Nothing but a Man.

Review #2182: Nothing but a Man.

Cast: 

Ivan Dixon (Duff Anderson), Abbey Lincoln (Josie Dawson), Julius Harris (Will Anderson), Gloria Foster (Lee), Yaphet Kotto (Jocko), Leonard Parker (Frankie), Stanley Green (Reverend Dawson), Eugene Wood (Johnson), Helen Lounck (Effie Simms), Gertrude Jeannette (Mrs. Dawson), Tom Ligon (Teenager), and William Jordan (Teenager) Directed by Michael Roemer.

Review: 

"I recognized everything. It was immediate. I said, 'Oh, I know this. I know what this feels like.''

Independent films don't always get a fair rap. But history does lend some credit to those that really did make an effort to make something worthwhile. This film was released 60 years ago this year as a fairly naturalistic feature that only made a profit upon a re-release in the 1990s. The film was written by Michael Roemer and Robert M. Young, who also produced the film with Robert Rubin (Young served as cinematographer). Born into a Jewish family in Germany, he had been sent to a Bunce Court School (a boarding school) in England in 1939 by the Kindertransport. After time spent in Bunce Court School in England, he moved to the States in time to attend at college at Harvard University, where he graduated with a degree after doing a bit of filmmaking and also met Young, a good friend of his. Roemer worked with Louis de Rochemont for a number of years in production management along with making a handful of educational films. Young and Roemer got together first to do a documentary called Cortile Cascino that would've been shown on NBC in 1962. It was a film meant to show the lives of people living in a slum (Palermitano) in Palermo, Italy, but the footage was thought of as not suitable for TV. The basis for what became this film was shaped in part by Roemer's upbringing (such as his relationship with his father) along with travels spent with Young for a few months in the American South. The film was shot in New Jersey on a budget over $200,000 as a film where "the most powerful, useful political statement would be a human one" with a handful of music from the Motown label. Lincoln was a singer (with one appearance in film as herself in The Girl Can't Help It) and Harris was a male nurse making his film debut.  Roemer's next film in The Plot Against Harry (1969) couldn't find a distributor because of its perceived failure in comedy before 1989 saw attention given to it at the New York Film Festival. Roemer had shot other documentaries as well, such as Dying, which was from the point of view of those near death. As late as his eighties (Roemer still lives, now 96!), he was a professor at Yale. A television film of his in Haunted (1984) was re-released in theaters as Vengeance is Mine in 2022.

The heart of the film is the timeless quality that comes in hard-edged honesty for 95 minutes. It is a sensitive film that doesn't rely on easy piety or easy outs when it comes to the simple story of how the shadow of life under the grip of prejudice and pre-conceived ideas of what one seems to be can wreak havoc on trying to live at all. The illusion of being free is a hard one to see get stripped away from oneself, whether that involves that illusion of being free in their job or one's love having an illusion of freedom from nasty words or complications. In other words: life is hard, and it is going to stay hard regardless of if you have someone there with you or not, but you just have to face the wind and roll with whatever is there to blow against you. Dixon was evidently proud of his lead performance here (released the year before having a long-running role on Hogan's Heroes and becoming a director himself), and it is easy to see why. He has a smoldering honesty that commands the screen in a way that is easily recognizable for those who have ever experienced some kind of misfortune when it comes to perceptions or in a personal matter. He sees Lincoln and goes from thinking of her as one of just desire to of equals when it comes to not just being a background face in the crowd. His frustrations are our frustrations in a way that draws the viewer to think about within our lives when it comes to what one is and is not in the scheme of things (be it stubborn, proud, or otherwise). The sequence of him seeing his son toil as one away from his parent (and accompanying words of why one hasn't made more of the effort) makes it clear of what one has here in those vulnerabilities and hazards to think about. Lincoln is the tender one that makes a worthwhile pairing with Dixon in whirlwind curiosity and accompanying vulnerability. Harris is the key in shaping the film for such a carefully handled amount of time, a smoldering heap on the last legs of a type of person with unyielding tension that makes one wonder how one really could be that good in their first acting role that quickly.  (Dixon was the most experienced of the main cast, as Foster had her debut in 1964 with The Cool World and this). As a whole, the movie ends on its own terms for one's own imagination when it comes to what it means in the idea of feeling so free and where the road can take them. It plays well for now among curious viewers looking for indie films because it is a story we can all look to in tender natural amazement and smile in its imperfect dealing with a imperfect world.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Monkey Hustle.

Review #2176: The Monkey Hustle.

Cast: 

Yaphet Kotto (Daddy Foxx), Kirk Calloway (Baby D), Thomas Carter (Player), Rudy Ray Moore (Goldie), Rosalind Cash (Mama), Debbie Morgan (Vi), Randy Brooks (Win), Lynn Harris (Sweet Potatoe), and Donn Carl Harper (Tiny) Directed by Arthur Marks.

Review: 

Oh sure, the "blaxploitation" genre had their share of hits and misses in that noted era of the 1970s, some of which being pretty evident to see fall in and out of the public eye. Arthur Marks was one of those directors that made a handful of films in that decade that can be thought of as belonging to that certain label. Born in Los Angeles to a family involved in show business, Marks was an assistant director in the early days of television alongside film before getting his chance to direct with television, most notably with over 75 episodes of Perry Mason. Marks started directing features with Togetherness (1970), but the films that likely stick with people best were the five (for which he also sometimes produced) in the "blaxploitation" label with each featuring a prominent name (in varying levels): Detroit 9000 (1973, starring Alex Rocco), Bucktown (1975, starring Fred Williamson and Pam Grier), Friday Foster (1975, starring Grier with Yaphet Kotto and Godfrey Cambridge), J. D.'s Revenge (1976, with Glynn Turman and Louis Gossett Jr.), and this feature, which actually was his last as a feature director. He directed a bit of TV afterwards before his death in 2019 at the age of 92. The film was cited later by Michael Jai White as an inspiration when growing up (prior to starring in films such as Black Dynamite), where he described it as "just brash, unlike anything I'd ever seen".

The script was done by Odie Hawkins and Charles Eric Johnson (which ended up as the last feature screenplay credited to each) for distribution by American International Pictures. Honestly, the fact that Kotto is featured with Rudy Ray Moore (in his first non-Dolemite film) on the poster seemed like a useful enough argument to go looking for this film, even though it sounded like one of those films that could go either way in varying entertainment level. Unfortunately, the movie is not particularly consistent enough to work for 90 minutes beyond the occasional chuckle. It may seem like an interesting ensemble idea, but it lacks proper tension and all-around energy to actually pull it off. It seems more like a collection of half-baked ideas of trying to shape the youth into productive lines of work (read: hustling) that practically begs for a bigger presence in the overall endgame. Kotto does have a generally useful presence when it comes to huckster charm, because his confidence in not needing to do an honest day of work to live another day for the tricks of trade is satisfactory to the bare minimum required. Oh to live with better material to watch. Moore does not have as much schtick to play with  (who appears lightly but has his own music cue pop up a handful of times when he appears in a scene), but he at least seems game to actually play the role of playing the strings of the community in flair rather than just sit there. Good God, I'd rather watch Kotto and Moore try to ham each other out rather than spend time with Calloway and the nonconsequential story that comes in youth (remember that that the main "plot" only comes together because of having to appeal to the folks lording over the rest in hustles and not anyone else). Who care about romance between a bunch of folks in the mean (citation needed) streets of Chicago when they have the connection of a battery with 5% remaining? It basically is a series of vignettes that loosely tie together with the all-encompassing "protect the streets from pesky construction" that falls on deaf ears. If the action or hustling (the plans shown here sure are detailed enough for such small-time gains) is going to seem like something you've seen before, the least one can do is have some fun with ham acting or noted names, but here it just is a flatly average experience all the way through. Everything is rudimentary here, but a 5 is just about right for a few curious stares on a late night, because a halfway there rating seems accurate enough in hustle and accuracy.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare.

Review #1144: Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare.

Cast: 
Robert Englund (Freddy Krueger), Lisa Zane (Maggie Burroughs/Katherine Krueger), Lezlie Deane (Tracy), Shon Greenblatt (John Doe), Breckin Meyer (Spencer Lewis), Ricky Dean Logan (Carlos), Yaphet Kotto (Doc), Tobe Sexton (Teenage Freddy Krueger), Cassandra Rachel Freil (Young Maggie/Katherine), and Lindsey Fields (Loretta Krueger) Directed by Rachel Talalay.

