Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
Night of the Hunter, The (1955) 
Charles Laughton
Robert Mitchum gives one of his greatest performances as Harry Powell, one of cinemas greatest villains. In the film Powell is a crazed preacher who marries a woman (Shelley Winters) knowing that her kids know the whereabouts to some money that their now deceased father has hidden somewhere. The psychotic Powell will stop at nothing to find where the money is hidden and that includes murder. It's funny to think that critics hated this movie when originally released and that people didn't go to the theater to see it. Today this film is rightfully considered a classic and it certainly deserves that label because it's without question one of the greatest suspense films ever made. It's rather amazing that Laughton was a first time director here because he hits so many right notes that I'm sure his old boss, Alfred Hitchcock, would have been impressed. What works so well is that many thrillers have a very thick atmosphere but this one here instead has a very cold one. This is the type of film that your body will just get chills because of the coldness and all the situations and the bleak nature of the story. I think in a lot of ways this film is an attack on religion as a whole and the rather perverse look at it and Mitchum's character really makes the film a very cold one to watch. The film doesn't have items jumping out at you but instead it just builds up this coldness from start to finish and really delivers three extremely intense sequences as the story unfolds. The black and white cinematography is a character of its own as is the brilliant music score by Walter Schumann. Then we have Mitchum and his downright masterful performance, which one could argue as being one of the greatest in the history of motion pictures. Not only does he make Powell extremely creepy but he also does a great job in some of the black comedy that gets thrown in. Mitchum is downright chilling in scenes like the wedding night one but he can also be extremely powerful in ones like the "Love/Hate" one. Even if Mitchum isn't saying anything his character has so much energy that you can feel him breathing on your neck. Winters is also excellent in her small role as are Peter Graves, Billy Chain, Sally Jane Bruce and Evelyn Varden. A lot of credit should also go to Lillian Gish who has some rather silly dialogue to speak at times yet she makes it seem realistic and really makes it work. It's a real shame that this film was hated so badly at the time of release that Laughton would pretty much retire from directing movies. It's doubtful he'd ever make something as great as this but who knows what else he could have done.
Ernest Saves Christmas (1988) 
John R. Cherry III
Part of my childhood was watching Ernest movies so perhaps my opinions of this film are going to be bias but I'm sure there were many in my same shoes. Even after all these years I remember my parents taking me to the movies to see ERNEST GOES TO CAMP and I remember how happy I was at the age of eight to know this movie here was coming out. As I went to view this movie again, probably my first time in fifteen-years, I wasn't really sure what to expect but it wasn't too bad. The story is quite simple as Ernest picks up Santa Claus at the airport and must help him convince another guy that he's going to be the new Santa. The film certainly didn't thrill me or entertain me as much as when I was a kid but that's to be expected. I'm sure kids today would still eat this film as it's still extremely cute and the message is still there. I'm sure adults will have to be fans of Ernest but I find him charming in his own way. Only Jim Varney could create a character like this and while it's true he's obnoxious, that's kinda the point as the character was aimed at children. With that in mind I think he made a very love able character that many kids will continue to enjoy over the years. Even when I forget that I'm now an adult, the character makes me smile. As for the film, it starts off a lot better than it ends. I think the first thirty-minutes are quite clever as we get a few good twists and the storyline itself, while simple, is still pretty imaginative. I think what really hurts the movie are the cut aways to the Chuck and Bobby characters by series regulars Gailard Sarain and Bill Byrge. The scenes with them and the reindeer's never get any laughs and they really take away from the "action" going on with Ernest and Santa. I think that most people will read the title and know whether or not they'll like this. If you're a fan of Ernest and can take his humor then this is an enjoyable little film. If you're not a fan then you know to stay away.
One Romantic Night (1930)
Paul L. Stein
Screen legend Lillian Gish made her talkie debut in this rather static (?) comedy about a love triangle. In the film she plays a princess who is promised to a man (Rod La Rocque) but of course she's in love with another (Conrad Nagel). This film was filmed once before in 1925 and again later with Grace Kelly but I haven't seen either of those to make a far comparison. I'm certainly hoping that either one is better than this film because sadly this film is quite poor. I love Gish and always have but this film here is pretty poor from start to finish and even her lovely grace can't save it. In fact, I'd say she's part of the problem because she's way too old (37 at the time) to be playing the part, which is clearly mean for someone in their early twenties, if not younger. Having her squeeze into a role like this is certainly unfair and especially considering this was also her first talkie. Her talking sequences are really bland, which took me by surprise. I thought she would have handled the jump a lot better than she did because she had a lovely voice but it seems she's trying way too hard to push her voice. Just watch her in a number of scenes where she actually looks like she's trying to "push" her voice. She wouldn't make another film for three years and apparently hated making this movie, its director and had an overall negative opinion on the film but after seeing this you could understand why. Both La Rocque and Nagel are rather stiff and bland as well. Supporting players Marie Dressler and O.O. Heggie fair somewhat better but they can't save the film either. The entire film is poorly directed and I'd question whether anyone knew if they were making a comedy or drama because I honestly couldn't tell. Things are that flat from start to finish so there's really no one to recommend this to unless, like myself, you're a Gish fan and want to say you've seen her first talkie.
Christmas Carol, A (1938)
Edwin L. Marin
Nice adaptation of Charles Dickens short story has character actor Reginald Owen playing the role of the miser Ebenezer Scrooge. Everyone should know the story but Scrooge is warned by his old partner Marley (Leo G. Carroll) that he's going to be visited by three ghosts and his fate depends on what he learns. I've seen quite a few versions of this famous story and I must admit that I think all of them are charming in their own right and most of the credit must go to Dickens himself for writing such an amazing story that we all know so well that sometimes it's hard to believe someone could come up with such a clever story and message. I wouldn't say this is my favorite versions of the story, that would probably be the one with George C. Scott, but there's still plenty to enjoy here. What works best is that the film really doesn't add any filler as the thing runs a brief 68-minutes so it's pretty much to the point from start to finish. We briefly get to know the characters and then we're off to the races as the filmmakers are certainly expecting the viewer to know what's going on and who's who. Owen was excellent at playing the "happy" Scrooge but I felt he wasn't nearly mean enough in the darker role. I certainly enjoyed his performance here but it seems like he was either held back from being too dark or he simply didn't go a bit further with the role. On the other hand, he's flawless as the happy Scrooge and really makes that part of the character his very own and is quite memorable in the final moments of the film. Gene Lockhart turns in a very good performance as Cratchit and Barry MacKay is also very good as Scrooge's nephew. Lionel Braham, Ann Rutherford and D'Arcy Corrigan are good as the three spirits and the rest of the supporting cast are also fine in their roles.
Mickey's Christmas Carol (1983)
Burny Mattinson
Disney kept Mickey Mouse off the big screen for nearly three decades but they certainly picked the right story to bring him back in. This wonderful adaptation of the classic story has Mickey playing Bob Cratchit, the poor worker whose boss Scrooge is about to get a lesson on treating people the right way. In my opinion this is Disney greatest moment and also one of the greatest shorts ever made. Even though the film only runs 20-minutes, there's enough heart and spirit to carry a dozen feature films. I've loved this movie since first seeing it as a child and I'm pretty sure I could watch this once a day and not tire of it. What amazes me most and always has is that the animators got all the right characters in the story being played by the right Disney character. Goofy as Marley, Willie the Giant and Jiminy Cricket as a couple of the ghosts, Donald Duck as the nephew and of course Mickey and Minnie. The entire story is a very familiar one but it's given so much life by these Disney characters that one really could argue that this is the very best version of the story, which has had several good adaptations over the past hundred years. I loved all the animation, the music and of course the ending is incredibly touching and funny.
United States Service Bands, The (1943)
Jean Negulesco
This Warner shot is pretty much a hack job version with earlier shorts being edited down to one. Songs from THE UNITED STATES ARMY BAND, THE UNITED STATES MARINE BAND and THE UNITED STATES NAVY BAND are all edited down into this film so if you haven't seen any of them you might get a kick out of this. Personally, I've seen those shorts and I think you'd do yourself justice by spending the 24-minutes watching those three instead of viewing them in an edited down 8-minute version. The music here is certainly good as the bands really do nice justice to the songs they're performing but if you enjoy what you see and hear here then you'll certainly want to see the expanded versions.
Did'ja Know? (1950)
Dave O'Brien
Nice Pete Smith short tries to explain various items of interest to those who want to know minor things. For instance, this short tells us how many greeting cards are sold in this country each year. We also learn why animals yawn and why radiators make that annoying 'ping' sound whenever you want quiet. Also on hand is what fathers do when they're expecting a child. Fans of O'Brien and Smith will find this short to be another winner, which both men had many of in their careers. Once again O'Brien not only direct and wrote the film but plays the main fool as well. He plays in each segment but the best is the first one dealing with him playing a father in two forms. One as the overly nervous guy and the other the overly calm one. The nervous bit certainly works the best with one of the highlights coming when he tries to light a match with his cigarette. The greeting cards sequence gives us a couple dumb jokes that might make you laugh because they're so bad. The radiator sequence isn't the best but there are still a few smiles to be had.
To My Unborn Son (1943)
Laszlo Kardos
Another fine entry in John Nesbitt's Passing Parade series, which often times told true, if unbelievable, stories. This time out he tells the story of a mild, weak man named Peter Ravitch who must leave his pregnant wife behind when he goes out to protect his village from the Nazis. Soon he is shot but before dying his writes a letter to his unborn son, which by miracle finds its way back to his mother shortly after the man dies. It's important to remember that this film was released in the heart of WWII so it's certainly going to try and be very patriotic and it does that very well. The actual story itself is a pretty interesting one and will certainly keep you entertained from start to finish. What works so well is that we're told the father dies within minutes of the movie and it makes us wait until the end to actually read what he had written. This builds up some nice tension as we patiently wait to see what he wrote his unborn son. The poem he wrote was quite touching especially when you consider that it was written while he was dying. Director Kardos, working as Leslie Kardos here, would later make a few "B" pictures including THE MAN WHO TURNED TO STONE.
Mediterranean Ports of Call (1941)
James A. FitzPatrick
Another entry in MGM's TravelTalks series with this one taking a look at ports in Algiers and Monaco. In Algiers we learn that the place was an original piracy hot spot for various sea thieves until the French government finally got them under control. In the slums we see the various costumes being worn by the people and how women still go around with veils on their faces. We also see a war memorial and in Monaco we see the infamous Suicide Rock and learn that there really aren't too many suicides there after all. Once again this is your typical entry in the series, which means we learn a few interesting things and the Technicolor gives us a lot of great stuff to look at. There are certainly some beautiful images but the stand out would have to be the beautiful waters that we see.
Colorful Islands Madagascar and Seychelles (1935)
This TravelTalks episode takes us to a couple islands on the coast of Africa. In Madagascar we learn that there are about three and a half million people living there (at least in 1935) and how the place actually features a lot of women in power, which wasn't the norm for this type of country back then. We also learn that France took the place over in 1896 and that in 1916 many people were arrested for a plot to poison all French people living there. We learn that rice, coffee and salt are the main exports. In Seychelles we learn about their colorful spiders that are apparently very dumb as well as their double coconuts. The actual stories being told here are fairly interesting and I certainly would have liked to had heard more about that 1916 poisoning case but the real reason to check this out is for the Technicolor and some of the amazing shots. There's a scene towards the end where we see the skies sitting over the beach and I must say this was perhaps the most breathtaking images I've seen from the several dozen TravelTalks shorts I've seen.
Cash Stashers (1953)
Dave O'Brien
Decent short from the Dave O'Brien and Pete Smith team explains why men shouldn't be cheap and hide their money around the house instead of putting it in a safe bank or buying bonds with it. In the film we see various reasons as to why hiding money is so dangerous. One example is hiding the money in an old pair of shoes, which of course the wife ends up giving away. Another example would be hiding it in a pillow only to have your friendly dog eat it up. That will pretty much give you the idea behind this short, which certainly isn't the best from the duo but I'm sure fans will find it mildly entertaining. The screenplay (also by O'Brien) is pretty good as the set ups are pretty entertaining but none of them really pay off with any big laughs. The stuff dealing with O'Brien's pains of trying to find his money in the shoes will put a smile on your face but you won't find yourself laughing out loud. If you have eight-minutes to kill then this is certainly worth you time.
Dogway Melody, The (1930)
Zion Myers, Jules White
A mildly entertaining entry in MGM's Dogville series is a spoof of their THE BROADWAY MELODY from 1929. This time out, naturally, we have dogs spoofing that movie and for the most part the story here stays pretty close to that of the film its spoofing. This Dogville series is going to be love it or hate it but I'm somewhere in the middle as I find most of the films to be incredibly bad but at the same time they're so darn surreal and at times creepy that you can't help but watch them from start to finish in some sort of morbid fascination. I actually found this to be one of the better episodes especially if you've seen the film that they're spoofing. The spoof of Anita Page is pretty spot on and also quite funny. The highlight of the film would have to be when Al J. Olsen comes on stage to sing "Mammy". Of course, the film features a black dog just to fit in with the real actors most famous way of singing. Like most of the others, making this a two-reeler is somewhat pushing it as I'm sure the film would have moved and worked better at an eight or nine minute running time but if you're a fan of the series you'll want to check this one. If you've never seen a film from the series then you might as well start here.
So Quiet on the Canine Front (1931)
Zion Myers, Jules White
Another zanny entry in the always surreal Dogville series from MGM with this one spoofing ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT. As is to be expected, the story here is pretty similar but only this time we have dogs acting out all the parts. I really can't say I'm a fan of this series but each one is rather twisted, sick and surreal in their own way and that's reason enough to keep your eyes open throughout the running time. I found this to be one of the better entries as we get some pretty funny scenes including one where a dog para shoots down into some hay and another nice scene where the dogs are in basic training and they can't turn their eyes the correct way. The scenes with the rifles changing positions were nicely done but at the end of the day you still won't be able to call this short "cute" because it's just way too bizarre seeing the dogs being treated the way they are. I'm sure PETA members won't be happy but others probably won't find too much to enjoy here either.
That's Why I Left You (1943)
Edward L. Cahn
Even before the credits role, John Nesbitt lets us know that this here isn't your typical Passing Parade entry because this one here is a lot more personal. Even though I didn't really buy into what the film was offering I must admit that I admire its twists and turns and for it at least trying something different and original. We learn that a husband leaves his wife and then sends her a letter explaining why he has ran off. That's pretty much all you need to know as the story takes a few twists that I won't ruin here. I'm not sure how big these twists actually are but I found them to be quite nice and they actually manages to make the film worth viewing even though I didn't get the full impact that I'm sure the writers were going for. I really enjoyed how the letter was used to talk about the couples history together and I thought everything really tied together nicely at the end. Nesbitt offers his usual nice narration and director Cahn handles all the material well.
Believe It or Not #5 (1930)
Murray Roth
You never really know what you're going to get out of Robert L. Ripley's short series because they all vary in quality. They also vary in what exactly you're going to get and this one here offers very little. Ripley goes to a Milk Fund where he begins to talk about all sorts of things that we can believe or not and then we see a six-month-old girl who can roller skate. That's pretty much all we get to "see" as the rest of the stories are just that. Ripley tells us all sorts of strange things but we never get to see them and that makes this short rather worthless and boring. As I said, the series is always hit and miss but I've never seen one that offers us so little in terms of getting to watch some of these amazing stories. At the start of the film we're told about a man who hasn't slept in 75 years. We finally see this guy at the end of the film as he gets a few lines of dialogue (badly dubbed at that) and this is all the proof we're given of his claim.
One of these days I'm going to revisit 1941. I didn't care too much for it when I saw it years ago but I'm curious if it has changed any over the years. Like you, I really can't remember too much about it.
Battle of Britain, The (1943)
Frank Capra
The fourth film in Capra's "Why We Fight" series takes a look at Britain and their entrance into the war. As with the other films in the series, the main goal here was to teach people in the U.S. why we're entering the war and bring them up on what's been going on overseas. Today we have much better documentaries about all these events so it's important to keep in mind that these were rather fresh when originally released and the information being passed here was all that was known then. Today, much of the information told here has been corrected but history buffs probably aren't going to be watching these for a lesson. The film remains mildly entertaining as a nostalgia trip because it gives us a chance to see what was being taught back while the war was going on. We get the typical clips of Hitler, various battles and things like that but the most interesting footage comes from the factories in England where we see all the extra work being done to help push the cause. Most of the stock footage is in bad shape but that's somewhat to be expected. Overall, I'm really not sure how much Capra had to do on the film and I doubt his fans will be the ones watching this. WWII buffs will probably want to check it out but others will either find it too stale or find more fulfilling documentaries out there.
War Comes to America (1945)
Frank Capra
Seventh and final entry in Capra's "Why We Fight" series centers in on America, their reasons for wanting to stay out of the way and their eventual slide to knowing that the war was the only way out. As usual Capra, or how much he actually had to do with it, fills the screen with all sorts of stock footage of various battles and even more shots of Hitler and his various rants. This time out there's even more polls showing how Americans were viewing the stuff overseas and it's no shock that the majority wanted nothing to do with what was going on in Europe. Looking at the various poll numbers was one of the most fascinating things about this film and especially how the numbers changed over the years. Also worth mentioning are the various turning points that the government finally realized that they were going to have to power up the various military forces here. Again, as with many of the entries in this series, there's a lot of stuff that would probably be called incorrect today but we must remember when this thing was made. One could also roll their eyes when the film talks about freedom of people here yet we know that wasn't really the case in this era. With that said, there's enough here to make it worth watching and the overall feel of patriotism is quite high and works very well. The movie doesn't pull many punches as we get some rather graphic photos of injured children and it certainly hammer home its point of why America should enter the war.
Divine Lady, The (1929)
Frank Lloyd
Director Lloyd picked up the Best Director Oscar for this film, which is the main reason why anyone remembers or talks about it today. While that might be the reason the film is remembered today, the film itself is still pretty good and holds up fairly well. The film tells the story of the doomed love affair of Lady Emma Hamilton (Corinne Griffith) who married Sir William (H.B. Warner) only to cheat on him with Captain Horatio Nelson (Victor Varconi). I'm not overly familiar with the true events but I've been told this movie isn't too close to the truth but that's to be expected. Whereas Hamilton is shown as a rather cheerful and charming person here, apparently in real life she could be twisted and cruel and those sides aren't on display here. With that said, I found the movie to old up fairly well in certain fields but the melodrama has dated quite badly. The entire love story really isn't all that interesting even though the performances carry it for the most part. I found the love triangle to be rather forced as I never really bought into why Hamilton would marry Sir William in the first place. The money might be obvious but I felt that the film really rushed their relationship and that William's entire motivation and feelings are overlooked. The ending is pretty tacky and unemotional, although I'm sure many fell for it back in 1929. The entire look of the film from the cinematography to the amazing sets are a reason to watch the film as are the performances. I found Griffith to be quite charming and she certainly carries the film on her own. The two men turn in fine performances as well. Marie Dressler is pretty much wasted in a thankless role. What really makes this film worth watching is a battle sequence out at sea that happens towards the middle of the picture. The action sequences are very exciting and the stuff dealing with the ships being torn apart look very realistic.
