Columbia liked A Swingin Summer so much they financed this follow up with the same producer and stars, James Stacy and William Wellman Jnr. The "plot" has Wellman and Stacy running a ski lodge - this was the time when producers were trying to vary beach party movies by setting them in the snow.
There's a lot going on - two rich kids cause nasty trouble (this was a good subplot they were good smary villains), a rich girl chases after Wellman who is adored by stunning Beverly Adams who decides to go for Adams by pretending to be French but then that subplot is thrown away.
There's some energetic musical numbers - including a quite decently choreographed one with everyone in pajamas (there weren't many properly choreographed dance numbers in beach party movies... the effort is appreciated!)
There's also a comic Chinese cook (this was the era of Bonanza), a fair degree of political incorrectness (smug men telling women where they went wrong), not a lot of bikini action, some quite good skiing footage - it's a good looking movie.
It ends with a wedding, which is totally weird. But I liked this.
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Movie review - "Wild Wild Winter" (1966) **1/2
Universal were slow out of the blocks to make a beach party movie - they were sufficiently impressed by Beach Ball to offer the same makers the chance to do another one, only it was a "ski movie", a sub genre of the beach films that also included Ski Party and Winter a Go Go.
This has a lot in common with Beach Ball - many of the same cast (including Chris Noel and Dick Miller), a similar plot driver (trying to raise money), plot structure (a smarmy guy tries to seduce a uptight girl via deception, a deception that is quickly exposed). It borrows from the Taming of the Shrew template which always basically works - I wouldn't have minded a bit more plot.
The lothario here is Gary Clarke, a tv star I wasn't familiar with though he's totally fine - it's a shame they couldn't have gotten Edd Byrnes again, surely he wasn't that busy. The scene were me meet him at the beach up the top is a jolt - I found this in Ski Party too, I don't feel snow movies work going to the beach.
The acting is pretty solid (Noel is always fun and the cast is full of vaguely familiar people such as Steve Franken) and it's bright and colourful. The music acts aren't of the same strength as Beach Ball but I didn't mind it - the Beau Brummells, the Astronauts. There's a person in a gorilla suit running around in the climax - very AIP. It doesn't quite have the magic of Frankie and Annette but it's fun.
This has a lot in common with Beach Ball - many of the same cast (including Chris Noel and Dick Miller), a similar plot driver (trying to raise money), plot structure (a smarmy guy tries to seduce a uptight girl via deception, a deception that is quickly exposed). It borrows from the Taming of the Shrew template which always basically works - I wouldn't have minded a bit more plot.
The lothario here is Gary Clarke, a tv star I wasn't familiar with though he's totally fine - it's a shame they couldn't have gotten Edd Byrnes again, surely he wasn't that busy. The scene were me meet him at the beach up the top is a jolt - I found this in Ski Party too, I don't feel snow movies work going to the beach.
The acting is pretty solid (Noel is always fun and the cast is full of vaguely familiar people such as Steve Franken) and it's bright and colourful. The music acts aren't of the same strength as Beach Ball but I didn't mind it - the Beau Brummells, the Astronauts. There's a person in a gorilla suit running around in the climax - very AIP. It doesn't quite have the magic of Frankie and Annette but it's fun.
Saturday, March 30, 2019
Movie review - "South of Tahiti" (1941) ***
Maria Montez's first leading role is very much in the Dorothy Lamour isn't-she-beautiful-and-hot-for-white-visitors-native-island-girl mode - a type which, interestingly, she didn't play that much once she became a star (she was more likely to be an oriental princess).
Universal made a lot of buddy comedies at the time, many starring Andy Devine - this one has Devine, Broderick Crawford and Brian Donlevy as American sailors who wind up on a south sea island, where Montex is a princess.
It ticks all the boxes of south sea cliches: a dingy bar full of sailors and a hooker, a brawl, lying on the deck of a yacht, washing up on a beach and waking up to find the chief's daughter staring at you, the native turns out to be actually white and adopted therefore allowing a happy ending, random tigers running through the island, sacrifice, hidden temples with pots and fire, shark killing a local, funeral, unscrupulous pearl dealers, breaking tribal law, an ambitious unscrupulous tribal Iago figure and kindly chief.
It's in black and white but is fast paced and quite fun. The cast is strong even if Donlevy isn't handsome enough to play Montez's love. It's unsatisfactory Henry Wilcoxon isn't killed and turns good - no real close ups for him.
Universal made a lot of buddy comedies at the time, many starring Andy Devine - this one has Devine, Broderick Crawford and Brian Donlevy as American sailors who wind up on a south sea island, where Montex is a princess.
It ticks all the boxes of south sea cliches: a dingy bar full of sailors and a hooker, a brawl, lying on the deck of a yacht, washing up on a beach and waking up to find the chief's daughter staring at you, the native turns out to be actually white and adopted therefore allowing a happy ending, random tigers running through the island, sacrifice, hidden temples with pots and fire, shark killing a local, funeral, unscrupulous pearl dealers, breaking tribal law, an ambitious unscrupulous tribal Iago figure and kindly chief.
It's in black and white but is fast paced and quite fun. The cast is strong even if Donlevy isn't handsome enough to play Montez's love. It's unsatisfactory Henry Wilcoxon isn't killed and turns good - no real close ups for him.
Movie review - "The Sharkfighters" (1956) **
In the mid 1950s a film about the development of shark repellent no doubt sounded exciting, but now we know it isn't particularly useful there's something hollow about it. The treatment here doesn't conquer those problems - it's about the US army working on shark repellent. Victor Mature doesn't like sharks. A Cuban kid dies. Then the repellent works. The end.
The best thing about it is location filming in Cuba. I also liked the final shark attack where two sharks swim around Mature's body double. And the cast isn't bad - there's Mature, and also a young James Olson (not bald but looking one step away), and the striking Karen Steele as Mature's wife.
But it's a dud story. There's no ticking clock, no villain, no enemy spy. The shark attacks are staged. The human relationships are dull. Why have Mature and Steele married? Why not have them fall in love? Why not give Steele something more to do than run around in a bikini and handle exposition?
Maybe there's simply no good film to be made out of shark repellent . But it could have been better than this.
The best thing about it is location filming in Cuba. I also liked the final shark attack where two sharks swim around Mature's body double. And the cast isn't bad - there's Mature, and also a young James Olson (not bald but looking one step away), and the striking Karen Steele as Mature's wife.
But it's a dud story. There's no ticking clock, no villain, no enemy spy. The shark attacks are staged. The human relationships are dull. Why have Mature and Steele married? Why not have them fall in love? Why not give Steele something more to do than run around in a bikini and handle exposition?
Maybe there's simply no good film to be made out of shark repellent . But it could have been better than this.
Movie review - "Beach Ball" (1965) ***
Edd Byrnes must wonder what he could have done differently when Kookie in 77 Sunset Strip was the rage of teenagers throughout the nation. He popped up in Yellowstone Kelly but fought with Warners and by the time he left the show he was less of a hot property.
This gave him a leading role though it was a beach movie. However it is bright and cheerful with some excellent songs - The Righteous Brothers, the Supremes, the Hondells.
The same team made The Girls on the Beach and this is similar in many ways - the plot's about raising money, it involves four girls and four guys, there's a cop played by Dick Miller, a finale involving people in drag and the crowd don't seem to notice - but it's better because the dramatic lines are cleaner. The girls are nerd, the guys are in a band, the girls want the guys to go back to college, the guys want money for their instruments.
Byrnes and Chris Noel are a strong lead duo and Aaron Kincaid good in support. Stephanie Rothman directed second unit.
This gave him a leading role though it was a beach movie. However it is bright and cheerful with some excellent songs - The Righteous Brothers, the Supremes, the Hondells.
The same team made The Girls on the Beach and this is similar in many ways - the plot's about raising money, it involves four girls and four guys, there's a cop played by Dick Miller, a finale involving people in drag and the crowd don't seem to notice - but it's better because the dramatic lines are cleaner. The girls are nerd, the guys are in a band, the girls want the guys to go back to college, the guys want money for their instruments.
Byrnes and Chris Noel are a strong lead duo and Aaron Kincaid good in support. Stephanie Rothman directed second unit.
Movie review - "The Girls on the Beach" (1965) **1/2
The beach party movie with the Beach Boys in it, and they are the best thing about the movie, along with Lesley Gore. Both sing a couple of catchy tunes - I really like title track from the Beach Boys and also "Little Honda".
It's odd though that the plot concerns the Beatles - to wit, a couple of guys pretend to know them, and one impersonates Ringo on the phone. Actually the set up has a group of girls raising money for their sorority house - the boys try to con them by pretending to be the Beatles.
The same writer also did Beach Ball which was about people trying to raise money and had three girls and three boys. (Both films were financed by Roger Corman on the sly and distributed by Paamount and had Dick Miller in a small role and Aaron Kincaid in a bigger one). But that was better because the lines were clearer - the girls were nerds, the guys were cool and in the band - it also had star power via Edd Byrnes.
Here it is really hard to tell the girls apart and the guys. I just remember Aaron Kincaid is one and a guy losing his hair is another.
And while some of the Beatles stuff was cute - impersonating Ringo and also the girls dressing up at the end being the Beatles (the audience buy it for a big which stretches credibility) - it's annoying because we know we're never going to meet the Beatles... and the Beach Boys are right there! I mean, why not make it about the Beach Boys???
Anyway it's bright, colourful and has good tunes and it always trying to entertain. Lana Wood is one of the girls.
It's odd though that the plot concerns the Beatles - to wit, a couple of guys pretend to know them, and one impersonates Ringo on the phone. Actually the set up has a group of girls raising money for their sorority house - the boys try to con them by pretending to be the Beatles.
The same writer also did Beach Ball which was about people trying to raise money and had three girls and three boys. (Both films were financed by Roger Corman on the sly and distributed by Paamount and had Dick Miller in a small role and Aaron Kincaid in a bigger one). But that was better because the lines were clearer - the girls were nerds, the guys were cool and in the band - it also had star power via Edd Byrnes.
Here it is really hard to tell the girls apart and the guys. I just remember Aaron Kincaid is one and a guy losing his hair is another.
And while some of the Beatles stuff was cute - impersonating Ringo and also the girls dressing up at the end being the Beatles (the audience buy it for a big which stretches credibility) - it's annoying because we know we're never going to meet the Beatles... and the Beach Boys are right there! I mean, why not make it about the Beach Boys???
Anyway it's bright, colourful and has good tunes and it always trying to entertain. Lana Wood is one of the girls.
Movie review - "When Strangers Marry" (1944) ***1/2 (warning: spoilers)
Cult noir which promised a bigger career as director for William Castle than eventuated - he could clearly do a great job on a two week shoot... but that didn't necessarily mean he'd do a better one on a three week shoot.
It's tight and crisp - it clocks in at a little over an hour and there's still time for a music number (Dean Jagger and Kim Hunter pass via a Harlem club and they do a dance) but you don't feel cheated. The story (mostly from Philip Yordan) is neat and has a solid fnal twist. Castle's handling is fresh, the atmosphere is evocative. There are some clunky moments, and a surprisingly large amount of humour involving a dog but you forgive it.
The chief benefit is the cast - young Kim Hunter is excellent as the bewildered heroine, Dean Jagger is ideal as her mysterious husband (who looks as though he could be a killer), and young Robert Mitchum has charisma to burn as the best friend (his acting is a little awkward at the end, but it's great to see him).
I don't want to over hype this film - it's probably the sort of movie better discovered than hyped - but it was entertaining.
It's tight and crisp - it clocks in at a little over an hour and there's still time for a music number (Dean Jagger and Kim Hunter pass via a Harlem club and they do a dance) but you don't feel cheated. The story (mostly from Philip Yordan) is neat and has a solid fnal twist. Castle's handling is fresh, the atmosphere is evocative. There are some clunky moments, and a surprisingly large amount of humour involving a dog but you forgive it.
The chief benefit is the cast - young Kim Hunter is excellent as the bewildered heroine, Dean Jagger is ideal as her mysterious husband (who looks as though he could be a killer), and young Robert Mitchum has charisma to burn as the best friend (his acting is a little awkward at the end, but it's great to see him).
