If you like The Dick Van Dyke Show, or clips you may have seen from Sid Ceasar's shows, or if you are a fan of Peter O'Toole or if you are a fan of old swashbuckling movies, you will love this movie. This movie was made by alumni of the great Ceasar's shows and like the Dick Van Dyke show is a look at that era. In this case a week when an Errol Flynn -ish character came to co-star.
Synopsis:
We begin by following Benjy Stone (Mark Linn-Baker)describing 1954, his favorite year that he spent as part of the writing staff of the King Kaiser comedy cavalcade and specifically the week his idol Alan Swann (Peter O'Toole) was going to guest-star on the show. A major turning point for him, he says. We meet the other writers and see clips from Swann's alleged movies then we cut to Swann waking up next to a beautiful, very young girl and promptly going into a horrible hacking cough. We also meet the object of Benjy's affections, not thus far reciprocated, King Kaiser's secretary K.C. Downing (Jessica Harper). We meet producers, including the great songwriter and sometime actor, Adolphe Green. Then we meet the great King himself (Joseph Bologna) as he berates the head writer's monologue in front of the whole crew. Finally, the great Alan Swann shows up to set only to pass out. The decision is made to replace him but Benjy argues against it. King relents but assigns Benjy to watch him for the week, Swann has to be at every rehearsal, sober, or Benjy pays. That's when the fun really begins.
The key to this movie is the casting. With any actor less larger-than-life than Peter O'Toole it would be hard to believe that all that follows really could happen, but O'Toole makes you believe it. You believe his escapades and you believe his humanity. He not only takes Benjy on drunken hijinks throughout the city he dedicates himself to helping him win over K.C. and even agrees to dinner with Benjy's relatives in Brooklyn. We also learn some of the self-loathing that just may be part and parcel of the alcoholism - Swann, it seems has a daughter he has been unable to face for years. The final face-off comes the night of the show when Swann find out for the first time that the show is done live. He panics and leaves threatening everything that he and Benjy have built over the week. Mostly the movie is very, very, funny with each character cast perfectly. The director is the actor Richard Benjamin of Goodbye Columbus fame.
We really get the feel of early television and all that it entailed.There are little things that harken back to the Sid Caesar show specifically, for example, there is a writer that only whispers comments to his colleague who then voices them. This allegedly hearkens back to the behavior of Neil Simon on the Ceasar show who would speak so softly someone else would have to repeat them to the room. This type of inside baseball makes the movie all the more authentic and funny.
Director ............................................................Richard Benjamin
Writers .............................................................Norman Steinberg
...........................................................Dennis Palumbo
Alan Swann ......................................................Peter O'Toole
Benjy Stone ......................................................Mark Linn-Baker
K.C. Downing ..................................................Jessica Harper
King Kaiser ......................................................Joseph Bologna
Sy Benson ........................................................Bill Macy
Belle Carroca ...................................................Lainie Kazan
Alice Miller ......................................................Anne De Salvo
Herb Lee .........................................................Basil Hoffman
Uncle Morty ....................................................Lou Jacobi
Leo Silver .......................................................Adolph Green
Alfie Bumbacelli ..............................................Tony DiBenedetto
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
Saturday, June 7, 2014
Henry V (1989) or (1944)
Actually the technical title of Olivier's Henry V - the 1944 movie is The Chronical History of King Henry the Fift with his Battel fought at Agincourt in France but that is just too much of a mouthful for me to deal with so I will treat both as being titled Henry V. I just returned from Forest Park in St. Louis where I was rained out from seeing Henry IV so I had Shakespeare on the brain. While there are no really famous movies of Henry IV these two versions of Henry V are both excellent and well worth seeing.
Synopsis:
When he is Prince Hal in Henry IV this member of the British Royalty was very worrisome to his relatives - running around with a bad crowd, drink, debauchery and even some law breaking. Now however, his father has passed and Prince Hal is Henry V faced with an important decision. Should he go to war with France winning back the territory originally held by his Norman ancestors - thereby continuing what would become known as the 100 years war? He decides that God is indeed on his side and the side of his ancestors and so he raises an army and invades.
Meanwhile in a MUCH seedier part of London, Sir John Falstaff, Henry's close friend in Henry IV, dies. The other former friends of the younger Prince Hal decide to follow their former friend to war. Meanwhile, in France, Charles VI and his son the Dauphin disagree about how big a threat is posed by Henry V. The Dauphin still views Henry as the playboy from Henry IV, while his father takes the threat more seriously. Next the action moves to the battlefield in France. We see not only the battle, but all of the doubts and worries that fill the minds of the various players the night before.
After the battle, (Spoiler alert if you don't know history) in which the British win handily over the numerically superior French forces, Henry and the daughter of the French King Charles VI meet and decide to marry, meaning that Henry's heir will be heir to France as well.
This is one of Shakespeare's best known history plays and both movies really do it justice. They are both faithful to the text (for the most part, there is always need for some cutting when Shakespeare is filmed to avoid a four hour movie) Despite Olivier's iconic status when it comes to filming Shakespeare, I personally prefer the 1989 version filmed by Kenneth Branagh. He was more age appropriate for one thing (Branagh was 29 which is exactly the same age Henry was while Olivier was in his 50s.) Furthermore, Olivier's version begins as if it were being performed on stage at the Globe - a device praised by many but one I find off-putting and distracting. Either way though, the play/movie is a must see. You won't believe how many well known lines originate in the play. The casts are excellent though most of the names in the Oliver version will be unknown to today's audience, Branaugh's version includes Derek Jacobi, Ian Holm, Paul Scofield, Judi Dench and Branagh's then-wife, Emma Thompson.The direction of both could not be better as each is a demonstrated master of film directing.
Synopsis:
When he is Prince Hal in Henry IV this member of the British Royalty was very worrisome to his relatives - running around with a bad crowd, drink, debauchery and even some law breaking. Now however, his father has passed and Prince Hal is Henry V faced with an important decision. Should he go to war with France winning back the territory originally held by his Norman ancestors - thereby continuing what would become known as the 100 years war? He decides that God is indeed on his side and the side of his ancestors and so he raises an army and invades.
Meanwhile in a MUCH seedier part of London, Sir John Falstaff, Henry's close friend in Henry IV, dies. The other former friends of the younger Prince Hal decide to follow their former friend to war. Meanwhile, in France, Charles VI and his son the Dauphin disagree about how big a threat is posed by Henry V. The Dauphin still views Henry as the playboy from Henry IV, while his father takes the threat more seriously. Next the action moves to the battlefield in France. We see not only the battle, but all of the doubts and worries that fill the minds of the various players the night before.
After the battle, (Spoiler alert if you don't know history) in which the British win handily over the numerically superior French forces, Henry and the daughter of the French King Charles VI meet and decide to marry, meaning that Henry's heir will be heir to France as well.
This is one of Shakespeare's best known history plays and both movies really do it justice. They are both faithful to the text (for the most part, there is always need for some cutting when Shakespeare is filmed to avoid a four hour movie) Despite Olivier's iconic status when it comes to filming Shakespeare, I personally prefer the 1989 version filmed by Kenneth Branagh. He was more age appropriate for one thing (Branagh was 29 which is exactly the same age Henry was while Olivier was in his 50s.) Furthermore, Olivier's version begins as if it were being performed on stage at the Globe - a device praised by many but one I find off-putting and distracting. Either way though, the play/movie is a must see. You won't believe how many well known lines originate in the play. The casts are excellent though most of the names in the Oliver version will be unknown to today's audience, Branaugh's version includes Derek Jacobi, Ian Holm, Paul Scofield, Judi Dench and Branagh's then-wife, Emma Thompson.The direction of both could not be better as each is a demonstrated master of film directing.
Monday, June 2, 2014
Reds (1981)
Reds was released in December of 1981. That Spring semester the enrollment in Soviet History doubled at Yale. Why, because the Soviet Union has never seemed so sexy before or since than it was in this movie. A sweeping, beautifully filmed, magnificently acted, tour de force this movie is a must see no matter what your politics are.
Reds is based on the true story of Jack Reed (Warren Beatty), writer journalist and political activist who went to Russia in 1917 to cover the Russian Revolution in person. The movie is based partially on his memoir of that trip, Ten Days that Shook the World. It doesn't limit itself to that trip, however, we see Reed before and after those fateful ten days. The movie examines his role in founding the Communist Party in America and his other trips to and involvement with the early Soviet Union, ultimately resulting in his being the only American buried in the Kremlin. The movie also focuses on the people in Reed's life beginning with is girlfriend/wife Louise Bryant (Diane Keaton). Their relationship and hers with others including Eugene O'Neill (Jack Nicholson) is where the sexy comes into the movie. The community they were part of in Greenwich village is filled with fascinating characters like famous/infamous anarchist Emma Goldman (Maureen Stapleton), some of whom were interviewed about that time by Beatty and those interviews are interspersed with the scripted drama in the film. Among the testifiers from the period are people like Henry Miller, Adela Rogers St. Johns, Rebecca West and George Jessel. Their comments alone and the chance to actually see them instead of reading about them or by them make the movie worth seeing all by itself.
Beatty was nominated for writing, acting, directing and producing this picture a feat that he alone has equaled with Heaven Can Wait (although Orson Welles came close with Citizen Kane). The movie won three Oscars, for Beatty's direction, Maureen's supporting actress performance, and for Vitorio Storaro's cinematography. I would argue that all three were well deserved. Why didn't it win best picture? Good question, an upset from tiny but brilliant Chariots of Fire is why, but don't let take away from the impressive quality of Reds. From the minute details of the relationships to the vast sweep of landscapes as varied as those covered by the Soviet Union itself it succeeds at all levels. If all you know of the Soviet Union is Reagan's rhetoric, you owe it to yourself to see how idealistically it came into being - even if those ideals were compromised almost immediately.
Reds is based on the true story of Jack Reed (Warren Beatty), writer journalist and political activist who went to Russia in 1917 to cover the Russian Revolution in person. The movie is based partially on his memoir of that trip, Ten Days that Shook the World. It doesn't limit itself to that trip, however, we see Reed before and after those fateful ten days. The movie examines his role in founding the Communist Party in America and his other trips to and involvement with the early Soviet Union, ultimately resulting in his being the only American buried in the Kremlin. The movie also focuses on the people in Reed's life beginning with is girlfriend/wife Louise Bryant (Diane Keaton). Their relationship and hers with others including Eugene O'Neill (Jack Nicholson) is where the sexy comes into the movie. The community they were part of in Greenwich village is filled with fascinating characters like famous/infamous anarchist Emma Goldman (Maureen Stapleton), some of whom were interviewed about that time by Beatty and those interviews are interspersed with the scripted drama in the film. Among the testifiers from the period are people like Henry Miller, Adela Rogers St. Johns, Rebecca West and George Jessel. Their comments alone and the chance to actually see them instead of reading about them or by them make the movie worth seeing all by itself.
Beatty was nominated for writing, acting, directing and producing this picture a feat that he alone has equaled with Heaven Can Wait (although Orson Welles came close with Citizen Kane). The movie won three Oscars, for Beatty's direction, Maureen's supporting actress performance, and for Vitorio Storaro's cinematography. I would argue that all three were well deserved. Why didn't it win best picture? Good question, an upset from tiny but brilliant Chariots of Fire is why, but don't let take away from the impressive quality of Reds. From the minute details of the relationships to the vast sweep of landscapes as varied as those covered by the Soviet Union itself it succeeds at all levels. If all you know of the Soviet Union is Reagan's rhetoric, you owe it to yourself to see how idealistically it came into being - even if those ideals were compromised almost immediately.
Thursday, May 29, 2014
The Godfather I and II
I'm starting with The Godfather because so many things do. It is, as Nora Ephron put it in You've Got Mail the I Ching,
particularly of 70's movies in general and any gangster movie since.
I've included both I and II in this review because they are so great
seen together or in close succession. Though each stands on it's own. In
fact, part II is arguably the only sequel that was actually better than
the original. I have not included part III because it was made so much
later that it really doesn't stand with the other two, and with all due
respect to the creative people it really doesn't belong on the same page
as the other two.
Spoiler Free Synopsis
I'm gearing this page to people who have missed many of the great movies and although it is hard for me to imagine there are too many out there who haven't seen either of these movies I'm sure there are some so I won't spoil in this section.
Godfather I tells the story of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) major figure in the New York Underworld. It begins during the wedding reception for his only daughter, Connie (Talia Shire) at the Long Island, NY home of the Corleone family. Because it goes against tradition for the Don to refuse a request made of him on this special day he is stuck in his office for most of the wedding seeing supplicants. Based on these requests and his reaction to them we see how powerful and fearful Don Corleone is. Meanwhile we also meet the rest of the family, Sonny (James Caan)the randy eldest son. Fredo (John Cazale) the friendly open middle son, and Michael (Al Pacino) the youngest son still in uniform from World War II and in attendance with his clearly WASP-y girlfriend Kay (Diane Keaton). He spends much of the wedding telling her rather frightening stories about his father and his family while emphasizing that those stories have nothing to do with him or his plans for his life. Michael also introduces Kay to his brother Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall). He explains that Hagen has a different last name because he was adopted by his father after he saw him living on the street but that his believed it would disrespectful to Hagen's birth father to change his name. Hagen has been in on all of the meetings that the Don has been having so we know that he is a close confidant of the Don's.
After the wedding we follow the next few years in the life of the family. There are major changes in the life of all of the characters caused by the dangers of the family business, organized crime. This is the business both of the Don's nuclear family as well as his crime family, all of whom refer to him respectfully as Don or the Godfather. It is clear that the Don is working to transfer control of his family to his son, primarily to Sonny if he can get him away from the women long enough. Needless to say difficulties ensue and the rolls of all of the family members change over time, including that of Michael who was so determined to stay free of the family business.
Godfather II begins with another family/religious celebration, this time the first communion of of Michael and Kay's son. Our location has moved, however from Long Island to Lake Tahoe, NV. Michael, like his father before him is stuck in meetings. This time the business involved is semi-legal, the operation of gambling casinos in Nevada. The tactics have changed less than the location, however. Shortly after the party, we are transported thousands of miles and 60 years away to turn of the century Italy where we meet the young Vito Corleone, nee Andolini. This portion of the Don's early life are woven between the scenes of Michael's quest for legitimacy throughout the movie. The cast of characters for both sections mirrors that of the first movie, though it is the younger versions of Don Corleone and his co-horts that we see in the flashback sequences. Don Corleone is played by Robert DeNiro in these sections.
These are two of the great treasures of American movies. Based on different portions of Mario Puzo's epic book about the American Mafia they are beautifully written by Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola and directed by Coppola. Coppola had a solid career in Hollywood both as a screenwriter, culminating in the brilliant screenplay for Patton and as a journeyman director (most incongruously directing Finian's Rainbow a musical starring Fred Astaire), but it was The Godfather that made him.
Keep in mind that there was little to no Mafia lore prior to the Puzo book and these movies. There were lots of gangster movies but most of those more closely resemble crime dramas than mafia movies. The genre of mafia movie began with the Godfather. Remember that J. Edgar Hoover, and therefore the FBI refused to acknowledge the existence of the mafia for most of his career which didn't end until his death a few months before this movie was released. The Kefauver hearings which tackled organized crime in this country for the first time were only 20 years old.
It's not just that the genre started with this movie though but - what a movie! Brilliant performances mostly by previously unknown actors who later became the voices of that generation. Lushly written and filmed it is, quite simply an essential movie to see for anyone who likes movies at all.
Spoiler Free Synopsis
I'm gearing this page to people who have missed many of the great movies and although it is hard for me to imagine there are too many out there who haven't seen either of these movies I'm sure there are some so I won't spoil in this section.
Godfather I tells the story of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) major figure in the New York Underworld. It begins during the wedding reception for his only daughter, Connie (Talia Shire) at the Long Island, NY home of the Corleone family. Because it goes against tradition for the Don to refuse a request made of him on this special day he is stuck in his office for most of the wedding seeing supplicants. Based on these requests and his reaction to them we see how powerful and fearful Don Corleone is. Meanwhile we also meet the rest of the family, Sonny (James Caan)the randy eldest son. Fredo (John Cazale) the friendly open middle son, and Michael (Al Pacino) the youngest son still in uniform from World War II and in attendance with his clearly WASP-y girlfriend Kay (Diane Keaton). He spends much of the wedding telling her rather frightening stories about his father and his family while emphasizing that those stories have nothing to do with him or his plans for his life. Michael also introduces Kay to his brother Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall). He explains that Hagen has a different last name because he was adopted by his father after he saw him living on the street but that his believed it would disrespectful to Hagen's birth father to change his name. Hagen has been in on all of the meetings that the Don has been having so we know that he is a close confidant of the Don's.
After the wedding we follow the next few years in the life of the family. There are major changes in the life of all of the characters caused by the dangers of the family business, organized crime. This is the business both of the Don's nuclear family as well as his crime family, all of whom refer to him respectfully as Don or the Godfather. It is clear that the Don is working to transfer control of his family to his son, primarily to Sonny if he can get him away from the women long enough. Needless to say difficulties ensue and the rolls of all of the family members change over time, including that of Michael who was so determined to stay free of the family business.
Godfather II begins with another family/religious celebration, this time the first communion of of Michael and Kay's son. Our location has moved, however from Long Island to Lake Tahoe, NV. Michael, like his father before him is stuck in meetings. This time the business involved is semi-legal, the operation of gambling casinos in Nevada. The tactics have changed less than the location, however. Shortly after the party, we are transported thousands of miles and 60 years away to turn of the century Italy where we meet the young Vito Corleone, nee Andolini. This portion of the Don's early life are woven between the scenes of Michael's quest for legitimacy throughout the movie. The cast of characters for both sections mirrors that of the first movie, though it is the younger versions of Don Corleone and his co-horts that we see in the flashback sequences. Don Corleone is played by Robert DeNiro in these sections.
These are two of the great treasures of American movies. Based on different portions of Mario Puzo's epic book about the American Mafia they are beautifully written by Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola and directed by Coppola. Coppola had a solid career in Hollywood both as a screenwriter, culminating in the brilliant screenplay for Patton and as a journeyman director (most incongruously directing Finian's Rainbow a musical starring Fred Astaire), but it was The Godfather that made him.
Keep in mind that there was little to no Mafia lore prior to the Puzo book and these movies. There were lots of gangster movies but most of those more closely resemble crime dramas than mafia movies. The genre of mafia movie began with the Godfather. Remember that J. Edgar Hoover, and therefore the FBI refused to acknowledge the existence of the mafia for most of his career which didn't end until his death a few months before this movie was released. The Kefauver hearings which tackled organized crime in this country for the first time were only 20 years old.
It's not just that the genre started with this movie though but - what a movie! Brilliant performances mostly by previously unknown actors who later became the voices of that generation. Lushly written and filmed it is, quite simply an essential movie to see for anyone who likes movies at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)