Red Garters (1954)

Starring Rosemary Cloony, Guy Mitchell, and Jack Carson, and Pat Crowley (who looks very pretty). This musical Comedy Western takes a different approach. Instead of the wide open spaces, we get an artificial sound-stage. Instead of quasi-reality, a complete fantasy. And instead of western tropes, smart-ass satire. For example, every mention of "The Code of the west" results in everyone stopping and bowing their heads.* The technicolor set design is great** 

On the negative side. The two leads were known for their singing - not their acting. The script is pedestrian, the story bland, and everything between the muscial numbers is pleasant filler.  Its still better than South Pacific - but that's a low bar. 

Favorite Songs:   

• Bad News with Clooney.    
• Good Intentions with Clooney. 

Summary:  Good songs.  Attractive "B" cast.  Average Script.

*   Mel Brooks stole this for Blazing Saddles but used "Randolph Scott". 
** AA nominated for Best Art Direction.

The Music Room (1958) -Satyajit Ray

Short Review. One of those well directed, well acted, Dramas that I didn't like as much as I wanted. 

You can't blame the cast, they're great. In particular, Chhabi Biswas is mesmerizing as the proud, aging Aristocrat whose fallen on hard times.  Unfortunately, my musical tastes are very narrow, and I found the Indian Classical music (and there's a lot of it) less than enjoyable. The other problem was the white subtitles.  These often disappeared as they were constantly projected against white clothes or white sand.  I respect the film but its not my cup of tea. 

Bukowski Documentaries

These two documentaries cover the life Charles Bukowski, novelist and poet.

1) Bukowski Born Into this (2003)
2) Bukowski -Live October 12, 1979 (2008)

Bukowski Live covers his 1979 rowdy, profane, poetry reading in Vancouver BC.  Ah, the 1970s.  Everyone, the audience, Bukowski, the club owners, seem to be in various stages of drunkeness.  There's an energy and honesty to Bukowski that's endering but it comes with much loutishness and profanity. Definitly not PG.  I felt that Bukowski's anger at the audience was mostly an act and he apprecitated their involvement .  Anyway, its entertaining, if you're in the mood for it. Rating **1/2 

Bukowski Born Into this is the family authorized documentary of Bukowski's life.  The beginning is rather dull as the filmmaker talks about how he met Bukowski, why he decided to do the film, etc. After a boring 15 minutes, the film improves.  Still, like many film biographies, we get way too much blah blah narrative and not enough talk from the man himself or those who knew him. But it does have some good moments. Rating **

Bed and Board (1970)

Mildly amusing Truffault rom-com about Antoine Doinel,  a Parisan florist, and his life with his pregnant wife Christine. As usual, the location shots of 1970 Paris are always a plus, and there's a sweet and charming tone to this French Rom-com. 

 Unfortunately, Rom-coms (and Domestic comedies) depend on the personality of their leads, and while Claude Jade is quite good as "Christine" - Jean-Pierre Léaud (as Antoine) is such a scrawny little wuss its impossible to care about him. And one point, this wimp takes his shirt off, and all I could say was: "Ugh, that's pathetic, dude.  Hit the Gym." I think Woody Allen could have beat him up. And I'm talking about 2021 Woody.

So, he kept taking me out of the movie.

And this set me to thinking about what draws us to movies. In the old days,  Movie execs used to think women were all hot for Cary Grant or William Powell and that's why they were watching their movies. But when they did some research they found out that women actually were watching the Thin Man series because they loved Myrna Loy.  Or because they loved Irenne Dunne with Cary Grant. IOW, women identified with the female stars. And the men identify with male stars. And that's what drew them to the films.  

And we don't want to see a member of "our sex" let down the side when its a Rom Com or Romance film.  As a man, I kept focusing on the male lead. And that's why I had such a negative reaction to Jean-Pierre Léaud.  I could not identify with this guy.  He was too wimpy and unattractive. I kept thinking, Hell,  I could have taken Claude Jade away from this guy.

So, anyway, despite all the good scenes. And the first 50 minutes was very charming,  I can't give the film a high rating.  The awful male lead just spoiled it. 

Scenes From A Marriage (1974)

Lisa, I'm no good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three  two little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world.

Man was this a struggle.  I like Bergman - mostly. When he's good, he's great. And when he's not so good, he's still interesting. But I just could not care about these two smug, "ridiculously bougoise" characters. Five hours of them was about 3.5 hours too much.

And the overall theme of the story seemed overly familiar and boring. Bergman, of course, knows his audience is made up of women and liberal/leftist men. So, we get a more or less standard story of the wife "repressing" herself at the start and then growing in freedom and feminist wisdom as the story goes on, while the man - a bit of an egotisical male chauvanist - gets his just dessserts. 

 Summary: Wished I could have enjoyed it more, but sometimes these family dramas bore the hell out me. Ullmann and Josephson are excellent actors, but at 5 hours, this one needed Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn. 

What's Up Doc? - Rewatch

 Sorry I found this rewatch unwatchable.  

The older I get, the more intolerant I am of 2nd rate actors. And nobody was more 2nd rate than Babs Streisand. 

Everytime I saw Streisand on the screen I was struck by how agressively annoying and homely she was.  It doesn't help that Striesand is filmed as if she had the face of Garbo and charm of Audrey Hepburn.  Her big nose, big mouth,  and big eyes dominate the screen in way too many close-ups**. 

And the rest of the cast?  Also annoying.  Ryan O'Neal is all at sea, shooting for amusingly nerdish, he ends up being dull.  Even Madeline Kahn strikes out as the staid, uptight middle-class wife - she's miscast.  The chase scene at the end had its moments, but there was too little wit, and too many cars crashes.  Summary:  My first rewatch, and my last. 

** =  these kind of films make me appreciate John Simon.  We don't need an endless stream of beautiful faces on the screen.  But if you're a plain actress, it's better to be like Marie Dressler, Thelma Ritter, Whoopi Goldberg, or Margaret Rutherford.  Have some inner beauty, warmth, and charisma. The problem with Striesand is she's obnoxious and homely.  Plus, she and her fans pretend she's some beauty who has no problem landing Ryan O'Neal or Robert Redford! 

Torn Curtain - Rewatch

 Man, what a disappointment.  I'd hoped this  Hitchcock hit from the mid 60s would improve with one more view, but nope. I disliked it even more. 

Torn curtain a failed "Entertainment"

Grahame Greene divided his novels into serious ones and entertainments, and one could do the same thing with Hitchcock films. In the serious category you have films like: The Wrong Man, I confess, Shadow of Doubt, or Vertigo.  In the entertainment group:  The man who knew too much, 39 steps, north by northwest, sabotuer, rear window,  to catch an thief,  the lady vanishes. 

Torn Curtain was supposed to be a suspenseful spy thriller. But the failed casting and lack of fun and thrills dooms it.     

Julie Andrews and Paul Newman

These two were super-stars both are miscast.  Paul Newman as a scientist? Give me a break.  Not only that Newman is NOT a Hitchcockian leading man.  Newman was a star who could act. But he didn't possess the likablity or charisma of a Grant, McCrea, Stewart, or Fonda.  And that's what the part requires.  

The same is true of Julie Andrews. She was great singer and possessed some low key charm but she simply wasn't in the same league with Doris Day,  Grace Kelley, Ingrid Bergman,  or Tulluah Bankhead.  Needless to say, she isn't sexy and she has zero chemistry with Newman. 

Andrews and Newman  seem to be sleepwalking through their roles. Is this is due to their innate lack of warmth? Or because the script/direction doen't prop them up as they do in other movies.  Of course, neither was known for their wit/comedic acting 

Script Problems

Another problem with Torn Curtain is the complete lack of warmth or humor. . The rest of the dialogue is just blah.  There's a complete lack of fun and excitement. 

Direction Problems

Its hard to think of Hitchock film that has so many slack, tensionless chase scenes. Whereas Man who knew too much and North by Northwest had you on the edge of your seat,  Torn curtain's suspense scenes seem mechanical and overly familiar.  The amount of cheap, projection shots further decrease the enjoyment.

On the Plus Side

The villians of the piece - Kedrova, Wolfgang Kieling and Tamara Toumanova are excellent , and the death of the policeman, "Grommek" is the highlight of the movie.

Summary:  Other then the killing of the policeman scene,  Torn curtain isn't worth a 3rd watch. There's a complete lack of fun and excitement. Incredibly I'd rather watch Marnie,  since I find Connery and Hedrin a more attractive and interesting.