Monday 31 December 2012

Beat the Devil (1953)

THE FILM:
In 1953, Humphrey Bogart was looking to make a film out of the novel Beat the Devil. His wished for his longtime collaborator John Huston to direct the film, but Huston was involved in post-production on his film Moulin Rouge, and was committed to making another film with Katherine Hepburn. Bogart was then forced to go with two-time collaborator Nicolas Ray. However, before the cameras could start rolling, Huston manged to fit the film into his schedule.

The shoot was eventful, shooting on the Amalfi coast in Italy. The script was constantly being rewritten, often the night before shooting, by Huston and Truman Capote. Bogart was involved in a nasty car accident, and his speech ability was made limited. In post-production in England, Huston hired a skilled mimic to dub some of Bogart's lines. His name was Peter Sellers. Beat the Devil would be the last film Huston and Bogart would make together, as Bogart died in 1957.

THE PLOT:
Billy Dannreuther and his wife Maria are in Italy, planning to take a steamer to Africa, with four conniving criminals. They plan to buy land in Africa rich with uranium to exploit, and get rich off of it. When Billy wakes up one day, he finds that a man who had helped them with the plan was mysteriously killed in London. Going downstairs, he meets future fellow passengers, the Chelms; Gwendolen and Harry. Harry seems to be a stuffy Englishman, but his smart, attractive, blond wife is taken with Billy, and he invites them to dinner.

They arrive at the restaurant a confused sort. Gwendolen is smitten with Billy, while Harry doesn't care much for him. On the other hand, Harry is smitten by Billy's seductive wife, Maria. Their steamer is delayed constantly, by a malfunctioning oil tank and a drunk captain. When Billy and one of his four acquaintances watch their car fall over a cliff, they are presumed dead, and one of the criminals lets Harry in on the secret, and Gwendolen confesses her love for Billy.

When Billy and his acquaintance arrive back, everyone is confused, and then they get the call to board the steamer. It only gets more confusing, so I'll save you the trouble.

THE CRITICISM:
When I finished Wise Blood, another Huston film, I was terribly perplexed. On one hand it was a very interesting film,  on the other it left me cold, and confused. I didn't know how to review it, properly at least. I promised myself that if I ever came across a similarly perplexing film, I would think for a while before I wrote a review. When I first heard of this film, I immediately thought I would come across a similar situation. I mean, come on, have you heard the plot! Critically, it is also divisive.

Roger Ebert placed it upon his Great Movies list, a list of the best films of all time, yet it has a 6.6 on IMDb. I was worried I would be overly confused by the plot and turned off by its craziness. What a surprise I found when I finished watching the film, and had  a review already planned in my head.

This film has been called a satire, but a satire of what? I cannot classify this as a satire, so what is it? The answer is very simple, it is an adventure film. I found myself laughing at many points, although it is not a comedy. It is certainly an odd film, yet it is entertaining to say the least and the tricky twists and turns of the plot are actually quite easy to follow.

It seems like the whole cast is having a ball, with Bogart turning in the kind of cynical performance he is the master of. Jennifer Jones is blonde, and loving it. I haven't seen many films with her, so I can't quite judge her quality as an actress, but she is excellent as the devious Gwendolen Chelm. The typical English exterior is betrayed, as she reveals herself to be a scheming little devil with a voracious appetite, for love out side of her marriage.

Peter Lorre, Robert Morely and Edward Underdown are all also excellent. The odd man, or should I say woman, out is Gina Lollobrigida. Her role as Bogart's young, sensuous Italian wife is certainly fine, but she seems to be in the wrong film. This may not be her fault, as it seems as if no one on this movie knew what they were going for. Her performance is a bit one note, which is never good, even in a adventurous romp like this film. To be fair she is never really given any stand out scenes.

The screenplay seems incredibly muddled, yet it works in a very strange way. It seems that even working nights wasn't enough to stop Truman Capote from putting his own spin on the proceedings, and the dialogue is one of the films strengths. Capote and Huston manage to keep the screenplay tight and lean, but some scenes could have been cut, and some are just unnecessary.

This film can be found in the Public Domain, so the transfer isn't of the best quality. The cinematography is fair, but nothing truly stands out. The same can be said of the score, it works, but you don't find yourself humming it later on. The locations are beautiful and they work well for this type of story.

Huston's direction reflects the tone of the story, relaxed, smooth and in control. It flows naturally, showing that Huston wasn't afraid to take it easy, while still remaining in command of his film.

Overall, is it amazing? No, not really. Is it entertaining enough to serve as an enjoyable experience for 90 minutes? Yes, of course. It isn't thought-provoking. It isn't deeply psychological. It is entertaining, fast paced and likeable. So yes, it's not bad.

 Beat the Devil,
1953,
Starring: Humphrey Bogart, Jennifer Jones and Robert Morely.
Directed by John Huston,
7.5/10 (B+)


RANKED:
1. The Dead
2. The Man Who Would Be King
3. Moby Dick
4. The Asphalt Jungle
5. The Misfits
6. Beat the Devil
7. Wise Blood
8. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre
9. Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison
10. Prizzi's Honor



 

Sunday 16 December 2012

The Man Who Would Be King (1975)



THE FILM:
In the mid 1950's, John Huston picked up a copy of Rudyard Kipling's The Man Who Would Be King. Huston felt the story would make a great film. He approached both Humphrey Bogart and Clark Gable for the lead roles, and they accepted. Unfortunately, due to Bogart's death in 1957, the project stalled. Interest was regained during the making of The Misfits, when Clark Gable expressed his desire to do the film. Unfortunately, due to Gable's death in 1961, the film was once again shelved.

It would be brought up in conversation now and then, with names like Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas attached.  Nothing came of it, and the project was yet again shelved. Finally in 1973, during the making of The Mackintosh Man Huston approached Paul Newman about doing the film, with Robert Redford. Newman thought the film sounded excellent, but if the film was to be about British men, British actors should be cast. Newman mentioned Sean Connery and Michael Caine as possible leads.

Huston thought the idea excellent, and immediately contacted the two. Both agreed, and the shooting commenced in Morocco. It would be the last large scale epic Huston would ever tackle.

THE PLOT:
Rudyard Kipling is the author of a newspaper in Victorian era India, and one night as he types the next day's paper, a figure in rags approaches him. It comes with great shock to him when he realizes that this is a man he had befriended years prior. Indeed, it is Peachy Carnahan, whom Kipling had met when Peachy stole his watch. Carnahan begins to tell the story of his adventures, with fellow rogue Daniel Dravot.

Years earlier, they had the idea to walk to the mystical land of Kafiristan, where no man has been since Alexander. The idea was to make peace with the warring tribes, and set themselves up as kings. After many sidesteps, they reach their destination and kick their plan into action. After Dravot is hit with an arrow, blocked by an ammunition belt, the local populace think him a god. After a great coincidence, he becomes the ruler of the land, and people worship him.

Unfortunately, Dravot begins to think himself an actual god...

THE CRITICISM:
If ever the phrase "they don't make 'em like they used to" is applicable, this is a shining example. This kind of epic, big budget swashbuckling adventure is distinctly old Hollywood, but also incredibly entertaining. The film balances drama with comedy, adventure and greed, and does it flawlessly. This film hits all the right buttons, and then even more. Caine and Connery have tremendous camaraderie and their friendship is one of the most believable of all time.

Indeed, in their performances, they exude a remarkable charm and drama. Caine, as Peachy Carnahan is charming, dangerous and greedy, while the same can be said for Connery's Daniel Dravot. Those who know Connery only as James Bond will be in for a shock when they see this film. He proves that he can not only act, but act well. For those who know Caine as an old man, will be surprised to see that in his youth he was an excellent actor.

Christopher Plummer, in the role of Kipling is absolutely excellent. He is the lens through which you observe the story. The many years, and drafts of the screenplay, definitely show. All of that time in pre-production result in a perfectly realized script, and film. The score, by Maurice Jarre can be too much at points, but is still quite moving, especially in the last scene. The cinematography is beautiful, although it might feel slightly old school at points, so is the film.

Too many epics find that with a big budget, the film must be intense and brooding drama. As Huston realizes here, that is not the case at all. With a big budget, he manages to craft an excellent, drama that doesn't mind verging on the comic at points. This is but one of the many literary adaptations Huston would tackle throughout his long career. As is the case with almost all of those films, I have not read the source material. From my understanding Rudyard Kipling was an actual British writer, who at one point did live in India.

I am once again bring light on Huston's direction. He brings a masterful touch to the proceedings, crafting what could even be considered satirical by some. The film comes together through his direction, and indeed I cannot think of many directors whose range extends as far as Huston. If there was ever a running theme throughout his films, it is greed. This is no exception.

As I wrap up, I call attention to the last scene of the film. To those who have seen it, and those who haven't, I believe you might be able to sympathize with me when I call attention to the incredibly moving nature of the ending. The singing was an incredibly sad and fitting end to this, one of the greatest epics ever made.

I considered putting this film as my number one Huston, but I couldn't bring myself to remove The Dead from that position, so at least for now, this film will have to be content with second place.

The Man Who Would Be King,
1975,
Starring: Michael Caine, Sean Connery and Christopher Plummer,
Directed by John Huston,
10/10 (A+)

RANKED:
1. The Dead
2. The Man Who Would Be King
3. Moby Dick
4. The Asphalt Jungle
5. The Misfits
6. Wise Blood
7. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre
8. Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison
9. Prizzi's Honor


Monday 10 December 2012

Prizzi's Honor (1985)

THE FILM:

John Huston is in his late 70s. He isn't what you'd normally call hot stuff. Richard Condon wrote a book about the mob, it was a comedy. Condon decided he would make his story into a film, so he approached Huston, despite Huston not having made a comedy in some time. Huston went through an impressive roll call of names for the various parts, but he made his mind up in the end with Jack Nicholson playing Brooklyn mobster Charley and Kathleen Turner playing the seductive Irene.

Huston even cast his daughter Anjelica in the juicy part of Maerose. The film was not expected to perform well, but it became such a massive sleeper hit that when it came out on VHS, it was still in theatres. Critics loved it, and  it nabbed Huston his last Oscar nomination for Best Director, at the young age of 78, a record that stands even today. So it would make sense for this film to be regarded as a classic these days, right?

Wrong.

THE PLOT:
Charley Partanna is born into the mafia, so when he becomes of age he becomes a contract killer for the Prizzi's, one of the most famous of the New York mafia families. At a family wedding, he notices the beautiful Irene Walker. He is immediately smitten, but he loses her and can't find her. Afterwards he gets a call from her, she's in California and she wants to meet him. The next day Charley flies out and they fall immediately in love, and so does she.

He flies back home bursting with happiness, and he gets an assignment. Someone stole money from the Prizzi's casino in Vegas, and they aren't happy. It was a husband and wife job, apparently and they are in California, so Charley flies back out. There he shoots the husband, and then waits for the wife to come home. The wife is Irene, and she gives him the money, only there is half of it missing. In doubt over weather to kill or kiss her, Charley flies back to New York (again), and consults his former fiancee, after they have sex on the carpet.

Charley decides to kiss her, and flies (seriously, they use the same airplane each time, it's really annoying) back to California and marries Irene. From there, the newlyweds go back to New York (guess the method of transportation) and begin to work on a new job. It turns out that Irene is a contract killer and she and Charley plan to kidnap a bank manager for ransom, only they are forced to shoot a cops wife, turns everyone against them, even each other.

THE CRITICISM:
 I really wanted to like this movie, but I think you can tell by my annoyance over the constant air travel (seriously, it's like an ad for United) that I didn't love this film. I didn't hate it though, because Nicholson is just so entertaining while trying to pull off a Brooklyn accent, though it almost works. It is a black comedy, but I did not laugh once or cringe. I sat there and saw the movie.

Above, I wrote that this film has mostly been forgotten, and that is true. it was apparently a big hit in the 80s and I can see why. But it has been partially forgotten. Maybe because 1985 was such a weak year for film, this was regarded as good enough. Nicholson looks a little old, but he and Turner had sufficient box office appeal to pull it off. I had been told that this film was amazing and really bad. Personally I did not enjoy it, but it was entertaining enough.

With the performances, Nicholson is so completely over the top that his Charley Partanna almost works, the accent is enough to make me smile, but unfortunately for a two hour long film, a smile is not enough. Kathleen Turner certainly has an abundance of sex appeal, but I found Irene to be incredibly similar to Turner's work in the outstanding Body Heat. She had me confused about whether she was a hero or villain, up until the last few minutes I did not know. Some would sat this helped the performance, but I personally just found it confusing.

Anjelica Huston won an Oscar for her work as Maerose Prizzi, but like I said above, it must have been a weak year. Huston was good, but again I couldn't figure out weather she was good or evil. It just ended up confusing me. The rest of the cast does good work, but nothing jumps out. The cinematography can feel rather old school at some parts, but I guess that's just the way Huston interpreted the story. Alex North's score can feel clawing at some points, but the covers of popular Italian music can be entertaining.

I felt as if the film was Huston taking a break. It certainly didn't feature any amazing shots or scenes, I cannot comprehend the film's multiple Oscar nominations, it seems to me like a really average film. That is not to say that it wasn't entertaining, Nicholson was enough to save the film from mediocrity. The end result is not the boring film it might have been without Nicholson's presence and Anjelica certainly injects life into her scenes, but in the end, despite the wicked satire of the plot the film never really goes anywhere you want it to and you are left feeling empty.

But I guess that's better than nothing.

Prizzi's Honor,
1985,
Starring: Jack Nicholson, Kathleen Turner and Anjelica Huston.
Directed by John Huston,
6/10 (C-)

RANKED:
1. The Dead
2. Moby Dick
3. The Asphalt Jungle
4. The Misfits
5. Wise Blood
6. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre
7. Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison
8. Prizzi's Honor

Monday 3 December 2012

Moby Dick (1956)



THE FILM:
One day, famed science fiction writer Ray Bradbury got a call out of the blue from John Huston. Huston asked Bradbury to help him write a film adaptation of Herman Melville's Moby Dick. Bradbury confessed that he had never managed to finish reading the book, but Huston handed him a copy and told him to read what he could. Then Bradbury headed over to Ireland with his wife to write. Even after the screenplay was completed, it took Huston two years before financing could be arranged.

Indeed the film lacked a female star, and was about a bunch of men hunting whales. As part of the film's financing arrangement, Huston was forced to cast a big name in the part of Captain Ahab. He chose Gregory Peck, who no one thought would work in the role, including Peck. The shoot was plagued by production issues and multiple "Moby Dick's" were lost. Indeed Peck almost drowned during a scene. On release the film made next to nothing, and critics were generally indifferent to the film. It has yet to make it's budget back.

THE PLOT:
Any English major could tell you the plot, Ishmael is a stranger who takes a need for the sea. He heads to the town of New Bedford, where he rooms for a night with a mysterious stranger with whom he later befriends, named Queequeg. Together they strike out on a whale-hunting voyage on the Pequod. The Pequod's captain, is the mysterious Captain Ahab whose leg was taken by the infamous white whale Moby Dick, and whose is rumored to have half a heart.

It is Ahab who clarifies the Pequod's  true mission. They are not to hunt whales, they are to hunt Moby Dick.


THE CRITICISM:
I have not read Moby Dick, although I have tried. The story was not as familiar to me as it is to many, so I will just clarify something. This is the definitive screen adaptation of Moby Dick. Huston gets everything right. Peck, who has been criticized as wooden in many things, is magnificent in this. His Ahab is an intensely foreboding portrait of evil. Richard Basehart may have been a little old, and his performance may be average, but he allows you to reflect your own feelings and opinion through the character of Ishmael.

I hope I do not alienate literary fans who dismiss this as an inadequate adaptation when I say that the film does a great job of condensing the story into an enjoyable film experience. Ahab has been corrupted by the whale, and he has lost more than his leg. He has lost his soul. This is brilliantly conveyed in the performance by Peck, his foreboding glance and scars make him visually scary, but I never found myself to be afraid of him. He most certainly is not 'wooden', the dialogue is old fashioned, and I am sure that part of it must have come from the novel.

Baseheart does good work, but we never really focus on his character. His character is the lens through which we observe the tragic story of Ahab. The film can feel like an ensemble in parts, and we get time to explore some of Ishmael's shipmates. However, in one of the best scenes in the film, Orson Welles delivers an absolutely sterling monologue containing a parable. Welles dominates in that one scene, although apparently he was so nervous before delivering the monologue, that Huston had to hide a bottle of Brandy on set for Welles to sip from during nervous spells.

The screenplay is terrific, melancholy and dark, while containing a mysterious edge that Bradbury and Huston exploit terrifically. Credit must go to Melville's novel, for giving us a beautiful story. However it is the screenplay that condenses the novel without losing it's edge. For some reason I found the film to be slightly satirical, although it is certainly very darkly satiric if this is the case.

The cinematography is incredibly interesting. It looks and feels like no other Technicolor film. The colours are not garish as is the case with many films of that era. In fact, even the scenes at sea look like they are actually taking place at sea, and not in a tank or against some kind of backdrop. The film invokes a somber melancholy tone, through the muted pallet of colours. I have heard that the day for night (shooting in day, and darkening the image to make it look as if it takes place at night) technique was used, and it certainly makes sense.

Finally to the direction. Huston once again delivers a great film. While the direction may not be as energetic as Wise Blood, or relaxed like The Dead. His direction is key to the success of the film. It's a good thing he does well, admirably. The tone is slow, though not nearly as slow as the novel. It certainly feels that by the end someone is winking at you. that someone may very well be John Huston.

Moby Dick,
1956,
Starring: Gregory Peck, Richard Baseheart and Leo Genn
Directed by John Huston,
9.5/10 (A+)

RANKED:
1. The Dead
2. Moby Dick
3. The Asphalt Jungle
4. The Misfits
5. Wise Blood
6. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre
7. Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison