Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, The (1974)

Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz, The (1974)

“A man without land is nobody.”

Synopsis:
An ambitious young man (Richard Dreyfuss) in post-WWII Montreal alienates his girlfriend (Micheline Lanctot) in his relentless pursuit to own a plot of land.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Coming of Age
  • Denholm Elliott Films
  • Get Rich Quick
  • Randy Quaid Films
  • Richard Dreyfuss Films

Review:
Canadian director Ted Kotcheff‘s adaptation of Mordechai Richler‘s novel remains an engrossing coming-of-age tale featuring a decidedly unlikable yet oddly sympathetic title character. Dreyfuss couldn’t have been better cast (who else comes to mind when thinking “obnoxiously brash male protagonist”?), and he brings appropriately relentless energy to his role as a young man so hell-bent on achieving property ownership that he ultimately sacrifices elements of his humanity. Richler’s screenplay makes it painfully clear how much suffering can result from differential treatment of siblings — which is why we understand what drives Duddy: when your older brother is the unambiguous “golden child”, receiving a disproportionate share of praise and financial support, what else can a young man do but find a way to make his own mark, in any way possible?

In addition to Dreyfuss’s memorable lead performance (that cackling laugh!), the film makes excellent use of authentic locales (it possesses a strong sense of time and place) and has an interesting score (by Stanley Myers). Various supporting characters and sub-plots are also strongly delineated — from Denholm Elliott’s portrayal as an alcoholic director hired by Duddy to film bar mitzvahs (the documentary-within-the-movie is truly inspired), to Randy Quaid as Duddy’s mentally slow buddy, to deep-voiced Micheline Lanctot as Duddy’s long-suffering (to a point) girlfriend. Despite its challenging subject matter and some decidedly dark narrative turns, this one is definitely worth a one-time look.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Richard Dreyfuss as Duddy
  • Excellent use of authentic Montreal locales

Must See?
Yes, as an unusual and finely crafted character study. Listed as a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

More the Merrier, The (1943)

More the Merrier, The (1943)

“These days, Miss Milligan, everybody’s business is everyone’s business.”

Synopsis:
A retired millionaire (Charles Coburn) visiting Washington D.C. during a severe wartime housing shortage convinces a young woman (Jean Arthur) to share her apartment with him — then offers to rent half of his section to a G.I. (Joel McCrea) in hopes of setting up the young couple and distracting Arthur away from her impossibly dull fiance (Richard Gaines).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Charles Coburn Films
  • George Stevens Films
  • Jean Arthur Films
  • Joel McCrea Films
  • Love Triangle
  • Romantic Comedy

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary notes that this “sparkling George Stevens comedy” possesses “deft performances by the leads and brilliant dialogue by Robert Russell, Frank Ross, Richard Flourney, and [uncredited] Garson Kanin”. He points out that while “the ending fizzles a bit”, “along the way there are many great scenes” — including the classic sketch in which “Coburn and Arthur try to adhere to her impossibly rigid morning schedule”, but find that they “constantly bump into each other as their schedule goes awry”. Coburn won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his fun performance — though equally deserving is McCrea, “a truly underrated comic actor”, as evidenced specifically in “the scene in which [he and Coburn] lie on the roof reading the Sunday comics out loud”. Meanwhile, Arthur and McCrea do indeed “make an appealing romantic team”: the “scene in which they lie on single beds that are separated only by a thin wall” is particularly sensual and provocative, evoking “the classic ‘Walls of Jericho’ bit in It Happened One Night.”

In his Alternate Oscars book, where he names Arthur Best Actress of the Year for her role as Constance Milligan, Peary elaborates on her impressive acting chops and delightful screen presence. He writes that she’s “thoroughly charming as a kind, unaggressive — she fights for herself, but doesn’t have the heart for it — underdog who is trapped in a dull life until two men magically appear”. He writes that “funny as she is” — she shows her skills as an exceptionally adroit slapstick comedienne — “what is most memorable about [her] characterization is how sexual it is.” Indeed, she shifts from a classically repressed “spinster” (engaged in name only) to a remarkably sensual creature, “quite physical [with McCrea] as they stroll and spin down the street” after a night out. She’s really a pleasure to behold, and we take delight in her complete transformation.

Finally, it’s impossible to discuss The More the Merrier without referencing its very specific historical context: during World War II, the housing shortage was so severe that many people felt it was their patriotic duty to take in boarders (an issue only very briefly mentioned here in Wikipedia’s article about life on the American homefront during WWII). Meanwhile, there were apparently eight women for every available man (!), and fuel shortages necessitated waiting for a “full load” before taxis could take off. Despite the obvious challenges of the situation, there’s nonetheless vicarious enjoyment to be had in glimpsing this unique era in American history, one most film fanatics have likely never experienced. To that end, while clearly presenting circumstances from a satirically over-the-top and humorously sanitized perspective, the film remains an interesting sociological time-capsule as well as a fun comedy.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Jean Arthur as Constance Milligan
  • Charles Coburn, who deservedly won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his role as Benjamin Dingle
  • Joel McCrea as Joe Carter
  • Fine direction by Stevens
  • Plenty of authentically sizzling romance between McCrea and Arthur

  • Fun “vintage footage” of wartime housing shortages

Must See?
Yes, for the fine lead performances. Nominated by Peary as one of the Best Films of the Year in his Alternate Oscars.

Categories

  • Noteworthy Performance(s)
  • Oscar Winner or Nominee

Links:

History is Made At Night (1937)

History is Made At Night (1937)

“I didn’t know then — he hates everybody, mostly himself.”

Synopsis:
A sociopathically controlling millionaire (Colin Clive) refuses to allow his wife (Jean Arthur) a divorce, attempting to blackmail her by putting her in a compromising situation with her chauffeur (Ivan Lebedeff). Ironically, this set-up leads her to meet the love of her life — a chivalrous French headwaiter (Charles Boyer) who intervenes and whisks her away to his restaurant, where he wines and dines her with assistance from his loyal chef-buddy, Cesare (Leo Carrillo). However, Clive’s jealous clutches remain so strong that Arthur is unable to get away, and she and Boyer are temporarily separated — though Boyer will do whatever he can to find her again.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Charles Boyer Films
  • Colin Clive Films
  • Frank Borzage Films
  • Jealousy
  • Jean Arthur Films
  • Star-Crossed Lovers

Review:
Frank Borzage directed this unabashedly romantic tale of star-crossed lovers determined to reunite. Arthur has never been lovelier (her performance is typically stellar), and Boyer taps into his most appealing romantic-lead strengths as her ardent pursuer. Less impressive — though arguably well-cast — is Colin Clive (in his final role before dying from tuberculosis at just 37 years old) as Arthur’s husband-from-hell. Clive’s “Bruce Vail” is a stereotypically vile baddie; while we certainly believe he’s vindictive enough to stop at nothing to prevent his wife from leaving him, a bit more nuance would have strengthened his characterization. Also distracting is the comic-relief role played by Leo Carrillo as Boyer’s conveniently loyal buddy — an Italian with a Chico Marx accent (working in a top French restaurant!?) who literally drops everything time and again to help out his friend; a running joke about his famous lobster dish and salad feels stale from the get-go. With that said, this remains classic Hollywood soaper material, served up with visual panache by director Frank Borzage (channeling Ernst Lubitsch) and cinematographer David Abel. It possesses a small but solid fan base, who value Boyer and Arthur’s romantic chemistry and Clive’s unrepentant villainy. Despite its flaws, this one’s worth a one-time look if you can catch it.

