First rate script from Trumbo. Sometimes it's a little difficult to read because stylistically scripts are different - but the structure is very solid, the characters well etched. There is good simple good vs evil with the slaves rebelling and some more complex, interesting stuff about machinations in Rome with Cassius determined to exploit it and the crafty Senator wanting to block him and Julius Caesar a lot more complex and interesting on the page than he was as depicted by John Gavin on screen.
Sexually frank, with the Senator and his hookers, bisexual Cassius and the gay Antonious who seems to be in love with Spartacus, and Spartacus and his lady.Many powerful scenes like the slave revolt and the death of Spartacus. Very good screenplay.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Thursday, August 30, 2018
Script review - "Return of the Jedi" by Lawrence Kasdan and George Lucas
Just finished reading the script for “Return of the Jedi” (Lando dies in the original draft!) and for no particular reason thought would list the top ten things I legit love about the film (its top ten disappointments is too easy)
1) Jabba the Hutt
2) how jabba dies
3) Salacious Crumb
4) that bit of business where Luke bounces on the plank and flips and catches a light saber and starts wasting guards - it’s really cool
5) the line “many bothans died to get this information” - v evocative, simple
6) Admiral Ackbar (until Nemo probably the most positive on screen role model for fish)
7) the three prong structure of the climax (Endor/Death Star/space)
8 ) the fact the emperor is undone by not factoring in Ewoks
9) the emotion in the final light saber battle with the emperor /Luke /Vader and the Vader acting when he makes his final decision
10) the final images
Jedi is easy to neg for a fan boy but has lots of good stuff.
Okay I should list some negatives
1) it's too easy for Luke to become a Jedi
2) the heroes seem to have no real plan at the beginning
3) the film could've done with a proper second act instead of a very brief Luke visit to Dantoine
4) the stuff about Leia being Luke's sister is awesome but is thrown away
1) Jabba the Hutt
2) how jabba dies
3) Salacious Crumb
4) that bit of business where Luke bounces on the plank and flips and catches a light saber and starts wasting guards - it’s really cool
5) the line “many bothans died to get this information” - v evocative, simple
6) Admiral Ackbar (until Nemo probably the most positive on screen role model for fish)
7) the three prong structure of the climax (Endor/Death Star/space)
8 ) the fact the emperor is undone by not factoring in Ewoks
9) the emotion in the final light saber battle with the emperor /Luke /Vader and the Vader acting when he makes his final decision
10) the final images
Jedi is easy to neg for a fan boy but has lots of good stuff.
Okay I should list some negatives
1) it's too easy for Luke to become a Jedi
2) the heroes seem to have no real plan at the beginning
3) the film could've done with a proper second act instead of a very brief Luke visit to Dantoine
4) the stuff about Leia being Luke's sister is awesome but is thrown away
Script review - "Girl on the Train" by Erin Cressida Wilson (warning: spoilers)
Excellently written script by Wilson, who I'm now a big fan of - the big print is a pleasure to read, the structure tight, the dialogue engaging. Everything in it has been seen before but the combination of it keeps it fresh - someone observing on a train, alcoholic hero who doesn't know if she killed someone, cheating man, unreliable narrator, cheating shrink, infertility and loss of a baby. It's really well done.
Wednesday, August 29, 2018
Movie review - "Buddy Buddy" (1981) **
Billy Wilder's famously unloved final film as a director - while Private Life of Sherlock Holmes and Avanti have their fans, and some speak up for The Front Page and Fedora, no one seems to like this one.
It's not very good - slow and lethargic.Walter Matthau seems to take forever to say his lines. Jack Lemmon is better; Paula Prentiss (in another misfire from a top director) and Klaus Kinski are quite good. The support cast is full of sparkly little support roles in best Wilder fashion - a chatty bellhop, lazy cop, hippie father of a baby - but they rarely seem to shine.
I couldn't put my finger on why this didn't work. The basic story is okay - it never seems real. Maybe it's too slowly paced for farce. I didn't believe it. Maybe Matthau was miscast when the role needed a straight action star. It just felt slow and long and... off.
I actually enjoyed some of Wilder's attempts to modernise - Matthau telling someone to f*ck off, the topless servant at the end, sex jokes. While Wilder would whine and whine about declining standards in new Hollywood I wish he'd had the guts to make a really bawdy comedy.
It's not very good - slow and lethargic.Walter Matthau seems to take forever to say his lines. Jack Lemmon is better; Paula Prentiss (in another misfire from a top director) and Klaus Kinski are quite good. The support cast is full of sparkly little support roles in best Wilder fashion - a chatty bellhop, lazy cop, hippie father of a baby - but they rarely seem to shine.
I couldn't put my finger on why this didn't work. The basic story is okay - it never seems real. Maybe it's too slowly paced for farce. I didn't believe it. Maybe Matthau was miscast when the role needed a straight action star. It just felt slow and long and... off.
I actually enjoyed some of Wilder's attempts to modernise - Matthau telling someone to f*ck off, the topless servant at the end, sex jokes. While Wilder would whine and whine about declining standards in new Hollywood I wish he'd had the guts to make a really bawdy comedy.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Movie review - Aces of Action#13 - "Raiders of the Desert" (1941) **
Richard Arlen and Andy Devine were teamed by Universal in a series of action comedies, which I think were inspired by the antics of What Price Glory? - two friends who get into various adventures. This one sends them to a backlot fictitious Arabian country - a part of which is being developed by a benevolent American businessman (George Carleton), who isn't the villain, but an admirable figure - which is an interesting depiction of American colonialism. There are villainous locals who want to reclaim the country for themselves, so not it's not exactly PC.
I didn't mind the film. It's not terribly bright but it moved along and Arlen (a heavyset actor) and Devine are fine as a team. Linda Hayes is spirited as the girl, and various white actors pretend to be actors. Even though it was a low-budget film and only at Universal, it was still Universal so the production values are decent and there's quite an impressive brawl at the end, with the French (?) Foreign Legion coming to the rescue.
The film is interesting not just for its political depiction but also its support cast - Maria Montez is in a very small role as a local girl, and Turhan Bey has a more prominent part as a villainous local. Both would go on for bigger and better things.
I didn't mind the film. It's not terribly bright but it moved along and Arlen (a heavyset actor) and Devine are fine as a team. Linda Hayes is spirited as the girl, and various white actors pretend to be actors. Even though it was a low-budget film and only at Universal, it was still Universal so the production values are decent and there's quite an impressive brawl at the end, with the French (?) Foreign Legion coming to the rescue.
