The mad, mad, maddest caper in the world

Director: Stanley Kramer

Main Cast of Characters
J. Russell Finch (Milton Berle)

Melville (Sid Caesar)
Dingy Bell (Mickey Rooney)

Mr. Pike (Jonathan Winters)
Cpt. Culpepper (Spencer Tracey)

Mr. Hawthorne (Terry-Thomas)
Emeline (Dorothy Provine)

Monica (Edie Adams)
Benjy (Buddy Hackett)
Mrs. Marcus (Ethel Merman)

Mr. Meyer (Phil Silvers)
Date released: November 7, 1963

Plot: After hearing a dying man’s prophesy, eight people are involved on a wild car chase in search of $350,000. Their attempts to be the first ones to the treasure garner many comical mishaps and give word to more people wanting to be hunters in the greedy search.

I cannot say that I have a strong opinion about liking this movie or not; to me it was just average. It has a typical car chase scenario that many people go to great and outlandish lengths to obtain a large sum of money, but that some clumsy person drops it in the end and no one is any richer. To me, this formula is a bit tired.

Highlights:
In the end, all of the characters seemed to be put in situations that suited their personalities: Melville was thrown through a window into a building and down a flight of stairs (similar to the battering he sustained while locked in the hardware store); bossy Mrs. Marcus slips on the floor in the hospital, and the group of men laugh at her moment of weakness; corrupt Mr. Meyer gets “locked away” in a folding bed.

A family member we'd all like to have: 'Auntie Mame'

Director: Morton DaCosta
Main Characters:

Mame Dennis (Rosalind Russell)

Patrick (young) (Jan Handzlik)

Patrick (older) (Roger Smith)

Vera Charles (Coral Browne)
Release Date: December 27, 1958

Plot: When young Patrick Dennis’s father dies, he is sent to the care of his eccentric aunt, Mame Dennis, who lives in New York City. The two quickly bond, but as the story progresses through Patrick’s life, some hard times like the Great Depression, and people who are more conventional than Mame, their relationship is tested.

I enjoyed the film very much because each element worked together to create a good story. The characters were very interesting, especially Mame in her eccentricity. Her relationship with Patrick—how she was able to bond with him, but still keep her flare in the face of people trying to tear them apart was what really made the story for me. I also enjoyed Mame’s inspiring mantra of “Live, live, live!”

Highlights of this film:
I especially liked the ending sequence when Patrick brings his fiancée over to Mame’s apartment and her unusual houseguests and house furniture test the girl’s conservative parents. It is at this point that her relationship to Patrick is tested—some things come to light that outrage his fiancée’s family, but Patrick sticks by his aunt anyway because he is grateful for her being the one that raised him.

Color was very appropriate for this film because it very much highlighted Mame’s eccentric style—from the sparkly clothes she wore to how she decorated her apartment. Even her overall enthusiastic personality was highlighted by the colors she surrounded herself with.
Though Mame’s personality might be enough to carry the film in black and white, the film’s overall brilliant aesthetic would not have been the same had it not been in color. Again, the brightness of Mame and her surroundings highlighted her overall flare.

Because Mame was such a unique character, her apartment matched this uniqueness. It was highly decorated in themes and colors—one time reflected Oriental influences and another it radiated various shades of purple. Mame completely redecorated every few weeks to match her mood…and her money. Thus, it was a bit outlandish to real life, but then again, Mame’s character was larger than life.

Again, Mame’s overall eccentricity and her appearance very much complemented each other. She wore bright clothes made of rich fabrics and donned many flashy accessories. She always stood out. Even her nephew Patrick was overshadowed by her costuming, because he never wore more than neutral colors. This difference stands out most prominently toward the end of the film where he is engaged to the conservative Gloria Upson and everything about his aunt’s flashiness embarrasses him. He even asks Mame to change before Gloria comes over, but he finally realizes that the flashiness about her is what he had loved all along.

Since this film spanned through several years (from Patrick’s childhood to early adulthood), the makeup changed to reflect the ages. In Mame’s case especially, she was growing older and put on a lot of makeup perhaps to hide this. She always had heavily lined eyes and very deep shades of lipstick. She even wore different colored wigs to hide her graying hair most times. This reflects the difference between her and the rest of the characters she was with. She always wanted to stand out even when others, like Patrick began to, wanted to sink into the crowd and be more conservative. Mame always wanted to be her own person, no matter what anyone else thought.

I'll have my breakfast at Tiffany's

Release Year: 1961
Director: Blake Edwards
Main Characters:
Holly Golightly (Audrey Hepburn)
Paul Varjak (George Peppard)
Doc Golightly (Buddy Ebsen)
Mr. Yunioshi (Mickey Rooney)
Runtime: 1 hour, 55 minutes
Rated: unrated, but suitable for most audiences

The slinky black Givenchy gown. The Tiffany’s window. Everyone knows what an iconic film “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” came to be, especially in that opening shot. The film also catapulted its star, Audrey Hepburn to fashion icon status.

“Breakfast” is a classic in so many people’s minds, but I will admit that at first I did not enjoy the film as much as some seemed to. Perhaps I was too preoccupied by trying to take in too many of the classic moments, like the dress, like the rain-soaked kiss between Holly and Paul at the end. I waited about a year before watching it again; the first time I had popped in the DVD from my collection of five of Hepburn’s films. But something drew me back to the film; something made me want to watch it again. That something has to be the charm with which Hepburn approached the character of Holly Golightly.

Golightly is a young New York socialite. Her sexy, sophisticated approach to life fascinates her new neighbor, Paul Varjak. But Golightly has some insecurities that surface when she and Varjak are alone. She confesses that she doesn’t know who she really is. She feels like a mut, like a no-name slob like her orange tabby whom she only refers to as “Cat.” Holly Golightly, of course, is not her real name. Her real-life identity is that of Lula Mae, a down-home girl with a veterinarian husband she left behind for the city named Doc Golightly. When Doc comes to New York for Holly, she can’t bear to go back to her rural surroundings.

The end of the film is an emotional encounter between Holly and Paul. He confesses that he loves her for the Holly he knows. It is up to her if this Holly is she can accept for herself.

Through all of its sophistication, there were a few parts that made “Breakfast” pretty risqué for its time. The character of Holly Golightly was a call girl, a woman who gets paid to, shall we say, rendezvous with men. Hepburn plays this character with surprising charm, however, which may be what has given “Breakfast” an iconic status rather than a sleazy one. Also, Andy Rooney (a Caucasian actor) played the part of Holly’s Japanese landlord, Mr. Yunioshi. His portrayal of this character is a pretty offensive stereotype, and director Blake Edwards himself said if he had to make the movie again, he would not have made the same casting choice for that character. A smart decision, I would say.

Other than its brief flaws, “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” goes down in my books as one of the most engaging films I have ever seen and solidifies Audrey Hepburn as one of my all-time favorite actresses. ***1/2 out of ****.

I spy a genre of classic movies

The 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s seemed to be full of some type of spy/detective movie, whether it was the classic police inspector with his faithful sidekick (a takeoff on the old Sherlock and Holmes) or a comedy caper where an unlikely hero solves the mystery. There were so many of those types of films that a few parodies were made as well (think "Murder by Death").

I had a film seminar last year in which we watched "Murder by Death" and a film in the series about detective Hercule Poirot called "Evil Under the Sun." I've always liked a good mystery, but I am hesitent to watch these detective movies because they always seem to make the detective a bumbling fool, whose sidekick is the smarter and more cunning one who solves the mystery for them (or at least is willing to give the credit to the detective). Not that I don't love the show, but this must be why "Inspector Gadget" is so popular. I always felt bad Gadget's niece, Penny who was his faithful sidekick.

However, with "Murder" and "Evil," I was pleasantly surprised. Even though I did not know much about Agatha Cristie's Poirot character, who was the star of "Evil," Peter Ustinov played him sharply. He is a man who asked all the right questions and did his own detective work, thank you very much.

"Murder" was very funny and had a lot of famous faces: Maggie Smith, Peter Sellers (playing an Asian man) and "In Cold Blood" author Truman Capote, who played the owner of the mansion where the other characters stayed and where the mayhem ensued.

For one being a serious take on mysteries, and the other being a more humorous take, I highly recommend these films for people who love the gamut of the mystery genre.

Movie Classics: 'Lover Come Back'

First Released: March 3, 1962
Director: Delbert Mann
Main Characters:
Carol Templeton (Doris Day)
Jerry Webster (Rock Hudson)
Pete Ramsey (Tony Randall)
Rebel Davis (Edie Adams)
Dr. Linus Tyler (Jack Kruschen)
Runtime: 1 hour, 47 minutes
Rated: unrated, but suitable for all audiences

The star of "Lover Come Back," Doris Day, is notorious for being a cute, blond, sugary-sweet personality of 1960s cinema. When I had to watch this movie in a film seminar class in school, I was a bit apprehensive because, frankly, overly bubbly people like what Doris Day had been portrayed as kind of get on my nerves. However, after watching this film, I was pleasantly surprised. Even though much of the dialogue in "Lover" was incredibly cheesy, I left my classroom/theater with the impression that this film was a lighthearted romp between the film's two main stars (Day and Hudson, who had also starred together in other romantic comedies like "Pillow Talk" in 1959 and "Send Me No Flowers" in 1964). The cuteness here tickled me more than scratched my nerves.

As with most romantic comedies the plot of "Lover" is not very complicated. Set on Madison Ave. in New York City, the movie centers on Carol Templeton and Jerry Webster, who are in the advertising business and are competing for clients. Carol likes to do everything by the book and gets miffed when Webster pulls ahead, bribing the clients with alcohol and women. Carol soon sees a commercial for a product called VIP and tries to befriend the inventor so he will sell the account to her agency—anything to get back at Jerry Webster. Since she has never met Webster in person, the man that she takes to be the inventor is really Webster. Jerry uses this mistaken identity to try to get Carol to let her guard down and reveal a more personal side of herself.

This film has a classic mistaken identity plot, which made it funny, considering Webster duped Carol into getting close to him when he portrayed the inventor, since she so despised him in real life. Also, for all of her innocence, Carol was a pretty strong female character, as she stood up for herself in what was wrong (she organized the hearing against Webster with the ad council), even though she still got duped in the end.

The highlight of this film is that the two characters' parts were comically overacted. Usually overacting can be the sign of a terrible-quality movie, but the silliness worked in this format (as well as given that this film was a 1960s version of a romantic comedy, that couldn't take some of the risks that our films do today). Though many of the lines were cheesy, especially when Jerry, as the inventor and staying in a room at Carol’s apartment, was trying to subtly seduce Carol by conveying the inventor’s shy, neurotic personality. Carol was fully smitten by him and you could tell she was exercising great control not to jump wildly into his arms. She portrays an innocence that is not often seen today. Speaking of innocence, it amused me that when Carol got angry at one of Jerry’s schemes, she made little noises of disdain, rather than screaming or cursing. Her pastel outfits and ridiculously eccentric hats also made me laugh.

Despite this cheese factor, "Lover Come Back" was not a bad foray into the work of Doris Day. ***/****.

'A Clockwork Orange': the film with no appy-polly-loggies

Release Year: 1972
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Main Characters:
Alex De Large (Malcolm McDowell)
Droogs:
Pete (Michael Tarn)
Georgie (James Marcus)
Dim (Warren Clarke)
Runtime: 2 hours, 16 minutes
Rated: R for intense and graphic violence and nudity

Oh, my brothers, what is there to say about “A Clockwork Orange” and its humble narrator, that is, Alex De Large, a boy of fifteen who routinely engages in a bit of the old ultraviolence?

The smooth flow of De Large’s speech is what lures viewers in to a two hour glimpse of the young man’s life. A charismatic sadist, De Large and his gang (known as droogs) get perverse pleasure from acts of physical and sexual violence (referred to as ultraviolence).

So how did a person as despicable as De Large become one of the best known movie characters of all time? Perhaps it is because his persona is so wildly different from any other in cinema history. People who haven’t even seen the film could likely identify by his black bowler hat, right eye-lined eye with long black lashes, and white jump suit with matching codpiece. His use of the slang language Nadsat can be easily quoted (for those who cannot decipher the title of this post, appy-polly-loggies is Nadsat for apologies), as can his love of milk plus (“milk plus vellocet or synthemesc or drencrom,” which is what they were drinking); narcotic-laden milk.

Perhaps also it was the fascination in the 1960s and 1970s of movie goers to enjoy a psychology film. De Large goes too far when he kills one of his victims. He is sent to jail, but authorities know that he has to be rehabilitated of his old habits. The government uses an aversion therapy technique called the Ludovico technique that conditions De Large against his ultraviolent ways by forcing him to look at brutal images. Doctors force pin his eye lids back so that he cannot blink. They give him medicine so that he becomes physically ill when he sees those images, and will experience the same feelings if he tries to behave violently again. Doctors inadvertently condition Alex against his favorite piece of music, Beethoven’s “Ninth Symphony,” and he gets physically ill when he hears the song as well. All of this is reminiscent of the famous Pavlov dog classical conditioning experiment.

Alex De Large is both the protagonist and the antagonist. Audiences are made to feel sorry for him when the Ludovico technique proves to make Alex crazy and suicidal, and the government apologizes for making him their lab rat. De Large was a rat before, so even though the government tries to cure him from his aversion, it is up to him whether or not he goes back to his old ways.

This film can be visualized as both a drug-induced hallucination from the bright colors and artwork were prevalent in all the rooms shown in the movie (perhaps to give it a futuristic feel; the movie was supposed to be set in 1995). De Large’s narration can be likened to subject matter expressed by someone while lying on a psychologist’s couch. While it should be private, the audience is made uncomfortably aware of De Large’s ultraviolence by the graphic portrayal of it onscreen. We are made to experience the same joy De Large feels by having classical music juxtaposed to these images. In the 1950s, the song “Singin’ in the Rain” was visualized as Gene Kelly in a trench coat and umbrella twirling around lampposts while singing in the rain. For “A Clockwork Orange,” it is the theme song to De Large’s rape of a middle-aged woman in front of her bound and gagged husband.

For the sheer uneasiness the film gives me, I am not sure if I can say that I like it. But considering De Large’s character, the exact goal of the filmmakers was to make me uncomfortable. Style-wise this film gets a high rank because of its portrayal of such an unconventional, almost unorthodox character. It takes a taboo subject matter (acts of extreme violence) and portrays it in such a way that exaggerates reality (the imagery, the colors, sets, costumes, and music).

***1/2 out of ****

(pictures: top--filmjournal.net; bottom: moviecritic.com.au)

(Horror) Movie of the Week: 'Suspiria'

Release Year: 1977
Director: Dario Argento
Main Characters:
Suzy Banyon (Jessica Harper)
Sara (Stefania Casini)
Madame Blanc (Joan Bennett)
Miss Tanner (Alida Valli)
Runtime: 1 hour, 32 minutes
Rated: R for gruesome images and violence

“Suspiria” may very well have been catapulted into twenty-first century filmgoers’ lexicons by the 2007 film “Juno.” In one scene, the character Juno (Ellen Page) is debating the merits of horror films and mentions “Suspiria” by name. She also says that director Dario Argento is “so the ultimate master of horror.” Personally, I was brought to the attention of this movie by Bravo’s 2004 countdown of the 100 Scariest Movie Moments, where it placed at number 24.

The plot of “Suspiria” is simple enough: an American ballet student named Suzy Banyon travels to Germany to enroll in a prestigious school for training. But as soon as she arrives, trouble starts. A young woman that Banyon saw running away the night she arrived was murdered. Banyon believes that the incident was just a fluke, so she tries to get settled at school. However, when she is overcome by an unexplainable sickness, faces the disappearance of her friend Sara and other mysterious deaths around the school, she discovers that the school is just a front for a coven of witches bent on destruction.

In some ways, “Suspiria” is like a typical horror film. It has multiple bloody murders, and of course, all of the murders overshadow the plotline so that it becomes shallow and cheesy.

What “Suspiria” doesn’t rely on, though, is a terrifying serial killer like Freddy Krueger and Jason Voorhies. No, what makes “Suspiria” such a triumph of the horror genre is the startling use of Technicolor. Every scene Argento created gives a unique stimulation to the senses. This effect is so well done in the murder scenes especially are incredibly disturbing.

Another fascinating element to this film that is well represented in the above sample (besides how smoothly the assailant seems to stab the knife into the girl) is the score of banshee-like wailing from the aptly-named band, the Goblins.

The entire package of eye-popping colors, brutal murders and haunting music make this film an on-screen representation of your worst nightmare. This film gets such a high rating from me because it is 1970s horror, which is the best kind. Today’s horror flicks rely too much computer-generated effects, which may be technologically savvy, but does not work magic on the senses like something as fundamental as color did for “Suspiria.” Though the plot of this film was incredibly cheesy (though who goes to a horror film for the story?) the other elements of the film could most definitely satisfy any horror-fan’s scare fix. ***1/2 out of ****

Also check out the film's theatrical trailer, which is replete with excellent 70s creepiness:



(movie poster found at best-horror-movies.com)

Movie Treasures: 'Some Like it Hot'

Release Year: 1959
Director: Billy Wilder
Main characters: Sugar Kane Kowalcyzk (Marilyn Monroe)
Joe/ Josephine (Tony Curtis)
Jerry/Daphne (Jack Lemmon)
Runtime: 2 hours
Rated: not rated

I first watched “Some Like it Hot” in a class I had last year that focused on classic films, called Hidden Treasures of a Bygone Era. I took it not only for my love of films, but because before that, I was ashamed to say that I had not seen many classic films. In the class, we watched many films by legendary actors, such as Katharine Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart. Even more ashamedly, I will admit that I found many of the movies to be slow moving and sleep inducing (especially “Casablanca.” I know. How bad of me.) When we got to watching “Some Like it Hot,” I was a little skeptical. I mean, how many movies had been released with men dressed in drag? I can name “White Chicks,” “Big Momma’s House,” and John Travolta in last year’s “Hairspray” just for a few. The American Film Institute had also rated the film the number one comedy in its “100 Years, 100 Laughs” listing. It was hard for me to believe that a film made nearly 50 years ago could be considered funny enough compared to some of today’s more risqué movies. When I was finished with the film, I realized how wrong I had been to pre-judge this amazing movie.

The movie opens in Chicago in 1929. Two struggling musicians, Joe and Jerry, are looking for work. One night they must go to a show in another town and need to borrow Joe’s girlfriend’s car, which is in the garage. At the garage, they mistakenly happen upon a mob group, headed by a man known as Little Bonaparte (Nehemiah Persoff). The mob shoots everyone in the garage, but Jerry and Joe, who must run away because they are now marked witnesses. (It is later revealed that the shooting was the Valentine’s Day Massacre.) The two decide to disguise themselves as women and join an all-women’s band that is traveling to Florida. They decide to call themselves Josephine and Daphne.

On the train to Florida, “Josephine” and “Daphne” meet a young woman named Sugar Kane, who has also run away from the male bands that she used to perform with. She is beautiful, and also a little ditzy, and both Joe and Jerry fall head over heels for her, but struggle with their disguises and not to reveal they are really men. Along the way, many capers ensue as the men are dressed as women, most especially entertaining is a subplot involving Jerry, dressed as Daphne, and “her” relationship with an elderly millionaire named Osgood Fielding (Joe E. Brown). In the meantime, the mob has managed to locate their hotel, and much of the end of the movie deals with “the girls” trying to dodge getting “rubbed out.”

Overall, this movie provides fast-paced comedy and charming dialogue and characters. I also love the infamous end line when Daphne finally reveals that she is a man to Osgood (who had proposed marriage to her), who says “Well, nobody’s perfect.” Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon are an amazing comic duo and Marilyn Monroe impressively displayed her niche as the flirty seductress in her songstress character Sugar. (I rushed to put the three songs she sings in the movie “I Wanna be Loved by You,” “I’m Through with Love,” and “Runnin’ Wild” on my iPod.)

The movie may have a simple plot, but it is definitely evident of its classical notoriety. I can easily give **** out of ****

Fun Fact: Marilyn Monroe also recorded a song called “Some Like it Hot,” but it was not included in the movie. Listen to the song here, which also has some clips of the film, and stills from the set. (This video plays the song twice.)

(thanks to soundtrackcollector.com for the picutre)

Next Up: Movie of the Week: 'Get Smart.'