Tag Archives: James Karen

F.I.S.T. (1978)

fist

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 7 out of 10

4-Word Review: Laborer becomes union leader.

Set in the 1930’s in Cleveland the story centers on dock worker Johnny Kovac (Sylvester Stallone) who becomes so upset at the poor treatment of the employees that he leads a revolt that soon gets squashed by a management when Kovac goes to the office of Mr. Andrews (James Karen) who promises to bring his demands to ownership only for the next day to have Kovac and his friend Belkin (David Huffman) fired from their jobs. Impressed though by their tenacity truck driver Mike (Richard Herd) recruits them into his union telling them they would have a job of going out and recruiter others. Kovac initially refuses the offer until he finds out that a free car would come along with it. Kovac eventually rises up the union ladder until he becomes their national leader, but with the power and prestige also comes corruption and enemies.

This was Stallone’s first film after doing Rocky, which was a bit of a gamble by director Norman Jewison. He had wanted to cast Jack Nicholson in the role, Nicholson would later star in a similar film Hoffa, which came out 14 years later, but was so impressed at Stallone’s performance in the boxing film that he offered the role to him before he was even a household name. Jewison felt Sly was a star in the making just from what he saw in the preview of the film not knowing whether that movie was ultimately going to be a runaway success, or not. Had it not it might’ve put him in an awkward position as the studio wasn’t likely to finance a project that didn’t have guaranteed star power. As it was it became a blockbuster making the tables-turned a bit because Stallone could’ve easily backed out of the deal since it had only been a verbal agreement and he had since then been offered higher paying roles, but he kept to his word and took on this project, which surprised Jewison as many big names in Hollywood don’t always stick to their promises, but then later when the film didn’t do as well as expected Jewison’s blamed Stallone’s casting as part of the problem.

From my perspective I thought Stallone was terrific. His delivery does come-off as a bit monotone, but I felt that’s what added to the authenticity as this was a character with a limited education, so he probably wouldn’t sound real smart to begin with. Seeing Sly fight the system correlated with his real-life struggles as an actor trying to make it big in a competitive business, which helped to make it seem all the more genuine like this was a guy who had really lived the same type of life as the man he was playing.

In support I was highly impressed with David Huffman. This was an actor, whose career and life were sadly cut short in 1985 when he got stabbed to death, who I had always found quite bland. He had an attractive looking face, which I figured is what got him his foot-in-the-door, but his acting always came off as blah, but here he puts a lot of emotion into his role and it’s interesting to see the way his character grows and morphs throughout. James Karen and Tony Lo Bianco both have small parts, but there sinister facial expressions and ability to mug to the camera without it seeming obvious is what helps them stand-out. I was surprised though with Rod Steiger who gets second billing, but doesn’t appear until 1 Hour and 33 minutes in. His part, as a powerful senator, does ultimately become integral to the proceedings, but the fact that he underplays instead of his usual over-acting is what got me.

I thought the way Jewison captured the setting was great. It was actually shot in Dubuque, Iowa because by that time Cleveland no longer looked the way it once did, but the flavor and vibes from that period come-out strong and you feel right from the start that you’re being swept away to a bygone time. Stallone’s ascension into the ranks of union head prove riveting, but his corruption and downfall get glossed over and seemed rushed. I did though appreciated the way it examines worker’s unions from all angles both the good and bad making it seem less like a propaganda movie than Norma Rae, which came-out at around the same time, but only focused on the positive aspects of unions.

Spoiler Alert!

The ending, in which Kovac gets shot and killed while in his home came-off like a cop-out. It was intended to reflect at the time the recent disappearance of union head Jimmy Hoffa, but seeing the main character get assassinated without telling who was behind it proves unsatisfying. Sure we could probably surmise who the culprits were, but having to sit through a long movie only to be left with more questions than answers makes the viewer feel like watching it had been a big waste of time.

My Rating: 7 out of 10

Released: April 13, 1978

Runtime: 2 Hours 25 Minutes

Rated PG

Director: Norman Jewison

Studio: United Artists

Available: DVD, Blu-ray

I Never Sang for My Father (1970)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 8 out of 10

4-Word Review: Father and son clash.

Based on the Broadway play of the same name written by Robert Anderson, who also wrote the screenplay, the story centers on college professor Gene (Gene Hackman) who tries to mend his relationship with his father Tom (Melvyn Douglas) a very bull-headed man who can’t seem to get along with anyone. When Gene’s mother (Dorothy Stickney) passes away suddenly it becomes a concern what to do with the father who is showing early signs of dementia and other health issues. Gene, who has recently been widowed himself, wants to remarry and move off to California, but his father prefers him to stay close by in New York. When Gene offers to move his father to California the old man refuses leading to a bitter feud between the two that also opens up old wounds.

To show just how good this movie is one only needs to compare it to Dad, which was an 80’s film starring Ted Danson and Jack Lemmon, which had a similar subject matter, but that film conveniently glossed over the many negative aspects of taking care of an elderly parent while this one tackles the downside head-on. Hearing the arguments that Gene has with his sister Alice (Estelle Parsons) and how neither one of them want to be straddled with the responsibility of being a round-the-clock caretaker I found to be refreshingly honest. Too many modern movies, in their attempt to make the lead character likable, never address these very real concerns. Also in the movie Dad the Ted Danson character flies across the country to help his father with no explanation for how this affected his job or finances while this one does touch on the economic realities. It also shows how elderly people aren’t always that lovable and can at times be genuinely nasty.

Douglas is outstanding as he manages to bring out different sides to his character. While the viewer finds him exasperating I still enjoyed the shots showing him kneeling at his bedside in prayer, which gave him, even as old and crotchety as he was, a child-like dimension. The conversations that he has about his own father and the poor relationship he had with him are quite revealing as it shows how the same issues can go across many generations with Douglas inadvertently treating his own son in the same shoddy way his old man treated him and not even realizing it.

With Douglas’ powerhouse performance Hackman gets overshadowed. He has fleeting moments where he displays his trademark anger and pent-up frustrations, but it doesn’t come-off as quite as genuine as it does in some of his other roles. It also would’ve been nice had there been some flashback scenes showing past altercations between the two, which would’ve helped the viewer emotionally connect to what he was feeling instead of having their differences just briefly touched on through dialogue. In many ways Parsons comes-off better and the reasons for her anger at her father is more clearly and eloquently explained.

The only complaint that I had with the film is when Hackman goes touring the assisted senior living homes. While the film had approached the material in a straight forward dramatic manner, which stays quiet true to the play, it suddenly shifts during this segment to becoming more artsy and cinematic by blocking out the dialogue and instead playing loud, moody score with a more subjective, hand-held camera. While this is all right I still felt it wasn’t needed and goes against the tone of the rest of the film, which had been very minimalist up until the then. The sudden pounding music doesn’t make the visuals showing the bleak living conditions of those places anymore shocking or disturbing and if anything becomes unnecessarily jarring and in-the-way.

These scenes also feature a very early appearance of James Karen as one of the directors of the senior facilities that Hackman tours. However, with the dark curly hair that he has here and the thick horn-rimmed glasses that he wears, you most likely won’t recognize him unless you look closely and even then you still might not think it’s him. With the decision by director Gilbert Cates to play music over these scenes we unfortunately never get to hear hear what he was saying or how he was trying to sell the dismal looking place to the potential customer, which could’ve been interesting.

My Rating: 8 out of 10

Released: October 18, 1970

Runtime: 1 Hour 32 Minutes

Rated GP

Director: Gilbert Cates

Studio: Columbia Pictures

Available: DVD, Amazon Video, YouTube