cinemalover: Confessions of a Video Junkie

[cinemalover]

Date watched: 1/26/2007
Title: Weiss-O-Rama Made: 1923-1928
Genre: Comedy Shorts Studio: Weiss Brothers
Format: DVD Extras: Commentaries on Selected Shorts by Film Historian Richard M. Roberts, piano accompaniments by Philip C. Carli and David B. Drazin.
Number of times viewed: First

Stars:
Ben Turpin
Snub Pollard
Poodles Hanneford
Jimmy Aubrey

This is a two disc set totally 6 hours of silent shorts produced by the Weiss Brothers (Max, Louis and Adolph). The Weiss Brothers had scratched out a living making low-budget Westerns and Serials but towards the end of the Silent Era they decided to try their hands at making 2-reel comedy shorts. Hal Roach had temporarily shut down his studios and canceled all of his contracts while he converted over to sound. This allowed the Weiss Brothers to sign Ben Turpin and Snub Pollard to a series of shorts. The set includes 20 shorts made between 1923 and 1928.

List of shorts included:

Ben Turpin (A man whose eyes tend to play pinball off his bumper nose) shorts:

The Cockeyed Family 1928 (Where Ben’s “wife’ also suffers from crazy eyes)
Why Babies leave Home 1928
Holding His own 1928

Snub Pollard (Who has a horseshoe hanging on his face disguised as a mustache) shorts:

The Bum’s Rush 1927
Fire! 1927
Once Over 1928
The Big Shot 1928

Poodles Hanneford (A Circus Clown who was an expert trick rider, so most of his shorts found an excuse to use horses) shorts:

Circus Daze 1928
Better Behave 1928
Fare Enough 1928

Hairbreadth Harry (Harry is a dastardly bed guy who constantly tries to ruin the life of hero Rudolph) shorts:

Sign Them papers 1927
Fearless Harry 1926
Rudolph’s Revenge 1928

Izzie and Lizzie shorts:

Ham and Herring 1928
Movie Mania 1928

Bonus Short Subjects:

The Hunchback of Notre Dame 1923 (It looked like it had been filmed in someone’s garage. Absolutely terrible, you’re young kids could do better if turned loose with a video camera)
Who is Safe? 1925

These aren’t Chaplin, Keaton or Lloyd quality, but they’re amusing in their own right. The quality of the prints is amazing (with a few minor exceptions). These were a discovery for me as I had never even heard of the Weiss Brothers or any of their films. A total of 12 of the shorts had audio commentaries by film historian Richard M. Roberts and these were very informative for me. Roberts traced the history of the Weiss Brothers as well as talked about the careers of Snub Pollard and Ben Turpin and how sound affected their employment possibilities. He did a nice job of pointing out gags that were used in the shorts that were direct steals form more famous comediennes. The Weiss Brothers apparently weren’t worried about getting sued because their films were intended for regional distribution and any one caring to sue them might have a difficult time finding a paper trail.

The Turpin shorts were the best of the lot and seemed the most professionally done. In The Cockeyed Family we are traeted to a 4 year old Billy Barty as Ben's baby son. As Roberts mentions in his commentary, Billy wouldn't get much taller than he is in this short since he topped out at 3'9" as an adult. The Pollard shorts weren’t bad, just nothing to write home about. Jimmy Aubrey was apparently a mean son of a gun off of the set (according to the commentary) and his mean spirit comes through in his films which are a mean spirited type of comedy. The gags seem to go beyond normal slapstick violence. Poodles Hanneford came form a long family history of working in the circus. He was a headliner for several different circuses and made these shorts during his winter down time. Some of the stunts he did on a horse were pretty entertaining and amusing. He was obviously very at ease performing in front of a camera and had a grace that you associate with the top caliber comics. He can make very complicated stunts appear easy.

7* (out of 10) For any who enjoy shorts, this was both an amusing and historical find for me. The Set is produced with love and care and the picture quality is very impressive. I picked this set up on a whim and I’m glad I did.

[knitwit45]

re: the Yakuza

Chris, what was Karie's take on this movie? I have wanted to see it, but the blood and gore of the trailer put me off.
Love your reviews!!!
Nancy

[Bogie]

Chris i'm jealous! The Yakuza is one movie I've always wanted to see. Hmmm maybe my local Blockbuster might have it on sale somewhere.

Great review too!

[cinemalover]

Hi Nancy,
Karie didn't watch this one with me so no reaction from her.

The Yakuza has a couple of violent battles, but other than the cartwheeling hand most of the violence is not overly graphic. It's certainly not in Peckinpah's neighborhood of mayhem. Hopefully, it wouldn't be enough to distract you from an otherwise well-crafted action piece.

[cinemalover]

Bogie,
I think you'd enjoy the film, I hope you get the opportunity to see it. I got it as part of the Robert Mitchum Signature Collection since I'm a big Mitchum fan. Somehow I had never seen this one previously and I really liked it. I also loved seeing Brian Keith as a slimeball, definitely not his Family Affair persona.

