GlLee Reviews

Eyewitness (1956)

Film an underrated gem

[9/10 · 25 November 2012]

Only those of a certain age appreciate good character acting and dry wit, apparently, because that is what we have in this underrated classic British thriller. While there are a few chance coincidences, the film manages to keep the viewer guessing at the next turn while supplying a very amusing counterpoint of character acting, notably Ada Reeves playing the elderly patient Mrs. Hudson who sees "whole tribes of men skulking about outside the French doors" and is never believed.

I also credit the way the elderly woman patient's dialogue is staged to _Eye Witness's_ director Muriel Box, who the next year (1957) directed _The Truth about Women_, starring Lawrence Harvey and Julie Harris. The viewer may be baffled by some of the comings and goings inside and outside this general hospital (modern in design for its day) but there is nothing amateur about the staged activity. On the contrary, the skillful use of minor characters and near-misses of criminal and pursuers helps to build the tensions, rather than diminishing them.

At its outset, this film shows the realities of life in 1950s England where television ownership was a heady business that was not to be entered into lightly. The whole issue of buying on credit is what sets the initial plot and the first disturbance (the eye-witnessing of a crime)in motion. I recommend this film highly. It is one of those good finds for a Sunday afternoon's viewing.

Juarez (1939)

Muni tops in Juarez

[10/10 · 13 June 2006]

I thought Paul Muni's acting was excellent in Juarez. The sincerity he brought to this role was breath-taking. Those of us who have followed Muni's acting career know that he had a passion for portraying progressives throughout history: statesmen like Juarez, scientists like Pasteur, and writers like Emile Zola. I have shown the film to my college Humanities classes. These old Muni films, such as Zola, Pasteur, and Juarez educate while entertaining. The times we live in show how rare a grasp of history is and I applaud Muni for his selection of roles and great skill in portraying figures such as Benito Juarez.

Many students today do not realize that Louis Napoleon's France had a Realpolitik role in our Civil War by way of its "bet" on the course and how that would play out when France attempted to install a monarch in neighboring Mexico. As a teacher AND a classic film buff, I find little to criticize in this film and much to praise.

Viva Muni, viva Juarez! GlLee

The Sign of the Cross (1932)

Wonderful film

[10/10 · 16 March 2004]

First, this film is high camp. One need only know some of the backstage events to know that all the actors had a great deal of fun in making the film. March tells in his biography that Claudette Colbert spurned his attempts to flirt by chewing several garlic cloves before each close up between the two of them. The famed Chicago World's Fair fan dancer Sally Rand has an uncredited role (according to her family members) as the woman who is about to have her head bitten off by an alligator near the end. There is a close up of Sally's face. With such goings-on, what's not to like here?

I found Fredric March as Marcus Superbus (the Prefect of Rome and man upon whom Empress Poppea has her eyes) convincingly full of himself through the first three quarters of the film. He shows a believable change of heart towards the end. Colbert is charmingly over-the-top as Poppea, as is Charles Laughton, who plays Nero. The ingenue Christian girl, Mercia, is played with restraint by Elissa Landi. While this may make her seem to be overshadowed by Colbert, Marcus states that he is "tired" of overpowering patrician women and, thus, Landi's cool understatement entrances him.

Despite the violence, which is standard fare in tales about early Christians in Rome, there are moments of good acting, not only by the main characters, but by the bit players. Some of the group scenes and interactions among the Christians as they await the arena are well-played, indeed.

There is nothing to dismiss here. At very least, the film is worth a viewing as a landmark epic sporting some of the Hollywood elite of the mid-1930s.