Funeral in Berlin.

Review #2562: Funeral in Berlin.

Cast: 
Michael Caine (Harry Palmer), Paul Hubschmid (Johnny Vulkan/Paul Louis Broum), Oskar Homolka (Colonel Stok), Eva Renzi (Samantha Steel), Guy Doleman (Colonel Ross), Hugh Burden (Hallam), Heinz Schubert (Aaron Levine), Wolfgang Völz (Werner), Thomas Holtzmann (Reinhardt), Sarah Brackett (Babcock), Günter Meisner (Otto Kreutzman), and Herbert Fux (Artur) Directed by Guy Hamilton  (#280 - Diamonds Are Forever, #289 - The Man with the Golden Gun, #291 - Goldfinger, #293 - Live and Let Die, #612 - The Devil's Disciple, #2019 - The Ringer [1952])

Review: 

Yes, I suppose it makes sense that Guy Hamilton would be brought in to do work on a Harry Saltzman production with Funeral in Berlin (as based on the Len Deighton book of the same name), which was released the year after the success of The Ipcress File (1965), which Sidney J. Furie had managed to craft a pretty decent spy movie. And yet, Salesman apparently didn't like what Furie did to the point where he went with a familiar face to deliver another Palmer movie. In his 1993 autobiography, Caine described the movie as one where he doubted that the filmmakers managed to capture the "special atmosphere" of the city of Berlin, stating that Hamilton seemed more at home with the Bond movies (hey, I think Goldfinger was the best of the first few of the movies, at least until say, 1969) rather than the "gritty realism" attempted with the Palmer movies*. From 1964 to 1974, Hamilton worked with Saltzman on six films (The Party's Over, released in 1965, was the lone exception of that time period). Interestingly, Hamilton actually had served in a secret unit of the 15th Motor Gunboat Flotilla that brought over agents into France and send down pilots back to England in the second World War (for which he went through certain danger on one occasion) The screenplay was written by Evan Jones, who previously had adapted works into film with The Damned (1962) and Modesty Blaise (1966). The third and final feature film with Caine as Palmer came out with Billion Dollar Brain (as directed by Ken Russell) the following year.

There are aspects that are pretty interesting in dry charm, at least. Sure, it has pretty evident charms and flaws, but it is fairly likable with Caine at the helm with a locale in Berlin that at least seems like a useful capsule for its time. Undeniably, the movie is plagued by basically being a cipher in actually getting to the point of the "intrigue", because it muddles itself for 102 minutes with only a moderately interesting supporting cast and motivations that just aren't as sleek or as icily effective from before. So, what's it all about? Well, through a bit of loitering in the streets of Berlin, one sees an array of not-quite defections, Israeli agents* on a trail, and a motivation to keep some things buried from the light (the title here refers to the would-be smuggling scheme: getting out of East Berlin in a coffin). Caine coasts with the irreverent mannerism of coasting through the machinations of people who all look to get one over another (as if the spy game really is just a game of cons). This was the international debut for Renzi (cast over Anjanette Comer, apparently), who had one other film credit (Playgirl [1966]) to her name, but apparently she was dubbed. So it goes, I guess, because she basically drifts through the film anyway*. Homolka might actually be the most interesting presence in the exuberant, seasoned presence (sure, it's not his story, but, well...). Hubschmid is probably the bigger cipher of the film, trying to be elusive to hide the movie eventually getting to the point (Germans) that is only mildly interesting when paired with Caine. The movie sometimes is interesting with its locale and the bleak scenarios that creep around the corner for a feel that you just wish was a bit tighter with its globe-trot in Berlin. You just want a little more energy amidst the gloom, as one basically drifts through it all. However, if you prefer to see what a spy movie from Hamilton looked like that wasn't merely James Bond, this might be up your alley.

 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Song of the day!

*Caine also noted in one instance that they were filming near the Wall on a sunny day and border guards with nothing better to do shone mirrors in the lenses that led to the filmmakers moving somewhere else.

*Israeli agent, you say? Don't worry, I don't think I would say anything that would get someone to whine about anti-semitism. Free Palestine?

*Comer married Hubschmid the following year but didn't exactly take off as an actress, even rejecting a role in You Only Live Twice.

The Ipcress File.

Review #2256: The Ipcress File.

Cast: 

Michael Caine (Harry Palmer), Guy Doleman (Colonel Ross), Nigel Green (Major Dalby), Sue Lloyd (Jean Courtney), Gordon Jackson (Jock Carswell), Aubrey Richards (Dr. Radcliffe), Frank Gatliff (Eric Grantby), Thomas Baptiste (Barney), Oliver MacGreevy (Housemartin), Freda Bamford (Alice), and Pauline Winter (Charlady) Directed by Sidney J. Furie (#787 - Superman IV: The Quest for Peace)

Review: 

"If you have a great story and you try to do all these different camera angles, you'll get away with it. But if you don't have a great story, they'll hit you hard. If you try to use the screen the way a painter uses a canvas, somehow it's not considered acceptable. The reason I did it for the first time on THE IPCRESS FILE was because we had a script and we hated it. What we did was we shot from the beginning and we rewrote as we went."

When it comes to spy features, it makes sense to eventually encounter this film. It is an adaptation roughly based on The IPCRESS File, a 1962 novel written by Len Deighton, who had been inspired by a neighbor he once had named Anna Wolkoff, a daughter of a czarist admiral and also a spy that ended up being arrested, which Deighton (a young boy living in central London when World War II started) witnessed. Interestingly enough, the ensuing film would be produced by Harry Saltzman, who had went from producing stuff such as Look Back in Anger (1958) to being a partner in producing the first couple of James Bond films (incidentally, Deighton was initially hired to write From Russia with Love [1963] and had even travelled with the crew but was eventually replaced). The director was the Canadian Sidney J. Furie, who had started his career in his native Canada in 1957 (turning a planned CBC project into his debut feature with A Dangerous Age) before moving to England and gradually rising up the ranks of small-scale stuff in horror, drama and musicals (most notably with Cliff Richard). Apparently, Harry Saltzman did not like Furie in production and even once claimed editor Peter R. Hunt (also a Bond alumni) was mostly involved in direction (he wasn't big on certain angles utilized in certain shots, but Hunt backed Furie). The film screenplay was credited to Bill Canaway to James Doran, although apparently Lionel Davidson, Johanna Harwood, Lukas Heller and Ken Hughes delivered uncredited work; according to Caine, Furie took a copy of the script on the first day he was on set and set it on fire, which meant that the film was basically being re-written as they shot it. Deighton wrote five further novels involving Harry Palmer (he wasn't named in the books, but, well, go with it) until 1974; two of those books were turned into films (Funeral in Berlin [1966] was directed by Guy Hamilton while Billion Dollar Brain [1967] was directed by Ken Russell) to go with two "TV films" that all had Caine as the lead. In 2022, The Ipcress File was adapted again as a six-episode TV miniseries.

There are a handful of people familiar with the James Bond films here, such as production designer Ken Adam, editor Peter R. Hunt and composer John Barry, but it doesn't mean one is watching a pastiche. Instead, one has a neat and compact feature that has a wonderfully dry Caine. The results matter most in a grounded and cynical feature that clearly reflects well upon its era with a craftsman and a worthy cast and crew to make entertainment in the art of the mundane for elite paranoia. There is a smoothness to the production that you can feel through its 109-minute runtime that has style even in the mask of realism. Even for his second big role in a film, one just sees Caine and understands just how he could be a star just like that, because his habits are ones that we quickly grow to know and love that goes from disregard for authority to appreciating the fine art of cooking. His wit is drier than say, a certain quippy film icon of the time, but it oozes a certain type of charm within the perception that just never fails. Doleman and Green provide worthwhile contrast to Caine in the general stiff-lipped sense of bureaucracy and stone-wall nature that is more unnerving than it seems (of course Doleman would end up being the only recurring actor besides Caine in the trilogy of feature films). Lloyd is soothing in that elusive tête-à-tête between her and Caine. When you think about it, it really isn't so much about the plot (although Gatliff is pretty unnerving when it comes to the brainwashing stuff) as it is about the vibes that arise from a camera that has you view the action as if you were the one staking out the characters. The atmosphere (complete with seemingly underrated John Barry doing the music) is one that is hard to match in carefully composed fun. The patience taken to watch it play all the way through leads to plenty of reward for the viewer that seeks it out.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

On the Beach.

Review #1402: On the Beach.

Cast: 
Gregory Peck (Commander Dwight Towers), Ava Gardner (Moira Davidson), Fred Astaire (Julian Osborn), Anthony Perkins (Lieutenant Commander Peter Holmes), Donna Anderson (Mary Holmes), John Tate (Admiral Bridie), Harp McGuire (Lieutenant Sunderstrom), Lola Brooks (Lieutenant Hosgood), Ken Wayne (Lieutenant Benson), and Guy Doleman (Lieutenant Commander Farrel) Produced and Directed by Stanley Kramer (#139 - Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and #228 - Inherit the Wind)

Review: 
"I take a very reluctant and conservative view on what a single film can do in affecting our lives. I don't make films to stir the world. I am not conscious of a responsibility to society or even to my own social consciousness when I make a film. My motivation can be as simple as saying, gee, this would make an exciting picture."

Message films, with the right execution, can strike a chord with an audience. Stanley Kramer was a director-producer who liked to specialize in these type of films throughout his career in film. Kramer had written columns for his university paper and graduated with a business degree from New York University, and it was his zest for writing that led to a internship with 20th Century Fox (as opposed to his initial ambition for law), which led to a variety of small jobs around the Hollywood studios for over a decade, such as set furniture mover, writer-researcher, and film cutter. His plan to make his own independent production company was delayed due to Pearl Harbor, and Kramer served underr the Signal Corps to make training films. After the end of the war, he formed a partnership alongside writer Herbie Baker, publicist George Glass and producer Carl Foreman to form Screen Plays Inc. They set out to make films with stories they wanted to do that had something of value to say as per their personal taste without needing to rely on stars. Their attempts at producing independent films met with a few notable films such as Champion (1949), The Men (1950), and High Noon (1952). In 1951, Columbia Pictures signed Kramer and the company to a deal that would give them their own production unit within the studio that gave them free rein and increased budgets. It did not last the contracted five years, and Kramer felt that this one of the most dangerous moves of his career. In a three year partnership, he would produce films such as The Wild One (1953) and The Caine Mutiny (1954) before deciding to enter the foray of directing and producing with Not as a Stranger (1955). This was his fourth work, released between noted films The Defiant Ones (1958) and Inherit the Wind (1960), and it simultaneously premiered on all seven continents one week before Christmas Eve. Despite fair reviews, it was not a big hit with audiences, although it has found appreciation in later years.

Can you imagine what the world would look like after a massive event that affected people's lives and led to long-term consequences? Authors have written apocalyptic and post apocalyptic fiction for as long as people have been around on this Earth, with the modern age being no different in inspiring further looks into what a world would look like with disaster from nuclear fallout, or from something like disease or the environment. Nevil Shute wrote one such work on the apocalypse, writing his work in 1957 while residing in Australia (he also worked as an aeronautical engineer and pilot before his death in 1960). The novel has been turned into a film twice, with the other adaptation being a TV film in 2000. Shute found dissatisfaction with this adaptation when it came to certain aspects of the novel, particularly the romance between Peck and Gardner's characters being more pronounced than in the book when it came to the former's fidelity to his dead wife (Peck agreed with this privately). It certainly must have been an interesting film to view for the time (where this decade had seen war in Korea and continuing Cold War tension) - a bleak movie through and through, where blame is not given to any one side of the unseen war. While one is spared visual decay of vanquished people or even the effects of radiation on the survivors, the film manages to do well enough in maintaining itself in grim composure that makes one think about their future that could have been or the future that could be for what was the future of 1964, complete with filming in Australia. Peck handles himself with resolve in a mellow voice that can handle impending doom and conflicting feelings with care. Two actors playing against the type they were usually known for in film are femme fatale Gardner and song-and-dance Astaire, and each follow Peck fine, making light romance and guilt come out with some effectiveness. Perkins and Anderson give off a bit of intimacy and anxiety decently enough, although they don't stick out as much as they could when it comes to such a dreary quiet time. It is the sights and what one can see and doesn't see within the Australia landscape and beyond (such as a shot of the Golden Gate Bridge with no one present) that drives the film for 134 minutes with adequacy. It comes off with an urgency that warns for the future without becoming too much of a lecture to stand on its own as a film of oblivion that resonates still after over six decades since release.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

And now, an announcement for the month of May, comprised of 30 films.

Movie Night: Thunderball.

Review #335: Thunderball.

Cast
Sean Connery (James Bond), Adolfo Celi (Emilio Largo), Claudine Auger (Dominique "Domino" Derval), Luciana Paluzzi (Fiona Volpe), Rik Van Nutter (Felix Leiter), Bernard Lee (M), Guy Doleman (Count Lippe), Martine Beswick (Paula Caplan), Molly Peters (Patricia Fearing), Earl Cameron (Pinder), Paul Stassino (François Derval), Desmond Llewelyn (Q), Roland Culver (Foreign Secretary), and Lois Maxwell (Miss Moneypenny) Directed by Terence Young (#150 - Dr. No, #278 - From Russia With Love)

Review
Thunderball was the fourth Bond film, released a year after Goldfinger, and...it's that film after Goldfinger. That film was a good, if not great film with good action and an even better villain. In a way, that was the high point of the Connery era. But how is this film is the main question. And it's...alright. Connery does a decent job, slightly suave and slightly Bond. Auger is a good leading lady, having a personality different from the last three of the Connery films, which is usually the best way to go. And then there is the villain played by Adolfo Celi. When I first saw him I thought I would be calling him "Captain Hook's Cousin, Captain Eyepatch", but he does have some sort of villainy that while not being entirely great, he does have some usefulness. Van Nutter is good, being a good pair with Connery when on screen. The rest of the cast is fine, doing what most supporting cast in Bond films do. But what sets this film apart from other Bond films is the use of aquatic action (Not so subtly told in the opening credits), rubbery suits and all. Half the time it does feel inventive and the other half I can barely tell who's who. The scenery is nice and the plot is useful enough. Is it a let down? Not really, it's a fine film, with enjoyable moments and all.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.