Archive for Kirk Douglas

I Am Groot

Posted in FILM with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on August 19, 2017 by dcairns

Walter Brennan as Groot in RED RIVER.

I had a tooth pulled yesterday. It had been panging away badly. It had once been a heavily filled thing, more edifice than natural outcrop, but the back came off and the filling came out, so as to present only a facade to the world, like a western street in a movie backlot. So the dentist pulled itup by the groot, which turns out to be about the cheapest form of treatment you can have — only £12.50.

But now I’m rather sore. And sympathised more than I might have with Kirk Douglas and his finger-removal scene in THE BIG SKY. This drunken amputation was planned for RED RIVER but John Wayne didn’t think it was funny. When he saw it performed he realised it WAS funny after all, and his trust in Hawks grew. It’s quite a strong scene for its day.

Arthur Hunnicutt performs the op. If Arthur Hunnicutt ever met Walter Brennan, would there be a huge explosion?

Meanwhile, as I type this, Fiona is on the toilet watching CHARADE. She’s been having a Cary Grant film festival today as she prepares for a colonoscopy tomorrow. She’s going to star in a film, or a film’s going to be shot inside her anyway. To prepare for this, you have to drink cement or something, and it means you spend a lot of time on the lavatory. Might as well spend it with Cary Grant.

While I was trying to sleep through the throb in my jaw, and Fiona was drinking cement or whatever it is, she watched HIS GIRL FRIDAY and yesterday we both watched MONKEY BUSINESS (the Hawks, not the Marx Bros). Fiona is well-read on the subject of chimps and observed that the young ape who swings from a lamp and batters scientists on the head is making his “play face.” So s/he was having a good time on a Hawks set, as actors tended to do. Andy Serkis can stand down.

 

Advertisements

Adolphe McMenjou

Posted in FILM with tags , , , , , , on March 4, 2017 by dcairns

vlcsnap-2017-03-03-21h28m48s233

Weird.

Adoplphe Menjou (attired as a Scotsman) to Fred Astaire in YOU WERE NEVER LOVELIER: “At heart I’m a sentimentalist. I pity you but I love my daughter.”

vlcsnap-2017-03-03-21h33m32s645

Adolphe Menjou (attired as a Frenchman) to Kirk Douglas in PATHS OF GLORY: “You have spoiled the keenness of your mind by wallowing in sentimentality. […] You’re an idealist, and I pity you as I would the village idiot.”

Be that as it may, there is absolutely nothing to be gained by comparing these films.

However, YWNL is a very enjoyable Astaire-Rita Hayworth musical, though light on music — it takes forever for Fred to dance, and we’re fifty minutes in before the first duet. The plot is fine, with just enough plausible deniability to prevent us concluding it’s about Menjou’s incestuous passion for his daughter, Rita (the biology is as unbelievable as the plotting), but it seems to take a long time to work through, with a few really good laughs along the way, admittedly.

Points are awarded for excellent use of Xavier Cugat, who gets to conduct, cartoon, and converse with far smoother integration than in the Esther Williams vehicles he pops up in (generally trying to palm off chihuahuas on Jimmy Durante, though my memory may be exaggerating the frequency of that transaction). And though I think Ginger was undeniably Fred’s best dancing partner in terms of chemistry, it is certainly arguable that Rita is the better dancer.

I can’t believe I snapped this frame grab at random and it came out so great ~

vlcsnap-2017-03-03-21h30m17s157

 

Unfriendlied

Posted in FILM, Politics, Television with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on February 23, 2016 by dcairns

vlcsnap-2016-02-23-08h38m41s133

TRUMBO breaks new ground, as a dramatic film about the blacklist, by featuring an actual communist as its hero. When Irwin Winkler was preparing GUILTY BY SUSPICION, he worked with Abraham Polonsky as screenwriter for a spell, but the partnership broke up over AP’s insistence that the protagonist had to be a communist and Winkler’s insistence that he couldn’t be. Prior to TRUMBO, only the BBC TV film Fellow Traveller had the guts to take an actual leftie as lead.

Put it this way — do you prove that the blacklist was an injustice by demonstrating that some people who were not communists got blacklisted? Would you be proving that the law against murder is wrong by making a film about an innocent man wrongly accused of murder?

vlcsnap-2016-02-23-08h38m59s50

So director Jay Roach and writer John McNamara are to be congratulated for not making the million-dollar mistake, especially in a time when right-wing pundits in America have been attempting to restore McCarthy and HUAC to favour. They do offer excuses for those who were tempted by the Party — perhaps a stronger, simpler defense would be the one used in THE PEOPLE VS LARRY FLYNT — we don’t like what these people do, but in a free society they have a right to do it.

The film has been greeted by quite a lot of grumbling, not for its politics, but for its quality. I would group it along with movies like KINSEY and THE NOTORIOUS BETTY PAGE (though it doesn’t rely on musical montages to popular, on-the-nose hits, thankfully) — a biopic which struggles to craft a solid dramatic story out of its subject, or to find a satisfying cinematic style.

vlcsnap-2016-02-23-08h39m11s172

A film on this subject cries out to be a film of ideas, since a writer’s life usually entails little action, certainly when he’s at work. To McNamara’s credit, he includes useful discussions illustrating the slippery moral slope one embarks on when trying to cooperate with HUAC, to the extent that Edward G. Robinson, chosen as main example of the friendly witness/traitor, can still seem somewhat sympathetic — he made the wrong choice, is all.

What’s rather lacking is strong emotional, dramatic scenes. Trumbo’s HUAC testimony is rather rushed through, which is unfortunate since it’s one of the rare occasions where he comes up against his enemies. Instead we have many, many short scenes in which he argues with friends, notably Louis CK, excellent in the role of a combination of various members of the Hollywood 10. Balking at crowding the screen with nameless pinkos, the screenplay is probably wise to conflate a few of them, but by name-dropping Dmytryk and other offscreen personae to no particular effect, and making the point repeatedly that there are ten of these guys whom we never get to see, the film is guilty of failing to have its cake and failing to eat it. There’s a feeling the real drama is happening elsewhere.

vlcsnap-2016-02-23-08h37m12s253

vlcsnap-2016-02-23-08h37m13s13

As director, Roach is… OK. He was on surer ground with the AUSTIN POWERS films. He makes a terrible misstep in beginning Trumbo’s HUAC testimony as a newsreel, hauling us a way from what should be the most dramatic moment yet and putting the thing into the past tense before it’s happened, and the genuinely moving moment when Trumbo sees his name on the credits of SPARTACUS after years of enforced anonymity gets a flashy reflection shot it really doesn’t need.

That should be a simple moment for letting the actors act, which Roach is otherwise quite happy to do — whatever the consequences. Bryan Cranston’s mannered perf may reflect Trumbo’s real personality, but it still feels forced, especially, as Fiona pointed out, when Louis CK and Diane Lane are being completely natural opposite him. I wonder if what was needed was a more naturally flamboyant personality, or at least a character actor with certain built-in quirks, so that the eccentricity would seem innate rather than assumed. I love Bryan Cranston, and I worry that he’s painted into a bit of a corner — any TV show he does is bound to be compared unfavourable with Breaking Bad, which means he’s pushed into movies at just the time when the smart talent i heading the other way. And movies haven’t found the best use for his talents.

(Actually, if he took part in an ensemble piece like the magnificent American Crime Story, I don’t think there would be any negative comparisons with BB.)

vlcsnap-2016-02-23-08h39m24s45

This movie also features some odd lookalikes and sortalookalikes and lookunalikes. The Edward G Robinson surrogate, Michael Stuhlbarg, bears zero resemblance to the man he’s playing, except when turning up with a beard in old age, when it’s rather too late. Perhaps wisely, he doesn’t try to sound like Robinson either. Dean O’Gorman seems to be putting all his efforts into sounding slightly like Kirk Douglas, which doesn’t help him sound like a human being or give a performance, and he still fails to call the star to mind with the force of a Frank Gorshin TV impersonation. Berliner Christian Berkel makes a good fist of the Viennese Otto Preminger, though my Facebook friend Matthew Wilder thinks the role should have been his. What that says about Matthew I leave to your own judgement.