Hollywood Shuffle

Hollywood Shuffle
1987 - Samuel Goldwyn Company
Directed By Robert Townsend



SYNOPSIS

An up-and-coming black actor (Robert Townsend) gets his big break when he's cast as a street-wise gangsta. But war rages inside him as he wonders if doing the role is demeaning to his race and ponders leaving the production.



MY THOUGHTS

I often wondered while watching this film "what ever happened to Robert Townsend?" He's got a great screen presence and is a good director and writer. He's kept busy in the years since this film but not with anything major acting or directing-wise, but has a successful career as a producer and created (and starred in) TV's The Parent 'Hood and a few films.

The politics of the film all could get very heavy-handed if not for the outrageous sense of humor. Unlike many comedies of the 80's, Hollywood Shuffle isn't afraid of dropping an f-bomb or even an m-f-bomb with glee.

Many sketches appear in the film parodying the stereotypical black roles in film (servants, blaxploitation heroes) and how certain films + genres would be different with black protagonists (Rambo, film noir, etc.) or TV (Siskel + Ebert.) These parodies play much like they would on Saturday Night Live, but pack a stronger bite because they bring a message with them.
The Black Acting School sketch (see video above a few minutes in) is one of the main highlights of the film.

Most of the actors play multiple roles, giving the film a very small-budget feel. Townsend financed the film himself, thanks to credit cards!
The elder Wayans brothers Keenan Ivory Wayans and Damon Wayans make early screen appearances here... and the always great comic Paul Mooney (The Chappelle's Show's Ask A Black Guy) plays the local head of the NAACP!

Any movie that can make me laugh out loud AND think at the same time deserves the highest praise and Hollywood Shuffle definitely deserves it.

Monsters, Inc.

Monsters, Inc.
2001 - Walt Disney/ Pixar
Directed By Pete Docter



SYNOPSIS

Sully (John Goodman) and Mike (Billy Crystal) are monsters who work for a company that sends them out to human kids bedrooms at night to collect their screams in order to power their world. Their life is turned upside-down when a young girl enters their world. They must foil an evil plot and try to get her back to the safety of her bedroom.



MY THOUGHTS

Pixar scores again with another inventive and delightful kids movie.

The main concept of the film, that all the monsters under kid's beds and hiding in their closets are all part of a big corporation is a very creative one. With that comes rules, procedures, paperwork, etc. Big intelligent ideas like this helps to appeal to adults as well as their children. There are fewer jokes in the film that adults would 'get' in a different way than their kids.



Like with most Pixar films, the film attracts some big name talent. John Goodman and Billy Crystal are at their best. The main appeal of the film is how these two play off each other. Even though they're monsters these two are never really all that scary.

There's also recognizable voices lending support like James Coburn, Steve Buscemi, Jennifer Tilly, and John Ratzenberger - who has appeared in all Pixar's films.

The animation is top notch and with such a creative story and enthusiastic performances, Monsters, Inc. is a winner.

The Sheik

The Sheik
1921 - Paramount Pictures
Directed By George Melford


SYNOPSIS

Wealthy Sheik Ahmed (Rudolph Valentino) sees a beautiful white woman (Agnes Ayres) that he absolutely must have, so he kidnaps her. She rejects his advances and wants to go back home. After an escape attempt, she realizes that she's in love with Ahmed just as she gets abducted by bandits.






















MY THOUGHTS

There's no cows or milk in the desert, but there is PLENTY of cheese.

Valentino got dubbed "The Great Lover" largely from the huge success of this film. It's hard to see why. He has an entire harum of women yet kidnaps another for sex. Some runaway horses are all that keeps the Sheik from raping his new catch as she struggles to get away. Sound romantic? Add in his silly, far-from-authentic Arabic robes and you have a creep dressed up like a clown.


















The script allows silly crap like this to happen the whole time.

After how horribly the kidnapped woman's been treated, a French author visits. He's a friend of Ahmed and she reads his latest work. The author reveals that Ahmed was the inspiration for the main character. This is, of all things, what makes her fall in love Ahmed. We're supposed to believe that?
The whole story seems to be the lamest most cliched romance novel come to life... especially the extra corny ending.

The acting is your average hammy, overdone silent film style, which doesn't help the cheesy script.

So if you want something hammy or cheesy I recommend this:











 over that:

The Incredible Mr. Limpet

The Incredible Mr. Limpet
1964 - Warner Brothers
Directed By Arthur Lubin



SYNOPSIS

Henry Limpet (Don Knotts) is a nerdy bookkeeper who can't qualify for military service near the outbreak of World War II. He love fish nearly as much as he does his wife (Carole Cook.) One day at Coney Island, he wishes he were a fish and becomes one. As a fish, he joins the Navy and helps destroy several German U-boats in the Atlantic and becomes a hero.




MY THOUGHTS

A fun, amusing fantasy.
I don't know if you would call this a fish-out-of-water tale... or a fish-IN-the-water tale.
There are darker themes at work here Henry's friend/future fish-liaison is clearly gunning for his wife, and of course WW2, but these are touched lightly and won't leave young kids asking too many questions. It does add some depth for adult audiences to ponder over.

The great Don Knotts always had a unique comic gift/persona. Here, the role isn't really geared toward that. Anyone could have played the role of Henry, but Knotts makes good with the simplistic character and makes it memorable.
This was the final film for character actor Larry Keating (as Admiral Spewter,) who died before it was released. He plays his character almost identically to his best known role as Mister Ed's neighbor Roger and is one of the funniest supporting roles.

The Technicolor cinematography is seemingly extra vivid and beautiful. Once in the animated world, the film loses much of it's brightness. The difference is jarring when it switches from below to above, but maybe that's what they intended.
The animation lacks the detail and beauty of a Disney film and the interaction scenes between animation and real life are much more limited than Mary Poppins or Who Framed Roger Rabbit? The compositing of the animation and real life images could have been done better, since you can see water rippling right through Henry (as fish) nearly every time he's above water.

Still, it's a great little harmless and entertaining film for children.

The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms

The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms
1953 - Warner Brothers
Directed By Eugene Louirie



SYNOPSIS

Atomic testing in the arctic releases an enormous dinosaur frozen in the ice. After a series of attacks on ships and buildings along the coast of Canada and the United States, a group of scientists believes the beast is heading for New York City!



MY THOUGHTS

Made a year before the king of them all first laid waste to Tokyo... the first of the atomic monster films remains one of the best.

Like many sci-fi films of the 1950's, The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms features scientists as the main characters. Those other films like It Came From Beneath The Sea, The Thing From Another World, and This Island Earth had some very dry performances from their scientist-leads and this film is no different. It gives the movie a very pulp novel-like quality and doesn't bog down the story with excess plot or depth... making for a great popcorn-flick.



The film features special effects by the master of stop-motion animation, Ray Harryhausen. Today's younger audiences could easily pick apart some of his work as being very phony-looking... but the black and white photography mixed with moody lighting and weather conditions mask some of the limitations of the FX technology of the time and create some truly effective shots. This is some of Harryhausen's best work in his long and successful career and any classic sci-fi film with his touch is instantly made better.



Fun Fact: You may recognize the dinosaur skeleton in the museum scene is the same one who had a much bigger part in the classic screwball comedy Bringing Up Baby.

The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms remains an exciting film and rarely delves into cheese like many lesser sci-fi and horror films of the era. Definitely recommended.

The Hoodlum

The Hoodlum
1951 - Jack Schwarz Productions
Directed By Max Nosseck



SYNOPSIS

Recidivist Vincent Lubeck (Lawrence Tierney) gets released from prison and is back with his family for the first time in 5 years. His brother (Edward Tierney) gives him a job at his gas station. It's right across the street from a bank, and Vincent quickly hatches a plan with some criminal friends to take an armored truck. The plan goes off perfectly, but his friends turn on him and now the cops are closing in on Vincent.



MY THOUGHTS

A low-rent film noir that succeeds despite its limits.

Noir could easily work or a shoe-string budget as long as the story and characters were strong. B-movie studios like Republic and Monogram made many successful film noir, as did smaller fly-by-night studios. Jack Schwarz Productions was only around for a short time, though the film was distributed for release by United Artists.
The smaller the studio, the shorter the production schedule... so film noir tended to look less 'arty.' The exotic camera angles and extreme lighting of more artier noir did not appear, and The Hoodlum was no exception.

Lawrence Tierney was the perfect, dynamic actor to bring Vincent Lubeck to life.
During a time where actors got black and brown-listed due to their political beliefs, Tierney was practically brown listed for his drunkenness, brawling and odd behavior. He really WAS the tough thug he played on screen and no one wanted to work with him. Even though he made a splash in big films like Dillinger and Born To Kill, he found himself in so-so films for c-grade studios.
In his later years, he made the cast of Reservoir Dogs squirm, and the cast and crew of Seinfeld never want him back (he was Elaine's dad - once and only once.)

Tierney's real life brother Edward plays the same brotherly role in the film. He's not as dynamic of an actor, but you can definitely tell they're related, and that adds something.

The film is a well-paced hour long tale that is a must see for noir fans.

Horror Of Dracula

Horror Of Dracula
1958 - Hammer Films
Directed By Terrence Fisher



SYNOPSIS

Jonathan Harker (John Van Eyssen) accepts a librarian job in the castle of Dracula, knowing full well who and what Dracula is. After staking a woman under his power, Dracula (Christopher Lee) kills him. Harker's friend Doctor Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) comes looking and finds Harker is now a vampire and stakes him. Van Helsing returns to Harker's fiancee Lucy (Carol Marsh) to tell her the news but finds out she is now under Dracula's control. Van Helsing and Lucy's brother Arthur (Michael Gough) team up to put an end to Dracula for good.



MY THOUGHTS

Horror of Dracula put Hammer Films on the map as the most important studio in the horror genre since Universal in the 1930's. The studio revisited many of the tried-and-true characters of horror like Frankenstein's Monster and Dracula. This was their first attempt at the fanged count.
There's a campy feel to the whole thing (as with most Hammer films) but it doesn't detract from the experience.



Though he appears in the film only for brief moments, Christopher Lee owns the film as Dracula. His amazing presence adds more menace and chills than Bela Lugosi, the definitive Dracula.
Lee ranks as probably the screen's greatest all-time villain... and Dracula is his most famous role. He would become a star from this film and went on to play the role several more times, despite the way this film ends.

Peter Cushing's Van Helsing is one of the better performances of the character over the years. It's rare than an intelligent, well-spoken, complex character can be the hero of a horror film.

The film does deviate from Bram Stoker's classic novel, but does so to make the story better cinematically.

This is a very low budget affair. But with great sets and the atmospheric way they were shot, it doesn't look like it. The low budget means tight pacing, with little fluff or down time and makes for a more exciting film. It's simple, bare-bones storytelling and succeeds where many overdone vampire movies fail miserably.

Definitely one of the best big screen takes of the Dracula tale.

The Champ

The Champ
1931 - MGM
Directed By King Vidor



SYNOPSIS

Andy Purcell (Wallace Beery) is an ex-champion boxer who's looking to get his title back. He also has major drinking and gambling problems that sidetrack him and leave him penniless. He takes care of his son Dink (Jackie Cooper) who idolizes him and calls him "Champ." After running into the boy's mother (Irene Rich,) Champ decides to give Dink to her so the boy can have a nicer life. Dink runs away back to Champ and find that he's turned his life around and is headed back to the ring one more time.



MY THOUGHTS

Two stellar performances and a great script make for a classic.

The film's script was 'the champ' at the Oscars that year. It delivers a story that wears it's emotions on it's sleeves somehow without ever getting too corny or sentimental.
In any other script, Dink's mother and step father would be evil and mean. Here they're the two nicest people you could ever meet. Also, for a film that deals with the custody of a child, we're not forced to sit through any cliched court proceedings.

Wallace Beery also won a much deserved Oscar for his performance. He's a horrible father setting a terrible example for his young boy... yet his heart of gold makes him very sympathetic and we cheer for him when he does good. That's hard to pull off believably.

Jackie Cooper does an outstanding job as well. Giving such a large part to a child is a dangerous thing for a film, but Cooper's confidence and his emotion-filled performance really stand out as a highlight of The Champ.

Beery and Cooper's superb chemistry make them feel like a real father and son.

The film has one major flaw... the footage during the final fight is sped up, giving it a very comical look, which was not the intent. This detracts from the suspense and makes the action silly.

Other than that, it remains a solid and entertaining (and tearjerking) story, nearly 80 years after it was released.

Headin' Home

Headin' Home
1920
Directed By Lawrence C. Windom



SYNOPSIS

Babe Ruth (himself) lives in a small town in the sticks and dreams of playing baseball... but he's a laughingstock of the whole town on the ball field. He joins the team of a neighboring town and finds success. Soon the New York Yankees coming calling.



MY THOUGHTS

The life of Babe Ruth couldn't be more inaccurate if it took place on the moon.

Ruth's "humble small-town' was actually Baltimore. This is hardly the town of Haverlock that appears on screen. Haverlock is like the idyllic small towns in 1950's sitcoms... or that America that conservative commentators wish the country would return to, even though it never ever existed.
His family lived above a saloon that his father ran, not in a pleasant country home. Ruth led a rough young life and wound up being put in a special all boys school to keep him out of trouble.
The film also glosses over the later facts the Ruth started out as a pitcher and began his career with the Boston Red Sox.

I'm not an expert on silent films. I've seen many of the important ones, German Expressionist, Russian and some of the early great American ones and classic comedy shorts. Those films were excellent at SHOWING the audience the action, along with the occasional title card announcing a line of dialogue or a change of scenery.
Headin' Home practically has a title card before every shot explaining what we're going to see. Without them, the film would be confusing because it did such a poor job of SHOWING what was happening.
The title cards use a lame hick vernacular (Th' instead of the, wuz instead of was, etc.) that gets very annoying, very quick. If it was intended as humor, it failed miserably.

Also a failure was the script. It was a total hammy bore and may have been written by a 3rd grader. Several lengthy sequences appear and have nothing to further the plot. There's a long scene about a dogcatcher trying to do his job (with "comical" results.) This and other scenes seemingly only exist to pad out the running time of the film to a whopping 71 minutes.

The only great thing about the film is Babe Ruth. Not because of his acting, but because we see him as a young player in the prime of his career. Several scenes show Ruth in his Yankees uniform and on the field (the field is actually the Polo Grounds, home of the New York Giants)
Ruth was already a star... but not yet a superstar and legend. He would be that by the end of the decade.

His presence is probably the only thing that kept this pointless film from being lost to the sands of time, like so many silent films.

Daffy Duck's Quackbusters

Daffy Duck's Quackbusters
1988 - Warner Brothers
Directed By Greg Ford



SYNOPSIS

Because he was able to make a dying millionaire laugh, Daffy Duck inherits his fortune. There is one caveat... he must be honest and businesslike or the money will vanish. Daffy forms a paranormal investigations company with Porky Pig and Bugs Bunny.



MY THOUGHTS

An obvious take on Ghostbusters suits the Looney Tunes characters well.

Much like the previously reviewed Daffy Duck's Fantastic Island and the other Looney Tunes films of the 1970's and 80's, this film exists as a framework in which to use scenes from classic shorts. Quackbusters was the final one in the series.

This film focuses on more horror/ sci-fi themed shorts from the 40's and 50's and about a dozen classics are featured.

Sometimes Quackbusters will jump mid-scene from the modern plot right into an old clip. This is occasionally very jarring since the animation style is different (done-on-the-cheap Hanna-Barbera style vs. old school master-painter style) and Mel Blanc's voices are noticeably different over the years (especially Porky Pig.)

I was glad the film only borrowed the concept of Ghostbusters and was not a flat out parody.
The modern plot is more episodic than Fantastic Island and that suits the story better. The writing is also sharper, funnier and the film begins with a brand-new short... but all said, the new stuff still doesn't hold up to the classics.

It's still an enjoyable film for kids of all ages.

A Woman Is A Woman

A Woman Is A Woman
1961 - France
Directed By Jean-Luc Godard



SYNOPSIS

Angela (Anna Karina) is a stripper and the thing she wants most is a baby. Her boyfriend Emile (Jean-Claude Brialy) is not ready to have a child yet. Angela may have to seek out Emile's friend (Jean Paul Belmondo,) who is in love with her.



MY THOUGHTS

A Woman Is A Woman is a very whimsical breath of fresh air.

The film was made at the height of the French New Wave and the experimental freshness that keeps the romantic comedy from going stale. It also helps to have one of the main architects and talents of the New Wave behind the camera, Jean-Luc Godard.

Many French New Wave films have a very fluid style filled with energy. Moving cameras, a fast pace, and seemingly improvised dialogue... and this film is no different (in that aspect.) It's shot in very vivid color, which does differentiate it from it's comrades in the French movement. Godard's film also sheds the American film noir influence that fueled many of the New Wave's plots.

A Woman Is A Woman's cheeky script offers several in-jokes to film fans. Belmondo's character can't wait to get home to see Godard's breakthrough film Breathless on TV (the film that made Jean-Paul Belmondo a big star.) Actress Jeanne Moreau appears in a cameo and someone asks how the filming is going on her latest (Truffaut's Jules and Jim.)
In a running gag early in the film, Angela wishes she was in a musical. Several moments in the film, the music swells up like a song is going to break out and every time (except once) the music stops abruptly. She also acknowledges the camera with the occasional look, nod or wink.

Anna Karina is the highlight of the film. She's bright and chipper and even innocent, which are not traits of a usual stripper. Angela has a cool detachment from her life and surroundings, which makes the character that more attractive in a story-telling way (she doesn't need any help being physically attractive!)



The film doesn't disappoint especially if you're looking for something unconventional.

You Can't Take It With You

You Can't Take It With You
1938 - Columbia
Directed By Frank Capra



SYNOPSIS

Tony Kirby (James Stewart) falls in love with his secretary (Jean Arthur.) He's the vice president of a firm headed by his father (Edward Albert.) His dad is looking to build a major factory in a neighborhood and the one hold-out happens to be the secretary's Grandpa (Lionel Barrymore.) Grandpa, his family, and friends that stay in his home are all eccentric free spirits that do as they please. When Tony has the two families meet their ways of life clash... and soon the police show up.



MY THOUGHTS

A delightful screwball comedy that actually has a message.

The film won Oscars for both director Frank Capra and Best Picture.

I did not find this as funny as other screwball comedies (like His Girl Friday) but there are many laugh-out-loud moments. The film's 2 hour plus run time might have diluted this, since most comedies run only about 1:30. But the film has many sequences that are hilarious.

The film does have a breezy, happy quality that may be shadowing a darker anti-capitalist message.

Opposed to the business-centric Kirbys, the eccentric family and friends isn't ruled by the almighty dollar and are all like-minded and live together in peace and harmony. This is like a commune is supposed to be run. The presence of an actual Russian character and some mention of 'the reds' adds to this and we're presented with a subtle Capitalism Vs. Communism debate. The film says communism is the better option. I may be looking too much into this, but oh well, it's something to think about. It's an interesting concept to dwell upon, since WWII was about to break out soon after this was released. (Maybe some pro-Russian sentiments =were in order?)
But this didn't distract me from the fun of the film.

All the actors contributed greatly to the film, but Lionel Barrymore stands out as Grandpa. He's one of those great film characters that you would want to know in real life. The rest of the film is populated by great character actors and future huge star James Stewart.

You Can't Take It With You's script (based on a play) kept the story moving without any dull moments.
The film is a delight and you shouldn't miss it especially if you're a fan of great screwball comedies.

The Gore Gore Girls

The Gore Gore Girls
1972
Directed By Herschell Gordon Lewis



SYNOPSIS

Someone is killing and horrifically disfiguring strippers. A reporter (Amy Farrell) and a famed sleazy private investigator (Frank Kress) team up to solve the murder spree.



MY THOUGHTS

For better or worse, The Gore Gore Girls is a fine example of an exploitation film.

The exploitation genre freely celebrated it's liberation from Hollywood's dead production code. Old taboos like extreme violence and nudity were allowed to crop up in mainstream film in the 1960's. Exploitation films 'exploited' these and showed them to the extreme. Once the newness of all this liberation faded, so did the genre.

The genre was mostly made outside of Hollywood and far from the major studios. The films would almost never make it into a traditional theater. Only the more sleazy drive-ins and theaters would show them. Their very low budgets and subject matter helped these 'fringe' films make a healthy profit.

Director Herschell Gordon Lewis was one of the kings of the genre. The Gore Gore Girls would be his last for 30 years.

This film lives up to its title and features gore to the extreme. Heads are shredded with bare hands, throats slit, etc. This has to be one of the most misogynistic films I've ever seen. Not recommended for the squeamish. The gore is very obviously fake but it's still nasty.

The humor is also over the top and is as campy as humor can get, complete with characters quipping directly to the camera. The humor is a dark and sadistic as the violence.

The acting (if you want to call it that) is uniformly bad but that's the point. The strippers were picked for their nice bodies, not because they could speak. Their 'seductive' dances are very dated but add to the campy fun.
Of all people, legendary stand up comic Henny Youngman appears as the owner of the affected strip clubs. Most of his dialogue wisely consists of one liners, as that was his specialty ("Take my wife, please!" doesn't appear here.)

I have to be in a specific dark, cynical, depraved mood to truly enjoy an exploitation and thankfully I was tonight.

Taking Woodstock

Taking Woodstock
2009 - Focus Features
Directed By Ang Lee



SYNOPSIS

Elliot (Demetri Martin) works at his parents motel in upstate New York. As the president of the local chamber of commerce, he allows a permit for a music festival that winds up drawing half a million people... and the ire of the townspeople.



MY THOUGHTS

Ang Lee strikes again.
Each film Ang Lee makes couldn't be more different than the last. His previous three: Lust, Caution; Brokeback Mountain; and Hulk. Taking Woodstock is light and amusing.... two traits that couldn't be further from those films.

One trait that pervades ALL of his films are the humanness of the characters. Everyone seems as real as you or me. No one is an actor playing a part. Only some of that can be achieved by a good script. A director working closely and expertly with his actors can achieve this, and with his track record Ang Lee is very successful at this.

Demetri Martin excels in his first major acting role because of this. He provides an understated center for the crazy goings-on around him.

It would be impossible to tell the whole story of Woodstock and the film succeeds by limiting it to the story of Elliot Tiber. This little story gives the tale an anchor to build upon. We never feel cheated that we don't see the iconic stage (except from extreme long shots) or hear the actual music... but it feels like we're there nonetheless.

The film pays homage to many classic scenes from the documentary Woodstock and several famous photographs, but all this is done in the background and never weighs down the narrative. This was exactly the way Lee handled all the 1970's kitsch in The Ice Storm. Taking Woodstock also utilizes some split-screen shots that ape the classic film and are used in clever and effective ways.

In a lesser director's hand, Taking Woodstock could be a mess. But Ang Lee has another winner.

High Gear

High Gear
1933 - Goldsmith Productions
Directed By Leigh Jason



SYNOPSIS

big time race car driver Mark 'High Gear' Sherrod (James Murray) loses his nerve following a crash that killed his racing partner Ed. Sherrod decided to honor his memory by sending Ed's son Jimmy (Jackie Searl) to a military academy that the boy wanted to attend. Unable to drive a race car, Sherrod becomes a taxi driver, which he hides from his new girlfriend (Joan Marsh.)



MY THOUGHTS

Dead god, where do I begin?

The movie shows promise to be about race cars. Apart from the crash near the beginning and the very end of the film do we see any in action. Stuffed in between is a pedestrian and uninteresting schmaltzy story.

James Murray was an adequate hero but he looks and acts so much like Dick Powell that I took an instant dislike to him.

Joan Marsh was the least-offending actor in the film. She's cute and plays her part well.

Jackie Searl never achieved the big stardom of a Jackie Cooper or Freddie Bartholomew, though he often played supporting roles in their films and was quite good. He's not here, but with the dialogue he was given it's clear the screenwriters were never children. Searl and the other kids in the film seemingly had to say "golly"or "swell" in every line of dialogue. It's hard to be good when you've got nothing but crap to say.

Eddie Lambert plays the over-the-top Jewish immigrant stereotype. He's the Jar Jar Binks of the film. He's completely annoying the entire time but without him, the film would be a complete dreadful bore filled with uninteresting characters.

The direction, cinematography, editing, music and all aspects of the film show a real half-assed effort.
High Gear looks like it was made for next to nothing by a fly-by-night production company, and it probably was.

Pin Up Girl

Pin Up Girl
1944 - 20th Century Fox
Directed By Bruce Humberstone



SYNOPSIS

Two waitresses at a USO club in Missouri head off to Washington DC to be stenographers for the Navy. One of the girls, Lorry Jones (Betty Grable,) decides they should stop off in New York City. She fashions herself a new identity as musical comedy star Laura Lorraine and meets Tommy Dooley (John Harvey) a famed hero of the battle of Guadalcanal. After a few weeks, the two girls are in DC working when Dooley shows up and Lorry is assigned to be his stenographer. Lorry puts on a pair of glasses and fools Dooley, while moonlighting as Laura Lorraine.

MY THOUGHTS

It's clear this patriotic war-time film wasn't shown to our armed forces because there was no mass surrender to the Nazis and Japanese in 1944.

If the film was designed as a piece of fluff to keep people's minds off the war, why have every moment of screen time filled with men in uniform? Pin Up Girl is not overly patriotic other than the constant military presence.

The two big pluses of the film are: it's beautifully shot in Technicolor, and the somewhat forgotten big band sounds of Charlie Spivak & His Orchestra. Both help to keep the film from being totally terrible.

The band sounds great but the songs performed are totally forgettable, especially the lyrics for Grable and Martha Raye.
Raye appears along with Joe E. Brown, who are supposed to be comedic relief, but the script lacks any humor.

The script also has some major flaws.
1. Dorthea Kent, who plays Betty Grable's friend completely disappears from the second half of the film without explanation. Same goes for Tommy Dooley's war buddy.

2. Betty Grable donning a pair of glasses to fool Tommy Dooley is even harder to believe than Superman fooling Lois Lane.

3.When Dooley discovers the truth, instead of a conversation where Grable explains herself or even a hug or declaration of love or anything... we're treated to a 5 minute all-girl marching drill team on stage. Then the movie ends, leaving us hanging.

I'm guessing the studio gave the screenwriters just a few hours to turn this into a movie:



and it shows... and yes Grable's famous photo does appear in the film several times.
The photo has become legendary. The film forgettable.

3:10 To Yuma

3:10 To Yuma
1957 - Columbia Pictures
Directed By Delmer Daves



SYNOPSIS

A small-time rancher (Van Heflin) helps to capture notorious outlaw Ben Wade (Glenn Ford.) He then takes on a dangerous mission, to escort Wade to the 3:10 train to Yuma where the outlaw will go back to prison. But Wade's gang will stop at nothing to see their leader set free.



MY THOUGHTS

A western that trades it's guns in for psychology of it's two leads.

This film can definitely be compared to the superior High Noon. Both feature a honorable hero facing an almost certain death, alone, in the name of justice. High Noon's editing and pacing made it the superior film, along with Gary Cooper's performance.

Here the highlight is the interplay between the two leads Glenn Ford and Van Heflin.
After realizing he was playing the villain, I was unsure how Glenn Ford would be able to pull it off. He always struck me as an "aww shucks" type of squeaky-clean with his cheshire cat-like grin (even when he wasn't smiling.) But he uses those traits to his advantage and plays a very intriguing character.
Heflin's Dan Evans is in a bad way. He's got little income thanks to a big drought, and a wife and two kids to feed... yet we don't pity him. He's doing this job just for the money but when Ford's character offers him significantly more money, he sticks with his job, knowing it's the right and moral thing to do.
Both characters know how to push each other's buttons and their chess game of words when they're confined to the hotel room is far more exciting than any gunfight in the film.

The cinematography is stunningly beautiful and we get to see a lot of the amazing countryside, even though the majority of the story concerns two men in a hotel room.

This film was remade in 2007. I despise the current trend of remaking everything because the new version never holds up to the original. But the new 3:10 To Yuma is slightly superior. It builds upon the story and makes it seem less of a High Noon knockoff. The end of the production code in the 1960's allowed the story to be shown more realistically graphic and less hokey. The remake was far from perfect, but that's for another review.

This version is a sturdy, fine example of the 1950's western, when the genre was at it's height.

Blood Simple

Blood Simple
1984
Directed By Joel Coen



SYNOPSIS

A bartender named Ray (John Getz) runs away with his boss' wife (Frances McDormand.) His boss Marty (Dan Hedaya) finds out after hiring a private investigator (M. Emmet Walsh.) He then hires the P.I. to kill the couple. The P.I. steals the wife's gun and shoots Marty and takes money. Ray happens upon the body and decides to dispose of it... but Marty isn't quite dead yet



MY THOUGHTS

The Coen brothers hit the ground running with their first film.
This film, like the majority of what was to come from them, is a expert homage to film noir.
Noir is usually set in the big city, but being in a sleepy Texas town adds a unique twist to the formula.
Like many noirs, the pacing is sort of like a slow burn. It starts off almost excruciatingly slow but picks up steam and races toward the climax.
Along the way the film picks up suspense and there's a few moments that could cause you to jump out of your seat, more than your average slasher film.

Blood Simple has a serious tone, lacking much of the subtle humor in their later films apart from a flourish or two here or there. But many other touchstones of the Coen Brothers are here like their use of closeups, low camera angles and some unique camera movements.

The performances are uniformly realistic. The characters seem very real thanks to the dialogue. Their words are true to life and lack 'flowery dialogue' that makes many films more cinematic than life-like. (Quentin Tarantino writes amazing dialogue but really who talks that way in the real world?)

I don't think "Blood Simple" is on par with some of their later works like Fargo, but it's not far off and is well worth a look. The Coen Brothers started off strong and only got better.

Humoresque

Humoresque
1946 - Warner Brothers
Directed By Jean Negulesco



SYNOPSIS

A driven young man, Paul Boray (John Garfield,) grows up to become a virtuoso violinist. His big break comes at a party hosted by a wealthy socialite (Joan Crawford.) The two fall in love despite the fact she is married. But she finds out the hard way he is married too... to his music.



MY THOUGHTS

I've always been a fan of movies that were heavily music-centered but not considered 'musicals.' Films like The Blues Brothers, this site's namesake Blues In The Night or even concert films have music play a central role but doesn't feature the typical singing and dance numbers associated with a musical. Humoresque certainly fits this label.

The plot is an oft-traveled one, and the film doesn't add much to it, but it features great actors doing what they do best.

John Garfield delivers a complex, strong and realistic performance as Boray. Boray's tough and outspoken yet has the passion to be a great musician.
Though largely forgotten today, Garfield was a powerhouse actor, one of the first 'method' actors in Hollywood. He sadly saw his career (and ultimately his life) destroyed by the House Un-American Activities Committee.



Joan Crawford's character is a weak point for me in the story. We never really understand her motivations as a character apart from her love for someone that she won't be able to have and control.
She has a serious drinking habit that is never truly explained. Is it because of her marriage or boredom? It doesn't get worse through the film. It starts out bad and stays there.
I also don't get Garfield's attraction to her. He doesn't seem interested in money... so it must be looks. But by this time Crawford had begun to go from a beautiful woman into starting to look like a drag queen.

Oscar Levant's role as Boray's pianist/ friend is essentially the same role that he played just a few years later in An American In Paris. That's not a bad thing.

By far the standout performance is by Franz Waxman. He arranged, conducted and put together the musical selections for the film. The classical compositions are stellar and work both as concert pieces and are also woven into the narrative, much like Dvorak's piece that named the film.
Waxman also hied future legendary violinist Isaac Stern to play Garfield's violin. It's actually Stern's hand fingering the violin for Garfield, while another musician's hand was moving the bow... yet it looks like Garfield playing the whole time. That's movie magic if I ever heard of it!

The film does have some magic to it... and is recommended to classical music fans and those who like a music-centered film.

Pride Of The Bowery

Pride Of The Bowery
1940 - Monogram
Directed By Joseph H. Lewis



SYNOPSIS

Muggs (Leo Gorcey) wants to find a new place to train to become a great boxer. He enlists Danny (Bobby Jordan) and his other friends to find a new place. Danny dupes Muggs into going to a CCC camp (Civilian Conservation Corps) and all the East Side Kids accompany them there. Muggs struggles to fit in and soon seeks to help out a troubled boy who stole money from the camp safe to send to his ailing aunt. So, Muggs enters a boxing tournament in town and gets money... but gets caught putting his winnings back in the safe.



MY THOUGHTS

The fourth film in the East Side Kids series lacks the humor the series was known for and only an adequate plot.

Leo Gorcey and Bobby Jordan appear in the series for the 3rd time (the first film featured other actors) and have their roles nailed down perfectly and adlib most of the humor to assist the dry script.
The lack of funny also meant a much smaller part for comic relief 'Sunshine Sammy' Morrison. He's not even in the gang, just a fellow camper this time.

The film was Bobby Stone's first of his twelve appearances in the series and his worst because he's given more than a handful of lines. As the troubled boy Willie, he is simply terrible. In a series that cannot claim too many great supporting performances anyway, Stone stands out as the absolute worst.

The fight scenes were well shot with plenty of quick cuts and multiple angles, though the film is sped up almost comically fast.
Most of the film was shot outdoors (California doubling for upstate New York) and the beautiful scenery helps you to forget the film's budget was about $13.47
The low budget and short shooting schedule (all the films in the series were shot in about 6 days) definitely affects the final product, giving it an unpolished shine for better or worse.

Far from the best in the series, but far from the worst.

(500) Days Of Summer

(500) Days Of Summer
2009 - Fox Searchlight
Directed By Marc Webb



SYNOPSIS

Tom Hansen (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) has fallen in love with his co-worker Summer (Zooey Deschanel.) He knows she's the one he's supposed to spend the rest of his life with but she doesn't believe love exists and doesn't want a boyfriend... and their relationship is doomed.



MY THOUGHTS

(500) Days of Summer is a unique, fresh and excellent take on the romantic comedy genre.
We're told from the outset that the relationship won't work out. This combined with the non-lineal story adds a much more creative aspect to a tired genre. Since we know they're not going to work out, you focus more on the relationship, trying to pick out what went wrong, why and when.

Unlike many romantic comedies, the characters of Tom and Summer seem like real people living in the real world. This is due to an excellent and intelligent script and superb performances by the leads.
Both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel have built up excellent indie film resumes over the past decade and with the success of this film have hopefully broken through to the mainstream, so we can see their amazing talents more often (though lets hope they stay in Indie film because that's still where the best parts lie.)

The film has many laugh-out-loud moments and the humor sometimes hits the infantile/toilet humor variety which is even funnier than normal because you wouldn't expect it in a film like this.

(500) Days of Summer should appeal to just about everyone and is well worth checking out.

The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus

The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus
2009
Directed By Terry Gilliam



SYNOPSIS

A traveling show lead by Doctor Parnassus (Christopher Plummer) allows people to literally step into their imaginations through a magic mirror. The troupe has fallen on hard times when they rescue a man (Heath Ledger) hanging from a bridge. With his charisma, charm, and business know-how he starts bringing in money. But the immortal Parnassus faces even bigger problems. He made a deal with the Devil (Tom Waits) years ago. In order to regain his youth, he would give up his daughter (Lily Cole) when she hit 16 years of age. That day is very soon and the Devil shows up to collect, he renegotiates the deal. Now Parnassus and the Devil race to see who can seduce the first five people to the light side or the dark side.



MY THOUGHTS

(Since it's still in theaters I must warn you that this may contain minor spoilers)

Doctor Parnassus is a return to form for director Terry Gilliam and a fitting farewell for Heath Ledger.
Gilliam's last two films Tideland and The Brothers Grimm both had his imaginative visual style that defines his films, but suffered from weak screenplays. Parnassus fits in tonally with Gilliam's films from the 1980's Time Bandits, Brazil, and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, and has more than a few nods to his Monty Python days. Parnassus doesn't hit the highs of Brazil or Time Bandits but is a strong film in its own right.

The film contains huge surrealist landscapes from Gilliam's rich imagination when the characters enter the mirror, much like Alice (In Wonderland) when she looks into the looking glass.
The real-life scenes are also skewed and show off Gilliam's acid wit with plenty of commentary on today's society (a sign in a store window reads "Only 364 Days Until Christmas!)

I was surprised by how much of the film Heath Ledger appears in... he's in everything but the scenes inside the mirror.
Ledger's character's appearance helps to save the fledgling troupe, yet there's no way he could be called the hero of the story and I'm not sure there really is one. Ledger shines one last time in bringing this murky character to life and once he's on screen the film picks up steam.
The character's true darkness is shown as he enters the mirror.
His mirror identities are played by Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell. The three are all clearly playing playing the same character and the whole thing doesn't come of as distracting or gimmicky. The changes are explained in the film.



Christopher Plummer is always an asset to any movie he's in.
He seemingly hasn't portrayed a 'good guy' since before The Sound Of Music and its great to see. As a counterpoint to the devil and with his special powers, Parnassus is sort of a god-like character but the role isn't a flattering one. He's a serious alcoholic who spends most of the time lamenting the past and wishing he were dead . Plummer's presence adds a lot of gravity to the film.



Like his other films, The Imagination of Doctor Parnassus is not for everyone, but fans of Terry Gilliam and fans of films that are off the beaten path will delight in this unique and entertaining film.

Candyman

Candyman
1992- TriStar
Directed By Bernard Rose



SYNOPSIS

A college grad student (Virginia Madsen) is doing her thesis on urban legends. She learns of one called the Candyman who has a hook for a hand and appears when you say his name 5 times into the mirror who plagues a housing project on the south side of Chicago. When she goes to research she discovers the Candyman (Tony Todd) is no legend... he's real! Soon, people she cares about turn up dead... and she's accused!



MY THOUGHTS

For years I'd put off watching Candyman, thinking it fell into the same cheesy, lame slasher-movie crowd of the era. But unlike most horror films of the late 80's early 90's, Candyman is actually disturbing and creepy.... and good.

Candyman has an intelligence that many horror films at the time seemingly forgot. There's more than just hacking and slashing, there's some psychology in the mix. The film toys with the idea that Helen Lyle is crazy or that the Candyman is just some guy impersonating the legend. This adds depth to what could have been a flat story and adds some intrigue to the plot and keeps the audience guessing. The film contains ample gore, but that's not the main focus of the horror, it's more cerebral.

The horror genre isn't known for great acting performances but Virginia Madsen and Tony Todd deliver. Todd is unsettling every time he's on screen, ideal for a villain.

The film is based off of a story by horror master Clive Barker, who's also responsible for the equally creepy Hellraiser.

Candyman is one of the better horror films of the 1990's and is definitely worth a look.