Badlands (1973) Review

Star Wars

Badlands is a razor sharp dissection of youthful arrogance taken to its extreme, succeeding due to its humanizing and detailed look at its main character. The film originally seemed to be primarily about the dangers of those wanting to take advantage of underage girls, with the scenes having a rhythm of the leads trying to find safety for themselves, then something always going wrong. The first scene of the runtime is of Holly, played by Sissy Spacek, discussing a potentially traumatic childhood experience that may disorient her as to what is or isn’t normal. Crucially, her and her father suddenly move. While Holly’s dad, like many others, is a bit stubborn and protective, Kit, played by Martin Sheen, offers her additional support. This is shown in the fish scene. Regardless, he is quick to set off red flags, like faking signatures. The story gets a lot more interesting when Holly becomes a little older, having a more nuanced view of what’s going on, while still being childlike. She is a very important character for the development of the themes, characterized by many moments like her awkwardly delivering a joke she probably read in a magazine, as if trying to acclimate herself to her surroundings as much as possible and make what she can out of it from a staged source.

Kit is a troubled and multi-layered role, acting realistically like an extreme example of youthful rebellion and overconfidence. He is constantly characterized by small absurdisms that prove how little thought he’s put in his behavior, not unlike how a child might follow what they want without considering the consequences. One example is his rudimentary home and defense mechanisms, put together in a way that’s not sustainable in the long term or even that effective in the short. Another is that at a point where he should carefully consider his options, he leaves his decision up to pure chance. Logically, his behavior continues to make no sense, with his extreme thoughtlessness very compelling, possibly due to it making him vulnerable to the audience. Despite the movie featuring narration from only Holly, we learn so much about Kit, including his contradictions or otherwise strange lines of logic which seem forced to justify his impulse behavior to himself. He shows disdain for bounty hunters that doesn’t extend to the police, but he later treats the police with the same disrespect. He is also misogynist, probably as that’s the only way he can justify how little agency or freedom he gives Holly, due to him trying to live his own fantasy.

Kit is both unpretentious and uncertain of himself. What is suggested is that his behavior might be desirable to many people and the difference between them and him is that he doesn’t have the ability to comprehend how untenable his choices are and he lacks an ability to empathize. He wants to be cared about and take what he wants. His decisions follow those goals, with little more to consider. Just like how Kit doesn’t seem to understand his own behavior, neither does Holly. She treats everything like a strange adventure that doesn’t have much real value or impact. She discussed Kit like he’s a fictional character or someone unrelated to her, whose attributes are described as descriptions instead of beliefs that might be intended to inform her on a way of thinking. Her barely involved attitude makes for a very compelling contrast to the “act for the sake of acting” Kit, with some of the finest moments of the film coming from when Holly metaphorically reaches the point where he does become “real”, with her not knowing anything better to do than just be direct, like how Kit had been when describing his wants or actions.

The many wide shots of terrain give the sense of endless possibilities and are nice to look at, though overtime they seem more and more fruitless and flat. The ground leads to everywhere, but it is not in and of itself anything, and feels endless. Due to a few methodical scenes followed by a fast action, the film manages to shock you by first giving the audience uncertainty or numbing them with more mundane scenes that also tell us about the leads or the world they’re in before something happens. This is helped by the score, which shows us how they feel due to the tropical tone, like we’re watching some light escapade, which creates a brilliant surreal atmosphere that makes the story feel not real.

A fairly common issue with these sorts of movies is the characters falling in love very quickly without seeing much of why. Considering the tight and snappy pace of the story, it is probably for the best to not have had more scenes of the leads bonding. A potential work around for this would be for the movie to start with the two already dating. Another minor complaint is that the mumbling of the characters, while there for a reason, means it is sometimes really difficult to hear what’s being said.

SPOILERS

One of the most heart wrenching scenes of the film is when Kit unexpectedly and brutally shoots Holly’s dad, like the act is nothing. One of Spacek’s strongest moments is when she asks if he’ll be okay while watching his lifeless body. One of Sheen’s best is of his face painted with disbelief that he did that. He tries to keep a calm and tempered attitude over the killing, probably to keep Holly from getting upset, but also due to not knowing what this says about himself. He even says to her he’s fine with her calling the police, partially realizing that what he’s done is wrong and not trusting himself to make the right decision. After this we get him cooking up a convoluted scheme that has no way of working, like he has found some way to justify his actions as a coping mechanism. The destruction of youth for Holly continues with the long shots of her house burning down, including her toys and pictures.

One initially confusing part details Holly walking with a woman to where Kit wants them, with them not knowing what he will do with his gun, the woman possibly thinking he’ll kill her and the man she’s with. Her demeanor is surprisingly calm. However, the quiet and conversational leads might be giving them hope that if they are simply non-aggressive they’ll be allowed to live. You can also hear her holding back tears, not being entirely calm. This scene also shows how in a moment of panic, destruction can come in rapid succession, with Kit trying to solve all his issues with his gun, though getting sloppier and sloppier with how he’s using it. It is not unlikely that the couple survived their murder attempt.

It progressively becomes less apparent to the leads and the audience why they’re even running away from the authorities other than out of a force of habit. You see Kit start to realize this when he doesn’t kill someone he told an obviously suspicious lie to. There would be no reason to kill him logically, though it could be justified to Kit as preventing a witness from causing trouble for them. Of course, the pointlessness can also be applied to his other victims. The difference is that the earlier ones were done when the sense of love and adventure Kit had was stronger. There’s a fine scene of the two dancing in pitch black to a song about a love that’s ended, like our lead is celebrating his dark and horrible journey before it stops being fun and ends, with some understanding it will. This comes to a breaking point when Holly decides to stop going with him. As an aside, we see his face up close right before she says she isn’t going to go with him, letting us really see him right before it really becomes clear how idiotic this all is to him and that the ordeal is running on fumes; the last moment he will feel free.

The reason why Holly loses interest is because someone like Kit becomes less interesting upon a deep exposure. There’s nothing to him other than his look. Her being able to talk to the rich man after most of his killings humanizes his victims and gives her an opportunity to see that it’s unnecessary to be murdering people. While not consciously, Kit removes avenues that could give Holly the opportunity to see the error of his behavior, like his friend or her father. Holly may realize that she’s been manipulated by the end, with her face in the last scene suggesting this, her eyes lacking a romantic view of Kit and comprehending better what’s happened to her. One issue with this is that she seemingly accepts him murdering her father, which you think would be a deal-breaker.

One reason why people, like Holly, would like this guy is because he is reasonably nice and doesn’t seem to even understand that he’s doing something wrong, with his “heart being in the right place”. He is often compared to James Dean, someone known for living in states of uncertainty while regardless looking cool. Even if you don’t know who James Dean is before watching this, you can gauge who he is from his appearance in a magazine and the comparisons to him clearly being reverent. If you are more familiar with James Dean, while he’s obviously no murderer, he gets boiled down to just this figure of “cool”, when the man himself as well as his characters are deeply complicated and troubled. While Kit is also troubled, not in the same way. Even in James Dean’s most famous film, his character is shaken by death. Nonetheless, Kit is liked partially because of a resemblance to a more empathetic person.

The message of Badlands seems to be to be wary of charismatic figures, who might take advantage of people that want something more interesting in their lives. He clearly has some degree of respect from the cops, which logically would make no sense as he killed one. His use of humor, like when talking to the police; kissing Holly when she wants to stop running; or looking like an underdog, when he calls the law “bastards” that will probably blame him for an overturned car, are ways that manipulators and violent people can make themselves look normal or likable to those around them. Holly is also just a teenager, so is very impressionable. One issue with this is his brutal response to Holly’s dad. What would make more sense, and help explain why Holly likes him, would be if the dad was shown to be problematic and/or he wasn’t killed and instead was just prevented from seeing Holly somehow. If the filmmakers didn’t want the dad in the meat of the story, they could have Kit kill him in a way where he could lie to Holly and say he is alive.

Many characters clearly admire Kit to a surprising degree. Arguably, this should have been more prevalent throughout the film, instead of being consolidated in the end with the police officers, but this works as essentially a twist. Just as someone like Billy the Kid, you know about his story after the fact, so does Kit get written into time once he’s no longer a threat and people see him as someone to laugh with or at. Someone seems to have an understanding of this, as Kit spent his imprisoned period in solitary confinement probably because he was a bad influence on others. His audio recording of his views on life and how others should act are reasonably common among “young rebels”, which feeds off of the view of himself he’s garnered. Despite this, he’s not saying anything profound, instead something that very well could’ve come from one of Holly’s magazines. Him burying his belongings and giving more to the police gives something for potential “fans” of his to look for or idolize, like they’re artifacts. He even gave his body to science after his death. In the beginning, Kit complains about someone littering, saying that if everyone did it the whole town would be a mess. Certain “outlaw” figures are celebrated for something positive about their behavior. That may be the intention of the reference to littering, though obviously that’s too minor a moment and it’s not even something the police would know about him, but it shows his mind is not focused on hate or killing, but supposed social injustices like anyone else, which adds a layer of irony to the character that is funny and might lighten his most extreme traits to the audience.

Probably my favorite scene of the film is Holly pondering over what could have been for her while looking at old photos, really taking in and thinking on the fact that she easily could have been anywhere if things went a bit differently at numerous points. Thus, there is no reason why her current situation should be looked at as the best it can get. Just like how those pictures of people living their lives represent possibilities, we also see Kit simply existing, like he’s another part of history or possibility and no more. The final shot of the sky is a touching one. Most of the film depicts Kit unable to transcend or get anywhere. One issue Holly had with him is that he would not be able to get a job, while he enjoys their mindless traveling. However, due to his actions, he has found a way to transcend simply being a bum. In turn, he does rise above and possibly is remembered fondly or not by people for years to come. Kit often seems mindless and driven by a desire to feel fulfilled, so now he is getting an experience that takes him to an ending point, a point where he no longer has to worry. He has gone above being a person, compared to the photos of people living and is now an ethereal idea that exists in the mind or “in the clouds”. This is foreshadowed by Kit burying those photos before Holly leaves him and he turns himself in. Now that those mementos of his humanity are gone, he can become a concept.

Kit, possibly with some limited understanding that he’s become a figure of cool, enjoys his newfound attention and respect while being slightly celebrated by the police at the end, clearly trying to enjoy his presence before he’s sentenced to death. There’s a wonderful dichotomy of law enforcers loving someone because they broke the law. They even say things like that he didn’t specifically cause one of them trouble and that they wish him luck, clearly not taking the degree of his crimes into account. In the beginning, Kit wasn’t respected enough to even be given a cigarette, but at the end he stands above them like he is on a stage. He’s now someone that has some focus and can partially satisfy his fear of dying alone. He even tries to assure this by letting himself be captured in a way that would make for a good story after a very thrilling chase scene, knowing that in this way he can continue to matter. He even says he always wanted to be a criminal, though he probably lied by saying he didn’t want to be as big of one out of thoughtlessness or for the sake of the myth, unless he was hoping to be a criminal in a way where he wouldn’t ruin his life. This is a bit doubtful due to how extreme his actions quickly become. While you think he would have mentioned his desired criminality earlier, note that we pretty much only know what Holly is told and it is possible he is just making all this up as he goes, maybe without realizing it. His relative ignorance over himself here and in many other scenes adds to the appeal.

Regardless of how likable Kit is, the film is still a tragedy. To emphasize this twisted coming of age tale, as well as Holly’s “loss of innocence”, even once Kit is gone from Holly’s life she marries her defense attorney’s son, showing she will continue to be defined and exist by this incident that she had little control in. Just like how we last see Kit in a plane and then the sky, we earlier saw Holly go up in a plane after leaving him. Kit seems to understand what he’s done and finally feels bad for the woman he loved, acknowledging killing her dad and saying they should talk more later, even at the end not thinking ahead that such a chance will never come, just like he did with any kind of future with Holly. He also referred to her dad’s death as if he didn’t take part in it, but the point is he has left complete and utter self-absordment. To the detriment of her prospering in life on her own terms, Holly will also go into the verbal history book of these events, also existing as a story more so than a living person.

OVERVIEW

Kit being often described by Holly shows that he, and by extension this story, is told as a tale filtered through the mind of another person and not just Kit himself doing his thing. It’s possible that even the filmed moments are not supposed to be taken as literal, and instead a personification of what Holly is saying. Kit has become folklore that the people in the movie might look up to or show interest in, and despite some variety in how you can interpret Badlands, you can’t deny; isn’t that terrifying?

Christmas in Connecticut (1945) Review

Barbara Stanwyck as Elizabeth Lane (Not Sloan!)

Christmas in Connecticut is a very charming and funny holiday film. Many wacky and bizarre things happen, with them generally being taken with a light heart. To epitomize this, John Sloan, played by Reginald Gardiner, finds the scheming of some other characters idiotic and doesn’t want to be involved, but is ultimately compelled to. It’s like the holiday spirit and comedic tone are forcing poor John into doing what the story needs, as if Christmas is this great force where magic happens. The basic concept of Barbara Stanwyck as Elizabeth Lane having to put on a fake life for the sake of pleasing her coworkers is a good hook and the movie delivers. Stanwyck is very likable, as usual. Stanwyck plays her humor-enhanced lines straight, letting the dialogue get the laughs. Her focus is on her believable character that doesn’t want to do something like interrupt or hurt anyone, but at the same time doesn’t want to lose personal things like her job or a new coat. When she does find something more stimulating and interesting, she lights up and is ready to take the world by storm.

There are a number of feminist themes at the heart of the story, which mostly revolve around Elizabeth. When she feels she has control, she takes it and enjoys it, often being fed up with those who in her eyes are not letting her just live. At around the one hour mark, she seems willing to do something she shouldn’t simply because it is finally giving her fulfillment. This is also in line with her character as this whole time she is pretending to be what is expected of a woman and considered to be the ideal, but she’s only doing it for money. A great performance of Stanwyck is when she yells about how tired she is of everything, which eventually gets to a good joke as a bonus. Arguably this “feminist” view is contradicted by her still just wanting love, but to counter that, most people want love and she doesn’t let her desire for such a thing get in the way of her job or independence. She in fact doesn’t seem to ever mind her job or wish she could be a housewife instead. Also, while she isn’t married, she claims to be, but still uses her own last name, which would suggest that in the lie she tells others she didn’t want to change it.

The other cast members essentially fill the role of giving non-comedic deliveries of comedic situations, which get laughs. Una O’Connor as Norah and to a lesser extent S.Z. Sakall as Felix Bassenak add a more wacky touch, seeming generally more animated than the others. Neither serve a crucial role, but work to steal the odd scene. Dennis Morgan as Jefferson Jones is one of the flatter, but also more important characters. He’s at his best in the beginning when he acts like this goofy guy that just wants some tasty food. The sight gag of him eating a well presented meal in a nice outfit on a raft in the middle of the water is hilarious. Another great shot is the romantic scene of two characters on a horse and carriage talking about their feelings, being surrounded by the pretty snow. The strong emotions of the characters have been just below the surface, so it doesn’t feel jarring when they finally come out, especially because the two now have privacy. The dialogue is very sweet and heartfelt. The scenes around this one are also funny.

SPOILERS

When Elizabeth first falls for Jefferson, she has a giant grin on her face and is about ready to abandon her facade for the sake of how good he makes her feel. Seeing as she probably thinks this will pass, she doesn’t go through with anything, such as a kiss. The scene gives us a nice chance to see Elizabeth be a little naughty, entertaining the possibility of being with this man. Another one of the most powerful scenes is at the end when Elizabeth is pleased to be arrested, as she will be with Jefferson and thus her marriage with John will be again put off, as if doing a social taboo can have the potential to free someone. Now that she knows she loves and wants to be with Jefferson, she lacks much of a care in the world, not even maintaining her lies when they fall apart as they to her have lost their value. This also represents her removing the mold expected of her, to be a wife and a mother in an overly idyllic scene. Even though she seems upset about losing her job, she is quick to move on to her next opportunity, not going to let things get her down. Beyond Elizabeth is Jefferson’s nurse and brief fiancée who similarly just “goes for what she wants” and doesn’t much worry about social judgment.

One issue, that also contradicts this theme, is Jefferson creepily forcing kisses on Elizabeth when she doesn’t want them. He predictably never gets in trouble for this. When Elizabeth learns that he is no longer engaged, they can in her eyes be together, which does go along with Elizabeth trying to be ethical, but also going for what she wants if there’s no reason not to have it. If you removed the lack of consent, Elizabeth going and kissing Jefferson at the end would be a great climactic moment that shows our lead finally getting what she was after. Morgan does still turn in a very good performance here, having this light in his eyes, like he is ravenous to be with Elizabeth. It’s a shame his energy here couldn’t have been used for a moment like when he finds out he doesn’t have to marry the nurse instead of on non-consensual gestures.

OVERVIEW

Ignoring any greater meaning, Christmas in Connecticut is consistently witty and well performed, with warm visuals and a sharp pace keeping the boat afloat and the 100-minute runtime feeling much shorter.

How to Steal a Million (1966) Review

Another of Audrey’s wonderful, memorable, and comical outfits

How to Steal a Million wins by being very charming and funny. The cast carry their material with a light heart and embracement of the absurdities. Some tropes of the era are present, like the chic leading lady with really attention-grabbing fashion, serious subject matter has a really relaxed tone, and the romance. Especially with the latter, these tropes are cleverly used to actually play into the main story and serve the most important purpose of the film, to get laughs. Audrey Hepburn as Nicole Bonnet has well fleshed out desires and objectives, which make for interesting developments when she has to compromise her values. Hepburn’s minor changes in body language paints a full picture of a character.

Peter O’Toole as Simon Dermott follows many more archetypes. He projects a light charm and class that feels rehearsed and too perfect, but you can’t look away due to how much personality is in his character. When he does things like throw the boomerang around, you want to see what he’ll do next, with the gears in his head clearly turning, just like with Nicole. The other two prominent characters are the weaselly Eli Wallach as Davis Leland and the big eyed and overconfident Hugh Griffith as Charles Bonnet. Neither are as developed as the leads, but are no less entertaining. You can imagine Griffith making a career off of his unique facial hair and eyes. Wallach is amusing in his determination with such ridiculous dialogue.

The story does take a little while to get going. A lot of time is killed establishing the premise and the characters. The highlight of the narrative is the main plan of the leads. While there is some value in the setup, especially in emphasizing the development of Nicole, it could’ve been heavily trimmed down. Nicole is also often looked at in a purely sexual context. While she fortunately has more to her, a few men will do something like plant a kiss on her or remark on her beauty, as if that’s all she’s worth. Once we’re at the height of the story, it is somewhat predictable, but not too much. In trying to think out what would happen next, I got some stuff wrong. The fact I even cared to do that shows the movie got me hooked!

SPOILERS

The heist the leads go on is not as absurd or implausible as one might imagine, with lots of novelties to make it interesting. Simon uses a magnet to move a key across a wall and eventually over a corner. He finds a clever way to unlock the door he’s stuck in from the inside. Things don’t ever really go wrong for him or Nicole, though they easily could’ve. When he is throwing his boomerang around, what if he hit something he didn’t mean to? What if after the alarms went off, one or more guards were told to remain in view of the sculpture? At one point, trouble is hinted at with Nicole leaving the closet she was in to just watch Simon. Nothing wrong comes of that, unlike what you’d expect. Not that it needs to, as it demonstrates Nicole starting to enjoy what she’s doing. Nothing particularly not going as planned is not an issue, as the adventure is in itself so well paced and creative.

The movie spoils what could have been a great twist by revealing early on that Simon isn’t actually a thief. At the end when he reveals it to Nicole would’ve made for a good shocker. Nicole’s response to this is nice and silly, adding to the hyper and fun tone. Challenging Nicole’s image as a nice girl, she seems to really enjoy the escapade and implies she would want to do something like it again. This arguably goes in contrast with her strong desire to not get in heat early on, but this is not an impossible turn and does work as a bit of absurdism. Similarly ridiculous is that Simon goes through so much just out of love for Nicole, which could be seen as an accidental parody of old Hollywood romances often being based on wild situations. The ending is similarly ridiculous, with Davis ending up with what he wanted. A highlight is when he’s afraid to even say a word to Nicole after being told to avoid her. He acts like a fool. Him ending up with the engagement ring he gave Nicole is humorous, though it is confusing how it got there, instead of Nicole or Simon retrieving it beforehand.

Another missed opportunity is not seeing how the leads escaped when the police showed up. You’d think that area would be heavily monitored. Our heroes in turn appear out of place, especially if they look like they’re carrying a reasonably big sculpture. Also, an explanation of why they couldn’t just walk out the front door immediately after stealing the sculpture would’ve been ideal.

OVERVIEW

How to Steal a Million supplies the laughs to be a solid film, though some filler and no strong theme would detract to those who want a story to make an effort to be as tight as possible.

Loving You (1957) Review

Elvis at the end of the film

Loving You was one of the more intriguing Elvis movies, with many commenting on its similarities to Elvis’ life. While I looked at this as a unique opportunity to see a perspective of someone’s career in a way you normally don’t, this could also be looked at negatively. Perhaps there were so few ideas for Elvis that they’d just jump to covering his brief history in the spotlight? Theoretically this depiction of him just being a lighthearted performer would be for the best, as Presley’s acting is famously flat here, but that doesn’t fit with when the movie tries to be a real story. The beginning focuses too much on the “rise” and the fun times, with it feeling like nothing is happening. The constant music ruins any decent pacing. The songs are all okay-to-good, but we could’ve lost some for pace. Some of them, such as “Party” are particularly dull. “Loving You” and some others are really nice offerings. It’s also annoying when the same song is performed more than once when just as easily a different one could’ve been played.

The movie improves a smidge when we get some character development. More nuanced than you’d expect is Elvis Presley as Deke Rivers being often driven by a desire to not be abandoned or alone, though mildly afraid of fame. This does go to explain some things and lend us some novelty. In Deke’s first public performance in the film, he is awkward, but not so much that you couldn’t see talent or potential. Presley is generally out of the way and quiet. I would imagine that’s because the man himself is not so comfortable with acting in movies, but that also works for the character. In fact, despite receiving top billing, Deke isn’t even the protagonist…

Lizabeth Scott as Glenda Markle pushes the story and receives the most character growth. She is initially a bit seedy, though reveals a heart of gold. Scott’s portrayal is simplistic, as is the character’s writing, though we get some nice moments of not knowing whether she’s telling the truth or not. Deke seems to trust in her more than anyone else. While this could lead to a lot of interesting ideas, it is mostly typical. While she does take advantage of him, it’s not in a way that really affects Deke’s mind meaningfully. She does push and want him to perform, even when he doesn’t.

