Reviews

So many reviews here critical of the casting, harshly evaluating not only those chosen as starring cast members but their acting talent as well. Dean Martin, in particular, receiving a thumbs down in his presentation of the ne'er-do-well brother whose business ventures have inevitably failed. On the contrary, Martin gives quite an acceptable characterization and has the physical attributes to add credence to his image as a womanizer. As for Geraldine Page, her hysterical style well fits the devious, emotional woman she presents. Wendy Hiller, as her sister, gives a nuanced performance as the only one of the group connected to reality and attuned to the consequences brought about by the tragically misguided thinking and actions of those around her. Then there's the pathetic child-woman as played by Yvette Mimieux. Yvette's presentation of this naive, intellectually challenged, easily manipulated girl is effectively shown.

The movie was a box office failure. Understandable, as an incestuous desire of a sister for her brother would be unappetizing subject matter for a movie audience in 1963.

Dr. Luther Brooks, the character Sidney Poitier plays, certainly has his heart in the right place but lacks experience with medical care protocol. Two criminals caught by police are brought to a jail hospital with gunshot wound to the legs. Dr. Brooks, an intern, is called in to treat these wounds which should be the top and only priority. So what constitutes his focus is what he diagnoses as probable neurological damage in one of the men based on what this patient's brother has related about the brother's habitual behavioral dysfunction.

This is where Joseph Mankiewicz, the scriptwriter, went wrong. Concentrating on showcasing the black doctor's humanity while failing to recognize what is the doctor's misguided thinking. The movie's main focus is a powerful dramatization of racism, yes, with failure to reveal that this young black doctor has yet a lot to learn about the practice of the medical profession.

You watch the play out of the storyline and can't help thinking one thing throughout it. What are these two beautiful humans, one male, one female, doing playing characters living such deprived, misguided lives? It's just not credible to have cast Ann Margaret and Alain Delon in these roles. And nothing was apparently done with either makeup, hair styling or costume to make them more true to the lifestyle they were to represent. You keep on waiting to see a lightbulb go off in their heads so they head over to a mirror, take a good look at themselves and yell out: "Hey! We're gorgeous!! Let's head out to Hollywood. Let's dump this dump! We can be movie stars!"

There's nothing here that makes for an exhilarating wave. It's a presentation of three messed up people who carry on for decades further messing up themselves and each other. Going along as if their dysfunction constitutes what's a normal course of life events. Then there's what permeates throughout and what public opinion of this movie has failed to acknowledge. That this storyline is a misogynist treatise. At base it presents the road traveled by two men led astray into ultimate tragedy by the machinations of a female seductress. Advertising throughout an antique male lament. Women, you can't live with OR without them. This movie was a stale commodity when released 61 years ago and the passage of time has only served to intensify its indigestibility.

A silly mess of a movie signified by the non-stop appearance of Halloween type monsters in combat gear joined by one female ghoul terrorizing a writer who served in the Vietnam War. Is he suffering from an extreme case of delayed PTSD or are these demons not imaginary but real? Is his son really dead? What happened to his wife after their divorce? Questions, questions, questions, go on without clues offered to nudge out even minimal truth. The viewer just subjected to things happening one after the other going unresolved. Then there's George Wendt in the background of the main hero's tortuous existence. He plays the intrusive next door neighbor more curious than concerned. If you can sit through until the ending, you've got just as much remarkable stamina as the besieged hero of the story.

Constipation and diarrhea is presented as a running theme in this movie which serves to define this movie in it's entirety. Something to pass on as flushable down the toilet. What we get subjected to are the trials and tribulations of its male star attraction who heroically goes through life tasked with gratifying his sexual lust. Which for him is a daily routine as necessary for life as three meals a day. Amazing it is that the people who put this production together were able to assemble reputable actors willing to become cast members in this fiasco. Do yourself a favor and pass this one up.

Richard Benjamin, Karen Black, Lee Grant, Jill Clayburgh, what were you thinking?

If you like Liz and Dick, this is your prime meat. For what goes on here is as Martha approvingly puts it, "gets to the meat of things." And a messy serving it is as Martha and George the combative couple dish out their own version of connubial fun and games with George Segal and Sandy Dennis playing their captive audience.

If anything, the storyline that unfolds captures a viewer's attention. Two couples becoming involved in what rolls out as some improvised group therapy session with shots fired in all directions. Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton seem custom made for these parts. No other other actors come to mind that could portray Martha and George as mesmerizingly outrageous as these two actors.

This movie classified as a "drama," "mystery." I'd add comedy to those descriptors. Lew Ayres, try as he might, and he really does try, fails to deliver on presenting an heroic save the day character. You wonder why he's involved in all this but then, of course, you realize that for him it's all about scoring with the girl he's become obsessed with. Played by Linda Darnell who provides an adequate presentation of the proverbial damsel in distress. Do you really care about the stalker/villain being unmasked? Not really. The kitty cat who lives with the woman under threat and appears only intermittently and symbolically makes for an intriguing supporting cast member. The movie has amusement value and worth watching if you have nothing else to do.

A fantastical piece of self-indulgent display on the part of John Waters and the entire cast. And what's not been picked up on is what this movie is all about. Its core trouble. It being a grandiose presentation of a misogynist portrayal of women. Females are consumed by vanity to oversized proportions, they have shallow values and are driven by petty selfishness. Don't sit down with a bag of popcorn to watch this monstrosity. You'll either gag while eating or feel compelled to hurl pieces of popcorn at the screen. This movie recommended only for those that are gluttons for punishment.

Greed, corruption, deception, femme fatale dame, key elements of a noir thriller that here in totality are deficiently dramatized. Likely the fault of director Richard Quine who failed to infuse the storyline and actors with the necessary passionate momentum. We get Fred MacMurray presenting his usual average American guy this time cast as an undercover police detective. And in this context still not able to fully cancel out his innate milk toast image. Takes what's called suspension of disbelief to buy into the premise this dedicated cop can so easily become a corrupt cop even when the lure is a seductive gangster moll. Even one dished up so tantalizingly by Kim Novak. Kim Novak in her intro featured movie role is 21 years old and carries herself like a woman of the world who at a young age has been around. Has already seen, heard and done plenty. It fits her character well as she manages to flavor her resilient worldliness with the right amount of poignant vulnerability. Dorothy Malone appears here still in her brown haired days before she renovated into a platinum blonde. An image transition that jump started her career and brought her to public attention. All in all, the movie is no great shakes but well worth watching. Has significant entertainment value. Not strictly a B movie but more like a B+.

This series is less a police procedural than it is an episodic presentation of masculine prerogative, pride and courage presented by law enforcement upholding values and societal standards. Upholding the law but a mechanism for what each week presents the viewer with a morality tale. As for women, they are obedient, devoted helpmates to men or obstructive, deceitful intrusions. The scripts are oftentimes inexpertly crafted so the storyline contains illogical or unexplained progression. As in a season two episode when the cops show up at a dockside warehouse where the hoods are holding a woman prisoner. How the cops found out where she was being held is never explained. The singular distinction of Naked City, for me, is the opening theme song that accompanies the title. As orchestrated by Nelson Riddle. A musical piece that hauntingly evokes the urban stratosphere of big city life in the New York City of the 1950s and 1960s.

Seemingly a minor criticism that in actuality underscores the entire reason for this bomb of a movie. Garbo when masquerading as her sister comes off as a man in drag. That hairdo with tight curls meant to emphasize her girlish, seductive femininity does her no favor. The hairdresser that concocted this look should have had their license revoked. The non-captivating storyline is secondary and needs no mention. So miscast is Garbo in this role it consumes all of a viewer's attention. At least Garbo had the sense to recognize this role marked the end of her glorious career. A career whose peak had taken place in the silent movie era.

A disappointing Nick and Nora adventure not up to customary standard. The charm of the Thin Man series is grounded on their sophisticated allure. Their vibrant life style with home base in the social enclaves of an urban setting, particularly New York City with San Francisco secondary. But here we have them transplanted to a small town environment and it just doesn't fly. Their witty repartee is stretched uncomfortably thin and falls flat here. Nick and Nora go to visit his parents. A sentimental journey for Nick indulging in nostalgic musings over his childhood and high school years. The story isn't totally without charm but can be passed on without regret. You won't be missing anything.

We get Julie Harris here playing the effervescent Sally Bowles not as a kooky, endearing madcap but as a manic lunatic totally disconnected from reality. With the added disconnect of hearing Sally presented with Julie Harris's customary upper class finishing school accent reflective of her own background. Albeit, flavored with a British lilt. It's unbelievable that Julie Harris played this role on Broadway and received a Tony award.

As for Laurence Harvey, the least said the better. He didn't seem to know what his character was about other than someone being besieged by a world and everything in it out of his control. Making him an unappealing bungler in every way.

The production values in this movie in its entirety were also misaligned. Except for minimal reference to Hitler and the Nazis the events could have taken place in 1950s America.

In conclusion, the whole thing one monumental mess.

I assume this is supposed to be a clever little vignette of a day in the life, so to speak, of the average modern married couple. There's little really to captivate the imagination or eye in what can be called the mystery of the fur coat. Thankfully, it was something to be endured for only half an hour.

Not much to say about this movie except that it's an ego fest for several talented actors and director Vincent Minnelli. The story line proceeds with the emotional ferocity of intermeshed personalities that the movie audience could care less about. Who is on top, who is getting stepped on next about sums it up. And what we come away with is seeing a waste of talent.

What this story is about is homosexuality going unacknowledged, being sold as something else. Presented as a unique, oversize emotional sensitivity and not sexual preference. So that the main character a prep school teen is not even aware that he is gay. Added to this unpleasant, disingenuous environment is the headmaster's wife who seeing her role as one supporting the vulnerable young man actually works to lead him down a detoured path. The movie in its entirety can be categorized as a movie of its time. Upholding social standards where diverging from socially accepted norms only leads to friction and possibly disaster. For a 21st century audience this movie serves as a educational tutorial on the way things once were. And thankfully, are no more.

It was 1942, and incredibly, making fun of Hitler and the Nazis seemed a grand idea to the Hollywood movie making world. By this point in time Nazis occupied Europe. And..in early 1942, only months before this movie was released, top Nazi brass had met to formalize what was called The Final Solution for the elimination of Jews worldwide. Yet, here was a movie that several noteworthy Jews in the movie industry participated in and saw as appropriate entertainment. Those being Ernst Lubitsch, the Director, Jack Benny and Felix Bressart. Almost 80 years later, this movie is as offensive in its concept today as it should have been back then. I'd go even further and call it shamelessly vile.

Here we have a male/female combative stand off that showcases the little woman going off the deep end. A storyline that emphasizes all the negative female stereotypes to extreme level. Doris Day playing a silly woman with nothing to do all day so she makes what amounts to trouble for herself. And her poor husband. Played by handsome, customarily agreeable Rod Taylor. Here he plays a man with a demanding job that keeps him away from home. All presented by scriptwriters venting their own misogyny which makes it ludicrously dated, no fun for movie viewers. In the year 2021 it would probably be unimaginable for this type of movie to be made. And good thing.

None of the characters here have any redeeming qualities. What keeps you watching, almost against your will, is the repulsive human being that Richard Burton plays with such enjoyable relish. You can't believe that anyone like this character as played out could have lived as long as he has without being punched to the ground dead. Keeps the viewer on edge waiting for it to happen. The two women are just as damaged in their own way. Susceptible to being vulnerable to the dominance of male testosterone and ready made victims to end up drowning in it.

If this movie had been presented as a wacky fantasy and the fantastical element pumped up, it could have passed as having sufficient amusement value. Instead, this predicament these society elite travelers find themselves in is sold as a totally believable story. Trapped on a secluded island we have the two men parading around in pristine, white starched shirts and evening wear with Ava seeming to have a limitless clothing wardrobe at her disposal. Many more examples of this misguided production could be cited. What overall distinguishes it, however, is that it stands as an embarrassment to the three actors involved.

On any list of the top 5 noir movies out of Hollywood this one rates near the top. It presents all the elements that signify noir to maximum effect. It's a storyline where deception reigns in the proverbial tangled web of unknowns and characters that are masterful at manipulating people and events. Dick Powell as Phillip Marlowe is a standout representation of the hard boiled private eye. As if born to play this part. Powell the song and dance man of 1930s musicals, here shows his significant talent as dramatic actor. Then there's Claire Trevor who is the quintessential noir dame leading men to their doom. To sum up, this movie not one to miss.

Having watched "The Honeymooners" enthusiastically with the rest of America during The Golden Age of Television in the 1950s, revisiting it in 2020 is not so enjoyable. Jackie Gleason, long celebrated as a comedic great, well, here, his Ralph Kramden character hasn't aged well. What was funny, even hilarious 60 plus years ago is today too often offensive. The antics of Ralph Kramden significantly tag him as more repulsive than engaging. Of course, this program needs to be evaluated in the context of the era in which it was presented. For it's time, one of cultural standards and values differing greatly from today, it's popularity during its heyday can be understood. For a 21st century viewer it can rub you the wrong way, enjoyable only with the understanding that it's an entertainment relic from times long past.

A comedic take on the male/female relationship from a male perspective 1950s version. This story never would fly as a product of the 21st century world let alone be a long running big Broadway hit and subsequently be made into a movie. It's subject is male dominance and masculine vulnerability to the seductive female as it collides with domestic family life. In this net is the family man presented to us in the unexciting presence of Tom Ewell meeting up with the glorious Marilyn Monroe at the height of her beauty. The movie in total is an entertaining offering representing the world that once was. The main attraction being Marilyn who captivates from beginning to end so irresistibly you can't take your eyes off her. This is Marilyn Monroe's movie from start to finish and for that reason alone makes it a must see.