Showing posts sorted by relevance for query the great dictator. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query the great dictator. Sort by date Show all posts

March 2, 2018

The Great Dictator.


Review #1054: The Great Dictator.

Cast: 
Charlie Chaplin (Adenoid Hynkel - Dictator of Tomania / A Jewish Barber), Paulette Goddard (Hannah), Jack Oakie (Napaloni - Dictator of Bacteria), Henry Daniell (Garbitsch), Reginald Gardiner (Schultz), Billy Gilbert (Herring), Maurice Moscovitch (Mr. Jaeckel), Grace Hayle (Madame Napaloni), Carter DeHaven (Bacterian Ambassador), Emma Dunn (Mrs. Jaeckel), Bernard Gorcey (Mr. Mann), Paul Weigel (Mr. Agar), and Chester Conklin (Barber's Customer) Directed by Charlie Chaplin (#353 - Monsieur Verdoux#599 - The Kid#600 - City Lights#759 - The Gold Rush#775 - Shoulder Arms#820 - Modern Times#923 - The Pilgrim#1025 - The Circus, and #1041 - A Woman of Paris)

Review: 
The Great Dictator was Charlie Chaplin's first true sound film, along with his first without his character of "The Tramp", which he had utilized for his silent films. In any case, the film was released a year after the beginning of World War II, with Chaplin playing a parody of Adolf Hitler and Oakie playing a parody of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, although it was noted by Chaplin in later years that had he knew about the horrors of the concentration camps, he wouldn't have made the film. The film manages to be brilliant in utilizing comedy, satire and drama without having either of its elements being lost in excess, being a funny but also brave movie that holds its principles together by finding a balance in its two environments, with credit going to Chaplin and his script. Chaplin also does a tremendous job in both of his roles, having a fine distinct nature that works well within the mistaken identity parts later on, with the dictator parts having numerous highlights with all of the gestures and posturing that definitely strikes a chord. The parts with the barber might remind you a bit of the Tramp, although he plays it more of a outsider type that certainly fits. Goddard does a fine job in her parts on screen, having fine chemistry with Chaplin at points. Oakie does a stand-out job, having the correct amount of bombast and stature that makes for amusing rapport with Chaplin when they are both on screen together, particularly one scene involving chairs. Daniell and Gardiner also do fine jobs in their parts, distinct in their roles within the dictatorship that leave room for amusement. The rest of the actors do fair jobs in their roles. There are numerous great sequences and gags involving both slapstick and language, with one of my favorites being the ballet with a globe, which is helped by the music by Meredith Willson and Charlie Chaplin, fairly brilliant in its own right that has a fine timing to them that helps contributes to the flow of the film effectively for several scenes. The cinematography by Karl Struss and Roland Totheroh (a regular for some of Chaplin's films) is acceptable for the movie and its look.

The film does run finely at 124 minutes, never feeling too long. I will state that the climax of the film feels a bit sudden, particularly since it ends with a speech, which is an inspiring piece at least, so I can't blame Chaplin for wanting to incorporate it in a film he had all control over. Since that serves as the last point for the film, it is strange to wonder what would've happened after that point in the film, although apparently a folk dance sequence was apparently going to serve as the finale, and there were also plans to include shots of people from all over the world that would accept the message of peace, but these were abandoned after a bit of shooting from Chaplin. In any case, the movie isn't ruined by the last part, so take his words for what you will. The film was nominated for five Academy Awards (Outstanding Production (now known as Best Picture), Best Actor, Writing (Original Screenplay), Best Supporting Actor (Oakie), & Best Music (Original Score), although it fell short each time. It has since been selected by the Library of Congress for preservation in the National Film Registry, and it is easy to see why. This is a brilliantly made movie that serves as a fine piece of entertainment for all ages that belongs with the rest of Chaplin's classics for a look.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

April 15, 2022

Rebecca (1940).

Review #1828: Rebecca. 

