Browsed by
Month: February 2023

Masculin-Feminin (1966)

Masculin-Feminin (1966)

“Don’t you think you’re the center of the world?”

Synopsis:
A young Parisian (Jean-Pierre Léaud) newly out of military service pursues an aspiring singer (Chantal Goya) while also bedding her roommates, Catherine (Catherine-Isabelle Duport) and Elisabeth (Marlène Jobert).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • French Films
  • Jean-Luc Godard Films
  • Love Triangle

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary refers to Jean-Luc Godard’s eleventh feature-length film as “one of most memorable films of the sixties, about the ‘Children of Marx and Coca-Cola’.” He argues that it “captures the sense of an exciting, confusing, often frustrating era when young people in France and America were simultaneously learning leftist politics and having their first sexual affairs” — and he notes that “being involved in politics was so much fun because it brought together many people with similar viewpoints whose blood was already pumping and adrenaline already flowing.”

While this film continues to be almost universally lauded — with a Metacritic score of 93, and inclusion in the book 1,001 Movies You Must See Before You Die — its appeal eludes me. These boring, self-absorbed young individuals are as aimless on screen as they appear to be in their own lives, and I don’t understand the desire to watch them interact for an hour and 43 minutes.

They sit around in coffeeshops, pursue and/or sleep with one another, interview each other about sex and politics, spray-paint political slogans, go to the movies, do laundry, smoke, and I suppose act very much like young people at a certain time in their lives — exploring who they are, who they like, and what they want to do. But there’s not a whole lot in the narrative to hold onto or wait to see unfolding; while Peary refers to the “depressing ending” as a “surprise”, I simply find it pointless.

Note: I was amused to read the following on IMDb’s Trivia page:

The film within a film sequence which parodies the work of Ingmar Bergman was shot at the Scandic Hotel Continental, Stockholm. Ingmar Bergman, not being a fan of Jean-Luc Godard found out about the film, went to go and see it and called it “a classic case of Godard: mind-numbingly boring.”

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Willy Kurant’s cinematography

Must See?
Nope; while many disagree, I think this one is only for Godard completists.

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

Links:

Married Woman, A (1964)

Married Woman, A (1964)

“I love you, and maybe love is complicated.”

Synopsis:
A self-absorbed young woman (Macha Méril) drifts between an affair with an actor (Bernard Noël), and married life with her pilot-husband (Philippe Leroy) and his son (Christophe Bourseiller).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • French Films
  • Infidelity
  • Jean-Luc Godard Films
  • Marital Problems

Review:
Despite there being very little substance to this stylized look at a shallow marriage threatened by infidelity, this film (Godard’s eighth feature) premiered to great acclaim and ended up as one of his most financially successful pictures. Méril — perhaps best recognized as the blonde psychic who is brutally murdered on stage near the beginning of Dario Argento’s Deep Red (1975) — plays Charlotte, a beautiful but vapid woman who is overly concerned with her appearance and sexual appeal, as echoed in the media-saturated landscape she moves within.

She bounces back and forth between lovemaking sessions with her lover, Robert (Noël) — who is eager to have a child with her — and her husband, Pierre (Leroy), who’s had her followed by a private investigator; many of these scenes are comprised of various body parts, emphasizing the physicality and truncated nature of Charlotte’s daily existence.

Indeed, Charlotte’s life is so empty that she spends her time discussing tidying up the cupboards, measuring her bust, and wandering through department stores; occasionally we hear her inner musings, which consists of statements like, “The most important thing for me is to understand what’s happening to me.”

Yes, that’s pretty much what you get with this tiresome flick, which is visually pleasing (Raoul Coutard’s cinematography is top-notch as always) but otherwise a bore.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Raoul Coutard’s cinematography

Must See?
No; you can skip this one unless you’re a Godard completist. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

War Hunt (1962)

War Hunt (1962)

“Better get some rest; this war is going on for awhile.”

Synopsis:
A new soldier (Robert Redford) sent to the frontlines of the Korean War is disturbed by the behavior of a rule-breaking private (John Saxon) who heads out at night to gather information, and spends much of his time with an orphaned boy (Tommy Matsuda).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • John Saxon Films
  • Korean War
  • Orphans
  • Robert Redford Films
  • Soldiers

Review:
This low-budget Korean war-time flick by brothers Denis and Terry Sanders is primarily notable these days as Robert Redford’s big screen debut as an earnest soldier puzzled by what he sees going on in his platoon:

… particularly with Saxon, who puts on blackface for night-time excursions, fails to follow strict military protocol, and basically seems one step away from a mental breakdown.

There isn’t much to the storyline other than waiting to see what will happen with Saxon (especially once a ceasefire is called), and we’re not sure what to make of the role of the young orphan, whose well-being Saxon is obsessively concerned with.

However, it’s all finely filmed by DP Ted McCord, the low budget is put to good use, and the ensemble cast works well together.

Note: Watch for Tom Skerritt in his film debut as a young sergeant.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Robert Redford as Private Roy Loomis
  • John Saxon as Private Raymond Endore
  • Ted D. McCord’s cinematography

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one time look. Listed as a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

36 Hours (1964)

36 Hours (1964)

“When things are going along too smoothly, you can’t help but be a bit suspicious.”

Synopsis:
In May of 1944, an American military intelligence officer (James Garner) is poisoned, kidnapped, and brought to a secret German site designed to look like a U.S. hospital, where an army doctor (Rod Taylor), a concentration camp survivor (Eva Marie Saint), and a German officer (Werner Peters) attempt to convince him that he has amnesia and the war is over, in order to get him to share plans for D-Day.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Amnesia
  • Eva Marie Saint Films
  • James Garner Films
  • Rod Taylor Films
  • World War II

Review:
This clever suspense thriller — based on a short story by Roald Dahl — features a premise so intriguing it’s hard not to be drawn in nearly right away: what kind of powerful intelligence might one obtain upon successfully convincing an enemy that years have passed and the war is now over? In this film, we’re told that getting to that stage with Garner’s character has taken months of careful planning by dozens of players who can’t risk making a single mistake (i.e., accidentally speaking German).

And the ruse works — at first:

… until suddenly Garner suspects something’s up, and the house of cards comes tumbling down. The tension from there lies in how Garner will handle this news, how his capturers will receive what he’s forced to tell him (is he lying?), and whether the other sympathetic players in the narrative (Taylor and Saint) will turn out to be allies or enemies.

The final half-hour turns into an escape plot that drags the storyline out unnecessarily, but this flick remains worth a look simply for its thought-provoking premise.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • James Garner as Jeff Pike
  • Rod Taylor as Major Gerber
  • Philip Lathrop’s cinematography

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a one-time look. Listed as a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Seven Days in May (1964)

Seven Days in May (1964)

“Senator, we’re talking about the survival of the United States.”

Synopsis:
When a military aide (Kirk Douglas) learns that his superior (Burt Lancaster) has plans to overthrow the government given concerns over nuclear disarmament, he tells the president (Fredric March) and is soon embroiled in efforts to gather evidence of the impending coup.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ava Gardner Films
  • Burt Lancaster Films
  • Cold War
  • Edmond O’Brien Films
  • Fredric March Films
  • George Macready Films
  • Hugh Marlowe Films
  • John Frankenheimer Films
  • Kirk Douglas Films
  • Martin Balsam Films
  • Military
  • Political Conspiracy

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary’s review of “John Frankenheimer’s taut political thriller” — scripted by Rod Sterling, and based on Fletcher Knebel and Charles W. Bailey II’s novel of the same name — is primarily focused on the fact that it was “surely… not a favorite at Reagan’s White House.” He notes that “if it were made today [in 1986] it would be a lot flashier and more gimmicky — and probably March and Douglas would be made into the villains.”

Freakiest of all is Burt Lancaster’s “sinister portrayal as a rightwing extremist, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who plans a military coup.” The relevance to current politics, albeit through a different lens of concern, couldn’t be starker: when a group of individuals is convinced they’re right and the well-being of their nation is at risk, we know they will stop at nothing.

As Peary writes, this is a “smart, well-acted, suspenseful film”, bolstered by Frankenheimer’s innovative use of camera angles:

… Ellsworth Fredericks’ stark cinematography, and strong performances by the leads and many of the supporting players — including Martin Balsam as a loyal advisor:

… and Edmond O’Brien’s Oscar-nominated role as an alcoholic Southern senator (and one of March’s oldest friends).

Unfortunately, Ava Gardner’s role as a boozy mistress to Lancaster feels gratuitous, though she’s essential to the plot.

This political thriller would make an excellent double-bill with Fail Safe (1964) if viewers can handle the pressure (though perhaps Dr. Strangelove would be needed as a darkly comedic chaser).

Note: Watch for John Houseman in his uncredited screen debut as a key player in O’Brien’s hunt for evidence.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fredric March as the President
  • Burt Lancaster as General Scott
  • Kirk Douglas as Col. Casey
  • Edmond O’Brien as Senator Clark
  • Ellsworth Fredericks’ cinematography

Must See?
Yes, as a powerful — and relevant — good show.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

Fail Safe (1964)

Fail Safe (1964)

“In a nuclear war, everyone loses.”

Synopsis:
When a group of U.S. bombers are accidentally sent to destroy Moscow, the president (Henry Fonda) enlists help from a translator (Larry Hagman) in reaching the Soviet Prime Minister and attempting to prevent a nuclear disaster.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cold War
  • Henry Fonda Films
  • Nuclear Threat
  • Sidney Lumet Films
  • Walter Matthau Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary refers to this “very tense, grim drama, seriously directed by Sidney Lumet” — based on a 1962 novel of the same name by Eugene Burdick and Harvey Wheeler — as “Dr. Strangelove without the humor.” This story about “U.S. planes carrying nuclear bombs [who] are accidentally given the go-ahead to fly a bombing mission deep into Russia” “points out that there would be hawks in our government who’d insist that the U.S. should go through with a full-scale nuclear attack if such a mistake occurred rather than wait for the Russian retaliation.” What’s “most interesting is how we end up rooting for our own planes to be shot down, although the innocent men inside believe they’re just following orders.”

I was very pleasantly surprised to see how well this “serious counterpart” to Dr. Strangelove (both produced by Columbia Pictures) has stood up. Fonda effectively embodies the measured president we all wish we had; and Hagman is quietly nuanced in one of his earliest film roles. Meanwhile, Lumet’s direction (with support from George Hirschfeld as DP, Walter Bernstein’s script, and Ralph Rosenblum’s editing) is spot-on in terms of creating and maintaining tension across the various inter-connected spheres of the storyline (primarily the president’s office, the War Room, and the pilots’ cockpit).

This film is a literal nailbiter in terms of what will come next, with nothing less than the fate of our planet in the balance. You have every right to go into a viewing of it with trepidation — and come out feeling even more.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Henry Fonda as the President
  • Larry Hagman as Buck
  • George Hirschfeld’s cinematography
  • Walter Bernstein’s screenplay
  • Ralph Rosenblum’s editing

Must See?
Yes, as a powerful Cold War thriller.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

View From the Bridge, A (1962)

View From the Bridge, A (1962)

“This guy’s looking for his break; that’s all he’s looking for.”

Synopsis:
An over protective Italian-American (Raf Vallone) living in Brooklyn with his wife (Maureen Stapleton) and grown niece (Carol Lawrence) is distressed to learn that Catherine (Lawrence) has fallen for a young immigrant (Jean Sorel) who has come to the country illegally with his cousin (Raymond Pellegrin).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Arthur Miller Adaptations
  • Immigrants and Immigration
  • Play Adaptations
  • Sidney Lumet Films
  • Waterfront

Review:
The same year Long Day’s Journey Into Night (1962) was released, Sidney Lumet also directed this adaptation of Arthur Miller’s play of the same name — though to much lower critical acclaim. (Indeed, as of 2021, this film still hasn’t been released to video.) It’s a unique story in terms of its focus on immigrant status as a leverage point, with Vallone’s obsessive love for his niece getting in the way of doing the right and decent thing for his countrymen.

While Vallone himself is unaware of it, he harbors semi-incestuous feelings for Lawrence — and handsome Sorel bears the brunt of his anger. (In a “daring” scene for the time, he accuses Sorel of being homosexual by kissing him on the lips.)

However, arguably the most impacted by Vallone’s irrational hatred is Pellegrin, who is keeping his kids back at home alive by sending money he’s earned in America, and whose immigration status may be jeopardized by Vallone.

Meanwhile, Vallone’s wife (Stapleton) tries to intervene, but mostly simply watches events unfolding with horror. This tragedy of obsession, loyalty, responsibility, and revenge plays out in a way that hints at heartbreak from the get-go — which turns out to be accurate.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • A powerful drama of inter-familial tensions
  • Good use of location shooting in Brooklyn

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a look if you can find a copy. Listed as a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Dolce Vita, La (1960)

Dolce Vita, La (1960)

“Only love gives me strength.”

Synopsis:
An entertainment journalist (Marcello Mastroianni) fields distressed phone calls from his clingy girlfriend (Yvonne Furneaux) while having a fling with an heiress (Anouk Aimee), accompanying a buxomy actress (Anita Ekberg) on a trip around Rome, covering a rainy media spectacle visitation from the Madonna, and hanging out with his married philosopher-friend (Alain Cuny) at his home.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Anita Ekberg Films
  • Anouk Aimee Films
  • Federico Fellini Films
  • Italian Films
  • Journalists
  • Marcello Mastroianni Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, “Federico Fellini’s mammoth film about the meaninglessness of Rome’s ‘sweet life’ is one of his most ambitious, fascinating, and popular works” — and also “his most cynical film.” Peary gives away a significant spoiler (occurring in the seventh night sequence out of nine) pretty early in his review, so I’ll bypass that and simply quote him noting that Mastroianni ultimately “realizes he has no escape from his worthless life” and “like all the others who have given up trying to find happiness or make a positive contribution to society, he dives headlong into orgies, cruelty, [and] planned frivolity.”

Peary describes “Fellini’s depiction of the sweet life [la dolce vita]” as one in which “nights are given over to decadence, dawn is a quiet time for reflection and, this being Italy, guilt — but not enough guilt to abandon the ugly yet intoxicating life-style.” He points out that the “film is filled with memorable characters (who move in and out of the story) and classic scenes: a statue of Christ hanging from a helicopter”:

… “Anita Ekberg’s walk through a fountain”:

… “Mastroianni’s argument with Furneaux in their car”:

… “the night at the palace”:

… “the striptease”:

… “Mastroianni slapping and putting feathers on a dazed female partygoer during an orgy”:

… “etc.”

As the film which sparked the phrase “Papparazzi” — after the name of Marcello’s photographer-friend “Papparazzo” (Walter Santesso), who is hovering around the periphery at all times — this film is appropriately filled with frenzy, movement, and multiple jam-packed frames.

Indeed, it’s so easy to get caught up in the relentless energy of the narrative that the film’s more sobering moments — especially those near the end — come as a quietly disturbing shock. Despite its technical brilliance and historical relevance as a turning point in Fellini’s career, this is not a film I can imagine watching very often; it’s far too heartbreaking for that. However, it remains must-see viewing at least once for all film fanatics.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Marcello Mastroianni as Marcello
  • Otello Martelli’s cinematography


  • Numerous memorable scenes

  • Nino Rota’s score

Must See?
Yes, as a classic of Italian cinema.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem
  • Genuine Classic
  • Important Director

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

Links:

Body Heat (1981)

Body Heat (1981)

“You’re not too smart, are you? I like that in a man.”

Synopsis:
An unhappily married woman (Kathleen Turner) begins a torrid affair with a lawyer (William Hurt) who quickly comes to believe that Turner’s husband (Richard Crenna) is in the way of their happiness.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Femmes Fatales
  • Infidelity
  • Kathleen Turner Films
  • Lawyers
  • Mickey Rourke Films
  • Plot to Murder
  • William Hurt Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
In Peary’s GFTFF review of this neo-noir thriller, he writes that “it’s almost as if director-writer Lawrence Kasdan lucked upon footage from a noir classic that, for some reason, was missing actors — so all he had to do was photograph actors of his own using a script that utilized the sets and look of that old film and then mix the new footage with the old.” He argues that the “film so closely resembles — visually and thematically — classic noir films such as Double Indemnity that many critics complained… Kasdan was playing the copycat,” but he’s “impressed by what [he] thinks is a film lover’s attempt to re-create the noir style so he could thoroughly explore the elements that made it so fascinating.”

He adds that the “picture has a sharply written, almost campily humorous script; exciting, sexually explicit scenes; [and] strong performances by Hurt, Turner…, Crenna, Ted Danson (as Hurt’s DA friend), and Mickey Rourke (who teaches Hurt how to use explosives).”

In Cult Movies 3, Peary expands upon his analysis, noting that the film developed an obsessive fan club, and sharing his thoughts on why the film does more than simply slavishly imitate older noir. He points out that while “Kasdan incorporates a fatalism that is prevalent in noir classics,” he “gives it a twist” since “both adulterers are not doomed the moment they seal their conspiracy with a kiss”; instead, Turner’s Matty “determines her own destiny.”

On the other hand, Hurt’s Ned “pretty much fits the profile for noir ‘heroes'” given “he drinks and smokes constantly, is cynical and bored, thinks any woman would fall for him and that he is better than the man she is with now, tries to impress the femme fatale by devising and carrying out an intricate crime… and assumes Fate is too strong for him” — however, he “differs from most in that he’s not particularly sympathetic” and “doesn’t have any good qualities.”

Meanwhile, “Kasdan also breaks convention with the third major character, Edmund Walker [Cranna]… In film noir, the husband whom the lovers try to kill typically is an absolute victim, unaware that there is a plot against him and too weak to put up a defense if he did know” — but “not so with Richard Crenna’s creepily played Walker,” who is “anything but an unaggressive patsy” and “has reached his position of wealth and power by stepping on weaklings and exhibiting a callous disrespect for the law.”

However, “the biggest difference between Body Heat and the forties’ classics is in the presentation of sex.” Peary writes that “like Bob Rafelson’s Jack Nicholson-Jessica Lange remake of The Postman Always Rings Twice (1981), it brings the forefront the sex in James M. Cain’s novels that was only hinted at in the forties’ film adaptations.” He adds that “whereas forties’ femmes fatales used their sex appeal to lure unsuspecting men into their webs and to keep them willing prisoners, Matty uses the sex act to keep Ned in line.”

Peary writes that while he doesn’t think Body Heat is “on the same level as the classics of the genre,” he finds it “a worthy, legitimate, most enjoyable entry to the genre,” and adds that he especially likes “the cinematography — the prowling camera, the interesting light patterns — of [DP] Richard Kline”:

… “and how adeptly John Barry’s bluesy score complements the visuals and helps establish the proper sense of nightmare.” He notes that “best of all is Kathleen Turner,” who “proudly displays her long legs and daringly does nudity”; she “is extremely sexy, not just because of the way she looks… and her uninhibited nature in bed, but equally because of her energy and eagerness…, her confidence, her strength, her ambition, her perseverance, and her intelligence” — to the point that “Ned comes to realize, it was kind of an honor to be duped by such a woman.”

Note: The use of wind chimes in this film is particularly effective.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Kathleen Turner as Matty Walker
  • William Hurt as Ned Racine
  • Richard H. Kline’s atmospheric cinematography
  • John Barry’s score

Must See?
Yes, as a most enjoyable neo-noir.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic
  • Good Show
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

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

Links:

Chastity (1969)

Chastity (1969)

“Let’s do it my way; we’ll do it your way some other time.”

Synopsis:
As Chastity (Cher) hitchhikes her way across the country and into Mexico, she encounters a kind college student (Steve Whittaker), a naive young whorehouse visitor (Tom Nolan), and a predatory lesbian madam (Barbara London).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cher Films
  • Road Trip
  • Strong Females

Review:
Sonny Bono and Cher’s follow-up to their debut feature, Good Times (1967), was this self-financed flop which put the couple in debt. They wanted to connect with younger audiences through Cher’s portrayal of a beautiful hippie living life on her own terms — and to her credit, Cher’s Chastity is remarkably self-sufficient.

However, everything else about this turkey — including the script (Chastity talks to herself, a lot) and the acting — simply stinks; the final scene is especially cringe-worthy. Be forewarned.

Note: As DVD Savant posits, the director “Alessio de Paola” was likely Bono himself.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:
Not much.

Must See?
No; you can most certainly skip this one unless you happen to be a Cher completist. Listed as a Sleeper in the back of Peary’s book.

Links: