Showing posts with label Sidney Poitier. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sidney Poitier. Show all posts

April 29, 2026

Shoot to Kill (1988).

Review #2532: Shoot to Kill.

Cast: 
Sidney Poitier (Warren Stantin), Tom Berenger (Jonathan Knox), Kirstie Alley (Sarah Renell), Clancy Brown (Steve), Frederick Coffin (Ralph), Richard Masur (Norman), Andrew Robinson (Harvey), Kevin Scannell (Ben), Michael MacRae (Fournier), Milton Selzer (Mr. Berger), Les Lannom (Sheriff Dave Arnett), and Robert Lesser (Agent Minelli) Directed by Roger Spottiswoode (#171 - Tomorrow Never Dies, #191 - The 6th Day, #1205 - Air America)

Review: 

Admittedly, I picked this movie to clear a few obligations of mine, mainly in my director logs (as one does when "this movie or this movie?" is not enough). I came across Roger Spottiswoode and figured, why not talk about one of his movies? The Ottawa-born director was the son of a documentary filmmaker that had made films for the war effort for the National Film Board of Canada. He started his film career as an editor (once stating that his school was in the cutting room), rising from doing work on commercials to being the co-editor of Straw Dogs (1971). He was approached to direct for the first time with the horror film Terror Train (1980), which was a light success. He took over the production of the troubled The Pursuit of D. B. Cooper that came out the following year before doing Under Fire (1983) and The Best of Times (1986), which were not major successes at the time. All of this collides with the return of Sidney Poitier to the big screen, as he had not starred in a film in eleven years (having spent a good chunk of his time directing). The story was written by Harv Zimmel, who in turn co-wrote the screenplay with Michael Burton and Daniel Petrie Jr, with the latter serving as a co-producer. For whatever reason, outside of North America the movie was called "Deadly Pursuit" (one of the working titles was "Mountain King"). Over the next couple of decades, he would direct a variety of films along with ones for television to varying levels of quality such as Turner & Hooch (1989) or And the Band Played On (1993). 
 
Sure, it might be easy to call this one routine, what with it being a buddy thriller in the mountains between two people who get through a few personal disagreements to work together in pursuing one pretty obvious goal. It's a machine of familiar aspects, right down to changing the locale for the final pursuit...and I love stuff like this. It's a fun movie for the execution that it holds in its hand of entertainment, one where you can playfully ask questions about its premise and not feel the need to come up with an answer (or, "cope", if one is younger). Who cares about why just one FBI guy is present to chase a killer when it is so much fun to see the revolving door of moments that come from Poitier and Berenger. It helps that Poitier (who turned 60 in 1987) hasn't lost his touch when it comes to selling the movie with poise that is basically unshakable even when in a different element (as one does when stolen jewels turn into folks having their eyes shot out), and it pairs well with the hardened Berenger (always a charmer*, I would say) for a few chuckles in the crisscross of trying to move forward in a locale that curves on a whim, such as say, a bear encounter. It helps that the movie takes some time to actually reveal just who is the killer is (okay you already can tell by the billing) to pair along with Alley (decent, if not exactly comparable to someone like Brown) and others for a bit of smooth tension, because there is a bit of a mean streak with the body count. Seriously, you get a few people thrown off ledges to pair with an experience that eventually climaxes with shooting a gun in water, it is the kind of movie you slip on at night and just enjoy the ride. Both actors get to run the process of what they know best in their environments without underselling the other person. This was a movie made when films still liked to actually strive for a landscape to look upon with pride (it was mostly filmed in British Columbia, as one does when being set in the Northwest), suffice to say. As a whole, Shoot to Kill is a pleasant thriller for all involved, maneuvering through its 109-minute runtime with a good sense of adventure and fun that doesn't waver in its entertainment value regardless of how familiar it might seem because its charms are too good to resist.
 
Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.


*Berenger is a sentimental favorite of mine, I think, mainly because I re-watch Major League every year.

*By the way, this movie actually has a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Seriously.

April 28, 2026

They Call Me Mister Tibbs!

Review #2531: They Call Me Mister Tibbs!

Cast: 
Sidney Poitier (Lieutenant Virgil Tibbs), Martin Landau (Logan Sharpe), Barbara McNair (Valerie Tibbs), Anthony Zerbe (Rice Weedon), Ed Asner (Woody Garfield), David Sheiner (Lieutenant Kenner), Jeff Corey (Captain Marden), Ted Gehring (Sergeant Deutsch), Juano Hernandez (Mealie Williamson), Norma Crane (Marge Garfield), and Beverly Todd ("Puff") Directed by Gordon Douglas (#663 - Them!, #686 - In Like Flint, #2320 - Viva Knievel!)

Review: 
Hey, remember In the Heat of the Night? To refresh my memory, because I only remember a few fragments...the movie was based on the 1965 novel by John Ball that involved a small Southern town in Mississippi rocked by a murder in the midst of the 1960s as an outsider detective comes in, deals with bigotry and solves the case. Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger were big on doing the film together, which was filmed in Illinois (as directed by Norman Jewison) that probably had its most interesting scene when Poitier's character slaps someone back (as not originally envisioned). Or, well, the scene where Poitier's character, being asked what he gets called back in Philadelphia, responds, with, well, "They call me Mister Tibbs!". Ball actually did a handful more novels with the character of Tibbs with The Cool Cottontail (1966), Johnny Get Your Gun (1969), Five Pieces of Jade (1972), The Eyes of Buddha (1976), Then Came Violence (1980) and Singapore (1986). But this would be a movie that just went on its own way, with Alan Trustman (writer of The Thomas Crown Affair and co-writer of Bullitt [both 1968], interestingly enough). writing the story and co-writing the screenplay with James R. Webb (the Academy Award winning writer of How the West Was Won eight years prior). At the helm for director was Gordon Douglas, a regular presence in various genres, which included follow-ups to films such as Lady in Cement (1968). While not as big a success as the first film, it made roughly over $2 milllion in rentals in the first six months. Poitier returned as Tibbs for one more movie with The Organization (1971), with Don Medford serving as director.

We now have a film set in San Francisco as our title character is now wrapped up in the investigation of a dead prostitute as some sort of city referendum is coming up about urban renewal with a preacher on one side. This also goes with a few scenes spent in the household of his wife and children (what, a lonely detective in the big city?) that results in a few moments of strife because damned if there is even one bit of tension in the murder case. The 1970s would have a few movies with an interesting presence behind it in terms of crime action thrillers, but Shaft (1971) would be the one people think of as among the first to get the ball rolling rather than this film, that's for sure. Hell, Cotton Comes to Harlem, released a month before Tibbs, is more captivating because it just feels like a movie that yearns to actually do something beyond the mundane routines that come with an investigation that might as well be the equivalent of turning over a rock to see a bunch of ants on the bottom. You might say that there was something lost in the curiosity factor in the character played by Poitier, because now he just seems completely rigid as a board, as if someone wanted to make a Dragnet impersonation but gave up. His family life just sits there in a strange type of "I recognize the dynamic, but I don't care about these people". Landau was a nice actor who people loved in film and TV (such as, say, his Mission: Impossible run*) but he barely has anything to really give in this film, which seems shocking when you consider he is playing a street preacher. You would think that an investigation that you've got a pretty good guess on who the killer is would have some sort of way to drive interest but nope, it basically stays on autopilot for most of it. Zerbe is the more interesting presence, and he's playing for a pimp, for God's sake (to say nothing of putting a wig on Ed Asner and doing a routine car chase). You get little to nothing from folks such as Corey on the police side and you barely get a feel for the city as a whole, managing to resemble Generic Town USA even more than the average sequels that usually pass by on charm. But this one doesn't have enough charm to actually ride the wave for a complete winner for all of its 108 minutes, even with its ridiculous ending (calling it a shaggy dog procedural might be nicer). As a whole, They Call Me Mister Tibbs! is a downgrade from the previous film in most of the aspects that matter and just isn't enough of a film to call a winner, managing to be a disappointment that lies in the shadow of the decade that would give out better films to offer in procedures and thrillers.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.


*What can I say, I watch old TV from time to time. The Wild Wild West is the other old show I'm on at the moment, I've done a whole bunch of TV watching on DVD such as The Fugitive, The Addams Family, The Munsters, Batman, Star Trek, The Twilight Zone, Lost in Space, and Get Smart.

February 25, 2024

Buck and the Preacher.

Review #2179: Buck and the Preacher.

Cast: 
Sidney Poitier (Buck), Harry Belafonte (Preacher), Ruby Dee (Ruth), Cameron Mitchell (Deshay), Denny Miller (Floyd), Nita Talbot (Madame Esther), James McEachin (Kingston), Clarence Muse (Cudjo), Enrique Lucero (Indian Chief), Julie Robinson (Sinsie), and Lynn Hamilton (Sarah) Directed by Sidney Poitier.

Review: 
Admittedly, first-time directors have a tough task upon them, and it is harder when one is also the star of the film as well. Joseph Sargent was the original director in mind for this film, which had a screenplay done by Ernest Kinoy (who had done the script for Brother John (1971), which had Poitier as star), although it had been refined by him and Poitier prior to production beginning. Poitier wasn't fresh to Westerns, as evidenced by his starring role in the 1966 Western Duel at Diablo, although he was second-billed next to James Garner. Sargent had directed a variety of television films and a handful of films such as Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970). However, Sargent was replaced early into production because Poitier (and Belafonte, a friend of Poitier ever since they met at the American Negro Theater years ago) felt that it was focused on just being a Western rather than one that honed to certain values near to them (Sargent wasn't hurt as a filmmaker - perhaps ironically, his 1972 production of The Man went from TV movie status to being released in theaters); note that within values of basically doing a buddy film in the clash of escape within hate is two prominent Native American characters being played by, well, the spouse of Belafonte and a man named Lucero. Poitier took over the production (as done in Mexico such as Durango) and did well enough that Columbia Pictures did not interfere in his filmmaking.  Poitier would be a director for over a decade, directing such films as Uptown Saturday Night (where he starred with Belafonte again) and the highly successful Stir Crazy (1980) before closing it out with Ghost Dad (1990); Poitier died in 2022 at the age of 94.

It is a curious movie to say the least. There had been a handful of Westerns with black actors in prominent roles before this film, such as say, Two Gun Man from Harlem (1938), a musical, or ensemble films like 100 Rifles (1969) or Skin Game (1971 - incidentally, that featured Garner...billed before Lou Gossett). In fact, this wouldn't even be the only Western with black leads, as The Legend of Black Charley was released a few months after this film (incidentally this was also the same year that Black Rodeo, a documentary about an all-African American rodeo that happens to feature Muhammad Ali was released). Really this is probably a bit more familiar to those with experience enjoying Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969). It always helps to have film spring to mind actual history such as "Exodusters", which were African Americans that were moving along to places such as Kansas from states along the Mississippi River that started in 1879 (the film is actually set around the late 1860s while dealing with migration attempts out of Louisiana, but you get the idea). Liberation never felt so fun when it comes to the clash of men trying to deal with who they are with or without the gun. Poitier does pretty well in showing the vulnerability that comes with trying to be a man of one's word, which results in an engaging dynamic with Belafonte (a famed singer who acted in roughly over a dozen films). That clash of wills in terms of dogged truth and some form of faith (beyond just saying a huckster) work out well for gripping entertainment in 102 minutes. Scenes such as watching the first meet up with the natives and the two or one involving a distraction-shooting work best in that regard. Mitchell makes a suitable adversarial presence in malice that stokes that flame of fear desired for a film like this, which goes for Dee in quality timing as well. As a whole, the movie works best in the presentation attempt of showing the clash of wills between the races of people that each have belief in their way of life (whether that involves setting for Kansas, wanting to retain cheap labor through fear or living among the land as Natives) that works out on the basis of a confident filmmaker at work. It tells a useful story with two leads that had appreciation for the material put to them for a quality show that carved a useful place as a true Black Western.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

September 14, 2022

Sneakers (1992).

Review #1886: Sneakers.

Cast: 
Robert Redford (Martin Bishop / Martin Brice), Ben Kingsley (Cosmo), Sidney Poitier (Donald Crease), David Strathairn (Irwin 'Whistler' Emery), Dan Aykroyd (Darren 'Mother' Roskow), River Phoenix (Carl Arbogast), Mary McDonnell (Liz Ogilvy), Stephen Tobolowsky (Werner Brandes), Timothy Busfield (Dick Gordon), Eddie Jones (Buddy Wallace), George Hearn (Gregor "Greg" Ivanovich), Donal Logue (Dr. Gunter Janek), Lee Garlington (Dr. Elena Rhyzkov), and James Earl Jones (NSA Agent Bernard Abbott) Directed by Phil Alden Robinson (#488 - Field of Dreams)

Review: 
Ensemble movies need their appreciation too, if you think about it. Do you remember WarGames (1983)? In the process of writing the script for that film, Lawrence Lasker and Walter F. Parkes discovered the existence of "sneakers", which refers to hackers that well, sneak into a computer system somewhere (in this case, the hackers here are hired by banks to break in and test the security system). A number of drafts eventually attracted the attention of Phil Alden Robinson, and he ended up spending nine years trying to get the film going. Getting the attention of Robert Redford (cast in a role originally intended with a star in their mid-40s as written by people in their 40s) helped the process and eventually led to a film with a cadre of actors that went from veteran stars to younger names such as River Phoenix (this was the penultimate movie released before his death the following year) while squeezing James Earl Jones in for one scene. Lasker and Parkes also produced the film, which was their fourth venture together (one of them was Awakenings (1990)). Clearly, the movie is really more of a take on the caper movies of yesteryear with its distinct characters in its ensemble, although the message about a world run by "little ones and zeroes" probably still seems quite true after three decades. You probably remember Robinson as the director of Field of Dreams (1989), his second effort; Sneakers is his third feature effort, and his next feature film ended up being Freedom Song eight years later.

Admittedly, it is a nice little movie when it comes to seeing familiar faces in an attempt at a techno-thriller/heist movie. Oh sure, it is a movie that does extoll a little bit about the quirks of a new age where having control of the information might be more important than having the fastest gun. Sneakers does so with a grasp of a number of cliches you have probably seen in countless heist movies with how you can describe the supporting characters in two-word phrases or how the climax is operated (besides the literal slow-motion sequence), right down to needing to acquire a box. In that sense, it can either prove as a comfort movie with plenty of enjoyment from an age like the 1990s or just an average ensemble, and I think it works out more often than not to make a quiet winner. Redford does well with what is needed in general charm, a uniter of misfits with what you've seen a few times from him (perhaps playing a bit of The Sting but without looking like a copy). Poitier, in his penultimate appearance in a feature film, still has the knack for steely timing to contrast the semi-whimsical others, mostly against Aykroyd (amusingly, when approached for the film, he actually was more interested in playing the Cosmo role before being told that Kingsley was signed for it). Kingsley doesn't have as much to really do as the adversary, but in a movie with just a fraction of action and more about the general chase, this works out okay in general familiarity (better him than a ham or a nonentity, perhaps). Strathairn lends a few chuckles to go along with a wiry Phoenix that make the most of those little moments to shuffle the plot. McDonnell makes a quality deadpan middleperson, one who does share a few interesting moments with Redford alongside some chuckles with Tobolowsky, who seems to be having a ball with his moments on screen. 126 minutes is admittedly a big ask for thrillers to enjoy, but I think it does pull enough out of the bag of enjoyment to work at the expectation required from its cast and crew. It's a movie about a couple of scraps who just want to untangle themselves from a weirdo conspiracy involving uncertainties that is dealt with in wry patience that makes a solid little three-decade gem. If fun-loving ensembles trying to play caper is up your alley, go right ahead with this one, where the game of concerns of privacy still holds true now.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

February 10, 2022

No Way Out (1950).

Review #1798: No Way Out (1950).

Cast: 
Richard Widmark (Ray Biddle), Linda Darnell (Edie Johnson), Stephen McNally (Dr. Dan Wharton), Sidney Poitier (Dr. Luther Brooks), Mildred Joanne Smith (Cora Brooks), Harry Bellaver (George Biddle), Stanley Ridges (Dr. Sam Moreland), and Dots Johnson (Lefty Jones) Directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz (#750 - All About Eve and #1378 - People Will Talk)

Review:
“If the fabric of the society were different, I would scream to high heaven to play villains and to deal with different images of Negro life that would be more dimensional. But I’ll be damned if I do that at this stage of the game. Not when there is only one Negro actor working in films with any degree of consistency.”

There were film noirs that also existed within the realm of social consciousness. Boomerang! (1947) dealt with following the rule of law, Crossfire (1947) was a mystery that gradually revealed a message against antisemitism, Panic in the Streets (1950) dealt with trying to stop the plague. What we have here is a film of blind rage...specifically, racist rage, complete with a hallmark film debut for Sidney Poitier. Born in 1927, Poitier grew up in the Bahamas before moving to the United States as a teenager, where he would serve in the United States Army during World War II. Right after the war ended, he applied twice to the American Negro Theatre, where he would study acting - he broke into Broadway in 1946. He was under contract for a play when he decided to take a screentest for this film, not expecting to actually receive the part. However, director Joseph Mankiewicz saw something he liked in Poitier (who actually fibbed his age to say he was five years older than his actual age). Poitier became a star in the next two decades in his way to becoming the first major African American film star, one who became the second black actor to win an Academy Award before he shifted focus to directing in later years; Poitier passed away this year at the age of 94, and he is generally remembered as an icon who made a difference with his integrity as a filmmaker. 

The script was done by Lesser Samuels and Mankiewicz, as the former had a son-in-law doctor (Philip Yordan provided uncredited contract script work). Mankiewicz modified the story to be more of a noir with the viewpoint of Poitier rather than an observation of black medical hopefuls. Darryl F. Zanuck, the head of 20th Century Fox (the studio that released the antisemitism expose Gentlemen's Agreement three years prior), personally supervised production of the film. Of course, the original script apparently ended with a gruesome murder, but the studio did not want to leave audiences with a hopeless feeling (which honestly seems like a good decision). Seven decades later, this 106-minute film certainly pulls enough punches within an outspoken flair for useful storytelling and a message that still stings curiosity without turning into predictable mush on any count. It is the story of a man trying to dig his way out of an awful situation: trying to prove themself when a racist is breathing down their neck (complete with inciting a riot). The unshakable object meets the immovable force when the facts are not enough to stop rage, and this still seems like something that could be seen today.

You have to remember that Widmark had captivated the screen with Kiss of Death (1947), so to see him in a scuzzy role filled with venom is not too surprising. He proves startling effective as the simmering bully, one who balances the line between caricature and terror, since he serves as a reflection of people who would rather blame race rather than confronting themselves for why their lives are the way they are (in that sense, he makes the audience uncomfortable and thus does it right). Of course, Poitier can't be forgotten, even if he is billed fourth despite having the brunt of screentime. Filled with self-doubt and pride, he makes an astonishing debut here (incidentally, Widmark and Poitier became friends during production, and he would even go so far as to apologize to him after certain takes), with the enmity between the two leads being quite palpable when it comes to a match of pride. McNally is fine here, although one can see the seams of a character that could've seeped into self-righteousness. Darnell fares better in the conflict of which strife matters most to her (i.e. the scuz-ball saying things in her ear or her crappy life) that makes the climax (and its fateful last words) fairly worth it.

The supporting cast is nicely assembled, revolving from the warm presence of Smith to the tense Johnson. Additionally, this is the onscreen debut of Ossie Davis (in a brief uncredited role), and he appears with wife Ruby Dee briefly for the first time of numerous occasions where they were paired together on screen. The film was not a major success, likely owing to objections from select censor boards due to its content (what with the whole race riot and all, although I wonder if they were totally fine with all the racial epithets), with Chicago fearing it would incite riots (which as we all know is bullshit) before cuts were made regarding the riot. Of course, Mankiewicz already had another film ready to release later that year with All About Eve (1950), while this film is less well-known (incidentally, each film would have their script nominated for Academy Awards). At any rate, this is a film anybody would be proud to have been a part of, and it is definitely one worth seeing for what it manages to do for the time as a socially conscious movie with a worthwhile debut from an actor that was just getting started.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Carib Gold.

January 16, 2017

A Patch of Blue.


