FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
Radio DJ Alan Freed (Tim McIntire) deals with pushback from law enforcement while promoting his upcoming (and final) rock ‘n’ roll show at the Brooklyn Paramount Theater.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Biopics
• Radio
• Rock ‘n Roll

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that director “Floyd Mutrux’s affectionate facts-out-the-window tribute to the late Alan Freed” — “regarded as the first white deejay to play black music” — has “as flimsy a storyline as those fifties ‘B’ rock ‘n’ roll movies in which Freed appeared.” “Nevertheless,” he asserts, it “has great drive and sustained momentum, a chaotic atmosphere that properly reflects the wild era it depicts, and familiar music from 1957-60 (both performed by acts in the film and played on the soundtrack) that will make you feel joyfully nostalgic.”

“Best of all,” Peary adds, is “Tim McIntire giving a dynamite performance as the former ‘Mr. Rock ‘n’ Roll'” — someone who “really loved rock music.” We see Freed “respectfully spinning platters on his radio show”:

… “taking a quick look at aspiring acts whom agents march through his office”:

…”amiably chatting with teenagers on the street”:

… “stopping to listen to unknown doo-wop groups… who always cross his path between his car and a building”:

… and “watching a rousing recording session (of ‘Come Go With Me’).”

Peary argues that “McIntire’s Freed is totally believable,” and “looks as if he walks through this cluttered, special world every day.” He points out that “while the film hints at Freed’s imminent downfall (because of a payola scandal)”, it ends on a “high note,” with special performances by “Chuck Berry (doing a really dirty version of ‘Reelin’ and Rockin”), Jerry Lee Lewis, [and] Screamin’ Jay Hawkins.”

There are also a few minor subplots woven throughout, including a young boy (Artie Ripp) who shows up at Freed’s station as the President of the Buddy Holly Fan Club:

… a quibbling couple (Jay Leno and Fran Drescher) working for Freed:

… and an aspiring songwriter (Laraine Newman) trying to convince her dad (Garry Goodrow) about her dreams:

Indeed, this film very much has the feeling of a sprawling Robert Altman flick, with a cast of dozens; perhaps this was intentional, to show us how many rock ‘n’ roll lovers were orbiting Freed’s universe. It’s not must-see viewing, but those interested in this era of music history will certainly want to check it out.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• An intriguing glimpse into the unique world inhabited by Freed
  

Must See?
No, but it’s recommended if you’re interested in this subgenre.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• TV Guide Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
When members of the Disciples of James Dean fan club — Mona (Sandy Dennis), Sissy (Cher), Joanne (Karen Black), Stella Mae (Kathy Bates), and Edna Louise (Marta Heflin) — meet for a twenty-year reunion at a small drug store in Texas run by a deeply religious widow named Juanita (Sudie Bond), secrets emerge that shake up long-held beliefs around identity and paternity.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Cher Films
• Flashback Films
• Get Togethers and Reunions
• Karen Black Films
• Obsessive Fans
• Play Adaptations
• Robert Altman Films
• Sandy Dennis Films
• Small Town America

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary writes, this film about “a James Dean fan-club reunion 20 years after his death” — taking place nearby where “Dean’s last film, Giant, was filmed” — centers around “revelations [having] to do with self-identity, [and] how [the characters] deal with being female.” He notes that “most critics agreed that Ed Graczyk’s screenplay is awful, but thought Robert Altman’s direction (he also directed Graczyk’s play) and the performances by Dennis, Cher, and Black gave the film emotional resonance.”

However, Peary ultimately asserts that he “thinks it’s a bore,” noting that “the acting is okay, but [he doesn’t] believe any of the characters” and “can’t even figure out why any of these particular women would like James Dean.” (I don’t have trouble believing that latter point; obsessions over Dean were legendary and wide-spread at the time when they were young women.)

Peary points out that “Altman’s one interesting touch was to use a two-way mirror through which we can look back to 1955,” which is indeed a clever cinematographic technique.

Knowing that one of Altman’s first feature films was a documentary entitled The James Dean Story (1957) helps make his choice of directing this adaptation even clearer, given that — like September 30, 1955 (1977) — it serves as an interesting meta-commentary on the American public’s fascination with the enigmatic young actor. However, I’m in agreement with Peary that this movie isn’t really all that successful. While there are several “secrets” at play, two are “spoiled” nearly right away, leading us to simply wait for the moment when all the other characters will finally catch up to what we’ve known from the beginning (and the third secret, involving Cher, isn’t all that revelatory). Meanwhile, it’s not a lot of fun watching these women — each unhappy in her own way — come together to spill their guts and/or be told off by one another.

Altman fans will be curious to check this one out, but it’s not must-see viewing for everyone.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Creative direction and cinematography
  

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
In Nazi-occupied Rome, a pregnant widow (Anna Magnani) who is about to marry her lover (Francesco Grandjacquet) collaborates with a priest (Aldo Fabrizi) and her young son (Vito Annichiarico) to help hide a resistance fighter (Marcello Pagliero) whose girlfriend (Maria Michi) is dependent on a wily Nazi sympathizer (Giovanna Galletti) to provide her with drugs — but the fighters are soon discovered, and forced to confront deadly atrocities at the hands of the Nazis.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Anna Magnani Films
• Betrayal
• Italian Films
• Nazis
• Priests and Ministers
• Resistance Fighters
• Roberto Rossellini Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “first film of Italy’s postwar ‘neorealistic’ cinema” — “made with borrowed money and second-rate equipment” — is “directed with brutal frankness by Roberto Rossellini,” noting that the film’s “authenticity has as much to do with the ‘documentary’ look of the street scenes in rubble-strewn Rome as with our knowledge that the filmmakers and actors had experienced firsthand the Nazi occupation of their city.” (Indeed, filming began while Nazis were still occupying another part of the country.)

He describes the story as “set in Rome during the height of Nazi power, when [a] Gestapo leader [Harry Feist] makes a concerted effort to weed out members of the underground,” specifically “those who try to avoid detection: a kindly priest (a wonderful performance by Aldo Fabrizi)”:

… “a resistance leader [Marcello Pagliero]”:

… “a young boy [Vito Annichiarico], and the man [Francesco Grandjacquet] who is about to marry the boy’s mother (Anna Magnani).”

He points out that “the girlfriend [Maria Michi] of the resistance fighter falls under the drugs-money-lies spell of a lesbian Gestapo officer [Giovanna Galletti]”:

… “and helps set a trap that nets the Nazis both the resistance leader and the priest,” leading to a “devastating sequence” in which “the Gestapo leader, who’s much like the Bela Lugosi maniac that Hollywood typically cast in such roles, tortures the resister while forcing the priest to look on.”

Peary notes that “of course, this picture is an attack on the Nazi mentality as well as on collaborators who had no idea of the agony they caused.”

However, “it is also a tribute to those political prisoners who withstood Nazi torture stoically, the members of the resistance, those simple but quick-thinking people who risked their lives to help the underground, and the children who played an essential part in the movement when few men were left in the city.”

Peary notes that while “there are many powerful scenes,” his “favorite moment is tender, when the boy hugs his would-be stepfather before going to sleep — he is still a child.”

Quite a bit has been written and discussed about this formative Italian movie, which remains a remarkably potent film about resilience in the face of persistent evil. The movie’s most famous sequence — involving Magnani running down a street as her lover is taken away — packs a visceral punch to the gut like few other movie moments I can recall:

(Try watching it a few times and you’ll see what I mean — it’s never not heartbreaking.) Speaking of Magnani, she brings earthy zest and pragmatism to her role as a pregnant widow whose hopes for marriage are put on hold:

… while former comedic actor Fabrizi is unexpectedly poignant in a central role that allows him to portray the full complexity of a priest committed to both his religious beliefs and his political convictions. This fine film remains well worth a look.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Aldo Fabrizi as Don Pietro Pellegrini
  
• Anna Magnani as Pina
  
• Excellent use of location shooting in Rome
  
• Ubaldo Arata’s cinematography
  

Must See?
Yes, as a foreign classic.

Categories

• Foreign Gem
• Historically Relevant
• Important Director

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Movie Diva Review
• Q Network Review
• DVD Savant Review
• TCM Article

Synopsis:
While visiting a cafe, a renowned poet (Jean Marais) married to a newly pregnant wife (Marie Dea) witnesses an accident involving a drunk young poet (Edouarde Dermithe) and a Princess (Maria Casares), and is taken with them to Casares’ chateau. After being driven home by Casares’ chauffeur (Francois Perier), Orphee (Marais) soon finds himself caught up in a confusing world of secret messages and ambiguous borders between life and death.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Artists
• Death and Dying
• French Films
• Jean Cocteau Films
• Love Triangle

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “enigmatic but spellbinding version of the Orpheus-Eurydice myth by Jean Cocteau” — “derived from his first play” — presents a “deeply personal work” about a contemporary poet who, “like Cocteau… fears that while his art has brought him fame it may not bring him immortality and that young poets with different styles and themes may be the voices listened to in the future.”

Peary asserts that Cocteau “takes the experiences of the classical Orpheus — his pursuit of and cat-and-mouse game with Death, his journey into the underworld after Eurydice” and “uses them as the means by which Marais learns about death, eternity, love, his art, [and] himself” — and, as a poet capable of “surreal experiences,” he “has no restrictions on his imagination: people can come back from the dead; pass through mirrors; [and] travel through a netherworld while time stands still back home.”

Peary argues that the “film would work better if Orpheus’s love for [his] wife Eurydice (Marie Dea) were more convincing; as it is, [he doesn’t] understand why Death [Casares], who loves Orpheus, would send him back to his wife, especially since he desires Death more.”

(To me, this seems like a classic instance of all characters in the play — including Death herself — acknowledging The Poet’s genius and doing what they can to ensure his fame, work, and genetics, are allowed to flourish.)

Peary concludes his review by pointing out that “Nicolas Hayer’s cinematography is excellent, the special effects are magical, the underground sets are haunting, and the dynamic Cesares gives that fellow who played Death in The Seventh Seal a run for his money.”

While I appreciate Cocteau’s artistic vision — like Peary, I admire the cinematography, sets, effects, and dynamic Casares’ performance — I’m not a personal fan of this film. Tales of self-absorbed (male) artists who believe their creative output takes precedence over all else, and who treat their loyal spouses terribly, are exactly not my cup of tea — so for me, this movie remains of historical curiosity and little more. However, film fanatics will surely want to check it out once.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Maria Casares as the Princess
  
• Creative low-tech special effects
  
  
• Nicolas Hayer’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
Yes, once, for its historical relevance.

Categories

• Historically Relevant

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Criterion Collection Essay
• NY Times Original Review
• Q Network Review
• TCM Article
• TV Guide Review

Synopsis:
A poverty-stricken pensioner (Carlo Battisti) living with his beloved dog Flike (Napoleone) seeks helps from a pregnant young maid (Maria Pia Casilio) in preventing eviction by his unfeeling landlady (Lina Gennari) — but Maria has problems of her own, and none of Umberto D. (Battisti’s) longtime friends seem willing or able to help him out financially.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Elderly People
• Italian Films
• Pets
• Survival
• Vittorio De Sica Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that in this “sad but beautiful postwar social drama” — focusing “on an individual member of the dispossessed aged” — director Vittorio De Sica wisely doesn’t “make his hero into a sweet grandfather type whom you automatically love and feel sorry for,” instead showing “his gruff exterior and stubbornness” — though we also see “his loving gestures towards his dog and his concern for the lovely unmarried young maid (Maria Pia Casilio), who is pregnant and will soon be cast into the street by the landlady.”

Peary points out that this “realistic film has many deeply moving sequences — you won’t forget Umberto sitting in his room, which has been virtually destroyed because the landlady is having it converted into a parlor”:

… “or Umberto searching for his dog at the pound”:

… “or the maid silently going through her morning routine while obviously thinking of her unhappy future.”

An ongoing theme of the film is that Umberto is “too proud to ask his well-off acquaintances for a needed loan (and they never offer it)”:

… “or join the growing number of beggars in the city” — though he does attempt to sell as many of his items as possible to collect money for his back rent.

However, “Umberto feels increasingly lost and tired, and would commit suicide if he didn’t worry about the welfare of [his] dog.”

Umberto D. is an emotionally challenging film to watch, especially given how strongly its central issues continue to resonate today — we’re not a whole lot closer to providing any kind of security to those living on the margins of survival. As usual, it’s non-governmental organizations that step up to provide a safety net, as when Umberto goes to a private Catholic hospital to recover from tonsillitis and receives a week of care, shelter, and steady food:

Meanwhile, the unfeeling nature of the ever-present bourgeoise is epitomized by Umberto’s self-absorbed landlady, who bears a passing resemblance to Lana Turner:

This neo-realistic classic (often considered the final film of the “movement”) remains well worth a look by all film fanatics — who should nonetheless be prepared to shed some well-deserved tears, especially during the moments leading up to the “glorious final shot, which allows Umberto D., Flike, and us at least a moment of relief.”

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

• Carlo Battisti as Umberto D.
  
• Maria Pia Casilio as Maria
  
• Fine use of location shooting in Rome
  
• G.R. Aldo’s cinematography
  
  

Must See?
Yes, as a foreign classic.

Categories

• Foreign Gem
• Genuine Classic

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Q Network Review
• Criterion Collections Essay (Peter Becker)
• Criterion Collection: Seeing Clearly Through Tears