Fleapit Reviews

Gone with the Wind (1939)

The Decamping Husband's Farewell

[7/10 · 5 January 2009]

GWTW is a woman's picture about feisty Scarlett and the men in her life. Ostensibly about the American civil war, it degenerates into a story of marital disharmony, recognisable in any era with its overtones of women's lib.

David Selznick's MGM background leads him to mimic their films which predominately reflect the lives of upper middle class American society. Scarlett comes from the upper echelons of the cotton plantation owners and when Ashley goes to fight the Yankees he becomes a Major. This is an unusually high rank for a young man with no previous military service;likewise Scarlett's first husband, Charles Hamilton, becomes a Captain.Most young officers would have been second lieutenants. GWTW is atypical as it does not therefore represent the life of the ordinary fighting man. This fascination for the affluent in life reflects Miss Mitchell's own life since both her father and second husband were lawyers.

The film opens with Scarlett and her friends jabbering away at nineteen to the dozen. This fast pace of dialogue continues for several minutes making it impossible to catch much of what is being said. Eventually the film settles down to a more acceptable pace. All of her beaux seem to be West Point graduates which reflects Miss Mitchell's day dreaming at 15 of being a boy and entering West Point.

Mr. Howard as Ashley is so bewilderingly miscast that it is hard to understand why another player could not have been found. He comes over as a father figure rather than a newly wed young man. He looks his age (45) and is far too serious; he rarely laughs or jokes and is never frivolous.

Of the supporting actors, Thomas Mitchell plays Scarlett's father very convincingly and his Oscar was well deserved; in a smaller role Dr. Meade is very well played by Harry Davenport. Miss Mitchell probably based him on her own days as a beginning medical student.

The film is so drearily long because the plot is structurally unsound. The first part deals with the Civil War in a conventional way but only as it affects the privileged few. In the second part Scarlett eventually marries the likable rogue Rhett, based on the real life blockade runner Charles Trenholm, but after the birth of their only child she forsakes her marriage vows by excluding him from the marital bedroom. To which Rhett, obviously seriously hurt emotionally by Scarlett's rejection, responds "You know I could divorce you for this?" Forget about the Civil War from here on it's just the well-worn story of battling embittered spouses. Miss Mitchell's mother had been a suffragette and this seems to have rubbed off on her and her novel. One night a drunken Rhett, carries her upstairs in his arms to bed and ravishes her. This has parallels in Miss Mitchell's own life as her first marriage was annulled after she suffered the same fate from her husband.

I have not read the book but at over 1000 pages in length it has been considerably condensed; one major change is that Scarlett has three children by Rhett compared with just Bonnie in the film. This significantly changes the situation when Rhett leaves her with his oft-quoted farewell 'Frankly, my Dear, I don't give a damn' (a simple but effective piece of alliteration), a similar emotion must have passed through the mind of many an exiting spouse. Scarlett is left alone with no children compared with two in the novel. However this is where both the novel and the film end. Was this done to make Rhett's departure more morally acceptable? The entire film revolves around Scarlett and Rhett but although Scarlett is in almost every scene it is Rhett who is the commanding presence and steals all his scenes. At the beginning of the second part action drags without Rhett and Miss Leigh fails to hold her audience. The tedium which sets in could have been relieved if there had been a sub-plot to the story. This is an essential element of such a long story and is a weakness of Miss Mitchell's novel.

A further weakness is that there are too many convenient deaths. Characters are killed off willy-nilly when they hinder the story's development. Very early on, Scarlett's first husband, Charles Hamilton, dies after a short illness. Later, her second husband Frank Kennedy is conveniently killed when they go out to a 'political meeting' concerning shanty-town raiders and get involved in a skirmish with Yankee soldiers. There is the death of Bonnie which lets Rhett off the hook morally as there are no children to support after he leaves Scarlett. The death of Scarlett's mother of typhoid fever is acceptable. This is another parallel with Miss Mitchell whose mother died of Spanish 'flu. Melanie conveniently dies in childbirth leaving Ashley potentially free to marry Rhett after he eventually leaves Scarlett but both the novel and the film only make this point obliquely when Rhett tells Scarlett that 'all you need now is a divorce and your dreams of Ashley can come true.' Finally he realises he has seen through Scarlett's scheming ways and tells her ' you think that by saying: 'I'm sorry,' all the past can be corrected'. In fact, Scarlett loves no one; she is incapable of love and just loves herself. She proved herself to be unsuited to married life as she rejects the act of procreation and behaved like a vixen throughout.

The story would have been more true-to-life if the clergy had been represented, especially in the hospital scenes.

The film is more outspoken on marital matters than the feature films of the period. It also makes it clear that the 'saloon', a centre point of westerns, is not just a place for men to have a drink, gamble and brawl but is a bawdy house.

The restored DVD has a sharpness and clarity previously unseen and I recommend it to any fan of GWTW.

In a Lonely Place (1950)

B-movie fodder.

[6/10 · 1 August 2008]

WARNING Contains Spoiler! Many postings on this website describe 'In a Lonely Place' as film noir. This particular film does not have any of the criteria that a film of this genre must meet. The plot needs to be intricate as in the Chandler classics 'The Big Sleep' and 'Farewell my Lovely' yet this movie has the simplest and oldest plot known to man - girlfriend sees another man, innocently as it turns out, boyfriend gets jealous and kills girlfriend; the stuff of B-movies. Apart from Bogart this is just a souped-up humdrum B-movie. Additionally some of the acting from the female players Martha Stewart, Jeff Donnell and Gloria Grahame is very poor and fails to convince; I've seen better from local 'rep' players. The producing company was Bogart's own Santana Productions and one wonders how well financed it was as some of the sets look minimalistic and cheap. The film has been described as one of the few giving a rare authentic look at what goes on in Hollywood. Although some scenes are set in a bar frequented by top screenwriter Dix Steele, Bogart, and other Hollywood bigwigs past and present they are merely window dressing. Bogart just plays Bogart. Take out Bogart and you have nothing left. A better casting would have been with B-movie stalwarts Lloyd Nolan and Lynn Bari as the leads. That, together with some adroit editing to reduce the running time, would have produced a better picture. One aspect of the movie that struck me as untypical of Hollywood was the complete absence of guns, even though there are scenes of violence, murder and suicide. An over rated bit of nothing.

The Hidden Room (1949)

Excellent Pedigree.

[9/10 · 21 February 2008]

Last summer the BBC, in conjunction with the UK Film Council, celebrated a "Summer of British Film. For its part the BBC ran a seven-week series of documentaries on BBC2 entitled "British Film Forever" and screened its own selection of top films from the last of the 'Silents' to modern times. Several of these were a rare opportunity for the serious film devotee to see films that have been neglected or were underrated in their day. Also, the Film Council came up with its list of seven top films, BBC viewers with their list and the veteran BBC film critic Barry Norman with yet another list. So take your pick or Google "Best British Films" to find many more lists. As it was summer I taped several of those aired and have recently been watching them in the dark winter evenings. One of the best was "Obsession", truly a little gem. Mistakenly, I thought that this was a Hitchcock film when I was watching it but I was not disappointed as it lived up to my expectations being as good as many a Hitchcock work. No wonder, its pedigree was excellent, director Edward Dmytryk gave us the film noir masterpiece "Farewell my Lovely" aka "Murder my Sweet" in 1944, with Dick Powell. Although its author Alec Coppel is relatively obscure he wrote Vertigo and several hour long Hitchcock TV programmes. Born in Australia he became a US citizen but died in London.

The film opens in a corner of the Liberal Club in London; quickly we see Dr. Clive Riordan (Robert Newton) divert his gaze to a pocket of his overcoat hanging close by; instinctively we know he has a gun hidden there. A deft touch by Edward Dmytryk. Riordan goes home and lies in wait for the return of his wife Storm (Sally Gray) and lover, Bill Kronin (Phil Brown). After the confrontation Bill just disappears but in reality is being held captive by Riordan in a derelict house on a WWII bomb-site. Scotland Yard, in the form of Superintendent Finsbury (Naunton Wayne), is called in, ostensibly to find Mrs. Riordan's lost dog, Monty. Wayne gives a clever performance with an impish sense of humour that blends in well with the general tenor of the film, which mainly occupies itself with Newton tormenting his victim over several months leading towards the planned ultimate disposal of the corpse in a bath of acid. A slip of the tongue by Riordan however leads to his unmasking. The film ends as we see Storm leaving for a long cruise with her newest piece of nookie.

Some have complained that the film is too long but it is just this kind of long drawn out teasing of the audience that characterised Hitchcock; Dmytryk does equally successfully here. The film has an extremely well written dialogue with the occasional slightly humorous repartee.

Robert Newton was a talented British actor best remembered for his portrayal of Long John Silver in Treasure Island. Under Dmytryk's direction Robert Newton is superb. Sadly alcohol got the better of him and he died prematurely aged 50 of a heart attack.

Sally Gray was a popular star of the 30s and 40s, her best known film being Dangerous Moonlight with its Warsaw Concerto theme. Here she gives an excellent performance as the errant wife. She looks extremely smart and over dresses slightly with her wide brimmed hat so that she automatically attracts the attention of men without overtly inviting advances. She has married well, her husband is a leading psychiatrist with a practice in Harley Street and at the top of his profession with a very substantial income; they live in a luxurious house with servants, yet she seems to be the type who indulges in one petty affair after another and risking everything by killing off the goose that has laid her golden egg for her. She does not seem to have children but dotes on her pet poodle 'Monty' and goes to bridge parties. Perhaps they could not have a child of their own so she hoped to have someone else's child which her husband would have to accept for the sake of his career. It is an intriguing situation. The film, an excellent example of the suspense genre, is more such an exercise with a minimal plot rather than a full-blown story. It is implausible that a man in Riordan's position would hardly risk his career to murder his wife's lover. Remember, this film was made in 1948 when divorce was still a disgrace and the death penalty had not been repealed. It would have been a question of suffering in silence but one can't help feeling sorry for the two of them.

The Shipping News (2001)

"The Life and Death of a Nymphomaniac"

[6/10 · 18 January 2007]

NB. SPOILER COMING UP ! Was it Hemingway who coined the phrase "Telling it like it is"? I can't remember. It doesn't matter as Hemingway is not writing this review and I'm telling it like it isn't! The theme of the film is as old as life itself - the perennial 'boy meets girl'. The problem I have with "The Shipping News" is that while concerning itself almost entirely with how their relationship develops after they meet, it tells the boy's story before they meet in summary only while virtually ignoring that of the girl. The film is therefore unbalanced. Perhaps the novel suffers from this defect as well or was 111 minutes not long enough to do it justice? If the book does tell her story then a more satisfactory treatment would have been a trilogy, much favoured by French filmmakers, telling their two separate lives in PART I and PART II, with PART III recounting their lives after they meet.

I was drawn to this film solely because I had been impressed by "The Cider House Rules", which had also been directed by Lasse Hallström, but was disappointed to find that it did not come up to expectations. It had atmosphere and good photography but mostly failed. In particular the first half-hour was absolute trash. It was almost like fast-forwarding through a newsreel: boy (Quoyle - KEVIN SPACEY) meets nympho (aka Petal – CATE BLANCHETT), nympho promptly seduces boy, baby arrives, nympho has a series of lovers, nympho gives up baby for adoption, nympho gets killed with latest lover in car crash, boy gets baby back. The only redeeming feature seems to be a view of Cate Blanchett's seductive posterior.

END OF PART I

PART II Missing

PART III

Then JUDI DENCH as Aunt Agnis Hamm arrives on the scene and the film takes off. Judi holds the film together, without her it would not be worth watching. As the action proper begins here the film could easily start at this stage and would have worked better within its own confines with the initial part as a series of flashbacks. The real story is set on the Newfoundland coast where the location shots were made. The Canadian Maritime Province comes over as a cold, harsh, bleak and uninviting place; but this is snowy wintertime, perhaps it is much pleasanter in the sunny summer; anyway I wouldn't mind holidaying there for their fine lobster salads! Aunt Agnis drags Quoyle back to his birthplace in Newfoundland where he gets a job writing the "Shipping News" column for the local newspaper. I felt that the best scenes in the film were those featuring the newspaper offices where Quoyle is taught to think in terms of headlines. But unknown to Quoyle has family has a past as they were "wreckers" luring unsuspecting cargo ships onto the rocks. This is direct plagiarism from Daphne duMaurier's well-known novel "Jamaica Inn". As for the plot, most of it is preposterous but like all fairy stories, in the end everyone lives happily ever after.

Pardon Us (1931)

Not one of Stan & Ollie's best.

[4/10 · 5 July 2006]

"Pardon Us" was the first full-length film featuring the comedy duo of Laurel and Hardy. It was short by present day standards, running for just under an hour at 56 minutes. It was released in 1931 as the infamous prohibition era was coming to its end. It was the era of Chicago gangsters and hoodlums, it was the era of Al Capone, it was the era of the electric chair, it was the era of the speakeasy, it was the era of the bootlegger, it was the era of illegal alcohol production, it was the era of prisons. So against this background our happy pair of laughable chaps find themselves in prison for trying to sell their home made brew to a friendly LA cop! However there is no real story running through the film, it is no more than a series of separate sketches loosely tacked together with prison life as a common theme. Many of the prison scenes of riots and shoot-outs are in fact left over footage from an earlier film, "The Big House". Maybe MGM felt they were on a winner with something that was in the public's eye - lawlessness, crime and corruption. However it does not seem to have worked, for laughs are few and far between. The best supporting star is Walter Long who plays an extremely tough and much feared prisoner "The Tiger". Apart from one sketch involving the daughter of the Prison Governor there is no female character in the film, perhaps she should have been more prominent. Stan and Ollie's old stalwart James Finlayson appears in just one sketch in which he plays an idiosyncratic teacher in front of a class of prisoners. There are a few mild laughs here but one is immediately reminded of the famous British comedian Will Hay who as Headmaster of St.Michaels school had perfected virtually the same act around 1920; as both he and Laurel had worked for Fred Karno, it is possible that Finlayson was introduced to this act by Laurel. Surprisingly, Hardy comes over very well in one scene as a singer, he had a good baritone voice, not something we normally associate with him. Overall "Pardon Us" is very out dated so it must be regarded as a nostalgic work that has not aged well; so much so that the MGM credit has been removed from the start of the film. If you are a Stan and Ollie fan watch it by all means but for others, watch something else instead.

True Stories: Robinson Crusoe (2003 TV Movie)

Make sure you see this.

[9/10 · 1 February 2006]

I did not know that there was a true story to Robinson Crusoe until I saw this first class documentary produced in Canada by CineNova Productions for the Discovery Channel. Although only 50 minutes long it skilfully intertwines the lives of Daniel Defoe and the real castaway Alexander Selkirk. Selkirk was the son of a Scottish tanner who goes to sea on a pirate ship as its navigator in 1706. After an argument with the Captain he is cast ashore on the Chilean island of Juan Fernandez in the southern Pacific. He survives on the island for about four years. His main source of food is a herd of wild goats. As well as their meat he also makes clothing from their skins. Eventually he is rescued by the pirate Woodes-Rogers. After capturing a Spanish galleon he is set on board as the Captain and returns to England where he collects £800 in prize money making him a wealthy man. Later he marries but returns to sea where he dies aged 42 of yellow fever.

The story of Selkirk was published in a book written by Woods-Rogers and it is on this account that Daniel Defoe based his novel but blended in more details from other accounts of marooned seamen. The main original contribution of Defoe was Man Friday. The book, which made Defoe rich, has been translated into more languages than any other book except the bible.

This made for TV documentary is very capably produced and relies on realistic re-enactments as well as voice-over and contributions from academics to tell the story. It is made for an intelligent audience so proceeds at a reasonable pace and does not waste time in overlong explanations of the obvious. If you get a chance to see this don't miss it. Incidentally, the island which has since become inhabited, was renamed Robinson Crusoe Island in 1966 and a smaller one in the same group Alejandro Selkirk island.

Manon of the Spring (1986)

Sequel fails to live up to expectations.

[7/10 · 23 January 2006]

The full title of this film is "Manon des Sources. Part II of Jean de Florette". The original version of "Manon des Sources" in 1951 was directed by Marcel Pagnol and told the story in one four hour long marathon. Later Pagnol elaborated the story in his novel "L'eau des Collines". In 1986 this was made into the two-part film under the faultless direction of Claude Berri. The two films were made in succession so they can quite rightly be regarded as two parts of the same film. Unfortunately hints and clues abound in part I making part II little more than a perfunctory exercise, albeit admirably performed by masters of the art, with an inevitable unfolding of events. After the death of Jean the teenage Manon (Emannuelle Beart) tends a herd of mountain goats in the hills above César's farm whilst her absent mother is a member of an opera company in Marseilles. As she grows up Manon gradually pieces together bits of village gossip until she realises how the villagers have remained silent while César connived to get the piece of land and spring from her parents' farm. She then accidentally stumbles on a way of getting her own back but with unexpected consequences. By the end of the first hour the film drags due to the slow telling of the story and also the sparsity of characters. Suddenly it comes to life as we meet many of the other villagers including the mayor and the priest. There is so little to tell that it pales in comparison with Jean de Florette despite possessing many of the qualities of that film i.e. superb acting, direction and photography. It is little more than an ending tacked on. As even the twist at the end was signalled in Part I, I would have preferred a single but longer film telling the whole story at one viewing. I was surprised at the large number of reviewers who found the final twist unexpected; I can only conclude that today's cinema audience, having been weaned on films in which everything is explicitly stated, is unable to read messages hidden in the film.

I am glad to report that the problems with subtitling I commented on in J de F have are no longer apparent apart from the intrusion of "orology"; also the occupation of Jean's father is now satisfactorily rendered as "blacksmith" in place of the previous cryptic "farrier".

I have not seen the 1951 version but critics consider it better than J de F and M des S. Let's not forget that Pagnol was The Master so perhaps his way was the right way? I wish they would put his version on TV one day then we can tell for ourselves.

Jean de Florette (1986)

Sub standard sub-titles

[9/10 · 19 January 2006]

The French pulled out all the stops when they made this film even involving the French Ministry of Culture and the Centre National de la Cinématographie but it is marred by just one thing and that is the subtitling. When translating from one language to a second it is imperative that the translator is a native speaker of the second language. It is soon apparent that that was not the case here. Why oh why did they not devote the care and attention they gave to the original to the foreign language version? Nevertheless cinematography wins through and this is a joy to watch.

Firstly, those sub-titles; these include several obscure English words such as genuflect, midden and farrier. Subtitles are literally gone in a flash so they must be sharp, to the point and in everyday language; one does not have time to ponder over them in the cinema, they became an irritant and are off putting. Even when watching a recording at home it is too distracting to have to keep on resorting to a dictionary. Having got that off my chest, let's turn to the film itself.

The story is based on a novel "L'eau des Collines" by Marcel Pagnol, itself an expansion of an earlier novel filmed and directed by Pagnol as "Manon des Sources" in 1952. Pagnol was a member of the French Académie and achieved fame with his Marseillaise film trilogy "César", "Marius" and "Fanny" made in the early 30s. After Pagnol's death in 1976 "Manon des Sources" was remade with the original title at the same time as "Jean de Florette"(1986) so forming a sequel. The film is set in a small sleepy village, little more than a hamlet, in Provence near the town of Aubagne (Pagnol's birthplace) some dozen or so miles to the east of Marseilles in the 1920s. Much of Pagnol's writing is set in his beloved Provence of which he is a true and passionate observer. The film, made almost 10 years after his death, is the French nation's tribute to him; it presents an idyllic view of life in the sparsely populated rocky hilly region, falling not far short of a masterpiece. One sees all the features of a village run by old men playing pétanque or just sitting around doing nothing and saying very little. Yves Montand is excellent as César aka "Le Papet", one of the village patriarchs. Aged but unmarried he lives with his nephew Ugolin (Daniel Auteuil), a very withdrawn and ugly youth in his twenties with not much to say for himself. They are the sole survivors of the Soubeyran family who once dominated the region. César treats him as the son that was never his. Ugolin finds that the soil around their farm is ideal for growing carnations but as the area is arid they need water for irrigation. They are aware of a long forgotten spring on an adjoining farm, so plot to acquire the land by deception from some townspeople who have recently acquired it. Gerald Dépardieu plays the part of the hunchbacked owner of the land and is the son of a former local beauty Florette who caught many a young man's eye not least that of César. The Soubeyrans are content to bide their time as the years go by, seeming to help their new neighbours become farmers but all the time finding ways of undermining them.

The film proceeds at a leisurely pace creating the true atmosphere of this sleepy community and with the breathtaking cinematography coupled with the fine acting it all adds up to a very rare cinematic experience. So much of what César has to say or is thinking is seen in expression on his face; a slight twitch here, a raising of an eyebrow, a nod, they say it all: truly a masterly performance reflecting the leisurely way of life. Daniel Auteil also gives a fantastic performance as the seldom-speaking nephew.

César is evil and wicked beyond belief and will stoop to anything to get his way, yet he has the most pleasant of disarming smiles and an ever-present twinkle in his eyes. Usually well mannered, his Achilles heel is his temper and when he loses it the consequences are disastrous. Somehow one is drawn to him and sympathises with him. The hunchbacked Jean comes across as the unwanted intruder from the town and one does not feel for him in the way that the story demands. It's all part of the craft of film-making.

Quite a few reviewers have praised the background music taken from Verdi's "The Force of Destiny". I was so enthralled by the film that I was not aware of any background music until I read these comments, but opera stops for me after Carmen. This exemplary film is in the great tradition of French cinema, which it should be as Marcel Pagnol was himself a great film maker and the founder in 1936 of the journal "Les Cahiers du Film". I have given this film only nine marks out of a possible ten on account of the defects I have referred to in the subtitling. One essential quality I expect a film to possess to deserve ten marks is that I must be able to enjoy viewing it time and time again, and "Jean de Florette" certainly passes that test.

The Other Love (1947)

Class actors can't deliver the goods.

[6/10 · 13 January 2006]

This pairing of Barbara Stanwyck and David Niven is a strange one – never to be repeated. Stanwyck was a big name, having been in films since 1927 and several famous pre-war films, more recently she had received wide acclaim for playing the femme fatale in "Double Indemnity"(1945); Niven's reputation had been established in the 1930s but "A Matter of Life and Death"(1946) had brought him further fame. Perhaps Hollywood saw a future for him as a heartthrob but Niven was too light an actor for such roles. "The Other Love" revolves around a young concert pianist, Karen Duncan(Barbara Stanwyck) who is being treated for TB in a Swiss sanatorium by Dr. Anthony Stanton(David Niven). Apart from one other patient, Celestine (Joan Lorrine), Karen seems to have no one to talk to and is easily emotionally drawn towards her doctor. One day while out riding she meets Paul Clermont, a racing car driver(Richard Conte). He tries unsuccessfully to date her but Karen is unable to get him off her mind. Realising that she perhaps may not have long to live and tired of life lying in a sanatorium bed she becomes the fickle female and decides on one last fling, so ditches the doctor and seeks Paul out at the proposed meeting place in nearby Monte Carlo, actually a good 200 miles away from Switzerland, how she accomplishes this feat remains unexplained. The eternal triangle has been constructed – QED, as my maths master used to say. But the geometry is non-Euclidean and refuses to obey the normal rules. Anything might happen and does!

Classical pianists and exclusive doctors were common themes in 1940s Hollywood but somehow in this film they don't jell. Academy Award winner (A Double Life), Miklos Rozsa's music score comes across well as a piece of heavy classical piano. Barbara Stanwyck displays a seldom seen ability as a pianist making it look very authentic. Niven by comparison is shown at the keyboard only once in an out of focus long shot and is obviously bluffing his way through. As for his doctor part, it is evident that he never seems happy in it. It is a rôle which Claude Rains had excelled at previously in "Now Voyager", here he could have played it to perfection so lifting the film out of its mediocrity. It's left to Stanwyck to carry the film.

Not one to rush to watch but interesting as a period piece and a chance to see two great stars of their time.

Mildred Pierce (1945)

The beginning of Cain's decline?

[8/10 · 8 January 2006]

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS –YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

"Mildred Pierce"(1945),based on the novel of the same name, is one of three works by James M. Cain that were filmed in the 1940s; the others were the novellas "Double Indemnity"(1944) and "The Postman Always Rings Twice"(1946). This is the least suspenseful of them and this is achieved only through the use of a series of three flashbacks. If told as a straightforward third person narrative it would have had little impact. Cain did write the novel in the third person and admitted that in retrospect it was a shortcoming that caused it to lack bite. The film was directed by Michael Curtiz and the screenplay was by Ranald MacDougall.

Mildred Pierce (Joan Crawford) is a hard working businesswoman whose husband has left her with two young girls to bring up. Mildred uses her housewife skills at cooking and baking together with a forté for organisation to establish a chain of popular family restaurants in Southern California in the early years of WWII. The war itself plays no part in the film but there are a couple of topical asides alluding to the war such as the shortage of nylon stockings. After the younger daughter dies early on from pneumonia the elder daughter, Veda, (Ann Blyth) becomes the centre of Mildred's love but by the time she is in her early teens has become a spoilt little brat. Mildred has little financial acumen and relies on her business partner, whom she has known since childhood, Wally (Jack Carson) for advice. Carson fits the part well and this is one of his better screen performances. He had worked as an Estate Agent with Mildred's husband and fancies his chances with Mildred as soon as she becomes separated and makes a clownish pass at her every time he opens his mouth. She remains aloof and eventually marries a wealthy playboy Monte Beragon (Zachary Scott).

As the film opens we hear a series of gunshots in quick succession and then see Beragon falling to the floor, dead, inside his coastal mansion. A car standing outside is then seen accelerating rapidly away. The film uses the propaganda technique of the juxtaposition of unrelated scenes to give a misleading account thereby casting suspicion on Mildred. However about halfway through the film I could not help comparing the character of Veda with the real life tragedy of Lana Turner's daughter and the killing of Lana's husband in 1958. I then realised that it was Veda not Mildred who was the murderess. Truth is, indeed, stranger than fiction. Mildred is basically a good woman and is not portrayed as being in any way evil. It is here that the film differs substantially from Cain's story in that there is no murder in the original. In the other Cain films the lead role is a femme fatale, an essential film noir element who plots with her lover to murder her husband. In my opinion, without the femme fatale Mildred Pierce is definitely not film noir which requires an almost impossible to follow convoluted plot whereas that of Mildred Pierce is straightforward. Other missing elements would typically include a private investigator, a crooked gang-master and darkly lit outdoor scenes. To have been a film noir the character of Mildred's daughter Veda would have to have been developed into the main lead.

Some final thoughts: The 17-year old Ann Blyth gives an exceptional performance as Veda and steals at least one scene from Crawford. Eve Arden as Mildred's restaurant manager cum girl Friday (Ida Corwin) turns in her usual stereotyped 1930s 'tough dame' performance. Not a film to be missed although not the best of Cain's work; written in 1941 it probably marks the beginning of Cain's decline.

Enigma (2001)

Who was listening to whom?

[6/10 · 7 January 2006]

Purely as a film I give ENIGMA 6 out of 10; as an historical document – zero. Generally I do not necessarily expect a film with an historical content to be a piece of cinematic non-fiction but merely a source of entertainment, so I score it on this basis. If the distributors claim it as a true historical record then that is another matter. Enigma has a fairly good plot but suffers from poor direction and frequently indistinct dialogue. It centres around a young man and a young girl working at the Government's code deciphering establishment at Bletchley Park and their involvement in the breaking of the German U-boat cipher SHARK (or TRITON to give it its original German name). As the mechanics of the breaking of SHARK has little story value a sub-plot involving a femme-fatale as German spy is introduced.

During 1941 our Atlantic convoy losses were becoming unsustainable so the ability to read SHARK was imperative. The film has a section in which the code breakers are shown helping a naval lieutenant to pinpoint the position of U-boats in the Atlantic based on wireless direction finding information. This was not the work of Bletchley Park so is historically wrong. In fact,convoys and U boats were tracked by the Admiralty in London.

The film also purports that breaking SHARK was the sole factor in helping to bring down convoy losses. The truth is somewhat more ironic. Whilst we could not read TRITON/SHARK the Germans could read the Royal Navy Cipher No. 3! However it took us a year to find out. It was this cipher which was used to transmit the rendez-vous points for departing convoys to RN escort vessels in the North Atlantic. The Germans picked this up at their listening stations and promptly re-transmitted it to their U-boat wolf packs who were then able to proceed to the rendez-vous ready to pick off their prey. This information was sent in SHARK so once it was broken we knew that RN Cipher No.3 was being compromised and had to be changed. As a result convoy losses decreased.

The reason for the weakness in Cipher No.3 was that when WWII started the Royal Navy was essentially still using code book methods from the Great War and were very slow to adopt mechanical encipherment, similar to Enigma. On the other hand the RAF introduced it in the 1930s for use on the Defence Teleprinter Network run by the GPO. For this the Type-X machine was developed and was featured in the film for reading German enigma code. The German Enigma machine itself features prominently in the opening sequences of the film with several close-ups and supporting dialogue explaining how it worked.

Did the Germans know that we could read their enigma messages? This is a moot point as officially they did not but both Rommel and Doenitz, the U-boat commander, were highly suspicious; Rommel because convoys from Italy to North Africa were frequently sunk and Doenitz because U-boat code changes only gave him a short term advantage against convoys. In both cases the leakage was blamed on spies, although it has been suggested that Doenitz's staff were very possibly convinced but dare not tell Hitler that Enigma was compromised, so they just contented themselves with improving the system. Unlike the British centralised Intelligence centre at Bletchley Park the Germans had separate intelligence staffs for each of the three services with the inevitable rivalry between them. This weakened their counter intelligence operations which, coupled with the extreme secrecy surrounding Ultra, meant that our success against Enigma went undetected.

The film is well worth seeing for its entertainment value and just a wee peek at the work of Bletchley Park but for anyone interested in learning the truth about this fascinating story I suggest that they read the official history entitled "British Intelligence in WWII" by Professor Sir F. H. (Harry) Hinsley (himself an alumnus of BP), or just Google "Bletchley Park".

The Dead (1987)

They just don't make them like this anymore!

[8/10 · 17 January 2005]

An exquisite film. They just don't make them like this any more! We eavesdrop on an upper middle class family in Dublin in the early part of the 20th century. They are hosting an after Christmas dinner for their friends and relatives. Their table talk is just idle chatter but it is so well written that one is engrossed. Away from the dinner table some fine piano playing helps to create an intimate atmosphere as if one were there as one of the guests. Perhaps a bit too perfect for an amateur player, the odd mistake here and there would have added to the magic of this film. No real story but real entertainment and an object lesson for up and coming film makers.

The Cider House Rules (1999)

Forbidden Fruit. Irresistible. Taboo, Taboo, Taboo.

[8/10 · 13 August 2003]

*************** SPOILER *************

A charming and absorbing film. Readily appreciated for its superficial story it has darker inner meanings. It won an Oscar for Michael Caine, not an actor to my liking but this time he drops his silly irritating cockney accent and performs reasonably well but not really up to Oscar standard. Set during WWII in the year 1943, ostensibly the story of an orphan (Homer Wells - Tobey Maguire) brought up as the protégé of the Doctor Larch (Michael Caine) administering an orphanage in the state of Maine, the film deals with three taboos; illegal abortions; incest; the unfaithfulness of wives of serving soldiers away at war. In doing so the film spreads itself too thinly leaving many things unexplained such as the ether addiction of Dr. Larch, the background to Candy Kendall (former South African Playboy model Charlize Theron) having an abortion just before her forthcoming marriage to her army officer boy friend. How did someone find an abortionist back in 1943 and what did it cost? Surely it would have been easier for her boyfriend to find one of his Medical Officer colleagues willing to do it? Also since the medically unqualified Homer ends up by stepping into the shoes of his mentor Dr. Larch one senses the implication that the good doctor was himself unqualified. Dr. Larch regularly bids 'goodnight' to his beloved orphans with the phrase 'Goodnight my Princes of Maine: you Kings of New England' however this becomes incongruous when Homer's bogus degree certificate refers, in Latin, to 'the Republic of Maine'. The incest occurs between a father and his daughter who are part of a group of coloured itinerant apple pickers at the orchard where Homer gets his first job after leaving the orphanage. The Rules of the Cider House these workers must follow are clearly displayed but, although openly flaunted they are irrelevant to the film. In the language of cinematic symbolism the broken rules are those of life's moral code relating to the film's three taboos. Although that on the discussion of abortion has changed much since 1943 it was absolutely banned by the Hays office until William Wyler's 1951 'Detective Story' with Kirk Douglas. The other two remain as strong as ever; incest is universally repugnant and who is going to confront the soldier-hero returning from the war with tales of his wife's infidelity? One of the rare films dealing with this is John Schlesinger's 'Yanks' (1979)which earned Rachel Roberts a BAFTA award for best supporting actress. In CHR the main action takes place in an apple orchard - apple the 'forbidden fruit' of the Garden of Eden. This was the tacit theme of the popular wartime Andrews Sisters' hit 'Don't Sit Under the Apple Tree' which echoed the plea of the soldier at war to his girl friend/wife to remain faithful '....don't sit under the apple tree with anyone else but me until I come marching home .....'. A later hit tried to give him that reassurance when Alice Faye sang '..... no love, no nothing, I'm getting plenty of sleep.....no love until my baby comes home.....' Here the left-alone Candy blatantly goes out of her way to seduce the naive and innocent Homer, brought up as he was in the sheltered environment of an orphanage with no mother and a foster father. In one shot we see Candy with a come-hither look on her face as she sensually bites into the symbolically forbidden apple. In another Homer is shown how to pick apples, symbolising his sexual initiation. Towards the end Candy's husband is invalided home paralysed from the waist down after his plane crashes, presumably leaving him unable to have children but the story unsatisfactorily hangs there. Generally good acting all round and, unusually for a contemporary film, there is a refreshing lack of foul language.

One petty quibble: before seeing this film I found its title ambiguous as the word 'rules' can be interpreted as either noun or verb and still make sense.

Casablanca (1942)

One Night of Love? The unanswered questions. !! SPOILER !!

[10/10 · 27 December 2002]

!! SPOILER !!

Without doubt a work of genius. Full marks, 10 out of 10. When this film appeared in 1942 Bogart was yet the great Star he was to become. During the 30s he had regularly featured in Warner Bros. gangster films as a typical hoodlum; all churned out on the WB assembly line with little of interest in them. His reputation at the time was on a par with that of the dependable B-movie actor Lloyd Nolan, perhaps even lower. However, recently he had been cast in The Maltese Falcon where he had displayed a previously unknown potential; Casablanca, in retrospect, transformed his career for him. It also enhanced that of Ingrid Bergman. Others on this website have said much in praise of this film which screams out for its missing sequel (did Hollywood fear a flop so they shied away from it?) a prequel would not come amiss either. So many things are unexplained in the story that there is ample material for further development. Was it coincidence that the man who showed Laszlo the Cross of Lorraine ring, Berger, and Ilsa were both Norwegian? Why does Laszlo, the great underground leader want to go to America at a time, 1941, when all external resistance movements are centred in London? Signor Ferrari is a very mysterious character, is there something more to him than just a clever black marketeer and owner of the Blue Parrot bar? What really took place between Ilsa and her lost lover Richard on that last night together? What happened to Ilsa and Laszlo after they left for America? Did she and Richard ever meet again? Why was the attitude of Laszlo towards her so cold? What was the powerful force that tore the recently reunited lovers apart when they could easily have stayed together? As for a prequel, there are the untold stories of Ilsa and Laszlo, Ilsa and Richard (briefly related in the film) and Laszlo himself.

Here is how I see the story continuing. After Ilsa and Laszlo depart on the plane, Berger goes to Ferrari who turns out to be a British agent and the contact man for all agents operating from London in the region. Berger identifies himself as a Norwegian resistance member sent out from London and requests help in getting back urgently. He gives Ferrari a brief coded message for radioing to London. Ferrari promptly sends this off and routinely adds the information that Ilsa and Laszlo are en route for Lisbon. He also requests that Rick and Captain Louis Renault, who have gone into hiding, should accompany Berger as they are in mortal danger from the Nazis who are seeking revenge for the killing of Major Strasser. The next night a small boat takes the three men out to sea where they rendezvous with a Royal Navy warship which carries them safely to England.

After arriving in Lisbon, Ilsa and Laszlo go to the American embassy to get the required travel documents and are whisked into the office of the ambassador who tells them that he has been urgently informed by the American ambassador in London that Laszlo has been requested to fly to London by the next plane to participate in a top secret high level conference of senior resistance leaders. However when the couple reach the Norwegian resistance HQ in London, Ilsa promptly denounces Laszlo as a Nazi plant who has infiltrated the upper echelons of underground movements throughout Europe; he holds the rank of colonel in the SS. She learns from Berger that Richard is in England serving in General deGaulle's Free French Army; so the lovers are brought together again. The beautiful, alluring Ilsa is, in reality, a member of the Norwegian secret service who had been deployed as a honey trap to bait Laszlo when suspicions first arose about him following the Nazi take over of Czechoslovakia. Ilsa entered into her sham marriage with Laszlo in England before the war in order to get evidence of his duplicity and, later, his links to the Norwegian traitor, Quisling. Ilsa had explained all this to Richard on their last night together. The two promised each other that they would marry but first she had to complete her work on exposing Laszlo. Richard was sworn to secrecy. Afterwards when the waiter, Carl, escorted Ilsa back from Rick's place she had given him a note in Norwegian to be delivered at once to her compatriot, Berger, instructing him to inform London that she had all the evidence against Laszlo. This was the coded message that he sent via Ferrari. Berger's mission all along had been to ensure the safety of Ilsa.

It takes a few months in England before Ilsa's marriage can be annulled on the grounds that it was not consummated due to the impotence of Laszlo (this explains the puzzling brother and sister like relationship between the two in the film). She and Richard married shortly thereafter with Louis as best man. A few weeks later she gives birth to Richard's son, conceived on that last night of passion at Rick's place.

Laszlo, still a Czech citizen, was imprisoned under the notorious British regulation 18b as an undesirable alien. His true reason for wanting to get to America had been to set up an underground sabotage ring to undermine American aid to Britain. Major Strasser's secret assignment had been to ensure that Laszlo "escaped" to America and to prevent his cover as an underground leader from being blown. In doing this he willingly sacrificed his own life by deliberately aiming wide at Rick so allowing Rick to fire the fatal shot.

Postscript: after the war Rick opened a bar in the sleazy Soho district of London, laconically calling it "Bar of the American Patriot".

Sam's piano playing was performed by Elliot Carpenter http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0139325/bio.

Spellbound (1945)

Bergman shows how to outwit the hotel detective.

[6/10 · 23 August 2002]

Early American Hitchcock, this film uses two of the most notable features of mid-40s Hollywood: psychiatrists and background music. The film is now outmoded, being more of a curio than entertainment and offers little for the student of the cinema. It is also flawed by being two long (just nine minutes short of two hours), having an, at times, transparent plot and an unconvincing skiing sequence in which one gets the impression of the two Stars siting in front of giant fans blowing their hair into wild disorder. Somehow Hitch seemed at times content with the technically incompetent, as in the ludicrous backdrops of his 1964 'Marnie'. But why; does it hark back to his days when British studios were financially impoverished? In the 1940s any film with psychiatry as a theme was a sure winner, another one was the Bette Davis, Paul Henreid classic 'Now Voyager' with trick cyclist Claude Rains. Both films were widely acclaimed in their day but sadly Spellbound has not stood the test of time. The characterisation of Bergman's former professor of psychiatry as a small bearded and bespectacled man with a high pitched German accent is now seen as over the top but passed muster then. In the development of the cinema soundtrack, background music had, by the mid-1940s, come to be regarded as of major importance by producers but in this film it overwhelms to the point of distraction: obviously outstandingly successful by contemporary standards as it won an Oscar. For me the best scene is one of the byways of the film in which the hotel detective tries to chat up Ingrid Bergman but she uses her female wiles, leading him on to commit the indiscretion of disclosing a guest's room number (Gregory Peck, of course). Ingrid throughout most of this film plays the psychiatrist part with typical Swedish reserve approaching aloofness but in this couple of minutes the genius of Hitchcock succeeds in showing us another Bergman - the comedienne. As she coyly but, at the same time flirtatiously, leads the detective into believing that she is a school teacher and marvels at his prowess in using psychiatry to weigh up suspicious characters, Hitch gives us an hilarious moment of pure comedy. OK for whiling away a rainy afternoon but not much else, unless you are an hotel detective fan.

The French Connection (1971)

Five Oscars but what was it all about?

[1/10 · 24 February 2002]

A prestigious production that gained five Oscars and numerous other awards in 1971 but I must confess that I could not follow it at all. I found that the dialogue was almost impossible to understand and was even incomprehensible at times. That apart other factors were to blame. The film was unconventional in being mainly shot outdoors on locale on the streets of New York. Perhaps Fernando Ray was intended to be different from all the other characters but the trouble was that he stood out like a sore thumb; so much so that his presence jarred. In an attempt to authenticate the French connection the cast included the French actor Frédéric de Pasquale who died recently, also the film was shot partly in France (Marseilles) again outdoors and legitimised with French dialogue and sub-titles. But it still failed to create the sought after atmosphere; in fact all these directorial devices failed. I found it hard to keep track of even the main characters; I kept asking myself who is the detective? Who is the crook? Too many of the characters resembled each other so I couldn't tell which was which. I could only keep track of the detective Eddie Egan (Gene Hackman)because of his conspicuous hat. It was all a horrible mishmash. The only good feature was the high speed car v. train chase which was expertly edited and came over really well enough to earn the film its one and only mark from me, although I got the impression that some of the shots were repeated. Incidentally it won Gerald Greenberg an Oscar for Best Editing. If I wanted to learn how to get an Oscar I would not have got any clues from this film. It was only after reading the reviews that I found out what it was all about.

Jagged Edge (1985)

A weak plot plus poor on-screen development don't make good cinema.

[6/10 · 31 January 2002]

Leading lady lawyer Teddy Barnes (GLENN CLOSE) allows passion to overrule professional ethics and recklessly embarks on an affair with her client. Teddy Barnes is defending newspaper publisher Jack Forrester (JEFF BRIDGES) who is accused of viviously slaying his leading socialite wife with a hunting knife. The plot is mediocre and is not helped by poor on-screen development. The main dramatic effect is produced by the use of unexpected twists and turns in the unfolding courtroom drama as suspicion shifts from suspect to suspect and new witnesses are miraculously found who contradict all that has gone before. The device is overused and becomes gimmicky but nevertheless remains effective as an instrument for creating suspense. Somewhat reminiscent of Casablanca where the story changed on set from day to day. Glenn Close plays the feisty lawyer with conviction but Jeff Bridges renders a bland newspaper tycoon, adding nothing to a poor script that fails to give character to the magnate; although he is portrayed as someone leading an affluent life style appropriate to any well-heeled prominent member of the community such as a doctor, lawyer or successful businessman his actual status has no relevance to the story. This sort oof superficiality is a general weakness of this film which fails to fill in any of the characters except lawyer, Teddy Barnes.

Major acting honours go to the support cast. John Dehner delighfully underplays the aging, almost senile, Judge; although Marshall Colt's makeup is overdone as the repugnant tennis pro cum gigolo he gives a very convincing performance. Robert Loggia achieved an Oscar nomination for supporting actor in the role of Teddy Barnes' private investigator, Sam Ranson. He is very much a father figure to her but that does not prevent his incessant use of porn-speak. Given a more eloquent use of the English language with a fine turn of phrase he could have been a much more interesting character but as it is he is just an uncouth pulp fiction nobody. Characterisation is one of the film's weaknesses, coupled with some trite dialogue such as when Teddy Barnes asks Sam Ranson whether his mother ever washed his moth out with soap. The film fails to tell the sory visually but falls back on straight narrative between characters (after all it is supposed to be a picture!). Another weakness is that there is no police investigation of the murder, all the enquiries are conducted in the courtroom. And why, when the murder weapon is discovered, are finger prints not mentioned? The court scenes are very flat and much of it seems more like the mutual mudslinging of a divorce case as the philanderings of the suspects are pursued by Teddy Barnes and the DA, effectively played by Peter Coyote.

Other Comments:

The sound was so indistinct in a number of scenes that I had to play them back to catch what had been said.

OK for passing a couple of hours away but hardly worthe watching otherwise.

The Glenn Miller Story (1954)

If music be the food of love, play on Glenn, play on!(after W.S.)

[7/10 · 13 January 2002]

Produced nine years after his death this is Hollywood's obituary of swing era legend Glenn Miller. Essentially a musical told around the story of his struggle to achieve musical stardom. A film that will appeal to all lovers of 1930s swing music and Glenn Miller in particular. A film also for James Stewart fans. Casting the gangling Stewart as Miller was a huge gamble that succeeded; if it had failed so would have the film. This success was due to Anthony Mann's undoubted ability as a director. The Mann-Stewart combination had already proved itself but here both were on unfamiliar territory. Mann's forté was the outdoor adventure while Stewart was a pre-war light comedy star still trying to find a new identity. Mann had earlier directed Stewart in Winchester '73(1950)and the two were to go on to further success with The Far Country (1954) and The Man from Larramie (1955). He excels himself in bringing out previously unknown talents in Stewart that make this a career best for the Actor. Clad simply in a military raincoat, a trombone to his lips and sporting a USAAF officer's peaked cap he requires no further make-up to pass himself off as the wartime Miller. Among the lesser credits is the name of an unknown Henry Mancini but this was to be his big break as at the young age of 22 he was to become an Oscar nominee (jointly with Joseph Gershenson) for musical scoring. Before joining Universal Mancini had been a piano player and arranger with the post-war "Glenn Miller Orchestra", by using musicians from this band, made up mainly of sidesmen from Miller's own bands, Mancini ensured an authentic re-creation of the seductive Miller sound that had enchanted teenagers in the years leading up to the war. Regrettably an argument with the Miller Estate prevented the participation of saxophonist Ted Beneke, who had earlier led the post-war band and was renowned for his performance of Chattanoga Choo-Choo in"SunValley Serenade" (1941). The fidelity of the sound track of Miller's music won the film an Oscar for best sound recording of a musical. After a ponderous start the film picks up pace in apparent tune with Miller's success until the last reel is a non-stop performance of Miller standards. Miller was supported throughout by his wife, Helen, sympathetically played by a cuddlesome June Allyson, who ceaselessly encouraged him when all seemed to have failed. When news of his death reaches her one immediately feels her sadness in her loss and spontaneously grieves with her. Get your hankies out! A few minor lapses mar an otherwise competent production; Miller is incongruously seen in his army raincoat an a glorious summer's day conducting his wartime band at an outdoor concert in England just after D-day while the audience and band are in standard military attire; a continuity lapse shows a German flying bomb attack taking place before D-day, 6th June, whereas the first one did not reach England until the following week. Miller's loss at the peak of popularity, flying in advance of his band to make arrangements in Paris for his Christmas concert, ensured his enduring fame. As his plane and body were never recovered the mystery of his death has added to the legend. Only in the last decade have military historians been able to piece together his last moments and pinpoint where the plane came down. Whilst crossing the English Channel in dense fog the plane, which relied entirely on a compass for navigation, wandered off course and entered a prohibited area reserved for returning Allied bombers to drop any left over bombs; it was one of these that hit the plane so bringing to its end the life of one Glenn Alton Miller. Anthony Mann's deliberately abrupt end to the film comes as a jolt and dramatically conveys the unexpected loss of the patriotic Miller in his prime - the touch of the Master. A film that has stood the test of time; part fact, part fiction, it will remain the definitive tribute to the man and his music. Good wholesome entertainment for the whole family and a must for Stewart and Miller fans.

Roadblock (1951)

Good example of the film noir genre.

[7/10 · 4 November 2001]

Billed as the story of an insurance investigator who goes crooked to please his femme fatale but there the similarity with "Double Indemnity" ends.

No twists or turns, no subtleties, this story is told as it is. A plain straightforward account that becomes almost predictable as the plot slowly unwinds from one situation to the next inevitable one. Nevertheless it's good yarn and well worth seeing. Better than your average B film. The outdoor footage gives a good impression of LA circa 1950. Ends with a thrilling police car chase on the LA river(?) and the villain ? ....... we'll you'll have to see it yourself.