Movie review - "Drake of England" (1935) **

 George MacDonald Fraser gave this a dismissive review in his book on historical movies. It's got the costumes and sets but isn't very good - Matheson Lang is too old and laid back for Drake. The drama isn't personalised, not really. 

Nice photography. Impressive production values. But dull.

It's based on a historical pageant play and feels like it. There's scenes were people march though and music plays. It doesn't dramatise what's going on.

Lost money and no wonder. Dull. Goes through the greatest hits. 

Movie review - "Tudor Rose" (1936) ***

 British view on Lady Jane Grey. It doesn't have much time to settle into anything other than Jane and her husband were sweet and naive, and Edward VI was manipulated and the adults were prats... but that's basically true, so why not? There is no central core relationship - at the very least it could've dug into the love story more.

 Nova Pilbeam briefly became a star playing the lead. John Mills didn't playing her husband - he just is too young looking. Cedric Harwicke is a terrific villain. I liked Desmond Tester, from Sabotage, as Edward VI.

Very stylishly shot and directed by Robert Stevenson.

Movie review - 'The Devil Ship Pirates" (1964) ***1/2 (re-watching)

 Put this on again just because. It looks so great for a low budget film - the ship, the costumes. Classy with its actors. Jimmy Sangster did a solid script - a lost Spanish ship, conning the locals that the Armada won, conflict within the Spanish (they are former pirates), a hero has a dud arm because the Spanish tortured him, the local leader gives in very quickly.

Could have done with another draft to improve the female roles - they are mostly victims; a traitorous woman would've been great. And maybe one to genuinely fall for a Spaniard. 

But it spanks along.

Movie review - Carry On#21 - "Carry On Henry" (1971) ***

 Henry VIII fits the world of Carry On so well, with all his wives, that one wonders why it took so long for the team to tackle him - presumably cost. Sid James has a great time, as do all the gang. Horny kings, little ladies having fun. Good fun.

Movie review - "Mary Queen of Scots" (1971) **

 Weirdly close to the Margot Robbie version - maybe that's not so weird, they've just gone for the same greatest hits, with Mary arriving in England, Liz sending her lover to marry Mary, Darnley having it off with Rizzo. This even has a feminist slant too with the men all trying to pinch power off Mary and Liz, and John Knox ranting away.

Basic problem of this remains - how not to make Mary sound silly. She seems like an idot. The men characters take over.

Timothy Dalton steals the show in the best part - the bisexual playboy Darnley. Ian Holm is Rizzio. Patrick mcGoohan is Mary's brother. Trevor Howard basically playing Donald Crisp. Glenda Jackson and Vanessa Redgrave seem to be going through the motions.

Everyone speaks in that historical recap dialogue way.

Movie review - "The Virgin Queen" (1955) **

 Bette Davis returns to the part of Elizabeth I, this one focusing on her relationship with another handsome young lout, here Sir Walter Raleigh played by Richard Todd.

There's bright colours and set design and it all looks splendid in CinemaScope - I assume that's a big reason why Fox greenlit this project.

Dramatically it's not very interesting. The Private Life of Elizabeth and Essex was stronger because it concerned a great love, built up to Essex leading a rebellion against Elizabeth and being executed..

This has less focus. It's about Walter Raleigh trying to persuade Elizabeth to finance ships and he marries Joan Collins which annoys Davis but not that much and she lets them go. The "baddies", Robert Douglas and Jay Robinson, are bad because they don't like Todd because... it's never really spelt out. I didn't care about Raleigh and Elizabeth because he was just after her cash and she was just a little egotistical but basically decent. There's no stakes.

They should've done the Mary Queen of Scots story with Davis as Elizabeth. That would've been more worthwhile. The one effective moment is when Elizabeth reveals herself to be bald. I guess when Dan O'Herlihy died.

Rod Taylor appears as a Welsh soldier delivering a message from the palace while Dan O'Herlihy is there - he passes on gossip that Collins is pregnant.

It was so hard to care. Todd and Collins were so selfish.

Book review - "The Black Arrow" by Robert Louis Stevenson (1888)

 Second tier Stevenson. The adventures of a 17 year old and the girl he hooks up with during the War of the Roses - he's on the Yorkist side i.e. ultimately unsuccessful though he wins in this one. There's fights, outlaws and derring do but I struggled to register it and my mind drifted listening (it was an audio book).

Movie review - "The Black Arrow" (1948) **

 Columbia went into swasbucklers in a big way after World War Two - they were usually produced by Sam Katzman or Edward Small. This one is a Small effort, based on the Robert Louis Stevenson novel with the hero aged up to make a vehicle for Louis Hayward, and a dash of Robin Hood and Hamlet sprinkled into the story.

Hayward returns from the wars to find his dad dead. George Macready blames another noble, whose daughter Janet Blair is under the control of Macready. There's a sassy fiar, outlaws in the woods, a trial by combat at the end, a cameo by the future Richard III in a sort of sympathetic but not really part (he's depicted as pompous)

Director Gordon Douglas does a decent job and there's fine production values even if in black and white. But it's a sluggish tale. Uninspired support cast. Not very engaging story. I had that issue with the novel (which is different to this).

Some decent Hayward-Blair flirting but that's about it.

Book review - "The Reivers" by George MacDonald Fraser (re-reading)

The last novel to be published in Fraser's life time. A throwback to The Pyrates but not as good. Fraser loves language and I wanted to like this but he lost the knack of telling a good story and creating new characters. In Pyrates the characters were memorable and different - here they kind of all blended in (I got the two heroic male leads especially confused). The story isn't that great either (the first bit is based on The Candlemass Road) - maybe if he'd introduced a few more genuinely famous people like given a bigger role to King James or something. It'll be honest, it was tiresome to read.

Movie review - "The Devil Ship Pirates" (1964) ***1/2 (re-watching)

I've always loved the cleverness of this movie's concept - a Spanish ship is wrecked off the coast of England during the Spanish Armada of 1588; they've lost the war but the locals don't know that, so they try to pull off a con.

It's one of those movies that force you with the baddies and the plan is so bold at times you hope they'll pull it off.

There are plenty of other strong ideas - most of the ship's crew were former pirates keen to go back to their old life, there's a goody-goody noble on board (Barry Warren) to provide conflict with the captain (Christopher Lee), the British town includes a quisling type as well as an injured young man.

The cast is well above average - its a good chance for Christopher Lee who does well, and Andrew Keir is in there as well as Michael Ripper (in dark make up).

The filmmakers put ship action up the top to try and cover the fact that there's no ship action until the end. There are some sword fights.

It doesn't quite get there as a classic - I felt it could with another draft. Maybe there are too many characters to service. Or not enough emotional relationships. Perhaps we needed a love triangle involving Warren, lee and a girl - the female characters feel very undercooked. A local lady who falls for Lee/Warren could have made the difference. Maybe a more villainous/treacherous local?

Book review- "Steel Bonnets" by George MacDonald Fraser

When the film sale of Flashman enabled Fraser to quit journalism and take up writing full time, he had so much energy he not only churned out more Flashmans and the McAuslan stories, but did this very long, extremely readable history of the Borderers. It was a labour of love, he says in the afterword, but is still an impressive peace of scholarship - trudging through all those old records to find out what happened.

Fraser is a wonderful writer and his prose is clean, evocative and concise. I admit I did get lost in the last third of the book keeping track of who was who - all the Careys and Howards and Grahames.

But he has a real feel for the subject particularly the people on the Border - their bravery, shiftiness, sense of loyalty, love of sport and fighting, and so on. I'm surprised British filmmakers haven't turned to this period more - it's full of blood, thunder, romance and action, you could truly make British Westerns here.

Book review - "The Candlemass Road" by George MacDonald Fraser

A different sort of book from Fraser - only short, almost a novella, with dense writing, very much in the style of the time, I assume. There's a long afterword where he explains his historical sources and I'll take his word for it.

Historical or not it's still influenced by other novels/films - you can imagine Tyrone Power and Susan Hayward playing the leads. It's a simple story, almost a Western - on the rough northern English frontier and beautiful English lady, who has inherited property, finds her tenants subject to blackmail demands, and hires a "broken man", Waitabout... who while broken can speak Latin, is handsome and super tough, to fight them. He ends up wiping them out, in an exciting sequence - which threatens to cause a border war.

What interested Fraser, apart from the period, was the subject of law and order and civilisation... what people are forced to do in an untenable situation. Its tough and moving (and there's a chance Waitabout could  survive... isn't there?)

Although its only 150 or something pages it took me a while to read because the language was dense but it was worth it. The fight sequence was so well done I wish they'd been another.

Movie review - "The Adventures of Don Juan" (1948) ****1/2 (re-viewing)

This film makes me smile. It's bright and colourful and very witty. The women have agency - they chase after Errol Flynn more than the other way around, it's less rapey.

The sets are spectacular as is the color. Don Juan's journey to responsibility is well done. Decent action. Strong support cast- Alan Hale, Ann Rutherford being heaps of fun. Robert Douglas is a terrific villain.

Viveca Lindfors is poor as the female lead. I miss Olivia de Havilland. If they couldn't get her then it's a shame they couldn't have, I don't know, borrowed Maureen O'Hara or someone. Eleanor Parker would've been amazing.

Jaunty music. Great fun. This movie isn't as well known as The Sea Hawk but it's as good.

Movie review - "Young Bess" (1953) ***

The fame of the Somerset brothers has suffered from their great days coming after Henry VIII but they were still a highly entertaining pair of rogues, grasping at power in the wake of Henry's death, trying to control Edward VI and the young Queen Elizabeth.

This takes an inevitably romantic look - Stewart Granger is a dashing Thomas Seymour, admired by Henry and loved by young Queen Bess (Jean Simmons). Simmons is meant to be a 14 year old but clearly looks over 20, and what's more was married to Granger in real life.

In the first bit Granger only has eyes for Deborah Kerr as Catherine Parr. But then - and I feel this was a mistake - he falls for Simmons as well. It's a bit yuck because she's so young (not completely young but very young) but also dramatically unsatisfying because Granger is torn between two nice women. Those sort of plot lines rarely work - it's better when one is Bad but Kerr is good. They would've been better off having Granger entirely devoted to Kerr then falling for Simmons after Kerr died.

Still this is an entertaining film, with that MGM gloss and colour and a decent story plus George Sidney behind the camera. It helps that it's kind of true and is so domestic - you believe Simmons having a crush on Granger, and Granger squabbling with brother Guy Rolfe, and Simmons bickering with her brother Edward.

Charles Laughton pops up as Henry VIII. Everyone is well cast. Kathleen Byron has some good moments as Rolfe's wife. The character of Thomas Seymour has been romanticised - even Henry VIII prefers him, everyone says he's brave and good looking - but that does fit in with the story they want to tell.

They should consider remaking this film, or at least re telling this story, showing Seymour as more of a predator, which he was. I think it would work well these days.

Movie review - "The Sword and the Rose" (1953) **1/2

In the 50s Disney specialised in boys own stories - Treasure Island, Third Man on the Mountain This was a rare "girl's own" and I don't think they were entirely comfortable with that fact. This should be all about Glynis Johns' character, the sister of Henry VIII - and she's kind of the focus of the film but the action keeps drifting over towards Richard Todd as Henry Brandon.

Taken on it's own merits this is a perfectly okay kids look at a famous romance but it really needed to focus more on Johns - make it more of a fairytale and so on, with Todd as Prince Charming.  Johns' performance feels reigned in at the beginning then sparks up in the second half with some enjoyable come-hither looks at Todd.

The costumes  and sets are fun. It could have done with more action - it's exciting at the end, but some more earlier on would have been good.

James Robertson Justice plays Henry VIII more like the well known Henry when in reality he was younger, which would have been interesting - but I understood why they did it that way. Michael Gough adds some oily villainy.  They could have used a decent female support - more Catherine of Aragon, say.

Still, not bad.

Movie review - "Mary Queen of Scots" (2018) **1/2

Frustrating because there are some superb things - well one, really, the performance of Saoirse Ronan as Mary Queen of Scots. The whole conception and depiction of this character is perhaps the best ever of Mary in a film - she's proud, smart, charismatic, a bit dodgy, cunning but not cunning enough, with bad judgement.

Margot Robbie's Elizabeth is strong too - insecure, uncertain, but with a big picture view (and better advisers) than Mary. The scene between the two at the end is brilliant - that's what the whole film should have been, about their relationship.

But it's not. It's patchy and uncertain. Scenes seem to randomly start and end. There's little dramatic build. We have the greatest hits but it never seems real never comes alive.

The support actors are shockingly poorly drawn. Guy Pearce's sidekick just spouts lines in a bad beard. Mary's brother glowers in a beard. Darnley has something to do (bisexual and useless). Rizzio's gay, which is fine, but that's it for him - no depth, no shade. Robert just pines over Elizabeth. Bothwell just glowers. John Knox just shrieks. Mary's handmaidens - who could easily have characters - just giggle. Elizabeth's handmaiden doesn't even do that.

The theatre background of the director is evident in scenes like the assassination of Rizzio - it feels stagy - and the random diversity casting of some support players. I don't really mind they put in a black actor and an Asian actor - this period was more racially diverse in reality than many people realise - but these actors don't have a character to play. That black noble just sort of spouts exposition  Elizabeth's Asian lady in waiting infuriated me - I've got problem her being Asian, but she had no character. She just say there and listened.

I get the feeling this really should have been a six part series. The time jumps wouldn't have been disconcerting - you could build to definite climaxes like the death of Rizzio, Darnley, etc.

As it is the film doesn't have courage to focus on what it's theme should be - Elizabeth and Mary as sisters, women in a man's world.  The story needed to totally focus on that. It kind of does but this theme is dissipated.

TV review - "The White Queen" (2013) *1/2

Game of Thrones has made a lot of TV series in the historical/fantasy realm seem worse by comparison and this is one such case. It takes one of the most exciting, fascinating periods in English history - the war of the Roses - with a fresh idea - telling it from the POV of the women involved rather than the men - and muffs it.

There's uninspired direction, mediocre writing and some drab performances. Rebecca Ferguson is a particular disappointment in the lead, a role that cried out for and deserved a star; Faye Marsay isn't that much better as Mrs Richard III and Amanda Hale really got on my nerves as Henry VII's mum. There's so many scenes of them speaking softly with this irritating enunciation with the volume of their words turned right up - it drove me bonkers.

Characters come and go - it's hard to tell them apart, no time is spent investing in them, the deaths mean nothing, the politics is poorly conveyed. This was hard to get through.

Book review - "The History of Britain" by Simon Schama

Three books incorporating the history of Britain from, well, the beginning up until Winston Churchill and George Orwell (there is a brief bit bringing it up to date in the 90s but that's more epilogue-y). Schama is an excellent writer with a great gift for juicy story. Some things are really zipped over eg War of the Roses.

There was probably too much talk about buildings and the publication of books (do historians place undue emphasis on the power of books because they themselves are writers?). But a gripping, enthralling read.

Movie review - "Cry of the Banshee" (1971) **1/2

This early 70s AIP horror flick, part of their second Poe cycle, has gotten a bad wrap from the fans and even the people who worked on it. I didn't mind it so much though I wish it had been less of a rip off of Witchfinder General, with Vincent Price once again in period clothes tormenting the peasants and accusing them of being witches, and Hilary Dwyer on hand screaming and screaming and screaming.

The actual story isn't bad - Price is a rich lord who is mean to everyone and delights in trying to stomp out witches (more for his own pleasure than legal reasons); he runs into trouble when he tracks down a real life coven of witches, led by Elisabeth Bergner, star of the 30s stage and screen, and they take out a curse on him and his family.

There are lots of subplots going on here, so there's plenty of light and shade and characters with some complexity - Price's daughter Dwyer is in love with a nice servant and gets rogered by him fairly often (Dwyer was good as these English roses with a taste for naughtiness), only for the servant to get possessed; his son has a nasty side; his wife is tormented and spaced out; his step son is sadistic. There's also a drunken gravedigger, the head witch, and a nice priest.

At times it was a bit confusing as to what was going on in part because I wasn't that familiar with many of the supporting actors and had trouble keeping track of who was who. Also it's really nihilistic - the witches are kind of nice but turn to violence very quickly, the nice son has little trouble killing, the nice daughter is killed, the nice servant is possessed and turns into a murderer. Of course there are rape/molestation sequences, which early 70s cinema seemed unable to do without. Also there are places where it's down right laughable - the witches rituals, Dwyer's screaming, and, if I'm honest, Terry Gilliam's opening credit sequence.

But at least its ambitious and was no way near as bad as I thought it would be.

Radio review - Suspense - "The Queen's Ring" (1953) **1/2

A bit different for Suspense: a look at Queen Elizabeth's famous fling with Essex. Normally he's depicted as a dashing good looking spoilt idiot - James Mason is cast here, giving the role a far more mature, villainous dash. Queen Bess is still a whiny idiot who at the end begs for Essex to come back so it's not exactly fresh drama, but Mason's performance keeps it fresh. He's supported by his wife Pamela, who plays the other woman.