The film is interesting not just for its political depiction but also its support cast - Maria Montez is in a very small role as a local girl, and Turhan Bey has a more prominent part as a villainous local. Both would go on for bigger and better things.
Monday, August 27, 2018
Movie review - "Foxfire" (1955) **
Jane Russell and Jeff Chandler should make a better team than they do - both big, bold, vaguely unrealistic screen types - but they underwhelm in this film. To be fair, it's a poor film though you can see what Universal were going for. It's a "woman's picture" with society girl Jane Russell marrying tough mining engineer Chandler and finding it a bit challenging.
Problem is the film doesn't exploit that basic situation - we don't really get much of a sense where Russell came from (cf Elizabeth Taylor's character in Giant got set up scenes establishing her world). Russell feels a bit miscast too - she so obviously belongs in a rough tough world you're not surprised by her triumph.
The film badly lacks a villain and threats to the relationship. There is dusky maiden Mara Corday and drunken idiot Dan Duryea but neither are a real threat. Chandler is so obviously more charismatic than drunken Duryea the film is weakened - the film needed to make this character a sophisticate and cast George Nader or someone.
The plot about finding a mine is so tired and unexciting - no decent flood or cave in. It's mostly Chandler being a proud aresehole - that's where they get the drama from. I didn't want this couple to make it. I really didn't like this film at all.
Problem is the film doesn't exploit that basic situation - we don't really get much of a sense where Russell came from (cf Elizabeth Taylor's character in Giant got set up scenes establishing her world). Russell feels a bit miscast too - she so obviously belongs in a rough tough world you're not surprised by her triumph.
The film badly lacks a villain and threats to the relationship. There is dusky maiden Mara Corday and drunken idiot Dan Duryea but neither are a real threat. Chandler is so obviously more charismatic than drunken Duryea the film is weakened - the film needed to make this character a sophisticate and cast George Nader or someone.
The plot about finding a mine is so tired and unexciting - no decent flood or cave in. It's mostly Chandler being a proud aresehole - that's where they get the drama from. I didn't want this couple to make it. I really didn't like this film at all.
Random thoughts on Neil Simon
He died this week - a ripe old age. I don't know what his last years were like but I hope they were okay ish. He seemed to find happiness with his last marriage.
Simon was once a very big deal in my life - I would read and re-read his plays and try to ape his style. He had the basics so down - simple stories, strong emotion, solid structure, laughs and heart. He was a great gag man but knew his work needed more than that.
Simon was once a massive deal in the theatre world - from the 60s to the 90s, really, Neil Simon plays were events. He would stumble to be be sure but always bounce back.
Some random thoughts on his theatre works:
* Come Blow Your Horn (1961) - solid first play, decent laughs, based on the Simon family notably Neil and his brother but also his parents. Not a classic, but good.
* Little Me (1963) - musical which Simon would criticise but which seems to be revived a lot. I've read it - it's okay. Maybe needs tunes.
* Barefoot in the Park (1963) - funny, warm play which hasn't dated particularly well, in part because it was so imitated - it is about a manic pixie dream girl. But written with a lot of love and skill. The film adaptation is very well acted and awfully directed.
* The Odd Couple (1965) - a deserved classic, brilliantly funny, subtle structure, a great idea masterfully executed. Like Barefoot the film is divinely acted and not very well directed.
* Sweet Charity (1966) - Bob Fosse was the real star of this, but Simon's adaptation is solid.
* The Star Spangled Girl (1967) - not a bad idea, two liberals fight over a conservative manic pixie dream girl, but Simon doesn't get the girl - its his first play not really based on a world he knows, or a girl he knows, and you can tell.
* Plaza Suite (1968) - another Simon classic, the first and last eps especially. The middle bit is fine but the first and last are brilliant. A segmentthat was cut resulted in a film The Out of Towners that is stressful to watch.
* Promises Promises (1968) - first rate musicalisation of The Apartment and I can't believe it wasn't filmed.
* Last of the Red Hot Lovers (1969) - this was okay. A bit repetitive.
* The Gingerbread Man (1970) - interesting tough ish play. I saw it live - it has lost a lot of its freshness.
* The Prisoner of Second Avenue (1971) - angry white middle class rage, quite well done.
* The Sunshine Boys (1972) - lots of fun and one of Simon's best star vehicle
* The Good Doctor (1973) - Simon does Chekov. Not bad. Some people love this but I found it a bit cold.
* God's Favorite (1974) - I didn't like this one. Repetitive and not terribly interesting.
* California Suite (1976) - a marvellous return to form. The slapstick play isn't that great but the othe three are superb.
* Chapter Two (1977) - Simon's most autobiographical effort since Barefoot I guess, a very moving and funny account of widowhood.
* They're Playing Our Song (1978) - skilful funny book which is probably Simon's most original musical. I wish it had been filmed.
* I Ought to Be in Pictures (1980) - not bad, but feels like ingredients he's used before.
* Fools (1981) - terrible play about Russians. Simon's worst.
* Brighton Beach Memoirs (1982) - Simon returns to autobiography and it works a treat, a very fine play which was badly filmed.
* Biloxi Blues (1984) - another fine memoir play that was turned into an even better film.
* Broadway Bound (1986)- a decent play, the least good of the trilogy in part because he'd already mined this material for Come Blow Your Horn but some good moments.
* Rumors (1988) - Simon attempt at a farce. Not bad.
* Lost in Yonkers (1990) - a return to material of his other plays (dodgy family, etc) but very well done.
* Jake's Women (1992) - Simon with some familiar themes (widowhood etc) but well done
* The Goodbye Girl (1993) - I remember being less impressed by the film when I rewatched it. Have never seen the musical.
* Laughter on the 23rd Floor (1993) - disappointing play which I wanted to be better because of its source material but lacks story and real insight into Simon's collaborators.
* London Suite (1996) - a dud, no really strong plays not even the sequel to the California Suite classic.
* Proposals (1997) - haven't read this and have no desire to it doesn't sound very good.
* The Dinner Party (1999) - another play I haven't read. I think I should though!
* 45 Seconds from Broadway (2001) - not a very good play, I have read this one, it is very creaky.
* Rose's Dilemma (2003) - I saw this on Broadway. It wasn't very good - dealt with widowhood etc. Had some funny lines but I think from the 1990s Simon ran out of gas.
Honourable mentions for his original film scripts:
* The Heartbreak Kid (1972) - genius writing
* Murder by Death (1976) - lots of fun
* The Goodbye Girl (1977) - feels like a play. Not bad. I remember finding it brilliant the first time and annoying the second.
* The Cheap Detective (1978) - haven't seen it
* Seems Like Old Times (1980) - quite fun
* Max Dugan Returns (1983) - not very good not enough story for a film
* The Lonely Guy (1984) - very sweet I remember this fondly
* The Slugger's Wife (1985) - never seen it and it sounds awful
* The Marrying Man (1991) - I should try to see this from all accounts its a train wreck but a fascinating one
* The Odd Couple 2 (1998) - no desire to see this.
So his great days were really the 60s and late 70s and 80s... for me and any rate.
Wonderful entertainer. Brilliant writer.
Simon was once a very big deal in my life - I would read and re-read his plays and try to ape his style. He had the basics so down - simple stories, strong emotion, solid structure, laughs and heart. He was a great gag man but knew his work needed more than that.
Simon was once a massive deal in the theatre world - from the 60s to the 90s, really, Neil Simon plays were events. He would stumble to be be sure but always bounce back.
Some random thoughts on his theatre works:
* Come Blow Your Horn (1961) - solid first play, decent laughs, based on the Simon family notably Neil and his brother but also his parents. Not a classic, but good.
* Little Me (1963) - musical which Simon would criticise but which seems to be revived a lot. I've read it - it's okay. Maybe needs tunes.
* Barefoot in the Park (1963) - funny, warm play which hasn't dated particularly well, in part because it was so imitated - it is about a manic pixie dream girl. But written with a lot of love and skill. The film adaptation is very well acted and awfully directed.
* The Odd Couple (1965) - a deserved classic, brilliantly funny, subtle structure, a great idea masterfully executed. Like Barefoot the film is divinely acted and not very well directed.
* Sweet Charity (1966) - Bob Fosse was the real star of this, but Simon's adaptation is solid.
* The Star Spangled Girl (1967) - not a bad idea, two liberals fight over a conservative manic pixie dream girl, but Simon doesn't get the girl - its his first play not really based on a world he knows, or a girl he knows, and you can tell.
* Plaza Suite (1968) - another Simon classic, the first and last eps especially. The middle bit is fine but the first and last are brilliant. A segmentthat was cut resulted in a film The Out of Towners that is stressful to watch.
* Promises Promises (1968) - first rate musicalisation of The Apartment and I can't believe it wasn't filmed.
* Last of the Red Hot Lovers (1969) - this was okay. A bit repetitive.
* The Gingerbread Man (1970) - interesting tough ish play. I saw it live - it has lost a lot of its freshness.
* The Prisoner of Second Avenue (1971) - angry white middle class rage, quite well done.
* The Sunshine Boys (1972) - lots of fun and one of Simon's best star vehicle
* The Good Doctor (1973) - Simon does Chekov. Not bad. Some people love this but I found it a bit cold.
* God's Favorite (1974) - I didn't like this one. Repetitive and not terribly interesting.
* California Suite (1976) - a marvellous return to form. The slapstick play isn't that great but the othe three are superb.
* Chapter Two (1977) - Simon's most autobiographical effort since Barefoot I guess, a very moving and funny account of widowhood.
* They're Playing Our Song (1978) - skilful funny book which is probably Simon's most original musical. I wish it had been filmed.
* I Ought to Be in Pictures (1980) - not bad, but feels like ingredients he's used before.
* Fools (1981) - terrible play about Russians. Simon's worst.
* Brighton Beach Memoirs (1982) - Simon returns to autobiography and it works a treat, a very fine play which was badly filmed.
* Biloxi Blues (1984) - another fine memoir play that was turned into an even better film.
* Broadway Bound (1986)- a decent play, the least good of the trilogy in part because he'd already mined this material for Come Blow Your Horn but some good moments.
* Rumors (1988) - Simon attempt at a farce. Not bad.
* Lost in Yonkers (1990) - a return to material of his other plays (dodgy family, etc) but very well done.
* Jake's Women (1992) - Simon with some familiar themes (widowhood etc) but well done
* The Goodbye Girl (1993) - I remember being less impressed by the film when I rewatched it. Have never seen the musical.
* Laughter on the 23rd Floor (1993) - disappointing play which I wanted to be better because of its source material but lacks story and real insight into Simon's collaborators.
* London Suite (1996) - a dud, no really strong plays not even the sequel to the California Suite classic.
* Proposals (1997) - haven't read this and have no desire to it doesn't sound very good.
* The Dinner Party (1999) - another play I haven't read. I think I should though!
* 45 Seconds from Broadway (2001) - not a very good play, I have read this one, it is very creaky.
* Rose's Dilemma (2003) - I saw this on Broadway. It wasn't very good - dealt with widowhood etc. Had some funny lines but I think from the 1990s Simon ran out of gas.
Honourable mentions for his original film scripts:
* The Heartbreak Kid (1972) - genius writing
* Murder by Death (1976) - lots of fun
* The Goodbye Girl (1977) - feels like a play. Not bad. I remember finding it brilliant the first time and annoying the second.
* The Cheap Detective (1978) - haven't seen it
* Seems Like Old Times (1980) - quite fun
* Max Dugan Returns (1983) - not very good not enough story for a film
* The Lonely Guy (1984) - very sweet I remember this fondly
* The Slugger's Wife (1985) - never seen it and it sounds awful
* The Marrying Man (1991) - I should try to see this from all accounts its a train wreck but a fascinating one
* The Odd Couple 2 (1998) - no desire to see this.
So his great days were really the 60s and late 70s and 80s... for me and any rate.
Wonderful entertainer. Brilliant writer.
Script review - "Jaws" by Peter Benchley
This draft is solely credited to Benchley who oddly enough never gets much credit when it comes to the final film, even the script - most talk goes about John Milius' contribution to the Indianapolis scene. But if this script is all Benchley then his contribution is vastly underrated - the structure is all pretty much there: shark attacks, mayor down playing, more attacks, beach shutting down, going on the expedition... there's even a version of the Indianapolis scene.
The dialogue isn't as good as it would become - the final film has really first rate dialogue. But the characters are all there. And good stuff like the complaints about the kids doing karate.
The dialogue isn't as good as it would become - the final film has really first rate dialogue. But the characters are all there. And good stuff like the complaints about the kids doing karate.
Movie review - "Beiruit" (2018) ***1/2
Throwback to smart intelligent filmmaking for adults which had pretty much morphed entirely to television. It's from an older script by Tony Gilroy which has fortunately come back to life focusing on a period of history which was a big deal at the time but now isn't very well known... the troubles in Lebanon in the early 1980s just before the Israel Invasion.
I presume Jon Hamm was the one who pushed this through - it's a great role and he's very good as the negotiator who suffers (alcoholic, doomed) and runs around Beiruit trying to get a friend released. I don't feel this is a white saviour movie - it's about Americans trying to rescue an American in Beirut. The Arab characters are sketchy.
I wasn't familiar with much of director Brad Anderson's work but he does a very good job. Loved that 70s/80s feel - the smoking and jackets.
I presume Jon Hamm was the one who pushed this through - it's a great role and he's very good as the negotiator who suffers (alcoholic, doomed) and runs around Beiruit trying to get a friend released. I don't feel this is a white saviour movie - it's about Americans trying to rescue an American in Beirut. The Arab characters are sketchy.
I wasn't familiar with much of director Brad Anderson's work but he does a very good job. Loved that 70s/80s feel - the smoking and jackets.
Script review - "Superman" final revisions by Tom Mankiewicz
From accounts by Mankiewicz and George MacDonald Fraser the writing of this was uncommonly tricky - Mario Puzo, Robert Benton and David Newman were among others who did it,though Mankiewicz is the only writer credited here.
It's 240 odd pages but is two scripts, Superman 1 and 2. The 1 is closer to the final film and it feels very close -although the ending doesn't have any going back in time by Superman which I never noted.
Some key differences in 2 - the nuclear explosion which releases Zod and his cohorts is from Superman who throws Lex's hijacked missiles into space (which I preferred), we hear from Superman's dad at the end (the Salkinds refused to pay for Brando). But basically it's the time including reversing the Fortress of Solitude, etc.
It's a very good script - wholesome and positive and full of lively comedy: Clark and Lois of course but also Lex and Otis and Eve. There's not that much action. There is plenty of heart - and its surprisingly fast moving. The sort of script that gives comic book movies a good name.
It's 240 odd pages but is two scripts, Superman 1 and 2. The 1 is closer to the final film and it feels very close -although the ending doesn't have any going back in time by Superman which I never noted.
Some key differences in 2 - the nuclear explosion which releases Zod and his cohorts is from Superman who throws Lex's hijacked missiles into space (which I preferred), we hear from Superman's dad at the end (the Salkinds refused to pay for Brando). But basically it's the time including reversing the Fortress of Solitude, etc.
It's a very good script - wholesome and positive and full of lively comedy: Clark and Lois of course but also Lex and Otis and Eve. There's not that much action. There is plenty of heart - and its surprisingly fast moving. The sort of script that gives comic book movies a good name.
Sunday, August 26, 2018
Movie review - "Avengers: Infinity War" (2018) **** (warning: spoilers)
A genuine marvel, if you'll excuse the pun - how they pulled off such a juggling act, which so much expectation and so many characters to service. And they did, big time.
How? Well the basic story is super duper simple - bad guy wants stones. Easy to follow. They focus on character work - a few characters in particular who have depth, so at the end when everyone "dies" it means something: there's the father-son relationship between Tony Stark and Peter Parker, the rivalry between the egomaniacs/basically same character Stark and Dr Strange, the romances between Vision and Scarlett and the Star lord and Gamora, and the father-daughters relationship between Thanos and Gamora.
Characters like Black Widow, Steve Rodgers, Black Panther, etc take more of a back seat, which is entirely appropriate. Thor has a great moment with a semi nervous breakdown. Plenty of smart lines, and extremely well done action sequences. A very good movie.
How? Well the basic story is super duper simple - bad guy wants stones. Easy to follow. They focus on character work - a few characters in particular who have depth, so at the end when everyone "dies" it means something: there's the father-son relationship between Tony Stark and Peter Parker, the rivalry between the egomaniacs/basically same character Stark and Dr Strange, the romances between Vision and Scarlett and the Star lord and Gamora, and the father-daughters relationship between Thanos and Gamora.
Characters like Black Widow, Steve Rodgers, Black Panther, etc take more of a back seat, which is entirely appropriate. Thor has a great moment with a semi nervous breakdown. Plenty of smart lines, and extremely well done action sequences. A very good movie.
Saturday, August 25, 2018
Movie review – “The Disaster Artist” (2017) ***1/2
Warm, affectionate look at the making of The Room, which
reminds in many ways of Ed Wood – though it’s not as comprehensive/complex in
part because pretty much everyone depicted in this film is still alive so they couldn't go in as hard.
It's really just about the relationship between Tommy and Greg, a bromance given extra resonance by casting two brothers. Both Francos are superb - James has the showier part, which he nails, but Dave is good too.
There's lots of stuff about acting and giving into the emotion. Occasionally I wouldn't have minded another subplot or something - and every now and then all the well known actors in the support cast make it feel a bit too much like "Hey we're in the cool group" (this is my problem not the film's): Seth Rogen, Paul Scheer, June Diane Raphael, Jason Mantzoukas, Zac Effron, Ari Graynor (a standout), Jackie Weaver (also hilarious, when she faints), Sharon Stone (I wish we'd seen her character again), Alison Brie, Josh Hutcherson, Melanie Griffith, Hannibal Buress.
It's lovely though - much kinder spirited than the book on which it's based.
Movie review - "Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story" (2017) ****
Superb look at the life of perhaps Hollywood's greatest startlet/inventor, Hedy Lamarr, whose private life was interesting enough (a stunning beauty, marriage to Austrian munitions manufacturer, early nude/orgasm scene in Ecstacy, fleeing to the US and MGM fame)... but then they throw in her inventing in her part time, quite successfully.
Lamarr is a fascinating character: warm, imperious, smart, funny, addicted to speed and plastic surgery, Jewish (but who would hide that even from her kids), an occasionally great and also terrible mother, bad taste in men, not great with money (she wound up with a pension despite her MGM salary and marrying an oil man).
The biography is very good helped by some great "gets" - a taped interview people did of her, home movie footage, grabs of the Austrian films. I did feel the filmmakers were a bit mean taking MGM to task for miscasting her - I felt Louis B Mayer used her very well. I mean, she was obviously brilliant and gorgeous but it doesn't mean she could act. She was made for stuff like White Cargo.
Lamarr is a fascinating character: warm, imperious, smart, funny, addicted to speed and plastic surgery, Jewish (but who would hide that even from her kids), an occasionally great and also terrible mother, bad taste in men, not great with money (she wound up with a pension despite her MGM salary and marrying an oil man).
The biography is very good helped by some great "gets" - a taped interview people did of her, home movie footage, grabs of the Austrian films. I did feel the filmmakers were a bit mean taking MGM to task for miscasting her - I felt Louis B Mayer used her very well. I mean, she was obviously brilliant and gorgeous but it doesn't mean she could act. She was made for stuff like White Cargo.
Movie review - "Tomb Raider" (2017) ** (warning: spoilers)
Disappointing lethargic reboot of the Lara Croft story which lacks pace and imagination. Alicia Vikander isn't as charismatic as Angelina Jolie but it's not her fault this doesn't work - she is likeable and pretty and has obviously worked out.
She doesn't have any sort of character to play - a plucky young thing who misses her dad seems to be about it. And her adventures are so uninteresting - she's working as a bike courier despite being an heiress, then goes to look for her dad and has some mediocre adventures.
There's no interesting twists, or bits of business, or support parts. Walter Goggins occasionally looks like he's going to go full Colonel Kurtz but never does; Dominic West seems to phone it in (there's not much he can do).
The most interesting bit is the reveal that her guardian Kirsten Scott Thomas is head of some nefarious organisation - this is a great idea. But they just use it at the end to set up the sequel - instead of in this film which needs it. Daniel Wu's character has potential - drunk ship captain on his own vengeance mission - but the film forgets him for most of the last act, when he should be more crucial.
The film sets up a bunch of other interesting support characters - Lara's best friend, that Indian boy with a crush on her, the cocky courier dude - and uses none of them. You might forgive this in the pilot of a TV series but this is meant to be a movie.
Occasionally the film sparks to life - an action sequence where Lara is crashed down some rocks. But it's just so underwhelming. It looks cheap too - there's little star wattage apart from the support cast and a lot of Lara's journey's feel circular.
She doesn't have any sort of character to play - a plucky young thing who misses her dad seems to be about it. And her adventures are so uninteresting - she's working as a bike courier despite being an heiress, then goes to look for her dad and has some mediocre adventures.
There's no interesting twists, or bits of business, or support parts. Walter Goggins occasionally looks like he's going to go full Colonel Kurtz but never does; Dominic West seems to phone it in (there's not much he can do).
The most interesting bit is the reveal that her guardian Kirsten Scott Thomas is head of some nefarious organisation - this is a great idea. But they just use it at the end to set up the sequel - instead of in this film which needs it. Daniel Wu's character has potential - drunk ship captain on his own vengeance mission - but the film forgets him for most of the last act, when he should be more crucial.
The film sets up a bunch of other interesting support characters - Lara's best friend, that Indian boy with a crush on her, the cocky courier dude - and uses none of them. You might forgive this in the pilot of a TV series but this is meant to be a movie.
Occasionally the film sparks to life - an action sequence where Lara is crashed down some rocks. But it's just so underwhelming. It looks cheap too - there's little star wattage apart from the support cast and a lot of Lara's journey's feel circular.
Saturday, August 18, 2018
TV review - The Crown Season 2 ****
This took a while to get going for me - the early eps about Suez, Philip in Australia and what-not didn't do it for me, for whatever reason. But the series then hits its stride and is really superb at the end, notably the eps on Edward VIII, Margaret marrying Snowdon, and Charles at Gordonstoun (who whined about their depiction but f*ck that bully factory I say... besides the depiction is quite fair), and the Profumo affair. Some terrific moments. Very well acted and gorgeous to look at.
Friday, August 17, 2018
Movie review - "San Andreas" (2015) **
Big disaster film which has some of the pleasures of films from that era, and a typically confident performance from Dwayne Johnson. The special effects are impressive - there's some really good destruction.
But the basic story isn't great. Dwayne is a rescue pilot - yet when San Francisco is getting wasted and he's flying around in a helicopter not rescuing anyone except his wife and they go looking for their daughter. Who's not in that much danger - well, not compared to everyone else. You know, people who died.
Most of the action time is Dwyane and ex Carla Guigno running around trying to find their daughter who is with two guys (a SNAG and his brother). Paul Giamatti hangs around in his office a lot.
There's a bunch of Aussies in minor roles like Dennis Coard and Kylie Minogue!
But the basic story isn't great. Dwayne is a rescue pilot - yet when San Francisco is getting wasted and he's flying around in a helicopter not rescuing anyone except his wife and they go looking for their daughter. Who's not in that much danger - well, not compared to everyone else. You know, people who died.
Most of the action time is Dwyane and ex Carla Guigno running around trying to find their daughter who is with two guys (a SNAG and his brother). Paul Giamatti hangs around in his office a lot.
There's a bunch of Aussies in minor roles like Dennis Coard and Kylie Minogue!
Script review - "Unreal" by Sarah Gertrude Shapiro & Marti Noxon
Wonderful script, full of life and fun and bitchy lines with a great central female dynamic - it was like a female version of Hildy and Walter in The Front Page. I have no idea how real it is but it feels real - the two leads are complex rich characters and there's plenty of strong complications eg the Brit aristocrat contestant, all the girls.
Book review - "Last Man Standing" by Roger Moore
Moore tries to ape his pal David Niven with a second book of memoirs, a collection of stories about famous people he has known. But its a disappointing read - he doesn't have Niven's eye or knack for a good story. You'd think he would but he doesn't.
There are some funny stories, mostly about drunken British stage actors (I love how all Brit actors seemed to know each other and they all seemed to guest star on The Saint) - Robert Newton etc. There's some tales from Rape of the Sabine Women and Lana Turner teaching him how to kiss. Tony Curtis livens up things.
But surely Moore had more stories in his arsenal. Far too many stories pop up in other people's memoirs, such as Tom Mankiewicz on the set of The Comancheroes. And I didn't like how he didn't mention his second wife by name at all.
There are some funny stories, mostly about drunken British stage actors (I love how all Brit actors seemed to know each other and they all seemed to guest star on The Saint) - Robert Newton etc. There's some tales from Rape of the Sabine Women and Lana Turner teaching him how to kiss. Tony Curtis livens up things.
But surely Moore had more stories in his arsenal. Far too many stories pop up in other people's memoirs, such as Tom Mankiewicz on the set of The Comancheroes. And I didn't like how he didn't mention his second wife by name at all.
TV review - "Star Trek episode 5 - The Enemy Within" (1966) ***
Another outbreak on The Enterprise - the crew get doubles. Kirk's tries to rape Janice (who is in a surprisingly large number of eps) in a shocking scene. Richard Matheson wrote this. It's smart and good and thought provoking because down deep Kirk wants to rape.
Script review - "Into the Darkness" by Anthony Jaswiski (warning: spoilers)
This became The Shallows. It's an excellent one person thriller - well not really one person, there's also two surfers, a drunk, a kid, a seagull and the shark. It's a great role for the lead however - Nancy, the nurse student who can surf, stitch up her wound, fight off a shark.
The structure is solid. The writer throws in a buoy for her to clamber on - and a reefy rock. There's a drunk on the beach who steals her things, two other surfers one of whom has a go pro on his head. She uses jelly fish as an electric shield.
It's very well written. I loved Jaswiski's use of big print - very evocative. Nancy really goes through the wringer.
I havent seen the film. I read the synopsis on line - some interesting changes, such as in the final film Nancy doesn't lose her leg, she talks to her dad not her brother, she wants to be a doctor not a nurse, she kills the shark via impalling it not through shooting a flare on the oily water, the seagull lives whereas in the film he dies. I don't know why these changes were made they don't necessarily improve things. Actually yes I do - to soften it.
The structure is solid. The writer throws in a buoy for her to clamber on - and a reefy rock. There's a drunk on the beach who steals her things, two other surfers one of whom has a go pro on his head. She uses jelly fish as an electric shield.
It's very well written. I loved Jaswiski's use of big print - very evocative. Nancy really goes through the wringer.
I havent seen the film. I read the synopsis on line - some interesting changes, such as in the final film Nancy doesn't lose her leg, she talks to her dad not her brother, she wants to be a doctor not a nurse, she kills the shark via impalling it not through shooting a flare on the oily water, the seagull lives whereas in the film he dies. I don't know why these changes were made they don't necessarily improve things. Actually yes I do - to soften it.
Random thoughts - Barry Spikings and Michael Deeley at EMI Films
In the early 1970s, Nat Cohen of EMI was the most powerful person in the British film industry, responsible for something like 70% of British movies. In 1974 he enjoyed his greatest triumph with Murder on the Orient Express.
However within the year EMI seemed to feel the need for a change. I'm not sure why - Cohen had done well for a while. Maybe it was the a slate of films he greenlit in the mid 70s - Ace's High, Seven Nights in Japan, To the Devil a Daughter, Spanish Fly, Sweeney!, The Likely Lands, and It Shouldn't Happen to a Vet. These were all projects that sounded good on paper - a remake of Journey's End, a romantic comedy in the style of Roman Holiday, a Hammer horror with Chris Lee, a Leslie Phillips sex comedy, two adaptations of TV shows, a sequel to All Creatures Great and Small. However only Sweeney! seemed to impress much. (I think a lot of them lacked the stars to put over eg Malcolm McDowell, Michael York, John Alderton)
So EMI brought in the team of Michael Deeley and Barry Spikings, who had impressed with their nous at British Lion. Their films included The Wicker Man, Don't Look Now, The Man Who Fell to Earth and Conduct Unbecoming. These weren't particularly huge hits but they seemed to have "it" so got the job over Cohen, who was presumably annoyed.
Deeley and Spikings did have a good idea - make international focused films, but if they do, make sure you get half the money and distribution from a major studio. That's a sensible approach later used by Working Title.
The films of their regime were pretty good
*Sweeney 2 (1978) - sequel to the original, no nonsense TV adaptation
* Warlords of Atlantis (1978) - part of the John Dark/Kevin Connor collaboration. I can see why they did it - but was probably a mistake not to use a well-ish known source novel like the previous three collaborations from Dark and Connor. It's a much weaker entry.
* Convoy (1978) - based on a song, which is random, but it's a truck movie with crashes and Sam Peckinpah. A safe-ish movie - and proved to be a hit despite the difficult production.
* The Driver (1978) - a solid safe-ish choice, a car chase movie from Walter Hill. Interestingly it did poorly in the US (perhaps because Ryan O'Neal was in the lead) but did well interationally.
*Death on the Nile (1978) - all star Christie from the producers of Orient Express. They got the appeal of the first - lots of names and cool locations.
*The Deer Hunter (1978) - the riskiest film. Vietnam War. Russian roulette. Downbeat.A huge success. Good on them for doing it. But one risky film in six is good odds.
Then Deeley let EMI who dropped their policy of seeking co-finance and distribution. They set up their own distribution with Lew Grade - it turned out to be a massive mistake.
Let's look at Spikings films:
*Arabian Adventure (1979) - more Connor/Dark stuff. Probably needed a better known source material - and international names, considering its bigger budget. But a decent choice.
* Can't Stop the Music (1980) - even at the time, a riskier choice than you might think. Disco was on the decline during pre production. No real stars. The leads couldn't sing or dance cf Olivia Newtown John and John Travolta. They should've shared the risk.
* The Awakening (1980)a mummy movie with Charlton Heston. Not a bad choice in theory but should've split the risk.
* Time's Square (1980) - some grittiness a la Saturday Night Fever but it didn't break through. Didn't have dancing or commercial elements.
* The Elephant Man (1980) - great true story, which was a solid basis for a film. Risky choice for director but it paid off in spades.
* The Jazz Singer (1980) - much maligned but a good commercial choice I feel. They just should've locked in their approach before replacing directors during filming.
* The Mirror Crack'd (1980) - didn't do as well as other Christie films but a good solid choice. Perhaps it lacked the spectacular locations of the first two.
* Honky Tonk Freeway (1981) - ridiculous choice. $20 million on a broad comedy from a director untested in that genre with no stars, especially no comedy stars. Absurd.
*Evil Under the Sun (1982) - solid Christie choice. Second tier stars though maybe. Locations - Majorca - felt a bit same-y. Not sure what else I would've picked though.
* Britannia Hospital (1982) - great EMI supported British film. Just probably should've been a cheaper movie.
* Frances (1982) - good solid choice, the lead role was always going to get plaudits.
* Second Thoughts (1983) - why did they think there'd be a market about a woman wondering to have an abortion? Think this was a silly choice.
* Bad Boys (1983) - modern day Jimmy Cagney style film. Decent choice.
* Tender Mercies (1983) - Horton Foote, Robert Duvall. Won Duvall an Oscar.
* Strange Invaders (1983) - really weird choice.
* Cross Creek (1983) - biopic about the writer of The Yearling. Had pretty pictures and a romance. No one remembers this but I think it was probably worth making with a big enough star... didn't have one in Mary Steenburgen.
* Handgun (1983) - low budget gun movie. Weird it got finance.
* The Mirror Crack'd (1980) - didn't do as well as other Christie films but a good solid choice. Perhaps it lacked the spectacular locations of the first two.
* Honky Tonk Freeway (1981) - ridiculous choice. $20 million on a broad comedy from a director untested in that genre with no stars, especially no comedy stars. Absurd.
*Evil Under the Sun (1982) - solid Christie choice. Second tier stars though maybe. Locations - Majorca - felt a bit same-y. Not sure what else I would've picked though.
* Britannia Hospital (1982) - great EMI supported British film. Just probably should've been a cheaper movie.
* Frances (1982) - good solid choice, the lead role was always going to get plaudits.
* Second Thoughts (1983) - why did they think there'd be a market about a woman wondering to have an abortion? Think this was a silly choice.
* Bad Boys (1983) - modern day Jimmy Cagney style film. Decent choice.
* Tender Mercies (1983) - Horton Foote, Robert Duvall. Won Duvall an Oscar.
* Strange Invaders (1983) - really weird choice.
* Cross Creek (1983) - biopic about the writer of The Yearling. Had pretty pictures and a romance. No one remembers this but I think it was probably worth making with a big enough star... didn't have one in Mary Steenburgen.
* Handgun (1983) - low budget gun movie. Weird it got finance.
So, what to think about Spikings' regime? The most bizarre thing is how uncommercial it was. Times Square, Honky Tonk Freeway, Britannia Hospital, Tender Mercies, Strange Invaders, Handguns. These films would have to click exactly right, like say The Deer Hunter, to actually work. Cross Creek needed a big star. Can't Stop the Music was just too late. The only obvious commercial films were Can't Stop the Music and the Christies. The Frances story was always going to attract a bit of attention.
Spikings clearly was out of his element, like Forbes, but to give him his due he wanted to make good films, not crap.
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
My favourite "arguably Australian" filmmakers...
Number one, Colin Higgins (1941-88) a writer director whose
credits include Harold and Maude, Silver Streak, Foul Play, Nine to Five,
Best Little Whorehouse in Texas - an amazing string of hits, ended early when
he died of an AIDS-related illness...From around 1942 to 1957 he lived mostly
in Sydney, attending Riverview. That's totally enough for us to claim him IMHO
yet he's not widely known as an Aussie.
Number two - Fred Stafford who is best known for playing the
lead in the Hitchcock film Topaz (1969) - a Hitchcock film that even his die
hard fans struggle to excited about (and I don’t think including that duel
sequence would’ve helped ) Stafford was from Czechoslovakia... he emigrated to
Australia as a young man and lived here for a decade becoming a businessman- he
then moved to Asia and someone suggested he be an actor and he became one
(mostly in France). He’s not very good in Topaz which is probably why Australia
never claims him but he is our greatest Czech-French-Aussie star.
Part 3... Flea, the bass player in the Red Hot Chili Peppers
who has also been in a fair few films notably Baby Driver and My Own Private
Idaho. He was born in Melbourne and lived the first seven or so years of his
life here. Like a lot of people I only cared about the Peppers for five minutes
in the early 90s when they toured here and seemed to be everywhere but they’re
still playing so good on them. Someone should do a Sliding Doors type tale
about Flea if he’d stayed in Melbourne . He probably would’ve turned out a bass
player in a band just less rich
Part 4... James Clavell. If your grandmother/parents was a
reader chances are you would've encountered one of his weighty tomes around
their house (seriously, they're like bricks)... King Rat, Shogun, Tai Pan,
Noble House, etc... books which influenced mainstream Western thought about
Hong Kong/China for a generation... he came to writing from a film career that
included the excellent scripts for The Fly (1958) and The
Great Escape (1963 and writing and directing To Sir With Love
(1967) - he also directed I think pretty much the only English language film
about the 30 Year War, The Last Valley (1971). How Aussie is he?
Well he was born here when his dad was on secondment with the Navy and left
when he was about nine months old... That'll do! We'll claim that! Besides
there were Aussie references in his Hong Kong books, notably King Rat, and
Bryan Brown played Dirk Struan in the film of Tai Pan - how more Aussie can you
get!
Part 5... Matthew "wig" McConaughey, who spent a
year here on a rotary exchange program when he was 18 during which time I get
the feeling he wouldn't have found it hard to get laid.
Number 6 - the legendary Tony Hancock who spent the last few
months of his life here making a tv show before committing suicide in Sydney in
1968 Does this give us a right to claim him? Is it as legitimate as being born
here? Or less?
Part 7 - Felix the Cat, the animated star of the 1920s
(before Mickey Mouse)... created by Australian writer Pat O'Sullivan... or was
it by an American? Stuff it, we'll claim Felix.
Part 8 - Alan Marshall (1909-1961) the actor not the author.
Born in Australia while his parents were touring here as actors he soon moved
to the US but was often claimed as Aussie at the time by local media. He was a
good looking guy who looked like he should be a star but was kind of forgettable
on screen - so he was discovered a few times - film buffs may know him from The Garden of Allah (1936), The White Cliffs of Dover (1944) or House on Haunted hill (1959) . Two items of interest (1) he had a nervous breakdown in
the late 40s and quit acting for a bit (2) he died of a heart attack he
suffered on stage - he was doing Sextette with Mae West, had a heart attack
during the show, finished his performance , went home and died in his sleep.
What a pro!
Part 9 May Robson (1858-1942). Born in Moama (I had to
google it - near Echuca) she moved to the UK when she was 12. Had a long career
as a character actor, eventually specialising in little old ladies. Then got
the role of a life time in Capra's Lady for a Day (1933) which
earned her an Oscar nomination at the ripe old age of 75 (she was the first
Australian nominated for an Oscar and the oldest Oscar nominee at the time) and
suddenly she was a star. She was top billed in a series of movies - One
Man's Journey, Lady by Choice - before drifting back to
support roles but basically was never out of work until her death. It's never
too late!
Random thoughts on Bryan Forbes vs Nat Cohen at EMI Films
Current obsession - Bryan Forbes' stint of production as head of EMI Films. First read about it in Alexander Walker's book Hollywood England then it's sequel National Heroes and in Forbes' own book.
In brief, EMI took over ABPC - who were a cinema chain that dabbled in production. Forbes was brought in to run the film unit. His reputation was high as a writer-director - he'd made some impressive films such as Whistle Down the Wind. He was going to bring Class to British films.
But EMI hedged their bets - they also had a film unit under Nat Cohen. Cohen was an enormously experienced executive who ran an organisation called Anglo-Amalgamated - they did a bunch of films with AIP as well as helping finance early John Schlesinger films.
The two man had duelling units. I'll compare their output from 1970-71 - I hope I've got my facts correct. Cohen outlasted Forbes as an executive for a considerable time.
Bryan Forbes Films
In brief, EMI took over ABPC - who were a cinema chain that dabbled in production. Forbes was brought in to run the film unit. His reputation was high as a writer-director - he'd made some impressive films such as Whistle Down the Wind. He was going to bring Class to British films.
But EMI hedged their bets - they also had a film unit under Nat Cohen. Cohen was an enormously experienced executive who ran an organisation called Anglo-Amalgamated - they did a bunch of films with AIP as well as helping finance early John Schlesinger films.
The two man had duelling units. I'll compare their output from 1970-71 - I hope I've got my facts correct. Cohen outlasted Forbes as an executive for a considerable time.
Bryan Forbes Films
* Eyewitness (Jun 1970) - a remake of The Window. Forbes said he wanted to give young directors a go and here he backed John Hough so good on him. Haven't seen this film - it doesn't seem widely known. Had a semi-name in Mark Lester. It feels like it was an unpretentious programmer that maybe thrived better in the 1950s and 1960s but no disgrace.
* And Soon the Darkness (Jul 1970) - thriller about girls in the French countryside. From Robert Fuest. Unpretentious programmer - a good choice I think.
* Hoffman (Jul 1970) - I can see why Forbes greenlit it. Peter Sellers in a drama. It could've been good. It wasn't. Sellers would bag the production. I don't blame Forbes for making the film though... a risk worth taking. Probably needed a really good director and I'm not sure Alvin Rakoff was the front rank.
* The Man Who Haunted Himself (Jul 1970) - thriller, Roger Moore's favourite performance. A flop. Good to have made though - a real cult film now.
* The Breaking of Bumbo (Sep 1970) - I can see the rationale: an attempt at a Virgin Soldiers style romp. Directed by the author of the novel. No stars. Very risky. But an arguable risk.
* The Railway Children (Dec 1970) - a risk that paid off big time. It helped that the source novel was very well known. Forbes' punt on Lionel Jeffries reaped strong dividends. Forbes' first hit.
* A Fine and Private Place (1970) - a disaster. The director struggled and was replaced. A risk that did not take off.
* The Raging Moon (Jan 1971) - Forbes was a talented writer-director but running a studio is a full time job and I think it was silly of him to over-stretch himself by making this film. It also had a risky subject matter too - paraplegics in love.
* The Tales of Beatrix Potter (Jun 1971) - a risk that paid off, but like Railway Children it had a better known source material.
* Mr. Forbush and the Penguins (Dec 1971) - this was a commercial sounding film, but it had a tricky production, a star who has been respected more than popular (John Hurt) and was not a success. I think it's the sort of film the British industry are good at and I can't blame Forbes for trying.
* Dulcima (Dec 1971) - a middle aged man has sex with a manic pixie dream girl. Urgh. No one saw it.
Forbes also said it was he who greenlit The Go-Between (1971) from Joseph Losey - Cohen has taken credit for it. Robert Littman was in charge of MGM England. This an accomplished film with stars which did extremely well critically though not really commercially. But a film to be proud of.
So what about Forbes' legacy? Every film was defendable. All but one were based on novels. He gave new talent a go. That talent didn't always rise to the occasion - maybe he wasn't the best spotter of talent. That can't be helped.
I think it was overly ambitious program - he tried to do too much too soon. Most of the projects had to really really work to come off. Everything had to click. There were three thrillers - but even thrillers are harder to do than say horror or action. I feel he could've done with one or two action-y films and/or horror. Or something based on better known source material.
I think all the projects he did were worth a punt, even Dulcima, they just needed to be spread out with more conservative choices. Or at the least the films could've cost less money.
Nat Cohen's Regime
On the Buses (Jul 1971) - its weird to think how popular big screen adaptations of British TV shows were in the late 60s and 70s but they were. In particular this. A massive hit. A safe choice, cheap - paid off big time.
Blood from the Mummy's Tomb (Oct 1971) - one of several Hammer co productions. A mummy film with a famously troubled production. Worth doing you just wish it was better.
Get Carter (1971) - an MGM/EMI co pro. I'm not sure if it was Cohen who greenlit this to be fair, I think it was more Robert Littman, but it was a solid success at the time, and is beloved.
The Boy Friend (1971) - another MGM/EMI co pro. Ken Russell did it. The film has a varying reputation but worth a go.
All the Way Up (1970) - a vehicle for Warren Mitchell, based on a play. The sort of film that might've worked in the early 1960s.
Spring and Port Wine (Feb 1970) - another adaptation of a play. Didn't do that well.
Entertaining Mr Sloane (Apr 1970) - a play adaptation done by new talent. This could've been a Forbes regime show. Cohen's regime was famous for it's crassly commercial films but he greenlit stuff like this too.
Percy (Feb 1971) - high concept sex comedy from the team of Thomas-Box and a big hit.
Up Pompeii (Mar 1971) - adaptation of a TV show and very popular
Villain (May 1971) - gangster flick which benefited from a star turn from Richard Burton. This is the sort of movie Forbes could and should have made more of... but he didn't like violence.
Family Life (Dec 1971) (AE) - arthouse stuff from Ken Loach.
So what about Cohen's slate? Far more varied than people gave him credit for... there's a sex comedy and a several adaptations of TV shows (Cohen would, not surprisingly, make a bunch more of these), but also a gangster film, a horror film, some play adaptations, a Ken Loach.
Forbes had great intentions and did some very good things - it's a shame he didn't stick around. Maybe had he been given a smaller slate eg five films a year or something. Or maybe he wasn't cut out for it in the long run. Cohen was very skilled and should be better known.
-->
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)