Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
renegadeviking-271-528568
https://letterboxd.com/renegadeviking/ http://youtube.com/renegadeviking
http://isgb.blogspot.com http://iainthegreat.wordpress.com
http://tiktok.com/@fb22strikeraptor http://instagram.com/fb22strikeraptor
https://www.rfgeneration.com/cgi-bin/collection.pl?&name=renegadeviking&folder=Collection https://www.discogs.com/user/renegadeviking
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try again![](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOTM1ZjczZjgtMTI3ZC00Njg0LThiMGUtNmM4OTkyODdmZjYxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTg3NjAxNzI@._V1_SY86_CR23,0,86,86_.jpg)
![](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOGQzZTBjMjQtOTVmMS00NGE5LWEyYmMtOGQ1ZGZjNmRkYjFhXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjUzOTY1NTc@._V1_SX86_CR0,0,86,86_.jpg)
https://plus.google.com/117219064164364800507?prsrc=5 http://www.youtube.com/user/renegadeviking http://isgb.blogspot.com http://iainthegreat.wordpress.com
![](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYmQyNTA1ZGItNjZjMi00NzFlLWEzMWEtNWMwN2Q2MjJhYzEyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjUzOTY1NTc@._V1_SX86_CR0,0,86,86_.jpg)
![](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BZjRlMzhkODktMmJiYS00NjUyLWExNzgtMzY5ZGUxMTNjYjRlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjQzNDI3NzY@._V1_SX86_CR0,0,86,86_.jpg)
Reviews
N.H.K ni yôkoso! (2006)
Welcome to the N.H.K. review
The N. H. K. Is a collection. Collection of troubles and problems we can meet in our life. It doesn't perceive as anime. It doesn't perceive as something fictitious. It is life. Hateful everyday life gets emotional colors and draws a wide reaction with slowly walking real life on the our side of screen.
In "NHK" everyday events are not shown grotesque and mockingly as in parodies and not weightly depressed as in psychological thrillers but somehow chaotically and tragicomicly - you want to weep, smile, think ironically and philosophize simultaneously. Every joke provokes not a roar of laughter but the sad smile as you recognize yourself and your troubles in "fictional" heroes.
Even if you have a job, relatives, interests, it doesn't change anything. You aren't able to get rid of solitude if you feel your purposelessness and pettiness. If you laugh, you laughter is insincere. If you cry, you wail. Problem of self-concept and fear of the life is urgent for many people, but the feeling of hopelessness and despair appears only when there is nobody to support you. You've got tired from struggle along on your's own not at once but gradually. It happens little by little but it does. There are no N. H. K., there is no god, there are only nonchalance, loneliness and despair. You think that people around get everything easier and live merrily and sociable but you simply can not see the same as you as they also are dissociated from the world. It is impossible to meet for such humans but only they can understand each other. It is very hard and cruel. In "NHK" it is shown somehow exaggeratedly but the inner life is described entirely faithful. Psychology is described as much as possible faithfully, all the reasons are named correctly, emphases are placed where they needed.
Art and sound do for this work and don't have any serious shortcomings. All the aspects of this anime are high qualitative.
Such masterpiece anime must be a conspiracy... Conspiracy against what?
Ôkami to kôshinryô (2008)
Spice and Wolf review
Great show. Refreshing medieval drama without corny magic (stunning historically accurate and fun depiction of medieval economics and commerce), immensely likeable main characters, awesome period-appropriate soundtrack, amazing dub, good art. Watch this show, despite the unfortunate cliffhanger ending of Season 2.
This is a great lesson on 'Never judge a book by the cover'. That said, I wish they had a better cover... Spice and Wolf was marketed with a half-naked furry wolf girl. Like most people, I was repulsed by it at first sight. Little did I know this seemingly shallow fanservice poster girl is one of the deepest characters in any anime ever, and the show is far better than the light novels it's based on.
Spice and Wolf doesn't have a grand story - but follows the motivations of its two main characters - Lawrence, a traveling merchant, and Holo, an outcast diety traveling with him. This gives the show freedom to deeply invest into its arcs, and use them as an excellent form of character-building. It also does something great - leaves a lot unsaid, but does it so tastefully that it creates mystery and intrigue rather than frustration.
Besides one of the characters being an outcast god, this is an incredibly low-fantasy, low-magic medieval drama, and I haven't seen anything quite like it in Anime - that I enjoyed.
The main characters are incredible. They're fun, intelligent, and never compromised to move the plot along. When something happens, it almost always makes sense given the characters' motivations and flaws. The character flaws are so well written, which lets the characters be defined by their shortcomings as much as their strengths. It's great to see them experience joy, fear, exhileration, jealousy, rage... All in complex, unique, believable ways.
The side characters aren't as great, but their screen time is so limited that I don't care, they serve their purpose and don't overstay their welcome. Bonus points because the English Dub is far better than the Japanese and brings out the characters way more.
The animation isn't groundbreaking or extravagant, but is thoughtful and gorgeous. It captures the setting of a medieval world before the advent of mass industry, blending undisturbed nature with primitive settlements and medieval cities, all without obnoxious fantasy outfits and outlandish weapons. They changed the studio in the second season, but honestly the different style works pretty well too.
The soundtrack is great - Yuuji Yoshino seems to have gone to great lengths to specifically use historically accurate instrumentation and techniques, and it shows. Everything hits home, from the festival music (there's a LOT of festival music) to the darker, suspenful tracks.
I can't talk about the sound without bringing this up. WATCH. THE. DUB. The Japanese voices can't hold a candle to the English. J. Michael Tatum is a genius, and Brina Palencia is the definitive Holo. The Japanese voices are full of Anime cliches - and once removed, this show has almost none, making it a truly refreshing watch.
Don't miss it.
Tensei shitara ken deshita (2022)
Reincarnated as a Sword review
The genre that has been done so much, to the point that these days, one has to really hit a lot or marks, in order to not only stand out. But to be one of the more enjoyable and good Isekais, that you, or your friends, or anyone would be recommending to you, and that you should check out and watch, as it would be worth your time and more so. This is one of those shows. An Isekai with care and class, that makes it an enjoyable watch from start to finish. Let me explain how.
Story and characters: 9
What makes this one stand out first and foremost is of course the concept itself. Instead of being Isekai'd into a OP person, child, or what not. Instead your a sword?! Finally, a different niche for a change! But that's not all, as you'll come to find with this anime, it's a coming of age type, it's a work for it, rather than seemingly being OP from the get go. The anime does a great job step by step, of showing off growth, and doesn't seem to be rushing things at all. That goes from the training of the sword itself, to Fran's journey in general. As if they're taking their time, and letting us see how the characters grow and learn, how they become strong as you will. Which will explain how they're good. Hard work pays off. Rather than already being the best, like some shows do. But let me go more in detail on these characters,as they're a highlight in themselves.
Fran as I've mentioned, gosh she's adorable. If one thing you may be watching this anime for, it's more to want to see her grow and develop. To see her finally evolve as she puts it. To prove any doubts, and doubters wrong about her, and her kind. That she can rise and become strong. But the best thing is as I've stated, is that we're gonna be right there with her. It's like the start of an RPG. At the start. You're decent, but you're hardly strong at all. While sure, in Fran's case, it helps having a strong sword, a magical one at that, but through the anime's story, it's really shown how the hard work of it all pays off and more so. As we'll see her go from the start of her journey, to hopefully where she wants to be. Not to mention how good of the team these two are, it's a team you can root for, and we're bound to meet many other colourful characters along the way, while cheering on this good duo.
As for the sword themselves, they're quite energetic, but with a good head, or handle I should say on their shoulders. Willing to support Fran on her journey, which is great to see, and also furthers my point in that they make a good team.
Art and sound: 8
I really adore the OP and ED for this one, it's got a great track, and is great to listen to. Much like the overall animation, that really blends well together throughout the show. There won't be parts in some areas, that will blow you away, but what is shown, is real care given to the look, presentation, and how everything sounds and blends together. It's really well handled, and will make the experience of watching this, oh so better.
Tensei is a real fun coming of age story, that'll be enjoyable from start to finish. I would recommend to watch it here and now.
Sonic Prime (2022)
Sonic Prime review
The fury blue hedgehog is back, coming to Netflix in his new show, Sonic Prime. In this series, Sonic accidentally shatters a magic crystal called the Paradox Prism, sending himself, and all of his friends (and foes!) into alternate dimensions with twisted realities. In order to return to his own world, Sonic must speed through dangerous universes where his friends are no longer the friendly animals he once knew, and retrieve the broken shards of the Paradox Prism in order to restore the multiverse.
Sonic Prime serves to reintroduce Sonic to a television platform, utilizing the latest in CGI animation to give the blue hedgehog elegant imagery and action. Sonic Prime is an homage to the latest SEGA/Nintendo games of the franchise, with vast and colorful settings and design, humorous quips from Sonic and supporting characters, and an easy-enough plotline for the younger audience to follow. Just as in the two Sonic the Hedgehog films from Paramount, Sonic retains his family-friendly tone.
As a work of cinema, and animation cinema at that, Sonic Prime essentially goes through the motions, hitting familiar storytelling tropes and simply playing with the current trend of "multiverse" tales in Hollywood. Hopping on the train along with Spider-Man: No Way Home, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, and Everything Everywhere All at Once, Sonic's new show adds to the popular theme of crossing through dimension and battling variant characters. No real surprises await the viewer, and it is clear that Sonic Prime has intentions to entertain the kids with spunk and heroism.
While Sonic Prime may not break any new cinematic ground, there's no doubt that fans will marvel over the multiverse journey, and this first season of the show absolutely leaves the viewer wanting to see where Sonic's adventure takes him next. Being a multiverse, the possibilities are endless, and I have no doubt the animation artistry will continue to dazzle. Needless to say, Sonic Prime will most likely stay in its lane without taking any risks or exploring any deeper meaning, but so long as it pleases its audience, Sonic will certainly remain a source of excitement and high entertainment.
Blood from the Mummy's Tomb (1971)
Blood from the Mummy's Tomb review
Hammer Films produced four Mummy movies between 1959 and 1971 and one of my favorites is Seth Holt's BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB (1971). This unabashedly sexy horror extravaganza was the last Mummy movie made by the Studio that Dripped Blood and thanks to a great cast and some creative directing choices it turned out to be one of their best. But before it reached the screen the production was plagued by some serious setbacks that seemed to resemble the consequences of a 'mummy's curse' typically associated with doomed adventure seekers and tomb raiders. Was it just circumstance and bad luck or did something supernatural interfere with the making of this Hammer film? Read on to learn more!
Loosely based on Bram Stoker's The Jewel of Seven Stars, BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB is a surprisingly gory (by Hammer standards) variation of the typical mummy story involving a group of explorers that discover a cursed mummy's tomb and unwittingly unleash a monster on the world. But this time the monster isn't a lumbering cloth-wrapped creature, it's a beautiful curvaceous brunette named Queen Tera (Valerie Leon) wearing a bejeweled gold-laden costume. The evil mummy Queen plans to vanquish her enemies, gather her plundered treasure, and walk the earth in a new human form but that won't be easy. First, she must take control of a lookalike young woman named Margret (also played by Leon) who was born on the same day that Margret's father (Andrew Keir) and his cronies unearthed Queen Tera's tomb in Egypt.
The cast is uniformly terrific and includes many horror and science fiction film veterans that genre fans should recognize. Bond girl Valerie Leon leads the pack and the statuesque beauty is perfect in her duel role as a naïve young woman and a cutthroat queen who is able to easily bend men to her will. Although she only appeared in one Hammer production Leon is the epitome of 'Hammer Glamor.'
Leon's father is played by Andrew Keir who was a familiar face at Hammer studio thanks to his memorable appearances in THE PIRATES OF BLOOD RIVER (1962), THE DEVIL-SHIP PIRATES (1964), DRACULA; PRINCE OF DARKNESS (1966), THE VIKING QUEEN (1967) and QUATERMASS AND THE PITT (1967). Other familiar faces include James Villiers (THE DAMNED; 1963, THE NANNY; 1965, REPULSION; 1965, ASYLUM; 1972), Rosalie Crutchley (THE GAMMA PEOPLE; 1956, THE HAUNTING; 1963, WHOEVER SLEW AUNTIE ROO?; 1971, AND NOW THE SCREAMING STARTS; 1973), Aubrey Morris (BLOOD BEAST FROM OUTER SPACE; 1965, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE; 1971, THE WICKER MAN; 1973, LIFEFORCE; 1985) and James Cossins (THE LAST CONTINENT; 1968, HORROR OF FRANKENSTEIN; 1971, DEATH LINE; 1972, FEAR IN THE NIGHT; 1972).
