Monthly Report: December 2022

Standard

By Scott Ross

As ever, click on the highlighted text for links and fuller reviews.

I Want to Live! (1958) As an Orson Welles partisan it’s almost impossible for me to enjoy a movie directed by Robert Wise. Welles believed that the one-time editor of Citizen Kane, in exchange for the opportunity to direct, eagerly butchered The Magnificent Ambersons for the management of RKO while its maker was in South America, and whether this is true or the justifiable paranoia of a man whose masterpiece was destroyed while he was unable to defend it is almost beside the point. In addition to his editorial malfeasance, Wise directed some of the terrible scenes in Ambersons re-shot by studio diktat, and he did become a director, eventually winning two Academy Awards (for the emotionally manipulative The Sound of Music and the appalling West Side Story). I admit to liking parts of some of his pictures: The Set-Up (largely for Robert Ryan’s superb performance), Executive Suite (sweaty capitalist melodrama somewhat redeemed by its cast, especially Nina Foch), Somebody Up There Likes Me (for Paul Newman), Run Silent Run Deep (for Gable and Lancaster), Odds Against Tomorrow (nowhere near as good as its source novel but watchable for Ryan and Harry Belafonte, and the picture’s ironic ending), The Haunting (not a patch on Shirley Jackson’s book but it is hard to forget that breathing door) and Star! (cynical and wildly overblown but fascinating, for all the wrong reasons). His two Val Lewton pictures (The Curse of the Cat People and The Body Snatcher) are memorable as much for what Lewton, their producer, brought to them as for anything Wise did. But there is absolutely no excuse for how badly Wise and Robert Anderson distorted and cheapened Richard McKenna’s wonderful novel The Sand Pebbles.

My distaste is not entirely centered around the matter of Wise v. Welles, however. Generally I find Wise the worst sort of obvious filmmaker, prone to symbols and to Expressionist camera angles, not for reasons of organic composition but merely to be smart, drawing attention to his cinematic “invention.” With I Want to Live! — note the gratuitous exclamation point — Wise was abetted in his emotional manipulation by the imprimatur of The Truth. Based by the screenwriters Nelson Gidding and Don Mankiewicz on newspaper pieces by Edward Montgomery concerning the guilt or innocence of the condemned Barbara Graham, and on Graham’s letters, the movie paints its subject as a smart-ass good-time girl railroaded by The System. (The reality may have been less sanguine, although Graham maintained that her confession was coerced.) Susan Hayward gives one of those performances, half-banal, half-inspired, that kept getting her Academy Award nominations and, finally, this time, won her the prize. What’s best about the picture are Lionel Lindon’s superb black and white photography, William Hornbeck’s intelligent editing, and the trend-setting score by Johnny Mandel. Other soundtracks of the period, including several splendid ones by Elmer Bernstein and Alex North, were jazz-oriented. But like Bernstein’s Sweet Smell of Success the year before (and Duke Ellington’s Anatomy of a Murder the year after) Mandel’s was jazz, performed by a remarkable aggregation that included Gerry Mulligan, Art Farmer, Bud Shank, Shelley Manne, Milt Bernhardt, Pete Jolly, Jack Sheldon and Red Mitchell.

One thing Wise did get absolutely right: The depiction of Graham’s gas-chamber execution, whose starkness emphasizes the calculated nature of capital punishment as it is carried out in this country; the gawking spectators, eager to catch the condemned’s last breath, are more cold-blooded than Barbara Graham ever was.


The Wizard of Oz (1939) The generations born and raised after 1990 will find it hard to credit how, from 1959 to 1991, this already well-loved musical fantasy became an institution, its annual network television airing (usually at Easter) an event looked forward to and savored by children, even those (like me) whose families did not own a color teevee and who didn’t discover until they were in their 20s that the Horse of a Different Color was just that. Once Ted Turner got his mitts on the picture you had to have a cable subscription to see it; now, of course, it’s shown only on TCM, which, considered a thing only the old are interested in, I suspect few young people ever watch without coercion.

I may not be exactly happy to have reached my sixth decade but I wouldn’t trade the yearly excitement of tuning in to this imperishable product of the studio age for a few years chipped off my biography. Who, knowing their glories, would want to miss Harold Arlen’s felicitous melodies, “Yip” Harburg’s delicious lyrics, flying monkeys, dozens of midgets, a cranky apple tree who speaks in the voice of Candy Candido, Herbert Stothart’s background score with its instantly memorable theme for Miss Gulch on her bicycle and its menacing Winkie chorus, Judy Garland’s endearing performance as Dorothy (and her marvelous singing voice), Margaret Hamilton’s as The Wicked Witch of the West, Frank Morgan’s as The Wizard, Jack Haley’s as the Tin Man or Ray Bolger’s as the Scarecrow? Or, supremely, the great Bert Lahr as the Cowardly Lion, especially when, singing “If I Were King of the Forest” like a mad Met tenor with enlarged adenoids, he belts the immortal phrase, “Monarch of all I survey/Mah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-haah-nuck!” It always slays me.


The Dybbuk [דער דיבוק] 1937 A beautiful Polish adaptation (direction by Michał Waszyński, screenplay by S. A. Kacyzna) of S. Ansky’s Yiddish folk play, exquisitely filmed by Albert Wywerka and with an effective musical score by Henryk Kon. The splendid cast includes, in the leading roles, Abraham Morewski, Ajzyk Samberg, Mojżesz Lipman, Lili Liliana and the superb Leon Liebgold as the thwarted lover whose imprecations have such disastrous results. One of the few major European Yiddish productions, The Dybbuk was made near the end of a decade that would see Poland subsumed by Nazi Germany and, presumably, most of its cast and creators destroyed in the Shoah.

The excellent restoration is part of the Kino Blu-ray collection Jewish Soul: Classics of Yiddish Cinema.


The Love God? (1969) This frequently hilarious Nat Hiken-written and directed take on 1960s sexual mores was the first adult Don Knotts comedy, and died a miserable death on its release in 1969. It was also traduced by the critics, who either didn’t seem to comprehend that it was a satire or if they did, like Judith Crist, considered it “smutty.” If you’re open to it, there’s something just inherently funny about Don Knotts as a mousy bird magazine publisher being turned into a Hugh Hefner prototype by an unscrupulous flesh-peddler (Edmond O’Brien), an ambitious editor (Anne Francis) and a pretentious gangster (B.S. Pully) with a penchant for punching everyone, women included, who disagrees with him. Along the way there are hilarious bits by James Gregory as a crusading lawyer, Maureen Arthur as a nudie magazine model, Jesslyn Fax as a retired schoolteacher, Marjorie Bennett as an ancient small-town secretary who can’t wait to cut loose in New York, Herb Voland as the Attorney General and Ruth McDevitt as an outraged old bat. If Maggie Peterson, who plays Knotts’ virginal beloved, looks a little like a pretty horse surprised by a grass bouquet, Knotts himself is in fine fettle, especially when sporting his new “mod” wardrobe or, riotously, twice performing his medley of bird calls, the second time with a mouth gone dry from terror. The score is, as usual for a Knotts comedy, by Vic Mizzy. Sadly, Hiken died between the filming and release of this, his only feature film.


The Green Man (1956) Memory betrays us in peculiar ways. There was a scene in some movie comedy or other — I no longer recall which one — that for years I misremembered almost completely. When I finally saw the picture in question again, I was more than a bit taken aback because my false memory of that scene (whatever it was) was so much funnier than the reality. I was a victim of memory distortion; somehow in the intervening years between first exposure and second my brain had filled in the details in a way that was almost infinitely more satisfying than what my eyes had actually seen. This psuedomemory recurred to me while watching the British comedy The Green Man because I saw it on the strength of a recommendation by Stephen Fry, whose appreciation of it I now realize was as misguided as my own for that nameless, long-ago seen comedy. In “A Critical Condition,” one of the essays in his book Paperweight, Fry writes, “As a child I saw a film on television starring Alastair Sim called The Green Man. Like almost any picture featuring that incomparable genius it contains moments of as absolute a joy as one is ever permitted on this sublunary plain. There is one scene, in which he attempts to bustle a female palm court trio out of a room that he needs to be vacated, which remains as funny as anything committed to celluloid.” Well! It sounded like something Billy Wilder and I.A.L. Diamond had unaccountably left out of Some Like it Hot. Who wouldn’t want to see that?

I waited with great anticipation for the palm court sequence and when it arrived was utterly flummoxed to find the action consisted of little more than a somewhat anxious Sim asking the ladies of the trio to join him for drinks in the adjacent bar, and the women, after delightedly agreeing, following him out. That was it. Not that The Green Man was as puny a thing as the critic who offended Fry by deeming it “a thin, ultimately unsatisfactory vehicle for Sim” would have his readers believe. Sim, as a very successful middle-class assassin, is marvelous, as he nearly always was, the picture is cleverly constructed by Frank Launder and Sidney Gilliat (based on their play), directed with assurance if not flair by Robert Day (and an uncredited Basil Dearden) and the supporting cast, which includes George Cole, Jill Adams, Avril Angers, John Chandos, Terry-Thomas, Raymond Huntley and Dora Bryan, performs with brio. But Stephen Fry, alas, appears to have been the victim of the same, unreliable memory distortion that also afflicted me.


Love and Death (1975) At the time of its release, this was considered Woody Allen’s most pretentious movie, by critics who hadn’t yet lived. Considering that this satire on Russian literature includes take-offs on, and homages to, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky (an entire dialogue scene composed of his titles), Chekhov and, although he was not Russian, Ingmar Bergman, pretentious Love and Death certainly is. It is also extremely funny.

If Sleeper gave Diane Keaton her first exposure as a comedian of no small inspiration, her performance here delivers something very close to genius. As Sonja, the lifelong love of Boris Grushenko (Allen) Keaton skewers every pseudointellectual Barnard graduate who ever pontificated mindlessly and reactively, and, in the scene in which Allen and the man (Lloyd Batista) he’s about to impersonate take turns bopping her on the head with a wine bottle, she’s blissfully funny. Sleeper represented an enormous leap in Allen’s filmmaking, and Love and Death is even more impressive, enriched by Ghislain Cloquet’s fine-grained, deeply saturated cinematography. The movie also contains Allen’s first great ensemble cast, including James Tolkan (as Napoleon); Olga Georges-Picot in a role intended for Groucho Marx’s secretary and manager Erin Fleming who had appeared in everything… about sex but re-cast when that mentally unbalanced woman stormed off the set in outrage; Zvee Scooler as Boris’ idiot father; Despo Diamantidou as his disapproving mother; Jessica Harper as Sonja’s Chekhovianly depressed friend; Alfred Lutter as the young Boris; Frank Adu in a hilarious bit as a black drill sergeant during the French invasion of Russia; and the wonderful Harold Gould, who shares a hilarious dueling sequence with Allen.

Some of the set-pieces are uproarious, some merely wan, and a few of the jokes don’t work at all; hearing that Boris is seen leading a cheering squad during a battle, for example, is funnier than actually seeing him do it. Allen’s Bob Hope impersonation, honed in his earlier movies (Bananas, Sleeper and as the Jester in sex) gets a full workout here, and in some ways the picture is little but a remake of the 1946 Hope comedy Monsieur Beaucaire, right up to the hero’s surprise execution at the end. But it’s handsome looking, occasionally brilliant, and the lulls don’t last long. The score, comprised solely of music by Sergei Prokofiev, includes well-chosen excerpts from “The Lieutenant Kijé Suite,” “Alexander Nevsky,” “The Love for Three Oranges,” the String Quintet in E and “Scythian Suite” for Orchestra.


The cast as seen by Al Hirschfeld

The Night of the Iguana (1964) After A Streetcar Named Desire, the finest of all Tennessee Williams screen adaptations. John Huston, the director and with Anthony Veiller co-scenarist, working in Gabriel Figueroa’s luminous black-and-white cinematography, enhanced what was effective in Williams’ 1961 drama (the characters, the situation, the dialogue and the jungle-like Mexican atmosphere) and removed what was superfluous (the 1940 time-frame and the German Nazi tourists), crafting a genuinely cinematic experience that is also a faithful interpretation of a great American dramatist’s last important play. Richard Burton has one of his best movie roles as the Reverend Dr. T. Lawrence Shannon, a disgraced minister driven by circumstance to shepherding a bus full of middle-aged church ladies around Mexico, drinking too much, fending off the advances of a hormonally unbalanced teenage girl, and being put into a blind panic by all of it. Shot largely in Puerto Vallarta, then little but “a remote fishing village” but which the unrelenting paparazzi fixation on The Liz and Dick Show eventually helped turned into an exclusive resort which I assume the fishermen and their families could no longer afford to live in, The Night of the Iguana exhibits throughout the sort of supple artistic control Huston lavished on material that really engaged him. Williams of course was continually drawn to his twin themes of the sacred versus the profane and the struggle of the sensitive to survive brutality; here he embodies the former in Shannon’s battle with his own nature (and the nature of the girl, and of the earthy widow who’s got her eye on him) and the latter through the character of the gentle spinster Hannah Jelkes, companion to her grandfather, an aged poet embarked on his last tour and hopeful of completing his latest poem before the little strokes that beset him carry his fragile spirit away.

I hope I don’t make The Night of the Iguana sound deadly, because it’s the furthest thing from that, and not least because of Huston’s superb cast. As Maxine Faulk, the lusty widow of Shannon’s oldest friend, Ava Gardner gives what is probably her finest performance — dallying with two strange maraca-playing Mexican youths (Fidelmar Durán and Roberto Leyva) out of her anger at, and jealousy over, Shannon, laying out her disappointments in invective yet capable of great kindness. As Hannah, Deborah Kerr is an utterly transcendent figure, not fluttery and self-deluding as Blanche Du Bois or Alma Winemiller in Summer and Smoke are or driven to ruthlessness like Maggie the Cat but practical-minded and, despite her genteel poverty, filled with compassion for the sufferings of others, even those like Shannon whom she correctly suggests enjoy their own mental anguish. She, and Cyril Delevanti as the poet Nonno, are deeply moving; when Nonno recites his final poem while his granddaughter takes it down, it would take a stonier constitution than mine not to melt before the beauty both of the language and Delevanti’s becalmed, ancient face. Before that transcendent event, during her long discussion with the immobilized Shannon, Miss Jelks observes, “Nothing human disgusts me, Mr. Shannon, unless it is unkind or violent.” This seems to me Williams’ response to the Roman playwright Terence’s “Homo sum: humani nihil a me alienum puto.” (“I am human: I consider nothing human is alien to me.”) Interestingly, as Williams wrote it Hannah’s line concludes “unless it is unkind, violent.” Someone (Huston and Veiller, or perhaps Kerr herself) altered it slightly, and for the better. Poetic expression like that can work onstage but is not as easily digested in the more realistic medium of film.

Sue Lyon, the physically overripe Lolita of the Kubrick picture two years earlier, fully captures what Orson Welles once called the insanity of adolescence, careening from her lubricious crush on Shannon to suddenly hating him to switching her allegiance to the tour’s young bus driver (James “Skip” Ward). Mary Boylan does wonders with the brow-beaten tourist Miss Peebles, but Grayson Hall steals every scene she’s in as Lyons’ chaperone Miss Fellowes, a woman clearly in the thrall of her own Lesbian obsession but, as a convention-minded church choral director, unwilling or unable to see it for what it is. Although the movie could be seen as cruel toward the character, even her chief nemesis Shannon is at pains to protect her from the self-knowledge he correctly believes would destroy her. Benjamin Frankel composed a beautiful score for the picture, Huston’s best work between The African Queen and The Kremlin Letter. Yet in his infinite wisdom and renowned critical perspicacity, Leonard Maltin in his movie guide deems this poetic masterpiece a “plodding tale.” He would.


Broadway Danny Rose (1984) I’ve never quite been able to reconcile the snideness and cynicism of Woody Allen with some of the pictures he’s made that suggest a sweeter soul than he generally displays. Are they the result of calculation merely? Broadway Danny Rose is one of those seemingly incongruous movies, an openhearted paean to the losers of show-biz that is both unexpectedly moving and sidesplittingly funny. Told as a long, shaggy-dog anecdote by Sandy Baron to a table of his fellow comedians at the Carnegie Deli, the picture doesn’t make fun of Danny’s acts, such as the stuttering ventriloquist or the balloon-folding couple, as much as it laughs at Danny’s unflappability — his unshakable belief that any one of his stable of barely employable clients could become wealthy and famous. It’s easy to laugh at a man who keeps reminding these pathetic acts to say to themselves, “Smile, star, strong,” yet Danny genuinely loves and care for these bottom-feeders, and the casual way he’s betrayed by his favorite, a washed-up singer called Lou Canova (Nick Apollo Forte) and Lou’s Mafia-connected mistress Tina (Mia Farrow) shatters him. For once in an Allen performance the pain isn’t just a story point indifferently acted; when near the end Tina unexpectedly shows up at the tatty Thanksgiving dinner Danny holds for his clients the look of deep hurt on Allen’s face is remarkable.

Gordon Willis shot the movie in thick-grained black-and-white, and the picture’s look renders the action as a modern fable, remembered not from a distant past but recounted at best a few months later. Among the comics at the Carnegie, in addition to Baron, are Jackie Gayle, Will Jordan (when people imitate Ed Sullivan, if indeed they still do, they’re really imitating Jordan’s impersonation of Sullivan) and Allen’s then-manager Jack Rollins, and Milton Berle, Howard Cosell and Joe Franklin also appear as themselves. Gina DeAngelis is marvelous as a vindictive Mob mother and Farrow, hiding behind smoked eyeglasses, gives a terrific comic performance as the sort of woman no one would ever mistake her for (or, up to the time of the movie, ever thought her capable of enacting.) Among the comic pleasures of Broadway Danny Rose is a hysterically funny sequence in the warehouse in which Macy’s Thanksgiving Day balloons are stored involving Danny, Tina, a gun-wielding hood and the unexpected release of helium.


It’s a Wonderful Life (1946) There has probably never been a more manipulative, counterfeit “populist” in American movies than Frank Capra, and this perennial holiday favorite (a dud in its time which only became popular through loss of its copyright) is the perfect illustration of that. What Capra did well, such as depicting the dark corners of American platitudes, he did exceptionally well here, as when James Stewart’s George Bailey rejects a weeping Donna Reed and marriage even as he’s embracing her in desperation, or when with his life in tatters he hugs his young son, or as with tears in his eyes he’s praying in a bar for a deliverance he doesn’t believe possible. (Capra realized too late that he needed to move the camera in and when Stewart said he couldn’t perform the scene again, resorted to a slow optical printer zoom.) Casting is half the battle here, and in James Stewart Capra got a man capable of both enormous charm and pitch-black despair; it was George Bailey that led the critic David Denby several years ago to claim that Stewart was the greatest actor in American movies, a sentiment with which I wholly concur.

Alas, what Capra did badly is in even greater abundance in It’s a Wonderful Life: That cloying, mealy-mouthed (and patently phony) embrace of treacly platitudes that mars if it does not ruin every picture of his except It Happened One Night. It’s particularly galling when one knows that Capra, although he publicly proclaimed himself a populist, loathed and distrusted people, in groups or singly, and privately worshiped fascism, adopting the political traits and impulses of the natural-born reactionary. His “convictions” tended to be those of his principal screenwriter, Robert Riskin, from which he ran in terror during the Blacklist years. It’s telling that Capra is one of four scenarists credited on It’s a Wonderful Life, because George Bailey’s dilemma is his director’s as well, that of a man who hates what he believes he’s supposed to love. I don’t mind that Capra, along with the husband-and-wife team of Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett (and Jo Swerling, who also worked on the script) lards on the ironies with a trowel or even that he paints George’s antagonist Mr. Potter (Lionel Barrymore) as an irredeemable villain whose fangs fairly drip with poison like the spider George compares him to so much as I do his concomitant wallowing in sentimentality; that bit about bells and angels’ wings makes my teeth ache.

Although Capra was too profligate with money for the picture to ever show a profit, it must also be admitted that having built an entire town on the backlot, he used it effectively. The cinematography by his gifted director of photography Joseph Walker (with Joseph Biroc) is exceptional as well, and Dimitri Tiomkin’s music is less oppressively heavy than was his norm. The director also got, in addition to Stewart and Reed, lovely and/or thoroughly engaging performances from a large cast including Thomas Mitchell, Henry Travers, Beulah Bondi, Frank Faylen, Ward Bond, Gloria Grahame, H. B. Warner, Frank Albertson, Todd Karns, Sheldon Leonard, Charles Lane, Carl Switzer, Ellen Corby, Dick Elliott and Bobbie Anderson, who is extraordinary as the young George.

Eliot M. Camarena believes the movie depicts the final thoughts of a suicide, and although Capra certainly would have disagreed, it’s an avenue of interpretation worth pursuing.


Radio Days (1987) Woody Allen’s sweetest movie, a loving tribute to the mass medium of his childhood refracted through a fictionalized depiction of his family. It’s also among the writer-director’s most beautiful pictures, shot with a burnished glow by the great Italian cinematographer Carlo Di Palma on Santo Loquasto’s richly designed and executed sets. One could, I suppose, accuse Radio Days of nostalgic excess but the tone is generally so light and amusing it’s a bit like Fellini’s Amarcord translated into American pop iconography. Allen narrates, and his youthful doppelgänger Joe is charmingly played by the young Seth Green, with Julie Kavner and Michael Tucker as his bickering parents. The large ensemble cast includes Joy Newman as Joe’s teenage sister, Josh Mostel as his quarrelsome uncle (“Take the gas pipe!”), Renée Lippin as his equally bovine wife, Mia Farrow as a talentless aspiring actress, Danny Aiello as her would-be mob assassin, Gina DeAngelis as his practical mother, Kenneth Mars as the family’s rabbi, Wallace Shawn as the hilariously incongruous radio voice of The Masked Avenger and Diane Keaton in a lovely New Year’s sequence as a nightclub singer crooning Cole Porter’s “You’d Be So Nice to Come Home To” (and incidentally wiping Farrow’s anemic rendition of “I Don’t Want to Walk Without You” off the screen and out of your memory.) Although Radio Days is a love-letter to Allen’s reminiscences of radio it’s also a Valentine to Dianne Wiest. As young Joe’s chic, marriage-minded Aunt Bea, Wiest is the movie’s vibrant human fulcrum, ever hopeful of romance yet nearly always thwarted; one of her suitors leaves her stranded on the road when he becomes convinced the Martians have landed, another is married and a third (Robert Joy), seemingly the most appropriate match for her, turns out to be grieving the death of his boyfriend.

The wonderful soundtrack of period recordings includes Benny Goodman’s “Body and Soul,” Glenn Miller’s “In the Mood,” Tommy Dorsey’s “Opus One” and “I’m Gettin’ Sentimental Over You,” Artie Shaw’s “Frenesi,” The Mills Brothers’ “Paper Doll,” Bing Crosby and The Andrews Sisters’ “Pistol Packin’ Mama,” Carmen Miranda’s “South American Way” (to which Newman joyously lip-synchs, accompanied by Tucker and Mostel), The Ink Spots’ “If I Didn’t Care,” Xavier Cugat’s “Babalu” and “One, Two, Three, Kick,” Guy Lombardo’s “That Old Feeling,” Duke Ellington’s “Take the ‘A’ Train” and, in a nice sequence, a then-living link to the past Allen was evoking: The aged Kitty Carlisle performing “They’re Either Too Young or Too Old” on the radio.


The Band Wagon (1953) Produced by MGM’s Freed Unit the year after Singin’ in the Rain, written (like Rain) by Betty Comden and Adolph Green and based (also like its predecessor) around an existing musical catalog — in this case the elegant songs of Howard Dietz and Arthur Schwartz — The Band Wagon is usually treated like the proverbial red-headed stepchild. But how fair is to compare any movie against what many people (myself included) regard as the best of all film musicals and find it wanting? For one thing, under the direction of the design-oriented Vincente Minnelli, it looks even better than Singin’ in the Rain. For another, it’s got Fred Astaire.

I hope if you’re reading these pages you don’t need to be told that Astaire was the greatest performer in musicals, or why. Just watching him stroll beside a stationary train with his distinctive walk while softly singing in that inimitable voice the Dietz and Schwartz standard “By Myself” is joyous, and when he gets an opportunity to do what he did best, there is almost no one in movies who could, or can, touch him. Comden and Green used Astaire’s insecurities to flesh out his character, a faded movie star taking a chance on a Broadway show: His concern that Cyd Charisse, his dancing partner in the picture, was too tall for him, for example, or too much of a ballet dancer, or that he had no natural sympathy with or ability to perform Michael Kidd’s stylistic choreography. Despite his fears and as a result of his willingness to be persuaded by people with talent, Astaire gets to do more in The Band Wagon that he had in years, and in more different but related styles. He has a great number with an authentic shoe-shine man (Leroy Daniels) in “Shine on Your Shoes”; a breathtaking pas de deux with Charisse in “Dancing in the Dark“; a charming duet with the wonderful Nanette Fabray in “I Love Louisa” (which he originally performed with his sister Adele in the stage revue, also called The Bandwagon); a hilarious version of “Triplets” with Fabray and Jack Buchanan; a long, funny Mickey Spillane spoof (“The Girl Hunt Ballet,” written by Alan Jay Lerner) that also includes a sexy dance with Charisse which virtually defines the appeal of both partners; and, with Buchanan, an exquisite song-and-dance to one of the most sophisticated ballads ever written, “I Guess I’ll Have to Change My Plan,” gloriously designed by Oliver Smith. Watch the way Astaire slides out of his highchair in “Triplets” and seems to be moving to the floor in graceful slow motion, and marvel that such golden beings once walked the earth.


Streamers (1983) During what I think of as his wilderness years, between the debacle of Popeye (1980) and the triumph of Vincent and Theo (1990), what Robert Altman mostly did was stage plays, and in a few instances, film them. The movie of David Rabe’s excoriating Vietnam-era drama Streamers came just before Altman’s superb condensation of Donald Freed and Arnold M. Stone’s Nixon fantasia Secret Honor (1984) and while neither was seen by nearly enough people (Streamers cost a mere $2 million to make but earned only $378,452) both represent a different way of looking at plays cinematically. Streamers doesn’t feel entirely real, the way McCabe and Mrs. Miller did, or California Split, but it also doesn’t look exactly like a stage play either. Some critics of the movie were bothered by that, and there are times (as with the lack of outside activity around the Army barracks in which it’s set) when the picture does feel hermetically sealed. Yet it’s so well directed, so beautifully lit (the cinematograper was Pierre Mignot) and so magnificently acted by its exceptional cast this slight air of neither-fish-nor-fowlness in no way detracts from the power of the drama.

In 1975 when Mike Nichols directed the premiere of the play at the Long Wharf, theatre in America was seldom as strong, as confrontational, as violent or as bloody as Streamers, and there were a lot of walk-outs and, in New Haven, Off-Broadway, on Broadway and in Los Angeles, reports of men and women fainting in their theater seats. I’ve always found it interesting that people can sit through all sorts of violence, gore and human viscera being spewed in a movie, the most realistic of all performing artforms, without demur yet are overcome by seeing it done by live actors on a stage. Perhaps the very artificiality of theatre, however heightened its reality, lulls them into such a state of comfortable alienation that the explosion of violence un-moors them. I also confess that I’ve never quite understood the essential situation of Rabe’s play, which primarily concerns sexual tensions in a stateside barracks. While the interior struggle of a draftee to come to grips with his homosexuality is one countless young soldiers have dealt with, in every nation, presumably for centuries, the way Ritchie (Mitchell Lichtenstein) flirts with the others, flaunting what he’s uncertain of himself, doesn’t ring true for 1965, when Streamers is set. Nor do the attitudes of his barracks-mates (Matthew Modine and David Alan Grier) who in a comparable situation would probably have beaten Richie up on a regular basis or otherwise have made him so miserable he would have asked for a transfer. Here they reject his being what they call a “faggot,” but don’t despise him. That, however dismissive, still seems a bit enlightened, if I may use the word, for that time.

However, Rabe’s dialogue is so good, the acting here of so high a quality and Altman’s staging of it so effective as to sweep such cavils aside. All of the young men are splendid, but Lichtenstein and the terrifyingly mercurial Michael Wright as the outsider who deliberately stirs the tensions, are better than that, as are Guy Boyd and, especially, George Dzundza, as the veteran officers who float in and out of the action and whose generally drunken presence is a fearful reminder of what is about to happen to the boys when they are finally shipped to Vietnam. Dzundza has a long monologue at the end that, as written and acted, are pocket illustrations both of why American stage drama was once revered, and how much has been lost in the decades since Streamers premiered.


the birdcage (1996) The latest (and, so far, last) iteration of the popular French stage play by Jean Poiret that became an internationally record-breaking movie in 1978 and a Broadway musical which despite premiering in the age of Reagan, AIDS and rampant public and private bigotry against gay men and Lesbians,* became a long-running, Tony Award-winning hit. The musical La Cage Aux Folles kept its action in Europe (the original creators, who included Tommy Tune, Jay Presson Allen and Maury Yeston, had planned to set theirs in New Orleans); for the movie, wittily written by Elaine May and flavorsomely directed by Mike Nichols, the action was, wisely, moved to South Miami Beach and the central characters made American. (The sole exception is the Guatemalan houseboy Agador, hilariously portrayed by Hank Azaria.) The basic plot remains the same: Middle-aged couple consisting of club owner (Robin Williams) and drag star (Nathan Lane) find their son (Dan Futterman) is getting married to the daughter (Calista Flockheart) of a Moral Majority-type Senator (Gene Hackman), himself fleeing the press over a sex-scandal involving his late political partner. Add in the politician’s convention-minded spouse (Dianne Wiest), a conniving National Enquirer reporter (Tom McGowan) and attempts to, variously, temporarily get rid of the drag queen or train him to pass, to remodel the couple’s apartment in Early Conservative and to inveigle the boy’s biological mother (Christine Baranski) to put in an appearance at the dinner party, and pandemonium naturally ensues.

I like this edition of the material better than the original, and infinitely more than the stage musical. May has a way with a comic line that is as distinctive as Larry Gelbart’s or Woody Allen’s. In addition, that master of behavioral direction Mike Nichols was the perfect person to guide an enterprise that, although wildly funny, could if not kept on a believably human line become protracted and silly. Emmanuel Lubezki lit the movie to bring out the pastel surroundings, Jonathan Tunick contributed some characteristic melodies and orchestrations, Stephen Sondheim added a nifty number (“Little Dream”) for Williams to stage with Lane and a sullen dancer, Ann Roth contributed witty costumes, there is some splendid matte work by Robert Stromberg and Mike Wassel, and the cast performs the material with comedic gusto and fresh invention, especially Hackman and Lane. The latter’s beard is noticeable during his scenes as “Mother,” however, proving Billy Wilder right for shooting Some Like it Hot in black-and-white.


You Only Live Once (1937) A tough, nihilistic Fritz Lang picture starring Sylvia Sidney as an idealistic legal secretary and Henry Fonda as the ex-con she believes in. The screenplay by Gene Towne and Charles Graham Baker sets up Eddie Taylor (Fonda) as such a born loser that when he’s arrested for an armored car robbery and a batch of murders and sentenced to death you know that no matter what else happens, his story is not going to end well. Fonda pitches his soft tenor low, and gravelly, as if Eddie is in a constant state of fury and although the picture lost money his performance in it almost certainly led to better quality projects than he’d enjoyed during his first two years in Hollywood. 15 minutes of the movie were taken out of the original hour and forty minute cut, allegedly for then-extreme violence and it shows; some of the picture’s continuity is off as a result. (The deleted footage is lost and was likely destroyed.) The cinematography by Leon Shamroy, especially in the restored Classic Flix Blu-ray, is striking and Alfred Newman composed a strong score with a lovely main theme for the lovers. If you know and appreciate Newman, you can tell it’s him from the first notes of the main title.


The Romantic Englishwoman (1975) I don’t really know what to say about this British curio directed by the expatriate American blacklistee Joseph Losey except that it’s well acted (Glenda Jackson, Michael Caine and Helmut Berger are the leads), occasionally witty (the screenplay is by Tom Stoppard and Thomas Wiseman out of the latter’s novel), beautifully photographed (by Gerry Fisher, who at times almost makes Glenda Jackson look attractive) and engagingly scored (by Richard Hartley). But it’s such an elliptical chimera of a movie that with very few changes it could have been a Harold Pinter play, and I don’t mean that as a compliment. And while in real life Berger, who plays a sociopathic drug smuggler and pathological liar, identified as bisexual, his performance as a part-time heterosexual gigolo is, shall we say, less than convincing. What with his pronounced lisp and languid, piss-elegant walk we keep expecting him to come on to Caine rather than Jackson. Surely that’s not what was intended?


Man’s Favorite Sport? (1963) An intermittently hilarious variation by Howard Hawks on Bringing Up Baby, with Rock Hudson in the unenviable position of working up a sub-par imitation of Cary Grant and Paula Prentiss not evoking Katharine Hepburn and thereby coming off much better. In John Fenton Murray and Steve McNeil’s screenplay, Hudson is a fishing expert at Abercrombie & Fitch who has never fished in his life and who is bedeviled by the determinedly wacky Prentiss, who enters him into a prominent fishing competition and then must teach him everything he needs to know in three days. The picture is buoyed by Hawks’ expert way with comic set-ups and dialogue, by Russell Harlan’s scrumptious color photography, by a bouncy main title song by Henry Mancini and Johnny Mercer, some very funny sight gags (the look a bear gives the camera as it rides by on a runaway motorbike is priceless) and by the sparkling supporting cast which includes John McGiver, Roscoe Karns, James Westerfield, Regis Toomey, Forrest Lewis and, as a phlegmatic professional Indian, Norman Alden. Prentiss can’t match Hepburn’s originality in Baby, but she is an original nonetheless, especially when she laughs, which is often. Hawks later said of her that she was fine but couldn’t remember what she’d done from take to take, creating continuity problems. Yet she’s so engaging you don’t notice the technical flaws. Why her performance here didn’t lead to better opportunities than What’s New, Pussycat? is one of those eternal mysteries. Hudson is in his own way a good comedian, but it’s almost impossible to watch him in this role and not think of Grant, to Hudson’s detriment. Cary Grant’s touch with a comedic line was nonpareil and, like Fred Astaire, when he walked across a room there was no mistaking him. Hudson walks like a former truck driver.


Love Me Tonight (1932) This frothy, Lubitsch-like musical concoction is often regarded as one of the greatest of all movie musicals. It isn’t quite that, but it’s extremely entertaining, imaginatively directed, smartly written and beautifully scored. The director, Rouben Mamoulian, does some nice things, such as the way he hands off “Isn’t It Romantic?” from Maurice Chevalier — who sings it satirically — to various characters in Paris, on a train out of town and in the suburbs where in Jeanette MacDonald’s voice it becomes a soaring ballad. The songs are by Richard Rodgers and Lorenz Hart, and Hart also wrote some of the dialogue, in rhyming couplets, which sounds rather fey but, as staged and acted, is charming. (The score includes “Lover,” “Mimi” and the title song.) The script, by Samuel Hoffenstein, George Marion Jr. and Waldemar Young, is light and witty, built on Graustarkian implausibilities cleverly worked out. Victor Milner’s cinematography is extraordinary, and the delightful supporting cast includes the peerless Charles Ruggles as an impoverished vicomte; Charles Butterworth as MacDonald’s thwarted would-be swain; Myrna Loy as a man-mad comtesse; Elizabeth Patterson, Ethel Griffies and Blanche Friderici as a trio of dizzy aunts; Robert Greig as a major domo; and C. Aubrey Smith as the imperious duke who rules all of their lives. If you like Chevalier, as I do, you’ll be entranced by his performance as the exuberant Parisian tailor, but as the princess above his station MacDonald is a little tough to take at times, especially when we’re exhorted by the director to gaze upon those vaguely homely shopgirl’s features of hers and pretend she’s a great beauty.


