A GHOST STORY

US, 2017, 90 minutes, Colour.
Casey Affleck, Rooney Mara.
Directed by David Lowery.

Here is, definitely, a film to test audience responses and loyalties.

A ghost story is usually about spectres and hauntings and there is something of that here, including a book called A Haunted House, falling to the floor and audiences glimpsing some descriptions. But, this is not really that kind of film. And for those expecting it, with some excitement and horror to boot, they will be very disappointed and may well not last the distance (or even the first half hour).

A ghost story can also be a story about a ghost. And, on the surface, this is what that film is.

However, writer-director, David Lowery, seems to have been over-dosing on some of Terence Mallik’s films, especially The Tree of Life, and is more interested in a cosmic exploration of the universe, of history, of time and relativity, of the meaning of life, than in providing any chills.


The basic situation is set up very slowly, a musical composer, Casey Affleck, and his wife, Rooney Mara, packing up and perhaps moving from their house. A clue is given when there is a very long sequence showing Rooney Mara carrying a chest out of the house, along a long the path, across the grass, to put it with other stuff from the house. Then, almost immediately, a scene showing the husband dead in front of the car, the windscreen smashed.

The husband is the ghost. One wonders why the decision was made to have him appear in the conventional, somewhat comic, disguise of a sheet (he arises from his hospital gurney) with two holes for eyes. For many it will be too reminiscent of the Ku Klux Klan, Casper the friendly ghost as well as the mask for the villain of the Scream series. For most of the film this ghostly apparition lurks around the house – seeing a similar spectre with a sheet of floral design in a house opposite, waiting for someone to arrive.

The big test for an audience’s patience and attention is the wife coming in, being given a gift of a pie by a friendly neighbour and her beginning to eat it, sit on the floor, and continue to eat it, continue eating, more eating (giving inquisitive audiences time to wonder what kind of pie it is and for how long Rooney Mara had not been eating so that she could devour the pie in this very long single take).

At this stage, audiences will realise that they are being asked to be quiet, calm, reflective, contemplative – and many will not be willing.

Then, suddenly, the ghost observes different people in the house, a Hispanic mother with her children disturbed by of some poltergeist activity when the ghost angrily destroys crockery. Then there is a party with a character sitting at a table, speaking a monologue, speculating on the meaning of life, on the meaning of the universe, on human destiny… Quite a long speech which reassures the remaining audience that this is speculation about the meaning of the cosmos and existence.

The theme of the film is the ghostly presence for the future – with the demolition of the house, the building of a huge plant on the site, and the futuristic glance at a Cosmopolis in the vein of Blade Runner. But there is a ghostly presence in the past, going back to the site, a pioneer family with a wagon, the remnants of an attack by the Indians.

And back to where the couple started, moving in, his compositions, the piano, … the differences and the difficulties.

It would seem that this is a kind of cosmic purgatorial experience for the ghost.


1. The title, expectations? Different expectations? The serious tone? The narrative? The pace?

2. The settings, the variety of the musical score and instruments? The piano and the composition? The home, interiors and exteriors, later, home occupied, demolished?

3. The vision of the future? The vision of the past?

4. The situation, the marriage, the man and the woman, life together, the compositions, his intensity, her response, growing distant? The suddenness of his death? Her grief, his being in the hospital, rising from the gurney, the sheet? The attempt to re-connect?

5. The director’s decision about the sheet, reminiscent of the Ku Klux Klan, of Casper, of the ghost mask in Scream series? The sheet, the holes for the eyes? The ghost standing round, sitting, listening – and the outburst with the crockery?

6. The director’s decision about the pace, editing, the very long takes, the wife listening to the music, the man at the computer can posing, carrying out the chest, the eating of the pie?

7. The wife sad, the audience seeing her go in and out of the house, the neighbour with the pie, the long take of the eating the pie? The ghost watching?

8. The move into the future, the Hispanic family, the mother, the children, their playing, the meal, the poltergeist effect of the breaking of the crockery? The emotions of the ghost?

9. The party, the range of types, drinking, discussion change of pace?

10. The speaker, his monologue, confidence and sure, his questions, life, meaning, purpose, death, the cosmos and creation – and leading to theistic questions and considerations? The effect of this on the audience, for reflection, for contemplation?

11. The future, the demolishing of the house, ghost watching, the building of the huge plant, the building of this the buildout of the city, the futuristic Cosmopolis?

12. Going back into the past, the site, the settlor measuring out the land, American history, pioneers, the family, the horse and cart, the children playing, the Indians and the spectre of death, skeletons, corruption?

13. The ghost returning to the house, his continued chipping at the wood? Watching the past, composing, the wife listening, remembering, the bump on the piano?

14. The ghost, satisfied, leaving and the collapse of the sheet?

15. The circularity of time, relative?

16. The ghost, ghostly life, death and being dead, the purgatorial journey?

HOODLUM

US, 1997, 130 minutes, Colour.
Laurence Fishburne, Tim Roth, Vanessa Williams, Andy Garcia, Cicely Tyson, Chi Mc Bride, Clarence Williams III, Richard Bradford, William Atherton, Loretta Devine, Queen Latifah, Ed O' Ross, Mike Starr, Beau Starr, Paul Benjamin, Tony Rich.
Directed by Bill Duke.


Can there be a gangster movie with a difference? Yes, just as we are beginning to see Westerns with black Americans, this is a picture of Harlem gangsters in the mid-30s, especially a strong, silent, loyal type who confronts Dutch Schultz who is muscling in on black territory and discovers that he is not all that different from the gangsters he despises. Laurence Fishburne is a sombre 'Bumpy' Johnson who goes down the path of violence - but seems to have a conversion at the end of the movie or is moving towards beatification.
b&
Hoodlum shows the numbers games and protection rackets of the times, punctuated by grim shootouts. It is the black perspective that creates the interest as well as arresting performances by Andy Garcia as Lucky Luciano and Cicely Tyson as 'The Queen'. Tim Roth is there snarling familiarly but more so as a completely obtuse and obnoxious Schultz. Another chapter in New York gang warfare.


1. The title, audience expectations? American crime, gangsters, the rackets? The Depression? African- Americans? The Mafia? The law, corrupt police?

2. New York City, Harlem, downtown, city landscapes? The African- American world? Apartments, streets, headquarters? The Mafia headquarters? The musical score?

3. The film as historical, audience knowledge of the period, the criminals focused on?

4. Bumpy, Laurence Fishburne, his age, career, getting out of prison, involved in the rackets, the numbers, his friendship with Illinois, friendship with Mary? Going back into business? His associates? The meeting with Francine, the attraction, talking, the outings, the development of the relationship? Her judgement on his gangster career? Yet her being with him?

5. At the antagonism with Dutch Schultz? Schultz and his influence, the declaration of war? The various attempts on Bumpy’s life? The sequence with the poisoned ice cream, Jimmie, his confessing? Vallie, his being behind the poisoning, money, his ring? His death, Bumpy cutting of his finger, sending it to Dutch Schultz?

6. The character of Dutch Schultz, psychopathic, age, white, the violence? His set up, the clash with the African- Americans? His rackets? Corrupt police, the attack on Queen, her refusal to work with him? Her arrest? The war with Bumpy? The range of hitmen, associates? The attack on Bumpy in his home, with Francine, the blood, Francine shooting the gangster?

7. The atmosphere of the Cotton Club, the music and singers, Duke Ellington?

8. Blacks forbidden to enter, Bumpy and his challenge, the threats? The warfare, the bombs, buildings exploding?

9. Illinois, his friendship, Mary, the warehouse, finding Mary dead, his being murdered?

10. Schultz, his henchmen, their ruthlessness, Bob Hewlett?

11. The picture of the police, corrupt, the officer?

12. Francine, the attraction to Bumpy, with him, disapproving, the decision to leave, his angers, the dresses and the jewellery?

13. The role of Lucky Luciano, his control, his rackets, invited to mediate? Collaboration with Bumpy, to kill Schultz? Lulu, his shooting Schultz, Schultz coming out, staggering, sitting on dying? And Lulu murdered on Luciano’s borders?

14. Illinois, the church, Bumpy going in, the rain, the singing amazing Grace? At the coffin? How much of a signification that he would change his ways?

15. The importance of this kind of re-creation of the period and New York gangster history?

ANYTHING GOES

US, 1936, 92 minutes, Black and white.
Bing Crosby, Ethel Merman, Charles Ruggles, Ida Lupino, Grace Bradley, Arthur Treacher, Margaret Dumont, Chill Wills, Keye Luke, Philip Ahn, the Avalon Boys.
Directed by Lewis Milestone.



Anything Goes is based on the 1934 musical by Cole Porter, based on a play by Guy Bolton and P.G.Woodhouse and revised by Howard Lindsay and Russell Crouse. It was remade in 1956, but not staying close to the original play.

There are quite number of songs by Cole Porter but also quite a range of songs by other composers, especially for Bing Crosby.

However, the film it is worth seeing for Ethel Merman, reprising her stage role, singing bits of Anything Goes but, especially, I Get a Kick out of You as well as a duet of You’re the Top with Bing Crosby. It is entertaining always to hear Porter’s witty lyrics and his skill at offbeat rhyming.

The plot is slight, and more than slightly implausible. Ethel Merman portrays a cabaret singer travelling with her group to performance in London. She wants her friend Billy, Bing Crosby, to go but he has to stay to run the New York office. But, he is indecisive, is too late in leaving the ship and has to pretend to be a gangster in order to stay on board. He comes across a fake minister, a comic role for Charles Ruggles, a conman who is upset that he is only 13th on the Most Wanted list. Grace Bradley is his accomplice, Bonnie.

There is a romance, Billy seeing Hope Harcourt dejected in the club, taken away by armed men – but it is revealed that they were private detectives hired to get her to come back to England for a wedding under the chaperone, Lord Evelyn, Arthur Treacher, a variation on his stiff upper lip Englishman, aristocracy this time not a butler. And he is attracted to Ethel Merman.

There is romance, Bing Crosby finding all kinds of clothes and even shaving a dog for hair for a beard to elude discovery. It is surprising to see Ida Lupino in a very early role as the romantic lead. There is a singing group The Avalon Boys who have two numbers along with Chill Wills. And there is a moment with Margaret Dumont, taking time off from her Marx Bros films to do a similar kind of cameo performance.

Surprisingly, the film was directed by Lewis Milestone who came to great prominence in 1930 with All Quiet on the Western Front and who was to have a long career with dramas, war dramas, and, eventually in the 1960s, Oceans 11 and the Brando Mutiny on the Bounty.

MISS ANNIE ROONEY

US, 1942, 94 minutes, Black-and-white (colorised version available).
Shirley Temple, Guy Kibbe, William Gargan, Dicky Moore.
Directed by Edward L.Main.


The main interest for seeing this film is Shirley Temple at the age of 14, making a transition from her little girl rolls to a teenager – in such films as Kiss and Tell, Fort Apache, The Bachelor and the Bobbysoxer, That Hagan Girl.

In retrospect, the film seems very dated, paying a lot of attention to teenager slang at that particular period, sometimes a bit incomprehensible, and the adults trying to latch on. There is also quite a bit of jitterbug dance with Shirley Temple more than adept.

There is also an unexpected class division underlining the film. Shirley is Annie Rooney, living with her kindly grandfather, Guy Kibbee at his usual genial, and with William Gargan as her dreaming father, always looking on the bright side of life even as he loses all his money, the furniture is being taken from the house, and his family have nowhere to go.

Annie has a great deal of self-confidence, quite articulate, reading Pygmalion, having intelligent conversations with her girlfriend, going out with the young man whose main preoccupation is his jalopy. When they crash, she is rescued by an uppercrust young man, Dicky Moore, who is charm personified. He and Annie have many outings, great attraction, her teaching him to jitterbug, his inviting her to his birthday party at his aristocratic home, to the disdain of his mother and wariness of his father. It is quite clear that Annie is out of her depth despite the pink dress, her charm. Grandfather and father seem to speak over-deferentially about the rich people implying that they are better because of their wealth and position.

Everything changes when the two jitterbug and everybody wants to join in, even the parents.

Her father has paid money for a machine that can transform milkweed into rubber. Desperately, he brings it to the birthday party and demonstrates it, only to be humiliated, taking Annie home.

With only a few minutes left in the running time, how will it all end happily? In the depths of despair, grandfather and son quarrelling, and he showing a stiff upper lip, the rich man arrives at the house, showing material that has fallen from the failed experiment the night before, and his chemist arrives declaring that there has been nothing like it, it is extraordinarily resistible to all kinds of pressures – and would be valuable to sell to the Army for the war effort. The young boy had sent it to the chemist for examination.

Everything wonderful at the end – a Shirley Temple memento of the times.

GRIEF STREET

US, 1931, 64 minutes, Black-and-white.
Barbara Kent, John Holland, Dorothy Christy, James P. Burtis.
Directed by Richard Thorpe.

Grief Street is an early talkie, supporting feature, short running time, but taking up themes that were popular in murder mysteries of the time and in the silent era: the murder of someone in a locked room.

The film has a theatre background, quite a drama in the opening minutes and a clash between husband and wife and the audience soon finds that it is the finale of a play being performed in the theatre.

The star is a womaniser, clashes with his wife and the actress who performs with him, is a friend of the stage manager – and, is due to meet everyone at a restaurant, the stage manager finds him strangled in his dressing room which is locked.

There are the police, especially an interfering and inexperienced officer, Jardine, who intervenes all the time and one wishes were offscreen. There is an old culture caretaker who can vouch for the room being locked and no one going in or out. There is a police inspector to whom he is responsible. But there is also a newspaperman who eventually investigates and solves the crime.

Two of the suspects are his long-suffering wife and the man with whom she is having an affair (this is a pre-Code film). The other main character is a young woman, an aspiring actress, who had a relationship with the dead man. She also received notes warning that the actor is to be killed and, later, that this would be the last article by the newspaperman who is so busy typing at that he takes his phone off the hook and so is not warned, and discovering that the girl has rung and that the police inform him that she has been shot (not fatally, of course).

Audiences could have worked out what happened if they worked on the premise that the most likely murderer was the one who found the body and unlocked the door – the manager who has an infatuation about the young girl and was jealous of anyone who favoured her, the actor, the newspaperman…

Of its time, some historical interest.

WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES

US, 2017, 140 minutes, Colour.
Andy Serkis, Woody Harrelson, Steve Zahn, Karin Konoval, Amiah Miller, Toby Kebbel, Gabriel Chavarria, Judy Greer.
Directed by Matt Reeves.


This third film in the recent trilogy of the Planet of the Apes received very strong critical affirmation. It has also done well at the box office. However, it has not pleased and myriad of fans who had been expecting a bellicose version of the war between the apes of the humans. They did not appreciate the amount of focus on the small group of apes led by Caesar, on the small group of humans led by The Colonel, and the limited amount of warfare at the end of the film, helicopter invasion, explosions. And, to cap it all, there is an extraordinary avalanche sequence.

It is amazing to think that the Planet of the Apes has been part of our consciousness since 1967, ever since, at the end of the first film, Charlton Heston came onto the beach and saw the toppled head, in ruins, of the Statue of Liberty. This film had for sequels: Battle for, beneath, escape from, conquest of… as well is television series The franchise was rebooted, as they say, in 2001 by Tim Burton but it did not have the impact of the original.

So, it was rather daring to begin a new trilogy in 2011 with The Rise…, conflict between humans and apes, the education of the leader of the apes, Caesar, and his ability to speak, and his leadership against the exploitative humans. This episode was so successful that Caesar led the apes against the humans in The Dawn… which also featured the rogue ape, Koba, and fierce battles.

In this film, Caesar is still the leader. And he is played by Andy Serkis, expert in this kind of performance after his Gollum in the Lord of the Rings series as well as Peter Jackson’s King Kong. Caesar can speak, but communicates with his fellow apes by sounds and sign language. He is roaming the forest with a loyal group, especially Maurice, a sympathetic and emotional ape.

They encounter some humans, are in conflict, but send the survivors back to the ruthless Colonel in the human headquarters. The colonel is played by Woody Harrelson reminding audiences of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and its film version, Apocalypse Now. He is in charge of a rebel group, in conflict with the apes, confining prisoners to a kind of concentration camp and hard labour without food and water.

During the winter, Caesar and his band wanders the mountains and snow, finding a mute girl and taking her with them, also encountering a comic ape, Bad Ape, who grew up in a zoo but is able to lead the small band to find the human headquarters.

The film sometimes takes its time, especially in the confrontation/interview sequence between Caesar and The colonel, explanations of Caesar’s attitude towards the humans, the loss of his son, the battles and the rebellion of Koba, and The Colonel explaining the deterioration of the humans infected with an illness which deprives them of speech and their faculties – which the Colonel exterminates by killing.

Delicacy is not exactly the word one expects in connection with the Planet of the Apes, but there is much human delicacy in the feelings of both apes and humans, highlighted by the variety in the musical score, especially delicate notes from the piano accompaniment.

Caesar is a charismatic leader but is also consumed by his hatred of the humans – which leads us to wonder where the next film in the series could go.

1. The popularity of Planet of the Apes films, in the 1960s and 70s? Television? In the 21st-century? This film the third in a trilogy?

2. Audience interest, in the idea, humans versus apes, intelligent apes and conflict? War?

3. The basic situation, the explanation of the Rise and the emergence of Caesar? The experiences of Caesar, leadership, the apes? Leading to Dawn and conflict, the superiority of the apes? Koba and his revolution? Human deaths? Ape deaths? Enmities?

4. The musical score, the range, the delicacy of the piano sequences?

5. The importance of the make up, the photography styles and acting? Convincing apes?

6. The focus on Caesar, his character, Andy Serkis and his screen presence, his rise, experiences, education, ability to speak? His leadership, family and deaths? Koba and the revolution? His being isolated with his group? The apes surviving in the forest? The roving bands? Loyalties? Interactions with the humans, fights, Caesar returning the soldiers, the significance of Preacher? The encounter with Bad Ape, the story of the apes in the zoo? Going through the winter, the snow, to the human headquarters? The apes as prisoners, hard labour, no food and water? The children imprisoned? The human conflict – and the troops from the North in conflict with those at headquarters? Caesar being taken, interrogated, imprisoned?

7. The forests, the isolation, the winter and the snow, the spring the blossoms, the impact of the avalanche?

8. The action sequences, stunt work, the final climax, the helicopters, the fighting, the explosions?

9. Caesar, wandering the countryside, the deaths, finding the little girl, her inability to talk? Taking her? His reliance on Maurice? The others? Talking and sign language? Travelling, the search? The character of Bad Ape, on horseback, shooting, his fear? The encounter with Caesar? His past, leading them on the trek? The comic touches?

10. The Colonel, echoes of Conrad and Heart of Darkness, Apocalypse Now? His leadership, the previous hostilities, his special squad, his scouts and soldiers? His leadership? Confronting Caesar, admiring his intelligence, the past, the family deaths, his cruelty, the story of the defect, the failing humans, his own son, killing him, killing the other troops? Preparation for the conflict with the soldiers from the North?

11. Caesar, taken, the confrontation with The Colonel, the interrogation, his being beaten, his being exposed on the stocks? The little girl coming in, the food and water, Caesar surviving?

12. Bad Ape, discovering the tunnel, the water filling the tunnel? Blocking it? Caesar’s friend and his sacrificing himself to divert attention from Caesar, his being put in prison, the beating? Finally giving his life?

13. Maurice, nice, with the little girl, her inability to speak, supplying the food and drink for Caesar? Her participation in the attack, her escape and hiding?

14. The plan for the escape, the workers, counting the number of steps, tunnel, helping the children to escape? Preacher and his doing the behest of The Colonel, on guard, any sympathy for the apes, his being released? At the end – and his death in the explosion?

15. Caesar, his anger, unable to forgive The Colonel? Confronting him, the Colonel suffering from the defect, collapsing, the gun, his death?

16. The attack, the helicopters, the fight back, the apes escaping, the shooting of the apes? Caesar, being shot, the grenade, the oil? And the final explosion and destruction?

17. The avalanche, the apes caught, climbing the trees, with the little girl, surviving?

18. The status of the apes at the end of the film? The humans? Caesar and his achievement?

 

 

 

 

KIKI, LOVE TO LOVE

 

Spain, 2016, 102 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Paco Leon.

This is a comedy about sex and sexuality. And the various stories in it are to be found along the continuum from prudishness to permissiveness. But, it is a reminder that anything human, any human experience can be the subject of humour otherwise it is taken too seriously, put on false pedestal, while at other times it is taken far less seriously for crass entertainment.

There are five stories in this film and they are intercut. There is a young couple in love but she finds that she is aroused by the experience of being attacked, as she was at a service station. This leads to some serious talk between the couple but also to a farcical re-enactment when the girl breaks her fiance's nose in a set up attack. There is also a plastic surgeon whose wife has been in a car accident and is particularly bitter and frigid. He is aroused by seeing her sleeping so decides that he will drug her each night for his own satisfaction, she not aware of what has been happening. (They also have a Filipina maid who is wanting breast enhancement surgery and shrewdly uses her observations to bring down the price.). Another couple want to become pregnant and the wife gets advice from the doctor only to find that she is aroused by seeing her husband weeping, especially at the funeral of a friend.

The director of the film, Paco Leon, takes the role of a husband who goes with his wife to a therapist, discusses sexual problems rather frankly, experiments at home but the couple's life is disturbed by a friend who works a sex club which gives the audience the opportunity to blend prurience with curiosity as they visit the club and see some bizarre behaviour. The solution to the problems comes in the form of the friend and her becoming part of the household.

Sex and pathos are combined in the fifth story, a hearing-impaired young woman who is affected by the texture of fabrics but who also works at a phone exchange for hearing-impaired clients, discussing phone sex with a very ordinary woman at the other end who is busy fixing her face and disturbed by a saucepan exploding on her stove. The young man is studying for exams but is attracted to his interpreter.

With the story told, some kind of conclusion reached, everybody turns up at a local fairground.

It is surprising to find that this is a fairly exact remake of an Australian film, The Little Death, by Josh Lawson. In transferring it to Spain, the makers have given it more sunlight and exuberance than the original.

1. Spanish exuberance? Sex, love, sexual issues?

2. The original, Australian, its tone? The transition to Spanish characters, moods, excitement?

3. Audience interest in the themes, responses? Problems and their repercussions?

4. The Spanish city, homes, hospital, doctor's surgery, the fair, the phone service for the deaf, the sex club? The musical score, the songs?

5. Humour about sex and sexuality? Anything human being the subject of humour? The issue of how it is treated?

6. The five stories, their interconnection throughout the film, everybody together at the fair at the end?

7. Natalia and Alex, the relationship, sexual, the lovemaking, her story of the garage and the attack, being roused? Alex and his attempts to recreate this, during the picnic? The gift of the earrings and her disappointment? The meal, the setup, the parking lot, the thugs attacking, Alex arranging it, changing his clothes, the attack on Natalia, her breaking his nose, injury and in hospital? The engagement and the ring? The discussion about being together, intimacy, and breaking wind? The experience of the picnic and the Natalie's sister, aroused by plants and trees?

8. Ana and Paco, going to the therapist, the frank talk about sexual behaviour, their trying to emulate the experience in the kitchen and failing? Belen and her arrival, her story? Needing help and accommodation? Her work at the club? Inviting Ana and Paco to the club, dressing up, the encounters, the bizarre behaviour, the old man being spanked, Ana and her awkwardness and feeling sick, Belen giving her the kiss? And the issue of urinating? Belen at home, with their daughter, sexually provocative? The effect on Ana, discussions with Paco? His setting up Belen with his wife? Going out, spying on them – and the threesome?

9. Antonio, his job, Candelaria, his watching the pornography, the sexual encounters, her ovulation, going to the doctor, the issue of orgasm, her being roused by tears, Antonio weeping, at the funeral and the aftermath? The loss of the dog, pretending that she had cancer, Antonio following her, the phone calls? His wanting proof of the cancer? The doctor congratulating them on their pregnancy? At the fair and their stall?

10. The doctor, plastic surgery, his assistant and her story about her daughter selling her underwear, the clients? His wife, accident, in the chair, her irritability? The Filipino maid looking after them? The doctor roused by his sleeping wife, drugging her, dragging along the floor, the sexual behaviour and the effect? The maid, knowing the truth, wanting the breast implementation, the price, its going down, her saying she would not reveal the truth and her getting the discount? All at the fair?

11. The deaf woman, at home, aroused by fabrics? Being deaf, able to turn the hearing aid on and off? In the train, fingering the silk, getting off the train, her experience? In the phone exchange, the young man, wanting the sex talk, the ordinary woman at the other end of the phone, fixing her face, the explosion in the kitchen, her sex talk? The woman translating, toning it down? The young man and his exams?

12. Everybody at the fair, solutions, the deaf woman and seeing the student and the audience leaving the cinema cheerfully?

13. The technical terms used throughout the film for sexual arousal and their seeming somewhat bizarre to the ordinary audience?

 

PICKUP ON SOUTH STREET

US, 1953, 100 minutes, Black-and-white.
Richard Widmark, Jean Peters, Thelma Ritter, Murvyn Vye, Richard Kiley.
Directed by Samuel Fuller.

Pickup on Self Street has a loyal following, many considering it one of Samuel Fuller’s best films, early in a career which was to last for the next 30 years or more, culminating in his autobiographical war film The Big Red One. During the 1950s he made quite a number of small-budget action films.

As a crime film, this is a story of a middle-aged pickpocket, Skip, Richard Widmark who can do evil characters particularly well, especially their offhand laugh and anti-authoritarian cackle. He is just out of jail, but with a strong reputation, always challenging the police, taunting them. The film opens with him stealing a wallet from Candy, Jean Peters, in the subway. While the film shows his denying everything to the police, Candy trying to track him down to retrieve her purse, scenes with a very interesting character, Moe, Thelma Ritter, an older lady who sells information because she knows everything about crime in New York, and she sells a range of ties as a cover, actually selling them. Thelma Ritter was nominated for a Best Supporting Actress award.

However, there is a complication, because in the purse was some microfilm which Candy was to deliver to Communist connections, something she was unaware of. It is her last job for her former boyfriend, Joey, Richard Kiley. The police have been watching her for her to deliver the microfilm, and follow Joey and nab the head of the cell.

There are various tough complications including Candy being bashed several times, Moe being killed by Joey, and some crises of emotions and conscience for Skip.

The film was released in 1953 at the time of the anti-Communist, stances in the United States, House Un-American? activities, Senator Joe McCarthy? and his interrogations and the Black List. The dialogue, written by Fuller himself, is staunchly anti-Communist.

1. A strong reputation for a crime thriller? The early work of Samuel Fuller and his tough films? Crime in the New York subway, police investigations, the atmosphere of nuclear espionage?

2. Location photography, New York City, apartments, homes above the water, police precincts, the subway and the stations? The musical score? The classic songs?

3. The atmosphere in American politics of the time, the very strong anti-Communist stances? The dialogue of this film filled with this anti-Communism?

4. Candy, on the train, crowded, Skip and his approach, Candy being watched, the men and the surveillance, Skip and his techniques, the newspaper, his fingers, taking her wallet? Getting out of the train, the surveillance men unable to get out? Candy, discovering the loss in her purse, her phone call to Joey? Her dilemma?

5. The situation, Candy and her background, tough, relationship with Joey, breaking it off, her being a courier? Not knowing what she was delivering? Her last job? Finding she was robbed, going back to Joey, his desperation?

6. The police, going to the lieutenant, getting the information about pickpockets, the photos?

7. Calling in Moe, a character, background, getting the money for her plot of land and her significant funeral instead of in Potters Field? Peddling information? Her betting on issues? Identifying Skip?

8. Moe, friendship with Skip, knowing him, his allowing her to give information? Candy coming to see her, getting the information about Skip? The later confrontation with Joey? Her going to the police, the Communist issue, issues of loyalty? Getting money out of Candy, selling her the tie – which meant that Skip knew that Candy had visited her?

9. Moe and her final reflection on her life, tired, having the coffee with Skip and ready to collapse, at home, lying down, Joey and the gun, talking about her life, ready to go, not giving him the information, her being shot? Skip and his tracking down her body, using his money to give her a proper funeral?

10. The espionage issue, diagrams, microfilm, stealing, deliveries? Communist cells?

11. Skip, out of prison, offhand attitude, taunting the police? The money, the discovery of the film, going to the library, eluding the man following him, examining the microfilm?

12. The police, wanting to do a deal with Skip, to drop the charges, but to get the microfilm? His denials?

13. Candy, coming to see him, the kiss, the effect on her? Trying to pay him off? Her searching his house – and his punching her? Her going to see Moe and her pleading? Going back to Joey, his threats? Her finding out the truth about communism? Giving Joey the false information, warning Skip, upset at Moe’s death, going to the police, excusing Skip and making him seem honest? The final confrontation with Joey, bashed, in hospital, Skip coming to see her?

14. Joey, the contacts, Skip and his pursuit, the chase and the subway, the fights?

15. Joey, the contacts, the timeline? The police, the ring broken up?

16. Tough action – and final romance?

CROSS-EXAMINATION

US, 1932, 74 minutes, Black-and-white.
H.B.Warner, Sally Blane, Natalie Moorhead, Edmund Breese, Don Dillaway, Sarah Padden.
Directed by Richard Thorpe.


Cross-examination is a brief film of the early 1930s directed by Richard Thorpe who was to have a successful career for the next quarter of a century or more, many dramas and, in the 1950s, some mediaeval action films with Robert Taylor like Knights of the Ground Table and Quentin Durward.

This is the equivalent of a filmed play, most of the action taking place in a court room during a trial, with flashbacks to the events during the testimony of each of the witnesses.

A wealthy man has been murdered, his son is considered the main suspect and is on trial. Witnesses include the housekeeper and a lazy maid who turns out to be her daughter. There is also the butler, pompous in a quasi-British style in his answers. There are also the police as well is the widow of the murdered man.

The strength of the film is in the performance of H. B. Warner (DeMille’s Jesus in The King of Kings, also appearing in Sunset Boulevard amongst many films). He brings strength to the character of the defending lawyer.

There are many interchanges throughout the hearing, objections overruled and sustained, the young man himself being interrogated, the story of his clashing with his father, his wanting to marry a young woman, demanding his share of his father’s wealth in diamonds.

All is cleared up when a woman calls out from the public, her turning out to be the mother of the young man, having had an affair with the wealthy man. And, of course, by this stage, the audience realises that she has confronted the murdered man, struggled with him, shot him, taken the diamonds.

An interesting example of court proceedings in the early 20th century.

CORRUPTION

US, 1933, 67 minutes, Black and white.
Evalyn Knapp, Preston Foster, Charles Delaney, Tully Marshall, Mischa Auer, Jason Robards senior.
Directed by C. Edward Roberts.


Corruption is interesting to look back on in hindsight, a film from the years of the Depression, a look at elections in New York City, reminders of political corruption, party systems, party influence, political bosses – and the challenge for a mayor to clean up the politics as well as the consequent rackets.

Preston Foster plays a young lawyer who is elected mayor, but is intended to be the puppet of the party system. He is encouraged by the party boss and has interviews with the standover tactician. He is also to be engaged with the party boss’s daughter.

However, with the help of his devoted secretary, he gives speeches denouncing corruption and giving his intentions to clean out the city. When the party tactician and his henchmen pull a gun on the mayor after his provoking them, his friends, a journalist and photographer, photograph them causing an expose in the papers. However, the mayor is misled, a seemingly genuine request to visit a family but it is a set up with a provocatively dressed blonde – more photos, scandal in the paper, the mayor loses his job.

It is even worse when there is a scuffle with a gun in an elevator lobby and it seems that the mayor has killed his political rival, the tactician.

The mayor is then taken to court. The judge seems to be corrupt and, listening to all the evidence, framed against the mayor, he is found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment.

In the meantime, one of the examples of corruption was people getting sick because of the contaminated food which was donated in charity, part of a racket. The coroner and a scientist have denounced the corruption.

Finally, the scientist (Miscah Auer) confesses to having killed the tactician – the coroner is puzzled because there was no bullet in the dead man’s body – and explains that he had ice pellets which could be fired from a gun, he has killed others including the judge, a hit list against the corrupt. He then pulls the trigger on himself.

In the meantime, the governor has praised the mayor and has offered him an attorney job when everything is cleared up. His secretary, always devoted and outspoken in her criticisms of corruption, has lent him money to keep going – but is giving up her secretary job to become a closer supporter, his wife.

(There is quite a surprise when the journalist gives the finger to the opponents – not a modern rude gesture after all.)