Directed by Edward Dmytrik
Screenplay by Lenore Coffee from the novel by Graham Greene
Photography by Wilkie Cooper
Music by Benjamin Frankel

Love triangle with splashes of guilt and religion.

An ordinary soapy love triangle (DID I JUST WRITE THAT?) becomes a rather clumsy and pretentious film, contrived in the extreme. Greeneland seems too complex for the good of the film, but it is watchable, and boasts another impeccable performance from Peter Cushing as one corner of the triangle.

Benjamin Frankel thankfully avoids the Warsaw Concerto style of film music, though there are ominous hints, and provides a fine score. Church scenes are always meaty musically.

This has never been one of my favorites of Hitchcock. Never really seems to gain momentum, but I will admit, the final merry-go-round scene is well done. Also, the tennis match is very bland when viewed now, both because the "final game" suspense builder has now been imated time and time again, and because tennis was played so differently back then and it lacks intensity. No fault of Hitchcocks, though. He can't do anything about changing times.

Princess Mononoke
Directed by Hayao Miyazaki
Saw on Video
***/****

Really, I don't see what the big fuss is about this one. Granted, my expectations were fairly high after hearing countless praises for the film. The storyline is pretty well constructed, the animation is decent (though nothing spectacular), and the voice acting is average. Still, it's difficult not to enjoy it, since it moves at a breakneck pace, and has numerous well-made action sequences. One thing I loved was the Forest Spirit, who controlled life and death in the forest, perfectly illustrated by the flowers that grow where he steps, then whither and die when he moves on. Genious.

The Crying Game
Directed by Neil Jordan
Saw on CineMax
**.5/****

Mr. Death : The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter Jr.
***/****

A great documentary, a provocative film, done well, told well. Worth a rent 100%.

American Movie
****/****

One of the best movies ever made-very impressed!

Bram Stoker's Dracula ***

**/****

I also found it interesting that I actually enjoyed MISSION TO MARS on
video more than at the movie theater. I rented it to once again
hear Morricone’s superb score. I found the movie tighter and more
heart felt and interesting on the small screen.

Directed by Gordon Douglas
Screenplay by George Bruce
Photography by George Robinson
Music by Paul Sawtell
Main Cast: Louis Hayward, Dennis O'Keefe, Louise Allbritton, Raymond Burr

Dirty Communist scumbags are thwarted by clean-cut American patriots.

I was ready to have a good laugh at this, but it's actually quite a sober little thriller, marred by a terribly redundant voice over ("Then, he got on the bus, feeling an overwhelming mixture of fear and guilt", as we see him getting on a bus with a look of overwhelming fear and guilt on his face).

Trying as it does for a semi-documentary tone, it just occasionally veers towards Edward D. Wood territory in its seriousness, but director Gordon Douglas just about manages to keep the whole thing on the rails. His later film "I Was A Communist For The FBI" promises to be a lot more fun, though.

Directed by Mikael Salomon
Screenplay by Graham Yost
Photography by Peter Menzies Jnr
Music by Christopher Young
Main Cast: Morgan Freeman, Christian Slater, Randy Quaid, Minnie Driver

Lots of people try to get their hands on stolen money during a very dark and rainy night.

This was on TV, and I got the beers in for it. Quite good seen with a crate of beer, I thought. The character tensions seemed to be pretty well set up, and the action scenes well handled. I was expecting it to be more of a disaster movie, but as a thriller with a difference (the setting), it was quite enjoyable.

Directed by Max Ophuls
Screenplay by Henry Garson and R.W. Soderborg, from the novel by Elizabeth Sanxay Holding
Photography by Burnett Guffey
Music by Hans Salter
Main Cast: Joan Bennett, James Mason, Geraldine Brooks

Murder and blackmail disrupts an ordinary family in California.

Well, I fell asleep. I've really been trying to get a movie education recently, and in filling the gaps I come up against things like this. Apparently director Ophuls was one of the greats, but I'm afraid I found it kind of flat and uninvolving. Now, if Frankenstein's monster had been in it, I would have had an immediate frame of reference.

So, why have I no opinion on this film? Ah! An opinion! Joan Bennett was quite good, but James Mason looked awkward and had a funny Irish accent. And another opinion! Hans Salter's score was fine. Turbulent when it had to be, but on the whole quite economical. (I feel comfortable with Salter. Those old monsters again.)

ABE LINCOLN IN ILLINOIS (US 1940) movie **** score ***

An Oscar-nominated Raymond Massey gives a superb (and sincere) performance as perhaps the greatest of American heroes.

Some have registered ‘surprise’ that such a definitive ‘impersonation’ of this most ‘American’ of Americans comes from a Canadian – but, that is no reason to view Massey’s performance with any scepticism, for Lincoln himself was descended from an English weaver's apprentice who had migrated from England to Massachusetts in 1637 – like the majority of Americans up until the 19th century, Lincoln was of British extraction – so being Canadian in some ways adds to the authenticity of his casting.

Anyhow, Massey is so good you almost feel as though he was born to play the part, and rest of movie is of equal proficiency.

ABE LINCOLN IN ILLINOIS is remarkable for its even-handedness. Though Lincoln is rightly regarded as one of the great champions of democracy throughout the world, he never flinched from recognizing his English roots, and throughout the movie, references are made to ‘Mother England’ with an almost apologetic tone.

What a breath of fresh air to have an American movie set in 19th century America that is far removed from the misrepresented fantasyland perpetuated by a billion mythological and wholly inaccurate historical representations that constitutes the Movies’ Western genre. Here we are ‘back East’ and there is an atmosphere of authenticity and healthy realism that pervades the whole production. Not only are the people real, but so are their motivations – though the movie, like so many other ‘historical’ movies that come out of Hollywood, does suffer a little from the politically correct white-washing of history – though to nothing like the same degree as the laughable and childish LAST OF THE MOHICANS (1992), BRAVEHEART and THE PATRIOT – enjoyable movies though they may be.

Ruth Gordon gives one of her excellent eccentric performances as Mary Todd, and Minor Watson, Gene Lockhart and Howard da Silva are all equally excellent in meaty supporting roles. The script is first-rate and Lincoln’s climactic election-winning speech is a knockout – Roy Webb provides a fine musical score.

An excellent mix of history and drama – though, as with any movie - take it with a pinch or three of salt.

September 4 2000

CUBE (Canada 1998) movie ** score **1/2

Initially intriguing, but ultimately disappointing fantasy has an assortment of mismatched characters attempting to escape from a booby-trapped maze of compartments within a giant cube.

The paper-thin storyline and inconclusive ending doesn’t do the movie’s concept or the good-ish special effects any justice – though a very bland cast seems well at home with such a lame and infantile script. This is the sort of movie that is very easy to make – the pointless ending makes all of the preceding events almost entirely worthless – anyone could have thought-up this witless and impotent exercise in vacuous Kubrickesque filmmaking.

This is the sort of movie that is reasonably entertaining while its on, but afterwards you wish you hadn’t bothered – in fact, CUBE wasn’t much better than an average episode of Voyager (according to my grandchildren).

Even the kiddies won’t be fooled into thinking CUBE is anything other than a waste of space – you have been warned.

September 5 2000

THE SINS OF RACHEL CADE (US 1961) movie *** score ***1/2

Perhaps not to everyone’s taste, THE SINS OF RACHEL CADE tells of an American missionary (an okay Angie Dickinson) arriving in the Belgian Congo (Zaire) on the eve of WWII and struggling to convert the locals against the backdrop of impending World War.

Though much of the action is disappointingly set-bound, Peter Finch is excellent as the beleaguered Belgian official who faces German aggression and also falls in love with the initially frigid Dickinson - and the script is full of interesting comment on European colonial exploitation of indigenous populations.

The trouble is, the movie is a little too long, and the rather slight story cannot be sustained into the final quarter of the movie’s running-time. Roger Moore turns up halfway through, here playing an American doctor working for the RAF. His performance as the carefree American is initially quite good – after breaking a leg after crashing his British plane, he has to be nursed back to health by Dickinson, during which time they fall in love – Moore then stays on to support Dickinson and provide the locals with vital medical attention.

However, with WWII well underway, the British are keen to have Moore back in action, and with the British army now occupying the Belgian Congo, he eventually leaves for the RAF base at Stanleyville without realizing that Dickinson is ‘with child’.

Originally discovered by the great British explorer David Livingstone, it is interesting that the Belgian Congo (Zaire) was one of Belgium’s few overseas territories, and as such, was rather naively governed. For instance, during the 1950s, as Britain gradually prepared its vast African territories for independence, Belgium steadfastly refused to allow the indigenous peoples a say in their own affairs – thus, when independence came (in 1960) it happened with much haste and little ceremony, and the resulting independent government was weak and inexperienced – Zaire’s catalogue of social and political disasters ever since is evidence of this poor preparation for independence.

THE SINS OF RACHEL CADE also features a fine score from Max Steiner – his striking and very romantic main theme is woven into all aspects of the score – whether the music is ethnic or traditionally European – and as usual Steiner throws in countless musical surprises and orchestral shadings that further increases the effect of the score both superficially and as an effective musical description of the movie’s agenda.

If you approach it with an open mind, and forgive it its occasional lapses, THE SINS OF RACHEL CADE is a reasonably good film.

September 6 2000

SONS OF THE MUSKETEERS (US 1952) movie * score **

Cardboard claptrap with particularly dull musketeers (Cornel Wilde (yawn) Dan O’Herlihy (double yawn) Alan Hale Jr (triple yawn) and !!Maureen O’Hara!! (infinite number of yawns)).

Even the great British Hollywood character actress Dame Gladys Cooper is left floundering – though I did detect the occasional grimace of contempt for the incredibly dire proceedings.

Only perennial bad-guy Brit Robert Douglas survives the movie with reputation intact – pre-revolution France has never appeared so garish and yet been so miasmatically dull.

September 7 2000

ELIZABETH (GB 1998) movie ** score *1/2

Very ordinary and tame treatment of a fascinating subject.

The events surrounding Protestant Queen Elizabeth I of England’s ascent to the throne are both complex and dramatic – this movie manages to virtually expunge all trace of interest in this most vital of stages in England’s eradication of Catholicism from the monarchy.

Unfortunately, FilmFour, who produced this dull and wafer-thin whimsy, are stuck in some kind of outmoded 60s time-warp – to think!, I was expecting a full-blooded and boisterous dramatisation of events, not this weedy and ingrown stinker.

ELIZABETH harks back to the conservative and bland days of 60s and 70s moviemaking – a period when filmmakers actually had the temerity to believe that their own personal political and motivational philosophies were of the slightest interest to the viewing public. It was interesting to note that immediately prior to this cinematic non-event being screened, there was an horrendously self-gratifying advertisement of FilmFour’s other filmmaking exploits. To me, this lineup of moviemaking mediocrity was like a sickening reminder of the extraordinarily conservative, narrowminded, immature and bland moviemaking philosophies of such 60s movie-making dinosaurs as Stanley Kubrick. The voiceover kept saying ‘….cutting-edge…..avante-garde….shocking….revealing…..potent…..disturbing….’ – what a load of shite – I mean, who do these people think they are trying to kid – it was such lamebrained and anachronistic attitudes as these that led to the virtual death of the British Film Industry thirty years ago.

Anyhow, ELIZABETH was watchable, despite being saddled with a completely overblown and worthless score from David Hirschfelder. Australian Cate Blanchett was great in the title role, Kathy Burke was dismal as Queen Mary I, Geoffrey Rush was fine, but Joseph Fiennes was terrible…..and the rest of the cast is alternately good and bad – the script is mundane, to say the least – and the whole production has a B-grade television feel – the sort of thing you might show to a class of schoolchildren – but it wasn’t historically accurate enough even for that.

It’s funny, I wasn’t that impressed with SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, and was surprised that it swept the board at the Oscars, and I did sympathize a little with ELIZABETH’s poor showing despite Critical praise – that’s until I saw ELIZABETH for myself – and you know what, this stinker from Britain’s anachronistic production dinosaur Channel Four makes SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE seem as inventive and as successful as Michael Curtiz’ brilliant THE PRIVATE LIVES OF ELIZABETH AND ESSEX (1939).

September 8 2000

EAST OF EDEN (US 1955) movie **1/2 score ***1/2

EAST OF EDEN is far more interesting for its background detail than for its main plot. The movie serves as a contemporary (well 1917) version of GENESIS, but here the action is rather less interesting than in the bible.

A terminally introspective James Dean is the central character in this powder-puff drama – but it is Raymond Massey’s powerful father-figure that provides the movie with its life-blood – though Jo van Fleet, Albert Dekker and Burl Ives are excellent in support.

As I say, when one has become accustomed to the drearily formulaic and familiar plot, there is much to be gained from the background detail. 1917 California, with America on the brink of joining the British in their efforts to repel German aggression, is a fascinating place – and many of the complex issues that faced Californians at that time are tackled by the moviemakers. For instance, a fairground scene has a British officer delivering a vociferous propaganda speech against the Germans – this is followed by the victimization of a German emigrant to California.

Leonard Rosenman’s dissonant score in full stereo is a major plus.

EAST OF EDEN is a movie that has aged badly in itself, but is still of great interest today for the performances and the detail, rather than the plot and storyline.

September 9 2000

DISTANT DRUMS (US 1951) movie ** score ***1/2

Only Max Steiner’s typically superb scoring and the authentic Florida locations give this movie any substance.

Seminole and Creek Indians are routinely butchered as Gary Cooper, giving a characteristically wooden performance, leads a team of US army and navy specialists to destroy an Indian/Spanish stronghold next to the Everglades.

A ‘Western’ in all but location – and a routine one, at that.

September 10 2000

ALIEN CARGO (US 1998) movie *1/2 score **1/2

A deep-space freighter harbours a deadly ‘alien’ force – how many times have we heard this one before?

Obtuse, inept and stilted scripting and acting are somewhat compensated for by some reasonable effects.

In case anyone is wondering, this movie borrows more from STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE than it does from ALIEN.

Either way – FORGET IT!.

September 11 2000

DEADLINE AT DAWN (US 1946) movie *1/2 score **1/2

Pretentious mystery with noir-ish elements has Susan Hayward and Bill Williams as innocents caught up in a murder. Paul Lukas stars as a cabbie who is not quite what he seems.

Vividly captured New York locations help create a ‘larger than life’ atmosphere, but the silly and awkward script and the stilted performances destroy all of this movie’s good intentions.

September 11 2000

THE STORY OF THE SAS (Discovery Channel) documentary *** music **1/2

The World’s premiere fighting force is the subject of an hour long documentary that is worthy without being particularly revealing – and considering the necessary security surrounding this elite force, it’s just as well the program wasn’t too revealing.

The United Kingdom is particularly prone to terrorist attack – no other nation in the Developed World suffers more from terrorism, and from such a wide range of sources (partly due to the legacy of Empire) – and it is a source of great comfort that the SAS (Special Air Service) continues to be the most respected and revered of all of the world’s military units.

The documentary began with several re-enactments of SAS anti-terrorist operations in Britain – most notably the elimination of various Arab terrorist groups throughout the British Isles.

The rest of the program charted the history of the SAS from its beginnings during WWII to its latest operations in The Balkans. The SAS was formed during WWII and was the brainchild of British officers, led by Sir David Stirling, who wished to make swift and speedy hit and run guerrilla strikes against the German enemy in the Sahara – in much the same way as that great hero of the British Empire General Sir Banastre Tarleton carried out similar operations against the rebellious British American Colonists during the American War of Independence. Tarleton led his Loyalist cavalry in numerous stinging slash and dash guerrilla operations against the rebellious Colonial Army.

During WWII the SAS carried out many successful operations against the German aggressor in North Africa – teams of up to four highly trained specialists would operate behind enemy lines, knocking out communications installations, assassinating German officers, and destroying fuel and munitions dumps. Right from the beginning, only the cream of Britain’s manhood were accepted into the SAS (and SBS (Special Boat Service)). Physical and mental strength and agility are of primary importance – along with a ‘never say die’ attitude, an ability to lead men, and a healthy lack of respect for ‘red-tape’.

After WWII, the SAS continued to grow in importance – and its reputation grew with it. During the period 1945 through 1970 the British Empire was gradually being dismantled – but for many fledgling nations the road to independence was a perilous one, and often Britain had to employ its military might to give democracy the best chance of taking root – sadly of course, as in Afghanistan, many nations that once comprised the British Empire remain ravaged by civil war and at the mercy of petty dictators to this day. Even yesterday, it was the SAS (along with British paratroopers) who were responsible for freeing the captive British soldiers in the former British territory of Sierra Leone.

The SAS was probably utilized to its fullest during the Malayan (now Malaysia) conflicts of the early 1950s. Various warring factions were vying for supremacy in this once important rubber-producing territory within the British Empire. The dense tropical jungle of this Asian country provided the perfect cover for the numerous warring factions – and the SAS were flown in to impart their guerrilla skills onto the pro-democracy jungle fighters fighting alongside the regular British Colonial Army – it was here that the SAS pioneered the art of parachuting into the dense jungle canopy, and then lowering themselves to the ground. SAS involvement here in South East Asia was instrumental in ensuring the success of democracy in Malaysia following independence from the British Empire in 1957.

The SAS have since been deployed throughout Africa, Asia and South America – Britain’s final colonial war took place in the early 1970s in the Middle Eastern country of Oman - Britain resolved to defeat the communist forces that threatened the country’s fledgling democracy – once again SAS involvement was instrumental in the success of Britain’s military operations – the main purpose of British military involvement was to safeguard oil supplies to the West – after all, it was Britain who discovered, and initially exploited, the vast oil supplies to be found in the Middle East.

Since then, the Falklands War, The Gulf War and the unrest in the Balkans have provided the SAS with much high profile work – however, it is the covert operations that continue to make the SAS the envy of all of the world’s military.

During the late 80s, the SAS was despatched to South America with the intention of assassinating a Colombian drugs baron and smashing his cocaine producing empire. The mission was an unqualified success, as a crack SAS team anihilated a private army before gunning down the drugs baron and his son.

Overall, the documentary is adequately scored with synthesized martial music – fittingly reflecting the precise nature of SAS planning and operations.

Despite the term ‘guerrilla warfare’ being first coined in the early 1800s following the Duke of Wellington’s training of Spanish guerrillas during the Peninsular War against Napoleon’s France, some people are still under the illusion that the British Army is not well-versed in wilderness fighting – some people, such as Howard L, appear to have been ‘taken-in’ by such historically-inaccurate trifles as THE PATRIOT – of course, in reality, the British have always been superb wilderness fighters – but sometimes it was necessary for the British to employ large and well-disciplined forces – having seen countless movies portraying the ‘spit and polish’ of the Redcoats, this may be why some people like to think that the British Army wasn’t adept at guerrilla fighting – the fact is, Great Britain, at various stages in its history, had the most disciplined regular army, the most powerful navy, and the most skilled wilderness fighters of them all. And today, the SAS remains the most skilled and feared military unit [b]in the world.

Indeed, with the current fuel crisis enveloping Britain (most Filling Stations have now run dry), perhaps the SAS will come into play if Martial Law is imposed.

During the course of the documentary, several heavily-disguised former members of the SAS were interviewed, and what came across most was their unflinching ability to tackle the task in hand – nothing, but nothing, would deflect them from their course – how appropriate their motto is –

WHO DARES WINS.

September 13 2000

THEY WON’T BELIEVE ME (US 1947) movie ***1/2 score ***

A very entertaining movie with Robert Young excellent as a compulsive womanizer whose philandering leads to him being accused of murder.

Good as THEY WON’T BELIEVE ME is, Hitchcock may have elevated this movie to even greater heights by creating a more ‘larger-than-life’ atmosphere and by utilizing the full potential of the dramatic score. Also, fine though Young is, Cary Grant would probably have been perfect in the role – Grant had the magnetic charm and good looks, and also that undercurrent of uncertainty that is somewhat lacking in Young. Yes, I could see Hitchcock, Herrmann and Grant combining well on this one – but on the other hand, Hitchcock may have made a stinker, so let’s be glad that THEY WON’T BELIEVE ME is such a satisfactory movie as it stands.

Roy Webb’s main theme is actually quite Herrmannesque, but such is the nature of the movie’s direction, the composer was unable to truly bring his score to life.

The movie begins in the courtroom with Young pleading his innocence to the sceptical jury. All of the events leading up to Young’s arrest are told in lengthy flashback sequences, so the movie is not annoyingly fragmented. Jane Greer and Susan Hayward are among Young’s women.

Interestingly, part of the movie is set in Kingston, Jamaica, which is the hometown of my son-in-law Wynton. Jamaica is a wonderful place being situated in the Caribbean just ninety miles south of Cuba. After early Spanish settlement, in 1655 Jamaica was captured by the British and incorporated into the British Empire. During the 17th and early 18th centuries the British authorities were consistently harassed and attacked by the Maroons, armed and organized freed slaves who operated from the thick woods and mountains – before the British Army finally rooted them out. At the same time, the Royal Navy and British buccaneers operated from Kingston (then Port Royal) on Jamaica, attacking Spanish ships and contributing importantly to the continuing decline in Spain’s global empire. The slave trade, introduced by the Spanish, continued to flourish under British rule, and grew steadily in volume as the sugar produced by Jamaican slave labourers increased in quantity and value, and by the end of the 18th century Jamaica had become a prized colonial possession within the British Empire. However, the plantation system was overhauled with the abolition of slavery on Jamaica in the early 1800s. In 1866 the British crown-colony form of government, with the governor wielding executive and legislative power, was established. However, by the 1930s, in the wake of the Great Depression, calls for self-determination were mounting – such demands were met in 1944, and in 1959 full internal self-government was obtained, and three years later Jamaica became an independent country within the British Commonwealth.

Anyhow, THEY WON’T BELIEVE ME grabs your attention from the start, and never lets up. And there’s a twist ending that rivals HALLOWEEN IV: THE RETURN OF MICHAEL MYERS for effectiveness.

September 14 2000

BABE: PIG IN THE CITY (US/Australia 1998) movie ****1/2 score ****

Having witnessed public disinterest and critical divisiveness when BABE: PIG IN THE CITY was released, I was in no particular hurry to watch this movie, believing it to probably be another disappointing, predictable and inferior retread of the first movie’s ideas - like many sequels are.

And, let’s face it, BABE (1995) was such a great movie, it was hard to see how any sequel could possibly continue in the same rich vein of innovative and charming movie-making proficiency – the great thing about BABE (1995) was its apparent simple nature, and its actual sophistication and depth. It’s movies like BABE (1995) that make going to the cinema such a wonderful experience – simple, charming, straightforward and unpretentious fun on the surface – and yet overflowing with imaginative, sophisticated and innovative moviemaking ideas underneath. Great movies that signalled cinema’s late-80s renaissance such as DIE HARD, TERMINATOR and ROBOCOP have similar qualities – it’s like they’re simple movies that can be appreciated as such, but at the same time there is an undercurrent of incredible movie-making intelligence and dynamism – recapturing the qualities that made 30s and 40s cinema so successful – in my opinion.

So, BABE: PIG IN THE CITY had a lot to live up to – and by heavens, what a magnificent show the moviemakers put on.

The movie begins at the idyllic farmhouse setting that became so familiar in BABE (1995), but with the minimum amount of fuss, the farmer (the excellent James Cromwell) suffers an unfortunate accident at the hands of the pig (a brilliantly choreographed and hilarious sequence of events), and whilst the farmer is recuperating, the farm suffers financial problems and Mrs Hoggett is compelled to jet off to the city in an attempt to raise funds. There, the pig and Mrs Hoggett enjoy all manner of perilous adventures.

BABE: PIG IN THE CITY is an Anglophile’s Paradise. The farm is set in an unknown rural location that could be in Ireland, England, Australia, or North America, and the city itself is a composite of many well known cities (including some from outside of the English Speaking world). However, the whole essence of the movie espouses those values that unite the entire Celtic/Anglo-Saxon English speaking world (and beyond) – not only are all of the characters in the movie British/American/Australian/etc composites, but their actions are also innately British.

Interestingly, BABE: PIG IN THE CITY is filmed in New South Wales (in and around Sydney), and this is most topical considering the Sydney Olympic Games. I was fortunate enough to view the Opening Ceremony, and what a magnificent achievement that was, marred only by a temporary technical fault during the final ascent of the Olympic Flame, and also the rather nervous opening declaration by the immensely popular Governor General Sir William Deane. Really it should have been Australia’s monarch, Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain who did the honours, but it was felt more politically astute to have Sir William Deane perform the task.

As I say, Sir William Deane is a most popular Governor General of Australia on behalf of Her Britannic Majesty’s Government, and many hope that Sir William may one day be made Australia’s first President. However, the Republican movement has been stifled for the moment, and Sir William will be entering his seventies next year. Many liken Sir William to George Washington – both were, to all intents and purposes British, and it would be most fitting for such a loyal servant of the British Crown as Sir William to be elected first President of Australia.

Sydney itself, the capital of New South Wales, is named for the great British statesman Lord Sydney (who also gave his name to Sydney, Nova Scotia), and is the oldest and the largest city in Australia. Because of its history as a great port and its status as the site of the country's main international air terminal, Sydney is perhaps the only city in Australia with a genuinely international atmosphere. Yet it remains a very Australian city, with a nice compromise between the Anglo-Saxon efficiency of its British heritage and the South Seas attractions of its climate and environment. I wonder what Lord Sydney would make of ‘his’ city today?

Anyway, getting back to BABE: PIG IN THE CITY, one has to register surprise at the movie’s desperately poor box office showing. Admittedly, the movie does have a ‘darker’ atmosphere, most notably Mickey Rooney’s wordless clown who could have just walked off of the set of SPAWN. But it is the movie’s incredible contrasts between hope and despair, good and evil, light and dark that makes BABE: PIG IN THE CITY all the more successful as a truly superb family movie. Okay, so the movie has its faults – the plot is sometimes overwhelmed by the spectacle, and Rooney’s clown could have been made into a sympathetic character.

That said, all of the characters in BABE: PIG IN THE CITY (animal and human) are superb creations – contrast this with the lame and extremely simplistic (but still fairly enjoyable) DOCTOR DOOLITTLE. The special effects are extraordinary – the city is simply incredible, and the lip-synching is almost perfect. But, no matter how good the effects, it is the inspiration, judgement, wit and inventiveness of the filmmakers that really counts, and all those attributes are in plentiful supply.

Not only are there some very amusing scenes, there are also some very moving moments during the movie – I really do not understand why some parents have taken against this movie claiming it isn’t suitable for younger children. I can only assume that such parents are over-protective of their children, and fail to acknowledge the child’s ability to comprehend the surrounding world. Not only was BABE: PIG IN THE CITY utterly harmless, it was also a canny and valuable study in human nature.

So, what of the music? Well, first of all, judging by the poor standard of Jerry Goldsmith’s 90s output, it was a great relief (and no surprise at all) that JG’s involvement with BABE (1995) was severed very early on. Nigel Westlake’s original score to both BABE and its sequel and the incorporation of many familiar tunes is magnificently accomplished – BABE: PIG IN THE CITY got the score it truly deserved, often delicate and moving, sometimes powerful and inspiring, occasionally ethereal and sublime and always packed full of genuine emotion – words that could describe all aspects of the movie. Someone recently said at the MovieMusic Messageboard that it would be nice if someone could post a definitive list of all of James Horner’s borrowings – as if that would somehow be to the detriment of the most successful film composer of the 90s. A very important part of the film composers’ art is the appropriate incorporation of well-known or familiar compositions – and not just to make some obvious statement as one may quote from say ‘Land of Hope and Glory’. Horner didn’t use Khachaturian’s ‘Invention’ in ALIENS because somehow the music had ‘alien’ connotations – he used that particular piece of music because it was so right for that movie. Borrowing from other composers is a vital element of the successful application of CMS (Contemporary Musical Sensibilities) – and is just as important as the judicious application of stylistics. Therefore, any list of Horner’s borrowings would merely substantiate and reinforce my belief that Horner is the number one film composer working today, and would also prove just how knowledgeable and skilful he is in applying the right music to any given movie. The brilliance of Westlake’s score to BABE: PIG IN THE CITY (complete with numerous borrowings) is evidence that a good film score doesn’t have to be original.

Overall though, BABE: PIG IN THE CITY really succeeds through the huge array of memorable ‘animal’ characters – all of the animals are so convincingly ‘human’, that in the end I almost forgot they weren’t human. The best character of all, to my mind, was the orang-utan called Thelonius who surveyed all around him with worldly-wise eyes – of the many successful scenes involving Thelonius, one of the best had to be the moment the animals escaped from their cages and then waited for Thelonius to dress.

Still, the movie was full of magical moments – I really can’t recommend BABE: PIG IN THE CITY strongly enough.

September 15 2000

THE JOKERS (GB 1967) movie *** score ***

Archetypal London-set swingin’ sixties farce has Michael Crawford and Oliver Reed as ?!?brothers?!? planning a monumental anti-establishment ‘gesture’.

Very pleasant, energetic and likeable movie, though Crawford is absolutely hopeless, with a good cast in generally fine form, most notably Oliver Reed, Harry Andrews as a police inspector, James Donald as an idiotic bomb disposal expert, Michael Hordern as the Police Commissioner, amongst many other familiar faces.

The pop-styled score fits in well with the movie’s swingin’ sixties London setting, and we get to see plenty of London landmarks.

So, if like me, you’re a fan of Oliver Reed’s comically overblown and preposterously over-the-top ‘William Shatner-acting-style’, I can thoroughly recommend THE JOKERS.

TARZAN’S SECRET TREASURE (US 1941) movie ** score **1/2

Despite being one of the best classic Tarzan’s, TARZAN’S SECRET TREASURE still provides only measly entertainment value.

Putting to one side the fact that the Weissmuller Tarzan series was only slightly more realistic and intelligent than the juvenile no-brainer LAST OF THE MOHICANS (1992), at least TARZAN’S SECRET boasts a memorable supporting cast, including Reginald Owen, Barry Fitzgerald and Tom Conway as crooked explorers who attempt to dupe Tarzan.

STAGE STRUCK (US 1958) movie **1/2 score **

First of all I should say that STAGE STRUCK would have been an excellent movie but for the lunatic casting of Susan Strasburg as Eva Lovelace, the stage struck young woman who tries to succeed as an actress in New York City. Strasburg is utterly hopeless, as she was in virtually every other movie she appeared in – a great shame, because the supporting cast around her here is uniformly excellent. Henry Fonda, Christopher Plummer (in his first movie), Herbert Marshall and Joan Greenwood are all in top form playing theatrical types – director Sidney Lumet makes the most of these actors’ heavyweight screen presence.

STAGE STRUCK is a remake of the 1932 classic MORNING GLORY (movie ***) – a rather dated affair now but still boasting strong performances from Katherine Hepburn (as Lovelace), Adolphe Menjou (in the Fonda role), Douglas Fairbanks Jr (in the Plummer role), and Sir C Aubrey Smith (in the Marshall role).

Alex North has never impressed me particularly – in my opinion, he’s a reasonably good film composer (47th on my list of favourite film composers) – but I tend to find his scores somewhat uninvolving and rather unconvincing. His work on STAGE STRUCK is no exception – the necessarily jaunty and bustling theme to musically describe the frantic theatrical world and the snowy New York settings is ‘production-line’ stuff – it sounds right, but there is a lack of conviction in the actual thematic material and the way in which the music is developed in later scenes. North’s work on A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE remains his best achievement by some margin, though Goldsmith’s recent re-recording is bland and passionless – it was almost as if Goldsmith was trying to make North’s flavourful music conform to Goldsmith’s own sadly outmoded and unromantic sensibilities.

I would recommend STAGE STRUCK, but Strasburg’s constant and tiresome presence onscreen sabotages all of the movie’s good aspects.

September 16 2000

MAGNIFICENT DOLL (US 1946) movie ***1/2 score ***

The movie begins with the British invasion force under Sir George Cockburn closing in on Washington DC during the War of 1812 (1812 – 1815) – we see President James Madison and wife Dolly fleeing the burning Capital of the United States.

The rest of the movie is a flashback that traces the life of Dolly Madison and her involvement with the notorious Aaron Burr before falling for the future President of the United States of America. The interaction between Aaron Burr, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison is quite extensively described – but is distorted and oversimplified so as to clearly contrast the treasonous Burr and the goody-two-shoes Jefferson.

MAGNIFICENT DOLL was almost universally despised by critics and public alike, and the first fifth of the movie is not at all promising. However, as the movie progresses there is much to be enjoyed in this heavily fictionalized version of actual events. The movie spans the period just after the American Revolution (1775-1783) through to the British invasion during the War of 1812, and the period feel is well captured. The three main characters are badly cast, but Ginger Rogers (Dolly), David Niven (Burr) and Burgess Meredith (Madison) give it their best shot – and Niven is actually quite good for a change – perhaps he should have played more villains. Hans Salter is another composer that I am not particularly impressed with – he’s 67th on my list of favourite film composers - but here he is allowed to produce a large-scale romantic score (Steiner-esque, but nowhere near the Master’s standard).

Of course, MAGNIFICENT DOLL is heavily sympathetic towards the ‘American way’, and the movie tends to whitewash the troubled course of American development following the Revolution – although the subject of slavery is touched upon, MAGNIFICENT DOLL tends to avoid most of the troubles, squabbles and inequities that continued to effect American progression. Because of this, the British Press poured scorn on the movie when it was released in the United Kingdom – the Daily Mail said, “No duller case has ever been made out for liberty”, and The Times said “Some day the moviemakers will discover that they can make history wonderfully believable and exciting by sticking roughly to the facts” – unfortunately things haven’t changed in the intervening 50 years – THE PATRIOT, BRAVEHEART and LAST OF THE MOHICANS have taken the art of twisting history to fit contemporary society’s comfortable, soft, diluted and politically-correct sensibilities to new heights.

The War of 1812 was a conflict arising chiefly out of American grievances over oppressive British maritime practices during the Napoleonic Wars. The long struggle between Great Britain and France, fought intermittently between 1793 and 1815, compelled the British to prevent ‘neutrals’ from trading with France. Napoleon averted hostilities by agreeing not to interfere with US trade to Britain. Britain, on the other hand, confident in its naval supremacy, insisted that all neutral vessels first call at British ports and pay duties. In addition, American sensibilities were offended by the British practice of stopping American ships on the high seas and enlisting American seamen into the Royal Navy. A declaration of war was signed by President Madison on June 18 1812.

Though Britain was heavily preoccupied fighting Napoleon, the British Authorities in Canada quickly seized the opportunity to make frequent sorties into the Northern USA along with their numerous Indian allies. The British authorities trained and supplied the Shawnee leader, Tecumseh, in an effort to check the advance of American settlers into mid-Western Indian country. After the British and Shawnee attack led to the pitched Battle of Tippecanoe in 1811, Westerners raised the cry that the British must be expelled from Canada to allow US westward expansion. This theme was espoused vigorously by a group of expansionist congressmen called War Hawks, who also included Florida in their territorial ambitions. Anyhow, under British control, Tecumseh brought together by far the most formidable force ever assembled by a North American Indian, an accomplishment that was a decisive factor in the capture of Detroit and of 2,500 U.S. soldiers by the British and Tecumseh in 1812.

Because of growing British military strength in Canada and the strengthening alliances between the native Indian and their British rulers, the Americans’ ambitious plans to invade Canada were never realized. However, American warships won three notable victories in duels with British frigates in 1812 (briefly interrupting Britain’s 100 year naval supremacy), including that of the USS Constitution against the HMS Guerrière, though the three later frigate duels of the war were won decisively by the British. Numerous naval skirmishes were fought for control of Lakes Erie, Ontario, and Champlain. Despite limited American success, including the recapture of Detroit, by the summer of 1814 the British still controlled access to Lake Michigan and occupied the northern Mississippi River.

Then, an amphibious British force ravaged the shores of Chesapeake Bay and, after winning the Battle of Bladensburg, burned Washington DC in retaliation for similar American acts in Toronto (then York). The Americans had pillaged and occupied Toronto for 11 days before it was retaken by the British Army. Interestingly, the Speaker's Mace was carried off but was returned in 1934, but the Royal Standard is still in the US Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland.

US morale was lifted somewhat when American ships hindered British commerce, but this action failed to disturb Britain's control of the sea and its blockade of the American coast. However, weary of futile warfare, Britain and America signed The Treaty of Ghent in Belgium on Dec 24, 1814, restoring exact pre-war conditions. This settlement came just in time to prevent a New England separatist movement in response to the extremely unpopular war with Britain.

Though the United States gained nothing from the War of 1812 with Britain, popular legend soon converted defeat into the illusion of victory, partially because the War of 1812 did actually subdue Indian resistance with the death of Tecumseh in battle and the crushing of the Creek/British confederacy in the South by General Jackson in 1814. And of course, the British and their European allies finally defeated Napoleon once and for all at the Battle of Waterloo in 1815.

So, the War of 1812 played an important part in the ongoing development of the United States – though American plans to invade British Canada never took off, the British made numerous invasions into the United States, none of which had any permanent effect on the outcome of the war. Apart from the British invasions from Canada and the burning of Washington DC, perhaps the largest British invasion force was to be found at the Battle of New Orleans right at the end of the war (in fact, such were the poor communications, this battle took place after peace between Britain and America had been agreed). A British fleet of more than 50 ships commanded by General Edward Pakenham sailed into the Gulf of Mexico and prepared to attack New Orleans. An invasion of force of 7,500 British regulars was repulsed by General Andrew Jackson’s force of 7,000 American militiamen – a victory that greatly enhanced Jackson’s reputation – the British suffered nearly three hundred dead, with the Americans losing only fifty men.

A naval battle on Sep 11, 1814 in Cumberland Bay, near Plattsburgh, resulted in a victory for the American fleet under Commodore Thomas Macdonough, causing the British to abandon the invasion of New York, and Norfolk, Virginia was twice saved from British invasion when a local militia beat off a land attack on Portsmouth and when General Robert B Taylor's defence of Craney Island prevented a barge invasion. And, it must be said, following Britain’s burning of Washington DC, public indignation over the destruction of the seat of government ended all significant movements to relocate the federal city, and Washington became the national capital in fact as well as in name.

Another interesting aspect to the War of 1812 was the pioneering use of rockets by the British. During the 1790s, Britain was conquering the Indian sub-continent in Asia, and one of the British Empire’s biggest obstacles was overcoming the rocket attacks by many of the Indian Kingdoms. Though rudimentary, these rocket attacks against the British were pretty effective, and back home in England the artillery officer and inventor Sir William Congreve sought to capitalize on this new technology by creating the first military rocket. Congreve based his rockets specifically on those used by the Indian prince Hyder Ali against the British in 1792 and 1799 at Seringapatam. In 1805 he built a rocket 40 inches long, with a stabilizing stick 16 feet long and a range of 2 kilometres. Congreve's rockets were first used to bombard Boulogne, Copenhagen, and Danzig in the Napoleonic Wars. His designs made it possible to choose either an explosive (ball charge) or incendiary warhead. The explosive warhead was separately ignited and could be timed by trimming the fuse length before launching. Thus, air bursts of the warheads were feasible at different ranges. In addition to aerial bombardment, Congreve's rockets were often fired horizontally along the ground.

These side-stick-mounted rockets were employed in a successful naval bombardment of the French coastal city of Boulogne in 1806. The next year a massed attack, using hundreds of rockets, burned most of Copenhagen to the ground. And then, during the War of 1812 between the United States and the British, rockets were employed on numerous occasions. The two best-known engagements occurred in 1814. At the Battle of Bladensburg (August 24) the use of rockets assisted British forces to turn the flank of the American troops defending Washington DC. As a result, the British were able to capture and burn the city. In September, the British forces attempted to capture Baltimore harbour - rockets were fired from a specially designed ship, the Erebus, and from small boats.

This time however, the British were unsuccessful in their bombardment, but it was here that Francis Scott Key, inspired by the sight of the Sir William Congreve’s rockets, wrote the lyrics to ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ that was later adopted as the United States national anthem.

It really is quite amusing to hear many Americans describe such ‘American’ anthems as ‘Yankee Doodle’ and ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ as having those special American qualities of independence, confidence and rebelliousness, when both melodies were written by Englishmen, but then again, the American Constitution itself was based on the philosophies of Englishmen and written by American colonists of British extraction – Yankee Doodle was written by a British Army surgeon during the fourth French and Indian War, and the Star-Spangled Banner’s melody was taken from "To Anacreon in Heaven," a drinking song of the Anacreontic Society (of London, England) that was written by the British composer John Stafford Smith. Key's words were first published in a broadside in 1814 under the title "Defence of Fort McHenry”. The song's title was changed when it appeared in sheet-music form later the same year. After a century of general use, the four-stanza song was officially adopted as the national anthem by act of Congress in 1931 – the final two stanzas are usually dropped out of respect for the British.

Here is part of the opening stanza to ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ –

“Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hail'd at the twilight's last
gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through
the perilous fight
O'er the ramparts we watch'd were so gallantly
streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting
in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was
still there…..”

‘The rockets' red glare’ has continued to memorialize the English inventor Sir William Congreve's rockets ever since.

Of course, the War of 1812 was to a large degree caused by the British-American rivalry in the fur trade. The British colonists and army supported Indian tribes in their contest with the advancing US frontier to the south of the Canadian border. In the end, though the war was a stalemate, it did, however, push back the Indian frontier, increase the breach between the United States and the British North American colonies, and confirm the US-British Canadian boundary. That boundary had been fixed in 1783, though the Oregon Territory was jointly occupied by the British and Americans before the territory was shared between Britain and America in 1846.

The War of 1812 provided Madison with a major headache. Both Britain and France attacked American shipping, but Britain was more resented by America, because with the greatest navy it was more effective and also because Americans were extremely sensitive to British insults to national honour. Certain expansionist elements looking to both Florida and Canada began to press for war and took advantage of the issue of naval protection. Madison's own aim was simply to preserve the principle of freedom of the seas and to assert the ability of the United States to protect its own interests and its citizens. However, when war was declared, there was almost no support from the New England states. The Americans were poorly placed for war from every point of view. Ideological objections to armies and navies were responsible for hindering America’s acts of aggression. Ideological objections to banks had been responsible, in 1812, for the Senate's refusal to renew the charter of the Bank of the United States. Traders’ sentiment was also hostile to the Government.

Under the circumstances, it was remarkable that the United States succeeded in staggering through two years of war. In historical retrospect, the most important aspect of the peace settlement was the advent of an era of mutual trust between America and Britain that has remained to this day. The conclusion of the War of 1812, which has sometimes been called the Second War of American Independence resulted in a pacification of the old feelings of pain and resentment against Mother England and her people - still for most Americans a kind of paternal relationship. And, by freeing them of anxieties on this front, it also freed Americans to look to the west.

Anyway, entertaining though MAGNIFICENT DOLL is as a fictionalized and biased American version of the facts, it is not the sort of movie that admits to such things as the fact that the melody of America’s national anthem was written by an Englishman, and that Key was partly inspired to write the lyrics by the sight of the British rockets bombarding Baltimore.

Though the fact that America managed to wage a war for two and half years (the War of 1812) against the might of the British Empire was no mean feat, it was even more remarkable to think that Britain was able during the same period to strengthen its grip on Canada and its Central American and Caribbean possessions, to pursue (and finally defeat) Napoleon throughout Europe, to improve its position in South America and Africa, to substantially extend its Empire in Asia (most notably the Indian sub-continent) and to begin its colonization of Australia and New Zealand.

As portrayed in MAGNIFICENT DOLL, the early part of Dolly’s adult life is spent in an arranged marriage with the Quaker John Todd (well played by Stephen McNally). The simple family life in Philadelphia was far removed from Dolly’s life of luxury in Virginia.

Of course, the Quaker, byname of the Society of Friends, was founded in England. George Fox, founder of the society, recorded that in 1650 "Justice Bennet of Derby first called us Quakers because we bid them tremble at the word of God”. It is likely that the name, originally derisive, was also used because many early Friends, like other religious enthusiasts, themselves trembled in their religious meetings and showed other physical manifestations of religious emotion. Despite early derisive use, Friends used the term of themselves in such phrases as "the people of God in scorn called Quakers." No embarrassment is caused by using the term to or of Friends today.

Quakerism represents the left wing of the 17th century English Puritan movement. The three chief emphases of its founder, George Fox, were the immediacy of Christ's teaching and guidance, the consequent irrelevance of special buildings or ordained ministers, and the application of Christ's teaching to the whole of life. The early Quakers gathered for worship without liturgy or prearrangement of any kind, or any appointed preacher, believing that out of an energetic and expectant silence God might use any one of the worshipers as a minister.

The rapid spread of Quakerism in the West and North of England was followed by a vigorous expansive movement to London and the rest of England, to Scotland and Ireland, to the continent of Europe, and especially to North America. The main centres of Quaker missionary activity in the New World were New England, New York and Long Island, Maryland, Virginia, and the West Indies. Almost everywhere they went, the Quakers met with persecution for what were considered unconventional Christian practices. Although the Toleration Act (1689) brought an end to the worst violence of persecution in Great Britain, the Quaker found life in North America to be far less ‘taxing’.

The Quaker system of church government has remained substantially unaltered since the time of the Englishman George Fox. The principal unit is the monthly meeting, a body usually meeting once a month and responsible for all matters of membership, for finance and property, and for deliberation on concerns raised by individual members or referred to it by superior meetings. The extreme austerity characteristic of early Quaker worship services has been modified in many areas with the adoption of hymn singing, set prayers, and prepared sermons. Almost alone among Christian bodies, Friends have no form of outward observance of the sacraments. They believe in a spiritual baptism and a spiritual communion.

Of course, in North America, the Englishman William Penn is one of the most celebrated of Quaker colonists, having founded Pennsylvania he went on to create Philadelphia, the ‘city of brotherly love’.

William was the son of the British Admiral Sir William Penn. He acquired the foundations of a classical education at the Chigwell grammar school in the Essex countryside, where he came under Puritan influences. After Admiral Penn's naval victory in the West Indies in 1655, the family moved back to London and then to Ireland. In Ireland William heard Thomas Loe, a Quaker itinerant, preach to his family at the admiral's invitation, an experience that apparently intensified his religious feelings. In 1660 William entered the University of Oxford, where he rejected Anglicanism and was expelled in 1662 for his religious Nonconformity. Determined to thwart his son's religiosity, Admiral Penn sent his son on a grand tour of the European continent and to the Protestant college at Saumur, in France, to complete his studies. Summoned back to England after two years, William entered Lincoln's Inn and spent a year reading law.

William Penn was granted the province of Pennsylvania in 1681 from his close friend King Charles II of England as a place where his fellow Quakers could enjoy freedom of worship and a chance to govern themselves and develop their own way of life. The English King made the grant, signed on March 4, 1681, to complete the settlement of the Middle Atlantic region with Englishmen. Penn sent his cousin William Markham to take charge of affairs of government and also to lay out the city Penn named Philadelphia, city of "brotherly love," the name symbolizing his idealistic concepts. From England, Penn wrote in 1681 asking that "the Rivers and Creeks be sounded on my side of the Delaware River . . . in order to settle a great Towne, and be sure to make your choice where it is most navigable, high, dry, and healthy." He wanted every house to be placed in the middle of its own plot to provide ground about it "that it may be a greene Country Towne, which will never be burnt, and always be wholesome."

Penn arrived in 1682 but had little chance to enjoy his city. He was forced to travel to England in 1684 and was unable to return until 1699. By then, Philadelphia was a flourishing town with many shops and trading houses, as well as several hundred dwellings and about 10,000 people clustered close to the riverfront. Penn's governor declared the city already was the equal of New York "in trade and riches." Penn's policies throughout the colony of religious toleration and the right of the people to take part in the government, in addition to growing prosperity, soon began to attract thousands of English, Welsh, Irish and Scottish settlers and most came by way of Philadelphia.

Philadelphia by the 1770s had grown to at least 30,000 persons in the central city, and it was the third most important business centre in the British Empire, overshadowed only by Liverpool and London.

It is after the early death of John Todd that the widow Todd becomes entangled with both Aaron Burr and James Madison.

If ever you do get the opportunity to watch MAGNIFICENT DOLL, give it a chance, and don’t take it too seriously – it’s pure American wish-fulfilment.

THE SPANISH MAIN (US 1945) movie ** score **1/2

A small group of peaceful Dutchmen are granted land in the Carolinas by the British Crown, but their ship is blown off course and ends up wrecked on the shores of a Spanish colony in the Caribbean. The Spanish Governor imprisons the Dutchmen who, having managed to escape, become fearsome pirates bent on wreaking revenge on the Spanish.

A colourful, but over-familiar romp – there really is nothing new here. The action scenes are reasonable and Walter Slezak is good as the corrupt Oliver Hardy-like Spanish Governor, but Paul Henreid is miscast as the swashbuckling hero. John Emery (excellent in THE WOMAN IN WHITE and THE PARADINE CASE) plays a fellow pirate, and Maureen O’Hara is typically feisty as the object of Henreid’s desires.

Hans Eisler’s score is disappointingly run-of-the-mill, especially considering his fine work on NONE BUT THE LONELY HEART. His score here is thematically weak and somewhat undernourished – though that is a fair reflection of THE SPANISH MAIN taken as a whole.

WHAT PRICE GLORY? (US 1952) movie *1/2 score ***

Extremely limp comedy about rival American officers fighting over the same girl in WWI France.

Considering the production values and talent involved in this picture – John Ford, James Cagney, Dan Dailey, William Demarest, Harry Morgan, Alfred Newman and so on – the results are spectacularly ordinary.

WHAT PRICE GLORY? is a broad farce that just isn’t funny – miss it.

OUTPOST IN MOROCCO (US 1949) movie * score **1/2

George Raft as a romantic French Foreign Legion Officer – a piece of casting that is about as believable as having Stan Laurel play Jack the Ripper – and the results are quite hilarious. Raft’s just too old and too wooden.

OUTPOST IN MOROCCO tells of Raft’s ‘Captain Gerrard’ and his attempts to subdue tribal chief Akim Tamiroff’s rebellious tendencies whilst becoming romantically involved with Tamiroff’s daughter, played by Marie Windsor – and it’s all very boring, obvious and shoddy. The fort Commandant is played by the usually reliable John Litel, but even he’s not very good.

It’s interesting to note that the Foreign Legion is now based in France itself, following Algeria’s independence in 1962. The Foreign Legionnaire swears allegiance to the Legion and not to France, which may explain why a unit of the Legion actually sided with Algerian pro-independence rebels against the French Government when independence was being pursued. The Legion itself has fought all over the world since its creation in the 1830s, and though it has a romantic reputation as a refuge for lovelorn and ruined European aristocrats etc, the Legion is actually made up of highly skilled soldiers of all nationalities (over 10% are now British) commanded by French officers.

The one good thing about OUTPOST IN MOROCCO is the fact it was filmed at a genuine French Foreign Legion fort in Morocco, which only goes to make the poor quality of the movie itself doubly disappointing.

BUGLES IN THE AFTERNOON (US 1952) movie *** score ***

No classic, but there’s plenty of action and melodrama in this Western set against the backdrop of ‘Custer’s Last Stand’ at the Battle of Little Bighorn.

Ray Milland is fine as a wrongfully disgraced US Army officer making a fresh start in the North West. There he clashes with villainous Army Captain Hugh Marlowe and makes friends with Barton MacLane and Forrest Tucker.

Tiomkin’s score is boisterous without being particularly memorable, and BUGLES IN THE AFTERNOON is never boring.

A MAN ALONE (US 1955) movie **1/2 score **1/2

A wandering gunman is framed by a gang of crooks for the murder of six people, including a young child.

Ray Milland directs for the first time, and stars as the gunman who’s really a decent sort of chap. A minor Western – a mixture of character study and schoolboy ‘good guys versus the bad guys’ – it comes across as slightly experimental – the movie is slow and atmospheric, but rather unconvincing.

A MAN ALONE is worth watching – there’s some interesting directorial touches, a solid performance from Milland, and a good supporting cast that includes Ward Bond, Raymond Burr and Lee van Cleef. Victor Young’s score is occasionally very effective, but, the main theme is just a bit too reminiscent of ‘Waltzing Mathilda’ (another song that is supposed to be as definitively Australian as ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ is definitively American, and yet, unsurprisingly, both are derived from old English songs).

Towards the end of A MAN ALONE, the almost obligatory lynch-mob makes its appearance – you know, the townsfolk are in uproar and baying for blood, and they almost inevitably attempt to hang the wrong man. Interestingly, the terms lynch-mob and lynching came about during the American War of Independence, in which the British American Colonists and their numerous European allies defeated the forces of the British Crown. Though popular history, including such soft and politically-correct movie bastardisations of history as THE PATRIOT, usually casts the British Authorities as the ‘bad guys’, it was a rebellious British American patriot, Charles Lynch, whose name has been immortalized because of his practice of hanging men who had not been tried by the proper authorities – in this way, Lynch and his mob murdered many Loyalists (those many British Americans who remained loyal to King George III), proving once again that although the rebellious British colonists may have been justified in their revolution against the Crown, both sides of the conflict were guilty of carrying out atrocities – though nothing like the nazi tactics of ‘Colonel Tavington’ that are portrayed in that travesty of history, but otherwise fun movie, THE PATRIOT.

Ray Milland’s career has always fascinated me. Born Reginald Truscott-Jones in Neath, South Wales in 1905, Milland worked hard during the 30s to establish himself in Hollywood. During the 40s he reaped the reward for his labours with a line-up of fine movies including THE LOST WEEKEND (1945), for which he won an Oscar. During the 50s, Milland suffered a decline in popularity and turned to movie directing with only limited success. During the late 50s he returned to England to direct and star in the enjoyable THE SAFECRACKER (recommended), before taking time out from the movies. In the early 60s Milland returned to the big screen to appear in a number of wretched horror/fantasy movies – some were mildly entertaining, but otherwise they were cheap and wretchedly shoddy productions. Nevertheless, the ageing Welshman, despite being linked with so much dross, still managed to appear in a number of ‘legitimate’ movies, such as GOLD, THE LAST TYCOON and LOVE STORY, among others – he was never short of work. During the late 70s Milland began to suffer ill-health, and it was a great shame that because of this he was unable to appear in the immensely popular movie TRADING PLACES – however, on the plus side, it meant that Don Ameche was able to take the role originally intended for Milland, thus Ameche made a spectacular return to Grade-A movies having at one point sunk to being a circus ringmaster.

Milland finally succumbed to cancer in 1986 – he had a fine career in movies, but one feels he could have done even better. Another interesting thing about Milland is the way he started off as a handsome, energetic and cheerful young man and gradually evolved into the grumpy-looking old curmudgeon that is so familiar to many of us – everyone changes as they grow old, but rarely has the contrast between the effervescent optimism of youth and the cynical resignation of old age been so marked – still, whatever stage of life Milland was at, his presence onscreen was always welcome.

A MAN ALONE is interesting without being especially entertaining.

TRAPEZE (US 1956) movie **1/2 score ***

I must say I’ve never been a fan of movies set in and around the circus – though CIRCUS OF HORRORS (GB 1960) and PSYCHO CIRCUS (1964) were good fun. I guess I don’t like circuses very much, never have, which is shame, what with the Moscow State Circus touring the English West Country at the moment.

In TRAPEZE, Burt Lancaster and Tony Curtis vie for the attentions of Gina Lollobrigida, but despite some good scenes, I couldn’t get the imaginary stench of elephant dung out of my nose. Thomas Gomez and Sid James are good in support.

The movie is directed by Carol Reed, and the flavourful score comes from Malcolm Arnold, with the ubiquitous Muir Mathieson also involved.

A passable entertainment, even for non circus freaks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DjC:
American Psycho

**/****

I was a tad let down by this film. It was edgy, violent, slightly entertaining in it's dark dark humor, but I found it disappointing. Worth a rent at least.

---

DjC, this if that movie this way (here I go). AND ALSO ANOTHER WARNING SPOILER AHEAD!!!

Ok, remember when he called his lawyer on the phone and confessed this all to him, then the next day he saw his lawyer and he (the lawyer) told the guy (I forget his name)that he could not have killed that guy because he had lunch with him in London a few days prior. Also when he goes into "Paul Allen's" (HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA, get it? Paul Allen hahahahahah) apt, and "everything" is gone..White walls, nothing in the closet....

See what I'm getting at. What if it was what he wanted to do to the people, in essence he dreamed the movie.

But your right, the movie was very dark, and I did not like it.

--Kyp
Writer/AVID Editor

THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE (US 1967) movie *** score ****

Likeable musical farce set in 20s New York and starring Julie Andrews and James Fox as young Americans destined for love.

Sparkling song and dance routines are complemented by a wonderful feeling of time and place, as well as some judicious casting. The two leads are fine, and Mary Tyler Moore is good in a vacuous role, but it is Carol Channing and John Gavin who make the most impact. In addition, there are plenty of other memorable characters in the supporting cast – from singing Spaniards to sinister Orientals.

The story is completely off the wall – whilst Julie is searching for the right boss to marry, she manages to thwart a gang of Orientals engaged in kidnapping young ladies for the White Slave Trade – but, no matter how apparently stupid and madcap the proceedings become, everything is actually kept well disciplined – and that’s the only way to make a truly successful farce. Too many movie farces in the past have been self-indulgent, self-satisfied and cringemakingly embarrassing. One such example is 1966’s HOTEL PARADISO, in which such actors renowned for their expert comedy performances as Robert Morley and Sir Alec Guinness are absolutely dreadful – the trouble is, movies like HOTEL PARADISO think that all they have to do to be funny is to have big name stars running around in circles in silly costumes – paradoxically, a farce, more than anything, needs discipline and control to be truly successful.

THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE boasts some fine 20s jazz-styled music – the well-known title song sets the movie off nicely, and the rest of the soundtrack is a pleasant mixture of songs (old and new) arranged by Andre Previn, and a seamlessly and expertly interwoven score from an Oscar-winning Elmer Bernstein.

To me, Elmer Bernstein is a member of that select group of expert film composers that have impacted strongly on popular culture – others include John Williams, Alfred Newman, Max Steiner, James Horner, Dmitri Tiomkin, Ennio Morricone, John Barry, Hans Zimmer and so on – but not Jerry Goldsmith. Fine film composer though he is, and popular amongst soundtracks enthusiasts at that, Goldsmith has failed to create any ‘household themes’ that may have endeared him to the public at large, apart from maybe THE WALTONS, KILDARE and STAR TREK.

Beyond that, although Goldsmith has produced some pop and jazz orientated scores, most notably FLINT, they have generally been inauthentic and half-hearted, you know, they’re more spoofs than genuine, although THE RUSSIA HOUSE gave a glimpse of what Goldsmith may have been capable of. As it is, whilst Williams, Barry and Elmer Bernstein etc have excelled in all genres, Goldsmith remains renowned only for his work in movie genres that do not necessitate the application of pop and jazz stylings.

Elmer Bernstein’s work on THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE perfectly displays this composer’s abilities as a ‘complete composer’ – especially when one takes into account Bernstein’s other accomplished compositional achievements across the broadest range of movie genres. That’s what makes Bernstein great. And, by the same token, I believe that John Williams, Alfred Newman, Max Steiner, and John Barry amongst other notable film composers would have been just as capable of successfully working on THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE because each of them has already proved his abilities in the broadest range of genres possible.

I am not saying that Goldsmith is or was incapable of doing a score for a musical, I am just saying that he never proved he was able – I suppose THE BALLAD OF CABLE HOGUE was the closest he got, but that only had sketchy and insubstantial ‘musical’ passages. However, based on Goldsmith’s stylistically limited output during the 90s, it would seem completely out of the question for him to conjure anything like the innovation and pure musical sense necessary to bring a musical to life – his rather introverted, stifled, conservative and thematically weak work on MULAN is surely proof of that.

Whereas the famous and successful film composers seem to possess the innate ability to compose detailed, fluid and lyrical musical works, Goldsmith seems unable to extend his range beyond the staccato-like, repetitive, obvious and ponderous – Goldsmith’s music is rarely anything else. Goldsmith used to be able to cover-up his stylistic shortcomings by giving the illusion of versatility in his music – during the 90s, he hasn’t even been able to that, the result of which has been a catalogue of movie music mediocrity that constitutes one of the most banal, simplistic and artless bodies of musical work in existence.

It is interesting to note that when Goldsmith was at the height of his powers during the 60s and especially during the 70s, film scores and cinema in general was at its most limited, conservative, uninspired, narrow-minded, simplistic and unentertaining. Perhaps if the requirements of cinema on the film composer had been greater and more extensive, Goldsmith would have responded by extending his repertoire – or, perhaps Goldsmith, owing to his stylistic limitations, would not have enjoyed the industry status that he did.

However, since the late 80s, Hollywood has recaptured the flare, imagination, intelligence, enlightenment and sheer entertainment value of 30s and 40s cinema, and in my opinion Goldsmith has appeared to be like a fish out of water. Whereas virtually every other film composer has welcomed cinema’s burgeoning high quality output during the 90s and have been willing to supply their movies with the most appropriate music based on the principles of CMS (Contemporary Musical Sensibilities), not only has Goldsmith steadfastly refused to provide his movies with anything more than adequate low-key scores, but he has actually regressed – Goldsmith has retreated into his shell, making his presence in a modern, sophisticated, broadminded and enlightened cinema incongruous and anachronistic.

Whilst the music of Williams and Horner etc has impressed itself on society in general, Goldsmith remains largely unknown despite influencing the progression of film scoring development almost as profoundly as the better known composers such as Williams and Barry. I guess that Goldsmith is “the film composer’s film composer” – admired, influential and respected throughout the industry for his pre-90s work, and yet there is so little of lasting importance and quality to show for his forty years of immense effort as far as popular culture is concerned. Goldsmith worked hard to achieve what he did achieve, but at the end of the day, people know Barry for his Bond and Dances etc, they know Williams for Star Wars and all the rest – but, ask ten people on the sidewalk if they have ever heard of Jerry Goldsmith, and the answer in every case would probably be – ‘Jerry WHO?.

Anyway, the only major drawback with THOROUGHLY MODERN MILLIE is that it is too long – the frantic pace and sweet nature of the movie wears a little too thin by the time we enter the third hour.

DOCTOR AT SEA (UK 1955) movie **1/2 score **1/2

This first sequel (of six) to the immensely popular DOCTOR IN THE HOUSE (UK 1954) has Simon Sparrow (Dirk Bogarde) becoming a ships’ doctor to escape the clutches of a love-struck and exceedingly ugly Joan Sims.

DOCTOR AT SEA is more memorable for its talented cast and excellent production values than for the level of humour, that is, to say the least, rather ordinary.

However, the excellent characterizations and the movie’s brisk pace help to make up for the lack of real laughs.

Bogarde joins the crew of a British freighter bound for North Africa, and once in Algiers, misogynistic Captain James Robertson Justice is compelled to take on board Briggite Bardot and Brenda de Banzie at the request of the Chairman.

That’s pretty much all the plot amounts to, and DOCTOR AT SEA is really just a collection of loosely related sight-gags and familiar jokes.

Maurice Denham, Geoffrey Keen, Cyril Chamberlain, Raymond Huntley, Joan Hickson, Thomas Heathcote, Noel Purcell, Michael Medwin and the peripatetic George Coulouris are amongst the supremely accomplished supporting cast.

However, seen today, DOCTOR AT SEA is mainly of nostalgic or/and academic interest to the movie enthusiast, rather than as a source of genuine amusement for the casual moviegoer.

THE BIG CLOCK (US 1948) movie ***1/2 score ***1/2

Charles Laughton and Ray Milland are well cast in this entertaining thriller with romantic comedy elements.

A powerful newspaper magnate (Laughton) murders his mistress and puts one of his editors (Milland) on the case. As the case unfolds the evidence points more and more toward Milland’s guilt.

The movie opens in classic noir style – the New York skyline is silhouetted against a moonlit backdrop and Victor Young’s music is moody and rhapsodic. However, the movie opts more for sharp comedy, and the thriller elements definitely come off second best.

I have to say that THE BIG CLOCK would probably have been a really great movie had it been made ten, or even only five years earlier – but, by 1948 the energy and wit was just beginning to seep out of Hollywood, and THE BIG CLOCK merely ends up as a slick and sharp but only superficially entertaining movie.

Maureen O’Sullivan, Lloyd Corrigan, Frank Orth, Richard Webb and Henry (Harry) Morgan are just a few of the familiar faces that pop up in the supporting cast, and George McCready is typically excellent as Laughton’s scheming right-hand man.

Nearly a classic – but lacking real substance.

JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH (US 1959) movie ** score **1/2

Everything about this movie is fake, from Pat Boone’s Scottish accent to the polystyrene sets – even the flamin’ duck’s a drake!

Only James Mason’s commanding performance prevents the film from being completely unwatchable.

One thing is for certain, Herrmann’s VERTIGO + JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH = Goldsmith’s ‘Cloud’ music.

Having said all of that, 1880’s Edinburgh is nicely recreated and Alan Napier is useful in the supporting cast – but the movie is a real embarrassment, and it seems to go on forever.

Take my advice, forget JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH and watch the INDIANA JONES series of adventure movies – JTTCOTE may have inspired Indie, but that’s one of its only positive attributes.

THE SEA CHASE (US 1955) movie *** score ***1/2

Good WWII adventure yarn has a miscast but still effective John Wayne as a German cargo-ship captain who defies the Royal Navy’s attempts to impound his ship, and attempts to journey from Sydney, New South Wales, back to Europe.

It’s good to see a Hollywood movie illustrating that most Germans are as good-natured as the rest of humanity, and though Wayne fails to convince, the gesture is most welcome. If Wayne is unconvincing, then Lana Turner is simply absurd as a German spy based in Australia working to infiltrate British Australia’s intelligence agencies – but, for all her stolidity, she makes a pretty picture.

Anyhow, Wayne’s German captain evades the British Navy in Australia and heads south to British Aukland Island to the south of New Zealand to take on board fuel and provisions. There, evil nazi First Officer Lyle Bettger (excellent) callously murders a few British New Zealander fishermen before returning to the ship.

The pursuing Royal Navy ship the HMS Rockhampton led by David Farrar (a lifelong friend of Wayne’s character) discovers the atrocities and redoubles its efforts to track down the German freighter believing Wayne himself to be responsible for the murders.

The rest of the movie involves a game of cat and mouse between Wayne and the Royal Navy stretched across two oceans – and it’s involving stuff. There’s humour too. When the German ship stops off in Chile, the crew engage in a drinking contest with some British merchant seamen. When back onboard ship the next morning, one of the German crew recounts the story to Wayne saying they woke up and remembered nothing of what happened after the drinking contest began. Wayne asks ‘So, what’s the problem?’ In response, the German crewman sheepishly enquires ‘…any ideas on how to remove tattoos?’, and then displays a massive Union Jack and the words ‘Britannia Rules the Waves’ tattooed all over his back.

Roy Webb’s score is great – there’s one of those haunting Webb themes, and the soundtrack is broadcast in stereo. There’s a fine supporting cast too – James Arness, John Qualen, Claude Akins, Tab Hunter and Alan Hale Jr – to name but a few.

A good Hollywood movie, with the Royal Canadian Navy supplying the ships.

AUSTRALIA: BEYOND THE FATAL SHORE BBC2 documentary **** music ****

Fascinating entry in the series of documentaries chronicling Australia’s history and ongoing development from a loyal member of the British Empire to the multi-cultural and exciting modern country it has become. Good music as well – it doesn’t opt for cliched Aboriginal instrumentation, but for a dreamy and yet profound electronic mix that is reflective when describing the old British colonial tradition, and urgent and optimistic when accompanying the images of modern Australia.

Like the United States before it, the British started Australia, but now it is all the peoples of the world that are moulding its destiny.

The world-renowned Australian art critic Robert Hughes presents the program, and though he is naturally a liberal left-wing homosexual, his account of Australia’s past is refreshingly even-handed and doesn’t fall into any politically-correct traps.

Up until fifty years ago, 98% of the Australian people were of British extraction – things are very different today, with people having flooded in from China, India and continental Europe in particular over the past fifty years.

The hottest debate in Australia at the moment is about the perceived erosion of Australia’s historically British culture by the influx of peoples from many other diverse cultures. A dwindling number of ageing Australians cling on to the old ties with mother England – but times are changing, and whilst a die-hard minority of Australians understandably fear for Australia’s future, the general consensus is for acceptance of change. The same is true throughout the English-speaking world, nowhere more so than in Great Britain itself.

Britain’s Victorian era created the idea of the stereotypical Englishman – toffee-nosed, supercilious, snobbish, superior and heavily accented – a false impression that still exists (though to a far lesser degree) to this day and a characterization of the British that could not be further from the real world. Yes, some members of the British aristocracy can be described in such terms, but the vast majority of the British people are pretty much down to Earth, and the regional variations of accent, dialect and manner are incredibly diverse in England alone.

What the Conservatives in Australia and elsewhere in the English-speaking world fail to understand is that all societies and cultures must change and evolve to maintain their dynamism and vitality. All of the English-speaking world, whether it’s Canada, the USA, Australia, or Britain itself, remains essentially linked by the ‘British’ way of life. That is the essence of Britishness – the English have always been great Anglicisers – the English language itself is a composite of many languages, and the English race is a mongrel breed anyway.

Some speak of being ‘purely English’ – but, there’s no such thing. Okay, so the Scots, Irish, Welsh and Cornish are basically Celtic, but the English are so much more than just Anglo-Saxon (Germanic). The English have the blood of many other races flowing through their veins – Celtic, Roman, Jewish, Norman, Viking and so on – and in recent years, the huge influx of people into England from the former British Empire has forever changed the makeup of the British people – people have flooded in from Africa, the Caribbean, South America and Asia, as well as from Europe itself.

But, away from the Hispanic and Sikh ghettos, rather than British culture being eroded by the influx of foreign peoples, the cultures of the English-speaking world are being enriched. It is the broad-minded, flexible and tolerant nature of British culture that enables the assimilation of other cultures – Australia is no exception. When Muslims move to England they become British but are still able to practice strong elements of their original culture whilst embracing the British way of life, and indeed, their culture is added to the overall mixture of cultures in modern Britain.

Therefore, the British culture that exists in all of the countries of the English-speaking world is not dying, it is simply evolving as it has always done – thus, immigrants to Australia, rather than undermining the existing culture, are enriching it and in the process are themselves becoming Anglicised.

TWELVE ANGRY MEN (US 1957) movie **** score **1/2

TWELVE ANGRY MEN is a jury-room character study years ahead of its time – it’s a ‘politically-correct masterpiece’ – and what superb drama it makes.

A brilliant cast is headed by Henry Fonda and Lee J Cobb. Both men are on top form and give performances that seem to epitomise their perceived screen images. Here, Fonda plays the quiet, reasonable, intelligent good guy with a granite will. Cobb is the loud-mouthed and bigoted bully. Everyone else in the cast, excellent though they may be, are slightly less certain about their motivations and actions.

Considering the potentially claustrophobic setting of the movie – basically, all the action takes place in one room – debuting director Lumet does a wonderful job of maintaining audience interest. But it is Reginald Rose’s script, overflowing with canny observations, crafty humour, and biting truisms that really maintains the movie’s momentum.

Also of note is the parsimonious use of music – a pleasant change to have a movie that doesn’t have to rely on the cheapening effect of dramatic score – with TWELVE ANGRY MEN, too much dramatic score may have reduced the proceedings to melodrama.

TWO RODE TOGETHER (US 1961) movie * score ***

Puerile and obtuse ‘comedy’ western, with the promising partnership of James Stewart as a cynical marshal and Richard Widmark as a dutiful cavalry officer falling flat from the very first scene – there’s no chemistry because there’s no decent lines. An excellent supporting cast, including the always entertaining Andy Devine, is largely wasted.

It is hard to believe that John Ford directed TWO RODE TOGETHER, such is the incompetence of the proceedings. The story, such as it is, involves our mismatched stars attempting to rescue some pioneers from the Comanches.

The movie’s only positive attribute is George Duning’s reasonable score – I mean, even that fine actor John McIntire muffed his lines on one occasion.

Take my advice, if ever this movie turns up on television, go and walk the dog instead.

BUNDLE OF JOY (US 1956) movie * score **

If anyone ever wondered why the Hollywood Musical became virtually extinct by the late-50s, BUNDLE OF JOY provides a particularly good reason.

It pains me to describe this movie as atrocious, simply because it was so sad to see the once great Hollywood character actor Adolphe Menjou reduced to appearing in such dross.

Now, Eddie Fisher does sound good on record, but onscreen he looks wrong, and here he is lumbered with some particularly bland numbers. Debbie Reynolds never could sing or dance, so I was quite prepared for her incompetent performance.

Sadly, BUNDLE OF JOY is also one of the accomplished British Hollywood character Melville Cooper’s last films.

Movies like this do at least provide a fascinating historical record of Hollywood’s late 50s decent into the unenlightened and simplistic chasm of late 50s to mid 80s cinema.

Excellent movie. Now I love Goldsmith's score even more!

South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut --- **

THE TRAIN ROBBERS (US 1973) movie ** score *

Small-scale Western has Ann-Margret hiring John Wayne, Rod Taylor and Ben Johnson to recover some gold, the whereabouts of which only she knows, to return to the authorities to help clear her son’s name. Crook Ricardo Montalban and his gang of twenty gunmen are in hot pursuit.

There’s some nice Texan scenery, a typically ingratiating performance from Wayne, and an obvious ‘twist’ ending – but it’s all pretty lame and laborious.

Dominic Frontiere’s typically dreadful score is worthy of note. The music lurches from the Mission Impossible theme to Lawrence of Arabia and back again, whilst incorporating every cliched Western musical device known to man.

A childish Western that will bore the kiddies to death.

MARTY (US 1955) movie ***1/2 score ***

Ernest Borgnine’s Oscar-winning performance as Marty is a revelation. I remember going to see this movie when it was released having been used to seeing Borgnine typecast playing villainous and heartless bullies – here he displays an enormous amount of sensitivity and even insecurity as the 34 year-old New York butcher tied to his mother’s apron strings.

Betsy Blair co-stars with Borgnine as they play a pair of ugly, boring no-hopers destined to remain lonely and rejected by the rest of society – and then they meet, and their miserable existence suddenly gains meaning.

Superb performances, great New York locations and Chayefsky’s perfect script combine to create a comedy drama of great importance. Between the frequent laughs there are plenty of truisms in the script and all of the characters are believable because we all see such people in our everyday lives.

DVD purchases were low last month. High Fidelity (****) being the only real one worth mentioning along with North by Northwest (****)... I also got Men In Black DTS (**1/2) and Haunting DTS (***). Think that's it, I can't remember.

I'd do some in-depth reviews if I were not so tired and coming down with an evil cold. Sorry...

Dan (UK)