Death of a Gunfighter (1969)

Death of a Gunfighter (1969)

Comments 0 Comment

“I tried my damnedest to not kill him!”

Synopsis:
When a marshal (Richard Widmark) kills a drunken civilian (Jimmy Lydon) in self-defense, the entire town decides to fire him from his job — but Widmark isn’t interested in leaving town.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Don Siegel Films
  • John Saxon Films
  • Lena Horne Films
  • Richard Widmark Films
  • Sheriffs and Marshals
  • Westerns

Review:
This decent if uneven western is primarily notable for what it prompted: the creation of “Alan Smithee” as a pseudonym for a director whose actual director (or some other key player) doesn’t want to be associated with the film. In this case, Widmark didn’t get along with the original director, Robert Totten (who primarily worked in television), so Don Siegel was brought in to finish up the job — but he didn’t want to take credit for work mostly completed by someone else, so “Alan Smithee” (a creative variation on the too-simple first pass try of “Al Smith”) was the result.

(I find it interesting that this film is about attempting to fire someone perceived as incompetent in his job given what it became known for.)

Perhaps I was unduly biased, but as soon as I saw Smithee’s name flashing across the screen, I started noticing the film’s clunkiness; indeed, many wonder what this film could have been like with Siegel at the helm the entire way.

The storyline — hinging on an entire town feeling resentment for Widmark’s character, for no clear reason — doesn’t quite hold its weight; though Kent Smith, who film fanatics should fairly quickly recognize from Cat People (1942), plays the role of a desperately ashamed lawyer quite well.

The film is also notable for featuring Lena Horne in a supporting role as Widmark’s girlfriend, without any comment on her race.

Watch for Royal Dano hovering menacingly (what else?) around the periphery:

… and John Saxon as a county sheriff brought in to help mediate the situation.

Note: Subtle yet overt antisemitism is briefly shown through the treatment of the town’s “peddler,” Mr. Rosenbloom (David Opatoshu) — though it’s simply included without any explanation or resolution.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Richard Widmark as the Marshal
  • Kent Smith as Andrew Oxley
  • Fine Technicolor cinematography

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a look for curiosity’s sake (and of course Siegel completists will want to check it out).

Links:

Coming Apart (1969)

Coming Apart (1969)

Comments 0 Comment

“I like to photograph things as they happen; I’m interested in reality.”

Synopsis:
A self-absorbed, soon-to-be-divorced psychotherapist (Rip Torn) on the verge of a mental breakdown places a video camera in his office and secretly records his interactions (primarily sexual) with a variety of neurotic women.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Mental Breakdown
  • Peeping Toms
  • Psychotherapy
  • Rip Torn Films
  • Womanizers

Review:
Made in a similar vein as Jim McBride’s David Holzman’s Diary (1968), this faux documentary by writer-director Milton Moses Ginsberg was filmed in one room at Kips Bay Towers in New York City, and seems explicitly designed to exploit both a narcissist’s interest in chronicling their every move — welcome to the 21st century! — and the depravity of non-consenting voyeurism. It’s a laborious affair to sit through, for all sorts of reasons — primarily Torn’s character (Joe) being such an ass, but also because so much of what we see and hear is either boring and/or demeaning — and only rarely mildly amusing.

Writing about this film for the SF Gate in 1999, Edward Guthmann noted:

Time capsules can be embarrassing things. What once seemed hip and cutting-edge can reveal, after 30 years, a naivete and smug narcissism that wasn’t apparent at the time. That’s certainly the case with “Coming Apart,” an underground film that broke new ground with nudity and raw language and attempted to say something about the fallout of the sexual revolution. Starring Rip Torn and Sally Kirkland, “Coming Apart” opened in 1969 — the same year as “Easy Rider,” “Medium Cool” and “Midnight Cowboy” — but disappeared after the critics ground it up into pieces.

Rightfully so; check out Andrew Harris’s review in The Village Voice for a particularly lambasting take. For the record, notable supporting actors in this film include Viveca Lindfors as Joe’s former lover (trying to remind him about the “former” part):

…. and Sally Kirkland as an unhinged and exhibitionist former patient.

Note: Ginsberg’s only other film was The Werewolf of Washington (1973).

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Occasionally creative cinematic moves

Must See?
Nope; skip this one unless you’re curious. Listed as a Cult Movie in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

That Cold Day in the Park (1969)

That Cold Day in the Park (1969)

Comments 1 comment

“I saw you from my apartment; I’ve been watching you in the rain.”

Synopsis:
When a wealthy spinster (Sandy Dennis) invites a shivering young man (Michael Burns) she sees in the park over to her apartment, a bizarre relationship quickly ensues.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Michael Murphy Films
  • Obsessive Love
  • Psychological Horror Films
  • Robert Altman Films
  • Sandy Dennis Films

Review:
Robert Altman’s final early feature before his breakthrough success with M*A*S*H (1970) — after helming The James Dean Story (1957), The Delinquents (1957), Countdown (1968), and quite a few TV episodes and industrial flicks — was this adaptation of an unpublished novel by Peter Miles, about a lonely woman whose concern for a bedraggled young man she sees outside her apartment window:

… turns into a most unusual series of events and circumstances. To the immense credit of the screenplay, we are kept on our toes throughout, sincerely wondering where in the world things will lead — and it’s most often not where we expected.

Dennis seems perfectly content simply caring for Burns, not minding too much that he is completely mute; indeed, this provides the perfect opportunity to bare her soul.

Horror-like elements are introduced from fairly early on (about 25 minutes in), when Dennis first locks Burns into his room:

… though as soon as he easily slips outside the window, we breathe a sigh of relief for him. We quickly realize, however, that he is not at all what he seems — or what Dennis believes him to be.

The mystery continues, as we’re introduced to Burns’s sister (Susanne Benton) and her boyfriend (John Garfield, Jr.), and learn why he was out there on that bench during that rainy, cold day.

Suspense continues, and Altman’s confident hand with his camera and actors ensures we are kept engaged — up until the disappointing final five minutes or so. Watch for Michael Murphy in a bit part as a man who helps Dennis procure services in a seedy area of town:

… and Luana Anders — from Dementia 13 (1963) — as a prostitute.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Sandy Dennis as Frances
  • Laszlo Kovacs’ cinematography

Must See?
No, but it’s strongly recommended for one-time viewing. Listed as a Cult Movie in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Reflections on Must-See Films From 1968

Reflections on Must-See Films From 1968

Comments 0 Comment

I just watched the final title from 1968 listed in Peary’s Guide for the Film Fanatic, and am ready to reflect and share my thoughts. Thankfully, it was another good year for movies!

  • Out of 89 total titles, I voted 44 (or ~50%) must-see. Of these, 10 are in a language other than English: one is in Japanese, one is in Wolof-and-French, two (both by Ingmar Bergman) are in Swedish, three are in Spanish, and three are in French (one by Demy, one by Truffaut, and one by Chabrol). We definitely see the strong emergence of Third Cinema (i.e., non-Hollywood and European movies) this year — specifically Ousmane Sembane’s relentlessly depressing Senegalese film Mandabi (1968) and all three of the Spanish-language titles: two from Cuba — Memories of Underdevelopment and Lucia — and one, The Hour of the Furnaces, from Argentina.
  • Sergio Leone’s most epic spaghetti western was Once Upon a Time in the West, which I recently revisited and reviewed. It features a wonderfully villainous turn by Henry Fonda, and a powerful portrayal by Claudia Cardinale as a savvy whore-turned-businesswoman who kicks ass as soon as she shows up on her new home-front. It’s a beautifully shot film with numerous memorable sequences, and another essential score by Ennio Morricone.
  • I also fairly recently rewatched George Romero’s Night of the Living Dead (with my son, to help prepare him for performing in a play adaptation). We both agreed it remains top-notch, and viewers who aren’t too jaded by the many horror films that have come in its wake “will surely find themselves genuinely frightened, at least during the third section of the film, when the situation builds to a feverish pitch, and it becomes increasingly clear that most members of our ensemble cast are not long for this (living) world.”
  • Roman Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby simply never gets old. As I noted in my review, “Each element of this masterfully constructed psychological horror film ‘works’ — from William Fraker’s cinematography, to Polanski’s unusual camera placements (he often films scenes through doorways), to fine use of sound and music, to judicious set designs and strategic use of outdoor New York locales, to the perfect casting of each character.”
  • Rosemary’s Baby co-star John Cassavetes was just breaking through with a shift in his own iconic directorial career that year, as seen in Faces — an “utterly bleak yet cinematically groundbreaking look at a bourgeois marriage in decay,” featuring “fine, natural performances by everyone involved, and provid[ing] a daringly unfiltered look at class and gender relations in 1960s America.”
  • I’m excited to revisit The Yellow Submarine for the first time with my teenage son (I’ll report back on how that goes). As I noted in my review from back in 2006 (four years before he was born): “The Beatles’ only animated film — featuring their music and their cartoon likenesses but not their actual voices — remains as enjoyable and mind-blowing today as it was 30+ years ago… The sheer variety of animation techniques in Yellow Submarine is blissfully overwhelming,” and “it’s enormously satisfying to see the Beatles immortalized as cartoon caricatures” with “just a few strategically drawn lines mak[ing] each of them instantly recognizable.”
  • Of course, in 1968 one must give a shout-out to Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, which earned Peary’s vote as Best Picture of the Year and remains an enduring cautionary tale now more than ever, in the age of proliferating AI. (“I’m sorry, Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.”)
  • A must-see cult favorite from 1968 is Michael Reeves’ The Conqueror’s Worm, a.k.a. The Witchfinder General, featuring Vincent Price as infamous witchfinder Matthew Hopkins in a horrific tale of “relentless violence [which] has a (sadly relevant) purpose, showing how easily mankind can descend into joy of torture — or at least mindless acceptance of it as commonplace and necessary.” Also noteworthy is “the film’s gorgeous cinematography, showcasing real-life horror taking place in an atmospheric landscape of Gothic forests, meadows, village squares, and dank interiors.”
  • Speaking of satanism, a personal favorite is Hammer Studios’ The Devil’s Bride a.k.a. The Devil Rides Out, in which “the script, musical score, acting, and set designs all contribute towards the creation of a suspenseful, sometimes humorous tale of demonic possession in our midst,” and the special effects “convey a frighteningly believable alternate universe.”
  • Peter Yates’s action-packed crime drama Bullitt, starring Steve McQueen in the title role, remains well worth a look. Interestingly, as I noted in my review, it’s “so closely associated with McQueen’s [Ford Mustang GT Fastback] (and the justifiably lauded car chase it’s involved in) that it’s easy to overlook how enjoyable the film is as a police procedural and character study.”
  • A dark comedy classic from that year also worth a revisit is The Odd Couple, based on Neal Simon’s play and starring a perfectly cast Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau “as the title ‘couple’; their comedic timing and rapport is impeccable.”
  • Finally, there were several highly memorable matriarchal performances that year by aging Hollywood divas. Be sure to check out Bette Davis in Roy Ward Baker’s The Anniversary (though be forewarned that “the words coming out of this anti-mother’s mouth are almost beyond belief”):

    … Katharine Hepburn as savvy Elinor of Aquitane in The Lion in Winter, also telling it like it is (“Oh, my piglets, we are the origins of war… We are the killers. We breed wars — we carry it like syphilis inside.”):

    … and Shelley Winters as a “hypocritical, brown-nosing mother” in Wild in the Streets, a biting political satire about “Age Police” who’ve “managed to take over the White House and imprison anyone over 35 in LSD ‘concentration camps’.”

Super trippy (literally).

Fifty-six years later, we’re battling different sets of societal and personal demons than in 1968 — yet the films outlined here continue to offer up plenty of compelling and relevant dramas, performances, and insights. The following year (1969) would once again bring cinematic innovations and many noteworthy titles, so — I’ll be back!

Camille 2000 (1969)

Camille 2000 (1969)

Comments 0 Comment

“Love me now — and let that be enough.”

Synopsis:
A drug-addicted woman (Danièle Gaubert) financially supported by a count (Roberto Bisacco) must confront her priorities when she falls in love with a man (Nino Castelnuovo) who wants to be with her exclusively.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Love Triangle
  • Radley Metzger Films
  • Romance

Review:
Radley Metzger’s follow-up to Therese and Isabelle (1968) was this updated adaptation of Alexandre Dumas fils‘ 1848 novel — a convenient opportunity to wrap a softcore story around an established set of characters and circumstances. Changes include Marguerite (Gaubert) suffering from drug addiction rather than TB, and the entire affair taking place in 1960s swinging Rome:

… but otherwise the inherent melodrama is all there (alongside plenty of explicit sexual encounters). The characters are shallow and the acting is poor, but the sets and costumes are pretty groovy:

… and as always, Metzger uses creative camerawork.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Ennio Guarnieri’s cinematography
  • Good use of location shooting in Rome

Must See?
No; you can definitely skip this one.

Links:

Hour of the Furnaces, The (1968)

Hour of the Furnaces, The (1968)

Comments 0 Comment

“Revolutionary violence will put an end to imperialist crimes. Liberation or death!”

Synopsis:
Argentina’s neo-colonialist and revolutionary histories are explored as part of a call for national liberation.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Documentary
  • Revolutionaries
  • South and Central American Films

Review:
Octavio Getino and Fernando Solanas co-directed this four hour and 20 minute political documentary about Argentina, which was shown in extremely limited release in its home country given its incendiary content. It is considered a key entry in the Third Cinema movement (so called as a response to Hollywood films as First Cinema, and European art/auteur films as Second Cinema), and it specifically “rejects the view of cinema as a vehicle for personal expression, seeing the director instead as part of a collective; it appeals to the masses by presenting the truth and inspiring revolutionary activism.”

The Hour of the Furnaces is comprised of diverse historical footage alongside current “stealth” footage and interviews with key players, and is divided into three parts of unequal lengths with intentional time built in for discussion. As one set of title cards tell us:

“This film is a pretext for dialogue, for the search, for different wills to meet. It’s an open report that we offer for your consideration, for you to discuss after the screening is over. The most important thing is to create this unitary space, this dialogue for liberation. Our opinions are as valuable as yours, and you can add to this action any other view or experience.”

In segment one — titled “Neo-Colonialism and Violence” (1 hour and 25 minutes long) — we are informed in all caps:

WE HAVE BEEN TAUGHT A FALSE HISTORY, FALSE HOPES OF WEALTH, A FALSE INTERNATIONAL VIEWPOINT, FALSE ECONOMIC BELIEFS, A FALSE FREEDOM. TO BE FREE, THERE IS ONLY ONE CHOICE: PUT THE PEOPLE IN POWER.

We are given an overview of Argentina’s history of oppression and imperialism by Spain and England:

… and then shown how the hegemonic forces of global capitalism are still at play, with one particularly notable extended sequence intercutting the slaughter of cattle with facile advertisements.


We see and are told that native peoples have been dehumanized (“The Indian was worthless; only a Christian had value”) and are living in poverty:

… while “50% of the land is in the hands of 1.5% of the landowners.”

Segment two (“Act for Liberation”) is the lengthiest at nearly two hours, and includes a more detailed overview of Argentina’s 20th century political history, including Peronism:

… and activist resistance.

Segment three (the shortest at just over 30 minutes) is entitled “Violence and Liberation,” and includes an interview with a political dissident (“Comrade Troxler”) who was tortured and meant to be assassinated but escaped with his life through sheer luck.

We are shown imagery of liberation movements taking place across the globe:

… and reminded that “peaceful coexistence is just opium that permits imperialism.” While this lengthy, history-intensive, no-holds-barred political rejoinder is certainly not for all tastes, it represents a unique moment in cinematic history and will likely be of interest to film fanatics.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Highly effective “guerrilla” filmmaking

Must See?
Yes, for its importance in international cinema.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links:

Lion in Winter, The (1968)

Lion in Winter, The (1968)

Comments 1 comment

“I’ve built an empire — and I must know it’s going to last.”

Synopsis:
In 1183 England, King Henry II (Peter O’Toole) — living with his mistress Alais (Jane Merrow) — summons his imprisoned wife (Katharine Hepburn) back home to his castle, so they can determine who among their living sons — Richard (Anthony Hopkins), Geoffrey (John Castle), or John (Nigel Terry) — will be named as his successor; meanwhile, Merrow’s half-brother Philip II (Timothy Dalton) arrives for a diplomatic visit from France.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Historical Drama
  • Inheritance
  • Katharine Hepburn Films
  • Marital Problems
  • Peter O’Toole Films
  • Play Adaptations
  • Royalty and Nobility

Review:
Katharine Hepburn won her third Best Actress Oscar (sharing it with Barbra Streisand in Funny Girl) for her stand-out performance as Elinor of Aquitane in this adaptation of James Goldman’s play — which, for the record, is not necessarily historical accurate. As a royal drama, however, it plays out beautifully, with Hepburn making a truly majestic entrance by boat:

… and O’Toole – who played a younger version of the same character in Becket (1964) — appropriately larger-than-life from beginning to end. He’s arrogant and emotional, pig-headed yet practical — and it’s easy enough to understand how and why beautiful young Alais (Merrow) loves him and remains loyal.

The entire storyline is about power and succession (topics which remain of enduring interest to current viewing audiences). These particular two narcissistic monarchs equally “love” and loathe their children, despairing over who can or should replace them (no one, naturally; they should live forever) and ultimately shaping their offspring into differently problematic pieces-of-work. Richard’s alleged homosexuality is turned into a significant plot point regarding a dalliance with Philip II (Dalton):

… while “idiotic” John is played for disturbing laughs, openly reviled as a gullible “pustule”:

… and Geoffrey simply seems to be struggling with major Middle Child syndrome. (I can’t really figure out why he wouldn’t be a reasonable option.)

To its credit, given that we know how history turned out, we’re kept on our toes throughout the entire film, wondering what will happen next — and things wrap up in a reasonably satisfying manner. This well-acted historical drama remains worth a look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Katharine Hepburn as Elinor of Aquitane
  • Peter O’Toole as King Henry
  • Anthony Hopkins as Richard
  • Fine supporting performances by Timothy Dalton, John Castle, and Nigel Terry as Philip, Geoffrey, and John
  • Douglas Slocombe’s cinematography

  • Effectively authentic historical sets
  • John Barry’s score

Must See?
Yes, as a fine film and for the powerhouse performances. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)
  • Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

Lucia (1968)

Lucia (1968)

Comments 1 comment

“Wake up, Cubans!”

Synopsis:
Three generations of women named Lucia reflect Cuba’s history: in 1895, during the Cuban War of Independence from Spain, upper-class Lucia (Raquel Revuelta) falls in love with a deceptive soldier (Eduardo Moure) who puts her guerrilla-fighting brother in harm’s way; in 1932, middle-class Lucia (Eslinda Núñez) falls in love with a Machado dissident (Ramón Brito) and becomes politically active herself; and in the 1960s, working-class Lucia (Adela Legrá) meets her husband-to-be (Adolfo Llauradó) at a farming compound, but is distressed to learn that he is heavily patriarchal, abusive, and jealous.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cuban Films
  • Feminism and Women’s Issues
  • Historical Drama
  • Revolutionaries
  • Strong Females

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, “Humberto Solás directed this monumental three-part epic about three women, each named Lucia, who lived during three pivotal times of modern Cuban history,” featuring episodes “filmed in wildly divergent styles” which “show how the political consciousness of these politically naive women is raised as the result of jolting personal experiences.” Each Lucia in the film comes “to realize that the same betrayers, opportunists, and oppressors (ranging from friends, lovers, and husbands to imperialists and uncommitted revolutionaries) who damage them as individuals are also undermining the progressive political movement in Cuba.”

Indeed, this is far from light fare: feminist themes and concerns are front and center, and none of these women has an easy time of it.

SPOILERS AHEAD

In the first episode, “Lucia is an aristocratic Cuban spinster (Raquel Revuelta) who becomes the lover of a married Spanish stranger (Eduardo Moore)” only to find out he is “using her to find the whereabouts of a mountain plantation where her brother and other revolutionaries are hiding.” He notes that this episode — which is “almost operatic in style”:

… is “the most visually impressive of the three episodes,” and “contains two astonishing sequences: several nuns being raped on a battlefield; [and] naked Mambi soldiers on horseback chasing and killing terrified Spanish soldiers.”

The second episode shows what happens when a “new regime turns out to be equally corrupt and oppressive” as the one taken down. Peary notes that “of the three episodes, this is the most politically provocative” — and “this Lucia is by far the most appealing” (meaning, traditionally beautiful).

The third episode brings us to (then) current times, “when Castro’s regime [was] attempting to set up a revolutionary society where men and women work and everyone is literate.” Ultimately, Peary argues that this “silly, comedic episode is like a sex battle in a Lina Wertmuller film,” with the “issues brought up… by today’s standards very simplistic” — but I don’t agree. There’s a huge discrepancy between the jaunty score running through this episode and the blatant violence we see happening on screen.

There is really nothing “silly” or “comedic” about it except perhaps what Solás felt obliged to include as a way to make it past censors. To that end, it’s astonishing to know that Solás (who was closeted gay) was only 26 years old when he made this impressively scoped film, which remains well worth a look by film fanatics interested in the evolution of international cinema.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Jorge Herrera’s cinematography


Must See?
Yes, for its historical relevance in Cuban cinema.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem
  • Historically Relevant

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

Links:

Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Comments 0 Comment

“People scare better when they’re dyin’.”

Synopsis:
Shortly after a harmonica-playing stranger (Charles Bronson) rides into in a western town seeking a man in black (Henry Fonda) who has just slaughtered a farming patriarch (Frank Wolff) and his children, Wolff’s newly widowed wife (Claudia Cardinale) arrives and is told that a man named Cheyenne (Jason Robards) was responsible for her husband’s death; however, she soon learns that Fonda has been ordered by his boss — a disabled railroad baron (Gabriele Ferzetti) — to do what it takes to earn control over her newly acquired land, and she becomes caught up in a deadly web of greed, lust, and revenge.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Charles Bronson Films
  • Claudia Cardinale Films
  • Corruption
  • Henry Fonda Films
  • Jason Robards Films
  • Keenan Wynn Films
  • Revenge
  • Sergio Leone Films
  • Westerns
  • Woody Strode Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary is an enormous fan of this “baroque epic western,” which he refers to as “Sergio Leone’s masterpiece” — indeed, he names it Best Picture of the Year in his Alternate Oscars and discusses it at length in his first Cult Movies book. He argues that this movie — co-scripted by Leone, Dario Argento, and Bernardo Bertolucci — is Leone’s “most pessimistic film,” given that “its end signals the death of his ‘ancient race’ of superwarriors (first seen in his Clint Eastwood ‘Dollars’ films) and the moment when there is no more resistance to advancing civilization.” This is “represented by laying down of railroad tracks, the building of a town, and a whore (Claudia Cardinale) becoming a lady, a businesswoman, a maker of coffee, [and] a bearer of water”:

… all of which means that “in the new matriarchal West, money will be more important than the gun and super-gunfighters will be passe, part of the Western folklore.”

In Cult Movies, Peary elaborates his thoughts on how this “mythological progression” came to be across Leone’s westerns, writing:

“In A Fistful of Dollars, civilization doesn’t exist; in For a Few Dollars More, it serves as a background. In The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, the mythological and historical worlds overlap, but ‘The Man With No Name’ is still able to literally send history/the Civil War elsewhere by blowing up a strategic bridge so he can carry on his own greedy activities. But Bronson’s ‘The Man’ is forced to move elsewhere when he realizes that post-Civil War civilization… cannot be denied. He won’t even try to fit into the civilized West as Frank [Fonda] did before realizing the futility of it.”

Back to GFTFF, Peary notes that “in an incredible scene that recalls the family massacre in John Ford’s The Searchers” Fonda’s Frank (he “finally got to play a villain!”) “wipes out Brett McBain (Frank Wolff) and his children”:



… simply so that his boss “can use McBain’s land for a railroad station” — a crucial driver of the narrative, with ongoing impacts for everyone involved. Meanwhile, Frank’s sadistic past comes back to haunt him, as we gradually learn why Bronson is so insistent on capturing and killing him.

Peary posits (and I agree) that the “film is incredibly ambitious, splendidly cast, beautifully shot (no one uses a wide screen better than Leone)”:

… “hilarious, erotic, psychologically compelling, and wonderfully scored by Ennio Morricone;” as Peary notes, Morricone’s score “shifts easily from dramatic to ethereal to ironic to comical,” offering “haunting melodies, musical motifs, theme songs, and choral numbers that comment on the action, add humor, and help move the story forward.” He points out that “among the many highlights are the lengthy, humorous title sequence in which three villains” (Jack Elam, Woody Strode, and Al Mulock*) “await The Man’s arrival by train (only to be killed by him)”:

… “Frank’s seduction of Jill” (I’m not a fan of this sequence; she’s clearly terrified and simply doing what she needs to do, as she always has, to survive — though it is creatively filmed):

… “the elaborately staged gunfight between Frank and The Man (how splendidly Leone uses space and close-ups)”:


… “the final scene between Cheyenne and The Man”:

… “and seeing The Man ride off into mythology at the end of the picture.”

In bit parts, watch for Keenan Wynn as the Sheriff of Flagstone:

… and Lionel Stander as a barman.

* Note: Mulock — a Canadian character actor who trained with Lee Strasberg — committed suicide by jumping out of his hotel window right after filming his scene for this movie; according to one source, he was purportedly depressed and drug-addicted and couldn’t find a fix.

Wolff also committed suicide the following year.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Henry Fonda as Frank
  • Claudia Cardinale as Jill
  • Jason Robards as Cheyenne
  • Charles Bronson as ‘Harmonica’
  • Gabriele Ferzetti as Morton
  • Tonino Delli Colli’s cinematography

  • Excellent use of location shooting

  • Many memorable faces, shots, and moments



  • Excellent management of scores of extras
  • Ennio Morricone’s score

Must See?
Yes, as a deserved classic of the genre.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic
  • Important Director

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

Links:

Isadora / Loves of Isadora, The (1968)

Isadora / Loves of Isadora, The (1968)

Comments 1 comment

“You’re a legend, aren’t you? A legend in your own lifetime.”

Synopsis:
During the year before her premature death, American dancer Isadora Duncan (Vanessa Redgrave) reflects back on her troubled past, including love affairs with scenic designer Edward Gordon Craig (James Fox), sewing machine heir Paris Singer (Jason Robards, Jr.), and Soviet poet Sergei Yesenin (Zvonimir Crnko).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Biopics
  • Dancers
  • Flashback Films
  • James Fox Films
  • Jason Robards, Jr. Films
  • Karel Reisz Films
  • Strong Females
  • Vanessa Redgrave Films

Review:
Vanessa Redgrave received an Oscar nomination for her role in this biopic of controversial modern dance pioneer Isadora Duncan, whose grisly death by automobile added to her notoriety. Not knowing much at all about Duncan or her innovations to dance prior to watching this film, I began by listening to a two-part podcast episode on her life, which was helpful in laying out the details of her rise from poverty and hustling to provide for her family:

… to her creation of a bohemian, naturalistic dance style (in direct contrast to the constraints of classical ballet):

… to her affairs with Craig (Fox):

… and wealthy Singer (Robards, Jr.):

… both of which led to beloved children.

SPOILER

The tragic deaths of her son and daughter had an enduring impact on Duncan, one from which she understandably never fully recovered. We see her trying to find meaning and purpose in her life after this by following an invitation to the newly emergent Soviet Union:

… where she embarked on an affair with a poet (Crnko) 18 years her junior.

Throughout the film, all of these storylines are intercut as asynchronous flashbacks told by a perceptibly distressed and distraught Duncan, whose life continued on a downward spiral.

We see what brought her the most joy — primarily her work with children:

… though unfortunately there isn’t enough emphasis in the film on this, despite an overly lengthy running time (itself cut down from Reisz’s original vision) which often drags. The overall impression we get of Duncan was that she was a free-spirited, non-conforming, at-times-loopy woman who relentlessly lived according to her own sensibilities; it’s too bad her innovations in dance were ultimately overshadowed by her challenging life and hideous death.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Vanessa Redgrave as Isadora Duncan
  • Larry Pizer’s cinematography

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a look for Redgrave’s performance. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Links: