom Tryon, Stuart Whitman and Steve Forrest hanging around in the side of frame, Aussie John Meillion as an admiral (Ron Randell is in it apparently but I must have blinked and missed them), Richard Todd defending a bridge, Red Buttons going deaf.
Sean Connery is pretty embarrassing as an Irish soldier and I wasn't wild about the French stuff - I had trouble telling the characters apart - in part because I didn't recognise the actors as well, but I didn't have that problem with the Germans. Peter Lawford underwhelmed me too in a terrific role (Lord Lovat). And some times the depiction of the action was hokey - not to mention long.
Still, a worthwhile movie with some excellent moments. Daryl F Zanuck made a lot of other better movies, but it's still pretty good.
Movie review - "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" (1984) ****
When Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade came out it became fashionable to knock this sequel and the film's reputation never recovered - in part because Spielberg slags it off too. It's certainly darker than other films in the series (Spielberg and Lucas were getting divorced around this time)... but that darkness makes it interesting. And yes it's racist though not really more than the first one (although this does surprisingly extol the virtues of British rule in India... I kept expecting a baddie white guy along with all the bad Indians but nope... all the baddies are coloured.)
It's perhaps the best looking of all the movies because it's set in India (though was shot in Sri Lanka) - the colour and locales are gorgeous. The pace is it is terrific - it's full throttle almost the entire way, and features some of the most memorable set pieces in the whole series: Kate Capshaw singing 'Anything Goes' in Chinese in a big dance number (Spielberg does Busby Berkley, and very well), the spectacular battle in the Shanghai nightclub, the raft sliding down the mountain (when it went over the cliff was too over the top), the thugee death ceremony, the brilliant chase on the mine train, and final battle on the bridge.
Kate Capshaw's whingeing nightclub singer came in for a lot of criticism but I liked her - she was lively and wisecracking and always had clear goals (to get laid, get money, get out of trouble and into luxury). Maybe there was one too many screaming sequences, but, like I said, the two main filmmakers were going through women troubles at the time.
(On that note it was also interesting that the chief villain is someone who literally rips out people's hearts and steals children from their parents... and puts Indy under their sway via magic potion until he wakes up and shakes free... and the suited Oxford Prime Minister front man, i.e. the "wife's lawyer" stand in, turns out to be a psychotic religious nut. Bitter much?)
The cast is strong, the action frentic, the visuals sumptuous, the music rousing. It is flaws (dodgy attitude on race, silliness) but is much better than its reputation.
It's perhaps the best looking of all the movies because it's set in India (though was shot in Sri Lanka) - the colour and locales are gorgeous. The pace is it is terrific - it's full throttle almost the entire way, and features some of the most memorable set pieces in the whole series: Kate Capshaw singing 'Anything Goes' in Chinese in a big dance number (Spielberg does Busby Berkley, and very well), the spectacular battle in the Shanghai nightclub, the raft sliding down the mountain (when it went over the cliff was too over the top), the thugee death ceremony, the brilliant chase on the mine train, and final battle on the bridge.
Kate Capshaw's whingeing nightclub singer came in for a lot of criticism but I liked her - she was lively and wisecracking and always had clear goals (to get laid, get money, get out of trouble and into luxury). Maybe there was one too many screaming sequences, but, like I said, the two main filmmakers were going through women troubles at the time.
(On that note it was also interesting that the chief villain is someone who literally rips out people's hearts and steals children from their parents... and puts Indy under their sway via magic potion until he wakes up and shakes free... and the suited Oxford Prime Minister front man, i.e. the "wife's lawyer" stand in, turns out to be a psychotic religious nut. Bitter much?)
The cast is strong, the action frentic, the visuals sumptuous, the music rousing. It is flaws (dodgy attitude on race, silliness) but is much better than its reputation.
Documentary review - "Australia Marches with Britain" (1941) **
A short propaganda documentary (not a newsreel) from Ken G Hall and Cinesound, made to reassure Britain that we were there to help, i.e. so made before Pearl Harbour when our focus became more firmly about the Japanese.
Like most Australian films the cinematography is very good but it's dull (like too many Australian films) - there's talk about our sheep, and wheat, milk, the Egg Marketing Board, timber, ammunition, plans and a navy, plus an introduction by Senator Foll, an impressively uncharismatic politician. Australia is very much positioned as part of the British Empire - the final shot involves the British flag and a picture of the king.
