Change Your Image
gkrupa73
Reviews
The Finishing Touch (1928)
Stan and Babe Developing into Laurel and Hardy
There is little I can add to the comments offered by the other posters. However, when viewing this film I do see Stan and Babe working on becoming the masterful Babes in the Woods characters we have come to know them. Their timing and interaction is never less than astounding and their fearlessly effective telegraphing of a gag reveals a mastery of their craft that I would argue no other comics have. There was one event that startled me about this film and helped me to appreciate it more. I have been informed by a reliable source that this film is used as a training film at the United States Department of Labor!!!!!!!!!!! What is it used to train people about? The common mistakes that ordinary people make in construction sites or similar situations that place themselves in danger. When film scholars label Stan and Babe as the perfect masters of Reducio ad Absurdum comedy, as they do, perhaps the use this early Stan and Babe effort found itself put to helps prove the point.
It Conquered the World (1956)
The Cast Saves This Otherwise Blooper.
I have always found Lee Van Cleef to seem to be a very limited actor. Of course, that is because of the roles he found himself having to play. There was not much he had to do in the spaghetti westerns except stand around and look blankly sinister. Then some years ago I found a copy of this film. I remember seeing it in the 1950s but had forgotten the cast. I remember thinking the film silly back then. Now as I have ripened into maturity ("A full grown nut" as Ralph Kramden said to Ed Norton)- or maybe I have just gotten ripe- I find I really enjoy this film. A good monster film is never about the monster. The film is about the people dealing with each other and the monster in that order. It Conquered The World fits that rule. The special effects simply do not exist. The alien is totally absurd in its appearance. However, I can ignore all that because of the acting and the plot involving the characters. I found Lee Van Cleef especially effective in this role and I enjoy watching him bring his character to life. He is struggling with his decision to assist an alien from Venus come to Earth to save us all from our jejune frivolities which inhibit human progress. He wants things to be better for people and thinks he has found a way through this alien being. He has his doubts and Lee is well able to act this conflict of doubt to our great satisfaction. Peter Graves is an actor you can count on to give a good performance even when he is not inspired. Dittos for the rest of the cast. In short, if you can ignore the cheap sets, absurd special effects, uninspired means of corner cutting due to lack of budget, and just enjoy the acting- a weakness for the lesser of the 1950s genre helps, too- I would recommend this film with the stated qualifications.
National Lampoon's Animal House (1978)
Funny FIlm, Hardly a Classic.
I loved Animal House. I still do. It is far more comical then banal nonsense like like Seinfeld, that ignoramus Jim Carry, or whoever that jerk is who made those Spy Shagging things (whatever that losers name is). They may have made money-but not comedy. I would go so far as to say that a good fun comedy has not been made in 25 years. As such, I pity the younger film goers. What do they have to compare current comedies to? Generational arrogance and narcissism will not allow them to watch a film made at an earlier time-God forbid-and they must watch what their peers tell them to (Far be it have an original mind!). So, I loved Animal House simply because it is a comedy that is funny. You cannot have a comedy about nothing and enjoy it unless you have nothing inside. Animal House follows the rules. You have well defined characters who successfully engage in comical acts and get involved in comical events. They are funny because you know who the characters are and can relate them to the events and their own comical actions have reason, logical direction and are therefore funny. So, when Blutto gets a ladder and peeps into the girl's dormitory, we laugh not because he may be exploiting the girls (I figure someone is going to address that subject that way so I might as well do it first)or that we are exploiting them- laugh because by the time Blutto does this, we expect him to do something like this, we recognize this and we laugh. Thus, Animal House is a well made comedy that follows the rules of comedy in a contemporary sea of films made by people who are passed off as comedy makers but who are as funny as foot fungus. In that context, how could it seem to so many be as anything other but a "classic"?
The Lost Weekend (1945)
One of the five best films ever made.
Allow me to begin by saying that I will not list the other four. This film is as perfect a presentation of the disease of alcoholism as one can expect from any film. Upon its unspooling in 1945 those ignorant of alcoholism sought reasons why the character drank. Viewers do to this day. They fail to realize a simple fact of life. Alcoholism is a condition that exists on its own. The alcoholic does not drink because he or she is "frustrated" by something or has been shocked by some misfortune. Most likely, the misfortune is the result of the alcoholism. For those aware of the horrors of this disease one will see that this drama is more a fictional, but clinically accurate and thorough, case study than anything else. This film frightens me every time I see it. People often wonder why the character played by Jane Wyman stuck with this very sick man. In real life this is common. Both she and the main character's brother are enablers who commonly surround the active alcoholic. The brother, Wick, rescues Don from his misfortunes. Helen (Jane Wyman)is not his fiancée but is identified in the film as his "best girl". Don flirts arrogantly with the poor soul of a bar fly girl named Gloria (Why nach Gloria, Nach!)who he sarcastically insults right and left. However, he takes much abuse from the bartender. All very typical in the world of the active alcoholic. One should note that the ending is as it is because Billy Wilder had to bow to the nincompoops in Hollywood in order to get this film out at all. The novel, written by Charley Jackson, has Don getting another bottle of booze at the end. Jackson was also technical adviser on this film. Jackson died of TB at New Yrok City's Bellevue Hospital while in restraints from suffering from the DT's. Again, if you want to understand alcoholism, just watch this film. Do not try to analyze it, you do not need to. This film will never be outdated.
The Creature Walks Among Us (1956)
The Best of the Three For Me.
I seem to differ from many of my fellow "monster movie" fans because I find this film the best of the series and in many ways one of the better horror flicks from this era. The reason for this preference on my part is because the human characters are rich, the actors do an excellent job, especially Jeff Morrow, and the focus is on the relationships between the characters against the backdrop of the adventure of again capturing the creature and then dealing with what to do with him when they get him. These relationships are as complex as my last sentence. The film opens with establishing a very strained relationship between Dr. Barton and his wife Marsha by inference of their nonverbal behavior. We soon find that Dr. Barton is not simply a very suspicious man afraid of being turned into a cock old by his young sexy wife. He is exploding with paranoia and she is repelled by him. This sets the underplay of all the remaining events in the film. Dr. Barton is a narcissistic, arrogant man besides paranoid. And, these are his more charming features. Jeff Morrow, who usually played a good natured hero, gets to show his muscles an actor by making himself totally repulsive in this role. Rex Reason is very good in his role and does so by using his good looks, great voice and easy charm to underplay his part. Thus, he makes himself a pleasant contrast to the splenetic Dr. Barton. Leigh Snowden as Dr. Barton's wife Marsha is, well, very good and also underplays her sexuality so well that it becomes intense. For those who look at a "monster movie" and think the plot of the movie is the monster, which in a good monster film would never take place, this film is not for that person. For those who like a little gem of good acting and interesting characters- enjoy this film.
Invasion, U.S.A. (1952)
An interesting film for intellectual discussion, today.
One of my earliest memories in life is seeing this film as a dark frightening image from childhood. All I could remember was the sight of a man spinning a brandy glass and otherwise much chaos and destruction. Some years ago I found a copy of this film (on the $5.00 rack), recognized it and bought it. It was a thrill- of intellectual interest. This film is in the grammar of the 1950s genre of film. And, yes, there is a 1950s grammar of film. Because studios seldom gave money to make films that where geared toward the Saturday matinée or the drive-in, little money was given to the producers. Therefore, stock footage had to be used as well as the techniques of theater. This is fine so long as these tools are used with enough creativity to tell the story of the film. Such is the case with this film. Invasion USA when viewed today begs the knee jerk cliché observations too often given about any 1950s film. The cliché notions to which I refer are that 1950s films are cold war relics that reveal "anti Communist Paranoia" and are McCarthy-ridden. One usually finds variations and elaborations on these thin ideas which we are supposed to accept a priori. Such retroactive assumptions are intellectually dishonest or at best reveal that the person offering such jerry-made matrix interpretations is innocent of any good grasp of history or the desire to engage in critical thinking. This film takes an anti-Communist position. What is wrong with that? I can think of many reasons why that is right. I suppose it would receive many kudos as an enlightened film if it was pro Communist. Invasion USA simply looks at the Cold War and other issues of the day (the Marshall Plan, income tax rates and personal responsibility) and within a tricky plot context reveals what would happen if it turned hot. The military moves by the Soviets are strategically accurate and the special effects are very poor. But they exist well enough to tell the story which is all that counts. I was not aware that Mystery Science Theater 3000 worked their banal act through this film. This is unfortunate because besides being totally unaware of the difference between a good film and a bad one, that show is devoid of any wit. For people who can have a reasonable open discussion on the subjects this film presents they should find it rewarding. However, its effect is all but destroyed by the reality of 9/11/01.