Reviews

THE FINAL COUNTDOWN is a terrific film that successfully blends the War Movie and Science Fiction genres. Only the Americans could blatantly re-write military history and get away with it. They succeed because the film is so slickly assembled.

Director Don Taylor ensures all the ingredients-pacing, action, romance, suspense (heck, there's even a dog!) come together to tell what is actually a very basic TWILIGHT ZONE-ish premise: a contemporary U. S. S. Aircraft carrier, the Nimitz, goes through a time warp and finds itself back in time, immediately prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. How cool is that?

It isn't hard to guess the outcome. It's the journey that counts. And what a ride! Produced by Kirk Douglas' son Peter-who also has a small role-the cast is impressive. Spearheaded by Kirk, the cast also includes Martin Sheen, James Farentino, Katharine Ross, Ron O'Neal and WWII veteran Charles Durning.

The spanking new Limited Edition release comprises three discs: a stunning 4K Ultra HD plus a Blu-ray plus a CD of the film score by John Scott. There's also a Collectible Booklet featuring The Zero Pilot Journal which will satisfy all the airplane geeks.

A thoroughly enjoyable voyage!

Honestly, I loved this film. It's circumstances in being produced were at odds with the finished product. To quote from the brilliant and accurate product description: "After a promising start on Poverty Row quickies, Joseph H. Lewis (The Big Combo) made his first film at Columbia and established himself as a director to watch with this Gothic-tinged Hitchcockian breakout hit, which later proved so popular that Columbia promoted it to A-feature status. The morning after Julia Ross (Nina Foch, Executive Suite) takes a job in London as secretary to wealthy widow Mrs Williamson Hughes (Dame May Whitty, The Lady Vanishes), she wakes up in a windswept Cornish mansion, having been drugged. Mrs Hughes and her volatile son, Ralph (George Macready, Gilda), attempt to gaslight Julia into believing she is Ralph's wife, Marion. Her belongings have been destroyed, the windows barred and the locals believe that she is mad. Will Julia be able to escape before she falls prey to the Hughes' sinister charade? And what happened to the real Marion Hughes? A briskly paced and brilliantly stylised mystery that grabs its audience from the start, My Name Is Julia Ross immediately cemented Lewis' place in the noir pantheon, and anticipated the elaborate identity-based deceptions found in future classic thrillers like Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo and Brian De Palma's Obsession."

If there is anything to criticize about this film, one might nitpick about things like the occasional bad accents, but given the expectations of this little gem when going into production (that it would be the bottom half of a double feature) such details are forgivable. Production of My Name Is Julia Ross is a "little engine that could" story. It just goes to show that in the hands of a master, like Joseph H. Lewis, anything is possible.

The extras are very good, too, especially the audio commentary and the audio essay "Identity Crisis: Joseph H. Lewis at Columbia," by The Nitrate Diva: Nora Fiore. Excellent. Would all the great B films from this era could receive such a careful restoration and distribution!

So, in this viewer's opinion, the film is a terrific thriller worth eight stars on its own, but the excellent restoration and extra features add another star to its over-all value.

One couldn't ask for more with this stunning Blu-ray release of the long-neglected Western THE HIRED HAND. It has all the bells and whistles for a premium release: restored picture, sound, extras galore--even an introduction from Martin Scorsese. Well, actually you COULD ask for more. That is, maybe a better movie?

This is not to say Fonda's lovingly-realised homage to the Western is not a good film, I'm just not convinced it is a great movie. The beauty of this release from Arrow Academy is that it allows you to decide for yourself, first by making the film available and second by releasing it as it was meant to be experienced, with pristine picture and sound.

When THE HIRED HAND works, it really works. One sequence--and it is discussed at length by Peter Fonda in one of the extras--is the scene where the great Warren Oates reads Scripture over their fallen comrade. I absolutely love that Fonda was acknowledging the classic Western by having someone read over another (his observation, not mine). The scene is reminiscent of that memorable shot in THE OXBOW INCIDENT (starring Peter's dad, Henry) when the elder Fonda reads the letter written by an innocent man that has just been hanged. The camera pulls in and Fonda's eyes are masked by the brim of Harry Morgan's Stetson: all we see is Fonda's mouth, which of course helps emphasize what he is saying. The scene is similar to THE HIRED HAND when Oates' and Fonda's faces are seen in near-silhouette as Oates reads.

Stunning images like this permeate THE HIRED HAND and are a testament to Fonda's respect for the genre and for having the chutzpah to hire little-known (at the time) cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond, who finds beauty in such everyday objects as a windmill.

The meandering script by Scottish writer Alan Sharp is the first indication for this reviewer that we might be in for a sloooooow ride but where the film doesn't work as well for me (though it works quite well for many--this is just my opinion) is that overall, rather than have an elegiac feel to it like, say, MONTE WALSH, with Lee Marvin, THE HIRED HAND has a sort of drug aura suspended over it. I thought this was my imagination, given this film was Fonda's follow-up project to his breakthrough film EASY RIDER, but in the extra features themselves mention is made that virtually everyone working on the film at the time was smoking marijuana. Not, Fonda submits, while they were actually working, but everyone knows the stuff stays in your system for some time after consumption. Hence, the hazy cloud of "mellow" that, in my opinion, holds the movie back from being a better film than it is.

It IS a good film, but I'm not convinced it's the masterpiece that is implied by this loving restoration.

One further note, closed captioning is always appreciated by this reviewer. Glad they are available for the film but it would be even better if the extra features were captioned too!

The story of Frank Serpico is part heroic, part tragic and part odyssey.

Serpico was a young policeman in New York in the sixties and early seventies. He saw widespread corruption in law enforcement (officers taking bribes, etc.) and his sense of honour and his moral code was offended. But his response did not stop there. He took action. He reported the moral decay he witnessed to his superiors and testified repeatedly to lawmakers to try to initiate change and reform. He stuck his neck out when many others who might be equally disturbed by the corruption around them would not have had the courage to do so.

And it cost him. Big time. Serpico was ostracized, his life was imperiled and the toll it took on him mentally and physically, was and continues to this day to be, siginificant.

This new documentary by Antonio D'Ambrosio attempts to show Frank Serpico, warts and all. Through extensive interviews with Serpico and former friends and colleagues (not to mention enemies) as well as clips from the Al Pacino Oscar-nominated film SERPICO, Serpico's epic journey from rookie to celebrity to chump to whistle blower to outcast and to celebrity is vividly conveyed, sometimes with alarming frankness. One hand-shaking, slap on the back reunion with a former colleague soon deteriorates into an uncomfortable trip down memory back lane when it becomes apparent that the former colleague of Serpico's was one of his detractors. And while it's all water under the bridge now, to this fellow's credit he doesn't back off from his criticisms of Serpico and his relentless drive to expose the New York Police Department as a den of corruption.

One excellent choice by director/producer/writer D'Ambrosio is his use of clips from the Pacino film. Why use re-enactments when you've got the scenes you want already intact, directed by no less a director than the great Sidney Lumet? Anything less than Lumet's gritty, '70's-era approach would have paled by comparison.

Where the film takes a tragic turn is when it becomes obvious that Frank Serpico's bull-headed integrity has taken a terrible toll on him. He truly suffers from PTSD and might even be seen to be a little crazy. D'Ambrosio wisely does not comment, but lets the viewer decide for himself if and how much Serpico is mentally disturbed by his experiences.

Was what Serpico did necessary? To him, yes. Was his approach the best? For him, yes. Was the cost to his physical and mental well-being too great? You decide.

When you live by the credo "Never run when you're right" it is bound to cost. Even when motivated by the unique type of stubborn moral integrity possessed by Frank Serpico, not everyone is going to admire what you do and how you do it. Very few of us could do what Frank Serpico did. Not everyone would want to. This outstanding film shows the rightness, the wrongness, and the everything in between-ness of the cost of personal integrity and morality.

During the later part of his career, the great actor George C. Scott turned to television for artistic opportunity, if not fulfillment. One such undertaking was his take on the colourful Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini.

Scott was the right age to play Mussolini in his later years, but is less convincing in the earlier part of this massive two-disc, six hour miniseries. On the other hand, try to find an actor who could convincingly complement Scott for the earlier parts of the story, especially when George is the star name that sold this program in the first place.

There are similar hurdles to get over in order to really enjoy this miniseries for what it is: an American take on a distinctly Italian subject. Despite a first-rate small screen director in William A. Graham (the "other" Billy Graham, he will tell you, with good humour), the production has a bargain basement look to some of its scenes. Even those involving European locations. The background artists also look less than enthusiastic, as if they didn't know why they are doing whatever they are supposed to be doing in any given scene.

BUT--and here is just one man's opinion, George C. Scott is worth seeing in almost anything. Seeing the actor who won an Oscar (and famously refused it) for playing General George S. Patton take on the opposite side of the military coin, as it were, is fascinating. Especially since Scott is best remembered for playing Patton. Was he trying to show his virtuosity as an actor? Was he trying to eradicate the public's pigeon-holing him as one of the U.S.'s most famous warriors?

Given that it was around this time that Scott resurrected Patton in the so-so TV movie THE LAST DAYS OF PATTON, it seems likely he was simply looking for a good role.

MILD SPOILER BELOW! Whatever his reasons, Scott is magnificent as Il Duce, at times despicable (as in his treatment of a female English journalist which would fit right in with current headlines involving men who abuse their power) and at other times tender and loving towards his family.

Scott is limited at times by the production values and especially in the scenes when he is supposed to be younger, but even medium Scott is great Scott, in my books. Scott is well-supported by some big names: Lee Grant as his long-suffering wife, the luminous Virginia Madsen as his mistress, and as his three oldest children, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Gabriel Byrne and, surprisingly and effectively, Robert Downey, before he added the "Jr." to his name. Raul Julia also shows up as Duce's son-in-law, count Ciano, but he pales in comparison to Anthony Hopkin's performance in the same role for another Mussolini miniseries also made in 1985.

The bottom line here is while MUSSOLINI: THE UNTOLD STORY is not in the same league as, say, THE WINDS OF WAR and its even greater sequel WAR & REMEMBRANCE, it is still the canvas upon which the reviled Italian dictator's life is painted by one the 20th-Century's most powerful actors. How much you like Scott will influence how much you like this miniseries. And were it not for these ground-breaking miniseries in the first place, we would likely still be stuck in the old-style weekly series format, emphasizing one main plot per week, instead of allowing room for multiple story arcs and deeper characterizations, which are the norm today.

One of my favourite movies of all time is the Kirk Douglas-produced adventure saga THE VIKINGS.  I love that movie.

I've known of the Viking film ERIK THE CONQUEROR for years but just never got round to watching it.  I suspect I thought there was no way this Italian-produced spectacle could come anywhere near Douglas' vision.  After all, ERIK THE CONQUEROR is a film that intentionally invites comparisons to the Douglas film.

Well I'm sorry I waited so long! With a beautiful new Blu-ray and DVD transfer from Arrow Video, ERIK THE CONQUEROR can now be enjoyed in all its restored glory.

And what a magnificent film it is!  Directed by the Cinematographer-turned-Director Mario Bava, a cult favourite whose reputation is predominantly based on his being a master of horror films--sort of a Grand Guignol/Italian Alfred Hitchcock--ERIK THE CONQUEROR is packed with glorious compositions, opulent colours and action and spectacle galore.

And of course, being one of the first "Sex & Sandal" films, it has beautiful women in skimpy outfits.  It is when pursuing some of these more questionable elements that it becomes apparent that ERIK THE CONQUEROR is not as good a film as THE VIKINGS.  But it is still a superb film in its own right. (And I have nothing against women in skimpy outfits--I'm just saying that sometimes giving sway to more sensational content can compromise the artistic intent of a film. Sometimes.) Instead of watching with a critical attitude: "Oh, that's a rip-off of THE VIKINGS", it makes much more sense to simply enjoy the comparisons.  One of the extras on the new release does just that, it compares the two movies, sometimes with segments from each film shown side by side.  This is almost as fun as watching the movie.  Yes, there are two brothers at the core of the story whose strained relationship accounts for much of the drama.  Yes, there is a stunning sequence when Erik climbs a drawbridge with the help of strategically-placed arrows from his dead-eye archers, a sequence that is so obviously inspired by (better than "a rip-off of") the scene in THE VIKINGS when Kirk Douglas climbs a drawbridge with the help of several battle axes which have been thrown by his men to help him gain access to the enemy's castle.  ERIK THE CONQUEROR is full of segments like this.

If there is one element that stood out for me as being superior to THE VIKINGS it was the way several shots of the sky looked like paintings, especially during battle scenes.  It is one of the major achievements of ERIK THE CONQUEROR. It brought to mind Kubrick at his visual best, i.e. BARRY LYNDON.

But when you get right down to it, THE VIKINGS remains a superior movie to ERIK THE CONQUEROR.  Why?  Sheer star power.  Kirk-Tony-Ernie-Janet, as well as some solid supporting actors like James Donald and Frank Thring give THE VIKINGS a weight that ERIK THE CONQUEROR simply can't match.  Cameron Mitchell is the only star of note.  He is terrific, though saddled by being 20 years too old for the part. That and having his lines dubbed into Italian while the English subtitles and his mouth movements clearly match.  Some of the Italian actors are terrible, including one sad attempt at comic relief.  Were Cameron Mitchell (a really wonderful actor who never got his big break) supported with actors of greater or equal talent, ERIK THE CONQUEROR may have transcended its status as a B movie.  A brilliant B movie, but a B movie, nonetheless.

Still, ERIK THE CONQUEROR will appeal to action fans as being one of the very best of its kind.

I really enjoy programming from other countries, particularly the U.K. In recent years, however, many of their series and one-off films have presented material that is so dark it makes you feel like you have a layer of dirt on you for about a week before it wears off.

CAPITAL is a lovely exception. It presents a typical street in London that could really be located anywhere in that there is a cross section of cultures and lifestyles and ages that makes it clear the filmmakers are trying to create a story with a universal theme.

Toby Jones appears once again in a quality production--he is clearly a highly sought-after actor. While he can be bland at times, in CAPITAL he hits all the right notes playing a greedy banker whose life and values are challenged when things go awry in his job. This is one of several sub-plots that serve to show the variety of characters who share one extraordinary, upsetting event in common: they all receive in the mail a postcard saying WE WANT WHAT YOU HAVE. This leads to fear, paranoia, resilience and surprise as the different types find a way to deal with what eventually becomes a disturbing and persistent feature in their lives.

Rachel Stirling as Jones' wife (they appeared together--though were not paired together--in the recent series DETECTORISTS) is so materialistic you can almost see the dollar signs in her eyes. Well, pound signs, as this is set in England. She's outstanding.

Many of the other roles are superbly played, especially the great Indian actress Shana Azmi as a domineering Pakistani matriarch perfectionist. She's brilliant. She's matched by the always wonderful Gemma Jones as an elderly resident on the street whose interactions with her strong-willed daughter (Lesley Sharp) and compassionate grandson (Robert Emms) are an important part of the story-line.

SPOILER While the incidents of the subplots as well as the main dramatic thread (the receipt of the postcards) are compelling, it is the strength of the individual characters that really drives CAPITAL.

I enjoyed it thoroughly and highly recommend it.

RAY HARRYHAUSEN: Special Effects Titan is a breath of fresh air in documentary movie making the same way Harryhausen's work is a breath of fresh air in the realm of special effects.

Here we have a documentary that spares us the annoying tell-you-what-to-think voice-over that is so typical of this type of film. Instead we are treated to a volley of on camera admirers from Spielberg on down who acknowledge Ray Harryhausen as the innovative genius that he was.

Generous clips from Harryhausen's films illustrate his work even as it is described in such loving detail by his fellow cinematic artists.

Made s few years before his passing and when he was still spry and articulate, RAY HARRYHAUSEN: Special Effects Titian benefits greatly from interviews with the great man himself.

One interesting point of conflict occurs when director James Cameron opines that, if he were working today, Harryhausen would unquestionably embrace the latest CGI technology. Yet in stark contrast to that we hear Harryhausen say that he wouldn't. Cameron, who has pioneered many contemporary special effects, understandably believes that the latest is the best. But Harryhausen has a point. Today's effects might be flawless in terms of execution, but does that very achievement undermine the humanity of it all? Consider looking at a painting generated by a computer then compare it to one of the great masterworks of Rembrandt, Van Gogh, Degas, etc. where you can actually see the indentation of the brush hairs--a reminder that a human hand once guided the brush that created the work of art. Perhaps it is a matter of preference and both points of view are valid. If James Cameron or George Lucas stopped making films would there be others who could take their place? Had Ray Harryhausen not been the innovator and genius that he was, blessed with incredible patience, single-mindedness and focus, might another have achieved the same thing? Put it another way, if Cameron and Lucas had come first, would they have inspired Ray Harryhausen? Surely the point of RAY HARRYHAUSEN: Special Effects Titan is that it is a tribute, a work of love and respect and veneration towards the true titan and father of modern special effects. For every fan of fantasy and adventure who loves dinosaurs and sword-wielding skeletons and a Medusa that sends shivers down your spine, RAY HARRYHAUSEN: Special Effects Titan is a must-have. And, while bowing to Harryhausen's genius, the filmmakers never fawn. This is the difference between tribute and treacle.

An extra feature showing the rediscovery of many of Harryhausen's sculpted creatures that have been packed away in crates for years is like a cross between kids opening their much-anticipated Christmas presents and Howard Carter entering the tomb of King Tutankhamun. "Is that really it? Oh my--!!!" Priceless.

How many times have we been told that a film is "important" or a "must see" or "life changing" or any other word or phrase designed to compel us to watch it? Most of the time it is just hype, often fuelled by a director's sense of self-importance. Thankfully that is not the case with A DOG NAMED GUCCI. This time, it's the truth. Important? Yes. Must see? Yes. Life changing? Yes. Self-important? No. SUBJECT-important? Absolutely.

Even so, it would be easy for a subject-important film to be derailed by its maker's sense of self-importance.

It would also be relatively easy to make a film about animal abuse that forcefully appeals to peoples' sense of decency and compassion. It wouldn't take much to shock the viewer to the point of numbness. Wisely, filmmaker Gorman Bechard takes a different approach. Instead of making us feel outraged or guilty or anything that even suggests manipulation, he presents his story with the purity of the master documentarian, by presenting the facts unadorned as they are, without commentary (from him) and letting his audience respond to them.

Of course there are moments in A DOG NAMED GUCCI when you will cry, especially if you are a dog lover. You are bound to feel outrage at other times. But not because the director wants you to feel that way. When a filmmaker starts telling you what to think and feel about something that becomes propaganda. At times, this is appropriate. Most of the time, it is the easy way out. The "voice of God" director--think Michael Moore--dictates. I prefer the director who relates, assumes the intelligence of the audience and then has the strength of his/her convictions that the material they are presenting for consideration is sufficient to make their point.

In a fallen world, animal abuse remains a constant. As a subject for a documentary film it is horribly relevant. Critics may yell "animal abuse? what about the abuse of children? the elderly? war? etc." But that simply misses the point. The subject of animal abuse will be as meaningful to you as much as your sense of justice, compassion and indignation is engaged. Presented in the way A DOG NAMED GUCCI is presented, the widest possible audience is likely to respond in the way that best serves the subject matter: by being inspired to stand up, speak up and make a difference.

SPOILER Once upon a time an adorable little puppy was ripped from the arms of its young runaway owner, hung by a rope around its neck over a tree branch, slapped and punched, then set on fire. An innocent animal that should have died was instead rescued and nurtured back to life by the love and care of a number of individuals, including his new "dad", Doug James. After recovery, the mission to see the little dog's (now named Gucci) tormentors apprehended and punished was under way.

And therein lies the true substance and value of this film. Woefully inadequate U.S. laws that made it difficult to prosecute let alone alone punish Gucci's perpetrators were gradually challenged and changed through the efforts of Doug James and many, many others. And always, like the truest guide to justice, was the presence of Gucci in the courtroom a considerable factor in appealing to lawmakers' compassion and sense of responsibility. And with Doug James and Gucci leading the way, others, in other circumstances, stood up and were counted as well. A DOG NAMED GUCCI takes a handful of these heart-rending stories and weaves them into the tapestry of the film's fabric. By the end, though we have cried, felt outrage and mourned the loss of so many of God's precious creatures to human cruelty, we are left with an appreciation for those who have facilitated change in the law toward animal abusers. Equally important, we are inspired to have zero tolerance for these criminals if and when we encounter such behaviour in our own experience and in our own country.

And that is why A DOG NAMED GUCCI is one of the most important films you will ever see.