Island of Lost Souls (1932): A Review (Review #1260)

ISLAND OF LOST SOULS

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon sponsored by Journeys in Classic Film and Musings of a Classic Film Addict. Today's star is Leila Hyams.

Island of Lost Souls, an adaptation of H.G. Wells' The Island of Dr. Moreau, is quite creepy if unfortunately short, coming in at a brisk 70 minutes. With some standout performances and arresting visuals, Island of Lost Souls is tamer than the original story but with some horrifyingly creepy moments.

Edward Parker (Richard Arlen) is rescued by a passing ship. He sends a message to his fiancee Ruth Thomas (Hyams) that he will arrive soon, but a fight with the drunk Captain Davies (Stanley Fields) causes Parker to be tossed overboard onto the ship bound for the mysterious Island of Doctor Moreau (Charles Laughton) and his henchman Montgomery (Arthur Hohl).

The bad doctor sees Parker as a guinea pig for his satanic medical experiments: turning animals into humans via surgery and genetic modifying. Parker is a lure for Lota (Kathleen Burke, billed as 'The Panther Woman'). She is the only female and the most 'successful' of the mad scientist's creations as she is the most human-looking of Moreau's ghastly menagerie. Parker is tempted by the unwitting temptress, but Ruth has cajoled officials back home to find Parker.

Aided by Captain Donahue (Paul Hurst), they too now arrive on the mysterious island. Moreau sees this as more fortuitous than when he plotted to make Lota Parker's mistress and see if they could create humanoid children. Ruth will be used by the monstrosities Moreau has created, but in his efforts to have Ruth killed he has unwittingly created an uprising among his Beast-Men.

The Sayer of the Law (Bela Lugosi), now realizing that "The Law is No More", leads a revolution. Montgomery, guilt-stricken at his evil work, helps Edward and Parker escape while both Lota and Donahue are killed. Moreau now finds himself in his own House of Pain, the monsters enacting their own vengeance.

Island of Lost Souls is not graphic but atmospheric, which sometimes makes things more horrifying. Of particular note is when the final revolt takes place: things are so bonkers that this final sequence fills the viewer with genuine shock. Everything from the frightening Beast-Men to the sounds of Moreau going through his own demented surgery at the hands of his creations makes the final part shocking.

Again, we do not see just what the Beast-Men do to Moreau, just hints of it and Laughton's screams, but the overall effect is terrifying.

Island of Lost Souls is clearly Laughton's show, and he plays the wicked doctor with a mix of creepiness and almost childlike glee. Whether it is playing a little voyeur while watching Lota and Parker close to getting it on or flaunting that whip around you think Dr. Moreau is pretty fond of the kink. As he contemplates what he can do with Lota, this former panther-turned-sexpot, Laughton's face displays a sense of him being more a very naughty child than a crazed figure.

Arlen was very handsome, filling that square-jawed action hero, but Edward Parker came across as a bit dim if he couldn't figure out that the 'natives' were anything but monstrosities, as The Sayer of the Law declares, "Part Man! Part Beast! THINGS!" Hyams was very pretty but she was limited by the role, as Ruth was more a worried girl/damsel in distress than anything else.

Hohl, in his smaller role, was a standout as Montgomery, the henchman who saw the error of his wicked, wicked ways. Burke was sympathetic as Lota, the unwitting victim, and Lugosi too did strong work as the Sayer.

With regards to the last two, it was unfortunate that Island of Lost Souls was so short, as they would have benefited from having a more expanded role.

We also see some brilliant work from cinematographer Karl Struss, evoking an eerie and atmospheric world. The makeup work on the various Beast-Men is also a high achievement, looking both frightening and realistic for the premise.

It is unfortunate thought that director Erle C. Kenton did not match either the makeup or cinematography. He had a terrible habit of swinging the camera around to capture a scene or a moment rather than do some cutting. The whipping-around at times became distracting.

Island of Lost Souls, if one thought on it, does ask questions about what is man, what he is capable of in mad pursuit of being God-like, and the thin line between civilization and depravity. "Are we not men?", the Beast-Men are trained to ask. When they find that they are not, the retribution is frightening. It's an excellent film that might be worth considering remaking.

Then again, I've yet to see 1996's The Island of Dr. Moreau, so there's that...

DECISION: B+

These Three: A Review

THESE THREE

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon sponsored by Journeys in Classic Film and Musings of a Classic Film Addict. Today's star is Joel McRae.

In the heavily-censored world of the Hays Office, the idea of lesbianism on film was not about to happen. That would make adapting Lillian Hellman's play The Children's Hour rather problematic. A little sex-swap was needed to pass muster and make These Three, and surprisingly it holds up quite well after a bit of a lengthy start.

Recent college graduates Martha Dobie (Miriam Hopkins) and Karen Wright (Merle Oberon) decide to open up their own girls school at Karen's grandmother's farmhouse. There, they encounter happy-go-lucky Dr. Joe Cordin (Joel McRae) who helps repair the ramshackle farmhouse. Martha's eccentric actress Aunt Lily (Catherine Doucet) soon arrives and forces her way to being an elocution teacher.

The Dobie-Wright School finds success, but there's a viper in their bosom. It's Mary Tilford (Bonita Granville), the Tween Bitch From Hell. Spoiled, willful and perpetual liar, Mary bullies and torments everyone. After being found in another lie, she actually fakes a heart attack and when found to be nothing she runs away to Grandmama Amelia (Alma Kruger). There, she concocts a wild story with bits of information she sees and hears from others into a lurid tale of tawdry goings-on.

Mary tells her Grandmother that Martha and Dr. Cordin (who is engaged to Karen) are themselves having an affair. The ensuing scandal, corroborated by blackmailed fellow student Rosalie Wells (Marcie May Jones) shocks everyone, especially 'these three'. A failed libel suit ruins them all, but it isn't until the exiled Aunt Lily returns and inadvertently reveals vital information that the truth is finally exposed. Martha, who finally admits that she too loves Joe, decides to go away, giving Karen and Joe a chance for happiness after he leaves to work in Vienna.

These Three reminds me of something supposedly said by Samuel Goldwyn, who produced the film. According to legend, he had wanted to film the novel The Well of Loneliness. "But it's about lesbians!" was the shocked response. "Well, we'll just make them Americans!" is his alleged reply. These Three, adapted by Hellman herself, needed to make that radical change but on the whole the film works quite well.

To both Hellman and director William Wyler's credit there is barely a hint of lurid same-sex attraction in These Three unless one really wanted to see it. Moreover, the fact that it was a heterosexual love triangle works as well without diminishing the other.

To be honest, the only genuine suggestions that Martha might have been in love with Karen versus Joe come early. "Take a chance with me," Martha says to Karen about starting their school. Perhaps I am naive but that's as close to a 'let's get it on' line that I could find.

What is really great about These Three are the performances, almost all of them top-notch. I was completely pleased with Joel McRae, who managed a fully-formed character. He was breezy and jolly, particularly when courting Karen. However, he could also deliver the dramatic goods and give a strong performance. One might be surprised to see someone as attractive as McRae demonstrate that he was a very strong dramatic actor, but These Three is an early showcase that he had a deeper range than he was given credit for.

Oberon and Hopkins too did very well as the women caught in tawdry accusations. Oberon's dramatic manner worked well for the film, as did Hopkins more hysterical manner. Doucet was appropriately wacky and insufferable as Aunt Lily, both grande and idiotic.

However, it was the children who did best, none more than Bonita Granville as Mary. Granville earned a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination for her performance, an amazing feat given she was about twelve or thirteen. She more than earned it and made a strong case that she should have won. Her Mary is as I said the Tween Bitch From Hell: selfish, abusive and malicious with not an ounce of compassion in her. From her very first brief appearance you can see what a monster Little Mary is.

Granville does not hold back in making Mary as unsympathetic as possible. She smacks poor Rosalie left right and center, tormenting her to get her own way. Most other actresses her age would have played Mary as a spoiled brat, but Granville gives Mary an adult quality, someone unrepentant and unapologetic, determined to get her own way and stopping at nothing to do so. She is frightening and monstrous as Mary to where you want to slap her into the Ninth Circle of Hell where she belongs.

In the annals of child monsters, it is surprising that Mary Tilford in These Three is left off. The only reason she is not more hideous than The Bad Seed's Rhoda Penmark or The Omen's Damien is that Mary never actually killed anyone but you wouldn't put past her to have tried. Even Macaulay Culkin's The Good Son would be no match for Little Mary Satan. She makes the perfect bride for Rosemary's Baby.  All Hail Mary Tilford: Queen of the Damned.

Jones too is superior to the adults save perhaps McRae as Rosalie, forever crying and hysterical about being dragged into this nightmare, sympathetic and much abused.

These Three had to be 'cleaned up' from any hint of 'unnatural' sexual inclinations, but even without any gay touches it holds up extremely well. The film's only real flaw is a very slow start to where you wonder if it is going to be almost a romantic comedy. However, once Granville takes full stage as the Devil's Handmaiden the film roars to a strong conclusion.

DECISION: B+

Trial (1955): A Review

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon sponsored by Journeys in Classic Film and Musings of a Classic Film Addict. Today's star is Dorothy McGuire.

TRIAL

Trial is pretty much forgotten, perhaps with good reason. Hardly the paean to Communism that I was led to believe it was, Trial is a bit heavy-handed and at times insulting, though not without some positives.

Law professor David Blake (Glenn Ford) is dismissed from State University due to having no actual courtroom experience. Told that he will be reinstated if he gets some during the summer break, David finally finds a law firm willing to take him on. It's the practice of Barney Castle (Arthur Kennedy), and he has a big case on his hands. Mexican-American youth Angel Chavez (Rafael Campos) has been accused of murdering a pretty little Anglo girl while in fits of passion.

That's enough to set the sleepy town on fire, complete with white supremacists mobs coming close to lynching Angel. His mother Consuela (Katy Jurado) is terrified for her son's safety but trusts Barney completely. Now it's up to Blake, assisted by Barney's Girl Friday Abbie Nyle (Dorothy McGuire) to mount a defense.

David joins Barney on a fundraising event in New York City hosted by the "All People's Party", but it soon becomes clear that Barney is in cahoots with Communists and that he himself is one. Moreover, Abbie is a former fellow traveler who seems to think there's nothing wrong with Barney deliberately throwing the case to ensure Angel's conviction.

With the death sentence hovering over Angel, Blake sees that Angel will be sacrificed to be a martyr for their cause. David balks at the whole idea but he's powerless to stop this oncoming trainwreck of justice. However, David has a few tricks up his own sleeve to save Angel from being executed, if perhaps not from a conviction.

I understand that Trial may have been seen as subversive Communist propaganda in the same way as The North Star, Mission to Moscow or Tender Comrade. If that was the intention of Don Mankiewicz adapting his own novel, it's a curious way of trying to pass on Red messages given how Barney Castle came across. Rather than as some noble, non-prejudiced crusader, Castle came across as at the minimum a grifter, shameless huckster out to rob dupes blind.

The fact that he was a Communist was downplayed a bit, as if it were inconsequential to Barney's naked greed. It also leaves a bad impression that Barney was plotting to leave Angel out to dry for a greater 'cause'. None of this suggests to me that Trial was meant as pro-Commie propaganda.

Then again, the suggested 'happy ending' for Angel does not sound so happy. In fact it sounds rather condescending: the idea this "Mex" would be better off in a reform school and that he was found guilty of something he didn't do is rather horrifying to me.

As a side note, the term "Mex" is used as a slur. As someone who is of Mexican descent, I find this a rather odd slur, especially since it's one I've never heard, and I've heard quite a few.

I also found some of the performances rather broad. Ford in particular struck me as excessively jittery and mannered, though I cut him some slack given he was playing a man who was going into his first trial. He did have a good line when he says "There's a big difference between being fooled and being a fool, and I'm no fool".

McGuire was efficient and effective as the wise girl who ended up getting wise to her poor past decisions supporting Communism. She was better when she was the 'girl Friday', able to sort out David's jumbled ideas and giving him inside information than when called to play passionate.

Not for one moment did I believe these two were in love. Their romance was more out of plot necessity than something that appears to have been plausible, and neither looked romantic with each other. I found the Abbie/David romance hard to believe.

Kennedy in an Oscar-nominated performance pretty much steals Trial. His Barney is cynical, shrewd and shifty, able to suggest genuine zeal for justice while also showing how greedy and corrupt he was. As he narrates how the rally will go, he makes the line, "Every rally needs a little cheesecake" when we see a flamenco dancer on stage sound a perfect mix of cynicism and realism.

It's to where when Angel says "She wanted it" when talking about his romantic encounter with the soon-to-be-dead girl, Barney is almost justified in slapping him. He was rather fond of smacking Angel around, but then Angel was pretty fond of saying oddball things like how he and the girl were 'making love'.

One wasn't sure if Angel knew exactly what that term suggests. Jurado was a bit too dramatic as Consuela, and I could not shake the idea that Campos' accent was exaggerated to sound more foreign. Jurado does have a nice line where she complains to Barney that all the dinners she has to either attend or make the menu is always the same: tamales, frijoles (beans) chile con carne, despite the fact that she and Angel usually eat meat and potatoes.

In a small role, Juano Fernandez as the African-American judge who could not be baited or fooled more than held his own against Ford and Kennedy.

There is one aspect of Trial that did puzzle me. John Hoyt played the leader of the white supremacists named Ralph Castillo (pronounced 'Cast-till-oh'). My understanding was that "Castillo" was a Hispanic surname meaning 'Castle'. That left me rather confused.

Trial is a bit slow, a bit dull, but with some good performances from Kennedy, McGuire and Hernandez it might be worth giving it some time.

DECISION: C+

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1960): A Review

THE ADVENTURES OF HUCKLEBERRY FINN

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon sponsored by Journeys in Classic Film and Musings of a Classic Film Addict. Today's star is Buster Keaton.

I find it most curious that The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is thought of in rather pleasant and sweet terms given that it is remarkably dark. Tom Sawyer may be more nostalgic but Huckleberry Finn is a tale revolving around the great sin of America: slavery. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn keeps a pretty good balance between the original story and the more familiar if erroneous watering-down version. Mostly well-acted albeit perhaps too focused on secondary characters, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn holds up surprisingly well.

Young Huckleberry Finn (Eddie Hodges) wants to be good but does not want to be civilized. His Pap (Neville Brand) abuses him something awful and threatens to take him away from the Widow Douglas (Josephine Hutchinson) unless she gives him $500. Pap says that 'that n****r Jim (Archie Moore)' could fetch that much at a slave auction.

Jim is not about to be sold and Huck, having faked his death, is yearning to travel. More out of necessity than a desire to help Jim get to free territory, Huck agrees to go with Jim down the Mississippi. As they sail down Old Man River, they get involved with "The Duke of Bilgewater" (Mickey Shaughnessy) and "The King of France" (Tony Randall), two cons attempting to bilk two orphans out of money. More twists and turns involving Pap, the Duke and King along with a journey to the Circus run by Mr. Carmody (Andy Devine) and The Lion Tamer (Buster Keaton) ensue.

At long last, Huck manages to finally outwit the Duke and King, Jim arrives in Illinois where he is free and Huck, declining an offer to stay with Jim, takes the raft to an oncoming steamship and new adventures.


Perhaps because of the time period The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was made, the entirety of Mark Twain's masterpiece could not be filmed, particularly if one is aiming for a general family audience. As such, this may be a reason why the Duke and King were made the antagonists, two foils to provide our heroes with difficulties to overcome.

My memory of the novel had them take up only a small space and they met a rather awful fate: tarred and feathered, evoking a sense of genuine pity within Huck and the reader. In this film version, they took a more central position, which here I think was a wise idea given that it also altered the ending.

On the whole the changes were not bad and kept the story flowing, though it does not explain how the Duke and King managed to escape one situation to keep hounding Huck and Jim.

This also allows Tony Randall to take a more central position (he is the first billed actor), and he is appropriately sleazy and excessively courtly and mannered as the faux monarch. He does an exceptional job forever conning while simultaneously attempting to sound grand. At one point he tells his protege, "When you've got all the fools in town on your side, that's a big enough majority anywheres".

That should be the theme in any election.

Shaughnessy's Duke seemed a good match as the Duke, the more dimwitted stooge to his partner.

Hodges was absolutely delightful as Huck, and at age 12 the appropriate age for our hero. His mixture of innocence and shrewdness worked excellently to make Huck Finn a survivor, eager for adventure yet also scared.

The adaptation also allows us to see the evolution to Huck that Twain's novel gives us. He mentions how he doesn't want to be like those 'down-low abolitionists' but by the end he tells Jim that Jim hasn't sinned, except perhaps to run away from the Widow Douglas. And even that, he questions as being a sin. It's a positive sign to see a character change in his thinking.

In smaller roles Devine, Keaton and Patty McCormack as Joanna, one of the young marks, do well in their limited screentime. McCormack played Joanna like a shrewd old bird, aware that her "uncles" and "cousin" Percy were frauds.

It is unfortunate however that The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn did not allow Keaton to do any physical comedy with the lions. It seems like a lost opportunity to have even a little bit of humor, reducing Keaton to almost a mere cameo.

I think the only weak performance was Moore as Jim, but to be fair this was his big-screen debut after retiring from a major boxing career. He sometimes was a bit stiff in his line readings but it's a credit to director Michael Curtiz that Moore did pretty well for being a non-professional. He has a wonderful moment where he recounts his shame at having beaten his daughter for not obeying him, not realizing she was deaf.

It is difficult to recommend The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn to children given the use of "n****r" in the film. Granted, it was said only once and by the reprehensible Pap but it still is troubling. This is a rare moment when I would offer the recommendation for the film to redub the dialogue. However, with enough vim and vigor, some nice comic moments (of particular note, Huck's drag act) and a story that flows well, I think The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn works well enough.

DECISION: B-

They All Laughed: A Review

THEY ALL LAUGHED

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon sponsored by Journeys in Classic Film and Musings of a Classic Film Addict. Today's star is Audrey Hepburn.

Question: What do you call a romantic comedy that is neither romantic or comic? Answer: They All Laughed.

No film has been as woefully and erroneously named as They All Laughed, a blunder of a film whose awfulness is only overshadowed by the true-life horror that befell one of its stars.

The Odyssey Detective Agency is tracking down two separate women who are having or may be having extramarital affairs. One, Angela Niotes (Audrey Hepburn) is married to a wealthy businessman and has a young son. The other, Dolores Martin (Dorothy Stratten) is thought to be involved with her next-door neighbor Jose (Sean Hepburn Ferrer, real-life son of Audrey Hepburn).

Complications arise when John Russo (Ben Gazzara), the detective following Angela, not only falls for her but ends up having an affair with Angela himself. Dolores for her part has won the heart of  Charles Rutledge (John Ritter), the private eye following her. John and Charles' co-P.I. Arthur Brodsky (cowriter Blaine Novak) is wigged-out metaphorically and literally: when not rollerskating around New York City he's chasing a bevvy of beauties.

Hilarity and hijinks ensue, with aspiring country singer Christy Miller (Colleen Camp)  and country music fan/cab driver Deborah (Patti Hansen) joining in as romantic foils to Charles and John respectively. One pair of lovers eventually unite, one pair sadly parts ways.

For better or worse, They All Laughed is forever haunted by the tragedy that took one of its stars' lives. The film was meant as a showcase for Dorothy Stratten, a former Playboy Playmate of the Year who was being groomed for an acting career. Director and cowriter Peter Bogdanovich had fallen in love with Stratten and began an affair with her. Stratten had decided to divorce her husband Paul Snider and started living with Bogdanovich.

In one of the most horrifying and tragic crimes in Hollywood history, Snider brutally murdered Stratten before committing suicide.

Stratten's murder lends watching They All Laughed a touch of tragedy, the juxtaposition of this beauty with the ugliness of her death calling out to us. It's unfortunate on so many levels, but with regards the film it is unfortunate that Stratten never got the chance to develop. As Dolores there is a bit of an awkward, hesitant manner to her performance, but that is understandable given she had limited experience. It is, however, to her credit that she managed to hold her own against more experienced performers like Ritter. There is a hint of potential to Stratten, a potential we sadly would never see.

That Stratten and to a lesser extent Sean Ferrer looked a bit lost is not surprising given their lack of experience. It's everyone else whose near-total inability to act that is more astounding. Ritter was a natural comic performer, but in They All Laughed he was simply trying too hard with the physical comedy. It looked forced, almost insulting. Whether trying for pratfalls during rollerskating or stumbling with straws one could see a very rehearsed manner with Ritter's shtick.

Worse was his overall performance, where his line reading was abysmal. This however can be put on Bognanovich, who appears to have directed everyone to show as little emotion as possible. Hepburn and especially Gazzara slept-walked through They All Laughed, showing as much passion as two rotting fish. It's as if they never knew who these characters were, what really brought them together other than the plot needing them to be together.

It's hardly a great love affair if she keeps calling him "Mr. Russo".

As bad as the performances were, perhaps the two worst ones were from Miller and Novak. With regards to the latter his most defining characteristics were going around town on roller skates and picking up beautiful women with ease despite what was either a fright wig or way too much real hair. With regards to the former it was in playing a highly annoying and surprisingly stupid person. In a scene where she attempts to seduce the disinterested Charles she keeps repeating "Charles" in almost every sentence.

Was she concerned she would forget his name?

It became too distracting. To be fair though Camp's rising country star did provide the one element in They All Laughed that is almost sure to elicit laughter: the idea that there are country music fans in New York City.

There's probably a greater chance of finding a Republican Boston Red Sox fan living in the Bronx than there is to find a whole club full of Hank Williams and Merle Haggard fans in NYC.

There was one funny line if I am honest. As part of yet another bungled monitoring of Dolores, Charles and Christy visit a shoe store. "We'd like to see some new shoes," Charles tells the salesclerk. "Well, we don't sell old shoes here," she quips.

There was no sense of romance in They All Laughed. Truth be told there was no sense of anything in They All Laughed, for it takes a long time to exactly figure out what all these people's connections to each other are. We spend at least thirty minutes trying to figure out what exactly is going on here.

The film is sure never to live up to its name. They All Laughed? Hardly.

DECISION: F

Yesterday: A Review (Review #1255)

YESTERDAY

When I heard the premise for the film Yesterday, I had two main thoughts. One: this was a variation on the jukebox musical, where we would get as many songs from one catalog into a film. Two: if The Beatles never existed, I think my life would not be impacted to the degree the trailers made it out be. Yesterday is like a cover band: it belt outs the hits but does not have any genuine originality.

It also suggests that Ed Sheeran is on the same level of creative brilliance as The Beatles, which is enough to warrant a negative review.

Unsuccessful singer/songwriter Jack Malik (Himesh Patel) is finished with playing to uninterested audiences in small pubs and sparsely-attended tents at music festivals. Despite the urging of his manager/platonic friend Ellie (Lily James), Jack has decided to let his guitar gently weep.

On the fateful night he hangs it up, the power goes out throughout the world for 12 seconds. Jack is seriously injured by a bus during the blackout and wakes up around two weeks later. He quickly realizes that he is apparently the only person in the world who remembers any of The Beatles' songs. All his friends are astonished at the beauty of 'his new song' Yesterday, though as one points out to him, it's not Coldplay's Fix You.

With some quibbles, Jack decides to pass off The Beatles' whole catalogue (or as much as he can remember of it) as his own. This attracts the attention of Ed Sheeran (playing himself) and his manager Debra Hammer (Kate McKinnon). With his wacky friend Rocky (Joel Fry) as his roadie, Jack rises to greatness as the premiere singer/songwriter of all time.

Take THAT, Bob Dylan!

His success makes his relationship with Ellie tough as they have struggled to start a relationship despite their obvious romantic interest. Will Jack's rouse be discovered? Will Jack and Ellie end up together? Will Ed Sheeran keep fooling people he's actually good?

Yesterday seemed a bit haphazard, introducing elements to drop them or not bother with them again. Take for example Gavin (Alexander Arnold), the producer who first found Jack post-blackout. He is used as some kind of romantic threat when Ellie decides not to wait on Jack, then quickly dropped when Jack gives up his 'career'. It's almost a cliché: the boyfriend who is in so many ways right for the female but who is dumped at the last moment by the heroine to be with 'the real thing'.

As a side note, why would Coca-Cola disappear just because the Beatles weren't around? If I'm not mistaken, Coca-Cola predates The Fab Four by a good seventy years. I'm not so well-versed in Beatles minutia to understand that bit.

There is also the 'Ed Sheeran' bit. Let's leave aside the oddball idea that Ed Sheeran is some kind of musical genius: he's not. Yesterday suggests there's some kind of envy from Sheeran in seeing someone is superior to him in songwriting (and again I'd argue random homeless men with psychological issues would make better songwriters than Ed Sheeran, but I digress). However, soon after Sheeran is back, offering advise about changing the title from Hey Jude to Hey Dude.

Why screenwriter Richard Curtis thought this was a sign of wit I can't guess at, but it isn't. Neither is the suggestion that Jack would have had the exact success that John, Paul, George & Ringo would have based on the songs alone. Curtis does have a clever bit about how Jack got some lyrics wrong, but other elements are almost ghastly.

Without giving too much away, Jack and two other fans didn't seem to care where George Harrison was or even if he was alive.

Yesterday can't get away from the trappings that plague many a rom-com. There's the wacky bestie. There's the couple we know will end up together but has unimportant impediments. There's whatever Kate McKinnon was supposed to be.

We had some bad performances here. McKinnon was not only pointless she seemed to act as if she didn't know whether she was meant to be serious or over-the-top so apparently she opted to try and play it both ways simultaneously. James was so boring and uninteresting I was nodding off when she came across. Sure, I figure Ed Sheeran had a blast playing a campy version of himself, but I don't like his alleged music, so why would I even care that he was here.

Patel, however, was much better as Jack, a mixture of almost Woody Allen neurotic and sincere man. He seemed to struggle when attempting to be harsh, as if he is just too nice to be demanding or forceful. However, he has enough charm and a pleasant demeanor to convince you he could be this bumbling but basically decent figure.

Yesterday asks a lot from its audience, and if you like the music you may like it more. However, I was not won over and one wonders: would a world without Oasis really be that bad?

DECISION: D+

The Adventures of Errol Flynn: The Television Documentary

THE ADVENTURES OF ERROL FLYNN

This review is part of the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon sponsored by Journeys in Classic Film and Musings of a Classic Film Addict. Today's star is Errol Flynn.

Errol Flynn: scandalous, swashbuckling and genuine actor. The original Tasmanian devil, Flynn was both a daredevil with a devil-may-care attitude and an intellectually curious man. He loved women but was also a devoted father to his children. The Adventures of Errol Flynn covers his life story, one that reveals a man who thought life was an awfully big adventure, but who also was deeply trapped by that which brought him what he wanted.

Narrated by Ian Holm, The Adventures of Errol Flynn covers his life from his birth and upbringing in Tasmania, Australia through his various exploits on his way to becoming an actor first in Great Britain and later in Hollywood. Once there, with a little help from his first wife, actress Lili Damita, he was cast in the title role in Captain Blood, a newcomer who was given the role after Robert Donat, Leslie Howard and Fredric March turned it down.

Astonishing how no one could imagine anyone other than Flynn in the role, he nearly didn't get it but Mr. Chips did.

His turn as this daring swashbuckler made him an overnight success, the public response to his athleticism and incredible beauty surprising everyone. He quickly was put in a series of action costume pictures, usually with Olivia de Havilland with The Adventures of Robin Hood as their definitive piece. His studio Warner Brothers had found a formula that worked, and while he was allowed to occasionally venture into other genres like comedies, the public on the whole preferred Flynn in essentially two types of films: costume swashbucklers and Westerns.

As Flynn observed in the audio track, "Give him a horse, give him a sword, do something, Errol".

However, Flynn did want to get away from the trappings of his screen persona but instead found said persona spilled into his private life. A sensational statutory rape trial and failures in his marriages plagued him, as did a morphine addiction he began in his quest to try anything.

Financial problems too started in on him, culminating in an unfinished film, The Story of William Tell, which all but bankrupted him and even brought a lawsuit from his then-friend, actor Bruce Cabot, whom Flynn had hired for William Tell to help Cabot out to begin with.

Flynn's last cinematic hurrah was in Too Much, Too Soon, a biopic of John Barrymore that played more like a biopic of Flynn than of The Great Profile. The Shakespeare soliloquy he recited as part of the film caused the crew to give him a standing ovation, and he was even presented a recording of it as a gift from them. That kind of belated adulation for his acting versus his 'wicked, wicked ways' quietly moved him, but he died in 1959 aged 50, a life of excess finally catching up to him.

The Adventures of Errol Flynn is a good primer to this most fascinating yet slowly fading figure. While the expression 'in like Flynn' still is used, Flynn's on-screen persona as a swashbuckler seems more ripe for parody than for genuine respect. Despite that Robin Hood: Men in Tights is supposed to be a spoof of Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, it's clear that Flynn's lusty, laughing characterization is also held up for mockery. Flynn's performance was also essentially ridiculed in the Doctor Who episode Robot of Sherwood, and The Rocketeer went one step further.

In that film, "Neville Sinclair" was meant to be an Errol Flynn-type, and also uses Flynn's alleged Nazi connections as a plot point. The Adventures of Errol Flynn touches on the allegations, making clear that there is no solid evidence Flynn was a Nazi collaborator or even sympathizer. The interviewees ranging from his longtime costar de Havilland to his surviving children and film historians like Rudy Behlmer make clear that Flynn was in reality quite free of prejudice, disinterested if a man was Jewish or black or anything.

We do learn some fascinating information about Flynn the man as opposed to Flynn the persona. While lacking in much formal education he not only read but wrote two novels and became an art collector of taste. He had a passion for adventure and sailing but he also deeply yearned to stretch as an actor beyond 'cowboy hats and tights'. He turned down a chance to play the sympathetic role in That Forsyte Woman so as to play the more villainous role and earned high praise for his sympathetic alcoholic in The Sun Also Rises.

One can see Flynn, despite his protests to the contrary, did want to be seen as a genuine actor. It is tragic that he was belatedly recognized for his skills, including by his The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex costar Bette Davis. As told by their mutual friend de Havilland, Davis despised Flynn as a talentless charmer to her genuine actress, but after having a private screening of Elizabeth and Essex Davis had a change of heart, admitting he was an actor.

De Havilland was also amusing in her own elegant and discreet manner when talking about how she declined an off-screen romance due to the uncertain situation with Damita. She got back at Flynn by deliberately blowing a kissing scene in Robin Hood, then says that Errol had 'a little trouble with his tights', a most demure way of saying his erection was fully visible.

Flynn not only had a way with women but was able to laugh at his own screen image: the documentary begins with his appearance on the television game show What's My Line?, where three people claim to be one person and the audience has to figure out who the 'real' person is. It's easy to see which of the three (including Don Knotts) is 'the real Errol Flynn', but his side-look when the mention of being married three times is amusing.

Not so amusing was the damage to his reputation over the statutory rape charge, which the documentary suggests were politically motivated as revenge against Flynn's studio. Though he tried to cover his pain and anger by joining in the jokes, the idea that he violated women bothered him to no end.

Errol Flynn was a rake, a rogue, and a much better and more skilled actor than his detractors then and now admit. He lived large, sometimes to his own detriment, but if anything The Adventures of Errol Flynn gives one insight into a person who never shrunk from life.

1909-1959

8/10