If you visit the Chicago Tribune archives and go to the July 20, 1971 issue you will find a review of Shoot Out from Gene Siskel. He gives it his lowest "no stars" rating, saying the film was so poorly made he noticed the overhead microphone on at least five separate occasions. He further dismissed it as a blatant True Grit knockoff. I'm surprised no other reviews have mentioned noticing those microphones.
Reviews
10 Reviews
Hawks
(1988)
Moving,but has a huge plot-hole.
1 March 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I loved this movie when it first came out,and kept going back to it again and again. The subject matter was very sad,and the acting was uniformly excellent.However,I suddenly became aware of a huge plot hole,and it's bothered me ever since. Frankly,I'm stunned that no one else has seemed to pick up on it. Anthony Edwards plays an American in England with terminal cancer who ends up in the hospital fighting the disease. However,at no point in the film is he ever visited by any relatives,and in fact does not receive so much as a phone call from anyone expressing concern for his condition. Even at the end,we see him with the Dalton character and not a single family member present. What gives? Was he estranged from his entire family? The movie doesn't say. More likely is that explanatory scenes were edited out for whatever reason. It's an odd omission that bugs me every time I think of it.
Underrated Oddity
23 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Not everyone thought this was a bad film. The great film critic Gene Siskel actually liked it, although I have to date searched in vain for a print review. Also, it appears that Siskel and Ebert reviewed this movie on their TV show, but an episode of this has yet to turn up anywhere. As proof that Siskel liked it, I went back to the Chicago Tribune archives and located the issue where he listed his 10 best films of 1982. There, in a section he called "I liked it-you didn't" he listed Halloween 3:Season of the Witch. I actually agree with him that the movie has merit. It's not really scary and frankly should never have been called Halloween 3:Season of the Witch, since the Halloween killer is absent and I don't recall seeing a single witch. The plot does flow smoothly from beginning to end and does hold ones interest. I also liked the t.v. commercial created by the main bad guy to help enact his plot "Eight more days 'til Halloween,silver shamrock". Honestly, I don't recall what silver shamrock refers to, but I do think it adds to the overall weirdness of this film.
Eyes of a Stranger
(1981)
Lauren Tewes Surprisingly Good
10 August 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I think I would give this movie 3 stars out of 4, since what is good about it is often very good. However, the violence is shockingly explicit and gratuitous, which very nearly derails the picture. In fact, it is so needlessly explicit one is tempted to turn away from the screen in order to avoid it. Lauren Tewes is shockingly good in the lead role, so good that I now wonder why she didn't get more opportunities to shine. Jennifer Jason Leigh is also excellent, and I have to admit I forgot it was her until near the end of the picture. The identity of the killer is revealed early on, so the only suspense comes when Tewes begins to think she knows his identity and then begins to follow and taunt him. Some of this was compelling, but a lot of it was so unlikely that I had to laugh on occasion. At one point Tewes finds herself in the killer's apartment when he suddenly returns, and the way she extricates herself from this predicament is so unlikely that I laughed out loud(entering another apartment directly below and then casually walking out with the inhabitants eating at their table? Really?). The great film critic Gene Siskel gave this movie 2.5 stars out of 4, saying that without the gratuitous violence he could recommend the film without reservation as a well-made urban thriller. I agree with him, but for those who like these slasher-type movies, I believe this is by far the best. It's genuinely creepy and scary much of the time.
Becky Sharp
(1935)
A Beautiful Movie To Look At-Okay To Watch
29 June 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Years ago, this movie played on American Movie Classics, where I was able to record a VHS copy and put it away for almost 25 years. While going through a box of VHS tapes in my garage recently, this movie surfaced and I watched it again to see what my reaction would be. This review is for the UCLA Restoration Print, which is what AMC played the day I recorded it. The first half-hour or so seems very fuzzy and occasionally out of focus, and the colors are so glaring that I often felt as though I was viewing a black and white movie that had been colorized(the yellows are especially off-putting). After this period of discomfort, the color seemed to stabilize and I was able to actually get into the plot of the film, which truth be told is pretty predictable once you realize that it basically involves a woman who uses whatever means necessary to advance her station in life. Miriam Hopkins is actually very good in a broad, humorous sort of way, and if you look at this as a star vehicle for her the movie succeeds. I also noticed that close-ups were consistently beautiful, so maybe the inconsistent color issues were related to the difficulty in shooting color scenes in long-shot.
The Rogue Song
(1930)
Portions Of This Film Are On YouTube.
15 September 2013
This is perhaps not a review, but a comment that portions of the movie have been posted on you-tube. If I remember correctly, the scenes/clips together added up to about 20 or so minutes. This means that about 1/5th of The Rogue Song is known to survive today. The clips were actually quite beautiful, although they involve mostly Laurence Tibbett and not Laurel and Hardy. One can also see the original trailer, a ballet sequence of about 5 minutes and a 3 minute clip of Laurel and Hardy rushing into a cave. Hopefully the entire film will turn up someday soon.The 10 rating is for the joy that I think any film lover will have while seeing these tantalizing scenes from an otherwise lost film.
Day of the Dead
(1985)
Way,Way Too Much Yelling!!!
21 July 2013
The yelling in this picture is so extreme and extended that my ears blister when I try to get through it all. Roger Ebert, who gave high ratings to the previous 2 films in the trilogy, mentioned it in his 1.5 star review. I absolutely agree with him. I have never watched a picture that was pitched at such a loud extreme for its entire length. Surely other viewers agree. I'm a fan of film critic Dave Kehr, but I truly believe that his top rating for this film has to be one of his worst. One of the 5 best films of 1985?! Did we even see the same movie? I have to say that zombie pictures are my absolute favorite type of horror film, and I would recommend titles such as Night of the Living Dead(1968),Dawn of the Dead(1975&2004)and Return of the Living Dead(1985) to anyone with my head held high. Count me out of the fan club for this one, however. Be prepared to get a splitting headache after watching it. In fact, having not seen Day of the Dead since it originally came out in 1985, I excitedly purchased the DVD release in the hopes that my original feelings were misguided. After about a half-hour, I realized that I was absolutely right the first time-the yelling was so intense I had to turn the movie off. Gene Siskel gave this picture Zero Stars and called it awful, and while I wouldn't go that far, I do think that Roger Ebert's 1.5 stars are more on the mark. In fact, go to rogerebert.com to read his original review and you'll get a better idea of what I'm trying to get across in this review.
Black Christmas
(1974)
A Well-Done Horror/Thriller Film
7 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I don't know if this review will have spoilers, but just in case I thought I better warn of the possibility. The acting in this picture is excellent, and the movie is not only scary, but sometimes downright funny as well. Olivia Hussey is an excellent lead, although I couldn't tell if she was attempting an American accent at times(She's actually British). Margot Kidder was very,very good. I must be honest and say that two things bothered me about the picture, and kept it from achieving greatness.One was the fact that the picture clearly attempts to pin the murders on one particular character, so much so that it soon becomes obvious that this person could not be the killer. Otherwise, the movie couldn't surprise us at the end with a different revelation. I think that if the movie had presented other characters as possible suspects, it would've worked better. The second problem for me was the behavior of the Olivia Hussey character at a key moment after she receives a phone call containing information that is crucial to her being able to exit the house alive. While 9 out of 10 people would've taken that information and literally run with it, she astoundingly does the exact opposite, making her a prime candidate for a Darwin Award in my opinion. Although one could say that she was only thinking of her friends in those moments, her behavior was a complete bummer for me, and caused me to lose sympathy for her. Apart from those 2 issues, the picture worked for me. Again, I must comment on how good the acting is. You simply don't see such good work very often in a horror picture. The direction is also quite good, with some great atmosphere. How did Bob Clark go from this to sleazy trash like Porky's?
Big Boy
(1930)
Shockingly Entertaining
12 August 2012
Big Boy was a complete shock to me, a 1930 picture that was vibrant, funny,bizarre and very entertaining. I bought it expecting to see a train-wreck,a politically-incorrect minstrel show featuring a white actor performing in black-face. Not just for a scene or two mind you, but for the entire picture(save for the very end)!!! What I got was a fabulous performance by Al Jolson,who is frankly so good here it's almost scary. He's funny, charming, sings wonderfully and performs with a sort of wink-wink to the audience, as if he knows he's in a ridiculous situation as an actor and wants everyone else to know it. His asides are often hilarious,and frankly he is so good overall that if he had chosen to play the part in normal black makeup, without the exaggerated lips common with black-face, I honestly think he would've disappeared into his role completely and truly transcended his makeup. The plot is almost completely beside the point-it exists simply to provide a frame-work for a series of wonderful musical interludes.There is one extended flashback sequence that appears almost out of nowhere, and is so wild and broadly played that I don't think anyone who sees it will ever quite forget it. Print quality is sometimes excellent, and often-times poor. This picture is in definite need of some restoration. I have to applaud those who decided in this sensitive age to release a movie as bizarre and potentially offensive as this one,and I'd like to think that it's because they trust us to be adults and apply some context to what we're watching. If the very idea of black-face portrayals offend you, this picture is to be avoided at all costs. If you can place the use of it into a proper context, this picture might still offend you, but at least you won't keep yourself from watching a wonderfully bizarre and surreal little curio. The ending to my mind is fabulous,by the way.
Back Pay
(1930)
A Charming Curio
17 June 2012
This movie is not the disaster some have made it out to be, and although only 55 minutes in length it felt like a well-made, complete picture. To my mind Corinne Griffith was quite good, even singing during a charming early scene. Her costars ranged from adequate to good, but never bad enough to sink the picture. Because this may turn out to be her only surviving sound picture, it is a must see for film historians. I cannot thank the studios enough for making so much of their old inventory available for viewing, and I encourage everyone to show your appreciation by continuing to purchase titles from any archive collection.The plot of this one was probably dated even in 1930, but it is earnestly acted nonetheless. I do agree that there appear to be anachronisms throughout, mostly relating to clothing/vehicles, but that was not fatal to the picture for me. Overall, a charming curio, nicely photographed. The print has some damage but is surprisingly good overall. I think I'd give Back Pay 3 stars out of 4.
Tell Your Friends