"Hey, that stuffed shirt's got something on the ball!", 21 September 2017
Working out of his Park Avenue office, Dr. Clitterhouse (Edward G. Robinson) is a well-respected doctor who handles society's elite. But his real passion is the study of the criminal mind and what makes them tick. He decides the best way to study criminals is to become one himself. After a series of successful robberies, he decides to expand his study and finds a fence for his merchandise. In no time at all, Dr. Clitterhouse is leading a band of thieves on one successful robbery after the next. But not everyone in the gang is happy about taking orders from Dr. Clitterhouse. A real hoodlum named Rocks Valentine (Humphrey Bogart) would like to see Clitterhouse out of the way.
The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse is one amazing movie! I love "discovering" a wonderfully entertaining film that I've never seen before. The Amazing Dr. Clitterhosue is just a lot of fun. My opinion of Robinson as an actor has softened over the years. As blasphemous as this may sound, there was a time when I really didn't care for him. The Amazing Dr. Clitterhouse has finally brought me all the way around on Robinson. Here, he gives a fantastic performance. His portrayal of Clitterhouse is a real joy to behold. The scenes where he meets the gang, especially his handling of the police officer, are as entertaining as anything I've seen him do. The writing here is superb. Robinson is given some of the best dialogue imaginable. And he delivers. What a performance!
The rest of the cast is just as strong. Bogart plays the tough-talking thug to perfection. Clare Trevor is Bogart's equal as the fence, Jo Keller. It's interesting to watch her character's transformation from the tough as nails fence to a woman who falls in love. It's just as interesting to watch Robinson's Clitterhouse totally unaware of Keller's feelings as he's blinded by science. The rest of the supporting cast is incredibly strong and enjoyable with Allen Jenkins, Maxie Rosenbloom, and Gale Page giving especially wonderful performances.
I've read a few complaints regarding the film's ending. While I would have loved to see more, the finale was more than satisfying for me. It's quite a Catch 22 – Clitterhouse on trial, his attorney using an insanity defense, and Clitterhouse reluctant to be labeled insane as it will negatively affect his scientific work. It's an interesting set- up. It may be a bit rushed, but it plays out nicely.
9/10
"Maybe people really aren't worth saving.", 20 September 2017
Five seemingly random individuals find themselves mysteriously on board an alien craft. The alien gives each person three capsules. Each capsule is capable of wiping out vast sections of the Earth's population, but will not harm anything else. The five are sent back to their homes with their powerful weapons and told that they have 27 days in which to either use their devices to destroy humanity or find a way to live in peace. If they should chose to wipe-out the Earth's population, the aliens will take over the world. If not, the aliens will move on and look for another home. Each of the five is left with a horrible dilemma – how to handle this kind of power?
I was going to get into detail on a whole political thing about some of the deeper aspects of The 27th Day, but I've since thought better of it. I usually write about the entertainment value of a film and what I liked and didn't like. I tend to leave the deep thinking for people who are much smarter than me. All I say on the subject is I would hate to see anyone allotted this kind of power given the current state of affairs in the world where words are considered a form of violence. I'd hate to see what someone would do with these capsules just because they felt slighted, etc. The ending of the films is especially troubling. So the people in the film discover how to use their devices to kill only those they consider evil because they do not support freedom? How do you decide who is in favor of freedom and what is your definition of evil? Were all those communists you wiped out really evil? Or were some of them living under a regime they did not agree with? Just a silly, illogical, nonsensical way to end the film.
On to other things. So, was The 27th Day an entertaining film? Reading through some of the comments on IMDb, I know it has its fans, but I'm not really one of them. The film is well made, it has a reasonably interesting premise, and it features rock solid acting. But, unfortunately, it is all pretty much a bore. I found most of the movie as dry as dust. I had to fight with myself to stay awake. The relatively short 75 minute runtime just seemed to drag on and on forever. People talking and talking and talking with nothing much happening. Not what I call entertainment. And then there's that ending I've already discussed. What a mess.
My one sentence summary: The 27th Day is a well-made film that suffers from a deathly dull script and an ending I find especially troubling. An unfortunate 4/10 from me.
4/10
"I'm a simple thief. Killing has no place in my book of rules, especially when it applies to me.", 19 September 2017
Mundy is tasked with retrieving a microdot that contains weapons' plans. The microdot is in the possession of a fashion photographer. Mundy goes undercover as a Texas oil millionaire to infiltrate this world of high fashion and beautiful models. What a tough job!
A Spot of Trouble might not be the best episode I've seen so far, but I still had a decent amount of fun with it. The problem I have with the episode is the theft Mundy pulls off. The intricate heist I so love is totally missing. Instead, it's a relatively simple breaking and entering job. The rest of the episode, however, is really good. The models actually look the part and William Campbell is exactly what I'd picture as a 60s photographer. The hired muscle, played by Cliff Osmond, comes across as especially menacing. Osmond would have made a great Bond heavy. He's big and believable in a fight. Finally, I didn't think I would care, but I enjoyed seeing Katherine Crawford in a return performance. Here, her contribution is vital to Mundy's success. Finally, I got a real kick out of the microdot's hiding place. What a clever idea!
6/10
Not unentertaining in its own modest way, 19 September 2017
The body of a private investigator, who also dabbled in a bit of blackmail, is literally dumped on the police department's doorstep. The case becomes politically charged when the prime suspect is determined to be one of the mayoral candidate's daughter. And to complicate things further, one of the city's newspapers may also be involved. Lt Sam Carson (William Gargan) has to get to the bottom of things. Problem is, he's fallen for his #1 suspect.
I really enjoyed this little movie much more than I could have imagined. Behind Green Lights will never be confused with a noir heavyweight like Double Indemnity, but it's not unentertaining in its own modest way. The story is compelling enough and director Otto Brower keeps things moving throughout the film's (too) brief 64 minute runtime. Budgetary restrictions can be seen in the limited number of sets (there are really only two or three that matter), yet the film never feels confined or stagey as I've seen before with similar films. Again, a tribute to Director Brower. The film has the benefit of a nice cast. Gargan might not be the most engaging lead, but he's solid and gives a real workmanlike performance. His character falling for the main female character, Janet Bradley (Carole Landis), is certainly believable. Speaking of Landis, she also gives a nice performance. I'm not overly familiar with Ms Landis, but what a tragic figure. Supporting players, including Richard Crane of Rocky Jones "fame", Mary Anderson, and a very young John Ireland, are all strong. My only real complaint is with the doctor character. I'm not sure how this man, who could so easily be tempted to basically break the law, kept his job as a police medical examiner. It's just doesn't make sense.
So, to summarize my thoughts, Behind Green Lights is an engaging little film that's aided tremendously by a nice cast.
6/10
A&C's first screen appearance, 18 September 2017
Like a lot of 1930s-era romantic comedies, One Night in the Tropics has a central plot gimmick it employs in an attempt to differentiate it from the plethora of similar fare. Here, the plot device is something called "love insurance". In this case, Steve Harper (Robert Cummings) buys a policy from Jim "Lucky" Moore (Allan Jones) to insure he will marry Cynthia (Nancy Kelly) or collect on the policy. Problem is that Steve is really in love with another woman, Mickey Fitzgerald (Peggy Moran), and Cynthia falls for Lucky shortly after meeting him. That's the basic set-up – so let the comedy begin!
One Night in the Tropics will forever be remembered as Abbott and Costello's introduction to American movie screens. They've got a few funny bits (I particularly like the $1 a Day gag), but they aren't the central figures in the film Instead, A&C play second fiddle to the rather predictable melodrama I've briefly described above. It's all harmless enough entertainment, but it's really not that clever and never funny enough on its own to be much more than mediocre. No real attempt is made to incorporate A&C into the script. Their routines, regardless of how good they might be, never fit into the rest of the movie. It's 15 minutes of movie followed by 5 minutes of A&C. This pattern is repeated throughout. Another real negative for me is the singing. One song by Allan Jones is one song too many. And he has something like four or five numbers in the film. I couldn't have taken much more.
To summarize, One Night in the Tropics is harmless enough, but not great. A&C have some funny bits, but it's not an A&C movie. And, though I'm sure he has a good voice, Allan Jones sings far too much for my liking. I'll give this one a very average 5/10.
5/10
"Or is it less familiar to call you Beelzebub?", 16 September 2017
A metal band rents an old farmhouse to use as a recording studio for their new album. It doesn't take long, however, for things to go horribly wrong. Creatures begin to appear and people start to go missing. Soon, only lead singer John Triton (Jon Mikl Thor) is left to do battle with the devil and his many minions. But Triton is not who he seems and is ready for this battle.
A plot summary really can't do Rock 'n' Roll Nightmare justice. There's more here than seems to be at first glance. It's a fairly ambitious plot for a reported $53,000 budget. Speaking of the budget, with limited funds like that, it's amazing how watchable the end product actually is. You can tell that there's a lot of unpaid work by family and friends, not to mention Jon Mikl Thor's music, that were key to making this thing work. And, given the budget, the special effects end up looking "special". No, they won't compete with today's CGI effects or anything from big a big practical effects company, but for what they are, I enjoyed them. And then there's that final fight scene. What a total blast!
Even though I had fun watching most of Rock 'n' Roll Nightmare, there were a few things that kept me from fully embracing the film and lowered my overall rating. The main problem comes from the long stretches of the movie where nothing happens. Maybe I"m just getting too old, but endless shower scenes and PG-rated sex scenes do nothing for me. A little more variety might have really helped.
Overall, I'm impressed with what these people were able to do. I say "these people" because it's apparent Rock 'n' Roll Nightmare was a group effort. The final product is good, but not great. My slightly above average 6/10 rating seems appropriate.
6/10
A cleverly written, humorous, entertaining film, 15 September 2017
Henry Clitterburn is in charge of running an old, crumbling estate. His problem – he doesn't have the funds he needs. Enter a rich old uncle from America. Henry believes that if the uncle were to pass, his money troubles will be solved. Surely Henry can come up with a foolproof plan to do away with his doddering old uncle, right?
What a cleverly written, humorous, entertaining film! Even though How to Murder a Rich Uncle only bears passing resemblances, for whatever reason, I was reminded of Ten Little Indians mixed with Arsenic and Old Lace. The comedy in How to Murder a Rich Uncle is incredibly dark. Much of the humor is derived from death being treated in a matter-of- fact manner. Each attempted murder of Uncle George is more elaborate than the next. Sure, all are doomed to failure (well, they don't kill their intended victim), only adding to the humor. The final one is so ridiculously complicated that it reminded me of something out of Wile E. Coyote's twisted brain. And with each attempt on his life, the unaware Uncle George manages to stumble his way out of trouble. Very funny stuff.
The cast in How to Murder a Rich Uncle is superb. Nigel Patrick, Charles Coburn, Wendy Hiller, and Anthony Newly all give very fine performances. All, however, are upstaged by Katie Johnson. In what would sadly prove to be her last role, she steals the scene every time she's on-screen. Finally, there's the impossibly young Michael Caine in one of his very first roles. He's okay in his small part, but there's nothing to indicate he'd go on to the long, distinguished career he's enjoyed.
8/10