One flourish is when a girl packing eggs (possibly the most boring job in the world) discovers "two bad eggs" - eggs with Hitler and Mussolini sketched on them, and smashes them. More of this would have made the movie more entertaining. Ken G. Hall didn't take a producing or directing credit for so many newsreels documentary but he did for this - maybe because it got overseas distribution. It's likely overseas audiences found this as dull as Aussies would have.
Like most Australian films the cinematography is very good but it's dull (like too many Australian films) - there's talk about our sheep, and wheat, milk, the Egg Marketing Board, timber, ammunition, plans and a navy, plus an introduction by Senator Foll, an impressively uncharismatic politician. Australia is very much positioned as part of the British Empire - the final shot involves the British flag and a picture of the king.
One flourish is when a girl packing eggs (possibly the most boring job in the world) discovers "two bad eggs" - eggs with Hitler and Mussolini sketched on them, and smashes them. More of this would have made the movie more entertaining. Ken G. Hall didn't take a producing or directing credit for so many newsreels documentary but he did for this - maybe because it got overseas distribution. It's likely overseas audiences found this as dull as Aussies would have.
Movie review - "Suspicion" (1941) ***
This movie was a big hit and won Joan Fontaine and Oscar but Hitchcock complained for the rest of his life about the happy ending RKO forced on him. This has marred the reputation of the movie - and you know what? Deservedly so. If Grant had been a murderer it would have made emotional sense and had some kick. As it is, Grant is basically a dick (lazy, gambling addict) and Fontaine a moron, and the bits of story that happen (eg Nigel Bruce involved in an investment scam) not particularly interesting. There's no Judith Anderson or George Sanders to jazz things up the way they did in Rebecca.
It's got some decent gloss; the support cast is impressive; Hithcock rarely had stars as well cast as Fontaine and Cary Grant. The story is based on some novel but actually feels heavily inspired by Washington Square. But it's very much a half success, if that.
It's got some decent gloss; the support cast is impressive; Hithcock rarely had stars as well cast as Fontaine and Cary Grant. The story is based on some novel but actually feels heavily inspired by Washington Square. But it's very much a half success, if that.
Movie review - "Kokoda Front Line" (1942) ****
A deservedly famous newsreel, which won an Oscar and helped turn Damien Parer into a legend. He introduces it - producer Ken G. Hall knew the value of the star system, and in the absence of on screen names (it was a documentary after all), he put forward the camera man. Parer talks about the battles faced by our boys over in the jungle then we see some gripping footage of various battles there. Extremely well shot, edited and generally put together, it remains an impressive movie. (Though maybe I've seen it too many times and it's been replaced in my affections by Men of Timor and Bismarck Convoy Smashed).
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Documentary review - "From Palestine to Bengazi with the Prime Minister" (1941) **
Robert Menzies isn't particularly well remembered as a war leader but he did get this documentary about his trip to Aussie trips in the Middle East (this was before Japan declared war against the British Empire). It's a bit of a suck job to Menzies, with the narrator talking about criticism of him being unjustified, and not particularly well put together - it lacks the inherent excitement of later Cinesound newsreels like Bismark Convoy Smashed because it doesn't center around a military action, just a Prime Ministerial visit. It is interesting to see vision of Menzies doing war time Prime Minster stuff, and of our troops over there. Damien Parer shot some of this, apparently.
Documentary review - "RAAF Eagles Over New Guinea" (1943) **
A sort of sequel to Bismark Convoy Smashed!, also shot by Damien Parer for Cinesound. It's hard to judge because the copy I saw was silent and it was hard to get much of a sense of story from the pictures. Basically it's about the RAAF in, d'uh, New Guinea - Parer shot it so lots of it looks beautiful and there's great vision of the planes going off to battle and cruising over the New Guinea mountains. However it doesn't seem to have a narrative; to be fair, voice over might have fixed this.
Documentary review - "Bismark Convoy Smashed!" (1943) ***1/2
An excellent newsreel from Cinesound, focusing on the Battle of the Bismark Sea, when Australian and American pilots tore into a Japanese convoy. Damien Parer - who was essentially promoted as the star of these newsreels - turns in some superb work with exciting footage shot from a plan actually going into action... we go with a plane going right in there, firing away... it's thrilling.
