Bolero (1984).

Review #2315: Bolero.

Cast: 

Bo Derek (Ayre “Mac” McGillvary), George Kennedy (Cotton), Andrea Occhipinti (Rejoneador Angel Sacristan), Ana Obregon (Catalina), Olivia d'Abo (Paloma), Greg Bensen (Sheik), Ian Cochrane (Robert Stewart), and Mirta Miller (Evita) Written and Directed by John Derek.

Review: 

The best way to talk about these weird Derek-Derek films is to just go with it. The Hollywood-born John Derek had the looks to score a few bit parts in the 1940s before getting a break with being cast in Nicholas Ray's Knock on Any Door (1949). Derek would do a handful of films in the studio system era along with a select group of European productions but was on record for saying he never liked acting, with one trouble listed by him being his "monotone voice". He pursued directing and photography while marrying and divorcing three wives. He did work on Nightmare in the Sun (1965) as a co-producer before making his feature debut with Once Before I Die (1966). In total, he made eight feature films as a director, half of which starred Bo Derek. Born Mary Collins, she had decided to go to Greece to do a movie with Derek rather than continue to attend high school (she was 16 in 1972). The two had an affair that just happened to lead to the two marrying and returning to the States in 1976 (as for the film, Fantasies was released in 1981). Anyway, it was her appearance in 10 (1979) that raised her presence to the public (cornrow hair and all). A Change of Seasons (1980) and Tarzan, the Ape Man (1981) would follow, with the latter being her first "starring" role that was directed by her husband. What better association for the Dereks to have with Bolero and Cannon Films? Menahem Golan served as an executive producer and apparently suggested to the Dereks to spice up the sex scenes. Amusingly enough, the movie was shown to the CEO of MGM in Frank Yablans in an attempt to get him to intervene against Golan...who in turn stated his disliking of the film to the point where MGM dropped releasing the film when it looked like it would get an X rating to the point where Cannon released it themselves without a rating. The Dereks did one more film together with the "release" of Ghosts Can't Do It (1989); John Derek died in 1998 at the age of 71 while Bo has appeared in a handful of films and TV since.

Honestly, some movies are so dull you can actually feel your body focusing on anything other than what is occurring in front of you. I have to confess that sometimes I write reviews for one film when watching a different film, mainly for attempts at "efficiency". You can imagine how this might get odd with a movie that strives for steamy passion but has the execution of a 78-year-old virgin. With a crap flick, sometimes one just feels the need to pause the movie to just breathe with the stupidity you are watching and sometimes you pause because you get distracted trying to wonder how you got on a tangent reading about the last non-practicing lawyer to win a Supreme Court case (Sam Sloan, for those asking). Other times you wonder how the hell George Kennedy could be involved in such a wide spectrum of movies in quality (you might remember the Academy Award winning actor tried his hand at singing with Lost Horizon along with all of those Airport movies). I wonder how my perception of the Dereks would be if I had checked out that Tarzan film (which somehow got Richard Harris to co-star), which also had nudity. Nothing will really prepare you for Bolero and its bizarre qualities in trying to make a love story that has no actual substance to it. The Dereks sure must have had fun making films as a couple, but I can't imagine many viewers had that same experience. You could probably write a better script of sexual awakenings with crayons, but I don't know if you would be able to get your spouse to shoot the film (seriously, how many movies are there where a husband is directing his wife going through love scenes and being the cinematographer?). I kid you not, the climatic lovemaking sequence takes place amid a great deal of fog meant to make one believe they are looking at clouds while an "ecstasy" sign is briefly seen in the background. All of this is far more interesting to talk about than the acting of the film, which is the type you might find in a bad *parody* of romance movies, particularly from Derek, who has no sense of believability in terms of "awakening" beyond seeming like she is doing a crappy home movie. Occhipinti actually is more known as a producer/distributor more than his acting, and it is easier to give credit for someone making a living rather than simply talking about how a crappy movie's chemistry between its lead actors stinks. Kennedy may be struggling to contain himself in rigid weirdness for a movie that gives him lines such as musing about the last time he saw a certain person naked (the context isn't any better) and so on that makes one hope he got to have some sort of vacation with the experience. In general, the movie strains at times with leaps in logic, even forgetting to show how one escapes a plane in the air (seriously she just is out the plane right there) amid the general lack of sexual tension that would be fodder for several puns (the movie sure is limp when coming to the point, you might say). One feels dirty watching this movie in a way that exploitation directors would shudder to think about in ways that you honest to God would not see nowadays (Olivia d'Abo was 14 when she did this film and no, do not Google what that means).  In conclusion, Bolero is the movie one thinks The Room (2003) is when it comes to terrible vanity projects, failing to achieve any sort of charm beyond making you realize that some married couples really can be the most insufferable people you know. In a sea of bad movies, there is very little to redeem in this flaming heap of crap.

Overall, I give it 0 out of 10 stars. 

Next up: Familiar actors and the 1970s clash in Laserblast.

Strait-Jacket.

Review #2301: Strait-Jacket.

Cast: 

Joan Crawford (Lucy Harbin), Diane Baker (Carol Cutler), Leif Erickson (Bill Cutler), Howard St. John (Raymond Fields), John Anthony Hayes (Michael Fields), Rochelle Hudson (Emily Cutler), George Kennedy (Leo Krause), Edith Atwater (Mrs. Allison Fields), and Mitchell Cox (Dr. Anderson) Produced and Directed by William Castle (#369 - House on Haunted Hill (1959), #1071 - 13 Ghosts, #1418 - The Night Walker, #1703 - Undertow, #2261 - Macabre, #2300 - Homicidal)

Review: 

Sure, William Castle got to reap the benefits of making a movie that seemed a bit familiar to Psycho (1960), which you might remember was a loose adaptation of the famed Robert Bloch novel. Bloch had just finished his first screenplays with 1962's The Couch (where he worked off a story that had been devised by Blake Edwards and Owen Crump) and The Cabinet of Caligari (which had its own litany of troubles). So anyway, here is a movie written by Bloch directed by Castle. Oh, but this one has a gimmick far more noted than buzzers and skeletons: it has the same star from What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) in established stars dipping in suspense: Joan Crawford (cast after Joan Blondell, star of, well, not Baby Jane, dropped out somehow). Crawford, if you remember correctly, had a hell of a time with her final decade in filmmaking, which resulted in a good deal of horror movies that come with casting old familiar names, which saw her career close out in film with I Saw What You Did (1965, re-uniting with Castle), Berserk! (1967), and, well, Trog (1970). Crawford had enough influence to make sure that Anne Helm (apparently nervous being cast opposite Crawford) was quickly replaced with Baker before rewarding the production with commitment in promoting the film (this went with a plastic ax giveaway of course). As for Bloch and Castle, the two worked together once again in The Night Walker, which came out the same year involving a different accomplished actress in the main role (Barbara Stanwyck) in his first film away not distributed by Columbia Pictures after five years (his last seven films were either distributed by Universal or Paramount); Bloch would soon work in collaboration with Amicus Productions on a regular basis, most notably doing six film scripts from 1965 to 1972.

