chezmax

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]

Another musical, which I admit, isn't my favourite genre of film, but this had an appropriate level of silliness that made it
decent.

Set in Paris, the titular American is Jerry (Gene Kelly), a veteran and aspiring painter who moved there for the inspiration he hoped it would give him. He has some friends there, and the focal plot and struggle of the movie is the love triangle that develops between him, Milo, a rich woman who acts as Jerry's patron, and Lise, a young (but engaged!) frenchwoman who captures his heart.

Beyond that, there's not much else, but lots of music and dancing. I enjoy the tap dancing that Gene Kelly gets up to. Whatever happened to tap? It's so... charming!

I found the climactic dance/ballet at the end of the film to be a little drawn out, and the conclusion a little wanting. But the characters themselves are charming, and the film is fun. However, I certainly don't find it Best Picture worthy, given its faults; perhaps 1951 was a weak year, or musicals were a lot more popular.

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]

Been a while since my last review...

This film was three hours across two discs, so I ended up watching it in two parts: with balatro on Friday, and the rest this evening.

It's based on the classic book by Jules Verne, and features a Victorian gentleman, Phileas Fogg, who bets some other gentlemen a substantial sum money that, with all the new-fangled steamships and trains covering the planet, that he can circumnavigate the world in 80 days. With his new valet, Passepartout (played by an apparently then-famous Mexican comic, Catinflas), he embarks on his challenge, and serieses of unfortunate events and wacky hi-jinx ensue, including interference from an inspector who believes he has robbed the Bank of England and wishes to delay him until he can be arrested.

As the audience, we are treated to a variety of locations ranging from Paris to Hong Kong to San Francisco, and a variety of methods of travel from train to hot air balloon to elephant to steamship.

Wikipedia indicates that the scope of the film was huge, employing over 100 locations, tens of thousands of extras, thousands of animals, and dozens of cameos by famous performers.

Unfortunately, to modern eyes, the scope of the film isn't quite as apparent: it doesn't feel as huge, especially compared to modern films. Some of the wonder of seeing foreign places is lost, and the pacing seems slow, and so I felt that film tends to drag in places. I also don't know how much of the foreign places is silly stereotype versus historical accuracy.

In the end, the film is fun, but long.

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]

Terry Malloy (a young Marlon Brando) is a longshoreman and former boxer working for a corrupt union boss, Johnny Friendly. At the open of the film, Terry is used to unwittingly lead another dockworker to his death, which he resents, but there is a culture of D&D: deaf and dumb; nobody talks out of fear of shame or retribution.

The dead dockworker's sister, Edie, however is determined to find out what happened to her brother, and enlists the help of a local priest, Father Barry. Terry falls in love with Edie, and feels tremendous guilt over his involvement, but refuses to testify out of fear.

Father Barry eventually convinces another dockworker to testify at the hearings, but he ends up dead, crushed in a dockside 'accident' . This incident causes Terry to lean towards testifying, and Friendly sends his lawyer/accountant, Charley, Terry's older brother, to convince him to stay silent or to kill him.

This leads to a famous film scene in the back of a taxi, where Charley attempts to convince Terry, offering him a cushy job in exchange. In an incredibly emotionally poignant scene, we learn about Terry's former boxing career: he was a promising young boxer, and he 'coulda been a contender, could abeen somebody' but he had thrown an important match because his brother asked him to, so Friendly could win a substantial amount of money betting on the underdog. Charley is unable to convince Terry, nor convince himself to kill him, so he lets him go. However, Charley has been spied on, and he is killed shortly thereafter.

Terry is understandably furious, and plans to kill Friendly. Father Barry manages to convince Terry to get his revenge by testifying instead, which then leads to climax of the movie.

Apparently based on actual stories of corruption on the waterfront of the East Coast, the film has an air of authenticity. The defeatist attitude of the dockworkers is heartbreaking, but they have no alternative: they fear for their safety and their jobs. And one mirrors the frustration at this attitude by the outsiders, Edie and Father Barry.

The performances are great, and the story is strong (though I felt the eventual ending was a bit weak and loose), but it puts you a bit through an emotional wringer. Marlon Brando's performance was strong enough that I just added his other famous early film, A Streetcar Named Desire to my list.

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]


This film was epic. It goes on for for more than three and a half hours. It has fantastically elaborate sets and scenes. And it's ridiculously wide screen, to fit more on at all times.

The story itself is also pretty epic. And it appears that it's only about half of the book it's based on.

The movie is roughly is the life of Judah Ben-Hur, who is a wealthy merchant in Jerusalem, and is a contemporary of Jesus. His childhood friend, Messala, has returned from Rome as a military tribune. They are at first happy to see each other, but they soon discover they have political differences: Judas believes in the freedom of the Jews, and Messala believes in the might of the Roman Empire.

A little later on, while watching the new Roman governor arrive in Jerusalem from their rooftop, a loose tile falls, and nearly kills the governor. Messala, despite knowing of his innocence, banishes Judah to be a galley slave, and has his sister and mother thrown into prison.

After several years in the galleys, the ship Judah is in goes down in a fight, but Judah was able to save the commander, an important Roman Consul, Quintus Arrius. However, the battle is won, and in gratitude, has Judah freed, and adopts him as his son.

More time passes, and Judah longs to return to Jerusalem, to find what has become of his family. He is lead to believe that they have died in prison, when reality they had contracted leprosy, and were expelled from the city.

He enters a chariot race against Messala, hoping to get some form of revenge. The race is violent, gripping, and seems to go on and on. In reality, this scene took three months to create, and is sort of the crowning achievement of the film... and I shan't give away the ending.

Despite mostly taking place in Jerusalem during the time of Jesus, Jesus is just a bit part in the film. It opens just before the nativity, and closes just after the crucifixion.

The characterization is strong: Judah distress over his family, and his longing for revenge conflict with his faith. The heartbreaking desire of his mother and sister for Judah to believe they are dead rather than lepers. Messala's ambition conflicting with his childhood loyalties... They all make for complex characters. The cinematography is great (perhaps even over the top: apparently a huge gamble on the part of an MGM on the brink of bankruptcy), and although quite long, it doesn't drag (although, I was glad for the intermission. We watched it over two nights, since my attention span isn't 3 hours long...).

I think as far as epic films go, I preferred Gone With The Wind, but this was also quite good.

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]


The movie opens on an awards banquet, where Eve Harrington is accepting a prestigious award for her theatrical work. As we watch the ceremony, the movie fades into a flashback...

Eve is a woman who is down on her luck, and has a fanatical devotion to Margo Channing, a famous Broadway performer. After seeing her waiting outside the theatre every night for 6 weeks, Margo's friend Karen takes pity on Eve, and brings her in to be introduced to Margo. Amazingly, Eve and Margo hit it off, and Margo employs Eve as her assistant. Eve is kind, attentive, and wonderful, and we soon discover Eve is a more talented actress than anyone could have ever guessed...

Unfortunately, without giving away the entire movie, that's about all the plot I can mention.

The central cast in this film is fantastic. Eve is played charmingly and perfectly by Anne Baxter, and Margo, the aging actress who is starting to feel that her career is over is played fantastically by Bette Davis. George Sanders, playing Addison DeWitt, a well-regarded film critic, is wonderfully portrayed as a conceited but highly intelligent fellow that no one quite likes... The supporting cast playing Margo's flame Bill, the playwright Lloyd, and his wife, Karen are also great (and in fact, many of these were nominated for Academy Awards for their acting). Their relationships, egos, ambitions all come across as realistic (although Margo, as the famous actress does come across as very dramatic).

Despite the plot being almost entirely based on these 6 people and their relationships and ambitions, the film is excellent, and after a slightly slow start to establish location and characters, I was rivetted.

In sum, this was a fantastic film, and for a change from recent films, did not depress me, but the exploration of ambition is eye opening and indeed, this film was worthy of it's awards, in my opinion.

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]

This film, based on the same-titled best-selling novel from the previous year, is the story of an alcoholic writer, Don, who goes on a drinking binge on a long weekend, and it shows the effects on him, and those who care about him.

The film is pretty dark, and watching the protagonist's descent into drunkenness, desperation, and self-aborption is even harrowing at times, and the compassion shown by his girlfriend is touching. The blunt honesty of the film is powerful.

The acting by Ray Milland, who plays Don, is fantastic. He manages to portray an otherwise quite intelligent man caught in the grips of severe alcoholism. He plays the intelligent, waxing poetic about the alcohol as he's drinking it; to the desperate, stealing money to fund his habit; to the pathetic, nearly unable to function from the pain of withdrawal. He received a (well-deserved) oscar for his acting.

I found this film somewhat eye-opening for it's frank treatment of alcoholism, and it certainly gave me a new understanding of it as a disease beyond the control of its victims.

[Poll #1563596]

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]

From World War I and right into World War II. Thank you zip.ca for sending all the depressing all at once...

Where All Quiet On The Western Front was about the horrors faced by the soldiers, Mrs. Miniver is about their families. Mrs. Miniver is a housewife in a village outside London, and this film is about her, her family, and how they face the realities of war.

The Miniver's are shown to be a fairly successful English family: Kay is a housewife; Clem is her architect husband; Vin, her eldest son, is a university student; and Toby and Judy are her younger children; Gladys and Ada, their household staff. As War breaks out in England, Vin joins the air force, and falls in love with Carol, the granddaughter of the aristocratic Lady Beldon.

As the war intensifies, and the Blitz begins, we are shown the family struggling with the uncertainties of war: sons out on assignment, huddling in shelters during bombardment, buildings shattered, and the death of friends. But through these moments of horror and the more mundane moments of every day life, we are also shown the indomitable British morale that helped pull them through the war.

Apparently, this film was on a series of newspaper columns, written about this (fictional) Mrs. Miniver, which apparently was quite popular, and wikipedia says is sometimes credited with hastening US involvement in the war.

The film is a product of its time, and is a little propagandistic, the intense emotional ups and downs in the second half of the film and wonderful acting still make it a great movie, but like AQOTWF, I won't hurry out to see it again.

Again, I'm still looking to get rid of a mini-stereo system, $50 OBO :)

And I'm looking to part with my original PS2 Guitar Hero and Guitar Hero 2, with guitars. I never play them anymore since they're not PS3 compatible and am pretty satisfied with Rock Band. Free to a good home.

Hopefully someone else can make better use of these than I do.

[Zip.ca] [IMDB] [Wikipedia]

I don't have much commentary on this film. It's Shakespeare, done traditionally, which you either you like or you don't. A pretty good treatment. The acting and delivery was such that I found it pretty easy to follow and understand, although I have seen Hamlet more than once before.

Laurence Olivier is both director, and lead, in which roles he won both Best Picture and Best Actor. He plays melancholy and brooding very well.

Since the play is rather longer than the time allotted for a film, apparently about half the play had been excised for the screenplay; most notably, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are completely removed, leaving the film much darker and with little comedy.