Will Penny (1967)

Will Penny (1967)

Comments 5 comments

“Nobody stops on Flat Iron Range.”

Synopsis:
An aging cowhand (Charlton Heston) shot by a vengeful, deranged preacher (Donald Pleasence) becomes romantically involved with a woman (Joan Hackett) who is living illegally with her son (Jon Francis) in a lineman’s shack.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ben Johnson Films
  • Bruce Dern Films
  • Charlton Heston Films
  • Donald Pleasence Films
  • Joan Hackett Films
  • Westerns

Review:
Writer/director Tom Gries’ “one hit wonder” was this fine western which Heston referred to as his personal favorite among his own roles — and his performance is indeed among his best. Gries nicely establishes a gritty western milieu where work must be found and negotiated on a day to day basis:

… and tussling over the body of an elk could very well turn into a life-or-death situation, especially when dealing with unhinged individuals on the range, such as Pleasence and his daughter and three sons (Bruce Dern, Gene Rutherford, and Matt Clark).

Heston’s illiterate, hardworking Will Penny is a pragmatic and overall decent guy, as evidenced by his fair and humane treatment of Hackett and her son when he finds them camping out unlawfully on property he’s supposed to be safeguarding. The relationship he develops with them — and how this changes him (or not) — serves as the heart of the film:

… with plenty of tension and drama interspersed along the way. This film remains worthy one-time viewing.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Charlton Heston as Will Penny
  • Joan Hackett as Catherine Allen
  • Donald Pleasence as Preacher Quint
  • Lucien Ballard’s cinematography

Must See?
Yes, as a fine western, and for Heston’s performance.

Categories

  • Good Show
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

I Am Curious (Yellow) (1967)

I Am Curious (Yellow) (1967)

Comments 0 Comment

“You destroy everything with chatter and questions!”

Synopsis:
A politically curious drama student (Lena Nyman) making a film for a director (Vilgot Sjöman) gets romantically involved with a salesman (Börje Ahlstedt) who has a partner and child on the side.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Movie Directors
  • Scandinavian Films
  • Sexuality
  • Strong Females

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary points out that this “important film breaking down U.S. censorship rulings between 1969 and 1972” contains a “lengthy scene containing full frontal nudity of both the” female and male leads, in addition to other seemingly-natural simulated sexual interactions — all of which are “incorporated into a political comedy,” thus making it “a rare legitimate film that contains explicit sex as just an element of the story.” As Peary writes, “Nyman plays herself, the actress who’d starred in Sjöman’s 491 (1964). She and director-writer Sjöman have become lovers”:

… and “now she is starring in his new film as the daughter of a political sellout (he’d fought with the Republicans in Spain for a couple of weeks before returning home).”

Peary notes that Nyman “considers herself a nonviolent radical and, in a very funny [extended] scene, asks people on the street about class structure and sexual equality in Sweden,” in addition to spending “time protesting U.S. involvement in Vietnam.”

Soon “she has an intense affair with car salesman Ahlstedt,” not realizing “he lives with another woman and their child.”

Another notable sequence — very much of its time — involves Nyman heading off to a spiritual retreat, which is interrupted when Ahlstedt shows up.

Peary argues that while this film is “overlong,” it’s “worthwhile” and “has substance.” However, though the film is certainly startling for what Sjöman was willing to put forth at the time, the experimental storyline itself hasn’t aged particularly well; these days, viewers will likely simply be “curious” to check it out once given its historical notoriety.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Lena Nyman as Lena

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

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links:

Billion Dollar Brain (1967)

Billion Dollar Brain (1967)

Comments 0 Comment

“Some games are more dangerous than others.”

Synopsis:
Special agent Harry Palmer (Michael Caine) is pulled by his boss (Guy Doleman) into another case, this one involving an old friend (Karl Malden) and his mistress (Françoise Dorléac) in Finland, and an eager Texas tycoon (Ed Begley) working to eradicate Communism across the globe.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cold War
  • Ed Begley Sr. Films
  • Karl Malden Films
  • Ken Russell Films
  • Michael Caine Films
  • Spies

Review:
Ken Russell’s follow-up to his (non-GFTFF-listed) debut film French Dressing (1964) was this big-budget entry in Harry Saltzman’s Harry Palmer trilogy, based once again on a novel by Len Deighton. While Russell struggled and felt constrained under Saltzman’s leadership, the resulting film nonetheless shows his unique directorial style at play, to compelling effect.

The Cold War storyline is typically wild, sending Palmer to the coldest reaches of Finland, over to Texas, and back again to Latvia through cinematic feats of magic.

There are double crossings, seductions, and an encounter with a beloved character from Funeral in Berlin, Oskar Homolka’s Colonel Stok.

Malden is an appropriately slimy shyster, well-paired with beautiful but deceptive Dorléac.

It’s a good thing Palmer keeps his wits about him at all times.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Michael Caine as Harry Palmer
  • Françoise Dorléac as Anya
  • Karl Malden as Leo Newbegin
  • Ed Begley as General Midwinter
  • Billy Williams’ cinematography

  • Fine production design

  • Creative opening credits
  • Richard Rodney Bennett’s score

Must See?
Yes. While its value is debated, I consider this a fine and worthy entry in the Harry Palmer trilogy – and an auspicious post-debut for Russell.

Categories

  • Good Show
  • Important Director

Links:

Beach Red (1967)

Beach Red (1967)

Comments 1 comment

“Some of us put up a better front than others, but underneath, all of us were god-awful scared.”

Synopsis:
During an invasion of a Japanese-held island during World War II, a Marine captain (Cornel Wilde) oversees his group of men — including death-hungry Gunnery Sergeant Honeywell (Rip Torn) and a pair of friendly young soldiers (Burr DeBenning and Patrick Wolfe) — while they and their Japanese counterparts reflect on their lives back home.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cornel Wilde Films
  • Rip Torn Films
  • Soldiers
  • World War Ii Films

Review:
Director/producer/writer/star Cornel Wilde followed up The Naked Prey (1966) with this differently unique adventure film, an adaptation of a 1945 novella by Peter Bowman set during World War II. The artistic opening credits –depicting paintings and a voice-over song by Wilde’s real-life wife, Jean Wallace — shift directly into action on a boat (here’s cigar-chomping Rip Torn):

… as scared Marines are preparing to land on and invade an unnamed Japanese-held Pacific island. Well over the first half-hour of the film shows us the non-stop living nightmare of invasion, comparable to that shown in Saving Private Ryan (1998) (note also that we see the first cinematic depiction of live filming during battle here):

… complete with limbs being shot off:

… and no easy decisions, ever.

Meanwhile, we are made privy to thoughts and memories of various characters throughout the film — not just Wilde but random men, both American and Japanese, with no subtitles provided for the latter (though we can easily see what’s on their hearts and minds, thus very effectively humanizing them in the midst of sheer bloody hell).


We’re shown a refreshingly unvarnished vision of the impact of war on men, including vomiting, the runs, fear, humor, paralysis, insecurity, anger, disgust, and shame. Comic “relief” of a sort comes primarily from DeBenning, who happily eats can after can of nasty rationed food:

… and reminisces about various drunken sexual escapades he enjoyed before the war.

We also see Jaime Sanchez’s Colombo thinking about various ways to win a medal and/or get sent home safely.

While critical opinions on this film seem mixed, I’m impressed by Wilde’s creative moxie; as he said in a 1970 interview with “Films and Filming”:

I think that a cut from one scene to another should have an impact, should carry you from a certain degree of involvement and excitement to something else without letting you down . . . I really think that a good deal of happenstance editing still goes on, and part of my style is that I like to feel there is a reason and impact to every frame of film. Nothing should be wasted.

This is exactly what we see playing out. While Beach Red isn’t a movie I would necessarily choose to revisit, it’s well worth one-time viewing.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • The artistic opening credits
  • The terrifying early invasion sequence
  • Creative direction, editing, and inclusion of memory-flashbacks
  • Refreshing humanization of the Japanese

Must See?
Yes, as a uniquely told wartime flick.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

Mouchette (1967)

Mouchette (1967)

Comments 1 comment

“I love the dead; I understand them.”

Synopsis:
A teenager (Nadine Nortier) in rural France endures a life of abuse, ridicule, and death all around her.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Coming of Age
  • French Films
  • Living Nightmare
  • Robert Bresson Films

Review:
Robert Bresson’s eight feature-length film — following (among other titles) the GFTFF-listed Les Dames du Bois de Boulogne (1945), Diary of a Country Priest (1951), Pickpocket (1959), and Au Hasard, Balthazar (1966) — was this adaptation of Georges Bernanos’ 1937 novel of the same name. As indicated in my synopsis above, with just one notable, brief exception during a bumper car ride at a fair:

… there is nothing but pure misery on display here, made worse — for me, anyway — through Bresson’s intentionally stylized method of having his non-actors simply move through their scenes like automatons. Nortier (who never made another movie) does still manage to tug at our heartstrings, making it all the more distressing to watch her suffering nearly endless indignities and abuses, such as having her head shoved into a piano at school when she doesn’t get a chorus note just right:

… being teased and taunted by her classmates:

… caretaking for her infant brother while tending to her mortally ill mother:

… and being coerced into lying on behalf of (then being assaulted by) an alcoholic, epileptic poacher.

While this remains among Bresson’s most acclaimed films, and is beloved by many — including Ingmar Bergman and Andrei Tarkovsky — I’m not among this crowd of admirers.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Stark cinematography

Must See?
No. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

China is Near (1967)

China is Near (1967)

Comments 0 Comment

“The things you believe in — which I also believe in — will never become true.”

Synopsis:
In an upper class Italian family, middle-aged Countess Elena (Elda Tattoli) has an affair with a lower-class man named Carlo (Paolo Graziosi), while Vittorio (Glauco Mauri) — in love with his young secretary Giovanna (Daniela Surina) — seeks a shift from teaching to a political career despite having no such skills, and young Camillo (Pierluigi Aprà) takes a hard-line approach to Socialist politics and sex.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Black Comedy
  • Class Relations
  • Cross-Class Romance
  • Italian Films
  • Marco Bellocchio Films
  • Political Corruption
  • Siblings

Review:
After wowing the cinematic world with his debut film Fists in the Pocket (1965), Italian director Marco Bellocchio followed up with this political satire also focusing on grown siblings, but with much more intentional digs at structures, class, religion, and corruption.

Because I wasn’t particularly taken with this film, I browsed around on IMDb to see what others thoughts, and saw this informative review by someone with a different opinion.

This playfully weird, dark satire of, well, everything from over-serious young Marxists, to the Church, to class climbing, to family, to marriage, to abortion to political ambition, to wimpy socialists who don’t really believe in anything except ‘success’ entertained me in a way Bellocchio’s much better known and more highly praised Fist In His Pocket never quite did.

As with that earlier film, this is a very dark comedy, where everyone’s morals, beliefs and ethics are paper thin and no one is worthy of much admiration. The young Bellocchio had quite a bleak view of human nature, and the shallow, manipulative way we use each other, our sexuality and our emotions. But here, like a Paddy Chayefsky film on acid, we laugh at the darkness at the same time we shudder.

I appreciated this assessment of what one might get out of it (and why) — though I honestly found it challenging to remain focused on the (intentionally chaotic) storyline; and given that we really don’t like or admire anyone, there is very little to hold onto.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Tonino Delli Colli’s cinematography

Must See?
No, though of course Bellocchio fans will definitely want to check it out.

Links:

Born Losers, The (1967)

Born Losers, The (1967)

Comments 0 Comment

“If we allowed citizens to take the law into their own hands, our streets would become jungles — armed jungles.”

Synopsis:
A Green Beret veteran (Tom Laughlin) joins forces with a young rider (Elizabeth James) in fighting against a vicious motorcycle gang.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Gangs
  • Jane Russell Films
  • Motorcyclists
  • Tom Laughlin Films
  • Veterans
  • Vigilantes

Review:
Shot over a period of three weeks, this mostly self-financed film was Tom Laughlin’s cinematic debut for the character of Billy Jack, who he would resurrect in four more films: Billy Jack (1971), The Trial of Billy Jack (1974), Billy Jack Goes to Washington (1977) and The Return of Billy Jack (1986) (not listed in GFTFF). The screenplay — “based on a real incident in 1964 when members of the Hell’s Angels motorcycle gang were arrested for raping five girls in Monterey, California” — was written by co-star Elizabeth James, and made specifically to capitalize on the motorcycle gang movie trend.

However, the film also very much wants to be a western of sorts, as evidenced by a variety of iconic settings (open landscapes, bars, town centers); villains versus Laughlin’s good-guy (a “sheriff”); Laughlin’s cowboy hat and laconic nature (until he’s pushed to action); and motorcycles serving in place of horses. (I got specific vibes of Peckinpah’s Ride the High Country [1962] due to James’s pixie haircut a la Mariette Hartley.)

But the most direct cinematic reference is the strategic poster of rebellious James Dean, which provides the backdrop for later exploitative confrontation scenes.

James is super cute and sexy in her white bikini, glasses, boots, and head scarf — though the female rider in me (when I rode, I wore a full-on armored suit) was screaming at her internally for not wearing more protective gear of all kinds on the open road…

There’s not much else to say about this film other than to be fully prepared for vile characters committing gross acts of violence and intimidation, repeatedly.

However, with Billy Jack on the horizon, rest assured justice of some kind will be served. Watch for Jane Russell in a cameo role as the mother of an impacted girl; apparently she got upset enough at Laughlin that she channeled this into her scene of anger at authority figures, and it shows.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Fine location shooting across California

Must See?
No, though you’ll likely enjoy it if this is your cup of tea.

Links:

Stranger, The (1967)

Stranger, The (1967)

Comments 1 comment

“I’m not quite sure what to say; it doesn’t seem to matter very much to me.”

Synopsis:
Shortly after attending the funeral of his mother, a French clerk (Marcello Mastroianni) in 1930s Algeria befriends a shady neighbor (Georges Géret) and becomes inextricably involved in a life-altering crime.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Courtroom Drama
  • Italian Films
  • Luchino Visconti Films
  • Marcello Mastroianni Films
  • Morality Police

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary asserts that Luchino Visconti’s “adaptation of Albert Camus’s existential novel” is “reasonably well made but philosophically shallow.” He argues (and I agree, though not all do) that “Mastroianni is well cast as an alienated man whose great guilt — over his indifference as well as the murder he committed — cannot be decreased because to him God doesn’t exist and the hypocritical men who judge him cannot forgive an atheist anything.”

Peary writes that while Meursault (Mastroianni) “does have feelings and kindness,” “his contempt for the world and his meaningless existence serves to anesthetize his emotions almost entirely” — to the point where taking lethal action on the beach could be seen as “almost a positive act!” given that “he has finally moved out of passivity” (no, but I understand Peary’s point).

Peary adds (somewhat randomly) that “scenes with [a] scabrous old man and his scabrous dog are memorable.”

I don’t necessarily agree with Peary that this adaptation is “philosophically shallow.” While the film can’t — and doesn’t really — get into the novel’s meaty themes of the irrationality of the universe, the meaningless of human life, and the importance of the physical world, we are nonetheless presented with a sufficiently complicated and complex scenario: should a man be judged based on some of his perceived character flaws, such as not showing overt emotions at his mother’s funeral (how dare he smoke a cigarette!):

… going out with his girlfriend (Anna Karina) — who he admits he doesn’t love — the next day:

… befriending and staying loyal to a pimp:

… and not believing in God; and/or could (should) these very actions and attitudes easily be interpreted differently? And even more importantly, should they even matter? For what it’s worth, as pointed out by Meursault’s defense lawyer (Bernard Blier, who co-starred with Mastroianni in 1963’s The Organizer):

… Meursault was actually showing responsibility for his mother by sending her to a facility where she could socialize and receive sufficient care. Regarding his affect and actions at the funeral, people react very differently to grief; it’s incredibly dangerous to judge people based on how they look during a time of stress. Meanwhile, we see Meursault being friendly with the (socially unacceptable) “scabrous man” — and his friendship with the criminal could be seen as simply refusing to judge others for their lifestyle (by which I do NOT mean to condone or justify this man’s hideous treatment of a woman). While we do feel sad for Karina that Meursault won’t tell her he loves her, he is at least relentlessly honest with her — as he is about his lack of faith. This film remains worthy one-time viewing as an interesting adaptation of a morally challenging novel — though I would be curious to see an updated version in which colonial/racial tensions and injustices are given fair due.

Note: The Stranger has an unusual release history which bears noting. According to J. Hoberman’s 2017 review in The New York Times: “It has long been without an American distributor and, owing to complicated rights issues, was never released here on DVD… The movie was eagerly anticipated but suspiciously received when it opened in New York in December 1967.”

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Marcello Mastroianni as Meursault
  • Anna Karina as Marie
  • Giuseppe Rotunno’s cinematography
  • Excellent use of naturalistic outdoor settings

  • Mario Garbuglia’s production design

Must See?
Yes, once, as an effective adaptation.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

Who’s That Knocking At My Door (1967)

Who’s That Knocking At My Door (1967)

Comments 1 comment

“You know: there are girls, and then there are broads!”

Synopsis:
When an Italian-American named J.R. (Harvey Keitel) learns that his new girlfriend (Zina Bethune) was violently assaulted by a former boyfriend, he is unsure how to respond.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Feminism and Women’s Issues
  • Harvey Keitel Films
  • Martin Scorsese Films

Review:
Martin Scorsese’s debut film has a bit of a complicated origin story, which bears mentioning right away. According to IMDb trivia:

Originally, the movie was conceived as a short film about J.R. and his friends, titled “Bring on the Dancing Girls”, and filmed in 1965. In 1967, the romance plot with the Girl was filmed, and added to the earlier short film with the title “I Call First”. This version was the one premiered at the Chicago Film Festival, in November 1967. In 1968, exploitation distributor Joseph Brenner offered to buy and distribute the movie, with the condition to add a sex scene, which was shot by Martin Scorsese in Amsterdam. The film, with that new scene, was premiered in September 1968, with the title “Who’s That Knocking at My Door”, and is the version of the movie as we know it today.

Despite its cobbled together nature, every scene of the film was storyboarded, thus showcasing Scorsese’s nascent cinematic voice: he uses techniques such as double-exposure, extreme close-ups, unusual angles, flashbacks, slow motion, an eclectic soundtrack, and freeze frames.


Indeed, Scorsese’s clear love (obsession) for film shows through in some portions of the semi-awkward screenplay, including when Keitel and Bethune “meet cute” over a French magazine and he grills her on whether she’s seen The Searchers or not.

Other instances are less direct, but will still be obvious to cinema fans — such as the rooftop scene when the couple discusses pigeons (hearkening, of course, to On the Waterfront, which similarly features a tentative romance between an Italian-American New Yorker and a lithe blonde).

Scorsese’s trademark machismo and violence are in full evidence — such as during a scene when J.R.’s friend forces him out of the car (then lets him back him), and a slo-mo sequence involving a gun being waved around at a party.

Although she’s not given much dimensionality, we like Bethune’s character enough that it’s distressing to see how she’s treated after sharing her dark story; but to Scorsese’s credit, he doesn’t shy away from depicting exactly how such a scenario may have gone down in such a deeply (toxically) Catholic culture. While this film isn’t pleasant — and its amateur status is clear — it will probably be of interest to Scorsese fans.

Notable Performances, Qualities, and Moments:

  • Harvey Keitel as J.R.
  • Zita Bethune as the Girl
  • Effective cinéma vérité cinematography, location shooting, and editing

Must See?
No, though of course diehard Scorsese fans will for sure want to check it out. Listed as a Cult Movie in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Reflections on Must-See Films From 1966

Reflections on Must-See Films From 1966

Comments 0 Comment

Hello, film lovers! I’ve just finished watching all titles from 1966 listed in Guide for the Film Fanatic — culminating with one of the most massive, Tarkovsky’s 3+-hour historical epic Andrei Rublev — and I’m ready to reflect!

  • Out of 68 movies from 1966, I’m voting 30 (or 44%) must-see. Of these, 7 are in a language other than English: one German, one Swedish, one Russian, and four French, including a Bresson film, a Rossellini title, Senegalese director Ousmane Sembene’s debut, and Gillo Pontecorvo’s gripping The Battle of Algiers.

  • A personal favorite from 1966 is John Frankenheimer’s Seconds — often referred to as the third of Frankenheimer’s “paranoia trilogy”, following The Manchurian Candidate (1964) and Seven Days in May (1964). It “remains a fascinating — if undeniably emotionally challenging — viewing experience” about a middle-aged banker who undergoes extreme plastic surgery and emerges as… Rock Hudson. Is it worth it? (As you can probably guess — no, but watch to find out more.)

  • Strong female characters were featured in numerous titles this year, including Anne Bancroft’s Dr. Cartwright in John Ford’s satisfying swan-song Seven Women:

    … Liv Ullmann and Bibi Andersson in Ingmar Bergman’s Persona:

    … Claudia Cardinale in The Professionals:

    … Millie Perkins’ nameless “The Woman” in Monte Hellmann’s The Shooting:

    … and Florence Marly’s mute but powerful green alien in Planet of Blood / Queen of Blood. While much of this film is slow-going, “Marly’s wordless performance is a marvel to behold, as she hypnotizes the men around her and clearly has malevolence up her sleeve (or perhaps up in her beehive-do).”

  • Of course, that year’s most infamous “strong female” was Elizabeth Taylor’s Martha in Mike Nichols’ Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, which effectively opens up Edward Albee’s Broadway play by employing “the power of close-ups, angles, editing, and mixed settings to maximize the impact of Albee’s grueling tale about marital discord.”

  • Speaking of play adaptations, don’t miss Fred Zinnemann’s A Man For All Seasons, featuring Paul Scofield in an Oscar-winning role as Sir Thomas More — a man calmly willing to sacrifice his life on behalf of his beliefs. He kindly reminds us:

    “I think that when statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties, they lead their country by a short route to chaos.”

  • Meanwhile, in Robert Wise’s The Sand Pebbles, “Steve McQueen gave one of his best, most introspective performances in the central role of Jake Holman — a soldier genuinely ‘in love’ with engines, who situates his integrity as a man within his ability to care for them effectively.”

  • Film fanatics should definitely seek out John Korty’s fable-like Crazy-Quilt, an “unusual portrait of an unconventional love affair” offering a “delightful taste of mid-century independent American cinema.” (Click here to see an extended trailer, and scroll down for a link to purchase it.)

  • Another interesting cult favorite — and much easier to find — is Richard Fleischer’s The Fantastic Voyage, featuring a wild sci-fi plot you simply won’t believe until you watch it; here is my synopsis:

    “During the Cold war, a U.S. secret agent (Stephen Boyd) is recruited by General Carter (Edmond O’Brien) of the CMDF (Combined Miniaturized Deterrence Forces) to join a team — including Dr. Duval (Arthur Kennedy), Dr. Duval’s assistant Cora (Raquel Welch), Dr. Michaels (Donald Pleasence), and a pilot (William Redfield) — travelling on a submarine into the brain of a dying scientist (Jean Del Val) in order to remove a blood clot so he can share a vital secret about miniaturization.”

    Yep; that happens.

  • Finally, no film fanatic worth their weight in cinematic gold will want to miss seeing a few other iconic titles from that year — including Richard Lester’s A Funny Thing Happened On the Way to the Forum:

    … Michelangelo Antonioni’s Blow-Up:

    … Robert Aldrich’s gritty survival flickThe Flight of the Phoenix:

    … and Sergio Leone’s The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

    “You see, in this world there’s two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig.”

You dig? Happy viewing!