Showing posts with label M. Emmet Walsh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label M. Emmet Walsh. Show all posts

August 31, 2024

At Long Last Love.

Review #2249: At Long Last Love.

Cast: 
Burt Reynolds (Michael Oliver Pritchard III), Cybill Shepherd (Brooke Carter), Madeline Kahn (Kitty O'Kelly), Duilio Del Prete (Johnny Spanish), Eileen Brennan (Elizabeth), John Hillerman (Rodney James), Mildred Natwick (Mabel Pritchard), and M. Emmet Walsh (Harold) Written, Directed and Produced by Peter Bogdanovich (#1000 - The Last Picture Show, #1475 - Mask, #2093 - Targets)

Review: 
Admittedly, a handful of films that were thought of as flops are really just because they fit the bill of something worth tearing down because of its star or director being, well, worth taking down a peg. In this case, Peter Bogdanovich might have been an easy target. He had made a tremendous debut feature in Targets (1968) after once being a stage actor, film essayist and critic. Sure, it wasn't a hit with audiences, but it was a damn good thriller. The Last Picture Show (1971) came out of the blue to rip-roaring success. His next film was a homage to screwball comedies in What's Up, Doc? (1972); Paper Moon (1973) was a road feature that adapted a play to pretty good acclaim. And then there was Daisy Miller (1974). The lavish period adaptation of the novella of the same name that Bogdanovich labeled as both "good" and "completely uncommercial" was not exactly a favorite at the time. At Long Last Love (1975) did not have the time or luck to change a perceived slump by Bogdanovich. He was inspired to make the film when he was given a book of song lyrics that had been done by Cole Porter by his then-girlfriend Cybill Shepherd (star of two of Bogdanovich's previous films). It was the first Bogdanovich written entirely by himself (after having co-written a few of his other ones) and it would be one where the actors would sing the song live, which is tough to do if one is not exactly in with dancing on step. It was rushed into theaters and torn apart enough to the point where Bogdanovich printed an open letter of apology. Reynolds stated his belief that the film "Not as bad as it was reviewed. What was reviewed was Cybill and Peter's relationship." Various versions of the film persisted over the years (with different scenes added or missing), which included a cut that wasn't even done by the director. Apparently, a studio editor named James Blakely (a Porter fan) had made an edit of the film (lasting 121 minutes) that honed to the shooting script that was similar to the first preview cut that found its way as the "default" used for streaming. Bogdanovich (having heard of the Netflix version and being delightfully surprised) acknowledged the edition and with a little bit of additions, a "Definitive Director's Version" came out in home media in 2013. But in general, one probably does have to take a little bit of effort to see the film more than other certain flops, particularly when compared to other Bogdanovich films.

Sure, the footwork and singing in certain areas is a bit curious to view for those familiar with musicals. Sure, it has an air of strange elegance that could only come from someone who pushed on making a "jukebox musical" of Cole Porter songs with a loose execution in, well, take your pick. Sure...I actually liked it. It is a playful meet-cute that is full of strange imperfections that seem quite amusing when packed in such a dazzling feature that is old fashioned and yet amusing. These are eccentric "different class" people that are seen doing things such as say, dropping glasses off buildings or casually parking cars with a thud on the lawn. They bumble and stumble in such casual effectiveness that could only come from someone who believed in the actors to basically be like the figurines that are seen to introduce and end the film in that wind-up fashion (complete with a look once described as "Black and white in color"). Reynolds glides through the film with such a casual aura that benefits the proceedings in the charm that arises in offbeat singing/dancing that seems more on the joke in stumbling neatness. Of course, I might be biases because, well, I like seeing Reynolds even in a strange movie like this. Shepherd might have been a lightning rod for criticism, but she doesn't do a terrible job here. Sure, she wavers in certain numbers, but she isn't exactly meant to be playing an angel anyway (goofy brat might be the word here). Del Prete (an Italian singer/songwriter/actor) is adequate, albeit mostly as a straight man (with the obvious qualities in hunky goofiness) to other odd qualities, at least when Kahn is right there to play up this frivolous foursome that really need someone to be there with them for those good times rather than melancholy. It is the support from Hillerman and Brennan in amusement that end up saving the film from dottering away, for which one can be grateful. There are worse ways to hear songs played out than this film, ones where they drone on and on or never really elevate the material, but At Long Last Love just happens to be lightly charming in a way that seems to be an out of its time curiosity that plays with the musical while not forgetting the interest that arises in its Porter jukebox for a chuckler that is about people who happen to sing rather than just a straight to the point singing film. On that note, it is a Bogdanovich movie worth looking into with a curious glance because of the clear delight he has in making a tribute to the old days that I'd affectionate without being beholden to doing everything just as one would expect it to be. It is the kind of odd duckling that belongs in the discussion for viewing not as a flop but as something to marvel as a director's vision that hits its mark.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Well, here we are with another theme August finished up. Fourteen reviews (one redux) saw a few surprises in the mix from theatrical interests such as Trap and fun times such as Showgirls. I've been trying to get into the spirit of viewing+reviewing movies with the proper amount of commitment that I hope has been maintained to usual expectations.