As a commentary on Elvis’ life, it is serviceable. There is the issue of how sanitized everything is, but there’s a few highlights. Deke, just like Elvis, seems gullible, but caring. Still, his image is so sexy and apparently foreign that concerned parents get up in arms. (His defense against the parents seems like it was intended to cool off real ones!) One of the best scenes, that mirrors Elvis’ movie career, is when he’s pressured in public by someone to sing for everyone. That lack of privacy and practically forced to always be presenting himself does weigh on Deke and did Elvis. After this scene we get a moment of Deke not being so innocent or quiet. That imperfection is appreciated, though it doesn’t matter when it really should’ve. This scene, and the movie as a whole, is at least daring enough to show the music industry as somewhat nefarious and mentioning that someone like Elvis is popular because sex sells. Yes, they use the word sex.

SPOILERS

Deke not wanting a fan to kiss him shows thoughtfulness. Perhaps he doesn’t want to get anyone, including himself, into unwanted attention? Both the romances, and learning of the origins of Deke’s name, seem forced in to give more development to everyone. Deke’s name actually changes the dynamics a little, with Glenda becoming closer to Deke, so that point is not so bad. The romance is just like any other from movies where that doesn’t belong.

Tension escalates when Deke runs off, amusingly not for the first time. The direction and color are nice, though Presley is quite wooden when acting as mad. This scene ties off the movie well with Glenda realizing and coming to terms with the ways she’s schemed and taken advantage of him. Elvis later looks so cool going out to perform in the raggedy clothing he left in. Despite this moment of intensity, things then get light hearted with everything working out too quickly and nicely. We should’ve been left with a bit of darkness. To read such darkness into the film, Deke having quit a few times suggests he will again, especially if he gets married.

OVERVIEW

This film reminds me of the famous A Hard Day’s Night. Both promise to give an insight into hot personalities and provide fun comedy scenes and more impressive music. Night really depicts a mindset and culture, while Loving You often feels like any other 50s movie, even down to a paper thin romance. If a girl flirts with Deke, it doesn’t strive to tell us anything about Elvis, Deke, their fans, or the culture. It seems to just exist to give Presley some romance before not mattering. The excessive talking and fluff leaves little to really appreciate about this 1957 outfit, but some powerful Elvis performances and an okay story make it passable.

Love Me Tender (1956) Movie Review

The three main players

The great surprise of Love Me Tender is how solid the story structure is. There’s a lot of small details that come into play in believable ways that in turn escalate the stakes. As such, it’s easy to get lost in the story, even when it’s a bit cheesy. The cast is at worst sufficient and at best compelling, though predictably they aren’t ever truly great. Richard Egan as Vance Reno is the protagonist. He keeps a strong jaw and demeanor. He is likable enough to be worth wanting to succeed. The more interesting elements of him are what he places his trust and affection in and how that affects him. Early on, he trusts the money he takes to be problem-free. That proves very important. He also trusts his brothers. If his brothers weren’t there to support him, but he still trusted them, that would make for a very different story.

Elvis Presley as Clint Reno is much more erratic and careless than the other characters, which goes along with the fact that he’s so young. While Clint’s material isn’t exactly Oscar-worthy, Presley handles it fine. He does manage some depth, like when he’s arguing with people. His character is possibly the most important of the story. His decisions make big strides in how the story goes, even when he is not being rational. This of course drives Vance heavily. While not everyone likes the musical numbers, and they are a bit out of place, they are fun and energetic enough to be worthy of inclusion. They are excellently performed and serve to give texture to this world and Clint’s character. Real people can go to places and have fun.

Apparently the character of Clint was less important before Elvis got on board, causing his relevance to be beefed up. Considering how necessary this character is, it is interesting to wonder how the original would’ve gone. One theory of mine is that one of the war buddies of Vance would’ve served this role. This would explain the plot hole of why Clint wouldn’t have been made to go to war if he’s a healthy man in his 20s.

The other characters don’t do too much, though some of the more villainous ones get a few fun moments. Most don’t need a lot, though exceptions are Clint and Vance’s brothers William Campbell as Brett Reno and James Drury as Ray Reno. Both have very few lines and just seem to be there to make up for the fact that Vance can’t be in three places at once. They don’t have girlfriends or feelings or individuality. At one point when things unexpectedly go wrong for them, they have amusing looks of bafflement. Also, I like to think that Campbell went on to replace that bass player in the Beatles.

SPOILERS

When Vance and his brothers come home from the war, they find out their father is dead and they seem unphased. Especially because of how important Clint is, it is a shame that it takes so long for him to show up in the story. That’s not so bad as once he does the bomb is dropped that he’s married to Vance’s love Cathy. It’s nice seeing that built up throughout before this revelation hits everyone. When Vance is told that if he agrees to give up the money, everyone will be left alone, he keeps quiet before eventually coming clean. Ideally, something he cares about would’ve been connected to this, like if he was told his mother would be bothered by authorities or his dad wouldn’t have wanted him to lie.

To Vance, lying about the money seems like a small thing. Clint doesn’t think it’s that big of a deal. However, this expertly plants doubt in Clint’s view that Vance is always truthful. Thus, when someone later says Vance is running away with Cathy, he can’t so easily discount that. Initially, all these characters like each other. Issues come from believable places and thus there’s drama when some turn on the other. People can separate and in turn that can cause someone to say something bad about the other, then someone else can go find someone that separated to tell them what happened. There’s a constant thought of who will go where and who will discover what.

Clint is physically violent to Cathy. The scene where he does this is pretty horrific. Fortunately, his brothers are against this. The points they bring up are that she isn’t lying to him, when ideally they would’ve pointed out that hitting her is wrong no matter what. Whether or not we’re supposed to be rooting for Clint isn’t made too clear. The music scenes, which show him as lovable and charismatic, suggest very loosely we should be. Ultimately Clint dies, which also points to us feeling for him. It is genuinely moving when we see him superimposed over his family walking away from his grave. Still, the spousal abuse, explosive temperament, and shooting his brother all make him too much of an antagonist.

Initially I wondered what the point of Clint’s death was. Seeing as things started as simply as “Let’s take this money” and that decision caused problems to escalate greater and greater, it makes sense that an especially extreme place you could take that is by having someone die. Still, odds are the reason for this was because we walked into the love triangle between Vance, Cathy, and Clint from Vance’s perspective. It’s also made clear that Cathy loves Vance more than Clint. This is basically the only way Vance and Cathy could’ve ended up together, especially after trying to prove to Clint that they weren’t going to run away. That’s too bad for Clint, though, dying for plot catharsis.

OVERVIEW

There are a handful of moments that feel random, typically to inject some drama, but none are too off-putting. The sense of fun and adventure, with plenty of fight scenes and action, make Love Me Tender hard to take seriously, but very enjoyable. It is very breezy and lovable, being far better than its reputation suggests.

She’s the Man (2006) Review

Amanda Bynes as Viola Hastings

She’s the Man is a pretty outdated and amusing for it drag comedy. Despite being (loosely) based on a Shakespeare play, which was based on the common crossdressing convention, the movie understandably goes for the 2000s teen crowd. It’s frankly barely even based on the aforementioned play. The storyline is also pretty formulaic, though there’s a few small twists. This is fine if the actors can carry the dialogue and scenes, making the story work. Amanda Bynes as Viola Hastings consistently has an awkwardness to her, like she is going through the motions. Apparently, Bynes didn’t like having to play a male, but that isn’t channeled anywhere useful, like by utilizing that to make Viola seem uncomfortable. A lot of the time, Viola doesn’t seem uncomfortable with inherently presenting male. It’s also way too hard to buy her as not someone in disguise or looking like the person she’s pretending to be, her brother Sebastian.

Channing Tatum as Duke Orsino initially comes off as a generic brand jock, though later shows some more intrigue, mainly from being insecure. One highlight is how he doesn’t like that someone seems to be graphically talking about women a lot, a la in a dehumanizing way. While Tatum is fine, he doesn’t distinguish himself enough from this character type. David Cross as the wonderfully named “Horatio Gold” steals the show, as Cross usually does with ease. He’s not as sharp in children’s media as he is in adult’s, but he’s still a lot of fun, especially relative to everything else here. He doesn’t take all this very seriously.

There’s many contrivances, like Sebastian conveniently going to London for a time period, which doesn’t make sense how he’d get away with it. Many of these concern pure comedy moments of it seeming Viola might get caught as a girl, only to find a work around. Whether or not these are “funny” is up to viewer discretion. The movie as a whole wouldn’t work if people pointed out that Viola and Sebastian obviously look nothing alike.

It was nice to see Viola not willing to put up with her boyfriend being rude to her. That later leads to Viola’s mom seemingly being attracted to Viola’s ex-boyfriend, a high school student. Viola being a tomboy doesn’t serve much of a purpose. Maybe it could fuel Viola thinking everything will go swimmingly as Sebastian, only to realize she doesn’t like a lot of elements of masculinity? Kissing booths are so creepy. Are they real things?

One of my favorite tropes in female-as-male crossdressing films is when a girl falls for the main character, typically because they seem different than other men, which appears accidentally gay. The complicated and changing romantic dynamics of certain people being interested in others, sometimes one person publicly and another privately, is quite funny and a clever way to get laughs and more importantly forward the plot.

SPOILERS

Viola imagining herself playing soccer in a long poofy dress is effective out of context, showing someone who feels so out of their element, but seeing as Viola is fine with being a girl, this doesn’t make much sense. What would work better would be to have her present as male in an environment where she would normally be presenting as female. Apparently this dream is something a lot of real trans men can relate to.

Viola’s male friends and peers look pretty fake when all it takes to get them, including Viola’s ultimate love interest, to like her is by having some women speak highly of her in public. They later show more layers and realism. It seems Viola was initially dismissed for being a small man, but everyone, especially Duke, came to really respect her because of that moment. A smaller moment of a minor character showing interest in an “unattractive” woman suggests the movie is criticizing strict views of what an attractive straight man should want.

Something that’d be nice to see more often is when a man falls for a woman dressed as a man, we see him be into her as a man. In these mainstream films where that would be too racy, the best we get is the man seeming uncomfortable with the situation. Here, Duke generally is just very awkward coming off as emotional or vulnerable. The subtext of Duke being uncomfortable with crushing on a “man” is almost bursting to the surface, but is barely subdued.

It’s a little bizarre the real Sebastian wouldn’t acknowledge how weird it is he’s being treated like he’s been there a while or say or do anything that would expose he hasn’t been there. It is of course absurd seeing a principle out a student in the middle of a big game, especially with the student proving as much by showing their nude body, but fortunately this isn’t supposed to be taken seriously. It’s funny that Viola would say she likes Duke before revealing she’s a girl. It doesn’t make sense Viola would be allowed to compete, considering girls aren’t supposed to play. Viola’s ex complaining about losing is fun.

Viola and Duke talking later does show some grayness to both characters that adds a little spice to this story. Duke is upset about all that Viola has done and he’s right. Viola did manipulate him, mainly in her attempts to get him to date her as she was acting as Sebastian. She was also dishonest in general. Duke says he misses his roommate. Viola says he is still here, then touches her heart. Duke then says things will be easier if she is a girl full-time. This seems just made for people to read subtext into. My favorite part is Duke’s last comment implied he would be accepting and open to Viola presenting as a male and that he may think she did this because she likes expressing herself as a man sometimes.

OVERVIEW

Beyond those looking for a light comedy of the era, She’s the Man does feature some novel and almost certainly accidental trans allegories, like being uncomfortable with others seeing your body or going through hijinks to prevent certain people from knowing a certain identity. There is also a good feminist message about not prejudging women as bad at sports.

The Unholy Three (1925) Review

Lon Chaney in the film

The Unholy Three doesn’t relent with captivating performances and interesting drama. Despite this, there are some issues with both. Lon Chaney is consistently intimidating, but sympathetic as “Professor Echo”, a wonderful name. This is exemplified by how masculine and dominating he looks normally, as opposed to when he’s dressed as and pretending to be an old woman. Chaney really sells it as “Mrs. O’Grady”. If he had played an actual old lady, you could imagine no one knowing it was him. As is common for the time, some of the negatives he does are not forgivable, like how little he respects Mae Busch as Rosie O’Grady. Still, the movie could’ve been a lot worse at getting you to root for a villainous person. Chaney’s low moments are humbling to the character and relatable, with the exception of things like the misogyny. His treatment of some, like Rosie, make him impossible to like or support. Echo is colored in interesting ways where in some regards he’s very moral, being against killing people, but in others he’s not.

Rosie’s goals are a little narrow minded and typical of what you’d expect from a woman in a movie written by and about men. There were plenty of opportunities to show her emotions that weren’t taken, though Busch does serviceably with what she has to work with. Harry Earles as Tweedledee is the other really great performance here. He is someone you love to hate and has this sense of bitter energy, like his appearance contrasts or causes a hateful and selfish person. Even in Harry’s earliest scene, his explosive temperament is on display.

Victor McLaglen as Hercules comes off as disappointing in how he is less distinguished and noticeable than the other members of the “Unholy Three”. A few more moments to shine definitely should’ve been given to him, though this element of his character is used as a strength later in the story. He laments how the flexibility of the others, who both use disguises drastically different to how they really are. That makes it easier to escape situations. He is just a normal person and is at a greater risk. Some of his behavior later could be read as a response to this attitude, though this isn’t delved into directly or anymore. For the most part, Hercules just plays off of the more energetic and interesting Echo and Tweedledee. Matt Moore as Hector McDonald is the weakest prominent character, just being a little nervous and awkward.

Despite being a drama, the movie finds time to let our characters have a little fun. It understands that a lot of stuff here, such as Earles dressing like a baby, is entertaining and we want to see him do things. There’s one point where he grabs onto a necklace and doesn’t want to give it back. It’s funny to think Tweedledee was hoping they’d let him keep it. There’s some fun lines like, “If you tip that boob off to who we are, I’ll lay some lilies under your chin!”

The opening of the film is reminiscent of director Tod Browning’s later work Freaks. It features similarly abled people. Browning’s direction is beautiful in many shots, like when the main trio come together to become “The Unholy Three”. Focus on their shadows shows how nefarious what they’re doing is. It is a little silly they’d name themselves at all, as that makes them seem like comic book villains. That name also overemphasizes how bad they are. “Look at us, we’re sooo against God!”

SPOILERS

Echo stopping Hercules from letting a detective in because Tweedledee is smoking while dressed as a baby is a funny bit. There’s really great suspense when everyone is really nervous about whether the detective will discover the necklace they stole. You do genuinely feel for Hector when Rosie says she doesn’t love him, and later when she says she actually does. Why would Rosie tell the Unholy Three she has a plan for them? Obviously they would try to stop her. It’s a shame we didn’t get to see much of how Rosie feels about being kidnapped and essentially forced to leave her boyfriend. She takes it all lighter than you’d think.

Echo giving his voice to Hector in the courtroom is pretty silly, but such a well filmed and interesting idea as to be an enjoyable sequence and not sink the movie’s engagement. Hercules and Tweedledee’s fates are far too predictable. They turn on each other, then get killed for being so evil. Boring! It’s a shame this wasn’t tied to Hercules’ resentment at not having a disguise. It is good that he strangles Tweedledee to death. He utilizes his two main attributes, lacking the morals of Echo and the obvious brute strength over Tweedledee. The most interesting part of this scene, though not for the right reason, is Hercules’ ridiculous and comical facial expression. Busch’s face watching this is even more over the top and seems destined to be featured in a gif. Outside of this scene, we get Echo’s look of shame, sadness, and contentment around the end. They are strong highlights here, letting you read so much of the character off of Chaney’s face. The music and cinematic lighting make for a powerful climax in the courtroom.

Echo basically did whatever he could to stop Rosie from being with Hector, being willing to ruin Hector’s life, then we’re supposed to feel sorry for Echo when Rosie leaves him? Why would Rosie have any fondness for Echo? At the end, she seems really happy with him and a little content with potentially spending her life with him, though the reason Hector got arrested in the first place was because of Echo. She should hate him. If the movie wanted him to be likable, why not have him be unknowing of Hector getting framed, then against the plan when he finds out? If they wanted to keep Echo gray, why not have it so he’s very reluctant to this idea being proposed by his accomplices, but he’s threatened by them in some way, so he decides to go with this instead of taking personal risk?

OVERVIEW

This movie would make more sense in sound, so you could better appreciate things like the ventriloquism. Appropriately, this movie was remade in sound and is Lon Chaney’s only talkie. The Unholy Three successfully balances many tones, from comedy to drama to tragedy. The ending wraps this all up nicely and emphasizes the whole flick as a powerful and moving experience, despite some issues. “That’s all there is to life, friends… a little laughter… a little tear~”

Kissing Jessica Stein (2001) Review

Heather Juergensen and Jennifer Westfeldt

I wanted cheesy, corny, stupid Lesbian rom-coms and this movie turned out to be that. I’ve seen many straight rom-coms like Kissing Jessica Stein and basically everyone has. This film is ridiculously samey and undistinguished, other than a fair twist of gayness. That twist may be enough for some. Despite not being very funny, this movie might pass as a decent watch for a queer crowd if it wasn’t for the ending that betrays a lot of the movie before it and makes the whole experience unsatisfying.

The dialogue is unintentionally silly. The film establishes the character’s personalities by them saying things that are very defining of that type of person, but there’s no subtlety or masking to what the point of the dialogue is. As an example, the dating scenes are overly goofy and cut too fast, with Jessica’s dates absurdly uncharismatic. Let the tone seep in a little. There’s also points like when Jessica keeps talking as someone tries to tell her her phone is ringing, which she somehow misses. She’s supposed to be clumsy, but this is a little much. Jennifer Westfeldt as Jessica Stein can often be way too bombastic instead of going for something simpler that would be more relatable.

The movie has some nice little moments. While not terribly subtle, there’s an amusing transition from the dates with weird men to two women kissing. Heather Juergensen as Helen Cooper dumping her purse is hilarious. As Jessica and Helen’s conversation progresses, the shot gets closer, like they’re becoming closer. The two guys at the bar are hilariously douchey. “But no one special?” “You know, I just don’t know.” When the film has less comedy around the start of the wedding plot, it gets a lot better. The leads pull off drama decently. There’s one shot where someone isn’t at their desk because it was established what it looked like earlier.

Scott Cohen as Josh Myers goes on a long tirade at a dinner table with Jessica where he criticizes her in front of a bunch of people. This early scene makes him extremely unlikable and his image never recovers after this point. Josh is supposed to be more sympathetic. The comedy scene with all the papers is particularly bizarre. It’s treating our protagonist as a stereotypical nerdy girl. She was more fleshed out before, being nerdy, but having various other qualities. The several kissing scenes are strange. Many of the jokes in them are so forced, when these scenes should just be romantic.

“You like the penis!” is a terrible line in an intended serious moment, though amusingly the conversation is overheard by an old woman who dawns a disgusted face. The handheld camera is sometimes too sporadic and moves too much, but it occasionally is very effective. When Helen and Jessica argue at one point, the camera is moving a lot because it’s a tense situation.

A little obsessed with these outfits and this picture

SPOILERS

Jessica’s discomfort around many men suggests she’s not that attracted to men. The upbeat music stopped when Jessica was asked to not sit with Helen, which shows the divide in their relationship. I was really curious if Josh was going to catch our two protagonists having sex when they were at Jessica’s mother’s house. It’s some quality suspense. Later, Jessica’s mother asks if she got an invitation and Jessica looks down in shame. Helen has a great shocked look on her face.

When Jessica comes out to her friend, Westfeldt gives a good performance as someone panicked. This scene is another example of a lot of fast dialogue shoved in one moment. It’d be more realistic if the characters were less wordy. Jessica’s mother’s monologue was well acted and well written. It seems like she knows too well about her problem, then there’s the reveal and it leaves the audience very surprised and relieved. Jessica inviting Helen and her family being supportive is very cathartic, as we never knew how they’d feel. Later we get the chuckle-worthy line, “Are you the lesbian?” The ending is foreshadowed a little heavily when at a party, Jessica kisses Josh for a lengthy amount of time.

The ending of Helen leaving Jessica, causing the latter to get back with Josh is pretty controversial. It doesn’t fit the story before it. The main problem with the ending was a lack of foreshadowing, though there was some, and that the whole emotional thrust of the movie was on these two women working it out. The concept of the ending, which seems to be that people can realize they’re bi, but still end up with someone of the opposite gender, is okay. Here, the two leads seem fine once they get over their bump. If the ending was going to work, there should’ve been seeds that Josh was really what Jessica needed and Helen wasn’t and not frame the lesbian relationship as satisfying and fulfilling.

Josh seemed antagonistic, with us at one point thinking he was going to fire Jessica. Thus, him being her real love interest is jarring. Scenes like Jessica’s mom affirming her daughter’s sexuality are so powerful for how it builds on and puts importance in the relationship between Jessica and Helen. Why not cut this moment if they were just going to break up later? This plays into how this ending is weird structurally. The main tension is relieved with the mom revealing her support, then another is created right around the end. “Jessica finds love, figures out how to accept what that means in her reasonably intolerant mindset, and then she just loses it for something that didn’t even seem like it would work.” Jessica and Josh already dated and broke up before the movie started.

The ending feels like a series of vignettes, with us getting a bullet point look at how Jessica and Helen part and then move on, with little breathing room. At one point, Jessica said Helen wanted to be with someone “A little more gay.” That line makes Jessica feel clueless, like she can’t grasp what Helen really wanted in a relationship and boiled it down to her being gay. A way to make this breakup work a little better is to take an element of the story that was underemphasized, Jessica’s love of art. Maybe there’s some way Josh was able to support that or at least her breakup made Jessica realize something about her art? Maybe she was putting off working on art because of her relationship, then got back to it when she needed something to keep her mind off Helen?

Admittedly, Josh’s presence throughout the film doesn’t make a lot of sense here unless he’s going to ultimately have some big role, which could probably be guessed to be him ending up with Jessica. If Helen had been a man, it’d be a lot more predictable Jessica would go back to Josh, as this movie’s attempt to seem daringly progressive made that not seem so likely.

OVERVIEW

The movie was okay for the most part, at least those looking for a light lesbian romance flick that feels a lot like most other romance flicks. The ending is so bad that it really sinks the graces the film had set up. Especially for those that like the comedy, you could theoretically edit out the ending and the few bits of short foreshadowing and have a better experience. “What do you do to be happy?” “Nothing, I’m not!”

Mexicali Rose (1929) Review

Mexicali Rose will please some for being a “naughty” role for Barbara Stanwyck, more about getting ahead in life. In some later 30s cinema, such as the Stanwyck film Night Nurse, dishonesty is treated as being done for a good reason, namely to succeed in life. While her character of Rose probably would say she just wants to get by if you asked her, some of her actions are slimy and the actual protagonist wouldn’t say differently.

Sam Hardy as Happy Manning is written and performed without much to define him. He seems to have this eternal good nature that feels fake. You could believe that Hardy wanted a role to make him look good. This gets a little ridiculous when he seems to have no life other than to assist William Janney as Bob Manning. There are a few moments where Happy gets a little aggressive, but little develops from that. Still, Hardy’s performance is a lot better when he can get a little mean. Bob is essentially just a good natured guy that doesn’t need or get any character. It is a little funny as usually the main character’s wife is the overly innocent one, but here it’s his brother.

Especially in the beginning, the movie is painfully slow and uneventful. Perhaps it’s intended for those that like late 20s excess, parties and drinking, but it’s hard to believe it couldn’t really be trimmed down and the story could still get where it’s going? Possibly because of the poor quality print, it all becomes a bit difficult to follow. Around halfway through there’s a nice twist that causes things to improve, but it’s all still relatively too slow and doesn’t come to much. There’s a few intense moments, but they seem like they were intended to give something good for the actors to say and the people to watch, but not for the story itself to prosper.

Stanwyck snags a few memorable moments. “Gee, I could go to the devil in your arms.” is a great line of hers. Rose looks so beautiful and seductive when she drapes herself in her marvelous outfit over a dresser. There’s a great scene around the end where Happy stands up firm and Rose lies back in a chair. Both project power to the other, unwilling to compromise to what the other wants. Based on what we know of these characters, they have seemingly gotten their way in life a lot, so it makes sense and makes for great acting moments to have them be so unwavering and fiery at each other.

SPOILERS

“I don’t need your money.” “Then give it to the starving Armenians.” Later there’s, “Oh forget it, I’ve been thrown out of better places than this.” Stanwyck does a great job of making her character feel like she’s hustled a lot of people and is used to everything that can happen, good and bad. She gets both sharp lines and actions that work as fun moments, while also showing her run through the routine, essentially of trying to manipulate people into giving her a break.

At one point, she throws money she’s handed on the ground and storms out. Later, she walks back in to collect the money, with the person she was talking to gone and another still there. She has no shame or self consciousness in what she’s doing. She earlier wanted to project power and not needing money and now that things have settled, there’s no reason not to get it. She also must not care about people seeing her, as long as they can’t negatively affect her.

Happy’s depressed face when he finds out Bob married Rose is great. Bob lets Happy kiss Rose. Was this normal at the time? One of the most interesting plot points is when Happy is unsure if Rose is telling the truth when she says she loves Bob. This would’ve been stronger if we had seen more scenes earlier of Happy and Rose married, so we could understand his perspective, and also have Rose not betray herself so soon. Afterwards, she’s simply known to be untrustworthy and Happy has to try to control her. His attempts to control her are another moment where the movie has the potential to get really interesting, but of course it goes nowhere. A missed opportunity would be to see Happy try to control Rose more and harder than he does. Maybe he gets in a toxic relationship with her, in an attempt to get her to pretend to be good for Bob?

Rose’s apparent suicide was seemingly supposed to be commentary of something, but what is anyone’s guess. There is a slight suggestion she isn’t dead, which does manage to create intrigue. “Was Rose so committed to keep hustling she faked her death?” If she decided to take herself out actually, that’s a little too silly, as if the movie didn’t want an antagonist to get away.

OVERVIEW

Likely the only thing to draw people to this movie is Barbara Stanwyck. She doesn’t betray that, turning in a decent, but not exceptional performance of a “bad girl”. She’s fun. Her scenes with Sam Hardy are the only real bright spots here. This sixty minute flick could’ve been edited down to thirty minutes, or made a feature again if you add in more development of ideas. Sadly, the best concepts here are way too underexplored.

Flesh And Fantasy (1943) Review

Betty Field as Henrietta in the film

Flesh And Fantasy is an immediately atmospheric anthology fantasy film with a lot of interesting and inviting elements, while also some lowlights that are typical of the time. The dark and moody shots, mainly in the first short, look wonderful and bring a great creepiness to the whole affair. It’d be fun to think all these events happened in a short period of time, with mystical things going on around these different people. All the shorts have many spooky qualities that are interesting to think on, like a poignant line of dialogue. As an example, the discussion of a dead body is really morbid, with points like thinking if he wanted to die.

Regardless, a problem with the best and worst of this film is the dialogue. It’s usually incredibly on the nose, despite some great lines here and there. In my favorite of the segments, which is about a woman that feels she’s ugly, she calls herself hateful. She does seem well meaning, so it’s odd she’s prescribing that to herself. Let’s see her act in a hateful way, as opposed to just saying it. One person describes what she should be seeking to achieve, instead of leaving it unsaid and letting her get to that point on her own. Later, a shopkeeper comes in and just describes important details for the plot, despite it not making sense why he would care or feel a need to do so. The framing segments of men reading these shorts as stories are probably the worst example of this dialogue problem. They’re also just pretty unfunny. One of the men at a point just describes the “moral” of the first segment, as if it wasn’t obvious.

The shorts, especially their endings, are really incongruent. There isn’t much of a thematic throughline. It’s as if these were three unrelated stories stitched together. Another oddity is that the second goes straight into the third, but neither of the last two are connected to the first. This feels a little jarring, especially because it would probably be very easy to include something like a character of the second in the first. There was going to be another segment that didn’t make the cut. I’m curious if it would’ve been a fourth that maybe ties things together? Maybe it was replaced by one of the ones here, which would explain a lot?

In the first short, Betty Field as Henrietta is said to be horribly ugly. Camera effects and dark lighting are used to aid this. However, she is obviously extremely beautiful. It’s ridiculous to think that she is mockingly unattractive, as the character apparently is. She is also said to have an ugly personality by someone when all she did was not give a woman an outfit that she wasn’t then able to pay for. The narration of how Henrietta feels seems like a bad case of telling and not showing, though it’s slightly vindicated by being revealed to be said by a person played by Edgar Barrier with otherworldly qualities. Barrier gives a great presence and supernatural atmosphere to this story. Still, the explaining instead of showing isn’t ideal.

There is an interesting feminist commentary here. When Henrietta takes the “pretty” mask, the mannequin it was over has an ugly face. This can show how people try to cover up their negative traits. When she looks at herself in a reflection with and without the mask, she’s relaying a common experience of comparing and judging yourself against supposedly “perfect” standards. When Henrietta goes out with the mask on, it’s obvious she’s wearing a mask, but people around her talk about how beautiful she is, as if that was her actual face. Beauty standards sometimes reflect that it’s more desirable to look fake than like how average people look. Then again, that’s not to say Field isn’t already very beautiful.

At one point, the protagonist of the second short, Edward G. Robinson as Marshall Tyler, verbally says out loud alone that he can’t work or think, which is quite silly. That summarizes the move to more pulp fiction-styled stories, though the performances, even by Robinson, are quite good, especially when he has to confront the main ideas of the short. The second outing brings more horror to the show than the first segment did. Tyler talking to his reflection is both creepy and well filmed. It solves the issue of how we can know what he’s thinking when he would have no reason to tell anyone, while not being handled in a comical way, like if we simply heard his thoughts.

Charles Boyer as Paul Gaspar in the third short walking while imagining himself falling in his dream is a really striking image. There is also a beautiful discomfort to the shots of Gaspar and the audience as a seemingly endless drumroll plays. Later, a friend of Gaspar is understanding of him not doing his most dangerous stunt because he “only has to be wrong once.” Gaspar speaks to the part of people that is attracted to trouble. Some of his actions are very risky, but he does them anyway. Unfortunately, instead of focusing on an idea like a person afraid of, but attracted to, bad things, the movie doesn’t focus much on them. Gaspar kills some time with Barbara Stanwyck as Joan Stanley. Other times, we’re just going through the motions without much analysis of the story or what’s going on. How does Gaspar feel and think about all that’s happening?

There are a lot of little moments here and there that give some value to the whole proceedings. As an example, the first short has the best lines. “Perhaps we could put our time together and make it last twice as long?” The character of Podgers at one point amusingly walks up to someone with a cat in arms, as if to make him seem more witchy. In the credits, a costumer is described as serving “Miss Stanwyck’s Gowns”. An assistant of Gaspar is funny, probably doing the best job of injecting some comic relief. When Joan puts on the earrings that Gaspar earlier dreamed, he asks if he’s currently in a dream too, which is such a chilling moment. Despite this, the biggest issue with the third segment is that Stanwyck is phoning it in so hard. She doesn’t seem to care about any of this, having a weirdly wooden vocal.

SPOILERS (FIRST SEGMENT)

When Barrier’s character helps Henrietta, she starts to show more warmness, suggesting a little kindness was all she needed. Betty Field and Robert Cummings as Michael have such good chemistry that it’s easy to overlook the parts of their relationship that don’t make sense, namely how short their time together has been. Their discussions of their feelings are so realistically it’s at least a smidge believable they’d feel how they do about each other.

Henrietta and Michael have a very profound and relatable conversation. “I’ve never done anything else but wait, just working, walking, eating… eating sometimes, sleeping. When you have the time your mind will let you sleep, but that’s only… only just waiting for life. It’s not living.” “I know. You watch other people enjoying themselves, as if you were hungry and outside the window of a restaurant.” “And you don’t have enough money to go in.” The angst of these feelings is delivered very realistically, as if the actors really went through these issues. This sharp moment is offset by Michael not understanding how Henrietta could relate, considering how pretty she is. Ignoring that that’s obviously a mask she’s wearing, a pretty woman could still relate to this.

“If staying here meant staying for you.” “You hardly know me.” “I know your voice, the touch of your hand, your eyes. They’re what I was waiting for.” “But I wanted you to believe in yourself, not in me.” “Couldn’t that be the same?” This really captures the sense of ecstasy love can create. “I know your face is beautiful, because you are.” Probably the intended interpretation of this line is to foreshadow when the mask comes off and she has a face of makeup on. However, I like to interpret it as meaning that her personality is so beautiful that that glows up everything about her. As can happen with people in love, it can be hard to see the faults in others.

Henrietta’s insecurities speak very strongly when she’s asking Michael to forget about her and she’s not like what he believes, with her not wanting him to learn the belief is wrong. Seeing as this movie can’t resist outdated values, it’s a shame Michael is pressuring her to take the mask off. He continues to push her, instead of letting her decide that impartially. “I’m not anything like what you believe. I don’t want you to lose your belief by seeing me as I really am.” “But you created belief in me. That’s real and it includes belief in you. You can’t doubt that if I mean anything to you.” “I lied to you from the start. There wasn’t nobody looking for me. There never has been. I pretended I was beautiful to lead you on. I’m only telling you now because you mean so much to me.” Henrietta continues to criticize herself and call herself things like selfish. Yet, here she is trying to do what she thinks is best for Michael, despite the fact they both love each other. She’s internalized so much about herself and her face that she can’t handle someone else seeing it.

“What does it matter how you look? I’d love your face no matter what it is because it’s you.” “Oh, please go, I’m not asking for myself but for your sake.” “Won’t you believe in me? In my love, enough to rely on it.” Later he says, “You gave me belief in that miracle [love], won’t you let me give you belief?”, which is another great line. Henrietta apparently being pretty once Michael removes the mask does ring a little too hollow. There would be a much nicer message if she looked the same, but was still admired as beautiful. That beauty would probably be more evident if the lighting was brighter and she was smiling. The message of this installment seems to be that Henrietta really was ugly and just needed to become better looking, which is frankly absurd.

SPOILERS (SECOND SEGMENT)

Tyler being convinced to actually do the murder is a chilling moment, with a shadow of him talking to him about it. It gets more chilling when he tries to pick the right person and then justify how he’d be doing his victim a favor. Later, he gives poisoned medicine to a woman. When she asks how she can get more if it works, he says that if it works she won’t ever need any more. We see the lead become more broken when after originally having very strict standards for who he will kill, he simply looks around a room, wanting to get it over with, so as to fulfill other plans he made. Here, he’s putting himself over anyone else. Seeing him look at the others, who of course don’t know what’s in his head, is haunting.

Tyler’s humanity comes out when he realizes what’s become of him when he almost kills someone in a reasonably brutal way. He seems ashamed. While this isn’t commented on in the film, his first plan of killing someone would be reasonably difficult to trace back to him, but his plans become progressively more brutal to the victim and harder for himself to look innocent. Tyler killing Podgers, mainly because of the music, is a little too hammy. The fact that he is killing someone brutally and painfully in a public area suggests he was never really as normal or as much an everyman as he probably wanted to believe. This could be a commentary on how most people have dark qualities to themselves or could be driven to drastic behavior under certain circumstances.

The fact that Tyler wouldn’t find a better solution here speaks to him not ever really being standup. Why wouldn’t Tyler kill someone that’s terminally ill or a death row inmate that admits to their guilt, or better yet just not do a murder? You’d think his conscience would be really inflamed after killing an innocent person. The twist that the woman he tried to kill didn’t actually die because of him is such a good moment, restoring the sense of fear to our lead. Tyler’s confession to the police suggests he has basically gone mad, openly discussing his actions, but not taking any blame. It is a wonderfully tragic way to end the segment.

SPOILERS (THIRD SEGMENT)

Various elements of Gaspar’s morbid dream have come true. When he sees the girl in his dream in real life, you’d think he’d want to make sure she isn’t at his show, because then the dream couldn’t happen as he remembers it. However, he actually does his best to get her to come to the show. That woman is Joan. Gaspar constantly pressures Joan into being around him. It’s extremely creepy and makes it hard to like him, especially because she likes him back. When Joan doesn’t want to have dinner with him, he assumes there’s another man she’s hiding from him, which is really manipulative. Of course, there is really no reason for Joan to like Gaspar.

The second short basically says prophecies can’t be broken, then the third one does just that. There isn’t any comparison between the different ideas. We simply get one message, then the other. It’d be one thing if Gaspar did something to essentially break the prophecy, but here he just does the stunt he had failed in his dream for no other reason than to give a happy ending. More strange is that Joan is arrested for criminal activity. This comes really out of the blue and doesn’t have much to do with anything.

OVERVIEW

The film basically feels like three episodes of The Twilight Zone, albeit not as good. Still, the spooky nature of Flesh And Fantasy makes a fun experience that is worth at least one Halloween viewing, especially for fans of the famous Rod Serling series. Despite the problems, mainly formulaic story elements, there are lots of interesting bits to keep things rolling.