Real life couple Virginia McKenna and Bill Travers play real life animal conservationists Joy and George Adamson in a cinematic telling of Joy’s bestselling biography Born Free, which is more about the lion cub Elsa than about Joy or George.
It’s a good looking, well photographed interpretation of the Kenyan safari of the fifties. Very British and very polite. A pedestrian film enlivened only by the occasional moment of drama and the two central performances. Three if you include the lioness – an undeniably masterful feat of animal training or coaxing. There’s a neat running gag where Travers always sleeps in his pyjama trousers and McKenna wears the matching top.
I watched Born Free primarily because I wanted to hear the John Barry soundtrack. It was a curious experience as I caught echoes and reminiscences of cues from his first three Bond film scores. At one point I was certain I was under the Caribbean sea with Sean Connery, at another a laser was trying to cut his groin in half, a third had me in Istanbul. I even caught the intro to The Knack. The title song is great, but the score isn’t Oscar winning quality for me. The award feels like one of those back-handed compliments the Academy plays every so often, recognising the whole body of an artist’s work rather than the individual. So Born Free’s original score award becomes more a reflection of Barry’s work on numerous movies c.1963 – 1966.
Geoffrey Keen crops up as the Game Reserve Manager.
A pleasant enough experience, but they do better than this on telly these days. No CGI though, which is really remarkable. It was very popular in its day.
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,673MI6 Agent
Yes, I can certainly see your point about it ultimately being counterproductive, especially with much older films, not to show them on TV on an at least semi-regular basis. If younger people can't see, say, The Quiller Memorandum (1966) then how are they realistically going to know it exists or that it interests them? Luckily I did see it on the TV in 2004 (on Channel 4 I think) and I recorded it. I later bought it on DVD as it's went on to become one of my favourite spy films outside of Bond (along with the Harry Palmer films of the 1960s). If such a film hadn't been shown on TV how would younger people have known about it or known if it was good enough to buy commercially? In a way, it's a kind of chicken and egg argument I suppose. In other words, exposure to a previously unheard of film on TV can in turn actually help to drive up physical sales of said film. The proviso being that this will happen only if it is a sufficiently good film of course and if it makes a real connection with the viewer.
You also make a good point about Bond being shown regularly on ITV and its expanded number of digital channels, such as ITV4, nowadays. Exposure to Bond films on terrestrial TV is certainly an important factor in ensuring a future audience of the Bond film franchise. That was in fact how I (and doubtless countless others) became a Bond fan in the first place. In my case it was repeats of Bond films on the regional channel UTV from the early 1990s onwards that made me a Bond fan. However, back in those days (approaching 30 years ago now) Bond films didn't seem to be shown on TV anywhere near as much as they are now. You'd be lucky if they were on during Bank Holidays and at Christmas. And some Bond films seemed to be shown more often than others, too. I was young then and still growing up but, for just one example, I can recall watching Goldfinger in 1994 and it not being on TV again until the summer of 1999 when ITV had the 00Heaven Summer of Bond where they showed all of the Bond films back to back for the first time. Now, of course, I could have missed a TV showing or showings of Goldfinger in between that five-year break but it just goes to show Bond wasn't as ubiquitous on TV as he is now. Of course, there were only the four main TV channels back then (Channel 5 not coming along until 1997) and therefore much more competition for screen time between programmes and films. TV wasn't on 24 hours a day then either and there were closedown times and testcards that were accompanied by unusual high-pitched noises. Nowadays there are all these additional digital TV channels from the main UK broadcasters and their channels have to be filled with a mixture of new content, repeats of TV shows and repeats of films. There could be an argument made that nowadays Bond films are shown too much on TV and that the market is becoming oversaturated with Bond whereas before Bond films were shown too little on TV. I suppose that as long as overexposure to the Bond films on TV doesn't ultimately put viewers off them then there's no harm done. It's funny how things change from one extreme to the other. There's literally no happy medium.
That's interesting too about Moore being the Bond of record in the early 1980s and the role of Connery in the Bond films being rather played down. I suppose there was less incentive to trumpet the initial achievements of Connery in establishing the role and making it world famous as the home video market was still in its infancy then. There could well have been an arrangement between Broccoli and British TV to suppress the Connery films in favour of the flavour of the month decade Bond, Roger Moore. We do know that by the end the decade and into the early 1990s there was a dispute involving Eon about the screening rights to show the Bond films on TV. This, and other legal disputes in the courts served to keep Bond away from the big screen for six years and ultimately for Timothy Dalton to throw in the towel as Bond leaving Pierce Brosnan free to take the role for GoldenEye.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
You all know who directed this one and what year it was made. If you don't, you're not allowed to participate in any further BondFilm discussion until you get caught up, this film is a prerequisite.
I decided to rewatch this to check out the Mr Waverley content. Leo G Caroll is not so doddery as he is in the Man from UNCLE but more cynical. Also note the establishing shot of the United Nations Building, which would also re-appear in his teevee show.
You know who else is in this movie? Edward Platt plays Roger Thornhill's lawyer. Yes, Sorry About That Chief from Get Smart! So thats two 60 teevee spybosses in one film!
Also evil henchman Martin Landau went on to be a good guy in Mission Impossible. So three characters from mid60s SpyMania American teevee series!! Have I missed anyone else?
I had thought for a long time this was a near remake of The Thirty Nine Steps. Just in its broad shape, the film is mostly composed of unique original scenes and situations, some of the most iconic images in all of Hitchcock, and the plot mechanics that move Thornhill through his journey are rather different. Saboteur is much closer to the original film. But this film in turn updates the Statue of Liberty climax of Saboteur, making the three films a type of evolutionary sequence.
Roger Thornhill of course has mommy issues, which dominate much of the first act. A recurring Hitchcock theme.
Early scene where Cary Grant is in danger of driving off the edge of the road is a reprise of the climax of Suspicion, his very first Hitchcock film.
Eva Marie Saint's position is basically the same as that of Ingrid Bergman in Notorious, but Cary Grant's feelings about the situation are the opposite from his character in that film. It is Leo G Caroll who is pressuring her to sleep with the villain.
The film is full of great dialog, Cary Grant gets many highly quotable lines. But the auction scene is particularly well played with the changes in relationships between the players that unfold largely unspoken. The various lines about duplicitous purpose of advertising throughout suggest parallels with spywork, and why such a seemingly unlikely man could actually be good at the job.
The film has an vast epic scale all the way through, from the UN Building then halfway across the continent to Mount Rushmore, and lots of mighty impressive architecture along the way. No wonder Hitchcock felt the only thing he could do to top this is scale back the production values completely and make a low budget shocker.
Most Norwegian cinemas boycot the movie because Disney released it for streaming services immediately. It's a shame since some scenes are shot "in the neighbourhood", but at the same time I wish more cinemas were more principled.
Paul Henreid stars as the flamboyant pirate the Barracuda in a hugely extravagant actioner which lacks a little swash among its buckle. It was a huge money spinner back in the day. One exec noted: “No pirate movie ever lost money!”
Henreid – he of Casablanca’s dull Victor Laszlo – is not your immediate idea of a buccaneer, but since The Spanish Main was his idea, he gets to play the lead. The film would have benefitted from a more Errol Flynn / Douglas Fairbanks Jr type hero. Maureen O’Hara is the flame haired damsel he falls for. Walter Slezak is a dandified villain, prone to bouts of misdirected anger. Binnie Barnes turns up as real life pirate Anne Bonny, but she’s made a figure of romantic fun. It’s odd to include a real [and misinterpreted] character in a fictional movie.
There’s plenty of over acting among segments of slow-pitched action. It looks lavish, but isn’t anywhere near as bloodthirsty and exciting as it should be. Too many of the best fights are done with words. Frank Borzage, who won Oscars in the 1920s and 30s doesn’t quite seem to grasp the idea of swashbuckling. He frames most of the scenes mid-length.. He’s so proud of the exotic period look the art director has created, he seems to want the audience to see every stitch of drapery. Unfortunately this makes the film feel very static when it should be freewheeling. The painted backdrops don’t do the sets any favours. They were a common device of the era, but as movie makers quickly discovered, they look much better in black and white. Hence, the movie appears old-fashioned, and probably did even in 1945. Rousing music. Good costumes. Fine photography.
The Spanish Main was something of a landmark movie; RKO Picture’s first colour film since Becky Sharpe, which in 1935 was the first all-colour feature length sound movie to be made in Hollywood. Sadly, not long after this, RKO was bought by Howard Hughes, whose interference in production and finance [movies like Jet Pilot] and a long legal wrangle over distribution rights, saw the first of the ‘Big Five’ studios from Hollywood’s Golden Age enter a terminal decline. Despite still making great movies, the company was effectively dissolved in 1957.
Do I need to have seen the other Marvel pics to enjoy or understand Black Widow? I've seen Assemble years ago, plus Thor and Iron Man and maybe Hulk, but now it feels like doing homework catching up on them.
Besides watching England losing on penalties yet again, my Sunday consisted of a WWII POW-themed double feature. It doesn’t sound like the most cheerful Sunday, does it?
First up: KING RAT (1965) – directed by Bryan Forbes. Based on a novel by James Clavell, the film is set in a Japanese prisoner of war camp in Singapore populated mostly by British soldiers (with a handful of Americans alongside them). The film is full of striking visuals and interesting contrasts. For example, the small bamboo and grass buildings of the prison camp are dwarfed by an imposing fortress-like structure. Another is the contrast between the majority of the British soldiers – who are dressed in the shredded remains of their service uniforms, some are even wearing skirts instead of trousers – and the American corporal King who is immaculately dressed (albeit his clothes covered in sweat) with a Rolex on his wrist. He is a classic prison camp hustler, and the conflict between him and the British provost marshal is one of the central conflicts of the narrative. Conditions are harsh, and for most of the prisoners they are barely surviving. There is brilliant black and white cinematography, and performances by a large cast of immense talent, including George Segal, Tom Courtenay, James Fox and John Mills. Also making a fine contribution is John Barry, who provides a sparse but effective score. The music seemed to me to have a similar feel in certain moments to some of his work on other films of 1965, such as Thunderball and The Ipcress File.
Second: STALAG 17 (1953) – directed by Billy Wilder. This time round we are in a German camp populated by non-commissioned US Air Force aircrew. We have another hustler as a central character. In this case he is an airman who is suspected by his fellow prisoners of being an informer for the Germans, because every trick or escape attempt is foiled by their captors. Much of the second half of the film revolves around the unmasking of the true informer. The tone here is very different to the previous film, a lot more comedic at times but it still has its tragic and darker moments. However, after the low key and austere performances in King Rat, the broad, occasionally slapstick style of acting in Stalag 17 caught me off guard and for the first half of the film I struggled to gel with it. On the other hand, I found William Holden quite compelling in the lead, and the main German guard is played by Sig Ruman who I know mainly from Marx Brothers comedies such as A Night at the Opera and I found him surprisingly effective here. Despite some of my reservations, I got to the end thinking that I’d watched another solid film and intend to go on a bit of a Billy Wilder binge in the near future because there are so many of his films on my watchlist. My only two previous Wilder films are Double Indemnity and Ace in the Hole – both amongst my favourite films of all time. Stalag 17 ranks somewhat lower than these, but I still enjoyed it and may well go back and rewatch it again sometime in the future.
I found Stalag 17 quite unsettling. The jovial interpretation of life in a POW camp didn't ring true for me. I do of course understand it is a comedy. I guess I don't find the subject matter very appealing. Oddly, I do admire The Great Escape, which as early as the credits has comic elements within it; these are tempered by the dramatic escape scenes, the executions, etc. I didn't find the sudden turn of events in Stalag 17 anywhere near as compelling. I admired William Holden's portrayal without enjoying his character who was unsympathetic, selfish and bitter. On that basis, and reading your review of King Rat, I'm not sure that'd be to my taste either. Wilder would make much better films than this to higher regard. You already mentioned Double Indemnity, but I'd recommend Sunset Boulevard, Some Like It Hot - his funniest - and, probably his finest and most subtly cynical film, The Apartment. Many of the others you can take or leave.
I certainly like Double Indemnity plenty, as well as Sunset Boulevard and essential Marilyn Monroe films The Seven Year Itch and Some Like It Hot. I see Billy Wilder has a huge filmography, and I am not familiar with most of the others, so one day should investigate further. I know he supposedly contributed to the writing of Casino Royale (the "funny" version), no idea if anything he contributed made it to the final film.
On the day the nice young men in their clean white coats come to take me away in the Wacky Wagon, I intend to turn to the camera and say "I'm ready for my close up now, Mr Demille", and see if anybody gets the joke. Something to look forwards to.
I love the films of Roger Corman and this is probably his best. Vincent Price also gives his most impressive performance, aside from Witchfinder General, he is both evil and sympathetic in this one. The photography (by Nicolas Roeg) is superb and the sets are excellent.
The plague is out of control in 15th century Italy and Prospero (Price) has retreated to his castle with a hedonist crowd where the corruption of beautiful young ladies is first and foremost on the agenda. Hazel Court and Jane Asher have leading roles.
__________________________________________
THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL (1951)
This classic sci-fi movie still holds its own amongst the best of the genre. Michael Rennie’s Klaatu comes to Earth with a warning for the government’s of the world. Simple in structure but suspensefully directed by Robert Wise, and with a great Bernard Herman score, this is essential viewing for those partial to serious science fiction.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
One of my favourite Wilder films is Kiss Me, Kate. It got mostly negative reviews, but I found this sex comedy to be very, very good, with a standout performance from Dean Martin.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
Third in the Hammer “Dracula” series. Christopher Lee plays the Count- and before you say “well of course he does, Barbel” that wasn’t always the case. The plot is paper thin, with an English family (two brothers and their wives) touring Transylvania being manipulated into spending the night in Castle Dracula which turns out not to be to their advantage.
Lee has no lines whatsoever beyond a hiss or two. He said the lines were so bad he refused to say them, the screenwriter said he never wrote any in the first place. Take your pick.
There are some very atmospheric moments- Dracula’s revival probably being the most memorable- and an excellent supporting cast. Andrew Keir plays the protagonist (since Dracula is the antagonist), and Barbara Shelley shines as always as the initially straight-laced Helen.
For me the only way this film falls down is the absence (apart from a flashback) of Peter Cushing as Van Helsing.
Edit: Hammer regular Thorley Walters plays a character who is very clearly Renfield, but is called Ludwig. No idea why.
It appears that Fleming's OHMSS was inspired by Dracula, in that you have a fellow pretending to be an academic to research his nemesis' life in his abode far away from civilisation, populated perhaps by angels of death, while actually plotting his downfall. In the book Blofeld as an enemy is a nebulous figure, not sure there's the bobsleigh fight in it is there? There's no great unveiling.
It doesn't quite suggest that in the film as Lazenby is an unconvincing academic and Savalas is not really the Pleasance villain Fleming's treatment demands but more an upfront, swaggering American.
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,673MI6 Agent
I started to watch a bit of that one the other day as I'd dusted off my Hammer Films DVD boxset that I bought a few years ago and that I still haven't gotten around to watching much of. I think that's the one where there's a flashback scene to an earlier Dracula film at the beginning which features Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing? I really must get around to watching it in full now that you've reviewed it, @Barbel! 😃
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
Thanks, @Barbel. I thought so. I've always wanted to see the Hamner films and the Dracula films in particular after I had a good friend at high school in the 1990s who was a Hammer horror film fanatic and who told me a lot about them. I, in turn, converted him to the James Bond films so you could say that it was a fair exchange of interests. 😃
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
This is my favourite film of all time. I have forgotten how many times I’ve seen it, but it’s certainly more than a hundred times, and each time is a renewed pleasure.
It’s a remake of Seven Samurai, and superbly directed by John Sturges. The score by Elmer Bernstein is justly lauded as one of the finest in history.
Yul Brynner plays Chris, who leads a band of mercenaries who defend a Mexican village against 40 bandits, the bandit leader being played by a suitably evil Eli Wallach. Steve McQueen, Charles Branson, Robert Vaughn and James Coburn all became major stars after this film as four of the seven. The other two less so, but Brad Dexter later saved Frank Sinatra from drowning and was rewarded with roles in later Sinatra films and being his producer. Horst Buccholz never really made it in Hollywood but he had a decent career in European films.
A small Mexican village is regularly raided by bandits and decide to go and get guns from across the border. Meeting with Yul Brynner’s character, a weary gunfighter, he tells them that hiring professional gunfighters would be cheaper and more effective than buying guns. With the money raised from the villagers possessions, Brynner recruits a further six. Steve McQueen is quick witted, Charles Bronson is a thoughtful, insightful character who wishes he had raised a family, Robert Vaughn has lost his nerve, James Coburn is an ice-cool fighter who welcomes a challenge, Brad Dexter is a chancer, always on the lookout for something extra, and Horst Buccholz is the youngster who dreams of the ‘glamorous’ world of gunfighting.
Arriving at the village, after scenes of them riding in line with THAT glorious theme playing, they quickly make plans to rout the bandits when they next turn up.
The film is chock full of fabulous lines;
’I have been offered a lot for my work, but never everything’
‘That was the greatest shot I’ve ever seen’ - ‘The worst! I was aiming at the horse.’
’The old man was right. Only the farmers won. We lost. We always lose.’
’Nobody throws me my gun and says run. Nobody.’
’Well, the graveyards are full of boys who were very young and very proud’
The entire screenplay is superb, there is not a wasted line. The action is exciting and the viewer cares about the gunmen, they all have their own issues and frailties.
If you haven’t seen it, do so. I first saw it as a nine year old at the cinema in 1965, it was on a rerun from the original 1960 release, and ever since that night nothing has surpassed it. It is truly, magnificent.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
I need to rewatch The Magnificent Seven. Its been a long time since I saw it, and that was very early on in my exploration of Western movies. It's never ranked highly on my list of favourite Westerns but that could always change when I revisit it.
I do remember many of the lines quoted by CoolHandBond and agree that they are fantastic. And the score is absolutely first rate!
I need to watch it again too. what a cast! were they really all unknowns when they made this?
A while back I watched Battle Beyond the Stars, Roger Corman's Star Wars rip-off that follows the basic plot of Seven Samurai/Magnificent Seven but now in space. I'm not going to say its a fraction so good as any of its inspirations, but it does feature an older Robert Vaughn amongst the mercenaries assembled to save the farm, but a different sort of character than he played the first time.
I'd like to add my vote for "The Magnificent Seven". I wouldn't mind seeing it again.
FLORENCE FOSTER JENKINS (2016)
Meryl Streep plays the world's worst singer, with Hugh Grant as her supportive husband and Simon Helberg (from "The Big Bang Theory") as the constantly amazed piano player. Florence really existed, but unlike most terrible singers she had enough money and contacts to hire Carnegie Hall.
Streep is perfect, of course, but Grant gives maybe a career best performance here working on several different levels.
It may not have been the first, but producer Dino di Laurentis’ Conon the Barbarian is quite possibly the granddaddy of sword-and-sorcery epics, the film to which the sub-genre of fantasy owes its highest debt and the one which launched its star to fame.
Based nominally on several stories by the prolific American writer Robert E. Howard, this huge saga is cruelly underrated, dismissed as a cult film, mocked for its acting and chastised for its hybrid production values. I think that misses the point. The original Conan short stories were exploitation fare, published in the weekly magazine Weird Tales between 1932 and 1935. Howard, a phenomenally fast worker, has a vast body of work spread across several genres. He is not known for literary style. His offerings were purely for entertainment. Which is exactly what the film Conan the Barbarian is, providing a series of exciting set pieces, dramatic landscapes and a mythological template on which to build characters. Howard perceived Conan as a pre-history version of Edgar Rice Burrough’s Tarzan, an educated, violent loner in tune with people and places. Writers Oliver Stone and John Milius reimagine him as not so much from pre-history as from an age of non-history, where all things are possible and pagan gods hold sway over superstitious humans. Their Conan is less well educated, learning his creeds through the blood and gore of the gladiatorial arena and the ethics of martial arts. He’s no less intelligent because of it.
It’s easy to criticise Arnold Schwarzenegger, but the Austrian more than fills out the role of Conan. He’s almost a composite fit, so much so the reissued patchwork novels copied his physique for the face of Conan on their cover art. His accent doesn’t matter in a film such as this, in fact it lends a certain authenticity to a man forbidden to speak through adolescence, who is a slave until he is in his mid-twenties and who finds communication an obsolete past time. When he seduces women, for instance, it is performed by demonstration, not by dialogue. Similarly the dubbing and overacting of Gerry Lopez and Mako doesn’t matter here as the film inhabits that realm of fantasy fiction where all things seem possible and are yet impossible; we don’t need historical accuracy or authority, reality doesn’t exist in these Dark Ages. Broad stroke characterisation aids the spectacle. The slightly comic book, and often comic, exploits of Conan and his various sidekicks are presented in such a fashion as to be both believable and unbelievable. This trick is pulled off by a surprisingly literal screenplay, as well as a series of vignettes reminding us of great historical epics from the past, such as Spartacus and The Fall of the Roman Empire, To Ho cinema like Seven Samurai and Kwaidan, even the Japanese legend-dramas Monkey and The Water Margin. The story proper doesn’t kick in until almost half way.
Conan is an orphan, whose people, the Cimmeron’s have mastered the riddle of steel, creating magnificent weapons in praise of their god, Crom. One winter, Conan’s village is massacred by the Set and their leader Thulsa Doom. Only the children survive, sent to work at a slave mill. Conan grows strong and becomes a gladiator in the pit of death, is educated in the arts of battle and the way of life at a school for warriors and is freed to roam the world by his drunken master, who recognises he has created a beast, a barbarian he cannot control. Defenceless, Conan discovers the lost temple of the Atlanteans and steals a great broadsword. He meets a witch, who seduces him and prophesises his greatness. Always chasing the emblem of the two-headed snake, Conan pairs up with a comrade, the archer and scallywag Subotai, as well as a lover, the Amazonian Valeria. They steal the Eye of the Serpent from the Tower of Snakes, kill an enchanted giant python and celebrate in wine, women and sex. A grateful King Osric, who is appalled by the demi-god Doom and his rapacious sect, recruits the thieves to rescue his daughter, who is in thrall to Thulsa Doom. Conan travels alone, seeking vengeance, but is discovered posing as a priest, tortured and crucified. He is saved from the gods by the incantations of an old Wizard and the loyalty and love of Valeria. Returning to the Temple of Set, the thieves recapture the Princess, but Valeria is killed by a poison arrow formed from a snake, her pact with the gods now made complete. Conan cremates her, the rejuvenation of fire to the barren Land of the Mounds marking him as God-like; his companion Subotai empathetically notes the Barbarian, like the gods, cannot cry. Conan and his companions battle Doom’s warriors and he, with the aid of the Princess, who it is hinted has become his lover, returns again to the Temple where he decapitates Thulsa Doom, despite the latter’s attempt to mesmerise him. In a short spoken epilogue, the Wizard informs the audience Conan went on to have further adventures.
Mako’s Wizard is the de facto narrator of the tale. This explains the episodic, picaresque, first half compared to the mythic, epic second, to which his character plays a huge part. His role as Greek Chorus aids the telling tremendously allowing explanations come via clear, well-structured dialogue, not through long explanatory sequences. Conan never explains to anyone who he is or what his past was, because the Chorus – the Wizard – has told us. It makes Schwarzenegger’s performance far more rounded simply by removing likely swathes of dialogue. He becomes as mute as Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson in their seminal westerns A Fistful of Dollars or Once Upon a Time in the West. Indeed co-writer and director John Milius has clearly done his cinematic homework as several sequences of this film owe much to other artist’s work, particularly Sergio Leone’s sixties westerns, Kurosawa’s samurai epics and the horror work of Masaki Kobayashi. The opening is superb, a forest village is pillaged by Set raiders, who rampage through the forest, reminding us of the bandits in Seven Samurai or the Steppe Cossacks in Taras Bulba, their heavy animal skin cloaks, long hair and body paint are familiar from The Fall of the Roman Empire, or more modern fare such as Gladiator. They are bloodthirsty and merciless. The killing is gore soaked. Thulsa Doom confronts Conan’s mother, mesmerises her, and beheads her in a moment of brisk unseen horror, the mother’s hand slowly falling from her child’s as her head topples off-camera, a moment enacted through a series of swift cut close ups and orchestrated to match Basil Poledouis’ splendidly heroic music score. Seen through the eyes of child, this opening murder matches the homestead killing which inhabit Leone’s …West. Poledouis wrote much of his music based around the screenplay rather than the finished film and the composition stretched to over two hours. Many of the themes are linked and melodically intertwined which allows the film to shift easily between brutality and beauty, action and calm, using the music as its narrative hook. Ennio Morricone also worked in a similar fashion when creating his masterpiece for …West.
Later Milius homages Kubrick [the gladiator scenes], Kobayashi [the incantations and the thieving gods], Kurosawa again [the wandering hero, the thief as accomplice – this also resembles the legend of Monkey], even the Bible [or Norse myth, take your pick] with its crucifixion and resurrection story. Schwarzenegger’s physique and demeanour remind us of other muscle men, such as Steve Reeves and Gordon Scott. The latter once played Tarzan, and the ghost of the Ape Man is noticeable in the scenes at the Temple of Set, where thousands of followers congregate to worship Thulsa Doom’s snakes in the manner of Barcuma’s Jaguar Cult or the Leopard Tribe [Tarzan and the Great River / the Leopard Woman respectively]. Rather than stifle the narrative, these subtle reminders of other films and genres serve to placate us. The violence is shocking, but enshrined in familiar circumstances which reassure us, else the movie would be lopsided and too horrific.
The central theme is a philosophical one, that of the will of the flesh and the mind over the power of steel, the might of the sword. Conan’s father explains the secret of steel, forged by the gods and stolen by men. Thulsa Doom believes it is the body which is strong, as demonstrated by the willingness of his devotees to sacrifice themselves needlessly. “It is the hand that holds the sword,” he declares during their initial confrontation. James Earl Jones, with his booming authority, is perfectly cast as the serpent king, a demonic yet strangely regal being. The long straight-cut wig is a misstep though. Similarly his two hulking henchmen appear to have escaped from Status Quo. Overall however, the costumes, the set design and the sheer look of the film is superb.
Magnificently photographed in southern Spain by Duke Callaghan, the action is gorgeously coloured and utilises vast landscapes and medieval fortresses, replicating ancient plains, bazaars and castles. The Alhambra style architecture is reproduced for the interiors. The hillside temple resembles Franco’s fascist memorial Valley of the Fallen, with its steep steps and crowning apex, a sure nod to the cult of personality employed by dictators – the multitudes even hum “Doom, Doom” in the manner of cultists. The feel of the piece is slightly uneven. The comic pursuits often feel misplaced, the magical elements are too broad and genuinely mystifying, while the philosophical insight tends to slow the action. Events err toward the functional; for instance, Conan’s original infiltration of the Temple of Set is haphazard, both easily accomplished and easily thwarted.
At the time of release many critics took against the film’s traditional interpretation of men being powerful and women being mere objects, but while scenes of sex, sacrificial virgins and masked orgies are included, they are relatively tame. It’s hardly exploitative fare. It is noteworthy the lead female, Sandahl Bergman’s Valeria, is a warrior, capable in a fight, intellectually superior, loyal and strong willed. It is she who takes the head infiltrating the Tower of Snakes and the Temple of Set, leads the night time battle against the spectres of death and makes a pact with the gods: her life for Conan’s. There are strong roles too for Cassandra Gava as the seductive Witch and Valerie Quennessen as the Princess. These women may be beautiful, but they are not objects, they use their sensuality, their skill and their intelligence to achieve what they want in an ancient world dominated by men. The latter has manoeuvred herself into a position at Doom’s right hand. In fact, one of the weaknesses of the film is the lack of depth to its male villains, of which only James Earl Jones achieves credit, the rest are mere mountains of cruelty. Max Von Sydow deserves a mention as the old and bitter King.
I thoroughly enjoyed rewatching Conan the Barbarian, a movie I hadn’t viewed for over twenty years. It is grand sorcery, epic in scale and execution and inspired all those lesser deities such as Krull, Flesh and Blood, Kull the Conqueror, Legend and, of course, He Man. It wins out over a dire 2011 remake by sheer might of ambition. The latter in comparison is only a noisy pick-pocket.
by coincidence I too recently watched Conan the Barbarian and its sequel Conan the Destroyer, and got Red Sonja queued up to watch next.
one relevant aspect of the sequel: Grace Jones. She got a lot more to do in that film than she did in A View to a Kill. I still wont say she's a great actress, but the Bond producers could have used her talents better. An early example of the phenomenon where they hire a villain based on a scenery chewing performance in an earlier film, but fail to get a performance half so good in the Bondfilm. See also Robert Carlyle, Javier Bardem, and Christopher Waltz. Even Christopher Lee was sort of coasting on his reputation of being really scary in many earlier films.
Watched GOODFELLAS last night. I'd seen it before but it might as well have been a first viewing because when I watched it previously it was on one of the worst DVD transfers I've ever seen and I spent most of the film bemoaning the poor image quality and as a result my memories of the film were pretty vague. And I certainly enjoyed it a lot more second time round. Great performances all round, some very memorable scenes and shots, a number of which have become well ingrained in the lore of popular culture. I also like that it is a fairly historically accurate mafia movie, unlike a work of fiction like The Godfather. Check out the History Buffs YouTube channel review of the film if you're interested.
I'm currently embarking on a bit of a Scorsese binge. There are so many significant films in his ouevre that I've never seen. I'm following Goodfellas with a string of gangster films - I've got Casino, The Departed and The Irishman coming up in the next week or two. Anybody want to recommend some favourite Scorsese films for me to check out. I've already seen Raging Bull, The Aviator, Shutter Island and I'm going to be rewatching Taxi Driver sometime soon as well.
Tugging on the coat tails of Gone Girl and The Girl on a Train, this is a black comedy mystery thriller with two antagonists matching crazy designer outfits to snappy irreverent dialogue. Anna Kendrick, forever watchable and cute, befriends Blake Lively’s high powered PR executive outside the school gate. When the latter disappears, Kendrick turns detective. Cue some neat lines, bizarre choices of clothing, a weird chorus of envious Mums, a lack of sympathetic characters and a plot which doesn’t work because the director forgot to add a beauty spot to his lead actress. Almost from the off, I had a curious sense of déjà vu. Hitchcockian? Not quite. Wilder-esque? Could be. It’s not wacky enough for a Hawks or a Sturges. Blake Edwards, maybe. A too wordy screenplay with too many expletives. It’s based on a bestselling novel and dialogue and incidents such as what’s represented here always read better on a page than they do when you see it on a screen. Thankfully short, it just about held my interest.
The latest Christopher Nolan's newest movie is impressive in many ways. The acting, action scenes etc. are probably top notch. But in spite of the many qualities of the movie and Nolan's great talent I didn't like Tenet very much. I got the feeling the director was more interested in showing of how clever he is than making a thriller/action movie the audience can enjoy. I also feel that a movie with such a high concept needs some humor to show that they are aware of how far-fetched it is. I'm not saying it should be a comedy, but a funny comment or two would hjelp a movie that takes itself too seriously'.
THE FATHER, the movie for which Anthony Hopkins won an Oscar (whether he deserved it over the late Chadwick Boseman is a question for the ages). He's an elderly man suffering with dementia, and the film is seen mostly through his eyes--as such, the film circles around a bit and sometimes the same characters are played by different actors. It's a very good film--and there are some moments of real humor--and the acting is superb. . .but I found it a little hard to watch, as others might. My grandmother had dementia, and Hopkins's performance is dead-on--it brought back a lot of bad memories--and, though my father thankfully still has all his senses, he's 90 years old and I couldn't help but think how little time there is left. So. . .it's a good film and a worthwhile film, but you might want to avoid it.
Comments
BORN FREE (1966)
Real life couple Virginia McKenna and Bill Travers play real life animal conservationists Joy and George Adamson in a cinematic telling of Joy’s bestselling biography Born Free, which is more about the lion cub Elsa than about Joy or George.
It’s a good looking, well photographed interpretation of the Kenyan safari of the fifties. Very British and very polite. A pedestrian film enlivened only by the occasional moment of drama and the two central performances. Three if you include the lioness – an undeniably masterful feat of animal training or coaxing. There’s a neat running gag where Travers always sleeps in his pyjama trousers and McKenna wears the matching top.
I watched Born Free primarily because I wanted to hear the John Barry soundtrack. It was a curious experience as I caught echoes and reminiscences of cues from his first three Bond film scores. At one point I was certain I was under the Caribbean sea with Sean Connery, at another a laser was trying to cut his groin in half, a third had me in Istanbul. I even caught the intro to The Knack. The title song is great, but the score isn’t Oscar winning quality for me. The award feels like one of those back-handed compliments the Academy plays every so often, recognising the whole body of an artist’s work rather than the individual. So Born Free’s original score award becomes more a reflection of Barry’s work on numerous movies c.1963 – 1966.
Geoffrey Keen crops up as the Game Reserve Manager.
A pleasant enough experience, but they do better than this on telly these days. No CGI though, which is really remarkable. It was very popular in its day.
Yes, I can certainly see your point about it ultimately being counterproductive, especially with much older films, not to show them on TV on an at least semi-regular basis. If younger people can't see, say, The Quiller Memorandum (1966) then how are they realistically going to know it exists or that it interests them? Luckily I did see it on the TV in 2004 (on Channel 4 I think) and I recorded it. I later bought it on DVD as it's went on to become one of my favourite spy films outside of Bond (along with the Harry Palmer films of the 1960s). If such a film hadn't been shown on TV how would younger people have known about it or known if it was good enough to buy commercially? In a way, it's a kind of chicken and egg argument I suppose. In other words, exposure to a previously unheard of film on TV can in turn actually help to drive up physical sales of said film. The proviso being that this will happen only if it is a sufficiently good film of course and if it makes a real connection with the viewer.
You also make a good point about Bond being shown regularly on ITV and its expanded number of digital channels, such as ITV4, nowadays. Exposure to Bond films on terrestrial TV is certainly an important factor in ensuring a future audience of the Bond film franchise. That was in fact how I (and doubtless countless others) became a Bond fan in the first place. In my case it was repeats of Bond films on the regional channel UTV from the early 1990s onwards that made me a Bond fan. However, back in those days (approaching 30 years ago now) Bond films didn't seem to be shown on TV anywhere near as much as they are now. You'd be lucky if they were on during Bank Holidays and at Christmas. And some Bond films seemed to be shown more often than others, too. I was young then and still growing up but, for just one example, I can recall watching Goldfinger in 1994 and it not being on TV again until the summer of 1999 when ITV had the 00Heaven Summer of Bond where they showed all of the Bond films back to back for the first time. Now, of course, I could have missed a TV showing or showings of Goldfinger in between that five-year break but it just goes to show Bond wasn't as ubiquitous on TV as he is now. Of course, there were only the four main TV channels back then (Channel 5 not coming along until 1997) and therefore much more competition for screen time between programmes and films. TV wasn't on 24 hours a day then either and there were closedown times and testcards that were accompanied by unusual high-pitched noises. Nowadays there are all these additional digital TV channels from the main UK broadcasters and their channels have to be filled with a mixture of new content, repeats of TV shows and repeats of films. There could be an argument made that nowadays Bond films are shown too much on TV and that the market is becoming oversaturated with Bond whereas before Bond films were shown too little on TV. I suppose that as long as overexposure to the Bond films on TV doesn't ultimately put viewers off them then there's no harm done. It's funny how things change from one extreme to the other. There's literally no happy medium.
That's interesting too about Moore being the Bond of record in the early 1980s and the role of Connery in the Bond films being rather played down. I suppose there was less incentive to trumpet the initial achievements of Connery in establishing the role and making it world famous as the home video market was still in its infancy then. There could well have been an arrangement between Broccoli and British TV to suppress the Connery films in favour of the flavour of the
monthdecade Bond, Roger Moore. We do know that by the end the decade and into the early 1990s there was a dispute involving Eon about the screening rights to show the Bond films on TV. This, and other legal disputes in the courts served to keep Bond away from the big screen for six years and ultimately for Timothy Dalton to throw in the towel as Bond leaving Pierce Brosnan free to take the role for GoldenEye.North by Northwest
You all know who directed this one and what year it was made. If you don't, you're not allowed to participate in any further BondFilm discussion until you get caught up, this film is a prerequisite.
I decided to rewatch this to check out the Mr Waverley content. Leo G Caroll is not so doddery as he is in the Man from UNCLE but more cynical. Also note the establishing shot of the United Nations Building, which would also re-appear in his teevee show.
You know who else is in this movie? Edward Platt plays Roger Thornhill's lawyer. Yes, Sorry About That Chief from Get Smart! So thats two 60 teevee spybosses in one film!
Also evil henchman Martin Landau went on to be a good guy in Mission Impossible. So three characters from mid60s SpyMania American teevee series!! Have I missed anyone else?
I had thought for a long time this was a near remake of The Thirty Nine Steps. Just in its broad shape, the film is mostly composed of unique original scenes and situations, some of the most iconic images in all of Hitchcock, and the plot mechanics that move Thornhill through his journey are rather different. Saboteur is much closer to the original film. But this film in turn updates the Statue of Liberty climax of Saboteur, making the three films a type of evolutionary sequence.
Roger Thornhill of course has mommy issues, which dominate much of the first act. A recurring Hitchcock theme.
Early scene where Cary Grant is in danger of driving off the edge of the road is a reprise of the climax of Suspicion, his very first Hitchcock film.
Eva Marie Saint's position is basically the same as that of Ingrid Bergman in Notorious, but Cary Grant's feelings about the situation are the opposite from his character in that film. It is Leo G Caroll who is pressuring her to sleep with the villain.
The film is full of great dialog, Cary Grant gets many highly quotable lines. But the auction scene is particularly well played with the changes in relationships between the players that unfold largely unspoken. The various lines about duplicitous purpose of advertising throughout suggest parallels with spywork, and why such a seemingly unlikely man could actually be good at the job.
The film has an vast epic scale all the way through, from the UN Building then halfway across the continent to Mount Rushmore, and lots of mighty impressive architecture along the way. No wonder Hitchcock felt the only thing he could do to top this is scale back the production values completely and make a low budget shocker.
Most Norwegian cinemas boycot the movie because Disney released it for streaming services immediately. It's a shame since some scenes are shot "in the neighbourhood", but at the same time I wish more cinemas were more principled.
THE SPANISH MAIN (1945)
Paul Henreid stars as the flamboyant pirate the Barracuda in a hugely extravagant actioner which lacks a little swash among its buckle. It was a huge money spinner back in the day. One exec noted: “No pirate movie ever lost money!”
Henreid – he of Casablanca’s dull Victor Laszlo – is not your immediate idea of a buccaneer, but since The Spanish Main was his idea, he gets to play the lead. The film would have benefitted from a more Errol Flynn / Douglas Fairbanks Jr type hero. Maureen O’Hara is the flame haired damsel he falls for. Walter Slezak is a dandified villain, prone to bouts of misdirected anger. Binnie Barnes turns up as real life pirate Anne Bonny, but she’s made a figure of romantic fun. It’s odd to include a real [and misinterpreted] character in a fictional movie.
There’s plenty of over acting among segments of slow-pitched action. It looks lavish, but isn’t anywhere near as bloodthirsty and exciting as it should be. Too many of the best fights are done with words. Frank Borzage, who won Oscars in the 1920s and 30s doesn’t quite seem to grasp the idea of swashbuckling. He frames most of the scenes mid-length.. He’s so proud of the exotic period look the art director has created, he seems to want the audience to see every stitch of drapery. Unfortunately this makes the film feel very static when it should be freewheeling. The painted backdrops don’t do the sets any favours. They were a common device of the era, but as movie makers quickly discovered, they look much better in black and white. Hence, the movie appears old-fashioned, and probably did even in 1945. Rousing music. Good costumes. Fine photography.
The Spanish Main was something of a landmark movie; RKO Picture’s first colour film since Becky Sharpe, which in 1935 was the first all-colour feature length sound movie to be made in Hollywood. Sadly, not long after this, RKO was bought by Howard Hughes, whose interference in production and finance [movies like Jet Pilot] and a long legal wrangle over distribution rights, saw the first of the ‘Big Five’ studios from Hollywood’s Golden Age enter a terminal decline. Despite still making great movies, the company was effectively dissolved in 1957.