There was not quite enough time to consider more films to give "acknowledgement" for August, with a few shortlist misses being movies such as: Treasure Planet, Heartbeeps, 1941, City Heat, Quintet, Moment by Moment, and Staying Alive (the latter three have been thought of for Turkey Week before). The future is uncertain for August 2025, but I'm sure there will be a suitable "A" thing for next time around. I'll try to find some interesting films for September 2024 before, well, you know about October and November. See ya soon. 

April 28, 2024

Missing in Action.

Review #2202: Missing in Action.

Cast: 
Chuck Norris (Colonel James Braddock), M. Emmet Walsh (Jack "Tuck" Tucker), David Tress (Senator Maxwell Porter), Lenore Kasdorf (Ann Fitzgerald), Ernie Ortega (General Vinh), James Hong (General Tran), E. Erich Anderson (Masucci), and Pierrino Mascarino (Jacques) Directed by Joseph Zito.

Review: 
Much in the same way that a fruit can be cut several different ways, one can really do movies with similar subject matter with pretty different execution. If you remember, James Cameron was behind the original treatment for what became Rambo: First Blood Part II in May of 1985 (he had written it when waiting to start filming The Terminator), which, well, was an action film where Rambo went from being a "documenter of possible prisoners held by jailers" to "fuck 'em". Incidentally, earlier in the decade, Robert R. Garwood (a Private), among one of the last American POW from the Vietnam War (as captured in 1965 but one who did not return to America until 1979) faced a court martial after being accused of being a collaborator with the enemy that saw him stripped of his rank (he had claimed that American POWs were left behind in Vietnam). Even decades after the war, the Department of Defense lists "current numbers of Americans who are unaccounted for in Southeast Asia" at over a thousand. Anyway, Cameron's script led to inspiration (as one says) for the Cannon Group to see if they could do their own film involving war veterans and beat the Rambo film to the punch, which they did. In fact, they filmed two Missing in Action films, with the original plan to have the one directed by Lance Hool (which involved the POW days of the lead character) be released first before the rescue one...but the commercial prospects were found to be better with this film and so the other film was titled Missing in Action 2: The Beginning and released in March of 1985 (not long after the first one!) and somehow two months before the Rambo sequel. All of this is how the first film gets a screenplay and writing credit that has Arthur Silver, Larry Levinson and Steve Bing listed for characters, James Bruner for screenplay, and John Crowther and Lance Hool for story. 1988 saw the release of Braddock: Missing in Action III, which was considerably less successful.

Norris has stated that the film was one he made as a memorial for his younger brother Wieland, who died in combat in Vietnam. It was also the first film he did with the Cannon Group. This was the fifth film of Joseph Zito, who had directed the fourth (and intended final) film of the Friday the 13th series earlier in 1984, although his previous effort The Prowler (1981) has received far more interesting notice in later years. He did one further film with Norris in Invasion U.S.A. (1985). Imagine making a 100-minute movie with as little tension as possible and you have something that probably would fit right at home with keeping one eye open when trying to, say, paint. Norris seems to have settled into a Clint Eastwood impersonation that happens to do action with feet and blasting away, but it isn't particularly infused with even the slightest bit of charisma besides the minimum. The film somehow feels small in scale because by blasting away with faceless enemies (Hong doesn't even make it to the 45th minute but he does what the film needs before being disposed of) and having just Walsh with the semblance of energy, one just finds an average hollow film. Walsh is sly enough that being a sidekick character in his mid-forties is a hoot fitting enough to engage with. Well, I can say this much...it makes one realize that um, maybe I misjudged Good Guys Wear Black (1978) when it came to calling Norris one who sounded like an "instructional guidebook for using a power tool". This film at least drops the pretense of playing it for the thriller angle and goes straight for an action cheese fest. Sure, it lacks a true villain besides the nameless folks getting shot at, but one can at least get some sort of curiosity of seeing Norris playing opposite a character actor pro in Walsh (rest in peace) as opposed to trying to wedge in a romantic angle between Norris and Kasdorf (at least this one doesn't go like that aforementioned Good Guys film and explode a plane). I especially like how the ending is a dramatic build to...storming a building to show the truth. As a whole, it may have beaten First Blood Part II when it comes to POW rescue films, but it doesn't hold too much of a candle in overall execution, instead being an average film that lacks the final push to be anything other than the action film picked after the pile has nearly been finished.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

March 2, 2019

Raise the Titanic.


Review #1195: Raise the Titanic.

Cast: 
Jason Robards (Admiral James Sandecker), Richard Jordan (Dirk Pitt), David Selby (Dr. Gene Seagram), Anne Archer (Dana Archibald), Alec Guinness (John Bigalow), Bo Brundin (Captain Andre Prevlov), M. Emmet Walsh (Master Chief Vinnie Walker), J.D. Cannon (Captain Joe Burke), and Norman Bartold (Admiral Kemper) Directed by Jerry Jameson.

Review: 
What film can best be summed up by a quote from its producer other than this one: "It would have been cheaper to lower the Atlantic." With a budget of over $40 million (which would be roughly over $120 million in 2019) and an ultimate box office finish of $7 million, this was another of Lord Lew Grade's failures for the year of 1980, where production overruns and story re-writes doomed a film to fail beyond belief. The film is based off the novel Raise the Titanic! (1976) by Clive Cussler, the third book in his series of adventure books involving the character Dirk Pitt, for which he has currently written 24 of since 1973. Grade saw potential in Cussler's books to adapt to film and make a series much like with the James Bond films. The intent was to have Stanley Kramer as director, although he quit as pre-production began due to creative differences, with the brunt of the budget's spiraling being due to making models (alongside re-writes for the script); a fifty foot scale model was built for the climatic raising of the ship that required a 10 million-gallon tank to accompany its size. Larry McMurtry (writer of novels such as The Last Picture Show and Lonesome Dove) claimed to have worked on the screenplay alongside sixteen other writers, although he was the only one who did not petition for writing credit, although the final credits list Eric Hughes for story and the screenplay credit for Adam Kennedy.

As ridiculous as it may sound, the idea of making an adventure film set around raising the Titanic could have had potential, albeit one that would have to rely on charm and effects instead of tight logic to really work. Keep in mind, the Titanic was not proven to have been broken up into two pieces (as opposed to the theory that it simply sunk intact) until 1985. Unfortunately, the final product is not particularly interesting to watch, managing to squander its premise with plenty of padding surrounded by one pure highlight. Jordan doesn't spring too much interest as the main hero, perhaps in part because there really is nothing for him to go on in terms of personality. I suppose him and Selby are supposed to be an interesting pair to see interact and bicker with, too bad they don't really click well. Robards is okay. The actors besides him really seem to just say the lines very mildly. Honestly, the only one who seems interesting is Guinness, playing a survivor of the Titanic who exists just to say exposition about the mysterious person who just happened to put the "byzanium" in a vault before the ship sank. He's in the film for one scene, looking perfectly like someone waiting to cash a check, but at least it means he isn't stuck in the feature for very long. Archer has slightly more screen-time, yet her character (and her motivations for being in the plot) fade halfway through the film. There isn't even a real villain worth mentioning, and the only real menace in the entire film is boredom over the water scenes, which don't really give the film much in terms of spectacle for 114 minutes of run-time.

Comparing it to Grade's other boondoggle in Saturn 3 is amusing, since both films have such strange differences yet still manage to both be ridiculous in their own ways due to their cast, story and use of effects. In this regard, the earlier film is somehow a bit better, perhaps because it doesn't feel so long. Undeniably, the only shining part of the film is composer John Barry (known for his work on Born Free and the James Bond films) and his score, which is entertainingly majestic, fitting quite well for the film, particularly when dealing with the climatic raising. In a less flawed film (i.e. one that works better), the scene of the Titanic rising the depths would prove to make the film ultimately feel worth it, as it is a nice sequence even after over three decades since its release. Understandably, Cussler was not happy with the results of the film, saying that they had turned the plot into a hollow shell of the original along with not liking the cast. He refused to give permission for any more film adaptations of his books, with the only other film adaptation of his books in Sahara (2005) also being a tremendous failure with audiences. In any case, this is a strangely terrible flick, being occasionally watchable but also being something that doesn't quite elevate itself to serviceable entertainment, unless one likes to watch an adventure film sink itself.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

March 21, 2018

Blood Simple.