Most surprisingly, 68-year-old George Coulouris shows up as an asylum inmate driven mad by the discovery of the lovely mummy. Coulouris is probably best remembered by classic film fans for his award-winning role in CITIZEN KANE (1941) but late in his career he appeared in a number of horror films including THE SKULL (1965) and THE ANTICHRIST (1974).
Andrew Keir's role was originally supposed to be played by Peter Cushing but as I mentioned earlier, the film survived some major setbacks before it was released. Was BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB truly cursed? I'm sure that's what a few cast members must have assumed when its star was suddenly forced to leave the film after his wife's health took a turn for the worse. When Peter Cushing's wife died a few days later the sad event shocked the cast and crew. Unfortunately, this wouldn't be the only death that occurred during film production.
Director Seth Holt was particularly taken aback by the news. Holt had helmed two of Hammer's most distinguished black and white films, SCREAM OF FEAR (1961) and THE NANNY (1965) but BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB would be his first and final full-color film for the studio. The director was highly respected by Hammer producers who gave Holt full control over his films. This meant that he had final say over the script and the editing but the heavy workload, as well as the tremendous responsibility, must have been taxing.
Five weeks into the six week shooting schedule, Holt suffered a fatal heart attack. The director was only 48-years-old and his sudden and unexpected death was blamed on excessive alcohol use combined with exhaustion. In the wake of this unfortunate incident, Hammer producer and director Michael Carreras (MANIAC; 1963, THE LOST CONTINENT; 1968, PREHISTORIC WOMEN; 1967, SHATTER; 1974, ETC.) was forced to step in and finish the film but fortunately, Holt left behind detailed notes and instructions on how he had planned to complete the movie. As a result BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB still retains much of Holt's unique sensibility and visual flair. With only a handful of movies under his belt the director managed to establish himself as a distinct talent who remains an important part of Hammer horror history.
When the film was finally released it received fairly positive reviews with critics being especially taken by the lovely Leon who was called a "500 percent knockout" by New York Times critic Roger Greenspun. But in another unfortunate twist, this would end up being the only starring role the budding British actress had. Besides her stunning good looks, Valerie Leon was a skilled performer and charismatic screen presence who showed exceptional ability and range in the duel role of Margret/Queen Tera. It's easy to assume after watching the film that she would go on to much bigger roles that made use of her talents but that didn't happen. Maybe she was just another victim of the BLOOD FROM THE MUMMY'S TOMB curse?
The Ghost Ship (1943)
The Ghost Ship review
In any collection of films, there has to be one that's the "least", the one that just doesn't hit the right buttons hard enough, or which just somehow feels lacking in some way. And for the nine Val Lewton horror films, it's The Ghost Ship (1943). Not that it's a bad film at all, far from it - just that when stacked against the films surrounding it, it inevitably pales a little, though certainly not by much. It's still a fascinating film but when you're up against the likes of I Walked with a Zombie (1943), The Seventh Victim (1943), The Curse of the Cat People (1944) et al, any film would start to look a bit ordinary.
In a change of direction, Lewton and his director Mark Robson and screenwriter Donald Henderson Clarke (working from a story by Leo Mittler), largely abandon any pretence at the supernatural here. Lewton's productions are famed for their ambiguous approach, hinting at things supernatural but leaving enough wiggle room to allow for more mundane answers to the mysteries. Here the ambiguity comes from a different direction. The only hint of something otherworldly comes at the very start of the film when Tom Merriam (Russell Wade), making his way to take up the post of third officer aboard the ship Altair ("played" by stock footage of the Ventura from King Kong (1933)), meets an old blind beggar (Alec Craig) who warns him of the terrible fate awaiting him ("nothing but bad luck and bad blows at sea"), sightless but seemingly able to see things that other can't.
Merriam should have heeded his warnings about the Altair as, although he seems at first to get on with Captain Will Stone (Richard Dix), a series of deaths occur aboard the ship which at first seem accidental: "the Greek" dies from the effects of appendicitis; Louie (an uncredited Lawrence Tierney) dies horribly, crushed to death by the ship's anchor chain after suggesting to the captain that they take on new crew to make up the shortfall; and further deaths are narrowly averted when the ship's hook comes loose and swings perilously around the deck after Stone refused to allow it to be secured. Merriam comes to suspect that the captain is murderously insane, obsessed with his need to maintain his authority over the crew, but his men are so blindly loyal to him that no-one will listen to his warnings. Is Stone really mad - or is Merriam just imagining it all?
So this time, the ambiguity springs not from whether there are supernatural forces at work or not, but from whether or not Stone is insane enough to allow his men to die if they cross him. By the climax, all that ambiguity is gone as Stone cracks completely, menacing a bound and gagged restrained Merriam with a blade that turns into a quite brutal knife fight with mute crewman Finn (an uncredited Skelton Knaggs) that gives lie to the myth that all of Lewton's films were subtle and restrained. Stone fears nothing so much as losing his precious authority (there's something deeply unsettling about the way Rix pronounces that single word) and his control over his cowed crew. As such it can be read as an allegory for conformity and more particularly for fascism. Stone has no respect for his men ("men are worthless cattle" he opines) and all that matters to him is that his law is obeyed to the letter, and any man that stands in his way is casually disposed of. Rix plays him superbly, a chilling presence whose calm demeanour hides a man seething with insecurities and hatreds.
There's no disguising the fact that the film was made on the cheap. The film exists mainly because Lewton was told by producers RKO that he should make use of the standing ocean liner sets left over from Orson Welles' Journey into Fear (1943). Lewton had wanted to shoot a fantasy comedy titled The Amorous Ghost but the idea fell on stoney ground at RKO whose head of production Charles Koerner wanted Lewton and his B-movie unit kept busy after The Curse of the Cat People had been delayed. It was he who came up with the title and the idea of reusing existing sets and it was Lewton who came up with the idea of a murderous captain: Edmund G. Bansak in his book Fearing the Dark: The Val Lewton Career (2003) writes that "this story about a demented sea captain obsessed with authority and petty details seems to bear a significant relevance to Lewton's own seafaring attitudes. Others may argue that Lewton more likely envisioned The Ghost Ship's Captain Stone as a parallel to the authority-conscious RKO executives. Both views are probably correct; Lewton, who revised the script and rewrote many lines of dialogue, may have been thinking he was lashing out at his superiors, but through the process of dissociation, he was also providing us with a villain who possessed some negative traits not unlike his own."
Other signs that the film was made cheaply are the aforementioned scenes featuring the Ventura (the image is optically flipped left to right to try to disguise the source) and the reuse of sets from Gone With the Wind for the port that the ship briefly calls in at. That port is on the island of San Sebastian, a fictional Caribbean island last seen in I Walked with a Zombie (which, like The Ghost Ship, also featured Lewton regular Sir Lancelot performing a calypso) and which would turn up again later in the non-Lewton film, Zombies on Broadway (1945). With Cat People (1942) and The Seventh Victim linked by the presence of the character Dr Louis Judd, this marks the second time that Lewton and/or his writers would try to link two or more of their films together in a very subtle, easy to overlook way.
Sadly, not many people got a chance to spot the connection. The film was released in the States on Christmas Eve 1943 but was gone two months later after playwrights Samuel R. Golding and Norbert Faulkner successfully sued Lewton claiming that he'd plagiarised their 1942 play A Man and His Shadow which they'd earlier submitted to him as a possible source for one of his films. Lewton always denied the charge, but the courts sided with the writers (ordering RKO to pay up $35,000 in damages) and The Ghost Ship was yanked from distribution, turning up only fitfully on television and at one-off screenings for many decades and it became one of the hardest to find of the nine Lewton horrors. Lewton himself was said to have been deeply upset by the whole affair, becoming depressed and scrapping two further horror films already in development. In the aftermath he made the already-in-development The Curse of the Cat People before taking a break from the genre with Mademoiselle Fifi (1944) and Youth Runs Wild (1944). There would be further problems with the production of Isle of the Dead (1945) before he oversaw his final two horror classics, The Body Snatcher (1945) and Bedlam (1946).
The Awakening (1980)
The Awakening review
Eighteen years ago, Egyptologist Matthew Corbeck (Charlton Heston) was in Egypt with his pregnant wife (Jill Townsend) and his comely assistant (Susannah York), looking for the tomb of an Egyptian queen whose name had been erased from history because she was bad news-REAL bad news. Of course, he ends up finding the tomb, but as he's breaking the seal on the outer door, a wind rushes out and travels to his pregnant wife. Now, in the present day, his daughter (Stephanie Zimbalist) is about to turn eighteen, but she's not feeling like herself these days...and Dad is beginning to believe that he can bring the dead queen back to life via an incantation that was found in her tomb.
The Awakening is an adaptation of a novel by Bram Stoker, the author of Dracula, that had already been filmed twice in the preceding ten years-first for television in 1970 as an episode of Mystery and Imagination, a British anthology series, and a year later as Blood from the Mummy's Tomb, a co-production between Hammer Films and American International Pictures. I don't know what the statute of limitations is for remakes, but nine years seems a little too soon to remake a film to me. I could be right, as The Awakening didn't cause much of a stir at the box office. It died a relatively quick and painless death in theaters, then went on to become a fairly early VHS release.
The problems with the film are pretty obvious: a star well past his prime; a TV director making his first studio film; an attempt to ride on the coattails of The Exorcist and The Omen while moviegoers were paying to see slasher films; a muddled script; and what appears to be post-production tampering by the studio. Even with these problems, the film is still watchable, thanks largely to the camerawork by Jack Cardiff (Black Narcissus, The Red Shoes, The African Queen) and the lush music score by Claude Bolling. The music was good enough to convince the tiny label Entr'acte to release a soundtrack LP-if you want to listen to it, here's a recording from vinyl on YouTube:
Even though it's not a terribly good movie, and the film ends before anything really fun happens, I still find myself being drawn to the film over and over again. I think that I've owned the film on four different formats over the years, with the latest being the Blu-ray released by Scream Factory. There's not even the slightest shudder to be found, but I trot it out and watch it every few years anyway. There's something there that's appealing, but I sure can't put my finger on what it is. Your mileage may vary, however; you may find the film to be more akin to The Put-to-Sleeping than The Awakening.
As I said earlier, the film didn't make a whole lot of money in theaters, and it got bad reviews from the critics who stooped to review it. Here's Siskel & Ebert's take on the film from their show Sneak Previews (it's the first film reviewed in the episode):
I certainly don't want to dissuade anyone from watching The Awakening, however, because it's watchable and might appeal to those who like mummy movies and/or any of the lesser Indiana Jones films. Here's the theatrical trailer from YouTube; it might convince you to give the feature a watch:
And just for funzies, here's one of the TV spots that have been uploaded to YouTube. You've got to admit that this advertisement at least makes the film look interesting:
The full film doesn't seem to be streaming anywhere on the Web, but you can rent a stream of it from several of the usual providers. It's also available on DVD from the Warner Archive via Amazon, and on Blu-ray from Shout! Factory at your favorite online media retailer.
But-to make up for the lack of a link to the full feature, I've got a super-secret surprise down here in the swamp for the more literary-minded among you: links to the full text of the novel on which The Awakening was based, Bram Stoker's The Jewel of Seven Stars!
Isle of the Dead (1945)
Isle of the Dead review
Mark Robson's third film as director for Val Lewton (after The Seventh Victim (1943) and The Ghost Ship (1943)) took its inspiration and title from a series of paintings made by Swiss symbolist Arnold Böcklin between 1880 and 1901, depicting a gloomy, castle-like structure on a forbidding island towards which a small boat bearing what is usually regarded as a coffin, is making its way. One of the paintings can be seen behind the opening title sequence and inspired a marvellous matte painting seen later in the film.
In terms of production, it marked the first time that Lewton and his team worked with Boris Karloff who had returned to his old stomping grounds at Universal after a short break away from Hollywood appearing in the touring production o the Broadway hit Arsenic and Old Lace. But Karloff had been dismayed at the way that horror films were going at Universal and, after making his comeback in the classier-than-usual The Climax (1944) and appearing in House of Frankenstein (1944), he jumped ship and headed for RKO, signing a new contract on 18 May 1944 and the Lewton B-unit seemed his most logical home. For his part, Lewton was initially unimpressed at having a horror star on board, one associated with the very kind of films that he was keen to distance his own work from. But having sat down for a chat with his new star, he was delighted to find that they shared the same ideas about what the genre should be and they hit it off famously. Which, given the problems that the actor was about to inadvertently cause him, was probably just as well.
Karloff, as magnificent as ever (his trio of films with Lewton really brought him back to his best form) plays General Pherides of the Greek army during the Balkan Wars of 1912 who, during a lull in the fighting, is visited by American journalist Oliver Davis (Marc Cramer). He persuades Pherides to allow him to accompany him to a nearby island, the eponymous Isle of the Dead, to pay their respects to the General's long-dead wife. However, they discover that her tomb has been broken into her, her coffin empty and are startled by the sounds of a woman singing. They find that they're not alone on the supposedly deserted island - retired Swiss archaeologist Dr Aubrecht (Jason Robards Sr) has set up home there with his Greek housekeeper Madame Kyra (Helen Thimig), and his guests British diplomat St. Aubyn (Alan Napier) and his sickly wife (Katherine Emery), her young Greek companion Thea (Ellen Drew), and English tinsmith Andrew Robbins (Skelton Knaggs). Aubrecht admits that 15 years earlier, he had encouraged the locals to rob graves for valuable Greek artifacts while Kyra mutters ominously about a vorvolaka, a sort of energy vampire, that she believes is among them in the shape of Thea. Things take a turn for the sinister when Robbins dies in the night and Pherides' medic, Dr Drossos (Ernst Deutsch) reveals that he died of septicaemic plague and quarantines the island, explaining that when the imminent hot, dry sirocco winds arrive, they will drive the infection away. As more bodies mount up, Kyra continues to claim that Thea is a vorvolaka and Mrs St. Aubyn falls into a cataleptic trance and is entombed. But she's really still alive and driven murderously insane on waking in her coffin, her greatest fear. Will there be anyone left alive to escape the Isle of the Dead when the sirocco arrives?
Isle of the Dead is smothered in a doom-laden atmosphere from the very start, a sense of dread that starts with the opening text crawl that cautions of the vorvolaka and never lets up. Beautifully shot by Jack MacKenzie, it's a gloomy and sombre film, poetic and occasionally haunting, doing a sterling job in capturing the claustrophobia and isolation of the island. Ardel Wray provides a talky but compelling script, full of the usual Lewton obsessions about the struggle between science and superstition: "We'll make a wager," says Albrecht at one point. "The doctor can use his science and I'll pray to Hermes. We'll see who dies and who is saved." As it turns out both men succumb to the plague so the film remains open minded about which is the more useful approach to the problem.
As ever, there's a degree of ambiguity about Wray's script. Were kept guessing for some time about whether there really is a vorvolaka abroad on the island though by the end we're pretty sure what the answer is. The late-in-the-day introduction of the mad, knife-wielding Mrs St Aubyn feels a little tacked on and certainly the threat she poses is wrapped up far too quickly and neatly, though her "resurrection" provides one of the film's most memorable moments: a marvelous, slow zoom in on her tomb, a cut away just as we hear a muffled moan from within for a brief interlude with Pherides and David, before suddenly cutting back, the camera zooming back again as a scream and frantic scratching at the coffin lid is heard.
There are plenty nuances to Wray's typically lyrical script. There's a suggestion that Kyra's superstition, a form of madness, is as contagious as the plague, even the world-weary old warhorse Pherides falling for her ravings. Though in practice, no-one but the two of them - and crucially us - ever really believes that Thea is a supernatural creature,. Elsewhere, Wray is suggesting that the horrors of war and its effects on the minds and bodies of its combatants are the real enemies here, more so than the plague and any imaginary supernatural monster. As with all of Wray's work for Lewton, it's a bold and very literate script that reveals more subtleties with every rewatch.
Production of the film was a troubling time for all involved. Shooting began in July 1944, but production was shut down after just two weeks when Karloff's back gave out. He'd injured it while performing rigorous manual labour for the B. C. Electric Railway Company many years earlier, before his acting career had begun, an injury further aggravated by the heavy shoes he'd been required to wear while playing the Frankenstein monster. Surgery was required and although he was up and about and ready to start work again soon enough, Lewton couldn't get the original Isle of the Dead team back together until December 1944 and in the interim, he had Robert Wise direct Karloff in The Body Snatcher which made it into cinemas four months before the reactivated Isle of the Dead.
Occasionally, the disjointed production shows in some odd lapses in the story and particularly in that rushed way they finish off the Mrs St Aubyn rampage. But on the whole, Isle of the Dead is a highly creditable addition to the Lewton stable, too often under-appreciated today (though Martin Scorsese hailed it the "11th scariest horror movie of all time" on The Daily Beast website in 2009), but worth it for a fantastic turn from Karloff, an atmosphere you can cut with a knife and some interesting call-backs to a previous Lewton productions - like I Walked with a Zombie (1943), it's set on a remote island where a clash of cultures plays out and Thea's wandering around the grounds of the huge graveyard in pursuit of an ethereal Mrs St Aubyn echoes the earlier film's famous plantation walk.
Pickup on South Street (1953)
Pickup on South Street review
I'll preface this review by saying of all the films on the iCheckMovies IMDb noir list that I am working through, this was one that I was looking forward to the most. I only own one other Samuel Fuller film - Shock Corridor - but it is a personal favourite of mine, so I had high hopes for Pickup on South Street. I wasn't disappointed.
Petty thief Skip McCoy (the excellent Richard Widmark whom I respect more and more as a dramatic actor every time I see him) is in the wrong place at the wrong time as he lifts a purse from the earthy, but alluring Candy (Jean Peters) on a train. Unluckily for him, she was a mule, carrying a microfilm for her weaselly boyfriend Joey (Richard Kiley). Before long, he finds himself an unwitting player in a Communist spy ring, playing off the cops on one side and fighting for his life against the Communists on the other.
The political connotations aren't exactly subtle, especially when you consider when this was made. No matter what side you are on in this movie, everyone hates the Commies! The attitudes of Americans at the time are summed up perfectly in a single line by Brooklyn wise-girl Thelma Ritter. Her character - Moe Williams - is as happy to hang out with criminals as she is to sell them out to the police, but when suspected of selling out to a "Commie" she gives the deadpan reply :
"What do you think I am, an informer?"
Thankfully, Fuller doesn't really push this as a propagandist film, and in fact there is much to suggest this is to be taken as a satirical glance at American attitudes, rather than an anti-communist propaganda work. For example, another line given life by Ritter;
"What do I know about commies? Nothing... but I know I don't like 'em".
Like I said, everyone hates the commies. Even the stool pigeons.
Also, the Communists create the added bonus of putting an inventive twist on the standard noir themes. Rather than just having the law and the criminals, and every shade of gray in between, the film uses the Communists as a 3rd player, creating an interesting playground wherein the law are after the criminals, and everyone is after the communists and their microfilm - giving a fresh feel to what is essentially a genre-film.
Zeitgeist political suggestions aside, this is a swift, entertaining roller coaster ride of a movie. Weighing in at a fairly lightweight 77 minutes, the film breezes along, rarely slowing down to take a breath.
The performances are excellent, with the possible exception of Richard Kiley, whose anxiety-ridden character is often tinged with wide-eyed, twitchy melodrama. Richard Widmark plays his role to perfection, one of the truly great noir anti-heroes. If a film can have you rooting for a character even after they punch out a beautful lady and laugh about it, that's one great script and actor. When Skip isn't dislocating the lovely Candy's jaw, he is caressing it, and the more tender scenes between them are simply electric, with a real chemistry.
They are very nearly all upstaged though, by the afore-mentioned Thelma Ritter. Without a doubt one of the most under-appreciated supporting character actresses that ever lived. Her character is a complex one, one that works on both sides of the law. She sells her friends out to the police, and they know it, but they still have a huge amount of respect for her. In a genre that is ridden with stoolies who get their come-uppance, this is a quite a hard cliche to break, yet the combination of the excellent script, and Ritter's pitch-perfect performance lend the film the credibility it needs to break that barrier.
Visually, the film is faultless and unique. Fuller plays with high angles, low angles, shadows, light, cross-fades etc. In a masterful way. It's all tightly edited, with no excess baggage and underlined by an understated but desperately cool blues saxophone.
I cannot write this review without mentioning the bone-jarringly realistic fight scenes. One scene in particular, shot in a single take, is a brutal tête-à-tête between Richard Kyley and Jean Peters, and the beating he hands out to her is quite hard to watch. Slaps and punches land with convincing fervor, and the poor actress is thrown into tables and furniture as they smash on her battered body. I can honestly say that of all the films I have seen from this era, this is the first time a fight scene has made me wince in imagined pain - it is a powerful moment.
In summary, I cannot find a fault with Pickup on South Street, other than a slightly hammy performance at the start of the film by Richard Kiley - but even he picks up the ball and runs with it towards the end. This is a brilliantly dark, fast-paced, satirical script, with well developed characters and relationships, great set-pieces and flawless direction, as well as being an essential commentary on American political beliefs at the time. A must-see.
Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950)
Where the Sidewalk Ends review
Detective Sgt. Mark Dixon (Dana Andrews) despises criminals. Loves nothing better than burying his knuckles into some hoodlums ribcage. Sometimes you hear the crack. That wince of pain is also satisfying. Better still, landing a clean, perfectly placed right hook, pow, straight to the jaw. He punches the air. If you're lucky you'll catch that sweet moment when the lights go out within their eyes. He smiles with the thought.
His father had been a small time crook. Stupid. Armed robbery of a liquor store. Locked up. He'd seen first hand what it does to families. The destructive nature of the criminal. Yep he detested them. He became a cop. I ain't my father? He'll show them. Each and everyone. He'd become a bit notorious down at the 16th precinct and a celebrity with the tabloids. The newspapers happy to publish his criminal takedowns. His precinct not so keen with his methods of brute force. "Your job is to detect criminals Dixon, not to punish them!"
Mark Dixon had his eyes on the nasal vaping gangster boss, Tommy Scalise (Gary Merrill). They constantly locked horns. Scalise was cool with a loyal gang around him. Dixon couldn't get to him. Scalise knew his moves, kept his business tight. Dixon was obsessed. If he waited long enough, Scalise would mess up. He'd make a mistake. Dixon was ready was to jump. "I'd bring that lowlife down, first with my fists and then with the cuffs."\
His moment was coming. Something dodgy was going down at an illegal dice game. Big money was on the table. Scalisi was patient. Nineteen thousands dollars was riding in the lucky hands of a Texas tycoon called Morrison (Harry von Zell). Scalisi and his boys had the game rigged. Come on! Just one more throw of the dice. Morrison had company for the night with the beautiful Morgan Taylor (Gene Tierney). Little did Morrison know his next roll would lighten the roll of cash in his hand. Morgan was tired. "Take me home, please"
From that moment on Mark Dixon eyes were focused. He would become Scalisi's shadow. Unfortunately for Dixon he's soon to be hiding in the shadows himself. His world as the tough, good guy, raging out justice and pain to the thugs of Manhattan might be coming to end. Sucker punches, beatings and violence followed like the Grim Reaper. What was going on? How was he going to escape being the one thing he despised?
Det. Sgt. Mark Dixon - "Innocent people can get into terrible jams too. One false move and you're over your head."
A Few Things To Add
Where The Sidewalk Ends is directed by Otto Preminger who has an incredible body of work to his name. With a good bunch of film noirs like the classic Laura and others like Fallen Angel and Whirlpool. He also hit the musicals with Porgy and Bess and Carmen Jones. Plus a selection of brilliant sounding films all with Saul Bass posters I need to see, pronto. In Harm's Way, Advise & Consent, The Man with the Golden Arm and of course Anatomy of a Murder. I have some truly fantastic viewing coming my way very soon. Oo and I just noticed Angel Face to add to the noirs! Spoilt for choice.
Based on a book by William L Stuart called Night Cry. Though I could not say how much the film resembles the novel as the film is credited to three for the story and then Ben Hecht on screenplay duties.
Also stars Mark's partner Det. Paul Klein (Bert Freed). Morgan's taxi driver Dad Jiggs Taylor (Tom Tully). New 16th precinct boss Lt. Thomas (Karl Malden). Morgan's ex partner Ken Paine (Craig Stevens) and last of all Tommy Scalise loyal muscle, the tough hood Steve (Neville Brand).
The opening scene is excellent showing footsteps walking along the pavement of the sidewalk as the the titles are boldly writing in white chalk to the sound of a whistling man.
What is Tommy Scalise (Gary Merrill) snorting throughout the film? Lee Marvin's character is addicted to it also in the superb "colour" noir, 1955s Violent Saturday.
One of the best bits that lightens the darkness is the banter with the landlady of Martha's Cafe (Ruth Donnelly) where Mark takes the lovely Morgan on a "date".
Mark - "It's the worst food in town, but don't worry. They usually serve a stomach pump with the dessert." Martha - "Who invited you to come to my restaurant, Mr. Detective? Not me!" Mark - "Bring us two of your dangerous dinners, Martha." Martha - "You know how much I've been offered to poison this man?" Mark - "Ten dollars?" Martha - "That's right. I'm holding out for fifteen. Two dinners. Do you want wine?" Mark - "Bring a small bottle" Martha - "Huh! Same old cheapskate!"
