Topper Returns (1941)
“It isn’t every day a girl gets murdered!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review: Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Topper Takes a Trip (1938)
“Topper’s too nice a fella to be in trouble… I’m going to get him out!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
And while Young’s slapsticky pratfalls were amusing in the first film, they’re overused for laughs here. As usual, Burke’s bubble-headed socialite (“Too bad the people in America aren’t French”) is insufferable:
and reliable character actors Franklin Pangborn (with a bad French accent):
and Alan Mowbray are simply wasted. Topper Takes a Trip is, unfortunately, “comedy” at its low-brow worst, and certainly not must-see viewing. Redeeming Qualities and Moments: Must See? Links: |
Soylent Green (1973)
[Note: The following review is of a non-Peary title; click here to read more.]
“Your dead one was a very important man.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
Heston — “an actor who has had better last movie lines than any other star”, according to Stomp Tokyo’s reviewers — is appropriately stalwart as the hard-nosed detective who is determined to uncover the conspiracy behind Cotten’s death:
but is never above taking advantage of the amenities (namely wildly overpriced foodstuff) he encounters during his investigation. Meanwhile, Robinson is a class-act in his final role as Heston’s roommate, a “Book” (so-named because he actually reads) who remembers long-gone days of bountiful flora and fauna on Earth; his delight at eating a piece of genuine beef is a joy to watch, and his final scene in the film (considered hokey by some) never fails to move me to tears. I’m also impressed by the simple yet effective way in which New York City is portrayed as drastically overpopulated, with Heston literally crawling over live bodies sprawled up and down stairwells, and crowd members serving as gruesomely effective “body armor” during assassination attempts.
The film’s main flaw is its decidedly anti-feminist portrayal of women, who are (for the most part) either kerchief-clad personae non gratae, or beautiful and sexually compliant “furniture” (ouch!) for wealthy men — yet this gender-biased vision of the future is, sadly, perhaps not all that unrealistic, making Soylent Green all the more effective as a disturbing cautionary tale. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Against All Odds (1984)
“It’s simple: either you want to play football again, or you don’t.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
… they’re saddled with such an awkward, muddled script (the synopsis above barely touches on the complexity of the dense plot, which involves insider gambling and high-level corruption) that it’s difficult to care about either their ill-fated romance or their respective predicaments. Ward’s family problems — she’s the spoiled, petulant daughter of a wealthy land developer — are never fully explored, and she fails to project the necessary edginess or complexity of a truly compelling femme fatale. Meanwhile, James Woods is either badly miscast or badly directed in a pivotal role as Ward’s covetous lover:
While no one would ever accuse Woods of an inability to project “slime”, he nonetheless fails to embody the “Mr. Big” presence required of his character here. Worst of all, however, is director Taylor Hackford’s decision to have his actors spout neo-noir dialogue (“I love you, Jessie. Why did that have to be a bad thing?”) as though it’s realistic banter; attempts to infuse this type of hardboiled rhetoric into modern cinematic settings (c.f. Rian Johnson’s Brick, 2005) are tricky at best, and the effort fails completely here — it’s almost laughable, but (sadly) not quite. Not even the presence of cinematic icon Richard Widmark (badly underused):
… or Out of the Past‘s original star, Jane Greer:
… can revive this disappointing thriller, which should be much better than it is. Redeeming Qualities and Moments: Must See? Links: |
Dutchman (1967)
“I told you I’m not an actress. I also told you I lie all the time. Draw your own conclusion!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review: Director Anthony Harvey and cinematographer Gerry Turpin do a reasonably impressive job cinematizing what is by its very nature a claustrophobic, geographically-limited playlet, and John Barry’s pulsating score is appropriately jarring — but the truth is that Dutchman (even at such a short running time) remains a bit of a chore to sit through, due primarily to Knight’s insufferable central performance. While subtle characterizations are perhaps too much to ask for in such a heavily weighted allegory, Knight’s performance is (as noted in Nathan Rabin’s DVD review for The Onion) “embarrassingly theatrical, a tour-de-force of histrionics that only underlines the pretentious, feverishly overwritten nature of Jones’ script.” Freeman — infinitely subtle in comparison — fares somewhat better, but can’t help being overshadowed by Knight’s hideous gargoyle of a femme fatale. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Sudden Impact (1983)
“Go ahead — make my day.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review:
Indeed, Eastwood fails to elicit any subtlety whatsoever from the rest of his cast: the gang of rapists — including a “mean, foul-mouthed lesbian” (Audrie Neenan):
and the gang’s psychotic leader (Paul Drake) — are particularly one-dimensional; meanwhile, Pat Hingle as San Paulo’s defensive sheriff is sadly underused. Joseph Stinson’s hardboiled script contains plenty of zingy one-liners (including the infamous “Go ahead — make my day”), but is ultimately too focused on providing “Dirty Harry” with dramatic opportunities to kill off Bad Guys to make the most of what should be a compelling tale of justifiable revenge and vigilante romance. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Footsteps in the Fog (1955)
“Another woman once thought she owned me. Don’t drive me too far!”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
… while Granger secretly admits to marrying his dead wife for her money, and plans to woo another eligible young heiress (Elizabeth Travers) as soon as propriety allows.
While both are initially conniving, however, Simmons’ Lily Watkins eventually emerges as a sympathetic protagonist — and we can’t help cringing at the ill-founded loyalty she maintains for her murderous master.
Granger’s acting is as limited and campy as ever, but he’s well cast:
Meanwhile, Simmons demonstrates once again why she remains one of the unsung actresses of her time (c.f. her differently plucky turn-of-the-century role in 1950’s So Long at the Fair). Fine set designs and Benjamin Frankel’s score add to this suspenseful film’s overall period ambiance; and while it never reaches the heights of Hitchcock’s masterpieces (Arthur Lubin’s rather perfunctory directorial style prevents this), it’s certainly worth a look. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
Year of Living Dangerously, The (1982)
“We’ll make a great team, old man: you for the words, me for the pictures. I can be your eyes.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Gibson is ostensibly the lead protagonist in the film, given that it’s his growth of conscience as a reporter — and his erotic courtship with sexy, smart Weaver — which form the primary arc of the narrative. Yet it’s the Chinese-European dwarf photographer “Billy Kwan” (Hunt) who ultimately leaves the deepest impression.
As Peary notes, Kwan is a truly “enlightened male”, someone whose socialist ideals allow him to transcend his own beleaguered stature in life (he’s cruelly teased by his ignorant colleagues) and instead work towards helping “spread sunshine” in whatever small ways he can. Essentially a collector of people, he keeps extensive files on his friends and associates in order to both understand them and help guide them:
— a pastime which sounds creepy (indeed, Hamilton accuses him of being an operative), but is clearly driven by Kwan’s deep desire to help the world, and his realization that, as a misunderstood, marginalized dwarf, he must enlist the help of others in order to achieve his goals. Hunt “deservedly won an Oscar” for her performance as Kwan, and she’s reason enough to check out this satisfying political drama. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Mary Poppins (1964)
“I shall stay until the wind changes.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Response to Peary’s Review: Yet Peary’s assessment seems unduly harsh, given that beautiful Andrews (whose iconic voice is in peak form here) literally glows in the title role, and creates an undeniably memorable character in her film debut. Meanwhile, though Peary gripes about Van Dyke’s obviously “phony cockney accent”, kids won’t care — and his “Bert” is such a changeable fellow (he holds down no less than four different jobs throughout the film: a one-man band, a chalk artist, a chimney sweep, and a kite salesman) that it actually makes sense for his accent to be somewhat difficult to pin down. In addition, his “cameo” role as the elder Mr. Dawes (which he fought to get) is enormously enjoyable (apparently Dotrice and Garber weren’t told that it was Van Dyke underneath all that makeup and snowy white hair!). With that said, I’ll agree with Peary about some of the film’s flaws. First, at 139 minutes, it is indeed “about 40 minutes too long”, and could have used some serious editing. The chalk-drawing sequence, for instance — though imaginatively conceived — ultimately drags on longer than necessary; and while I enjoy Ed Wynn’s improvisatory turn as the high-on-laughter “Uncle Albert”, this entire musical sequence does nothing to further the plot, instead simply showcasing Poppins at her least appealing (she’s all simpering, thin-lipped disapproval, but what’s the harm in wanting to laugh yourself silly every once in a while?). Finally, I’ll agree with Peary that Andrews’ character isn’t given enough screentime: as he points out in Alternate Oscars, she “disappears for such long, pivotal stretches of the movie that her part nearly becomes a supporting one”. It should be noted that Peary is not the only critic of this beloved film: P.L. Travers — author of the “Mary Poppins” series (there were 8 books in all) — was notoriously displeased with the way in which her fictional creation was transferred to the big screen. According to an article by Caitlin Flanagan for The New Yorker*, Travers’ “Mary Poppins” was far from the stern but loving caretaker portrayed by Andrews:
For better or for worse, however, Disney’s version of Mary Poppins is the one most children will grow up getting to know — and, given its historical importance, the film itself remains indispensable viewing (at least once) for all film fanatics. Note: A weird bit of trivia on the film, according to IMBd: “Many of the nannies in the large queue of applicants for the job at the start of the film were actually men in drag.” !!! * Thanks to my friend David for pointing this article out to me! Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Categories
Links: |
Wait Till the Sun Shines, Nellie (1952)
“To a pretty woman like you, Sevillinois must become pretty dull.”
|
Synopsis: |
|
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review:
a quartet of willing customers arrives in perfect harmony, ready to sing — you guessed it — barbershop tunes (including the title song).
Unfortunately, much less effort is spent on character development; as a result, we’re asked to care about people we’ve barely been given a chance to get to know. Wayne (a notable character actor — you’ll recognize him… from somewhere…) doesn’t quite have the charisma to carry the leading role — and he’s not helped any by the script, which has him deceiving his wife (Peters, looking extremely fetching) from the very beginning of their marriage. Without advance warning, he takes her to a small town, rather than a big city for their honeymoon (as promised); he lies to her about having purchased (rather than leased) the barber shop; and he continually makes decisions about their future without consulting her. No wonder she’s royally teed off by the middle of the film, at which point she petulantly flees to Chicago (can you blame her?) and promptly gets herself killed. Unfortunately, once she’s absent from the film, we care even less about what happens next to our widowed protagonist — so you may be tempted (as I was) to tune out completely from this point on. Redeeming Qualities and Moments: Must See? Links: |