Review #1063: Blood Simple.

Cast: 
John Getz (Ray), Frances McDormand (Abby), Dan Hedaya (Julian Marty), M. Emmet Walsh (Private detective Lorren Visser), Samm-Art Williams (Meurice), and Deborah Neumann (Debra) Directed by Joel Coen and Ethan Coen (#659 - True Grit (2010) and #765 - Fargo)

Review: 
Blood Simple was the directorial debut of the Coen brothers (although due to guild rules Joel was the one credited as director while Ethan was credited as producer, with both also writing the film), with future director Barry Sonnenfield serving as cinematographer. The film has its edge of darkness and amusing nature, with a fine balance that never comes off as inconsistent nor endless. It's a twisted film that also serves as a good neo-noir that pulls its devious strings of paranoia and guilt with characters that certainly accompany the movie in their own particular ways. Easily the best part of the film is Walsh, who manages to elevate the character onto a sort of legal edge that can be both ruthless and amusing - never coming off as too much of one thing while also being an interesting person to watch on-screen. Getz and McDormand prove to be a fairly decent pairing, being adept at their situations that make this escape of a romance seem right and not out-of-place. Hedaya plays his slimy role comfortably well, doing his role with a sort of relish and emotion that seems right at home for a film like this. The film certainly has a good look to it, having a feel to it that is important to making such a tawdry tale come alive without being glitzy nor overtly muddled. The climax is tense and quick to the point, with a final line that certainly closes the film out on the right note. It is clear that the Coen brothers had a good vision that they wanted to tell on-screen, and they certainly achieve that, weaving a film that succeeds as a piece of noir that manages to hit more times than it misses. They manage to build tension without suffocating the audience in too many cuts or being too long, with this film lasting 96 minutes (with a director's cut that tightens the editing along with shortening certain shots that runs slightly shorter), which feels just right for this movie. Ultimately, this is a fine piece of film-making from the Coen brothers that certainly shows a kind of ingenuity and flair that makes for good entertainment if you're in the mindset for it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

July 11, 2017

Fletch.


Review #967: Fletch.

Cast:
Chevy Chase (Irwin M. "Fletch" Fletcher), Joe Don Baker (Chief Jerry Karlin), Dana Wheeler-Nicholson (Gail Stanwyk), Richard Libertini (Frank Walker), Geena Davis (Larry), Larry "Flash" Jenkins (Gummy), Tim Matheson (Alan Stanwyk), M. Emmet Walsh (Dr. Joseph Dolan), George Wendt (Fat Sam), Kenneth Mars (Stanton Boyd), George Wyner (Marvin Gillet), and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (Himself) Directed by Michael Ritchie (#616 - The Bad News Bears)

Review:
Based off the novel of the same name by Gregory Mcdonald, Fletch is certainly one of those films that seems deserving of a cult following, owing in part to a variety of factors, the first starting with Chase himself. What is it about his performance that works so well? Perhaps it's because he actually seems perfectly as ease with the role that he's playing, where he doesn't look like he's just doing a job, with the ad-libbing being quite effective while not becoming ridiculously tedious. One of my favorite scenes is the scene where he is confronted by Baker's character and he gets pushed into a wall with framed pictures, noting one of them has a picture with Tommy Lasorda, who he notes he hates while punching the photo (I don't blame him, honestly). There are quite a few other good scenes involving wigs and disguises, and they are also pretty quirky along with amusing. Some could find Chase's schtick a bit tiresome, but I found it to go well with a movie that never aspires to be too conventional nor too ridiculous in its approach, with the quick wit feeling just right for the role. It's no wonder that he has said this is his all-time favorite personal role, because there's just something easy and natural about Fletch that works neatly, with that deadpan manner being quite entertaining for me. The rest of the cast is also quite enjoyable, always managing to hit the right chords of amusement and entertainment; Baker and Matheson are fairly decent adversaries, Chase has some decent chemistry with Wheeler-Nicholson, while Libertini and Davis are both fine standouts in the newsroom scenes. This is a fairly crafted thriller, managing to have the right kind of action and mystery that makes for some good quality entertainment that deserves the following it has.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

September 14, 2013

Movie Night: Wild Wild West.


Review #454: Wild Wild West.

Cast
Will Smith (James T. West), Kevin Kline (Artemus Gordon and Ulysses S. Grant), Kenneth Branagh (Dr. Arliss Loveless), Salma Hayek (Rita Escobar), M. Emmet Walsh (Coleman), Bai Ling (Miss East), Ted Levine (General "Bloodbath" McGrath), Frederique van der Wal (Amazonia), Musetta Vander (Munitia), Sofia Eng (Miss Lippenrieder), and Garcelle Beauvais-Nilon (Belle) Directed by Barry Sonnenfeld (#005 - Get Shorty, #077 - The Addams Family, #078 - Addams Family Values, #211 - Men in Black, and #212 - Men in Black II)

Review
This was adapted off the classic television show The Wild Wild West, though judging by how they apparently changed significant aspects of the film, I'd cross out the word adapted. Will Smith is usually charming, even in the cliched Independence Day, but not even he can give any life to the way his character is portrayed. Kevin Kline is okay at best, but to say this would be a step down from A Fish Called Wanda is an understatement. Kenneth Branagh...playing an southern scientist with no legs was odd enough...but the thing that takes the cake is...the spider. Yes, a Mechanical Spider, in the Wild West. You might wonder how it could feasibly be made, I'm just wondering how no one ever mentions seeing it after the film's end, though I suppose Grant wouldn't want "I saw a giant spider, while opening a railroad. No I am not insane." being the last line of his memoirs. The effects have more merit then the story and it's a bland  stand still of a film, disappointing western buffs, action buffs, and of course, Wild Wild West fans.

The film was terrible enough to inspire Robert Conrad (the star of the original show) to accept the film's five Golden Raspberry Awards in person, and I can't blame him for doing that. In conclusion, the best way to sum this film is one quote: "I made a mistake on Wild Wild West. That could have been better. ... No, it's funny because I could never understand why Robert Conrad was so upset with Wild Wild West. And now I get it. It's like, 'That's my baby! I put my blood, sweat and tears into that!' So I'm going to apologize to Mr. Conrad for that because I didn't realize. I was young and immature. So much pain and joy went into The Fresh Prince that my greatest desire would be that it's left alone." And when that comes from Will Smith himself, that just makes this sad film even worse. Avoid this film like it's the plague.

Overall, I give it 2 out of 10 stars.

September 21, 2012

Movie Night: Back to School.



Review #245: Back to School.

Cast
Rodney Dangerfield (Thornton Melon), Sally Kellerman (Dr. Diane Turner), Burt Young (Lou), Keith Gordon (Jason Melon), Robert Downey, Jr. (Derek Lutz), Paxton Whitehead (Dr. Phillip Barbay), Sam Kinison (Professor Terguson), Terry Farrell (Valerie Desmond), and M. Emmet Walsh (Coach Turnbull) Directed by Alan Metter.

Review
It firgure to come back from a six day hiatus of not reviewing with a film title like this (and if you want to add to it, a few hours ago I was in school, so there). Last time I reviewed Rodney Dangerfield was in Caddyshack (#208), and I forgot to menton his role in making that film and this film a success. The way he pops out at you (especially with the eyes) gives you a sense of confusion that turns to gigles soon after. While the plot may not be a sight for the ages, the film is at least useful in its own right. Dangerfield truly was good at what he did. Countdown to 250: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

December 19, 2011

Movie Night: Christmas with the Kranks.


Review #082: Christmas with the Kranks.

Cast
Tim Allen (Luther Krank), Jamie Lee Curtis (Nora Krank), Dan Aykroyd (Vic Frohmeyer), Julie Gonzalo (Blair Krank), M. Emmet Walsh (Walt Scheel), Elizabeth Franz (Bev Scheel), Erik Per Sullivan (Spike Frohmeyer), and Cheech Marin (Officer Salino) Directed by Joe Roth.

Review
It feels...not fitting for this film review to be the season finale of Season 1 of reviewing films here on Movie Night. Oddly enough, this film was based off a John Grisham novel, Skipping Christmas. Anyway, this film tries to sell us on the Kranks, and I personally feel the film makes the neighbors a little too crazy, as they just don't leave the Kranks alone. It's more fun to see the neighbors losing then to see the actual ending (The last few minutes tries to make Luther look like a jerk, who (of course) warms up but it feels like a cliche, which is full in this film) The film has decent acting, as Curtis and Allen work well together. But the film feels so...Off. It tries so hard to work everything up to be funny and heartwarming, yet the film just doesn't fall into place. You never feel like you should care at all about why they are skipping Christmas, because you just can't care about any of this. No one comes off as sympathetic, because no one seems natural in their motivations.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.