Reviews

ON THE BUSES was the UK's top sitcom in the early 1970's,but this extraordinary fact is hard to believe 3 decades later.What's even more astonishing is despite this (1971) being the year of THE FRENCH CONNECTION,A CLOCKWORK ORANGE and GET CARTER,the film was the most successful at the UK box office this year.

The very thin plot is carried along further by Reg Varney and Bob Grant laughing at their own(mostly feeble) puns and double entendres,a leering,grotesquely stereotyped view of the young women in view,and a script that makes even the most sub-standard CARRY ON film seem like Shakespeare.

The TV show itself lasted until 1973,and two further film sequels followed,but the bawdy traditions of this first ON THE BUSES effort continued with even more excess with the CONFESSIONS series starring Robin Askwith;again the first of this series topped the UK box office in 1974.

As a Briton,I can assure the US we've all grown up and matured since those days!

Despite being actually filmed on the Amazon river and expensive CGI effects,ANACONDA is basically no more than 'B' picture adventure fodder,with dialogue,plotting and performances to match.The script is hopelessly hackneyed and wooden,and Jennifer Lopez gives the dullest performance,mainly because she has the dullest lines.I actually think J-Lo isn't a bad actress when given decent scripts to work with(U-TURN,OUT OF SIGHT),but her agent either generally picks mediocre/bad scripts,or she overrules and picks them herself! Most of her film career to date is composed of below-average scripts(or even beneath that!),and this is no exception.

The rest of the cast(Ice Cube,Jonathan Hyde)fare little better with the arrant stereotyped characters present,though at least Jon Voight keeps interest going with a richly hammy performance.His character is pure cardboard too,but his odd accent(a curious hybrid of Spanish,Czech,German and Godfather Brandoesque)is perversely fascinating.

Voight's overplaying may have been even been more enjoyable on the Jack Nicholson-Joker level had there been a trace of wit in the script;the fact that this is non-existent considerably mitigates against the film.The same year's MEN IN BLACK had similar 'B' picture credentials,but at least it had better production and CGI,witty lines,a genial Will Young,and genuinely frightening monsters(especially towards the end);the scaly one itself here is rather poorly composed,and it's sleight-of-mouth with Mr.Voight near the end is more (unintentionally)amusing than chilling.Apparently,Anacondas in real life are mostly rather shy and difficult to find in the Amazon,and have rarely had humans for their lunch.The one in this film seems to have a serial grudge against all humankind,and a severe bulimia condition!

If you want camp 'B' picture fun,check out PIRANHA(1978)instead.Now that was both FUNNY and FRIGHTENING.

The winner for best short film at the 2005 Oscars,this well-made,gritty and honest film seems to me to have a very ambivalent attitude towards it's main character Zoe(convincingly played by Nathalie Press).

A single mother living on a grim council estate,she's prepared to scrap with a woman who attacked her kids by going to her house dressed merely in a nightie,then uses the most foul,gutter language in front of them(all pre-teen).Capable of behaving like an sweet angel one minute,and a gross harridan the next,she attempts to have some fun with a sympathetic suitor(Danny Dyer),but with no partner or babysitter in sight this is doomed to failure,with dire consequences for her children,left outside a pub.

The film charts the difficulties that such women face(or perhaps bring on themselves),and the subject of social services is frequently brought up.But is there a happy ending in store with the would-be suitor? The film will probably have different interpretations by Social Libreals and Right-Wing Fundamental Moralists because of this ambivalence.Despite it's undoubted quality,Laurel & Hardy's THE MUSIC BOX(1932),is still the best short ever awarded the Oscar for me!

Pre-team Laurel and Hardy silent,with Stan as an effeminate private,being bullied by Sergeant Banner(Ollie)and General James Finlayson.There is virtually no plot,and a lot of the humour on show is of a surprisingly vulgar,broad nature,involving putrid garlic and swollen posteriors,amongst others.Again,the boys are cast as enemies rather than friends,though Ollie's behaviour towards Stan is slightly friendlier in the second reel.Bizarrely(and pointlessly),a poster of Cecil B.De Mille's film THE VOLGA BOATMAN(1926)is used for a gag later in the film.They weren't a team yet,but would be in several films'time when they would be shoulder-to-shoulder buddies.

One of the better shorts made with Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy before their celebrated teaming;well produced,some amusing sequences,though frustratingly the boys don't share that many scenes in the film.Still,we get the the first known camera-look from Hardy(although he had performed this trait in previous films,notably STICK AROUND,made in 1925),and Anita Garvin and Harry Earles are fine as an improbable man and wife jewel thieving team.Hal Yates is credited with the direction,though in fact Hal Roach is thought to have been the director,with Yates filming one day's worth of retakes.Later in the year,he directed HATS OFF,when the teaming was becoming an item;sadly no copy of HATS OFF is known to exist.

WHY GIRLS LOVE SAILORS was a lost film for many years until it turned up in a French Film Archive in 1971.It took another 15 years for the film to be viewed again,but happily it is now readily available on DVD and Video,with the French subtitles translated into English.

So,do Stan and Ollie work as a team here? Not really,though they do share one scene towards the end as Stan(called Willie Brisling here)tricks Ollie(billed as the First Mate)into thinking he's a woman,though he's actually trying to rescue his girl who's been kidnapped by the Ship's captain(Malcolm Waite).Anita Garvin,who was not thought to have appeared in the film until it's rediscovery,steals the show as the Captain's irate wife.Interesting more historically than aesthetically,but still watchable.

The previous film Laurel and Hardy appeared in(DUCK SOUP)had them remarkably as a team from beginning to end despite only being their second film at Hal Roach.The boys do share scenes again in SLIPPING WIVES,but this time as hated enemies.These work well enough,but the film has the flaw that mars all these very early L&H efforts;too frantic a pace.There are only very feint traces of the familiar later Laurel and Hardy characteristics on view,and fading silent stars Priscilla Dean and Herbert Rawlinson take the lead roles.SLIPPING WIVES was reworked into one of Stan and Ollie's final short films,THE FIXER UPPERS(1935).

LOVE 'EM AND WEEP was a very early pre-team short featuring Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy at the Hal Roach Studios;the only problem is that they share no virtually no scenes together,and the double act working here is Stan and James Finlayson,not Stan and Ollie.The remake,CHICKENS COME HOME(1931),when the Laurel and Hardy team was well established,is far superior with less frantic pacing and better characterisation.Like Finlayson,several L&H co-stars make their first appearance with the boys;Charlie Hall,Mae Busch.Although the above remake has 10 minutes extra footage(foreign versions had even more footage),Laurel and Hardy together are far funnier than Laurel and Finlayson,though Fin is great as the blackmailing butler,played in this silent original by Hall.

A dated but still very effective 'kitchen sink' drama in the wake of Alan Sillitoe's Saturday NIGHT AND Sunday MORNING two years earlier.Sillitoe again sets it in his native Nottingham,although the main performers involved,Tom Courtneay(Hull)and James Bolam(Sunderland) are clearly from Northern England and not the East Midlands and do nothing to disguise their native accents.

The film is told mainly in flashback,with Colin Smith(Courtneay)thinking over his depressing life while serving time in Borstal for a robbery;his only real strength is running,and a sympathetic warden(Michael Redgrave)encourages the youth to better himself.

The film is basically about a working-class rebel and his battles with authority(i.e. the police,bosses,borstal,etc.),a new and refreshing concept at the time,but somewhat done scores of times over four decades later.Still,the bleak,dismal atmosphere is accurately caught by cinematographer Walter Lassally,quirkily directed by Tony Richardson(several scenes in the film are momentarily speeded up,providing some humour amongst the grimness)and well-acted.The final race sequence is somewhat ambiguous;why does Colin behave as he did? The ultimate rebellion against the establishment or as a acceptance of the dull,ordinary life he will lead? The cast has some interesting names before they made it big on UK TV;Bolam,John Thaw,and Arthur Mullard,whose bluff cockney tones are absent here due to dubbing.

A decent low-budget horror-thriller given extra class by the presence of Boris Karloff and Catherine Lacey.Future Saint actor Ian Ogilvy is hypnotised and brainwashed by the above elderly couple into committing increasingly violent acts,as Miss Lacey gradually succumbs to megalomania and madness,while a gentle,stable-minded Boris is left helpless in stopping his wife's crazy actions.

Some of the pop music and the labyrinth Night-Club is interesting,as is the appearance of a young Susan George,whose grisly fate was to repeated in subsequent roles through her film career.Notable also for Victor Henry,a young actor whose promising future was tragically cut short several years later by injuries he suffered in a road accident.He spent the rest of his life in a coma before dying in 1985.

A Basically unconvincing storyline(those trucks using country lanes as Grand Prix practice for a start!)is compensated by an excellent cast and well-handled action scenes.The Film has a heavily Celtic feel about it;i.e The Welsh(Baker,Cummins),The Irish(McGoohan)and The Scottish(Connery,McCallum,Jackson),hence the brooding,intense acting we frequently see,though this is counter-balanced by more light-hearted performers(James,Bass,Lawson).The cast indeed is the main reason for watching,with the presence of future 1960's secret agents(Connery,McGoohan,McCallum)giving the film a resonance today that it certainly didn't have at the time of release.One last problem:why didn't they cast George Murcell(Italian-born)as Gino,instead of Czech Herbert Lom?

A patchy but very watchable novel adaptation,with some fine performances(MacMurray,Johnson,Ferrer),but this is Humphrey Bogart's movie.His usual persona of an amiable,trench-coated tough guy with a heart of gold is totally jettisoned here,as the character of Queeg is a nervous,paranoid,jittery wreck who is clearly unsuitable to be a US Navy Captain.Despite this,Bogart still makes his character oddly pitiable and sympathetic.His crumpling under Jose Ferrer's questioning in the courtroom scene is a great piece of film acting.The film is unbalanced(as everybody notes)by the pointless romance between Willie Keith and May Wynn,but the last word should go to Bogie himself.An anedocte claims he was once asked how he managed to convey the paranoia of Captain Queeg so accruately."Simple.Everybody knows I'm nuts anyway!" was the alleged reply!

One of the rubber-legged Australian comedian's funnier and more offbeat short comedies,the premise has Leon returning drunk to his home again,but has a ornament smashed over his head,and when he comes to,is told that he is dead.Afterwards,we have a 'TOPPER' ghost-like situation as Leon and an associate observe in his apartment his wife and friends ignoring him as if he were dead,and Leon making some very risqué comments about everyone therein! As a combination of TOPPER,Charles Dickens' A Christmas CAROL,and black farce,"THE SPOOK SPEAKS" works very well and is worth checking out if it turns up on TV,as it did in the UK in the 1980's in the early mornings.

A routine,uninspired secret agent thriller.What is not generally acknowledged is that this film is a remake of Anthony Mann's first-class 'B' Film Noir T-MEN(1947).The original had far more resonance and atmosphere(mainly because of Mann's effective direction and John Alton's moody monochrome photography).THE FILE OF THE GOLDEN GOOSE has touristy views of London,flat colour imagery,and unremarkable direction by Sam Wanamaker.Wanamaker,a fine actor,never really made it as a film director,and despite some reputable performers here,like Yul Brynner(in the old Dennis O'Keefe role),and Edward Woodward(in the doomed Alfred Ryder part),the result is a just passable time-waster.

A routine Edgar Kennedy comedy short which has something of a cult reputation nowadays,mainly because a long sequence in the middle of this film has a washing machine being carried up a large flight of stairs.This happens to be a reworking of a sadly lost Laurel & Hardy comedy,HATS OFF(1927),which was directed by the same man,Hal Yates.HATS OFF was the inspiration for L&H's legendary Oscar-winning THE MUSIC BOX(1932),but IT'S YOUR MOVE is the only clue we have to the content of HATS OFF until it ever turns up in some archive or private collection somewhere.The reworking of HATS OFF into this somewhat obscure short was virtually unknown and unnoticed for decades,until it turned up on early morning British TV in January 1988.

DUMMY ACHE is arguably the funniest short film Edgar Kennedy made in his run of short domestic comedies which ran from the early 1930's until his death in 1948.Interestingly,the film is heavily reworked from a silent comedy short,DUMB DADDIES(1928),starring Jewish comedian Max Davidson.Kennedy himself had a part in DUMB DADDIES as a policeman,but takes over the lead in the remake.Despite this being a remake of a silent comedy,the pacing does not suffer and the confusions and misunderstandings over the 'dummy' of the title are adroitly handled and are fresh and inventive.DUMB DADDIES itself is featured on one of Robert Youngson's silent film compilations of the 1960's,LAUREL & HARDY'S LAUGHING 20'S(1965),and the director,Hal Yates(not Leslie Goodwins,who does a fine job on DUMMY ACHE),would later direct many of Edgar's short comedies in the 1940's.DUMMY ACHE was nominated for an Oscar for best short of the year,but lost out to OUR GANG's BORED OF EDUCATION.

Peter Sellers in a rare departure with Blake Edwards and the 'PINK PANTHER' series;the film itself has many positive aspects in it' favour;stylishly produced,lushly photographed(by one of Hollywood's best color cameramen,Lucien Ballard),and an enjoyable reliance on mostly visual humour,some of which comes off very well. Despite this,it has about twenty minutes too much footage(the mayhem with an elephant is far too overstretched),and there is virtually no plot,which the amusing incident sometimes cannot compensate.Still good fun,though,and Sellers is magnificently politically incorrect as the accident prone Indian actor(hopefully this is not a comment on Indian people in general!).

Kubrick's sci-fi epic is arguably,even nearly four decades on,technically the most accomplished of it's kind ever made.This is not surprising,since Kubrick was,with little doubt,the fussiest,most meticulous of filmmakers. Visually,the film is breathtaking,with special effects that are still remarkably convincing,and unlike every other sci-fi caper there are no scaly alien psychos,no ray-gun fights,no spaceship chases,no planets being blown-up.Instead,we have a measured,methodically-paced narrative which(personally)gets off to an interminable start with actors in ape suits(no where near as good as the same year's PLANET OF THE APES),but the scene finishes ingeniously when a flying bone cuts to the shape of a space station floating in orbit.The big 'if' about 2001 is the human interest,or rather the lack of it.Kubrick has(most certainly deliberately)no big name actors in the film,only mildly well known North American performers like Keir Dullea,William Sylvester,and Robert Beatty,but there are surprising appearences by the great Leonard Rossiter(better known for his roles in classic British sitcoms like RISING DAMP and REGGIE PERRIN)and even veteran BBC newsreader Kenneth Kendall,on BBC 12(an accurate prediction of cable and satalite TV). The problem for the actors is that the script is just plain dull,and the only real character of interest is a non-human,HAL the computer,a gentle-voiced,monotoned contraption that turns nasty(superbly voiced by Douglas Rain). Despite the sensuous visuals before it,the final journey into infinity is a quite extraordinary piece of cinema which even surpasses the outstanding model work seen earlier in the film.The ending is either confusing,pointless,obscure,symbolic or meaningful according to your mood,but despite the lack of human feeling throughout,just sit back and enjoy some of the most lustrous images ever filmed,or even,as they did in 1968,think of it as 'THE ULTIMATE TRIP',without LSD!

On the face of it,the film is no more than a routine story of teenage girl falling for older man,but there is so much comically inventive incident which takes it into near classic territory.Standing above all is the eternally handsome Cary Grant,in a brilliant portrayal of comic facial expressions and dialogue;it's easy to understand why teen Shirley Temple(in easily the best of her young adult roles)fell for him.Also first class are Myrna Loy(she adds clever nuances to her slightly underwritten role),Rudy Vallee,Ray Collins and Harry Davenport;mention should be made of underrated comedy supporting actor Irving Bacon too,who gets big laughs with his sparse few lines in a bit part;others can struggle for entire movies without getting as much as a chuckle. But Cary Grant is peerless here,as he was in most of his films.There are great moments with most of the cast in the film,but Grant produces the funniest,especially his reaction to seeing Ms Temple in his abode,and his explaination to lawyer Dan Tobin(also excellent)in a prison cell of how she got there.Many are now beginning to realise that he was(and still is)the greatest leading actor to have appeared in films;there are very few,if any,who can match his consistency in comic or dramatic roles.8 out of 10.

This low-budget British horror pic has become the quintessential cult film.Ignored and misunderstood on it's initial release,and heavily cut(the full version is now thankfully available),film buffs and critics alike are now gratuitous in vast praise for it's understated,controlled direction,literate script,haunting music,and excellent cast. I'm in total agreement;the film has been described as 'the CITIZEN KANE of horror movies',and it's difficult to argue with that opinion.Fan clubs,cult magazines,even books have been published and built around THE WICKER MAN;all I'll say is it proves you can make a brilliant horror film without resorting to mass blood-spilling and bestial monsters;horror films are far better when they scare rather than repel.THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT pulled this off quite well,but not as well as this cult classic.The finale is shattering and one of the most chillingly effective ever filmed.If you haven't seen it,don't miss:totally compelling from first to last shot.

For the era it was made(late 1940's),BRUTE FORCE is surprisingly brutal and vicious in places,pre-dating similar antics from James Cagney two years later in WHITE HEAT. The majority of Hollywood prison movies seem to have riots in them and this is no exception,but BRUTE FORCE has arguably the most explosive of the lot,with tear gas,shootings,and killings galore. Mind you,with a warder as brutal as Hume Cronyn(who sadly died recently)in charge,it's no wonder.His psychological bulling of mild-mannered inmate Whit Bissell leads to the former's suicide,and savage beating of Sam Levene results in near death. The misery,waste,and isolation of prison life is well observed here,with fine performances all round,but especially from Cronyn and Jeff Corey,as a cringing,cowardly informer,both of whom incur the rage of the intense Burt Lancaster.

1971 was a watershed year in many ways for mainstream cinema;such controversial films as THE DEVILS(Ken Russell),GET CARTER(Mike Hodges),A CLOCKWORK ORANGE(Stanley Kubrick),and STRAW DOGS(Sam Peckinpah).The above were often lambasted for their portrayals of sex and violence,more explicit-seeming than what had been witnessed in cinema before.All the above mentioned were British-produced films,and the last two named were directed by celebrated American filmmakers. Three decades on,these films seem far tamer now then when first shown,inevitably,but what seemed daring and nastily innovative then dosen't make them undisturbing now. STRAW DOGS,arguably the most controversal of the lot,is not as disgustingly unpleasant as some critics would make you think.There is violence,but not as gratuitous as you'd think.THE WILD BUNCH(1969),Peckinpah's best-known work,for instance,is far bloodier and unrelenting,and the use of bad language is virtually non-existent. The story itself,about a mild-mannered American scholar and his young wife being intimidated by Cornish locals,is fairly familiar,but Peckinpah does a good job of stoking up tension until the final siege at Dustin Hoffman's house. It fails somewhat in portraying Cornish yokels as in-bred idiots;this worked rather better in John Boorman's DELIVERENCE the following year.(Reversing Peckinpah's example,Boorman was a British filmmaker in Rural America) It was more credible having in-bred Hillbillies as villains,as the Rural areas they live in are so isolated from Urban America,much more than rural areas in England. The scene which caused the most fuss was the rape sequence involving Susan George,Del Henney and Ken Huchison.Miss George eventually seems to like the rape by Henney,but reacts with horror when buggered by Huchison.However,the script makes clear that she and Henney had been lovers previously,so is that first part of the scene showing rape anyway? Peckinpah's ambivilence to the female character is not surprising;there has probably never been a more masculine-obsessed,misogynist director in history.(Female characters in his other films are treated with similiar disdain or ignorance) So,STRAW DOGS is a decent thriller in many ways,just unbalanced by the above aberrations.Well-acted by the cast(such fine character actors as Peter Vaughan,T.P McKenna and Peter Arne are present);it's not the gore fest as portrayed by some critics,and by contempary standards is quite mild.But,watch the film and decide:MILD or WILD?

A clever and funny short film about an innocent man's paranoia after simply by chance following a woman who happens to be walking in the same direction as him.Marc Maron gives an excellent performance,even though most of the time it's his inner thoughts we hear and not his voice.As all good shorts should be,well-paced and edited.A minor gem.