Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

Re: THE CAINE MUTINY, I've always thought Robert Francis would have been better served in any number of John Ford movies.   He just seemed to have that certain "Yes, sir" quality that Pappy would have appreciated and utilized to full capacity.

I must break away from the majority opinion about Ferrer and MacMurray in their roles.  Disclaimer:  Jose has always been one of my favorites;  he is masterful at expressing tormented emotions but here I find him, well, kind of...ham-fisted, especially after the verdict.  Never came across believably to me as someone who would get three sheets to the wind in that particular situation.  As for Fred, he's proved his chops as a fine dramatic actor (DOUBLE INDEMNITY and THE APARTMENT) but I thought he could have played Keefer with perhaps a bit more....subtlety.    The best performance apart from Bogart is Van Johnson.  Underrated.  Very versatile, likeable, always gives you his best.   

That Max Steiner score is by equal turns exhilarating and corny.   

As for "May Wynn", the less said the better, lol.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing about ROBERT FRANCIS -- he never really got a chance to be a better actor.  If I remember rightly he died 66 years ago in a plane crash at age 24 or 25.   I remember seeing THE CAINE MUTINY many moons ago; long before I had access to a computer or the IMDb and I wondered why I had not seen Robert Francis in other movies.  I checked 'The World Almanac and Book of Facts'.  Nothing on Robert Francis.  This would've been in the late 1980s.  Years later I found out he'd died in 1955 in a plane crash.

I also had the same wonder about actor AL LETTIERI.  I'd seen him in several early 1970s movies and then . . . nothing.  Not until I could get online and look him up did I read that he'd been dead since October 1975.   He was 47. 

And so it goes . . .

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I haven't seen The Big Bluff and you know how much I enjoy Martha Vickers.   I'll have to catch this one on youtube.     Thanks for the tip.

The Big Bluff - WikipediaThe Big Bluff - Rotten Tomatoes

 

I found it on tubi.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Did anybody see Elia Kazan's THE ARRANGEMENT?   This one vies with Bob Fosse's ALL THAT JAZZ for self-indulgent, navel-gazing badness -- two creative men grappling with middle-aged angst, but THE ARRANGEMENT is definitely in a class by itself.

Kirk Douglas is a successful ad man who hates his job.  He's got all the perks of unfettered consumerism -- beautiful home, pool, servants, wife (a rheumy-eyed Deborah Kerr, who has a brief nude scene.  The tushie is actually hers), and mistress (Faye Dunaway).  Kirk has a nervous breakdown and tries to commit suicide.  In addition, he's got to cope with the mental deterioration of his aging, tyrannical Greek/Turkish father, played with Anthony Quinn-like relish by the underrated Richard Boone, who sports a silver wig and dialogue along the lines of  "You give me  money!" and "Is taxi here yet?"  Kazan directs in "Swinging Sixties" style, with some Fellini thrown in for good measure, if you can possibly imagine.  Must be seen to be believed.

How could Elia Kazan take his own novel (which I totally liked) and turn it into such a terrible movie?  Leonard Maltin rated it with one of his few BOMBS.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, King Rat said:

Yes, The Caine Mutiny would have been a better film with someone like Tony Perkins as Willie. Willie is actually the main character in the film, but it doesn't feel that way because Robert Francis just isn't good enough. And you didn't mention "May Wynn as May Wynn!"--who, like Gig Young and Anne Shirley, changed her stage name to the name of the character she played. Of course, May Wynn as May Wynn doesn't make much impression, either.

Also MGM's musical actress Suzanne Burce changed her name to Jane Powell after playing a young teen named Jane Powell in 1944's "Song of the Open Road."

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

And remember that actor JUSTUS McQUEEN changed his screen name to the character he played in BATTLE CRY (1955): 

L.Q. JONES

And also:  Actor R.G. ARMSTRONG's real name was 'Robert Golden Armstrong' . . . but there was already an actor of some note named 'Robert Armstrong' whom I reckon everyone here is familiar with.  What to do?  Go with initials! 

In regards to THE ARRANGEMENT (1969) it's hard to believe Kirk Douglas (b. December 1916) was older than Richard Boone (b. June 1917).  Boone had more wrinkles for a man of his age than any other actor I know of.   Alcohol, cigarettes and Sun will age anyone a lot faster . . . but still the amount of wrinkles he had for the age he was astounds me.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, filmnoirguy said:

How could Elia Kazan take his own novel (which I totally liked) and turn it into such a terrible movie?  Leonard Maltin rated it with one of his few BOMBS.

I managed to watch most of it. Did Kirk or the film win any Razzies that year??? Did they exist back then? I remember the film bombing badly (at the B.O. and with critics) Kirk is really over the top (even for him). But the script and direction are terrible too. The scenes between him and Richard Boone are so awful. Non-stop shouting. UGH.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2021 at 5:42 PM, CinemaInternational said:

Without You I'm Nothing (1990)

Coming right on the heels of TCM's semi-rebranding to, I guess, try to appeal to "woke" audiences in 2021,  along comes Without You I'm Nothing, a stand-up film of sorts that seems to be vying for the title of most "woke" film of 1990 (although 2021 wokesters would be less than thrilled about a seemingly positive reference to old drinking cups that looked like black women in a stereotypical way). I guess that makes it the perfect TCM Underground showing for the first week of the remodel, but it's a strange, disconcerting film.

It stars, Sandra Bernhard, a comedian who at various times in the film describes herself as a Communist, Jewish, Bisexual Feminist, who is likely best known for playing the kidnapper obsessed with Jerry Lewis in The King of Comedy, and for her recurring appearances as a lesbian friend of the leading lady on Roseanne in the 90s. Bernhard cannot be mistaken for anyone else with her barbed skewerings of everyone including herself and her angular face which differs in appearance even based on how light hits it. She's a strange sort to watch; she's really arrests the attention, she has a good speaking and singing voice, but everything else seems very off kilter. The film finds her smashing many public symbols of the time (this is the type of film that likely made some heads almost explode on its first release), and finds her careening between egomania and self-hatred. She jokes, she sings, she rants, she strips, she has sex, she generally is meant to confront the audience as to how they feel about her. We have looks in of mockumentary, and strange cuts to a lesbian showerroom scene and to a black woman who leaves Bernhard an R-rated insult on a tablecloth at the end of the film.

At times, this film does seem to work, unlike most other stand-up in concert films, the camerawork is not static and does not rely on a laughing audience's reaction shots (the onscreen audience in this film just simply stares silently at her), and at times, her personality is enough to seemingly make it work. But in the final 20 minutes it becomes pretty overbearing and preachy, and the ending, having her draped in an American flag, until she takes it off to reveal her standing in only the tiniest thong and G-string imaginable as she does a 3  minute nude dance and burlesque number to the entirety of Prince's "Little Red Corvette" while the camera slobbers over her (admittedly good) physical  physique is extremely embarrassing, simultaneously both self-indulgent and demeaning at the same time.

I'm still not sure what to make of it all. Except maybe shock that this in-your-face cutting -edge comedienne once had a cameo in a Sesame Street movie. After seeing this, she seems like the least likely person to be hobnobbing with Oscar the Grouch.....

I recorded it, but havent watched it yet. Whatever happened to Bernhard????

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Did anybody see Elia Kazan's THE ARRANGEMENT?   This one vies with Bob Fosse's ALL THAT JAZZ for self-indulgent, navel-gazing badness -- two creative men grappling with middle-aged angst, but THE ARRANGEMENT is definitely in a class by itself.

Kirk Douglas is a successful ad man who hates his job.  He's got all the perks of unfettered consumerism -- beautiful home, pool, servants, wife (a rheumy-eyed Deborah Kerr, who has a brief nude scene.  The tushie is actually hers), and mistress (Faye Dunaway).  Kirk has a nervous breakdown and tries to commit suicide.  In addition, he's got to cope with the mental deterioration of his aging, tyrannical Greek/Turkish father, played with Anthony Quinn-like relish by the underrated Richard Boone, who sports a silver wig and dialogue along the lines of  "You give me  money!" and "Is taxi here yet?"  Kazan directs in "Swinging Sixties" style, with some Fellini thrown in for good measure, if you can possibly imagine.  Must be seen to be believed.

Even then you can't believe it! I saw most of it.  I've attempted to watch it before, but could never make it through. UNBELIEVABLY BAD. Kirk and Boone vie for worst over acting performance. GAG inducing. I missed Deborah's nude scene. All for naught!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Hibi said:

I recorded it, but havent watched it yet. Whatever happened to Bernhard????

Last I head about Bernhard, she was making frequent guest appearances on a recently ended series on FX called Pose, set in the world of the underground gay/drag bars of New york in the 1980s and 1990s. (The show was cancelled because it was considered to be hard to attempt in the Pandemic era).

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Hibi said:

I managed to watch most of it. Did Kirk or the film win any Razzies that year??? Did they exist back then? I remember the film bombing badly (at the B.O. and with critics) Kirk is really over the top (even for him). But the script and direction are terrible too. The scenes between him and Richard Boone are so awful. Non-stop shouting. UGH.

 

48 minutes ago, Hibi said:

Even then you can't believe it! I saw most of it.  I've attempted to watch it before, but could never make it through. UNBELIEVABLY BAD. Kirk and Boone vie for worst over acting performance. GAG inducing. I missed Deborah's nude scene. All for naught!

Razzies didn't exist in 1969, but the film did receive very bad reviews and was considered to be one of the major disappointments of the year as expectations were high with Kazan adapting his own book, and with that cast attached. So if they had existed, the film would likely have been a top contender for them. As for Deborah Kerr, don't look for a nude scene of her in this film. They filmed one, but it was cut from the finished film; however she did go nude in John Frankenheimer's The Gypsy Moths the same year in a scene where her character was having an affair with Burt Lancaster (again) on a couch while her husband William Windom was upstairs knowing exactly what was happening. Her nude scene there remained in the film, and its very clear that it is her in the scene and not a body double.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

 

Razzies didn't exist in 1969, but the film did receive very bad reviews and was considered to be one of the major disappointments of the year as expectations were high with Kazan adapting his own book, and with that cast attached. So if they had existed, the film would likely have been a top contender for them. As for Deborah Kerr, don't look for a nude scene of her in this film. They filmed one, but it was cut from the finished film; however she did go nude in John Frankenheimer's The Gypsy Moths the same year in a scene where her character was having an affair with Burt Lancaster (again) on a couch while her husband William Windom was upstairs knowing exactly what was happening. Her nude scene there remained in the film, and its very clear that it is her in the scene and not a body double.

Yes, I knew she had a nude scene in that film also (and pushing 50!). I guess I didn't miss anything in The Arrangement then. (missed part of the middle this go round) Yes, had a feeling the Razzies came after '69. Too bad! The film deserved several! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mr. Gorman said:

Since TCM aired the Sandra Bernhard stand-up movie then why not air Andrew "Dice" Clay's 1989 HBO Special "THE DICEMAN COMETH"?  Alicia Malone could do the 'Intro'.  

😉

I am reminded that Andrew Dice Clay's 1991 stand-up film Dice Rules is only one of two films (the other being a Marin Lawrence stand-up film) to ever get an NC-17 (aka equivalent of an X rating) for language alone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hibi said:

Yes, I knew she had a nude scene in that film also (and pushing 50!). I guess I didn't miss anything in The Arrangement. (missed part of the middle) Yes, had a feeling the Razzies came after '69. Too bad! The film deserved several! :D

I would have thought that The Harvard Lampoon might have gone out after it in 1969 since they did a worst films of the year list, but their lists were always very snarky, usually going after a few beloved films, instead of going only for despised films, giving their lists a slightly dubious air. They did not pick The Arrangement for their "worst" list; instead their 10 of dishonor were: Easy Rider, Medium Cool, Putney Swope, Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice, Topaz, True Grit, The Maltese Bippy, John and Mary, Hello Dolly, and Last Summer. In typical Lampoon fashion, they carved up several films there that didn't deserve it.....

 

I did find though while using Google, a link to The New York Times (and for once I could read the article because I hadn't exhausted my limit of free articles). For a few short years, the Times used to write an article about the 10 worst films of the year, until their management stopped it thinking it was too mean-spirited to continue. However, 1969 was one of the years they did do a column, and indeed, The Arrangement was picked as one of the year's 10 worst by the Times. I'm enclosing the complete column from January 4, 1970 here via copy and paste:

Quote

THERE were a lot of dreadful movies around in 1969, but I really can't dismiss a 12‐month period in which Warner Brothers‐Seven Arts gave us, as their Easter attraction, a horror film called “Dracula Has Risen From the Grave,” or in which the stockholders of 20th Century‐Fox approved a motion to change the name of the company to 21st Century‐Fox. I don't worry about whether such a name‐change will fool anybody; I'm more impressed by the stockholders' faith in the efficacy of symbols. This is the same company, of course, whose management scored the miscasting coup of the year by expressing its man in the efficacy of symbols—by giving Barbra Streisand the title role in “Hello, Dolly!” However, if Fox had been casting the film four years ago, the role might have gone to Julie Andrews—as six years ago it would have gone to Elizabeth Taylor, and 13 years ago to Grace Kelly. Be thankful for blunders that are less major than they could have been.

Be thankful too for those small moments that make memorable a number of movies that would otherwise be forgotten even before you've left the theater. There was one such in Roger Vadim's “Metzengerstein” sequence from “Spirits of the Dead.” Jane Fonda, as a medieval lady in love with her horse, is relaxing at an **** at home. Someone hands her a goblet. She sips, and then pushes it away from her with bored distaste: “Ugh—it's blood.”

It was a very bad year for **** in general, although I do remember with fondness a lady in a piece of ersatz German erotica called “Succubus” who, at the moment of pleasure's paroxysm, cried out: “Oh, Dante! Oh, Beatrice!” It almost makes up for the fact that in 1969 we had no less than four Gregory Peck performances that can only be described as “ambassadorial.” Whether he is playing a retired Army scout (“The Stalking Moon”), a sheriff (“Mackenna's Gold”), a scientist‐turned‐secret agent (“The Chairman”) or the head of NASA (“Marooned”), Peck acts as if he were on some high‐level mission on behalf of clean, resonant speech.

Incidentally, “Marooned” doesn't make my list of the year's Ten Worst. It is not only funnier than “Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice,” it's also a perfect movie for children between the ages of 7 and 9 who like to test their reading skills. Just as in real life, every piece of equipment of space technology in “Marooned,” including each astronaut, is labeled with either its name, its function or the identity of its manufacturer. The night I saw the film, I sat in front of three small boys who began reading out loud with the opening credits (“Columbia Pictures...”) and didn't stop until “The End.” I should report they did have some trouble with the pronunciation of the name “Braniff,” which appeared briefly on a sign in an otherwise superfluous scene in an airport.

My list of the year's Ten Worst Films does not include any Gregory Peck films, nor such things as “Krakatoa, East of Java,” “de Sade,” “The Great Bank Robbery,” “The Maltese Bippy” nor even “Skidoo” (which should not be dismissed simply because it's a comedy that isn't funny). It doesn't even include Richard Fleischer's “Che!”, based on the poster, which one friend of mine saw as an attempt by the United States Department of State to ingratiate itself to Fidel Castro by placing most of the blame for Cuban‐U.S. problems on Che and the Russians. None of these films represents enough ambition to make their failures in any way distinguished. The following films—in alphabetical order—do:

The Arrangement, written, directed and produced by Elia Kazan, based on his own, best‐selling novel about a West Coast advertising man who chucks success and for tune and Deborah Kerr for inner peace, a modest income and Faye Dunaway. It's one of those no‐contest contests. Kazan uses a lot of snappy sixties' cinematic techniques but the movie still looks like a gutsy Ross Hunter production from the fifties.

Can Heironymous Merkin Ever Forget Mercy Humppe and Find True Happiness? di rected and scored by Anthony Newley, who also; stars in it, sings his own songs and plays its most conspicuous nude scenes. Newley, who has watched too many Fellini films without actually seeing them, is the greatest argument I know for assembly line movie production since the success of the Hardy family films. A studio boss like Louis B. Mayer simply would not have put up with such egomaniacal junk.

Hail Hero!, directed by Da vid Miller and starring Michael Douglas as a left‐wing flower child, the son of wealthy, right‐Wing parents, who joins the Army to fight a war he does not believe in (he wants to love the enemy). The movie is so fearless in tackling contemporary issues that it doesn't even mention the name of the war the boy is going to fight.

The Happy Ending, written, directed and produced by Richard Brooks, and starring Mrs. Brooks (Jean Simmons) as a bored Denver housewife who has taken to booze and pills. Brooks, who shot much of the film on Denver locations, has tried to make a serious, provincial movie, but Denver sounds suspiciously like Beverly. Hills, or, at least, the way that the people in Beverly Hills think Denver sounds. Brooks‐the‐writer is handicapped by an ear for real‐life small talk that is block tin.

John and Mary, directed by Peter Yates and starring Dustin Hoffman and Mia Farrow as a couple of unlikely, New York singles who meet at Maxwell's Plum, go to bed and then try to get to know each other. The settings and some of the subsidiary dialogue have an edgy kind of truth to them, but the characters are too inconsistently written to allow the stars to give performances that mean anything.

 

The Lost Man, written and directed by Robert Alan Aurthur, starring Sidney Poitier, as a black “Odd Man Out in white Philadelphia. The film was better when it starred James Mason and was directed by Carol Reed, but it has some importance as containing Poitier's first performance as a black militant in contemporary America. The movie is full of odd compromises. Although it seems to be about blacks, it depends on the tired devices of cops‐and‐robbers films to sustain interest. Although it seems to say that black is beautiful, Poitier's true love is Joanna Shimkus, who is white and beautiful. Like “Hail Hero!,” “The Lost Man” doesn't really want to alienate anybody.

Oh! What a Lovely War, directed by Richard Attenborough, adapted from the stage improvisation put together by Joan Littlewood. Not the year's most expensive musical, but it seems to be the biggest, the longest, the most all‐star‐casted—and the most stylistically con fused. The physical proportions of the film flatten the edge of the World War I satire that once—on the stage —had the energy and the charm of a series of engaged music hall routines. The movie should be in conjunction with “Battle of Britain,” which uses many of the same actors and is just as reverent of British caste as “Lovely War” is irreverent.

On Her Majesty's Secret Service, directed by Peter Hunt and starring George Lazenby, who looks as if he'd been chosen by computer to replace Sean Connery as Ian Fleming's James Bond. If you squint your eyes a bit, he does resemble Connery, but he seems ill‐at‐ease in his beautifully tailored suits, and never manages to suggest— even for fun—that the script's terrible, single entendre one‐ liners might have a perfectly innocent second meaning. The, thing that ruins the film, however, is Diana Rigg, who is such a beautiful, intelligent, responsive, mysterious actress that her presence makes everything around her look even more dull and foolish than is absolutely necessary. It isn't that James Bond is fallible—just that the producers, the director and the writer are.

The Secret of Santa Vittoria, directed and produced by Stanley Kramer from Robert Crichton's novel. Kramer's manner of adapting a small, comic novel is to turn the project into a sort of bucolic “War and Peace.” Rent several entire Italian towns. Hire a large proportion of the members of the Italian film industry, including such stars as Anna Magnani and Virna Lisi. And, just to make sure that everyone understands that the whole thing is sup posed to be fake, hire Anthony Quinn to impersonate Anthony Quinn as a big, loud, slovenly boob. When you've done all that, turn on the cameras and point them at your employees.

Winning, directed by James Goldstone and starring Paul Newman, Joanne Woodward and Robert Wagner. It's bad enough when Hollywood moviemakers try to imitate good European films, and worse when they give homage to poor ones, like the financially successful “A Man and a Woman.” Take “A Man and a Woman” out of “Winning” and you've got Richard Arlen at the Indianapolis Speed way, circa 1937.

Now, let's get on to 1970, hoping, of course, that no one effectively legislates mediocrity out of business—or art.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The HBO Special is just as dirty as the DICE RULES movie. 