A Boy Named Charlie Brown (1969) The first Peanuts feature was wildly successful in its time, and broke Disney’s exclusive hold on big-screen animation. Charles M. Schulz’s screenplay, based on the notion of Charlie Brown being entered into a national spelling bee, is a charmer; it retains, and builds on, the characteristics of the strip that made it so unique and treasurable through the decades. Although I think that in his direction of the Peanuts features and TV specials Bill Melendez often flattened out the look of Schulz’s renderings, and occasionally made them downright ugly, his direction of the picture is assured, inventive (lots of split screens) and often very funny. While Snoopy’s skating/hockey fantasy at the Rockefeller Center rink is perfectly in keeping with his character the long Schroeder sequence set to his playing the Beethoven “Pathetique,” is a more puzzling inclusion, but most of what’s in the movie is entirely apt.

The musical score is variable, what with Rod McKuen’s typically gauzy ballad — why, during what is obviously the school year, does he twice invoke August afternoons, and what exactly is this “kind of magic that only little boys can do”? — vying with John Scott Trotter’s arrangements of the familiar Vince Guaraldi themes, but the vocal casting is not only just right it’s nearly definitive: Peter Robbins’ distinctive husky rendering of Charlie Brown, Pamelyn Ferdin’s conclusive Lucy van Pelt, Glenn Gilger’s gently philosophical Linus and Erin Sullivan’s entirely adorable Sally Brown.


Below, a newspaper advertisement for the weirdest movie coupling I think I’ve ever seen. It’s like an entry in one of those competitions to find the least (or most) appropriate double-feature.

This could be a satirical mock-up. I sincerely hope it is. We’re Hanging You from Your Nipples, Charlie Brown!


The Jungle Book (1967) I ended 2022 revisiting one of my earliest movie loves. I was the perfect age when this one was released to embrace a new Disney animated feature. As a cartoon-mad child, Walt Disney was at the center of my imaginative world; when he died in December of 1966, I was as stunned and saddened as I had been when my beloved maternal great-grandmother passed away in her sleep the year before. Remember, “The Wonderful World of Color” was a television fixture in those years, and the presence of Walt himself, although he appeared less often then than he had in the early days of its previous iteration (“Walt Disney Presents”) was still occasionally a part of that weekly experience.

Although my sister and I saw Cinderella in 1965, the reissue of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, to which my mother took me on a memorable afternoon in 1967, made so marked an impression on me that I have for years mistakenly believed it was my first animated feature. I tended to obsession even then, and Snow White was the focus of my six-year-old’s ardor for several months… until The Jungle Book arrived and I went duly gaga over it: I had the special double-length Gold Key Giant Jungle Book comic (I wore the cover off that one through obsessive re-reading), Jungle Book Disneykins figurines from Royal Pudding, Jungle Book temporary tattoos, a Jungle Book oil-paint-by-numbers kit, the wonderful Joe Liptak-designed Jungle Book View Master pack, a Jungle Book Whitman frame-tray puzzle, a Jungle Book coloring book, Jungle Book books, and, of course, the Jungle Book soundtrack album, whose surface I eventually wore to the smooth consistency of a hockey-puck. (My poor parents.) Seeing the picture again in its 1990 re-release I was considerably less enthusiastic, and not merely due to being 20 years older. Yet it’s remarkable what an additional three decades can do for a picture, and to your perception of it. Seeing The Jungle Book again in 2022 I still think, as I did going to the 1978 and 1990 reissues, that it’s too self-consciously (and anachronistically) hip for its own good, especially in Phil Harris’ and Louis Prima’s likable but slangy vocal performances. The rich character designs (by Bill Peet and Ken Anderson) and backgrounds (Al Dempster), however, are superb and the animation wonderfully expressive, particularly that by Milt Kahl, John Lounsbery, Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston, who animated most of the picture by themselves.

Cavils aside, although I’ve seen The Jungle Book numerous times since it was first released I don’t think I’ve enjoyed it as much since the age of six as I did watching it again on New Year’s Eve.


*I have never, and will never, employ “LGBT” or any of its increasingly ludicrous (and increasingly wearisome) acronyms for the so-called gay community. You would think any politician who panders by routinely mouthing such barbarisms as “LGBTQIA2S+” would find the letters causing his or her tongue to cleave to the roof of his or her mouth. Further, I will not be a party to pushing transgenderism, either as a part of that “community” or otherwise, especially to the self-questioning young. My reasons are manifold. First, until relatively recently, transsexuals did not wish to be considered as having anything in common with Lesbians and gay men, and I am perfectly happy to honor their previous wishes indefinitely… especially when they push gay men entirely out of leadership positions at Pride events, as happened two summers ago in New York. Second, I resent the coopting for its own highly suspicious reasons by the unbalanced Woke of a movement that did so much, beginning in 1969, to make my life less anxious. Third, when I was a youth the term was simply “gay,” period, which always seemed entirely sufficient. Later the acronym was “GLB,” although few of us trusted bisexuals, for good reason; they may have affairs with us but they nearly always go back to safe, heterosexual pairings. Besides, no one asked me whether I minded taking the second seat to gay women, who make up a mere 16% of the self-identifying gay population. (I did, and I do. Is this a social movement, or imprecations for dealing with a shipwreck, where the women must be gotten to the lifeboats first?) Fourth, I do not see the advantage, aside perhaps from providing political comfort, of labeling oneself in any way. Fifth, and perhaps most important: These labels are not used to unite. They are intended to divide, and are being used to do just that. Did the veterans of the Stonewall riots really put their bodies on the line so that one day children could have their hormones blocked and their breasts and genitals removed and have know-nothing college students claim, without citing the slightest evidence, that evil white gay men removed blacks and Latinos from the movement?

Text copyright 2023 by Scott Ross

Prisoners of war: “MASH” (1970)

Standard

Major Margaret “Hot Lips” Houlihan:
(Objecting to a wounded North Korean soldier in the O.R.)
That man is a prisoner of war, doctor!

Captain “Trapper” John McIntyre:
So are you, sweetheart, but you don’t know it.

By Scott Ross

After you’ve read enough books about movies and interviews with people who make or star in them and seen enough “making of” home-video documentaries, certain essential truisms become manifest, and make sorting things out a little easier. One lesson I’ve learned is that nothing Dustin Hoffman has ever said about a movie is be believed. (I’m not saying he’s a liar. I’m sure he believes every word he says.) Another is that Orson Welles, like Truman Capote, liked a good story better than reality. And yet another is that nearly everything Robert Altman had to say about MASH bears about as much relationship to reality as the contents of the Warren Report.*

One example, at random: Sally Kellerman’s famous shower scene. Gary Burghoff, who played “Radar” O’Reilly in the movie as well as the subsequent television series, has always said that to make her feel less self-conscious he jokingly proposed that everyone on the camera side in her line of sight strip too. Kellerman later said that when the tent flap raised up she saw Burghoff standing naked next to the camera, which the actor confirmed. But to hear Altman tell it on the MASH DVD commentary, it was his idea, and both he and Burghoff were nude. It’s a minor incident, I know, but after hearing Altman claim for two hours that everything that worked in MASH was his and everything he felt did not was due to someone else it was a blessed relief to go directly to The Godfather commentary track and hear Francis Ford Coppola giving credit to his cinematographer, his actors, his assistants and anyone else who contributed a line or a bit of business or made a suggestion that enriched his movie. Altman also never missed an opportunity to run down the Richard Hooker novel on which his movie was based, which he called bad and racist, or (especially) the subsequent television series… which he called bad and racist…

One can well understand Altman’s bitterness. He was paid only $75,000 for directing a movie that, made for less than $4 million reaped $40 million at the box office at the time of its release (back, as they say, when $40 million was real money) and eventually became, through the teevee show, a cash-cow that is still being milked. Further, not only did 20th Century-Fox not exhibit the integrity and basic decency required to reward Altman with even a nominal bonus for having made their biggest-grossing picture of the year and the third highest-grossing movie released in 1970 but his teenage son eventually racked up some $2 million for writing the lyrics to that movie’s theme song. Although Altman liked to claim the movie gave him something more than money — his career — from his consistent, sour comments on it, the financial deprivations of MASH clearly bugged him for the remainder of his life.

About the book and the show, however, Robert Altman was full of shit.

Since first picking up, at the age of 13, the novel attributed to Richard Hooker (the nom de plume of the physician Richard Hornberger, Jr. in collaboration with the journalist W.C. Heinz, who polished the manuscript) I have read MASH more times than any other book, and always with undiminished pleasure. It is true that Hornberger was a social conservative, although his novel does not necessarily reflect that. It is also the case that, having been drafted and sent to Korea in 1952 he missed the period, roughly 1950 — 1951, during which the M.A.S.H (Mobile Army Surgical Hospital) units were at their most mobile, so there is no “bug-out” in the book as there often were before he arrived, and which later memorably occurred in the television series. I will further attest that, yes, Hornberger’s novel (like the eventual movie and, for a single season, the show) contains a black doctor called Oliver Wendell Jones and nicknamed “Spearchucker” during his college years as a javelin thrower. But since he is as much a part of “The Swamp” as Hawkeye Pierce, “Trapper John” McIntyre or Duke Forrest, the Southerner with whom he reaches a mutually respectful accommodation, and is a superior surgeon in no way stereotyped or subservient, I have never felt any racial animus toward this character on the part of the author. Indeed, Dr. Jones is such a part of the fraternity of the Swamp he’s also in the two subsequent novels Hornberger wrote in the 1970s.† (Although the author is, I admit, rather freer in MASH with the ugly epithet “gook,” still in use in the Vietnam era, as well as, at least once, “Chink.”) As for the series, which the rock-ribbed Maine Republican Hornberger despised for its liberal attitudes, the charge by Altman of racism is even more absurd. The last thing Larry Gelbart, who developed the show for television, would have wanted to be associated with was a racist series; while I have yet to meet anyone who (aside from myself) remembers watching it, Gelbart parlayed his “M*A*S*H” success into a second, short-lived comedy series called “Roll Out!” in 1973 and which centered on the black supply drivers in World War II France, and that at a time when there were no other series on the American air featuring a majority-black cast. (Even that superliberal Norman Lear didn’t have one until 1974 when “Good Times” premiered.) At least Hornberger ascribes to the Korean locals the wider variety of jobs they performed in the camps, which the series largely ignored… as did, for all his talk of other people’s racism, Altman’s movie.

Larry Gelbart’s “M*A*S*H” follow-up. Remember it? The young Ed Begley, Jr. was also in the cast.

Aside from the foregoing, the content of the “M*A*S*H” series speaks for itself, as it did for 11 seasons on CBS. The television “M*A*S*H” can be criticized on a number of levels, not least of which was its increasing preachiness and concessions to the vanity of its stars — Loretta Swit’s terrible 1980s hairdos, for example, and the softening of her character to the point where she barely had a reason to exist. But to deem the show as Altman frequently (and reflexively?) did “racist,” is risible.

Exactly why the novel MASH appeals to me to the degree that I’ve re-read it repeatedly since 1974 is a bit of a mystery, one I’m not sure I can fully explain. In addition to my deep fondness for the characters Hornberger created and who have become beloved of, by now, generations of readers, movie audiences and television (and home video) viewers across the globe, I suppose I like the dryness of his prose style and the matter-of-fact tone even when he’s describing outrages both comic and dramatic, as well as the genuinely witty manner with which the Swampmen communicate and the sharp playfulness of their verbal acrobatics, a trait they share in a more self-conscious, deliberately humorous manner with the characters in Catch-22 whose burlesque of language is of course representative of Joseph Heller’s satirical use of vaudeville humor. I admire the oddball characters in the book, seldom as self-righteous as their cinematic and television counterparts. I like its episodic structure — Ring Lardner, Jr., who adapted it for the movies, quite rightly observed that it was less a novel than a collection of short stories featuring the same characters — and the way it, like the movie, begins with Hawkeye and Duke arriving in Korea and ends with their leaving. I appreciate the seriousness with which the operating theatre is treated because Hornberger, like Lardner and Altman and Gelbart, never loses sight of why these men are in Korea. And, frankly, the book simply makes me laugh, a lot. I do think the series bested Hornberger and Altman in one respect: Making explicit what Gelbart considered the material’s perfect existential conundrum, young surgeons patching up even younger soldiers to be sent to the hospitals of Seoul and Tokyo where they will be given fuller treatment and rehabilitation and, all too often, returned to active duty to be shot (or in any case, shot at) and bombed again.

I suppose that, taken together, these novelistic factors simply exert a pull on my literary imagination that is irresistible. And that’s not to mention a few items not even the movie, for all its irreverence, dared to depict. I’m thinking partly of the way the Swampmen torment a staggeringly insensitive Protestant chaplain, partly of the way the “Painless Pole”‘s bout of impotence is resolved by dint of a blue ribbon tied around his prodigious appendage before he’s resurrected (Painless doesn’t know whether he went to Heaven or to Hell but wherever he was, he declares happily, “I won First Prize”) and mostly of the way Hawkeye and Duke raise the necessary tuition, room, board and travel expenses for their young houseboy Ho-Jon‡ to attend Pierce’s alma mater after he’s been drafted by the ROK Armed Forces, wounded in battle and fixed up by the Swampmen: By convincing Trapper John to grow out his beard and his locks, be photographed as Jesus, autograph hundreds of the subsequent snaps for sale as souvenirs and, kept perpetually drunk, be tied to a cross and dangled from a helicopter for personal appearances. It would undoubtedly have made a hilariously irreligious addition to the picture but even the sardonic atheist Lardner, whose only novel (The Ecstasy of Owen Muir) was an anti-clerical satire, wasn’t brave enough to include it in his screenplay and I doubt the lapsed-Catholic Altman could have gotten away with it on a studio picture in 1969 even if he’d tried.


It seems obvious that the same deranged genius who came up with the portmanteau montage logo for The Knack in 1966 also designed the weird, distinctive artwork for MASH in 1970 (or at least, that he was inspired by the older image, and improved upon it). Yet I have been unable in 45 years of searching to discover his name.

What Robert Altman did get away with in MASH was almost everything else, and which helped make the movie a cultural touchstone and a box-office phenomenon. Although thwarted in his attempt to make explicit that the picture was set in Vietnam (20th Century-Fox insisted on a “dedication scroll” making clear it was actually Korea) those who saw MASH when it was new and the increasingly hated war in Vietnam was raging fruitlessly and murderously on, especially its core youthful audience, had no difficulty drawing the inference.§ They understood that war is an obscenity beside which sexual pranks, irreligious commentary and four-letter words are as a few skinned knees to a holocaust. The things Altman, and Ingo Preminger, the movie’s producer, fought for, such as the bloody, sometimes painful and occasionally excruciating operating room scenes, were the things that mattered, and what MASH was about. (Gelbart and Gene Reynolds, the producer of the television series, had similar problems, at least in the early days of the show, with the suits at CBS.) The stark juxtaposition of humor with genuine horror, common now, was unique at the time. It’s intrinsic to the novel but, even for the late 1960s — the picture was filmed in 1969 but released in early 1970 — strikingly different from the then-current tone of movie comedy.

MASH didn’t sound like other American movies of the time either; Altman placed small mobile microphones on many of his actors, enabling him to catch what was necessary of the overlapping dialogue in the group scenes, such as in the mess hall when Duke and Hawkeye arrive in camp. Then there were screwball bits like the Japanese recordings of popular American songs of the early ’50s from Radio Tokyo and the inane announcements on the camp P.A. system, an effect arrived at during editing, was carried through the picture and which reaches a dazzling apogee at the end, when the announcer nonchalantly informs us that, “Tonight’s movie has been… MASH” and introduces the actors over fast clips from their performances. (Please refrain when describing this to your friends from using the hack-word “meta.”) And while Altman did not write, nor reap the rewards of, the lyrics to the cleverly titled “Suicide is Painless,” the phrase was his, as were the song’s poker metaphors; the Painless Pole (John Schuck) runs a 24-hour poker game in his tent. The look of MASH was different too: Not merely Altman’s use of zooms or the pointed way he and Danford B. Greene edited the picture but the rich, grainy diffusion of the widescreen Panavision images arrived at by the director and his gifted cinematographer Harold E. Stine; the only comparably shot (and edited) contemporary American movie comedy I can think of is The Graduate of 1967. Stine had to be flexible, as when on the day of filming the “farewell dinner” for Painless his director got the idea to shoot it as a parody of Da Vinci’s Last Supper, complete unto Elliott Gould crooking his finger at John Schuck à la Judas Iscariot. Hornberger calls the stag party The Last Supper in his novel, and Lardner repeats the line in his screenplay, so the idea was there from the beginning. It just took Altman’s perverse visual genius to make it explicit.

Lardner, whose credit (and subsequent Oscar) as the picture’s screenwriter was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of Red Scare-era blacklisting, rightly objected to the needless slapstick at the beginning of the movie, when a supply sergeant gets into a physical altercation with a pair of MPs after Hawkeye drives off in one of his jeeps and wrongly to the football game, which he felt was too long and lent the wrong tone, as well as to Hawkeye (Donald Sutherland) and Duke (Tom Skerritt) taunting Frank Burns (Robert Duvall) by leading a group-sing of “Onward, Christian Soldiers.” (The pair sing it in his script, but others in the camp don’t pick up on it as they do in the movie.) As to the game, Hornberger spends an equivalent amount of time on it in his novel, and its antic spirit is a needed corrective to the alternative deluges of blood and boredom the surgeons are faced with, both in the book and in the movie. The scenarist was understandably upset when he finally saw a screening of the picture. I doubt he’d ever encountered anything like it, and the shock of seeing and hearing Altman’s revolutionary approach to the scenes and the dialogue must have been profound for a man who got his start writing movie scripts in the early 1940s. Lardner reevaluated MASH over time (his Academy Award surely helped there) and so presumably recognized that Altman did not alter the script so much as he and his cast enhanced and enlivened it. Despite his own narcissism, even Altman freely and repeatedly gave his screenwriter credit for the movie’s shape and form, and its success. Lardner cleverly fused the religious nut in Duke and Hawkeye’s tent in the book with Burns, for example, and the basic structure of the movie is his. Altman credited his writer as well with concocting the vicious but very funny sequence in which the Swampmen wire Hot Lips’ tent for sound and broadcast her assignation with Frank over the P.A. system. (Father Mulcahy: “Is this The Bickersons? I love them.”) On the other hand, I don’t know whether it was Altman or the actors who came up with the notion of Hawkeye and Trapper camping it up the morning after Frank and Hot Lips’ thwarted liaison, but it hasn’t aged well.

“Well! What’s wrong with her?”

That isn’t the only example of dated “fag” humor in the picture. One area in which I fault Altman’s approach is the manner in which Painless reacts to his bout of temporary impotence in, respectively, the novel, the screenplay and the completed movie. Hornberger merely has Painless, a periodic depressive, listening to his prodigious appendage with Hawkeye’s stethoscope and announcing, “I think it’s dead.” Lardner has him assume that after an incident with a nurse in which he couldn’t achieve an erection he’s become “homosexual.” Altman and the movie’s Painless, John Schuck, up that ante (“Well… I’m a fairy”) which to their credit Hawkeye and the other doctors ridicule him for declaring on no evidence other than not being able to get it up a single time. This, in now-typical fashion, leads to current online ignoramuses writing that Painless “comes out as gay” to Hawkeye. Jesus, who breeds these idiots? And why?

Aside: Painless — or in any case, Schuck — is responsible in MASH for the first use of the word “fuck” in an American studio picture. Altman had instructed the actor to taunt his opponent on the football field and in a rehearsal ad lib Shuck barked, “All right, bub, your fuckin’ head is comin’ right off!” He had no idea Altman would use the take. Joan Tewkesbury, in the forward to her published Nashville screenplay, recalled the young 1970 audience exploding into cheers and applause when they heard that.¶


Those who come to MASH only after years of watching the television series can quickly grow bemused or even confused that characters they knew during the show’s long lifetime (and even lengthier afterlife) are so different in the movie. As played by Alan Alda and initially written by Gelbart, Hawkeye Pierce in particular is warmer and less snide than in Donald Sutherland’s original performance. (Alda’s Hawkeye is also a bachelor.) Duke of course never made it to teevee, and Spearchucker lasted less than a season. Radar started out on the series more or less as he was in the picture — Gary Burghoff considered him “a sardonic little guy,” far from the naïve innocent he quickly evolved into on the show. And Lt. Colonel Henry Blake is vastly different from book and movie to series. Hornberger’s (and Lardner and Altman’s) Blake (Roger Bowen) is Regular Army, not a civilian doctor drafted into command as McLean Stevenson’s Henry was on television. While as sweet in his own confused way as his series doppelgänger (the gentle William Christopher) Father Mulcahy (René Auberjonois) is more bumbling in the movie where, with his ginger Irish hair he’s known as “Dago Red.” The character in the picture who is furthest from his teevee counterpart is Frank Burns; Duvall’s Burns is as sour, incompetent and self-righteous as Larry Linville’s on the show but not nearly as much of a ninny. And while Linville is a brilliant comic technician and, occasionally, less than despicable, there’s a deeply unpleasant quality to Duvall’s performance, and to the character as Lardner (and, earlier, Hornberger) envisioned him. Although, despite his loathsomeness and hypocrisy, Frank’s exit from the 4077th, strapped into a straight-jacket and escorted by MPs is, I would argue, not presented by Altman as intentionally humorous — Duvall, photographed behind the rising heat waves of a trash-barrel fire, appears utterly depressed and defeated and even Sutherland’s Hawkeye looks away — viewers whose responses to Burns are trained by years of Linville’s portrayal roar with laughter at the sight; it’s happened every time I’ve seen MASH with an audience, and I would very much like to know if moviegoers in 1970, well before the series took hold of the popular imagination, reacted the same way. Young audiences were so reflexively anti-establishment then that it’s certainly possible even if their current, older selves rush to defend lying hack politicians and government institutions and demand censorship when it doesn’t appear quickly enough to satisfy their well-honed sense of self-loathing. They’ve become Frank Burns.

The stars of the ensemble: Fred Williamson, Sally Kellerman, Elliott Gould, Donald Sutherland, Jo Ann Pflug, Tom Skerritt

I don’t mean to suggest by my comments above that Sutherland is in any way a liability to the picture. In spite of his and his co-star’s discontent with Altman and attempts to get him replaced — for which Gould later apologized — the role of Hawkeye Pierce turned out to be a career-maker for Sutherland, who until then had been floating on the periphery of American movies. His persona as an actor tends to be dry and understated if not phlegmatic, entirely unlike Alan Alda’s, which sometimes makes him a bit of a chilly presence. Well, the Hawkeye Pierce of the novel isn’t the most ebullient character in the world either. Sutherland’s cool makes for a nice contrast with the warmer, scruffier appeal of Elliott Gould’s Trapper John and the half-cynical, half-perplexed Southern charm of Tom Skerritt’s Duke Forrest. Skerritt was even more of an unknown than Sutherland. (Gould was Ted in the 1969 Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice and had received an Academy Award nomination for his assured comic performance.) Tom Skerritt’s immense likability redeems a character who could have been a boor, especially in the early scenes where he is erotically aggressive to the exclusion of almost any other emotion and, later, a conventional Georgia bigot. Sally Kellerman’s Margaret Houlihan (called, curiously, “O’Houlihan” by both Roger Bowen and G. Wood’s General Hammond, but by no one else) is rigid and foolish but not silly, a complaint one could lodge against the TV version of her, at least in the early years, even as one was laughing at what Loretta Swit said and did. The movie’s “Hot Lips” becomes a bit silly, once her hard shell is softened, as when she leads cheers at the football match and seems utterly bewildered by the rules of the game. (Hot Lips: A red flag! We got a red flag! / Henry: It’s a penalty, you blithering idiots!)

The arrival of Margaret Houlihan.

Kellerman’s performance has very interesting curlicues, as when Trapper John is made Chief Surgeon and calls for sex, Lt. “Scorch” (Dawne Damon) is offered up to him and he points to Houlihan shouting, “No, no, no, that one — the sultry bitch with the fire in her eyes! Take her clothes off and bring her to me!” In Lardner’s script, “her eyes [are] blazing with indignation” but in the movie Kellerman’s flash with defiance… accompanied by a smirk of erotic interest. Kellerman’s Hot Lips takes the journey in under two hours that it took the producers of the TV “M*A*S*H” five seasons to achieve. By the end of the movie she’s not only relaxed, perhaps more than could reasonably have been expected, she’s succumbed to Duke’s charms; the look of panic she expresses with only her eyes at the news that he’s being discharged from the Army is remarkable, and gives the character a sudden and unexpected aura of emotional vulnerability. Her best scene, of course, is just after the shower revelation, when she demands that Henry court-martial the Swampmen (“This isn’t a hospital, it’s an insane asylum…”) Altman cannily had Kellerman do the scene directly after she’d gone through the shower sequence, when the actress’s emotions were still on edge and it’s among the pictures’ most indelible moments. I suspect it was this hysterical monologue, and the look of utter disbelief on her face when Henry dismisses her, that got Kellerman her Academy Award nomination.

The company Altman assembled for MASH in 1969 may well have been the best ensemble cast seen in an American comedy in three decades, or since His Girl Friday in 1940, and even there the range of characters was much smaller. I don’t think there have ever been as many “Introducing” credits in a movie before or since, and many of those actors went on to decades of success in movies, television and (in the case of René Auberjonois) theatre. Roger Bowen’s Henry Blake is not the lovable klutz played so memorably by McLean Stevenson; he’s Regular Army yet easily manipulated by the Swampmen and almost pathetically eager to speechify (“Ever since the dark days before Pearl Harbor I have proudly worn this uniform…”) Auberjonois’ Mulcahy is as well-meaning as William Christopher’s eventual teevee iteration but more tenuously connected to the world; he stumbles around in a gentle daze, equally fearful of giving offense to man and God. In the instantly infamous group revelation of Hot Lips Houlihan’s true hair color his first response is to shield Ho-Jon’s eyes, and he’s terrified of giving absolution to the would-be suicide Painless, even though he knows, as Painless doesn’t, that the whole thing is a charade. It was Auberjonois who discovered the blessing for a chariot and suggested he speak it over Duke and Hawkeye’s jeep at the end, sure that Altman would love it. (He did.)

David Arkin is very funny as Blake’s ineffectual aid Vollmer, the unexpected hero of the football game, whom no one in camp respects or heeds and who is heard (along with Marvin Miller and, supposedly, Ted Knight) throughout the picture reading the absurdly gung-ho war-movie come-ons and administrative announcements over the P.A. system, some of which Altman altered from actual memos at Fox. For the series, Gelbart and Reynolds essentially conflated Vollmer and Radar and made him less officious, as Arkin is, than un-worldly. My only complaint about Altman’s otherwise nearly perfect casting has to do with Carl Gottlieb as the anesthesiologist “Ugly John.” This has nothing to do with Gottlieb’s performance but with what seems an almost deliberate misunderstanding of the character’s name. As Hornberger makes clear in the novel, “Ugly John” got his name from being the handsomest man at the 4077th. (At least Gottlieb is, while heavy, reasonably attractive. The casting of the undeniably homely John Orchard, who played the role during the first season of the television series, almost seems cruel by comparison.) Especially notable among the supporting ensemble are the charming Jo Ann Pflug as Lt. “Dish”; the strikingly beautiful Indus Arthur as Henry’s bed-mate Leslie; Ken Prymus singing “Suicide is Painless” during The Last Supper and grinning with the pleasure of performance even as the words he’s vocalizing are wholly to do with death; Fred Williamson, remarkably assured in his movie debut; the understated Michael Murphy as “Me Lay” Marston; Bud Cort as the gullible Private Boone; Dale Ishimoto, splendid as the doctor examining Ho-Jon at the Korean induction center; and the songwriter Bobby Troup as the beleaguered sergeant whose response to the golf-happy Hawkeye and Trapper John is to repeat the concise phrase, “Goddamn army.”


Sound and image: Robert Altman’s signature look and aural tone are evident in the first dialogue sequence following the titles.

I have written elsewhere that, while I am a militant anti-auteurist, at least as regards non-writer/directors, Robert Altman tends to be the exception to every one of my rules. I was disgusted the other day to stumble across one of those ridiculous internet polls on movies, this one listing Altman as “the 34th greatest director of all time.” I was too dispirited by this to look any further, but I’d be willing to bet that Quentin Tarantino and Martin Scorsese both placed in the top ten, if not the top five. I’m not claiming that Altman deserves the ultimate slot — I don’t know who does, nor do I care especially — but if it isn’t John Ford or Orson Welles or Francis Coppola or Robert Altman, I also don’t know what greatness means any longer. Of all American sound film directors, only these four it seems to me were genuine poets, and seeing their best work not only alters the way one views movies, it alters the viewer.**

Not that there is a great deal of poetry on display in MASH; its tone is too antic, and subversive. There’s nothing in it that rivals the image of Warren Beatty dying in the snow or Julie Christie’s faraway opium gaze at the end of McCabe and Mrs. Miller, or the women listening to Keith Carradine singing “I’m Easy” in Nashville, or the dreamlike imagery of 3 Women, or the haunting juxtaposition of the funeral rites that begin Vincent and Theo with, on the soundtrack, the multi-million dollar auction of Van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” with its privileged fiscal obscenity, the figures rising ever higher as Vincent’s body is placed in a pauper’s grave. But if ever a filmmaker’s identifiable, idiosyncratic touch is evident from the opening frames of a movie, it’s here. Audiences in 1970 couldn’t have known of course that Robert Altman’s highly individualistic aural and visual aesthetic was, essentially, being unveiled in MASH, but two or three pictures later those elements were obvious and recurrent enough to be considered a personal style. Altman was amused at having become an adjective, and bemused by how often the term “Altmanesque” concerned externals only. But this is the way of such things. What people generally mean by that neologism is items like overlapping dialogue, slow camera zooms, an improvisatory approach (which does not mean letting actors improvise during a take) and ensemble acting. What isn’t considered as often is tone, and the filmmaker’s humanist concerns.


Gelbart always credited Altman with the look of the TV “M*A*S*H,” naturally achieved in miniature, and the series opening is essentially a paraphrase of the movie’s credit sequence, helicopters flying the wounded into the 4077th and the personnel on the ground scrambling to get these damaged bodies to Pre-Op. And if the hills and even the camp itself look uncannily like those of the movie it’s because the series was shot on the picture’s standing sets, and in the hills of what was then the Fox location ranch and is now the Malibu Creek State Park. (The exterior of the Swamp is clearly the same, right down to the Moorish hex symbol painted on the door, but Hawkeye’s gin still is original to the series.) Set designs aside, Altman’s sensibilities are all over MASH, mostly to the good. The innovative use of sound was a key part of his technical approach and I’ve always been taken with the way during Duke and Hawkeye’s discussion with Henry Blake about getting in a chest surgeon the filmmaker cuts to the men on duty in a very busy (and very bloody) Pre-Op while the dialogue continues on the soundtrack, the Swampmen’s point about being understaffed made explicit by the vivid juxtaposition of word and image. Or take the way during the eavesdropping on Frank Burns and Hot Lips the P.A. system attains a disturbing, echoey sound that matches the would-be lovers’ panic. Or how, when the generator fails and plunges the O.R. into blackness and nurses appear with flashlight torches, the doctors begin singing “When the Lights Go On Again (All Over the World.)” Altman’s Operating Room is not only bloodier than the O.R. of the television series, it’s noisier. When Hawkeye is amputating a leg, we hear the sound of the saw cutting through bone. When suction is applied by a nurse, that is heard as well.

Altman was light on his feet throughout the filming, adapting to take advantage of happy accidents, such as the crashed helicopter in the background during the scene in which the doctors question whether Major Houlihan is a natural blonde. (A Fox pilot had crashed the ‘copter; he was unhurt.) In this Altman resembles Orson Welles, as indeed does his concern with sound. When Hawkeye and Trapper John return from golfing in Tokyo wearing plus fours and are immediately engulfed in wounded patients, the director films them at floor level from the calves up amid scrap buckets, blood and gore. (He claimed he wasn’t interested in filming the Tokyo sequence until he saw that image. Yet another load, if you’ll forgive me, of patented Altman bullshit. Why were they wearing those duds if they hadn’t gone golfing in Japan?) Occasionally an attempt at indirection is strained, as when Lt. Dish leaves for home, seemingly in a fury at having been conned by Hawkeye into sleeping with the well-endowed Painless Pole after his “suicide” until, airborne in a helicopter, she looks directly into the lens and grins delightedly.

A much more effective feint is Duke’s homecoming fantasy when Hawkeye announces their orders have come through. It was, in imitation of the novel, in Lardner’s screenplay, but as a realistic scene. Making it purely imaginary is a marvelous touch, as is the improvement on Hornberger in the mess scene in which Hawkeye tells off Major Houlihan and she asks, to the world at large, “I wonder how a degenerated person like that could have reached a position of responsibility in the Army Medical Corps?” In the book, and in Lardner’s screenplay, the question is addressed to Hawkeye who replies, “Sister, if I knew the answer to that, I sure as hell wouldn’t be here.” How much richer, funnier and more satisfying, in the movie, is Father Mulcahy’s simple declaration, “He was drafted.” Curiously, it was not Lardner who gave Kellerman the line that forever connects Margaret Houlihan to her nickname (“Oh, Frank, my lips are hot! Kiss my hot lips!”) He did, however, go further in his script than Altman as far as vulgarity is concerned when, speculating on the color of Hot Lips’ pubic hair Duke opines that he prefers “blonde pussy.” But had there been heard in any movie before MASH the sound of women leading a cheer for a numbered football player (Tim Brown in this case) with the words, “69 is divine!”?

My cavils about the way Altman put MASH together are so few it almost feels churlish to mention them. The O.R. scene where Trapper John gives Houlihan a backhanded compliment (“Hot Lips, you may be a pain in the ass but you’re a damn good nurse”) and she murmurs, “Thanks, Trapper” precedes the shower scene but the change in her character feels like something that should occur much later in the movie, before the football game. That’s a continuity flaw; my other complaints concern content. When “Dago Red” asks how he enjoyed his visit to Tokyo Trapper’s response (“I screwed a Kabuki dancer”) is appalling. Mulcahy isn’t Frank Burns. Why insult the poor man that way? Similarly, there’s a terrible moment of Hawkeye and Trapper babbling in mock-Japanese on their arrival in Tokyo which, judging from the way what Sutherland and Gould say in voice-over in no way matches what the actors are speaking on film, was a deliberate after-thought by Altman. This from the man who constantly accused Richard Hornberger and Larry Gelbart of racism?


The original music and dialogue soundtrack LP

As an example of Robert Altman’s perversity, nothing concerning MASH exceeds the germination of what may be its most recognized element: Johnny Mandel’s theme, replicated in hundreds of television episodes and far and away the melody for which its versatile composer is best known. When he conceived the need for a song to send Painless off, Altman very cannily selected the theme (death), the central metaphor (poker) and a title that brought together the name of Schuck’s character with the notion of suicide. Yet he insisted that it ought to be “the stupidest song ever written,” for which his “idiot son” should write the lyrics. Mandel later said he had to get drunk to set Mike Altman’s lyrics which, even if do they revolve around an assonant near-rhyme (“Suicide is painless/It brings on many changes…”) are strikingly mature to have come from the mind and imagination of a 14-year old. Yet his father clearly wanted a deliberately bad song, with “stupid” music. Would anyone still be humming Mandel’s melody if Altman had gotten what he asked for?

To the director’s credit, he was impressed enough by the song to have it recorded for the main title sequence, where “Suicide is Painless” benefited enormously from the superb orchestrations by Herbert W. Spencer. Think of how softly it begins, with strummed acoustic guitar chords in B minor interspersed with finger cymbal chimes and eventual strings and percussion, wrapped around a Brian Wilson-style vocal. The song, and that particular arrangement of it, are so good it is astonishing to see what other movie songs in 1970 got the Oscar nomination Mandel and Mike Altman didn’t. I have no quarrel with “For All We Know” from Lovers and Other Strangers, the eventual winner, nor with the magnificent Henry Mancini and Johnny Mercer song “Whistling Away the Dark” from Darling Lili, nor for that matter with Leslie Bricusse’s sardonic “Thank You Very Much” from Scrooge. But can anyone tell me why two numbers no one remembers (“Till Love Touches Your Life” from something called Madron, and “Pieces of Dreams,” from, as they used to say, the film of the same name) were doing on the list even if the latter was by Michel Legrand and Alan Bergman and Marilyn Bergman?

