Guys and Dolls

Guy and Dolls Imperfect, but Delightful

By Kristin Battestella

I love the 1955 musical charmer Guys and Dolls. I do however also hate a good portion of it. Yes, perhaps Marlon Brando’s Sky Masterson is the biggest example of suspect casting in Hollywood history, and for most classic film laymen, that’s all Guys and Dolls is about. Thankfully, the catchy tunes, colorful hijinks, and otherwise stellar cast win out against any infamy.

Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) and his nightly craps game have been put on the run thanks to Lieutenant Brannigan (Robert Keith). Not only will know one take a chance on hosting the game, but Nathan has to sweet talk his lady Adelaide (Vivian Blaine)-they’ve been engaged fourteen years and he’s forgotten their anniversary! One garage will take on the craps game, but only if Nathan can put down $1,000 first. Desperate and broke, Nathan makes a bet with old pal Sky Masterson (Brando) that he can’t woo Save A Soul Mission Sergeant Sarah Brown (Jean Simmons). Masterson vows to fill up Sarah’s empty mission and whisks her off to Havana for some dulce le leche. Will Brannigan catch on to game or will Detroit really have to marry Adelaide this time?

There have been times that I’ve been dying to see Guys and Dolls. Then again, I’ve had a few taped off TV copies that I’ve taped over! Fans of musicals, Frank Sinatra, Jean Simmons, and yes, even Marlon Brando can adore director Joseph Mankiewicz’ (All About Eve, Cleopatra) capper of dames, crime, and song. We don’t care if the lavish color is a little garish and dated today. Musical lovers don’t mind if not all the stars can sing. That’s part of Guys and Dolls’ charm. It’s so preposterous it’s good. Based upon the Frank Loesser’s 1950 Broadway production, Guys and Dolls looks like it was filmed on the stage. It’s coincidences of crooks and mission sergeants is a considerable leap of faith, but we can’t help but see these two opposing worlds collide in catchy songs and kitschy numbers.

If there is one reason to see Guys and Dolls, it is not the woeful miss of Marlon Brando. Rather than dwell on the bad, however, let’s spend some time with the exceptional Chairman himself. We expect Frank Sinatra (From Here to Eternity, The Manchurian Candidate, Robin and the Seven Hoods) to steal a lavish musical production, yet he still surprises us with fine songs, wise cracking wit, and onscreen style. Younger folks who even know who Sinatra is probably think of his latter day, heavier, white haired specials. Those youngsters might be surprised to see the square shouldered, thin, and active Frank here; but the Nathan Detroit style is how I still picture good Old Blue Eyes.

In addition to all the suavity, Sinatra’s tunes are up to snuff in Guys and Dolls. ‘Adelaide’ remains stuck in my head even when I haven’t heard it in some time, and who doesn’t play ‘songs you kind of know the words to’ with the titular track? I love the humor and pacing of ‘Sit Down You’re Rockin’ the Boat’, too. When we don’t have the big numbers, there’s also wonderful Oscar nominated scoring by Jay Blackton (Oklahoma!) keeping up the style. The backing chorus in all the numbers keeps Guys and Dolls catchy, too. The late Jean Simmons (The Robe, The Big Country, Elmer Gantry) may not have been known for her singing vocals, but her piece ‘If I Were a Bell’ is a-okay. Her distinctive speaking voice and button up style is wonderful. We believe she is religious, educated, and a little uptight- but we know Sister Sarah Brown has some spunk that needs to be let loose. It’s a shame that almost all of Simmons’ scenes are with Marlon Brando, for her charm is all over his. Though many of her roles are actually similar-the strong willed, defiant good girl- Simmons brings warmth, growth, and life to Sarah Brown.

Now, I do have to talk about the detriment of Guys and Dolls that is Marlon Brando. The Oscar winner and star of such classics as On The Waterfront, A Streetcar Named Desire, and The Godfather has never been one of my classic leading men favorites, and I suspect this performance is largely the reason why. From the first time we see Sky Masterson battle wits with Nathan Detroit, we know Brando is out of his element. Where Sinatra fits as the lovelorn song and dance craps man and Jean Simmons is lovely as the naive and good-hearted missionary, Brando’s Sky is beyond parody of the stereotypes already presented. His mannerisms are overdone, the put on crook accent is much too much, and by golly he can’t sing! After the lovely instrumental and Spanish renditions, he simply ruins ‘A Woman in Love’, and it’s best to think of Sinatra’s later versions of ‘Luck Be A Lady’ instead of Brando’s drivel. How did they get through filming Guys and Dolls without seeing all this? I must confess, on most viewings, I simply fast forward through all of Brando’s scenes. As much as I love to see darling Jean Simmons get the better of him, Masterson comes off as a jerk and Brando, well, a bit of an ass. Why did he even take the part?

Thankfully, there’s some delightfully cute support to strengthen Guys and Dolls. Robert Keith’s (The Wild One, My Man Godfrey) Lieutenant Brannigan is wonderfully crotchety in that Dragnet copper style, and Viviane Blaine (State Fair, the stage version of Guys and Dolls, too) almost steals all her scenes as Nathan Detroit’s long waiting fiancée Adelaide. Her shrill voice and good-natured annoying of Nathan is typical, but sweet and charming. Who can resist her kitten spectacle ‘Pet Me Poppa’? Though perhaps not as famous now as the other stars, she holds her own against Sinatra- unlike some players coughbrandocough. Detroit’s Laurel and Hardy-esque henchman Johnny Silver as Benny (The Dick Van Dyke Show) and Stubby Kaye (also reprising his stage role) as Nicely Nicely Johnson also add some subtle slapstick wit. It’s all a little stereotypical yes, but in good fun. Come on, how can you not love B.S. Pully and his milk drinking Chicago gangster Big Jule?

Guys and Dolls also has plenty of fifties color and style for the mid-century enthusiast. Some of the sets are clearly cardboard storefronts, yes, but that’s part of the stage-like atmosphere. The colorful pinstripe suits, bowties, and tilted fedoras are also delightful. While today’s metrosexual look doesn’t fit all men, a fedora and a sideways cigar harkens back to a time when all men could have some suavity. The ladies dance numbers are also a whole lot of fun, with pink satins, long gloves, mink, and pearls. For all the code restrictions and supposedly tame culture of the fifties, there’s also plenty of fishnet stockings and fanny wiggling!

Old school folks who remember when films like Guys and Dolls were the height, young aficionados of musicals, and everyone in between can still enjoy these singing and dancing gangsters. Guys and Dolls is not perfect, but the whole family can reminisce in this time capsule of fifties merriment and bad casting. Spend the evening humming with Guys and Dolls tonight.

Quantum of Solace

Quantum of Solace Still Missing The Bond Mark

By Kristin Battestella

Even after having such a love hate relationship with Daniel Craig’s 2006 Bond debut Casino Royale, I was eager to give his second picture Quantum of Solace a due chance. Unfortunately, director Marc Forster once again strays too far from what makes Bond, well, Bond.

Picking up where Casino Royale left off, Quantum of Solace has MI6 Agent 007 James Bond (Daniel Craig) tracking Mr. White (Jesper Christensen, The Young Victoria) and another Quantum leader, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric) to Bolivia and beyond. CIA Agent Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) and Bolivian Officer Camille Montes (Olga Kurylenko) aide Bond in infiltrating Greene’s environmental schemes, but Bond’s tactics are almost too reckless for MI6’s leader M (Judi Dench) to handle. How far will Bond go in stopping Greene and resolving his dead lover Vesper’s death?

I suppose I shall begin where a proper Bond picture begins and ends-with the ladies. Like Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace portrays women in very unBondlike ways. Craig’s Bond comes and goes with no partner, has a very brief night with Strawberry Fields (a wasted Gemma Arterton, RocknRolla) and skydives with Camille. Wow. Actually, we don’t even hear the full name of Agent Fields onscreen. Why even have a juicy, innuendo-filled name like Strawberry and not say it? Her hyped up and thus spoiled death by being drowned and covered in oil is weak in comparison to Jill Masterson’s fictitious death via goldpaint in Goldfinger. The scene is actually too dang brief, barely anything actually except a rip off thinly dressed as homage. Moreover, the complex, convoluted, heavy handed, and mish mashed plot gives us no reason to care. We spend more time harping on the late Vesper Lyn, inevitably tying Quantum of Solace as a direct sequel to Casino Royale. For this supposedly new, edgy, and rebooted Bond, he’s certainly spending a lot of time in the past, isn’t he? The drudgery doesn’t let the lovely Olga Kurylenko (Max Payne) shine, either. I’d like to see her return and get something more than all that woe. You can’t have both a depressing Bond and the tortured but beautiful leading lady. It’s almost too much of an emotional expectation for the audience. Are we looking for that much emotion in a Bond picture, anyway?

Of course, I can’t really say anything bad about Judi Dench (Notes on A Scandal, Nine, Mrs. Brown) and her continually strong portrayal as M. We get a lot of M again for this installment, and again, she’s not served well by returning writers Paul Haggis (Letters from Imo Jima, Crash, Million Dollar Baby) and Neal Purvis and Robert Wade (The World is Not Enough, Die Another Day). The logistics just don’t add up here. Bond has been rebooted, so we visually might assume M has not been, since it’s the same actress. How, then can she not trust Bond? It’s easy to forget the same M is with a new Bond. We think we can rely on the relationship, but then everything gets turned on the dime. Likewise, Giancarlo Giannini (Man on Fire) as Mathis and Jeffrey Wright (W, Angels in America) as Felix Leiter are wonderful, but underused and exited far too soon. Their scenes might be the best in the film! I dare say the next film’s course should be almost a buddy picture of Leiter and Bond with pieces from Fleming’s 007 in New York. This fine support is being wasted amid obvious and boring modern commentaries that do a lot less than letting a talented cast strut their stuff.

Now then, let’s talk about the man himself. I’ve never really liked a Bond because he’s been so hot and sexy or dreamy. However, in Quantum of Solace, 007 going psycho, flying by the seat of his pants and always getting beat up is not attractive or appealing. Perhaps I’ve been too harsh in saying I hate Daniel Craig and his portrayal of James Bond. I want to like him and his Bond, but he’s so dang heavy! There’s no Brit wit, dry humor, or spy subtleties. For the next film, add some of the old traditions-Bond, James Bond. Shaken, not stirred. Q. Moneypenny- and Bob’s your uncle Craig could be the best Bond ever. Unfortunately, all this action for action’s sake makes Craig’s brooding Bond depressing and unlikable-and unlikable, James Bond is not. You’re supposed to like 007 and root for him no matter what. That’s why we’ve put up with some very lean films over the past thirty years.

Nevertheless, I’m trying not to be mean, for I don’t think Craig is without talent. I’m making a point to watch his other films, in fact. In Tomb Raider, (which I love) he takes hot showers, struts around naked with strategically placed objects covering his tackle; and after an unfulfilling close encounter with Angelina Jolie, he proclaims, ‘Now I need a cold shower!’ I always scream at the television, ‘Why can he do that as Bond?’

Quantum of Solace does have several visual and action proud points. The lesser shown, not necessarily pretty sides of locales like Italy, Panama, and Chile are delightful. The chases are on the one hand, exceptional-but count ‘em by foot, car, boat, and plane! A lot of the action is just too dang much, too intricate and complex and without the triumphant Bond theme to tell us when it’s really cool. Likewise the main titles, theme song, and hi-tech MI6 interfaces are sweet-but I keep thinking of how dated this heavily focused upon technology will seem in a decade. Speaking of technology, the blu-ray is sharp, distinct and clear…. but sensitive and a real pain when it freezes. Quantum of Solace seems so long and loud and headache inducing despite its short 106 minutes.

The fine action in Quantum of Solace competes with itself and can’t hold the viewer amid the repeatedly obvious plot of oil corruption and environmentalism MacGuffins. The intriguing introduction of the Quantum organization is ala SPECTRE, yes, but the geeky yet villainous Greene is again too seriousness and politically uninteresting for me to care. There are also a few too many side villains here, and it’s tough to tell who is who. For everything that’s potentially good in Quantum of Solace- like the realistic usage of different languages worldwide- we get stupid seriousness and obvious symbolism and ridiculously over done deaths. Not only do we never strike the right blend on this brooding roller coaster ride, but the absence or askew use of traditional Bond anchors is just too much. You end with the gun barrel and don’t think it’s necessary for ‘Bond. James Bond’ to ever introduce himself? Come on!

However…I do have faith! Now that everyone has gotten this brooding Bond set out of his or her systems; for the next picture perhaps we can have a few familiar laughs and light-hearted innuendo, traditional Bond music, and lovable friends like Q and Moneypenny. I’ve said it before I know, but apparently, it bears repeating: coughQMoneypennycough. I’ve even thought of ways for the hat toss to make an appearance! Bond could be in uniform alone and pissy in M’s office, toss his cap, miss the rack, break something, and thus a quip from the newly entered Moneypenny. Craig could even give a fourth wall glance to the viewer, making a silent coincidence to Casino Royale’s ‘I’m the money…every penny of it.’ Yes, I have that kind of time!

Unfortunately, as the British would say, ‘the proof is in the pudding’. When I had the chance to pick up one of a dozen copies of Quantum of Solace for $3 at my local library’s sale, I passed. Sure, I took Casino Royale when it ended up being free with my library volunteer discount, but there’s just an overall sense of blandness, blah, and meh that seems to follow Quantum of Solace. Craig lovers and fans of this new Bond turn no doubt own and love Quantum of Solace, but the traditional Bond aficionado can certainly do better. Completist collectors can find the DVD or blu-ray editions affordably enough, but the casual 007 fan or layman action viewer can do without Quantum of Solace. Ironically, there’s not a iota of solitude in it.

Designing Woman

Designing Woman A Fun Fifties Treat

By Kristin Battestella

I don’t like today’s romantic comedies one bit. They’re all the same aren’t they? Thankfully, the classics got it right- as exampled in 1957’s Designing Woman.

Sportswriter Mike Hagen (Gregory Peck) and fashion designer Marilla Brown (Lauren Bacall) meet on a blissful vacation. After a whirlwind romance, they marry and return to New York, expecting their very distinctly separate lives to merge just fine. But of course, the couple realize they have nothing in common- and former flames Lori Shannon (Dolores Gray) and Zachary Wilde (Tom Helmore, Vertigo) put a wrench in the romance, too- along with crooked boxing bookie Martin Daylor (Edward Platt). Can the Hagens survive- or will the world of sports and fashion collide?

To the uneducated classic film novice, Designing Woman doesn’t seem like the big picture in either of its stars’ repertoires. However, director Vincent Minnelli (Gigi, An American in Paris) and Best Screenplay Oscar winner George Wells (Till The Clouds Roll By, Take Me Out to the Ball Game) craft a delightful battle of the sexes. Yes, it’s stereotypical- you couldn’t very well have a female sports reporter and a male designer back in the day- but there isn’t anything pissy here, no interfering sexual subtext or heavy handed statements about Mars and Venus. The narration between the characters may be unusual to the modern viewer, but the lighthearted inner monologues are also a treat. Today if we get a character’s thoughts, it’s usually depressing and moody. Designing Woman isn’t afraid to take the wink, wink to the audience, and it’s still refreshing fifty years on.

Who doesn’t like Gregory Peck, honestly? Surely classic viewers adore him, but there’s nothing modern audiences can’t enjoy, either. Designing Woman’s tongue-in-cheek style shows us some more wit and humor than we see in some of Peck’s more noble roles like To Kill A Mockingbird, The Gunfighter, or Gentleman’s Agreement. But of course, he is up to the challenge. His stoic style works great as an irritated husband, but his everyman style is still charming. There’s even a few great jokes and physical comedy fun from an actor whom we generally expect fine dramatic performance. Most of the other men in the picture are otherwise the usual stereotypes- the crazy editor Ned (Sam Levene, Crossfire) and the brain dead boxer Maxie (Mickey Shaughnessy, Jailhouse Rock, From Here to Eternity). However, Mike’s sardonic analysis of these players keeps Peck’s performance fresh and relatable. How could you not like Gregory Peck, honestly?

Sadly, you would never know Lauren Bacall’s off screen tragedy by her performance here. Her professional air, sexy confidence, witty charm, and great zingers excellently hide any despair over husband Humphrey Bogart’s cancer. I dare say you could almost forget the famous Bogie and Bacall because Bacall (The Big Sleep, How to Marry A Millionaire, Key Largo) and Peck are so delightful. Bacall’s Marilla is at odds with the man’s man Peck, but they also have great fun and laughter together. Perhaps because the emphasis here is on the fashions, we don’t get many close ups of our leading lady. Bacall’s eyes are still enchanting, however, and that husky voice makes us believe that if anyone needed to whip Gregory Peck into shape, Lauren Bacall could do it.

Dolores Gray (Kismet) is sweet and capable as Mike’s prior flame Lori Shannon, but we might expect a bigger name as the song and dance femme fatale. Likewise, we might think of a better villain than Edward Platt (Rebel Without A Cause) as Martin Daylor. These players serve their parts just fine, but perhaps it is better that there’s no secondary folks stealing our star couple’s thunder. Though not a musical per se, there are a few standard numbers in a fun, film-within-a-film frame style. The breaking of the fourth wall is great, too. I’ve seen many old movies in my time, but recently I’ve been impressed with the wondrous powers of fifties Technicolor again. Today’s pictures can be so dark and depressing or digitally saturated and filled to the brim with computer imagery. It’s refreshing to see bright suits, colorful fashion, and brightly decorated mid century sets. Naturally, Designing Woman is about a fashion designer, so we get a peek at some sweet, timeless styles: Fedoras and pillbox hats, gloves, stoles, and those weird fifties cape coats that would look so dumb today, but look great here. It’s also nice to see sexy costumes that show off women’s hips and curvy bodies. And could we also take a moment to enjoy $5 being enough for a cab?

Outside of being the perfect time capsule of colorful mid-century New York hijinks, there’s nothing wrong with Designing Woman. Modern audiences who love the nostalgia and charm of old will delight here, and contemporary romantic comedy fans should take up a viewing to see how the genre’s supposed to be done. Those who’ve already fallen in love with Gregory Peck or Lauren Bacall can love with the great pairing and performances in Designing Woman today.

Lonelyhearts (1958)

Lonelyhearts Heavy and Monty-riffic

By Kristin Battestella

I’ve been making a point to upgrade my Montgomery Clift VHS collection to DVD, but alas, some of his movies-like 1958’s Lonelyhearts- are not available on DVD, much less blu-ray. For shame!

Adam White (Clift) is an idealistic young journalist looking for his big break at The Chronicle. Adam’s boss, a cynical and sour husband William Shrike (Robert Ryan) contests his protégé’s hopeful outlook by giving him the ‘Miss Lonelyhearts’ column. Citizens write to Adam with their troubles-everything from the lovelorn to the ill, injured, or worse. Instead of laughing the letters off or answering with popular, witty advice, Adam grows very conflicted about the column and the people needing his help. Shrike’s unhappy wife Florence (Myrna Loy) hates to see the growing change in Adam, as does his waiting girlfriend Justy (Dolores Hart). When Adam decides to contact one of his letter writers, Fay Doyle (Maureen Stapleton), complications arise that could destroy the already distraught and emotionally fragile Adam.

Today, Lonelyhearts would probably be played as a romantic comedy or witty insight into relationships and love. Television director Vincent J. Donehue’s (Peter Pan) approach, however, is a little melancholy to say the least. The examination of adultery, sin, idealism and cynicism is somewhat heavy-handed, but also a little too close to home. We don’t like facing the loss of love, innocence, loyalty, and honor. Modern audiences will either love Lonelyhearts’ well-played drama and realism or just hate the melodrama and dismiss it as depressing drivel. The fifties stylings may also hamper this brooding flick. The action here is largely played like the stage-understandably as Lonelyhearts is based on the Broadway adaptation of Miss Lonelyhearts by Nathanael West. The women are very dated to the time as well. Even though the film examines the troubles of the displeased housewife, these women are meant to be content waiting for their husbands, and Justy is very happy when she’s promoted from ‘file clerk’ to ‘secretary’!

I’m getting the hang-ups out of the way because once you accept Lonelyhearts as the disillusionment that it is, you can see that it’s not a bad movie. The pacing and editing is a little uneven, and the lesser characters aren’t given much room to shine, but Montgomery Clift once again puts his tormented heart and soul into what seems like his perfect part. Though tough living and a deforming car accident hampered what could have been of Montgomery Clift and his filmmaking, he’s still pretty and dang talented enough to carry Lonelyhearts. His Adam is charming, loveable, an everyman trying to make his way in the industry. Unfortunately, we slowly see-just like Adam- that he can’t fight the system without destroying himself. Knowing what we know of the ‘mincemeated’ Monty, Lonelyhearts takes on a new examination of shattered dreams and conflicts. Where does the drunken and depressed Adam begin and the injured and pained Monty end? You never get the feeling Clift is merely playing himself-oh no. Where another actor of the day could bubble over and ham it up for such a role, Monty’s methodical talent wins out with one hundred percent believability.

I’m sure there were budgetary concerns, but I dare say Lonelyhearts is a black and white picture due to the inability to film graceful up close shots due to Clift’s facial damage. Some of his finest films-exceptional films in their own right, really, like From Here to Eternity and A Place in the Sun and Red River- are all black and white. Yes, we have to consider the accident, but even so, Monty doesn’t seem to belong in color pictures-he only made three anyway. Though tragic, he seems the last of the fifties old school gents before James Dean and Marlon Brando took his method style towards youth and the rebellious sixties. Montgomery Clift has been alluded to in songs and pop culture, but he’s still a little unloved by the movie laymen in comparison to later method actors. Audiences and viewers I implore you, rectify this error immediately!

Well, now that I’ve taken care of the Clift showcase, let’s talk about the rest of Lonelyhearts’ ensemble. Some of the newspaper office and boozing, bar hopping clientele are fairly stereotypical of 1950s dames and wise talkers, but it is kind of neat to see this time capsule of clickety clicking typewriters and cigarettes and stoles again. Robert Ryan (The Dirty Dozen, The Wild Bunch) is a little too fast talking for modern young audiences who may not understand all the old school colloquialisms, but there’s a lot of truth in his cynicism. Cruel boss Shrike belittles everything from his wife to religion-but he sure can name all Ten Commandments, can’t he? Is he tough on Adam out of his own sorry outlook on life, or is he looking out for the unlearned youth in his own harsh but endearing way? Ryan’s antagonism fuels the onscreen spirals and train wrecks wonderfully.

Unfortunately, the lovely Myrna Loy (Best Years of Our Lives, Meet Me in St. Louis, The Thin Man) doesn’t have as much to do at the trapped Mrs. Shrike. Whatever complexity she could add is cut off by too little screen time. Likewise, Dolores Hart (King Creole) is a little mismatched as Montgomery Clift’s love interest. He seems older due to his injuries, but it’s also tough to discern Justy’s age as well-why is she always wearing drab housecoats and pinafores? She’s little more than a loving secretary who’s set her life aside to wait on her father and brothers and men in general it seems. Maureen Stapleton (Reds, Airport, Bye Bye Birdie) received a Supporting Actress nomination for her ambiguous Fay, but again, there’s only two or three critical scenes for her-not really enough to get to the meat of her desperate wifeness.

It’s a little too fifties and maybe Monty isn’t as pretty as he once was, but Lonelyhearts still packs a powerful punch in its examination of love and adultery. Folks looking for sex and abusive angst won’t find all that visually desensitizing glory here-but this is also one that probably can’t be appreciated or understood by the kiddies. Classic film fans can enjoy the old school filming style and the pushing the taboo envelope of what’s a relatively tame discussion today. Fans of Montgomery Clift certainly know and love his more famous pictures, but Lonelyhearts is not mere filler in a fine career that was cut all too short. Not only do we only have seventeen Clift movies to treasure, but again, this is another VHS to hang onto! Look for this one on television and pop in the blank tape or set up your DVRs. Study, pout, and watch Lonelyhearts whenever possible.

I Think, Therefore I Review is in the Spotlight!

Hey there movie fans!

We're going into our third year of intelligent criticism on modern movies, classic film, timeless television, and even great books and music critiques. As we near 300 reviews for 2010, something amazing has happened! I Think, Therefore I Review has been feature in the British Magazine Total Film as part of its '600 Movie Blogs You Might Have Missed' expose series.



There we are on page 4 in nice red letters!

http://www.totalfilm.com/features/600-movie-blogs-you-might-have-missed/page:4


Very special Thanks to Total Film and the Large Association of Movie Blogs for establishing I Think, Therefore I Review in the movie blogging industry!

Bell Book and Candle

Bell Book and Candle is still Great, Witchy Fun

By Kristin Battestella

We may think all the young adult fantasy books, Potter-esque films, and shows like Charmed have cornered the magic market onscreen, but classics like 1958’s Bell Book and Candle have kept the kooky comedy and witchy situations innocent and fun all along.

Over Christmas, good natured New York witch Gillian Holroyd (Kim Novak) grows a little tired of her witchy ways and Aunt Queenie’s (Elsa Lanchester) magical games. When Gil falls in love with publisher and upstairs neighbor Shep Henderson (James Stewart), she uses her cat Pyewacket to cast a spell. Shep must fall in love with Gil and thus not marry her former rival and college classmate Merle Kittridge (Janice Rule, 3 Women). While all the love blossoms, Gil’s warlock brother Nicky (Jack Lemmon) assists writer Sidney Redlitch (Ernie Kovacs) in his new book ‘Magic in Manhattan’. Will Shep’s publication of the book expose the Holroyds’ witchy ways and ruin Gil’s romance with Shep?

Based upon the play by John Van Druten (Gaslight, Cabaret), director Richard Quine (Sunny Side of the Street) and screenwriter Daniel Taradash (From Here to Eternity) craft a charming look at the power and hijinks of magic and love. We often allude to love being like a bewitching spell in lyrics and poetry. Even though a spell is cast in Bell Book and Candle, we’re never quite sure where the magic ends and the true love begins. The fanciful and fun take on possible love from socially at odds groups-humans and witches-is lighthearted and still enjoyable today. We can make all the modern and hefty allusions we want about mixed romances or stereotypes about practitioners of witchcraft, but it’s nice to just take in a sweet movie with none of those pretenses. There are a few lighting effects, camera tricks, and the proverbial smoke and mirrors, but more than anything Bell Book and Candle allows its players the time and space to show the magical fun.

Yes, Jimmy Stewart (Harvey, It’s A Wonderful Life, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Rear Window, Anatomy of a Murder, need I go on?) is a little too old to be a leading man here against Kim Novak, but he’s still delightful as the straight man publisher caught in the magical mix of spells and romance. We believe a charming witch could get Shep all flustered, confused, and tongue-tied due to Stewart’s loveable slip-ups. His mix of enchantment and clueless nonsense when confronted with the world of witchcraft must have been great fun then-as it still is now to the modern viewer. Stewart’s old, and perhaps his performance is a bit Capra-esque old fashioned, but it’s a fun turn nonetheless. As wonderfully fooled as Shep is, Jack Lemmon’s Nicky is wickedly slick. His magic is all in good fun, too, but he can’t resist the spotlight. Nicky’s ill-attempted exposé writing collaborations mix the crazy ambition with the sardonic blend of wit and drama contemporary audiences expect from the late star of Grumpy Old Men and The Odd Couple. In a way, there is a touch of passing the torch between the graying Stewart and energetic Lemmon. Both men handled the romance, seriousness, and comedy of their roles before and after Bell Book and Candle with a style and class not often found in today’s young acting crowd.

Though not as famous as her male counterparts, its fun to see Kim Novak paired with Jimmy Stewart again after Alfred Hitchcock’s suspense filled Vertigo the same year. Novak’s good witch longing for love does take some getting used to after her deceptive dame in Vertigo, but her husky voice and dynamite eyes adhere to the femme and witchy vibe we expect. Her costumes are hip, with mostly spooky black or eye-catching reds- but what’s with the high, almost white hair? There’s not many close ups of Novak for some reason, but the ones we’re given are breathtaking. Fun effects and cat motifs add to Gil’s already enchanting ways, too. We believe her when she says she has the power to get things done, yet we feel for her wishes for normalcy. Likewise, Elsa Lanchester’s (The Private Life of Henry VIII, Bride of Frankenstein, Witness for the Prosecution) Aunt Queenie is great fun as the elder, kooky and mischievous sprite helping with some good natured interference and match making. Comedy maven Ernie Kovacs (Our Man in Havana, North to Alaska) is also a delight as author Sidney Redlitch – an ‘expert’ of modern witches among us who fails to see the warlocks right under his nose.

Part of Bell Book and Candle’s charm is its fun fifties color and style: the cigarettes, quirky music, Oscar nominated high-end fashion and nonchalant, cute effects. The high life of mid century New York is a delightful time capsule, and the pillow talk approach to witchcraft is in a way modern but no less sweet. However, part of this charm also irrevocably dates the portrayal. It’s 1958- the innocence of the post war years would soon be lost. Some of the whirlwind two-week romance is a little too innocent with no innuendo before the quick marriage talk, and even the colorful styles and titled fedoras would be on the fashion outs in a few years’ time. It’s as if the onscreen attitudes and styles are a final fifties hurrah before the turmoil and realizations of the sixties.

Now I’m sorry to say that I don’t know anything about current Wiccan and religious practices; but naturally modern pagans and witches looking for some seriousness and accuracy won’t find it in Bell Book and Candle. While not deliberately offensive, the clean cut fifties stylings goes for the traditional broomstick stereotypes. It’s great if you like films with some witchy fun, but there’s no realistic portrayal here. Classic film fans, however, can also enjoy the similar I Married A Witch (1942) starring Veronica Lake- both films are often attributed as the inspiration for the beloved television series Bewitched. Modern romantic fans tired of the same inane plots over and over will be charmed, too. Youthful audiences who still enjoy enchanting tales like Bewitched or Hocus Pocus can take in Bell Book and Candle at Halloween, Christmas, or any time of year.

Dragonwyck

Dragonwyck A Spooky and Charming Little Old Film

By Kristin Battestella

I was a bit surprised when I stumbled upon this 1946 title starring Gene Tierney and Vincent Price, for I had never heard of it before. Based upon 1944 novel by Anya Seton, Dragonwyck is a creepy little gothic tale of frightful mansions and murderous tendencies.

Miranda Wells (Tierney) dreams of bigger things than her family’s Connecticut farm, much to the chagrin of her devout parents Ephraim (Walter Houston) and Abigail (Anne Revere). When a letter arrives from Abigail’s distant and wealthy cousin Nicholas Van Ryan (Price), Miranda takes the offered opportunity to serve as companion to Nicholas’ daughter Katrine (Connie Marshall, Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House) at the Van Ryan’s legendary Hudson Valley estate Dragonwyck. Once at the mansion, however, tales of hauntings, local unrest, and the uneven relationship between Nicholas and his wife Johanna (Vivienne Osborne) can’t deter Miranda from falling in love with Nicholas. But of course, he is married, and spends far too many nights in his secret tower room…

Though not a horror movie or thriller per se, Dragonwyck has many fearful moments and suspense-filled sequences, largely due to the simplest suggestions of intrigue. The black and white cinematography, creepy angles, spooky lighting, and haunting score by the famed Alfred Newman (How the West Was Won, The King and I, Camelot) give just the right amount of suggestion that not all is well at Dragonwyck. Screenwriter and first time director Joseph L. Mankiewicz (All About Eve, Guys and Dolls, Cleopatra) makes great strides in giving us the basis of the novel’s complex time and place, but some sequences in Dragonwyck do seem ill edited. Quick references to a change of time and place aren’t enough to indicate the move-sometimes it seems like you’re watching a film ‘edited for content and cut to run in the time allotted.’ Thankfully, performance and story win out with the help of great costumes and gothic sets.

I don’t know much about Prince Aly Khan, except that he seemed to mentally ruin not one, but two Hollywood ladies- Rita Hayworth and Gene Tierney. Perhaps more well known today for her many romances, Tierney (Laura, The Ghost and Mrs. Muir, Leave Her To Heaven) was pretty and she could act. Maybe her beauty draws the viewer in, but Tierney’s expressions of innocence, naiveté, and love keep us interested in Miranda. We want her to find joy and happiness-even if the high society life at Dragonwyck clearly spells doom. Likewise, parents Walter Huston (Yankee Doodle Dandy, The Treasure of The Sierra Madre) and Anne Revere (National Velvet, The Song of Bernadette) are stern and respectable parents with only the best interests at heart. Observant viewers will also see a young Jessica Tandy (Driving Miss Daisy) as Peggy, the crippled Irish maid with a good heart.

It’s pretty plain to see that the ‘low’ farming folk have more values and morals than the ‘high’ Hudson folk, but Vivienne Osborne (Tomorrow at Seven) earns a piece of sympathy as Nicholas’ wife Johanna. She seems chubby and more interested in food than her daughter, but we feel that in some ways, this snotty style is not her fault. Her callous upbringing and lack of attention from her deceitful husband help blur the lines between this detailed look at the early Victorian lifestyle and Hudson society. But of course, Vincent Price (The Ten Commandments, The Pit and the Pendulum) plays a man who is not always what he seems. He’s thinner and more subdued than what we expect from the maniacal old horror maven to come in later films. Price’s Nicholas looks the waistcoat and top hat society man, we believe he can be respectable and a good love for Miranda-and yet we should know better. Price shows his range through Nicholas’ love, flagrant callousness, addictions, and other… nefarious… tendencies.

Dragonwyck is not a perfect film, and it is a little dated in some respects. Mankiewicz’ inexperience as a debut director also hampers some scenes. Nevertheless, gothic lovers and fans of classic suspense can enjoy Dragonwyck. Younger audiences may not understand some of the historical back-story about patroon landowners keeping tenant farmers in feudal like arrangements, but the spooky air is just right for a youthful scare or two. But of course, the DVD edition of Dragonwyck is now out of print. Thankfully, fans of Vincent Price can pick up a copy in several horror sets. It’s a strange placement, but fans of the cast and viewers who love a little bit of Bronte suspense will enjoy getting their hands on Dragonwyck. I’m tempted to find the book now, too!

The Prisoner of Zenda (1937)

The Prisoner of Zenda Dated, but Charming Nonetheless.

By Kristin Battestella

Everyone’s probably heard of The Prisoner of Zenda and refers to the 1894 novel by Anthony Hope as a basis for adventure film, video games, and ‘Ruritanian romance’- but have modern audiences even seen any of the film adaptations of The Prisoner of Zenda? I took in an afternoon with the 1937 version to see this gem for myself.

While on vacation in Ruritania, Rudolf Rassendyll (Ronald Colman) meets his distant royal relative, the soon to be King Rudolph V (also Colman). The cousins look exactly alike; and when the wine loving Rudolph is drugged by his vile illegitimate half brother Duke Michael (Raymond Massey, Abe Lincoln in Illinois), Rudolph’s aides Colonel Zapt (C. Aubrey Smith) and Captain Fritz von Tarlenheim (David Niven) convince Rassendyll to take the would-be king’s place. Matters are further complicated, of course, when Rudolph is taken prisoner at his castle in Zenda. Rassendyll must go on as king, and he quickly falls in love with the beautiful Princess Flavia (Madeleine Carroll).

This tale of romance and mistaken identity needs no additional support, but the subtle talk of abdication and modern political intrigue creep into The Prisoner of Zenda, thanks to producer David O. Selznick’s push for this film in light of the abdication and scandal of Edward VIII and Wallace Simpson. Director John Cromwell (Of Human Bondage, Since You Went Away) saves the big action sequences for the finish, and the talk-heavy script may seem slow and dated compared to today’s films. It’s tough to see all the lavishness of the costumes and set in the tone on tone silver screen, but the ornate chairs and adorned uniforms get the look across just fine. The supposedly big scenes seem a little small scale, too; but it’s the tale at heart that wins out in The Prisoner of Zenda. Could you so easily assume a hostile rule? Could you walk away from such power and love?

I have to admit the dual scenes with Coleman (A Tale of Two Cities, A Double Life) as both Rassendyll and the titular prisoner look dang good, without any of the obvious split screen tricks and such. He’s not bad at hamming it us as the drunk regent to be, either. Colman has the proper blend of hesitancy about kingship, romance with the ladies, and action in protecting his duty. Likewise, the loyal C. Aubrey Smith (The Four Feathers, Rebecca, Little Women) and David Niven (The Bishop’s Wife, Around the World in Eighty Days) look and act the proper aristocrats. As a lover of old school film, it’s a shame to think many of the players here lost most of their prime years to decorated service in World War II. It’s sadder still that the gems we do have- like The Prisoner of Zenda- are growing under appreciated seventy years on.

Although he made many fine pictures including Gunga Din and Little Caesar, Douglas Fairbanks Jr. might be less well known to the classic film layman than his famous father. Nevertheless, Young Fairbanks’ Rupert is so bad it’s good. He’s slick, a snake waiting to strike. If anything is more alluring than the royal look-a-like switch, it’s the swarthy villain who’s seeking to subvert all to his advantage-including the noble women. The ladies in The Prisoner of Zenda are delightful as well. Madeleine Carroll (The 39 Steps, The General Died at Dawn) is I think a little forgotten today, but she is a beautiful woman and fine actress-not nearly as done up and over the top as the women of the day could be. Her lovely air makes us believe in princesses and royal intrigue. Likewise Mary Astor (The Maltese Falcon, Meet Me in St. Louis) is wonderful as the bad but good girl Antoinette de Mauban. As wonderful as the bait and switch and political villainy are, the ladies at stake make The Prisoner of Zenda all worthwhile.

Yes, it might be too old-fashioned for younger, graphic obsessed audiences, but fans of classic films and swashbuckling adventure tales can love The Prisoner of Zenda. There’s nothing offensive here-even the political aspects of the story are fairly innocent. If you’re child is a fan of adventure, try a viewing or offer up the titular novel. It’s such a shame for good fiction and great films to be pushed aside simply because they’re a little old. Fortunately, a dual DVD edition is available, including this film and the sub par 1952 version. That Technicolor version may add spectacle and lavishness to its frame-by-frame update, but the cast isn’t as charming. Actually, in this day of remakes and updates, I’m surprised a proper, lavish, modern interpretation of this timeless tale hasn’t happened yet. Till then, love and cherish this The Prisoner of Zenda.

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

No Substance Whatsoever in G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

By Kristin Battestella

Halfway through seeing the 2009 live action G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, I wished I hadn’t bothered. Generally, I try not to be negative in my reviews, but I can’t find any substance or redemption in this bad CGI and effects laden picture that destroys the joy of the original cartoon series.

Nato soldiers Duke (Channing Tatum) and Ripcord (Marlon Wayans) are transporting dangerous warheads with nanotechnology developed by MARS leader James McCullen (Christopher Eccleston)- but their convoy is attacked by Duke’s ex-flame the Baroness (Sienna Miller). Duke and Ripcord are rescued by a team of G.I. Joes and subsequently join General Hawk’s (Dennis Quad) Alpha team in retrieving the warheads. While Ripcord romances Scarlett (Rachel Nichols), Duke confronts the Baroness and the deformed Doctor of the Cobra Organization (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). Joe ninja Snake Eyes (Ray Park, The Phantom Menace) also renews his longstanding conflict with Storm Shadow (Byung-hun Lee, Hero) as master of disguise Zartan (Arnold Vosloo) helps Cobra infiltrate the heights of global power.

It’s taken literally years, dozens of writers, and numerous rewrites, drafts, scripts, and screenplays to bring G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra to the big screen. If this is the best they could do then director Stephen Sommers (The Mummy, Van Helsing) and credited writers Stuart Beattie (Pirates of the Caribbean), David Elliot and Paul Lovett (Four Brothers), and Michael Gordon (To Live and Drive in L.A.) shouldn’t have bothered. Yes, you can’t have a rose colored view like the eighties Joe cartoon with America being perfect and the best or the bad guys parachuting out at the last minute- a positive moral for kids can’t really be applied to an action war picture, even if ‘knowing is half the battle.’ Perhaps a big screen adaptation had to involve global cities and locales and highlight an international Joe team. However, G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra didn’t have to be nothing but two hours of useless effects. Sommers (who should really retire, retrograde after The Mummy) said he didn’t want an old school white boys Vietnam-esque tale, but I would much rather have seen a modern, realistic look at a bunch of harden Joes who’ve been around the block and know what secretive ops sacrifices really cost. When Bond got to this low point with Die Another Day, it got rebooted to the opposite gritty extreme. Who was G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra’s intended audience? I can’t imagine old school, pre Sergeant Slaughter folks who adored the toys and the cartoons can enjoy this- and do modern teens and younger read the comic books? Do they have the DVDs in all their glory? Heck, do little boys still play with 3 ¾-inch action figures?

Flashbacks and built up back-stories that conflict with the established canon also hamper G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra. The Baroness is with Duke, Scarlett with Ripcord-Huh? Arnold Vosloo (The Mummy) is barely there-for his Zartan obviously disappears halfway through the film to assume the identity of the President. Even if we weren’t scratching our heads as to why anyone would cast perpetually twelve Joseph Gordon-Levitt (3^rd Rock from the Sun, Stop-Loss) as Cobra Commander, again it’s ridiculously obvious that this dead brother Rex and The Doctor are one and the same. And frankly, for a film subtitled Rise of Cobra, we end for the inevitable sequel with the newly crowned Cobra Commander in prison. Yeah, he rose really far, didn’t he? And why oh why does he have a milk carton on his face? Keep the damn blue hood! So what if it looks like the Klu Kux Klan. Let’s remind folks that a villain with an idea, the means, and the power is bad, not comical.

The production team is obviously trying not to offend anyone whilst simultaneously making ready for the sequel. Good Lord I hope Storm Shadow isn’t really dead. We could have had an entire development film for Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow ala Batman Begins. Don’t flashback in a useless first mission movie. Start at the frigging beginning of how each recruit came to be Joes. Let’s see the 12 year old Scarlett graduating then kicking her brothers’ butts, show Ripcord flying that crop duster, open with our young ninjas instead of Medieval France- um, yeah that’s what I said. Give us people that we know and like, then the mission doesn’t matter. Oh no, that would mean the effects wouldn’t matter, and oh by gosh by golly we can’t have that!

Part of the original toys and media fun was that there were too many dang Joes to keep track off; but here, there aren’t enough of them and yet everyone feels the dang same. Where are Flint, Lady Jaye, Shipwreck, Blowtorch, Spirit-hell Junkyard! More emotion could have been had with some cute or heroic dog in danger scenes before an unrealistically hokey Paris attack and underwater battle. Although I think the first X-Men film suffers from being an introductory piece, it gave fans all the things they were looking for-nods to the suits, montages of powers and characters hinted. In Rise of Cobra, there’s one scene of a woman kicking butt while testing an invisible suit. I’d like to think its Lady Jaye, but I don’t think Karolina Kurkova’s Cover Girl was even introduced! The displacement of beloved characters for poor CGI is unforgivable.

Though some of the name cast is able to stand out amid this weak, mismashed script, sometimes it’s understandable that certain people are placed beneath effects. My friends were bemused because I thought the guy from Spartacus: Blood and Sand, Star Trek, and G.I. Joe were one and the same. Channing Tatum (Stop-Loss, Public Enemies) is another blondie cookie cutter chiseled pseudo bad-ass that we don’t need. Marlon Wayans’ (White Chicks, Scary Movie, In Living Color) Ripcord easily outshines the miscast Duke. I wish more development was given to Rachel Nichols (who for the life I me I can’t remember being in Star Trek) as Scarlett. At least Dennis Quaid (Any Given Sunday, The Rookie, The Day After Tomorrow) and Brendan Fraser (School Ties, The Mummy, again. Did Sommers cast all his buddies?) are having fun with their parts. Nothing they’ve done yet has really interested me, but Christopher Eccleston’s (Doctor Who, Heroes) Scottish accent and Sienna Miller’s (Factory Girl, Layer Cake) conflicted Baroness are over done at the expensive of proper introductory Joeness. Make us like the Joes first, then give us the dark and villainous Act II. Imagine if The Empire Strikes Back had come first: no Alec Guiness to introduce us to the Force, no reason for Vader to seek Luke, and why should we care if Han and Leia kiss?

G.I. Joe has the material and potential to be a serious franchise again. In this day and age of constant unoriginal remakes and updates, I’d be seriously happy if this series was chewed up, spit out, and rebooted over this drivel. Rise of Cobra was ill conceived to begin with, and should never have made it to the general public with this many amateur faults. I am strongly opposed to another viewing of this, and the blu-ray set only intensified the bad effects. Why on earth would you need six effects companies for one movie’s CGI? How do you expect six different graphic teams to mesh together and look good? True fans should stick with the classic cartoon and all its idealistic and charmingly drawn imperfectness. Even fan fiction is better that G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra.