alv790 Reviews

Murder on the Orient Express (2017)

Can't Hollywood do better than this nowadays?

[17 September 2023]

Kind of disappointing adaptation of a novel that has known better adaptations in the past. Why did Kenneth Branagh do this, when we already have such a superior Poirot in David Suchet? I suppose it's a way to give younger generations a way to approach Agatha Christie, but... what is it with Hollywood and period pieces? At times it reminded me of Robert Downey Jr's awful Sherlock Holmes movies. We get Poirot running after suspects, fighting, absurd chases, just for the sake of inserting action scenes where they don't belong... This is not what an Agatha Christie story is like. It's never credible or convincing as a period piece. No subtlety, no wit, just the usual Hollywood tics.

The movie looks pretty, expect for the CGI, as excessive as unnecessary, which does not look real. It doesn't find a way to really profit from the large and talented cast. It's mostly Branagh's show. It would have done better with more real exterior shots and less blue screens.

The investigation is perfunctory: a few quick conversations and Poirot has all the facts out of thin air. It's a difficult story to adapt as a movie, true, with the novel being a long series of suspect interviews that would not work on the screen. But still, it can be done better.

I liked the ending, though, showcasing Poirot's moral dilemma in an emotional way.

The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)

If you loved the first movie and you really want more of the same, this movie is for you

[20 July 2023]

It lazily follows the plot of the first movie, to offer some more action and narrow escapes from lethal dinosaurs.

Jeff Goldblum was more convincing as a supporting character in the original than here as the action hero. No one else returns, except for very short cameos from Attenborough and the kids. The other characters are forgettable.

The plot is at times shockingly dumb (like, why was Ian's girlfriend dumped alone on an island filled with unrestrained, murderous dinosaurs?), but it does the job of repeating the "bunch of guys running around pursued by dinosaurs" plot.

The only thing new that is brought to the table is the final night scene on the mainland, with a T-Rex loose in a city.

It does entertain, however, as a mindless action movie with dinosaurs. Which is the point, I suppose.

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023)

This leaves me with much better sensations than Crystal Skull

[8 July 2023]

Admittedly, I went to the theater with low expectations, and the movie was better than I expected. Clearly better than Crystal Skull.

Some thoughts:

* I loved the initial set piece. I watched it with a grin on my face, like I watched the first three movies. The rejuvenation effects were good. Maybe he did not look exactly the same as Harrison Ford looked in the 80s movies (I don't know, a bit more clean-cut, perhaps?) but it was good enough to completely avoid that uncanny valley effect when it looks almost right but not quite. It was a thrilling extended sequence, and I wouldn't have minded a whole movie like that.

* After that, the pace of the movie is different from the other movies. There is a lot of action, of course, but the pace is not as relentless. I did not get bored (even though the movie is long at 2 hours and a half!), but it was not quite as thrilling as the 80s movies. Which is natural, I think, because Ford is 80, and I think such a relentless pace would not have worked, unless it was all with rejuvenation like in the beginning.

* Mads Mikkelsen was really good as the villain.

* There's controversy about Phoebe Waller-Bridge's character, but I liked her work. Helena Shaw was not very likable for a lot of the movie, but that's because of how the character is designed, not because of the actress' work. Yes, Indy in the beginning of his career was after fortune and glory, but he was never as cynical and ruthless as Helena Shaw is for most of the movie. I would have liked a few more character moments with her to explain how she went from trapping Indy with the nazis so that she could escape in the beginning of the movie, to doing crazy action stunts to save him in the last part.

* I liked Harrison Ford here, more than I did in Crystal Skull. I thought he looked too old in Skull. Here, for obvious reasons, he looks older, but I thought the movie adjusted well to that fact, instead of pretending that it was the same as in the 80s. At the same time, I thought his action scenes were convincing, and his punches still looked serious.

* PWD was the co-lead in this movie, more so than any of the characters accompanying Indy in any of the other movies. However, I personally did not feel that it was at the expense of Indy's role. I thought it made sense that he would have another character to take some of the weight of the action, because 80-year-old Ford doing the huge amount of physical scenes that he did in the older movies might have been too much.

* More importantly, I did not feel that this movie took away from Indy's status as a hero. I am one of those who are pissed off at Disney for their handling of Luke Skywalker in Star Wars, so I was wary of the reports about PWD's protagonism. But no, Indy is still a hero and is still kicking ass as much as it's possible for a character played by an 80-year-old actor.

* The kid (Teddy) was cold. He was even more money-focused than Helena, and he killed that nazi guy during the underwater scene without being traumatized. I don't get why they established that he couldn't swim when he was on the ship, only to have him do that underwater stunt later. I liked how he cared about Helena, though.

* Thankfully, no awful CGI scenes like Mutt swinging from tree to tree.

* The time travel... Yeah, it worked for me. Quite thrilling, the whole thing in the past. I was quite wary of this concept, because in Skull, the whole mental powers/aliens/extradimensional beings thing did not quite work for me. I felt it was too much. But this was a more solid story than Skull, and I thought it was enjoyable and fit better within Indy's world.

* John Rhys-Davies had nice cameos. Karen Allen is given very little screen time, and only appears in the final scene. However, when they did the "tell me where it doesn't hurt thing" I got emotional. Yeah, I liked that.

* I have read people saying that Skull was a better ending for Indy, with a son and getting married with Marion. Here he ends up with Marion, but his son is dead. While technically it's true that Skull's ending was happier for Indy, I liked this more as a way to say goodbye to the character, because this movie leaves me with much better sensations. And, regarding Mutt, well, loss is also a part of life.

* I have also read Indy should have stayed in the past. I don't agree. He should have stayed if the alternative was to be alone and miserable, but he belongs with Marion. They deserve to be happy together in their final years.

All in all, a really solid effort. I have some nitpicks, but on the whole I was really happy. It can't be easy, making an action movie with an 80-year-old lead, with a character who is mostly about thrilling action set pieces... They did quite well. It's a shame that this movie is not doing well at the box office while Skull, a weaker movie, did. But, anyway, life is not always fair, and for us fans I think we have been treated to a good final Indy story.

I wouldn't personally mind if the role was recast after Harrison Ford dies and we got more movies with a young Indy, but if that happens that will be many years in the future. For the moment, this goodbye leaves me with a smile, unlike Crystal Skull.

The Smurfs and the Magic Flute (1976)

The smurfs are not really the main characters here

[26 December 2022]

With this title, you would expect the movie to be about the smurfs, but in fact they only appear in the second half of the movie. The actual main characters are Johan and Pirlouit, the heroes of a different comic book series by the same creator (Peyo), which are much less well-known internationally. In fact the English dubs renames them as a generic John and William. I gather this was the first appearance in film of the smurfs, and they were not yet famous. Anyway, this was a decent movie that never trascended its target audience. Little kids should enjoy it, but for adults it does not have much to offer, although certain moments and details are funny, and it has decent songs and animation. I did enjoy Johan and Pirlouit more than the smurfs, who are tiny and cute but a bit tiresome with their insistence of substituting every verb with "smurf" when they speak.

Fort Apache (1948)

one of the first westerns to depict the Indians, the Apaches in this case, with respect

[7 November 2022]

A very strong cast and a great director elevate what initially seems a a slice-of-life account of life in a frontier fort. There's some comedy, some romance, while the rigid Lt. Col. Owen Thursday (Henry Fonda) takes command of the fort, which he considers a demotion, and disregards the advice of men with more experience on the terrain, like Capt. Kirby York (John Wayne). He demands, and obtains, obedience, not debate.

The cinematography is excellent, as you would expect in a John Ford western, and it's a pity it's not shot in widescreen so that we may enjoy the landscapes of Monument Valley even more.

However, it's in the final part of the movie when it becomes impressive. It's one of the first westerns to depict the Indians, the Apaches in this case, with respect, showing the wrongs done to them and their dignity. At the same time, it doesn't strip the U. S. soldiers of dignity, showing how good men have to operate as well as they can within the constraints of rank and social class.

Even the Colonel Thursday, stupid, stubborn and unable to treat the Indians with honor, behaves with personal dignity in the end. Is that enough to erase his flaws? No, but it makes for a more powerful story.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948)

A character study disguised as an adventure story

[30 October 2022]

A character study disguised as an adventure story. Slow, oppressive and authentic. You can feel the dirt and the misery.

Great performances from the three leads, particularly Bogart and Walter Huston, who get the more juicy characters.

Well-crafted, this black and white classic would have gained if it had been filmed in widescreen format, since it does not take as much advantage of the landscapes as other westerns. Perhaps it's for the best, though, contributing to the claustrophobic sensation.

Some might find this little masterpiece (comparable to The Ox-Bow Incident, perhaps) too slow, but I thought it had a tight plot and just gave the characters space to take over the show.

Unconquered (1947)

Another Cecil B. DeMille production, with all that it implies

[29 October 2022]

Storyline: In 1763, felon Abby Hale is sentenced to slavery in America. In Virginia, heroic Capt. Holden buys her, intending to free her, but villain Garth foils this plan, and Abby toils at Dave Bone's tavern. Garth is fomenting an Indian uprising to clear the wilderness of settlers, giving him a monopoly of the fur trade. Holden discovers Garth's treachery, but cannot prove anything against him. Can Holden and Abby save Fort Pitt from the Senecas?

---

Another Cecil B. DeMille large production, with all that it implies: Filmed in Technicolor, with many extras, colourful costumes and sets, violence, and sensationalism. It's set on the western frontier in the mid-18th century, shortly before the War of Independence, pitting American colonists against Native Americans, spurred on by white agitators who seek to profit from halting the colonization of the west.

Obviously it's targeted to the audience of the time, and has little interest in historical accuracy or in telling things from the perspective of the Indians. The Indians are savages, the pioneers are good, Gary Cooper (as Captain Christopher Holden) is gallant and heroic, and Howard Da Silva (as Martin Garth) is evil beyond redemption.

I'm no big fan of Gary Cooper, who seems rather inexpressive to me, but there's no denying his screen presence. Paulette Goddard is not given much to do for most of the film, only having to look helpless and adorable, meticulously made up despite being dragged through the forest and down a giant waterfall. When she is given something with more depth to do, she does fine, though. Contrary to modern reviewers who can't accept an actor playing a character from a different race, I rather enjoyed a menacing Boris Karloff as the Seneca chief.

As far as Cecil B. DeMille's productions go, this wasn't my favorite. The plot is flimsy, with the hero acting as an agent of the government but unable to confide in the troop commanders on the field, for no convincing reason other than it being required by the plot. Some scenes are a bit cringeworthy if judging by modern standards, and somehow it never really looks like we are actually in the frontier.

Still, it's epic at times, and entertaining.

Gunfighters (1947)

decent but unexceptional western

[8 May 2022]

It tells the story of a gunfighter who wants to leave violence behind, but is forced by circumstances to take up the guns once more. It's a kind of story that has been told many times, and often better.

It's a decent enough western, with competent action scenes. The cinematography is nothing exceptional, although we get a few nice landscapes.

Randolph Scott does his thing and he always has good screen presence. However, the movie is too average, too routine. It lacks the pathos that the story needed. There is too much background music, attempting to provide dramatic depth.

The best quote goes to Sheriff Kincaid: "Remember that badge o' his don't die, it just gets up and comes after ya again, in the shirt pocket of another man."

The romantic element does not get too much focus but it was perhaps the most original part of the story. Barbara Britton and Dorothy Hart play sisters Bess and Jane Banner, the daughters of one of the bad guys, and there are some misunderstandings because of their physical likeliness and their different motivations.

Duel in the Sun (1946)

over the top and excessive, but never boring

[10 November 2021]

It's difficult for me to rate this remarkable David O. Selznick production. A very good cast, a high budget, an intense family drama... it should have resulted in a better movie than this. Nevertheless, it is a great spectacle. It's over the top and excessive, but never boring.

The sensuality of the film was quite scandalous for the time (it was nicknamed "Lust in the Dust"). The torrid, tortured romance between Pearl (Jennifer Jones) and Lewt (Gregory Peck) is interesting because you don't see many characters like Pearl in classic westerns. She wants to be good, but she is weak and can't resist the evil man. It's disconcerting to see Peck playing such a despicable character, with no principles nor scruples. He is half a rapist and only misses the other half because of how willingly she ends up falling into his arms once and again.

Great supporting cast, starting with Lionel Barrymore as the formidable but unlikable patriarch.

There is little subtlety in this film. It could perhaps have used some better editing. It is excessive, but also memorable, with some good visuals and an unexpected final scene.

Ramrod (1947)

The story is told in a straightforward, understated manner, trusting the audience to connect the dots

[10 November 2021]

Some reviewers complain of a slow pace, but that wasn't my impression. The story is told in a straightforward, understated manner, trusting the audience to connect the dots and not wasting thirty seconds on a scene if it can be done in ten. It moves at a good pace most of the time, even though, at the end, the payoff is a bit easy and conventional. Because of that, it turns out not to be as good as it promised during the first part, when there was plenty of tension and psychological work.

The unusual setup is a strong point, subverting the trope of the beautiful lady rancher harassed by the evil local despots who want to run her out of her ranch. In this case, the lady rancher is as evil and petty as them. She boasts "From now on, I'm going to make a life of my own. And, being a woman, I won't have to use guns." She may not use them personally, but plenty of men are going to die because of her war, which is more a vanity project than really necessary for her to live her life.

I'm not a big fan of McCrea or Lake, but they are helped by a capable supporting cast.

I also need to mention the stunning scenery, shot in black and white. The camera doesn't linger in it often, though. More than the traditional open spaces of a western, here the story is sometimes claustrophobic and dark. It's kind of a hardboiled noir film.

I find it underrated, although it could have stuck the landing better.

Star Trek: Enterprise: Dear Doctor (2002) Season 1, Episode 13

That time the Enterprise commited genocide

[29 October 2021]

So, a whole planet of intelligent people is dying of a disease and you have the cure. But you decide to let them die instead, because you shouldn't interfere, and who knows, allowing them to die might allow another intelligent species in the planet to reach their full potential in the future. WTF? With doctors like that who needs genocides?

I mean, people talk about an ethical dilemma, but this is not really an ethical dilemma, it's just ethical bankruptcy.

The Knick (2014–2015)

Could have been great with subtle writers

[28 September 2021]

Very high production values, good actors, interesting premise... it had everything to be great, except for good writers. The characters are so absurdly over-the-top that at some point I couldn't take them seriously any more, and just watched the rest of the show with amusement. The characterization is just too heavy-handed and unsubtle.

Angel and the Badman (1947)

Only a man that carries a gun ever needs one

[27 August 2021]

The setup is similar to the Harrison Ford movie Witness, which would be made four decades later. Here, however, the worldly man who falls in love with a Quaker girl is not a law enforcement officer, but a gunfighter more likely to break the law than to respect it.

Witness is a better movie, but this one, despite the insta-love between the two leads, turned out to be a quite charming western romance, with some witty dialogues and chemistry between John Wayne and Gail Russell, who are both convincing in their roles.

Add some beautiful black and white photography taking place in Sedona and Monument Valley, and a few action scenes to balance the romantic ones, and you get a movie that is quite pleasant, without being great.

The Yearling (1946)

powerful coming of age theme

[23 August 2021]

The movie has very good cinematography, and doesn't mind taking its time (it's an hour until the fawn first appears), which I felt was used to good effect in order to develop the characters and establish how they lived.

It's quite sentimental, which I don't mind but some people will dislike. This is not helped by Claude Jarman Jr's occasionally over-emotional performance as the boy Jody.

Also the way the conflict developed was a bit forced, I felt the movie was uplifted by its ending, with a powerful coming of age theme.

My Darling Clementine (1946)

falls short of greatness

[23 August 2021]

The familiar story of Wyatt Earp, Doc Holiday and the Clanton clan. Don't expect any historical accuracy here, but that was never the point.

The movie is a treasure of good black and white cinematography by John Ford, his second western of the sound era after The Stagecoach (the third if we count Drums Along the Mohawk). Great scenery, as usual with Ford's westerns. Henry Fonda is great as always, what a screen presence, and Victor Mature is fine as Doc Holiday, giving a suave interpretation. Great action scene with the duel at OK corral.

Despite all the positive things going for it, it is somewhat let down by the unfocused script, which doesn't do itself a favor by spending so much time on the romances of Doc Holiday. Linda Darnell is just a bit too much of a classic Hollywood diva to be convincing as a rugged saloon singer, while Cathy Downs is fine in a supporting role as the titular character.

An excellent movie that falls short of greatness.

The Harvey Girls (1946)

uninspired, although the songs are nice

[19 August 2021]

This is a MGM musical with Judy Garland, about a bunch of ladies who go west to work as Harvey House waitresses. The owner and the ladies working at the local saloon feel threatened, because supposedly the Harvey house restaurant will turn the town into a civilized place with no need for a saloon.

It's difficult for me to rate this one, because it has nice singing, and for a musical that surely is important, but on the other hand the story is completely nonsensical.

Look, I know, this is a musical, the story is allowed to be silly, but it should be silly in a light-hearted, fun way, and instead the non-musical parts are a bit of a chore to watch. The movie thinks itself funny when it's not, and the romance is unconvincing. He is kind of creepy, in fact.

The whole thing is uninspired, although the songs are nice, particularly "On the Atchison, Topeka and the Santa Fe", which won the Oscar.

Canyon Passage (1946)

good, but might have been even better

[19 August 2021]

What an interesting western, and kind of frustrating too. I enjoyed it, but I respected it more than I enjoyed it. I had the feeling that there might be an even better movie to be had here.

French director Jacques Tourneur tells the story in a matter-of-fact way. He doesn't so much tell the story as let us follow the hero and witness events, accompanied by an ever-present melodramatic soundtrack I could have done without. The movie starts slow, but it speeds up and plenty of stuff happens.

Once you get used to the style, you can enjoy the gorgeous exterior shots (mixed with some studio scenes), but the best thing about the movie is the subtlety in the plotting and characterization. It defies conventions. You see the hero stand up to a lynching mob, only the lynching mob is right and the hero is wrong. You have to wonder if the hero knows that. Does he believe the suspect is innocent or is he just doing it out of some stubborn sense of friendship or fair play? You see the Indians going into a murderous rampage, only they are depicted with some dignity, and have had ample provocation.

You recognize this as a 40's western but at the same time it's done from a different perspective.

The Virginian (1946)

goes through the highlights of the novel at a brisk pace

[15 August 2021]

Like the 1929 version of the Virginian, this film goes through the highlights of the novel at a brisk pace, resulting in an eventful story but lighter on the character development when compared to the novel.

In just 17 years between the two movies, you can notice the evolution of the craft. Long gone are the mannerisms of the silent era that you could see in the 1929 version, which was a very early talkie. This 1946 version is in technicolor, a bit clean-cut as westerns from this period tended to be, but confident in the storytelling techniques of the medium.

It does not feel like a very big production, even though there are some nice exterior action shots. But there are no majestic sceneries with faraway horizons.

Joel McCrea is not bad in the titular role, but he is always kind of inexpressive, and this role might have benefited from some more dramatic range. Because of that, there wasn't too much chemistry in the romance. Barbara Britton had more of that range and I enjoyed her work as the young schoolteacher Molly Wood. Sonny Tufts as the Virginian's wayward friend and Brian Donlevy as the black-clad villain Trampas were quite good. In a smaller supporting role, Fay Bainter had some nice scenes interacting with Britton.

The Virginian is a great story, and here you can enjoy it without any time to get bored, but I wouldn't have minded twenty minutes more, allowing for some respite from the action.

Abilene Town (1946)

Entertaining but light-weight

[19 March 2021]

Not as great as some other movies about the conflict between homesteaders and cattlemen. Randolph Scott and Ann Dvorak are fine in the lead roles, but there's too much comedy (see Edgar Buchanan as the bumbling, cowardly sheriff), musical numbers and romance to really build up an epic and poignant tale. Still, this is quite entertaining and fast-paced, making it a pleasant if forgettable experience.

Dakota (1945)

lackluster

[2 February 2021]

John Wayne's last film for Republic during the war years is one of his worst westerns, not counting the B-westerns he made during the 30s before his breakthrough with Stagecoach.

The film goes through the motions, but the plot is muddled and the writing lacks inspiration. Wayne is not helped by the rest of the cast. Vera Ralston lacks acting skills. Even Walter Brennan, who other reviewers praise, seemed tiresome to me. His comic relief routine with Nick Stewart received way too much screen time here.

Lackluster and dull, only for John Wayne completists.

Tall in the Saddle (1944)

Mystery and suspense, a fiery Ella Raines and a convincing John Wayne

[1 February 2021]

Yet another fine John Wayne western. He is considered the king of the genre for a reason, after all. At this point (1944) his screen persona is well defined, and he plays it perfectly here. The tough guy, self-sufficient, with morals and occasionally a sensitive moment. That moment when, unarmed, he is driven away from the poker table by a card sharp, only to return a moment later, wearing his revolver... he is absolutely convincing as someone not to be messed with.

It has many of the elements to be expected of these movies, like the comic, trustworthy sidekick (George "Gabby" Hayes), but I found the movie quite enjoyable and different enough from other westerns, with its mystery and suspense element, and the romantic triangle with Wayne, a traditionally sweet young woman (Audrey Long) and a fiery ranch owner (Ella Raines), who occasionally steals the show in a convincing "strong woman" role.

Perhaps the mystery is a bit convoluted, but the script is fast-paced and well-written, and it goes slightly beyond other solid western of that era.

In Old Oklahoma (1943)

Solid entertainment, if a bit formulaic

[31 January 2021]

This was Republic's most successful picture of 1943, offering solid if unspectacular entertainment.

It is a somewhat unusual western, being set in the early 20th century and featuring an antagonist (played by Albert Dekker) who is a ruthless businessman rather than the conventional evil villain. Dekker represents modernity and Wayne, of course, the more traditional hard moral man.

The two male leads compete for the heart of a romance writer played by Martha Scott, and for the oil rights of the Indian territory, with Wayne representing a much less predatory way of doing business.

Add some humor and lively action scenes and you get a quite enjoyable product, if a bit formulaic.

The Desperadoes (1943)

light-hearted and entertaining

[6 January 2021]

This is Columbia's first technicolor feature, and a rather solid western. Not a groundbreaking story, but lively and entertaining. We also get the usual gorgeous scenery and a rather spectacular horse stampede scene.

The actors are good. Randolph Scott looks like he is having fun, and a very young Glenn Ford does a solid job too. The actresses are also given more interesting roles than usual in these classic westerns, and both Claire Trevor and Evelyn Keyes are convincing. The supporting cast is strong too.

It's just fun, a dramatic story told in a light-hearted and entertaining way.

The Outlaw (1943)

Weird but entertaining

[6 January 2021]

Granted, this production is something of a mess, but not as bad as some reviewers would make you think. At the very least it is entertaining.

Apparently, a big selling point were the risqué sexual situations (suggested rather than shown), mainly between Jack Buetel and Jane Russell's characters. Also, the camera's emphasis on Russell's bust. It all seems much tamer from a modern perspective, but it was scandalous at the time. Also, I'm not at all a fan of looking for homoerotic subtext in every friendship between males, but in this case I won't blame you if you see some of that between Billy the Kid and Doc Holliday. Doc's unexpected friendship towards Billy, Pat Garrett acting like a jealous lover...

The music is also weird at times, too loud and aggressive, and then adding comical sound effects as if this were a comedy, which it isn't. Just weird.

Having said all that, the story is quite entertaining, with badass western heroes and nice exterior shots. It happily disregards history, but that's par for the course in these old westerns. I liked all the actors, even Jack Buetel, who is often criticized for having little range but who seemed to me well-casted as this version of Billy the Kid, with the required beauty, charisma and youth.

I wouldn't call this a good movie, but it's interesting and entertaining.

The Ox-Bow Incident (1942)

masterpiece

[4 January 2021]

Storyline: Two drifters are passing through a Western town, when news comes in that a local farmer has been murdered and his cattle stolen. The townspeople, joined by the drifters, form a posse to catch the perpetrators. They find three men in possession of the cattle, and are determined to see justice done on the spot.

---

An ensemble cast tragedy, intense and character-based. It reminded me in some ways of 12 Angry Men, although that movie would be made 15 years later, because this has the same high quality and powerful story.

I felt that perhaps at the end it insisted a bit too much on its message by reading aloud the letter. There was no need, and it could have been handled more subtly, but it's just a minor nitpick. This is truly a masterpiece.

Henry Fonda of course is very good here, as he always is, but he is just one in a bunch of memorable characters.

Rating: 10 of 10