FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
A group of outlaw bikers — Firewater (John ‘Bud’ Cardos), Acid (Greydon Clark), Muscle (William Bonner), Willie (Robert Dix), Romeo (Bobby Clark), Gina (Regina Carrol), and their leader, Anchor (Russ Tamblyn) — terrorize and kill a young couple, then move on to a diner where they take its owner (Kent Taylor) and waitress (Jacqulin Cole), as well as three customers — an ex-cop (Scott Brady) and his wife (Evelyn Frank) and a Vietnam vet (Gary Kent) — hostage in the desert, eventually running into a trio of geology students (Yvonne Stewart, Cheryl Anne, and Bambi Alen) as well. Who will survive in the arid wilderness?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Deserts
• Motorcyclists
• Russ Tamblyn Films
• Veterans

Review:
Peary lists two films by notorious schlockmeister Al Adamson in his GFTFF: Nurse Sherri (1978) and this earlier biker outlaw flick, which followed fast on the heels of Easy Rider (1969) and clearly took some visual inspiration from it:

That’s Russ Tamblyn there behind the shades, and it’s appropriate to feel sorry for his terrible choice in starring in this flick. (Perhaps his embarrassment is why he spends so much time in a floppy hat covering much of his face.)

Cole earns my personal vote for giving the most vacuous female throwaway performance I can recall in recent years:

“I want to go to a big city and meet somebody important and get married.”

Meanwhile, Anchor’s “mama” (Carrol) is so obsessively in love with him — and so willing to denigrate herself for him in any way possible — that we can’t help at least feeling at least a little thrilled by the creative way she finally takes matters into her own hands:

Note: This film has the “distinction” of being (perhaps) the first movie to show someone dying by having their head held down a toilet; nice.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Effective use of desert locations
  

Must See?
Nope. Listed as Trash in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TV Guide Capsule Review
• Spinning Image Review

Synopsis:
Shortly after a maid is found murdered in a small town, a recently released prisoner (Viviane Romance) who took the rap for her boyfriend (Max Dalvan) meets up with him and learns he is the murderer — but when an eccentric local (Michel Simon) with a crush on Romance is marked as the likeliest suspect, Romance is torn between love for Dalvan and her conscience.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Carnivals and Circuses
• Ex-Cons
• Falsely Accused
• Femmes Fatales
• French Films
• Julien Duvivier Films

Review:
Julien Duvivier is a lesser-known yet distinctive French director who made a few notable classic films — specifically Pepe Le Moko (1937) and, after his return from working in America during the World War II years, this adaptation of Georges Simenon’s 1933 novel about a socially ostracized peeping Tom who falls for a duplicitous female.

Romance is excellent playing an unconventional femme fatale — a woman whose deep and abiding love for a criminal overpowers her growing recognition of his sociopathic nature:

Indeed, we’re kept in authentic suspense throughout about whether she’ll stick with Dalvan or be swayed by sympathy for Simon. Simon, meanwhile, is perfectly cast as a self-professed loner — a man who, in addition to ordering an “extra bloody” pork loin from the butcher, admits things like, “I never chat with anyone,” “I’m always alone,” “I never vote,” and “I don’t like men.” When he opens up to Romance about his past, we learn that Simon’s mother “always preferred his brother” (who was “better-looking”), and that “at school, in the army, and at college, [he] was always excluded.” As he explains, “I didn’t choose a life of solitude — others just avoided me.”

Indeed, it’s clear from the get-go that the deck is stacked against Monsieur Hire (Simon), who will inevitably be forced to take the blame for a crime he didn’t commit. Meanwhile, parallels between this film’s storyline and the persecution of Jews and other “undesirables” during the war couldn’t be clearer (especially when Hire is asked his full name and he shares that Hire is short for “Hirovitch”). The strategic inclusion of a carnival taking place throughout the entire narrative adds to a heightened sense of Hire being put on display for the town’s viewing pleasure.

Duvivier — who co-wrote the screenplay with Charles Spaak — expertly moves us from scene to scene, beginning with the shocking discovery of a body, and culminating with a King Kong-inspired cliffhanger ending. This one remains well worth a look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Michel Simon as Monsieur Hire
  
• Viviane Romance as Alice
  
• Atmopheric direction and cinematography
  
• A chilling portrait of group-think and mob violence
  

Must See?
Yes, as a still-gripping foreign noir.

