11/24/06
Like the painter Picasso, director Otto Preminger went through many periods. One of the most productive of which was the era of controversial epochs he made during the 1960's. The best of these films were not afraid to take on strong subject matter and powerful institutions, and succeeded in bringing there messages to the public in large part because they were dressed in Hollywood spectical. Exodus examiend the establishment of the state of Israel, Adivse and Consent the U.S. Senate, and The Cardinal The Roman Catholic Church. In Harms Way, Premingers 1965 opus of a World War II film, is not as successful as any the movies mentioned previously.
I don't know what it is exactly that the movie lacked, but when stacked up against the other films I just mentioned (with the possible exception of Exodus which I know only by reputation) the picture mostly falls flat. Where it does succeed however is in its incredible cast featuring then stars John Wayne, Kirk Douglas, Patrica Neal, Dana Andrews, Franchot Tone, Priminger discovery Tom Tryon and the directors frequent supporting player Burgess Meredith. The movie also boasts an impressive group of up & comers including George Kennedy, Carroll O'Conner and a young Larry Hagman.
Despite all this talented cast the film is slow going and surprisingly conventional. In fact the most visually intersting part of the flick comes in the end credits sequence where a wild sea storm slowly transforms into a montage of explosions and battle culminating in several mushroom clouds. This imagery coming during the relatively early stages of massive American military commitment in Vietnam speaks potential volumes. It is only a pity that the usually incisive Otto chose to be overly subtle throughout the rest of the movie.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Sun Valley Serenade (1941)
11/23/05
For my first movie review on this blog I have selected the 1941 film Sun Valley Serenade, which I watched earlier this evening. As a fan of the Glenn Miller Orchestra I have been meaning to see this film for some time. I regret that back in the winter of 99' I was unable to make the trip up to Sun Valley for a showing of the film with some of the surviving members of Millers orchestra, that would have been a neat experince.In watching this film it seems to me as if the whole movie were constructed by the studio in a despereate attempt to do something with various players they'd signed but had no idea how to use. The Nicholas brothers are here doing a dance number with a young Dorothy Dandridge (Note: I got to meet Fayard Nicholas in Burbank this last summer at the age of 90!). A pre-television Milton Berle does a fine job in a role that would have gone to Bob Hope if the film had been made at Paramount rather then Fox. Finally Glenn Miller himself comes off as a particularly stiff version of George Reeves in his Clark Kent persona.
The plot is typical of a programer of this sort, a light romance full of misunderstandigs and songs. John Payne is the lead playing Ted Scott a piano player with a little known band that's headed by Miller and managed by Berle. As part of a publicity stunt for the band Ted is talked into sponsoring a refuge from Europe. But craziness ensues when instead of the young tike he expected, Scott is saddled with the responsibility for 29 year Sonja Henie (in the film she's a refugee from Norway named Karen Benson). This situation of course leads to conflict with Vivan Dawn (Lynn Bari) the irritable lead singer Scott's been courting. So when Vivan gets so irritated that she splits just before the opening of the bands Sun Valley gig, it is very helpful that the group now has an Olympic quality figure skater on hand to take her place in the show. Yes I gave away the ending but you don't watch movies like this for plot. Anyway the flicks a harmless little distraction valuable mainly for its unusual cast and well choreographed musical numbers.
For my first movie review on this blog I have selected the 1941 film Sun Valley Serenade, which I watched earlier this evening. As a fan of the Glenn Miller Orchestra I have been meaning to see this film for some time. I regret that back in the winter of 99' I was unable to make the trip up to Sun Valley for a showing of the film with some of the surviving members of Millers orchestra, that would have been a neat experince.In watching this film it seems to me as if the whole movie were constructed by the studio in a despereate attempt to do something with various players they'd signed but had no idea how to use. The Nicholas brothers are here doing a dance number with a young Dorothy Dandridge (Note: I got to meet Fayard Nicholas in Burbank this last summer at the age of 90!). A pre-television Milton Berle does a fine job in a role that would have gone to Bob Hope if the film had been made at Paramount rather then Fox. Finally Glenn Miller himself comes off as a particularly stiff version of George Reeves in his Clark Kent persona.
The plot is typical of a programer of this sort, a light romance full of misunderstandigs and songs. John Payne is the lead playing Ted Scott a piano player with a little known band that's headed by Miller and managed by Berle. As part of a publicity stunt for the band Ted is talked into sponsoring a refuge from Europe. But craziness ensues when instead of the young tike he expected, Scott is saddled with the responsibility for 29 year Sonja Henie (in the film she's a refugee from Norway named Karen Benson). This situation of course leads to conflict with Vivan Dawn (Lynn Bari) the irritable lead singer Scott's been courting. So when Vivan gets so irritated that she splits just before the opening of the bands Sun Valley gig, it is very helpful that the group now has an Olympic quality figure skater on hand to take her place in the show. Yes I gave away the ending but you don't watch movies like this for plot. Anyway the flicks a harmless little distraction valuable mainly for its unusual cast and well choreographed musical numbers.
The Dredge Report: Movie Reviews
On my previous blog 'The Dredge Report' I posted many a film review. As a continuing project I am going to try and transcribe my movie reviews from that blog, onto this one, so that they will all be available on one site. This will take awhile. Also I'm going to avoid changing the format when I can, about all I anticipate altering is the titles of the reviews. I will keep with the simple film designation format that I have established here thus far. I will add the reviews in the chronological order in which they appeared on 'The Dredge Report'.
Jesus Camp (2006)
This is a paper I wrote for a class last semester on documentary film, thought I might include it here for discussion.
Examining Jesus Camp
Nate Dredge
Comm 494
Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady’s documentary Jesus Camp is a well made expose of an evangelical American subculture. It is important to point out however, that the people, practices and beliefs depicted in this film, are just that, A evangelical American subculture. Someone not well versed in the varieties of American Evangelicalism, might come away from this film viewing it as representative of the movement as a whole, this is off course not true. Jesus Camp gives us a look at a particular bread of charismatic Pentecostalism, one that accepts women preachers such as Becky Fischer, embraces speaking in tongues, is militantly anti-abortion, and is within the orbit of Republican national politics. This association of conservative evangelicalism, with Republican party politics has become so commonly held in our national psyche, that the film is able to say some things about this larger national group by examination a chosen sub-set. So while much of the politics of the film are not interchangeable with Evangelicalism as a whole, it is representative of a sizeable constituency within the movement. With this constituency having grown to immense political prominence, particularly within the years of the second Bush presidency, Jesus Camp can be said to be particularly relevant to the time of its production.
The aim of the film can be seen as a political one, while the actions of the individuals depicted in the film appear non-coursed, and indeed the vast majority of the participants in the project later stated they felt ther depiction there-in to have been fair, the movie is constructed rather blatantly along political lines. Counterpoint to the Republican subjects of the documentary is provided in the framing of the film, which features radio personality Mike Papantonio, of the decidedly liberal Air America network, opining on his fears regarding the aforementioned powerful constituency. Papantonio comes in and out of the film several times, each time commenting negatively upon the group of which Becky Fischer and Ted Haggard are presented as representative. However Papantonio comes across as a balanced and removed observer, objective in a way the documentary’s other participants are not. Papantonio, who describes himself as a Christian by upbringing, can disparage against the methods and teachings of Fischer and her ilk as being, “not the Christianity I grew up with”, but rather a warped, or a just ‘not quite right’ variant there of. Papantonio is always shown to be fair and reasoning, while the others in the film are depicted as so wrapped up in their little world as to be removed from true reality.
The final scene of the film, when Becky Fischer takes here vehicle through a car wash while listening to a reverend preach conservative social politics on the radio, is subtle invocation of Papantonio’s, and by extension the filmmakers, views of their subjects religion. The car wash constitutes a ‘warped baptism’, one removed and not truly purifying of the individual that experiences it, as such it is reprehensive of Papantonio’s views of Ms. Fischers faith. This false baptism climaxes when the wash doors open reveling a Pier One Imports and a freeway, a decidedly commercial landscape. This commercial landscape of chain stories, highways, and billboards with simplistic Christian sentiments emblazoned upon them, are repeatedly displayed throughout the film, and wedded to the vision of the America Ms. Fischer and her co-religionist are trying ‘to protect’. This wedding of politically conservative and eccentric evangelicalism, with a bland corporatist Midwestern environment is cemented in these images overlay with Becky Fischer’s comments about loving and wanting to preserve there way of life.
Explicitly the film is about the experiences of children at Becky Fishers ’Kids on Fire’ summer camp in Devils Lake, North Dakota. While a good number of children are depicted in the film, it keeps its focus through following a few in greater detail then the rest. Foremost among those followed are Levi, Rachael and Victoria, with there families and associates providing additional commentary. While this is the straight forward subject matter of the film, as stated before the implicit meaning is in the packaging. The framing once again is important for this, because of the political aspects of the film. The sense of time in the film is very much built around the resignation of moderate supreme court justice Sandra Day O’Conner and the fight to appoint conservative justice Samuel Alito to fill her set. As Papantonio points out in the film, Fischers emphasis on a youth ministry serves duel theological and political purposes, that combine in fostering the creation of an youthful ‘army for the Republican party’. As the Tory children toward the end of the film (after there instructive period at Becky Fischers camp), mix with politically influential preacher Ted Haggard and travel to Washington D.C. to protest abortion, Papantonios point seems to be born out. This is also the subjective meaning of the film, Fischer and her associates dress in religious jargon something that is mostly political in social impact.
That any group socializes and instructs its young so as to perpetuate its traditions and world view is not something that in itself is liable to cause much controversy. Jesus Camp however manages to infect a slightly sinister tinge to this process as practiced by Becky Fischer and others. To make this affect in advocating a implicate sense of disconcertion on the part of the audience, it is important that its point of critique extend beyond the political. Politics is subjective, viewers opinions on the issues vary, but if an audience can be brought to think that some indoctrination method is harmful to the participants, they are more likely to reassess and think critically about what is being presented. This can be aided a little through slight and subtle tweaks with the material, such as the use of the foreboding music when showing the camp at night. More effective however is to see the effects of the process on the subjects. We are presented with many scenes in Jesus Camp of impressionable young children reacting with strong emotions to there experiences at the camp and else where. That these children have internalized and taken what they have learned at face value is manifest in many ways. The young girl speaking of ‘dancing for the flesh sometimes’ shows the assimilation of a rather heavy, sexually laden and adult conception of sin, incorporated into her perceptions of what many of her piers would doubtless view as harmless childhood play. The emotional devastation and fear shown on the faces of children called out for hypocrisy and sin by their leaders, should be enough to convince many viewers that they are witness a type of spiritual abuse, and that the kids are being harmed on a psychological level.
The movie is subtle in its implicit advocacy by its seeming neutrality. The interaction of the crew with the subjects is minimized, we don’t even hear the film makers during interviews,something that should naturally take us out of the cinema verta aspects of the work. It is perhaps not a wonder that so many of the participants in the film, failed to view the finished project in a negative light, despite implicate criticism within the context of the film. They are presented as they are, nothing explicitly negative is said. The theologically an politically committed subjects of the piece see things within a filter of belief not shared by the audience at large. It is through a purportedly objective viewing of the subjective worldviews of the participants of Jesus Camp, that the audience sees these figures within a context evoking fanaticism. The movie I think dose have a proverbial ax to grind, but it is skillfully handled and for the most part wilded in a manner that does not seem overly reactionary. As a film it displays a masterful understanding of construction and subtle implication, it allows its subjects to do its advocacy for it in a thought provoking manner.
Examining Jesus Camp
Nate Dredge
Comm 494
Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady’s documentary Jesus Camp is a well made expose of an evangelical American subculture. It is important to point out however, that the people, practices and beliefs depicted in this film, are just that, A evangelical American subculture. Someone not well versed in the varieties of American Evangelicalism, might come away from this film viewing it as representative of the movement as a whole, this is off course not true. Jesus Camp gives us a look at a particular bread of charismatic Pentecostalism, one that accepts women preachers such as Becky Fischer, embraces speaking in tongues, is militantly anti-abortion, and is within the orbit of Republican national politics. This association of conservative evangelicalism, with Republican party politics has become so commonly held in our national psyche, that the film is able to say some things about this larger national group by examination a chosen sub-set. So while much of the politics of the film are not interchangeable with Evangelicalism as a whole, it is representative of a sizeable constituency within the movement. With this constituency having grown to immense political prominence, particularly within the years of the second Bush presidency, Jesus Camp can be said to be particularly relevant to the time of its production.
The aim of the film can be seen as a political one, while the actions of the individuals depicted in the film appear non-coursed, and indeed the vast majority of the participants in the project later stated they felt ther depiction there-in to have been fair, the movie is constructed rather blatantly along political lines. Counterpoint to the Republican subjects of the documentary is provided in the framing of the film, which features radio personality Mike Papantonio, of the decidedly liberal Air America network, opining on his fears regarding the aforementioned powerful constituency. Papantonio comes in and out of the film several times, each time commenting negatively upon the group of which Becky Fischer and Ted Haggard are presented as representative. However Papantonio comes across as a balanced and removed observer, objective in a way the documentary’s other participants are not. Papantonio, who describes himself as a Christian by upbringing, can disparage against the methods and teachings of Fischer and her ilk as being, “not the Christianity I grew up with”, but rather a warped, or a just ‘not quite right’ variant there of. Papantonio is always shown to be fair and reasoning, while the others in the film are depicted as so wrapped up in their little world as to be removed from true reality.
The final scene of the film, when Becky Fischer takes here vehicle through a car wash while listening to a reverend preach conservative social politics on the radio, is subtle invocation of Papantonio’s, and by extension the filmmakers, views of their subjects religion. The car wash constitutes a ‘warped baptism’, one removed and not truly purifying of the individual that experiences it, as such it is reprehensive of Papantonio’s views of Ms. Fischers faith. This false baptism climaxes when the wash doors open reveling a Pier One Imports and a freeway, a decidedly commercial landscape. This commercial landscape of chain stories, highways, and billboards with simplistic Christian sentiments emblazoned upon them, are repeatedly displayed throughout the film, and wedded to the vision of the America Ms. Fischer and her co-religionist are trying ‘to protect’. This wedding of politically conservative and eccentric evangelicalism, with a bland corporatist Midwestern environment is cemented in these images overlay with Becky Fischer’s comments about loving and wanting to preserve there way of life.
Explicitly the film is about the experiences of children at Becky Fishers ’Kids on Fire’ summer camp in Devils Lake, North Dakota. While a good number of children are depicted in the film, it keeps its focus through following a few in greater detail then the rest. Foremost among those followed are Levi, Rachael and Victoria, with there families and associates providing additional commentary. While this is the straight forward subject matter of the film, as stated before the implicit meaning is in the packaging. The framing once again is important for this, because of the political aspects of the film. The sense of time in the film is very much built around the resignation of moderate supreme court justice Sandra Day O’Conner and the fight to appoint conservative justice Samuel Alito to fill her set. As Papantonio points out in the film, Fischers emphasis on a youth ministry serves duel theological and political purposes, that combine in fostering the creation of an youthful ‘army for the Republican party’. As the Tory children toward the end of the film (after there instructive period at Becky Fischers camp), mix with politically influential preacher Ted Haggard and travel to Washington D.C. to protest abortion, Papantonios point seems to be born out. This is also the subjective meaning of the film, Fischer and her associates dress in religious jargon something that is mostly political in social impact.
That any group socializes and instructs its young so as to perpetuate its traditions and world view is not something that in itself is liable to cause much controversy. Jesus Camp however manages to infect a slightly sinister tinge to this process as practiced by Becky Fischer and others. To make this affect in advocating a implicate sense of disconcertion on the part of the audience, it is important that its point of critique extend beyond the political. Politics is subjective, viewers opinions on the issues vary, but if an audience can be brought to think that some indoctrination method is harmful to the participants, they are more likely to reassess and think critically about what is being presented. This can be aided a little through slight and subtle tweaks with the material, such as the use of the foreboding music when showing the camp at night. More effective however is to see the effects of the process on the subjects. We are presented with many scenes in Jesus Camp of impressionable young children reacting with strong emotions to there experiences at the camp and else where. That these children have internalized and taken what they have learned at face value is manifest in many ways. The young girl speaking of ‘dancing for the flesh sometimes’ shows the assimilation of a rather heavy, sexually laden and adult conception of sin, incorporated into her perceptions of what many of her piers would doubtless view as harmless childhood play. The emotional devastation and fear shown on the faces of children called out for hypocrisy and sin by their leaders, should be enough to convince many viewers that they are witness a type of spiritual abuse, and that the kids are being harmed on a psychological level.
The movie is subtle in its implicit advocacy by its seeming neutrality. The interaction of the crew with the subjects is minimized, we don’t even hear the film makers during interviews,something that should naturally take us out of the cinema verta aspects of the work. It is perhaps not a wonder that so many of the participants in the film, failed to view the finished project in a negative light, despite implicate criticism within the context of the film. They are presented as they are, nothing explicitly negative is said. The theologically an politically committed subjects of the piece see things within a filter of belief not shared by the audience at large. It is through a purportedly objective viewing of the subjective worldviews of the participants of Jesus Camp, that the audience sees these figures within a context evoking fanaticism. The movie I think dose have a proverbial ax to grind, but it is skillfully handled and for the most part wilded in a manner that does not seem overly reactionary. As a film it displays a masterful understanding of construction and subtle implication, it allows its subjects to do its advocacy for it in a thought provoking manner.
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Follow Me, Boys! (1966)
(The town of Hickory and environs, probably in the sate of Illonis; 1930-1950)
IMDb
I really enjoyed this straight forward Disney fare about the twenty year career of a beloved small town scout master. Fred MacMurray is that scout master, Lemuel Siddons, a veteran of the First World War, college graduate, and saxophonist in a traveling band who aspires to be a lawyer. When his bus stops in the small town of Hickory, Lemuel (or Lem to his friends) decides to put down roots, not least because he has his eye on young bank employee Vera Miles. To impress said young lady, Mr. Sunny Can-do Lem volunteers to take on the job of local scout master when nobody else wants it. Oddly in time this strategy works and the two get married.
The movie is episodic, which is completely appropriate for it. Lem organizes the troop, helps them build a cabin, and mentors troubled young boy "Whitey". When Whitey's well intentioned but alcoholic father dies, the Siddons adopt him, which works out fine because they are unable to have children of their own. As time passes Whitey grows up to be a doctor and serves in the Second World Ward, while Lem stays at home with the scouts. One of the more amusing episodes concerns the scout troop getting mixed up in military war games in 1944, they capture a tank. Towards the end of the film Lem manages to save the scouts unofficial lake front home from a greedy banker, and later a scout camp is built there and named in his honor. This is truly the Mr. Hollands Opus of boy scout movies (are there other boy scout movies?). Pure, Innocent, and very WASPy Disney family fare.
IMDb
I really enjoyed this straight forward Disney fare about the twenty year career of a beloved small town scout master. Fred MacMurray is that scout master, Lemuel Siddons, a veteran of the First World War, college graduate, and saxophonist in a traveling band who aspires to be a lawyer. When his bus stops in the small town of Hickory, Lemuel (or Lem to his friends) decides to put down roots, not least because he has his eye on young bank employee Vera Miles. To impress said young lady, Mr. Sunny Can-do Lem volunteers to take on the job of local scout master when nobody else wants it. Oddly in time this strategy works and the two get married.
The movie is episodic, which is completely appropriate for it. Lem organizes the troop, helps them build a cabin, and mentors troubled young boy "Whitey". When Whitey's well intentioned but alcoholic father dies, the Siddons adopt him, which works out fine because they are unable to have children of their own. As time passes Whitey grows up to be a doctor and serves in the Second World Ward, while Lem stays at home with the scouts. One of the more amusing episodes concerns the scout troop getting mixed up in military war games in 1944, they capture a tank. Towards the end of the film Lem manages to save the scouts unofficial lake front home from a greedy banker, and later a scout camp is built there and named in his honor. This is truly the Mr. Hollands Opus of boy scout movies (are there other boy scout movies?). Pure, Innocent, and very WASPy Disney family fare.
Saturday, June 2, 2007
The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947)
(London and Wytcliff England; roughly 1900-1947)
IMDb
Fantasy romance based on the novel by R. A. Dick. A year after the death of her husband, Lucy Muir (Gene Tierney) takes her child and maid and moves from her in-laws residence in London, to a quite seaside village. There she is rather taken by a house that has become the bain of a local real estate company. It seems sense the place first came on the market no tenet has stayed longer then one night, convinced the house to be haunted. The willful Mrs. Muir decides to move in anyway, and quickly becomes acquainted with the resident spook, the late Captain Daniel Gregg (Rex Harrison). All things considered Mrs. Muir takes this development rather well, and her and Captain quickly enter into a teasing, even flirty relationship characterized by lite banter. Having brought up the banter I need to mention the dialogue in this film, as it kind of bugged me. The scene in which Lucy and the Captain have there first prolonged conversation is very plot-point to plot-point, and didn't feel natural, in fact I found it quite stilted. It went from things like, 'you're a ghost?', 'I'm a ghost', how'd you die?', 'accident, not suicide', 'this is my house!', 'no, this is my house'. It just seemed so formula and uninspired I though it was going to ruin the movie for me, as it over expeditioned the whole set up, fortunately it improved somewhat and there was viewing compensation available, such as the chemistry between Tierney and Harrison.
Gene Tierney's performance seemed to improve with the film. Early one the Lucy role is rather limited, there was not much to be done with it, it was bound to be kind of predictable. In fact the budding romance between her character and the cynical children's author played by George Sanders, seemed mostly non sensible. Sanders character came on heavily as kind of a heel, in fact he proved in the end to be a pretty despicable fellow, which made Lucy's enamoration with him seem odd and out of character for what would have been a fairly liberated women for her time. All the other character seemed to see through him, why couldn't Lucy. In fact the whole episode only serves to validate the Captains views about frivolous, naive, femininity. Perhaps the writers thought the ghosts character needed to have some sort of a solid victory in the relationship, given that he quickly gave in to having mortally permanent residents in 'his house.' Harrison has most of the good stuff in the picture however, though I must say post-Sanders Lucy gets a few semi-poignant scenes towards the end.
I can see why this story's concept has rang so well with so many, especially women over the years. It's romantic yet chaste, fancifully but tragic all at the same time. One of the networks even managed to string out its proceedings for two seasons as a television series from 1968-70, though they moved the location to Main under the widely held assumption that Americans won't watch a foregone set programme (save MASH) in half hour time allotments. Seriously, name another American sitcome set abroad. I the end I didn't like this movie as much as I'd hope to, though its still a nice little production.
IMDb
Fantasy romance based on the novel by R. A. Dick. A year after the death of her husband, Lucy Muir (Gene Tierney) takes her child and maid and moves from her in-laws residence in London, to a quite seaside village. There she is rather taken by a house that has become the bain of a local real estate company. It seems sense the place first came on the market no tenet has stayed longer then one night, convinced the house to be haunted. The willful Mrs. Muir decides to move in anyway, and quickly becomes acquainted with the resident spook, the late Captain Daniel Gregg (Rex Harrison). All things considered Mrs. Muir takes this development rather well, and her and Captain quickly enter into a teasing, even flirty relationship characterized by lite banter. Having brought up the banter I need to mention the dialogue in this film, as it kind of bugged me. The scene in which Lucy and the Captain have there first prolonged conversation is very plot-point to plot-point, and didn't feel natural, in fact I found it quite stilted. It went from things like, 'you're a ghost?', 'I'm a ghost', how'd you die?', 'accident, not suicide', 'this is my house!', 'no, this is my house'. It just seemed so formula and uninspired I though it was going to ruin the movie for me, as it over expeditioned the whole set up, fortunately it improved somewhat and there was viewing compensation available, such as the chemistry between Tierney and Harrison.
Gene Tierney's performance seemed to improve with the film. Early one the Lucy role is rather limited, there was not much to be done with it, it was bound to be kind of predictable. In fact the budding romance between her character and the cynical children's author played by George Sanders, seemed mostly non sensible. Sanders character came on heavily as kind of a heel, in fact he proved in the end to be a pretty despicable fellow, which made Lucy's enamoration with him seem odd and out of character for what would have been a fairly liberated women for her time. All the other character seemed to see through him, why couldn't Lucy. In fact the whole episode only serves to validate the Captains views about frivolous, naive, femininity. Perhaps the writers thought the ghosts character needed to have some sort of a solid victory in the relationship, given that he quickly gave in to having mortally permanent residents in 'his house.' Harrison has most of the good stuff in the picture however, though I must say post-Sanders Lucy gets a few semi-poignant scenes towards the end.
I can see why this story's concept has rang so well with so many, especially women over the years. It's romantic yet chaste, fancifully but tragic all at the same time. One of the networks even managed to string out its proceedings for two seasons as a television series from 1968-70, though they moved the location to Main under the widely held assumption that Americans won't watch a foregone set programme (save MASH) in half hour time allotments. Seriously, name another American sitcome set abroad. I the end I didn't like this movie as much as I'd hope to, though its still a nice little production.
Take The Money and Run (1969)
(New Jersey and unspecified other locations progressively further south; 1935-contemporary)
IMDb
One of Woody Allen's "early funny ones." Done in mockumentary format, tales the story of Virgil Starkwell, a largely incompetent New Jersey born criminal and Cello enthusiast. The story and even the continuity are played lose, but its all just mere vehicle for Woody's comic antics. Some of the funner sequences include the marching band, the bathroom scene, and several escapes attempts. Amusing. Janet Margolin lovely as the love interest.
IMDb
One of Woody Allen's "early funny ones." Done in mockumentary format, tales the story of Virgil Starkwell, a largely incompetent New Jersey born criminal and Cello enthusiast. The story and even the continuity are played lose, but its all just mere vehicle for Woody's comic antics. Some of the funner sequences include the marching band, the bathroom scene, and several escapes attempts. Amusing. Janet Margolin lovely as the love interest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)