Joe's View

With Joe Meyers, entertainment writer

‘Un Flic’: crime classic explores fine line between cops, crooks

by:

unflic1New York’s Film Forum has just unveiled a new print of a terrific 1972 French film noir, “Un Flic,” starring Alain Delon and Catherine Denueve, that will be screened through next Thursday.

The movie was the final effort of writer-director Jean-Pierre Melville, one of the modern masters of crime stories, who loved the hard-boiled American thrillers of the 1940s and 1950s, but who put his own cynical spin on the genre.

The fact that there is generally not an ounce of sentiment in Melville movies, and the stories are told with such a cool, sleek visual style, has made them perennial arthouse favorites. Pessimism never goes out of fashion.

Pictures like “Le Samourai” and “Les Doulos” were overshadowed in this country at the time of their original releases by the more prestigious fare of U.S. arthouse favorites such as Francois Truffaut and Federico Fellini. But starting 15 or 20 years ago, Melville’s popularity has steadily grown, and a “rediscovered” 1969 World War II thriller “Army of Shadows” became a major arthouse hit here a few years ago.

unflic2“Un Flic” translates as “a cop” but the film is pretty evenly balanced between the jaded Paris policeman played by Delon and the big score heist specialist played by American actor Richard Crenna. One of the henchmen is another familiar face, Michael Conrad, who went on to star in “Hill Street Blues.”

The cool blonde who is of equal interest to both men is played by a very young and very beautiful Catherine Denueve who creates a character as morally bankrupt as any of the women in 1940s Hollywood noir.

“Un Flic” opens with a beautifully staged bank heist in a French resort town during the off-season. Crenna and his three accomplices almost pull it off without a hitch until one of the tellers sets off an alarm and shoots one of the robbers.

The crooks get away but face the challenge of finding medical treatment for the wounded man (a problem that is solved by the ice-cold Deneuve).

When Melville starts intercutting between the thieves and the cop played by Delon, the behavior on both sides is so brutal that it is hard to distinguish the police from their prey.

Delon’s chilling performance was part of his successful attempt in the 1970s to get away from the romantic/pretty boy roles that established him as an international star a decade earlier.

The actor was so attractive in his youth that he fell into a romantic leading man niche in films such as “The Leopard” and “Eclipse” or playing the scheming seducer in pictures such as “Purple Noon.”

Thanks to Melville, who cast him in several of his bleak thrillers, Delon broke out of the stereotype, and was able to make a smooth transition to mature roles. He is just about perfect in “Un Flic.”

(For information on the Film Forum screenings of “Un Flic” visit www.filmforum.com. Also, a good print of the film is also available for free screening to members of the Amazon Prime service.)

unflic

Categories: General

Rent it now: regaining lost youth in ‘Seconds’

by:

seconds6Director John Frankenheimer suffered a major career setback in 1966 when “Seconds” opened to wildly mixed reviews and then bombed at the box-office.

The dark and experimental movie was just a tad ahead of its time — the following year would bring “Bonnie and Clyde,” “The Graduate” and a whole new wave of challenging Hollywood films.

“Seconds” is a horror fantasy about the ruthless American pursuit of eternal youth and endless “lifestyle” options.

seconds5A burned-out middle-aged Scarsdale businessman (John Randolph, below) is offered a chance for a second life through a mysterious New York company that guarantees a new face (and body) through plastic surgery and then a relocation into a new home and career.

The catch is that there is no going back — a cadaver is used to provide the cover of an accidental death and estate money is secretly transferred to the new “you.”

So, the overweight and balding businessman Randolph goes into surgery and comes out the much younger and trimmer Rock Hudson (above), who is relocated to an artist’s colony in Malibu (where he falls for Salome Jens).

Hudson gives a very powerful and poignant performance, but his casting probably worked against the picture in 1966. The audience for his light 1960s comedies was appalled by the horror of “Seconds” and the “serious” film audience had no interest in a “Rock Hudson movie.”

Frankenheimer wanted to have Laurence Olivier play both halves of the role, but Paramount said the Brit wasn’t a big enough star (!) After both Glenn Ford and Kirk Douglas turned the movie down, Frankenheimer heard Hudson was interested, but only if his participation was limited to the “after” scenes.

“Seconds” has slowly gathered a cult following and critics have come to regard it as one of Frankenheimer’s career high points, just under the peerless “The Manchurian Candidate.”

seconds7

Categories: General

‘The Last Detail’ — a quintessential 1970s movie returns

by:

ashbyA few weeks ago, Film Forum in New York presented the new digitally restored version of the 1973 film “The Last Detail” (above).

I’m assuming that this means a spruced-up DVD is in the works which is great news for the home video market.

Watching the film 40 years after it debuted was a bittersweet experience. The collaboration between writer Robert Towne and director Hal Ashby is as moving and as funny as ever, but it also points up the changes in the movie industry over the past five decades.

“The Last Detail” was one of dozens of risky releases during the 1970s that would have almost no chance of being funded and distributed by a major studio today. The picture came out before the rise of the mass releasing of films and the construction of multiplexes later in the same decade.parallax

Once “Jaws” and “Star Wars” demonstrated how much money could be made on a broad-appeal movie released to hundreds of theaters at the same time, the studios started to lose interest in the sometimes tricky small films that needed the slower release patterns that had ruled the movie industry for decades.

In 1973, Columbia was quite happy to have a $10 million return on their $2 million investment in “The Last Detail.” The money came in based on good reviews, good word of mouth, and the film’s slow and steady journey through single screen theaters around the country.

As studios gravitated toward the wide-release pattern — backed by expensive national television advertising — the story material that would support such handling became much simpler. Action. Broad comedy. Science-Fiction. Horror.

The early 1970s was marked by terrific (and financially successful) films that would not fit into the mass-marketing genre structures of subsequent decades. Directors like Hal Ashby and Robert Altman had their glory days in the 1970s, because the studios gave them the stars and the financial backing they needed for hard to categorize classics such as “Shampoo,” “The Long Goodbye,” “Coming Home” and “Nashville” (below).

Today, a studio would rather spend $150 million on one easily-marketed potential blockbuster like “Iron Man 3” than finance 15 risky $10 million ventures.

Of course, the independent companies and studio art house subsidiaries still handle fine films, but they don’t move into the center of the popular culture the way that the 1970s landmark movies did. People didn’t care about the budgets or the grosses of pictures such as “Chinatown” and “The Parallax View”  — they were excited by the content.

nashville3

Categories: General

MPAA tweaks movie ratings — again — on violence quotient

by:

mpaa2Few elements on the American cultural scene are as mocked and as irrelevant as the ratings system of the Motion Picture Association of America.

Anyone who goes to the movies on a regular basis knows that most big films are rated PG-13 now which means they get away with murder (literally) in terms of violence and have reverted to an almost 1950s-style squeamishness when it comes to the depiction of sex.

The MPAA announced changes in the ratings regarding violent content yesterday — changes that will no doubt serve as come-ons rather than warnings when they go into effect later this year.

The Associated Press reported that “CEO Christopher Dodd announced the tweaks in Las Vegas Tuesday at the annual movie-theater convention, CinemaCon. The White House has called on the movie industry to give parents better tools to monitor violence in media since the Newtown, Conn., school shooting.”

The changes will be in the fine-print description under the rating (like the ones that are already in place in regards to sex and nudity). The new wording will include vague phrases such as “strong carnage” (impalements? decapitations?) or “war violence” (A-bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? A bayonet in the gut?)mpaa6

The strictly voluntary (i.e. ignored) system was created out of a similar atmosphere of political panic in 1968 when the movie studios feared that more states would follow in the footsteps of Maryland (and a few other reactionary places) and start censoring the racier fare that was coming out in those days.

Hollywood was in a terrible bind because the studio heads knew they had to start creating more adult material in the mid-1960s due to stiffer competition from abroad. Pictures such as “La Dolce Vita,” “A Man and a Woman” and “The Silence” were distributed in this country by independents who didn’t belong to the MPAA and who therefore didn’t have to follow its arbitrary restrictions on content.

While most of these foreign and indie films weren’t widely distributed in the heartland, they did play in every major city in the country and their grosses, in some cases, surpassed the earnings of Hollywood fare (“La Dolce Vita” was one of the biggest U.S. box office successes of 1960.)

Before the ratings system was instituted, Hollywood pulled some fast tricks to distribute steamier fare. MGM had a little-used foreign subsidiary, Lopert Pictures, that it dusted off to distribute “Blow-Up” (above) here in 1966 after it met with resistance from the MPAA. A naughty major studio release that same year — “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” — was only approved by the MPAA after Warner Bros. agreed to special advertising that presented it as a de facto “adults only” movie.

The launch of the movie ratings system in the fall of 1968 included two adult categories — R and X — that allowed the studios to fight the foreign film invasion with strong pictures that were released within months of the MPAA labels. “Midnight Cowboy” (below) opened in the spring of 1969, “Easy Rider” was unveiled that summer, and within a year actors were using harsh obscenities in movies as varied as “MASH” and “The Owl and the Pussycat.”

The new violence fine-print on the movie ratings will allow the studios to go about their merry business while claiming in Washington that the ball is now in the parental court.

mpaa5

Categories: General

PBS airs ‘Central Park Five’ tonight — must see TV

by:

It’s the bitterest of bitter-pill movies — a non-fiction film that shows us how the legal system botched one of the most high profile crimes of the 1980s.

The 1989 Central Park jogger case — in which a female Wall Street investment banker was raped while running in the park — became one of those New York City crime stories that the media and its huge audience couldn’t get enough of.

The story just had so many angles — the dangers faced by women alone in an urban environment; the mingling of the very wealthy and the underclass within the same spaces in Manhattan; and then the way that five young black and Hispanic men were targeted and accused of the crime (actually they were underage suspects who still qualified as boys rather than men).

“The Central Park Five” — which PBS is showing tonight at 9 p.m. — lays out the events of the case and its aftermath lucidly, with a minimum of dramatic hyping — co-directors Ken Burns, David McMahon and Sarah Burns clearly knew that the material would be explosive enough without any embellishment.

The five suspects probably never would have gone to trial if they had not made the terrible decision to talk to the cops without attorneys present. As the film shows us, they were separated and convinced that the other boys were spinning tales against them, so by the time the night was over, the cops and the prosecutors had confessions from all five.

If “The Central Park Five” had no other virtues it would be a significant film simply for the way it shows how confessions mean almost nothing when they are gathered in this sleazy manner — the film shows us that under similar circumstances we might do the same thing if we were dumb enough to say anything to the investigators without a lawyer at our side.

Even when DNA evidence failed to link the boys to the rape, the city went ahead with the trials with the only evidence being the confessions the boys wisely recanted soon after their interrogations.

The jury took longer than the prosecutors anticipated because of one hold-out — interviewed for the film — who admits he finally buckled under pressure.

All five boys went to prison and lost years of their lives before the actual rapist stepped forward, and proved what he claimed when his DNA matched the material in the jogger’s rape kit.

“The Central Park Five” is both horrifying and achingly sad. The rush to judge five kids who had already been rounded up for hooliganism in the park wouldn’t have happened if the suspects were white and they had lawyers.

If things can go this badly in such a high profile case, imagine what happens in the ones we never hear about.

Categories: General

Rent it now: ‘Not Quite Hollywood’ celebrates Aussie trash

by:

not-quite-hollywood-1

When we think about the Australian movies of the 1970s and 1980s most of us recall art house hits such as “Picnic at Hanging Rock” and “Breaker Morant,” but as the DVD documentary “Not Quite Hollywood” demonstrates, we were only seeing the tip of the iceberg on this side of the Pacific.

Mark Hartley’s delirious and rather shocking movie traces the history of “Ozploitation,” the low-budget horror flicks and nudie comedies that revived the Australian film industry after decades of virtually no production.

The theater business Down Under was dominated by American and British product in the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s, but the rise of drive-ins and the emergence of some very adventuruous directors led to a wave of crazy but highly profitable B-movies.

Those films in turn helped push directors such as Peter Weir — who got his img_alvinstart with a surreal action flick called “The Cars That Ate Paris” — in the direction of higher toned fare such as “Gallipoli” and “The Last Wave.”

The Aussie Bs also provided work for young actors like Jack Thompson and Nicole Kidman (above) and Mel Gibson who would dominate A-list productions in the country as the film industry began to boom.

“Not Quite Hollywood” is raunchy and at a few points disgusting as we see clips from sex/horror pictures like “Alvin Purple” (right) and “Dead Kids.” But Hartley has edited the clips with great flair and includes excellent interviews with filmmakers and actors, most of whom had no delusions of grandeur about what they were working on. There is also terrific interview footage with B-movie connoisseur Quentin Tarantino who saw many of the pictures on cheap videocassettes that were retitled — and sometimes dubbed into “American English” — for the U.S. market.

Few of us (other than Tarantino) would want to sit through any of these pictures in their entirety, but the clips (and the copious extras on the DVD) are lots of fun.

Categories: General

‘Miss Jones’: DVD debut of neglected romantic comedy classic

by:

devilandmissjonesIn all of the remake mania of the past few decades, I’ve been surprised that no one has ever taken a look at the wonderful 1942 RKO romantic comedy “The Devil and Miss Jones.” It’s funny and sexy and has a potent social issue aspect as well.

Part of the problem might be that the movie Jean Arthur made independently (with her producer husband Frank Ross) is not nearly as well known as the pictures she made at her home studio, Columbia Pictures — her hits there included “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” “The More the Merrier” and many others.

(Another problem might be confusion with the 1973 pornographic film that lifted the title with only a slight change in wording, “The Devil in Miss Jones.” If you do an Internet search for the Jean Arthur picture you will probably also find lots of naughty material from the Georgina Spelvin vehicle.)

For many years, “Miss Jones” was more or less unavailable because there were no good prints until UCLA did a restoration of the original negative. The film was briefly released on VHS, but didn’t make its DVD debut until this month.devilandmissjones1

Jean Arthur gives one of her most charming performances (and that’s saying a lot) in this tale of union organizing at a New York City department store.

Arthur plays a sales clerk, Mary Jones, whose boyfriend, Joe O’Brien (Robert Cummings), is fired for trying to organize the store.

The owner, John P. Merrick (Charles Coburn), is a reclusive mogul with huge real estate holdings in the city. He is so furious about the union move that he decides to go undercover as a new employee to see what is really going on.

Merrick gets more than he bargained for, as he is treated badly by the management, and falls under the spell of the decent, kind-hearted Mary before he finds out that she is engaged to the man behind the union move.

The message in the film — if the rich and powerful saw how the other half lives, they’d change their tune — isn’t very overt because director Sam Wood and screenwriter Norman Krasna are more interested in the romantic and comic potential in the premise.

Although “Miss Jones” was filmed entirely in Hollywood, it has a slightly gritty edge that makes it feel like a real New York story. There’s a wonderful sequence set on the crowded beach at Coney Island that has the flavor of location filming.

The story is beautifully constructed and has a great payoff scene in which Mary and her friends find out who their poor old co-worker really is.

On paper, Arthur’s romantic partner is Robert Cummings as Joe, but the real love match in the film is between Mary and Merrick. The teaming of Arthur and Coburn was so successful that they paired up again in “The More the Merriier” two years later (earning Coburn an Oscar).

“The Devil and Miss Jones” is in need of rediscovery by fans of romantic comedy and the peerless Jean Arthur.

Categories: General

‘Cliffhanger’: not-so-funny money in Washington, D.C.

by:

cliffhangerThe PBS “Frontline” special “Cliffhanger” has just been released on DVD.

The show aired in February, but I doubt that it will feel “dated” anytime soon.

Michael Kirk’s lucid and scary film is about the game of chicken that has been played with the budget in Washington, D.C.

It focuses on the lead-up to the “fiscal cliff” that could have sent the world economy into a tailspin last winter, a disaster that was narrowly averted at the very last minute, but which only delayed the overall problem of U.S. money madness.cliffhanger1

The tight focus on recent months gives “Cliffhanger’ lots of energy and tension — as we explore the conflict between the Republicans over reaching an agreement with Obama, and on the other side, the way the president has manipulated Republican House Speaker John Boehner (including reneging on verbal agreements).

The film doesn’t explore the larger issue of why such a rich country keeps finding itself on the verge of bankruptcy.

If we’re so broke that Obama is putting forward cuts in Social Security and Medicare, how can we keep sending billions overseas in foreign aid each year?

(Who among us would have any patience with friends who are dangerously deep in debt but keep giving money away to other people?)

Where did we get the $10 billion a month that the needless war in Iraq cost the country for a decade?

Of course, on some level our politicians in Washington accurately reflect a populace that isn’t very serious about money and budgeting (we collectively owe $850 billion in credit card debt and the outstanding tab for college loans is even higher than that.)

“Cliffhanger” is especially interesting on the challenges faced by Boehner, who is disliked by many within his own party and has had to deal with a Tea Party uprising led by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.

Boehner earns points for sitting down with Kirk for what appears to be have been an in-depth interview. His willingness to talk with PBS — a Tea Party enemy — illustrates his attempt to set real negotiations in motion.

Categories: General