Showing posts with label Peter Finch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Peter Finch. Show all posts

Thursday, August 07, 2025

Book review - "My Life with Cleopatra" by Joe Hyams and Walter Wanger

 This book has traditionally been dismissed but it's terrific - self serving but so what? It's in diary form so there is tremendous urgency and fascination as Wanger gets a movie greenlit by being high concept - Liz Taylor as Cleopatra - without ever being really sure of the story (you can spin it in all directions).

The producer gushes about Liz and Burton and Mankiewicz, is more exasperated on Spyrous Skouros.

Looking back it's kind of scary how many mistakes were bad luck and understandable - makes sense they'd hold out for Liz, and to film in England where they had a deal with Rank, and to cast Peter Finch and Stephen Boyd, and even to use Robert Mamoulian, and to try to rewrite the script, and not their fault she got sick, but that meant she won an Oscar which made her invaluable. And a lot of things they did were to make the movie better, like hire Mankiewicz. Other things more avoidable - the movie is basically people talking they could have cut a lot of spectacle (yet they had to add some).

Some things I didn't know like Taylor recommended Peter Finch, and they went after Laurence Olivier first for Caesar. 

Fun to read little asides like Wagner commenting that he hadn't dealt well with being cheated on. 

Saturday, June 14, 2025

Movie review - "Windom's Way" (1957) *** (warning: spoilers)

 Good on Rank, it tried to make a decent film here. Corsica steps in fairly well for Malaya, there's some terrific sets, Peter Finch and Mary Ure. The movie doesn't quite work. Feels rewritten. Lacks a cohensive emotional thrust. Finch is a decent doctor, tries to keep the peace in the Malayan Emergency. Struggles.

The antagonists are the white plantation owner (Michael Hordern) and a Malay politician (Marne Maitland - the latter has real status here even if he is treacherous.

The movie can't quite personalise its conflicts. For instance Robert Flemying's white official should have been a hunky guy in love with Mary Ure. Give Ure more of a choice - show her glamorous life in London. The sympathy goes to Natasha Parry, as the Malay nurse in love with Finch.

But the film keeps falling into Rank traps. Not giving women characters anything to do - Ure just lecutres at the end. Make her a nurse, have her shoot someone dead, fight with Parry. Parry just loves Finch and is killed - I hate this bummer stuff. Ure should have died. 

Monday, May 12, 2025

Peter Finch on acting

 Films and Filming


 Also Films and Filming







 

Tuesday, March 18, 2025

Movie review - "The Woman for Joe" (1955) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

 Obscure Rank feature from the 1950s despite being in colour and Vista Vision - it got a decent release but wasn't a TV perennial. Perhaps due to the story. George Baker runs a circus and becomes best friends with little person Jimmy Karoubi. Then Karoubi falls for Hungarian barmaid Diane Cilento.

Having a little person as protagonist is so unsual the film has a fascination.  Karoubi isn't really up for the part - he's got a charisma, I just wish he was a better actor. George Baker isn't that good either - he wrote in his memoirs that Peter Finch should've played the role and he was right.

The film is too nice. Baker and Karoubi like each other. Cilento is a decent person. They still are selfish. Karoubi loves Cilento. She's hot for Baker. Baker goes for her even though he would (arguably) have other options and she would have other options. She's got to go for Karoubi's best friend and he's got to go for her. Sorry, they're selfish. They don't even struggle against their attraction. Then Karoubi dies in an accident (I think it's a hinted suicide because she set him up with a dwaf he rejected earlier in the film after Baker tried to set him up with her?) They go off together feeling a little bad. Sorry for bad language, but fuck them. In playing everyone as "nice" they still come across as insensitive pricks because at the end of the day Karoubi is a dwarf and he isn't.

It might've been more fun using the plot of Freaks. Cilento is  tramp out for Karoubi's mother and hot for Baker. Or if they wanted to make Baker nice have some sexy dude she humps. Throw in a murder.

The writer has done for a more sensitive portrayal. Which is fine. But those need really skilled handling. Everyone tries. No one is outstanding.  It needed a better director. Cilento comes off best despite a Hungarian accent - which again is fine just another layer of artificiality.

I read a review which said the film seems to go on forever. I get that and think I know why. It lacks pace, it puts everything out in a linear manner. We meet Baker. Establish his problems. We meet Karoubi. Things get better. We don't meet Cilento until 30 minutes in. The film could've stared five minutes before hand.

The glimpses of circus life are fun. This is a negative review but there are many good things about the movie. The fact it's about a dwarf is inherently interesting. It totally gets points for that.

Friday, February 07, 2025

Movie review - "Far from the Madding Crowd" (1967) ***

Darling made so much money that MGM pulled out the cheque book for Joseph Janni, John Schlesinger, Fred Raphael and Julie Christie and went "take our money". So they did Thomas Hardy, presumably to give Christie a big fat lead role.

The film looks gorgeous - Nic Roeg shot it and it's full of his wonderful colour. It's made with taste and skill. Everyone can act. Peter Finch is superb.

But it's almost three hours, a Roadshow, and I didn't care about anyone. Julie Christie is beautiful and a fine actress but I just didn't care. Terence Stamp livens things up as a love rat but this could've been told in 90 minutes. Peter Finch is a drip for hanging around and so is Alan Bates. Schlesinger didn't connect with the material.

Honestly I would've prepared a sexed up Gainsborough melodrama version of this with Stewart Granger and James Mason.

Prunella Ransome has a showy role as Fanny.

Wednesday, June 26, 2024

Movie review - "Mr Chedworth Steps Out" (1938) ***1/2

 Ken G. Hall wanted to fashion a film vehicle for Cecil Kellaway so came up with this (adapted from a novel). Kellaway plays Chedworth, a little man, likeable, with a useless gambling son, a nice daughter who is dating an aged idiot, a comic son, and a chirpy young daughter who can sing (Jean Hatton). Apparently Kellaway played these sort of roles on stage all the time back in the day. He's very good in these sort of parts (only in his forties but he looks older).

His character gets fired (excellent direction from Hall, lingering on Kellaway), he's kept on as a nightwatchman, discovers some money, it's forged, wins money on a bet, wins money in share investments that he's conned into by Sydney Wheeler who's also associated with the forgers, and who is the boss of son Peter Finch, and there's John Warwick as an old looking treasury man who likes Kellaway and romances Kellaway's eldest daughter, and daughter Jean Hatton enters a singing contest.

It's a bit all over the place but a lot of old 30s Hollywood star vehicles were - check out some of MGM's efforts.

I wonder why Shirley Ann Richards didn't play Kellaway's hot daughter. Maybe Hall felt he'd done that in It Isn't Done and didn't want to repeat himself. It's not a very big part - he's not in it very much. I did like how she dated a dodgy older guy, a shonk. But was there no better looking man than John Warwick as the treasury guy?

Rita Pauncefort has a high old time as Kellaway's greedy wife - the sort who was caricatured but when you think about it, suffered because she couldn't work. He tells her off early on but then she doesn't seem to change, spending all his money. 

Hatton is very likeable and engaging. No wonder Hall used her again in Ants in His Pants. Peter Finch is excellent and full marks to Hall for giving him a decent role. He's so skinny - no wonder Hall struggled to see him as a romantic lead. 

Frank Harvey juggles it well enough in his script. You can laugh at the gangsters but it does provide an element of pace. The film has a serious subtext and glimpses of Australia's class system and life.

Tuesday, June 04, 2024

Movie review - "A Son is Born" (1946) ***

 Three stars maybe high for something low budget (the sets are very basic) but it's very comptent, well realised. Unpretentious. Plot follows logically. Muriel Steinbeck marries dead beat Peter Finch - her mum believably unsympathetic. He drinks. Travels. Their son prefers him. She walks out, son stays with dad, dad dies, son grows up to be bitter, wants vengeance by seducing daughter of Mum's new bloke (John McCallum).

Finch is very good as is Steinbeck - she's a little soap actory but it suits story. Randell is brilliant - handsome, evil, charismatic. He marries Jane holland intending to root her and dump her. That's full on. They don't have sex here - McCallum and Steinbeck get to the church. Boo! 

It ends in New Guinea. Randell becomes a Good Person rather quickly via war service. There's some terrific Damien Parer photography and action. The ending does work.

Kitty Bluett, the maid, had an affair with Randell IRL.

Holland is likeable. McCallum looks the part but is a little stiff playing "old".

But just a really good solid film. Location filming helps immeasuably.

Sunday, April 14, 2024

Book review - "Mad as Hell: The Making of Network and the Fateful Vision of the Angriest Man in Movies" by Dave Itzkoff

 I think Network means more to Americans who didn't grow up with public broadcasting but I recognise the film's excellence and power. This is a worthy book - the writer did his research, especiallu going through the different drafts that Chayefsky did. Getting finance was not too hard - I mean, it wasn't super easy, but it was the 70s and The Hospital had made money. Also Sidney Lumet was idea and there were stars - William Holden, Faye Dunaway.

No one wanted to play the Peter Finch part. He wasn't on any lists but his agent pestered and he got it. Though he had to audition, sulked, then called back and said "sorry darling I forgot I was an actor". Finch stories are the most lively - he got bored acting opposite Ned Beatty during Beatty's speech so started impersonating a monkey, he moved to LA from "semi retirement" because the film reignited his career, he warned everyone that black extras would find him irresistible, he campaigned for his Oscar, he'd walk to the Beverly Hills hotel every day (couldn't drive) and wait until someone bought him breakfast (so he died trying to scab a freebie), William Friedkin organiser of the Oscars told Chayefsky that Finch's black wife couldn't accept the Oscar but Chayefsky or Lumet could, Chayefsky invited her up anyway.

Chayefsky was a pain on the film but Lumet could handle it -what a bummer they just didn't pay Lumet the few extra hundred thou to do Altered States (though what happened with Arthur Hiller?). 

William Holden was boozy and insecure with emotional scenes. Fay Dunaway was terrific but freaked out about her sex scene - the author makes diva claims but she had to do most of her career surrounded by men with their hands down their pants around her. She was very sympathetic here. I think the film and Oscar made her a bit nuts - she made it to the top and didn't know what to do next, went for star parts as opposd to best parts.

The impact/fandom of the movie is well conveyed. A totally decent book.

Monday, April 08, 2024

Movie review - "Eureka Stockade" (1949) *** (re-watching)

 I've got it - they should've just made Chips play Dan McAlpine again and give him a family and plop them in the middle of the Eureka Stockade. The hot daughter could've romanced a digger and a cop, make the historical people background figures.

Tuesday, April 02, 2024

What films could Chips Rafferty have starred in?

 After The Overlanders he was signed to a long term contract by Ealing. Here's what resulted.

- Bush Christmas - perfect choice

- The Loves of Joanna Godden - awful (just micast)

- Eureka Stockade - awful (as in, miscast)

- Bitter Springs - ideal.

Rank/Ealing made The Shiralee, which could've used Rafferty, though he wasn't that sexy - also Robbery Under Arms... he could've played the boys' dad. He would've suited The Siege of Pimchgut as the lead instead of Aldo Ray. But really that film should've been about German POWs.

Ealing announced Pepper Springs for him and Tommy Trinder which doesn't sound that great but would've been better than Eureka Stockade.

He didn't really have the romantic look for the lead in Sons of Matthew.

Okay so here's what would've worked (I'm approaching from the POV of Ealing):

- Eureka Stockade with Rafferty as a fictional lead and Peter Finch or someone else as Lalor and someone handsome to do the romance

- Siege of Pinchgut with Chips as main cop

- an adaptation of We of the Never Never with Chips as the husband (was this novel ever considered for adaptation?)

- a variation of The Overlanders only set in New Guinea i.e. group fleeing Japanese

- adaptation of The Long Shadow by Jon Cleary 

- Mary Bryant story with Chips as Will

On his own, Rafferty definitely should've played the lead role in Dust on the Sun (Justin Bayard) - Ken Wayne didn't have the name. I know they were insecure about the romantic stuff but they could've cast an age appropriate lead. He also could've appeared in The Stowaway and The Restless and the Damned. It would've helped. He was still internationally known.

Wednesday, August 02, 2023

Movie review - "The Rats of Tobruk" (1944) (re-viewing) **1/2

The good stuff is good. The photography is beautiful - gorgeous in the way so many Aussie films are. The sets are terrific - the production design, costume, etc. Looks a treat.

I liked the acting. Grant Taylor, Peter Finch and Chips Rafferty are a fine trio - Finch much better than Pat Twohill.  Full of culturally interesting touches.

A lot of the film's flaws were understandable. Such as:

* Opening scene at the homestead. You've got visuals, sheep, horses, etc. Set up Taylor and Pauline Garrick's history. Quite adult. Taylor a walking red flag. But... you could cut it out.  Doesn't impact story. Betty Bryant was integral. Not Garrick. I'm sure Chauvel discussed maybe having an Italian woman character in the siege. That would've possibly been too melodramatic for how he wanted to do it. They should've just focused on the nurse romance. I would've kept Garrick stuff but had her die. Have Taylor coming home or going to visit and she carks it. So he's got a death wish. Would've given it some point.

* No progressive story. A scene of vignettes. You need a relationship to tie it together. Love story would've been fine. Kill Garrick and have the love story between the nurse... Taylor doesn't want to love again. Finch loves the nurse. Triangle.  Problem though: they evacuated the nurses.

*Could have a rival within the camp. A Pole or Brit. They learn to respect each other. Maybe too late.

*I get desire to have comedy. But it clunks. Joe Valli alright. George Wallace not he looks so old.

*Make it clearer why the siege was important. Maybe this wasn't an issue in 1944. But surely it could have been dramatised? People preparing to evacuate Cairo or something? They could've dramatised a scene or two with the Germans, surely?

*The ending PNG sequence feels very tacked on, as it was. But apart from the photography it is memorable for one thing - when Taylor kills the Japanes soldier. They fight, he shoves the guy's head under water. Holds it there til the guy drowns. Brutal. Tough, Depicted uncompromisingly.

Wednesday, July 28, 2021

Movie review - "The Shiralee" (1957) ***1/2 (re-watching)

A film that means even more to me now because I'm the father of a young girl, and the beautiful casting of Peter Finch is even more effective. It's a mystery how director Leslie Norman stuffed up Summer of the Seventeenth Doll but made such a good fist of this. Having the perfect star of course helps - Finch was never better as the charming, irresponsible drifter who abducts his kid in a fit of pique and is stuck with her.

The Australian outback is beautifully conveyed - the camraderie on the back of trucks, the slang, the casual mateship, the horrible local bullies (Guy Doleman and Lloyd Berrell) threatening Finch at the pub, the loneliness of Nial Maguiness. Charles Tingwell gives Finch a lift in the truck - is his voice dubbed?

Superb performance from Dana Wilson the little girl. Love the moments like her tagging along, and laughing in the rain with her dad, and him carrying her on her shoulders.

Rosemary Harris is lovely as the girl Finch once impregnated. Russell Napier is her dad - he was an Aussie, I wasn't familiar with him.

There is some stuff that I really didn't like. When Elizabeth Sellers the wife turns up wanting her child back... he holds his ground, the kid picks him, then Finch tries to dump the kid with his friends. What a lousy dad. I think they should've made the mum a drunk or something and not into the kid. They do at the end, kind of, but not enough - not when she goes to visit him in the country town. That's the twist at the end but they should've bought it in earlier. She's too sympathetic! She should go with her mother. He's not a very good dad, always dumping the kid outside pubs and in cars and leaving her with people he's just met like Reg Lye and talking about packing her off to boarding school.

Also I didn't like all the fat jokes all the characters make about Tessie O'Shea. They really pour it on.

The film recovers for a decent last act though - with heartbreaking stuff of Wilson chasing after Finch going "dad, dad". And the lovely moment where Finch roots the shop girl (Barbara Archer) who dreams of going to Wagga Wagga and some decent heartbreak when the kid is run over (off screen - they miss a trick).

Oz movie fans will love seeing familiar faces bob up like Bruce Beeby (Finch's lawyer), Frank Leighton (a barman who knows Rosemary Harris), Henry Murdoch (Aboriginal actor in a car).

Friday, November 13, 2020

Overview of Ken Hughes

Ken Hughes was one of those directors I used to dismiss on the basis of a traumatic childhood experience. One day in high school, a history teacher locked us inside the assembly hall and forced us to watch the 1970 epic Cromwell, a sluggardly dull trudge through the English Civil War. Hughes’ name was plastered all over it, as writer and director, and it scarred me from visiting his filmography for many years.

It was unfair, I know, but these things happen. Later on I heard he made one masterpiece, The Trials of Oscar Wilde (1960), which I did see - and was brilliant. So I had a second look at Cromwell, was bored again, and ran away once more.

What prompted a more serious dive into the Hughes oeuvre was my interest in Diana Dors. (https://www.filmink.com.au/a-tale-of-two-blondes-diana-dors-and-belinda-lee/) Hughes directed Ms Dors in The Long Haul (1957), a great little unpretentious B-movie about truckers co-starring Victor Mature. I was surprised to see the name of the auteur of Cromwell on it, and decided to revisit his filmography, only properly this time.  I was surprised to find a filmmaker whose output was consistently interesting and entertaining, and deserved more critical attention than it has received.

Hughes was born in Liverpool in 1922. He began working at the BBC as a technician when he was only sixteen, then during the war moved into making documentaries, short features, and training films for the Ministry of Defence. After the war he directed documentaries for the BBC.

The British film industry had a thriving “B” picture scene in the 1950s, helped by quota protections which incentified thrifty producers to make short features that played the lower half of double bills. A new organisation that specialised in this field was Anglo-Amalgamated, run by the team of Stuart Levy and Nat Cohen. Cohen is one of those moguls who should be better known - a shrewd gambler who would later control EMI Films and help finance debut features from directors as varied as John Schlesinger, Ken Loach, John Boorman and Alan Parker... and Ken Hughes. Anglo-Amalgamated wanted to make a crime drama called Wide Boy (1952), based on a radio and TV play by Australian Rex Rienits about a low-class chiseller who gets in over his head when he attempts blackmail. Hughes was given the job of directing and did it excellently - it’s stripped back, atmospheric entertainment, without an ounce of fat on it. Check out this opening sequence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1k8ESUCgmjE

Anglo-Amalgamated put Hughes to work writing and directing 30 minute films for release in cinema, such as The Missing Man (1953), The Candlelight Murder (1953), The Drayton Case (1953), The Dark Stairway (1954), The Blazing Caravan (1954), The Murder Anonymous (1955), Passenger to Tokyo (1954), The Strange Case of Blondie (1954), Night Plane to Amsterdam (1955). These essentially feel like self-contained episodes of an anthology TV series; I’ve only seen a few but they hold up well - Australia’s own Vincent Ball pops up in some, like The Drayton Case here
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2goxdb

Hughes’ second feature was Black 13 (1954) which he wrote and directed for low budget producer Roger Proudlock. The star was Peter Reynolds, a highly entertaining actor who specialised in cads, and who later emigrated to Australia where he died in a fire.

Hughes then wrote and directed The House Across the Lake (1954) based on Hughes’ own novel. This was made for Hammer Films, before that studio specialised in horror, and featured many aspects of British B movies from the 1950s: a short running time, film noir-ish plot, and imported B-list American stars, in this case Alex Nicol and Hilary Brook. It’s quite a fun movie, reminiscent of The Postman Always Rings Twice; one is inclined to wonder if Nicol’s character, a writer under the pump and distracted by lust, was a Hughes self-portrait.

Here’s a trailer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmhJJn0LIPA

Anglo-Amalgamated hired Hughes to make The Brain Machine (1955) with Elizabeth Allen and Maxwell Reed, a decent little thriller that feels like it wants to be sci fi but isn’t. Like most of his early features, it’s an easy watch if you’re in the right mood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o2kJ8Vdmdc

Hughes wrote and directed two more features for Anglo, both with B-list stars from Hollywood, both worth watching: The Little Red Monkey (1955) with Richard Conte, based on a TV serial, and Confession (1955) with Sydney son-of-Charlie Chaplin. He also helped write The Flying Eye (1955) for the Children’s Film Foundation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb9BBVS4hOw

Hughes’ thrift and versatility impressed Tony Owen, aka Mr Donna Reed, who had set up a filmmaking operation in England, Todon. Todon had a lot of success making genre pieces aimed at the international market; indeed, Owen’s impact on the British scene is under-rated because he rarely took screen credit - it was easier to get British subsidies with a local producer’s name on it. Owen hired Hughes to write Portrait of Alison (1955), a lively Laura (1944)-style murder mystery starring Howard Hughes favourite Terry Moore and Canadian-living-in Britain Robert Beatty; Guy Green did the actual directing.  Also for Owen, Hughes wrote and directed Timeslip (1955), a slightly sci-fi tale based on a TV serial, starring two Americans, Gene Nelson and another Howard Hughes fave, Faith Domergue. Both were distributed by Anglo-Amalgamated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUKLDiI_zak

The first really stand-out movie of Hughes’ career was Joe MacBeth (1955) a modernised re-telling of Macbeth set among American gangsters of the 1930s, shot in England. It was produced by American Mike Frankovich from a script by another American, Philip Yordan (with a little help from Shakespeare). “It was one of the few scripts I picked up in my life that didn't require a great deal of work,” said Hughes. The movie is gloriously fun. Everyone is in strong form: Paul Douglas, Ruth Roman, Sid James, Bonar Colleano (an American who worked extensively in British films prior to his death in a car crash). It was distributed by Columbia; Frankovich became head of that company’s British operations, and they would finance Hughes’ next few films.

First of these was Wicked as They Come (1956), which Hughes wrote and directed for producers Frankovich and Setton. It starred Arlene Dahl as a woman who claws her way from poverty to the top; it’s revealed at the end she was motivated by having been sexually assault when younger (there was a feminist-ish strand through some of Hughes’ work: for instance in The Brain Machine a person refers to Elizabeth Allen’s character as “ma’am” and she asks to be called “doctor”.) Dahl later sued Columbia over the movie claiming its poster art was misleadingly sexy.  The film would have been better off following the lead of the poster art rather than the script: at heart this should have been a campy Joan Crawford vehicle but it’s far too reticent and dull. I watched this after Joe MacBeth put me on a high over Hughes’ abilities - Wicked as They Come sent me back down to earth. I’m sure the film has its fans. Dahl lost her case, incidentally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7E9WNUWJLU

Hughes worked on two more Max Setton films for Columbia. He wrote the excellent script for Town on Trial (1957), directed by John Guillermin, where detective John Mills investigates the murder of a sexy piece of tail in a small town (men driven by lust was a recurring theme of Hughes movies). He also wrote and directed The Long Haul (1957) which I mentioned at the top of this piece, a movie that has been overshadowed in the cinema of British truck driving stories by Hell Drivers (1957) but which is enormously entertaining, with Diana Dors and Victor Mature giving excellent performances.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1-1SZN3yVg

Maxwell Setton left Columbia to help establish Bryanston Films with Michael Balcon, leaving Hughes needing a new patron. For British TV he wrote episodes of Solo for Canary (1958) and had a huge personal success with a one-man TV play he wrote and directed, Sammy (1958); this was a 40-minute story about a low-level Soho operator (played Anthony Newley) who can’t pay his gambling debts. Reviews were excellent and Hughes’ script was adapted countless times in other countries for TV, notably in the US as Eddie (1959) starring Mickey Rooney.

Hughes’ work had impressed producers Irwin Allen and Albert Broccoli, owners of Warwick Films,  which, like Todon, was an operation aimed at making international-orientated genre pieces in England “for a price”. Hughes worked on the script for Warwick’s High Flight (1957) a Top Gun-esque tale, complete with cocky pilots and homoeroticism starring Ray Milland, that was directed by John Gilling.

Warwick liked it enough to hire Hughes to direct two films for the company. Oddly, these were different to the bulk of their usual output, being non-action films, and not featuring a Hollywood star. Instead, both featured Anthony Newley: Jazz Boat (1960) (based on another story by Rex Rienits) and In the Nick (1960).  Jazz Boat starts out as a crime drama then weirdly turns into a musical (complete with dance numbers) then back into a crime drama again. In the Nick is a comedy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV0basjmZns

Neither film is particularly remembered today but Warwick also financed Hughes’ one undeniable classic. This was The Trials of Oscar Wilde (1960) with Australia’s own Peter Finch in the title role. It’s a stunningly good account of the legendary playwright, with beautiful art direction from Ken Adams and a superb line-up of actors doing sterling work. Finch was rarely better; the entire subject is treated with taste and discretion.

The film was highly acclaimed by critics but not popular at the box office, in part because of the appearance at the same time as a rival project on the same topic, Oscar Wilde (1960) starring Robert Morley. The movie’s financial failure contributed to the dissolution of Warwick; Broccoli and Allen split up, Broccoli went on to make the James Bond films, while Allen spent the rest of his career trying to catch up to his former partner (and came close, incidentally, with a series of hit movies based on the Matt Helm stories).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQWf3VyLu9Y&list=PL0gml3Zg1wRlNV2NvOUtIq2sS01wBoh9y&index=39&t=0s

Hughes had wanted to follow Oscar Wilde with a biopic about Oliver Cromwell but was unable to raise the finance. Instead he wrote and directed The Small World of Sammy Lee (1963),  a feature-length adaptation of his TV play Sammy, with Anthony Newley reprising his small screen performance. The film was a co-production between Bryanston Films and Seven Arts, an American company headed by Ray Stark which had set up operations in England. The film contains much to admire, including superb photography and acting (Aussies Ken Wayne and Kenneth Warren have support roles), and a glimpse of Soho of the time. It is repetitive (Sammy tries to get money, almost gets it, doesn’t) and how much you like it will very much depend on your opinion of Anthony Newley. The movie has become something of a cult item in recent years but was a commercial failure on release and contributed to the collapse of Bryanston Films.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmJ7LrgcKpk

Hughes moved back to television, directing episodes of the TV series Espionage (1964) and writing episodes of An Enemy of the State (1965). He returned to features when Henry Hathaway walked off the set of Of Human Bondage (1964) which the latter was directing in Ireland with Laurence Harvey and Kim Novak. The film was made by Seven Arts and Ray Stark offered Hughes the job of taking over; Hughes also rewrote Bryan Forbes’ script, based on the novel by W. Somerset Maugham. The resulting film is interesting, and contains one of Harvey’s best performances, but isn’t that good. Novak’s performance doesn’t help and, more seriously, Hughes doesn’t get - or didn’t have time to capture - the essential DNA of the story. It is interesting to compare it with other versions of the novel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmthl1hAdFA

Seven Arts still liked Hughes and helped finance a comedy he wanted to write and direct, Drop Dead Darling (1965), starring Tony Curtis as a Bluebeard type who kills women he marries. It’s a frantic farce that does cartwheels for a laugh with beautiful locations and contains some excellent support performances, including Zsa Zsa Gabor. Curtis claimed in his memoirs he did the film because he liked Hughes’ “excellent script” but felt the final movie did not add up to the sum of his parts.  He was spot on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=um5J9x-R89c

The movie was presumably why producer Charles Feldman hired Hughes to direct a section of the James Bond spoof Casino Royale (1967) - reportedly the Berlin stuff with Joanna Pettet. Other directors credited included John Huston, Val Guest, Robert Parrish and Joseph McGrath. I’m not sure comedy was Hughes’ strength.

I think this is Hughes’ stuff here, but don’t quote me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_8o4BbDqkg

Hughes’ next movie also had a Bond connection, or rather, several: Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968), was based on a novel by Ian Fleming, produced by Albert Broccoli, written by Roald Dahl (who had scripted You Only Live Twice), designed by Ken Adam, and featured a number of Bond actors (Desmond Llewellyn, Gert Frobe). Hughes directed and rewrote Roald Dahl’s script. It’s a gorgeous looking movie with divine sets, a fabulous cast and cheerful songs; it’s also, like so many late 60s musicals, far too long and would have been better at a tight 90 minutes.

Chitty Chitty cost so much it actually lost a lot of money on first release - it helped convince Broccoli not to make anything other than Bond movies - but it was popular and has become a family viewing perennial.

“The film made a lot of money, but that doesn’t really make me feel any better about it,” said Hughes later. “On the other hand, I’ve made pictures that got awards at Berlin and places, and didn’t make any money, and that doesn’t make me feel any better either”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTTzcXSLjhI

The film was well regarded enough to enable Hughes to raise finance for his dream project, an epic biopic of Oliver Cromwell called Cromwell (1970). It was produced by Albert Broccoli’s old partner, Irwin Allen.

I’ve been mean about this film and will be again, but it does have some good things about it: Alec Guinness is superb as Charles I, and the production design is amazing. But it’s dull. So dull. Every time Richard Harris walks on screen he looks as though he’s about to give a speech and he does. Admittedly I don’t enjoy English Civil War tales unless they involve witch burnings or focus around Charles II in exile. But if you are a history teacher who couldn’t be bothered talking to class for two hours, Cromwell could solve your issues that day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7QHFm2AeMo

Up until making this film, Hughes was riding high. He earned £44,177 in 1968 and £47,960 in 1969, the year he sold his company, Ken Hughes Productions, to Constellation Investments for  £300,000. It was one of those tricky financial arrangements filmmakers sometimes enter into to help with their tax situation; Hughes was to regret it.

Cromwell was popular at the British box office failed to recoup its huge cost. Around this time the American majors pulled out of filmmaking in Britain, and Hughes, after steady work for almost two decades, found himself floundering a little, earning no money in 1970.

In hindsight, he probably should have fled to Hollywood, like so many of his contemporaries (John Gilling, Michael Winner) or gone into horror, sex comedies or big screen adaptations of TV shows (the most profitable genres in 70s British cinema). Instead he stayed in London where he wrote for television (Menace, Colditz, Fall of Eagles, Dial M for Murder, Oil Strike North). He eventually got two feature gigs as writer-director: The Internecine Project (1974), a thriller for British Lion starring James Coburn and Lee Grant, and Alfie Darling (1975), a sequel to the comedy-drama Alfie (1966), financed by his old patron Nat Cohen (now head of EMI). Internecine has a decent central idea - James Coburn is up for a job so decides to kill off four people who know about his shady past - but feels in badly need of some extra twists/complications. And Alfie Darling suffers very, very, very badly in comparison to the original, which turned Michael Caine into a star (you may feel differently if you like Alan Price, who steps into Caine’s shoes).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vhl7orjm20

Both films flopped. In 1975 Hughes declared bankruptcy, claiming his personal inability to curb expenses, two divorces, taxes and the collapse of the film industry.

Hughes decided to move to the US. He got the gig making one of the most bizarre movies of all time, something even weirder than Casino Royale: Sextette (1978), starring Mae West. Irving Rapper had originally meant to direct before Hughes stepped in just before shooting began. The resulting film is absurd but almost compulsive in its randomness, whether it’s Timothy Dalton singing “Love will Keep Us Together” to Mae West, or George Hamilton playing a gangster, or Ringo Starr putting on a weird European accent to play a director, or Tony Curtis as a Russian, or Dom De Luise as a manager flunky, or West talking to George Raft in an elevator, or Keith Moon and Van McCoy and Alice Cooper AND Walter Pidgeon or... Oh, anyway, see it if you want.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as6Iv5R1G0M

Hughes’ last film as director was a slasher flick, Night School (1981), the movie debut of Rachel Ward. It’s quite a stylish piece of entertainment, made with professionalism and skill rather than ludicrous excess, which means it isn’t as fun as others in this genre. Ward has X factor from the get-go and takes part in a Psycho (1960) shower scene homage; it has a feminist moments and there’s also not one but two sexually predatory academics.  For me, it was Hughes’ most enjoyable film since Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fuMpdXBVZA

And then the credits stopped. I don’t know what happened. Night School was well done. The producer of that film speaks well of Hughes in interviews. He was heading towards sixty years of age so there was ageism, but he could write as well as direct and was used to low budgets... Maybe there were other issues (if anyone knows, please feel free to tell me). He died of complications from Alzheimer’s Disease in 2001.

So how good a filmmaker was Ken Hughes? For me - and this is purely, utterly subjective - he was very “ups and downs” kind of guy with a solid over-all average: the maker of a genuine classic (Trials of Oscar Wilde), a handful of terrific movies (Long Haul, Joe MacBeth, Wide Boy) and some films that have splendid things in them (Small World of Sammy Lee, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and yes Casino Royale). He also made movies that were dull (Cromwell), dire (Alfie Darling), disappointing (Timeslip) and in one case beyond belief (Sextette). He clearly worked best when attached to a feisty little production company with strong Hollywood links (Anglo Amalgamated, Tony Owen, Warwick, Seven Arts).

I also wonder if maybe Ken Hughes rated his own writing too highly. He clearly had abilities as a writer - some of his scripts were fabulous. But it is hard to keep a high level of quality if you write and direct all the time and Hughes was also prone to rewrite, even on screenplays by skilled colleagues (Roald Dahl on Chitty Chitty, Bryan Forbes on Of Human Bondage). In hindsight maybe Hughes would have been better off working more with a trusted collaborator than being a one man band. I completely admit It’s hard to make these sort of judgements without reading/comparing original drafts and the rewrites, but it’s just a sense I get.

Still he should be better known. I wonder why he isn’t. Check out Joe MacBeth if you haven’t.

Sunday, October 11, 2020

Movie review - "Windom's Way" (1957) ***

Not fondly remembered by many, but I liked it. I have affection for these Rank movies but the people involved did try to make a decent movie. It helps to have some excellent leads in Peter Finch and Mary Ure. And the script is quite left wing for Rank which gives it freshness - there is a lot of criticism of the white rubber company man (Michael Hordern) who only cares about profits and the white colonial officials who seem incompetent; the main antagonist is an Indian, who is quite smart and not unsympathetic.

It is still a 1957 Rank movie - the hero is a white man, there is brownface, it was shot in Corsica instead of where it is actually set. Peter Finch is very good - he did well as these tortured doctors in the third world. Mary Ure matches him as the wife - she's gorgeous, especially with her blonde hair swept back, fresh out of the water.  By Rank standards this gave her a decent role - although the plot is resolved half way through. 

The nurse who loves him, Natasha Parry in brownface, never does anything. The film isn't enough action and isn't enough melodrama - it's smarter, which is fine, but doesn't give the audience simpler baser pleasures.

It looks good. Beautiful colour photography. Frustratingly vague about being set in Malaya - it could be Burma. Why not just call them communists, etc? I was never quite sure how it was going to end. Maybe it would've been a bigger hit had Finch and Parry been a couple, then Ure died. Parry goes off to war. That would've had more emotional impact.

Thursday, October 08, 2020

Movie review - "Robbery Under Arms" (1957) *** (re-watching)

 I'm going dotty in my old age... I'm developing a fondess for this misfire. Now my expectations are low watching it is like putting on an old pair of shoes - it's the sort of fllm that plays on the ABC at 2am.

It's flaws are clear - it's not very exciting, and it doesn't work on the character relationships. It should be about Starlight and the boys and their dad, and the girls in their life... and the "good people in their life. And that's all there but it's not connected.

Some of it works. Its clear that one brother is shiftier than the other (Ronald Lewis vs David McCallum both of whom are quite good) and that one sister is shiftier than the other (Maureen Swanson vs Jill Ireland, again both quite good).

But it's not clear how both brothers interact with Starlight and their father - which should be be the emotional crux of piece.

Starlight just sort of strolls in and out of the movie - he rocks up and goes "we are robbing cattle" and they rob cattle then he disappears and then he's captured off screen and escapes off screen, then they see him again and then he disappears so they go to the goldfields without him.. then Starlight happens to rock up and rob a town that the brothers just happen to be present in.

It's frustrating because all these things could have been fixed with a quick edit - strengthen the relationship between the boys and Starlight, show what he means to them compared with their dad. It feels so lazy that the robbery at the end is conincidental.

Support characters could have been made clearer - that Vincent Ball's neighbour for instance, is meant to be the goody goody that should inspire them. As it is he just pops in and out... they should have combined his character with that of Grace, the good girl... or combined with the trooper Goring, or made Vincent Ball into a villain.

And the nasty bushranger in theStarlight's band - the one who shoots the trooper and then later, shockingly, shoots and kills the mother of a small boy in the robbery (the best sequence in the film). His part could have been even bigger. Larry Taylor is the actor, I think.

The character of the father is completely under utlitised as is that of Warrigal. These should be key.

But lets look at the positives: the location photography,that laid back opening credit sequence, the sparing use of music creates its own atmosphere. The robbery sequence is strong, and I enjoyed the long distance shooting sequences. It's well acted - Ronald Lewis and McCallum are effectively contrasting brothers ditto Swanson and Ireland. Finch is good.

There's barely any Aussies in the cast. I mean it's quite shocking how few. Finch, yes and Johnny Waddell and Vincent Ball. But Ball's sister, and the lead four, and the dad and mother... Why not use locals? Grant Taylor or Chips Rafferty or someone? I wonder what happened.

You could cut Starlight out of the film. He has no romance, no impact that the father couldn't do.

To keep what they had I would make Vincent Ball a cop... have him in love with the Marston sister. Have the sister in love with Starlight. Make the dad the fully evil one who kills.

Ah, there I go. Can't help nit picking. Better it exists than it doesn't. I just wish it was better.

Sunday, August 09, 2020

Movie review - "Eureka Stockade" (1949) *** (re-watching)

 Three stars is generous but I am Australian.

The pros

- spectacular production value - it was the most expensive Australian film made until that time, apparently, but a lot of that is up on screen - spectacular sets of the mining camps and settlements and stockade, and teems of extras... it's a shame they didn't re-use the sets for another film or two, or at least re-use the footage.

- I appreciate the effort it went to to get the historical facts right.

- The action sequences are very well done - the attack on the stockade, the murder of Scobie, the miners rioting.

- the photography is beautiful.

- the editing and other technical aspects are first rate.

- Gordon Jackson and John Fernside manage to create living, breathing characters with very little. 

- I loved that random bug eyed doctor who cut off Lalor's arm at the end.

- they do show an occasional POC such as one of the Eureka people standing trial and the very occasional Aboriginal.

The cons

- the script isn't great - Harry Watt whinged about Australian writers, justifying importing Walter Greenwood - it goes through the events without managing to dramatise them.

- the characters aren't characters they are people who say speeches - there's no life say in the Chips Rafferty-Jane Barrett romance, Rafferty spouts platitudes (Lalor has been de-Irished), I didn't know what Finch's character was (he just appears as an Important Person - I had to google him)

- Commissioner Rede twirls his moustache but is depicted as being so reasonable (surely motivated by fear out of offending the establishment) about his position it sucks the piece clear of drama (it kind of hints maybe he's interested in Jane Barrett but it's only a hint).

- the only people who seem real are Gordon Jackson, the doctor and John Fernside - Fernside is best because he is a spy, just a good old fashioned villain.

- the miners come across as a bunch of whingers - complaining about having to pay a fee (should they have it for free?), Scobie is a drunken brat who throws something through a window (I mean it was harsh he was killed but he wasn't like this innocent victim).

- it wasn't worth importing Jane Barrett, or any of the cast they brought in, except maybe Jackson - the British cast are dull, lacking charisma and surely had no name value at the box office.

- Peter Finch or Grant Taylor should have played Lalor and Muriel Steinbeck could've played Alicia.

- I barely recognised Grant Taylor, in whiskers as a cop.

Actually they shouldn't have focused on Lalor - that straightjacketed them to history. They should have had a fictitious love story-  maybe center around two brothers in love with the same girl or something else simple but effective.

The waste of it gets me irritated at times because it didn't have to cost as much money, be so hokey or have such a miscast star. I get Harry Watt was feeling confident after The Overlanders but not so much that he could leave history - he leant into it. Which is fine, we all make mistakes, but he spent too much money.

Still, there is much to admire about it.

Monday, June 29, 2020

Movie review - "Make Me an Offer" (1954) **

No one has much good to say about the Group 3 films of the early 50s. This is one - it's not much. The novel sold well and was turned into a musical.Maybe it needed songs.

It's about Finch who is an antiques dealer into vases and stuff. It's hard to make that cinematic and this film doesn't manage it - there's not even decent antiques form.

This is the sort of role that needs a breezy star like Kenneth Moore. Finch was more of an actor than a star. I am so ambivalent about him in this movie. I watch him going "he's not bad, his performance is fine... I just don't care." There's a sweet moment where he finds the vase that he loves and smiles and it's solid acting but... the film's not really about that. You don't get the sense he actually truly loves the vase. Maybe I'm just more indifferent to Finch than I realise.

The guts of the plot has him trying to get this vase off Felix Alymer. I didn't follow all the stuff with him selling it and what not. The girl is Adrienne Cori... only she's not because Finch is married. That's dumb. The girl should have been single and it should have been a romance.

Finch's wife seems miserable. They've got two kids - it's weird seeing him play a family man. Maybe the character needed to be more Jewish or something. I dunno. This film just is very underwhelming.

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Movie review - "No Love for Johnnie" (1961) ***

Highly regarded in accounts of the careers of Peter Finch and Ralph Thomas, so I was keen to see it, but it was underwhelming. The skill that went into it was evident - it is a well made movie, Thomas does a strong job (it's easily one of his best movies) and Finch is typically excellent.

I had more problems dramatically.It sort of flounders. Finch is a Labour MP who doesn't get a cabinet position and then sooks a bit. His wife leaves him, his neighbour upstairs (Billie Whitelaw) has the hots for him, he goes and roots a 20 year old (Mary Peach).

Are we meant to care? He doesn't seem to have much drive or ambition he just sort of ambles along. He's keen to have sex with Peach, that gives it some narrative and she has sex with him then calls it off, sensiblt. He's not good at his job - he never seems to care about his constituents, or even that in to any of his women.

There's some bed scenes with Finch and Peach - I think they were hoping for another Room at the Top but it didn't happen. Harvey's desires in that film were clear and understandable. He was faced with a clear moral choice which made things exciting. This plods along.

There's nothing at stake - when his wife suggests they try again it means nothing because they don't like each other and also she's a communist holding his career back so it's good it doesn't work out; the plot with Whitelaw goes nowhere; he gets to have sex with Peach, and she breaks it off causing no trouble. I mean he misses her but that's it. It's not a good match politically.

Reviews were kind. I think they were influenced by the fact the author of the novel died prior to publication.

The acting is uniformly strong - people like Stanley Holloway, Donald Pleasance, etc.

At the end I was like... oh... right. Well. Nicely done. But dull.

Tuesday, May 05, 2020

Movie review - "Summer of the Seventeenth Doll" (1959) ** (warning: spoilers)

The sh*tness of this version really gets to me. Why did it have to be so bad? I mean, I guess they tried. But it's bad.

The play was very effective. Simple. Didn't have to cost a lot. Nothing wrong with setting it in Sydney. I get they wanted things like the Harbour and Luna Park.

But they stuffed the structure. They don't set up Bubba and the boys, there's a weird middle section where Roo has a fight with the wrestler and Dowd is all forgiving. And the ending is shocking - Roo makes up with Barney and then Roo and Olive seem to reconcile. The piece loses all its power.

The acting is bad. Burt Lancaster and Rita Hayworth would've been great... if they didn't want to do it then surely it could have been reworked for Peter Finch who did The Shiralee with Leslie Norman. He was a good enough actor to act older.

Ernest Borgnine and John Mills can act but they just feel wrong - they never seem like mates. Anne Baxter and Angela Lansbury are also fine actors but they struggle with their accents. They seem so uncomfortable. Vincent Ball and Janette Craig aren't very good as the young ones - they're fine, but I wished at least Rod Taylor (who had done a movie for HHL) had the role.

"The Americans" copped the blame for this but I think it was more the British.

Thursday, April 23, 2020

Movie review - "The Rats of Tobruk" (1944) ** (re-viewing)

The drop in quality between this and Forty Thousand Horsemen is remarkable. That film had so much energy and pep. This starts well with loving shots of cattle in the outback but is soon bogged down by Peter Finch's dreary narration. It was like Chauvel had made too many pompous self important propaganda documentaries during the war and it leaked into this movie.

Finch introduces himself and his mates Rafferty and Taylor who are never allowed to have any fun. The characterisations are fine, all three are capable - Finch is an improvement over Pat Twohill, just dull. The concept of a writer getting to know Australians isn't very exciting - why not have him a man in disgrace or something.

Taylor has a decent character to play - shiftless, womanising, brave. But he's a downer too. You don't see him having any fun womanising. It's all glum.

I liked Pauline Garrick as Kate the squatter's daughter but she's a misery guts. Mary Gay's nurse is a pure trope though she makes sense from the delusional mind of Peter Finch.

Chauvel's tendency was to melodrama with location shooting. I think he was hampered here by the fact he couldn't go full melodrama - or didn't want to.  I did like how Finch would write to Garrick which made Taylor jealous.I think they should have made this a proper love triangle - it would have given the piece some meat. Or had love triangle with Mary Gay.

Some of the visuals are impressive - the night fighting, the dingy trenches. But it's a movie of scenes and moments rather than a coherent narrative. Those scenes include vaudeville bits - they run into Joe Vallie to do some comic acting in the sand dunes, and George Wallace does some wacky antics with a barber chair. Then there's a tacked on finale in New Guinea.

The movie is definitely of historical interest but it's lame.