Showing posts with label Alexander Lockwood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alexander Lockwood. Show all posts

July 8, 2023

Beauty and the Beast (1962).

Review #2035: Beauty and the Beast.

Cast: 
Joyce Taylor (Althea), Mark Damon (Eduardo), Merry Anders (Sybil), Walter Burke (Grimaldi), Eduard Franz (Orsini), Alexander Lockwood (Man), Dayton Lummis (Roderick), and Michael Pate (Prince Bruno) Directed by Edward L. Cahn (#331 - It! The Terror From Beyond Space, #560 - Experiment Alcatraz, and #656 - Invasion of the Saucer Men)

Review: 
In 1740, a story was published in La jeune amĂ©ricaine, et les contes marins (The Young American and Marine Tales) that in English was called Beauty and the Beast. It was written by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve. Sixteen years later, a re-written and abridged version was published by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont, which is the one that ended up being most known among fairy tales told to folks. Oddly enough, Beauty and the Beast took considerable time to adapt for film. The most notable film adaptation for most of the 20th century might be the French film Le Belle et la BĂȘte (1946), which was directed by Jean Cocteau to noted interest in its visual style. The first English-language adaptation, however, was made in 1962, with Edward Small as executive producer. Small was a producer with a lengthy career that spanned both the silent and sound era and covered various productions such as The Man in the Iron Mask (1939), Raw Deal (1948), and Witness for the Prosecution (1957). This film was one of numerous ones that he did with United Artists that were targeted to make money when sold to television rather than make large profits on its budget (roughly $100,000-$300,000), whether that involved Westerns, or melodramas. This was one that was targeted for the family audience that he called a "fairytale for everybody - no messages, no menace." The film was written by George Bruce and Orville H. Hampton. At the helm of director was Edward L. Cahn, who had directed films since the 1930s after getting his start with Universal Pictures in 1917 within the editing department. He became known for his work in Poverty Row studios such as Monogram along with short films that kept him busy (this was the fourth of four films he directed for release in 1962 alone). It may interest you to note this was the last film for Cahn as a director, as he died the year after it was released at the age of 64. It was also the penultimate film with makeup by the famed Jack Pierce, who closed his career with The Creation of the Humanoids (1962) and constant work on the TV show Mister Ed prior to his death in 1968.

I wish I could say that the film is a decent little cheapie. I wish that there was something positive beyond a few effects within a story about a guy who turns into a wolf-looking beast at night, particularly since the effect resembles The Wolf Man from two decades earlier. Alas, this is not one of those little gems that you wish to find and spend 77 minutes with intent curiosity. You can't even be mean about calling it "not good", because it mostly is just a bland film that could be constituted to about five sentences: Duke wants to get married to a woman, silly prince wants to stop him, Duke is a wolf at night that stands around cursed because [reasons], woman saves him with love at the stake, the end. The debate you will have here is whether to call the film "paper-thin" or "paint by the numbers", unless you are not really interested in harvesting as many words as possible. Small's message of no message or menace unintentionally comes true in the worst way possible that it also has no real sense of urgency. The transformation sequences with Damon merely seem to come and go with him standing like a shaggy statue rather than convey any sense of tragedy that come from someone who spends more time than necessary wondering how much sunlight is left, which isn't exactly a compliment for Damon or Taylor when it comes to trying to sell this patchwork of romance. At least Pate seems like someone who could be a useful stoolie for adversarial presence, but again, the only threat the movie has going for it is the idea of tricking villagers into murdering someone that happens to look like a wolf at that very moment. As a whole, Beauty and the Beast at least has a look like a set for the Middle Ages, so that is probably the best thing I can say for a movie that seems a bit too slipshod all the way around to work for anything other than for people who really, really want to see anything that moves. 

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

November 20, 2017

The Invisible Boy.


Review #1012: The Invisible Boy.

Cast: 
Richard Eyer (Timmie Merrinoe), Philip Abbott (Dr. Tom Merrinoe), Diane Brewster (Mary Merrinoe), Harold J. Stone (Gen. Swayne), Robert H. Harris (Prof. Frank Allerton), Dennis McCarthy (Col. Macklin), Alexander Lockwood (Arthur Kelvaney), John O'Malley (Prof. Baine), Robby the Robot (Robby), Gage Clarke (Dr. Bannerman) Directed by Herman Hoffman.

Review: 
Based on the short story by Edmund Cooper, The Invisible Boy is certainly an interesting science fiction film that has both wit and charm at times, being a strange little adventure that certainly wins over on its charm. It was the second appearance of Robby the Robot, who had previously appeared in Forbidden Planet (#199), with his character having been brought back from the future during a time travel experiment (not joking). Yes, the film has its tongue-in-cheek moments, but it is also a film that has scenes involving a supercomputer that goes berserk with power (which for the era was a pretty new thing) and then of course there is parts with the invisible boy. Eyer does an okay performance, though it may come off as a bit bratty, and he certainly isn't as interesting as Robby, although who can really say they are more interesting to watch on screen than him? In a film as oddly plotted and as oddly thought out, the Robot is one of the best parts of the film in part because of how interesting it is to watch the Robot move around, especially with that voice, which was delivered by Marvin Miller, although he was not given credit for the role. The parents (Abbott and Brewster) are decent, and they seem to be having a decent time. The rest of the supporting cast is nothing too special, but at least they serve their purposes well, whether it be for the plot or for some amusement. Made for a budget of $384,000, it certainly is a movie that has some cheap-looking moments, but the invisible effects are at least somewhat passable; aside from that, the biggest spectacle is the robot and the supercomputer, with the latter being somewhat amusing. While the film isn't anything too special, it has a strange charm to it because of amusingly entertaining it can get to with the narrative. At best, it is neat entertainment and even at its worst it serves as mostly harmless fare. Take it for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.