There's also a scene where a plane strafes a life boat of Japanese survivors, the commentary says a lot of thing like "take that, Nips". And there's some charmingly awkward banter at the end between American and Australian pilots. I so wish Ken G Hall (who produced all these newsreels) could have made an Aussie fighter pilot feature. I guess there was Smithy.
There's also a scene where a plane strafes a life boat of Japanese survivors, the commentary says a lot of thing like "take that, Nips". And there's some charmingly awkward banter at the end between American and Australian pilots. I so wish Ken G Hall (who produced all these newsreels) could have made an Aussie fighter pilot feature. I guess there was Smithy.
Saturday, April 18, 2015
Documentary review - "Men of Timor" (1943) ***1/2
Another well known Cinesound newsreel - though none of them are as famous as Kokoda Front Line. It focuses on the fascinating story of Sparrow Force, Australian guerrillas who lived behind enemy lines for such a long time. What makes this great is the fact Damien Parer joined the troops in Timor behind enemy lines - Timor was wild and easier to hide out in than say Malaya but it's still pretty amazing. There's a great behind the scenes story of how the guerillas agreed to delay a raid so that Parer could film it.
It's full of terrific images: Aussie soldiers having bamboo showers and talking on their make shift radio, eating crocodile, an attack on a village. We also get to meet some of the soldiers - a former roo shooter, teacher at Geelong Grammar. One only wishes Cinesound could have made a dramatic feature film of this campaign which is suprisingly still not that well knoown.
It's full of terrific images: Aussie soldiers having bamboo showers and talking on their make shift radio, eating crocodile, an attack on a village. We also get to meet some of the soldiers - a former roo shooter, teacher at Geelong Grammar. One only wishes Cinesound could have made a dramatic feature film of this campaign which is suprisingly still not that well knoown.
Documentary review - "Assault on Salamaua" (1943) ***
Australia's film industry was a very mixed bag in World War Two - barely any features, but some excellent newsreels, such as this one. It's introduced by Damien Parer, who was a newsreel star of the time, given plenty of publicity even before his untimely death - and deservedly so because some of the photography is truly stunning. It's about the battles around Salamaua, one of the many, many battles in New Guinea that weren't Kokoda.
Parer gets right in there - as in, we see grenades being thrown. The biggest jolt for me came from seeing Japanese corpses. There is also some very 1940s attitudes to Japanese locals.
But still, its full of powerful images and is an important film in our cinematic history.
Parer gets right in there - as in, we see grenades being thrown. The biggest jolt for me came from seeing Japanese corpses. There is also some very 1940s attitudes to Japanese locals.
But still, its full of powerful images and is an important film in our cinematic history.
Monday, April 13, 2015
Script review - "Dad and Dave Come to Town" by Frank Harvey (1938)
One of the advantages of the internet age is research is becoming easier - there's a full script of Dad and Dave Come to Town, my favourite early Aussie movie at the National Archives. It's a copy registered with the copyright office, from the days before such things were automatically given. Sole credit is given to Frank Harvey for writing it even though Ken G Hall says he extensively used a team of gag writers as well around this time.
The look of the script is a little different to what we're used to today - it's two columns, the one on the left being visuals the one on the right being dialogue. But after a while you get used to reading it.
The thing that first struck me most is how many subplots this film. A few pages in and we hear about Joe Rudd's sore tooth, neighbour Bill Ryan wanting to marry daughter Sally, Bill's dad Ryan and Dad arguing, a fox is loose, daughter Jill runs a successful store in town, Dad borrowed 300 pounds from an uncle... it's all set up.
The script is broken down into sequences, normally of a comic variety - Joe getting his tooth removed, Bill asking Dad if he can marry Sally and Dad thinking he wants to buy a dog (this is first rate comic writing), an old man telling Dad he wants to get married, Dave shows off his new invention, Dad and Ryan argue about a paddock one wants to buy, they hear about the death of "Uncle Alf" and Dad and Dave argue about Dave going along.
In the city Dad finds he's inherited a house and fashion store; Dad is inclined to sell but Jill wants to make a go of it; there is comedy with the new housekeeper Miss Quince; then on their first morning in the city Dad and Dave get up comically early to feed the chooks; Dad and Dave have comic adventures trying to run a bath.
At Cecile's we meet Rawlins and Sonya who seem to be baddies - Rawlins makes a joke about Entwistle not being interested in women. Then we meet the baddie Pierre described in the script big print as "presumably a Frenchman, but in forgetful moments dropping into Jewish idiom" who tells Rawlins he wants the Rudds to run the shop but only make small profits - he wants to buy it eventually and doesn't want them to sell to a higher bidder who might make it successful; his ace in the hole is a one thousand pound promissory note between him and the late Alf Rudd. We also meet Pierre's cocky but honest press agent, Jim Bradley, who is ignorant of his boss's schemes.
Dad and Dave arrive at Cecille's and there are shenanigans with mannequins. They meet Entwistle and there are some comic misunderstandings; Entwistle is described in the script big print as "effeminate without being revolting". Dave meets a model called Myrtle. Jill tells Rawlins she's not impressed with how out of date the store is and it's clear Entwistle has ideas so she tells him to implement them; Dad puts Jill in charge of the store. Dave is flirting heavily with Myrtle.
Warned by Rawlins about Jill Rudd's acumen, Pierre sends Jim Bradley over to make friends with the Rudds. There is a comic set piece involving Dad and some twin elevator operators, then him trying to drink out of a water fountain and being mistaken for Santa. Jim meets Jill and after being confused about her being the boss, the two banter and clearly like each other.
Three days later Jill's plans have revived the business but some of the dresses she was going to sell are in Pierre's widow. Dad - who has arrived in top hat and tails as per an Entwistle make over - thinks "there's a nigger in the woodpile somewhere". Dad sabotages the sale (not very convincingly) with the help of Myrtle.
Entwistle dobs on Sonia for trying to sell Cecille's stock on the sly. Sonia admits it and Jill fires her; Sonia gives an unexpectedly moving little speech about how hard it is to be an in store model, all the dehumanising work involved and Jill pities her and changes her mind; Sonia thanks her by telling Jill about Rawlins' treachery. Jim pops in and arranges a date with Jill.
There's some comic misunderstanding between Dad and a customer wanting treatment for her foundations. Jill forces Rawlins to resign (so he'll have less trouble finding another job) and appoints Entwistle in his place. Jim and Jill go out on a date, talking about a movie they've just seen (some "meta" dialogue about whether she thought the hero of the film was too fresh) and Rawlins heckles them; Jim knocks out Rawlins. Jim quits Pierre and goes to work for Jill.
Dad decides to hold a fashion show to promote the business which he decides to turn into a manufacturing concern - Jill to design dresses for mass appeal and the firm to manufacture them. Dad gives a speech about the importance of investing in what you believe in and we launch into a montage of Jim Bradley promotion for the store.
Ryan arrives in the city and heckles Dad - there is a comic scene where they are lifted up on a crane and carried through the city while arguing. Jim talks Dad into appearing in a radio broadcast (Ken Hall often used this joke and based it on Bert Bailey and Cecil Kellaway's real life habit of going "I will not do it" and then doing it.)
There's a not particularly funny extended sequence where Dad and Dave stuff up a radio broadcast - but according to Jim Bradley its a big success.
The Rudds are about to launch their fashion line with a show when Pierre calls in his one thousand dollar payment. Feeling low, Dad cooks up a billy in the kitchen and is seen by Mum. Dad admits he borrowed a lot of money from the bank to pay for the fashion shop. Mum gives him this speech where she tells him to pull his finger out and fight - but also says the money is his to do with as he likes and she fires Mrs Quince because she can look after her man. It's not much of a subplot for her but it is integral to the film.
The fashion show goes ahead with Dad and Dave keeping guard to ward off Pierre's goons.The fashion show was surely influenced by the Astaire-Rogers film Roberta. Pierre sends in the bailiffs and Dave and Entwistle try to fight them off with the help of Myrtle.
They succeed and the show is a massive success but Pierre demands payment right now. Ryan comes to the rescue, bailing out Dad - "where I come from a man stands by his mates". And all is well.
The film finishes with a sequence at Ruddville - Dave is with Myrtle, Jim with Jill, Billy with Sarah. The script doesn't have the final last line of the movie about populating or perishing.
Overall it's a very strong script, with an effective central situation and solid humour. Some of the comic set pieces I don't feel worked such as Dad sabotaging Pierre's show, and the radio show - and the script has an indication of anti Semitism that I didn't pick up from the film. There is a great deal of warmth in all the family and friends of the Rudds, a touching bit involving Sonya, and first rate rom com banter between Jill and Jim. It remains one of our best comic scripts, even if purely on a craft level.
The look of the script is a little different to what we're used to today - it's two columns, the one on the left being visuals the one on the right being dialogue. But after a while you get used to reading it.
The thing that first struck me most is how many subplots this film. A few pages in and we hear about Joe Rudd's sore tooth, neighbour Bill Ryan wanting to marry daughter Sally, Bill's dad Ryan and Dad arguing, a fox is loose, daughter Jill runs a successful store in town, Dad borrowed 300 pounds from an uncle... it's all set up.
The script is broken down into sequences, normally of a comic variety - Joe getting his tooth removed, Bill asking Dad if he can marry Sally and Dad thinking he wants to buy a dog (this is first rate comic writing), an old man telling Dad he wants to get married, Dave shows off his new invention, Dad and Ryan argue about a paddock one wants to buy, they hear about the death of "Uncle Alf" and Dad and Dave argue about Dave going along.
In the city Dad finds he's inherited a house and fashion store; Dad is inclined to sell but Jill wants to make a go of it; there is comedy with the new housekeeper Miss Quince; then on their first morning in the city Dad and Dave get up comically early to feed the chooks; Dad and Dave have comic adventures trying to run a bath.
At Cecile's we meet Rawlins and Sonya who seem to be baddies - Rawlins makes a joke about Entwistle not being interested in women. Then we meet the baddie Pierre described in the script big print as "presumably a Frenchman, but in forgetful moments dropping into Jewish idiom" who tells Rawlins he wants the Rudds to run the shop but only make small profits - he wants to buy it eventually and doesn't want them to sell to a higher bidder who might make it successful; his ace in the hole is a one thousand pound promissory note between him and the late Alf Rudd. We also meet Pierre's cocky but honest press agent, Jim Bradley, who is ignorant of his boss's schemes.
Dad and Dave arrive at Cecille's and there are shenanigans with mannequins. They meet Entwistle and there are some comic misunderstandings; Entwistle is described in the script big print as "effeminate without being revolting". Dave meets a model called Myrtle. Jill tells Rawlins she's not impressed with how out of date the store is and it's clear Entwistle has ideas so she tells him to implement them; Dad puts Jill in charge of the store. Dave is flirting heavily with Myrtle.
Warned by Rawlins about Jill Rudd's acumen, Pierre sends Jim Bradley over to make friends with the Rudds. There is a comic set piece involving Dad and some twin elevator operators, then him trying to drink out of a water fountain and being mistaken for Santa. Jim meets Jill and after being confused about her being the boss, the two banter and clearly like each other.
Three days later Jill's plans have revived the business but some of the dresses she was going to sell are in Pierre's widow. Dad - who has arrived in top hat and tails as per an Entwistle make over - thinks "there's a nigger in the woodpile somewhere". Dad sabotages the sale (not very convincingly) with the help of Myrtle.
Entwistle dobs on Sonia for trying to sell Cecille's stock on the sly. Sonia admits it and Jill fires her; Sonia gives an unexpectedly moving little speech about how hard it is to be an in store model, all the dehumanising work involved and Jill pities her and changes her mind; Sonia thanks her by telling Jill about Rawlins' treachery. Jim pops in and arranges a date with Jill.
There's some comic misunderstanding between Dad and a customer wanting treatment for her foundations. Jill forces Rawlins to resign (so he'll have less trouble finding another job) and appoints Entwistle in his place. Jim and Jill go out on a date, talking about a movie they've just seen (some "meta" dialogue about whether she thought the hero of the film was too fresh) and Rawlins heckles them; Jim knocks out Rawlins. Jim quits Pierre and goes to work for Jill.
Dad decides to hold a fashion show to promote the business which he decides to turn into a manufacturing concern - Jill to design dresses for mass appeal and the firm to manufacture them. Dad gives a speech about the importance of investing in what you believe in and we launch into a montage of Jim Bradley promotion for the store.
Ryan arrives in the city and heckles Dad - there is a comic scene where they are lifted up on a crane and carried through the city while arguing. Jim talks Dad into appearing in a radio broadcast (Ken Hall often used this joke and based it on Bert Bailey and Cecil Kellaway's real life habit of going "I will not do it" and then doing it.)
