Production on RENARD THE FOX was begun by Ladislas and Irene Starevich in 1930 and the film was completed in 1940. It is the first puppet animated feature film. It is not the first animated feature film (that honor belongs to Lotte Reiniger's ABENTEUER VON PRINZ ACHMED of 1926.)SNOW WHITE remains the first animated feature film with sound. Now that that's done-- Why can't this wonderful feature be released in the USA? Well, Starevich completed it in 1940 in Paris. The Nazis, who had conquered France in 1940, provided funds for its completion. US law forbids any film made by the Nazis from being released in the country. RENARD is actually a very subversive piece of film-making based on a medieval fable. The moral of the story is this: Each man has his price, even the king, and if you can't beat the fox, appoint him as your minister so he's at least on your side! The animation is absolutely stunning and there is nothing in this story that could not be shown today. You may be able to locate copies of the movie in France and it is well worth the effort; RENARD is a milestone in animation. I was blown away by a photograph of Starevich with his "Lion King" puppet--the thing was nearly as tall as the animator! The sequence with the flirty Lion Queen being serenaded by a cat minstrel is marvelous, but then so is nearly everything else in the film. Try and see RENARD if you are interested in animation. It is a delight.
Reviews
31 Reviews
The Story of the Fox
(1937)
A great picture, though NOT released in 1930
8 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Exit Smiling
(1926)
This marvelous film...
19 August 2004
This marvelous film stars one of the funniest women who ever lived, as a theatre slavey who plays both male and female roles in the play to help the love of her life-whom she does NOT ride off with to live Happily Ever After. Perhaps the 'no happy ending' of this particular Cinderella story doomed it to failure at the time of its original release, but it's a delight that should amuse today's comedy fans...please, could we just see it once more? Beatrice Lillie is lovely and extremely funny. I will never forget the sight of her tossing a long fur boa over her shoulder as she 'vamps' the villain...and getting it caught in an electric fan...
Dr. Pyckle and Mr. Pryde
(1925)
Scary Stanley is a hoot as Mr. Pryde in this superb restoration.
17 August 2004
Stan Laurel's character in his early solo films was as different as could be from the dimbulb he played in the Laurel and Hardy team efforts a few years later. DR. PICKLE is one of the genre parodies he was making in the mid Twenties with merciless sendups of 'romance' and 'dramatic acting' (if you can, see MUD AND SAND with his devastating parody of Valentino).
DR. PICKLE AND MR. PRYDE is the Holy Grail of Laurel films; it was lost for decades, then a French print turned up in somewhat unsatisfactory video versions. Now it has been beautifully restored with the original titles, which add a great deal of amusement to Laurel's portrayal of Pickle (a veddy, veddy British scientist). But it is his take on John Barrymore's Mr. Hyde that makes this film a must-have for any comedy buff: Laurel is not only hilarious, he is actually SCARY as he 'menaces' the town while capering around with clawed hands outstretched...
This film is on an excellent new DVD of Laurel's work. I just wish they had also included MUD AND SAND...but this one is worth the price of the double disc set, all by itself.
DR. PICKLE AND MR. PRYDE is the Holy Grail of Laurel films; it was lost for decades, then a French print turned up in somewhat unsatisfactory video versions. Now it has been beautifully restored with the original titles, which add a great deal of amusement to Laurel's portrayal of Pickle (a veddy, veddy British scientist). But it is his take on John Barrymore's Mr. Hyde that makes this film a must-have for any comedy buff: Laurel is not only hilarious, he is actually SCARY as he 'menaces' the town while capering around with clawed hands outstretched...
This film is on an excellent new DVD of Laurel's work. I just wish they had also included MUD AND SAND...but this one is worth the price of the double disc set, all by itself.
Dr. Pyckle and Mr. Pryde
(1925)
HILARIOUS.
16 August 2004
DR. PYCKLE is one of the Holy Grails of silent comedy...for years it was thought lost, until poor quality French prints turned up on video. Now it has been magnificently restored on DVD by Kino (bravo to them) and the original titles restored. Stan Laurel's solo comedies featured genre parodies that were far different from the dim-bulb act he perfected with Oliver Hardy. Here, Stan is a veddy British scientist who turns into the horrific Mr. Pryde.
The story follows Stevenson very closely, except for the 'dire deeds' that Pryde does; this is the best part of the picture, with Stan having a wonderful time terrorizing the townsfolk. (He actually succeeds in being funny and scary at the same time.) I'll never look at a Chinese finger trap in quite the same way again...
The story follows Stevenson very closely, except for the 'dire deeds' that Pryde does; this is the best part of the picture, with Stan having a wonderful time terrorizing the townsfolk. (He actually succeeds in being funny and scary at the same time.) I'll never look at a Chinese finger trap in quite the same way again...
The Cook
(1918)
Salami Salome
16 August 2004
Buster Keaton walks like an Egyptian and sips spaghetti from a teacup. Fatty Arbuckle shifts from cootch dancer to Salome to Cleopatra...(the snake gets bitten) and performs acrobatics with pancakes and knives, nearly decapitating Buster in the process. Which is to say this is a record of a pretty typical day on the Comique lot, circa 1918. Fatty Arbuckle and Buster Keaton made some of the most violent films ever shot...and it's a wonder that they walked away from some of them in one piece. THE COOK is amusing, and it is a remarkable job of restoration, so if you are a completist for either Keaton or Arbuckle it's worth having. Not their best, but it's good cartoon fun.
In the Bedroom
(2001)
ZZZZZzzzzzzzz....
4 January 2002
Why o why are movies today at least one hour too long?
There is nothing in this film that could not have been expressed better with fewer shots of Camden Maine's streetlights, harbor, or mannequins in shop windows. The pacing was absolutely even. Yes, this is like real life. But I don't go to the movies to see real life. I go to see good editing, good directing, good acting. At least the third part works.
The director manages to include just about every art-film cliche there is. What is it with the pretentious Bulgarian singing? Is it because it is as monotonous as the editing?
I was waiting for the slow motion double exposure shot. This predictably appeared late in the film. I was past all caring by then.
The actors play ordinary people and the acting (while technically good) shows its technique at every turn. People stand around and react to each other or show how tormented they are by little gestures. Everything takes much too long and there are precisely three scenes in which something actually HAPPENS.
It could have been much better than it was. As it was, it was physical torture. I have never looked at my watch more often during the course of a film. I didn't care about the characters and just wanted the thing to end. So did the audience.
Boring, boring, boring.
There is nothing in this film that could not have been expressed better with fewer shots of Camden Maine's streetlights, harbor, or mannequins in shop windows. The pacing was absolutely even. Yes, this is like real life. But I don't go to the movies to see real life. I go to see good editing, good directing, good acting. At least the third part works.
The director manages to include just about every art-film cliche there is. What is it with the pretentious Bulgarian singing? Is it because it is as monotonous as the editing?
I was waiting for the slow motion double exposure shot. This predictably appeared late in the film. I was past all caring by then.
The actors play ordinary people and the acting (while technically good) shows its technique at every turn. People stand around and react to each other or show how tormented they are by little gestures. Everything takes much too long and there are precisely three scenes in which something actually HAPPENS.
It could have been much better than it was. As it was, it was physical torture. I have never looked at my watch more often during the course of a film. I didn't care about the characters and just wanted the thing to end. So did the audience.
Boring, boring, boring.
THE MOST OVERRATED FILM OF THE YEAR
4 January 2002
I was horribly disappointed with this movie.
The only reasons to go and see it are the scenery of New Zealand, which is stunning; the performance of Sir Ian McKellen, who brings real charm and warmth to his portrayal of Gandalf; and praise must also be given to Christopher Lee, menacing and convincing as Saruman, and Ian Holm as a very believable Bilbo.
The other actors, including the usually excellent Cate Blanchett, stagger around in a fog as if completely stoned. At one point she is literally reduced to a cheap special effect instead of being allowed to actually act. This must be Magick. I found it Dull.
No one is allowed to underplay anything, unless it is McKellen, when he is not running around on his head. Just because something CAN be done in special effects does not mean it SHOULD be done.
I have seen better editing in a butcher's shop. Why does every single closeup have to have a jump cut that is completely mismatched? Why is there absolutely no suspense in this movie, particularly in the first encounter with the Black Riders?
Too much time is spent on lovingly bloody (and badly edited) battle scenes and too little on character development. The charm and menace of the original books is completely lost. The cheap joke about 'throwing dwarfs' was about as appropriate as a pickle on a Charlotte Russe, and the genuine comedy of Gimli's love for the Lady of the Wood eliminated entirely.
Boromir's death was so comically staged that I kept waiting for Eric Idle to come out yelling "Bring out your dead!" ("I'm not dead! I'm getting better!")
Here's hoping that the next two films do, too.
The only reasons to go and see it are the scenery of New Zealand, which is stunning; the performance of Sir Ian McKellen, who brings real charm and warmth to his portrayal of Gandalf; and praise must also be given to Christopher Lee, menacing and convincing as Saruman, and Ian Holm as a very believable Bilbo.
The other actors, including the usually excellent Cate Blanchett, stagger around in a fog as if completely stoned. At one point she is literally reduced to a cheap special effect instead of being allowed to actually act. This must be Magick. I found it Dull.
No one is allowed to underplay anything, unless it is McKellen, when he is not running around on his head. Just because something CAN be done in special effects does not mean it SHOULD be done.
I have seen better editing in a butcher's shop. Why does every single closeup have to have a jump cut that is completely mismatched? Why is there absolutely no suspense in this movie, particularly in the first encounter with the Black Riders?
Too much time is spent on lovingly bloody (and badly edited) battle scenes and too little on character development. The charm and menace of the original books is completely lost. The cheap joke about 'throwing dwarfs' was about as appropriate as a pickle on a Charlotte Russe, and the genuine comedy of Gimli's love for the Lady of the Wood eliminated entirely.
Boromir's death was so comically staged that I kept waiting for Eric Idle to come out yelling "Bring out your dead!" ("I'm not dead! I'm getting better!")
Here's hoping that the next two films do, too.
Waking Life
(2001)
Snore
28 October 2001
The most overrated non-film I've seen in a long time.
The point that 'life is a dream' was made more succinctly in ALICE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS, in the White King's Dream.
This pretentious exercise has occasionally interesting dialogue, but that's all there is to it. It's not a film, it's static shots enlivened sporadically by applied color and rotoscoping. There are only a few genuinely interesting scenes and the constantly morphing imagery becomes tiresome to watch after a while. The film has one obvious point to make and beats it to death. Repeatedly. I'd have liked it better if it was 15 minutes long, top.
The point that 'life is a dream' was made more succinctly in ALICE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS, in the White King's Dream.
This pretentious exercise has occasionally interesting dialogue, but that's all there is to it. It's not a film, it's static shots enlivened sporadically by applied color and rotoscoping. There are only a few genuinely interesting scenes and the constantly morphing imagery becomes tiresome to watch after a while. The film has one obvious point to make and beats it to death. Repeatedly. I'd have liked it better if it was 15 minutes long, top.
Shrek
(2001)
Can't anybody write a story any more?
19 May 2001
SHREK could have been a nice, simple story about beauty being in the eye of the beholder. The DreamWorks people are so insistent on putting a finger in Disney's eye that they persistently undermine what little story there is in SHREK.
Mike Myers is affecting as the ogre and gives a good performance. Eddie Murphy is allowed to run on at the mouth until you just wish for a pair of earplugs. Generally speaking the latter part of the film is better than the first part; but there is no pacing, the climactic revelation happens TWICE (can't anyone make a film any more?) and the filmmakers telegraph every major story point. If they had slowed down a bit, it would have been a real pleasure to watch the visuals--a decided improvement over the first PDI-Dreamworks film, ANTZ. YOu care about Shrek, which is quite an achievement. Dear DreamWorks, get over this childish one-upmanship with Disney; drop the other shoe and make a real movie, not a collection of parodic shots that date before the film is finished (the CROUCHING TIGER references are going to look very, very dated in a manner of months, as do the RIVERDANCE shots.) The fact is, this fairy tale parody is getting very, very tiresome and there is no need to consistently parody the genre when you are in fact telling the BEAUTY AND THE BEAST story in reverse.
Mike Myers is affecting as the ogre and gives a good performance. Eddie Murphy is allowed to run on at the mouth until you just wish for a pair of earplugs. Generally speaking the latter part of the film is better than the first part; but there is no pacing, the climactic revelation happens TWICE (can't anyone make a film any more?) and the filmmakers telegraph every major story point. If they had slowed down a bit, it would have been a real pleasure to watch the visuals--a decided improvement over the first PDI-Dreamworks film, ANTZ. YOu care about Shrek, which is quite an achievement. Dear DreamWorks, get over this childish one-upmanship with Disney; drop the other shoe and make a real movie, not a collection of parodic shots that date before the film is finished (the CROUCHING TIGER references are going to look very, very dated in a manner of months, as do the RIVERDANCE shots.) The fact is, this fairy tale parody is getting very, very tiresome and there is no need to consistently parody the genre when you are in fact telling the BEAUTY AND THE BEAST story in reverse.
How to Make a Mess
29 July 2000
AND GOD SPOKE brilliantly portrays what can go wrong on a movie shoot. Its one drawback: You have to be working in films to truly appreciate the dead-on portrayals of clueless workers, egomaniac directors and interfering producers, and the 'compromises' made to get the film done. All these basic realities of real film production are hilariously exaggerated here. It's too close for comfort sometimes.
This is one of the funniest films made in the last decade and it is well worth seeing--particularly if you are in film or are considering it as a career.
This is one of the funniest films made in the last decade and it is well worth seeing--particularly if you are in film or are considering it as a career.
Princess Mononoke
(1997)
Princess Monotonous
28 July 2000
I cannot understand why this insufferably dull, badly drawn, and overlong film received the praise that people have lavished on it.
I attended a screening with 100 people who were raving about the film beforehand, then watched as all but one or two lapsed into comfortable slumber during MONONOKE's interminable running time. The pace is leaden, even during battle scenes.
Add to this a script that seems to have been made up as they went along, some of the ugliest looking and worst animated animal characters in any film, standard anime design on the characters--with the exception of one warrior woman and the very interesting and well designed tree spirits. This is the most overrated film I've seen in years.
There is nothing in this picture that was not done infinitely better at the Walt Disney studios 60 years ago.
I attended a screening with 100 people who were raving about the film beforehand, then watched as all but one or two lapsed into comfortable slumber during MONONOKE's interminable running time. The pace is leaden, even during battle scenes.
Add to this a script that seems to have been made up as they went along, some of the ugliest looking and worst animated animal characters in any film, standard anime design on the characters--with the exception of one warrior woman and the very interesting and well designed tree spirits. This is the most overrated film I've seen in years.
There is nothing in this picture that was not done infinitely better at the Walt Disney studios 60 years ago.
the best Granada feature, and a great Sherlock Holmes film
28 July 2000
This is a gorgeous production, expertly filmed, beautifully directed and scripted. The cast is also spot on and the pacing rarely flags.
The boat chase on the Thames is a marvel. This was the first 'chase scene' in detective fiction and it seems as fresh here as it was 100 years ago.
My one change would have been to put back the original beginning and end to the story, but the Granada production left Watson a bachelor and so there is no mention of his marriage. They had also used the 'cocaine' opening in another show and so did not repeat it here.
Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke give outstanding performances and the rest of the cast is also excellent.
The boat chase on the Thames is a marvel. This was the first 'chase scene' in detective fiction and it seems as fresh here as it was 100 years ago.
My one change would have been to put back the original beginning and end to the story, but the Granada production left Watson a bachelor and so there is no mention of his marriage. They had also used the 'cocaine' opening in another show and so did not repeat it here.
Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke give outstanding performances and the rest of the cast is also excellent.
Saw half of it
28 July 2000
I managed to see a highly incomplete version of this and was therefore able to add the names of several other cast members to this database. This is a nice looking production, with the usual high standard of costuming found in English film. It does not look dated at all. Jeremy Brett is extremely handsome as Captain Jack Absolute and plays his part well. Beryl Reid is a very imposing Mrs. Malaprop though sadly I didn't get to hear her say the line about being 'as stubbor as an allegory on the banks of the Nile". The other cast members are generally excellent.
Young and Willing
(1962)
The Tame and the Annoying
5 November 1999
This is the sort of movie that should be so bad it is good. It is just bad, period. Notable only for being the debuts of some good actors who do the best they can with unintentionally parodic material. But the pacing is so slow and the characters so uninteresting my only reaction was to sit watching, stupefied, as it just went on and on.
This 'angry young man' film was brilliantly parodied by Harry Enfield in NORBERT SMITH: A LIFE which I dearly wish I had watched instead.
This 'angry young man' film was brilliantly parodied by Harry Enfield in NORBERT SMITH: A LIFE which I dearly wish I had watched instead.
The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes
(1984–1985)
One of the very best television series ever made.
31 October 1999
This superb series is not only the best adaptation of the Sherlock Holmes stories that I have ever seen (and I have seen a few), it is one of the best television series ever made, period. Some episodes are better cinema than many feature films made at the same time. It is amazing to see the way Granada and the cast and crew kept the quality consistently high in every episode of this series, as well as the second series of the ADVENTURES, the RETURN, and the adaptation of THE SIGN OF FOUR. Later shows showed some decline in the quality of the writing and direction, and the illness of star Jeremy Brett also had a deletrious effect. But there is no negating what went before. Jeremy Brett leaves all the other actors I've seen play Holmes in the shade, and both David Burke and Edward Hardwicke are marvellous as Dr. Watson. For the first time, I believed that these men were good friends. Why has it taken over a century for someone to play them in this fashion? The credit goes to the people involved in this landmark production. The biggest crime in the series: why no professional awards or nominations for such marvellous work? There is no excuse for this. Watch the shows on video, recent broadcasts butcher the life out of these wonderful treasures.
Rebecca
(1979)
Superb
31 October 1999
This film contains three superb performances, and it really is a shame that it is not available on video.
Anna Massey, Jeremy Brett, and Joanna David are a wonderful team of actors who bring a great deal of depth to their roles. David has the most difficult job; her character is so self effacing we never even know her name. She is meek without seeming stupid, and perfectly captures the body language of a very young girl.
Anna Massey is a terrifying Mrs. Danvers and is never more sinister than when she is smiling. She did 'everything' for her late mistress, and we get the impression that she was in fact in love with the title character. Massey's original take on this character has influenced all subsequent portrayals. She also resembles an Edward Gorey drawing in her bleak black costume.
Jeremy Brett is all burning eyes and barely-suppressed rage as Max. The character gradually progresses from a vaguely sinister, sardonic figure to a hunted man who finally appreciates his second wife's devotion. This is a fine portrayal by a wonderful actor and it is an excellent complement to his similarly superb portrayal of Sherlock Holmes.
This film has the usual high production values of a British adaptation, and has the sense to use the music of Claude Debussy on the soundtrack instead of some dated 'horror music' that often mars Seventies films.
All supporting cast members are excellent. My criticism is that the show is a trifle long; the Manderley ball and the visit to Max's grandmother do not really need to be portrayed at this length. The ending is, if anything, even more ambiguous than the ending of the novel It would be a wonderful thing to have this title back in print.
Anna Massey, Jeremy Brett, and Joanna David are a wonderful team of actors who bring a great deal of depth to their roles. David has the most difficult job; her character is so self effacing we never even know her name. She is meek without seeming stupid, and perfectly captures the body language of a very young girl.
Anna Massey is a terrifying Mrs. Danvers and is never more sinister than when she is smiling. She did 'everything' for her late mistress, and we get the impression that she was in fact in love with the title character. Massey's original take on this character has influenced all subsequent portrayals. She also resembles an Edward Gorey drawing in her bleak black costume.
Jeremy Brett is all burning eyes and barely-suppressed rage as Max. The character gradually progresses from a vaguely sinister, sardonic figure to a hunted man who finally appreciates his second wife's devotion. This is a fine portrayal by a wonderful actor and it is an excellent complement to his similarly superb portrayal of Sherlock Holmes.
This film has the usual high production values of a British adaptation, and has the sense to use the music of Claude Debussy on the soundtrack instead of some dated 'horror music' that often mars Seventies films.
All supporting cast members are excellent. My criticism is that the show is a trifle long; the Manderley ball and the visit to Max's grandmother do not really need to be portrayed at this length. The ending is, if anything, even more ambiguous than the ending of the novel It would be a wonderful thing to have this title back in print.
Rebecca
(1979)
Never have so few done so much with so little.
26 October 1999
I wish this show was available on video. It perfectly catches the spirit--and leisurely pace--of the novel, which might not to be to the taste of the MTV-cut-watching public, but I think it still has great acting and excellent direction to recommend it.
All the principals are excellent. They have to be, since nothing happens for so long the interaction between the characters is the main 'action' in the film, and it's all rather compactly staged despite some spectacular locations. The production does not date--thankfully, no one tried to 'update' the women's fashions and the music, a major pitfall in shows from this time, is all based on Debussy.
Anna Massey is a terrifying and sadistic Mrs. Danvers, Joanna David is perfectly cast as the clueless heroine (she's pitiful without seeming stupid, no mean feat), and Jeremy Brett is brilliant in showing the past hurts of an essentially selfish and cruel hero, entirely with his facial expressions.
All the principals are excellent. They have to be, since nothing happens for so long the interaction between the characters is the main 'action' in the film, and it's all rather compactly staged despite some spectacular locations. The production does not date--thankfully, no one tried to 'update' the women's fashions and the music, a major pitfall in shows from this time, is all based on Debussy.
Anna Massey is a terrifying and sadistic Mrs. Danvers, Joanna David is perfectly cast as the clueless heroine (she's pitiful without seeming stupid, no mean feat), and Jeremy Brett is brilliant in showing the past hurts of an essentially selfish and cruel hero, entirely with his facial expressions.
The Hound of the Baskervilles
(1988 TV Movie)
One of the weakest entries in this series
24 September 1999
The best thing about this HOUND is the Baker Street sequence in the opening, where they do the original introduction to Doctor Mortimer. Holmes sees Watson with 'eyes in the back of his head'--actually Watson's reflection in the lid of a highly polished coffee pot--and then Watson and Holmes reach very different analyses of Mortimer from an examination of his cane.(Guess which one turns out to be right.)
Unfortunately the film is very weak on suspense, due to the direction and editing and to the very poor special effects.
Jeremy Brett was also ill during the shoot and this affects his performance, but I'd say the deficiencies in the film are not his fault. There is a charming bit of adlibbing between Holmes and Watson in the hut upon the moor that is worth wading through the slow pacing of the rest of this picture.
I do not recommend this one particularly highly. It is a pity; this was the team that was best qualified to do the definitive version of the story.
Unfortunately the film is very weak on suspense, due to the direction and editing and to the very poor special effects.
Jeremy Brett was also ill during the shoot and this affects his performance, but I'd say the deficiencies in the film are not his fault. There is a charming bit of adlibbing between Holmes and Watson in the hut upon the moor that is worth wading through the slow pacing of the rest of this picture.
I do not recommend this one particularly highly. It is a pity; this was the team that was best qualified to do the definitive version of the story.
An absolutely wonderful film, beautifully made.
24 September 1999
This is an outstanding adaptation of a really weird story. Although it was made for television it was shot in 35mm and frankly, it is better made than many theatrical features done at the same time. The casting is wonderful and the production values are, as usual, outstanding.
Jeremy Brett is a delight as Holmes; his 'most winning woman' speech to Watson ranks as one of my favorite scenes in this entire series. Edward Hardwicke gives him able support.
This story featured the first chase scene ever written in a detective story, and it's staged beautifully.
It's a pleasure to watch this series after suffering through the arch, camp, or (worst of all) deadly serious Holmes films made by so many other actors. THE SIGN OF FOUR is an excellent picture by any standard and a lot of fun, period.
Jeremy Brett is a delight as Holmes; his 'most winning woman' speech to Watson ranks as one of my favorite scenes in this entire series. Edward Hardwicke gives him able support.
This story featured the first chase scene ever written in a detective story, and it's staged beautifully.
It's a pleasure to watch this series after suffering through the arch, camp, or (worst of all) deadly serious Holmes films made by so many other actors. THE SIGN OF FOUR is an excellent picture by any standard and a lot of fun, period.
They Might Be Giants
(1971)
What were they thinking?
24 September 1999
There is a monologue in this film where George C. Scott analyzes Joanne Woodward's character in blunt terms, a la Holmes.
This is the best part of the movie, and it shows that Scott was probably the one American actor since William Gillette to play this character convincingly.
Unfortunately the rest of the film is simply not up to the brilliance of this one scene. It degenerates into insufferable cuteness. New Yorkers are all apparently a bunch of charming eccentrics, and they rapidly become cutely tiresome. Joanne Woodward's character is a one-note, and the plot of this film is never even resolved!
Saccharine, arch, and impossibly overrated, though better than the wretched WITHOUT A CLUE.
This is the best part of the movie, and it shows that Scott was probably the one American actor since William Gillette to play this character convincingly.
Unfortunately the rest of the film is simply not up to the brilliance of this one scene. It degenerates into insufferable cuteness. New Yorkers are all apparently a bunch of charming eccentrics, and they rapidly become cutely tiresome. Joanne Woodward's character is a one-note, and the plot of this film is never even resolved!
Saccharine, arch, and impossibly overrated, though better than the wretched WITHOUT A CLUE.
Svengali
(1954)
Unintentionally hilarious
21 September 1999
Donald Wolfit gets my vote as Best Animated Cartoon character of 1955. He cracks his fingers before 'playing' the piano, just like Bugs Bunny!
I think this Svengali dies of overacting.
There is a special bonus in this film: an uncredited (and very young) Jeremy Brett appears as a very happy art student in two sequences. He has a few lines and some nice closeups, and even gets to sing along with Harry Secombe on "Alice Where Art Thou". A curious concept.
Hildegarde Knef is very beautiful and the film is nicely art directed, except when she wears the Dior gowns. And the 'art' is pure Fifties kitsch. Some of the dialogue is so hilarious you will be yelling along with it, ROCKY HORROR-SHOW style.
I think this Svengali dies of overacting.
There is a special bonus in this film: an uncredited (and very young) Jeremy Brett appears as a very happy art student in two sequences. He has a few lines and some nice closeups, and even gets to sing along with Harry Secombe on "Alice Where Art Thou". A curious concept.
Hildegarde Knef is very beautiful and the film is nicely art directed, except when she wears the Dior gowns. And the 'art' is pure Fifties kitsch. Some of the dialogue is so hilarious you will be yelling along with it, ROCKY HORROR-SHOW style.
The Very Edge
(1963)
Worth seeing for Jeremy Brett
18 September 1999
This is a mediocre film which contains a remarkable performance. Jeremy Brett is scary and pitiable as a stalker who is obsessed with Anne Heywood's helpless housewife. I found his performance absolutely convincing and incredibly intense. The subject matter of the film is certainly timely, but the rest of the performances are workmanlike at best and no one else seems to have any particular passion in their role--though Anne Heywood is at least watchable.
Macbeth
(III) (1960 TV Movie)
The best filmed version I've seen
17 July 1999
It is a real pity that this film is not available on video. I was surprised to see how much of the staging of the battle scenes was re-used in BRAVEHEART years later. There are some striking sets and the soundtrack and lighting are well above average. Production design is of a very high standard. The direction is excellent; there is a mounting feeling of dread as the action progresses, with the Sleepwalking scene and Banquo's Ghost being particularly well done. The cast is very good. Judith Anderson reminded me of the Witch in SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARVES, and Maurice Evans is a suitably ambitious Macbeth. Watch for a breathtakingly handsome 28-year old Jeremy Brett as Prince Malcolm.
Instinct
(1999)
IT STINKS
7 June 1999
I don't know which was most offensive about this movie: the wretched 'acting' of Cuba Gooding, the appallingly inappropriate music by Danny Elfman, or the bromide-ridden script. Take GORILLAS IN THE MIST, cross it with ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST, add a touch of SILENCE OF THE LAMBS,add heavy handed metaphors about Men in Jails being Like Animals In Cages, mix badly, and serve. Nothing made sense, nothing was resolved, and the only reason to go see this at all is to see Anthony Hopkins do his thing. I don't know how he kept a straight face when working with Gooding.
The 24 Hour Woman
(1999)
Very enjoyable and much truer to life than others in the genre
9 February 1999
I found THE 24 HOUR WOMAN to be very funny. The lack of structure was deliberate. I have a feeling that the author of the above review was a man; certainly he/she has no children. The movie is about the total chaos that the baby brings into the lives of extremely controlled and stressed people who actually think they can 'manage' the situation while not changing their lives in the least. Nancy Savoca mentioned in an interview that 'when others went to the right, we went to the left' she deliberately avoided cliches like the 'contrast between the working class black woman and middle class Latina.' The ethnicities are there, but are never shoved in your face, and the situations apply to all races. This was not a movie about 'class differences' but about the troubles one has in trying to 'have it all', whether by choice or necessity. The problem applies to the male characters as well as the women. This movie is very entertaining and far more honest than the Hollywood versions of the 'working mom/dad/take care of baby' that I have seen. Recommended.
Tell Your Friends