WAKE IN FRIGHT (1971)

Posted on November 6, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Ted Kotcheff

SCREENWRITER: Evan Jones, Ted Kotcheff

FILM STARS: Donald Pleasence, Gary Bond, Chips Rafferty, Sylvia Kay, Jack Thompson, John Meillon, Norman Erskine, Slim DeGrey

COUNTRY: Australia

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Kenneth Cook

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Penguin

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1973

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1961

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Drama

WORDS: The film is certainly not an advertisement for “Tourism Australia” though, perhaps, at the time it was a more truthful depiction of a part of Australia … the “Outback”. One of the great Australian films. It is in your face and certainly picks up on a specific part of Australian culture – rural, pre migration Anglo-Celtic, working and lower middle class.

It could be argued (if this was a sociological exercise) that the culture depicted extends beyond that. There is some evidence to suggest that Australian culture is the great equalizer and that its power lies in making you become part of it rather than you making it part of you. It is certainly seductive in it cavalier attitude to social norms and rules .. and the further one travels from “society” the more the norms and rules can be disregarded.

The central character, John Grant, certainly lives that as he journeyed into a alcoholic, cultural, sexual and spiritual nightmare as he tried to get back to Sydney from his teaching post in outback New South Wales. He is stranded in a small rural town (the fictional town of Bundanyabba is based on Broken Hill in New South Wales) and becomes immersed in the local culture of the “outback”.  Kenneth Cook is, I suspect, a much underrated writer. He was a journalist (who spent much time in the outback) but with an artistic bent.  His lines are matter of fact though there is a big picture going on. The book opens with a great opening “He sat at his desk, wearily watching the children file out of the room, reflecting that, this term at least, it was reasonable to assume that none of the girls was pregnant”. The title comes from an old curse: “May you dream of the Devil and wake in fright”.

Despite that the film was called “Outback” in both the UK and the USA and only reverted to its current tile on the DVD release in 2012

The film came at a time when few Australian films were being made though English money (largely) financed the film which explains director Kotcheff (Canadian but working in England) and the two leads, Englishmen Gary Bond and Donald Pleasence (interestingly, Michael York stated (apparently) in a 1980 interview that he turned down a role in the film due to being offended by the kangaroo hunting scene and Robert Helpmann was initially hired to play the role of Doc Tydon, but he was replaced with Donald Pleasence due to scheduling conflicts). Director Ted Kotchelff who had worked in film and television (and would go on to direct westerns (“Billy Two Hats” (1974)), action films (“First Blood” (1982)), and comedies (“Fun with Dick and Jane” (1977), “Switching Channels” (1988), “Weekend at Bernie’s” (1989)) is much underrated and approaches the material straight on. The cast is great including Australians Chips Rafferty (who died of a heart attack prior to the film’s release), Jack Thompson (whose first film it was), and John Meillon. The only surprise was why Bond didn’t become a bigger star (though he was quite well known in the UK in theatre). The film won (apparently) much critical acclaim in Europe, and was Australia’s entry at the Cannes Film Festival. Interestingly a film version was linked with the actor Dirk Bogarde and the director Joseph Losey in the early 1960s. Cook originally sold the adaptation rights for his novel in 1963 to Bogarde, who intended to play John Grant and make the film for his production company, Bendrose Films, with Joseph Losey directing the film. Nothing happened so Bogarde sold the rights to (Australian author) Morris West who sold it to the films producers. Ironically, when the film was shown at Cannes, it was competing with “Death in Venice ” (1971) starring Bogarde and Losey’s The Go-Between (1971) for the Grand Prix du Festival. It lost to the latter.

Quoted from the movie credits … “The hunting scenes depicted in this film were taken during an actual kangaroo hunt by professional licensed hunters”. Apparently the hunt lasted several hours, and the hunters were getting really drunk and they started to miss. Kangaroos were wounded, hoping around. There was blood, there were intestines. The crew were not used to this and eventually orchestrated a power failure in order to end the hunt. Art imitating life? The kangaroo hunt scene is confronting to modern urban audiences (apparently at the 2009 Cannes Classic screening 12 people walked out during the kangaroo hunt)

Despite this the mindless brutality of human and life in the Australian outback is, perhaps, even more confronting, unsettling and disturbing. And controversial, at the time … apparently, during an early Australian screening, one man stood up, pointed at the screen and protested “That’s not us!”, to which Jack Thompson yelled back “Sit down, mate. It is us.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_in_Fright

Amusingly, according to some trainspotter there are approximately 107 occurrences in the film where a person drinks from a beer glass, beer bottle, whiskey bottle or whiskey glass. Director Ted Kotcheff recalled that Chips Rafferty insisted on drinking real pints of beer during the bar sequences. Kotcheff replaced non-alcoholic beers for the real stuff, but Rafferty noticed immediately and demanded proper pints be served. He told Kotcheff: “You concentrate on the directing, I’ll concentrate on the drinking.”  The director calculated that due to this, Rafferty was drinking up to 30 pints per day.

The book is a good read. the film is a must see.

And, the big question is, does the culture shown still exist?

LINKS

TRAILER

40th Anniversary trailer (2012)

1971 US Release Trailer

 

 

 

Posted in Drama, Novel | Tagged | Leave a comment

TWO RODE TOGETHER (1961)

Posted on October 30, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: John Ford

SCREENWRITER: Frank S. Nugent

FILM STARS: James Stewart, Richard Widmark, Shirley Jones, Linda Cristal, Andy Devine, John McIntire, Paul Birch, Willis Bouchey, Henry Brandon, Harry Carey Jr., Olive Carey, Ken Curtis, Anna Lee, Jeanette Nolan, John Qualen

COUNTRY: USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Will Cook

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Bantam

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1961

COUNTRY: USA

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1959

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: Comanche Captives

NOTES

GENRE: Western

WORDS: The American west in film (and in literature) has been the black and white battle ground between concepts of good and evil even if the protagonists are grey. Its landscape is usually stripped of laws (or at least established accessible laws), is remote (where things can go hidden), and is a place where undesired consequences don’t always follow anti-social acts. It becomes a place where human emotions and personal philosophies can be viewed without the garments of “civilisation”. The clash of the new, of different cultures and the changes time itself brings just adds to the fun.

More than any other genre  the western is a place where actions have reactions, and both could end in death. I think this occurs because the  western is the setting for the last place where everyday people could carry weaponry in the open … and could use the same. It’s a place where the violent reactionary past of humanity meets the beginnings of modern liberal civilisation.

The beauty is, though, the west, like everything, isn’t black and white.

Cook’s novel, “Comanche Captives” (1959) seems to be a follow on to Alan Le May’s “The Searchers” (written 1954, filmed by John Ford in 1956). “The Searchers” is all about the quest to recover white captives taken by Comanche Indians. “Two Rode Together” starts with the recovery of the white captives. The rest is about how they fit in. Both stories are based on real life (and relatively) common place incidents through out the south west of the time. Cook’s book is grim but entertaining, as westerns had to be. Readers wanted action with their philosophical discussion, or, rather, they wanted action to hide any philosophy. It’s a great read.

In both the film and book two different philosophical types are sent to negotiate with Comanche chief Henry Brandon (who was also the chief in “The Searchers”) as Chief Quanah Parker for the release of prisoners. In history Chief Quanah Parker was the half native American son of the girl stolen by the Comanches (which is the basis for “The Searchers”). So if you want to look at this in a meta way. Henry Brandon here (in “Two Rode Together”) is playing the son of the girl stolen by an Indian, played by Henry Brandon (in “The Searchers”).

Quannah Parker’s story (and he himself) is well known in the south west. Recently the wonderful non-fiction “The Searchers: The Making of an American Legend” (2013) by Glenn Frankel tied up history, literature and film. The book (just like the novels), in its treatment of history pulls no punches on the relationships between whites and native Americans, unlike films and television of the time. There is no desire to turn the Comanches into a Native American version of the Cunningham family of the Cosby family (which was what, for all the right reasons, the film “Broken Arrow” (1950), with Jimmy Stewart in the lead, did, and set a trend for). Ford’s film however reflects the unpleasant history.

 To some it may be violent and reactionary but to portray protagonists in other ways would be unkind to history, legend or not. There is some darkness in Ford’s west in “The Searchers”, especially with John Wayne’s character , though ultimately, as a character says “this can still be a fine land”. “Two Rode Together” is perhaps Ford’s first totally dark western. That’s not to say there is no humour but it is still philosophically cynical.

Stewart is the cynical marshal hired to repatriate pioneer children captured by the Comanche, and Widmark is the cavalry officer who accompanies him. The captives, the Indians, the soldiers, and the settlers all are victims of the frontier. Westerners, Native Americans (both proto capitalists of different “tribes”) compete with new migrants, and with Easterners for a piece of the action. Gone is the clean frontier as a would-be potential garden of “The Searchers” and earlier Ford films. Instead, Ford offers us a nightmare vision, the frontier overrun by hysteria and (Eastern/Yankee) hypocrisy, with even the Indians seen as primitive entrepreneurs. It is an unsettling film. By all account Ford was unhappy with the film., and he said as much. He may have been but what the famously cantankerous Ford said should be taken with a grain of salt. He had everything he liked including supporting roles populated with Ford regulars and Frank Nugent who was brought in to write the screenplay (he wrote many Ford films and worked on “The Searchers”).

I love this films. It has flaws but it has more merits … the relationship between Stewart and Widmark and their different ideals (in the film they play each others normal roles) is funny but pointed. There are many great scenes – their riverfront dialogue exchange has been mentioned by others and is a classic.

It was called “second rate John Ford” but second rate Ford is far better than first rate from 90% of directors.  This neglected Western repays careful attention.

LINKS

TRAILER

two reissue trailers (the first for the DVD release and the second for cable) which are clearly aimed at different audiences (or have different philosophies)

 

Posted in Novel, Western | Tagged | Leave a comment

BARABBAS (1961)

Posted on October 20, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Richard Fleischer

SCREENWRITER: Christopher Fry, Nigel Balchin (uncredited), Diego Fabbri (uncredited), Ivo Perilli (uncredited), Salvatore Quasimodo (Italian dialogue) (uncredited)

FILM STARS: Anthony Quinn, Silvana Mangano, Jack Palance, Ernest Borgnine, Arthur Kennedy, Katy Jurado, Harry Andrews, Vittorio Gassman, Norman Wooland, Valentina Cortese, Arnoldo Foà, Michael Gwynn, Laurence Payne, Douglas Fowley, Guido Celano, Enrico Glori, Sharon Tate.

COUNTRY: Italy – USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Par Lagerkvist

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Four Square

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1962

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1950

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Historical

WORDS: I saw the film so long ago I have little recollection of it. But given it stars (favourites) Anthony Quinn and Ernest Borgnine and is directed by (favourite) Richard Fleischer it deserves to be revisited.

The story (of Barabbas) is familiar enough to anyone of the Christian west, though only in part. The novel (and film) follow Barabbas after Christ’s crucifixion as he struggles with answering “why me?”

The premise of the movie (and novel) is that Barabbas has to go around in life with the weight of the fact that the Son of God died in his place. The film, then, is a long movie about survivor’s guilt. The book is an existentialist, philosophical look at faith and belief by a Swede who had rejected Christianity (but never became bitter to it). In 1951 Pär Lagerkvist was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature largely on the back of this book’s popularity (critical and public).

The novel (which is quite short) and the film (which is quite long) both set out to ask what became of the man who was freed instead of Christ. The novel is a pure work of fiction which expands the story of Barabbas in the Bible. The film expands the novel even further … and adds all sorts of action scenes as required in a Biblical epic.  The novel’s Barabbas wants to believe in Christ but his nature prevents him from accepting a God who preaches love and forgiveness. He wants rough justice. He cannot affirm his faith. He cannot pray. He can only say, “I want to believe.” The film is more ambivalent and can be read (at the end) as a person who has placed his faith in Christ.

Postscript (12.05.2026).

I watched the film recently, at Easter, with the kids, and I’m glad I revisited it. I read the novel and am glad I did. Everything I had said above is correct but revisiting the film and the book has put more meat on the bones. The film is a Hollywood (via Italy) thoughtful Biblical epic whist the books is a man struggling with who he is. The Barabbas of the book understands his good fortune when Jesus Christ takes his position on the cross but understands little else. His life s a series of events where God is present through others and it seems as he has understood the message only to fail. Only at the end, totally alone, on his crucifixion does it come to him. Does he see God or is it the fear of, as a friend said to me once about atheists, “they all die roaring for God”, or a bit of both. The Bible has next to no detail on Barabbas’ background so Lagerkvist fills in the detail – the carouser, the hedonist, the thug who apart from escaping the crucifixion always seems to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, or perhaps the right place at the right time but misinterpreting the events. He is unable to understand spiritual love and, accordingly unable to understand the Christian faith. Various characters in the book extend the faith to him, and just when it seems he gets it, he fails. He can only say, “I want to believe.” On my reading, though, he (speed bumps aside) is moving to faith which finally dawns on him. The book is short and not dull but I found it a slow read perhaps because of its mix of Swedish existentialism and Protestant despair.

