review: The Desperate Hours ('55)

Well. I was a little disappointed. I mean, I worship almost everything that Humphrey Bogart does. He was good, but the movie overall was a little ... meh.

It's about a family who becomes hostage to three escaped convicts. It boils down that easily. Again, the movie is okay, but it is a little too "50s idealistic" for me. Almost unreal. Like I said, good, but unimpressive.

I saw as I was researching this poster:It's for the play. LOOK AT THOSE NAMES!! Karl Malden and Paul Newman!! No wonder it was a hit! I think this probably would be better off as a play. The reality of the situation would help with actual presence. I would love to read the script. I'll have to get my hands on it somehow.

As for the movie. Mediocre rating: 3 out of 5 stars.

Movie Review: Dead End (1937)

Once again, WOW. I love this movie. Not a complete 5 out of 5, but a very respectable 4 1/2 stars.

Based on the stage play of the same name, this film is about life down by the docks of the East River in NY. It is an interesting time, because very recently, the fashionable and rich moved into the area in big apartment buildings that overlooked the river and its "picturesque" views. With the fashionable front street closed for repairs, the rich must mingle with the poor on the back street.

A hot scorcher day in the slums. Its starts out like everyday with everyone getting up and starting the day. You meet the groups that define the area. The "Dead End Kids" who are pretty much hoodlums. They talk tough, act tough, and try hard to be tougher than the slums they grew up in. They're not a good bunch of kids. They've got it in for the rich kid who lives in the apartment looking over their turf. The leader of the Dead End Kids is Tommy Gordon. He lives with his sister, Drina(Sylvia Sidney), who has always slaved away in the slums to try and get a better life for herself and her brother. She is on strike from her work, trying to get a raise which will allow her to send Tommy someplace better. You meet Dave (Joel McRea), who grew up in the area, managed to escape to college and became an architecht. But, as one character says, jobs "don't grow on trees" and Dave is back in the tenants, doing odd jobs to pay his way. Dave has met and fallen for a girl named Kay, who is the fiance of one of the fashionable rich. Kay loves him too, but not where he comes from, or what he has. On this particular day we also meet "Baby Face" Martin (Humphrey Bogart), an infamous murderer who grew up in the area. Now a big-time gangster, he managed to get some face work done so that few can really recognize him. He has returned to see his mother (Marjorie Main) and his best girl Francey (Claire Trevor).
It's a great story with a lot of social problems seen and discussed. I imagine the play would be better at the moral part, but the film does okay. The set is fantastic and gritty. I loved so many of the shots used in this film. There is a fantastic lack of space, throughout the entire thing except at the docks, the "dead end." Beyond that is just the river. A lot of the settings have that wonderful sense of being very enclosed. When Kay goes into the tenants to meet Dave, her horror is perfectly justified in the way these people lived. But there is also a sense of doing the best with what you have. You always see people cleaning, painting, trying to improve their enviroment and their lives as much as possible. It says something about the people there, and the time it was made.

As far as acting goes, Sylvia Sidney is a little melodramatic, but appropriately so - her character has a beautiful moment of confessing her dream to Dave, and in that moment, you truly see the beauty in her; Joel McRea is fantastic - he is kind of the moral beacon of the piece, but you can see his struggles between what he wants and what he should do; Bogart is as amazing as always - he is constantly the gangster, but he's never the same one twice, and in this film you really see the man behind the story. But the two best performances for me came from Marjorie Main and Claire Trevor. They did not get much screen time, but they were fantastic. First of all, Main is usually a very specific character actress, and when I first saw her, I couldn't recognize her at all. She was so gripping! You could hear the various levels of disgust in her voice as well as the weariness and pain. Her scream near the end of the movie is shattering! And Claire Trevor was amazing as well. In her brief appearance she captured that character. You could see who she was, what she became, how it hurt her, and how she hated it. In her voice and eyes, you could see her anger and pain. I was fascinated. The movie doesn't say this, but in the script she has syphilis. She does say in the movie that she is "sick" What I love about this character is that she is truthful about it. Knowing that he has come back to take her with him, and to build a life with her, she shoves him away and tells him that she isn't good for him. After he truly looks at her, all she can manage to say is "What did you expect?" And that says it all. It's amazing.

I highly, HIGHLY reccommend this movie!
4 and 1/2 out of 5 stars!!

To Have or Have Not

:D I love Bogart! And for their first film together (and Bacall's first ever) they sizzle. I don't really know why I like this movie so much, its not an amazing story - its just so-so.
There are some amazing moments though - including the very famous "You know how to whistle, don't you Steve?" bit. Oh yeah, and one of the best exits ever made on film by Bacall.
To be honest, the romance kind of outshadows everything else. Not saying that the rest of the movie isn't good, but chemistry and the work of two very fine actors is hard to top. But you do have Walter Brennan, who does a fine job playing not much of a role. His character just doesn't make much sense, but he still makes him a character we love. The movie has a little bit of the Casablanca feel - but just a little in the storyline. I haven't read the story, but apparently a lot of changes we made to make it more adaptable to Hollywood - also to make it as much as a star vehicle for Bacall as possible.
Again, I don't know what it is, but I do like this film.
4 out of 5 stars

The Maltese Falcon

My actor crush on Bogart continues to grow. I've seen this movie before, but it seems like a perfect night to rewatch a classic with one of my all-time favorite leading men.
This is considered by many to be the gem of all film noirs. I can't say for sure if it is the best, but it is certainly a jewel in the crowning glory of the genre. It certainly was acclaimed in its own time, being nominated for 3 Academy Awards. It has registered its long time fame also, being included in the National Film Registry as well as 5 AFI lists.
You just can't get much better in anything. Acting, design, cinematography, etc, etc. Some of the shots in this movie are utterly amazing. Bogart being as amazing as he is, Lorre - I can't say enough about how much I love him as an actor. Sydney Greenstreet in a role that just epitomizes the type of character that he is remembered for. Astor does very well at being a tricky actress. You can hardly ever tell when she is lying and when she is not - until she really puts on an act. That isn't easy to do, and she does it pretty well.
But the star of this movie is the story: so many twists, and the best part is, you'll be shocked at the ending - it just blew my mind the first time.
Not much else I can say except that the movie speaks for itself.
4 out of 5 stars

review: the Caine Mutiny

Again, a story about a slightly mad officer in the Navy. Two in a row - what are the odds?
While one is more of a comedy, this is quite the drama.
It follows the story of a young navy officer assigned to a down-and-out boat near the end of WWII. Once the serving officer is relieved of duty, the boat gets a new commander: Queeg (Bogart). He is strict, to the book, and also seems to suffer from paranoia. Needless to say, there is a mutiny (not like the one in mutiny on the bounty) and a trial.
This movie is quite interesting, but not exactly a wonderful film. You don't quite know who to cheer for. Queeg is a pain in the ass, but he is also suffering from something. He asks for help, so you can't really blame him. The exec. officer is honestly doing what he thinks is right, and he has to care for the crew, so he's in the right. In the moment of the mutiny, everything seems clear, but the trial tears everything up. People lying, twisting the truth, and so forth. Only at the end, during a party scene, does everything go right, and everyone gets his right way.
Bogart is fantastic. His portrayal of this man has to keep you wondering if he is crazy or not - and then once you know, he has to hold you as a sympathetic character. Not easy, but Bogart certainly is up to the task. The young man, who the story centers around, was played by Robert Francis. His portray is believable convincing, and he does a good job at being the medium man between the audience and the world of the movie. This was his film debut, and he was being groomed for stardom, being a young hotshot at the time - unfortunately, he died in a plane crash in 1955 before his career ever would reach a star status. Jose Ferrer is sublime. He is only in the film a short while (as Maryk's lawyer) but his ending speech maked the whole movie work. Van Johnson (as Maryk - the exec officer) is kind of the conflicted hero. He doesn't like or want to do what he does, but his concious leads him. It is interesting to see him in this movie as I only know him from a couple of musicals. Quite a different role for him. Fred MacMurray is very good at keeping the audience off-balance. Through most of the movie, you really like him. He's smart, witty, and a little bit of a rebel. Then something happens and suddenly, he makes you unsure of him. Then, next thing you know, you're completely at the opposite. It takes talent to make an audience go off-balance, and he does it well.
All in all, a pretty good movie.
3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

review: Dark Victory

Tearjerker.
1939. What a year. The more I see of movies made in this year, the more I realize that it really was a golden year for Hollywood. I mean, Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind kind of swamped everything, but there are so many gems. This is one of them.
Story: a young, vivacious woman (Bette Davis) is having problems with her sight and her head. Call in a specialist (George Brent). I don't know all the medical lingo - but it is something with the brain, and they need to operate. They do, and the operation is a success, but you find out that it is also a failure because it only fixed the immediate problem. She is going to die. But she will be okay until just before, when she will become blind. The rest, I leave to you to see.
What makes this movie is the performances. Bette Davis is ... well, Bette Davis. She is so fascinating in this role - mostly because the character is just so good - despite herself. At first, she seems a little fake, but quickly you learn the difference between the facade and her personality. When you can tell the difference between an actress playing a happy woman, and an actress who is playing a woman who is playing at being happy, you know you've got something great on your hands.
George Brent is also quite wonderful in it. He goes from brilliant, no nonsense, to tortured lover to incredibly happy and ignorant. Geraldine Fitgerald is also quite subtle in her acting. It takes a while to see if she is good or not. The only thing I don't like is that so often she won't look at the camera or at someone. She is always diverting her eyes. Some of it is character, but the rest just seems odd. But I quite warmed up to her after a bit, and her character is so touching. Humphrey Bogart is quite out of his realm in this movie. He's not bad by any means at all, the character is just different. He plays the Irish stablehand. I think he got short changed in this film - but that is the studio system for you. He was a contract player, and he played the role they assigned him. The character isn't as developed as I would have liked. And if Bogart's character needed more, than Reagan really got the shaft part. He's just there. You hardly notice him at all except for the constant glass in his hand.
All in all, a very ... poignant film.
3 out of 5 stars

review: Sahara 1943

I picked this movie up, completely forgetting that I had seen it a couple years ago. I never was good with names.
So, good movie. Bogart, you can't go wrong.
An interesting film about an American tank that was sent to learn desert warfare in North Africa in the beginning of our time in the war. At the beginning we find out the not much is left - orders are to retreat - the only way out is south - which is nothing but desert. So they do. Not far away they come across what is left of a field hospital. A couple of British soldiers and their doctor and a Free Frenchman. They pick them up and continue on. Then the meet a Sudanese soldier who has an Italian prisoner. They pick them up and continue on. The first place they stop for water is out. Bone dry, so they go on some more, to the next possible place to find water. Then, they are attacked by a single german airplane. They manage to shoot it down and they take the man as a prisoner. Then they arrive at the next well - only to find that it is mostly dry, save a trickle. They rest, collecting all the water they can. This is where I end it, because you just have to see what happens.
Again, this is one of those movies that just is an empecable ensemble. No real "names" aside from Bogart. The man who played the Italian (J. Carrol Naish) has the greatest speech in the entire movie. Seriously, amazing. He won a Oscar for his work.
This movie also got Oscars for Best B&W Cinematography and Best Sound.
What really gets you is the ending. I mean, how it all ends up. Seriously, it takes you by surprise. This film really makes you long for a big, tall glass of ice water.
Wonderful movie: 3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre

Interesting. I will admit from the get-go that this was not my cup of tea. It's not my kind of story, mostly. Everything else is. Acting: fantastic, Production Design and Shooting: wonderful, Story: well, interesting, but overall very downbeat.
This movie started off as a book by a writer whose identity is pretty much a secret. There are theories, but nothing definate. It was first released in Germany because the author refused to publish it in a capitalist country. The story is definately about greed and money and power, and mostly corruption.
The story (of the movie specifically) 3 Americans (Bogart, Walter Huston, and Tim Holt) band together while in Mexico to search for gold. That is pretty much all you need to know to start of with. You also should know that it is not a happy movie. This is not your typical Western or a typical anything as far as genre goes. So, it is kind of hard to sell to an audience. However, the one thing it does have going for it is that it is brilliant. That is undisputed.
John Huston directs this, and apparently this was a pet project of both his and Bogarts. Huston also has a cameo in the beginning of a well to do American that Bogart's character keeps asking money from. Bogart is exceptional. I can understand how a fan of Bogart's would not be too keen on this part. It is certainly a departure from anything else he had done. This man is not a gangster, a tough romantic, or any kind of decent. Whatever the character is, Bogart does it brilliantly. His slow drive towards greed and a little bit of madness is fascinating to watch. This is good acting! That also goes for Walter Huston, John Huston's father, who plays the"old man" in the trio. I did not recognize him in this role until I watched the special features and realized that this was the same guy who played George M Cohan's father in Yankee Doodle Dandy. Talk about a switch. He won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor that year - and it is well deserved. Tim Holt is also quite good in a role that was supposedly softened for the film. He plays the mediator, a kind of niave young, go-between. But more than that also. His character is able to stand up to Bogart's in a particularly brilliant scene (I think).
As far as other honors go, this movie also won John Huston Best Director and Best Writing Adapted Screenplay (he did both writing and directing). It was nominated for Best Picture, but lost to Hamlet that year. It is rated as #30 in the original AFI Top 100 list, and #38 on the 10th Anniversary list. A line from this film has also been rated #36 on AFI's top quotes list "Badges? We ain't got no badges! We don't need no badges! I don't have to show you any stinkin' badges!" And on top of that, it also is #67 on their Top Thrills list. Aside from those, this movie is very easily seen to be a American classic.
So, I will say that the rating is mostly because I appreciate the skill and the historical significance of the film, but again, its not my cup of tea, and its not one I would ever own.
3 out of 5 stars

"The Big Sleep"

You know, I think I am beginning to get a movie crush on Bogart. And this movie only fuels that. Bogart plays a private detective hired by a man who thinks he is being blackmailed. All because of his floozy of a daughter (Martha Vickers). There's another daughter too (Bacall), and if you can figure her out before the movie has only 20 minutes left, than you're good. That is by way of saying that she is as complicated and twisted as this story (that is a compliment). His first night on the job he follows the suspected blackmailerer to his home. Suddenly a gun goes off - and this is how the whole thing gets started. Just when you think you've got it figured out and everything is done, something else happens. Most of the time, you're just trying to figure it out. It's not easy. A great detective story. I love Bogart's character in this one. He's got a little bit of a comic in him, and he's something of a lady's man. At least, all the women in the film seem to find him engrossing - well duh - it is Bogie we're talking about.
Acting wise, it's pretty good. Bacall is one of the best at playing the mysterious woman. She doesn't give much away to the audience, but Bogie's character reads her like a book, which is a great way of saying something about both characters to the audiences. You know, this movie has just reaffirmed something about Bogart for me. Yes, he gets cast in the same type of roles over and over again (that's the studio system for you) - but I have begun to notice that his characters always seem to have a little something different. Bogart is not playing the same person - same type maybe, but not the same person. His performances are somewhat studied. Look at him in Petrified Forest, specifically how he carried himself. Arms bowed out, I mean. And look at him in this film; his character is always tugging on his ears when he is thinking, and he is always holding on to his belt - resting his hands there. Granted those are only two example, but consider. These are marked character traits that the actor will use to make their character's distinct. It's a mark of an actor. And another thing (You're going to think I am ridiculous for noticing this, but) he never kisses the same way. Aside from the top two - the rest of the cast is believable, but nothing too special - although I will say that Vickers is quite interesting. Her character is pretty distinct too - and she plays the part well. (It's always a good sign that the acting is good if you are disgusted by or you hate a character) I can honest;y say that she is someone I would like to have seen more acting from - but looking at her work, I haven't hardly seen or heard of much of her work. It's a shame - she had talent - or she was type cast, in which case it would be easy to understand why she didn't go further.
The Story... well the story is. It's a little convuluded and you jump so much that it just kinda leaves you confused. However, it keeps you raptured. Some of the dialouge is quite suggestive -although it is only a 1940s suggestive (no dirty here folks!) There are a couple of back and forth exchanges between Bacall and Bogie that are really interesting to listen to; so back and forth, witty, and the words snap. That's the best kind of writing. As much as I love meaningful speeches, a good quip and comeback conversation is pricless!
This is a good one!
4 out of 5 stars

Review: "High Sierra"

High Sierra: The movie that made Bogart into a leading man - and this was a breakout picture if you ever saw one! Also introducing Joan Leslie starring with Ida Lupino. I gotta say it: I love this movie! Basic Plot: Roy Earle (Bogart) just pardoned out of jail is back at work again, pulling a robbery of a hotel in California. He meets up with 2 fresh crooks who happen to have a girl with them (Lupino). I won't get into the story too much, because this is one you have to see for yourself! It is amazing! Bogart is at the best I have seen him (aside from Casablanca) and that is saying something! Really, I can't gush enough! All the actors are superb (for the most part), the story is top-notch, and some of the photography is really interesting. There is even an under the car shot, which is something I have hardly ever seen in movies from this era.
Wonderful! 5 out of 5 stars!

Reviews: 'Irma La Douce', 'The Harder They Fall', 'The Sheik', 'The Son of the Sheik', 'Intermezzo', 'The Public Enemy'

The Public Enemy - Well this was certainly a different kind of film. It starts off like a little like Reefer Madness does - warning about the danger of the people in this story. And how it is real - although the names and dates are all fictional. It essentially follows the crime life of two friends from their early mischief making days as boys and how they first started sneaking and stealing through to their ends. Cagney is just okay through most of the movie - nothing quite special, but there is a moment in the rain with him - and let me tell you, you take one look at him and you know the shit has hit the fan! He's awfully powerful in that moment, and all he is really doing is standing there, then walking. It's all in the face, and it is amazing. Harlow is in it, I don't know why. She makes an appearance playing a role I don't think she has ever played since; certainly not in any role I have seen her in. She plays a classy girl in this movie, and her fake british tells you plain enough that she is a bit of an elite character. I was not at all impressed. She was too fake. Again, maybe I am missing something; maybe watching it again might do some good, but just this once wasn't enough to wow me - although it is significant to note that this was THE film of the genre - not the starting point, but certainly one of the top of the early films.
So, 3 out of 5 stars.

Intermezzo: Ingrid Bergman in one of her first American films, and Leslie Howard. A very beautiful love story. Usually, I don't like stories about cheaters, but this one tugs at the heart strings. Howard is a violinist who is finally coming home from a long tour - he's also looking for a pianist to take the place of his old friend who has decided to retire. While he is at home, he meets his daughter's piano teacher (Bergman) who turns out to be a very talented pianist. They fall in love rather passionately and suddenly. Again, I will stop there so as not to ruin it. It is beautiful. Bergman is so ... readable in this role. You see her every emotion, no matter how small or big it is. When she is playing the piano, you see everything in her face and her motions, it really is beautiful. Leslie Howard is as wonderful as always. It is so touching - and so sad at times, and so incredibly happy at others. It is a wonderful movie. The young girl who plays Howard's daughter is so adorable. This is not one I had heard of until I saw the movie sitting on the shelf, and I must tell you that you should see it - especially my fellow saps!

4 out of 5 stars

The Harder They Fall: Bogart's last film. Too bad, he was as good as he ever was. This time he plays an out of work sports writer who is hired by a boxing manager to be the press agent of his latest discovery. Problem is, the latest discovery can't box, and can't take a hit. So, everyone "fixes" every fight, telling the world how amazing the discovery is. Boxing meets mafia meets corrupt businessmen. With Bogie in the middle. The acting is pretty good in the film on all sides. The boxer (Mike Lane) is a pretty sympathetic character, the manager is as good a rotten man as I've seen in films. The story is an okay one, and the drama is medium. There wasn't much to take from this performance, except for the last fight of the film. I can't say I understand why B&W boxing films are so much more effective than color - especially considering the look of the wounds - which you can expect to be impressive in any movie with boxing in it. Their make-up guy knows their stuff. For all of it's so-soness, it is a good film to see.

3 out of 5 stars

The Sheik: starring the original male sex symbol, Rudolph Vanentino. I really don't know about this one. For it's time, it is certainly racy. I can see how women went crazy about this picture. Rugged, mysterious, powerful man captures and eventually wins the love and admiration of a beautiful woman. The acting was a little melodramatic, but that was how it was done then, so it was appropriate. Photography was sketchy at points, but they got the close-ups on the ladies wonderfully. You can't really mess up close-ups of beautiful women, I guess. This is pretty much a female fantasy film of the time, and if you expect that, you're going to be pleased. I do have one thing to really criticize. The writers or director did a bad job with Diane (the woman). From the beginning she is presented as a strong-willed, spirited, determined girl, but she spends more than half of her time on screen crying and lamenting. That just doesn't work to have it both ways. Some character development needs to be worked on there.

It's not my cup of tea, but maybe after another viewing, I just might appreciate it more. I will say this: watching this movie is watching a piece of cinematic history, and there is a certain allure about it - and interest.

3 stars out of 5

The Son of the Sheik: And guess what it's about! Not very imaginativly titled; It's the son's chance to fall in love, fight it, then fall in love again. Now we are concerned with the story of a young dancer who has met and fallen for the young man. Unfortunatly, she works with a rather dubious gang. When they find out about the pair, they capture him, torture him, and tell him that the dancer does this for a living, and that he is not the first to fall prey to her charms. Once he escapes, he is bent on revenge. He gets his, and like his father before him, captures the girl. Everything gets sorted out and the young lovers end up happily together (I am going to assume that is not much of a spoiler). This film was the more traditional B&W instead of the shades of blue, yellow, and sepia that the original was. The photography was better, the close-ups were better, and overall, you can see what a difference a couple years makes in the film industry when it first was getting going. Still, it's not much but a pretty good sequal, although I like Vilma Banky as the dancer in this one a little more than Agnes Ayres in the last. Character-wise, at least, the dancer has more spunk and spirit than the lead girl in the first film, which I think was a better choice.

3 out of 5 stars.

Irma La Douce: Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine. Initial reaction: Oh for cute! That is pretty much this film. It's cute. Lemmon and MacLaine work wonderfully together. I've seen some of Lemmon's comedies before, but until this movie I never realized just how good of a comedian he is. Basic Plot: an idealistic cop is promoted to work in a shady part of town. He gets fired on his first day after raiding the rent-by-the-hour hotel there. He meets Irma - a streetwalker. When he returns to the neighborhood and stands up to Irma's current "manager", he wins the right to be her manager - and her heart. Pretty soon he realizes that he doesn't want her working on the streets anymore, so he comes up with a plan to disguise himself as an English Lord and pays Irma to be his solely. Obviously things get complicated. Like I said, it's a cute film - definately not something you'll want to watch if you're looking for real life drama, but a good time comedy. It almost gets to be too much at a point or two, but all works out in the end.

Solid 3 out of 5 stars.

"The Petrified Forest"

, Be It's a little melodramatic and very dated, but I LOVE this movie! I adore the fact that it was a play before it was made into the movie. I like the setting, the way it was shot, and pretty much everything. I don't think it is lessened by its melodramatic elements.
Leslie Howard plays a wandering intellectual who finds himself in the middle of nowhere, Arizona. Bette Davis plays a girl longing to get out of the desert. Humphrey Bogart plays the gangster who takes everyone hostage. Yes, it is one of those pictures: a group of ransom people forced to be together in a small space. Like Lifeboat except in the desert with gangsters. Again, sounds corny, I guess, but it is amazing - I guess I am a sucker for this kind of story. Bogart is amazing in this movie. He is so studied in his character - he has a distinctinve walk, talk, look. He is so morose in this movie that you can't hate him. You're scared of him, but you're drawn to him. Howard is a little grand, but the character fits into that acting style so well. Bette Davis gravitates between appropriate and a little melodramatic. There is one scene where she practically yells her line, and I have to think that she forgot that she was not onstage. But in a way, her character is full of that drive, so it seems to be half-intentional.
I really want to get ahold of this script. Desperately.
Four and a half out of five stars.

Reviews

Dark Passage: Bacall n' Bogie. Ummmm. Never realized I loved Bogart so much, but thinking about it, yep - he's dandy. The story is a little strange. A man breaks out of prison where he has been serving time for a crime he did not commit. A girl helps him. He runs, but he can't run far enough. It's not a surprising story, but then again it is, in the fact that nothing ever gets solved really. The first half is rather odd because it is almost all from a character's view shot. After a while, that gets old. A good deal of the film feels like a Nip/Tuck episode - only trust me, Bogart does it better.
3 out of 5 stars.

Lifeboat: Hitchcock classic. Brilliant. Utterly brilliant. Plot basic: a group of people who survived a Uboat torpedo sinking their ship find themselves stranded in a lifeboat. Most of the entire thing takes place in the lifeboat, only leaving it 2 time, or something like that. You would think that would leave an incredibly cramped feeling to the picture, but it doesn't. Hitchcock finds space somehow, but also juxtaposes that with the closeness of the people and of course tensions. The incredible tensions. It is a good story. Brilliant photography, the suspense, it is all screams Hitchcock. I can't imagine how it must have been to shoot the film. Acting was brilliant on all sides. There was not one wink link, in any aspect.
Four out of five stars.

I Was a Male War Bride: with Cary Grant and Ann Sheridan, directed by Howard Hawks.

First reaction: "that was cute" That pretty much sums it up - Acting was nice, but there was nothing too special about it. Story was funny and entertaining, but again, there was nothing special. It is a perfectly nice film. Plot: A French and an American officer are asked to team up again for an assignment. They don't particularly get along, but as always, that is just a front for thier love. The come to realize this, and the decide to get married. And rest of the movie is about the Red Tape. Like I said, it is a perfectly nice film, and it is worth a watch every now and again, but there was not much to it.

3 out of 5 stars.

Movie Reviews: Broadway Melody (of 1929) and Roaring Twenties

Well these movies couldn't be more different. Except maybe that they are about the same general time era - oh! and there is singing in both.


First, "The Broadway Melody" The original. 1929. This baby is considered by film enthusiasts to be the first musical. Well it is, and it isn't. Let's just say that it was one of the first. The interesting thing about this film is that it #1: was also released as a silent, and #2: had a two-toned Technicolor version of "The Wedding of the Painted Doll" Sadly, both different versions are lost to time. This movie is also history because it is the first sound picture to win an in Best Picture.
The film is a delight. You can see how new sound was because they still printed all most of the locations on the screen - why I don't know, because you would think they would believe we would be able to figure it out on our own. Also, the dialouge is a bit ... well, it's not exactly up to par with reality. Still, like I said, it is delightful. The opening sequence is wonderful, and it invites you in warmly, and within 2 minutes gives you the title song with wonderful enthusiasm. Then they proceed to beat you over the head with that same tune for the first half of the film. That's okay, it's rather catchy, so we'll forgive them that.
Basic plot: a sister team (played by Anita Page and Bessie Love) has arrived in New York to make good on the stage. The older sister is romantically connected to a singer/somgwriter (played by Charles King) who is going to get them into a show with his new number. With a couple little hitches, they get in, and thus begins all of their triumphs and troubles. Again, I won't spoil it.
The acting ranges from pretty good, to somewhat corny, back to pretty good again. No one blew me away with their work, but I was never bored with a character. Strangely enough Page was both sides of the spectrum in one. Some of the scenes are just downright bombastic acting on her part, but there is another side. In a scene where King is singing to her, her reactions are ... well, dead on. Not subtle acting, but true to the moment and to the emotion. She makes it obvious what she is feeling (to us). At one point he touches her on the arm, and you see her muscles first tighten, and then melt. He touches her hair and her eyes flutter and her breath catches. I'm a romantic sucker, so I loved it! I will say this. No one I work with in the theatre had better ever give the types of performances that the people in this movie did. The dancing was off, the attention span was ridiculous, and some of the performances were just half-ass. Except for "The Wedding of the Painted Doll" number. And I'm pretty sure that was because there were so many acrobatics going on that it was all out- or someone would get hurt. It was pretty neat to watch.
I will also say this for the picture: a lot of people have a big problem with the story plots of the early musicals, meaning that they have none. Just a loose story tangled around some songs. I have yet to find this to be true. Granted all the shows in these films are products of the types of shows that were produced in those days. They were "revues" not shows as we think of them today. Maybe that is what they mean. But this film had a story and a plot, and yes, the musical numbers could be taken out, but why would you want that? Can you think of a better way of expressing your love than a song? Not to mention that I thought the story was rather good. It was intricate and full of ... well "torn" is the only word I can think of. And misunderstanding and noble intentions and secrets. For a very early musical, it was full of intrigue.
Highly recommended - especially if you want to see a bit of cinematic history.
Next: "Roaring Twenties" starring James Cagney, Priscilla Lane, Humphrey Bogart, Jeffrey Lynn, and Gladys George. This was an interesting one. Through a series of montages and voiceovers, we travel back from the present to look at the period between 1918 and the mid- 30's, focusing mostly on the 20s and the rise and fall of prohibition and the people living then. Mostly focusing on the story of a man named Eddie Bartlett (Cagney).
Cagney, Bogart, and Lynn are established as very different WW1 buddies. After the war, they each split their own ways. Due to economic hard times, Cagney gets mixed up in a bootlegging scandal and is arrested. The woman (George) he was making the "delivery" to gets off, while he gets $100 or 60 days. George bails him out, and they start working together. Slowly, Cagney takes off and begins to be a big shot. The rest I leave for you to find out.
Cagney is great, Lane is good - never really knew she could sing, Lynn is just there, and George as the second hand girl is wonderful. What can I say? I'm a sucker for those roles. Bogart. Well. He is good in parts - through most of it. He plays a somewhat dispicable guy, so you never really like him completely. There is only one problem. At one point he is supposed to be scared. And I just can't believe him. I think this is both his and the writer's fault. Because of how he is presented throughout the film, it is not believable that he would be scared. They make him look like a coward, and I just can't believe it. On the other hand, it is up to Bogart to make us believe it. And I just Can't! Other than that, he is delightful as the bad guy. I've never seen him in that type of role before, and I kinda like it. I've also never seen Cagney in anything but 'Yankee Doodle Dandy', so this is quite the interesting discovery. I know Cagney was knows for these films, so this is supposed to be his element, while 'Yankee' is how versitle he can be. I'm sold.
Also highly recommended.

Okay, so you might be thinking about now that I am no critic. And you would be right. I am no critic. I am easy to please and very forgiving. But if there is something wrong, I will tell it. If it bothers me enough to remember it through the movie to write about later, then it is significant. If I haven't remembered, its likely only mediocre. To me, anyways. Plus, I'm cheating because I am watching movies that I want to see, that I have picked out for myself. And by now, I have a general idea what I am going to like and what I am not. When I get to the ones I have to watch or just happen to see with others, then I might actually not recommend a few.
On the docket: Teej vs. "Lust for Life", "The Deer Hunter", "A Place in the Sun", "Gunga Din", and "Big Street"

Rant, Key Largo, and agenda

Can I just get this out? I had an interesting work session, and I have a few things I want the general public to know about how to behave.
First of all: read the menu before ordering. It will make things so much easier. I won't go into details exactly, but I will say that we had a couple come in, and the woman just made things difficult after they ordered. All because she didn't read the menu or bother to look at the specials we have posted! So, please, in the future do us all a favor and take an extra minute to look over your options, or better yet, ask the servers. That is what we are there for. We like answering questions and making suggestions!
Secondly: I know part of the glamour of going out to eat is that you don't have to do the clean-up. But I do also think that leaving a HUGE mess is just bad manners. I have seen tables that beg the question: who ever taught you how to eat? Pigsty much? Also, here's a thought: control your kids! Don't let them throw their food on the ground or get it all over the table and the floor and the chairs and the booth. Granted, babies don't know better - but I don't think leaving a rice or noodle bowl unattended in front of an infant is a good idea. That is just asking for trouble. And you know what: if you do leave a BIG mess, leave a tip for the poor saps who have to clean it up. Am I wrong about this? I mean, I was always taught to leave your spot on the table as clean as you can - even in public. Is this a lost thing now?

Okay, enough of that. Time for a Movie Review!! That's right, last night I watched 'Key Largo' featuring the talent of Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall, Edward G Robinson, Claire Trevor, and Lionel Barrymoore. It was quite the cast. And quite the movie. I really like it. Basically an old war hero (Bogart) travels to Key Largo to meet the father (Barrymoore) and wife (Bacall) of an old pal of his who died during the war. Barrymoore and Bacall operate a hotel, which is being exclusively rented out for a little while by a man who calld himself "Brown" and his fellow travelers. Enter a hurricane, literally. While closing up shop, it comes out that "Brown" is actually the gangster Johnny Rocco (Robinson) who sneaked back into the country to do some dirty work. He takes the hotel under hostage. I'll leave it there so as not to spoil anything. Really, it is a great movie. Apparently it was originally a play - and I would love to get my hands on it! Bogart is typically brilliant. Bacall is ... I don't know what she is. She wasn't bad or anything, but her character wasn't really developed at all. Although she did a good job at showing, not telling, how her feelings for Bogart grew. There is this one moment between them that is just beautiful. Bacall is sleeping by Bogart and he gently soothes her hair. She looks up at him and there is the moment. And you know for sure that they are in love. Barrymoore was wonderful as always, and Trevor was perfect as the scorned drunk. Watching her sing one of her old songs from "back in the day" was just heartbreaking and so touching. And now I finally know who all the gangsters in any cartoon are modeled after. Robinson is the quitessencial gangster, right down to the "That's how it is, see?" Watching him go from tough guy to just being scared to being a coward is really great to watch. Wonderful movie, highly suggest you check it out.
4 out of 5 stars
What's next: "Pick-Up on South Street" a dark film noir, "The Roaring Twenties" one of Cagney's classic gangster movies, and "The Broadway Melody" one of the very first movie musicals! Also got the soundtracks to Leonard Bernstein's "Peter Pan", "HMS Pinafore", and the 2008 concert version of "Chess"