The Verdict (1982).

Review #1935: The Verdict.

Cast: 

Paul Newman (Frank Galvin), Charlotte Rampling (Laura Fischer), Jack Warden (Mickey Morrissey), James Mason (Ed Concannon), Milo O'Shea (Judge Hoyle), Lindsay Crouse (Kaitlin Costello Price), Edward Binns (Bishop Brophy), Julie Bovasso (Maureen Rooney), Roxanne Hart (Sally Doneghy), James Handy (Kevin Doneghy), Wesley Addy (Dr. Towler), Joe Seneca (Dr. Thompson), and Lewis J. Stadlen (Dr. Gruber) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men, #036 - Network, #404 - The Anderson Tapes, #1065 - Deathtrap, #1446 - Murder on the Orient Express, #1450 - Dog Day Afternoon, #1545 - Before the Devil Knows You're Dead)

Review: 

A combination of a director known for his crafting of actors into diverting character dramas and a powerhouse star and script surely would work out for a fair classic, you might say. The movie is an adaptation of the 1980 novel of the same name by Barry Reed. In addition to writing for American Bar Association Journal alongside novels, Reed had his own legal practice in Boston, Massachusetts and he had a reputation for specializing in medical malpractice, personal injury, and civil litigation. Interestingly, one of his proteges was Jan Schlichtmann, a lawyer noted for his own case that became a book and film about a lawyer taking on a big name (in this case, two companies sued for leukemia deaths), which you might know as A Civil Action (1998). Right before publication of The Verdict, producers David Brown and Richard D. Zanuck purchased the film rights. The two hired David Mamet to write a screenplay based on the book. By this point, Mamet was noted for his array of off-Broadway plays in the 1970s such as American Buffalo. The first produced screenplay by Mamet was the 1981 adaptation of The Postman Always Rings Twice. It shouldn't be too surprising that there were numerous choices for directors and main stars: James Bridges was the initial choice for director and Robert Redford was the first-pick star, but when Bridges became busy with Urban Cowboy (1980), the producers went with Arthur Hiller as the potential director...before a disagreement with Mamet saw him depart (of course, Zanuck wasn't particularly big on the ending of the original script, which ended before the jury came back with the verdict). Jay Presson Allen came in to try and deliver a new script, and when Bridges had time at last to do a project, he also seeped his fingers into writing for the film, but it all went for naught when Redford and Bridges had disagreements over the nature of the main character (Redford irked at the idea of playing the character with the flaws as written). Not long after, Lumet was asked to do the film, and he elected to go back to the original Mamet script, complete with Paul Newman as star. 

Admittedly, the legal aspects of the film aren't completely on the level, as I suspected from a cursory bout of research. For the record, if you are suing a hospital and they offer you a settlement, your lawyer cannot simply reject the offer (without even consulting the clients), and the opposing council doesn't go around telling the client about offers either. But I suppose if you can buy a film that hinges its big finish on having the jurors challenge their doubts in their beliefs, institutions, and the law itself, you can do almost anything. But the movie as a whole is pleasant as a stone-cold thriller of possible redemption as baptism by fire, utilizing its 129 minutes to general effectiveness. It relies heavily on the performance of Newman, in his only appearance in a feature film with Lumet as director. He pulls off a great performance, plundering the depths of redemption in an understated and powerful manner that never blusters or hits a false note from start to finish, one where burying the case is not the end of his own road. Sure, one could put the highlight as the last scene in the courthouse or even the final shot with a rejected call, but the best one might be a sequence where Newman is taking photos of his client (a comatose victim) before he processes what he is doing when the photo is developing and snaps himself to action without having to say a word. It isn't so much as chewing the scenery as it is just a case of a damn good actor being accompanied by pretty decent support in the cast besides him. Rampling makes a quality counterpart to Newman, since each are wayward spirits to begin with, and the last sequence where they share time together (i.e., not just stare at each other) is quite effective in its shock, while Warden accompanies Newman as the long-suffering lawyer pal in useful character presence. Mason (in the twilight of his career) is the ideal foil to Newman, bringing dignity to a role of slime, which goes just as well for O'Shea in steely impatience. As a whole, it is more of a thriller of the lead character rather than a straight-boiled court drama, which results in a slow burn experience that ultimately shows Lumet and Newman in their proper environments: rehearsed excellence, one that has endured well for itself after four decades. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead.

Review #1545: Before the Devil Knows You're Dead.

Cast: 
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Andy Hanson), Ethan Hawke (Hank Hanson), Marisa Tomei (Gina Hanson), Albert Finney (Charles Hanson), Rosemary Harris (Nanette Hanson), Brían F. O'Byrne (Bobby Lasorda), Aleksa Palladino (Chris Lasorda), Michael Shannon (Dex), Tom Zolandz (Junkie), and Amy Ryan (Martha Hanson) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men, #036 - Network, #404 - The Anderson Tapes, #1065 - Deathtrap, #1446 - Murder on the Orient Express, #1450 - Dog Day Afternoon)

Review: 
“In drama, the characters should determine the story. In melodrama, the story determines the characters."

If one can say they directed 44 films, that would probably be enough to have pride in as a director. If one could say they had a handful of memorable movies to go alongside an Honorary Academy Award and some notice for stars that feature in those films, that would be exceedingly good to have. At the age of 83, Sidney Lumet created one last classic to serve a career filled with well-managed preparation and a vitality for storytelling with complexity and stature to go with it. Not every film of his was great, but Lumet managed to cultivate success and audience notice with films in multiple decades with films like 12 Angry Men (1957), The Pawnbroker (1964), Network (1976), and The Verdict (1982) while still keeping busy with smaller films and a soft return to television (his involvement with 100 Centre Street was his first in 40 years). The film was written by first-time screenwriter Kelly Masterson, who previously worked with stage plays before being inspired by "the folly of human nature" and his study in theology to write this screenplay, which took seven years to get it made. Lumet was attracted to the script (likening it to a melodrama as opposed to just a thriller) while also making key suggestions to the plot such as having the main two actors play brothers rather than friends in order to heighten the tension. Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (based on a old Irish saying) was the first and only Lumet film to be shot on high-definition video (owing to less hassle) along with being the last film that he directed before his death in 2011.

Sometimes a simple plan of robbing a mom-and-pop store for easy money and easy solutions to the problems of two brothers just doesn't go the way one expects. Or more specifically, sometimes people are just brought down by the obsessions that wreak havoc on one's soul, particularly their obsessions. What we have is a family on the verge of a breakdown in terms of morality and beyond that captures the desperation one can encounter when greed turns into guilt. I think we all reach a moment where we think about what would happen if we could just escape from our troubles, where one must try to stop themselves from having envy over how the grass looks on the other side. We look upon these people and we see them as fairly believable types reflecting upon us regardless of however many bad choices they end up making, because the simplest plans can go awry just like that turn crime dramas into tragedies. It does this by spanning through different perspectives that will occasionally crisscross a scene we saw earlier with another look, which pleases those who desire such non-linear telling for the most part. Hoffman, generally known for his variety of distinct character actor roles throughout his life, does tremendous here in pulling strong will and desperate emptiness needed to encapsulate his part of the drama needed that would have been rough putty with less talent behind it. Hawke has an equally interesting challenge with his pathetic counterpart that he still handles with a fair sense of conviction to what he needs to pull here on his end to keep up with the level of desperation required without becoming consumed in languished pity. Tomei doesn't have as much dialogue, but she does well in capturing a lack of satisfaction and aimlessness with what she has when facing Hoffman or Hawke. Finney is the last key to come together in terms of this growing spiral in terms of hardened nature that sells those carefully planned moments just right, with his one highlight being a scene of attempted reconciliation that ends with a devastatingly executed breakdown in what you see in the margins. Of the rest of the cast, Shannon does nicely in those small moments of sad intimidation for a film all about people past their prime. It generally works out for 117 minutes in winding itself up in tension and bleak situations that looks upon consequences and lost values within oneself and family that usually hits the mark in keeping up with its perspectives that all build to a mostly rewardingly bleak conclusion in what it says and doesn't say. Ultimately, I would say it proves to be an underrated classic worth looking upon with its high-strung string-pulling as Lumet's last winner.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Dog Day Afternoon.

Review #1450: Dog Day Afternoon.

Cast: 
Al Pacino (Sonny Wortzik), John Cazale (Salvatore "Sal" Naturale), Charles Durning (Sergeant Eugene Moretti), James Broderick (Agent Sheldon), Lance Henriksen (Agent Murphy), Chris Sarandon (Leon Shermer), Penelope Allen (Sylvia), Sully Boyar (Mulvaney), Susan Peretz (Angela Wortzik), and Carol Kane (Jenny) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men, #036 - Network, #404 - The Anderson Tapes, #1065 - Deathtrap, and #1446 - Murder on the Orient Express)

Review: 
"I don't think of myself as anything but an actor struggling to find the next role and when I do get the role to try and see if I can find any way into it."

"While the goal of all movies is to entertain, the kind of film is which I believe goes one step further. It compels the spectator to examine one facet or another of his own conscience. It stimulates thought and sets the mental juices flowing."

How can one talk about esteemed method actors and not think about Al Pacino? Although Pacino had ambitions of baseball as a teenager, he soon shifted focus to acting, for which he would have to take modest-paying jobs to help finance study, with one job being a mailroom employee for the magazine Commentary. He acted in small plays in New York, but he wasn't accepted into the Actors Studio when applying as a teen (he would attend the HB Studio for four years until being accepted into the Actors Studio). He cited Lee Strasberg and the Studio as a key effect on his future career in putting all of his focus into acting, and the two would even appear in films together in later years (most notably with The Godfather Part II). He soon shifted to stage work (which he has continued to make on-and-off star appearances), performing for the first time in 1967, with his debut in Broadway coming two years later. That same year, he also made his first appearance in film with Me, Natalie. The 1970s proved to be a tremendous decade for Pacino, starting with notice in The Panic in Needle Park (1971), and it helped him get attention for his next role: The Godfather (1972), for which he was picked over prominent other choices. One of the eight films in the decade Pacino did was Serpico (1973), which he did with Lumet to tremendous success (including an Academy Award nomination, which he received four other times in the decade). Lumet was known for his distinct prolific work over a lengthy career in films (over 40 in a half century starting with 12 Angry Men) and television (primarily doing work in television in the fifties), noted for their social realism and naturalism while mostly set in New York (where he grew up after being born in Philadelphia) that served him well as someone labeled an "actor's director".

The film is very loosely based on real-life events that occurred on August 22, 1972, where failed bank robbers John Wojtowicz and Salvatore Naturale held nine bank employees hostage for 14 hours in attempts to take money for an sex change operation for the former's lover, which resulted in one death and 20 years for Wojtowicz. The exploits of the robbery were covered in an article ("The Boys in the Bank" by P. F. Kluge) for Life magazine, and while writer Frank Pierson wanted to interview Wojtowicz personally in prison, an agreement couldn't be reached about how much to pay for the story. Wojtowicz would later state that only 30% of the film was accurate, although he did find that Pacino and Sarandon were captured accurately (the actual amount robbed was over 37 thousand in cash and over 175 thousand in traveler's checks, and this doesn't even count the allegations from anonymous sources that it was actually organized by a Mafia family). For an biographical film (of sorts), it is interesting to note the improvisations done through the dialogue at times (which keep with the structure of Pierson's screenplay), since Lumet encouraged the actors to show spontaneity when it came to rehearsals (a hallmark of his when it came to establishing trust with his actors) that would help in making lines come out naturally (the famed Attica! line was improvised, for example).

One always seems to feel on the edge when it comes to a film like this, where you can feel every little moment of tension and furor that is headlined by a tremendous performance from Pacino. He molds himself into a frantic pace in a tour-de-force achievement of wired hysteria that we cannot take our eyes of, where our view of him through the film and the people that see him through their television or right in front of their eyes seem to muddle each other into something worth pondering about. The 1970s were certainly a divergent time for America, particularly in light of what people saw on their television screens or in the streets, and seeing someone holding a bank hostage isn't too different. Even now the film proves relevant because of the nature of fame (or infamy) in the eyes of a curious audience looking for some sort of person to relate to or stand with (regardless of how one feels about glorifying/boosting certain actions) in social media. The others prove just as well in following along on a natural tense pace, such as Cazale (who did over a decade of work in the theater before making his first of five film appearances in The Godfather) and his well-placed subtlety as the lead man to a situation that gets worse and worse by the minute. Durning proves resilient with growing tension through some bluster that takes a good chunk of the first half more so than the second for effect. Broderick and Henriksen fill the screen nicely, while Sarandon delivers well in evoking curiosity and humanity for the second half of the film, particularly through the phone call sequence with Pacino. When the film opens itself up in tension and details, we care to see where it all may lea to without too much judgement or impatience. On the whole, while it may prove a bit too much to hold for all of its 125 minute run-time, this is a film worth checking out to see the raw spirit of the times play out in fascinating detail from Pacino, who makes for a frantic yet always interesting presence worth viewing to the bitter end.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Murder on the Orient Express (1974).

Review #1446: Murder on the Orient Express.

Cast: 
Albert Finney (Hercule Poirot), Lauren Bacall (Mrs. Hubbard), Martin Balsam (Bianchi), Ingrid Bergman (Greta Ohlsson), Jacqueline Bisset (Countess Helena Andrenyi), Jean-Pierre Cassel (Pierre Paul Michel), Sean Connery (Colonel Arbuthnot), John Gielgud (Edward Beddoes), Wendy Hiller (Princess Natalia Dragomiroff), Anthony Perkins (Hector McQueen), Vanessa Redgrave (Mary Debenham), Rachel Roberts (Hildegarde Schmidt), Richard Widmark (Ratchett), Michael York (Count Rudolf Andrenyi), Colin Blakely (Cyrus B. Hardman), George Coulouris (Dr. Constantine), and Denis Quilley (Antonio Foscarelli) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men, #036 - Network, #404 - The Anderson Tapes, and #1065 - Deathtrap)

Review: 
"My job is acting, and that is why I hate interviews or lectures, explaining myself to an audience."

Sometimes the devil is in the details when it comes to making a film, and this can be two-fold for a movie like this, an all-star mystery film based on the book of the same name by one of the most famous authors of all time, Agatha Christie. Her novel featured the famed character Hercule Poirot, who was featured in over forty novels and short stories since the very first in The Mysterious Affair at Styles (1920). Murder on the Orient Express (1934) had been inspired by numerous events, such as a stuck Orient Express train that was there for five days in snow along with the infamous kidnapping of Charles and Anne Lindbergh's baby. Christie had her works first adapted into film with The Passing of Mr. Quin (1928), while the first Poirot adaptation followed with Alibi (1931, starring Austin Trevor). Four actors have played the character of Poirot in film: Trevor, Tony Randall, Finney, Peter Ustinov, and Kenneth Branagh, although the most famous portrayal of the character is likely David Suchet's portrayal (1989-2013) that adapted the entire catalogue of mysteries by Christie as 70 episodes for British television. Despite reservations about a film adaptation, this proved to be one of the very few that she liked (the other was Witness for the Prosecution) prior to her death in 1976.

