Showing posts with label Richard Chamberlain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Richard Chamberlain. Show all posts

April 19, 2024

The Return of the Musketeers.

Review #2200: The Return of the Musketeers.

Cast: 
Michael York (d'Artagnan), Oliver Reed (Athos), Frank Finlay (Porthos), Richard Chamberlain (Aramis), C. Thomas Howell (Raoul), Geraldine Chaplin (Anne of Austria), Kim Cattrall (Justine de Winter), Philippe Noiret (Cardinal Mazarin), Christopher Lee (the Comte de Rochefort), Roy Kinnear (Planchet), Eusebio Lázaro (the Duke of Beaufort), Jean-Pierre Cassel (Cyrano de Bergerac), Alan Howard (Oliver Cromwell), David Birkin (Louis XIV), and Bill Paterson (Charles I) Directed by Richard Lester (#541 - A Hard Day's Night, #594 - A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, #785 - Superman II, #786 - Superman III, #972 - The Three Musketeers, #976 - The Four Musketeersand #1939 - Help!)

Review: 
“I really won’t talk about The Return of the Musketeers, I never have and I won’t now. But I think you can draw your own conclusions.”

On April 19, 1989, The Return of the Musketeers was released into European theaters. Let us refresh ourselves by going back a few years. In 1844, the adventure novel The Three Musketeers [Les Trois Mousquetaires] was first serialized, as written by Alexandre Dumas and his collaborator Auguste Maquet, which was the first of three Musketeer novels between 1844 and 1847 (Twenty Years After and The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later); Dumas had been inspired by Gatien de Courtilz de Sandras and his memoirs of Charles de Batz de Castelmore d'Artagnan, an actual captain of the Musketeers of the Guard in the 1600s. Films have been done of the Musketeers since the early days of film, albeit mostly of the first book. At any rate, the Salkinds (Alexander and Ilya) had an initial idea of getting the Beatles to play the roles of the Musketeers for a film. Years went by (and, well, no Beatles to play the roles) before the Salkinds asked Richard Lester to do the film, who had not directed a film since The Bed Sitting Room (1969); noted novelist George MacDonald Fraser was hired to do the script. The Three Musketeers (1973) was filmed so heavily, that, well, clearly the Salkinds thought to pull a quick one and eventually tell the actors of the impending The Four Musketeers (1974) rather than having to strain hard to make one long film. So, now in 1989, was a return for Lester after his previous film had been Finders Keepers (1984). The Salkinds were not behind the production (in fact, they wouldn't let any old footage be used here), but Pierre Spengler, a producer involved with the previous two films, was there to produce this one; Fraser returned to do the script and a handful of cast members from the previous two films were there (even William Hobbs, who was behind the stage combat for the previous two films, returned). Lester has not been particularly keen on talking about the film too much in the 35 years since the release of this film, one that was both a trying production along with one that did not even get a proper American release (it was put on cable in 1991 for the States). Lester did one more project as a director with the 1991 concert film Get Back before essentially retiring (this was also the last screenplay written by Fraser).

The nature of Twenty Years Later basically entails that you won't really see all of the core of York, Reed, Finlay, and Chamberlain at once (the latter is credited as "special appearance by") all together at once. In fact, this was the last film to feature Kinnear, also returning from the previous two films (alongside Lee, Chaplin, and Cassel). On September 19, 1988, he suffered a horrific accident while on a horse that saw him fall off that saw him fracture his pelvis (while also having internal bleeding). The next day, he died from a heart attack while in the hospital. As such, seeing what a mix of him alongside stand-in shots (and a soundalike in parts) will probably be a bit jarring. The whole film is a jumble when it all comes down to assessment, but I would venture to say that a decent romp of yesteryear is more ideal to sit through once than not at all. They may be aged and may not be as big in star power as they were fifteen years ago, but it is hard to resist the qualities that come through most in York (if someone is compelled to do a voiceover, might as well be him) and Reed (when he is on, he is right there...), although at least Howell and Cattrall make for adequate newcomers to the smile game of adventure (one can't match Faye Dunaway exactly, but Cattrall at least seems to to be having fun trying). Finlay may be tired, but at least he has bits and pieces to contribute that go further than the "here is a scene there and here is one for the climax because I can" of Chamberlain or particularly Chaplin (you might say Lee is all too brief, but we* adore Lee being there at all). I particularly like the sequence involving a litany of traps within a rough-and-tumble fight that sees it go all the way to the foundation (literally). The clash of trying to play faithfulness to the source material goes to a point (for one thing, the threat was actually de Winter's illegitimate son, but even if this was a hit, would you have expected, say, another of these films where the Musketeers all die?), because there are moments where the strain of trying to keep up with its structure makes it nearly crash into pieces. As a whole, the 102-minute runtime makes for a fairly sustainable feature that deserved better than to be shuffled away as just a lower-release film or Lester's last hurrah, if only because there is something worth seeing with that spark of familiar wonder and chuckles. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*"we" being me, myself, and I

June 17, 2020

The Towering Inferno.

Review #1447: The Towering Inferno.

Cast: 
Paul Newman (Doug Roberts), Steve McQueen (Michael O'Hallorhan), William Holden (James Duncan), Faye Dunaway (Susan Franklin), Fred Astaire (Harlee Claiborne), Susan Blakely (Patty Duncan Simmons), Richard Chamberlain (Roger Simmons), Jennifer Jones (Lisolette Mueller), O. J. Simpson (Harry Jernigan), Robert Vaughn (U.S. Senator Gary Parker), Robert Wagner (Dan Bigelow), Susan Flannery (Lorrie), Sheila Matthews Allen (Paula Ramsay), Norman Burton (Will Giddings), Jack Collins (Mayor Robert "Bob" Ramsay), Don Gordon (Kappy), Felton Perry (Scott), and Gregory Sierra (Carlos) Directed by John Guillermin (#726 - King Kong (1976) and #1231 - Shaft in Africa)

Review: 
"You know, there's really nothing like an exciting film on a big screen. Hopefully, I've made a few in my career."

Here's an idea: How about a film based on not one, but two books? No wait, here's one better, how about one released by two major studios? This film, adapted from The Tower by Richard Martin Stern and The Glass Inferno by Thomas N. Scortia and Frank M. Robinson, was released in the United States by 20th Century Fox and worldwide by Warner Brothers, as Irwin Allen (who would direct the action sequences) convinced them to make one film together rather than just adapting the novels separately for film. There were numerous disaster films of this era, but The Towering Inferno likely topped them all, despite attempts for others to try to raise the heights, considering 1974's output in this film, Earthquake, and Airport 1975 (the sequel to the original film with familiar disaster star Charlton Heston). Simply put, if something existed that had people nearby, by George would there be a disaster waiting to happen, whether that involved rollercoasters (with Sensurround!), football games (sniper or blimp, take your pick), or meteors. The one fitting to helm a big budget action adventure would be John Guillermin, noted for his intense perfectionist attitudes for his film that crept to his stars and producers for a varied career of distinct hits at times in a career that spanned over three decades.

This is an interesting duo for a film, since both Newman and McQueen apparently have the same amount of lines despite the latter not appearing until forty minutes into a 165 minute film (he actually was meant to star as the architect but lobbied for the architect role and got it). One thing this film certainly has enough of is ludicrous spectacle, a film that builds and builds and builds until it nearly becomes too much about a massive fire that engulfs its audience and stars to make for fair entertainment in parts with enough effects and silliness for a lifetime. It is arguable to say which Allen epic is better with The Poseidon Adventure or this, but it can't be denied that they have had their own types of lasting appeal, with both making plenty of money and receiving accolades (mostly technical awards along with title songs, oddly enough) that make them interesting pieces for their era. Newman (who apparently described the film later as a "turkey" before appearing in another Allen film years later in When Time Ran Out) is quite casual here, rolling with the occasional line about safety and exposition without trouble. McQueen (who appeared in three more films before his death after taking a four-year hiatus following this film) is calm and collected in leading the fire aspects that keeps your attention in a balance that favors the two stars without engulfing them in a scenery-chewing contest. Holden, who described his part as one that spends all the time talking on the phone (while clearly liking the money more than the script), does just fine with a role that doesn't really require too much besides just interacting with the occasional figure in a room - as long as he doesn't seem to be lost in the fun, it works out. Dunaway definitely gets close to being lost in all of this, since she only interacts with Newman for a few scenes before being mostly in the background. There are little highlights within the rest of the cast, such as the kindly professional Astaire paired with the equally kind Jones (in her last role), or a snidely Chamberlain, or even sprinkles of football star-turned-actor Simpson and his rescue of a cat (who then only reappears at the end to give the cat away to a survivor, naturally). One is here to see who will come out of alive, and while there may not be as much of a seeable count of vanquished stars, it still makes for a thrilling film at times, if only because of the thought of a building on fire from below does seem pretty scary. There are plenty of spectacle moments such as the stairwell rescue, the outsider elevator debacle and rescue, the daring attempts to rescue people (and cats) from fires, and a two million gallon water climax. For those who seek out something brimming with spectacle and stars that overflow the pot with mostly satisfaction, you can't quite go wrong with this film - a worthy disaster film highlight for its era.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

July 27, 2017

The Four Musketeers (1974).


Review #976: The Four Musketeers.

Cast:
Michael York (d'Artagnan), Oliver Reed (Athos), Frank Finlay (Porthos / O'Reilly), Richard Chamberlain (Aramis), Jean-Pierre Cassel (Louis XIII), Geraldine Chaplin (Anne of Austria), Charlton Heston (Cardinal Richelieu), Faye Dunaway (Milady de Winter), Christopher Lee (The Count De Rochefort), Raquel Welch (Constance Bonacieux), Roy Kinnear (Planchet), Michael Gothard (Felton), and Nicole Calfan (Kitty) Directed by Richard Lester (#541 - A Hard Day's Night, #594 - A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, #785 - Superman II, #786 - Superman III, and #972 - The Three Musketeers)

Review:
As I mentioned in my review of The Three Musketeers last week, the original plan to make an epic of The Three Musketeers that would last around three hours (including an intermission). However, these plans were scuttled by the producers, instead splitting it into two features. I had forgotten to mention that the two films also had a subtitle applied to them, with the first film's being The Queen's Diamonds and the second one being Milady's Revenge. Due to the first film having been released in February of 1974 in the United States and the United Kingdom, this film was released first in West Germany on October 31, 1974 before being released in the US and UK in February of the following year.

It feels unusual to cover this due to how similar it seems to the first film, although this one is a bit darker along with the charm and laughs that were fine enough once and give out fair returns the second time around. It's not easy to express a lot of thoughts on the film other than saying that it is a decent movie. If the first film was a decent piece of art (or a song), the second film could be considered a print (or a cover) of that same piece, albeit with some differences. The costumes and style of the film shines once again; York and Reed stand out among the four musketeers, and it is nice to see Dunaway having a bigger role this time around (taking advantage of it quite well). The plot is a bit muddled in the sense that it doesn't seem as compelling as the action scenes; there are stakes, but it never really takes off into tension level. The film isn't empty, but there doesn't seem to be as much substance this time around. Its climax is fair and efficient in the right places as you would expect. This is a slick feature that obviously works well with the first film, but it's easy to say that it isn't as good as the original; the spirit from the first film is present, even if it is slightly diminished. It's not hard to recommend it for people who enjoyed the previous film or are looking for another Musketeer film to hang their hat around.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

July 20, 2017

The Three Musketeers (1973).


Review #972: The Three Musketeers.

Cast: 
Michael York (d'Artagnan), Oliver Reed (Athos), Frank Finlay (Porthos / O'Reilly), Richard Chamberlain (Aramis), Jean-Pierre Cassel (King Louis XIII of France), Geraldine Chaplin (Anne of Austria), Charlton Heston (Cardinal Richelieu), Faye Dunaway (Milady de Winter), Christopher Lee (The Count De Rochefort), Simon Ward (the Duke of Buckingham), Raquel Welch (Constance Bonacieux), Spike Milligan (M. Bonacieux), Roy Kinnear (Planchet), and Nicole Calfan (Kitty) Directed by Richard Lester (#541 - A Hard Day's Night, #594 - A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum, #785 - Superman II, and #786 - Superman III)

Review: 
Based off the novel of the same name by Alexandre Dumas, the story has been adapted to film numerous times over the past century, but this one is often hailed as one of the better versions of the tale, and it's easy to see why. Everything from the cast to the action scenes is studded with great spectacle and entertainment. The fighting sequences (arranged by William Hobbs) are quite riveting, having an energy and execution to them that is incredible to see throughout the movie, made in a time without the possibility of using computer effects nor shortcuts; the cinematography by David Watkin is also fairly decent. York is engaging to watch on screen, being quite personable and fitting for the film. As you would probably expect from Lester's prior filmography, there is an injection of some comic humor within the film that doesn't manage to distract from the other parts of the film. There is a fine look to the film (filmed in Spain and France) that certainly helps give the film some atmosphere. The trio of Reed, Finlay and Chamberlain are fairly fine together, certainly going well together when dealing with the action scenes. Cassel and Chaplin are fine, but Heston (along with Lee) are interesting adversaries that certainly lend themselves to some fine moments, such as when York and Kinnear encounter Lee's character near the climax, having a fight scene without much light. Dunaway and Welch are fairly memorable, and they serve the climax pretty well with a scene for their own fight, and Milligan and Kinnear are fine comic relief. The best part of the film is seeing the action scenes play out with all of these characters, without giving too much thought to the story (which in itself is fine), instead its the way the film operates that makes for an exciting time. Of interest is that the original plan was to make a long epic that would run around three hours, but it was decided to separate it into two films (without telling the cast), with a trailer for the next film (The Four Muskateers) playing at the end of this film. This inspired the Screen Actor's Guild to make a stipulation that future contracts say how many films are being made. In any case, this is a fine adventure that sets out for enjoyment and succeeds with ease.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

April 22, 2013

Movie Night: Julius Caesar (1970).


Review #367: Julius Caesar.

Cast
Charlton Heston (Mark Antony), Jason Robards (Brutus), John Gielgud (Julius Caesar), Richard Johnson (Cassius), Robert Vaughn (Casca), Richard Chamberlain (Octavius), Diana Rigg (Portia), Jill Bennett (Calpurnia), and Christopher Lee (Artemidorus) Directed by Stuart Burge.

Review
Well, well, I'm reviewing a movie based on a play by William Shakespeare, and it's been a while since I've done that (#103 - Romeo + Juliet, unless you count #229 - She's the Man, but even that was just a revised version), but there is the benefit of the star power, who've managed to be reviewed in films here, examples being: Planet of the Apes, Arthur, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, any of Christopher Lee's films, etc. (Seriously, this is the tenth time he has been listed, and he is listed here due to his small but significant part in the film.) But nevertheless, does that mean that there is a good film in all of that? In some ways yes, but in others, no. Heston does a good job, commandeering a relatively good performance, probably the best here. Gielgud does alright, even if his part is ironically small (It's not like his character is the title of the film or anything), but oh well, and Richard Johnson does a decent job, even if he is another example of having a beard equaling being evil. The supporting cast (Such as Rigg, Vaughn and even Lee) do okay, not having much time to act but adding on nicely. Then there's the acting performance that apparently some are split on, Jason Robards as our de facto lead. His performance has been called "flat" and "wooden", I prefer to use "miscast". He just looks a bit old for the part, given the grey hair, which even Johnson doesn't have. Besides that, the battle sequences are alright and the sets do look like there was effort put into it, but in the end not everything connects perfectly, despite the movie being a decent adaptation of the play. Take it for what its worth, which may or may not end with "Et tu, Brute?". Ironically, the only reason I watched this was due to my teacher selecting this to be shown to our English class.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.