Note: Reading a bit more about Borzage’s background, I found myself wondering if Carrillo’s accent was an homage of some kind to Borzage’s Italian-speaking stonemason dad? I was also glad to finally be informed that his name is pronounced “bor-ZAY-gee” rather than rhyming with “corsage”.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Jean Arthur as Irene Vail
  • Charles Boyer as Paul Dumond
  • Fine cinematography and direction

Must See?
No, though it’s certainly recommended.

Links:

Conversation, The (1974)

Conversation, The (1974)

“If there’s one surefire rule that I have learned in this business it’s that I don’t know anything about human nature.”

Synopsis:
An increasingly paranoid surveillance expert (Gene Hackman) becomes convinced that his most recent assignment — trailing the young wife (Cindy Williams) of a business executive (Robert Duvall) as she meets her lover (Fredric Forrest) — will result in murder.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Allen Garfield Films
  • Francis Ford Coppola Films
  • Fredric Forrest Films
  • Gene Hackman Films
  • Guilt
  • Harrison Ford Films
  • Robert Duvall Films
  • Spies
  • Teri Garr Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary reveals his true feelings about this quietly tense thriller (written and directed by Francis Ford Coppolla) in his Alternate Oscars, where he names Hackman Best Actor of the Year for his role as Harry Caul but asserts that “the picture is extremely flawed”. He argues that “Coppola’s worst mistake is to delve into pretentious fantasy (Harry’s nightmares) and arty images when realism is the picture’s strongest suit”; however, he concedes that “as a character study it works quite well, because Gene Hackman is brilliant at portraying a unique movie protagonist: … a dull man, a paranoid man, a secretive man, an isolated man, [and] a very, very guilty and depressed man”. While I agree with Peary’s assertion about Hackman’s excellent, nuanced performance, I disagree with his overall assessment of the film: by intentionally making it unclear whether Harry’s paranoid suspicions are grounded in reality or his own mind, the movie becomes an increasingly haunting meditation on how guilt effects a “moral (Catholic) man whose work is sleazy and immoral”; the “arty images” and fantasy elements work extremely well in the context of what’s slowly unfolding.

While Peary claims that “Coppola’s pacing is a bit too methodical”, I find the entire narrative gripping from beginning to end — including the intriguing mid-script scenes in which Hackman attends a surveillance expo, reconnects with a sleazy rival (Allen Garfield), and is bedded by one of Garfield’s acquaintances, a frantically seductive middle-aged call girl (Elizabeth MacRae). Peary complains that this seduction turns Harry into a “foolish amateur”, given that his tapes disappear while he’s sleeping with her, but he concedes that “in Coppola’s defense, he may have been showing Harry’s slip-ups as being symptomatic of his deteriorating mental condition” — an assertion I fully support. To that end, The Conversation bears close thematic resemblance to several other paranoia-themed films of the (Watergate) era — including Roman Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby (1968) and The Tenant (1976), as well as Allan J. Pakula’s The Parallax View (1974). The Conversation remains a powerful, masterfully crafted tale — one well worth repeated viewings.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Gene Hackman as Harry Caul
  • Fine cinematography
  • Excellent use of strategically designed sets

  • Powerful editing (of both visuals and sound)
  • Coppola’s provocative script
  • David Shire’s haunting score

Must See?
Yes. This classic merits multiple viewings.

Categories

  • Cult Movie
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

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

Links:

CrazyLegs / Zero Hour (1953)

CrazyLegs / Zero Hour (1953)

“You forget about everything out on that field, don’t you?”

Synopsis:
Football legend Elroy “Crazylegs” Hirsch stars as himself in this overview of his fabled athletic career.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Biopics
  • Football

Review:
It’s difficult to understand why Peary includes this tepid, poorly scripted biopic of football star Elroy Hirsch — a.k.a. “Crazylegs” — in his GFTFF, given that it suffers from a serious lack of genuine dramatic tension, and will only be of interest to diehard sports fans or those specifically interested in Hirsch’s story. For what it’s worth, Hirsch — who has a decent on-screen presence — actually seems like a nice enough guy: he’s hardworking, devoted to his all-American “girl” (Joan Vohs) and loyal parents (Norman Field and Louise Lorimer), and intensely committed to both his country (he voluntarily enlisted as a Marine) and to sportsmanship in general. But niceness and a strong work ethic don’t necessarily make for a particularly interesting protagonist or storyline.

While he’s best known for his stellar work as a running back and receiver for the L.A. Rams and Chicago Rockets, Hirsch was also the only University of Wisconsin student to win a Varsity letter in 4 major sports in one year. To that end, the thesis of the film seems to be summed up in the following quote:

Sports aren’t just a sideline; it’s a way of life, competing against the very best. There’s a special way you feel about things — you can’t buy it, you can’t explain it to anybody else; you have to live it.

It’s unfortunate that such an intriguing life perspective — ripe for dramatic exploration — is handled so dully. Don’t bother seeking this one out unless you’re a true football fan (in which case you’ll likely appreciate all the vintage footage of actual games).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Vintage footage of Hirsch on the field

Must See?
No; this one will only be of interest to fans of football history.

Links:

Night Monster (1942)

Night Monster (1942)

“All matter is really cosmic substance in vibration.”

Synopsis:
A reclusive cripple (Ralph Morgan) with a seemingly insane daughter (Fay Helm), a lurking butler (Bela Lugosi), a skittish maid (Janet Shaw), and a menacing chauffeur (Leif Erickson) invites a diverse group of guests to his decaying mansion — including a mystic (Nils Asther), a psychiatrist (Irene Hervey) hoping to help Helm, two doctors (Frank Reicher and Francis Pierlot) who may or may not have played a role in botching Morgan’s recovery from his disabling accident, and a young crime novelist (Don Porter) intent on solving the series of murders that are shortly played out.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Bela Lugusi Films
  • Lionel Atwill Films
  • Murder Mystery
  • Old Dark House

Review:
While this “old dark house” thriller (directed by Hollywood workhorse Ford Beebe of Flash Gordon fame) will clearly be of most interest to Bela Lugosi fans, they’ll quickly find that his role is peripheral at best. Fortunately, the storyline — though predictably convoluted, and overpopulated by too many characters — is engaging while it lasts; of particular interest is the sequence in which Asther works his creepy mumbo-jumbo (“There are certain details in the process that we are not allowed to explain to the uninitiated.”), and Atwill’s nicely handled “big reveal” scene. Not must-see viewing, but not a total snooze, either.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Atmospheric cinematography (by Charles Van Enger)
  • Some humorously corny dialogue:

    “How is it dames always know what’s on a guy’s mind before he knows himself?”

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

Links:

Three Strangers (1946)

Three Strangers (1946)

“We’re three strangers — that’s the point.”

Synopsis:
On Chinese New Year, three strangers — a socially-aspiring attorney (Sydney Greenstreet), the wealthy wife (Geraldine Fitzgerald) of a philanderer (Alan Napier), and a petty thief (Peter Lorre) — share in the outcome of a lottery ticket after praying to a goddess of fortune.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Geraldine Fitzgerald Films
  • Jean Negulesco Films
  • John Huston Films
  • Peter Lorre Films
  • Sydney Greenstreet Films

Review:
Jean Negulesco directed this atmospheric, fast-paced thriller, based on a script by John Huston and Howard Koch and featuring Maltese Falcon (1941) co-stars Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre (as well as luminous Geraldine Fitzgerald, who seemed to specialize in playing women with a potentially loose screw). Huston and Koch’s tight screenplay intrigues and invites from the very beginning; we’re held captive throughout, wondering what will befall each of our hapless, all-too-human protagonists. There’s really not a false step taken here, with uniformly strong performances, atmospheric cinematography (by Arthur Edeson), and a satisfyingly ruthless screenplay, complete with potent character names (“Crystal Shackleford”, “Icey Crane”, etc.). Enjoy this one!

Note: Warner Brothers teamed Lorre and Greenstreet in one other title — 1944’s The Mask of Dimitrios, also directed by Negulesco and listed in Peary’s GFTFF.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Excellent performances by the three leads
  • Fine cinematography by Arthur Edeson

Must See?
Yes, as a most enjoyable sleeper.

Categories

  • Good Show

Links:

Barbarella (1968)

Barbarella (1968)

“An angel does not make love; an angel is love.”

Synopsis:
In the distant future, a sexually liberated female astronaut (Jane Fonda) is sent by the President of Earth (Claude Dauphin) to find a nefarious scientist (Milo O’Shea) who has invented the ultimate weapon — the Positronic Ray.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Jane Fonda Films
  • Mad Doctors and Scientists
  • Revolutionaries
  • Roger Vadim Films
  • Satires and Spoofs
  • Science Fiction
  • Strong Females

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary asserts that despite the dizzying amount of activity occurring throughout this cult futuristic film — based on an adult comic strip by Jean-Claude Forest — it’s nonetheless “quite dull”. He writes that “the whole production… lacks imagination” and that “Barbarella herself is a weak heroine”, given that “her actions have little effect on what transpires at the end”. He notes that the “film’s cult has to do with [both] the campy humor” — which he finds “unintentionally amusing” — as well as the “uninhibited, scandalously garbed Fonda”, who “gives her body to all men who assist her”. He complains that director Roger Vadim (married to Fonda at the time) “subjects his heroine to ghastly tortures while she is either nude or having her clothes ripped off”, and posits that “trying to stimulate men by showing pretty women being physically abused is irresponsible”.

In Cult Movies 2 (where he analyzes the film in more detail), Peary notes that Fonda herself has claimed Barbarella isn’t one of her “many mistakes” (“I like it — it’s fun”, she’s insisted, without elaboration). Actually, the erstwhile brouhaha over Barbarella‘s role in Fonda’s otherwise (mostly) esteemed acting career feels entirely irrelevant these days, given that she’s no longer so actively in the limelight, and her recent attempts at an acting comeback have been less-than-memorable. Ultimately, I agree with Peary that the film — while undeniably visually provocative — is essentially an “innocuous” and dull piece of ’60s soft-core fantasy erotica. For instance, where’s the humor in exchanges like the following (taken from IMDb’s Quotes page)?:

Dildano: [radioing instructions to the rebel army] And our password will be… Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch.
Barbarella: You mean the secret password is Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch?
Dildano: Exactly.

I’ve seen Barbarella twice, and read about it plenty — but the point of its needlessly convoluted storyline continues to elude me, and I can only understand its cult appeal on an intellectual level.

Note: The best-known piece of trivia associated with Barbarella is the fact that the ’80s English rock band Duran Duran named itself after the central villain, “Durand-Durand” (O’Shea).

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Imaginative set designs and costumes


Must See?
Yes, once, simply for its cult status.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links:

Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life (1983)

Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life (1983)

“Would you like to talk about the meaning of life, dear?”

Synopsis:
British comedy troupe Monty Python enacts a series of sketches about the absurdity of birth, child-rearing, and human existence.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Comedy
  • Episodic Films
  • Monty Python Films

Review:
The Trivia section on IMDb provides some revealing insights into the inception and production of this final Monty Python collaboration, openly acknowledged by the troupe as one of its lesser (and less coherent) efforts. Python claims to have refused to show Universal Studios a script, instead relying on collective inspiration and strategic ad-libbing to produce a series of loosely linked vignettes — some of which are (inevitably) more successful than others. It opens with a Terry Gilliam-directed live short entitled “The Crimson Permanent Assurance” — originally conceived as an homage to the cinematic convention of showing a short film before the feature presentation, though in typically surreal Python fashion, it re-emerges later as part of the overall episodic arc. Next we’re presented with a developmental overview of humanity, beginning with the Miracle of Birth and proceeding through Growth and Learning, Middle Age, Live Organ Transplants (!), the Autumn Years, and Death (with the Middle of the Film and the End of the Film — as well as an exploration of the Meaning of Life — thrown in for the sake of cohesion and philosophical rigor).

Sketches in Part I (The Miracle of Birth) and Part II (Growth and Learning) are the most memorable and inspired, and could easily be considered must-see viewing in their own right — indeed, all film fanatics should likely be familiar with the magical “machine that goes ping”, with what happens when one believes that “every sperm is sacred”, and with the fact that a classroom setting can turn even a live sex act into a humdrum, yawn-inducing mundanity. Unfortunately, most of the later vignettes are decidedly less amusing, though the infamous “Mr. Creosote” sketch — in which a morbidly obese man is enjoined to eat one more “wafer thin” treat before literally exploding — should likely be endured once, simply for its cultural relevance. (Quentin Tarantino apparently admitted to finding it beyond his own considerable gruesome-tolerance level — no small admission.) Ultimately, however, film fanatics unfamiliar with Monty Python’s cinematic genius should start with their cult masterpiece, Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) — and decide from there whether they’re interested in exploring more.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Several genuinely surreal, hilarious, and memorable sequences

Must See?
No, though it’s obviously must-see for Monty Python fans, and certainly worth a look by all film fanatics. Listed as a Cult Movie and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Life With Father (1947)

Life With Father (1947)

“Vinnie, we have four children — if we’re not married now, we never will be!”

Synopsis:
In 1880s New York, the domineering father (William Powell) and scatterbrained mother (Irene Dunne) of four red-headed boys (Jimmy Lydon, Derek Scott, Johnny Calkins, and Martin Milner) deal with a series of household challenges — including Lydon’s crush on a beautiful visiting teen (Elizabeth Taylor), and Dunne’s distress that Powell has never been baptized.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Edmund Gwenn Films
  • Elizabeth Taylor Films
  • Historical Drama
  • Irene Dunne Films
  • Michael Curtiz Films
  • Play Adaptation
  • William Powell Films
  • Zasu Pitts Films

Review:
Clarence Day Jr.‘s affectionate homage to his Victorian-era upbringing was originally published as an autobiographical memoir in 1935, then turned into the longest-running non-musical play on Broadway before gaining an even wider audience via this cinematic adaptation (directed by Michael Curtiz) and finally being made into a T.V. series in the mid-’50s. Clearly, Day’s recollections of his parents’ loving yet contentious pre-Suffrage marriage struck a nerve with audience members of the day, many of whom likely appreciated watching a domineering control freak effectively “managed” by his clever wife. To that end, Dunne’s ability to run her household the way she wants to — through strategic use of deception, feigned ignorance, and passive-aggressive techniques — is played for laughs, most notably in her extended ploy to trick her reluctant husband into getting baptized.

While dosing his anecdotal storyline with plenty of humor and nostalgia, Day makes it clear that one of his primary goals is to reveal the inanity (and futility) of his father’s dated patriarchal beliefs:

“Men have to run this world, and it’s not an easy job. It takes work and it takes thinking. A man has to reason things out. Now you take a woman, a woman doesn’t think at all. If a man thinks a certain thing is wrong, he shouldn’t do it. If he thinks it’s right, he should do it. You just have to let the women know that what you’re doing is for their good. Be firm.”

The fact that Day manages to salvage his father’s character while simultaneously skewering such nonsensical drivel reveals the secret to the film’s blockbuster success. Meanwhile, Michael Curtiz’s solid direction helps move the proceedings along smoothly. With that said, Life With Father will likely only hold minimal appeal for modern film fanatics, and remains of interest primarily to see Dunne and Powell’s typically solid lead performances. Fans of Elizabeth Taylor will also, of course, want to watch it for her:

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • William Powell as “Father”
  • Irene Dunne as Vinnie

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a look simply for Dunne and Powell’s performances.

Links: