The Poseidon Adventure.

Review #1442: The Poseidon Adventure.

Cast: 
Gene Hackman (Reverend Frank Scott), Ernest Borgnine (Detective Lieutenant Mike Rogo), Red Buttons (James Martin), Carol Lynley (Nonnie Parry), Roddy McDowall (Acres), Stella Stevens (Linda Rogo), Shelley Winters (Belle Rosen), Jack Albertson (Manny Rosen), Pamela Sue Martin (Susan Shelby), Arthur O'Connell (Chaplain John), Eric Shea (Robin Shelby), Leslie Nielsen (Captain Harrison), and Fred Sadoff (Linarcos) Directed by Ronald Neame (#673 - Scrooge and #1204 - Meteor)

Review: 
"I suffer along with them. We have many story conferences. As a writer/director/producer, I have triple agonies. I'm bucking to be known as the most sympathetic producer in town."

Oh sure, there were plenty of films to pick from that had an independent streak with directors and stars in the 1970s, but let us not forget about the films that followed the lines of all-star casts that came from previous decades. In this case, the all-star cast format came in the disaster movie genre, one that is just as prevalent in generating spectacle as other genres. Airport (1970) was the start of a whole new era of disaster films, as it made over $100 million upon release that was followed by three sequels before the decade ended. Who better to further the genre than Irwin Allen, the "Master of Disaster"? After all, he had already mastered the hand of producing/directing in television and film with projects such as The Sea Around Us (1953, an Academy Award winning documentary), Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (1961, which became a hit 1964-68 series), and Lost in Space (1965-68). He would produce four further disaster films (with all but one in the 1970s) with The Towering Inferno (1974, about a fire in a tower), The Swarm (1978, involving killer bees), and Beyond the Poseidon Adventure (1979, which involved a return to the ship to recover treasures). The director who fell right into directing this film turned out to be a good one with Ronald Neame (after Gordon Douglas stepped off). He had been a cinematographer in British films starting in the 1930s before taking a hand at producing (Cineguild, with David Lean and Anthony Havelock-Allan) in the late 1940s that moved to directing with Take My Life (1947). Although he did not find the final result to be one to be proud of, he did describe it as his favorite film in that it gave him plenty of "F.U. money".

I suppose one reason for my curiosity with this film (based on the 1969 novel of the same name by Paul Gallico) was seeing how all of these stars would match up with each other, considering there are five Oscar-winning actors here (Hackman, Borgnine, Winters, Albertson, Buttons) alongside a mish-mash of supporting actors with melodramatic turns and plenty of spectacle. The result is one of the most ridiculously enjoyable films to ever sit through, one that is soapier than Grand Hotel (1932), with actors that did a majority of their own stunts that makes one think they are watching a P.E. competition. It is like going to a restaurant and asking everyone about who they were and what they liked to do and then going back to eat something you know is overstuffed but eating it anyway because you just need that experience (or getting a kick, I suppose), regrets be darned. Hackman leads this disaster squad with plenty of unorthodox spirit and candor to go with it that makes for an fair rapport with the equally blustery Borgnine who is charmingly rough around the edges. The others fall around the lines you could see coming from their opening moments, such as the quiet haberdasher Buttons that proves resourceful when paired with a nervous Lynley, or a gloomy but game Winters (who apparently gained 30 pounds for a role that requires her to do a swimming sequence). Others like Albertson, Stevens and Shea have smaller parts to play, but they do their best in making a good time with convenience (whether that means a quick remark or not), and this also includes short trips with McDowall (switching accents as a waiter, I kid you not) and a sternly useful Nielsen (an actor with standing even before hitting it bigger with comedy). One is here to see some fiery action, and they do generally pay off well, starting with the crash that starts all the fun (complete with a massive fall onto a light in an upside down dining room, a tremendous stunt to see). It is executed well with a fine look of despair and water to keep things sinking through for 117 minutes with plenty of moments that can make your head agape for better or worse (the question one generally associates with that would be "Wait, what?" in my view). It's funny, I had heard of the song "The Morning After" a number of times before seeing this film, but I didn't actually realize that it was performed in this film first (written by Al Kasha and Joel Hirschhorn), which was apparently written in one night. Oh sure, it's a terrible song (cheesy but annoyingly catchy), but it found a following and ended up winning an Academy Award for its songwriters. The additional Academy Award won by the film (which snagged eight nominations, mostly technical) was for its visual effects from L. B. Abbott and A. D. Flowers. A sequel followed a few years later, and there were two remakes (one for television, one theatrical), but none have really matched the sheer lasting power of this, one with plenty of silliness alongside enjoyment to go for an era like this.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Meteor.

Review #1204: Meteor.

Cast: 
Sean Connery (Dr. Paul Bradley), Natalie Wood (Tatiana Donskaya), Karl Malden (Harry Sherwood), Brian Keith (Dr. Alexei Dubov), Martin Landau (General Adlon), Trevor Howard (Sir Michael Hughes), Richard Dysart (Secretary of Defense), Henry Fonda (The President), and Joseph Campanella (General Easton) Directed by Ronald Neame (#673 - Scrooge)

Review: 
What is a meteor? One definition (at least according to a cursory Google search) is that it is a " small body of matter from outer space that enters the earth's atmosphere, becoming incandescent as a result of friction and appearing as a streak of light." Perhaps the definition doesn't give the movie's big threat proper credit, since this is a disaster film released to ride on the popularity of films of its ilk released in the 1970s such as the Airport films (1970, 1974, 1977, 1979), The Poseidon Adventure (1972) and countless others  - with this one being distributed by American International Pictures and funding from Hong Kong studio Shaw Brothers. This was one of numerous AIP films in the 1970s that differed from the usual fare they had delivered in previous decades, with less focus on horror and more focus on other genres (whether it involved kung fu, blaxploitation, or something else), with an increase in budgets. This film, unlike others released by the studio, proved to be a failure, making less than $10 million on release with a budget over $15 million. This led to the demise of AIP, which soon merged with Filmways, Inc and stopped distributing films by 1980. In any case, the hands that attempted to guide the film might have seemed promising. Stanley Mann and Edmund H. North were the writers for the film, with the latter being responsible for writing films such as The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) and Patton (1970). Much like the disaster films mentioned already, this one also boasts a collection of big-name actors of its time to supplant the roles.