Lagerkvist won the Nobel prize (which usually honours a complete body of work rather than single titles) in 1951 after having been nominated three times earlier (1947, 1949, 1950) “for the artistic vigour and true independence of mind with which he endeavours in his poetry to find answers to the eternal questions confronting mankind”. I suppose the book does do that. And it was a best seller.

The Barabbas of the film is as conflicted as the Barabbas of the book and Anthony Quinn is perfect in the role. But this is meant to be an epic produced by Dino De Laurentiis , not a internal monologue (the film would be vastly different if directed by Robert Bresson) so action is needed. the book has all that but the crucifixion, the life of a slave, the working in the mines are only backdrops (and tests) for Barabbas. In the film they become big action or dramatic set pieces. And to cap it off the final third of the film has Barabbas becoming a gladiator (and vanquishing (sort of) the evil Jack Palance) before finding his faith and dying on the cross. None of this is in the book. Barabbas has doubt, and is tested but he is never quite alone, and he is always moving towards faith. The film with its (relative) optimism and big action set pieces becomes rousing Catholicism.

The film is still a handsome film and it has the look (perhaps because it was filmed in Italy with an Italian crew – Italian, Aldo Tonti, was the cinematographer) the look of a big budget art film with dollops or realism. Some of the shots are lit and framed with a intention to mood not to narrative (the film is famous for shooting its genuinely ethereal crucifixion scene during a real solar eclipse on February 15, 1961, which occurred over southern Europe), the script by poet and playwright Christopher Fry is sufficiently cerebral and the score by Mario Nascimbene is unconventional (though still epic). The performances are great and though the glorified cameos by Borgnine, Palance, and Arthur Kennedy may be intrusive, I like Borgnine (love Borgnine), Palance, and Arthur Kennedy. The rest of the cast, especially Gassman, is solid but Quinn is the whole show and he carries the film. Quinn played good guys, bad guys, and a lot of loud guys but he also played a lot of introspective characters. Here he is both loud and introspective which is probably where Quin himself was at (his autobiography from 1972 “The Original Sin” is perhaps the best Hollywood autobiography I have read). Fleischer proves yet again he is underrated as a director (best at small action films and drams he also did big budget epic type films  – 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954), The Vikings (1958), Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970)), and De Laurentiis shows he can throw money around and make it look good (he was never a stranger to producing epics – Attila (1954), Ulysses (1954), War and Peace (1956), and later The Bible: In the Beginning… (1966), Anzio (1968), Waterloo (1970)) and make convincing dramas (La Strada (1954), Woman of Rome (1954), Nights of Cabiria (1957), Five Branded Women (1960)) … Barabbas was the fourth of four films he made with Anthony Quinn (the other three – La Strada, Attila, Ulysses).

The film did well at the the Italian and International box office and did fair trade in the US.

See the film, read the book.

LINKS

TRAILER

 

The Italian trailer which is the same though sharper in picture

 

Posted in Historical, Novel | Tagged | 2 Comments

SONS AND LOVERS (1960)

Posted on October 16, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Jack Cardiff

SCREENWRITER: Gavin Lambert, T.E.B. Clarke

FILM STARS: Trevor Howard, Dean Stockwell, Wendy Hiller, Mary Ure, Heather Sears, Donald Pleasence.

COUNTRY: Great Britain

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: D.H. Lawrence

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Penguin

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1960

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1913

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Drama

WORDS: I haven’t read the book but the film is great. I’m sure the book is good, but I had to (forced to) read (other) Lawrence when I studied literature at Uni. It through me off a little. I was young, I wanted, modern, I wanted post war (well, at least post World War 1). I regret that. I later went on to read Dickens, James Fenimore Cooper, Sinclair and others and loved them. Still haven’t made it back to Lawrence.

Published in 1913 and, as per usual for Lawrence, followed by allegations of obscenity, the book is regarded as one of his best. Lawrence summarised the plot in a letter to Edward Garnett on 19 November 1912, “It follows this idea: a woman of character and refinement goes into the lower class, and has no satisfaction in her own life. She has had a passion for her husband, so her children are born of passion, and have heaps of vitality. But as her sons grow up she selects them as lovers – first the eldest, then the second. These sons are urged into life by their reciprocal love of their mother – urged on and on. But when they come to manhood, they can’t love, because their mother is the strongest power in their lives, and holds them. It’s rather like Goethe and his mother and Frau von Stein and Christiana – As soon as the young men come into contact with women, there’s a split. William gives his sex to a fritter, and his mother holds his soul. But the split kills him, because he doesn’t know where he is. The next son gets a woman who fights for his soul – fights his mother. The son loves his mother – all the sons hate and are jealous of the father. The conflict goes on between the mother and the girl with the son as object. The mother gradually proves stronger, because of the ties of blood. The son decides to leave his soul in his mother’s hands, and, like his elder brother go for passion. He gets passion. Then the split begins to tell again. But, almost unconsciously, the mother realises what is the matter, and begins to die. The son casts off his mistress, attends to his mother dying. He is left in the end naked of everything, with the drift towards death”. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sons_and_Lovers .

The film was stark and uncompromising for its time. Dean Stockwell (much underrated) was great and Trevor Howard was … magnificent (all modern British actors are rubbish compared to him). Howard, in a sizeable role, lifted average films to something better than they were. In a film with quality antecedents like he added tenfold. Both he and Mary Ure were nominated for Oscars. The film was nominated for seven Academy Awards(including best Actor (Howard), Best Supporting Actress (Ure), Best Director, and Best Picture) winning one for Best Cinematography.

Jack Cardiff said, apparently, “The films that I am most proud of – the film, for instance, that I made under great difficulty, Sons and Lovers (1960), I wanted to make it into a good film because the book is marvellous, and I didn’t want to let the author down”. https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002153/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm.

Director Cardiff was a great cinematographer (The Vikings (1958), Legend of the Lost (1957), The Prince and the Showgirl (1957), War and Peace (1956), The African Queen (1951), 1The Magic Box (1951), Pandora and the Flying Dutchman (1951), The Black Rose (1950), The Red Shoes (1948), Black Narcissus (1947), and Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985), Conan the Destroyer (1984), The Awakening (1980), Death on the Nile (1978), Scalawag (1973)) and an interesting director (Young Cassidy (1965), The Long Ships (1964), The Mercenaries (aka Dark of the Sun)(1968), The Liquidator (1968)) though I suspect much credit should go to the producer, American Jerry Wald, who was an expert at these sorts of family melodramas (Wild in the Country (1961), Return to Peyton Place (1961), Hound-Dog Man (1959), Infidel (1959), The Best of Everything (1959), The Sound and the Fury (1959), Mardi Gras (1958), The Long, Hot Summer (1958), Peyton Place (1957), An Affair to Remember (1957), Queen Bee (1955), The Lusty Men (1952), The Glass Menagerie (1950)).

This is a superior family drama, kitchen sink style.

LINKS

TRAILER

Posted in Domestic Drama, Drama, Novel | Tagged | 2 Comments

BEING THERE (1979)

Posted on October 12, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Hal Ashby

SCREENWRITER: Jerzy Kosinski, Robert C. Jones

FILM STARS: Peter Sellers, Shirley MacLaine, Melvyn Douglas, Jack Warden, Richard Dysart, Richard Basehart, Ruth Attaway, David Clennon

COUNTRY: USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Jerzy Kosinski

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Corgi

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1980

COUNTRY: USA

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1970

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: satire

WORDS: Kosinski’s 1970 satire and the 1979 Hal Ashby film of the same, about a simple gardener who rises to become an influential political pundit, commentator and presidential advisor are both considered classics, and rightly so.

The story: Chance, a gardener, has taken (or inherited) his former wealthy employer’s expensive, old-fashioned suits and people make mistaken assumptions about his social station and wisdom, and call on him for opinions, elevating him to a celebrity (a influencer today). His wisdom, though, is only derived from his knowledge of gardening and his constant television watching.

Polish born Kosinski writes in a dry, simple way in much the style of the American satirist novelists of the 50s and 60s. It’s a one gimmick book and not as profound as some may think but it is an enjoyable read. There are some changes between the book and the film. Chance is much younger and handsomer than he is represented in the film (changed, I assume, to accommodate Peter Sellers age). Also, importantly, I think the most important difference between the book and the movie is that in the book, we get to read what Chance is feeling and thinking, but in the movie, we only get to see his actions. Since we only see Chance’s actions in the movie he seems even more innocent and simple than in the book. Oddly, because of his distance he also seems more other worldly or godly whereas in the book he is more human. Perhaps this was intentional. For example, when he is working in the garden in the film it seems he has no facial expressions, feelings or emotions. He is beyond that … he isn’t tired, sad, happy or anything, he just is. His inner thoughts in the book though give a more human picture. Of course, an inner monologue is always difficult to put on the screen but I think a true, complete “innocent” is, also, easier for movie audiences to follow. There are pros and cons about both.

It has been suggested that Kosinski modelled the character of Chance on Jerry Jarvis, the national leader of the transcendental meditation movement during the late 1960s and early 1970s, who had been a greenhouse manager and who Kosinski had met. On the other hand, some Polish critics (at the time) said the book was a variation on Kariera Nikodema Dyzmy (Nikodem Dyzma’s Career) by Tadeusz Dolega-Mostowicz, a Polish novel from 1932, and Kosinski was accused of plagiarism.

The film gave Peter Sellers one of his best latest roles, and  director Ashby was not slacker when it came to gentle cynical observation. He had bite but he also saw the humanity in situations. The supporting cast is wonderful. The film is more of a tragicomedy than the book.

The film (and the book) are still relevant today … in relation to the media (its shallowness), perception, assumption and status.

LINKS

TRAILER

Posted in Comedy / Satire, Novel | Tagged | 2 Comments

PRINCE OF THE CITY (1981)

Posted on October 10, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Sidney Lumet

SCREENWRITER: Jay Presson Allen, Sidney Lumet

FILM STARS: Treat Williams, Jerry Orbach, Richard Foronjy, Don Billett, Kenny Marino, Carmine Caridi, Bob Balaban, James Tolkan, Lindsay Crouse, Cynthia Nixon, Lance Henriksen, Alan King.

COUNTRY: USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Robert Daley

TYPE: Non Fiction Novel

PUBLISHER: Granada

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1980

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1978

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: Prince of the City: The True Story of a Cop Who Knew Too Much

NOTES

GENRE: Crime

WORDS: I saw the film when it first came out, and loved it. Director Sidney Lumet could do no wrong it seemed. The more I saw of his films I realised he could. But, even his failures are watchable. This film, is much like his 1973 film with Al Pacino, “Serpico”, also set in NYC (has many Lumet films), deals with cops, corruption and a police officer breaking the police code of silence in NYC.  Both are based on true stories  and both follow similar story arcs, though at the time of this film Lumet said he felt guilty about the two-dimensional way he had treated cops in “Serpico” and said that “Prince of the City” was his way to rectify this depiction.

The earlier film was a critical and commercial success, but “Prince of the City” wasn’t. Some complained of Treat Williams’ lack of star power compared to Pacino but Williams does well. I think the films length (167minutes) on what is a crime drama may have been a problem though that never stopped Scorsese or even “Serpico” which ran 130 mins. Perhaps, after all the 1970s NYC cop films, and the real life investigations, people were weary of the same. It’s a pity as it is a fine film. It plays like a documentary with live actors s0 perhaps it’s a good example of a late 1940s police procedural docu-drama updated.

Author Daley was a former New York Deputy Police Commissioner for Public Affairs turned writer who here wrote about the police life of Robert Leuci, an NYPD detective whose testimony and secret tape recordings helped indict 52 members of the Special Investigation Unit and convict them of income tax evasion. Though this is reportage Daley is also a novelist so the book does read like a novel.

LINKS

TRAILER

Posted in Crime, Non Fiction, Novel | Tagged | Leave a comment

CATLOW (1971)

Posted on October 7, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Sam Wanamaker

SCREENWRITER: Scot Finch, James Griffith

FILM STARS: Yul Brynner, Richard Crenna, Leonard Nimoy, Daliah Lavi, Jo Ann Pflug, Jeff Corey, Michael Delano, Julián Mateos, David Ladd, Bob Logan, Bessie Love

COUNTRY: Great Britain / USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Louis L’Amour

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Corgi

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1972

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1963

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Western

WORDS: I have read a lot of Louis L’Amour. Louis L’Amour has written a lot of books. Many Louis L’Amour novels have been filmed. I have watched many films based on Louis L’Amour novels.

Very few have been filmed successfully. This isn’t one of them. It’s a British western (produced in England but funded through MGM with American leads and director) and for whatever reason, very few British westerns work (the same applies to British film musicals). I’m not sure why …

The film, filmed in Spain, is watchable, but only due to the cast … Brynner, Crenna and Nimoy in the same film … nice. And, having Jeff Cory and the gorgeous Daliah Lavi and Jo Ann Pflug doesn’t hurt. But, the film is all over the place, oddly directed, with much tongue-in-cheek, cynical, and sardonic humour. I can’t recall it being good. I recall it being odd. Brynner’s Catlow seems too contemporary (in attitude and attire) and is not what a L’Amour hero would look like. Clearly, the film was looking towards the humorous  side of the spaghetti westerns for inspiration. Englishmen, producer Euan Lloyd, and primary screenwriter Scot Finch, wrote two other European films based on L’Amour novels The Man called Noon (1973) (in which Richard Crenna co-starred) and Shalako (1968) with Sean Connery which is the best of the three.

The book is a straight action western and different in tone to the film. It’s not one of L’Amour’s best but it is easily readable and full of the usual L’Amour types in this setting – bad guys with a heart of gold, lawmen who aren’t entirely sure that the law is the best way to achieve justice, cowboys, Indians, gunfights, danger, action and places that actually exist. Here L’Amour adopts an old film trope from gangster films of the 30s – boyhood friends who grew up to be on different sides of the law. Catlow is on the wrong side of the law, though you’d never meet a nicer guy. His best friend, Ben Cowan, is a US marshal and is kind of regretful that his duty is to catch Catlow and arrest him. Though centered on Catlow it is a little unusual for L’Amour (outside the family clan westerns) to have another central character but it works. The novel, also, has more humour than normal for a L’Amour western though not as many as the film, which is played for laughs.

LINKS

TRAILER

Posted in Novel, Western | Tagged | Leave a comment

CHUKA (1967)

Posted on October 2, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Gordon Douglas

SCREENWRITER: Richard Jessup, Rod Taylor (uncredited)

FILM STARS: Rod Taylor, Ernest Borgnine, John Mills, Luciana Paluzzi, James Whitmore, Victoria Vetri, Louis Hayward, Michael Cole, Hugh Reilly, Barry O’Hara, Joseph Sirola, Marco Lopez, Gerald York, Herlinda Del Carmen, Lucky Carson.

COUNTRY: USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Richard Jessup

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Coronet Books

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1967

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1961

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Western

WORDS: I love Rod Taylor, so, this pet project for him – he starred, co-produced and co wrote (uncredited) is a must.

The film is a brutal (for its time) western, with starving Indians on the warpath, a fort commanded by an aging ex-British Colonel, tough professional cavalry men, gunfighters, and buxom women. The cast is worth the price of admission (Taylor, Borgnine, Mills, Whitmore and Hayward) though the film is not wholly successful.

This is a B film made by a A studio trying to imitate the spaghetti westerns coming out of Italy. It doesn’t achieve that as it does not let go of its big studio apron strings. But, what we have is a interesting tangle of ideas and plot threads amid absurdities, occasional obvious sets, and plot holes. Regardless, the film is strangely entertaining, and one at the time, if I recall correctly, reminded me a little of Beau Geste (emotion under attack, a massacre and a flashback). The fort is under siege and it is manned by soldiers with back stories and some babes, Luciana Paluzzi and Angela Dorian (aka Victoria Vetri, who was Playboy Playmate of the Year in 1968 under the name of Angela Dorian). Everyone talks and everyone is flawed until the action kicks in. It’s all a little silly but director Gordon Douglas, always solid, could handle these cowboy macho heroics (Fort Dobbs (1958), Yellowstone Kelly (1959), Rio Conchos (1964), Stagecoach (1966), Barquero 1970 etc) and wasn’t afraid of emphasising (snippets of) philosophical dialogue.

Author Jessup had a colourful youth (brought up in an orphanage, became a merchant seaman, drank with Albert Camus) and put some of that onto paper. He wrote quite a few westerns (some under the pseudonym of Ricard Telfair) but is most famous for his book on poker playing, “The Cincinnati Kid”, made into a film with Steve McQueen and Edward G Robinson in 1965. Here, the script was apparently significantly reworked by producer/star Rod Taylor. The book is a good fast read but I haven’t seen the film in a while so I can’t comment on what’s been changed (or how well it’s been changed).

BTW: The title character Chuka is so named because, as a child, he hung around chuckwagons.

Posted in Novel, Western | Tagged | Leave a comment

POWER WITHOUT GLORY (1976)

Posted on September 29, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM (Mini Series)

DIRECTOR: Douglas Sharp, Keith Wilkes, David Zweck, Oscar Whitbread, John Gauci, Michael Ludbrook

SCREENWRITER: Howard Griffiths, Cliff Green, Sonia Borg, Roger Simpson, Tom Hegarty, John Marti

STARS: Martin Vaughan, Rosalind Speirs, John Wood, Heather Canning, Terence Donovan, Wendy Hughes, George Mallaby, Michael Pate, Rowena Wallace, Tony Bonner, Gerard Kennedy, Graeme Blundell, Gus Mercurio, John Hargreaves

COUNTRY: Australia

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Frank Hardy

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Angus & Robertson

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1982

COUNTRY: Australia

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1950

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Political drama

WORDS: I recall the Made for TV mini series in Australia as a kid. It was quite the event, though I remember little about it. It was extremely popular. That I recall.

Australian television mini-series of the 1970s (this one made of twenty-six 50 minute episodes!) tended to be lavish (at least by Australian standards). They all look pretty clunky today but not without their charm … most (including this one) were filmed on location rather than on sets (no money for extravagant sets).

Hardy’s famous (famous in Australia) novel, I’m sad to say, I haven’t read, though I’ve owned it since 1986! It would have been right up my alley at one time … a cross between John T. Farrell and John O’Hara though written by someone on the left.  Its central character, a working class Catholic boy from Melbourne, becomes a gambler, bookmaker, businessman  and then a powerbroker in the Australian Labor Party.

It’s a Roman à clef (a novel in which many of the characters correlate with real-life figures of the time). Here, very closely.  The Australian Communist Party (ACP) had apparently funded Hardy (a member of the party) to write the book, because they wanted to expose corruption in politics without having to name real names and be liable in front of the courts. This fit with Hardy’s writing philosophy … he was a member of the Realist Writers Group, an Australian-wide organization of writers who believed that the function of literature was to change society. Despite the changing of names Hardy was sued by the wife of Australian political figure John Wren, who the book was ostensibly based on. Her character in the book has an affair and an illegitimate child. The case was dismissed when Hardy argued successfully that the title character was based on more than one person, and so, the wife’s character is a composite also.

 

 

Posted in Drama, Novel | Tagged | Leave a comment

THE ARRANGEMENT (1969)

Posted on September 25, 2022 by velebit2

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Elia Kazan

SCREENWRITER: Elia Kazan

FILM STARS: Kirk Douglas, Faye Dunaway, Deborah Kerr, Richard Boone, Hume Cronyn, Harold Gould, Michael Murphy, John Randolph Jones, Charles Drake, Barry Sullivan

COUNTRY: USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Elia Kazan

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Sphere

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1969

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1967

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Drama

WORDS: I saw this a couple of times a long time ago and recall loving it. Why, I don’t know. By that I do not mean it’s not good but apart from the general disillusionment of the central character I’m not sure why I would relate as I was in my early 20s. Maybe it was because Kirk Douglas was playing a variation on a Kirk Douglas role … the flawed hero. Something I liked and something we could do with now in the age of characters who triumph over all. Or maybe it was Faye Dunaway circa 1969. What’s not to like? Kerr and Boone offer good major supports. The rest of the cast, likewise, is strong. I watched everything by director Kazan (more than once) and here he directs from a screenplay written by him base on a book he wrote. Yep, love him or not, he was an auteur.

It seems to me now, and the film is still vivid in my rose coloured glasses mind, that I could not have appreciated the film for the right reasons being that the film is about middle age disillusionment. Disillusionment with oneself, one’s job, one’s life, one’s marriage …. the arrangement you have made to survive successfully. My life now? I have to watch the film again to see what I make of it now.

This Kazan book I have not read, but I should as I’m about the same age as the protagonist … or maybe I shouldn’t for fear it may jolt me out of my arrangement as the back cover suggests. The book was a best seller. And a recommendation from Henry Miller no less.

The film did well. Interestingly, given our (recent) times, production was shut down twice, with Douglas catching Hong Kong Flu three times.

LINKS

TRAILER

Posted in Drama, Novel | Tagged | Leave a comment