Nate-48 Reviews

Grumpy Old Men (1993)

Watch Burgess Meredith steal the show

[6/10 · 11 May 2024]

Sure Jack Lemon and Walter Matthau are great together. You would expect nothing less. Ann Margret is divine.

But for me, this movie is all about watching the great Burgess Merrdith. At 87 or 88 depending on when this is filmed, the legend is an absolute show stopper here despite only having a supporting role where he might be on the screen about 15 minutes.

One of the greatest American actors, world war 2 interrupted his career which was just taking off. He rose to the rank of captain in the army. Blacklisted from hollywood in the McCarthy era, he had to return to the stage. He appeared in a couple twilight zone episodes after that. He is best remembered now as the trainer of Rocky and for playing the Penguin on the Batman TV series and movie. Both incredible performances.

But other post ww2 standout performances are not as well remembered.

You can't miss him here.

It is his distinctive booming voice and the power of his personality in the delivery of his lines that truly separate himself from anybody. I can't think of anybody in his league in that realm.

Lemmon, Matthau and Ann Margret are all one of a kind gems but they are all let down by this buffoon of a script which looks like it was piecemealed together over a drunken booze fest.

All I can think throughout this movie is did a fifth grader actually write this crap?

Ultimately the story is just not that important in this case. Its just a last chance to enjoy this loveable group together.

Young Frankenstein (1974)

Brilliant from start to finish

[8/10 · 27 April 2024]

Most amazing part of this movie is the ratta tat tat dialogue and screenplay in the first half of the movie from Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder.

It's fun to figure out which parts are Brooks and which are Wilder's though I think it is fairly easy to tell a lot of the time.

Some really classic Brooks schtick here - just incredibly smart jokes one after the other - this is a tour de force.

Things slow down just a bit as the movie gets into more Franktein and less Mel Brooks comedy but then finishes with hilarious Brooks comedy.

The cinematography and sequencing is superb.

The acting - incredible - nobody lets down - from top flight Gene Wilder to top notch Teri Garr doing a Transylvania accent, the always adorable Madeline Kahn, Peter Boyle, always good Cloris Leachman, off-the-wall Marty Feldman and perhaps best of all Gene Hackman in an uncredited role.

Look early for Danny Goldman, who went on to voice Brainy Smurf.

Footloose (1984)

Worth a watch for some early 80s performances

[6/10 · 18 April 2024]

Not a great movie by any means but as one reviewer said - it is like an 80s musical.

Some parts of the movie still hold up well and have relevance.

Above all, it is worth watching for some good performances by Kevin Bacon, John Lithgow and an early look at Chris Penn and Sarah Jessica Parker. Dianne Weist is very good as well.

In some ways, this is your typical 80s high school movie - which Hollywood made a million of for some reason at this time.

It is really a breakout vehicle for Bacon, who handles a difficult role exceptionally well. If he fails, the movie fails. But he holds it together - not an easy job by any means.

Chris Penn makes a big impression early though he has to play to the script a little bit - he has to play the supporting role to Bacon and isn't allowed to overshadow him. I think the movie would have been better if Penn was allowed to stretch his wings more and be treated as more of aj equal but that's not what the script calls for.

There are some interesting political overtones that still have a lot of meaning today with parts of our history that seemed in the past having a resurgence.

Hugo (2011)

Scorcese's greatest film

[10/10 · 11 January 2024]

Some people will tell you that Raging Bull is director Martin Scorcese's greatest movie. Others will say Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, Mean Streets or Casino.

They all have legitimate cases as his best work but none of them achieve what Scorcese was able to produce here.

This has been called a love letter to silent films and that is very true though this movie is much more than that. Those who appreciate silent movies will be more touched by this movie though it is NOT a silent movie.

The movie is set in Paris post WW1 in a train station. Scorcese mixes 3D with live action sequences to create some of the best cinematography I have ever seen.

The young protoganist of the film is Asa Butterfield, who is a total revelation as is a young Chloe Grace Moretz.

Ben Kingsley pulls off the finest performance of his career.

Sacha Baron Cohen steals the show in every scene he is in.

Christopher Lee has a small role near the end of his life where you wish you saw more of him.

Jude Law, in a minor role, is perfect.

This is one of the rare movies that got better each time I watched it. The third time was greater than the first two - which is hard to do.

The only thing that bothers me about this is that Scorcese went from making something so magical to something rather dopey next with Wolf of Wall Street but I forgive him.

This is a masterpiece.

There are clips of old silent film classics that will take your breath away and recreations of some of the films that are just as startling.

There is not one false move from any of the actors.

Lost in Translation (2003)

This movie has a good heart

[6/10 · 30 December 2023]

I liked this movie for its aspirations to tell a love story with the exotic backdrop of Tokyo which at the time this movie was made was kind of rare for an American movie. Ironically, Kill Bill (which features Tokyo scenes) also was shot in the same year. And that is also around the time the director Sofia Coppola and Kill Bill Director Quentin Tarantino began dating. Maybe just a coincidence.

I like Sofia Coppola. She has the genetics for movies, is smart, understands characters, has enough of a of a Lubitsch.erotic sensuality to this movie while not pushing the limits of the characters.

Coppola is respective to the young Scarlett Johansson. She gets the best out of Bill Murray, who underplays his character while doling out his great physical comedy skills and tricks. I don't think this movie could have been made today.

At the same time, a lot of this story is unrealistic. There are some holes in the script. My understanding is a lot of the movie was written on the fly with improvisation and not a lot of dialogue.

The relationship between Johansson and Ribisi could have been fleshed out a little more perhaps.

The ending is totally unrealistic again which makes this a 6 for me instead of perhaps a 7.

It's a great effort but not a great movie, But worth seeing.

History of the World: Part I (1981)

Hits and misses, memorable lines

[7/10 · 8 October 2023]

Ambitious effort from writer/director Mel Brooks. Has some good laughs especially in the beginning but sort of gets lost along the way. Brooks is the star in this journey through history and he is in nearly every scene playing multiple characters. Best actor in the movie is Madeline Khan who is a tour de force. Orson Welles as narrator almost as impactful. Sid Caesar in the beginning is so dynamite you wish he had even more scenes. Set decoration is outrageous. Some good supporting performances from a number of actors and a ton of cameos to look out for. Some great memorable jokes and some witty lines from Brooks and his writing team make up for some of the more slower parts. Campy as always for Brooks but that is part of the fun. One of the best parts is actually the ending after the ending. Brooks was going to do a part 2 but instead did Spaceballs - a good choice and one of his best triumphs.

Silent Movie (1976)

Bundle of laughs

[8/10 · 5 October 2023]

If you are of the age where you remember the 70s or have enough movie knowledge to recognize the 70s and/or silent era you should get a kick out of this. Mel Brooks is great and so is Sid Caesar. I watched this wishing there were even more scenes for Caesar, he is so great. Alas this is Brooks' vehicle and Marty Feldman's too. You get the idea that Brooks repays Feldman here for his great work in Young Frankenstein.

In the first half of this which is funniest part you are wondering where are all the babes I usually see in a Mel Brooks film? They arrive later.

I don't want to give away the cameos but they are also great. A running joke in the beginning also hits well though they give up on it - would have liked to have seen it carry on until the end.

Just as Blazing Saddles was controversial this movie also takes a politically incorrect joke and runs with it (would be frowned upon by the pc police today).

Dom DeLuise is just total money here and is the precursor to the John Candy role in Brooks' Spaceballs as is one of the gags.

This satirical comedy clearly influenced Airplane, Naked Gun and Three Amigos to name a few.

Brooks shows a lot of character acting here not just comedy and the guy who gets the ladies but shows vulnerability and other sides you don't normally see.

Brooks is a big Buster Keaton fan and is knowledgeable of the silent era which shows here.

Harold Gould steals every minute as the villain.

Bernadette Peters is lovely and is perfectly cast.

Brilliant set decoration.

Overboard slapstick comedy might be a bit too much of 70s campiness but in this day and age we could use more camp.

The Hunt for Red October (1990)

Formulaic Hollywood naval Star Wars meant for the big screen

[5/10 · 27 March 2023]

First of all, it starts out great before it falters but let us count all the good actors here: Connery, James Earl Jones, Baldwin, Sam Neil, Scott Glenn, Tim Curry, Sen. Fred Thompson, Jeffrey Jones. Each performance is sharp and noticeable and each time a new character is introduced you applaud their appearance. This was cast well.

2) This was meant for the big screen. That is why it banked more than $200 million. Your home tv is probably not going to do the trick.

3) Too much formulaic Hollywood crap at the end. The premise of the cold war submarine story is good though it is takes some rather unlikely turns where you can literally see the Hollywood suits in a 1990 smoke-filled room telling the director to do "one of these" and "one of those."

4) The studio was trying to do a little Star Wars in the water. So we have Connery as kind of a Darth Vader character. Is he good or is he bad? You are not sure. A few people die - one in a strange way. There are two scenes with Connery almost straight out of Empire Strikes Back. Just for good measure, we have James Earl Jones in the film though he is definitely one of the good guys who will perform a Mission Impossible save the world moment later on.

5) This movie might have had more potential to be something more than it was after a quick beginning that puts you on the edge of your seat but halfway through it slows down to a crawl with all of the Hollywood formulaic thoughts, gestures, speeches and twists we have all seen a million times before.

Extra credit: Scott Glenn puts in a very good performance in a supporting role.

Connery is great as always. He is freaking Sean Connery.

I gave it a 6 for effort, acting, some great visuals, special effects, a decent story however convoluted but leaned more towards a 5 for how badly they screwed up the second half. Still entertaining.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931)

Fredrich March tour de force, great direction

[8/10 · 5 March 2023]

Brilliant filmmaking- puzzling the director was not more successful.

For 1931, this is an exceptionally sharp production with innovative filmmaking techniques.

The Hyde character portrayed by March is disturbing yet still captivating.

March could be one of the most underrated actors.

Miriam hopkins is excellent in the type of pre- code role that would soon disappear from screens for a good 30 years.

Only negative would be that a couple of the scenes seem slightly unlikely even under the circumstances in which we are suspending our disbelief to begin with.

Makes you wonder if this film influenced Teenwolf.

This is better than the later remake with Spencer Tracy. There is also a silent version with John Barrymore.

Last Tango in Paris (1972)

Only gave it a 3 for Brando, otherwise a 1

[3/10 · 18 February 2023]

High on shock value, low on screenplay or meaningful dialogue or a story that makes any sense of being realistic.

Marlon Brando may have been nominated for an Oscar but he didn't win and he is not all that good here nor does he have much to work with. There are a few glimpses of greatness here and there because he can't help himself but he doesn't have a script to really pull anything that great off.

One obvious defect is he uses at least five different voices. There is his Godfather voice, his Stella voice, an English accent for one scene and one of the few times I have heard what sounds like his native Nebraska dialect.

The young actress does the best with a very difficult assignment playing Brando's love interest. The movie has them about 23 years apart though in real life the difference is almost 30 years. Brando is about 48-49 during filming.

Biggest problem in the movie is not so much the racy sex scenes but the infatuation of the director with sliminess and a fetish for making the scenes full of dirt.

Even a well choreographed ballroom dancing scene can't save this.

Decent ending sequence but this is really a waste of time.

Jeopardy (1953)

Entertaining 50's flick with Stanwyck

[7/10 · 31 December 2022]

Surprisingly entertaining 50's thriller with Stanwyck and Meeker.

Wasn't sure what to expect with Stanwyck in her mid 40s in a motherly role paired with Barry Sullivan. Sullivan is fine underplaying the part and doing the best he can with the script.

Ralph Meeker enters about halfway through and steals the show as the plot thickens and the pace quickens.

John Sturges is very surgical in his approach with some very good scenes technically and visually.

Known largely for his westerns and movies like the great escape and the magnificent seven.

Not a great film by any means but fun viewing. Some very suggestive scenes as well for the time period. Stanwyck radiant and brilliant as always. She makes everything better.

My Outlaw Brother (1951)

Movie really rolls along, good acting but ending is a letdown

[6/10 · 19 December 2022]

I swear this must have been one of the favorite movies of George Lucas when he was a kid because I see so many similarities in the storyline of Star Wars.

This independent western really moves quickly with great too notch acting from Mickey Rooney and solid turns by Robert Preston and an early Robert Stack.

Some great comedy lines, a lot of great action shots and horse battle sequences.

The ending really builds up with a great action scene but they kind of just rush it and it is a major letdown.

Rooney is so great in everything he does. I Wish he received more credit.

This was one of the last movies directed by Elliot Nugent who directed Bob Hope in Cat and the Canary and pictures with Harold Lloyd and Danny Kaye.

It Can Be Done Amigo (1972)

Jack palance can't make up his mind on his accent

[3/10 · 18 December 2022]

Only watched this to see Jack Palance and he is great as always in his presence. The only problem is he cant make up his mind if he is going to be Jack Palance from Shane or southern Jack Palance or Mexican Jack Palance.

The dvd quality I had was horrible (20 great westerns heroes & bandits). Perhaps you will have better luck with this 70s Italian Spaghetti Western doing its best Good the bad the ugly impression. A lot of shooting and action often out of nowhere for almost no reason.

If you blink you might miss what just happened. A lot of slow parts though as well and very campy. Without Palance I would give it a 2.

The Funeral (1996)

Only worth watching for how bad a career move this was for Chris Penn

[2/10 · 18 December 2022]

Painfully horrible pre-war gangster movie that reunites Chris Walken with Chris Penn (At Close Range). Instead of Walken being the badboy outlaw father to Penn he is portraying a gang leader with a conscience who lives in a funeral home with apparently several generations of family members cousins friends and funeral employees. Apparently this is funeral home is the big gathering hole in this town. We never really know where this is supposed to be.

From the non-believable setting and background follows a snail's pace screenplay which takes periodic breaks for sex scenes with prostitutes including some silent era footage of a sex scene.

The film is directed by Abel Fererra, known for his trashy films. The writer nicholas st john worked with him on the grossly overrated romanticized kings of new york.

A good acting turn by Walken, who is always good though this isnt a standout performance with only a few good lines to work with. Early performance by Benicio Del toro and gretchen Mol. Victor Argo always makes an impression.

Worst part of the film was watching the very talented chris penn, who died too young. He is good here but the part is beneath him. He might not have ever been leading man material in the 90s or the superhero 2000 but he was a singular talent with a lot of skills.

With the success of Reservoir Dogs he had a lot of opportunities and I believe took on a lot of the wrong roles - this was one of them. With better character selection I believe he would have had a much more successful career and perhaps a better life. For an actor with so much energy and diverse talents, he never got to really show all he could do.

Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)

Audrey Hepburn and George Peppard are great, script underwhelming

[6/10 · 12 December 2022]

Audrey Hepburn and George Peppard are outstanding in this legendary movie. Mickey Rooney, in a supporting role as an almost unrecognizable character, is also great though I wish he had more screen time.

The story is pretty ludicrous though I understand why it is well-remembered and fondly thought of.

I understand the appeal of this film. Hepburn wears a lot of fancy outfits, there are some nice shots and a couple interesting party scenes. The Hepburn character is a preamble to the free-wheeling 60's and the emergence of the independent woman.

At the end of the day, a movie is only as good as its script and while there are some memorable scenes in this film and the cinematography and art direction will always make this a well-remembered iconic classic, it doesn't rise to the level of a great film.

I would give the story a 2 or 3, but I give the movie a 6 because of the three great acting performances and the cinematography, as well as its historic place in movie history. I think Peppard was an incredibly underrated actor.

Shadow of a Doubt (1943)

Theresa wright is great, Cotten good, movie is a 7

[7/10 · 26 November 2022]

Theresa Wright is worth every penny and more of the $18 I spent on the dvd.

Joseph Cotten is pretty darn good himself, having just recently made jouney into fear with Orson Welles after Magnificent Ambersons and Citizen Kane.

Nice support from Henry Travers and Hume Cronyn.

There are some classic Hitchcock camera moves and shots which make this a quality picture. There is certainly enough suspense.

The only issues are that there are some major holes in the story and script that are a bit below what we expect in Hitchcock's prime.

If I were to rank Hitchcock's feature films into five tiers I would put this in the third tier.

Bugsy (1991)

Takes a lot of liberties with story

[6/10 · 17 September 2022]

One of the major knocks against this film when it was released was the amount of unfaithfulness to the truth throughout the movie.

Despite many liberties taken against the historical record of what occurred and a number or made-up scenes that are hard to fathom, the movies tries at times to follow close to what was known at the time but the lack of attention to detail keeps getting in the way.

Beatty does a great job acting in the film and his chemistry with his future wife Annette Bening is something to behold.

I don't mind so much that Beatty is about 15 years older than Siegel was during these years but it's more upsetting that Virginia Hill (Benings character) is portrayed as a street tough city girl when she was a street tough country girl from Alabama.

Mickey Cohen was in his early 30s but is portrayed as a hardened criminal in his late 40s to early 50s. Also the background story on his relationship with Siegel is tangled up here.

The movie does drag on at times and there are some absurd scenes which never would have happened.

Beatty is at his best playing the family man - his charisma carries the picture but they couldn't even get the ending to be accurate historically which kind of defeats the purpose of making a biopic movie.

Giant (1956)

Great cinematography and acting but movie is too long, drawn out and disjointed

[7/10 · 12 September 2022]

Beautiful cinematography from start to finish.

Great acting from Elizabeth Taylor, Rock Hudson, James Dean, Caroll Baker and Dennis Hopper but the movie moves too slow from beginning to end and almost never speeds up.

Some parts are especially slow, dull and cringeworthy but it remains a must-see movie (if you can handle 3 hours and 20 minutes) for it being Dean's last performance before death, Hudson's best performance and one of Taylor's best.

Also early Baker and Hopper are a plus.

Director George Stevens had directed Elizabeth Taylor in A Place in the Sun and this has moments similar to that one as well as Steven's Shane.

Stevens would only direct three more movies after this.

The Trial (1962)

Only worth watching if you have high quality version

[5/10 · 8 August 2022]

This movie, more than anything, is noted for its superb surrealistic visual work. That being said, if you pick up a cheap dvd copy of this film as I did, you will be greatly disappointed.

This movie was meant to be seen on the big screen in the theater. The camera work is groundbreaking and hurdles over boundaries into new territory.

Unfortunately the script and sequences are largely dreamlike, unrealistic, not to mention confusing and devoid of any sense of feeling for the characters or understanding of their motives and backgrounds.

This will be even worse again if you find yourself watching a dvd from one of the low quality collections out there.

The story line is far beneath what we would expect from Orson Welles via his Citizen Kane and Magnificent Ambersons days.

This film tracks more in the mood of Touch of Evil and the Lady from Shanghai.

The movie represents the darker side of Welles films and perhaps his stranger sense of humor a la Stanley Kubrick.

If you are going to try and make any sense of this, do yourself a favor and spend some extra money to pick up a high quality print or it will be a waste of time. To many, not looking for a surrealistic escapist piece in the mold of Christopher Nolan, this may feel like a waste or time.

Feels like it was inspired partly by Bergmans The Seventh Seal and could be seen as a forerunner to Kubrick films, christopher nolan and films like Inception or perhaps even Spielbergs Minority Report.

Some good acting from Welles and Perkins and others. Missed some opportunities. Outstanding filming locations in Europe including Croatia and France.

61* (2001 TV Movie)

Ok tv drama nothing special for those who dont know story

[5/10 · 19 July 2022]

If you didnt know a thing about the 1961 home run chase then this is a good introduction. If you do, this can be rather boring, overly pretentious, melodramatic and worst of all butchers and makes up a couple scenes that never happened including one particularly egregiously made up episode which I wont give away.

I think Crystal did a good job directing but you can tell where the producers got involved and stuck their hands into the sauce.

The French Dispatch (2021)

Biggest wes anderson disappointment

[3/10 · 30 October 2021]

Wes Anderson has made two of my favorite movies - grand budapest hotel and royal tennenbaums but this forgettable movie ranks near the bottom of his work.

The art and style is all there - a lot of tributes to the old french and italian cinema greats, to the silent movies back to meiles but what is missing is a cohesive compelling story.

There is irony because you get 3-4 stories depending on how u look at it but nothing at all memorable or believable for a second.

The writing is on the wall literally from the first scene when we are asked to indulge a joke that liberty, kansas (population 100) had a newspaper at one time with an office in paris. That alone was not enough to sink this movie - not with this great case of top notch actors.

What is redeeming here is a few standout performances. If you hadnt seen benicio del toro before this movie is worth something because he shows again why he won the academy award 20 years ago for traffic. His eyes and facial expressions have a hint of lon chaney.

Adrien Brody hits the mark and does not disappoint- however the script undercuts him and does not do him justice.

They had Jeffrey wright playing roebuck wright who seems to have been partially based on the writer richard wright and a little James Baldwin partial composite though his story does not really resemble either Richard wrights character or James Baldwin that well ( both were american ex pat writers living in france at timeframe of the film) and frankly was quite the waste of time for the character who has the most lines in the movie.

I know wes anderson likes to have his trademarks with these stories about how they always become unglued but this movie really took things to an extreme - there was almost literally no point to this nonsense.

Add in some animation which he used in his boring movie isle of dogs- another sleeper and he completely lost me.

A nude portrait scene was an example of the director's focus on the art crowd which did nothing for me and was another sign early that this was going to be bad. The scene did not do much to move the rather boring story and looked like a misfire of trying to be edgy.

Also the use of black and white was ok sometimes and made the color scenes more powerful when they came out of the black and white - there was too much shifting between black and white color and animation - he overdid it. I liked the black and white scenes where he paid homage to the classic films but much of the b&w scenes were tedious.

A scene involving an electric chair had some interesting metaphorical and symbolic value though that may have been just for shock value or laughs not sure.

Three good scenes in the whole movie - a flashback scene paying tribute to Beau Geste (a three-second montage part of a larger flashback in the way royal tenenbaums does its ramones flashback scenes) an art scene and a quick shootout scene.

This movie needed more great scenes - second story should have been cut out entirely.

I gave it three stars - one star for art decoration, one star for the actors involved, and another star for the effort to pay tribute to the classic cinema.

I cant give it more than three stars because that would be bad advice if you value your time and money. This movie is only going to appeal to the most loyal Wes Anderson fans and those overindulging in artistic self indulgence.

This film overdosed on self indulgence.

Lansky (2021)

You get what you pay for

[5/10 · 26 June 2021]

I am not saying you need a $100 million budget to tell the story of Meyer Lansky, or you must have Tarantino, Spielberg, or Coppola but it would help a lot.

Trying to make a biopic on one of the most consequential figures of the 20th century underworld is a massive undertaking.

First things first - Harvey Keitel is really great. Not just great. He is perfect for the part. It is one of his five best roles.

He is from new york, jewish, tough, pretty much the same age as Lansky was at the time the movie is supposed to take place and is old enough with the nyc street background and wise enough to understand the Lansky character.

The actor playing the younger Lansky is not bad but is not the man for the job - few could be.

The Bugsy siegel character works fine for the early crime scenes but in the vegas scenes he does his best vince vaughn in Swingers Impression and he is about 10 years too young for siegels vegas years though it could have been pulled off with some better acting and directing. A scene of Siegel falling asleep at the bar is not something he would have done. Siegel also wouldnt have showboated in the manner the director depicts. The director ends up making a cartoonish impression of siegel.

The filmmaker also loses a lot of credibility with the Millers Crossing stolen execution scene which is not just a scene lacking any believability but shows a real sloppiness of filmmaking.

This movie was shot in 20 days and it shows. It was rushed together.

A love triangle and hotel story involving the author is a completely unnecessary distraction which turns the film from a biopic of a monumental figure to a late night soap drama on the oxygen channel.

The movie somewhat recovers from its pitfalls through the power of Lanskys story. Much of the general storyline is true though the amount of liberties taken such as the millers crossing execution scene are too big of a distraction.

The maranzano showdown also takes liberties with what is known. The director also fails to detail the importance of the moment or that Maranzano was the biggest boss of the time.

Many of the scenes in the film are just made up though others are credible.

One great part of the movie is the jewish attacks on the nazis which is little known today but was factual.

The movie also does a good job in explaining lanskys assistance to the us government in rooting out nazi spies which is very important to the story.

This movie is a more realistic depiction of lansky then some other movies and shows have done.

While Keitel does a great job in his portrayal, it feels too much at times like the younger version is too much Hymen roth. Roths version of the Lansky character had too many elements which were not accurate. For example he had a tough Rugged baritone voice which instilled fear and demanded respect not the squeakiness that the younger lansky version shown here and in the roth version and other versions.

There are two great supporting acting performances in this film - david james elliot who is the government agent hounding lansky and anna sophia robb who plays lanskys wife.

Robb is a real revelation here and is an actress to look out for if you are unfamiliar.

My Other main criticism is most of the violent scenes are just not believable and were more interested in gore.

The depiction of murder inc as an afterthought is a fatal flaw as it is integral to the lansky story. This should have been central to the story. Instead it is treated like the orks in lord of the rings with a saturday afterrnoon cartoon feel.

The prohibition era is essentially glossed over. Except for a card room scene and the meeting of his wife and luciano.

What we have here is a major error of trying to combine a story about a reporter who interviewed lansky and whose stories may or may not be partially fictional and a story of one of the most impactful gangsters which is given equal treatment to the reporter.

Consider for a moment all of the time godfather 2 spent on the cuba scenes when our story is supposed to be about the man who made those cuba scenes happen and instead we get about two minutes of cuba - which is where lansky made his great fortune and lost it.

Basically this film tries to do too much with too little and falls short by rushing through each item as if it were a checklist.

The greatness of Keitel makes this worth watching. As for the story of Lansky, it is a teaspoon mixed with some accuracy, some false tales and some folly but ultimately there is an honest attempt by the director to show the general character of lansky in the manner in which he is believed to have acted. The ending is perfect and that is a big part of the lansky story.

The problem lies in the parts of the film which stray too far from the truth.

Like having a guy in cowboy hat in nyc or visiting an alabama jail to find a magical clue from some southern convict turn the film into a version of con air.

The Gazebo (1959)

Great script debbie reynolds and carl reiner shine

[7/10 · 7 May 2021]

What makes this a good movie is a great script from alec coppel who wrote Vertigo.

Debbie Reynolds and Carl Reiner are absolute darling standouts.

As for Glenn Ford, he is nauseating. I dont know how anybody could stand him or how he seemed to have gone to bed with every actress he worked with.

I will admit that you can sense the sexual chemistry here between him and Reynolds. The film succeeds despite him.

Moonfleet (1955)

Close to greatness - disappointing ending falls short - worth watching for fun

[7/10 · 5 December 2020]

It's astonishing how many films can do so many great things like this one and then when it really counts they don't know how to end it.

This movie is such the epitome of anti-climactic.

Great acting all-around from top to bottom. Sets and costumes top notch.

Credit Fritz Lang here for using a lot of his tricks here - seems like he was working on a tight budget on a tight time frame because they try to scoop this up at the end like they ran out of money and ideas - too bad because at times this feels close to a masterpiece but so much is lost at the end, unexplained with loose ends everywhere.

What could have been.

Enchanted Island (1958)

Powell deserved better in final starring film role

[2/10 · 1 December 2020]

You can sometimes judge an actor or actress by how well they carry themselves in a poor film. That is the case here with Jane Powell. Aside from being so stunning, she is full of charm with some great acting qualities. She should have been a huge star in the 1950's but Hollywood made so many bad movies during this period of transition into the television age. Not only were there so few good movies made but the number of good roles for women were even harder to find. I was circumspect as to how Powell might perform in one of these natives meet the white man type of movies but she singlehandedly pulled it off and made it worth watching. Most of the film is unbearable aside from a few nice shots. The screenplay is ludicrous. That is hard to do because this about one of the worst movies I have ever seen.