FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
At a British seaside boarding house, a spinster (Deborah Kerr) dominated by her nosy mother (Gladys Cooper) nurses a crush on a former major (David Niven), while a young medical student (Rod Taylor) fends off distracting amorous advances from his girlfriend (Audrey Dalton), and a drink-loving ex-con (Burt Lancaster) recently engaged to the hotel’s manager (Wendy Hiller) is visited by his glamorous former wife (Rita Hayworth). When a significant secret is revealed about Niven’s past, how will his various housemates — also including a former schoolteacher (Felix Aylmer), a butch female gambler (May Hallatt), and Cooper’s kind friend (Cathleen Nesbitt) — respond?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Burt Lancaster Films
• David Niven Films
• Deborah Kerr Films
• Ensemble Cast
• Mistaken and Hidden Identities
• Morality Police
• Rita Hayworth Films
• Rod Taylor Films
• Wendy Hiller Films

Review:
This cinematic adaptation of Terrence Rattigan’s two inter-related one-act plays underwent significant changes for the screen: it was originally designed to be performed by just two actors shifting roles throughout, but by the time Hollywood got its gears in action (hiring Delbert Mann to direct), original co-stars Laurence Olivier and Vivien Leigh were no longer involved, and the broad cast of characters were all played by different actors.

The dominant theme throughout the storyline is moral condemnation against anyone straying even slightly from “proper” British norms, as embodied by Cooper’s stereotypically tut-tutting busybody:

The sway she holds over her dowdy, severely repressed grown daughter (Kerr) would be tragic if it weren’t so Hollywoodized (Kerr is oh-so-clearly “acting”).

The gradual revealing of Niven’s shocking secret drives the narrative, though even that has been seemingly modified from its original impact. (Harassing random women in dark movie theaters is gross — but not anything close to what his character is accused of in the play.)

The parallel subplot about beautiful Hayworth coming to visit the boarding house and disrupting Lancaster’s new life is meant to shock its residents (and us) out of whatever complacency we exist in, but frankly, she’s a non-starter.

Hiller (who won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar) provides a solid grounding to the film as the house’s ever-present manager, but her romance with Lancaster is underdeveloped and not terribly realistic:

Meanwhile, blink a few times and you’ll miss Rod Taylor in a throwaway narrative thread about unmarried lovers (shocking!) trying to hide their obvious affair — which wouldn’t be nearly such a problem if progressive Dalton would just agree to get married already:

Peary doesn’t review Separate Tables in GFTFF, but he comments on David Niven’s Best Actor win in Alternate Oscars, where he notes that “Niven gave what was probably his most respectable performance… playing what was probably his least respectable character.” He adds that, “As usual, Niven gave a solid, professional performance,” though “this time he was more serious than he had been in the many thankless roles he’d had in his career” — and he argues that “Niven’s popularity in the Hollywood community — he was a nice, witty, gracious gentleman — was a contributing factor to his victory.” Indeed, Niven’s fine performance here is noteworthy, and one wishes the story focused even more on his character’s troubled past; at least he’s provided a measure of compassion in the film’s moving final moments.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• David Niven as Major Angus Pollock
  
• Fine cinematography
  

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one-time look if you’re curious.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• Spinning Image Review
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
An aging vaudeville star (Laurence Olivier) living off the charity of his wife (Brenda de Banzie) and elderly father (Roger Livesey) — and emotionally supported by his stagehand son (Alan Bates) and do-gooding daughter (Joan Plowright) — romances a young beauty pageant contestant (Shirley Anne Field) while dreaming about his next big hit, evading taxmen, and avoiding news of his son Mick (Albert Finney) fighting in the Suez Crisis.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Actors and Actresses
• Alan Bates Films
• Albert Finney Films
• Has-Beens
• Laurence Olivier Films
• Play Adaptations
• Roger Livesey Films
• Shirley Anne Field Films
• Tony Richardson Films
• Vaudeville and Burlesque

Review:
Following his cinematic directorial debut Look Back in Anger (1959) (based on a play by John Osborne), Tony Richardson adapted Osborne’s next play, written with Laurence Olivier in mind. It’s difficult to say which of these two films/plays is more depressing — though I give my vote to The Entertainer, which is only 103 minutes long but feels twice that given its relentlessly bleak trajectory. That’s not to say the film isn’t well-made, because it is — but watching a nice young woman like Plowright postpone her engagement to a solid guy (Daniel Massey) in order to stick around and support her deeply dysfunctional family is a rough way to start the storyline off.

Meanwhile, as soon as we learn more about both Archie Rice (Olivier) and his troubled wife Phoebe (de Banzie), we know we’re in for a rocky ride, given that Archie doesn’t want to face the fact of his financial troubles, and Phoebe is perpetually on her last nerve about it.

Making matters worse, Archie is a chronic womanizer who somehow manages to woo a pretty young beauty pageant contestant through an aspirational lie about featuring her in his upcoming (as of yet unfunded) production:

… not fully realizing what his affair will do to his wife, whose brother in Canada is willing to help pay their bills and get them started on a new life if only Archie were open to this option. Bosley Crowther describes the overall scenario perfectly, referring to the film (which he nonetheless seems to recommend) as “a devastating picture of a hollow, hypocritical heel and of the pitiful people around him who are drowned in his grubby vanity.”

Precisely. Is there anything worse than a once-well-known performer past his prime who refuses to step down from his perch, and drags everyone else along with him on his descent? Well, clearly there are many things worse — but this film makes a good argument on behalf of Archie as a top Pathetic Loser of cinema. Because he’s played by Olivier (giving a marvelous performance), we want very much to seek empathy with him:

… but frankly, it’s hard. Archie doesn’t necessarily mean to be cruel, but his own needs are so dominant that he can’t or won’t stop to reflect on what he’s doing to others. To that end, the film is littered with distressing and/or depressing scenes, including a beauty pageant in which several contestants are described matter-of-factly as having “no hobbies” (ouch):

… Archie’s employees hovering in the background to eavesdrop while he hears bad news on the telephone (they know this means their own paychecks will be further delayed, but are perhaps experiencing schadenfreude as well):

… de Banzie’s multiple hysterical breakdowns:

… and the terrible culminating scenes with Livesey (about which I won’t say more at risk of spoiling). With that said, as with other films of the British New Wave, Richardson makes excellent use of authentic locales, very much bringing the seaside world of low-brow entertainment to life:

… and Oswald Morris’s cinematography throughout is stellar. Both Alan Bates:

… and Albert Finney (appearing only in an early sequence):

… made their cinematic debuts in this film, and it’s also notable for bringing together Olivier and Plowright romantically (they went on to marry and have three kids). However, it’s hard to recommend a film that’s such a consistently bleak downer — so consider yourself forewarned.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Laurence Olivier as Archie Rice (nominated as one of the Best Actors of the Year in Alternate Oscars)
  
• Brenda de Banzie as Phoebe Rice
  
• Fine use of location shooting
  
• Oswald Morris’s cinematography
  

Must See?
No, though it’s certainly worth a one time look simply for its historical relevance, as well as Olivier’s stand-out performance.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Spinning Image Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
A teenager (Rita Tushingham) whose flighty single mother (Dora Bryan) leaves her on her own to marry a younger man (Robert Stephens) has a brief cross-racial romance with a black sailor (Paul Danquah), then befriends a gay young man (Murray Melvin) eager to support Tushingham through her pregnancy.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Cross-Cultural Romance
• Homosexuality
• Play Adaptation
• Pregnancy
• Rita Tushingham Films
• Single Mothers
• Tony Richardson Films

Review:
Tony Richardson’s fourth cinematic directorial outing — after Look Back in Anger (1959), The Entertainer (1960), and Sanctuary (1961), and just before The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (1962) — was this adaptation of a play by 18-year-old Shelagh Delaney (who co-wrote the screenplay with Richardson). Tushingham is vibrant and perfectly cast in her debut role as Jo, playing an “angry young woman” whose unique eyes pierce the screen with intensity:

We can see from the film’s opening moments what a pickle she’s in, given her mother’s penchant for evading responsibility at every turn. (Bryan is shown below leaving her residence without paying back rent, with Tushingham following.)

Indeed, Bryan is truly a sorry lot, seeking escape and a sense of purpose at a local pub where a glass-eyed lout (Stephens) takes a fancy to her:

For better or for worse, Stephens can’t stand Tushingham — which is refreshing given that it breaks with expectation (we anticipate he’ll instantly hit on his aging fiancee’s nubile daughter), but also leads to Tushingham being abandoned yet again as her mother chooses Stephens over her. It’s no wonder Tushingham finds solace in the caring arms of Danquah, who she fantasizes is a descendant of African princes:

The screenplay doesn’t make much of the inter-racial aspect of their romance other than Tushingham reassuring Danquah that her mother won’t care he’s Black (not quite true). Meanwhile, the second half of the film focuses on another “controversial” topic of the day: homosexuality.

