It is a gripping story that is told about the efforts made to make use of that stationary aircraft carrier in the middle of the Mediterranean. It is also poignant that Alec Guinness should play the part of a reconnaissance pilot because it is just this ruse that the British used to pretend that they hadn't broken the Italian and German ciphers thus enabling them to sink all the Gerry troop ships and always be just in time everywhere. A lame performance by the cast is diverted by the backdrop of a desperate situation on a tiny island that has been invaded by every great power since anyone can remember. If Ultra hadn't done it stuff these people would have been run over even though the Axis forces would have lost the war in the long run.
Reviews
5 Reviews
Battle Cry
(1955)
Unusual human interest film of war to the ordinary person
6 January 2007
Right from the start the title suggests heroism and a great deal of fighting in this second world war drama. Far from it, it showed the effects that war and the social schism that is created by removing men from their families and loved ones has on everyone involved.
The heroism is not just from the men that are fighting but the families they leave behind. This film shows how complicated relationships can be in these extreme circumstances.
The acting is superb, especially from Aldo Ray as Pfc Andy Hookens. He takes up with a New Zealand war widow during maneuvers in the pacific before Saipan. In a moving scene at her father's farm where her brother, who was also killed, had buried an ax in a tree before leaving for war, he took the Axe and felled the tree. This showed commitment more than words could do. The IMDb ratings shown for this film highlight the different values taken by men and women. Men it seems just want to see blood and gore and the women the human side, well the latter get it is spades here.
There is no propaganda regarding any particular enemy, it could be applied to any foe. The film tries to show that the fighting units are fighting for each other and do what they are trained to do without any political agenda. There is no Gung-Ho attitude shown at all which is the reserve of those who have not seen action, even though this term was coined by Lt. Col. Evans Carlson of the 2nd Marine Radier Battalion in 1942. Let us hope that such values also hold today.
The heroism is not just from the men that are fighting but the families they leave behind. This film shows how complicated relationships can be in these extreme circumstances.
The acting is superb, especially from Aldo Ray as Pfc Andy Hookens. He takes up with a New Zealand war widow during maneuvers in the pacific before Saipan. In a moving scene at her father's farm where her brother, who was also killed, had buried an ax in a tree before leaving for war, he took the Axe and felled the tree. This showed commitment more than words could do. The IMDb ratings shown for this film highlight the different values taken by men and women. Men it seems just want to see blood and gore and the women the human side, well the latter get it is spades here.
There is no propaganda regarding any particular enemy, it could be applied to any foe. The film tries to show that the fighting units are fighting for each other and do what they are trained to do without any political agenda. There is no Gung-Ho attitude shown at all which is the reserve of those who have not seen action, even though this term was coined by Lt. Col. Evans Carlson of the 2nd Marine Radier Battalion in 1942. Let us hope that such values also hold today.
Pretty Woman
(1990)
Badly cast but good movie
16 October 2006
I just wish they had discovered Rosie Perez by then who would have been more believable than Julia Roberts. That would have been a great movie. Julia Roberts is too much of a model type who just cannot carry it off even though her acting is always excellent.
The whole movie does give a sense of the decadence of the 1980s, which dates it wonderfully. Obviously, this project was on the cards and in production before the crash of the 90s. It's incredible people really thought it wouldn't end.
I'm not sure I could live a life where everyone around me just sees dollar signs and I think that someone who does would be shallower than Richard Gere's hard but soft man, which comes across as a little artificial.
The whole movie does give a sense of the decadence of the 1980s, which dates it wonderfully. Obviously, this project was on the cards and in production before the crash of the 90s. It's incredible people really thought it wouldn't end.
I'm not sure I could live a life where everyone around me just sees dollar signs and I think that someone who does would be shallower than Richard Gere's hard but soft man, which comes across as a little artificial.
12 Angry Men
(1997 TV Movie)
Unnecessary remake
22 August 2002
Warning: Spoilers
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This story is from a teleplay written by Reginald Rose and first screened in the early 50's and later made into the classic film version by Sidney Lumet. Having seen that version a few years ago, I was stunned to realize there was a remake. What! How can you top that superb production? Just look at the exquisite camera work, the seamless editing, and flawless acting. If it hadn't been for David Lean's 'The Bridge on the River Kwai', it would surely have cleaned up the Oscars: it was left to several foreign and non-Hollywood organizations to heap praise on it.
Was it because it was in black and white that modern film makers think the modern audience wouldn't bother to watch it and so they contemporize it? It is not that Friedkin's remake is bad but it hasn't quite got it when compared with the original. Great directors sometimes recognize that black and white can give good effect: The Wizard of Oz and The Secret Garden's switch from black and white to color; and the shocking Schindler's List with its little girl in red. The use of black and white in this case adds to the claustrophobic effect in the cramped and hot jury room of this old municipal building.
* SOME MINOR SPOILERS *
So where else has this production gone wrong? Well, a major irritation is the advanced age of the principle jurors (#3 and #8) considering that the script makes a big play on how old and doddery juror #9 is supposed to be. Joseph Sweeney playing the original character gave a perfect performance of a wily old man, whereas Hume Cronyn's was distinctly bland. Sweeney was 73 where the next oldest was juror #10, played by Ed Begley, at 56. In the modern version the average (mean) age is 56 to the original's 44, and too widely spread to give a convincing microcosm of the good 'ol USA. Just look at some of the ages: Scott (69), Lemon (72), Mueller-Stahl (66), and Davis (80!); in most states of the US this will excuse them service, which is nearly half of this jury. It grates when Scott is told to stop bullying the old man by the patronizing Gandolfini, when it was Scott that looked like he would bust a blood vessel.
Certainly, in their younger days, the lead actors would be perfect for the parts they played and I am left thinking that the casting crew were just remembering how they were. Twenty years ago you could believe that Jack Lemon would go out of his way to track down evidence in his own time during the course of the trial (remember the excellent China Syndrome), but here he gave a markedly tired performance. And you can see why they picked 'Old Blood and Guts' Scott as the patronizing bully, who was obviously physically incapable of backing it up. Interestingly, Juror #10 (the racist bigot) was the opposite, he was played here by Mykelti Williamson and was 20 years younger than the brilliant Ed Begley. I think you need a few years under the belt to cut such a deep-seated attitude. You will remember Begley's performance as the communist hating General Midwinter in The Billion Dollar Brain. He was just made for that kind of role, and you 'knew' he believed his ranting diatribe. There was no need for anyone to retort `don't open your filthy mouth again' in the original version as you could see the dawning realization on Begley's face, that he stood utterly alone in his views, crumpling into his seat? Williamson was totally unbelievable mainly because he was part of a culturally diverse jury making it unlikely anyone of his character would risk making such extreme views known; Begley's character was part of an all white jury out to convict the minority Hispanic boy and he thought most of the others shared his assumptions.
The small details carefully placed in the original, such as the conspicuously dry E.G Marshall (Mueller-Stahl) showing a bead of sweat when cornered, and the skilled close shots of the reactions of the players gave an atmosphere you could cut through.
* END OF MINOR SPOILERS *
Besides Scott, who won an Emmy and a Golden Globe award, and Lemon, the other notable performance was from Tony Danza as the bored and indifferent juror #7, who had two tickets to the baseball game burning a whole in his pocket. It was he that got some sort of spark from the Jack Lemon we know from old during one lengthy exchange. In contrast to Lemon, I feel Scott should have been reined in a little, as he was tending to ham it up, especially in the finale.
Don't get me wrong, this movie rates an 8, even with the loose directing and surfeit of long shots but it doesn't stand a chance against the original by Sidney Lumet.
Was it because it was in black and white that modern film makers think the modern audience wouldn't bother to watch it and so they contemporize it? It is not that Friedkin's remake is bad but it hasn't quite got it when compared with the original. Great directors sometimes recognize that black and white can give good effect: The Wizard of Oz and The Secret Garden's switch from black and white to color; and the shocking Schindler's List with its little girl in red. The use of black and white in this case adds to the claustrophobic effect in the cramped and hot jury room of this old municipal building.
* SOME MINOR SPOILERS *
So where else has this production gone wrong? Well, a major irritation is the advanced age of the principle jurors (#3 and #8) considering that the script makes a big play on how old and doddery juror #9 is supposed to be. Joseph Sweeney playing the original character gave a perfect performance of a wily old man, whereas Hume Cronyn's was distinctly bland. Sweeney was 73 where the next oldest was juror #10, played by Ed Begley, at 56. In the modern version the average (mean) age is 56 to the original's 44, and too widely spread to give a convincing microcosm of the good 'ol USA. Just look at some of the ages: Scott (69), Lemon (72), Mueller-Stahl (66), and Davis (80!); in most states of the US this will excuse them service, which is nearly half of this jury. It grates when Scott is told to stop bullying the old man by the patronizing Gandolfini, when it was Scott that looked like he would bust a blood vessel.
Certainly, in their younger days, the lead actors would be perfect for the parts they played and I am left thinking that the casting crew were just remembering how they were. Twenty years ago you could believe that Jack Lemon would go out of his way to track down evidence in his own time during the course of the trial (remember the excellent China Syndrome), but here he gave a markedly tired performance. And you can see why they picked 'Old Blood and Guts' Scott as the patronizing bully, who was obviously physically incapable of backing it up. Interestingly, Juror #10 (the racist bigot) was the opposite, he was played here by Mykelti Williamson and was 20 years younger than the brilliant Ed Begley. I think you need a few years under the belt to cut such a deep-seated attitude. You will remember Begley's performance as the communist hating General Midwinter in The Billion Dollar Brain. He was just made for that kind of role, and you 'knew' he believed his ranting diatribe. There was no need for anyone to retort `don't open your filthy mouth again' in the original version as you could see the dawning realization on Begley's face, that he stood utterly alone in his views, crumpling into his seat? Williamson was totally unbelievable mainly because he was part of a culturally diverse jury making it unlikely anyone of his character would risk making such extreme views known; Begley's character was part of an all white jury out to convict the minority Hispanic boy and he thought most of the others shared his assumptions.
The small details carefully placed in the original, such as the conspicuously dry E.G Marshall (Mueller-Stahl) showing a bead of sweat when cornered, and the skilled close shots of the reactions of the players gave an atmosphere you could cut through.
* END OF MINOR SPOILERS *
Besides Scott, who won an Emmy and a Golden Globe award, and Lemon, the other notable performance was from Tony Danza as the bored and indifferent juror #7, who had two tickets to the baseball game burning a whole in his pocket. It was he that got some sort of spark from the Jack Lemon we know from old during one lengthy exchange. In contrast to Lemon, I feel Scott should have been reined in a little, as he was tending to ham it up, especially in the finale.
Don't get me wrong, this movie rates an 8, even with the loose directing and surfeit of long shots but it doesn't stand a chance against the original by Sidney Lumet.
Johnny in the Clouds
(1945)
Life around a WWII air base shared by US and British airmen.
19 December 2000
The story is set around an English bomber air base during WWII, which subsequently becomes host to the US 8th air force. The principle characters frequent the local inn, run by 'Toddy', the wife of Flight Lieut. David Archdale.
There is an ensemble of emotions, but the theme concentrates on stiff upper lip stoicism as bomber aircrew are faced with terrible odds of survival, and friends and loved ones make the best of the situation.
The movie was obviously made as a morale booster at the end of the war in Europe and features an outstanding poem that serves as an epitaph to airmen killed in action. The poem is a parody on one written by Heinrich Hoffman, the title translating to `The Story of Johnny Head-In-Air' [1844].
For Johnny
Do not despair for Johnny head-in-air; he sleeps as sound as Johnny underground. Fetch out no shroud for Johnny-in-the-cloud; and keep your tears for him in after years. Better by far for Johnny-the-bright-star, to keep your head and see his children fed. [John Purdey (RAF 1941-1945)]
There is an ensemble of emotions, but the theme concentrates on stiff upper lip stoicism as bomber aircrew are faced with terrible odds of survival, and friends and loved ones make the best of the situation.
The movie was obviously made as a morale booster at the end of the war in Europe and features an outstanding poem that serves as an epitaph to airmen killed in action. The poem is a parody on one written by Heinrich Hoffman, the title translating to `The Story of Johnny Head-In-Air' [1844].
For Johnny
Do not despair for Johnny head-in-air; he sleeps as sound as Johnny underground. Fetch out no shroud for Johnny-in-the-cloud; and keep your tears for him in after years. Better by far for Johnny-the-bright-star, to keep your head and see his children fed. [John Purdey (RAF 1941-1945)]
Tell Your Friends