robert3750 Reviews

One Touch of Venus (1948)

I get it

[6/10 · 6 May 2024]

There was a time when I looked at pictures of Ava Gardner, and thought "What's all the fuss? She's not so hot." But this is one of the pictures that makes me "get it". Her face and figure are undeniably exquisite in this, and her voice exudes sultry, smoldering sexuality. I'm talking about her speaking voice, of course. I assume her singing voice was dubbed. The movie as a whole is ok. It's a fantasy comedy about a man who kisses a statue of the goddess Venus, which magically comes to life. Robert Walker is ok as the befuddled department store employee who kisses the statue, and initially wants nothing to do with the goddess, since he has a girlfriend. Eventually, however, he succumbs to her charms ( who wouldn't?), and her mere presence in the city causes many people to fall in love, including Walker's boss, the owner of the department store. Eve Arden is her usual excellent wise cracking self, who gets a chance for once to find love, thanks to Venus. The song Speak Low is nice.

The Sting (1973)

The Great Con

[10/10 · 5 May 2024]

Robert Redford and Paul Newman once again exhibit the great chemistry they had shown years earlier in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. They play Depression era con men out for revenge against a big time gangster. Director George Roy Hill did a fantastic job blending comedy and drama. The sets, costumes, locations, music, and editing are outstanding, doing a great job of giving the movie the look and feel of something made in the 1930s. The supporting cast is excellent--Harold Gould, Ray Walston, Charles Durning, Ellen Burstyn, and many more. Robert Shaw is superb, wonderfully menacing as the vindictive gangster whom we want to see get what he deserves. I have problems with the aforementioned Butch Cassidy, because it doesn't really justify why two men who rob people at gunpoint should be rooted for. But this one does. It shows that those who are conned think they're the ones doing the conning.

Mildred Pierce (1945)

Well done film noir character study

[9/10 · 4 May 2024]

This is the quintessential Joan Crawford vehicle. Her Mildred Pierce is an amazingly hard worker, an ambitious go getter who has the intelligence and the work ethic to provide a good life for herself and her two daughters. She'll do anything to "give them the best", even to the point of marrying and essentially purchasing the "services" of a playboy whom she doesn't love, whose only real asset is his silver tongue and posh pretenses, and therein lies her fatal flaw: Her utter blindness to the insatiable greed, amorality, and cynical manipulations of her oldest daughter (played brilliantly by Ann Blyth), who values money and social status above all else, while being utterly contemptuous of the work needed to generate wealth. Mildred thinks she can buy her daughter's love and respect, but all she succeeds in doing is to nurture and feed her daughter's thorough rottenness, and she almost drowns in the astounding naivety that not even murder can strip from her. Jack Carson is excellent as the business partner who has eyes for her, but whose only value to her is what he can do for her financially. Bruce Bennett is very good as the husband she divorces after he loses his job. Kudos also to Even Arden as the wise cracking manager of Mildred's restaurants. Great use of light and shadow. Another winner for director Michael Curtiz.

From Russia with Love (1963)

Great for being a pure spy story

[9/10 · 28 April 2024]

Sean Connery said this was his personal favorite of the Bond moves he made. It's easy to see why. This isn't the jokey, fantasy, comic book Bond that would become so prevalent starting with the next film, Goldfinger (although those films have their own entertainment value). This is a grounded Bond, a Bond involved in a much more realistic plot than the later "supervillain plots to destroy/conquer cities or the world" story lines. The story revolves around a plot by SPECTRE (changed from the real Soviet spy agency SMERSH in the novel because of a desire to de-emphasize the Cold War) to embroil Bond in a plot to steal a highly desired Soviet decoding machine, with the added inducement of a beautiful Russian SMERSH employee being part of the plot. Bond knows it's a trap, but decides the reward is worth the risk. Other than the attache case with the exploding tear gas canister, there are no fantastic gadgets. Bond must rely on his wits and his own fighting skills to win. Connery is superlative as Bond, able to charm women into his bed one minute, and ruthlessly kill bad guys the next. Robert Shaw is excellent as Red Grant, the psychopathic killer hired by SPECTRE to kill Bond and take the decoding machine. The climactic "to the death" fight between Bond and Grant is superb, the kind of brutal struggle that pretty boy Roger Moore never engaged in.

It's everything James Bond should be.

Dr. No (1962)

One of the great character introductions in the history of movies

[8/10 · 28 April 2024]

This is it. This is the movie that brought the fictional literary hero to life. I can't think of a more impressive movie debut. Ian Fleming had his doubts about Scottish actor Sean Connery playing Bond, but it turned out to be one of the greatest ever casting choices. Connery's Bond positively radiates masculine charisma and energy the moment we lay eyes on him, the kind of charisma and energy that's irresistible to women, the kind of charisma and energy that every man wants to have, the kind of energy that says to an enemy "you are dealing with someone very very dangerous, someone you cross at your peril". When Connery gets up from the table, he moves with cat like grace. He's cool, he's suave, he's confident, as he talks to (and later effortlessly beds) the voluptuous beauty he's been playing cards with. Bond's mission is to investigate the murder of a British agent in the Bahamas. He discovers an atomic powered installation that interferes with American space launches, led by the first of the Bond villains, Dr. No, played superbly by Joseph Wiseman. He meets the first of the "Bond Girls", Ursula "Undress", as I like to call her. When she comes out of the ocean in that white bikini, we're impressed, and so is Bond. She was the template for all Bond women to follow. Of course Bond enters Dr. No's lair and defeats him, and gets Ursula in the end. United Artists thought the movie would flop. Boy, were they wrong. Boy, were they clueless about the incredible phenomenon this would launch.

You Only Live Twice (1967)

Bigger, and in many ways more impressive, but...

[7/10 · 28 April 2024]

There is much to like about this fifth entry in the James Bond series. I always liked the way there was a tinge of science fiction in most of the films, and this one delivers on that score, more so than in previous entries. I remember thinking how exciting it would have been to see Bond go into space, but this turned out not to happen. The title song is great, and the Japanese location and characters (especially ninjas) lend a nice touch of the exotic to the proceedings. The big battle inside the volcano is impressive in scope. Impressive set. However, there's something about Connery's performance that doesn't seem quite up to par to me. Perhaps it's because he had grown weary of the role, and simply wasn't infusing his performance with the same emotional depth. Perhaps it's because he was noticeably heavier in this one, and his age was starting to show, although he was only 37 at the time. I miss the sleek, muscular Bond of the earlier films, the Bond who "moves like a cat", as someone described Sean Connery. Ah well, time marches on, and nothing lasts forever. To me, the classic 60s Connery films are the epitome of what the character was supposed to be (I can't stand Craig, who looks like the third Russian henchman from the left, not Bond). A moment in time that can never be recaptured.

From the Earth to the Moon (1958)

OMG, this was awful

[2/10 · 26 April 2024]

I want to erase having seen this awful movie from my memory. It took a long LONG time for the journey to the moon to even begin, and there was no feeling of plausibility with the whole thing. The physics were ridiculous. Exactly how did Debra Paget survive the acceleration of takeoff?? They didn't even bother to show anyone actually ON the moon. I couldn't stand the George Sanders character, with all his huffing and puffing about going against the will of God. The other characters were too dull to even be annoying. Perhaps worst of all, the movie ripped off the Forbidden Planet score! Ugh. I'll NEVER watch anything from this....thing.....again.

The Temptations (1998)

Compelling drama

[8/10 · 25 April 2024]

I've watched this movie twice, and both times I've been drawn into the story. The Temptations were one of my favorite singing groups when I was growing up. The story of young men who have both the talent and the drive to succeed is compelling. They all had various obstacles to overcome, but they would not be denied. It's the kind of American success story I love. The movie, however, does not treat these people as idealized musical icons. They're depicted as human beings, people who have their ups and downs, people who have their sorrows as well as their joys, people who have their failures as well as their successes. The performances are all very good. Of course the movie has its historical inaccuracies, but that's par for the course.

Peter Pan (1960 TV Movie)

Doesn't hold up

[4/10 · 13 March 2024]

There are quite a few movies and TV shows from my childhood that I remember fondly and that still hold up for me as an adult. In fact, in some ways I have an even greater appreciation for them now than I did then. An example is the 1965 Cinderella, which I watched when it first aired and rediscovered several years ago on Youtube. I loved the songs, performances, and story so much that I bought the DVD.

Unlike most of the reviewers on here, I'm old enough to have seen this on its initial broadcast in 1960. I only remembered two things from it: The youngest boy flying out the window on his way to Neverland, and Mary Martin urging the audience to revive Tinkerbell by clapping. Five year old me clapped.

I decided just yesterday to give it another go, much as I did with Cinderella four years ago. It left me totally flat. There's just no "there there". Not a single song is memorable (in contrast, I remembered two songs from Cinderella a whopping 55 years after seeing it). That's the kiss of death for a musical. The story doesn't interest me. Being a pirate or an Indian never captured my imagination, I was FAR too young to worry about growing up, and I'm far too old and have experienced too many adult pleasures to think it's good to remain a boy. That leaves NOTHING to hook me.

I also can't get over the fact that this pre-pubescent boy is played by a 47 year old woman. WTH? It's glaringly obvious. Mary Martin played it with enthusiasm, but it left me thinking "so what? It's a woman." It was also obvious that Wendy, who is supposed to be around 12 or 13, was played by a woman in her 20s.

A big disappointment.

The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (1962)

Ambitious Cinerama effort

[5/10 · 25 February 2024]

Cinerama was an ambitious effort to counter the "threat" of television to movie theaters. It used three 35 mm cameras side by side to produce spectacular, ultrawide immersive images. Add in 7 channel surround sound, and you had something that TV couldn't hope to compete with visually or sonically. I was fortunate enough to see This is Cinerama at the Cinerama Dome in genuine three projector Cinerama. Unfortunately, the process proved far too cumbersome and finicky to succeed commercially. Not only was the Cinerama camera difficult to use, it was very difficult to align everything using three projectors. A special screen was needed for projection, and the seams weren't invisible.

I was convinced to watch this movie because of the very high praise for the recently released Blu Ray of it. It was one of only two full length feature films using the process. Everything said about the Blu Ray is true. It looks and sounds gorgeous. It has spectacular European locations--castles, quaint villages, mountains, etc. Digital technology enabled almost perfect alignment of the three panels. The detail and colors are wonderful. Kudos are very much due to the restoration team that worked on this. It's one of the best looking Blu Rays ever made. I watched the smile box version, which simulates what it would look like on a Cinerama screen.

Unfortunately, it falls completely flat as a narrative. Laurence Harvey and Karl Boehm are rather wooden as the brothers, with an absence of any true romance or charm, or coherent tone. The storytelling segments, one about a princess and a magic cloak, and the other about a dishonest, cowardly knight and his comic relief servant fighting a dragon, fail to capture the imagination. About the only thing that I was interested in was the stop motion of the dragon and George Pal's Puppetoons.

Even though I consider the movie a failure, I have to thank Warner again for restoring it, as it is an important historical moment in cinematic history.

Conan the Barbarian (1982)

Grand pulp fantasy

[8/10 · 2 February 2024]

Conan the Barbarian was made in the early 80s, a time when fantasy movies were in vogue. In fact, it may have helped kick off the trend. The movie milieu of that time was light years removed from the woke, DEI absurdities that have run amuck in today's Hollywood. The movie begins with a quote from Nietzsche -- "that which does not kill us makes us stronger." Conan is full of hyper masculinity (while at the same time showing a very strong, capable female warrior in the person of Valeria, played very well by the tall athletic Sandahl Bergman), of attractive women in various states of undress, of swords decapitating and eviscerating people. This R rated tone is very much in keeping with the original Robert E. Howard stories. Credit director John Milius for remaining true to that tone, a tone which the truly awful, execrable sequel junked in favor of a goofy, "let's get more kiddies in the seats" approach. Blame Dino De Laurentiis for that nonsense.

Of course, Arnold has the perfect look for the part. I do wish that he had exhibited more intelligence and cunning early on. It's really only after his "rebirth" following his crucifixion that he comes across as the Conan of the books. It's also a misstep to depict him being raised as a slave taught the ways of civilization. Conan in the books was a barbarian, a half wild savage who looked askance at civilization even while having the intelligence to deal with it. James Earl Jones makes a fine, menacing villain, and Max Von Sydow is great as King Osric.

No discussion of this film can be complete without mentioning its musical score. Basil Poledouris wrote the score of a lifetime. It's magnificent, one of the greatest film scores ever written. He makes the orchestra sound HUGE, with pounding drums, biting brass, and sumptuous use of male and female choruses. It's symphonic in its opulence. Right off the bat, it stirs the blood, making one ready to "crush your enemies", as Conan puts it. But it's also lyrical, wistful, and melancholy at times. I can't think of any other score that's so integral to to the film it was written for, so vital to the very fabric of the images and the emotions that are conveyed. I wouldn't rate the film as highly as I do without it.

The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974)

Tough, gritty crime drama

[9/10 · 30 January 2024]

Well done crime drama that does a superb job of capturing the ambience of 1970s New York. At times, it almost has a documentary feel to it. Walter Matthau is excellent as the transit police lieutenant grimly dealing with the hijacking of a subway train. He has just the right combination of street smarts, investigative smarts, and world weariness. Robert Shaw is superbly menacing as the leader of the hijackers. No one was better at communicating dangerous vibes than he was. Hector Elizondo nicely plays a trigger happy hijacker eager to kill anyone at the first provocation. Martin Balsam does a fine job as the ex motorman, providing crucial inside expertise on the technical side of the hijack. Although it wasn't meant to be him, you can easily imagine that the mayor is Ed Koch, the stereotypical political hack moved to action solely to get votes. There are too many fine supporting roles to name, but it all adds up to an enjoyably tense, gritty drama laced with the occasional humorous touch.

Barbarella (1968)

60s psychedelic kitsch at its most flamboyent

[5/10 · 26 January 2024]

Boy, Roger Vadim had quite the gig in the 50s and 60s. He had the knack for bedding and wedding spectacularly attractive movie babes (Brigitte Bardot, Catherine Deneuve, and Jane Fonda), and getting them to take their clothes off for the camera. For men whose libido hasn't been diluted by the anti-male hysteria of the current age, that's a pretty satisfying job. Barbarella is a prime example. It's based on the French comic book of the same name, with Fonda as the eponymous heroine. After doing a nude striptease in the opening credits (with strategically placed text to keep us from seeing everything, although we do see plenty of breast), she prances around in various revealing outfits. She's certainly decorative enough. This was made before Fonda went full on with the left wing political activism, so she was willing to do the "sex kitten" role. Emphasis on the sex part, as Barbarella makes use of her sexual prowess to gain allies, restore an "angel's" ability to fly, and defeat the bad guys. Note that I've said very little about the plot. That's because it's hardly worth mentioning. The film is all style over substance. The set design and color schemes are something out of a 60s drug trip. It's certainly colorful, and often fun to look at, but it doesn't make much sense, and has little substance. Kind of like biting into cotton candy.

The Rock (1996)

Tolerable Bay

[6/10 · 21 January 2024]

I hadn't seen this movie since it was released in theaters. The blu ray was given to me years ago, but I only got around to watching it last night.

I'm not a fan of Michael Bay. His frenetic editing style grates on me. His typical shot lasts hardly more than two seconds. I'll give him credit for knowing how to assemble an action sequence. This particular movie plays well enough for its purpose. The best aspect of it is Sean Connery's performance. He's effectively playing an older James Bond, although his character is not named James Bond, and the background of the character is such that he's clearly not Bond.

The most irritating aspect other than the hyperkinetic editing is all the conspiracy nonsense--JFK, aliens in Roswell, etc.

The Time Machine (1960)

Nice George Pal production

[7/10 · 16 January 2024]

One of several science fiction movies directed by George Pal in the 50s and early 60s. The design of the time machine is recognizable by all fans of movie SF, so much so that it was featured in an episode of The Big Bang Theory. Rod Taylor is very good as the stalwart, idealistic hero and inventor, who hopes that the future will be better than his own time. Yvette Mimieux is scrumptiously cute as the innocent Weena, one of the futuristic Eloi. What red blooded male wouldn't want her? She's adorable. I also want to emphasize how much the musical score contributes to the movie. Russell Garcia's score is melodic, exciting, and adventurous. It's one of my favorites.

Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins (1985)

Fails due to weak villain

[5/10 · 10 January 2024]

I've read that it was hoped this would be the start of a franchise in the mold of James Bond, a kind of working class American version of him. It probably sounded good on paper, just as Chitty Chitty Bang Bang sounded like a good imitation of Mary Poppins, stirring in Dick Van Dyke and Sherman Brothers songs. Remo was directed by Guy Hamilton, who famously directed several Bond films, including the archetypical Goldfinger. But, like CCBB, the ingredients don't come together. Remo himself is cool enough, and Fred Ward plays him well. His mentor Chiun is an entertaining character, full of fantasy martial arts ability mixed with Eastern mystical mumbo jumbo.

The problem is the villain is a huge let down. He's nothing more than an overcharging defense contractor. Bleah. Where is the world threatening crime, the evil headquarters, the truly exotic henchman? Comparing him to the likes of SPECTRE led by Blofeld, or the aforementioned Goldfinger finds him very very lacking. Too bad. E for effort.

Have Gun - Will Travel (1957–1963)

Soured by the first episode I watched

[5/10 · 5 January 2024]

The first episode of this show I watched was one where Paladin is hired to be a tax collector. A tax collector as a protagonist?? An intellectually honest person realizes that taxes are just the government stealing money from people for "services" that they may not have asked for, need, or benefit from. It's essentially theft. Paladin agrees to take the job, but only if he gets a huge percentage of the "take". IOW, he is stealing from people under color of authority. He gets the biggest cattle rancher to help him in exchange for the rancher getting a percentage of the LOOT. In the process, Paladin literally holds a gun to someone and essentially says "give me your money or else". The rancher reneges on the deal, there's a gunfight, and Paladin kills him. He also kills the son of the man he's taking money from by force. The whole scenario left me with a bad taste in my mouth.

King Kong (2005)

Overly long and muddled

[5/10 · 31 December 2023]

I just rewatched this after a friend gave me the UHD. I hadn't seen it since the theatrical release. My thoughts about it haven't changed much. I still think it's overly long and self indulgent, to the point where things become nonsensical. For example, Peter Jackson chose to show the ship being severely damaged at the island (a plot development utterly unessential to the story). The sailors are shown throwing supplies overboard like crazy. Yet the ship returns to New York without difficulty, all while apparently towing Kong (the ship seems awfully small to carry him on board, and how would they have gotten him on the ship?). Also, the scene with a whole HERD of sauropods running around stampeding is silly. Why so damn many (the island isn't THAT large to support so many huge animals), and why show such huge animals running so fast? Yeah, I know, Jackson wanted to make a big spectacle, even if it makes no sense. This is where they shot themselves in the foot with their use of CGI. The whole point of CGI is to make motion more realistic, and then they go and show 50 ton beasts running around like buffalo. Meh. I will acknowledge that Kong is rendered very well, with great texture and fluid movement. It helped that his movements were based on those of Andy Serkis. He really does seem like a 25 ft. Gorilla.

The other problematic aspect is the relationship between Ann and Kong. For some reason, Jackson chose to show them developing an emotional bond, to the point where she actually walks to him in the streets of New York! This is utterly ludicrous. Any woman, any person, would be terrified of the beast, and would want to stay the hell away from it. It gets even more ridiculous when she eschews the safety of being INSIDE the Empire State to climb a ladder on the outside, exposing herself to the EXTREME danger of falling to her death, and for what? To save the beast that put her in that danger in the first place? It's nonsensical. If Jackson really wanted to show Ann having empathy for Kong, she could have been given a line after his death saying something like "I feel so sorry for him". But no, Jackson had to show her looking at him as though he's her-what? Pet? Animal boyfriend (gag me!)? Just ridiculous.

A Christmas Carol (1984 TV Movie)

Lacks emotional weight

[5/10 · 26 December 2023]

George C. Scott was a very skilled actor. His role as Patton is one of the greatest ever put on film. However, I think his performance misses the mark here. He speaks his lines with accomplished skill and elocution, but he fails to make one believe he IS Scrooge, the mean spirited misanthrope. He doesn't hate people. At worst, he's indifferent to them. There's none of the bitterness, the resentment. Another crucial element that's missing is the sense of regret at the loss of Belle, not even when he's shown what happened to her after she left him (something no other version I've seen shows). He shrugs it off as being of no importance. He doesn't even acknowledge that he once loved her. His regret at what might have been is a key part of his transformation, and it's absent here.

Also missing is the exuberance, the sheer joy of being ALIVE (of "liking LIFE" per the lyrics to a song from my favorite version, the Albert Finney one) after his transformation. Instead, it's a perfunctory "ok, I should do good things now" attitude. It isn't until the ending scene with Cratchit that he expresses any joviality at all.

Speaking of Cratchit, that's another problem I have: The casting of David Warner. As with Scott, I do not question Warner's acting skill. However, he was far too imposing a man to be believable as the timid Bob Cratchit cowering before the tyrannical Scrooge. Warner's look and size made him far more suitable for roles far removed from that of an intimidated clerk. I have similar thoughts about the casting of Susannah York as Mrs. Cratchit. She's far too aristocratic in her bearing and appearance to pull it off at the lowly wife of a man who's barely able to make ends meet.

For me, it will always be the Albert Finney version that I turn to. It's all there-the embittered hatred of his own kind, the immense regret and wistfulness of losing Belle (as well as his sister), the giddy joy of being alive and loving life, everything.

Holiday Inn (1942)

Leaves me somewhat cold

[6/10 · 25 December 2023]

Finally saw this yesterday. I know it's considered a Christmas classic of sorts, but it lacks something. First of all, much of it has very little to do with Christmas. The idea is that the inn is open and gives shows on holidays, which means that Christmas is just one of many shown. Second.... something about Bing Crosby's awww shucks nice guy performance seems inauthentic to me, especially in light of what I know about him. The female leads annoy me. One dumps Fred Astaire's character the minute some guy waves dollars at her. Then she comes crawling back to him and expects him to forget that she dumped him. Hardly a sympathetic character. The other one can't seem to make up her mind what she cares about. Does she really love either man? For that matter, does either one love her? The best Crosby can muster for her is a perfunctory peck on the cheek, and both of them respond with an "oh well, whatever" when she bounces from one to the other. It seems like they're more interested in competing than in love. Fred's dancing is the redeeming feature, especially the firecracker dance. Him dancing while "drunk" was silly, though. The Lincoln song was awful for its racism, but it's in line with the attitudes of the period. The song White Christmas is the one truly memorable aspect.

It's a Wonderful Life (1946)

A true classic

[10/10 · 23 December 2023]

Yes, it's familiar, yes, everyone has enjoyed it many times. The same can be said about the Ode to Joy or The Wizard of Oz. Like those things, It's a Wonderful Life has endured and been enjoyed because of its greatness. Its themes are timeless--that of the importance of family, of friendship, of supporting each other, of caring about each other, of learning about what really matters. The acting, writing, cinematography, and directing are all excellent. The best acting in the film belongs to the great James Stewart, in his most memorable role. His George Bailey is wonderful. We see in him all that a man can experience--joy, sorrow, love, hate, fulfillment, disappointment, despair, hope. We see what a good, caring, decent man he is. We see the effect he has on other people, and we see him learn just how important he has been to those people.

One thing I want to address is the idea that George "sacrificed" to have the life he has. I would argue that he no more sacrifices than parents do when they give up certain things to have children. In the end, what he did and what he has is according to the things he values most, and that's no sacrifice. Suppose Clarence had said to him "George, I will give you the life you said you wanted. You will be a world traveler who builds bridges and plans cities. You won't put down roots, and you won't be part of a community that cares about you. Most importantly, you will never marry. You won't have Mary or your kids". Does anyone believe that George would take up the offer? No. Clarence showed him how valuable what he does have is to him. As Harry says, George is the "richest man in town".

Tarzan and His Mate (1934)

The formula laid bare

[7/10 · 18 December 2023]

I absolutely loved the Johnny Weissmuller/Maureen O'Sullivan Tarzan movies when I was a kid. They seemed so fantastical, so adventurous. Of course, they ARE fantasies. Jungle life is not that idyllic, and no human has Tarzan's superhuman abilities, including his control over animals. But I don't remember seeing this one back then, and I certainly don't remember the nudity from it (it was probably cut for commercial broadcast). Wowza, Hollywood certainly pushed the limits before that old prude Hayes clamped down. Just look at the nude swimming scene! Even if O'Sullivan's body double was wearing "something" sheer, she was indeed nude for all practical purposes. It only made sense, given the "outside civilization" setting, but as I said, there were obviously people who wouldn't stand for it, and no subsequent movies had such a scene. Neither did they have anything like the scene where O'Sullivan's loin cloth separates from her body, and you can clearly see what's underneath it. Even if she was wearing some sort of "appliance" there, one is certainly getting an eyeful.

Something else I was never aware of back then was how repetitive the films were. I was made aware of this by watching several of the films consecutively. The identical scene showing Tarzan fighting a giant crocodile is shown in three different movies. We also see the scene of him fighting a rhino repeated. Except for the film where Tarzan goes to New York, the plot formula is the same as well:

Devious white men intrude on Tarzan's jungle paradise.

Tarzan proves to be correct in his mistrust of the civilized white men. The white men's greed/violence/treachery puts Tarzan/Jane/Boy in jeopardy.

The white men and Jane/Boy get captured by hostile African tribe, which violently kills the white men.

Tarzan rescues Jane/Boy from tribe, making use of his extraordinary control of elephants/apes.

All ends well.

It works well enough. Weissmuller had very limited acting skills, but it's ok, because he wasn't asked to do much except look the part. O'Sullivan's acting is very good. Good chemistry with Weissmuller. Love her accent. She was luminously beautiful, and it certainly helped that her outfits showed so much of her.

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977)

Rekindled my love of movies

[10/10 · 10 December 2023]

Star Wars burst upon the scene like no other movie before it, stimulating the imagination of fans of genre fiction everywhere. Gone was the view, so prevalent in the 70s, that the technological future, and space travel in particular, was something to be dreaded, something that would lead to humanity being worse off. Instead, exploring the galaxy was depicted as exciting and adventurous, the ultimate thrill ride. Technology was a fantastic tool, not a manifestation of evil. George Lucas had managed to combine this space adventure with the fantasy, sword and sorcery genre. That, combined with state of the art visual FX and sound and a wonderfully exciting and romantic symphonic score, made people like me eat it up.

Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

A sequel that's better than the original

[10/10 · 10 December 2023]

Star Wars burst upon the scene like no other movie before it, stimulating the imagination of fans of genre fiction everywhere. Gone was the view, so prevalent in the 70s, that the technological future, and space travel in particular, was something to be dreaded, something that would lead to humanity being worse off. Instead, exploring the galaxy was depicted as exciting and adventurous, the ultimate thrill ride. Technology was a fantastic tool, not a manifestation of evil. George Lucas had managed to combine this space adventure with the fantasy, sword and sorcery genre. That, combined with state of the art visual FX and sound and a wonderfully exciting and romantic symphonic score, made people like me eat it up.

The Empire Strikes Back is a brilliant followup. It avoids the usual "let's redo the first movie, only more so" trap that sequels usually fall into. It expands and deepens the fictional universe, lore, and characters, giving them additional complexity. The villain from Star Wars becomes even more menacing. The protagonists are put in JEOPARDY, and Luke is made to go through the hero's journey. The music is again thrilling and epic. The ending leaves the audience very much wanting more. A great movie that, almost unique among sequels, actually improves upon the original.

The inane Disney efforts are a pale imitation and a perversion in comparison.

He & She (1967–1968)

Precursor to Mary Tyler Moore

[6/10 · 7 December 2023]

The ways in which this show influenced the MTM show a few years later are obvious. The apartment resembles Mary's, the Ted Baxter character is a copy of the Oscar North character, etc. In fact, the show feels more like it was made in the 70s than the 60s. I have mixed feelings about it. There are some good, funny lines, and the chemistry and affection between the two leads is obvious (they were married in real life). It was also nice to FINALLY see a married couple sleeping in the same bed (no ridiculous twin beds). The way that Jack Cassidy played Oscar North was also funny. But it's not perfect. I found the handyman character to be annoying. I also thought the concept of a fire station just a few feet from their living room was ridiculous, but Harry the fireman was a good part of the ensemble.