Yes, it’s an entertaining film. And I like both actors too. Generally and in this film.
El Cid (Anthony Mann)
Very well made and entertaining Bronston epic. Obviously telling the tale of the spanish hero, El Cid. Full of inaccuracies but who gives a rat’s ass? Great battle scenes. Rather quick paced as well. And Sophia Loren is always some sort of bonus. Never been too big a fan of Heston (have I said this before?) but he’s completely acceptable here.
Judgement at Nuremberg (Stanley Kramer)
Also very well made film. Very engaging, no bullshit, hard hitting film chronicalling the Nuremberg trials of 4 German judges charged with crimes against humanity. Most of this 3 hour film is set in a court room. Some great performances from some of the greatest actors ever. Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift, Maximilian Schell, Spencer Tracy, and Richard Widmark are standouts. But then again that’s more than half of the principal cast members. Clift is especially strong as his performance was mostly his ad libbing. He comes across convincing and real.
This film had a major impact on me when I saw it on the big screen as a kid. I picked up the DVD awhile back and was very happy to find it has held up very well. Good stuff!
The last movie I watched was CONFUCIUS starring Chow Yun-Fat. A finely made film with a good performance from Mr. Chow. But, I felt the film certainly could have been better.
I know there was a lot of ground to cover in telling this story which spans decades; but, I kept feeling like the director was rushing through everything just to get to the end. Not enough time spent on building emotional connections to the characters.
Still, though, I found it enjoyable.
Today’s epic was Otto Preminger’s retelling of the birth of Israel. More controversial a subject today then in 1960. Controversy aside, a very interesting story and film that, despite it’s great length (3 1/2 hours) and rather slow pacing, I found was quite watchable. Most people say Paul Newman is miscast as Jewish patriot, Ari Ben Canaan. But I don’t think a lot of people realise that Newman himself was Jewish. Well made overall with a fantastic score.
And there was you saying you found Otto Preminger to be the most ovrrated director of all time!
True, but I haven’t seen all his films. But I do think some of his noirs are overrated. Mostly Angel Face and Fallen Angel. Haven’t seen Laura yet. It was probably unfair of me. But Exodus is well made.
I’m pretty sure your opinion will change once you’ve seen Laura; another good one of his that is well worth seeking out is Anatomy of a Murder.
Yesterday was Where Eagles Dare on TV. I remember there were some surprisingly favourable comments on this board, so I wanted to watch it again (haven’t seen it for 25 years).
Unfortunately I forgot it while surfing in the net, and then started watching what was left, the last 40 or 50 min. But fell asleep after boring 30 min of mindless and endless bang bangs.
But the 30 min still looked like the crap I had in mind, and I would still call it a strong contender for one of the worst films ever (at least one of the most boring). Only that the directing is not really trashy, only verveless routine. Sort of a superior Fidani?
Red Planet (Anthony Hoffman, 2000)
First post-holiday movie, a good-looking but otherwise flat sf/horror movie, a sort of alien with a robot going mad taking the place of the monster
Good actors wasted to a so so script and some really awful dialogue
[quote=“Stanton, post:2328, topic:1923”]Yesterday was Where Eagles Dare on TV. I remember there were some surprisingly favourable comments on this board, so I wanted to watch it again (haven’t seen it for 25 years).
Unfortunately I forgot it while surfing in the net, and then started watching what was left, the last 40 or 50 min. But fell asleep after boring 30 min of mindless and endless bang bangs.
But the 30 min still looked like the crap I had in mind, and I would still call it a strong contender for one of the worst films ever (at least one of the most boring). Only that the directing is not really trashy, only verveless routine. Sort of a superior Fidani?[/quote]
I preferred The Guns of Navarone… was disappointed by Where Eagles Dare. My expectations were high after hearing how “Clint kills more people in this than any other film” and it was “action packed”… but found it sort of boring… I liked it enough to give it a 6-7 out of 10 though.
Tony Arzenta 1973
Excellent Italian crime film with a nice mix of pace throughout. Alain Delon is very cool in this and my only gripe is the underutilising of a bevvy of fantastic actresses. Nicoletta Machiavelli and Erika Blanc both have very little screen time while Rosalba Neri only has a walk on. What a waste! Never mind. The film as a whole makes up for any little disappointments. Having recently watched the very poor Kiss Kiss Bang Bang it was nice to see a Tessari film when he was back on his A game.
[quote=“Stanton, post:2328, topic:1923”]Yesterday was Where Eagles Dare on TV. I remember there were some surprisingly favourable comments on this board, so I wanted to watch it again (haven’t seen it for 25 years).
Unfortunately I forgot it while surfing in the net, and then started watching what was left, the last 40 or 50 min. But fell asleep after boring 30 min of mindless and endless bang bangs.
But the 30 min still looked like the crap I had in mind, and I would still call it a strong contender for one of the worst films ever (at least one of the most boring). Only that the directing is not really trashy, only verveless routine. Sort of a superior Fidani?[/quote]Personally, I think that’s a bit strong. I iked it. It kept me interested.
[quote=“Stanton, post:2328, topic:1923”]Yesterday was Where Eagles Dare on TV. I remember there were some surprisingly favourable comments on this board, so I wanted to watch it again (haven’t seen it for 25 years).
Unfortunately I forgot it while surfing in the net, and then started watching what was left, the last 40 or 50 min. But fell asleep after boring 30 min of mindless and endless bang bangs.
But the 30 min still looked like the crap I had in mind, and I would still call it a strong contender for one of the worst films ever (at least one of the most boring). Only that the directing is not really trashy, only verveless routine. Sort of a superior Fidani?[/quote]
I love it; I just can’t resist the idea of two macho men winning a war within a few hours by blowing up the entire enemy army
A film that makes me feel young again when watching it, like Mackenna’s Gold
Where Eagles Dare…love the film. Never get bored and viewed so many times. One of the best paced war films of all time in my view, and like the way the plot goes.
Completely agree. I never found it boring. In fact, it moves quite quickly. If you had got teir before the last 45 mins, Stnaton. The film isn’t that bang bang. Very suspenseful. The sort of thing I love about Maclean film adaptations.
Sand Pebbles (Robert Wise)
I believe this was Wise’s favorite among his own films. Rightfully so. Its a very good film. Well directed, well acted, a bit long but justifiably so. Some great action scenes. Overall, a very enjoyable experience.
Watched the Wild East Goliath Double Bill.
Goliath and the Barbarians 1959
Steve Reeves looking pretty darned impressive as a physical specimen but is out acted by at least three horses and a stone pillar. Never mind, Chelo Alonso is at hand to take the mind to a much happier place. The Cuban bombshell shakes her stuff in fine style here and makes the whole film worthwhile. Also good to see Livio Lorenzon in full scenery munching bad guy mode. Overall, rubbish but entertaining enough.
Goliath and the Vampires 1961
This time it is Gordon Scott’s turn to play the big man which he does does in much the same, if less well physically defined fashion as Mr Reeves. No Chelo in this though which makes staying awake for the full 90 minutes more of a challenge. On the plus side we have a much more interesting (ludicrous) plot involving a magical, claw handed, blood drinking, smokey formed super villain, an underground race of blue faced soldiers and a harem of stolen, scantily clad slave women. Magic? Half naked women? Blue Men? Sounds like an entertainment guide for a weekend in Vegas. Sadly not nearly as much fun but a giggle if you like this sort of Saturday Morning Pictures thing.
All in all not a double bill that will likely turn anyone on to Peplums if they didn’t like them before but, for their type, they are both watchable and contain some levels of fun when in the right mood. One thing I will say though is that these are probably the worst quality Wild East releases in terms of picture I have ever seen. No remastering of any kind is on show here and the second of the films in particular is very poor. Faded, scratched and patchy throughout. I’d have been a bit pissed off if I’d bought them new at the $19.95 price tag. Their western releases are magnificent in comparison.
“smokey formed super villain”
Always good the learn new expressions: what the hell is that, a smokey formed villain?
None of the meanings given by the free dictionary helps me any further:
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:2337, topic:1923”]“smokey formed super villain”
Always good the learn new expressions: what the hell is that, a smokey formed villain?
None of the meanings given by the free dictionary helps me any further:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/smoky[/quote]
Well not exactly a phrase that you’d find in any guide on the English language Scherps. More a free form descriptive attempt to suggest an evil entity who appears as a cloud of coloured smoke as often as anything solid. But if this has challenged your language skills some I feel my work has been worthwhile. 
I really love The Sand Pebbles, one of my all time favourites… i’ll need to give Where Eagles Dare another go.
No no, it was already a waste of time when I first saw it back in the 80s.
I have read btw also the novel a few years earlier, and it was also disappointing. Like al Maclean novels. They have interesting plots, but the story development is lousy.