Touch of Evil: A Review

TOUCH OF EVIL

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Janet Leigh. This review is also for the 1998 restored version of the film. 

In 1958, Orson Welles had a chance to make a directorial comeback. While the maverick filmmaker had worked in Europe, he had not made an American film in years. Welles, who had been hired to merely act in Touch of Evil, now had the chance to direct, even if it was a B-picture. Trust Orson Welles to try and elevate this pulp product into something more. Trust the studio to crush those aspirations and wreck what he had so meticulously planned. Despite, or perhaps because of this interference, Touch of Evil still stands as a great film.

Along the U.S.-Mexico border, honest Mexican cop Miguel "Mike" Vargas (Charlton Heston) and his new American wife Susan (Janet Leigh) find their honeymoon interrupted by murder. A car driven by local bigwig Rudolph Linnekar has just gotten blown up, instantly killing him and his newest mistress, a stripteaser in the Mexican border town of Los Robles. Police detective Hank Quinlan (Welles), heavyset and with a game leg, is on the case. His loyal and devoted aide Pete Menzies (Joseph Calleia) is convinced that Hank can crack the case easily. Quinlan does not take kindly to the Mexican Vargas getting involved, but he may need to since the bomb came from the Mexican side.

Soon, things devolve into a mishmash of crimes. What connection to the bombing, if any, does local crime lord Uncle Joe Grandi (Akim Tamiroff) have? Uncle Joe, who detests Vargas for interfering in the family business, thinks that he can put the squeeze on Mike through Susan. Susan, though, is a tough cookie, not easily intimidated. As things go on, things start getting muddled. Susan is eventually drugged, probably raped, and even framed for murder and drugs. The investigation of the bombing leads Mike to suspect that Hank is attempting to frame Manelo Sanchez (Victor Millan), a young Mexican involved with Linnekar's daughter Marcia (Joanna Moore). Mike also suspects that Menzies may either be part of other frame-ups or served as Quinlan's dupe. 

Uncle Joe and Hank Quinlan join forces against their mutual enemy. However, Quinlan has fallen off the wagon thanks to Uncle Joe. This makes Quinlan more dangerous and erratic. Not even Quinlan's former flame, psychic Tana (Marlene Dietrich) can help Quinlan as he sinks further into crime. Will Menzies' eyes be opened to how far Quinlan has fallen? Will Susan be rescued? Will justice be visited on the guilty? Will anyone shape the plot into coherence?

As I think on Touch of Evil, I can see how Universal executives could worry that the plot would be hard to follow. Writing the summary of Touch of Evil, I was suddenly struck by how it meandered from one thing to another. The car bombing that starts off Touch of Evil in a bravura three-minute, one-take shot does not involve the Grandi crime family in any way. It is totally separate from the Grandis criminal empire. Yet they somehow managed to blend into things. The Grandi element then slips into getting poor Susan into this labyrinth of darkness. Few characters have been as abused as Susan Vargas. 

It is never overtly stated that Susan was raped, but Welles' adaptation of Whit Masterson's Badge of Evil makes that strong suggestion. Alone in the isolated hotel, she finds herself surrounded by a group of Grandi's nephews and nieces. There is a quick shot of the main nephew, whom she nicknamed "Pancho" (Valentin De Vargas) licking his lips and looking down on her. "Hold her legs", he whispers, and then the room descends into the lot of them grabbing the screaming and terrified Susan before the door closes. 

One can quibble over why one of female gang members is Mercedes McCambridge, one of the many cameos that show Welles could get major stars for something as ostensibly schlocky as Touch of Evil. 

McCambridge's request to stay, saying that she wants to watch, makes this already daring scene downright outrageous. In this film, the suggestion of rape has the added element of lesbianism, beyond subversive for the time. Still, what exactly Susan or Mike had to do with the actual crime supposedly at the heart of Touch of Evil is a bit off. 

Touch of Evil seems to almost delight in its curious logic. The actual plot blending the Linnaker and Grandi stories is already a bit odd. You also have the idea of the very Teutonic Marlene Dietrich as a Mexican or Gypsie fortune teller. Whether we are even supposed to believe that she could be Mexican or Gypsie (what would be called Romani now) is pretty much irrelevant. You just roll with it.

Touch of Evil is brilliantly directed in terms of acting. Much criticism has been thrown at Charlton Heston for playing a Mexican. I think that it was a poor decision, and Heston's makeup job is far too dark to be believable. The lack of accent is also held against him. However, some things should be taken into account. First, Heston was directed by Welles to not have an accent. Second, few people focus on how having the Mexican character as the hero would have been extremely rare for the times. People also forget that it was Heston's idea to have Welles direct the film. Touch of Evil as we have it now might not have come to pass if another director had helmed the project. 

Heston's overall performance is quite strong. He plays the heroic figure with such moral rectitude that you can believe this man was incorruptible. It was firm and solid, like the character. Janet Leigh was feisty but vulnerable as Susan, the innocent almost destroyed by the wickedness around her. In her early scenes, she was almost funny when she literally wagged her finger at the crime boss Grandi. "You know what your problem is, Mr. Grandi? You've seen too many gangster films!" she snaps at him. She also admits being afraid, but notes that her husband isn't. Leigh makes Susan's descent into terror eerily effective. 

Orson Welles makes Hank Quinlan evil but tragic. We see his arrogance and racism quickly. However, when he realizes that he has fallen off the wagon, we do feel for him. He can be terrifying, such as in his last scene with the hapless Uncle Joe. However, at the end, we end up feeling so sad for the man, done in by his own faults. 

The highlight acting-wise is Joseph Calleia as the doomed Menzies. He is loyal and loving, almost worshipful of Quinlan. Seeing him realize that Quinlan was not the man that Menzies held him to be is a slow and painful thing. Menzies loved Quinlan, so the betrayal of his idealizing is heartbreaking. 

As much grief as Charlton Heston has received for playing a Mexican, I do not get why Akim Tamiroff still does not get the same level of criticism for his Uncle Joe Grandi. Perhaps it is because he is a more comic figure, with his grandiose manner and toupee (his nephews keep telling him to put his "rug" back on). He is at times bumbling and flustered, almost naive in how he behaves around the cops. However, Tamiroff can also show Uncle Joe's calculating manner. His final scene is downright terrifying, the gruesomeness of it all shocking. 

In their smaller roles, Dennis Weaver as the hotel night watchman and Marlene Dietrich as the mysterious Tana are standouts. Weaver's eccentric, perhaps crazed watchman is kooky, scared and engrossing. He freaks out at the mention of "bed" and seems scared of his own shadow. It ran the risk of being ridiculous, but Weaver managed to keep things bizarre without going full cray-cray. Dietrich brings a sense of weariness as Tana, the woman aware of what kind of man Hank Quinlan is, was and could have been. 

Touch of Evil is, I think, less about the actual crime or crimes than it is about the ultimate fall of Hank Quinlan. At the end, a man observes that he was a good detective. "And a lousy cop," Tana adds. When asked if that's all she has to say, Tana replies, "He was some kind of man". 

Orson Welles has been highly praised for his directing in Touch of Evil. I do not think that he has been given much credit for his witty screenplay (even if the plot itself is a bit opaque). When Tana first sees Quinlan after many years, she sees how heavy Quinlan has grown. Claiming that she doesn't recognize him, Tana looks at him and says, "You better lay off the candy bars". In the same scene, he remarks that he is still fond of her chili and might come up to sample some of it. "Better be careful. Might be too hot for you," she replies. There is a double meaning there to Tana's comment about it being too hot for him.

There is less subtlety at their final meeting. Quinlan, drunk out of his mind, orders Tana to give him a reading. Scrambling the tarot cards, he tells her, "Come on, read my future for me". Tana sadly looks up at him and says, "You haven't got any". "What do you mean?", he asks in an almost childlike manner. "Your future is all used up," she tells him. It is a sad scene, well-acted by both Dietrich and Welles, with the latter directing it to perfection.

Touch of Evil is highly praised for its visual style. The film begins with a four minute and sixteen second single take shot (by my calculations). Here, we see so much going on, establishing part of the plot and keeping viewers in suspense. Unintentionally or not, Orson Welles took the advice on suspense that Alfred Hitchcock offered. An audience might be shocked by a sudden bomb explosion, but they would be in anticipation if they knew that a bomb was underneath a table. The same principle applies.

The film has a strong visual style, using techniques new for the time. There are the shifts from the Mike and Susan stories. Effective use of shadows and low camera angles. A perhaps lesser-mentioned element is Henry Mancini's score. The film uses everything from jazz to an old-time style from a pianola to create this sinister world. Mancini's score sets the mood of danger, sleaze and tragedy the film has. 

I believe Charlton Heston referred to Touch of Evil as "the greatest B-Picture ever made". I think I am inclined to agree with Heston on this assertion. There is something low grade about Touch of Evil, as if it is not prestige. However, this restored version is as close to what Welles envisioned as we will have unless his original print has somehow survived and is rediscovered. The film that we have now still holds up well. It has strong performances from even the guest stars, an involving if perhaps opaque story and is a great character study of a good bad man. 

DECISION: A+

Winter Kills: A Review

WINTER KILLS

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Sterling Hayden.

Long before JFK, we got Winter Kills. The difference is that JFK is supposed to be serious, while Winter Kills is supposed to be a comedy. From what I saw, few people seemed to be in on the joke. I find Winter Kills to be a curious film, one that is too close to what it appears to want to spoof to be funny.

Nick Keegan (Jeff Bridges) is the half-brother of the late President of the United States who was assassinated on February 22, 1960. Later I will touch on why I focus on the date of the assassination. It has been nineteen years since Tom Keegan was gunned down in Philadelphia. To his shock, someone has come to his family's ship claiming to have been a second gunman. He confesses to being the true assassin, the official killer being essentially a patsy.

Did I mention that the official assassin was himself killed a few days later while in police custody by a small-time gangster named Joe Diamond (Eli Wallach)? 

As it stands, Nick now starts going on this wild goose chase looking for who is behind the murder. Unfortunately, everyone whom Nick finds somehow ends up dead or is already dead. Nick's father, business and political tycoon Pa Keegan (John Huston) is at first disbelieving, then apparently helpful to Nick's grand investigation. Pa sends him hither and yon, finding all sorts of clues and dead ends. Pa's frenemy Z.K. Dawson (Sterling Hayden) is more irritated that Nick has interrupted his literal war games, threatening to blow him up with his tank. Nick's current on/off mistress Yvette Malone (Belinda Bauer) wants an exclusive for her magazine. She also screams during sex like she's being murdered.

Soon, the investigation into President Tom Keegan's murder involves big business, the Mafia and Hollywood studios. According to Pa's accountant and fixer John Cerutti (Anthony Perkins), it might even involve Pa himself. Nick is not in a good place: Yvette, he discovers, was not only a fake but was murdered herself. It is time for Nick to confront Pa Keegan, leading to more deaths before the day is out.

Winter Kills is clearly based on the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The film isn't too subtle about this. You don't name the low-level hood hired to kill the alleged Presidential assassin "Joe Diamond" and not expect people to think "Jack Ruby". What I found curious in Winter Kills is that, essentially, it never fully decided if it was going to be a straightforward political thriller or a spoof of Kennedy conspiracy theories.

As a side note, while the Keegan family is meant to be the Kennedys, I don't think Nick Keegan would ever be confused for either Robert or Edward. 

You have some pretty oddball moments in Winter Kills that do play like farce. Sterling Hayden in what essentially is a cameo seems to be spoofing his Dr. Strangelove performance. Barking out his lines, if memory serves right with a cigar in his mouth, Hayden seemed more crazed here than as General Jack D. Ripper. You have an uncredited Elizabeth Taylor and her then-husband, Senator John Warner, also popping up. Why exactly was Toshiro Mifune in this film? Why was he named Keith? He too had pretty much a cameo, and odd ideas of Mifune as the Keegan Japanese houseboy pop up. At least Erin Grey as "Beautiful Woman Three" had a reason for being there.

Maybe they all thought Winter Kills was some kind of lark. The problem is that Jeff Bridges plays it pretty straight. Permanently bamboozled by what is going on, Bridges looks to make Nick someone genuinely attempting to find the truth about his half-brother's killing while everyone else seems to be playing a long joke at his expense. Just before Pa bites the dust in a way that admittedly had me laughing, I half-expected John Huston to look up at his son and yell, "PSYCH!".

You do get the chance to see Bridges constantly shirtless, so I suppose writer/director William Richert made full use of Bridges' appeal. You even had both Bridges and Bauer appear fully nude after their intense sex session. You did not, however, have an explanation why "Yvette Malone" (whom we later find out is really a Jenny O'Brien) had a French accent.

Winter Kills does have good moments, almost all of them due to John Huston. He plays this as a lark, throwing out great lines all over the place. "You abandoned my ship. I got sixty million bucks floating there, and you take off like she's Friday night's hooker," he berates Nick when he comes home. Huston is having a whale of a time camping it up to the Nth degree. Every time he is on screen, you get some rapid-fire delivery of someone not bothering to take any of this seriously. 

One would have hoped that such a thing could have rubbed off on Anthony Perkins as the mysterious Cerutti. In his final scene, he ends up moving in such a way that I thought that he was either crazy or a malfunctioning auto animatronic. It was simultaneously hilarious and bizarre.

As a side note, one of the characters in Winter Kills is named Gameboy Baker (Ralph Meeker). I could think of something else whenever I heard anything about Gameboy.

There are good things in Winter Kills. Maurice Jarre's score is much better than the film. The film does not feel slow. It does, however, seem at war with itself. It could have gone all-in on spoofing conspiracy theories. It could have taken the premise seriously. Instead, Winter Kills seems to want it both ways. I do not know if it works as well as it could have. I do at least understand why Winter Kills is something of a cult film. It's not one that I share but bless them for trying.

I mentioned why I focused on the date of the assassination: February 22, 1960. If we go by the date, I figure that President Keegan was running for reelection as 1960 would be a Presidential election year. It would also be early in the election campaign since the election would have been in November, nine months away. Given that this President Keegan would have been out of office in 1964, it doesn't seem worth the trouble to bump him off at all. I do not know why this detail stuck out to me. However, I am a reviewer that tends to get hung up on specific details, so there it is.

Finally, Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.  

DECISION: C+

Bewitched: A Review

BEWITCHED

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Shirley MacLaine. 

There was a brief time when filmmakers decided to raid old TV Guide issues for their next projects. Writer/director Nora Ephron decided that she was going to take a different tactic with these television-to-film adaptations by going meta. Thus, we got Bewitched, a curious and contradictory effort to simultaneously adapt the television series and be separate from the television series. Unsure of itself, Bewitched tries to be clever but ends up only confused about itself.

Isabel Bigelow (Nicole Kidman) is a literal witch who wants to give up witchcraft and live as a mortal. 

Quick side note: it is unclear if Bigelow is Isabel's actual last name or something she made up on the spot. The film tries to have it both ways.

Isabel's father Nigel (Michael Caine) is appalled at her plans but cannot change her mind. With that, Isabel tries to get off the magic but finds it hard to not use it as she is unfamiliar with life in the mortal world. Into this situation, she stumbles into Jack Wyatt (Will Ferrell). Jack is a well-known actor whose latest film, Last Year in Katmandu, flopped big-time. Looking to revive his flailing career, his agent Richie (Jason Schwartzman) gets him to agree to a reboot of the television series Bewitched. To placate Jack's ego, the show will now put his character of Darrin as the focus versus Darrin's wife, Samantha.

Jack thinks that Isabel, who makes clear that she is not an actress, would be perfect as Samantha. Despite never having seen Bewitched (Nigel saying that it degraded their kind), Isabel is cast, along with legendary acting diva Iris Smythson (Shirley MacLaine) as Endora. Isabel, good natured and naive about things, is enraged to find that Jack and Richie are playing her for a sucker. Hell hath no fury like a witch scorned. Isabel is not above using her witch powers to get back at Jack.

Jack for his part is befuddled by things. He grows more befuddled when Isabel's Aunt Clara (Carole Shelley) puts a hex on Jack to make him totally besotted and subservient to Isabel. Fortunately for Isabel, she is able to literally rewind the past to make all this go away. She rewinds and erases the past twice, I should add. Will the rakish Nigel fall for Iris, who is revealed to be a witch herself? Will Jack need the help of Uncle Arthur (Steve Carrell) to sort out his feelings and screen credit for Isabel?

As I thought on Bewitched, I thought that the idea of being meta with the material in and of itself isn't a bad one. One could have some fun with winking a bit at the audience about a woman who is a witch playing a woman who is a witch. The problem is that Bewitched is simply poorly executed. Both Nora Ephron and her writing partner, her sister Delia, were trying to be too clever with the material. Instead of being witty and clever, they ended up muddled and confused. From what I saw, Bewitched tried to have it both ways. It wanted to spell out that it was fully aware of the source material (no pun intended). It also wanted to be part of the material.

 

Let's see if I can set the situation for how Bewitched needlessly tied itself into knots. Everyone is aware of the television series Bewitched, along with the series' premise (mortal man marries a witch, hijinks ensue with the wife and her witch family causing chaos unintentional or not). On the show, you have characters like Darrin's mother-in-law Endora, and Samantha's Aunt Clara and Uncle Arthur. So far, so good. 

HOWEVER, Aunt Clara, the Bewitched television character on the reboot that Isabel is in, is also Isabel's actual aunt also named Clara. Isabel's Aunt Clara also happens to have the same accident-prone nature of the television series' Aunt Clara. I don't think that there is any way to make sense out of that. If Bewitched the movie is to be believed, the television Aunt Clara is somehow also Isabel's Aunt Clara. Either that, or there is a wild and irrational coincidence that Isabel happens to have a literal Aunt Clara who is exactly like the character of Aunt Clara on a television show that Isabel was forbidden to watch prior to entering the mortal world.

The Uncle Arthur situation is even more puzzling to irrational to downright nuts. Jack had mentioned earlier that Uncle Arthur was his favorite character on Bewitched, the television show. Near the film's conclusion, Uncle Arthur appears to Darrin in the way Uncle Arthur would appear on Bewitched, the show. This would mean that Jack is seeing a literal figment of his imagination as he should know that Uncle Arthur does not exist.

Yet, somehow, Uncle Arthur appears to be real, fully involved with Isabel's witch world as he says that he knows how that world operates. Carrell here is apparently playing a Paul Lynde impersonator playing Paul Lynde playing Uncle Arthur. I say this because Carrell adopts Paul Lynde's voice and mannerisms as Uncle Arthur. I thought Carrell's Paul Lynde impersonation was wildly exaggerated. Even for someone as camp as Paul Lynde, he was never that over-the-top. 

I figure that Carrell was attempting to play the Uncle Arthur from the television show. However, by the time he pops it, Bewitched is so confused about whether it is trying to be an adaptation of the television show or be a movie about adapting the original show that one simply does not know what to think. "I'm about to be killed by a fictional character," Jack screams out. That, I think sums up what is wrong with Bewitched. I get the desire to not be a straightforward film version of the television series. I can even respect the desire to play with the premise. What fails, what ultimately fails Bewitched is that it never decided which route to take. As such, it wanted to take both routes, which ended up confusing everyone.  

Bewitched puts in elements that never get a solid answer. We learn that Iris is actually a witch. We see her casting spells. Yet, we never know exactly why she is a witch. We do not learn if Nigel actually falls in love with Iris or is himself placed under a love spell. We also pretty much drop them from Bewitched, leaving such questions unanswered.

Perhaps the worst element in Bewitched is in how Isabel erased a long section of the Isabel/Jack relationship by literally rewinding what we had seen and erasing it from ever happening. It is a cheap and lazy way to not deal with the situation that the film had taken our time to present. One wonders why Isabel simply did not do this from the get-go. Worse, she does this rewind again when Jack's ex-wife Sheila (Katie Finneran) appears. At first, Isabel's witchcraft causes a light to fall on her, which would have killed her. Saying to herself that it was probably a bit too much, she just rewinds and has her merely whipped by a wind machine. It was the worst thing that the Ephron sisters could have done to move the plot forward. 

It is unfortunate that Bewitched was such a disaster because I think the actors genuinely tried to make it good. Nicole Kidman was game to play Isabel as this woman who wants a normal life but ends up in the most unnormal world of television. She does well as Isabel and when playing Samantha. Will Ferrell too I think tried to make Jack's egocentrism humorous. If you like Ferrell's manic, madcap manner, you will find Bewitched tolerable. If you don't, you will find Bewitched unbearable. The film has a montage of clips from his past films. I liked the quick glimpses of Sunday's Fool, Atticus Rex, An Onion for Wally and the infamous Last Year in Katmandu (where he plays a Vietnam War soldier from the South, a Roman soldier, a boxer and a Himalayan explorer respectively). I get that Jack is supposed to be an idiot. I don't get how he could plausibly have been a star, even in this world. 

Michael Caine and Shirley MacLaine were here for a good paycheck where they could be as over-the-top as their hearts wanted. To be fair, Caine appears to have tried to play the situations straight with a hint of mischief. He has a nice section where he pops up to berate his daughter while she's shopping. I hope he kept the Newman's Own box where we see his face rather than Paul Newman's. MacLaine camped it up to almost unheard-of levels. I guess she figured that she was playing an over-the-top acting diva who just happened to be a witch. As such, she just ran with it and never looked back. 

Bewitched is misguided and misdirected in every sense of the word. They thought that they were being clever with the material. They were actually being incoherent with the material. Bewitched will not put a spell on anyone, except perhaps one to have you fall asleep.

DECISION: D+

El Rebozo de Soledad (Soledad's Shawl): A Review

EL REBOZO DE SOLEDAD (SOLEDAD'S SHAWL)

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Pedro Armendariz.

I do not think that people outside of Latin America realize the beauty of Mexican cinema from their own Golden Age. If people consider Mexican films, they think of Guillermo del Toro or Alfonso Cuarón. Long before them, however, there were filmmakers like Emilio "El Indio" Fernandez and Roberto Gavaldon. His film El Rebozo de Soledad (Soledad's Shawl) is a beautiful looking film, with good performances that still impress all these decades later. 

Told mostly in flashback, Soledad's Shawl is of the experiences of Dr. Alberto Robles (Arturo de Cordova). He is an idealistic doctor who has gone to the rural town of Santa Cruz to start his medical practice. Here, he has to combat the traditional folk medicine of the curanderos. These local faith healers are nothing more than witch doctors to Dr. Robles. He finds it his mission to fight these superstitions, just as the curanderos fight him.

One person whom he does fight is Roque Suazo (Pedro Armendariz). He owns vast land around Santa Cruz, but he is no grandee. He is pretty rural in his outlook and manner. After his beloved mother passes away despite the curanderos' efforts, he leaves the area. This is the perfect opportunity for corrupt official David Acosta (Carlos Lopez Moctezuma) to sweep in take the property, which he rents out while pocketing the money.

Robles stays out of things. He also is disillusioned by the local community's fierce faith in curanderos. He decides to leave Santa Cruz over the urging of his friend, Father Juan (Domingo Soler). At the train station, he performs an impromptu tracheotomy on an infant. Now convinced that he is needed in town after, Robles stays. 

He helps save the arm of Mauro (Jaime Fernandez), the brother of local beauty Soledad (Estela Inda). Soledad is indeed solitary, but she is loyal and caring. In gratitude, she helps Dr. Robles at his clinic. It is here that Suazo returns to his lands. He is first enraged to find Soledad and Mauro squatting on his property. He softens somewhat when he finds that they were deceived about the ownership. He also finds Soledad beautiful, a feeling that is not mutual. Suazo presses but does not force anything on Soledad.

She is in love with Robles. Robles does not want to admit that he too is in love with her. Things come to a head for Robles, Soledad and Suazo when she goes to a local wedding. Will Suazo finally force himself on the virginal Soledad? Will Robles be able to save her? Will he go to Mexico City and find curing wealthy hypochondriacs is better than curing peasants? 

In perhaps a case of something getting lost in translation, the Spanish title of Soledad's Shawl may have a double meaning. El Rebozo de Soledad does indeed mean "Soledad's Shawl", the head and shoulder covering that Suazo attempts to present to her as a token of his affection. Soledad, however, can also mean "solitude". As such, the title could mean "the Shawl of Solitude". This is I think accurate as the three principal characters are alone. Robles is the most alone, as he is left to mourn his own losses romantic and idealistic. Soledad too is alone, her love for Robles mostly ignored by him. Suazo is also alone, though his actions are more brutal.

Gavaldon coadapted Javier Lopez Ferrer's novel with Jose Revueltas and with uncredited work from actress Inda. They did a masterful job of showing just enough without having to be graphic. The most effective "less is more" moment is when Suazo corners Soledad under a bridge. Here, it is clear exactly what he did to her. However, we never see anything. We see him approach the frightened Soledad. We see him take her shawl, which is clean and well-maintained. We then see it trampled underfoot. 

After that, Soledad's shawl is torn and battered. Francisco Dominguez's score, Gavaldon's direction and the performances from Armendariz and Inda all tells us what has happened without showing us. 

Another element in Soledad's Shawl is Gabriel Figueroa's cinematography. Figueroa was one of the greatest cinematographers of all time, easily ranking alongside figures like Gregg Toland, James Wong Howe and Roger Deakins. The sequence where Robles, Father Juan and Soledad are in a dilapidated church is breathtaking, enhanced by the sound design of Robles' echoes. Soledad's Shawl is a beautiful looking film.

The film is also strongly acted. Arturo de Cordova, like Pedro Armendariz, spoke English, allowing both of them to go from Mexican to American films. De Cordova's Dr. Robles is a strong performance. He is both idealistic and demoralized, strong and shattered. We see him initially as a broken man, the weight of the tragedies he has lived heavy on him. In the flashbacks, we see how he got to his position. However, we also see him revived when he calls out the quacks that he came close to joining. In his stubbornness, in his moral rectitude, de Cordova excels as Dr. Robles.

Inda too brought Soledad's integrity, innocence and devotion to her brother and Dr. Robles. She plays a traditional Mexican woman, but also one not afraid to stand up to Suazo on occasion. 

Armendariz has the most complex role in Soledad's Shawl. He is in some ways a good man. He will not allow the corrupt Acosta to bully him. He also has joie de vivre when he arrives at the wedding, bringing the gift of a gun and shawl to the groom and bride. This is a man of the soil, but also one who watches for his community. However, Suazo is also someone who had reached the end of his patience with Soledad. His actions are cruel. Despite this, one senses that he did feel something of regret, which he did not do when he whipped another squatter and then bullied him into not telling Acosta who did it.

This is a good scene. Robles is attending to the man's wounds, with Acosta badgering the victim to tell him who did it. Suazo, who is in the operating room, says nothing, but makes clear what will happen if the man squeals. Frightened, the victim insists that "the devil" did it, adding that if he says more, the devil will do worse. Perhaps the viewer does get something of a catharsis when Suazo meets justice, but there is still a twinge of regret. 

Beautifully acted and films, Soledad's Shawl is an interesting tale that manages to end with a touch of hope despite the tragedies we have seen. 

DECISION: B-

Little Caesar: A Review (Review #2015)

LITTLE CAESAR

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Glenda Farrell. 

If people today think "Little Caesar", they will probably think of the pizza. That is perfectly reasonable. However, I hope that people do not forget about another Little Caesar, a brilliant gangster film that was one of the films to set the standard for early gangland portrayals. With strong performances and a surprisingly short runtime, Little Caesar showcases the rise and fall of a truly villainous crime boss.

Caesar Bandello Enrico or "Rico" (Edward G. Robinson) and his friend Joe Massarra (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.) are small-time crooks holding up gas stations. Rico wants to hit the big time and become a crime boss in Chicago. Joe wants to be a professional dancer. Loyalty ties them together when they go to Chicago. Rico joins the gang of local midlevel boss Sam Vettori (Stanley Fields). Joe is nominally a member, but his main line is working as a dancer with Olga Stassoff (Glenda Farrell) at the Peacock Club. Joe and Olga fall in love and Joe wants out of the gang. 

Rico, however, won't let his buddy go. In fact, he forces Joe to be part of a holdup at the Peacock on New Year's Eve. Reluctantly, and despite Olga's pleas, Joe goes along with it. He doesn't, however, go along with Rico killing Police Commissioner McClure (Landers Stevens), who was leaving the club. There were firm orders from the top that no one was to hit McClure. In fairness, Rico and his crew did not know that McClure was at the Peacock when they held it up. However, Rico, who got the nickname "Little Caesar" is a quick-trigger man, always itching for a fight and a way to dethrone those above him.

Little Caesar manages to do just that, using his bullying and belligerence to push anyone in his way. If it means ordering a hit on a former ally whose conscience gets the best of him, so be it. Rico eventually manages to push everyone out to take over the whole racket. He also insists that Joe be by his side. Joe flat-out refuses, putting his and Olga's life in danger. Will Rico actually kill his longtime friend? What will be the end of Rico?

It seems almost unbelievable that Edward G. Robinson could become one of the definite gangsters. He was short and not traditionally handsome. Moreover, in real life Robinson was an urbane art collector, among the first to discover such figures as Frida Kahlo. He also hated violence and guns, so much so that he had to have his eyes taped open to stop him from closing them in reflex whenever he fired the pistol. However, I think that is what makes him so effective as Caesar Enrico. This is a cold, ruthless individual, cocky, arrogant, one who delights in being deadly.

Robinson makes Rico someone with a permanent chip on his shoulder. He also makes him a raging egomaniac. When he manages to make a getaway, he survives in a flophouse. Once he hears a newspaper article mocking him, his ego becomes so enraged that he foolishly calls the police. Robinson's rapid-fire delivery and gruff manner work so well in Little Caesar.

Robinson also does something that I do not think people give him enough credit for. He makes him a sad and tragic figure. In the film's climax, he faces off against Joe, with Rico pointing his gun at his unarmed friend. Mervyn LeRoy uses a close-up of Robinson to show him crumbling, the thought of killing his lifelong friend creating his first emotional turmoil. The determination in Rico's face starts collapsing, the conflict within emerging into doubt and fear. It is as if we can see Rico asking himself, "Can I kill someone that I genuinely love?"

The film ends in a brilliant ironic note. As he is mowed down by his nemesis Sargeant Flaherty (Thomas Jackson), Rico looks genuinely stunned but still defiant. He first mocks Flaherty by pointing out that he kept to his pledge of never letting him put handcuffs on him. Rico soon, however, realizes that he is at the end. "Mother of mercy, is this the end of Rico?" he asks. Rico, damned to death, does not realize that he died behind a billboard advertising the show Tipsy Topsy Turvy, starring the duo of Olga Stassoff and Joe Massara.

Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., I think also plays against type. He does not come to mind when thinking of gangsters. Fairbanks, Jr. usually played suave, cheery men. Here, he does well as Joe, a man who would prefer dancing over killing but who still stays loyal to his friend. 

I do not think it would be accurate to call Glenda Farrell's Olga as Joe's moll. She technically has her career separate from being merely a mobster's floozy. I found her a bit overdramatic as Olga. However, her last scene where she urges Joe not to flee but to call the police and turn state's evidence is strong. She tells Joe that they cannot run from where Rico cannot find them. Moreover, she adds that they cannot run forever. There is a scene where Olga literally finds a gun in Joe's pocket. I could not help smile that in this case, he wasn't happy to see her. 

There were certain scenes that genuinely moved me. Robinson facing the prospect of killing Joe is one of them. The struggle of Tony Passa (William Collier, Jr.) with his conscience and how he hated hurting his Italian mama were quite moving. We end up wanting him to get a new life and confess to his childhood priest but know that such a thing is impossible. 

I get the sense that Little Caesar could have played as a silent film. We get title cards from time to time. We also see that some of the staging looks as if the actors were playing to the microphone.  

Little Caesar moves fast and has a defining performance from Edward G. Robinson as one of the best gangsters in film. In a sense, one can say that this is not the end of Rico, not by a long shot.

DECISION: A-

Her Husband's Trademark: A Review

HER HUSBAND'S TRADEMARK

It is unfortunate that many people think that silent film acting was overwrought and exaggerated. While there were, I figure, silent film actors that did at times go over-the-top, there were some that were quite natural on screen. One of them was Gloria Swanson. Best remembered now as the demented Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard, I think more people should be aware of her pre-Sunset Boulevard career. A case in point is Her Husband's Trademark, where Swanson displays a naturalness and beauty that shows how she was one of the leading ladies of early cinema.

James Berkley (Stuart Holmes) appears to be a successful New York financier. However, his business acumen is really a front, his finances a house of cards. He manages to lure investors by using his unsuspecting wife Lois (Swanson) as his "trademark" to trade favors with. Lois knows nothing of James' financial predicaments or how she is being used as bait to charm investors. 

Into their world reenters Allyn Franklin (Richard Wayne), an old college friend to both men who once loved Lois. Allyn has recently received a grant for huge oil rights in Mexico from the government, making him a very wealthy man. James now thinks that if he can dupe Allyn into handing the rights over to his company, he can solve all his problems and have a vast fortune. Under the guise of visiting Allyn on business and seeing Old Mexico in person, he persuades Lois to join him.

Lois herself still has feelings for Allyn, though she remains faithful to her husband. Allyn, for his part, still carries a torch for our beauty. Eventually, he confesses his feelings and betrays them with a kiss. Lois, shocked, at first pushes to return to the United States, unaware that James' deal still has not gone through. She soon learns that James has been using Lois as that trademark and declares that she will leave him for Allyn. The sudden arrival of Mexican bandit and self-proclaimed General Juan Lopez (Clarence Burton) puts them all in danger. Will they manage to escape the Mexican horde storming Don Allyn's hacienda? Will they all survive? Will the gringos manage to make it across the Mexican border to safety? Will true love win out?

In Sunset Boulevard, Swanson as Desmond comments to another character, "We didn't need dialogue, we had faces", adding that perhaps with the exception of Greta Garbo there were no faces that could match Swanson/Desmond. Her Husband's Trademark proves Gloria Swanson right: she does have a face, a beautiful face that conveys much on screen. Contrary to what I think is a common misperception, silent films did not have mugging or exaggerated poses. Her Husband's Trademark at the most has one moment that can be seen as overacted. That is when the Mexican bandits are attempting to take Lois by force, with both James and Allyn defending her. You can see Swanson's body movements being a bit overdone. However, that is a total outlier to her overall performance.

Gloria Swanson is beautiful and charming as Lois. She is quite natural when working with others. Of particular note is her grace and kindness when James' parents (Charles Ogle and Edythe Chapman) unexpectedly come to visit. Holmes' James does his best to hide his displeasure at them coming when he is close to landing a big contract with Allyn. He behaves like a total jerk to his aging parents, which is perfect for the role. Swanson, on the other hand, shows Lois' charm and genuine care and concern for these two nice old people. Swanson is quite natural on screen, eluding charm, grace, beauty and elegance. 

Holmes may be the villain, and he does show in his performance how sleazy he can be. That, however, is nothing in comparison to Lucien Littlefield as the appropriately named Slithy Winters, James' right-hand man. Wayne is appropriately rugged as the true love interest, working well with Swanson.

The program for the Plaza Classic Film Festival notes that Her Husband's Trademark "contains offensive depictions of Mexican bandits". Personally, as a Mexican American, I was more amused than outraged in the images. I think some in the audience had a similar reaction, more chuckles than shock at the bandidos about to take our white woman for their own pleasures. I was neither angered nor pleased to see Burton made up as General Lopez, the Mexican bandit. I do not remember if he had heavy makeup, but I do not think it was as overdone as other times when white actors don brownface. 

As a side note, I struggle with the idea of having inoffensive depictions of Mexican bandits as they are, well, bandits. Yet I digress.

The presentation was elevated by the score specifically written for this presentation. Enrique Ponce wrote a wonderful score for Her Husband's Trademark. It was a nice chamber piece with bits of piano, guitar and trumpet performed by violinists Stephen Nordstrom and Leslee Way, violist Ray Arreola and cellist Michael Andrew Way. 

The film has wonderful location footage, lending to the thrilling climax of the daring escape to the United States. It also shows wonderful title cards that became almost characters of their own. One title card introducing Slithy has an illustration of him as either a puppet or of the puppet master. These little details show character and setting which might be overlooked. 

Her Husband's Trademark shows at least two things. The first is that silent film acting could be natural and not the cartoonish mugging that many imagine it is. The second is that Gloria Swanson was correctly seen as one of the great stars of the silent era. Beautiful and talented, I hope that more of Gloria Swanson's silent work is rediscovered. 

DECISION: B+

Run Silent, Run Deep: A Review

 

RUN SILENT, RUN DEEP

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Clark Gable. It is also part of the Plaza Classic Film Festival.

Underwater menaces plague ships at war. Run Silent, Run Deep is a good and entertaining film about men fighting battles external and internal aboard a submarine.

In 1942, Commander P.J. Richardson (Clark Gable) lost his submarine to the Japanese vessel Akikaze in the dangerous Bungo Straits. While he manages to save his crew, Richardson's loss still haunts him. A year later, he is still assigned to a desk job when he learns that the submarine Nerka is returning to Pearl Harbor. The Nerka is in need of a new captain. Most of the crew expects Executive Officer Jim Bledsoe (Burt Lancaster) to be promoted. Bledsoe didn't count on a superior officer's need to redeem himself and get a second chance to avenge his men and his honor.

Richardson is by-the-book, not dictatorial but obsessed with drills. The crew grumbles about the endless drills. Their irritation grows when Richardson deliberately avoids a Japanese ship. Why drill so much if they are not going to engage the enemy? 

Simple. Richardson is set on going back into the Bungo Straits and take down the Akikaze. To do that, he must ignore orders for him to avoid the straits. Richardson does destroy another ship on his way to pursue the Akikaze, but at a cost. Richardson too faces health issues that may make him incapable of completing his own personal mission. As such, he must relinquish the Nerka to Bledsoe, who will sail back to Pearl Harbor. 

However, an unexpected radio message from none other than Tokyo Rose herself alerts Bledsoe on how the Japanese are having such success in sinking American ships. The Akikaze already thinks that the Nerka has been sunk, so the Americans have an advantage. Will Bledsoe end up finishing what Richardson started? Who will live to see victory, and who will end up buried at sea?

Run Silent, Run Deep is not a slice-of-life about life in a naval submarine. It is meant as a portrait of men at war and men at odds. In this situation, Run Silent, Run Deep director Robert Wise does well with his two main leads. Richardson and Bledsoe are rivals, but they are always professional. Run Silent, Run Deep does well in making clear that for all of his frustrations and dislike, Bledsoe would never contemplate a mutiny or disobey orders.

Clark Gable is appropriately commanding in his role of Richardson. The film does allow him moments of regret, even humor. Both of these are in the early sections of the film. Gable's professionalism is evident when he attempts to take down the Akikaze the first time. He shows Richardson's frustration at being behind the desk. There is a brief scene where Bledsoe first confronts Richardson in a last-ditch effort to request that he give up commanding the Nerka. This scene, while not funny and played perfectly straight, does something interesting. 

It takes place at Richardson's home. As such, we get to see a different side of him. Here, he is the gardener caring for his tree. We also see him advising his wife (Mary LaRoche) to prepare lemonade with a touch of gin. This clues us in that Richardson is fully aware of Bledsoe's resentment about losing the Nerka. It also shows Richardson to be a family man, giving the viewer an idea that he is not a lone wolf seeking validation. Instead, he is a determined man seeking justice.

Lancaster is able to match Gable in quiet intensity. Bledsoe is a serious man, but he too has a moment where he lets down his guard. Again, it is early on, when he is genuinely touched, even amused, at the gift of a jacket with "Captain" on it from the crew.

Run Silent, Run Deep does give us some bits about the type of men aboard the Nerka. It is surprising to see Don Rickles of all people pop up as a crewman. Here, he is sarcastic but with a soft edge, far removed from his Merchant of Venom persona. Jimmie Bates in his small role of naive crewman Jessie is amusing, and we end up caring about him.

The film does not shy away from showing the conflict between the men. However, it does not dwell on them, showing them to be professional and mature (except perhaps for their habit of tapping the backside of a pinup for good luck). 

While the battle scenes do look a little dated, one can roll with the overall effect. The attack on the Nerka is well-filmed and ultimately moving. The film also has an excellent musical score by Franz Waxman. For history buffs, we get some idea of what a Tokyo Rose broadcast would have been like. The film does well to have our enchanting Japanese female voice say that they call her "Tokyo Rose", since no one actually used that name on air. Still, we get to hear that mix of American swing music and attempts at downbeat propaganda.

Run Silent, Run Deep is good for people who enjoy action and war films. Some of the effects are dated. Still, it is well-acted and entertaining. Run Silent, Run Deep is worth diving into.

DECISION: B-

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? A Review

WHO'S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF?

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Elizabeth Taylor.

Among their other sobriquets, the acting couple of Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor were known as The Battling Burtons, boozing and brawling their way through nine films and several headlines. Sometimes, their public personas and domestic squabbles could be played for laughs, like in The Taming of the Shrew. Other times, they were played for frightening drama. Such is the case with Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? as dark a tale of domestic strife as has been committed to film.

Over the course of an evening, associate history professor George (Burton) and his wife, Martha (Taylor) host a new couple at their home for lots of drinks. Biology professor Nick (George Segal) is young and handsome. His wife Honey (Sandy Dennis) is mousy and scatterbrained. Even though it is already in the early morning hours, George and Martha keep insisting that Nick and Honey continue their midnight caps.

Martha, daughter of the university president, is a harpy to her henpecked husband. They take turns expressing love and hate toward the other in equal measure. Honey cannot handle liquor, leading to her becoming ill. In the midst of all this, Martha mentions her and George's son, who is about to turn 16. The mention of their son unleashes a very strange anger from George. Nick and Honey have no children, though Nick married Honey when he thought she was pregnant, but which turned out to be a hysterical pregnancy.

As everyone keeps drinking and fighting, with bits of affection slipping through, the foursome eventually ends up at a roadhouse where secrets are revealed. Here, Martha declares total war on George. These wicked games of "Humiliate the Host" are followed up by such horrors as "Get the Guests" and "Hump the Hostess". It may be dawning, but for one of our gruesome couples, the son will set to heartbreaking results. Who is afraid of Virginia Woolf? The answer is a deeply tragic one.

An evening with George and Martha is like entering the twentieth circle of Hell. These two figures, vicious and cruel to everyone around them, at first appall us with their insults and anger. As Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? continues, we start seeing something different. Behind their backbiting and barbs are two very hurt, pained people. It is a strange coupling in that they would appear to hate and resent each other. Yet, while George and Martha are nasty towards each other, they are also holding on to the other for dear life. One senses that life has made them bitter, the optimism of their early years sapped into a mix of resentments, recriminations and resignation about where they are. 

Despite all that they do to the other, we end up feeling great sadness for them. George and Martha may at times physically assault the other. Yet, they also reveal that behind their outward animosity and anger is still a spark of genuine love. That makes it all the more tragic.

The entire credited cast (Burton, Taylor, Seagal and Dennis) received Oscar nominations for Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? The Academy favored the women as Taylor and Dennis emerged victorious that year. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is in my view Elizabeth Taylor's finest hour as an actress. She deglamorized herself here, looking disheveled and bordering on the brink of total chaos. Taylor shifts throughout the film perfectly. In the beginning, she is tough, belligerent, a mouthy broad who seems to take delight in bashing her seemingly weak husband. As the film progresses, she takes on a mix of defiance and defensiveness. "I'm loud, and I'm vulgar, and I wear the pants in the house because somebody's got to, but I am NOT a monster," she proclaims to George. It is as if despite her vulgarity and cruelty, Martha is also desperate for love and kindness.

When the film reaches its climax and we learn the truth about George and Martha's son, Martha's emotional collapse is extremely heartbreaking to witness. Elizabeth Taylor will move the viewer in her role. It is a painful thing to see, Martha losing the one thing that has given her a sense of joy. It is sad, so terribly sad. Despite her earlier claims, she cannot stand it. As dawn rises, we see Martha fall, the pain and loss she now has making us tear up for her. That mix of cruelty and bravado comes undone, and Taylor makes us sympathize with someone who has done so much to hurt and humiliate George.

Dennis, winning for Supporting Actress, makes Honey into this wimpy, dim figure, easily pushed into agreeing to things that did not happen. She is almost crazed as Honey, indulging in irrationality but also deeply vulnerable and hurt.

While Richard Burton did not win Best Actor, one of his seven eventual losses, he is brilliant as George. Martha calls him a flop and a simp (long before the term became more common). Yet, behind his facade of intellectual wimp is someone who is as cruel if not crueler than Martha. Burton makes George into an eerily calm figure, calculating at times, aware of how he can hurt others. He has a wonderful monologue where he talks about a childhood classmate who killed both his parents on separate occasions. It is a spooky scene, acted with quite foreboding. George is at times self-pitying, but he is also lashing out at the frustrations of his life to painful ends.

George Segal, to my mind, is the weak link in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? It is not that he gave a bad performance. His scene with Burton when he reveals more than he should about his life pre-and-post Honey along with his idea of literally sleeping his way to the top is good. It is just that to me, Segal does not have the looks or build that I imagine that the seductive Nick should have. Nick is supposed to be 28, but Segal looks older than his 32 years. 

Everything in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? works. It is a surprise that this is the directorial film debut for Mike Nichols. He got excellent performances out of his cast. I would say that Nichols directed each actor to what I think are their definitive performances. He also made all the other elements of the film work. There is Alex North's score, which is elegant and mournful. Sam O'Steen's editing was top-notch, particularly the transition from when George slams the breaks on the car to Honey's wild interpretive dance. Haskell Wexler's cinematography gave us this stark world. The highlight here is when George and Martha declare total war on each other, the streetlights making them look as if they were in some living nightmare. Ernest Lehman's adaptation of Edward Albee's play manages to open up the story just enough without it looking like a filmed play. 

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? goes from a horror show to a deep tragedy. It has brilliant performances from the cast. It flows smoothly and never lags throughout its two-hour-plus runtime. At the end of the film, we find out the answer to the question, "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf?" (the title coming from a play on the song "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf?" and writer Virginia Woolf). The answer is again, a heartbreaking one. 

DECISION: A+

Murphy's Romance: A Review

MURPHY'S ROMANCE

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is James Garner.

What happens when you find Love for the Last Time? Murphy's Romance shows that in matters of the heart, wisdom can be stronger than passion.

Divorcee Emma Moriarty (Sally Field) is starting a new life in Arizona with her young son, Jake (Corey Haim). Here, she will train and house horses for the local ranchers and cattlemen in her new home. The house itself may be dilapidated, but it will be just fine for them. As she starts finding her way, metaphorically and literally, in Eunice, Arizona, she encounters idiosyncratic pharmacist Murphy Jones (James Garner). Murph both fits into Eunice and is distinct from his fellow residents. The eligible widower plays fiddle in a local honky-tonk band but also has No Nukes and Re-Forest America stickers on his prized old-style automobile. Murph insists on parking it outside his pharmacy and detests the parking meter the City imposed there, paying the parking tickets but refusing to pay the meter. Eventually, he offers the suggestion that he will not trouble the Eunice council in exchange for the City putting up a tree in place of the meter at Murph's expense.

Emma and Murphy develop a friendship and perhaps start harboring feelings for each other. However, things take an unexpected turn when Emma's ex and Jake's father Bobby Jack (Brian Kerwin) comes to call on his ex-wife. Despite her dislike for Bobby Jack, she knows that Jake loves him. She also finds that she cannot fully let go of her hunky ex-husband and lets him stay at her ranch. All this irritates Murph, who is surreptitiously helping Emma by giving Jake a part-time job and sending business to her via his friends and neighbors. Will Emma go for the older but wiser Murphy or be entangled with Bobby Jack? Fate has a few twists and turns before the Emma finds the right man.

While Sally Field is the central character in Murphy's Romance, the film gives James Garner a plum role that earned him the sole Oscar nomination of his career. One can see why he alone was singled out for his performance as Murphy Jones (the film receiving a second Oscar nomination for Cinematography). Murphy Jones is a well-rounded individual. He is a salt of the earth person who keeps to his code. I would figure that he would be a liberal politically, putting him at odds with the community at large. "You can carry a gun, but you can't get an abortion", he tells Emma on their first meeting when talking about what kind of town Eunice is.

However, Murph also reads the letters of Stonewall Jackson and will not pay the parking meter where he stations his beloved roadster out of principle. That puts him closer to a libertarian, which again is out of step with his town. Murphy is also quietly appalled at the violence that he sees in the rare movie that he is talked into going to with Emma, Jake and Billy Jack. Murphy is his own man, and James Garner makes him believable and wise. Despite their age difference (the film ends with Murphy telling Emma how old he really is, a question that he has either dodged or refused to answer), we can see how they can develop a romance. 

The scene where the four of them go to the movie perfectly captures what kind of people they are. Director Martin Ritt shows Emma, Jake, Billy Jack and Murphy in various reactions to an unseen violent scene. We see shock, confusion, enjoyment and dismay. Each actor reveals what kind of people they are in this scene. It is a well-directed and acted moment.

Sally Field gives Emma a quality of gumption, a woman who is strong despite her small stature. She expresses irritation to downright anger when told by a female bank officer that they will not give her a lone because she has no husband to cosign. Emma grows in the film while making her vulnerable. Her reaction after a car accident is both funny and endearing. It is a delightful, amusing and captivating performance.

It is a shame that Corey Haim was never able to overcome his personal demons. We see such promise from him in Murphy's Romance as Jake. He is clever, loving towards his parents but also able to play a teen who is a mix of innocent and knowing. Late in the film, he tells Murph that he is aware of the card tricks that the father he loves was pulling. Yet, Jake clearly loves Billy Jack for all his faults. 

Brian Kerwin is quite good as Billy Jack. We can believe that he can charm his way back to Emma's heart (and maybe even bed) despite her common sense. He is shown as a schemer and dreamer, but one who does not fool Murphy. The tug-of-war between them has funny moments, such as when they keep cutting in to dance with her, leaving her in a bizarre loop. It is to where we do not hate Billy Jack, but we do not think well of him either. Billy Jack is a loathsome scoundrel, which makes Kerwin's performance so good.

Harriet Frank, Jr. and Irvin Ravetch's adaptation of Max Schott's novella gives the actors strong material to work with. 

Murphy's Romance is also blessed with Carole King writing both the score and at least two songs for the film. The opening and closing songs, Running Lonely and Love for the Last Time, capture the feel of the story. It is surprising that she was not singled out for Oscar consideration for either the songs or score, which all work well and are enjoyable.

Murphy's Romance is a delight. The film flows well and makes the title believable. We end up not only liking Murphy and Emma but wanting them to get together despite their own hangups. Murphy's Romance is a lovely film that should be better-known. 

DECISION: B+

The Tall Target: A Review (Review #2010)

THE TALL TARGET

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon. Today's star is Ruby Dee.

The temptation to see today's political climate as toxic and unprecedented in the history of the Republic is there. However, I think the most dangerous time for the very survival of the United States occurred between November 1860 and March 1861. This was the gap between the election and inauguration of President Abraham Lincoln. Southern states were seceding. The Administration of Lincoln's predecessor, James Buchanan, was doing nothing to so much as slow down the impending crisis. Finally, there are the various plots to prevent Lincoln's swearing-in, which included trying to kill the President-elect. The Tall Target takes a true event and spins an interesting film that blends elements of film noir to a historic setting.

New York policeman John Kennedy (Dick Powell), who once protected Lincoln prior to his election, knows that there will be an attempt on the President-elect's life on route to Washington, D.C. 

As a side note, the character's name really is "John Kennedy" and The Tall Target was made in 1951, nine years before John Kennedy became the 35th President of the United States. It is just a wild coincidence. 

Kennedy boards the Night Flyer train to get to Baltimore, where Lincoln is scheduled to give a speech and where he suspects that the assassination attempt will take place. He is to be met on the Night Flyer by a friend, but instead he finds an imposter attempting to pass himself off as Kennedy. He also finds his friend dead. Kennedy appears to have an ally in Colonel Jeffers (Adolphe Menjou), a Northern military appointee who will be part of the military parade in Baltimore.

However, not everything is as it appears to be. The conspirators go high up. They also may involve Lance Beaufort (Marshall Thompson). He, his sister Ginny (Paula Raymond) and their slave Rachel (Ruby Dee) are traveling to Atlanta before any conflict begins. Ginny and Rachel know that Lance will resign from West Point to join the Confederacy, but neither realize that he is plotting to commit murder. Who else is involved in the plans to eliminate the next Commander-in-Chief? Will Kennedy be able to unmask and stop the assassination attempt? Will he find friend or foe in Jeffers, Rachel and Ginny? 

The Tall Target runs a brisk 78 minutes, compacting a lot of its story within its short runtime. I do not think that there is a wasted moment in The Tall Target. The film keeps to the action and mystery of who the conspirators are and the lengths that Kennedy must go to keep himself on the train and stop the assassination attempt. The film's pacing is so strong that we even have surprisingly strong social commentary.

Near the end of The Tall Target, Ginny berates Rachel for attempting to help Kennedy. Though she is unaware of Lance's involvement in the assassination plot, Ginny is no abolitionist. She tells Rachel that while she never mistreated her, she was not going to give her freedom. "Freedom isn't a thing you should be able to give me, Miss Ginny," Rachel responds. "It's something that I should have been born with". This is a strong, I would even say powerful, moment from Ruby Dee. George Worthington Yates and Art Cohn's screenplay was good in having this bit of dialogue. It allowed for the human element in the "peculiar institution" to have a mention amidst the various mysteries of who was targeting Lincoln and Kennedy.

The Tall Target is also interesting in that it has a film noir feel to it. We see this in the opening, where the train station could have easily been for a film set in the 1940s. Bronislau Kaper's score lends the film that sense of noir, mysterious and menacing in the title opening. 

The casting of Dick Powell as John Kennedy adds yet another element in The Tall Target's noir feel. Powell was cast as a charming song-and-dance man or a tough hardboiled detective in film. Here, he leans into the latter. His Kennedy is a tough, no-nonsense detective, determined to stop a crime. He can interrogate his suspects or work with secret allies with equal dexterity. 

The cast works well with each other in The Tall Target. Menjou can be charming, humorous or menacing as Jeffers, depending on the situation. Dee brings a quiet elegance, grace and strength in her role. She also is spared from speaking in stereotypical dialect. Instead, she is soft spoken but perfect in her diction. While Rachel is opposed to slavery, she tells anti-slavery activist Mrs. Charlotte Allsop (Florence Bates) that she will not move to Africa. Bates is not exactly comic relief, but in her absentmindedness and enthusiasm for Lincoln, she does make the character amusing.

There is more comedy with the minor character of Winfield (Brad Morrow). He is a small child who sees all and is willing to tell anyone who asks what he knows, for a price. The few times he wheels and deals for payment from the various adults is a nice touch. I think that Raymond and Thompson as the Beauford siblings are probably the weakest performances. Both seem to be a bit exaggerated in their manner.

That, however, is not a dealbreaker. The Tall Target, while probably not well-known, is a strong film. Well-filmed and with generally good performances, The Tall Target tells its little-known story to great effect. 

DECISION: B+

Terminator 2: Judgement Day. A Review

TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY

The war between humans and machines continues in Terminator 2: Judgement Day. The sequel to The Terminator more than equals its source material. A richer, deeper film with visual effects that still hold up, Terminator 2: Judgment Day is a great thrill ride. 

Narrated in voiceover by Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton), we learn that the artificial intelligence known as Skynet continues battling the human resistance for control. Skynet sends into the past a new Terminator, the T-1000 (Robert Patrick), which can change shapes and is made out of almost indestructible liquid metal. Having failed to kill John Connor before he was born, Skynet now plans to kill him as a child.

Under the disguise of a police officer, the T-1000 has tracked down John Connor (Edward Furlong). John is making do with his newest foster parents, with Sarah locked up in a mental institution, her stories about the past believed to be deranged ramblings. It looks like the T-1000 will complete his mission. However, the Resistance has its own Terminator. It is a modified T-800 (Arnold Schwarzenegger). John is terrified of both Terminators but eventually learns that the T-800 has been reprogrammed to be John's protector, not murderer.

The T-800 realizes that the T-1000 has already murdered John's foster parents to get to him. John now is determined to rescue his mother, with whom he has a strained relationship, from the mental hospital. He also orders the T-800 to not kill people, which the Terminator is obliged to obey. The rescue works, though coincidentally Sarah had managed to make an escape attempt that very night.

Despite their differences, John and Sarah now go into the desert to acquire weapons and escape into Mexico. She also sees John bonding with the T-800 in a way that he hasn't with anyone. A dream about Judgment Day, when Skynet will unleash a nuclear holocaust, convinces her that Skynet can and should be stopped. She learns that Cyberdyne researcher Miles Dyson (Joe Morton) will have a breakthrough that will start the rise of Skynet. She sneaks off to kill Dyson, with John and the T-800 in hot pursuit. Will she be able to kill someone who technically has done nothing wrong? Will the T-1000 find them? It will be a battle to the bitter end to save humanity, a battle where not everyone survives. 

Terminator 2: Judgment Day is a sequel where I do not think that you need to see the original to follow the plot. James Cameron, who returns to direct the film and who cowrite the screenplay with William Wisher, gives the viewer a bit of a reprise through Sarah's voiceovers. The film was wise to limit these voiceovers and let the story play out. It also was wise in having some of those voiceovers give us Sarah's thoughts. We see Sarah as both despairing and hopeful. Hamilton has a wonderful monologue where the audience sees John interact with the T-800. 

This bit of respite allows us to see that at this moment John is not the great leader of the Resistance. He is a kid, one who wanted a father figure and found one in the most unlikely of beings. Hamilton conveyed Sarah's sanity, intelligence and strength when in the hospital and her escape. We also see the human side when she struggles to kill Miles. 

I think one of Terminator 2's great strengths is that it takes the premise seriously. The film, both in its various action scenes and quieter moments, does not play the situations for straight-out laughs. That is not to say that Terminator 2 does not have a bit of humor. Early in the film, the T-800 walks out of the biker bar where he has acquired what he needs to the song Bad to the Bone. At the film's climax, the T-1000 gently mocks Sarah and John by waving his finger menacingly, almost as if scolding them for trying to defeat him. It is simultaneously amusing and alarming.

An undervalued aspect of Terminator 2 may be the performances. Arnold Schwarzenegger became a star with The Terminator, and here he manages to expand his original role. Granted, he is playing a reprogrammed T-800. However, his deadpan manner when attempting to recreate human responses works. He keeps a balance between robotic and almost more lighthearted. In short, Schwarzenegger brings a touch of humor and even emotion. His use of "Hasta la vista, baby," has become a catchphrase, and the film set that use up brilliantly. I think that few people will not be genuinely moved at the end, when he gives a final thumbs up to the young boy who has grown to love him and a former adversary who has grown to trust him.

That adversary also did remarkably well. Linda Hamilton balanced Sarah Connor's strength with her vulnerability. She is physically strong, able to take down those who fight her. She also, however, manages to show that Sarah genuinely struggles with killing someone who has not harmed her. It is a very strong performance.

More credit should be given to both Cameron and Robert Patrick as the T-1000. It was a wise decision to cast someone who is not physically imposing like Arnold Schwarzenegger is. Patrick is lithe, but that makes the T-1000 more menacing. His physicality is seemingly not threatening, but we see in Patrick's performance a deadly determination. Like his predecessor, this Terminator is relentless, unyielding and highly dangerous. When he has to play human, Patrick does well in his interactions with his other cast members.

Furlong too balanced the youthfulness of John Connor with a jaded, cynical young man. He has wonderful interplay with Schwarzenegger as the father figure he would have wanted. Furlong also has great moments with Hamilton. They were sometimes in conflict, but also with deep love between mother and son.

The highlight of Terminator 2 is in its visual effects, one of the four categories where the film was acknowledged with Academy Awards. Even now, almost thirty-five years later, the visual effects not only still stand up well but are quite impressive. Of particular note is the T-1000, this liquid figure that shapes itself and reflects whatever is in front of it. The visual effects heighten the tension and suspense in the film. The escape from the mental hospital with the T-1000 in hot pursuit is thrilling, the visual effects making things more so.

That is not to say that, in retrospect, some of the visual effects are shockingly bad. The brilliant hospital escape is followed by some of the worst rear-screen projections that I have seen. Some of the model work is also a bit weak.

Those are minor points, however. Terminator 2: Judgement Day is probably my favorite action film of all time. I admit to being slightly prejudiced in its favor. I am not unaware of whatever flaws it has. However, I still love the film. I also love the closing song, Guns N' Roses' You Could Be Mine, though I'm not the band's biggest fan.  Terminator 2: Judgement Day is a thrilling action picture with a heart. It is a worthy sequel which I think outdoes the original film. 

Pity that pretty much all that came after never lived up to the first two films. 

DECISION: A-