Vice Versa (1948)

VICE VERSA (1948)
Article #1092 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-11-2004
Posting Date: 8-8-2004
Directed by Peter Ustinov
Featuring Roger Livesey, Kay Walsh, Petula Clark

A boy and his father wish upon the eye of an idol from the temple of the laughing hyena and end up switching bodies.

Switcheroo comedies are really not all that common, so it’s actually pretty strange that I would run into two in a row, as this one follows right on the heels of TURNABOUT, but that’s the way things fall out. This is a British take on the concept which takes place at the turn of the century; the credits are presented in the form of a slide show of old placards that is quite amusing. In its way it’s as wild as TURNABOUT, though it’s more in that British absurdist mode where the world itself seems to have gone mad; it’s quite surreal at times and occasionally reminiscent of Monty Python. Roger Livesey and a very young Anthony Newley play the father and son, and a young Petula Clark also appears as the daughter of the cruel headmaster. I found it all very amusing, but you do need to be a fan of British comedy of this sort.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Turnabout (1940)

TURNABOUT (1940)
Article #1091 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-10-2004
Posting Date: 8-7-2004
Directed by Hal Roach
Featuring Adolphe Menjou, Carole Landis, John Hubbard

A constantly bickering married couple agree on only one thing, and that is that they wished they could switch places with each other. A mystical statue grants them their wish.

The Switcheroo theme is a fairly standard comic plot, even if it isn’t used that often. The basic plot is simple; two people switch places and live each other’s lives for twenty-four hours. They both discover how hard it is to be the other person and switch back, their lives changed by this very important lesson. That’s pretty much the plot of this one in a nutshell, but since the story is based on a novel by Thorne Smith (the man who gave us the stories for TOPPER, NIGHT LIFE OF THE GODS and I MARRIED A WITCH, among others), things are a hair more outrageous than the usual take on the theme. The movie gets a lot of comic mileage from the simple ruse that when they switch bodies, they do not switch voices (or wardrobes, for that matter), and must find excuses for the sounds of their voices. The movie is peopled with eccentric characters, bizarre situations (when the husband buys a Pekingese dog for his wife, it accidentally gets switched with a little bear), and some risque situations that must have worried the Hays office (this may be the first movie to feature a pregnant man). Even though the various Thorne Smith novels have been directed by different people, there are definite qualities of his that consistently shine through that I quite like. Though he stops short of anarchic comedy, you never really know how outrageous he is going to be from moment to moment, and there’s always a surprise around the corner. Other fun things in the movie include performances by Donald Meek as a butler who must deal with the changes in his employers, and Marjorie Main, whose commentaries on the action alternately remind me of ones you’d expect to hear from W. C. Fields or Groucho Marx. There’s also a relaxed but hilarious scene where Adolphe Menjou and William Gargan try to destroy a radio so they won’t have to hear the advertisements of the sponsor whose account they have lost.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

The Tales of Hoffmann (1951)

THE TALES OF HOFFMANN (1951)
Article #1090 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-9-2004
Posting Date: 8-6-2004
Directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger
Featuring Moira Shearer, Ludmilla Tcherina, Anne Ayars

A poet relates to the guests at an inn the tales of his three great loves.

It’s opera again, folks, and I didn’t expect another one to pop up so soon, but here we are. As I mentioned during my review of THE MEDIUM, I’m not an opera buff and I find the form a little alien. As for my comments that the vocal phrasing in opera was the equivalent of listening to your native tongue in a bizarre dialect, all I can add to that is that my wife sat down and watched about ten minutes of this movie with me, and then asked what language it was in. This opera is, like THE MEDIUM, in English.

Fortunately, it’s directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, the same team that gave us A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH, and the visual sense that pervaded and enhanced that movie are in full sway here as well. This movie is simply stunning on a visual level, and it uses color in such a memorable, daring and evocative way that it makes most color movies look like they’re in black and white. It’s by no means merely a photographed opera; it’s a thoroughly cinematic experience, taking full advantage of the flexibility that marks one of the advantages that films have over live productions. I heartily recommend the movie to anyone interested in brilliant direction, the works of Powell and/or Pressburger, and anyone interested in opera.

However, it is opera, and as such, there came a point for me where the dazzling visuals couldn’t quite overcome my exhaustion at trying to figure out what the characters were warbling, and my attention began to stray quite badly during the second tale. Fortunately, the last tale turned out to be the easist of the three to understand in terms of hearing what the characters were saying, and it drew my interest back in long enough for me to truly appreciate the rest of the movie, including the ironic and sad denoument of the framing story. Incidentally, all three of the stories are fantastically themed; the first has Hoffmann falling in love with a dancing marionette whom he watches through a pair of magic spectacles. The second involves a woman who is under the spell of a magician who steals the mirror reflections of his victims. The third is about a woman who labors under a curse that she will die if she should sing (considering that they do nothing but sing during an opera, how long do you think she will last?).

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Six Hours to Live (1932)

SIX HOURS TO LIVE (1932)
Article #1089 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-8-2004
Posting Date: 8-5-2004
Directed by William Dieterle
Featuring Warner Baxter, Miriam Jordan, John Boles

When a representative of the country of Sylvaria becomes the sole dissenting voice in the adoption of an economic treaty, he is targeted for murder by his foes. When he is murdered by strangulation, he is brought back to life by a scientist testing a new machine, but he discovers that he will only live for six more hours.

For some reason, I like reviewing a movie that lends itself to comparison with several other movies, and this one does; it exists at that point where the movies D.O.A, THE WALKING DEAD and CHARLY meet. The idea of a man tracking down his own murderer while suffering under a time constraint dictated by his own mortality is certainly similar to D.O.A., though this movie throws in a science fiction angle that movie does not have. Like THE WALKING DEAD, our protagonist returns to life with knowledge he did not possess at the time of his death. In some ways, however, the similarities to CHARLY are the most striking because of the surface differences in the plot; for one thing, this movie is more drama then melodrama, and it’s also another movie in which a man undergoes a medical experiment and finds his life bound inextricably with that of the test animal that also underwent the experiment (in CHARLY it was a white mouse, here it is a white rabbit). The fact that this movie predates the other three signifies that if any of these works were influenced by the others, it’s they that would have been influenced by this one.

On its own terms, this movie is a standout. It has an excellent script in which practically every character has greater depth and dimension than you might imagine and dialogue that always sounds fresh and real. It also has top-notch performances by everyone, though special notice should go to Warner Baxter as the man brought back to life. Furthermore, it has exemplary direction by William Dieterle; I can somewhat tell that this movie was brought to us by the same man who gave us the 1939 version of THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME and PORTRAIT OF JENNIE, because it has some of that some visual flair. I love the subtle portrayals of some of the characters; in particular I like the way that the Professor’s big hulking deaf-mute assistant is not portrayed as a monster (though some people definitely react to him with fear), and the character of the butler, who tries to give the protaganist two very different items at two separate points in the story (his item is rejected both times, but one of them is eventually kept). Like DRACULA, this movie has no musical soundtrack; unlike that movie, I find the drama so breathtakingly powerful at every point of the story that I never once feel like nodding off. In my opinion, this science fiction drama with mystical overtones should be recognized for the classic it is rather than to lie forgotten in the mists of cinema history. This one is worth tracking down and checking out.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Wonder Man (1945)

WONDER MAN (1945)
Article #1088 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-7-2004
Posting Date: 8-4-2004
Directed by H. Bruce Humberstone
Featuring Danny Kaye, Virginia Mayo, Vera-Ellen

When a nightclub entertainer comes forth as a witness to a murder committed by a notorious gangster, he is knocked off before he can testify. The entertainer’s ghost then persuades his bookworm twin brother to take over his identity for a few days.

Danny Kaye was known for his comic singing and monologues, and it’s really no surprise that this movie takes every opportunity to drop the story momentarily in order to jump into one of them. He plays a dual role here, but this doesn’t seem particularly novel in his case, as he would constantly change characters as an entertainer; he does very well as you might expect. The special effects are top-notch (it won an Oscar for them), and there are a number of familiar faces in the supporting cast, including Edward Brophy, Natalie Schafer, Huntz Hall (as a sailor who punches Kaye at one point) and Otto Kruger. My only complaint is that the comic bits do rely a little too much on the repetitions of two situations; jokes hinging on the fact that the living brother is the only one who can hear and see the dead brother, and the living brother’s constantly being stuck in situations where he needs the spirit brother to take over his body, but the spirit brother doesn’t show. This is somewhat compensated for the final musical number, which both highlights Kaye’s talents and advances the plot.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Remember Last Night? (1935)

REMEMBER LAST NIGHT? (1935)
Article #1087 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-6-2004
Posting Date: 8-3-2004
Directed by James Whale
Featuring Edward Arnold, Robert Young, Constance Cummings

When a murdered body is found in the mansion of rich partiers, nobody can remember what happened since they were all too drunk to recall the circumstances.

This comedy-mystery directed by the man responsible for some of the greatest horror films of all time has a lot going for it; it has a great cast, beautiful sets, an energetic, almost dizzying pace, and Whale’s wonderful visual sense. I don’t think it’s quite as hilarious as it sets out to be; the first quarter of the movie consists almost entirely of the antics of rich drunken people, and except for Arthur Treacher’s long-suffering but contemptuous and curt commentary on the proceedings, I get fairly tired of the endless partying. The story also gets very confusing as it progresses, though its strong points are such that I would be more than willing to give it all a second viewing. The fantastic aspects are minor, but memorable; Gustav von Seyffertitz makes a memorable appearance as a hypnotist, and this sequence is definitely a high point in the movie. There are also direct verbal references to both THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and DRACULA’S DAUGHTER (though the latter hadn’t been released yet), and some of the later scenes also have a slight horror feel to them. There are many familiar names in the cast, include Robert Armstrong, George Meeker, Edward Brophy, Gregory Ratoff, and Regninal Denny. E.E. Clive has a priceless bit as the coroner’s photographer.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Hop Harrigan (1946)

HOP HARRIGAN (1946)
(Serial)
Article #1086 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-5-2004
Posting Date: 8-2-2004
Directed by Derwin Abrahams
Featuring William Bakewell, Jennifer Holt, Robert ‘Buzz’ Henry

A pilot is hired to deliver a scientist’s secret invention to the man who financed the experiment, but ends up running afoul of crooks who are also after the secret.

Every once in a while I run into a serial that helps me to identify why it is that I find many serials somewhat unsatisfying. Most serials are so geared towards nonstop action that all other considerations are thrown out the window, including character and plot development; generally, they do nothing more than establish the good guys, establish the bad guys, set up the McGuffin, and let them fight it out. I suspect those that love that type of structure will be somewhat disappointed by this one, which has more talk and less action than usual, but I really enjoyed this one because it added one element that made it work; namely, a sense of mystery. The mystery lies in the existence of certain characters who can’t be easily established as good guys or bad guys from square one. The scientist here is a loose cannon; he spends most of the serial being kidnapped and rescued, but he is such a paranoid, quick-to-anger, and resourceful personality, that you’re never sure who he will side with ultimately. Furthermore, the character of Ballard who is trying to cut a deal with the scientist for his invention is playing a game of his own that fits in with no other agenda. Both characters are mysterious and somewhat unpredictable, and trying to figure out how things would pan out in the end was actually more fun than obvious. I also found the characters likeable and interesting; even the little kid who is Hop’s fan isn’t merely a helpless pawn to be rescued; he is resourceful, smart and useful, and that’s also somewhat unusual for the child characters in these movies. The way the various elements of the plot unfold over the length of the serial also has a smoothness about it that I enjoyed; I never got the feeling they were continually rehashing the same situation repeatedly. I’m sure many serial fans will disagree, but I have to rank this one as one of my favorites.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Algol (1920)

ALGOL (1920)
Article #1085 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-4-2004
Posting Date: 8-1-2004
Directed by Hans Werckmeister
Featuring Emil Jannings, John Gottowt, Hans Adalbert Schlettow

A miner is given the secret to limitless energy by a mysterious friend, and uses it to become the master of a global economic empire.

This obscure german science fiction movie may be at least partially fantasy; the opening scene describes the star of Algol as being “the eye of the devil”, and there is some reason to suspect that the character named Algol may be the devil himself. As such, the movie hovers in a somewhat odd area between FAUST and METROPOLIS, though it really can’t be fairly compared with either one. One odd thing about the movie is that it really doesn’t seem to dwell on political or social commentary despite the theme of economic oppression; the focus seems to be on how the miner’s eventual growth into an economic tyrant destroys his personal relationships, and it is ultimately his loss of those aspects of his life (rather than a realization of the widespread suffering he is causing) that causes him to take the final actions that he does. Despite the fact that the character could be extremely unpleasant, you end up caring somewhat about him, and you’re sad to see him destroy the love and affection that surrounds him. Much of this can be attributed to Emil Janning’s excellent performance. My print has German subtitles, but I was fortunately provided with a translation of the title cards that went a long way to explaining the story; without it, you would have had another one of those confused “what’s going on here” reviews that I find myself doing whenever I don’t understand the language.

A special thanks goes here to the person who was kind enough to provide me with a copy of the film.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

The Love of Sunya (1927)

THE LOVE OF SUNYA (1927)
Article #1084 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-3-2004
Posting Date: 7-31-2004
Directed by Albert Parker
Featuring Gloria Swanson, John Boles, Pauline Garon

A woman wishing to marry the man she loves discovers that her father is in debt. Her duty towards her father tempts her into considering alternative choices that would get her father out of debt. She is then visited by a mystic who offers her a chance to look into a crystal ball to see the results of her choices.

This interesting silent drama has two fantastic aspects; first of all, there is the use of the crystal balls to foresee the possible futures, and secondly there is a backstory in which we discover that the mystic was once a priest in ancient Egypt who wrongs a woman unto death, and who now lives under a curse to expiate his sin by finding the woman’s reincarnation and atoning for his sin. Outside of bringing the theme of destiny into the story at an early point, the latter subplot has very little impact on the story as a whole; it could have been omitted without really damaging the story. The basic story and the final moral are both pretty simple, and in some ways everything that happens is a fait accompli, but it’s well acted (particularly from Gloria Swanson as the torn Sunya) and has some very well-directed sequences, including a clever scene at a dinner table which focuses only on the movements of hands. It strains credibility at one point when the story heaps so much undeserved misery and degradation on one character that it almost becomes laughable, but shortly after that it features a revelation that manages to not only put this exaggeration in an understandable context, but also short circuits one of the fantastic aspects of the tale. Nevertheless, it’s an interesting movie, and it’s always entertaining to see Gloria Swanson at her best.

0 CommentsLeave a comment

Assignment Outer Space (1960)

ASSIGNMENT OUTER SPACE (1960)
(a.k.a. SPACE MEN)
Article #1083 by Dave Sindelar
Viewing Date: 3-2-2004
Posting Date: 7-30-2004
Directed by Antonio Margheriti
Featuring Rik Van Nutter, Gabriella Farinon, Archie Savage

When a space station threatens to destroy the earth with its photonic generators , it’s up to a crew of astronauts and a reporter to save the day.

I’m going to coin another term here. You know how in some movies, the musical soundtrack is in sync with the action on the screen, enhancing and heightening the mood at all times? If so, then I’m sure you’ve noticed how in some movies, the musical soundtrack does no such thing; it just plows on without a care for the action on the screen, sounding the same during the thrilling, tense sequences as it does during the thoughtful sequences or the exposition? It’s obvious in such cases that the soundtrack is only there to fill in empty silence, much like elevator music is only there to give you something to listen to in an elevator. This type of soundtrack which heightens nothing, enhances nothing and reduces everything it touches to dreary sameness of mood I hereby dub the “Elevator Soundtrack”.

This movie starts out with a certain initial charm, with a savvy space pilot subtly taunting a know-it-all reporter on his first trip into deep space. The bargain basement special effects also had a certain charm to them; when I first saw them, I found myself hearkening back to my childhood when I used to watch “Space Angel” on a local cartoon show, a space opera which displayed just how limited limited animation could be. In fact, I’m a little surprised at how cheap the special effects seem to be; frankly, I think the Rocky Jones movies have better effects, and at least one effect (in which a burning and clearly earthbound car is used to substitute for an explosion in outer space) may win the award for the most desperately bad special effect I’ve seen. The charm does wear off, though, and between the dubbing (it’s in sync but poorly acted) and that Elevator Soundtrack, the movie ends up being like a long trek through the mud. It’s a bit of a shame, though; the story itself isn’t too bad, and at least one scene (in which one character navigates a space taxi through a narrow and invisible tunnel by tossing extraneous items about him to figure out the safe route) really caught my attention. Probably the most memorable thing about the movie is Archie Savage, whose striking physical appearance (a black man with snow-white hair) causes him to steal every scene he’s in without trying.

2 CommentsLeave a comment