If you've never seen the 'Old Time Dice Man' his act starts out with nursery rhymes ("Little Boy Blue . . . He Needed The Money!"). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

I would have thought that The Harvard Lampoon might have gone out after it in 1969 since they did a worst films of the year list, but their lists were always very snarky, usually going after a few beloved films, instead of going only for despised films, giving their lists a slightly dubious air. They did not pick The Arrangement for their "worst" list; instead their 10 of dishonor were: Easy Rider, Medium Cool, Putney Swope, Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice, Topaz, True Grit, The Maltese Bippy, John and Mary, Hello Dolly, and Last Summer. In typical Lampoon fashion, they carved up several films there that didn't deserve it.....

 

I did find though while using Google, a link to The New York Times (and for once I could read the article because I hadn't exhausted my limit of free articles). For a few short years, the Times used to write an article about the 10 worst films of the year, until their management stopped it thinking it was too mean-spirited to continue. However, 1969 was one of the years they did do a column, and indeed, The Arrangement was picked as one of the year's 10 worst by the Times. I'm enclosing the complete column from January 4, 1970 here via copy and paste:

 

LOL. Thanks for the list. I've gone through my NYT free quota and cant read their reviews anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hibi said:

I recorded it, but havent watched it yet. Whatever happened to Bernhard????

Sandra Bernhard does comedy and cabaret. I'm told that although she is not a great singer, she knows how to use the voice she has and what kind of material works for her.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

About The Arrangement: Kazan was excited to do America America because it was based on his family's experience as Greeks in Turkey. He said he was through directing other people's stories and was only going to do original work of his own. The Arrangement suggests that this plan did not work out well.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

s-l500.jpg

I just borrowed this from the library to see a few Lemmon films that have escaped me thus far.

I pretty much only got halfway through each film, finding them pretty underwhelming. Kim Novak was great in THE NOTORIOUS LANDLADY, but I just couldn't get interested in it, it seemed pretty lackluster in the writing even though written by Larry Gelbart & Blake Edwards. 

I started PHFFFT! which seemed like the same cliché story as THE MARRYING KIND, showing a divorcing couples relationship through flashback, how they initially fell in love. It was the last Judy Holliday movie for me to see, so I just duped it to watch later. Hopefully it'll be better if I'm in a better mood.

Last night was pt 2 of UNDER THE YUM YUM TREE, boy do I hate that title. It took me two evenings to get through this, but it was OK. Lemmon played a real cad for a change-a predatory landlord who rents apartments only to young pretty single girls. Ew.  Carol Lynley & Dean Jones play a couple that move in, much to Lemmon's chagrin.

I was very impressed with all performances, I couldn't take my eyes off Lynley-what a stunner. And I've NEVER seen Dean Jones as handsome or sexy, until now. Man, what a shame his career went so utterly Disney fluff, but guess everybody needs to work. Fun to see greats Paul Lynde & Imogene Coca in comedic supporting roles doing their best, only eliciting groans for the un-funny dated material. Coca's charactor was the only other DORCAS I've heard of save 7 Brides/Brothers!

Jack Lemmon is a great comedian, although comes across as somewhat one-note in what I saw of this collection. Like all other actors/comedians, he's performance is more enjoyable with better material. No one sets the stage for a star performance like Billy Wilder.

I hated Under the Yum Yum Tree when I saw it.  I love Jack Lemmon, but his character was so off-putting.  

I really liked the two films you didn't mention--Good Neighbor Sam and Operation Mad Ball.  'Sam' is fun. I also liked Operation Mad Ball because it featured Ernie Kovacs and a very early James Darren appearance.  While 'Operation' is pre-Some Like it Hot and The Apartment, Lemmon went through this weird period in the early-mid 60s where he appeared in all these comedies playing offbeat characters.   Despite this period, I am still a big fan of Lemmon's.  He is excellent in comedies like 'Hot,' The Odd Couple, and my personal favorite, Grumpy Old Men.  But he's also fantastic in heavy dramas like Days of Wine and Roses (one of the most depressing films I've ever seen) and The China Syndrome. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

Re: THE CAINE MUTINY, I've always thought Robert Francis would have been better served in any number of John Ford movies.   He just seemed to have that certain "Yes, sir" quality that Pappy would have appreciated and utilized to full capacity.

I must break away from the majority opinion about Ferrer and MacMurray in their roles.  Disclaimer:  Jose has always been one of my favorites;  he is masterful at expressing tormented emotions but here I find him, well, kind of...ham-fisted, especially after the verdict.  Never came across believably to me as someone who would get three sheets to the wind in that particular situation.  As for Fred, he's proved his chops as a fine dramatic actor (DOUBLE INDEMNITY and THE APARTMENT) but I thought he could have played Keefer with perhaps a bit more....subtlety.    The best performance apart from Bogart is Van Johnson.  Underrated.  Very versatile, likeable, always gives you his best.   

That Max Steiner score is by equal turns exhilarating and corny.   

As for "May Wynn", the less said the better, lol.

I agree that Jose Ferrer was pretty hammy in that part, though I enjoy seeing people (who deserve it) get what's coming to them, so I liked that scene.  Interesting what you said about MacMurray.  While I noticed that he seemed pretty indifferent to everything that was going on on The Caine, I didn't really pick-up on him doing anything overt.  When Jose Ferrer gave him his verbal lashing re: putting the idea about Queeg's paranoia into everyone's minds so that it would grow, I didn't immediately think that he was doing anything under-handed.  Maybe I'm just not up on my military politics, or I need to re-watch the film again.

May Wynn was not anything to write home about.  The ONLY thing notable about her was the song she was singing at the beginning of the film.  It was the same song that Tom Neal's girlfriend is singing at the beginning of Detour.   Other than that, she was so dull and Robert Francis was so dull and his mother was so dull, that they were the dullest couple with mommy issues ever! 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Det Jim McLeod said:

This is one of my favorite Bogart movies. I made a thread a long time ago asking the question "Is Queeg a unhinged paranoiac or just a quirky neurotic?" His performance is so good, it could be either way. I also think this is Van Johnson's best performance as the conflicted officer Maryk. Fred MacMurray also great as the weaselly Keefer. I agree that Robert Francis is not in the league of the rest of the cast and his romantic sub plot does bring the film down a bit.

Interesting.  I agree that Bogart could go either way.  He seems like a paranoid neurotic. At first, he seemed like a jerk, but I started to feel sorry for him during the strawberry debacle and later the mutiny.  It's like he knew what to do, but couldn't think, but didn't want to admit to weakness. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, King Rat said:

Yes, The Caine Mutiny would have been a better film with someone like Tony Perkins as Willie. Willie is actually the main character in the film, but it doesn't feel that way because Robert Francis just isn't good enough. And you didn't mention "May Wynn as May Wynn!"--who, like Gig Young and Anne Shirley, changed her stage name to the name of the character she played. Of course, May Wynn as May Wynn doesn't make much impression, either.

Lol.  The less said about May Wynn, the better.  She was fine.  But that's about it.  Like I said before, she does sing the same song that Tom Neal's girlfriend sings in Detour, so there's that I guess.  I didn't understand why she wanted to be with Willie so much.  I wasn't convinced that they were in love.  He was always going to be away.   She turned him down (I think) twice when he asked her to marry him, why did she agree at the end? It didn't make any sense. 

I agree that Anthony Perkins would have been way better as Willie--at least he's more interesting. I never really bought that Robert Francis really cared all that much about being in the military, that he really liked or disliked either Queeg or DeVriess. He was just kind of there.  I kind of wish Lee Marvin had played Willie--it would have been more interesting than him playing "Meatball." Even Jerry Paris who played another young ensign would have been better! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Knock on Any Door (1949)

I've been on a Bogart kick lately.  I was such a nerd while watching this movie too. I just happened to be wearing my new Bogart shirt while I watched Bogart.   Anyway, this was a movie that was streaming on The Criterion Channel as part of a series they have on courtroom dramas.  In this film, Bogart plays Andrew Morton, a fairly prominent lawyer who is offered a partnership at his firm at the beginning of the film.  However, part of the terms of the partnership is Andrew turning down Nick "Pretty Boy" Romano (John Derek), a troubled young man who has been accused of murdering a police officer.  Andrew ends up turning down the partnership because he feels guilty about Nick's circumstances.  It seems that a few years prior, Nick's father was falsely imprisoned due to Andrew's partner's mishandling of the case.  The Romano family entrusted Andrew with the case, but he didn't have time and passed the case off.  Mr. Romano is convicted and is imprisoned for four months before dying.  Due to the family patriarch's death, the Romano family is forced to move to the slums to survive.  Nick, who up until now was presented as a fairly nice kid, devolves into a juvenile delinquent.  He begins by dabbling in petty crime; but it soon escalates into more serious, more dangerous heists.  Andrew also feels somewhat of a kinship with Nick as he himself grew up in the slums and was also a juvenile delinquent until he pulled it together and became a successful lawyer.  

Much of the film involves Andrew in the courtroom, in flashback, telling Nick's story (to gain sympathy from the jury) and what circumstances led to him being the defendant in this trial.  Much of this film's message involves the idea of being permanently labeled a delinquent, because of society's need to provide harsh punishment and condemnation versus providing opportunities for rehabilitation and offering second chances to be a valuable member of society.  Andrew also argues that Nick being forced to live in the slums due to his family's lack of income is what made him a criminal.  I felt that this was somewhat prescient today, in that society tends to condemn and generalize people who live in poverty, saying that most of the time, it's the impoverished person's fault that they are poor.  It's never that they had the misfortune of being born into an impoverished family who is unable to break free of the cycle.  I just read an article the other day about a school district in Wisconsin that actually voted against providing free school lunches to children because they didn't want these kids to "be spoiled."  Seriously? We're forcing children to go without food due to their parents' inability to afford school lunches, because we don't want them to get spoiled by being able to eat a meal?  This is such a messed up society.

But I digress.

 In Knock on Any Door, Andrew who grew up in the slums, was obviously was able to pull it together and be a productive member of society in spite of society's stance on poverty.  It could be argued that it is up to the individual's desire to change as much as society's willingness to provide the chance to change.  Nick does run into the issue of being treated like a criminal even if he's not doing anything illegal (at that moment).  At the beginning of the film, as he's arrested under the suspicion of murdering the police officer, Nick proclaims his innocence.  However, because of his history and connection to the slums, he is ignored--after all, his life's motto is, "live fast, die young, and leave a good looking corpse."

I thought this was an interesting courtroom film.  Bogart's impassioned plea to the jury at the end was performed very well by Bogart.  I thought that George Macready who played the District Attorney was excellent.  While his character is not a villain, he is very adept at playing those sophisticated, high brow, haughty types who seem to command fear just as well as respect.  He really put the screws to Nick to get the truth about the evening out of him and it was very fun to watch.  John Derek was fine.  He was an attractive man, so he definitely fit the "Pretty Boy" label, but I wished that he had a bit more of an edge to him as I didn't completely believe him as the cynical, hot-tempered delinquent.  The weak spot in the film I thought was the Emma character who marries Nick.  I could not understand for the life of me why this young, soft spoken girl was interested in this thug--aside from the fact that he was attractive.  It might have been the classic story of someone wanting to "save" a troubled person.  But I couldn't believe that she wanted to stay with him as the movie wore on.   I just thought she was too much of a namby pamby and she didn't hold my interest.

Overall, this Nicholas Ray-directed film had a grittiness I like in a noir and featured strong performances from Bogart and Macready.  I don't think this is Ray or Bogart's best film by any means, but it was interesting and I would watch it again.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulldog Drummond Escapes (1937)

Bulldog Drummond at Bay (1937)

Bulldog Drummond's Peril (1938)

 

A World War One veteran seeks danger and excitement and beautiful women to lift him out of the boredom of being just another English gentleman of independent means.

I recently discovered that: TubiTV has these and several more Bulldog Drummond movies. 

It is interesting to see the differences which Ray Milland, John Lodge and John Howard bring to the role. R. Milland is the most polished but his humor seems a bit forced. I had the impression that J. Lodge did not find the role comfortable. That his movie was the worst-written did not help. I found J. Howard to be the most believable as a man who would go through life as an undemanding bum if he were not wealthy and this seems to me to fit the concept of the character.

6.4/10   5.2/10   6.1/10

I am sorry to say that there is one Bulldog Drummond movie which I have never watched.  13 Lead Soldiers (1948) starring Tom Conway does not seem to be available anywhere.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...