1) Genevieve (1953) - cheery breezy fun where More teams so well with Kay Kendall you wish they'd made a bunch of other movies.
2) Reach for the Sky (1956) - British film par excellance - bit of drama, stiff up lip, cheeriness, being a POW is like being at school, etc. More is very good
3) A Night to Remember (1958) - excellent account of the Titanic with More underplaying effectively in an ensemble piece.
4) Doctor in the House(1954) - More's also good against Dirk Bogarde - why not reteam them?
5) The Admiral Crichton (1957) - entertaining colourful adventure comedy with More very well cast
6) Dark of the Sun (1968) - only a small part but I love the film and More's work in it
7) Northwest Frontier (1958) - postwar Imperial adventure tale, self consciously superior to natives, with More a refreshingly different type of action hero
8) The Sheriff of Fractured Jaw (1958) - More's attempt to become a US star and he might have done it with a better co star and stronger material - his fine work was not really appreciated in the US.
9) Appointment with Venus (1951) - More has a showy support role in a fun film
10) The Deep Blue Sea (1954) -bad version of a wonderful play. More is excellent though.
Monday, July 31, 2017
Movie review - "Black Widow" (1954) ** (warning: spoilers)
Nunnally Johnson, who wrote, produced and directed this, pitched it as "All About Eve for suspense movies" which is great shorthand and sounds like a fantastic movie but this is a bit flat. It's got compensations - stars, CinemaScope, colour - but lacks Eve's X factor stars, and theatrical atmosphere.
Eve had a few bland spots in its cast - Hugh Marlowe, Anne Baxter - but they were more than compensated for by Bette Davis, George Sanders, Celeste Holm and Gary Merrill. They also had Joseph Mankiewicz's scintillating dialogue.
Johnson was an excellent writer, but didn't have Mankiewicz's knack for quips. Maybe he could have got there but he was presumably busy doing the producing and directing.
He wasn't as experienced a director - I think this stopped him from capturing the theatre atmosphere this badly needs. It doesn't help that there are few scenes in cafes, backstage, on stage, on the road, etc... it's mostly people hanging out in plush apartments. For instance, Van Heflin is supposed to be a Broadway producer but I never got the impression he actually did that for a living. Perhaps this would have been better off being shot in black and white.
The staging of so many of the scenes is perfunctory - characters just hang around, saying their lines. There's no feeling that this is made by someone who knows were to put the camera.
But then Heflin's presence is a debit for the whole movie - a glowering, intense actor, Heflin could be effective in the right role but he wasn't a star, which is what this movie needs. Gregory Peck, who had been discussed, would have been ideal - an everyman the audience could have related to, so we cared when he was unjustly accused of murder.
Peggy Ann Garner is all wrong as the girl who is killed. Maybe I'm too used to seeing her as a child star, but she seemed weird - with a perm, and lacking glamour/charisma. She also simply isn't very good as an adult actor. (In her defence she has some dreadful dialogue about being a writer).
Gene Tierney is alright as Heflin's wife - she isn't given much to do. She spends most of her time literally just lounging around.
Far better are Ginger Rogers (as a bitchy actress - the Clifton Webb part), Reginald Denny (her husband), and George Raft (doing solid work as the investigating detective). Virginia Leith (an actor I wasn't very familiar with) shines in a showy role as Garner's old flatmate, and I enjoyed African-American actress, Hilda Simms, getting a decent scene with Heflin.
It's a shame because it's a decent enough mystery. It's fantastic that Rogers is the killer. It just has some key miscast leads and lack atmosphere and ordinary direction.
Eve had a few bland spots in its cast - Hugh Marlowe, Anne Baxter - but they were more than compensated for by Bette Davis, George Sanders, Celeste Holm and Gary Merrill. They also had Joseph Mankiewicz's scintillating dialogue.
Johnson was an excellent writer, but didn't have Mankiewicz's knack for quips. Maybe he could have got there but he was presumably busy doing the producing and directing.
He wasn't as experienced a director - I think this stopped him from capturing the theatre atmosphere this badly needs. It doesn't help that there are few scenes in cafes, backstage, on stage, on the road, etc... it's mostly people hanging out in plush apartments. For instance, Van Heflin is supposed to be a Broadway producer but I never got the impression he actually did that for a living. Perhaps this would have been better off being shot in black and white.
The staging of so many of the scenes is perfunctory - characters just hang around, saying their lines. There's no feeling that this is made by someone who knows were to put the camera.
But then Heflin's presence is a debit for the whole movie - a glowering, intense actor, Heflin could be effective in the right role but he wasn't a star, which is what this movie needs. Gregory Peck, who had been discussed, would have been ideal - an everyman the audience could have related to, so we cared when he was unjustly accused of murder.
Peggy Ann Garner is all wrong as the girl who is killed. Maybe I'm too used to seeing her as a child star, but she seemed weird - with a perm, and lacking glamour/charisma. She also simply isn't very good as an adult actor. (In her defence she has some dreadful dialogue about being a writer).
Gene Tierney is alright as Heflin's wife - she isn't given much to do. She spends most of her time literally just lounging around.
Far better are Ginger Rogers (as a bitchy actress - the Clifton Webb part), Reginald Denny (her husband), and George Raft (doing solid work as the investigating detective). Virginia Leith (an actor I wasn't very familiar with) shines in a showy role as Garner's old flatmate, and I enjoyed African-American actress, Hilda Simms, getting a decent scene with Heflin.
It's a shame because it's a decent enough mystery. It's fantastic that Rogers is the killer. It just has some key miscast leads and lack atmosphere and ordinary direction.
Saturday, July 29, 2017
Movie review - "Each Dawn I Die" (1939) ***1/2
George Raft had a successful few years at Paramount, but his casting in this film - a last minute thing, when Fred MacMurray and John Garfield proved unavailable - led to him finding a new home at Warners. He fitted in straight away at that tough no-nonsense studio, full of unpretentious films and tough guy stars, and the result were some of his best ever movies... not that it seemed to make Raft happy, and he turned down a whole bunch which turned out to be classics.
He's absolutely electric here - it's possibly his best performance, brilliantly protected as the noble gangster. He spends a lot of time looking, not talking, with fantastic seething glances - tense, wound tight, with some clipped dialogue. Having him do scenes with Cagney really lifts him (he was at his best opposite a strong co star).
It's a great role too - a gang leader who befriends crusading reporter Jimmy Cagney, uses Cagney to help him escape, betrays him, is jolted back into doing the right thing by Jane Bryan (thankless in a thankless part).
Raft's actions don't really make sense at the end - going back into prison to track down a prison who is there involved in Cagney's cast, and planning on breaking out again.... really? But it is an exciting well shot sequence. There's some other great moments too such as the murder of a stoolie prisoner while watching a movie.
The depiction of society is remarkably bleak: society is so corrupt the DA gets in with organised crime figures to frame Cagney for the manslaughter of three (three!) people. The governor of the prison is a dunderhead (I think he's meant to be sympathetic but he loves throwing prisoners in the hole), the guards are incredibly brutal, the system harsh. Prisoners get massive sentences and only after intense effort (and much bloodshed) is justice done. Cagney goes practically insane through his treatment - it's quite shocking.
There's a fine support cast including George Bancroft, Maxie Rosenbloom, Alan Baxter, Victor Jory and Louis Jean Heydt. Cagney and Raft work well together. Maybe Raft should've been in love with Jane B more... as it is the film is fairly homoerotic in the depiction of the relationship between the two men.
He's absolutely electric here - it's possibly his best performance, brilliantly protected as the noble gangster. He spends a lot of time looking, not talking, with fantastic seething glances - tense, wound tight, with some clipped dialogue. Having him do scenes with Cagney really lifts him (he was at his best opposite a strong co star).
It's a great role too - a gang leader who befriends crusading reporter Jimmy Cagney, uses Cagney to help him escape, betrays him, is jolted back into doing the right thing by Jane Bryan (thankless in a thankless part).
Raft's actions don't really make sense at the end - going back into prison to track down a prison who is there involved in Cagney's cast, and planning on breaking out again.... really? But it is an exciting well shot sequence. There's some other great moments too such as the murder of a stoolie prisoner while watching a movie.
The depiction of society is remarkably bleak: society is so corrupt the DA gets in with organised crime figures to frame Cagney for the manslaughter of three (three!) people. The governor of the prison is a dunderhead (I think he's meant to be sympathetic but he loves throwing prisoners in the hole), the guards are incredibly brutal, the system harsh. Prisoners get massive sentences and only after intense effort (and much bloodshed) is justice done. Cagney goes practically insane through his treatment - it's quite shocking.
There's a fine support cast including George Bancroft, Maxie Rosenbloom, Alan Baxter, Victor Jory and Louis Jean Heydt. Cagney and Raft work well together. Maybe Raft should've been in love with Jane B more... as it is the film is fairly homoerotic in the depiction of the relationship between the two men.
George Raft Top Ten
1) Scarface (1932) - clearly a limited performer but with a fantastic "look" and he was given a fabulous bit of "business" in flicking the coin.
2) Souls at Sea (1937) - Raft outshines Gary Cooper, what do you know - a very good part and perhaps Raft was right to have it rewritten. Spawn of the North was a kind of follow up.
3) Bolero (1934) - enjoyable melodrama with Raft as a dancer who falls for his partner Carole Lombard; Pre-Code sexy, with Ravel's "Bolero", and an unexpectedly moving ending.
4) Each Dawn I Die (1939) - perhaps Raft's best performance, electrically charismatic and he steals a film from Jimmy Cagney.
5) Manpower (1941) - rollicking melodrama with Raft rising in the company of Edward G Robinson and Marlene Dietrich.
6) They Drive By Night (1941) - great tough truck driving saga with Raft good opposite Bogart and Ida Lupino.
7) Night After Night (1932) - best remembered for Mae West's debut and she's great but Raft is good too in his star debut, in .a fun movie.
8) The Bowery (1933) - Raft on the Bowery with Wallace Beery - an irritatingly racist movie but entertaining.
9) Mr Ace (1946) - surprisingly feminist melodrama with Raft romancing congresswoman Sylvia Sidney.
10) Some Like It Hot (1959) - Raft only has a small role but is a fine villain and makes you wish he'd done more support parts in decent movies.
2) Souls at Sea (1937) - Raft outshines Gary Cooper, what do you know - a very good part and perhaps Raft was right to have it rewritten. Spawn of the North was a kind of follow up.
3) Bolero (1934) - enjoyable melodrama with Raft as a dancer who falls for his partner Carole Lombard; Pre-Code sexy, with Ravel's "Bolero", and an unexpectedly moving ending.
4) Each Dawn I Die (1939) - perhaps Raft's best performance, electrically charismatic and he steals a film from Jimmy Cagney.
5) Manpower (1941) - rollicking melodrama with Raft rising in the company of Edward G Robinson and Marlene Dietrich.
6) They Drive By Night (1941) - great tough truck driving saga with Raft good opposite Bogart and Ida Lupino.
7) Night After Night (1932) - best remembered for Mae West's debut and she's great but Raft is good too in his star debut, in .a fun movie.
8) The Bowery (1933) - Raft on the Bowery with Wallace Beery - an irritatingly racist movie but entertaining.
9) Mr Ace (1946) - surprisingly feminist melodrama with Raft romancing congresswoman Sylvia Sidney.
10) Some Like It Hot (1959) - Raft only has a small role but is a fine villain and makes you wish he'd done more support parts in decent movies.
Movie review - "Nob Hill" (1945) **1/2
George Raft, who made some of the dumbest choices in Hollywood star history (turning down High Sierra, The Maltese Falcon and Double Indemnity, among others) got so sick of being a gangster that he quit a studio that was perfect for him, Warner Bros, and went freelance. At first it started well for him, and he was in a number of successful movies. This was one - little remembered today but at the time a hit, a technicolour musical, set in old time San Francisco.
I think Darryl Zanuck put Raft in it because he once had a big success with Raft in The Bowery, set in old time San Francisco. (Zanuck made lots of films set in old time San Fransisco). He plays the manager of a saloon, but although Raft was on a musicals kick at the time (Follow the Boys, Broadway) he doesn't do any dancing or singing, just introduces acts, which seems a waste.
One of those acts is Vivienne Blaine, best known for her turn in Guys and Dolls. She's good, as is Joan Bennett as the rich girl from Nob Hill who Raft chases after. Peggy Ann Garner has a big a part as anyone, playing an Irish girl who comes looking for her uncle, finds out he's dead and gets kind of adopted by Raft and Blaine. Still it's hardly packed with names who you think would mean something to aficionados of musicals - there's no Betty Grable, June Havoc or John Payne; yet people still came to see it.
It's an odd sort of movie. There's plenty of colour and production value, and some songs, but the script feels as though it was rewritten a lot. Garner runs around speaking in an Irish accent which gets wearisome after a while. I couldn't really follow the subplot where Raft was wooed politically by Bennett's brother - something about shutting down saloons, and him being a clean skin, and other saloon keepers being upset. This felt undramatic and un-utilised. It was crying out for a real baddy to be beaten in the climax and it doesn't happen - just Garner getting lost which was hardly exciting.
Also the film badly could have used a comic character to keep things fun - like Phil Silvers was in Coney Island. Raft, Bennett, Garner and even Blaine are all kind of downers. Raft's character is surprisingly weak - Bennett gives him the run around (only she doesn't because she secretly loves him) so he sulks and gets smacked around. I had trouble telling Bennett and Blaine apart at times.
This was Henry Hathaway's first musical - maybe that was part of the problem. It does get points for novelty - Raft in a musical (though he was in a few throughout his career), the B-list star power of Bennett, Garner and Blaine.
I think Darryl Zanuck put Raft in it because he once had a big success with Raft in The Bowery, set in old time San Francisco. (Zanuck made lots of films set in old time San Fransisco). He plays the manager of a saloon, but although Raft was on a musicals kick at the time (Follow the Boys, Broadway) he doesn't do any dancing or singing, just introduces acts, which seems a waste.
One of those acts is Vivienne Blaine, best known for her turn in Guys and Dolls. She's good, as is Joan Bennett as the rich girl from Nob Hill who Raft chases after. Peggy Ann Garner has a big a part as anyone, playing an Irish girl who comes looking for her uncle, finds out he's dead and gets kind of adopted by Raft and Blaine. Still it's hardly packed with names who you think would mean something to aficionados of musicals - there's no Betty Grable, June Havoc or John Payne; yet people still came to see it.
It's an odd sort of movie. There's plenty of colour and production value, and some songs, but the script feels as though it was rewritten a lot. Garner runs around speaking in an Irish accent which gets wearisome after a while. I couldn't really follow the subplot where Raft was wooed politically by Bennett's brother - something about shutting down saloons, and him being a clean skin, and other saloon keepers being upset. This felt undramatic and un-utilised. It was crying out for a real baddy to be beaten in the climax and it doesn't happen - just Garner getting lost which was hardly exciting.
Also the film badly could have used a comic character to keep things fun - like Phil Silvers was in Coney Island. Raft, Bennett, Garner and even Blaine are all kind of downers. Raft's character is surprisingly weak - Bennett gives him the run around (only she doesn't because she secretly loves him) so he sulks and gets smacked around. I had trouble telling Bennett and Blaine apart at times.
This was Henry Hathaway's first musical - maybe that was part of the problem. It does get points for novelty - Raft in a musical (though he was in a few throughout his career), the B-list star power of Bennett, Garner and Blaine.
TV review - "I'm the Law" - episode "The Trucking Story" (1953) **
In 1953 George Raft made a syndicated TV series, I'm the Law playing a cop. The plot for this ep seemed like a reworking of a movie he'd recently made, Loan Shark, with Raft going undercover to bust a racket. Mind you Raft liked to go undercover a lot. He's investigating the murder of a dock worker and there's lots of scenes on the docks, avoiding crashing palettes and what not. There's a comic drunk and some shady women.
Raft is a good TV star - underplaying, effective. It's a shame for him the series wasn't more successful.
Raft is a good TV star - underplaying, effective. It's a shame for him the series wasn't more successful.
Thursday, July 27, 2017
Movie review - "Escape Route" (1952) **
Lots of American stars popped up in British B movies of the early 1950s - this has George Raft, looking old but he's still George Raft, as a man trying to find out who is abducting British nuclear scientists.
There's a great scene where a girl, Sally Gray, beats up Raft - she gets a gun off him and everything. Poor George! In another scene he's wearing a frilly apron in the kitchen. But don't worry, Raft fans, George gets to take over the action and gets the girl even though he's old enough to be her grandfather.
It's a weird sort of movie - Raft feels slightly out of place, and the genres mix uneasily (detective/Cold War spy/British setting). It moves fast, there's some good acting and location work in London.
There's a great scene where a girl, Sally Gray, beats up Raft - she gets a gun off him and everything. Poor George! In another scene he's wearing a frilly apron in the kitchen. But don't worry, Raft fans, George gets to take over the action and gets the girl even though he's old enough to be her grandfather.
It's a weird sort of movie - Raft feels slightly out of place, and the genres mix uneasily (detective/Cold War spy/British setting). It moves fast, there's some good acting and location work in London.
Movie review - "Jet Across the Atlantic" (1959) **
The disaster film cycle of the 1970s was well known; less was the disaster film cycle of the 1950s, where a bunch of drama played on on a plane - No Highway, The High and the Mighty, Zero Hour, Jet Pilot, The Crowded Sky.
This is one such entry (shot in Mexico!), where the subplots include: FBI agent George Raft bringing back accused murderer Guy Madison; Madison's fiancee Virginia Mayo; nutter George MacReady, so traumatised by the death of his child that he's decided to take down the plane and kill everyone; diva Illona Massey.
The story has a few flaws and contrivances (eg how Madison's innocence is proved - it just happens) but something's always going on - a little old duck taking pity on Madison and Mayo and arranging for them to be married is unexpectedly sweet; the pilots get poisoned so Madison has to land the plane (just like in Flying High); there's poison in the airvents; a little romance between Brett Halsey and another girl.
Raft isn't a very good agent - he falls asleep allowing Madison to steal his gun and later Madison knocks him out and Raft shoots Madison with all these other people around. I liked his relationship with Madison and wish there's been more of it. Virginia Mayo's character is a wet drip, just hanging off her man.
Some of the acting is very good - eg Macready, Massey; everyone is professional. I enjoyed seeing old Raft in this movie, well cast and tough. Madison's not bad - he'd learnt a few things by now. Byron Haskin directs with competence and pace.
This is one such entry (shot in Mexico!), where the subplots include: FBI agent George Raft bringing back accused murderer Guy Madison; Madison's fiancee Virginia Mayo; nutter George MacReady, so traumatised by the death of his child that he's decided to take down the plane and kill everyone; diva Illona Massey.
The story has a few flaws and contrivances (eg how Madison's innocence is proved - it just happens) but something's always going on - a little old duck taking pity on Madison and Mayo and arranging for them to be married is unexpectedly sweet; the pilots get poisoned so Madison has to land the plane (just like in Flying High); there's poison in the airvents; a little romance between Brett Halsey and another girl.
Raft isn't a very good agent - he falls asleep allowing Madison to steal his gun and later Madison knocks him out and Raft shoots Madison with all these other people around. I liked his relationship with Madison and wish there's been more of it. Virginia Mayo's character is a wet drip, just hanging off her man.
Some of the acting is very good - eg Macready, Massey; everyone is professional. I enjoyed seeing old Raft in this movie, well cast and tough. Madison's not bad - he'd learnt a few things by now. Byron Haskin directs with competence and pace.
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Movie review - "Loan Shark" (1952) **
Unpretentious, inoffensive (well apart from one scene) low budget B movie made at a time when that species was migrating to TV. George Raft is looking pretty old and still hasn't really learned how to act but is a good tough guy and ideally cast as a man who gets out of prison (wasn't his fault - hit someone who conked their head and died). He visits his sister whose husband is sticking up to lean sharks and winds up dead. Raft goes undercover to investigate.
The crooks are a bit dumb to believe Raft, who is the brother in law of someone they just killed, is one of them - maybe it would've been better had they not known. I guess some of the crooks are suspicious. The support cast are pretty good especially Paul Stewart, with his sunken eyes and seemingly tobacco stained face.
The dodgy bit is Raft's romance with a secretary - he forces himself on her and she kind of likes it. There's a bit of an age gap.
Fresh handling - some good action sequences and I wish there'd been more of them. This is no classic, not a major B movie but it's tight and quick.
The crooks are a bit dumb to believe Raft, who is the brother in law of someone they just killed, is one of them - maybe it would've been better had they not known. I guess some of the crooks are suspicious. The support cast are pretty good especially Paul Stewart, with his sunken eyes and seemingly tobacco stained face.
The dodgy bit is Raft's romance with a secretary - he forces himself on her and she kind of likes it. There's a bit of an age gap.
Fresh handling - some good action sequences and I wish there'd been more of them. This is no classic, not a major B movie but it's tight and quick.
Monday, July 24, 2017
Movie review - "The First Traveling Saleslady" (1956) **
Sometimes the wind changes and what would've worked a few years ago doesn't anymore... This is an amiable comedy about a female salesperson flogging corsets out west, which probably would've passed muster with the public in the heyday of its star Ginger Rogers. But that time had passed - with TV drawing audiences and censorship relaxations making these stories seem old fashioned.
I couldn't tell the characters played by Rogers and Carol Channing apart. Both are blonde and wacky; Channing is a bit more keen on guys maybe. Channing has this wide eyed character-in-a-Tim Burton-movie feel to her performing.
The film is full of frustrating inconsistencies. Channing sings one song early on and I thought it was going to be a musical - but it's the only song. It's a bit feminist, about women trying to make it in a man's world (selling barbed wire) but in the end Rogers has to be saved by Barry Nelson. The film sets up a love triangle between Rogers, Nelson and James Arness, then throws in another guy keen on Rogers, played by David Brian. They set up a love story between Channing and a young Clint Eastwood and hardly give it any running time. The story was confusing. James Arness' antagonist - kicking the girls out of town threatening them with hanging - had horrible rapey undertones that were not fun.
It's not dreadful. It just doesn't come together.
It doesn't quite work. I like Rogers and director Arthur Lubin, it has colour and movement. But it never quite works. It lacks the discipline and pace of say Lubin's films at Universal in the 1940s; it was part of a revived RKO and maybe lacks the polish that would have come from a studio used to more regular production.
I couldn't tell the characters played by Rogers and Carol Channing apart. Both are blonde and wacky; Channing is a bit more keen on guys maybe. Channing has this wide eyed character-in-a-Tim Burton-movie feel to her performing.
The film is full of frustrating inconsistencies. Channing sings one song early on and I thought it was going to be a musical - but it's the only song. It's a bit feminist, about women trying to make it in a man's world (selling barbed wire) but in the end Rogers has to be saved by Barry Nelson. The film sets up a love triangle between Rogers, Nelson and James Arness, then throws in another guy keen on Rogers, played by David Brian. They set up a love story between Channing and a young Clint Eastwood and hardly give it any running time. The story was confusing. James Arness' antagonist - kicking the girls out of town threatening them with hanging - had horrible rapey undertones that were not fun.
It's not dreadful. It just doesn't come together.
Sunday, July 23, 2017
Script review - "The Princess Bride" by William Goldman
Very sweet, lovely and clever. As pointed out by Honest Trailers the action scenes aren't terribly exciting but it's awesome... Goldman adapts his own novel very well, keeping the charm and story. Everything is very clear, the action moves along at a fast clip.
I've got to admit it still feels cheating to kill Westley then bring him back. Also I'm not sure if I buy him and Buttercup having much of a future together - they seemed to love each other at the beginning but later on he's full of wisecracks and she's a bit dim. Will this last?
Never mind everything around them is fabulous - the giant Fezzik, Ingo the fighter (how can you fail to be moved when he gets his revenge), Vizzini, Rugen and Humperdinck (did wish he had more of a comeuppance). The lovely script, written with a big heart, that completely pulls off what it was going for.
I've got to admit it still feels cheating to kill Westley then bring him back. Also I'm not sure if I buy him and Buttercup having much of a future together - they seemed to love each other at the beginning but later on he's full of wisecracks and she's a bit dim. Will this last?
Never mind everything around them is fabulous - the giant Fezzik, Ingo the fighter (how can you fail to be moved when he gets his revenge), Vizzini, Rugen and Humperdinck (did wish he had more of a comeuppance). The lovely script, written with a big heart, that completely pulls off what it was going for.
Friday, July 21, 2017
Movie review - "Criss Cross" (1949) ****1/2 (re-viewing)
In an earlier review of this film on this blog, I regarded it as a story-lite remake of The Killers. Seeing it on the big screen I was knocked out what a good movie it is, brilliantly shot and directed (by Robert Siodmak).
The story held up better than I originally thought, and there were heaps of things I didn't notice - notably the richness of the support cast: the slimy waiter, amiable bartender, drunken girl at the bar, the fiancee of Lancaster's brother, his brother, the collection of gangsters (the quiet spoken white haired guy, the drunken mastermind of the operation, the tubby gangster, the lean one).
The story was full of richness I hadn't noticed - the interplay between the gangsters, the level of Lancaster's addiction for Yvonne de Carlo, Lancaster's family life (his brother Richard Long gets his girl to kiss him by "mock" threatening to hit her).
De Carlo isn't fantastic (this film shows that she was never an A-tier star... she simply doesn't have the charisma) but she's pretty good and has that fantastic dance moment where Lancaster sees her dancing (with Tony Curtis) after a long absence. Lancaster is superb - with his physique and puppy dog eyes, hopelessly hooked on de Carlo (for a macho star Lancaster was excellent at playing sensitive). Dan Duryea is good as always as the gangster.
A really superb film noir.
The story held up better than I originally thought, and there were heaps of things I didn't notice - notably the richness of the support cast: the slimy waiter, amiable bartender, drunken girl at the bar, the fiancee of Lancaster's brother, his brother, the collection of gangsters (the quiet spoken white haired guy, the drunken mastermind of the operation, the tubby gangster, the lean one).
The story was full of richness I hadn't noticed - the interplay between the gangsters, the level of Lancaster's addiction for Yvonne de Carlo, Lancaster's family life (his brother Richard Long gets his girl to kiss him by "mock" threatening to hit her).
De Carlo isn't fantastic (this film shows that she was never an A-tier star... she simply doesn't have the charisma) but she's pretty good and has that fantastic dance moment where Lancaster sees her dancing (with Tony Curtis) after a long absence. Lancaster is superb - with his physique and puppy dog eyes, hopelessly hooked on de Carlo (for a macho star Lancaster was excellent at playing sensitive). Dan Duryea is good as always as the gangster.
A really superb film noir.
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
Movie review - "Sky Pirates" (1986) **
That's healthy in terms of Australian films - it suffers badly in comparison with Hollywood blockbusters... though not say Hollywood B films. Judged by the standards of Raiders knock offs it's fine, helped with cheerful performances from John Hargreaves and Max Phipps.
It starts quite well with Hargreaves and Phipps and Simon Chilvers going off on a mission to a Pacific Island. This is great... but then all this stuff happens off screen, people go missing, and Hargreaves winds up back in Australia being court martialled, then escapes and heads off with Chilvers' daughter, Meredith Phipps to figure out what's going on.
The main problem with this film structure wise is the action keeps stopping and starting again - would've been a much more fun had the mission started and everything built from there. Them being on the run from the authorities has no real pay off or threat once they're going because the bulk of the action happens out in the isolated Pacific.
It's full of irritating holes - why is Phipps evil? Why have a silly Russian roulette scene? What is the Mysterious Power and why does it do what it does.
There's some good stunts and sets. Loved the photography and location work on Easter Island. It's full of tropes I love, like pilots and dingy bars in the third world. It's silly and over the top just a bit sloppy. People were too mean about this.
Monday, July 17, 2017
Stanley Baker Top Ten
1) Zulu (1963) - of course, though Baker is out-acted off the screen by Michael Caine and Nigel Greene
2) Robbery (1967) - great British heist movie and Baker is always good as a crim
3) Hell Drivers (1957) - a Brit film industry take on the sort of tough B movies Warners used to make
4) The Criminal (1960) - an excellent Losey-Baker collaboration
5) The Guns of Navarone (1961) - Baker is one of many names in this guys on a mission film but it is a very showy part
6) The Cruel Sea (1953) - Baker is only in a small part but makes a great impression in a fantastic movie
7) Accident (1967) - perhaps Baker's best "I'm playing against type" role in a film which I half like and others love but does have good things going for it so I put on this list for variety
8) Hell is a City (1960) - good tough Val Guest crime stuff
9) Yesterday's Enemy (1959) - another Baker-Guest collaboration, hard core look at British troops in Burma in the war
10) Hell Below Zero (1953) - one of Baker's best villainous performances (with a nod to Knights of the Round Table but this is a much better movie)
2) Robbery (1967) - great British heist movie and Baker is always good as a crim
3) Hell Drivers (1957) - a Brit film industry take on the sort of tough B movies Warners used to make
4) The Criminal (1960) - an excellent Losey-Baker collaboration
5) The Guns of Navarone (1961) - Baker is one of many names in this guys on a mission film but it is a very showy part
6) The Cruel Sea (1953) - Baker is only in a small part but makes a great impression in a fantastic movie
7) Accident (1967) - perhaps Baker's best "I'm playing against type" role in a film which I half like and others love but does have good things going for it so I put on this list for variety
8) Hell is a City (1960) - good tough Val Guest crime stuff
9) Yesterday's Enemy (1959) - another Baker-Guest collaboration, hard core look at British troops in Burma in the war
10) Hell Below Zero (1953) - one of Baker's best villainous performances (with a nod to Knights of the Round Table but this is a much better movie)
Movie review - "Throne of Blood" (1957) ****
Snazzy adaptations of Shakespeare have become a cliche because they are so handy as a way for directors to get a reputation ("it's Romeo and Juliet between penguins and polar bears!" "King Lear set in the Congo!). This is one that gives it a good name, a brooding, gripping Kurosawa adaptation of Macbeth.
It's set in a world of fog and rain and wind and harsh dirt ground and volcanic ash and creepy witches with face covered in all-white make up living in the forest. It's visually stunning with these samurais galloping around and pulling up in courtyards and massive gates, not to mention screen wipes and long shots of warriors with their spears at hats.
Toshiro's Mifune is perfect to play the intense Macbeth (the character has a different name - let's just call him Macbeth - uptight, lusting after power but scared of that lust. He's pretty nutty from the get-go but because it's Mifune he's got extra gas in the tank to go the Full Nut.
Isuzu Yamada is fully creepy as the seemingly ruthless, very closed and face-painted Lady Macbeth. It's a real jolt at the end when she loses her stuff.
Some incredible action, whether the final assault on the castle (the trees moving), Mifune's death via a thousand arrows, the murder sequences. Takashi Shimura is in it as the Macduff character but for some reason his presence didn't really register with me. (While Macduff should be a great role I struggle to remember any great Macduffs).
It's set in a world of fog and rain and wind and harsh dirt ground and volcanic ash and creepy witches with face covered in all-white make up living in the forest. It's visually stunning with these samurais galloping around and pulling up in courtyards and massive gates, not to mention screen wipes and long shots of warriors with their spears at hats.
Toshiro's Mifune is perfect to play the intense Macbeth (the character has a different name - let's just call him Macbeth - uptight, lusting after power but scared of that lust. He's pretty nutty from the get-go but because it's Mifune he's got extra gas in the tank to go the Full Nut.
Isuzu Yamada is fully creepy as the seemingly ruthless, very closed and face-painted Lady Macbeth. It's a real jolt at the end when she loses her stuff.
Some incredible action, whether the final assault on the castle (the trees moving), Mifune's death via a thousand arrows, the murder sequences. Takashi Shimura is in it as the Macduff character but for some reason his presence didn't really register with me. (While Macduff should be a great role I struggle to remember any great Macduffs).
Sunday, July 16, 2017
Book review - "Constantinus II:Usurpers, Eunuchs and the Antichrist" by Peter Crawford
Constantine II is one of those Roman Emperors who no one gets excited about, despite having a relatively long reign and even possibly dying of natural causes. He's probably best known for being the baddy in the life story of Julian - a paranoid, crafty emperor who had a lot of his family wiped out and eventually tried to kill Julian, and who lost a heap of battles.
Crawford sets out to rehabilitate the man's reputation, while not being blind to his faults... It's exhaustively researched - as in a really detailed book. A lot is known about Constantinus, due in part to all the military campaigns he was involved in (many of them civil wars).
Occasionally the book seems to lose focus as Crawford goes off on other tangents - Julian Shapur, etc - but I understand why he did it. It's hard to imagine a more definitive account.
Crawford thinks Constatinus has gotten a bad wrap but isn't a massive fan of the man - he slaughtered too many family members, let too many incompetent killers loose in the kingdom (eg Paul). But he did do less long term military damage to the Empire than say Julian. He's a "solid" Emperor - competent, tired, no visionary but no disaster. A very strong book from the gang at Pen and Sword.
Crawford sets out to rehabilitate the man's reputation, while not being blind to his faults... It's exhaustively researched - as in a really detailed book. A lot is known about Constantinus, due in part to all the military campaigns he was involved in (many of them civil wars).
Occasionally the book seems to lose focus as Crawford goes off on other tangents - Julian Shapur, etc - but I understand why he did it. It's hard to imagine a more definitive account.
Crawford thinks Constatinus has gotten a bad wrap but isn't a massive fan of the man - he slaughtered too many family members, let too many incompetent killers loose in the kingdom (eg Paul). But he did do less long term military damage to the Empire than say Julian. He's a "solid" Emperor - competent, tired, no visionary but no disaster. A very strong book from the gang at Pen and Sword.
Movie review - "Sixteen Fathoms Deep" (1934) **
A cheap, endearing, creaky actioner from Monogram which gave a leading role to Lon Chaney Jr early in his career - so early she was billed as Creighton Chaney. He gives this movie a point of difference - not a conventional leading man, even in his early days, with his lump features. But he has kind eyes and presence and works quite well with Sally O'Neill, the female lead.
The plot is simple and the action clocks in at under an hour. Chaney's a sponge diver who wants to make money to marry his girl; a dodgy ethnic is trying to stop him.
This reminded me a lot of Lovers and Luggers, the Australian film - scenes of divers going to the bottom of the ocean and getting bends, romance with a feisty girl, ethnic villain. That was based on a novel which was published in 1928; it's entirely possible the writers of this came up with the same tropes independently.
It's no classic, but there's lots of location work and it zips along. It was liked enough to be remade in 1948.
The plot is simple and the action clocks in at under an hour. Chaney's a sponge diver who wants to make money to marry his girl; a dodgy ethnic is trying to stop him.
This reminded me a lot of Lovers and Luggers, the Australian film - scenes of divers going to the bottom of the ocean and getting bends, romance with a feisty girl, ethnic villain. That was based on a novel which was published in 1928; it's entirely possible the writers of this came up with the same tropes independently.
It's no classic, but there's lots of location work and it zips along. It was liked enough to be remade in 1948.
Saturday, July 15, 2017
Movie review - "Andy Warhol's Bad" (1977) **
I've never seen an Andy Warhol film. I'm not sure this was the best introduction - it's like a John Waters film played straight, a delirious melodrama in the suburbs with Carroll Baker as a hair removalist who runs a murder business on the side. Perry King comes to stay with her and mayhem ensues.
I think this was meant to be a comedy but it doesn't feel like one. The handling is flat. Some actors play it broad, others underplay. It was nice to see Carroll Baker in a good role in an American film made by a leading artist (even though Warhol didn't write or direct it); she's competent in a role that might have required more flair. Perry King is fine in the "beautiful young man" part he often had to play in the 70s - but this role does have some meat on it.
The supporting cast have energy. There's scenes with a toilet overflowing with shit, amputations, a woman with gas... There's also, shockingly, a scene with a baby thrown out the window - it hits the ground and goes splat.
It was kind of dull. I kept expecting it to be more fun than it was.
I think this was meant to be a comedy but it doesn't feel like one. The handling is flat. Some actors play it broad, others underplay. It was nice to see Carroll Baker in a good role in an American film made by a leading artist (even though Warhol didn't write or direct it); she's competent in a role that might have required more flair. Perry King is fine in the "beautiful young man" part he often had to play in the 70s - but this role does have some meat on it.
The supporting cast have energy. There's scenes with a toilet overflowing with shit, amputations, a woman with gas... There's also, shockingly, a scene with a baby thrown out the window - it hits the ground and goes splat.
It was kind of dull. I kept expecting it to be more fun than it was.
Friday, July 14, 2017
Movie review - "Sylvia" (1965) **
Michael Caine once wrote when he arrived in Hollywood in the 60s every male film star was called George - George Peppard, George Chakiris, George Maharis, George Segal. This one stars Maharis, a smug 60s type whose name I was familiar with but who I don't recall from much - his claim to fame is being in Route 66. He feels like a TV star. He's definitely not a film star - too bland, too smug. Maybe he would make a good villain.
This uses the Citizen Kane/Laura template of someone putting together the pieces of someone's life. Maharis is investigating, Carrol Baker is the subject. Maharis gradually comes to fall in love with Baker, which is a stock story line... it can work, but here Maharis doesn't meet Baker until the last half hour. We see them fall for each other but it's very late in the day and a bit yuck too because Maharis uses everything he's found out about Baker to get her to like him. It's like he's being rewarded for being a stalker.
I think we're meant to go "gee isn't he great for not minding she was a hooker and rape victim" but he's creepy. And Maharis plays him smug and creepily. Maybe it would have worked if first choice Paul Newman played the role but even with him it would have retained elements of dodginess.
The film is mainly of interest for a cast. It's structured to be a lot of two handers - Maharis interviewing someone, who gets a chance to do some juicy emoting. We've got Peter Lawford as a prospective husband, Ann Sothern as a drunken lady, Edmond O'Brien as an ex, Aldo Ray as a rapist, Viveca Lindfors as a librarian, Lloyd Bochner as another rapist, Joanne Dru as an ex-prostitute, Paul Gilbert as a nasty cross dresser, Nancy Kovak as a stripper. The quality of acting varies - there's a fair bit of ham going around.
And some bad writing. Sylvia isn't a terribly interesting character - men seem to like her and want to have sex with her; she's a loyal friend... but that's about it. Baker is okay in the role - I always like her, but she can't surpass the material. Maybe someone better could have made more of the role, but I doubt it (Jane Fonda? Natalie Wood?) At least she's got a bit of charisma. And even Vanessa Redgrave at her peak would struggle to make all that gunk about Baker's love of poetry and poetry writing work (and there's a lot of it, especially in the last half hour when she meets Maharis).
The whole film has an unpleasant sixties male vibe - with this man investigating a woman, as if he's going to understand her, and these censor-pushing items like two rapes (I mean two, come on...), and a cross dresser and alcohol, and these women seeming to find Maharis super attractive (not just Baker but also Kovak and Lindfors). It's a misfire, only for completists of the actors.
This uses the Citizen Kane/Laura template of someone putting together the pieces of someone's life. Maharis is investigating, Carrol Baker is the subject. Maharis gradually comes to fall in love with Baker, which is a stock story line... it can work, but here Maharis doesn't meet Baker until the last half hour. We see them fall for each other but it's very late in the day and a bit yuck too because Maharis uses everything he's found out about Baker to get her to like him. It's like he's being rewarded for being a stalker.
I think we're meant to go "gee isn't he great for not minding she was a hooker and rape victim" but he's creepy. And Maharis plays him smug and creepily. Maybe it would have worked if first choice Paul Newman played the role but even with him it would have retained elements of dodginess.
The film is mainly of interest for a cast. It's structured to be a lot of two handers - Maharis interviewing someone, who gets a chance to do some juicy emoting. We've got Peter Lawford as a prospective husband, Ann Sothern as a drunken lady, Edmond O'Brien as an ex, Aldo Ray as a rapist, Viveca Lindfors as a librarian, Lloyd Bochner as another rapist, Joanne Dru as an ex-prostitute, Paul Gilbert as a nasty cross dresser, Nancy Kovak as a stripper. The quality of acting varies - there's a fair bit of ham going around.
And some bad writing. Sylvia isn't a terribly interesting character - men seem to like her and want to have sex with her; she's a loyal friend... but that's about it. Baker is okay in the role - I always like her, but she can't surpass the material. Maybe someone better could have made more of the role, but I doubt it (Jane Fonda? Natalie Wood?) At least she's got a bit of charisma. And even Vanessa Redgrave at her peak would struggle to make all that gunk about Baker's love of poetry and poetry writing work (and there's a lot of it, especially in the last half hour when she meets Maharis).
The whole film has an unpleasant sixties male vibe - with this man investigating a woman, as if he's going to understand her, and these censor-pushing items like two rapes (I mean two, come on...), and a cross dresser and alcohol, and these women seeming to find Maharis super attractive (not just Baker but also Kovak and Lindfors). It's a misfire, only for completists of the actors.
Script review - "The Handmaid's Tale" pilot
Stunningly good adaptation of the famous novel (which I've got to admit I've never read), whose themes seem more pertinent than ever today. There's plenty of dystopian sci fi out there but not much which focused on the oppression of women - this is very smart, very believable, incredibly powerful. There are scenes that will likely haunt you for days like the woman who gets an eye torn out, a rape victim being called a slut, a man having sex with a fertile woman who lies on top of his actual wife.
Sunday, July 09, 2017
TV review - "Raquel!" (1970) ***
There was a time when TV specials roamed the earth - stand alone episodes that focused on a particular entertainer. They'd normally do a bunch of songs have special guests. In many ways they were the fore-runner of video clips.
Nancy Sinatra did one, so did Herb Albert (Tom Mankiewicz wrote about working on them in his memoirs). This was Raquel Welch's one and it was popular enough to lead to a sequel, Really Raquel!
It's a bizarre thing, consisting of a series of video clips, really... Raquel doing covers of songs like "California Dreaming", "Good Morning Starshine". and "Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head".
There's appearances by John Wayne (plugging True Grit), Tom Jones (singing two songs including "I Who Have Nothing") and Bob Hope (whereupon a laugh track starts up, disconcertingly; they duet on "Rocky Racoon"). Raquel plays off all three well and I wish she'd made a movie with anyone of them - she worked best with strong co-stars, as with Frank Sinatra in Lady in Cement.
It's very campy - Raquel does a number dancing with spacemen, and imitates Mae West (ironic considering they would clash on Myra Breckenridge) - and very much a product of its era. Raquel can carry a song well enough, she can dance (it's a shame she didn't do more musicals), changes her outfits constantly, and is in a massive variety of locations.
Nancy Sinatra did one, so did Herb Albert (Tom Mankiewicz wrote about working on them in his memoirs). This was Raquel Welch's one and it was popular enough to lead to a sequel, Really Raquel!
It's a bizarre thing, consisting of a series of video clips, really... Raquel doing covers of songs like "California Dreaming", "Good Morning Starshine". and "Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head".
There's appearances by John Wayne (plugging True Grit), Tom Jones (singing two songs including "I Who Have Nothing") and Bob Hope (whereupon a laugh track starts up, disconcertingly; they duet on "Rocky Racoon"). Raquel plays off all three well and I wish she'd made a movie with anyone of them - she worked best with strong co-stars, as with Frank Sinatra in Lady in Cement.
It's very campy - Raquel does a number dancing with spacemen, and imitates Mae West (ironic considering they would clash on Myra Breckenridge) - and very much a product of its era. Raquel can carry a song well enough, she can dance (it's a shame she didn't do more musicals), changes her outfits constantly, and is in a massive variety of locations.
My Raquel Welch Top Ten
1) One Million Years BC (1966) - more than just a poster, though the poster is pretty awesome
2) Kansas City Bomber (1972) - roller derby feminism Raquel Welch style - a surprise
3) The Three Musketeers (1973) - Richard Lester and George MacDonald Fraser do swashbuckling and Raquel adapts to comedy - she'd made a few more in that genre
4) The Wild Party (1975) - heavily flawed James Ivory directed piece set in late 20s Hollywood with Raquel in patchy form but it's consistently unusual and interesting
5) Bedazzled (1967) - Pete and Dud's most famous movie together, with Raquel in a short but effective part
6) 100 Rifles (1969) - Welch made a surprisingly number of Westerns, all a bit disappointing but all of interest - this perhaps the most interesting of all
7) The Last of Sheila (1973) - a fascinating puzzle movie
8) Myra Breckinridge (1970) - an utterly terrible movie but it's sheer awfulness demands some sort of respect
9) Fantastic Voyage (1966) - Raquel is very clothed in this film, but its imaginative and interesting
10) The Legend of Walks Far Woman (1979) - full disclosure: never actually seen this. But put it in because Welch so clearly wanted to ACT in it.
2) Kansas City Bomber (1972) - roller derby feminism Raquel Welch style - a surprise
3) The Three Musketeers (1973) - Richard Lester and George MacDonald Fraser do swashbuckling and Raquel adapts to comedy - she'd made a few more in that genre
4) The Wild Party (1975) - heavily flawed James Ivory directed piece set in late 20s Hollywood with Raquel in patchy form but it's consistently unusual and interesting
5) Bedazzled (1967) - Pete and Dud's most famous movie together, with Raquel in a short but effective part
6) 100 Rifles (1969) - Welch made a surprisingly number of Westerns, all a bit disappointing but all of interest - this perhaps the most interesting of all
7) The Last of Sheila (1973) - a fascinating puzzle movie
8) Myra Breckinridge (1970) - an utterly terrible movie but it's sheer awfulness demands some sort of respect
9) Fantastic Voyage (1966) - Raquel is very clothed in this film, but its imaginative and interesting
10) The Legend of Walks Far Woman (1979) - full disclosure: never actually seen this. But put it in because Welch so clearly wanted to ACT in it.
Script review - "Romancing the Stone" by Diane Thomas
A famous script in part because of Thomas' story - working as a waitress, pitching it to Michael Douglas, selling it, buying a Porsche with her bonus money and dying in a car crash. But on it's own terms it's a grand read. I've heard other writers worked on this but this script I read is credited solely to her and feels like the work of one person. It's a simple, solid adventure tale with a great central idea - romance novelist goes to Columbia to help her kidnapped sister. She's pursued by a nasty Columbian general as well as Ralph, a comical kidnapper (his cousin Ira is the other one) and helped by dashing Jack Colton.
The action scenes are solid rather than spectacular - swinging on a vine across a ravine, running into a ran of the romance novelist - but they're effective and the film has a wonderful light touch.
The action scenes are solid rather than spectacular - swinging on a vine across a ravine, running into a ran of the romance novelist - but they're effective and the film has a wonderful light touch.
Saturday, July 08, 2017
Movie review - "Blue Monkey" (1987) **
A Canadian knock off of Alien takes a while to get going - the first half hour feels like uninspired TV with some old codger whisked off to hospital because he's not well. Then a creature comes out of him and runs rampant in the hospital.
I wish they'd gone the creepy tone from the get go... the film took a long time to warm up. Also I couldn't help but laugh at some of the cast - Steve Railsback and John Vernon play it straight but they've done that too often in comedies (Vernon anyway) it was hard to take it seriously.
There's some kids running around and comic relief. The movie never quite seems to get it's tone right. It's okay but is too competent to be insane fun and too polite to be really scary.
I wish they'd gone the creepy tone from the get go... the film took a long time to warm up. Also I couldn't help but laugh at some of the cast - Steve Railsback and John Vernon play it straight but they've done that too often in comedies (Vernon anyway) it was hard to take it seriously.
There's some kids running around and comic relief. The movie never quite seems to get it's tone right. It's okay but is too competent to be insane fun and too polite to be really scary.
Movie review - "976-Evil 2" (1991) *1/2
Uninspired horror film about a pretty co-ed (Debbie James, quite likeable) who is tormented by a serial killer. I've never seen the original so maybe I'm missing something but this felt tired. The handling from Jim Wynorski was professional enough but the story was dull. There's running around and the odd killing and an un-engaging killer and a weird dude in a leather jacket.
The best bits were the Wynorski touches: Brigitte Nielsen's random cameo as an occult book dealer; a wonderfully over the top sequence where a girl is sucked into a television and finds herself as an extra in It's a Wonderful Life and is killed by zombies from Night of the Living Dead (I watched that scene and thought "that's what this film should be... that film would be awesome").
Production values are decent and some of the acting isn't bad but I found it on the whole hard to whip up much enthusiasm for this movie.
The best bits were the Wynorski touches: Brigitte Nielsen's random cameo as an occult book dealer; a wonderfully over the top sequence where a girl is sucked into a television and finds herself as an extra in It's a Wonderful Life and is killed by zombies from Night of the Living Dead (I watched that scene and thought "that's what this film should be... that film would be awesome").
Production values are decent and some of the acting isn't bad but I found it on the whole hard to whip up much enthusiasm for this movie.
Script review - "The Keep" by Michael Mann (1983) (warning: spoilers)
The odd man out in Michael Mann's filmography - this script is a lot easier to understand than the final film. It's a relatively simple story - Germans in 1941 Romania occupy a Keep, unleashing an evil force (Molasar) that starts killing them. An SS officer comes in and makes things worse; a local Jewish professor is tempted to let the evil thing run riot on the Nazis, and a mystery man, Glaeken, turns up from Portugal.
The fact the film's easier to understand doesn't mean it's free of problems. It sets up all this conflict between the Germans and the locals, establishing the contrast between lefty Captain Woermann and nasty SS dude Kaempffer... but this kind of gets thrown away in the second half and the film becomes about Glaeken. Glaeken has this super rushed romance with the Jewish professor's daughter, Eva, which is meant to have big emotional stakes but the relationship is too little too late.
There's neat stuff about Glaeken being Molasar's alter evil, but we don't find out that until towards the very end. And it's never clear what they are - what sort of beings they're supposed to be. It really would have helped if Mann had just said "they're vampires" then we would have known the mythology and gone with it. We've got all this other stuff to absorb.
Also I was unsure why it was a bad thing that Molasar might get out and start killing people. It was during World War Two the holocaust was about to happen. Molosar was against the invaders, not everyone.
Some of the dialogue is pretty ripe and the characters aren't that great - good Nazi, bad Nazi, mystery man, professor, professor's daughter. There are some interesting ideas and the setting is novel.
The fact the film's easier to understand doesn't mean it's free of problems. It sets up all this conflict between the Germans and the locals, establishing the contrast between lefty Captain Woermann and nasty SS dude Kaempffer... but this kind of gets thrown away in the second half and the film becomes about Glaeken. Glaeken has this super rushed romance with the Jewish professor's daughter, Eva, which is meant to have big emotional stakes but the relationship is too little too late.
There's neat stuff about Glaeken being Molasar's alter evil, but we don't find out that until towards the very end. And it's never clear what they are - what sort of beings they're supposed to be. It really would have helped if Mann had just said "they're vampires" then we would have known the mythology and gone with it. We've got all this other stuff to absorb.
Also I was unsure why it was a bad thing that Molasar might get out and start killing people. It was during World War Two the holocaust was about to happen. Molosar was against the invaders, not everyone.
Some of the dialogue is pretty ripe and the characters aren't that great - good Nazi, bad Nazi, mystery man, professor, professor's daughter. There are some interesting ideas and the setting is novel.
Friday, July 07, 2017
Movie review - "Jeff" (1969) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)
Alain Delon as a gangster, once more - not the title role though, oddly. He's part of a gang who commit a robbery; the leader disappears and most of the gang think the leader's done a runner but Delon (who kind of loves him in that French cinema way). They torture the leader's mistress, Mireille Darc (who Delon kind of loves in that French cinema way).
This isn't a great film but it's full of interesting moments: the crims setting around in a gym after the heist, gabbing away like they're in Reservoir Dogs; the death of a bee keeper; Delon being shot at the end. The direction is fresh; the supporting cast strong. Delon produced this.
This isn't a great film but it's full of interesting moments: the crims setting around in a gym after the heist, gabbing away like they're in Reservoir Dogs; the death of a bee keeper; Delon being shot at the end. The direction is fresh; the supporting cast strong. Delon produced this.
Wednesday, July 05, 2017
Movie review - "The Wild Party" (1975) **1/2
Every now and then Sam Arkoff at AIP, despite all his protestations about not wanting to make "arty farty" movies, made a stab at arty farty movies - it's the only explanation I can think of why he invested money in this, which was based on a narrative poem, has a narrator breaking the fourth wall to speak poetry, was directed by James Ivory, has characters break out into song and features nudity but relatively tame nudity.
Maybe the nudity's what sold it to Arkoff - that and Raquel Welch in the lead, and the potential to make a film with some respectability that still hit exploitation beats.
There are apparently a few versions of this movie floating around - Ivory did a version, AIP did their version. I think this is Ivory's one because it clocks in at 100 minutes. Also apparently the AIP cut tried to make James Coco's character more sympathetic, and used flashbacks and flashforwards - which aren't here.
This isn't a successful movie. As Ivory himself admitted, you don't really empathise with anyone - everyone is a bit of a dick. James Coco is an egomaniacal star, whose films (from the extracts we see) aren't particularly funny, who doesn't listen to advice. Raquel Welch stays with Coco for the money and reflective fame and cheats on him. David Dukes makes all these pompous judgements about people - and why is his film feedback so awesome?
On an exploitation level the film isn't that "wild". Some ingredients are there - drinking, drug taking, women making out with each other, an omnisexual orgy (for all his snobbish comments, Dukes' character still takes part in the orgy) - but it's all very politely shot. Ivory is not Jack Hill.
On a dramatic level it suffers from sketchy support characters - Perry King is just required to hang around and be beautiful, Dukes hangs around and makes comments. Coco and Welch are given lots of chances; Coco takes his, though it's hard to care too much about his character, and Welch takes some of hers.
However it is interesting. The art design is pretty, it's stylistically different, with it's poems and songs. The ending is suitably dramatic. It's very flawed but it tries to break the mould.
Maybe the nudity's what sold it to Arkoff - that and Raquel Welch in the lead, and the potential to make a film with some respectability that still hit exploitation beats.
There are apparently a few versions of this movie floating around - Ivory did a version, AIP did their version. I think this is Ivory's one because it clocks in at 100 minutes. Also apparently the AIP cut tried to make James Coco's character more sympathetic, and used flashbacks and flashforwards - which aren't here.
This isn't a successful movie. As Ivory himself admitted, you don't really empathise with anyone - everyone is a bit of a dick. James Coco is an egomaniacal star, whose films (from the extracts we see) aren't particularly funny, who doesn't listen to advice. Raquel Welch stays with Coco for the money and reflective fame and cheats on him. David Dukes makes all these pompous judgements about people - and why is his film feedback so awesome?
On an exploitation level the film isn't that "wild". Some ingredients are there - drinking, drug taking, women making out with each other, an omnisexual orgy (for all his snobbish comments, Dukes' character still takes part in the orgy) - but it's all very politely shot. Ivory is not Jack Hill.
On a dramatic level it suffers from sketchy support characters - Perry King is just required to hang around and be beautiful, Dukes hangs around and makes comments. Coco and Welch are given lots of chances; Coco takes his, though it's hard to care too much about his character, and Welch takes some of hers.
However it is interesting. The art design is pretty, it's stylistically different, with it's poems and songs. The ending is suitably dramatic. It's very flawed but it tries to break the mould.
Tuesday, July 04, 2017
Movie review - "The Steel Helmet" (1951) ***1/2
The film that really put Sam Fuller on the map - a tough look at the Korean War, focusing on a sergeant who is the sole survivor (Gene Evans) of an ambush. He joins up with some other soldiers and they get stuck in a Bhuddist temple. The same old structure really - a siege movie - but Fuller always keeps it fresh and new: the opening shot of a steel helmet, a soldier being stabbed going "oh no... oh no..."
The low budget is artfully used - scenes in the temple, at night, with mist. Tight, very good.
The low budget is artfully used - scenes in the temple, at night, with mist. Tight, very good.
Sunday, July 02, 2017
Movie review - "Lady in Cement" (1968) **1/2
An unexpected surprise - I wasn't thinking this Frank Sinatra PI movie would be much, but it was a tight, fast paced, entertaining flick. I'm not saying would've liked to have spent any money on it, and recognise it's flaws but it was fun - at least for the first half.
Frank is well cast as a tough weary private eye, Tony Rome - this was the second in a series. He's fast with a quip and seems to be having a good time has he investigates the death of a topless blonde he finds at the bottom of the ocean while scuba diving for treasure.
There's a subplot where Sinatra is hired by a big goon, Dan Blocker (very good) to look for a girl, which reminded me of Farewell My Lovely - indeed, the whole film feels as though it was made by people who watched a lot of Chandler and Hammett adaptations.
Raquel Welch has a supporting role, looking splendid in a bikini. She's still awkward but has some nice by-play with Sinatra. People like Richard Conte pop up in the support cast.
There's some unpleasant late 60s masculinity things - not one but two villainous gays, the hilarity of a cop going undercover in drag, lecherous scenes perving on not one not two but three bimbos (the topless dead blonde, Raquel, and another bimbo). The story becomes less interesting as it goes on - after a strong beginning I enjoyed it less.
Frank is well cast as a tough weary private eye, Tony Rome - this was the second in a series. He's fast with a quip and seems to be having a good time has he investigates the death of a topless blonde he finds at the bottom of the ocean while scuba diving for treasure.
There's a subplot where Sinatra is hired by a big goon, Dan Blocker (very good) to look for a girl, which reminded me of Farewell My Lovely - indeed, the whole film feels as though it was made by people who watched a lot of Chandler and Hammett adaptations.
Raquel Welch has a supporting role, looking splendid in a bikini. She's still awkward but has some nice by-play with Sinatra. People like Richard Conte pop up in the support cast.
There's some unpleasant late 60s masculinity things - not one but two villainous gays, the hilarity of a cop going undercover in drag, lecherous scenes perving on not one not two but three bimbos (the topless dead blonde, Raquel, and another bimbo). The story becomes less interesting as it goes on - after a strong beginning I enjoyed it less.
Movie review - "Flareup" (1969) **
A not particularly well known movie despite having the sort of one line concept that you'd think people would go for: Raquel Welch is a dancer in Las Vegas who sets out to avenge the death of her friend, a fellow dancer.
We know who did it straight away - we see Luke Askew gun down the girl - when some mystery might have been more useful. The handling is very late 60s network TV, as is the plotting. To be fair, TV from this time was often stronger in its handling.
There are some breasts on display from some of the dancers but Raquel is surprisingly covered up. It's a good role for her - she's brave, spirited, a bit nihilistic in her life, is the focus of attention.. It's got to be said she's not very good - her awkwardness and inexperience clearly shows. I think she needed to be protected more. And wear better outfits - if she didn't want to show off skin she should at least have changed outfits every scene and danced more.
Her best moments come in the love scenes with James Stacy - a virile, confident actor who never became a big star but who is comfortable on screen (and later lost an arm and leg in an accident and was arrested for molesting young girls; he tried to kill himself by jumping off a cliff but caught a ledge on the way down and survived!). These two have good chemistry - not sure if the director spent more time on the scenes or Welch and he rehearsed or she just lifted around him.. but she's at her most natural and relaxed with him.
Luke Askew is a good psycho. The characters of the fellow dancers and investigating police officer feel stock - I kept wanting to know more, to have them flip the story on its head somehow. As it is, the film is very linear.
The movie was produced by a company financed by one of the Getty family. It was released through MGM.
We know who did it straight away - we see Luke Askew gun down the girl - when some mystery might have been more useful. The handling is very late 60s network TV, as is the plotting. To be fair, TV from this time was often stronger in its handling.
There are some breasts on display from some of the dancers but Raquel is surprisingly covered up. It's a good role for her - she's brave, spirited, a bit nihilistic in her life, is the focus of attention.. It's got to be said she's not very good - her awkwardness and inexperience clearly shows. I think she needed to be protected more. And wear better outfits - if she didn't want to show off skin she should at least have changed outfits every scene and danced more.
Her best moments come in the love scenes with James Stacy - a virile, confident actor who never became a big star but who is comfortable on screen (and later lost an arm and leg in an accident and was arrested for molesting young girls; he tried to kill himself by jumping off a cliff but caught a ledge on the way down and survived!). These two have good chemistry - not sure if the director spent more time on the scenes or Welch and he rehearsed or she just lifted around him.. but she's at her most natural and relaxed with him.
Luke Askew is a good psycho. The characters of the fellow dancers and investigating police officer feel stock - I kept wanting to know more, to have them flip the story on its head somehow. As it is, the film is very linear.
The movie was produced by a company financed by one of the Getty family. It was released through MGM.
Saturday, July 01, 2017
Book review - "From Journey's End to the Dam Busters: The Life of R C Sheriff" by Roland Wales
I became familiar with Sheriff's career after reading his autobiography, No Leading Lady. I can't remember what compelled me to pick it up as I wasn't that familiar with his work, but I enjoyed the book a lot - the tale of a quiet, unassuming insurance clerk who wrote plays in his spare time to help raise funds for his rowing club, who then wrote a play which became a phenomenon, then he went on to become one of the leading writers in Britain.
Maybe "leading writer" is too much in such a literate country but Sheriff had an excellent career. He never repeated the success of Journey's End - who could? - but he compiled a formidable body of work, including plays, screenplays, radio plays and novels. The best known are The Long Sunset, Home at Seven, St Helena, The Four Feathers, The Dam Busters, Quintet.
It was a very accomplished career and Wales has done incredibly well by it with this superb biography. It's affectionate, well-written, extremely well researched; Wales had access to many letters and diary entries of Sheriff. He also goes through as much of the man's writing as possible, including unmade screenplays, giving decent weight to them (so often these things are overlooked).
Sheriff's memoirs were full of blanks - he skipped over his war service for instance, and was hazy about his private life (he was devoted to his mother... as in, really super devoted). This fills in the blanks, tackling Sheriff's family's background, childhood, school days (glorious for Sheriff who loved sport), the boring insurance job, war service (Sheriff saw hard action but not a super large amount and indeed his superiors seemed keen to find ways to avoid having him at the front line; he received a lucky wound in a way which knocked him out of the war but didn't give him long term damage), going back to work, starting writing, developing his craft through the 1920s, writing Journey's End, the challenges of that production (where he met James Whale and Colin Clive), taking off to Oxford for a bit, expanding into screenwriting and novel writing, his experiences in the war (the bulk of which he spent in the USA), slight career wobbles, hitting new peaks in the 1950s, becoming unfashionable in the 1960s.
It was a steady career without giant dips and shows what you can do with a strong work ethic and good temperament. Also, no kids or romantic entanglements. Wales spends a bit of time on this but not too much - he sources a letter from a friend which could be deduced to referring to gay behaviour, discusses the relationship with the mother, acknowledges he preferred to be around men to women... but the proof is inconclusive. I have the feeling he was asexual.
Wales' book rises to the occasion for the big challenges - the background to Journey's End (including the inspirations for the main characters). Heaps of stuff I didn't know, like a proposed sequel to Journey's End, the many unfilmed scripts he did, his professional and personal relationships. I'm not sure that Sheriff was that compelling a person but is career was fascinating and got a fantastic tribe.
Maybe "leading writer" is too much in such a literate country but Sheriff had an excellent career. He never repeated the success of Journey's End - who could? - but he compiled a formidable body of work, including plays, screenplays, radio plays and novels. The best known are The Long Sunset, Home at Seven, St Helena, The Four Feathers, The Dam Busters, Quintet.
It was a very accomplished career and Wales has done incredibly well by it with this superb biography. It's affectionate, well-written, extremely well researched; Wales had access to many letters and diary entries of Sheriff. He also goes through as much of the man's writing as possible, including unmade screenplays, giving decent weight to them (so often these things are overlooked).
Sheriff's memoirs were full of blanks - he skipped over his war service for instance, and was hazy about his private life (he was devoted to his mother... as in, really super devoted). This fills in the blanks, tackling Sheriff's family's background, childhood, school days (glorious for Sheriff who loved sport), the boring insurance job, war service (Sheriff saw hard action but not a super large amount and indeed his superiors seemed keen to find ways to avoid having him at the front line; he received a lucky wound in a way which knocked him out of the war but didn't give him long term damage), going back to work, starting writing, developing his craft through the 1920s, writing Journey's End, the challenges of that production (where he met James Whale and Colin Clive), taking off to Oxford for a bit, expanding into screenwriting and novel writing, his experiences in the war (the bulk of which he spent in the USA), slight career wobbles, hitting new peaks in the 1950s, becoming unfashionable in the 1960s.
It was a steady career without giant dips and shows what you can do with a strong work ethic and good temperament. Also, no kids or romantic entanglements. Wales spends a bit of time on this but not too much - he sources a letter from a friend which could be deduced to referring to gay behaviour, discusses the relationship with the mother, acknowledges he preferred to be around men to women... but the proof is inconclusive. I have the feeling he was asexual.
Wales' book rises to the occasion for the big challenges - the background to Journey's End (including the inspirations for the main characters). Heaps of stuff I didn't know, like a proposed sequel to Journey's End, the many unfilmed scripts he did, his professional and personal relationships. I'm not sure that Sheriff was that compelling a person but is career was fascinating and got a fantastic tribe.
Movie review - "The Black Tulip" (1964) ***1/2 (warning: spoilers)
Alain Delon tries his hand at swashbuckling, in this adaptation of an Alexandre Dumas novel which I've never read but apparently this isn't very faithful. It would seem to owe more to The Scarlet Pimpernel and The Prisoner of Zenda with Delon playing twin brothers, one a dashing freedom fighter who runs around the countryside robbing the rich in the name of the poor, the other a more quieter, nebbish type who takes over his brother's position when the cool brother is injured.
There's a good twist in that the quiet brother discovers the groovy brother actually doesn't care about the poor, he robs for kicks - he's like the villain in The Wicked Lady. He finds love in the comely shape of peasant Virni Lisi whose father is a revolutionary.
The other great twist is the bad brother is captured and gets hung... and actually dies. This was like The Corsican Brothers. But it gives the piece some emotional kick. (Even if the movie shies away from going into the emotional turmoil the surviving brother must feel).
There's plenty of banter, action and pleasing production design, though I feel it would be prettier had it been shot in France rather than Spain. Delon is handsome and charismatic and gives two distinctive performances - it's some of his best work. The support characters are fine: some rich aristocrats and comic revolutionaries.
There's a good twist in that the quiet brother discovers the groovy brother actually doesn't care about the poor, he robs for kicks - he's like the villain in The Wicked Lady. He finds love in the comely shape of peasant Virni Lisi whose father is a revolutionary.
The other great twist is the bad brother is captured and gets hung... and actually dies. This was like The Corsican Brothers. But it gives the piece some emotional kick. (Even if the movie shies away from going into the emotional turmoil the surviving brother must feel).
There's plenty of banter, action and pleasing production design, though I feel it would be prettier had it been shot in France rather than Spain. Delon is handsome and charismatic and gives two distinctive performances - it's some of his best work. The support characters are fine: some rich aristocrats and comic revolutionaries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)