Showing posts with label Captain Blood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Captain Blood. Show all posts

Friday, January 2, 2015

BEST AND WORST OF 2014

      Another year of watching war movies and another mixed bag.  I saw 89 war movies this year and finished the 100 Greatest.  Besides some great movies, I also saw a discouraging number of very bad movies.  But that's my life, so I'm not complaining.  Some of my fondest memories are of truly terrible movies.

THE TOP TEN

10.  Lone Survivor - a balls to the wall "who will survive?" scenario set in Afghanistan involving a SEAL team behind enemy lines
9.    Captain BloodErrol Flynn swashbuckler with plenty of action and some nonmushy romance with Olivia DeHavilland
8.    Go Tell the Spartansearly in the American phase of the Vietnam War, an outpost is defended against a Viet Cong attack while Burt Lancaster deals with the insanity of the war
7.    The Dawns Here Are QuietSoviet film about a male sergeant and five female soldiers who take on German infiltrators in some woods 
6.    Das Bootone ill-fated tour by a German u-boat in 1941 which is the best submarine movie ever made
5.    Born on the 4th of Julythe biopic about disabled Vietnam veteran Ron Kovic from gung-ho warrior to anti-war activist 
4.    All Quiet on the Western Frontthe granddaddy of all war movies based on the greatest war novel
3.    Paths of Glory a drama about the trial of three French soldiers in WWI who are accused of not making a suicidal attack and must be sacrificed for unit morale/intimidation
2.    Tropic Thunderthe funniest war movie comedy ever made which satirizes several famous war movies

BEST MOVIE 2014:  84 Charlie MoPic (1989)


                This year the best war movie I saw was an old favorite – “84 Charlie MoPic”.  It won my March Madness Tournament to determine the best Vietnam War movie which means it beat some stiff competition.  Most of my readers may not have heard of it, but it deserves to be better known.  I go way back with this movie.  I first saw it when it first came out.  It was shown on PBS.  (It was one of the first movies I taped with my cutting edge new VCR.  I showed it in my American History class a few times.)  I don’t think it spent much time in theaters and made less than $200,000.  It was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Festival and Best First Feature for writer and director Patrick Sheane Duncan (“Courage Under Fire”) at the Independent Spirit awards.  It was a “found footage” film long before “Blair Witch Project” made that style popular.  The movie was filmed in Southern California on a very low budget with unknown actors.

                84C is the military designation for a movie cameraman.  The premise of the movie is that 84 Charlie (Byron Thames) is tagging along on a long range patrol to chronicle what happens in the bush.  The entire movie is seen through MoPic’s lens and we only see him briefly at the end of the movie.  The mission of the five man patrol is to locate a North Vietnamese Army base camp in the Central Highlands of South Vietnam in August, 1969.  The mission is being led by a green lieutenant (Jonathan Emerson) who is called LT.  He is looking to get his combat ticket punched for promotion purposes and sees the motion picture (to be called “Lessons Learned”) as a career move.  He is not exactly welcomed by the veteran LRRP squad.  In fact, the sergeant who runs the unit (and continues to run it in spite of the LT) is downright belligerent and disrespectful.  OD (Richard Brooks) is hard core and makes it clear he thinks the presence of LT and MoPic will get his men killed.  The rest of the unit is heterogeneous in the classic tradition of small unit films.  Easy (Nicholas Cascone) is the radio operator who is close to the end of his tour.  He jokes around a lot.  They are the kind of lame jokes soldiers tell.  “I wouldn’t shit you, you’re my favorite turd” is typical.  Pretty Boy (Jason Tomlins) considers himself to be lucky, but is about to crack.  Hammer (Christopher Bergard) is the cocky M-60 gunner.  Cracker (Glenn Morshower) is a hillbilly who is a lifer.  He’s the guy who is usually called “Pop” in war movies.  His best friend is the African-American OD.   The five are very tight knit in spite of their various backgrounds.  The mission is pretty standard for a long-range patrol.  The men hump through the boonies until they reach the enemy camp.  They call in artillery and then move to the egress point.  This is when things get complicated and the movie becomes a “who will survive?” story.


