Dorothy Malone had been around for ages before nabbing an Oscar for a showy support role in Written on the Wind. This must have seemed life a sure-fire follow up, a biopic about a famous yet tragic female star…a reliable formula in the 50s (Interrupted Melody, Jeanne Eagles, I’ll Cry Tomorrow).
She gives a fine performance though she’s overshadowed by Errol Flynn in a role that was always going to steal the notices – John Barrymore, the real life Flynn’s old boozing partner. Flynn never had Barrymore’s reputation for a great actor but he’s perfectly cast – full of charisma, charm and sadness, with a beautiful speaking voice and fondness for the bottle.
Everything Flynn does is memorable – John Barrymore asking Diana to tell all about her life and him getting bored straight away, Flynn performing ‘once more into the breach’ soliloquy to a neighbouring yacht while a bit pissed and getting increasingly roused (he’s not magical but he does not disgrace himself) – then abandoning his daughter, showing his daughter around a near-empty mansion, going on a massive drunk leading to his minder having to tackle him, a scene where he makes eyes at a young starlet… played by Beverley Aadland, his fear at getting the lead in The Man Who Came to Dinner (one of the few films to use its actual name), a drunken phone call to his ex wife, his final plea for Diana to stay. One hour in he disappears.
It’s only after his death that Diana hits the bottle (out of guilt) – and starts rooting around too, seducing Effram Zimbalist Jnr. He married her but when he goes off to make a film, she starts becoming a real party girl, dancing at parties in her swimsuit, hooking up with tennis pro Ray Danton. He dumps her when mum cuts her off and she hooks up with a nice other actor who is revealed to be an alcoholic and they hit the booze together.
There are other good scenes too – Diana getting big applause on her first appearance on stage (and her mother saying – all too accurately – that she’s a second rate actor and is only getting applause for her name), sexy Malone dancing in her swimsuit at her party, Ray Danton abusing Diana while smacking a tennis ball off a wall near her head (and eventually smacking her in the face with that ball – great scene), Diana doing a nightclub act while trashed (she starts off doing impersonations and ends up stripping).
I’ve always remembered the ending where Diana is inspired to meet up with a publisher by an old boyfriend who turns out to be bald. She may be a drunk but she’s not bald! As a baldy I admit on one hand to be a little bit offended – but it’s also a warm, human, true and different end. “Once all I had was money. I’ve got something else now – I’m a real nice guy” – that’s a nice thing for baldy to say.
Malone isn’t quite convincing as the young Diana but once she grows up and gets to flash that lovely hair she improves. She’s particularly effective once she starts rooting – the Malone specialty.
One gripe – there’s too much music in the background during all the scenes. And there’s a strain of misogyny through it – Diana’s early boyfriend complains that because she’s rich he can’t surprise her with things and Zimbalist refuses to be a kept man, whereas Danton doesn’t.
It’s been a while since I read Diana Barrymore’s book but from memory they changed an awful lot. One memorable scene from the book which didn’t make it – John taking his daughter out while at school with one of her friends, and ending up making out with that friend – that’s enough to make you wish they’d make another version of this story. Also she was married to Bramwell Fletcher, a fellow alcoholic best remembered now for appearing in The Mummy, and had a fling with Victor Mature, was under contract to Walter Wagner.
Maybe this doesn’t deserve four stars – but I really liked it and loved certain scenes. Fun is muted with the knowledge that Barrymore killed herself soon after the book came out.
(Check out this fascinating interview between Mike Wallace and Barrymore shortly after the book came out. She says she can’t give up drinking just yet. Come on, Diana…)
Friday, October 03, 2008
Movie review – “Hangover Square” (1945) ***1/2
The Lodger was such a hit that 20th Century-Fox promptly commissioned a follow up, with Laird Cregar as another homicidal maniac in period London from a script by Barre Lydon directed by John Brahm, with George Sanders co-starring.
It took a while to reveal The Lodger was a killer but Hangover Square doesn’t waste any such time, having Cregar stab someone to death in the first few seconds. However, Cregar’s performance is a lot more subtle and sensitive than his eyes-bulging work on that earlier film – indeed, you could say that about the whole movie. For one thing, Sanders is more convincing as a doctor here than a detective, as in the earlier film. Also Linda Darnell is much better than Merle Oberon – sexy, vivacious, beautiful (to be fair, she’s got a decent character – an ambitious singer – whereas Oberon was just this girl).
The structure of this one is reminiscent of a werewolf film – the killer is a sympathetic, sensitive soul who is unaware of the crimes he is committing. Cregar is very likeable and never kills someone who doesn’t deserve it –his initial victim is shown to be a crook, Darnell is a tramp, her lover is smarmy (he doesn’t kill Sanders, just imprisons him so he can play his symphony). Excellent climax with Cregar playing Bermard Herrmann’s theme music as the room goes up in flames.
It took a while to reveal The Lodger was a killer but Hangover Square doesn’t waste any such time, having Cregar stab someone to death in the first few seconds. However, Cregar’s performance is a lot more subtle and sensitive than his eyes-bulging work on that earlier film – indeed, you could say that about the whole movie. For one thing, Sanders is more convincing as a doctor here than a detective, as in the earlier film. Also Linda Darnell is much better than Merle Oberon – sexy, vivacious, beautiful (to be fair, she’s got a decent character – an ambitious singer – whereas Oberon was just this girl).
The structure of this one is reminiscent of a werewolf film – the killer is a sympathetic, sensitive soul who is unaware of the crimes he is committing. Cregar is very likeable and never kills someone who doesn’t deserve it –his initial victim is shown to be a crook, Darnell is a tramp, her lover is smarmy (he doesn’t kill Sanders, just imprisons him so he can play his symphony). Excellent climax with Cregar playing Bermard Herrmann’s theme music as the room goes up in flames.
Book review – “Just One More Thing” by Peter Falk
Different sort of autobiography – Falk tells his life story in terms of anecdotes, throwing in bits like his drawings, a scene he wrote for a movie he was in which wasn’t used, a photo of his wife in what looks like a showgirl outfit. A breezy, light read – Falk must be a lot of fun to be around. He seems to have been compensated for losing an eye at a young age (to cancer) by having health and a long running career.
I love it when top notch stage actors enjoy a hit tv show later on in their career, it seems so, how should I put it, fair: Angela Lansbury, Falk, Sam Waterston. Falk came to acting late, put in hard yards on theatre, before finding success as a supporting actor in movies then as a tv star. While he’s best known for Columbo he has some serious street cred in his career – The Iceman Cometh with Robards on off-Broadway, films with Cassavetes and Wim Wenders, two Oscar nominations (for his first two movies!) – as well as more commercial stuff – the lead in a Neil Simon hit, a movie with the Rat Pack. He has had a healthy thirst for knowledge and adventure, travelling behind the Iron Curtain several times.
I love it when top notch stage actors enjoy a hit tv show later on in their career, it seems so, how should I put it, fair: Angela Lansbury, Falk, Sam Waterston. Falk came to acting late, put in hard yards on theatre, before finding success as a supporting actor in movies then as a tv star. While he’s best known for Columbo he has some serious street cred in his career – The Iceman Cometh with Robards on off-Broadway, films with Cassavetes and Wim Wenders, two Oscar nominations (for his first two movies!) – as well as more commercial stuff – the lead in a Neil Simon hit, a movie with the Rat Pack. He has had a healthy thirst for knowledge and adventure, travelling behind the Iron Curtain several times.
Book review – “I Hate My Neck” by Nora Ephron
I’ll admit there are a lot of things I find irritating about Nora Ephron movies – all the emphasis on food and interior design and sentimentality. But she’s a great writer and some of the stuff here is terrific – advising parents of teenagers to buy a dog so someone will be glad to see them, doing aerobics to Chicago. I wasn’t so interested in the whining about the price of rent in New York and the state of her neck and aging, but it’s all well written and it is consistently smart and witty. There’s som unexpectedly moving stuff too when she talks about her friend who died young (age 66).
Movie review – “Emperor of the North” (1973) **1/2
Robert Aldrich didn’t have much luck with the Depression in The Grisson Gang, but he went back to that period just two years later, this time armed with two of his favourite actors, Lee Marvin and Ernest Brognine. It has an intriguing idea, with hobo Marvin betting he can ride on Borgnine’s train. It’s a simple story which could stand as a metaphor for all sorts of stuff they liked in the early 70s – freedom, authority, bucking the system, slang (eg Vanishing Point, Easy Rider). No doubt that’s the film’s backers were hoping the youth audience would enjoy that aspect.
However the only real young character is Keith Carradine as a bratty young hobo forever creating trouble. Although he’s got potential he’s never shown to really have the right stuff, even at the end - perhaps this was why the youth audience didn’t go for the movie.
The film is way too long at two hours. You could say that about a lot of Robert Aldrich films but this seems really padded because really it should be about one train journey but it takes all these side detours. Some of the battles on the train are really clever – I especially loved Borgnine’s little chain device that he uses to get at hobos sleeping under the carriage.
Borgnine, Marvin and Carradine are all effective and the support cast demonstrate Aldrich had not lost any of his skill for casting great “faces” – the agony, sweat and hard work of the Depression are etched on all of them. (The men that is – there are hardly any women in the film)
However the only real young character is Keith Carradine as a bratty young hobo forever creating trouble. Although he’s got potential he’s never shown to really have the right stuff, even at the end - perhaps this was why the youth audience didn’t go for the movie.
The film is way too long at two hours. You could say that about a lot of Robert Aldrich films but this seems really padded because really it should be about one train journey but it takes all these side detours. Some of the battles on the train are really clever – I especially loved Borgnine’s little chain device that he uses to get at hobos sleeping under the carriage.
Borgnine, Marvin and Carradine are all effective and the support cast demonstrate Aldrich had not lost any of his skill for casting great “faces” – the agony, sweat and hard work of the Depression are etched on all of them. (The men that is – there are hardly any women in the film)
Movie review – “The Lodger” (1944) ***
Laird Cregar established himself as one of Hollywood’s leading character players from his first film role in Hudson Bay, with that great charisma, speaking voice and presence. This was his first starring vehicle, and remains the film for which he is perhaps best remembered.
He plays the title role – unlike Ivor Novello in the Hitchcock version of the same tale, the Lodger actually is the Ripper. He is very effective – though, to be honest, he acts fairly guiltily from the get-go. No wonder they suspect him of the crimes.
Cregar was a homosexual and you could do a gay reading of this film – the lodger hates women, he caresses lovingly a picture of his “brother”. Actually, come to think of it, it’s hard to do a straight reading of it, what with Cregar’s agonies, effeminate nature and soulful eyes. He has a great death scene: surrounded by coppers (a la Frankenstein’s monster), eyes bulging, gripping his knife, he snaps and plunges into the river. The body is never found… had this been made by Universal surely there would have been a sequel.
Merle Oberon is okay as the female lead – she doesn’t have much charisma, and acts like she’s the prettiest girl in high school, but she is pretty, and even does the can-can. Her character is quite stupid, refusing to think Cregar is weird despite him going on these long monologues (though to be fair she doesn’t know she’s in a horror film but we do.)
George Sanders is the detective on the case. Making this film, I wonder if Cregar wondered “if Sanders can play romantic leads why can’t I – he’s no better looking than me, has played a lot of villains, and has that silky voice… all I need to do is diet.” And so he did diet, with fatal consequences.
Like The Undying Monster (another film directed by John Brahm, teamed with this on a DVD) this has lovely period detail and excellent Lucien Ballard photography. It has a stronger script and cast. According to the making of doco featurette on the DVD, Daryl Zanuck requested an effective murder sequence that happens during the film be put at the beginning.
He plays the title role – unlike Ivor Novello in the Hitchcock version of the same tale, the Lodger actually is the Ripper. He is very effective – though, to be honest, he acts fairly guiltily from the get-go. No wonder they suspect him of the crimes.
Cregar was a homosexual and you could do a gay reading of this film – the lodger hates women, he caresses lovingly a picture of his “brother”. Actually, come to think of it, it’s hard to do a straight reading of it, what with Cregar’s agonies, effeminate nature and soulful eyes. He has a great death scene: surrounded by coppers (a la Frankenstein’s monster), eyes bulging, gripping his knife, he snaps and plunges into the river. The body is never found… had this been made by Universal surely there would have been a sequel.
Merle Oberon is okay as the female lead – she doesn’t have much charisma, and acts like she’s the prettiest girl in high school, but she is pretty, and even does the can-can. Her character is quite stupid, refusing to think Cregar is weird despite him going on these long monologues (though to be fair she doesn’t know she’s in a horror film but we do.)
George Sanders is the detective on the case. Making this film, I wonder if Cregar wondered “if Sanders can play romantic leads why can’t I – he’s no better looking than me, has played a lot of villains, and has that silky voice… all I need to do is diet.” And so he did diet, with fatal consequences.
Like The Undying Monster (another film directed by John Brahm, teamed with this on a DVD) this has lovely period detail and excellent Lucien Ballard photography. It has a stronger script and cast. According to the making of doco featurette on the DVD, Daryl Zanuck requested an effective murder sequence that happens during the film be put at the beginning.
Movie review – “Tarzan’s Three Challenges” (1963) **1/2
Tarzan was still in jet-setting mode – this time he heads off to Asia (a fictitious country – it was actually shot in Thailand) where he helps the legitimate ruler of a country fight of a usurper. Why would Tarzan care? Well, apparently the former ruler was an old mate. It’s not much of a motivation, to be honest – Tarzan doesn’t really have any business messing about in Asia (perhaps he was inspired by Kennedy’s Peace Corps), and who’s to say Strode wouldn’t make a decent leader? He’s certainly brave and willing to do hands-on villainy.
Having said that, the Thailand locations and extras are terrific, full of colour and variety. Robert Day directs with a sure hand again, and there is some impressive action, notably the final battle between Tarzan and Strode on a rope bridge just above steaming cauldrons. Strode is a strong villain, and its great that he got the chance to act in a better Tarzan film.
This isn’t quite the top rank though. The story is weak – it’s a travelogue really with Tarzan dolphining along, and the whole “you must do X challenges” thing feels really contrived. Also Jock Mahoney looks tired and dispirited; I’m trying not to be ageist (apparently he fell sick during filming) but it counts against the result. Maybe they should have used his age more – had Tarzan having a mid life crsis or something (you know that would make a terrific Tarzan film).
Having said that, the Thailand locations and extras are terrific, full of colour and variety. Robert Day directs with a sure hand again, and there is some impressive action, notably the final battle between Tarzan and Strode on a rope bridge just above steaming cauldrons. Strode is a strong villain, and its great that he got the chance to act in a better Tarzan film.
This isn’t quite the top rank though. The story is weak – it’s a travelogue really with Tarzan dolphining along, and the whole “you must do X challenges” thing feels really contrived. Also Jock Mahoney looks tired and dispirited; I’m trying not to be ageist (apparently he fell sick during filming) but it counts against the result. Maybe they should have used his age more – had Tarzan having a mid life crsis or something (you know that would make a terrific Tarzan film).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)