The body-count is five, although two come for the prologue that just gives you a quick rundown of one person's solution to adultery way back when: the ax. How could I resist? Sure, Crawford may have been stuck playing for scripts that weren't exactly Mildred Pierce, but there is never a moment where you find her looking like it is beneath her talent to give commitment (and yes that includes the scene where they give her a wig to make her look years younger, but would you really think Crawford was in her late fifties with this?). Audiences did flock to the film despite such devastating critiques that called the movie "inexcusable for its scenes of violence" (seriously, did people just watch horror movies with blinders back then). It's very amusing to see a movie past and future Academy Award winners (Crawford and Kennedy, respectively) mixed in with a PR vice president for Pepsi in Cox (Crawford was a board member, incidentally) for a movie that goofs around with axe-murdering (Homicidal had a stabbing early, this one has fake heads chopped off with a sound effect that would be fun to guess about). Crawford is enjoyably on point for a film that relies on commitment to really make it work in vulnerability among a returning member of society and in family. She never looks foolish or makes one think they are wasting their time in seeing her play horror, and Baker clearly is game to match with her in reasoned timing that goes along with the rest of the seasoned cast. I like the bubbling tension in just what is going on in what you expect for a movie about nuts and axs and what you end up with in passive sadness in adjustment, albeit one that is undoubtedly a Castle film through and through (hokey is not a mean word when you like it). Strangely enough, the one thing that bugs me about the film is the exact last scene of it all, because it really doesn't need a tight-winded explanation of what you saw (hey, let it play out), it could've just ended right as that twist crashes into you; apparently, it was Crawford who "suggested" that scene be in the film to end it all. As a whole, I think it actually is a neat film, managing to get a worthwhile performance from Crawford in gnashing the screen that makes for a capable Castle experience.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Special Announcement: For the second straight year, you get to enjoy a Halloween Triple-Threat Spectacular: The Cabin in the Woods goes first.

Creepshow 2.

Review #2268: Creepshow 2.

Cast: 

Wraparound story: Domenick John (Billy), Tom Savini (The Creep), Joe Silver (The Creep voice), with the voices of Brian Noodt, Marc Stephan Delgatto, Jason Late, P.J. Morrison, and Clark Utterback.

"Old Chief Wood'nhead" segment: George Kennedy (Ray Spruce), Dorothy Lamour (Martha Spruce), Philip Dore (Curly), Frank Salsedo (Ben Whitemoon), Holt McCallany (Sam Whitemoon), David Holbrook (Vince “Fat Stuff” Gribbens), Don Harvey (Andy Cavanaugh), and Dan Kamin (Old Chief Wood'nhead)

"The Raft" segment: Paul Satterfield (Deke), Jeremy Green (Laverne), Daniel Beer (Randy), and Page Hannah (Rachel)

"The Hitchhiker" segment: Lois Chiles (Annie Lansing), David Beecroft (Annie's Lover), Tom Wright (The Hitchhiker), Richard Parks (George Lansing), Stephen King (Truck Driver), and Cheré Bryson (Woman at Accident)

Directed by Michael Gornick.

Review: 

Oh hey, remember Creepshow (1982)? That was the fun-as-hell anthology film (distributed by Warner Bros.) that had the 1-2 punch of George A. Romero directing five stories that had each been written by Stephen King. There were plenty of interesting shots in the film that aimed to capture the feel of comics such as Tales from the Crypt that had interested the minds of children (and made whiny complainers mad) in the 1950s. Five years after the general success of the film came a sequel that had Michael Gornick serve as director. In addition to being the cinematographer of five Romero features (such as Creepshow), he had directed a handful of episodes of the Romero-created Tales from the Darkside (1984-86) show; this is the only film directed by Gornick. Stephen King wrote an outline for the film that George A. Romero utilized to write the screenplay. Of course, because of a lessened budget for the sequel (reported to be half of the original, as distributed by New World Pictures), the plan for five stories instead became just three. "Pinfall" involved a rivalry between two bowling teams that turns deadly in more ways than one. Apparently, the story was adapted into a comic book of limited quantity in 2016. The other story, "The Cat from Hell" (a story written by King in 1977), would eventually find its way into filming as one of the segments for Tales from the Darkside: The Movie (1990), which if you remember was co-written by Romero. The movie was a mild hit with audiences. There was a Creepshow 3 (2006), but it is more "in name-only" than anything; a TV series based on the 1982 film (with two King stories adapted into episode form) came out in 2019.

This time around, there are a few wraparound segments (done in animation), such as the five-minute opening involving a delivery boy and "The Creep" (seen in live action for the intro and the final shot before the credits). I wanted to like this movie, but there is an underwhelming fashion to it all that reminds me more of lesser episodes of Tales from the Darkside than the fun times one had with Creepshow (there isn't anything as entertaining as say, Leslie Nielsen casually burying a man on the beach). It just doesn't have as much interesting things to really play in grand execution, seeming more a problem of middling acting and budget more than anything. In terms of "not quite great anthology", it probably matches more with The Vault of Horror (1973) than Tales from the Crypt (1972), which is to say is not a compliment. "Old Chief Wood'nhead" is somehow the longest story at 28 minutes, probably because it loves to stall for what it thinks is atmosphere for the beginning when it comes to setting up an old dying town and two leads in Kennedy and Lamour that is then interrupted by-oh you get the idea, something has to happen for a wooden Indian statue to matter. It is about as predictable as the gore that will arise from it, for better or worse. "The Raft", lasting roughly 20 minutes, was based on the King story of the same name (as published in 1982), albeit with a few small changes. It probably matches the best in terms of compact pacing with a useful enough terror to go with some silly teenagers getting nabbed. "The Hitchhiker", lasting roughly 24 minutes, is mostly a duet where one hangs inside a car and one hangs from it. Chiles and her casual nature of trying to cope with what is and what isn't real in that debate of culpability while one gets to hear "Thanks for the ride, lady!" again and again. The movie didn't really have that much steam to lose, anyway. The wraparound segments aren't even that satisfying after a while because really, what's the point of having Tom Savini under makeup anyway? The animation is mild and overall conclusion involving plants isn't even worth writing home about. In conclusion, there are plenty of things one can say about the movie that are "okay" or "mild", but the movie in total never particularly gels greatly enough in enough of its stories to really pull a punch. Being the sequel to a really fun anthology is no fun, managing to make the subsequent Tales from the Darkside film come off as being better handled is another matter. I can't call it a good movie because I know it will just fade from my head as quickly as it came in, which is a shame.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

The Concorde... Airport '79

Review #1926: The Concorde... Airport '79.

Cast: 

Alain Delon (Capt. Paul Metrand), Susan Blakely (Maggie Whelan), Robert Wagner (Kevin Harrison), Sylvia Kristel (Isabelle), George Kennedy (Capt. Joseph "Joe" Patroni), Eddie Albert (Eli Sands), Bibi Andersson (Francine), Charo (Margarita), Pierre Jalbert (Henri), John Davidson (Robert Palmer), Andrea Marcovicci (Alicia Rogov), Martha Raye (Loretta), Cicely Tyson (Elaine), Jimmie Walker (Boise), David Warner (Peter O'Neill), Mercedes McCambridge (Nelli), Avery Schreiber (Russian coach Markov), and Sybil Danning (Amy) Directed by David Lowell Rich.

Review: 

"We believe that Concorde is a magical star that people will go to see in a good motion picture." - Jennings Lang

You remember the Airport movies, I am sure. Based on the novel of the same name by Arthur Hailey, Airport (1970) was an all-star dud. The sequel Airport 1975 (1974) was more of the same. Airport '77 (1977) can be described aptly: "no better and no worse than the previous two features in terms of mediocrity. Sure, there are probably a few more things to make fun of here, but it is the same kind of blah movie from before that made money in a time where people were ripe for seeing these kinds of movies." The screenplay was done by Eric Roth, but Jennings Lang was behind the story along with serving as producer.  Lang had produced the last two Airport films, but he also was a producer on films such as Play Misty for Me (1971) and Earthquake (1974), but this was the only script that Lang ever did. Roth got his start with film scripts such as The Nickel Ride (1974), but he would go on to better work in later years: he wrote films such as Forrest Gump (1994)...and The Postman (1997). The movie was made on a budget of $14 million. It actually made $65 million, making over 75% of its money in audiences not in America or Canada. Keep in mind, the cast is a bit more international this time around, owing to the fact that the Concorde was a plane manufactured by France and British developers. The supersonic airliner plane had its first flight in 1969 before being retired from service in 2003, three years after the only fatal incident of the plane, which by horrible coincidence was the plane utilized for this film. Air France and Aerospatiale (the French national airline and the makers of the plane, respectively) allowed permission to use the Concorde after a few modifications to the script, such as pilots behaving right in the cockpit (so yeah, they could drink off duty and romance, but discussions weren't cool); amusingly, the movie talks about the impending 1980 Olympic Games, for which the summer edition was hosted in Moscow, one that saw America boycott the Games. Of course, the reviews in contemporary times were even more negative than the last three films. The effects used here involve blue screen that deal with primer and paint to help with possible blending. As for Rich, he was the 1978 winner of the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Directing for a Limited or Anthology Series or Movie, but he did get plenty of work from 1950 to 1987, such as Madame X (1966).

Imagine having the guy from Good Times, the title character from Emmanuelle (1974), a French matinee idol, and George Kennedy in the same movie. Oh, and a plane that deals with obstacles such as air balloons, an attack drone, an evil jet fighter pilot, and bomb sabotage with most of the passengers on board to experience more terror than making the rounds for Christmas shopping. So yes, this is the first one of these films with a cleanly set villain in terms of multi-phased terror, namely because of how overly complicated they make it in the art of trying to take down one person (the first film had a bomb and the third film had a hijacker, but neither had a Plan B). Far be it from just having an assassin take them down (aside from the guy they take down right in front of her), nah, you have to launch a drone at them. Only the power of firing a flare gun out the cockpit window and doing a roll can stop drone power. Hell, the climax of the film involves the plane having to land on a snowy mountain and freeing the passengers before the damn thing explodes! You know, if the Airport movies were meant to be bizarro propaganda against flying, this one is probably the peak of anti-flying entertainment: enjoy the Concorde in the title, just watch out for the possible chance of pilots that either fire flare guns to prevent terrorism or explosions. The stories of the people don't mean diddly poo, since one cares even less than they did before with boring people meeting disaster planes.

Kennedy played a mechanic in the first film, then he played an airline vice president, then he played a aero expert/technical advisor, and now he plays a pilot of the Concorde who gets to have an escapade with the plane and a hooker played by Andersson. Truly, some actors get all the luck (imagine being a reliable character presence and having an Academy Award), even if his performance is more of a gruff sleepwalk more than anything. Delon apparently made this film as his last shot at breaking into American notice, since being a French star wasn't enough - it did not end well, although at least Delon ended up just fine back in his native country where he could get a script worth acting. The fact that he is acting opposite Kristel in bland overtones is especially sad. Blakely can't make any headway into being noticeable among all the cheese, because who cares about people being targeted for murder when the preposterous Robert Wagner is acting opposite you? To say nothing of the middling attempts at comic relief of Walker or Albert (or worse yet, Charo having only one scene to do schtick). 113 minutes of pure unintentional humor is a weird price to pay, but anyone who has seen their way through Dean Martin trying to play a pilot or Gloria Swanson play Gloria Swanson or Bermuda Triangle bullshit will surely have no problem with a movie that practically starts with its head in the sand.

Remember, this was the last of these crappy movies. Of course, this film was released in the same year that saw the Italian thriller Concorde Affaire '79, but the real nail in even thinking about doing another Airport movie probably came with Airplane! (1980), the spoof to end all spoofs with airplanes. If you like crappy movies with recognizable names, this may be up your alley. It may be the worst of the bunch, but those with a sicko committee desire to see how low crappy airplane/big cast movies can go will surely have a ball here.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Saving Christmas. 

Airport '77.

Review #1720: Airport '77.

Cast: 

Jack Lemmon (Capt. Don Gallagher), Lee Grant (Karen Wallace), Brenda Vaccaro (Eve Clayton), Joseph Cotten (Nicholas St. Downs III), Olivia de Havilland (Emily Livingston), James Stewart (Philip Stevens), George Kennedy (Joseph "Joe" Patroni), Darren McGavin (Stan Buchek), Christopher Lee (Martin Wallace), Robert Foxworth (Chambers), Robert Hooks (Eddie), and M. Emmet Walsh (Dr. Williams) Directed by Jerry Jameson (#1195 - Raise the Titanic)

Review: 

See, one knows they are dealing with a product movie, because what other movie have the year titled on it? Of course, by this point, the Airport films (1970, 1975) have now evolved past even having an airport involved in the actual plot, since now it deals with the Navy helping to find a fancy plane that crashed near the Bermuda Triangle. The true star is Albert J. Whitlock, who provides the special effects within matte paintings, which is probably the most interesting part of the film (besides having scenes shot in a water tank in Florida, I suppose). By this point, the Airport series has managed to ditch the attempt at thrills, really. You know what you are getting into if you've decided to pick the third film of a series dedicated to making planes and flying as boring as humanely possible. Exposition is the true terror of the sky when it comes to stuff like this, and it is probably not surprising that four writers (Michael Scheff, David Spector, H. A. L. Craig, Charles Kuenstle) were hired to do the film. Jameson may have been more of a TV director than a feature film man, but at least he fitted the occasion of helming disaster-fare (such as TV movies involving hurricanes and elevators in trouble). Even The Poseidon Adventure (1972) managed to evoke some sort of interest within trouble in the waters with a sinking ship, mostly because there is more gusto given by the actors along with better time spent in the water.

Apparently, Lemmon took the role because of he thought it would be fun to do a "blatantly commercial cartoon" (of course, he also was coming off a failure with Alex & the Gypsy and apparently told his agent to accept the next high-paying offer, so...). Eh, he is technically better as a pilot in the acting scale than Heston or Martin, in that he isn't beholden to hammy overtones like the others were - him and Vacarro at least look like they want to be there and act together with believability. Of course, Lee accepted his supporting role because he wanted to work with Lemmon. They do get to share a scene together at least, so one can at least consider the contrast of tastes for certain acting presences over others (i.e. I am always curious to see a movie with Lee in it). This is mostly apparent because he shares most of his segmented time paired with Grant, who gets to play the jealous spouse that also gets to panic the most when disaster strikes - yeah, I don't get it either (apparently, the television version adds more of her, so there's that). At least you get to see her get hysterical and be punched out after trying to open a hatch? Why exactly was Kennedy in this movie? He spends about two minutes in the movie, and he also is the only actor to actually spend any screen-time with Stewart, who might as well have filmed his stages in a box. One can't quite tell which actor is phoning it in more, but I imagine Stewart was quite comfortable with making a movie where he didn't have to speak much and could make a check worthy for his grandchildren to enjoy - this was his fifth-to-last role on film, after all. Cotten and de Havilland are okay, but one isn't really here to see traditional actors if McGavin is jawing exposition right in front of you, right? Honestly, although the film doesn't have as much to generate in weirdo character stuff, at least one can appreciate the small role done by Walsh, who actually had been appearing in a handful of films in bit parts for almost a decade (with this being right before better stuff such as Blood Simple).

At least you can say the Navy wouldn't be embarrassed by participating in this film. The credits even list that the rescue operations are actually utilized by the Navy in similar emergencies, so one can at least appreciate seeing the USS Cayuga being used for something that isn't a waste of time (granted, scenes filmed in water isn't exactly the most interesting thing to watch but your mileage may vary). Look, the movie is no better and no worse than the previous two features in terms of mediocrity. Sure, there are probably a few more things to make fun of here, but it is the same kind of blah movie from before that made money in a time where people were ripe for seeing these kind of movies (making over $90 million on a $6 million dollar budget). Naturally, Airport had to continue with The Concorde ... Airport '79 (1979), so one can only wonder where the adventure of mediocrity can go from there.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Airport 1975.

Review #1675: Airport 1975.

Cast: 

Charlton Heston (Captain Alan Murdock), Karen Black (Chief-Stewardess Nancy Pryor), George Kennedy (Joe Patroni), Efrem Zimbalist Jr. (Captain Stacy), Gloria Swanson (Herself), Susan Clark (Helen Patroni), Helen Reddy (Sister Ruth), Linda Blair (Janice Abbott), Dana Andrews (Scott Freeman), Myrna Loy (Mrs. Devaney), Sid Caesar (Barney), Roy Thinnes (First Officer Urias), Ed Nelson (Maj. Alexander), Nancy Olson (Mrs. Abbott), Larry Storch (Glenn Purcell), Martha Scott (Sister Beatrice), Norman Fell (Bill), Jerry Stiller (Sam), and Conrad Janis (Arnie) Directed by Jack Smight.

Review: 

There are quite a few times that you see a sequel to a movie and wonder why there was a second one to begin with. Unfortunately, you know, and I know, the reason that there exists a sequel like Airport 1975 (1974): money. People really couldn't get enough of big stars to go with airplanes in trouble, complete with a title that I suppose was made to sound like it came from the future. It appears that the budget was reduced in the four years since the last film in 1970 (from ten to three million), but this one also managed to make over $100 million, and one can only wonder how rentals would go for this fellow turkey. To be fair, one probably can't blame Jack Smight for his direction here. He did his work in both television and film (starting with the former since its golden age in the 1950s), and this was the eleventh of seventeen films that he would direct from 1964 to 1989, with Harper (1966) generally being the one that stands out among his work. I'm sure you might remember Airplane! (1980) when it comes to its take on the disaster genre...and those little gags that might seem familiar to those who have seen both films, what with a kid that is awaiting a transplant as soon as they make an airplane trip (complete with a doctor calling beforehand to make sure they aren't startled), and a singing nun that plays to the kid. Now, technically Reddy was qualified to sing, because she was actually a singer (with one newspaper outlet describing her as the "Queen of '70s Pop", after all)...so keep that in mind in trying to figure out which one is a parody. That 1980 film also had Ethel Merman in a cameo appearance, while this feature has Gloria Swanson playing herself (if you really want to stretch this around into an oblong circle, Linda Harrison accompanies her...while using a second name as "Augusta Summerland"...yes). I am not playing you for a bit, because Airport 1975 actually features Dana Andrews in a brief appearance, and Andrews had starred in Zero Hour! (1957), which Arthur Hailey had adapted from his teleplay a few years prior while eventually writing the novel Airport...and Airplane! would lift lines from said movie. At least one will get to see the pair of Heston and Kennedy again, because they had co-starred in another disaster film with Earthquake (1974), which was also done by Universal Studios.

So yes, there are a few strange folks present here, whether that means a trio of odd drunks overshadowed by Myrna Loy playing a more eccentric drunk...or Swanson, who had apparently wrote all of her lines. Strangely enough, this may actually be better than the original film, mostly because of one thing: it manages to be so cheesy that it nearly defies reason. It is so self-serious at the weirdest times that one wonders how exactly this was the only film credit for screenplay man Don Ingalls, who specialized in television from Have Gun - Will Travel to Fantasy Island. It sometimes feel like a script that mutated from the bins of television hokum and engulfed any famous person they could find, who I hope managed to enjoy the monetary benefits of this sham spectacle. Heston is technically the star, in that he gets to ham the screen up from moment to moment while doing the bare minimum in charisma and minimal plane involvement. One wonders if he was worn out from the aforementioned film about the earthquake. Kennedy blusters through some shouting in a performance that is probably degraded from what one saw in the first film, although it can be said that in the earlier movie he was more of a helpful highlight (since if you remember, the airplane trouble was somewhere sidelined behind lots of gobbledygook about affairs and the airplane industry). Ah, but the real presence is Black, making her shift into commercial work after a string of noted supporting roles. While it isn't a great performance by any means, I'm sure I wouldn't fare much better at fumbling with the controls and not collapsing into panic with trying to fly a plane over mountains (the attempts at chemistry with Heston is a different story), although older fans might recognize that this isn't the first movie where a flight attendant is shown taking a plane to safety (Julie (1956) starred Doris Day in a noir, of all things). Zimbalist plays the unfortunate pilot that gets to spend half his time on a couch with his eyes closed to makeup, so there is that. Swanson, making her final film appearance before her death in 1983, certainly had to have a fine time here, since I imagine a role spent mostly in a chair talking about oneself would make anyone proud. It isn't exactly a parody of herself, but one can still keep their eyes open to wonder how this "interesting" pairing of famed star to alleged disaster movie came to be. Others have the energy of a broomstick when it comes to really sticking out, most notably with a bored-looking Andrews, or a bedridden Blair, or an oddly complacent Caesar to go with Storch (who might as well have been chosen out of a hat), and it is Loy who really seems to stand out best when it comes to pairing eccentricity to the level of cheese needed. At least there is some sort of inherent danger present here, since the chances of even one important character biting the dust is at 1% rather than the level done from the first film, although it hasn't meant the movie has increased its levels of thrill from before. One wonders exactly how the other two Airport movies turn out in raising (or keeping) the standards of disaster movie excitement, really. Airport 1975 (1974) isn't really an accomplishment in anything, but technically being better than its predecessor in being less boring has to account for something. If one desires a movie packed with ridicule and name actors, one might not go wrong here.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Airport (1970).

Review #1612: Airport.

Cast: 

Burt Lancaster (Mel Bakersfeld), Dean Martin (Vernon Demerest), Jean Seberg (Tanya Livingston), Jacqueline Bisset (Gwen Meighen), George Kennedy (Joe Patroni), Helen Hayes (Ada Quonsett), Van Heflin (D. O. Guerrero), Maureen Stapleton (Inez Guerrero), Barry Nelson (Anson Harris), Dana Wynter (Cindy Bakersfeld), Lloyd Nolan (Harry Standish), Barbara Hale (Sarah Demerest), Gary Collins (Cy Jordan), John Findlater (Peter Coakley), Jessie Royce Landis (Mrs. Mossman), Larry Gates (Ackerman), and Peter Turgeon (Marcus Rathbone) Written and Directed by George Seaton (#303 - Miracle on 34th Street)

Review: 

I'm sure you are familiar with the disaster film. After all, how many times can you draw from the well of disaster films in a decade quite familiar with big spectacle and stars? Airport isn't the first disaster film ever (obviously), but it surely played a key part in the boom of big-time spectacles involving thrills that would be refined into refined hokum to chuckle with The Poseidon Adventure (1972) and The Towering Inferno (1974), which turned out way better in actual suspense (namely by not putting its characters in peril so late in the film). But wait, we are talking about a movie that somebody somehow really liked, since this made its budget back ten times (on a $10 million budget) and received a plethora of Academy Award nominations (going from Best Picture to Best Supporting Actress...twice! This was the year of Patton and Love Story, remember). But hey, this might seem interesting in its connections with Airplane! (1980). That film was a remake of a film called Zero Hour! (1957), which was adapted from a TV production that both featured Arthur Hailey as writer. A decade later, Hailey would write a book called Airport (1968), one of his numerous novels involving the depiction of a certain profession (such as hotels or the automobile industry), for which this film is adapted from. So, in a decade that saw disasters like earthquakes, meteors, infested animals, what can happen with an airport? If you can believe it, not too much, because this manages to be an interminable experience, proving that big stars cannot hold a 137 minute movie beyond B-movie clichés with all the predictable trimmings for exactly one thrill and nothing else. It is as if Grand Hotel (1932) was being regurgitated, one might say.

This was the 20th of 21 films done by George Seaton, the contract writer-turned-director who many will recognize from Miracle on 34th Street (1947, which he won an Academy Award for), although this film was the biggest one of his career; he never actually shot in Minneapolis–Saint Paul International Airport due to catching pneumonia, and Henry Hathaway stepped in to direct for five weeks there (he did not want payment for his work), complete with starting with fake snow upon having clear conditions. It is interesting to note this as the second-to-last film produced by Ross Hunter, mostly because of the fact that it reminded me of the fact that he left Universal Studios after this to produce Lost Horizon (1973), and we all know how that worked out. The only reason this is any better than that other film is the fact they don't think to ever start singing. Burt Lancaster even called the film a "piece of junk", and he starred in this film! At least he enjoyed the money that came from starring it to do something better (which is preferable to starring in junk and then getting swindled). Seberg didn't like it much either, but I'm sure the big winners proved to be Kennedy and Hayes, since the former was the only one who ended up starring in the next three Airport films and the latter won an Academy Award for her performance (no, I am not kidding, beating out her own cast-mate Stapleton!). This was also the last film role for Heflin and Landis. The only thing that will likely come out of it fine is the airplane industry, seeing how it is promoted so much in such a corny movie, one that will talk about anything else before thinking about thrills, whether that means trouble with noise pollution, office affairs, and quirky customers - oh, but the thing with a flailing airplane, that's just there for the last 25 minutes. To go through the list of actors is like looking through a view-finder and seeing the various slides to see which one "sticks out" the best, before realizing it is a hunk of junk. Lancaster is a fine actor, but he can't help a silly time get better, stuck between rescue mission and workaholic-ism that would've been in vogue with the 1940s or 1950s more than played here. Martin gets the pleasure of being Martin with a considerable age difference in his romance subplot (while reminding me of how many movies I've yet to get to with him as a lead). Seberg seems more stuck in that coat than anything, miles away from films like Breathless (1960) with confounding astonishment. Bisset is here and there with a supposed role of the mistress that seems quite empty for a film in need of a hole in the head. Kennedy is quite enjoyable, in the sense that a cigar-chomper trying to get a plane moving is probably more exciting than anything else that happens in the film. Hayes plays the stowaway with a few wisecracks that is only noteworthy because it is the famed actress of theatre, film, and TV playing it and nothing else - her being used as a ploy near the climax is amusing though. Heflin, a actor of theatre, radio, and film with star and character roles before his death in 1971, does just fine with the quiet adversarial role that is given very little to really do besides bide his time. Stapleton mounts herself to the ground with panic that could be thought of as camp pantomime, while others are there to point out and say words about, like Nelson (never quite a star, but he was the first James Bond...on television), or Wynter (tall, elegant, and wasted in this film for arguments), or Nolan (various roles in light entertainment or B-fare).

So yes, I have been quite mean with just calling it a turkey, and it is the fact that I did not expect much from it that only seals just how bland my disappointment is at the end of the day. The only plot that really matters involve Kennedy or the plane in the air possibly going down, not so much with the billions of other plots about these folks. But at least when the plane does receive some trouble, it ticks up in interest, which therefore means I did get some silly amusement in seeing actors fumble in cheesy danger, complete with the magic of split-screen photography. Actually, that is my other bone of amusement, because certain scenes feature a shot of someone in a circle cut into a scene on the plane saying their dialogue, as opposed to simply cutting to them just saying it...or just having them heard instead of seen. This is also used with a scene of someone using code words for security (with a diamond cut to see all five guards - nifty?). If things are happening in this film, watch out, because it will probably just stop not long after for something else. With a movie that introduces only one troubled person and nothing else, take a guess at how many people will face danger and lose by the end. Congratulations, you won - oh did you guess zero? If you did, you get credit because that would have made an even worse film. Naturally, there were sequels, and they only managed to get sillier with their progression alongside their choice of stars, which ranged from James Stewart to Gloria Swanson that were all released later in the 1970s (1974, 1977, 1979). Truly, the only thing I learned from this is maintaining an aversion to airplanes for yet another year, with the hope that no one tries to make corny movies like this about the bus industry or worse yet about walking. At that point, one might as well just cover your eyes and look for the hurl bag.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Lost Horizon (1973).

Review #1601: Lost Horizon.

Cast: 

Peter Finch (Richard Conway), Liv Ullmann (Catherine), Sally Kellerman (Sally Hughes), George Kennedy (Sam Cornelius), Michael York (George Conway), Olivia Hussey (Maria), Bobby Van (Harry Lovett), James Shigeta (Brother To-Lenn), Charles Boyer (the High Lama), John Gielgud (Chang), and Kent Smith (Bill Fergunson) Directed by Charles Jarrott.

Review: 

"A picture of hope, of faith with a spiritual quality. We all need that with the pressures of the world... Everyone's looking for a place that has peace and security."

Sometimes one does not know where to start and stop in their pursuit of a movie Shangri-La. The 1933 novel by James Hilton (who had eight of his works turned into films), had been adapted into a film previously by Frank Capra in 1937. While it was generally received well at the time, it did not recover its $2 million budget for a few years. Incidentally, the same year that this film was released, the 1937 film was first being restored by the American Film Institute. The funny thing is that there is so many hands here known for better things. We have past and future Academy Award winners with Kennedy, Finch, and Gielgud. We have a B-movie actor-turned-dialogue director-turned producer in Ross Hunter that was known for films like Pillow Talk (1959), Thoroughly Modern Millie (1967), and Airport (1970). We have a director in Jarrot that received a fair bit of notice with Anne of the Thousand Days (1969) and Mary, Queen of Scots (1971). Composer Burt Bacharach and Hal David were a classic partnership in contributing songs together. And then...Hunter never produced another theatrical film after this, while Bacharach and David never worked together again. At least writer Larry Kramer (writer for Women in Love (1969)) came out of the affair well, in the sense that the money for doing it helped keep afloat for several years (he would become a playwright the year this film was released along with activism in the gay community alongside AIDS awareness).

An adventure can be tough at 150 minutes, but this is a musical fantasy adventure, which means one is in for incredible pain if it is done terribly. Would you be surprised to hear that this did not prove well with audiences? Bette Midler called it "Lost Her-Reason", and there isn't much in the film to argue against that. For the first thirty (or so) minutes, one is seeing a straight-laced adventure, as it has to set up its trappings and characters with clichés-I mean personality with flaws to inevitably confront later on. In that sense, it probably could have been an interesting adventure film that could have updated itself with finding a place of inner peace with the secrets that lurk within. And then Gielgud shows up, fur costume and all, to help usher them into their strange little utopia, complete with a re-used set (castle) from Camelot (1967). There might be a chance at a scene involving characters having a conversation, whether that involves a thought process over meeting the Lama or just about why it may be futile to think about smuggling gold out of paradise. Of course that can't happen, because it is a musical of the worst kind: one that doesn't know when to shut up. Simply put, the songs aren't too particularly interesting, the music to go alongside it is too sickeningly sweet to go alongside the fact that only three actors actually sung their lines (Kellerman, Shigmata, and Van). Of all the things to make a musical, why would you take an adventure like this and make a musical of it? The funny thing is that this was already tried: In 1956, the book was turned into a musical in Shangri-La (with Hilton credited for co-contribution to the book and lyrics), where it promptly ran for 21 performances on Broadway. The film was the last of a line of musicals that received a roadshow release, done after the boom of films like Mary Poppins, My Fair Lady, and so on (Pete's Dragon (1977) was evidently the last one to have such release).

I hope Finch (noted for films like A Town Like Alice (1956) and Sunday Bloody Sunday (1971)) liked what he saw from being the head of a dignified mess. After all, most of his "songs" are through internal monologue, for which he isn't singing them, but that's...better than the others? Worse? It is wooden all the way, but that is technically better than the star-studded clunkers following him. Ullmann (famous for a variety of roles, mostly with director Ingmar Bergman) acts in theory with the idea of sweet charm, dancing her way through dubbed songs with stiffness expected from casting non-musical actors for a musical. Now, now, Kellerman did in fact do her own singing and dancing, but that doesn't exactly leave her with more dignity in a Saturday school special type of acting fit for such a silly character, one that looks like she wants to be anywhere else but here. Kennedy is just as baffling, because one would almost think they should have tried for camp, but yet here we are with strange choices all the way through. York plays the strangest character present in both book and film: the skeptic, which he doesn't do well with in the least, probably because however legitimate his concerns with an obvious utopia are, he can't really do much with actually carrying this to anything worthwhile - besides, he is meant to be the brother of Finch's character, and the age difference between them is 26 years (!) - they might as well have been playing father-and-son. Hussey (most famous from Romeo and Juliet (1968), a film long sought to cover) falls to the wayside in silliness, mostly because one is more curious to see how the effect will go when the secretly elder one will age outside of the mountain...it ultimately reminds me of a peanut, which is pretty amusing. At least Van, a musical actor known for productions like No, No, Nanette and others for two decades, is somewhat right for what is needed in comic relief and singing, although one almost wonders if he would've been better as the lead somehow. Shigeta (who also did his singing like Kellerman and Van as a pioneer for leads for Asian Americans alongside TV and singing) seems sorely lacking, one who needs more to do than to just help shepherd these bread-like personalities through utopia silliness. This was the third-to-last role for Boyer, acting in a chair to some effect for like five minutes in a film that seems to have not updated itself one bit from films of Boyer's era. Gielgud later described his role as an "idiotic walkabout", one that seemed to not let him really act alongside noting his slight shame in taking the film to help in money problems. Being wrapped in a warm fur costume and a dubious script without having to sing and get paid for it? Sure, why not. There are technically highlights, in picking out the silly moments besides the hokum that comes through with such pallid singing, but my favorite is near the end, where Finch and York are travelling slowly away down the mountain, trying to keep up with the guides and they yell at them to slow down...which promptly leads to an avalanche occurring over the guides. The other little nugget comes from when Finch tries to go back in the end, and a brief song happens after he apparently reaches it - I just like to pretend he actually just when snow-blind again. On the whole, there is very little to like from a film that deserves all of its notations of turkey classification in how silly it all proves to be within an intolerable 150 minute run-time, ineffective execution of songs and dance, and its lack of anything meaningful to make a worthwhile adventure in utopia that merits needing more than one adaptation of the original material by Hilton. In short, it sucks.

Happy Thanksgiving. Next Time: Thirsty for more? It's time for Hobgoblins.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Lonely Are the Brave.

Review #1229: Lonely Are the Brave.

Cast: 
Kirk Douglas (John W. "Jack" Burns), Gena Rowlands (Jerry Bondi), Walter Matthau (Sheriff Morey Johnson), Michael Kane (Paul Bondi), Carroll O'Connor (Truck Driver), William Schallert (Harry), George Kennedy (Gutierrez), and Karl Swenson (Rev. Hoskins) Directed by David Miller.

Review: 
Sometimes you come across a Western that is a bit different from the rest. This Western drama is adapted from Edward Abbey's 1956 novel The Brave Cowboy with a screenplay from Dalton Trumbo. The film deals with the difficulty an individual can have living within growing society, one where wires and fences loom over the open country, where one lone man stands with his principles. Douglas (who calls this his favorite film) was attracted to playing the lead after reading the novel, with him getting Universal Pictures to help fund the film with him as star, complete with cast and crew recruited from his production company Joel Productions. Filmed on a budget of two million around Albuquerque, New Mexico, Lonely Are the Brave is a stark and excellently done tragic classic, headlined by a great performance from Douglas alongside a capable supporting cast to go alongside him in a film that stands out from other Westerns of its time, both in setting and in tone. Key moments include Douglas and his fight with a one-armed man (Bill Raisch, a stand-in for Burt Lancaster on occasion best known for his appearances on The Fugitive beginning the following year), well-done cinematography by Philip H. Lathrop that shows off vast landscape shots without trouble and fine detail and an understated performance from Matthau, who was more known for his work on the stage (winning his second Tony Award the same year of this film's release, in fact). For the most part, this is a film for Douglas to grab with his performance, which is quite wonderful, running the gamut in grace as a man of the West trapped in a tragic fate of a moving world that makes this revisionist Western stand tall. Rowlands and Kane do fair with their brief time on screen, being the kind of people who could cross paths with a rogue like our lead without seeming completely in the background, trying to roll with their path in a weary world. The other members of the cast (including a young O'Connor) do just fine, including a rough Kennedy. It did not prove to be a huge hit upon initial release, in part because of disputes between Douglas and Universal over how the film should be released, with Douglas believing it should be released in art-houses and gradually build its audience and the studio preferring to release it wide without any sort of big support. Despite this, the film has its own cult following and it isn't hard to see why. It has a solid headliner with Douglas in a role he excels with, making it obvious why he would adore it still after half a century since, since it is a solid production with its own bit of thrills and distinctive voice among Westerns that make it a fair piece to recommend out of curiosity on the trail.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Charade (1963).

Review #1029: Charade.

Cast: 
Cary Grant (Peter Joshua), Audrey Hepburn (Regina Lampert), Walter Matthau (Hamilton Bartholomew), James Coburn (Tex Panthollow), George Kennedy (Herman Scobie), Dominique Minot (Sylvie Gaudet), Ned Glass (Leopold W. Gideon), Jacques Marin (Insp. Edouard Grandpierre), Paul Bonifas (Mr. Felix), and Thomas Chelimsky (Jean-Louis Gaudet) Directed by Stanley Donen (#137 - Bedazzled, #227 - Singin' in the Rain, and #346 - On the Town)

Review: 
Writers Peter Stone and Marc Behm had made a script called The Unsuspecting Wife across Hollywood, however nobody wanted the script. It was turned into a novel (with the title of Charade), along with being serialized in Redbook magazine, with attention soon focused on it, with the rights sold to director Stanley Donen. The final script was written by Stone to fit the main cast, while Behm got a co-credit for story. In any case, this is a movie that fits into three genres: suspense thriller, romance, and comedy, and the final result is a film that does well in all three genres, particularly due to the cast. The movie has been cited as one resembling an Alfred Hitchcock movie (Grant had starred in Hitchcock's North by Northwest (#223) four years prior), with a few plot twists, scenes to build tension, and innocent people thrust into strange/dangerous situations. It helps that the title sequence is done by Maurice Binder, who would become famous for doing the title sequence for the James Bond films for over 20 years, with Henry Mancini providing the music score.

The movie also happens to have an interesting relationship between Grant and Hepburn, resembling something out of a romantic comedy, although this is one that is quite interesting. Grant was nearly 60 by the time of the film's release in December of 1963, with the age difference between him and Hepburn being one of roughly 25 years. There are lines in the film where he comments on his age, and it is Hepburn who pursues him, which is certainly refreshing. In any case, they have good chemistry with each other, responding with a sense of wit and fanciful cleverness that always seems right. In terms of the suspense elements, they also do a good job handling the thrills and suspense just right. Hepburn is refreshing and compelling as usual, which one could apply to Grant as well. Matthau does a fine job, sticking out easily but being quite useful for the film. The trio of Coburn, Kennedy, and Glass are all fine adversaries for the movie, not merely just cardboard cut-outs for the film to throw away without giving them some sort of scene for them to stick out, such as when they first appear during a funeral. The rest of the cast is also fairly decent in their roles. In any case, this is a movie that keeps you on your toes, having a few turns that don't cheat the audience but keeps them guessing and keeps them excited as well. The violence that occurs in the film may feel a bit off in tone with the other parts of the movie, but it never comes off as too distracting with the entertainment that comes with the movie. The run-time of 113 minutes is pretty fair for the film, never really dragging at any one point.

One thing to note is that the movie is in the public domain, due to an error made by Universal Pictures (the studio that released the film) on the copyright notice. At the time, copyright notices needed to include "Copyright", "Copr." or its symbol on the notice, but since there was no such thing on there, the film (but not the music by Henry Mancini) was immediately in the public domain upon release. The film has been remade four times: Kokhono Megh (1968), Somebody Killed Her Husband (1978), The Truth About Charlie (2002), and Chura Liyaa Hai Tumne (2003). In any case, Charade is a fine gem that succeeds in what it wants to be, whether a thriller or a romantic comedy, whether due to Donen's execution of the script, or from the dynamic cast. This is an easy one to recommend, for all the charm and fun that it inspires.

Let me say a few words about the significance of today's day, December 20th. Seven years ago on this day, Movie Night was created. Over the years, I have done reviews on this certain day for previous anniversaries, from The Iron Giant (#083) for 2011, The Avengers (#312) for 2012, The Man Who Came to Dinner (#501) for 2013, Shock (#676) / Elf (#677) for 2014, Galaxina (#770) for 2015, and Billy Madison (#887) for 2016. Obviously the show has evolved quite a bit since then, and I like to think that Movie Night will continue to evolve and hopefully stay useful, no matter what happens. Thank you. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Dirty Dozen.

Review #1014: The Dirty Dozen.

Cast: 
Lee Marvin (Maj. John Reisman), Ernest Borgnine (Maj. Gen. Sam Worden), Charles Bronson (Joseph Wladislaw), Jim Brown (Robert T. Jefferson), John Cassavetes (Victor R. Franko), Richard Jaeckel (Sgt. Clyde Bowren), George Kennedy (Maj. Max Armbruster), Trini Lopez (Pedro Jiminez), Ralph Meeker (Capt. Stuart Kinder), Robert Ryan (Col. Everett Dasher Breed), Telly Savalas (Archer J. Maggott), Donald Sutherland (Vernon L. Pinkley), Clint Walker (Samson Posey), Robert Webber (Brig. Gen. James Denton), Tom Busby (Milo Vladek), Ben Carruthers (S. Glenn Gilpin), Stuart Cooper (Roscoe Lever), Robert Phillips (Cpl. Morgan), Colin Maitland (Seth K. Sawyer), and Al Mancini (Tassos R. Bravos) Directed by Robert Aldrich (#105 - What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? and #778 - The Longest Yard)

Review: 
Admittedly, war films are not exactly my preference when it comes to what I try to watch for films, but from time to time there can be ones that pique my interest, and this is certainly one that garnered a look. The movie is based on the novel of the same name by E. M. Nathanson, which was inspired by a real-life group called the "Filthy Thirteen". The film has a big cast (as the title suggests) along with a considerable length of 150 minutes, not so much due to the action but the training of the group, although the last parts of the film contains plenty of action. It is evident to say that of the twelve members, six stand out the clearest: Bronson, Brown, Cassavetes, Savalas, Sutherland, and Walker. They have distinct characteristics that they apply well to their roles that just clicks. Marvin is fairly entertaining, having a great sense of gravitas, which could also apply to Borgnine. My favorites of the group are Brown and Sutherland, the former due to him being easily watchable and the latter due to his charm. The film has its share of amusing moments along with its scenes of fellowship with these hard-edged (but watchable) people. I especially like the sequence with Marvin and Sutherland in which the latter has to help fool a general. The war game part is also fairly commendable in its execution as well. Admittedly, the cast is perhaps a bit old to be playing soldiers (the youngest of the group is Cooper and Maitland, both born in 1942 for a film released in 1967), but it isn't too much of a detraction. It's not a movie that relies heavily on a big spectacle action scene, in part because the film isn't meant to be like that. The last sequence (with the château) is a fairly thrilling sequence, but it is one that you can also dwell on due to the characters that we have watched prior to that point. It's a gritty movie that has its shares of bleakness, but it is a well-paced and well thought-out film. Whether the film achieves its goals or not, it is at the very least a fine piece of entertainment.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult.

Review #826: Naked Gun 33⅓: The Final Insult.

Cast
Leslie Nielsen (Lieutenant Frank Drebin), Priscilla Presley (Jane Spencer), George Kennedy (Captain Ed Hocken), O.J. Simpson (Detective Nordberg), Fred Ward (Rocco Dillion), Kathleen Freeman (Muriel), Anna Nicole Smith (Tanya Peters), Ellen Greene (Louise), Ed Williams (Ted Olsen), and Raye Birk (Papshmir) Directed by Peter Segal (#466 - Nutty Professor II: The Klumps)

Review
If you wanted to see a Naked Gun movie...just watch the first one three times. The movie will be the same, but compared to the two actual sequels you won't really miss much. Honestly, this isn't a bad movie by any means, but there is such an underwhelming feel to everything, from the execution of ideas to the general movie itself. No one really stands out, aside from the numerous cameos that come and go quickly. The opening sequence (spoofing the sequence from The Untouchables) is probably the best part of the movie, having fine timing shown by Nielsen, though the film never really gets any better from there. It's not even something to get worked up about its middling quality. It's not even so much a case of it being the third (and last) one, it simply isn't that funny. Nielsen is fine as ever, but he can't help a movie that relies on tired gags and not so quick gags. The dynamic between him and Presley isn't as prevalent this time around, with a good portion of the movie being between him and the trio of Ward-Freeman-Smith, which doesn't have much fun to it. The jokes that are present seem either verge on the thinly obvious side and the side of just not being that good of a joke. The sequence with Pia Zadora is quirky, sometimes being funny. Even the usual supporting cast of Kennedy and Simpson (in his final film, released less than three months before the murders and chase) are lacking. By the time the climax comes around, it's a frustrated sigh of relief more than anything. The only good thing is that it is at least better than Airplane II: The Sequel (#698), and I guess that says something. If you're looking for something with Leslie Nielsen...check for something else.

Side note: We just reached 20,000 views on this blog! I'm happy to hear that, and I thank anyone who's come to the blog over the past few months (and years).

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear.

Review #821: The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear.

Cast

Leslie Nielsen (Lieutenant Frank Drebin), Priscilla Presley (Jane Spencer), George Kennedy (Captain Ed Hocken), O.J. Simpson (Detective Nordberg), Robert Goulet (Quentin Hapsburg), Richard Griffiths (Dr. Albert S. Meinheimer/Earl Hacker), Jacqueline Brookes (Commissioner Anabell Brumford), Anthony James (Hector Savage), Lloyd Bochner (Terence Baggett), and Tim O'Connor (Donald Fenswick) Directed by David Zucker.

Review
It's strange, I did not really notice that the 25th Anniversary of this film was 13 days ago until doing this review. Happy 25th.

The original film (#599 - The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!) was fast-paced slapstick slapstick comedy that worked exceptionally well, with Nielsen being a particular highlight in part due to his comedic timing. With the second (and a half) film, you could say mostly the same thing, just with a few diminishing returns. Simply put, if you enjoyed the first film, you'll at least like the second film a little. Even though the movie seems a bit more predictable with the jokes, there are at least enough gags that work, with a pace of 85 minutes that fits enough. Nielsen and Presley do well enough again, with a gag spoofing "Ghost" being pretty funny. The supporting cast is well enough, with Goulet and Griffiths being decent enough additions, having good chemistry with Nielsen when needed. I wish I could say more, but take my word for it: It's okay, but if one had to pick between the two Naked Guns, take the original. It at least is a decent comedy sequel, as opposed to other comedy sequels (#402 - Rush Hour 3, #496 - The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause, and #698 - Airplane II: The Sequel), so take this movie for what it's worth.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!

Review #699: The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad!

Cast
Leslie Nielsen (Lt. Frank Drebin), Priscilla Presley (Jane Spencer), Ricardo Montalbán (Vincent Ludwig), George Kennedy (Capt. Ed Hocken), O. J. Simpson (Det. Nordberg), Susan Beaubian (Wilma Nordberg), Nancy Marchand (Mayor Barkley), Raye Birk (Pahpshmir), and Jeannette Charles (Queen Elizabeth II) Directed by David Zucker (#664 - Airplane!)

Review
Yes, we have come to the point of The Naked Gun. In a way, I feel proud of that fact, though I do wonder how it took so long for me to review it. In short, I was lazy. But hey, nobody's perfect, though this movie sure comes close to it. This movie will tickle your funny bone so much that you'll be on the floor with laughter calling for help. Yes, there are sight gags, but the movie's biggest strength is with Leslie Nielsen, who has the absolute best timing with any sort of gag. It's hard to pick a favorite scene, though the beginning scene (and the credits that go along with it) is hard to beat, especially with Nielsen at the wheel. Any scene with Nielsen and Presley is effective because it provides the movie with a nice blend of fun and humor, especially at the end of the movie. I was pleasantly surprised to see Ricardo Montalbán in this movie, and he does a pretty good job at basically playing a villain in a comedy movie, but it is fun to see him, especially because he does it so well. The supporting cast is right for the job, complimenting a movie that already has so much going for it. It's a movie that is over 25 years old, and that's usually the point where a movie starts to feel like fine wine, well versed and well aged. Go see the movie, it will be the best 85 minutes you could spend because the movie just lets you have fun.

Now then. There is a matter of the next review. It will be...the 700th. No spoilers here...yet.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Small Soldiers.

Review #097: Small Soldiers.

Cast
Gregory Smith (Alan Abernathy), Frank Langella (Archer), Kirsten Dunst (Christy Fimple), Tommy Lee Jones (Chip Hazard), Phil Hartman (Phil Fimple), George Kennedy (Brick Bazooka), Jim Brown (Butch Meathook), Ernest Borgnine (Kip Killigan), Clint Walker (Nick Nitro), Bruce Dern (Link Static), Kevin Dunn (Stuart Abernathy), Ann Magnuson (Irene Abernathy), Jay Mohr (Larry Benson), David Cross (Irwin Wayfair), and Denis Leary (Gil Mars) Directed by Joe Dante.

Review
This is a bit similar to Gremlins (#096), with our lead hero releasing the villans to the world, destroying things, and ultimately losing to another toy/gremlin. But the film does try to distance itself a little, with action and slight laughs all over the film. It may be a little dark, but compare it to Gremlins, which had microwaved heads and more. This is just a cherry to that cake, really. It has excellent effects with good voice acting and standard acting that entertains you for two hours (Make that 1:50). It's not a great film, but it at least is enjoyable. Countdown: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3...

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.