Last film seen...

1388389391393394413

Comments

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent

    Snowbound (1948) - a black and white thriller set in the winter Alps where an assortment of characters are thrown together, many it emerges are there on a competitive mission to uncover a hidden horde of Nazi gold. Among them are Dennis Price - still looking young as as he did in Kind Hearts and Coronets, Robert Newton, Herbert Lom and Stanley Holloway. A lot of it anticipates Bond - mostly OHMSS including skiers holding torches in the night, but also TWINE with a male and female downhill skier against magnificent music.

    The credits reveal Dr No's Zena Marshall is in it, though I didn't notice her at the time.

    The set-up and atmosphere is great - only a couple of drawbacks; too much of it latterly relies on explanatory flashback which bucks the rule of show don't tell (though I suppose flashbacks to show, still it's a bit much), also it is a bit of a Maltese Falcon shaggy dog story. Oh - another thing, it's rubbish. Not individual scenes, just the overall arc. Characters try to kill off another then unaccountably don't succeed or you think they're dead then they recover, you think an Alpine hut has only them, then two other extras pop out of nowhere for no reason and the ending is a cop out. It's like it's made up as they went along. Shame.

    I dare say Talking Pictures TV will repeat it at some point.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 21,704MI6 Agent

    Yes, must have ...... 🙂

  • HardyboyHardyboy Posts: 5,882Chief of Staff
    edited February 2023

    SMILE. I'd heard good things about this horror flick, and they don't cover it. This is an EXCELLENT shocker, involving an entity or ghost that travels from host to host and drives them to suicide. The affected woman--herself a psychiatrist--is driven literally insane, and so of course the question comes up: is this all real, or is it in her head? Whichever, it's a fine chiller.

    Vox clamantis in deserto
  • Lady RoseLady Rose London,UKPosts: 2,667MI6 Agent

    The Menu

    I enjoyed it but I don't know how I would categorise it. Seemed to be in a genre all of it own. 😁

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent

    Gloria

    Much-touted 1980 thriller by John Cassavetes in which a blowsy woman has to go on the run with a kid whose family has been wiped out by the mob, shades of the famous Leon here but less stylish for sure - and the kid is a six -year-old boy and kind of annoying.

    Bill Conti does the music, some historic tragic stuff of the kind we got a year later.

    It's gritty and excitingly directed but not always credible, one of those films were you think, well, if they're after you do you want to get the kid a new shirt, maybe not wear the same pink outfit all the time? Lots of little things make it implausible, like they seem to be unable to lose themselves in New York despite it being a pretty easy place to get lost in. She tries to book into a hotel but it's too plush so they turn her away, so she next goes to a slop house about two bucks a night - I mean, wasn't there anything in between? What happened to her cat? How come she has two apartments - or what was the second place she went to? How come if she knows the mob - and this turns out to be true, she's not just telling the kid that to calm him down - how come she was in the very same apartment as the accountant who was ratting on them? Is that coincidence or because they all hang out in the same run-down joint?

    It's as though New York is restricted to one postcode.

    Good performance by Gina Rowlands, though. Kid quite unsympathetic though that makes for it being more realistic.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    THE MACALUSO SISTERS (2020)

    The writer Xiaolu Guo once described western cinema as fast and materialistic, while Eastern cinema is slow and spiritual. That’s a fair point, but this interpretation seems to wrap all western cinema under the umbrella of English speaking cinema. Italian cinema has almost always been about displays of emotion, the turmoil decisions create and how individuals cope or do not cope. Even a director as self-absorbed as Fellini presents his characters in an endless contemplative struggle with their lot in life. Frequently, these emotions are played out against a background of obscure normality. Something unnoticed and unseen is always afoot in Italian cinema, prying at the edges of the action we watch, hawking at people’s passions and compunctions.

    This happens in Emma Dante’s The Malcaluso Sisters, a low-key drama about five sisters and how an impulsive trip to the local beach beckons tragedy, the effect of which resonates with them for the rest of their lives. The action is set around a low rent apartment in Palermo, where the Macalusos scratch a living selling and renting rock doves for racing, funerals and weddings. The eldest sister, Maria, has ambitions to be a ballerina; Penuccia wants to sleep with boys; the mentally unstable Lia loves books; the overweight Katia is practical; the youngest, Antonella, idolises them all. Dante recreates their small, hollow world in a series of quick bustling scenes full of energy and detail. We sense, without minimal words, how these girls interact, evolve and strive. Only a brief mention of their parents tells us they are orphans and that Maria has taken on responsibility for the household upkeep and the pigeon business. Making ends meet tires her; we see it in her face and her attitudes: when we first meet Maria, she is asleep, dreaming, her hands in the extended posture of a ballerina.

    Later, as a mature woman, those hands scrape dead animal remains from a zoologist’s work bench. The vibrant dancing girl has vanished, replaced by a wan, limp portrait. Meanwhile, Penuccia is still f***g, now for kicks and cash and Lia has become almost brutally feral, even at home. The interaction between the characters is harsh, stunted almost, the decrepit nature of their existence stuck at the time of tragedy, deepening their regrets, petty jealousies and blind, animal loyalties. Even as they argue, bicker and fight, you sense how underlying familiarity breeds vicious contempt, yet still binds these warring siblings. As one tragedy builds upon another, the sisters come to realise how much they truly mean to each other. The last scenes, as Lia bids farewell to the apartment she has lived in her whole life, are torn with a great wound of melancholy, played out in virtual silence, where emotion must be seen and not heard.

    It is no surprise the film is based on a stage play – Emma Dante’s own – as it has the claustrophobic feel of a theatrical production. The scenes at the Charleston Restaurant and Beach Club feel ‘opened out’ from the original, providing colour and brightness beyond the grey of the apartment. The three act structure isn’t strong enough to provide a resolution – spoiler: there isn’t one – and the overall impact becomes shrouded in retrospective grief. That may be the intent, but occasionally the director is so concerned with emotions, she forgets to explain. The scene where Maria gluttonously eats all the pastries is befuddling by its intensity of close up and length. The effect bores rather than enthrals. The sisters constant aggravations become wearisome. Having set the place and the emotional conundrum, the centre act doesn’t go anywhere accept to introduce more of the same. This is disappointing as the visually strong beginning and climax both display subtlety and integrity of character and landscape. The middle is moribund in the extreme.

    There are other missteps. Lia’s illness is not well addressed; she seems a caricature and the make up team revel in having her resemble Linda Blair’s crazed child from The Exorcist. The film starts in 1985, lurches suddenly twenty years forward and then again over an unspecified gap, possibly to an imminent time. A reference is made to the film Back to the Future and the movie simplistically suggests the characters want to turn back the clock and change the past, believing it will change their lives. Not so, and that isn’t what Back to the Future tells us. The emphasis on literature and storytelling, which seems at odds with the fantastical adventure of Marty McFly, is diluted because we don’t know which books Lia is reading. There’s a poignant song played over the final shots of the rock doves escaping the empty apartment, but there are no subtitles so we don’t understand the significance of the lyrical content. A lesbian under-theme is introduced for no apparent reason.   

    For all that, the film does have a certain pull. The actors are passionate. The camerawork is controlled. The editing is confident, choosing not to puzzle by obscurity. We see too much. The expectation is for us to emote with our characters’ behaviour rather than their dialogue and while this ought to be lauded, here it is what causes our confusion. The opening scene has the girls drilling a peep hole through the wall of their apartment, a telescopic view to the world outside, and we are looking back through the telescope at the lives within, yet we need far more than torrid arguments and enigmatic, prettily arranged cinematic canvases to explain the emotional chasms between the women.

    The Macaluso Sisters is well regarded in Italy and won a host of awards.    

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent


    I like all kinds of movies and dislike even more 😉

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent
    edited March 2023

    Reach for the Sky

    Sort of biopic of legless pilot Douglas Bader directed by three-time Bond man Lewis Gilbert and starring Kenneth More. Alexander Knox is Bader's GP early on in the film, he popped up in a brief role as the Defence Minister in You Only Live Twice, the one who says something like, 'Well, that's World War III averted' as they appear to head off to the golf course.

    A couple of other Bond stars in minor roles I think, plus Nigel Green who went on to be Dalby in The Ipcress File.

    Enjoyable movie, skirts around the idea that Bader might not have been such a great laugh to be around, a bit like Guy Mitchell in The Dam Busters, it's said. Surprised to see his crash was attributed to some snide goading comments from some others in the forces, rather than his own pure tomfoolery.

    Tar

    Now, I did enjoy this at the cinema today. It's the Cate Blanchett film in which she's up for all the awards, as a demanding conductor whose life catches up with her. First 10 minutes - after some highly minimalistic credits - consist of her being interviewed, where she is highly articulate and charismatic, yet you see glimpses of danger.

    It's a slow burn. Loved the look of the film, the decor etc. Great performances all round and it's nice to see Mark Strong turn on his acting credentials in stuff like this rather than Kingsman and Shazam, where he is also good but they're not meant to be great movies, they're not meant to build a legacy, a body of work. A notable Bond alumni shows up too, but you'll have to see it to find out who (or just look up on imdb).