Mandel, one of the most original voices of his era, was not only a superb craftsman who could with equal invention assay pictures as disparate as The Americanization of Emily, The Sandpiper (for which he and Paul Francis Webster won Best Song for “The Shadow of Your Smile”), Harper, The Russians Are Coming The Russians Are Coming, Point Blank, Escape to Witch Mountain, The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea, Agatha and The Verdict; he was also an accomplished jazz performer and composed one of the few true jazz (as opposed to jazzy or jazz-inspired) movie scores, for I Want to Live! Although his MASH score is brief it includes the most felicitous of several military marches he composed for movies (it takes off neatly from Alfred Newman’s 20th Century-Fox fanfare), a hilariously sanctified accompaniment for Lt. Dish’s unveiling of the Painless Pole’s stupendous accoutrement, deliberately melodramatic underscore for the scene in Tokyo where Hawkeye and Trapper confront the MPs with a mock-serious invocation of spy movie clichés, and an amusing gallop for the football game, complete with slide-whistle. Good comedy scores that do not attempt to be humorous through lugubrious mickeymousing are rare. Genuinely witty ones are the unicorns of cinematic euphony.

Rather shockingly, while MASH received five Academy Award nominations including Picture and Director, it was not nominated for its highly distinctive — and, for its time, revolutionary — sound. And speaking of such things: I was astounded several years ago while leafing through the MusicHound soundtrack guide to note that the MASH soundtrack album was given the lowest rating (a “Woof!”) while the author of the brief review claimed that the LP was pointless and that one might listen to it once but not twice. I grant you that when I got my copy in 1974 and listened to the record incessantly I was a MASH-crazy 13-year-old (and home-video in the form of cassettes or laserdiscs did not yet exist for most Americans.) But as a keepsake of the movie, I don’t see how the Columbia producer Thomas Z. Shepard’s calculatedly messy album could be bettered. Shepard, who for years afterward was Sondheim’s indispensable cast album producer, understood instinctively what Altman had wrought, and brilliantly replicated it as a listening experience. The dialogue excerpts were not only well chosen, they were edited brilliantly, even dazzlingly, into the whole, creating a small small masterpiece of comic collage. If nothing else Shepard isolated some key lines in the football sequence in a way I wish Altman had — so they can actually be heard.

Text copyright 2002 by Scott Ross


*The picture, like the book on which it was based, was called MASH, not M*A*S*H. It’s MASH in the opening credits; the asterisks were added to the poster art, the subsequent paperback reissues of the source novel, the 1970 soundtrack LP and of course the television series.

†Hornberger was also listed as the co-author of a dozen M*A*S*H Goes to… novels in the mid-to-late-1970s but these books, commissioned to cash in on the roaring success of the television series, were written entirely by William E. Butterworth. (His own titles were the 1971 M*A*S*H Goes to Maine and the 1977 M*A*S*H Mania.) Hornberger was infuriated when the movie took off because he’d sold his rights for a mere few thousand dollars — in that he certainly resembled Robert Altman — so in addition to the millions of Pocket Books paperback reissue copies that continued to sell well into the ’80s these “sequel” novels, even if he didn’t write a word of them, were a good means to fast cash for him as the copyright holder.

‡Ho-Jon’s arrival at the 4077th as a war casualty was part of a subplot cut from MASH before its release. Supposedly his dead body was originally removed during the football game sequence, and while one appreciates the filmmakers’ juxtaposition of high-powered leisure activity with grim reality, the moment would surely have destroyed the comedy of the ball game and brought down the entire picture. (Lardner’s screenplay contains a sad, ambiguous moment when a recurrence of his wound is deemed inoperable, but not the boy’s subsequent death.) Interestingly, the North Korean soldier on the operating table is not Kim Atwood, but Atwood is clearly who is subsequently being operated on. It seems obvious that Altman and his editors were forced to splice two separate sequences together for the sake of continuity, but considering the director’s wanton attributions of racism to Hooker, Gelbart and everyone else, there is a whiff of “they all look alike” in the confusion of the North Korean and the former Swamp houseboy. Parenthetically, “Ho-Jon” is allegedly not a Korean name.

§The hats worn by what the U.S. military is pleased to call “indigenous personnel” during the Seoul sequence are deliberately incorrect, as Altman insisted they be Vietnamese and not Korean, even though Hawkeye jokingly says the boy should go to the head of the line because he’s one of Korean president Syngman Rhee’s sons and all radio news stories heard on the soundtrack are datelined Korea. Once again, so much for Altman’s claims. That scroll, which includes one of Dwight D. Eisenhower’s more famous election pledges, reminds me of something Gore Vidal once said of him: “Eisenhower always read his campaign speeches with a real sense of discovery. ‘And if elected… I will go to Korea?!?‘”

¶Being too young to have seen MASH in a theater I had to make do with the autumn 1974 “CBS Friday Night Movies” airing of it which was of course heavily censored. Given the soundtrack album for Christmas, when I heard Schuck say that line the top of my 13-going-on-14-year old’s head nearly came off. I finally got to see the picture on a big screen a year or so later and was bitterly disappointed that it had been re-cut for a “PG” rating, the word “fuckin'” dropped out on the soundtrack (and the Hot Lips shower scene truncated, as well as some of the OR gore). It wasn’t that I had a prurient interest in hearing “fuck” in a movie — this was the ’70s after all and the “R”-rated American pictures I was getting in to see then were becoming routinely more profane, as was the popular fiction I was then reading — but I did want to see my movies, if I was experiencing them in a theater rather than on a TV set, unadulterated. I saw the picture subsequently several times in this bowdlerized fashion, in theaters and on cable, before Fox finally released the original, un-tampered-with MASH on home video. Similarly, when the picture was re-released in 1973 (along with the reissue of the 1970 soundtrack LP I was given in ’74) Fox removed the “Suicide is Painless” vocal from the main title of both movie and record and replaced it with Ahmad Jamal’s funky (and identically-timed) instrumental. Fortunately, the vocal was eventually reinstated in the picture. An eventual CD release of the soundtrack includes both.

**Note that I said both “sound” and “American.” The poets of silent film range from D.W. Griffith and King Vidor to Buster Keaton and his collaborators, and there is no shortage of great, poetic filmmakers, sound and silent, in world cinema.


Post-Script, January 2023
Anent my comments below, in the footnote section, on the M*A*S*H Goes to… novels of the 1970s attributed to William E. Butterworth and Richard Hooker: I attempted over the holidays to re-read them for the first time since the age of 14 or 15, and had to give it up as a bad job after two and a half titles, leaving nine-and-a-half unread. If Hooker wrote any of the material in them, the only trace of his style (and medical expertise) I can find in the books are the occasional passages involving surgical procedure. What Butterworth, their apparent actual author, is chiefly concerned with is depicting convoluted and determinedly “wacky” scenarios involving versions of Hawkeye, Trapper John and “Hot Lips” Houlihan that bear little relation to their previous literary counterparts (and none at all to their television versions) with a growing, and increasingly annoying, supporting cast including an obnoxious Russian-American opera singer, two bumbling New Orleans-based reporters, a sexually suspect diplomat, a gaggle of alcoholic (and extremely unfunny) Cajuns and — God help us — a largely benign, German-inflected, Yiddish-prone American Secretary of State who can only be a comic rendition of that Teutonic psychopath Henry Kissinger. Even worse (if such can be imaged) the social and “comedic” attitudes exhibited by Butterworth, a genuine hack who under the pen-name W.E.B. Griffin published nearly 60 military-themed thriller, are stuck in some weird, reactionary world where women are either brainless sex-pots, alternately cooing or suspicious sitcom-like hausfraus, militant man-hating “libbers” and/or “radical” lefties and gay men are “exquisitely mannered,” wispy little queens or sex-mad, prissy faggots. Butterworth’s moving of the action in these books to the 1970s also makes hay of the characters’ original ages; “Hot Lips,” for example, is described by Hooker/Hornberger in MASH as being “fortyish,” making her, if you care to extrapolate, “sixtyish” in the books although still depicted as a hot, stacked number lusted after by many. At the beginning of the second book (M*A*S*H Goes to Paris) Hawkeye and his wife Mary are expecting another child, although both would be, in Hooker’s chronology, in their 50s. One almost gets the idea, reading these novels, that time has in some weird way frozen since 1951, although Henry Blake shows up periodically as a Major-General. Based on the first three titles, the series is about as ugly a betrayal of the affections of M*A*S*H aficionados as can be imagined. Butterworth even renames Walter “Radar” O’Reilly “Robespierre,” and Hooker lets him get away with it. Robespierre O’Reilly?!?

The singer as well as the song: “Tanner ’88”

Standard

By Scott Ross

This innovative 11-part series (it should have been longer but HBO pulled the plug on any additional episodes) placed a fictional Presidential candidate (Michael Murphy’s Jack Tanner) into the 1988 Democrat primaries and the subsequent summer convention. Created and written by Garry Trudeau with the wit, savvy and aplomb you’d expect from the onlie begettor of “Doonesbury,” Tanner ’88 was directed by Robert Altman during his wilderness years and, as usual for him even — or perhaps especially — when the critics didn’t notice, observed with a master’s eye for understated satire. Although Jack Tanner begins as a slightly more open-minded standard-issue Democrat, when he loosens up he reveals himself as one of those inspiring, honest figures like Jay Bulworth in the Warren Beatty picture who are so thoughtful and practical they can only really exist in fantasy; if a candidate from either party espoused what Tanner does he’d be killed, or at least effectively marginalized.

Murphy, an Altman regular, does splendid work as Tanner, ultimately making of him even in the character’s rare political and personal missteps a man at once multivaried, likable and worthy of our respect and attention. The best acting in the series, however, is done by Pamela Reed; as Tanner’s campaign manager T.J. Cavanaugh, Reed is astonishing, so good it’s almost shocking. (And equally shocking that Tanner ’88 didn’t lead to better for her.) In the rich recurrent cast Daniel Jenkins, Ilana Levine and Jim Fyfe excel as Tanner’s aides; Veronica Cartwright gives a spicy account of a typically spoiled and self-centered network hack; and Kevin J. O’Connor a thoughtful one as a political columnist who proves far less destructively opportunistic than his coevals in the press. It’s nice to see how good an actor O’Connor can be when he isn’t being directed by Stephen Sommers.

As Tanner’s selfish college-age daughter Cynthia Nixon is the ultimate horror illustrating the folly of single parenthood (note to Joe and Hunter Biden…) E.G. Marshall embodies the reason many sons run from their inflexible fathers, and Harry Anderson is both funny and frightening as a high-priced convention consultant. In one-shot roles Cleavon Little is marvelous as an old ally of Tanner’s betrayed by the over-eagerness of political expediency and Jeff Daniels shows up as an unusually honest park ranger. Only Matt Malloy as the campaign’s unscrupulous renegade videographer strikes nothing other than false notes, but the character himself is impossible — the sort of thing you can get away with in a daily satirical comic strip but which can’t work in a serious comedy. Who would employ this duplicitous creep for anything?

Although Jean Lépine’s cinematography cannot in any way be faulted, admirers of Altman approaching Tanner ’88 for the first time (it’s available on DVD from Criterion) will be somewhat disappointed in its having been shot on video rather than film, robbing the filmmaker of his patented multi-track recording system, making the soundtrack less distinct than usual. I imagine it was cheaper, and more expedient, to film the series on tape and it likely, in those pre-digital video days, gave the show an immediacy denied to film. Trudeau and Altman were able to convince several actual participants in the 1988 presidential field to appear on camera, ad-libbing their own dialogue, and these cameos are often more revealing than the figures themselves might have imagined. Kitty Dukakis, for example, while appearing outwardly sweet and companionable, solicits a sleazy political favor under a thinly-veiled threat; Bruce Babbitt, dispensing wise campaign advice to Tanner, conclusively reprises the reasons he alternately annoyed and bored every potential voter in the ’88 primaries; and Dorothy Sarnoff’s consultancy on how Tanner should behave during his speeches sums up just how slick, phony and calculating public politics became in the post-television world. Only Linda Ellerbee and (of all people) Pat Robertson sound genuine, although in the case of the latter that is an indication only of what a genuine phony he is.

Speaking of phonies: Watching Tanner ’88 in 2022 it’s pretty obvious that pretentious professional liberal Aaron Sorkin lifted the cast of “The West Wing” from Trudeau and Altman, even naming his Press Secretary C.J. and, as Tanner does with T.J., having Martin Sheen refer to Allison Janney’s C.J. Cregg by her full name.

Murphy and Reed. Copyright: HBO / Courtesy Everett Collection

You know, T.J., just before you called me last spring, Lexy and I went down to the Democratic Leadership Conference in South Carolina. The last night, we were sitting around with Kirk O’Donnell, and Hart, and Biden, a couple of the other candidates, who were shooting the breeze about how much the party had changed since the Sixties. And suddenly, out of the blue, Lexy turned to Hart and she asked him who his favorite Beatle was. Now, at first, Hart laughed, and then he stumbled around trying to remember a name. Then she repeated her question for Biden, and Biden said, well, he’d never been a Beatles fan, he was into jazz. And Dukakis answered Paul, ’cause he liked his wife or something. Now, I don’t know if Lexy knows the names of all the Beatles herself, let alone the answer to her own question, but it suddenly dawned on me that I sure as hell did. And I knew for sure that anybody who didn’t had absolutely no claim to generational leadership. Now I must have, what, uh, ten years on Joe Biden; but, dammit, he wasn’t paying attention back then, and I was. And one of the things I figured out very early on was the singer mattered as much as the song – that ideas were only as valuable as the people who got behind them. I mean people that wouldn’t settle; people unafraid of honest inquiry; people who didn’t mind asking the impertinent question. God, the impertinent question. Where the hell would we be without it?…

Oh, and if you young people are still wondering, the right answer is John Lennon.
— Jack Tanner, Episode 1: “The Dark Horse”

Text (aside from Trudeau’s) copyright 2022 by Scott Ross

Monthly Report: September 2022

Standard

By Scott Ross

As ever, click the links on the capsules for the complete reviews and essays.

Funny Face (1957) Fred Astaire’s last major musical, with vintage Gershwin songs, a typically charming performance by Audrey Hepburn and a brilliant supporting turn by the treasurable Kay Thompson.


The Shakiest Gun in the West (1966) A generally amusing remake of the 1948 Bob Hope vehicle The Paleface reimagined for Don Knotts with bits of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance thrown in. It’s better, certainly, than the anemic The Reluctant Astronaut although nowhere near as good as The Ghost and Mr. Chicken. (All three were written by James Fritzell and Everett Greenbaum.) The picture virtually defines the word “inconsequential,” but it’s got some good laughs — the sight of Knotts in drag not the least among them, although the question of why some big, virile Indian brave goes mad with lust every time he lays eyes on him remains unanswered — excellent set direction (Alexander Golitzen and Henry Larrecq), good costumes (Grady Hunt), enjoyable music (by Vic Mizzy, of course) and a lot of wonderful character actors in supporting roles. These include Jackie Coogan, Ruth McDevitt, Dub Taylor, Hope Summers. Burt Mustin, a young William Christopher, Carl Ballantine as a fast-talking wagon salesman and and Pat Morita as his general factotum.


Little Shop of Horrors – The Director’s Cut (1986) Why some people feel the need to tamper with success is a question perhaps best left to psychoanalysis, but some things really are better left alone. Frank Oz and Howard Ashman, trying to preserve the satirical content of Ashman and Alan Mencken’s stage musical, filmed the show’s original ending, in which both leading characters die, then seemed shocked when preview audiences hated what they’d done. They somehow didn’t get that film transforms the human figure, gives it a realism, ironically, that an actual person performing in front of you on a stage often doesn’t have. The pair also designed and filmed a long sequence in which the alien plants lay waste to a city. Both scenes were subsequently cut and a new ending devised in which the nebbish Seymour (Rick Moranis) and his sweetly ditzy inamorata Audrey (Ellen Greene) escape to their suburban dream, with a sly wink at the audience at the climax. Having badly miscalculated once, and corrected the error, Oz replicated it in this “Director’s Cut,” which preserves the nasty preview edit. (Ashman died years ago, before the premiere of Beauty and the Beast.)

What’s always been delightful about Little Shop remains so, even in this overstuffed edition: The witty doo-wop score, Ashman’s darkly funny script taking off from the two-day-wonder 1960 Roger Corman movie, Oz’s creative direction, the performances by the leads (Moranis, Greene, Vincent Gardenia, Steve Martin and Levi Stubbs as the voice of the plant), the wonderful black girl-group Greek chorus (Tichina Arnold, Michelle Weeks, Tisha Campbell), the superb “Skid Row” production design by Roy Walker, the felicitously-named Robert Paynter’s rich cinematography and Lyle Conway’s miraculous puppetry for the “Audrey II” alien. Bill Murray gives an inspired performance as a dental masochist; his scene with Martin is almost a cinematic transliteration of the old joke about what happens when a sadist and a masochist meet. But Oz’s original finale, with its obvious nod to the original King Kong, goes on and on, pointlessly and annoyingly, for what feels like hours. The Blu-ray on which I watched his preferred cut fortunately contains the original theatrical edit. I sincerely hope the “Director’s Cut” never supersedes it. That would be a horror.


Dori Brenner, “Chris” Walken, Ellen Greene, Antonio Fargas and Lenny Baker

Next Stop, Greenwich Village (1976) The writer-director Paul Mazursky’s funny, heartfelt cinematic reminiscence of his youth as an aspiring actor. Mazursky’s previous picture, the splendid Harry & Tonto, had been a “road movie,” and Next Stop is a bit like a road movie without the road: Mazursky’s alter ego, Larry Lapisnky (the wonderful Lenny Baker) leaves home at the beginning for the Village, and exits New York at the end.

Mazursky’s openheartedness informs every moment of Next Stop, Greenwich Village. I don’t think there’s ever been a movie portrait of the Village to match it, and I doubt there’s another American picture that comes close to capturing the headiness, the ardor, the go-for-broke optimism (and the sadness) of a group of talented young people on the cusp of launching their theatrical careers. Mazursky even makes a kind of peace with his own maddening mother who in Shelley Winters’ marvelous performance becomes in a way the ultimate screen embodiment of Jewish Motherhood. Larry’s world, which his creator observes with non-judgmental amusement, includes his girlfriend Sarah (the superb Ellen Greene), his gentle peacemaking father (Mike Kellin), a womanizing dramatic poet (Chris Walken) based on Mazursky’s one-time friend and romantic rival Howard Sackler, the periodically suicidal Anita (Lois Smith, in an astonishing performance), the amiable Connie (Dori Brenner), the gay black hustler Bernstein (Antonio Fargas) forever announcing he’s fallen in love with some trick or other, Larry’s health-food purveying employer (the great Lou Jacobi) and his acting coach (Michael Egan, essentially playing Herbert Berghof). Joe Spinnell also has a good bit as a cop who interrupts Larry’s drunken actor fantasies and Jeff Goldblum has another as an obnoxious actor. Arthur J. Ornitz, who also shot An Unmarried Woman for Mazursky, brought a beautiful, warm, muted palette to the picture, a form that perfectly complements the movie’s content.


The Player (1992) Robert Altman and Michael Tolken’s satirical fantasia on Hollywood, based on the latter’s novel, was the brightest release of its summer and one of that year’s most accomplished and entertaining pictures. I’ve never been sure that Altman’s Brechtian approach, treating the entirety of the action as a film-within-a-film, succeeds — those B- movie, film noir posters on the walls of a modern movie studio which could more reasonably be expected to sport framed examples of its own product only exist, after all, as self-conscious symbols — yet the movie is so light on its feet, and contains so many artfully rendered digs at the naked crassness pervading the movie industry it’s seldom less than both amusing and instructive. The dozens of stars playing themselves, some in what Mike Todd once called cameo roles, others in what amounts to walk-on appearances, lend a strange verisimilitude to the picture… “strange” in that the movie has no particular reality, so personalities such as Harry Belafonte, Cher and Jack Lemmon are like figures in the carpet of a dream. Or perhaps a nightmare; although The Player is often very funny, and its central actor rightly called “a shit-bag producer,” one moreover who murders a screenwriter and gets away with it, the journey of Griffin Mill (Tim Robbins) is one Kafka would appreciate.


Snoopy, Come Home (1972) The second Peanuts feature, which I loved at 11, made the mistake of putting Snoopy in the forefront and relegating the kids to supporting actors, a tendency it shared with the strip itself in those days. The modestly talented Bill Melendez directed and although the songs are by Richard M. Sherman and Robert B. Sherman they’re more about mood than character, and character was the Sherman’s forte. Among the artists involved were the Disney veteran Don Lusk, Phil Roman and Bob Clampett’s great (and certifiably insane) animator Rod Scribner.


The Frighteners — Director’s Cut (1996) As with Tim Burton, it’s become increasingly difficult to remember the time when Peter Jackson was an interesting filmmaker. The Frighteners is like its Danny Elfman score: Too busy, too frenetic and, ultimately, not exhilarating but exhausting. The best thing about the picture is Michael J. Fox’s performance as Frank Bannister, a phony spiritualist whose business is kept (barely) afloat through his association with several actual ghosts (Chi McBride, Jim Fyfe, John Astin). The death of his wife in an automobile accident years before has left Frank nearly devoid of feeling and although Fox is engaging he carries a weight of depression. The movie’s larger plot involves the ghost of a young mass-murderer (Jake Busey) who is still killing, and the approach of Jackson and his co-scenarist Fran Walsh to matters of spiritualism are utterly illogical: Shades such as Astin’s Judge are somehow still moldering, losing parts of their bodies as they rot, and the spirits can themselves be destroyed by other ghosts. The crowning horrors of the picture are not the ghostly goings-on but the incredibly overripe performances by Peter Dobson as a recent murder victim and, especially, the appalling Jeffrey Combs as the unhinged government investigator Dammers. However low one’s opinion of the FBI, surely it’s an impossible stretch to imagine that even so corrupt an entity would sanction an agent as obviously deranged as this one.


George Segal and Ruth Gordon as seen by Al Hirschfeld

Where’s Poppa? (1970) One of the sickest comedies ever made and, if you’re open to it, one of the funniest. In this adaptation by Robert Klane of his acid-tinged comic novel, George Segal plays a hag-ridden lawyer coping with his senescent mother (Ruth Gordon) whom he would like to get rid of by fair means or foul. (When he dresses in a gorilla suit in hopes of giving her a fatal coronary she knees him in the balls; as he lies there in pain she gurgles, “Oh, Gordonyou almost scared me to death!” to which he rasps, “Almost doesn’t count.”) It’s a surreal black comedy where nearly everyone is either insane or behaves that way. Carl Reiner directed the picture as if it made perfect sense, and that squareness makes the dialogue even funnier; at a crucial juncture Segal snarls out a hilarious threat to Gordon whose obscene ferocity absolutely fractured me.

Among the other inmates are Ron Leibman as Gordon’s idiot brother, Trish Van Devere as the home nurse Gordon falls in love with, Barnard Hughes and Vincent Gardenia as pathological court plaintiffs, Rob Reiner as one of Gordon’s typically loopy clients, Rae Allen as Leibman’s wife, Paul Sorvino as the barking curator of a nightmare old-folks’ home, Garrett Morris as a cheerful Central Park mugger, William Le Massena as a judge and Alice Drummond, who has a great scene as a woman stuck in an elevator with a naked Leibman.


Image via Blu-ray.com

Mastermind (1969/1976) A silly, enjoyable spoof of Charlie Chan movies starring Zero Mostel that sat on the shelf for seven years before being given a perfunctory release. When you think of the number of truly wretched, slavering “comedies” that routinely infested American screens during that period and were infinitely more successful at the box office it’s hard to imagine why the producers of this one were so ashamed of it, or why they couldn’t find a distributor. Written by William Peter Blatty (billed as “Terence Clyne”) and Ian McLellan Hunter, Mastermind is frequently hilarious and never less than amusing, although you may wonder why, when every other Japanese character speaks perfect English only Mostel’s Inspector Hoku Ichihara expresses himself in Charlie Chanese. (It’s not exactly Pidgin, but if you’ve read the Earl Derr Biggers Chan novels you’ll recognize its contours immediately.) The direction by Alex March is like so much television of the period, as is the cinematography by Gerald Hirschfeld. But there’s a funny chase sequence, and the likable performers range from Bradford Dillman as an iffy American government agent to Sorrell Booke as a suspect scientist, Herbert Berghof as a mad German and Felix Silla as his creation, a mean little robot called Schatzi. Jules Munshin and Phil Leeds also show up, as a pair of Israeli agents who may or may not be lovers. Fred Karlin contributed a pleasant score, and Mostel is more restrained than usual; there’s a slightly Zen quality to the character of Inspector Ichihara, and it affects the entire tone of the picture in a positive way.


Peter’s introduction to the audience: A fascinating image suggesting a young masked burglar with an unsettling, malevolent smile.

Peter Pan (1953) The inevitable Disney version of J.M. Barrie’s play and, later, novel. I saw the picture initially on one of its theatrical reissues (ask your parents) around 1970 and it was one of the few animated Disneys I had no overwhelming desire to see again. Watching it now I can understand that lack of enthusiasm. It’s a typically good-looking, well animated exercise that feels utterly empty of content or emotion and, although set in the early part of the 20th century, is wedded to Jud Conlon’s resolutely 1950s vocal arrangements. That it took no fewer than seven composers and lyricists to come up with the anemic song score is telling, and Sammy Fain’s “What Made the Red Man Red?” is, to a modern sensibility, appalling. (And why does the asexual Peter whoop it up like a sex-crazed wolf in some Tex Avery cartoon because Tiger Lily has rubbed noses with him?)

Speaking of Avery, the best thing about this Peter Pan are the realizations of Captain Hook (Frank Thomas), Mr. Smee (Ollie Johnston) and the Crocodile (Wolfgang Reitherman), all of whom seem to have wandered in from another, broader animated dimension and whose vocal characterizations (Hans Conried as Hook, Bill Thompson as Smee) are unalloyed delights. Bobby Driscoll was the model for Peter and gives a nice vocal performance which emphasizes Peter’s unthinking pubescent selfishness.


Carnal Knowledge (1971) Jules Feiffer’s wonderfully titled look at incompatible sexual relationships, icily directed by Mike Nichols in long, long takes and exquisitely photographed by Giuseppe Rotunno. Feiffer initially planned it as a play, and the scenes have a theatrical shape to them. Actually, they feel like elongated versions of Feiffer’s Village Voice strips and the ironies he expresses have a ruthless inevitability. The script grew out of its author’s observation of men who desire women’s bodies yet despise the women themselves and the embodiment of that attitude is Jack Nicholson’s Jonathan. As a college boy he’s the kind of young hypocrite who complains of a girl that she “let” him feel her up on the first date and it turned him off and who is constantly alert for “ball-breakers” yet is brutal to the women who are fool enough to love him. Jonathan’s counterpart, his college roommate Sandy (Art Garfunkel) is gentle and less crude (Jonathan has an adolescent fixation on “big tits”) but he’s every bit as hard to please: He goes from the blank Susan (Candice Bergen) to the steely Cindy (Cynthia O’Neal) to the flower-child Jennifer (Carol Kane) and never seems satisfied with any of them. And Jonathan is such a rat, and so sexually suspect, he isn’t happy unless he can seduce Susan while she’s dating Sandyactually, because she’s seeing his best friend.

The acting is highly variable. Why anyone ever thought Bergen was an actress is one of those eternal mysteries, while Garfunkel’s character barely exists and poor Rita Moreno is given an impossible scene in which as a call-girl she has to excessively praise Jonathan’s virility in order for him to achieve an erection. Nicholson completely gives in to Jonathan’s psycho-sexual contradictions and obsessions, but the revelation is Ann-Margret as the hapless Bobbie, who under Jonathan’s tender ministrations goes from a happy young woman to an emotional and psychological wreck. Nichols was a master at directing actors, and of developing character through behavior. Where, in this picture, he was less assured was in his showier gambits: The restaurant set seeming to revolve as Jonathan and Bobbie talk, for example, or the way the background behind Moreno appears to be rising as she performs her degrading monologue. The worst moment, naturally, involves Bergen: A tight closeup of her face as the unseen Jonathan and Sandy compete to make her laugh and she does so, endlessly. Earlier Susan has told Sandy that everyone acts, and it’s clear that this scene is supposed to show how she acts as much as everyone else, yet instead of illustrating the thesis the shot becomes increasingly annoying, with Bergen’s incompetence its chief feature. Far better is Feiffer’s often trenchant dialogue, such as when Jonathan complains that Bobbie never gets out of bed:

Bobbie: The reason I sleep all day is, I can’t stand my life.
Jonathan: What life?
Bobbie: Sleeping all day!

If you’ve ever been a depressive, or loved one, you know how true that statement is.


Text copyright 2022 by Scott Ross

The Magic Factory, Part Four of Four: A Few Essential Books About the Movies — An Annotated List. Individual Films and Miscellaneous Titles.

Standard

By Scott Ross

See also:
Part One
https://scottross79.wordpress.com/2022/03/03/the-magic-factory-a-few-essential-books-about-the-movies-an-annotated-list-part-one-actors-and-animation/

Part Two
https://scottross79.wordpress.com/2022/04/06/the-magic-factory-a-few-essential-books-about-the-movies-an-annotated-list-part-two-criticism-and-filmmakers/

Part Three
https://scottross79.wordpress.com/2022/04/11/the-magic-factory-part-three-an-annotated-list-of-a-few-essential-books-about-the-movies-screenwriters-screenwriting-and-screenplays/

Note the First: I do not by any means claim that this list, which I am posting in installments, is either exhaustive or definitive. It’s merely obsessive. And highly personal. This is my list, based on my experience, my likes and prejudices and my reading, Your list will differ wildly. I merely mean to recommend a few books that influenced me and that you might also enjoy.

Note the Second: Although the list, when it’s finished, is meant to add up to 100, I am going to fiddle outrageously with the numbers. When within a particular category a writer has a number of titles, or a series of books, or I mention a volume by someone else on the same topic, I will count them all as one entry. It’s my party, and I’ll cheat if I want to.


VII. Specific Movies

“Making-Of” books are a fairly recent phenomenon, although a handful were published in the 1950s. They seem, as a genre, to have gotten a boost in the early ’70s from the success of Jerome Agel’s massive (and, to me, unreadable) The Making of Kubrick’s 2001. Herewith a few of the better ones.

73. Alfred Hitchcock and the Making of Psycho Stephen Rebello (1998)

Rebello does an exceptional job of illuminating the history of Psycho from Robert Bloch’s short story “The Real Bad Friend” and the later novel through Hitchcock’s interest in it and the writing by Joseph Stefano of the screenplay to the filming itself, a deliberate attempt by the director to make a theatrical hit on a television budget, and with a television crew. I use the word “exceptional” above because Rebello was not writing a contemporaneous account of a new movie but sifting through then-nearly 50 year-old records and the memories of the surviving participants.

Among other things, the author demolishes Saul Bass’ ludicrous claim that he directed the shower sequence, which the credulous had unquestioningly accepted as fact.


74. Close Encounters of the Third Kind: The Making of Steven Spielberg’s Classic Film Ray Morton (2007)

Few theatrical releases in my lifetime enchanted, and excited, me more than this one, and Morton’s intelligent, thorough account of its making was worth the three-decade wait. His archeological excursions into the authorship of the screenplay, attributed solely to Spielberg, is especially useful. (Among those who worked on it, some of them extensively: Jerry Belson, John Hill, Hal Barwood and Matthew Robbins.) The author is also excellent on the extraordinary special effects, and why they looked so much better than those in the contemporaneous Star Wars. Morton’s is as close as we are likely to get to a definitive history of one of the best pop movies of the 1970s.


75. Close Encounters of the Third Kind Diary Bob Balaban (1977; Reprinted 2003)

Balaban — whom theatregoers might have remembered as Linus in the Off-Broadway musical You’re a Good Man, Charlie Brown and moviegoers would have recalled as the boy in Midnight Cowboy who blows Jon Voight in the movie theatre — got himself cast in CE3K in the time-honored fashion of actors: He lied. His character, the American interpreter for the scientist played by François Truffaut, was supposed to be fluent in French and Balaban could recall a few phrases from his high school studies; spoken quickly and authoritatively, that was sufficient to fool the casting directors. Balaban’s diary of the filming has a wonderful immediacy and is especially informative on the many weeks of filming in the huge Alabama hangar converted into the Devil’s Tower “Other Side of the Moon” set for the alien landing. His book is one of best glimpses we’ve ever gotten into the day-to-day realities of filming an important popular motion picture, an account written with unusual perceptiveness and wit.


76. Close Encounters of the Third Kind: The Ultimate Visual History Michael Klastorin (2017)

Published in conjunction with the long-awaited (by me, at any rate) 40th anniversary theatrical re-release of CE3K, the movie of movies from my late adolescence. A smallish coffee-table book — the best kind, easily read — packed with beautiful color photographs and useful information on one of the most visually ravishing movies of its time. Had Close Encounters entered the market when Steven Spielberg wished, not in the late autumn of 1977 but before the May premiere of Star Wars, it would almost certainly have stolen George Lucas’ thunder, in no small part due to its superior look. Achieved by filming the special effects shots in 35mm and blowing them up to 70, softening the blue-screen edges and permitting the marriage of backgrounds and effects to appear seamless, this process had the subsequent effect of making Vilos Zsigmond’s muted cinematography look even more impressive than what Lucas and his team had unveiled earlier in the year.

See also: Encounters of the Third Kind: A Document Of The Film (1977) A beautiful contemporaneous trade paperback published by Ballantine with a lovely introduction by Ray Bradbury.


77. Final Cut: Dreams and Disaster in the Making of Heaven’s Gate Steven Bach (1985)

Bach was one of the executives at United Artists (senior vice-president and head of worldwide production) as Michael Cimino was filming his epic about the Johnson County wars, and intimately involved in approving the picture for shooting. Although he is critical in the book of his own failings during the making of the movie whose budget overruns (and subsequent poor box-office performance) more or less destroyed UA, some — including Pauline Kael in her review of the book for the New Yorker — felt he let himself off the hook too easily. But in a story like this, there are always multiple points of view, and many directions from which fingers can and will be pointed. I have never seen Heaven’s Gate, so I can’t speak to its merits or defects, but a friend whose opinions I value admires it enormously and thinks the critics who slammed it, pretty much en masse, got it wrong. And United Artists had a history of fucking things up financially before it ever engaged Michael Cimino; in 1970 the men who’d been running it for 20 years were ousted for losing $35 million on bad choices. Studios spend comparable amounts today on catering but 50 years ago that was real money, just as the $44 million spent on Heaven’s Gate was a substantial amount in 1980.


78. The Jaws Log Carl Gottlieb (1975; Updated numerous times to 2012)

The first book of its kind I purchased with my own money, and one I re-read every few years for the pleasure of its author’s company and the remembered delights of a favorite movie. Gottlieb, who played the Amity Island newspaper editor Meadows, was the credited co-author of the screenplay after Peter Benchley turned in his unacceptable first draft; although he was by no means the last writer to tweak the picture’s dialogue (the playwright Howard Sackler worked on it — the USS Indianapolis monologue was his — as did John Milius, Matthew Robbins and Hal Barwood and the third-billed star Robert Shaw) Gottlieb was on the set by day and working with Spielberg on revisions at night. His version of the filming, while obviously subjective, had the advantage of being fresh, and is about as reliable a narrative as we have of what, to everyone’s surprise, became the highest-grossing of all movies within months of its opening, knocking The Godfather off the top of the list. That fact, and the subsequent shark-like feeding frenzy among Hollywood suits for the next sure thing (which is of course a chimera) led, slowly and inexorably, to the lousy state of things we’ve been living through at the movies for the last four decades. But I for one do not blame Spielberg for that (although he certainly helped dumb things down in the ’80s). Due in large part to the trouble they had making it, for which so much had to be compensated and because of which the actors, their director and their screenwriter had more time than usual in which to improvise dialogue and deepen their characters,* Jaws remains the most beautifully assembled and entertaining of popcorn movies.

Gottlieb’s revised editions correct his few errors and elaborate nicely on what he’s learned since that he didn’t know in 1975.

See also: On Location… On Martha’s Vineyard: The Making of the Movie Jaws Edith Blake (1975) and Jaws: Memories from Martha’s Vineyard: A Definitive Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Greatest Suspense Thriller of All Time Matt Taylor (2012) Blake is a Martha’s Vineyard resident, a photographer who wrote a column for the Vineyard Gazette. Her book is packed with the many terrific photographs she took and benefits greatly from her local’s perspective. Taylor’s gorgeous coffee-table style trade paperback benefits from page after page of luscious color photos detailing every aspect and phase of the production.


79. The Magic Factory: How MGM Made An American in Paris Donald Knox (1973)

“MGM” didn’t make An American in Paris, of course; that shorthand takes in the producer, Arthur Freed and his un-credited associate Roger Edens; the director, Vincente Minnelli; the star/choreographer, Gene Kelly; his fellow actors Leslie Caron, Oscar Levant, Nina Foch and Georges Guétary; the screenwriter, Alan Jay Lerner; the lyricist, Ira Gershwin; the music directors, Saul Chaplin, Johnny Green and Conrad Salinger; the cinematographers, Alfred Glik (the film) and John Alton (the ballet); the editor, Adrienne Fazan; the art and set directors, Preston Ames, Cedric Gibbons, F. Keogh Gleason and Edwin B. Willis; the costumers, Orry-Kelly, Walter Plunkett and Irene Sharaff; and the hundreds of technicians, crew, dancers, extras, costumers and artisans MGM employed. Knox’s oral history of one of the most accomplished and pleasurable of all movie musicals is itself a pleasure, and covers with admirable thoroughness every aspect of the production.

See also: Directed by Vincente Minnelli Stephen Harvey (1990) A very fine and perceptively written coffee-table tome on Minnelli by the late critic and associate curator of film at the Museum of Modern Art. As well as offering his well-considered critical analyses of Minnelli’s movies Harvey also reveals the extent of the director’s visual fussiness: On Some Came Running he had a Ferris wheel moved a few inches, decided he didn’t like it and had it moved back. Although unrelated to Minnelli, I still cherish a critique Harvey made in his Pyramid Illustrated History volume on Fred Astaire in 1975: Writing about Silk Stockings, he cited as a defect of that particular dud the “Novocain-tinged line readings” of Cyd Charisse. Perfect.


80. The Making of The Wizard of Oz: Movie Magic and Studio Power in the Prime of MGM and the Miracle of Production #1060 Aljean Harmetz (1977)

I wish Aljean Harmetz published more books but this one, and her Casablanca study (see below) are worth a barrelful of other, shoddier “making of” volumes. She was the first to assay The Wizard of Oz in depth, and there is almost nothing about that beloved musical soufflé she missed, and little she got wrong. Harmetz traces the history of the picture from the marvelous Baum books to the subsequent popular stage musical of 1902 and the largely forgotten 1925 silent movie (in which Oliver Hardy played the Tin Man) through the first faltering steps toward a new screenplay and on to the composing of the imperishable song score, the designing of the sets and the sometimes-troubled filming itself, speaking to as many survivors as were able and willing to talk. (The Introduction was written by that most adorable of witches, Margaret Hamilton, about whom I have never heard a bad word.) People seeking an avalanche of color photos can look elsewhere. If you want the goods on how Oz was made, this is your book.

See also: The World of Entertainment!: Hollywood’s Greatest Musicals Hugh Fordin (1975) Speaking of MGM, if you enjoy movie musicals you may wish to avail yourself of the late Hugh Fordin’s fascinating history of the Arthur Freed unit, which along with some appalling dross did indeed produce the greatest of them after the glory days of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers at RKO and before the advent of Cabaret and Fiddler on the Roof: The Wizard of Oz, Cabin in the Sky, Meet Me in St. Louis, The Harvey Girls, Easter Parade, Royal Wedding, An American in Paris, Singin’ in the Rain, The Band Wagon, Gigi. Some spoilsports complained that Fordin’s book was little more than a collection of telegrams and in-house memos, but reproducing these primary sources is a perfectly legitimate, and often illuminating, way of putting together the history of a movie production unit. Besides, most of Rudy Behlmer’s books are collections of similar items and no one complained about that, or needed to.


81. The Nashville Chronicles: The Making of Robert Altman’s Masterpiece Jan Stuart (2000)

Another splendid oral history, this time of what may have been the most representative American movie of the 1970s. It’s a picture that could only have been filmed by Robert Altman, the exception to nearly all my rules about directors of movies. Although conceived and written by Joan Tewkesbury, Nashville is the ultimate exemplar of its maker’s technical acumen and personal, highly idiosyncratic style. We learn here about the picture’s origins and how Tewkesbury came to write her kaleidoscopic, elliptical screenplay with its 24-character ensemble (the movie was her idea, pitched to Altman while they were working on McCabe and Mrs. Miller) as well as how the roles were cast and the freedom Altman gave his actors, not only to improvise, which was by then the lingua franca of his method, but to compose many of the songs heard in the movie, as well as about the day-to-day exigencies of the location shoot. As with Michael Zuckoff’s later oral biography of Altman, this concatenation of contrapuntal voices is the perfect format to illuminate a movie whose aural imprint is as memorable as its visuals. One of the nicest compliments I can pay Stuart’s book is to say that just talking about it makes me want to read it a second time.

Although I hate to keep harping on the defects of Wikipedia (no I don’t, not really) the category into which their Usual Gang of Idiots has dropped this nonpareil is too good not to share: On the page devoted to the movie we learn that Nashville is an “American satirical musical ensemble comedy-drama film.” I suppose we ought to be grateful for how much nettlesome critical thinking these imps of the perverse save us through their obsessive need for categorization.


82. Notes Eleanor Coppola (1979)

Younger people may not credit this, but there were few celebrity figures in the 1970s more compelling than Francis Ford Coppola, and no movie on which more ink was spilled before its premier at the Cannes Film Festival than Apocalypse Now. Everyone who cared even slightly about the present and future of American movies knew that the director and co-writer of The Godfather and The Godfather — Part II (and the writer-director of The Conversation) was shooting an epic vision of the Vietnam war, the most controversial American-directed conflict since our rape of the Philippines 80 years earlier and from which we had only extracted ourselves, bloodied and bowed, a scant few years earlier. That Coppola was refracting his version of the war through the equally vivid nightmare of Conrad’s Heart of Darkness made an intriguing picture sound even more enticing. His wife Eleanor was there throughout, watching and worrying as her husband (and his cast and crew) grew increasingly less and less tethered to reality, as one leading man (Harvey Keitel) was replaced by another (Martin Sheen) who then suffered a near-fatal coronary, and as the entire project threatened to spin crazily out of control and engulf her and everyone she loved. Eleanor Coppola captures all of this and more in spare, limpid prose that limns the everyday and the extraordinary with the same practiced, sometimes coolly imperturbable eye.


83. Outrageous Conduct: Art, Ego and the Twilight Zone Case Stephen Farber and Marc Green (1988)

In July of 1982 during a night shoot for the multiple-director omnibus Twilight Zone: The Movie, a helicopter crash killed the actor Vic Morrow and two illegally employed Vietnamese children. It was one of the worst, most incompetent and, as we later learned, unconscionable incidents in movie history. Farber and Green followed the case and in their book explicated every sickening detail, including the culpability of the picture’s producer, Steven Spielberg, who instantly distanced himself, in one of the more craven performances of the last 50 years, condemned the director John Landis and desperately downplayed his own involvement. Not that Landis did not deserve opprobrium; in fact he deserved a prison sentence. (Did anyone really expect him to receive one?) He also behaved like an appalling, infantile brat during the trial, which is as revealing of his character as his willingness to endanger the lives of his actors, his technicians, and two small immigrant children.

See also: Indecent Exposure — A True Story of Hollywood and Wall Street David McClintick 1983. When the wildly successful television executive David Begelman foolishly (and puzzlingly) embezzled petty amounts of cash from, among others, the actor Cliff Robertson, no one outside Begelman’s circle expected to hear about it. Then Robertson went public. The result was one of the great scandals of a scandalous decade. McClintock covers every tawdry feature of a cheap, mystifying affair.


84. Picture Lillian Ross (1952)

The grandmother of all fly-on-the-wall accounts of moviemaking. Ross followed the filming by John Huston of his and his co-scenarist Albert Band’s adaptation of The Red Badge of Courage and its subsequent dismembering by MGM — which slashed it from two hours to 69 minutes — and published her report first in The New Yorker and later as a book. It’s a classic in a field that hasn’t many masterworks. Huston was the most reproduceable of speakers, and in an accurate account of his speech such as Ross provides the reader can hear his curious, deceptively mellow tones and odd conversational patterns and locutions. (Peter Viertel in White Hunter, Black Heart, his wonderful 1953 roman à clef about the filming of The African Queen, also got Huston absolutely down.)

See also: Anatomy of a Motion Picture Richard Griffith (1959) An enjoyable, largely photographic, account of the making of Anatomy of a Murder.


85. Put Money in Thy Purse: The Making of Othello Micheál MacLiammóir (1952)

Othello was Orson Welles‘ most protracted movie, shot on multiple continents and filmed over time; it was begun in 1949 but for complex reasons was not completed until 1951, and not exhibited before 1952. (The American release was further delayed, to 1955.) Filming had already begun when the original producer informed Welles he’d run out of money. With no cash and no costumes, the filmmaker shot two crucial reels depicting the murder of Roderigo in a Turkish bath in Morocco while local tailors labored to sew the clothing he needed to proceed. He was forced eventually to stop shooting and earn money to continue, and even then had to work around the schedules of his actors. Out of this grew the erroneous legend that Welles couldn’t complete a project. MacLiammóir, the movie’s inspired Iago, kept a contemporaneous diary that captures the madness of the filming and Welles’ mercurial moods and contradictory impulses as well as his talents and determination in the face of setbacks that would have defeated a lesser man. It’s a tour de force literary performance, one of the inarguably great books on the making of an equally great, if necessarily flawed, motion picture.

“… everything as I see it is against him before he starts, but his courage, like everything else about him, egotism, generosity, ruthlessness, forbearance, impatience, sensitivity, grossness and vision, is magnificently out of proportion.” — MacLiammóir on Welles


86. Roger Moore’s James Bond Diary Roger Moore (1973)

Written when Moore was filming Live and Let Die, his (if you’ll pardon the seeming oxymoron) maiden effort as James Bond. Whether Moore habitually kept a diary or did so only for one picture, the resulting manuscript is a delightful account of a typically complicated international Bond shoot, nicely illustrated with on-set photos and publicity stills, although as was typical of Fawcett paperbacks of the time you risked tearing the spine apart if you opened the book wide enough to read their captions. (The British edition, published by Pan, contained a different set of photos, most in color. Both are now prohibitively expensive, but the History Press reprinted the book in 2019, with a foreword by David Hedeson, the movie’s Felix Leiter.) I daily await with a certain dread the discovery by the Generation-Z cancel-culture brigade of Live and Let Die, with its hip black villains and sinister depiction of Baron Samedi. Doubtless they will demand Eon burn every extant copy, or get Disney to buy them all and stick them in a subterranean vault with its prints of Song of the South.

Moore was many 007 fans’ least favorite Bond apart from George Lazenby, but I usually found him charming company. So is his book.


87. Round Up the Usual Suspects: The Making of Casablanca – Bogart, Bergman, and World War II Aljean Harmetz (1992)

What Harmetz did for The Wizard of Oz in 1977 she did again for Casablanca in 1992. She covers, with her usual diligent thoroughness, its origins in the un-produced play Everybody Comes to Rick’s; the complicated saga of the screenplay and its multiple authors; the miracle of its casting; the filming and editing; and the picture’s decades-long legacy which saw a popular wartime romance gradually become recognized as the ultimate movie-movie of the great age of studio filmmaking. Not incidentally, the author also addresses, in detail, the way the government controlled the content of what American audiences saw during the Second World War. Other writers, such as Glenn Frankel, have attempted to do for pictures such as The Searchers and Midnight Cowboy what Harmetz did for two of the most well-loved American of all movies, but no one has come close.† A treasure.


88. A Star Is Born: The Making of the 1954 Movie and Its 1983 Restoration Ronald Haver (1988)

Without the author’s perseverance, it’s unlikely that A Star is Born would ever have been restored and rediscovered. Granted there were gaps in the footage that were only partially mitigated in the restored version by fuzzy outtakes and still photographs. But a minor masterpiece of Hollywood craft had, like Lawrence of Arabia, been cut, and cut again, although at least Lawrence got a full release at its original length; A Star is Born was shorn of far too much footage before its premiere, and Jack L. Warner showed so little faith in it that he had it eviscerated again after less than a month in theatres. (Perversely, Warner had also demanded that more footage be added to a movie that was already too long: The unnecessary “Born in a Trunk” number, which none of the creators of the movie had a hand in.) Haver’s essential book not only covers, with remarkable thoroughness, the development and filming of the movie but his own, only partly successful search for the lost footage and soundtrack. In this case, however, a partial success was still more than anyone could have hoped, or expected. If only for the restoration of the wonderfully written, beautifully shot and charmingly acted marriage proposal sequence on the soundstage, unseen for decades, we owe him.


VII. Miscellaneous

89. Are You Now or Have You Ever Been: The Investigation of Show Business by the Un-American Activities Committee, 1947-1956 Edited by Eric Bentley (1972)

Although this small volume is essentially a playscript adapted by Bentley from his own, much longer book on the House Committee on Un-American Activities Thirty Years of Treason, it’s a perfect vest-pocket history of the hearings and the misery they merrily visited upon American citizens for the accused beliefs. In this pared-down version the veteran dramatist Bentley highlights some of the more memorable witnesses such as Marc Lawrence, who claimed he joined the Party to pick up girls; Paul Robeson, who chopped the Committee down to size but was its victim anyway; Sterling Hayden, who ratted on others at the urging of his analyst and loathed himself forever after for it; that dissembling rat Elia Kazan; Lillian Hellman, who with her lawyer cannily (and memorably) extricated herself from having to testify; Zero Mostel, who was clever enough to gentle himself off the hook (but who was blacklisted all the same); and of course the drama’s central tragic figure, Larry Parks, the unconscionable bullying of whom into informing on others against his will remains a stain on our national character and institutions. But then, the hearings were largely a matter of, in no particular order, vengeance against Roosevelt, scare-tactics in aid of building a National Security State, anti-Semitism and the totalitarian impulse with its attendant sadistic delight in forcing others to bend to the will of petty martinets drunk on temporary power.

There seems to be an un-organized movement afoot among many Millennials these days to deify these bastards and to pretend that a few ineffectual Communist cells in Hollywood somehow poisoned the American character. It goes hand in hand with the new intolerance of alleged leftists who seek to call anyone who disagrees with them a racist, a Nazi, a Putin-puppet or, saints preserve us, “an anti-vaxxer.” Bentley’s book is a needed corrective. Now, how can we get these mindless lickspittles to read it?

See also: Thirty Years of Treason: Excerpts from Hearings Before the House Committee on Un-American Activities 1938-1968 Eric Bentley (1971) The mother-lode: 1,000-plus pages of testimony.


90. City of Nets: A Portrait of Hollywood in the 1940s Otto Friedrich (1986)

One of the most compelling narratives about the movie business ever written. Friedrich begins his portrait with the old-fashioned triumph of Gone with the Wind (1939) and ends, a decade and a world war later, with the Grand Guignol cynicism of Sunset Boulevard (1950). Nothing escapes his notice, from the sexual epistemology of the Hollywood closet and assimilated Jews worrying that focusing on anti-Semitism and the plight of European Jewry will bring unwanted goysische attention to themselves, to Joseph L. Mankiewicz despairing of the sub-literate ignorance around him and the arrogance of Walt Disney, presuming to teach his fellow citizens about concert music about which he himself was staggeringly obtuse. Among this magnificent book’s strengths is its author’s knowledge about, and ability to limn, the émigré community of largely German expatriates, most but not all of them Jewish, some of them (like Thomas Mann) giants struggling to eke out a living, as the late Martin Greif put it in one of his once-annual Gay Engagement Calendars, in the land of Pygmies. If, as they like to say in the ad biz, you read only one book about Hollywood, it should be this one. I regard it, without hesitation, as not only the finest book on Hollywood I’ve ever read but the best of all books about the movies.


91. The Genius of the System: Hollywood Filmmaking in the Studio Era Thomas Schatz (1988)

Schatz’s impeccably researched and forcefully written book is perhaps the ultimate refutation of auteurism. Taking off from the critic André Bazin’s commentary that one ought to praise American cinema “for what is most admirable, i.e., not only the talent of this or that filmmaker, but the genius of the system,” the author illuminates how that system worked, and who was most responsible for the classics that occasionally emerged from the various factories: Surprise, Mr. Sarris! The producers.


92. Haywire Brooke Hayward (1977)

I considered placing this one in my round-up of actor biographies but I include it here because Hayward takes in so many Hollywood personalities and so much cultural history of her youth and childhood that her book transcends the personal memoir and becomes something of a collective biography. Born to the agent and theatrical producer Leland Hayward and the charming screen actress Margaret Sullavan, she and her siblings were caught in a maelstrom that also included on the periphery Henry, Jane and Peter Fonda, a family whose sad, creepy dysfunction rivals that of the Haywards. Brooke’s sister Bridget was a probable suicide at 21 and her brother Bill finally succumbed, years after this book was published, shooting himself in the heart. Tolstoy was right, as he so often was, about unhappy families; Hayward’s book may be recommended to anyone who still maintains a childlike faith in the annealing powers of fame and money.


93. A Heart at Fire’s Center: The Life and Music of Bernard Herrmann Steven C. Smith (1991)

Herrmann had long been in need of a comprehensive, sympathetic and erudite biography, and in Smith he got all that and more. The giant on whose shoulders so many, both major and minor, have stood, Herrmann brought to Hollywood a radical approach to scoring movies; it’s more than appropriate that his initial movie score should not only be for his friend and radio collaborator Orson Welles, but for that most radical of talking pictures, Citizen Kane. More than anyone else in movies, Herrmann concentrated on orchestral color rather than themes and motifs and only he, I think, could have composed what he called the “black-and-white score” for Psycho; certainly only he would have written it solely for strings. Although he could be bombastic — there are moments in his otherwise lovely score for The Ghost and Mrs. Muir that set my teeth on edge, and his last, Taxi Driver, is largely over-emphatic and often hysterical — his was a singular talent; it’s impossible now to imagine certain movies (Kane, The Magnificent Ambersons, Hangover Square, On Dangerous Ground, The Day the Earth Stood Still, Vertigo, North by Northwest, The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad, Psycho, Jason and the Argonauts, Marnie) without his music. An explosive, highly-strung artist, Herrmann often clashed with his colleagues, even with the imperious Alfred Hitchcock. It was the composer, for example, who averred, against the instincts of the director, that the crop-dusting sequence in North by Northwest should be assembled without music until its climax, and who insisted that the Psycho shower scene must have it. That one stood as perhaps the most famous piece of music composed for a major American movie since the Max Steiner “Tara’s Theme” in Gone with the Wind, and until John Williams’ equally unsettling theme for the Great White shark in Jaws. Smith’s biography of the man who virtually defined the word “irascible” is full of splendid insights and striking details. One among many: His description of Herrmann in the ’70s scouring Manhattan record store soundtrack holdings for bootlegs of his scores and banging angrily on the bins with his cane when he found one.


94. It Don’t Worry Me: The Revolutionary American Films of the Seventies Ryan Gilbey (2003)

I regard two eras in American movies as our finest: The 1930s (at least once the technicians mastered the soundtrack and freed the camera again) which in spite of the reactionary Catholic domination of film via the Production Code saw such wonders in comedy, drama, melodrama, thriller and social polemic as (to take only 1931 into consideration) City Lights, Little Caesar, The Front Page, The Public Enemy, Monkey Business and Frankenstein. No one would suggest that all the pictures of the decade were as adult, witty, sophisticated, daring and critical of social norms as the best of them, but the ’30s was the period when the movies grew up and burst their chains, despite the efforts of small minds to contain them. In the creatively comparable era of the ’70s it was only the public’s desire for the conformity of the sure thing, and the studios’ concomitant eagerness to replicate the contours of what had been successful, that pretty much put an end to personal movies made by serious writers, actors and filmmakers. It is astonishing that someone as young as Ryan Gilbey, who was four years old when Taxi Driver was released in 1976 and who missed nearly all of the important pictures he writes about so knowledgeably, and beautifully, when they were new could write a book this good about an era he had to catch up with at Bfi screenings and on video as a young man. When I add that he is British, it should go some way toward conveying my surprise and delight with this, the best book on 1970s American movies I’ve ever encountered.

See also: Hollywood Films of the Seventies: Sex, Drugs, Violence, Rock ‘n’ Roll & Politics Seth Cagin and Philip Dray (1984) This small book was, until It Don’t Worry Me, not only the best available volume on ’70s cinema but virtually the only one. It’s still a splendid and insightful title.


95. Movie Comedy Teams Leonard Maltin (1970; reprinted in 1973 and 1985)

A breezy overview of a dozen major teams from Laurel and Hardy to Martin and Lewis, touching as well on some minor ones (Noonan and Marshall, anyone?) by a professional fan with an ear for the telling phrase. In addition to the dozens of wonderful black-and-white photographs, Maltin also provides complete filmographies and biographical details that make this one of the more pleasurable books of its kind.

For the longest time I thought that beautiful cover on the 1973 reissue as well as the one on Marjorie Rosen’s Popcorn Venus were the work of Richard Amsel. However, the gifted artist and Amsel expert Adam McDaniel informs me that both were by Ann Meisel.


96. Naming Names Victor Navasky (1980)

Navasky, then the editor of The Nation, later its publisher (back when it was still true to its roots as a radical publication and not yet another compromised house organ for the DNC) was perhaps as a result the perfect man to write what for many years was the definitive book on the Hollywood Blacklist. I’ve read numerous volumes on the subject both before the 1980 publication of Naming Names, and in the four decades since, and none has exhibited more erudition, social-historical acumen or unsentimental compassion. This is a subject which in the years since the Clinton campaign launched its phony accusations of “Russian collusion” against her opponent has become, to my astonishment, current again.

See also: Tender Comrades: A Backstory of the Hollywood Blacklist Patrick McGilligan and Paul Buhle (1997) An extremely informative collection of interviews with survivors of the 1950s Red Scare including Norma Barzman, Walter Bernstein, Alvah Bessie, Betsy Blair, Jeff Corey, Jules Dassin, Faith Hubley, Marsha Hunt, Paul Jarrico, Mickey Knox, Mill Lampell, Ring Lardner Jr., Karen Morley, Abraham Polonsky, Martin Ritt and Lionel Stander.


97. Double Life Miklós Rózsa (1989) Rózsa was one of the masters, not only of 20th century movie scoring but of concert forms as well; hence the title of his memoir, taken from one of the MGM pictures for which he provided his distinctive Hungarian folk-laced musical scores. Notable among composers for his erudition and wit (in several languages!), Rózsa was suited, perhaps more than any of his contemporaries, to writing a book as informal, and informative, and as charming, as this one.
Why, if you don’t know him, you should:
Concert works: Theme, Variations and Finale; Three Hungarian Sketches; Rhapsody for cello and piano; The Vintner’s Daughter – twelve variations on a French folk song; Violin Concerto; Piano Concerto; Spellbound Concerto; Sonata for guitar
Movie scores: The Jungle Book (1942), Double Indemnity (1944), The Lost Weekend (1945), Spellbound (1945), The Killers (1946), The Red House (1947), Madame Bovary (1959), Quo Vadis (1951), Ivanhoe (1952), Julius Caesar (1953), Lust for Life (1956), Ben-Hur (1959), El Cid (1961), The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973), Time After Time (1979), Eye of the Needle (1981), Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid (1982)
Masterworks: The Thief of Bagdad (1940), The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (1970, score based on his Violin Concerto), Providence (1977)

See also: No Minor Chords: My Days in Hollywood André Previn (1991) A teenage prodigy, Previn began working in the MGM music department at 16 and was composing for films at 17. Although he turned his back on movie scoring in favor of conducting concert music, in spite of four Academy Awards (and 13 nominations; we may not presume that an Oscar is a sign of quality, but those numbers are impressive) his “Days in Hollywood” certainly made an impression on him. Reading his book is like listening to him speak: A pleasure. In addition to illuminating the corners of his own creative life, at MGM and elsewhere, Previn is often wickedly funny about others, as when he quotes Frederick Loewe’s staggering musical pretension; his own stunned reaction at witnessing, just before intermission of the flop Alan Jay Lerner-Leonard Bernstein musical 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the shadow of Abraham Lincoln ominously crossing the stage and thinking to himself, “I’m going mad”; and, on being asked to meet with Michael Eisner to discuss a continuation of Fantasia and discovering the Disney CEO wanted him to arrange an entire soundtrack of Beatles instrumentals.

‘Tis a mad world, my masters.


98. Pictures at a Revolution: Five Movies and the Birth of the New Hollywood Mark Harris (2009)

With this book Harris, at the time the only notable writer aside from Stephen King at Entertainment Weekly (or, as it is known in my home, Ew!) hit on a notion so good and so obvious in retrospect it’s amazing no one thought of it before: Examining the five Oscar nominees for Best Picture in 1967, the year that changed the contours of the movie business more than any since the advent of the talkies. The nominees represented the warring taste of American moviegoers, or at least how they were perceived by the studios: The well intentioned, feel-good-about-how-unbigoted-you-are-when-your-white-daughter-snags-Sidney-Poitier Stanley Kramer picture (Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner); the overblown musical/”family” film, a flop the studio flogged so relentlessly it almost had to get a nod (Doctor Dolittle); the phenomenally successful youth comedy directed by a theatre and movie wünderkind (Mike Nichols’ sophomore effort The Graduate); the witty whodunnit with a social conscience (In the Heat of the Night); and the most radical alternative movie of the year (Bonnie and Clyde). Harris guides the reader through the thickets of America’s late-’60s cultural divide, plots with admirable meticulousness how each picture was developed, made, marketed and received, and draws his irrefutable conclusions in a way that will keep even the most knowledgeable of readers riveted. Pictures at a Revolution is one of the few genuinely great new books on American movies produced so far this century.


99. Roadshow: The Fall of Film Musicals in the 1960s Matthew Kennedy (2014)

Following only five years after Mark Harris’ landmark study was another wonder, a book on a subject that on the surface should have attracted, as writer and reader, only a fan besotted by Julie Andrews and Barbra Streisand but which, to my almost shocked surprise and pleasure, was a serious, thorough, wonderfully written examination of a long-gone cultural phenomenon that, in its day and after the success of The Sound of Music, became the holy grail of every American movie studio: The roadshow musical. “Roadshows” were big-budget movies, usually in (as Cole Porter had it) glorious Technicolor, breathtaking CinemaScope and stereophonic sound that before general release at (as they then said) “popular prices” were exhibited in select cities on a reserved-seat basis, and were often accompanied by overture, intermission entr’acte and post-show “exit music.” One after another of these pictures flopped at the box office, some (Sweet Charity, Darling Lili) undeservedly, until the accumulated disaster pretty much killed off the movie musical. Kennedy is splendid company, witty and thoughtful by turns, and admirably thorough.


100. Walt’s Time: From Before to Beyond Robert B. Sherman and Richard M. Sherman (1998)

One of the rarest of movie books to locate, and one of the most delightful. I have long felt the Shermans severely underrated as songwriters, but what isn’t widely enough known is how essential they were to the scripts of the pictures for which they wrote their literate yet accessible numbers. Mary Poppins is the classic example of a movie for which Richard (music and lyrics) and Robert (mostly lyrics) developed the story before Disney assigned a screenwriter, and the one that perhaps most fully expressed both their sensibility and his. They didn’t always operate at top of their game (who does?) either at Disney or, later, elsewhere, but they were right more often than they were wrong. The Shermans’ beautiful book celebrates a time and an opportunity they knew they were lucky to be chosen for, and to seize. Like its gently punning title and the brothers’ own penchant for merging old, ordinary words into entirely new and enchanting ones, Walt’s Time is a charming thing. I will resist the impulse to say it’s supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, but you are free to do so.


*All, ironically, except Gottlieb’s own role, which got smaller with each revision, until it was comprised of a couple of lines in one brief scene: The one on the ferry, in which Roy Scheider’s Chief Brody is browbeaten into not closing the beaches after the girl’s death.

†In addition to imposing anachronistic 21st century slang on events of the past, Frankel also makes far too easily-corrected factual errors, and mis-readings both of source material and finished film — errors which without a doubt will be repeated in the future by other lazy writers.

Text copyright 2022 by Scott Ross

The Magic Factory, Part Two of Four: A Few Essential Books About the Movies — An Annotated List. Critics and Filmmakers.

Standard

.By Scott Ross

See also: Part One
https://scottross79.wordpress.com/2022/03/03/the-magic-factory-a-few-essential-books-about-the-movies-an-annotated-list-part-one-actors-and-animation/

Part Three
https://scottross79.wordpress.com/2022/04/11/the-magic-factory-part-three-an-annotated-list-of-a-few-essential-books-about-the-movies-screenwriters-screenwriting-and-screenplays/

Part Four
https://scottross79.wordpress.com/2022/04/16/the-magic-factory-part-four-an-annotated-list-of-a-few-essential-books-about-the-movies-individual-films-and-miscellaneous-titles/

Note the First: I do not by any means claim that this list, which I am posting in installments, is either exhaustive or definitive. It’s merely obsessive. And highly personal. This is my list, based on my experience, my likes and prejudices and my reading, Your list will differ wildly. I merely mean to recommend a few books that influenced me and that you might also enjoy.

Note the Second: Although the list, when it’s finished, is meant to add up to 100, I am going to fiddle outrageously with the numbers. When within a particular category a writer has a number of titles, or a series of books, or I mention a volume by someone else on the same topic, I will count them all as one entry. It’s my party, and I’ll cheat if I want to.


III. Criticism

Of (obvious) deep concern to the present writer, good movie criticism has never been exactly plentiful, although criticism generally has certainly been a hell of a lot healthier than it is today. On the other hand, so has everything else. Alas, in a land where either editors no longer know the rudiments of their jobs or writers for print and online publication simply do as they please without the nagging interference of the men and women who used routinely to turn poor writing into the acceptable and the good into the great, we can expect little better than what we get. (I’d love an editor to give my work the once-over before I post it — probably the fond wish of some of you as well — but since I get paid nothing for this and thus cannot afford to hire one…)

Gore Vidal famously noted that there can be no great writers without great readers, and not only was he correct but his aphorism has a corollary applicable to film criticism: There can be no great movie critics without great movies, and great movie audiences. It’s no accident, then, that most of the best-written movie criticism in America was of another era or focuses on the movies of the past.

21. Agee on Film Volume 1: Essays and Reviews by James Agee (1958) (Library of America edition [#160]: James Agee: Film Writing and Selected Journalism: Agee on Film / Uncollected Film Writing / The Night of the Hunter / Journalism and Film Reviews, 2005)

Whenever I want to remind myself what a great writer can do with material scarcely worthy of his notice (and to feel correspondingly wretched about my own, comparatively anemic, abilities) I re-read Agee’s reviews, written mostly for Time and The Nation. While he seldom got near a movie good enough to merit his attention, it’s safe to say that many if not most of the pictures he routinely critiqued during this period — roughly 1942 to 1948 — often in omnibus groupings, would be entirely forgotten except for his memorable reviews of them: His response to one standard B-musical olio (“Vaudeville is dead; I wish to God someone would bury it.”) inters any number of equally silly wastes of time. Yet however biting Agee’s wit could be, his open-heartedness is never far from the surface. I’m not sure what would possess a man, even the world’s most devoted Charlie Chaplin fan, to take three long columns to review Monsieur Verdoux, and then to complain that a three-part critique is not long enough to address it fully. But one would rather Agee’s very occasional folly than the sanest work of almost anyone else of the period. No writer of his generation had as much love for, and knowledge about, silent comedy than Agee, and his 1949 Life magazine essay “Comedy’s Greatest Era” is arguably the best overview of the pictures Agee loved as a boy and which were still fueling his ardor for movies 30 and more years later.

If you really want to feel like an inarticulate boob, read Dwight McDonald’s piece on Agee in which he quotes letters from his then 16 year-old friend, who not only had a fully worked-out philosophical attitude toward movies, a subject beneath the contempt of most of his contemporaries, but astonishingly sophisticated ideas on how they could be made better and with greater artistic and psychological license. It may be that Agee, who so badly wanted to direct movies from a young age, would, had he lived to try his hand at it, have made an arty mess of things. Perhaps he wouldn’t have. Maybe he would have made something astonishing. The great catastrophe of his largely self-foreshortened life is that neither we nor he ever got to find out. But his reviews will live on as long as there are at least a few great readers around to cherish them.

See also: Dwight MacDonald on Movies (1969) Speaking of MacDonald, this collection of his occasional reviews of the late 1950s and early-to-mid 1960s is a useful one, even if his tastes diverged from much of the movie-going public of the time and aligned, somewhat alarmingly, all too closely to those of John Simon, who whatever his gifts as a theatre critic, and his adoration of Ingmar Bergman, could nearly always be counted upon to get any English or American picture wrong. Anyone can commit a critical error now and then; for men this erudite to get so many now classic pictures (The Apartment, Psycho, One Two Three, Hud, Tom Jones) wrong is dismaying. MacDonald also, like Simon, got schoolmarmishly huffy about the 1962 Cape Fear. He should only have lived to see what Scorsese did with it.


22. A Biographical Dictionary of Film David Thomson (1975; Revised and expanded numerous times)

Thomson is a troublesome writer: Part critic-part biographer, a sometimes-lazy researcher and a sort of celebrity voyeur, speculating on the private lives of personalities in a way that most of us indulge in privately but which becomes unseemly and even creepy when aired in print. He’s also an unrepentant auteurist; nowhere in the several revisions of his 1975 Biographical Dictionary will you see a single entry on a screenwriter unless he happens to be a director. (“Over 800 directors, actors, actresses, producers” reads the cover blurb.) Yet he’s fascinating to read, his opinions alternatively outrageous and insightful. In no other book, I think, will you read an entry on W.C. Fields written, appropriately, in the voice of Charles Dickens — appropriate not only for Fields’ own Dickensian character names and florid, circumlocuted Victorian dialogue (as well as his having starred as Micawber in the 1935 David Copperfield) but to his dying on Dickens’ special provenance: Christmas day.


23. Canned Goods as Caviar: American Film Comedies of the 1930s Gerald Weales (1985)

Weales illuminates the movie decade year by year, with a single picture presenting each, from City Lights in 1931 to Destry Rides Again in 1939 and taking in as well the Marx Bros., Mae West, W.C. Fields, Ben Hecht, William Wellman, Leo McCarey, John Ford, Morrie Ryskind, Gregory La Cava, Frank Capra, Robert Riskind and Howard Hawks. Although as another reader noted a better title might have been Caviar as Canned Goods, Weales’ is an eloquent analysis of the greatest decade for American comedy after the merging of picture and sound — a period in which a general literacy prevailed that is now unimaginable, and which permitted genuinely witty (as opposed to wise-ass) dialogue to be heard in the nation’s motion picture theaters on a regular basis. (We can obviously except Chaplin from that generalization.) My only cavil is that Weales has a tendency to over-emphasize directors when surely the writers of these pictures were often of at least equal if not greater importance.

See also: We’re in the Money: Depression America and Its Films Andrew Bergman (1971) Before becoming a published mystery novelist (the Jack LeVine series) and screenwriter (Tex X, which became Blazing Saddles; the original The In-Laws; The Freshman) Bergman was a doctoral student. This, his PhD thesis, is a bracing overview of early 1930s American movies, intelligent, knowledgeable and erudite. Bergman is especially good on the Warner “social problem” pictures and their frequent, now forgotten, star, the remarkable Richard Barthelmess.


24. The Celluloid Closet: Homosexuality in the Movies Vito Russo (1981; Updated, 1987)

When I discovered Russo’s book in 1981, it was with the force of revelation. For an avid movie lover and a young gay man of 20, The Celluloid Closet almost seemed to be the book I’d waited my adolescence for without knowing it. Parker Tyler’s 1972 Screening the Sexes: Homosexuality in the Movies got to the subject first, but I don’t know anyone who has ever been able to get through it, including me. Russo didn’t tag absolutely every gay (or implied) character who ever appeared in a movie, nor did he try to. But his scholarship is impeccable, and he airs his critiques with intelligence, enthusiasm and wit. The author had no idea (nor did the rest of us) that something eventually called AIDS was about to alter the existence of every gay man on the planet, a vulnerability that, rather surprisingly, did more to advance the cause of gay civil rights than Stonewall or Anita Bryant, and included greater — though not necessarily more positive — visibility in popular culture. Harlan Ellison was fond of quoting Pasteur’s dictum that “Chance favors the prepared mind.” Russo’s was one of the most prepared of his generation.

See also: Behind the Screen: How Gays and Lesbians Shaped Hollywood, 1910-1969 William J. Mann (2001) and Screened Out: Playing Gay in Hollywood from Edison to Stonewall Richard Barrios (2002) Two entertaining surveys, the first of gay and bisexual Hollywood figures, the second of movies with overt or coded homosexual characters which is, perhaps surprisingly, not merely a Celluloid Closet re-tread.


25. Warning Shadows: Home Alone with Classic Cinema Gary Giddins (2010)

Giddins, arguably the finest critic and historian of American jazz, latterly turned his attentions to movies. This collection of pieces from The Sun, wedded to the DVD releases of a wide range of pictures both domestic and foreign, exhibits his customary taste, intelligence and wit, and one wishes Giddins would compile a compendium of capsule reviews which might, with Pauline Kael’s 5001 Nights at the Movies, more or less obliterate the need for Leonard Maltin’s middlebrow movie guides. (But then I’ve been wishing for decades that David Denby would put together a collection of his movie reviews and that’s never happened.)

See also: Natural Selection: Gary Giddins on Comedy, Film, Music and Books (2006)


26. On the Verge of Revolt: Women in American Films of the Fifties Brandon French (1978)

One of the most graceful, beautifully written books of its kind, a knowing survey of ten movies from a transitional decade’s screen representation of women, from Sunset Boulevard (1950) to Some Like it Hot (1959). Far from a doctrinaire broadside, French’s exceptionally trenchant study benefits not only from its author’s thoughtful analyses but from her limpid prose, which reminds the reader of why, whatever its flaws or virtues (and its perhaps suspicious origins) the so-called second wave of feminism had to occur. Each time I return to its pages I find this book more lucid, and more charming, than I’ve remembered from my previous readings.

See also: The Runaway Bride: Hollywood Romantic Comedy of the 1930s Elizabeth Kendall (1990) Kendall’s auteurist approach is unique: She pairs several important actresses (Stanwyck, Colbert, Hepburn, Ginger Rogers, Jean Arthur, Carole Lombard, Irene Dunne) with the directors (Capra, Sturges, George Stevens, Gregory La Cava, Leo McCarey) of their great romantic/screwball comedies. Despite my aversion to the Auteur Theory as popularized by the idiotic Andrew Sarris, Kendall’s is a delightful study.


27. Popcorn Venus: Women, Movies, and the American Dream Marjorie Rosen (1974)

Molly Haskell’s sour, fag-baiting feminist broadside From Reverence to Rape: The Treatment of Women in the Movies got far more ink and sold many more copies — she knew what she was doing putting “rape” in her title — but Rosen’s is the finer achievement, elegant and witty. (And, unlike Haskell, Rosen doesn’t confuse an actress’s screen persona with the performer herself.) A bright, perceptive cultural critic, Rosen charts the development of women in American movies from the Victorianism of the ‘teens through the emergence in the 1920s of the independent “flapper” and the ’30s and ’40s working girl all the way to the Second Wave revolution of the early 1970s: From “Little Mary” Pickford to Jane Fonda in Klute.


28. Reeling Pauline Kael (1977)
Readers of these pages will know how highly I esteem Kael’s criticism, and had the 1970s never happened she still would have been an important and influential writer on the movies. But as great writers need great readers, they also need great subjects, and the era of adult, personal American filmmaking that ran from roughly 1967 to 1982 was Kael’s great subject. When the phenomenal receipts for the Star Wars series rang down the curtain on popular movies for mature adults Kael was as marooned as the writers, actors and directors she championed and about whose best work she wrote more urgently and enticingly than anyone else. John Simon, in his review of Reeling, sneered at Kael for asserting that “we [were] living though a classic period for movies,” but she was entirely correct, among the first to sense that something extraordinary, and exceptional, was going on, and that even those pictures about which she was less enthusiastic were a part of that.* I’m just slightly too young (a happy phrase I don’t get many opportunities to use) to have seen many when they were new, or to have read Kael’s critiques of them then, but I can well imagine the keenness with which avid moviegoers of the time, many of them of the so-called “Film Generation,” must have anticipated reading what Kael had to say about the newest release. Even her detractors —Renata Adler perhaps excepted — must admit that having such a lightning-rod of a movie critic at the center of popular discourse was a healthy thing, especially now that most critics function as little but public relations flacks for the dwindling pack of major studios, all of which will disappear up Disney’s asshole ere long.

See also: Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (1968), Going Steady (1970), Deeper Into Movies (1973) and When the Lights Go Down: Film Writings 1975 – 1980 (1980) Taken together with Reeling, these titles constitute a vest-pocket history of the last great period of American movies, and the last we are ever likely to get: Our best movie critic on our best decade and a half of popular entertainment.

5001 Nights at the Movies (1982 / Updated, 1991) During the 1950s Kael contributed capsule reviews for the Berkeley revival house she managed, later publishing a clutch of them as “The Movie Past” in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. These eventually resurfaced in the movie listings of The New Yorker before Kael collected them, along with excerpts from many of her New Yorker reviews, into this compulsively readable compendium. Once you start poring over it, you may come to and realize you’ve been reading for hours.

Following Kael’s death in 2001, the New Yorker began busily scrubbing these brief reviews of classic movies from its pages, replacing them with the mind-numbingly pretentious yawping of one Richard Brody. It almost seemed the magazine wished to erase any trace of Kael’s connection to it… and considering how many readers she brought to what (Seymour Hirsch’s reporting to one side) had become a moribund and largely irrelevant publication, that’s a real slap in the face. Even more puzzling, Brody’s stultifying academism is precisely the sort of cloistered, dead prose and mode of thought Kael’s jazzy approach was in opposition to. Exactly what message is the New Yorker sending?


29. Toms Coons Mulattoes Mammies and Bucks: An Interpretive History of Blacks in American Film Donald Bogle (1973; revised and expanded numerous times)

Like The Celluloid Closet years later, Bogle’s was a book whose timeliness, encyclopedic breadth and critical acumen were sorely needed. His analyses are sharp and genuinely witty (especially in the photo captions), evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the actors and personalities available to black audiences on their theater screens — always assuming they could see them, since in the South black performers, especially those in musicals, were often cut from the movies in which they appeared. Bogle is particularly perceptive on the acting limitations of a number of sacred cows as well as of those pictures whose good social intentions were overwhelmed by their earnestness and general mediocrity. The last edition of Toms etc. I read was the revision of 1994, in part because I got the feeling that the first book did not need updating or expansion; it was a product of its time, and brought needed discussion to a too-long neglected topic. But did the original criteria on which Bogle based his study still obtain in the 1990s, and beyond? I wish that, instead of grafting new material onto a splendid old book, its gifted author would create a new, perhaps encyclopedic, title specifically designed to explicate what has happened since 1973.

See also: The Devil Finds Work (James Baldwin) 1976 Baldwin’s book-length essay on race, politics and film is also a memoir of one Negro boy’s experience of American movies not made with him — or any black audience — in mind.


IV. Filmmakers

As an unrepentant anti-auteurist, I tend to favor the work of writer-directors — or at least, those filmmakers (Ford, Cukor, Hitchcock, Hawks, Lumet, George Roy Hill, Peter Bogdanovich) who not only worked closely with their scenarists but had they so chosen could have taken a screenwriting credit on most of the movies they directed. Robert Altman, who could be a writer fucker, I except from this personal rule because, whoever wrote it, an Altman movie was an Altman movie. He was both a genuine innovator and a poet, and how many of these have there been in American movies?

30. Billy Wilder in Hollywood Maurice Zolotow (1977; Updated in 1987)

I feel quite sure Zolotow’s is by no means the finest book written about my favorite writer-director. However, because of a writing project I began long ago and have not been able to finish, I have deliberately not read any of the subsequent books published about him and his movies in the years since. Zolotow’s was the first biography of Wilder and while he was either a bit gullible, unwilling to challenge his subject’s self-devised mythology (and the myths devised by others) or unable to do the research necessary to debunk them — and also had a dismaying inability to retell an anecdote without somehow mucking up the punchline — his book is a great deal of fun and had the advantage of being authorized, so Wilder’s distinctive voice prevails throughout.


31. Buster Keaton: Tempest in a Flat Hat Edward McPherson (2007)

Following my introduction to silent comedy as a nine-year-old, via a children’s matinee of the Robert Youngson compilation 30 Years of Fun and (thanks to a New Year’s Eve PBS marathon of his Mutual comedies) I became an instant Charles Chaplin fan. Buster Keaton’s great shorts and features were tougher to see in those years, but the more of them I encountered the higher he rose in my estimation. Now, I happen to think that comparing these two short-statured giants is a waste of time, especially since the Keaton camp tends to look down its nose at Charlie for his sentimentality and I have no interest in starting an argument. But I must admit that as time has gone by I find Keaton, while ingenious and physically astonishing, a more limited performer and his movies, taken as a whole, surprisingly and at times almost depressingly gruesome. That doesn’t mean Keaton’s pictures are not funny; indeed, his 1924 The Navigator is the second-funniest movie I’ve ever seen (the first is Richard Pryor: Live in Concert) while The General (1927) manages to be beautiful, dramatic and hilarious and watching his two-reelers in order, as I did last year, is an exercise in genuine dazzlement. His life, unfortunately, was as disordered as his best work was controlled; in addition to being an alcoholic he seems to have been both hapless and alarmingly passive. He got a superb biographer in Edward McPherson, whose wonderfully titled volume was one of the most pleasant surprises of the early ‘aughts.

See also: Keaton: The Man Who Wouldn’t Lie Down Tom Dardis (1979) A good early biography detailing Buster’s travails and his achievements.


32. Chaplin: His Life and Art David Robinson (1985)

I wish I could adequately convey the excitement I experienced when this book was published in America, or the complete spell it wove over me as I read it over several completely satisfying weeks. The breadth of its author’s knowledge, and the extent of his research, were impeccable as he set about gently deflating the mythology that had accrued to Charles Spencer Chaplin, some of it generated by Charlie himself. Robinson’s was the first book of which I am aware to detail the painstaking manner in which Chaplin worked out his great comedies. (Much of this was also explicated in Kevin Brownlow and David Gill’s three-part 1983 documentary Unknown Chaplin.) He is also correct on the impact of Charlie’s pretentious, self-serving memoir My Autobiography (1964) and the hurt it generated among the many long-time Chaplin associates whom he slighted in it. Robinson’s remains the Chaplin book of Chaplin books.

See also: Chaplin: The Mirror of Opinion David Robinson (1984) The year before his biography of Chaplin was completed, Robinson published this fascinating volume which details what was written and said about Charlie during the various important periods of his life. It’s almost a Concordance to the biography, but fully able to stand on its own.


33. Chasing the Light: Writing, Directing, [sic] and Surviving Platoon, Midnight Express, Scarface, Salvador, [sic] and the Movie Game Oliver Stone (2020)

I don’t know how the proliferation of unnecessary commas before the conjunction “and” took hold, or why it affects even seasoned writers. That small cavil aside, this is the book Stone’s admirers have been waiting for, detailing his childhood and youth, his Viet Nam experience and the frustrating road he traversed from struggling screenwriter to Academy-honored writer and director. Stone spares no one, least of all himself, and as is so often the case with the most interesting movies what a friend and I used to call “the backstage stuff” is almost as interesting as the pictures themselves (and occasionally more so.) Stone’s prose is both graceful and unflinching, and his book a deep pleasure to read. Chasing the Light takes the reader up to the triumph of Platoon, so we can only hope that Stone will bring out a second volume on the years of his greatest daring and achievement.


34. David Lean: A Biography Kevin Brownlow (1996)

Brownlow’s biography honors Lean but also sees him plain, his follies as notable as his masterworks and his personal style that of a cold, shy autocrat with flashes of great decency. The author had enviable access to Lean, so we hear his voice throughout; Brownlow also interviewed as many of Lean’s old associates as he could, resulting in descriptions of the making of his movies that are remarkably thorough. Appropriately, he devotes three long chapters to Lawrence of Arabia, Lean’s magnum opus and, despite its somewhat muddled politics, one of the great glories of world cinema. Brownlow, whose subject has been the silent movie, judges Lean not merely as a great editor but a director whose eye missed little. Anyone who has seen his adaptation of Great Expectations remembers with a shiver up the spine the opening sequence in which Pip encounters Magwitch. Equally likely to sear themselves in the mind are the climax of Oliver Twist; the exquisite views of Venice in Summertime; the scene at the well, the train wreck, the hallucinogenic ship, the attack on Aqaba and the desert itself in Lawrence; the long train journey, the ice palace and Omar Sharif’s trek across the desert of snow in Doctor Zhivago; Judy Davis’ encounter with the monkeys and the death of Peggy Ashcroft in A Passage to India; and the many indelible sequences in Bridge on the River Kwai. Lean was a born filmmaker, and as Brownlow makes clear, the movies gave him a life that saved him from the despair that so often attends the misfit of genius.

See also: David Lean Stephen Silverman (1992) A through, beautiful coffee-table volume limning Lean’s filmography.

Lawrence of Arabia: The 20th Anniversary Pictorial History L. Robert Morris and Lawrence Raskin (1992) A well-written celebration of Lean’s finest picture, with glorious color photographs throughout.


35. The Hustons Lawrence Grobel (1989; Revised and updated, 2014)

A revealing group biography of one of Hollywood’s great dynasties, and a disturbing critique of its center, the gifted but deeply troubled, sadistic, misogynist John. Grobel also points out that the writer-director’s best features were those based on second and third-rank material (The Maltese Falcon, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The African Queen, The Night of the Iguana, The Kremlin Letter, The Man Who Would Be King, Prizzi’s Honor) and that it was only when he tackled the first-rate (The Red Badge of Courage, Moby-Dick, Wise Blood, Under the Volcano) that he floundered. (The single notable exception is Huston’s swansong, the beautifully observed The Dead, which somehow almost miraculously approximates in cinematic terms its universally well-regarded source.) Grobel chronicles the family from John’s actor father Walter to John’s children, the actress Angelica and his eventual actor/writer/director sons Tony and Danny. But it’s John who is the focal point of the book, and who, while endlessly fascinating, leaves the most unpleasant aftertaste.


36. Making Movies Sidney Lumet (1996)

Although there have been countless “how-to” books published on filmmaking, some dating back to the 1920s, Lumet’s is the only volume I know of in which an important movie director discusses the process at length, and covers every department. While the specific means by which Lumet achieved his considerable effects are, obviously, unique to him (few directors care to rehearse their actors as Lumet routinely did, for example) the anecdotes he offers as illustrations of each topic under discussion express a universality that I’m sure has resonated with filmmakers who’ve read his book. We were the poorer for the loss of this most humane filmmaker but Making Movies continues to shine with the same qualities that mark his work on film.

See also: Sidney Lumet: A Life Maura Spiegel (2019) A lovely first biography of Lumet, written with thoughtfulness and grace. Among other things, Spiegel had access to Lumet’s unfinished memoir, abandoned shortly after it was begun and in which the remembered pain of his childhood and youthful experience apparently overwhelmed their author. Spiegel also reveals that Lumet seldom looked back at his own work; his impatience to push forward was something Pauline Kael noted early on, when she observed the filming of The Group, and which she felt limited him as a director. Perhaps she might have been a bit more compassionate had she known about Sidney’s youthful traumas: His father, the Yiddish actor Baruch Lumet, exploited his young son as a child actor, his mother died when he was a boy and his sister was deeply troubled. No wonder he was always playing hurry-up.


37. On Cukor Gavin Lambert (1972; Reprinted, 2000)

In the early 1970s Gavin Lambert, an excellent novelist, biographer and sometime screenwriter (with a special focus, in a time when it was definitely not the thing, on gay characters) conducted in-depth interviews with his friend George Cukor on the movies he’d directed. The result is a wonderful free-ranging discussion on some of the brightest and most entertaining pictures of the talkie era: Dinner at Eight, David Copperfield, Holiday, The Women, The Philadelphia Story, Adam’s Rib, Born Yesterday, The Marrying Kind, It Should Happen to You, the 1954 A Star is Born. Around the time of On Cukor Lambert also wrote GWTW, the first book-length account of the making of Gone with the Wind. It was a picture from which Cukor, its original director, had famously been fired, for reasons that remain murky but which may have been the result of Clark Gable’s discomfort with him. The 2000 edition of On Cukor was reimagined as a well-illustrated coffee-table book.

See also: A Double Life: George Cukor Patrick McGilligan (1992) The first biography of Cukor, by one of our best and most thorough writers on film.


38. Mainly About Lindsay Anderson Gavin Lambert (2000)

Although I had not seen any of Anderson’s pictures and only one video of a play he directed (David Storey’s Home) when I stumbled upon Lambert’s affectionate biography/memoir I found myself entranced by the book, its subject’s rigorous intelligence and its author’s reconstruction of his friendship with his one-time fellow cineaste co-founder and contributor to Sequence magazine.

The title is a nod to Anderson’s own influential study About John Ford.

See also: Inside Daisy Clover (1963), arguably the best novel ever written about Hollywood and Running Time (1982), the second-best.


39. Orson Welles: A Biography Barbara Leaming (1985)

Leaming, perhaps taking a leaf from Whitney Stein’s Bette Davis book Mother Goddam, wrote her fascinating authorized biography of Welles with Orson’s input. Due to his intimate involvement with it, and because he would die a few months after her book saw publication, Leaming’s biography became in a way a final portrait of the playwright, actor-manager, radio and theatre innovator and great, radical filmmaker whose work exerted a powerful influence over the medium of film. It was a harsh (and expensive) mistress, one that demanded of its devotee more time and attention than any other art form and which still reverberate, even among ignoramuses who’ve never seen a frame of Citizen Kane, The Magnificent Ambersons, The Lady from Shanghai, MacBeth, Othello, Mr. Arkadin, Touch of Evil, Chimes at Midnight or F for Fake. In Welles’ case that meant taking on acting work in lesser pictures as a means of earning the funds to produce his own, and chasing after deals that were somehow never finalized. As a result, a great moviemaker left us with far fewer pictures than he intended. Leaming illuminates both Welles’ ardor and the decades-long frustrations which, along with his excessive weight, almost certainly led to his death at 70.


40. Robert Altman: The Oral Biography Michael Zuckoff (2010)

The form Zuckoff employed for his Altman book is so perfect for its subject, one of the great innovators of motion picture soundtracks, and most of whose movies are essentially kaleidoscopic, I’m amazed no one came up with before. Inevitably with these things, there is occasionally a kind of Rashomon effect. There is also much agreement. The form seems to me eminently fair and gives a marvelous sense of perspective on the various movies Altman made, as well as on his personality.

See also: Robert Altman: Jumping Off the Cliff Patrick McGilligan (1991) McGilligan has for decades been quietly amassing a stack of fine, non-sensational biographies of important figures in American movies. This is one of his best.


41. Searching for John Ford Joseph McBride (2001)

McBride is, like Patrick McGilligan, one of our best and most reliable writers on movies and their makers, especially on Orson Welles. Here he gives serious consideration (838 pages) to Welles’ favorite filmmaker. The result is, I suspect — and barring a fuller discussion of his possible bisexuality, hinted at elsewhere — essentially the definitive Ford biography. I do not believe that any biographer can fully explicate his subject, any more than any human being ever completely knows himself, and Ford was more complicated than most. Yet if McBride cannot reach into the man’s psyche and examine the threads that made Ford Ford, he comes awfully damned close.

See also: About John Ford Lindsay Anderson (1983) A superb study of Ford and his pictures, written with a director’s eye and the perspective of a prickly critic for whom “not quite” is never good enough.

John Ford Peter Bogdanovich (Revised and Enlarged Edition, 1978) Bogdanovich’s Ford monograph, expanded and with extensive interviews with the deliberately crotchety director.


42. A Splurch in the Kisser: The Movies of Blake Edwards Sam Wasson (2009)

Readers of these pages may know that I have a great deal of difficulty with Wasson. While I respect the authoritative scope of his knowledge and understanding I find his work sloppy and limited (Fosse) and sometimes shockingly ignorant, even about the subjects of his own books (The Big Goodbye). In the case of Wasson’s wonderfully-titled examination of Blake Edwards my irritation lies with his occasional mind-numbing academic flights, seeking as is common with what Gore Vidal once called “scholar-squirrels,” to root out symbols, with stultifying persistence. When Wasson is good, however, he is very fine indeed, and among other things I am grateful to him for leading me to Ellen Barkin’s marvelous performance in Switch, which I missed in 1991 and which I now treasure.

See also: Blake Edwards Peter Lehman and William Luhr (1981) and Returning to the Scene: Blake Edwards, Volume 2 Peter Lehman and William Luhr (1989) Speaking of scholar-squirrels, these two volumes are both useful and annoying, in the rather typical academic style. But for many years they were all we had, so that usefulness must be acknowledged.

Blake Edwards Interviews (Conversations with Filmmakers Series) Gabriella Oldham (2017) A bit repetitious — Edwards tended to tell the same anecdotes repeatedly — but full of goodies.


43. A Third Face: My Tale of Writing, Fighting, and Filmmaking Samuel Fuller (2004)

I don’t know whether, post-stroke, Fuller dictated this superb memoir or not, although it sounds like his speech. Frankly I don’t care if Fuller spoke it, typed it, wrote it longhand or whether it appeared, fully formed, like Venus from his forehead. A Third Face is one of the finest autobiographies any movie writer or director has ever written, and it may be the best of all such books. Fuller brings everything he was and did into focus: From impossibly young cub reporter to novelist to screenwriter to soldier to writer-director, and from the lively crime scene of the 1920s through the heartbreaking dismissal of good work in the ’80s. He seemed, even after his debilitating stroke, to have total recall about his life and work, and it’s his unique voice, cigar firmly in place, you hear as you read his wonderful book.

Martin Scorsese famously observed that, “If you don’t like the films of Samuel Fuller, then you just don’t like cinema.” If we ignore the pretentious use of the words “films” and “cinema” (Fuller would have rolled his eyes at both) Scorsese’s observation is entirely correct. If you can look down your nose at the subway sequence at the beginning of Pickup on South Street, or the devastating scene in which Thelma Ritter’s professional stool pigeon is murdered, or the brutal fight between Richard Widmark and Richard Kiley; if you can watch the opening of The Naked Kiss without astonishment; if the transformation of Mark Hamill, on Omaha beach and at the ovens at Falkenau, and the mute child Lee Marvin attempts to bring back to the world of the living in The Big Red One leave you un-moved; if you can watch White Dog and come to the conclusion that the movie is an expression, not of outrage but of racism… you are lost not only to Fuller but to what makes moviemaking special.


44. This is Orson Welles edited by Jonathan Rosenbaum; with Peter Bogdanovich & Orson Welles (1992)

Welles’ great friend Marlene Dietrich once said of him, “When I have seen him, and talked with him, I feel like a plant that has just been watered.” I have the same reaction to this book; re-reading it, which I do every couple of years, opens my senses and, despite the sadness of Welles’ unrealized projects, leaves me in something close to a state of wonder. (The tapes Random House released of some of Welles’ and Bogdanovich’s conversations conversations do likewise for me, although I wish they had been issued on CD as well as cassette.) While these wide-ranging talks were edited by Welles, who sometimes reduced his own words from poetry to prose — for example when he says “under the shadowed elms” on Bogdanovich’s tape but revises it on paper to read, “the shadows of the elms” — and he even added an event that didn’t happen, for flourish, reading their transcripts is such a pleasure that niggling doubts or critiques drift away like grains of sand in a breeze. If the later My Lunches with Orson is to be accepted and Henry Jaglom did not invent any of Welles’ comments or obnoxious attitudes (like many men who are sexually suspect, OW expresses repeated appalling viciousness about gay men), Bogdanovich may have smoothed things out a bit. Welles is at pains not to make critical remarks about other filmmakers, although the few that slipped through are instructive, and apt. As much a mythologist about himself and his movies as Hitchcock at his worst, there is much here that should be taken with skepticism, especially if you don’t know the truth of these matters. Yet everything I said in praise of the book still obtains. And as if the conversations were not sufficient, Jonathan Rosenbaum contributes a career chronology that is surely definitive, and staggering: Once you know how much Welles did, year by year and nearly day-to-day, and how busy his gifts kept him, it forever destroys the boring old “He couldn’t finish anything” critique.

See also: Citizen Welles: A Biography of Orson Welles Frank Brady (1989) The first biography of Welles following his death in 1985, Brady’s is marked by its intelligence, thoroughness and compassion.

In My Father’s Shadow: A Daughter Remembers Orson Welles Christopher Welles Feder (2009) A thoughtful, beautifully rendered memoir of her father by Welles’ eldest daughter. (She’s in MacBeth, as the foully murdered young son of McDuff, and the scream she lets out off-screen is chilling.) Although Feder has no axes to grind her portrait of Welles illustrates how manipulative he could be with his children as much as with the adults around him — and how distracted, playing Daddy as if it is a role, and not one in which he had a great deal of interest. Feder is revealing as well about her half-sisters, particularly the Dread Beatrice, who has fucked up everything of her father’s she’s touched, up to and including his funeral. There must be enormous unacknowledged rage at work there.

Making Movies with Orson Welles Gary Graver with Andrew J. Rausch (2008) As much as anyone other than Welles’ companion and collaborator Oja Kodar it is Graver we owe for everything from F for Fake to the end of Welles’ life. By making himself, as a cinematographer, constantly available to Welles he enabled him to shoot off the cuff, and at considerable cost to Graver’s own career. (Although Welles gave him his writing Oscar for Citizen Kane during the filming of The Other Side of the Wind in lieu of payment.) There I is something touchingly foolish about that, and rather heroic. Graver’s is a lovely book about a period he clearly regarded as the most interesting of his working life.


45. When the Shooting Stops… The Cutting Begins: A Film Editor’s Story Ralph Rosenblum and Robert Karen (1980)

Rosenblum’s book is one of the key titles of my pivotal six year post-high school/pre-college period as an autodidact, when I absorbed like an especially thirsty sponge everything I could get my hands on about theatre and movies. In it the veteran editor recalls the ways in which several important pictures on which he worked evolved through his collaboration with their directors during the post-production process. And while we have only the author’s word to support this, it would seem that few movies of the period were more significantly altered in the editing than the adaptations of Herb Gardner’s play A Thousand Clowns and Rowland Barber’s delightful novel The Night They Raided Minsky’s. The most heartbreaking chapter in the book is Rosenblum’s recollection of how with cold-blooded logic Monroe Arnold’s performance of an excoriating monologue in Goodbye, Columbus (and which he was promised would win him an Academy Award) was ruthlessly and gradually trimmed away until his role existed as little more than a walk-on.


46. Who the Devil Made It Peter Bogdanovich (1997) As a young writer and occasional critic, Bogdanovich published several monographs and interview books on movie directors, finally collecting many of them in this entrancing volume. And no, the title does not require a question mark; it’s part of an observation made by Howard Hawks about film directors whose pictures interested him.

See also: Conversations with The Great Moviemakers of Hollywood’s Golden Age at the American Film Institute George Stevens, Jr. (2006) and Conversations at the American Film Institute with the Great Moviemakers: The Next Generation, From the 1950s to Hollywood Today George Stevens, Jr. (2012) Two superb omnibus reprintings of the old “Dialogue on Film” segments from the late, lamented magazine American Film, in-depth and often revealing colloquies with movie and television actors, writers, directors, editors, cinematographers, designers, composers, critics and producers. Stevens, son of the director, was a co-founder of the American Film Institute, and its director during the first decade which, among other things, saw the creation of the Institute’s Life Achievement Award, once venerated and now, with the likes of George Clooney winning it, a very un-amusing joke. (Actually, the AFI self-dubbing its award “the highest honor in film” is itself hilarious. Sez who?) In any case, these two volumes fully capture the voices of, among others, Harold Lloyd, Raoul Walsh, King Vidor, Fritz Lang, Frank Capra, Ernest Lehman, Arthur Penn, Leonard Rosenman, Neil Simon, Howard Hawks, Robert Towne, Anne V. Coates, James Wong Howe, Roger Corman, William Wyler, Sidney Poitier, John Sayles, William Clothier, Steven Spielberg, David Lean, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Cortez, George Lucas, George Cukor, Gregory Peck, Jack Lemmon, Billy Wilder and I.A.L. Diamond, John Huston, Peter Bogdanovich, Ray Bradbury, Fred Zinnemann, Gene Kelly, Richard Brooks, Hal Wallis, Jean Renoir, Robert Altman, Larry Gelbart, Alan Pakula and François Truffaut.


47. Young Orson: The Years of Luck and Genius on the Path to Citizen Kane Patrick McGilligan (2015)

I have over the years read so many books on Orson Welles — my shelves are fairly sagging with volumes by and about him — that I have begun to approach new titles with an inner groan. Will this one merely repeat the many lazily resold myths about Welles? Will it tell me anything I don’t already know? Thankfully, Young Orson wipes away nearly everything we think we know about Welles’ early years, his theatrical triumphs and follies, and most especially about the making of Kane. In 832 meticulously researched, exhaustively sourced and utterly compelling pages, Patrick McGilligan portrays George Orson Welles in all his glory, his contradictions, his achievements, his cruelties and his kindnesses.† McGilligan has written terrific books on Robert Altman, George Cukor, Fritz Lang, Jack Nicholson, Oscar Michaux and Alfred Hitchcock. Young Orson is his chef d’oeuvre. Many biographies are called definitive, and few ever are. This one almost certainly is.‡


*Among them, just taking in the years from 1970 to 1973: M*A*S*H, The Angel Levine, Bartleby, The Liberation of L.B. Jones, The Owl and the Pussycat, I Never Sang for My Father, The Landlord, The Boys in the Band, The Garden of the Finzi-Continis, Quackser Fortune Has a Cousin in the Bronx, Something for Everyone, The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes, The Traveling Executioner, Klute, Fiddler on the Roof, McCabe and Mrs. Miller, Cold Turkey, A New Leaf, Bananas, They Might Be Giants, The French Connection, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Sunday Bloody Sunday, The Go-Between, Desperate Characters, The Skin Game, Born to Win, Harold and Maude, The Last Picture Show, The Hot Rock, Travels with My Aunt, What’s Up Doc?, The War Between Men and Women, Frenzy, The Candidate, The Ruling Class, Sleuth, Avanti!, Cabaret, The Godfather, Sounder, Across 110th Street, The Iceman Cometh, The Last Detail, Mean Streets, Oklahoma Crude, Serpico, A Delicate Balance, The Legend of Hell House, The Exorcist, The Last of Sheila, High Plains Drifter, Scorpio, Paper Moon, “Save the Tiger,” Love and Pain and the Whole Damn Thing, Slither, American Graffiti, Sleeper, The Three Musketeers, The Day of the Jackal, The Seven-Ups, The Sting. Kael would argue with me about the quality of some of those titles, just as I argue with her negative opinions of some of my favorites. But the fact that interesting, intelligent and largely adult movies were being released in this country on practically a weekly basis, for years, is something of a miracle… and one that will not be repeated.

†The single aspect of Welles’ personality which remains underexplored is the one that is likely impossible to pin down, and may be forever elusive, although Joseph McBride has commented on it: His possible, even likely, bisexuality.

‡There are in existence now three foul volumes of Welles biography by a pompous British character actor apparently bent on tearing the man’s reputation to shreds, and which are now routinely deemed “definitive.” Avoid them.

Text copyright 2022 by Scott Ross

Quarterly Report: October – December 2019

Standard

By Scott Ross

Note: For fuller reviews of some of the movies below, click on the highlighted titles.

Hound of the Baskervilles - Richardson, Churchill

The Sign of Four / The Hound of the Baskervilles” (1983) A pair of Sherlock Holmes adaptations by Charles Edward Pogue for British television starring the irreplaceable Ian Richardson which, while not precisely faithful to Conan Doyle, are rich in atmosphere and, in Richardson, boast perhaps the finest Holmes before Jeremy Brett sealed the franchise.


Underworld U.S.A. - Dolores Dorn, Robertson

Underworld U.S.A. (1961) Mediocre Samuel Fuller is still worth watching, although we might have expected better of a former ace crime reporter than this half-baked yarn concerning revenge served at freezing temperature. But then, the picture dates from an uncertain period for Fuller, the years wherein he meandered between the sting of House of Bamboo (1955) and Forty Guns (1957) and the astonishment of Shock Corridor (1963) and The Naked Kiss (1964). Most of the Fuller pictures from that time are curios, quasi-successful but tamer affairs than those that came before. This one, suggested by some Saturday Evening Post pieces by Joseph F. Dinneen, has its moments but the plot isn’t feasible in the slightest, the romance seems shoe-horned in, and I don’t buy Cliff Robertson as a hardened criminal for a moment. (But then, I don’t buy Robertson as pretty much anything.) Much better are Beatrice Kay as his surrogate mother, David Kent as his adolescent self, Dolores Dorn as his would-be paramour, Larry Gates as the cop-turned-D.A. who’d like to nail the mobsters and set Robertson straight, and Richard Rust as a smiling, sweet-faced sadist who seems to literally seduce Robertson into the mob; their initial meetings feel like an extended courtship dance.

Despite some beautiful set-ups (the cinematographer was Hal Mohr) and a few effective scenes, Underworld USA ultimately has too many sequences like Rust’s running-down of a little girl on her bicycle: Fuller doesn’t show the killing, only the child’s mother calling to her from an upstairs window and the girl (Joni Beth Morris) looking back just before impact. Instead of enhancing the horror, these rather studied choices diminish it; they’re like the worst of Hitchcock — which is bad enough only a fool would emulate it. Like Verboten!, Run of the Arrow, The Crimson Kimono, Hell and High Water and Merrill’s Marauders, Underworld USA is less a good movie than a collection of some good scenes in search of a better place to go.


Scorpio - Scofield

Scorpio (1973) An avis of increasing rarity, the intelligent thriller, anchored by the performances of Burt Lancaster, Alain Delon and the magnificent Paul Scofield.


The Maltese Falcon - The stuff that dreams are made of

The Maltese Falcon (1941) John Huston’s extraordinary debut as a writer/director, a masterpiece of detective fiction featuring Humphrey Bogart’s breakthrough performance as Sam Spade.


The Man Who Would Be King - Caine, Plummer, Connery

The Man Who Would Be King (1975) Another of John Huston’s group quests toward ultimate failure, a tangy adaptation of Kipling with a superb trio of leading players in Michael Caine, Sean Connery and Christopher Plummer.


A Study in Terror - John Neville and Donald Huston

A Study in Terror (1965) A clever, if implausible, mating of Sherlock Holmes with the Jack the Ripper mythos, which isn’t a patch on the later Murder by Decree (1978) but which boasts an excellent Holmes in the person of the classical actor John Neville, later immortalized as Baron Munchausen by Terry Gilliam. Donald Houston is a good Watson, the splendid Anthony Quayle an excellent Doctor Murray, Frank Finlay in a part he reprised in Murder by Decree is an intelligent(!) Lestrade, and it’s fascinating to see a very young Judi Dench in a pivotal role. The boxer Terry Downes has a sexy, and surprisingly well acted, cameo role, and John Scott composed an effective score which, even when it brings in bongo drums(!!) does so in a way that feels wholly appropriate.

The cinematography by Desmond Dickinson is a bit on the bland side, period television color where chiaroscuro was called for, and James Hill’s direction, while brisk and effective, lacks the sick-making horror the subject demands. Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of the movie is Georgia Brown, the original Nancy of the musical Oliver!, whose warm whiskey-contralto has long been a favored sound in my home. She shows up twice, as a pub singer in Whitechapel (presumably on the basis of her performance of the Lionel Bart song “Oom-Pah-Pah” in Oliver!) and if you only listen, she’s perfect. Her face, alas, explains why others got to play her stage roles in movies. She grew into her looks eventually and became a handsome older woman, but in 1966 hers was not the type of physiognomy guaranteed to queue up the paying customers.


The Life of Emile Zola - Paul Muni and Vladimir Sokoloff

The Life of Émile Zola (1937) I first encountered this all-too-typical Warner Bros. biopic on television in my early adolescence, and all I really remembered was the material dealing with Captain Dreyfus. Seeing it again, now, I understand why: It’s one of the few inherently dramatic portions of the narrative. While the picture’s Dreyfuss (Joseph Schildkraut) was whitewashed — it was his arrogance of personality as much as the fact of his Jewishness that precipitated his false arrest and cynical imprisonment — and the anti-Semitism downplayed, at least the subsequent trial of Zola for J’Accuse has spark, courtesy in part of Donald Crisp as the outraged attorney Labori. Those who have complained that the scapegoating of Dreyfus in the picture is depicted as entirely devoid of religious bigotry have apparently never noticed (and I admit it is fast) the juxtaposition of the insert-shot of the Captain’s file reading, “Religion: Jewish” with Harry Davenport’s line damning him as, of two suspects, the man to charge with treason. The implication is entirely obvious. But what can be expected of people who for decades have sung hosannas to Paul Muni’s unconscionably hammy performance as Zola? His constant shameless mugging for the camera indicates a self-regard so thorough an audience has little need to bother; he clearly thinks he’s adorable enough, why should we make it redundant?

L’affaire Dreyfus eats up so much screen time — and at that omits the role of Alfred’s older brother, promoting the idea that it was his wife who most successfully pressed the case for his innocence — that it would have made more sense to focus on it entirely rather than to attempt squeezing in the rest of Zola’s biography, and with such brevity; his early decades here are a whirl-wind of narrative cliché and the people (his wife, Alexandrine, played by Gloria Holden; Morris Carnovsky’s Anatole France; Grant Mitchell’s Clemenceau; and Vladimir Sokoloff’s Cézanne) are little more than names and attitudes. That it took no fewer than three scenarists (Heinz Herald, Geza Herczeg and Norman Reilly Raine) to bake the thin crust upon which the insufficient filling of this movie rests says something… although just what, I couldn’t say. Gale Sondergaard struggles valiantly with the underwritten role of Lucie Dreyfus and at least retains her dignity, but Schildkraut (who, rather unbelievably, won an Oscar for this) is reduced to little more than periodically screaming, “I’m innocent! I’m innocent!” He does get one nice scene, however, when, freed at last after a decade on Devil’s Island he repeatedly hits the open doorway inviting him back to the outside world, turns, and retreats to his hated cell; in that moment you know everything you need to about the learned behavior of prisoners. The picture’s director, William Dieterle, does what he can with the material, and it is at least a very brisk movie, with very few longueurs despite its 116-minute running-time. Tony Gaudio’s black-and-white cinematography is rich, and beautifully lit; on the big screen in 1937 it must have seemed luminous.


Unforgiven - Clint Eastwood, Jaimz Woolvett

Unforgiven (1992) Clint Eastwood’s award-winning Western, a beautiful, even poetic, rumination on the cost of killing.


MBDLAPI EC004

The Last Picture Show (1971) The damn near perfect adaptation of Larry McMurtry’s suberb coming-of-age novel by McMurtry and the director Peter Bogdanovich.


Big Jake - Boone

Big Jake (1971) Enjoyable late-period John Wayne, with an intelligent script and a savory performance by Richard Boone as the story’s mercenary central miscreant.


somethingwicked_coverimage

Something Wicked This Way Comes (1983) A badly muddled misfire purportedly adapted from Ray Bradbury’s magical literary fantasy.


California Split - Altman

California Split (1974) Robert Altman’s first feature utilizing the 8-track recording system that made Nashville possible, a genial character study of two degenerate gamblers played charmingly by George Segal and Elliott Gould.


Scarecrow-of-romney-marsh-feat-10

The Scarecrow of Romney Marsh  (1963) An atmospheric and intelligent rendition, from Walt Disney, of Russell Thorndyke’s 18th century rogue Dr. Syn starring a splendid Patrick McGoohan.


targets-7

Targets (1967/1968) Peter Bogdanovich’s extraordinary, disturbing first feature as a writer-director anatomizing both the sick state of Hollywood and the weird anomie of a serial killer is all too relevant to 21st century America.


20,000 Leagues Under the Sea - Mason, Lorre, Douglas and Henried resized

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954) Walt Disney’s first movie to be filmed in CinemaScope — it was also in 4-track stereo —  20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was at the time one of the most expensive Hollywood productions ever attempted (between $5 and $9 million, imagine) and had it flopped would have been disastrous to the studio. The picture turned out so well it was one of the two top-grossers of its year, earning $28 million in 1954. And if it is less than absolutely ideal, especially in its confusingly British-Christian characterization of Jules Verne’s Sikh Captain Nemo, the movie is technically almost without a flaw, beautifully designed and shot, lengthy but involving, with literally marvelous art and set decoration (Peter Ellenshaw contributed some typically beautiful matte paintings)* and a splendid quartet of above-the-title actors. It’s the perfect Boy’s Adventure movie: Rich color photography by Franz Planer (his underwater and day-for-night effects are especially pleasing), an exciting score by Paul J. Smith, assured direction by Richard Fleischer, and an intelligent, often witty, adapted screenplay by Earl Felton that combine to form an exceptionally enjoyable night’s entertainment and in which human conflict, interior as well as exterior, are not elided.

Aside from the presence of the seal Sophie (that she needed water we never see her enter or exit from is evident from her shiny and obviously moistened skin) and the now-questionable “humor” of black cannibals getting zapped by Nemo’s protective electricity (why was it considered funny then?) the humor is refreshingly adult and mostly supplied by Kirk Douglas as the harpoonist Ned Land and Peter Lorre as Paul Henried’s assistant. Douglas also gets to sing a nifty ditty by Al Hoffman and Norman Gimbel called “A Whale of a Tale” which becomes one of the movie’s leitmotifs and makes a nice, belated compensation for his having left, in 1944, the original cast of On the Town, where he had the lead. James Mason is so good as Nemo you forgive Disney for messing with the original. That superb light baritone of Mason’s, combined with his elliptical speech patterns and highly idiosyncratic line readings, make him commanding, tragic and ironic at once.

The special effects, all of course in those days done by hand, are deeply impressive even now, with only one or two indifferent rear-screen bits muffing the whole. Walt produced this one himself, and his acumen shows: When the fight with the giant squid, originally shot against a red sunset on a static sea, both proved lifeless and revealed too many of the technicians’ wires, Disney suggested they re-shoot it at night, and during a storm at sea. It made all the difference; overnight, as it were, a poor sequence became a classic.

* The picture won Oscars for Best Art Direction – Color (John Meehan, Emile Kuri) and Best Special Effects (John Hench, Joshua Meador), although according to Wikipedia, “the movie’s primary art designer, Harper Goff, who designed the Nautilus, was not a member of the Art Directors Union in 1954 and therefore, under a bylaw within the Academy of Motion Pictures… was unable to receive his Academy Award for Art Direction.”


The Adventures of S Holmes - Rathbone and Zucco

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1939) 20th Century Fox’s immediate follow-up to its The Hound of the Baskervilles, released earlier in 1939, proves what a fluke the studio’s first Holmes picture was. Allegedly based on the William Gillette play, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes bears no resemblance to it, nor to the 1916 movie in which Gillette himself starred. Although the picture has a fine, foggy atmosphere — Leon Shamroy was the cinematographer — the narrative is asinine, and even insulting; two of Holmes’ typical lines are, “Whatever Watson has found out, you’ll know inevitably. I have unbounded confidence in his lack of discretion” and (to Nigel Bruce as the Doctor) “I’m afraid you’re an incorrigible bungler.” It concerns the machinations of a bearded(!) Professor Moriarty (George Zucco) to humiliate Holmes, by whom he is eventually thrown off the Tower of London(!!) and Zucco has a high old time of it, all but baring his fangs and gnashing his teeth. In the supporting cast, Terry Kilburn is a good Billy, Mary Forbes charming as a matron, Anthony Kemble-Cooper has a nice turn as a gentle upper-class twit avant la lettre, and Basil Rathbone has an enjoyable bit in disguise as a music hall entertainer. But Ida Lupino is wasted as the damsel in distress and the movie is both lumpy and formless. The director of this flavorless mélange was someone named Alfred L. Werker; this was probably his only well-remembered movie. Nowhere in the credits of the picture will you see the name of Arthur Conan Doyle… for which omission I presume his heirs were duly grateful.


HealtH lobby card resized

HealtH (1979/1982) An often very amusing political satire directed by Robert Altman involving the race for president of a health convention. It’s an allegory about Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson, with Lauren Bacall as a narcoleptic 83-year old virgin (Ike) and Glenda Jackson as a prating intellectual (Stevenson) who talks, dryly and utterly without emotion, through everything and everyone. Paul Dooley is an obnoxious hypocrite of a third-party candidate who is a mass of prejudices and whose shtick is holding his breath under water, Carol Burnett is very funny as a representative of the President — since the picture was filmed in 1979, presumably Jimmy Carter — and James Garner is only slightly less so as her estranged husband, working for Bacall. Donald Moffat shows up in a sinister performance as Bacall’s frightening brother; Henry Gibson is a political operative whose first sequence in drag as an old woman is so convincing you almost wonder who that interesting actress is; Diane Stilwell is Jackson’s secretary who can’t type and who has supplied Jackson with a portable tape recorder, with which she is pretty obviously in love; MacIntyre Dixon is marvelous as the convention manager; Alfre Woodard is the hotel’s determinedly sunny convention representative vexed by this unmanageable collection of loons; Ann Ryerson is Bacall’s physician who lacks the ability to enjoy sex; the singing group The Steinettes appear throughout the movie, singing brightly and inanely at every conceivable opportunity; and Dick Cavett plays himself, vainly attempting to interview Bacall and Jackson and perennially frustrated by Bacall’s unexpected sleeping fits (if that isn’t an oxymoron.) Altman and Dooley wrote the sharp screenplay with Frank Barhydt, and it’s a relaxed, cheery, sometimes hilarious ensemble comedy. Why any of the people involved thought that a satire on Eisenhower and Stevenson was relevant to anything, or anyone, in 1979 remains a mystery, but everyone in the picture is terrific with the notable exception of Bacall. We watch her thinking we know she was famous for something once, but from her performance we can’t recall just what; after 1966 she always seemed to be playing the paralyzed rich-bitch from Harper — she’d become all surface, the grande dame in her element. What the hell happened to that woman? She was better at 19, when she knew almost nothing about acting.


Matewan - Chris Cooper

Matewan (1988) John Sayles’ achingly beautiful evocation of a violent, largely forgotten incident of the 1920s involving West Virginia miners arrayed against vicious coal industry gun-thugs, one of the key movies of its decade.


Casualties of War - Fox, Thuy Thu Le and Penn

Casualties of War (1989) A deeply unsettling examination of an American atrocity in Vietnam directed by Brian De Palma which is best when it sticks to the facts but is never less than compelling even when it’s embracing war movie clichés that would have embarrassed John Wayne.


Little Drummer Girl - Kinski, Keaton

The Little Drummer Girl (1984) This surprisingly good attempt by the screenwriter Loring Mandel and the stylish journeyman director George Roy Hill at condensing one of John Le Carré’s large, complex thrillers is compromised but, curiously, not undone, by its central miscasting. With her signature red hair and championing of Palestinian rights, the actress Charlie in the novel was obviously meant to remind readers of Vanessa Redgrave. Unlike Redgrave (or Diane Keaton, the Charlie of the movie) it was central to the Le Carré novel that Charlie was young, in her early 20s, passionate but unformed, and not nearly as worldly, or as informed, as she thinks she is. Likewise, casting Yorgo Voyagis, Keaton’s junior by a year, as the Israeli agent who seduces Charlie into falling in love with him while seeming to put her off (and who becomes her guide and instructor in the elaborate “theatre of the real” the actress is enticed into against a Palestinian bomb-maker) rather than a distinguished, reticent, aging actor of the time — Paul Scofield might have been ideal, or even Dirk Bogarde or Alan Bates — eliminates Charlie’s obvious father-fixation. These rather essential cavils aside, Keaton is excellent as Charlie, locating both her anger and her pain, although I don’t believe for a minute an American would be headlining a small British theatre troupe. Unlike Keaton, Klaus Kinski is an almost perfect casting choice for Kurtz, whose complicated scheme keeps Charlie, and the audience, in the dark until the climax; Kinski absolutely gets the Israeli agent’s bonhomie, his middle-aged charm and his deadly seriousness. Like the book, the movie is highly ambivalent about Zionism even as it largely accepts the more than dubious notion that violence is the proper response to terror. The strong supporting cast includes Sami Frey, Michael Cristofer, Eli Danker, Philipp Moog, Anna Massey, Thorley Walters and David Suchet. My only complaint about the production design is the truly terrible coat Keaton is forced to wear through much of the picture. She can’t carry it off, but I can’t imagine the woman who could. Such is Le Carré’s brilliance that Charlie’s last line, slightly altered from the novel, has stayed with me since I saw this one 35 years ago.


Thieves Like Us resized

Thieves Like Us (1974) As Pauline Kael once suggested of him, Robert Altman made two bad movies for every good one, and in-between another that was essentially lousy but with enough good, or even great, moments in it to sustain your interest. Examples of this last include The Long Goodbye, Buffalo Bill and the Indians, Short Cuts, Gosford Park… and Thieves Like Us; it has some splendid things in it, and is beautifully cast, and shot. But it’s both elliptical and repetitive in weird and off-putting ways, and you sit there wondering what you’ve missed when you haven’t missed a thing. In the sequence in which the movie’s young central characters Bowie (Keith Carradine) and Keechie (Shelley Duvall) make love for the first time while listening to a radio broadcast of Romeo and Juliet, for example, and we hear the same between-act announcement from the narrator at three separate intervals, we don’t know what it means. Is the sequence a fantasy of Keechie’s or Bowie’s? Is one scene real and the other two fantastic? But because they don’t seem to be anything other than what they appear to be — sequential moments broken up in the cutting — nothing about these scenes really supports that hypothesis. So why did Altman choose to disorient us at this important juncture? Why, for that matter, is there a discussion between Carradine, Bert Remsen and Ann Latham in which it seems Bowie and Keechie have become notorious Bonnie and Clyde figures, their doings reported in the newspapers, when we have seen no such thing? It feels as though there’s a reel missing, or at least a few scenes. Speaking of which, why is Remsen’s violent death only spoken about, in a radio news story, and not seen? The omission feels like narrative cheapness. Kael said of Thieves Like Us that it was, “the closest to flawless of Altman’s films — a masterpiece.” What movie did she see?

The picture was shot on location in Mississippi, which Altman was told was “the asshole of America” but which he and his French cinematographer Jean Boffety found beautiful, and their fondness for the place and the people shows; the look of the movie is almost like a living Impressionist painting. The excellent cast includes John Shuck, Louise Fletcher, Al Scott, Tom Skerritt and Joan Tewkesbury, who also collaborated with Altman on the script and would write Nashville for him. (She’s the woman at the train station Duvall talks to at the end). Calder Willingham also worked on the screenplay, based on the 1937 Edward Anderson novel which originally provided the basis for the 1950 They Live by Night, directed by Nicholas Ray.


Three Days of the Condor gettyimages-591378586-612x612

Three Days of the Condor (1975) Although Three Days of the Condor rather needlessly complicates the novelist James Grady’s original plot, there are some real compensations, not least of which is intelligence.


thief_cobbler-1430160095

The Thief and the Cobbler (1993/2013) Richard Williams’ astonishing animated Arabian Nights feature, still incomplete but reconstructed by Garrett Gilchrist in his Recobbled Cut Mark 4.


Great Train Robbery-1200-1200-675-675-crop-000000 resized

The Great Train Robbery (1978) Michael Crichton’s The Great Train Robbery (known in Britain as The First Great Train Robbery, to distinguish its action in the minds of potential ticket-buyers from the much more contemporaneous, and well-remembered, “Great Train Robbery” of 1963) is one of those richly appointed, beautifully shot and wonderfully cast entertainments that make for a wry, exciting evening’s amusement as long as you know that, while depicting on an actual incident, the picture is largely fictional and should be taken as such. Based on the 1855 theft of gold from a moving train, and on the writer/director’s own novel, the picture is a cheery, funny escapade with some sharp digs at the British upper class, and glorious production design that puts you absolutely in Victorian era London (although it was shot largely in Ireland.) Sean Connery is the ersatz nobleman of dubious means, suave but dangerous, who plans and executes the theft; Lesley-Anne Down is his actress lover who proves useful in a number of necessary diversions; Donald Sutherland, often hilarious, is the safe-cracker; and Wayne Sleep is the ill-fated criminal acrobat who runs afoul of Connery.

Crichton’s direction is elegant and wonderfully paced; he seems always to know exactly where to place the camera. Jerry Goldsmith composed one of his most distinctive scores for the picture, anchored to a charming waltz he then transforms into variants: Slowed down it evokes the atmosphere of London’s mean streets, simplified it becomes a romantic lyre accompaniment for Connery and Down’s bedroom scenes and sped up it’s rousing background music for the robbery. One of the movie’s great pleasures is the lush widescreen color cinematography by Geoffrey Unsworth, to whom Crichton dedicated it. A painter with light, Unsworth shot some of the most sumptuous looking movies of the 1960s and ‘70s: Becket (1964), the Olivier Othello (1965), 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), Olivier’s Three Sisters (1970), Cabaret (1972), Murder on the Orient Express (1974), Royal Flash (1975), The Return of the Pink Panther (1975), A Bridge Too Far (1977), Superman (1978) and Tess (1979). The fine supporting cast includes Alan Webb, Pamela Salem, Gabrielle Lloyd and Malcolm Terris as a smug, hypocritical bank official. The final joke has no basis in historical reality, but takes the movie out on a high, and very funny, note.


Heat - Pacino

Heat (1995) Michael Mann’s complex, character-driven heist movie has the texture of a sun-lit nightmare: L.A. as a warm place to die a chilly death.

Heat - De Niro


The Thrill of it All - Day, Reiner, Garner

The Thrill of it All (1963) A shrill, occasionally funny farce, meant to satirize television advertising but so dishonest about that it merely gums the subject rather aggressively. Doris Day is an obstetrician’s wife who gets corralled into performing impromptu cleanser commercials for a cheesy live drama omnibus show (in 1963?) and finds her marriage on rocky (or, if you prefer, soapy) ground. It’s too ephemeral to take seriously for a moment — The Glass Bottom Boat had more gravitas — but it’s a pretty thin gruel to have come from the combined talents of Carl Reiner (screenplay) and Larry Gelbart (story, with Reiner). Some of the scenes have that terrible look so representative of the era’s color television episodes, but the cinematographer, Russell Metty, occasionally gets in some pleasant lighting. It would have been almost impossible at that time to imagine the director, Norman Jewison, ever making movies as rich as In the Heat of the Night and Fiddler on the Roof, but at least his pacing is brisk.

James Garner brings his usual charm and comic outrage to the husband, and the supporting cast includes Reiner (in several bits), Arlene Francis, Edward Andrews, Reginald Owen (playing Andrews’ father, the sort of role Andrews himself would corner in the coming years), Zasu Pitts as a rape-obsessed housekeeper, Elliott Reid as an advertising man, Alice Pearce, Herbie Faye, Hayden Rorke, Burt Mustin, Robert Strauss, Lennie Weinrib, Lillian Culver, King Donovan, Bernie Kopell and, in a voice-over, Paul Frees. I could also swear I heard Madge Blake’s voice, but can find no proof of her participation. Brian Nash and Kym Karath play Day and Garner’s small children; Karath is best remembered as Gretl, the tiniest of the Trapp Family Singers of The Sound of Music two years later. The picture is inoffensive, even with its dated attitudes toward women in the workplace; the one absolutely unforgivable element is the appalling, mickeymouse musical score by (Frank) De Vol.


Alias Nick Beale

Alias Nick Beal (1949) A dark political fantasy that, on balance, seemed designed to satisfy everyone who ever thought a politician had sold his soul, which is pretty much all of us. (Today people like Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton don’t even bother to hide their corruption; they display it openly, and their worshipers call us names if we say anything about it.) Beautifully directed by John Farrow and with a brisk, intelligent screenplay by Jonathan Latimer from a story by Mindret Lord, the movie is so sharply observed it puts to shame all the cringe-making, faux-populist projects of Frank Capra, a man with a deep distrust of “the people” even as he desperately kept trying to woo them. Thomas Mitchell plays the crusading District Attorney who in his frustration at being unable to nail a mobster makes a casual wish he never expected to have granted, and Ray Milland is “Nick Beal,” the Satanic figure with the means to deliver. Mitchell gives his usual fine performance, and Audrey Totter is excellent as a good/bad girl, but Milland really delivers. There was always something a little unpleasant about him as an actor that lingered below his surface charm. Billy Wilder tapped it in The Lost Weekend, and Farrow really mines it here. Lionel Lindon’s cinematography, even in a bad print, is rich and atmospheric, and about the only miscalculation in this 82-minute gem is the uncharacteristic, almost shockingly emphatic, score by the otherwise subtle Franz Waxman. With Fred Clark as a machine boss, Geraldine Wall as Mitchell’s saintly wife, a very young Darryl Hickman as a reform-school candidate and George Macready as, of all things, a minister. (Thanks for this one, Eliot M. Camarena!)


Citizen Kane - Moorehead

Citizen Kane (1941) I ended one year, and began another, with the same film. It isn’t among my very favorite pictures, nor even my favorite among those of its co-author, director and star. But Orson Welles‘ debut is still among the most enjoyable movies ever made, and it yields new pleasures and unexpected contours with every viewing. This time I noticed, for the first time, the way Welles keeps the lighted window at Xanadu in the same spot throughout the prologue, even when it’s a reflection in water. That may not be strictly logical, but it certainly is impressive.

Text copyright 2019 by Scott Ross

Oranges on an escalator: “California Split” (1974)

Standard

By Scott Ross

California Split is a potsherd from a culture not all that far removed, chronologically, from our own but which in appearance, artistic accomplishment on a popular scale, the possibility of progress and of a general maturity is as ostensibly ancient, and as forgotten, as Carthage.

Written by the actor Joseph Walsh, himself a gambler (and who has an unsettling role in the picture as a mercurial bookie) and initially developed by, of all people, Steven Spielberg, California Split focuses on two speculators, the casual novice Bill (George Segal) and the degenerate Charlie (Elliott Gould) who meet during an acrimonious game of poker, form an odd friendship based almost entirely on their shared addiction, and, on their uppers, travel to a high-stakes poker meet in Reno where everything they have rides on Bill’s abilities. Although not originally intended as a Robert Altman movie, that admittedly terse précis certainly suggests his approach — seemingly meandering, shaggy-dog stories that illuminate their subjects, and their characters, in ways many more “daring” or “challenging” narrative techniques and stories fail to do, and what the overwhelming bulk of movies never even attempt.

With Altman at his considerable best, only the contours remained the same, by which I mean those readily identifiable personal traits that marked his filmmaking: The actors’ improvisations, the long takes, the large ensemble casts, the muted palettes, the zooms, the overlapping dialogue. But that is window-dressing, almost by the way. How Altman used film to explore human beings and their relationships to each other, which because it changed from film to film was never predictable, is what we should mean when we think of his work, or refer to anything as “Altmanesque.” In his and Brian McKay’s adaptation of the Edmond McNaughton novel McCabe, for example, what was removed was everything trite and predictable — the gambler dying on the street in Mrs. Miller’s arms, for example. Altman’s McCabe keeps muttering, “I got poetry deep inside me” when he hasn’t (and anyway, what man who is genuinely poetic needs to keep reassuring himself of it?) Yet at the end, sitting in the gathering snow with no witnesses to his murder, he’s become a beautiful metaphor: In death he is poetic… and Mrs. Miller is nowhere around; she’s deep in an opium dream, with Altman ending the movie on a close-up of the oblivion contained within her preternaturally glazed eyes. And that is poetry too.

California Split - Gould, Segal

Charlie (Elliott Gould) and Bill (George Segal) about to wager on the names of the Seven Dwarfs.

Although Altman had been experimenting with overlapping dialogue at least as early as MASH in 1970 and certainly relied on it in McCabe, especially in the long first sequence in the saloon, it was for California Split that he developed the multi-track recording system without which his follow-up, Nashville, would not have been possible; it enabled him to capture several conversations at once without our losing track of what’s important. It isn’t over-used in California Split, and never becomes oppressive, but during the opening poker sequence in a large, organized gambling establishment, it’s as essential as the many extras imported from the Synanon organization (or cult, if you prefer.) The faces, and the personalities, that come through in these scenes are both peripheral and essential; they’re the milieu into which we’re about to plunge, and they have a tang, an earthy charge, that ground the action and give it savor. I can’t imagine them in any other movie directed by any other filmmaker.

Despite the cavalier desperation of Charlie and Bill, and the glancing sadness of the women in their lives, a pair of lower-middle class prostitutes played by Ann Prentiss and Gwen Welles, this is a surprisingly buoyant movie, and it lacks the mean-spiritedness that dogs so much of ’70s cinema, especially in the realm of the homophobic. I’m thinking specifically of the sequence in which Prentiss and Welles’ date with the transvestite “Helen Brown” (Bert Remsen) is upset by Bill and Charlie’s need to celebrate their winnings. Although the two, pretending to be vice cops, send the poor man scurrying, the fact that he’s in drag is not made an issue, nor do they abuse him for it; even if their playing with him could be seen as victimization, it’s not the kind of sequence that makes you squirm. You laugh along with it, and Remsen, who plays the role of “Helen” with astonishing delicacy, is somehow able to exit with most of his dignity intact. Indeed, neither Bill nor Charlie ever lets on to “Helen” that they know he’s anything but a well-dressed and sophisticated middle-aged woman, enabling him to maintain his own necessary fiction. Had the movie been made by a professional liberal of the period like Sidney Lumet, I shudder to imagine what Bill and Charlie would have done to the poor man. Calling him a queer would have been the least of it — they’d have probably beaten him up as well. Contrast this with the later bar scene in which a blowsy drunk (Sierra Bandit) spews alcoholic invective in a monologue of self-pity remarkable in its piggishness, hurling the word “faggot” at her absent boyfriend and anyone else who crosses her. She’s clearly meant to be an offensive boor and is treated as such, even by the disgusted bartender (Jack Riley) who’s obviously beyond caring whether she hears his sarcastic comments or not. Charlie and Bill may be cheerfully amoral but they don’t engage in deliberate ugliness. This puts them on a plane above Hawkeye Pierce and Trapper John in Altman and Ring Lardner Jr.’s MASH, who, as Richard Corliss observed, in their modish “irreverence” occasionally behave like frat-boy bullies to anyone who isn’t on their special wavelength.

California_Split_8

Bert Remsen as “Helen Brown,” flanked by Gwen Welles and Ann Prentiss.

In a picture like this the side-long glance is as piquant as the piercing gaze, and the incidental figures have more impact than the leads in other, less alive and incisive movies. There’s a wonderful sequence in which Charlie takes the bus to the racetrack, and can’t get the seat his superstitions demand he take because each of the other riders has his or her own gambler’s fetish, leading to an elaborate switching of seats that is wonderfully farcical but which holds its own, demented logic. And even as Charlie exploits the trusting nature of the woman (Barbara London) he sits beside on the bus when he and Bill win on the long-shot horse Charlie has told her not to bet on she becomes furious at Bill, hilariously hurling oranges at him in her rage as he rides up an escalator. As written by Walsh and directed by Altman it’s a set of scenes at once quirky, idiosyncratic, wildly funny, thoroughly on point and absolutely in character. Bill will likely never see that woman again, but he’ll always remember her…. and so will we. How do you forget someone who throws oranges at you?

Likewise, in an Altman movie even the extras and small-part roles resonate, like the hefty older woman in the opening poker scene, or the receptionist played by Barbara Colby in the magazine office at which Bill works. (A young Jeff Goldblum also shows up, as the editor, forever seeking the errant Bill, who ignores him.) The best and most memorable of these cameos is the Reno barmaid portrayed by Barbara Ruick. She hasn’t many lines, but with her engaging middle-aged mien, white cowboy hat, half-glasses, long hair, large grin, blasé good humor and un-self-conscious dance moves to a private melody only she can hear Ruick is, while nearly always in the background, intensely memorable; you want more of her.*

California-Split-1974-3

In Reno: Barbara Ruick at center.

Pauline Kael, who admired the picture, felt the breakfast meeting between Bill and his bookie had the feel of an expository play scene, its neatness at odds with the looser structure of rest of the picture, but I demur. It helps us understand how close to the financial edge Bill has gotten himself in a relatively short period of serious gambling, and gives what has up to then been merely a disembodied voice on the other end of Bill’s telephone a bodily presence, a life and a psychology. Walsh had become by 1974 the furthest thing from the odd minor child star† he’d been in the ’50s; as the bookie called Sparkie his jumpiness and buried rage give him dimension, and weight. You judge that violence is not his first resort — he’s been carrying Bill for months — but that he’s getting closer to it, and that in turn makes explicable Charlie’s convincing Bill to take that all-or-nothing plunge in Reno. If the sequence is squarer than most of the others in the picture, neither does it feel false or unnecessary.

CALIFORNIA SPLIT - Segal and Walsh

Bill and Sparkie (Joseph Walsh).

Elliott Gould’s gift for cheerful, amoral expansiveness suits Charlie perfectly. He accepts everything that comes his way, even being beaten up, robbed and having his nose broken by an abusive thug of a fellow gambler; before exacting vengeance, he expresses admiration for the punch he’s just received. Charlie lives for the chance, and in common with many degenerate gamblers it doesn’t seem to matter to him whether it’s big or small. (Early in their relationship he and Bill bet each other over the names of the Seven Dwarfs.) A clue to his character is that his girlfriend is a whore, a fact that never seems to bother him, except when it gets in the way of a celebration. That he doesn’t exhibit any of the standard masculine jealousy has less to do, I think, with Barbara (Prentiss) letting him crash at the apartment she shares with Susan (Welles) — unlike with Bill, we never see any other place Charlie calls home — than that getting upset about such an immutable fact of life would probably strike him as a waste of time that could be better spent on fun. He’s so loose and secure in his sexuality he isn’t self-conscious about smearing hot shaving cream on Bill’s abdomen after they’ve been beaten up, and doesn’t respond defensively when Barbara has a light suggestive response to walking in on them, just as he later and out of sheer ebullience gives Segal a public kiss on the lips during Bill’s winning-streak. In Gould’s equable performance, although Charlie can be annoying he is just about the happiest, most relaxed and likable wastrel you’ll ever see.

Prentiss is amiable too, and endearingly protective of Welles, but Susan’s character is difficult to pin down. She doesn’t seem quite real, which is no reflection on Welles herself but on the conception of the role; although Susan is appropriately casual about her carnality — when she offers herself to Bill, it’s as if she’s giving him a freebie because she’s un-engaged, and bored, and he’s present — she falls in love with random johns (Bill included) and repeatedly lapses into crying jags over them. We can’t get a handle on her, and she finally becomes slightly irritating. Susan is the one area of the picture where I think Walsh, and Altman, blew it.

california_split_01657

Bill is a far more successful creation, and I suspect Segal is largely the reason. Gould and Altman were gamblers, and Segal admits he was an innocent, which he used to help give Bill a naiveté that lets the audience in. He isn’t our surrogate, exactly, but he’s often as much at sea in Charlie’s milieu as we would be, and that confusion allows us access; when Charlie is explaining a system to Bill, he’s also telling us, but without seeming to, which would be fatal to the movie’s tone. It’s easy at this remove, in the years after he became a weekly comedic fixture on the television series Just Shoot Me, for an audience to forget what a fine dramatic actor Segal was, and is. (Not that an Academy nomination is or has ever been the final arbiter of quality but he got one, in 1966, for Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?) As opposed to Gould, whose humor is brash, Segal is subtler, and more charming. The actors complement each other, and when at the end Bill has what, to employ an over-used word, we can only call an epiphany, Bill’s (or Segal’s?) reserve gives the moment its quiet power.

California Split - Gould, Segal poker

Bill and Charlie, on a roll.

There’s a certain dread that goes with movies like this: The fear that you’re going to watch the main characters spiral so far downward there’s no going back, especially when, as it does here, everything rides on the outcome; it’s what happens in another under-seen George Segal picture from the ’70s, Ivan Passer’s 1971 study of a middle-class junkie, Born to Win. How Altman and his stars surmount that hurdle is exemplary, even if their muted ending upset the screenwriter. (Henry Gibson, in Mitchell Zuckoff’s oral biography of Altman, remarks that Walsh has been repeating that story “for the last 700 years.”)  When Joseph Walsh’s previous collaborator saw the picture made of the script on which he had initially worked, he lamented that Altman had squandered the climactic final third. He, Spielberg, would, he said, have shaped the material in a way that would have stroked the audience’s response to a glorious orgasm. We can all too easily, and with a shudder, imagine the Spielberg version of California Split, and be doubly grateful he never got to make it.

The DVD in my collection is the 2004 Columbia Tristar release, and it’s in full widescreen. From what I hear, the aficionado should beware the later Mill Creek release, which while slightly (3 minutes) longer is not in the 2:35:1 aspect ratio; it’s allegedly in 1:85:1, which is a considerable difference in framing, and Paul Lohmann’s images are too good to be squeezed, or “panned-and-scanned.”

I’ve seen California Split dismissed as “minor Altman,” but no movie that engages you on the levels this one does, or that so beautifully limns the contours of human personality and experience, is “minor” anything.

California Suite - Gould and Segal at racetrack


* Horribly, the actress, the memorable Carrie Pipperidge of the 1956 Carousel, died of a cerebral hemorrhage during filming, which may account for the brevity of her appearance. Married to the composer John Williams, who scored Altman’s The Long Goodbye, Ruick left him a widower with three children. She is the Barbara to whom Altman subsequently dedicated California Split.

† Walsh, who had a good role in Walter Hill’s minimalist 1978 crime thriller The Driver, is probably best-remembered as Danny Kaye’s Platonic (and hilariously Brooklyn-accented) young companion in Hans Christian Andersen (1953) — which, given the complex sexuality of both the Dutch writer and Moss Hart, the author of that movie’s screenplay — as well, possibly, of Kaye himself — feels like more than a bit of a dodge.

Text copyright 2019 by Scott Ross

Armchair Theatre 2018

Standard

By Scott Ross

Continuing my reluctant withdrawal from moviegoing, due to perpetual disappointment both with new work and with the new theatre audience — neither of which seems to be improving; indeed, the latter now infects every performance venue in the land — I saw only two pictures in a theatre last year… and they were from the 1970s and ‘80s. Additionally, the summer and autumn of 2018 were for private reasons exceptionally difficult for me, and entertainment was something I was able to devote very little time or attention to. Here’s to a much more movie-intensive 2019, whatever the venue.

And herewith, the movies (and other video items) I did manage to see during the year recently passed.

BOLD + Underscore                       Denotes very good… or at least, better than average.
*BOLD + Underscore w/Asterik     A personal favorite


1.
Older titles re-viewed on a big theatre screen

the front page - 1974_main title

The Front Page (1974) Thanks to the Carolina Theatre in Durham I was able to add one more Billy Wilder picture to my list of his work seen on a big theatre screen, having missed this adaptation (by Wilder and I.A.L. Diamond) of the Hecht-McArthur perennial when it was first released. I have a complicated relationship with The Front Page: As an adolescent, influenced — as were so many of my generation — by Woodstein (and perhaps even more so by Carl Kolchak) I aspired to be a journalist. My interests eventually led me elsewhere, but that early appreciation of the Fourth Estate remains, even if it has now, as increasing numbers of people have begun to believe, become a fifth column. No play had a greater influence on popular American culture than this breakneck 1928 farce-melodrama; all the great newspaper comedies of the 1930s (especially those featuring Lee Tracy, who had the starring role in the play) flowed from its influential fount, and it absolutely cemented our image of the hard-bitten, ink-stained, wisecracking reporter… a figure now utterly obliterated by $30,000-a day neoliberal whores for the Establishment.

Yet as much as I admire it, I don’t find the play especially funny, except in the 1940 Howard Hawks variation His Girl Friday, and that’s due largely to the charm of Cary Grant, the fast-talking zing of Rosalind Russell and the fizz they spark off each other. (The final line is funny, but once you know it, it’s not one that elicits much of a laugh next time around.) The newsmen depicted are, in the main, appalling — less the bulwark of free-press democracy than shabby, cynical hacks more concerned with snappy headlines than with anything approaching truth. Some would no doubt argue that’s the point of the thing, but the authors clearly intended the play as a paean to the type, not a critique. That their star characters, Hildy Johnson and his unscrupulous editor Walter Burns, eventually manage to keep a corrupt Chicago mayor and sheriff in check is almost by-the-by; they wouldn’t do so unless their own liberty was at stake. That’s not to mention the casual bigotry of the piece: The word “nigger” is used by some of the reporters when “colored,” the general nomenclature of the time, not only would do, but did, elsewhere in the play, and the character of Bensinger is the piss-elegant pansy type prevalent in the ‘20s and ‘30s, all too easily ridiculed, and ridiculous. That Wilder and Diamond not only didn’t improve on that stereotype in 1974 but embellished it, making a cute young cub reporter (Jon Korkes) the object of Bensinger’s attentions, is a mark against their movie. An end-credits post-script reveals — presumably for a boffo laugh… which, sadly, it probably got from its contemporary audience — they’ve left the newspaper business and opened an antique shop together. Why not a florist’s while you’re at it?

As was their wont when adapting material by others, Wilder and Diamond made several changes to the original, and some critics were unreceptive; Wilder later admitted that he hadn’t understood how deeply venerated the play still was among members of the press. It’s a lively enough transliteration, with a fine performance by Walter Matthau as Burns, a good one by Jack Lemmon as Hildy despite his being too old for the role, and a controversial turn by Carol Burnett as Molly Malloy. (She famously apologized, to a planeload of passengers whose in-flight entertainment the movie was, for her performance.) Yes, she’s strident, but she’s also vulnerable, although not nearly so endearing as Austin Pendleton as the convict Earl Williams, whose imminent execution and eventual escape sets the plot — which Walter Kerr memorably described as “a watch that laughed” — in motion. Some of the scenarists’ alterations are pleasing, such as their stab at making the role of Hildy’s fiancée less thankless, and casting the young Susan Sarandon in the part. There is also excellent support by Charles Durning, Alan Garfield, Dick O’Neill and Herb Edelman (as Hildy’s fellow reporters), a blustery Vincent Gardenia (was there any other kind of Vincent Gardenia?) as Sheriff Hartman, a suave Harold Gould as the Mayor, Paul Benedict as the emissary from the governor, and wonderful old Doro Merande as the Criminal Courts Building custodian Jennie. As Bensinger, alas, David Wayne makes the worst of a bad job. While largely set-bound, the picture has a rich look to it, and there’s even a wild Keystone Kops-like chase through the Chicago streets. The opening credit sequence, set to a spritely Billy May rag (the production company was Universal, no doubt keen to have another Sting-like radio smash on its hands) and depicting the mechanized assembling of a newspaper from page one typeset to completed broadside, is a two-and-a-half minute gem.


the-changeling-ghostballer

*The Changeling (1980) A beautiful rumination on the basic ghost story. Its admittedly thin screenplay is augmented by the usual marvelous George C. Scott performance, rare intelligence behind the camera — the director was the underrated Peter Madek — and a remarkably rich musical score (mostly by Ken Wannberg, with an assist from Rick Wilkens, anchored to an exquisite little music box theme by Howard Blake.) It’s one of those movies that has seen extremes of response: Dismissed, when not bludgeoned, by the critical fraternity on its 1980 release, it was restored and reissued in 2018 to ludicrous over-praise by people who can only deal in absolutes, and in an eminently dismissible interrogatory style: “Is The Changeling the most terrifying movie ever made?” The answer, even for partisans of the picture such as myself, is no. Not even close. But that hardly disqualifies the picture from being seen, and embraced, as a stylish — and surprisingly plangent — exercise in supernatural emotionalism that rewards repeated viewing. Thanks to my friend Eliot M. Camarena for suggesting this one to me a few years back.



2. Documentary

I.F. Stone’s Weekly (1973)

I.F. Stone’s Weekly (1973) Jerry Bruck, Jr.’s illuminating portrait of the fiercely idiosyncratic progressive journalist and, for many years, publisher of the eponymous newsletter still considered among the best, and most reliable, of progressive American news and opinion journals. Viewed courtesy of a kind friend who for the last several years has been my personal source for previously undiscovered (at least by me) cinematic gems.

untold history - showtime
*Oliver Stone’s Untold History of the United States
(2012) A staggeringly effective multipart examination of the dark underbelly of our history no American public school educator will touch: This one-time Republic’s century-plus evolution into the world’s most avaricious, and murderously dangerous, empire. Reactionaries, conservatives, liberals and their corporatist ilk will, if they sample it, no doubt sputter with impotent fury. And even for those of us who’ve been paying attention these last few decades, the revelations on display here will astonish and enrage. Yet even after 12 exhaustively documented hours* (and which feel more like two) neither Stone nor his co-authors Peter Kuznick and Matt Graham succumbs entirely to despair, and their Untold History is, finally, an impassioned call to arms that refuses to admit the defeat of essential values… provided we want them badly enough to fight for their reinstatement. “The record of the American Empire is not a pretty one,” they write. “But it is one that must be faced honestly and forthrightly if the United States is ever to undertake the fundamental structural reforms that will allow it to play a leading role in advancing rather than retarding the progress of humanity.” The Untold History is a vital step in facing that record. Now: Is there the popular will to make the changes we need?


rush-to-judgment-mark-lane-interview-1

Rush to Judgment (1967) This collaboration between the radical American documentarian Emile de Antonio and the Warren Report-debunking Mark Lane is in essence a 98-minute cinematic edition of the latter’s bestselling jeremiad of the same year. Lane’s is the research on which fifty years of responsible investigation into the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and its subsequent and violent cover-up, are based. And, as nearly as I can determine, none of his central findings have in the intervening decades been proven incorrect.


Directed by John Ford (1971)

Directed by John Ford (2006 edit) Peter Bogdanovich revisited his lovely 1971 documentary/overview in 2006. Alas, his new interview footage (with Clint Eastwood and Harry Carey, Jr.), shot on video, lacks, as Joseph McBride correctly noted in his review, the “vibrant look” and “elegant mobility” of their earlier counterparts. Nor does Eastwood add anything of value to what was observed originally by John Wayne, James Stewart, Maureen O’Hara and Henry Fonda. Still, the prickly sessions with Ford himself, the representative sequences Bogdanovich lovingly culled from his pictures, and the original Orson Welles narration are evergreen, and certainly reason enough to revisit this very personal Valentine to perhaps this most American (in both the good and bad connotations of the word) of 20th century filmmakers.


3. Video/Made for Television

Johnny Mercer - The Dream's On Me
Johnny Mercer: The Dream’s on Me
(2009) A pleasant, if not especially inspired, Clint Eastwood-produced TCM centenary portrait of our finest pop lyricist.

*The Night Stalker (1972) No American made-for-television movie had a higher viewership in its time than this wonderful, and genuinely scary, adaptation by Richard Matheson of a then-unpublished Jeff Rice novel, and it has lost little of its power, or its humor, in the decades since. The inspired casting of, and performance by, Darren McGavin as pain-in-the-ass investigative reporter (remember them?) Carl Kolchak is half the fun, and the supporting roles are no less vividly limned: Simon Oakland as his dyspeptic editor; Ralph Meeker as that oxymoron, a helpful FBI agent; Elisha Cook, Jr.’s professional snitch; Peggy Rea’s cameo as a switchboard operator bribable with foodstuffs; Larry Linville’s no-nonsense coroner; Charles McGraw’s polished, slippery Chief of Las Vegas police; and Barry Atwater, cunningly revealed in stages by the director, John Llewellyn Moxey, as the vampire. There’s also a terrific score by Dan Curtis’ house composer Robert Corbert. The new Kino Blu-Ray restoration is mouth-watering, making The Night Stalker look as good as it must have when first aired. My favorite bit of Kolchakian rhetoric (“Now, that is news, Vincezo. News! And we are a newspaper! We’re supposed to print news, not suppress it!”) is one that has, thanks to Bill Clinton’s Telecommunications Bill of 1996 and the subsequent, nearly total corporate takeover of all news media, become even more sadly pertinent.

night-stalker-blu-ray-1000-01
The Night Strangler (1973) This inevitable sequel to The Night Stalker is nowhere near as good as its record-breaking predecessor, and pointed up the major flaw of the subsequent weekly series: That supernatural crimes keep popping up wherever Carl Kolchak goes, and that only he believes in them. But it’s atmospheric as hell, what with its remarkable abandoned city beneath the streets of Seattle, from whence a new serial murderer emerges. And it has McGavin and Matheson (not to mention Simon Oakland) and that’s almost enough. It also has a feast of fine supporting roles embodied by Scott Brady, Wally Cox, John Carradine, Al Lewis, Margaret Hamilton, Jo Ann Pflug as Kolchak’s co-conspirator, and Richard Anderson as the urbane villain. Dan Curtis directed this one, and it’s also out in a sumptuous-looking Kino Blu-Ray.


The Incredible Mel Brooks

The Incredible Mel Brooks: An Irresistible Collection of Unhinged Comedy (2012) If, as I do, you can’t quite imagine life without the mad, unbridled wit of Mr. Brooks, this Shout! Factory set is five discs of bliss. (Six, if you count the accompanying CD. Which isn’t to mention the nifty hardcover book.) The DVDs consist of Brooks’ television appearances, an uproarious reunion interview with Dick Cavett, a five-part Mel and His Movies documentary, shorts (including Brooks’ and Ernest Pintoff’s Academy Award-winning The Critic) and even episodes of Get Smart! (one show is enough to make us wonder why we loved it so much in the ‘60s), When Things Were Rotten (which is no better now than it was in 1974) and Mad About You. There is never such a thing as too much Mel Brooks but even if there were, this set would support Mae West’s contention that too much of a good thing can be wonderful.



4. Seen a second… and final… time

Buffalo Bill and the Indians, or Sitting Bull’s History Lesson (1976) Robert Altman and co-scenarist Alan Rudolph’s adaptation of Arthur Kopit’s trenchant, theatrical play Indians lost much in the translation, and the result is an occasionally diverting mess. A fine cast (Paul Newman, Joel Grey, Burt Lancaster, Geraldine Chaplin, Kevin McCarthy, Harvey Keitel) flounders in material too diffuse to have a discernible shape or point of view.


Von Ryan’s Express (1965) Joseph Landon and the redoubtable Wendell Mayes adapted David Westheimer’s fascinating World War II thriller, and lost thereby much of what made it enthralling. To their credit, they kept the central figure’s prickly, unlikable character, and their star, Frank Sinatra, never winks at the audience. But the ending, which sacrifices Colonel Ryan on the altar of carnage, and which has no correspondence in Westheimer’s book, is wholly unnecessary. Mark Robson directed crisply, Trevor Howard makes a good foil for Sinatra, Vitto Scotti shows up as a train engineer, and the propulsive score by Jerry Goldsmith is one of his finest early works.


The Black Cauldron (1985) When I saw this animated Disney adaptation of Lloyd Alexander’s Prydain pentalogy on its release, I found it exceptionally impressive visually but largely uninvolving on a human level. In the intervening years I read, and fell in love with, Alexander’s entrancing series of novels for young people, so seeing the picture again was dispiriting. The novelist’s scope is Tolkeinean in its breadth, characterization and action, and 80 minutes is too skimpy a running-time to even begin encompassing it. But the books are as well deeply moving, something the movie never is, even with an illogical tear-jerker of a climax added on. The action takes in only a small set of events from, essentially, the first and second novels in the series, and the vast canvas of characters has been reduced to a mere handful, with one major figure (the Horned King’s tiny henchman Creeper) created out of whole cloth. Or ink-and-paint, as may be. One could go on at length, but why bother? Elmer Bernstein composed a splendid score, and young Grant Bardsley makes a properly questing Taran. The other voices include Freddie Jones, Nigel Hawthorne, Arthur Malet, Billie Hayes, John Hurt (as the Horned King) and John Byner, very fine as Gurgi. Among the familiar Disney names associated with the picture are Roy Disney (dialogue), John Musker and Ron Clements (story), and, in the animation department, Ruben Aquino, Hendel Butoy, Pixote Hunt, Glen Keane, John Lasseter, Rob Minkoff, Phil Nebbelink, George Scribner and Andreas Deja, all of whom would go on to far better things.



5. New to Me: Meh

bye bye braverman - godfrey cambridgeBye Bye, Braverman
(1968) This adaptation by Herb Sargent of Wallace Markfield’s 1964 novel, directed by Sidney Lumet, is richly populated with wonderful actors (George Segal, Jack Warden, Joseph Wiseman, Sorrell Booke, Phyllis Newman) and is on a certain level a vivid comic depiction of 1960s New York Jewish intellectuals. Sargent’s screenplay elides some of the archness of Markfield’s self-consciously (and, to my ear, anachronistic) “Jewish” dialogue, but, alas, is no more substantial, and its climax is even wispier. Godfrey Cambridge does have a marvelous scene as a cabbie, and Alan King gets a sly satirical sequence as a pompous Rabbi.


The Last of the Mobile Hot-Shots (1970) Another Lumet adaptation, by Gore Vidal this time, and of a Tennessee Williams flop (The Seven Descents of Myrtle) is the last word in weird. And although Robert Hooks is, as always, excellent, his presence as the mulatto bastard brother of James Coburn’s shabby white racist makes a hash of the action, since “Chicken” is supposed only to be somewhat dark-skinned, and not, as depicted here, obviously black. (The filmmakers also, un-shockingly, removed the Coburn figure’s homosexuality.) Lynn Redgrave gives a winning account of Myrtle, Coburn is fascinating, and the thing was shot, beautifully, by James Wong Howe. But it’s a curio merely, and a rather disagreeable one.


The Cowboys (1972) A real misfire. William Dale Jennings’ sumptuous novel (based on his own rejected original screenplay) was turned, by Irving Ravetch and Harriet Frank, Jr., into a crude, morally objectionable revisionist Western, the ambiguity of the original lost by the appalling placement of John Williams’ rousing “Cowboys” theme at a crucial juncture. John Wayne and Roscoe Lee Browne almost triumph over this unsavory mélange, unimaginatively directed by Mark Rydell. But Bruce Dern, as the chief villain, wallows in overstated ugliness.

executive action - ryan and lancaster

Robert Ryan and Burt Lancaster

Executive Action (1973) What might have been a galvanizing fictionalized critique of accepted wisdom on the assassination of John Kennedy was turned in its pre-production into an oddly tame affair. The original script, by the JFK assassination researcher Mark Lane and the playwright Donald Freed (cf., the Nixonian fantasia Secret Honor, filmed by Robert Altman) and later adapted by them into a compelling paperback novel, made no bones about CIA involvement in Kennedy’s murder. The subsequent screenplay, by Dalton Trumbo, muddies these waters to the point of nearly complete opacity: From which shadowy organization, if any, is Burt Lancaster’s team derived, if not directed? Your guess would be as good as mine. Lane and Freed also focus their narrative very effectively on two of the conspirators’ descending life spirals, both of which the picture eschews, to its ultimate detriment. That said, the sight of three old Hollywood lefties (Lancaster, Will Geer and Robert Ryan, whose last film this was) as sinister reactionary collaborators holds a sly kick.


Play Misty for Me (Resized)

Play Misty for Me (1971) Clint Eastwood’s directorial debut is a time-capsule movie in any number of ways: As a depiction of the artistic colony of Carmel, California (where Eastwood resides, and was once a bar-owner — and later the mayor) at the beginning of the 1970s; the hair, autos, interior design and clothing of the time; the emergent style of Hollywood filmmaking as practiced by bright young directors feeling their oats; and, perhaps most interestingly, as an example of a narrative form that would no doubt be greeted with howls and Twitterized hisses today. “What? A thriller with a knife-wielding psycho… and she’s a woman? How dare they? And Eastwood goes to bed with her and then dumps her just because she’s a little unstable? #Hatred for the Mentally Ill! Maybe it was men like him who made her crazy! So she stabs his housekeeper — does that make her a bad person? (His Black housekeeper. #Racist Director!) And then he punches her? #Abuse! #Sexist Pig!” Never mind that one of the screenwriters (Jo Helms, who also crafted the story) was a woman. (The other was Dean Riesner.) Much more to the point is that fact that Eastwood’s character, an FM jazz d.j., behaves in such a demonstrably stupid manner throughout the rising action. And his directorial flourishes date the picture far more than the actors’ clothing, reaching their nadir in a soft-focus romantic montage with Donna Mills, set to Roberta Flack’s “The First Time Ever I Saw Your Face,” which became a Top 40 hit. There is a nice sequence at the Monterey Jazz Festival, a narrative development obviously close to the director’s heart, Eastwood’s mentor Don Siegel shows up in a pair of nice bits as a barkeep and Jessica Walter does wonders with a character so frighteningly mercurial you wonder why her co-star doesn’t take out an immediate restraining order against her. But then, if he had, there might not be any movie. (I said he was stupid.) Bruce Surtees was the cinematographer.


Broken Arrow (1950) This early attempt at being fair to Native Americans — the screenwriter, uncredited until decades later, was the then-recently blacklisted Albert Maltz — is overly earnest, stilted in its dialogue (which James Stewart’s opening narration hastens to warn us is due to the Apache language being spoken solely in English) and, while beautifully shot in color by Ernest Palmer, was directed with no distinction whatsoever by Delmer Daves, whose oeuvre only a confirmed Sarrisite could love. Jeff Chandler, whose stardom has always seemed to me one of American cinema’s great enigmas, is Cochise. The best one can say is that at least he doesn’t embarrass himself. Debra Paget is rather lovely as Stewart’s eventual Apache bride, and Will Geer, himself about to be blacklisted, has a small, showy role as an angry settler. Mickey Kuhn, who memorably played Montgomery Clift as a boy in the early part of Red River, also appears, as Geer’s son. Stewart, alas, has little to tax him histrionically until late in the picture.


night-passage-8

Night Passage (1957) I’ve seldom seen a good Western novel so thoroughly — and, to my mind, perversely and irresponsibly — ruined by Hollywood as what the makers of this one did to Norman A. Fox’s remarkable little book. But either the producer or the screenwriter (the redoubtable Borden Chase) removed the guts from Fox’s story, one that couldn’t have been more of a ready-made movie if it had been typed in screenplay format. A terrific picture could, and should, have been made from it, preferably in black-and-white, but neither Chase nor James Neilson, the ploddingly literal director, trusted what they had. There’s not even more than a few minutes’ worth of night in the damn thing… and that with a director of photography as certifiably great as William H. Daniels! Audie Murphy gives a good account of the nominal villain; you get the sense that he, at least, read the book. But Brandon deWilde, while game, is years too young for a role that should have been cast with an adolescent, and Dan Duryea is truly dreadful; the characteristic habit of his role is laughter, but each time Duryea breaks into it, the braying result is as phony as the backdrops the actors are framed against in the medium shots and close-ups. As good as James Stewart is in the lead, he’d have been twice as effective if more of Fox had made it onto the screen. Indeed, the only actor in Night Passage who’s a true breath of fresh air is Olive Carey, and it’s notable that her character, a wise, cheerful old muleskinner, wasn’t in the novel at all. The picture reaches its creative nadir in an added sequence that probably pained Norman Fox as much as, if not more than, what they took out of his book: A would-be comic brawl among querulous Irish laborers that is no funnier here than it was the many times John Ford attempted it, usually with Victor McLaglen. An extended sequence, on a moving train-car, provides the only real suspense in the picture: You keep looking at Stewart and deWilde, and those rushing waters far down below, and wondering how much insurance was issued on the actors.


6. New to Me: Worth (or More Than Worth) the Trip

from-noon-till-three_jpg
From Noon ‘Til Three (1976) Frank D. Gilroy wrote and directed this delightful Rashomon-like parable, from his own ingenious little novel, which takes off from variations on what may have happened between a bank robber and a young widow during a crucial three-hour liaison. Charles Bronson and Jill Ireland are surprisingly charming as the lovers, and if the finale is less downbeat than the climax of the book its payoff is in its way no less pointed. Elmer Bernstein composed the delicious score, and the lyrics to his eponymous waltz are by Alan and Marilyn Bergman. (Bernstein and Alan Bergman appear on-screen as early Tin Pan Alley hacks, plugging the song.) Lucien Ballard added his usual luminous cinematography, and the Twilight Time Blu-Ray transfer makes splendid show of it.


Violent Saturday (1955) A good crime drama depicting the planning of a bank robbery in a mining town that gets a lift from the performances of Stephen McNally, Richard Egan, Sylvia Sidney, J. Carrol Naish, Margaret Hayes, Tommy Noonan and Lee Marvin. Sydney Boehm wrote it, from a novel by William L. Heath, and it’s crisply directed by Richard Fleischer. With its small town full of adulterous dames, peeping Toms and kleptomaniac librarians, the picture suggests what might have happened had Richard Stark written Peyton Place. Charles G. Clarke provided vivid Technicolor cinematography, Hugo Friedhofer composed the taut and intelligently-spotted suspense score, and there’s a spectacular finale at a farmhouse owned by, of all people, Ernest Borgnine in an Amish beard and accent. Victor Mature, playing a man embarrassed that his son thinks he’s a coward, struggles manfully with a lousy part. He doesn’t overcome it, although he fares rather better with the villains.


The Crucible (1996) This excellent Nicholas Hytner-directed film of the 1953 Arthur Miller play about the Salem witch trials — and, in part, the playwright’s response to the House Committee on Un-American Activities — when seen in the years since the Democrats instigated a brand-new Red Scare on “evidence” no more substantial than that concocted by the terrified young Salemite Abigail Williams, carries with it a new and unavoidable metaphor: Hillary Clinton is Abigail.


The Landlord (1970) Bailey, Grant

The Landlord (1970) Hal Ashby’s directorial debut is a determinedly quirky take on what used, rather prettily in America, to be called “race relations.” The perennially under-rated Beau Bridges plays a wealthy ne’er-do-well who capriciously buys a Brooklyn apartment building, selfishly concerned only with refurbishing his own apartment and utterly unprepared for the wild array of his new black tenants, whom he plans to evict. The superb cast includes Diana Sands, Lee Grant, Pearl Bailey, Lou Gossett Jr., Mel Stewart and Robert Klein. Kristin Hunter wrote the novel on which the actor and playwright Bill Gunn based his cutting screenplay. Gordon Willis was the cinematographer.


The Public Eye - Pesci

The Public Eye (1992) Howard Franklin wrote and directed this beautifully photographed (by Peter Suschitzky) attempt at a latter-day, albeit period, film noir (always a fool’s errand) and basing the central character played by Joe Pesci on the idiosyncratic photojournalist Arthur Felling, aka “Weegee.” It doesn’t entirely work either as a character study or as a thriller, but it’s a highly original conceit, and Pesci, who has a tendency to repeat himself, is refreshingly restrained here. The always interesting Barbara Hershey also stars, and Stanley Tucci has a fine role as a hood with a conscience. Some of Wegee’s distinctive photos are featured, along with work by others.


Hombre (1967) One of several collaborations between Martin Ritt and the aforementioned screenwriters Ravetch and Frank, this one based on an Elmore Leonard Western. It’s an expansive movie, shot by James Wong Howe in widescreen and muted color, but doesn’t, finally, add up to a great deal. Paul Newman is the eponymous anti-hero, a taciturn young Caucasian raised by Apaches, and his performance is very nearly silent. It’s the kind of thing Steve McQueen made a fetish of, but that was due to his own well-deserved insecurities as an actor; you’ve only to picture any of McQueen’s defining roles with Newman instead, to comprehend the gulf that lay between them. Only a performer of Newman’s range and seriousness could really pull off the conceit, and he’s splendid here, as is the rather astonishing supporting cast: Frederic March, Diane Cilento, Cameron Mitchell, Martin Balsam, David Canary and, especially, Richard Boone. If not an ideal movie, it’s certainly an intelligent one.

tom sawyer - funeral

Tom Sawyer: Huck and Tom eavesdrop on their own funeral.

Tom Sawyer (1973) Conceived and written by Richard M. Sherman and Robert B. Sherman and financed by, of all things, The Reader’s Digest, this musical variation on Mark Twain turns out to be a welcome, and very pleasant, surprise. Johnny Whittaker is Tom to the life, especially in the delightful fence-painting sequence; with his curly mass of strawberry hair and those half-attractive/half-ordinary features, Whittaker passes for a young Sam Clemens, which is who Tom is anyway. As Becky Thatcher, Jodie Foster (in only her third film appearance) is already poised and appealing; and Celeste Holm is the Aunt Polly of one’s fondest dreams, exasperated and warm in equal measure. The Shermans elevated Muff Potter to featured status, giving Warren Oates a chance to shine (although his vocals were dubbed) and the supporting cast includes Jeff East, very good as Huckleberry Finn; Lucille Benson as the Widow Douglas; Henry Jones as the cane-wielding pedagogue; and, as “Injun Joe,” the impressive Kunu Hank (no actor, his entire performance was dubbed). It’s about as likable a piece of Americana as you could wish, and the Sherman songs are their distinctive, patented mix of word-drunk whimsy (“Gratifaction”) and incisive character writing (“Tom Sawyer,” “How Come?,” “If’n I Was God,” “Aunt Polly’s Soliloquy”). My only real complaint concerns the cavern sequence, too brightly lit to achieve the terror intended; the 1938 David O. Selznick version got it much better, and remains one of the most frightening memories of my life as a children’s matinee moviegoer in the late 1960s. (Obviously, Injun Joe is dispatched in a less grisly manner in both pictures than the truly nightmarish demise Twain gave him in his book.) The director, Don Taylor, shot the picture in Missouri, and his approach to the material — and indeed, that material itself — never falls into the elephantiasis that doomed so many movie musicals of the time. There’s a marvelous, long helicopter tracking shot of Whitaker running through fields toward the Mississippi to meet the steamboat docking there which is as lovely as it is exuberant; the airy, attractive cinematography is by Frank Stanley, and looks especially good in the Twilight Time Blu-Ray. John Williams supervised the music and also served, with Irwin Kostel, as orchestrator. The movie does contain an odd detail, one that would never pass muster today: When, in their duet ”Freebootin’,” Tom and Huck swim naked off Jackson’s Island, the camera catches, almost gratuitously, what seem to be deliberate (if brief) glimpses of their bare bottoms thrust above the water. We can tell they’re not wearing anything in the sequence; what was the point of embarrassing adolescent actors that way?


Huckleberry Finn (1974) Also featured on the Twilight Time Tom Sawyer release, this inevitable sequel fails on nearly every level. Yet somehow you don’t hate it. Sawyer’s producer, Arthur P. Jacobs, died before the picture began shooting, and his absence is felt throughout, especially as the director, J. Lee Thompson, clearly had no idea how a musical should be shot. László Kovács’ cinematography is gorgeous, but the predominance of muddy tones (and mud itself), while appropriate to a story set on the Mississippi, is at variance with the material. It might work for a straight adaptation of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, but it’s disastrous for a musical. And Thompson’s staging is no help either; when the Duke and the King (David Wayne and Harvey Korman) are introduced with an energetic soft-shoe, they’re reduced to stomping around in the mud; what should soar with comic invention merely lies there, inert and gasping for air. As Huckleberry Finn is not merely one of my favorite novels but a cornerstone of American literature, I was surprised that the picture didn’t offend me. But the technique that worked so well for the Sherman Brothers on Tom Sawyer — they called it “A Musical Adaptation” rather than attempting a perfect transliteration — doesn’t suit this book, whose incidents are so well-remembered, and so crucial to the narrative, that variations can only disappoint. The death of Colonel Grangerford (Arthur O’Connell) in the feud here, for instance, simply lacks the heartbreak and horror of young Buck Grangerford’s murder, witnessed by Huck. (When Buck himself appears, it is not as the Colonel’s grandson, but as a black boy slave.) Nor is there anything in the picture as horrific as the tarring-and-feathering of the King and the Duke. Worse, the Shermans, having omitted the attempted lynching of Colonel Sherburn, give some of his lines to the King! East, whose second picture this was, is unable to breathe much life into a character whose struggles are largely internal, and not well illuminated in the screenplay, and Paul Winfield makes a dignified and endearing Jim, but the movie lets them both down; at the end they simply part and the picture fades off into nothingness. Korman and Wayne probably come off best, although Gary Merrill’s brief turn as Pap is properly unpleasant, and Natalie Trundy has a nice cameo as Mrs. Loftus. But the Sherman songs are a great deal less buoyant and memorable than those in Tom Sawyer. I suspect the material, darker and more pointed, was simply not a part of their creative purview.


Run of the Arrow (1957) Samuel Fuller’s examination of race in post-Civil War America focuses on an Irish Confederate (Rod Steiger) who, refusing to accept Lee’s surrender, turns his back on white civilization. If you admire this most idiosyncratic of writer-directors, as I do, this one is essential viewing. Astonishingly, there are those now who don’t get that Steiger deliberately loses his accent while speaking Sioux when it’s blazingly obvious Fuller intended these dialogues, as the makers of Broken Arrow did, as representing the Siouan language in English. They think it’s just bad acting. Christ, how unbelievably obtuse Americans have become!

the-tamarind-seed-1974-2

*The Tamarind Seed
(1974)
Blake Edwards’ return to filmmaking following his disastrous experiences on Darling Lili, Wild Rovers and The Carey Treatment is a fascinating, intelligent and very effective little romantic thriller (from a good novel by Evelyn Anthony) on Cold War tensions. It’s bright, tense, well-conceived and often witty, with good performances from Julie Andrews, Omar Sharif and Anthony Quayle and a brief but extremely effective John Barry score.

traveling_executioner


The Traveling Executioner (1970)
Had Gerrie Bateson written The Traveling Executioner as a novel rather than a screenplay, it might have been hailed as a modern neo-Southern Gothic black comedy on a par with the best of Flannery O’Connor. The picture, directed by Jack Smight, has the feel of the form, and if it’s difficult to imagine quite how it could ever have caught on with a large audience, then or now, it’s also in its small way superior to the later, much-heralded John Huston adaptation of O’Connor’s Wise Blood. Bateson, whose only movie this was (he wrote a Night Gallery and a Mission: Impossible before disappearing from the business forever) completed it for a film-school assignment, and it exhibits a smart novice’s go-for-broke quality. It’s ruthlessly efficient, rather like the device the smirkingly-named Jonas Candide (Stacey Keach) creates for quick penal executions, and carries through without compromise from its premise to its unsettling climax. Keach, fresh from Arthur Kopit’s play Indians and with his long hair worn in an anachronistic ponytail, is splendid, never appealing for audience sympathy as a less secure performer might. Although the tone veers from knockabout comedy to genuine tragedy, the picture feels entirely of a piece. My only cavil is with the ending, in which the dejected mortician played by Bud Cort takes on Jonas’ persona, and takes over his job. Having botched things so spectacularly, what state — even a backwards Deep Southern one — would let him continue executing felons? The Jerry Goldsmith score is a marvel, ranging from a circus-like waltz theme whose calliope gives way to an ersatz Gospel hymn, to a tender, moving accompaniment for Jonas’ soothing verbal depictions for his victims of an annealing vision he calls “The Fields of Ambrosia.”

Love The Traveling Executioner or hate it, it’s certainly unlike any other movie you’ll ever see.


The Comancheros (1961) A big, colorful, episodic John Wayne vehicle that never takes itself seriously for a moment, doesn’t ask you to either, and is all the more likable for that. (Although Wayne’s character was subservient to that of Stuart Whitman’s in the Paul I. Wellman novel on which it was based.) The backstory is in some ways even more interesting than the picture — see the Wikipedia entry — and it was the final work of Michael Curtiz, whose illness forced him to withdraw during shooting; Wayne himself completed the movie. Clair Huffaker’s script was eventually re-written by Wayne stalwart James Edward Grant when the actor was cast in a role intended first for James Garner. The flavorsome cast includes Ina Balin, Bruce Cabot, Jack Elam, Jack Buchanan, Gwinn “Big Boy” Williams, and Henry Daniell. Nehemiah Persoff makes an elegant, wheelchair-bound villain, and Lee Marvin is both amusing and frightening as a mercurial, whip-wielding gun-runner who, scalped by Comanches, wears his remaining hair in a long braid down one side of his head. Elmer Bernstein wrote the score in his characteristic Big Western mode, and it’s a honey, rousing and relentlessly melodic.


Wall Street (1987) Although supposedly made in tribute to his stockbroker father, Oliver Stone’s movie is really a disgusted response to the bald, grasping greed of the Reagan era. And while Michael Douglas is perhaps my least favorite actor of his generation, I must admit he has a feel — come by naturally, one presumes — for embodying sleaziness. I am if anything less enamored still of Charlie Sheen, Martin’s less gifted son, but even he is in good form here, as Bud Fox, an ambitious young trader who willingly allows himself to become corrupt. (Is it coincidental that he shares the first name of Jack Lemmon’s equally climbing would-be junior executive in The Apartment?) Martin Sheen himself provides splendid contrast as Bud’s honest dad, Hal Holbrook has some nice moments as a seasoned broker, James Karen is solid as Bud’s predictably mercurial boss, and Terence Stamp does well by an icy corporate raider. Only Darryl Hanna proves a true embarrassment; in her big break-up scene with the younger Sheen, she’s appalling. Whatever his limitations as an actor, he’s trying to do honor to the moment, but she gives him nothing to play against. Stone, who wrote the screenplay with Stanley Weiser, has a fine feeling for the trappings and appurtenances of the time and place, although when the picture ends you may find yourself shrugging with indifference at the whole thing.

saint jack 5

Gazarra and Bogdanovich. Two pimps. At least Jack’s whores give pleasure.

Saint Jack (1979) Largely ignored on its release, and barely given a chance to find an audience, this adaptation by Peter Bogdanovich, Howard Sackler and Paul Theroux of the latter’s caustic picaresque novel set in the Singapore of the 1960s and early ‘70s is beautifully made and wonderfully acted, especially by its star, Ben Gazzara, who gives a performance in which every word and sparing gesture is so honest we feel like eavesdroppers. Bogdanovich and his collaborators — although presumably not Theroux — deviate from the book’s structure (it’s both linear and temporally fragmented) and its events in substantial ways, particularly in their depiction of the Hong Kong-based accountant played with understated garrulity by Denholm Elliott; he dies early in the novel, but pops up repeatedly in the picture, and since Elliott is so pleasing a presence, even Theroux devotees may not mind.  Bogdanovich himself shows up, in a coldly effective portrayal as a wealthy fixer. (Amusingly, his ever-present aide and chauffeur walks as if he has a stick shoved permanently up his ass.) George Lazenby appears late in the movie as a liberal Senator, the unintentional means of Jack’s redemption. Interestingly, Bogdanovich changes the odd but essentially innocent liaison between the politician and a young woman Jack is supposed to spy on into one between Lazenby and a native rent-boy, making Jack’s rejection of the plot even more pointed. I say “interestingly” because Bogdanovich has seemed in his writing to be at best rather uneasy with homoeroticism. Robby Müller photographed the picture, beautifully, on location.


The Immortal Story (1968 — Criterion) Orson Welles’ intriguing adaptation, for French television, of the Isak Dinesen story was his first project not filmed in black-and-white. And while he disdained color, he shortly became a master of it; his subsequent F for Fake is the most beautiful of movies, and among the most pictorially splendid of Welles’ own work. Welles was also a realist, and he understood that color was increasingly important to distribution, indeed the dominant mode of world cinema, and especially, television. (The Immortal Story was shot by Willy Kurant.) Welles appears as the wealthy catalyst of the events, Roger Coggio is his ambiguous aide-de-camp, Norman Eshley is the virginal young sailor and the luminous Jeanne Moreau is the impecunious woman at the center. Since I have not read Dinesen’s story, I am not sure what is missing in the loss of authorial voice, and indeed I would like to know how Dinesen ends the narrative, because I’m not at all certain how I am supposed to feel, and what it all means. On that basis — one of the most basic to movies — The Immortal Story must, I suppose, be accounted an artistic failure; a picture that depends on our understanding of the story it is based on and cannot express its own intentions clearly enough to stand on its own is not a success. Or perhaps I’m just thick-headed. Despite the foregoing, anything Welles put his name to is, perforce, worth seeing, and more than once. I’m sure I’ll be watching this one again… although I also suspect that it, like his adaptation of The Trial, will never be a personal favorite.



7. Revisited with pleasure

the-death-of-stalin 800x567

Jeffrey Tambor, Steve Buscemi and Simon Russell Beale in various attitudes of perplex, phony grief and calculation.

*The Death of Stalin (2017) Armando Iannucci co-wrote (with David Schneider, Ian Martin and Peter Fellows) and directed this at once hilarious and horrifying black comedy based on the French graphic novel La Mort de Staline by Fabien Nury and Thierry Robin, and it’s one of the finest — and funniest — political satires in motion picture history. Granting there haven’t been that many of those takes nothing away from this audacious, witty, occasionally shocking and blazingly intelligent movie. Even the casting amuses: When Steve Buscemi, Michael Palin and Jeffrey Tambor show up (as, respectively, Khrushchev, Molotov and Malenkov) they elicit sly chuckles. There is, however, nothing remotely amusing about Simon Russell Beale’s chilling performance as the appalling Lavrentiy Beria. Rat-like both in action and physiognomy (courtesy of some superb prosthesis by Kristyan Mallett), pathologically sadistic and lethally efficient, Beale’s Beria is a genuine sociopath who only exhibits human feeling when it’s his own neck on the line. Buscemi and Tambor take top honors among the comedians but the entire picture is beautifully cast, with standout work especially from Andrea Riseborough as Svetlana Stalina. Foolishly, “Me Too” accusations against Tambor led to the producers erasing him from the poster while the picture was still in theatres. One wonders where this insanity will end. With Errol Flynn being digitally erased from The Sea Hawk, presumably.


Harry and Walter Go to New York (Lobby card) Resized

Harry and Walter Go to New York (1976) An enjoyable farce starring James Caan, Elliott Gould, Diane Keaton and Michael Caine whose screenplay, one gathers, was muddled by that hack Mark Rydell; Caan averred Rydell “completely” re-wrote what he called a “wonderful script” — by John Byrum, with later revisions by Robert Kaufman and Don Devlin — adding, “The director sacrificed jokes to tell a story no one cared about.” (Leslie Anne Warren, who is featured in the deliberately overripe, and amusingly sabotaged, play-within-the-film, claimed she couldn’t get work for five years after the picture opened.) If you approach this period farce with appropriately lowered expectations it’s buoyant and engaging, if not especially hilarious. The muted ending is another detraction, turning as it does Keaton’s radical newspaper publisher into a rank, gold-digging opportunist. Among the delicious supporting cast: Charles Durning, Carol Kane, Michael Conrad, Burt Young, Bert Remsen and the always delightful Jack Gilford. The early 1900s décor is sumptuous, heightened by the burnished cinematography of László Kovács and the bouncy score is by the marvelous David Shire, who also appears, briefly, as the blasé pianist accompanying Harry and Walter’s vaudeville act.


The Front Page (1931)

The Front Page (1931) The first time I saw this Lewis Milestone-directed version of the Hecht and McArthur play, in an admittedly poor print, it seemed to me one of those creaky, set-bound early talkies that illustrated why the camera needed to be freed from the tyranny of the sweat-box microphone. But the restored edition, made available on Criterion’s splendid recent release of His Girl Friday, showed me just how wrong I was. Culling footage from the domestic, British and foreign versions of the picture, and a 35mm print from the Howard Hughes Collection struck from the original nitrate negative in 1970, the Academy Film Archive re-assembled and restored the movie to spectacular life. Although Lee Tracy, the original Hildy Johnson, was engaged elsewhere in Hollywood (and playing very similar roles) Pat O’Brien makes a suitable substitute, and that otherwise insufferable old reactionary Adolphe Menjou is a very creditable Walter Burns. Best among the supporting cast are Walter Catlett (as Murphy), Mae Clarke (Molly Malloy), Slim Summerville (Pincus), Frank McHugh (McCue) and, as Bensinger, the peerless Edward Everett Horton.


Harper - Newman

Harper (1966) William Goldman wrote this sharp adaptation — and slight updating — of Ross Macdonald’s initial Lew Archer novel The Moving Target, removing, thankfully, most of the original’s ugly homophobia in the process. (Perhaps at Paul Newman’s request? That is sheer speculation on my part, but something about the subject of homosexuality clearly bugged Macdonald; every Archer novel I’ve read contains at least one unsavory Lesbian or gay man, and Newman was notably squeamish about such sexual demonizing. The one exception in the picture is the murderous thug played by Roy Jenson whom Harper queer-baits, to predictable results.) The star, coming off The Hustler and Hud, was convinced that the letter “H” was lucky for him, hence the change from Archer to Harper. The rich supporting cast includes Lauren Bacall as a paraplegic ice-queen; Julie Harris as a drug-addicted singer-pianist; Arthur Hill as Archer’s lawyer pal; Janet Leigh as his dry, cynical ex-wife; Pamela Tiffin as a spoiled rich girl; Robert Wagner, pretty and dangerous as a glorified pool-boy; Shelley Winters as a former Hollywood starlet turned blowsy man-trap; Harold Gould as a sheriff; and Strother Martin as a phony spiritualist. Johnny Mandel wrote the brief, jazzy score. Appropriate to the tawdry sadness that overlies the Archer books, Goldman’s twists are less clever than deflating, particularly the last one, and he gets off some pretty fair hard-boiled lines of his own, the best and most famous being one for Newman: “The bottom is loaded with nice people, Albert. Only cream and bastards rise.”


Dick Tracy - Pacino, Madonna

*Dick Tracy (1990) Warren Beatty’s witty take on the notably grisly Chester Gould strip, complete with a color palette evoking the bright hues of the Sunday newspaper comic page… and which scores of ignorant American critics referred to at the time of the picture’s release as having been done in “primary colors”… which of course would have meant only in red, blue and yellow. Maybe they were taking their cue from Richard A. Sylbert, the movie’s designer(!), who said the same thing(!!) in a number of contemporary interviews. It’s a fast, enjoyable ride (Jim Cash and Jack Epps, Jr. are the credited screenwriters) decked out with some marvelous pastiche songs by Stephen Sondheim, a Danny Elfman score that emulates Gershwin as well as his usual hommages to Herrmann and Rota, glorious photography by Vittorio Storaro, and a terrific cast to embody the many odd, pre-Fellini grotesques of Gould’s imagination. Aside from Beatty himself as Tracy, Madonna as his temptress Breathless Mahoney (she gets a great Sondheim number in the Harold Arlen mode called “Sooner or Later”), the delicious Glenne Headly as Tess Trueheart and the gifted Casey Korsmo as Junior we also get Seymour Cassel (Sam Catchem), Michael J. Pollard (Bug Bailey), Charles Durning (Chief Brandon), William Forsythe (Flattop), Ed O’Ross (Itchy), Mandy Patinkin (88 Keys), R. G. Armstrong (Pruneface), Paul Sorvino (Lips Manlis) and, in an inspired bit of kidding, Dustin Hoffman as Mumbles. Dick Van Dyke, alas, is wasted as a crooked D.A., but Al Pacino has a veritable field-day as the chief villain “Big Boy” Caprice. It’s the perfect role in which to indulge his occasional penchant for explosive over-acting; like Akim Tamiroff in Touch of Evil, he’s both menacing and very, very funny. Mike Mazurki also shows up, in a bit. He’s a living link to the past the movie depicts, as is Mel Tormé, whose voice we hear on the radio crooning Sondheim’s “Live Alone and Like It.”

nashville - lily tomlin

Lily Tomlin in the great sequence in which three women hear Keith Carradine perform “I’m Easy” and each is convinced he’s singing directly to her.

*Nashville (1975) — Criterion
Robert Altman and Joan Tewksbury’s unrivalled nonesuch, one of the greatest movies of a great movie period.


Tom Jones - Finney

*Tom Jones (1963) — Criterion John Osbourne wrote and Tony Richardson directed this elegant, playful, French New Wave-inspired adaptation of the sprawling Henry Fielding novel, which made Albert Finney an international star. (It made a then-astonishing $36 million in its initial release, on a $1 million budget.) Five and a half decades on, the bawdiness which titillated its contemporary audience has become about as shocking to the sensibilities as your octogarian grandmother saying “Fuck,” but the performances, and Walter Lassally’s exquisitely rendered cinematography, remain enchanting, and the famous “eating scene” between Finney and Joyce Redman is still riotously suggestive. Although I am averse to the hack-phrase “breaking the fourth wall,” which is most often used by the sort of people who think direct address was invented in Hollywood sometime around the year 2000, it’s notable that Richardson and Osbourne (and yes, dear auteurists, the moments were scripted) have fun twitting the audience with acknowledgments of the camera: Redman’s impressed, impish shrug to the audience when she realizes she’s slept with her own son is still jaw-droppingly hilarious. Susannah York makes a charming Sophie Western, Hugh Griffith is a roistering Hogarthian feast as her father, and the rest of the fine supporting cast (Edith Evans, Joan Greenwood, Diane Cilento, George Devine, David Tomlinson, Jack MacGowran, David Warner, Peter Bull, Angela Baddeley, John Moffatt, Lynn Redgrave) are a comprehensive delight. Micheál Mac Liammóir adds his rich, plummy actor’s tones to Osborne’s narration which, while it does not often quote Fielding directly, approximates his style with aplomb. The witty score is by John Addison, and Antony Gibbs provided the sprightly editing.


The Adventures of Baron Munchausen - Death (Resized)
The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
(1988) 
Terry Gilliam is, arguably, our greatest movie fantasist — and, inarguably, has the worst luck of any major filmmaker; there is nothing as insane in the Gilliam universe as the people for whom he has worked. On Munchausen, he was saddled with a very strange, possibly criminal, German producer and yoked to corrupt Italian artisans and the wildly expensive and inefficient facilities at Cinecittà, rendering much of his original vision compromised… and, when the picture was completed, suits and countersuits by the completion bond company and the indifference of a new regime at Columbia Pictures which preferred taking a $38 million loss to promoting a project of the previous administration. Yet Gilliam delivered a movie of such richness it is nearly overstuffed with delights. Seeing it in a theatre in 1988 was an exhilarating experience, one comparable to the high you get if you’re lucky enough to watch Lawrence of Arabia on a wide commercial screen. The director and his co-scenarist, Charles McKeown, made going to the movies an act of veneration, and the Cineplex a palace of wonders: An ancient European city besieged by Ottoman artillery; encounters with Death; a wild nocturnal ride on a cannonball; a hot-air balloon made of women’s undergarments; a flight to the Moon; a corresponding plunge to the center of the earth; ingestion by a giant sea monster; incarceration in, and escape from, a Turkish seraglio; and a character whose impossible feats of sprinting make him the human equivalent of Chuck Jones’ Road Runner. Nor are these marvels wholly (or even necessarily partly) realistic. Munchausen is, if anything, about the advantages of storytelling artifice over absolute verisimilitude, and the movie is filled with delicious theatrical concepts — another age’s deliberately exaggerated invocation of splendor. Giuseppe Rotunno shot the picture, which features John Neville as the Baron, Sarah Polley as the skeptical child he endeavors to convert, Eric Idle as Berthold, Jonathan Pryce as an officious officer, Oliver Reed as Vulcan, Uma Thurman as Venus, Valentina Cortese as the Queen of the Moon and a prototypically untrammeled Robin Williams (in the credits he’s “Ray D. Tutto,” a homonym approximation of the Italian “king of all”) as the King.


*The Godfather (1972) I doubt I can add anything to the millions of words that have been written, and said, about Francis Coppola’s adaptation of the Mario Puzo novel, with Jaws a prime exemplar of the notion that third-rate source material can, when filtered through the sensibilities of supernally gifted popular artists, yield first-rate movies. The Blu-Ray edition of the “Coppola Restoration” is exquisite.

Howard_Hawks'Rio_Bravo_trailer_(31)

*Rio Bravo (1959) I have a good friend who positively loathes Howard Hawks. I am precisely the opposite. I don’t love his movies equally, and I know dreck when I see it, whoever made it. But when I think of the creative filmmakers (as opposed to the many hacks for hire whose oeuvres made Andrew Sarris swoon) whose best work I most enjoy, Hawks — with Wilder, Welles and Chuck Jones — comes high on the list. Rio Bravo is one of those pictures that, if I begin watching it, I know I’m in for the duration. It is, in a way, a perfect distillation of everything Hawks did well, and all his thematic quirks. That sort of thing can be deadly, but, working with the excellent screenwriters Jules Furthman and Leigh Brackett, Hawks keeps things light and, despite the lengthy running time, so relaxed and enjoyable you don’t even mind the cavalier attitude he took toward re-staging for a new picture what had already worked for him once. (He apparently had never heard that old movies were regularly showing up on television. And he would later essentially remake Rio Bravo twice, in the 1967 El Dorado and his final movie, the very likable 1970 John Wayne Western Rio Lobo.) All of the Hawksian concerns are here: Intense male camaraderie bearing more than a whiff of the homoerotic; fast talk between cynical men and sharp, witty women (Angie Dickinson is pretty much Bacall in To Have and Have Not, albeit without Bacall’s ineffable je ne sais quoi); and action that, while headed for an explosion, dawdles charmingly on seeming irrelevancies that add immeasurably to its texture. Made in part as a response to High Noon, whose plot Hawks found infuriating, in Rio Bravo the protagonists spend much of the picture preparing for an impending assault by outlaw killers, and the rest of the Texas town might as well not even exist. Aside from Wayne, giving one of his most relaxed and endearing performances, the cast includes Dean Martin, very good in an essentially dramatic role; Walter Brennan, lovably cantankerous; and the astonishingly beautiful Ricky Nelson as a young gunslinger. Russell Harlan photographed the picture and Dmitri Tiomkin scored it, less bombastically than was his usual wont.

the verdict
The Verdict (1982) Paul Newman’s performance as Frank Gavin, a broken-down, ambulance-chasing lawyer handed a life-changing case he’s expected to lose is so keenly observed many of us in 1982 were convinced there was no way the Academy could continue denying him his Oscar. We hadn’t counted on the typical response to Gandhi: Alcoholics (and the physically and mentally handicapped) usually get awards, but not as many as historical figures. (23 in the “Best Actor” category, at last count.) Scarcely less impressive than Newman are James Mason as his urbane opposing counsel; Charlotte Rampling as his ambiguous love interest; Jack Warden as his mentor; Milo O’Shea as a political hack of a judge; Edward Binns as a Bishop; Julie Bovasso as an angry potential witness; Wesley Addy as a self-important surgeon; Joe Seneca, both dignified and apologetic as Newman’s chief medical expert; and Lindsey Crouse in a striking turn as an unexpected witness. (You can also, if you look closely, spot the young Bruce Willis as a courtroom observer in the climactic scene.) I am by no means an admirer of that overpraised reactionary David Mamet, but this almost insanely overrated playwright got nearly everything right here,† and jettisoned most of what made Barry Reed’s novel such an irritatingly second-rate exercise. (Rampling’s character in the book, for example, is a one-dimensional schemer — a corporate bitch; Mamet gives her moments of aching humanity, and when Newman decks her in justifiable fury, you hate neither of them.) Sidney Lumet directed, with his customary intelligence and unobtrusive artistry, and Andrzej Bartkowiak provided the autumnal imagery. My only cavil with Newman’s otherwise scathingly honest performance: Frank smokes, constantly, but Newman never inhales, and it’s almost shockingly phony to watch. Wouldn’t it have been better to have dropped the cigarettes entirely than let your star look that foolish?


The Boys from Brazil - Peck, Mason
The Boys from Brazil
(1978) 
Perhaps there were too many old Nazis running around in the late ‘70s… by which I mean, on the nation’s movie and television screens. I have a feeling that, after Marathon Man (1976) explored the narrative possibilities of resurrecting Mengele, The Odessa File (1974) played out its revenge fantasy, television weighed in with Holocaust and The Wall, and this, Ira Levin’s masterly speculation on cloning Hitler, had come and gone, there was little popular appetite left for the subject. Which might explain why the very fine Thomas Gifford thriller The Wind Chill Factor, positing nothing less than that Nazism was not only alive and well but integral to Western governmental organization, was announced, on the jacket of its paperback edition, as “Soon to Be a Major Motion Picture”… and promptly never was. In any case, The Boys from Brazil gave us, of all people, Gregory Peck as Mengele, Laurence Olivier (Marathon Man’s Mengele stand-in) as a Wiesenthal-like Nazi hunter, James Mason as Peck’s comrade and eventual nemesis, Uta Hagen as a bitter old one-time Nazi guard, and the gifted Jeremy Black in multiple roles, each intensely dislikable, as the boys. The supporting cast is especially effective, and includes Lilli Palmer, Steve Guttenberg, Denholm Elliott, Rosemary Harris, John Dehner, John Rubinstein, Anne Meara, Bruno Ganz, Walter Gotell, Wolfgang Preiss, Michael Gough, and Prunella Scales. The screenplay, by Heywood Gould (who later wrote the effective cop study Fort Apache—The Bronx) was largely true to Levin’s work, Franklin Schaffner directed it with verve (and staged a notably gory climax) and Jerry Goldsmith composed one of his essential ‘70s scores, hinging it on an at once exuberant and sinister waltz theme — kaffee mit bitters. And if the picture lacks the gravitas and the nerve-wracking grip of Marathon Man, it’s that rare thing, an intelligent thriller, and Peck has a high old time of it playing militantly against type.


*The Ghost and Mr. Chicken (1966)
A perennial favorite since I first encountered it on television around 1969, this most likable of all Don Knotts comedies gets a workout on my Blu-Ray player every October.

jfk - donald sutherland

*JFK: The Director’s Cut
(1991/1997) Love it or despair of it, Oliver Stone’s incendiary examination of the Kennedy assassination was one of the most important movies of its time, its popularity leading directly to the establishment of the Assassination Records Review Board. That the Board has not, as directed by law, made public “all existing assassination-related documents,” that the CIA has not permitted the release of the most incriminating information, and that we are still awaiting some confirmation of the essential facts, is hardly Stone’s fault. To expect more would, one suspects, be tantamount to believing in Santa Claus, or in the non-existence of an American Empire. Based primarily on On the Trail of the Assassins, Jim Garrison’s memoir of prosecuting what is to date (and a half-century ago) the single case brought against any of the conspirators and on Jim Marrs’ Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, Stone and Zachary Sklar fashioned a fiercely cinematic examination of the assassination and its largely transparent official cover-up that so enraged the Establishment it was attacked even while it was being shot — Time magazine even published a critique on an early script, making blatantly false claims about its content. That more than slightly hysterical response only intensified when the picture opened big; its success must have truly unnerved the CIA and its plants in the American press. Pat Dowell, the film critic for The Washingtonian, found a mere 34-word capsule review killed for being, however brief, positive, and even The Advocate piled on; I am ashamed to admit their screaming headline (“JFK: Pinko Fags Offed the Prez!”) kept me from the theatres in 1991… and from Stone’s work generally, for years. Well, it was my loss. And I should have realized, once nearly every mainstream media outlet in America inveigled against the movie, that Stone was touching a very raw nerve. He and Sklar were criticized even by dedicated assassination researchers like Mark Lane, who did not seem to understand that a feature is not a documentary. And while it is true that they conflated some characters, made composites of several participants (the racist male prostitute played by Kevin Bacon, for example, is based on a number of real figures)‡, speculated — as all assassination journalists, given no official confirmation, must — and (horrors!) invented dialogue, that is what filmmakers do. One can reasonably nit-pick over a scene such as the one in which the terrified David Ferrie (Joe Pesci) says more than one imagines he would to Garrison’s team, but to dismiss the picture entirely because a dramatist dramatized is to admit you know nothing about movies, and understand less. But Stone’s critics make up their own rules where he is concerned… that is, when they don’t ignore his pictures entirely. There are sequences in JFK that are among his finest work: The long sequence with “X” (Donald Sutherland), the former operative based on L. Fletcher Prouty and John Newman, is, in its melding of dialogue and music (by John Williams) and its gripping juxtaposition of images, the work of an absolute master. One can reasonably quarrel with Kevin Costner as Garrison, an imposition, one assumes, by Warner Bros. as box-office insurance. It’s a role rather beyond not merely his limited abilities but his physiognomy and vocal timbre; Garrison sounded more like Gregory Peck than anyone else and was of comparable and imposing physical stature. Costner isn’t bad by any means, merely conventional. He gets exceptional support, moreover, from the large cast, which includes Tommy Lee Jones as Clay Shaw, Gary Oldman as Lee Harvey Oswald, Sissy Spacek as Liz Garrison, Edward Asner as Guy Banister, Brian Doyle-Murray as Jack Ruby, John Candy as Dean Andrews, Jr. and Jack Lemmon as Jack Martin. Michael Rooker, Laurie Metcalf, Wayne Knight and Jay O. Sanders play members of Garrison’s legal team, John Larroquette shows up as a lightly disguised version of Johnny Carson, and Garrison himself appears, briefly, as Earl Warren. Robert Richardson was the cinematographer, and the kinetic editing was the work of Joe Hutshing and Pietro Scalia. JFK is most effectively enjoyed in its 206-minute “Director’s Cut.” Appropriately, the most disturbing moments in the picture stem from Stone’s use of the Zapruder footage which, however altered by the CIA, is still horrific after 55 years. As Richard Belzer is fond of reminding people, whatever one’s feelings about John F. Kennedy, or how and why and by whom he was killed, a man died that day in Dallas — horribly.

nixon richard-helms

The number of the Beast: Sam Waterston as Richard Helms.

*Nixon (1995) Criminally ignored — when not slammed outright, by the same chorus of professional neoliberals and CIA plants who reflexively ganged up to “discredit” JFK in 1991 — on its release, this Oliver Stone picture, written by Stone with Stephen J. Rivele and Christopher Wilkinson, is less a conventional “biopic” than an epic meditation on post-war American political realities, using as its anchor that most Shakespearean of Presidents. (Much of the idiot criticism the movie engendered centered on Stone’s audacious depiction of Richard M. Nixon as a multi-faceted human being… the first obligation of the dramatist.) It’s a film that looks better with each viewing, particularly in Strone’s home-video “Director’s Cut,” which among other things restored what to me seems its most absolutely essential sequence, between Anthony Hopkins’ RMN and a silkily foreboding Sam Waterston as the CIA Director Richard Helms — the single segment of the picture that most directly addresses Stone’s central thesis: That the President, whoever he (or in future, she) might be, is a temporary employee of a National Security State so overweening, and so powerful, it is a beast with its own sinister momentum, over which the Commander in Chief has no recourse, defense, or power. One senses in its excision from the 1995 theatrical release the fine Italian hand of the Walt Disney Company. Elaine May once observed that “They” always know what your movie is about — the very reason you wanted to make it — because it’s what they make you cut first.

The Russia House casarusia05
*The Russia House (1990)
A beautifully lucid and bracingly intelligent spy thriller out of le Carré that, unlike the run of these things, rewards repeated viewings as few such entertainments ever do.


The Front - Murphy, Allen

The Front (1976) Even at 15 I knew that this earnest dramatic comedy written, directed by and starring a number of blacklist survivors carried with it more than a whiff of wish-fulfillment. Yet it carries you along, and engenders a great deal of good will, despite Woody Allen’s amateurish performance, and general repulsiveness of personality, in the lead. The nadir of Allen’s appearance here is his questioning by a HUAC panel. The great screen actors allow a director to photograph thought; at the crucial moment, all Allen knows how to do is blink and stare. Walter Bernstein was the screenwriter and Martin Ritt directed. The supporting cast includes Andrea Marcovicci (struggling against a poorly written part), Michael Murphy (very good as a blacklisted television writer), Zero Mostel (obnoxious in a largely obnoxious role), Herschel Bernardi as a harried network producer, Remak Ramsey as a slithery investigator, Lloyd Gough and David Margulies (also playing blacklistees, which Gough was), Charles Kimbrough and Josef Sommer (as HUAC members) and in a small early role, Danny Aiello. Michael Chapman (The Last Detail, The White Dawn, Taxi Driver, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Raging Bull) provided the warm, burnished cinematography of a lovely, and lovingly recreated, 1950s New York.

winchester '73
*Winchester ’73 (1950) This first of many taut collaborations between James Stewart and the director Anthony Mann is tough to beat. It’s practically a Western noir, shot by William H. Daniels in beautifully rendered black-and-white and written (by Robert L. Richards, with an important final revision by Borden Chase) seemingly in hot type. Stewart, to my mind the single finest actor in American movie history, plays a man obsessed, at which he excelled — the sort of role that allowed this beloved figure to limn the darker contours of American life. Some think this is a post-war innovation, but if you look over Stewart’s filmography you become aware that this dramatic tendency (which he shared with Cary Grant, an actor just barely second to him in range and ability) goes back at least to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington in 1939, and that even in such sparkling comedies as The Philadelphia Story and The Shop Around the Corner he hints at discordant rumblings beneath an often placid surface. The splendid cast includes Shelley Winters as a tarnished angel, Millard Mitchell as Stewart’s trusted friend, Charles Drake as a congenital coward, John McIntire as a laconic seller of firearms, the ever-likable Jay C. Flippen as a Cavalry officer, Rock Hudson as a dangerous Indian, the wonderful Will Geer (who was shortly to be blacklisted) as Wyatt Earp, Stephen McNally as the object of Stewart’s quest, Tony Curtis in a small role as a soldier and Dan Duryea as a cheerful psychopath; the scene in which Stewart interrogates him, nearly breaking his arm, is a small masterpiece of unexpected violence. Stewart’s profit participation deal with Universal for this and the film of Harvey made him a very wealthy man.

the magnificent ambersons - moorehead
*The Magnificent Ambersons (1942) — Criterion Whenever I contemplate what RKO did to what might have been Orson Welles’ masterpiece, not merely disemboweling it but destroying the original negative, I become physically ill. Yet even in its severely truncated form, Ambersons is a movie of such exquisite textures it demands to be seen, studied and yes, even loved. Perhaps no American literary adaptation has so conscientiously retained its author’s voice, with Welles himself memorably narrating Booth Tarkington’s un-emphatic yet revealing descriptive prose. Perhaps only a master radio dramatist, as Welles certainly was, would have been as concerned with the sound and shape of authorial tone, and Tarkington’s lovely novel was quite clearly one that resonated with him; he adapted it for radio twice before embarking on the movie. Unavoidably out of the country as the picture was being edited, and lacking the right of final cut he enjoyed on Citizen Kane, Welles was powerless to stop the picture’s evisceration: His initial cut ran 148 minutes, the preview edit was 131, and the final release print was further hacked to a mere 88 — fully an hour shorter than Welles intended. It was one of those two previews that so frightened management at RKO, when his ending, and Agnes Moorehead’s performance, received what he later called “roars of laughter from some stupid Saturday night audience.” That climax, it should be noted, was the one area in which Welles’ narrative diverged from Tarkington’s, and certainly it was depressingly dark.§ But the studio’s solution, allowing several hacks (one of whom was the editor, Robert Wise) to re-shoot in an appallingly unambiguous manner, not even attempting to match the style to that of Welles, are disastrous, and it takes a strong constitution to bear them; the final scene is especially stomach-churning. (The movie’s composer, Bernard Herrmann, was so incensed by the damage done to the picture he demanded his credit be removed.) Matters weren’t helped by the slowness with which Stanley Cortez lit the stages for his admittedly shimmering cinematography — and indeed, the time he wasted likely would have allowed Welles to edit it to both his and RKO’s satisfaction; Cortez was eventually fired and replaced with Jack MacKenzie. What still exists is among the finest work, not merely by Welles, but by anyone. There are sequences, like the ball in the Amberson mansion, and two on the streets of the Midwestern city in which the story takes place that are among the most quietly astonishing ever committed to celluloid. And his cast is first-rate: Tim Holt as Georgie Minafer, the spoiled, headstrong scion of the family; Ray Collins as his laconic uncle; Dolores Costello as his indulgent mother; Joseph Cotten as Eugene Morgan, her quondam and future suitor; Anne Baxter as his daughter, and Georgie’s inamorata, strangely unable to resist this appalling boy; Richard Bennett, deeply moving as the Amberson patriarch; and Moorehead in a towering performance as Georgie’s embittered spinster aunt, who foolishly if unwittingly sets in motion the wheels of the family’s eventual destruction. Her scene with Holt toward the end, where she bravely resists her own rising hysteria until she can no longer stave it off, is one of the peerlessly great moments in movie acting. Welles always wondered why she didn’t get an Academy Award for her performance, and you will too.


* Ten, if you don’t watch Stone’s two Prologues detailing the last years of the 19th century and the earlier years of the 20th — and you should; they provide the necessary context to what follows. There is also on the Blu-Ray set a long colloquy between Stone and Tariq Ali that is not to be missed.

†Except the ending. Infamously, Mamet concluded his screenplay without the jury returning a verdict, then left the picture in a childish huff when his wisdom was questioned. (The producer suggested that, had they filmed the picture as Mamet wrote it, the marquees would have to have read “The Verdict?”)

‡One of them, Perry Russo — who as far as I know was not a hustler, although the question of his sexuality is a curious one — was Garrison’s star witness. Interestingly, Russo appears nowhere in JFK.

§In the novel, the eventual redemption of both Georgie Minafer and Eugene Morgan is accomplished through a bizarre deus ex machina: Eugene, while in New York, visits a medium, whose “control” convinces him he must “be kind.” Welles later told Peter Bogdanovich that his ending was “not to un-do any fault in Tarkington,” but surely he was either mis-remembering, or protecting Tarkington’s reputation, which he quite reasonably felt deserved contemporary re-evaluation.
_______________________________

Post-Script
I have, since writing the above, heard Oliver Stone admit that he cut the Richard Helms sequence from Nixon on his own volition and not, as I assumed, due to studio interference. I respectfully submit that he was wrong. That single scene is what Stone’s Nixon is really all about. Sometimes the creator can’t see in his work what outside it others can.

Text copyright 2019 by Scott Ross

Burning bridges, using live boys for kindling: “Kelly’s Heroes” (1970)

Standard

By Scott Ross

I recently posted on the splendid Alistair MacLean-penned Where Eagles Dare, a World War II espionage epic of grand scope, superb characterizations, truly terrifying set-pieces (that cable-car to the schloss) and a series of twists and ambiguities that un-spool at the very start and don’t resolve until the final scene. The director was one Brian G. Hutton who, two years later, was represented on American screens with Kelly’s Heroes.

I remember the picture’s iconic Jack Davis poster art when the movie was released in 1970 — an interesting year for war-comedy art, what with that bizarre image on the poster of the year’s other big genre title:

I also recall having seen Kelly’s Heroes on television in the ’70s — if remembering when the three big networks still aired theatrical features doesn’t date me, nothing will — and having only vague memories of it: The opening sequence, with Lalo Schifrin and Mike Curb’s infectious “Burning Bridges” vocal playing over the main titles (a song I like nearly as much as MASH’s “Suicide is Painless,” but which in context is as anachronistic as the radio source cues on the soundtrack and Donald Sutherland’s absurd proto-hippy Sgt. Oddball); the lone Tiger Tank spreading mayhem in the French village; Don Rickles kvetching, Telly Savalas barking, Gavin McLeod laughing maniacally, and Carroll O’Connor chewing up every available stick of scenery.

What I did not remember was how sinister the damn thing is.

Take another look at that Davis poster: Jolly comrades screwing the Army. Dollars replacing the Stars and Stripes. Caper-comedy in the European Theatre of Operation. Hogan’s Heroes meets the Anti-Establishment. All just good, dirty fun, right?

Tell that to the young soldiers who die in the various actions Kelly and his growing cohort of booty-seeking mercenaries trigger on their way to plundering a cache of Nazi gold bars. Yeah, I know it’s only a movie. A fiction. But the deaths, violent and anguished — particularly the pair in the minefield — are not un-felt; they represent the snuffing-out of youth, and promise. Not in the advancement of a military goal, or even that hoariest of hoary clichés, “defense of liberty,” but in hopes of that far greater American Dream: The Perfect Score. It’s a light caper-comedy set against the hideous realities of war, and those deaths, and the cavalier attitudes that lie behind them, linger in the mind.

As Kelly, Clint Eastwood plays an only marginally more talkative version of his Man with No Name character, but with infinitely less to work with. It’s as though the filmmakers decided his mere presence was enough, and indeed the Sergio Leone connection is made explicit in one protracted, and unfunny, sequence in which Clint confronts the Tiger, accompanied by a Schifrin pastiche of Morricone.

TGTBTU07-e1298014010452-300x154

But did anyone connected with Kelly’s Heroes, including Eastwood, recall that “Blondie”’s encounter with the beautiful dying soldier near the climax of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly was a sequence that acknowledged the awful futility of armed conflict and the heartbreaking waste of the young men who serve as cannon-fodder? Even the emotionless, cynical Blondie, as obsessively single-minded in his pursuit of riches as Kelly, is moved to compassion by the obscenity of that boy’s impending death.


MASH, despite its occasionally ugly, bullying, frat-boy antics, had a sense of outrage. Both Robert Altman and the scenarist Ring Lardner, Jr., whatever their professional discord, were in agreement on the one essential: They were appalled by the waste of young lives in the depraved theatre of organized war. Kelly’s Heroes regards violent death as a regrettable but necessary step to the ultimate blessing: The accumulation of un-earned wealth… much like what motivates those who start wars to begin with.

The scenarist of this occasionally diverting but ultimately dismaying and cynical exercise was one Troy Kennedy-Martin, a Scot. It is to him, far more than to anyone else associated with the movie, even the minimally interesting Brian Hutton, that the final opprobrium must accrete. Kelly’s Heroes, despite its resolutely “anti-everything” tone, finally comes to represent the very aspects of America the Hippies rightly loathed: Self-righteous, money-grubbing callousness.

Killing young men, even in fiction, for the greater glory of the personal savings account is beyond obscene; it’s utterly indefensible.


Text copyright 2013 by Scott Ross