Another wonderfully entertaining episode, 3 June 2017
Phyrne is summoned to a small town by Oskar Voigt, the co-owner of a winery. Upon her arrival, she and Dot discover that Mr Voigt is dead. While the police and local doctor call it a heart attack, Phryne has seen enough to know that something is odd about Oskar's death. The local police, however, threaten to arrest Phryne if she continues her investigations. Even Oskar's brother doesn't want Phryne investigating. It feels as if the whole town is against her. She calls Jack to her rescue. Together they attempt to determine what's happening in this small town and who killed winemaker Oskar Voigt.
The run of wonderfully entertaining episodes continues with Death on the Vine. This one has a bit more atmosphere than most. There is a real sense o danger. I was reminded of The Avenger's episode The Town of No Return. Both feature our heroes in a small town, trying to investigate, but being blocked at every turn by the locals. Very nicely done. The acting, as usual, is perfect. The actors playing the band of villagers, led by David Ford as Sergeant Ford, is especially strong. The sets, costuming, and the locations are spot-on. I really enjoyed the rural setting in this episode. It made for a nice change of pace. Finally, the mystery's solution is satisfactory. I doubt that any viewer could figure out the whole thing, but it's fun to watch Jack and Phryne investigate.
One last thing, the scenes featuring Dot and Hugh are about as "cute" (can't believe I used that word) as any I've seen. Watching Hugh try to find the perfect way and the perfect moment to pop the question is endlessly entertaining. Well done!
8/10
Nice little disaster movie, 3 June 2017
Two things you could easily find in the 70s were disaster movies and made-for-TV movies. Heatwave! (I love the added exclamation point) combines the two. The end result is a nice, little, enjoyable film. The movie focuses on Frank and Laura Taylor (Ben Murphy and Bonnie Bedelia) as they try to cope with and survive an unrelenting heatwave. Complicating matters, Laura is seven months pregnant. They decide to try to escape the heat and general nastiness of the city and head to Laura's parent's cabin in the mountains. But the heat and nastiness follow them. They are forced to hike the last several miles, which is rough on the pregnant Laura. Fortunately, one of the few remaining residents on the mountain is an old doctor. Laura prematurely goes into labor. With no modern medical equipment, no power, and no way to get back to civilization, will the baby survive?
Unlike modern films with their overblown special effects, Heatwave! is a much smaller, more intimate movie. It's the kind of movie that I'm not sure you could make today. The movie works primarily due to some outstanding acting and writing. The two leads, Murphy and particularly Bedelia, are great. There were times when Murphy got on my nerves, but that had more to do with his character than him as an actor. The supporting cast is strong. Lew Ayres, David Huddleston, John Anderson, and Dana Elcar are all veterans and more than capable. The script is well-written and provides a good amount of tension and suspense. The run-ins that Frank and Laura have with other people are interesting. I'm sure the message here is that we are all living in a world that is just one small disaster away from breaking down into chaos. Frank's encounter with the old man on the road is proof of that. There were, however, moments of manufactured tension that didn't quite work. I got a chuckle out of Laura's overly dramatic encounter with a raccoon. This was a 70s made-for-TV movie so the happy ending should come as no surprise. Still, the ingenious way they all pull together in the end to save the baby, however improbable, was nice.
6/10
A chore to sit through, 2 June 2017
- Duello nel mondo
When a fellow insurance investigator is killed, Fred Lester (Richard Harrison) is asked by his company to take over the case. Lester finds a series of unusually large claims on policies issued just prior to death. Also, in each case, a bank or other business is listed as the beneficiary – not a family member. There has to be a connection. Digging further, Lester discovers that a criminal organization is behind the deaths. Lester must find the killer and the person behind the murderous plot.
The list of things I like about Ring Around the World is brief – the groovy 60s music, Harrison's Clark Kent style glasses, Giacomo Rossi Stuart's performance, and . . . well, I guess that's pretty much the whole list. As for what I didn't like, I'll stick to my main gripe - the plot. It's just so deathly dull. Trying to get through Ring Around the World is a real chore. A perfect example is the film's final shootout between Harrison and Stuart. This should have been one of the most exciting parts of the film, but, in reality, it couldn't get much worse. The two actors play cat and mouse on the side of a small hill for what seems like an eternity. I'm not sure how they actually managed to avoid each other, but somehow they were able to accomplish this nearly impossible feat for more than 10 minutes. How exciting (sarcasm). And when the end finally does come, it's such a letdown. The dual between the two chief protagonists ends in a whimper. To ratchet up the dullness even more – everything in the movie is so utterly predictable. The big reveal in the closing scenes of the head bad guy should come as a surprise to no one. There is no mystery. What a snoozefest!
3/10
Could have been great, 2 June 2017
I'll start this by saying that I agree with the negative comments I have read on the internet over the depiction of Phryne's black lover in chains. The decision to depict this man in that manner is indefensible. It's too bad because this one unnecessary scene puts a damper on what would otherwise be one of the best, most fun episodes in the series.
In Framed for Murder, we discover that Phryne has invested in a film titled Bride of Babylon. Her investment is in danger, however, when the leading man is killed on-set. Phryne is called in to investigate. Before she (or Jack) can find the killer, the film's director is also murdered. Phyrne is forced into multiple roles – detective, investor, and, now, director.
Other than the unfortunate scene I've already mentioned, the rest of Framed for Murder is fantastic. An Australian motion picture studio in the 1920s makes for a fascinating set. I'm not sure how accurate everything is, but it makes for great TV. There are plenty of opportunities for period costumes and the episode uses this to its full advantage. The period detail is, to my untrained eye, fantastic. As with the previous episode, I think the writing in Framed for Murder is as good as I've seen in the series. While figuring out the "why" of the murder is fairly obvious, the "who" is trickier. I'm sure most viewers will be like me and guess incorrectly.
Overall, I'm rating this episode a 7/10. While I was thoroughly entertained and thought about rating the episode higher, the scene I keep referencing left a bad taste in my mouth.
7/10
A perfect example of Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries at its finest, 2 June 2017
Expecting to find the body of a recently deceased young woman, Dr Mac is shocked to discover the body of her colleague, Professor Katz, on the dissection table. Dr Mac asks Phryne and Jack to put aside whatever differences they may have to help solve the murder. Things are complicated when they discover a valuable manuscript missing from Dr Katz's wall safe.
The Blood of Juana the Mad is a perfect example of Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries at its finest. The writing in here is very clever. I'm guessing that Phryne and Jack spend at least 75% of the episode trying to track down the missing book. The book turns out to be something of a false lead or red herring or a McGuffin or whatever you want to call it. The real clue to the murder is all but staring them in the face and no one recognizes it. Very well done.
Another really enjoyable aspect of this episode is the advancement of the Phryne / Jack relationship – or lack of a relationship. The way they try to investigate the same things without speaking or interacting with each other is brilliantly played. I especially like Phryne's discussion on how they should walk – should Jack be two steps ahead of Phryne or two steps behind? It's a hoot.
8/10
Fun, 1 June 2017
To raise money for a local youth center, Nancy and friends decide to revive a play that was last performed 20 years ago. To everyone's surprise, the original actors agree to come back for the play. But is the cast's motivation really altruistic or does this group have another reason for returning? As soon as rehearsals begin, strange things start happening. Is the old theater really haunted by a phantom? Nancy is determined to get to the bottom of things.
In a couple of different ways, A Haunting We Will Go doesn't feel much like a traditional Nancy Drew episode. For much of the runtime, Nancy and Co play second fiddle to rest of the cast. Not surprising, really, when consider the rest of the cast includes the likes of Bob Crane, Victor Buono, Dina Merrill, and Pippa Scott. I enjoy Pamela Sue Martin's work in the series, but she didn't stand a chance against an over-the-top actor like Buono. He, and the others, dominate every scene in which they appear. Another reason that this episode doesn't feel like a normal Nancy Drew episode is the amount of comedy. While there's usually a laugh or two to be had in every episode, this one is jam-packed with funny bits. The scene where Buono and Crane are carrying bricks in the alleyway is very funny. Still, the final reveal is handled quite nicely and the solution to the mystery is satisfying. While it's not overly difficult to figure out why the original actors came back for the play and the phantom's identity, the way Nancy weaves the solution into the live play performance is a nice touch and very enjoyable. In fact, the whole thing is enjoyable. It may not feel like Nancy Drew, but A Haunting We Will Go is a lot of fun and very entertaining. And for me, entertainment is what it's all about.
7/10
While I like Flight to Tangier, I really wanted to love it., 31 May 2017
A private plane, supposedly carrying $3 million, crashes outside the Tangier airport. The authorities find no bodies in the wreckage – neither pilot nor the courier carrying the $3 million. What happened to the people? An assortment of characters, who had been waiting on the plane, sets off to find the missing loot, including: Gil Walker (Jack Palance), friend of the plane's pilot; Susan Lane (Joan Fontaine), the missing pilot's fiancé and a recent arrival in Tangier; Danzer (Robert Douglas) and Goro (Marcel Dalio), two underworld types; and Nicki (Cornine Calvet), love interest to both Danzer and Gil. Who will get there first?
While I like Flight to Tangier, I really wanted to love it. It's filmed in that gorgeous 1950s era Technicolor that never ceases to amaze me. The cinematography is often quite stunning. The movie probably looks a million times better than it has any right to. Sets and locations are perfect. I especially liked the way the filmmakers tried to recreate the tight quarters of Tangier. The costumes also look fantastic. The dresses, the mobster suits, and the police uniforms are all impeccable. The outfits worn by Cornine Calvet steal the show – wow! The acting is first-rate. Joan Fontaine is Joan Fontaine and gives one of her typical outstanding performances. Jack Palance is the young, reluctant hero. It's interesting to watch him play something other than the typecast baddie he would later be associated with. Calvet is new to me, but she more than holds her own with the other actors. Douglas, Dalio, and the always dependable Jeff Morrow give fine supporting performances. Flight to Tangier includes plenty of action with fist fights, police chases, plane crashes, gunplay, mystery, suspense, and more. There really are very few dull moments. It's got just about everything I could ask for in a movie.
So, why don't I love Flight to Tangier? The answer is simple – the plot. To me, the plot is so unnecessarily complicated that it ends up being a weight on everything. It's a mess. Often, there's too much going on. A more streamlined focus and approach could have done wonders for the movie. And the plot falls apart in the final scenes. The movie sort of fizzles out and loses steam by the last act and sort of limps its way to the finish. Flight to Tangier deserved a bigger send-off.
6/10
