Terminal Station (1953) - De Sica

 I enjoyed this Jennifer Jones, Montgomery Clift, romance about an Italian/American extra-martial affair.  Usually, I'm not a fan of romance pictures, but this one had several things going for it:

• The Film is beautifully shot in B&W and well-directed
•  Jones is very attractive and has good chemistry with Clift
• The 1950s Italian background and supporting characters are interesting people.  A fat guy  uttering “Permesso” each time he has to squeeze by someone, a man more interested in counting the wad of money than waving goodbye, four priests traveling together always trying to figure out Italian currency, etc.  Everyone is doing something interesting. 
• Its only 89 minutes.  

Montgomery Clift

This movie shows Clift at the peak of his form and how good he was prior to his facial surgery & resulting dependence on drugs/booze.  I liked him in this role, better than From Here to Eternity, primarily because I never bought Clift as a boxer.  He didn't have the build for it. 

The Children are watching (1943)

Beautifully done, powerful movie, with a simple 80 minute story. We follow a 4 y/o boy as he deals with separated parents and his mother's love affair with another man.. Well acted, especially by the child. Too bad, it was so sad. There are also fascinating views of 1940s Italy. De Sica is hit or miss with me, but this is a winner. Not as good as Bicycle Thief, or Umberto D but among his best. Rating ****

The Irishman (2019)

 Yes, I know.  Good God, another Scorsese Gangster film?!  Yes, it treads old ground.  Yes, Pacino, De Niro and Pesci are too old.  Yes, its too long.  But, hey its well done, and you sorta get used to 75 year old Pacino and De Niro pottering around, and being digitally enhanced to look 45-50 instead of 80.  And great set design. It really gives off a 1940s and 1950s vibe.  Summary: It would've have been better, if it'd been made 25 years ago and  30 minutes shorter, but that didn't happen.  While not up to the level of Goodfellas, Raging Bull,  or Casino it was still enjoyable.  Rating ***

The Story of Temple Drake (1933)

 A short review.  Based on Faulkner's trashy,  written for a quick-buck,  novel Sanctuary,  Temple Drake is a trashy, made for a quick-buck movie.  Overall, it's not badly acted, Miriam Hopkins is quite good, but several of the supporting players would be more at home in silent pictures. The camera work and direction is unremarkable to say the least.  There's not much else to say.  The story was shocking and risque in the 30s,  and isn't now.  And without the "shocking" sex, there's not much else.  Summary: For Film Historians only.  Released by Criterion for some reason. 

Paths of Glory - Book vs. Movie

 Although Humphry Cobb's 1935 novel been adapted into a Broadway play,  Kubrick's 1957 film was the first  -and only - movie adaption.  I may write in more detail, but for now I'll just summarize the differences as follows:

The Expanded Role of Col Dax  

In the novel, Col Dax is just one of 8 main characters and pretty much disappears after the decision to go ahead with the Court Martial.  He's regular army officer, not a lawyer. Given that his producer and box office star Kirk Douglas was playing the part, Kubrick had to expand the role. So Kubrick and Harris (his co-screenwriter) did the following:

• Movie Dax was changed to a Reserve Office and prewar defense lawyer.  This allows Movie Dax to become the defense lawyer at the Court martial.  The  novel's Captain Etienne is eliminated. 
• Movie Dax leads the attack on the anthill. In the novel, the attack is headed a Major, the Battalion commander. Further,  Movie Dax takes over the roles of several other inferior officers. Douglas orders Roget to go on patrol and receives his report.  Later, Douglas orders Roget to head the firing squad and also tells the sergeant to let them stay in the Cafe for a while. The Regiment seems to be run by Douglas personally. 
• Kubrick adds a subplot related to the general ordering a barrage on his own troops.  The artillery officer gives Movie Dax a written statement saying so.  Douglas then confronts Adolphe Menjou  and demands the men be freed or else.  Later, Menjou offers Douglas a Generalship which Movie Dax turns down in a burst of anger.  None of this is in the novel - which ends with the execution.  Further, in the novel, the artillery officer says nothing, since he never fired on the troops and received no written orders. 

Other Changes

• The film makes the attack seem more dramatic. In the novel, nobody can advance behind the French wire, the Germans' lay down a barrage and machine gun fire and prevent any forward movement.
• The closing café scene is pure Kubrick
• The Characters of General Assolant (Macready) and De Guerville (Menjou) are made more deranged and sinister. In the novel, the attack has been ordered by Joffre and is considered a necessary prerequisite to the upcoming General offensive. An "assault division" is required. so Assolant is given the job.  Assolant protests his Division is tired and understrength but eventually agrees since he's a "fighting General".  The same is true of Col Dax.  He protests, but he's regular army and orders are orders. 
• The General's chit chat with the soldiers was added by Kubrick.  As is the slapping of a soldier for shell shock. 
• Kubrick makes Col Dax into a liberal civilian in uniform,  Movie Dax calls Menjou a "degenerate old man"  and tells Macready "Patriotism is the last refuge of the Scoundrel".  In fact Douglas is so contemptuous of patriotism and the military you wonder why he's in the army.
• Kubrick shows Ralph Meeker as an innocent victim. In the novel, his character tries to shoot Lt. Roget while on patrol
• In the novel, the prisoner who attacks the Priest has his leg broken by the guards. Kubrick changes this to Ralph Meeker hitting the man on the head.  Later, Kubrick shows the Priest comforting a soldier on the way to the execution. I suppose this was soften the attack on the Priest. 

Clockwork Orange (1971)

Writing about Kubrick films is difficult, because while he was obviously a great Director and  produced movies with great scenes ( cf: HAL the computer,  The boot camp with Lee Emerick, the attack on "The anthill" etc.)  his movies are, on the whole, unsatisfying.  The great scenes are usually accompanied with  unengaging characters, simple-simon plots, and a lack of humanity.  Such is the case with Clockwork Orange.

We have *individual* violent or nasty scenes  of great power.

 The gang rape and fight, the singing in the rain rape, the murder using a plastic penis, etc.  The set design is creative and memorable even if it often verges on the pornographic. Yet, everything after Alec's arrest is dull as dishwater. As Ebert says  the last 1/3 of the movie seems like the last 1/2.  Equally dull are every interaction between Alec and his gang or his home life.  

The Shocking Violence - not so shocking anymore

In 1971  many critics were shocked by the violence and found Kubrick's sympathetic portrait of a rapist-killer disturbing.  Now, 50 years later, of course, we've all become so jaded with violence, sex and torture porn (cf: Game of Thrones) that Clockwork Orange seems almost restrained. 

The Leading Character Book vs. The Movie

Kubrick seems to have loved taking famous books, written in first person narrative, and turning them into movies. Lolita, Barry Lyndon, and Clockwork Orange all have "Monsters" narrating their adventures (usually unreliably) and doing so in great literary style.  None of this can be translated to the film. So, Kubrick ends up giving us unengaging lead characters.  We can't sympathize or identify with them, they're objectively awful.  And their actions when translated to film, have to be shown literally. We don't have an author filtering their actions through a lens of irony or humor.  The result? On film - they're either disgusting or dull.  

There's a big hole in middle of Clockwork Orange

We have a unsympathetic lead character that's in every scene, and he's impossible to care about.  We end up observing him - like looking at a bug on glass.  And that can be boring. Nor does the story about his "cure" hold any interest. So what's left?  Just various scenes of violence, rape, and perversion.  Which are well done from a technical standpoint.

Summary:  This was my second viewing of Clockwork Orange and my opinion hasn't improved. Outside of some well done "sex and violence" there was nothing that kept me interested.  All the greatness of the novel has been lost, and the last 1/3 is incredibly dull.  One of Kubrick's biggest misfires. Rating **