oldmovieman Reviews

Endeavour: Pilot (2012) Season 1, Episode 0

Shaun Evans Good but . . .

[8 July 2012]

It's never easy to play another actor's character. As another reviewer pointed out, every actor wants to make the character his own. That, however, must be tempered by a fair reference to the character as already known by the audience. I thought Shaun Evans did a very good job of capturing the attitude and body language of the older Morse as we knew him from John Thaw's work. One problem for me, a big one, is that Evans plays Morse with an accent wholly different from John Thaw's. (It seems to be a Liverpool accent but don't quote me.) What's surprising is that Shaun Evans is an accomplished voice artist and presumably could have duplicated Thaw's accent perfectly. I'd love to know what he was thinking.

The Goodbye Girl (1977)

painful to watch

[3/10 · 2 October 2007]

Such a predictable plot. Very strange boy with heart of gold meets bitter neurotic girl with cutesy 10 year old adult daughter. It's hate at first sight, followed by love, followed by hate, followed by love. The end.

Such annoying characters. Marsha Mason's single mom is so unpleasant and unstable that it's hard to imagine any man wanting to have a romantic relationship with her. Dreyfuss's character is written to make him a real weirdo, though as the movie progresses all the weird character traits disappear. (For example, he's portrayed early on as a health freak and very particular about what he eats; later, he's eating spaghetti and drinking cheap wine, and I think pizza appears in a later scene.) The 10 year old daughter/adult spouting Neil Simon one-liners is painful.

Only saving grace -- the "B" plot with an unwilling Dreyfuss forced to play Richard III as a flaming gay at the direction of crazed director Paul Benedict. Watching Dreyfuss mince and lisp his way through some of the great scenes in Richard III is enough to give this dreadful movie a 3.

Curse of the Demon (1957)

Watch the long version

[8/10 · 16 September 2006]

Previous posters have rightly commented that this is a fine, A-level thriller on a B-level budget with generally good acting, tight direction, great cinematography, and a good script taken from a good story. Just a few comments about the two versions of this movie. "Night of the Demon" is the original version released in U.K. and is 135 minutes long. Re-edited and retitled for the American market as "Curse of the Demon," this version is about 14 minutes shorter. A number of scenes were cut from the original but as far as I can tell, no other scenes were added or changed. Luckily for me, the DVD had both versions. Thinking that "Curse" was the original and "Night" was a sequel, I watched Curse and found it greatly entertaining but a bit disconnected and confusing at points. Reading Maltin's review later, I learned that I had one movie in two different edits. WATCH THE LONG VERSION IF YOU CAN! The missing scenes go a long way in explaining Karswell's motivation (it's not just that he's opened Pandora's box and can't close it -- he's motivated as well by the money he makes as a cult leader), as well as the peculiar actions of Karswell's mother which don't make much sense without the missing two scenes that explain her motives. Also, the missing scenes make Karswell slightly less appealing than in the edited version. All in all, a really good movie. P.S. I think the monster was OK.

The Bird with the Crystal Plumage (1970)

Flawed thriller -- Warning-SPOILERS!

[6/10 · 21 May 2006]

Atmospheric thriller uses obscured views, shadows, POV camera work, and an edgy soundtrack to create suspense in this tale of American ex-pat writer on trail of serial killer whose latest murder he witnessed. The problems with this film, though, are legion. First, the motivations of the characters are hard to believe from what little character development the story provides. Why is Sam so obsessed with finding the killer? Why does he continue to pursue it after someone tries to kill him? Why does he continue after a SECOND murder attempt on him and a threat (later undertaken) against his girlfriend? Why doesn't he return to the U.S. as he's advised by the police? Why doesn't he at lest send the girlfriend home? Second, there are plot holes galore, the principle one being the amazing coincidence that Sam's friend just happens to recognize a bird sound on a death threat tape that could only come from a certain rare bird that resides in a zoo near a suspect's apartment. And how did Julia (the girlfriend) escape from being hog-tied by the killer to call the police and save Sam just in the nick of time? And why didn't the murderer kill Julia? Third, the wrap-up that explains the killers' motives is unconvincing.

This movie is worth watching for the atmosphere but only if mediocre scripts don't bother you.

Proof of Life (2000)

Good actioner but what's with Meg's character?

[7/10 · 28 November 2005]

According to the director's commentary on the DVD, Meg Ryan demanded (and got) significant rewrites to her character. Maybe Meg should stick to acting because her character is pretty unappealing. When her husband's humanitarian engineering project is unraveling and he's terribly upset, what does she do? She complains about their life traveling around the globe (a very curious scene because one of Meg's rewrites required her character to be rewritten from a country-club wife into a social activist), dredges up her miscarriage which she blames on her husband (apparently because it happened while they were both voluntarily in Africa working on aid projects), and essentially tells him to take her back to America. When he offers to do so, she reverses course and rejects the offer. After the husband is kidnapped, Meg (almost immediately) starts to fall for Russell Crowe though somewhat later she slaps HIM in the face when he's only trying to get her husband back. Finally, when the husband is rescued and returned to Meg, she looks about as thrilled as someone presented with a stinking fish. Yikes! We should be happy at movie's end but I couldn't stop from thinking that the rescued kidnapee had gone from the frying pan into the fire.

Chicago (2002)

Huge Disappointment

[5/10 · 27 September 2005]

And you thought "Chicago" was such a great musical that no one could foul it up? You were wrong. First, you substitute Fosse's brilliant work with Rob Marshall's schlock choreography. It's not even close to the style or spirit of Fosse and just putting your dancers in Fosse-like costuming doesn't cut it. Second, you cast the homely Renee Zellweger to play Roxie, the "cute girl." Yikes! Worse, someone should have suggested to Renee that badly channeling Marilyn Monroe all the way down to the pout looks ridiculous. So what are we to do with this Academy Award winner? It's best to watch it the same way an accident reconstruction expert looks at the scene of a train wreck. In so doing we learn from this awful mishmash of MTV quick cuts, strange lighting, and massive over-direction that 1) Catherine Zeta-Jones can't dance, a fact that Marshall and his editors try to hide by rarely letting you see CZJ dance more than a few steps without a cut and by taking a lot of shots from the waist up; 2) Richard Gere is a surprisingly good song and dance man (never would have imagined); and 3) We should have bought the musical's cast album and saved ourselves a long 113 minutes.

Solaris (1972)

Groundbreaking Thoughtful Sci-fi

[8/10 · 16 September 2005]

Watching this movie in 2005, after years of sci-fi stories involving mind-controlling aliens, holodecks, Matrixes, and the like, the notion of an artificial reality created by an alien intelligence seems a bit old hat. BUT ... In 1972, Solaris was groundbreaking, thoughtful sci-fi of a sort rarely seen on the big screen. Yes, Kubrick's "2001" was cerebral and had some similar elements (think of the aged astronaut in the bleached-out white room near the end) and the Star Trek TV series had some mind-control episodes (e.g., the reworked pilot that had the crippled Captain Pike choosing to remain on Talos IV where the alien illusionists could make him believe he was whole and in the company of his beautiful lover), but as a general rule the theme of Solaris had been rarely explored. A few observations: 1) This is a very long movie that, at times, is needlessly tedious (though it's absorbing and engaging most of the time) so try to watch it on a Saturday afternoon when you can stretch out and savor it; 2) This is a film worth watching twice. Tarkovsky loads his scenes with imagery that flow from scene to scene and its hard to catch it all at once. Actually, if you get this on DVD, watch it a third time on 150%. You'll still get the subtitles and the story will seem to make more sense. There are a number of plot holes in the story but, ultimately, they don't lessen your enjoyment because Solaris is not so much about plot as it is about theme and imagery; 3) Some of the stranger elements in the film are explained by production limitations -- some scenes are in brilliant color, others in subdued color and some in black and white. Tarkovsky's artistic intent was shaped by the mundane fact that he had barely enough film to shoot the movie and what he had was a mix of black and white, some mediocre Soviet color film and a little high quality Kodak stock; 4) Finally, Tarkovsky watched 2001 before shooting Solaris and expressly said he intended to make his movie look different, but see if you agree with me that many of the lighting elements, scene compositions, and tracking shots are very 2001-esque.

A Perfect Murder (1998)

Who Cares

[6/10 · 10 September 2005]

Most of the negative reviews here have it right. The main problem with Perfect Murder is that the only "good guy" around, Ms. Paltrow, is a two-timing wife whose excuse for hooking up with a low-rent artiste is that her husband is too controlling. Duh? You marry a fabulously wealthy commodity/currency trader and you expected a Woodstock personality? We may not be rooting for the missus to be bumped off but who cares much one way or the other? Contrast this to Dial M for Murder where Grace Kelly is a much more sympathetic character. The second problem with Perfect Murder is the profusion of gaping plot holes, the principal one being that the lover/artiste who Michael Douglas forces to do the killing in fact has no reason to do so since he taped the murder deliberations between himself and Douglas. He doesn't need to attempt a murder. He just needs to blackmail Douglas. This is what eventually happens and you have to wonder why it didn't happen in the first reel. David Suchet is essentially wasted as a suspicious NYC detective -- bolstering his role might have made this clunker a little more palatable. By the way, what kind of linguist is Paltrow's character anyway. She's apparently fluent in Arabic and Spanish and whatever the Yugoslavian delegate was speaking in the opening scene -- an odd combination. Perfect Murder is a fairly slick looking film but it's not a film to go out of the way for.

Topper Takes a Trip (1938)

Flat Followup

[5/10 · 10 September 2005]

The main characters less Cary Grant reappear for a second act in the Topper saga. Because Marion Kerby materialized by Topper's side in a hotel in the first movie (gasp), Mrs. Topper wants a divorce. Ghostly Marion thwarts the New York divorce proceedings but Mrs. Topper goes to France for a quickie divorce. Topper and Marion follow but, unfortunately, hilarity does not ensue in this slow-moving, predictable farce. The jokes are tedious variations on the first films antics and don't bear reuse; there aren't any really funny moments here. But -- Constance Bennett is gorgeous as always and ever so elegantly dressed. And Roland Young's remarkable physical comedy, e.g., lurching about as if he were being pushed or pulled by the invisible Marion, is worth watching. Bottom line: if you're an old movie buff and want to flesh out the Topper series, invest a few hours when you have nothing else to do and treat it as an educational investment. Don't expect many laughs.

Coogan's Bluff (1968)

For Eastwood Fans Only

[6/10 · 9 September 2005]

Eastwood fans will want to see this movie as it marks Clint's transition from a purely Western star (i.e. TV's Rawhide and the no-name spaghetti westerns) to a star able to carry other action roles such as soldiers (Kelley's Heroes, Where Eagles Dare) and, especially, cops (Dirty Harry). And as a transition from star of the old West to cop, Coogan's Bluff does it beautifully: it starts as a Western with a wide panorama shot of the Arizona desert and ends with Clint taking off from the Pan Am building in NYC on a helicopter. Can't get more urban than that. Coogan's Bluff is also Eastwood's first pairing with Don Siegal so there are reasons for Eastwood fans to watch just to fill in the man's history. Plus, if you're a New Yorker of a certain age, you'll enjoy the NYC location shots. BUT . . . as a movie this doesn't cut it principally because none of the characters here is worth caring about. Most importantly, Deputy Sheriff Coogan is no Harry Callaghan. Dirty Harry was a tough cop but he had a moral code and no patience with those who didn't measure up. Coogan, on the other hand, is wholly self-centered. His pursuit of Ringerman is principally motivated by his desire to get the assignment over with and, after he loses the prisoner, to redeem his self-image. He uses (or abuses) every other character for his own purposes. He's no gentleman though I suspect Harry is. One thing for sure -- if Clint weren't in this film it would merit a rating of 2. As it is, even Clint's undeniable charm can't save his character and the story, for what it's worth, is implausible and at times silly. One minor point: how hard up for cash was Lee J. Cobb to play a stereotyped detective in this clunker?

Kagemusha: The Shadow Warrior (1980)

Stunning Photography

[7/10 · 7 September 2005]

This is a long, leisurely movie, albeit one with some furious and exciting battle scenes, that suffers from the difficulty an American audience has in trying to keep straight who all the characters are and who is doing what to whom. BUT . . . you don't need to follow it all that closely to appreciate the stunning photography and color Kurosawa brings to this movie. Long tracking shots that are crisp from near foreground to deep background are populated with brilliantly colored soldiers, banners, skies. This is as good as it gets in an epic. Even when you have no idea of what's happening you can't take your eyes off the screen. You'll probably need to watch it twice to get the story straight and when you do you'll probably find it a bit obvious and predictable. Doesn't matter. Watch it so you can say you've seen one of the most visually beautiful movies ever.

Shrek (2001)

Huge disappointment

[4/10 · 3 September 2005]

After reading so many positive reviews I was really looking forward to this movie which I expected to be clever and satirical. Instead, I saw a coarse, vulgar and essentially mean-spirited send up of Disney-style animated fairy tales wholly lacking in originality. Endless fart and gross out humor, obvious references to other movies (hey guys -- just because you can reference a Hidden Dragon fight sequence doesn't make your movie interesting or funny), a predictable plot, and the self-contradiction of the theme (we're all beautiful) with the attacks on the short and the fat(all short people are Napoleon wannabees, the Princes is ugly when she's fat), overwhelm the few good lines in the movie. Plus, the animation is terrible; I've no doubt that it's technically excellent but artistically it looks blocky and low budget. If you're thinking of renting this for the kids, it's too crude. And for yourself, too stupid.

Ghosts of Mars (2001)

Clichés galore, cheesy effects, plot holes aplenty

[4/10 · 2 September 2005]

Other reviews here set forth the storyline so I won't repeat it here. It's essentially this: good guys come to town, find trouble, have to unite with bad guys to survive the onslaught of even badder guys (think Union and Confederates unite to fight the Indians). Not very inventive. As others have noted this is a rehash of earlier Carpenter movies, particularly "Assault on Precinct 13." What's not been generally noted is how much this movie owes to the 1967 cult flick "Quatermass and the Pit." In both, Martians live in the ground, are exposed by human excavation, take over the minds of earthlings and set them in homicidal fury against one another. The shots of the Martians' cavern look very much like the subway extension in Quatermass. As for "Ghosts" itself, the cheesy special effects are a real downer. The movie opens with a shot of a train coming into a Martian town. It is a very, very bad miniature that even Carpenter in the DVD's commentary acknowledges is pretty poor. Unfortunately, they don't get better. The characters are pretty much stock and the acting is rudimentary though I think Henstridge is fine in the lead and Jason Statham does a good job as a horny tough cop with an Australian accent. As for Ice Cube, what can be said that hasn't been said before. He can't act -- not at all. Honestly, his acting is on a par with community theater amateurs. He glares and scowls and that about sums up his technique. He does have nice teeth though. And the storyline! If killing a zombie results in its spirit leaving the dead body and entering yours, why kill so many? Plus, even though the good guys kill scores of zombies, very few of them are possessed. Why? Some good things about "Ghosts": good heavy metal music and, in the first 30 minutes, some suspense as we try to figure out what's going on. By the way, many posts here note the gore level of this movie. As one who is quite squeamish about gore, I found the blood and body parts so phony looking that I was unaffected.

Legend of the Lost (1957)

A Desert Character Study from John Wayne (SPOILERS)

[7/10 · 25 August 2005]

Wayne is a desert guide in Timbuktu and anxious to get out of town for good. Loren is a local lady of questionable morality. Brazzi is a pious visitor seeking a guide to lead him into the deep reaches of the Sahara; he's searching for a lost treasure, the location of which was disclosed to him in a letter from his beloved, saintly father who, he believes, probably died at the site. Brazzi wants the treasure to help the poor and sick, i.e., to carry on the work of his father. Early on, Wayne makes it clear he has no respect for Loren and she returns the feeling, but Brazzi treats her in a kindly way and tries to save her soul. Wayne regards Brazzi as a hollow do-gooder. A very long trek through the Sahara eventually leads them to the treasure site which turns out to be a Roman settlement. There they find the treasure but they also find the body of Brazzi's father entwined with the remains of a woman, a lower-class (or worse) woman judging by the cheap jewelry that remains on the body. Brazzi's father had been stabbed in the back. There's also a love letter in the woman's effects that makes it clear Brazzi's father and she were having an affair. For reasons that are not entirely clear to me, Brazzi's image of his father (and, derivatively, of himself) collapses and he loses his mind. His father is transformed from saint to sinner and everything about him is revealed as a lie. He no longer wants to save Loren's soul, now he wants her body and he's willing to bribe her with the vast wealth he's discovered. But she wants to stay saved -- she rejects Brazzi's advances. Brazzi decides Loren's really in love with Wayne so he tries to shoot him. In the ensuing confusion, Brazzi steals off with the pack animals, the jewels and the water. Wayne and Loren set off on foot and catch up eventually. I reiterate the plot at some length to clarify two issues raised by other reviewers. First, Brazzi's mental breakdown is dissimilar from that of Fred C. Dobbs in Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Dobbs was motivated by greed and it was his essential paranoia that ultimately worked its way to the surface. Brazzi's character broke down because the core of his personality, i.e., the self-image of the faithful son longing to live the life of his beloved father, disintegrated when he learned the truth of his father's affair. Second, Brazzi and Wayne are not rivals for Loren's love. For most of the movie, Brazzi is protecting Loren from Wayne's ill treatment because he respects her soul; he isn't in love with her. When, later, Brazzi lusts for Loren, he's out of his mind and Loren knows it (she says he's drunk). Legends of the Lost turns out to be a really interesting character study with a fairly clever storyline, good acting by all, and, as many have noted, some gorgeous Technicolor photography. One strange note -- the music sounds like a 50s sci-fi or "chiller theater" score. It's not bad but, at least to me, it sounds out of place.

The Day Mars Invaded Earth (1962)

good but could have been better

[5/10 · 18 August 2005]

The story line has been related in other reviews so no need to repeat it. Yes, it is a low, low budget movie, shot essentially on the grounds of a mansion (a very big mansion!) and there are no effects to speak of. But the story is, at first, intriguing, and definitely creepy and atmospheric. The storyline does a very good job of keeping the viewer on edge, wondering what's going on and creating a good sense of mystery. In fact, for the first half of the film, it's more mystery/thriller than sci-fi. The problem is that the protagonist, Kent Taylor, solves the mystery without the script giving him any real basis for doing so. And once the mystery is revealed, there's not much left but to wonder whether they'll survive. And that gets wrapped up so quickly that the end comes as a surprise, both as a shock ending but also "where's the rest of the story?" Nonetheless, the atmosphere makes this worth watching. A slightly better script could have made this into a real cult movie.

My Favorite Blonde (1942)

Better than the Road pictures

[7/10 · 17 August 2005]

Carroll is a British secret agent on the run from German spies. She's carrying valuable information that must reach Los Angeles. She lands in New York and eludes her pursuers by dashing into Hope's dressing room while he's on stage doing a bad act with a penguin. The thin plot has Hope and Carroll traveling across country with the bad guys always on their tail. So far, just formula. But Hope is excellent here, much better than in the Road pictures. He's less self-conscious here -- no talking to the camera, no in-jokes between him and Crosby, no leering at Lamour. Woody Allen once said that his film persona was to a large extent modeled after Bob Hope's character and nowhere is this more evident than here. As you watch the movie, try to imagine Woody playing Hope's role. You can easily visualize Woody doing the lines as Woody and it's not much different from Hope (though Hope's character isn't a New York neurotic). Definitely worth watching.

Blood Alley (1955)

Underrated Wayne-Bacall pairing

[6/10 · 14 August 2005]

Passable Wayne outing finds the Duke as an American skipper stuck in a Red Chinese jail (don't know why) and sprung by some villagers who want him to pilot them off the mainland to Hong Kong via a rickety riverboat. Amongst the passengers is Lauren Bacall, daughter of an American doctor and an influential person in the village. A stormy love interest develops between Wayne and Bacall as he takes the slow boat through the Formosa Straits despite the presence of Chinese gunboats. Why is this movie worth watching? First, good chemistry between the Duke and Bacall. She's believably tough and has some good moments putting the Duke in his place. Second, interesting photography and sets seem to capture the feel of the China coast though it was shot (as one reviewer has noted) in California. Third, the plot moves pretty quickly though, strangely, nothing much dramatic happens. And this brings up the flaw in the movie. At the outset, the Duke tells the village leaders that their scheme to use a paddle-boat on an ocean escape is crazy -- the boat is extremely slow and, being flat-bottomed, is likely to sink in rough ocean water. Moreover, they have no charts. We later learn that the compass is flaky as well. But we never see Duke solving any of these problems, never laying out a plan or having any sort of technical conversation with anyone on board. He's not rattles at all when they encounter a raging gale. He just pilots the boat as if he were driving from New York to Albany and encountering some rain along the way. It's just too easy and the drama of the journey is lost. Best moment: Bacall pushing Duke into a wall and telling him "And keep your hands off me." Worst moment: realizing that Mike Mazurki, with no makeup and not even a hint of an accent, is supposed to be a Chinese villager!

Berlin Correspondent (1942)

Improbable plot, heavy handed propaganda, leading lady lisps

[3/10 · 11 August 2005]

Ouch! This wildly implausible story finds Dana Andrews as an American radio correspondent broadcasting censored news back to America shortly before America's entry into WWII. Andrews, however, is getting secret information about military failures of the German army and covertly incorporating them into his newscasts. The secret info is then published in the American newspaper that has the code, much to the Germans embarrassment. The contrived plot has a Gestapo officer use his fiancée to cozy up to Andrews and learn the source of his information. She is almost immediately successful in solving the mystery (it was that easy?) and informing her fiancé. But the joke's on her when Andrews' source turns out to be her father and he's tortured and sent to an asylum for execution. Incredibly, the Gestapo doesn't execute or even arrest Andrews as a spy but lets him go about his business. Not to fear, Andrews saves the day. How? He just impersonates a Nazi psychiatrist (complete with colonel's uniform), visits the asylum, arranges the father's escape, and ships him to Switzerland. How does he solve the problem of the border crossing? Easy. He gives the father his passport, which he had altered by a friend so the 60 year old father would pass as Andrews. The plot gets far worse from here but it's too much too describe. As for the tone of the movie, the treatment of the Germans is so cartoonish and the dialogue so over the top that you'll cringe. Yes, this was a propaganda film but a little more subtlety would have gone a long way. There is, however, one reason to watch this horror: Virginia Gilmore as the Gestapo officer's fiancée. First, she is gorgeous. Second, she has the worst lisp of any leading lady I've ever seen on film. Every "this" becomes "thith." It's really amazing she got any roles at all.

End of the Game (1975)

Obscure, slow-to-get-started, but intriguing film

[7/10 · 8 July 2005]

This very artsy movie has within it the elements of a fine noir thriller, but stumbles over its own excesses. First the good news: there are three superb performances here. Martin Ritt (best known as director of "Norma Rae","Hud", "Sounder", "The Spy Who Came in From the Cold", and many others), is superb as the weary but guileful old detective out to settle a score. So is Jon Voight as his newly assigned assistant; Voight's performance right from the beginning suggests he is a seriously unbalanced character and makes much of the remaining action plausible. Though dismissed by some reviewers as bad acting, this really was the only way to make this character work. Finally, Robert Shaw is the bloodless villain, recreating essentially the same character as he did the previous year in "The Taking of Pelham One, Two, Three." Now for the bad news: the plot is murky and the ending illogical; the direction and cinematography are grotesque (apparently there is more fog in Switzerland than London and Kodak had a special on grainy film); and the score is so whimsical that it suggests a parody of the genre. Best subtle scene: after Martin Ritt's character is apparently mauled by the Shaw character's guard dog, he (out of everyone's sight) removes a protective shield he had under his coat. That's a first clue that the old detective is up to something.

Forty Naughty Girls (1937)

weak character, good plot

[6/10 · 2 February 2005]

Schoolmarm Hildegarde Withers (Zasu Pitts) and her friend Inspector Oscar Piper (James Gleason) go out for a night on Broadway. Naturally, no evening on the town can take place without murder, not when Hildegarde and the Inspector are around. This entry in the series is played more broadly for laughs than its predecessors but not much more than typical for the B-level crime movies of the day. The problem here, from my perspective, is that Zasu Pitts's character is so different from the great Edna May Oliver's that only the name appears to be the same. Edna May's Hildegard Withers was a feisty old girl who basically ran the Inspector's case for him despite his grousing. Zasu plays her standard ditz and the movie suffers for it. It's hard to imagine the Inspector putting up with her; moreover, some of the slapstick seems forced. On the other hand, this entry is saved by a very clever plot with plenty of false leads and twists. The film might have played better as a straight mystery rather than mystery/comedy. By the way, the lovely Marjorie Lord gets an early turn here as a singer/hoofer type.