The Friends of Eddie Coyle.

Review #2063: The Friends of Eddie Coyle.

Cast: 

Robert Mitchum (Eddie Coyle), Peter Boyle (Dillon), Richard Jordan (Dave Foley), Steven Keats (Jackie Brown), Alex Rocco (Jimmy Scalise), Joe Santos (Artie Van), Mitchell Ryan (Waters), Helena Carroll (Sheila Coyle), Jack Kehoe (The Beard), Margaret Ladd (Andrea), and James Tolkan (The Man's Contact Man) Directed by Peter Yates (#506 - Bullitt, #927 - Krull, and #1197 - The Deep)

Review: 

In 1970, George V. Higgins saw his first novel in The Friends of Eddie Coyle become published. Formerly, he had served his native Commonwealth of Massachusetts as a deputy assistant attorney general alongside as an Assistant United State Attorney. Higgins dabbled as a novelist when not involved in private practice in law that distilled the words that he would hear from gangsters and made them the kind of thing you would hear in a great potboiler. Better writers than me can lend you some context within the scene of Boston and gangs (as presented here). It made some sense to have Peter Yates as director, as his third effort with Robbery (1967) had given him a chance to direct Bullitt (1968), a movie packed with a car chase so notable that I'm sure those who view it now will talk about with fanfare; Yates directed a variety of genres besides crime of course, but, well, we are here to talk about a film that was underappreciated by audiences in its time. This is the first of only two adaptations of a Higgins book, with the only other one being Killing Them Softly (2012). Paul Monash wrote the screenplay while serving as producer. Of the films that Yates made, he stated that the three films he was most proud of was Breaking Away (1979), The Dresser (1983), and this film.

When it comes to the grimy classics of a decade as ideal for grimy films as the 1970s were, you can't really go wrong with this one. Life is hard, but it sure is harder if you are stupid, as is reflected within the dialogue that is told with such dedicated efficiency. Before you get to films of the region such as The Town (2010) or The Departed (2006), you might want to consider this one when it comes to looking at the people that dwell in the corners of crime. This isn't merely just the big-timers or two-bit hustlers, it involves folks wrapped firmly in the middle, the kind that are referred to with irony as having friends. It rewards those who value character presences such as Boyle or Keats to serve in the lines behind the immeasurable Mitchum. One of the cast members actually was formerly involved in organized crime within the East in Rocco, who was linked loosely with the Winter Hill Gang in the Boston area that had seen him accused of being involved in an assault on a diner owner. Apparently, when Mitchum had asked to see a local gangster for research, Rocco tapped him to see Howie Winter, who was still part of the gang. Of course, Mitchum having an accent that has been looked upon favorably among select folks in the region is not a surprise given the veteran actor's immense talent that relies heavily on seeing this one man in the time he has remaining in such a weary existence that knows his strengths and weaknesses when it comes to the life put upon him. This includes moments spent with Carroll to remind oneself of just what is really at stake when it comes to playing information or not (it isn't a movie built on overt violence, basically). Only Mitchum could waltz right into a role like this with such natural skill that it seems that nobody could have done it better. He may be a hustler of guns, but he is our hustler and his dilemma matters more than anything to us, particularly since we know the game that comes in Boyle, who provides such a worthy mobster presence in subtlety on the level of a snake. Jordan is the leading authority (with pretty good results) to watch upon these distinct elements of crime that is thoroughly unglamourous. Violent or not, you know what kind of underworld you are in with this film in folks such as Keats and Rocco that obviously accomplish what is required in the shades of laying out plans in their own scope that can only go the way things go with the unending world of crime moving on with or without the best laid-out plans working right. The robbing aren't the most important part, because it is a slow boiler all about seeing what happens to Mitchum as a battle of pride, one that works out to effective drama with no sense of false note moral by its end. In that sense, it is a worthwhile crime film wrapped firmly in its Boston surroundings for a worthwhile time of grime. Bleak and unflinching, it stands worthy of its time rather than one that flinches away.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Grosse Pointe Blank.

Review #1859: Grosse Pointe Blank.

Cast: 

John Cusack (Martin Q. Blank), Minnie Driver (Debi Newberry), Alan Arkin (Dr. Oatman), Dan Aykroyd (Grocer), Joan Cusack (Marcella), Jeremy Piven (Paul Spericki), Hank Azaria (CIA Agent Steven Lardner), Barbara Harris (Mary Blank), Mitchell Ryan (Mr. Bart Newberry), K. Todd Freeman (CIA Agent Kenneth McCullers), Michael Cudlitz (Bob Destepello), and Benny Urquidez (Felix La Poubelle) Directed by George Armitage.

Review: 

Yes, this was a movie script that was first written by a man who received an invitation to their 10th high school reunion. Michigan native Tom Jankiewicz worked as both an advertising copywriter, a substitute teacher and cashier when he was developing a script that would become this movie, which he started in 1991, which had a variety of characters that were based on people he had known (no, not the lead character). The script, when finally picked up for production, would feature re-writes that saw three people credited alongside Jankiewicz in the final version: John Cusack, Steve Pink, and D.V. DeVincentis. In the end, this was the only feature script that Jankiewicz would see made into a film, although he did serve as a script doctor on a handful of scripts while working primarily as an advertising copywriter and news-writer. In 2013, while participating in a question-and-answer session with college students about the movie, he collapsed and died; he was 49. Now, a film does need a solid director, which is where George Armitage comes into the picture, since Cusack sent him a copy of the script to see if he was interested. Born in Hartford with a move to California as a teenager, he started the road to filmmaking as a film fanatic who happened to study political science and economics at UCLA before being offered a mail room job at 20th Century Fox. He would do work for the studio on television while writing his first scripts in the mail room, most notably with Peyton Place. It was Roger Corman, who was there at the studio to make The St. Valentine's Day Massacre (1967), that helped inspire Armitage on his way to become a filmmaker, particularly his style of letting the actors improvise while getting his day in of shooting; he would write Gas-s-s-s (1970) for Corman (while also serving as an associate producer), and he was impressed enough to have Armitage direct his first film with Private Duty Nurses (1971). Armitage, when presented the script by the four writers, found himself having to guide them to cut down the script in pre-production in order to get it right for shooting (in a sense, he was doing un-credited script work, although he did not want to deal with the Writers Guild and their way of handling credits). It was shot three ways: the written version, a mildly understated version, and an over-the-top version, with the latter being generally utilized to go alongside actor improvisation. This was the fifth feature he directed in his career.

It's funny how you can make a movie about a morally flexible assassin trying to not satisfy their urge and end up having to do so anyway for a solid and clever movie, one that manages to get the finer points of what it really means to try and go home again. It is a coherent black comedy that rewards its viewer with solid characterization in the art of detachment and wry behavior that happens to also have a soundtrack by a member of the Clash. The strength comes from Cusack, wrapped in curiosity and well-placed timing in a character role that requires someone who can eke out something worthwhile in a mess of a character that isn't simply just a calm and collected mercenary. It all comes with the eyes of watching someone who has seen the other side of life and wants to come back, with a little bit of shooting on the side. Driver makes up the other part of the captivating chemistry that comes with the movie in passionate cynicism that has tried to re-invent themselves again and again only to find frustration and hesitancy, complete with sharing a kiss with Cusack from the get-go only to throw a mic on him to do on-the-air blasting in ten years of irritation. Of course, the other members of the cast lend a hand in curious charm, whether that involves Cusack and Cusack sharing brief scenes together or on the phone that matches stoic and chipper attitudes. Arkin makes a reluctant pairing with Cusack that results in a few good moments in the art of attempted conventional therapy. Aykroyd is enjoyably deranged here, making for a quality (union man) ham that makes a quality contrast to Cusack without overstepping him. The setup to get to the climax might be a bit convenient, but one could also find a variety of situations to be a series of convivences and coincidences, which it is really a dandy way of saying that some things are just fun enough to go with things. The 107 minute run-time makes for a pleasant breeze, one that carries its time back home with memories and long-gone people with select moments of action, most notably with a locker-room fight that is executed effectively. As a whole, Armitage and company cultivated a movie with plenty of lasting appeal that has not diminished in the 25 years that have followed the release of this film, one with capable wit and timing from its characters that make it a lingering classic worth checking out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

High Plains Drifter.

Review #1831: High Plains Drifter.

Cast: 

Clint Eastwood (The Stranger), Verna Bloom (Sarah Belding), Mariana Hill (Callie Travers), Billy Curtis (Mordecai), Mitchell Ryan (Dave Drake), Jack Ging (Morgan Allen), Stefan Gierasch (Mayor Jason Hobart), Ted Hartley (Lewis Belding), Geoffrey Lewis (Stacey Bridges), Dan Vadis (Dan Carlin), Anthony James (Cole Carlin), Walter Barnes (Sheriff Sam Shaw), Paul Brinegar (Lutie Naylor), Richard Bull (Asa Goodwin), Robert Donner (Preacher), John Hillerman (Bootmaker), John Quade (Freight Wagon Operator), and Buddy Van Horn (Marshal Jim Duncan) Directed by Clint Eastwood (#1252 - Space Cowboys, #1310 - Million Dollar Baby, #1476 - Pale Rider, #1501 - Unforgiven, #1550 - Gran Torino, #1638 - Bird, #1757 - Sudden Impact)

Review: 

"The townspeople did not represent the true spirit of the American pioneer, the spirit that made America great." 

It's interesting to consider the reactions one can have over a Western that dared to do something different with the genre, if only because not many Westerns get criticized by a Western icon - because that quote above is by John Wayne, referring to this feature film, which was the first Western directed by Clint Eastwood (apparently, he had sent a letter to Wayne after this film was released to perhaps star together on a film - go figure). This was his second feature, with the first having been Play Misty for Me (1971), and Eastwood would end up directing a total of six features in the 1970s (all but one featured him as star). Of course, Eastwood had plenty of time to incorporate his vision of the Western hero with six seasons of Rawhide and stardom in Sergio Leone's "Man with No Name" trilogy around him. It wasn't even the first starring feature of his to feature a lead character dedicated to serving some sort of retribution to others that had brought upon him, as could be evidenced by Hang 'Em High (1968). Eastwood's influences in Don Siegel and Sergio Leone prove apparent here, probably helped by the fact that Eastwood included their names on gravestones in the film. The film was evidently inspired by a murder in 1964 of Kitty Genovese, who reporters had said numerous people heard or saw the crime from their apartment building but did nothing (of course, this report was later found to be highly inaccurate). Ernest Tidyman, who had won an Academy Award for his work on The French Connection (1971), wrote the screenplay, although Dean Riesner (a writer on numerous Eastwood films) provided key re-writes.

It's too bad that Wayne thought there was some sort of disagreeable element to making a portrayal of the Old West that differed from what had been seen in dozens of films before it (perhaps he saw something in this film that reminded him of High Noon (1952) when it comes to examining one's conscience, since Wayne also disliked that movie). Well, at least the ones before The Wild Bunch (1969), anyway, because heaven knows the genre has only managed to have one or two highlights in the next couple of decades, and High Plains Drifter is probably one to spotlight for the 1970s, paranoia and all. I welcome any kind of movie that has interest in showing the fear of a town in what they know about themselves, where trying to teach a town courage ends up exposing a lack of moral courage from before. Of course, this is a movie that makes itself starkly different from other films with its hero in the first 25 minutes, so there is that to consider. Eastwood has made an effective film here, one filled with iconoclastic spirit that points the mirror firmly at oneself when it comes to showing conscience and justice. It isn't surprising that the script proposal presented to Eastwood was offbeat enough for him to like it, because it is a lead role that continues what Eastwood liked to do best: the less one says, the stronger one becomes in the imagination of the audience. This results in an efficient production and performance, one that maneuvers his way through with raw enigmatic energy; interestingly, the original script had him as the brother of a marshal, but this was changed to something that could lend itself to discussion. The rest of the cast follows along with worthy reflection, most notably with Curtis. While most of the folks here are representations of the ooze of the morals in town, Curtis is different even when presented as a yes-man to the folks around him, if only because of his eyes, ones that have seen pain despite plenty of friendliness to go around. Bloom is the only other one with a semblance of conscience here, one that eventually festers to the surface that results in a few interesting moments shared with Eastwood, while Hill represents the other side of feminine influence in the town of alleged morals with proper wiles. Ryan is the other highlight among the smarmy folks, one who serves as the ideal conniving presence without having to chew scenery to do so, with the others following along in that regard. Lewis, Vadis, and James do well as the adversaries in simple ruthlessness without needing to see more than what is needed. If you think about it, Pale Rider (1985) is the cousin to this feature when it comes to long & tall mysterious strangers arising from somewhere in a small town, but I think High Plains Drifter is slightly better, if only because it has a jagged edge of humor and allegory that makes its result all the more whole, one that utilizes its 105 minute run-time for gratifying effect in haunting display, complete with a Dee Barton music score to generate a first-rate Western. It isn't perfect, but it makes a worthy first impression when looking on the career of Clint Eastwood - the star and director.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Note: This one was for Dad.

Magnum Force.

Review #1135: Magnum Force.

Cast: 
Clint Eastwood (Inspector Harry Callahan), Hal Holbrook (Lt. Neil Briggs), David Soul (Officer John Davis), Tim Matheson (Officer Phil Sweet), Kip Niven (Officer Alan "Red" Astrachan), Robert Urich (Officer Mike Grimes), Felton Perry (Inspector Earlington "Early" Smith), Mitchell Ryan (Officer Charlie McCoy), Bob McClurg (the Cab Driver), and John Mitchum (Inspector Frank DiGiorgio) Directed by Ted Post (#518 - Hang 'Em High and #662 - Beneath the Planet of the Apes)

Review: 
The original Dirty Harry was a great success as an action crime thriller upon release in 1971, having a great combination of talent and style to it, from Don Siegel as director to a screenplay written by Harry Julian Fink, R.M. Fink & Dean Riesner, with un-credited work from John Milius. This time around, the director is Ted Post, who had directed numerous television programs such as Rawhide (also starring Clint Eastwood) and The Twilight Zone along with a few feature films, with Milius doing the story and co-writing the screenplay with Michael Cimino (co-writer of the screenplay for Silent Running a year prior). It should be noted that there had been a draft for the original film written by Terrence Malick that had a vigilante who hunted wealthy criminals who had gotten free of justice, which certainly has a bit of similarity with the story that Milius came up with for the sequel - albeit with motorcycle cops. The original film certainly attracted attention (and controversy) with the way it portrayed its loose cannon main character and how he did business, but the movie was certainly a popular one due to how it reflected the time it was made. In any case, the sequel tries to follow that up with something fresh, with the villain being people more rogue than him. For the most part, Magnum Force does a fine job in generating entertainment and thrills enough to make for a decent sequel, although it certainly has its limitations. Eastwood is as tough and grizzled as ever, which certainly leads to a bunch of effective sequences, such as the one involving a pistol championship between the cops or a scene with the adversaries and Eastwood stating their differences. Holbrook does a fine job with the role, managing to not fall under the radar while providing a fair contrast between his character and the main with how they treat the system - made true with the last half. Soul and the other three cops are okay, but they pale when compared to the villain from the original, particularly since they feel a bit more disposable and not as creepy this time around - for better or worse. Perry makes an fair impression when with Eastwood as partners, for the most part. Ryan does okay with the raw bit of time he has on screen. The film certainly feels a bit long at 124 minutes (as compared to the original being 102 minutes), and it is likely due to occasional lulls in the middle. The climax does fine with helping the film end without stumbling too much, but it doesn't seem to have the kind of punch that stands out amongst other action thrillers. Milius wasn't a particular fan of the film, describing it as one he did not like much, saying "They changed a lot of things in a cheap and distasteful manner. The whole ending is wrong, it wasn't mine at all. All movies had a motorcycle or car chase at the time — except Westerns." the film certainly had its troubles, with Post and Eastwood having disagreements over how the film should be done, which led to a falling out. In any case, There certainly is a good amount of action that will satisfy people enough without being too brutal or too out of place. I can't say that this is a great film by any means, but it is at least fair entertainment and a fair sequel.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers.

Review #478: Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers.

Cast
Donald Pleasence (Dr. Sam Loomis), Paul Rudd (Tommy Doyle), Marianne Hagan (Kara Strode), Devin Gardner (Danny Strode), J.C. Brandy (Jamie Lloyd), Mitchell Ryan (Dr. Wynn), Kim Darby (Debra Strode), Bradford English (John Strode), and George P. Wilbur (Michael Myers) Directed by Joe Chappelle.

Review
In honor of Halloween, I've decided to close out the second phase of the Halloween franchise with...this film. Six years after the lame cliffhanger that Halloween 5 delivered, a sequel was made, taking a cliche name for a horror film (Or a Pink Panther film), and...not adding a number to the film, presumably to not make the idea of a 6th film in an already stretched beyond belief franchise sound even more ridiculous (However that title of silliness goes to Friday the 13th) then it already is. The first notable aspect is the replacement of Danielle Harris with J.C. Brandy, who while not being a bad replacement, isn't as good, though it is kind of disappointing that Jamie, a character we've rooted for the last two films, dies in the beginning, without much struggle. The film had gone through 6 years of legal rights issues, and then there was one more thing: The extensive re-editing. The original cut of the film (Which is uniquely, but strangely called The Producer's Cut) was massively re-edited, apparently due to negative reaction to the original ending. And I'm not gonna lie, I've at least seen the original ending. Spoiler alert, but...it's a lame one. You wanna know what it is?

So the way to stop Myers in the producer's cut is...put a bunch of stones in a circle, which stops him indefinitely, only the reveal that Myers was actually Dr. Wynn, with Myers as Wynn. And Loomis is selected to be the new cult leader.

Due to middling reaction and Pleasence's death, new scenes would be filmed, which apparently cuts much of the plot line, replacing it with more horror scenes. The film drudges along, introducing characters, later killing most of them off, basically just setting up people to die, which is strange (I know it isn't, but let's pretend), but oh well. Pleasence is back one final time, doing as well as he's done before, this sadly being his final film and all. Paul Rudd (yes, that Paul Rudd) is...okay, even if his performance seems to be to just have one "creepy" look and monotone voice. The film seems to try to connect to the first film, what with Tommy Doyle, Dr. Wynn (You know, that guy with one scene in the first film..Hell, I almost forgot who he was), and...the Myers house. So the Strodes (who adopted Laurie, who was Michael's sister), are now living in the Myers house, all those years later. Why live in a house where death and terror happened to your adopted daughter and numerous others is beyond me. I guess the Strodes got the house at a cheap price, the prices were essentially slashed, an awful pun. Loomis is sadly not much in the final 30 minutes, as the ending of this film seems to imply that Michael can be beat by a lead pipe and corrosive. That and...Loomis screams for what reason after pulling off his mask? This is a film plagued by an extensive behind the scenes editing, mediocre-to-lame acting, story lines like Danny Strode's voices in his head going nowhere, and this...is an awful way to continue the franchise. The scares and blood are okay, but that's not enough to save the film. I'd stick to better films, anything else would probably be better, but oh well. Happy Halloween.

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Lethal Weapon.

Review #355: Lethal Weapon.

Cast
Mel Gibson (Martin Riggs), Danny Glover (Roger Murtaugh), Gary Busey (Mr. Joshua), Mitchell Ryan (Peter McAllister), Tom Atkins (Michael Hunsaker), Darlene Love (Trish Murtaugh), Jackie Swanson (Amanda Hunsaker), Traci Wolfe (Rianne Murtaugh), Damon Hines (Nick Murtaugh), and Ebonie Smith (Carrie Murtaugh) Directed by Richard Donner (#075 - Scrooged)

Review
This has a lot going for it, especially with the two main characters and the villain. Gibson and Glover work especially well, as a duo for some laughs and as a double team, which is magnified by the action. Oddly enough, Gary Busey does a fine job as...a villain. Last I reviewed him he was Buddy Holly, so its a bit of a change. But it works. The rest of the cast is good as well, keeping the pace going. The film manages to have some gags that do manage to not get in the way of the action. It's a strange, but good feeling. The story is fine, and the directing is effective. After all these years and some sequels, this hangs well, managing to live on and on. I'm not getting too old for this stuff...

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.