The Oscar (1966)

Posted on February 24, 2013 | 4 comments

oscar 1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 2 out of 10

4-Word Review: Actor’s career on decline.

Frank Fane (Stephen Boyd) is a flippant, self-centered, and arrogant man who makes a living by setting up gigs for his stripper girlfriend Laurel (Jill St John) at local strip joints. By pure chance he watches the rehearsal of a play and in a fit of frustration jumps onto the stage to show the actors how to perform a knife fight when he doesn’t think they are doing it right. This impresses Sophie (Eleanor Parker) who uses her influence to get him signed to a contract at a big movie studio that makes Frank a star almost overnight, but as the years pass the quality and quantity of his roles diminish.  His overspending begins to catch up with him and just when he thinks his career may have faded he gets nominated for the Oscar. He feels a win will revive his career and will stop at nothing and use every dirty trick he can in order to influence the vote.

Adapted from the Richard Sale novel this is high drama at its worst. The scenarios are over-the-top and soap opera-like while bearing little relation to reality. The characterizations are on a kindergarten level and a composite of every Hollywood cliché and stereotype rolled together. The dialogue sounds like it was taken from a 50’s B-movie and comes off more like rants and speeches than anything any real person would actually say. Any attempt at gaining any insight into the behind-the-scenes world of Hollywood is lost with a script that becomes wildly off-center until it becomes absurd and ludicrous. Famed science fiction writer Harlan Ellison who scripted this mess was completely out of his realm here and the film is so botched, over-long, and redundant that it isn’t even good for laughs.

If the film had a glossy visual quality to it then it could at least be entertaining on that level, but director Russell Rouse shows no visual flair, or imagination. The scenes are lighted too brightly, which washes out the color and makes the sets look flat and one-dimensional. The music is too loud and used in a heavy-handed way similar to the canned laughter on some sitcoms. Every time there is some dramatic revelation, or shift the music comes booming out in order to alert the viewer who apparently was perceived by the filmmakers to be too dumb to pick up on it otherwise.

I did like Boyd in the lead. He has good looking chiseled features and parlays the necessary arrogance of the part, but the character is wholly dislikable and only gets worse as the film progresses and having to spend two hours watching a jerk be nothing but a jerk is too much.

The only time he shows any slight compassion is when he finds a fellow actor (Peter Lawford) down on his luck, but it is too extreme to believe that a one-time headlining movie star could one day fall to the point that he would have to wait tables to make a living and thus makes this moment as ridiculous and everything else in the movie. An ‘A’ list actor may fall down to becoming a ‘B’ list actor, or having to go from movies to guest spots on TV-shows, or even doing commercials, or infomercials, but having to become a waiter at a restaurant just isn’t plausible.

Elke Sommar gives a sincere performance and her German accent is sexy, but her character becomes too much of an emotional yo-yo. One minute she loves Frank then the next minute she hates him, only to quickly fall in-love with him again and then hate him shortly after that. Parker, as Frank’s mistress on the side, is good, but wasted despite looking as elegant as ever.

Tony Bennett is badly miscast as Frank’s best friend Hymie. This was to date his one and only film role and he may be a great crooner, but as an actor he is uncharismatic. Milton Berle fares almost as poorly playing Frank’s agent. Initially it was interesting seeing him take a dramatic turn instead of being the perennial comic ham, but his acting skills appear limited and his drama becomes as hammy as his comedy.

Ernest Borgnine gives the film’s only real solid performance as a shady and conniving private detective. The scene where Frank slugs him and it sends him flying backwards and toppling over his desk before crashing against the back wall is the film’s only good moment unless you count St John’s opening striptease.

Lots of cameos by famous stars and celebrities including famed costume designer Edith Head in a non-speaking part and gossip columnist Hedda Hopper in a part she did just before her death.

A good movie can inspire the viewer and expand their thinking and imagination, but this film had the absolute opposite effect. It made me feel like my mind had been sucked away by a giant vacuum. I felt depressed after watching it and continued to feel depressed the next day when I woke up.

oscar 2

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: March 4, 1966

Runtime: 1Hour 59Minutes

Not Rated

Director: Russell Rouse

Studio: Embassy Pictures Corporation

Available: VHS, YouTube

4 Comments

Posted in 60's Movies, Drama, Movies Based on Novels, Obscure Movies

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Night Watch (1973)

Posted on February 22, 2013 | 1 comment

night watch 2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Murder in the window.

Ellen Wheeler (Elizabeth Taylor) is an emotionally unstable woman recovering from a nervous breakdown. Her first husband died in a car crash along with his young lady lover. Now her second husband John (Laurence Harvey) is fooling around with Ellen’s best friend Sara (Billie Whitelaw). One night Ellen witnesses a murder at the abandoned house next door, but because of Ellen’s past mental state no one believes her. Even the police doubt her story, which starts to send her over-the-edge.

I saw this play about a year ago with a group of friends at a local church. It was written by Lucille Fletcher best known for having done Sorry Wrong Number, which was later turned into a classic film starring Barbra Stanwyck. Although the play started out slowly the twist ending was impressive and something no one in the audience had predicted, but what I liked even better was that when you went back and thought about it, it made perfect sense. I thought at the time that it would make a great movie and was interested in seeing what this film did with it. I felt that there was no way they could screw up such a great story, but somehow they managed to do it.

Director Brian G. Hutton adds a lot of elements to make it more cinematic that should have helped it, but it really doesn’t. I liked the flashback sequences showing the car crash of the first husband as well as Ellen visiting the hospital and identifying the bodies. These segments have a good nightmarish visual quality to them, but Hutton goes back to it too often and eventually wears it out. I also liked that the film shows the police inspecting the inside of the abandoned home, which in the play you never see, but I felt they could have done a lot more to make the place seem more distinct and creepy. There is also a skirmish between two people inside the place at the end that you can hear, but not see because it is too dark and shadowy, which was annoying. The music is effectively creepy, but it also has a ringing quality that quickly becomes irritating and gets way over-played.

This was just one of the many misfires that Taylor did during the 70’s that helped extinguish her otherwise illustrious career long before it should’ve. This one fares slightly better than the others, but not by much. Her affected British accent could seem annoying to some and sounds kind of like the put-on one that Madonna sometimes does although for the record Taylor’s is better than hers. Liz’s emotionalism is a bit too theatrical and may come off as unintentionally funny to certain viewers although seeing her go completely nutty is impressive and fun.

Harvey is all wrong as the husband. His cold, detached presence can work in certain roles, but definitely not in this one. In the play that I saw the actor cast in this part looked more middle-aged with a spare tire stomach, balding head, and graying sideburns, which is what I felt the role called for. This is a character that is overburdened with a stressful job and unstable wife and yet Harvey shows none of this. His slick black hair and turtleneck shirts, which were fashionable at the time, make him look like someone still going out to the trendy nightclubs to pick up young chicks… or guys.

Whitelaw is one of the best British character actresses of all-time, but her talents are wasted with a part that doesn’t allow her to show any range. Her blonde hairdo is nice, but Taylor’s histrionics dominate the proceedings and unceremoniously push Whitelaw into the background.

The play had a lot of humor especially with the Mr. Appleby character played here by actor Robert Lange. Unfortunately the movie turns it into a serious drama making it seem more like a soap opera instead of a mystery. I came away from this feeling that the live production that I had seen was far more entertaining and intriguing. I would suggest to viewers to skip this film and wait for a chance to see it done as a play as the movie does not do the story justice.

night watch 1

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: August 9, 1973

Runtime: 1Hour 39Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Brian G. Hutton

Studio: AVCO Embassy Pictures

Available: DVD (Warner Archive), Amazon Instant Video

1 Comment

Posted in 70's Movies, British Movies, Foreign Films, Moody/Stylish, Movies Based on Stageplays, Mystery, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Windows (1980)

Posted on February 18, 2013 | 2 comments

windows 3

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 1 out of 10

4-Word Review: She’s obsessed with her.

Emily (Talia Shire) is attacked in her apartment by a rapist (Rick Petrucelli) and when the police come to investigate the crime she starts to fall in love with Bob (Joe Cortese) the handsome police captain. Little does Emily know that her friend Andrea (Elizabeth Ashley) was behind the attack. She is a closet lesbian with a secret psychotic obsession for Emily who hired the man to rape her and record it, so Andrea could get-off on listening to the sounds of Emily moaning during the struggle. Now that Emily is going out with Bob it makes Andrea angry and her behavior becomes more dangerous and erratic.

For a thriller this film is extraordinarily low-key to the point that it also comes off like a drama, but fails on both ends. There is no mounting tension and little if any scares. The only one that they do have is when Andrea sticks Emily’s cat into a freezer and later it drops out of it like it was a Popsicle, which is actually unintentionally funny. There is also hardly any music. Ennio Morricone was hired to be the composer, but they don’t use him as much as they should. An amazing amount of the movie deals with the natural street sounds and ambience from life in New York, which is interesting for a while, but does nothing to elevate the tension, or create any excitement. Famed cinematographer Gordon Willis in his directorial debut seems more interested in capturing the New York skyline and creating shadowy interiors than actually making a movie with an original story, or interesting characters.

Shire is so quiet and awkward that she seems to be in a mental stupor. Her screen presence here is transparent and lifeless and it is easy to see why her leading lady status was brief. Cortese is no better as the male lead and the romantic side-story has no energy or chemistry and only helps to bog down an already boring story. Intercutting this with Andrea’s visits to her psychiatrist (Michael Lipton) successfully creates the first thriller to have no suspense whatsoever.

Ashley seems like the perfect choice for a homicidal lesbian, but the part is written in a way that doesn’t allow her to go over-the-top with it, which she should have although you do get to see her wearing quite possibly the biggest pair of sunglasses that I have ever seen. It might have worked better had the viewer not been aware from the start about Andrea’s psychosis and instead only revealed it at the end as a twist.

The climatic sequence between Emily and Andrea would be laughable if it weren’t so mind numbingly stilted and prolonged. The scene goes on for almost twenty minutes and features the two women standing in front of a window with Emily weeping incessantly while Andrea rambles incoherently. How anyone who was involved in the making of this movie would think anyone would flock to see this dull and contrived thing should have their brains checked. Has an air of pretense to it like it is trying to be a ‘sophisticated’ thriller, but it is pointless. If ‘Mystery Science Theater’ were still around this would be a great candidate for it.

My Rating: 1 out of 10

Released: January 18, 1980

Runtime: 1Hour 36Minutes

Rated R

Director: Gordon Willis

Studio: United Artists

Available: DVD, Amazon Instant Video

2 Comments

Posted in 80's Movies, Drama, Gay/Lesbian, Movies that take place in the Big Apple, Obscure Movies, Thrillers/Suspense

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

The Caretakers (1963)

Posted on February 17, 2013 | 4 comments

the caretakers 2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Doctors with opposing viewpoints.

Two doctors working at a psychiatric hospital come at odds with each other over how to treat their patients. Dr. Donovan MacLeod (Robert Stack) believes in a more humanistic approach in treating mental illness including group therapy and more patient freedoms. Dr. Lucretia Terry (Joan Crawford) is hard-lined and exacts rules on her patients that have severe penalties if broken. The film examines their infighting and how it affects their patients.

Director Hall Bartlett has a nice cinema-verte style to the material that manages to avoid being ‘Hollywoodnized’ or overtly sanitized. The subject is approached in a matter of fact way and the patients are not portrayed as ‘crazy’ or ‘scary’, but instead as sick people looking to get well and learning how to do it. The opening sequence done over the credits and featuring all sorts of moody artsy drawings have an excellent avant-garde flair.

Polly Bergen is effective as Lorna a middle-aged mother and housewife who suffers a nervous breakdown and begrudgingly becomes a member of Dr. MacLeod’s therapy group. Some of her acting particularly when she is having her breakdown is theatrical and over-the-top, but I did like the way Bartlett shows things from her perspective allowing the viewer in a visual sense to feel what she is going through and makes one compassionate and sensitive to her condition.

It is great to see Crawford as always and the scene showing her in a leotard and teaching the other nurses judo lessons is a gem and much too brief. I was hoping to have her play up the part of the heavy more making her almost like a Nurse Ratched, which she could have easily done to perfection, but unfortunately the script doesn’t take advantage of it. I was also disappointed that we never see Crawford ever dealing directly with her patients, which seemed to me should have been necessary.

Stack in the lead is terrible and completely wrong for the part. The role required a man with a more youthful appeal instead of the middle-aged Stack who never displays the kind of sensitivity and compassion that his character supposedly has. Instead he delivers his lines in a stiff and monotone fashion and comes off like he came from the old school of acting.

The scene where his character allows the patients to go to an outdoor park for a picnic and mingle with the staff unsupervised seemed to be pushing the plausibility meter to the extreme. It also makes him look like a complete schmuck who should have known better especially when one of his patients leaves the picnic and runs away while he chases after her in a panic.

The supporting cast is outstanding showcasing many up and coming stars and is one of the major highlights for watching the film. Barbara Barrie is great as the silent and troubled Edna. Janis Paige is excellent as the brassy prostitute Marion. Susan Oliver gives one of her best performances as a young nurse who is just learning how to deal with those with mental illness and Robert Vaughn is also effective as Lorna’s long suffering and confused husband. This is also a great chance to see a young Van Williams before he starred as the Green Hornet as well as the beautiful Sharon Hugueny whose promising acting career was cut short when she was hit years later by a speeding police car.

If you come to this film looking for genuine insight into the illness you will be disappointed as it goes only to the most elementary level into the area of psychiatry. MacLeod’s speeches about how his group therapy can be a ‘cure’ to mental illness are shallow and almost laughable. However, for the era the film manages to be gritty and slick enough to pass as entertainment.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: August 21, 1963

Runtime: 1Hour 37Minutes

Not Rated

Director: Hal Bartlett

Studio: United Artists

Available: VHS, DVD, Amazon Instant Video, Netflix streaming

4 Comments

Posted in 60's Movies, Black & White, Drama, Movies Based on Novels, Movies with a Hospital setting, Psychological

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Goodbye Girl (1977)

Posted on February 15, 2013 | 19 comments

the goodbye girl 2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Goodbye doesn’t mean forever.

Paula (Marsha Mason) is a ‘dumped on’ single parent, whose live-in boyfriend has just left her, and now must contend with Elliot (Richard Dreyfuss) a rather obnoxious man who is subletting the apartment. Despite long odds the two end up ‘falling in love’ in this rather obvious, mechanical love story that is finely tuned to the female, especially those from that era. (The macho guy viewer will have run out of the room long before David Gates even has a chance to sing his soft rock title tune).

This was made when writer Neil Simon was still considered in vogue, although his patented one-liners are sparse and when they do come they are more cute than funny. This in some ways seems a retooling of his earlier ‘lovers in a New York apartment’ film Barefoot in the Park. Only here it’s a little rougher around the edges so it can appeal to a ‘hip’ audience. No clean-cut, cutesy newlyweds instead these people are more jaded to modern sensibilities and will routinely live with their partner even when they are not quite yet divorced.

If you can get past a rather strong late 70’s feel (gotta love that Fonzi poster hanging in the bedroom) then the characters remain solid and believable. No beautiful models living lavish and exciting lifestyles. These are average people just trying to make ends meet and find a little happiness along the way. It also doesn’t just show them when they are together, but also when they are out and alone in the ‘real world’, which allows us a rounded and sympathetic view of them.

Dreyfuss basically plays his usual opinionated, abrasive self. Whether the viewer sees the intended charm underneath is completely up to their own personal tolerance. His performance is good, but not exactly screaming for an Academy Award, which he won anyway, but then poked fun of it when he later hosted ‘Saturday Night Live’ on May 13, 1978.

Mason, who at the time was married to Simon, is the one who should have won it. Her performance is both believable and fluid. You truly see a lot of everyday people in her characterization and she clearly carries the film.

Quinn Cummings, as Paula’s daughter, is cute without being too precocious. Her sensibilities help compensate for the sometimes emotional immaturity of her adult counterparts. Though it really looks and seems dumb to have a ten year old still smearing food on the edges of her mouth and wearing a big napkin around her neck while eating.

Although I don’t always have a great eye for continuity errors this one has a doozy. When Dreyfuss comes home one night drunk he knocks over a table with a lot of stuff on it. He sticks his head out the window to shout something into the night air and then two seconds later comes back to where the table is standing and everything on it is neatly set.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: November 30, 1977

Runtime: 1Hour 51Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Herbert Ross

Studio: Warner Brothers

Available: VHS, DVD, Amazon Instant Video

19 Comments

Posted in 70's Movies, Academy Award Winners for Best Actor, Comedy/Drama, Movies that take place in the Big Apple, Romance

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Sliding Doors (1998)

Posted on February 13, 2013 | 1 comment

sliding doors

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Two scenarios in one.

This movie examines the life of a woman named Helen (Gwyneth Paltrow) who lives in a parallel universe. In one story she makes it through the sliding doors of a train and comes home to find her boyfriend in bed with another woman. In the second story she misses the train and does not find out about the affair.

The novelty keeps your attention for a while as the director Peter Howitt cuts back and forth between the two stories nicely. They evolve in interesting ways, but then instead of veering off into separate directions they start to come together until the one story ends up being pretty much like the other. This then negates the original idea altogether and makes it just another ‘chick flick’. The boyfriend Gerry (John Lynch) has to be one of the most pathetic out there. Not only does he have the audacity to have an affair on the beautiful and sweet Helen, but he does it while she is supporting him so he can sit home all day and write a book! He also seems to be unable to ever stand up for himself and he has a Hugh Grant type hairstyle that seems to only look good on Grant and nobody else. Jeanne Tripplehorn as the other woman is extremely cold and bitchy to the point that you wonder why anyone, even this twit, would want to have a relationship with her. Helen’s other love interest James (John Hannah) is charming in too much of a prepackaged sort of way and at times it seems to come off like he is a stalker even though that is not the intention. Also Paltrow ends up becoming afflicted with the ‘Ali MacGraw syndrome’ as she is shown lying in a hospital bed after a bad accident with no scratches or bruises and looking as beautiful as ever.

On the positive side Paltrow is really pretty to look at and speaks with an effective British accent, which takes a little getting used to, but she does it well. She sports two different hairstyles and looks good in both, but with the second one it starts to make her look exactly like Susan Dey from the 80’s TV-show ‘L.A. Law’.

The movie is fun for a while, even engaging, but eventually it throws in too many dramatic twists. The boyfriend is beyond pathetic and Tripplehorn, as his lover, seems to be running for bitch of the century.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: April 24, 1998

Runtime: 1Hour 39Minutes

Rated R

Director: Peter Howitt

Studio: Miramax Films

Available: DVD, Amazon Instant Video

1 Comment

Posted in 90's Movies, British Movies, Foreign Films, Quirky, Romance

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Murphy’s Romance (1985)

Posted on February 11, 2013 | 1 comment

murphys romance 2

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Love blossoms in desert.

Emma (Sally Field) is a divorced mother with teenage son Jake (Corey Haim) who moves to a small Arizona town and try to singlehandedly start up a horse ranch. Once there she meets Murphy (James Garner) an older gentleman who she starts to have feelings for only to have her ex-husband Bobby Jack (Brian Kerwin) show up and try to rekindle their relationship.

This is a very leisurely paced romantic movie that doesn’t add anything new to the genre, but does end up going down like a cold drink on a hot afternoon. The dialogue is snappy and the wrap-up quite pleasing. It keeps things on a realistic level by showing Emma struggling with a lot of chores and financial constraints and thus making it perfectly relatable to those who have moved and tried to start over. It is also nice to see Haim when he was still a cute kid and before he became the 80’s poster boy for trouble child stars. Unlike other romantic comedies there is no one moment that is particularly funny or engaging however the scene involving Bobby Jack and Murphy fighting over Emma during a country dance party is amusing.

On the negative side it tends to be too formulaic. It only gets interesting when the ex-husband arrives, but then the film plays this scenario out in much too obvious a fashion. It would have been better had the ex-husband not been such a prototypical jerk and there had been more conflict and intrigue as to who she would end up choosing.

There is also a scene where Bobby Jack tackles Emma into a mound of hay in an effort to rekindle some of their old passion, but Emma ends up becoming allergic to the hay. Although this was clearly done for obvious laughs it doesn’t seem too believable. This is a woman, who by her own admission, has been working with hay and horses since she was child so this affliction would have become apparent long before then or at least during the several hours that it is shown where they are shoveling it into the stalls. It is possible that she was only faking this reaction in order to get away from him, but if that were the case then it should have been made more clear to the viewer

This is tailor made for the romantic diehards and they should enjoy it even though others may find it only passable.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released:  December 25, 1985

Runtime:  1Hour 47Minutes

Rated PG-13

Director: Martin Ritt

Studio: Columbia

Available: VHS, D VD, Amazon Instant Video

1 Comment

Posted in 80's Movies, Comedy/Drama, Movies with a rural setting, Romance

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Girl with a Suitcase (1961)

Posted on February 10, 2013 | Leave a comment

girl with a suitcase

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 9 out of 10

4-Word Review: She likes shy guy.

This movie will start off a week long theme of romance movies in celebration of Valentine’s Day, which will be on the 14th. One romance movie from each decade will be reviewed starting with this sleeper from Italy that is well worth seeking out.

The story is about Aida (Claudia Cardinale) a young woman who is abandoned at a gas station after having a fight with her boyfriend. When she eventually tracks him down at his house she finds that she is actually more attracted to his younger brother Lorenzo (Jacques Perrin). Although Aida is more worldly-wise and Lorenzo shy and sheltered the two slowly form a bond that becomes emotionally compelling.

This is one of those films that despite being made over 50 years ago is still amazingly fresh. The characters are believable and reveal different layers of themselves in interesting ways. Claudia has never looked more beautiful and her performance here may be her best. Perrin is also excellent and the viewer cannot help but emphasize with him. The film packs some very powerful scenes and imagery that stays with you long after it is over and it manages to do it in a natural way that never seems forced.

If I have one complaint it is the fact that it becomes bit protracted especially at the end. Shaving the runtime by 30 minutes would have helped and possibly even made it stronger. However, Valerio Zurini’s direction is still top-notch.

The film features two fascinatingly fractured characters that are played to the zenith by the two leads. This is a film that deserves way more attention. The script, direction, and black and white cinematography are superb.

My Rating: 9 out of 10

Released: February 9, 1961

Runtime: 1Hour 55Minutes

Not Rated

Director: Valerio Zurlini

Studio: Ellis Films

Available: VHS, DVD

Leave a comment

Posted in 60's Movies, Black & White, Drama, Foreign Films, Italian Films, Romance

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Wake in Fright (1971)

Posted on February 8, 2013 | 2 comments

wake in fright 3

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 8 out of 10

4-Word Review: The middle of nowhere.

To an extent this is a one of kind film that is handled in such a raw and unpretentious way that it is like no other film you have ever seen before. The opening shot alone is amazing. You see a birdseye view of an isolated schoolhouse in the outback where our main character teaches. The camera then turns at a full circle and you see that there is absolutely nothing for miles in any direction. The desolation is mind boggling and it’s isolation at its purest.

Not only does this very inspired shot get its point across, but it also becomes the essence of what the film is about by trying to get you to understand the ruggedness of its characters by immersing you into their environment. It’s an uncompromising film full of startling images.

The story deals with a British schoolteacher John Grant (Gary Bond) who, through a loss in gambling, becomes trapped in the isolated outback town of Bundanyabba. He is cultured and educated and his sensibilities can’t mesh with the raw simplistic elements of the people in it.

It’s a highly intriguing viewpoint that not only captures man’s ever daunting task at dealing with nature, but also the overall reality of his existence and even himself. It makes you feel you are right there experiencing the same onslaught with him. There are also some interesting low key scenes proving that one of the biggest hurdles one must fight when in these places is actually just the boredom.

I do have to warn readers that the film has a very prolonged brutally explicit kangaroo hunting scene that features the actual killing of the animals. It even shows the men physically beating up on some wounded kangaroo’s and then viciously slashing their throats in a mocking fashion. Although I do feel that these scenes leave the viewer with the intended strong, raw impact and I like the lighting during the nighttime hunt that allows for a surreal element I still admit this may be a very difficult watch for some and may turn them off from viewing the film altogether. Apparently there were quite a few people that walked out of the film during this scene when it was shown at the Cannes, so be prepared.

Star Bond is excellent. You can relate to his anger and defiance at being somewhere he doesn’t want to be as well as feeling his desperation, exhaustion, and eventual surrender.

For many years this film sat in almost virtual obscurity, but after an exhaustive worldwide search a print of the film was finally found in the back of a Pittsburgh warehouse in a canister with a ‘to be destroyed’ label on it. Fortunately the print was saved and the restoration process is fantastic with colors that are bright and vivid. Director Ted Kotcheff captures the region in all of its rustic, desolate glory including the incredible crystal blue sky.

Reportedly many Aussies dislike the film as they feel it creates a negative stereotype. However, I don’t see it that way. I love the county and people and consider this more of a portrait of what happens when people are stuck in an isolated environment, which technically could be anywhere.

wake in fright 2

My Rating: 8 out of 10

Alternate Title: Outback

Released: October 13, 1971

Runtime: 1Hour 49Minutes

Rated R

Director: Ted Kotcheff

Studio: United Artists

Available: DVD (Region 1 & 2) Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video

2 Comments

Posted in 70's Movies, Action/Adventure, Drama, Exploitation, Foreign Films, Moody/Stylish, Movies Based on Novels, Movies from Australia, Movies with a rural setting, Outdoors

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Turtle Diary (1985)

Posted on February 4, 2013 | 2 comments

turtle diary 1

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: They free the turtles.

William (Ben Kingsley) becomes fixated with the idea of freeing the sea turtles at the London Zoo and returning them to the ocean. Neaera (Glenda Jackson) starts to have the same dream. The two get together and with the help of the kindly zookeeper George (Michael Gambon) begin to execute their plan.

Although well received by the critics at the time of its release I felt the film never seemed to gel. The plot is too thin and there is no explanation as to why William got so worked up about the turtles being in captivity. I felt there needed to be something shown in his history or character to explain this motivation. After all there are thousands and thousands of people that go to this zoo each year and none of them seemed to get worked up about the same idea. Also, why just the turtles? If William’s problem is seeing an animal that is not in their natural habitat then why not free all the species in the complex.

The plan also goes off way too seamlessly. What are the odds that the zookeeper would be in agreement with them and pretty much do all the work for them in setting it up to the point that all they end up doing is driving the turtles to the ocean. The story would have been a lot funnier and exciting had they somehow had to do it all themselves and behind the scenes. As it is here it becomes almost a non-event that barely holds any interest. Also, I have never heard of a zoo that decides not to press charges when they find that the turtles have been stolen or not firing the employee when they find that he had something to do with it.

The way Neaera and William get together is equally uninspired. They seemingly just keep bumping into each other and through sheer circumstance find out they have the same motivations. I was expecting something a little more creative and humorous. Neaera’s attempts at getting William’s address is particularly forced and contrived. In fact almost all of the conversations that they have with the exception of one where Neaera describes a weird dream that she had is very ordinary. The dialogue they have while traveling to the ocean is the blandest and none of it reveals much about the characters who end up being pretty forgettable.

Watching them carry the turtles to the open water has no emotional impact at all. It is not even the climatic sequence as it happens with 30 minutes left of the film. The rest of the movie concerns William’s dealings with the other people in his flat, which is mainly pointless.

The screenplay was written by celebrated writer Harold Pinter, who has an amusing cameo as one of the customers at William’s bookstore. Pinter was famous for his cutting edge and provocative plays of the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s many of which I found to be quite fascinating, but this thing seems to be the polar opposite. The story and execution is standard while lacking any flair or pizazz. I can handle low-key and subtlety and many times relish it, but there still needs to be something more to it. More quirkiness and humor was needed as well as some tension. The film as it is here is flat and seems to waist a potentially unique idea as well as its cast.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: September 10, 1985

Runtime: 1Hour 37Minutes

Rated PG

Director: John Irvin

Studio: The Samuel Goldwyn Company

Available: VHS

2 Comments

Posted in 80's Movies, British Movies, Drama, Dry Humor, Foreign Films, Movies Based on Novels, Obscure Movies

Tagged , , , , , , ,