Movie review - "Valentino" (1977) **1/2

 I had heard this film was terrible. It isn't. I mean it has flaws but it's always interesting. Even the fact the film ends with Valentino in a box match a la Rocky and it was made by the producers of Rocky is interesting.

Rudolph Nureyev is Valentino and does okay. He's got the looks, the build, can dance, has charisma. Russell protects him - he shoots him dancing, with his clothes off, strutting around. It's effective.

As a movie buff I enjoyed seeing representations of Jean Acker, Nijinsky, June Mathis (Felicity Kendall), and various executives.

Michelle Phillips  is his main wife. She's beautiful (naked in one scene) but not as effective. Slightly miscast, I felt. However the film is best when focusing on their relationship. The story loses it when she disappears.

Leslie Caron pops up as Nasimova. The last act of the film is odd. Up until then I was having a good time watching this. Ken Russell films are always interesting.

Movie review - "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" (1962) **

A fascinating disaster, one of the movies that (along with Mutiny on the Bounty and The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm) helped end the Vogel-Siegel regime at MGM. It would have to be one of the most miscast movies in history - a few basic decisions sunk this to the bottom of the cinematic ocean even before the cameras rolled.

It updates the story from World War One to World War Two, which wasn't in itself fatal, it just makes the movie more obvious - lots of talk about Nazis and standing up to Nazis. Mortally wounding is putting Glenn Ford in the role which made Rudolph Valentino a star; Ford was a competent actor with a decent range but he's hilariously inappropriate as an Argentinian playboy and wastrel who dabbles in painting - far too American and stiff, and way too old to be a drifter. (The younger Ford of Gilda may have gotten away with it - but someone of Ford's age in this film who is without a solid foundation... that suggests an entirely different sort of character) They occasionally have Ford do a bit of Valentino - ride a horse, fly a plane, do a little dance (though not a tango), paint - and it's always a mistake. A bunch of other actors were considered - Vincente Minnelli says he wanted Alain Delon, press reports say George Hamilton and Maximilian Schell were looked at - and all would have been better than Ford.

Secondly they got Minnelli to direct. He says in his memoirs the studio forced him to do it, but surely the person behind Gigi could have gotten out of it? I think he was just embarrassed when it turned out to be such a disaster... and Minnelli must take a lot of the blame. It's a candy coloured MGM look at the war, with some snazzy art direction and costumes that make the whole thing seem unreal. You couldn't do that in 1962 - especially not for a serious drama about war, love, family and passion.

 The casting is dreadful - good actors have rarely been so wrongly used. You've got Yvette Mimieux, who I normally like as Ford's Argentinian younger sister who gets involved in the French resistance - blonde Mimieux who specialised in ethereal types (notably in The Time Machine) isn't convincing for one second as an (a) Argentinian (b) sister of Ford (c) daughter of Charles Boyer (d) someone who cares enough about politics to join the French resistance.

There's also Ingrid Thulin as the married woman Ford loves.... Her performance isn't bad but she's dubbed very distractingly by Angela Lansbury (very unfair on Thulin to get such a distinctive actor to do it, completely undermining her). She's not helped by her subplot, where she has an affair with Ford despite being married to an anti-Nazi.... played by Paul Henreid. This brings in echoes of Casablanca this movie really shouldn't have done, because it doesn't do well by way of comparison. (For instance, Casablanca nodded at the complexity of Vichy politics of the time - here everyone descended from the Germans is a Nazi, everyone descended from the French is an anti-Nazi, even if it takes some time for them to get violent about it.... there's no mention of collaborationists here.)

Lee J. Cobb is ridiculous as an Argentinian patriarch (described by Ford as "pure Argentine"), in a bad wig and moustache, delivering an outrageously over the top performance, even by Cobb's standards (he has this ripe death scene, railing against Nazis, saying the four horsemen of the apocalypse are coming, then collapses and dies in the rain).

Having vented all that spleen, I should point out that Charles Boyer (Ford's French father), Karl Boehm (Ford's German cousin), and Paul Lukas (Ford's German uncle) are all very comfortably cast - but the film never recovers from the quadruple punch of Ford, Cobb, Mimieux and dubbed Thulin.

Dramatically the movie is hurt by the fact we never see any friendship between Ford and Karl Boehm (they are cousins) - even just a scene between them early on would have helped. The change to World War Two I think could have worked but it makes the whole thing about Nazis - Cobb doesn't prefer Ford to Boehm because he's a bit of a prick, like in the original, now it's political; Henreid ignores Thulin because he's devoted to fighting Nazis. Mimieux hates the Nazis and wants to fight them; Ford and Boyer don't like the Nazis either, it just takes them a while to get into it. I'd wish they'd given the characters different points of view - there's no really differing attitudes towards Nazism from Lukas and Karl Boehm, for instance, they are just "Germany is awesome". There's no differing attitude towards the war from Boyer or Ford, as well - Boyer has a bit of guilt for ducking World War One service, but that's it.

There's also no real big dramatic set piece the movie makers could bank on. Ben Hur had the pirate battle and the chariot race - plus also the resurrection scene, I guess. There were director and actor proof moments. The original Four Horsemen didn't have those - it had a tango scene plus a tragic ending. And so they get rid of the tango scene.  This movie was a big budget production but it actually didn't have to be - there are no balls, or battles, or scenes on water. The final action scene is bombs dropping on a building but that's it. Most of the action consists of people talking in a room - and usually only two people. Its a monument to MGM's (and Minnelli's) inefficiency.

Could this have worked with Ford's casting? Maybe - I think the family needed to be American, not Argentinian. The story as written needs to have them as Argentinian in order that Ford can stay in Paris through the war - but you could have set it prior to Pearl Harbour when America was neutral.
There are some effective moments - Thulin and Ford consummating their love during an air raid, Minnelli's use of colour, Boyer chastising Ford for seeing a married woman. The second half is better because they refer less to the fact that Ford is Argentinian. But it's still pretty poor.

Book review - "Lucky Stars: Janet Gaynor and Charles Farrell" by Sarah Baker

It's a wonder why no one's written a bio of Gaynor or Farrell before - after all, for a few years there they were among the most popular stars in Hollywood, and their movies went into the sound era; they made a large number of films together, several of which were classics (Sunrise, Seventh Heaven), and Gaynor not only won the first Best Actress Oscar, she appeared in some sound classics (A Star is Born, State Fair). Also, they had a long-running affair with each other - and/or Gaynor is one of the best known "rumoured lesbians" of Hollywood.

Maybe it's because their best films together were silents, and thus not widely seen once sound came in; perhaps it was because State Fair and A Star is Born were followed by more-famous remakes; also, to be blunt, neither of them died young or featured in a scandal, meaning they missed out on the immortality gained by silent stars like Fatty Arbuckle and Valentino.

Still, better late than never and Baker has done a very good job - well written, thoroughly researched. And the two leads did have interesting lives - plucky little Gaynor, essentially thrust into acting by her mother and step father, despite not having much enthusiasm for it; she began as an extra but her big eyes and waif appeal saw her graduate to leads then stardom fairly rapidly, much to the chagrin of her bitter sister; she managed to stay a star for the rest of her career, retiring when on top. She also made a lot of money, battling with studios and going on strike for better terms and conditions (she was a pet of William Sheehan's and later David O. Selznick's) - but also hung on to it, dying a wealthy woman.

A first marriage proved disastrous, but her second and third were happy; this was to costume designer Adrian and then, when he died on her, producer Paul Gregory. The Adrian liasion in particular fuelled the rumour that Gaynor was a lesbian, as did her close friendships with Margaret Lindsay and Mary Martin. This book doesn't support these rumours, and quotes people who criticize them - but the evidence doesn't rule it out either. Whatever she did in the privacy of her bedroom and/or mind, it's clear she did have intense friendships with women, and a happy marriage to Adrian.

It's also clear she and Farrell had an affair, though she never married him; Baker argues this may have been due to the fact Gaynor sensed that, down deep, Farrell was weak. His story was worth telling on it's own merits - coming from a comfortable family, who he defied to go into acting, Farrell's climb to the top was a little rockier, with several false stars before he hit big. Like Gaynor, he managed the transition to sound with relative ease but was never regarded as big a star, and his decline was swifter - from being still regarded as one of the biggest names at the box office in 1932, he was firmly B list within a few years time, making The Flying Doctor in Australia in 1935. (As an Aussie, I would have liked to have read more about this; Baker mentions his affair with Mary Maguire - though doesn't talk about the fact her later husband wound up imprisoned during World War Two for fascist beliefs).

He bounced back, though, helping found and run the successful Palm Springs Racquet Club, becoming a force in Palm Springs politics (including stints as mayor), making money as a property developer, then rediscovering acting success in 50s sitcoms. His personal life was rockier - a womaniser whose marriage lasted a long time but was often stormy and unhappy; he had a long affair with Diana Powell, William Powell's second wife - something I was completely unaware of (W. Powell was much older than his wife, and apparently was willing to turn a blind eye so Diana could have a bit of fun). Farrell battled with the bottle, kicked it for some years but relapsed towards the end of his life and became a hermit. At least he was rich  (I hate it when they lose their money).

So not one but two stories which deserved to be told and they've been told well.

Movie review - "Cobra" (1925) **

Campy, crappy Rudolph Valentino film with our hero as a lecherous Italian count who begins a bromance with a rich, lesser good looking American and goes to work for him in New York. He falls for a nice, innocent secretary but struggles with the lure of other women (cobras, he calls them) - in particular Nita Naldi, who marries his friend. He tells her she's not interested and she replies "tell me that when you're holding me in your arms". He goes with her to a hotel but doesn't sleep her - she calls up her plan B and they both die in a fire. His mate figures it out and falls for the secretary - Valentino decides to give up his one chance at true love, do the decent thing by his mate and go home.

I'd heard this was awful but it was fine - Rudy is in dashing form, the role suits him to a T, the story isn't bad. The girl who plays the true love secretary isn't pretty enough but Nita Naldi is great fun as the femme fetale.

Movie review – “The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse” (1921) **1/2

Rudolph Valentino may have been a joke even in his own life time but he was a genuine star, as shown by this film, which launched him – charismatic, good looking, moves like a panther, skilled dancer. The role is made for him too – dashing Franco-Argentine gaucho slash womanising playboy who dances the tango in Buenos Aries dives and is adored by his strict grandfather. His family is half German and half French and they go to their respective countries before the war. Rudy is a painted in Paris - doing portraits of women who are actually topless which is full on as well as dancing. He falls in love with a married woman but is about to leave with her when war stars. The woman decides to stay with her now blond husband, Rudy joins the French army and is killed as he spots his cousin in a trench. Melodramatic, spectacular stuff - too much time devoted to Rudy's uninteresting father. There's a Rasputin type figure who sees the four horses. Why the hell did MGM think Glenn Ford was suitable to play Rudy's role in the remake?

Movie review – “The Sheik” (1921) **1/2

Old-fashioned, racist, romantic schlock which remains Rudolph Valentino’s best known role and one of the best remembered silent films of them all. Audiences made fun of it even at the time but they also turned up in large numbers. It has a simple, solid story which must have ticked wish fulfilment boxes for many women in the audience; there’s also lots of action, strong production design (palm trees, oasis, dunes, horses galloping over dunes, tents, belly dancing), and a charismatic performance from Valentino, who is very effective.

The heroine is a modern flapper, Diana (Agnes Ayres) who says things like, “Marriage is captivity – the end of independence. I’m content with my life as it is.” On a lark, she goes on a one-month trek through the desert and is kidnapped by Valentino. “I am not accustomed to having my orders disobeyed,” he says. “I am not accustomed to obeying orders,” she says. “That will change”. Etc. etc.

He doesn’t rape her, but he looks as though he wants to and is going to until he sees her praying for it not to happen. Adolphe Menjou rocks up as an old friend of Rudy’s (did Menjou ever look young?) – he persuades the Sheik to let the woman go back to her people. While she’s writing “Ahmed I Love You” in the sand (I’m not kidding) some bad Arabs attack – Menjou and Diana blow some away with their pistols but run out of ammo. She asks Menjou to shoot her so she won’t fall into their hands but before he can he’s shot. She’s taken away to Bad Arab land and the Bad Arab wants to rape her but Rudy saves the day. And the eleventh hour twist… he’s European, not Arab after all, so they can get married! Hooray!

Codswallop, but not un-entertaining. Definitely fascinating.

Radio review – Lux – “Blood and Sand” (1941) **

Tyrone Power had one of his biggest hits remaking the Rudolph Valentino classic – even though he’s very American he’s still got enough dash and charisma to pull off the part of a Spanish bullfighter. The story must have been stock, even then – Power is an ambitious bullfighter, who marries a Good Girl but gets attracted and distracted by a rich temptress, learns his lesson in time to die. The film version had costumes, colour photography, bullfighting, and a cast including Laird Cregar, Linda Darnell and Rita Hayworth – none of which we have here. We do have Power plus his future wife Annabella playing his love interest and it works on a hokey melodramatic level.

Movie review – “The Eagle” (1925) ***

Rudolph Valentino’s career had almost been ruined by his own negligence and interference from his wife, Natacha Rambova, but this film saw him return to the public favour. (It was his penultimate movie - he made Son of the Sheik then died). He plays an officer in the Russian Imperial Guards whose act of heroism attracts the attention of Catherine the Great – she wants to make him her stud, but he refuses and takes off, resulting in a price on his head. It’s back to home where dad has fortunately been swindled out of his estate by a baddy – I say “fortunately” because it gives Rudy the chance to don a mask and become “The Eagle”, and fight for revenge. He pretends to be a tutor to the baddy’s daughter in order to get access but unfortunately he falls in love with the baddy’s daughter.

This is an enjoyable swashbuckler with some decent action and Rudy in good dashing form; he also gets the chance to do a bit of comedy and pulls it of. The film has story problems – we know the baddy is a baddy (all the locals hate him) yet he’s allowed to live and not even be punished at the end. They needed to give Rudy someone to duel – a henchman or something. Also the Catherine the Great angle is introduced, dropped for most of the film, then returns as a deux ex machina. It’s interesting that Catherine isn’t unsympathetically portrayed – she’s a tyrant, but with a heart. Vilma Bankey is Rudy’s love interest.

But it’s still a lot of fast-paced fun, with good performances, a pleasing risqué tone and pleasant art direction.

Book review - "Dark Lover"

Excellent biography of the legendary silent film star, Rudolph Valentino. Valentino is one of the few silent stars still known by young 'uns today along with Chaplin, Keaton, Garbo. Why? He had a totally suitable name, he had a strong iconic presence, and he died at the right time of his career. Valentino had a mythic reputation in his lifetime and even more so today. This book shows the real Rudy - who seems to have been an amiable guy, a charmer and talented dancer who was a bit of a dill, kept having affairs with lesbians/bi-sexuals, a kind of spoilt kid who loved his food and worried about going bald. He is touchingly human here - so his death is a genuine shame. I watched a copy of the Eagle recently and Valentino still has charisma.

The book is very well researched. It sheds a lot of light on his impact on 1920s America - popularising of the latino lover, his effect on women, and - surprisingly - his effect on men. Valentino was hated by many men in his life - he was the first metrosexual superstar - but he influenced male fashion, especially after Blood and Sand. Its interesting to consider how he would have fared with the coming of sound.