Geronimo: An American Legend (1993) Hill - Film 334

"We're telling the story of Geronimo the fighting man, we're not putting him on a pedestal and saying he never did anything wrong. He was brutal, he did kill women and children. But he was reacting to the way his people were being treated by the U.S. government. He was a stubborn man trying to preserve a way of life." - Wes Studi

Co-stars: Wes Studi as Geronimo, Jason Patric, Gene Hackman, Robert Duvall, and Matt Damon.

Plot: The movie covers Geronimo's last uprising, 1881-1886. At the beginning of the film Geronimo (Wes Studi) is already a living legend, having turned himself in and settled on a reservation. However, when the army kills several Apaches, Geronimo decides to go on the warpath and heads for Mexico. The film covers two expeditions to apprehend Geronimo and his final surrender.

Pros: Geronimo has several things going for it. First, the acting is quite good, especially Studi and Dvuall and of course Hackman is always solid. Second, its beautifully photographed. Its full of beautiful near-desert vistas that dwarf the small groups of men fighting each other. Third, everything looks authentic. Fourth, not only is Geronimo played by a Native American, but all the Apaches are. The Apache language is used with subtitles. Finally, Hill tries to be even-handed, showing everyone as complex characters with different motivations, including Geronimo himself. There are no saints or sinners and the facts are more or less hewed to.

Cons: While evenhandedness is admirable, it makes the film less involving and dramatic. Geronimo may be a legend but he's not a hero either, and its hard to root for him. Nor are the white characters (except for Patric) particularly sympathetic. The film views all the characters from a distance, so the film often seems like a historical docudrama. And since the viewpoint is rather neutral, it was hard to get excited about the battles and the killings. Dramatically, the film probably should have focused more on the Duvall - Patric conflict and given us more sympathetic background on Geronimo.

Of course, that's the problem with filming historical figures like Western outlaws, Indian war chiefs, Vikings, etc. - if you tell the whole truth about them, nobody would root for them, so you get a fanciful retelling of their story or you just have to leave out a lot of things.

Also a minus, the battle scenes themselves were rather repetitive, bland, and surprisingly unrealistic. Far too many scenes of Apaches jumping on the backs of Cavlarymen and pulling them to the ground (try that it in real life!) or Apaches mindlessly charging the enemy firing their six-guns. Hill is no Anthony Mann. Note: I did like the pulling down of the horse and firing a rifle at a charging enemy - that's straight from history.

Finally, the pace lags at times , and Matt Damon's character really adds nothing.

Summary: An above average Western notable for its even handed portrayal of the Apache and the US Calvary. Despite the large number of battles its not a "shoot 'em up" nor is it a good vs. the bad guys. Those interested in history will probably enjoy it more than the average film fan. Rating **1/2

Added Notes:

1) Mexican Bounty on Apache Scalps: The film brings up the historical point that the Mexican Government paid money for Apache scalps. From reading some history, it seems the Mexicans didn't wish to "steal" Apache land, so their solution was to put up with Apache raids and rely on bounty hunters. The Mexican Government eventually gave the US Cavalry permission to pursue Geronimo in Mexican territory.

2) The Incredible Weirdness of the MSM Film Reviews.

After seeing the movie, I read some of the online MSM reviews. For some reason this movie brought out their liberal weirdness. Actual discussion of the MOVIE took a backseat. Instead, reviewers preferred to Gnash their teeth over the Native American "Genocide", preen about their moral superiority, and tell how they cry deep tears (Lo, the poor Indian). at the evil "the white man" (themselves excluded) who exterminated the Indians and "stole" the Indians land. They seemed upset that Geronimo tries to be even handed, when of course, all 'enlightened' (aka Liberals) people know that isn't so. One even calls Indian Reservations "Concentration Camps"! They were confused that Hill doesn't show the US Calvary as pure evil. As expected, Ebert leads the pack in this mindless un-historical nonsense. Per his review:

"Within a few days of each other, I saw "Schindler's List" and "Geronimo," and it occurred to me that both films are about Holocausts, about entire populations murdered because of their race"

Later -oblivious to the contradiction -he writes:

"Geronimo was never defeated, although he surrendered twice and finally died a natural death at 80, a prosperous Oklahoma farmer."

Danny Kaye Movies

1. The Kid From Brooklyn (1946) McLeod Remake of the 1936 Harold Lloyd movie "The Milky Way" starring Virginia Mayo and Danny Kaye. Superb technicolor and supporting cast with Kaye as a timid milkman who becomes a champion boxer. Mayo and Vera Ellen do most of the singing and dancing (thankfully). Kaye concentrates on Lloyd like slap-stick and one comic song. Summary Amazing, the first Danny Kaye movie I've liked. A silly story but enjoyable. I can understand why postwar audiences would lap this up. Rating **1/2

7. On the Riviera (1951) - Lang. A vehicle for Danny Kaye. Kaye plays a nightclub singer who impersonates a famous French aviator and ladies man. Gene Tierney and Corrine Calvert lend support. The story is rather slight, a remake of "That Night in Rio (1940)" Kaye dominates this film from start to finish, playing both male leads, singing all five songs, and making almost al the jokes. Sadly, the songs (written by Fine) are forgettable, as is the comedy.Danny Kaye as performer: Kaye was versatile - but a mediocre dancer, singer, romantic lead and comedian. His forte was tongue-twisting patter songs. I like hm better in support or as part of an ensemble cast.Pluses:Tierney and Calvert don't do much but are charming and beautiful. The technicolor and art production look fantastic. Summary For Kaye fans only - its all Danny Kaye all the time. Only 90 minutes - the five Kaye production numbers are long on perspiration - short on inspiration. Rating **

120. Court Jester (1955). In 12th Century England, Danny Kaye plays a court jester who becomes involved with a plot to kill the King. Co-stars Rathbone and Lansbury. I didn't realize how much I'm NOT a Danny Kaye fan until I saw this movie. Other than the famous "Vessel with the Pastel" bit I didn't laugh once. Further, Kaye really isn't much of a singer/ dancer and I found him bland when he wasn't mugging or over-acting. Looking at his filmography his success seems in large part due to Goldwyn putting him in high-budget technicolor pictures with attractive co-stars As for the other actors, Rathbone and all the others turn in good performances but the film's main focus is Kaye Rating **

252. Five Pennies (1959) - Kaye. Danny Kaye stars in this Biopic of Jazz Great Red Nichols. The lovely Barbara Bel Geddes co-stars along with Louis Armstrong.Not your usual Kaye movie, he plays it relatively straight and the story is downbeat at times. Kaye's not much of a dramatic actor - even Astaire is better - but he's adequate. "Five Pennies" has a lot of pluses, great technicolor photography, good songs, the Kaye-Armstrong duet, and a story that didn't bore me. A nice, enjoyable little movie. Rating **1/2

Devil's Doorway

332. Devil's Doorway (1950) Mann 85 Minutes B&W Stars: Robert Taylor, Louis Calhern. Plot: A Civil war Indian Medal-of-Honor winner returns to home and fights against prejudice and to keep his land.

Devil's Doorway was a box office and critical flop when released. Although, it had some boosters, who saw it as a civil rights movie, most saw it as a low budget movie copy cat version of "Broken Arrow" released the same year. Seeing it 70 years later,  the public in 1950 was correct in turning up its collective nose.

Devils Doorway is a low budget, badly written Western B&W western notable only for a few things: First, Robert Taylor is badly miscast as an Indian. Taylor's acting isn't bad, if you forget he's supposed to be an Indian, which the movie never does. Secondly, after establishing that Taylor is an Indian, and that the evil Luis Calhern is an "Injun hater" the movie turns into a boring talk-fest for the next 60 minutes. Taylor hooks up with a lady lawyer and there's a lot - way too much - of legalese about land grants and the homesteader act, blah blah. After boring us to death with endless legal disputes, and run-ins with a few irrational 'what are you doing here Redskin?' racists, the movie turns into a mindless shootout. The movie then indicates we're supposed to cheer on the Indians as they attack the white sheepherders and their covered wagons. Interestingly, the Indians and Robert Taylor use Dynamite, which of course wasn't invented yet. Third, The script and story are complete historical fantasy.

Summary: While you can see Mann's genius in the camera work and some of the action scenes, the script, cast, budget and thin plot simply aren't good enough to make this more than a C+ Western. Lately, many film critics have been beating the drum for it, but not every Mann film was a good one, and this is Exhibit A. Rating **

Rio Lobo (1970) Hawks

Stars: John Wayne, Jose Rivero, Jennifer O'Neill, Jack Elam & Christopher Mitchum, Sherry Lansing. 
Plot: During the CW, Confederate soldiers hijack a Gold shipment guarded by John Wayne. After the war, Wayne hooks up with Rivero and begins a search for the traitor who made the robbery possible. 
Pros: Wayne, great Scenery, Elam. 
Cons: Supporting cast, Lame script, unoriginal story.

Widely acknowledged to be the second copy of Rio Bravo, Rio Lobo was a real disappointment. There are a few good scenes of course, and Wayne is still the Duke - but this movie dragged and dragged and seemed much longer than 114 minutes. Hawks' two prior Wayne Westerns, "Rio Bravo" and "El Dorado" were also rambling, discursive movies with rather thin plots. But both were enjoyable due to better writing, a more dynamic Wayne, and - above all - better supporting casts.

Rio Lobo has one of the worst supporting casts I've ever seen. Jose Who? Jennifer what? Chris Mitchum? The women are pretty but can't act, while the male supporting actors and villains - except for Elam -are simply forgettable. It was a little unfair to expect tired, old John Wayne to carry the whole movie. Further, the action scenes were rather mediocre and the gun shots-wounds look cheesy. In the 60s Western films started showing bloody wounds to be more 'realistic' but 40 years later they just look like ketchup stains. 

Summary: Nice looking girls and scenery - otherwise a complete bore **

Eastwood Movies - Invictus, Eiger Sanction, Grand Torino, Every which way

Invictus (2009)

Stars Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon 134 minutes. 

Plot: Nelson Mandela enlists the national rugby team on a mission to racially integrate and win the 1995 Rugby World Cup. 

Freeman is very good as Mandela but he can't save the movie from being another predictable (almost cliche) feel-good sports movie about putting aside differences to win. Eastwood's direction is solid but old-fashioned. No doubt Rugby fans will enjoy the film more. Rating **

The Eiger Sanction (1975) 

Stars: Clint Eastwood and George Kennedy. 123 minutes. 

Plot: A professor who doubles as a professional assassin, is coerced out of retirement to avenge the murder of an old friend. 

A typical Eastwood action/thriller made enjoyable by the breath-taking mountain climbing/survival scenes. Not much of a story, and while the dialogue is forgettable, except for a few Eastwood one-liners - Jack Cassidy isn't. He's quite memorable in a fairly small role and reminds me of his terrific guest shots on Columbo. Summary: A typical Eastwood movie, its not Shakespeare, but its entertaining when seen on a big enough screen. Rating **1/2

Grand Torino (2008) Eastwood. Eastwood play a Korean War vet & recently widowed autoworker who learns to like the Hmong family next door. A pleasant surprise. Eastwood shines as a combination Archie Bunker and Dirty Harry. Eastwood tosses around Asian ethnic slurs and glares at his grand-daughter for her smoking and tattoo, but we know good Ol' Clint really isn't a hater, he's just a grumpy old guy with a heart of gold. The story is well done - but predictable. Eastwood defends the Hmongs against a local gang and teaches their son how be a man (Dirty Harry version). And of course there's a priest who Eastwood can insult and talk to. The Ending was needlessly violent. Summary: Except for the ending - a good Clint Eastwood movie. Rating **1/2

Every which way but Loose (1978) Eastwood Clint co-stars with his wife (Locke) and an orangutan in this blue-collar comedy about a truck driver/bare knuckle fist-fighter. An Eastwood version of Burt Reynolds’ “good ol’boy” movies. Lots of beer, country music, fighting, and a funny monkey, Clint really isn’t funny, but he’s likable and uses others to carry the comedic load. Summary: Some good elements and enjoyable for the first 20 minutes, but shallow and repetitive. A lame script. Rating *

Sam Fuller Films - Part II

320. Fixed Bayonets (1951) - Fuller. Co-stars Gene Evans and Richard Basehart B&W 92 minutes. Korean war movie. In the freezing snow of North Korea, a small US army platoon must protect the Division's retreat. The story is predictable and characters are generic but Fuller adds some realistic banter/grittiness and Evans shines as tough guy Sgt. Rock. Some memorable action scenes (the minefield and the final attack) -but the movie is hampered by a low budget and sound stage look. Rating ***

321. Steel Helmet (1951) - Fuller. Co-stars Gene Evans and Robert Hutton B&W 85 minutes. Fuller's first Korean war movie. Led by Sargent Zack (Gene Evans), several stragglers, a lost patrol, and a Korean orphan hole up in Buddhist Temple and await a Chinese attack. Costing less than $150,000 - it made him famous and led Zanuck to hire him at 20th Century Fox. Given the low budget, the film is surprisingly good, and Fuller does an excellent job through close-ups, fog, etc, in disguising the cheap sets. Fast moving with a gritty script -Evans' portrayal of Sargent Zack is the highlight. The final attack scene is a let down due to budget constraints. Fuller shows an American shooting, cuts to a Chicom shooting back, then cuts back to the American, etc. and occasionally spices in some old WW II film But overall the film is enjoyable. Rating ***

322. The Big Red One (1980) - Fuller. Co-stars Lee Marvin and Mark Hamill Reconstructed Version - 162 minutes. The Reconstructed version includes over 40 minutes cut from the original release and is digitally restored and remastered. In a series of episodes, focusing mainly on combat, the story follows 4 GI's in US rifle squad (1st US Infantry Division) led by Lee Marvin from North Africa to Czechoslovakia (VE day). Wrongly described as "Fuller's masterpiece" or a "Gritty realistic war picture", the movie is really a hodgepodge of melodrama, fantasy, realism, and variations on "Fixed Bayonets". "Big Red One" has one big positive - Lee Marvin - but otherwise suffers from several major problems, including:

• A weak, obscure, charisma free, supporting cast, Marvin is great of course, and Mark Hamil is adequate, but everyone else is bad or barely adequate. Most of them have faded into oblivion.


• Underdeveloped characters. Lets see, there's Lee Marvin, some guy who smokes Cigars, Hamill, who doesn't like Killing, an Italian guy, a blond guy who doesn't say much. Plus, a bunch of faceless replacement nobodies who get killed and a really evil Nazi Sargent, who wandered in from a DC Comic. Except for Marvin none of the characters seemed real.


• Bad special effects. The battle scenes reminded me of the TV series "Combat". People get hit, grab their stomach and fall down. The Germans speak English, and while there are few explosions here and there - its mostly like "Combat" with Americans on the right side of the screen shooting at Germans with rifles on the left hand side. The Germans always miss our 5 main characters, but the Americans always hit.


• Low budget. It looks like an over-lighted TV movie. Omaha Beach has 20 guys and 1 ship. Fuller uses the same 3 Tanks, sometimes as Shermans other times as Panzers. No scene has more than 20 people in it. Usually its just Marvin, the 4 main GI's, and a couple Germans or civilians. .


• Lack of Realism. Filmed mostly in Israel, many European scenes look phony. The Omaha beach scene, for example, was filmed on a hot, sunny, Israeli beach. We rarely see an officer, or anyone from any other outfit and Mortars, machine guns, Trucks and jeeps don't seem to exist. Incredibly, Marvin and the 4 main characters get through 2 1/2 years of combat with nothing more than flesh wounds.


• Badly done fantasy - an attack on an insane asylum, a mother giving birth in a tank, a German soldier hiding in Gas Chamber, the French Calvary riding to the rescue, a German infiltrator eating lunch with the rifle squad.

Finally, critics claim the movie is based on Fuller's personal WW II experiences but that seems doubtful. Based on Fuller's autobiography "The Third Face" he wasn't in a rifle squad after North Africa. He was assigned to the Regimental HQ Company as a writer/clerk. and was close to Col. Taylor, the Regimental Commander.

And Fuller comes off as a bit of BS artist. He claims to have talked to Hitchcock - as a US Corporal - in London in '44. He claims John Wayne begged him twice to play the lead in Big Red one - but Fuller turned him down. He claims he told off Adolph Menjou in front of Douglas MacArthur. He claims he was big pals with famous WW II Photographer Robert Capra. He claims the Regimental commander begged him to be the Regimental historian with a commission to go anywhere and see anything, but Corporal Fuller turned him down.

I've never read a critical analysis of Fuller's book, but I think the guy stretched the truth a little. It should be noted Mailer claimed all his life to a US Infantry vet, but was just a cook. And Hellman's memoirs were full of made up stories.Rating **

Sam Fuller Films

314. Shock Corridor (1963) - Fuller. Co-stars Peter Breck and Constance Towers. B&W 101 minutes. A Pulitzer prize winning reporter has himself committed to a mental institution in order to solve a murder. The movie has the usual Fuller energy and drive along with a few inspired interesting scenes. But the acting is bad, the production values low, and the story exploitative when its not unintentionally funny. Why Criterion is putting this stuff out when so many better movies are unreleased is a mystery.Rating *

315. House of Bamboo (1955) - Fuller. Co-stars Robert Stack and Robert Ryan 102 minutes. A remake of "Street with no Name" filmed on location in Japan. An ex-serviceman (Stack) who infiltrates a gang of ex-GI's headed by Robert Ryan. Pros:Beautiful wide-screen photography of 1950s Japan, Robert Ryan, Shirley Yamaguchi. Cons: Story drags at time, Robert Stack is boring. One of the first US films shot in Japan, the movie was a success. Summary: A Routine Film-noir story made enjoyable by the 50s Japanese setting/photography and Robert Ryan. Rating **1/2

316. The Crimson Kimono (1958) Fuller. Stars Steven Shigata. B&W 85 minutes. Low budget B movie about a pair of detectives investigating a strippers death in Japan-town Los Angeles. The movie is has three positives: Shigata is good as the Japanese-American detective, the movie some interesting shots of the Japanese section of LA circa 1959 and there are a few good action scenes. But that's about it. The soundtrack is awful, the script is bad, the story routine, and the acting ranges from amateurish to barely adequate. Summary: Were it not for Fuller's name and Japanese American angle this movie would be completely forgotten. Rating **

317. White Dog (1982) Fuller. The story: a white German Shepard has been trained to attack - and kill - black people. Kristy McNichols, Burl Ives and Paul Winfeld try to reprogram him. One of the dumbest movie I've ever seen. Boring, predictable, and without any intentional humor. Oh, and filmed with all the passion and budget of a bad TV movie-of-the-week. What's worse the direction, the story, the human acting or the dialogue? I can't say - its all bad. Of course idiots will see all kinds of hidden powerful statements about RACISM. He's a WHITE dog who hates BLACK People. Wow, subtle. No doubt some University professor has already written a 50 page article called "White Dog: Symbolism, Racism, and films of the Sam Fuller" I will however give the Dogs credit. What acting! Whining on cue, snarling on cue, even chasing rabbits on cue! And all for a bowl of dog food and a pet. Always believable and without any babbling about "the method." The dogs gets four wags of my tail - the movie one. Rating *

318. Underworld USA (1961) - Fuller. Co-stars Clift Robertson and Deloras Dorn. B&W 98 minutes. A young hood (Robertson) joins the mob to seek revenge against 4 gangsters who killed his father. Really nothing more than an expanded TV "Untouchables" episode less Winchell and Stack. The production values and sets look the same. The story has a certain amount of energy and narrative drive, but its routine, and the Fuller dialogue ranges from corny or flat to adequate. However, there is no chemistry between Dorn and Robertson. The supporting actors are barely adequate except for Richard Rust as the dapper, sunglassed hit man and Richard Emhardt. Summary: The only reason to watch the movie - aside a few good action scenes - is Robertson who's quite good as the revenge obsessed hood. Rating ** 1/2

318. Naked Kiss (1964) - Fuller. Stars Constance Towers. A former prostitute moves to a small town seeking peace but finds perverse secrets instead. B&W 98 minutes. There are a few good scenes and Constance Towers is excellent in the lead role, but "Naked Kiss" has the usual Fuller film flaws. Most of the acting is bad, the soundtrack is awful...etc. see my review of "Shock Corridor." Some good scenes: Towers seduced while the Venice home movie plays, the revel of the dark secret, the creepy kids song. Too bad the rest is a 2nd rate Peyton Place and the often praised opening scene struck me as absurd as a bald, 110 lbs Towers with stick arms beats up her 165 lbs Pimp with a shoe. Summary: Just more evidence that Fuller should have stuck with direction and hired a good script writer and a good editor. Rating **

The Bravados (1957)

Co-stars Gregory Peck and Joan Collins. 101 minutes. 
Plot: Gregory Pecks hunts 4 men who he thinks killed his wife. 

The movie has some positives, great location photography, a gritty Greg Peck, Henry De Silva, and an interesting plot and ending. Negatives include some gaping plot holes and Joan Collins, who looks great but can't act. An above average, if somber, Western. Rating **1/2 

Blood Alley (1955) and Boomerang (1947)

Blood Alley (1955) - Wellman. Co-stars John Wayne and Lauren Bacall. 115 minutes. John Wayne captains a boat full of Chinese refugees and a Doctors daughter 300 miles to freedom in Hong Kong. The Red Chinese are in pursuit. Originally slated for Mitchum, Wayne replaced Mitchum after he slugged Wellman during pre-production. "Blood Alley" has a few good action scenes but the rest of the movie is routine, including the acting. A lack of authenticity hurts the film. The Chinese are whites in makeup, China is actually Northern California. Summary: A lackluster John Wayne Movie. Rating **

Boomerang (1947) - Kazan. Co-stars Dana Andrews, Jane Wyman and Lee J. Cobb. B&W 88 minutes. Crime drama based on a true story. After a priest is killed the heat is on to catch of the killer. A suspect is arrested and a confession obtained. But the DA (Andrews) only wants to convict if its right to do so. Kazan has some interesting camera angles and Andrews does an excellent job in the lead role but overall I found the movie tedious. Cobb’s johnny-one-note performance didn’t help. Summary: Outside of some good acting by Andrews, I found the movie routine and forgettable. Rating **

Rock Hudson Films Part II

296. Pillow Talk (1959) Gordon - Rating ***1/2 Co-stars Doris Day and Rock Hudson 102 Minutes. The perfect romantic comedy. Hudson is a philandering song writer “Brad Allen” who shares a party line with interior decorator, Doris Day. He dislikes her until - by chance - he sees her at a nightclub, and decides to turn into “Rex Stetson” in an attempt to bed her. Tony Randall and Thelma Ritter lend excellent support. And Day has a couple good songs. A great script, very funny and perfectly cast. Whoever decided to pair Day and Hudson should have received a medal.

297. Lover Come Back (1961) Mann - Rating *** Co-stars Doris Day and Rock Hudson 107 minutes. In this follow-up (rip-off) of “Pillow Talk” Day and Hudson are battling advertising execs, she’s hardworking and ethical, he’s a hard-drinking Lothario, who steals her clients. Hudson impersonates a scientist in this one. Tony Randall returns as a neurotic rich guy. A cut below “Pillow Talk” its still pretty funny. The script isn’t as good but Day, Hudson and Randall are.

298. Send Me no Flowers (1964) Jewison - Rating **1/2 Co-stars Doris Day and Rock Hudson 100 Minutes. Hudson is a hypochondriac who thinks he's dying and makes plans for Day which she discovers and misunderstands and decides is an excuse for an affair. Randall shows up, again, as Rock’s best friend. However, best supporting supporting actor honors go to Paul Lynde as a Funeral director who loves his job. The last and least of the Hudson-Day comedies. The script lacks wit and the story is too much like a TV sit-com. The actors are as good as ever but they need good lines.

299. A Farewell To Arms (1957) Vidor - Rating **1/2 Co-stars Jennifer Jones and Rock Hudson 152 Minutes. Based on the Hemingway novel, in WW I Italy, an American Ambulance driver falls in love with a British nurse. The movie looks beautiful (Italian Alps) and is well photographed but never seems to come alive. The pace is too slow, the script mediocre, and neither Jones nor Hudson provide the needed intensity. Hudson, in particular seems bland. But the supporting actors are good, especially De Sica and the war scenes are well done. A troubled, expensive, production, Houston was replaced by Vidor and Selznick micromanaged the film with indifferent results. Like most Hemingway, the novel is much better than the film.

300. Tobruk (1967) Hiller - Rating **1/2 Co-stars George Peppard and Rock Hudson 107 Minutes. British Commandos commanded by "Canadian" Hudson with German Jews (Peppard) in support, disguise themselves as Germans and try to destroy Rommel's fuel supplies at Tobruk. An above- average behind enemy lines-on-a-mission movie ala the "Guns of Navorone", "Dirty Dozen", etc. We get the standard conflicts within the group, the possibility of a traitor, obstacles to be overcome along with the usual "is it all worth it?" philosophizing. Peppard, for some reason, was always good at playing Germans and he does a good job here. Hudson is adequate, playing the calm leader trying to accomplish the mission. The supporting cast is full of familiar British character actors doing their usual bits. The special effects and battle are quite well done. Had the script been better, the characters more complex, and the story less predictable, I'd rate it higher.

Come September & Man's Favorite Sport

290. Man's Favorite Sport (1964) - Hawks. Rating **1/2 Co-stars Rock Hudson and Paula Prentiss 120 minutes. A variation and updating of "Bringing up Baby" with Hudson filling in for Cary Grant (who turned down the role). Rock's an expert sports fisherman whose never been fishing or camping. When Prentiss and her girlfriend (played by sexy Maria Perschy) find out - they help him keep his secret and his job. This is a low-key, somewhat plot less, studio bound, uneven comedy with lots of slapstick and some funny dialogue. Highlights: a bear on a motorcycle, John Screaming Eagle, and the ever delightful John McGiver. Sadly, Prentiss has better chemistry with Pershcy than with Hudson, and Hudson himself seems slightly miscast, he's simply too All-American to play either an urbane outdoors klutz or be full of outraged dignity (Something Eddie Albert did so well on Green Acres). And why he's so hostile towards Prentiss is a bit of a mystery.

294. Come September (1961) - Mulligan. Rating **1/2 Co-stars Rock Hudson and Gina Lollobrigida . 104 minutes. A wealthy American businessman arrives unexpectedly and finds his Italian mansion turned into a hotel for teenage tourists. Gina is his beautiful manipulative girlfriend - Sandra Dee and Bobby Darin are hotel guests. The story is fun but slight, the humor unsophisticated, the pace leisurely. Lollobrigida and Hudson are excellent together. Highlights: the Italian scenery and sexy Lollobrigida.

Rock Hudson Films

282. Ice Station Zebra (1968) - Sturges Co-stars Rock Hudson, Patrick McGoohan and Ernest Borgnine. 148 minutes. Based on the novel by Alistair McLean. The U.S.S. SSBN Tigerfish (Captain Rock Hudson) goes to rescue scientists at an Arctic research/weather station (Ice Station Zebra) and to retrieve a Super-secret Satellite camera. Passengers include a British Spy (McGoohan), Russian defector (Ernest Borgnine), and a US Marine captain (Jim Brown). Someones a double agent, but who?

Pros: Acting, except for Borgnine's Russian accent. Authentic looking sub, some good, realistic action including the sub almost sinking, and some good verbal jousting between McGoohan and Hudson and Hudson and Russian colonel Alf Kjellin.

Cons: Too long (2 hours 20 minutes) given the lack of characterization and thin plot. Padded scenes and sluggish pace. It takes 90 minutes to arrive at Ice Station Zebra, partly due to endless shots of the Sub going slowly - very slowly - through the water. Overall, not much action - and - the last 30 minutes is filmed on a sound stage with plastic snow drifts. Added: Like the ones they used on the original Star Trek, yep, its that bad.

While the movie is often labeled "Big Budget" its puzzling where MGM's money went, because it not there on the screen. It didn't go to the actors - Hudson is the only star. It didn't go to location shooting, since the whole movie is shot on various sound stages. Maybe the special effects and Submarine sets cost a lot more in real dollars money than today. Summary: Very enjoyable in parts but the script and lack of action drag it down. Rating **1/2

283. Something of Value (1957) - Brooks. Co-stars Rock Hudson and Sidney Poitier. B&W 114 minutes. Based on the best selling Ruark's novel about the Mau-Mau uprising in Kenya. Hudson and Poitier are childhood friends. Later, Poitier is treated unjustly and joins the Mau Mau's in opposition to landowner Hudson. A low budget B&W movie, shot in Hollywood with some African footage spliced in. The acting is standard Hollywood American and Poitier isn't convincing as an African. Rock Hudson is bland as a White Kenyan.Summary: A missed opportunity. Two good action scenes but overall a very forgettable adaptation of a very good novel. Rating ** 

284. Written on the Wind (1956) - Sirk. Co-stars Rock Hudson, Lauren Bacall, Dorothy Malone and Richard Stack 99 minutes. A lush melodrama that's considered Sirk's best after "Imitation of Life". Soap Opera about a rich Texas Oil magnate brought down by his spoiled, debauched offspring (Malone, Stack). Hudson and Bacall are Stack's level headed friend and long-suffering wife. Summary: Seen as a favor to Mrs.RC - this wasn't as bad as I expected. Sirk is an excellent director and the acting (except for wooden Bacall) is good and the technicolor photography excellent. A good movie of its kind. Rating **1/2

285. Magnificent Obsession (1954) - Sirk. Co-stars Rock Hudson and Jane Wyman. 108 minutes. Another lush Sirk Melodrama that's remained popular. A Doctor's widow and a rich playboy become linked after the Husbands death and go through trials and tribulations. Some good location shots of California in the 50s. Summary: Like "Written on the Wind" the movie surprised me. It was quite watchable although my attention wandered in the middle. Hudson and Jane Wyman do an excellent job and photography and set design is good.Rating **1/2

286. Darling Lille (1970) - Edwards. Co-stars Rock Hudson and Julie Andrews. 107 minutes. A musical extravaganza set during WW I. Andrews in a German spy/nightclub singer, Hudson a WWI flying ace. A truly awful film. Some great WW I dogfight scenes but that's it. And except for Hudson's action scenes, it all Julie Andrews all the time. Sadly, she no chemistry with Hudson and isn't sexy, funny, or interesting. Her songs are bland and mediocre. The story is a mess - leading an MGM exec to remark - "we got 24 million dollars of footage and no movie". Rating *

287. Seconds (1966) - Frankenheimer. Co-stars Rock Hudson and John Randolph. B&W 100 minutes. A secret organization offers wealthy people a second chance at life; their death is staged and using plastic surgery are given new lives. But things don't always go as planned... Now considered a cult classic, this was Hudson's first film after he left Universal and a box-office bomb. (It appears that - in 1966- Rock Hudson fans didn't want to see a SF movie like "Seconds" while SF fans didn't want to see a 'Rock Hudson film'). Both Randolph and Hudson are excellent as the "Before" and "After" - Hudson in particular is quite impressive in the last part of the movie, quite a change from his usual bland exterior. There are some great individual scenes, the ending, the discussion between Hudson and his widow, pretty much every scene in "The Company" - but the movie as a whole doesn't jell. I never really cared that much of the main character because he was presented more as a stereotype (tired middle-aged banker tired of the rat-race) than as an interesting character. But the direction and camera work are flashy and superb.Summary: I enjoyed the movie but its somewhat overpraised - for good or bad it plays like a very good, extended Twilight Zone episode. My opinion was lowered the second time round. Once the surprises are known, the films bleak, superficial philosophy becomes obvious. But still enjoyable on many levels. Rating ***

288. All That Heaven Allows (1955) - Sirk. Co-stars Rock Hudson and Jane Wyman. 108 minutes. A Sirk Melodrama that followed their popular "Magnificent Obsession". In this one, Wyman is a wealthy small town New England widow in love with Landscaper Rock Hudson. Naturally, all the town and Wyman's two kids are aghast that she would marry a mere Gardener, who reads Thoreau and lives in an old mill. But love triumphs over all. My least favorite of the 3 Hudson-Sirk's. The acting, set design, and direction are excellent but it was difficult to really care or believe that Hudson's character would fall for a middle-aged Jane Wyman. Plus the movie really stacks the deck. Hudson not only is young, handsome, and reads Thoreau; he's self-confident, wise, and romantic, -AND - he can wear a tuxedo and can hold his own at any high-society cocktail party. That's some Gardener!

Haynes did a remake in 2002 with a black Gardener and Gay husband - Sorry Mrs. RC I ain't watchin' that one ! Summary: Universal tried to keep the magic going with this follow-on to "Magnificent Obsession" but failed. A high class soap opera.Rating **

289. Imitation of Life (1958) - Sirk. Co-stars Lana Turner and Juanita Moore. 125 minutes. Melodrama about two widows (one white, one black) and their two daughters. A remake of the 1934 movie and a big hit in 1959. Imitation of Life is a good movie of its kind. The direction, set design, and acting is very good - the story isn't. The movie is about RACE in 1959 so its somewhat self-importance and full of symbolism. Sirk isn't a Kramer, thank goodness - its fairly subtle, but IOL's combination of Race story and Soap Opera just didn't interest me. Plus the only real star in the film is Turner.Rating ** 1/2

Brute Force (1947)

Plot: At a tough penitentiary, a prisoner (Lancaster) rebels against a power-mad chief guard (Hume Cronyn)
Stars: Burt Lancaster and Hume Cronyn, Charles Bickford
Best Quote:  You talk to the prisoners over a loudspeaker. I talk to them with a club. You only MAKE the rules. I have to enforce them.

Dassin was a great director and there are some stunning shots and action scenes. The problem are the unbelievable characters and the lack of a believable plot. Cronyn's so evil, you wonder if he worked before in Stalin's Gulag while the prisoners are so good they should be working for UNICEF instead of being in prison. Since Dassin was a communist, maybe the prisoners symbolized "the workers" while guards/Cronyn are the "Bourgeois" Summary: A good prison movie let down by some unbelievable characters and an over-the-top story.Rating **1/2

Lancaster Films

272. Elmer Gantry (1960) - Brooks. Co-stars Burt Lancaster and Jean Simmons.
Plot: A 1920s con-man/salesman (Lancaster) joins an traveling revivalist show and falls in love with lay preacher Sister Sharon (Jean Simmons)

One of those well-acted and well-directed (for the most part) films that bore me silly. Yes, Simmons is delightful and Lancaster is a perfect fit for the role, but I just didn't care about 1920s evangelicals or Elmer Gantry. Brooks and Lancaster wanted a veiled attack on religion that did good box office - so the Novel's satirical attack on Christianity is softened and Gantry is made more likable. But they still couldn't make Gantry interesting. Note: I didn't like the book either - a tedious Sinclair Lewis 'satire', with the last 100 pages so bad, Mencken thought Lewis wrote it while drunk. Summary A movie for Burt Lancaster fans or those interested in 1920s evangelicals, everyone else will be bored Rating **1/2

273. His Majesty O'Keefe (1954) - Haskin. Co-stars Burt Lancaster and Joan Rice. Set in 19th Century Fiji, an adventurous Sea Captain becomes the King of a South Seas Isle. O'Keefe has an unremarkable story, a 2nd rate supporting cast, and mediocre script but it sill manages to be enjoyable due to the beautiful location shots of Fiji and the use of real Fijians in the cast. Further, Lancaster shows off athletic ability and there are several excellent fight/action scenes. Summary: Enjoyable for the local color and Lancaster, but forgettable. Rating **1/2

274. The Kentuckian (1955) - Lancaster. Co-stars Burt Lancaster and Walter Matthau. Often labeled a western its really a family drama set in 1820s Kentucky. Its enjoyable with some excellent action scenes, but nothing special. Matthau shines as the villain with a bullwhip. Rating **1/2

276. The Flame and the Arrow (1950) - Tourneur. Co-stars Lancaster and Virginia Mayo.
Plot: Dardo (Lancaster) is a Robin Hood-like figure in Medieval Lombardy who conducts an insurgency against their Hessian conquerors.

A delightful tongue-in-cheek spoof of Robin Hood and the Medieval swashbucklers. Lancaster's former circus partner Nick Cavato shows up and they engage in some great stunts. Summary: Not as good as The Crimson Pirate and it drags in spots, but Mayo and the technicolor are beautiful, and its an enjoyable romp Rating ***

278. The Crimson Pirate (1952) "Ask no questions, and believe only what you see...No, believe only half of what you see." So says swashbuckler Lancaster at the start. Shot on technicolor in Italy, Crimson Pirate was the last of Lancaster's tongue-in-cheek adventure spoofs and the best. Full of energy and comedy but you need to see a few Errol Flynn movies to appreciate some of the gags. Lancaster and his partner Cavato perform some excellent acrobatics. The plot is silly but the supporting characters are well-cast and move the plot from A to B. Rating ***

Tarus Bulba and The Defiant Ones

268. Taras Bulba (1962) - Thompson. Co-stars Tony Curtis and Yul Brynner. 121 minutes. Set in 16th Ukraine, Brynner is a Cossack Chieftain determined to regain his lands from the Poles. Tony Curtis plays his son in love with a Polish Girl. Historically inaccurate to say the least, Taras has two things going for it. First, lots of action - Calvary horses sweeping over the Steppe (actually Argentina) and Cossacks fighting and having wild parties. Second, Yul Brynner who dominates every scene and made me kinda sorta believe he was a Cossack. But there's also a long, tedious Curtis-Kauffman love affair and a so-so script. Curtis is miscast but adequate. Summary: An enjoyable, if mindless, action movie. Must be seen on a big screen TV. Rating **1/2

269. The Defiant Ones (1958) Kramer Co-stars Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier . B&W 96 minutes. Two convicts - one a white racist, one black - escape from a Southern Chain-gang. Chained together, they must cooperate or be captured. Nominated for nine Oscars and not really deserving any of them. "The Defiant Ones" is basically a propaganda film - a good propaganda film, in a good cause - but still a propaganda film. Drama and character development, not mention believability, all take a backseat to Kramer's beating the anti-racism drum & it sometimes gets annoying. Pros: The two leads do well. While Curtis' Southern accent comes and goes, he's credible as the bigoted Southern Con who learns to respect his Black partner. Poitier, by far the better actor, is hampered by the requirement to play a Symbol: the good, intelligent black man angry at the racism that put him in prison. Despite endless provocation, he's still more patient, decent and gentle than anyone else. The photography won an Oscar and its quite good. Cons Besides the often silly story, unbelievable plot twists, and average direction, the supporting characters are paper thin. Israeli character actor Theodore Bickel is miscast as a humanistic Sheriff (where was Rod Steiger?), and the movie suffers from the usual angry Southern Stereotypes running around forming lynch mobs and making nasty racial cracks. Actress Cara Williams does what she can as the "evil" poor white who tries to drive a wedge between our two heroes. Usually Hollywood sympathizes with poor, lonely widows with small children, but she's a racist and therefore up to no good. Summary: Not bad if you lower your expectations, it won the Oscars for politics not excellence. Younger viewers may find the anti-racism message boring and the ethnic slurs shocking Rating **1/2

Kirk Douglas Westerns 1960s

Douglas as 60s Western film star: Looking at his 60s films, I think Douglas saw his weakness as a straight cowboy lead - and cast himself in different type roles and quasi-Westerns. "There was a Crooked Man" is really a prison movie, "Lonely are the Brave" is a modern individual vs. the system movie, "War Wagon" is a comedy/caper film set in the West, and "Man from Snowy River" is a growing up story set in Australia. The "Way West" is probably the closest to a straight western. Further, only in "Lonely are the Brave"is Douglas the hero. In "War Wagon" and "Crooked Man" he's amoral and out for himself, in "Way west" he's the egotistical elitist Senator who rides in a carriage, and in "Snowy River" he's the comic relief and the stern businessman.

261. The Way West (1967) - McLaglen. Co-stars Richard Widmark and Robert Mitchum. 122 minutes. Senator William J. Tadlock (Douglas) leads a group of settlers overland in a quest to start a new settlement in the Western US. One of those sprawling, epic, big screen 1960s movies ala "How the West was Won" or "Cheyenne Autumn". Probably the best thing about "Way West" is the scenery and the technicolor photography. The worst thing is a mediocre script full of soap-opera subplots, cliches, and vulgarity. Douglas is wasted playing, "Senator Tadlock" who leads the Wagon train in a carriage, snarls a lot, goes after Widmark's wife, and likes to be whipped. Mitchum and Widmorelooked bored throughout. The direction is ponderous. Note: While filming,Widmark and Douglas fought like wildcats. Widmark resented Douglas' attempts to co-direct the film. Mitchum just went fishing. Summary: Bearable only when seen on a big screen with lots of beer on hand and low expectations.Rating *


263. There Was a Crooked Man. (1970) Mankiewitz. Co-stars Henry Fonda. 126 minutes. Killer Pitman (Douglas) is sent to Arizona territorial prison and begins to manipulate everyone - including idealistic Warden Fonda - to achieve his goal: escape and retrieve his $ 500,000 in loot. More a prison comedy-drama than a Western. Probably 90 percent of the movie is set inside the prison and its quite cynical and full of dry/black humor. Cons: The movie awkwardly lurches between violence, drama, and comedy. Pros: A good script and the pace doesn't flag. Douglas is in his element here as the intelligent, amoral, anti-hero, alternately evil and charming. Fonda does equally well as the seemingly upright, idealistic warden. Hume Cronyn, John Randolph, Warren Oates, lend excellent support. Rating ***

264. The Man from Snowy River (1982) Miller. 104 minutes. An "Australasian Western", Snowy River is a young-man growing of age picture set in the high country of Australia. The leading man, Tom Burlinson is likable and well cast. Douglas was almost 70 during filming and he has a dual supporting role, playing Spur, the good-natured, peg-legged prospector, and his twin brother Harrison who's forceful, wealthy, and mannered. His Spur's a little over-the-top An entertaining film with an excellent lead and some beautiful Australasian scenery. The story is somewhat predictable. Rating **1/2

265. Lonely Are the Brave (1962) - Miller. Written by Dalton Trumbo. Co-stars Walther Matthau. B&W 107 minutes. Based on the Edward Abbey novel about an individualistic cowboy who's out-of-sync with modern society. He gets himself arrested to visit his brother in jail, then escapes and heads for Mexico. Douglas plays the man- on-the run cowboy with great sensitivity. Matthau is the wisecracking Sheriff in pursuit. Through much of the film, its just Douglas, his horse, and the New Mexico scenery. The movie is very enjoyable and kept my interest. Matthau is funny but completely unbelievable as a New Mexico Sheriff. Flaws: Contrived ending, Pointless scenes with Archie Bunker and a truck full of toilets, overly-obvious symbolism. The stupidity of Douglas' character. The guy deliberately gets arrested, escapes after one night, shoots down a Helicopter, assaults policeman and prison guards, and ends up being killed in an auto accident - all because he wanted to visit his brother.Summary: A great 70 minute movie expanded to 107 minutes. But still enjoyable. Rating ***

Kirk Douglas Westerns 1950s

Kirk Douglas As 50s Western Star: Based on what I've seen, I'd say Kirk was a GOOD western star but not a great one. The same international quality that allowed him to play a Viking and Spartacus hurt him in playing the Cowboy. Like Lancaster - and unlike Stewart, Cooper, or Wayne - he lacked that homegrown Western quality. He also lacked the easy-going charm (ala Stewart/Cooper) that can make up for a mediocre script. Douglas could be playful/charming (see his banjo singing in "Man Without a Star") but he has to work at it, and he really isn't cut out to be the strong, silent type. But he was still pretty good, and usually the best thing in his Western movies. I didn't really like his 50s Westerns that much - but the fault is more with the scripts and supporting casting then in Douglas. He's really the only reason to see most of them.

254. The Big Sky (1952) Hawks Co-stars Dewey Martin and Arthur Hunnicut. B&W 140 minutes. Rambling almost plot-less tale of a couple of mountain men circa 1840 heading down the Missouri for profit and adventure. Based on the Guthrie best-seller. A little too long at 140 minutes. A Box office and critical disappointment, Hawks later identified three reasons why: it should have been in color, the pace was too slow, and the leading parts were miscast. Hawks considered it a buddy picture and regretted his preferred choices Wayne/Mitchum or Heston/Brando were unavailable. So, Hawks had to settle for Douglas/Martin. (Note: Martin was cast for his low salary of $5,000). Douglas has some good moments, but its a buddy picture and male camaraderie isn't Kirk's strong suit. Summary Has some excellent scenes - and Hunnicut is a delight -but "Big Sky" lacks action and narrative drive. A definite cut below "Red River" and "Rio Bravo". Rating **1/2

255. Man Without a Star (1955) - Vidor. Co-stars Jeanne Crain and Claire Trevor. 89 minutes. Douglas is a happy-go-lucky cowboy who ends up working for a Greedy Lady rancher from the East. The movie starts out strong - but soon turns into a Soap Opera & a conventional Cattle Baron vs. small rancher conflict. The supporting cast is good, Crain is very attractive and gunslinger Richard Boone adds some menace. Entertaining but forgettable. Rating **1/2

256. Indian Fighter (1955) - De Toth. Co-stars Walter Matthau and Elsa Martinelli The first movie Douglas produced. Douglas plays a scout leading a wagon train though Indian territory. He's called the "Indian Fighter" but he only fights in self-defense and romances an Indian maid. Some excellent technicolor photography and Kirk has some good action scenes. The main problem is the average script and the absurd casting. The Indian maiden is played by an Italian actress, the Sioux Warchief is played by Jewish Character actor Ed Franz, and the villains are Lon Chaney and Walter Matthau! Chaney seems to think he's still in "Of Mice and Men", while Matthau acts like he just wandered over from a New York Deli across the street. Summary: Average - but enjoyable at times - if you can stop giggling at the New York and Italian accents. Rating**

257. Gunfight at the OK Corral (1957) Sturges Co-stars Lancaster and Rhonda Fleming. 122 minutes. Produced by Hal Wallis with script by Leon Uris. I thought Gunfight was an average western and I'm surprised it was Box office smash in 1955. Yes, there are some good action scenes, Douglas is excellent as the bitter, dying, Doc Holiday and Fleming is very beautiful. But the movie looks stage-bound and inauthentic and Lancaster is so stern and upright he's almost robotic. Other problems include an annoying theme song (a sort of High Noon ripoff) and and a mechanical, unremarkable script. The Clayton's only show up near the end and before that the movie goes through a predictable cycle of Shootout, 10 minutes talk talk, shootout, rinse and repeat. I also missed the great Western character actors. Summary: OK - if you're in the right mood. Rating **1/2

258. Last Train from Gun Hill (1959) Sturges. Co-stars Carolyn Jones and Anthony Quinn. 95 minutes. A Sheriff brings the son of an old friend to justice for the murder of his Indian wife. While labeled a Western, Last Train seems to be set near the turn of the century, since we see telephones and a campaign poster for TR. This was my least favorite Douglas' Western. The wife's rape/murder scene was sleazy, Quinn was miscast as a Western Rancher, and the last part feels like a bad rip-off of 3:10 to Yuma. Its also talky, had an unbelievable ending and stars my least favorite character actor - Earl Holliman. Oh, and most of its shot on a Hollywood set. Yep, I didn't like it. Rating *

259. The Last Sunset (1961) Aldrich. Script by Dalton Trumbo and co-starring Rock Hudson and Dorothy Malone. 112 minutes. Douglas is the bad guy in this one. Sheriff Hudson tracks Douglas down in Mexico for the murder of his brother-in-law . They meet Douglas' old flame (Malone) and decide to join a cattle drive back to Texas. Part western, part Douglas Sirk romance. As usual, Douglas is fine as the villain or anti-hero. And Hudson, as usual, seems uncomfortable playing the action/western "hero". Summary: Another Douglas western that seems unauthentic and talky. Crowther says it best: "It is all exceedingly conventional... Even the rock-studded scenery and the color look depressingly familiar and dull. The trouble simply is that Dalton Trumbo's unoriginal script is utterly lacking distinction and Robert Aldrich's direction is flat and slow. The actors all go through their assignments as if they were weary and bored. We don't wonder. After only one hour's exposure to them, we were quite weary and bored, too." Rating **

260. Along the Great Divide (1951) Walsh Co-stars Virgina Mayo and Walter Brennan. B&W 88 minutes. Douglas is a Marshal tasked with escorting a murder suspect (Brennan) to justice while being opposed by a lynch-minded rancher. The movie starts out well, but we lost interest after 15 minutes due to the slow pace and mediocre script. Some good location shots, and Douglas does OK in his first Western outing -but Mayo and Brennan are wasted. Rating **

Midnight (1939) and My Dinner with Andre (1982)

250. Midnight (1939) Liesen Comedy starring Colbert as a penniless French showgirl who impersonates a Countess. Co-stars Don Ameche and John Barrymore. A charming and winning screwball comedy. Barrymore reins it in and Colbert never looked better. The pace never flags thanks to a great script by Wilder & Brackett. Rating ***

251. My Dinner with Andre (1982) Malle. An unusual film that consists of two men, William Shawn and Andre Gregory talking over dinner. Its a two hour talk fest, full of dime store philosophy, but its well written and held my interest. Gregory is a born storyteller and Shawn is funny & an excellent counter-puncher. It starts slow but becomes more interesting in the last 45 minutes. Summary: Enjoyable if you're in the right mood. Rating **1/2

Ox-bow incident (1943)

Story:  In the old West, an innocent man is hanged by a lynch mob
Stars:  Henry Fonda,  Dana Andrews
Pros: Acting, 75 minute run time, Script
Cons:  Stage bound, Predictability, Another Mob Justice Sermon

Theodore Roosevelt on Lynching in 1886
The regulators of backwoods society corresponded exactly to the vigilantes of the western border to-day. In many of the cases of lynch law which have come to my knowledge the effect has been healthy for the community; but sometimes great injustice is done. Generally, the vigilantes, by a series of summary executions, do really good work; but I have rarely known them fail, among the men whom they killed for good reason, to also kill one or two either by mistake or to gratify private malice. 

Background
Henry Fonda made Ox-Bow Incident just before he joined the Navy in August 1942. A Box-office flop, it was based on the Walter Van Tilburg Clark novel of the same name. Considered "Brave" and "Daring" at the time - it was a not so subtle attack on Southern lynchings. Of course, by 1943 lynching had pretty much died out - even in the South. There were only 30 Lynchings in the USA from 1940-1949 compared to 1,500 during the 1890s. Zanuck thought Ox-Bow would have little box office appeal, so the budget was limited. Result?  Wellman had to shoot the picture in B&W on the Fox back lot and sound-stages.

The Good
The best thing in Ox-Bow is the acting. Dana Andrews wins the honors as the man to be hanged, while the other actors fit their roles like a glove. While Fonda is the main character for the first 20 minutes and the last 5, in-between he fads into the background & lets the ensemble cast take over.

The script was so tight and well written it made me forgot (mostly) the lack of action and phony exteriors. There's an amazing amount of group dialogue, which only works with good supporting actors and great dialogue.

The Bad
The picture is set-bound and lacks the action of a typical Western, it also has lots of static shots with dark, artificially-painted and phony exteriors serving as backdrops.

But my main problem with Ox-Bow is its predictability and the tired sermon on mob justice. The "Mob of Hot-heads want to lynch an innocent man" plot has been copied and replayed ad nauseam for the last 65 years. Every Western TV show had an episode(s) where the hero, Lucas McCain, Hoss, Richard Boone, Steve McQueen, Barbara Stanwyck, etc. stands up to a lynch mob and saves an innocent man. Even Sci-Fi TV shows and dramas had the same plot (Cf: Twilight Zone "Monsters Due on Maple Street"). Further, variations on the same theme are found in movies like "Hang 'em High", "Fury". "Young Mr. Lincoln" and "To kill a Mockingbird".

So the comments about how "bold". "brave" and "important" this movie is are rather puzzling. We've seen movies with the same theme for 65 years. The only way to make a brave/bold movie about lynching would be to make one that supports it.  How refreshing it would be to see a movie where the lynch mob is actually right.

Further, the movie would have been more suspenseful and interesting if the lynch mob had not been so hot-headed and irrationally bent on hanging or if Andrews innocence had not been made so obvious.

Brando 1950-1953

The Men (1950)

Why Brando Took the Role
His First Hollywood movie, Brando had finished Streetcar on Broadway and liked the idea of a socially relevant movie the focused on the plight of disabled vets. Also to his liking were Kramer's terms - $40,000 for one picture with no options.

Brando Performance
Brando is completely, vividly, real as the disabled vet adjusting to life in a wheelchair. And at 26 he was the right age. His forte was vulnerable-tough guys so this role was perfect for him. His chemistry with Wright is excellent. Rating ***1/2 

The Movie
Released 2 weeks after the start of the Korean War, the movie was a box office flop but a critical success. While the two leads give good performances, the movie sufferers from a mediocre script and a TV-movie of the week plot. Jack Webb plays a supporting role. Repeating his role from "Best Years of Our Lives" good old Ray Teal shows up to harass the crippled Brando. Watched today only because of Brando. Rating **1/2

Streetcar Named Desire 1951

Why Brando Took the Role
An easy gig repeating his Broadway plus working with Kazan. Brando signed for $80,000 & no options..

Brando Performance
The iconic Brando role. Nominated for an Oscar. Tennessee Williams was impressed -from then on, Brando was offered the lead role in all of his plays. Williams actually wrote several with Brando in mind. Brando's performance changed Hollywood's conception of acting. From then on everyone wanted to be Brando not Tyrone Power. Tuxedo's were out, T-shirts were in. Rating **** stars

The Movie
A great adaptation of the 2nd best Williams' play. A Box office smash. Kazan's direction is superb and Malden and Brando were born to play their roles. However, the real star is Vivian Leigh, who plays the ultimate Blanche. Olivia De Haviland was offered the role but wanted $175,000 so Warner went with Leigh. Rating ****

Viva Zapata 1952

Why Brando Took the Role
An excellent, liberal script (by John Steinbeck) & a chance to work with Kazan. Zanuck wanted Tyrone Power for the lead bu Kazan refused and demanded Brando. So, Brando got the role and $100,000. In return, Brando was forced to do a screen test and sign a multipicture deal with 20th century Fox.

Brando Performance
Brando gives it a good try, but comes off as an American wearing a Sombrero, pretending to be Mexican. However, he convincingly portrays Zapata's internal conflict and bursts of anger. Brando was nominated for an Oscar - but his Zapata is too soft and too Anglo. Rating ***

The Movie
An earnest liberal, but dull, take on the Mexican Revolution. Zanuck was afraid it would labeled "Communist", but nobody cared about its politics or the movie. Not a box office success but loved by critics.

Zapata has some fine acting, and some excellent dramatic scenes. But the movie is historically inaccurate and suffers from a condescending desire to rewrite Mexican history. Further, havng American actors pretending to be Mexican - just doesn't work anymore . Kazan directs the drama well - the action scenes not so well. Quinn gives excellent support - and should have played the lead. Rating **1/2

Julius Caesar 1953

Why Brando Took the Role
In 1952, John Houseman, Joe Mank, and MGM decided to do a prestige production of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. A blend of British and American actors were chosen to play the roles, including James Mason as Brutus, John Geilgud as Cassius, Louis Calhern as Caesar, and Deborah Kerr and Greer Garson. But Houseman wanted Paul Scofield as Anthony; while MGM wanted Stewart Granger. Finally Mank broke the deadlock and offered Brando the role, Brando jumped at the chance. At that time, Brando was afraid of being typecast as a "blue-jeaned slobbermouth" - and wanted to prove his critics wrong. Brando signed for $40,000 and top billing; Geilgud got $20,000..

Brando Performance

Brando was nominated for his 3rd Oscar. Beloved by the Academy he was nominated for a "Lead Actor" even though his character (Anthony)  shows up at the 58 minute mark and is more or less gone 30 minutes later. It should have been a supporting actor role.  However, Brando is magnificent and his precise diction is a far cry from the mumbling Stanley. Geilgud was so impressed he invited Brando to England to do Hamlet. However, I think Charlton Heston was tailor made for the role, and probably would have done as well. Rating ****

The Movie
Julius Caesar was a critical and box office success. Although Brando is praised for his performance, the true stars are Mason and Geilgud both of whom are stunning. Everyone else does an excellent job - except for Calhern as Caesar whose too "American" and lacks the gravitas necessary to play Caesar. Slow in parts, and made in B&W, the movie still holds up after 56 years. Rating ***1/2

Brando 1953-1955

The Wild One 1953

Why Brando Took the Role
Another Socially conscious role with Stanley Kramer. Further, Brando was fascinated with these "outlaws" and wanted to show how why young people gathered in groups that seek expression in violence.

Brando Performance
Brando is miscast as the "outlaw" Biker. He's simply too pudgy, soft, and mannered to be the head of an outlaw biker gang. Comparison to Lee Marvin (as his rival Chino) highlights this inadequacy. Surround Brando with women and beta males (as in the "Streetcar" and "On the Waterfront") and he comes off as the vulnerable brute. But along side true tough guys like Lee Marvin - Brando's softness becomes obvious. However, Brando had his heart in the movie and is obviously trying his best. His interactions with Mary Murphy are excellent. Rating ***

The Movie
Controversial, and popular when released, the movie was condemned for its "shocking" violence, and banned in Britain until 1968. The Daily News called it "filled with horror and sadism" Brando himself was disappointed in the movie, stating that all the meaning had been drained from the original script leaving only the violence.

From a 21st century perspective the movie's violence is incredibly mild, and the bikers are as threatening as a 4-H club. They buzz around town on their bikes, are rude to old people, and play their loud "boogie music", but pay for their beers and coffee and dance with each other. Brando's gang includes Alvy Moore (Mr.Kimbal), Gil Straton, and Jerry Paris (Jerry Helper) - not exactly a bunch of dangerous thugs. Some look like Junior high school kids, others like High school teachers. As for the direction, the movie was filmed in Columbia' back lot on a low budget, & looks like a 1950s B movie. Finally, The "Hipster" lingo is laughable :

"They going to do a cement job on Crazy -- We going to sit around scratch ourselves? Hey, let's get a scramble going here! Blow those squares -- have a scramble for ourselves!"

Like, Dig it, Daddy-O. Without Brando the movie would be forgotten. Rating **1/2

On the Waterfront 1954

Why Brando Took the Role
Originally promised to Sinatra (who was mad to do it) - producer Sam Spiegel really wanted Brando. But Brando had already sent the script back - twice. Undeterred, Spiegel and Kazan kept after him. Finally, Brando agreed for one reason - he needed money to pay his psychoanalyst. Brando got $125,000 in cash, all in advance. As result, Sinatra was upset and sued Spiegel for $500,000. Also angry was a young unknown actor called Paul Newman. Kazan had offered him the part after Brando's first turn down.

Brando Performance
The iconic Brando performance. "You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let's face it. It was you, Charley. It was you Charlie, it was you."Rating ****

The Movie
A superb movie. Still powerful after 55 years, the 1954 best picture of the year, with excellent performances from Brando, Eva Marie Saint, Malden, Steiger and Lee J. Cobb. Rating ****

Desiree 1954

Why Brando Took the Role
20th Century Fox forced Brando to do it. While under contract to Fox for two movies , Brando walked off the set of the "Egyptian". Brando plead illness, but its the script that made him sick. Zanuck was livid and Fox sued. As part of the out-of-court settlement, Brando had to do both Desiree and the Young Lions.

Brando Performance
Brando adopts a British accent and plays Napoleon as a cool, calm high-toned Englishmen. Deliberately understated or on cruise-control? Who Knows. Sadly, he has no real chemistry or passion with Jean Simmons (Desiree). But not a bad performance. Rating ***

The Movie
A lavish 1950s CinemaScope production of best selling novel. It tells the story of Napoleon though the eyes of his first mistress Desiree (Jean Simmons). Merle Oberon plays Josephine. One of those 1950s Historical epics with a mediocre script that tries to get by on lavish production values and some great actors. Nice to look at but too long Rating **1/2

Guys and Dolls 1955

Why Brando Took the Role
Brando liked the director Joe Mankawitz, thought a musical would be interesting and signed for $200,000. Goldwyn's original choice was Gene Kelly but MGM refused to loan him out. Who did Brando beat out for the role? Sinatra, Crosby, and Clark Gable. Goldwyn also considered Lancaster, Mitchum, and Douglas for Sky. But Goldwyn believed the public would flock to hear Brando Sing - and he was right.

Brando Performance
Brando took voice lessons and as many as 100 takes to produce his musical numbers. And they are quite adequate and charming. Of course, he's no Sinatra - he's not even Van Johnson, but his singing is good enough. Brando shines in the romance/dramatic part of the play and has excellent chemistry with Jean Simmons. As for the comedy - Brando said it best: "I wanted to effect a frothy farce style, but I'm heavy footed with comedy". Having Frank Sinatra as his comic sidekick "Nathan Detroit" didn't help. A good try. Rating ***

The Movie
A lavish 1950s middlebrow musical that was a smash hit. I l have mixed feelings. I love most of the movie but find parts dull and/or unfunny. Vivien Blaine and Stubby Kaye are good, the musical numbers are great, & the Simmons-Brando romance is excellent. The movie is good - but could have been better.

First, the pace is too slow, the direction too static, and the movie too long (150 minutes) Second, Sinatra's character should have been played by a comedian (Phil Silvers?) or a singer with comedic skills (Dean Martin) And while Jean Simmons is good, Shirley Jones would have been better Sinatra, Gable or Mitchum as Sky would have been an improvement. Sinatra as Sky and Martin as Nathan would have been ideal. Kelly was Goldwyn's first choice, but Kelly had a smirky, insincere manner and weak voice.

The main failing is too many non-musical people in front of and behind the camera. You had 2 lead actors who didn't sing or dance, a comic sidekick who didn't do comedy and a director who didn't do musicals. I've sounded quite critical - but with all its flaws its quite good.. Rating ***1/2

Brando 1956-1961

Tea House of the August Moon 1956

Why Brando Took the Role
As early as 1955, Brando was (politically speaking) a loudmouthed horses ass. Per his biography, Brando would often lecture anyone who'd listen on Asia, economics, Japanese-American relations, and the third world. IOW, before the Indians, Brando loved the Japanese and Asians. In 1955, Brando commented Asians "don't strive for material success the way we do, they consider the moral development more important."

Brando's interest in Asia and Japan led him to a popular Broadway comedy, Tea house of the August Moon. The play was an attack on "Americanization" and seemed to be a box-office sure thing. Brando requested MGM let him play the Okinawan interpreter "Sakini" in the film version. The Dore Shary, head of MGM, was skeptical -but Brando was the most popular movie star in the world. Per Dore Shary - "If Marlon wanted to play Little Eva, I'd let him". Brando also got to choose his friend Dan Mann as director. .

Brando Performance
Ugh, simply awful. Wearing a black wig & bad makeup the 170 lbs Brando is unconvincing as an Okinawan. But even worse than his accent - is his cartoonish overacting. Brando approaches the role with the subtly of a jackhammer. Sadly, his co-star Glenn Ford joins in. As one reviewer noted, Ford & Brando make Lewis & Martin look repressed. I give Brando points for trying. Rating *1/2

The Movie
Brando described The play as"magical" but the movie isn't. Even dependable Paul Ford and Eddie Albert can't save this turkey. While Machiko Kyo does a good job, Ford and Brando clownishly overact and the slapstick seems forced and mechanical. Further, the script isn't particularly good and is really a one-joke comedy. And the one joke's premise disappeared 40 years ago. A long two hours. This is one "classic" that should be forgotten. Rating **

Sayonara 1957

Why Brando Took the Role
Based on the bestselling Michener novel, Brando was attracted to the liberal message of racial tolerance. He also wanted to return to Japan. Having Logan as director and a nice salary were extra inducements. It should be noted the film is set in 1951, six years after WW II, and by 1957 official attitudes toward intermarriage had changed completely. Hence, the movie was not controversial when released. While filming Brando had the famous New Yorker interview with Capote .

Brando Performance
Incredibly Brando was nominated for an Oscar for this standard leading man role. One of my least favorite Brando performances. Trying to make him more interesting, Brando talks slow and adopts a deep southern drawl - resulting in a character that seems not like a hot-shot Jet fighter pilot - but a thick-headed halfback from Old Miss. But Brando does nail the final scene, where he preaches racial harmony and understanding. I think James Garner (the "Best Friend") would've been a better lead. Rating **

The Movie
Sayonara has some good things going for it. The Photography is beautiful, the production values are high, and most of the cast is excellent. But the passage of time has dimmed the movie's message. And the focus on Kabuki theater and Geisha's, along with the casting of Non-Asians as Japanese, comes off as condescending. Some of the acting, not just Brando, is pretty bad. Ricardo Montaban is simply absurd as the Japanese Kabuki performer. Worst of all is Red Buttons -playing an airman in love with a Japanese woman. For some reason, Buttons won an Oscar for playing an obnoxious whiner, who orders his wife around while making self-righteous speeches. Rating The acting gets ** stars, the rest of the movie a ***, so **1/2 overall.

The Young Lions 1958

Why Brando Took the Role
Brando was under contract to Fox, moreover, Brando was forced to take a $50,000 salary (as opposed to his usual $100K) to compensate Fox for his walkout on the "Egyptian". However, per his biography Brando looked forward to working with Dmytryk and Montgomery Clift.

Brando Performance
Dyeing his hair blond and adopting an acceptable German accent, Brando plays "Christian Diestal" a young German soldier who begins by supporting the Nazi's but becomes more and more disillusioned as the war drags on. Christian's ideals, his heroism in France, his dissatisfaction of his duty, his affair with his Captain's wife, his disillusionment, his pitiful retreat, and his sense of humanity that is heavily clouded by his blind ideals were all vividly brought to the screen by Brando's skillful rendering. He's particularly good playing off of Maximilian Schell - his aggressive, ruthless, commanding officer.

This was one of Brando's finest hours as he took the standard boring "evil Nazi" portrayed in Shaw's book and made him into a three-dimensional human being. Brando not only made the character work as an actor, he was responsible for changing the original script that gave him a generic movie villain. Rating ****

The Movie
The Young Lions is a 3 hour B&W WW II movie based on Shaw's rather pedestrian novel. The novel is full of 2 dimensional characters and while rightly forgotten was a "Blockbuster" in the 1950s. Fox didn't have much faith in the movie and only budgeted $2 million for it. Its cheapness shows in the large amount of studio bound scenes and use of back-projections. Further, there's only one good battle scene (the Afrika Korps ambush). The movie keeps us focused on the home front - no doubt to keep down costs.

Fox was able to cast series of "A" actors while keeping salaries down for a variety of reasons. Brando owed Fox for walking out of the "Egyptian", Clift was damaged goods due to his accident and surgery, Dean had just quit his comedy act and signed for $25,000. Meanwhile, most of the Europeans were unknowns in the US and were gotten relatively cheap.

The acting is of a high level but the 3 separate stories (Dean, Brando, and Martin) never really connect with each other. In effect, its 3 separate movies all spliced into one. To make matters worse, the only interesting one is Brando's. As for the other two, Dean plays a nightclub singer who is nagged into the army by his patriotic wife, while Clift plays Ackerman - a Jewish draftee who fights antisemitism. If this isn't dreary enough, once drafted Clift replays his role in From Here to Eternity as the loner harassed by the Company for not playing ball.  BTW, Brando and Clift don't have a scene together. Ultimately, Brando is the only reason to see the movie.  Rating ***

The Fugitive Kind 1959

Why Brando Took the Role
Money. Brando had rejected the script once since he thought Italian actress Magnani would "eat him alive" onscreen. But in 1958 he was short of cash and when the producers dangled a salary of $1 million - Brando bit. The salary was the highest paid an actor until Cleopatra.

Brando Performance
As "Snake" the guitar playing, leather wearing "bad Boy" Brando is excellent in the role. Most Williams male leads were tailor made for Brando and he has no problem with the role. The only problem is a lack of chemistry with Magnani. Rating ***

The Movie
A Box office bomb when released. People were tired of Tennessee Williams in 1959 - and the depressing ending. static direction, and B&W photography didn't help. I have mixed feelings. Some excellent acting, but good scenes alternate with the bad, and the story is simply old hat. Too much of it seems recycled from other Williams movies and plays. And despite two great performances by Magnani and Brando. both are slightly miscast. The parts really call for more needy, vulnerable characters. -I think Woodward as the lead and Newman or Clift as Snakeskin would been better. Rating **½

One Eyed Jacks 1960

Why Brando Took the Role
Brando's production company wanted to do a "commercial" project and a new kind of western. Brando wanted Tracy for his Co-star but had to settle for his friend Karl Malden. To give the movie a fresh look, Brando shot most of it Monterrey and Big Sur. Although designed to make money, Brando's perfectionism took over and millions of feet of film and several years later the film ended up over-budget and in the red. To quote Time:

"One-Eyed Jacks (Pennebaker; Paramount). Marlon Brando has often announced that mere acting ("a childish thing ... by and large the expression of neurotic impulse'') is too small a bottle for his creative genie. In 1958 he got a chance to put aside childish things: he launched his first independent picture, planned as a nice, safe, medium-budget ($1,800,000) western. Producer: Brando. Star: Brando. Director: Stanley (Spartacus) Kubrick. Kubrick obviously had to go. and he soon did, leaving Brando with the megaphone and, as one Paramount saddle." executive put it, "Stanislavsky in the 

First day on the set. Brando tossed his script aside and mumbled to his actors: "We're going to improvise." And for the next six months, at an average cost of $42,000 a day, Brando improvised. Some times he just flicked on the cameras and let them roll while his actors ad-libbed —of 1 1 .000 ft. of film exposed one day. he used only 270 ft. in the finished picture.

When an actor accidentally belted him one. Brando happily reorganized his story to work the incident in. And the end of the picture is not the end Brando had in mind: the actors, in a democratic ballot, voted for one they liked better. Production was still further slowed by Brando's perfectionism. With a cast and crew on full salary, he sat for hours beside the Pacific Ocean and waited for the waves "to become more dramatic." For a drunk scene, he chugalugged a pint of vodka, got sincerely stoned and reportedly lost his supper — but kept the footage".

Brando Performance
Brando does a superb job both as a cowboy outlaw and then as the conflicted lover as he seeks revenge against Dad. Rating ****

The Movie
One of my favorite westerns. The movie beautifully photographed with excellent shots of the California coast. In the last reel, the lead flies and the ketchup spectacularly splatters. The big action scenes are ingenious and exciting. Brando seems to combine a small boy's infatuation with violence and a dancer's flair for movement. Both Ben Johnson and Slim Pickens get in touch with their dark sides - and both are a hoot. Rating ****