TheLittleSongbird Reviews

Dangerous Crossing (1953)

Danger on the luxury liner

[7/10 · 15 July 2020]

Have always loved films with mystery and suspense, so 'Dangerous Crossing' immediately had me sold. Was also very encouraged seeing a lot of favourable reviews for 'Dangerous Crossing', as well as some that weren't so much. The setting sounded very atmospheric and a great location for this type of story. The cast was also a selling point, Michael Rennie is always dependable and Jeanne Crain impressed me hugely in 'Pinky', enough to make me want to see more of her work.

While 'Dangerous Crossing' didn't strike me as a great film and could have been better than it was, especially considering that its potential was hardly small in the first place, a lot works in its favour and far outweighs the not so good. And if asked as to whether to recommend 'Dangerous Crossing', my answer would be a solid if not quite enthusiastic yes. There are a lot better films of this type and there are also worse, if this is the sort of film that appeals to you there should be plenty to like even if it doesn't reach masterpiece level.

'Dangerous Crossing' has its flaws. The melodrama does get a little much in the latter stages and Crain's character as others have said is pretty one-dimensional and could have done with more subtlety in the writing.

Also found the ending somewhat abrupt, although to me it actually wasn't a predictable one. Although the use of the foghorn is creepy and leaves one feeling unsettled, it could have been used less and not emphasised as much as it was.

On the other hand, 'Dangerous Crossing' looks great. Very beautifully and atmospherically photographed with effective use of fog and the setting has class and creepiness. Although there are reservations with its overuse, the foghorn does give one the creeps. The dialogue on the most part is thoughtful and tightly structured until getting overwrought towards the end. The direction keeps the film moving at a crisp clip.

The story is intriguing and suspenseful generally, the mystery not routine or implausible. Rennie is admirably restrained and sympathetic and Crain does more than credibly and is fully committed in a difficult role of this nature to pull off. The rest of the cast are solid.

Concluding, good if not great. 7/10

City for Conquest (1940)

Tough conquest

[8/10 · 15 July 2020]

Have liked what has been seen of Anatole Litvak's work, although there is more to see, one of his better films being 'All This and Heaven Too'. Although melodrama has a lot of traps, namely over-sentimentality, over-acting and soapiness, that is not to say that it hasn't been done well. It actually has been numerous times, such as the best of Bette Davis and Joan Crawford. Really liked the idea of the story. The cast is filled with immensely talented actors and it was the cast that was actually my main reason for seeing 'City for Conquest'.

'City for Conquest' has a huge amount to recommend and is very good on the most part. Is it melodramatic? Oh yes. Is it well made and performed? Absolutely. As far as Litvak's films go, 'City for Conquest' is in the better half in my view, while James Cagney is always well worth watching with plenty of fine performances under his belt. It was also interesting seeing Anthony Quinn and Arthur Kennedy so young and future director Elia Kazan in a rare-pre director acting role.

As well as being my primary reason for seeing 'City for Conquest', the cast is the main reason for why the film works so well. No weak links here. Cagney does a terrific job being both tough and sympathetic. Ann Sheridan is sensual and touching and she has great, and at its best blistering, chemistry with Cagney. Donald Crisp is always reliable who rarely put a foot wrong and he is solid as rocks here. Quinn is very good and shows a lot of promise, but aside from Cagney the biggest revelations casting wise for me were the superbly cast Arthur Kennedy, his sensitivity being quite poignant without being overplayed, and how Litvak drew such a great unsettling performance from Kazan (before he went on to be one of cinema's most influential directors). Litvak directs with great atmosphere and intensity without wallowing, also bringing a suitable amount of grit to the story.

The production values are top notch, especially the cinematography which is sumptuous but also quite eerie in the way it is lit. Max Steiner's music score is stirring in orchestration and emotion, shining especially towards the end. The script has enough moments of tautness and is sincere, while the story has many moments where it's tough as nails, especially in the tensely choreographed boxing, but it is also a tear-jerker. The ending is moving.

Did feel though that the melodrama got a little too over the top in the last third where the dialogue did get soapy.

Which was also where the film felt on the drawn out side, the climax is moving and brilliantly scored if slightly overlong.

On the whole though, a very well done film. 8/10

The Westerner (1940)

In the adventurous West

[9/10 · 15 July 2020]

Have said more than once about highly appreciating Westerns, though when it comes to film genres it wouldn't be my first choice when it comes to picking a favourite, and there are many great films in the genre. Absolutely love William Wyler as a director, the number of classic films he did are countless. The story sounded interesting as did the character of Judge Roy Bean. Personally like Gary Cooper, and this is the sort of role he always played very well indeed. Walter Brennan always shone in support.

'The Westerner' didn't disappoint me. When it comes to Westerns, while it's not one of my very favourites it is one of the most fascinating and most accessible as well as well made and entertaining. One of those Westerns where even those that dislike the genre normally are likely to find a lot to love or at least appreciate, and those that do already love the genre will love it even more. 'The Westerner' represents everybody involved extremely well indeed and deserves the positivity it has always gotten.

Almost everything is done right, no brilliantly even. 'The Westerner' is a very audaciously photographed film with a lot of atmosphere, with some sweeping camera angles that prevent the film from looking static or stage bound. The setting looks handsome and is evocative. Dmitri Tiomkin's music score is typically luscious and atmospheric with clever, complex and beautifully balanced structuring of his mood-enhancing themes, his distinctive style (when reading up about it and people analysing it it was incredibly illuminating and made me appreciate him even more).

Wyler directs immaculately, directing with typically impeccable taste, intensity and class. Although he was a notorious perfectionist, 'The Westerner' never struck me as clinical or emotionally cold, and although Westerns is not a genre one normally associates Wyler with he doesn't seem uncomfortable in it. The script is clever and taut, especially towards the end and especially in the interactions between Harden and Bean. The story is always compelling, there is a light-heartedness in places but a not held back grit in others. Absolutely loved how the entertaining relationship between Harden and Bean was handled.

Some of my friends consider Cooper on the wooden side and dull generally, personally don't agree. Not every role suited him, especially early on, but this role does and perfectly. At his best his acting is appreciatively natural and restrained and also with personal touches, which was pretty much what his whole acting style was, and all of that can be seen here in 'The Westerner'. Other Western leads may have more intensity, but Cooper underplays beautifully here and is likeable. Doris Davenport brings a lot of heart and charm to the picture and her character is more than just a plot device, in no way does his role slow the plotting down or feel like padding. Best of all is Brennan in a ferocious performance that is both sinister and charming, how he managed to make an evil character likeable says a lot about how good an actor he was at his best. He did deserve the Oscar he got for his performance here, but would make a strong case of him actually being a co-lead rather than supporting.

My only issue, and actually this is minor, was that the ending could have done with more tension and not been as too neat.

Otherwise, a great film and well worth catching. 9/10

The Comedians (1967)

Love through destruction

[5/10 · 15 July 2020]

'The Comedians' had all the right ingredients to be a good film. It has such a talented cast, not just Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor but also Alec Guinness, Peter Ustinov and Lillian Gish. It was written and adapted from his own novel by Graham Greene, considered one of the leading 20th century novelists. His work has proven not easy to adapt, there are brilliant film adaptations of his work on their own terms such as 'The Third Man' certainly but others such as this could have been a lot better.

Even with this good a cast on paper and with Greene writing the script, 'The Comedians' did disappoint me quite a lot. Can see why it was not successful financially and wasn't and generally still isn't well received. It is not unwatchable and has a good deal of notable things, but with the novel being as complex as it is this adaptation would have worked a lot better as a mini-series. Which would have been more focused and not as over-crowded. As a film though, despite things worthy of admiration, 'The Comedians' is heavily flawed and an example of a great book that should have been left alone or done as made for television or something.

Will start with what comes off well in 'The Comedians'. It is a very well made film visually, gloriously photographed and captures the already atmospheric, beautiful yet at times unforgiving locations vividly. Laurence Rosenthal's score is beautifully orchestrated and ominous. There are a few intriguing and suspenseful scenes, with the film's clear dramatic highlight being the powerful scene between Burton and Guinness.

Burton gives great intensity and brio to his character and Ustinov makes the most of his underused screen time. Paul Ford is cast against type and succeeds in creating a character that feels real, while Gish (one of the legends of the silent film era) commands the screen effortlessly. For me the two best performances came from Raymond St Jacques and Guinness, the former is frighteningly malevolent and although his role does sound odd Guinness' performance did strike me as quite profound, especially in that aforementioned scene where he does the near-impossible in upstaging Burton.

Sadly a badly miscast Taylor is another story entirely. She is all over the place in accent (which is not consistent and was like a number of approximate types of accents rolled into one) and in interpretation (looking both disengaged and with a tendency to overact) Plus her character never feels real or that crucial to the drama. Despite Burton and Taylor's relationship being so notorious at the time and in film history, to me their chemistry doesn't sizzle or have much heat or heart to it at all which is a big problem here. Peter Glenville's direction is rather leaden and struggles to balance all the different subplots and connect them together.

'The Comedians' is overlong and goes at a pedestrian pace, generating little tension and emotionally there is quite a big disconnect most of the time. Even when compressed Greene's script is too talk heavy and verbose, and the story felt both bland in atmosphere and over-stuffed. Due to trying to cram in too many subplots and under-developing nearly all of them, hence what was meant when suggesting that the film would have been better as a mini-series.

Overall, a very mixed bag here. 5/10

Stürme über dem Mont Blanc (1930)

Lukewarm storm

[4/10 · 15 July 2020]

Really wanted to like 'Storm Over Mont Blanc'. While Arnold Fanck is not one of my favourite directors, when it comes to films set in the mountains and his capturing of alpine scenery he was one of the best at the time. Have liked some of Leni Riefenstahl's other work, both as actress and director, her personal life makes no difference to me and have always judged the person and the artist separately. 'Storm Over Mont Blanc' did sound quite interesting.

Quite a lot more interesting in the concept than the actual execution of the overall film. Which had its moments/good things, but struck me as rather lacklustre which was somewhat disappointing. Fanck did do much better ('White Hell of Pitz Palu' for instance, although that did have GW Pabst's involvement too) than 'Storm Over Mont Blanc', and so did Riefenstahl (not one of her worst performances, but one of her worst films in my view).

'Storm Over Mont Blanc' is not all bad. The best things about it are the photography and scenery. The photography is stylish and atmospheric, quite artistic in places too without being too indulgent. The long lingering shots of mountain peaks were eye-catching. Although some might find the use of it on the stock side, the alpine scenery is still quite stunning and has a lot of character.

Also thought that Riefenstahl came over quite well. She is luminous and her performance is committed and doesn't hold back while resisting any temptation to go camp. The aerial sequences are beautifully shot and have the wonder that wasn't there in the drama of the story.

Much of the story to me was very bland and to call it thin as ice is being kind. A lot of the film felt plotless and doesn't really go anywhere and almost like a series of travelogue scenes. The pace is dull and what would have helped it was if the extraneous fat (and there is a lot of it here) was trimmed and if any overlong scenes (some of those too) were tightened up.

Fanck succeeds visually and technically when it comes to the direction but dramatically he fails to give the drama any tension or emotional impact. Aside from Riefenstahl, the acting is nothing special and the character writing is basically of the "just there but not much more than that with not enough development" sort. Inexperience in sound does show at times, with some oddly placed sound effects and while mostly the film looks fine the editing at times lacks finesse and has a slapped together look.

Concluding, semi-watchable but left me rather lukewarm at best. 4/10

Law & Order: Criminal Intent: Sound Bodies (2003) Season 3, Episode 8

"Oh look! Bing! Reality!"

[9/10 · 15 July 2020]

Have already said a couple of times as to being generally impressed by the quality of the first half of Season 3, though the previous two seasons of 'Law and Order: Criminal Intent' had a more consistent straightaway quality and had a higher number of great episodes. The only properly outstanding episode prior to "Sound Bodies" was for me "But Not Forgotten", the others were between decent and very good with a couple of annoying getting in the way of many great things.

"Sound Bodies" is another outstanding episode. The best easily since "But Not Forgotten". The chemistry between Goren and Bishop and Bishop herself, the latter making one of her better appearances, didn't feel quite as bland this time round whereas they did bother me somewhat before as it was very hard to not compare to Eames. A very memorable villain also elevated "Sound Bodies" to a greater level as do some particularly fun lines from not just Goren.

Goren and Bishop's chemistry still doesn't completely ignite for me, but that is pretty much it for my problems with "Sound Bodies".

Taking that into account though, "Sound Bodies" does have one of Bishop's best appearances. Her smoking caulking gun line is one of not enough lines of hers to stand out, just one of a number of gem lines in a tight and beautifully balanced script that provokes a lot of thought. It's not just Goren who has the best lines here, Rodgers also has a couple such as the one concerning whether toilet seats and doorknobs have made a comeback.

Moreover the story is twisty and always intriguing, as well as quite creepy. Connie gives one the absolute shivers, as is how effective his controlling hold is, while fascinating just as much as Goren. The ending has a nice amount of tension. The acting is strong all round, Billy Lush is quite chilling and have actually run out of superlatives to say about Vincent D'Onofrio. The production values are slick and the music unobtrusive.

Bottom line, great line and one of Season 3's best. 9/10

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Inheritance (2001) Season 3, Episode 8

Nature versus nurture

[10/10 · 15 July 2020]

This was an example that held my attention even before it began and hearing about it on first watch. The subject is one of Season 3's heaviest therefore it would have been one of the most difficult to tackle, the heavier the subject the more challenging it would have been to tackle it. One does feel somewhat worried though too if they are one of those people that has always felt that the cases that begin to get personal for a team member tend to vary in execution.

Having said that, 'Special Victims Unit' did have some very good to outstanding episodes with "personal" cases. "Inheritance", a return to form after a little dip in the season quality-wise, is one of the most personal cases and is one of the best of the episodes to have that amount of emotional significance. It is one of Season 3's high points and one of its most emotional and relatable. Also consider "Inheritance" an early season high point for its emotional power mainly and how it managed to connect with me.

"Inheritance" boasts a powerful performance from Mariska Hargitay, who really pours out her soul to heart-breaking effect. BD Wong kept getting better with each episode and is suitably sympathetic in a case that also ends up meaning much to him. There is beautiful chemistry between Olivia and Huang, the latter himself showing himself to be remarkably balanced amidst such a difficult case.

A standout scene here is agreed the therapy scene dramatically, one of the most emotional ones of Season 3. It was very relatable to me actually, being somebody who has had to have therapy in the past and who found it very difficult.

Furthermore, "Inheritance's" case is also riveting and has a huge amount of poignant emotional impact throughout. It was amazing for the episode to deal with such a complicated and important to address subject, that will resonate with anybody even now, so compassionately and thoughtfully. We see to moving effect how it affects Olivia and how personal it gets for her and Huang without resorting to unprofessionalism. Had no problem with the slick production values, the unobtrusive music or the deliberate yet tight enough direction, and really appreciated the sincerity of the script.

Concluding, outstanding. 10/10

Law & Order: Prince of Darkness (1992) Season 3, Episode 8

Darkness in blood

[10/10 · 15 July 2020]

It is hard not to feel excited before sitting down to watch "Prince of Darkness" for the first time. That was my feeling on first watch, and with it having one of Season 3's most interesting concepts part of me knew that it would be at least a very good episode. Have often seen it deemed as one of the standouts of the early seasons and it is hard to resist such a sinister sounding episode title, the episode title of the season to grab me the most even.