There's a not particularly funny extended sequence where Dad and Dave stuff up a radio broadcast - but according to Jim Bradley its a big success.
The Rudds are about to launch their fashion line with a show when Pierre calls in his one thousand dollar payment. Feeling low, Dad cooks up a billy in the kitchen and is seen by Mum. Dad admits he borrowed a lot of money from the bank to pay for the fashion shop. Mum gives him this speech where she tells him to pull his finger out and fight - but also says the money is his to do with as he likes and she fires Mrs Quince because she can look after her man. It's not much of a subplot for her but it is integral to the film.
The fashion show goes ahead with Dad and Dave keeping guard to ward off Pierre's goons.The fashion show was surely influenced by the Astaire-Rogers film Roberta. Pierre sends in the bailiffs and Dave and Entwistle try to fight them off with the help of Myrtle.
They succeed and the show is a massive success but Pierre demands payment right now. Ryan comes to the rescue, bailing out Dad - "where I come from a man stands by his mates". And all is well.
The film finishes with a sequence at Ruddville - Dave is with Myrtle, Jim with Jill, Billy with Sarah. The script doesn't have the final last line of the movie about populating or perishing.
Overall it's a very strong script, with an effective central situation and solid humour. Some of the comic set pieces I don't feel worked such as Dad sabotaging Pierre's show, and the radio show - and the script has an indication of anti Semitism that I didn't pick up from the film. There is a great deal of warmth in all the family and friends of the Rudds, a touching bit involving Sonya, and first rate rom com banter between Jill and Jim. It remains one of our best comic scripts, even if purely on a craft level.
Sunday, April 05, 2015
Book review - "The Ellis Laws" by Bob Ellis
Entertaining collection of essays from Ellis where he talks about simple rules of life eg power flows to the most boring man in the room. It's very well written and funny with some genuine original thought in there - Ellis' writing picks up when hes not just consistently bagging the Liberal Party and broadens his horizons a bit.
Book review - "Heaven and Mel" by Joe Eszterhas (2012)
Train crash reading - awful but you can't look away. It's also highly entertaining - Eszterhas is a very good writer, even if he does come out of this story almost as bad as Mel Gibson. It's based on the time he wrote a script about the Maccabes for Gibson, which was never made - I remember when it was announced most people assumed it was just a sop to get people off Mel's back about anti-Semitism and that seems to be the case. But there was a long development process which meant several meetings between Eszterhas and Mel, resulting in some memorable encounters.
Everything Mel does in the story feels authentic and all to true - the grey skin, chain smoking, concerns about his balding head, railing at God for turning him old, bitter rants about his second wife, the constant outbursts of rage, entourage of priests and others, innate intelligence (he's no dummy, look at his career), obsessions with enemas and oral sex, receiving blow jobs from women at dinner parties, genuine love for his daughter, sense of humour, desire to confess, overwhelming unhappiness, bitching about Brian Hegeland and Randall Wallace, Richard Donner being the only director he had a good word for, threatening to hire hit men to kill his ex, wanting to convert Jews to Christianity, hating John Lennon.
Eszterhas comes out of it as a dick too - firstly, writing the book at all; almost bragging about ignoring his father for the latter's anti Semitic writing in the 30s and 40s despite all the good his father did for his son since then (cutting the guy off from his grandkids?); taking the job with Mel and not quitting despite what sounds like constant anti-Semitic rants; allowing his 15 year old son to go to Costa Rica and hang out with Mel when he knew Gibson had a temper; only resigning after Gibson had directed his first draft (Eszterhas quotes some dialogue from it which sounds pretty terrible). Eszterhas leaves out the fact he's had only something like one credit in the last 15 years, and by leaking a letter about Gibson he was replaying his old trick against Mike Ovitz back in the early 90s when he was more of a Hollywood player; calling Mel mad because he didn't like Eszterhas' script. He also says he's started having the occasional drink of wine because his doctor said it was okay - the guy was/is an alcoholic, he shouldn't be drinking at all.
I actually wound up having more sympathy for Gibson than Eszterhas - Gibson is clearly a tormented person given a lot of bad lessons by his father who is still alive and has messed with his head; fame and power hasn't been healthy to him - since the 1980s he's been bombarded by people who want to use him. He's managed to channel his madness into some truly memorable cinema - not just as actor but also director and producer. He's full of rage, can't let go of his addictions, probably doesn't have any real friends and is bonkers - but at least he's not a self righteous holier than thou clown.
Still Eszterhas can write and this was so much fun to read.
Everything Mel does in the story feels authentic and all to true - the grey skin, chain smoking, concerns about his balding head, railing at God for turning him old, bitter rants about his second wife, the constant outbursts of rage, entourage of priests and others, innate intelligence (he's no dummy, look at his career), obsessions with enemas and oral sex, receiving blow jobs from women at dinner parties, genuine love for his daughter, sense of humour, desire to confess, overwhelming unhappiness, bitching about Brian Hegeland and Randall Wallace, Richard Donner being the only director he had a good word for, threatening to hire hit men to kill his ex, wanting to convert Jews to Christianity, hating John Lennon.
Eszterhas comes out of it as a dick too - firstly, writing the book at all; almost bragging about ignoring his father for the latter's anti Semitic writing in the 30s and 40s despite all the good his father did for his son since then (cutting the guy off from his grandkids?); taking the job with Mel and not quitting despite what sounds like constant anti-Semitic rants; allowing his 15 year old son to go to Costa Rica and hang out with Mel when he knew Gibson had a temper; only resigning after Gibson had directed his first draft (Eszterhas quotes some dialogue from it which sounds pretty terrible). Eszterhas leaves out the fact he's had only something like one credit in the last 15 years, and by leaking a letter about Gibson he was replaying his old trick against Mike Ovitz back in the early 90s when he was more of a Hollywood player; calling Mel mad because he didn't like Eszterhas' script. He also says he's started having the occasional drink of wine because his doctor said it was okay - the guy was/is an alcoholic, he shouldn't be drinking at all.
I actually wound up having more sympathy for Gibson than Eszterhas - Gibson is clearly a tormented person given a lot of bad lessons by his father who is still alive and has messed with his head; fame and power hasn't been healthy to him - since the 1980s he's been bombarded by people who want to use him. He's managed to channel his madness into some truly memorable cinema - not just as actor but also director and producer. He's full of rage, can't let go of his addictions, probably doesn't have any real friends and is bonkers - but at least he's not a self righteous holier than thou clown.
Still Eszterhas can write and this was so much fun to read.
Book review - "A Maverick Life: The Jack Kelly Story" by Linda Alexander (2011)
The best possible book that could have been written about Jack Kelly, best remembered today as "the guy who played Maverick who wasn't James Garner". It's extremely well researched with great access to Kelly's surviving relatives and plenty of newspapers and magazines that have been gone through. Kelly should be honoured someone has gone to this effort to write such a book about him.
It doesn't change the fact that he didn't have that interesting a career. His non Maverick credits are spectacularly unimpressive, despite Kelly starting as a child star - support parts in Forbidden Planet and To Hell and Back, the lead in some forgotten films (Hong Kong Affair, Love and Kisses), some theatre, lots of guest stints, being host of Sale of the Century. It's not very impressive, especially when compared to co-stars Jim Garner and Roger Moore - there aren't even that many decent cult favourites on there, apart from a Cold War flick The Commies are Coming.
Kelly was a household face at least with his hit TV series but when that was cancelled he was dumped by his studio (Warner Bros) he displayed a real knack of plunging into obscurity - you'd have thought he'd be able to star in a couple of low budget films at least, even in the late 60s, but he didn't. Rod Taylor was once up for the role of Bart Maverick - one feels he would have used it as more of a springboard to do more.
Alexander, his extremely diligent biographer, blames this on part on his drinking - Kelly was an alcoholic, albeit a highly functioning one, which prevented his career from reaching its full potential and helped kill his two marriages. She's too polite to say (or doesn't believe) another reason: that he was basically was a bland actor, who suited the 50s but not so much the late 60s. Even his name is kind of bland.
Kelly was no dummy though - even as his acting career wound down, he managed to hold on to his money, moving into real estate. He became Councilman then Mayor of Huntington Beach and had a great "third act" to his life - he might have risen higher had he not died of a heart attack in 1992.
Kelly's life was a little more interesting than his career - he had a model mum, actress sister (Nancy Kelly from The Bad Seed which I didn't know), started as a child actor, did a lot of MC work, was best mates with Desi Arnaz and adored JFK. Still, despite Alexander's sterling work I did find this heavy going at times - all the talk about Kelly's love for cooking and opinions on things and his endless, endless guest appearances on TV. It is the last word on Jack Kelly to be sure - I just hope her next subject is a little more noteworthy.
It doesn't change the fact that he didn't have that interesting a career. His non Maverick credits are spectacularly unimpressive, despite Kelly starting as a child star - support parts in Forbidden Planet and To Hell and Back, the lead in some forgotten films (Hong Kong Affair, Love and Kisses), some theatre, lots of guest stints, being host of Sale of the Century. It's not very impressive, especially when compared to co-stars Jim Garner and Roger Moore - there aren't even that many decent cult favourites on there, apart from a Cold War flick The Commies are Coming.
Kelly was a household face at least with his hit TV series but when that was cancelled he was dumped by his studio (Warner Bros) he displayed a real knack of plunging into obscurity - you'd have thought he'd be able to star in a couple of low budget films at least, even in the late 60s, but he didn't. Rod Taylor was once up for the role of Bart Maverick - one feels he would have used it as more of a springboard to do more.
Alexander, his extremely diligent biographer, blames this on part on his drinking - Kelly was an alcoholic, albeit a highly functioning one, which prevented his career from reaching its full potential and helped kill his two marriages. She's too polite to say (or doesn't believe) another reason: that he was basically was a bland actor, who suited the 50s but not so much the late 60s. Even his name is kind of bland.
Kelly was no dummy though - even as his acting career wound down, he managed to hold on to his money, moving into real estate. He became Councilman then Mayor of Huntington Beach and had a great "third act" to his life - he might have risen higher had he not died of a heart attack in 1992.
Kelly's life was a little more interesting than his career - he had a model mum, actress sister (Nancy Kelly from The Bad Seed which I didn't know), started as a child actor, did a lot of MC work, was best mates with Desi Arnaz and adored JFK. Still, despite Alexander's sterling work I did find this heavy going at times - all the talk about Kelly's love for cooking and opinions on things and his endless, endless guest appearances on TV. It is the last word on Jack Kelly to be sure - I just hope her next subject is a little more noteworthy.
Book review - "Sir Quixote of the Moors" by John Buchan (1895)
John Buchan's first novel isn't very long but it is hard going. It's about a Frenchman in Scotland in the late 17th century who falls in love with a woman who is engaged to another. It feels like the subplot to a longer novel - there is some decent action when the Frenchman goes on the run to start off with (it's the time of the Convenanteers) but there's not nearly enough of it. Written in a florid style it's pretty dull.
Thursday, April 02, 2015
Movie review - "Land of the Pharaohs" (1955) **
A bit of an odd man out on Howard Hawks' resume, lacking humour, lightness and bantering dialogue, not to mention that great bonding between friends he could capture. You can't blame him for having a crack at an Ancient World epic in 50s - Warners probably dangled a lot of money at him, and he likely figured any idiot could make one and clean up - but it seems the period made him freeze a little creatively.
Jack Hawkins is ideally cast as the driven pharaoh who wants to build a massive thief-proof tomb for himself - not the most interesting goal because it's dumb (he wants to stash treasure in there). It's not particularly relatable - not like lust or revenge or any of the standard plots, it's just stupid. Joan Collins is meant to be a femme fetale because she wants his money but her actions make more sense than Hawkins'. So too does captain of the guard Sydney Chaplin, who wants to sleep with Collins.
James Robertson Justice is good as the captured slave building the temple and some of the spectacle is truly epic - it's all up there on screen, and you really feel like you're watching a pyramid being built. It seems like a lot of pointless hard work and effort, so it's hard to get too involved.
Collins tries but was out of her element at this stage in her career - she's not helped by acting in blackface. Dewey Martin is hilariously miscast as Justice's son; he has a romance with a slave girl that's basically forgotten.
There is a memorable finale with Collins being buried alive along with Hawkins' idiot best friend and idiot servants. Visually ravishing, stiff, dramatic misfire.
How could he have made this work? Maybe about a bunch of construction engineers building a pyramid - architects, etc. That could've worked. Hawks struggles without humour.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)