Search
Search results
Andy K (10823 KP) rated The Shootist (1976) in Movies
May 4, 2019
The final film starring John Wayne
Who knew that John Wayne's final film would star "The Duke" opposite Ron Howard? Also great performances by Lauren Bacall and James Stewart.
An notorious aging gunslinger learns he has inoperable cancer and decides to try and live out his final days in peace. Unfortunately, not to be as elements from his past come back to haunt him or just won't let him enjoy his final moments. He befriends a widow and her son as he rents a room from them. He wants to tie up some loose ends in his life before his time on Earth ends.
Still being a John Wayne novice, I thought his performance here was miraculous. He showed his usual toughness and charisma, but also real heart and vulnerability at times. You could see he felt remorse for some of his past actions and wanted to atone for them; however, life had other obstacles for him to overcome and to draw his relationships to their conclusion.
Very pleasantly surprised how much I enjoyed it.
An notorious aging gunslinger learns he has inoperable cancer and decides to try and live out his final days in peace. Unfortunately, not to be as elements from his past come back to haunt him or just won't let him enjoy his final moments. He befriends a widow and her son as he rents a room from them. He wants to tie up some loose ends in his life before his time on Earth ends.
Still being a John Wayne novice, I thought his performance here was miraculous. He showed his usual toughness and charisma, but also real heart and vulnerability at times. You could see he felt remorse for some of his past actions and wanted to atone for them; however, life had other obstacles for him to overcome and to draw his relationships to their conclusion.
Very pleasantly surprised how much I enjoyed it.
Deborah (162 KP) rated The May Bride in Books
Dec 21, 2018
The May Bride is not, in fact, so much about Jane Seymour - although she is the first person narrator and was married in May (practically before her predecessor was cold.....) - as about her sister in law, Katherine Folliot, first wife of her eldest brother Edward (later Duke of Somerset and Lord Protector under Edward VI). Edward's second wife, Anne Stanhope, is probably better known to historians or lovers of historical fiction, but there remains something of a mystery around the fate of Katherine Folliot, which Dunn has chosen to take as the basis of this novel.
I realised I had read a couple of Dunn's previous works - The Queen of Subtleties and The Confession of Katherine Howard. Of the former, I remember thinking that Dunn must have done a lot of research into the history of confectionery, but I can't remember anything of the second book, other than it wasn't dreadful, but wasn't the best thing I'd ever read either. I feel a bit the same about this latest offering. There's a lot of detail in there about how a moderately wealthy Tudor family may have lived, but a couple of days after I finished reading it there is nothing that stands out for me. I think perhaps that Jane herself isn't very interesting and Dunn doesn't make her interesting. I think her point is that she's plain and dull and normal and gets on with things because it's just easier.... but it doesn't make for a very entertaining read somehow. Katherine herself, who is the focus of the novel also often doesn't seem very likeable, so it's difficult to like her story or to really feel sorry for her.
In summary, not a bad read and there are far worse out there, but someone it doesn't quite hit the mark for me - just a bit forgettably mediocre.
I realised I had read a couple of Dunn's previous works - The Queen of Subtleties and The Confession of Katherine Howard. Of the former, I remember thinking that Dunn must have done a lot of research into the history of confectionery, but I can't remember anything of the second book, other than it wasn't dreadful, but wasn't the best thing I'd ever read either. I feel a bit the same about this latest offering. There's a lot of detail in there about how a moderately wealthy Tudor family may have lived, but a couple of days after I finished reading it there is nothing that stands out for me. I think perhaps that Jane herself isn't very interesting and Dunn doesn't make her interesting. I think her point is that she's plain and dull and normal and gets on with things because it's just easier.... but it doesn't make for a very entertaining read somehow. Katherine herself, who is the focus of the novel also often doesn't seem very likeable, so it's difficult to like her story or to really feel sorry for her.
In summary, not a bad read and there are far worse out there, but someone it doesn't quite hit the mark for me - just a bit forgettably mediocre.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Anatomy of a Murder (1959) in Movies
Nov 30, 2018
One of the Best Courtroom Dramas of all Time
I have to admit, that (at times) the fun part of going to "SECRET MOVIE NIGHT" is the anticipation of not knowing what the film is. Sometimes the film is "good, not great" (like THE BLUES BROTHERS, BODY HEAT and A FACE IN THE CROWD) and other times it is a CLASSIC (Like CITIZEN KANE, THE APARTMENT and NETWORK). I am happy to report that this month's installment IS a classic, our old pal Jimmy Stewart in 1959's ANATOMY OF MURDER.
Directed by the great Otto Preminger, AOM is often referred to as the finest courtroom drama ever filmed. While I need to give that some thought, I will say AOM is right up there as one of the finest examples of a courtroom drama.
Starring Jimmy Stewart as "country lawyer" Paul Biegler, who is brought in to defend Army Lieutenant Manion (Ben Gazzara). Manion is accused of murdering a man that raped his wife (Lee Remick). The central mystery isn't "did Manion kill the man" (he did), it is more of "did he kill his wife's rapist or lover" and "will Biegler get away with the temporary insanity plea".
This is the kind of plot that we've all seen a dozen times on standard TV shows, but back in 1959, this type of film - and trial - was quite new and fresh and this film was "scandalous" in it's use of frank language. Remember, this is 1959 in Eisenhower "Happy Days" Americana, so hearing words like "bitch, panties, penetration, slut, sperm, bitch and slut" was quite shocking and led to many protests of the film.
Those who were turned off by the language and frankhandling of the subject matter lost out on an intriguing, well-acted, well-written and well-directed courtroom drama, where the verdict is up in the air right up until the foreman of the jury says "We, the jury, find the defendant..."
Jimmy Stewart is perfectly cast in the lead role of Defense Attorney, Biegler. Stewart brings an instant likableness and every man integrity quality to the role. His Attorney is down-to-earth but whip-smart, able to crack a joke to lighten the mood or explode in rage at an affront at a moment's notice. He goes toe-to-toe with Prosecuting Attorney Claude Dancer (a VERY young George C. Scott). Dancer is everything that Biegler is not, crisp, well-polished and arrogant. While it would have been very easy to paint these two characters as good (Stewart) and bad (Scott), Director Preminger and screenwriter Wendell Mayes shy away from this and show these two as fierce competitors playing a very serious game of chess - and this works very well, indeed. Both Stewart and Scott were nominated for Oscars for their work as Best Actor and Supporting Actor respectively.
The Supporting cast is superb, featuring such 1950's/early 1960's stalwarts as Arthur O'Connell (also Oscar nominated as Stewarts's alcoholic law mentor), the always good Eve Arden, Orson Bean and Katherine Grant. It also features three character actors in small roles (witnesses in the trial) who you would recognize from other things - Murray Hamilton (the Mayor in Jaws), Howard McNear (Floyd the Barber from Mayberry) and Joseph Kearns (Mr. Wilson in Dennis the Menace).
Special notice needs to be made for Lee Remick as the sultry and flirtatious woman at the core of the film. Remick is superb in this role, and that is fortunate, for if she wasn't believable in the "would she or won't she" role that she is asked to play, then the film could have easily fallen apart. But the real bright spot in this film is the scene stealing Joseph N. Welch as the Judge in the case. His performance as the judge is the perfect "third leg" to the Stewart/Scott stool, balancing charm, folksiness and strength in even portions (depending on what is needed to balance the other two).
Otto Preminger (LAURA, STALAG 17) is a Director who's name is beginning to fade into the dust of the past - and that's too bad, for he is a strong director who knows how to frame a scene and pace a film. Even though AOM is 2 hours and 40 minutes of talking, it never feels long or slow.
Two other aspects of this film need to be mentioned - the "jazz" score by the great Duke Ellington (which won a grammy) is perfectly suited to the themes and mood of this film and the opening title sequence (and movie poster) is reminiscent of an Alfred Hitchock film - and that is because they are done by frequent Hitchock contributor Saul Bass.
Nominated for 7 Oscars (it won zero, falling to the juggernaut that was BEN HUR that year), ANATOMY OF A MURDER is an intriguing courtroom drama that also opens the door to performers of the past. Well worth the time investment, should you run across it (it is frequently shown on TCM).
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Directed by the great Otto Preminger, AOM is often referred to as the finest courtroom drama ever filmed. While I need to give that some thought, I will say AOM is right up there as one of the finest examples of a courtroom drama.
Starring Jimmy Stewart as "country lawyer" Paul Biegler, who is brought in to defend Army Lieutenant Manion (Ben Gazzara). Manion is accused of murdering a man that raped his wife (Lee Remick). The central mystery isn't "did Manion kill the man" (he did), it is more of "did he kill his wife's rapist or lover" and "will Biegler get away with the temporary insanity plea".
This is the kind of plot that we've all seen a dozen times on standard TV shows, but back in 1959, this type of film - and trial - was quite new and fresh and this film was "scandalous" in it's use of frank language. Remember, this is 1959 in Eisenhower "Happy Days" Americana, so hearing words like "bitch, panties, penetration, slut, sperm, bitch and slut" was quite shocking and led to many protests of the film.
Those who were turned off by the language and frankhandling of the subject matter lost out on an intriguing, well-acted, well-written and well-directed courtroom drama, where the verdict is up in the air right up until the foreman of the jury says "We, the jury, find the defendant..."
Jimmy Stewart is perfectly cast in the lead role of Defense Attorney, Biegler. Stewart brings an instant likableness and every man integrity quality to the role. His Attorney is down-to-earth but whip-smart, able to crack a joke to lighten the mood or explode in rage at an affront at a moment's notice. He goes toe-to-toe with Prosecuting Attorney Claude Dancer (a VERY young George C. Scott). Dancer is everything that Biegler is not, crisp, well-polished and arrogant. While it would have been very easy to paint these two characters as good (Stewart) and bad (Scott), Director Preminger and screenwriter Wendell Mayes shy away from this and show these two as fierce competitors playing a very serious game of chess - and this works very well, indeed. Both Stewart and Scott were nominated for Oscars for their work as Best Actor and Supporting Actor respectively.
The Supporting cast is superb, featuring such 1950's/early 1960's stalwarts as Arthur O'Connell (also Oscar nominated as Stewarts's alcoholic law mentor), the always good Eve Arden, Orson Bean and Katherine Grant. It also features three character actors in small roles (witnesses in the trial) who you would recognize from other things - Murray Hamilton (the Mayor in Jaws), Howard McNear (Floyd the Barber from Mayberry) and Joseph Kearns (Mr. Wilson in Dennis the Menace).
Special notice needs to be made for Lee Remick as the sultry and flirtatious woman at the core of the film. Remick is superb in this role, and that is fortunate, for if she wasn't believable in the "would she or won't she" role that she is asked to play, then the film could have easily fallen apart. But the real bright spot in this film is the scene stealing Joseph N. Welch as the Judge in the case. His performance as the judge is the perfect "third leg" to the Stewart/Scott stool, balancing charm, folksiness and strength in even portions (depending on what is needed to balance the other two).
Otto Preminger (LAURA, STALAG 17) is a Director who's name is beginning to fade into the dust of the past - and that's too bad, for he is a strong director who knows how to frame a scene and pace a film. Even though AOM is 2 hours and 40 minutes of talking, it never feels long or slow.
Two other aspects of this film need to be mentioned - the "jazz" score by the great Duke Ellington (which won a grammy) is perfectly suited to the themes and mood of this film and the opening title sequence (and movie poster) is reminiscent of an Alfred Hitchock film - and that is because they are done by frequent Hitchock contributor Saul Bass.
Nominated for 7 Oscars (it won zero, falling to the juggernaut that was BEN HUR that year), ANATOMY OF A MURDER is an intriguing courtroom drama that also opens the door to performers of the past. Well worth the time investment, should you run across it (it is frequently shown on TCM).
Letter Grade: A
9 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)