As the film progresses though there are glimmer's of hope for it, as the plot takes some interesting twists, but it also suffers in the fact that when the action happens some of the CGI effects look quite dated. The CGI for AMEE, the AI robot that's been assigned to the mission, does manage to look okay until it starts attacking the cast (which is a saving grace in itself). It's a shame though that films like these aren't remade, as there really isn't much to be lost in redoing this as opposed to a remake of Total Recall. The film's essence has potential, but sadly all the ingredients used to turn the screenplay into a movie have proved disastorous, and this film doesn't end up offering much in the way of a entertainment nor originality. I suppose the most irritating thing about this film, is the knowledge that it had such a large budget and you're left wondering how and where it was spent.
Fred Zinneman's A Man For All Seasons with Paul Scholfield as the saintly Sir Thomas More, torn between the role of serving his king or serving his God. It's film that perhaps doesn't resonate with the state of today's secular society, but it is a great tale of a Godly man which still shows the important role of religion and morality in the world not only then, but now. Legendary playwright Robert Bolt delivers one of his most fascinating screenplays for this film as the tensions between More, King Henry VIII and Thomas Cromwell come to a head. Robert Shaw delivers a typically strong and charismatic performance as the obstinate King Henry, Cromwell by the reliable Leo McKern. An impressive cast is completed with a young John Hurt as the pivotal Richard Rich and Susannah York as More's daughter; along with cameos from Orson Welles as the late Cardinal Wolsey and Vanessa Redgrave as Anne Boleyn. It is really though all about Schofield who provides an exceptional performance as the man who stood up for his own beliefs and followed his own moral compass at risk of his own demise.
Whilst the film isn't as gripping as maybe Becket, it is yet another great example of the terrific output of cinema during the 1960's. It's yet another impressive movie from Zinneman and Bolt and is a fantastic portrait of one of history's few good men.
I then watched my first ever movie starring one of early cinema's biggest icons: Jean Harlow. Platinum Blonde was early Columbia picture, directed by Frank Capra, the man that would propel the studio to the mainstream a few years later with It Happened One Night. Although this film was released after her career defining Hell's Angels and The Public Enemy, it was made before Harlow had become a mainstream megastar, which is probably why she plays a slightly different role to her usual type.
The film is about a reporter (Robert Williams) trying to get a scoop on a wealthy socialite's (Harlow) family's misdemeanours, instead he falls in love with her and they elope. His colleague Gallagher (Loretta Young) is in love with the reporter and is heartbroken when she learns of their marriage. Meanwhile the newly weds each try to change each other to how they want them to be, with him wanting her to be his obedient wife and she wanting him to become a gentleman and a playwright. Whilst the film does come of as a bit dated in some places, the story is still enjoyable and engaging enough for today's modern audience. The acting is pretty decent for an early talkie, although one can't help but think the film would have worked better with Harlow and Young switching roles. Harlow seems beyond her age of 20 in this role, but she is very cute in this role, and her voluptuous figure is reminiscent of Mae West, which probably isn't befitting of 1930's socialite. Loretta Young is equally beautiful, even though she is stuck in dowdy clothes for the most part.
The biggest tragedy is watching the film knowing the untimely death of it's star, not Jean Harlow who would die just 6 years after this film, but Robert Williams, who died just after the film's release. He manages to carry the film where needed, and is similar in style to Cary Grant. It seems a shame that he would die at such a young age, as no doubt he would have gone on to a successful career as one of Hollywood's leading men. The film also has the early hallmarks of a Frank Capra picture, with all the witticisms and fast paced progress that his future films contained. Admittedly, the comedy is slightly laboured and dated at times. Overall though it is a decent film that serves as a launchpad for me to watch more of Harlow's films.
The Great Gabbo was an early talkie that featured a starring role for the great director Erich Von Stroheim. The film is heavily referenced in an episode of The Simpsons, and as such isn't as forgotten as the majority of film's of this ilk from this era. The quality of the film isn't great as it's degraded understandably over the years, and 26 minutes of footage is missing (including early colour footage), which is unfortunate. Having said that though, the movie is decent, and features some good acting, especially for an early talkie.
Von Stroheim shows us that he wasn't just meticulous director, but also a meticulous and accomplished actor also. He plays the title role as a ventriloquist, who becomes tired of being upstaged by his incredibly life like dummy. It's hard to understand whether Gabbo is just a great ventriloquist, or Otto does have a life of his own. Equally one could come to the conclusion that Gabbo is quite literally mad and is a borderline schizophrenic with Otto serving as his other half.
It is very unnerving movie, which is heightened with each time Gabbo and Otto appear on screen. This is a credit Von Stroheim, who is one of the few actors to be able to create such intensity in these early days of Hollywood. It's also interesting that Ben Hecht wrote the screenplay, a man who would go on to write some of the great screenplays for both MGM and Hitchcock. The film does try to utilise it's sound a bit too much, with plenty of musical numbers, which come across as superfluous in places, but are quite visually impressive. Nonetheless, it's an interesting film (thanks mainly to Von Stroheim), that would possibly be even more highly regarded if fully restored. The entire film can be viewed below:
F for Fake was a documentary produced and starring Orson Welles. It focused on the art of fraud, specifically centring on the story of Clifford Irving and how writing a biography of the great art forger Elmyr De Hory, inspired him to write the most infamous biography of the 20th century.
Of course, I had already been fortunate enough to watch the adaptation of Irving's publication of the fake Howard Hughes biography in 2006's The Hoax. This probably helped me understand a lot of the information Welles was presenting in this film, concerning Irving as a person and his motivation. However it is De Hory's forging of art's great masterpieces that produces the most intriguing debate on the morality and legality of such hoaxes. Without doubt Elmyr is an artist with incredible skill and technique; his ability to recreate works by Matisse, Modigliani and Renoir is astonishing. Welles rightly questions whether instead of criminalising him, we should laud him. Though this film tends to do just that anyway. It was also nice to see Welles make reference to his own infamous hoax: his 1938 radio broadcast of H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds, which sparked mass panic and hysteria across America, But it isn't only these three characters that cause such fascination with their enigmatic and evasive characteristics. Howard Hughes himself is perhaps the most enigmatic and certainly the most evasive of this film's cast. Hughes had his own penchant for trickery and showmanship, using his own doubles, his pioneering work in the aircraft industry; even with the in question biography, some believed Hughes has perpetuated a lot of the hoax himself in order to pressurise then President Richard Nixon.
It is a captivating documentary that goes one step further (arguably one too far) at the end. Even so the final segment is still spellbinding due to Welles' own art of storytelling, as well as the theatrics. It may not be to everyone's taste, but people with a sense of admiration for those who achieve infamy through undiscerning routes, will be swept away by the deception. It is a film that is emblematic of Welles as a person and a film maker, which is a compliment to this documentary.
I finished the month by watching the latest Pixar offering Brave. It was an interesting take on the princess stories, with a tomboy Scottish princess (Kelly MacDonald) this time trying to take her destiny into her own hands. Sadly the concept was the best thing about the story, as the film resulted in being a bit of a jumbled mess, and not nearly as captivating as the majority of Pixar's output.
Granted, the animation was magnificent, but I'm afraid that Pixar, and for that matter animation, has gone beyond being just well animated to be regarded as good; it needs to be backed up. The film also has a strong and talented British cast, but here their voices don't lend much to the film, possibly because their characters lack enough depth to make them engaging. The one character that really goes well with the movie is The Witch played by Julie Walters. The rest of the film seems to be stuck in limbo, as it seemingly attempts to be a cross between Princess Mononoke and Braveheart, but pales in comparison in almost every aspect. There are some murmurings that Pixar are on a downward trajectory, but I think that's a bit unfair, as unfortunately they may be becoming victims of their own success. Unfortunately, the majority of their film's are seen as some of the greatest of all time in terms of animated features, and rightly so.
No comments:
Post a Comment