The Mad Magician

Review #2296: The Mad Magician.

Cast: 

Vincent Price (Don Gallico / Gallico the Great), Mary Murphy (Karen Lee), Eva Gabor (Claire Ormond), John Emery (The Great Rinaldi), Donald Randolph (Ross Ormond), Lenita Lane (Alice Prentiss), Patrick O'Neal (Police Detective Lt. Alan Bruce), and Jay Novello (Frank Prentiss) Directed by John Brahm.

Review:

Sure, you might have heard of a 1950s horror film with "3D Thrills" starring Vincent Price...with House of Wax (1953). Columbia Pictures wanted to join in on the fun of 3D and employed the sane producer (Bryan Foy) and the same writer from that film in Crane Wilbur, who had gone from acting in the silent era to writing in his own right, which started with the 1922 play The Monster (which itself was turned into a film in 1925); he wrote (and directed) for a variety of genres from noir to horror, which included The Amazing Mr. X (1948). This was the second of three films with Wilbur and Price, with the next one being The Bat (1959). Up until that point, Price was getting lagged in noirs and adventure films, albeit not so much as the leading man (let's just put aside that first contribution to horror with The Invisible Man Returns at the very early part of his career in 1940). But Magician was the second of the eventual run that would come from Price in horror by the time the decade was over. This was directed by John Brahm as he was winding down his directing career. The German-born actor-turned-director had left his native country with the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s, eventually seeing him settle in America. He was a steady director for three decades (he directed the second remake of The Lodger) before adding television to his repetoire in the 1950s (he directed 12 episodes of The Twilight Zone, perhaps most famously starting with "Time Enough at Last"); he directed four features after Magician, with Hot Rods to Hell (1967) being his last prior to his death in 1982 at the age of 89.

Loosely set around the 1890s, what we have is a decent movie that isn't quite at the level of future Price films in devilish interest for what kind of madcap stuff could happen next, but he at least manages to make things work in a cut-rate 73-minute feature. Anyway, here's the gambit: a wannabee magician finds that the only way to get out of people trying to stop him from performing finds that murder is a handy tool. You do get to see a bit of stage magic when it comes to winding up how one would accomplish the act of severed heads or incineration for a curious audience. The plot is a bit out there, made clearest with the landlord character played by Lane, who just happens to be a writer for murder mysteries that surely won't come to play. The disguise parts (yes, in addition to would-be magic making, he also does disguises) is also pretty amusing. The body-count is more about what is implied in gruesomeness than actually seen (just your average stuff like having a head sawn off, death by strangling, and incineration), but it moves at a leisurely pace that leaves the viewer willing to accept at least some of its maneuvering. Price makes for a maniacally useful showman that we can follow with up to a point when it comes to genre-savvy viewers that like to see him play opposite a few weirdos and do-gooders in the mix. Murphy and O'Neal may be ordinary (fingerprint curiosity from the latter notwithstanding), but an average film with quiet faces besides the one we inquire to see is serviceable, while Gabor-Emery-Randolph make for quality fall-guys in such short time (take note of the fact that Price likes to impersonate the latter a few times when it comes to doing stuff). The climax is about on part with Wax the most, but it ultimately is serviceable enough to provide some average charm that might prove worth it for those who've been to the well of films of its ilk, genre, star, or otherwise. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Under Siege.

Review #1877: Under Siege.

Cast: 

Steven Seagal (Chief Petty Officer Casey Ryback), Tommy Lee Jones (William Strannix), Gary Busey (Commander Peter Krill), Erika Eleniak (Jordan Tate), Colm Meaney (Daumer), Patrick O'Neal (Captain J.T. Adams), Andy Romano (Admiral Bates), Dale Dye (Captain Nick Garza), Nick Mancuso (Tom Breaker), Damian Chapa (Tackman), Tom Wood (Private Nash), Troy Evans (Granger), Dennis Lipscomb (Trenton), Bernie Casey (Commander Harris), Glenn Morshower (Ensign Taylor), and Raymond Cruz (Ramirez) Directed by Andrew Davis (#176 - The Fugitive and #187 - Holes)

Review: 

“Most people are surprised that the film is as sophisticated as it is. It appeals to people who have a point of view about nuclear weapons and the story thrusts you into an incredible situation that is not far-fetched.” - Andrew Davis

Admittedly, the sentence "A movie considered to be one of the best with Steven Seagal" is not exactly a big selling phrase in the realm of picking out action movies. This was the fifth film for an actor that in some ways looks and sounds like what would happen if a Soldier of Fortune ad came to life, one that you may remember had gone from stunt coordinator to starring in Above the Law (1988), which had been directed by Andrew Davis, who had only been known as an action director because of Code of Silence (1985). Davis would get to work with Jones again after their collaboration on The Package (1989). The writer for Under Siege was J. F. Lawton (a former member of the Coast Guard Reserve), who wrote it as a spec script named Dreadnought, which evidently was written with a big budget in mind before it got scaled down (Lawton would also serve as an executive producer, and like a number of his films, Seagal also produced the movie) to be made for roughly $35 million. Seagal actually turned the film down a couple of times, apparently because he was resistant to the character played by Eleniak, calling the character as a "bimbo", but revisions were done that pleased him, with him calling the film "an adventure, not an action movie" with human moments and humor (he has since claimed it was his idea to have the character in the film for humor, but can you really take that seriously?). At any rate, Seagal got to be director and star for On Deadly Ground (1994) in exchange for participating in Under Siege 2: Dark Territory (with Romano, Mancuso and Dye returning), which takes place on a train. As for Davis, he got the job for The Fugitive (1993) because of how Harrison Ford liked what he saw from this film.

The strange thing is that the film only features Seagal sparingly if you really think about it, since he is basically present for about 40 minutes of a 103-minute film (this fact was apparently presented to Davis by a Warner Bros. executive as to why he should direct). The ship (USS Alabama, which was docked in Alabama) is basically the most important presence of the film anyways, given the scenario of the film (basically Die Hard on a battleship). It moves along full speed with execution being at the forefront in terms of action staging and (let's just say) quirky characters to carry the movie, complete with playing on an actual real-world development of US Navy surface ships having their nuclear weapons removed in 1991. To be generous to Seagal, he does well with the material given to him in part because he seems relaxed here, one who can play on the silly parts of the script (the cook who happens to be a former Navy SEAL being teamed up with a Playboy playmate) without coming off as wooden or out-of-touch. In other words: if you let him kick and try not to say too much, he does fine. Besides, with Busey and Jones on the other side of the coin, how can you go wrong? Man is it fun to see these two get to play adversary, particularly from Jones. Busey can chew on scenery like it was a solid piece of steak, let's get that out of the way, since he gets to grit his teeth in brazen intensity, complete with doing mayhem in a dress for a few moments. Jones still manages to be the key attraction, doing so with manic chaos in all the enjoyable over-the-top ways. Naturally, he gets the best ending sequence, because of course he does, as him and Seagal get to make faces in hand-to-hand combat before he gets taken down with the art of overkill: his eye gets gouged, then he gets stabbed in the head before he is pushed into an electrical radar screen (this plays right into my theory that one could cut Seagal films into a horror movie, since one other guy gets pushed into a band saw). Eleniak (an TV actress and model with one obvious showstopper scene) is okay, mainly there to add a few chuckles in the attempts at making Seagal and her look like a normal tandem despite both a considerable height difference (basically a head), which does work out for a few neat moments. Meaney may be playing just an Irish heavy but being a Star Trek alum makes one smile anyways, while O'Neal (in his final film role) makes a decent character presence/sacrificial lamb. The film makes for a solid thriller, mostly because one gets a collection of good action beats without sacrificing much in the plot stakes. For some odd reason, there are plans for a reboot of this film, which confuses me in part because how can you improve on what was? The accomplishment of the film is not so much the plot but the maneuvering of spectacle and familiar actors to the right places for fun, and that is more suited for original filmmaking rather than drawing from the well. At any rate, it is the direction of Davis in making a suitable thriller in confined space that helps to bring Under Siege into winning material even as it reaches three decades of age.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The Way We Were.

Review #1444: The Way We Were.

Cast: 
Barbra Streisand (Katie Morosky), Robert Redford (Hubbell Gardiner), Bradford Dillman (J.J.), Lois Chiles (Carol Ann), Patrick O'Neal (George Bissinger), Viveca Lindfors (Paula Reisner), Allyn Ann McLerie (Rhea Edwards), Murray Hamilton (Brooks Carpenter), Herb Edelman (Bill Verso), and Diana Ewing (Vicki Bissinger) Directed by Sydney Pollack (#084 - Tootsie and #1441 - Jeremiah Johnson)

Review: 
“As a young woman, I wanted nothing more than to see my name in lights.”
Barbra Streisand dreamed of being an actress from childhood, and it is easy to say that she has followed through with considerable talent for six decades. The daughter of a teacher and a singer-turned-bookkeeper, she practiced singing from a young age while eventually spending additional time studying acting (such as stage actress biographies and acting theories). She made her way from nightclubs in 1960 to Broadway in 1962, with her first album being released the following year. Her appearance in the 1964 Broadway production of Funny Girl furthered her success, and when the musical was adapted into a film in 1968, she would make her film debut and reprise her role and win an Academy Award for Best Actress. By the time she was in line to do this film (her seventh), she had starred in a variety of genres such as musicals, comedies, and dramas.

Some movies are just schmaltzy, and this one nearly drowns because of it. Actually, one little barometer you can use to try and set the mood for if you may enjoy this film is how one reacts to the title song of the picture, sung by Streisand and written by Alan Bergman, Marilyn Bergman, and Marvin Hamlisch. It supposedly is a tearjerker kind of song, so if one really is swayed by melodramatic phrases like "Memories light the corners of my mind / Misty watercolor memories of the way we were", then by all means go for it. If I ever had a blindspot when it comes to music, sad love songs rank up there. Inspiration for the film came from the experiences of writer Arthur Laurents during his time at Cornell University, where he knew a student just as reactionary about events of the time as the main character present here, with an eventual turn to creating a love story (of sorts) with a talented writer without the strength to really apply themselves with writing. Laurents was a noted playwright who had directed Streisand in I Can Get It for You Wholesale back in 1962. The film may seem a bit jumbled with its plot, and the fact that there were numerous re-writes done to the script (from writers such as Dalton Trumbo) doesn't help, and Laurents had left (and returned) the production due to taking issue with Pollack with his handling of the main characters, since he felt that he needed to make Redford's character more equal to Streisand's character (since Pollack had promised Redford to make the character less of a strawman in order to get Redford to sign on). Laurents was obviously not too pleased with the resulting film, once stating that "To make a mantra of 'It's only a movie was as useless and foolish as feeling pain. No matter what I felt or thought, no matter what I tried to accomplish or how, Sydney Pollack would ultimately have his way. That was what I had to face and accept. They didn't cry 'Author! Author! in the movies, they never had. Now they cried 'Auteur! Auteur! -- even if the auteur fucked up the picture."

As a film about the evolving times into the Hollywood blacklist interlaced with a tragic romance, it isn't exactly a strongly put-together film, particularly when it comes to settling in the tragic parts of its climax, which seem too abrupt for a film that somehow seems too long and not long enough at the same time of 118 minutes. Your mileage may vary on what seems most interesting to you when it comes to the story, but I just couldn't get myself into all that this film wants to juggle, a snoozer in the political aspects (when not trying to preach to the choir). Everything one could praise for a film like this can soon be followed by the word however, as if this was a film of contradicted principles. Streisand and Redford seem to do well with each other, beaming as stars with distinct craftsmanship that can make for interesting magic when not arguing with each other. You know the type: the idealist with resilience and fire like a phoenix and the golden boy with his own sense of preservation (you can tell pretty quickly which one you might like better when it gets to the college speech scene, where she talks about her beliefs with Marxism before getting mocked with a "Any Peace But Katie's Piece" sign - which leads to her getting mad and calling them fascists, which is just as amusing as trying to take Marxism super seriously). In a sense it is like watching passionate waves crash onto a calming beach, which can work pretty well. On the other hand, the supporting characters seem to be a victim of the editing (particularly with a wasted Hamilton), where one only sees fleeting moments with folks like O'Neal that only serve to try to not drag things out to the inevitable pasture.  If one goes along with these characters, then all power to you - to me I couldn't help but think of them more as belonging to camp than true tragedy. For its failures to really set up a cohesive finish before its final manipulations with the climax, I can't find myself to give a positive shake for this film - its machinations to get to its tragic point are frenzied and not consistent enough to stick its landing, regardless of how much star power is present here. I do not care for tearjerker films like this because I know that it really isn't going to shake me the way it thinks it will, since this one nearly inspires laughter at its subject rather than pity. Maybe it is a reflection on what fits my tastes more than anything, since one knows Streisand and Redford have done far better films than this. This is an irritating mediocre movie, because you know that this annoying tearslop could do so much better, and yet here we are with a shaky principled mess that only serves as a late night rental for those who just want to see Streisand and Redford together once without having the highest of expectations. 

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Silent Night, Bloody Night.

Review #678: Silent Night, Bloody Night.

Cast
Patrick O'Neal (John Carter), James Patterson (Jeffrey Butler), Mary Woronov (Diane Adams), Astrid Heeren (Ingrid), John Carradine (Charlie Towman), Walter Abel (Mayor Adams), and Fran Stevens (Tess Howard) Directed by Theodore Gershuny.

Review
Yes, I realize that the movie doesn't have much (if any) ties to Christmas. But hey, the title is a reference to a Christmas song and apparently it takes place on Christmas Eve, so there you go, you've got a Christmas review. That, and it should've been reviewed in October but is being reviewed now. This movie is in the public domain and easy to find, though the real question is should you watch it? Yes and no. What we have here is a weird, weird, weird movie, and the fact that it came out in the 70's only supports that fact. It figures that John Carradine is in this as well (take a drink of your favorite beverage folks), in a movie that also features former Warhol superstars (Heh, it took me 1,462 days to make an Andy Warhol reference). The actors are at least decent enough, trying to make this movie work even if sometimes it looks more like a stage production than a movie. At least it has some moments of chill to it, and the reveal on the killer is spooky...even if the mask (or whatever it is) that Butler wears is sort of silly. It's at least a passable movie that runs only about 90 minutes, and I guess it's the perfect movie for 70's fans, John Carradine lovers, people cynical of Christmas, and people who decided to review this movie with the stupidest explanation ever.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.