Dawn of the Dead (1978)

Guns, ammo, Jack Daniel's - gives a whole new meaning to one stop shopping.

Intro.

As you could probably tell from my last post, I had a pretty interesting Saturday night.  No, I was not bitten by any zombies (luckily), but I did get to watch Dawn of the Dead for the first time.  And I was surrounded by zombies (and a few zombie hunters).  It made such a difference watching the movie - there were cheers for both the zombies and the survivors.  The right audience can really make or break your initial impression of a film, and I'm very appreciative to all those who made it such a great experience.

Overview

Dawn of the Dead opens with a television station urgently trying to stay afloat during a crisis.  The dead have been walking around devouring people and the disease - and fear - is spreading quickly.  Two of the station's workers, the traffic reporter/helicopter pilot Stephen (David Emge) and his girlfriend/TV executive, Francine (Gaylen Ross) decide to make a break for Canada in the chopper.  They are met by two SWAT team members, who have just witnessed a brutal police bust on an apartment filled with both the living and the undead.  One of the SWAT guys, Roger (Scott H. Reiniger) knows Stephen and had planned to meet him there.  He brings along his friend Peter (Ken Foree), despite Stephen's remark about the extra weight using more fuel.  They fly out and pass fields of both zombies and hunters, and finally decide to take refuge at a shopping mall (with a convenient helicopter pad on the roof).  Turns out there is a locked room accessible by skylight and stacked full of survival supplies.  The crew decide to stay there for awhile, since when they tried to stop for gas, all the pumps were empty and they were attacked by some hungry zombies.  Anyway, what better place to hold up in than a shopping mall?  Everything they need is just outside of the secure passageway.  It's too tempting for Peter, so he and Roger decide to go out and investigate.  Together they dodge some zombies, kill a few more, and then lock themselves safely inside "Penney's" Department store.  Stephen, not wanting to miss anything, follows them and has to be rescued (in a pretty well-thought-out way!) and when they finally think of going back for Franny, they find her about to be chewed on by a zombie because Stephen forgot to leave her a gun.  Anyway, Franny steps up and gets an equal role with the guys (and she's three months pregnant!), learning to shoot and to fly the helicopter.  The guys figure out how to use the duct system to navigate the mall and pretty soon they build themselves a very comfortable home in the safety area.  But nothing good ever lasts, as first Peter is bitten and turns, then a motorcycle gang of hunters/looters comes to raid the mall.  It's all fine until Stephen lashes out and starts an all out war - man vs. man vs. zombies.  It's pretty intense, all the way to the edge of your seat finale. 

Highlights
I've already mentioned how great this film was with such an enthusiastic audience, but I have to say it again.  Like most horror films, they're not always mainstream, but their fans are dedicated.  The popularity has grown and even exploded in more recent years, with college classes in zombie culture now being taught in several schools.  So much of that is owed to George Romero, for his classics such as Dawn of the Dead.  Unlike the original Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead is much more comical, definitely touching on the idea of humor as a coping mechanism.

Prior to seeing the film, I asked Catherine to explain it to me.  She said that where Night of the Living Dead was a commentary on racism (as the remake was on feminism), Dawn of the Dead is a commentary on consumerism.  It's blatantly obvious once they land on the mall's roof and witness all the zombies flocking to the building.  "This was an important place in their lives."  What I liked most of all was how the camera shots set up the zombies and the mannequins in the mall - they were posed and acting the same way, as if shoppers had finally "shopped 'til they dropped" and then rose again to become zombies.  Have you ever felt that way after a long day at work?  Or getting up on Monday before you have any coffee?  Just this morning my co-worker said she felt like a zombie because she hadn't had an tea yet.  But it's even worse during busy shopping days - think about that sense of sullenness and desire to shop the day after any major holiday.  It's consumerism and a bit tragic to consider.  But the zombies aren't the only ones affected in Dawn of the Dead.  The survivors all give in to the riches of all that the mall has to offer, including mink coats and chocolates and three course meals, carpets and money taken from the in-mall bank.  The list goes on and on.  Stephen has the cynical line to Franny "well, you always wanted to play house."  But consider their options - what else can they do?  They are relatively safe, well stocked, well fed and very low on fuel with no idea of where the next gas station might be.  In some ways it could be seen as a perfect haven, but also a bit of a prison, like house arrest.  When the novelty wears off and Roger turns into a zombie (only to be killed by Peter, as promised), they need something, anything, to happen.  Their consumer driven paradise is slowly suffocating them.

Enter the motorcycle gang.  I wasn't sure what the purpose of these guys were at first (besides having those great 70's mustaches).  But then I realized that they were other survivors and now the real fight was not between man and zombie, but between man and man.  Peter's plan of just letting them take what they wanted and hide until they left was a good one.  Unfortunately, Stephen snapped and started shooting.  I'm not quite sure why he did - did he feel like he needed to protect this "important place" in his life?  Did he feel that Franny was in danger?  Did he just snap after that prolonged period of just waiting?  It doesn't really matter why he did it, but what matters is how quickly the survivors change from being alright with killing zombies to being alright with killing the living.  In the pull of a trigger, any shadow of morality shatters.  It reminds me of a sign I've been seeing a lot lately - "Zombies Were People Too".  It's true.  They were once people just like us.  Just as they did in Night of the Living Dead, zombies embody our own fears.  That line between monster and fellow human is a fine one.  It's crossed after Peter kills Roger - a huge turning point.  Here they've lived with Roger, taken care of him while he was dying, and now they have to kill him.  After that, it's hard not to imagine them justifying the killing of the motorcyclists.  If they can kill one of their own, then they have no problem killing strangers.

Before I wrap this up, I wanted to take a moment to look at the historical time frame.  I had to check, but it was the late sixties - early seventies that saw the beginning of postmodernism in the art world.  There's a general disheartening in the world and a loss of faith in all of the optimism of previous generations.  The Vietnam War ended in 1975, but its aftermath can still be felt today.  Our consumer culture boomed and kept going into the eighties with high supply and demand and a need for everyone to have everything and to have it "right at their fingertips".  It's a dark part of our culture, and one that is a basic instinct - to have more and better things than your neighbor.  You could probably argue that it is basic survival because having more means wealth which means you are a better candidate as a mate which means a better chance for passing on your genes and becoming a biological success.  But I won't get too much into that, since it's late and I might just be guessing.

One last thing to leave you with, though.  As I was writing this post, I had the song "No Man's Land" by Billy Joel stuck in my head.  One line in particular struck me: "Give us this day our daily discount outlet merchandise / Raise up a multiplex and we will make a sacrifice."  The song was released in 1993, but I wonder if Billy Joel had seen Dawn of the Dead and films with similar messages.  Especially since one of the lines includes the phrase "Zombie town".  Even the title itself is a reference to the area between the trenches during World War I - the original "no man's land."  The battle ground seems a fitting reminder of what the survivors in Dawn of the Dead faced - a modern paradise with everything they could ever need, except hope.

Review and Recommendation

Of all the zombie films I've seen, this is one of my favorites.  While not as serious or deep as the original Night of the Living Dead, it is just as well constructed and even more enjoyable.  Also, the zombies are blue.  Instant win, right there.  If you only see one zombie movie in your life, I definitely recommend making it this one.   
 

P.S. Also, I loved the shout-outs to the original Night of the Living Dead.  I'm probably missing some, but a few I spotted were the blown up truck, the close-ups of stuffed animal heads in the gun shop, the town for the television station being Monroeville, and the listing of shelters on the television (which was also pointed out by Catherine).

A funny thing happened on the way to the AFI theater....

 

We knew we were in for a good time when two little kids next to us on the crowded sidewalk started shouting "the hoards!  the hoards!!"

My friend Catherine and I innocently went to Silver Spring last night to watch Dawn of the Dead at the AFI.  On our way to the theater, we were met with hundreds of zombies!  Turns out it was the annual Silver Spring Zombie Walk, and it was a blast!  Not only did these colorful creatures invade downtown Silver Spring, but they also attended the screening of Dawn of the Dead.  (Their organizers actually had it worked out with the AFI and a lot of local businesses - kudos on all the great planning! That took a lot of work and was totally worth it!)  To all you zombies out there, thank you for not eating me or my camera. For all you viewers, I'm very sorry about the shakiness.  I only have a regular Canon camera, so it isn't all that stable or clear for night-time zombie filming. 

A word on the dialogue: Catherine and I were talking as we watched the zombie parade, but some of our comments may be cut off/out of context.  The "sign" I mention on the zombie's head says "I am a Zombie".  Catherine is also posting this clip and possibly another one or two that I took, so check it out on her site here.   I'll be doing a review of Dawn of the Dead, but really wanted to share this first.  Enjoy!

Topper (1937)

Poor Topper doesn't stand a ghost of a chance when his two friends decide to haunt him.

Intro.

Okay, so I know Topper isn't really in the realm of this month's horror/thriller/Hitchcock themed films, but it does star two mischief making ghosts and I couldn't resist.  I'm also bending one of the rules in the Production Code, as I had seen this movie previously.  It had been many years since I had seen it though, and I didn't remember much of it, so I decided to watch it again the other night.  I'm so glad I did!

Overview

George Kirby (Cary Grant) and his beautiful wife Marion (Constance Bennett) are an extremely wealthy, fun-loving couple.  They are the typical roaring twenties type of couple living in the thirties, leaving a 3 day anniversary party at their penthouse to go into town for the annual bank stockholder meeting.  Their friend Cosmo Topper (Roland Young) is the bank president, and while annoyed at George's adolescent remarks during the meeting, he nevertheless cares deeply for his friends.  Marion decides that she wants to help Topper shake off his stuffy, responsible attitude and enjoy life.  However, Mrs. Topper (Billie Burke) is the exact opposite of Marion, and insists that her husband remain the uptight, respectable businessman.  Everything changes though when an awful car crash kills the Kirbys.  George and Marion's spirits cannot move on then, presumably because they were so busy enjoying themselves in life that they hadn't done any good deeds.  Topper soon becomes their good deed.  Together, George and Marion follow Topper, appearing and disappearing at their whim.  It causes quite a bit of confusion and pretty soon they've not only gotten Topper to drink for the first time in his life, but get him into a fight with the police, resulting in his arrest and name in the paper.  He and Mrs. Topper fight and he leaves.  Marion goes with him to the Seabreeze Hotel, presumably for the first night where he can drink and dance and enjoy himself.  Many comedic moments follow, as the house detective finds something funny about a man talking to a woman who is there in voice, but not visible.  Then a very jealous George appears and has a row with Marion.  However, to help George avoid more trouble with the police, they trash the hotel while invisible, much to the shock and terror of all the guests.  They get an unconscious George safely back home to his wife, and when he awakens, both are relieved that he is alright.  More than that, Mrs. Topper agrees that she has been too rigid and wants to relax and enjoy life again.  Happy at last, Topper and his wife finally rekindle their love and the Kirbys get to pass into the afterlife.    

Highlights

I don't recall ever seeing Constance Bennett before, and after a quick search on IMDb, I realized that I didn't recognize any of the films she had made.  It often amazes me how many Hollywood films were made in the 30s and 40s and how many of them aren't shown anymore.  I'm not saying it's because of quality so much as it is just a staggering number.  TCM is always having first showings of films they'd never aired previously.  I think I could spend my whole life watching every film that came out of each of the studios in Hollywood in the 30's and 40's and never have to watch the same film twice.  Granted, this was also a time when the movies didn't have to compete with television - higher demand and supply.  Still, I would really enjoy watching more of Ms. Bennett, as she is a wonderful, bright and fashionable woman.  She's the perfect match to the comedic, light-hearted side of Cary Grant (whose performance in Topper reminded me of his role in Holiday).   

Overall, the film struck me for its commentary on high society.  True, their foolhardy recklessness gets them killed, but even in the afterlife, the Kirbys are much happier than Topper is in his own life.  It isn't about money so much as it is about enjoying the little things - taking time to spend with your husband/wife or go out dancing.  But more than that, it's about loosening up a bit.  Mrs. Topper is shocked when the wives of the highest members in society ask her for lunch only after they see that Mr. Topper was arrested.  Apparently that made the Toppers "interesting" and worthy of joining that slightly eccentric upper crust.  That seems odd but somewhat typical of the time - most people in America with money during the Great Depression are usually depicted as more than a bit strange.  That may be why the main point of the film is so well done - all the Toppers need to be happy are each other, not all that money.  The Kirbys are proof enough of that, making up after their big fight in the afterlife.

Finally a word about the special effects.  I'm not familiar with the history of special effects or what was cutting edge at the time of a film's release.  However, I was impressed by how well the effects were done in this film.  The fading on and off screen might seem a bit silly, but it works well for the story.  The best parts are when things start to move and float seemingly by themselves - the car almost fixes itself, papers are thrown up into the air at Topper's (and Marion's) passing, and general chaos like that.  A few of the tricks I could figure out, but most of them are just entertaining and believable enough because the perpetrators are two such likable characters.

Review and Recommendation
While not a very well-known film, Topper is a classic example of comedies from the 1930s.  It is warm, silly and entertaining.  I recommend it to fans of Cary Grant and Constance Bennett, and to anyone interested in depictions of the upper class.

P.S. Best line was from Cary Grant.  Marion asks George what he's doing walking along the roof peak like a tightrope.  His response?  "I'm practicing to be an angel!"  It's nice to think that he'd make a great angel too, years later in The Bishop's Wife.  

Gaslight (1944)

Don't you hate it when you can't remember where you placed that long, scary butcher knife?

Intro.

I don't know how widespread it is, but lately I feel like myself and everyone I know is suffering from some sort of stress-overload at work.  There's just too much to do and not enough time or resources.  Don't get me wrong, I love my job and wouldn't trade it for anything, but lately I feel like I just can't keep track of things.  It all culminated yesterday when I noticed a stain on my jacket and couldn't remember when I had spilled something on it.  My co-worker looked at it and said she didn't see anything.  I know I wasn't imagining it, but I started doubting myself.  Suddenly I felt just like Ingrid Bergman's character in Gaslight, which I had just watched.  It's funny how films can suddenly influence your thoughts and perceptions in day-to-day life.

Overview
October 14, 1875 - London is being terrorized by the Thornton Square Strangler and his latest victim is wealthy singer, Alice Alquist.  Her niece Paula (Ingrid Bergman) finds her aunt's body.  Still trying to recover and mourn on her own, Paula travels to Italy and begins to study music with Alice's former instructor.  She instead is more interested in his piano accompanist, a charming man named Gregory Anton (Charles Boyer).  They run away together and marry, and as he has always dreamed of living in London, Paula bravely offers her aunt's (now her) house.  Despite her obviously frail emotional health, Gregory tries to make the best of the home.  But it's clear that Paula isn't well and only proceeds to get worse.  She grows forgetful, loses things and starts to hear things in the boarded up attic.  Gregory continues to tell people she is sick, even when she feels well, forcing her into isolation.  He hires a pretty new maid and feeds into Paula's suspicions.  Just when Paula starts to believe that she really has gone mad, a man she had seen in the park re-enters her life.  He had mistaken her for her aunt, of whom he had been a great admirer.  His name is Brian Cameron (Joseph Cotton) and he comes to visit while Gregory is out.  He soon helps Paula uncover the truth - not only about her sanity, but about Gregory's true identity and the secrets hidden within her aunt's attic.

Highlights

Ingrid Bergman won an Oscar for her performance as Paula.  It was richly deserved.  Her slow transformation from sane and happy to tragically depressed and possibly mad is fascinating to watch.  How on earth could she think her husband would trick her or purposefully hide her things?  I thought it was rather interesting that they were married so soon after the murder, and I wonder if part of that was his idea so that her mind would still be preoccupied with mourning.  I think Paula also wanted to be married in an effort to get past her sadness - she was using Gregory as a crutch and he took full advantage.  Her final showdown with Gregory though is priceless - she finally has him all figured out and only pretends to be mad to spite him.  Just when he needs her to be sane and help him escape, she suddenly can't remember how to untie the ropes that bind him or where she's placed that long butcher knife.  It's wonderful!

I also recommend watching the first major role of Angela Lansbury.  She is delightful as the flirtatious maid and a perfect fit for this role.  Also worth watching is the busybody neighbor, Bessie Thwaites (Dame May Whitty).  She's the comic relief for the picture and does a fine job of helping the audience understand the murder from an outsider's viewpoint.  I should also mention that Joseph Cotton is great.  Think about it, how would Paula have figured it all out on her own if she had convinced herself she was mad and could never get a moment to herself?  She almost had it when she noticed the gaslights dimming without explanation.  I guess we'll never know if Paula would have recovered all the missing articles herself.

What I took away from this film was how simple it is to start doubting yourself.  Being in a fragile emotional state, Paula was in no position to get married, let alone to move back into the house, so from the outset we know she's going to have problems.  Add in Gregory's strange behavior and his pains to make her "extra" forgetful and it's a whole new level of abuse.  In her defense, who can she trust but this man she adores?  I wonder if at some level she feels like she's being punished because she wasn't able to save her aunt (she had been upstairs during the murder, and came down too late).  It leaves us each with the question of what it would take to drive us mad.  It isn't always some big, traumatic event, but sometimes a series of carefully planned incidents.  I don't know what I would have done in Paula's shoes.  And I'm not sure I want to know. 

Review and Recommendation
Overall, Gaslight is a story of an intense breakdown, marvelously portrayed by Ingrid Bergman.  A psychological mind-bender and good old murder mystery make this an excellent addition to the thriller films I've reviewed this month.  Definitely a film worth watching!  

Dial M for Murder (1954)

And I thought telemarketers were bad.

Intro.

As I've mentioned before, I love Hitchcock.  The more I watch his films, the greater I can appreciate his great camerawork and attention to detail.  So when I noticed Dial M for Murder in the television listings recently, I had to catch up on one of his films I hadn't seen before.  And this time I actually saw Hitchcock hidden in the film!

Overview 

At the beginning, Tony (Ray Milland) and Margot (Grace Kelly) appear to be a perfectly happy married couple.  That is, until we realize that Margot's returning friend Mark (Robert Cummings) was more than just her friend.  Margot tells Mark that although their affair ended a year ago, Tony's been acting strangely.  What's worse is that the only letter she kept from Mark was stolen awhile ago, and although she paid the mysterious blackmailer, she never received the letter back.  She and Mark go out for the evening, as Tony says he has to stay home and get work done.  His "work" consists of meeting an old college acquaintance, Captain Lesgate (Anthony Dawson).  More like blackmailing, that is.  Mark's been plotting the perfect murder ever since he discovered Margot's affair.  It wasn't so much jealousy as it was a way to get her money.  He's spent weeks tailing Lesgate, discovering many petty crimes and name changes along the way.  What's more he offers $1,000 - money which Lesgate desperately needs.  He describes the murder, complete with alibis - Tony and Mark will be away at a stag dinner, Tony will call at 11:00 pm, Margot will come out of her room and answer the phone at the desk.  Lesgate will have retrieved a key from outside and let himself in to hide behind the curtains.  After she answers the phone, Lesgate simply strangles her, then the murder is over and no one needs to know.  The phone call is the key.  Well, nothing seems to go exactly to plan - Margot wants to go out instead of staying home, then Tony's watch stops and finally while she's being strangled, Margot fights back and -whoops!- kills Lesgate!!  Tony has to think fast as to how to frame Margot and plants the missing love letter on Lesgate.  Although Margot is arrested and tried for murder, the police chief Hubbard (John Williams) and Mark (who conveniently is an American mystery writer) aren't convinced.  Can they prove Margot's innocence before she is executed?      

Highlights

I'm often told that I'm too detail oriented.  I'm not so sure this is always a bad thing.  Hitchcock's stories come alive because of the attention to detail.  Both in the plot itself and the characters, he has a keen eye for what matters and every line, every motion adds something vital to the story.  It's almost like watching a Hemingway story come to life - there is no room for extraneous dialogue or scene setting.  Instantly we become engaged and engrossed in this film.  What's more, Tony goes to the trouble of explaining exactly what's going to happen and how.  Then later in the film, Mark figures out what really happened and suggests that Tony "make up" the same story in order to get Margot a stay of execution.  It all comes down to the smallest of clues (which I won't reveal, don't worry).

The acting is also very well done in this film.  Grace Kelly is always a delight and she is wonderful in this role.  I was so happy when she killed Lesgate - a true victory for women!  It reminded me a lot of her stand in High Noon but I don't think I should really give that ending away either.  Anyway, she is wonderful.  I also really enjoyed watching Ray Milland as the evil mastermind - I don't recall if I've seen many of his films before, but if he's in any more thrillers, I'm going to add them to my list!  Cummings and Williams both made strong supporting actors, and I loved how the Inspector refused to give up even after the trial.  He steals the show in the final scene.

Finally, a brief mention of the amazing cinematography.  As always, the camera angles and frames comment on the film itself.  I particularly enjoyed the lower camera position as it looked up at Tony while he discussed his twisted plan with Lesgate.  The near-strangulation is also very well done with all the suspense and horror we expect from Hitchcock.  I also like how he snuck into the photo of Tony's college reunion, since most shots in this film are only inside the apartment, leaving little time for him to make his famous appearance elsewhere.  I always get excited when I find him - there are still quite a few films where I haven't seen him.  All the more reason to keep watching!

Review and Recommendation

One of Hitchcock's best films, Dial M for Murder has a tight, fascinating plot, and a story with more twists and turns than an intestine.  Okay, bad analogy, but you get the idea.  I recommend it as the standout type of murder mystery where we're let in on the who/what/why beforehand and the fun comes in following the capture of the criminal.  Great for Hitchcock fans, thriller fans, Grace Kelly fans and really, anyone with any movie taste. 

The Time Machine (1960)

"Can't repeat the past?...Why, of course you can!" - Jay Gatsby 

Intro.

Ever since I can remember, I've been enamored by both science and literature, as well as the intricate dance they create around the problems that continue to puzzle humanity.  Literature can build on the science of a time and open up possibilities that may lead to new innovations.  Undoubtedly, H. G. Wells revolutionized the science fiction genre in an exciting time in England's Victorian era, when science was cultured and inventors praised.  It's the perfect setting and story for a story about time travel.

Overview

The Time Machine begins on January 5, 1900, when George Wells (Rod Taylor) stumbles into his dining room, greeting his guests looking as if he's been in a major explosion.  He sits down and explains to them that he has mastered time travel and thus begins his flashback story.  One week earlier, on New Year's Eve, George had shown them a miniature time machine and made it disappear using some sort of pressure device to travel in the fourth dimension.  When they scoff at his discovery and suggest that it has no usefulness or commercial value, he sees them off and then tests out his full scale model in his laboratory.  Slowly he passes through a day at a time, watching the sun and stars move and watching the fashions change on the mannequin in the dressmaker's shop across the street.  He flies through, going faster still, and stops in 1917 because his house has been boarded up around him.  He makes his way out and finds a different world - one with a lot of cars and people.  He sees a man who looks exactly like his friend David and stops him in the street.  It's a young man in uniform who is David's son (he's referred to as a baby in the opening).  He says his father was killed in the war and that the house has been kept out of respect for his father's friend George, who disappeared in 1900.  George, deeply moved, returns to his time machine and decides to push onward to the future.  This time he is forcefully stopped in 1940 during the bombing of Britain.  It's so devastating and his house winds up destroyed, that George can't stay.  He makes it to 1960 and marvels at all the building and progress that's been made, only to see it destroyed by a bomb scare.  Nuclear bombs decimate the city and cause a volcano to explode, trapping George and his machine in lava.  It's still moving through time though, so George is somewhat protected.  The lava forms a rocky encasement and he must speed through time until the rocks wear away in year 802,701.  He emerges into an Eden-like garden, properly cared for, cultivated and nurtured.  He finds people too - a group of silent, golden-haired young adults gathered around a river.  One of them, a young woman, slips into the current and begins to drown.  Her cries go unheard until George jumps in to save her.  He learns that she is one of the Eloi people who live above ground and obviously have no minds of their own.  They are like cattle, dumb and driven by the people who live below ground - the Morlocks.  George's machine is stolen by the Morlocks and taken into their temple-like underground dwelling.  He and the girl, Weena (Yvette Mimieux), try to figure out a way to get in, but their efforts stop when an air raid siren sounds and all the Eloi start marching into the temple.  Weena goes in and George has to figure out how to get in after her.  Turns out the Morlocks are only raising and breeding the Eloi like cattle and eventually call them in to kill and eat them.  A massive fight to save the Eloi begins and only ends once they have destroyed the temple.  But George finds and returns to his time machine, and is forced to use it to escape without Weena.  His friends in 1900 don't believe his story, although he does bring some proof with him.  In the end George returns, supposedly to the Eloi, in an attempt to help them live and survive and re-establish civilization.

Highlights

I regret that I have not read the book, The Time Machine, though I will certainly do so now.  I'm curious to see just what happened to George between 1900 and whenever he reached the Eloi.  What stops did he make?  Were all of them due to war?  Apparently this was the story that H. G. Wells wanted made into a film the most, but was one of the last to be done.  It comes at a time that has seen a lot of turbulance, as noted in the three stops George makes.  In 1960, the Cold War was still a threat and air raids were held.  There is some hope though, as there are at least some survivors left to make it into 802,701.

The writing in the film is very well done, as is the nice attention to detail.  I loved the opening in George's library where there are clocks literally everywhere.  It reminded me a great deal of The Great Gatsby, which I quoted in the tagline.  Time is pervasive - it affects us all and yet none of us have any power over it.  This desire to go into the future and to also return to the past is a deep part of the human experience.  Ironically, this very desire - the curiosity we all have - is what is missing from the Eloi.  They don't have any reason to figure things out, to explore or even have use for writing or reading.  They've never even seen fire.  In this sense, George becomes a Prometheus figure to them.  He brings not only fire, but also knowledge.  That's what he wants to do in the end; to return to lovely Weena and help her people survive. 

What I liked the most about The Time Machine was how many questions it raised.  I know they were raised when the book published, but think about how much has changed and where science and literature have gone since then.  Yes, we had the story, but it took us time to be able to get it properly told on screen.  The use of time-lapse photography was a new and innovative concept in 1959, and earned the film an Academy Award for best special effects.  Likewise, the film itself made it easier for later films like Back to the Future, Star Trek, Dead Zone, and countless others that deal with time travel.  It also adds to certain films like It's a Wonderful Life where we realize how interconnected we all are - how the absence of one person can change not only the past, but also the future.  It's the butterfly effect that spans generations and so much of that creativity began with one story by one person.  Equally interesting is the depiction of the split in the human race.  Is that really a possibility in our future?  Could some of us turn into hairy, glowing-eyed cannibalistic Morlocks?  That's the real terror in the whole film; that we could degenerate into such creatures.

Review and Recommendation - and a Question for Readers
I loved this movie much more than I expected to.  I've enjoyed some science fiction films in my time, but I've never been a die-hard fan of the genre.  That may have changed though with this film.  It's not merely about imagining wormholes and alternate realities.  It's more about people, humanity, what makes civilization work.  It's about how science can ultimately save or destroy us, but it's up to ourselves to use it justly.  No, George's machine may seem commercially impractical for the present, but it helps shape and ensure our future.  That's what we should strive for, with or without the aid of a machine.  I definitely recommend this film to everyone!

And finally as an end note, I'd like to talk about the closing of the film.  George has taken off and his friend David and George's housekeeper, Mrs. Watchett (ahh, I just got that her name is "Watch"-ett) are left wondering about his disappearance.  As George is a practical man, they realize he must have taken something with him to help the Eloi.  They see that three books have been taken from the library, but they don't know which ones.  "Which three would you take?" David asks Mrs. Watchett.  Neither of them has an answer and the film closes.  So I wonder, what three books would you take if you had to help a young, naive people try to re-establish a working society?  The only book I thought of for sure that I'd take would be a large dictionary to try and help them learn to write and communicate efficiently.  Any thoughts or ideas from my great readers?  Please comment!

P.S. Recently I read an article that scientists have developed a small-scale version of teleportation.  Read all about it here.  This can change the next dimension - space.  (Yes, you should cue the music here and add "the final frontier".)   

P.P.S. F. Scott Fitzgerald.  The Great Gatsby.  New York: Charles Scribner, 1925.

The Mummy (1959)

Note to self: next time I invade an Egyptian tomb, I won't read aloud anything I find in there.

Intro.

In keeping with my October fright fest, I've been watching as many old monster movies, zombie flicks and Hitchcock thrillers as I can find.  Today I watched the British remake of The Mummy, which was a Universal picture from 1932 starring Boris Karloff.  The remake was done after Hammer studios in England struck a deal with Universal to remake all the classic horror films - this time in Technicolor.  I regretfully have not seen the 1932 version, but the 1959 version proved to be chilling enough!

Overview

1895 in some unknown area, a team of archeologists uncover the lost tomb of an Egyptian high priestess, Princess Ananka.  The leader of the group, Stephen Banning (Felix Aylmar), explores the crypt alone while his partner Joseph (Raymond Huntley) goes back to tell the others of the find.  Stephen finds an old scroll (the Scroll of Life, he calls it) and decides to read it aloud in the crypt.  Not a good idea, as the words bring to life another mummy (Christopher Lee) from behind the wall panel.  Outside Joeseph and Stephen's son John (Peter Cushing) hear screaming and only find Stephen out of his mind with fear.  He's sent back home to a nursing home, where he's declared beyond help, and the team closes the tomb and returns home with Ananka's coffin and burial relics.  They don't have the scroll though, as a local man, Mehemet Bey (George Pastell), has taken it and decides to try and re-open the tomb, unleash the mummy and seek vengeance on those who have desecrated the Egyptian grave.  Three years later and Stephen is still in the hospital, convinced that something is coming to kill him.  He has a violent outburst at the time when a mysterious package containing "Egyptian relics" is lost in transport in the swamp near the hospital.  It's the mummy alright, and he rises from the muddy swamp at Mehemet's command.  The mummy breaks into Stephen's barred and locked room and kills him.  As you can imagine, the mummy then goes after Joseph, whom he also kills.  The mummy finally goes after John, but is stopped mid-way through the attack by the sight of John's wife Isobel (Yvonne Furneaux).  Isobel bears a striking resemblance to Ananka, and the mummy leaves.  Inspector Mulrooney (Eddie Byrne) begins his investiagation into the murders, and gets the entire legend of Ananka from John.  Apparently when Ananka died, her high priest Kharis (with whom she shared a forbidden love) tried to bring her back to life with the scroll, but was apprehended before he could finish the ritual.  In punishment, he got his tongue cut out, was wrapped in bandages and sealed into the wall of the tomb, to keep eternal vigilance over his Princess.  That explains what finally happens - the mummy returns to kill John, but when Isobel intervenes, the mummy captures her and carries her off toward the swamp.  What will kill the mummy in the end?  Will Isobel and/or John survive?

Highlights
I really enjoyed seeing this film in Technicolor.  Everything feels right for the classic 1950's monster movie, right down the smog rising up from the eerie swamp.  It's shot well and with attention to detail, particularly in the flashback scene of the story of Ananka's death.  I haven't studied Egyptology much, but I can tell that they tried to give some amount of reverence to the rituals of mummification.  What really impressed me was how the mummy came to be a mummy - if you look at the film deep down, it could even be called a love story.  Khardis loved Ananka so much he risked everything to try and bring her back from the dead so that they could finally realize their love.  Even as a mummy he not only seeks vengeance (see below), but recognizes Isobel to look just like Ananka.  It's beauty that tames and kills all beasts, as all the great monster movies show us.

There are some interesting points to be made regarding what this film reflects about our culture.  In the film, Mehemet tells John that his people have dared to assume ignorance and blasphemied his religion.  Although John tries to defend the archeologists and the study of cultures, there is a good point in Mehemet's rage - it is one thing to gather artifacts and study them, but it is another to disregard the beliefs of a culture and desecrate the graves of the dead.  I think what it really comes down to is respect.  Not only that, but it speaks a little to the British empire.  In 1932 Britain still controlled Egypt.  But in 1959, most of Britain's colonies had declared independence.  There was also the British loss of control at the Suez canal in 1956.  So it makes sense to have an Egyptian legend come to life and strike fear into the hearts of the British.  But in the face of all this, it is encouraging to see that while the mummy is terrifying, he is, in a way, justified.  He doesn't go off killing just anyone - only those who desecrated his love's tomb.  He is in effect exacting vengeance not only for the destruction of the tomb, but also for the lack of understanding shown by the British.  He's a monster, but perhaps only a misunderstood one.     

 

Review and Recommendation    
Overall good acting and nice detail in the cinematography, I think this version of The Mummy is very well done.  It's very entertaining and not too serious - a great film for any fans of the horror, thriller or monster-movie genres.

P.S. Fun fact from TCM - Christopher Lee was the first actor to play all three classic monsters: Frankenstein (1957), Dracula (1958), and The Mummy. 

Man from Music Mountain (1938)

Because a shoot-out in an underground gold mine is always a good idea. 

Intro.

When I started this blog back in January, I was still able to get a cable channel that showed a Gene Autry film every Sunday.  I moved and lost that channel, but I do have a collection of Gene's films that I've been saving for a rainy day.  Despite being a sunny day, I just needed something sweet, simple and fun.  I had heard of Man from Music Mountain and while chuckling at the name, decided it was the perfect way to unwind.   

Overview
Man from Music Mountain begins with the opening of Boulder Dam.  Power line routes are being laid out, and any land around those lines promises to profit.  Two shady businessmen decide to take advantage of the situation and start selling land in Gold River, including a stake in the nearby mine to every landowner.  Many entrepreneurs take the deal, but upon arrival, discover that Gold River is an abandoned ghost town.  Gene Autry runs into these folks on their way to town and realizes that he knows the no-good land baron, Scanlon (Ivan Miller).  Autry tries to get Scanlon to stop the scam, but it doesn't work.  Meanwhile Gene's sidekick, Frog Millhouse (Smiley Burnett), is taken in by the deal and winds up with some land and a stake in the mine.  Gene's invested now, so he agrees to help the townspeople as they try to make the best of the situation.  They all still believe that the power lines will come through, but Gene has his doubts.  When they discover the mine's been worked dry and abandoned some twenty years ago, Gene and Frog hatch a plan to plant some gold dust from Gene's father and start a rumor that the mine's really profitable.  That of course makes Scanlon very upset and he tries to first discredit Gene, and then to buy back everyone's shares while they still think it's a hoax.  The rumor starts a gold rush and the town grows, which really helps the early settlers, but makes Gene really nervous.  Anyway, it all ends with a shoot-out in the mine and a very fortunate discovery!

Highlights (and a quick story)
As with most of Gene's earlier films, the music is fun and the story is pretty lighthearted.  I had some issues first with the slightly racist joke made by an African-American woman who works at Gene's ranch (still much better than Carolina Moon).  And while I applauded the fact that there were two very ambitious women in the earliest settlers who open their own salon, they weren't in keeping with the usually strong female leads that often featured in Gene's films.  Sure they ran their own business and managed to give Gene a manicure (more on that later), but they still relied on the men for everything and didn't fight their attentions.  I missed June Storey's competition with Gene or Irene Manning's use of a rifle to defend herself.  But in all honesty, they are still not the maidens strapped to the railroad tracks by an evil villain with a black mustache.  They choose to strike out on their own as "modern pioneers" and handle their difficulties with a laugh and a smile.  "Modern Pioneers" is a great title too, as this is a typical thirties Western, where the good guys are the hard-working cowboys and the bad-guys are tech-savvy crooks.  I swear in all these films, there's usually a group of cowboys who get run off the road by some vehicle (bus, truck, you name it) and then later the cowboys prove that horses are better because those same vehicles get stuck in the mud or in a river or in a ditch somewhere.  It's a great triumph of the hardworking homesteaders against the rich and mighty. 

The musical accompaniment was also well done.  Not only do we have Gene's usual singing ranch hands (was that asked in their job interview?  Can you rope a steer and then break into three part harmony?), but there's also Polly Jenkins and her Plowboys, a western band lead by a woman.  Gene gets to do a few of his own numbers of course, the best being "Goodbye Paint" which is actually really depressing because it's about a cowboy saying goodbye to his dying horse.  Anyway, I wanted to take a minute and talk about Gene Autry as a singing cowboy and what that meant for the Western film genre.  I know I've mentioned it before (like in Public Cowboy #1), but the addition of a singing cowboy to films helped make Westerns appeal to women, thus increasing the audience and helping save what would have been a dying genre.  But there's an interesting genre mix going on when you take a traditionally masculine genre like a Western and add in a typically feminine genre like a Musical.  I almost fell over laughing when Gene goes to visit the women in the salon and finds himself subjected to a manicure.  When his friends come in and start making fun of him, he is quick to his feet and shoots a warning at them, then forces them to also get manicures.  It's like a hold-up in a beauty salon all with the song, "Burning Love."  The perfect marriage of Western and Musical, with a subtle wink to the name, the "Lavender Cowboy."  It made me reconsider the gender coding of the parent genres and wonder about some underlying homosexual innuendo.  It seems funny that Gene is so quick to defend his right to get a manicure (even if the manicurist is a very pretty woman).   

And that leads me to my brief story.  At work, we had been talking about how films are marketed to female audiences - very few are when you think about it, and the ones that are still stereotype women.  One of my coworkers brought up a good point that in the new Twilight films, men are being objectified the way women have been for centuries.  I got to thinking about how this changes the audience and the marketing of these films and realized that on a similar level William Holden had also done this in the film Picnic.  I mean, that whole film revolves around him being shirtless and causing all the women to go a bit nuts.  But on a different level, Gene's films could also be argued to have been marketed to men and women equally.  When I brought this up, Catherine looked at me and said "so was he a Chippendale cowboy?"  I'm not too sure what Gene would've said to this, but I had a good laugh.  No, there was no shirtless-ness (he was still an idol of kids, remember) and definitely no kissing!   Anyway, the point of the story is that if we really want to consider targeted audiences, it goes back further than just glittery vampires.        

Review and Recommendation 
A solid film on many fronts, Man from Music Mountain is a pretty typical B-Western.  It's a fun ride if you don't take it too seriously.  The ending might make you groan a bit, mainly because the women turn into airheads, but whatever.  It's Gene Autry and he sings and gets fabulous nails.  What more could you want?

P.S.  Sad but true: I couldn't make out the year on this film's title screen, so I tried to guess as I watched.  Based on Gene's appearance, his sidekick and supporting cast and the general feel, I guessed 1938.  Turns out I was right.  I'm not sure whether or not to be proud of this....

Key Largo (1948)

That Florida hurricane isn't the only ill wind that's descended on the Largo Hotel.    

Intro.

Bogart and Bacall are probably the most iconic couple in Hollywood.  There's even a song about them called "Key Largo" by Bertie Higgins, which has the line "we had it all, just Bogie and Bacall."  You can find references to them just about anywhere, but the best place to see and learn about their chemistry is in the four films they made together.  Key Largo was the last of those four. 

Overview

Frank McCloud (Humphrey Bogart) comes down to the Largo Hotel on the Florida Keys to visit the father and wife of his friend and fellow soldier George, who died in the war.  While he gets a warm reception from George's father James Temple (Lionel Barrymore) and George's widow Nora (Lauren Bacall), he doesn't take to well to the gangsters who have holed up in the hotel.  At first the men say they've rented the whole place out to go fishing, but when they beat up a police officer who recognizes the leader, Rocco (Edward G. Robinson), the truth comes out.  With the gangsters is Rocco's alcoholic girlfriend Gaye Dawn (Claire Trevor), whom Frank pities and tries to help.  Tensions start to brew when a hurricane forces the group to stay together within the hotel.  Rocco dares Frank to kill him, to get rid of all their trouble.  He's just a gangster who was deported and trying to sneak back into the US - who would miss him?  But Frank doesn't fight anyone else's battles.  At least, not until Rocco threatens Nora - we don't hear what Rocco says to Nora, but she spits on him.  Frank reminds him that there would be too many witnesses if Rocco tried to take revenge.  Things go from bad to worse as the hurricane gets closer.  Rocco's getaway boat disappears, Gaye has a breakdown, and the police officer they've been holding gets killed.  Not only that, but a police detective shows up and discovers the body.  With the arrival of some of Rocco's friends (and some freshly laundered money), it's clear that they have to figure out what to do with the hostages and how to escape.  They take Frank with them and overtake a nearby boat in the harbor, forcing him not only to drive the boat, but to try and put an end once and for all to their evil plans.

Highlights

Key Largo is a must for any Bogart and Bacall fans.  It's clear right from the start that their chemistry isn't manufactured.  I loved some of their unspoken interactions as we see Frank and Nora start to care for each other.  One of the most tender actions is when Nora's asleep and Frank, sitting beside her, brushes her hair back gently to wake her.  This is the stuff that makes legends.  The best part is that Bacall had matured since her first film and holds her own as a great leading lady, something that would only get better with time.  As wonderful as Bacall is in the film, it's Claire Trevor who is the real standout.  She's a sweet but tormented woman who has taken the brunt of both Rocco's anger and the alcohol she craves.  She won a well-deserved Oscar for her role too.
  
And finally there's Bogart.  Not only was he at the top of his career here, he just falls naturally into this role.  In fact, his line about fighting his own battles sounds just like it's coming from Rick in Casablanca instead.  He's the perfect embodiment of a worn out, reluctant hero.  And his victory in the end (sorry for the spoiler) is not only a testament to how Frank was and still is a war hero, but how far Bogart had risen in his career.  In his earlier days, he was always the gangster being shot and killed by Robinson; this is the first and only time the roles were reversed.  It's a great scene too - there's no fight, no real struggle.  Just a clean, dead shot (okay, three shots).  Also, Frank's line, "my first sweetheart was a boat" isn't far from Bogart's truth - as a young boy he fell in love with the sea when he would go sailing on his father's boat.  He later joined the Navy and eventually bought his own boat, the Santana.  That's the boat that's used in the end of this film, just with the place, Key Largo, added onto the stern.  

Review and Recommendation
I know this is a bit short, but I'm afraid I'm a bit sleepy.  I might add some more points to the comments - check them out this weekend!  Key Largo is one of those films you really should see not just for its place in film history, but because it's a great example of acting, cinematography and really telling a story by what is said and what is left unsaid.  Pay attention to the silences just as much as the dialogue.  Overall, a good film noir/drama, though watching tonight on such a rainy night really made it even better.  So next time you've got a rainy day, I'd recommend this classic!

Strangers on a Train (1951)

I had no idea that merry-go-rounds could be so terrifying!

Intro.

I am taking a slight break from the movie monster phase to talk about Hitchcock - which still seems appropriate for October and Halloween.  Do you ever find yourself watching those films that everyone seems to know, but not too many people today have actually seen?  I'm definitely guilty of a lot of those films - I've never seen the full length of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington or Citizen Kane but I know what happens in those films and why they are so key to film history.  (I know, I'm a terrible fangirl for not having seen those!)  I think Strangers on a Train is one of those films, which is why I'm glad it was recently featured on the TCM series, The Essentials. 

Overview

The premise of Strangers on a Train is exactly what it sounds like - two strangers meet on a train.  Guy Haines (Farley Granger) is a famous tennis player, not quite pro yet, who is approached by a very talkative fan, Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker).  Bruno seems to know a lot about Guy's life, including the fact that he wants to divorce his wife and marry his girlfriend, Anne Morton (Ruth Roman).  Bruno admits that he has family troubles of his own, namely his stern, disapproving but very wealthy father.  Pretty soon Bruno tells Guy his idea of a perfect murder - two strangers with no connections between them "swap murders".  "Everybody has someone they'd like to get rid of," Bruno says with all the charm of a snake.  For whatever reason, Guy disapproves but not too harshly, possibly to not upset this stranger who may decide to kill him instead.  Anyway, Guy gets off the train and confronts his pregnant wife.  She's decided not to go through with the divorce and to tell everyone that the baby she's carrying is Guy's (even though it isn't).  He's so furious, he calls Anne and says he's so angry that he could strangle his wife, Miriam (Kasey Rogers).  That's about all Bruno needs to know when he calls Guy to see how things went with his wife.  Bruno then tracks and finds Miriam at a local carnival, where he follows her for some time before getting her alone on an embankment by the river.  There he strangles her and slips away. He tells Guy what he's done and expects him to uphold his end of the "bargain".  Bruno's left nothing to chance either - if Guy goes to the police, Bruno can frame him as an accomplice.  Worse still, he has Guy's engraved cigarette lighter, which he plans on taking back to the crime scene.  A battle of wills begins between the two men as complications arise - first Guy's alibi, a man he took the train with during the murder, was too drunk to recall seeing him.  Then the police send a detective to shadow Guy 24/7, making any meetings between him and Bruno difficult and risky.  Bruno starts losing patience and comes out of hiding to start following Guy more closely.  He even invites himself to a big society party with Anne's family (her father is a Senator).  Her sister, Barbara (Patricia Hitchcock) recognizes Bruno after he almost strangles one of the guests and from there one last plan is hatched - Bruno must get back to the crime scene to leave the lighter and frame Guy irrefutably.  A mad chase and a terrifying merry-go-round ride bring this great thriller to a dizzying end.   

Highlights
As in so many Hitchcock films, the cinematography is outstanding.  I found out through TCM that the cinematographer was Robert Burkes, whom had worked with Hitchcock on something like 10 films.  The shots in this movie are so well crafted and again, there is more showing than telling.  I loved the tennis match that Bruno attends - he is the lone spectator whose head does not turn to follow the ball, but instead remains eerily fixated on Guy.  Also, when Bruno is following Miriam in the carnival, she watches him at the strongman game - he looks at his hands, looks at her, picks up the hammer and whacks the target so hard he hits the bell.  It's a testament to the strength in those hands and the look he gives both his hands and then her foreshadows the strangling that follows.  When he wins, he also looks at her and waggles his eyebrows - so creepy!  I mean, his stalking is bad enough, but that look just gave me chills.  She thinks it's flattering to have a man so interested in her (which, by the way, is so messed up! Stalking is NOT OKAY.) which is why she winds up alone with him in the dark struggling for life and losing.  That moment of the murder, we see the act as it is reflected in her glasses, which have fallen into the grass.  It's a beautiful shot and one I'm sure that has been imitated many times since.  The overall art direction is phenomenal and typically in the style of Hitchcock where ever shot tells a part of the story.  Look away for a minute and you've missed so much.

In addition to such fine camera work, we also have great performances by the cast.  In the intro from The Essentials series, they mention that the two lead actors were chosen partly because they had previously always been identified with "everyman" types of roles.  That in itself makes the film even more thrilling - these men are seen as regular guys like anyone in the audience.  Put Vincent Price in that role and forget it, the effect would be gone and the film wouldn't be nearly as good.*  It's what I've seen Hitchcock do in so many of his films.  He takes an everyday person and puts them in an out of the blue, terrifying situation that only escalates.  Think about Cary Grant's character in North by Northwest, or Jimmy Stewart in, well, in any of his Hitchcock films (wow, there were a lot.  perhaps because Jimmy Stewart defined the "everyman" type?).  As long as I'm talking about acting, both Ruth Roman and Patricia Hitchcock also give great performances and sort of help redeem the film from becoming anti-feminist thanks to Miriam.  (Really, Miriam?  If a guy is stalking you like that and won't even speak to you, run away!!!)


I think what I liked the most about this film is how it can be thrilling, suspenseful and downright creepy without anything out of the norm.  What I mean is, there are no vampires, no aliens, no voodoo zombies walking around (not that I don't also love and appreciate those films too).  The fear grows from something as simple and innocuous as two seemingly normal strangers meeting on a train. 

Review and Recommendation

Strangers on a Train reminded me of a pot of water boiling on the stove.  It took some time to get started and after a loud bang or two it slowly grows more fierce until it explodes (okay, so I may have left a pot on the stove once and forgotten about it till the scorched pan started making really odd noises).  The film grows on you, wearing down your patience just as it wears down the characters.  It's true, I thought it was a bit slow at times, but really it was only because all of the action was building, waiting to bubble up and over.  And the ending, well, that is well worth the trip.  Overall, fantastic cinematography, great concept, and good solid acting make this one film I can recommend to anyone.

A few end notes: 
* Don't get me wrong - I love Vincent Price.  He is a great actor in his own right, but his type-casting as the villain in so many horror films would have not helped Hitchcock's cause of the everyman.  If you'd like to see a Vincent Price horror film, I recommend House of Wax.  It was (and probably still is) my favorite horror film. 
 
Also, Alec Baldwin referred to Bruno as one of the top 5 creepiest villains of all classic films.  It makes me wonder who the other 4 are.  I'm sure that Max Cady from Cape Fear is on that list.  Mitchum's performance in that picture reminds me somewhat of Walker's portrayal of Bruno; I wonder if it was an influence.  Something tells me it probably was, as Strangers on a Train is such a standard classic for all film historians.

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Well, a slightly more sloppy, drooling, cannibalistic version of us, but still us.

Intro.

Part of my new induction to the world of zombie films included watching both the original Night of the Living Dead from 1968 and the remake from 1990.  Even if you haven't seen either film, you probably know the story - a group of strangers in a farmhouse; lots of slow, flesh-eating zombies; some crazy girl named Barbra.  You've probably even heard the line "they're coming to get you, Barbra!"  So my question going into this film was will it live up to its mighty legacy?   

Overview
Night of the Living Dead actually starts in the evening, with Barbra (Judith O'Dea) and her brother Johnny (Russell Streiner) venturing out to a country cemetery to pay respect to their father.  Although Barbra is obviously uncomfortable in the creepy graveyard, Johnny teases her like when she was a kid - "they're coming to get you, Barbra!" he calls out to her.  The only problem is that another "visitor" in the cemetery actually is coming for her and when he attacks her, Johnny steps in only to get gnawed on himself.  Barbra takes off running, but realizes that Johnny had the car keys.  She coasts the car downhill, hits a tree, then runs to the nearest farmhouse.  She isn't alone long, as a pickup truck pulls up and out comes well-dressed Ben (Duane Jones).  He seems to know exactly what to do and sets about barricading the house.  He even covers the homeowner's half-eaten corpse, despite Barbra's obvious state of shock and complete helplessness.  He tells her about how he saw a gas station blow up because of those "things" and he realizes that they are afraid of fire.  A few stray zombies later and they realize that there are people (non-zombie people) hiding in the basement of the house.  There's a young couple, Tom (Keith Wayne) and Judy (Judith Ridley), and a married couple, Harry (Karl Hardman) and Helen (Marilyn Eastman) who have a young daughter who is sick in the basement.  Harry is pretty stubborn about everyone taking refuge in the cellar and waiting until help arrives.  Ben nixes that idea as there is only one way in and out and he doesn't want to get cornered.  Tensions grow, fights break out, but in the end they all have to work together to survive or become lunch meat.  A television broadcast tells them there's an emergency shelter nearby, and they agree to risk taking Ben's truck to the nearby gas pump to fill up the tank and get them all out of there.  But of course, nothing really works out for our survivors and they get picked off one by one until there's just Ben in the house.  And even his life is in jeopardy.

Highlights

Boy, there is so much to discuss!  George Romero redefined the zombie genre with this film.  It's funny, but some dynamics in this film reminded me of some previous films in different genres.  Although that can happen when a genre begins or is redefined - often the shaping influences are from a wide range of sources and media.  What Night of the Living Dead reminded me of were the Westerns of John Ford and the thrillers of Alfred Hitchcock.  I thought a lot about Ford's classic, Stagecoach, which in its own way helped revitalize the Western film genre.  In Stagecoach, the idea is very simple - take a group of strangers with different and sometimes clashing personalities, put them together in a tight situation and then give them some "outsiders" to fight, which ultimately brings them together.  Be it in a way station on the stage route or in the farmhouse, the tensions and arguments for the best course of survival are the same.  I even expected Ben to say "I saw a ranch house burnin' last night" and then he tells Barbra he actually did see a fire!  In Night of the Living Dead, the argument is to either stay in the basement or to make a break for it; in Stagecoach the argument is to push on towards Lordsburg or to return with the cavalry where they may or may not be safe.  In respect to Hitchcock, there is some great camera work and also the feeling of claustrophobia - almost the entire film takes place in one space - the farmhouse.  Hitchcock often tried to contain his more intense thrillers (like Lifeboat or Rear Window) to one space.  It creates more tension between the characters in close quarters and increases that claustrophobia! *   

I also keep mentioning "others".  In Night of the Living Dead the monsters are never called zombies.  In fact, in most zombie films, the word is never said.  They are the others, the outsiders.  Although in White Zombie the zombies are named - recognized for the people they are.  That's why it's so important that Johnny and later the daughter are recognized among the zombies (sorry for the spoilers, but really? what did you expect - it's a zombie film!!).  It makes it much harder to fight people you know - how can you be expected to shoot your brother or daughter in the head? **  Recognizing the "other" is the key here - they are us.

To make a bit of a detour, I wanted to talk about what was going on when Night of the Living Dead was made.  The cause for the zombie outbreak is attributed to some radiation brought in by a satellite returning from Venus.  It seems a bit silly now, but in 1968, we were 1) in the middle of the Cold War and worried about nuclear warfare 2) we were also in the Space Race and 3) had yet to land on the moon.  Makes it more of a concern, I think.  And it makes the Russians are the "others" of 1968.  It makes it that much more tragic when Ben dies - not at the hands of the zombies, but at the hands of the overzealous survivors who mistake him for a zombie.  Our own fear and paranoia will destroy us. 

Speaking of Ben and his horrible end, Night of the Living Dead was meant as a commentary on racism.  Ben's the lone African-American in the film, the one guy with any class and BAM he gets killed by friendly fire (or should that be not-so-friendly fire?).  This is where the film really diverges from its parallels with Ford's Westerns - there is no happy ending.  Ben doesn't get to go off into the sunset with a girl.  He gets killed anyway, like the whole thing was for naught.  Society (the guys coming in as relief) doesn't recognize his efforts or what he's endured.  But we see it.  Romero makes us see it and makes us painfully aware that Ben is treated as just another dead zombie.  What does that say about audiences in 1968?  What does it say about us now? ***

As much as this film is about racism, it fails to also address sexism (a major criticism).  Barbra, although in shock, just shuts down once a man arrives to take care of her.  My friends and I yelled at her the entire film because of her inability to do or say anything.  Although it is a good step above White Zombie, it still makes you very angry at Barbra.  Luckily we have more sensible women like Judy and especially Helen to balance it out some.  My friend Rachel brought up a good point - Barbra seems to be more afraid of Ben because she's alone in a house with him (and he's an African-American) than she is of the zombies.  If nothing else, she definitely takes on the "deer in headlights" attitude.  Which is fitting because in this farmhouse there are several animal heads mounted on the wall and Barbra is often shot being close to or right in front of the deer's head.  In some way, this could explain her docile nature.  She can't run, so she freezes up and won't move.  That explains why she's also taken by the zombies - she's easy prey.

The Remake - The Night of the Living Dead (1990)
Since the remake of Night of the Living Dead isn't a classic time-wise, I won't give it a separate write-up.  The basic plot and story line remain, but there are some major changes.  Thankfully the biggest one is Barbra (played by Patricia Tallman).  She kicks ass in the remake!  The new Barbra is a determined woman, one who won't passively cower on a couch when there are zombies to kill and people to save.  Instead of Romero commenting on racism, this version he focuses on sexism.  The ending is also very different, as Barbra actually makes it out of the house, down the road and stumbles onto the search and rescue crew.  A key scene there is when she sees a fenced in ring and spectators watching a "zombie fight."  It's a way to distance yourself from zombies being real people - in the remake Tom is related to the farmhouse owner and recongizes many of the zombies as friends and neighbors.  It's a chilling thought about how far you would have to go to survive.  To survive as an individual then, must you turn your back on your family?  Does that have anything to do with the re-establishment of Barbra as a woman of her own independence?  Think about the films of the eighties that dealt with the breaking up of families as a result of women going back to work (Die Hard) comes to mind.  I'm not sure if these ideas are related, as it is getting pretty late and I'm feeling a bit sleepy.  So let me end with this - are zombie movies really about monsters after all?  Or about facing what scares us most about our own selves?    

Review and Recommendation

I recommend both versions of the Night of the Living Dead.  Each one has very good merits and serve as great reflections and commentaries on society.  I have a new-found respect for the zombie genre and look forward to watching more films! 

P.S. I know I've probably left a lot out of this post, which is why you should check out Catherine's zombie blog, here.  If you think of any points you want to bring up, feel free to post comments!!

P.P.S. I was just looking for other sites to reference you for further reading and check this out - it's an article about how Romero was influence by Ford and Hitchcock.  I wasn't making it up - who knew?!  I'm still reading through it, but I couldn't resist linking it!

* I should mention that Romero also used the classic vampire film I Am Legend as inspiration, and possibly the film Things to Come.  

** I also watched the modern zombie film Zombieland right after seeing this film and I loved it!  It mixes both the traditional zombie films with a great sense of humor.  It's a very dark, survival type of humor, often like that seen in war films.  The movie also makes the point never to learn anyone's real name, as you never know when you might need to kill them.  Distance from the other is again in play.  Also, check out the opening shot of Zombieland and the opening shot of Night of the Living Dead (1968).  See anything identical?  I'll give you a hint - it's a pretty big hint that this film is about to comment on American culture.

*** Last note, I swear.  I just realized that 1968 brought America into Vietnam as well.  That's a whole other blog post about racism and fighting "the others".  Something to think about!

White Zombie (1932)

Mina! I mean, Madeline!!! ~ Catherine

Intro.
It's great to have friends that are so into movies. Recently I've been watching some zombie films with my zombie-phile friend Catherine. Considered the first Hollywood zombie film, 1932's White Zombie proved to be a good starting point in studying the movie monster phenomenon. I mean, you can't really get much scarier than a scratchy black and white film with close ups of Bela Lugosi!

Overview
White Zombie is the traditional voodoo zombie film - zombies are people given a drug so that they appear to be dead, then their bodies are taken by whomever is working the voodoo and become zombie slaves, without a mind or will of their own. Such is the kind of atmosphere that engaged couple Madeline (Madge Bellamy) and Neil (John Harron) enter as they travel to the house of their friend, Charles Beaumont (Robert Frazer). He has agreed to let them get married at his estate, but really he has other plans. He enlists a local mystery man known to have an army of voodoo slaves working in his factory, 'Murder' Legendre (Bela Lugosi). Legendre's plan is to turn Madeline into a zombie and have her "buried" above ground. It all goes to plan - Neil is convinced she died and Legendre successfully steals her body and turns her into a zombie-slave. But it doesn't end there, as Neil learns what really happened (thanks in part to a local missionary priest, Dr. Bruner (Joseph Cawthorn)) and goes after Madeline. Meanwhile Beaumont discovers that he really didn't want Madeline if she would never smile again. So we have Beaumont and Neil come against Legendre, who's just a bit too voodoo happy for his own good. A few crazy zombie fights in Legendre's super creepy ocean cliff-side castle and at last Madeline recovers in the arms of her love.

Highlights
I think White Zombie was a very important film in the history of horror films and of course in the zombie sub-genre. The low-budget seems obvious and time has not been very kind to the recordings, but even so there's something inherently eerie in scratchy sounds and not-quite-clear pictures. It's definitely Bela Lugosi's vehicle though, not Harron or Bellamy's, though both are key players. He's the one that we watch most intensely and the one who scares us the most. I mean, no other actor besides Vincent Price has ever been so good at being so scary! Catherine told me that he also did not speak English and had to learn his lines phonetically as someone read them to him. That may be the reason his delivery seems out of the normal speaking pattern, but really I just thought the unusual breaks and lilts were to effectively make him more mysterious. He had made Dracula only a year early, and was billed in White Zombie as "Bela Dracula Lugosi". It's pretty easy to see that the filmmakers drew more than just his name to make this film - the entire opening and Legendre's castle all seem like a repeat of Dracula. At one point Legendre's interaction with Madeline is very close to Dracula's talk with Mina (which prompted the quote in my tagline)!

There is quite a lot to be said about the film culturally, but I won't get to all of it here. I'm sure Catherine will cover it on her blog (which you should check out!). I won't even get into the racism issues, though I have to admit, at first I thought that the "white" in White Zombie referred to Madeline being a bride - she's definitely the woman in white here. It's also a sign of her innocence and sacrifice. More than racism, it also had some inherent sexism. I mean, really? You want this woman to leave her fiancee and love you so naturally the best way to do that is to fake her death and turn her into a mindless slave? There is some hope though, as Beaumont realizes that he was very wrong to do this to Madeline - that beauty alone wasn't enough, he needed her to have her soul back. I should correct my post, as these zombies weren't really mindless so much as they were soulless and without willpower. We can see this not only with Madeline, but also with Legendre's other zombies - big scary men who carry out his will. To quote Catherine again, they were puppets, acting out the fears of the audience - loss of control, loss of free will. I think the line that struck me the most in the film was from Bela Lugosi. He's telling Beaumont about his "factory workers" who of course are all zombies under his spell. Legendre says "they are quite used to long hours" as if to suggest that the perfect workers have no sense of time or think to complain. I wonder what factory workers of the time felt - first Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times and now this. Dark thoughts for such a dark time as the Great Depression.

Review and Recommendation
Well, it's getting late and I'm about zombied-out. White Zombie was a pretty interesting look at old Hollywood history. From a genre standpoint, it's an important film to watch. If you can forgive the low-budget and poor quality, you'll probably enjoy it. If nothing else, it's just fun to watch Bela Lugosi make so many creepy faces!

Golden Boy (1939)

Violins and boxing rings don't go together, even if you are William Holden with fabulous hair.

Intro.

Just when I thought that William Holden month was over, I came home Friday night and discovered that I had long ago set up some recordings and two of his films were waiting for me.  It was a very pleasant surprise, and after a lot of errands, cooking and general chores, I finally let myself unwind with some popcorn and Golden Boy. 

Overview

Golden Boy opens with struggling sports agent Tom Moody (Adolphe Menjou) telling his girlfriend Lorna (Barbara Stanwyck) that he can't afford to divorce his wife and marry her.  He only has one client, a boxer, but as luck would have it, a lanky young man with floppy curls barges into his office to tell him his client just broke his hand.  The young man follows Tom and Lorna down to the gym, asking to be given a chance to sign with them as a fighter.  Tom only listens though when he learns that the young man, Joe Bonaparte (William Holden) is the one responsible for breaking his prize fighter's fist.  So Joe gets signed and starts boxing.  He's never had any formal training, but he learns quickly and has a beginner's enthusiasm and reckless courage.  He also has a very loving family who know nothing about his first fight.  His father, an Italian storekeeper, has saved up enough money to buy Joe a beautiful $1500 violin for his upcoming 21st birthday.  Joe's played the violin since he was very young and has earned a music scholarship, but with the tempting new world of boxing and fast money, Joe comes to a difficult decision.  Which life should he pursue?  He loves music, but he wants to provide for his father and earn enough money for them to live comfortably - boxing allows for big money like that.  Joe's talented in both fields.  But nothing is that simple.  Lorna, trying to help Tom stay in business, charms Joe and convinces him to keep boxing.  Joe rises to become a great sensation, but at the price of his music - 8 months on the road without playing have made his hands tough and shaky on the violin.  To make things even worse, Mobster Fuseli (Joseph Calleia) wants a piece of Joe's contract.  And he keeps raising his price in exchange for Joe's signature.  Joe accepts, much to the dismay of Lorna, who has met Joe's family and has found herself falling in love with Joe.  What it all comes down to is a big fight against the middle-weight champ in Madison Square Gardens and devastating consequences.

Highlights
I am now a Barbara Stanwyck fan.  What an actress!  She's one of those actresses that steals every scene with her talent, charm and beauty.  Not to mention her strength.  She is outstanding as Lorna, both the "girl Friday" to Tom and yet the compassionate friend and then lover of Joe.  We can see her character transform from a middle-aged cynical spinster into a warm, devoted part of a family.  She has a real presence and gives the film its heart.  I am looking forward to finding more of her films to watch and enjoy!

Barbara Stanwyck lobbied to get unknown William Holden into this film as the title character.  I read somewhere that something like 5000 actors had been considered for the role, but it was Barbara Stanwyck that really pushed for Holden and in the end, got him cast.  It did more than that too - it launched his whole career and even earned him the nickname of "The Golden Boy" of Hollywood.  Check it out - if you search IMDb's site for "Golden Boy" you'll get William Holden listed before the movie itself.  Holden was so grateful to Barbara Stanwyck for her support that he reportedly sent her flowers every year on the anniversary of their first day of shooting.  He also trained pretty hard for this role, taking both boxing and violin lessons so as to make his performance look more natural.  It's the stuff that movie legends are made of.

Although the story line was a plot that I'd seen in variations before (youth trying to choose between two different worlds/careers), it was very well done here.  Most of that is due to the fine acting of Stanwyck and Holden, but a good part of it is also due to the way the events unfold.  There is a great deal of love and tenderness in the film and Joe's family (although sadly stereotyped) is one of the happiest families on screen.  We come to care for them the same way Lorna does.  This is just as much her story of finding happiness and a family just as much as it is about Joe finding out who he really is and accepting his destiny.  It isn't nearly as straightforward as my overview might make it seem, and the ending will definitely come out of left field.    

Review and Recommendation

What did you accomplish when you were 21?  If you were William Holden, you were making a film that would jump-start your career.  It's astonishing to think about where I was at 21 (probably struggling through my class in organic chemistry) and to see how cool and confident he appears on screen.  His performance and the great performance by Barbara Stanwyck make this film worth seeing.  If you're interested in a Hollywood legend or like films about boxing or even if you just want a good, solid hour and a half of entertainment, give Golden Boy a try.  


P.S. Also, just to satisfy my fan-girl side, I have to say that when Holden appeared at first, tall, a bit lanky and sporting some gorgeous, floppy dark curls, I thought for a moment there was a mix-up because he looked an awful lot like Tom Hanks in the movie Big.  Just now I'm watching the opening of Sunset Boulevard and man, there's a scene where I swear he could be Hanks.  Or would that be, Hanks could be Holden?  I wonder if Tom Hanks could be considered the "Golden Boy" of modern films.  I know he's been called the Jimmy Stewart "everyman", but I think he definitely follows Holden's footsteps too.  That's a post I'll have to write another day.

The Sundowners (1960)

A film with everything - Deborah Kerr, Robert Mitchum, sheep herding, horse racing, gorgeous locations and a baby koala.  What's not to love?

Intro.

I realized the other day that I spend entirely too much time thinking about classic movies.  I came to this conclusion when I was flipping through my copy of the TCM guide to Leading Men: The 50 Most Unforgettable Actors of the Studio Era.  I got really excited that the latest film on my DVR, The Sundowners, was the last film on the entry for Robert Mitchum (each actor has 5 Essential films listed).  Then I started to plan on watching all 5 films for each actor in the book and soon realized that would be 250 films, or more like 180 if you count all the ones I've already seen.  Such is the life of a classic film fangirl!  Anyway, now that I've seen all 5 Robert Mitchum films (the others being Out of the Past, Cape Fear, Night of the Hunter and Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison), I can say that The Sundowners truly qualifies as an essential.

Overview

Sundowners, in Australian terminology, are people whose home is where the sun goes down; in short, people always on the move because they have no permanent home.  Such is the way of life for the Carmodys - Paddy, the father, is a sheep drover and hates the idea of settling anywhere.  His wife Ida (Deborah Kerr) wants to settle somewhere and have a real home for their teenage son, Sean (Michael Anderson, Jr.).  The film starts out with them driving a flock of sheep to be sold and sheared.  They hire another man to help them, an older gentleman named Rupert (Peter Ustinov).  Together this family deals with the rough terrain to drive the sheep, including a horrible "crown fire" that spreads like lightning between tree tops.  Finally they manage to get the sheep to a shearing town, and despite his strong feelings against settling anywhere, Paddy agrees to stay for the season and shear sheep.  The rest of the family also get jobs and the bankroll starts to grow.  Although Ida and Sean are set on getting a farm, it takes some convincing (and some conniving) to even get him to look at one.  A few gambles later and the family gains a beautiful racehorse which they name Sundowner.  They decide to enter him in a few races, but just how much are they willing to lose?

Highlights
Okay, first of all, I love Deborah Kerr in just about every film she's made.  She has a lot of gumption but can also be very graceful and demure.  She's perfect for the role of Ida and in later interviews, she said of the 5 times she was nominated for an Academy Award, this role was the one she wanted to win for the most.  She deserved it too - she has a kind of stoic pride that gets Ida through all of the family's hardships, but she still has no problem telling Paddy exactly what she thinks.  In fact, Ida and Paddy are well suited for each other, and I think a bit part of their chemistry comes from how well Robert Mitchum and Deborah Kerr work together.  According to TCM, William Holden was the first choice for the role of Paddy, but when he turned it down, Robert Mitchum jumped at the chance.  He didn't even need to read the script; when he heard Deborah Kerr was in it, that was all he needed.  It's great to see actors have such a good working relationship, and both are outstanding in their roles.

In the beginning I felt that the film had an epic tone - the cinematography and directing were wide and grand.  But as the film progressed, it focused in more on the family.  Part of it was the great score by Dimitri Tiomkin and the wonderful directing by Fred Zinnemann.  But what really makes this movie a standout is the filmography - it's all done on location in Australia.  Apart from the great scenery, we also have some adorable wildlife like kangaroos, wallabies and of course, a koala with its baby.  The work with the shearers is all really well done, especially the shearing contest between Paddy and some ringer.  Also, I know there are articles out there criticizing the accents, but I think both Deborah Kerr and Robert Mitchum have great Aussie accents.  I think my favorite part was when Paddy gets drunk and starts singing "Wild Colonial Boy" in the local pub.  Think about that - 1) Robert Mitchum has to pretend to be drunk 2) and manage to keep his accent 3) while singing.  Now that's talent. 

What the film really comes down to is a family trying to stay together.  Paddy and Ida clearly want the best for their son and for themselves, but can't agree on what that is.  All they have is each other.  In the end, they are still Sundowners and continue onward with their futures still unsettled.  That heart - that love they have for each other - makes this movie a success.

Review and Recommendation
I really enjoyed this film.  The ending doesn't really settle anything, but I think that's in keeping with the nature of the characters.  If it had been any different, it couldn't really be called The Sundowners. Australia serves as a perfect (and breathtaking) setting for this tale of family, love and survival.  It's a gamble every step of the way for the Carmody family, and a great movie every minute.  Definitely worthy watching!


P.S. For anyone who has seen Crocodile Dundee, the line "Flat out like a lizard drinkin'" is actually used in The Sundowners too!!  I had a little bit of a fan girl moment there.     

October Fun!

My friend Catherine is a big fan of zombie movies.  Really, she's an expert on all things zombie - books, films, general knowledge of how to best barricade her house in case of a zombie virus outbreak.  Anyway, as we are now in October, it's time for all those great classic monster films and we've agreed to watch several old zombie movies together.  I'll post about them here from a general classic-film standpoint and Catherine will be posting about them on her blog.  So keep checking in for the latest and greatest in the undead on film!

Here's her blog, Zombi Ga Imasu !  Enjoy!!

The Man with the Golden Arm (1955)

Pick your poison - alcohol, money, drugs, or an insane amount of guilt.

Intro.

I'm finding the 1950's to be a very fascinating era to study.  Right now I've been watching a lot of films that pushed the limits and broke the rules of the strict Hollywood codes put in place by the Breen office (see The Moon is Blue), thanks to TCM's recent film series.  Otto Preminger is quickly becoming one of my favorite directors, mainly because of his sheer determination to break as many of the constricting codes as possible.  In The Man with the Golden Arm he goes after the rule that drugs, drug paraphernalia, usage and all things associated with drugs are forbidden.  You couldn't show someone taking drugs and it could never be said out loud.  So this film, which centers on a man struggling to kick his heroin addiction, exploded out of the box.  And what an explosion!

Overview
Right from the get-go we know that Frankie Machine (Frank Sinatra) is coming back home from some time in drug rehab.  He first stops at the local bar, where he is greeted by all of his colorful neighbors, including his good friend, petty thief Sparrow (Arnold Stang).  His old boss is there too, Zero Schwiefka (Robert Strauss), who runs high-stakes, back room poker games.  Frankie's heroin dealer Louie (Darren McGavin), is also there, and offers him a free "fix".  Frankie refuses and keeps refusing as he tries to get away from that kind of life.  He returns home to his wife Zosch (Eleanor Parker), who is in a wheelchair and tells her he has learned to play the drums in rehab and wants to go into the music business.  She begs him to go back to being a dealer for Schwiefka because she doesn't want anything to change (she doesn't want him to ever leave again).  It seems like Frankie can't get a break though, as he waits to hear back about auditions and has to constantly turn down offers from Louie and demands from his wife to go back to the shady poker games.  He gives in to both though, and from there he begins a downward spiral.  The only people on his side are Sparrow and Frankie's neighbor Molly (Kim Novak).  Molly and Frankie are in love, but Frankie won't leave Zosch until the doctors can cure her.  What he doesn't know is that Zosch has already been cured and is only pretending to be disabled to keep Frankie from leaving her.  Frankie hits bottom when he first flubs his one real chance at getting a job as a drummer in a big band (his one dream) and then gets caught cheating as he deals at poker (losing his valuable "golden arm" reputation).  He had cheated in an exchange with Louie so he could get another fix.  Pushed to the edge, he decides to do his own withdrawal.  He has Molly lock him up in a room of her apartment and begins the long, painful process of recovery.  But an angry Louie shows up and catches Zosch up and walking.  From there the tensions keep rising until, much like the Breen codes, the film's ending shatters the lives of all the characters.
 
Highlights
Frank Sinatra may have won his Oscar for From Here to Eternity but man, he should have gotten an Oscar for this film.  TCM host Robert Osborne said that Sinatra had researched and prepared for this role for weeks and never worked harder to get such a realistic performance.  Sinatra always has a bit of that manic side showing through, and he puts it to good use here.  The withdrawal sequence especially showcased just how hard he worked - it's painful and heartbreaking to watch, even when you tell yourself he's only acting.  He's also joined by some equally talented co-stars like Kim Novak and Eleanor Parker (who I finally found out looked familiar because years later she played the Baroness in The Sound of Music). 

The relationship between Frankie and Zosch needs to be discussed.  It's such a tragic situation - we learn that Zosch was injured in a car crash where an intoxicated Frankie was driving.  Once in the hospital, doctors said she'd never walk again and not long thereafter she and Frankie married (out of guilt, you think?).  They've been together three years and her passive-aggressive nature just turns on the guilt whenever Frankie wants to do something different that may take him away from her.  The worst part is that she really can walk!  You go from feeling kind of sorry for her to despising her.  She's just as dependent on Frankie as he is on heroin.  She needles him constantly (no pun intended) to give up his hopes of joining a band and instead do exactly what she wants him to do.  Their whole relationship runs on guilt.  That's probably why Frankie and Molly get along so well - she's the exact opposite of Zosch and willing to do whatever it takes to help Frankie kick his habit for good, even at the risk of jail time.  Her own crutch is an alcoholic boyfriend, whom she finally banishes from her apartment. 
 

Finally, the storytelling in the film is really well done.  I liked the intertwining stories of Frankie being a dealer (at poker) and his need for a dealer (in drugs).  It took me awhile in the beginning to realize the difference, as everyone kept calling Frankie a dealer - I thought he had been a heroin dealer who had gotten addicted.  Then there's the name of the film.  Frankie's called "the man with the golden arm" because of his prowess as a card dealer, but he's also got a golden arm for playing the drums and of course those are the same arms that he's destroying with his shots of heroin.  It all creates a tight, compelling tale of addiction that anyone can relate to - like Frankie says, "everybody's a habitual something".  

Review and Recommendations

One of the reasons directors like Preminger wanted to break the codes in the fifties was to create films with more adult themes and lure consumers away from the new fad called television and back into the movie theaters.  And you can't break out of the code any more than The Man with the Golden Arm does.  Not only is it an engrossing story, but one of Sinatra's best performances.  Definitely worth watching!