With all of that in mind, it sure is strange that this film turns out to be a dud. How does one make a film racked with only the bare minimum of suspense and mild special effects? How does one make a film where the energy of the cast and the people they are playing fight blandness? By the time the actual meteor shows up for its climax, the level of excitement jumps up a percentage point, since it means it's almost over, even if the tension levels by this time are nearly non-existent. This probably would've fared better as a comedy, actually. Imagine a bunch of people flailing around talking about a giant rock hitting the Earth in your driest voice, and you have this movie basically summed up. As nice as it is to see Connery be pulled into this ridiculous mess, he isn't too particularly interesting - whether that it is due to the script or due to being on autopilot waiting to get done with this mess (and the check to clear) is up to you. Him and Wood don't have much chemistry with each other, but it really is more because it just feels like filler before scenes of exposition/meteor stuff take the stage again. Keith is fine, and he does provide a bit of humor to a film that is practically begging for some action. Malden proves okay with his gruff if not stock kind of role. Landau goes over-the-top for a role without any real sort of depth to it besides being adversarial to the others. The other members of the cast make brief appearances that come and go as they please. The effects are okay, but they don't really elevate this material to any real sense of enjoyable spectacle, with one sequence utilizing footage from Avalanche (1978) alongside tons of artificial snow for background shooting. The sequence involving the subway and the mud surely must've proven interesting to think of as effective in concept - but it just seems more of a waste of money and time (along with a pain for any actor having to act in mud). This mish-mash in quality for the effects can be attributed in part because numerous visual effects teams came and went during production due to being fired for the quality of effects delivered on a small budget (no doubt due to the budget focus on the actors) - the shots involving building collapsing near the end was actually just re-used footage from building demolitions. Ultimately, it is the lack of any interesting characters or situations that prove fatal to the film. It becomes evident quickly that there isn't much in the way of tension, since the idea of the meteor actually hitting the Earth never really seems all that likely. The film actually ends with a notation about a report named "Project Icarus", a student project done in 1967 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology that involved students in a systems engineering class to make a plan to use rockets to deflect or destroy an asteroid in the event of a possible collision with Earth, which led to a book release the following year. One would likely be better off reading the report than watching the film, actually. It disappoints on a basic level as entertainment with its actors and it disappoints on a level of spectacle that makes this a chore for all but people with nothing better to do.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Scrooge (1970)

Review #673: Scrooge.

Cast
Albert Finney (Ebenezer Scrooge), Alec Guinness (Marley's ghost), Edith Evans (Ghost of Christmas Past), Kenneth More (Ghost of Christmas Present), David Collings (Bob Cratchit), Michael Medwin (Fred), Paddy Stone (Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come), Frances Cuka (Mrs. Cratchit), Richard Beaumont (Tiny Tim), Laurence Naismith (Fezziwig), and Mary Peach (Fred's wife) Directed by Ronald Neame.

Review
Ouch, it's been a week since the last review. Sorry for the delay, but hey, December's a tough month. I celebrated my birthday on the 1st, then promptly was sick for the next three or so days. Colds are very annoying to deal with, but now I'm better and ready to get back into the circuit...with another film called Scrooge. If you're wondering how it's any different from the other films, this time we're dealing with a musical version of the tale (I guess at this point anything can be turned into a musical, even hockey.), with one small change from the novel. But hey, how's the movie? It's alright, I suppose. For a Christmas film, it's fine as it does have a good deal of spirit (Heck, it even has Santa-I mean Father Christmas in it. I'm just surprised that the store happened to be selling it in Scrooge's size rather then the fact that they were open on Christmas), and you do get the sense of warmth and fun. Albert Finney is the biggest highlight, especially given that he portrays Scrooge so effectively you barely notice him under all that makeup, which helps when focusing on how he ranges Scrooge's emotions, such as the flashback sequence, where you see his grief and his regret in the past; I especially like seeing the present Scrooge berating the younger one for his actions, which makes Scrooge out to be more than a miser. The songs and how they are sung, are debatable though. Sometimes they're good (Thank You Very Much is nice, I admit), but other songs aren't as good (Father Christmas isn't a bad song, it just feels long). The ghosts are fun to watch (Ghost of Christmas Present sounds more like a feasting buddy, but he at least gets the point across, so there), and Guinness does a fine job as Marley. The one scene in the movie that veers from the tale is at the end, when Scrooge sees his future in death...and in chains. Yep, Scrooge sees more than just his grave, he also sees his chain. It's an unnecessary scene; Having Scrooge only see his grave without anyone being sad for his death and having them cheer in the streets in more haunting than a sequence in "fire land", with rats. But ultimately the movie is fine, and it manages to have enough quirks to be a good telling of the tale.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.