Review #896: A Patch of Blue.

Cast:
Sidney Poitier (Gordon Ralfe), Shelley Winters (Rose-Ann D'Arcey), Elizabeth Hartman (Selina D'Arcey), Wallace Ford (Ole Pa), Ivan Dixon (Mark Ralfe), Elisabeth Fraser (Sadie), and John Qualen (Mr. Faber) Directed by Guy Green.

Review:
There is something interesting about how the movie paces itself with elements of romance and a touch of good natured humanity. It's not a movie mired in being dated or only relevant for the time, in part because this is still a film that could be made today. Sure, one could be cynical and rail against the literal nature of "love is blind" the movie takes, but I find it to be an entertaining movie in part because of the two leads. There is just something magical and charming about their scenes, where Poitier and Hartman (in her debut performance) simply just click on screen. Hartman makes this naive but charming girl one to care about. Poitier is entertaining as well, showing the right kind of depth and humanity. It's not an innocent movie either, with Winters portraying her character with the right kind of toxic nature that accompanies a movie that has enough punch to be quite effective. Ford (in his last performance) is also quite good in his role, portraying this sad old man without any hint of fakery. You can have scenes where the two are enjoying themselves buying groceries, and other scenes where she tries to navigate herself to the park on her own without help. There is enough emotion and heart that it never feels manipulative nor too sentimental. The movie flows well at 105 minutes, never dragging itself too much while also managing to have a ending that fits the film well in being itself and not going for the easy out. It certainly is a film that leaves itself open to discussion over a good deal of subjects, and it makes the mark of a fairly good movie. While it may not be as influential as Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (#139) was when released two years after this film, A Patch of Blue still manages to leave its mark with the way it presents itself and its characters. Happy Martin Luther King Jr. Day, folks.

Countdown to #900: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

February 16, 2014

Movie Night: In the Heat of the Night.


Review #544: In the Heat of the Night.

Cast
Sidney Poitier (Virgil Tibbs), Rod Steiger (Bill Gillespie), Warren Oates (Sam Wood), Lee Grant (Leslie Colbert), Larry Gates (Eric Endicott), James Patterson (Lloyd Purdy), William Schallert (Webb Schubert), Beah Richards (Mama Caleba/Mrs. Bellamy), Peter Whitney (George Courtney), Kermit Murdock (H.E. Henderson), Larry D. Mann (Watkins), Quentin Dean (Delores Purdy), and Anthony James (Ralph Henshaw) Directed by Norman Jewison (#127 - Rollerball and #273 - The Cincinnati Kid)

Review
The movie has two notable moments, a quote: "They call me MISTER Tibbs" (Which would also be used as the title for the sequel), and when Tibbs slaps Endicott back, eliciting shock. The movie has other brilliant moments as well, such as when Steiger and Poitier share a scene inside Steiger's character's house, which turns from the two drinking to them talking about loneliness, which is a poignant scene just for the two and their interactions in that and their other scenes in the movie. The actors are good, especially Poitier and Steiger. They have a good deal of tension in their performances, and the supporting cast is fitting for a film with tension like this. The last scenes may end the movie maybe too quick, but the movie still has tension, and a good deal of entertainment value to it. In the Heat of the Night is such an influential film when it all boils down to it, and this is a really slick but classic film.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

May 12, 2012

Movie Night: Guess Who's Coming to Dinner.


Review #139: Guess Who's Coming to Dinner.

Cast
Spencer Tracy (Matt Drayton), Sidney Poitier (Dr. John Prentice), Katharine Hepburn (Christina Drayton), Katharine Houghton (Joanna "Joey" Drayton), and Cecil Kellaway (Monsignor Ryan) Directed by Stanley Kramer.

Review
This film was the ninth and final pairing of Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn (1st time I've reviewed a film with these two though, Hepburn's 105th Birthday being today), and they both are wonderful in this drama. It's beautifully acted, especially from Poitier. This is a well set drama that after 45 years holds up allright. But not perfectly allright. I feel that this film wants to have Poitier be too perfect (Which is actually what the director wanted) He does so much good, why would the other parents not accept him? It's a bit outdated, but it is still an allright drama.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.