    Some thought provoking problems. I sound awful, but the character Lydia Tar didn't seem THAT bad. It's like the argument about Govt minister Dominic Raab, I mean being an awful person doesn't quite make you a sociopathic bully. One suspects if it had been a bloke in the role, all sorts of excuses would have been made for the character, say Jack Nicholson, contrast with his 'Here's Johnny!" in The Shining where he is a complete nutter and yet.... he's almost held up as a humorous heroic figure in popular culture whereas the woman is just a bitch, end of.

    At time my mind wandered... it's a shame Bruce is out of action now because you could see Blanchett as the long-lost Die Hard villain based on this. 'My name is Lydia Gruber. I believe you knew my father, Hans...'

    'I want you to take out the entire string section... Do it NOW. You can take it this will be an Unfinished symphony.'

    Not quite sure that the finale of Tar made sense really given her earnings - then again look how Harvey Weinstein ended up. Not really sure the case against her stacked up. There's also a mystery gaslighting subplot suggestive of the French film Hidden but it doesn't seem to go anywhere, at least nowhere conclusive. It's a bit of a shaggy dog subplot.

    It is gradually somewhat similar to the film Notes on a Scandal, which I've not seen but I've read Zoe Heller's book - Judi Dench starred as a misanthropic teacher who develops an unhealthy friendship with a younger work colleague, gradually we find out Dench's character is not as she presents herself, there are skeletons in the closet. The younger colleague? Why, played by Cate Blanchett.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    Thanks for those @Gymkata I enjoy the first two, but haven't seen the others for decades. I do recall not liking the last one.

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    ONE MILLION YEARS B.C. (1966)

    Exuberant Hammer production from Michael Carreras and director Don Chaffey with special creature effects wizard Ray Harryhausen doing what he does best with his plasticine dinosaurs. It’s a load of historical claptrap but once you throw that in the bin and accept the stupidity of the premise, One Million Years B.C. is a half decent adventure yarn, albeit one with little dialogue to explain what everyone’s thinking. Grunts and the odd fantasised word is about the level of it. Ultimately, who cares when you have Raquel Welch parading around in an animal skin bikini?

    The film is probably more famous now for its posters and production photos than the film itself which fits neatly into the ‘prehistoric monster’ genre – that of Godzilla, 20000 Fathoms, The Lost World, etc – and blends the silly creature stuff with a tale of rivalry between early men and women. John Richardson plays the hero Tumak, who is exiled from the Rock People after quarrelling with his father Akhoba. He leaves his mate, Nupondi, to the wiles of his brother Sakana and ventures into the desert where he encounters and escapes strange beasts before staggering into the realm of the Shell People, a far more civilised outfit than his cave dwelling, black haired, hairy, meat chewing home-folk. These blonde Amazonian warriors bid him a cautious welcome and Tumak attempts domestication, before a battle with an allosaurus gives him ideas of revenge – the effectiveness of the hunting spear enthrals him. Having romanced Raquel Welch’s Loana, the two return to the mountains in a futile attempt to gain mastery over his old tribe. Man’s first war erupts at the same time as a belching volcano.

    Of note are the two screeching pterodactyls which fight over Miss Welch and the attention to detail in a dinosaur’s death scenes: twice they are breathing long after defeat and in a particularly good effect a spear stuck in a creature’s heart vibrates slower and slower as the animal dies. It’s interesting for a low-brow film such as this to suggest that Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals coexisted; which they did, although I’m not sure it was scientifically proved at the time. The scene where Tomak and Loana hide in the Neanderthal’s secret cave, surrounded by skulls and fighting primitives was remarkably gripping. The film does have flashes of directorial style which keep the viewer alert. The prologue is very good, evoking memories of Roger Corman’s Poe cycle or seventies Dr Who, adding a frisson of precredit excitement. The title cards are enormous. Hammer showed real confidence and flair with this one, even if the end result errs to the mundane occasionally. Martine Beswick is the wronged Rock woman and Robert Brown a surprisingly muscular Akobha – so that’s two of our alumni. Miss Welch didn’t get the gig for Thunderball, but she certainly gives Claudine Auger a run for her money in the bikini-body stakes.

    Very well filmed – in the Canary Islands – and surprisingly well-constructed despite the obvious historical flaws and a curious decision from Harryhausen to use real reptiles in some scenes, which rather divides the magic. I haven’t ever seen the forties original, which has retrospectively come under fire for animal cruelty, and starred Victor Mature, Lon Chaney and men in dinosaur suits. The Talking Pictures channel showed this 1966 version and ended the film with a picture card of the star and the moniker: Rachel Welch: Rest in Peace 1940 – 2023. Nice touch that.         

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent
    edited March 2023

    INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM (1984)

    Okay. Deep breath. A very deep breath before I put my fingers to the keyboard.

    I have three points to make about this film:

    1.    For a family movie the scenes of torture, abuse and death are startlingly bloodthirsty. I see less shocking incidents is supposed horrific Hammer Productions. Under no circumstances is this kind of blood curdling content acceptable for kids. I am not surprised to learn the U.S. board of certification had to create a new category for this movie: PG13. Not acceptable, not at all, especially when…

    2.    The content is so slanted towards the infantile. George Lucas hinted strongly at a shift in his filmmaking emphasis to the childish with those daft Ewoks in Return of the Jedi. He’s done something similar here with a sidekick for Indy in an annoying all-too-bloody-clever Chinese boy called Short Round. Yes, honestly, Short Round. He saves Indy’s life several times and engages in kiddish fisticuffs with an adolescent Maharajah. Then there is a whole underground mine full of children. Hundreds of them. Thousands. All being whipped and chained and God knows what. Indy wants to rescue them all. I was more intrigued how the mine could exist so close to a pit full of molten lava – there is no volcano in sight – this is one of the stupidest geological hiccups in cinema history. It is simply bizarre the filmmakers didn’t think we’d notice. Maybe they thought we’d be distracted by all those bloody kids. There are other quite appalling errors in continuity, narrative, fact, fiction, special effects, etc, etc. I can’t be bothered to list them. I am fairly certain the good people at IMDB will have an extensive list.

    3.    This film is insulting to Chinese, Indians, children, women, archaeologists, the British Raj, Sikhs, chefs, elephants, the audience and even Busby Berkley. The film kicks off with the daftest of preludes set in an extravagant art deco night club on the fourth floor of a Shanghai gongyu. The movie runs a shade over two hours, but I was bored within ten minutes. It feels about two hours too long.

    I had never seen this film before. I had heard it isn’t good. It isn’t. It is one of the very worst ‘blockbuster’ films I have ever watched. A misstep in every direction, from writing, to directing, acting, photography, editing, effects and music. There are many great artists associated with the project, but none of them emerge with any credit whatsoever. A dreadful experience from the too cheerful beginning to the chummy ending via a Thuggie cult of excruciating fantasy. Midway Harrison Ford as the titular Dr Jones says: “You have a vivid imagination.” He must have been referring to the filmmakers.

    Rubbish.    

  • CoolHandBondCoolHandBond Mactan IslandPosts: 6,033MI6 Agent

    I love this quintet of Apes movies. The first one is a genuine classic. I would rank them slightly differently, 1-3-4-2-5. Escape has great performances from Roddy McDowall and Kim Hunter with an exciting climax and neat ending. I also binge watch them every few years - great entertainment.

    Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
  • CoolHandBondCoolHandBond Mactan IslandPosts: 6,033MI6 Agent

    Ray Harryhausen added the scene with real reptiles as a tribute to the original 1940 One Million B.C.

    As @chrisno1 points out, the Neanderthal cave scene is very tense, and as a 10 year old in a cinema in 1966, seeing that was terrifying!

    Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent
    edited March 2023

    As you probably know, the scene features in Kenneth Branagh's fine movie, Belfast, along with some wonderful Bond Xmas present moments, worth a watch.

    Saw Indy and TOD as a teenager at Empire Leicester Square for my birthday with Mum, the sound in the cinema was off or muffled rather so it made for a jarring experience. Loads of kids at the screening, it failed to hold their attention. We then went to see The Man Who Knew Too Much at the cinema on Charing Cross Road which was running a Hitchcock season that summer.

    It's odd isn't it, Spielberg struggled to get funding for Raiders after the box office disaster of 1941 but then Raiders knocks it out the ball park so he then does this, oh dear. But Temple wasn't a flop, it sort of wasn't allowed to be. But we forget the Indy strike miss is literally hit and miss, after this it was the excellent Last Crusade then the dreadful Crystal Skulls. The Craig tenure wasn't much better imo.

    Personally I'd never noticed or bothered with a mine set next to molten lava but I guess it's like the dam on top of a mountain in the GE pre-credits.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 21,704MI6 Agent

    While I agree Temple of Doom has an unfortunate mix of brutality and the childish, I have to disagree. Well. I don't HAVE TO, but I do. 😁

    I really like the feeling of adventure and fun, the great locations and sets, the action and chase scenes, Harrison Ford's performance, the musical scene at the start and much more. Given the genere and style of the Indiana Jones movies I really don't mind the mine close to the lava. It's based in 1930's action/adventure movies, not documentaries. Temple of Doom is the least strong of the first three, but it's still great entertainment.

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    SKY WEST AND CROOKED (1966)

    (a.k.a. Gypsy Girl)

    I don’t know very much about John Mills’ career. A well regarded thespian he’s of those pre / post war generations of Rank actors who always seemed to play the same role, matinee fodder, until by fluke or design they pulled a stupendous performance out of the locker. I’m talking Dirk Bogarde, Richard Johnson, Kenneth More, Dickie Attenborough, etc, actors who graced the screen over and over and rarely put a foot wrong, but rarely troubled the critics either.

    I had no idea Mills had a brief flirtation with directing. Here, he’s got a family operation up and running. His wife [writer Mary Hayley Bell] wrote the story and screenplay and his daughter [Hayley] has the lead. The film concerns a naive, traumatised adolescent whose obsession with death leads her into conflict with her alcoholic mother, the local kindly sherry-drinking parson and a whisky sodden landowner grieving for his long dead son. There is an awful lot of drinking. Curiously the supposed ‘villains’ of the piece, a group of Romany gypsies, barely touch a drop. They prefer soup.

    Miss Mills gives a half decent performance. She was trying to develop a more mature screen personality at the time, but she still looks about five or six years younger than her character’s age or her actual age (17 & 19). Having her surrounded by primary aged kids doesn’t help. The fact she’s clearly being portrayed and written as a simpleton makes the unfolding drama distinctly creepy. For two thirds of its length, the movie is virtually a horror show for kids, all those drunken adults, dead animal corpses, abusive parents, a series of heckling close-ups, sinister gypsies, etc, etc. When Ian McShane’s Roibin Krisenki plucks young Brydie from a river and keeps her for himself we are in Whistle Down the Wind territory in reverse, although there are no Christ-like overtures and childish wonder gives way to distinctly unsettling coercion. The romanticised ending seems unlikely.

    Very odd indeed. 

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent

    Robocop (87)

    Straightforward Terminator-style futuristic adventure (though I don't know if the date is specified, maybe it isn't futuristic, it's implied like in The Running Man) anyway it's redeemed by the witty satirical flair and subtle running jokes.

    Isn't the main villain the one in Arnie's Total Recall?

    Pleasingly straightforward, but it's not quite a plot hole to have this robot cop get machine gunned and smashed up and in the next scene simply be licking his wounds and ready to go again. On top of which, 'shoot in the face' might be a simple enough instruction for assailants, as that is uncovered.

    Wittily prescient at the time, it is now depressingly topical. The ending I recalled had Murphy be allowed to die by his woman cop buddy but it's been years, decades even, and I got it wrong, it leaves the way open for a sequel, one directed by Irvin Kershner who gave it the same magic touch he did Never Say Never Again, in other words it was like Kick Ass 2 in that hit missed the funny, satirical slant of the original.

    Dressed to Kill

    Intensely pleasing Sherlock Holmes story with Basil Rathbone - short but satisfying, with a female nemesis on a par with the lovely Isabel Oakeshott. Lines like 'Praise coming from you is all the more gratifying' that sort of thing.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • CoolHandBondCoolHandBond Mactan IslandPosts: 6,033MI6 Agent

    NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968)

    George A. Romero single-handedly started the modern zombie era in this groundbreaking horror outing. A small group of people take refuge in a farmhouse whilst under attack from flesh eating ghouls. The low budget and filming in black and white adds atmosphere to the proceedings and the amateur actors do well, especially the lead character Duane Jones. It’s the sort of film that Ed Wood was yearning to make if he had had the talent that Romero had. The special effects were gruesome for the time and the film has gone on to be rightly revered in the annals of horror movies.

    I first saw this in about 1978 at an all night cinema which showed 5 horror films stating at 11pm and ending at breakfast time. One of the other films was Dracula vs. Frankenstein with YOLT’s Karin Dor but I have forgotten what the others were.

    Excellent and essential viewing for zombie fans.

    8/10

    Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
  • BarbelBarbel ScotlandPosts: 36,057Chief of Staff

    JOYRIDE (2022)

    Olivia Colman is the only name most will have heard of here. The title is appropriate and has more than one meaning. Beautiful Irish scenery, an engaging boy acting opposite the ever-reliable Olivia, some laughs, some sentiment. Be warned, the Irish accents are heavy.

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    THE EAGLE HAS LANDED (1976)

    This film crops up fairly regularly on television these days, but if my memory serves it barely made it onto home screens for decades. The BBC presented it as a tribute to Sir Michael Caine, who is 90 years old this month. Far better I feel to watch The Ipcress File and Funeral in Berlin next week. A pity no channel is showing films like Alfie, Pulp or The Quiet American which demonstrate Caine’s acting chops, but here we have it:

    in late autumn 1944 a company of rebellious German commandos are parachuted into the Norfolk village of Studley Constable. Their mission: to kidnap Winston Churchill. A local agent assists them and an IRA sympathiser ingratiates himself with the village milkmaid while assisting Col Steiner and his band of brothers. Only the priest’s daughter and her US Ranger boyfriend show any common sense among the townsfolk. It all ends in a suspenseful bloody climax.

    Jack Higgins’ bestselling wartime escapist adventure transfers easily onto the big screen. Director John Sturges has form for this kind of outing, but the shine of his late fifties / early sixties success is waning. He’s most effective in the action scenes, which are palpably, realistically gory. The film has a sub-Alistair MacLean feel to it, although one would expect MacLean’s heroes to be kidnapping Hitler. To that end there is an effort to make the German protagonists sympathetic; these are loyal, dutiful men of war who have a moral code far above that of their nominal leaders. An excised scene would have demonstrated this well: the film should have opened with a top level Nazi meeting at Schloss Hohenschwangau. This would have explained the opening title shots of the schloss. There’s a DVD edition that features a whole twenty minutes of extra footage. As with most deleted scenes, some read as if they would bog the story down, others aid explanation. The whole storyline involving Liam Devlin – a character Jack Higgins liked so much he wrote more books involving him – his work in the village and relationship with Molly Prior needed significantly more attention than it receives here. The Germans are well catered for in that regard, their planning and people being treated with much respect, even including the wily Himmler.

    Donald Pleasance is the S.S. top man and another of ours, Tom Mankiewicz, wrote the screenplay. The actors don’t do enough with it. Anne Coates edits strongly, but she can’t do much with the off-kilter performances of a stellar cast – Larry Hagman and Treat Williams as the Americans come across badly as comic caricatures, one is even called Col Pitts. Lalo Schifrin’s incidental music suggests he might have had a decent stab at a Bond movie score.

    Good entertainment without being a top notch entry in the wartime espionage stakes. 

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent

    The Caine double bill is on tomorrow, @chrisno1 on BBC2 at 1.30 with The Ipcress File, followed by Talking Pictures (presumably the Sylvia Syms narrated appraisal of Caine's career) then the Harry Palmer sequel Funeral in Berlin at 4.05pm.

    In my youth channels like BBC2 would show a mini-season with the kind of films you've nominated but they don't do that stuff much, and the two movies they're showing have been seen in the last year in the same slot anyway. I've never actually seen Pulp.

    The funny thing about Caine is while he always seems to be the same in his movies, you just can't compare his role in Ipcress with that in Mona Lisa or that of Hannah and her Sisters with, say, Little Voice. They're completely different, but he's a star, that's the common denominator.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    Thanks for that @Napoleon Plural I'll be watching the Thursday repeat. Pith I didn't record Billion Dollar Brain on Tuesday, I could gave watched all three consecutively.

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent

    Thursday repeat? I thought as much and that's a good thing; despite my talk I missed Ipcress today. Tied up with other things but the glimpse I saw, I regretted missing it. It's such a classic and now I find it arguably finer than any 60s Bond movie which in a way means any Bond movie. Being down at heal and almost dated already, it hasn't dated.

    I caught all of Funeral in Berlin, dubbed by famed Bond author John Brosnan as 'the best of the bunch'. I'd seen it before, of course. It seems to try a lot harder than its predecessor to far less effect. You have it set in East and West Berlin, chic photography emphasising the contest between the two, there's a defector, one defection that's similar to the Berne crane job in OHMSS, another involving a hearse and coffin - classic Harry Saltzman touch, that, as it was down to him that hearses showed up in so many Bond films (Moonraker's floating Venetian number the exception as it was a Broccoli film), double crosses, and women of dubious loyalty.

    I'll cut to the chase - this may provoke a shudder from those of my own vintage - but the film is boring. It shouldn't be. It just is. Guy Hamilton is too smooth a director for this stuff, he lacks edge. John Barry is sorely needed but he's not there, there's an attempt to pastiche him at times but that's all it is. Why they couldn't get Barry back I don't know, or the Ipcress director either.

    This should be the follow up in the same way that FRWL was to Dr No - yes, more adventurous, more plot driven whereas the first was mostly establishing the character's tropes. But key characters from Ipcress don't show again - Guy Doleman's Ross only briefly - so Harry Palmer seems a lonely character and a fish out of water in Berlin, meeting a new array of characters who don't charm or interest. He seems a cypher for the plot which soon becomes the usual turgid double cross thing where you don't believe what's presented to you, a trick of diminishing returns. It all seems going through the motions with no terribly interesting set pieces moments. There's a love interest of sorts, but writing this carefully I don't find Israeli spies terribly interesting, the whole thing seems to have a brand problem I can't put my finger on. Perhaps I'll watch Munich to have my mind changed. I think The Quiller Memorandum touched on this a bit and I never got into that either but at least it had a John Barry score. Maybe Barry thought this film would go over old ground so avoided it

    I do think the Palmer films should have been a lot better - it seems the gimmick of his being insubordinate to his public school superiors might have been passe too soon and didn't travel well either. Once you take Palmer out of London and away from his posh superiors he slightly loses his definition and identity.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    Thanks for that @Napoleon Plural I'll compare notes once I've done my Thursday re-watch.

    Meanwhile, a J-Lo bonanza:

    THE WEDDING PLANNER (2001)

    Jennifer Lopez stretches her acting template a little with this deft [daft?] rom-com about a wedding planner who commits the ultimate professional faux pas and falls for the groom. Daft isn’t the half of it, chiefly because Matthew McConaughey is nobody’s idea of a romantic lead. He seemed to get handed these kind of roles over and over to less and less effect. Here, McConaughey best resembles a sick puppy about to be put down. I guess impending marriage to feisty go-getter Brigitte Wilson-Sampras [tennis Hall of Famer Pete Sampras’ wife] does that to a man. Everything is pleasant to look at, occasionally funny, occasionally touching and ends on the least eagerly anticipated reconciliation of all rom-coms. You saw it coming from the moment they first met. This kind of escapist entertainment used to star people like Cary Grant and Doris Day. It wasn’t much good in the forties or fifties and it’s a tough nut to revitalise for the 2000s. It’s okay and passes the time, I suppose.

    On a side note, J-Lo’s second album J-Lo topped the Billboard Top 200 in the same week this movie was number one at the U.S. box office. Apparently this was a first. Who knew? Who cares? 


    MAID IN MANHATTAN (2002)

    Quickly taking a lead from The Wedding Planner, one year on and Jennifer Lopez is cast again as a woman in love with an unobtainable man, this time Ralph Fiennes' politician. She’s a hotel maid. It has modern Cinderella elements to it, a sort of Pretty Woman for Latinos. Ah, that’s not fair. It’s a charming film which relies solely on J-Lo’s likeability to succeed because it sure as hell won’t get any likeability from Ralph Fiennes' dour turn. Extremely popular DVD when I worked for Blockbusters, it has ‘chick’s movie’ and ‘quiet night in with the boyfriend / dog / chardonnay’ printed all over it. Throw-away entertainment. It looks pretty.

    They used to make this sort of thing with Cary Grant and Doris Day…

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent

    INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE (1989)

    I was scathing about the first two Indy movies, but the similar ingredients fall neatly into place for this third episode, despite sharing the same pitfalls for topographic and geological nonsense as all the others – Venice cannot have catacombs – I mean, seriously??? – note three question marks, dear God – and lumping Petra into the climax is a slap in the face for all kinds of historical fact. The movie succeeds because the screenwriter understands characters. Unlike the first two efforts, where Harrison Ford’s Dr Jones was saddled with wimpy weepy women, here he has a meeting of minds with his learned father. So, midway an archaeologist’s buddy-buddy movie kicks off which proves far more enjoyable and enterprising than any screaming damsel in distress. Sir Sean Connery as Dr Henry Jones is anything but a damsel. Harrison Ford has difficulty keeping up with Sir Sean’s superior comic and dramatic timing. It’s throw-away stuff, but the cast is working magic with grail. Much like the last crusader who guards the Cup of Christ. Julian Glover’s closet Nazi antiquities hunter should really know better. Ditto Alison Doody’s hapless historian. A returning Jonathon Rhys Myers caps off a quartet of Bond alumni and it’d be nice to say they make the movie… well, they probably do. That and having the humour be created from the circumstances rather than from supposed character personalities. The jokes are more subtle than the previous two movies and they carry the audience with them, coaxing and cajoling rather than sitting barefaced and baying: “Laugh!” You only need to witness the scene with the two bickering Dr Jones tied together to get that. The fluff on the airship was sublime and the tank fight stupendous. The ending is as dumb as the other two movies, but it hurts less.

    In the absence of Match of the Day and following on from a dispiriting last episode of the usually reliable Endeavour, this was pleasant light relief. I watched it drinking Colombian coffee and Haig over ice. Not a bad combination for the whip-wielding Dr Jones. I think he’d probably agree. Cheers!

  • CoolHandBondCoolHandBond Mactan IslandPosts: 6,033MI6 Agent

    THE LAST HARD MEN (1976)

    Andrew V. McLaglen was an underrated director who made several decent movies including Shenandoah and The Wild Geese amongst others. This time around sees James Coburn’s villain make a bloody escape from a prison work detail and formulate a plan to get revenge on Charlton Heston’s retired lawman who put him away and killed his wife in the process. Both the leads are in fine form and Barbara Hershey looks gorgeous as Heston’s daughter and Clint Eastwood regular John Quade is excellent as one of the loathsome gang members. McLaglen ramps up the tension as Hershey is kidnapped by the gang and the chase scenes are tense as we get to the final shootout.

    Good stuff.

    7/10

    Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,239MI6 Agent
    edited March 2023

    Are we to take it ChrisNo1 hadn't seen any of the Indy movies until now?

    Anyway, Bond alumna Michelle Yeoh bags her Oscar for Everything Everywhere All At Once which I caught at the Prince Charles a few weeks ago and didn't much care for personally, it was like an extended and frenetic episode of Red Dwarf. Big twist following on from the recent scathing review of Temple of Doom is that the annoying kid now has an Oscar - that's Yeoh's co-star Ke Huy Quan. It's odd that he wins in a year when a) Indy director Steven Spielberg presumably goes home empty handed for Capturing the Spelmans (is that the film's name? Didn't fancy It myself) and b) The newest Indy film is out this year, you wouldn't think they'd be kicking themselves not to have got that kid back for it. To be honest, I didn't find his character markedly less irritating in the Yeoh film but there you go. Arnie's wife in True Lies Jamie Lee Curtis gets her Oscar too, I like her but I now feel like a rat fink for saying how great it is she's scrubbed up for the ceremony cos she's looked rough for that movie and also Knives Out. All that stuff with the sausage fingers got on my nerves a bit. But I didn't like much about the Everything movie - I've been told it appeals to women because the strong characters in it are women while the husband is a wimp (charming!) - and with the exception of Top Gun sequel - a man's film I guess but not that macho - wasn't mad about this year's run of films generally, I don't think I want to watch The Whale and I might see All Quiet on the Western Front but... I know what it's going to be like really. These movies don't seem quite adventurous or bold in scope somehow. Rather meanly, I feel that some of the awards are going to highlight diversity though I don't feel in doing that anyone was particularly robbed.

    Mainly because of Covid I feel it's literally been years since I sat in a cinema and had that collective group experience, I didn't even get that with the Bond film in its first week because it just didn't evoke that kind of response, I saw it with a lousy crowd on the first Monday at the BFI Imax, I think it was lousy because it was cheap so many were just cinema goers looking for a cheap deal not tip top Bond fans. It was packed out but the movie wasn't taking us anywhere collectively.

    It feels like some of these movies are made and shown in a vacuum. Then again, in a way society feels a bit like that too these days, it's made up of little Twitter tribes rather than what feels ike a high-minded, forward thinking group mindset. It's like everyone's saying, hang on, wait for those groups to catch up and be incorporated.... not the refugees or boat people, mind. It's all, hey, inclusive but not that inclusive.

    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 21,704MI6 Agent
    edited March 2023

    Can you believe I've never questioned how Venice can have catacombes? 😂😂

    But what I questioned at one is your claim that Indy's leading ladies in both the previous movies were weepy. Seriously - Marion Raven weepy?

    But it's still a great review of a great movie, and the chemistry between Ford and Connery is perfect.

  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 21,704MI6 Agent

    ...... But then I started questioning why I questioned the catacombes in Venice. Much of the city is built on islands after all. I checked online and there really are catacombes.

  • chrisno1chrisno1 LondonPosts: 3,178MI6 Agent
    edited March 2023

    @Number24 But not where he's exploring. Those are manmade islands in the centre of Venice, built on oak and pine beams slammed into the mud until they hit bedrock. They have to be extremely solid to support what is above them. Crypts were purposefully built underneath some churches. They often flood because basically they are an engineering folly. There is a big crypt in the basilica - purposely built - I went there when I visited - but I wouldn't call it a catacomb. I hold up my hands and say I may be wrong about this; I didn't research it before I posted and I haven't researched it now either. Thanks for the compliment on the review.

    @Napoleon Plural I've seen them all before except that second one. I didn't have any memory of it, so I must have given it a pass both at the flicks and on TV.

Sign In or Register to comment.