Cast: 
Joan Fontaine (The second Mrs. de Winter), Laurence Olivier (George Fortescue Maximilian "Maxim" de Winter), Judith Anderson (Mrs. Danvers), George Sanders (Jack Favell), Reginald Denny (Frank Crawley), Gladys Cooper (Beatrice Lacy), C. Aubrey Smith (Colonel Julyan), Nigel Bruce (Major Giles Lacy), Florence Bates (Mrs. Edythe Van Hopper), Edward Fielding (Frith), Melville Cooper (Coroner at trial), Leo G. Carroll (Dr. Baker), and Leonard Carey (Ben) Directed by Alfred Hitchcock (#219 - Rope, #223 - North by Northwest, #446 - Spellbound, #447 - Psycho, #450 - Vertigo, #455 - Rear Window, #553 - Strangers on a Train, #800 - Shadow of a Doubt, #910 - Notorious, #963 - The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, #964 - The Ring (1927), #965 - Downhill, #970 - Mr. and Mrs. Smith, #977 - Frenzy, and #1343 - The 39 Steps, and #1739 - The Birds)

Review:
It does become interesting to consider just how many movies one can see of the late Alfred Hitchcock, particularly since his line of work has taken up nine percent of all films I've ever seen, which is a weird way of saying seventeen films. Of course, the real story is the fact that this was not only the 26th feature film directed by Hitchcock, it was his first directed in Hollywood. Hitchcock was forty years old when he decided to move to Hollywood, having believed that he reached his peak in his native Britain, and it was the efforts of producer David O. Selznick that led to him moving; the two signed a seven-year contract; Hitchcock would end up producing more films by himself than with Selznick, and they would have their disagreements in terms of personality and professionalism when it came to this film, to where they only worked on one other film together in Spellbound a couple of years later, most notably because Hitchcock liked to film a controlled cut without too much extra footage. As such, this is an adaptation of the novel of the same name that had been written by Daphne du Maurier, and it was Hitchcock who had adapted her previous book Jamaica Inn in 1939. Incidentally, the book had been adapted on radio by Orson Welles in 1938, and a stage adaptation had been done by Du Maurier in 1939. Selznick aimed to be quite faithful to the book, as much as one can do with the Production Code, which had one particular rule about spouse death. Hitchcock was a busy man, since this was also the year of release for Foreign Correspondent, which like this film would be nominated for an Academy Award for Best Picture (other films nominated were films such as The Grapes of Wrath, The Great Dictator, and The Philadelphia Story). As it happened, Rebecca would win the award, making it the only Hitchcock film to ever win the honor; Selznick, as the recipient of the award, became the first back-to-back winner for a producer. As such, the screenplay was done by Robert E. Sherwood and Joan Harrison, while the adaptation was done by Philip MacDonald and Michael Hogan. 

Several actors were considered for the main roles, such as Ronald Colman, William Powell, Olivia de Havilland, Loretta Young, among others. Sometimes one needs a Gothic vision to really see the talents of Hitchcock come alive, if only because one wants to see just where the rabbit hole goes in mystery and tortured romance, where the unsaid is more biting than the action. 130 minutes never felt so magnificent when it comes to how Hitchcock has handled the macabre with the terror that comes from memories of a deceased wife that haunts both an estate and the husband himself (incidentally, one never sees the title character nor knows the name of the one of the main characters) that creates such diverting paranoia without becoming a costume show; George Barnes and his cinematography help in that regard to make a stirring film look as alive as it does, and it probably isn't surprising that Barnes won an Academy Award for his work. Of course, the cast is just as effective as the crew. Olivier portrays the vulnerability required with such brooding patience that makes for quite a volatile and curious interaction with Fontaine, one ripped by the past that holds him down further than anything else could, which means one is watching a gripping performance that isn't just a show for Olivier (a talented actor already noted for his performance in Wuthering Heights the year before). Fontaine (the younger sister of actress Olivia de Havilland) had a few key roles in films before this film, most notably Gunga Din (1939), but this was the film that made her a key star (Fontaine however did not care for her typecasting for just melodramatic roles, which would include films done by Selznick like Jane Eyre (1943) and even another du Maurier adaptation in Frenchman's Creek the next year). It doesn't take much to see why she became a star, because her performance is quite excellent, one with the exact type of withering vulnerability required in showing doubt that doesn't become overshadowed by the other members of the cast, and the growing confidence by the second half only helps to make a well-rounded performance of curiosity. Anderson (considered one of the great stage actors of her time) makes a compelling adversarial presence, one who lurks around Fontaine that practically glides from scene to scene (complete with a lack of blinking) that makes the final result all the more haunting. Sanders, when he does show up, makes a perfect cad to view against the others, and the rest of the cast keeps the proceedings dignified and well invested. As a whole, the movie is a classic worth viewing among all the other Hitchcock classics for what is seen and what isn't seen in this Gothic mystery that has the highlights from its director and producer in Selznick without becoming consumed by itself. One can debate just where the film rests among the classics, but one knows by the time the film ends that it is up there in the margins somewhere for what it ends up doing with a master at work.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

June 19, 2023

She Devil (1957).

Review #2022: She Devil.

Cast: 
Mari Blanchard (Kyra Zelas), Jack Kelly (Dr. Dan Scott), Albert Dekker (Dr. Richard Bach), John Archer (Barton Kendall), Fay Baker (Evelyn Kendall), Blossom Rock (Hannah, the Housekeeper), and Paul Cavanagh (Sugar Daddy) Produced and Directed by Kurt Neumann (#618 - Rocketship X-M, #710 - The Fly, and #832 - Kronos)

Review: 
You may or may not be surprised to hear that this falls under the web of film producer/cinema chain owner Robert L. Lippert. In 1956, he struck up a deal with 20th Century Fox that saw his Regal Films company make films that would be distributed by Fox. Lippert and Fox would do countless films together, and She Devil was released as a double bill with Kronos that had the same director in Kurt Neumann, who directed four features with Lippert as a producer (contrary to what it says in the film, which lists just Neumann as producer/director, since Lippert was trying to escape a rule about residual payments and TV). Both films happen to share the same cinematographer in Karl Struss, who shot various productions over the decades that ranged from Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927) to The Great Dictator (1940). Regal managed to convince Fox to let them use their CinemaScope format for their films (which were in black-and-white), which they did under the name of "RegalScope". The film is based on the short story "The Adaptive Ultimate", written by Stanley G. Weinbaum, which first appeared in print in November of 1935, one month before Weinbaum's death from lung cancer at 33. Prior to this film, it had adapted to radio (1949) and television (1949, 1952, 1955). Kurt Neumann and Carroll Young wrote the screenplay together. The story and film are a bit different in little details. Her first act of trouble is killing an old man in a park for money that she gets away with by changing her hair color before the trial begins. Also, she apparently can intensify her beauty as a mode of adaptation, which she either uses on a politician (story) or a millionaire (film). Of course, the mode of trying to take her down is the same in story and film: carbon dioxide.

It really isn't a horror film as it sometimes is labeled with being "sci-fi horror". It seems a bit too closed in to be anything other than a mild thriller, mostly because they have established a threat so clear that the only way to win is basically cheating. I mean, you've created someone who is probably immune to getting diseases worse than tuberculosis that can heal from bullet wounds and change their hair color, so the fact that she has a small body count seems more of a surprise than anything. Sure, you could interpret the film as one of attempted liberation, because she really is someone who is given newfound power (by men) that simply takes what she wants. But really it is just the doomed idiocy of two folks who should know better than to look away at the threat that grows until it has gone on a bit too much (such as admitting to bonking someone on the head when asked). The movie can't really pull a dilemma that you haven't already thought you saw in "insert Frankenstein feature/ripoff". Hell, what's the point of having "devil" in your title? Blanchard had been cast in various supporting roles throughout the 1950s, such as Abbott and Costello Go to Mars (1953) along with various B-movies such as Son of Sinbad (1955). Sadly, she was diagnosed with cancer in 1963 and passed away in 1970 at the age of 47. Blanchard might be pegged as the femme fatale type if this was actually meant to be a noir, because she does prove quite entertaining in a role that overshadows everyone around her, one that sees her as both brunette and blonde in hair (truth be told, dark hair always looks better) while finding just how much it means to be alive and ready to get what they want. Undeniably, having the ability to take on a leopard and not have a lingering wound could make an interesting god complex, and yet the movie can only find the smallest of threats to establish with the destruction of a marriage, but Blanchard still shines in watchability right down to the end. Kelly and Dekker are just too ordinary in their foolishness to really make them interesting beyond the fact that they made the simple choice to not murder people and that's it. Granted, the killer is supposed to be interesting when it comes to stuff like this, but man, you need even the tiniest bit of tension or interest when they aren't on screen, which is surprising when one of the actors ended up starring in Maverick that same year and the other was known for various adversarial roles such as The Killers (1946). It probably seems a bit too convenient that the 77-minute run-time comes with an ending where the threat is basically neutered without much trouble (of course, they include a reference to religion within the last few minutes when wondering just what will happen to the neutered she-devil, which is rich when it is revealed that she has tuberculosis again). As a whole, the movie falls just a bit short to really make a consistent enjoyable time, but it surely would be a decent double feature with another B-movie where one can sit back and look upon the wide frames and see for themselves how much a lead performance matters for both good and terrible films.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

March 10, 2020

To Be or Not to Be (1942).


Review #1358: To Be or Not to Be.

Cast: 
Carole Lombard (Maria Tura), Jack Benny (Joseph Tura), Robert Stack (Lt. Stanislav Sobinski), Felix Bressart (Greenberg), Lionel Atwill (Rawich), Stanley Ridges (Professor Alexander Siletsky), Sig Ruman (Col. Ehrhardt), Tom Dugan (Bronski), and Charles Halton (Dobosh) Directed and Produced by Ernst Lubitsch (#1026 - The Shop Around the Corner)

Review: 
Satire can be a curious thing. If you do it right, one will appreciate the humor and irony for years on end, regardless of how much time has passed (such as Gulliver's Travels). One would expect a war satire to come from brilliant directors (such as Charlie Chaplin with The Great Dictator the previous year), so it only makes sense for Ernst Lubitsch to make one as well. The German-born director had started as an actor in 1913. Although he appeared in roughly 30 films over the next seven years, he gradually shifted his attention to directing, making his debut with Shoe Palace Pinkus (1916). He made numerous movies in his native Germany with actors such as Pola Negri before leaving to Hollywood for good in 1922. He made films in numerous genres, ranging from comedy to bio-dramas to musicals, and he received an Honorary Academy Award in 1946, one year before his death from a heart attack. The story was done by Melchior Lengyel (who had co-written Ninotchka) while the screenplay was done by Edwin Justus Mayer (with un-credited work done by Lubitsch). Naturally, one would expect a star or two to headline the film, and one can't go wrong with Lombard and Benny. Lombard had started her career in 1921 (with a main debut in Marriage in Transit in 1925),  having small roles in films for Fox Film and Mack Sennett's short films before reaching her first high point with Twentieth Century (1934). It was the first of numerous screwball comedies that she became known for over the next few years. Tragically, this was to be her last film. She was killed in a plane crash after a war bond rally on January 16, 1942 (roughly a month before the film's release). Benny came into this film because Lubitsch wrote the film directly for him. He had originally done vaudeville for his violin playing before eventually deciding to do comedy with his act. In 1929, he had signed a contract with Metro Goldwyn Mayer and had his debut with The Hollywood Revue of 1929. While he made numerous appearances in film over the next few years, he became more well-known for his radio program, which ran from 1932 to 1955. 

The film is a wonderful one, dark and witty with its pursuit of making ridicule of a serious situation like the Nazis, in a time where World War II was in its third year and America had just entered the fight. There was a mixed reception among audiences and critics of the time, where even Benny's father initially was disgusted with the sight of his son in a Nazi uniform before being convinced otherwise (where he promptly saw it again and again). It is a keen movie with plenty of sharp observations and facial situations that rewards the viewer time and time again. The movie has a tremendous sense of timing, balancing comedy and drama with such deftness, which is helped with a prime screwball pairing through Lombard and Benny, who are both inspiring to watch either together or with others. The film doesn't repeat itself with tiring gags, knowing when to do something without needing to be prodded into it, where one could make a comedy-less version of the same basic story without finding trouble. Stack (who was reportedly terrified going into this role) does just fine with keeping up with Lombard and Benny with careful demeanor. The other actors pull off an inspired front in retaining interest, with Ruman doing the most well with bombast. It certainly is a timeless one to last among other comedies, and it even inspired a remake in 1983. The film moves with a dashing pace of 99 minutes, never seeming to wear itself out at any time with making a capable dark comedy that also serves as a romance and thriller with plenty to make light of with daring ambition and an especially capable director and stars at hand to make things shine in the dark. One can't go wrong with a Lubitsch picture, and this is no exception.

Next Review: The Invisible Man (2020).

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

May 22, 2018

Kung Pow! Enter the Fist.


Review #1086: Kung Pow! Enter the Fist.

Cast: 
Steve Oedekerk (The Chosen One), Hui Lou Chen (Master Tang), Fei Lung (Master Pain aka "Betty"), Ling Ling Tse (Ling), Lau Kar-wing (Wimp Lo), Jennifer Tung (Whoa), Chi Ma (Master Doe), Tad Horino (Chew Fat Lip), and Nasty Nes (Boombox Henchman) Directed by Steve Oedekerk (#525 - Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls)

Review: 
Parody movies, when done right, can be good experiences to watch. Whether it is something like The Great Dictator (1940), or Our Man Flint (1966), or Blazing Saddles (1974), the amount of fun one can have with a spoof depends on how far the filmmakers are willing to go get some laughs and make a meaningful time for the viewer. This film certainly has its own way of trying to get laughs, doing so by parodying martial arts movies. It utilizes footage of the Hong Kong film Tiger and Crane Fist (1976), which also was directed by its main star, who in that case was Jimmy Wang Yu. In most scenes, Wang Yu was replaced by Oedekerk through post-production chroma key techniques, with every character (except for Tung's) being re-dubbed by Oedekerk. The idea of using footage from a prior film or show and adding re-dubbed dialogue or new imagery isn't too particularly new, with one big example being Power Rangers and its use of footage from Super Sentai but also films such as Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid (1982). It's easy to admit that the film has a pretty low bar when it comes to doing jokes, so can I really give a movie flak for being making jokes out of silly voices an even more silly effects? Sure, because I didn't think this movie was really that funny. While the film does have some moments that generate some chuckles, the gag does tend to wear a bit thin after a while, feeling more like something that would've worked better as a sketch, not an 81 minute feature (this rings particularly true after a gag involving The Lion King). It has the kind of quirks you'd expect, such as nonsensical dubbing (intentional, of course) and effects that certainly stick out when they need to. For the most part, it's a mild experience that certainly won't stick out as anything too dreadful, and some will likely get a real kick out of it. It is evident that Oedekerk really wanted to bring this passion to fruition, since he also wrote and produced the film, and while I don't think that the end product was successfully funny enough to merit a positive rating, I'll give him credit for getting said passion to film. I can't say I hated watching this, but I also can't say I really "liked" doing so, either. Whatever you expect from the film likely won't live up to the eventual product. What other film has a fight sequence with a cow? It is likely that the best time to watch this is with either a group of friends or to watch it when there are no real options - for better or worse. The film is absurd in every sense of the word, but there is at least some sort of entertainment one can get from what it does, and I can't fault the movie for setting a low bar and then proceeding to clear it. Can I recommend it? Well, if you want something as "inspired" as this, go right on ahead. I probably won't ever see this film again, but I won't stop someone from doing the same.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.