FilmFanatic.org

Synopsis:
Leopold Stowkowski conducts the Philadelphia Philharmonic Orchestra as Deems Taylor introduces a series of animated vignettes set to classical music.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Animated Features
• Episodic Films
• Musicals

Response to Peary’s Review:
I was lucky enough to recently revisit this classic Disney animated feature by watching it “live” at the Hollywood Bowl, with all but two of its vignettes introduced by maestro John Mauceri and performed by the L.A. Philharmonic (and with fireworks on display in the background during Tchaikovsky’s “The Nutcracker Suite”). This was clearly a stellar way to enjoy this “most ambitious and conceptually daring of Disney’s features”, which remains a crowd-pleasing favorite decades after its rediscovery “in the early seventies when the ‘acid’ generation found that watching the almost psychedelic images was a sensory experience” (wine-drinking viewers at the Hollywood Bowl these days probably feel much the same way!).

Peary notes that Fantasia was Disney’s attempt “to impress the highbrow audience”, but he “was viciously attacked for taking much leeway with the music and for being so pretentious as to try to teach others about classical music when he himself was completely ignorant of the art”. Peary argues that “today one will probably be less upset by the mishandling of the music … than by the repetition of the images (characters napping, reflections on water); the lack of good personality animation (a Disney trademark) as characters of the same type tend to act identically; and the predictable way that nature goes haywire in almost every sequence… and the way scenes end as they begin, in tranquility.” Bah, humbug, Peary! In our post-modern era, the complaint that music can possibly be “mishandled” by an artist attempting to use it for secondary purposes seems naive at best — and while some of the imagery and/or thematic constructs may be repetitive, the animation is so consistently well-drawn and creatively conceived that one doesn’t really mind. Meanwhile, “good personality” isn’t exactly what one expects in a film like this.

Despite his grumpy overall attitude, however, Peary does call out a number of the film’s undeniable highlights — including “the exciting ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice’, starring Mickey Mouse and featuring a cosmic storm and march of the brooms; the creation of the world in ‘The Rite of Spring’ with otherworldly Kubrick-like shots of a newly formed volcanic landscape; ‘Dance of the Hours’, which has acrobatic ostriches, hippos in tutus, elephants, and alligators parodying ballet with a knockabout dance; and the spooky ‘Night on Bald Mountain’, featuring Vlad Tytla‘s magnificent demon”.

Interestingly, sixty years later, Disney Studios released Fantasia 2000, consisting of six new vignettes (and the original “Sorcerer’s Apprentice” thrown in for good measure). This is in keeping with Disney’s original intent for the film, which he envisioned as a true cult favorite which would stay in theaters permanently, with new vignettes gradually inserted over time. To that end, I should note that the Hollywood Bowl screening also included a couple of “new” vignettes — such as the Dali-inspired “Destino”, and the never-completed segment “Clair de Lune”. Very fitting, indeed.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Plenty of creatively conceived, expertly rendered animation
  
  
  
• The justifiably famous “Sorcerer’s Apprentice” sequence
  
• The truly stunning “Night on Bald Mountain” finale
  

Must See?
Yes, as a genuine Disney classic.

Categories

• Genuine Classic
• Historically Relevant

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• Washington Post Review
• Combustible Celluloid
• DVD Savant Review
• SF, Fantasy, and Horror Review
• Film Site Review
• Spinning Image Review
• Q Network Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
The son (Clancy Malone) of a renowned plastic surgeon (Herbert Rawlinson) is bailed out of prison by his sister (Dolores Fuller), but soon lured back into a life of crime by gangster Vic Brady (Timothy Farrell).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Ed Wood Films
• Fugitives
• Plastic Surgery

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary argues that while this Ed Wood “melodrama is ineptly made”, his “fans will be disappointed”, given that it actually “has a coherent plot”, “even has a clever ending”, and features acting that may be “mediocre” but is “better than in other Wood films”. With that said, “bad movie” fans will be happy to note that “the photography is dark, the sound and dubbing are horrible, [and] the music laughable”. (Indeed, the relentlessly repetitive, Spanish-themed guitar and piano score — borrowed directly from Mesa of Lost Women (1953) — is guaranteed to get on your nerves within about five minutes, and is far too often inappropriately “applied”.) Peary is dead wrong, however, in stating that “the women are ugly”: while Fuller isn’t necessarily a pin-up candidate, former fashion model Theodora Thurman — playing Farrell’s gun-toting mistress — is quite stunning.

Note: Sadly, Tim Burton’s Ed Wood skips over the production of Jail Bait altogether, moving straight from Glen or Glenda (1953) to Bride of the Monster (1955). While this is understandable, given its already two-hour-long running time, one can’t help but wonder what juicy tidbits would/could have been unearthed…

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• An amusingly inept (though occasionally surprisingly engaging) crime thriller
  

Must See?
No, though naturally Wood cultists will want to be sure to check it out. Available for free viewing on the Internet Archive.

Links:

• IMDb entry
• Spinning Image Review
• Images Journal Review

Synopsis:
A psychiatrist (Timothy Farrell) tells a concerned policeman (Lyle Talbot) the story of two individuals struggling with gender identity: a transvestite (Ed Wood) debating how to tell his fiancee (Dolores Fuller) about his cross-dressing predilection, and a transsexual (Tommy Haynes) about to undergo surgery.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Bela Lugosi Films
• Ed Wood Films
• Gender Bending
• Morality Police

Response to Peary’s Review:
Any film fanatic who’s seen Tim Burton’s must-see biopic Ed Wood (1994) will be keenly interested to (re)visit this “utterly perverse, personal film by Edward D. Wood, Jr.”, “making his directorial debut” and starring (under a pseudonym) in the title role. Originally intended to capitalize on the notoriety of Christine Jorgensen (whose story as the first widely known recipient of a sex change operation was later filmed as a “straight” biopic), Ed Wood saw the film as an opportunity to simultaneously address his own gender-bending predilection: transvestism. As Peary notes, “the picture’s treatment of [this issue] is serious and sensitive”, with Wood daring to “defend transvestites, saying that if allowed to wear women’s clothing they’ll be credits to their communities and government”. Peary argues that “one must be impressed by this film for the very reason that it takes a stand on a subject that surely was in 1953 not even acceptable enough to be considered controversial”.

He also points out that “Wood dares to incorporate footage that was obviously influenced by surrealists and experimental filmmakers”, noting that it’s “no matter that this footage is absolutely ridiculous”, given that “it shows Wood had an imagination”. Indeed, the surreal dream sequence occurring midway through the film is actually filled with such genuinely provocative imagery that, at the very least, you’ll sit up and pay attention — thus giving credence to the theory (espoused by some of Wood’s cult fans) that he may have been more of a maverick (amateur) auteur than merely the “bad director” he’s so frequently dismissed as. Meanwhile, those who’ve seen Ed Wood (or read about Glen or Glenda‘s production history) will know that Bela Lugosi was cast simply because of his name and his friendship with Wood, who wanted to provide him with some work. However, his role here is truly limited to that of an “absurd narrator” (“Pull the string! Pull the string!”); as Peary puts it, “Who knows what he is talking about?”

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• A truly groundbreaking look at a taboo subject
  
• The impressively surreal dream sequence
  
  

Must See?
Yes, as one of Ed Wood’s most infamous cult films.

Categories

• Cult Movie
• Important Director

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Review
• Stomp Tokyo Review
• Moria Review
• Q Network Review
• Time Out Capsule Review

Synopsis:
A Missouri farmer (Clint Eastwood) becomes a vengeful outlaw when his wife and child are killed by pro-Union Jawhawkers during the Civil War. Soon he finds himself crossing paths with a motley group of individuals, including a young pro-Confederate guerrilla (Sam Bottoms), an elderly Cherokee Indian (Chief Dan George), and a feisty Yankee woman (Paula Trueman) with a nubile young granddaughter (Sondra Locke).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Civil War
• Clint Eastwood Films
• Outlaws
• Revenge
• Westerns

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary accurately labels this “impressively directed” Clint Eastwood film a “sweeping epic”, calling out the “epic score” by Jerry Fielding, and noting that “the violence is bloody, made all the more exciting by Bruce Surtees’s [cinemato]graphy, which gives each shot the authentic look of old Civil War photographs”. He argues that this film indicates a “mellowing” of Eastwood’s iconic “westerner… from his early days”, showing that he “was ready to put his guns away and settle down” — but this actually isn’t quite true. Despite the fact that Wales “ends up living in a communal situation with his ‘family’ of friends”, the majority of the film focuses on his relentless vendetta against the men who’ve double-crossed him; he has multiple guns ready to fire at any given moment, and never stops to rest — other than during a brief, obligatory lovemaking scene with Locke, “whom he fell in love with off screen as well as on”. Regardless, Wales remains a well-produced, rousing western with quirky performances (particularly by Chief Dan George as Wales’ new Indian companion) and a refreshingly authentic portrayal of Native Americans in general. My only quibble — pointed out by Richard Eder in his original review for the New York Times — is the film’s “attempt to assert the romantic individualism of the South against the cold expansionism of the North”, given that “every Unionist is vicious and incompetent”; as Eder notes, “there is something cynical about this primitive one-sidedness”.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Bruce Surtee’s cinematography
  
• Chief Dan George as Lone Watie
  
• A refreshingly authentic portrayal of Native Americans
  
• Jerry Fielding’s “epic score”

Must See?
Yes, as a classic western, and one of Eastwood’s best films.

Categories

• Genuine Classic

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• TCM Article
• Native American Review
• Roger Ebert’s Review

Synopsis:
An alcoholic writer (Ray Milland) cared for by his loyal brother (Phillip Terry) and girlfriend (Jane Wyman) battles his addiction during a particularly grueling weekend alone in New York.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

• Alcoholism and Drug Addiction
• Billy Wilder Films
• Jane Wyman Films
• Ray Milland Films
• Writers

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary begins his review of this ground-breaking film about alcoholism (the first to address the issue head-on) by asking, “Is there anybody who really enjoys movies about junkies or alcoholics trying to cure their addiction?” (I’ll wager the answer is “Yes”.) He admits that he “invariably feel[s] less excitement than obligation to watch this early social drama and multi-Oscar winner (for Best Picture, Actor, and Screenplay) whenever it turns up on television”, yet concedes that he’s “always surprised to find [him]self becoming engrossed” in the film, However, he argues that his “enjoyment is somewhat perverse”, given that he is “not so taken by those scenes in which the drunk Milland makes a fool of himself in public… or has hallucinations” as by “watching the sober Milland start squirming and sweating… thinking about a drink, planning how to get it, lying so he can be alone to pursue it, figuring out what to pawn for the money he’ll need…” He posits that “surely director Billy Wilder and his co-writer, Charles Brackett, are exhibiting ironic wit when they show how much a man will suffer in order to suffer even more.”

Since its release, of course (when NY Times critic Bosley Crowther referred to it as “shatteringly realistic and morbidly fascinating”), countless other films — too many to list here — have tackled the sticky topic of alcoholism and/or drug addiction, thus lessening the inherent shock value of The Lost Weekend for modern viewers. Yet on its own terms, the film remains a well-told tale of “a several-day [nightmarish] binge that almost costs [a man] his loyal girlfriend… and his life.” As Peary notes, the “dialogue is tough and cynical” (“She knows she’s clutching a razor blade, but she just won’t let go!”), and “Wilder makes strong use of New York streets and backgrounds” by blending “harsh expressionistic visuals indoors with washed-out shots of the city to convey mood changes in Milland”. With a running time of 101 minutes, the film thankfully never feels too long; from the tensely scripted and filmed opening sequence (in which Milland tries to distract his brother long enough to pack a hidden bottle of alcohol that’s dangling from a rope outside his window sill), to the justifiably lauded sequence in which Milland walks the streets of New York in desperate search of a pawn shop (only to find that they’re all closed on Yom Kippur), we’re genuinely curious to know what kind of trouble Milland will find himself in next, and how he’ll worm his way out.

Most problematic for me, however, is the fact that “Milland (who usually played nice guys) is mean right from the beginning”. While Wilder and Brackett should be commended for not “pull[ing] any punches” in their portrayal of a man who all but the most loyal of friends and family members would have given up on long ago, it’s slightly discomfiting to be rooting for someone so utterly unlikable. Milland’s Don Birnam comes across like a self-pitying whiner who needs a serious kick in the pants to get himself back in gear; even a strategically placed flashback sequence — in which we get to see Milland meeting cute with Wyman at an opera — doesn’t help us like him any better. Fortunately, Milland’s performance is “strong”, and he carries the film surprisingly well. As Peary notes in his Alternate Oscars (where he votes for Boris Karloff in Val Lewton’s The Body Snatcher instead as Best Actor of the Year), Milland’s performance was “the best by any of the [official] nominees and maybe the best of his decent career, [but] he doesn’t make you feel enough empathy for his sick, troubled character”. Indeed, while Milland should certainly be commended for daring to “play an unsympathetic character for a change”, I don’t think society in general understood enough about the disease-driven nature of alcoholism at the time for Milland to do justice to the role; as a result, Birnam ultimately comes across as a pathetic anti-hero rather than the pitiable addict he really is.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

• Ray Milland as Don Birnam
  
• Fine supporting performances
  
• John Seitz’s cinematography
  
• Good use of authentic New York locations
  
• Charles Brackett’s screenplay

Must See?
Yes, for its historical relevance, and for Milland’s Oscar winning performance.

Categories

• Historically Relevant
• Important Director
• Oscar Winner or Nominee

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

Links:

• IMDb entry
• NY Times Original Review
• FilmSite Review
• Jigsaw Lounge Review
• ReelViews Review
• TCM: Behind the Camera
• TV Guide Review
• Time Out Capsule Review