Categories

• Foreign Gem

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Movie Diva Review
• Slant Review

Synopsis:
A rebellious lathe worker (Albert Finney) having an affair with the wife (Rachel Roberts) of his clueless co-worker (Bryan Pringle) falls for a beautiful young girl (Shirley Anne Field) who won’t sleep with him unless he’s ready to commit.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Albert Finney Films
• Infidelity
• Karel Reisz Films
• Love Triangle
• Shirley Anne Field Films

Review:
Karel Reisz directed and Tony Richardson produced this adaptation of Alan Sillitoe’s novel, part of the new wave of “kitchen sink realism” hitting British cinema in the late 1950s and early 1960s. It’s notable for Finney’s breakthrough role as a philandering cad who at least stays true to his own morals and priorities throughout; as he describes himself: “I’m a fighting pit prop that wants a pint of beer, that’s me… I’m me and nobody else. Whatever people say I am, that’s what I’m not because they don’t know a bloody thing about me! God knows what I am.”

To its credit, the script doesn’t glorify or gloss over any aspects of Arthur’s existence: he works hard and gladly provides money to his household, understanding that this is an important part of his identity; and when he learns about the predicament he and Roberts have landed in, they are both shown as multi-faceted adults facing the consequences of their actions.

A later interaction between Finney and Pringle also strikes one as unexpectedly and refreshingly honest.

This film remains well worth a look both for Finney and Roberts’ performances, and as a fine example of the “angry young men” genre.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Albert Finney as Arthur (nominated by Peary as one of the Best Actors of the Year in his Alternate Oscars)
  
• Rachel Roberts as Brenda
  
• Freddie Francis’s cinematography
  
  
• John Dankworth’s score

Must See?
Yes, for the lead performances and its historical relevance. Listed as a movie with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

• Historically Relevant
• Noteworthy Performance(s)

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TV Guide Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
A trumpet-playing candy stand owner (Richard Burton) living with his friend (Gary Raymond) quibbles with his newly pregnant wife (Mary Ure) when her friend (Claire Bloom) comes to stay, causing additional tensions in their cramped household.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Claire Bloom Films
• Cross-Class Romance
• Domestic Abuse
• Donald Pleasence Films
• Love Triangle
• Marital Problems
• Play Adaptations
• Richard Burton Films
• Tony Richardson Films

Review:
Tony Richardson’s big-screen feature directorial debut was this adaptation of John Osborne’s 1956 play about a troubled marriage between a working-class vendor and his upper-class wife, notable for launching the term “angry young men”. The problem is, we’re not given a reason to understand or care about Burton’s “angry young man”, Jimmy:

… who seems to think the world is fascinated by his brooding snarl and wailing trumpet. Instead, we simply see him acting in an abusive way towards his wife (is she meant to be blamed for her entire class?):

… and towards her friend (Bloom), who promptly falls in love with him herself once Ure has left (?!).

And what, exactly, is the deal with Raymond, who simply lurks around the edges of the storyline without much to do except serve as a sympathetic listening ear or comedic ally for Burton?

A subplot about an Indian vendor (S.P. Kapoor) enduring racist slander and bullying is far more interesting than anything else going on:

… but barely given any screentime, other than to showcase Donald Pleasence in an early supporting role:

Ultimately, I have very little patience for women who put up with childish, abusive, snivelling men — and since we’re forced to watch not one but two such women here, I don’t find much to appreciate about this tale.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Oswald Morris’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
No, though I suppose it’s worth a look for its historical significance.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
A socially aspiring young man (Laurence Harvey) from a lower-class town arrives at his new job eager to woo the pretty daughter (Heather Sears) of his boss (Donald Wolfit), whose wife (Ambrosine Phillpotts) is dead-set against her daughter dating anyone outside of her social sphere. Meanwhile, Joe (Harvey) begins a romance with an older woman (Simone Signoret) whose philandering husband (Allan Cuthbertson) keeps her locked in a loveless marriage — but will Joe’s desire for wealth and status outweigh his love for Alice (Signoret)?

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Class Relations
• Jack Clayton Films
• Laurence Harvey Films
• May-December Romance
• Simone Signoret Films
• Social Climbers

Review:
Jack Clayton’s feature debut was this adaptation of John Braine’s novel about — as Peary writes in his Alternate Oscars — “an unhappily married middle-aged woman who has an affair with an angry young social climber.” Indeed this “depressing” movie tackles challenging situations and characters head-on, introducing us right away to a head-turning young man who doesn’t hesitate to directly outline his aspirational goals to his friendly new co-worker (Donald Houston):

While Peary doesn’t review Room at the Top in his GFTFF, he briefly discusses Signoret’s Oscar-winning performance in Alternate Oscars, where he points out that “Signoret, a French actress in a British film, became the first actress in a non-American film to win the Best Actress Oscar.” He adds: “As had been the case in her European films, Signoret was impeccable, giving one of her typically strong, moving, honest portrayals. Significantly, American viewers were taken with a rare movie female who is forty and slightly overweight yet is extremely sensual… ” He asserts that while “Signoret’s part wasn’t really substantial” (I disagree), she “was impressive enough to have warranted the Best Actress Oscar… had it not been for Marilyn Monroe in Some Like it Hot” (who he gives the award to instead).

I’m in agreement with Peary’s assessment of Signoret’s compelling performance, which is both heart-breaking and nuanced. This former war-bride (who surely only ended up with Cuthbertson due to lack of other options) is in an undeniable pickle, and we understand her despair when things don’t work out with Harvey as hoped.

Meanwhile, Harvey’s character gradually shows more depth as well: while we despise his naked ambitions, we come to realize that he does feel things deeply, and has a conscience lurking just beneath the surface of his calculating demeanor.

This film doesn’t present any easy solutions to the dilemmas it poses, but its honest portrayal of class relations and thwarted romance make it well worth a one-time look (even if it may be too depressing for repeat visits).

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Simone Signoret as Alice
  
• Laurence Harvey as Joe Lampton
  
• Fine supporting performances
  
• Freddie Francis’s cinematography
  
  
  

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

Categories

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Glenn Erickson’s Review
• TCM Article
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
A pair of doltish peasants (Marino Mase and Albert Juross) are convinced by their wives (Catherine Ribeiro and Genevieve Galea) to go fight for their king in return for untold fulfillment of their desires.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• French Films
• Jean-Luc Godard Films
• Play Adaptations
• Satires and Spoofs
• Soldiers

Review:
Jean-Luc Godard’s fifth feature film is an odd-duck tale even for him — an adaptation of an adaptation (by Roberto Rossellini) of a play by
Beniamino Joppolo that is at first (for quite a long portion of its short running time) merely puzzling and annoying, but ultimately makes a powerful satirical punch in the face of consumerism, gullibility, and blind patriotism. It’s hard to believe how incredibly stupid and trustful Ulysses (Mase) and Michaelangelo (Juross) are when told that their king (their king?!) has personally invited them to serve him, in exchange for taking and doing whatever they want while at war.

In between watching Ulysses and Michaelangelo’s brutish, self-serving exploits, we see and hear snippets of letters they write home (taken from real-life letters of soldiers):

It’s only once the men return home and show the “spoils of war” they’ve collected to their wives that we understand the depth of absurdist irony Godard is reaching for. This unusual film is most definitely not for all tastes, but will — of course — be of interest to hardcore Godard fans.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Raoul Coutard’s cinematography
  
  
• The truly surreal postcard sequence
  

Must See?
No; you can skip this one unless you’re curious. Listed as a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Slant Magazine Review
• Village Voice Review
• TV Guide Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
During the Algerian War, a French special agent (Michel Subor) is sent to Geneva to assassinate a member of the National Liberation Front of Algeria, but gets distracted by his love for a beautiful woman (Anna Karina) with dubious political affiliations.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Assassination
• French Films
• Jean-Luc Godard Films
• Spies

Review:
Jean-Luc Godard made his second film — about the incredibly sticky topic of France’s involvement in Algeria — in response to critics who claimed his debut film (Breathless) was too apolitical. Ironically, Godard himself didn’t actually have strong views on the topic; he simply wanted to explore such ideas through cinema. It’s most notable for didactic scenes of torture, which resulted in the film being banned in France until 1963 despite being made in 1960:

Film fanatics may be most interested to see the scene in which Subor voices one of Godard’s most famous quotes:

“Photography shows the truth. Cinema shows the truth at a rate of 24 times a second.”

Indeed, the film is (not surprisingly) quite talky and philosophical, with characters often simply walking across or in front of one another while saying things like:

“When you take a picture of a face, you take a picture of the soul behind it.”
“In the ’30s, young people had a revolution: Malraux, Drieu la Rochelle, Aragon. We have nothing. They had the Spanish Civil War; we don’t even have our own war. Aside from ourselves, our faces and voices, we have nothing.”
“PeopIe look at me, but they don’t know what I’m thinking. They’ll never know!”

These quotes exemplify Godard’s obsession with meaning-making vis-a-vis a camera lens. Fans of his work will of course want to check this one out, but it’s not must-see viewing for all film fanatics.

Note: The film’s title seems to stem from a scene in which Subot has Karina complete a “test”:

“You know this is a test? It’s a drawing to discover a person’s character. I often use this on women. They love to be called little girls and to play like children.”

Along with additional lines like the following:

“Women should never get older than 25. Men become more handsome as they grow older, but women don’t age well.”

… we have yet more ample evidence of Godard’s objectifying views towards women.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Raoul Coutard’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
No. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• Slant Magazine Review

Synopsis:
A veteran and aspiring writer (Frank Sinatra) returns to his hometown on a bus with a woman (Shirley MacLaine) he barely knows, and quickly causes consternation for his socially conscious brother (Arthur Kennedy) and sister-in-law (Leora Dana) — and his would-be love interest (Martha Hyer) — when he gets into brawls and befriends a hustling gambler (Dean Martin). Meanwhile he tries to mentor his naive niece (Betty Lou Keim), who is mortified to discover her father having an affair with his secretary (Nancy Gates).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Arthur Kennedy Films
• Dean Martin Films
• Frank Sinatra Films
• Morality Police
• Shirley MacLaine Films
• Siblings
• Small Town America
• Veterans
• Vincente Minnelli Films
• Writers

Review:
Vincente Minnelli directed this adaptation of James Jones’ second published novel — his follow-up to the enormous success of From Here to Eternity (1953). Some Came Running is notable for bringing together members of the Rat Pack (Sinatra and Martin and ‘mascot’ MacLaine) for the first time:

… for being directly referenced in Godard’s Contempt (1963), when Piccoli’s character mentions wanting to emulate Martin in not ever taking his signature hat off:

… and for earning radiant young MacLaine an Oscar nomination:

Unfortunately, MacLaine’s performance — along with William H. Daniels’ beautiful Cinemascope cinematography — are the best aspects of this otherwise frustrating melodrama, shot through with sexism (Martin’s reprehensible “Bama” repeatedly refers to women, MacLaine in particular, as pigs) and trite dialogue (“We’ll have no more of that; I’m not one of your bar-room tarts!”). Sinatra’s world-weary character is sympathetic but underdeveloped:

… and his choice of Hyer as a marriage mate makes little sense:

Yes, she’s beautiful and has intense interest in his writing — but doesn’t she otherwise represent everything he’s scornful of in his brother’s small-town life?

Poor MacLaine gets the worst deal of all, playing what the video reviewer for Trailers From Hell (screenwriter Sam Hamm) casually refers to as a “dimwitted mattress back” (ouch!). MacLaine infuses more life and interest into her character than everyone else combined, yet is treated reprehensibly throughout.

(I’m not surprised that Godard and his male protagonists in Contempt — who likewise objectify the women in their lives as sex objects and workers — found connection with this film.)

The other female characters in Some Came Running are similarly posited as merely background context for the men as they live their lives and/or work out their neuroses (or not). Dana is a classic shrewish housewife who drips with condescension and entitlement, and casually “has a headache” the night Kennedy proposes some nookie (“What do you say we — go up… Sort of — relax?”)

It’s no wonder he flies into the arms of his conveniently working-late-at-night secretary (Gates) (though why they are stupid enough to drive to a common make-out spot in town is truly beyond me).

Meanwhile, Hyer seems to simply be emulating Grace Kelly in her blonde ice princess act, and is given terrible dialogue to work with (“Oh, Dave, we’ve met exactly three times. What do I know about you? What do you know about me?”). We at least have some sympathy for poor Keim, who is justifiably mortified to learn about her father’s hypocrisy, and gets to flee to New York by the end.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Shirley MacLaine as Ginnie
  
• Fine cinematography
  
  
  
  

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one-time look for MacLaine’s performance and for the adulation it’s accumulated.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• TV Guide Review
• TCM Articles

Synopsis:
While out seeking fire, three prehistoric members of the Ulam tribe — Amoukar (Ron Perlman), Naoh (Everett McGill), and Gaw (Nameer El Kadi) — encounter various predators and competitors in addition to a love interest (Rae Dawn Chong) for Naoh.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Historical Drama
• Prehistoric Times
• Survival

Review:
French director Jean-Jacques Annaud has had an interesting and varied career, with his debut film — Black and White in Color (1976) — earning an Oscar as Best Foreign Language Movie of the Year, and this subsequent movie breaking numerous conventions by taking place 80,000 years ago and not containing any known language (the limited dialogue spoken by various tribes was written by Anthony Burgess). At first it’s challenging not to laugh at the depiction of Paleolithic humans acting more like violent, primitive monkeys or gorillas than the “civilized” beings we associate ourselves with:

… but we quickly grow to see the three main characters as individuals, and can believe their interactions as authentic. The make-up (which took up to five hours to apply each day), costumes, and body movements are impressively realistic:

… and the location shooting by cinematographer Claude Agostini is often breathtaking. With that said, your interest in the storyline may or may not hold, given that there’s no discernible dialogue, and the plot points all concern either base survival (i.e., the trio sleeps in a tree to avoid saber-toothed tigers):

… or cultural interactions with different tribes:

Interestingly, we see this leading to evolution-in-action, as individuals quickly learn from and mate with one another, thus ensuring future generations will be even better prepared to face life’s challenges.

While this isn’t must-see viewing for all film fanatics, it’s certainly worth a look as a one-of-a-kind movie.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Authentic-seeming makeup, costumes, and body language
  
  
• Beautiful cinematography
  
  
  

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Moria Review
• Time Out Capsule Review
• TV Guide Review

Synopsis:
A suicidal man (Claude Rich) is taken from the hospital to a secret laboratory, where a team of scientists send him back in time to relive a minute of his life — but instead he’s caught in a back-and-forth journey between the lab and his memories of loving a woman named Catrine (Olga Georges-Picot), whose death he feels guilty about.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Alain Resnais Films
• Flashback Films
• French Films
• Science Fiction
• Suicide
• Time Travel

Review:
Peary lists nearly all of French director Alain Resnais’ pre-1987 feature-length films in his GFTFF, from his debut, Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959), to Life Is a Bed of Roses (1983) — but I’ll start by jumping in with a review of his fifth title. Je T’Aime, Je T’Aime falls exactly within the paramaters set forth in Wikipedia’s description of Resnais’s work as “frequently explor[ing] the relationship between consciousness, memory, and the imagination” — and, given that Resnais was known “for devising innovative formal structures for his narratives,” it’s no surprise that this movie jumps back and forth in both time and genre. It begins as a mystery-filled sci-fi flick (what are these scientists up to — and why is Rich so willing to go with them to their laboratory?):

… but eventually shifts towards a non-linear exploration of (Rich’s) memory, guilt, and sense of reality. Certain random scenes from Rich’s past are replayed repeatedly (i.e., a snippet of his snorkeling adventures on the beach):

… while others are merely flashes of conversations or glimpses into his life at work or play:

We never fully understand what happened with his lover Catrine, who was clearly depressed:

… or whether Rich will successfully return from his experimental jaunt through time. It seems he’s stuck in a series of loops — much like his own obsessive thought-process — and we don’t know what’s ultimately in store for him. Your appreciation of this film will depend entirely on your interest in avante garde cinema — i.e., stories more concerned with exploratory impressions and philosophical wonderings than with anything resembling a logical trajectory; though to Resnais’ and co-screenwriter Jacques Sternberg’s credit, the entire affair does cohere.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• A unique storyline and narrative approach
  

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a look for its historical relevance. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Moria Review