Shortly after being introduced to Murray Melvin’s Geoffrey (the pair meet in the shoe shop where Tushingham works):

… we learn that he was kicked out of his apartment for being caught having sex with a man. (I immediately thought of another British film from that year, Victim, which addresses the same topic from a more central angle.) Tushingham’s Jo — not the most mature of young women — teases Melvin endlessly about this, wanting to know details of his sex life (“You can stay if you tell me what you do,” she bargains with him. “Go on, Geoffrey. I’ve always wanted to know about people like you.”)

Eventually they develop a workable friendship, with Melvin clearly taking solace in the fact that he’s found a purpose in his life: caring for Tushingham. (“Somebody’s got to look after you. You can’t look after yourself, that’s obvious.”) As he tells Tushingham:

“Before I knew you I didn’t care much whether I lived or died, y’know. But then I met you and, well, being with you’s me life.”

Meanwhile, Tushingham continues to struggle with her unwanted pregnancy. (“I don’t want to be a mother! I don’t want to be a woman!” she wails at Melvin when he attempts to give her a “training doll” from a local clinic.)

We grow to care for these individuals, and stay invested until the very end (which is distressing, but perhaps realistic). Adding to our engagement is ample use of authentic locales around or near Manchester, nicely filmed by DP Walter Lassaly.

This “kitchen sink drama” remains worth a look by film fanatics, as a valuable female-centric entry in the genre.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Rita Tushingham as Jo
  
• Murray Melvin as Geoffrey
  
• Dora Bryan as Helen
  
• Robert Stephens as Peter
  
• Excellent use of authentic locales
  
• Walter Lassaly’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
Yes, for its important role in the British New Wave movement, and for Tushingham’s breakthrough performance.

Categories

• Historically Relevant

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Spinning Image Review
• Q Network Review
• TCM Article
• Criterion Essay

Synopsis:
When an aspiring actor (Reni Santoni) in 1938 NYC meets a grandiose acting school owner (Jose Ferrer) eager to take his “tuition” money in exchange for a part in a play, Ferrer’s daughter (Elaine May) convinces her father to hire Santoni for the role. Meanwhile, Santoni’s overbearing parents (Shelley Winters and David Opatoshu) — who want him to enter pharmacy school — are against his career choice, Santoni’s employer (Jack Gilford) is upset that Santoni is always late for work, and Santoni’s girlfriend (Janet Margolin) tries to be supportive but gets suspicious about May’s interest in Santoni, as well as Morris’s friendship with a gorgeous secretary (Nancy Kovack).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Actors and Actresses
• Aspiring Stars
• Carl Reiner Films
• Elaine May Films
• Janet Margolin Films
• Jose Ferrer Films
• Shelley Winters Films

Review:
Carl Reiner’s directorial debut was this adaptation of Joseph Stein’s 1963 play, originally featuring Alan Arkin in a Tony-winning performance. Unfortunately, Santoni doesn’t seem to be up to the task of embodying the lead role, as we quickly lose interest in him and his goals: his character is a terrible actor (and he’s meant to be), but aren’t we simultaneously supposed to be rooting for his success in his chosen field? Or should we take it as a telling sign that this would-be actor doesn’t even realize that “(Enter laughing)” refers to stage directions rather than dialogue?

Meanwhile, he’s surrounded by a cast of well-known (real life) supporting actors trying hard but unable to resurrect the production — including Jose Ferrer as the world-weary Great Actor gladly taking Santoni’s money, and Shelley Winters as a stereotypically overbearing Jewish mother:

Coming across the best — simply because she’s as wacky and unpredictable as always — is Elaine May as Ferrer’s romantically inclined daughter:

… who is primarily interested in rehearsing her love scene with Santoni as often as possible. Clearly, audiences at the time resonated with a story set back in the 1930s, when free theater in NYC was apparently a thing if you were willing to sit through a crappy production featuring actors paying for the privilege of appearing on stage (this was a different era of entertainment opportunities).

Note: There should be a category on this review site called “Overbearing Parents”, since that’s really the dominant theme in this movie; consider it an honorary one designated as of now.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Elaine May as Angela Marlowe
  

Must See?
No. Listed as a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Cleveland Memory Review

Synopsis:
A vacuum cleaner salesman (Alec Guinness) in pre-Revolutionary Havana is conscripted by a member (Noel Coward) of the British Secret Service Agency to serve as a local operative, and with help from a friend (Burl Ives), he concocts imaginary contacts and sends stories about them to his supervisor (Ralph Richardson) at headquarters. He receives ample money in exchange, which he uses to buy presents for his teenage daughter (Jo Morrow), who is dating a menacing police captain (Ernic Kovacs). Soon, however, a beautiful assistant (Maureen O’Hara) is sent from London to help Guinness, and his lies begin to unravel in increasingly lethal ways.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Alec Guinness Films
• Black Comedy
• Burl Ives Films
• Carol Reed Films
• Cuba
• Expatriates
• Maureen O’Hara Films
• Mistaken or Hidden Identities
• Noel Coward Films
• Ralph Richardson Films
• Spies

Review:
Nearly a decade after the release of The Third Man (1949), Carol Reed collaborated once again with British novelist Grahame Greene for this adaptation of Greene’s 1958 darkly comedic spy thriller about M16’s too-eager willingness to believe fictitious reports. Unfortunately, the overall tone of the film is uneven; despite gorgeous cinematography by Oswald Morris:

… good use of authentic locations in Cuba:

… and an all-star cast:

… the story never really coheres. As DVD Savant (actually a fan of the film) describes it:

“It’s an uneven satire about politics and espionage that contrasts a realistic view of conditions in a police state with understated British comedy. The tone veers from deadly intrigue to near slapstick, and Greene’s dialogue tries for too many verbal puns.”

However, Savant later calls out its “authentic background, expressive direction and interesting characters,” and notes that this “politically astute” film “suggests the horrors of Batista’s police state without making any statements about the revolution to come.” Clearly, one either responds to the approach taken here or not — and it didn’t quite work for me. Reading TCM’s article at least helped to explain why Guinness himself comes across in such a bland and uninteresting fashion:

Guinness… had not enjoyed his experience working with Reed. Early on Reed had surprised him by stating that Guinness’ character was really less important than the events happening around him, so there would be few close-ups of the star. When Guinness showed up on the set with ideas for playing the character as an untidy, fussy little man, Reed told him, “We don’t want any of your character acting. Play it straight. Don’t act.” Not knowing what to do with a direction like that, Guinness delivered an undistinguished performance, allowing Coward and Kovacs to steal the film.

Morrow also seems miscast as Guinness’s daughter (despite only being 20 years old in real life, she looks older), and her casual relationship with creepy Kovacs simply makes her seem like even more of a dimwit.

Meanwhile, O’Hara’s character isn’t given nearly enough distinction (she’s truly just a beautiful “Girl Friday”):

… and other supporting players (Coward, Richardson, Ives) are either vague or underdeveloped. I didn’t mind being confused for most of the beginning of the screenplay, given that spy yarns are inherently complex, and the addition of made-up narratives would necessarily complicate things further — but I wasn’t quite able to follow along as dominos began to fall. Perhaps a rewatch would help, though I’m not especially inclined.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Oswald Morris’s cinematography
  
• An unusual score by Frank and Laurence Deniz

Must See?
No, though of course Carol Reed fans will certainly want to check it out.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Spinning Image Review
• DVD Savant Review
• TCM Article
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A troubled young army deserter (John Cassavetes) who is being bullied by a vicious stevedore (Jack Warden) befriends a fellow worker (Sidney Poitier) and starts hanging out with Poitier’s wife (Ruby Dee) and their friend (Kathleen Maguire). Poitier tries to help Cassavetes regain his confidence and stand up to Warden — but tragedy soon strikes.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Friendship
• John Cassavetes Films
• Martin Ritt Films
• Racism and Race Relations
• Ruby Dee Films
• Sidney Poitier Films
• Waterfront

Review:
Martin Ritt made his impressive cinematic directorial debut with this adaptation of Robert Alan Arthur’s television play A Man is Ten Feet Tall. We’re not at all sure where things will head as we see young Cassavetes enter the dockyards looking for work:

When he finally encounters the man whose name he’s been told to give as a contact (Warden’s “Charlie Malick”), we can tell that Cassavetes has a rough history which we’ll presumably learn more about:

We’re especially kept in suspense when Cassavetes befriends Poitier, and ends up being taken under his wing:

In a most refreshing change of pace (at least for films of this era), Poitier and Cassavetes develop a meaningful cross-racial friendship, with Poitier listening closely as Cassavetes gradually shares details about his past.

Soon Poitier is encouraging Cassavetes to take risks with dating, and introduces him to a friend of his wife’s (Maguire):

Things take a dark turn, however, when Warden — a pathological bully — decides to push an issue to its limits, at which point Cassavates must make a challenging decision. To that end, many have pointed out the similarities between this film and On the Waterfront (1954), with both taking place on the docks of New York and featuring a protagonist who must decide whether to “squeal” or not — however, they are different enough to watch and consider on their own merits, and this one, too, remains worth a look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• John Cassavetes as Axel
  
• Sidney Poitier as Tommy
  
• Ruby Dee as Lucy
  
• Fine use of location shooting
  
• Atmospheric cinematography
  

Must See?
Yes, as a good and unusual show.

Categories

• Good Show

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• Time Out Capsule Review
• NY Times Original Review (spoiler alert)

Synopsis:
During the final days of the Civil War, a trio of trappers — Jed (Victor Mature), Gus (James Whitmore), and Mungo (Pat Hogan) — arrive at a fort that’s short on men, and are hired by a friendly captain (Guy Madison). Jed quickly falls for the wife (Anne Bancroft) of the fort’s reigning colonel (Robert Preston), who is dead set on rampaging the local Indians despite the danger this poses to his inexperienced new recruits; will Jed be able to convince Colonel Marston (Preston) not to follow through on his foolhardy plan?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Anne Bancroft Films
• Anthony Mann Films
• James Whitmore Films
• Robert Preston Films
• Victor Mature Films
• Westerns

Review:
Director Anthony Mann made numerous westerns during his lengthy career, including this Technicolor flick filmed in Mexico with Mount Popocatépetl seen in the background of the fort:

The storyline centers on differing conceptions of masculinity and success, with Mature wondering if it’s time for him to finally settle down with a wife and kids (he has his eye on Bancroft), and Preston determined to regain his reputation after leading a disastrously lethal charge during the war and being nicknamed The Butcher of Shiloh.

Bancroft (how strange to see her as a blonde!) serves as the tension point between the two men; she’s loyal to her husband, but attracted to Mature’s insistent virility:

Meanwhile, Mature is, ironically, too immature to handle life at the fort after years in the wild, and quickly makes enemies, especially when drunk (which is often). Will he be able to redeem himself by the end? I found myself surprisingly caught up in this tale, especially the excitingly filmed final shoot-out.

However, with that said …

SPOILER ALERT:

… the film’s very last sequence is jarring and unexpected. According to TCM’s article:

The Last Frontier’s ending, with Mature in a blue army jacket, having been recruited into the ranks, saluting while Bancroft smiles down on him from a platform above as an inanely upbeat song blares over the soundtrack, was, Mann has said, forced on him.

Be forewarned.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Victor Mature as Jed
  
• James Whitmore as Gus
  
• Fine direction by Mann
  

Must See?
No, but it’s recommended for one-time viewing.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• DVD Talk Review
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
When a former Air Force Colonel (James Stewart) is drafted away from his baseball career to serve in active duty during the Cold War, his new wife (June Allyson) must adjust to life as a military spouse.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Airplanes and Pilots
• Anthony Mann Films
• Cold War
• Frank Lovejoy Films
• Jimmy Stewart Films
• June Allyson Films
• Military

Review:
Jimmy Stewart and director Anthony Mann collaborated on eight films together: five westerns (Winchester ’73, 1950; Bend of the River, 1952; The Naked Spur, 1953; The Far Country, 1954; and The Man From Laramie, 1955); an oil-drilling drama (Thunder Bay, 1953); a biopic (The Glenn Miller Story, 1954); and this love letter to the skies — an Air Force flick so successful that it helped increase recruitment by 25%. Indeed, it’s a stunningly filmed movie, using VistaVision technology to maximum effect.

As described by Bosley Crowther of the New York Times, it was “far and away the most elaborate and impressive pictoral show of the beauty and organized power of the United States air arm that has yet been put upon the screen.”

Storywise, however, there’s a lot less going on. Allyson once again plays a put-upon ’50s housewife who nonetheless stands by her man despite not being allowed to know where he is half the time:

Other dramatic incidents include Stewart managing an engine fire requiring bail-out and a forced landing:

… and facing windstorms on a non-stop flight from MacDill AFB to Yokota Air Base while nursing an increasingly debilitating shoulder injury:

During this flight, we’re also treated to spectacular footage of mid-air refueling:

Stewart was perfectly cast in the lead role; according to Wikipedia, he:

“… had been a B-17 instructor pilot, a B-24 squadron commander, and a bomb group operations officer, completing 20 combat missions. At the time of filming, Stewart, much like the character he portrays, was also a colonel in the Air Force Reserve, serving with the Strategic Air Command when on duty and at the time was qualified as a pilot on the B-47.”

Talk about serendipity! Clearly, this film will appeal to those who enjoy plenty of air action, but it’s not must-see viewing for all-purpose film fanatics.

Note: It’s been pointed out that Stanley Kubrick may have been influenced by some of the footage here when conceiving of Dr. Strangelove (1964):

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Fine VistaVision cinematography
  
  

Must See?
No, unless you’re a fan of such films.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• TCM Article
• DVD Talk Review