Yeah. I probably should have mentioned that 😕
Do I need to have seen the other Marvel pics to enjoy or understand Black Widow? I've seen Assemble years ago, plus Thor and Iron Man and maybe Hulk, but now it feels like doing homework catching up on them.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Yes, that's one of the things that deters me from watching one.
Besides watching England losing on penalties yet again, my Sunday consisted of a WWII POW-themed double feature. It doesn’t sound like the most cheerful Sunday, does it?
First up: KING RAT (1965) – directed by Bryan Forbes. Based on a novel by James Clavell, the film is set in a Japanese prisoner of war camp in Singapore populated mostly by British soldiers (with a handful of Americans alongside them). The film is full of striking visuals and interesting contrasts. For example, the small bamboo and grass buildings of the prison camp are dwarfed by an imposing fortress-like structure. Another is the contrast between the majority of the British soldiers – who are dressed in the shredded remains of their service uniforms, some are even wearing skirts instead of trousers – and the American corporal King who is immaculately dressed (albeit his clothes covered in sweat) with a Rolex on his wrist. He is a classic prison camp hustler, and the conflict between him and the British provost marshal is one of the central conflicts of the narrative. Conditions are harsh, and for most of the prisoners they are barely surviving. There is brilliant black and white cinematography, and performances by a large cast of immense talent, including George Segal, Tom Courtenay, James Fox and John Mills. Also making a fine contribution is John Barry, who provides a sparse but effective score. The music seemed to me to have a similar feel in certain moments to some of his work on other films of 1965, such as Thunderball and The Ipcress File.
Second: STALAG 17 (1953) – directed by Billy Wilder. This time round we are in a German camp populated by non-commissioned US Air Force aircrew. We have another hustler as a central character. In this case he is an airman who is suspected by his fellow prisoners of being an informer for the Germans, because every trick or escape attempt is foiled by their captors. Much of the second half of the film revolves around the unmasking of the true informer. The tone here is very different to the previous film, a lot more comedic at times but it still has its tragic and darker moments. However, after the low key and austere performances in King Rat, the broad, occasionally slapstick style of acting in Stalag 17 caught me off guard and for the first half of the film I struggled to gel with it. On the other hand, I found William Holden quite compelling in the lead, and the main German guard is played by Sig Ruman who I know mainly from Marx Brothers comedies such as A Night at the Opera and I found him surprisingly effective here. Despite some of my reservations, I got to the end thinking that I’d watched another solid film and intend to go on a bit of a Billy Wilder binge in the near future because there are so many of his films on my watchlist. My only two previous Wilder films are Double Indemnity and Ace in the Hole – both amongst my favourite films of all time. Stalag 17 ranks somewhat lower than these, but I still enjoyed it and may well go back and rewatch it again sometime in the future.
Interesting reviews @Golrush007
I found Stalag 17 quite unsettling. The jovial interpretation of life in a POW camp didn't ring true for me. I do of course understand it is a comedy. I guess I don't find the subject matter very appealing. Oddly, I do admire The Great Escape, which as early as the credits has comic elements within it; these are tempered by the dramatic escape scenes, the executions, etc. I didn't find the sudden turn of events in Stalag 17 anywhere near as compelling. I admired William Holden's portrayal without enjoying his character who was unsympathetic, selfish and bitter. On that basis, and reading your review of King Rat, I'm not sure that'd be to my taste either. Wilder would make much better films than this to higher regard. You already mentioned Double Indemnity, but I'd recommend Sunset Boulevard, Some Like It Hot - his funniest - and, probably his finest and most subtly cynical film, The Apartment. Many of the others you can take or leave.
I certainly like Double Indemnity plenty, as well as Sunset Boulevard and essential Marilyn Monroe films The Seven Year Itch and Some Like It Hot. I see Billy Wilder has a huge filmography, and I am not familiar with most of the others, so one day should investigate further. I know he supposedly contributed to the writing of Casino Royale (the "funny" version), no idea if anything he contributed made it to the final film.
On the day the nice young men in their clean white coats come to take me away in the Wacky Wagon, I intend to turn to the camera and say "I'm ready for my close up now, Mr Demille", and see if anybody gets the joke. Something to look forwards to.
THE MASQUE OF THE RED DEATH (1964)
I love the films of Roger Corman and this is probably his best. Vincent Price also gives his most impressive performance, aside from Witchfinder General, he is both evil and sympathetic in this one. The photography (by Nicolas Roeg) is superb and the sets are excellent.
The plague is out of control in 15th century Italy and Prospero (Price) has retreated to his castle with a hedonist crowd where the corruption of beautiful young ladies is first and foremost on the agenda. Hazel Court and Jane Asher have leading roles.
__________________________________________
THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL (1951)
This classic sci-fi movie still holds its own amongst the best of the genre. Michael Rennie’s Klaatu comes to Earth with a warning for the government’s of the world. Simple in structure but suspensefully directed by Robert Wise, and with a great Bernard Herman score, this is essential viewing for those partial to serious science fiction.
One of my favourite Wilder films is Kiss Me, Kate. It got mostly negative reviews, but I found this sex comedy to be very, very good, with a standout performance from Dean Martin.
DRACULA PRINCE OF DARKNESS (1966)
Third in the Hammer “Dracula” series. Christopher Lee plays the Count- and before you say “well of course he does, Barbel” that wasn’t always the case. The plot is paper thin, with an English family (two brothers and their wives) touring Transylvania being manipulated into spending the night in Castle Dracula which turns out not to be to their advantage.
Lee has no lines whatsoever beyond a hiss or two. He said the lines were so bad he refused to say them, the screenwriter said he never wrote any in the first place. Take your pick.
There are some very atmospheric moments- Dracula’s revival probably being the most memorable- and an excellent supporting cast. Andrew Keir plays the protagonist (since Dracula is the antagonist), and Barbara Shelley shines as always as the initially straight-laced Helen.
For me the only way this film falls down is the absence (apart from a flashback) of Peter Cushing as Van Helsing.
Edit: Hammer regular Thorley Walters plays a character who is very clearly Renfield, but is called Ludwig. No idea why.
It appears that Fleming's OHMSS was inspired by Dracula, in that you have a fellow pretending to be an academic to research his nemesis' life in his abode far away from civilisation, populated perhaps by angels of death, while actually plotting his downfall. In the book Blofeld as an enemy is a nebulous figure, not sure there's the bobsleigh fight in it is there? There's no great unveiling.
It doesn't quite suggest that in the film as Lazenby is an unconvincing academic and Savalas is not really the Pleasance villain Fleming's treatment demands but more an upfront, swaggering American.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I started to watch a bit of that one the other day as I'd dusted off my Hammer Films DVD boxset that I bought a few years ago and that I still haven't gotten around to watching much of. I think that's the one where there's a flashback scene to an earlier Dracula film at the beginning which features Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing? I really must get around to watching it in full now that you've reviewed it, @Barbel! 😃
Yes, that's the one.
Thanks, @Barbel. I thought so. I've always wanted to see the Hamner films and the Dracula films in particular after I had a good friend at high school in the 1990s who was a Hammer horror film fanatic and who told me a lot about them. I, in turn, converted him to the James Bond films so you could say that it was a fair exchange of interests. 😃
Dracula Prince of Darkness is a masterpiece. Wonderful film. Not least because Barbara Shelley is in it.😍
THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (1960)
This is my favourite film of all time. I have forgotten how many times I’ve seen it, but it’s certainly more than a hundred times, and each time is a renewed pleasure.
It’s a remake of Seven Samurai, and superbly directed by John Sturges. The score by Elmer Bernstein is justly lauded as one of the finest in history.
Yul Brynner plays Chris, who leads a band of mercenaries who defend a Mexican village against 40 bandits, the bandit leader being played by a suitably evil Eli Wallach. Steve McQueen, Charles Branson, Robert Vaughn and James Coburn all became major stars after this film as four of the seven. The other two less so, but Brad Dexter later saved Frank Sinatra from drowning and was rewarded with roles in later Sinatra films and being his producer. Horst Buccholz never really made it in Hollywood but he had a decent career in European films.
A small Mexican village is regularly raided by bandits and decide to go and get guns from across the border. Meeting with Yul Brynner’s character, a weary gunfighter, he tells them that hiring professional gunfighters would be cheaper and more effective than buying guns. With the money raised from the villagers possessions, Brynner recruits a further six. Steve McQueen is quick witted, Charles Bronson is a thoughtful, insightful character who wishes he had raised a family, Robert Vaughn has lost his nerve, James Coburn is an ice-cool fighter who welcomes a challenge, Brad Dexter is a chancer, always on the lookout for something extra, and Horst Buccholz is the youngster who dreams of the ‘glamorous’ world of gunfighting.
Arriving at the village, after scenes of them riding in line with THAT glorious theme playing, they quickly make plans to rout the bandits when they next turn up.
The film is chock full of fabulous lines;
’I have been offered a lot for my work, but never everything’
‘That was the greatest shot I’ve ever seen’ - ‘The worst! I was aiming at the horse.’
’The old man was right. Only the farmers won. We lost. We always lose.’
’Nobody throws me my gun and says run. Nobody.’
’Well, the graveyards are full of boys who were very young and very proud’
The entire screenplay is superb, there is not a wasted line. The action is exciting and the viewer cares about the gunmen, they all have their own issues and frailties.
If you haven’t seen it, do so. I first saw it as a nine year old at the cinema in 1965, it was on a rerun from the original 1960 release, and ever since that night nothing has surpassed it. It is truly, magnificent.
I need to rewatch The Magnificent Seven. Its been a long time since I saw it, and that was very early on in my exploration of Western movies. It's never ranked highly on my list of favourite Westerns but that could always change when I revisit it.
I do remember many of the lines quoted by CoolHandBond and agree that they are fantastic. And the score is absolutely first rate!
I need to watch it again too. what a cast! were they really all unknowns when they made this?
A while back I watched Battle Beyond the Stars, Roger Corman's Star Wars rip-off that follows the basic plot of Seven Samurai/Magnificent Seven but now in space. I'm not going to say its a fraction so good as any of its inspirations, but it does feature an older Robert Vaughn amongst the mercenaries assembled to save the farm, but a different sort of character than he played the first time.
I'd like to add my vote for "The Magnificent Seven". I wouldn't mind seeing it again.
FLORENCE FOSTER JENKINS (2016)
Meryl Streep plays the world's worst singer, with Hugh Grant as her supportive husband and Simon Helberg (from "The Big Bang Theory") as the constantly amazed piano player. Florence really existed, but unlike most terrible singers she had enough money and contacts to hire Carnegie Hall.
Streep is perfect, of course, but Grant gives maybe a career best performance here working on several different levels.
It’s great to see so many of you like The Magnificent Seven, maybe put it on the watchalong list?
I would definitely join in that one, whatever the starting time was!
I’ve never heard of Florence Foster Jenkins, but it sounds really interesting, I will look that one up.
CONAN THE BARBARIAN (1982)
It may not have been the first, but producer Dino di Laurentis’ Conon the Barbarian is quite possibly the granddaddy of sword-and-sorcery epics, the film to which the sub-genre of fantasy owes its highest debt and the one which launched its star to fame.
Based nominally on several stories by the prolific American writer Robert E. Howard, this huge saga is cruelly underrated, dismissed as a cult film, mocked for its acting and chastised for its hybrid production values. I think that misses the point. The original Conan short stories were exploitation fare, published in the weekly magazine Weird Tales between 1932 and 1935. Howard, a phenomenally fast worker, has a vast body of work spread across several genres. He is not known for literary style. His offerings were purely for entertainment. Which is exactly what the film Conan the Barbarian is, providing a series of exciting set pieces, dramatic landscapes and a mythological template on which to build characters. Howard perceived Conan as a pre-history version of Edgar Rice Burrough’s Tarzan, an educated, violent loner in tune with people and places. Writers Oliver Stone and John Milius reimagine him as not so much from pre-history as from an age of non-history, where all things are possible and pagan gods hold sway over superstitious humans. Their Conan is less well educated, learning his creeds through the blood and gore of the gladiatorial arena and the ethics of martial arts. He’s no less intelligent because of it.
It’s easy to criticise Arnold Schwarzenegger, but the Austrian more than fills out the role of Conan. He’s almost a composite fit, so much so the reissued patchwork novels copied his physique for the face of Conan on their cover art. His accent doesn’t matter in a film such as this, in fact it lends a certain authenticity to a man forbidden to speak through adolescence, who is a slave until he is in his mid-twenties and who finds communication an obsolete past time. When he seduces women, for instance, it is performed by demonstration, not by dialogue. Similarly the dubbing and overacting of Gerry Lopez and Mako doesn’t matter here as the film inhabits that realm of fantasy fiction where all things seem possible and are yet impossible; we don’t need historical accuracy or authority, reality doesn’t exist in these Dark Ages. Broad stroke characterisation aids the spectacle. The slightly comic book, and often comic, exploits of Conan and his various sidekicks are presented in such a fashion as to be both believable and unbelievable. This trick is pulled off by a surprisingly literal screenplay, as well as a series of vignettes reminding us of great historical epics from the past, such as Spartacus and The Fall of the Roman Empire, To Ho cinema like Seven Samurai and Kwaidan, even the Japanese legend-dramas Monkey and The Water Margin. The story proper doesn’t kick in until almost half way.
Conan is an orphan, whose people, the Cimmeron’s have mastered the riddle of steel, creating magnificent weapons in praise of their god, Crom. One winter, Conan’s village is massacred by the Set and their leader Thulsa Doom. Only the children survive, sent to work at a slave mill. Conan grows strong and becomes a gladiator in the pit of death, is educated in the arts of battle and the way of life at a school for warriors and is freed to roam the world by his drunken master, who recognises he has created a beast, a barbarian he cannot control. Defenceless, Conan discovers the lost temple of the Atlanteans and steals a great broadsword. He meets a witch, who seduces him and prophesises his greatness. Always chasing the emblem of the two-headed snake, Conan pairs up with a comrade, the archer and scallywag Subotai, as well as a lover, the Amazonian Valeria. They steal the Eye of the Serpent from the Tower of Snakes, kill an enchanted giant python and celebrate in wine, women and sex. A grateful King Osric, who is appalled by the demi-god Doom and his rapacious sect, recruits the thieves to rescue his daughter, who is in thrall to Thulsa Doom. Conan travels alone, seeking vengeance, but is discovered posing as a priest, tortured and crucified. He is saved from the gods by the incantations of an old Wizard and the loyalty and love of Valeria. Returning to the Temple of Set, the thieves recapture the Princess, but Valeria is killed by a poison arrow formed from a snake, her pact with the gods now made complete. Conan cremates her, the rejuvenation of fire to the barren Land of the Mounds marking him as God-like; his companion Subotai empathetically notes the Barbarian, like the gods, cannot cry. Conan and his companions battle Doom’s warriors and he, with the aid of the Princess, who it is hinted has become his lover, returns again to the Temple where he decapitates Thulsa Doom, despite the latter’s attempt to mesmerise him. In a short spoken epilogue, the Wizard informs the audience Conan went on to have further adventures.
Mako’s Wizard is the de facto narrator of the tale. This explains the episodic, picaresque, first half compared to the mythic, epic second, to which his character plays a huge part. His role as Greek Chorus aids the telling tremendously allowing explanations come via clear, well-structured dialogue, not through long explanatory sequences. Conan never explains to anyone who he is or what his past was, because the Chorus – the Wizard – has told us. It makes Schwarzenegger’s performance far more rounded simply by removing likely swathes of dialogue. He becomes as mute as Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson in their seminal westerns A Fistful of Dollars or Once Upon a Time in the West. Indeed co-writer and director John Milius has clearly done his cinematic homework as several sequences of this film owe much to other artist’s work, particularly Sergio Leone’s sixties westerns, Kurosawa’s samurai epics and the horror work of Masaki Kobayashi. The opening is superb, a forest village is pillaged by Set raiders, who rampage through the forest, reminding us of the bandits in Seven Samurai or the Steppe Cossacks in Taras Bulba, their heavy animal skin cloaks, long hair and body paint are familiar from The Fall of the Roman Empire, or more modern fare such as Gladiator. They are bloodthirsty and merciless. The killing is gore soaked. Thulsa Doom confronts Conan’s mother, mesmerises her, and beheads her in a moment of brisk unseen horror, the mother’s hand slowly falling from her child’s as her head topples off-camera, a moment enacted through a series of swift cut close ups and orchestrated to match Basil Poledouis’ splendidly heroic music score. Seen through the eyes of child, this opening murder matches the homestead killing which inhabit Leone’s …West. Poledouis wrote much of his music based around the screenplay rather than the finished film and the composition stretched to over two hours. Many of the themes are linked and melodically intertwined which allows the film to shift easily between brutality and beauty, action and calm, using the music as its narrative hook. Ennio Morricone also worked in a similar fashion when creating his masterpiece for …West.
Later Milius homages Kubrick [the gladiator scenes], Kobayashi [the incantations and the thieving gods], Kurosawa again [the wandering hero, the thief as accomplice – this also resembles the legend of Monkey], even the Bible [or Norse myth, take your pick] with its crucifixion and resurrection story. Schwarzenegger’s physique and demeanour remind us of other muscle men, such as Steve Reeves and Gordon Scott. The latter once played Tarzan, and the ghost of the Ape Man is noticeable in the scenes at the Temple of Set, where thousands of followers congregate to worship Thulsa Doom’s snakes in the manner of Barcuma’s Jaguar Cult or the Leopard Tribe [Tarzan and the Great River / the Leopard Woman respectively]. Rather than stifle the narrative, these subtle reminders of other films and genres serve to placate us. The violence is shocking, but enshrined in familiar circumstances which reassure us, else the movie would be lopsided and too horrific.
The central theme is a philosophical one, that of the will of the flesh and the mind over the power of steel, the might of the sword. Conan’s father explains the secret of steel, forged by the gods and stolen by men. Thulsa Doom believes it is the body which is strong, as demonstrated by the willingness of his devotees to sacrifice themselves needlessly. “It is the hand that holds the sword,” he declares during their initial confrontation. James Earl Jones, with his booming authority, is perfectly cast as the serpent king, a demonic yet strangely regal being. The long straight-cut wig is a misstep though. Similarly his two hulking henchmen appear to have escaped from Status Quo. Overall however, the costumes, the set design and the sheer look of the film is superb.
Magnificently photographed in southern Spain by Duke Callaghan, the action is gorgeously coloured and utilises vast landscapes and medieval fortresses, replicating ancient plains, bazaars and castles. The Alhambra style architecture is reproduced for the interiors. The hillside temple resembles Franco’s fascist memorial Valley of the Fallen, with its steep steps and crowning apex, a sure nod to the cult of personality employed by dictators – the multitudes even hum “Doom, Doom” in the manner of cultists. The feel of the piece is slightly uneven. The comic pursuits often feel misplaced, the magical elements are too broad and genuinely mystifying, while the philosophical insight tends to slow the action. Events err toward the functional; for instance, Conan’s original infiltration of the Temple of Set is haphazard, both easily accomplished and easily thwarted.
At the time of release many critics took against the film’s traditional interpretation of men being powerful and women being mere objects, but while scenes of sex, sacrificial virgins and masked orgies are included, they are relatively tame. It’s hardly exploitative fare. It is noteworthy the lead female, Sandahl Bergman’s Valeria, is a warrior, capable in a fight, intellectually superior, loyal and strong willed. It is she who takes the head infiltrating the Tower of Snakes and the Temple of Set, leads the night time battle against the spectres of death and makes a pact with the gods: her life for Conan’s. There are strong roles too for Cassandra Gava as the seductive Witch and Valerie Quennessen as the Princess. These women may be beautiful, but they are not objects, they use their sensuality, their skill and their intelligence to achieve what they want in an ancient world dominated by men. The latter has manoeuvred herself into a position at Doom’s right hand. In fact, one of the weaknesses of the film is the lack of depth to its male villains, of which only James Earl Jones achieves credit, the rest are mere mountains of cruelty. Max Von Sydow deserves a mention as the old and bitter King.
I thoroughly enjoyed rewatching Conan the Barbarian, a movie I hadn’t viewed for over twenty years. It is grand sorcery, epic in scale and execution and inspired all those lesser deities such as Krull, Flesh and Blood, Kull the Conqueror, Legend and, of course, He Man. It wins out over a dire 2011 remake by sheer might of ambition. The latter in comparison is only a noisy pick-pocket.
by coincidence I too recently watched Conan the Barbarian and its sequel Conan the Destroyer, and got Red Sonja queued up to watch next.
one relevant aspect of the sequel: Grace Jones. She got a lot more to do in that film than she did in A View to a Kill. I still wont say she's a great actress, but the Bond producers could have used her talents better. An early example of the phenomenon where they hire a villain based on a scenery chewing performance in an earlier film, but fail to get a performance half so good in the Bondfilm. See also Robert Carlyle, Javier Bardem, and Christopher Waltz. Even Christopher Lee was sort of coasting on his reputation of being really scary in many earlier films.
Watched GOODFELLAS last night. I'd seen it before but it might as well have been a first viewing because when I watched it previously it was on one of the worst DVD transfers I've ever seen and I spent most of the film bemoaning the poor image quality and as a result my memories of the film were pretty vague. And I certainly enjoyed it a lot more second time round. Great performances all round, some very memorable scenes and shots, a number of which have become well ingrained in the lore of popular culture. I also like that it is a fairly historically accurate mafia movie, unlike a work of fiction like The Godfather. Check out the History Buffs YouTube channel review of the film if you're interested.
I'm currently embarking on a bit of a Scorsese binge. There are so many significant films in his ouevre that I've never seen. I'm following Goodfellas with a string of gangster films - I've got Casino, The Departed and The Irishman coming up in the next week or two. Anybody want to recommend some favourite Scorsese films for me to check out. I've already seen Raging Bull, The Aviator, Shutter Island and I'm going to be rewatching Taxi Driver sometime soon as well.
A SIMPLE FAVOUR (2018)
Tugging on the coat tails of Gone Girl and The Girl on a Train, this is a black comedy mystery thriller with two antagonists matching crazy designer outfits to snappy irreverent dialogue. Anna Kendrick, forever watchable and cute, befriends Blake Lively’s high powered PR executive outside the school gate. When the latter disappears, Kendrick turns detective. Cue some neat lines, bizarre choices of clothing, a weird chorus of envious Mums, a lack of sympathetic characters and a plot which doesn’t work because the director forgot to add a beauty spot to his lead actress. Almost from the off, I had a curious sense of déjà vu. Hitchcockian? Not quite. Wilder-esque? Could be. It’s not wacky enough for a Hawks or a Sturges. Blake Edwards, maybe. A too wordy screenplay with too many expletives. It’s based on a bestselling novel and dialogue and incidents such as what’s represented here always read better on a page than they do when you see it on a screen. Thankfully short, it just about held my interest.
Tenet (2020)
The latest Christopher Nolan's newest movie is impressive in many ways. The acting, action scenes etc. are probably top notch. But in spite of the many qualities of the movie and Nolan's great talent I didn't like Tenet very much. I got the feeling the director was more interested in showing of how clever he is than making a thriller/action movie the audience can enjoy. I also feel that a movie with such a high concept needs some humor to show that they are aware of how far-fetched it is. I'm not saying it should be a comedy, but a funny comment or two would hjelp a movie that takes itself too seriously'.
THE FATHER, the movie for which Anthony Hopkins won an Oscar (whether he deserved it over the late Chadwick Boseman is a question for the ages). He's an elderly man suffering with dementia, and the film is seen mostly through his eyes--as such, the film circles around a bit and sometimes the same characters are played by different actors. It's a very good film--and there are some moments of real humor--and the acting is superb. . .but I found it a little hard to watch, as others might. My grandmother had dementia, and Hopkins's performance is dead-on--it brought back a lot of bad memories--and, though my father thankfully still has all his senses, he's 90 years old and I couldn't help but think how little time there is left. So. . .it's a good film and a worthwhile film, but you might want to avoid it.