My comments on Peary’s reviews in Guide for the Film Fanatic (Simon & Schuster, 1986).
“From now on, I’m through with civilization. I’m going to be a savage, just like you.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Note: This film was followed by five other Weissmuller/O’Sullivan Tarzan movies made for MGM — all of which (yes, all) are listed in Peary’s book. Stay tuned for my ongoing assessment… Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
“He’s made a new kind of cloth. It never gets dirty, and it lasts forever!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: As indicated in the quotes above, Peary’s review focuses exclusively on the social message of The Man in the White Suit (based on a play by Scottish writer Roger MacDougall) — and a powerful, smartly scripted message it is, never dumbing down its content, and unafraid to take the outrageous scenario all the way to its bitter end. Yet there are other noteworthy elements in the film to call out as well — starting with Guinness’s portrayal as the iconoclastic genius, simply one of many outstanding performances he provided for Ealing Studios during this early period in his career. Meanwhile, film fanatics will surely be tickled by the irony of Ernest Thesiger (who portrayed one of cinema’s most iconic “mad scientists”, Dr. Pretorius, in James Whale’s The Bride of Frankenstein) being cast here as a character diametrically opposed to Guinness’s “semi-mad” initiatives. And Joan Greenwood is impressive in what could easily have been a thankless role, as the daughter and fiancee of industrialists who experiences a growing sense of social consciousness over the course of the film (indeed, in some ways, her character possesses more dimension than Guinness’s). Also of note are the fine set designs (both inside the two laboratories, and out on the streets), and Douglas Slocombe’s consistently atmospheric cinematography. Finally, as director of the entire affair, Alexander Mackendrick clearly deserves kudos as well. He strikes a fine balance between dark humor and social gravitas, giving us one of the most uniquely subversive cinematic stories ever told. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
“You see, we’ve got a problem, you and me: we don’t like each other much, but we have to take a trip together.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: However, I disagree with Peary’s assertion that there are “too many action sequences featur[ing] thousands of bullets being shot at structures”. It’s these over-the-top, utterly implausible, but undeniably rousing shoot-em-up scenes — such as the early scene in which so many bullets are fired at Locke’s house that it eventually collapses onto itself; cool! — that quickly turn our protagonists into sympathetic characters. Eastwood and Locke are on the run from forces clearly so much larger and stronger than themselves that they can’t help but eventually be propelled into each others’ arms. After all, you can only face imminent death so many times without starting to feel something for the person you’re fighting for your life with, can you? Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
“An intellectual carrot. The mind boggles!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: The Thing is notable as “the first sci-fi film to show opposing views of the military and scientists on how to deal with aliens”, given that “army men want to shoot them, [while] scientists want (foolishly) to communicate with them” — and it’s this tension that drives the narrative. In his Cult Movies 3 review of the film (where he argues that “to qualify as a true fan of the [sci-fi] genre, one must see this film many times”), Peary provides an even more extensive analysis of this dynamic. He notes that while we may “immediately distrust… Carrington, as we do most geniuses in horror and science fiction” — especially given that “he wears an insidious goatee and a Russian fur hat and fur-lined coat” — he’s not truly a villain, given that Tobey is never fully dismissive of the value provided by science. As Peary puts it, “Military strategy coupled with scientific application is a powerful combination”, and remains one of the film’s dominant themes (along with parallels drawn “between the Cold war and the Battle of the Sexes”, and the patriotic notion that “America’s armed forces can turn back any type of invasion” and “defeat any enemy”.) Perhaps most impressive about The Thing is its pacing, which manages to feel both relentless and natural at the same time. From the very beginning — thanks to Charles Lederer’s smart, literate script — we believe that we’re watching a real crew of airmen heading to the North Pole (viz. the fascinating scene in which they all spread out across an ice field to assess how large the spaceship is). You may need an extra cup of coffee to keep up with the rapidfire dialogue, but it all feels refreshingly authentic. Meanwhile, as Peary argues, “the sustained tension” throughout the film is a “result of [both] the clever timing of shocks” and the incorporation of “horror-movie elements”, such as “when Tobey opens a door expecting to find the alien hiding in a room only to have it standing right in front of him”. [To that end, my only minor quibble with the film is that the characters never seem quite scared enough; they’re having such a grand, confident time together that one never doubts they’ll come through with flying colors.] It’s been noted — and was especially clear to me during this most recent viewing — how much of an influence The Thing seems to have been on Alien (1979). Indeed, the parallels are positively uncanny, given that they both present a group of diverse yet (supposedly) united individuals trapped in a confined space with a “seemingly indestructible alien”; diverging opinions on what exactly to do with said alien; and an ultimate emphasis on survival at all costs. A key difference, naturally, is that Alien features a rare female sci-fi heroine, while The Thing relegates its primary female presence to a supporting (if strong and impressive) role; it’s too bad Sheridan’s movie career never really went anywhere, as she’s quite memorable here in a potentially thankless role. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
“Then the music begins to suggest other things to your imagination…”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Peary notes that Fantasia was Disney’s attempt “to impress the highbrow audience”, but he “was viciously attacked for taking much leeway with the music and for being so pretentious as to try to teach others about classical music when he himself was completely ignorant of the art”. Peary argues that “today one will probably be less upset by the mishandling of the music … than by the repetition of the images (characters napping, reflections on water); the lack of good personality animation (a Disney trademark) as characters of the same type tend to act identically; and the predictable way that nature goes haywire in almost every sequence… and the way scenes end as they begin, in tranquility.” Bah, humbug, Peary! In our post-modern era, the complaint that music can possibly be “mishandled” by an artist attempting to use it for secondary purposes seems naive at best — and while some of the imagery and/or thematic constructs may be repetitive, the animation is so consistently well-drawn and creatively conceived that one doesn’t really mind. Meanwhile, “good personality” isn’t exactly what one expects in a film like this. Despite his grumpy overall attitude, however, Peary does call out a number of the film’s undeniable highlights — including “the exciting ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice’, starring Mickey Mouse and featuring a cosmic storm and march of the brooms; the creation of the world in ‘The Rite of Spring’ with otherworldly Kubrick-like shots of a newly formed volcanic landscape; ‘Dance of the Hours’, which has acrobatic ostriches, hippos in tutus, elephants, and alligators parodying ballet with a knockabout dance; and the spooky ‘Night on Bald Mountain’, featuring Vlad Tytla‘s magnificent demon”. Interestingly, sixty years later, Disney Studios released Fantasia 2000, consisting of six new vignettes (and the original “Sorcerer’s Apprentice” thrown in for good measure). This is in keeping with Disney’s original intent for the film, which he envisioned as a true cult favorite which would stay in theaters permanently, with new vignettes gradually inserted over time. To that end, I should note that the Hollywood Bowl screening also included a couple of “new” vignettes — such as the Dali-inspired “Destino”, and the never-completed segment “Clair de Lune”. Very fitting, indeed. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) Links: |
“This afternoon we had a long telephone conversation earlier in the day.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Note: Sadly, Tim Burton’s Ed Wood skips over the production of Jail Bait altogether, moving straight from Glen or Glenda (1953) to Bride of the Monster (1955). While this is understandable, given its already two-hour-long running time, one can’t help but wonder what juicy tidbits would/could have been unearthed… Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
“Only the infinity of the depths of a man’s mind can really tell the story.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: He also points out that “Wood dares to incorporate footage that was obviously influenced by surrealists and experimental filmmakers”, noting that it’s “no matter that this footage is absolutely ridiculous”, given that “it shows Wood had an imagination”. Indeed, the surreal dream sequence occurring midway through the film is actually filled with such genuinely provocative imagery that, at the very least, you’ll sit up and pay attention — thus giving credence to the theory (espoused by some of Wood’s cult fans) that he may have been more of a maverick (amateur) auteur than merely the “bad director” he’s so frequently dismissed as. Meanwhile, those who’ve seen Ed Wood (or read about Glen or Glenda‘s production history) will know that Bela Lugosi was cast simply because of his name and his friendship with Wood, who wanted to provide him with some work. However, his role here is truly limited to that of an “absurd narrator” (“Pull the string! Pull the string!”); as Peary puts it, “Who knows what he is talking about?” Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
“Get ready, little lady. Hell is coming to breakfast.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) Links: |
“Most men lead lives of quiet desperation. I can’t take quiet desperation!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Since its release, of course (when NY Times critic Bosley Crowther referred to it as “shatteringly realistic and morbidly fascinating”), countless other films — too many to list here — have tackled the sticky topic of alcoholism and/or drug addiction, thus lessening the inherent shock value of The Lost Weekend for modern viewers. Yet on its own terms, the film remains a well-told tale of “a several-day [nightmarish] binge that almost costs [a man] his loyal girlfriend… and his life.” As Peary notes, the “dialogue is tough and cynical” (“She knows she’s clutching a razor blade, but she just won’t let go!”), and “Wilder makes strong use of New York streets and backgrounds” by blending “harsh expressionistic visuals indoors with washed-out shots of the city to convey mood changes in Milland”. With a running time of 101 minutes, the film thankfully never feels too long; from the tensely scripted and filmed opening sequence (in which Milland tries to distract his brother long enough to pack a hidden bottle of alcohol that’s dangling from a rope outside his window sill), to the justifiably lauded sequence in which Milland walks the streets of New York in desperate search of a pawn shop (only to find that they’re all closed on Yom Kippur), we’re genuinely curious to know what kind of trouble Milland will find himself in next, and how he’ll worm his way out. Most problematic for me, however, is the fact that “Milland (who usually played nice guys) is mean right from the beginning”. While Wilder and Brackett should be commended for not “pull[ing] any punches” in their portrayal of a man who all but the most loyal of friends and family members would have given up on long ago, it’s slightly discomfiting to be rooting for someone so utterly unlikable. Milland’s Don Birnam comes across like a self-pitying whiner who needs a serious kick in the pants to get himself back in gear; even a strategically placed flashback sequence — in which we get to see Milland meeting cute with Wyman at an opera — doesn’t help us like him any better. Fortunately, Milland’s performance is “strong”, and he carries the film surprisingly well. As Peary notes in his Alternate Oscars (where he votes for Boris Karloff in Val Lewton’s The Body Snatcher instead as Best Actor of the Year), Milland’s performance was “the best by any of the [official] nominees and maybe the best of his decent career, [but] he doesn’t make you feel enough empathy for his sick, troubled character”. Indeed, while Milland should certainly be commended for daring to “play an unsympathetic character for a change”, I don’t think society in general understood enough about the disease-driven nature of alcoholism at the time for Milland to do justice to the role; as a result, Birnam ultimately comes across as a pathetic anti-hero rather than the pitiable addict he really is. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die) Links: |
“That hat! I’ll have to watch my bell cords and lampshades.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review:
He posits simply that they “boggle the mind”, and likens the entire film to one of “those so-awful-they’re-fascinating half-time shows during the Orange Bowl”. With that said, film fanatics of any stripe (i.e., gay or straight) won’t want to miss watching — at least once — the film in which the infamously English-mangling Carmen Miranda (“I spilled the cat out of the beans!”) sings “The Lady With the Tutti-Frutti Hat” while “chorus girls do suggestive things with giant bananas”. Note: Watch for limber-limbed Charlotte Greenwood strutting her stuff in a brief scene, and a (perhaps unknown; her identity is debatable) acrobatic dancer in a black leotard doing a nifty solo in a medley towards the end. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
