I enjoyed watching Robin and Marion while visiting my mother every other day in her care home, obviously its themes become more poignant, particularly the final image. I later noticed that despite the way it plays out, Sean Connery was the last man standing in the cast, pretty much every other actor bar none died before he did. I think only the director is still alive - Richard Lester, the guy who did A Hard Day's Night and Superman II all those years ago.
Bizarrely, the young actress who played Richard II's floozy in this went on to have a distinguished career and is still acting.
That's Victoria Abril. She actually plays King John's young wife, and I mean YOUNG! There's a disturbing comment in the movie that all king John does is stay in be bed with his 12 year old wife, then Robin and his men laugh. Abril was 17 at the time.
Both John's wives were only 14 when he married them, and his second was a lot younger than he was. It wouldn't have been frowned upon in those olden days. Curiously he needed to get the Pope's permission to marry his first wife, as they were cousins. In his wisdom the Pope agreed they could marry as long as they didn't consummate the marriage. This made the eventual annulment a lot easier. Strange times the middle ages.
I ought to have some respect for Danny Dyer and director Nick Love, who constructed this appalling piece of British crime-comedy. They’re both London boys made good. Doesn’t mean they make anything good, although Danny did make his amusingly daft daughter Dani, so I suppose…
The Business is a filthy cocaine and guns thriller filmed mostly in Andalusia with a non-existent comic edge, a pumping 1980s soundtrack and a femme fatale whose more a brass without a heart than any Lauren Bacall type ever was. Danny Dyer’s no Bogart. The film’s no masterpiece, not by a long chalk. I don’t think anyone expected it to be. It came hot on the heels of better fare like Snatch, Layer Cake and Sexy Beast. No amount of obscenities and simulated f~~~~~~ will make this film any good. It has all the subtlety of a being hit by a brick.
That's Victoria Abril. She actually plays King John's young wife, and I mean YOUNG! There's a disturbing comment in the movie that all king John does is stay in be bed with his 12 year old wife, then Robin and his men laugh. Abril was 17 at the time.
chrisno1 sez:
Both John's wives were only 14 when he married them, and his second was a lot younger than he was. It wouldn't have been frowned upon in those olden days. Curiously he needed to get the Pope's permission to marry his first wife, as they were cousins. In his wisdom the Pope agreed they could marry as long as they didn't consummate the marriage. This made the eventual annulment a lot easier. Strange times the middle ages.
what was the life expectancy in those days? surely the job of the King's wife was to begin pumping out offspring as soon as possible, before there was an early death, and chance of dynastic interruption and yet another war?
this seems like an extreme example of applying modern moral standards to ancient history! then there was also droit de seigneur!
(all this said, Andrew lives in modern times and has no such excuse)
speaking about the behaviour of kings in these sort of films, what about McGoohan's king in Braveheart? wasnt he sleeping with his daughter-in-law because the heir to the throne wasnt interested?
My comment about "strange times" was more to do with the annulment. I am well-aware that we can't apply our modern laws and moral expectations on the histories of the past and I don't think I've done that.
yeh that bit with the cousin's a bit odd, now I reread that I don't even see the point. a lot of those marriages were to formalise political alliances, maybe this cousin was daughter to a rival to the throne? that might explain why the marriage was not consummated. I'm not sure anybody married for love, let alone Kings.
trying to apply modern morals to the mediaeval era is a bit of a rabbit hole, so much seems irrational, barely human. A lot of it straight out horrific. It isn't until the Renaissance and Age of Reason that we get scientific reasoning and the concept of human rights.
droit de seigneur was mentioned above, but that "custom" is probably just a myth. King John's wife really was that young and I don't mind movies mentioning facts. But I did find it a bit unpleasant to see the hero of the movie laughing about a grown man having sex with a 12 year old. At the time it's not unlikely people would've laughed in that situation, but still ....
I’m a big Humphrey Bogart fan, but I must confess to never having seen this pot-boiling melodrama set in a Catholic mission in war ravaged China, 1947. I was surprised to discover it was filmed in colour and in Cinemascope, although the version I watched seemed to be transmitted in the standard 1.37 to 1 ratio. Bogart’s pretty good, which was a relief, as this is generally considered one of the weakest of his later movies.
Bogie plays Father Peter O’Shea, a priest who arrives at a Catholic mission and revitalises the church and hospital through his unconventional attitudes and endeavours. Agnes Moorehead’s gossipy doctor’s wife thinks he’s hiding a secret: a burgeoning love for the pretty nurse, Anne Scott, played with much wariness by Gene Tierney. When Mieh Yang, the local war lord, turns up he’s interested in the rule breaking priest for entirely different reasons. Yang is played with some devilish urbanity by Lee J. Cobb. Bogart and Cobb spar dutifully, just as they did in Sirocco a couple of years earlier. This is a lesser project and they tread carefully, as if two old chums are revisiting past glories.
Bogart, as always, keeps us interested with his agitated pipe smoking, his subtle glances, his stooping gait, his sudden fits of righteous anger, which contrast with the calm, fatherly benevolence he displays with his new-found flock. We know all along he’s not what he seems, but the script doesn’t quite deliver on its promises. It isn’t a ripping yarn, nor is it a romance, or a tale of religious conversion. It touches on all three, but can’t make up its mind in case the story overbalances. Hence, it’s not entirely successful persuading us of any one’s motivations.
On the plus side, Franz Planer’s photography is grand, Victor Young’s music stately and Edward Dymtryk’s direction solid. Most of the Chinese roles are taken by Chinese or Asian actors, so it’s a pity to report on Lee J. Cobb’s embarrassing yellow-face make-up. The writers shove in a reference to an unlikely Ivy league education to account for Cobb’s undisguised accent. Could the producers not have found one decent ethnic actor to play the pivotal role? Given Bogart’s prominence in worker’s rights, you wonder why he didn’t raise an objection.
Middle-grade Hammer production starring Ingrid Pitt as Countess Elisabeth Nadasdy, commonly known in historical circles as the Bloody Countess, Elisabeth Bathroy of Hungary. The movie highly stylises the accusation that Countess Nadasdy murdered and tortured over 300 young women. Here they are given a supernatural twist as bathing in virgin blood allows the Countess to keep looking young. Unfortunately there’s a side-effect which proves the undoing of her romantic inclinations towards a virile young cavalry officer.
There’s not a lot of blood for such a bloody tale. Director Peter Sadsy and writer Jeremy Paul could have really come on strong with this one, turning in a genuine bloodbath, especially given the character’s legendary, though contested, exploits. It’s all a bit tame.
Ingrid Pitt does well inhabiting both the widowed Countess and her younger capricious self. Nigel Green lends sterling but unexceptional support. In an almost silent role as the virgin daughter Ilona, Lesley Anne Down manages to keep a straight face and her clothes on while attempting to evade / escape / seduce the mute woodsman whose kidnapped her. Their dumbshow two-handers were cringingly hilarious. The romantic subplots rather hinder the horror. We end up with a delirious menage a trois of infatuated madness and a few largely unseen killings.
The transformation scenes are well executed. The most intriguing character is the faithful nurse, whose loyalty is tested too much. Generally, the piece needs more gore. It feels old fashioned, although this may not have been so in 1971.
This mvoe is directed and co-written by Guillermo del Torro, an man who couldn't make a boring or average movie even if he was paid to do it. If you haven't seen "Pan's Labyrint" or "The shape of water", repent and go forth and watch them as soon as possible!
While Labyrint was inspred by fairy tales and had the aftermath of the Spanish civil war as a backdrop and Shape Of Water was inspired by old Sci-fi monster movies with a cold war backdrop, this one is very much a film noir happening while the US involvement in WWII is getting closer.
The movie starts with Stanton (Bradley Cooper) hiding a dead body under the floor and setting fire to the house. He soon gets hired by a carnival. He has a talent for reading people, manipulation and cheating so he becomes a clairvoiant at the carny. After a while he moves to the big city with Molly (Rooney Mara) where they move their act into an upper-class version of their carny act. Cate Blachet, William Deafoe, Toni Colette, David Stratthairn and more first-rate actors are also in the movie. As usual in del Torro's movies there is a strong interest and sympathy with the strange outcasts. Great production design is also typical for Del Torro's movies. The office of Cate Blanchet's character looks fantastic and of course Nightmare Alley is nominated for the Best Production Design Oscars. The first thing I said after exiting the cinema was "That was a real/proper movie!". Nightmare Alley is about characters, plot, psycology and beautiful shots created in camera. The movie is also Oscar nominated for Best Picture, Best Cinematography and Best Costume Design. Thsi is a top psycological film noir thriller with a twist or two. It may not be as good as Labyrinth and Shape of Water, but it is and excellent movie.
Guillermo del Toro, an man who couldn't make a boring or average movie even if he was paid to do it. If you haven't seen "Pan's Labyrinth" or "The shape of water", repent and go forth and watch them as soon as possible!
yep, I've seen both of those and I'm ready to see more, so I'll skip the spoilers and just add this to my must-watch cue. I wish he'd done the Hobbit as originally planned
much of the Shape of Water was filmed in a couple of old theaters in Toronto, and round that time there was an exhibit of his visual effects at our big art gallery that I was stupid and didn't see...
The 1999 World War I drama, THE TRENCH, starring a young Daniel Craig as the tough sergeant in charge of such fresh-faced soldiers as James D'Arcy, Cillian Murphy, and future Q Ben Whishaw. The acting is good and there are some powerful moments, but 99 minutes of soldiers largely chatting away in a trench creates a feeling of staginess. Worth it to see fine actors in early roles, but you may be fighting yourself to stay awake.
Saw a bit of Beaches, the classic drama with Barbara Hershey and Bette Midler but really my reason for posting is that someone pointed out to me that the actress who plays the young Bette Midler (seen on the left) - and is the spitting image of her, it's very well cast - would grow up to be, well, do you know, can you guess it?
Sheldon's girlfriend Amy in The Big Bang Theory, Mayim Bialik.
An unlikely compelling western which attempts to offer a view of the west from the Native American viewpoint. Taking as its compass the story of the Apache Wars and the true life characters of ex-cavalry scout Tom Jeffords and the Indian chief Cochise, Delmer Daves’ Broken Arrow is certainly more sympathetic towards the Apache. The stereotypical bigoted white settlers are a somewhat unfortunate counter balance. Their inclusion seems to be partly to emphasise their ignorance – and by extension a 1950s audience’s ignorance – but also to provide a suitable climax to a film which is low on action, but high on emotion.
James Stewart gives a great performance as Jeffords, really showing his maturity, sensitivity and class. Stewart elicits more emotion from a single frenzied, powerless stare than many others do with a whole gamut of expressions. It still remains a mystery to me how his nervous, one dimensional, supporting act in The Philadelphia Story bagged him an Oscar when so many of his other truly great and memorable leading roles didn’t even warrant due consideration. Anyhow...
There’s a lot of time and consideration given to Apache customs and the writers may or may not have the details right. The filmmakers are stymied by conventions: all the lead Indians are played by bronzed-up Caucasians, the Indian clothing just looks too comfortable, so too the camp, love is a beautiful and chaste thing, why does Debra Paget’s love interest Apache woman wear lipstick? etc, etc. The film is better as a romance across the divides than it is a wild west adventure. Paget looks lovely, but seems miscast. Excellent photography. Broken Arrow feels like a dry run for the more modern Dances With Wolves.
Despite being a little stilted, and not quite following the real history, the movie does take time to portray all sides of every argument, so we have a good idea of the prevailing attitudes of the protagonists and the difficulties facing Jeffords, Cochise, Geronimo, the settlers and the US Army. The film doesn’t delve deep enough into a complicated situation and when it ultimately pins its flags, it is done more for emotional than intellectual impact.
British comedies all had a certain style about them in the 50’s and this is no stranger to that. Directed by Mario Zampi, who helmed the classic Laughter In Paradise at the start of the decade, this stars Terry-Thomas, George Cole, Sid James, Bernard Bresslaw and a host of others who would become household names. An incompetent gang accidentally kidnap the wife of a rich businessman and proceed to try and get a ransom for her without knowing that the husband would love to be rid of her as he is having an affair with his secretary.
This is lovely stuff and very enjoyable. It was remade as Ruthless People in 1986, and that is excellent, too.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
The plot isn't as crazy as it sounds. In 1943 a German submarine crew placed an automated weather station on Labrador, Newfoundland in Canada. It wasn't discovered until 1977. Sorry, I'm a history nerd.
thsi movie is about the modern-day American nomads, the people whoæs homes are i their wanns. Fern (Frances MacDormand) not only loses her job, but the entire town is closed down and she moves into her van and travels the country. She sometimes stops for a period of time to work. She also becomes a part of the community of "nomads", an often overlooked part of modern America.
Franciss MacDormand actually lived as a "nomad" for four months for this movie. Most of the people in Nomadland are real "nomads" and at the time of shooting many of them belived Fern was a real person and the movie was a documentary. The movie has a very documentary feel and shows the people, lifestyle and landscapes in a wonderful way. Nomadland won Best actress (MacDormand), Best Director and Best Movie in last year's Oscars.
Now I've seen Northern Persuit too. It is what it is, but if you place the movie in the right context it's very enjoyable. Some of the back projection, fake backgrounds, fake snow and not so great model work is very noticicable, but for its time it's not too bad. The script work is the strength of this movie. The plot is solid, the goal of the villans isn't obvious and i particularely like the psycological thriller aspect of the story. Who knows what at what time, what's their real motive and can they be turned? I also liked the unusual setting. I also liked that they used an Austrian actor as the main villan.
Gerard Butler returns as CIA service agent protecting Morgan Freeman's President in what I think is the third of these instalments, and said by critics to be the best. It kicks off in Bourne style, with an outlandish assassination take down of the President and Butler on the run, suspected of having orchestrated it. That said, once he goes off grid and hooks up with a veteran in the woods, it becomes way too silly, he's the same character we see John Malkovich play in Red - the narled, cynical Vietnam vet that the audience is meant to have some sympathy with, there's an ambivalence there.
The hokum is escalated but attention is held due to the bad guys' quite brutal kills, so it's kept in balance. At one point an entire hospital is detonated but we aren't meant to be concerned about the poor patients hooked up in their beds. The film is a bit mad but seems to know that we don't care too much. It carries its authority I guess due to the fact that a US President actually was assassinated in living memory, with an attempt on Reagan 20 years later, plus many films like In the Line of Fire and JFK keep the flame burning. I enjoyed the film a lot - on TV - and have to admit it's hard to pull off, this kind of thing. It's got a British star but it needs to be an American product for this to work.
Terry O’Quinn puts in marvellous performance as the psychologically unhinged, identity stealing maniac, who slaughters his families when they displease him. Going from family to family his past catches up with him when his new stepdaughter suspects him of being a murderer. This is tense and exciting and well worth watching. O’Quinn went on to be a major character in cult TV series Lost. It was written by Donald E Westlake who wrote many crime books including the Parker series written under pen name Richard Stark.
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
As you may have gathered this movie is about Robert F. Scott's famous expedition to the South Pole in 1912. Right at the begining the movie thanks relatives and surviving members of the expedition for their cooperation. This reminded me of the fact that the movie was made only 36 years after the expedition and many were still alive. The last expedition member lived into the 1980s!
It's a colour movie and it looks great. I didn't know the name of the director, but it turns out he also directed "The cruel sea" (1953). I have reviewed that movie and found it gave me some idea of the traditional M's background. The cast iof "Scott of the Antarctic"s solid, but the actors aren't known to me despite their respectable IMDB listings. Much of the movie was shot in Norway and our national hero Fridtjof Nansen gets a comeo. Nansen gives some good advice: "I like dogs". Dogs are used to that climate and when a dog isn't needed anymore it can be killed and used to feed other dog or even humans if need be. Scott didn't follow Nansen's advice to the degree he should have. He also didn't use skis enough. Instead he used motororized sleds, a bad idea in 1912, and horses (the movie uses Norwegian Fjord horses) - a bad idea in the Antarctic at any stage in history.
Nansen's "pupil" Roald Amundsen had borrowed his ship Fram, a ship especially made for use in the ice, to go to the North Pole. But Amunsen had lied to everyone and planned to go to the South Pole. Scott's expedition focused on science and saw being the first on the South Pole more as a bonus. Amundsen only cared about the Pole. Partly because Norways was a new as a modern state and needed sources of identity and national pride, partly because Amundsen was an assh*le. But Amundsen was also an experienced and effective polar explorer who learned from Samis and eskimos and relied on dogs and skis. He also tested his equipment well. As the movie shows. Scott and his men found some the petrol cans in the depos had evaporated by the time they needed it deperately on the return voyage. Petrol cans from one of Amundsen's depos were found many decades later and all the fuel was still there. I also remember a TV documentary where British and Norwegian soldiers reenacted the two expeditions as closely as possible, including the rations. The Norwegian team actually weighed MORE when they returned to the coast while members of the British team had to be evacuated because they didn't get enough norishment. While luck and bad luck played a part in the outcome I'm convinced superior planning and experience was the main factor.
You may feel the review so far looks like a history lesson, but only because you're right. I think the movie is well made, looks beautiful and pulls you into the story. It looks more modern than the year of release would make you expect. it's good both as a movie and as a retelling of a dramatic part of history. I can recomend the 2019 movie as "Amundsen" as a double bill alongside "Scott of the Antartic" to see the story from the perspective of both expeditions. Amundsen (2019) - IMDb Amundsen is probably available in some streaming service.
Amongst the reasons that Scott used ponies instead of dogs was because he (and the English, he said), couldn't bear the thought of man's best friend suffering in such harsh conditions! This is an example of one of many ways in which people misinterpret Scott's actions today (although not you, N24, your summary is very good). Too many people view Scott through a 21st century lens when he was very much an Edwardian man. Although he made many mistakes, a lot of the things he did and said were viewed as completely correct by many people at the time. Furthermore, Scott was a Royal Naval officer, an institute steeped in tradition, whereas Amundsen was more of what we might call today an entrepreneur. The Golden Age of Polar Exploration is an absolutely fascinating topic filled with incredible stories. The film Scott of the Antarctic is a great introduction for anyone interested and yes, you are correct, members of the expedition were still alive then and some attended the premier.
Incidentally, the beautiful cinematography was the work of Jack Cardiff who also did The African Queen, Black Narcissus, The Red Shoes...and Rambo II !
I think people interpret Scott's choice to use ponies as a huge blunder correctly, and other explorers didn't use them in this type of climate.
I also suspect Scott unfortunately was a racist with a "white man's burden" mindset, stopping him from learning from indgionous peoples like Sami and inuit like Nansen and Amundsen did. Amundsen actually adopted two Inuit children. Nansen spent seven months living with and leaning from the Inuit on Greenland. This is a photo of Amundsen's mentor Nansen and his crew for his Greenland expedition. He later wrote and illustrated a book on his experiences with the Inuit. Here's a page on clothing.
This is a photo of Amundsen's mentor Nansen and his crew for his Greenland expedition. As you can see two of them, Ravna and Trana, are Sami:
Comments
I enjoyed watching Robin and Marion while visiting my mother every other day in her care home, obviously its themes become more poignant, particularly the final image. I later noticed that despite the way it plays out, Sean Connery was the last man standing in the cast, pretty much every other actor bar none died before he did. I think only the director is still alive - Richard Lester, the guy who did A Hard Day's Night and Superman II all those years ago.
Bizarrely, the young actress who played Richard II's floozy in this went on to have a distinguished career and is still acting.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
That's Victoria Abril. She actually plays King John's young wife, and I mean YOUNG! There's a disturbing comment in the movie that all king John does is stay in be bed with his 12 year old wife, then Robin and his men laugh. Abril was 17 at the time.
Both John's wives were only 14 when he married them, and his second was a lot younger than he was. It wouldn't have been frowned upon in those olden days. Curiously he needed to get the Pope's permission to marry his first wife, as they were cousins. In his wisdom the Pope agreed they could marry as long as they didn't consummate the marriage. This made the eventual annulment a lot easier. Strange times the middle ages.
THE BUSINESS (2005)
I ought to have some respect for Danny Dyer and director Nick Love, who constructed this appalling piece of British crime-comedy. They’re both London boys made good. Doesn’t mean they make anything good, although Danny did make his amusingly daft daughter Dani, so I suppose…
The Business is a filthy cocaine and guns thriller filmed mostly in Andalusia with a non-existent comic edge, a pumping 1980s soundtrack and a femme fatale whose more a brass without a heart than any Lauren Bacall type ever was. Danny Dyer’s no Bogart. The film’s no masterpiece, not by a long chalk. I don’t think anyone expected it to be. It came hot on the heels of better fare like Snatch, Layer Cake and Sexy Beast. No amount of obscenities and simulated f~~~~~~ will make this film any good. It has all the subtlety of a being hit by a brick.
There is a colour sequence in Hell's Angels. I think this was the 1930 version of having an IMAX sequence.
re Robin and Marion
Number24 sez:
That's Victoria Abril. She actually plays King John's young wife, and I mean YOUNG! There's a disturbing comment in the movie that all king John does is stay in be bed with his 12 year old wife, then Robin and his men laugh. Abril was 17 at the time.
chrisno1 sez:
Both John's wives were only 14 when he married them, and his second was a lot younger than he was. It wouldn't have been frowned upon in those olden days. Curiously he needed to get the Pope's permission to marry his first wife, as they were cousins. In his wisdom the Pope agreed they could marry as long as they didn't consummate the marriage. This made the eventual annulment a lot easier. Strange times the middle ages.
what was the life expectancy in those days? surely the job of the King's wife was to begin pumping out offspring as soon as possible, before there was an early death, and chance of dynastic interruption and yet another war?
this seems like an extreme example of applying modern moral standards to ancient history! then there was also droit de seigneur!
(all this said, Andrew lives in modern times and has no such excuse)
speaking about the behaviour of kings in these sort of films, what about McGoohan's king in Braveheart? wasnt he sleeping with his daughter-in-law because the heir to the throne wasnt interested?
My comment about "strange times" was more to do with the annulment. I am well-aware that we can't apply our modern laws and moral expectations on the histories of the past and I don't think I've done that.
yeh that bit with the cousin's a bit odd, now I reread that I don't even see the point. a lot of those marriages were to formalise political alliances, maybe this cousin was daughter to a rival to the throne? that might explain why the marriage was not consummated. I'm not sure anybody married for love, let alone Kings.
trying to apply modern morals to the mediaeval era is a bit of a rabbit hole, so much seems irrational, barely human. A lot of it straight out horrific. It isn't until the Renaissance and Age of Reason that we get scientific reasoning and the concept of human rights.
droit de seigneur was mentioned above, but that "custom" is probably just a myth. King John's wife really was that young and I don't mind movies mentioning facts. But I did find it a bit unpleasant to see the hero of the movie laughing about a grown man having sex with a 12 year old. At the time it's not unlikely people would've laughed in that situation, but still ....
THE LEFT HAND OF GOD (1955)
I’m a big Humphrey Bogart fan, but I must confess to never having seen this pot-boiling melodrama set in a Catholic mission in war ravaged China, 1947. I was surprised to discover it was filmed in colour and in Cinemascope, although the version I watched seemed to be transmitted in the standard 1.37 to 1 ratio. Bogart’s pretty good, which was a relief, as this is generally considered one of the weakest of his later movies.
Bogie plays Father Peter O’Shea, a priest who arrives at a Catholic mission and revitalises the church and hospital through his unconventional attitudes and endeavours. Agnes Moorehead’s gossipy doctor’s wife thinks he’s hiding a secret: a burgeoning love for the pretty nurse, Anne Scott, played with much wariness by Gene Tierney. When Mieh Yang, the local war lord, turns up he’s interested in the rule breaking priest for entirely different reasons. Yang is played with some devilish urbanity by Lee J. Cobb. Bogart and Cobb spar dutifully, just as they did in Sirocco a couple of years earlier. This is a lesser project and they tread carefully, as if two old chums are revisiting past glories.
Bogart, as always, keeps us interested with his agitated pipe smoking, his subtle glances, his stooping gait, his sudden fits of righteous anger, which contrast with the calm, fatherly benevolence he displays with his new-found flock. We know all along he’s not what he seems, but the script doesn’t quite deliver on its promises. It isn’t a ripping yarn, nor is it a romance, or a tale of religious conversion. It touches on all three, but can’t make up its mind in case the story overbalances. Hence, it’s not entirely successful persuading us of any one’s motivations.
On the plus side, Franz Planer’s photography is grand, Victor Young’s music stately and Edward Dymtryk’s direction solid. Most of the Chinese roles are taken by Chinese or Asian actors, so it’s a pity to report on Lee J. Cobb’s embarrassing yellow-face make-up. The writers shove in a reference to an unlikely Ivy league education to account for Cobb’s undisguised accent. Could the producers not have found one decent ethnic actor to play the pivotal role? Given Bogart’s prominence in worker’s rights, you wonder why he didn’t raise an objection.
Still, a very pleasant ninety minutes.
COUNTESS DRACULA (1971)
Middle-grade Hammer production starring Ingrid Pitt as Countess Elisabeth Nadasdy, commonly known in historical circles as the Bloody Countess, Elisabeth Bathroy of Hungary. The movie highly stylises the accusation that Countess Nadasdy murdered and tortured over 300 young women. Here they are given a supernatural twist as bathing in virgin blood allows the Countess to keep looking young. Unfortunately there’s a side-effect which proves the undoing of her romantic inclinations towards a virile young cavalry officer.
There’s not a lot of blood for such a bloody tale. Director Peter Sadsy and writer Jeremy Paul could have really come on strong with this one, turning in a genuine bloodbath, especially given the character’s legendary, though contested, exploits. It’s all a bit tame.
Ingrid Pitt does well inhabiting both the widowed Countess and her younger capricious self. Nigel Green lends sterling but unexceptional support. In an almost silent role as the virgin daughter Ilona, Lesley Anne Down manages to keep a straight face and her clothes on while attempting to evade / escape / seduce the mute woodsman whose kidnapped her. Their dumbshow two-handers were cringingly hilarious. The romantic subplots rather hinder the horror. We end up with a delirious menage a trois of infatuated madness and a few largely unseen killings.
The transformation scenes are well executed. The most intriguing character is the faithful nurse, whose loyalty is tested too much. Generally, the piece needs more gore. It feels old fashioned, although this may not have been so in 1971.
Nightmare Alley (2021)
This mvoe is directed and co-written by Guillermo del Torro, an man who couldn't make a boring or average movie even if he was paid to do it. If you haven't seen "Pan's Labyrint" or "The shape of water", repent and go forth and watch them as soon as possible!
While Labyrint was inspred by fairy tales and had the aftermath of the Spanish civil war as a backdrop and Shape Of Water was inspired by old Sci-fi monster movies with a cold war backdrop, this one is very much a film noir happening while the US involvement in WWII is getting closer.
The movie starts with Stanton (Bradley Cooper) hiding a dead body under the floor and setting fire to the house. He soon gets hired by a carnival. He has a talent for reading people, manipulation and cheating so he becomes a clairvoiant at the carny. After a while he moves to the big city with Molly (Rooney Mara) where they move their act into an upper-class version of their carny act. Cate Blachet, William Deafoe, Toni Colette, David Stratthairn and more first-rate actors are also in the movie. As usual in del Torro's movies there is a strong interest and sympathy with the strange outcasts. Great production design is also typical for Del Torro's movies. The office of Cate Blanchet's character looks fantastic and of course Nightmare Alley is nominated for the Best Production Design Oscars. The first thing I said after exiting the cinema was "That was a real/proper movie!". Nightmare Alley is about characters, plot, psycology and beautiful shots created in camera. The movie is also Oscar nominated for Best Picture, Best Cinematography and Best Costume Design. Thsi is a top psycological film noir thriller with a twist or two. It may not be as good as Labyrinth and Shape of Water, but it is and excellent movie.
number24 said:
Guillermo del Toro, an man who couldn't make a boring or average movie even if he was paid to do it. If you haven't seen "Pan's Labyrinth" or "The shape of water", repent and go forth and watch them as soon as possible!
yep, I've seen both of those and I'm ready to see more, so I'll skip the spoilers and just add this to my must-watch cue. I wish he'd done the Hobbit as originally planned
much of the Shape of Water was filmed in a couple of old theaters in Toronto, and round that time there was an exhibit of his visual effects at our big art gallery that I was stupid and didn't see...
The 1999 World War I drama, THE TRENCH, starring a young Daniel Craig as the tough sergeant in charge of such fresh-faced soldiers as James D'Arcy, Cillian Murphy, and future Q Ben Whishaw. The acting is good and there are some powerful moments, but 99 minutes of soldiers largely chatting away in a trench creates a feeling of staginess. Worth it to see fine actors in early roles, but you may be fighting yourself to stay awake.
Saw a bit of Beaches, the classic drama with Barbara Hershey and Bette Midler but really my reason for posting is that someone pointed out to me that the actress who plays the young Bette Midler (seen on the left) - and is the spitting image of her, it's very well cast - would grow up to be, well, do you know, can you guess it?
Sheldon's girlfriend Amy in The Big Bang Theory, Mayim Bialik.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
BROKEN ARROW (1950)
An unlikely compelling western which attempts to offer a view of the west from the Native American viewpoint. Taking as its compass the story of the Apache Wars and the true life characters of ex-cavalry scout Tom Jeffords and the Indian chief Cochise, Delmer Daves’ Broken Arrow is certainly more sympathetic towards the Apache. The stereotypical bigoted white settlers are a somewhat unfortunate counter balance. Their inclusion seems to be partly to emphasise their ignorance – and by extension a 1950s audience’s ignorance – but also to provide a suitable climax to a film which is low on action, but high on emotion.
James Stewart gives a great performance as Jeffords, really showing his maturity, sensitivity and class. Stewart elicits more emotion from a single frenzied, powerless stare than many others do with a whole gamut of expressions. It still remains a mystery to me how his nervous, one dimensional, supporting act in The Philadelphia Story bagged him an Oscar when so many of his other truly great and memorable leading roles didn’t even warrant due consideration. Anyhow...
There’s a lot of time and consideration given to Apache customs and the writers may or may not have the details right. The filmmakers are stymied by conventions: all the lead Indians are played by bronzed-up Caucasians, the Indian clothing just looks too comfortable, so too the camp, love is a beautiful and chaste thing, why does Debra Paget’s love interest Apache woman wear lipstick? etc, etc. The film is better as a romance across the divides than it is a wild west adventure. Paget looks lovely, but seems miscast. Excellent photography. Broken Arrow feels like a dry run for the more modern Dances With Wolves.
Despite being a little stilted, and not quite following the real history, the movie does take time to portray all sides of every argument, so we have a good idea of the prevailing attitudes of the protagonists and the difficulties facing Jeffords, Cochise, Geronimo, the settlers and the US Army. The film doesn’t delve deep enough into a complicated situation and when it ultimately pins its flags, it is done more for emotional than intellectual impact.
A worthy, stately western.
TOO MANY CROOKS (1959)
British comedies all had a certain style about them in the 50’s and this is no stranger to that. Directed by Mario Zampi, who helmed the classic Laughter In Paradise at the start of the decade, this stars Terry-Thomas, George Cole, Sid James, Bernard Bresslaw and a host of others who would become household names. An incompetent gang accidentally kidnap the wife of a rich businessman and proceed to try and get a ransom for her without knowing that the husband would love to be rid of her as he is having an affair with his secretary.
This is lovely stuff and very enjoyable. It was remade as Ruthless People in 1986, and that is excellent, too.
I remember crying laughing at Ruthless People when I first watched it never new it was a remake of Too Many Crooks amazing .
I've never heard of that one, Gymkata. Definitely sounds worth a watch. Thank you!
The plot isn't as crazy as it sounds. In 1943 a German submarine crew placed an automated weather station on Labrador, Newfoundland in Canada. It wasn't discovered until 1977. Sorry, I'm a history nerd.
1943
1977
I remember reading about that, N24. The plot is very plausible.
There were manned nazi weather stations on Svalbard and Franz Josef Land (USSR) too, It's facinating and some day I may post more about it.
Nomadland (2020)
thsi movie is about the modern-day American nomads, the people whoæs homes are i their wanns. Fern (Frances MacDormand) not only loses her job, but the entire town is closed down and she moves into her van and travels the country. She sometimes stops for a period of time to work. She also becomes a part of the community of "nomads", an often overlooked part of modern America.
Franciss MacDormand actually lived as a "nomad" for four months for this movie. Most of the people in Nomadland are real "nomads" and at the time of shooting many of them belived Fern was a real person and the movie was a documentary. The movie has a very documentary feel and shows the people, lifestyle and landscapes in a wonderful way. Nomadland won Best actress (MacDormand), Best Director and Best Movie in last year's Oscars.
Now I've seen Northern Persuit too. It is what it is, but if you place the movie in the right context it's very enjoyable. Some of the back projection, fake backgrounds, fake snow and not so great model work is very noticicable, but for its time it's not too bad. The script work is the strength of this movie. The plot is solid, the goal of the villans isn't obvious and i particularely like the psycological thriller aspect of the story. Who knows what at what time, what's their real motive and can they be turned? I also liked the unusual setting. I also liked that they used an Austrian actor as the main villan.
Northern Pursuit 1943 with Errol Flynn, Julie Bishop, Helmut Dantine and Gene Lockhart - Bing video
Angel Has Fallen
Gerard Butler returns as CIA service agent protecting Morgan Freeman's President in what I think is the third of these instalments, and said by critics to be the best. It kicks off in Bourne style, with an outlandish assassination take down of the President and Butler on the run, suspected of having orchestrated it. That said, once he goes off grid and hooks up with a veteran in the woods, it becomes way too silly, he's the same character we see John Malkovich play in Red - the narled, cynical Vietnam vet that the audience is meant to have some sympathy with, there's an ambivalence there.
The hokum is escalated but attention is held due to the bad guys' quite brutal kills, so it's kept in balance. At one point an entire hospital is detonated but we aren't meant to be concerned about the poor patients hooked up in their beds. The film is a bit mad but seems to know that we don't care too much. It carries its authority I guess due to the fact that a US President actually was assassinated in living memory, with an attempt on Reagan 20 years later, plus many films like In the Line of Fire and JFK keep the flame burning. I enjoyed the film a lot - on TV - and have to admit it's hard to pull off, this kind of thing. It's got a British star but it needs to be an American product for this to work.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
THE STEPFATHER (1987)
Terry O’Quinn puts in marvellous performance as the psychologically unhinged, identity stealing maniac, who slaughters his families when they displease him. Going from family to family his past catches up with him when his new stepdaughter suspects him of being a murderer. This is tense and exciting and well worth watching. O’Quinn went on to be a major character in cult TV series Lost. It was written by Donald E Westlake who wrote many crime books including the Parker series written under pen name Richard Stark.
Scott of the Antarctic (1948)
As you may have gathered this movie is about Robert F. Scott's famous expedition to the South Pole in 1912. Right at the begining the movie thanks relatives and surviving members of the expedition for their cooperation. This reminded me of the fact that the movie was made only 36 years after the expedition and many were still alive. The last expedition member lived into the 1980s!
It's a colour movie and it looks great. I didn't know the name of the director, but it turns out he also directed "The cruel sea" (1953). I have reviewed that movie and found it gave me some idea of the traditional M's background. The cast iof "Scott of the Antarctic"s solid, but the actors aren't known to me despite their respectable IMDB listings. Much of the movie was shot in Norway and our national hero Fridtjof Nansen gets a comeo. Nansen gives some good advice: "I like dogs". Dogs are used to that climate and when a dog isn't needed anymore it can be killed and used to feed other dog or even humans if need be. Scott didn't follow Nansen's advice to the degree he should have. He also didn't use skis enough. Instead he used motororized sleds, a bad idea in 1912, and horses (the movie uses Norwegian Fjord horses) - a bad idea in the Antarctic at any stage in history.
Nansen's "pupil" Roald Amundsen had borrowed his ship Fram, a ship especially made for use in the ice, to go to the North Pole. But Amunsen had lied to everyone and planned to go to the South Pole. Scott's expedition focused on science and saw being the first on the South Pole more as a bonus. Amundsen only cared about the Pole. Partly because Norways was a new as a modern state and needed sources of identity and national pride, partly because Amundsen was an assh*le. But Amundsen was also an experienced and effective polar explorer who learned from Samis and eskimos and relied on dogs and skis. He also tested his equipment well. As the movie shows. Scott and his men found some the petrol cans in the depos had evaporated by the time they needed it deperately on the return voyage. Petrol cans from one of Amundsen's depos were found many decades later and all the fuel was still there. I also remember a TV documentary where British and Norwegian soldiers reenacted the two expeditions as closely as possible, including the rations. The Norwegian team actually weighed MORE when they returned to the coast while members of the British team had to be evacuated because they didn't get enough norishment. While luck and bad luck played a part in the outcome I'm convinced superior planning and experience was the main factor.
You may feel the review so far looks like a history lesson, but only because you're right. I think the movie is well made, looks beautiful and pulls you into the story. It looks more modern than the year of release would make you expect. it's good both as a movie and as a retelling of a dramatic part of history. I can recomend the 2019 movie as "Amundsen" as a double bill alongside "Scott of the Antartic" to see the story from the perspective of both expeditions. Amundsen (2019) - IMDb Amundsen is probably available in some streaming service.
"Scott of the Antartic is available for free on Youtube: Watch Scott of the Antarctic (1948) Full HD Movie | Solarmovie.to
Fun fact: The Scott expedition's base is perfectly preserved in the isolation and cold and it still looks like Scott left yesterday:
Here's a short, but good documentary comparing the scott and Amundsen expeditions: Amundsen vs. Scott. What killed the British polar expedition? - YouTube
Amongst the reasons that Scott used ponies instead of dogs was because he (and the English, he said), couldn't bear the thought of man's best friend suffering in such harsh conditions! This is an example of one of many ways in which people misinterpret Scott's actions today (although not you, N24, your summary is very good). Too many people view Scott through a 21st century lens when he was very much an Edwardian man. Although he made many mistakes, a lot of the things he did and said were viewed as completely correct by many people at the time. Furthermore, Scott was a Royal Naval officer, an institute steeped in tradition, whereas Amundsen was more of what we might call today an entrepreneur. The Golden Age of Polar Exploration is an absolutely fascinating topic filled with incredible stories. The film Scott of the Antarctic is a great introduction for anyone interested and yes, you are correct, members of the expedition were still alive then and some attended the premier.
Incidentally, the beautiful cinematography was the work of Jack Cardiff who also did The African Queen, Black Narcissus, The Red Shoes...and Rambo II !
I think people interpret Scott's choice to use ponies as a huge blunder correctly, and other explorers didn't use them in this type of climate.
I also suspect Scott unfortunately was a racist with a "white man's burden" mindset, stopping him from learning from indgionous peoples like Sami and inuit like Nansen and Amundsen did. Amundsen actually adopted two Inuit children. Nansen spent seven months living with and leaning from the Inuit on Greenland. This is a photo of Amundsen's mentor Nansen and his crew for his Greenland expedition. He later wrote and illustrated a book on his experiences with the Inuit. Here's a page on clothing.
This is a photo of Amundsen's mentor Nansen and his crew for his Greenland expedition. As you can see two of them, Ravna and Trana, are Sami: