Swamp Women (1955)

Swamp Women (1955)

“This stinkin’ swamp water stinks!”

Synopsis:
An undercover policewoman (Carole Mathews) joins a gang of female cons — Vera (Beverly Garland), Josie (Marie Windsor), and Billie (Jil Jarmyn) — as they search the Louisiana bayou for stolen diamonds.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Deep South
  • Ex-Cons
  • Marie Windsor Films
  • Roger Corman Films
  • Strong Females
  • Undercover Cops and Agents

Review:
Roger Corman’s first directorial effort features many of his worst signature elements: interminable stock footage filler, brawling females, and an illogical, meandering script. Even at 67 minutes, it goes on for far too long, and fails to hold interest. One of its few mildly redeeming qualities is statuesque Marie Windsor, who is always fun to watch. On the other hand, as noted by Scott Ashlin (see his “1000 Misspent Hours Review”), it’s likely that Swamp Women was “a big hit with San Francisco’s lesbian underground at the time of its release”, due to the fact that “the women of the title divide neatly into a femme pair… and a butch pair” — with the ostensible male lead (Touch Connors) eventually fading into the background.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Marie Windsor as Josie
  • The women conveniently changing their prison-issue jeans into sexy short-shorts
  • The artistic, though completely unrelated, opening titles

Must See?
No, though film fanatics may be curious to see Corman’s first directorial effort.

Links:

Terror of Tiny Town, The (1938)

Terror of Tiny Town, The (1938)

“Here comes Buck Lawson — hit leather!”

Synopsis:
The son (Billy Curtis) of a rancher (John T. Bambury) falls in love with the niece (Yvonne Moray) of his father’s enemy, “Uncle Jim” (Billy Platt). When Jim is shot, Buck (Curtis) is the suspect — but the real killer (‘Little Billy’ Rhodes) is on the loose.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Dwarfs and Little People
  • Falsely Accused
  • Feuds
  • Musicals
  • Ranchers
  • Westerns

Response to Peary’s Review:
As Peary notes, this infamous, decidedly un-p.c. “novelty film” draws upon “every ‘B’ western convention and cliche around”. I disagree with Peary, however, that it’s “no worse than a lot of ‘B’ westerns of the period”: actually, it is, simply because the majority of the all-dwarf cast — who appear to be in the movie because of their size, not for any other reason — are irredeemably bad actors. Yvonne Moray as the central love interest is particularly awful; at a certain point, when she hears that Buck is in trouble, she literally pauses for a second or two before meekly stating (without emotion), “Buck! Oh, Buck!” The sole humor comes from the novelty of the film’s concept, which is mildly amusing at first (yes, it’s funny to see cowboys riding ponies instead of horses, and walking right under saloon doors), but quickly wears thin. On the other hand, this is a movie no hardcore film fanatic can go without sitting through at least once, simply due to its notoriety.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • A few mildly amusing puns
  • Groaningly bad acting and dialogue
  • A bizarre scene in which a giggling bartender drowns himself in beer

Must See?
Yes, simply for its cult status.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links:

Crimes of the Heart (1986)

Crimes of the Heart (1986)

“I didn’t like his stinkin’ looks.”

Synopsis:
Three grown sisters — Meg (Jessica Lange), Lenny (Diane Keaton), and Babe (Sissy Spacek) — reunite in their Southern childhood home when Babe is accused of shooting her husband (Beeson Carroll).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Deep South
  • Diane Keaton Films
  • Homecoming
  • Jessica Lange Films
  • Play Adaptations
  • Siblings
  • Sissy Spacek Films

Review:
Crimes of the Heart — directed by Bruce Beresford and starring a triumvirate of Oscar-winning actresses — is, unfortunately, a disappointment. Pulitzer Prize winner Beth Henley adapted her monologue-saturated, flashback-heavy play for the screen, but her attempts to open up the stage-bound settings do little to mask the fact that her characters are basically talking at each other the entire time. And Henley’s unique strain of Southern gothic humor — Spacek’s overt lack of guilt for shooting her husband; Keaton’s “shrunken ovary”; their mother’s odd “double suicide” — ultimately doesn’t work within the context of a realistic film.

With that said, both Spacek and Lange give wonderful performances as damaged sisters coping in their own dysfunctional ways. Keaton, unfortunately, fares much worse, coming across — as noted by Paul Attanasio of the Washington Post — as “a parody of herself, all nervous gestures, daffy glances and Annie Hall tics.” Sam Shepard and Tess Harper (the latter nominated for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar) are fine in minor roles, but don’t have enough screentime to make much of an impression. And, in the end, no amount of worthy acting can redeem what is essentially a flawed film.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Sissy Spacek as Babe
  • Jessica Lange as Meg
  • The hilarious moment when we first discover the notorious truth behind the girls’ mother’s suicide

Must See?
No. Despite its Oscar-nominated performances, this isn’t must-see viewing.

Links:

Bugsy Malone (1976)

Bugsy Malone (1976)

“Not the sarsaparilla racket!”

Synopsis:
During a rival gang war in Depression-era Chicago, Bugsy Malone (Scott Baio) is recruited by mob boss “Fat Sam” (John Cassisi).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Alan Parker Films
  • Depression Era
  • Gangsters
  • Jodie Foster Films
  • Musicals
  • Rivalry
  • Satires and Spoofs

Response to Peary’s Review:
It’s easy to understand why, as noted by Peary, “opinion is sharply divided” on this “comical Depression Era gangster musical”, populated solely by kids — it’s a truly bizarre venture which, unfortunately, I don’t think quite works. Writer/director Alan Parker replaces bullets with cream pies (a clever twist), but is otherwise inconsistent in his use of child actors: if they’re meant to be “just kids”, then why does pre-pubescent crime boss Dandy Dan (Martin Lev) wear a pencil-thin mustache? Although I understand Parker’s satirical point that gangsters often act in a child-like fashion, these kids aren’t childlike — they’re mini-adults! The production values are fine, but most of the performances are unimpressive (Jodie Foster is a notable exception), and the majority of the songs are unmemorable. Nonetheless, this film is beloved by many — primarily those who fondly remember watching it as children themselves; and, as a kids’ film, perhaps it works.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Jodie Foster as Tallulah
  • John Cassisi as “Fat Sam”
  • Foster singing “My Name is Tallulah”
  • The silly yet amusing use of cream pies as “deadly” weapons

Must See?
No, but it’s recommended for its historical notoriety, for Foster’s (too brief) performance, and as a cult film for adults who remember watching it as kids.

Links:

Man Who Came to Dinner, The (1942)

Man Who Came to Dinner, The (1942)

“Is there a man in the world who suffers as I do from the gross inadequacies of the human race?”

Synopsis:
After slipping on ice outside the home of an upper crust Ohio couple (Billie Burke and Grant Mitchell), curmudgeonly literary critic Sheridan Whiteside (Monty Woolley) commandeers their house as a recovery station. Meanwhile, his secretary (Bette Davis) falls in love with a local newspaperman (Richard Travis), and Whiteside — worried about losing his loyal employee to marriage — calls on the help of his seductive actress-friend (Ann Sheridan) to interfere.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ann Sheridan Films
  • Bette Davis Films
  • Comedy
  • Monty Woolley Films
  • Play Adaptation
  • Small Town America

Review:
Monty Woolley (a.k.a. “The Beard”) gave his signature performance in this adaptation of Moss Hart and George S. Kaufman’s madcap ensemble play, co-starring a subdued Bette Davis (who had originally hoped to perform opposite John Barrymore), and a deliciously self-absorbed Ann Sheridan. Unfortunately, the script has dated over the years, with too many references to contemporary celebrities, and an annoying cameo appearance by Jimmy Durante (who inexplicably starts playing the piano and singing, “Did you ever have the feeling that you wanted to go, and still have the feeling that you wanted to stay?”). Most egregiously, however, it features a lead protagonist who’s simply too nasty for comfort: not only is Whiteside litigation-happy (he immediately threatens to sue his gracious guests for $150,000 dollars), but he’s constantly making mean-spirited comments (“My great-aunt Jennifer ate a whole box of candy every day of her life; she lived to be 102, and when she had been dead three days, she looked better than you do now”). Unlike Noel Coward’s ruthless publisher in The Scoundrel (1935) — who eventually gets his come-uppance — Whiteside is, inexplicably, beloved by many; ultimately, it’s hard to root for someone so irredeemably obnoxious.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Monty Woolley in his most famous curmudgeonly role
  • Ann Sheridan’s over-the-top performance as the narcissistic Lorraine Sheldon
  • Mary Wickes in her screen debut as Nurse Preen

Must See?
No, though it’s recommended simply to see Woolley in his most definitive role.

Links:

Stolen Kisses (1968)

Stolen Kisses (1968)

“To make love is a way of compensating for death, to prove that you exist.”

Synopsis:
Newly discharged from the army, Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Leaud) heads to the home of his would-be sweetheart (Claude Jade), finds work as a private investigator, and falls for an older woman (Delphine Seyrig).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Delphine Seyrig Films
  • Detectives and Private Eyes
  • Francois Truffaut Films
  • French Films
  • Jean-Pierre Léaud Films
  • Obsessive Love
  • Romantic Comedy

Response to Peary’s Review:
Truffaut’s first full-length sequel to The 400 Blows was this “witty, sad, insightful meditation” on subjects as diverse as “passion, courtship, dishonesty, sex, conquest, and commitment”. As Peary notes, there are “countless wonderful moments” throughout the film, which “[relies] heavily on improvisation”, and showcases the theme (one of Truffaut’s favorites) that when one person is ready for love and commitment, the other usually isn’t. Unlike in the later Antoine Doinel films, Doinel’s youthful flitting from one bizarre job to the next — and one obsessive love to the next — is amusing rather than sad, and seems right-on. His work as an undercover agent (what an ideal job!) fulfills the longing most film fanatics have to slip into someone else’s life unnoticed, and his attraction to an “older woman” (Seyrig) rings true as well. The film ends on a surprisingly satisfying note, making one long to know what happens next; fortunately, one can satisfy this itch immediately by watching Bed and Board (1970).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • An amusing look at the fickleness of desire
  • Delphine Seyrig as Antoine’s “exceptional” love interest
  • Effective use of Paris streets
    Stolen Kisses Paris
  • The clever, seemingly improvised script

Must See?
Yes, as a fine follow-up to The 400 Blows.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem
  • Important Director

Links:

What Have I Done to Deserve This? (1984)

What Have I Done to Deserve This? (1984)

“Why did I ever marry? What a fool I was.”

Synopsis:
An overworked housewife (Carmen Maura) with an abusive husband (Angel de Andres Lopez), a wacky mother-in-law (Chus Lampreave), and two troubled sons (one a hustler, the other a drug dealer) relies on No-Doz and her prostitute-friend (Veronica Forque) to get by.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Black Comedy
  • Family Problems
  • Housewives
  • Spanish Films

Review:
This early film by Spanish director Pedro Almodovar is an excellent introduction to his signature style: bizarre situations are accepted as commonplace, sex is on everyone’s minds, women are put-upon by their loutish partners, and female camaraderie is the linchpin of survival. Indeed, the similarities between this and Almodovar’s most recent film, Volver (2006), are too obvious not to notice; watch them back to back and you’ll find that he’s continuing to explore (and exploit) the issues he feels most strongly about. One must be prepared to suspend all judgment and belief when watching What Have I Done…? In what is likely the film’s most jaw-dropping sequence, Gloria blithely gives her son away to a pedophilic dentist in exchange for the bill.

What else can she do, when her husband refuses to let her work but won’t give her money? Indeed, as in Volver, Almodovar has the ultimate respect for female survival: a bizarre subplot about an abused young girl with telekinetic powers serves as a cross-generational reminder that endurance takes many forms. Above all else, however, Almodovar’s films should be enjoyed for the perversity of the characters, the colorful sets, and the seemingly improvised scripts. It’s impossible to predict what will happen next, so simply sit back and enjoy the surreal ride.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Carmen Maura as Gloria
  • Veronica Forque as Cristal
  • Chus Lampreave as Abuela
  • Abuela advising her grandson and his friend to “visit Granada”
  • Gloria and Cristal watching an exhibitionist john as he strips
  • A bizarre subplot involving a neighbor’s “special” daughter

Must See?
Yes. This early Almodovar film is one of his wackiest, and a good introduction to his work.

Categories

  • Important Director

Links:

Group, The (1966)

Group, The (1966)

“Sacrifice is dated, mother. You don’t reform a man; he just drags you down.”

Synopsis:
In the 1930s, eight Vassar graduates — Lakey (Candice Bergen), Dottie (Joan Hackett), Priss (Elizabeth Hartman), Polly (Shirley Knight), Kay (Joanna Pettet), Pokey (Mary-Robin Redd), Libby (Jessica Walter), and Helena (Kathleen Widdoes) — search for love and happiness while keeping abreast of each others’ lives.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Candice Bergen Films
  • Elizabeth Hartman Films
  • Ensemble Films
  • Friendship
  • Jessica Walter Films
  • Joan Hackett Films
  • Shirley Knight Films
  • Sidney Lumet Films

Review:
Sidney Lumet’s adaptation of Mary McCarthy’s best-selling novel starts out strong: through nifty editing (while an all-female chorus chants in the background), we’re introduced to each of the key players, as they gather together for the low-key wedding of their ostensible “leader”, Kay. From there, we follow Dottie (played by the marvelous Joan Hackett) as she explores sex for the first time with a notorious womanizer (Richard Mulligan), but quickly realizes that her dreams for a wild love affair in New York won’t come true. Unfortunately, from this point forward, Dottie becomes largely a persona non gratis, as she heads to Arizona to lick her wounds, and is barely seen again.

As with every ensemble film, some vignettes in The Group are inevitably more compelling than others; we find ourselves wishing to know more about certain characters — and much less about others. Shirley Knight turns in a nuanced, compassionate performance as the do-gooding Polly, but her travails (which include an affair with a psycho-analyzed communist, and a mentally ill father) don’t do her justice. Elizabeth Hartman as Priss is equally compelling, and we definitely wish her character had more screentime. Libby — an amusingly clueless character in the book — is, unfortunately, portrayed with annoying smugness by Jessica Walters, and is easily the most irritating of “the group”. Kay’s failing marriage to an alcoholic philanderer (Larry Hagman, perfectly cast, but lacking nuance) is the primary thread of the story, but her character’s gradual transformation is less than convincing.

Others in the group barely register at all. Lakey (Bergen in her film debut) is only on-screen for a few minutes at best, and her “surprise revelation” near the end of the movie goes absolutely nowhere. Pokey provides comic relief and little else, while Helena is merely the film’s convenient narrator. Even so, the film is at least 1/2 hour too long. While screenwriter Sidney Buchman tries his best to do justice to all the subplots in the story, eight protagonists is — ultimately — too many.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Joan Hackett as Dottie
  • Elizabeth Hartman as Priss
  • Shirley Knight as Polly

Must See?
No. While it starts out strong, this melodramatic ensemble tale doesn’t live up to its promise. Listed as a Cult Movie in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Bed and Board (1970)

Bed and Board (1970)

“You have to be patient! All men are children.”

Synopsis:
Inveterate nonconformist Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Leaud) settles into married life with Christine (Claude Jade), and becomes a father. But when he finds himself attracted to a Japanese woman (Mademoiselle Hiroko) he meets at work, his marriage is in jeopardy.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Francois Truffaut Films
  • French Films
  • Infidelity
  • Jean-Pierre Léaud Films
  • Marital Problems

Response to Peary’s Review:
The fourth installment in Truffaut’s Antoine Doinel series is, as Peary notes, “very amusing, with a lot of humor” — but also surprisingly melancholy. Claude Jade (playing Doinel’s wife, Christine) finally emerges as a complex character in this film — we believe in her character’s growth from fun-loving teenager to loyal housewife and mother, and feel for her when Doinel knowingly harms their relationship. Because Truffaut chooses to frame Doinel’s affair in a humorous light, it’s genuinely amusing to watch (there are several hilarious moments involving the inscrutable Mademoiselle Hiroko); but this approach fails to acknowledge the seriousness of Doinel’s lapse in judgment. Bed and Board is a satisfying, enjoyable film in many ways, but frustrating as well, with the ending too neatly a figment of Truffaut’s wishful thinking about women and their tolerance for immature men.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Claude Jade’s appealing performance as Christine
  • Nestor Almendros’ cinematography
  • Several amusing ongoing gags — such as the strange man who intrigues his neighbors until they discover his true identity on T.V. one night
  • Antoine’s clever plan to remind Christine’s client to pay for her daughter’s violin lesson
  • A disturbing yet oddly lighthearted look at a new marriage on the rocks
  • Christine’s wordless response when she finds out that Antoine is having an affair
  • Antoine Duhamel’s score

Must See?
Yes, as another enjoyable episode in the “must see” Antoine Doinel series.

Categories

  • Foreign Gem
  • Important Director

Links:

Love on the Run (1979)

Love on the Run (1979)

“Don’t forget, it’s fiction — a bit autobiographical, but fiction.”

Synopsis:
30-year-old Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Leaud) quarrels with his girlfriend (Dorothee), goes through an amicable divorce with his wife (Claude Jade), and reminisces with his first love (Marie-France Pisier).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Flashback Films
  • Francois Truffaut Films
  • French Films
  • Jean-Pierre Léaud Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
The final installment in Truffaut’s “Antoine Doinel” saga is an unfortunate disappointment. The majority of the movie consists of flashbacks to the previous four films (The 400 Blows, “Antoine and Colette” in Love at Twenty, Stolen Kisses, and Bed and Board), offering little that’s new or insightful about Doinel, and occasionally misusing footage in a way that’s guaranteed to annoy purists. Given that eight years had passed since the latest installment in the series, it’s easy to imagine that audiences at the time were eager to relive some of their favorite Doinel scenes; but for modern viewers — who will likely watch the films in a row — it’s simply redundant.

Of the original scenes in the movie, none stand out as particularly humorous or insightful; we get the sense that Doinel hasn’t moved far beyond his limitations with both women and work, but at this point it’s difficult to have much patience for his immaturity. It’s also annoying to watch Claude Jade (Doinel’s wife) continue her long-suffering tolerance for her philandering husband; her patience and good will is truly inhuman, and clearly wishful thinking on Truffaut’s part. Ultimately, as Peary notes, Love on the Run “doesn’t do one of cinema’s great characters justice”, and is only “minor Truffaut”.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • An affectionate — if unsatisfying — homage to Truffaut’s leading character, Antoine Doinel

Must See?
No, but most film fanatics will likely be curious to watch it once, simply to complete the “must see” Antoine Doinel series.

Links: