Movie has an exciting set up - two crooks escape from Alcatraz and take over a household - loses some energy when they take over the house.
James Craig, who became MGM's back up Clark Gable, has a kind of muffled speaking voice, isn't quite right... I guess he's okay. I liked Bonita Granville.
The film needed people within the group to turn traitor -Craig's mate, say, or someone at the house. There's too many characters.
This was fine. Not an undiscovered jewel but servicable.
Re-read Richard Jewell’s excellent history(s) of RKO which includes an account of William Dozier’s short reign - the last time RKO really had bite.
Fascinating to look back at the slate... because of many of the choices were understandable.
There were colour remakes of earlier RKO hits:
- Back from Eternity (1956)
- The Brave One (1956)
- Bundle of Joy (1956)
- Stage Struck (1957)
- The Girl Most Likely (1958)
Star vehicles with old RKO names
- The First Travelling Sales Lady (1956) - with Ginger Rogers
- Death of a Scoundrel with George Sanders (1956)
- Public Pigeon No 1 with Red Skelton
Attempts to Launch New Stars
- The Unholy Wife (1957) with Diana Dors
- I Married this woman (1957) - with Dors and George Gobel
Two Fritz Lang noirs
- While the City Sleeps (1956)
- Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (1956)
War movies
- The Naked and the Dead (1958)
Westerns
- Tension at Table Rock (1956)
- Run of the Arrow (1956)
Adaptatios of TV plays
- The Young Stranger
Arthur Lubin films
-Travelling Saleslady
- Escapeade in Japan
But the films didn't work. I don't think any of them did.
Better than I thought in part because while it remakes the first film in terms of structure it has enough points of difference: New York rather than the suburbs, a hotel rather than the house, a bird lady rather than old man (this story felt as though it lacked a beat - her being reunited with someone).
Creepy Trump is in it alas but I liked Eddie Bracken, Pesci and Stern and Culkin was such an amazing star.
Remembered if at all for being the film which killed off Mark Robson and Robert Shaw. It's an old school spies on a train film, with an all star cast for TV sales. So there's Lee Marvin and Linda Evans and Mike Connors and Joe Namath.
Gene Corman and Monte Helman were called in to finish the movie and wound up doing more than they probably had to. The opening scene where Shaw and Max Schell are speaking in dubbed Russian while their lips are clearly moving in English. That was a post production decision. Why make that decision? Ah, I wasn't there... maybe they had reason to. But why get rid of Shaw's voice for the whole film?
Why have Max Schell in such a bad disguise? Why have so many characters in the film? It'd be better if Marvin was up against It. He doesn't do that much. They should've killed off more people - Linda Evans (who does barely nothing, just sitting and chatting), Mike Connors, Joe Namath. They throw in Horsct Bucholz for good measure. Why not have one of our leads as traitors? Or two?
They needed to have this take place over a shorter period of time and have better reasons for not getting off the train.
There is plenty of action. But it's both complicated and dumb. I really wanted to enjoy this - spies on a train. Terrific. But it's too loud, too many stars, too dubbed, and too silly.
A terrific film. Clever, handsome, beautifully shot, well researched. A career highlight performance from Boris Karloff as a Uriah Heep type figure. Shocking finale where he's bricked up - the hero and heroine let it go through. I'm not a massive Anna Lee fan but it's a gift part - beautiful, brave, spirited, driving the action. The hero kind of saves her but she does most of the work. He's interesting too - a Quaker.
Maybe would've done better with a murder or two extra. Bela Lugosi as a patient would have worked wonders. They could've told the exact same story just with extra violence/threat.
Literate. Goldfinger ripped off the scene. I think the best Val Lewton maybe?
Entertaining look at the life and times of Val Lewton. Excellent narration. A lot of made up dialogue. Some of it doesn't seem real and Lewton comes across as a bit of a whiner and a victim but I really enjoyed it.
One of the many (many) examples of why Dore Schary was not suited to run MGM. He took a fairly decent, basic idea (his, it must be admitted) - British girl inherits Texas ranch and is plagued by fortune hunters on the way over to the US - and piles bad decision upon bad decision. It's a vehicle for Deborah Kerr, not a natural comedian; Kerr has no set character to play other than placid (is she stuffy? bright? smart?); he assigns an ideal director (Norman Taurog) but a specutaculalr unsuitable producer (Val Lewton); he doesn't add colour or songs); foists his uninteresting support actors on it (James Whitmore).
Like that is the point? The fortune hunters hunting a fortune that doesn't exist makes the whole thing feel like a waste of time - we know up front there isn't a fortune. (Why not have them discover oil part way through.) The gangster to whom Walker is in debt is hardly a threat.
It's so dull. Strained. Charmless. Full of fake drama because it's all misunderstandings.
Kerr and Lawford show of their bodies in the pool I guess that's something. Maybe this plot would've worked with Esther Williams, colour, pools, dances and songs. Lawford suits it best - he was strongest as a second lead. Walker isn't quite comfortable but it's interesting to see Walker. Mark Stevens is dull - Van Johnson was cast then given a rest or something. The film needed his extra star power.
I think Dore Schary was ripping off RKO's Tom Dick and Harry. But that was simple - poor girl torn between current dull boyfriend, rich newbie and poor but exciting newbie.
Val Lewton's career ends on a strong note. It's not given a lot of love - if had been in horror and in black and white I think it would have, but it's a Universal Western from the unfancied Hugo but it's a realised film. The colour photography is beautiful though TBH it might've worked better in black and white - the superior last act in particular with the townsfolk holed up in a church and the unseen Apaches outside.
Still it's very effective. There's some solid B list star power - Steve McNallay is a gambler who loves good girl Colleen Gray who loves him but kind of is also drawn to decent dull blacksmith Willard Parler. Barry Fitzergerald's brother is a man of God who leads the sieged people singing 'Men of Harlech' - Zulu ripped off this film! Just as Goldfinger ripped off Bedlam!
Plenty of intelligence. It feels like a realised movie in the way most non-horror Lewton films do. In hindsight, Universal was ideal for Lewton - like RKO is was a studio that wasn't up itself, and appreciated a bit of class on a budget. Who can blame Lewton for going to Paramount and MGM but if he'd gone to Universal imagine the movies he could've made...
Some slow bits but like the RKO Lewtons full of interesting touches. Poor old Willard Parker does nothing wrong and winds up with a spear in his back.
A woman torn between father and son is always a solid dramatic situation but this film muffs it. For starters she meets both father and son in this film and it happens quite close to each other. Secondly there's no sense of Phyllis Calvert being into the father or son, though she spends more time with the dad and hardly any with the son, so the triangle is lopsided. Thirdly Melvyn Douglas looks too young to play Philp Friend's dad - they should've been brothers. There's no real differentiation between father and son either. I guess the son has been through a harsh war service and lacks a leg - but they don't feel different. On paper there's this bond between Friend and Calvery because both were POWs but we don't feel it. They shouls have been POWs together.
Calvert is alright. She's shot lovingly. When she talks about working in the camps in Occupied France it's like she's talking about organising a fete.
Douglas does his leading man thing, Friend is okay. You can't say it's a badly acting film.
But it's dull. There's no life to it. It needed a bitch, or a swine, or zombies, or bombs. Someone to murder someone. Betrayal. It's boring.
Compton Bennett directs this, dully. The photography is nice. Arthur Shields, Barry Fitzgerald's brother, popus up as this sort of artist spy I think and it seems he might be important but he's not really. Shields would've been better in Douglas' part - someone old. You'd understand more the attraction to the son then.
Wandra Hendrix feels miscast as Douglas' daughter - Douglas seems too old for her too. Binnie Barnes has an interesting little part as a woman who has always been in love with Douglas. Maybe that character should've been the lead. Or the villain. Pick a lane.
I guess it's a bit different Douglas worked in the war as a documentary filmmaker but they do nothing witth that.
Val Lewton produced this. He struggled without horror, Val. This was so boring.
In honour of her birthday
1) Foul Play - charming comedy-mystery. Farrah F would've killed it.
2) Private Benjamin - incredibly good. Really feminist third act.
3) Butterflies Are Free - Hawn's early roles were all the same but she's gorgeously entertaining in them. I'll pick this one.
4) Shampoo - a film I like better once I grew up. She's great in a terrific cast.
5) Deceived - no one remembers this thriller but I really liked it.
6) Overboard-really fun, sweet movie.
7) Protocol - used her star power for some good old Frank Capra consciousness raising
8) Housesitter - I wish she'd work more with Steve Martin
9) The Sugarland Express - Spielberg's first
10) First Wives Club - fun, she teams well with the others, they should've reteamed them
In honour of his passing, and in full acknowledgement I've only seen a smattering of his work:
1) Lethal Weapon 2 - may as well get it over with, but what a great villain
2) White Mischief - marvellous work, touching, awful, spoilt, scary
3) The Hunt for Red October - another scary foreigner
4) Royal Flash - one of the best, if not the best, things in this film
5) Villain - small role, great film
6) Saint Jack - another terrific film and small role but he's very good in it
7) It Couldn't Happen Here - I'm putting this in because it's so gloriously odd
8) The Apple - ditto
9) No Good Deed - not a good film, but he's good in it
10) Crescendo - I'm sure he was in better roles, definitely better movies, but he adds gravitas as a creepy chauffeur
1) Ingrid Pitt - fabulous star, can't believe she only did two for the company, should've done a heap more
2) The Collinson Twins - a gimmick yes, not sure there was a second film in these two, but a fabulous gimmick
3) Raquel Welch - suited the world of Hammer better than you'd think - her successors in cave outfits never had the same impact
4) Ursula Andress - wonderful in her film, again should've done more with the company
5) Valerie Leon - bewitching, captivating, helps make her mummy film a classic, deserved another movie
6) Barbara Shelley - perfected the sad eyes, secretly-wants-it look, finally got an actual lead in Blood Island 2 but wasn't done justice - still, probably the woman who did best out of Hammer
7) Martine Beswick - had probably the best role for a woman in Hammer as Sister Hyde and did very well
8) Susan Strasberg - she never became the great actress that she was predicted to become but she was very good and developed a neat line in "woman who is terrified" that was very well used in Taste of Fear
9) Stephanie Beacham - a bright light from a dim period for Hammer
10) Natassa Kinski- her presence is clearly problematic but she has genuine charisma and is perfectly cast
Val Lewton's career received a boost when RKO signed Boris Karloff, who adored the producer and gave him a lot of protection, resulting in three great films. This one is set in an exotic time and place for Western audiences - the Balkan Wars of 1912, with Boris as a Greek general stuck on an island.
Lewton has learned his lesson from Mademoiselle Fifi - this is another story about a group of disparate characters stuck together (there's even a girl who refuses to eat with a general), but this time there's a constant threat (plague), there's an American for audiences to identify with, and most importantly all characters are different: a grave robbing archeologist, feisty girl, smart doctory, shifty diplomatc.
This had more resonance for me post Covid, with its cut off people yelling at each other. There's a conventional romance and it could've done with a few more jump scares maybe?
No kidding. Four stars. I think it ages well. Big late 80s hair of course but Culkin is tremendous and the film has wonderful heart. That old actor got the role of a lifetime and delivered. Dan Stern and Jo Pesci are fun, Catherine O'Hara a lovely mother, John Candy brings it home. The little kids are so awful! It all works.
Not a big hit but it made a profit at a time when Scorsese needed to show he could do that. The film is iconic in a way - say After Hours type adventures and people get what you mean.
Griffin Dunne is negaging and low key handsome as the lead - I'm surprised he didn't do more films as star, or maybe he did and I just didn't hear of them.
Dunne runs into a series of nutty women - topless sculptor Linda Fiorentino, well read burns victim Rosanna Arquette, lonely waitress Terri Garr, ice cream ventor Catherine O'Hara, lonely Verna Bloom - and some less odd men - bartender John Heard, gay dude,Cheech and Chong (in separate roles), door bitch to a punk club. Other people pop up in it like Bronson Pinchot.
The script is circular but quite clever in its set up and pay off.
Val Lewton's second non horror at RKO apart from Youth Gone Wild is a more realised effort - it doesn't feel cut about. Yet the public didn't go for it either.
The low budget was blamed though it's still a decent looking film. I wonder if maybe it was also:
- lack of star power. There's Simone Simon. That's about it. Tom Conway would've helped.
- possibly too foreign. The Franco Prussian War isn't very well known - surely this was the case in 1944. Maybe a good old map and narration outlining the situation would've hlped, ie. the Germans invaded, French were under occupation. Though also the situation isn't that analogous because the Germans weren't in France was long were they? And didn't France start that war?
- too many characters. Odd thing to say for a low budget film. But some characters are easy to identify - lecherous German officer, proud prostitute, French guy who is political (undercast John Emery)... but the rest, the French passnegers who go with the flow, all seem the same. There's like six of them or something, three couples, who all seem identical (one is played by Alan Napier). And there's identical Germans. In Stagecoach this didn't matter because all the characters were so different - gambler, alcoholic doctor, pregnant woman, stuffy banker, weedy dude. Seriously, this would've been better with the cast halved.
- the coach people are thrown away in the last act and it becomes about Emery and Simon. Could not they have used the support characters? There's all this stuff about ringing a bell.
In fairness, if Lewton had been able to get some of his original casting - Eric Von Stroheim as the German, George Sanders as the freedom fighter... this would've been better.
But you know it would've been better with Tom Conway and Jean Brooks instead of Emery and Simon.
Anyway, this isn't bad. It's better than Youth Runs Wild. It is just cluttered and confusing when it needn't have been.
It is cool that a Simon stabs a German to death and isn't captured.
After his tremendous success with horror movies, RKO gave Val Lewton a few chances at non horror, neither of which worked out commercially and criticially. This was his juvenile delinquent film. It includes some of his stock company and was made by his regular collaborators.
The film I saw is apparently different from the original cut, changed after a poor preview - shades of Magnificent Ambersons. As with that the cuts didn't seem to work.
I'm sure Lewton's original version was better but there is something lacking here. His horrors worked because there was this constant underling menace. There's just sludgy drama hre.
For a film about juvenile delinquents there's all this emphasis on adults - Jean Brooks returns home to deal with her brother, Kent Smith is Brooks' husband (an injured soldier), Lawrence Tierney is a local gangster. Bonita Granville as Tierney's girlfriend. Sam Arkoff and AIP learned how to do a juvenile delinquent film - focus on the kids.
Glen Vernon is Brooks' brother who goes off the rails. Vanessa Brown is his girlfriend. Some kids ride a fast car.
There's a lot of pearl clutching about how parents neglect their kids. Brooks opens a day care centre. Brown's parents kick her out and Granville gets her a job at a dodgy bar. Smith teaches kids how to do.
Kent Smith is dull and smug. Jean Brooks looks sad. Maybe the film should've had their characters meet and fall in love - would've given the piece some progress.
Vernon's surrounded by family - caring parents, a sister, her husband. So the point of the film that thse kids are neglected doesn't hold.
This film is so dull. Scenes go on forever. Kent Smith runs around trying to solve problems. The judge gives the kid into Smith's care but the kid gets into trouble... but there's no blow back on Smith.
Brooks is wasted - may as well cut her part out of the film, given it all to Smith. Or cut Smith out given it all to Brooks.
The one good bit is where there's a brawl at a club (Vernon hassling Brown who is working as a hostess) - that results in Granville being knocked on the head, and Granville dies. Her death bed scene is decent.
Why not use Tierney as a threat? Why not use Vernon's sassy friend more he seemed interesting.
There's hilarious propaganda at the end where Smith tells Brown about the work of Ruth Clifton (whose work setting up clubs for teens inspired the film).
This movie is fairly awful.
Some people like this film. It has some not very good actors - Jane Rudolph, and Kent Smith. Val Lewton gave a gig to Sir Lancelot as their butler! In Tarrytown! I guess a gig's a gig and there wasn't much else going for him.
Robert Wise got his first directing credit here although he only got it because the original director was fired.
The film has resonance if you know about Val Lewton's life (which I didn't appreciate until I heard a podcast on his career). The little girl is both young Lewton and his daughter, a little odd, lonely, living in a fantasy world. The weird old lady, ex actress, is based on Lewton's aunt, Nazimova.
It's touching the girl wants a friend. The dad, Kent Smith, is a moron. I think it would've been better if they'd killed off him or Jane Rudolph (probably the latter to be honest) and played a romance.
It feels cut about, lacks a really cohesive whole type drive. The threat towards the girl feels contrived - the daughter who is angy at her doesn't feel as though she's really going to kill the kid. They throw in a storm.
It's interesting. I wish I'd seen the original version though (apparently onle exists). But the poor acting is the poor acting.
The same writer and director as Hitler's Children cranked out this semi sequel - tells a similar sort of story about life in the enemy country, only Japan here instead of Germany. Once again it's set against the backdrop of a country turning increasingly fascist and focuses on a romance between a more liberal girl and a man who has a decent core but has descended into militariam... and sort of comes back via love for the girl.
All the yellow face is really distracting - Tom Neal is the guy, Margo (who was Mexican) is the girl, J Carrol Naish as Neal's dad.
There's a number of American characters - Robert Ryan as some dude (who boorishly shoots at a cat, and fights on behalf of an American insulted by Neal), Gloria Holden as a female reporter whose face is slapped by Japanese soldiers, Don Douglas an an engineer (the closest thing to the Kent Smith part). Ryan is mostly in the film to take part in the fight scene.
Some scenes have tremendous power, such as a woman having her child ripped out of her arms and thrust into a comfort woman's station, Holden being tortured by Japanese secret police.
And for all the yellowface it does attempt to present slightly more complex Japanese characters than normal for a film of this time.
But these are around the side. in Hitler's Children Bonita Granville was an activist. Here Margo is a liberal but mostly wants to get married. The escape of the Americans at the end felt a little contrived - would've been better if they'd died.
A monster box office success - in part because I think people were in the mood, but also the immense power of its source material. My eight year old daughter was all over this she badgered me to see it.
It's fine. Acting adequate. Great to see Mary Stuart Masterton. I like Matthew Lilliard was in a hit. There's two teen girl characters who seem keen on Josh Hutcherson, who I thought was the girl's father but turns out to be older brother. Elizabeth Lail brings a lot of heart.
Direction is adequate but the animatronic creatures are a little spooky. There's a lot of Steven King vibes to it including a young kid with sort of psychic/special powers.
Thoughts:
- it's boring mostly
- lots of old man acting
- Joe Pesci steals the film - restrained, powerful, intense, he's great
- I liked the younger support
- what's it about? The friendship between Al Pacino and Robert De Niro isn't real. De Niro is his lacky. He's Pesci's lacky.
- maybe you could interpret this as the story of a man who is full fo crap and a fantasist a la King of Comedy - that would've been really interesting and you can see it here a little but you have to squint
- you could also see it as the inability of servants to have proper friendships with their masters, but again you have to squint
- de Niro is a great actor but he's so Italian it's kind of silly he's in a film called the Irishman, he never seems Irish - it didn't matter in Goodfellas I felt it mattered here
- Anna Pacquin has seven words of dialogue and later de Niro complains he won't walk to her - that is genuinely hilarious
- other female "roles" include: wives who smoke and that's it, a daughter who cries and that's about it, a daughte who got married - there's a scene between de Niro and a blonde daughter which isn't bad but might mean more if we'd spent more time
- it repeats story beats constantly eg there's two scenes of Pesci telling de Niro they have to kill Pacino - or scenes that could've been cut - there's so much that could've been cut
- for all it's flaws it's clearly made by people with talent and has memorable moments like the build up to the murder of Hoffa, de Niro talking about Hoffa to a nice nurse who has no idea who Hoffa is, old Pesci being wistful in prison about killing Pacino - I enjoyed the last half hour but that was in part because of relief the film was over
A sleeper blockbuster which made a fortune for RKO and propelled Edward Dmytryk into the top rank. Why was it so successful? It didn't have star factor, though the acting is fine (Tim Holt, Bonita Granville, Kent Smith). It took on the Nazis but so did many films. There's some OTT Nazi acting even for the time.
Trying to analyse it, I think the reason was this: it's a love story about young people. Tim Holt, raised to be a Nazi, falls for Bonita Graville, a German American who recognises the Nazis are wrong. So two young uns with strong point of view for their characters.
It offers career best roles for Tim Holt and Graville. He's a believable Nazi, whose conscience becomes pricked Granville is brave, spirited, beautiful - an anti Nazi in Germany.
Kent Smith lumbers through his role - he's okay I guess. The role is important, an American abroad, an audience surrogate. HB Warner as a Catholic Bishop is dull, giving a long speech - I kept waiting for the Nazis to shoot him.
But the rest is very good. Otto Kruger is excellent as a Gestapo officer who forgives Holt being soft on Granville then becomes vengeful. The pulpy quality suits the material: I mean, it's terrifying, Granville is torn away from her guardian and put into a camp, then later on women are sterilised, she escapes and his tortured, is whipped. Holt falls for her, he's put on trial, he makes a speech, is shot, she's shot. It's full on. Terrific stuff.
Dmytryk handles it all very well.
Just finished Scott Eyman’s biography of John Ford, though I’d do a top ten. My top ten of films probably too obvious so here’s a top ten of John Ford connections with Australia
1) He directed Rod Taylor in Young Cassidy (1965), before falling ill and being replaced by Jack Cardiff - Ford and Taylor got along very well and I wish Taylor had hired Ford to make Chuka, Taylor’s attempt at producing
2) Ford was BFFs with Frank Baker, an Aussie in Hollywood (brother of Snowy Baker) - he worked for Ford for a number of years as an assistant and actor
3) Aussie John Farrow directed Hondo (1953) but star John Wayne disliked his work and got in Ford to shoot some extra footage
4) Donovan’s Reef (1963) - Ford directed South Sea shenanigans features some Australian sailors all played by Americans
5) They Were Expendable (1945) - tale of the US defeat in the Philippines includes a sequence where General MacArthur is taken off the island and sent to Australia
6) Before and during Maureen O'Hara was making Kangaroo (1952) in Australia, she says Ford sent her a series of very inappropriate love letters which O'Hara put down in part to the fact he was envisioning her in The Quiet Man (O'Hara later claims she busted Ford making out with a male actor so anyway...)
7) In the late 1940s Ford explored making a Western style film set in Australia Stingaree based on the novel of the same name
8) The Long Voyage Home (1940) had for some reason censorship troubles in Australia (https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/167432598?searchTerm=%22john%20ford%22%20director%20australia)
9) Prisoner of Shark Island has two Aussies in the cast - JP McGowan and OP Heggie
10) Australian doco Kokoda Front Line won the Oscar for Best Documentary - but had to share it with Ford's Battle of Midway (and Moscow Strikes Back and Prelude to War - they couldn't make up their mind)
Eyman can be counted on to do a good biography and he does very well by Ford - solid research, entertainingly written. Maybe a little easy on Ford's racism. And also doesn't cover the possibility of his homosexuality - it refers to crushes and possible affairs with women (Katherine Hepburn)... although these seem asexual. His torment, drinking, preference for male company, consistent use of Jeffrey Hunter (who is barely mentioned in the book).
I'm being salacious. The rest is well done. Ford wasn't always admirable but also was a genius. The most moving section is the end, with Ford longing to direct but also scared he'll be able to (there were some options), being feted, estranged from his son, with an alcoholic useless daughter.
Philip Terry popped up in a few movies but is probably best remembered as Mr Joan Crawford (for a time). He's not overly charismatic, though he's not bad - I guess I was hoping for, I don't know, Tom Conway or something.
It's an RKO B which means it looks schmick. Lew Landers directs with competence - it's a dark deserted house, mystery guests. Jacqueline White is a competent leading gal, Eduardo Cianelli a competent threat.
This started well but as it went on it got tired, Terry's lack of energy started to tell. The whole thing felt tired and rote. A really keen director and cast could've made something more of this.
Still, looks good.
RKO got Val Lewton to make this in part to use a ship set - they weren't dumb, it's a spooky setting for a movie. I like this more on second viewing - its taste, intelligence and ambition is endearing, even if it lacks some jump scares.
Richard Dix is the weird ship captain whom no one else seems to notice is weird except a newbie.
The film lacks female interest, would've been better had they explained the crew's support and been about the one voyage where people couldn't get off the boat. But interesting, evocative.
A B-picture but an RKO "B" so it's done with class and there's some names associated with it - a young Anthony Mann working his way up was the director, the star was Tom Conway who's a personal fave, and his female lead is Ann Rutherford from the Andy Hardy films. Jane Greer is in the support cast.
Rutherford was so likeably in the Hardy movies I'm surprised she never became a bigger name, though she did tend to overact. She's a cab driver (hello WW2 feminism) nwho picks up amnesiac Tom Conway. It stars off moody and more recogniseably Anthony Mann but becomes lighter There's a wisecreacking cop, Rutherford is an ex actress who pretends to be a reporter, Conway pretends to be a reporter. The dead person is a Broadway producer.
I loved Conway in the Val Lewton films. In a more conventional leading man part he doesn't have the lightness and humour of his brother George Sanders. He's still a solid B star - just doesn't have the twinkle. He's really most effecitve as a second lead I think.
Martin Scorsese's famous cocaine fuelled misfire killed Liza Minnelli's career as a movie star (along with Lucky Lady and A Matter of Time) and left a magnificent title song. It starts bold and brassy with credits then has a cringy meet cute with Robert de Niro being a sex pest trying to get Minnelli's phone number.
De Niro's character is really revolting - I think in part because the film was improvised so much, he's experienced at it and she isn't, so he overpowers her in the scenes. When she can sing it's even.
Scorsese says this is a film about creatives. It's not, not really - it's about a possessive, controlling man. He stalks her, love bombs her, is possessive, controlling, abusive.
It's really, really unpleasant. It gets better in the last third when de Niro leaves and the movie becomes essentially a series of production numbers, including the famous 'Happy Endings' which was removed. It's a whole film within a film like they would do in Singin in the Rain. Why did they cut that out and not those terrible abuse scenes which hit the same beat (he's possessive/jealous/mean). They could have trimmed that right back and put in more songs.
I'll say this for Scorsese - he doesn't glamourise domestic violence. But he shoves it down our throats.
Liza flashes her big eyes and can sing the hell out of anything but doesn't have much of a character to play. De Niro is possessive. The film needed a second lead. It has cameo turns from people like Lionel Stander and Dick Miller - it should have merged these.
Tom Conway's success as the Falcon and in the Val Lewton movies saw RKO give him the lead in a B, a remake of a 1934 film. He doesn't have a firm character to play - a smart lawyer, who neglects his wife. It's full of types from 1930s films, and while I love Conway maybe this would've been better with someone with more Broadway energy - Lee Tracy or someone. I did like Audrey Long. She's gorgeous and can act - she married Leslie Charteris IRL!
Oh and the plot is confusing. It starts off with Conway married to Long but always off doing things. So she runs off with an artist which is racy but it's 1944 so not that racy. Really they should have been separated at the start and about to divorce.
Then... the artist's ex wants to kill the artist, which is good... Conway tries to stop her, they struggle, gun goes off... then Conway leaves. Artist gets blamed. Conway defends him. Um... Really Conway should've been more responsible for the death instead of vaguely responsible (apparently his character was in the 1934 version) and he should've been keen to blame the artist so he could get his wife back and make a sacrifice at the end. Instead he lets the artist go on trial... so as to trap a gangster into giving evidence against his boss (this is said at the end). No pay off against the big gangster, or the artist... Conway only decides to do his plan after he discovers the murder scene has been tampered with in the papers... SO for a at least a day he let it slide.
A censored mess. They should've played it as a noir with Conway as a baddie who gets redemption.
Mark Robson makes a beautiful directorial debut. Greenwich Village is spooky in the way New Mexico wasn't - helped by Kim Hunter's lovely work, excellent support including Tom Conway. The romantic male lead is balding, looks emaciated and was killed in World War Two which is interesting in its own way. Devil worshippers, believable cult, suicide. It's fascinating.
Those old Western TV series were so cheap - this is a couple of actors in a few sets, emoting. Brian Keith is a drifter, who turns up in a small town to rescue an ex "Jeff" a hooker in a destructive relationship with Geoffrey Keene - playing an Aussie I think with a great Aussie accent, he refers to fighting Percy Jackson.
Downbeat - Keene beats Keith in a fight, the girl stays. Warren Oates appears as a drunk.
The third Lewton horror. It lacks X factor - maybe a dash of exoticism, no Tom Conway or something. Dennis O'Keefe not quite right. The stoy is a more serial killer tale - murders are committed by a leopard... or are they.
The film perks up with its murders - there's three, quite well done. They figure out who done it quite quick.
This isn't bad. They figure out who the killer is quite quick. It feels like there's a few too many characters.
Still Scorcese's only feature that focuses on a woman - you think he might've done more because this won Ellen Burstyn an Oscar and was a hit. It's a modern updating of old 30s women's pictures with modern trappings.
It's still Hollywood. Her husband is a dipshit who threatens to hit wife and child so we don't feel bad when he dies early on. She finds an act two guy Harvey Keitel who turns out to be a married dipshit.
Then act three she moves to another town and works in a diner and it becomes recogniseably Alice with Diane Ladd channelling Eve Arden and Kris Kristofferson as George Brent (he suited playing.a love interest, KK, because he seemed so comfortable in his skin and not overly charismatic as to pull focus). It really is a Joan Crawford movie. But it's lovely and done with empathy if a little long.
The kid is excellent. Jodie Foster rocks up again as a girl who befriends him. Wish her part had been better.
I'm surprised how populist it is. I mean it ends with a public declaration of love in a diner with extras looking on and clapping when they kiss. I mean, it was turned into a sitcom.
Mind you it's a Scorsese so there's still domestic violence - full on from Harvey Keitel, mild from Kris Kristofferson.