Review: 
With such a ridiculous title like this, what do you expect? The sixth (and intended to be final) film in the franchise, Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare sinks to improbably new lows in terms of execution and ridiculousness, where Freddy Krueger has turned into a cartoon character for the amusement of an audience that have seen better days and clearly have seen better films. After all, Freddy even had his own day proclaimed for him, done so by Mayor Tom Bradley for the city of Los Angeles on the day before the film's release on September 13, 1991. Sometimes you just have to admire the audacity of a film in how ridiculous it can get without being scary, and this is done within the first five minutes of the film, featuring such "bold" moments as a title card telling us about how Freddy (in the not-too distant future of ten years since the last film) has apparently eliminated all of the children and teenagers from Springwood, which I guess means he has evolved into some sort of super-villain, although that doesn't help the fact that the actual body-count is just as low as the previous film, lingering more on mediocre exposition and even more mediocre characters. But the cherry on top is Englund on a broomstick mimicking the Wicked Witch of the West while taunting someone about how they'll get them and their little soul too. It doesn't get much better from there, but at least there are cameos to keep the audience surprised (or something), from Mr. and Mrs. Tom Arnold to Johnny Depp to even Alice Cooper. I found myself wondering which sixth installment in a horror franchise was worse, this one or Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers - both are needlessly incompetent with trying to deliver slasher scares, since they both look like films given re-workings even after filming stopped - but I at least could have a laugh with this one.

The cast doesn't exactly help make the film any better either. Sure, Englund is game to spew out one-liners and do stuff equivalent to a cartoon character, but it's sad to see how the series progressed so ridiculously for something that also tries to show some of the character's origins (at least the parts that weren't said in the other films, anyway). It just seems more like it demystifies the nature of who this guy is, unless you're big on having details about someone who likes to haunt people in their dreams. Zane is the lone highlight from the other members of the cast, having some actual screen presence and being interesting to follow around with. Greenbatt can't really elevate his role with no name to anything other than bare minimum characterization. The trio of Deane-Meyer-Logan to go along with the others as the new batch of kids with a characteristic to exploit later on, just like the previous film. Kotto is fine, but he doesn't have much time on screen. It's amusing to poke at when the film wants to be like a cartoon, but the film is never scary. Whether you like the idea of the backstory scenes or not, the "dream demons" are not executed well at all - it looks too silly with its resemblance to worms to really be anything haunting. Talalay wrote the film while Michael De Luca was credited for doing the screenplay, but the film never really goes anywhere too special that isn't either done for a cheap laugh or a cheap thrill in its 89 minute run-time. The effects and slashing sequences don't really help give the movie too much life either. The last portion of the film was shot in 3-D, complete with one of the characters putting on 3-D glasses, and I do wonder how the effect looked in theaters for 1991, but it doesn't really do anything for me as a way to end the film, especially the resolution for Freddy, which combines taking elements from the climax of the first film along with an "innovative" way to take him out - putting a pipe bomb on him while impaired on a steel beam, ending with a ridiculous effect when he explodes, complete with a title drop. On the whole, this is a ridiculous installment that serves as the low point for A Nightmare on Elm Street, failing at being fine horror slasher entertainment by how it executes itself with its style and story that makes this a silly one to get through.

Overall, I give it 4 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Thomas Crown Affair (1968).

Review #691: The Thomas Crown Affair.

Cast
Steve McQueen (Thomas Crown), Faye Dunaway (Vicki Anderson), Paul Burke (Detective Eddie Malone), Jack Weston (Erwin Weaver), Gordon Pinsent (Jamie McDonald), Biff McGuire (Sandy), and Yaphet Kotto (Carl) Directed by Norman Jewison (#127 - Rollerball, #273 - The Cincinnati Kid, and #544 - In the Heat of the Night)

Review
In a way, this is a movie made for technical buffs. The movie's use of split screen to show multiple images at the same time was inspire by the Multi-dynamic image technique, originally used for the short film A Place to Stand at the Expo 67 in Montreal. Jewison uses this technique throughout the movie, starting with the opening credits and ending with the ending credits. My favorite use is during the robbery sequence, showing the different points of view which helps tell the story for different points, which is neat. The movie is well photographed, and is pretty to look at. The movie, however tires to be a thriller and a romance movie. Whether it succeeds at both is up to you. For me, it's a marginally successful attempt, that starts to feel slow around the middle, though the ending of the movie is a good twist. "The Windmills of Your Mind" is a song used to great effect, it's a really strange but somehow perfect song for a movie such as this. McQueen and Dunaway have good chemistry together, and the chess scene between them is nice to watch. This is a passable movie that looks nice, has a rough interior, but manages to have a cult following of its own. Judge for yourself.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Alien.

Review #530: Alien.

Cast
Tom Skerritt (Dallas), Sigourney Weaver (Ripley), Veronica Cartwright (Lambert), Harry Dean Stanton (Brett), John Hurt (Kane), Ian Holm (Ash), Yaphet Kotto (Parker), and Bolaji Badejo (The Alien) Directed by Ridley Scott (#100 - Blade Runner)

Review

Alien has its shares of influences such as (#519) The Thing from Another World or (#331) It! The Terror from Beyond Space, but beneath all that is a wonderfully dark masterpiece. The set design by Ron Cobb and Chris Foss is really well done, it doesn't distract from the movie, but it is wonderful. The alien (and other accompanying elements) by H. R. Giger works so well because the design doesn't look like a suit for somebody to be in, it's a big and long suit that is so unconventional and yet so cool looking. Ridley Scott does a good job directing, his best decision in this film is not showing all of the Alien throughout most of the film, which keeps the suspense and terror of the Alien intact. The actors (insert your John Hurt as the War Doctor reference here, which I won't do out of choice in the name of peace and sanity...oops.) are well suited for a film like this, especially Sigourney Weaver, who certainly can act with terror all around her. Even Bolaji Badejo does a good job, his movements of the Alien from inside the suit are more natural looking and menacing. This is a tense and effective horror film that would later have three sequels and a...film in the same universe as Alien but not a prequel. Whatever the case, Alien is still a terror to behold 35 years later.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Live and Let Die.

Review #293: Live and Let Die.

Cast
Roger Moore (James Bond), Yaphet Kotto (Dr. Kananga/Mr. Big), Jane Seymour (Solitaire), Julius Harris (Tee Hee Johnson), David Hedison (Felix Leiter), Gloria Hendry (Rosie Carver), Clifton James (J.W. Pepper), Geoffrey Holder (Samedi), Bernard Lee (M), Roy Stewart (Quarrel Jr) Directed by Guy Hamilton (#280 - Diamonds Are Forever, #289 - The Man with the Golden Gun, and #291 - Goldfinger)

Review
This was the eighth Bond film, two years after the love it or hate it Diamonds Are Forever. In a way, this is like a trilogy, three straight films in order by the same director all with James Bond. But is this any better then the other two? Yes...and no. This was Roger Moore's first film as James Bond (Even though this is the third review of him as James Bond, sorry for the reviewing paradox), and he does a reasonable job, making the role slowly turn into his own, away from Connery (and Lazenby), which is a good thing. It's a shame that the film around him isn't exactly "good", though. Its plot lines are weird at points, making me wonder if I watching a Bond film or one of those random 70's films you might find in a cheap DVD pack. And that's another flaw of the film, it's dated at some points. (The fashion, the club locations, even the dialogue at times) What does dated mean exactly? It means that over time a film doesn't look as good as it might've been in its time, instead it looks like only a product of the 70's and not much else. The villain is not very impressive nowadays compared to other villains the Bond series has had (Goldfinger, Blofeld, Klebb, Jaws, even Franz Sanchez), and his henchmen Tee Hee reminds me too much of Dr. No, who wasn't exactly impressive to being with. The leading lady (Also known as the Bond girl, but I thought that would be weird to say) is excellent, having a purpose and being noteworthy enough to escape just being a girl who Bond saves. I'd almost forgotten that Q isn't in this film, and he usually provided some sort of fun, even if it was for one or two scenes. The action is mildly enjoyable. In the end, this film might be a step up or a small misstep for the Bond franchise, not being horrible, but not being very good either. At least Moore would have better opportunities as Bond. I think. Countdown to 300 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7...

Overall, I give it 007 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Running Man.

Review #067: The Running Man.

Cast
Arnold Schwarzenegger (Ben Richards), María Conchita Alonso (Amber Mendez), Richard Dawson (Damon Killian), Yaphet Kotto (William Laughlin), Marvin J. McIntyre (Harold Weiss), Mick Fleetwood (Mic), Professor Tanaka (Professor Subzero), Gus Rethwisch (Eddie "Buzzsaw" Bitowski), Jesse Ventura (Captain Freedom), Jim Brown (Fireball), and Erland Van Lidth De Jeude (Dynamo) Directed by Paul Michael Glaser.

Review
This film has an 80s charm to it, yet it's not really outdated. It still makes you wonder what could happen in the future (admittedly I made a joke about that while watching it) and what television could and might do to us. The acting is solid for the most part (Arnold and his lines with death puns being a good highlight). Dawson is our bad guy (with my jokes about Family Feud, it works for me) but the film uses its message and the action to keep you interested. And so the film is a drama, science fiction (possibly), dystopian futuristic thriller.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.