HOLMES & WATSON

US, 2018, 90 minutes, Colour.
Will Ferrell, John C.Reilly, Rebecca Hall, Lauren Lapkus, Ralph Fiennes, Kelly Macdonald, Steve Coogan, Pam Ferris, Noah Jupe, Rob Brydon, Hugh Laurie.
Directed by Etan Cohen.

With a long, long history of Sherlock Holmes films, this successor is not absolutely (nor relatively) essential. And it is not as if Sherlock Holmes hasn’t been the subject of cinema humour before. Well, if not Sherlock himself, his fictional brother, Sigerson, the product of Gene Wilder’s imagination who starred in, wrote and directed, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes Smarter Brother, 1975! (Sherlock and Dr Watson, the reputable Douglas Wilmer and Thorley Walters, along with Moriarty and his assistant, the reputable Leo McKern? and Roy Kinnear, balancing a cast led by Madeline Kahn and Marty Feldman!).

Modesty is not a one of the main characteristics of Sherlock Holmes and his vanity is taken up here by Will Ferrell in the title role, sporting a very British accent, supported by John C.Reilly playing an enthusiastically ingenuous Dr Watson (initially intending to kill himself after returning from the wars in Afghanistan in 1881, misinterpreting Holmes’ signs that there were other ways to commit suicide by thinking that Holmes was actually encouraging him to live!

So, who is the intended audience for this spoof of Holmes and Watson, of Holmes’ methods of detection, of the pursuit of Moriarty, the ministrations of Mrs Hudson, the request by Queen Victoria to solve the case? How to tell! Conan Doyle purists, like Victoria, will not be amused – actually that’s not quite correct here, Victoria enters into the investigations (even when she is subjected to a number of unintended punches and battering) with quite some enthusiasm. So, not for purists.

For fans of Ferrell and Reilly and their longtime collaborator, Adam McKay?, perhaps one of their more disappointing efforts. (And McKay? has recently gone on to serious satire with The Big Short and his film about Dick Cheney, Vice.) There will be a little consolation with some amusing cameos, Steve Coogan suddenly appearing as a one-armed tattooist, Pam Ferris as Queen Victoria, Kelly Macdonald as not quite the image of Mrs Hudson as we have come to know, Hugh Laurie as Mycroft (communicating wordlessly with Sherlock in the silence required by the diogenes Club. Ralph Fiennes is Moriarty and a final joke about Titanic with Billy Zane as himself.

Rob Brydon has a rather thankless role as a frustrated Inspector Lestrade but Rebecca Hall seems to be enjoying herself as a Boston doctor, able to make some points about women in the professions to a rather disbelieving Holmes. It was all written and directed by Etan Cohen, not to be confused with Ethan Coen of the Coen brothers. Etan Cohen wrote Men in Black 3, Tropic Thunder and his next announced project as Mandrake the Magician with Sasha Baron Cohen (so there!).

There are a whole lot of anachronisms, of course, and some consolation during an autopsy with the playing of Unchained Melody (which also had a key role in Bumblebee).

Advertising refers to the film as “a humorous take on…�. Most critics seem to use the word unfunny in their condemnations. Allowing for some near lowest common denominator humour (rather crutch-fixated), it could be called corny.

INCONCEIVABLE

US, 2017, 105 minutes, Colour.
Gina Gershon, Nicky Whelan, Nicolas Cage, Faye Dunaway, Sienna Soho Baker, Harlow Bottarini, Natalie Eva Marie, Jonathan Baker, James Van Patten.
Directed by Jonathan Baker.

The film opens with a gruesome killing, Katie, a seemingly battered mother killing the father and escaping with her child. She turns up four years later with her daughter, becomes friends with some of the mothers in a community, especially Angela, a doctor, whose husband, Brian, is also a doctor.

Audiences may feel they have already worked out what is going to happen, especially in the relationship with the adults.

Not exactly.

This is a Gina Gershon film even though Nicolas Cage appears as her husband, rather a minor role and is generally in the background. Gina Gershon plays Angela, having had several miscarriages, having succeeded in pregnancy with an egg donor and is the mother of the little girl. However, given drugs for her pain, she has become addicted Brian demanding that she stop. They want another child, Angela having so suffered several miscarriages, trying again for a donor egg but this time wanting a surrogate mother.

Katie reappears with her daughter, is talented as mother-nanny, is employed by Angela and Brian (despite the reservations of Brian’s mother, Faye Dunaway).

There are quite some complications, Katie and her relationship with one of the local women, Linda, the discovery that Linda is to be the surrogate mother which, of course, she wants to be, leading her to kill Linda. She does become the surrogate mother, revelling in the fact that she will have not only had daughter, Angela’s daughter (because she was the egg donor) and the new baby, a boy.

Lots of conflict, Brian not understanding, Angela desperately researching Katie, discovering the truth, getting DNA tests (with the doctor being the film’s director, Jonathan Baker).

And, a melodramatic ending with a knife fight, Angela wounded, Katie wounded but giving birth.

There is a final scene with the family all reunited – which seems quite unnecessary for the way the film was going.

1. The title? Conception, artificial insemination? Surrogacy? In the play on words, that the action could be inconceivable in credibility?

2. The opening, Katie and the crying baby, the man coming in, choking her, her getting the knife, killing him? Audience assumption that this was her child? (And the later revelation about her role as an egg donor, her daughter, taking, being a mother to her, the flashbacks to the murder of the selfish mother in the bath…?)

3. The focus of the film on Angela, at home with Brian, her medical background, his being a doctor? The love for Cora? The filling in of the background of her miscarriages, the donor, her bearing her child, the consequences, the drug relief, the potential for addiction? Her staying at home and caring for her daughter, wanting to go back to work?

4. Katie and her reappearance, years later, her daughter, Maddie? With Linda, the mothers in the park, caring for the children, playing with them? The bonds between Linda and Angela, Linda helping Angela with her rehabilitation? The later irony of Katie and the sexual relationship with Linda? The further irony that Linda was asked to be the surrogate mother for Angela? The donor eggs being those of Katie? The relationship, the beach, Katie coming into the water, the confrontation with Linda, drowning her? Reported as a boating accident?

5. Angela, her maternal instincts, wanting another child, prepared to go through with the surrogacy, not having thought it through thoroughly?

6. Brian’s mother, her presence, observing, sardonic, seeing through Katie? Give the continued help?

7. The role of Brian, a supporting character, in the background, allowing for Angela’s wishes, employing Katie, letting her stay in the guest house? The influence of his mother, her scepticism about Katie, suspicions? His growing worry about Angela, the drugs, the urine test? Wanting Angela to apologise to Katie after the accusations? His response to the knives and the wounds to both Katie and Angela? Angela wanting to give him the DNA information?

8. Katie, pathological, her background, donating her eggs, taking back her child and murdering the parents? Settling into a new situation? The irony of her eggs for Angela? Her being a mother to Cora, the two girls looking alike? Comments about sisters? Her abilities with the girls, continued caring for them? the murderous background?

9. Angela, competent, at work, welcomed? Friendship with Barry? Asking him to do the DNA testing? Her searching Katie’s house, the books, getting the samples for the DNA tests? The clashes with Katie, accusing her of Linda’s death?

10. Katie spiking the drink, Angela under the influence, the surprise party, her outbursts and accusations? The fight in the kitchen, the knives?

11. Brian and his behaviour, Katie giving birth and wanting Brian to be present, kissing him? The doctors? The impression that Angela had died? Brian taking Katie to see the baby, Katie having decorated the room, the paintings, Angela researching them and getting information and fuelling her suspicions, Gabriel’s name?

12. The revelation of the truth, Katie and despair, her being in a padded cell? And the family being together, including Maddie?

BEAST OF BURDEN

US, 2018, 89 minutes, Colour.
Daniel Radcliffe, Grace Gummer, Pablo Schreiber, Robert Wisdom.
Directed by Jesper Ganslandt.

A beast of burden tends to be a lowly lonely animal bearing at times unbearable loads. So, an apt image for the central character in this film.

However, it is not a film that could be recommended for general viewing. Rather, it is a curiosity item in the career of Daniel Radcliffe. There are some scenes with Meryl Streep’s daughter, Grace Gummer, and Pablo Schreiber.

An IMDb synopsis: Sean Haggerty only has an hour to deliver his illegal cargo. An hour to reassure a drug cartel, a hitman, and the DEA that nothing is wrong. An hour to make sure his wife survives. And he must do it all from the cockpit of his Cessna.

Which means then that Daniel Radcliffe spends most of the time in the cockpit. It is not as if something parallel cannot be an effective film – think, particularly, the British film Locke, all in the front seat of the car with Tom Hardy, or Buried with Reynolds, buried alive in a coffin, or Colin Farrell being menaced in Phone Booth.

However, the cockpit is dark, it is night, it is dangerous. Daniel Radcliffe seems to do his desperate best – but gets an opportunity for some straightforward acting in a few flashbacks which concern his wife and her illness, agents, hitmen, the DEA.

Somehow or other, most audiences will not be engaged with characters or situations – and, if watching on television or download, there will be many temptations to press the Fast Forward.

MAN ON THE RUN

UK, 1949, 80 minutes, Black and white.
Derek Farr, Joan Hopkins, Edward Chapman, Laurence Harvey, Howard Marion- Crawford, Alfie Bass, Edward Underdown, Kenneth More, Eleanor Summerfield.
Directed by Lawrence Huntington.

Man on the Run is an efficient British thriller from the late 1940s, capitalising on memories of the war, military service, and motivations for desertion and men going on the run to escape imprisonment. One such character is Peter Burton played by Derek Farr, working anonymously in a pub but suddenly recognised by a fellow soldier, played by Kenneth More, who threatens blackmail and exposure.

While Peter does go on the run, he has a great deal of bad luck, wanting to pawn his gun but drawing it just as thieves come in to rob the shop, a policeman being killed. Which means that Peter has to go on the run again, relying on an encounter with a war widow, a sympathetic performance by Joan Hopkins, who takes pity on him, hides him, shields him from the police, takes him down to the coast to a holiday house, recognises one of the criminals in a local cafe because he was missing several fingers, had an Australian accent (played by Edward Underdown).

Edward Chapman is the chief of police and Laurence Harvey players his main assistant.

The film builds up with the car chase to a confrontation in a pub in the wharf area, the police getting the criminals, Peter surviving but, interestingly, prepared to do a prison sentence for his desertion. And Joan Hopkins will wait for him.

Written and directed by Lawrence Huntington, director of a number of small-budget films (an exception, The Upturned Glass with James Mason) in the 1940s, a great deal of television directing the 1950s.

1. A British post-war thriller? Issues of the war and its impact? On civilian families? On the military, desertion, the consequences?

2. Atmospheric photography, country towns and bars, his city, streets, restaurants, police precincts? The coast and the beach and the holiday house? The wharf area and pubs? The musical score?

3. The introduction to Peter Burton, working in the bar, his hidden life, the encounter with Newman, memories of war days, Newman and his surprise, the suggestions for blackmail? Burton and his leaving? The background to his military career, family and difficulties, deserting, on the run?

4. Peter in the city, is going, going to the shop, pulling out the gun, coinciding with the masked figures and the robbery? The shooting of the policeman? Peter being identified? The escape, trying to hide?

5. The encounter with Jean, going to her flat, his not wanting to threaten, her response, the police arriving, her hiding him? The consequences? His staying at the flat, going to the shop to buy the cigarettes, the support of her friend at the shop? The information? Bringing things back to the flat, her own background, war widow? Her compassion for Peter?

6. The information about the thieves? The Australian accent? The man with the missing fingers? Locals?

7. The police, the information, the presumptions, interrogating Jean and the others in the street? Suspicions? The chief inspector, his associates?

8. Jean taking Peter to friends, the seaside, on the beach, relaxing, the attraction?

9. The police and their suspicions, Jean’s movements, the taxi driver and the interrogation (despite missing his meal)?

10. Jean, seeing the man with the missing fingers? Peter and his pursuit of the criminals? Jean explaining to the police?

11. The car, the disappearance, the police checking? The pub, the owner and his dealings with the criminals? Peter being taken, tied up, his getting away, going into the water?

12. The police, interrogations, the thieves pulling guns, the confrontations? Peter and the water, getting out, the vindication?

13. Peter and his going to court, accepting his punishment, Jean waiting for him?

14. A satisfying British drama, action, but low-key in style?

ADVENTURE IN IRAQ

US, 1943, 65 minutes, Black-and-white.
John Loder, Ruth Ford, Warren Douglas, Paul Cavanagh, Barry Bernard.
Directed by D Ross Lederman.

A small-budget supporting feature from Warner Brothers as part of the war effort. In retrospect, it looks rather silly but may have appealed to the American audience at the time.

Three military personnel, two men and a woman, crash land in Iraq which is held by the British. John Loder and Ruth Ford play an estranged married couple, Warren Douglas plays the gung ho pilot of the plane. It can be noted that the terrain looks rather lush, nothing like desert in Iraq, or even an oasis.


They land in an independent kingdom which is somewhat affiliated with Hitler and the Nazis. The ruler is played by Paul Cavanagh, a different role for him, but in some ways he makes the film worth watching.

He is silver-tongued, very cultured in manner and style and education, continually commenting on how Western powers look down on the Middle East as uncivilised (despite the thousands of years of culture). There are also some superstitions associated with demons, sinister high priest, the ruler taking over some of the ceremonies.

Ironically, he has a very British butler who does not want to go back to England but he seems happy to collaborate, for money, with the Westerners to help them in their escape.

The film also offers the opportunity for Ruth Ford to be decked out in a number of attractive gowns, even escaping back to the plane in a somewhat provocative evening dress.

The westerners complain, try to contact Cairo, escape to the plane fairly easily in terms of knocking everyone out and getting on by foot while the locals have to reach the plane by horse. John Loder gives his life for the others pretending that he has not been able to contact Cairo – but, as deathly rituals get underway, Americans land and start to bombard.

In a way the film is a bit reminiscent of cowboys and Indians, looking down on the inferior Indians, the presumptions of the white Americans about superiority, clashes between them – and the cavalry riding in at the end to save the Americans!

MAN FROM HEADQUARTERS

US, 1942, 64 minutes, Black-and-white.
Frank Albertson, Joan Woodbury, Dick Elliott, Arthur O' Connell.
Directed by Jean Yarbrough.

An ever so slight comedy thriller, supporting feature from the early 1940s.

Frank Albertson is a newspaper reporter, more than a touch of the rebellious against the editor, who receives an official commendation from the city because of his contribution in exposing a gang. When he gets caught up with some of the gang members who threaten him, the appeals to the editor who decides to teach him a lesson with a practical joke and does not help him.

He is knocked out, goes on a bus to another city, encounters an attractive young woman who has no money and pays for her food. She depends on him and rather falls for him, she is played by Joan Woodbury.

The rest of the film as a whole lot of tangles, police, criminals, thugs, the newspaper reporter being abducted, the dangers for the girl, everything working out well at the end and the two of them being praised for exposing the criminals!

For film buffs, one of the thugs in the car is Arthur O’ Connell, in later decades a genial and attractive old character actor.

STREAMLINE EXPRESS

US, 1935, 71 minutes, Black-and-white.
Victor Jory, Evelyn Venable, Esther Ralston, Erin O' Brien- Moore, Ralph Forbes, Sidney Blackmer, Vince Barnett, Clay Clement.
Directed by Leonard Fields.

This light entertainment begins as if it were going to be a film about the theatre, an angry director, rehearsals, a missing leading lady. In fact, it is a train journey film – and a most elaborate train for 1935, allegedly going on a monorail between New York City and Los Angeles in 20 hours, and a luxury hotel-like interior. (Not particularly likely at that time!)

Victor Jory, best known for dramatic and sinister roles, tries his hand at light comedy, bringing a certain toughness to it as the director and then posing as a steward on the train. Evelyn Venable is the missing actress, feeling humiliated by the director, going to marry a wealthy man in Santa Barbara, still in love with the director but exhibiting all the battle of the sexes syndrome.

While there is this battle of the sexes, with her intended husband being sympathetic to the steward, believing his stories about his fiancee being mentally unstable, there are some other complications on the train. There is a married man going off with a blonde who is being blackmailed for robbery by a sinister and suave criminal, played by Sidney Blackmer. There is the wife of the married man who gets onto the train, surprises her husband and his girlfriend. There are the various stewards, robbery of a pendant, the suave criminal concealing it, twists in the screenplay where the steward is to make up the bed, looks into magazine, sees that his actress recommends men shave and so he does, discovering the pendant – and then, of course, being blamed for the robbery!

There is also a comic turn by perennial comic Vince Barnett, son of vaudevillilans, an unlikely father, but hoping that his wife will give birth on the train in California so that they can inherit $10,000. She gives birth in Arizona! But, for a satisfactory end to the film, hosted by a drunk who continually reappears, a twin is born in California. And the fiance, decent chap that he is, withdraws to leave the happy couple together.

The film was written and directed by Leonard Fields who wrote a few films and directed four during the 1930s. (In the previous year there was Twentieth Century, a train romantic comedy with John Barrymore and Carole Lombard.)

AUGUST WEEK END

US, 1936, 62 minutes, Black-and-white.
Valerie Hobson, Paul Harvey, Betty Compson, Frank Melton, Maynard Holmes.
Directed by Charles Lamont.

This is very much a drawing-room drama and comedy, very much of the mid-930s.

It sets the tone (rather pre-Code) with an older financier wooing a young woman whose finances he has managed and even supplemented when she was going broke. In the background, there are signs that he will be exposed for financial mismanagement. He is played by Paul Harvey. The young woman is played by British Valerie Hobson who spent some time in the 30s in Hollywood before returning to very British films.

There are several characters introduced, especially the patient and faithful wife of the financier, his rather fickle and moody young daughter. There is also another financier who is living on the edge and is also keen on the young woman but the financier wanting him to marry his daughter.

These are some of the guests as well as the daughter of the caretaker, a former financial man who fell on hard times because of the financier. And there is a jolly, large man who is also in love, along with a moody actress who is in need of money, tries borrowing, stages the stealing of her necklace.

The theme of the film is that the moneyed class are not particularly moral, not particularly happy as they make money their goal (even the daughter of the caretaker who disappoints her father and wants to elope with the rather socialist-minded college student, son of the financier).

So, the film is rather a moralising story are about fickle characters, questioning goals of money, helping the characters to some kind of moral reform.

The film was directed by Charles Lamont, Russian origin, who worked with Max Sennet, directed a number of dramas during the 1930s and 1940s but then moved to comedies at Universal Studios, many for Bud Abbott and Lou Costello, some of the Ma and Pa Kettle films as well as one of the Francis films.

SECRETS OF THE LONE WOLF

US, 1941, 66 minutes, Black and white.
Warren William, Eric Blore, Thurston Hall, Fred Kelsey, Victor Jory, Ruth Ford, Roger Clark.
Directed by Edward Dmytryk.

This is the sixth episode of the series on the Lone Wolf, the jewel thief, played by Warren William. Once again, he is assisted by his very British valet, Eric Blore.

The film was released in 1941 and reflects the war in Europe, some jewels sent out of Paris before the occupation, arriving in the United States for sales and the proceeds going to help the Resistance. Unusually, Inspector Crane seeks out Michael Lanyard to discuss methods how he would steal the jewels. He has given an address to a group of wealthy ladies and Jamison is given a message for Lanyard to meet a distressed woman urgently.

A group of thieves have come together to rob the jewels and are seeking Michael Lanyard for advice. They mistake Jamison for Lanyard and he is to play along for a time. This involves phoning Lanyard and their pretending to change roles, especially for the benefit of the woman who comes to the apartment.

However, the police are continuing after Lanyard, always suspicious.

The jewels are stolen and hidden. There are complications when the main thief, Victor Jory, pretends to be an expert and goes on board. There are the French authorities. There are the American authorities – although there is quite a deal of (too much) shenanigans with the ineptness of policeman, Dickens (Fred Kelsey).

Lanyard exercise his usual suave deftness, leading the police in all kinds of chases, Jamison taken by the thieves and Lanyard insinuating that he is inspected Dickens!

And, finally, a complete explanation, the thieves had used a method that Lanyard had previously used for a robbery.

There were three more Lone Wolf films to come, but they did not include Lone Wolf in the title.

This is an early film by Edward Dmytryk, one of the Hollywood Ten, director of a number of significant films in the 1940s, Murder my Sweet, as well is The Caine Mutiny in the 1950s, continuing a prolific career until the 1970s.

MURDER IN GREENWICH VILLAGE

US, 1937, 68 minutes, Black and white.
Richard Arlen, Fay Wray, Raymond Walburn, Gene Morgan, Thurston Hall, Marc Lawrence, Leon Ames, Marjorie Reynolds.
Directed by Albert S.Rogell.

This is a murder mystery-lite! In fact, it is more in the vein of the screwball comedies so popular at the time.

Fay Wray is the wealthy heiress caught escaping from an artist’s apartment and, literally, falling into the hands of a commercial photographer, Steve Jackson, played by smiling but often exasperated Richard Arlen. The couple immediately go into bickering vein, she meeting all his associates in the photography company, especially an eccentric alcoholic who thinks he is a senator in the time of William McKinley?, played with exuberance by Raymond Walburn. Fay Wray then has to change clothes and Steve decides to take a photo of her for a commercial.

It emerges then that the original artist has been murdered. His gangster brother (Marc Lawrence in an early role – still 43 years before he appeared with Goldie Hawn in Foul Play) is determined to avenge his brother whom he brought up. There is a jealous rival because of the girlfriend flirting with the artist. However, the police (an irritatingly intrusive/portrusive performance by Gene Morgan) target Steve – and the couple pretend to be engaged.

The wealthy father wants to avoid a scandal. An advertiser, Leon Ames, would like to be engaged to the heiress is persuaded to get a contract for Steve to do all the photography for a Chromium company.

But, while the various clues are pursued, that is somewhat in the background, and the film is really a comedy, with romantic undertones, of a battle of the sexes.

Steve manages to bamboozle the policeman. His cleaner’s father is security in a department store there is a long sequence where the whole team go to the store in order to take photographs to impress the Chromium company -with some comedy as they have to pose as mannequins.

The mystery is solved very quickly in the final few moments of the film, surprisingly finding that Leon Ames is the villain and his motivation quickly explained before he is shot.

Entertaining its way – slight.