Track the Films You Watch (2009) - Page 9

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Blade

I haven't watched this one in quite a while. I believe this movie was actually the first taste I got of the genres action and horror combined so well. I think Wesley Snipes was a great choice to play Blade. He really looks the part... and has the Martial Arts background for it as well. I really enjoyed this movie. Whether you like Action, horror... or both I would recommend this one.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

I remember being pleasantly surprised by the first BLADE. However, BLADE II was awful and for me epitomized everything I despise about modern "horror/sci-fi/action" films.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Michael,
Just in case you don't have the info yet, to post pictures you need to host them here on the forum. Take a look at the toolbar above, to the right, under 'Quick Links', select 'Upload an image' in the drop down menu. Browse for your picture, upload and then merely imbed the created url in your post.

01/22/09

The Prizefighter and the Lady (1933) Dir: W.S. Van Dyke, Howard Hawks (uncredited)
Production: MGM

Myrna Loy and real life future heavyweight champion Max Baer (of all people) make a cute couple in this light comedy (elevated occasionally by Loy) about a boxer romancing a gangster’s girl.

The ‘Professor’ (Walter Huston) is a broken down, blustering rummy of a manager whose best days are behind him--until he discovers Steve Morgan (Baer) knocking out deadbeats in a bar. The two seem destined for a shot at the title, until Steve’s wandering eye catches Belle (Loy), gangster Willie Ryan’s (Otto Kruger) girl. Willie seems resigned to the fact that Belle and Steve are in love. He steps aside with the proviso that if Steve ever hurts Belle, all bets are off. As Steve’s boxing fortunes rise, he becomes catnip to the ladies, setting up a showdown with Willie and Belle.

What a weird choice to have Max Baer as the male lead in an MGM romantic comedy opposite Myrna Loy. Was one of the biggest hitters in boxing history being groomed as an actor? He doesn’t embarrass himself, as a matter of fact he’s quite good. He has an obvious natural brash charm that fits the character’s incorrigibility perfectly. The only giveaway is you can see that he doesn’t know what to do with himself when he’s not delivering lines. Baer is even in an extended musical number where he sings and dances. Loy is splendid, of course. When Belle and Steve’s relationship hits a crisis, she initially takes the betrayal stoically, in stride, at first. Very much a response that was of the times. But Loy imbues the character with a pathos that makes her real and believable. She’s dubbed in a couple of music numbers that aren’t much fun. Walter Huston is excellent, what else is new? Otto Kruger is a little hard to believe as a gangster, and when he spits out his tough guy lines rat-a-tat-tat, he doesn’t help himself. The highlight is the big title fight at the end, with Steve taking on Primo Carnera and for good measure, Jack Dempsey as the ref. Other real life champs, Jess Willard, James J. Jeffries, Frank Moran (future Preston Sturges stock company member) and wrestler Ed ‘Strangler’ Lewis make appearances.

Notes: Scripter John Lee Mahin said that Hawks was fired after two days for working too slowly. Hawks said he wasn’t interested after Gable and Harlow became unavailable to play the leads, but he was asked to start filming and do a little coaching on Baer.

out of 4
-----------------------------
W.S. VAN DYKE – “Miscellany”
The Prizefighter and the Lady (1933) , Journey for Margaret (1942)


01/23/09

Stanley and Livingstone (1939) Dir: Henry King
Production: 20th Century-Fox

No less than the “greatest story in the history of journalism.” So says James Gordon Bennett (Henry Hull), publisher of the New York Herald, as he sends his star reporter, Henry Stanley (Spencer Tracy), into the heart of the “dark continent” Africa to find the famous missionary Dr. David Livingstone (Sir Cedric Hardwicke). And as a bonus, embarrass a rival publisher, Lord Tyce (Charles Coburn) of the London Globe, who has declared Livingstone dead. Off go Stanley, and his valued scout Jeff Slocum (Walter Brennan), to a date with destiny and a famous quote.

Fine adventure of the type that Fox under Zanuck did so well, with a superb cast. Tracy is terrific as Stanley, very subtly underplaying the character after his meeting with Livingstone, which shows the effect it had on him. Hardwicke is also very good, he has to play Livingston as impressive, as a man who could change your life just by meeting him, and he does. Anybody can appreciate a supporting cast of Hull, Brennan, Coburn and Henry Travers, who plays a British diplomat based in Africa. Nancy Kelly plays Eve, the daughter of the diplomat. Stanley’s memory of her keeps him going throughout his trek. Richard Greene plays Lord Tyce’s son and unknowing romantic rival for Eve (Tyrone Power was initially set to play the role). The film is lent some added authenticity by a second unit that went on an actual safari following in the footsteps of Livingstone and came back with 100,000 feet of film. The New York Times noted that this crew dealt with fever, mutiny and attacks from the natives (some clever PR?) in gathering the footage. A scene where Stanley and his caravan escape from an attacking tribe, who think he’s come as part of the slave trade, by using a literal firewall, lighting the brush on fire, could’ve inspired Cornel Wilde (THE NAKED PREY). One of the best scenes, it comes near the end, shows something we probably don’t immediately think about with these ‘explorers’—the process of proving they actually went.

out of 4
--------------------------------------------
HENRY KING – “Subjects for Further Research”
Stanley and Livingstone (1939)


01/23/09

The Swinger (1966) Dir: George Sidney
Production: Paramount Pictures

Tedious, execrable slice of ‘swingin’ sixties’ offal. Ann-Margret plays an aspiring writer, named Kelly Olsson, trying to get her stories published in a men’s magazine, Girl Lure (read: Playboy). They are rejected as being to tame. When she spices them up, the editor, played by Tony Franciosa, rejects them as being phony. So Kelly starts acting wild in a bid to convince the editor she’s writing from experience.

This film demands that you leer at Ann-Margret and I complied. Congratulations movie, you have a smoking hot actress as the lead. But why else am I here?!?! On the bright side, if you’re a splosh fetishist you’ll be excited by a fake orgy Kelly stages, in which she rolls around in paint as it is thrown on her. There’s also a lot of wacky 60’s style ‘hip’ editing; extreme zooms, fish-eye lenses, speeding up of film (think Benny Hill chasing women around a room). If you think Laugh-In was funny, this film will probably make you crap your pants. Franciosa debases himself with his appearance. Robert Coote is ridiculous as a lecherous publisher. The whole film is over-the-top insipid vulgarity disguised as social satire (“if there is such a thing as public decency, nobody’s found out what it is”, says one character). I’m sure somewhere people enjoy this as camp. Not I! Ann-Marget is hot, though.

out of 4
---------------------------------
GEORGE SIDNEY – “Lightly Likable”
The Swinger (1966)


01/24/09

The Late George Apley (1947) Dir: Joseph L. Mankiewicz
Production: 20th Century-Fox

Gentle comedy about provincial Boston blueblood family, circa 1912. Ronald Colman plays George Apley, the patriarch of the family, struggling with his son John (Richard Ney) and daughter Eleanor (Peggy Cummins) as a new age threatens to make the traditions he holds dear outmoded. Scandalous things happen, like Ellie’s relationship with a man from New York, rather than a Bostonian (and a Lehigh man rather than Harvard!), or John’s relationship with a girl from Worcester whose father is a self-made man. Of course, nobody is as pig-headed or narrow as they seem.

In many ways, the film resembles a pair of certifiable classics. It shares a theme with THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS; George, a man of tradition, holds fast to his ways in the face of change, even when they hurt those he loves. Its evocative depiction of the world George lives in, which scarcely goes beyond his house on Beacon Street in Boston, is almost as well done as MEET ME IN ST.LOUIS. The story also gives a good sense of the restrictive social manners that George has subjugated himself towards. Colman is marvelous. His befuddlement towards his children’s ‘odd’ behavior is funny and endearing. Percy Waram also stands out with some of the best lines. He plays an in-law of George’s who also acts as his conscience at crucial moments. Richard Haydn is memorable as a sycophantic cousin, who doesn’t have the standing of the Apley’s so he does anything he can to curry George’s favor. There is an interesting ending, which is NOT especially happy if you look at it a certain way. Altogether a rather beguiling film, much like another Mankiewicz picture from the same year, THE GHOST AND MRS. MUIR.

