Browsed by
Month: December 2022

Buddy Holly Story, The (1978)

Buddy Holly Story, The (1978)

Comments 1 comment

“I have a sound in my head — and so far it’s not like anything we’ve done here.”

Synopsis:
Rock ‘n roll musician Buddy Holly (Gary Busey) gains fame with his fellow bandmates (Charles Martin Smith and Don Stroud) and marries his sweetheart (Maria Richwine), but has a tragically short time to make his mark on the world.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Biopics
  • Gary Busey Films
  • Musicians
  • Rock ‘n Roll
  • Untimely Death

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that “Gary Busey gives an exciting, natural performance as the legendary and influential country-tinged rock singer from Lubbock, Texas, who had scores of hits by the time he died in a plane crash (with Ritchie Valens and the Big Bopper) in 1959 (he was 21).” He describes Busey’s Holly as “basically a polite, nice guy” who “won’t be pushed around, has a mordant wit, stubbornness about his music, and unbridled drive.”

Indeed, the film nicely highlights Holly’s musical talents above all else; we understand why and how he managed to be such an influence on so many big-name stars despite his tragically early death. Peary points out that “Busey’s portrayal has an added dimension in that he actually sings Holly’s famous songs, rather than lip-synching Holly recordings.”

With that said, the story infamously “plays so much with facts that former Cricket Sonny Curtis felt inclined to write the song ‘The Real Buddy Holly Story’“, and should be closely fact-checked for those interested in the specific details of Holly’s career. Peary further argues that the “script’s conflicts are too minor: Buddy and [the] Crickets… mildly arguing about touring”:

… “the group having to prove themselves to an all-black audience at the Apollo (thought to be black, they were the first white singers to perform there)”:

… “Holly courting a young Puerto Rican woman (Maria Richwine)”:

… and “Holly trying to persuade the studio boss (Conrad Janis) to let him produce the group’s songs.”

However, he notes that the “film keeps interest, thanks to Busey” and is “consistently entertaining.” I would agree. While I immediately watched a documentary and read more about Holly’s life to correct my understanding, this is a nice introduction to his persona and music, and Busey’s engaged performance remains noteworthy.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Gary Busey as Buddy Holly

Must See?
Yes, for Busey’s performance.

Categories

  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

Union Maids (1976)

Union Maids (1976)

Comments 1 comment

“I learned that you can’t go anyplace unless you go together.”

Synopsis:
Three women active in the American labor movement reflect back on their lives and the legacy of their activism.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Documentary
  • Feminism and Women’s Issues
  • Labor Movements

Review:
This Academy Award-nominated documentary by Julia Reichert, Jim Klein, and Miles Mogulescu — selected for preservation in the U.S. National Film Registry by the Library of Congress in 2022 — features interviews with three women (Kate Hyndman, Stella Nowicki, and Sylvia Woods):

… who were profiled in the labor history book Rank and File by Staughton and Alice Lynd. At under an hour long, the film doesn’t overstay its welcome, instead remaining an engaging archive of reflections from key players-on-the-ground interspersed with archival footage. Because all three interviewees are women — one black, two white — we get to hear about what the labor movement was like for (at least a few) women, and some of the ways in which racial tensions were at least temporarily overcome. This documentary remains worth a one-time look, though it’s not must-see viewing for all film fanatics.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • A powerful set of oral history remembrances

Must See?
No, but it’s strongly recommended.

Links:

Sympathy for the Devil / One Plus One (1968)

Sympathy for the Devil / One Plus One (1968)

Comments 2 comments

“Maybe the devil is God in exile.”

Synopsis:
Clips of the Rolling Stones recording “Sympathy for the Devil” in London’s Olympic Studios are interspersed with scenes of Black Power activists in a junkyard, an adult bookstore with Maoist hostages, and a young peasant woman (Anne Wiazemsky) being interviewed in a meadow.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • African Americans
  • Documentary
  • Jean-Luc Godard Films
  • Rock ‘n Roll

Review:
The origin story of this avant garde pastiche film by Jean-Luc Godard (part fiction, part documentary, part staged readings of political texts) is that he went to England to make a documentary about abortion, only to have the Abortion Act of 1967 make this no longer such a hot topic — so he stayed there with the intention of filming either the Beatles or the Rolling Stones (and only the latter accepted). The result is hard to make any narrative sense of at all — though it’s not necessarily supposed to. Music lovers will likely enjoy all the scenes in which “Sympathy for the Devil” slowly emerges through plenty of creative trial and error:


… (though we never do hear the final song, at least not in Godard’s version of the film). Meanwhile, Godard fans will likely view all the weird interstitial material as simply part of his broader cinematic commentary on Marxism and revolution.

The prize for oddest sequence is a tie between a scene in a bookstore where Mein Kampf is being read out loud and patrons give a heil salute after making their purchase:

… and Wiazemsky wandering around a field followed by a film crew, answering either “yes” or “no” to a serious of questions designed for exactly such binary responses (“Do you think drugs are a spiritual form of gambling?”).

Is it worth spending more time analyzing this flick? Yes. No. I’m really not sure — though of course Godard fans will have a field day.

Note: Peary lists a total of 24 films by Godard (RIP) in GFTFF; I have 11 left to watch and review.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • An awesome title track song
  • Colorful cinematography

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for Godard completists.

Links:

Sleepwalk (1986)

Sleepwalk (1986)

Comments 1 comment

“Everything she had forgotten, everything she had lost sight of, suddenly flowed back into her heart — and the spell was broken.”

Synopsis:
When a stenographer (Suzanne Fletcher) is hired to translate an ancient Chinese manuscript, she finds the world around her subtly shifting in fantastical and sometimes scary ways.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Fantasy
  • Living Nightmare
  • New York City

Review:
This first feature film by Jim Jarmusch’s partner Sara Driver is a quirky, decidedly experimental mood piece set in a New York City that is both mind-numbingly mundane and inconceivably fantastical. The film opens with a scroll being placed in and recovered from a secure spot:

… then shifts to an office, where we see workers trying to pass the time either by zoning out while getting their tasks done:

… or acting out, as when Fletcher’s roommate (Ann Magnuson) bugs their boss about his weight and potato chip eating, or tries to bum money off of hard-working Fletcher.

Eventually we see that Fletcher has a son (Dexter Lee):

… who seems to primarily take care of himself. Fletcher, meanwhile, is obsessed with a new job she’s gotten translating the scroll we saw in the opening sequence — and as she writes out the story, we’re meant to understand that it’s somehow impacting (and/or interacting with) her reality as well.

It’s all highly atmospheric and somewhat spooky, yet makes little sense. Watch for Steve Buscemi in one of his earliest roles as an “office worker”, though he doesn’t have much to do or say.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Good use of New York locales
  • Jim Jarmusch’s cinematography

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for fans of this type of experimental cinema. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Film Fanatic End of 2022 Greetings

Film Fanatic End of 2022 Greetings

Comments 0 Comment

Hello, fellow Film Fanatics!

I hope this has been an enjoyable year of movie watching for all of you. My family and I (kids now ages 10, 12, and 14) watched Home Alone (1990) yesterday, and it was a fun harbinger of what’s to come: once I’m done with this project, I’ll be moving on to covering more modern classics.

Unfortunately, 2022 has been a rough year for our family, with loss on numerous levels; with that said, I’m always grateful to movies for providing a safe haven in the midst of personal challenges.

Midway through the year I wrote a reflection on my milestone of having watched all the films in GFTFF up through the 1950s — so, all titles I’ve been reviewing since then were made between 1960-1987. There have been some definite gems, though I’ll admit to missing flicks from earlier decades.

Here are a few of my highlights from this past year of (re)viewing movies:

  • For the number geeks among you, I’ve reviewed an additional 287 films in 2022 (so far!). That brings me up to 3,483 or 81% of the titles in Peary’s Guide for the Film Fanatic — just 817 more to go!
  • I’ve continued to work my way through titles from Peary’s three Cult Movies books (just seven left). I can’t say many are personal favorites, but I was pleasantly surprised by at least a few: The Terminator (1984) has held up remarkably well as a dystopian sci-fi time travel flick (Schwarzenegger’s performance is fun!); Liquid Sky (1982) remains a darkly acerbic cultural commentary with truly far-out visuals; and of course Blade Runner (1982) maintains its status as a haunting masterpiece on so many levels.
  • My favorite auteur viewing this year was catching up with more of Sam Fuller’s unique output. While his Steel Helmet (1950) is a justifiable indie classic, lesser-known but equally worthy Fuller titles to check out include Fixed Bayonets (1951) (also taking place during the Korean War), the colorful House of Bamboo (1955), and the flawed but boldly unique Crimson Kimono (1959).
  • I was pleasantly surprised by how compelling Sidney Lumet’s screen adaptation of Eugene O’Neill’s Long Day’s Journey Into Night (1962) remains: it’s powerfully acted, masterfully filmed, and never drags despite the undeniably challenging subject matter.
  • Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now (1979) continues to merit multiple viewings as a “surreal immersion piece.” As I noted in my review, “Coppola and his team set out to tell a tale of the Vietnam War that would highlight its deep absurdity and lasting impact on everyone involved — and in this, he succeeds.”
  • Finally, John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982) is a seriously creepy “remake” that offers an entirely different viewing experience from the 1951 classic; indeed, “Carpenter’s film succeeds on its own terms, presenting a wintery hellscape of justifiable paranoia in which these men… can no longer rely on one another for support and survival.” And the special effects are truly impressive.

Here’s to another year of watching and reviewing classic films!
— Film Fanatic.org

Exposed (1983)

Exposed (1983)

Comments 2 comments

“You have to turn the means around that were used on you: terror creates fear, fear creates violence, and violence creates change.”

Synopsis:
Shortly after moving to New York City, a young woman (Nastassja Kinski) from Wisconsin is discovered by a photographer (Ian McShane) who makes her into a famous model — but when Kinski falls in love with an enigmatic violinist (Rudolf Nureyev), she quickly finds herself in proximity to a ruthless terrorist (Harvey Keitel).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Harvey Keitel Films
  • Models
  • Nastassja Kinski Films
  • New York City
  • Terrorists

Review:
Writer/director James Toback’s third feature — after an intriguing debut, Fingers (1978), and a nearly unwatchable follow-up, Love and Money (1982) — was this equally presumptuous romantic adventure featuring terrible dialogue, (mostly) poor acting, and a confused plot about a young woman finding her way in and around the world. It’s not clear why Kinski’s character has a German accent given that she grew up on a Wisconsin farm — but regardless, we can see she has a penchant for picking terrible men, starting with Toback himself in a cameo role as a predatory English teacher she’s rightfully eager to get away from.

Once in New York, she not only becomes a famous model lickety-split:

… but falls for a creep-tastic violinist played by ballet dancer Rudolf Nureyev.

The pair share one of the most laughably contrived foreplay sequences I’ve ever seen: after hearing him play his violin, Kinski asks him, “What else do you play so beautifully?” and then proceeds to have her body “played” by his bow. (Yes, it’s just as weird as it sounds.)

It turns out Nureyev’s character isn’t who he seems — or so he says (though it’s not really clear how or why this is important), but there is at least one more douchebag we have yet to encounter: Keitel’s single-named “Rivas”, a malignant narcissist who seems to have formed a cult-like following of people willing to bomb, murder, and destroy on his behalf:

… and who gets to spout some of the film’s most inane lines.

“I’ll tell you what I want: good food, women, good cigars, good beds with fresh sheets, hot showers, and Hilton hotels… New shoes, poker, blackjack, dancing, Clint Eastwood westerns. That’s what I want. And you.”

Poor Bibi Andersson, getting herself sucked into this mess for even a few minutes in the opening sequences as Kinski’s mom back on the farm.

Note: Once I got far enough into this film to realize it was by the same director who made one of the worst movies in Peary’s book (and that’s saying something), I was not at all surprised to learn that Toback — who has stated, “The idea is not to have a separation between my life and my movies.” — has been accused by hundreds of women of sexual misconduct; it figures.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Henri Decae’s cinematography

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

Links:

Games (1967)

Games (1967)

Comments 1 comment

“Each of us has a quota to meet, and I must meet my quota!”

Synopsis:
When a New York socialite (James Caan) and his wife (Katharine Ross) allow a middle-aged saleswoman (Simone Signoret) to stay with them, she’s quickly treated to their favorite pastime of elaborate pranks — but when a delivery boy (Don Stroud) is accidentally murdered, the stakes suddenly become deadly serious.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • James Caan Films
  • Katharine Ross Films
  • Mental Breakdown
  • Simone Signoret Films

Review:
Before her breakthrough role in The Graduate (1967), Katharine Ross starred in this psychological thriller as a wealthy young woman who appears to be driven slowly crazy — but why, and by who? There aren’t too many options, though one is left guessing on certain details until the (twist) ending.

Unfortunately, Ross and Caan are a pretty uninteresting couple to be following; their love of trippy mind games seems like merely a childish way to pass their overly ample free time.

The sets and cinematography add plenty of visual flair to the proceedings, and Signoret is always interesting to watch:

… but the screenplay is ultimately not compelling enough to sustain the conceit here as a feature-length film. Games was helmed and co-written by B-director Curtis Harrington, whose other GFTFF-listed titles include the frustratingly dull Night Tide (1961); the slow but intriguing Queen of Blood (1966); and the disappointing Grand Guignol horror flicks What’s the Matter With Helen? (1971) and Who Slew Auntie Roo? (1972).

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Colorful and eclectic sets
  • Atmospheric cinematography

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

Links:

Crazy Mama (1975)

Crazy Mama (1975)

Comments 1 comment

“You ladies are lunatics! You’re damn crazy!”

Synopsis:
When a woman (Cloris Leachman) and her widowed mother (Ann Sothern) lose their beauty parlor due to lack of payments, they take Leachman’s pregnant daughter (Linda Purl) and her boyfriend (Donnie Most) on the run with them to begin a life of petty crime in hopes of earning enough money to buy back their family farm in Arkansas. Along the way, they pick up another suitor (Bryan Englund) for Purl, an elderly woman (Merie Earle) eager for action, and a lover (Stuart Whitman) for Leachman, who tries to convince his wealthy wife (Sally Kirkland) that he’s been kidnapped.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ann Sothern Films
  • Cloris Leachman Films
  • Dick Miller Films
  • Jonathan Demme Films
  • Strong Females
  • Thieves and Criminals

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, “Jonathan Demme directed this engaging offbeat comedy made under the guise of being a typical New World crime-spree exploitation film (i.e., Bloody Mama, The Great Texas Dynamite Chase)” but that’s actually a “spirited, unpredictable film” that’s “a lot of fun” and filled with “unusual characters played with unusual freedom by a fine ensemble of actors to whom mainstream directors weren’t offering parts” (i.e., classic film star Ann Sothern).

He notes that he “particularly like[s] the odd relationships between the characters and the loyalty and affection they have for each other”:

… and (of course) he makes special note of “the kittenish Purl” who he considers “a particularly exciting find.”

Peary notes that “Demme’s direction is extremely mature” — he “obviously feels warmth for the female characters and admires their guts, intelligence, [and] resourcefulness” — and asserts that “his diners, road signs, clothes, hairdos, [and] cars perfectly capture 1958 — as does the standout rock score from that year.”

I agree with Peary that this remains a “spirited, unpredictable film” filled with plenty of jam-packed action — including a sequence in a Vegas casino (and then a chapel):

… a motorcycle race:

… a bank robbery:

… a stay at a Teepee Village:

… and much more. Watch for Jim Backus as the bank representative who kicks Leachman and Sothern out of their initial business:

… Will Sampson (Chief Bromden in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest) in a silent cameo as an Indian at a trading post:

… and, of course, Dick Miller (here playing a cop having an affair with Whitman’s wealthy wife).

Note: “Happy Days” fans will surely make note of the strategic casting of Donnie Most as a character from the 1950s.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fine performances by the ensemble cast
  • Creative direction by Demme
  • The rocking ’50s soundtrack

Must See?
No, but I can see its value as a cult favorite, and it’s a must for Leachman fans.

Links:

Twice in a Lifetime (1985)

Twice in a Lifetime (1985)

Comments 0 Comment

“I tell ya, marriage isn’t everything it’s cracked up to be.”

Synopsis:
When a steelworker (Gene Hackman) falls for a widowed barmaid (Ann-Margret) and leaves his wife (Ellen Burstyn), his best friend (Brian Dennehy) is befuddled, his married daughter (Amy Madigan) is furious, his son (Stephen Lang) is understanding, and his younger daughter (Ally Sheedy) is unsure what this means for her own future.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ann-Margret Films
  • Ellen Burstyn Films
  • Gene Hackman Films
  • Infidelity
  • Marital Problems
  • Midlife Crisis

Review:
Bud Yorkin directed and Colin Welland wrote the screenplay for this adaptation of his own 1973 British TV play (called “Kisses at 50”), about the impact of a midlife crisis on a blue collar worker’s longtime marriage. (Welland had previously won an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay for Chariots of Fire.) Although Welland moved to Pittsburgh and did research in order to shift the story over to America, Yorkin ended up filming in Seattle and the nearby town of Snohomish, filling the storyline with numerous authentically place-based sequences (and as someone who lives here, I can attest to them doing a good job showcasing the beauty and natural landscapes of the area).

In terms of the storyline, it’s certainly plausible that a couple living the way Hackman and Burstyn are (working different shifts, a little too comfortable with one another, kids grown, not sharing the same preferences for socializing) would grow apart:

… and that Hackman might be flattered and intrigued by someone as openly interested in him as Ann-Margret is.

What’s less convincing is how openly Hackman would begin his new affair, not realizing what an impact it will have within his close-knit community, or the fact that he won’t simply be able to “keep the two relationships separate”.

I’m also not a fan of Oscar-nominated Madigan’s overly abrasive — and frankly intrusive — opinions about her parents’ marital choices; while critics were taken with her no-holds-barred performance, I found her hard to take, especially when she’s openly mistreating her child in a grocery store. (I have a particular issue with parents who take their anger out on innocent kids, who then become collateral damage.)

Sheedy — young, fresh, and beautiful — unfortunately doesn’t have much to do other than show up near the end as a daughter getting married (will Hackman come to her wedding? should he come to her wedding?).

Lang as her brother has even less screentime, and primarily seems to serve the role of the Understanding Male. With those complaints aside, the film possesses many moments of at least attempting to get at something more real than most Hollywood flicks about romance and marriage, and should be commended for that.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Nice incorporation of numerous Seattle area locales and authentic blue collar joints

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a one-time look.

Links:

Start the Revolution Without Me (1970)

Start the Revolution Without Me (1970)

Comments 2 comments

“I’m delighted to see you all stuffing yourselves while France has cramps from the tyranny of its own indigestion!”

Synopsis:
In 1789 France, two pairs of identical twins mixed and switched at birth grow up to become apolitical peasant brothers Claude (Gene Wilder) and Charles (Donald Sutherland), and power-hungry Corsican brothers Philippe (Wilder) and Pierre (Sutherland) — and the four accidentally meet up with one another at Versailles during an attempted revolt against King Louis XVI (Hugh Griffith), his nymphomaniac wife Marie Antoinette (Billie Whitelaw), and the devious aristocrat d’Escargot (Victor Spinetti).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Class Relations
  • Comedy
  • Donald Sutherland Films
  • French Revolution
  • Gene Wilder Films
  • Historical Drama
  • Hugh Griffith Films
  • Mistaken or Hidden Identities
  • Orson Welles Films
  • Plot to Murder
  • Revolutionaries
  • Royalty and Nobility
  • Twins

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary argues that while this “absurdist cult comedy” about an “identity mix-up” “has many funny gags and [a] bizarre performance by Wilder as the crazed, sadistic Corsican”:

…it “no longer seems original” and “halfway through… begins to drag, [deteriorating] into a silly bedroom farce in which characters keep zipping into different chambers through doors and passageways and being confused over who is who.” Adding insult to injury, this film makes “the French Revolution [come] across as the work of dumb clucks,” and the “ending is a terrible cop-out.”

I’m in agreement with Peary’s assessment of this earnest film, which tries too hard and far too often belabors each joke until it’s stale — as when King Louis sheepishly professes he thought a masked ball was a costume ball, again and again and again.

Watch for a very random appearance by Orson Welles at the beginning and the end of the film (making note of the fact that he doesn’t appear in it):

… and Ewa Aulin — star of Candy (1968) — as a busty Belgian princess.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • A few amusing sequences

Must See?
No; you can skip this one.

Links: