Are Frank and Joe ever at home?, 21 July 2017
Joe and Frank receive an ominous call from their father. He needs them to bring a case file to him in Acapulco. Before he can give much detail, however, the call is cut off. So, Frank and Joe head to Acapulco, but after arriving, they can't locate their father. They are approached by a man claiming to be one of Fenton's friends, but the boys are suspicious. And with good reason as it turns out. This man is holding Mr Hardy hostage in an abandoned prison.
Are Frank and Joe ever at home? Acapulco Spies is Episode 9 in Season 2 and so far they've been to Mexico, Bermuda, Kenya, Egypt, and Transylvania – and I'm pulling these off the top of my head. And don't you just love the way that, regardless of what far-flung destination they may be in, Frank and Joe immediately pick up the best looking women around. Amazing!
Acapulco Spies is about what you expect when you sit down with a Hardy Boys episode. It's good cheesy family friendly fun. One you've watched a season and a half of this stuff, it gets to be fairly predictable. This one does have a few features that make it stand out from the rest of the pack. Craig Stevens in a fine actor and he shows it here. He may in no way look Mexican, but otherwise, he's about as good as you'll find in the series. I also enjoyed Rudy Diaz as Carlos. He's one of the more menacing baddies the Hardy Boys ever encountered. Finally, as a real treat, we're not subjected to any of Shaun Cassidy's singing. That's always a sign of a better episode. A 6/10 from me.
6/10
A cheesy, reasonably entertaining piece of fluff, 21 July 2017
A diamond smuggler is attempting to put one over on his New York associates by sending glass instead of the real thing. To cover his tracks, he decides to drug the flight crew in hopes of bringing down the plane. His thinking is that if the plane is lost, the fake diamonds will be lost. As you might expect, Frank and Joe are on the ill-fated flight.
I'm not going to go into a lot detail about the actual episode. It is about what you'd expect – a cheesy, reasonably entertaining piece of fluff. Instead, I want to write about a couple of things that stood out to me as I re-watched The Strange Fate of Flight 608 last night. First, I've said this before, but seriously, is there anything these guys can't do? We've already seen the boys fly a small, private plane. But here, they get the chance to fly and land a commercial airliner in the middle of a hurricane. Not a problem for the Hardys! And I loved the way the boys took charge after safely landing the plane on a deserted island. On a plane loaded with trained flight attendants, Frank and Joe are just about the only ones to keep their heads. How remarkable!
Second, I'm not sure what the thinking was behind the two diamond smugglers. I'm shocked they put these guys in a 70s TV show aimed at a teenage demographic. The character Goldman is obviously "inspired" by Sydney Greenstreet. And less obvious, but I'm sure no less intentional, is Herbie Braha's take on Peter Lorre who often played Greenstreet's henchman. I'm not sure any of the kids got it in 1977 (I know that as a 14 year-old, I didn't), so it just seems terribly odd. Not to mention, the characters seem wildly out of place.
5/10
It's "safe", 20 July 2017
Agent Michael London (Gene Barry) poses as an art dealer so he can make regular trips between Paris and Istanbul. His latest mission is to enter an auction in Istanbul for some very desirable top secret scientific papers. There is a lot of interest from "the other side" concerning these papers. These enemy agents will stop at nothing to prevent London from getting the papers.
Overall, Istanbul Express is a fairly bland, milk-toast sort of spy film. Once I saw the name Mary Ann Mobley in the credits, I knew this wasn't going to be a very wild ride. If I'm not mistaken, Istanbul Express was originally a TV production – and it shows. It doesn't have any of the memorable fight scenes, big set-pieces, or over-the- top action you find in a theatrical release. The film's star, Gene Barry, is a fine actor, but even he is "safe". About the wildest thing Barry does is throw down a few drinks. Slow down there, dude – let's not get too crazy.
So far, I've made Istanbul Express sound somewhere between boring and a dog. Honestly, though, it's not all bad. The location shots were nice and a bit unexpected. You normally don't see actual location shooting like this on a television production. Another plus was Senta Berger in a very small, but pivotal, role. She's another of those actors who automatically make a movie better simply because they're in it. Finally, there is a really clever twist at the end during the auction scene that was quite well worked. It alone saved Istanbul Express from being below average.
In summary, Istanbul Express is a fairly harmless, mildly entertaining film that too often plays it safe. There is a nice twist at the end that saves it from being horrible. Like the movie, I'll rate it a milk-toast sort of 5/10.
5/10
I sometimes forget how good Richard Johnson was as an actor, 20 July 2017
Given Danger Route's lackluster 5.7 IMDb rating, I really wasn't expecting to like it as much as I did. In the movie, Jonas Wilde (Richard Johnson) is a successful government operative who handles more sensitive cases (he's an assassin). Recently returned from a mission, he's immediately sent on another. This time, his handlers really don't care if he's successful or not. Either way, they want him dead. Coincidentally, Wilde wants out of the game altogether and has taken steps in that direction. His steps, however, do not include his own death.
Most of the spy movie I watch tend to feature comedy or some other craziness. They may not be out and out spoofs or something like that, but they do include their share of humor. These spy movies generally feature crazy gadgets, over-the-top villains, exotic locations, and scads of beautiful women. Not here. Danger Route is deadly serious stuff. And while it does feature enough beautiful women for a Bond movie, there are none of the other trappings normally found in a spy film. I wasn't sure how this would play with me, but worked almost flawlessly. I appreciated the serious tone and the real tension it created. There's still plenty of action, but it's more subdued and realistic. I also thought the film had a nice flow to it. Never was I bored. I'll give credit to the brilliant Seth Holt who directed Danger Route. It's really too bad he died so young and after directing less than a dozen films. I'd like to have seen what a longer career might have produced. Finally, the writing is strong as well. The plot is filled with twists and turns. Most of these twists, including the final one, worked as intended on me. Overall, Danger Route is fine filmmaking.
The acting in Danger Route warrants a mention. Richard Johnson never gets enough credit as a rock solid actor. Whether it's a more comedic film like Some Girls Do or he's running form zombies in Zombi, I always seem to enjoy his work. He's joined by a very capable cast that includes Carol Lynley, Gordon Jackson, Diana Dors, and Harry Andrews. My only complaint with the cast is Barbara Bouchet. It's not that she's bad or anything, just terribly underutilized.
I really have nothing negative to say about the movie. It's a solid film with nice direction, writing, and acting. And, as is always key for me, I was thoroughly entertained. Danger Route gets an 8/10 from me.
8/10
More big, dumb fun, 20 July 2017
A sleazy (and we'll find out just how sleazy later) Hong Kong based businessman hires a man named Johnny to lead an expedition into the jungles of India to find a giant, mythical, ape-like creature. One disaster after another strikes the party and they're separated. Johnny is rescued by a bikini-clad, blond, Tarzan-like woman named Samantha (Evelyne Kraft). Samantha introduces Johnny to her protector, Utam – the giant beast Johnny was hired to find. In no time at all, Johnny and Samantha fall for each other, they set off for Hong Kong with Utam, and, as you could probably predict, Utam escapes and destroys a good chunk of the city.
A few months ago, I went to the theater to see Kong: Skull Island. I wrote that Kong was, "Big, dumb fun. If you went into Kong: Skull Island expecting much more than that, you were in the wrong theater." The same holds true for The Mighty Peking Man. With a giant ape smashing Hong Kong, a British army officer willing to destroy the other half of the city to get the creature, Evelyne Kraft and her leather bikini, and some truly amazing looking miniatures, I can't imagine expecting much more than big, dumb fun.
Instead of rattling on about what I liked or didn't like about The Mighty Peking Man (you can read any number of better written reviews on the internet), I want to spend the rest of this discussing what I feel is the stupidest character ever put on film. The giant Utam is already in a bad mood. He's chained, caged, and kept away from Samantha. The sleazy business man I mentioned earlier picks this time to show us just how sleazy he truly is. He abducts Samantha and attempts to rape her. But does he do all this in some out of the way place like a dark alley? No. Instead, he picks a location just feet away from where Utam is being housed. The apartment or whatever is right at Utam's eye level. Utam can clearly see what's happening. This guy has to be the most incredibly stupid individual imaginable. He decides to rape a woman in the presence of her giant protector who is already in a foul mood. Dude – you've got a death wish. Bye bye sleazy business guy!
7/10
Surprisingly well made - just depressing, 18 July 2017
The company where David works is going through layoffs. He's surprised to discover that one of his coworkers actually discusses work problems with his wife. Not David. He keeps it to himself, not wanting to upset his wife, Hazel. Instead, he doesn't eat, he doesn't sleep, and he is generally in a foul mood. From a friend, Hazel learns of David's work problems. When she tries to talk to him, David and Hazel have the biggest fight of their marriage. It's not only affecting them, but their three children as well. Can they learn to communicate?
The purpose of David and Hazel is to examine the importance of communication in a marriage. After watching, my initial reaction was to question the short's effectiveness. The film ends on a horribly depressing note. There is no resolution at the film's conclusion. Instead, we see David and Hazel sitting side-by-side in their living room, still unable to communicate. The more I thought about it, though, I realized that maybe that's the point. David and Hazel's miserable existence should be viewed as a cautionary tale. Communication is the key to avoiding a situation like David and Hazel's. So maybe the short was effective after all. What about entertaining? Well, it's just too depressing. There's really not much to latch onto here for entertainment purposes. David is an old school chauvinist (always fun) and Hazel reminds me of one of those housewives from the 60s who were fed tranquilizers by their doctors to keep them doped up. Sounds like a barrel of laughs.
The acting in David and Hazel is a step above what you'll find in similar films. The cast includes a very brief appearance from Percy Rodrigues. The name may not mean much, but if you grew up watching TV in the 70s, the face would certainly be familiar. The rest of the cast is competent and professional. In fact, I'd describe the entire production as competent and professional. Technically, David and Hazel is better than it has any right to be. It looks great.
In the end, you have a competently acted, professionally made short about the importance of communication. It does a reasonable job of conveying its message. However, the whole thing is so depressing it almost gets in the way of that message. I'll give this one a slightly below average 4/10.
4/10
The frozen-face monkey masks are the stuff of nightmares., 18 July 2017
One Got Fat is a bicycle safety video. In the short, a group of "kids" plan to ride their bikes nine blocks for a picnic. One kid has a large basket – big enough to hold everyone's lunch. The title refers to the one kid who actually made it to the picnic without having an accident or something else stop him. He ate all the lunches and got fat. The children who don't make it to the picnic are all dressed in monkey masks. The moral is don't be a monkey – practice safety when riding your bike.
One Got Fat is especially creepy and dark. The frozen-face monkey masks are the stuff of nightmares. It doesn't help that just before each child has an accident, their eyes bulge out of the mask. It's quite a sight. As for dark, the whole premise of the video is that nine kids don't make it to the picnic. They're hit by cars, run over by road equipment, slam into pedestrian, or suffer some other horrifying accident. All the while, we hear the bright, chipper voice of Edward Everett Horton narrating events. Horton's melodious style is a stark contrast to the images on the screen. It's a bizarre experience.
Was One Got Fat effective? Yes. While it may take it's time getting the message out, I don't think anyone who watches this would forget basic bicycle safety. Was One Got Fat entertaining? In a weird way, it was. It's not a laugh a minute, but it's hard to turn away from the surrealistic images on-screen. I'm giving it an 8/10.
8/10