                Although the movie is called a “found footage” movie, I prefer to refer to it as a movie that was filmed completely in POV.  This makes it unique among Vietnam War movies.  There are several excellent movies set in the war, but none does as good a job of putting you in the grunts’ boots.  The movie is as micro as you can get, but you will learn more about the soldier experience than any other film.  It is like a tutorial on what a mission behind enemy lines would have been like.  You are on the mission with the men.  The movie is excellent on the details.  There are many small touches that prove that Duncan was a veteran of the war.  For instance, the men use C-4 to heat their rations.  The uniforms, equipment, and weapons are realistic.  The dialogue is authentic and not forced like in many Vietnam War movies.  Duncan throws in a lot of slang (“there it is”) and it helps if the viewer is already versed in how the soldiers talked.  Much of the dialogue is the unit members ribbing each other.  Few war movies are better at portraying the unique comradeship of American soldiers.  Part of the film involves interviews with each of the men.  This aides in character development and gives various perspectives of typical soldiers.  For example, Easy was “volunteered” for service by a judge.  You care about the men and the dynamics in the unit are fascinating.  Although there is some stereotyping, the movie avoids the trope of the incompetent and/or frag-worthy officer.  The conflict between LT and OD is not trite or predictable.  The acting is surprisingly good for such a no-name cast.  Brooks (“Law and Order”) and Morshower (Lt. Col. Matthews in “Black Hawk Down”) went on to respectable careers.  For “cherries”, the cast acts naturally and there are no histrionics. 
               The movie is mostly talking and marching, but so is war.  It builds nicely to the action-packed concluding act.  Easy stops joking as things get really serious and there are some gut-wrenching deaths (including a great twist).  The movie does not pull its punches and can be quite emotional.  Given the budget, the action is not up to other Vietnam War movies, but the “fog of war” aspect of the jungle setting ameliorates this. Besides, the object of the film is more drama than action.
                Most lists of the best Vietnam War movies overlook “84 Charlie MoPic”.  It can be argued that it is not the best, but there can be no argument that it is in the top five.  It is a must-see for any fan of Vietnam War movies. 
GRADE  =  A+ 
a trailer
the whole movie! 
 
THE WORST MOVIES I SAW IN 2014
5.  Heartbreak RidgeClint Eastwood wins the war in Grenada with a motley crew of post-Vietnam Marines
4.  The Boys in Company Ca motley crew of draftees fights the establishment and plays soccer in Vietnam
3.  The Inglorious Bastardsgoing behind German lines with a motley crew of misfits
2.  Tank Battaliona tank crewed by some motleys gets caught behind enemy lines in Korea


THE WORST:  The Steel Claw  (1961)

                “The Steel Claw” is a George Montgomery movie set in the Philippines around Christmas time after the Japanese invasion.  That’s right, it’s a Christmas movie!  You couldn’t tell that from the title?  The movie was a labor of love for Montgomery and a gift for his multitude of fans.  He starred, co-wrote, produced, and directed.  The man was the Da Vinci of B movies.  Speaking of producing, it looks like he emptied his wallet to pay for the movie.  I mean literally.  He did have a crate of pineapples that he was able to use to hire some Filipino actors.
                It’s Christmas Day in 1941 in Manila.  Capt. Larsen (Montgomery) is visiting a brothel.  He’s a regular.  He is not in a Christmas spirit because he has recently lost a hand and has just a stump.  Now that his playboy persona and disability have been established, it’s off to a special mission.  Larsen has to go into the jungle to hook up with a rebel leader named Santana (Mario Barri).  Larsen is to ransom a captured American general for $5,000 (ironically, the same amount spent on the film).  At the rebel camp he meets a tramp.  Her name is Lolita (of course) and she is the type of girl who feeds the chickens while wearing high heels.  There is some painful to watch flirting accompanied by sappy romantic music.  Before setting off into the wilds, Larsen fashions himself a steel claw using the local blacksmith facilities.  Santana’s band joins a band led by the sexy Rosa (Carmen Austin).  She and Santana have something going on which makes four because Lolita insists on coming along in her high heels.  She is almost eaten by a giant snake and gets a spanking from Larsen.  Frolicking then ensues.   
                They ambush a train using Rosa disguised as a sexy water buffalo herder.  The train is used for an assault on the Japanese base.  This results in a wild fire fight with some of the most hilarious deaths I have ever seen in a war movie.  (And that’s coming from a war movie death aficionado.)  As if the action cannot get more intense, we are now treated to a train chase!  The general is rescued, but he is not who he appears to be.  Lolita is wounded and may not make it.  They are in a race against time to reach the rendezvous ship.
                When I saw that the movie starred George Montgomery I thought that since I had heard of this actor, the movie might be a step above the kind of WWII movies you can watch on You Tube.  Wrong!  The movie is incredibly bad, but does have the guffaw factor.  I laughed out loud several times, mostly at some of the ludicrous deaths which included a shark victim.  You have to give the extras credit for giving their all in their demises.  The movie appears to have been made without rehearsing and with only one take for each scene.  The acting is wooden with the exception of Barri who brings some panache to his role as Santana.  He outacts the gringo Montgomery.  There is a modicum of homage to the Filipino guerrillas and you do have the female rebel leader so there is some homage there (although I think it was probably due to Montgomery sleeping with Ms. Austin). The dialogue is what keeps the movie from being a messterpiece.  It is actually not horrible.  We do get the memorable line when they are waiting for the ship:  “Keep listening and listen hard.”  Unfortunately there are not too many howlers like that one.
                “The Steel Claw” is a must see if you are the George Montgomery fan.  Otherwise, avoid it like the plague.
GRADE  =  F-


Saturday, September 27, 2014

BOOK / MOVIE: Captain Blood (1935)


  

 

                “Captain Blood” is a swashbuckling film based on the novel by Rafael Sabatini which was published in 1922.  The movie was directed by Michael Curtiz (“Casablanca”).  It starred an unknown actor named Errol Flynn.  Warner Brothers took a big chance with him at a time when most big budget movies  were star-driven.  Very risky for a movie that cost $1 million dollars!  The studio settled for Flynn when several big names were unavailable and Flynn kept acing the screen tests.  They matched him up with an almost as unknown actress named Olivia DeHavilland.  It was a match made in Heaven and they went on to make eight movies together.  The movie was a big hit and started the second wave of swashbucklers which provided escapism from the Great Depression.  It was a critical success as well and received Academy Award nominations for Picture, Director, Writing, Sound, and Musical Score.

                The movie opens with an actual historical event.  When James Stuart became James II, his rule was challenged by the illegitimate son of Charles II.  James, Duke of Monmouth, invaded England in 1685 and attempted to overthrow the king, but his disorganized and untrained force was soundly defeated at the Battle of Sedgemoor.  In the movie, a doctor named Peter Blood (Flynn) is called upon to succor a wounded lord and is arrested as a conspirator.  Sabatini used the actual memoirs of a doctor named Henry Pittman.  He argues his innocence at the mass trial of rebels (based on the actual Bloody Assizes run by chief judge Jeffreys), but is sentenced to slavery in the West Indies along with many of the rebels who avoided being hanged, drawn, and quartered.  This was the punishment for some 800 rebels including Pittman.

                Blood and his ocean-crossing colleagues are auctioned off in Port Royal.  His feisty reaction to the teeth-analyzing military commander Bishop (Lionel Atwill) catches the attention of Bishop’s neice Arabella (De Havilland).  Because Blood is able to cure the governor’s gout, he is exempt from the harsh work on the plantation.  It also allows him to plot escape by purchasing a boat.  The fortuitous sacking of the town by pirates allows Blood and his comrades to upgrade to the pirates’ ship.  In the process, Blood earns the undying hatred of Bishop and he has to suspend his budding romance with Arabella.  Historically speaking, there obviously was no romance although Pittman did escape by boat.  However, he did not become a pirate. 

                Blood embarks on a life of piracy (loosely based on Henry Morgan) and brings him into alliance with the stereotypically roguish Levasseur (Basil Rathbone).  Flynn and Rathbone have the first of their cinematic duels.  The reunion of Blood and Arabella does not go smoothly as she calls him “a thief and pirate”.  Who you calling a thief?  Being a gentleman pirate, Blood decides to dump this ingrate back at Port Royal.  When they arrive, the town is being attacked by two French warships.  Blood says screw you and leaves the town to its destiny.  Well, that’s what a dastardly pirate would have done.

                I had never seen this movie before.  I was inspired to watch it as I had finished the book and decided to compare the two.  I did not have much expectation for it since I had recently tried to watch Flynn’s “Against All Flags” and could not get through it.  Naturally, I figured Flynn’s first major movie would be unpolished.  I was wrong.  “Captain Blood” is a thoroughly entertaining film.  Few actors have started their careers as auspiciously as Flynn.  He oozes charisma from the start.  De Havilland does not take a back seat to him, but does not ooze – she’s a lady!  Their chemistry is worthy of the multiple pairings in their futures.  The supporting cast is strong with Rathbone the standout, of course.  There are lots of familiar faces from the Warners’ contract players.  A couple of them provide some comic relief that would best be described as cute. 

Curtiz does a great job directing, especially since he had to coach the novice Flynn.  He was to make something of a career doing this as they made several more movies together (in spite of the fact that they despised each other).  The cinematography evidences Curtiz’ penchant for moving the camera around and concentrating on lighting to enhance scenes.  Most noteworthy are the several scenes that feature shadows on the walls of backgrounds.  Deep focus is also used often.  This works well in the spacious interior scenes.  The outdoor scenes were filmed on soundstages which gives the film a curio look.  The duel took place on Laguna beach. 

 The aspect of the film that struck me the most is the musical score by the great Erich Wolfgang Korngold.  Amazingly, the composer wrote the music in just three weeks.  And yet he set the template for future swashbuckling scores.  The music matches the scenes perfectly.  After watching the movie, I questioned whether there had been any parts of the movie where there was no music.  I checked and indeed there were a few moments with no music in the background.  Normally, I am harsh with movies that use music too much to steer our emotions.  I have no complaints here. 

The action scenes are well done.  The duel is not one of the great ones, but it was the first between Flynn and Rathbone and they were able to build upon it for movies like “Robin Hood”.  The sea battle is grand.  It was done with models, but those models were up to 18’ from stem to stern.  I’ll take that over CGI.  Some of the footage was “borrowed” from “The Sea Hawk” (1924).  The boarding is very frenetic and pretty violent for a 1930s movie.  It’s no shame that “Master and Commander” did it better.  Thankfully, the deaths are not silly.

So how does it compare to the book?  The movie is a very good condensation of the novel.  It streamlines the book well.  The book has a much busier plot.  The movie pares the novel down to two villains.  In the book, there is another Ahab obsessed with Blood (Estaban) and one nefarious French admiral (Rivarol).  The movie discards the love rival Lord Julian.  There are several adventures that did not make the cut including a bang-up section involving a raid on Miracaibo that includes a fire ship.  What the movie does include is pretty close to the book.  There are some tweaks.  For instance, in the novel the slave Peter is the wooer of Arabella and she is the rude one.  The duel with Levauser was over a different woman than Arabella.

“Captain Blood” is an example that the best book / movies are ones that have a symbiotic relationship.  You watch the movie then the book adds more to the story.  The movie sticks to the ambiance of the book and chooses wisely what plot points to include and does not mess with the scenes much.  Any changes are done to improve the entertainment value of the film or because of time constraints.
 
GRADES:
 
          Book  =    B
          Movie =  A