I don't want to over hype this film - it's probably the sort of movie better discovered than hyped - but it was entertaining.
Book review - " Charles McGraw: Biography of a Film Noir Tough Guy" by Alan K. Rode
A biography of Charles McGraw? Well, why not, I guess...
McGraw is has a little bit of a cult, mostly due to The Narrow Margin. Thick set leading men were in vogue in the late 40 and early 50s - Howard Duff and Edward O'Brien were some others. If you're a film buff you would recognise McGraw - either from The Narrow Margin or his support bits in films like The Killers, His Kind of Woman, Sparactus or In Cold Blood.
I think in his heart of hearts he was a support actor - great presence and growly voice, but lacked the individuality of, say, Wallace Beery or Humphrey Bogart. He made some interesting films, though his life wasn't particularly interesting. He sort of bummed around in the Depression, got the acting bug, struggled for a bit, got some roles, broke through with a bit in Golden Boy. He was part of the Group Theatre crowd for a bit - he knew Elia Kazan, though never worked with Kazan once the latter became a director.
He eventually went to Hollywood. His breakthrough was one of The Killers and he had a decent career, with a few years as an actual leading man. He was so castable (as gangsters, cops, detectives) that he steadily worked for most of his life, but he had a fondness for the bottle which wrecked his marriage (to a Eurasian lady) and his reputation.
Actually McGraw comes across as a bit of a f*ckwit at times, spending all his spare time at the local bar, ignoring his wife and daughter. He dies interestingly - accidentally shoving his hand through glass in a shower and bleeding to death (honestly, I don't mean to be rude but he probably just sped up an inevitable early end, he drank that much); his daughter had an unhappy life - her son was murdered in an accident.
Rode occasionally seems bored by McGraw's actual life and goes off on detours to discuss the making of films. This isn't as good as his book on Curtiz - the scholarship looking into the making of the films isn't that great. It's fine - the sheer novelty of a book on McGraw gets it over the line but I was a bit underwhelmed.
McGraw is has a little bit of a cult, mostly due to The Narrow Margin. Thick set leading men were in vogue in the late 40 and early 50s - Howard Duff and Edward O'Brien were some others. If you're a film buff you would recognise McGraw - either from The Narrow Margin or his support bits in films like The Killers, His Kind of Woman, Sparactus or In Cold Blood.
I think in his heart of hearts he was a support actor - great presence and growly voice, but lacked the individuality of, say, Wallace Beery or Humphrey Bogart. He made some interesting films, though his life wasn't particularly interesting. He sort of bummed around in the Depression, got the acting bug, struggled for a bit, got some roles, broke through with a bit in Golden Boy. He was part of the Group Theatre crowd for a bit - he knew Elia Kazan, though never worked with Kazan once the latter became a director.
He eventually went to Hollywood. His breakthrough was one of The Killers and he had a decent career, with a few years as an actual leading man. He was so castable (as gangsters, cops, detectives) that he steadily worked for most of his life, but he had a fondness for the bottle which wrecked his marriage (to a Eurasian lady) and his reputation.
Actually McGraw comes across as a bit of a f*ckwit at times, spending all his spare time at the local bar, ignoring his wife and daughter. He dies interestingly - accidentally shoving his hand through glass in a shower and bleeding to death (honestly, I don't mean to be rude but he probably just sped up an inevitable early end, he drank that much); his daughter had an unhappy life - her son was murdered in an accident.
Rode occasionally seems bored by McGraw's actual life and goes off on detours to discuss the making of films. This isn't as good as his book on Curtiz - the scholarship looking into the making of the films isn't that great. It's fine - the sheer novelty of a book on McGraw gets it over the line but I was a bit underwhelmed.
Thursday, March 28, 2019
Movie review - "Armored Car Robbery" (1950) ***
One of a series of unpretentious film noirs director Richard Fleischer made at RKO with writer Earl Fenyon - others included Trapped and The Narrow Margin, as well as uncredited work on His King of Woman. It's enjoyable low key stuff where everyone talks tough. Charles Macgraw is the detective - he can act and has a hulking frame and I can see why he has fans but he wasn't that charimatic.
But the support cast is strong notably William Talman as the head robber, Douglas Fowley as his slimy partner and Adele Jurgens as the latter's unfaithful wife.
It only clocks in at 67 minutes. The photography is enjoyable as is the tough dialogue.
But the support cast is strong notably William Talman as the head robber, Douglas Fowley as his slimy partner and Adele Jurgens as the latter's unfaithful wife.
It only clocks in at 67 minutes. The photography is enjoyable as is the tough dialogue.
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Movie review - "The Dirt" (2019) **
The book on Motley Crue is a deserved classic - you feel exhausted reading it, but it's amazing. The filmmakers tried to do it justice but they're not up to it. It needed to be done with the pizzaz of Martin Scorsese - for when the filmmakers try to do that this comes alive: characters talking to camera, a voice over saying "we couldn't fit this character in the film"... that's when it's great, and totally beats the biopic cliches.
It needed to be that all the way through - use, I don't know, animation sequences, musical sequences, just go to down. There's a little of it. But they didn't have the courage, time or money to go all the way and there's too much standard stuf.
The actors aren't up to it either. They've got the right look but it's all surface. There's nothing deep not even with one of the characters losing his four year old daughter to cancer.
It doesn't have the warmth of something like Entourage - it doesn't have the debauchery or satirical edge, either. (You know that's who they should have gotten to make this - Rob Weiss or someone.)
It needed to be that all the way through - use, I don't know, animation sequences, musical sequences, just go to down. There's a little of it. But they didn't have the courage, time or money to go all the way and there's too much standard stuf.
The actors aren't up to it either. They've got the right look but it's all surface. There's nothing deep not even with one of the characters losing his four year old daughter to cancer.
It doesn't have the warmth of something like Entourage - it doesn't have the debauchery or satirical edge, either. (You know that's who they should have gotten to make this - Rob Weiss or someone.)
Movie review - "The Bridge at Remagen" (1969) ***
Not many Hollywood war films focus on the last months of the war - because the stakes of the battles aren't as high I guess. This is about a battle to secure the last bridgehead into Germany - everyone expects it to be blown up, even the soldiers, which gives the story freshness. When the explosives don't work then the troops go in.
George Segal is really good as an American officer - I don't know why I'm surprised, maybe it's because I haven't seen him play this kind of character before, but he felt very authentic. Ben Gazzara is fine as a sergeant - he has the best bit in the film, being forced to kill a boy soldier shooting at him. Like many war movies, Segal and Gazzara are in love with each other but they throw in a scene where a girl takes her clothes off to Segal to establish that everyone is straight (mind you, Segal doesn't go through with it).
It's tough and fast and looks great. It was shot in Czechoslovakia then had to relocate to Germany when the Soviets marched in but you can't tell.
John Guillermin does a typically strong job of directing. Structure wise it is hurt that the last 15 minutes or so are at night - I had trouble telling what was going on a lot of the time. The photography is great. I loved the opening scene with tanks hurtling down the road (you rarely see them going fast in a film - because it's not historically true admittedly but it looks great).
Robert Vaughan is solid as a good German. His execution is memorable - walking to the spot, seeing the bullet marks on a piece of wood. Bradford Dillman and EG Marshall are fine as officers.
George Segal is really good as an American officer - I don't know why I'm surprised, maybe it's because I haven't seen him play this kind of character before, but he felt very authentic. Ben Gazzara is fine as a sergeant - he has the best bit in the film, being forced to kill a boy soldier shooting at him. Like many war movies, Segal and Gazzara are in love with each other but they throw in a scene where a girl takes her clothes off to Segal to establish that everyone is straight (mind you, Segal doesn't go through with it).
It's tough and fast and looks great. It was shot in Czechoslovakia then had to relocate to Germany when the Soviets marched in but you can't tell.
John Guillermin does a typically strong job of directing. Structure wise it is hurt that the last 15 minutes or so are at night - I had trouble telling what was going on a lot of the time. The photography is great. I loved the opening scene with tanks hurtling down the road (you rarely see them going fast in a film - because it's not historically true admittedly but it looks great).
Robert Vaughan is solid as a good German. His execution is memorable - walking to the spot, seeing the bullet marks on a piece of wood. Bradford Dillman and EG Marshall are fine as officers.
Saturday, March 23, 2019
End credit songs
Random observation from watching various movies - there seems to be a
tendency in recent films which had the rights to a
high-level-recognition-really-awesome-song to hold off using that song
until the final credits... recent examples I can think of include the
remakes of "Ghostbusters" and "The Magnificent Seven", which hold off
their classic title tracks until the end credits, as well as the Motley
Crue film "The Dirt" which doesn't use "Kick Start My Heart" until the
end credits... I guess the theory is
"we'll give the audience a real treat at the end to send them out
humming and that'll help spread good word of mouth"... but surely it's
better to use that song at the top of a film to start the whole thing
off with a high? Like "Another Day in the Sun" starts "La La Land" off
on such a high... so does the "Soul Bossa Nova" song in the first
"Austin Powers"...
Book review - "Some Kind of Hero: The Remarkable HIstory of the James Bond Films" by Matthew Field and Ajay Chowhudry
Exhaustive, near definitive account of the making of the famous series, written with passion and enthusiasm but also scholarship. I admit I knew a lot of the first half, but I'm a die hard fan - I know less about the Dalton period onwards, and this illuminated that.
The most striking comment for me was something by Michael Wilson, who said that other producers may have done a better job but plenty of others also would have done a much worse job - and that for me is part of the secret why the series has lasted so long. It's been run by a family business who never made too many mistakes - they always pulled things back on track.
The series has stumbled several times - George Lazenby (who I love but also recognise could have hurt the series), the fights between Broccoli and Saltzman, the constant executive turn over, the bankruptcy of Saltzman, creative misfires, the changing world). But they always manage to pull it back... they find a Roger Moore, or a Pierce Brosnan in the 90s, or after Man with the Golden Gun pull out The Spy Who Loved Me, after Die Another Day do Casino Royale. When Pierce demands $25 million they change bonds. They don't go with James Brolin or James Gavin. They remain true to Bond.
Screenwriters come and go. They and hired then replaced then brought back again. They don't pick the latest hot director but someone who will fit. They keep costs down. They try to keep up to date but don't slavishly follow trends. They promoted from within.
Some films prove to have been particularly tricky - Die Another Day, Never Say Never Again. Dalton was fired at the behest of the US studio, not of his own accord. Brosnan asked for too much money and was fired.
Exhausting, exhaustive, but very good.
The most striking comment for me was something by Michael Wilson, who said that other producers may have done a better job but plenty of others also would have done a much worse job - and that for me is part of the secret why the series has lasted so long. It's been run by a family business who never made too many mistakes - they always pulled things back on track.
The series has stumbled several times - George Lazenby (who I love but also recognise could have hurt the series), the fights between Broccoli and Saltzman, the constant executive turn over, the bankruptcy of Saltzman, creative misfires, the changing world). But they always manage to pull it back... they find a Roger Moore, or a Pierce Brosnan in the 90s, or after Man with the Golden Gun pull out The Spy Who Loved Me, after Die Another Day do Casino Royale. When Pierce demands $25 million they change bonds. They don't go with James Brolin or James Gavin. They remain true to Bond.
Screenwriters come and go. They and hired then replaced then brought back again. They don't pick the latest hot director but someone who will fit. They keep costs down. They try to keep up to date but don't slavishly follow trends. They promoted from within.
Some films prove to have been particularly tricky - Die Another Day, Never Say Never Again. Dalton was fired at the behest of the US studio, not of his own accord. Brosnan asked for too much money and was fired.
Exhausting, exhaustive, but very good.
Friday, March 22, 2019
Movie review - "Pursuit" (1972) **1/2
Michael Crichton was never much of a director, for all his talent and intelligence - he wasn't up to his writing. This was his directorial debut - an ABC Movie of the Week based on his terrific John Lange novel called Binary. Reading that you can see the film - it's tight, sparse, lots of dialogue. There is some internalised stuff - the battle of wits between the hero and villain- but that should be easy to dramatise.
Crichton actually didn't write the script of this, some guy called Robert Dozier did. The script's okay - it's more the handling.
There's lots of men hanging around in dark suits - brown and grey. But Crichton can't really milk the key moments. Occasionally he does such as when Ben Gazzara realises that he's part of the plan.
It is a very good cast - Ben Gazzara as the hero, EG Marshall as the baddy, Martin Sheen as an associate of Marshall. Marshall is fine but Gazarra is disappointing with his thick set glasses and walking around with hands in his pockets. Joseph Wiseman is really good though as a professor
The last half is better than the first and it's fine compared to other films of this type just not as good as the book.
Crichton actually didn't write the script of this, some guy called Robert Dozier did. The script's okay - it's more the handling.
There's lots of men hanging around in dark suits - brown and grey. But Crichton can't really milk the key moments. Occasionally he does such as when Ben Gazzara realises that he's part of the plan.
It is a very good cast - Ben Gazzara as the hero, EG Marshall as the baddy, Martin Sheen as an associate of Marshall. Marshall is fine but Gazarra is disappointing with his thick set glasses and walking around with hands in his pockets. Joseph Wiseman is really good though as a professor
The last half is better than the first and it's fine compared to other films of this type just not as good as the book.
Book review - "A Case of Need" (1969) by Jeffrey Hudson (Michael Crichton)
An early medical thriller by Michael Crichton who at one stage intended to use the name "Jeffrey Hudson" to write a bunch of books in that genre, but ended up only doing the one (he would later direct Coma, and write Five Patients and the pilot for ER under his own name).
It's an excellent page turner which deals with a subject that is still raw - abortion. Brennan, a pathologist in Boston, has an abortionist friend who is accused of murder so Brennan tries to solve it. There are some interesting philosophical discussions and character descriptions - an entertaining collection of medical people.
You wish the hero had a stronger motivation than "he was my friend". It felt as though he should have been Asian too (like the accused doctor), or have some family/romantic link, or be a woman (this was turned into a film at MGM directed by Blake Edwards with James Coburn... I kept thinking it should have been a Raquel Welch vehicle say).
The female characters are weak - the slutty dead girl, the slutty step mother, the non descript wives. But the research is wonderful as are the twists. It occasionally feels a bit 1969 - hero is constantly smoking and drinking alcohol (I think cigs killed Crichton) - but generally it's aged well.
It's an excellent page turner which deals with a subject that is still raw - abortion. Brennan, a pathologist in Boston, has an abortionist friend who is accused of murder so Brennan tries to solve it. There are some interesting philosophical discussions and character descriptions - an entertaining collection of medical people.
You wish the hero had a stronger motivation than "he was my friend". It felt as though he should have been Asian too (like the accused doctor), or have some family/romantic link, or be a woman (this was turned into a film at MGM directed by Blake Edwards with James Coburn... I kept thinking it should have been a Raquel Welch vehicle say).
The female characters are weak - the slutty dead girl, the slutty step mother, the non descript wives. But the research is wonderful as are the twists. It occasionally feels a bit 1969 - hero is constantly smoking and drinking alcohol (I think cigs killed Crichton) - but generally it's aged well.
Thursday, March 21, 2019
Movie review - "Red Skies of Montana" (1952) ***
Didn't know much about this film other than it was meant to star Victor Mature but they pulled the plug during filming then re-did it with Richard Widmark. The story suits Fox's template of the time - there's a solid star part for a middle aged guy, a thankless role for a woman (who could be cut out of the whole film), a crusty support, and a good role for a male ingenue.
Richard Boone plays crusty, and Jeff Hunter is the ingenue - a fire fighter who comes to believe Widmark is responsible for this father's death. What helps this piece is that Widmark himself is unsure of this - he was knocked out during a fire. It adds suspense (even if we're sure Widmark didn't do it we don't know what happened), and gives Widmark a decent role to play.
Colour photography helps, as does location shooting and the fact it's an unsual world - that of parachuting fire fighters (the smoke jumpers who were the characters in that film arc on Entourage).
It's a solid script and director Joseph Newman does a polished job. They really should have done something for the female lead - made her the daughter of the dead guy or something.
Charles Bronson has a very small role.
Richard Boone plays crusty, and Jeff Hunter is the ingenue - a fire fighter who comes to believe Widmark is responsible for this father's death. What helps this piece is that Widmark himself is unsure of this - he was knocked out during a fire. It adds suspense (even if we're sure Widmark didn't do it we don't know what happened), and gives Widmark a decent role to play.
Colour photography helps, as does location shooting and the fact it's an unsual world - that of parachuting fire fighters (the smoke jumpers who were the characters in that film arc on Entourage).
It's a solid script and director Joseph Newman does a polished job. They really should have done something for the female lead - made her the daughter of the dead guy or something.
Charles Bronson has a very small role.
Wednesday, March 20, 2019
Movie review - "Molly's Game" (2018) ****
Aaron Sorkin's directorial debut has plenty of bells and whistles - great dialogue, solid structure. It flew along for me - for the most part, I admit... I think the basic story isn't that interesting. Molly ran a poker game and... met some celebrities and... had some morals and... got busted and... wouldn't give up the names of her clients. Only she did give up some. Then she.... went about her life.
It's entertaining though and fascinating to see how Sorkin relates to Molly, who is a smurfette but is also beautiful, smart, sexy, captivating, briefly drug addicted but gets over it, idealistic... it's like he's making a film for his perfect woman and Jessica Chastain is shot like a goddess. She looks gorgeous.
Mind you she's got a lot of voice over and I don't think her voice is that great - she's no, say, Emma Stone.
Sorkin clearly invests in the father daughter stuff (the scenes with Kevin Costner are among the strongest) and the male-female mentor stuff (Idris Elba) and also men having crushes on beautiful women.
I don't really feel this was a film that had to be made but it's clearly a story with a female protagonist that Sorkin felt he could do, and he did do it, and the world is richer for its presence.
It's entertaining though and fascinating to see how Sorkin relates to Molly, who is a smurfette but is also beautiful, smart, sexy, captivating, briefly drug addicted but gets over it, idealistic... it's like he's making a film for his perfect woman and Jessica Chastain is shot like a goddess. She looks gorgeous.
Mind you she's got a lot of voice over and I don't think her voice is that great - she's no, say, Emma Stone.
Sorkin clearly invests in the father daughter stuff (the scenes with Kevin Costner are among the strongest) and the male-female mentor stuff (Idris Elba) and also men having crushes on beautiful women.
I don't really feel this was a film that had to be made but it's clearly a story with a female protagonist that Sorkin felt he could do, and he did do it, and the world is richer for its presence.
Book revview - "Michael Curtiz" by Alan Rode
I just finished reading a biography of the director Michael Curtiz by Alan
Rode and it struck me again how weird it was that someone who made one
of the greatest gangster films of all time (Angels with Dirty Faces),
one of the greatest melodramas of all time (Mildred Pierce), one of the
greatest musicals of all time (Yankee Doodle Dandy), three of the
greatest swashbucklers of all time (Captain Blood, Sea Hawk, Robin
Hood), one of the greatest Elvis Presley films of all time (King
Creole) and one of the greatest films of all time (Casablanca) never
got the auterist love of Ford, Hawks, Hitchcock, Wilder, Losey, Corman
or even Frank Tashlin... despite even having an identifiable visual
style... Was he too much a company man? Too mainstream? Too rarely a
writer? Didn't deal enough with "common themes" so auteurists could
group his movies together? Went off the boil too much when baby boomer
critics started to get into film?
Maybe it's simply he died too soon - in the early 60s so wasn't around to give lots of interviews to adoring cineastes, like Ford and Hawks could.
Some random things I learned from the book:
* He was married to top screenwriter Bess Meredyth (who worked in Australia in 1919-20 writing films for Snowy Baker) who was responsible for the fact many of Curtiz's script notes were excellent - she supplanted his career to his, which was unfortunately typical of the time, but as she spent 20 odd years sitting in bed eating cream cakes all day in a house with heaps of servants giving the occasional script note I didn't feel too badly for her (I can think of at least a dozen writers off the top of my head who would leap at a job like this)
* He may have gone senile towards the end of his life... making St Francis of Assisi in 1960 he grew so frustrated with the progress of filming he pulled down his pants and did a shit during filming (I wondered what director might be driven to do something like that today and too my surprise I could think of about five... filmmaking can drive people mad)
* He got busted by Confidential magazine in a hotel room paying for two African Americans to have sex while he watched... I started wondering what other directors would have done that and actually came up with a fair few names rather quickly...
* He didn't realise how ill he was but his family did and elected not to tell him.
This is an excellent book - exhaustive but then there was lots to cover. I was familiar with the Errol Flynn stuff and the great Warners classics but not his early life in Hungary (he was friends with Korda, and was successful as a director almost immediately), or his early silent Hollywood films, or even the early 30s stuff. His star rose with Flynn.
I also wasn't that familiar with his adventures in post war Warner Bros, when the studio declined after Hal Wallis left but Jack Warners' cost cutting kept it competitive. Curtiz made far less classics after the war but still did things like discover Doris Day, and turn out huge hits like White Christmas. It's a shame he never reunited with Flynn they could have used each other in the late 40s/50s.
A top ten is v easy to compile
1) Casablanca (1943)
2) Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)
3) The Sea Hawk (1940)
4) Captain Blood (1935)
5) Mildred Pierce (1945)
6) Angels with Dirty Faces (1938)
7) King Creole (1958)
8) Yankee Doodle Dandy (1943)
9) Dodge City (1939)
10) The Breaking Point (1950)
Maybe it's simply he died too soon - in the early 60s so wasn't around to give lots of interviews to adoring cineastes, like Ford and Hawks could.
Some random things I learned from the book:
* He was married to top screenwriter Bess Meredyth (who worked in Australia in 1919-20 writing films for Snowy Baker) who was responsible for the fact many of Curtiz's script notes were excellent - she supplanted his career to his, which was unfortunately typical of the time, but as she spent 20 odd years sitting in bed eating cream cakes all day in a house with heaps of servants giving the occasional script note I didn't feel too badly for her (I can think of at least a dozen writers off the top of my head who would leap at a job like this)
* He may have gone senile towards the end of his life... making St Francis of Assisi in 1960 he grew so frustrated with the progress of filming he pulled down his pants and did a shit during filming (I wondered what director might be driven to do something like that today and too my surprise I could think of about five... filmmaking can drive people mad)
* He got busted by Confidential magazine in a hotel room paying for two African Americans to have sex while he watched... I started wondering what other directors would have done that and actually came up with a fair few names rather quickly...
* He didn't realise how ill he was but his family did and elected not to tell him.
This is an excellent book - exhaustive but then there was lots to cover. I was familiar with the Errol Flynn stuff and the great Warners classics but not his early life in Hungary (he was friends with Korda, and was successful as a director almost immediately), or his early silent Hollywood films, or even the early 30s stuff. His star rose with Flynn.
I also wasn't that familiar with his adventures in post war Warner Bros, when the studio declined after Hal Wallis left but Jack Warners' cost cutting kept it competitive. Curtiz made far less classics after the war but still did things like discover Doris Day, and turn out huge hits like White Christmas. It's a shame he never reunited with Flynn they could have used each other in the late 40s/50s.
A top ten is v easy to compile
1) Casablanca (1943)
2) Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)
3) The Sea Hawk (1940)
4) Captain Blood (1935)
5) Mildred Pierce (1945)
6) Angels with Dirty Faces (1938)
7) King Creole (1958)
8) Yankee Doodle Dandy (1943)
9) Dodge City (1939)
10) The Breaking Point (1950)
Book review - "Binary" by Michael Crichton (as John Lange) (1972)
Crichton's last book as John Lange and I'm surprised he didn't publish under his own name because this is an excellent thriller, with lots of his trademark pace and research.
Crichton isn't famous for his characters but he has a memorable villain here - a rich nutter who wants to unleash nerve gas at the 1972 Republican convention in San Diego. The Sherlock Holmes style lead is a state department figure who is competitive and super smart - the gimmick of the sotr play is that the villain anticipated the hero would be sent after him and has anticipated his moves.
The villain dies two third of the way through - a shock (Crichton is great at action, exposition and suspense but big moments like death he doesn't milk for some reason)... but he keeps the clock ticking over by having the hero try to figure out. He also brings in a scientist to bounce off the hero - they have good by-play.
The research about gas and computers and stuff all felt authentic. It's fast paced (there's literally a ticking clock) and a lot of fun and you can see the movie reading it.
Crichton isn't famous for his characters but he has a memorable villain here - a rich nutter who wants to unleash nerve gas at the 1972 Republican convention in San Diego. The Sherlock Holmes style lead is a state department figure who is competitive and super smart - the gimmick of the sotr play is that the villain anticipated the hero would be sent after him and has anticipated his moves.
The villain dies two third of the way through - a shock (Crichton is great at action, exposition and suspense but big moments like death he doesn't milk for some reason)... but he keeps the clock ticking over by having the hero try to figure out. He also brings in a scientist to bounce off the hero - they have good by-play.
The research about gas and computers and stuff all felt authentic. It's fast paced (there's literally a ticking clock) and a lot of fun and you can see the movie reading it.
Script review - "A Few Good Men" by Aaron Sorkin
I've seen this film a bunch of times - and have read the play - and felt like revisiting it. For the most part it holds up very well - the "world" of Naval lawyers is less fresh than it was at the time but the structure holds. There's plenty of twists and turns and the hero, Kaffee, has a real arc from irresponsible playboy to conscientious lawyer. It's among the most perfect Tom Cruise roles of all time.
True, the one female character, Jo just eggs on the hero - but at least she has a character to play (well meaning, nerdy, clutzy). Sam eggs on Kaffee as well - the wisecracking Jew who is mostly there for extra exposition.
Some end of scene moments aren't great (they weren't great then): "you don't need a badge to have honor", "why do you like them so much", "I'm sexually aroused". The script ends on a kiss between Jo and Kaffee - I think it was good to cut. If you want romance, you can read into it.
But a very strong script. There are some solid parts - the defence lawyer, Ross, is a good role, as are the two defendents, the proud Dawson and the dim Downey - and of course Jessep is a dream, and Kendrick and the mysterious (and sooky) Markinson. It's extremely good stuff.
True, the one female character, Jo just eggs on the hero - but at least she has a character to play (well meaning, nerdy, clutzy). Sam eggs on Kaffee as well - the wisecracking Jew who is mostly there for extra exposition.
Some end of scene moments aren't great (they weren't great then): "you don't need a badge to have honor", "why do you like them so much", "I'm sexually aroused". The script ends on a kiss between Jo and Kaffee - I think it was good to cut. If you want romance, you can read into it.
But a very strong script. There are some solid parts - the defence lawyer, Ross, is a good role, as are the two defendents, the proud Dawson and the dim Downey - and of course Jessep is a dream, and Kendrick and the mysterious (and sooky) Markinson. It's extremely good stuff.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
Movie review - "Beneath the 12 Mile Reef" (1953) ** (warning: spoilers)
The second film shot in CinemaScope was a huge hit at the time but isn't that well remembered. I didn't mind it - there was some beautiful location photography, and an interesting location... the Florida Coast. Director Robert Webb does a competent job.
You can mock Robert Wagner in a black curly wig playing a Greek American, and you probably should, but he's actually a lot more animated and engaging than he was in many of his early movies. He teams well with Terry Moore, the perky ingenue who married Howard Hughes. They're fresh fasced kids.
The support cast has some weight - Gilbert Roland as Wagner's dad, Richard Boone (probably the best in the cast) as Wagner's dad, Peter Graves as the other man interested in Moore.
The film pulls its punches dramatically - Graves really should have been responsible for Roland's death instead of it being an accident, and he should have died at the end, and Wagner should have saved more people. The action scenes underwater are dull, as underwater action scenes tend to be. But I didn't mind this.
You can mock Robert Wagner in a black curly wig playing a Greek American, and you probably should, but he's actually a lot more animated and engaging than he was in many of his early movies. He teams well with Terry Moore, the perky ingenue who married Howard Hughes. They're fresh fasced kids.
The support cast has some weight - Gilbert Roland as Wagner's dad, Richard Boone (probably the best in the cast) as Wagner's dad, Peter Graves as the other man interested in Moore.
The film pulls its punches dramatically - Graves really should have been responsible for Roland's death instead of it being an accident, and he should have died at the end, and Wagner should have saved more people. The action scenes underwater are dull, as underwater action scenes tend to be. But I didn't mind this.
Book review - "Zero Cool" by Michael Crichton (as John Lange) (1969)
One of Crichton's early works - his fifth, apparently - is an enjoyable thriller about a doctor who heads off to Spain for a holiday and to present a paper at a conference and finds himself involved in intrigue: he's asked to do an autopsy, meets a beautiful girl and has people trying to kill him.
This is fun - it gets off to a flying start and is written with pace and energy. It doesn't have the research that marked Crichton's great works - which is a shame because when it deals with stuff he knows (eg performing an autopsy) it's good. The bulk of it is a bit derivative - the macguffin is an emerald like the Maltese Falcon, the head villain is a drawf - and some of it feels stock ("they're dead!" "no, they're not - twist!").
But there's plenty of pace and I loved the device of the falcon trained to kill people who smelled a certain way. This worked well in books.
Crichton added a beginning and end chapter for a reissue of the book - about the doctor remembering the adventure. There wasn't really a point to it - unless they'd referred to the fate of other characters which he doesn't.
This is fun - it gets off to a flying start and is written with pace and energy. It doesn't have the research that marked Crichton's great works - which is a shame because when it deals with stuff he knows (eg performing an autopsy) it's good. The bulk of it is a bit derivative - the macguffin is an emerald like the Maltese Falcon, the head villain is a drawf - and some of it feels stock ("they're dead!" "no, they're not - twist!").
But there's plenty of pace and I loved the device of the falcon trained to kill people who smelled a certain way. This worked well in books.
Crichton added a beginning and end chapter for a reissue of the book - about the doctor remembering the adventure. There wasn't really a point to it - unless they'd referred to the fate of other characters which he doesn't.
Monday, March 18, 2019
Movie review - "With a Song in My Heart" (1952) **1/2
A film that meant something at the time, when Jane Frohman was still well known, and Susan Hayward a box office star. It's like Bohemian Rhapsody and a bunch of other popular biopics - release them at the right time, when the audience still remember who they're about, pick the right lead and stuff the running time full of music, and you've got yourself a hit.
This was written and produced by Lamar Trotti who did a lot of biopics. The dialogue is risable - it always is in these films, full of fake conflict, inspirational speeches, platitudes, wonky exposition - but the structure is solid. It helps in that this has a solid middle bit - a plane crash which nearly crippled Frohman.
Hayward is fine. David Wayne always irritates me as her agent and husband who narrates the early part of the film. Rory Calhoun adds some virility to a relatively thankless part - the pilot of the plane who fell for Frohman. (Apparently in real life this guy did heroic stuff during the crash but we don't see any, presumably due to budget reasons).
Robert Wagner is effective in an early role - he's a soldier who Hayward sings to before he goes into battle, and then again after battle when Wagner is shell shocked. Wagner does good "being sung to" face - he did a similar thing in What Price Glory? and I'm surprised Fox didn't put him in more musicals to play "the guy". Maybe too young to co star against the studio's musical names like Betty Grable and what not.
There is a lot of dubbed singing. A lot. There's some awful soldiers from Texas who look like they're ready to rape/lynch someone during a concert until Hayward calms them down singing "Deep in the Heart of Texas".
Thelma Ritter livens up her scenes as a bossy nurse. I did like the way the film tackled a female lead falling out of love with her husband and going for someone else, and dealing with the difficulties of recovering from a major accident.
This was written and produced by Lamar Trotti who did a lot of biopics. The dialogue is risable - it always is in these films, full of fake conflict, inspirational speeches, platitudes, wonky exposition - but the structure is solid. It helps in that this has a solid middle bit - a plane crash which nearly crippled Frohman.
Hayward is fine. David Wayne always irritates me as her agent and husband who narrates the early part of the film. Rory Calhoun adds some virility to a relatively thankless part - the pilot of the plane who fell for Frohman. (Apparently in real life this guy did heroic stuff during the crash but we don't see any, presumably due to budget reasons).
Robert Wagner is effective in an early role - he's a soldier who Hayward sings to before he goes into battle, and then again after battle when Wagner is shell shocked. Wagner does good "being sung to" face - he did a similar thing in What Price Glory? and I'm surprised Fox didn't put him in more musicals to play "the guy". Maybe too young to co star against the studio's musical names like Betty Grable and what not.
There is a lot of dubbed singing. A lot. There's some awful soldiers from Texas who look like they're ready to rape/lynch someone during a concert until Hayward calms them down singing "Deep in the Heart of Texas".
Thelma Ritter livens up her scenes as a bossy nurse. I did like the way the film tackled a female lead falling out of love with her husband and going for someone else, and dealing with the difficulties of recovering from a major accident.
Book review - "Being Hal Ashby: The Life of a Hollywood Rebel" by Nick Dawson
Ashby was one of the stars of Peter Biskind's famous book, Easy Riders Raging Bulls, in part because his early death was so narratively neat. He was older than Coppola and Bogdanovich, working his way up the long way via editing - he became one of the top editors in the country, working for William Wyler and most importantly Norman Jewison, who mentored him and championed him.
Ashby turned director with The Landlord and had a hot streak few directors have equalled - Harold and Maude, The Last Detail, Shampoo, Bound for Glory, Coming Home, Being There. Then he suffered a cold streak few directors endured - Second Hand Hearts (made before Being There but released after), Lookin' to Get Out, The Slugger's Wife, 8 Million Ways to Die.)
This happened for a variety of reasons - drug use certainly didn't help him, though was perhaps over exaggerated; more critically, he was supported in the 70s but had bad relationships with his studios and producers in the 80s, including people like Ray Stark. He missed out on some films which could have turned it around like Tootsie - he was going to do it but Lorimar wouldn't let him.
I think Ashby would have come back big time in the 90s, though - the way Robert Altman did, for a similar reason: stars loved working with him. This would have meant he would have kept working - indeed he was still in demand up til his early death.
So I don't buy that Hollywood killed Ashby. If you smoke a lot of dope it does carry an increased risk of cancer. He had bad luck with his collaborators but was still mates with Sean Penn, Dustin Hoffman and the like, who would have kept him employed - he wasn't say, a female director.
He seems to have had many fine qualities - inspirational, caring, humanistic - but also a prick - he walked out on his wife and kid as a teenager, which I do get, but also refused to acknowledge the kid later in life, which is awful. He was a compulsive romantic - always getting married and divorced.
It's a fantastic biography - very well researched, with excellent access to Ashby's papers. It's very well done in particular on Ashby's early years.
Ashby turned director with The Landlord and had a hot streak few directors have equalled - Harold and Maude, The Last Detail, Shampoo, Bound for Glory, Coming Home, Being There. Then he suffered a cold streak few directors endured - Second Hand Hearts (made before Being There but released after), Lookin' to Get Out, The Slugger's Wife, 8 Million Ways to Die.)
This happened for a variety of reasons - drug use certainly didn't help him, though was perhaps over exaggerated; more critically, he was supported in the 70s but had bad relationships with his studios and producers in the 80s, including people like Ray Stark. He missed out on some films which could have turned it around like Tootsie - he was going to do it but Lorimar wouldn't let him.
I think Ashby would have come back big time in the 90s, though - the way Robert Altman did, for a similar reason: stars loved working with him. This would have meant he would have kept working - indeed he was still in demand up til his early death.
So I don't buy that Hollywood killed Ashby. If you smoke a lot of dope it does carry an increased risk of cancer. He had bad luck with his collaborators but was still mates with Sean Penn, Dustin Hoffman and the like, who would have kept him employed - he wasn't say, a female director.
He seems to have had many fine qualities - inspirational, caring, humanistic - but also a prick - he walked out on his wife and kid as a teenager, which I do get, but also refused to acknowledge the kid later in life, which is awful. He was a compulsive romantic - always getting married and divorced.
It's a fantastic biography - very well researched, with excellent access to Ashby's papers. It's very well done in particular on Ashby's early years.
Thursday, March 14, 2019
Movie review - "Bohemian Rhapsody" (2018) ***1/2
The late great William Goldman once wrote that dialogue was one of the
least important elements in a screenplay - after watching Bohemian
Rhapsody finally I’m inclined to agree - it had some of the most on the
nose dialogue I can recall in a studio film in recent memory (“you
can’t have a single longer than three minutes! I tell you it can’t be
done!”) but for me the film still worked brilliantly - a tribute to the
music, lead performer, costume and production and yes the structure,
story and characterization of the script.
'm totally sympathetic to the writers on something like this with so many people alive and so might rights holders who have to be made happy... the weird thing is how similar the scenes were to films like The Glen Miller Story (1955) ("I tell you Glenn... a whole swing band... it'll never work") and The Jolson Story (1948) ("I tell you Al, a film with sound... it'll never work") ... both also huge hits.
The story does have great appeal - I mean Freddy Mercury is a fascinating character, Indian from Zanzibar who moved to England at a young age, a gay man whose great love was a woman, who lead one of the greatest rock groups of all time. And he did find true love with a partner towards the end, and you can't go wrong with your Indian dad hugging you just before Live Aid. There's also an Iago style character who has died meaning he could have flaw.
Remi Malek is a marvel. The other acting is far more variable - I didn't like the guy who played Roger, the one who was Brian May was protected by the hair, but the guy who played the bassist was good. There's solid support players like Tom Hollander, grappling with tricky dialogue. Mike Myers' cameo is shameful.
Moving, exhilarating, exasperating.
'm totally sympathetic to the writers on something like this with so many people alive and so might rights holders who have to be made happy... the weird thing is how similar the scenes were to films like The Glen Miller Story (1955) ("I tell you Glenn... a whole swing band... it'll never work") and The Jolson Story (1948) ("I tell you Al, a film with sound... it'll never work") ... both also huge hits.
The story does have great appeal - I mean Freddy Mercury is a fascinating character, Indian from Zanzibar who moved to England at a young age, a gay man whose great love was a woman, who lead one of the greatest rock groups of all time. And he did find true love with a partner towards the end, and you can't go wrong with your Indian dad hugging you just before Live Aid. There's also an Iago style character who has died meaning he could have flaw.
Remi Malek is a marvel. The other acting is far more variable - I didn't like the guy who played Roger, the one who was Brian May was protected by the hair, but the guy who played the bassist was good. There's solid support players like Tom Hollander, grappling with tricky dialogue. Mike Myers' cameo is shameful.
Moving, exhilarating, exasperating.
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Movie review - "White Feather" (1955) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)
The film that must surely have indicated to 20th Century Fox that Robert Wagner didn't have what it took as a movie star. Surely. He looks completely out of his depth as a cowboy who tries to negotiate peace with the Indians - it's based on a true story, and in case you start wondering "hey that sounds like Broken Arrow", well this too is based on a true story, has a white man marrying an Indian played by Debra Paget, was based on a script by Delmer Daves, and focuses on the friendship between a white man and an Indian (played here by Jeffrey Hunter).
It lacks the oomph of Broken Arrow. Wagner and Hunter are no James Stewart and Jeff Chandler - but in their defence their relationship isn't as well drawn. The romance between Wagner and Paget is sweet but doesn't have the kick of Arrow because neither of them die (which is nice in its own way it just doesn't have the kick).
The film weakens Wagner's character for some reason. It sets up both Jeffrey Hunter and Hugh O'Brien are anti Wagner because of the latter's romance with Paget. Both try to kill Wagner. But Wagner doesn't kill either - the Indian chief shoots O'Brien and the cavalry shoot Hunter.
There's this potentially really interesting subplot about Virginia Leith, the daughter of a storeowner - who hangs out with Wagner for a bit, and, it's hinted, was a rape victim. But she disappears from the story. Why? Why not have a love triangle? Or use the rape victim stuff? Or have her fall for an Indian? Or made her a baddy? Do something!
John Lund has a bigger role but it's pointless too. Why not make him a racist? A baddy? Or a do gooder or a comic relief or something? You could cut him out of the film.
It looks good I'll say that. It does personalise Indians and gives them characters to play, albeit by white actors. There are some lovely images of the cavalry and landscapes and what not - the influence of John Ford is clearly felt. The director was Robert Webb who doesn't get much critical love but I felt did a good job.
It lacks the oomph of Broken Arrow. Wagner and Hunter are no James Stewart and Jeff Chandler - but in their defence their relationship isn't as well drawn. The romance between Wagner and Paget is sweet but doesn't have the kick of Arrow because neither of them die (which is nice in its own way it just doesn't have the kick).
The film weakens Wagner's character for some reason. It sets up both Jeffrey Hunter and Hugh O'Brien are anti Wagner because of the latter's romance with Paget. Both try to kill Wagner. But Wagner doesn't kill either - the Indian chief shoots O'Brien and the cavalry shoot Hunter.
There's this potentially really interesting subplot about Virginia Leith, the daughter of a storeowner - who hangs out with Wagner for a bit, and, it's hinted, was a rape victim. But she disappears from the story. Why? Why not have a love triangle? Or use the rape victim stuff? Or have her fall for an Indian? Or made her a baddy? Do something!
John Lund has a bigger role but it's pointless too. Why not make him a racist? A baddy? Or a do gooder or a comic relief or something? You could cut him out of the film.
It looks good I'll say that. It does personalise Indians and gives them characters to play, albeit by white actors. There are some lovely images of the cavalry and landscapes and what not - the influence of John Ford is clearly felt. The director was Robert Webb who doesn't get much critical love but I felt did a good job.
Tuesday, March 12, 2019
Top Ten Use of Queen's Music in Film
honour of watching "Bohemian Rhapsody" I thought I'd do a top ten of my favourite uses of Queen's music in other films:
1) In the Space Capsule - in "Flash Gordon" (1980) - seriously the whole soundtrack to this is amazing, the title song, the Football Fight, the Attack of the Hawk Men... but limiting myself to one song, I'll pick the theme that plays when Flash, Dale and Zharkov fly to Mongo
2) We Are the Champions in "Revenge of the Nerds" (1984) - like so many 80s sex comedies there are problematic aspects to this film - but it does have a great soundtrack! in particular the finale with the nerds embracing allies to the strains of Queen's greatest anthem
3)One Vision in "Iron Eagle" (1986) - remember the days when studios made films about young men who flew missions into Libya in order to rescue their dad? this was one such movie - and the man played a mix tape while blowing up Arabs, including "One Vision" - which actually is the perfect tune to do such things
4) Who Wants to Live Forever? in "Highlander" (1986) - another great soundtrack by Queen, with It's a Kind of Magic being a superb single... but... for effectiveness on screen I don't think you can go past the montage of Chris Lambert losing his mortal lady love to this song (used well in Bohemian Rhapsody)
5) Bohemian Rhapsody in "Wayne's World" (1992) - I'm still recovering from the shocking badness of Mike Myer's turn in Bohemian Rhapsody but his use of that song in Wayne's world was very funny and definitely captured a time and a place
6) You're My Best Friend in "Peter's friends" (1992) - remember this film? great cast, good moments, dodgy direction, fantastic soundtrack
7) Don't Stop Me Now in "Shaun of the Dead" (2004) - I actually don't like this song that much but love how it was used in the film
8) Under Pressure in "Studio 60 on Sunset" pilot (2006) - ah this flawed flawed show - the pilot is pretty great though and "Under Pressure" (which pops up a LOT in films) is used very well at the end
9) Flash's Theme in "Blades of Glory" (2007) - I found a way to use more Flash Gordon songs! This brilliant track is used superbly in one of the best sports comedies
10)Radio Ga Ga in "Metropolis" (1927) - okay i'm cheating here but stay with me... in the early 80s Giorgio Moroder released his own version of Metropolis with a new soundtrack including a Freddy Mercury track... in return Queen could use clips from the film in their video for this song which is one of my favourite Queen songs... and was my introduction to silent cinema. True story!
1) In the Space Capsule - in "Flash Gordon" (1980) - seriously the whole soundtrack to this is amazing, the title song, the Football Fight, the Attack of the Hawk Men... but limiting myself to one song, I'll pick the theme that plays when Flash, Dale and Zharkov fly to Mongo
2) We Are the Champions in "Revenge of the Nerds" (1984) - like so many 80s sex comedies there are problematic aspects to this film - but it does have a great soundtrack! in particular the finale with the nerds embracing allies to the strains of Queen's greatest anthem
3)One Vision in "Iron Eagle" (1986) - remember the days when studios made films about young men who flew missions into Libya in order to rescue their dad? this was one such movie - and the man played a mix tape while blowing up Arabs, including "One Vision" - which actually is the perfect tune to do such things
4) Who Wants to Live Forever? in "Highlander" (1986) - another great soundtrack by Queen, with It's a Kind of Magic being a superb single... but... for effectiveness on screen I don't think you can go past the montage of Chris Lambert losing his mortal lady love to this song (used well in Bohemian Rhapsody)
5) Bohemian Rhapsody in "Wayne's World" (1992) - I'm still recovering from the shocking badness of Mike Myer's turn in Bohemian Rhapsody but his use of that song in Wayne's world was very funny and definitely captured a time and a place
6) You're My Best Friend in "Peter's friends" (1992) - remember this film? great cast, good moments, dodgy direction, fantastic soundtrack
7) Don't Stop Me Now in "Shaun of the Dead" (2004) - I actually don't like this song that much but love how it was used in the film
8) Under Pressure in "Studio 60 on Sunset" pilot (2006) - ah this flawed flawed show - the pilot is pretty great though and "Under Pressure" (which pops up a LOT in films) is used very well at the end
9) Flash's Theme in "Blades of Glory" (2007) - I found a way to use more Flash Gordon songs! This brilliant track is used superbly in one of the best sports comedies
10)Radio Ga Ga in "Metropolis" (1927) - okay i'm cheating here but stay with me... in the early 80s Giorgio Moroder released his own version of Metropolis with a new soundtrack including a Freddy Mercury track... in return Queen could use clips from the film in their video for this song which is one of my favourite Queen songs... and was my introduction to silent cinema. True story!
Sunday, March 10, 2019
Movie review - "What Price Glory?" (1952) ***
One of those "oh yeah he made that didn't he" John Ford movies - a remake of a very influential 1920s play, whose influence can be felt on Ford's work with its quarrelling soldiers.
I actually didn't mind this. It should have been made on location at this stage in the game - the colour photography doesn't look good in the studio setting. You can sense it was once meant to be a musical - Corinne Calvet sings a number in a bar, and Marissa Pavan sings (well, mimes) to Robert Wagner.
But the basic material is still strong - two experienced soldiers squabbling with each other, stealing the same woman, then being brave, and going back to squabbling.
It's a strong cast but it doesn't quite click. It was weird to watch - individually Jimmy Cagney, Dan Dailey and Corinne Calvet were fine, but... they didn't have the right chemistry. I believed Cagney and Dailey on their own but not as long term rivals. I bought Calvet as a French tavern owner - she's bright and engaging - but I never felt Cagney or Dailey were genuinely interested in her. I just really wish John Wayne and Ward Bond were in it (they played in a stage production directed by Ford along with Gregory Peck and Maureen O'Hara!)
The best section is in a dug out when a soldier has a breakdown, and Robert Wagner dies. This has a serious element that the film could have done with more of.
It's vigorous and bright. No classic but decent enough.
I actually didn't mind this. It should have been made on location at this stage in the game - the colour photography doesn't look good in the studio setting. You can sense it was once meant to be a musical - Corinne Calvet sings a number in a bar, and Marissa Pavan sings (well, mimes) to Robert Wagner.
But the basic material is still strong - two experienced soldiers squabbling with each other, stealing the same woman, then being brave, and going back to squabbling.
It's a strong cast but it doesn't quite click. It was weird to watch - individually Jimmy Cagney, Dan Dailey and Corinne Calvet were fine, but... they didn't have the right chemistry. I believed Cagney and Dailey on their own but not as long term rivals. I bought Calvet as a French tavern owner - she's bright and engaging - but I never felt Cagney or Dailey were genuinely interested in her. I just really wish John Wayne and Ward Bond were in it (they played in a stage production directed by Ford along with Gregory Peck and Maureen O'Hara!)
The best section is in a dug out when a soldier has a breakdown, and Robert Wagner dies. This has a serious element that the film could have done with more of.
It's vigorous and bright. No classic but decent enough.
Saturday, March 09, 2019
Movie review - "Attention the Kids Are Watching" (1978) ***1/2 (warning: spoilers)
A film I'd heard nothing about and never would have watched if i hadn't been on an Alain Delon completionist drive but it's a little gem. It's based on an American novel about a group of siblings who watch too much TV and whose parents have left them under the supervision of a slack nanny. The kids want to be left alone... they put the sleeping nanny on an air matress and shove her out to the water as a joke, but she can't swim so she drowns. They decide not to mention it to anyone so they can live their lives as they want - smoke, eat whatever they want, watch whatever they want.
It's kind of Lord of the Flies slash High Wind in Jamaica stuff - the kids are presented matter of fact as lacking morals. They swear, they snap, they have low cunning.
There are four of them - the ringleader girl, who is 13, the oldest - a skinny brother and a fat brother with glasses who reminded me of Piggy in Lord of the Flies and a five year old. The fact the kids are so genuinely young really lifts this. The actors are excellent too - the director did a superb job of casting and handling them. They seem like real kids.
The plot comes from Alain Delon watching what happened then moving in. It takes him 50 minutes to do this, which is a worry - as the nanny dies 15 minutes in. I think they would have been better truncating this bit because although it's full of great moments (them going shopping, covering up) it tends to hit the same beat. But when Delon turns up that's fixed - he's very good too by the way, playing a bit more of a character type, swigging alcohol and looking shady.
The film commits to the end - Delon manipulates the kids, or tries to... then they decide to kill him... and do it! And cover it up! And get away with it!
It's a very good movie. Nice locations - some beach town. The kids are brilliant. Sophie Renoir is a standout as the leader but they're all good. I can't believe it flopped. Maybe it was too bleak.
It's kind of Lord of the Flies slash High Wind in Jamaica stuff - the kids are presented matter of fact as lacking morals. They swear, they snap, they have low cunning.
There are four of them - the ringleader girl, who is 13, the oldest - a skinny brother and a fat brother with glasses who reminded me of Piggy in Lord of the Flies and a five year old. The fact the kids are so genuinely young really lifts this. The actors are excellent too - the director did a superb job of casting and handling them. They seem like real kids.
The plot comes from Alain Delon watching what happened then moving in. It takes him 50 minutes to do this, which is a worry - as the nanny dies 15 minutes in. I think they would have been better truncating this bit because although it's full of great moments (them going shopping, covering up) it tends to hit the same beat. But when Delon turns up that's fixed - he's very good too by the way, playing a bit more of a character type, swigging alcohol and looking shady.
The film commits to the end - Delon manipulates the kids, or tries to... then they decide to kill him... and do it! And cover it up! And get away with it!
It's a very good movie. Nice locations - some beach town. The kids are brilliant. Sophie Renoir is a standout as the leader but they're all good. I can't believe it flopped. Maybe it was too bleak.
Friday, March 08, 2019
Movie review - "Diggers" (1931) **1/2
The feature film debut (although it does clock in at only 57 minutes) of FW Thring's Efftee Productions. It was smart of Thring to begin with established source material - although the film apparently made a loss. It's an adaptation of Pat Hanna's popular stage show which he had toured for years.
Hanna isn't particularly well remembered today, at least outside specialist circles - but basically Chips Rafferty stole his act: tall, skinny, gangly war veteran. Maybe that's a little unfair on Rafferty - Hann's persona tended to be more comic. He's a soldier Chic who is depicted as malingering in hospital and then later steals rum from a British hospital.
It's all decent enough stuff - not that funny to be honest, but fascinating to see. The quality of the acting is good - you can tell Hann knew his stuff, laconic and wry, but also George Moon, the shorty who plays his friend, and Joe Valli, who is a third member of the gang.,
In hindsight you can see why it wasn't a big hit despite having a solid basis and being well cast. It consists of three episodes - malingering in the hospital, stealing rum, and hanging out with a French girl. Hanna was annoyed Thring put the hospital segment first when he wanted it last... but the main problem is you could have shifted it around either way and it wouldn't have made that much difference because it's so episodic. There's no cause and effect.
Really all they needed to do was flesh out the subplot where digger Cecil Scott romances a French girl and is killed. This is handled super quickly in the last segment. They just needed to add a few scenes throughout of the romance, I think that would have done the trick.
Arthur Higgins did some lovely photography - it's crisp and clean and the one really world class thing about the production. The movie is edgy and of more interest from a historical point of view, but it's only an hour and is fascinating.
Hanna isn't particularly well remembered today, at least outside specialist circles - but basically Chips Rafferty stole his act: tall, skinny, gangly war veteran. Maybe that's a little unfair on Rafferty - Hann's persona tended to be more comic. He's a soldier Chic who is depicted as malingering in hospital and then later steals rum from a British hospital.
It's all decent enough stuff - not that funny to be honest, but fascinating to see. The quality of the acting is good - you can tell Hann knew his stuff, laconic and wry, but also George Moon, the shorty who plays his friend, and Joe Valli, who is a third member of the gang.,
In hindsight you can see why it wasn't a big hit despite having a solid basis and being well cast. It consists of three episodes - malingering in the hospital, stealing rum, and hanging out with a French girl. Hanna was annoyed Thring put the hospital segment first when he wanted it last... but the main problem is you could have shifted it around either way and it wouldn't have made that much difference because it's so episodic. There's no cause and effect.
Really all they needed to do was flesh out the subplot where digger Cecil Scott romances a French girl and is killed. This is handled super quickly in the last segment. They just needed to add a few scenes throughout of the romance, I think that would have done the trick.
Arthur Higgins did some lovely photography - it's crisp and clean and the one really world class thing about the production. The movie is edgy and of more interest from a historical point of view, but it's only an hour and is fascinating.
Movie review - "Shock Treatment" (1973) *** (warning: spoilers)
This has the sort of fun, junky plot line you'd expect from say a Hammer horror film or even Monogram - a woman visits a clinic where she discovers everyone is rejuvenated and she discovers that there are Nefarious Reasons for this.
Annie Girardot is winning as the the middle aged heroine who comes to rejuvenate herself. Alain Delon is perfect casting as the ageless doctor (did he ever play a vampire? He should have). The guests are other middle aged people - one of them includes the blonde who felt up Sylvia Kristen in Emmanuelle. They all cavort naked in the sauna and at the beach a lot. The exploited underclass here are the Portugese, which gives this an interesting European colonialism undercurrent.
There's a decent theme song, Girardot stabs Delon to death in a satisfactorily way and then is disbelieved the locked up for it. It's unpretentious, silly fun.
Annie Girardot is winning as the the middle aged heroine who comes to rejuvenate herself. Alain Delon is perfect casting as the ageless doctor (did he ever play a vampire? He should have). The guests are other middle aged people - one of them includes the blonde who felt up Sylvia Kristen in Emmanuelle. They all cavort naked in the sauna and at the beach a lot. The exploited underclass here are the Portugese, which gives this an interesting European colonialism undercurrent.
There's a decent theme song, Girardot stabs Delon to death in a satisfactorily way and then is disbelieved the locked up for it. It's unpretentious, silly fun.
Thursday, March 07, 2019
Book review - "Books, Movies, Rhythm, Blues" by Nick Hornby
Delightful collection of writings from Hornby - on PG Wodehouse, Abbey Road, other things, including memoirs about how his writing career got kick started when he found a bludge job teaching English that gave him time to write and pay the rent. Hornby consistent comes up with fresh angles and takes and it's always interesting.
Movie review - "Un Flic" aka "A Cop" (1972) ***
The last film from Jean Pierre Melville, best known for Le Samourai.It's got a name cast - Alain Delon (as a cop rather than a robber), Richard Crenna of all people (Americans were popping up in French films around this time) and Catherine Deneuve.
It starts brilliantly with a heist in a bank by the seaside during a wind-swept storm - how did they film this? There's another superb set piece in the middle - a heist on a train involving Crenna being dropped on board via a helicopter.
Crenna has the better role - because he gets to rob things, while Delon has to not catch him until the end (this is standard in heist movies though). So Delon walks around looking tough, bangs away on a shooting range, interrogates and later slaps a transvestite (I think) and hook up with Catherine Deneuve who has a small role as Crenna's moll (it's good to see her though - she suits these parts particularly when dressed up as a nurse and heading in to kill someone for Crenna).
Michael Conrad, the sergeant from Hill Street Blues pops up as a member of Crenna's gang and he's very effective despite his dubbed voice.
Like a lot of French gangster films it's a love story between two men, in this case Delon and Crenna who make eyes at each other over the table at Crenna's nightclub, with the woman in there to prove everyone's straight.
I wonder if this influenced Michael Mann's Heat?
It starts brilliantly with a heist in a bank by the seaside during a wind-swept storm - how did they film this? There's another superb set piece in the middle - a heist on a train involving Crenna being dropped on board via a helicopter.
Crenna has the better role - because he gets to rob things, while Delon has to not catch him until the end (this is standard in heist movies though). So Delon walks around looking tough, bangs away on a shooting range, interrogates and later slaps a transvestite (I think) and hook up with Catherine Deneuve who has a small role as Crenna's moll (it's good to see her though - she suits these parts particularly when dressed up as a nurse and heading in to kill someone for Crenna).
Michael Conrad, the sergeant from Hill Street Blues pops up as a member of Crenna's gang and he's very effective despite his dubbed voice.
Like a lot of French gangster films it's a love story between two men, in this case Delon and Crenna who make eyes at each other over the table at Crenna's nightclub, with the woman in there to prove everyone's straight.
I wonder if this influenced Michael Mann's Heat?
Wednesday, March 06, 2019
Movie review - "Heritage" (1935) **
I so wanted this film to be better than it was because its ambition is so endearing - to make an Australian historical epic.
And it has some good things - the photography by the Higgins' brothers is beautiful. There's some great locations, and memorable bits, like Governor Phillip having a banquet with little food, the female convicts coming off the boat. There's a central dramatic situation which is fine - a man falls for a woman but he is promised to someone else; the woman dies, and the man raises her baby... I mean that's solid soap.
But it's very amateurish - clunky dialogue, like Governor Macquarie talking about a street that he wanted name after him, awkwardly constructed scenes. Much of the acting looks like bad community theatre.
The biggest debit are the two leads - Franklyn Bennett and Peggy Maguire. Both of them look the part - which is presumably why they were cast. But Bennett is as stiff as a plank, and is called on to do too much. In fairness he doesn't have a great character to play - in his first iteration he's torn and noble; in his second he's a stick in the mud.
Maguire is pretty and spirited but awfully clunky. Maguire would evolve into a decent screen performer... and in fairness another Chauvel discovery, Errol Flynn, was stiff as a board in his first movie for Chauvel... so maybe Bennett would have come through in the long run. But he makes watching this a hard slog. Ugh, he's so bad.
Margot Rhys is the third lead - the Other Woman. She's a bit better than the other two. Stronger value comes from support players - Frank Harvey as Governor Philip and Joe Vali as basically Joe Vali.
It is historically fascinating but a lot of it is unpleasant. There is an aboriginal attack on a farmhouse, shot like an Indian attack in a Western - and I know such things did happen, occasionally, it was just a shame this is the only real depiction of aboriginals in the whole film. In the weird last act set in the 1930s Maguire turns up as a funky aviatrix but Bennett tells her her job is to follow her man, and... that's what happens. Again, typical of films of the time but still... I liked her flying planes more!
Anyway it is an unusual film. Overly ambitious - it tries to do too much, and loses sight of the personal drama that makes these sort of movies work. Chauvel would learn his lessons and do better with Sons of Matthew.
Tuesday, March 05, 2019
Movie review - "Les Doulos" (1962) *** (warning: spoilers)
Jean Pierre Melville crime film about a crook who gets out of prison, and is about to go back into crime. You think the film is going to be about this guy, Serge Reggiani (presumably they couldn't get/afford Jean Gabin or Lino Ventura) but then it becomes more about his fellow crook Jean Paul Belmondo, who works for the police.
There's a lot of plot going on - twists and turns and what not. I lost track of what was happening several times and had to keep double checking the synopsis. Belmondo seems to be an informer but is actually keen to get out of the life. It comes together quite satisfactorily at the end (a rainy, windswept shootout) but was a bit of a slog until then. Lots of talk and I had trouble telling people apart.
Quite a racy sex scene with Belmondo and his topless ex. Like so many French gangster films though it's clearly the guys who want to go off with each other - Belmono and Reggiani. That's why they both end up dead.
There's a lot of plot going on - twists and turns and what not. I lost track of what was happening several times and had to keep double checking the synopsis. Belmondo seems to be an informer but is actually keen to get out of the life. It comes together quite satisfactorily at the end (a rainy, windswept shootout) but was a bit of a slog until then. Lots of talk and I had trouble telling people apart.
Quite a racy sex scene with Belmondo and his topless ex. Like so many French gangster films though it's clearly the guys who want to go off with each other - Belmono and Reggiani. That's why they both end up dead.
Movie review - "Rangle River" (1936) **1/2
Hokey but fun Western whipped up by Zane Grey when he toured Australia and knocked into shape by Charles and Elsa Chauvel and directed by Hollywood import Clarence Badger. It has to be judged by the standards of films of the time, and by those it's reasonably entertaining.
Victory Jory doesn't really have any interest playing a romantic male lead - he's too weird looking - but he's got a deep voice and does look like a cowboy. And he seems to genuinely like Margaret Dare, the female lead.
Dare's character starts out quite interested and spirited but soon just hangs around. They should have killed off her father and had her own it outright.
The structure of this felt wonky. Too much screen time is given to Robert Coote, doing a silly ass in Australia - you really could take him out of the whole film. It's too obvious the neighbour is a baddy and the neighbours' reveal is delayed too late - the Chauvel's weren't very good writers.
It looks good, there is movement and a climatic whip duel which is weird - oh plus an aboriginal gum leaf orchestra. There were plans to make a sequel and it's a shame they never happened.
Victory Jory doesn't really have any interest playing a romantic male lead - he's too weird looking - but he's got a deep voice and does look like a cowboy. And he seems to genuinely like Margaret Dare, the female lead.
Dare's character starts out quite interested and spirited but soon just hangs around. They should have killed off her father and had her own it outright.
The structure of this felt wonky. Too much screen time is given to Robert Coote, doing a silly ass in Australia - you really could take him out of the whole film. It's too obvious the neighbour is a baddy and the neighbours' reveal is delayed too late - the Chauvel's weren't very good writers.
It looks good, there is movement and a climatic whip duel which is weird - oh plus an aboriginal gum leaf orchestra. There were plans to make a sequel and it's a shame they never happened.
Movie review - "The Last Remake of Beau Geste" (1977) ***
In the 70s Hollywood went spoof crazy, kicked off by the popularity of the Mel Brooks films - so much so that Gene Wilder then went and turned director for some spoof movies and also Marty Feldman.
This is an insane, joyous, off the wall movie - very surrealistic at times. It's dense with jokes, which is great. It doesn't have heart and a solid basic story, which I feel feature length comedies need - so we care.
It has a solid source material - Beau Geste - but every thing is so broad. Michael York is perfect and brave until he does a 180 at the end, Ann Margret is seductive and vixenish until she does a turn around at the end. Feldman has pop eyes and is nutty but I was never sure of where his character was coming from. He seems to like York, and... that was about it.
The cast is great Peter Ustinov as a sergeant, Spike Milligan as a servant, Terry Thomas as a warden, James Earl Jones as an Arab. Ann Margret is great fun. Sinead Cusack feels wasted - I wish she'd had more of a character to play.
There are also brilliant gags: a bling legionnaire reading braile centerfolds, the bug eyed kid who plays little Marty, Feldman meeting Gary Cooper from a film, the horse with a fake leg (comic props and art department are very big in this film).
Still, there is something hollow at the core.
This is an insane, joyous, off the wall movie - very surrealistic at times. It's dense with jokes, which is great. It doesn't have heart and a solid basic story, which I feel feature length comedies need - so we care.
It has a solid source material - Beau Geste - but every thing is so broad. Michael York is perfect and brave until he does a 180 at the end, Ann Margret is seductive and vixenish until she does a turn around at the end. Feldman has pop eyes and is nutty but I was never sure of where his character was coming from. He seems to like York, and... that was about it.
The cast is great Peter Ustinov as a sergeant, Spike Milligan as a servant, Terry Thomas as a warden, James Earl Jones as an Arab. Ann Margret is great fun. Sinead Cusack feels wasted - I wish she'd had more of a character to play.
There are also brilliant gags: a bling legionnaire reading braile centerfolds, the bug eyed kid who plays little Marty, Feldman meeting Gary Cooper from a film, the horse with a fake leg (comic props and art department are very big in this film).
Still, there is something hollow at the core.
Movie review - "Flying Deuces" (1939) **
I've never seen a Laurel and Hardy film before - at least, not that I can remember. I didn't really enjoy it. I can see that they were skilled, I like their expressions, particularly Stan. But it was slight stuff. I think I like my comedies more visual.
It's not much of a story - apparently Laurel and Hardy are better in small doses. There's some sweet stuff where Ollie wants to kill himself and expects Stan to do as well.. and Stan goes along with it.
I was hoping for more French Foreign legion stuff - there's a bit in there, but it's more enlisting in arm and basic training stuff. Funny end gag with one of them being reincarnated as a horse. Jean Parker who was in so many Pine Thomas films is a love interest, only not really because she's never into Ollie.
It's not much of a story - apparently Laurel and Hardy are better in small doses. There's some sweet stuff where Ollie wants to kill himself and expects Stan to do as well.. and Stan goes along with it.
I was hoping for more French Foreign legion stuff - there's a bit in there, but it's more enlisting in arm and basic training stuff. Funny end gag with one of them being reincarnated as a horse. Jean Parker who was in so many Pine Thomas films is a love interest, only not really because she's never into Ollie.
Book review - "This Terrible Business Has Been Good to Me" by Norman Jewison (2005)
A tale of one man's journey from success to success - Jewison was born into a relatively poor family but it was in Canada; he joined the navy and went to university and decided to go into showbiz. He moved to England and broke in there, then worked in the early days of Canadian TV then in New York. Handling Judy Garland for a TV special (he managed to sweet talk Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin into supporting her) got him a reputation as someone who could deal with stars - he received an offer from Tony Curtis to do Forty Pounds of Trouble which led to a contract with Universal: two comedies with Doris Day, one with Dick Van Dyke (his first flop), then changing gears with The Cincinnati Kid and hitting a golden streak: The Russians Are Coming, In the Heat of the Night, The Thomas Crown Affair, stumbling with Gaily Gaily but then doing Fiddler on the Roof, Jesus Christ Superstar, Rollerball and so on.
It was truly one of the great careers - plenty of critical acclaim and box office hits, lots of power. His personal life seems to have been tranquil - met a girl, married, had kids, kids turned up fine. Had a little bit of tall poppy syndrome from Canada but not a lot; a few flops but not that many; no production disasters. He dealt with some temperamental stars and seemed to be able to cope with all of them, even Garland and Steve McQueen.
He reveals himself to be the director who dealt with a sobbing star who had inadvertently killed her dog via giving her a lamb chop - a tale told by William Goldman in his memoirs (not told particularly well here - Jewison is a solid rather than top level writer) - the star was Doris Day. (So was Doris Day having an affair at the time? Goldman said the star was.)
He had/has solid liberal, humanistic beliefs which saw him make film like In the Heat of the Night and try to make Malcolm X before being booted off the latter to make way for Spike Lee.
Obviously a decent man, hardworking and talented, with great instincts for casting and story.
I was hoping for a little more gossip. Sylvester Stallone was a bit of an egomaniac on FIST and rewrote Joe Eszterhas. McQueen could be a baby but lobbied hard for the role in The Thomas Crown Affair. The screenwriter of Thomas Crown sounds like a character. But an enjoyable book.
It was truly one of the great careers - plenty of critical acclaim and box office hits, lots of power. His personal life seems to have been tranquil - met a girl, married, had kids, kids turned up fine. Had a little bit of tall poppy syndrome from Canada but not a lot; a few flops but not that many; no production disasters. He dealt with some temperamental stars and seemed to be able to cope with all of them, even Garland and Steve McQueen.
He reveals himself to be the director who dealt with a sobbing star who had inadvertently killed her dog via giving her a lamb chop - a tale told by William Goldman in his memoirs (not told particularly well here - Jewison is a solid rather than top level writer) - the star was Doris Day. (So was Doris Day having an affair at the time? Goldman said the star was.)
He had/has solid liberal, humanistic beliefs which saw him make film like In the Heat of the Night and try to make Malcolm X before being booted off the latter to make way for Spike Lee.
Obviously a decent man, hardworking and talented, with great instincts for casting and story.
I was hoping for a little more gossip. Sylvester Stallone was a bit of an egomaniac on FIST and rewrote Joe Eszterhas. McQueen could be a baby but lobbied hard for the role in The Thomas Crown Affair. The screenwriter of Thomas Crown sounds like a character. But an enjoyable book.
Monday, March 04, 2019
Movie review - "The Guns of Navarone" (1961) ***
I love guys on a mission film but this one is not among my favourites. It's too long and too flabby lacks a twist or two.
The things I liked:
* the fact it features three genuine stars, Peck, Niven and Quinn, and the support cast is super strong Irene Pappas, Stanley Baker, James Darren, Gia Scala)
* the location filming in Greece
*the photography
* the storm scenes
* the bits with the team climbing up the cliff
* the basic set up
*Papas killing Gia Scala
*the relationship between Peck and Quinn
*the music.
The things I remembered that jarred:
* Niven's miscasting as someone who refuses to be an officer
*Niven's weird attachment to Anthony Quayle
* the editing of the ending - what should be exciting was dragged out.
The things I forgot which jarred:
* James Darren singing a song in Greek
* the nobility of German Walter Gotel
Needed a lot of fat stripped off. Still fun though.
The things I liked:
* the fact it features three genuine stars, Peck, Niven and Quinn, and the support cast is super strong Irene Pappas, Stanley Baker, James Darren, Gia Scala)
* the location filming in Greece
*the photography
* the storm scenes
* the bits with the team climbing up the cliff
* the basic set up
*Papas killing Gia Scala
*the relationship between Peck and Quinn
*the music.
The things I remembered that jarred:
* Niven's miscasting as someone who refuses to be an officer
*Niven's weird attachment to Anthony Quayle
* the editing of the ending - what should be exciting was dragged out.
The things I forgot which jarred:
* James Darren singing a song in Greek
* the nobility of German Walter Gotel
Needed a lot of fat stripped off. Still fun though.
Sunday, March 03, 2019
Movie review - "The Sound and the Fury" (1959) *
Maybe one star is harsh considering the talent involved but this was a hard, hard slog. Het hated southern melodramas can work a treat and this was from the creative team who did The Long Hot Summer but I loathed it.
Yul Brynner loses a lot of his on screen power with hair and feels miscast as the horrible uncle. He raises Joanne Woodward, who is too old for her role (she just seems old) and overacts, like everyone else.
Jack Warden plays a deaf mute and might have been effective but has a silly dyed hair. There's some other member of the family played by John Beal who gets one monologue and that's it. Margaret Leighton turns up as Woodward's mum and she overacts. Stuart Whitman comes in as a shirtless sexually harrassing carny worker and he chews the scenery. Warden shares a bed with a little black boy.
Are we meant to be happy that Brynner, who has helped raise Woodward, and reminds everyone of that fact, and seems to be a horrible person, kisses her and they might have a romance? That's incest!
The only cast member who seems at home is Ethel Waters. This movie is terrible.
Yul Brynner loses a lot of his on screen power with hair and feels miscast as the horrible uncle. He raises Joanne Woodward, who is too old for her role (she just seems old) and overacts, like everyone else.
Jack Warden plays a deaf mute and might have been effective but has a silly dyed hair. There's some other member of the family played by John Beal who gets one monologue and that's it. Margaret Leighton turns up as Woodward's mum and she overacts. Stuart Whitman comes in as a shirtless sexually harrassing carny worker and he chews the scenery. Warden shares a bed with a little black boy.
Are we meant to be happy that Brynner, who has helped raise Woodward, and reminds everyone of that fact, and seems to be a horrible person, kisses her and they might have a romance? That's incest!
The only cast member who seems at home is Ethel Waters. This movie is terrible.
Movie review - "The Wild Bunch" (1969) ****1/2 (re-watching)
I saw this at the Lammle in Beverly Hills. Walon Green gave a talk with two academic/writers who hogged the mike over him, as if we weren't more interested in what Green had to say. Anyway it was good to see on the big screen.
Some random observations:
* It's too long. A lot of stuff I kept thinking "that could be cut" - particularly in between the heist and the final shoot out there was a lot of to-ing and fro-ing.
*Angel, the Mexican, really is a bad ass - he shoots people with as much relish as the gringos, and shoots his ex girlfriend, and threatens his fellow gang members with shooting.
*I think there's at least 20 prostitutes who get a line or a close up - there's a lot of prostitutes.
* The action scenes are cleverly constructed and devised - the Wild Bunch are clever. I also like how the logistics of it are discussed - the importance of raising money, seeking investors, etc.
* The finale is magnificent. The final reflective moments, "why not", the walk into town, shooting, etc.
* Ernest Borgnine's character feels inconsistent. He doesn't sleep with whores but he drinks and is as harsh as the others.
*Edmond O'Brien is nearly unrecogniseable even on the big screen.
*William Holden is great. Actually all the casting is excellent. The Mexican actors are great too.
*The production design and cinematography are rich and true. It looks amazing.
It is a classic. Peckinpah had a lot of issues though!
Some random observations:
* It's too long. A lot of stuff I kept thinking "that could be cut" - particularly in between the heist and the final shoot out there was a lot of to-ing and fro-ing.
*Angel, the Mexican, really is a bad ass - he shoots people with as much relish as the gringos, and shoots his ex girlfriend, and threatens his fellow gang members with shooting.
*I think there's at least 20 prostitutes who get a line or a close up - there's a lot of prostitutes.
* The action scenes are cleverly constructed and devised - the Wild Bunch are clever. I also like how the logistics of it are discussed - the importance of raising money, seeking investors, etc.
* The finale is magnificent. The final reflective moments, "why not", the walk into town, shooting, etc.
* Ernest Borgnine's character feels inconsistent. He doesn't sleep with whores but he drinks and is as harsh as the others.
*Edmond O'Brien is nearly unrecogniseable even on the big screen.
*William Holden is great. Actually all the casting is excellent. The Mexican actors are great too.
*The production design and cinematography are rich and true. It looks amazing.
It is a classic. Peckinpah had a lot of issues though!
Saturday, March 02, 2019
Movie review - "Woman's World" (1954) **
This is what happens when you try to re-do A Letter to Three Wives or All About Eve without Joseph L Mankiewicz. This has a good, solid set up - the position of general manager of a big car corporation is up for grabs, and company head Clifton Webb (wasted), invites three leading managers from around the country to check out them and their wives.
You expect a show of ruthless climbing and great one liners - and having a large bunch of characters doesn't matter in the right hands, as shown by say Dinner at Eight. But this doesn't work.
The main reason is it's so soft. The first couple out of the blocks are June Allyson and Cornel Wilde - just decent folks from the midwest. She's a bit clutzy and worries about her kids - this was during Allyson's "perfect wife" period. She occasionally embarrasses them with a bit of klutzy-ness but he doesn't really want the job.
More promising are Lauren Bacall and Fred MacMurray. He wants the job but he's a workaholic and she doesn't want him to have the job. She gives him a job-or-me ultimatum and they're both nice basically so you know he's not going to get it.
Then there's Van Heflin and Arlene Dahl. They both want it - she really wants it - she tries to seduce Webb which is promising. But it was all a trap by Webb so get Heflin to dump Dahl and then give Heflin the job. Which is typical misogynistic Fox stuff.
Everyone's so nice. You want (or at least I want) everyone to be stabbing each other in the back. Even Dahl isn't much of a villain. I get they wanted some nice people but they needed at least three unsympathetic characters. There's not enough jokes for it to work as a comedy - maybe if it had songs...?
Elliot Reid, that wet drip from Gentleman Prefer Blondes, turns up as Webb's nephew and you hope he's going to be a lecherous idiot but he does nothing. Webb kind of plays a Santa Claus.
It's a shame because it's fun to see these stars - even if some are a little B list - in a CinemaScope corporate setting.
You expect a show of ruthless climbing and great one liners - and having a large bunch of characters doesn't matter in the right hands, as shown by say Dinner at Eight. But this doesn't work.
The main reason is it's so soft. The first couple out of the blocks are June Allyson and Cornel Wilde - just decent folks from the midwest. She's a bit clutzy and worries about her kids - this was during Allyson's "perfect wife" period. She occasionally embarrasses them with a bit of klutzy-ness but he doesn't really want the job.
More promising are Lauren Bacall and Fred MacMurray. He wants the job but he's a workaholic and she doesn't want him to have the job. She gives him a job-or-me ultimatum and they're both nice basically so you know he's not going to get it.
Then there's Van Heflin and Arlene Dahl. They both want it - she really wants it - she tries to seduce Webb which is promising. But it was all a trap by Webb so get Heflin to dump Dahl and then give Heflin the job. Which is typical misogynistic Fox stuff.
Everyone's so nice. You want (or at least I want) everyone to be stabbing each other in the back. Even Dahl isn't much of a villain. I get they wanted some nice people but they needed at least three unsympathetic characters. There's not enough jokes for it to work as a comedy - maybe if it had songs...?
Elliot Reid, that wet drip from Gentleman Prefer Blondes, turns up as Webb's nephew and you hope he's going to be a lecherous idiot but he does nothing. Webb kind of plays a Santa Claus.
It's a shame because it's fun to see these stars - even if some are a little B list - in a CinemaScope corporate setting.
Friday, March 01, 2019
Movie review - "Attack Force Z" (1981) **1/2
Some random thoughts:
* always good to rewatch but it's never as good as you want it to be
* great opening with the foreword and troops climbing out of the sub and canoeing to the island
* action sequences are perfunctory rather than well done and I really wish Phil Noyce had done it instead of Tim Burstall - Burstall was excellent on casting and story choices but Noyce was the better director
* the cast are extremely good and deliver strong performances - Mel Gibson does well in a relatively thankless role (his one thing is being bullied into letting the Japanese diplomat live by that diplomat), but he definitely feels very Z Force
* the ending rips off The Wild Geese and is a needless bummer - the whole ending has fashionable 70s nihilism with pretty much all the goodies dead for absolutely no reason which actually is kind of more true of the typical Z Special Unit mission (those were the locals didn't betray them) but makes you feel depressed watching it and might be responsible for the film underperforming at the box office
* disappointingly little is made of Jon Phillip Law being Dutch - a great idea (could have explored the colonial issues etc), thrown away
* it's really distracting that everyone is Chinese when it should be Malaya/Indonesia/New Guinea - they just should have said "island off the coast of Taiwan"
* best role: Sam Neill - the ruthless operative who shoots John Waters but who then points out the locals will be killed if they rise up
* the Japanese are really stupid for believing that kid
* there's a lack of pace and energy - too much ambling when they get on the island when it should be fast paced
* production values are very good.
* always good to rewatch but it's never as good as you want it to be
* great opening with the foreword and troops climbing out of the sub and canoeing to the island
* action sequences are perfunctory rather than well done and I really wish Phil Noyce had done it instead of Tim Burstall - Burstall was excellent on casting and story choices but Noyce was the better director
* the cast are extremely good and deliver strong performances - Mel Gibson does well in a relatively thankless role (his one thing is being bullied into letting the Japanese diplomat live by that diplomat), but he definitely feels very Z Force
* the ending rips off The Wild Geese and is a needless bummer - the whole ending has fashionable 70s nihilism with pretty much all the goodies dead for absolutely no reason which actually is kind of more true of the typical Z Special Unit mission (those were the locals didn't betray them) but makes you feel depressed watching it and might be responsible for the film underperforming at the box office
* disappointingly little is made of Jon Phillip Law being Dutch - a great idea (could have explored the colonial issues etc), thrown away
* it's really distracting that everyone is Chinese when it should be Malaya/Indonesia/New Guinea - they just should have said "island off the coast of Taiwan"
* best role: Sam Neill - the ruthless operative who shoots John Waters but who then points out the locals will be killed if they rise up
* the Japanese are really stupid for believing that kid
* there's a lack of pace and energy - too much ambling when they get on the island when it should be fast paced
* production values are very good.
Movie review - "The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit" (1956) ***
50s suburban executive melodrama - based on a best seller, lots of men in suits being dissatisfied with their life, housewives being dissatisfied with their lives. I actually enjoyed this a bit - it touches on some important themes, it captures a time and a place (or at least what I imagine that to be).
It's not Terribly Important like it thinks it is but it's handled with sensitivity. Nunnally Johnson, who wrote and direct, does a decent job. He's helped by Gregory Peck who is ideally cast as the war veteran who is struggling financially - I mean he does have three kids and a live in house keeper, and the wife doesn't work.
Jennifer Jones' wive is impatient for money but she's not a bitch -she's encouraging of Peck's career, gives good advice, and is very loyal at the end when it turns out he's got a kid in Italy.
The film ducks scenes you'd think would be obligatory - no reunion between Peck and Marisa Pavan, no confrontation between Jones and Pavan, no meeting the kid. There's a subplot about Peck almost losing the house he inherited and then not (a "choked on a peanut" story... they're in danger! no they're not! and they didn't do anything to get out of it) Frederick March has a slutty daughter but she just goes off and continues to be a bit trashy.
Some decent acting. Lee J Cobb has a tendency to wear silly make up in his films and he does here but is quite good - so is Frederick March. Peck and Jones are good - so is Pavan.
I laughed how a big plot of the film is Peck writing a speech - should he tell boss Marsh what he wants to hear, or go his own way. Screenwriter Johnson obviously related to this!
But the film can't be dismissed. Some stuff is powerful - March realising how empty his life is, Peck having to kill in the war and accidentally killing his friend - and the themes are relevant: the importance of not being addicted to work, and getting kids to not watch a lot of TV, and working through marriage. Johnson was very good on marriage. It's better than many other 20th Century Fox films made in this area.
It's not Terribly Important like it thinks it is but it's handled with sensitivity. Nunnally Johnson, who wrote and direct, does a decent job. He's helped by Gregory Peck who is ideally cast as the war veteran who is struggling financially - I mean he does have three kids and a live in house keeper, and the wife doesn't work.
Jennifer Jones' wive is impatient for money but she's not a bitch -she's encouraging of Peck's career, gives good advice, and is very loyal at the end when it turns out he's got a kid in Italy.
The film ducks scenes you'd think would be obligatory - no reunion between Peck and Marisa Pavan, no confrontation between Jones and Pavan, no meeting the kid. There's a subplot about Peck almost losing the house he inherited and then not (a "choked on a peanut" story... they're in danger! no they're not! and they didn't do anything to get out of it) Frederick March has a slutty daughter but she just goes off and continues to be a bit trashy.
Some decent acting. Lee J Cobb has a tendency to wear silly make up in his films and he does here but is quite good - so is Frederick March. Peck and Jones are good - so is Pavan.
I laughed how a big plot of the film is Peck writing a speech - should he tell boss Marsh what he wants to hear, or go his own way. Screenwriter Johnson obviously related to this!
But the film can't be dismissed. Some stuff is powerful - March realising how empty his life is, Peck having to kill in the war and accidentally killing his friend - and the themes are relevant: the importance of not being addicted to work, and getting kids to not watch a lot of TV, and working through marriage. Johnson was very good on marriage. It's better than many other 20th Century Fox films made in this area.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)