Change Your Image
Retired508
Reviews
I Confess (1953)
Mediocre at Best
This Hitchcock should be forgotten. Wooden performance by Clift along with obvious faults: (1)When the girls saw the exiting priest who was supposedly a killer, they saw him from the rear. They never saw his face ,and for all they knew ,it was a woman dressed as a man. They were never asked the obvious question: How exactly did you know it was a priest? (1)Using such an obvious trick as having the blood soaked robe put in the murder's chest by the murderer. Isn't that a bit too obvious an error for a smart priest to make?
The Ipcress File (1965)
A Very Contrived Movie
1)How convenient, at the beginning of the movie, that Caine finds a playable tape in a huge warehouse conveniently labeled "The Ipress File."Really!
2)His friend is killed by mistake after being shot through the windshield of his car, and yet they let Caine live for the remainder of the movie when they have ample opportunities to easily kill him.
3)We never find out what purpose is served by kidnapping scientists, mentally disabling them, and returning them to their homes. Money? Then what is the purpose of doing this to Caine? Why not just kill him since they don't ask for money for his exchange?
4)An American CIA agent is killed with the sole purpose of implicating Caine in his murder. Really? Involve the entire U.S. intelligence in a plan when they could have killed Caine much more easily?
5)Caine's romantic interest. What is her purpose and what eventually happens to her?
6)But I have saved the best (worse) for last. Caine is specifically indoctrinated to only respond to this handler, the one who tortured him. "Listen to this voice" he is repeatedly told. But when his British, traitor boss uses the same words, Caine responds to them, even though they are spoken in another person's voice.
Don't take this film very seriously. It has too many flaws.
Road House (1948)
Terribly Contrived
One of the most contrived movies ever made. What jury would convict a man who left a note saying what he did, and was accused by a man who wanted the accused wife, and with no corroborating evidence. In announcing his decision, the judge announces his reasons as if they wouldn't have been made in open court, and then assigns the convicted to be paroled to his accuser. Really! And what kind of parole makes the convicted a slave to his keeper so much so that he can't even get married without his permission. Even in the final scene, Jeffey conveniently carries the receipt with him that proves what he did and then this receipt is conveniently found on him.Really now. Finally, when Jeffey, although drunk, somehow not only finds his prey, but can shoot so accurately that he can hit the motor of the boat.Then, we are led to believe that even though Ida Lupino shoots Jeffey, everything will be all right. Come on now.
Libel (1959)
Excellent except for one fatal flaw
From the beginning, the plot, character development and suspense are first rate. In fact, the movie goes very well in every respect, except that the whole movie turns on the remembrance of Mark on the witness stand at the end of the movie And even this is acceptable except for the fatal flaw: Mark gives absolutely no explanation as just why he switches jackets with the man he just beat up.As a matter of fact, if the reason was to pretend that, when found,the body would be that of a British Major and not his own, why in the world wold he put on a jacket which was probably spotted with blood, hardly the action of a sane man. Try as I might, I cannot think of a reason for the switch, and even the prosecutor fails to ask the reason for this action. Without a satisfactory answer to this question, the entire testimony is worthless.After all, it is in this jacket that the trinket that his wife gave him is discovered which then causes to prime witness against him to recant his testimony, and thus proves his innocence.
The Young Savages (1961)
Not Worth Watching Except for Laughs
The movie starts out with 3 young thugs obviously bent on killing someone.And they do. Much of the movie revolves around whether or not this was 1st degree murder. What else could it be? The only thing missing was a letter to the victim announcing what was going to happen. Regardless of motives,it was preplanned and executed. That's first degree. The supposed trial, which we are told first is a grand jury hearing,is as far from reality as one could imagine. Grand jury hearings are not trials, with defense lawyers and newspapers present, ending with a judge pronouncing sentences.It only decides if there is enough evidence to have a trial later. And to believe that a D.A. would scream at and impugn his own witnesses is pure hokum. Let's fact it, the whole film is pure Hollywood foolishness with all the requisite character types included (even a nasty D.A. running for governor sitting at the prosecution table.) By the way, it was Lancaster's father that changed his name not him. And to believe that a D.A. would continue on a case after getting beaten up by the defendant's friends? Really!Lancaster is excellent, but that's all the film has going for it.
Star of Midnight (1935)
Akk in all a very good movie, but...
I agree with all the good things said about this movie by other users. We are all used to seeing Myrna Loy as Powell's partner. But I wonder if we were used to seeing Rodgers, what would we think of Loy? Would we say " Loy is fine, but she is no Ginger Rodgers. Just asking. My biggest problem is with the ending. Doesn't the ending bother anybody? How exactly did Powell find the bank Mary Smith used? Did he go to all the banks on 5th Avenue and ask someone in every bank if they recognized and would provide an address for the lady he was looking for? This is too much to swallow. But, other than this, I loved the movie.