Category Archives: Movies Based on Novels

The Awakening (1980)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: Queen possesses his daughter.

Based on the 1903 Bran Stoker novel ‘The Jewel of the Seven Stars’, the film centers around Matthew (Charlton Heston) who is at an archeological dig in Egypt in 1961 along with his assistant Jane (Susanah York) and his wife Anne (Jill Townsend) who is pregnant with their child. One day he and Jane come upon a lost tomb that houses Queen Kara. When the tomb is opened it unleashes her spirit, which resides itself in the baby that Anne is carrying. The delivery is painful and at one point puts Anne into a trance, but the baby survives even though at first it was considered still born. Anne takes the child and leaves the country while also divorcing Matthew. Eighteen years later Matthew is now married to Jane and working at a college professor in England. He reunites with his daughter Margaret (Stephanie Zimblast) but finds her displaying odd behaviors and eventually realizes that she’s possessed.

The movie seems intent on stealing ideas and effects from The Omen, as well as The Exorcist. The scares and effects are light and at times non-existent, which is the biggest thing going against it. When there is a killing, it comes off as very routine, or something stolen from another, better movie, particularly the sequence dealing with York falling from a balcony. The on-location shooting, shot mostly in Egypt, is picturesque, but that’s unfortunately about the only good thing I can say about it as everything else fall flat and is boring.

Heston’s presence doesn’t help things. During the opening sequence, when he’s supposed to be ‘younger’ he already looks too old, like he’s better prepared to be a grandfather than a father expecting a newborn. The only thing that changes when he gets ‘older’ is that he grows a goatee, which in some ways actually makes him appear younger. York has the same problem. During the modern-day scenes, she has longer hair while in the segments when she was supposed to be younger, she has short hair, which makes her appear older and the styles should’ve been reversed.

Townsend, this marks to date her last film appearance, doesn’t change at all between the two time periods and looks more like Zimblast’s older sister than her mother. My biggest gripe is the way her eyes never blink when she’s in her trance, which would’ve caused severe damage to the cornea and potential vision loss. Meaning that when she does ultimately snap out of her trance it most likely would’ve blinded her though here it has no effect.

Zimblast is the best thing about it. The scenes done with her inside her therapist’s office are effective and it would’ve worked better had she been the main character all the way through. She could’ve been like Linda Blair in The Exorcist, an otherwise nice person who doesn’t understand why she’s having these strange thoughts and impulses, and the viewer could’ve gotten wrapped up in hoping she could find some answers before it’s too late. Making it a mystery about what was causing it would’ve been more intriguing than spelling it all out right away.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending is a huge letdown as it has Heston dying while Zimblast goes completely into queen mode but then cuts to the credits. This then leaves open a whole plethora of questions. Like what happens to her? Does she go out and terrorize the world as this queen, or remain in the tomb and if so, what does she do there? Is she ever able to fight off the spirit and come back to being herself? This is stuff we needed to see and not just have left hanging, which makes the viewer feel unsatisfied and like they’ve only seen half a movie.

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Release: October 31, 1980

Runtime: 1 Hour 45 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Mike Newell

Studio: Orion Pictures

Available: 

 

 

When Time Ran Out (1980)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 0 out of 10

4-Word Review: A big volcanic eruption.

Hank (Paul Newman) works on an oil rig that’s on a small tropical island who becomes concerned that the giant volcano there is ready to erupt. Shelby (William Holden) owns and runs a resort hotel that’s also on the island and is reticent to accept the warnings that Hank gives him as he’s afraid the news might panic his guests and cause undue harm to his business. He’s further backed up by Bob (James Franciscus) who has inherited the island from his father and wants to turn the location into a tourist local. He tries to assure the guests that even if the volcano erupts the hotel will be sturdy enough to withstand it, but Hank openly disagrees and tells those that are willing to listen that they should come with him who will take them to a safer location.

While disaster flicks were quite plentiful during the 70’s and often times ridiculed, I found most of them to be marginally entertaining and sometimes even well done, but this one is quite clearly the absolute worst. The idea for the film was ‘inspired’ by the 1969 novel ‘The Day the World Ended’ by Gordon Thomas, which was the true account of when Mount Pelee erupted in 1902 and killed 30,000 people. Had it stuck to being a historical recreation it might’ve worked, but producer Irwin Allen decided to modernize the setting and characters until nothing from the original story is left making it just another generic formula piece too reminiscent of other better films that had done it before and which offers no substance, or anything new.

The characters are of a stock variety and unable to propel the story. Newman is especially weak, he’s one of my favorite actors, but here it’s quite obvious that his heart wasn’t in it and he’s just phoning it in the whole way. Bisset is also wasted and the secret love affair that they have, she’s supposed to be marrying Holden who proposes to her, isn’t interesting because there’s never any big clash between the two men, so what’s the point of introducing a dramatic element if it comes with no payoff?

The rest of the cast suffer similarly boring dilemmas including Red Buttons who plays a fugitive being tailed by a cop played by Ernest Borgnine. The two are immediately at odds, but then when Borgnine gets injured during the volcanic event Buttons decides to come to his aid. While this is initially touching it ends up getting overplayed as Buttons continues to help him more and more until you forget that they were ever adversaries and the original irony gets completely lost.

Veronica Hamel is wasted here too playing the wife of Franciscus who is apparently unaware that she’s been played throughout her marriage, as he’s been secretly carrying on with another woman. I just can’t believe that she would be that fooled that much. Most women have a sense when something in their relationship is off, and I think she would’ve internally known he was cheating even if she couldn’t prove it. The scene where she’s finally forced to face the harsh reality doesn’t have much energy as all she does is walk away. Having her angrily attack the cheater, or the other women, or maybe even pushed them into the lava when it hits the place, would’ve given it some interesting payoff, instead of it just ending on a flat note like everything else.

Having so many people refuse to go with Newman to seek safety I didn’t buy into. There was nothing special about the hotel, which resembled more like a business building, that would convince me that it was ‘specially built, for volcanoes and would be a safe place to stay. Most people when they’re in a dangerous situation want to be doing something and not just sitting in one place waiting to die and feebly hoping for the best. Granted there still might be some that would choose to stay behind, but I felt it would’ve been a much smaller number and with that in mind we should’ve seen them pay for their bad decision by observing the shocked looks on their faces when the hotel crumbles versus an explosion that gets matted onto the film negative and looks completely fake.

I could almost handle the cardboard characters and storyline if the special effects were at least halfway decent, but they end up being the biggest letdown. Apparently, the budget got slashed significantly halfway through the production forcing them to put up with subpar effects that is just so bad it’s laughable. What’s the point of even doing a disaster flick if the whole source of what we’re supposed to fear, which is the volcano, resembles nothing more than an animated painting? Even the flowing hot lava looks cheesy like it was all done in front of a green screen making the whole crossing the bridge segment, which was intended to be the film’s tension packed highlight, come off as boring and unconvincing.

The only positive thing I can say about it is that Franciscus plays an excellent antagonist. He spent most of his career as generic good guys, so having him go against type for once, was a refreshing change of pace, but unfortunately the rest of the film is so bad that his efforts were largely forgotten and didn’t help propel his career in any type of interesting way.

My Rating: 0 out of 10

Released: March 28, 1980

Runtime: 1 Hours 49 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: James Goldstone

Studio: Warner Brothers

Available: DVD, Amazon Video, YouTube

 

 

Raise the Titanic (1980)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: Vessel brought to surface.

Government operative Dirk Pitt (Richard Jordan) along with the CIA become aware of an abandoned mine in Siberia that had a rare mineral called byzanium, which could be used to shoot down nuclear missiles. It was supposedly packaged into boxes and loaded onto the Titanic. The US Government now wants to obtain those boxes before the Soviets do and come to the conclusion that the only way to do it would be by raising the sunken ship to the surface.

The film is based on the 1976 novel of the same name written by Clive Cussler and universally panned for its weak characterizations and dialogue, but the plot itself was intriguing enough for Hollywood to take a stab at it. The result though isn’t much better as there’s too many people in the cast many of which are talking head figures like Jason Robards. He’s an excellent actor, but here his only task is to relay orders from other top officials and then stand around and look worried as the plans come into play. David Selby is also quite weak, but this is more because he isn’t an effective leading man and his overall presence is transparent and unnecessary.

Jordan is the only one that does well and had he remained at the center of it, it would’ve worked better. However, there’s no one to become attached to emotionally and the banal dialogue doesn’t give any of them any real distinction. They all seem alike and when one of the submersibles with several men on it implodes it has no impact and you really don’t care.

The book, as flawed as it may have been, actually did things a little better, at least plot wise. It had a hurricane come in, which allowed the soviets to take over the ship and hold the rest of the crew hostage, which then culminated in a battle. The movie though doesn’t touch on any of this. Here only one Soviet spy boards the ship but then realizes he’s easily outnumbered and essentially gives up making it all seem rather pointless to have introduced that angle at all. Granted the hurricane wasn’t included for budgetary reasons, but it certainly would’ve helped bring in more tension of which there isn’t much.

The way the ship gets brought back up to the surface is a bit suspect. I have no expertise in the matter, but it seemed too easy to the extent that it feels almost like a non-event. The special effects are subpar. It’s obvious that it’s a toy model and therefore not half as impressive to look at as it comes to the surface as I’m sure the producers thought it would be. The only moment that I did like is when Jordan boards the ship for the first time. Unfortunately, he only enters one room and then it cuts away. Would’ve been fascinating seeing him walk all around the ship going into many different rooms, but this was again likely scrapped due to the same budget constraints.

Spoiler Alert!

The biggest letdown is with the ending, which is similar to the one in the book where they find the boxes inside the ship’s vault to be filled with nothing more than sand. Then it is deduced, using wildly circumstantial clues, that the rare mineral was buried in a gravesite at a cemetery in Southby, England. However, when this is determined the American agents decide to leave it there, but why was it so important to get their hands on the mineral before, but now suddenly it isn’t? What if the Soviets, or some terrorist group, figure out the locations of the mineral and dig it up? Wouldn’t that still create the same frightening scenario that the US was hoping to avoid when they took so much time, effort, and money to bring up the ship?

This makes the whole thing not only a waste of time for the viewer, but also the taxpayers who funded what amounts to being just a wild goose chase. It becomes an inadvertent satire on government waste and misguided operations and on that level, it succeeds, but as a story it should remain sunk and submerged.

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Released: July 30, 1980

Runtime: 1 Hour 54 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Jerry Jameson

Studio: ITC Entertainment

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Fawesome, Plex, Roku, Tubi, YouTube

M*A*S*H (1970)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Rebellious surgeons break rules.

In 1951 during the Korean War Frank Pierce (Donald Sutherland), who goes by the nickname Hawkeye, arrives at the Mobile Army Surgical Hospital as their new surgeon. He gets placed in a tent with Frank Burns (Robert Duvall), but the two don’t get along due to Frank’s religious zealotry, so he gets transferred to another tent. Hawkeye then gets placed with another new surgeon nicknamed Trapper John (Elliot Gould) and the two, with their irreverent sense of humor and non-conforming ways, immediately become best friends. Not only do they break most of the rules, but they also routinely play pranks on others with their biggest ones being on Frank who falls for Margaret (Sally Kellerman) who is a head nurse.

The film, which is based on the 1968 novel ‘MASH: A Novel About Three Army Doctors” by Richard Hooker, which in turn was based on his experiences as an Army doctor during the Korean War, gets largely overshadowed by the TV-Series, which ran for 11 seasons and has become a huge cult hit. In retrospect I actually like the movie better. Robert Altman’s direction where conversations and actions overlap helps to give the setting a realistic kinetic feel where nothing seems staged. While I could’ve done without his patent whistling I still liked the portrayal of the Hawkeye character better here. In the series Alan Alda played him as a very talkative, loud, and opinionated person that dominated every scene he was in while here the character is more like just one of the guys that occasionally pushes-the-envelope, but only because he, like everyone else there, is a victim of the bleak circumstances that they’re in. This also has a much better balance between the humor and drama. The show had a tendency to get preachy but the movie manages to make the occasional serious point, but still overall remains consistently funny.

On the negative side it’s highly anachronistic with the characters behaving too much like it’s the late 60’s instead of the early 50’s almost like they’re a bunch of stoned, ‘free love’ hippies who found a time machine and decided to go back 20 years. While the sexual escapades are amusing it does tend to get one dimensional. Everyone is portrayed as being a sex maniac with no inhibition or restraint. Having some not engage, either because they just weren’t that into it, or wanting to remain faithful to their spouses/ romantic partners back home, would’ve given it a better balance and certainly been more realistic for the period.

Having Hawkeye immediately mock Frank when he wants to pray seemed off too. Granted there were atheists and non-religious people back then, but they tended to be in-the-closet as religion was still the dominant cultural force. If Hawkeye and crew got annoyed later on when Frank attempted to let’s say ‘convert’ them then it would be understandable, but upfront I’d think he’d not be so aggressive with his disdain and might even politely play along a bit, especially since he had just arrived there and wouldn’t know who else he’d be offending with his off-handed comments.

It’s all very disappointing the way Frank gets written out halfway through. I really liked the way Duvall played the role. On the TV-series the Frank character was a benign snobby dimwit that was constantly the butt of all the jokes and couldn’t do much about it, but here Duvall plays the part with an aggressive, even menacing edge that would’ve made him a great nemesis that should’ve allowed him to stay all the way through. Also, it’s a bit ridiculous that he gets put into a strait jacket after he has a confrontation with Hawkeye. Many people can and do get into fights and are not immediately deemed ‘insane’ because of it. If anything, he should’ve been handcuffed along with Hawkeye since it was Hawkeye who goaded him into it.

The Hot Lips character is another disappointment. Initially I thought she was great as her haughty ways helped give the proceedings some conflict, but then halfway through she does a complete Jekyll and Hyde. Initially she hates the place and just about everyone in it, even becomes a victim to a cruel prank, but then later during the big football game she’s seen on the side lines as a cheerleader aggressively rooting for them to win the game when logically you’d think she would be pulling for the other team.

Apparently, the movie’s logic is that since it gets revealed that she’s been having sex with Duke, played by Tom Skerrit, that this then ‘changed’ her. She’s now ‘liberated’ and no longer frigid/uptight, but it’s too drastic a switch that only further adds to the film’s overblown concept that sex can somehow ‘solve everything’.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: January 25, 1970

Runtime: 1 Hour 56 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Robert Altman

Studio: 20th Century Fox

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, YouTube

 

 

Where Are the Children? (1985)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 2 out of 10

4-Word Review: Her kids go missing.

Nancy (Jill Clayburgh) is a married to Clay (Max Gail) and living in Cape Cod with their two children Michael (Harley Cross) and Missy (Elisabeth Harnois). Nancy has a dark past. Nine years earlier she had two other children, Peter and Lisa, who vanished and later found drowned. She was convicted of the crimes but then released on a legal technicality. She remarried, as her first husband (Frederic Forrest), despondent over the deaths, killed himself though his body was never found. Everything was going great until the nine-year anniversary of the deaths when her current two children go missing while playing in their backyard. Could this be just a coincidence, or is someone from the past crimes involved with this one?

The film is based on the Mary Higgins Clark debut novel of the same name, which in turn was inspired by the real-life case of Alice Crimmins, who was convicted in the deaths of her two children, but like in the movie, was later released. The concept has a lot of potential, but for me a lot of tension gets lost when right away we’re shown who the bad guy is and his interactions with the kids. Don’t get me wrong, Forrest is a fine actor and it’s fun seeing him play a nut case and the kids are really good too, but it would’ve been more intriguing had we seen things solely from Clayburgh’s perspective where we really didn’t know much more than she did and having the kids suddenly disappear could’ve been played up as a surreal nightmare.

It’s also cartoonish when the bad guy, who’s been spying on them through a telescope, has to write in his notebook in big letters ‘TOMORROW’ with an exclamation mark in reference to his plan to go through with the kidnapping the next day, but people only write notes to themselves when they’re living busy lives and doing several different projects at once. With this guy it’s the only thing he’s been obsessing over, so therefore no note was needed as he was clearly not going to forget.

The supporting cast is quite dull particularly Gail as the second husband. It’s great that he takes his wife’s side and insists she has nothing to do with the missing kids, but after a while I would think, some doubt would have to creep in. He keeps insisting that he ‘knows’ she didn’t do it, but how could he? He wasn’t home when it happened and because it’s such a coincidence with the past crime any normal person would have to have some suspicion towards her. Having him start to suspect her, even if it’s just slightly, as the film progresses would’ve created an interesting subplot and made his character less one dimensional.

The main character has problems too. For one thing the odds of her having two kids in her second marriage, that are the exact same age as the two from her previous one, including the boy older than the girl, is too astronomically high to be believable. Even her having just one kid, compared to two from the first, would’ve been enough and not made the kids from the second one seem like just a generic carbon copy.

I also felt that if someone has lost her kids in such a traumatic way that she’d been more protective of these to the point that she might go a bit overboard by not letting them play outside or only letting them go out if she was always right there to watch them. Her taking a shower while the kids are outside makes her look irresponsible. When I was a kid one parent would watch the kids while the other one bathed. Bad things and accidents can happen to kids in a matter of seconds and with the water running, she’d have no way to hear it.

For a career move taking this role was a big mistake. Jill had been in several films during the late 70’s and early 80’s that had won high acclaim and she seemed set to become the big leading lady of the 80’s, but she then made the mistake of starring in Hanna K. a Costa-Garvas directed film that saw limited release, so for many filmgoers it seemed like she had disappeared from the film scene and was no longer in the limelight for a good four years. This film role was meant to be her ‘comeback’, but she really doesn’t have much to do for most of it other than sitting around inside the police station wearing a stupor like expression. She kind of comes on strong at the end when she decides she’ll go and save the kids on her own, but she’s just a thin woman with no weapon or any idea who the bad guy is, or how many of them, making it likely that she could easily be overpowered and thus should’ve let the police do it instead.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending, and the reveal of who the bad guy is, is a big letdown. Like I said earlier Forrest gives an interesting performance, but to have him be the first husband who somehow faked his own suicide, isn’t plausible. For one thing it should’ve been reported as a missing person case and not a suicide since his body was never found. At the very least his identity should’ve been kept a mystery till the end when Jilly confronts him in the home versus having sharp-eyed kid recognize him earlier from a news report.

His motivations for why he seeks ‘revenge’ on Jill is confusing. Supposedly he was a closet pedophile who played kinky games on Jill who he forced to dress like a child and when she refused to keep doing that, he started to do it on their kids and then killed them when they threatened to tell, but if anything, he should’ve been happy that Jill was accused of the crime while he was allowed to walk free without suspicion. Would’ve made more sense had the husband really killed himself and then someone who was close to him, like maybe a brother, decided to seek out revenge on Jill while under the mistaken impression that she really had murdered the first children and then unjustly let out.

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: November 15, 1986

Runtime: 1 Hour 37 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Bruce Malmuth

Studio: Columbia Pictures

Available: DVD (Out-of-Print), Amazon Video, YouTube

 

 

Loophole (1981)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Robbing an ‘impenetrable’ vault.

Mike (Albert Finney) is a career safe cracker who finds their last job unrewarding as the loot was less than expected. He decides their next project will be breaking into a bank safe that is supposedly impenetrable, but with one unknown loophole as it’s housed near a main sewer line. He comes up with the idea that he and his men will go into the sewer tunnels and drill holes through the brick walls until they can get underneath where the safe is and then drill through the floor of that until they can get inside. Of course, once they get into the safe it will set off alarms, but the police will not suspect anyone’s inside as the safe door will still be locked shut. In order for their plans to work they’ll need the assistance of Stephen (Martin Sheen) an architect who will be able to locate where the safe is while they’re tunneling underground. At first, he resists, but pressure by his wife (Susannah York) for him to maintain their affluent lifestyle eventually gets him to agree.

The film starts out in a highly unusual way in that with no backstory, or set-up, or even credits jolt the viewer right into a robbery in progress, watching in detail as Mike and his assistants break into a safe, which is disconcerting.  I almost thought there was some sort of glitch in the streaming of the film, and I had somehow come into it in the middle half and completely bypassed the beginning and this goes on for about 5-minutes. Without knowing who these characters are, or why they’re doing it, it’s not interesting or captivating. The result is off-putting and gives the production an amateur vibe.

When the story does finally come into play it still remains fairly awkward. I was surprised that Finney, who had taken a 4-year break from film acting, would choose this one for his ‘comeback’. The character he plays here is dull and one-dimensional and offers no real arc, or emotion. It’s interesting to an extent to see that he lives in affluence with a family, but the woman who plays his wife looks too similar to York, who plays Sheen’s spouse and thus it gets confusing at times, and more effort should’ve been made to make her distinct from the other.

Sheen does better as at the very least you see some change occur in the person he plays and some drama, at least at the very beginning, in his scenes. I liked how he’s resistant to the plan initially by constantly desribing himself as ‘an honest man’, which allows for some tension, but the way he ultimately caves is disappointing. There is the fact that he’s unemployed and in need of the money, but there still should’ve remained friction all the way through. If honesty is truly important to him then there should be lingering guilt about what he’s getting into and evidence of an inner struggle versus him ultimately just becoming ‘one of the guys’.

The robbery itself is pedestrian and been done before in other films. Having their truck get a flat tire, in order for the crew to slide through a trap door of the vehicle and into the manhole cover of the sewer without being detected, seemed too risky especially since it gets done in the daytime instead of under the darkness of night. At one point even the police drive by, which could’ve backfired as once the robbery has been committed, and the investigators realize how it was done they’ll immediately backtrack to the truck and research from the license plate who owned or rented it. Making it probable that they might not have been able to get away with it and would ultimately be caught.

Spoiler Alert!

The most disappointing aspect should’ve been the most exciting. It has to do with the sewer tunnels flooding during an unexpected rainstorm. Finney and his colleagues decide to wade their way through it, but Sheen hangs back insisting he’d rather stay in the safe though this will risk him getting caught once the bank opens on Monday morning.  Watching the water push up through the hole in the floor of the safe eventually creating an entire pool, which gives Sheen less and less room to stay above it, is quite intense, but then the film sells out in the most horrible fashion I’ve even seen, where he’s shown ‘waking up’ inside his own bathtub with absolutely no explanation of how he got out of the safe. If that’s not a copout I don’t what is and seriously ruins the film to the extent that I suggest no one bother to watch it as the stupid ending just destroys the whole thing.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: March 13, 1981

Runtime: 1 Hour 45 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: John Quested

Studio: Goldcrest Films International

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Fawesome, Plex, Roku, Tubi, Amazon Video

 

Evil Under the Sun (1982)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: Who killed the actress?

Hercule Poirot (Peter Ustinov) travels to a luxurious hotel in the Adriatic Sea in order to investigate a diamond that was purchased at Tiffany’s and given to a famous actress named Arlena (Diana Rigg) but later found to be a fake. When Poirot arrives at the resort, he finds the actress to be quite bitchy and disliked by everyone, including Daphne (Maggie Smith) the resort owner who resents Arlena’s fame, as she herself tried out to be an actress at the same time as Arlena, but her career never took off.  There’s also writer Rex (Roddy McDowall) who wants to publish Arlena’s biography, which she now refuses to sign-off on. Producers Odell and Myra (James Mason, Sylvia Miles) resent Arlena because she won’t star in one of their plays, Christine (Jame Birkin) hates her because she’s too flirty with Christine’s husband Patrick (Nicholas Clay), while there’s friction between Arlena and Linda (Emily Hone), Arlena’s 15-year-old stepdaughter, who resents her caustic ways. When Arlena does turn up dead while at the beach it’s up to Poirot to figure out, from the plethora of suspects, which one did it.

This was the second installment with Ustinov playing Poirot after the success of Death on the Nile, and the film starts out with plenty of potential. The exotic locale, filmed on the Balearic Islands, is definitely stunning and a chief asset. The comedic touches, particularly the acerbic interplay between the characters, is another strong point, and helps to make the first hour fun, despite the fact that nothing much happens you’re waiting for the murder to finally happen to the point you begin to wonder if it ever will.

While the production values are high the soundtrack gets overblown. It has a sort of show tune vibe to it, which isn’t bad, but not a good fit for the material. Sure, it’s about an actress who’s starred in some stage productions, but this is something that requires music that helps build suspense, and the stuff here not only doesn’t do that, but actually becomes intrusive. When the characters of Patrick and Myra are boating over to the dead body lying on the beach, the music should’ve been soft and menacing, but here it’s upbeat and booming and this is equally true when Poirot retraces the steps of the killer, where the sound should be downbeat and lowkey and not the reverse.

Spoiler Alert!

The biggest issue I had was with the mystery itself. Normally Agatha Christie does a great job of weaving an elaborate crime, but the resolution here is less than satisfying. While I had never read the 1940 novel of which this is based on, I quickly deemed the Birkin character as being the culprit and the most obvious suspect, so finding out it was her offered no surprise. The way Poirot solves it requires extreme guessing with no proof, like the fact that Birkin has a bottle of sun lotion, or changes the time on Linda’s watch, which is stuff that can’t be fully proven and in a lot of ways a stretch to even deduce. The whole signature thing where the killer (Birkin’s husband) signs his name in the hotel registry, which is a different name that how he signs his cheque, but Poirot is still able to confidently proclaim it’s the same handwriting seemed sketchy too as it didn’t look the same to me.

End of Spoiler Alert!

While the ending is a big letdown the performances by the women are splendid and help keep it entertaining through the lulls. Rigg camps it up perfectly and I enjoyed Smith whose ability to convey droll humor is second to none. Miles is really great too especially her oversized hats, Hone, who’s only ever been in two movies, is fun as the teen who doesn’t hesitate to speak her opinion. Birkin is also excellent particularly because at the time she was a big sex symbol, but here downplays that by covering up her body and coming off as someone who is drab and insecure.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: March 5, 1982

Runtime: 1 Hour 57 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Guy Hamilton

Studio: EMI Films

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Fawesome, Plex, Roku, Tubi, YouTube

 

Been Down So Long It Looks Like Up to Me (1971)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Ahead of his time.

Based on the 1966 novel of the same name by Richard Farina the story follows Paps (Barry Primus) who attends college in the ’50’s but behaves more like someone out of the 60’s and finds it challenging dealing with the rigid mind set of the other students. He gets into a relationship with Kristin (Linda De Coff) but it ends in acrimony when he refuses to meet her parents whom he deems part of the WASP establishment. He eventually gets in with Heff (David Downing) and Jack (Susan Tyrrell) who dabble in drugs and convince him to travel down to Cuba just as the Cuban revolution gets underway, which leads to tragic results.

While the novel did have some humor this film has none, which really hurts it. The expectation would be for a lot of irreverence but shockingly that doesn’t come and instead it’s talky that drones on and doesn’t lead anywhere. The opening bit has some comedy as Paps comes onto and makes out with his attractive young new landlord, played by Marian Clarke, but even that flubs because it brings out the sexually carefree culture of the late 60’s, but since this is supposed to be the 50’s it’s out of place and doesn’t help to establish the staid setting that our main character is supposedly feels imprisoned by.

Farina, who sadly died in 1966 just 2 days after his book got published, had far more interesting experiences in real life attending Cornell University during the late 50’s where he befriended fellow classmate Thomas Pynchon and got suspended for getting involved in student protests, but nothing like that gets shown here. At one point Kristin accuses Paps, during one of their spats, that he does nothing but sit around and waste away and that’s the absolute truth. He’s not actively propelling the action and seems like he’s dropping out of his own movie. I was expecting more lively confrontations between he and the other students, but outside of a few snarky comments this never comes to any adequate fruition. The scenic, tranquil landscape, filmed on location in Meadville, Pennsylvania, is the film’s only asset, but otherwise it stagnates badly.

There are a couple of good moments. One involves actor James Noble playing a priest who is duped into coming to Paps room in order to ‘cure’ him of his ‘deadly illness’, which is funny particularly Noble’s tiny pocketbook of candles and crosses that he brings out in order to perform the ‘last rites’. The painting of an ape that scares Paps while he has a drug trip has some diverting camera work though would’ve been better had the ape come to life though with the special effects capabilities of that era it would’ve been difficult. De Coff, who did just one more movie after this before retiring from the business to become an ordained minister, is really refreshing especially her appealing face, which is attractive but without the glossy Hollywood look.

It’s interesting seeing young stars before they were famous including Raul Julia, John P. Ryan, Susan Tyrrell, Zack Norman as a drug dealer, Nicholas Hammond who later became famous for playing Spiderman, and pop music composer/singer Paul Jabara. Bruce Davidson also gets featured in a small bit, but I was surprised he wasn’t made the star since he had a prominent role in Last Summer, which was released before this one was produced, and looked more age appropriate since he was in his 20’s while Primus was already 32. Either way the script doesn’t bring out these co-star’s talents effectively and their presence doesn’t lift the film out of its otherwise deadening pace.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: September 15, 1971

Runtime: 1 Hour 31 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Jeffrey Young

Studio: Paramount

Available: Amazon Video, YouTube

 

The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea (1976)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 4 out of 10

4-Word Review: They dissect a cat.

Jonathan (Jonathan Kahn) is a 14-year-old who lives with his mother (Sarah Miles) and nanny Mrs. Palmer (Margo Cunningham) in a beachfront house along the sea after the death of his father three years earlier. Jonathan enjoys his friendship with a group of boys lead by Chief (Earl Rhodes), but his mother does not approve due to Chief’s anti-social sentiment forcing Jonathan to have to sneak out on the sly to see them. One day Jonathan finds a peep hole in his bedroom wall that allows him to see inside his mother’s bedroom, and he begins to peer in on her when she’s undressed, and this creates an unhealthy arousal. When his mother begins a relationship with a sailor named Jim (Kris Kristofferson) he becomes jealous and conveys as much to Chief who devises a sinister plan to ‘solve the problem’.

Lewis John Carlino had a highly respected career as a screenwriter garnering 4 Academy Award nominations for best screenplay, but his three forays as director weren’t as successful and all started out well but ended up just missing the mark. This one was no exception as many critics at the time felt the problem lay in adapting a novel, that was written by Yukio Mishima, which was set in Japan, and trying to convert it to English society. The cultures differences that make up the complex Japanese society that were so integral to the characters in the book gets completely lost in the translation leaving the viewer feeling cold, detached, and genuinely confused when it’s over.

The on-location shooting filmed in Dartmouth, Devon, England, is excellent and the one thing that helps the movie stand-out particularly the isolated hillside house that gives the atmosphere an almost surreal-like feel. There’s also a really creepy performance by Rhodes who nails it as a highly intellectualized kid who displays no moral compass and effectively comes-off as a very believable young sociopath. However, these moments gets coupled with some very disturbing ones dealing with animal cruelty which includes a very drawn-out scene involving the killing and dissecting of a cat as well as putting a firecracker in a seagull’s mouth and while no animal was actually harmed during the production it still left many audiences at the time upset and will very likely do the same with viewers today.

The film’s biggest flaw though is that it doesn’t interpret the character’s actions in any way that helps makes sense of their motivations and for the most part they’re all quite two-dimensional. Jonathan’s arousal at seeing his naked mother needs much better explaining. Most kids aren’t this way, so what is it about his psyche that causes him to enjoy it without any guilt or shame? The movie gives us no clue, nor does it explain how his father died and when you add in the boy’s weird behavior and you start to wonder if the Jonathan maybe had something to do with it, which would’ve opened an interesting subtext if even brought up subtlety, but the script fails to touch on it.

The book makes the reasons for the son’s actions clearer. For instance in the novel the boy losses respect for the sailor when he sees him jump into a water fountain, which he considers to be undignified and the movie really needed to have some similar moment as the kid, like in the book, is initially in awe of the man, but it’s never totally clear what creates the deadly shift. Also, when the son is caught peeping in at his mom the response by his mother in the book is different as she feels the boy should receive a severe punishment, but the sailor, in hopes of becoming ‘friends’ with the kid whom he’s now helping to raise, resists, but the film flubs this scene too by treating it almost like a forgettable throwaway moment that has no impact versus one that would’ve helped reveal the sailor in a more in depth way.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending, which should’ve been a shocker, falls flat as well. In the novel it’s made clear that the boys plan to drug and dissect the sailor just like they did with the cat and they even bring along the tools to do it, in the movie we only witness him drinking the spiked tea. The camera then zooms way out showing the boys at an extreme distance where it’s not obvious what they’re doing. To really make a memorable impression we should’ve seen the boys stab the sailor several times with their knives, which would’ve been far more startling. I felt too there needed to be a reaction from the mother. Does she find out what they did, or does his violent demise remain a mystery? How does her relationship with her son evolve, or devolve afterwards? These questions remain unanswered making the movie seem less like a story and more as a concept that’s never adequately fleshed out.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: April 5, 1976

Runtime: 1 Hour 45 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Lewis John Carlino

Studio: AVCO Embassy Pictures

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Video, Plex, Roku Channel, Tubi, YouTube

Hitch-Hike (1977)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Couple picks up killer.

Walter (Franco Nero) and his wife Eve (Corinne Clery) are constantly bickering about Walter’s alcoholism. They go on a trip to Los Angeles and on the way pick-up Adam (David Hess) whose car is stranded on the road. Unbeknownst to them he’s a robber who has doubled-crossed his partners and absconded with a suitcase full of $2 million dollars. It doesn’t take long before Adam has a gun to both of their heads demanding they take him to Mexican border where he plans to escape while also killing them in the process. As the two try desperately to figure a way out they are also being secretly followed by the two young men whom Adam betrayed and who are now intent on extracting a revenge.

One of the biggest problems I had with the movie is that it’s supposed to take place in California but was actually shot in the mountains of Gran Sasso in Italy, which looks nothing like the state. I realize that California has a varied topography but the locales here are screaming southern Europe and the highway signs are done in blue, which anyone living in the U.S. would know is fake as here they’re green, which only accentuates the off-kilter look of the production. Since where they’re driving to makes no real difference to the plot I would’ve just had it be some city in Italy like Rome, which would’ve helped the authenticity.

The other problem I had is that, at least the version I watched, it’s spoken in Italian. Normally I prefer movies that are subtitled versus dubbed, but I could’ve sworn years ago I saw it in English, but what’s available on YouTube, which is the only service currently streaming it, doesn’t offer that, which is a big shame. Not so much because of Nero or Clery, but more Hess as his own voice is not used, which then defeats the whole reason for having him. He’s best known for playing the sadistic killer in The Last House on the Left, and he has an excellent way of being menacing, but because we don’t hear him actually speak in his native tongue all of that gets lost and the creepy energy that was supposed to be there by casting him gets completely wasted.

Spoiler Alert!

The story, which is based on the unpublished novel ‘The Violence and the Fury’ by Peter Kane, doesn’t get off to a good start as it features two people, particularly Nero, who are not likable, and thus the viewer really doesn’t care about their predicament making the tension mediocre at best. There are also elements that are stolen from better known movies like the mysterious truck that keeps chasing them during their drive, with the identity of the driver hidden, that’s taken straight from Duel. Loopholes abound as well as we later learn that Hess is the driver of the truck, but how was he able to avoid being shot by his cohorts earlier with a gun aimed right at him and how was he able to hijack the truck as he had been without any vehicle? Maybe he was able to hitch a ride with a truck driver, just like he did with the couple, and then do away with the driver once inside, but this is stuff that needs to be shown as otherwise it comes-off like the filmmakers are just making up the rules as they go with no concern whether it’s logical.

The twist ending is limp as it features Nero setting the car on fire with his injured wife inside and putting Hess’s dead body next to hers in an attempt to make it look like both he (Nero) and she died in the blaze, but there were such things as dental records back then, so after the coroner examined the charred bodies he/she would determine that it wasn’t really Nero who died and thus the authorities would continue to search for him. Seeing him then become a hitchhiker himself leaves open too many questions and comes off like a cop-out where the filmmakers ran out of ideas and thus decided to just end it there.

End of Spoiler Alert!

The moment where Nero is forced to watch Hess make love to his wife, and witnessing the humiliation and anger in his eyes, is the film’s best moment. Watching Clery, the only person you sympathize with, is entertaining both with her clothes on and off. However, the film lacks any character development, and the plot is quite strained with a lot of moments where the story, much like with the car ride, doesn’t seem to be going anywhere and if anything, just driving itself around in circles.

My Rating: 4 out of 10

Released: March 4, 1977

Runtime: 1 Hour 44 Minutes

Rated R

Director: Pasquale Festa Campanile

Studio: Explorer Film ’58

Available: DVD, Blu-ray, YouTube