Tillie's Punctured Romance (1914)
Mack Sennett
A big city con man (Charles Chaplin) comes across a homely farm girl (Marie Dressler) and decides to sweep her off her feet so that he can steal the inheritance she's gotten from a rich uncle. Some consider this the first full-length comedy and that's enough of a reason to watch the film in terms of its historic significance but it's also worth noting that Chaplin doesn't get top-billing and that this would also be the last time someone else would direct him. This is certainly a real mad cap of a movie as the Keystone tradition is on full display as there's very little story and all slapstick. It's rather amazing at how well the film works considering you could make a strong argument that it's just a two-reeler at best blown up into a 73-minute feature. There are obvious flaws with the film including the fact that it seems everything from the uncle being reported dead, to being alive and multiple other happenings seem to be taking place within one afternoon. The main draw of this film are its two stars, both who give wonderful performances and they really know how to work off the other. Dressler really fits her role, which she created on Broadway four years earlier. She perfectly fits the look of the character and she doesn't shy away from making herself look bad or silly on the screen in order to get a laugh. It's a rather brave performance and she handles it perfectly. Chaplin also manages to be quite good especially in all the slapstick stuff. Early on when he's being beaten up by Dressler he really gets to practice what he would become so famous for. His timing is top notch and he really has great chemistry with Dressler. Mabel Normand also gives an excellent performance in the role of the other woman. Mack Swain, Charles Bennett and Charley Chase add in some nice support.
Min and Bill (1930)
George W. Hill
Marie Dressler picked up the Best Actress Oscar for her performance here as Min, a waterfront rat who was given a small baby after its mother decided to run off. Min raised the kid to a young woman (Dorothy Jordan) along with the help of her friend Bill (Wallace Beery) but she is pretty much forced to throw her out to get her away from the trashy life on the waterfront. Then, Min must do even more when the girl's drunken mother shows back up. The actual screenplay here, by Frances Marion, is pretty standard for the era as it really doesn't try to do too much but there are some excellent performances that make the film worth viewing. I've been rather hit and miss on my opinions of Dressler but there's no question that this film belongs to her and it's without question the best work I've seen from here. I guess this was a real coming out after apparently considering suicide only a few years earlier when she made her comeback in THE PATSY, which eventually led to more roles and then this one, which got her the Oscar. Again, her look is just right for the film but I was amazed at how much heart and soul she pumped into her character and the film. This is a pretty dark little movie that doesn't take any comic turns or center on fake moments. The characters are shown as being ugly and trashy and it doesn't try to make them look good at any point. The film and Dressler's performance also makes it clear that ugly people can have good hearts, which I believe is the real point of the film. I was surprised that the film took a few of the twists that it did but then again, we're dealing with a pre-code era where happy situations weren't always forced on movies. Beery is also very good in his supporting role as his always plays the idiot well. I was also impressed with Jordan in her role and Marjorie Rambeau is fine as the drunken mother. Again, the screenplay is pretty straight forward and simple and it was clearly written to fit Dressler and Beery but the two take it, run with it and in the end deliver a nice little gem.
Everybody's Fine (2009)
Kirk Jones
Robert DeNiro plays a widower who grows tired of his four children making excuses for not coming to see him so he disregards his doctor's orders and takes a trip to visit all four. Along the way he starts to think about their childhood and where their lives are at now. I remember when THIS BOYS LIFE was released it featured a trailer that would make you think you were walking into one of the greatest family films ever made even though the actual film was a dark one about child abuse. I mention that because this film is pretty much the same effect as the poster, TV ads and trailer makes you think that you're in for a good time but the film is actually an incredibly depressing affair but it finally gives star DeNiro a true character and he does great work with it. Now, I'm not one of those who thinks DeNiro has wasted one performance after another for the past twenty years. I think he's given several very good performances even though many of the characters weren't the strongest items for an actor of his range. The performance here is downright terrific and truly deserves to be called that "old DeNiro" style. DeNiro doesn't need words to show what his character is feeling and he perfectly brings to life this rather sad character who is smart enough to know there's a lot more going on with his children then they're willing to tell him. I found DeNiro to be perfect and one would hope he'd get some Oscar consideration but that probably won't happen considering how the film did at the box office (but I would ask why that should matter). DeNiro gets to interact with various characters and the amount of life he brings this character will make one remember the type of work he was turning in on a consistent basis years ago. I won't ruin DeNiro's big scene towards the end but it's certainly very overwhelming. The supporting cast has Drew Barrymore, Kate Beckinsale and Sam Rockwell playing the children and they all give fine performances and mix with DeNiro very well. I do wish the actual film would have been a bit stronger because it's extremely depressing but at times I felt the film was holding back. I really can't explain what but it just never really felt like a full movie and at times there were some plot details that were a tad bit over dramatic and other times that the film pushes too hard to get its point across. While the film does have its share of problems, the real reason for anyone to watch this is for the return of DeNiro and that alone makes this worth seeing. Again, not the happiest film out there but at least we get to see DeNiro playing his best character in quite a while.
) 1/2 1/2
While the film does have its share of problems, the real reason for anyone to watch this is for the return of DeNiro and that alone makes this worth seeing.
I found a copy of SANTA CLAUS for $0.75 at Amazon so I should be checking it out fairly soon.
World's Greatest Dad (2009)
Bobcat Goldthwait
One of the blackest of all black comedies features Robin Williams as Lance, a failed teacher, failed boyfriend and failed father to an obnoxious pervert (Daryl Sabara) who masturbates too much, is hated by everyone and who has no real purpose in life. After a tragedy and a lie the father must then come to terms with something that I won't ruin here. When people think of Goldthwait, 99% of them are going to think of the crazy guy from the POLICE ACADEMY films and only 1% are going to know him as a filmmaker. SHAKES THE CLOWN has gained a cult following over the years and there's no doubt that this film will eventually be looked at as not a great movie but one that after watching you'll want to stand up and applaud the filmmakers for delivering something completely original and different. It's hard to really describe this movie because it's best that you go into it without knowing all of the details and how we get to the events in the second half. I'm sure you could show this movie to a hundred people and each one of them would walk away feeling the movie was about something different. I think the film certainly shines the spotlight on parenthood, teen suicide and how we worship celebs and how those celebs even become famous. The movie has so many layers that people are going to take different things away from it but I really respected the comedy of the first half and then the drama of the second. The first half of the movie is full of vulgar situations as the loser son offends one person after another and the viewer can't help but hate him. There's never an attempt to make us like him and that's usually not a good thing in a comedy if you hate the leading man. We're not even given a reason to like the father played by Williams, although I'm sure one could feel sorry for him because of how big of a loser he is to everyone around him. If you do find yourself caring for him then that might change after the events in the second half of the movie. Everyone was informed about Williams and his full frontal nudity but more people should really look at his terrific performance. I guess raw might be a simple word but the entire Williams persona is cleaned away and we're seeing a performance from him that we haven't seen before. I've always felt that he was a better dramatic actor than a comedic one but he handles both sides extremely well here. Sabara is just as great as the perverted son and Alexie Gilmore is wonderful as Williams' girlfriend. The film hits on all sorts of rather taboo subjects but for the most part is looks them directly in the face and doesn't back down. I'm sure the subject matter might be too much for certain film fans but I think those looking for a rather brave and original piece of filmmaking is going to at least respect what we get here even if they find themselves feeling uncomfortable.
Busher, The (1919)
Jerome Storm
Pretty good drama about a bush league baseball player (Charles Ray) who is a hero in his small town when he gets a shot at the majors. He goes there and is a major bust so he returns home as a loser but soon a second chance comes up and this might help him get the girl of his dreams (Colleen Moore). This 55-minute feature is pretty short on actual story but it's still pretty entertaining thanks to some of the baseball scenes. It's funny to see the sports dramas from 1919 had the same formula that sports movies today still have. Ray, a major star at this point in time, manages to give a good performance as the good ol' boy, which is apparently a role he would play quite often. I thought he fit the role quite nicely and he really made you believe that he just walked off the farm. Moore is also pretty good as the love interest but John Gilbert doesn't get too much to do as the rival. I think the main reason people should check this out is for the old-time baseball outfits, gloves and fields. Being a major baseball fan I found this stuff to be the most interesting and it was scenes like these that really made the film keep working even when the story itself starts to drag.
Lucifera: Demon Lover (1972)
Paolo Lombardo
Italian horror has three women (led by cult favorite Rosalba Neri) going to stay at a house that is said to be the home of Satan. They talk the caretaker in letting them spend the night when the Neri character sees a portrait that takes her back in time several hundred years where the three women are now in their own battle with the Devil. Fans of MARK OF THE DEVIL or THE DEVIL'S WEDDING NIGHT will probably be tempted to try this out as will fans of Neri but both parties are going to be disappointed because the movie is pretty much dull from start to finish. The entire story doesn't make a bit of sense and to make matters worse is the fact that director Lombardo didn't have much experience behind the camera and this clearly shows with the incredibly slow pacing. It also doesn't help matters that we have several Ed Wood moments where it will be light outside but then they'll cut to the next scene where it's dark and then cut back to light. This happens at least during two different scenes taking place at different times. The plot doesn't make a bit of sense but for this type of film that's really not overly important as long as we get good stuff. That good stuff being either violence, sex, nudity or in the best case all three. This film doesn't offer any blood and has very little nudity. We do get a pretty fun orgy taking place in a castle and fans of Neri and her nude scenes will have to wait until the very end to get just a little peak. The performances are all rather bland but you really can't blame them as I'm sure they were all aware that this thing wasn't going to turn out too well. Satan has invaded Italian horror films countless times but this here isn't the best out there and should pretty much be avoided by everyone unless they just have to sit through even the bad ones (like myself).
Hanging Woman, The (1973)
Jose Luis Merino
This Spanish horror film has been released under countless titles including TERROR OF THE LIVING DEAD, RETURN OF THE ZOMBIES and even DRACULA, TERROR OF THE LIVING DEAD even though Dracula isn't even in the film. It's best known as THE HANGING WOMAN and that's the title on Troma's most recent release. In the film, a man (Serge Checkhov) arrives at a small Scotish village to collect an inheritance from his late uncle when he walks through a cemetery and comes across the body of a woman hanging from a tree. This sets off some strange events, which might be coming from a necrophiliac grave robber (Paul Naschy) but black magic and zombies are also included. I had always heard good things about this film and it turned out to be pretty good. There was plenty of bloody killings, sex scenes and wall-to-wall nudity that will certainly keep people glued to the film but there's also some great atmosphere and some nice performances as well. I think this film will work best if you go into it as a murder/mystery because its heart is in that genre with just the horror elements thrown in for market reasons. That's not to say the horror elements are watered down or just thrown in because they mix in with the mystery stuff quite well. We get several bloody killings including a decapitation and an early autopsy sequence that has plenty of organs being pulled out of a body. There are quite a few beautiful actresses willing to part with their clothes and we even get one of the most bizarre sex scenes in any Spanish film I've seen. I found Checkhov to be quite appealing and believable in the lead role. While the film has always been sold as a Naschy film, in truth he has very little to do here, although he certainly milks the role for all it's worth. The atmosphere is extremely thick from start to finish and the nice looking sets certainly add to this. Fans of the genre are going to find plenty to enjoy here even if everything really doesn't add up at the end. This here is certainly much better than Naschy's VENGEANCE OF THE ZOMBIES, which was released around the same time.
30 for 30: The U (2009)
Billy Corben
Extremely entertaining documentary taking a look at the Miami Hurricanes and their powerful run throughout the 1980s and early 90s. The school started off as nothing in a town full of racial violence but soon Howard Schnellenberger decided to go into the ghettos of the city and bring those men to the school. This here would continue with Jimmy Johnson and Dennis Erickson coaching but soon the media and other schools started having second thoughts about what was really going on at the school. This is a rather extraordinary documentary that manages to do quite a few things. It does a lot but the one thing it forgets to do is to look at the program on a level playing field. Instead, Corben, a Miami native, has the players and coaches telling all of their stories about how great the program was and we never get to hear from other schools, players or coaches. To me this paints a rather unfair portrait where many of the controversial moments are either looked at and praised or glossed over all together. Towards the end of the film there's someone bragging about Miami players going out and robbing stereos!!! With that said, if you want a history lesson on what was going on during this period then you're going to have a hard time topping this. The film does a very good job at showing the "hurricane" coming through and destroying everything in its way. I thought the film did a wonderful job at explaining why Miami took off the way it did and how it eventually all came to an end. I'm sure a group of people could watch this film and debate on whether this school was good or bad for football but in my opinion it's great when a documentary can make you debate what it shows you. Again, for a history lesson this is great but I would have given it more credit had the other side been shown as well.
Dr. Socrates (1935)
William Dieterle
Fast moving and tense film from Warner features Paul Muni in the title role of Dr. Socrates, a doctor who becomes the outcast in a small town after he helps a woman (Ann Dvorak) who accidentally got caught up with a gangster (Barton MacLane). Soon the doc and the girl begin to have feelings for one another and he must figure a way to get her away from the gangster. In an interesting bit of trivia, Muni didn't want to have anything to do with this film but agreed to do it if Warner would allow him to make THE STORY OF LOUIS PASTEUR, which would eventually be released the same year and earn Muni the Oscar. There's also a funny joke here where Muni is talking about a book on the life of Pasteur. With that out of the way, the rest of the film is a pretty tense little gem that manages to feature some great performances and a pretty smart story. The movie might not be as respectable as some of Muni's bigger films but I thought there was enough here to easily recommend it. For starters we have Muni delivering an exceptional performance as he perfectly can play the kindness of the doctor but also show off his brains. The doctor being able to think fast on his feet plays an important part in the film and Muni makes us easily believe that he is smart enough to do what happens at the end. He also has a dry, sarcastic humor that comes off very well and he even delivers a few laughs. Dvorak isn't one of my favorites but she makes an interesting mix with Muni. MacLane isn't one you'd expect to see playing a gangster but he actually does a very good job and makes the character quite memorable with his humor and style of toughness. Fans of Humphrey Bogart will know that he and Kay Francis would remake this four years later in the bizarre KING OF THE UNDERWORLD. Bogart has another connection to this film as his first wife, Mayo Methot, plays the gangster's mole here. While this film is a lot smarter than many of the dramas from the studio, it also contain enough gunplay to please fans of their gangster pictures. The ending has one machine gun after another making for quite a big bang to go out on.
Scarlet Letter, The (1926)
Victor Sjostrom
Classic production of Hawthorne's story by MGM has Lillian Gish in the role of Hester Prynne, the woman who has an affair with a priest (Lars Hanson) and must wear the sign of an adulterous while keeping the secret of who her lover was. This story has been filmed countless times over the years but this silent version hasn't lost an ounce of its power in terms of the great acting, the greatness of the story and the all around production, which ranks as one of the very best for the studio. There's not a single second in the film where you don't feel as if you're actually living during the time that this thing is set. Everything from the sets to the costumes to the actual atmosphere just puts her right in place with the characters. You can feel their thoughts, their pain and their ignorance in what happens to the Gish character. There are countless great scenes in this film but the highlight has to be where the Gish and Hanson characters start to question love as they sit in a field. To me this entire sequence is one of the most passionate ever filmed as the two actors do a masterful job at showing their love for one another yet they don't even touch. The amount of passion in this scene will set the screen on fire. As much passion as there is, there's also equal amounts of pain. Gish's beautiful, sad eyes so perfectly fits the pain of the character that you can't help but fall in love with her and feel sorry for everything that happens. I can't think of an actress out there who could get so much out of this character as Gish does and this here clearly ranks as one of her greatest performances. Hanson is also extremely good in his scenes, although there are a few times where he goes a bit too over the top. I think he does do a great job at displaying his anguish of the Gish character being punished while he gets away with the same crime. Henry B. Walthall rounds out the cast as the bitter husband. He too turns in marvelous work as he can make you fear him yet at the same time you can't blame him for his anger. All three actors do terrific work together and really take the material and do wonders with it. A lot of the credit must go to director Sjostrom who keeps everything moving at a brisk pace and milks every inch out of the story. His visual style is on full display through the wonderful cinematography and this is brought further to life by the terrific music score played with the film. The first time I watched this movie was via a very dark and badly worn print but the latest, cleaned up print on TCM was a real revelation even though it still showed some damage. Seeing the cleaner print certainly made me appreciate this classic even more than ever.
Feel free to join the thread. The 2010 one will probably go up sometime next week or the week after.
Last Mistress, The (2007)
Catherine Breillat
Libertine Ryno de Marigny (Fu'ad Ait Aattou) is about to marry into a rich family but must explain to his soon to be wife's grandmother why he has spent the last ten years with the same mistress (Asia Argento. The man must explain the two's connection and he must then face the fact that he won't be able to see her again or if she will let this happen. Breillat has become one of my favorite directors since seeing FAT GIRL several years back and she continues her success with this love triangle that certainly has a lot more style than substance. In the end, I'm really not sure if this movie tries to say anything other than that men are worthless pigs but if that's all there is to say then I'm alright with it because this is a beautiful film to look at and we're given some fine performances to watch. Argento is the one who really stood out for me and this is certainly the best I've seen from her. She's usually hit and miss (especially in her dad's movies) but she nails all the right notes here and delivers a full character. I really felt Argento hit all the dramatic notes just right and I think she did quite well in the more emotional scenes at well. There's a bizarre sequence in the desert where she really gets to show this off as well as mixing it in with her sexuality. Being a Breillat film, you know there's going to be quite a bit of sex and nudity. There's plenty of both but it's certainly a lot tamer than we're use to seeing but Argento dives into it head first. There's not an inch of her body that Breillat doesn't put the camera on but this is never a bad thing as she's got a certain way to throw her sexuality around. Newcomer Ait Aattou is also very impressive as the libertine as he perfectly captures the spirit and tortured soul of this character. He and Argento work extremely well together and this is especially true during their more dramatic moments. The visual look of the film is a real treat as the cinematography is top notch as is the costumes, art design and the marvelous sets. It seems Breillat spent a lot more time on the style here than the actual substance but I don't say this as a negative thing. I'm sure some might feel there should be more meat here but I think the film balances both ends quite well and in the end we're left with a very impressive film, although no classic.
Scrooged (1988)
Richard Donner
Comedies are suppose to make you laugh. This so called comedy made me angry. Bill Murray plays an extremely mean and cold hearted TV exec who plans on spending Christmas Eve by putting on a live broadcast of Scrooge but soon he's visited by three ghosts who will try and teach him the true meaning of the holiday. Okay, I know this movie was a critical failure when it was released but in the past several years it has gained a large cult following. That's fine but I'm not one of them. I really can't remember the last comedy I watched that really made my blood boil and get me this angry. I thought the film started off fairly bad and just grew worse with each passing second. I don't mind that this was a complete rape of the Dickens story as even the cutest or nicest story can have an adult twist to it. I also don't mind the rather profane sections of this film. I really didn't mind anything going on here except for the fact that none of it was funny. I really couldn't believe how unfunny this movie was but I think a lot of the blame has to go towards director Donner as it seems each scene in the movie is just grasping for laughs. The entire film is so uneven that each scene just seems out of control with it trying to get laughs. The entire screenplay is over the top yet it never really seems to know if it wants to go all out or just stay low key. To me the film really came off as some weird mixture of adult humor that tries not to go too far where it would earn an R-rating. Perhaps this film would have been better had it gone all out but I'm not sure if Donner could have handled that either. As far as Murray goes, there's two ways too look at it. I guess you could say he gives a brilliant performance as the evil exec, which is good for him but it hurts the movie because you hate this guy so much that you really don't want to spend any time looking at him. The thing with the Dickens story is that we could see some good at the bottom of Scrooge's meanness but I never felt that with this guy. Karen Allen, John Forsythe, Bobcat Goldthwait, Carol Kane, Michael J. Pollard, Alfre Woodard and Robert Mitchum are all wasted in supporting roles. Every cult movie is going to have people that love it and people that hate it. This is one that I ended up hating.
Do You Remember Love (1985)
Jeff Bleckner
Joanne Woodward picked up her third Emmy win for this TV movie where she plays a poet/teacher who is slowly losing her battle with Alzheimer's disease. Richard Kiley plays her husband who must come to terms with the fact that he doesn't recognize the woman he originally fell in love with. The performances by the two leads are what really makes this film worth seeing as it's screenplay doesn't really have enough working for it to the movie to really succeed but fans of the two stars are going to get plenty here to make the film worth watching. Woodward really shines in her role as she is forced to play all sorts of different emotions and feelings as her character goes through a lot throughout the film. She has to play it bright, quiet and intelligent but then change on a dime to someone more abusive and argumentative. I thought Woodward did a terrific job at not being overly stagy or fake and I found every note of her performance to hit the right mark. She's so believable in the role that you never feel like you're watching an actress but instead you feel as if you're seeing a documentary about someone with the disease. I've read several reviews that seem to overlook Kiley but that's a shame because he's just as impressive. The scene where he finally crashes and loses his cool about having to take care of someone who acts like they're two years old is extremely effective. I think the biggest problem with the film is its screenplay, which doesn't do that good of a job with the supporting characters. I found most of the supporting characters to be extremely poorly written because they're just used as one-dimensional items. We have the son who is staying away because he's scared. We have the mom who just wants to know what's going on. We have the co-worker who is jealous of her success and wants to see her fail. All of this would be fine but the characters just pop up to give speeches or minor melodrama that never really works. Still, the two lead performances are why people are going to be drawn to this film and they're reason alone to watch the film.
From Noon Till Three (1976)
Frank D. Gilroy
Extremely delighting romantic comedy with Charles Bronson playing a bank robber who can't go on the latest heist and instead stays back at a house with a beautiful woman (Jill Ireland). The two spend three romantic hours together but after she thinks he's been killed, she decides to write a story about those three hours, which turns him into a legend but when he returns there's going to be trouble as he wants to be himself and not the legend. When you mention Charles Bronson you can have a great number of films to discuss. I have discussed the films of Bronson with many people but when I mention this film here everyone goes quiet as not many have heard of it and even fewer have actually seen it, which is a real shame because this is certainly one of his best. It's not common for Bronson to take part in what's basically a romantic comedy but he and Ireland really work wonderfully well together and this is clearly their best film together. It really seems like neither one is giving an actual "performance" but instead they're just being themselves because both come off so natural. Just take a look at the scene where they're swimming together as the perfect example. Perhaps they are just acting but this sequence feels so real that you can't help but feel they're just playing around and showing their real love for one another. The first seventy-five minutes of this movie are so refreshing, funny and charming because we're seeing Bronson playing a character unlike anything he had played before or since. I found him to be incredibly charming here and it's just great fun for a fan to see him flirting, picking flowers and actually smiling. Ireland, never accused of being a great actress, actually does a very good job here and is quite believable in her role. I think the final act with the "truth vs. legend" doesn't work as well as I'm sure everyone was hoping for but you have to give the filmmakers a lot of credit for the ending that I won't ruin here. The film actually says a lot about fame, believing lies that you might read and various other things but in the end the real jewel is seeing Bronson playing a role that he never really got to again, which is a shame considering how great he is here.
Playmates (1941)
David Butler
John Barrymore plays himself in this his final movie, which sees the great actor go out on a rather bad note. In the film Barrymore is pretty much playing his real life problem as he can't get any good press so his agent (Patsy Kelly) comes up with a scheme to say he's going to teach bandleader Kay Kyser how to be a Shakespearean actor. As with Barrymore's THE GREAT PROFILE, this so-called comedy has more frowns than anything else as it's rather sad seeing Barrymore having to spoof himself and make fun of his rather serious alcohol problem, which would claim his life the following year. With that in mind, it's sometimes rather hard to laugh at certain jokes that are clearly aimed to spoof him and his drinking. It's also rather obvious that he's quite bloated here and in many scenes he appears to be drunk so this here too will stick in your mind while watching the film. I will add that he isn't a complete wash out like many reviews would have you believe. Yes, he's incredibly over the top but no one does that quite like Barrymore and in his own charming way the performance is rather charming. His first appearance in the film will certainly put a smile on your face and you can't help but feel, at times, that he's really giving it all and giving a complete work out of a performance. We also get to see him act out Hamlet and give the famous "To be or not to be..." line. That alone is worth sitting through this otherwise forgettable film. The biggest problem is the actual screenplay that has one joke and it's not a very funny one. Barrymore teaching Kyser to do Shakespeare. That whole joke isn't funny and that means the film itself isn't going to be funny. We do have some mildly amusing moments but the pacing is incredibly bad and the 94-minute running time drags by rather painfully. Kyser gets a couple good musical numbers and he has his own bit of charm in terms of his performance. Kelly gets a few good lines with Lupe Velez and May Robson giving some support. In the end however, this is a pretty poor film that would sadly be Barrymore's last. Fans of his might want to check it out but others would be better served to see the actor in some of his better roles.
Holiday Affair (1949)
Don Hartman
Extremely charming, if forgotten, Christmas film has Robert Mitchum playing a store clerk who loses his job after helping a woman (Janet Leigh) get away with a scheme. Soon the two are spending time together and growing closer but she already has a fiance (Wendell Corey) and is still dealing with the death of her husband in the war. Even though I'm a fan of Mitchum and Leigh, this is a film I hadn't really heard too much about until a couple years ago when it seemed that a small group of people started recommending this one as a forgotten gem. After viewing the film I'd have to go along with them and say that this little thing certainly needs to find a larger audience. The movie has a lot going for it but the best thing is without question Mitchum who gets to play a calm, likable and all around nice guy, which is something he didn't get to do very much. I was surprised to see how well he handled the comedy and he had no trouble at all playing this character and really bringing it to life. When people think of Mitchum they're always going to think of a tough guy but he was able to put that down and come across very charming here. Leigh is also incredibly good here as she probably has the most difficult of the two characters as she has a lot more to deal with from the two men to her young son played by Gordon Gebert. Gebert is quite charming in his own right. Corey is also extremely good in the role of the boyfriend and this is easily spotted in a rather dark moment where Leigh talk about the kid as being "her kid", which doesn't sit too well with the man wanting to be his stepdad. The film has a pretty straight-forward story that doesn't really hurt things because the cast is just so good that you could follow them through just about anything. The movie isn't as magical of IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE and I'd say something like THE BISHOP'S WIFE is better but this is still a cute little gem that has enough going for it that people should really check it out.
Night at the Movies, A: The Gigantic World of Epics (2009)
The second entry in TCM's series is slightly better than the previous one but once again, trying to fit hundreds of movies into 60-minutes isn't really a good idea. In the documentary we start off learning that D.W. Griffith created the epic (not totally true) and then Cecil B. DeMille carried the torch until the likes of David Lean and up to Kevin Costner. This series, so far, has been extremely hit and miss and again I think trying to fit an entire genre into such a short running time is going to cost all sorts of problems. Here we have countless films and filmmakers being overlooked while others get too much of the spotlight. GONE WITH THE WIND, THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI and DeMille's remake of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS get the most attention, which is fine considering these are classic films but we also miss out on hearing about countless others. In fact, unless you don't know what an epic is then I doubt you're going to learn too much from this thing as it's pretty simple and straight-forward to the point where I'm sure most film buffs are going to know the stories being told here and perhaps seen the majority of the films. Steven Spielberg, Kenneth Branagh, Omar Sharif, Melvyn Stokes, Rudy Behlmer and John Milius are a few of the people interviewed as well as the children or relatives of Charlton Heston, DeMille and Anthony Mann.
Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The (1994)
Kim Henkel
Director/writer Kim Henkel was the man behind the screenplay to that legendary 1974 hit and he returned to this film in hopes of it being a direct sequel. No matter what the original idea was, this film, when it was finally released after countless years, is a complete disaster from the start. Four kids (one played by Renee Zellweger) leave their prom and end up on a back road where they're attacked and tortured by the psychotic family led by Leatherface. This "sequel" is pretty much just a remake but with some strange sense of humor that never works. I'm really not sure what they were trying here because the film is a complete mess that never really makes any sense. The film has Leatherface pretty much playing a scream queen as he's constantly putting on make up be it lip stick or fingernail polish. Okay, for a comedy. That would make you think you're watching a comedy but the very next scene will be something extremely dark that puts you back into a horror film. The entire movie jumps back and forth and it's not because they're trying to mix the genres but I think it's because no one was really paying attention to trying to make a good film. The dialogue is without question horrid and just take a listen to the scene where one of the killers has murdered one man in front of another and the man that's still alive says "you're scaring me" as if he hadn't witnessed anything major yet. Even dumber is the kids getting lost even though they're driving in their town and are only a few minutes away from their school. I know there are two versions of this thing and I've seen them both and neither one adds any sense. The screenplay doesn't seem to know anything except that it likes to show scenes of the female characters being tortured. The women here are kicked, punched, slapped, poked, spit on, flicked, shocked and countless other things. I'm not one of those who are against violence towards women in horror films but this movie is just pathetic in how cheap it is all around. Matthew McConaughey is actually fairly good in his role as he's clearly hamming it up just so he can at least say he's entertaining. Zellweger is also pretty good considering the screenplay doesn't leave her too much to do. In the end, this is without question the worst film in the series and I'm still not sure what on earth the filmmakers were thinking. It's a complete mess from start to finish and it's a film that could have sat on the shelf for a couple decades without the need to be released.
Younger Generation, The (1929)
Frank Capra
Early Capra melodrama has poor Jewish family taken out of the ghetto by their youngest son (Ricardo Cortez) who strikes it big. He moves his father (Jean Hersholt), mother (Rosa Rosanova) and sister (Lina Basquette) into a large house and expects them to do what he says and stay away from the "filth" they grew up around. Soon the three start to realize that money can't buy happiness but will the son learn this before it's too late? At this point in time Columbia was still a very small studio so they couldn't afford to go all in in terms of sound movies so this is another example of a silent with a few sound segments scattered throughout the film. I've always found this to be incredibly distracting but I think Capra does a great job at when to use the sound and I also think the quality of the recorded words is among the best I've heard from this era. Considering how poor the studio was it's rather shocking that some of the other studios early talkies didn't come off sounding better. With that said, there are some major problems with the film but for the most part it's a nice time filler that fans of the director will want to check out. The biggest problem is that even in 1929 this material was way too predictable. There's really not a single thing that happens in the film that you won't see coming from a mile away. The format pretty much follows every morality film that came before it and I just wish at some point Capra would have shaken things up just to keep us off guard or at least in some drama. It should come as no shock that Capra does a great job with what's here and manages to keep the film moving quite fast and he keeps it as entertaining as the screenplay will allow. The cast also keeps things moving nicely with their fine performances. Cortez would play this type of role countless times in his career and he always managed to do good with it. Hersholt clearly steals the film as the tortured father. In the end, this isn't the greatest film ever made but I think Capra did the most he could considering what he had to work with. I think those who like to search out these early talkies will find the quality here to be above average and will make one wonder why some of the bigger studios didn't have their stuff sounding as good.
American Madness (1932)
Frank Capra
Extremely entertaining and all around dramatic film from Capra tells various stories inside a bank. All are centered around the head man (Walter Huston) at a bank that soon finds itself robbed with a watchman dead. One of the most trusted guys (Pat O'Brien) gets blamed for it and while this is going on word starts to get around that the bank is going to fall, which causes a near riot of people showing up to withdrawl all their money. I'm sure people could call this thing preachy but then again that's something you could call just about any film from this director. I was really surprised after viewing this that it wasn't more talked about in terms of classics from the director because I found it to be a rather solid entertainment from start to finish. The movie not only features some great performances but we've also got Capra telling a great story and milking it for every ounce of drama. You could also take the opening speech by Huston and play it today and it would still make sense and pack quite a punch. Capra does a wonderful job at keeping the film rolling at an extremely fast pace and I think he handles every little story just perfectly. We have a subplot with one of the bankers connections to some mob men and he also just happens to be connected to Huston's wife. We have O'Brien and his woman going through some troubles, which is handled very well and all the stuff dealing with the bank is pretty much an early version of what we'd eventually see in IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE. The performances are also very good with Huston leading the way with another major winner. His opening speech is marvelous as is the scene where he finds the truth out about his wife. O'Brien is very good as well as he perfectly fits that every man role. Kay Johnson and Constance Cummings are both good as well. One of the best moments in the film happens at the end when we witness the mad rush of the bank. The hundreds of extras used here is very impressive especially for such a small movie like this. I really enjoyed how Capra just left the camera in one spot for a minute and just let us witness the mad dash as it really gives us an idea and feeling of being in there among everyone. When people talk about Capra they rarely mention this film but I think it's a very strong little gem.
Ride in the Whirlwind (1967)
Monte Hellman
Low-budget Western was co-written by Jack Nicholson but I think overall it proves that we're very thankfully he didn't give up acting to concentrate solely on writing. In the film, three men (Cameron Mitchell, Nicholson, Tom Filer) end up spending the night with an outlaw gang and briefly considering riding with them but instead decide to go their separate ways. This doesn't pay off when an angry posse think they're involved with the gang and begin to hunt them down. This film was shot at the same time as Hellman's THE SHOOTING and both films seem to have gained a huge cult following over the years but I can't honestly say I'm one of the fans. There's a lot to admire in both films but in the end I think both fail to live up to their reputations. I think the biggest problem with this film is its screenplay that never really seems to know what it wants to be. The first half of the movie comes off as your typical Western of three men being mistaken for someone they're not. Fair enough. The second half of the film dives a bit deeper and tries to be more psychological but I think this is where things start to get watered down even though an interesting third party (played by Millie Perkins) enters the picture. I think the film tries way too hard to be deep and mysterious and this is where the thing starts to fall apart. I found a lot of the dialogue, which was meant to be deep and serious, to wonder on and never really go anywhere. Thankfully the movie never gets too dull as Mitchell and Nicholson make for an interesting duo and their personalities alone keep the film moving. Perkins is pretty good in her role and we have an early appearance by Harry Dean Stanton as a one-eyed member of the bad gang.
Mario, it's funny that you watched BAH HUMDUCK! because I recorded it from a TV station just last week. I went to watch it and ended up turning it off at the five-minute mark because it didn't seem too interesting. I might try it again in a future Christmas but I had too many things to get watched this year. I saw GROUNDHOG DAY when it was first released and didn't care too much for it even though I knew it had gotten all sorts of great reviews. I keep planning on revisiting it at some point but WHAT ABOUT BOB? is still my favorite Murray film from this period.
It's also funny to see you watching FLETCH as it's one I haven't seen either. I just ordered a few extra movie stations and sure enough this will be on next week so I plan on recording it as well as a few other films from the 80s that I haven't seen.
Christmas Carol, A (1999)
David Hugh Jones
Beautifully looking version of Dickens' play has Patrick Stewart taking on the role of Scrooge. Everyone knows the story so there's no point in going on about that so how does this version stand up? I've said several times that the original story is so good that you'd have to try very hard to make a bad film out of it and with that in mind this version here works just fine even though there are a few flaws. What I enjoyed most about the film was its actual look from the cinematography to the lighting to the costume design and art direction. The production of this, I'm sure, had a small budget but you'd never notice by watching the film because the images are just so striking that they will certainly remain in your mind. The ghost of Marley is perhaps the best I've seen in any version with his ash-like look that really captures the feeling of the spirit. The other three ghosts also look quite nice compared to everything else that is on the screen. The visuals have quite a bit of CGI but it never takes control of the story and for the most part the director does a great job at not making it too distracting. Some of it comes out quite beautiful like the scene where Scrooge pretty much walks away from his love for money. The visuals here are quite striking as are the ones showing the ghettos of the town. I think a minor problem with the film is Stewart himself. He gives a good performance but there are times where it seems like he's trying to do something completely original with the role that he goes a bit over the top and takes one out of the mood of the film. A good example of this is when he first wakes up after the visits with the spirits and then again when he first wishes Cratchit a Merry Christmas. The supporting cast are all good in their roles and Stewart does handle some of the softer moments a lot better as well. In the end, this certainly isn't the best version out there but I think there's enough here to recommend to fans of the story of just Christmas fans in general.
Santa Claus (1959)
Rene Cardona
Insane Mexican movie has one of the worst reputations out there but I didn't find it nearly as bad as many would make it. The film has Santa Claus (Jose Elias Moreno) trying to deliver toys on Christmas Eve but he's being interrupted by a Devil but have no fear because Santa is friends with Merlin the Magician. One does need to remember that the figure of Santa is viewed differently from country to country so I think it's a tad bit unfair to criticize this movie just because he doesn't come off under the American tradition. With that said, one would really have to scratch their heads as to why the producers would think that having Santa battle the Devil would make a good holiday movie. You'd also have to wonder why on Earth K. Gordon Murray would want to buy the rights but I guess his investment paid off as this sucker did become a major staple around Christmas time for many years and today even more people are checking it out each year. The movie is certainly insane from start to finish because there's never really any explanation for what's going on. I'm still trying to figure out why Merlin and Santa are friends and why the reindeer's are fake and need to be started by cranking a key. I also have to wonder why they show Santa working out with a weight-reducing machine so that he can fit down a chimney. We also get to see the Devil make children throw some rocks at Santa but I have to admit this was pretty funny. The movie gets off to a pretty weird start as we see children from various countries singing various songs. You can tell these kids weren't actors as most of them are constantly looking around for their direction. This movie has surreal moments, creepy moments, funny moments and some rather smart moments (the magic key) and this is what makes this movie so watchable even though the production is quite horrid.
Scrooge; or Marley's Ghost (1901)
Walter R. Booth
Most people, myself included, haven't heard of Paul's Animatograph Works, the production company here but they were the first to produce a film version of Dickens' A Christmas Carol. In the film we see Scrooge visited by three ghosts and his redemption. This is a pretty unique film for 1901 in many regards. For starters, title cards weren't being used during this era but this film here has pretty long ones and I'm pretty sure that this is the earliest film I've seen them used in. The film also tells a "story" which again wasn't the norm for this era. One would be shocked that a three-minute film could stay pretty faithful to the original story but this film does a pretty good job at that. I was really surprised to see the film pay close attention to the original material, although, needless to say, this film does have to speed things up quite a bit. The special effects, from the Melies style of filmmaking, are pretty good and hold up well today. Apparently this film originally ran a bit longer but hopefully the other few minutes will be found at some point. What remains is an interesting bit of history.
I'm about twenty films behind but slowly catching up:
Crowd, The (1928)
King Vidor
Classic tale of dreams failing to come true certainly takes a honest look at its subject. The film tells the story of John Sims (James Murray), a man who feels that he has nothing but great things in his future. He marries a terrific woman (Eleanor Boardman) and to him this is just the start of his great life but soon he begins to realize that nothing is a given and he finds himself poor and in danger of losing his family. Even though silents were on their way out by the time this was released, I think this is just another film that proves you really don't need sound or color for something to reach its full power. This was one of those classic films that I had been wanting to see for many years and I'm certainly glad that I finally caught up with it because it certainly lived up to everything I had heard about it. A lot of the buzz for this film was for its technical merits and they are incredible but I thought the story itself was also very good and perhaps the main reason the films works so well. I think, for the most part, the movie takes a very honest look at ones dreams and how the majority of people are going to be letdown by them. I thought the film was very honest and depressing about how it looked at a man who kept expecting to have it all but finds himself losing at every possible turn. Vidor does a masterful job directing the film as he certainly puts all the right touches on the subject as the film goes through many feelings from happiness to sadness to downright depression but Vidor never misses a beat and really delivers a powerful message. I think most people will be able to feel for John because I'm sure everyone at some point has dreamed like he does. I'm sure many will also be able to connect with him when those dreams fall apart and reality hits. The story is a very tender one and it's told in a wonderful fashion except for the ending, which I found to be pretty poor and not going well with everything that led up to it. The performances by Murray and Boardman are extremely good with the two making it seem like they are a real couple. The two of them are very believable in their roles and there wasn't a second that I didn't believe they were these characters. The technical side of the film is also very impressive especially the opening sequences. The scenes of the boy walking up the long stairs was very haunting and the climb up the building was also quite chilling. Again, I don't think the ending worked very well but this is still an exceptional film that lives up to the reputation.
Big Parade, The (1925)
King Vidor
One of the all-time great war movies made John Gilbert a star and rightfully so. In the film he plays a spoiled rich kid who joins the Army on a whim after WW1 starts. He gets shipped off to France where he meets two guys who will become his best friend but also a woman (Renee Adoree) who he will fall in love with before being sent to the front lines. This is yet another classic film that really delivers on its reputation and in my opinion it's even better than the actual reputation. This is known for being a great war film but I'd go a bit further and say it's easily one of the best films of the decade and one of the strongest anti-war films ever made. I've heard a few people say that the love story is too melodramatic but I'd disagree with that as Vidor really handles the material very well and I'm sure there were millions of women in 1925 who would disagree about the love story. I think Gilbert and Adoree are so great together that we can easily buy them together and buy their story together. I must admit that I really got caught up in their relationship and all the drama that went with it. Yes, it's fairly predictable but it's still effective and that's all that matters. The film has several unforgettable shots even before we get to the legendary battle scene but the one with Adoree trying to say goodbye is extremely powerful. As for the battle scene that lasts for nearly a half-hour; pure brilliance. This is where the film lives up to its reputation and more because this entire sequence is known to be great but I'd probably push it a bit further and say it's one of the greatest ever created. It's also a great example of why silent movies can be so effective because not hearing the gunshots, the explosions and the screams really makes the sequence all the more surreal and Hell-like. Vidor does a masterful job at building this sequence up over time and I loved the way how it started so small with the simple walk and then built up the human drama before going all out with the battle. The final moments of the battle scenes are incredibly effective and a real treat on the eyes. I sometimes have a problem with war movies that want to show off the "battle" yet preach that it's wrong but this film manages to get the message across with a lot of power. It's also easy to see why Gilbert became a star after this film because his character goes through a lot of changes throughout the film and he handles all of them perfectly and in the end you can't help but think you've witnessed a true character and changes. This film is certainly one of the best war movies out there but it also features a lot more than just battle scenes and in the end it's certainly one of the highlights of silent cinema.
La boheme (1926)
King Vidor
Based on the Puccini opera, this MGM production had star Lillian Gish being able to pick her story, co-star and director and after screening THE BIG PARADE she knew who she wanted. The film, set in Paris around 1830, tells the story of various starving artists who are living in the Boheme area. Playwright Rodolphe (John Gilbert) is about to be thrown out of his room for not having the rent but he manages to pull some quick cash but seamstress (Gish) isn't so lucky and soon finds herself out on the streets. She catches the eye of Rodolphe and the two soon strike up a relationship. I'll start off by saying that this is a good movie that fans of Gish, Gilbert or Vidor will want to check out but I'll also admit to be rather disappointed because with talent like that you'd wish they would have made a masterpiece instead of something just good. Perhaps that's unfair to wish but to me this entire story wasn't the right material for Vidor and even Gilbert isn't at his very best. To me the story really doesn't work well enough for everything to come into place and work out in the end and I think a lot of this has to do with Vidor letting scenes drag on longer than they needed to. There are countless times where a scene should have been either cut or simply edited down but instead it's left intact and soon grows rather tiresome. What keeps the film moving is the brilliant performance by Gish who really gets into her role and delivers another very memorable character. The somewhat famous final scene with her was extremely well done but so is everything that leads up to it. Gilbert is good but he never really seems overly comfortable in the role. Renee Adoree, George Hassell and Roy D'Arcy round out the cast.
Street Scene (1931)
King Vidor
Hard-hitting drama set in a Bronx tenement building. We are introduced to various groups of people who live at the apartment or are just visiting and soon a vicious rumor is going to have deadly consequences. The film centers on a young woman named Rose (Sylvia Sidney) who is being pursued by a married man while another poor one also loves her. Even more damning is that there's a rumor her mother is having an affair with a milk man. Producer Samuel Goldwyn and director Vidor do a terrific job at bringing Elmer Rice's stage play to the big screen. Even though the budget is obviously incredibly low, that doesn't stop the great acting, directing and the terrific music score by Alfred Newman. The film runs a very fast paced 80-minutes and most of the action is simply dialogue with characters standing in front of their building. The stoop is pretty much the main location as that's where the people are constantly talking and the dialogue is so well written that you can't help but feel as if you're really standing there listening to folks talk. There's a very natural tone to the dialogue that also comes across in the directing and it really does seem as if you're watching a documentary on real people. Vidor does an excellent job at the start of the film where he puts us into the action by showing various objects suffering from the heat. The heat plays a major part in the film and thanks to this prologue we're really put right in the middle of it. The performances by the entire cast are wonderful but it's Sidney who really steals the film with her incredible work. I was really shocked to see how excellent she was her because of how natural she came off. You can just look at her and see her thinking and feeling at every turn her character goes through and this really helps one stay involved in the movie. Walter Miller, Estelle Taylor, Beulah Bondi, William Collier, Jr., David Landau, Matt McHugh and Russell Hopton all deserve being mentioned for their fine work as well. It seems this film never gets mentioned that much any more and that's real shame because this is a nearly flawless production that deserves to be more known.
Updated Trash #2
Truck Turner (1974)
Jonathan Kaplan
Violent, mean-spirited and entertaining blaxploitation film has Isaac Hayes playing Truck Turner, a former football star turned bounty hunter who gets a hit put out on him, which ends up getting his best friend killed. Soon Truck is tracking down the men behind the killing, which leads him to Harvard Blue (Yaphet Kotto). Apparently this AIP flick was originally written for Robert Mitchum but they decided to turn it into a blaxploitation flick after the genre started to take off in popularity. Hayes steps into the role with a certain style of coolness that certainly makes him right for the role. I don't think anyone would call him a great actor but he at least has what it takes to make this character believable and for the most part he's extremely entertaining to watch no matter if he's throwing out great one-liners, beating the heads in of racists or macking on his girlfriend. Hayes certainly fills the role of the good guy and Kotto, who many will remember as the FBI agent in MIDNIGHT RUN, fills out perfectly as the bad guy. Nichelle Nichols gets to scream some outrageous lines as a pimp and we get some cult faves like Dick Miller, Scatman Crothers and Charles Cyphers who many will remember from HALLOWEEN. The film contains some pretty strong violence and the action scenes are always entertaining if not believable or realistic. Just check out the scene at the end where there's a major shoot out inside a hospital. This entire sequence is certainly one of the high points of this genre. Also on hand is some downright crazy lines of dialogue that will certainly have you rolling. The entire revenge plot is leftover from countless other films but director Kaplan keeps everything moving at an extremely fast pace and in the end this is certainly a winning film for the genre.
Extremities (1986)
Robert M. Young
A woman (Farrah Fawcett) is attacked by a would be rapist but manages to get away before any serious harm can be done. A week later the attacker (James Russo) shows up at her home to finish the job but soon the woman turns the tables on him. That's a pretty simple set up for this psychological drama that comes off as a major disappointment. I had heard how terrific the original play was and how wonderful Fawcett was in it but this adaptation is a complete disaster that is poorly directed and features some questionable acting. I'll start with the direction which is just a complete horrid mess. There isn't a single thing in this movie that manages to have any emotion. None of the characters are believable and even worse is that we're never given anything to feel from start to finish. The opening attack sequence is meant to be full of suspense but it isn't. Fawcett's "fear" is meant to be dramatic but it isn't. The terror she's living in is meant to be dramatic but never is. Then when the cat and mouse game begins we're suppose to feel this psychological drama of the two characters going back and forth yet we never feel this. I've seen exploitation rape/revenge movies that have more emotion than this thing and that's pretty sad. I wouldn't place all the blame on the director because the cast has to take some of the heat for these horrid performances. Fawcett must have lost whatever she had in the play because she gives a one-note performance here and really comes off looking bad. Not once did I believe the shock her character was going through or anything else she was suppose to be portraying. Russo is just as bad as the rapist and Alfre Woodard and Diane Scarwid come off pretty poorly as well. This is all rather shocking because all four have proven that they can give good performance so why they're so incredibly bad here doesn't make any sense. The movie never really knows what it wants to do as it throws out so many mixed messages of rape, revenge and countless other items that are thrown out there only to slowly die off or be replaced by the next thought that the film tries to explain. A poor film all around and a real disappointment.
Girls at the Gynecologist (1971)
Ernst Hofbauer
German "report" movie in the same tradition as the SCHOOLGIRL REPORT series. This film instead has us introduced to a doctor who tells us about various women who came into his office with various problems. These problems range from pregnancy, to a serious rape, an abortion gone wrong and even a case of STDs. Director Hofbauer was the king of these report movies as he did countless entries in the SCHOOLGIRL REPORT series as well as other rips like this one here. To date I've seen four of the SCHOOLGIRL REPORT movies and found all of them to be entertaining sexploitation pictures but this film here didn't quite reach the same level of entertainment. The main problem here is that this is just a cheap excuse to see various women naked. One might say that's the case with all of these report movies but I think the good ones have a bit of attitude, stylish writing and some funny stories that make them entertaining. This film here pretty much comes off fairly weak because none of the stories are all that entertaining. The best one probably dealt with a father who was worried about his virgin daughter but it turns out he didn't realize she was quite sexually active and had already got a STD. The rest of the stories are about the same quality wise but none of them feature any laughs, drama or even erotic tones. Fans of sexploitation or the German report films will probably want to watch this no matter how tame it is but I'd recommend other films from other series first. After you've seen them then you can try this one out.
Devil's Honey, The (1986)
Lucio Fulci
Bizarre film for Fulci sees him in more of a Jess Franco type of territory. In the film, a woman (Blanca Marsillach) loses her mind after the death of her boyfriend. Even though it was his fault, she blames the doctor (Brett Halsey) who was operating on him when he died. Soon the woman kidnaps the doctor and plans to torture him both physically and sexually. This certainly isn't the type of film you'd expect someone like Fulci to make especially during this period in his career. Throughout this decade we were getting non-stop violence and gore but that's all cut out here and in its place is non-stop nudity and bizarre sex scenes. The first twenty-minutes of this film features one sex scene after another and it appears they each get more and more bizarre. Fulci's THE NEW YORK RIPPER was pretty perverse but so is this film and that includes a scene where the boyfriend "satisfies" the woman by putting his trumpet up to her private parts and playing. The sex scenes never reach the hardcore stage but Fulci handles them pretty well, although he never quite reaches a full erotic mode. The biggest problem for me was the actual screenplay and the entire revenge aspect. One could compare this film to Franco's SHE KILLED IN ECSTASY but that movie worked a lot better because we understood the woman's need for revenge. That's not the case here for a couple of reasons. The first being that the man is a complete jerk to her so we really don't care when he dies. The second reason is because the woman is simply blaming the wrong person for his death. There's no way around that and it's hard to buy into anything she's doing because you simply don't agree with her. Halsey, a soon to be Fulci regular, does a pretty good job in his role but there's no question that the film belongs to Marsillach who really digs deep into her character. The two work quite well together and certainly make the film a lot better than it really has the right to be. The brisk 78-minute running time moves pretty well and the jazz score is quite nice as well. Fans of Fulci will certainly want to check this one out but others probably won't find too much entertainment here.
Vibrations Sexuelles (1977)
Jean Rollin
French adult movie from cult director Rollin is the second hardcore feature I've seen from him and like the other one, DISCOSEX, this one here is take it or leave it material that some die-hard fans might want to track down but I'm sure most, including the director, would rather just stick with his "other" pictures. I had to watch the film in French without subs so as much of the story I could pick up centered on a man who could no longer enjoy sex but that doesn't stop him from sleeping with every woman he gets around. Soon he finds the "one" that will get him back into the groove. Running a brief 75-minutes, the plot here really isn't too important and we don't get that much of it. Rollin handles the material quite well for what this is; a hardcore French film. I think Rollin does a good job in certain aspects but I'm not sure how actual hardcore film fans would see it. Quite often while watching the movie it seemed like the director was much more interested in everything else going on with the sex scenes just taking a seat in the back. The non-sex scenes seem to have been filmed with more quality and the sex scenes are usually done with a shaky cam as if no one actually wanted to film the scenes. The big news for Rollin fans is that Brigitte Lahaie would make her first appearance for the director here. She does a few quick scenes at the start of the film and then disappears but she certainly has that appeal that would eventually make her one of the biggest stars in France. The two would make more films together but this was the only hardcore one.
2019: After the Fall of New York (1983)
Sergio Martino
During Italy's "trash boom", each and every film from America that was popular would eventually be "reinmagined" but in a lower form. Take this film where we get a semi-remake of John Carpenter's ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK and needless to say, this here isn't quite as good. Twenty years after a nuclear apocalypse, three men are sent into New York where they must find the last fertile woman and bring her out so that civilization can start over. Making it through New York isn't going to be easy as we got several bad guys, several ugly guys and a giant ape man (George Eastman). We can start off by stating the obvious in that Martino isn't Carpenter and Michael Sopkiw isn't Kurt Russell. With that said, this is still a pretty poor movie on all levels and in the end I was really disappointed because a lot of times these re-imagined films are decent for a few good laughs. That's not the case here because by the thirty-minute mark I was bored out of my mind and the final hour really dragged its feet so badly that the film just crashed and burned. I think the biggest problem is the budget. The horror or giallo films could get away with a low budget but I think that's a lot harder to do when it comes to futuristic action films. The action scenes are all incredibly cheap and they come off very fake looking. The post-apocalyptic world also looks very fake and especially the "burnt down" NYC at the start of the film. These are two things that you don't need a big budget for, just look at ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK but you need someone behind the camera to pull it off. Martino has made some good films throughout his career but this here isn't one of them. I think he has a hard time putting everything together as the film really loses focus of its (limited) story and goes off in all sorts of directions. Another major problem is that Sopkiw is just boring in the lead and doesn't make for a good character. The supporting cast isn't any better and that includes cult favorite Eastman.
Naked and Violent (1970)
Sergio Martino
Italian Mondo movie tries to explain why America is a horrible place full of horrible people doing horrible things to other horrible people. In the film we learn that sex and violence is all that America has to offer and if people come here they will either end up on drugs or murdered in the violent streets, which are full of homeless thugs who will stop at nothing to get their next hit. If you think I'm being a tad bit over dramatic then you haven't seen this film, which is also known as AMERICA HOW VIOLENT, HOW NAKED. The Mondo genre became quite popular after MONDO CANE so producers everywhere were jumping on the bandwagon and this here comes from the Martino clan with Sergio, best known for his future giallos, making his third stint behind the camera. A lot of Mondo movies take a look at poor countries or old fashioned countries that have strange customs so it was rather funny seeing a film take on America. Having lived here all my life I must admit that I had quite a few laughs at this film and the "issues" it tried to push off. By watching this film you'd think the country was some toxic wasteland full of nothing but losers. The film mocks all the homeless people that can be found in New York and mentions that we leave the elderly people of this country to die in the streets. Again, I'm not sure where word got out that we treat our elderly folks like this. We also see the various hippies smoking their pot and walking around naked, which again is looked down upon in this film. We learn that hippies have a mental defect that causes them to act like this and we learn that weed is one of the most dangerous drugs out there (I guess the Martino boys were watching REEFER MADNESS as a study course). As you can tell, the entire "story" being told here is pretty stupid and it makes you wonder if anyone involved in the production had any idea of what they were talking about or if they were just making these stories up as they went along. The portrait of the country is quite laughable and certainly doesn't show or tell anything the way it actually is. Having watched this it makes me curious how many other Mondo films are just 100% lies trying to push "reality" on those who might not know any better. Overall the film is pretty boring without any real good stories or adventures to go through. I think people living in America will get a few good laughs at a few of the stories here but I can't imagine too many others get any type of entertainment here. Fans of Martino won't find any of his style here either.