[movieman]

Chris,

That "The Robert Mitchum Signature Collection" is, overall, a good one. I found "The Sundowners" a bit overrated, though. Mitchum is great in it anyway.
And that "The Good Guys and the Bad Guys" is one lame western comedy. Ok, "Macao" is no classic either, but it was kind of entertaining.
The rest of the movies are very good.

That's my opinion.

[knitwit45]

boy, movieman, you're drawing blood, now!!! I LOVE the Sundowners, and The Good Guys and the Bad Guys is a lot of fun.
That's one of the great things about this site, we all agree to disagree at times without acrimony.

Nancy

[cinemalover]

Hi movieman,
The Mitchum Collection is a fairly good body of work. I agree with you on The Good Guys and the Bad Guys (sorry, Nancy). I had written my review of it on January 3rd and given it a generous 4. It was especially disappointing to me because it was helmed by Burt Kennedy who earlier that same year had directed one of my all-time favorites, Support Your Local Sheriff. The Good Guys lacked the comic spark that made Sheriff so entertaining. The Sundowners is one of two films in the collection that I haven't gotten to yet. It has been so many years since I last saw it that my memory isn't very clear on how well I enjoyed (or didn't) it.

Nancy,
If you don't mind, what did you enjoy the most about The Good Guys and The Bad Guys? I'm just curious because you may have seen something in it, or responded to something that I completely missed.
Thanks,
Chris

[knitwit45]

Chris, when I saw this movie, I was young and in love and the movie just hit all the right notes for me. I honestly can't tell you much more than that. I have never claimed any expertise in movies, I almost always post about how a movie touched me, or affected my life in some way.

So, in other words, I'M WORTHLESS when it comes to reviews.....sorry!

[cinemalover]

Nancy,
You are anything BUT worthless. Movies are meant to be experienced and how you react to them is the only important thing. I'm glad you enjoyed it, I wish I could've. There is no science to it. Just the other day Karie said she'll never understand my viewing habits. One day I'll be watching some highly acclaimed, Oscar caliber movie and I'll follow it up with some obscure foreign horror film that has few redeemable qualities. I just like to experience a wide spectrum of cinema, and I usually find something about each experience that I enjoy. (Some much more than others).

If a movie hit all the right notes for you that's the best review you could give it.
Thanks,
Chris

[cinemalover]

Date watched: 1/27/2007
Title: Jet Pilot Made: 1957
Genre: Drama Studio: RKO Radio Pictures
Format: DVD Extras: Anamorphic WS
Number of times viewed: First

Stars:
John Wayne—Air Force Colonel Jim Shannon
Janet Leigh—Lt. Anna Marladonna/ Olga Orlief
Jay C. Flippen—Major General Black
Paul Fix—Major Rexford
Richard Rober—FBI Agent George Rivers
Roland Winters—Colonel Sokolov
Hans Conreid—Colonel Matoff
Ivan Triesault—General Lengrad

Taglines:
Greatest air spectacle of the jet age! Earth-shaking sky-shattering! So big it took years to make!

Jet-flame action! Jet-hot thrills! No man can pay the price for what this woman offers!
(The copywriters obviously saw a completely different movie than I did!)

The movie opens with some beautiful aerial photography of Colonel Jim Shannon (Wayne) leading a formation of jets, searching the skies for a reported bogie. They don’t find it and have to land to refuel while another team goes airborne. One of the other pilots locates a Russian fighter jet and “encourages” it to land at the Air Force airfield. The Russian jet lands and is instantly surrounded by the bases’ security personnel and all the curious pilots and officers. The hatch on the cockpit opens and the Russian pilot stands up. When the pilot removes the flight helmet out pops the perfectly coiffed locks of Janet Leigh. The silence is broken only by the sound of dozens of jaws dropping.

Colonel Shannon, known for his quick wit, sums it up, “A woman!” Yep, that base must be one lonely place.

The pilot is introduced as Lt. Anna Marladonna, a member of the Russian Air Force. She is escorted to the barracks to be interviewed. Her English is text-book perfect. The Air Force assumes she is there to defect and views this as the perfect opportunity to learn about Russian technology and any other military secrets she will share.

Major Rexford (Fix), “Aren’t you hungry?”
Anna, “Yes, but not hungry enough to talk against my country.” (A classic line if ever there was!)
Colonel Shannon, “Look, lady, we were under the impression that you came here to get away from your country.”
Anna (pausing uncomfortably), “I came here to prevent myself getting shot.”
Shannon, “Why would they want to shoot you?”
Anna, “I did something that was wrong.”
Rexford, “I can’t believe it!”
Shannon, “What did you do?”
Anna, “Disobeyed an order of my commanding officer.”
Shannon, “What kind of order?”
Anna, “In regards to tactics, naturally I can’t explain.”

Anna does and says all the right things to convince the brass that she wants to become a refugee and seeks sanctuary in the U.S. She does, however, refuse to divulge any information that might damage her mother country. After a full debriefing in front of Major General Black (Flippen) and FBI Agent George Rivers (Rober) as well as Anna’s official escort, Colonel Shannon they decide to exploit a potential relationship between Shannon and Anna.

Major General Black, “Shannon, you certainly gave her the works.”
FBI Agent Rivers, “Yes sir, if anybody’s gonna’ get anything out this girl, it’s Shannon!”
Shannon (shocked), “Me!?”
FBI Agent Rivers, “The most perfect case of ambivalence I ever saw!”
Shannon (confused), “…case of what?”
Rivers, “Double values. They both like and hate each other. They don’t know which feeling to follow. Wonderful confusion. Perfect sex antagonism. This proves it!”

The mere mention of the word “sex” makes Shannon blush, but he’s got his orders. He must play up to Anna and try to sweet talk his way into her knowledge of the Russian military. Shannon doesn’t trust Anna at all, assuming that she is up to something, but he gradual warms to her as they spend all their time together. To show her how much he trusts her they go flying, each in their own U.S. Air Force jet. This leads to a seemingly endless dialogue exchange between the two pilots while the audience is “treated” to shots of the two jets darting around the clouds.

Back on the ground but with his heart still circling the sky Shannon’s charm seems to be turning real. Anna is not shy about returning the feelings. Anna is reeling in the Colonel like a prize trout as she has been sent to America as a “honey-trap” to lure one of America’s top pilots back to Russia with her.

As Anna tells her Russian superior about Shannon, “The man’s in love with me. There’s nothing he wouldn’t do for me!”

Anna and Shannon do fly to Russia on an exchange mission. Neither of the two pilots is playing above board as the tedium balances between espionage and lip-lock.

Thirty minutes could have been easily trimmed from this lingering bowser to make it less trying. The perpetual scenes of the two pilots exploring American life look more like a spread in LOOK magazine than a movie plot. If patience is not one of your virtues than the fast-forward button may be your best friend.

The Duke is armed with his normal charm, but the boorish dialogue he’s asked to spout is just embarrassing. To his credit he plays it straight, no matter how ridiculous it makes him look. Leigh is completely unbelievable as a top-tier Russian pilot, but she does look great in the swim wear that she inexplicably models. Beyond looking good and reciting her lines while looking earnest she isn’t asked to do much. It’s capitalism vs. communism by way of Peyton Place. If you like your politics served with melodramatic hokem this one may be for you.

2* (out of 10) For Duke completists or aviation buffs only.

[movieman1957]

I saw this years ago when it was released after some rights issues. I think it was a Howard Hughes production. WHich may have been part of the problem.

It was my desire to be a Wayne completist. (Now all but a couple of B westerns.) What a joke. Wayne and Leigh must have been having a bad day when they agreed to do this stuff. For all its faults Leigh still looks good. Hardly worth the sitting through though.

I admire your diligence in putting together all the notes you did when you could just as easily have said "YUCK!" You're a good and faithful reviewer.

[cinemalover]

Well, I'll tell ya', Chris, as I mentioned earlier in this thread I rarely can stop a film once I start it, no matter how tepid it is. This one tested my stance on that policy, but I managed to survive. Besides, the bad films can be a lot more fun to write about just because I feel I can vent my lost time on them. I'll teach them to toy with my affections!

[movieman]

Chris,
You know how to say it!

Nancy,

I know "The Sundowners" is considered a classic. But, I don't like the music, and the overall feeling of the movie. It's that "we're havin' a jolly good time haven't we, mate?".
And all the shots of nature and animals seems more like an excuse for showing us the beautiful Australia and don't add much to the plot.
Maybe, this movie hits homebase mostly for women?
The performances are very good, but the overall feeling didn't convince me.
Try making me change my mind, Nancy...

Even

[knitwit45]

Even, first off: My sister-in-law is full Norwegian, 3rd generation, her Christian name is Gudrun Oline. And SHE says the only thing harder-headed than a Norwegian is a diamond, so I might be doing this for nothing but the fun of organizing my thoughts.

I love the music, it just seems to fit with the rolling hills, sweeping vistas of beautiful scenery, and is full of romance. That is the key to the movie, the ongoing romance of Mitchum and Kerr. He has chosen a hard life, and she loves him so much she's followed him, even though she wants a permanent home of her own. He loves her so much he tries to give it to her. Peter Ustinov is kind of the catalyst that stirs things up a bit, making both of them take a hard look at their nomadic life. Glynis Johns is marvelous as the pub owner with her sights set on Mr. Ustinov.

Reading this over, I guess it really is a "chick flick". Anyone care to chime in????

Nancy