Now Where The Sidewalk Ends gripped me right out the gate. The lush greyscale of the photography made the black and white shadows so rich and raw. The dialogue and quick witted banter flew round aplenty keeping this film noir busling along. The pace is tight and filled with surprising ultraviolence for a film from 1950. The punches surprise. Sucker punches that really hit home. I had to rewind one just to slow it down to see how on Earth they filmed it. It was savage and straight at the screen. The script makes you feel for the characters. You're of the edge of your seat. Desperate to see how it will all play out. Every now and then you hit these films that really resonate home. Yep this film was perfect for me. I wanna watch it again. What about you? Have you seen this one? What's your favourite Otto Preminger? I got a whole heap of wonderful catching up to do.
Blood Simple (1984)
Blood Simple review
You can't really get the Coen brothers' No Country for Old Men unless you've first watched (and gotten) Blood Simple. Now I have to go re-watch the former. It's far too easy, these days, to hear/read about good filmmakers and view their recent work, when it might be better to start from the beginning. (Wim, if you're reading, you have exemplified this in the realm of popular music.) Now that I've finally seen Barton Fink and Blood Simple, I feel ready not only for the remaining two Coen works I haven't yet seen (Miller's Crossing and The Hudsucker Proxy) but also to re-view the rest of their corpus.
The popular literature out there has deeply mixed feelings about Blood Simple, with half of the reviewers quickly concluding that the Coens' first work was, simply, an overhyped B-movie. Thankfully, better thinkers have noted that this is the inaugural work from an important filmmaking duo that deserves careful attention. It would be difficult to argue now that the Coens are not at least talented, or better. They have established themes and motifs in their films that give them the status of auteurs (if you're into that). Blood Simple contains most, if not all, of those themes and motifs.
The Mortimer Young introduction is almost as delightful here as it is on The Big Lebowski. The rest of that speaks for itself. Within the first couple frames, the film establishes itself as a fusion noir/western genre film, and soon it will display major signs of the thriller/horror genre. Here already is a great stumbling-block to viewers, who have seen in Blood Simple nothing more than a mash-up of long-established movie clichés, as if the Coen brothers are just a less-creative Quentin Tarantino. The camera slowly moves in on towns and factories in a way that The Big Lebowski will later do more overtly, and the noir/western/thriller/horror/comedy feel of this film is repeated to grand effect in No Country for Old Men.
After the beginning shots of the landscape, the camera is placed in the back seat of a car, behind and between two characters as they drive. It is dark and rainy, and the headlights and windshield wipers ineffectively attempt to dispel the darkness and blurriness. It seems that the Coens are emphasizing the noir-nature of the film: what is ahead is unseen and most likely sinister in nature. The character of Abby, even early in the film, reminds one of other Coen brothers women, as in Fargo, O Brother Where Art Thou?, and No Country for Old Men. Ray may also be a foreshadow of Josh Brolin's character in the last film. In classic noir form, Ray is introduced after some dialogue by protruding his face from the shadows toward the camera and into violently bright light. The mood is one of uncertainty and despair.
To counteract, or counterbalance, the noir opening, the following scene has country music playing, with a close-up of boots on a desk and a cowboy hat placed beside them. The laughing of the P. I. works out to be a chiasm; he is a cliché at the beginning and the end of the film, sandwiching some very dark humor that is devoid of laughter. Though a major character (arguably the most important one), the P. I. is never given a name. He is the source of both truth and lies, giving Marty true and false evidence of his wife's affair. The prevalence of photographs and voyeurism in the film feeds the intersubjectivity of the characters and what they believe to be true. In many ways the film is about misunderstandings. One person is mistaken for another, a photograph is altered, a gun is misplaced and misinterpreted, a dream is thought to be reality, and a living man is considered dead. After the early meeting between Marty and the P. I., the camera moves through the "window" separating the office from the bar to reveal that it's a mirror on the other side. While not the most jaw-dropping of effects, it illustrates both the uncertainty within the film and its voyeuristic theme.
Little effects such as the camera crawling down the length of the bar toward its subject (and going over a sleeping drunk like a speed bump) have led some to conclude that Blood Simple is a style-over-content film. I don't feel a strong need to spend time rebutting this. Suffice it to say, it seems clear that (a) the content of the film is on par with its style, as this essay hopes to make clear; and (b) style is a very important aspect of the content, since this is in many ways a film about film. Its amalgamation of genres and weight given to the visual image contribute to this.
Not sure what to do with Marty's recurring vomiting. He always seems to be either throwing up or supressing the urge. Neither he nor the other characters seem to notice what must be a foul stench from the dead fish on his desk, though all the major players enter his office while the fish are there. This more superficial cause for potential puking is usurped by the gravity of death and getting knocked in the groin by Marty's eloping wife, which seems appropriate. And I suppose that someone is bound to point out the innuendo of emasculation: when Abby kicks Marty where it counts, she also breaks his finger, which is seen in the following scene in a closeup in a splint. From that point, whatever manhood Marty had left is history, along with his marriage.
The significance of the four dead fish is perhaps complex, not sure. They appear when the P. I. is showing Marty altered photos implying a double homicide. Presumably, the fish foreshadow the death of all four main characters, though they are all still alive at this point. Not all four characters die in the end, in the physical sense. The Coens are likely playing with the viewers heads by tying the fish with the characters, and at the same time rejecting what would have been another stylistic cliché.
As usual, the Coens seem to be portraying something moral in this film without making a moral statement. The P. I. accepts Marty's proposal for a job that's "not strictly legal," but tells Marty, "You're an idiot." The P. I. can't bring himself to commit the crime, but instead misleads Marty into paying him for the job, then offs him. As Marty sits there slouching, bleeding to death, the P. I. says, "You look stupid now." The P. I. associates ignorance with evil, is disgusted, and becomes an administrator of justice. That Ray is not actually dead, we find out a bit later, confirms the dishonesty of the visual image that has already been a theme. In the first instance, the altered photo seemed just fishy enough to have been fake, the audience infers. Marty is fooled, but the audience isn't sure. When Marty is "killed," the audience apparently sees it clearly and has no reason to doubt the murder. The viewer is as surprised as Ray to discover Marty gasping for breath later on. This takes the film from being merely a mystery-thriller to something in the category of "a film about film." The Coens know that their viewers are fluent in the language of film and know cinematic clichés. By deceiving the audience, the Coens are turning the clichés on their head, so to speak. This seems a perfect use of such clichés: make lazy viewers of the audience so that they stop thinking about the possibilities of the story, then show them their laziness.
Once Ray is shown late in the film sitting on a chair with one cowboy-booted leg up on a table, the connection with Marty is clear, along with the implication that Ray will share in Marty's fate. Abby's defense, "I haven't done anythin' funny" may be honest, but they are precisely the words Marty promised Ray she would utter, and they further tie Ray and Marty's fates together. Twisted clichés, stupid characters, and a hastiness to violence make Blood Simple a film of blood spilt by simple people who are incapable of seeing the complexity that the viewer is cursed to witness.
Crime of Passion (1956)
Crime of Passion review
Barbara Stanwyck differed from most (all?) of her contemporaries in at least one regard: onscreen, she never seemed conscious of herself.
Much though I love Bette Davis, say, I can't quite imagine her in a role in which she's unaware of her - Bette Davis's, not the character's - own greatness, her superiority (on almost every scale) to everyone within a half-mile. She might dismiss it, she might crack wise about it, but in doing so she couldn't help acknowledging and drawing your attention to it. Katherine Hepburn I'll watch in anything, and I'll laugh at or be heartwrenched by almost everything that issues forth from that Philadelphia Mainline throat. But Hepburn herself, although apparently modest in real life and dismissive of flattery, always radiated unapproachability by mere mortals. The planes of her face weren't the only things those famous cheekbones cleft into separate regions of life.
But even when playing a character utterly out of the league of everyone around her, Stanwyck's manner just said: Here I am. Take it or leave it. You've got your life, I've got mine, maybe they'll intersect and maybe they won't, and while I'm happy and maybe even delighted to meet you, I'll survive if I never do.
In 1956's Crime of Passion, she brings this manner to a role out of sync with the time.
-
The Story
Kathy Ferguson (Stanwyck) works for a San Francisco newspaper, writing an advice-to-the-lovelorn and gossip column successful enough to be advertised on posters around the city. "Fergie," her editor calls her, and her fellow "reporters" too seem to think of her as just one of the guys (despite her tasteful woman's wardrobe).
But there's something else going on under the surface, and the first sign of it comes early on, in the newsroom.
'Come over here, Fergie'The big story of the moment involves the murder of a man by his wife. Fergie's editor, a man named Nalence, calls upon her for help - not in (gods forbid) investigating the actual crime, but what he actually calls "the woman's angle." ("I killed him because I loved him, or I love him because I killed him...") Over there on the left you see the moment when Nalence actually summons Kathy to his desk. Click the image to enlarge it: note the look on the editor's face, which suggests a huge effort even to look up from his clutter to ask a woman for something; note, too, the "get a load of the woman in a man's job" look on the fedora'd newsman's face. These guys take her seriously, all right - only within the scope of what she does: that small, trivial, cute but very easy little thing she does. Confirmation arrives when she reminds Nalence that she's got a column to write and he tells her they can just fill the hole in the page with reprinted "cornball" copy: "Nobody'll ever know the difference."
Kathy (like the actress inside her) is no fool. She feels the sting of that last, dismissive gibe. But she's a professional, and heads over to SFPD headquarters.
They haven't found the wife yet, and because the murder took place in Los Angeles a couple of LA detectives are in town to aid the investigation. These are the gruff Captain Charlie Alidos (Royal Dano), and his more mild-mannered partner - and subordinate - Bill Doyle, played by Sterling Hayden. The two LA cops come into the press room to tell the reporters basically to leave them alone: they're here to investigate a murder, not answer questions from the press.
'YOUR work should be...'Kathy objects that they're just trying to do their jobs but Charlie cuts her off with a curt, almost sneering reply: "Your work should be raising a family and getting dinner ready for your husband when he gets home." Stunned, Kathy looks from one cop to the other. Bill is silent - and so, tellingly, are all the male reporters. None of them seems the least appalled by the remark.
Now we're getting the message in pretty unambiguous terms: Kathy's alone in a mid-'50s wilderness. She'll shortly swap one wilderness for another.
Bill Doyle, as it happens, has been smitten by Kathy's spirit. They have a brief, passionate affair, and he invites her to LA. Within days, apparently, they marry in a civil ceremony, and Bill takes her home to his little bachelor house in a suburban neighborhood. They settle into the life of a loyal, unambitious working detective and his dutiful wife: entertaining and being entertained by other police couples, but otherwise pretty much just eating and sleeping together - when he's not being called into the station to deal with one "squeal" or another.
Here's a still from this portion of the story:
On the brink of crazyWe see Kathy (center) and the other wives in the dining room, while the men play cards in the background. Note how the attention in the foreground is placed almost entirely on the blonde woman sitting down: that's Charlie Alidos's wife Sara (Virginia Grey), who talks about almost nothing - in every scene in which she appears - but the couple's warm friendship with the men's superior, the Chief Inspector, and his wife. They go out together, vacation together... you get it. The other wives profess to admire her so much (even when their faces, as above, reveal something else).
Or rather, let's say, almost all the other wives are focused like that. Look at Kathy there. She's the only woman not absorbed by Sara's assumption of center stage. Although graced by a half-smile, The horror, the horrorKathy is looking down at the tasteful, proper table setting, at the food which seems too trim and neat to actually put into one's mouth. She seems on the brink of throwing up. If you've seen another poster/lobby card for the film (right), suddenly its central image makes sense: it does not depict a woman who's discovered a crime so shocking and terrifying that she must scream; it depicts a woman about to commit such a crime, because she's being driven crazy by her everyday life.
Given that she herself no longer works, Kathy comes up with possibly just one (rather daffy) way out of this terminal dullness: she's got to get Bill promoted so she never has to spend another involuntary second in these people's company.
She first worms her (and Bill's) way into the life of Chief Inspector Tony Pope, by way of his wife Alice. Tony and Alice (played by Raymond Burr and Fay Wray) have not to this point appeared onscreen. It's like they've been isolated offstage in a transparent bubble of respectability which the other characters - save the grating Charlie and Sara - cannot hope to penetrate. But Kathy manages the trick, and even schemes to separate the Popes from the Alidoses.
Kathy meets TonyBut she does more: she worms her (and Bill's) way into the consciousness, specifically, of Tony himself. The first time they meet, at a cocktail party of sorts at the Popes' home, Tony seems (see the still at left) rather weirdly intense. When The Missus and I watched the film, she thought Tony suspected something about Kathy and her motives. I wasn't so sure - what I saw was a guy in the company of a woman hypnotist, imagining (haha) that he might hypnotize her.
