FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
A Jewish adman named Leopold Bloom (Milo O’Shea) wanders the streets of Dublin with young poet Stephen Dedalus (Maurice Roëves), reflecting on his adulterous wife (Barbara Jefford) back at home while engaging in his own adventures, both real and imagined.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Ireland
• Marital Problems

Review:
Peary isn’t a big fan of “Joseph Strick’s adaptation of James Joyce’s epic novel.” He argues that the character of Stephen Dedalus (a stand-in for Joyce) is “on screen too briefly and makes insignificant impact,” and notes that while “college lit majors and Joyce scholars will be thankful that this film was made by a devotee of Joyce,” “Strick proves — as he did with Henry Miller’s Tropic of Cancer [not listed in GFTFF] — that the source is unfilmable, as anyone who has read it (or carried the heavy thing in a bookbag) could have told him.” He argues that this “sleep-inducing, confusing film never sustains [the] flavor or power of [the] novel,” and that “it’s also hard to recognize Joyce’s Dublin or his colorful characters.”

He further asserts that while the “narration is from Joyce,” “Strick’s slapdash choice of images to accompany it is disconcerting.”

He concludes by noting that the “most interesting narration is by Molly as she lies in bed with the sleeping Leopold, whose feet are by her head”:

… and points out that “because the film was made back in 1967 when there were censorship problems, it’s jarring to hear her strong language,” yet “even today it’s still interesting listening to her lengthy discourse on the men in her life” (I agree).

However, I don’t quite agree with the rest of Peary’s take on this film — which is indeed super-challenging to follow, but that’s the nature of the book itself (which I’ll confess to not having read). As I’ve done more research into the storyline and structure of the novel, it seems to me that Strick admirably captures much of the flavor of the story and its characters (though maybe I would feel differently if I’d read and absorbed it first).

While I don’t fully “get” all of Joyce’s allusions, one isn’t supposed to; this is a novel meant to be explored and enjoyed over time, in conversation with others — and I can see how this film might be an interesting accompaniment to that process.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Milo O’Shea as Leopold Bloom
  
• Barbara Jefford as Molly Bloom
  
• Wolfgang Suschitzky’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
No, though of course anyone interested in this novel or James Joyce more broadly will certainly want to give it a look.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review

Synopsis:
At a small town Czechoslovakian celebration meant to honor a retiring fireman with cancer, absolutely nothing goes as expected.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Beauty Contests
• Black Comedy
• Eastern European Films
• Living Nightmare
• Milos Forman Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this film — “the last movie [Milos Forman] made in his native Czechoslovakia” — is “somewhat reminiscent of Bunuel’s The Exterminating Angel, in which bourgeois party guests can’t get home — [only] here the party guests stick around to commit mean acts or have them perpetrated on them.” When “firemen decide to throw a ball to honor their retired chief” because “it will be good for their own image”:

… “everything goes wrong: the leering, dirty old firemen decide to hold a beauty contest, but only ugly girls enter”:

… “the firemen are late to a fire that burns down an old man’s house”:

… “people steal the raffle prizes meant to benefit the old man”:

… “a respected fireman is caught red-handed with stolen meat;” and “the ex-chief’s gift disappears.” Peary argues that the “laughter comes from watching self-serving people try to show off their ‘generosity, benevolence, [and] solidarity’,” but he argues that “cruelty often overwhelms the humor.”

To be honest, Peary’s review weirdly misses the point of this 72-minute satire, which is clearly a direct allegory for the corruption of the Czech government, pre-Prague Spring. Nothing taking place here is kind, respectful, or even logical — presumably because nothing about how the government was being run at the time felt humanistic or made sense. The country was metaphorically burning down, and even its designated “firemen” weren’t able to save it. Thankfully, Forman got out, came to America, and started his own career anew; this remains a potent cinematic artifact of why that was necessary (at the time).

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Numerous surreally outlandish moments
  

Must See?
Yes, for its historical relevance as Forman’s final film before leaving Czechoslovakia, and for its Oscar nomination.

Categories

• Historically Relevant

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TV Guide Review
• DVD Savant Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
A gunslinger (Clint Eastwood) wandering into a desolate town on the border between Mexico and the United States hires himself out as a hitman for rival feuding families.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Clint Eastwood Films
• Feuds
• Sergio Leone Films
• Westerns

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that “this seminal spaghetti western” — “released in the U.S. in 1967” — was “the breakthrough film for both director Sergio Leone and star Clint Eastwood, whose portrayal of the Man With No Name” — the “most ruthless hero in western-movie history” — “quicky established him as the screen’s most charismatic action hero,” all while having “ripped off” the story “from Kurosawa’s samurai tale Yojimbo.”

He notes that while it’s “not on the level of For a Few Dollars More and The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,” it “did anticipate those films in several ways: the ritualistic, oddly humorous shootouts; the brutal violence; the use of music (by Ennio Morricone) to comment on the action; the near-death and Christlike resurrection of the hero (a theme Eastwood would use in his own films); a West that is populated mostly by ugly, unwashed, Fellini types”:

… and “an America where every person’s death means someone else makes a financial profit.” He adds that “most interesting is the Eastwood character,” who is “distinctively dressed in a tattered poncho over a sheepskin vest, a black cheroot… wedged in his mouth”:

… “and, with an air of casual sadism,” one “of the few survivors of a dying race of mythological super-warriors whose divine powers enable them to outdraw and outshoot anyone, to withstand terrible punishment, to have no fear of death, and to sense impending danger and have the cunning to get out of it.”

I happened to revisit this film before rewatching Akira Kurosawa’s Yojimbo (1961), which I quickly realized I needed to do before I could post a review — and to be honest, it’s now hard for me to get past the fact that this movie is literally (without permission) a near-remake of Kurosawa’s earlier work. I keep hearing Kurosawa’s letter of protest to Leone in my head: “I like your film very much. It’s a very interesting film. Unfortunately, it’s my film not your film.” Thankfully, Kurosawa earned the right to 15% of all revenue from the movie, which helped fund his own future projects — so I suppose it worked out in the end.

Regardless, this film now has a mythos all its own, with plenty written about how Eastwood (then star of the T.V. show “Rawhide”) stumbled into his first cinematic leading role after numerous others turned it down — and was mostly eager for a trip to Europe; how the film was made without dialogue and completely dubbed later; how Eastwood took his costume home every night to keep it safe for filming the next day (and still owns the original poncho); how Eastwood’s iconic squint and scowl were partly a result of his genuine dislike for smoking; how Morricone wrote most of the highly distinctive score ahead of time; and how critics mostly panned the movie at the time of its release, but eventually revised their assessment. It remains worth a look as an effective low-budget film which wasn’t precisely the first of its genre, but helped to spark the craze.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Distinctive direction by Leone
  
• Ennio Morricone’s score

Must See?
Yes, for its historical relevance as the first major title in the Spaghetti Western sub-genre.

Categories

• Historically Relevant

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• NY Times Original Review
• DVD Talk Review
• DVD Savant Review

Synopsis:
When an itinerant samurai (Toshiro Mifune) stops by a town fueled by rivalry between a corrupt silk merchant (Kamatari Fujiwara) and a corrupt sake seller (Takashi Shimura), he decides to make money off of both sides while standing up to a cocky henchman (Tatsuya Nakadai) with a pistol.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Akira Kurosawa Films
• Feuds
• Japanese Films
• Samurai

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, “Akira Kurosawa’s classic,” “most financially successful film” was “influenced by westerns such as Shane and in turn influenced a whole slew of westerns itself, most notably Sergio Leone’s A Fistful of Dollars, which completely lifts the plot.” He describes the town that Mifune’s “masterless samurai” wanders through as representing “the decay of a moral, chivalrous Japanese society” given that both rival leaders are waging “a war for control of the town’s gambling,” and “both are cowards who have hired scores of evil henchmen.”

He notes that Mifune’s “Sanjuro Kuwabatake” — a name he makes up for himself by looking off into the distance at a mulberry field and adding an age — is one of the few “fast-action movie heroes who think before they act,” and thus he “devises a clever plan by which he can exploit the situation to his financial gain.”

Peary adds that “like Leone’s films, this is a bloodbath (the violence is ferocious) that we react to with laughter — it is a comedy whereby the bad guys have the misfortune to be happened upon by a hero who can challenge and defeat them on their own amoral terms.”

In addition, “as in Leone, when the hero acts with emotion — acts human for the only time — he ends up paying the price, by suffering physical punishment.”

Peary asserts that this “classic” — an example of “great movie-making” — “is beautifully photographed by Kazuo Miyagawa… who does a remarkable job with composition and deep focus;” one particularly “striking shot” involves “the coffin maker hanging in the foreground, facing us; some bad guys in the middle plane, facing away from us toward the far end of town; and the ‘resurrected’ Mifune in the distance, facing us, with myth-making dust blowing past him from our right to left.”

As pointed out by Alexander Sesonske in his essay for Criterion, this film emerged nine titles after Kurosawa’s Rashomon “shocked both East and West by its triumph at the 1950 Venice Film Festival,” with numerous others in between — including Ikiru (1952), The Seven Samurai (1954), and Throne of Blood (1957) — considered “exotic for the Westerners, but alive with characters who continually impress us with their humanity.” Yojimbo is generally seen as Kurosawa’s explicit nod to America, given its potent mix of westerns and gangster flicks, with the village gangs here “so grotesquely wicked, they become ludicrous and enlist neither our sympathy nor our belief.”

What’s most enjoyable is watching Mifune managing everything that comes his way with aplomb, humor, and mastery. Also noteworthy is Masaru Satô’s score, written in just one week. This film was followed by Sanjuro (1962), which apparently was revised to accommodate the success of the title character here.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Toshiro Mifune as Sanjuro
  
• Tatsuya Nakadai as Unosuke
  
• Kazuo Miyagawa’s cinematography
  
  
• Masaru Satô’s score

Must See?
Yes, as a classic by a master director.

Categories

• Foreign Gem
• Genuine Classic
• Important Director

Links:

• IMDb entry
• TCM Article
• DVD Savant Review
• Criterion Essay
• Video Analysis: Comparing Yojimbo and Fistful of Dollars

Synopsis:
When an Arizona sheriff (Clint Eastwood) arrives in New York City to chase down a fugitive (Don Stroud), he encounters surprising resistance from a police detective (Lee J. Cobb), and woos a social worker (Susan Clark) to help track Stroud through one of his followers (Tisha Sterling).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Betty Field Films
• Clint Eastwood Films
• Don Siegel Films
• Fugitives
• Lee J. Cobb Films
• Sheriffs and Marshals

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary points out that while “Clint Eastwood still wore a cowboy hat in Don Siegel’s taut, violent film” (their first of five movies together), “it was his first attempt to move into contemporary times.” He adds, as “a predecessor to Dirty Harry Callahan, Coogan was Eastwood’s first character to be upset by the hedonistic decadence and crime of the cities, and frustrated by the ineffectiveness of urban police departments, where everything must go through proper channels.”

Because he gets “no help from the NYPD, he employs roughshod tactics used by lawmen in the west since the 19th century and, though he ruffles a few feathers, is able to carry out his mission.” Naturally, “along the way he is charmed by” and/or beds various women, including a social worker (Susan Clark) and “the bad guy’s girlfriend (Tisha Sterling).”

Peary doesn’t provide much more critique of this film in his GFTFF — but DVD Savant bluntly refers to it as “a wince-inducing fossil that nevertheless struck a solid chord with 1968’s ‘silent majority’,” noting that it “was beautifully engineered to cut through the socio-political confusion of 1968, when conservatives feared that riots, assassinations, protests and a wild new youth drug culture were spelling an end to Western civilization.”

Meanwhile, poor Susan Clark’s Julie is “a sad character indeed;” she’s terribly used here (both by Eastwood and by the script). Faring somewhat better is Sterling’s pixie hippie, and Betty Field in a bit role (her last) as Stroud’s sassy mother.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Good use of location shooting across New York
  
• Luminous Tisha Sterling as Linny Raven
  
• Betty Field in a tiny role as Ellen Ringerman
  
• The exciting motorcycle chase sequence
  
• Lalo Schifrin’s score

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for Eastwood fans.

Links: