The Man from Laramie (****)

Some have said that the western is dead, and they might be right with a few recent exceptions (3:10 to Yuma, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford). But, like it or not, westerns join the film noir subgenre, as being America’s lasting contribution to film. And to tell the truth, I like good westerns. They remind me of my grandpa who was an old cowhand and had probably seen every major American western ever made.

The Man from Laramie would not have generally been my first pick. The name itself was off-putting to me, having been to Laramie myself. Furthermore, the director Anthony Mann’s name doesn’t typically come up in discussions of America’s great directors (None of his films made AFI’s top 100). I was inspired to pick up the film after reading two great books that had chapters showcasing Mann’s work (Film Noir Reader edited by Alain Silver and James Ursini, and Never Coming to a Theater Near You, by Kenneth Turan). Each of these chapters argued that Mann’s work has been unjustly overlooked. So I decided to find out for myself.

Man from Laramie follows Stewart in the title role as a mysterious stranger who comes into the town of Coronado seeking revenge against those responsible for his brother’s death. The town’s people are anything but hospitable. You quickly gain a sense that the people of Coronado have something to hide. In this way, the movie is reminiscent of Spencer Tracy’s Bad Day at Black Rock, a wonderful film. Although I understand that westerns are an acquired taste for some, this film has many universal themes, such as love, greed, and revenge that would resonate with most any moviegoer. The themes and photography of the films also show consistencies with elements of film noir (Mann started his career making gritty hard-boiled noirs). Man for Laramie has a more subtle artistry and sophistication that those westerns of Sergio Leone (whose films I also enjoy) and the characters in Mann's film are played skillfully with emotional depth and complexity. One exception is the Native Americans, who are portrayed as inherently evil – a sad product of the times in which this film was made. The writing is good and so is the acting, except for the leading lady played by Cathy O’Donnell whose overacted performance borders on annoying. Overall, I would say if you are looking for a good western that is character driven you’ll do good with The Man for Laramie.

Gaslight (*****)

Although many of George Cukor’s films are well known (My Fair Lady, The Philadelphia Story, Holiday, etc), Gaslight, which was filmed in 1944, has relatively slipped under the radar. That is a shame. It is a wonderfully suspenseful film that keeps you at the edge of your seat from start to finish. Don’t let the film’s Victorian London setting fool you, this is no sentimental Jane Austin period piece. It has many of the classic film noir motifs and is in the same vein as Les Diaboliques and Sudden Fear. The film follows a young heiress named Paula, played by Ingrid Bergman, who tries to escape her dark past by rebuilding her life through marriage to her new husband. Together the newlyweds return to her family home, which has been untouched since the murder of Paula’s aunt 10 years earlier. Shortly after their arrival, Paula’s behavior becomes increasingly odd. She appears absent minded, misplacing household artifacts, forgetting things, and eventually begins hearing voices. Her husband becomes isolated from her and seems convinced that she is going insane. Or is she?…

I highly recommend this movie. It is worth it to see a 17-year-old Angela Lansbury playing the couples’ saucy little cockney housemaid in her debut role.

Interesting fact: The movie influenced the term gaslighting. The definition is included below, but watch out, it includes a movie spoiler!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

Thank You For Smoking (****)

This biting satire doesn’t pull any punches as it attacks tobacco companies, politicians, the news media, Hollywood, and especially lobbyists. Nobody is safe. Aaron Eckhart has the lead role and skillfully plays a ruthless tobacco lobbyist (are there any other kind?). Does anyone else see the irony in a Mormon playing a tobacco lobbyist? Eckhart and the rest of the cast do a wonderful job, William H. Macy is especially good, but it is the script that makes this film. With some big names in the cast, I was particularly surprised the entire film was made for only $7 million. If you rent it, don’t miss the included Charlie Rose interview with the director, producer, writer, and Eckart.

Golden Globes 2008

Here is a link to the Golden Globe Winners for 2008:

http://www.imdb.com/features/rto/2008/globes

The Dark Knight is Coming...

Through the link below you can bring up slides for the next Christopher Nolan Batman film. Is anybody as excited about this movies as I am?

http://www.premiere.com/previews/4342/trailer-picks-the-dark-knight.html

Stalag 17 (**)

Billy Wilder has written and directed some of America’s best movies, such as Some Like It Hot, Sunset Blvd, Double Indemnity, The Apartment, Sabrina, the list goes on and on. Some of these films make my top ten list. I found Stalag to be mildly entertaining but not Wilder's best. Billed as a dark comedy, it seems light on the dark and heavy on the comedy. Furthermore, there is very little character development and I felt very little emotional connection to the characters. This may be due to the large cast of characters. Certainly there is a great deal of symbolism in the movie (interested viewers are encouraged to read the following http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/00/5/stalag.html) but this film left me with wanting something more.

The Yakuza (***)

This is a film released in 1974 by Sydney Pollock that places Robert Mitchum as a detective returning to Japan to help a friend who is in trouble with the Yakuza. It is a neo-noir of sorts. The only problem I have with the film is that I am unable to tell if it shows an interesting aspect of Japanese culture or if it exploits Japanese stereotypes. I wonder what Pollock would say about this movie today. Overall the movie is very good, action packed and interesting. It takes place primarily in Japan, with a mostly Japanese crew. Like many noirs, it has a number of twists and turns, with each character harboring secrets about their past. There is an emotional reveal about the characters right before the climax at the end that really makes the movie. The film has its share of violence involving Katana blades and such, but nothing approaching Kill Bill. This movie is no Out of the Past, Cape Fear, or Night of the Hunter for Mitchum. It is interesting to see an aged Mitchum, perhaps past his prime, playing a leading strong man in Japan. Mitchum is one of my favor actors, but he almost seems a bit miscast in this role.

According to IMDB, Martin Scorsese and Robert Aldrich were each considered for directing the movie before Pollack. Also both Lee Marvin and Robert Redford were considered for the lead role.

Ken Takakura, who plays Mitchum's unwilling but loyal partner in the film is very good. I would really like to see more of his films but I don’t know where to start. I need more exposure to Japanese cinema.

Suspicion (*****)

Another Hitchcock great! The plot of the film revolves around a wealthy bookish women played by Joan Fontaine, who falls for and marries a gold-digging playboy played by Cary Grant. Fontaine won an academy award for her performance in this film, which is her second Hitchcock role following Rebecca. Grant’s performance is also very impressive. His character in this film is unlike any I have seen him play. Grant is known for his suave ladies’ man persona (see Charade, North by Northwest, Notorious, An Affair to Remember, etc.). In Suspicion, there is some of that but Grant also shows more depth and complexity with even evidence of a dark side. This film also has many of the Hitchcockian trademarks, the sweeping long shots, themes of obsession and underlying sexuality, and lots of suspense. Like many of his films, Suspicion shows the good and evil of each of its characters and it has a great surprise ending too!

Paths of Glory (*****)

I decided to watch another early Kubrick film, Paths of Glory starring Kirk Douglas. I was really blown away by this movie. The film is very well written and the cinematography is amazing. I don’t want to spoil too much of it but it is based on a true story about a French regiment in WWI that is tried for treason after refusing to take a German position. Douglas plays a captain who is forced to defend his men from the death penalty in a war tribunal with charges of treason. The film is essentially an anti-war film that packs an emotional punch. It explores military bureaucracy, and the disconnect between military leadership and frontline solders.
Kirk Douglas’ performance is wonderful. Perhaps his best. Overall, I think this film is on my short list of best war movies of all time.