Postman Always Rings Twice, The (1946)

Postman Always Rings Twice, The (1946)

Comments 1 comment

“With my brains and your looks, we could go places.”

Synopsis:
A drifter (John Garfield) falls for the beautiful wife (Lana Turner) of an older restaurant proprietor (Cecil Kellaway), and the two young lovers are soon plotting murder.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Audrey Totter Films
  • Cecil Kellaway Films
  • Courtroom Drama
  • Femmes Fatales
  • Hume Cronyn Films
  • Infidelity
  • John Garfield Films
  • Lana Turner Films
  • Plot to Murder

Review:
Although two foreign adaptations had already been made of James M. Cain’s 1934 novel — Pierre Chenal’s Le Dernier Tournant in 1939, and Luchino Visconti’s Ossessione in 1943 — this 1946 MGM iteration is widely referred to as “the original” version of Cain’s story, in contrast with Bob Rafelson’s steamy but disappointing 1981 remake. While the latter is more authentic to both the novel and the time period in which it takes place, the stylized look and feel of MGM’s version (Tay Garnett‘s best directorial effort) nonetheless lend it a sort of classic timelessness: from Lana Turner’s infamous “lipstick entrance”, to Turner’s (nearly) all-white wardrobe, to the spic-‘n-span cleanliness of Kellaway’s roadside diner, this Postman lingers in one’s memory long after viewing.

As the unwitting femme fatale who causes the downfall of both Garfield’s drifter and Kellaway’s bumbling restaurateur, “sweater girl” Lana Turner gives what is widely considered her best, most iconic performance: she’s all tanned legs, platinum hair, and seductive poses — literally a cheesecake model come to life — and while some (see DVD Savant’s review) have argued that she’s too pristine and wooden for the role of a gritty roadside waitress, Turner’s sunkissed looks are the perfect embodiment of a seductive force too strong to resist.

John Garfield is well-cast as smitten Frank Chambers, and is a perfect match for Turner, effectively capturing the frustrations of a man torn between erotic desire, wanderlust, and a basic sense of decency. Other bit roles are nicely played as well, particularly Hume Cronyn as the brilliant if corrupt lawyer who first plays Turner off of Garfield, thus starting a downward spiral which ends — in typical noir fashion — tragically.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • John Garfield as Frank Chambers
  • Lana Turner — in her best role — as Cora Smith
  • Hume Cronyn and Leon Ames as competing lawyers

Must See?
Yes, for its status as an undisputed noir classic. Listed as a film with Historical Importance and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Genuine Classic

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

Links:

Heroes for Sale (1933)

Heroes for Sale (1933)

Comments 1 comment

“I know that all my promotions and decorations belong to you. I know that I’ve stolen the credit from a real hero.”

Synopsis:
A war veteran (Richard Barthelmess) whose cowardly comrade (Gordon Westcott) has accepted all the glory for his heroism battles a morphine addiction, then starts life anew in Chicago, where he prospers as the co-owner of a labor-saving laundry machine and marries his sweetheart (Loretta Young). His luck turns again, however, when he’s falsely accused of inciting a riot, and sent away to prison — but he refuses to give up on his dream of helping those less fortunate than himself.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Depression Era
  • Do-Gooders
  • Falsely Accused
  • Loretta Young Films
  • Veterans
  • William Wellman Films

Review:
William Wellman’s hard-hitting tale of an unsung war hero whose [for]giving nature brings him both deep satisfaction and cruel treatment is, as noted in TCM’s review, “ungainly” yet “also unfailingly urgent and never boring”. The film starts off with a compelling exploration of bravery and cowardice during the heat of battle, and we wait with bated breath to hear Barthelmess’s reaction to Westcott’s stinging betrayal:

Once this is revealed, however (no revenge is taken by the extraordinarily good-hearted Barthelmess), the screenplay veers from one episode to another in rapid-fire succession — Westcott does show up again, but only in the film’s final scene, in order for Wellman to make the point that both rich and poor suffered under the iron grip of the Great Depression. In the meantime (as indicated in TCM’s assessment) we become oddly compelled by Barthelmess’s travails, watching his character emerge as a true “hero” of the era — someone who is decidedly not for sale, at any cost. The fine cast of supporting actors (particularly Aline MacMahon in a pivotal role) adds to the enjoyment of this unusual little film.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Richard Barthelmess as Tom Holmes
  • Gordon Westcott as Tom’s cowardly comrade
  • Aline MacMahon as Tom’s landlady and friend
  • Loretta Young as Tom’s wife

Must See?
No, but it’s recommended.

Links:

Man Who Reclaimed His Head, The (1934)

Man Who Reclaimed His Head, The (1934)

Comments 1 comment

“As long as munitions stay in the hands of private enterprise, war will always be around the corner.”

Synopsis:
An anti-war editorialist (Claude Rains) goes mad when he discovers that his editor (Lionel Atwill) has betrayed his trust by collaborating with munitions manufacturers.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Betrayal
  • Claude Rains Films
  • Flashback Films
  • Joan Bennett Films
  • Lionel Atwill Films
  • Play Adaptations
  • World War I
  • Writers

Review:
The Man Who Reclaimed His Head — based on a stage play by Jean Bart — is not, as its provocative title would suggest, a horror flick; while insanity and murder are involved, they ultimately take a back seat to the central story of a freelance writer (Rains) so in love with his beautiful young wife (Joan Bennett):

that he agrees to work for an unscrupulous former boss (Atwill), only to find his trust sorely misplaced. Unfortunately, while the expose of “special interests” driving the machinery of war — and the complicity of the media in such efforts — was surely shocking at the time of the film’s release, today’s audiences will find such nefarious collaborations sadly commonplace, and thus may have a hard time relating to the enormity of Rains’ emotions (not to mention his drastic actions). Rains — always a compelling actor — is excellent in the title role (indeed, Peary nominates his performance for an Alternate Oscar), but Atwill’s “evil” character isn’t fleshed out nearly enough.

Meanwhile, Bennett (capable of much better) emerges as little more than a pretty face.

While it’s not “must see” viewing for all film fanatics, however, Claude Rains fans will certainly want to check this one out.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Claude Rains as Paul Verin
  • An early expose of the military-industrial complex

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a look. Listed as a Sleeper and a Personal Recommendation in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Red Dawn (1984)

Red Dawn (1984)

Comments 1 comment

“The Russians need to take us in one piece, and that’s why they’re here.”

Synopsis:
When Communists invade America, a group of teenagers in Colorado — led by Jed (Patrick Swayze) and his brother Matt (Charlie Sheen) — defend themselves in the hills, eventually forming a resistance group known as the Wolverines.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ben Johnson Films
  • Cold War
  • Harry Dean Stanton Films
  • Resistance Fighters
  • Small Town America

Response to Peary’s Review:
In his review of this ’80s cult favorite (which he labels “anti-Communist paranoia gone mad”), Peary focuses primarily on the “right-wing politics” of its creator, director/screenwriter John Milius — who, Peary argues, “makes warfare seem fun”, and who seems to envy “the film’s teenagers and underground fighters as they attempt to recapture their homeland.” In truth, if you’re able to ignore the film’s controversial political stance (as well as some of the more glaring plot holes — the scenario is more fantasy than reality), Red Dawn remains a surprisingly enjoyable action flick, one which is guaranteed to appeal to anyone who’s ever dreamed of surviving off the land and/or becoming a guerrilla fighter. The lead actors, as Peary notes, are all “solid action heroes”, and convincingly portray the youthful rebels, though it’s frustrating that we never get to know any of them in great detail (character development is secondary to action here). Indeed, Milius infuses his script with so much fighting that at a certain point “it becomes hard to tell what specifically the insurgents are trying to accomplish during each of their sneak attacks on the invaders” — but action fans surely won’t be disappointed.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Fine performances by the cast of (mostly) unknown young actors
  • The frightening opening “landing” sequence
  • A sobering view of what American occupation might look like
  • Refreshing humanization of at least one of the invaders
  • Beautiful cinematography of deceptively “peaceful” landscapes

Must See?
Yes, for its status as a cult favorite.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links:

Seven Women (1966)

Seven Women (1966)

Comments 1 comment

“Whatever the doctor’s doing, she’s doing for our good.”

Synopsis:
A doctor (Anne Bancroft) sent to a mission in China clashes with its puritanical director (Margaret Leighton), but is a source of inspiration for many of the other inhabitants, including an older pregnant woman (Betty Field) and an impressionable young recruit (Sue Lyon). When their mission is invaded by the nefarious Mongol warrior Tunga Khan (Mike Mazurki), Bancroft makes a controversial sacrifice in exchange for the others’ safety, and must bear the brunt of Leighton’s disdain for her decision.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Anne Bancroft Films
  • Betty Field Films
  • China
  • Doctors and Nurses
  • Eddie Albert Films
  • John Ford Films
  • Mildred Dunnock Films
  • Missionaries<
  • Strong Females
  • Woody Strode Films

Review:
John Ford’s final film was a box-office failure upon its release, but has since become a critical darling of many (and is enjoyed as a thinly veiled bastion of homoerotic tensions by others). It’s a curious departure from Ford’s normal oeuvre, given that it focuses primarily on women rather than men, and takes place in Northern China rather than in the American West — nonetheless, as many critics have pointed out, it ultimately touches upon several of Ford’s key thematic concerns, including “an isolated group stranded in a hostile environment, civilization versus savagery, and self-sacrifice.” In truth, the women in this film can easily stand in for many of Ford’s archetypal characters: the dynamics between mannish Anne Bancroft and uptight Margaret Leighton are reminiscent of John Wayne and Henry Fonda in Ford’s Fort Apache (1948), for instance.

Indeed, it’s the interplay between these two females — both independent and strong-willed, but with radically different moral takes on the world — which carries the somewhat uneven script, and keeps us interested to see what will happen next. Leighton’s character eventually devolves into campy hysteria when the situation at “her” mission spirals out of control; her repugnance at being forced to stay in the same room as a woman (Betty Field) giving birth borders on laughable. Bancroft, meanwhile, maintains a fiercely realistic and forceful presence throughout; she’s suffered heartbreak and injustice in the past (simply by being a female doctor in the 1930s), but refuses to compromise her passion for helping others through medicine — even if this means sacrificing herself. The ultimate outcome of the film — in which Bancroft utters a now-classic line — will likely come as a touching surprise to most.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Anne Bancroft as Dr. Cartwright (Peary nominates her for an Alternate Oscar as Best Actress of the Year)
  • Margaret Leighton as uptight Agatha Andrews

Must See?
Yes, simply for Bancroft’s stand-out performance, and for its historical importance as Ford’s last film. Listed as a Cult Movie in the back of Peary’s book.

Categories

  • Important Director
  • Noteworthy Performance(s)

Links:

War of the Worlds (1953)

War of the Worlds (1953)

Comments 1 comment

“They seem to murder everything that moves.”

Synopsis:
A scientist (Gene Barry) accompanied by a beautiful library science instructor (Ann Robinson) works with the military to stop Martian invaders from taking over the Earth.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Aliens
  • George Pal Films
  • H.G. Wells Films
  • Science Fiction
  • World Domination

Response to Peary’s Review:
Unlike other reviewers who have fond memories of being both scared and thrilled by War of the Worlds when it was finally released in 1953 (Paramount Studios had owned the movie rights to the title for nearly twenty years), Peary seems less than enamored by producer George Pal’s updated version of H.G. Wells’ classic sci-fi novel. He cites the many changes to Wells’ original story as “annoying” (particularly Pal’s notion that “God is directly responsible for the aliens’ demise”), and argues that the “brutal, selfish” humans in the mob scene near the end of the film barely seem worth rescuing. “In fact,” he notes, the film “doesn’t [convincingly] show why earth’s people or their way of life should be preserved.” In terms of the lead performances, he notes somewhat harshly that “Barry is a sturdy if dull hero” while Robinson — who, in typical ’50s gender relegation, “merely looks on [and] serves coffee” — is “an embarrassment” (personally, I find it hard to fault Robinson for the way her role was written).

These days, particularly in the wake of Steven Spielberg’s tepid remake, Pal’s War of the Worlds — which Peary claims has an “enormous cult following” — is seen by most modern viewers as dated but of historic interest, thanks in large part to Gordon Jennings’ “tremendous special effects”, which were enormously impressive at the time.

It’s also important to remember, as Peary notes, that this was “the first film in which America itself is turned into a war zone because of an invasion”; indeed, it must have been tremendously frightening for audiences at the time to vicariously witness an A-bomb being dropped near a populated area. With that said, however, I’m largely in agreement with Peary’s assessment of the film as “colorful but overrated”, and only consider it to be must-see for its historical relevance.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Gordon Jennings’ Oscar-winning special effects

Must See?
Yes, simply for its historical status as the first major alien invasion flick.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links:

Hardcore (1979)

Hardcore (1979)

Comments 1 comment

“A lot of strange things happen in this world — things you don’t know about in Grand Rapids, things you don’t want to know about, doors that shouldn’t be opened.”

Synopsis:
When his teenage daughter (Ilah Davis) runs away during a church trip to Los Angeles, a devoutly religious midwestern businessman (George C. Scott) learns from a private detective (Peter Boyle) that she has joined the porn industry, and hunts her down with the help of a young prostitute (Season Hubley).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Father and Child
  • George C. Scott Films
  • Paul Schrader Films
  • Peter Boyle Films
  • Runaways
  • Search

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary and several other reviewers have noted that this tale of a moralistic man’s “descent into purgatory” while searching for his missing daughter is highly reminiscent of John Ford’s The Searchers (1956); as Peary points out, however, it’s not nearly as successful, given that director Paul Schrader seems to be using his premise as an “excuse… to show the sordid sexual world that has seduced him in real life and always finds its way into his films.” Indeed, after a strong, authentic opening — (we truly believe in this man’s orderly Calvinist world):

— things slowly go downhill, as Scott’s months-long undertaking (why don’t we ever see him checking in on his business back home?) turns into simply a convenient pretext for “exposing” the underground porn and prostitution industry — an expose which these days no longer seems all that shocking.

Scott’s performance is as fine and true as always, but his character as written doesn’t possess much of an arc — even once he begins opening up to a fresh-faced young prostitute (very nicely played by Season Hubley), we see little evidence of any real character transformation. The film’s deeply unsatisfying ending involves a sudden slo-mo action sequence (what happened to Schrader’s eye for naturalism?), an inexplicable shooting, and a cursory reunion between father and daughter. Given its intriguing premise and fine performances, Hardcore should ultimately have been much better than it is.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • George C. Scott as Jake VanDorn
  • Season Hubley as Niki

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a look simply for its premise and performances.

Links:

President’s Analyst, The (1967)

President’s Analyst, The (1967)

Comments 1 comment

“If I were an analyst — which I am — I would say I was rapidly turning into a paranoid personality — which I am.”

Synopsis:
A psychoanalyst (James Coburn) hired to work for the president of the United States becomes paranoid that spies are out to get him; soon he finds himself on the lam from multiple agents and hit-men, including Soviet agent Kropotkin (Severn Darden) and “CEA” agent Masters (Godfrey Cambridge).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cat-and-Mouse
  • Cold War
  • James Coburn Films
  • Psychotherapy
  • Satires and Spoofs
  • Spies

Response to Peary’s Review:
In his review of this “zany paranoia satire” (a minor cult favorite), Peary seems half-hearted at best, noting that while “everything seems to be filmed from the wrong angles, at least the story never gets totally out of hand” — but I don’t think his review does this enjoyable film justice. In addition to Coburn’s fine performance in the lead role, The President’s Analyst is notable for its prescient, no-holds-barred exploration of secrecy and paranoia at every level of government — there’s literally nowhere to hide in this agent-ridden universe, where (as Peary notes) “no one is to be trusted”. The outrageous story moves quickly enough to hold our attention throughout; just when Coburn thinks he’s (momentarily) safe, he finds himself on the run once again, so we never get bored of any particular scenario. The best sequences involve Coburn hiding out at the home of an “all-American” family, where the couple’s young son taps Coburn’s telephone call using his Junior Spy Kit, and a hilarious scene in which multiple agents kill each other off in an “idyllic” meadow while Coburn obliviously canoodles a hippie chick nearby. The supporting performances throughout are commendable, and — to his credit — writer/director Theodore Flicker takes his over-the-top premise to a suitably freaky conclusion. This one’s definitely worth a look.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • James Coburn as Dr. Schaefer
  • Coburn’s visit to a seemingly “all-American” family in New Jersey
  • Countless spies killing each other off in their fruitless attempt to capture Coburn

Must See?
Yes, for its status as a zany cult favorite.

Categories

  • Cult Movie

Links:

Cleopatra Jones and the Casino of Gold (1975)

Cleopatra Jones and the Casino of Gold (1975)

Comments 1 comment

“I never claim to be God… Only close to him.”

Synopsis:
With the help of a local detective (Tanny) in Hong Kong, female operative Cleopatra Jones (Tamara Dobson) tries to rescue her co-workers (Albert Popwell and Caro Kenyatta) from the clutches of a vicious drug dealer known as the Dragon Lady (Stella Stevens).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • African-Americans
  • Detectives and Private Eyes
  • Drug Dealers
  • Shelley Winters Films
  • Stella Stevens Films
  • Strong Females

Response to Peary’s Review:
Although I haven’t yet seen 1973’s Cleopatra Jones (not listed in Peary’s book), I believe Peary when he states that this sequel — a “sexy, funny, fast-moving exploitation film” — is “better than the original.” As Peary notes, “Amazonian” Tamara Dobson (“one of the main assets of [the] blaxpoitation generation”) is “no Pam Grier”, but she fits the bill here as a larger-than-life female agent; in her outrageously colorful outfits and over-the-top make-up, she’s consistently stunning to look at. Even better, however, is her “pretty and lethal” sidekick (played by “Tanny”, a.k.a. Ni Tien), who kicks some serious butt in a couple of well-choreographed fight scenes; meanwhile, cult film star Stella Stevens seems to be having fun in her role as the Dragon Lady, a drug “queenpin” who you don’t want to mess with. The film as a whole moves quickly, and director Chuck Bail makes good use of authentic Hong Kong locales; the final extended fight sequence — taking place inside the Dragon Lady’s baroque “Casino of Gold” — is especially exciting.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • “Tanny” as Mi Ling
  • Stella Stevens as the Dragon Lady
  • Cleopatra’s seemingly endless array of outrageous outfits
  • Enjoyably stylized set designs
  • Effective use of Hong Kong street locales

Must See?
No, but it’s worth a look as a representative blaxploitation / “strong female” film of the ’70s.

Links:

Our Dancing Daughters (1928)

Our Dancing Daughters (1928)

Comments 2 comments

“When it comes to marriage, men are still old-fashioned.”

Synopsis:
A fun-loving but decent flapper (Joan Crawford) is devastated when the man she loves (Johnny Mack Brown) marries a deceptively “innocent” gold-digger (Anita Page) instead.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Gold Diggers
  • Joan Crawford Films
  • Love Triangle
  • Silent Films

Review:
23-year-old Joan Crawford sparkles in this “part-sound” film about fun-loving flappers during the Roaring Twenties who find their desire for good times strictly at odds with their chances for happy marriage. Crawford’s character — a highly likable heroine who’s given a rough break but triumphs in the end — is allowed plenty of opportunities to dance the Charleston and show off her bubbly personality:

while blonde Anita Page as Crawford’s romantic rival is fine as well, particularly during her hilariously infamous final scene (“Women — women — why are you working?”).

The use of strategic background noise and musical numbers on the synchronized soundtrack is effective, adding to the overall ambiance of the era. While not one of Crawford’s best features, film fanatics will certainly be curious to check out Our Dancing Daughters at least once.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Joan Crawford as Diana Medford
  • Anita Page as “Annikins”

Must See?
Yes, for its historical importance as Crawford’s “breakthrough” role.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

Links: