Thank You, Mr. Moto (1937)

 ☆ ☆ ½

Thank You, Mr. Moto (1937) – N. Foster

Over there on youtube, I found a lot of complete (free) movies; presumably the copyright has lapsed.  As some might recall, I used to watch the mystery movie on Channel 38 (Boston) with my Dad on Saturday nights – Sherlock Holmes (Rathbone, of course), Charlie Chan (I prefer Oland, Dad prefers Toler), and yes, Mr. Moto. Peter Lorre starred as the Japanese detective (clearly a cultural faux pas these days, especially with that make-up) in the 1930s after his work with Hitchcock (e.g., The Man Who Knew Too Much, 1934; Secret Agent, 1936) and prior to his career in noir (e.g., The Maltese Falcon, 1941).  In this second film in the series, Moto is in China, searching for the missing scroll that will help to uncover Genghis Khan’s missing treasure. Interestingly, we don’t quite know whose side Moto is on – the film opens with him in disguise, killing an attacker. Then later, he seems to have killed another baddie who was admittedly about to shoot his friend, the man whose family owns the other six scrolls (that all the baddies are after).  This man (but not his mother) is played by someone with actual Asian heritage at least.  Distractingly, there is also a white couple who are involved as witnesses to all of the goings-on (perhaps they are audience surrogates for a Hollywood that assumes all of its viewers are white).  Perhaps I shouldn't bring a 21st century lens to an 80 year old film but it is hard not to in this case. At any rate, I didn’t find this Mr Moto film (reputedly the best of the series) to be particularly engaging (despite some solid character actors), but I accept that the screen writers didn’t resort to the traditional whodunnit formula. But really what should I expect from a B-movie?  

The Karate Kid (1984)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

The Karate Kid (1984) – J. G. Avildsen

My sons are learning karate now, so Amon and I decided to watch this 80s classic (which I had in fact never watched).  Director John Avildsen made his name with Rocky (1976) so I knew what to expect (if everything about this film wasn’t already cultural knowledge). Daniel (Ralph Macchio) moves from NJ to California with his single mum and encounters bullies there (and also falls in love with Ali/Elizabeth Shue).  He is taken under the wing of the building maintenance man, Mr Miyagi (Pat Morita), who eventually agrees to train him in karate.  The bullies, it turns out, are from a local dojo run by a sadistic Vietnam Vet and the head bully, Johnny (William Zabka), is Ali’s ex.  Trouble continues until everyone agrees to lay off until the big karate tournament at the end of the year.  You know what happens but Avildsen et al. handle the emotional pay-off well.  Amon is in the other room saying “wax on, wax off” right now – I hope this won’t affect his real training.

 

The Driver (1978)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

The Driver (1978) – W. Hill

Director Walter Hill seems to be trying to channel the spirit of Jean-Pierre Melville here, with his loner protagonist, a driver (Ryan O’Neal) with no friends who only takes certain heists for a big fee.  He doesn’t talk much and he doesn’t mess around – he gets the job done and doesn’t put up with nonsense or trouble.  When Police Detective Bruce Dern decides to capture him, the cool O’Neal accepts the challenge, walking right into the trap that Dern lays for him.  Isabelle Adjani helps O’Neal, perhaps for sheer admiration because he doesn’t let her in – he doesn’t let anybody in. You can see how Melville would have directed it, with Delon and Bourvil.  But Hill is no Melville and, although he gets the blue-green tone right and the driving action is as thrilling as in any film, there’s something missing. Perhaps it is the choice of O’Neal (a different sort of star) and Dern (much looser than Melville would have allowed) or perhaps the twist at the end doesn’t leave the right melancholy feeling.  Nevertheless, this is worth a look.

 

The Brasher Doubloon (1947)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

The Brasher Doubloon (1947) – J. Brahm

George Montgomery is probably the least good Philip Marlowe (as compared to Bogart, Dick Powell, or even Robert Montgomery, not to mention Elliott Gould and James Garner) – he tosses off the cynical lines (drawn from Raymond Chandler’s novel, The High Window, but not scripted by him) without enough bile.  Perhaps too, the plot is a little too compressed here (in only 86 minutes), as it does have some complications (though is by no means as unfathomable as The Big Sleep by Howard Hawks which no one can quite figure out).  Marlowe is asked to find the titular stolen coin by an elderly matriarch with a beautiful secretary and a spoiled no-good son.  After he stumbles upon a few corpses (and gets the police after himself), Marlowe starts to piece things together.  Not unlike, the plots of the various mystery series of the 30s and 40s (Charlie Chan, Sherlock Holmes, etc.), he gets all the suspects together in a room at the end – and the villain is outed.  This should never be your first stop if you’re interested in film noir or detective films, but it is passable for genre fans.

 

Side Street (1950)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Side Street (1950) – A. Mann

Reteaming of Farley Granger and Cathy O’Donnell (after the successful They Live By Night, 1948) as a young couple about to have a baby in post-war NYC.  He’s a part-time mailman and they need to live with her parents to get by.  When temptation rears its head, he steals some money, which turns out to be $30K, the proceeds of a blackmailing scheme in which one of the principals was offed to keep her silent.  But he doesn’t know that. He tries to give the money back but the hoods won’t take it because they think they are being set up.  But it turns out that the envelope with the money was empty anyway. So soon both the cops and the bad guys are after poor Farley.  He makes a go of it, trying to find the money before the crooks do and with his picture all over the newspapers wanted for murder. Director Anthony Mann (known for his noirs as well as his westerns) keeps things interesting with some great location shooting and it ends with a bang. Not sure we need the voiceover to let Granger off the hook, however.   

 

Ladies and Gentlemen, The Fabulous Stains (1982)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

Ladies and Gentlemen, The Fabulous Stains (1982) – L. Adler

The milieu alone (punk rock shows) makes this film worth a look, despite the lack of consistency in the characterisations and the grafted-on ending. Diane Lane is a rebellious teen who forms a band (The Stains) with her sister Marin Kanter and cousin Laura Dern and joins a cross-country tour in support of an aging metal band and younger British punk rockers (which include ex-Sex Pistols Steve Jones and Paul Cook and Clash bassist Paul Simonon) fronted by Ray Winstone.  All of the known actors are impossibly young here.  With her bold style (skunk hair) and attitude, Lane inspires an army of young female followers who elevate the band to headliners, much to the chagrin of Winstone (who is also her romantic interest).  Somehow though the tour manager convinces the Stains to completely monetise their brand by selling cheaply made merchandise – this seems to betray the Lane character’s initial drive for fan solidarity and identification. To make things worse, there’s an MTV styled coda that shows The Stains in the future as successful pop-rockers with mainstream looks.  Apparently, Lou Adler (Saturday Night Live) added this after poor audience feedback, leading writer Nancy Dowd (Slapshot) to disavow the film.

The Serpent and the Rainbow (1988)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

The Serpent and the Rainbow (1988) – W. Craven

Bill Pullman is a Harvard anthropologist working for a drug company who goes to Haiti to find the origins of a powder that anesthesises people so well that they are presumed dead (and later return to life as “zombies”).  Cathy Tyson is the psychiatrist collaborator who leads him to a zombie and the man who crafts the powder.  Unfortunately, Zakes Mokae plays the head of the secret police (for Baby Doc Duvallier) and master of black magic who seeks to thwart their plans.  As directed by Wes Craven, the film unfolds via some creepy visions that Pullman has which foreshadow major plot turns. Although the film might not always feel like a horror film (given the political themes), Craven liberally throws in grotesque and spooky images.  By the end, in fact, the film gives way to a free-for-all between the evil forces and Pullman and becomes rather schlocky.  Let’s say it’s a solid B picture with some ambition to be greater.