Browsed by
Month: August 2007

Story of Mankind, The (1957)

Story of Mankind, The (1957)

Comments 2 comments

“Whatever our sins, whatever our shortcomings, we believe the good deeds done by man on Earth far outweigh the bad — thereby earning him the right to survive.”

Synopsis:
When the Super H-Bomb is developed on Earth, a heavenly tribunal is called to determine whether humanity should be allowed to survive. The devil (Vincent Price) argues that humans are inherently corrupt, while the “spirit of mankind” (Ronald Colman) tries his best to defend them.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Agnes Moorehead Films
  • Cesar Romero Films
  • Charles Coburn Films
  • Courtroom Drama
  • Dennis Hopper Films
  • Fantasy
  • Hedy Lamarr Films
  • Historical Drama
  • John Carradine Films
  • Marie Windsor Films
  • Marx Brothers
  • Peter Lorre Films
  • Ronald Colman Films
  • Vincent Price Films
  • Virginia Mayo Films

Review:
It’s difficult to describe just how awful this infamous historical drama — written and directed by Irwin Allen — really is. Loosely based on Henrik van Loon’s 1921 book (notable for winning the first Newbery Medal for children’s literature), it presents Anglo-centric highlights of humanity from “the dawn of time” to the 20th century — all portrayed by a cast of well-known actors and actresses who should have known better than to sign up for this particular gig. Only Vincent Price (always suitable in campily bad ventures) emerges relatively unscathed:

One feels simply awful, however, for Ronald Colman (trying his best in what would be his final performance):

… and Peter Lorre (looking truly verklempt in his brief cameo as Nero).

While it’s well-known that Allen made ample use of discarded stock footage:

… scads of money were likely still spent on the creation of so many different sets and costumes; nonetheless, everything looks impossibly cheap and cheesy. Indeed, once Groucho Marx (as a Puritan!) appears on the scene:

… any semblance of historical sobriety is blown out the window. It suddenly struck me that The Story of Mankind might be successful as a comedic play (where low-budget, non-realistic sets are the norm); as a film, however — especially one grappling with such a heady issue as mankind’s ultimate fate — it bombs, big time, in every way possible.

Note: This turkey is included — appropriately enough — in Harry Medved’s 1978 book The Fifty Worst Films of All Time (and how they got that way), where he describes Mankind thus: “Fifty-five seconds before the title of the film appears, the names of twenty-five stars are flashed separately on the screen in huge block letters, accompanied by fanfare and drumbeat. The viewer braces himself, expecting the worst — and he will not be disappointed.”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Vincent Price as “Mr. Scratch” (the devil)
  • A truly bizarre all-star cast — including Virginia Mayo as Cleopatra:

    … Hedy Lamarr as Joan of Arc:

    … Harpo Marx as (the harp playing?) Sir Isaac Newton:

    … Agnes Moorehead as Queen Elizabeth:

    … and Dennis Hopper as Napoleon (actually giving the best performance of the bunch):

Must See?
Yes, simply for its status as a cult classic, and one of the “50 worst films of all time.” But I hesitate to recommend such a tedious bore.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links:

Stage Door (1937)

Stage Door (1937)

Comments 2 comments

“Isn’t there enough heartache in the theater without our hating each other?”

Synopsis:
In a theatrical boarding house, a bevy of aspiring stars — including Jean (Ginger Rogers), Eve (Eve Arden), Judy (Lucille Ball), Linda (Gail Patrick), Annie (Ann Miller), and Kay (Andrea Leeds) — hope for their big break. When wealthy heiress Terry Randall (Katharine Hepburn) shows up hoping to try her hand at acting, unexpected consequences ensue.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Actors and Actresses
  • Adolph Menjou Films
  • Ann Miller Films
  • Aspiring Stars
  • Eve Arden Films
  • Ginger Rogers Films
  • Heiresses
  • Jack Carson Films
  • Katharine Hepburn Films
  • Lucille Ball Films
  • Play Adaptations
  • Rivalry

Response to Peary’s Review:
Critical opinion seems to be split on this classic RKO ensemble tale, starring Ginger Rogers in her first major “non-dancing” role, Katharine Hepburn in a performance meant to disrupt her designation as “box office poison”, Lucille Ball in her self-described “breakthrough role”, and many other familiar female faces. Peary is among the film’s fans, calling it “one of the best films of the thirties”, and noting that it contains “some of the snappiest insult-laden dialogue found in thirties movies”. Others, such as DVD Savant, argue that “almost everyone concerned with this movie did better work elsewhere”, that the film “became a classic without being a really great show”, and that the “dialogue isn’t quite as witty as it wants to be”.

My opinion lies somewhere in between these two extremes. I find the film (noticeably different from the original play) to be a somewhat dated yet mostly enjoyable outing, primarily due to plenty of refreshing rapport between the young women, and the welcome absence of a distracting romantic subplot. The acting is noteworthy as well: Hepburn is strong and compelling as the nominal lead, Menjou is appropriately suave and slimy, and Rogers clearly shows her talent as a sassy comedic actress. On the other hand, several plot elements seriously detract from the film’s authenticity and power: the pivotal character of Kay, for instance (played by an overly maudlin Andrea Leeds, who was inexplicably nominated for an Oscar), is too much of a goody-two-shoes martyr to care about; and Hepburn’s transformation from an AWFUL actress (her rehearsal scene — “The calla lilies are in bloom…” — is literally painful) to a talented Broadway star is truly beyond belief. Nonetheless, film fanatics will certainly want to check out this Oscar-nominated melodrama at least once, and decide for themselves whether it’s an enduring classic, a dated disappointment, or a bit of both.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Ginger Rogers’ sassy performance as Jean
  • Katharine Hepburn as Terry
  • Adolph Menjou as slimy manager Powell
  • Terry and Jean’s ongoing sparring
  • Menjou’s reaction to Rogers’ drunken monologue

  • Many fine supporting performances — especially those by Eve Arden, Lucille Ball, and Constance Collier
  • Plenty of witty, caustic one-liners:

    Terry: It would be a terrific innovation if you could get your minds to stretch a little further than the next wisecrack.
    Eve: You know, I tried that once, but it didn’t snap back into place.

Must See?
Yes. While it hasn’t held up as well as one might hope, it remains must-see viewing for its noteworthy ensemble cast. Chosen as the best film of the year in Peary’s Alternate Oscars book.

Categories

  • Noteworthy Performance(s)
  • Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

Phantom Tollbooth, The (1970)

Phantom Tollbooth, The (1970)

Comments 1 comment

“Everybody says it’s such a big, wonderful world. How come it seems so small, and kind of empty? There’s no rhyme or reason to any of it!”

Synopsis:
An apathetic boy named Milo (Butch Patrick) travels through a mysterious tollbooth to a magical world, where the kings of Digitopolis and Dictionopolis argue over whether numbers or words are more important. During his journey, Milo finally begins to understand the importance of staying active and engaged in life.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Animated Features
  • Character Arc
  • Fantasy
  • Musicals
  • Road Trip

Review:
Based on Norton Juster’s classic children’s novel, The Phantom Tollbooth was the first and only feature-length film by famed Warner Brothers animator Chuck Jones (creator of Pepe le Pew and Wile E. Coyote); unfortunately, however, it doesn’t live up to Jones’ immense talents. While Juster’s goal — encouraging kids to take initiative in their own learning, and to explore the fascinating worlds of numbers and words — is a noble one, it comes across as didactic rather than exciting in the film. Unlike (just for instance) Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz, we never feel a true sense of urgency about Milo’s predicament — indeed, he’s never in any real trouble. Not helping matters any are the insipid, instantly forgettable songs sprinkled sporadically throughout the film; they would definitely have been best left out.

With that said, most adults will watch this film for its animation rather than its story or songs — and, despite some noticeable missteps (Tick Tock the Watch Dog is particularly disappointing), there are many creative sequences. I especially like Jones’ visualization of The Doldrums, and his many amusing wordplays. Also enjoyable are the live action sequences which bookend the film; Butch Patrick is a natural, believable child actor, and his bodily presence is missed once the animation begins. Ultimately, however, The Phantom Tollbooth remains more of a curiosity than a classic, and is noteworthy primarily for its historical importance as Jones’ only feature film.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Butch Patrick as the live-action Milo
  • Countless creative visualizations of verbal puns (a “senses taker”, “eating one’s words”, etc.)
  • The animated “doldroms”
  • Endlessly clever and creative imagery


Must See?
Yes. As Chuck Jones’ only animated feature, all film fanatics will certainly want to check this one out.

Categories

  • Important Director

Links:

Lodger, The (1944)

Lodger, The (1944)

Comments 1 comment

“I enjoy the streets at night — when they are empty.”

Synopsis:
While Jack the Ripper prowls the streets of London, a mysterious lodger named Slade (Laird Cregar) comes to stay in the house of Ellen and Robert Burton (Sara Allgood and Cedric Hardwicke) and their actress-niece, Kitty (Merle Oberon). As Slade’s behavior becomes increasingly suspicious, Ellen begins to fear that Kitty’s life is in danger; meanwhile, a police detective (George Sanders) searches for clues to the killer’s identity.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Detectives and Private Eyes
  • George Sanders Films
  • Jack the Ripper
  • Laird Cregar Films
  • Merle Oberon Films
  • Murder Mystery
  • Serial Killers

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary notes, this remake of Alfred Hitchcock’s silent thriller benefits from “first-rate” acting (especially by Cregar, in his definitive role), “solid dialogue”, “fine bit parts”, “exciting scenes”, and “atmospheric direction” by John Brahm. Although it’s based on the unsolved Jack the Ripper killings which plagued turn-of-the-century London, the Ripper’s actual victims (prostitutes in real life) have been turned into actresses here; indeed, the infamous killings seem more like an atmospheric plot device than anything else, since, as Peary notes, “we’re never given 100% proof that [Cregar] is the one and only Ripper”, thus leaving things open to interpretation. I’ll admit to a preference for Brahm, Cregar, and Sanders’ next outing together — the “even more stylized” Hangover Square (1945) — but The Lodger remains worthy, must-see viewing on its own merits.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Laird Cregar as Slade; Peary nominates his performance here for an Alternate Oscar
  • Merle Oberon as Kitty
  • Sara Allgood as Cregar’s suspicious landlady
  • Atmospheric cinematography (by Lucien Ballard) and direction
  • The climactic denouement

Must See?
Yes, to see Laird Cregar in his definitive role.

Categories

  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

If I Had a Million (1932)

If I Had a Million (1932)

Comments 1 comment

“I want to give somebody a chance at happiness. I don’t care who — I just want somebody to have something worthwhile out of what I spent my life to accumulate.”

Synopsis:
A dying tycoon (Richard Bennett) decides to give his money away — $1,000,000 at a time — to eight randomly selected names in the telephone book.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Charles Laughton Films
  • Episodic Films
  • Ernst Lubitsch Films
  • Frances Dee Films
  • Gary Cooper Films
  • George Raft Films
  • Henpecked Husbands
  • Millionaires
  • Revenge
  • W.C. Fields Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary notes, fans of “The Millionaire” TV series — or anyone fascinated by the lives of lottery winners — will doubtless enjoy this episodic film, directed by seven different men (including Ernst Lubitsch), and starring a host of Paramount’s most famous actors (Gary Cooper, W.C. Fields, George Raft, Charles Laughton, and more). As with any episodic film, some vignettes are more appealing than others; Peary correctly points out that “you’ll like best the three episodes in which [money can buy happiness]”, and be frustrated by those in which it can’t. Indeed, the most satisfying episodes are, as Peary notes, those in which “the money allows previously powerless people to put authoritarian figures in their place.” It’s a sign of the film’s appeal that, by the end, you feel sad that Bennett only selected eight names instead of more.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Henpecked Charles Ruggles’ nightmarish dreams in the china shop
  • Prostitute Wynne Gibson happily settling down for the night with ONE pillow
  • An elderly woman (May Robson) changing her oppressive group home into a fun-loving club
  • Charles Laughton in the film’s shortest, but perhaps most satisfying, vignette
  • W.C. Fields and Alison Skipworth taking revenge on “road hogs”

Must See?
No, but it’s recommended, if you can locate a copy.

Links:

How to Marry a Millionaire (1953)

How to Marry a Millionaire (1953)

Comments 1 comment

“Most women use more brains picking a horse in the third at Belmont than they do picking a husband.”

Synopsis:
Three golddigging models (Lauren Bacall, Marilyn Monroe, and Betty Grable) share a chic-chic apartment in New York, in hopes of snaring millionaire husbands.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Betty Grable Films
  • Cameron Mitchell Films
  • Dumb Blondes
  • Gold Diggers
  • Jean Negulesco Films
  • Lauren Bacall Films
  • Marilyn Monroe Films
  • Millionaires
  • Mistaken or Hidden Identities
  • Models
  • Romantic Comedy
  • William Powell Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
This remake of 1932’s The Greeks Had a Word for Them was meant to capitalize on Marilyn Monroe’s popular turn as “dumb blonde” Lorelei Lee in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (released earlier that same year). While Monroe’s performance here as “the hopelessly nearsighted bubblehead who won’t wear glasses around men” remains the most enjoyable in the film, Bacall and Grable do fine as well — and I disagree with Peary that Grable comes across as “annoying” (indeed, she’s responsible for some of the funniest moments in the film). I also disagree with Peary that the movie “chastises golddigging women” while presenting it as “perfectly acceptable for men to chase women because they’re pretty” — this is actually an equal-opportunity critique of the tricky interplay between romance and money; indeed, William Powell as an older man who loves gold-digging Bacall but is hesitant to marry her (he gives a “characteristically classy performance”) is evidence of this. Ultimately, while How to Marry a Millionaire may be, as Peary notes, simply “pleasant fluff”, it remains a worthy, must-see film.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Marilyn Monroe’s delightful performance as the nearly-blind Pola: “Men aren’t attentive to girls who wear glasses!”
  • Betty Grable as upbeat “Loco”
  • Lauren Bacall as the uber-rational Schatze
  • Cameron Mitchell as Tom Brookman, a deceptively wealthy man in pursuit of Bacall
  • William Powell as Bacall’s would-be older suitor
  • Grable and her married escort (Fred Clark) discovering their divergent interpretations of the word “lodge”
  • Monroe’s initial encounters with Alexander D’Arcy (the original occupant of their apartment)
  • Fun camarederie between the three golddigging friends

Must See?
Yes. While not entirely successful, this film holds historical importance as one of the first CinemaScope pictures, and should be seen by every film fanatic.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961)

Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961)

Comments 1 comment

“I don’t want to own anything until I find a place where me and things go together. I’m not sure where that is, but I know what it’s like: it’s like Tiffany’s.”

Synopsis:
In New York City, freespirited Holly Golightly (Audrey Hepburn) pursues wealthy men while falling reluctantly in love with her struggling-writer neighbor (George Peppard).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Audrey Hepburn Films
  • Blake Edwards Films
  • George Peppard Films
  • Gold Diggers
  • Martin Balsam Films
  • Mickey Rooney Films
  • New York City
  • Nonconformists
  • Patricia Neal Films
  • Romance

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary notes, this beloved adaptation of Truman Capote’s novel gave Audrey Hepburn “one of her most appealing roles” as an eccentric young woman who’s “taken on the guise of an ultra-sophisticated bohemian… to cover up her many insecurities.” While Mickey Rooney’s dated, pejorative turn as Holly’s buck-toothed Japanese neighbor is too awful for words (NY Times reviewer Bosley Crowther merely referred to it as “exotic”), the film has held up remarkably well in other ways, and remains both “witty” and “racy”. Peary correctly points out that the sexual undertones of the movie (while considerably tamed down from the book) “must have raised eyebrows in 1961”; Hepburn’s comment to Peppard that he “must be exhausted” after Neal has left for the night is a particularly droll shocker.

Hepburn (though far too thin, as always) has never looked more beautiful than she does here, with her stylish Givenchy outfits, super-long cigarette holder, and streaked hair sleekly gathered into an upsweep. Her performance itself is noteworthy as well; while Marilyn Monroe was Capote’s original choice for the role, I find it easy to imagine that down-to-earth Hepburn — like hicksville Holly-nee-Lulamae in New York — could relate to feeling like a bit of a poseur in the glamorous world of Hollywood. George Peppard is fine as “Fred”, but ultimately acts as more of a foil to Hepburn than anything else. Neal is delicious in a bit role as kept-man Peppard’s cynical sugar mama; interestingly, her character never appeared in Capote’s novel.

There are many touching, memorable, and/or amusing scenes in Breakfast at Tiffany’s; my favorite is probably Holly’s wild bash (has any director ever captured the zaniness of parties better than Edwards?) — I particularly enjoy the two brief sequences in which a knackered woman laughs (then cries) with her own reflection in the mirror. All of Hepburn and Peppard’s scenes together — from their first meeting, when Hepburn staggers around in eyeshades — are delightful; as Peary notes, it’s “refreshing seeing lovers whose relationship is mutually beneficial.” The ending is a true weeper, one of the best Hollywood ever conceived.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Audrey Hepburn in perhaps her most iconic role
  • Patricia Neal as Peppard’s “sugar mama”
  • The infamous “party scene”
  • Holly’s glamorous Givenchy outfits
  • Holly and “Fred”‘s giddy spree on the town
  • The final wrenching scene
  • Henry Mancini’s famous score

Must See?
Yes. While not entirely successful, this beloved film remains a “must see” classic.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic
  • Oscar Winner or Nominee

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

Links:

Desperately Seeking Susan (1985)

Desperately Seeking Susan (1985)

Comments 1 comment

“Desperate: I love that word. It’s so romantic.”

Synopsis:
After accidentally hitting her head, a bored housewife named Roberta (Rosanna Arquette) becomes an amnesiac, and is mistaken for a free-spirited woman named Susan (Madonna). With the help of her new friend Dez (Aidan Quinn), Roberta tries to avoid being killed by a mysterious man who is pursuing her; meanwhile, Roberta’s worried husband (Mark Blum) enlists Susan’s help in tracking her down.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Amnesia
  • Character Arc
  • Housewives
  • Mistaken or Hidden Identities
  • New York City
  • Rosanna Arquette Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Susan Seidelman’s popular ’80s fairytale about amnesia and switched identities is primarily notable as the film which gave pop star Madonna her breakthrough role. While she’s no great actress, Madonna is perfectly cast here as Susan, and it’s difficult to imagine anyone else in the part (though many were considered). As Peary so accurately describes her, Susan is “a sexy, sweet, cocky, casually amoral, totally irresponsible (but forgivable) live-one-minute-at-a-time hedonist who follows her own drumbeat” — in other words, someone it’s easy to imagine stifled housewife Rosanna Arquette longing to emulate. Arquette herself is as wonderful as always; this proved to be her most iconic role as well, and it’s fascinating to know that she originally envisioned herself as Susan. She’s surrounded by memorable supporting actors (including Aidan Quinn, Laurie Metcalf, and Robert Joy), and countless “cameos” by performers such as Rockets Red Glare and Giancarlo Esposito. But the best “performance” in the film is New York itself — Seidelmen perfectly captures “the mind-draining suburbia” of the city’s outskirts, as well as “crazy, festive, seductive, always crowded lower Manhattan.” While the storyline is undeniably preposterous, it is, as noted by Peary, “enjoyably” so. Indeed, it’s hard not to get caught up in Roberta and Susan’s wild exploits as they maneuver their way through this incomparable city of artists, killers, drifters, and housewives.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Rosanna Arquette as Roberta
  • Madonna in her best film role
  • Laurie Metcalf as Roberta’s sister-in-law
  • Aidan Quinn as Dez
  • Robert Joy as Susan’s boyfriend
  • Good use of authentic New York locales

Must See?
Yes, for its historical popularity.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

Five Star Final (1931)

Five Star Final (1931)

Comments 1 comment

“I think you can always get people interested in the crucifixion of a woman.”

Synopsis:
Hoping to boost circulation of his newspaper, editor Joseph Randall (Edward G. Robinson) begins a series of “Where is she now?” articles on a woman named Nancy Voorhees (Frances Starr), who shot her lover 20 years earlier. Nancy’s happiness over the impending wedding of her grown daughter (Marian Marsh) to a kind society boy (Anthony Bushell), as well as her own loving marriage to Michael (H.B. Warner), is immediately threatened by this resurgence of interest in her long-buried past.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Boris Karloff Films
  • Downward Spiral
  • Edward G. Robinson Films
  • Journalists
  • Mervyn LeRoy Films
  • Play Adaptations

Review:
Five Star Final was one in a cycle of newspaper-themed films made in Hollywood during the early 1930s, the most famous of which was The Front Page (1931). Based on a play by former editor Louis Weitzenkorn, Five Star is unabashedly critical of muckraking journalistic practices, clearly positing greedy newspaper owners as callous, mercenary, and willing to do nearly anything to boost circulation. In a way, not much has changed since then: we’re still a tabloid-happy society, and notorious individuals are never entirely free from the prowling feelers of The Media. While Five Star deals with an enduring dilemma, however, the story itself comes across as stilted and somewhat dated. It’s unlikely that a notorious “murderess” such as Nancy Voorhees would be able to successfully hide her past from everyone around her, and even less likely that she and her husband would react the way they do once she’s “found out”. In addition, the “baddies” of the film (including Robinson’s bosses, and Bushell’s parents) play their parts far too broadly, lacking any nuance whatsoever. The best scenes in the film are those between Robinson (wonderful as always) and his knowing secretary, Aline MacMahon — but these are relatively few and far between. Also notable is Boris Karloff in (naturally) a creepy turn as an unscrupulous investigative journalist. On the whole, however, Five Star Final hasn’t aged well enough to recommend as must-see viewing.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Edward G. Robinson as Randall (Peary nominates Robinson for an Alternate Oscar as best actor of the year)
  • Aline MacMahon as Randall’s secretary
  • Boris Karloff as “Reverend Isopod”

Must See?
No. Despite its historical importance as a best-picture Oscar nominee, this ultimately isn’t must-see viewing.

Links:

How Tasty Was My Little Frenchman (1971)

How Tasty Was My Little Frenchman (1971)

Comments 1 comment

“The natives are barbarous savages — different from us, and without any religion.”

Synopsis:
In 16th century Brazil, a French mercenary (Arduano Colassanti) is mistaken for Portuguese and captured by a tribe of Indians, who tell him he has eight months to live before being eaten.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cannibalism
  • Historical Drama
  • Native Peoples
  • South and Central America

Review:
This uneven yet compelling film by director Nelson Pereira dos Santos is a classic of Brazil’s cinema novo movement, which emphasized a reliance on native Brazilian aesthetic sensibilities and a break with cinematic conventions. It’s a cynical and subversive look at colonialism in 16th century South America, told through the non-idealized story of Indians dealing with the rape of their land in the only way they know how: through native traditions. This includes capturing and eating their enemies (the Portuguese), in order to literally ingest their “strength” — in other words, cannibalism. It’s to Pereira dos Santos’s credit that this element of the film is never sensationalized. In fact, he makes every effort to present the Indians’ lifestyle as “natural” — including their near-absence of clothing. Not surprisingly, Brazilian censors had a problem with this lack of modesty, and prevented the film from being shown for a year after it was made; but it’s a testament to the film’s ethnographic authenticity that the nudity quickly seems commonplace, and never exploitative. While How Tasty is a provocative and disturbing film in many ways, however, it’s not uniformly successful. This is primarily due to the opening montage sequence, which misrepresents the film as a comedy; though it certainly possesses satirical elements (the title alone is evidence of this), it’s not really a farce. Once this brief sequence is over, however, it’s remarkably easy to get caught up in the travails of Arduano Colassanti’s “Frenchman” — whose fate remains uncertain until the very end.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • A compelling pseudo-ethnographic look at the Tupinambas tribe of Brazil
  • The Frenchman’s new wife describing to him what his cannibalism ritual will be like
  • Beautiful natural settings
  • The haunting final images

Must See?
Yes, as an acknowledged classic of Brazilian cinema novo.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem
  • Important Director

Links: