Book review - "Joan Crawford" by Scott Eyman (2025)

 Very good book. Eyman loves to step up when redeeming maligned figures. He's sympathetic to Joan but doesn't gloss over her negative qualities. Solid research. A few too many smart ass asides.

Book review - "The First King of Hollywood: The Life of Douglas Fairbanks" by Tracey Goessel

 Very well researched, entertaining biography of Fairbanks who deserved a good new book - he's been unfairly overlooked. There's florid writing in places but it tells a gripping yarn. Fairbanks became successfully quite quickly: small town actor, Broadway success, then films. He found his medium: his athleticism and charm were a natural, he got the right collaborators (Anita Loos, Allan Dwan, etc), Hollywood was expanding. There was the romance with Mary Pickford, the bromance with Chaplin (both genuine), the creation of United Artists, his incredible international popularity, his artistic developments (the swasbuckler, colour).

His "fall" was alarming and rapid and surprising: he still had plenty of money (despite spending most of it), he could act with his voice. But he seemed to lose enthusiasm with talking pictures and his divorce from Pickford (caused by a few things... absences, her drinking, third parties, no kids, age, his love of travel). Despite a lot of good exercise he died quite young of a heart attack - but it was probably better that he did, the way he went.

I should watch more of his films.

Movie review - "The Hostage Tower" (1980) **

This should have been good. A story from Alistair MacLean about criminals taking over the Eiffel Tower. Location filming in Paris, including the tower. A cast including Peter Fonda, Maud Adams, Britt Ekland, Douglas Fairbanks Jr, Rachel Roberts, Keir Dullea, Billy Dee Williams.

But it's dumb. Annoyingly dumb. And bad.

It's directed with this dopey bad 70s TV way complete with silly music stings. The handling is far too light. I loved Fairbanks and Rachel Roberts as this duo running a crime fighting organisation but it didn't make sense... they knew Keir Dullea was up to something bad... so got Maude Adams and Billy Dee Williams to go undercover in the group... and went along with it as they took over the Eiffel Tower. Instead of, you know, stopping it.

It's so jokey and light. Keir Dullea's crack team includes not only Adams and Dee Williams but Peter Fonda who is out for revenge against him. The action isn't that fierce. You never fear for hostage Celia Johnston.

Adams makes a great thief/spy - ideal for this sort of thing. I liked seeing the others.

But this was stupid.

Movie review - "Safari" (1940) **

A so-so melodrama which reminded me of The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber and the Errol Flynn Film Another Dawn.Like that it's about a female who jets around the world, here played by Madeleine Carroll instead of Kay Francis, who is about to marry a man she doesn't love (Tullio Carminati) but falls in love with a dashing adventurer who leads her safari to shoot animals.

Unlike Another Dawn no one is married but the wounded party does not behave well - he gets a bit naughty. Not naughty enough really - you really want Carminatti to do more. It doesn't feel as though there's quite enough plot here.

It's okay I'm not a big Carroll fan but I like Fairbanks and it was interesting to see him play a more hard bitten type of character - a Burt Lancaster like woman hater. I was underwhelmed. These films run into trouble with big game hunting heroes because they also always try to not glamourise game hunting.

Its set in a fictitious country that is supposed to be West Africa. A British colony. There is talk of war being declared and Fairbanks wanting to go and fight. The film could have used some Nazis causing trouble.

Movie review - "The Exile" (1947) ***1/2

A charming effort from Douglas Fairbanks, who stars, wrote and produced it, and director Max Ophuls. I'd heard of this film but had never seen it - it was really charming. It could well be the best film Maria Montez was ever in. She doesn't have a big role despite her top billing - but it's a decent part as a countess who visits the exiled Charles in Flanders. Her character probably should have been villainous - her conflict with Paule Croset is relatively and frustratingly mild.

But it's a good story - Charles exiled, short of money, a bit knocked about after a series of failed returns to England, trying to calm down impatient supporters, worried about assassins. Henry Daniell is superb as an assassin - great introduction sequence, with puritans giving him the job, and when he arrives in Flanders the thing really perked up.

Croset is okay as the female lead rather than sensational. She and Fairbanks have a sweet romance. Fairbanks is brilliant in a role that fits him like a glove - smart, brave, a little weary, romantic, impulsive. It's one of his best films. He really should have made more swashbucklers but I understand this one didn't do too well. Maybe it was the lack of color or action - there's only really action at the end. It could have done with a fight in the beginning and middle, maybe.

It's a shame. There's lovely direction by Max Ophuls and it's beautifully shot - long tracking shots, lovely composition. The set is gorgeous - this was adapted from a novel but it also feels like it could have been a play (apparently there was a play version) as most of it takes place at an inn. There's some fields and a village nearby.

Alan Hale is solid support as an ally of Charles. Montez gives an animated performance and has a bath in a weird 17th century device. This is a romantic film. 

Movie review - "The Sun Never Sets" (1939) **

Hollywood's film industry of the 1930s was notably pro-British Empire - in part due to the success of Lives of a Bengal Lancer and the films that followed in its wake but also due I think to nervousness about the rise of totalitarianism in Europe. The relationship soured during and after World War Two but it was at its peak in this weird 1939 film from Universal.

Britisher Bill Lipscomb wrote the script which is presumably why there is such an emphasis on family and tradition and sacrifice. Basil Rathbone is a colonial servant whose family provides nothing but colonial servants so it seems - and apparently they're all okay about it. Well brother Doug Fairbanks Jr complains for a bit but is talked into sense by C Aubrey Smith who points out a map showing where all the family is.

Then Fairbanks goes out to Africa. Rathhone is sent out too on a top secret mission. His wife is pregnant and doesn't want to go but does because of duty. Rathbone doesn't really want to go but does because of duty. When they're there Rathbone goes on a mission. Baddy Lionel Atwill persuades Fairbanks to persuade Rathbone to come back from the mission to look after his sick, ill wife. This is a Bad Thing. When Fairbanks finds out his been duped everyone goes into scandal mode - despite the fact that Rathbone's baby child has died. Rathbone's career is wrecked and he's recalled; Fairbanks seems semi suicidal and decides to go and make money because that's all that's left but can't go back to London. However Fairbanks redeems himself by locating a radio and calling in an attack on the baddy's base which is led by Rathbone in planes.

The action component  of this is dumb. Lionel Atwill is up to No Good by.. transmitting in a radio. What's he doing exactly? Spreading fake news? Whipping up trouble? Asking for independence? They never say - but it's hollow to see Rathbone nobly fighting someone who wants to rule Africans when Rathbone is basically ruling Africans.

Also the climax is crap - Fairbanks smuggles himself in by pretending to be drunk... then calling out a code over the radio... which is heard back in London as a family code word, which ushers in a bomb attack? It's just stupid.

Fairbanks and Rathbone don't get much of a chance to be heroic - only at the end.

I did like Rathbone confronting Lionel Atwill and talking about ant farms (but again don't the British treat the Africans like ants in this film? There's certainly no black character in this film who does anything other than chant), and it's a novelty seeing Rathbone as a hero. Atwill is always good, and I liked Fairbanks. The death of the baby is sensitively handled. Cecil Kellaway pops up as a colonial official. Barbara O'Neil and Virginia Field are a little hard to tell apart as the women but they give decent performances. The stuff involving the agent helping Rathbone was well done.

The production values are decent - there's a fair few African extras and places like villages and mines, etc. But this is just too silly.

Movie review - "Green Hell" (1940) ***

This has a dreadful critical reputation - even James Whale cultists seem to have little good to say about it. Doug Fairbanks bagged it. So did Vincent Price.

I think it's a perfectly fine silly jungle adventure tale. A group of adventurers go into the jungle to dig up an inca temple.  A woman (Joan Bennett) rocks up to visit her husband (Vincent Price) who has been killed... and she's panted over by Fairbanks and George Sanders.

It's written by Francis Marion - maybe she is why the men are so sensitive and talk about their feelings more. (Look at the scene between George Sanders and Fairbanks where they talk about their mutual love for Bennett - they take it very seriously.) Is that a bad thing?

I feel Marion's involvement would also be why the woman character is more central than normal in this kind of film. She has a lot of power and agency, even though she doesn't have a job.

There's some truly spectacular sets - it looks amazing - and spooky poking-around-the-temple scenes. The natives are you standard "other" - savage, primitive, dangerous, occasionally loyal. This is entirely typical of pictures from the time. There's a good storm and final attack.

Some of it seems abrupt - John Howard's character for instance. I think it would have been better with more action - more of a ticking clock. There's a lot of sitting around in the jungle in the middle section and it's all over Bennett - there were a few more subplots in say Five Came Back which I feel influenced this.

It's not a classic - and maybe we are right to expect more from Whale - but I enjoyed this. Price, Fairbanks, Sanders and Bennett are good - so too is John Howard. George Bancroft's raucous American is annoying but it's not a big part. Alan Hale is miscast as a scientist but that's fun in its own way.

Unfairly maligned.

Movie review - "The Fighting O'Flynn" (1949) **1/2

Douglas Fairbanks never quite regained his pre war popularity (such as it was) after the war though he gave it a go. This is an enjoyable swashbuckler which he also produced and co wrote so its a Fairbanks movie. It really needed to be in colour and could have done with a stronger cast and maybe more action.

Patricia Medina is okay but her role is a gift - a lively courtesan - that a really good actress would have made sing. Richard Greene is competent but he's one of those actors you forget are in the movie even while watching him - that's mean, I'm sorry, but it's kind of true. Helena Carter is lively as the lady who falls for Fairbanks - I liked her.

A bit of action. The best bit was Doug sword fighting while really drunk. It has novelty with an Irish hero - the Irish hero is fighting for the British against Napoleon though.The film was a bright spirit.

Random thought - Fairbanks only made a few swashbucklers. He started with two classics though:
1) The Prisoner of Zenda
2) The Corsican Brothers
3) Son of Sinbad
4) The Exile
5) The Fighting O'Flynn

Movie review - "Man of the Moment" (1935) *

Terrible British comedy with amateurish acting and handling. There are two interesting things about it - the cast and an unexpected dark undertone. Douglas Fairbanks Jnr pulls Laura La Plante out of the river after she's tried to kill herself following an unhappy love affair (this is treated comically); he looks after her which upsets his fiancee (Margaret Lockwood, very young). Lockwood dumps him so he heads to Monte Carlo to gamble - leading to some location filming.

I didn't know much about La Plante but she was fairly terrible. I like Fairbanks Jnr but the material defeated him. Lockwood was very green. This was heavy going although it did improve as it went on.

Movie review - "A Woman of Affairs" (1929) **

Decent enough melodrama, a stock-ish sort of plot that was ideal for star vehicle. Apparently the novel on which it was based was a lot more risque - elements of that do survive into the film version: Douglas Fairbanks Jnr seems to have been in romantically in love with Johnny Mack Brown, who appears to have had a drug habit; John Gilbert and Greta Garbo clearly have pre-marital sex which results in her falling pregnant. There are two suicides - something which ironically films might shy away from depicting today because of fear of imitation.

The story centers around "loose woman" Garbo - actually she's not so loose at the beginning, being madly in love with childhood friend Gilbert, but she is from a dissolute family of rich drunkards. Her brother Doug Fairbanks pines after Johnny Mack Brown who loves Garbo. Gilbert's dad won't let him marry Garbo, which means Gilbert's character comes across as weak and not worthy of her. She goes off with Mack Brown, who dies, she sleeps around, it all ends tragically.

The acting is quite good - Fairbanks hams it up but is effective; Garbo looks good, Gilbert is dashing. I enjoyed Lewis Stone as an imposing member of the aristocracy, a friend of Garbo's never seen father - I did feel maybe his character could have been combined with Gilbert's father.

Radio review – Lux- “Prisoner of Zenda” (1939) ***

In the chat at the end of this play, Cecil b de Mille talks about how when Zenda was on Broadway it prompted lots of men to propose. Maybe they were attracted by the sense of honour and moment. Ronald Colman and Douglas Fairbanks are back, with Colman’s wife Benita Hulme (although I gather she wasn’t during recording of this as they don’t mention it) stepping in for Madeleine Carroll. It’s not as much fun to hear this as it is to see it because you don’t get to see the impersonation and the tension involved. But the romance works well as does the by play between Colman and Fairbanks Jnr and it's still a strong story.

Radio review – SDP - “Captain from Castille” (1951) **1/2

Challenge for Hollywood studios – how do you take a bloodthirsty event in history with such genocidal implications as the Cortez expedition to South America and turn it into a romantic epic? By basically ignoring the implications of said expedition, and making the villains instead the Spanish Inquisition. The story does touch on some issues, notably by having an Indian character appear and complain to Douglas Fairbanks Jnr (stepping in for Tyrone Power again for SDP) about the Spanish being in his country and Fairbanks goes “fair enough” – but then the Indian later appears to sacrifice his life for Fairbanks’. This cuts one of the most memorable moments from the film - the hero's peasant girlfriend stabbing him at the end so he won't go to gaol.

Radio review – SDP – “Prince of Foxes” (1951) **1/2

Doug Fairbanks Jnr slips naturally into Tyrone Power’s screen role as a charming adventurer who works for Cesar Borgia (who is here not played by Orson Welles); he is sent on a mission to smooth talk a besieged city into surrendering, but rather like Sam Worthington in Avatar he winds up changing sides.

No classic but not bad with Fairbanks well cast; its interesting to listen to a swashbuckler set in medieval Italy, and with a Borgia in the cast.

Book review – “Memo from David O Selznick” Ed Rudy Behlmer

Excellent collection of memos from the famed producer whose record during the Golden Years of Hollywood is second to none. His record in the post-war environment was a little more iffy; the memos reveal a man with great insight and ideas, a considerable ego, and real talent. Fascinating reading (although David Thompson in his biography of Selznick claims that this book make Selznick seem more decisive than he actually was).

Radio review – SDP – “The Fighting O’Flynn” (1950) **

As Jeffrey Richards pointed out in his history of swashbucklers, filmmakers tended to steer clear of Irish settings for action movies out of fear of offending the British market. This one gets around it by having an Irish hero fighting against Napoleon in Ireland. Douglas Fairbanks Jnr is accomplished in the lead role, even with an Irish accent (surely they wanted Errol Flynn) – he has a beautiful speaking voice. He has a dreadful female co-star.

Radio review – SDP - “The Exile” (1949) **

This swashbuckler suits a half hour adaptation because the story is so slight – indeed, it’s lucky to make that long (although they do cut out the Maria Montez role). Without the visuals of the action and Max Ophuls direction this is very slight; it does have Doug Fairbanks Jnr reprising his role (excellent speaking voice) and its fascinating to hear Ophuls himself introduce the show in his soft spoken, accented English.

Movie review – “The Back Pirate” (1926) ***

Enjoyable swashbuckler, which Jeffrey Richards says is Doug Fairbanks Snr’s best movie. As it’s the only one of his I’ve seen I can’t really say if that’s true, but there is lots to admire – maybe not so much the story which is basic (young noble swears vengeance against pirates who killed dad) but a bit weak (he then joins the pirate crew, doesn’t seem to have much of a plan of action, but then gets sidetracked when he falls in love with a beautiful princess the pirates have captured).

It’s great strength is its action set pieces – Fairbanks fighting a muscular duel on a beach with a bald pirate captain, Fairbanks capturing a boat single handed (including the famous shove-sword-in-sail-and-slide-down bit), Fairbanks duelling against a whole bunch of pirates on his own, the goodies swimming underwater to the boats (magnificent stuff – I can’t believe this hasn’t been ripped off more), Fairbanks being lifted up by his men up several levels of the ship.

There is plenty of action, extras and swordplay, a couple of full on moments which wouldn’t have survived the Hays Code (a prisoner swallows a ring to keep it safe from the pirates – but then a pirate grabs his sword and walks out of shot then comes back in shot with the ring… he’s cut the dude open!!!; also in another scene a pirate tests his sword by impaling someone).

Doug walks the plank and fights lots of duels. He runs around in tight shorts flashing his chest – Victor Mature was never so exploited. The romance with Billie Dove is a bit simpering (how about some revealing outfits for her? But no, she’s fully clothed). Donald Crisp is fun as a one armed pirate. I got confused when Doug suddenly found all these men to help him at the end – where did they come from. Fairbanks is very charismatic – he seems a more American actor than his son, lots of energy and brashness.

Movie review - "The Corsican Brothers" (1941) ***

Dumas' novel as one of the all time great concepts for a swashbuckler -Siamese twins are born, separated at birth, and raised apart so the evil lord who killed their parents will think they're dead. They they are reunited to wreck vengeance. Edward Small could be counted upon to produce a solid swashbuckler and this one gets off to a strong beginning- with Corsican celebrations ruined by evil Akim Tamiroff, who cheats by having dad (Henry Wilcoxon) shot by someone else, then the two babies raised separately, one in the scrub of Corsica, the other in Paris.

But then the script drops the ball big time by throwing away the scene where the twins meet: instead of taking a bit of time establishing the two separately, the film just has them turn 21, an old doctor introduces them, says "you two are brothers", they decide to get vengeance - and that's it. Talk about a great opportunity wasted. It also makes their decision to seek vengeance a bit flippant - how about establishing that their dad was nice and actually worth avenging, for instance? (Dad mayhave deserved to die) Also, the two don't really use the identical twins factor much - they raid places separately, but they are known as "a bandit in a red cap" - that could be separate people. They needed to have people actually see Fairbanks Jnr in the flesh, arrest him - then have witnesses say "no that's not him". But then I guess they couldn't use the Scarlet Pimpernel like shenanigans that follow when Fairbanks Jnr pretends to be a dandy.

To compensate for this the script throws in some fresh twists. It's particularly good how the Corsican bandit brother doesn't actually like his new brother very much - indeed, he gets sick of him and starts hating him, partly because he's sick of feeling things his brother feels (the comic potentials of this is not really exploited), partly because they love the same woman (Ruth Warrick, Mrs Citizen Kane, a bit bland). He hates him so much that he refuses to come to his brother's rescue and only attacks Tamiroff when he things brother is dead (there is a revival drug, which perhaps inspired William Goldman in The Princess Bride). The biggest kicker is that one of the brother's dies -this is a big shock, but a very effective one. The sets are good, there is a solid bunch of action, Tamiroff is a strong villain (though he needs a better side kick - the actor who plays Tamiroff's evil henchman,the part normally played by Basil Rathbone, is seriously undercast), and Fairbanks Jnr is excellent in the lead - totally at home with the derring-do and romance, and easily distinguishes between characters. A tighter script that better milked its source novel and a better second villain and this would have been one of the true classics of the genre, instead of a semi-classic.

Movie review - "Sinbad the Sailor" (1947) **

A swashbuckler with many fine things going for it - Doug Fairbanks Jnr throwing himself whole heartedly into the lead (he's not quite right -perhaps a little too aristocratic for Sinbad, who always struck me more as more lower class rogue), lovely Technicolor, Maureen O'Hara as one of her patented haughty princesses looking beautiful in said Technicolor, bright sets all very stylised and a supporting cast including some fine hams, such as Anthony Quinn and Walter Slezak.
It would count as a disappointment, though, mostly due to some slack handling and a script with plenty of exposition and chat (lots of "this person thought that"and "The Emir said") but a lack of action and humour - there's only really two action sequences of note, the ending battle (which isn't bad,with poisons and balls of fire and what-not) and a sequence where Fairbanks sneaks in to see O'Hara. It's not really enough. And why is Fairbanks telling the story to people at the beginning? What does he have to gain?

Book review – “The Prisoner of Zenda” by Anthony Hope

Marvellous adventure tale which still holds up well just like King Solomon’s Mines, primarily because of its central idea (man impersonates king), plus the creation of Ruritania, some clever plotting, galaxy of support characters (especially the great villain Rupert of Hentzau, beautiful Flavia and the devoted Sapt), brisk pace, dash of romance and royalty. 

Re-reading it I was surprised that Rupert doesn’t appear til halfway through (though he makes up for lost time); also it would be better to have one attack on the castle instead of two and have Rupert duel Randolf at the end (an error the excellent 1937 film version rectified). Still, glorious romantic fun.