Reviews

I had high expectations for this film. I liked the quirky "Sullivan's Travels" and wanted to see what Preston Sturgess could do with a screwball comedy.

Unfortunately, "The Lady Eve" was a disappointment. The opening scene introduces Charles (Henry Fonda), a dedicated ophidiologist. Then we meet Jean (Barbara Stanwyck) and Harrington (Charles Coburn), a couple of professional gamblers looking to take money off rich suckers aboard a cruise liner. There is some snappy dialog as Jean targets Charles for a take-down. Stanwyck has charisma in this role and the supporting cast do a fine job up to this point.

Then things go off the rails. Charles is boring and Fonda gives no life to this character. Why a cynic like Jean should go gooey-eyed over him is absurd. I dislike movies where the romantic leads say "I love you" when there is nothing to make you think these are anything more than words in a script.

The setup for this supposed romance is stupid. Jean finds that Charles' passion is for snakes. She is deathly afraid of snakes. This could be an act but her running out of his cabin and down the stairs is sped up for a cheap gag. Will he give up snakes for her? No! So now she is in love and wants to marry him?

That is pretty much the end of the snake theme. After the opening credits, we are led to expect that snakes and the legend of Eve must be a big part of this story. A snake appears in a brief scene at the Pike mansion later. Will a snake appear at the wedding to reveal Eve is Jean after all? No!

There are a couple of other things in the film that go nowhere. On the ship, Charles goes dizzy at the smell of Jean's perfume. At the mansion, Eve wears the same perfume but Charles refuses to believe that Eve is Jean. When Charles is courting Eve, the horse misbehaves. They shoot the scene from a different angle with the horse in shot. If this is meant to be a sight gag, it doesn't work.

The final scene is ridiculous. Charles is back on a ship where he meets Jean again. Why is he on a ship? Why is Jean there? Most importantly, why does Charles say he is in love with Jean? It makes no sense.

Screwball comedies are funny. This is not.

For a much better movie about a con artist marrying a clumsy naturalist, watch "A New Leaf" instead.

"Play Misty for Me" could have been a good thriller but is let down by the script, acting and direction.

Firstly, the script. Evelyn looms out of nowhere with no back story. Does she have a job or home? Was she always a psycho? What draws her to Dave? With none of these questions answered, she is more like a slasher film monster with supernatural abilities e.g. following Dave as if he had a GPS tracker on him, convincing Tobie to be her flat mate, killing a police detective with a pair of scissors, etc.

Secondly, the acting. Jessica Walter is good. Clint is OK but squints all the time as if he is facing down Lee Van Cleef in a Spaghetti Western. The rest of the cast range from boring (Donna Mills as Tobie) to over-the-top (James McEachin as Al).

Finally, the direction. Clint Eastwood had to start somewhere I suppose but this is self-indulgent and badly paced. Clint likes Carmel so we get panoramas of sea cliffs and pine forests. Clint likes jazz so we get home movies of the Monterey Jazz Festival. Clint likes sex so he gets naked in a waterfall.

I seem to be one of the few people who has not seen "Fatal Attraction" so I will not compare the two films. But I have seen movies with suspense and "Play Misty for Me" has very little of that.

I am surprised at how this movie divides viewers. I thought that this was a good film with solid acting from the leads. The direction is fine and most of the scenes fit together well.

However, I found the story lacking because the background of Brandon and his sister is not really explained so I had very little emotional connection with them.

Why can't Brandon have a relationship with any of the women he has sex with? Why does Sissy cut her wrists? If there was one - just one - flashback scene (possibly) explaining their "bad" past, this would have been a much better, more complete, film.

The director could have cut the scene where Sissy sings "New York, New York" VERY slowly. I get that they moved from Jersey but so what? I played that scene on double speed on my DVD and it was still too long. I suspect cinema viewers used that as a toilet break.

Finally, can we stop talking about sex "addiction"? Brandon has an obsession not a dependency. Two different things. Some guys just can't keep it in their pants - this is just biology. Addiction is overused in describing personal issues. Injecting smack? Yes - you have an addiction. Jerking off in the shower? No.