To put in perspective how careful one had to handle such a diverse international cast, five actors (Gielgud, Quilley, Redgrave, Bergman, and Finney) were participating in the production in the day while doing West End performances in London in the night time. Finney (third choice after Alec Guinness and Paul Scofield, both unavailable) must have had it worst of all, since he needed tremendous makeup done to emulate his character but also need sleep, which reportedly led to a routine where he would be taken out on a stretcher while asleep and the crew would do makeup on him as he was being traveled to the set. Finney, a graduate of the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, had started his career with the theatre in 1956 (starring as the title role in Henry V), before taking on television and film with The Entertainer (1960), and he would come into prominence with his lead roles in Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (same year) and Tom Jones (1963) in a varied career that had a good deal of success for over five decades before his death in 2019 at the age of 82. As a who's who for a whodunit meant to evoke the elegance of a different time (such as Richard Rodney Bennett's striking musical composition), this proves quite satisfactory for all parties involved. Whether one is familiar with the famed novel or not isn't too important - the mystery is carefully crafted with these distinct faces that are each given a few moments to shine while set primarily on a railway car that makes for a quality 128 minutes. Finney is quite excellent with a role basked in makeup and a careful disposition that makes him the ideal man to match up with a mystery like this, particularly when it comes to seeing his initial interactions with others before the train leaves compared to when he lays out the climax of the whodunit (a scene shot numerous times to capture all the adequate angles) - he leads the film on with well-crafted care. Balsam and Coulouris accompany him for the hunt with care, while Widmark makes for a fine conniving presence to set up his murder. Of the stars that appear, the ones who seem to stand out are Bacall, Bergman (who rejected playing a bigger part while having one stand out five-minute interrogation scene, which resulted in a Best Supporting Actress win at the Academy Awards - her third overall), Gielgud, and Perkins. Each stand their ground when it comes to making their moments count in laying out their side of a story, although no one really lends a bad performance anywhere, since having a bit of scenery-chewing now and then comes with the territory without derailing the suspension of disbelief. By the time one gets to its conclusion, one finds them satisfied with how things raveled and unraveled without fail or stumble. Films can serve as escapism for its audience, and a murder mystery with plenty of agreeable faces and voices complete with a game Finney at the head and a craftsman in Lumet make for a good time worth a curiosity in its era.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Deathtrap.

Review #1065: Deathtrap.

Cast: 
Michael Caine (Sidney Bruhl), Christopher Reeve (Clifford Anderson), Dyan Cannon (Myra Bruhl), Irene Worth (Helga Ten Dorp), Henry Jones (Porter Milgrim), and Joe Silver (Seymour Starger) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men, #036 - Network, and #404 - The Anderson Tapes)

Review: 
Deathtrap was adapted from the play of the same name by Ira Levin, which had run from 1978 to 1982 on Broadway, holding the record for the longest running comedy-thriller on Broadway. The original play comprised of two acts with one set and five characters. and it is easy to say that the transition to film went smoothly, with the only thing added being scenes set in the theater that bookend the movie - along with a few other small changes. Quite simply, this is an effective comedy-thriller, balancing its elements handily along with having a fine pair in Caine and Reeve. The film takes its time to get interesting, but it never comes off as boring nor stale, although I find that the second half of the movie is where it really gets itself into gear. Caine excels in his role, having the right kind of frantic and resourceful nature that makes him fun to watch on screen, particularly with the snappy dialogue that works with his dry tone. Reeve delivers an entertaining performance, managing to balance a boyish charm and unpredictability quite nicely. Cannon is the weak link in the main cast, coming off a bit annoying at points, with her shrieking being a bit tiresome to hear, although she can come off as endearing for others. Worth is fairly amusing in the parts that she is in, playing her eccentric nature with the right kind of conviction and energy that never rattles too much off the deep end. The movie doesn't elicit too much in terms of scares, but it does manage to elicit excitement from its main two actors in the finale to make up for it. The movie has often been compared to Sleuth (1972), which also featured Caine; I can't say how my opinion would've changed had I seen the other film before this one, but I would hope that the viewing experience for either film isn't bent too much because of any kind of comparison-making. The movie manages to run itself fairly well at 116 minutes, never becoming tedious with its twists nor lengthening itself to ridiculous heights, having fun with the ways it moves the pieces of its jigsaw puzzle kind of plot (which you should see for yourself) handily. This is a fine gem that has some dark humor to go along with its clever nature that works in the places it needs to the most with its cast and arrangements that is interesting enough to recommend.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Anderson Tapes.

Review #404: The Anderson Tapes.

Cast
Sean Connery (Duke Anderson), Dyan Cannon (Ingrid Everleigh), Martin Balsam (Tommy Haskins), Ralph Meeker (Captain Delaney), Alan King (Pat Angelo), Christopher Walken (The Kid), Val Avery (Socks Parelli), Stan Gottlieb (Pop Myer), Garrett Morris (Police Sergeant), Paul Benjamin (Jimmy), Anthony Holland (Psychologist), Richard B. Shull (Werner), Conrad Bain (Dr. Rubicoff), and Margaret Hamilton (Miss Kaler) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men and #036 - Network)

Review
There have been seven reviews on Movie Night in which Sean Connery starred in the film, consisting of the six James Bond films he did from 1962-1971 (#150, #278, #298, #335, #354, #279) and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (#170), so reviewing a film different from those is a welcome addition, especially when directed by Sidney Lumet, who hasn't gotten too much attention from me, though I loved 12 Angry Men. The Anderson Tapes manages to a decent thriller, and it does have its level of suspense, along with music by Quincy Jones, which is allright. Connery himself does a good job, as he manages to break out of the James Bond typecasting, doing something new, and it works. A fun fact in this film is that Christopher Walken makes his acting debut in this film and Margaret Hamilton makes her last acting appearance. The wire tapping and camera thing may seem a bit dated, but this film still works even in this day and age, and the thrill aspect of the film is toned enough to have an effect today. A fairly decent thriller with some more than decent actors and fine directing.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Network.

Review #036: Network.

Cast
Faye Dunaway (Diana Christensen), William Holden (Max Schumacher), Peter Finch (Howard Beale), Robert Duvall (Frank Hackett), Wesley Addy (Nelson Chaney), Ned Beatty (Arthur Jensen), Beatrice Straight (Louise Schumacher) Jordan Charney (Harry Hunter), William Prince (Edward Ruddy), Lane Smith (Robert McDonough), Marlene Warfield (Laureen Hobbs), and Conchata Ferrell (Barbara Schlesinger) Directed by Sidney Lumet (#035 - 12 Angry Men)

Review
Review to be updated at a later point in time - hopefully by the end of 2018 or 2019. 

This film is excellent. Its a fun film that parodies the news and what happens if we let sensationalism win...which in retrospect we may already have let happen to us. The acting especially by Finch is good. He is a riot, as he makes you giggle and more (a shame that this was his last role). This isn't just a movie about Finch, this is a satire that reflects the time it was made while having an angry but collected tone that works. The movie won four Academy Awards, winning for Best Actor (Finch), Actress (Dunaway), Supporting Actress (Straight, who is in the movie for five minutes), and Original Screenplay (Chayefsky) while being nominated for five more. The film flows alright, as the direction by Lumet is (as with the previous film reviewed here) good. This is a fine film that hasn't aged badly.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: 12 Angry Men.

Review #035: 12 Angry Men.

Cast
1. Martin Balsam
2. John Fielder
3. Lee J. Cobb
4. E. G. Marshall
5. Jack Klugman
6. Edward Binns
7. Jack Warden
8. Henry Fonda
9. Joseph Sweeny
10. Ed Begley
11. George Voskovec
12. Robert Webber
Directed by Sidney Lumet.

Review
Review to be updated at a later point in time - hopefully by the end of 2018 or 2019. 

This movie is the first covered of the 1950s on this show, and it is just pure greatness. It shows a lot of talent all in one set (And for a movie that took less then three weeks and $325,000 to make). Henry Fonda is the big star, and he is the best person in this movie. I like how it seems you are the Juror, you are feeling like you are one of them. The theories are deconstructed over time as the tension builds until the conclusion. It shows a lot of heart, and it can and will, make your heart beat.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.