At the end of World War Two, the British film industry had brief dreams of world domination - things went so well for them during the war, with a whole host of new stars, and the emergence of tycoons like Korda and Rank. Rank in particular made a stab at US glory only to come a cropper, although he had his moments (Caesar and Cleopatra, Henry V, The Red Shoes).
Rank would have been particularly disappointed with the reception to this one, which would have seemed it had the elements to break through - it was distributed by Eagle Lion, a company in which he had money, had Margaret Lockwood coming off The Wicked Lady, featured a Hollywood "name"-ish co star, Ian Hunter, and was based on a novel by Vera Caspary who just had a big hit with Laura.
Caspary's story is great - it's about a man who marries a woman and discovers she has a tendency to knock off her husbands. That's solid, with elements of Rebecca (there's even a bitchy housekeeper), Bluebeard, Suspicion and Leave Her to Heaven. There was no reason this couldn't have made a terrific thriller like Laura with the right casting and handling but it misses the mark.
The cast aren't quite right- Lockwood is okay and probably would have been fine in a better film but can't transcend her material (she does some decent hysterical acting). Ian Hunter is alright, although he played this ignorant husband role far too often in Hollywood (the Herbert Marshall part), and a really gifted actor could have made something of this. Barry Barnes is terrible in a role that cried out for a Stewart Granger or James Mason, someone with balls not this wet drip. Anne Crawford is underwhelming in what could have been a neat support role, the girl with a yen for Hunter.
The script also has a lot of problems. There's no emotional undercurrent - we never really feel that Hunter loves Lockwood and aren't sure what she feels about him. Barnes has no emotional connection to the story (why not personalise it? Have him avenging a dead friend/relative and also fall for Lockwood?). Key moments aren't dramatised - we never get the sense that Hunter's life is in danger, Crawford/Barnes are never threatened. The only one you're worried about is Lockwood.
Occasionally there's some effective moments like when Lockwood cracks it or the wind machine cranks up and things get a little spooky. But in generally they stuffed it. Someone should give thought to remaking this.
Sunday, April 03, 2016
Saturday, April 02, 2016
Movie review - "Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief" (2015) *****
Engrossing film about Scientology from Alex Gibney, who made that excellent film about Enron. It has some awesome footage: the mysterious L Ron Hubbard chatting away to camera, ditto the just-as-mysterious David Miscaviage. There's inhouse Scientology videos including their own attempt at an anthem, footage from conventions, home movie footage of adventures on the boats with L Ron. There's also hidden camera stuff of Scientology thugs trying to shake down people.
There's also some great "talking heads" - Paul Haggis would be the best known, but there's also some former top level Scientology people (one an Aussie whose accent can still be heard). It also discusses the role of Tom Cruise and John Travolta in the Church.
My two cents on this topic: Scientology is no sillier than any other religion, and should never be banned, it just needs to be subject to the rule of law. Like other religions it is susceptible to exploitation from particularly controlling/charismatic people, which seems to be what is happening with Miscaviage. Like many other businesses they keep their competitive edge via exclusionary business practices, suppressing criticism, use of ground troops and relentless effort.
It's a classy documentary with some excellent photography. Miscavige would make a great Bond villain - a Sejanus or Philip the Arab who managed to hang on to his power. Fascinating stuff.
There's also some great "talking heads" - Paul Haggis would be the best known, but there's also some former top level Scientology people (one an Aussie whose accent can still be heard). It also discusses the role of Tom Cruise and John Travolta in the Church.
My two cents on this topic: Scientology is no sillier than any other religion, and should never be banned, it just needs to be subject to the rule of law. Like other religions it is susceptible to exploitation from particularly controlling/charismatic people, which seems to be what is happening with Miscaviage. Like many other businesses they keep their competitive edge via exclusionary business practices, suppressing criticism, use of ground troops and relentless effort.
It's a classy documentary with some excellent photography. Miscavige would make a great Bond villain - a Sejanus or Philip the Arab who managed to hang on to his power. Fascinating stuff.
Movie review - "The Oldest Profession" (1967) **
A 60s Europudding comic look at prostitution through the ages. It's the sort of movie that makes you apprehensive thinking about it then when you watch your heart sinks because you realise your worst fears are to be realised. But after a slow start this was okay.
The first two segments are weak. Part 1 is set in prehistoric times with Michele Mercier as a cave girl who discovers make up. Part 2 is in ancient Rome with Elsa Martinelli and a Roman Emperor visits a brothel. Lazy jokes, not particularly well done.
Part 3 gets better- its the French Revolution and a young man pretends to be wanting to watch his uncle executed so he can sleep with Jeanne Moreau. The fact Moreau is in it helps this a lot.
Part 4 is set in the 1890s and is lots of fun, with Raquel Welch in good form as a stripper who cons a man into marrying her. It's one of Welch's best performances - she's splendid looking as always in some lingerie but is genuinely high spirited as the clever girl.
Part 5 has plenty of energy from Nadia Gray and France Anglade as prostitutes who operate out of the car and wind up running an operation from an ambulance. The possibilities in this premise feel undercooked (it could hold a feature eg Night Shift) but the actresses really go for it.
Part 6 was done by none other than Jean Luc Godard and is set in the future. Anna Karina appears along with one time Mr Brigitte Bardot, Jacques Charrier. This is the best segment, imaginative and bold, a fascinating companion piece to Alphaville. Incidentally, it's the one segment with nudity.
So all in all this wasn't a bad movie, certainly not as much as I feared going in.
The first two segments are weak. Part 1 is set in prehistoric times with Michele Mercier as a cave girl who discovers make up. Part 2 is in ancient Rome with Elsa Martinelli and a Roman Emperor visits a brothel. Lazy jokes, not particularly well done.
Part 3 gets better- its the French Revolution and a young man pretends to be wanting to watch his uncle executed so he can sleep with Jeanne Moreau. The fact Moreau is in it helps this a lot.
Part 4 is set in the 1890s and is lots of fun, with Raquel Welch in good form as a stripper who cons a man into marrying her. It's one of Welch's best performances - she's splendid looking as always in some lingerie but is genuinely high spirited as the clever girl.
Part 5 has plenty of energy from Nadia Gray and France Anglade as prostitutes who operate out of the car and wind up running an operation from an ambulance. The possibilities in this premise feel undercooked (it could hold a feature eg Night Shift) but the actresses really go for it.
Part 6 was done by none other than Jean Luc Godard and is set in the future. Anna Karina appears along with one time Mr Brigitte Bardot, Jacques Charrier. This is the best segment, imaginative and bold, a fascinating companion piece to Alphaville. Incidentally, it's the one segment with nudity.
So all in all this wasn't a bad movie, certainly not as much as I feared going in.
Movie review - "Where the Spies Are" (1965) **
I remember seeing a TV ad for this in the 80s and wondering how come I'd never heard of it - a groovy 60s spy film with David Niven. Apparently the first in a proposed series, too. Even today the film isn't particularly well known or remembered.
It's an odd sort of movie. Obviously inspired by the success of the James Bond films (Niven apparently was a front runner to play Bond in Dr No and indeed did play him in Casino Royale), it plays the story completely straight, although the concept seems to lend itself to a spoof: Niven is a doctor talked into doing some intelligence work by John LeMesurier because the Brits lack available talent.
Niven's character is Jason Love, and at times they play him as a fish out of water. But he's not really because he had military and intelligence experience in World War Two, he's quite suave, and he adapts to intelligence work relatively quickly, easily using some gadgets to get out of tight spots, knocking out Nigel Davenport, and being quite cunning. So there's no suspense or humour from the concept of a newbie agent at work.
I never really got a fix on Love - he's meant to be a country GP but Niven doesn't give that sense... he's David Niven, real life war hero and gent. (Someone like Alec Guinness for instance would have seemed more obviously rural GP). He doesn't have many distinguishing characteristics either apart from really liking old cars, which comes in at the beginning of the film then is ignored. He doesn't seem to have any family or friends.
There is some action but not that much - a shoot out here and there. Structure wise the story suffers from the fact it's about preventing an assassination, which Niven does around the 70 minute mark, but then there's this extended coda (or third act) with him captured by the Russians and on a peace plane and they're trying to get information out of him and the Brits are trying to get him down. This bit is too convoluted for a third act and probably would've been better off being it's own movie. (The film feels long at 110 minutes and this last act really really dragged.)
There were lots of things I did enjoy though. The acting was of very high quality across the board, not just the always reliable Niven but also Le Mesurier and solid British character types like Davenport; there are some strong villains like Eric Pohlmann and Francoise Dorleac was a superb girl, gorgeous and mysterious. Location shooting in Beirut adds to the charm, it's got that 60s colour I always enjoy, and there are some solid twists, such as Niven thinking he's being rescued by the Brits only it's the Russians, and the fact the head Russian baddie is the butler.
It's an odd sort of movie. Obviously inspired by the success of the James Bond films (Niven apparently was a front runner to play Bond in Dr No and indeed did play him in Casino Royale), it plays the story completely straight, although the concept seems to lend itself to a spoof: Niven is a doctor talked into doing some intelligence work by John LeMesurier because the Brits lack available talent.
Niven's character is Jason Love, and at times they play him as a fish out of water. But he's not really because he had military and intelligence experience in World War Two, he's quite suave, and he adapts to intelligence work relatively quickly, easily using some gadgets to get out of tight spots, knocking out Nigel Davenport, and being quite cunning. So there's no suspense or humour from the concept of a newbie agent at work.
I never really got a fix on Love - he's meant to be a country GP but Niven doesn't give that sense... he's David Niven, real life war hero and gent. (Someone like Alec Guinness for instance would have seemed more obviously rural GP). He doesn't have many distinguishing characteristics either apart from really liking old cars, which comes in at the beginning of the film then is ignored. He doesn't seem to have any family or friends.
There is some action but not that much - a shoot out here and there. Structure wise the story suffers from the fact it's about preventing an assassination, which Niven does around the 70 minute mark, but then there's this extended coda (or third act) with him captured by the Russians and on a peace plane and they're trying to get information out of him and the Brits are trying to get him down. This bit is too convoluted for a third act and probably would've been better off being it's own movie. (The film feels long at 110 minutes and this last act really really dragged.)
There were lots of things I did enjoy though. The acting was of very high quality across the board, not just the always reliable Niven but also Le Mesurier and solid British character types like Davenport; there are some strong villains like Eric Pohlmann and Francoise Dorleac was a superb girl, gorgeous and mysterious. Location shooting in Beirut adds to the charm, it's got that 60s colour I always enjoy, and there are some solid twists, such as Niven thinking he's being rescued by the Brits only it's the Russians, and the fact the head Russian baddie is the butler.
Movie review - "The Ape" (1940) **
In the 1996 thriller Extreme Measures Hugh Grant uncovers a plot where shady doctors and nurses are operating on homeless people to develop a technique to cure paralysis... fifty years before that Curt Siodmak came up with a junky film about kindly-but-mad Boris Karloff using spinal fluid to cure a crippled girl's paralysis.
That's a great motivation for a mad scientist and this throws in a killer gorilla as well.The gorilla knocks off someone useful for the experiments, so when the gorilla dies Karloff steps in Frankenstein-style putting on a gorilla outfit so he can kill people and use the serum.
That's a strong story, enough for a full length feature if developed properly, which this isn't at a little over 60 minutes. Maris Wrixon is likeable as the crippled girl and Karloff is always good; the rest of the support cast is not as strong. It's silly and fun though not really that good.
That's a great motivation for a mad scientist and this throws in a killer gorilla as well.The gorilla knocks off someone useful for the experiments, so when the gorilla dies Karloff steps in Frankenstein-style putting on a gorilla outfit so he can kill people and use the serum.
That's a strong story, enough for a full length feature if developed properly, which this isn't at a little over 60 minutes. Maris Wrixon is likeable as the crippled girl and Karloff is always good; the rest of the support cast is not as strong. It's silly and fun though not really that good.
Friday, April 01, 2016
Movie review - "100 Rifles" (1969) **
The teaming of three legends (in their own way): Raquel Welch, Jim Brown and Burt Reynolds. It was the brief period of stardom for both Welch and Brown - both getting lots of PR, and with the backing of major studios (Brown with MGM, Welch with Fox, who made this), both famed for their physiques and personal lives rather than their acting, both with reputations for being difficult on the set. Apparently things were tense between them on the set with Reynolds acting as referee. I get the feeling the behind the scenes story was more interesting than what we see.
I wish this film had been better. It sounds like it's going to be great, with Brown as a sheriff teaming up with wildcat Welch and bank robber Reynolds to help protect the local Indians against nasty Mexicans (led by Fernando Lamas)... it's set in the Pancho Villa era of 1912 Mexico. Dan O'Herlihy pops up as a gun runner and there's decent production values with trains, machine guns, extras and hangings.
But it's too dull too often. The action scenes lack zip. I've never seen so many Mexican extras and bit parts shot but all the genocide gets depressing after a while. There's a battle between Mexicans and Indians, then another one, then another one... it's hard to get too fired up and/or care. I don't think Tom Gries was much of an action director.
Occasionally it flares to life - there is genuine chemistry between Brown and Welch and their sex scene was hot (once they got past the bit where he forced himself on her). He's got that great build and she's awesome in a wet T shirt blowing away Mexicans.
In a way I wish this film had been trashier - more cleavage and torsos and sex and violence - with the roles rewritten to suit the stars more. Have Jim Brown full of pride and violence and rage, have Raquel play an imperious princess who is brave and gutsy and smart, and give Reynolds lots of self-deprecating jokes. It's in there a little bit, but not enough. The story of this is good - you've got anti heroes helping the Indians take on the baddies, sex, inter-racial stuff, buddy comedy, Western feminism... but they muffed it.
I wish this film had been better. It sounds like it's going to be great, with Brown as a sheriff teaming up with wildcat Welch and bank robber Reynolds to help protect the local Indians against nasty Mexicans (led by Fernando Lamas)... it's set in the Pancho Villa era of 1912 Mexico. Dan O'Herlihy pops up as a gun runner and there's decent production values with trains, machine guns, extras and hangings.
But it's too dull too often. The action scenes lack zip. I've never seen so many Mexican extras and bit parts shot but all the genocide gets depressing after a while. There's a battle between Mexicans and Indians, then another one, then another one... it's hard to get too fired up and/or care. I don't think Tom Gries was much of an action director.
Occasionally it flares to life - there is genuine chemistry between Brown and Welch and their sex scene was hot (once they got past the bit where he forced himself on her). He's got that great build and she's awesome in a wet T shirt blowing away Mexicans.
In a way I wish this film had been trashier - more cleavage and torsos and sex and violence - with the roles rewritten to suit the stars more. Have Jim Brown full of pride and violence and rage, have Raquel play an imperious princess who is brave and gutsy and smart, and give Reynolds lots of self-deprecating jokes. It's in there a little bit, but not enough. The story of this is good - you've got anti heroes helping the Indians take on the baddies, sex, inter-racial stuff, buddy comedy, Western feminism... but they muffed it.
Movie review - "Boys of the City" (1940) *
A movie about the East Side Kids, a gang of wise cracking juvenile delinquents who got up to trouble. They head off to camp and get waylaid, winding up in a haunted house.
It's like Dead End Kids meets The Cat and the Canary - an old dark house story with our heroes bumbling around and meeting a scary house keeper, mysterious chef - there's a scared black kid who is terrified a la Willie Best in The Ghost Breakers, a scene where the house keeper torments a young girl a la Rebecca, a Charlie Chan style denouement.
It was directed by Joseph Lewis who always tries to do something visually interesting. For a while I enjoyed this - a quite complex plot is set up with the kids staying at a house owned by a judge whom people are trying to kill, the judge was a bit corrupt, the kids were mentored by a former gangster who the judge sent to jail, there's a girl in there.
But the script becomes muddled. There were so many characters it was hard to tell who was who. The middle section drops the plot and consists of the boys poking around the house in some unscary scenes. It's not very scary. It was hard going as it went on and I was glad the film ended.
It's like Dead End Kids meets The Cat and the Canary - an old dark house story with our heroes bumbling around and meeting a scary house keeper, mysterious chef - there's a scared black kid who is terrified a la Willie Best in The Ghost Breakers, a scene where the house keeper torments a young girl a la Rebecca, a Charlie Chan style denouement.
It was directed by Joseph Lewis who always tries to do something visually interesting. For a while I enjoyed this - a quite complex plot is set up with the kids staying at a house owned by a judge whom people are trying to kill, the judge was a bit corrupt, the kids were mentored by a former gangster who the judge sent to jail, there's a girl in there.
But the script becomes muddled. There were so many characters it was hard to tell who was who. The middle section drops the plot and consists of the boys poking around the house in some unscary scenes. It's not very scary. It was hard going as it went on and I was glad the film ended.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)