Actually this is the 60 minute American version called House of 1,000 Women which is a shame but this is still pretty good. It has a strong central idea - an internment camp for British women in occupied France - and an interesting cross section of characters: wise cracking journo Phyllis Calvert, mystery woman Pat Roc who turns out to be a nun (not in this version), stripper Jean Kent, sensible cigarette smoking Renee Houston, Flora Robson and her "companion".
There's good solid conflict - a spy in the camp, some British airmen are shot down and need to escape, giving this a spine. It's very well written by Frank Launder - and directed too, building to an exciting climax at a concert.
Quite sexually frank, with it's stripper character who clearly sleeps with Germans, and a seemingly lesbian couple. The love plots involving Jean Kent and Pat Roc and the airmen feel rushed here - though maybe they were cut out.
There's lots of smoking and women being sensible and British but it's all quite exciting with plenty of movement. I've got to track down the hour-plus version.
Thursday, September 28, 2017
Tuesday, September 26, 2017
Dirk Bogarde Top Ten
1) Doctor at Sea (1955) - high-spirited fun comedy, which I prefer to the first one because it has some sea views and Brigitte Bardot
2) Victim (1961) - for an actor in the closet Bogarde played an amazing number of gay characters for the time - this one notably, a hard hitting genuinely entertaining thriller that became unfashionable for a time but retains its power
3) The Servant (1963) - Bogarde played a few creepy corrupters in his career but this was perhaps his greatest performance in that genre
4) A Tale of Two Cities (1958) - perhaps Ralph Thomas' best film, a very fine adaptation of the novel with Bogarde excellently cast.
5) Hunted (1952) - part of the young-kid-idolising-a-crook genre, with Bogarde excellent as a spiv
6) The Blue Lamp (1949) - Bogarde makes a superb villain and I wish he'd played more
7) The Wind Cannot Read (1958) - presumably David Lean would've made a better film but this is a pretty good melodrama
8) The Doctor's Dilemma (1959) - Bogarde and Shaw go together well in a literate, entertaining film
9) Death in Venice (1971) - it is about, well, a pedophile and has some shocking make up but is very well done
10) Cast a Giant Shadow (1955) - Bogarde again makes a marvellous villain well teamed with Margaret Lockwood in character actor mode
2) Victim (1961) - for an actor in the closet Bogarde played an amazing number of gay characters for the time - this one notably, a hard hitting genuinely entertaining thriller that became unfashionable for a time but retains its power
3) The Servant (1963) - Bogarde played a few creepy corrupters in his career but this was perhaps his greatest performance in that genre
4) A Tale of Two Cities (1958) - perhaps Ralph Thomas' best film, a very fine adaptation of the novel with Bogarde excellently cast.
5) Hunted (1952) - part of the young-kid-idolising-a-crook genre, with Bogarde excellent as a spiv
6) The Blue Lamp (1949) - Bogarde makes a superb villain and I wish he'd played more
7) The Wind Cannot Read (1958) - presumably David Lean would've made a better film but this is a pretty good melodrama
8) The Doctor's Dilemma (1959) - Bogarde and Shaw go together well in a literate, entertaining film
9) Death in Venice (1971) - it is about, well, a pedophile and has some shocking make up but is very well done
10) Cast a Giant Shadow (1955) - Bogarde again makes a marvellous villain well teamed with Margaret Lockwood in character actor mode
Script review - "Catch 22" by Buck Henry
I remember loving the novel for its pace and wit and disliking the film for being unfunny and so long, confusing and lumbered. David Shipman wrote that Buck Henry did a good job knocking the script into shape but was let down by Mike Nichols' direction. Reading this, for me the flaw it in the script.
This takes forever, over 200 pages, isn't very engaging or funny. The female characters are all sex objects, it was hard for me to tell characters apart on the page. It perked up in the last third when people started dying.
This takes forever, over 200 pages, isn't very engaging or funny. The female characters are all sex objects, it was hard for me to tell characters apart on the page. It perked up in the last third when people started dying.
Monday, September 25, 2017
Movie review - "Our Girl Friday" (1953) **
In 1957 Kenneth More appeared in a charming shipwreck tale, The Admirable Crichton. A few years earlier, when he was yet to establish himself as a star, he was in this un-charming shipwreck tale.
He players a stoker with an appallingly broad Irish accent who is shipwrecked with Joan Collins, who looks terrific, and George Cole and Robertson Hare. More is handsome enough but we have to sit through love scenes with Cole and Collins.
The film lacks comedy, romance and adventure. The story doesn't make logical sense - characters promptly fall in love with Collins then out of it. There's unpleasant scenes where Collin begs for the men to leave her alone and they don't. The adventures on the island mostly consist of Cole resisting his attraction to Collins (like he'd even had a chance normally) and Hare worried about standards and class based wackiness with everyone worried about Irish More getting his hands on booze, which does happen.
At least it's in colour and there's location work in Majorca, Spain. I like all these actors. Occasionally there's a glimpse of a more entertaining film - like when Collins takes over the island and runs things. I actually would have enjoyed a remake of this in the 70s or 80s when filmmakers were allowed to be a bit more naughty.
He players a stoker with an appallingly broad Irish accent who is shipwrecked with Joan Collins, who looks terrific, and George Cole and Robertson Hare. More is handsome enough but we have to sit through love scenes with Cole and Collins.
The film lacks comedy, romance and adventure. The story doesn't make logical sense - characters promptly fall in love with Collins then out of it. There's unpleasant scenes where Collin begs for the men to leave her alone and they don't. The adventures on the island mostly consist of Cole resisting his attraction to Collins (like he'd even had a chance normally) and Hare worried about standards and class based wackiness with everyone worried about Irish More getting his hands on booze, which does happen.
At least it's in colour and there's location work in Majorca, Spain. I like all these actors. Occasionally there's a glimpse of a more entertaining film - like when Collins takes over the island and runs things. I actually would have enjoyed a remake of this in the 70s or 80s when filmmakers were allowed to be a bit more naughty.
Friday, September 22, 2017
Movie review - "My Bill" (1938) ***
In the late 1930s Warner Bros notoriously tried to get Kay Francis to quit by putting her in B films of which this was the first - but it's a tight, unpretentious enjoyable film that holds up well. It's directed by John Farrow who was a dab hand at Bs, and benefits from a strong source material (well, strongly road tested - it was a play which had been filmed in 1930) and tight handling (it clocks in at 65 minutes).
I'm not super familiar with the work of Francis but she's absolutely fine as a widow with four kids, three of whom are brats - dress-obsessed Anita Louise, piano playing Bonita Granville (who needs a subplot) and poncey Bobby Jordan.
There are two old crones - Elisabeth Risdon who wants the three brats and hates Francis, and Helena Phillips as an old bat befriended by Moore.
Some things did bug me: the way Moore kept calling Francis "sweetheart" and "dear" (I think it was meant to be more charming than it is); her three bratty kids wouldn't have come back if the aunt was a bit more tolerant (i.e. they would've stayed away had the aunt not been horrible); I note "poor" Francis still has a black maid (who seems to have a drinking problem); and also Francis admits she blew a lot of money with dud investments.
But the acting is good - not just the reliable Francis and the old character actors, but the kids like Moore (who had a big role), Louise and Granville- it's good across the board which is rare in Bs. It's also inherently empathetic - Francis being a widow, and slut shamed by her sister in law, and taken advantage of by her kids. A good solid melo.
I'm not super familiar with the work of Francis but she's absolutely fine as a widow with four kids, three of whom are brats - dress-obsessed Anita Louise, piano playing Bonita Granville (who needs a subplot) and poncey Bobby Jordan.
There are two old crones - Elisabeth Risdon who wants the three brats and hates Francis, and Helena Phillips as an old bat befriended by Moore.
Some things did bug me: the way Moore kept calling Francis "sweetheart" and "dear" (I think it was meant to be more charming than it is); her three bratty kids wouldn't have come back if the aunt was a bit more tolerant (i.e. they would've stayed away had the aunt not been horrible); I note "poor" Francis still has a black maid (who seems to have a drinking problem); and also Francis admits she blew a lot of money with dud investments.
But the acting is good - not just the reliable Francis and the old character actors, but the kids like Moore (who had a big role), Louise and Granville- it's good across the board which is rare in Bs. It's also inherently empathetic - Francis being a widow, and slut shamed by her sister in law, and taken advantage of by her kids. A good solid melo.
Saturday, September 16, 2017
Script review - "Francis and the Godfather" (warning: spoilers)
Fun script, a little roughly written in places and at times felt like a collection of anecdotes rather than a cohesive story, but I guess how else would you do it? It's also entertaining.
The character of Coppola is a little sketchy and passive but there are entertaining turns from Evans, Brando, Pacino, James Caan. The script is a little mean on Ryan O'Neal and Stanley Jaffe. I love the way they co op the film's climax.
The character of Coppola is a little sketchy and passive but there are entertaining turns from Evans, Brando, Pacino, James Caan. The script is a little mean on Ryan O'Neal and Stanley Jaffe. I love the way they co op the film's climax.
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Movie review - "Black Magic" (1949) **1/2
Orson Welles loved to do magic tricks and was a great showman so is perfect casting to play the enigmatic Cagliostro. He didn't often play leading man roles in films he didn't direct, so it's a lot of fun to see him in this - even if the film isn't that great.
It's got good things going for it - the production values are high (it was shot in Italy), the cinematography is crisp. Some of the acting isn't bad.
It's very hammy and erratic though. I had trouble following the story. I think it's about the hypnotist Caglistro who gets involved in a plot to have a young woman impersonate Marie Antoinette - only he falls in love with the woman. That should be simple but everything feels complicated - Cagliostro is always hypnotising people, people are escaping, his plan is forever being revealed but he gets away with it etc.
Nancy Guild is a debit in the dual role as the girl and the queen - the girl part isn't that great as she's hypnotised most of the time, but she should be able to make Marie Antoinette interesting. Frank Latimore is dull as the hero. I wish Akim Tamiroff had been given something to do
Charles Goldner's character, a doctor, is at the beginning and pops up crucially at the end to bust Cagliostro - I got confused by who he was. I got him confused too with Stephen Bekassy, the main villain - he was killed off too early.
Welles darkens his skin, curls his hair and uses a broad accent. He's quite slim and dashing and hammy.
There's a weird, hammily acted opening sequence where Alexander Dumas Snr talks with Alexander Dumas Jnr (Raymond Burr) about the story.
I didn't mind this but have to admit I was surprised how dull it was. Needlessly so. I was really hoping it would be a little gem but it isn't.
It's got good things going for it - the production values are high (it was shot in Italy), the cinematography is crisp. Some of the acting isn't bad.
It's very hammy and erratic though. I had trouble following the story. I think it's about the hypnotist Caglistro who gets involved in a plot to have a young woman impersonate Marie Antoinette - only he falls in love with the woman. That should be simple but everything feels complicated - Cagliostro is always hypnotising people, people are escaping, his plan is forever being revealed but he gets away with it etc.
Nancy Guild is a debit in the dual role as the girl and the queen - the girl part isn't that great as she's hypnotised most of the time, but she should be able to make Marie Antoinette interesting. Frank Latimore is dull as the hero. I wish Akim Tamiroff had been given something to do
Charles Goldner's character, a doctor, is at the beginning and pops up crucially at the end to bust Cagliostro - I got confused by who he was. I got him confused too with Stephen Bekassy, the main villain - he was killed off too early.
Welles darkens his skin, curls his hair and uses a broad accent. He's quite slim and dashing and hammy.
There's a weird, hammily acted opening sequence where Alexander Dumas Snr talks with Alexander Dumas Jnr (Raymond Burr) about the story.
I didn't mind this but have to admit I was surprised how dull it was. Needlessly so. I was really hoping it would be a little gem but it isn't.
Wednesday, September 13, 2017
Script review - "Frost/Nixon" by Peter Morgan
Peter Morgan's one of my favourite writers in part because of this script which is extremely entertaining. It takes an event I'd vaguely heard of and makes it really interesting. It follows in many ways the stock template: an unlikely hero (glambot David Frost) has a dream (to interview Nixon), overcomes obstacles (lack of money, disdain) to triumph (getting Nixon to kind of apologise).
I'm sure there are historical errors but I went with it. The characters of Frost and Nixon are very defined - some solid support from Nixon's loyal deputy; Frost's idealistic helpers aren't as interesting and the female characters practically non existent. Still, gripping stuff.
I'm sure there are historical errors but I went with it. The characters of Frost and Nixon are very defined - some solid support from Nixon's loyal deputy; Frost's idealistic helpers aren't as interesting and the female characters practically non existent. Still, gripping stuff.
Movie review- "Snowbound" (1948) **
At one stage David MacDonald had a bit of a reputation as a director, owing to his war documentaries and the B film hit This Man is News but his post war films were very underwhelming. This is a case in point - which really disappointed me because I enjoy a good alpine-set thriller.
This has all the ingredients of a film that should work: a bunch of mysterious types gathered in a chalet, cut off via snow, the reveal that there's some Nazi gold buried there.
It suffers from uninteresting characters - I thought it was going to be unusual with Dennis Price having to pretend to be a screenwriter for director Robert Newton but nothing is really done with that. Why have Price and Newton as heroes? Why use Newton so little? Why cast someone as obvious as Herbert Lom as the villain? Why have a story with so much talk about what happened in the past.
There's an exotic pretty girl, a dodgy Brit. Hitchcock or Laudner/Gilliat or even Ralph Thomas would have made these situations perky and fun. Not MacDonald. It's never that suspenseful or scary. It's not awful - just dull.
Price seems ill at ease as a hero with silly hair and sweaters. Newton and Lom are always fun.Mila Parcey is forgettable
This has all the ingredients of a film that should work: a bunch of mysterious types gathered in a chalet, cut off via snow, the reveal that there's some Nazi gold buried there.
It suffers from uninteresting characters - I thought it was going to be unusual with Dennis Price having to pretend to be a screenwriter for director Robert Newton but nothing is really done with that. Why have Price and Newton as heroes? Why use Newton so little? Why cast someone as obvious as Herbert Lom as the villain? Why have a story with so much talk about what happened in the past.
There's an exotic pretty girl, a dodgy Brit. Hitchcock or Laudner/Gilliat or even Ralph Thomas would have made these situations perky and fun. Not MacDonald. It's never that suspenseful or scary. It's not awful - just dull.
Price seems ill at ease as a hero with silly hair and sweaters. Newton and Lom are always fun.Mila Parcey is forgettable
Tuesday, September 12, 2017
Script review - "Chappaquidick" by Taylor Allen and Andrew Logan
A really excellent account of the famous accident. Act one details what happened - I assume this has been researched; it felt real. It's a hit to the solar plexus to see Ted Kennedy drunkenly flopping around and Mary Jo being trapped for hours. This is emotionally devastating. The second and third acts aren't as good inevitably but are still pretty gripping - Kennedy tries to weasel out of things, fails, then tries to restore his reputation.
The character of Kennedy, as depicted here, is fascinating - unsure of his place in the world, keen to blame dad for everything, struggling to go his own way, constantly making mistakes when he does go his own way. It is not very nice to him - but it's a fantastic part. A great look at politics, humanity, American royalty, and scandal.
The character of Kennedy, as depicted here, is fascinating - unsure of his place in the world, keen to blame dad for everything, struggling to go his own way, constantly making mistakes when he does go his own way. It is not very nice to him - but it's a fantastic part. A great look at politics, humanity, American royalty, and scandal.
Movie review - "When the Bough Breaks" (1947) ** (warning: spoilers)
Gainborough melodrama given a modern day kitchen sink realism - Pat Roc expands her range as a working class girl who gives birth and finds out her husband's a bigamist. She kicks hubby to the curb and tries to make a go of it but struggles - an all too believable scenario, very empathetic. Eventually she gives up and passes the kid over to rich Rosamund Johns, who lost a kid and is fairly salivating to get her hands on Roc's. Her husband seems indifferent either way. Years later Roc gets her act together, marries kindly Bill Owen and tries to get her kid back.
There's no costumes, period setting or outrageous plot developments. There's not even handsome men - Owen is very bloke next door. Mind you that's the take the film was going for - and actually it could have worked. (And it did for audiences who turned this into a minor hit).
But the film fumbles the drama - it's way too polite and hesitant. We don't meet the father, who would seem to me.
It was a bit rough of Roc to just rock up to Johns and go "I want my kid back". But I didn't like Johns' character with all her cash, being desperate to get her hands on the kid, not telling the kid he's adopted and refusing to give the kid back. It has the potential for good drama. Potential which is missed.
The film misses dramatic moments wholesale - Johns and Roc never fight dirty, Owen mostly hangs around going "you're mothering him wrong" to Roc, Johns' husband just sort of goes "you've got to give the kid back" to Johns (he seems indifferent to the kid - he was the father for eight years - you'd think would have more of an attitude.)
We don't see the scene where the kid is told he is adopted and his real mother is someone else. The kid rocks up and asks who the maid is and where the garden is and is going to be a bit of a snob, and you think the film's going to use it in an interesting way... but they don't. The kid just an annoying little snob who runs away to his old home - but not a dramatically interesting snob. He's so unsympathetic you don't care what happens to him.
The film raises all sorts of class issues that probably could have been mined more. Johns and her husband have money, Roc and Owen don't. The kid's a rich kid who is bullied (off screen) by the poor kids. Both Owen and Johns' husband seem really keen to get rid of the kid.
And the ending is a damp squib - Roc drops the kid off with Johns. We don't see a final scene between Roc and Johns. The kid promises to write. Cut to the kid having a birthday with his rich parents and rich friends, then cut to Roc and Owen having a birthday with their new kid, a little baby. No sadness, no poignancy, no drama. Warring mothers of children offers great potential - look at Stella Dallas, The Old Maid etc. This drops the ball.
Roc struggles at times with her working class accent and is very non glamorous but is pretty and likeable. Johns is okay in an unsympathetic part. Owen is engaging.
There's no costumes, period setting or outrageous plot developments. There's not even handsome men - Owen is very bloke next door. Mind you that's the take the film was going for - and actually it could have worked. (And it did for audiences who turned this into a minor hit).
But the film fumbles the drama - it's way too polite and hesitant. We don't meet the father, who would seem to me.
It was a bit rough of Roc to just rock up to Johns and go "I want my kid back". But I didn't like Johns' character with all her cash, being desperate to get her hands on the kid, not telling the kid he's adopted and refusing to give the kid back. It has the potential for good drama. Potential which is missed.
The film misses dramatic moments wholesale - Johns and Roc never fight dirty, Owen mostly hangs around going "you're mothering him wrong" to Roc, Johns' husband just sort of goes "you've got to give the kid back" to Johns (he seems indifferent to the kid - he was the father for eight years - you'd think would have more of an attitude.)
We don't see the scene where the kid is told he is adopted and his real mother is someone else. The kid rocks up and asks who the maid is and where the garden is and is going to be a bit of a snob, and you think the film's going to use it in an interesting way... but they don't. The kid just an annoying little snob who runs away to his old home - but not a dramatically interesting snob. He's so unsympathetic you don't care what happens to him.
The film raises all sorts of class issues that probably could have been mined more. Johns and her husband have money, Roc and Owen don't. The kid's a rich kid who is bullied (off screen) by the poor kids. Both Owen and Johns' husband seem really keen to get rid of the kid.
And the ending is a damp squib - Roc drops the kid off with Johns. We don't see a final scene between Roc and Johns. The kid promises to write. Cut to the kid having a birthday with his rich parents and rich friends, then cut to Roc and Owen having a birthday with their new kid, a little baby. No sadness, no poignancy, no drama. Warring mothers of children offers great potential - look at Stella Dallas, The Old Maid etc. This drops the ball.
Roc struggles at times with her working class accent and is very non glamorous but is pretty and likeable. Johns is okay in an unsympathetic part. Owen is engaging.
Monday, September 11, 2017
Random thoughts on "Starship Troopers"
Random thoughts on Starship Troopers, 20
years on (warning: spoilers... but come on it's been 20 years)
1) I can't think of any other film that
matches it's tone - mixture of high school antics, awkward acting, war cliches,
Nazi imagery, bug killing, camp, seriousness.... even the sequels don't match
it - maybe Robocop comes close but this feels different to even that.
2) The acting ranges from the genuinely
good (Dina Meyer, Clancy Brown) to the iconic (Michael Ironside) to 50s B war
movie (Casper Van Diem) to 40s film noir (Denise Richards) to dreadful (the guy
who plays Casper's dad) but somehow everyone is perfectly suited... whether its
minxy Denise, square jawed Casper or Doogie Howser in a Nazi outfit.
3) Main problem with this film for me...
the last act (it's roughly five acts: school, training, Klendathuu, Planet P
and return to Planet P)... the action builds then there's this final battle
which we never see, Rico and his friends go off from a genuinely important
battle to go rescue Carmen who no one really cares about even if she is hot...
and at the end Doogie goes "the human race was saved by one guy who
captured the bug"... and it's Clancy Brown! Who we never saw. So we missed
a massive battle. I admit that this nutty story decision is part of the film's
charm.
4) Has Michael Ironside ever given a bad
performance? (To be fair you could also ask if he's ever given a different
one... but he's always awesome!)
5) Hokey as it is, the love triangle plot
completely works for me in this film and Dina Meyers is (don't laugh) the
emotional core. It's pure Archie-Veronica-Betty-Reggie (with Zander as Reggie).
6) I love the character touch of making Ace
(Jake Busey) a good violin player - and how Michael Ironside provided violins
for his troops along with beer and footballs. Are violins more popular in the
future? Did he just know a lot about his soldiers? Was it good luck? So much
mythology that remains unexplored.
7) I never noticed how perky the ship
captain played by Brenda Strong is... (Denise Richards' boss) - she's always
got a smile on her face, even when picking up Rico from Planet P after most of
his platoon has been wiped out.
8) I like how in the future people will
still listen to Mazzy Star.
9)It's great how even the more selfish characters,
Carmen and Zander, are completely bad ass - Zander has a great defiant final
line.
10) I love how the military strategy of the
humans is so incredibly abysmal that, like "Aliens", you can enjoy
the militarism and the critique of it at the same time.
-->
Tuesday, September 05, 2017
Movie review - "The Root of All Evil" (1947) **1/2
This isn't one of the most highly regarded Gainsborough melodramas - I think it was a bit of a fizzer, though I'm not sure - but it is entertaining. There's plenty of story and good motivated central character played by Phyllis Calvert - perhaps not entirely happily cast as a northern girl who is sick of being poor and decides to make a lot of money instead.
She starts off by suing the man who was going to marry her for breach of promise - he dumped her to marry a young Hazel Court. She becomes a grocer, then moves into the oil business. John McCallum is the boy next door who always loved her; Michael Rennie the suave type who gets her into oil.
There's a definite feminist subtext here because the film is full of men telling Calvert that money isn't everything - McCallum the poor but honest farmer, her father, her drip fiance, the fiance's father, the idiot farmer whose land she buys not knowing it's got oil on it. But McCallum does support her grocery career (he goes to work for her), the grocer she takes out of business is clearly an idiot. The only bloke to champion her ambition is Michael Rennie who she loves - but who is married. But she gets her revenge on him by kicking him out of the business, and McCallum goes and beats him up.
This lacks some of the fun of the earlier trashier Gainsborough melodramas - there's no good girl/bad girl contrast; Calvert never really cuts loose as a bad girl. She's quite sympathetic - smart, upfront and fair. Which is good feminism, I suppose but a little dull - I guess I was hoping for her to seduce people, and commit murder and sleep around, Scarlett O'Hara style. It's too sensible and fair.
I found this a lot about the later Gainsborough melodramas like Hungry Hill and Jassy - the filmmakers didn't go for it; they didn't put their feet to the accelerator the way they did in Madonna of the Seven Moons and Fanny by Gaslight. I think if you've got to make this sort of movie you've got to go for it. There's a scene where Rennie calls Calvert (not to her face) a "slut" which gave me a jolt - I think the film needs more moments like this.
The handbrake is on too often. Rennie is married but we never meet his wife - and he really loves Calvert. Rennie and McCallum fight and the fight just ends as a draw. The climax involves her office being burnt down - when really it should have been her house. There is some life and death danger but only because they run into a building to save some kids. It lacks sex - in part because Calvert isn't very sexy but no one has sex. And there's no elaborate costumes or sets.
Hubert Gregg is very wet as the bloke Calvert is engaged to but Michael Rennie and John McCallum are strong support. McCallum is very good as the star - handsome, virile, can act. I'm surprised he didn't become a bigger star in Britain. Rennie is quite good too. Solid support from the crusty old Northern types. Clavert is okay - pretty, can act, all that. But I feel if they couldn't have gotten Margaret Lockwood they would've been better off with Pat Roc or Jean Kent - they both had a touch of the minx about them.
Random idea... how I would have "fixed" the film (a useless exercise I know but this is for fun):
- I would have set in the past so they could have had interesting costumes from some period (maybe the 1920s?)
- give Calvert's character more drive... have her family's poverty result in her dad dying (he doesn't serve much purpose being alive).... maybe also have her pregnant to the fiance, and have her lose the baby
- use her sister more... poverty can send her sister off the rails... running around with men, drinking etc - if Calvert is using her desire to get money for a reason I feel it would make her more empathetic, like Mildred Pierce - she can constantly be bailing her sister out of trouble - the sister can maybe die, or reform, depending on what we feel
- have her marry the grocer instead of turning him down - he can still die.... it's great revenge
- use her old fiancee and his new wife more - they're set up in the beginning but then disappear - they should come back at the end - the new wife should be a villain
- use Rennie's character more - he just sort of gets in a brawl then leaves - Calvert should try to kill him, or he tries to kill her... he could team up with the new wife... I feel he should have been more evil and killed.
She starts off by suing the man who was going to marry her for breach of promise - he dumped her to marry a young Hazel Court. She becomes a grocer, then moves into the oil business. John McCallum is the boy next door who always loved her; Michael Rennie the suave type who gets her into oil.
There's a definite feminist subtext here because the film is full of men telling Calvert that money isn't everything - McCallum the poor but honest farmer, her father, her drip fiance, the fiance's father, the idiot farmer whose land she buys not knowing it's got oil on it. But McCallum does support her grocery career (he goes to work for her), the grocer she takes out of business is clearly an idiot. The only bloke to champion her ambition is Michael Rennie who she loves - but who is married. But she gets her revenge on him by kicking him out of the business, and McCallum goes and beats him up.
This lacks some of the fun of the earlier trashier Gainsborough melodramas - there's no good girl/bad girl contrast; Calvert never really cuts loose as a bad girl. She's quite sympathetic - smart, upfront and fair. Which is good feminism, I suppose but a little dull - I guess I was hoping for her to seduce people, and commit murder and sleep around, Scarlett O'Hara style. It's too sensible and fair.
I found this a lot about the later Gainsborough melodramas like Hungry Hill and Jassy - the filmmakers didn't go for it; they didn't put their feet to the accelerator the way they did in Madonna of the Seven Moons and Fanny by Gaslight. I think if you've got to make this sort of movie you've got to go for it. There's a scene where Rennie calls Calvert (not to her face) a "slut" which gave me a jolt - I think the film needs more moments like this.
The handbrake is on too often. Rennie is married but we never meet his wife - and he really loves Calvert. Rennie and McCallum fight and the fight just ends as a draw. The climax involves her office being burnt down - when really it should have been her house. There is some life and death danger but only because they run into a building to save some kids. It lacks sex - in part because Calvert isn't very sexy but no one has sex. And there's no elaborate costumes or sets.
Hubert Gregg is very wet as the bloke Calvert is engaged to but Michael Rennie and John McCallum are strong support. McCallum is very good as the star - handsome, virile, can act. I'm surprised he didn't become a bigger star in Britain. Rennie is quite good too. Solid support from the crusty old Northern types. Clavert is okay - pretty, can act, all that. But I feel if they couldn't have gotten Margaret Lockwood they would've been better off with Pat Roc or Jean Kent - they both had a touch of the minx about them.
Random idea... how I would have "fixed" the film (a useless exercise I know but this is for fun):
- I would have set in the past so they could have had interesting costumes from some period (maybe the 1920s?)
- give Calvert's character more drive... have her family's poverty result in her dad dying (he doesn't serve much purpose being alive).... maybe also have her pregnant to the fiance, and have her lose the baby
- use her sister more... poverty can send her sister off the rails... running around with men, drinking etc - if Calvert is using her desire to get money for a reason I feel it would make her more empathetic, like Mildred Pierce - she can constantly be bailing her sister out of trouble - the sister can maybe die, or reform, depending on what we feel
- have her marry the grocer instead of turning him down - he can still die.... it's great revenge
- use her old fiancee and his new wife more - they're set up in the beginning but then disappear - they should come back at the end - the new wife should be a villain
- use Rennie's character more - he just sort of gets in a brawl then leaves - Calvert should try to kill him, or he tries to kill her... he could team up with the new wife... I feel he should have been more evil and killed.
Monday, September 04, 2017
Movie review - "Bad Lord Byron" (1949) **
One of the films that helped kill off Gainsborough melodrama, even though officially it was a Sydney Box Production - a big box office failure which, along with Christopher Columbus, turned the British film industry off costume pictures.
Interestingly both films were very male focused. There are women in Byron but the women are all about the guy.
This is a fascinatingly poor film - it doesn't work, for a number of reasons, but there's always something going on.
Dennis Price proves he's not a star by fumbling a role that needed James Mason or Stewart Granger. He's got a decent enough voice but he doesn't have charisma or looks and he over acts - look at his "I'm sick" acting at the beginning. He doesn't seem particularly passionate or lively. Maybe a better director and script would have helped - but from watching Price in other films I think he simply lacked that level of bigness that's required for a star. He was lucky in that for so long Gainsborough saw him as a James Mason back-up and gave him so many chances. A good character actor, no more.
The support cast are better. Mai Zetterling impresses as Byron's One True Love (not so true that he doesn't go off gallivanting to fight in Greece); Joan Greenwood is an ideal Lady Caroline Lamb and I like Sonia Hale as his wife (I liked Hale in Broken Journey too - she was pretty and could act). Linden Travers is quite good as his half sister (their scenes together do have urst). Raymond Lovell isn't bad as Byron's friend.
The film feels as though it tries to put in too much - to cover all the greatest hits of Byron's career, including the quips ("mad bad and dangerous to know","I woke up to find myself famous"), some key poems ("she walks in beauty"), the key love affairs (sensible wife, Lady Caroline Lamb, Italian girl, possibly half sister), they key career points (House of Lords, Greece).
It borrows from Citizen Kane in that we hear from the POV of five different people. It also adapts a radio play device of there being a court hearing in heaven (taken from an actual radio play). I know this was used in A Matter of Wife and Death but that felt cinematic - this feels like a radio play.
It's patchy, it shouldn't have cost as much as it did, it feels like a bunch of scenes were cut out. It's a good lesson to biopic makers for what not to do with its miscast star and lack of focus.
Still, some of the production design, costumes and acting deserve respect. The film doesn't work but it's not hideous.
Interestingly both films were very male focused. There are women in Byron but the women are all about the guy.
This is a fascinatingly poor film - it doesn't work, for a number of reasons, but there's always something going on.
Dennis Price proves he's not a star by fumbling a role that needed James Mason or Stewart Granger. He's got a decent enough voice but he doesn't have charisma or looks and he over acts - look at his "I'm sick" acting at the beginning. He doesn't seem particularly passionate or lively. Maybe a better director and script would have helped - but from watching Price in other films I think he simply lacked that level of bigness that's required for a star. He was lucky in that for so long Gainsborough saw him as a James Mason back-up and gave him so many chances. A good character actor, no more.
The support cast are better. Mai Zetterling impresses as Byron's One True Love (not so true that he doesn't go off gallivanting to fight in Greece); Joan Greenwood is an ideal Lady Caroline Lamb and I like Sonia Hale as his wife (I liked Hale in Broken Journey too - she was pretty and could act). Linden Travers is quite good as his half sister (their scenes together do have urst). Raymond Lovell isn't bad as Byron's friend.
The film feels as though it tries to put in too much - to cover all the greatest hits of Byron's career, including the quips ("mad bad and dangerous to know","I woke up to find myself famous"), some key poems ("she walks in beauty"), the key love affairs (sensible wife, Lady Caroline Lamb, Italian girl, possibly half sister), they key career points (House of Lords, Greece).
It borrows from Citizen Kane in that we hear from the POV of five different people. It also adapts a radio play device of there being a court hearing in heaven (taken from an actual radio play). I know this was used in A Matter of Wife and Death but that felt cinematic - this feels like a radio play.
It's patchy, it shouldn't have cost as much as it did, it feels like a bunch of scenes were cut out. It's a good lesson to biopic makers for what not to do with its miscast star and lack of focus.
Still, some of the production design, costumes and acting deserve respect. The film doesn't work but it's not hideous.
Sunday, September 03, 2017
Movie review - "Broken Journey" (1948) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)
When Sydney Box took over Gainsborough he was less into melodrama, more into ripped from the headlines. This airplane disaster movie is based on a real life incident where a plane crashed in the Alps.
It's a British plane, with Phyllis Calvert ideally cast as the stewardess, James Donald as the navigator. There's a film star, an opera singer, a man in the iron lung, a person who was in a concentration camp. It's done sensibly and intelligently - to be honest the film probably needed to be crappier to be successful. It needed terrorists, escaped criminals, kids needing insulin, all that stuff - if you want to make these sort of movies you've got to go the whole hog. I remember when Rank tried to make sensible versions of Gainsborough melodrama and they couldn't pull it off eg Blanche Fury.
There's some good bits like the man in the iron lung sacrificing himself so the others can use batteries and his girlfriend (Sonia Hale) staggering off into the snow, Oates style. I also liked the opera singer singing for help and there's nice location footage.
There is too much sitting around talking about the meaning of it all and/or things that happened in the past like Calvert's love life. I think the film needed more subplots that took place in the present day. Still it's tight and well done - Ken Annakin was a very reliable director.
It's a British plane, with Phyllis Calvert ideally cast as the stewardess, James Donald as the navigator. There's a film star, an opera singer, a man in the iron lung, a person who was in a concentration camp. It's done sensibly and intelligently - to be honest the film probably needed to be crappier to be successful. It needed terrorists, escaped criminals, kids needing insulin, all that stuff - if you want to make these sort of movies you've got to go the whole hog. I remember when Rank tried to make sensible versions of Gainsborough melodrama and they couldn't pull it off eg Blanche Fury.
There's some good bits like the man in the iron lung sacrificing himself so the others can use batteries and his girlfriend (Sonia Hale) staggering off into the snow, Oates style. I also liked the opera singer singing for help and there's nice location footage.
There is too much sitting around talking about the meaning of it all and/or things that happened in the past like Calvert's love life. I think the film needed more subplots that took place in the present day. Still it's tight and well done - Ken Annakin was a very reliable director.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)