Reviews

12 Angry Men is a film that wasn't hailed as revolutionary at the time. In fact, it didn't make AFI's first "100 films" list and was only ranked #87 after the revision. It wasn't even a box office success when it was released. Despite all that, its with good reason that this film is ranked so highly on IMDb's top 250 list.

12 Angry Men is one of the few films ever made that is excellent in every regard, in some regards it feels almost flawless. The acting is top-notch from every actor involved, with Lee J. Cobb in particular standing out with one of the best performances I've seen in a film (in particular his speech near the end). The directing is wonderful, the plot is interesting, and the pacing throughout is spectacular. This is one of those films that is very hard to dislike, in my experience even younger audiences with lower attention spans or those who dislike black and white films have, with very few exceptions, really enjoyed this film.

One aspect that I want to single out is the editing and pacing, which stands out as some of the best I've ever experienced. All but a very few scenes take place in the jury room, and yet the film is "edge of your seat" material throughout. More than that, every single time I watch it I feel as the jurors feel. It starts out slow, like there's nothing to deliberate. When the jurors begins speaking a little more seriously, a little more angrily, you can feel your heart beating faster. Then the tension builds even more and just when I feel like I can't handle any more, the jurors take a break and walk around the room and cool off and wipe sweat off their brows just as I do while watching. The pacing is absolutely perfect, the fact that so many films are filled with gratuitous sex and constant violence and yet fail to enthrall me like this film, it speaks volumes as far as the quality and greatness of the film in all areas.

The most criticized element of the film is the ending (which I won't spoil) and really the entire process that is begun by Juror #8 (Henry Fonda), which is kind of out of bounds as far as how a jury is supposed to work. In real life, yes, what happened in the jury room, would probably have been enough for the whole situation to have led to a mistrial. But this criticism really misses the point of what is something of a "message movie", although not in an obnoxious way. Its a look at the justice system, the fact that a life is being put in the hands of twelve individuals with their own stories and, necessarily, their own biases. And indeed, a human life is worth enough to at least "talk about". The film takes a good hard look at the legal system, and its worthwhile and personally has led to many good discussions with others who have seen the film.

12 Angry Men isn't a film that was the first of its kinds, its ideas aren't necessarily unique. Its excellence in every category and the tremendous direction and pacing (and Lee J. Cobb) is enough to make this a favorite of mine and a film that will be enjoyed by almost anyone who watches it.

If you love action, this episode is for you. Hopalong Cassidy is of course played by William Boyd, who does an impeccable job as usual. Outside of a few nice appearances by a few regular bad guys and California, there's not much to say about the acting which is fairly standard. The appearance of Andy Clyde as California Carlson is always a plus, but unfortunately Jimmy Rogers as "Deputy Jimmy Rogers" isn't one of Hoppy's better sidekicks. The story is also pretty standard fare.

In my mind, what sets this episode apart from many of the later Hoppy movies is the action. There are several gun and fistfights and Hoppy and company manage to dispatch of many of the "forty thieves" on camera. The final fight on the bridge scene is one of the better ones out of all 66 movies, and there's also a classic gunfight in the saloon along with other more standard gun play.

Overall, its fairly standard in most respects except for lots of action. The other elements prevent this from being up there with the very best, but it stands out among some of the weaker later episodes.

Leave it to Beaver has been somewhat maligned for representing an idealized, almost utopian view of the 1950's (although half the episodes aired in the next decade) where everyone is in his place... the sons go to the school dances and participate in sports and take the girls out on nice, proper dates (as well as always addressing their father as "sir"), the father goes to work and comes back to read the paper, and the wife is in, you guessed it, the kitchen. Among certain circles "June Cleaver" is seen as a dirty name.

If you watch the series, however, the show is much more than its reputation. Ward and June Cleaver are not the perfect parents, they are merely very good parents. It almost should be remembered that the world is seen through the eyes of Beaver Cleaver, the show's star. Keeping that in mind, it shouldn't be a surprise that we rarely see the parents argue (and also why we never learn what Ward's job actually is) and the world in general is seen as a pretty friendly place. The family system is very idealized and it's refreshing to watch. The show has a nostalgic vibe no matter what the age of the viewer (my father was a toddler when it aired and I can still feel nostalgic about it) because it does idealize values that are still cherished by people all over the world- decency, honesty, responsibility, family... the Cleavers are great with all these things just about every episode. It's also a very comfortable show... it isn't aiming for laughs that will put you on the floor laughing, but it will consistently get a chuckle out of people.

Because the Cleavers are idealized, some may see the show as "dated" because the 21st century has a more cynical approach to family. This is not to say that television that strives to show a realistic family situation is bad or wrong, only that showing an idealized version of the family isn't wrong either. What is often overlooked, however, is that many issues are addressed throughout the series run. Some things that may have been more acceptable in that era are frowned upon in LitB, and serious issues are dealt with throughout the series. Racism, alcoholism, divorce, and more that would surprise those who know the show only be reputation. Very often other children would talk about their father beating them (something Ward absolutely never did... not even spankings), and although these lines are often played for laughs there is a definite somber tone as well. And as a younger person watching the show, I see the same basic social issues being dealt with by Beaver and his brother Wally as kids and even adults deal with today. The things that Beaver or Wally do wrong every week (the show has one basic formula, but it works well) may seem small and petty in comparison to what many of us have done, but many of the same principles are involved in the reasons behind the wrong actions and the solutions. So in this way, Leave it to Beaver is both tremendously old-fashioned and relevant to any culture in which humans are involved.

As far as specifics about the cast, they're all iconic characters with the nasty, conniving Eddie Haskell being one of the greatest TV character ever. Ward's wisdom is always a nice treat, and I believe that June Cleaver has more depth and strength than she's given credit for (there are a few times when you wonder who wears the pants in the family!). One of the biggest drawbacks of the show is the older Beaver in the later seasons. He's still saying the same lines that are supposed to be cute and innocent, the problem is Mathers wasn't cute and innocent anymore, he was a teenager. That's partly why the show finally ended with the cast moving on to different things.

So all in all, it's a show that I can't recommend enough.

Of all the B-movie westerns of the 1930's-40's, the Hopalong Cassidy films remain some of the best. They have more action, for those who are looking for that in these flicks (and many of us are) and excitement than some other westerns of that time, and have comparatively high production value and less cheesy story lines.

Bar 20 Rides Again is one of the earliest Hopalong Cassidy films, and it shares the strengths and weaknesses of the older films. It is less formulaic than the later movies with a more original story, and, although it is certainly family friendly, Hoppy is edgier and less like "a kiddie show". Although I love the later B-movies and the subsequent television series, I enjoy the slightly edgier stories as well. On the downside, the production value is much higher in some of the later movies and the story, although less formulaic, is pretty disjointed and doesn't seem to flow from scene to scene. As always, however, the locations are beautiful and scenic and capture a true "western" feel that many television shows 30 years later missed with obvious painted backgrounds on studio sets. James Ellison is also mostly terrible as Johnny Nelson, although William Boyd and Gabby Hayes as Windy help to save the day as far as acting goes. The best trio by my reckoning was still Boyd, Hayes, and Russell Hayden as Lucky Jenkins, and the movies with those three were often the better quality Hoppy films. In this movie there are also a couple of other recognizable faces, including Paul Fix who played Micah on The Rifleman.

The thing that really made this film memorable to me was the unique villain and some clever dark humor. Hoppy movies often cast the same actors as the same basic villains with a small mustache. Although the villain in this film had a similar motive to those villains, he had a bit more character, a Napolean aficionado who sees himself as a chess master and doesn't even consider fighting when the going gets tough. My family and I also got a kick out of how the demise of certain evil characters was treated by Hoppy and the gang with some nonchalant, deadpan humor.

So all in all, Bar 20 Rides Again doesn't have the best production quality or actors and has some pacing issues, but the fun factor and some more unique elements to the story makes up for that. This is a good one.

Although William Boyd's Hopalong Cassidy is a more mature cowboy then Roy Rogers or Gene Autry, this one is darker than usual. There's still the same humor (provided this time by Andy Clyde) as always, but the humor is much more somber than usual.

There are fewer fight scenes then some, but the fight scenes are extremely well-done for a B-western. This is also one of the longest of the Hopalong movies.

The reason I love this movie so much is because it is of refreshingly hight quality, the characters are consistent and 3-dimensional (unlike many B-westerns), and the story is unusually good. Just goes to show why Hopalong Cassidy is one of the best cowboy movie heroes there is.