Walk Don’t Run (1966)

Walk Don’t Run (1966)

“This is the most ridiculous race!”

Synopsis:
When a middle-aged British businessman (Cary Grant) arrives in Tokyo two days before the Olympics are due to start, he pushes his way into a roommate situation with a young secretary (Samantha Eggar) who eventually finds herself also sharing her flat with an Olympian competitor (Jim Hutton) — but how will Eggar’s fiance (John Standing) feel about her living in such tight quarters with two men?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cary Grant Films
  • Jim Hutton Films
  • Love Triangle
  • Olympics
  • Romantic Comedy
  • Samantha Eggar Films

Review:
Cary Grant’s final film before his definitive retirement was in this fluffy rom-com remake of The More the Merrier (1943), using the Tokyo Olympics as a setting wherein housing is nearly impossible to find. What one can’t help noticing right away is that unlike Charles Coburn in the original, Grant was far from beyond his prime:

… thus making his proclamation of romantic neutrality (he has a wife and kids back home who he talks to on the phone — though we never see them) less convincing all around. Indeed, pretty much everything about the storyline here feels contrived — and it’s nowhere near as humorous as the original.

With that said, DVD Savant’s generous assessment of the film is worth consideration:

Walk, Don’t Run seems to convey Grant’s satisfied attitude after a long and rewarding career. The film is like his last day in High School, walking the halls with no books to carry and no classes to attend, just feeling like everything’s going to be okay.”

Viewed from that perspective, I suppose one can spend this movie simply internally thanking Grant for his lengthy career, and for offering us so many opportunities to laugh alongside him — just not this time.

Note: Watch for George Takei in a small role as a desk clerk.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Harry Stradling, Sr.’s cinematography
  • Occasional effective use of location shooting in Tokyo (i.e., during the culminating walking race)

Must See?
Nope; you can skip this one.

Links:

Your Cheatin’ Heart (1964)

Your Cheatin’ Heart (1964)

“You’re the king, and you’re killing yourself — why?!”

Synopsis:
Shortly after marrying singer Audrey Williams (Susan Oliver), country musician Hank Williams (George Hamilton) rises in fame and fortune — but his alcoholism poses a threat to his marriage, career, and health.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Alcoholism and Drug Addiction
  • Biopics
  • George Hamilton Films
  • Musicians
  • Red Buttons Films
  • Rex Ingram Films

Review:
George Hamilton was cast as the lead in this biopic about famed country-western singer Hank Williams after befriending Williams’ widow, who was also interested in advocating on behalf of her son (Hank Williams, Jr.) dubbing the singing. The resulting film — a surprise hit for MGM — is a highly dramatized but reasonably powerful overview of this young star’s too-short life (he died at just 29 years old), which seems to have been dominated by tensions between his own wish to live a simple existence:

… and his wife’s desire for money and fame. We don’t see when or how Hank’s alcoholism first began, but it quickly overshadows all other considerations — and we can clearly see the writing on the wall of his downfall.

Arthur O’Connell plays Fred Rose, co-creator of Nashville’s first music publishing company, Acuff-Rose Music, which helped bring Williams to fame:

… and Red Buttons stars as a (fictional) loyal friend of Hank’s to the end.

I didn’t leave this film feeling like I learned very much about Williams, other than being reminded that he was behind such hits as “Hey, Good Lookin'”, “Cold, Cold Heart” and — of course — the title song; but it should be noted that a more recent attempt at telling his life story apparently wasn’t all that successful, either.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • George Hamilton as Hank Williams

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a one-time look. Listed as a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Inside Daisy Clover (1965)

Inside Daisy Clover (1965)

“You live in a world of your own; that’s your trouble.”

Synopsis:
In the 1930s, aspiring teenage singer Daisy Clover (Natalie Wood) — living with her kooky mom (Ruth Gordon) on the beach — is brought by a movie mogul (Christopher Plummer) to Hollywood, where she becomes a star and falls for a handsome but sexually elusive actor (Robert Redford).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Aspiring Stars
  • Christopher Plummer Films
  • Hollywood
  • Natalie Wood Films
  • Robert Redford Films
  • Roddy McDowall Films
  • Ruth Gordon Films

Review:
In his review of this adaptation of Gavin Lambert’s 1963 novel, New York Times critic Howard Thomspon states immediately, “There have been better pictures about Hollywood, but few as triumphantly, all-round bad as Inside Daisy Clover.” Ouch! However, the missed potential in this flick — especially given how much talent was involved — does sting a bit. Other than one powerful scene near the end (taking place in a sound booth), Wood’s performance is inconsistent at best, and somewhat cringeworthy at worst — though one gets the sense she simply wasn’t given good direction on who her character is (and the godawful wig she’s made to wear doesn’t help at all).

The opening sequences showing Daisy’s existence on “Angel Beach” with her delusional mother — Gordon’s career was jump-started from this film — make good use of this authentic setting (actually Santa Monica), but are over-the-top in their portrayal of QUIRKINESS.

Once Daisy arrives in Hollywood, the contrast between her ramshackle beach upbringing and the austerity of the studios couldn’t be more stark. Indeed, her time with Swan Studios eventually takes on the air of a horror show, with Plummer’s wife (Katharine Bard) hovering protectively nearby (secrets and a breakdown await):

… Daisy’s musical numbers surreally garish:

… and Plummer (fresh from his career-altering role in The Sound of Music) becoming increasingly menacing as the storyline progresses.

It’s not clear what part Daisy’s (much) older sister Gloria (Betty Harford) really plays in the proceedings; all we know is that she’s “taken a powder” from their family but somehow has significant clout in Hollywood.

Also popping up on the periphery is Roddy McDowall’s Walter Baines, a quiet assistant to Plummer who we learn pretty much nothing about (but his real-life status as a former child actor says a lot).

It’s too bad Redford wasn’t comfortable openly playing his character as gay or bisexual; this would likely have added much more interest and sincerity to their complex relationship.

While it has some diehard fans who stick up for it ferociously, Inside Daisy Clover really is an odd duck and a missed opportunity.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Christopher Plummer as Ray Swan
  • Good use of location shooting

  • Charles Lang’s cinematography

Must See?
Nope; you can skip this one. Listed as a Cult Movie and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Flight of the Phoenix, The (1966)

Flight of the Phoenix, The (1966)

“Are you asking me to kill the rest of them trying to get a death trap off the ground?”

Synopsis:
After a pilot (James Stewart) and his alcoholic navigator (Richard Attenborough) conduct an emergency landing in the Sahara Desert, they and the surviving men on board — including a German engineer (Hardy Kruger), a British captain (Peter Finch) and his sergeant (Ronald Fraser), a French doctor (Christian Marquand), a mentally deteriorating foreman (Ernest Borgnine), an oil company accountant (Dan Duryea), and three oil drillers (Ian Bannen, George Kennedy, and Alex Montoya) — work to craft a flyable plane out of their wreck.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Airplanes and Pilots
  • Dan Duryea Films
  • Ernest Borgnine Films
  • George Kennedy Films
  • James Stewart Films
  • Peter Finch Films
  • Richard Attenborough Films
  • Robert Aldrich Films
  • Survival

Review:
Robert Aldrich directed this gritty survival flick — based on a novel of the same name — about a group of diverse men attempting to make their way through a seemingly hopeless situation. From the beginning scene of instability in the air:

… to their crash landing in a dusty desert (resulting in two fatalities and one serious injury), we see a wide variety of emotional responses to the catastrophe, including humor, pragmatism, resignation, delusion, defiance, and despair. After setting up a relatively stable base:

… and determining how long they have until their highly rationed water runs out, the group comes up with a variety of contested ways to attempt rescue. Should they flag down a passing plane? (Yes, of course, but it doesn’t work.)

Should they walk across the desert and attempt to find others? (Finch is determined to try this.)

And how should they manage a group of nomads that suddenly appear over the horizon?

The craziest yet most deliberated idea comes from Hardy, a serious German who seems to approach every moment of his existence with rationality; throughout the film, we see him continuously calculating and making plans for building a new plane.

Eventually the rest of the men realize they might as well give this a try; even if it doesn’t work, at least they will keep up their morale doing something. Many scenes show the men working through the dark coolness of the night, following Hardy’s orders no matter how far-fetched — and lo and behold, a plane does emerge; but will it fly?

Ian Bannen was nominated as Best Supporting Actor for his small role here as a cocky Cockney, and he’s good but not necessarily more memorable than other members of the ensemble cast.

To say too much more would give away spoilers; this is an adventure flick that should be seen and enjoyed as the numerous tensions unfold.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fine performances by the ensemble cast

  • Joseph Biroc’s cinematography

Must See?
Yes, as a good show by a master director. Listed as a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Good Show
  • Important Director

Links:

This Property is Condemned (1966)

This Property is Condemned (1966)

“And you’ll stay, and you’ll stay — because of all you give me.”

Synopsis:
In Depression-era Mississippi, a gangly teen (Mary Badham) relates the story of her older sister (Natalie Wood), who fell tragically in love with a new lodger (Robert Redford) in the boarding house owned by their self-serving mother (Kate Reid).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Charles Bronson Films
  • Deep South
  • Depression Era
  • Flashback Films
  • Natalie Wood Films
  • Robert Redford Films
  • Sydney Pollack Films
  • Tennessee Williams Films

Review:
Inspired by a one-act play by Tennessee Williams, this Technicolor soaper — directed by Sydney Pollack, with screenplay input from Francis Ford Coppola — is referred to by several reviewers as a distillation of Williams’ classic themes all rolled into one less-than-satisfying tale. While Wood gives a heartfelt performance:

… and Reid is effectively witchy as her brutally mercenary mother:

… bland Redford and awkward Badham (clearly recreating some version of her most famous role as Scout in To Kill a Mockingbird) fare less well, and both Charles Bronson and Robert Blake get short shrift as would-be lovers of Wood.

In its favor, the film is beautifully photographed by James Wong Howe.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Natalie Wood as Alva
  • Kate Reid as Hazel
  • James Wong Howe’s cinematography

Must See?
No, unless you’re a Wood fan.

Links:

Collector, The (1965)

Collector, The (1965)

“I wouldn’t be a good prisoner if I didn’t try to escape.”

Synopsis:
A deranged butterfly collector (Terence Stamp) kidnaps an art student (Samantha Eggar) he’s had a crush on for years, and keeps her locked up in his basement; will Miranda (Eggar) find a way to escape?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cat and Mouse
  • Kidnapping
  • Obsessive Love
  • Samantha Eggar Films
  • Sociopaths
  • Terence Stamp Films
  • William Wyler Films

Review:
William Wyler’s fourth-to-last film — made before How to Steal a Million (1966), Funny Girl (1968), and The Liberation of L.B. Jones (1970) — was this adaptation of John Fowles’ 1963 novel of the same name. It’s essentially a two-character thriller — a tense tale of cat-and-mouse between an insane misfit and the savvy young woman he mistakenly believes will fall in love with him if given enough time.

What’s fascinating about the storyline is how many different tactics spunky Eggar tries; in the earliest scenes we see her searching deeply into Stamp’s face as she attempts to find the one thing that will allow her to either escape or shift his mind.

Stamp is seriously menacing as a sociopath who views “collecting” Miranda the same way he does his beloved butterflies, never understanding that humans simply can’t be “caught” in the same way.

While it’s a tad overlong and becomes increasingly bleak by the end, this film is well-acted by the two leads and keeps tensions high; it’s worth a one-time look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Samantha Eggar as Miranda
  • Terence Stamp as Freddie
  • Fine cinematography

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a look. Listed as a Cult Movie and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

King & Country (1964)

King & Country (1964)

“I just started walking — walking away from the guns.”

Synopsis:
A working class British soldier (Tom Courtenay) during World War I is defended by a compassionate lawyer (Dirk Bogarde) when he’s accused of desertion.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Courtroom Drama
  • Dirk Bogarde Films
  • Joseph Losey Films
  • Play Adaptation
  • Soldiers
  • Tom Courtenay Films
  • World War I

Review:
In between helming The Servant (1963) and Modesty Blaise (1966), Joseph Losey directed this adaptation of a 1955 novel by John Lansdale Hodson, which was turned into a play called Hamp. It’s a decidedly bleak tale all-around, with Courtenay posited as a sympathetic if slightly simple-minded young man who volunteered to serve in the Great War, then suffered from PTSD after losing all of his original company members and started wandering back home (i.e., deserting).

As Courtenay expains to Bogarde (assigned to defend him), “Well, I wasn’t really thinking about it, sir, one way or the other. I just couldn’t stand it anymore.” When asked to share more about the recurrent idea of deserting, he states:

“Well, the time this really started going in my head, I got blown into a shell hole. Two of the lads pulled me out with their rifles… I’d seen it happen to a bloke a couple of days before; he slipped off the duck boards into the hole [and drowned in the mud]… I thought it was my lot, see. I was going to drown in it, like he did, sucked into it, fighting it, drowning in it. Oh, after that I couldn’t stand it anymore.”

A central facet of the storyline is that Courtenay’s Private Hamp can’t “say it any different” to Bogarde or others; all he knows is that he needed to get away from “any place [he] could hear guns” though he “didn’t have a plan”, and he admits that his actual walk towards home was “like a dream” and he “didn’t know what was really happening.” Narrative tension is built from wondering how or if Bogarde will be able to help him — and if not, how his company mates will support him. Losey, cinematographer Denys N. Coop, production designer Richard Macdonald, and art director Peter Mullins do an admirable job helping audiences sense the muddy, bleak claustrophobia of the trenches, all through sets:

… and both Bogarde and Courtenay are excellent in their respective leading roles. This isn’t an easy film to watch by any means, but it’s worth a one-time look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Dirk Bogarde as Captain Hargreaves
  • Tom Courtenay as Private Hamp
  • Atmospheric cinematography

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a look if you can stomach it.

Links:

Trial, The (1962)

Trial, The (1962)

“I am sane. I am innocent. I have committed no crime!”

Synopsis:
A bureaucrat (Anthony Perkins) accused of a non-specific crime navigates a nightmarish labyrinth while attempting to engage his lawyer (Orson Welles).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Anthony Perkins Films
  • Courtroom Drama
  • Falsely Accused
  • Jeanne Moreau Films
  • Living Nightmare
  • Orson Welles Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that “Orson Welles’s baroque, ambitious telling of Franz Kafka’s comic nightmare” presents “a dark, decayed, distorted labyrinth-like world, not unlike a combination of the setting found in David Lynch’s Eraserhead and Michael Radford’s 1984” — and he adds that “Welles has created a visual tour-de-force that resembles no commercial films of the early sixties but rather the works of surrealists and experimental filmmakers.”



Peary argues that “appropriately, the bizarre events that transpire, all with Josef K. on screen, have the logic of a nightmare,” which is “all fascinating stuff, but you may need four or five cups of strong coffee to make it to the end” — and even by “then you may be hopelessly confused.” I’ll agree that the film feels a bit over-long, and could probably be reduced by half an hour or so (though that would mess with the integrity of the storyline even more than Welles already did) — but I disagree that one feels confused. Rather, the story plays out exactly like the nightmarish series of random encounters it is.

Peary further asserts that if Josef “were more like us and seemed to be disoriented by the strange people he comes across and the strange situation in which he finds himself… then we could empathize more with him;” however, as it stands, “we don’t really know how to react because he doesn’t seem too upset himself.” I once again disagree: Perkins is appropriately haunted and confused for most of the film, just as any of us would be if caught in such a surreal hellscape.

Peary’s analysis of Welles’ adaptation as turning “Kafka’s downer” into “a triumph for Man” — in which “Perkins’s prideful man becomes prideful of being Man” — doesn’t resonate with me either; but then, this is a film that has divided audiences and critics since its inception (and in recent years has been lauded by some as one of his best). Watch for Jeanne Moreau as Josef’s neighbor:

… Elsa Martinelli (star of that same year’s Hatari!) as the wife of a courtroom guard:

… Akim Tamiroff as a doomed client of the lawyer (Welles):

… and Remy Schneider as the lawyer’s lover.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Anthony Perkins as Josef K.
  • Highly atmospheric sets and art design
  • Edmond Richard’s cinematography
  • Alexander Alexeieff and Claire Parker’s “pin-screen” animation

Must See?
Yes, as a unique and provocative film by a master director.

Categories

  • Important Director

Links:

Hatari! (1962)

Hatari! (1962)

“Why don’t you find out what kind of a girl I am before you make up your mind?”

Synopsis:
The leader (John Wayne) of a big game capture company in Tanganyika is oblivious to advances made by the beautiful photographer (Elsa Martinelli) visiting their crew; meanwhile, his employee “Pockets” (Red Buttons) is in love with the young woman (Michèle Girardon) who owns the company, but worries that a new French hire (Gérard Blain) will woo her away from him.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Africa
  • Howard Hawks Films
  • Hunting
  • John Wayne Films
  • Red Buttons Films

Review:
In between Rio Bravo (1959) and Man’s Favorite Sport? (1964), Howard Hawks directed this romantic action comedy flick set in Africa and featuring baby elephants (alongside plenty of other wild animals). Indeed, the film is essentially an excuse to show numerous safaris to capture animals for zoos — including antelopes, zebras, ostriches, giraffes:

… rhinos (the most elusive and dangerous prize):

… and elephants. A significant sub-plot revolves around Martinelli’s insistence on saving the life of a young elephant whose mother has died, which leads to her caring for several calves:

… and eventually being honored in a terribly awkward ceremony by a local tribe. Which man will win the hand of each of the (conveniently) beautiful young women on hand otherwise takes up the bulk of the would-be storyline, alongside occasional “comedic” interactions between Wayne and Buttons.

POTENTIAL SPOILER

(With Hawks himself age 66 at the time this film was released, is it any wonder the middle-aged men in the cast would somehow have a leg up on the younger, much more handsome candidates?) You truly can skip this one unless you happen to be a Wayne or Hawks completist.

Note: The real-life story of Girardon (best known for her appearance here) is quite tragic.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Russell Harlan’s cinematography

Must See?
No; skip this one.

Links:

Great Escape, The (1963)

Great Escape, The (1963)

“We’re going to devote our energies to sports and gardening — all the cultural pursuits as far as they’re concerned. In fact, we’re going to put the goons to sleep. Meanwhile, we dig.”

Synopsis:
Following instructions from an RAF squadron leader (Richard Attenborough), a group of international prisoners of war collaborate in their attempts to escape from a high-security Nazi prison by digging several lengthy tunnels.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Charles Bronson Films
  • Donald Pleasence Films
  • Escape
  • James Coburn Films
  • James Garner Films
  • John Sturges Films
  • Prisoners of War
  • Richard Attenborough Films
  • Steve McQueen Films
  • World War II

Review:
John Sturges directed this epic (nearly 3-hour) historical adventure film based on the exploits of a team of Commonwealth POWs who attempted a mass escape from Germany’s Stalag Luft III in 1944. The storyline — co-constructed by six writers — is almost unbearably tense at times, with no illusions that these men will escape unharmed; in fact, we know from history that 50 escapees were murdered after being caught. Thankfully, some did survive — and this is fiction, after all — so we are able to watch events unfolding with curiosity, admiration, and trepidation all at once.

We get to know each of the main characters in part through their given nicknames (which are based on their skill set or proclivities). Attenborough is known as the “Big X” and is the clear leader of all operations; he’s deadly serious at all times, and rightfully so.

Steve McQueen is referred to as “the Cooler King” because he — along with his companion, Angus Lennie’s neurotic “The Mole” — is prone to escaping as often as possible, and being put into the “cooler”.

James Garner is “The Scrounger” given his ability to scrounge up whatever’s needed — including papers from an unsuspecting guard (Robert Graf’s “The Ferret”) who is drawn to his offer of Red Cross-supplied chocolate).

James Coburn is “The Manufacturer” (shown here holding an air pump he designed):

… while Gordon Jackson is “Intelligence” (here he’s mulling over what to do with all the dirt being tunnelled out):

… and David McCallum becomes known as “The Disperser” when he comes up with an ingenious way to disperse of the dirt.

Donald Pleasence is touching as “The Forger”, who eventually deals with additional hardships on top of imprisonment:

… while Charles Bronson has a significant role as the ironically claustrophobic “Tunnel King”:

… whose loyal companion (John Leyton) is also given this appelation. Other highlights of the film include Elmer Bernstein’s instantly recognizable score, good use of location shooting in Germany, and fine attention paid to historical details (including, for instance, how the men repurposed their uniforms to make civilian clothing and other disguises).

This action-packed adventure remains well worth a look, though be prepared for a big time investment. (DVD Savant points out that there probably should have been an intermission at some point, but there isn’t.)

Note: In real life, American POWs only helped with construction of the tunnel rather than escaping, but several big-name actors were included as key characters in order to appeal to American audiences.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fine performances by the ensemble cast
  • Good use of location shooting
  • Daniel Fapp’s cinematography
  • Authentic sets and costumes
  • Elmer Bernstein’s score

Must See?
Yes, as a still-enjoyable classic. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic
  • Good Show

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links: