The Shuttered Room (1967)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

The Shuttered Room (1967) – D. Greene

Based on a short story by August Derlath purportedly from notes by H. P. Lovecraft, the film seeks to conjure up a foreboding feeling of dread focused on an unknown (but horrible) creature locked behind a red door. A prelude shows us a toddler threatened by the (unseen) beast whose parents then meet their doom when trying to coax it back to the titular room. After the credits, the toddler has grown up to be 21-year-old Susannah Whatley (Carol Lynley), now travelling back to her remote island birthplace with her husband Mike (Gig Young) after growing up in New York City following the death of her parents. On the island, they meet a bunch of menacing rednecks (led by Oliver Reed, sporting an American accent despite the fact that filming was in the UK). Someone suggested that the film resembles Peckinpah’s Straw Dogs (1971) and I suppose that’s not far wrong, given the threat of rape here, although Gig Young is hardly the right actor to act as though his masculinity is threatened. The film moves inexorably toward the reveal of the creature and ends with tragedy rather than horror. Dated for sure, but creepy at times.

 

Nightmare Alley (2021)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Nightmare Alley (2021) – G. del Toro

Once upon a time, I spent a while searching for a DVD copy of the 1947 version of Nightmare Alley (1947) to complete my film noir collection, given its high standing among genre aficionados. I also read the novel by William Lindsay Gresham during a period when I sought out and consumed noir source material. So, it was with some anticipation that I watched Guillermo del Toro’s new remake of the book/film (especially given that del Toro himself has become quite a good filmmaker, winning the Oscar with his last outing The Shape of Water, 2017).  Set in the 1930s, with its protagonist Stanton Carlisle (previously Tyrone Power but now Bradley Cooper) drifting in to join the travelling carnival, learning the secrets of mentalism and then striking out on his own with his girl/partner (Rooney Mara here) to great success.  But Carlisle is a selfish and greedy sort, always the hustler looking for an angle, and his cons quickly move beyond parlour tricks and into more dangerous territory. Del Toro and his art department do a fine job of recreating the late 30s/early 40s with a heightened (almost surreal) sense of colour and deco/décor. The actors feature period hair and clothes straight out of historical photos. The plot ticks over slowly, almost as though this version is a lucid dream of the 1947 film, with my recollection of moments from the earlier 110m film serving as signposts along the way in the 150m remake. The focus on human nature making us all suckers is an evergreen theme.  And it worked, until suddenly it didn’t. The turning point involves Cate Blanchett’s Dr Lilith Ritter whose partnership with Carlisle isn’t quite as clearcut as it should be – something felt amiss with the plotting here, even though it worked fine in the original. Then it is all downhill for Stanton Carlisle straight to the clearly foreshadowed punchline, which del Toro does manage with aplomb. Verdict:  It should be tighter, shorter, punchier with more noir bite yet it’s still worth a look to see how a modern master uses new techniques to refashion an old genre.

 

Pursuit to Algiers (1945)

 ☆ ☆ ☆

Pursuit to Algiers (1945) – R. W. Neill

Twelfth out of the 14 Sherlock Holmes films with Basil Rathbone (Holmes) and Nigel Bruce (Watson). Although the series was in decline (and sometimes hijacked as a vehicle for patriotic WWII messaging), this entry holds up pretty well (and I could not remember any of the details, including the twist ending, from previous viewings which may very well have been 40+ years ago). Holmes is invited (through a series of mysterious clues) to a meeting where he is asked to protect the heir to the throne of a European country whose king had recently been assassinated. To distract the enemies of the throne, he sends Watson by ship while he accompanies the prince by plane.  Some twists later, they are all on the ship and playing literal and figurative chess with a trio of bad guys (and numerous red herrings) who want to capture the prince and kill Holmes.  Watson is slightly less the buffoon here but still mostly along for comic relief.   Always a salve to a weary brain, the B-movie series.

 

Cry Macho (2021)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Cry Macho (2021) – C. Eastwood

Yes, Clint Eastwood is 91, so it is pretty incredible that he directed this film and stars as a washed-up rodeo rider; it’s set in 1980 when the real Clint was starring with Clyde the orangutan in movies with fist-fight finales. So, is the title ironic?  Is it really about the cock-fighting rooster called Macho or is there some deeper reflection going on here? Does Clint regret his contribution to the outbreak of “toxic masculinity” that subsequently inflicted boys and men?  His character does seem to voice some remorse, suggesting that trying to show some “grit” only results in a broken body later on.  That’s probably not enough of a mea culpa, but I guess we can’t expect too much more from this staunch republican (in what would seemingly have to be his last film). But even though Clint’s Mike Milo begins as a sarcastic and bitter figure (with not just a little of the earlier Eastwood persona), after he travels to Mexico and kidnaps/rescues a 13 yr-old boy for former boss Dwight Yoakam (the boy’s father), he turns pretty tender.  The film slows way down and lingers in a small Mexican town where a widow and her grandchildren adopt the old man and teen.  So, even though there is no doubt that the acting here is pretty subpar, there is something about the schematic script that makes it feel almost like a fable designed to allow the living legend to signal his true values (“do the right thing”), despite the fact that this script has been kicking around Hollywood for decades. It’s a fitting farewell and perhaps a riposte to those who still think that being macho is some sort of ideal (rather than a sad and sorry façade).  But really what’s with the chicken?

 

Who Am I? (1998)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Who Am I? (1998) – B. Chan & J. Chan

Late Nineties and Jackie is already in his 40s (and on the verge of his US breakthrough with Rush Hour, also released in 1998).  The film starts slow and confusingly – is Jackie a CIA agent engaged in Black Ops? He’s with an outfit that has kidnapped some scientists who are making a new chemical weapon of some kind. But wait, now his team has been betrayed by their leader, Jackie has fallen out of a plane and landed on his head and has amnesia.  He’s adopted by a tribe in Namibia and seemingly spends some months or years there (with the new name “WhoAmI”).  There isn’t much action in this first third but then Jackie is found by the CIA and brought to South Africa where he soon discovers that he is also wanted by the police (at least this is what we guessed).  Finally, there are car chases and then when the action moves to Rotterdam, a lot of excellent hand-to-hand kung fu fighting old school style with Jackie’s trademarked comedy.  Perhaps the film is lacking in big stunts or setpieces but it's refreshing in its return to basics.  Who cares about plot in a film like this anyway!

 

Navalny (2022)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Navalny (2022) – D. Roher

Of course, it is a terrifying tale taken straight from today’s news, and all the more impactful for that reason. Alexei Navalny, Russia’s opposition leader, was poisoned in 2020 and this documentary shows the unfolding events and subsequent investigation (which point straight to the FSB and Putin) with involvement by Navalny himself and access to his family, colleagues, etc. Filmmaker Daniel Roher manages to create suspense, outrage, and sympathy through some well-chosen footage, solid editing, music, etc. -- it’s the complete package (and if it was supporting a different viewpoint, we might call it propaganda)  Only occasionally do the filmmakers question Navalny about his views (he once joined a rally with neo-Nazi leanings) and you do have to wonder (not if he’s better than Putin, just about what he stands for beyond being against this dictator). He suggests that Russian politics are at a primitive stage, still arguing about the need for human rights, fair elections, etc., and that sounds about right. He’s a young charismatic guy with a loving family and a good sense of humour. I don’t think it gives anything away to reveal the downbeat ending – Navalny was arrested and placed in jail after returning to Russia and he’s still there.  The fact that Putin is still in power after his brazen attempt to assassinate, censor, and unjustly imprison Navalny is the even bigger shock.  Obviously, the war in Ukraine has suggested even further that he feels above the law and is either evil or insane or both.

 

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)

 ☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) – S. Spielberg

By request from Amon (nearly 10 years old). I feel as though I must have watched this once or twice since its release in 1989 but I didn’t really remember much at all.  For example, there is a prelude where River Phoenix stars as the young Indiana Jones with a few nods toward the origin of various trademarks (whip, hat, fear of snakes)! Then, when Harrison Ford shows up, we are quickly into the adventure story which involves rescuing his father (Sean Connery), a professor of medieval literature, and finding the holy grail (yes, the real one).  I never read/saw the Da Vinci Code but, in my imagination, that book probably reads like this movie: the heroes have to solve a bunch of mysteries related to old texts, hidden tombs, ancient curses and booby traps and the like.  The Nazis are once again (as in the first film) the main antagonists, threatening to get to the grail first.  Director Steven Spielberg is clearly having fun here (Indy comes face-to-face with Hitler in one scene, played for laughs) and the action-adventure scenes are enjoyable/thrilling/comic. Sure, there are a lot of echoes of the first film (we haven’t watched the second because it is supposed to be too gory for young kids) but this didn’t interfere with our viewing pleasure. Harrison Ford is still in peak form and Connery plays against type with good effect.  It can’t top the original (Amon says it is his fave of all-time) but #3 is better than what came later (I don’t have high hopes for Indy 5 but Amon can’t wait).