Notes: Based on a George S. Kaufman play (along with the Pulitzer Prize-winning story’s writer, John Marquand). Ernst Lubitsch is supposed to have filmed some scenes with Peggy Cummins. TV version, from The 20th Century-Fox Hour which Fox Movie Channel has aired, starred Raymond Massey as George and Joanne Woodward as Ellie.

out of 4
---------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH L. MANKIEWICZ – “Less Than Meets the Eye”
The Late George Apley (1947)

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Milk - I didn't know much about Harvey Milk before watching this except that he was a gay political figure and he was assassinated (I was also familiar with the "Twinkie Defense" and I'd heard the name Dan White but I didn't realize they were connected). So I did learn quite a bit about Milk and the civil rights struggles of the period, assuming that none of the major historical points were fabricated. But as a film, it merely follows a standard biopic template: charting an escalating but measured path of defeats and triumphs, toss in a couple of moments of irony, some light humor, and the big inspirational ending, fade to black for the coda of follow-up intertitles. A tape recording made by Milk provides a convenient framework device for providing exposition when necessary. I probably sound too harsh... it's not a bad movie at all, and I'm sure it was important to Van Sant. Sean Penn was fine, James Franco arguably even better. I was just hoping for something as compelling as Drugstore Cowboy or as daring as Gerry. Rating: 7


El Norte (rewatch, Blu-Ray) - I don't have anything new to say about this, except that I'm so happy to finally have one of my favorite films in its original ascept ratio, with a generous suite of bonus features, and in hi-def. Yay! Rating: 10


Revanche - So I'm trying to see as many of the films nominated in the major Oscar categories as I can. I really want to avoid exoticising the foreign movies, but I can't shake the feeling that none of the Best Picture nominees will live up to this one. It's not even that great of a film, it's just that none of the BP noms look very promising. It is a very good film, though, one that brought to mind Haneke, Inarritu, and mostly Kieslowski. It's got that combo of interconnectedness and honest exploration of pure humanity that he often dealt with. I didn't find it as moving or artistic as most Kieslowski films, but it did tell an interesting story that for the most part rings true. That rotating saw is a brilliant device for building tension. The performances all seemed good too, although sometimes that's hard to judge with another language. Rating: 8


Man on Wire - I could've sworn that I remembered Phillipe Petit's World Trade Center wirewalk when it happened, but since I was three at the time, that seems unlikely. I must have heard about it elsewhere. Regardless, it's a gripping story, and Petit's passion is infectious. Director James Marsh uses a non-linear timeframe that keeps things lively, and almost makes the viewer wonder if Petit will survive. Like Capturing the Friedmans, this movie is blessed to have copious amounts of footage from home movies made by the subjects. The reenactments were a little cheesy, but generally effective and the film as a whole works well. I also think it's commendable that in a movie that features the WTC so prominently, "9/11" isn't uttered once. One thing bugged the hell out of me, though. Almost all of the music is cribbed from Michael Nyman's incredible scores for Peter Greenaway films. It was jarring to have The Draughtman's Contract or Drowning By Numbers constantly popping up in my head during this tightrope documentary. It was so bizarre and annoying that I had to research it; apparently Marsh wanted to hire Nyman to compose a new score but couldn't afford him. I suppose I can't complain too much, since I enjoyed Wes Anderson's use of Satyajit Ray scores in Darjeeling Limited. But in that case, it felt more like homage, evoking the emotions that Ray's films evoke. This just felt like blatant thievery, like Marsh was hoping no one would notice. He does slightly redeem himself by using Satie's "Gymnopedie #1" during the moment of truth. It's a piece that never fails to hook me in (I ought to have a marathon one day of all the movies that use it). Rating: 8


Waltz With Bashir - At first I doubted the need to do this film in rotoscope-style animation -- it allows for a few poetic touches, but it didn't seem necessary and I thought it might be more effective without it. But the stunning ending removed all doubt. It was a bold and fascinating choice. I am left with the sense that the ending is something like a "money shot", however, and that leaves a somewhat bad taste in my mouth. What I really liked about this film were the comments on memory, and I wanted a little more of that... not that the events themselves aren't interesting, but I was far more intrigued by Folman's struggles to recall his role in them. So far in the Oscar foreign category, I'd give Revanche a slight edge, but this one was certainly quite good as well. Rating: 8

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

That sums up my feelings exactly about Blade & Blade II.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Blade II

In my opinion, this is a very good follow-up to the first Blade movie. Once again Wesley Snipes was very cool in the title role. I got a real kick out of the new breed of vampire. I think I enjoyed this one just as much as the first one... if not a hair more. My daughter watched both Blade movies with me... the first thing out of her mouth after watching this one was to ask if I will be watching the 3rd. She also thinks Blade is very cool.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Obviously I didn't agree with you all on Blade II. But that's ok... each to their own.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

War Day #2


01/23/09: THE WOODEN HORSE (Jack Lee and, uncredited, Ian Dalrymple, 1950)

Excellent P.O.W. adventure, adapted by Eric Williams from his own book (a paperback copy of which forms part of my father’s library) that was inspired by true events; it may well be the first film of its kind and, therefore, has a lot to answer for – not just similarly stiff-upper-lipped examples such as ALBERT, R.N. (1953; which I’ll be watching presently), THE COLDITZ STORY (1955) and DANGER WITHIN (1959) but higher-profile releases from the other side of the Atlantic, namely STALAG 17 (1953) and THE GREAT ESCAPE (1963). This, then, sets the basis pretty solidly: British soldiers interned in a German camp devise an ingenious plan of escape, borrowing a page from Greek legend – burrowing from under a vaulting horse used during physical exercise and in full view of their captors! Actually, the film is neatly split into two halves: the first deals with the slow process of digging the tunnel, culminating in the escape itself, while the latter stages depict their fortunes outside the camp as they try to make it to neutral Sweden. Typically of these British films, the cast showcases several established (Leo Genn), current (Anthony Steel) and up-and-coming (Peter Finch, David Tomlinson and Bill Travers) stars, to say nothing of innumerable reliable character actors (Anthony Dawson, Bryan Forbes, Michael Goodliffe and Walter Gotell). The three leads/escapees are Genn, Steel and Tomlinson: while the first two stick together, the latter goes his own way – only to run into the others on reaching safety. As can be expected, the narrative involves plenty of suspense and excitement; as with most male-centered P.O.W. sagas, too, female interest is kept to the barest minimum. Director Lee didn’t have a lengthy career – with this and the somewhat similar (albeit with a change of both setting and viewpoint) A TOWN LIKE ALICE (1956) his most noteworthy achievements – but he certainly milked every gripping situation in this case (even if, reportedly, delays in filming saw Lee quitting his post prematurely…leaving producer Ian Dalrymple with the task of tying up loose ends!). Anyway, worth special mention is the exquisite lighting (particularly during night-time sequences) throughout.


01/23/09: BEACHHEAD (Stuart Heisler, 1954)

Standard Hollywood war heroics, clearly minor-league despite being filmed in pleasant Technicolor; it’s yet another Pacific-based actioner with a tight American unit on an ‘impossible’ mission before the fleet’s planned all-out attack. Typically, tension is created among the men by the fact that the commanding officer (Frank Lovejoy) is ‘tainted’ – his leadership qualities having been taken to task over the massacre at Guadalcanal. Here, too, he causes the death of two of his underlings – leaving only himself and Tony Curtis to verify the message sent by a French missionary from a Japanese-held island. When they finally come across him, the soldiers are surprised to find he has brought a daughter (Mary Murphy) along: of course, this strains the relationship between the two fighting men all the more – though it’s rather silly of middle-aged Lovejoy to think he could offer competition to the rugged, handsome Curtis! The action set-pieces are adequately handled under the circumstances (with one surprising bit involving a U.S. marine being dragged by the enemy inside their tank about to explode from his own grenade!) but, at the end of the day, the film emerges a rather undistinguished entry within this prolific genre.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Western Day #2


01/24/09: PASSION (Allan Dwan, 1954)

Maybe I had been spoiled a fortnight ago by the ‘surprising’ excellence of Dwan’s SILVER LODE (1954), or perhaps I had my mind on other things while it was playing (I had just installed my brand new DVD recorder), or it is simply that the film needed a more compelling villain than Rodolfo Acosta; the fact remains that I was underwhelmed by this first viewing of PASSION. Not that it really has a reputation to uphold or anything but, retaining the services of much of the same crew as SILVER LODE (director Dwan, producer Benedict Bogeaus, cinematographer John Alton, composer Louis Forbes, art director Van Nest Polglase, bit-part actors Stuart Whitman and Robert Warwick, etc.), one can’t help but expect similarly satisfying results. At least, the cast is quite good: Cornel Wilde, Yvonne De Carlo (in a dual role as Wilde’s ladylike wife and her tomboyish twin sister!), Raymond Burr (as the Sheriff), Lon Chaney Jr. (as a drunken brute with a really loud cackle), John Qualen (as De Carlo’s grandfather) and Anthony Caruso (as Burr’s suspicious colleague). The film, set in Old California, follows a typical revenge story pattern which, unfortunately, seems not to have inspired Dwan much until the snowbound (or rather studio-bound) finale: in fact, Wilde does most of the killings – barring that of Chaney and Acosta – offscreen! Ultimately, PASSION emerges as a modestly pleasing and colorful diversion that falls short of achieving its potential…especially when judging the end result against similar contemporary Western fare about obsessive odysseys of revenge like Fritz Lang’s RANCHO NOTORIOUS (1952) and Henry King’s THE BRAVADOS (1958).


01/24/09: NO NAME ON THE BULLET (Jack Arnold, 1959)

This mature, psychological Western was the first feature film director Jack Arnold made after that exceptional run of Sci-Fi movies (made during the genre’s heyday of the 1950s) for which he is deservedly best-known. Diminutive real-life war hero Audie Murphy atypically stars as a black-clad notorious hired killer whose appearance in a sleepy Western hamlet instills fear in several of its supposedly respectable citizens who each believe that their own past has come back to haunt them. Murphy lazes about town, quietly downing mug after mug of coffee in the saloon and indulging in the occasional game of chess with friendly town doctor-veterinarian Charles Drake. He never lets on whom he has come for (which is a given to everyone but Drake) but lets the increasingly paranoid townspeople unravel in front of him and, in some cases, settle their age-old disputes among themselves. The final revelation that he had actually been hired to eliminate the least likely candidate (i.e. the most respectable and most harmless citizen – an old wheelchair-bound Judge) and that the latter, unbeknownst to Murphy, only has six months to live anyhow, packs a real ironical wallop. Interestingly, Murphy had so far been able to get away with 23 killings because he always managed to coerce his victims into drawing their guns on him first; in this case, he contrives to molest the Judge’s daughter in his hotel room and tell him about it afterwards! The cast also includes R. G. Armstrong (as Drake’s blacksmith father), Whit Bissell (as a corrupt banker), Warren Stevens (who gets all liquored up to face Murphy but nothing comes of their meeting), Virginia Grey (as Stevens’ contemptuous lover), Jerry Paris (as the Sheriff’s reluctant deputy) and Karl Swenson (as Bissell’s tough business partner). A terse, offbeat Western that concludes in a unique confrontation between Murphy and Drake (who happens to be engaged to the Judge’s daughter) where the former is disarmed and disabled by a gavel thrown at his right arm; incidentally, this unusual object had featured prominently in a scene at the beginning of the movie – at which point, my father (who was watching the film with me) proceeded to reveal the ending he recalled from an almost 50-year old theatrical screening!


01/24/09: WHISPERING SMITH (Leslie Fenton, 1948)

Alan Ladd’s first film in color was also his first Western, a genre with which he would become associated after making 11 of them in all (having previously excelled in noirs during the 1940s and early 50s). Here he plays a character dating back to the Silent era: a soft-spoken (hence the title) but sharp-shooting investigator for a railroad company which also employs his best friends – rugged foreman Robert Preston (who married Ladd’s girl Brenda Marshall) and old-timer William Demarest. With Ladd away on company business i.e. chasing a notorious trio of sibling train robbers, Preston falls in with a bad crowd headed by cattle rustler Donald Crisp and his albino henchman Frank Faylen and, on whose account, he has been pilfering ‘damaged’ goods transported by the railroad. Ladd is ordered back home to look into this wave of train wrecks which have been occurring on a regular basis. Suspecting Crisp and his crew, he pleads with Preston to pull out in time but the latter is too deeply involved by now to listen and an eventual shootout between the two childhood friends is inevitable. An ordinary, unpretentious Western to be sure but one that is well acted, competently staged and provides consistent entertainment for the undiscriminating viewer and Western film buffs in particular.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Animation Day #3


01/25/09: BAMBI (David D. Hand, 1942)

I had seen most of Walt Disney’s sixth animated feature film many years ago via a local TV screening which, however, omitted the climactic forest fire sequence in its entirety…which is why I am considering it a first viewing here! Technically, BAMBI is certainly among the most accomplished works ever to come out of the famed animation studio: the level of artistry on display is so high that one scarcely believes that what he is watching is actually 70 years old and made under wartime conditions to boot! Frankly, the main story of BAMBI is pretty bland and can’t hope to hold a candle to the classic children’s fables like Snow White and Pinocchio; however, the film has an alternative trump card in its winning combination of typical Disney whimsy (having all kinds of animals gather round to greet Bambi’s nativity) and an unheralded documentary-like feel in its realistic depiction of forest life (witness the animals’ panic-stricken reaction to man’s intrusion in their territory). As a matter of fact, Disney’s perfectionism in this regard made the production drag on for 6 years! Therefore, together with the by-now famous characters of Bambi the beautiful deer itself, Thumper the amiable rabbit, Flower the shy skunk and the friendly Owl, we also have some uncharacteristically bleak passages: the killing of Bambi’s mother by an unseen hunter and the subsequent adoption by its princely father, the older Bambi battling a rival for its loved one’s affections, the aforementioned blazing forest incident, etc. Reportedly, BAMBI was Disney’s personal favorite among his feature films but, at the time of original release, it proved a box office disappointment so that the company reissued SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS (1937) theatrically to recoup its costs fast – a clever tactic that has become the norm for the studio since then. Another much less sensible decision taken by the studio many years later is that of making direct-to-video sequels to some of its classic legacy and, in 2006, it was the turn of BAMBI II – which isn’t even a sequel really since it centers on the relationship between young Bambi and its father!


01/25/09: THE GREAT MUPPET CAPER (Jim Henson, 1981)

The second theatrical outing of the popular “Muppet Show” TV characters relocates the action to London, as reporters Kermit The Frog and Fozzie Bear and photographer Gonzo are reluctantly sent by their editor Jack Warden to investigate the robbery of a famous jeweled necklace worn by unsympathetic fashion queen Diana Rigg. The culprit turns out to be her own obnoxious brother Charles Grodin and his trio of burglar-models; Grodin seems to have the hots for Miss Piggy (at one point singing his heart out to her but she puts down his effort by revealing that the actor’s voice was dubbed!), a model wannabe engaged as Rigg’s secretary and who ends up impersonating her boss to impress Kermit. The change in locale adds precious little to the table and, truth be told, the film tends to sag badly during its midsection (with too many schmaltzy songs for balance). However, when the film is funny, it’s frequently hilarious: the in-jokey commentary by the trio of reporters accompanying the opening credits; their traveling to London in a plane’s luggage compartment inside boxes denoting their species (Gonzo is a “Whatever”) and their being thrown off the plane in mid-flight eventually landing at Robert Morley’s feet; the eccentric and inquisitive guests at the Happiness Hotel; Miss Piggy’s central musical number is an amusing pastiche of old Esther Williams aquatic routines; Miss Piggy’s run-in with lorry driver Peter Ustinov (who complains, after being thrown into the garbage, that his is only a cameo), etc. Ex-Monty Python John Cleese also appears as a henpecked husband who thinks nothing of glimpsing a pig climbing the walls of his apartment building.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

032) 01/24/2009 Doctor of Doom (1962) 1/2 (out of four)

K. Gordon Murray strikes again by Americanizing a Mexican combination of mad scientist themes and, of all things, wrestling. A mysterious doctor is attempting brain transplants but the women subjects keep dying. He decides that a woman athlete, such as a wrestler, would be the perfect candidate because of her physical strength. Unintentional (?) hilarity ensues. If you like lovely, full-figured gals wrestling you still have to sit through the other 7/8’s of the film which features bad dialogue, nonexistent logic, and stupid characters. But it is, in its own way, rather fun.

033) 01/24/2009 The Girl Who Knew Too Much (1962) 1/2

Director Mario Bava’s stylish thriller stars Letícia Román as Nora, visiting Rome to care for bed-ridden aunt. One night the latter suffers an attack so Nora goes rushing to the hospital. But en route she is mugged, and as she comes out of her stupor thinks she witnesses a murder. The police find no evidence but Nora is convinced she did not hallucinate. Will she become the next victim of the so-called “Alphabet Killer?” While Bava offers stylish visuals the plot is one of those nonsensical ones where characters deliberately and repeatedly put themselves in danger. It's a pretty good diversion but little else.



My DVD Collection
My Film Blog

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

034) 01/25/2009 The French Connection (1971) (out of four)

I remember, during those wonderful years of watching Siskel and Ebert spar week after week, hearing that the 1970s was the last decade for great movie making. It was the decade of Friedkin, Coppola, and Cimino. Martin Scorsese and Steven Spielberg would make their first classics. Studios were willing to give certain auteurs free reign because their artistry was winning awards. The subject matter of most of the Best Pictures of this decade was bleak, and would frequently feature less than happy endings. Some of this was informed by a political climate that included the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal. But with the failure of Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate (1980) and the blockbuster that was Star Wars (1977), the 1980s mostly said goodbye to the negative. It was time to accentuate the positive.

One could see the trend starting in the 1960s. Gang violence, Nazism, and poverty were given upbeat presentations in musicals West Side Story, The Sound of Music, and Oliver!, respectively. Racism added the needed element to make In the Heat of the Night more than just a murder mystery, although by film’s end the villain is brought to justice and no harm has come to the heroes. Midnight Cowboy looked at a subculture that involved criminals and hustlers, and these very types would be the heroes of the 1970s. But at least there was plenty of humor to offset the sadness. Even Patton, a film where the title character gets his wish to kick Nazi arse, ends on a down note because this guy isn’t allowed to take on the Russians. But with 1971’s The French Connection, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences would begin regularly honoring films that looked at the darker side of the human experience.

Based on true events, The French Connection deals with two New York City detectives' attempts to stop a heroin shipment from reaching the city streets. In Marseilles, France, Alain Charnier (Fernando Rey), a near-mythic drug smuggler, is arranging for a shipment of heroin into the United States. Detective Jimmy "Popeye" Doyle (Gene Hackman) and his partner Buddy "Cloudy" Russo (Roy Scheider) work the Big Apple narcotics beat when they learn from an informant that a big shipment of heroin is coming in. Soon, a cat-and-mouse game between Doyle and Charnier commences to see which one will win this battle in New York’s looming drug war.

While serious drug stories today are a dime a dozen, this was not the case at the time of The French Connection. Most films dealing with illegal substances (e.g. Easy Rider) saw the users as admirable rebels, or at least as harmless folk just trying to attain a new reality. The French Connection, on the other hand, looked at another side of the equation – how the drugs came to be available. This is quite a different viewpoint from the idea of certain drug use being a victimless crime.

The French Connection is presented as an intense action thriller that boasts several impressive set pieces. Doyle and Charnier engage is an exciting pursuit sequence where Doyle tries to keep up with Charnier through the streets and subways of New York. There is the attempt on Doyle’s life which takes place in a public housing district, where a roof-top sniper kills innocent people in an attempt to eliminate Doyle. This in turn leads to the now-classic car chase where Doyle commandeers a citizen’s car so he can follow the would-be assassin who is attempting to escape via an elevated train. There is virtually no let up in the tension and suspense.

The movie is constantly contrasting the luxurious lifestyle led by Charnier with Doyle’s unglamorous one. The film opens with Charnier shown living at a beautiful villa and presenting an expensive gift to his lovely wife. There is mention of a daughter. Doyle is shown dressed up as Santa Claus on a stake out, which ultimately leads to Russo getting a knife injury. Doyle is alone. While Charnier dines in a elegant restaurant on a multi-course meal, Doyle is shown outside shivering in the cold, wolfing down a slice of pizza and pouring out his cup of foul-tasting coffee. Charnier is elegantly dressed and always moves gracefully and calmly, while Doyle is unkempt and out of breath. Still, while Charnier is a wily fox, so is Doyle. They may have differing pay grades. But they do seem matched with respect to cunning and resourcefulness.

But the real kick in the gut delivered by The French Connection is how the film ends. One authority figure is killed in friendly fire and Charnier gets away. We do not get the satisfaction of seeing the main villain punished. Furthermore, title cards inform us that only the lower level smugglers got any time. The higher-ups escaped justice. Doyle has put his life at risk almost for nothing, even though the drugs will presumably not reach the streets.

And thus begins a trend in the Best Picture winners of the 1970s whereby the audience is told stories that have challenging themes and troubling outcomes. In the two Godfather films (1972 and 1974), the heroes are actually gangsters, and the law can’t touch them. The Sting (1973) deals with low-level criminals taking on the mafia. In One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1975) a convict sent to a mental hospital for observation emerges as some kind of savior to the patients with tragic results. Rocky (1976) deals with the brutality of the boxing ring, and while Rocky gets the girl he loses the match. Failed relationships form the storyline for Annie Hall (1977). The Deer Hunter (1978) explores the emotional cruelty of the Vietnam War. Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) looks at divorce. And, in case you still have a spring your step, Ordinary People (1980) tackles suicide.

Apparently that was enough, because the Academy changed its tune for most of the 1980s offering more positive, inspiring choices such as Chariots of Fire (1981), Gandhi (1982), Amadeus (1984), and Rain Man (1988). There would be still be the occasional nod to darker themes (e.g. 1986’s Platoon) and even the aforementioned films had their less-than-sunny plot threads. But there would not be the practically unrelenting focus on life’s dark corners in the 1980s as there was in the 1970s.

The truth is though that the 1970s did deal with realistic themes. Crime does actually pay for some people; people do break up and divorce; and people do take their own lives. These were – and still are – sad realities that, in the '70s, reflected a decade where the United States lost its first war and a president resigned amidst criminal allegations. But these films were quality product, not just cinematic treatises on bleakness. It didn’t hurt that sitting behind the camera for many of these films were gifted, passionate directors who were largely given carte blanche to bring their visions to the screen. And while the following may not serve as any kind of absolute proof, it’s interesting to note that the 1970s is the best-represented decade on the recent AFI 100 Years, 100 Movies. Twenty of the 100 movies are from the ‘70s, more than any other decade. (The 1960s come in second with 17.) And seven of the ten best picture winners of the ‘70s made the AFI list. (The ‘60s came in second, again, with six.) The French Connection placed 93rd.

The French Connection is a finely crafted, well acted, exciting combination of real-life drama and suspense. Today, a film about drug trafficking would, in and of itself, result in shrugged shoulders. But for an industry that as recently as 1968 sang and danced its cares away, mixing lots of sugar with life’s bitter pills, the awarding of its highest honor to a rather downbeat look at society’s drug problem marked a decided turning point. And cinema is all the better for it.



My DVD Collection
My Film Blog

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

(I viewed The Godfather on 12/21/08 but am including it here since I never wrote about it and for Best Picture chronology purposes.)

The Godfather (1972) (out of four)

How familiar the events and characters of The Godfather are. I don’t know how many times I have seen this film. But I do realize now that this is my favorite film of all time. How can this be? It asks us to enter a world where a good business deal can mean murder. It wants us to care about the lives of the Corleone family because they are the “good” gangsters who are responding to threats from the “bad” gangsters. The main character’s arc is the transformation of a man who wanted nothing to do with his family’s way of life into a more ruthless head of the family than his father ever was. How are we supposed to feel when, in the film’s final scene, the door closes and a new generation of violence has taken hold? How I absolutely love this film.

New York, 1945: on his only daughter’s wedding day, Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando), as is customary, is granting audiences with those who want a favor from the Godfather, an affectionate term for the head of a mafia family. An undertaker wants revenge for a sexual attack on his daughter. A baker doesn’t want his daughter’s boyfriend, who also works in the bakery, deported. Vito’s own godson, singer Johnny Fontane (Al Martino), wants a part in a movie that will put his career back on track. Vito will grant these wishes in return for the promise of a favor to be named at a later date.

Attending this party is Vito’s youngest son, Michael (Al Pacino), a decorated war hero who is there with his girlfriend Kay (Diane Keaton). He assures her that he has no interest in this life, even though he cares for his family very deeply. But when an unsuccessful assassination attempt is made on his father’s life, Michael is willing to do his part to avenge the family. He fought for his country in World War II. He will now step to the front lines in the burgeoning war between two powerful mafia families. Michael’s actions do more than send a message to his father’s would-be murderers. They put him on a path that leads him to the honored position his father now holds.

While there are plenty out there who would argue the 1974 sequel is the better film, this viewer prefers the 1972 classic. The main reason for this is watching the evolution of the idealistic Michael from a sweet, well-meaning young man into someone who will rule the family with an iron fist. In a heartbreaking scene Vito tells him, “I never wanted any of this for you, Michael.” The Don imagined Michael a senator, governor, or even president. Now Michael is caught up in war, unable to distance himself from it. After a years-long exile in Sicily (the result of Michael’s vengeance) during which Don Vito has made peace with all the families, Michael returns home and takes Kay as his wife, promising he will make the Corleones “completely legitimate” in five years. But by this time he has seen and experienced too much. During his exile, Michael married, only then to witness his bride’s murder as the result of a car bomb meant for him. He enjoys the protection afforded him and also the respect his name commands. Upon his return he is ready to assume the title of Don Corleone, as his father’s health has deteriorated. And we see him lie to Kay’s face, in a way we could not have imagined based on their gentle exchange at the opening wedding scene, about his role in his brother-in-law’s death. It is a fascinating and frightening transformation. But also one that is understandable given the events that occur. At the end of the film, the door has truly closed on the life that Kay had envisioned for herself and Michael.

Rich in character and incident, The Godfather’s attention to plot details, no matter how small they seem, will have payoffs later in the film. In the opening scene for instance, the undertaker must later make Sonny Corleone (James Caan) presentable after he is horrifically gunned down. (“Look how they messed with my boy.”) The baker’s apprentice Vito saves from deportation assists Michael in scaring off those who plan a second attempt on Vito’s life at the hospital. The tensions and fights between Connie Corleone (Talia Shire) and her husband Carlo (Gianni Russo) lay the foundation for how Sonny will be murdered. And the actions in this film will also impact the future installments, such as when brother Fredo (John Cazale) admonishes Michael in front of Moe Green (Alex Rocco), the co-owner of a Nevada casino Michael wants to own outright. Fredo will betray Michael again in The Godfather Part II (1974), with fatal consequences.

Director Francis Ford Coppola visualizes the hypocrisy of the Corleone family (and mafia families in general) by contrasting sacrament against sin. While Connie has just been a part of the sacrament of marriage, her father is giving approval for criminal acts. While Michael is present at the Baptism of his godchild, Connie’s son, Michael’s orders to murder the heads of the rival mafia families are carried out. The sequels would follow the formula established here, whereby the Corleones would accumulate enemies and traitors, all of whom would be murdered during the climax. But none would match the impact that is achieved here by crosscutting between the Baptism and executions.

The sequels would involve the Corleones in even more dramatic confrontations. In Part II, Michael will be subject to a senate investigation. In Part III, the Corleones pursuit of purchasing stock in a company co-owned by the Vatican involves them in the assassination of Pope John Paul I. But the more intimate nature of The Godfather makes it the most emotionally involving of the three films, although such an observation is hardly meant as a negative comment on the other films, especially Part II.

Visually speaking the film is seductive. Gordon Willis’ sumptuous photography is as successful capturing the beauty and splendor of the wedding reception as it is the dark and lonely corridors of the hospital where Don Vito awaits isolated. There is an intimate feel to the private conversations between Michael and his father, or Michael and Kay, or the gathering at the family table where Michael tells Sonny about the former’s plan to avenge the attack on their father. Add to this the costumes, the art direction, the iconic music and The Godfather is as powerful technically as it is emotionally.

I come back to how is it possible to care so much about what happens to these people who should be housed in jail cells not luxury homes. The secret, I believe, is introducing Michael as someone who never planned on being a gangster, something the sequels cannot possibly do. It’s easy to sympathize with someone who is torn between their love of their family and what their family chooses as their livelihood. Michael and his siblings were born into this, unlike their father whom, we learn in Part II, essentially chose to pursue a life of crime instead of working low-paying jobs. It’s not hard to understand Michael's outrage at the murder attempt, or his further ire that police are being paid off to allow for a second attempt. He’s been backed into a corner. If someone doesn’t stand up for his father then Vito will surely be killed. As a strategist he understands he is the most likely one to have the chance to do what he feels is a necessary evil to protect his father and family. But he is answering immorality with immorality. And there is no turning back. How we feel for Michael in these earlier moments. How we loathe him before it is all over.

The Godfather continues to rate very highly on lists such as AFI and Sight and Sound as one of the truly great motion pictures. That the film explores the evolution of evil is beside the point. It starts with a character who is full of optimism and whose future is promising. Then we watch as he takes a u-turn towards the abyss. And we cannot look away.



My DVD Collection
My Film Blog

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

01/25/09

Down to the Sea in Ships (1949) Dir: Henry Hathaway
Production: 20th Century-Fox

Seafaring tale about a crusty old captain (Lionel Barrymore) of a whaling ship, who's nearing the end but determined to make one last voyage to ensure his grandson carries on the family tradition. Capt. Bering Joy (he was born in the Bering Strait) returns to New Bedford, Massachusetts in 1887 with a record haul of whale oil. Still, all is not well with the company. Bering was sick on the last trip and his increasing frailty has them worried. There is also the question of his grandson Jed’s (Dean Stockwell) education. Bering manages to cajole one last voyage. His main purpose is to train young Jed to get his whaling ship master’s license. But the company has assigned a first officer, Dan Lunceford (Richard Widmark), to keep watch of Bering. Bering resents Dan, who has many university and technical degrees but little practical experience, and decides to assign him the task of tutoring Jed. The two differing approaches make for figuratively rough seas, and the actual rough seas don’t help tensions either. Soon, lives will depend on the two men finding common ground.

Lionel Barrymore is terrific as the captain, although playing notes he had done often before. As in the Sturges picture I recently viewed, RIGHT CROSS, Barrymore’s actual physical frailty lends added poignancy to the character, a man losing his livelihood due both to his infirmity and the new ways. He sees Lunceford as a threat. Bering is not only afraid of losing Jed to him (as a more age-appropriate father-figure), he sees Lunceford as a repudiation of everything he’s done. Bering is also self-aware, he knows the end is coming, but in the face of all this, he steadfastly holds on to his position and what is required of a captain. A large part of the story is the question of duty versus what may be morally right but against regulations. Is there honor in holding to your duty, no matter what the consequences? Barrymore pulls all this off admirably. Widmark for his part is very good. It was his first role where he wasn’t playing a villain, and it was no doubt important to him for that reason. He has a similar arc to PICKUP ON SOUTH STREET’s ‘Skip McCoy’; at first Lunceford is a mercenary, but his actions later betray that cold approach. Dean Stockwell, well I’m sure he’s adequate, but some child actors just hit you the wrong way, and he does it. The film is more interesting in the decidedly Jed-light second half. Familiar and reliable support comes from Cecil Kellaway, Gene Lockhart, Harry Davenport, Jay C. Flippen, John McIntire, Henry Morgan and Paul Harvey.

Notes: No similarity, outside of the same title, to a 1922 film that is notable for Clara Bow’s debut. This film began production in 1940, with Tyrone Power and Laird Cregar cast, but eventually was put off due to war restrictions. There is an interesting whale rendering montage, showing the complete process, for which the studio imported four tons of whale blubber.

out of 4
------------------------------------
HENRY HATHAWAY – “Lightly Likable”
Down to the Sea in Ships (1949)



01/25/09

Jeanne Eagels (1957) Dir: George Sidney
Production: Columbia Pictures

Coincidentally days after Heath Ledger was given the dubious honor of being one of the few actors to receive a posthumous Academy Award® nomination, I viewed this biopic of the first such person to hit that particular double, actress Jeanne Eagels, played here by Kim Novak. Eagels was one of an all too frequent breed—the tempermental, self-destructive genius. She gained most of her fame on Broadway, where she was the first person to play ‘Sadie Thompson’ in a smash production of Somerset Maugham’s Rain, but she was also admired for her film work—her role in 1929’s THE LETTER (based on another Maugham play) gained her a best actress nomination in 1930 (Mary Pickford would win for COQUETTE).

The film follows the standard biopic formula of meteoric rise and comparable fall, but it is not especially flattering. From the first time we see Jeanne, she is doing something remarkably calculated in the hopes of advancing her dream of being on Broadway. She’s the original Eve Harrington. Once she’s on Broadway, she’ll do anything to get bigger. Her big break, the role in Rain, is gained by way of some nasty doings--it’s the point at which we, and the characters in the film, realize there is something quite devious, and maybe irredeemably so, driving this woman.

The problems start with Kim Novak. While it is certainly a great role for her, I found her unconvincing at the biggest moments. Jeanne Eagels was a mass of insecurities, so there are showy incidents with alcohol and “pills” (obviously heroin). Novak is overly mannered at these critical times. Neither is the script strong enough. Jeanne just appears at the beginning, with no story, so we never much know what drove her to this. There’s no real insight into her. Also, Jeanne’s struggle with alcohol is presented in a 10 second montage. So, first there’s no drinking, then this montage, then it’s understood that she’s an alcoholic who has destroyed her career, cancelled shows, is uninsurable, and has drawn the ire of the Actors Equity union. Weird. There is good support from Jeff Chandler as her love interest, who just wants Jeanne to settle down with him and forget acting. Agnes Moorehead does a nice spoof of a haughty acting coach Jeanne leans on. Frank Borzage appears as himself directing Jeanne in a movie, even though they never actually worked together. Nice b&w photography by Robert Planck, who was most notable for a string of MGM musicals and costume dramas.

out of 4
---------------------------------
GEORGE SIDNEY – “Lightly Likable”
Jeanne Eagels (1957) , The Swinger (1966)


01/25/09

The Revolt of Mamie Stover (1956) Dir: Raoul Walsh
Production: 20th Century-Fox

Even in 1941 Mamie Stover’s (Jane Russell) story was a familiar one. “Only the names and the geography change,” says the writer (Richard Egan). Born in a small town, desperate to get out, beauty contest winner, Hollywood wash-out, do anything to survive. As the film begins, Mamie is getting run out of San Francisco by the police. Now she’s on this boat to Hawaii, just her and the writer, his name is Jim Blair and he’s figured her out. Mamie is on a quest for respect and status. She equates money with respect, but the only way she knows how to make money isn’t very respectful. In Hawaii she quickly becomes the main attraction as a ‘hostess’ at The Bungalow, a joint popular with the servicemen. And after Pearl Harbor she pools all her dough into buying up real estate, which she makes a killing on. But she finds that all the money in the world isn’t enough by itself to grant her entrée to respectability. "You can't be transported to the home on the hill on someone else's back," Jim tells her. He should know--it's his home. But even though he already has the respectable girl (Joan Leslie), it's Mamie that he's drawn to. As for Mamie, what's that they say about a leopard and its spots?

Jane Russell has the requisite sass to play a woman who is repeatedly owned by life but doesn't give up. She’s not an especially compelling deliverer of lines, but then again, as studio publicity once said about a 3-D film Jane was in: “It’ll knock BOTH your eyes out.” Richard Egan smarms his way through the whole film. His character gets to be condescending to Mamie while having no integrity himself, although as the film plays around with class so much, that’s probably by design. Agnes Moorehead plays the ‘manager’ at The Bungalow and Michael Pate stands out as the club’s muscle who saves his best work for when the girls break the rules. The story felt like small glimpses that belonged to much longer episodes, like if it had another 30 minutes it might be FROM HERE TO ETERNITY. The whole film was shot on location in Hawaii and in CinemaScope, probably the movie’s best asset.

out of 4
-----------------------------------
Raoul Walsh – “Far Side Of Paradise”
College Swing (1938) , Cheyenne (1947) , The Revolt of Mamie Stover (1956)

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Great -- I knew this was going to be on and I wanted to see it, but I forgot about it.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

035) 01/26/2009 The Sting (1973) (out of four)

The Sting is fluff but it is entertaining fluff. It looks pretty, goes down easy, and has no lofty pretensions. In 1936, grifter Johnny Hooker (Robert Redford) and his partners unknowingly con a numbers runner out of $11,000. The mob kingpin in charge, Doyle Lonnegan (Robert Shaw), orders all those responsible for the theft to be made an example of. Meanwhile, a crooked bunco cop (Charles Durning) shakes Johnny down for his share of the take. When one of his partners is killed, Johnny teams with Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman), master of the big con, to hit Lonnegan where it hurts: in the money belt.

Reuniting after their successful teaming in 1969’s Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Paul Newman and Robert Redford have a natural chemistry as master and pupil. They cut dashing figures in their 1930s duds, and are surrounded by a genial supporting cast that includes Ray Walston, Eileen Brennan, and Harold Gould. Even though there is violence and the constant threat of more violence, the whole enterprise is a rather breezy affair where the audience never really fears our heroes are in danger. There are attempts by screenwriter David S. Ward to throw a twist or two in the mix. But this viewer saw these coming, probably a product of viewing films or television show episodes (Remington Steele: "Sting of Steele” comes to mind) that ripped off The Sting before seeing the original model.

The whole tone of the film is jovial. These confidence men and women are confident, and they don’t break a sweat. Illustrated title cards breakdown the development of the con for the audience: the set-up, the hook, the tale, the wire, the shut-out, and finally, the sting. We are there every step of the way, and nearly everything goes as planned. When Lonnegan wants to meet Johnny’s contact at the Western Union station, the conmen arrange to “borrow” an office for a few moments by posing as painters. Rarely though does anything interfere with the game plan. That’s part of the film’s charm. But it’s also part of the film’s problem. In spite of the bloodshed and impending threats from gangsters and the authorities, there’s rarely any true tension. We know they’ll pull this off. We watch amused and entertained, but never worried. The ending is a foregone conclusion.

The Sting stands out among the 1970s Best Picture winners because it’s so upbeat and bright, even though it takes place in Depression-era Chicago. It’s a finely crafted entertainment whose lack of gravitas makes it a real crowd pleaser. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.



My DVD Collection
My Film Blog

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

(I viewed The Godfather Part II on 12/22/08 but am including it here since I never wrote about it and for Best Picture chronology purposes.)

The Godfather Part II (1974) (out of four)

When we last saw Michael Corleone (Al Pacino), he had assumed control of the Corleone mafia family. It is now 1958, and he is organizing a move into the Nevada gambling industry, which is being supported by Jewish gangster Hyman Roth (Lee Strasberg.) At his home in Lake Tahoe on the night of his son’s First Communion, an attempt is made on Michael’s life. He tells Roth he believes the guilty party is Frank Pentangeli (Michael V. Gazzo), a disgruntled Corleone soldier in New York who is having problems with the Rosato brothers, who are backed by Roth. Later however Michael confides in Frank that he believes Roth was behind the attack, but must have had inside help. Michael must discover who the traitor is. He also must contend with a senate investigation into the dealings of the Corleone family.

While The Godfather Part II continues Michael’s saga, it also crosscuts to the story of how his father Vito, played here as a young man by Robert DeNiro, came to America and became a force in the underworld. As a young boy, his parents and brother were murdered under orders from a Don who was insulted by Vito’s father, and Vito escaped to New York to avoid the same fate. As a young man he now works at a grocery in an Italian neighborhood and gets involved with a local criminal, Peter Clemenza (Bruno Kirby). He learns that area merchants are being extorted by Don Fanucci, and soon finds himself in the same situation when Fanucci demands his share of Vito’s illegally gotten gains. Vito’s response starts him on his path to mafia chieftain.

What is most fascinating about The Godfather Part II is that, even though both Vito and son Michael are able men who commit horrible acts, they are not viewed the same way by those closest to them. In The Godfather, Don Vito Corleone is loved by his wife and children, and dies while playing with his grandson. Don Michael Corleone is, on the other hand, feared and reviled by his wife. Part III confirms that his children want nothing to do with the family business, which, ironically, was exactly Michael's feeling when we first meet him The Godfather. The final shot of Part IIhas Michael sitting by himself, wondering why his father was so loved while he is all alone.

While Part II is rife with double crosses and betrayals like its predecessor, one character’s fate packs a particular wallop. Poor Fredo (John Cazale, reprising his role), tired of playing errand boy to his younger brother, does the unspeakable thing of betraying Michael to Hyman Roth. A slip of the tongue on Fredo’s part reveals that he knows Roth’s right hand man, Johnny Ola (Dominic Chianese, later of The Sopranos). At a New Year’s celebration, as 1959 is ushered in, Michael grasps Fredo face, kissing him. His voice cracking, fighting back tears, Michael tells him, "I know it was you Fredo. You broke my heart." We have learned by now what happens to traitors, even if they’re your own mother’s child. Whatever heart Michael may have had left at the close of The Godfather is now completely gone. Pacino plays him as a cold, stern businessman with no room for humor or warmth. He will fly into a rage when his family is attacked, or when Kay reveals the devastating truth about a miscarriage. But we come into The Godfather Part II with no illusions about Michael or what he has become.

Perhaps realizing this, Director and co-writer Francis Ford Coppola and co-scripter Mario Puzo give us Vito Corleone’s back story which provides the emotional connection we felt with Michael in the first film. Vito Andolini, mistakenly given the last of the town from which he comes upon his entrance into America, is forced from his homeland through no fault of his own. He finds himself struggling to raise a family and loses his job at the grocery due to Don Fanucci ordering the owner to employee a relative. Fanucci is an arrogant, unpleasant thug for whom we feel no grief when Vito kills him. Vito’s early dealings are rather endearing, such as when he intimidates a sleazy landlord to let a lady stay in her apartment. Vito even gets him to lower her rent. We also don’t feel too bad when Vito returns to Sicily and avenges his family’s murders. But again, like Michael in The Godfather, Vito has responded to immorality with immorality and succumbs to the life of crime and power which will result in tragedy for his children.

Coppola also continues the sacrament and sin parallel by opening the film at Michael’s son’s first communion. But the meetings inside his Lake Tahoe home deal with gaming corruption, Connie’s divorce and remarriage, and the request for a hit on rival gangsters. Coppola will take the parallel to even further extremes in Part III, which has the Corleones involved with the Vatican and Michael making confession to a future Pope!

As in the first film, The Godfather Part II is rich in supporting characters. Michael V. Gazzo’s Frank Pentangeli is a nicely textured role that is a blend of bravado and wisdom. Lee Strasberg is superb as Hyman Roth, the back-stabbing conniver who outwardly seems so loyal and trustworthy. And Bruno Kirby brings humor to the role of Clemenza. He and DeNiro have real chemistry in their scenes together.

In The Godfather Brando’s Vito tells Michael, “A man who doesn’t spend time with his family is not a man.” The Godfather Part II continues the story of Michael Corleone and his alienation from the family that seems so important to him. He is a man who seems to have lost his humanity. His father may not have been proud.



My DVD Collection
My Film Blog

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

(I viewed One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest on 12/25/08 but am including it here since I never wrote about it and for Best Picture chronology purposes.)

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) (out of four)

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is the first film since It Happened One Night (1934) to take home the big five Oscars: Picture, Director, Actor, Actress, and Screenplay. (This wouldn’t happen again until 1991’s Silence of the Lambs.) Time has proven the Academy made the right choices. Jack Nicholson delivers one of his signature “Crazy Jack” performances as Randle Patrick McMurphy, and Louise Fletcher’s character made such an impression that “Nurse Ratched” has become a nickname for any unfeeling caregiver. Another film that delights in slapping the face of authority, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is an unexpectedly moving story about life and the human condition inside the confines of a mental hospital.

Randle McMurphy has been sent to a state hospital for the mentally ill for observation. Serving time in prison for statutory rape, McMurphy has been acting crazy. The warden believes Randle is faking it, but sends him anyway. McMurphy meets his fellow patients at a group counseling session presided over by the stern, officious Nurse Ratched. McMurphy grows to dislike the nurse as he observes how she seems to delight in making certain patient’s lives miserable. He starts to form friendships with the hulking Chief Bromden (Will Sampson) and the stuttering Billy Bibbit (Brad Dourif). Soon he finds himself in a struggle with Nurse Ratched for control of the men’s spirits.

Based on Ken Kesey’s 1962 novel, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest may be the pinnacle of the wave of anti-establishment films that arose during the 1960s. Events such as the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War brought about mistrust in authority that resulted in films such as Easy Rider (1969), where young people shunned the “nine-to-five” life and looked for something more meaningful. The famous chicken salad sandwich scene in Five Easy Pieces (1970) is another example. (Both of these films also star Nicholson.) Here, Nicholson’s McMurphy takes on a tyrant who has drained the joy out her charges. She tells them when to eat, when to sleep, and what they can or can’t do. It gets even more troubling when we learn most of the men are voluntary. Even though they can leave Ratched has made them dependent on her. She probably has one of the coldest smiles you’re likely to see.

But amidst the antiseptic atmosphere and unadorned walls of the hospital McMurphy is able to arouse the men’s spirits. When Ratched won’t let the men watch the 1963 World Series, McMurphy stands in front of the television and announces a mock game to the delight of the patients. He kiddingly taunts the 6.5 foot tall Chief on the basketball court. He arranges a little party around Christmas time. And at one point, he commandeers a bus and takes the group on a boating excursion. Initially McMurphy does these things to amuse himself. But the result is that he comes to care about these men. Suddenly they are smiling and laughing again in spite of their difficulties. This does not sit well with Ratched who finds she is losing control of the men. Not surprisingly this leads to tragedy, because people in power always have options others do not. And yet, there is still something stirring and upbeat about the film’s final moments, that even though McMurphy has left the building, so to speak, his positive influence will not be so easily quashed.

Nicholson and Fletcher make fine sparring partners, and the tension their characters generate is at times palpable. They are ably supported by a cast that includes Danny DeVito and Christopher Lloyd in early roles. Scatman Crothers has a brief but humorous bit as an orderly who lets McMurphy talk him into allowing a party. Marya Small is delightful as McMurphy’s girlfriend Candy. But it is Nicholson that we can’t take our eyes off of here as he mugs and merrily dashes about. And Nicholson also effectively conveys the growing rage in McMurphy as he witnesses Ratched’s tactics.

In spite of the heavy subject though One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest emerges as a mostly warm-hearted exercise in restoring the human spirit. Anchored by Jack Nicholson’s performance, this 1975 Oscar winner retains its power to provoke and inspire.



My DVD Collection
My Film Blog

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Khadak - Visually impressive and generally engaging, but somewhat confused. The (European) directors seem to have taken a surface understanding of Mongolian culture and attempted to infuse it with a smattering of Tarkovsky and Paradjanov. It's a jumble of faux-spirituality and mild symbolism, with long takes that serve little purpose. Still, there are some very memorable images (thanks largely to that apparent Paradjanov influence) and the characters are relateable. The highlight is a concert of modernist music using folk instruments. Rating: 6


Cassandra's Dream - Woody Allen retreading the same Dostoyevskian ground he's already covered in Crimes & Misdemeanors and Match Point. It's definitely familiar territory, and with a script that feels far too functional and contrived. But Allen takes it in a different direction at the end, so I give an extra point for that. Ever since The New World, I've gotten over my Colin Farrell hate, and here he does okay (except for occasionally acting too much with his eyebrows) as does Ewan MacGregor. Far from Allen's worst, but even farther from his best. Rating: 7


Anupama - Sharmila Tagore's first two roles (and several subsequent parts) were in Satyajit Ray films, so I thought I'd check out some of her other work. This is a fairly entertaining Bollywood melodrama, with some decent songs and a compelling (though quite predictable) romantic plot. Tagore, playing a very shy girl who rarely speaks, doesn't have all that much to do, but she does it well. Nice cinematography. The main problem is that most of the principal characters are exagerrated to some degree. This is most painfully felt in "Annie" (no doubt a nod to Annette Funicello) who is obnoxiously bubbly and ditzy. But even she settles into a more well-rounded character by the end. The film is rather long (often the case with Bollywood movies), it seems like an 85-minute film somehow stretched out to 140. Rating: 7


Burn After Reading - Chuckle-worthy comedy, nothing great but not offensively horrible either. The gags rely far too much on wacky character quirks and the whole scenario is based on no one being competent at anything. If I thought about it more I'd probably be more annoyed with it, but it was a decent way to forget my godawful back pain for 90 minutes. Rating: 6

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Michael,
Are you just catching the FitzPatrick TravelTalks on TV or are they compiled somewhere, as I find them very interesting.

01/26/09

The Kremlin Letter (1970) Dir: John Huston
Production: 20th Century-Fox

An inactive super spy is drafted back into duty by a shadow intelligence agency to be part of a team sent into Moscow to recover a letter. The letter contains a promise from the U.S. to assist the Soviet Union in 'shutting down' an atomic bomb project of China's. The letter, which amounts to a declaration of war on China, was composed by a high-ranking intel officer with no authorization to make such a promise.

The film takes its spying very seriously. Take the typical Huston worldview, cruel and unforgiving, then add utter ruthlessness, all in an 'official capacity' (as in government sponsored), and you get an exceedingly cynical piece. This is not necessarily a bad thing. The fact that you can't be sure of what will happen next, that there are no rules, and the by-virture-of-the-subject-matter obliqueness of the story, all combine to repeatedly bring the suspense to a full boil. There are complaints about the serpentine nature of the plot, but I wasn't especially turned off by that. I think it all holds up under close inspection and I suspect would do quite well on a repeated viewing.

An indisputable asset of the film is the great cast. Dean Jagger and Richard Boone are the heads of the spy group. Boone nearly makes the whole movie on his own. Patrick O'Neal is not so much the protagonist as the prism through which we view the events unfolding. Nigel Green, Barbara Parkins (VALLEY OF THE DOLLS) and George Sanders (in a role that seems to have upset a few people) make up other members of the team. Amongst the KGB agents and other small roles are the likes of Bergman muse Bibi Andersson, Max von Sydow, Orson Welles, Niall MacGinnis, Lila Kedrova, Marc Lawrence, Huston himself, and Michael MacLiammoir.

As to its reception, the film was a minor critical catastrophe. Small things, like an odd dubbing choice Huston makes (actors would start their lines in Russian but on another audio track under that we would hear the actors translate the line in English--this technique dropped in and out), were focused on. That also didn't bother me. I consider this a superb thriller.

out of 4
------------------------------------------
JOHN HUSTON - "Less Than Meets The Eye"
The Kremlin Letter (1970)


Mario, I see you gave this a low rating, but no review. I'm curious.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

01/26/09

Tales of Manhattan (1942) Dir: Julien Duvivier
Production: 20th Century-Fox

A series of vignettes follows a charmed tailcoat as it is passed from owner to owner. Blockbuster cast and one of the better films of its kind.

1st episode: Charles Boyer sneaks around with fickle married woman Rita Hayworth and plays cat-and-mouse games with jealous husband Thomas Mitchell. Well directed and shot, Hayworth and Mitchell seem to be playing it purposely over-the-top melodramatic. Fun, though.

2nd episode: On the morning of her wedding, Ginger Rogers finds a passionate love note in the jacket pocket of her fiance (Cesar Romero), who quickly gets the best man (Henry Fonda) to take the rap for him. Ginger suddenly finds herself very interested in the man who could elicit such a response from a woman. Disappointment, not as funny as it should have been. Fonda and Rogers probably had more fun than I did.

