Bestseller gets a witty, slightly erotic treatment

SEX AND THE SINGLE GIRL (1964)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

"Sex and the Single Girl" is the kind of mid-1960's brightly-colored romantic comedy that depends on slapstick and innuendo to make it sing. It does sing...until the 3/4 hour mark and it falls apart. Still, I enjoyed it but it hastily retreats to Road Runner cartoon territory and it almost gets submerged.

Tony Curtis, the paramount romantic leading man with something always up his sleeve, is Bob Weston, a writer for the dirtiest, smuttiest magazine in the country called "STOP." He truly hates a new best-selling book called "Sex and the Single Girl" written by Dr. Helen Gurley Brown (Natalie Wood), a 23-year-old psychologist involved in researching marital difficulties (Of course, this movie is based on the very same book by an actual writer named Dr. Helen Gurley Brown). She hates the negative attention she's gotten from Weston after an expose declaring her a virgin with no expertise. Weston gets the bright idea of pretending to be his neighbor, Frank Broderick (Henry Fonda), who runs a panty hose business and has marital problems with his wife (Lauren Bacall). When Weston meets with Dr. Brown and insist she help him with his faux marital issues, love slowly develops in the air.

"Sex and the Single Girl" could have used a snappier pace, especially with long-winded scenes between Fonda and Curtis playing golf that do not coalesce with the romantic sparks. When Curtis and Wood are on screen together (as they were the following year in "The Great Race"), they sparkle and are great fun to watch, especially the seduction scene that runs an eternity and yet it feels like just the right length. I also love the scene where Wood has a date with a flirtatious psychiatrist (Mel Ferrer) and their evening at her apartment is interrupted by Weston claiming he is about to kill himself by jumping off a pier! Scenes between Fonda and Bacall are tepid at best, evoking a squabbling old married couple that feels out of tune with the more animated Curtis and Wood.

Natalie Wood proves adept at comedy and at eroticism, the latter rather briefly (and she carried both more successfully in "Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice"), especially when she is nervously trying to put on her glasses or the way she lovingly gazes at Curtis' eyes or her final scene that I found genuinely moving. Tony Curtis is the sharpest screen presence you can imagine, and he does it all with poise and grace. But then we get that last ridiculous climax that belongs to another movie, a car chase involving two taxicabs and an insane motorcycle cop who tries to arrest everyone that is more in tune with "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad World" than the confines of a witty, slightly erotic romantic comedy. 

Pilgrim's action is the fact that became legend

THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE (1962)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Westerns that have pistol-packin' cowboys fighting Indians were hundred fold during the 1930's up until the 1950's. Westerns with noble heroic cowboys who sought to right any wrongs usually by gunfire were also ubiquitous. But when director John Ford made a western, he was way ahead of the curve of most - nihilism and/or good vs. evil were not his concerns, it was skewed morality and the dubious nature of righteousness. "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" has the Duke himself, John Wayne, and he packs some heat for sure, and James Stewart as a law-abiding lawyer in the making with Lee Marvin as the deadly Liberty Valance, a gunfighter always looking for a fight. It looks like a traditional western but it is far more eloquent about the Old West - like an elegy about who your true heroes are and how they are written in the history books.

Stewart plays the main protagonist, Ransom "Ranse" Stoddard, a lawyer who becomes a Senator later in life and the film begins with Ransom visiting his old stomping grounds to pay his respects to Tom Doniphon (John Wayne, a far too underrated actor), a rancher who was adept with a gun and an attitude (he sees himself as the only one who could kill Liberty Valance). Right from the start, Ford's theme of legends is scrutinized when the local newspaper doesn't recall who Doniphon was or know much about him. As Stoddard (who is running for President) explains his story, we flash back to the days when Stoddard's carriage was robbed by Liberty Valance (Marvin) and his two cronies (one played by Lee Van Cleef). Stoddard is badly wounded and ferociously whipped and is nursed back to health by Hallie (Vera Miles, in one of her very best roles) who helps run a restaurant in the town of Shinbone. Stoddard works the kitchen by cleaning dishes and occasionally waits on customers (considered a woman's job) and opens his own law practice and teaches illiterates how to read (boy, does he have time to court Hallie too?) Naturally Tom is hesitant to react to anyone, including Liberty Valance, with anything but force - laws mean little to him. Tom has his sweet little ranch and hopes to marry Hallie. Ford slowly develops the tension between Tom and Stoddard - they respect each other but they are on opposites sides of the law. How much good can the law provide when you are dealing with a disruptive and dangerous maniac like Liberty Valance? The townspeople of Shinbone may admire Stoddard but even they know that guns are the only active solution - in a running gag, the local Marshal Link Appleyard (Andy Devine, often hysterically funny) runs away anytime Liberty appears. Yep, he's no help and he provides some welcome comic relief throughout the film.

"The Man Who Liberty Valance" eventually culminates in a scene that we all anticipate - the shooting of Liberty. Doddard decides that it is the sole solution yet he realizes later, thanks to Tom, that he was not the only one who shot the villainous gunfighter. The tension grows again between Stoddard and Tom, especially when Stoddard is appointed as a Congressional delegate in a town that is about to receive statehood. The question is can a law-abiding citizen who takes the law into his own hands stand up and practice the ethics of law where non-violence is suggested? That all changes in the last third of the film where conflicts about character and legends are put into question. Would Stoddard had half a chance in politics had he not killed Liberty Valance? Valid question when you consider he did not actually kill Liberty. Meanwhile, Tom loses Hallie, burns down his ranch and recedes from history. It is a heartbreaking coda for both men.

John Ford's "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" is tough, bleak and unsentimental with no rosy touches, no barroom brawls, no duels at the town square, just simply a rough, unvarnished Western where heroes and villains are judged not by truth but by what is perceived as truth. Violence in this film is seen as a justifiable institution, whoever has the courage to enforce it. John Ford sees the Old West as what it was, and others would rather print the legend, not the reality.

Separation anxiety over these Universal Monsters

HOUSE OF FRANKENSTEIN (1944)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

The Universal Horror series had some first class entries in the Universal Monster canon. The Frankenstein series did well until about "Ghost of Frankenstein" (still fairly chilling thanks to Lugosi's Ygor). Then the series started incorporating other Monsters from their lot, bringing back the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney, Jr.) in the respectable "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" though the film was a sequel to two movies! The Wolf Man subplot was superior but the Lugosi Frankenstein Monster left too much to be desired in that film. Another sequel arrived in 1944 with the underwhelming though still fun "House of Frankenstein." Though it has a myriad of problems, it is still the world of foggy landscapes, a still functioning Frankenstein castle after 15 years since its supposed destruction (not to mention fresh linens in the castle dorms), flirtatious gypsy women, a burgomaster, and the return of the Wolf Man, the Monster, and a fresh batch of new faces including yet another mad scientist and a hunchback assistant (J. Carrol Naish, though he is no Ygor). And we also return to the land of Vasaria, which for some reason the road sign is spelled "Visaria."

Boris Karloff, in the film's most astute, clear-minded performance, is a mad scientist named Dr. Niemann who seeks revenge from his jail cell after being imprisoned for unholy scientific experiments. Wouldn't you know that a horrible electrical storm tears a hole through the prison's concrete floor and, just like that, he and the hunchback assistant flee in the rainstorm. They run into a Professor Lapinski (George Zucco, wish there was more of him) who travels through various carnivals to promote the skeletal body of Count Dracula (John Carradine) who has a stake through his vertebrae. Niemann and the hunchback kill Lapinski while the scientist assumes his name and removes the stake only to bring back Dracula, who must do Niemann's bidding or be staked through the heart. Since when does Dracula have to listen to anyone? Eventually we get a newly married couple who encounter Dracula and a carriage chase ensues, and then the couple disappear from the rest of the movie!

Niemann and his assistant go to Frankenstein's castle (I could have sworn it was completely destroyed in the last sequel), reanimate the Monster (this time played by Glenn Strange) and promises the resurrected Larry Talbot a cure, or something like that (Niemann may replace the hunchback's brain with Larry's or vice versa). Calamity ensues, especially when earlier in the film Niemann allowed a fun-loving gypsy girl Ilonka (Elena Verdugo) to come along - she first falls for the hunchback and then falls for Larry Talbot who drives the carriage to Frankenstein's castle! She develops an affection for Larry, culminating in a twist involving silver bullets that most will not see coming.

"House of Frankenstein" either could've been a swell Dracula movie involving Niemann and the hunchback or a Wolf Man movie involving Ilonka and Niemann and company. When both are meshed, it becomes a clumsily patched mess. The film was heralded at the time as "All the Screen's Titans of Terror - Together in the Greatest of All SCREEN SENSATIONS!" Only the advertising is incorrect - Dracula doesn't share any scenes with Wolf Man or Frankenstein's Monster. Even the Wolf Man barely has a moment with the Monster. The film is a cheat, hurriedly paced yet it still holds a certain bizarre fascination with me, possibly out of nostalgia. Karloff the Uncanny steals the show.  

They Speak too much to be Happy

LA POINTE COURTE (1955)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Many film scholars and critics might point to Godard's "Breathless" as the birth of French New Wave filmmaking yet it is actually Agnes Varda's electrifying debut film, "La Pointe Courte," that is the true sire of a new kind of cinematic language where connections need not be made obvious, and sometimes a disparity can exist between images of one location versus the other (though it does not adopt the raw jump cuts and odd assemblage of scenes and angles as Godard's film does). Shot in black-and-white documentary-like fashion, it is a stunning film of raw nerve and honest, heartbreaking beauty.

"La Pointe Courte" is not about plot but about a way of life, the disparity here is between a Parisian married couple trying to reconnect and communicate and find their voice in a fishing village. In the village itself (which is where the husband grew up), communication extends to parents feeding children and maintaining old fashioned views on marriage; fishermen being harassed by local police on forbidden areas to trap shellfish, and the problematic issue of too many cats. Clothes are frequently seen hanging on clotheslines, fluttering in the wind. We see a lot of chopped wood, unkempt shacks and a casual disregard for cleanliness (a nearby lagoon for fishing is contaminated) - these people are poor and just getting by but they remain earthbound in their attitudes and sensibilities particularly about their offspring and whom they should date and marry.

The Parisian couple (played by Silvia Monfort and Philippe Noiret) have a casual disregard for the past, they march along the village and wait for a train car to pass (without wondering for a second what the hell a slow train car is doing in the area), they ask for a canoe to take them to a hotel when they could have used the connecting bridge, and they cut through a village celebration and dance at the end ready for their own lives in the city. They are concerned with a future where marriage is less about excitement and more about living through it with some measured wisdom. It is implied that the villagers may have similar ideals but they do not dwell on it.

"La Pointe Courte" ultimately serves as a visual poem, enlightening us on how the past intrudes on the future. The descendants probably have a firmer grasp of reality than the couple (interestingly, the villagers are never really show in close-up but the couple is shown in intense close-ups where one face obscures the other in awkwardly distinct directions). Varda's film is about grit versus romanticism, especially in filmmaking. It will not be to everyone's taste but it will linger long after it is over. A first-class miracle of a movie.

Larry Talbot is still pure of heart

FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLF MAN (1943)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

As a true sequel to 1941's "The Wolf Man," "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" is right on the money due to the presence of sad sack Lon Chaney Jr. as Larry Talbot, man by day, raging werewolf at night. As a sequel to the frequently chilling "The Ghost of Frankenstein," it doesn't work. This is one of those rare instances (perhaps the first) where you have a sequel to two different movies and yet they do not coalesce as evenly as they should.

In the eerie foggy banks of the opening scene, a couple of thieves break into the Talbot crypt, helping themselves to Larry Talbot's priceless rings. Before you can say, fellas there is a full moon out there, Talbot turns into the Wolf Man, killing one thief while the other runs away. Then Talbot ends up in a hospital with a head wound, declaring himself to be Larry Talbot though he died four years earlier. The authorities are nonplussed, especially at some raging animal that kills the local constable. Nevertheless, Larry is off to find the soothsaying gypsy woman Maleva (Maria Ouspenskaya) - for those keeping a record of the events of "The Wolf Man," Maleva's son who on occasion became a werewolf bit Talbot. Maleva is not reluctant to help Larry and suggests that Dr. Frankenstein might be able to help him with his lycanthropy and ease his suffering through, I imagine, a Dr. Kevorkian method. This method of draining the life from Talbot will also be administered to the Frankenstein Monster (Bela Lugosi) who is brought back to life by Talbot  - in one rather contrived scene, he tears away at the Monster's confined ice tomb!

The best parts of "Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man" involve Lon Chaney, Jr. who is in a huge chunk of this movie, still showing the sincere, troubled, desperate Larry Talbot - you can't help but hope his predicament will be resolved. He is so tremendous in the movie that the plot didn't need the reanimated Frankenstein Monster (clunkily played by Lugosi). The subplot dealing with the welcome return of Maleva, the introduction of Baroness Elsa Frankenstein (Illona Massey, whom fans of Universal Monster flicks will remember from "Invisible Agent") whom Talbot takes a liking too are refreshing elements that make this sequel a slight cut above the subsequent entries in this series. Despite Lugosi's largely unremarkable Monster and a rather sloppy, hasty finale (oh, what happened to Maleva in that castle?), Lon Chaney Jr. makes us care and he is the heart and soul of this uneven Monster movie.

Intriguing Newspaper Noir

CALL NORTHSIDE 777 (1948)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

When James Stewart first appears in "Call Northside 777," he is working at a Chicago newspaper office typing away at a desk in the background, from the perspective of his editor boss's desk. The editor calls out "BOY!" to a relatively short young man who is sent to procure details on a convicted felon. Stewart is then called to the office and he is so tall and lanky that he has to shrink himself a little just to be in frame. There is some sense of towering over any story with a certain healthy skepticism from Stewart and, right away, I was immersed in Henry Hathaway's completely absorbing newspaper noir film.

A newspaper ad with a $5000 request for information on a convict serving 99 years for killing a police officer piques the interest of Chicago Times editor Brian Kelly (Lee J. Cobb, quite restrained). He asks one of his top reporters, McNeal (James Stewart), to verify it. This leads to an older woman scrubbing floors who had worked 11 years to come up with the money because she believes her son (Richard Conte) is innocent of the crime. McNeal is skeptical at first yet he is pushed further by Kelly to interview the suspect, get a lie detector test, interview the ex-wife, and so on. What transpires is not exactly hard-boiled detective (or reporter as detective) non-fiction nor will it invite much comparison to tougher noir pictures from the same period. What is fascinating is that "Call Northside 777" remains thoroughly involving as we are carried along with McNeal's own thorough investigation and we learn the details as he does (a rival newspaper photo has a clue that leads to a race-against-time climax). It will not come as any surprise that Conte's character and an alleged accomplice are innocent but it is the process that is intriguing.

Between the backroom intrigue of rival newspapers, legal ethics and selling newspapers with stories where someone's life is at stake, there is McNeal's crisis of conscience - can he really make a difference and do the right thing beyond printing salacious stories for a buck? Of course, with James Stewart aboard in an effortless performance, you know how this will turn out. "Call Northside 777" is an extremely entertaining, suspenseful and juicy film with close-to-the-bone documentary realism and occasional narration that actually works in its favor. Based on a true story, the film is so involving, so precise in its filmmaking and its performances that you will want to rewatch it immediately. I did.

Finding strength in what remains behind

SPLENDOR IN THE GRASS (1961)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

Up until the release of 1961's "Splendor in the Grass," the sprightly Natalie Wood had already played the naive ingenue in films like "The Girl He Left Behind, "A Cry in the Night," "Cash McCall" and "Marjorie Morningstar." The differences, aside from her spectacular turn in "Marjorie," is that Natalie delves into deeper territory here, exposing wounds that almost lead to tragic consequences. Elia Kazan's "Splendor in the Grass" is a grown-up movie about young people who are unable to conform to parents' expectations. 

As the story begins in Kentucky 1928, Wilma Dean "Deanie" Loomis (Natalie Wood) is deeply in love with football player Bud (Warren Beatty), but nothing is what it seems. There is no question loves exists between the two teens but is it just puppy love where sex is nonexistent? The answer is yes because Deanie will not have sex with Bud, despite his ongoing frustration. Deanie's mother is insistent that the couple do not consummate their love - the mother consummated with her husband only to produce a child, having sex recreationally was never a choice or a conjured thought. Deanie doesn't comprehend such a love bereft of passion.

Meanwhile, Bud wants to fulfill his own dreams and not necessarily what his wealthy father (colorfully and explosively played by Pat Hingle) expects. Bud's father wants him to attend Yale and then he can return to run the family business and marry Deanie (of course, if Deanie gets pregnant, Bud is expected to marry her regardless).

"Splendor in the Grass" has no real sentimental inclinations and probably bespeaks the 50's nuclear family unit more so than 1920's Kentucky values. Of course maybe writer William Inge is saying that nothing has changed, family unit is important and so is attaining wealth and conformity is essential. Since the period is the 1920's, the stock market crash is impending and tragedy befalls one family over the other. As we shift from the societal expectations of family unity, we see how Deanie reacts to Bud's brief affair with one of her classmates and how she cannot process the emotion of losing someone she loves. The naive ingenue has turned into an exposed live wire of emotion, and the film implies that such wrecked emotion (which almost leads to a suicidal drowning) can only be solved in a mental institution.

Natalie Wood has several electrifyingly emotional scenes, particularly when she breaks down while quoting Wordsworth in a classroom or the scene where she has a crying fit of rage in a bathtub. The scene in the bathtub with a naked Deanie screaming at her mother in agony at the prospect of her calling Bud is so powerful, so intensely saturated with emotion that you will spring from your chair and want to hug Natalie and tell her everything will be okay. It probably helps that director Elia Kazan was on board yet Natalie Wood's strength is in finding the vulnerabilities of her characters and nakedly exposing them - she is the movie, no question.

Warren Beatty has always been a strangely remote actor to me but as the indifferent Bud (who doesn't express a speck of emotion over the passing of his father), he singularly captures the kind of young man who sees a future that he cannot attain. His remoteness here works wonders and you feel more pity for him than sympathy. He is a lost soul but it is Deanie who finds the meaning of Wordsworth's poem and has learned that happiness is not always attainable.

"Splendor in the Grass" is elegantly made with a finesse and sophistication that can only come from Kazan with his upfront approach to the material. From scenes of heartbreak over Bud's flirtatious and drunk sister parading herself around others at a party, to the last chilling smile from Pat Hingle as Bud's father, to Bud seeing the possible mistakes he has made in the final scene, to Natalie Wood showing us an emotionally unstable young woman who is not so much emotionally disturbed as she is in adapting and controlling her emotions, "Splendor in the Grass" captures the soul of young love and its consequences. Deanie has control of the past by letting it go and is ready to move on, the other characters have more difficult adjustments to make. Pure Wordsworth poetry, and one of the purest Natalie Wood performances.