'Hey, if I light your cigarette will you light my fire?'By the time of their second get-together, at any rate - this one a birthday party which Kathy and Sara have arranged for the police commissioner (ambitious enough for two, she is) - Tony's much more genial. (See shot at right.) It doesn't hurt that Kathy can finally break out of her "I buy my dresses and jewelry at Woolworth's" rut.
(Stanwyck, who hadn't quite turned 50 when the film came out, looks great throughout the film. In this scene, though, she really relaxes into herself. She even manages to charm Raymond Burr from his usual bug-eyed, quasi-sociopathic look into someone almost resembling George Clooney.)
So now we see what's about to develop, although we can't make out its details as a scheme: Kathy, Tony... uh-huh.
Crazily, it works. Bill starts getting assignments that would normally have gone to Charlie. When Bill thinks that Sara and Charlie have begun spreading rumors about Kathy and Tony, he decks his old partner in the squad room. They both get called on Tony's carpet. In his questioning, the Chief Inspector clearly favors Bill's version of events over Charlie's; and although the nominal upshot is to "pretend the whole thing never happened," it's Charlie who gets transferred out - leaving Bill as Acting Captain.
Everything seems to be working out according to Kathy's (evil, and again rather daffy) plans. Until, well, it doesn't.
The kiss-offThe first thing that goes wrong: Tony - beset by guilt, or clearheadness - suddenly (in the scene at the left) pulls the plug on his and Kathy's affair. She'd probably go along with this; she's never seemed particularly infatuated, let alone in love, with the big man. But it brings with it other consequences. First, Tony's retiring. Second, he's recommending that Bill be passed over as his successor. ("He's just not good enough, Kathy.") And finally - the last nail in his own coffin, although he doesn't know it yet - he's nominating Charlie Alidos to take his place.
If you think of Kathy to this point as an evil genius of femme-fatale manipulation, you can be forgiven. But now she develops a new scheme - a revenge scheme - so loopy that...
Kathy (Kathy, Kathy...) lifts the gunWell, let's just say that she "borrows" a gun used in an unrelated crime. She confronts Tony, because suddenly she's consumed with the unfairness of everything.
Tony and Kathy, one last time...and then (as you can see at left, and certainly not to keep you in suspense) she shoots him dead. In the head. In his own home.
In a Lonely Place (1950)
In a Lonely Place review
In the book, Dix is a loner, newly arrived in L. A. and with no circle of friends, who is pretending to write a mystery novel so his uncle will give him an allowance. In the film, Dix is a hugely successful screenwriter, a celebrity, and has a wide circle of friends, enemies and acquaintances, all in the movie business. In the book, he's outwardly respectable and law-abiding. In the film, he has long had a violent streak and has a charge sheet of previous complaints against him as long as his arm. In the book, there has been a series of murders, none of whom have any apparent connection to Dix. In the film, there is only one, of a girl who works on the periphery of the film business and is known to Dix. There is nothing to connect movie Dix to book Dix other than his name and the fact that he was in the vicinity of a murder.
Gloria Grahame as Laurel
Then there's Laurel. In my review of the book, I described her as "a beautiful dame, a sultry, sexy feline in female form. Is she a femme fatale? Or is she destined to be another victim? Is she a temptress, a loose woman, or a forerunner of the sexually liberated women about to hit the scene?" Well! In the film, she's sweet, lovely, sensibly clad at all times, pure, loving and faithful, and positively refuses to be sultry - exactly the kind of girl you hope your son will bring home one day. There's no pretence at all that she's a femme fatale (though she is described as such in the movie's advertising).
True love...
So really to compare the two is almost redundant. They have to be seen as entirely separate and judged accordingly. That doesn't mean the film is bad, however - it's excellent! But I did wonder why they had bothered to connect it to the book at all, given the massive changes they made. It can't have been to attract an audience via the book's popularity. No offence to the author, but Bogart's star quality meant he was perfectly capable of filling seats all by himself. Did they start out meaning to stick to the book, and then drift away from it? There's a bit in the film that struck me as amusing, when Dix's agent is having a go at him for not sticking to the story of the book Dix is adapting for the screen, to which Dix replies that that was because the book was trash! I felt for poor Ms Hughes when she saw that bit for the first time!
Cuddling? Or strangling?
The film is more about the love affair between Dix and Laurel, and how the police's suspicion of Dix's involvement in the murder affects that. Bogart turns in a great performance, one of his best, I felt, and Gloria Grahame is excellent as Laurel, falling madly in love with Dix but gradually growing to fear him. In the book, which is told in the first person from inside Dix's head, it's clear from the beginning that Dix is a murderer, but the film leaves that in doubt till the end, using the more usual third person perspective of movies. By halfway through, when it became obvious just how much they'd changed it, I realised it wasn't at all certain that Dix would turn out to be the murderer in the film! So the suspense doesn't come from Dix's increased paranoia, as it does in the book. Here, it's more about Laurel's fear, which might be justified or might be paranoid, and the viewer's own uncertainty over Dix's guilt or innocence. The book gives Dix a motivation for his behaviour - not one that entirely convinced me, but it was there nevertheless. The film suggests he has always been violent, but gets away with it due to his celebrity.
Robert Warwick's drunk again!
There is an excellent supporting cast of actors none of whom were well known to me, but who may have been familiar faces to contemporary audiences. From my perspective, there wasn't a weak performance among them. Stand-outs for me were Robert Warwick as an ageing ham actor, constantly drunk and spouting quotes from Shakespeare and the like; and a young Martha Stewart playing Mildred, the murder victim, as a starry-eyed ingenue bedazzled by celebrity and the glamour of the movie industry.
I also enjoyed the small role of Ruth Warren as Effie the maid, vacuum cleaner in one hand, cigarette in the other, who brings a touch of humour into the general darkness.
Ruth Warren as Effie the maid
While the book is a study of the mind of a killer and of paranoia, the film is more a study of the mores of the movie industry, and of legitimate fear. It certainly deserves its reputation as a noir classic, and I'm glad that reading the book led me to watch it, even if the connections between them don't go far beyond the title.
The Sound of Fury (1950)
The Sound of Fury review
The second Frank Lovejoy noir that we've spotlighted is a lot more underrated than I Was a Communist for the F. B. I. (1951). While that film was the target of misconception, this film is hardly even brought up, even though it does contain a glimpse into the time-period the way IWaCftFBI does, but in a less controversial way, though still daring and ahead-of-its-time. Try and Get Me! (1950) (or The Sound of Fury) details how an innocent man can easily turn to crime, especially when he becomes chums with a maniac and simultaneously how a newspaperman uses their crime to stir mob violence unintentionally. The film pre-dates In Cold Blood (1967) in several ways, such as how one man plans on committing a serious crime while the other of the team just goes along with it. The team here is played by Lovejoy and Lloyd Bridges (in one of his best performances). Other cast members include Richard Carlson as the reporter, Kathleen Ryan as Lovejoy's understanding wife, and Katherine Locke and Adele Jergens as contrasting girls who are involved with Lovejoy and Bridges. The film was directed by Cy Endfield, who often did underrated but progressive films for the time. For instance, he also did The Underworld Story (1950), which similarly deals with newspapers and has a subplot of racial discrimination. Everyone concerned in this film gives amazing performances and the story is also worth its weight in gold, making it all the more confusing on why it's underrated. Leonard Maltin even says in his review of the film, "Deserves to be better known."
The story concerns Frank Lovejoy, a working-class man who lives in a shack with his wife and son, but constantly feels pressured into getting more money. This isn't by his wife, who only loves him, but due to his son being at the young age he is and wanting a nice television set and money to go out. Their living setting is similar to The Breaking Point (1950) of the same year, as is the married relationship displayed. Lovejoy befriends Bridges, a man who constantly flashes his money around and shows Lovejoy a good time. When Bridges reveals that he gets his money from holding up small gas stations and stores, Lovejoy joins him on his petty crimes so that he can bring more money home. He claims that he's been promoted at work to his family and that's why he's busy and makes more money. Lovejoy, however, gets more than he bargained for when the duo want more and more money and the only way to do it is to pull worse crimes. [SPOILER ALERT They get into hot water when they kidnap the grown son of a wealthy man for ransom money. They panic, though, and end up killing him. This causes them to be arrested and brings on the media uproar over how they're hardened criminals and justice needs to be done. The film builds to one of the strongest endings of noir where it shows the duo being lynched by an angry mob as it shows how ugly mob violence is, especially since we know one of the men isn't a bad person. [SPOILERS END Try and Get Me! Doesn't take the easy way out, it goes as far as a movie at the time could go with violence. The ending alone is noir at its most no-holds barred, but that's what makes it have the powerful effect that it does. The film is purely show and don't tell.
Another interesting aspect of the film that I wanted to bring up is Katherine Locke's character. The audiences knows that Lovejoy won't cheat on his wife, but Locke is under the impression that he's the knight in shining armor that she's been waiting for and falls in love with him while hardly knowing him. This happens when Bridges takes Lovejoy out on the town with his girl Adele Jergens and partners Lovejoy up with her friend, Locke. The poor girl is just happy enough to be on a date with an attractive and nice man that she goes for him instantly, unaware that he's married and a criminal. Her character isn't just there to be sad though as she has an important part in the development of the story. It's strong and believable character studies like those of Lovejoy, Locke, Bridges, and also Carlson as the story-hungry newspaperman who doesn't think ahead, that makes this film even more powerful. It makes the ending all the more tragic and effective. Why something so gun-wrenchingly real and unpredictable as this becomes underrated is a mystery, but it certainly deserves more praise and recognition.
If I were to put together a list of the "Top 10 Film Noirs That Deserve Way More Recognition," Try and Get Me! (1950) aka The Sound of Fury would likely rank near the top. The fact that it was independently made through United Artists (so buying it on home video is better than waiting for it to play on TV), neither stars someone like a Mitchum nor directed by someone like a Lang, and goes under more than one title have all likely played a role into why this film tends not to be very highly talked about. Despite it being somewhat obscure, many that sees Try and Get Me! Ends up having a lot of positive things to say about it. This is because Try and Get Me! Is an excellent film that delivers on the power it promises. In fact, the themes dealt with in Try and Get Me! Are often better handled than when they play a role in other, better remembered films. The focus of Try and Get Me! Isn't to blame any one side of the argument, but rather give both sides that push back against one another a point and a big flaw that cannot easily be overlooked. This makes the movie complex and gripping towards its end and even with its strong conclusion the movie doesn't waste much time getting started.
Frank Lovejoy (you can probably guess he's a regular in underrated noirs) stars as an unfortunate man who must support his family although he has no means of doing so without a job. His co-star is Richard Carlson (another underrated actor) who is a journalist more interested in a headline than anything else. Their paths cross later in the movie after Lovejoy gets arrested for kidnapping and murdering the son of a wealthy man in town after going on crime sprees. While Lovejoy is the lesser of two evils in his partnership with brutal criminal Lloyd Bridges and takes little part in the killing itself, the movie doesn't let him off the hook as he is complicit in Bridges' deeds and does commit crimes during the film's run. Carlson on the other hand publishes a sensationalized version of the story to rile up an angry mob by showcasing only one side of the kidnapping/murder and stereotyping the convicts. His yellow journalism tactics are also shamed by the film for being generalizations used to push hate and when poor consequences come of it, it is something Carlson wasn't expecting. Words have meaning after all. This leads to a great ending that is unflinchingly harsh in tone and execution. The last ten minutes are unforgettable and leave a lasting impression on the viewer.
The viewer feels sorry for Lovejoy's character as his motives are understandable, but in this case the end does not justify the means. When his crimes get worse, he still takes part in them even if not to the extent of his partner in crime Bridges. Lovejoy is great at handling such a melancholy character who feels useless and bitter. He gets all the right reactions from the audience. Carlson is likely recognizable to movie fans since he's been in some pretty noteworthy features often as the lead, but he gets more character to show-off here than just being a handsome lead. He must showcase remorse and regret as well as someone willing to undergo the necessary change his character needs. The movie does a good job showcasing this without getting preachy and Carlson doesn't let his character bog down in basics either. The supporting cast mainly consists of Bridges and Kathleen Ryan as Lovejoy's wife. There are other characters, but they aren't defined like the four main cast members which is perfectly fine as this is not their story and their part is mostly meant to be victims of both leads (Lovejoy and Carlson). Cy Endfield directs the film with a real, haunting feeling and unsurprisingly would end up blacklisted shortly after Try and Get Me! As this is the type of film that must have seemed progressive at the time of its release (and honestly hasn't lost much edge in that department although other movies have modernized the concept a bit over the years). Try and Get Me! Was even used as an example of Endfield's leftist agenda by HUAC. Afterwards Endfield went to England and had a successful directing career (such as directing Hell Drivers (1957) and Zulu (1964)), but Endfield could have been a great director of B-film noirs or ambitious independent noirs in Hollywood. Still, his directing eye was well-suited for edgier British features where he started a film company with Welsh star Stanley Baker. Try and Get Me! Was also written for the screen by Jo Pagano from his own novel and it might be his greatest work for cinema as he worked on a few other screenplays on both bigger and lesser features although nothing to truly grade-A epic proportions. His novel/script was based on a real incident from 1933 which likely helps explain the film's realistic quality.
Sound of Fury
Try and Get Me! Can feel reminiscent of other great films such as In Cold Blood (1967), Fury (1936), and The Ox-Bow Incident (1943) among others, but it still feels like its own movie with its own identity even all these years later. Jean-Luc Godard's criticism with the classic The Ox-Bow Incident was that the feature's victims were innocent to paint mobs as unjust rather than showcasing that mob mentality is always wrong even when the victims are guilty. While I think Godard missed the point of The Ox-Bow Incident (a favorite western of mine), I feel he would have been much more satisfied with the message presented in Try and Get Me! As the film showcases the ugly nature of mobs while making the victims guilty (and we even witness their crimes). The film goes even further displaying the outside factors that.
A Place in the Sun (1951)
A Place in the Sun review
I realized something watching this movie, I'm guilty of writing off older movies when it comes to darkness and grittiness. Sure, there are gangster pictures, murder mysteries and war movies, but I sometimes assume they all come with a naïve innocence that makes them more like a cute attempt at darkness. Then I see something like A Place in the Sun and am reminded that old movies can be just as dark and cynical as anything made today.
Things start so optimistically with A Place in the Son. Montgomery Clift's George Eastman arrives at the impressive offices of his uncle, Charles Eastman. It seems the two only recently met, Charles took a liking to his poor nephew and has offered him a job at his successful factory. With an entry level job on the factory floor, George gets to work trying to impress his uncle through hard work and dedication. He meets fellow low level colleague Alice Tripp, played by Shelley Winters. Against company policy, they totally hook up and start doin' it.
Eventually, a little old fashion nepotism leads to George rising up the corporate and social ladder where he takes to the upper class life of his uncle a little too easily. Especially when he meets the sex on legs society girl Angela Vickers, played by Elizabeth Taylor. Soon, George is mixed up with both women and even manages to get the poor one knocked up. With one pregnant and demanding he marry her, he decides the best way to confront the problem is to ignore it, and take off on holiday with the other. Once Tripp becomes aware of George's double life, it's time for him to sort these two birds out, obviously with pretty terrible consequences for everyone concerned. All just because George has a wondering sconce.
The matter of fact way A Place in the Sun treats the pregnancy is what really surprised me. I didn't expect a movie this old to address something like at all. But to do it as casually as it did surprised me even more. It leads to the climactic events of the third act and becomes a major plot point that really drives a lot the story, but the initial reveal almost makes it a throw away aspect of the story. I think that made the ultimate impact that much stronger.
A Place in the Sun is a pretty tried and true story. A poor man with only the best intentions is quickly corrupted once he gets a taste of the good life. A man goes from sending almost all of his money home to his mother, to contemplating the ultimate of evil acts in exchange for a life of money and leisure.
This movie is long and at times a little slow, but it really is worth a look. Names like Montgomery Clift and Elizabeth Taylor became such an entrenched part of classic Hollywood cinema, it's easy to assume you've seen them and know what they did to become such household names. Then you actually see a movie like A Place in the Sun, you see with them doing the things that made then icons, and you realize how they became those icons, with names still so recognizable all these years later.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024)
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga review
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024) by George Miller was fine. It was fine. Fine. Did it hit the unbelievable emotive highs of Fury Road? No. Was it as fast-paced and thrilling as Fury Road? No? Did it still have the same aesthetic and compelling characters with shades of the aforementioned things? Definitely. And, to be honest, there's no way it could have lived up to the classic from 2015. So that's definitely the place to start.
I don't know if I liked the structure. For near on or over a year we've been shown Anya Taylor Joy as Furiosa and the movie drops and it takes over half an hour to actually see her. If this is the character I'm supposed to connect to, we need them to be there at some point. It doesn't help her that Chris Hemsworth's Dementus is the extravagant villain that he is (By the way, more hemsworth in villain roles, I enjoyed him in that).
I do love the aesthetic. The vast landscape of the wasteland, the sandstorm, and the big wide shots of the action sequences paired with the closeups are always things that will make me sit up in my seat. While, like I said, it isn't as full throttle throughout the film as Fury Road was, this did scratch the itch of what was expected within the film.
I think my biggest issue through the film is I kept wondering what happened after Fury Road. Furiosa is an interesting character and the prequel was a worthy story to produce, but sometimes you can see a movie or do something and realize the thing you actually wanted to see/do. That was part of the realization in this for me as well.
Overall, I had fun. I gave it a four out of five on letterboxd for that alone (critically it's probably closer to a 3.5). If you're looking for a good action film to watch on streaming in a couple of months (or even see in theaters this weekend - it's a quiet week), Furiosa is definitely a worthy option.
Back to Bataan (1945)
Back to Bataan review
John Wayne and Anthony Quinn fight World War II on the backlots of RKO (subbing for the jungles of the Philippines) in BACK TO BATAAN, a stirring exercise in propaganda ripped from headlines of the era. The film was made to stoke audience's patriotic fires, and succeeds in it's objective. It's well directed and shot, has plenty of action, and superb performances by all, including a standout from 14-year-old Ducky Louie.
Wayne plays Col. Madden, assigned to train Filipino freedom fighters (try saying that three times fast!) to battle the invading Japanese. Quinn is Capt. Bonifacio, grandson of Filipino revolutionary hero Andres Bonifacio. He's having issues with his girlfriend Dalisay, who's the island version of Tokyo Rose (what he doesn't realize is she's secretly sending coded messages to the Allies through her broadcasts). Madden and his ragtag crew are out to destroy a Japanese gas depot, but first they encounter schoolteacher Bertha Barnes and little Maximo, whose village has been taken over, and whose principal refused to take down the American flag, and was hung in it's place in a gruesome scene.
The resistance fighters come across the infamous Bataan Death March, where Bonifacio has been taken prisoner. They free him, and Madden wants the men to rally around their former leader's heir. He's reluctant at first, but comes around and they make things hot for the Japanese. Little Maximo returns to his village and is tortured by the cruel invaders, but refuses to talk, and ends up sacrificing his life for the cause of freedom. Soon, the Americans are coming to the Philippines, and Madden and his guerilla band hold off the Japanese while the incoming Americans land and release the natives from their bondage.
John Wayne, complete with scruffy beard, is his usual heroic self, and Quinn has never been bad in anything (although he has made some bad films, he always rises above them). The two macho men compliment each other well, with Quinn's passionate Filipino trading off of Wayne's stoicism. Wayne and Quinn only made one other film together, the 1947 South American western TYCOON, and it would've been interesting to have seen them make more.
The wonderful Beulah Bondi shines as the schoolteacher, who's just as tough as Wayne and his men. Miss Bondi was a two-time Oscar nominee (for THE GORGEOUS HUSSY and OF HUMAN HEARTS); although she never won the award, she did receive an Emmy for her final role in a 1976 episode of THE WALTONS. Always a welcome screen presence, Bondi appeared in classics and near classics like STREET SCENE (her film debut), RAIN (with Joan Crawford), the fantasy ON BORROWED TIME, with Jimmy Stewart in MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON and IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE (both times as his mother), TRACK OF THE CAT (as Robert Mitchum's mom), and A SUMMER PLACE.
That embodiment of Imperial Japanese evil, Richard Loo is on hand as the rotten Major Hasko. Loo, who was actually of Chinese descent, cornered the market on Nippon bad guys during the 40's in such films as ACROSS THE PACIFIC, BEHIND THE RISING SUN, THE PURPLE HEART, GOD IS MY CO-PILOT, and FIRST YANK INTO TOKYO. Western fans will recognize Paul Fix (Micah on THE RIFLEMAN) as an American aiding the guerillas. And a young actor named Lawrence Tierney appears towards the end as Lt. Commander Waite, just before hitting it big in DILLINGER and other great noirs.
Then there's Ducky Louie, the boy playing young Maximo. Unlike a lot of child stars of the era, this kid had a natural acting ability, and holds his own with the pro cast. Ducky's career was brief, appearing in only six films (most memorably in CHINA'S LITTLE DEVILS as a resistance fighter again, and BLACK GOLD with costar Quinn). Young Ducky left show biz to become a dentist, and would be 85 if alive today (and if anyone can confirm whether he is or not, please let me know!). If his final death scene doesn't bring a tear to your eyes, you just don't have a heart or soul.
Director Edward Dmytryk and screenwriter Ben Barzman were the polar opposites of John Wayne politically, and I'm sure some sparks must've flew during shooting. Cinematographer Nicholas Musuraca lends his dark noir touches to the film, and Roy Webb's score "borrows" from KING KONG, as well as some patriotic tunes. At film's end, we're introduced to some of the real survivors of the Bataan Death March, marching along with the cast. Now if THAT doesn't get you up and saluting, I don't know what will! BACK TO BATAAN is a rousing actioner, depicting the brutal realities of war, and the brave men who fought for liberty and freedom during WWII. It's also a fine example of 1940's Hollywood filmmaking, and contains many outstanding performances, particularly young Ducky Louie.
The Fighting 69th (1940)
The Fighting 69th review
When I found out that Fritzi at Movies Silently and Lea at Silent-ology were together hosting a blogathon spotlighting World War I films, I jumped at the chance to take part, but the question was, did I actually know any World War I films to review? Offhand, the answer was no; I had to find a list of over 150 examples just to remind myself of what I had seen: Wings, The African Queen, Lawrence of Arabia, and more recently, In Love and War. For the blogathon, I decided I wanted to try a movie that was not only new to me, but one that was close to the Hollywood mainstream, and featured a director and actors I knew and admired.
And that movie was The Fighting 69th, directed by William Keighley and starring James Cagney, Pat O'Brien, and a host of recognizable character actors, in a 'fiction-based-on-fact' account of the 165th Regiment, also known as The Fighting 69th, an Army unit made up predominantly of Irish-Americans from New York. Cagney plays Jerry Plunkett, an insolent wiseacre recently arrived at Fort Mills for training, who soon finds out he's not quite the tough guy he thinks he is. Eventually, his trouble-making and false bravado provoke the ire of his commander and his battalion, and it's up to Pat O'Brien's company chaplain, Father Duffy, to save him, and in more ways than one.
If I didn't know better, I'd think this was some sort of ersatz sequel to Angels with Dirty Faces, where Cagney portrayed a roughneck, smart-mouthed gangster and O'Brien a parish priest. In The Fighting 69th, Cagney essentially plays the same character-brash, confident, not one to be pushed around-who makes light of the preparations for battle overseas, much to the consternation of his superiors. The first half of the film seemed to promote this attitude, with soldiers trading jovial dialogue and comic one-liners, and treating their training as if it were a military frat party. It made me wonder: was this going to be a serious war film, or a lighthearted comedy with war used merely as a backdrop?
Nope, it was a serious war film, and that point was made perfectly clear with the regiment's arrival in France, and their dismal, muddy march to the front lines, where the tables were abruptly turned on our happy-go-lucky story. Suddenly, the war was shockingly real, as the Germans released a relentless and frightening barrage of artillery fire on the trenches and outposts of the 69th; most of the dozen or so characters introduced to us in the first half of the film lost their lives, and were sadly and unceremoniously gone from the story. And it was here the audience was handed another shock: the film was not about Cagney the hero, who saves the day with his fortitude and determination like you'd expect, but was instead about Cagney the coward, whose fear and foolhardy behavior gets many, many men killed.
It was an interesting dichotomy, these two halves of the storyline. Not only was there a sudden shift from breezy comedy to action drama, but a shift in audience allegiance as well; I found myself becoming more interested in the other soldiers of the 69th-who took their responsibilities seriously, and displayed true heroism and courage-and less interested in the yellow-bellied Plunkett, who did nothing but create and promote an alarming level of dislike towards himself, and paid for his dubious actions throughout most of the film. Frankly, it would come as no surprise if he were a victim of friendly fire, and in fact, Alan Hale's character amazingly hints to this very idea after another one of Plunkett's meltdowns.
However, none of this is meant to imply that I didn't appreciate Cagney's performance, which I wholeheartedly did: I thought he was great in a difficult role, and offered yet another dichotomy to the film by suddenly transforming from one type of unpleasant character to another. The rest of the acting was stellar as well, and though I'm not normally a fan of O'Brien's work, I really enjoyed what he brought to his role here; he was the glue that held everything-and everyone-together. The film also got a boost from Keighley's direction, which was not only solid, but his way of framing scenes and shots really held your interest, and his battle scenes were well-paced, exciting, and tense. And at times, incredibly real.
What also worked in the film's favor was the use of actual WWI situations, battles, and participants within the screenplay. The Fighting 69th was, and still is, a division of the US military, and some of the battles they took part in during the first World War were also depicted in the film. In addition, four characters were directly based on their namesakes: Father Duffy, Major Bill Donovan (played by George Brent), soldier and poet Joyce Kilmer, and Lieutenant Oliver Ames (played by Dennis Morgan). I liked this touch of realism, and though beyond the uniforms and trenches I was never able to fully grasp what era I was in, I still thought it was a convincing look at the trials and tribulations of war no matter what the time frame.
Oddly enough, it wasn't until the wrap-up that it finally dawned on me: the story wasn't centered on leading-man Cagney after all, but on O'Brien instead, and for good reason, since it was his character you cared about most. The film bore this out with a tribute to the real-life chaplain at the end, and as I discovered later, the original working title was, fittingly enough, Father Duffy of the Fighting 69th. And though the point of the story was about one man's cowardice and eventual redemption (a redemption that came far too late, in my opinion), I think I would've preferred watching the exploits of Father Duffy and the Fighting 69th without the distraction of a hopelessly unlikable Plunkett. Still, a worthwhile and entertaining experience, and another entry in my short list of WWI films watched. (7/10)
Three Came Home (1950)
Three Came Home review
This WWII film is based on the autobiography of Agnes Keith, who was held along with other British civilians in Japanese prison camps (she was American-born, married to a Brit).
When the Japanese invade their area of Borneo, Mrs. Keith and her husband (Claudette Colbert and Patric Knowles) along with their young son George (Mark Kenning) are at first kept under house arrest and are later taken to prison camps (one camp for men, another for women and underage children). Col. Suga (Sessue Hayakawa), commander of the area occupation force and later commander of the prisons, is very friendly to Mrs. Keith. He'd been educated in the U. S., and he'd read a book by Mrs. Keith that was sympathetic to Oriental culture. Even so, he can't control all the actions of the men under his command. Camp conditions are difficult; and the behavior of the guards is unpredictable, ranging from random kindness to random brutality. (Hayakawa also played the camp commander in "The Bridge on the River Kwai.")
Content Warnings: Not for young children. This film isn't as harsh as more modern productions of its type; but there is a scene of attempted rape, a scene of mass killing of men trying to scale a fence, and the continual suffering (hunger, sickness, mistreatment) in the women and children's camp. Other than singing a hymn here and there, there are no noticeable expressions of faith in God.
Since it's a true story, I recommend this film for WWII buffs and for anyone interested in the general topic of courage under adverse conditions.
On the same theme: "Women of Valor" (1986), "Empire of the Sun" (1987), "Paradise Road" (1997)
Darby's Rangers (1958)
Darby's Rangers review
Subbing in for Charlton Heston who was originally slated to play Col. William Darby in this Wild Bill Wellman military bio, is first time leading man James Garner assuming the title role.
When Jack Warner lost his temper over the percentage points Heston was to receive from profit participation, he promptly tore up Heston's contract only to be sued by Heston and his agent Lew Wasserman. Jack paid up and promoted assigned costar James Garner to the lead role. The rest is history. Heston is really the lucky one here. He got paid for a movie he didn't appear in and to top it off, Darby's Ranger's is really a dog of a film considering the talent involved.
With Jack Warden doing double duty as narrator and Garner's personal sergeant, our newly christened leading man is stuck behind a desk during WW2 and wanting nothing better than to lead a team of commando's into enemy territory. Pleading his case to Willis Bouchey's General, Garner gets the go ahead to train and lead a team of top tier soldiers to fight the Nazi's. For recruiting purposes and giving us some background on the lead actors of the Rangers, a few actors are featured in mostly comical vignettes as we get to know them. These include the Mayor of Shark City, Murray Hamilton as a quick tempered brawler, Stuart Whitman playing a skirt chasing soldier in jolly old England and Peter Brown as a green recruit.
There's plenty of grouching and complaining as the Rangers hit boot camp overseen by the English and drill Sergeant, Torin Thatcher. There's far too much romantic shenanigans going on for the first half of the film that seem out of touch with the subject material. The comedy isn't very funny and I somehow think that even audiences of 1958 must have felt that this film seemed outdated and better suited to audiences of the thirties.
By the time Garner leads the men into battle, the film proceeds to mix the action with some montages of actual WW2 footage which was fairly common during the era of filmmaking. Having left the women back in England including second billed Etchika Choureau who isn't even playing Garner's love interest the boys hit Sicily. She's hooked up with Whitman's rebel whereas Garner actually plays this one stag with no leading lady.
It's a march across familiar war torn territories including Anzio where some of the Rangers will be left behind before the team is disbanded as this two hour feature film comes to a close.
I somehow can't see this film going before the cameras as it is. Not if Heston had stayed on to play the leading role. He was an action star and there's very little action in here for Darby. I think the film might have been in for some major rewrites for good old Chuck. Likable as James Garner is, here he proves to be ......... well ...... likable. It's as if he's prepping for those Doris Day comedies to come. The film really did need a Heston or a Holden to lead this regiment into hell on the front lines and play tough to the very end. Garner wasn't quite there yet.
Now on to the positives. I'm a guy who likes to see my favorite character players and lesser known leading men on screen and when they turn up in the same film, all the bigger bonus. Torin Thatcher is one such guy.
To me he's always a hard ass or villain and though he's the gruff Sarge here, he's really an old softy.
Murray Hamilton is always a welcome site due to his playing that Mayor guy in 1975. Eventual leading man Stuart Whitman was always a favorite of mine growing up and I still welcome finding new films I've yet to see where he makes an appearance. Either in support or leading roles.
As for Garner himself, there's just no way not to like this guy. Another of those actors that I grew up watching thanks to his many films and TV work as Rockford. Lastly, let us not forget the GREAT Jack Warden. An actor who made everything he appeared in worthy of checking out. (I think)
In the end I think if I had to I'd rather watch Darby's Rangers again before having to watch Wellman's other film of 1958, Lafayette Escadrille. Neither one is much good in the end but both feature a solid cast of up and comers. Despite some truly great films from Wellman including Wings, The Ox Bow Incident and Island in the Sky, his career kind of wound down with a couple of forgettable titles. Despite living until 1979, Wellman never directed another feature film following this less than stellar year.
Bataan (1943)
Bataan review
This is a movie unlike any other you will ever see.
In the early months of 1942, Japan launched an attack on the Philippines and, over the course of three months, they drove General Douglas MacArthur and his American forces right off of the islands.
Bataan is set during that retreat. A group of 13 men are assigned the task of blowing up a key bridge after the Allies cross it, and before the Japanese reach it. The 13 are castoffs and strangers to one another. In all the fighting they'd become separated from their original units. But now they'd been asked to come together and delay the Japanese advance for as long as they could.
The motley nature of this crew makes for some solid character-driven action but what makes this film so very unusual and exceptional is when it was shot. America had been forced out of the Philippine Islands, and those wounds still stung. This was not the seemingly invincible America that we know today, but was instead America the bloodied. It would still be a year's time before the US returned to the Philippines, and for Bataan's audience it was far from clear what the outcome of the war would be. The typical war film is about men facing incredible odds and eventually winning. They couldn't do that in Bataan, because it was about a battle the US lost. So, instead, Bataan was made as a pledge to honor the courage and sacrifice of men who died never knowing if victory would even happen.
The result is an emotional rollercoaster that keeps your attention right to the very end.
CAUTIONS
There is a lot of fighting in Bataan. And right from the opening - with the Japanese dropping bombs on the retreating columns of soldiers, Filipino families, and the wounded - there are a lot of people being killed. However there is very little blood. In the 1940s directors didn't feel the need to make things hyper-realistic, or depict killing blows in slow motion, so, compared to today's gore-fests Bataan isn't going to disturb adults.
But the sheer volume of killing makes this a film unsuitable for the very young.
CONCLUSION
This is one of the most memorable, and certainly the most unique World War II film I've ever seen. I'd recommend this for guys who have the patience to appreciate black and white films and who have an interest in learning about World War II from the films of the time.
Paths of Glory (1957)
Paths of Glory review
Paths of Glory is not the movie I thought it would be. From the posters it seemed like it would be a straight up war film, albeit a straight up war film directed by Stanley Kubrick, which would likely be something special. And the first third is a standard war film. It's all trenches and explosions, this being WWI. Kubrick gives us the set-up: Kirk Douglas is told that he must take a German stronghold. He tells his superior officer, played by George Macready as an evil and power hungry man looking for his next star, that his forces are not big enough nor will they have enough support to accomplish their goal. This, of course, doesn't matter and although Douglas tries his damnedest to take the hill he barely makes it halfway through no-mans-land and a third of his forces won't even dare to leave the trenches. This sequence is just as intense as the opening section of Saving Private Ryan, though it is shot completely differently. Where Spielberg's movie is all shaky cam and tinnitus, Paths of Glory scrolls along, not shying away from the terror, but giving a continuous forward push. Is the camera following the soldiers or are they following it? It's amazing, actually, in such an action packed frame that we can pick out Douglas as he blows his whistle and climbs over dead bodies and artillery holes. At one point the camera zooms in to spot him and his glorious chin only to zoom back out and show how crazy this attack is. It is grimy to the extreme, at the same time as it is emblematic of Kubrick's complete control over his films.
After the failed maneuver, the evil General must cover his tracks. He sets up a court marshal in his ridiculously opulent base, a mansion with room sized paintings and marble floors. One soldier from each of the three sections of the troop will be tried for cowardice and shot if found guilty. Luckily, Douglas also happens to be the best lawyer in France, and he jumps to defend his men from the silly trial. To go any further into the film's plot would do a disservice to it. It is a Kubrick film and as such isn't exactly a rip-roaring good time. He films his characters with the standard detachment, though he allows them to be real people. You can sense the Douglas is pained and wants to do right by his men, not only from what he says but from how he acts. It's him against the world, Germans and French alike. The film is as much about the failings of military thinking as it is about the French vs. The Germans. Douglas rages against the machine but to little avail. It is only the final scene that changes how he views the world. It's a marvelous scene, at first terrifying, then strangely comforting.
As the second film in my 1957 marathon, Paths of Glory continues the year's excellence. Along with Throne of Blood, it shows that filmmaking was just as vibrant then as it is now. There're plenty of explosions and gunfire and later plenty of explosive dialogue and fiery speeches. It is at least as good as that other courtroom drama from the same year, 12 Angry Men. And you can imagine the entirety of War Horse happening alongside it! Both films rely on American and British actors playing foreign characters. Where are the cries of crass commercialism for Kubrick's film? Lost in the fog of war, I guess.
Witness to Murder (1954)
Witness to Murder review
Alfred Hitchcock may have attained triumphant results for Rear Window in 1954, but Barbara Stanwyck also proved that she could surpass his record in a more thrilling production titled Witness To Murder, a suspenseful Film Noir that resembles Rear Window, also released the same year.
If it weren't for Rear Window that dominated box office popularity on it's release a month later, Witness To Murder would have been highly regarded by critics. At the time of it's initial release, Witness To Murder had everything running in it's favor. It highlighted a myriad of aspects that a cinematic staple contains, and unlike the latter it was shot in glorious black and white, and enhanced by superb cinematography and atmospheric vapors.
The films director, Roy Rowland is not as eminent as Alfred Hitchcock, nor has he had a successful string of pictures like Hitchcock. In truth, Rowland was only second rate compared to Hollywood's pantheon of directors, who spotlighted the entertainment industry with their commendable efforts in directing. For Rowland, Witness To Murder is what I would call his most effectual film. It provided him with the opportunity to explore heavy, solid material that is not only entertaining but rich and suspenseful in detail.
Witness To Murder was produced by Chester Erskine, with the screenplay by Nunnally Johnson, and featuring a stellar cast which includes, Barbara Stanwyck, George Sanders and Gary Merrill, who at the time of filming was married to Bette Davis.
Barbara Stanwyck headlines the production as the films protagonist. One cold, windy night in Los Angeles, Cheryl Draper ( Stanwyck ) awakens to witness a woman being strangled to death from her bedroom window. Shocked with what she just discovered, she immediately phones the police, but after Lt. Lawrence Mathews ( Gary Merrill ) arrives at the scene and finds no evidence of murder in the apartment of Albert Richter ( George Sanders ) he automatically believes that Cheryl dreamed the whole situation.
As time progresses, Cheryl still firmly believes that she observed a real life murder taking place, and is persistent in trying to get her point across to the police, but before she knows it, it's Cheryl's sanity that comes into question.
The similarities between Witness To Murder and Rear Window are more than evident all though out the film. Like Hitchcock's production, the films main prop to where the crimes are witnessed is the bedroom window, and to really resemble the latter, the object used to spy in the neighboring apartment to investigate the incident are a pair of binoculars, but while it contains many of the same elements as Rear Window, it also bares a startling analogy to Vertigo, North By Northwest and Psycho.
In Witness To Murder, Barbara Stanwyck has a role that's identical to James Stewart as the protagonist who witnesses the crime happening, and remains adamant in her beliefs about what she observed. Both characters experience trouble with the police, who won't believe them and start defending the antagonist, who in this case is George Sanders in a role that resembles that of Raymond Burr in Rear Window.
Alfred Hitchcock is truly a virtuoso of the film industry and Rear Window definitely warranted the critical acclaim it received, but in no means is a Witness To Murder a pale imitation of Hitchcock's masterpiece. Of course both films explore many of the same avenues and are similar in comparison, but audiences who favor the latter tend to forget that Witness To Murder was made and released before Rear Window.
In my opinion, Barbara Stanwyck is the greatest actress to ever grace the silver screen. In the annals of cinema history there is no other star that possessed the versatility that Stanwyck inhabited. From the moment she stepped foot on Hollywood soil, Stanwyck had been portraying a plethora of diverse roles in every genre imaginable. After her victorious results as the femme fatale, Phyllis Dietrichson in Double Indemnity ( 1944 ) Barbara Stanwyck's adeptness to Film Noir was well established, so much that she became accustomed to this genre during the 40's and the 50's.
Witness To Murder might not be considered one of Barbara Stanwyck's best works, but when you have an illustrious resume with a myriad of memorable roles, it's hard to choose what is. Stanwyck pioneered her way through a multitude of meritorious productions that are definitely worthy of an Oscar, in which she sadly never obtained.
I personally feel that Witness To Murder is one film that deserves more recognition. There is absolutely nothing that one could possibly dislike about the movie. It's abounded by a great script, an excellent cast, atmospheric cinematography, and a rising flow of suspense, resulting in a nail biting climax that will keep the viewer intrigued from beginning to end.
Apart from the many highlights, the cast is one exceptional feature. Barbara Stanwyck is laudable as Cheryl Draper, the indomitable, intelligent and independent woman who witnesses the murder and is determined to get the case resolved, even going as far as investigating the crime herself. She would do anything to prove to the police that she is correct, even if it means arranging a tour of Richter's apartment that is for rent so she can search for evidence, and when she finds a pair of earrings, she immediately takes them to the police to convince them she's right, but sadly for Cheryl this method is not effective.
Both George Sanders and Gary Merrill are magnificent. George Sanders is in full sneer mode as Albert Richter. To the police, he appears amiable and demonstrates that he would be incapable of committing such a crime, but in truth, he's a cold, ruthless murderer with a motive to kill.
The film is also packed with extreme punch. The scene where Cheryl is sent to the insane asylum is very intense and dramatic. In this particular part, Barbara Stanwyck as Cheryl Draper transforms her expressions into abysmal emotions as she is being swept into a mental state. Without having to resort to histrionics, Barbara is able to execute this scene perfectly by displaying such raw feelings and mountains of emotions.
Witness To Murder is the true definition of Film Noir at it's zenith. From John Alton's cinematography and the outstanding cast to the memorable chilling finale, this is one production that is not to be missed.
Clarissa Explains It All (1991)
Clarissa Explains It All review
This is another American sitcom aimed at children that eventually came to this country. Clarissa Explains It All was originally shown on Nickelodeon, and it starred Melissa Joan Hart as Clarissa Darling, a girl in her early-teens. Now this was that age where Clarissa was beginning to learn about things in life including boys and spots, and she wanted to tell us all about it.
Most episodes begin with Clarissa breaking the fourth wall and directly addressing the viewers about what was currently on her mind. This would also occasionally be accompanied by some bizarre cutaway scenes. Clarissa also had a fondness for computer games, and we would see how she was getting on at Thomas Tupper Junior High School, it really was chaos. Vlcsnap-00296
We also meet Clarissa's family, her mother Janet who was a teacher, her father Marshall who was an architect, and her younger brother Ferguson. He was something of a swot, and there was a lot of sibling rivalry between the pair of them, meaning that they spent a lot of time squabbling. All of these situations helped to shape Clarissa's increasingly worldly-wise outlook on life. Vlcsnap-00300
The only other main character was Sam, who often entered Clarissa's bedroom through the window, which was always accompanied by a piece of music, and the greeting "hey, Sam". Now I always thought that he was going out with Clarissa, but it seems that he was just a good friend, because she was very well-behaved. Oh, and did they do an episode where Clarissa developed a punk alter-ego and a boy at school fell for her? Of course they did! Vlcsnap-00297
Indeed, although Clarissa had to deal with various things as her life changed, she seemed to be much more level-headed and less angst-ridden than most other TV characters (a more traumatic portrayal of what the teenage years can be like could be found in other sitcoms around at the same time including Married... With Children). An episode where she tried to bake a cake as a surprise for her parents' wedding anniversary was just about as difficult as it ever got for her.
Clarissa Explains It All did well for Nickelodeon, and there were 65 episodes in five series. It wasn't shown in the UK until 1994, by which point it had already ended in America, and it was originally shown as part of the Saturday Morning show Live & Kicking, before it moved to the main CBBC afternoon slot, where it would be repeated regularly until 1999. The show also had a distinctive "na-na-na" theme song (provided by Rachel Sweet) that it was difficult to get out of your head.
As far as 90s American sitcoms go, I don't remember enjoying it as much as Out Of This World, but it still contained some good moments. I'm fairly sure that it wasn't been released on DVD in this country though. Hart of course would later star in Sabrina The Teenage Witch, another successful long-running children's sitcom (I'll review that one soon too).
Pride and Prejudice (1980)
Pride and Prejudice review
As many fans of Jane Austen must know, there have been several screen and television adaptations of the author's most celebrated novel, "Pride and Prejudice", published in 1813. I usually come across at least five of those versions - including the six-part BBC adaptation that aired in the U. S. in 1980. The miniseries was adapted by Fay Weldon and directed by Cyril Coke.
Only someone unfamiliar with Austen's story would not know that "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE" told the story of Elizabeth Bennet, the second-born daughter of an English gentleman and landowner in Regency England. The story focused on the efforts of her volatile mother to find eligible husbands for Elizabeth and her four sisters. It is also a love story about Elizabeth's tumultuous relationship with a wealthy and haughty gentleman named Fitzwilliam Darcy. Through six episodes, the miniseries explored Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy's emotions, as their relationship went from mild hostility, misunderstandings and prejudice, to love, respect and marriage. Many Austen fans consider Weldon's adaptation to be the most faithful to the 1813 novel. After my recent viewing of the miniseries, I realized that I could never agree with that opinion.
I am not saying that "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE" strongly differed from Austen's novel. But I can honestly say that it was no more faithful than the 1995 version. Only screenwriter Fay Weldon's variations differ from Andrew Davies'. In fact, most these differences were especially obvious in the segment that featured Elizabeth's visit to Hunsford, the Collins' home in Kent. But these differences did not lessen my enjoyment of the production. However, there were some aspects of the miniseries that did.
One aspect of "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE" that annoyed me was its occasionally slow pacing. There were moments when I found myself wondering if I was watching a filmed play. Most fans would dismiss this complaint on the grounds that many BBC miniseries productions had been shot in this static style. True, but I have seen a few of these old productions that managed to maintain a brisk pacing. Another aspect of the miniseries that annoyed me was the internal monologues that expressed Elizabeth's thoughts. This was especially apparent in scenes that reflected Elizabeth's opinion of the letter she had received from Mr. Darcy following his disastrous marriage proposal; and in the sequences that featured her thoughts on her sister Lydia's elopement with George Wickham and her parents' marriage. Frankly, I found the use of this film device simply a cheap way to reflect Elizabeth's opinions on the subjects. And these monologues nearly bogged the series' pacing to a standstill.
But the real disappointment proved to be the miniseries' portrayal of the Netherfield Ball. The ball given by Mr. Darcy's close friend, Charles Bingley, was one of the novel's centerpieces in nearly every adaptation of "Pride and Prejudice". The ball was replaced with a garden fête in the 1940 version. But it still turned out to be one of the movie's centerpieces. So, why did Fay Weldon dropped the ball with this particular sequence? In this version, the Netherfield Ball segment lasted a little over six minutes. Elizabeth expressed her displeasure over Mr. Wickham's non-appearance and the prospect of dancing with Mr. Darcy. She danced with both Mr. Darcy and her cousin, William Collins. She traded barbs with Caroline Bingley. And Elizabeth also witnessed her mother's embarrassing boasts about elder sister Jane's romance with Mr. Bingley. By deleting Mr. Collins brief discussion with Mr. Darcy and the embarrassing behavior of the other members of the Bennet family, Weldon's screenplay seemed to have rendered the sequence half done. Worse, Cyril Coke shot the sequence at an incredibly fast pace. Between Weldon's deletions and Coke's pacing, the Netherfield Ball sequence seemed like such a disappointing affair.
When I first saw "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE", I became immediately enamored of the miniseries. As an adolescent, I thought it was one of the best things to come from British television. After my last viewing of the series, my opinion of it has somewhat diminished. But I still consider it to be very entertaining. Austen's wit remained intact. Well . . . Somewhat. Some of the jokes - like Elizabeth's comment about Darcy's and her penchant for "amazing" statements - failed to make any impact, due to Elizabeth Garvie's delivery of the line. And many of Mr. Bennet's witticisms seemed angry, instead of funny. But plenty of humor remained in the miniseries. Elizabeth's first meeting with Lady Catherine de Bourgh and a reunion with Mr. Darcy struck me as one of the miniseries' funniest scenes. Just about every scene with Mrs. Bennet or Mr. Collins provided plenty of laughs. The romances featured in "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE" remained strong as ever, especially between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy.
I would not consider Paul Wheeler's photography for "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE" to be that colorful. In fact, it looked slightly faded. One could attribute this to the fact that the miniseries has been aging for the past thirty years. Yet, I have seen other television productions made around the same time or earlier that looked more colorful. But I must admit that I enjoyed Joan Ellacott's costume designs. They were certainly colorful and properly reflected the characters' social status.
Any adaptation of "Pride and Prejudice" would be nothing without strong leads to portray the two main characters, Elizabeth Bennet and Fitzwilliam Darcy. The 1980 miniseries certainly benefitted from strong performances provided by Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul. Garvie proved to be a very soft-spoken Elizabeth Bennet, reminding me of Greer Garson's performance in the same role in the 1940 adaptation. Yet, beneath the soft tones, Garvie provided plenty of wit and steel. I found her performance very enjoyable. And David Rintoul definitely projected Mr. Darcy's haughty demeanor. Some consider his performance to be the epitome portrayal of Austen's famous character. Perhaps. Perhaps not. There were moments when Rintoul's Mr. Darcy seemed a bit too haughty - especially when the character was supposed to be falling in love with Elizabeth. But I believe he still gave a first-rate performance. And he provided one of the miniseries' funniest moments in a scene featuring Elizabeth and the Collins' first visit to Rosings Park.
The rest of the cast seemed solid. But I can only think of a few exceptional performances. One came from Priscilla Morgan, whose portrayal of Mrs. Bennet managed to be extremely irritating without her resorting to caricature. I was also impressed by Marsha Fitzalan, who proved that Caroline Bingley could be both subtle and spiteful at the same time. Tessa Peake-Jones gave an entertaining performance as the bookish and pompous Mary Bennet. Her portrayal seemed more subtle than other actresses who have portrayed the character. Peter Settlelen also gave a solid performance as George Wickham, but he came off as too hale and hearty for me to consider him as an effective villain. And Peter Howell was certainly hilarious as the boorish and obsequious Mr. William Collins, Elizabeth's cousin and Mr. Bennet's heir. However, there were moments when he seemed a bit over-the-top.
And then there were the performances that I found questionable. I must admit that I was not impressed by Natalie Ogle's portrayal of the childish Lydia Bennet. I found her acting skills somewhat amateurish. Claire Higgins, who portrayed Kitty Bennet seemed a little too old for the role. There were times when her Kitty seemed more mature (in a negative way) than the other four sisters. And Kitty is supposed to be the second youngest sibling in the family. Actor Moray Watson gave a sharp and entertaining performance as the Bennets' patriarch. But I found his wit a bit too harsh and angry at times.
"PRIDE AND PREJUDICE" has its share of flaws, which I have pointed out in this review. But its virtues outweighed the flaws - the biggest ones being the first-rate performances of the two leads, Elizabeth Garvie and David Rintoul. Screenwriter Fay Weldon and director Cyril Coke did an above-average job in adapting Jane Austen's most famous novel.