3rd episode: Charles Laughton is a frustrated composer stuck playing piano in a saloon, until a friend gets him a tryout with the great conductor Arturo Bellini (Victor Francen), who is impressed and gives him his shot. Wife Elsa Lanchester buys him a tailcoat for his debut, but it proves tragically too small. Gets downright piteous at one point before an inspiring finish.

4th episode: James Gleason is a soup kitchen worker who receives a letter addressed to one of the skid row bums, Edward G. Robinson. The letter is an invitation to his college reunion. They clean up Edward G. and outfit him with a new dress coat so he can go to the dinner. A touching tale of second chances.

Interlude: A hilarious sequence originally cut from the film, added 50 years later for the VHS release. Phil Silvers is a tailor and W.C. Fields is a customer with a midget sidekick named Schickelgruber. I shouldn't have to say anything more than that. Armed with his new coat, Fields gives a lecture to a temperance society headed by Margaret Dumont, as the members drink spiked coconut milk.

5th episode: A thief (J. Carrol Naish) fleeing the country by prop plane is forced to throw his jacket, stuffed with $50G's, overboard after it catches fire. It lands in the hands of destitute sharecroppers Paul Robeson and Ethel Waters who consider it a gift from God. This is a strange one. Robeson gets to espouse his Marxist views and at the same time it's some sort of religious allegory. Rochester plays the reverend they go to for advice. The role so upset Robeson that he declared himself through with Hollywood "until movie magnates found some other way to portray the Negro besides the usual 'plantation hallelujah shouters.'" Didn't he read the script?!!?

out of 4
------------------------------------------
W.C. FIELDS - "Make Way For The Clowns!"
The Big Broadcast of 1938 (1938) , Tales of Manhattan (1942)

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Charlie Chan in Honolulu (1938)

This was the first Chan film in which Sidney Toler took over the main role from Warner Oland, and he is immediately masterful and acceptable in the part of the Asian detective. I didn't expect to enjoy Toler, not only since I am an Oland fan, but because my first exposure to him was through seeing one of his later mediocre Monogram Chan quickies from the '40s. But this debut has Toler in fine and confident form.

The film begins with a humorous dinner at the Chan home, with Charlie's wife and 10+ children. We quickly establish who the detective is and where he comes from, and then we see that his enthusiastic #2 son Jimmy (well played by Victor Sen Yung) is as excited about being a detective as his older #1 brother Lee had been in the Oland series. When a call arrives for Chan to investigate a murder aboard a small freighter, son Jimmy intercepts and decides to impersonate his dad to get some quality sleuthing in. Some fun happenings ensue before Charlie Chan himself gets wind of it and ultimately joins Jimmy on board to handle the case.

This is an all-around entertaining chapter in the series, with assistance too from George Zucco, as one of the mysterious suspects aboard the ship who collects criminal brains. There are some annoying bits by one of those typical "silly 1930s funnymen" used for comic relief in the mix, but what makes it all work is how effortlessly Sidney Toler and Sen Yung slip into their roles formerly undertaken by Warner Oland and Keye Luke, as the new father and son.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

1/24 The Hidden Fortress (1958):

I wanted to watch this film mostly to see the inspiration for the droids in Star Wars. I found The Hidden Fortress decent enough, if a bit stretched out in spots. I'm not sure if I was supposed to find the peasants quite so pathetic. Mifune's character and the princess were the only characters I could really get behind, and they did not have great roles to play. From the trailer included on the disc, it sounds like it would have been more impressive to the people of the time.

1/27 VeggieTales: An Easter Carol (2003): 1/2

This is an adaptation of Dickens' A Christmas Carol to the Easter holiday. It succeeds in getting the message of Easter across and being entertaining. The standout sequence is easily "Hope's Song." The story loses marks for including a mostly gratuitous factory explosion at the end. Also, I might have enjoyed it more if I had seen The Star of Christmas first, since this film follows after those events.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Scoop (2006)

I watched this one for the second time, and enjoyed it a bit more than the first view - so I've boosted the rating up a half star. Strange, but the first time I saw it in the theater I really thought Woody Allen came across as way too sluggish and old, but maybe since I'm currently used to watching a lot of his films at once, he seemed fine this time.

In this somewhat familiar story, the 70-year-old Allen plays a rambling stage magician in London who gets unwillingly roped into helping a young woman (Scarlett Johansson) find out the true identity of a potential serial killer (Hugh Jackman). The girl is an aspiring reporter who receives a tip from the spirit of a recently deceased writer that Jackman may be her man.

Woody had just made the superior and steamy drama MATCH POINT with Scarlett Johansson and was probably taken with her, so he tried casting her here alongside himself in something comical. At least he's beginning to realize he has become too long in the tooth to continue playing younger girls' love interests, and so he assumes the role of go-between mentor to the two young leads. Unsurprisingly, Jackman and Johansson are destined to become romantically involved as Scarlett pursues her investigation. Hugh Jackman is fine in his part, and though upon my first viewing of this I didn't quite buy Johansson's performance, a second look found her characterization working for me.

This film is only occasionally humorous and rather middle of the road as far as the director's overall dossier is concerned. I'm always game to continue seeing Woody cast himself in his own future comedies, so long as he keeps writing them more in line with his advancing age. Who knows, maybe he can make a senior citizen type of farce one day.

Re: Track the Films You Watch (2009)

Comedy Day #3:


01/26/09: KISS ME GOODBYE (Robert Mulligan, 1982)

This is an Americanization of the popular Brazilian film DONA FLOR AND HER TWO HUSBANDS (1976), which I own in a rather dismal print recorded off French Cable TV but haven’t yet watched. Though a minor effort by this director, as a romantic comedy/fantasy – especially for a title emanating from the 1980s – it’s fair, aided in no small measure by a good cast: Sally Field as the woman torn between two loves; James Caan as ghostly husband No. 1, a star Broadway choreographer; Jeff Bridges as her current “boring” intended, an Egyptologist (ironically, he gets the best lines); Claire Trevor as Fields’ outspoken mum, who adores Caan but can’t stomach Bridges; and Paul Dooley as Bridges’ assistant, who also happens to be an ex-priest. The film is a pleasant enough trifle but, obviously, a long way behind the Noel Coward/David Lean BLITHE SPIRIT (1945) – which had one husband and two ‘sparring’ wives – or, for that matter, the innumerable screwball comedy classics (usually featuring Cary Grant as the husband who won’t give up his bride and eventually gets her back) of the late 1930s and early 40s. To get back to the highlights: Bridges embarrasses Field at an isolated resort (to which Caan is also ‘invited’) by pretending to see himself a former acquaintance; when another vacationer witnessing the scene helpfully admits that she can barely make her out too, Bridges blows his top and insults her in front of the woman’s perplexed husband! During the wedding rehearsal, Bridges brings Dooley along to drive away Caan’s ghost once and for all: asking him to remain inconspicuous throughout, the would-be exorcist immediately begins loudly spouting Latin chants, with Bridges snapping: “You call that being nonchalant?!” Finally, during this same climactic sequence, Trevor’s amateur electrician husband gets locked in the attic, the door to which is guarded by their pet dog; believing the man’s pleas for help to be coming from the latter, Dooley alerts Bridges that Caan’s ghost has possessed the canine…with the result that the Egyptologist then has a hard time explaining to the guests his attempt to strangle it!


01/26/09: GHOSTS CAN’T DO IT (John Derek, 1990) BOMB

I’ve now watched all four Bo Derek vehicles directed by her husband, John; all are quite terrible, of course, but this is certainly the pits. Featuring the usual flimsy plot, bad scripting – by the director, naturally – and acting, not to mention gratuitous nudity by the star, it deals with her losing much older husband Anthony Quinn (she accepts his shotgun suicide by saying he had always admired Hemingway!!) but who continues to appear and talk to her. In fact, he wants to come back in another, younger body…but actually does so only in the very last scene! Derek is lovely as always, and still playing naïve(!) – especially during a muddled mid-section which has her pursued by a hired killer at a spa. Quinn, too, is typically larger-than-life (read: hammy) here, but this easily constitutes his nadir; besides, for much of the duration, he acts from behind a piece of shiny plastic (presumably suggesting his being in some sort of limbo)! His ‘replacement’, then, is obviously a handsome-looking stud who hasn’t a lick of talent or even personality. Also featured in the cast are Hollywood veterans Don Murray (as Quinn’s best friend and Bo’s business consultant) and Julie Newmar (as Quinn’s guardian angel in the afterlife) – plus a surprising cameo appearance by billionaire Donald Trump (who presumably needed this on his resume`)! It also goes without saying that John Derek was his own cinematographer on the film, that the end credits are filled with useless (and corny) expressions of gratitude to the many people who lent a helping hand, and that GHOSTS CAN’T DO IT swept the board at the 1990 Razzie Awards!