"Prince of Darkness" didn't disappoint me on first viewing. On re-watches, it is one of those episodes that got better with each viewing and it more than lived up to the very high expectations set by the concept and title and exceeded them. It is one of the standouts of Season 3, in its top 3 episodes, as well as the darkest and most tense (worthy of being season finale level). And a early season episode standout, a prime example as to why it is a shame that the early seasons aren't aired enough.

Can't find anything to fault really with "Prince of Darkness". It looks professional and the camerawork is neither overblown or static. The standout being at the beginning, which was quite unsettlingly (in a good way) shot. The music has a haunting and not too melodramatic presence, while being used relatively sparingly.

The acting is great, shining especially in the exchanges between Michael Moriarty, Richard Brooks and Paul Robinette (also three at the top of their game). Paul Sorvino, in his last major/lead appearance (his last ever being a brief cameo in the next episode) of 'Law and Order', comes into his own here, while Carlos Sanz and Mark Margolis make the skin crawl.

Dialogue is taut yet also flows freely, one hanging on to every word without being confused or talked down to. Schiff has some brilliant lines here. It is the story where "Prince of Darkness" most stands out. It is Season 3's darkest episode and one of the darkest episodes full stop of 'Law and Order'. There is a real sense of suspenseful dread throughout, especially in the final portions, and it is full of unpredictable turns. For instance as soon as one thinks that the case is done and dusted, it is revealed that there is more to it and there is a particularly shocking change of events that leaves one floored. There is even a horrifying heart in the mouth moment where the viewer's reactions mirror exactly what the characters in question are thinking and feeling.

In summary, wonderful episode and one of the season's best, as well as an early season standout. 10/10

The Froze Nose Knows (1970)

Winter hi-jinks

[8/10 · 15 July 2020]

Although not everything made/produced by DePatie-Freleng Enterprises was good, the studio were responsible for a lot of good cartoons, some even great. Their numerous theatrical series varied in quality and their overall effectiveness was largely dependent on how the lead/titular characters fared, whether they entertained, endeared and compelled or whether they bored, annoyed and had presence. They more or less made or broke their respective series.

Luckily the Ant and the Aardvark are examples of the former category and regardless of the series' predictability (and it was a predictable one because most followed the same formula) their weakest cartoons were better than the weakest cartoons of most of the studio's series. Up until the ending, 'The Froze Nose Knows' was this close to being one of the top three Ant and the Aardvark cartoons. It still is one of the best though due to the rest of it being so good, loved almost everything about it.

Have always never really cared for the ending, one of my least favourite endings for any of the Ant and the Aardvark cartoons, a clumsily executed attempt at a change of pace and one of not many things of the series overall that does not sit well with me. Just find it far too cruel and mean-spirited in a way that doesn't fit within the cartoon or the series, and one's sympathy is completely with the aardvark whereas any kind of empathy for the other characters diminishes. Am aware this is just one component of a cartoon, but it did bring 'The Froze Nose Knows' down by quite a bit.

The animation though is fine, simple but never cheap. The attention to detail in the backgrounds and the wintry detail make for one of the series' most vivid settings where one actually feels the winter as much as the aardvark. The music was always one of the best things about the Ant and the Aardvark cartoons, it is in 'The Froze Nose Knows', the jazzy rhythms and infectious light-heartedness difficult to resist. The main theme alone makes one want to do the jitterbug.

On the comedic front, 'The Froze Nose Knows' excels. There are some very well timed and amusing gags, one of my favourites being the aardvark finding the bear in his bed and the consequences of that. It is the dialogue, as seems to be the case for the Ant and the Aardvark series overall, that shines more. All the best lines coming from the aardvark, whose witticisms and breaking the fourth wall are often hilariously irreverent. The story is, apart from the setting and the ending, obvious but the energy is constant and it never feels dull.

Did feel that the ant was a little underused, though his dialogue is very nice at the beginning. The bear very nearly became one of the series' best supporting characters and was very funny in his first appearance, wish that promise was maintained to the very end where he became too mean. The aardvark is the funniest and most interesting character here, also the only one the viewer sympathises with. John Byner's one-man show voice acting is nothing short of stellar, even that strong adjective doesn't do it justice.

In conclusion, very, very good and great actually until the too cruel ending dampened it a bit. 8/10

A Series of Unfortunate Events: The Austere Academy: Part One (2018) Season 2, Episode 1

Austere is correct

[8/10 · 15 July 2020]

Season 1 of 'A Series of Unfortunate Events', adapting 'The Bad Beginning', 'The Reptile Room', 'The Wide Window' and 'The Miserable Mill', was surprisingly very well done. It wasn't perfect, the first part of "The Bad Beginning" was a little uneven, while K. Todd Freeman manages to make Mr Poe irritating beyond belief and some of the narration wasn't needed. When it worked, especially both parts of "The Reptile Room" and the second part of "The Miserable Mill", Season 1 was very good.

'A Series of Unfortunate Events' second season similarly gets off to a very good start. Doing a great job re-establishing the series' dark, grim tone apparent throughout Season 1, and also building upon it, which is appropriate as the storytelling was growing darker all the time. Also doing very well indeed adapting 'The Austere Academy', to me one of the better books in the series despite perhaps the single most annoying character in the book series (Vice Principal Nero). "The Austere Academy: Part 1" is not perfect, none of the series' episodes are and to me perfection is somewhat rare, but it is another case of more good things than not so good things. 'A Series of Unfortunate Events', both books and show, is not for all tastes, criticised for being repetitive and having stupid and easily fooled adult characters and understandably. Personally am quite fond of the books, and the show does laudably adapting them.

Beginning with what didn't work with "The Austere Academy: Part 1", whereas Vice Principal Nero was a contender for the most annoying character in the book series (although at least he was meant to be), Mr Poe is by far the most annoying character of the show and unlike Vice Principal Nero he is not meant to be. Not just that, but Mr Poe just didn't feel necessary and added very little to what was going on. K. Todd Freeman just doesn't do it for me and that was the case throughout the whole of the adaptation.

Despite playing a prominent role in the books, the narration also didn't feel necessary. Patrick Warburton fares very well as Lemony Snicket and there are entertaining moments but the interjections tended to explain too much and condescended a bit. Also we didn't really need to know that things were going from bad to worse when it was fairly obvious on screen and those who saw the previous four, all four in two parts each, adaptations of the show will find it obvious as well.

"The Austere Academy: Part 1" is well worth seeing for the production design, with the sets and attention to detail being some of the best of the series and practically revels in the unpleasant environment that the school should have. The school is as wonderfully austere as it should be and the shack actually looks horrible and unforgiving to live in. The costumes, a mix of demure and outlandish to represent the divide between the good and bad. The opening credits sequence are still delightful and very clever. The music has the darkness, absurdity and jauntiness needed and is suitably atmospheric.

Similarly very well executed is the spirit of Snicket's prose in the dialogue. The darkly humorous edge is there, as is the increasing gloom and absurdity. The stupidity of the adults will be a source of frustration for those who have not read the books and it was also something that was purposefully frustrating in the books too, that is handled very well too and doesn't get over the top. The story captures the tone of the book very well and makes the most of the austerity and absurdity of the setting, not taking too long in setting up the story or season. Even if the second part is more eventful.

On the most part, the performances are strong. Neil Patrick Harris' Olaf steals the show, he is clearly having a lot of fun with the character while posing a genuine threat too (more so in the second part though). In his class are Roger Bart, deliciously loathsome and hilariously outlandish as Nero in an atypical role for him and the similarly spiteful Carmelita Spats of Kitana Turnball. Appreciated the understated acting of the Quagmires, more interesting characters to me than in the books. Didn't have a problem with the Baudelaires, especially Sunny, though the new characters are much more memorable.

In conclusion, very well done. 8/10

Street Angel (1928)

Angelic love

[7/10 · 14 July 2020]

'Street Angel' had a good deal of good points. It was one of three films that garnered Janet Gaynor an Oscar that was groundbreaking for being a triple-film Oscar. It had Gaynor and Charles Farrell together again after being partnered with so beautifully in the superior '7th Heaven'. It saw the two stars together reunited with Frank Borzage in their second of three films, followed by 'Lucky Star', who specialised in the sentimental films where the characters had to face significant adversity.

While 'Street Angel' has a lot to admire and is pretty good overall, to me it was uneven and is by quite some way my least favourite of Gaynor, Farrell and Borzage's collaborations. My favourite being 'Lucky Star', that and '7th Heaven' were wonderful films whereas 'Street Angel' was only pretty good albeit with many superb elements. It is exceptionally well made, well directed, has a truly great central performance and starts strongly, but falters later and falls apart completely at the end.

Beginning with the many good things, 'Street Angel' looks great. It is beautifully photographed, both lush and atmospheric in both a romantic and gritty way. The lush romantic style Borzage started to develop not long before had fully developed it by this film and is evident throughout. Although a silent, there is use of sound through clever use of sound effects throughout and a quite sumptuous sounding music score that doesn't get too syrupy or mawkish. Borzage directs typically sensitively, though it is tauter in the generally superior first half.

The film has a great first half. It is incredibly charming, sweet without being sugary and has a light heart, while also having emotional impact. The pacing also felt tighter in the first half too. The supporting cast are solid. When it comes to the acting though, the clear standout is Gaynor. Whose very heartfelt performance really captivates and she has charming chemistry with Farrell who doesn't overplay and appeals enough on the whole.

He in my opinion was a lot more natural looking in '7th Heaven' and especially 'Lucky Star', there are moments of stiffness here and there were parts where he could have gone for it more.

More problematic is some of the second half, where things get rather turgidly paced and melodramatic, the sentimentality taken to wild extremes that it is barely palatable. The ending feels tacked on and too reliant on improbable coincidence.

On the whole though, while my clear least favourite of the Gaynor, Farrell and Borzage collaborations 'Street Angel' has a good deal to recommend and is pretty good. 7/10

Die Büchse der Pandora (1929)

Lulu through the eyes of Pabst

[10/10 · 14 July 2020]

The story of Lulu, was already familiar with the story from seeing and hearing Alban Berg's opera 'Lulu', is an immensely harrowing and tragic one, and a brave one to dare to adapt on film at this particular time in film history. GW Pabst was one of the best and most influential silent film directors, known for the authenticity of his settings visually and in atmosphere (coined "street realism"), how his films were edited and his direction of actresses and how he developed their skills.

All three can be found here in 'Pandora's Box', which made star Louise Brooks a cinematic icon for very good reason. It has Pabst written all over it, that's how big an impression his style and direction make here, and to this day is one of his and Brooks' best films. Even better than the wonderful 'Diary of a Lost Girl' (also directed by Pabst and also starring Brooks hence the comparison), which has pretty much all the brilliant things 'Pandora's Box' has but 'Pandora's Box's' ending works much better and takes more risks (even with again being significantly censored in various countries at the time) which is what makes it marginally better.

'Pandora's Box' looks fantastic even now, with some of the most truly beautiful and atmospheric images for any silent film. The lighting is moody, which adds so much to the dark, sleazy tone of the story, and the editing typically seamless for a Pabst film. The sets are far from static and are not static, even if they weren't authentic in real life they certainly looked and felt authentic, which is where Pabst's pioneering street realism comes in. Best of all visually is the exquisite, rich in atmosphere and very creative cinematography.

Moreover Pabst's direction is masterly, it's a triumph visually and creating a hugely realistic mood that is as hard hitting and moving as is required for the story. This is far from too safe directing, always admire it when directors and writers bring a pull no punches approach to uncompromising subjects and that was something that Pabst was consistently brilliant at and doing it in a way that makes one feel that they are there (another example of his street realism).

The most familiar of the music scores available for 'Pandora's Box' is Stuart Oderman's. To me, it fitted quite well even if it will never go down as one of my favourites. It was foreboding and leaves one unsettled even when not being complex in instrumentation, there are melodramatic parts but the nature of the story calls for that. While the story may seem too melodramatic and lacking in cohesion for some, to me it had some intense sensuality and some darkly humorous moments without resorting to camp. But above all it was violently harrowing and moving, with an unforgettably disturbing ending that never fails to shock. One of Pabst's biggest stengths and what set him apart was how he portrayed the dangers and plights of his female lead characters, most evident in 'Pandora's Box' and 'Diary of a Lost Girl'. Atmosphere-wise, 'Pandora's Box' is quite unlike any film released before and at the time and is still quite unique now.

Despite the characters not being ones one sympathises with (Alwa comes closest but namely down to how he is treated), with Lulu being pretty amoral, they are very interesting and the interactions between them induce a wide range of emotions. The cast are all strong, with Gustav Diessel a big standout as a truly sinister Jack the Ripper. Along with Pabst and the production values, one of 'Pandora's Box's' biggest treasures is the magnificent and quite iconic performance of Brooks in a challenging role that she embodies every single shade of. She looks wonderful on camera too and her face and eyes tell so much, one believes everything she conveys.

In summation, a silent film masterpiece. While the critical and commercial failure at the time is understandable, the acclaim it's garnered over-time is more so. 10/10

Westfront 1918: Vier von der Infanterie (1930)

On the westfront

[8/10 · 14 July 2020]

There are some fine WW1 films about, the king of them being 'All Quiet on the Western Font' (released in the same year as this) and there are many powerful films centered around war in general. GW Pabst, here in his first sound film so this was a first for him and the viewer, was a great director, very influential in the silent film era and in German cinema and especially good when it came to editing, his direction of his actresses and the realism of the stories. They were my main reasons for seeing.

'Westfront 1918' is not one of my favourite war films, while not having much inherently wrong with it as such. It is also not one of Pabst's very finest or one of his most important or a major influence in cinema. 'Westfront 1918' is still very good and is very well made and powerful, Pabst does not have a misfire here and he is not off form (far from it), he's just done even better which says a lot for how brilliant he was at his very best.

Story-wise, 'Westfront 1918' is quite slight and very simple.

Also some may find the point of view from the characters, especially with the universal brotherhood, on the naive side, but that is not an invalid point of view as quite a number of soldiers went into war not knowing what they were letting themselves in for.

However, Pabst does admirably on the directing front. Inexperience with sound shows at times (other silent film directors fared a lot worse though, DW Griffith with 'Abraham Lincoln' anyone?), but he shows clear command and understanding of the material, the point of view is not unfocused and technically this is typically accomplished work. 'Westfront 1918' is a fantastic looking film, the low tracking shots in the war scenes being hugely atmospheric and the editing is typically seamless for a Pabst film. The music is suitably haunting and the film is written with sincerity.

Despite the story not being perfect, it is still emotionally moving, especially at the end, and has a lot of power and the anti-war sentiment with resonate with everybody feeling exactly the same. The war scenes are gut-wrenching. The acting is very good in well defined roles.

Overall, very good. 8/10

Der heilige Berg (1926)

Not so holy

[5/10 · 14 July 2020]

Have given this mixed feelings rating with regret, would never rate or review anything with malice or any kind of bias. Leni Riefenstahl was not a bad actress at all but was an even better director (the latter of which she is perhaps better known for and her personal life), and when it came to films centered around adversity in the mountains it didn't get much better than Arnold Fanck when it came to direction at that particular point in film history.

So it did sadden me that 'The Holy Mountain' didn't connect with me completely, being somebody that really did want to like it as Riefenstahl's directing efforts and her other mountaineering-oriented outings with Fanck have much to admire. Visually 'The Holy Mountain' is a triumph and there is some inspired direction, but it is far from exceptional story-wise and Riefenstahl went on to do much better things when her acting style matured and became more subtle and comfortable (neither of which evident here).

'The Holy Mountain' has a good deal of good things. Visually it is masterly. The scenery is beautiful and atmospheric but even better is the cinematography. Not only are there some truly breathtaking images, but the moving camera and time lapse photography are so well used and make what happens raw and moving and the points of view interesting. It is a hauntingly scored film again and written with sincerity and good intentions.

Fanck's direction has a lot of impressive parts, especially when capturing the intensity of the action and emotional impact of it. As there are intense and moving moments here.

On the other hand, the story tends to be very dull and not particularly eventful, which may be down to that there is not a lot to it structurally and the film tried to pad it out. It is also excessively melodramatic, especially later on when it got very overwrought. The characters are underdeveloped and quite sketchy even.

Generally, the acting is nothing special and Riefenstahl herself went on to much better after. Here she overdoes it quite dreadfully and Fanck's direction of her is all over the shop.

In conclusion, watchable but underwhelming. 5/10

Das blaue Licht - Eine Berglegende aus den Dolomiten (1932)

Light on the mountaintop

[8/10 · 14 July 2020]

Films with heavy emphasis on mountaineering are not usually my thing, but there are ones that are very well done and are far more interesting than they sound. The four films Leni Riefenstahl as leading lady made with director Arnold Fanck ('The Holy Mountain', 'The Great Leap', 'The White Hell of Pitz Palu', 'Storm Over Mont Blanc') centered around this subject are variable quality-wise but have interest value. So expectations were high for Riefenstahl's directing debut, which she also stars in, 'The Blue Light'.

Those high expectations were on the most part met which made me happy. 'The Blue Light' is not quite a masterpiece, but it sure is evidence that Riefenstahl could direct like the strongest of storms and has so many brilliant things, those that are not too keen on the subject usually should find much to admire here being one of those people myself. It is not so exceptional when it comes to some of the pace and story, but from a directing and visual perspective 'The Blue Light' is masterful. So a very good film that just falls short of being the great one it was this close to being.

As said, the story is one of 'The Blue Light's' weaker points. It is very slight and at times a bit too simple and the early portions especially are very thinly plotted.

Which did make some of the pace on the sluggish side. Other than the lead character, the character writing could have been meatier.

However, everything else is exceptionally done. Will agree with everyone though that the sound version is significantly better than the rather primitive silent one. 'The Blue Light' has a score that has a nice atmosphere and isn't overused or too melodramatic while still having emotional impact. It is thoughtfully scripted too, and it was a good move to not having a lot of dialogue, which helped make the tense yet poetic atmosphere really resonate and not make one worry about over-wordiness like some early sound films did.

Even if the story isn't perfect, it does have the right amount of tension when necessary and there were also parts that came over as quite poignant. The acting is fine, with Riefenstahl typically luminous and affecting and one cares for her character's plight. She fares even better though here in the director's chair, which has a lot of stylised beauty and has a lot of confidence. This did not feel like a directorial debut, this was the quality of somebody who had been in the business for years. Even better than Riefenstahl's direction is the exceptional quality of the production values. The scenery has a lot of atmosphere and really captures the eye but the star visually is the cinemaphotography, some of the most visually gorgeous of any early sound film.

Overall, very good and almost great. 8/10

House of Cards: Chapter 64 (2017) Season 5, Episode 12

"Welcome to the death of the age of reason, there is no right or wrong, not anymore"

[4/10 · 14 July 2020]

On the most part, 'House of Cards' is a great show, namely though because of the strength of the first four seasons, with all the episodes being pretty good to fantastic. It did start to lose its way in Season 5, which had enough good things and most of the thirteen episodes that formed it fared better on re-watch, but also a lot of big problems that started to have the feel of a different show. A feel that intensified in the disgrace that was the sixth and final season that had all the fifth season's flaws, amplified them and made more on the way.

Count me in as another person that was very underwhelmed by Season 5's penultimate episode "Chapter 64". It is the highest rated episode of Season 5 and one of the highest of the show, which in all honesty perplexes me and this is coming from a subjective person. For me it is actually the worst Season 5 episode, "Chapter 59", "Chapter 62" and "Chapter 63" particularly were vastly superior, the worst of the show up to this point of it (if better than all the episodes of Season 6) and the episode where 'House of Cards' started to properly decline.

It is not an irredeemable episode by all means. It looks great, as slick and audacious in the photography as always. The acting cannot be faulted, regardless of the material (which was pretty uneven in Season 5) Kevin Spacey was never one of the drawbacks.

He, if anything, was the main reason to keep watching. There are fleeting moments of thought-provoking and intrigue, when not being annoyed by the ridiculousness, over-the-topness and being bored silly. The music score fits the tone of the story and show well and didn't feel excessive or like it belonged somewhere else, that was the case with the first five seasons throughout but it was the opposite in the final season.

Sadly, "Chapter 64's" writing is far too soapy and melodramatic to an excessive degree. As well as talk-heavy and in a rambling way, the tautness and sharp bite are completely gone here. The pace is mostly dull, this and the next episode were the dullest Season 5 got, with too many uncompelling or unnecessary parts in need of being focused on less and not being as aimless. The biggest problem with "Chapter 64" is the story, which is a complete mess. Granted, it may advance things more than other Season 5 episodes but never in a revealing, natural or interesting way and not without screwing up royally on the character writing. The story is not just painfully dull and full of ideas indicative of the 'House of Cards' having run out of ideas (another reason for the dullness), it is also truly ridiculous and painfully over the top. "Chapter 64" for example contains the single most insultingly far-fetched and implausible opening scene of the whole show, or certainly up to this point.

Morever, didn't ever give a tuppence for the Claire and Yates relationship dragged out interminably throughout the season and served no real point to it. Yates himself also added absolutely nothing to the season and this episode did nothing to change my mind. It was good that it was finally ended, but not without doing it in such a contrived fashion and practically character assassinating Claire in the process. No other episode up to this point of 'House of Cards' had this many characters out of character and in so bad a way. The resignation was a primary example, being against everything Frank was and stood for. The character writing was simplistic and most of the characters when not out of character were uninteresting and even useless with chemistry that never sizzles or engages. The least frustrating character here is Doug and even his too soft decision making is questionable. There is very little consequence, with so many bad actions barely if at all resolved or handled indifferently, and much more at stakes, undermined by the overload of absurdity.

Summarising, has its moments but didn't really care for this episode at all. Sorry. 4/10

Taggart: Saints and Sinners (2004) Season 20, Episode 4

Sins of the saints

[8/10 · 14 July 2020]

Did find myself mixed on the Burke era of 'Taggart', a period that didn't compare to those of Taggart and Jardine as an overall whole. There were definitely some great episodes, "Compensation" being a contender for the best Burke episode and one of my favourites of the whole show. It did take time for me to get used to Burke, tending to find him too agressive and the shorter episodes to me were less rushed and felt rushed and like the show had run out of ideas.

"Saints and Sinners" is generally deserving of a higher rating here. It is not as good as "Compensation" and is a slight disappointment in comparison (only because that episode was so good), but to me by Burke era standards it is very good and as far as Burke's episodes go it's towards being one of the better ones. Is it perfect? Not quite. Is there a lot to like? Absolutely, actually find that the lesser episodes have a good deal of good things.

It is maybe just me but to me the last victim behaved pretty ludicrously and there was something about what they were saying and how they said it that made me think "they are literally asking to be killed".

Also felt that the ending was on the rushed side and could have done with more tension.

However, the photography has the necessary grit and moodiness and the location is striking yet suitably unforgiving. The music matches that perfectly and the main theme is unforgettable. The script provokes thought and is both gritty and entertaining, really enjoyed the chemistry between Robbie and Gemma and felt that their subplot avoided distracting from the mystery. Have always really enjoyed the chemistry between Robbie and Jackie, their banter often entertains and it has heart too. Oh and that techie drawing confession.

While having reservations with the ending, the mystery is very intriguing with a suitably uncompromising approach and with some clever twists and turns (didn't see the real motive coming for some time). The identity of the responsible was also not to me obvious, though if the revelation happened slightly earlier it would have helped the ending have more impact. The team interact beautifully, this aspect has come on quite a fair bit since Burke was introduced. The acting is fine, Alex Norton doesn't overdo it as much as he did in some of the previous episodes.

On the whole, very well done. 8/10

A Shoe Addict's Christmas (2018 TV Movie)

Dickens for Christmas

[7/10 · 14 July 2020]

The story does not sound original at all, conceptually some of the plot elements are done to death, and the title sounds very corny. Hallmark though have showed more than once that they are capable of making above average festive films in a very hit and miss bunch. Candace Cameron Bure and Luke Macfarlane, both Hallmark regulars and no strangers to Hallmark Christmas films, are more often than not watchable and Jean Smart can be relied upon always to give a good performance.

'A Shoe Addict's' Christmas was surprisingly pretty good. Don't be put off by the title, the film is nowhere near as cheesy as the title indicates. It is not quite a great film and has flaws, but as far as Hallmark Christmas films go to me it's among the best and one of their better 2018 efforts too. Anybody that loves Christmas and wants a pleasant inoffensive distraction on a dull afternoon may find it likeable enough, and Bure, Macfarlane and Smart are all represented well.

Sure, 'A Shoe Addict's Christmas' is not perfect. It does jump around a little too much, so it is not always easy to follow narratively and some of the pace could have slowed down. Also felt that some of the supporting characters could have been developed more, they are little more than Hallmark cliches.

Have found more than once with Hallmark that their soundtracks are on the too intrusive and too constant side. Still find that the case here, though there have been worse cases before and since.

On the other hand, Bure brings a lot of sparkling charm to one of her easier to engage with characters in one of her better performances. She doesn't overplay the character's negative characteristics, and it is the type of role where that is a serious danger, and doesn't play it too twee either. Macfarlane's charisma smolders and he is very likeable and rootable. He and Bure connect very well together and have the adorable but not cutesy factor. Smart is both amusing and endearing. The supporting cast are all good enough even though their material could have been a lot more. The direction is sympathetic while not being leaden.

It looks great as a film. 'A Shoe Addict's Christmas' in my view is one of Hallmark's better looking films (Christmas and otherwise) from not just their 2018 output but also overall. It's beautifully photographed and the scenery is quite captivating. The dialogue flows better and more naturally than the dialogue in most Hallmark films and doesn't fall as much into cheese and soap. The story is very light-hearted and really warms the heart, any character changes actually not coming out of the blue or feeling hasty and the main character is one that actually grows.

Concluding, pretty good and in the better half of Hallmark's festive output. 7/10

Christmas at Graceland (2018 TV Movie)

Christmas with not enough grace

[3/10 · 14 July 2020]

'Christmas at Graceland' was hardly one of those films doomed from the get go. Expectations admittedly were mixed, the low rating and mixed to negative reviews here dampering them. Watched it anyway though, due to my love of Christmas, having seen a fair share of surprisingly good festive Hallmark films and remembering Kellie Pickler from when she appeared on 'American Idol' where she struck me as good when she had the right song and stayed true to her roots.

As much as it does pain me to say it, while it is not one of Hallmark's worst overall or one of the worst of their variable Christmas output, 'Christmas at Graceland' wasn't good at all for me. Really do have to agree with the negative critiques, and this is coming from somebody more than willing to go against the grain. This is including the criticisms for Pickler's performance, sans what has been said about her accent which strikes me as nit-picky and not valid (seeing as that is how she actually talks).

There are things done well. The best thing about it is Wes Brown, who is charismatic and charming in the way that the rest of the cast weren't. Close behind are the production values, especially the lovely setting that the camera was clearly in love with.

Some of the music is not bad and has a nice nostalgia, likewise with the singing.

Unfortunately, too often it was very forgettable and at times cheesy. Also thought that there was too much of it and some of the placement was random, the repeated use of "Silent Night" is enough to make one not want to listen to the carol anymore. Not to mention the lip synching, it is very sloppy and never fits with the singing so that the music was pre-recorded was so blatantly obvious. As said, do have to agree with Pickler being terrible here. Inexperience badly shows and she both tries too hard and is painfully stiff, it was pretty uncomfortable to watch her.

Only Brown stands out of the cast and to me there wasn't enough warmth or emotional connection in the chemistry between him and Pickler, which badly undermines the romantic angle of the story. Which in itself was not developed enough. The direction tends to be pedestrian and only Clay is interesting or worth rooting for of all the characters. Laurel is annoying and the others lack distinction in very typical roles, you've seen all these roles before in pretty much all Hallmark Christmas films and 'Christmas at Graceland does nothing new with them.

Faring just as badly are the script and story. The script is cheese and awkwardness personified, with the cutesiness going into overload and there is just no depth whatsoever to it. The story is incredibly predictable and far too slight for the running time. Meaning that the film crawls along at a dull pace and that atmospherically it is very bland, with very little charm or heart, adds further to that.

In summation, pretty weak. Brown and the production values make it just about variable, but the story is very wanting and even those that like Pickler as a singer will not be impressed by her here. 3/10

Noelle (2019)

The mediocre Noelle

[4/10 · 14 July 2020]

This is being said with a heavy heart. Love Christmas, so this is not coming from a Scrooge or a Grinch. The concept was an interesting one and sounded like it had ideas that tried to do something different. The cast is a talented one, Anna Kendrick and Bill Hader are always watchable and have gotten a lot of enjoyment over-time out of Shirley MacLaine's early career work. So this is coming from someone that really wanted to like 'Noelle' and should have liked it.

Sadly, count me in as another person that didn't care for 'Noelle' and was very disappointed by it. The cast is one of the better things about it, but the script and story sink 'Noelle' badly. It is not one of the worst Christmas films out there, but there are far better too. Despite seeing it on Disney+, 'Noelle' did feel like an average or just below Hallmark/Lifetime Christmas film with sporadic attempts at doing things differently but mostly followed a typical formula but in a heavier manner than most.

'Noelle' has its good things. Generally it doesn't look too bad. It has a slick look to the photography and doesn't look drab or garish. The soundtrack has memorable and easy to listen to moments, not making the mistakes of being used too constantly or being over-scored.

Most of the cast do laudably with what was given to them, the material was beneath them but they did well. Kendrick is charming and Hader has nice amusing moments and likeability. MacLaine enjoys herself. There are sweet, cute moments that are sadly too far and between.

The one exception when it comes to the cast is to me Billy Eichner, who is too subdued and it didn't seem like his heart was in it. The direction does work against the actors, tending to be too routine and the character interaction could have done with more spark generally. Nor the character writing, too many of the characters are not likeable or interesting so it was hard to root for them or anything here. There is one exception when it comes to talking about the production values and that is including the CGI, which looks horribly fake and felt too out of place as well.

Like has been said above, it is the script and the storytelling that are the biggest drawbacks. 'Noelle' fails when it comes to entertainment, any attempts at humour fall flat and come over as lacking in wit or sophistication and instead come over as very cheesy and not always tasteful. The more dramatic moments are too sugary sweet, very dreary in momentum, very melodramatic and the sentimentality is hard to stomach. The story is both dull and contrived, and any attempts at diverting from typical festive formula come over as mean-spirited and heavy-handed to the point of being shoved down the throat.

Altogether, rather mediocre. Wanted to like it so much more but sorry it just didn't connect with me. 4/10

7th Heaven (1927)

Magical heaven

[9/10 · 13 July 2020]

'7th Heaven' is the first of three films with Janet Gaynor and Charles Farrell paired together with all three films being directed by Frank Borzage. The other two being 'Street Angel' and 'Lucky Star'. Like those two films, this film's title is immediately appealing and the story sounded really relatable. One that certainly played to Borzage's strengths, a common theme of his in his early work being love fighting against and triumphing over adversity, and also Gaynor's.

Of Gaynor, Farrell and Borzage's collaborations, my personal favourite is actually 'Lucky Star'. But '7th Heaven' is a very close second, the Oscars garnered richly deserved and for me it was a better film than the film that won Best Picture that year 'Wings' (which is still very, very good, but this film connected with me more somehow). Gaynor and Borzage are on top form and Farrell showed with them that he did had potential of being a bigger star when the material was particularly good. Some may find fault with the story sure, and that aspect was not perfect here, but so much works brilliantly here.

Will get the not so good things out of the way. The story can be too coincidence-heavy and the ending did feel tacked on.

However, '7th Heaven' looks beautiful. The lush romantic style that Borzage was developing in the lead up to this film was very much evident here and by 'Street Angel' it was developed fully. The photography is lush and often dazzles, making the sets and costumes even more beautifully elegant than they already are, while also having a lot of atmosphere. Borzage directs typically sensitively and intelligently, not allowing the film to become too lightweight or too heavy.

'Lucky Star' has more subtlety and is lighter when it comes to the writing, but '7th Heaven' is still intelligently written and sympathetic. The story is immensely charming, carried by the already luminous chemistry between Gaynor and Farrell that blossomed with each film, and very moving. The battle scenes still impress and while the story was not quite as relatable as 'Lucky Star's' the same amount of emotional connection is here.

The characters are identifiable and one roots for them to overcome their trials. Gaynor is luminous in looks while also giving a very heartfelt performance that earned her a deserved triple film Oscar (a first). Farrell is similarly restrained but never dull, he brings a lot of heart to the film. The two work beautifully together.

All in all, great. 9/10

Wozzeck (2018)

Inner turmoil

[6/10 · 13 July 2020]

Of all the major Expressionism (a music form more appreciated for its importance in musical development than loved) composers, Berg is my personal favourite. While neither 'Wozzeck' and 'Lulu' are among my all time favourite, that doesn't stop me from considering them two of the finest operas of the 20th century. William Kentridge has a fascinating visual style that has leant itself well in opera, used to great use in the Metropolitan Opera productions of 'The Nose' and 'Lulu'.

His 'Wozzeck', which was broadcasted earlier this year live from the Met and a revival of this production, struck me as less successful as those two though when seeing that admirable but uneven production. My feelings since seeing this production have not changed. This is a marginally better performance, due to a much better Wozzeck and it has more passion and emotion here but a few of my criticisms with the recent Met production are present here too.

There is a lot to admire about this production of 'Wozzeck'. While the production is not perfect visually, Kentridge showcases once again, like he did with 'The Nose' and 'Lulu', his very interesting and quite unique visual style. The imagery is full of atmosphere, jaw-dropping at its best and is more often than not cleverly utilised. The sets are suitably austere while never being too ugly. The costumes fit beautifully within the concept and don't look too ugly on their own either.

'Wozzeck' is impeccable musically. The orchestra successfully manages to make Berg's incredibly complex score beautiful and affecting as well as frightening and twisted, this is more than just dissonant noise that some people from personal experience describe Expressionist music as, it seems like that on first listen but when one gets used to the style it is more appealing. Vladimir Jurowski, who still enjoys a very varied repertoire ranging from as early as Haydn, was an interesting choice for conductor, but he didn't seem taxed mostly even if inexperience with Berg showed in some pedestrian spots. He mostly conducts with authority and there is hair-raising intensity when necessary.

Despite the staging not being perfect, it didn't leave me cold on an emotional level. Act 3 has a lot of passion and emotion and the chemistry between Wozzeck and Marie is both tense and poignant. Matthias Goerne deserves every ounce of his acclaim he has gotten for his interpretation of this difficult title role. He sings firmly but warmly without sounding too refined or anything, he clearly had clear understanding of the text and that is obvious in how he shaped the words in such a nuanced but intense fashion and he is very musical. He is also a fine actor and Wozzeck is a complex tortured character here, where the roughness and anguish are both felt. Asmik Grigorian is quite a find as Marie, vivacious, steely and vulnerable with a voice that doesn't shriek or wobble its way through the music. She and Goerne have great chemistry together and their final scene is a dramatic highlight. The supporting cast are fine also, especially Gerhard Siegel having a lot of fun as the Captain.

However, although visually striking, striking Kentridge's designs were a little too over-stuffed and went at too fast a pace to near hyper-activity at times, meaning that it wasn't always easy catching up with it. The production would have benefitted from having less of this spectacle because it did get in the way of the drama a bit and doesn't allow one to completely invest, something that was not the case with 'The Nose' and 'Lulu'.

Marie could have been developed more as a character, everything is right on the surface but the complexity isn't always there. The final scene felt anti-climactic and has been more devastating elsewhere.

All in all, a lot to admire but uneven. 6/10

Korngold: Die tote Stadt (2003 Video)

The dead city

[4/10 · 13 July 2020]

'Die Tote Stadt' is my favourite of Korngold's works along with his film score for 'The Adventures of Robin Hood' (which to me will always be the definitive film version of 'Robin Hood'). It has a very powerful story dripping in atmosphere, and the music is hauntingly gorgeous, the highlights being Fritz's "Mein Sehen, mein Wähnen" (or Pierrot's Lied) and especially soprano favourite "Glück Das Mir Verblieb" sung by Marietta.

Its DVD competition is sparse, the CD competition is bigger and 'Die Tote Stadt' in my mind is better served on record, but what is available is very watchable on the whole and the best (the James King/Karan Armstrong production) is brilliant. This 2003 production sadly was for me a big disappointment on first viewing and was no better on re-watch. Although this production musically is one of the best available of 'Die Tote Stadt', it is the worst when it comes to the staging. A shame that a production so musically outstanding is a near-disaster in staging.

The production cannot be faulted musically or in terms of performances, which has what has brought up the rating. Torsten Kerl gives an intensely riveting performance dramatically, the more intense moments not coming over as too psychopathic and in the softer moments he is moving. Paul is a very demanding role and Kerl doesn't shout or strain through it luckily, and actually sings the music with remarkable nuance. Even better is a wonderful Angela Denoke, "Glück Das Mir Verblieb" is incredibly moving and one of only two parts of the production where there is any real emotion. She does wonderfully at being seductive and brings intensity and pathos, while also singing with a rich voice and varied expression.

Stephan Genz is the standout out of the rest of the cast as a sympathetic Fritz, and he has a warm voice and a good ear for musicality, all of Korngold's detailed and specific markings on the page coming to life in the voice. The other emotionally effective scene of the production is Pierrot's "Mein Sehen, mein Wähnen", sung very expressively and acted affectingly by Genz and with none of the too deadpan touch he had in the 2011 production. Brigitta Svenden is appealing and loyal and sings with confidence. The orchestral playing is dusky, rich, dark and nuanced and has the glow that was lacking in some other performances of the opera. The drama still stays alive under Jan Latham-Koenig's authoritative yet also sympathetic baton, and it is sad that that sense of life isn't in what's going on onstage.

Being somebody that did intensely dislike the staging. Just to make things clear right now, this is not coming from somebody that immediately trashes on any production that isn't traditional. There are many non-traditional productions with concepts that are actually good, because the drama still compels and doesn't miss the point and the characters and motivations are still interesting and make sense. While bringing out new things that sees different sides to certain scenes and characters. Here, for all the cast's valiant efforts, the drama was more dead than the city and does what too many non-traditional productions do. In having staging touches that constantly fall into gratuitous distaste and not just make the drama and motivations confusing but borderline incoherent as well.

No clear variation is here between what is dream and what is reality, which misses the point of the opera's message, and there are so many things that are uncomfortably bizarre, lacking in clarity (one is constantly asking what is this meant to signify and why is it here) and leave a bad taste in the mouth from the beating around the head execution. There are even completely pointless characters popping up on stage for reasons that are not obvious at all and confuse things further. The production also looks ugly, it's all non-stop gloom in an over the top grotesque way and it was like being stuck in this endless confusing nightmare. The costumes are no better, found them very garish and unintentionally creepy, making these in reality meaty characters appear like demented caricatures. One should feel sympathy for Paul in 'Die Tote Stadt', here one tires of him well before the finish. Frank in Act 2 is made up in a way that makes it impossible to take him seriously, the ridiculousness of how he looks is to be seen to be believed. The effects are a little more attractive but are distracting and add little. The ending is anything but moving or life-affirming and leaves a giant question mark instead.

Overall, musically flawless with top drawer performances but on the staging and production values front the production was like some ghastly horror film. 4/10

Artemis Fowl (2020)

Artemis Fail

[2/10 · 13 July 2020]

It's actually been a long time since reading the book series, but from retrospect they were certainly better than this film version. Love Disney and Disney+ has been a godsend recently and watched regularly actually, one of many reasons as to why my reviewing here has slowed down. Kenneth Branagh is a gifted director, absolutely love his Shakespeare adaptations with 'Much Ado About Nothing' being a personal favourite (though others will prefer the also great 'Hamlet' and 'Henry V'). Love Judi Dench as an actress too.

'Artemis Fowl' was a real disappointment. As an adaptation it's an abomination, one of the worst book to film adaptations there is in existence. Am not kidding here. It fares even worse on its own terms, despite what those that have defended the film say some that have hated the film have not read the books and saw it as fans of Branagh and Dench, my parents being among those people. Almost nothing works and Branagh has never been this uninterested in his directing in what is easily his worst film (those that disliked 'Murder on the Orient Express', didn't care for that myself while not hating it, will appreciate that film better after seeing this).

The least bad asset is actually the music score, which is actually beautiful to listen to, authentically Irish and lilting. Sadly it was one of those scores that were pleasant enough on their own but failed to fit within the film, this score sounded like it belonged somewhere else. The scenery also wasn't bad in parts but the photography generally is rushed looking and some of the images thanks to some very disjointed editing and garish lighting are quite ugly so that was wasted too. Any special effects are afterthought-looking.

Moving on further onto the criticisms, the acting is really not good. Ferdia Shaw is monotone and charisma-free throughout. Lara McDonnell has more perkiness but the character is very underwritten and bland on the whole. Colin Farrell is completely wasted. Josh Gad tries too hard is gets very annoying after a while, actually thought he didn't blend very well with everything else. You know something is wrong when Dench gives the least bad performance and still manages to give one of her worst performances, that affected accent and voice was not needed and she doesn't look engaged at times. At least she showed some signs of having command over her meagre material.

Branagh was clearly not interested in the material, as his direction throughout is uncharacteristically indifferent and phoned in. One would not think that he is a great Shakespearean director, and he did prove with his wonderful 'Cinderella' that he could do non-Shakespeare too, as this is quite inept. The target audience also felt confused, my mother was very unsure at who 'Artemis Fowl' was aimed at, children will find it hard to follow and it is too dull for adults. Even teens, the main target audience of the book series, will question the target audience.

Script is stilted and is too exposition-heavy (apparent right from the beginning with an over-explanatory narration), a lot of the film screeching to a deadening halt in the more talky sections and there are a lot of those. The storytelling is incredibly thin and not does it feel like a hodge podge of cobbled togther ideas it is all executed in a dull fashion and with little coherence, literally only one event happens. There is one action show-piece pretty much with a troll very late on but even that doesn't thrill and even the troll doesn't look that good. There is no character development whatsoever, nobody is given time to breathe, the villain is a non-entity and Artemis himself is practically useless. What little there is of the action is sluggish, incoherently edited and the sense of danger just isn't there. To cap it all off, the ending was a completely abrupt anti-climax.

In summary, very poor. 2/10

Hamilton (2020)

Musical history

[10/10 · 13 July 2020]

'Hamilton' was a major surprise for me when seeing and hearing it. Music is such a big part of my life, being now a semi-professional singer and raised into a musical family, and am a fan of musicals, especially the golden age ones. History was also one of my favourite and best subjects in most of my up and down school life, until it didn't work out in sixth form when my confidence went and my comprehension and drive worsened. So having a musical to combine the two immediately intrigued me, despite not being the biggest fan of the dominant styles here (was raised on classical music and opera personally).

That is what was meant when saying that 'Hamilton' was a major surprise. Hearing that a filmed version of a production was coming to Disney+, which has been a much needed distraction, there was no doubt in my mind about seeing it. So that the mix of history and music, the meaningful and relevant lyrics, the brilliant performances and the energy and heart it has can be revisited again. It does play fast and loose with history, blame that on the musical and not the production, sure and the style(s) of music that dominates the score here are not my first choices usually, but actually for its entertainment value, emotional impact and how well crafted it is as an overall whole, 'Hamilton' was a real winner. As was this production. Which was very much needed after suffering through 'Artemis Fowl', a musical surprise adapted masterfully and so accessibly and through a particularly unsettling time in a terrible few years.

It, the production that is, looks great. The sumptuous and true to the respective periods costumes especially and the setting is not too elaborate or overblown while still never looking cheap. Personally thought that the production was very well filmed, certainly compared to other filmed productions of musical theatre, opera and ballet seen and have seen many of each (being a major fan of all three). It made me feel like a member of an audience seeing it live, expect seeing it far more accessibly in terms of money and locations. Which is what is so great about these live/streamed performances and they have proven to be invaluable. Of which 'Hamilton' has been a big highlight.

Musically, 'Hamilton' is on point. Those that don't like the styles are best staying away unless wanting to see what the hoopla is all about, but as someone that saw it with an open mind and wanting to stretch even more my musical horizons 'Hamilton' made me appreciate hip hop and rap much more because they were so well done in their own way. When they are well done and not too repetitive or preachy, yes it is dependent on how they're executed in my view rather than any bias towards the styles, that is when it is easy to appreciate them and that is what 'Hamilton' excels so well in. Also found it very well accompanied.

What also comes over brilliantly is how 'Hamilton' is written. The musical and performance are very song heavy, which some may not like dependent on what your feelings on musicals, hip hop and rap are (some love it, others hate it and it is all down to taste which is fair enough). Found the melodies very clever and easy to remember, amazing considering how many there are and not an easy thing to achieve these days. It was the lyrics though that made a bigger impression on me, these lyrics were vastly entertaining and also at times quite emotional but what is just as admirable are their honesty and how relevant they are. These are lyrics that are likely to connect for many, and from the sounds of it have done. Historically, it is far and loose but that didn't matter for me being somebody that watched not expecting a history lesson. 'Hamilton' does very well at making people more interested in history and the particular time periods depicted, that is from my experience from seeing it with people that felt exactly the same as me. What is great about this production is how it does so well in being true and capturing the spirited energy and heart of the musical itself, which is what filmed adaptations of musicals in my mind should do.

Really loved 'Hamilton's' performances. Have seen both love and hate for Lin Manuel Miranda's performance. Personally loved his work here, he was very heavily involved in making 'Hamilton' work, his dilligent efforts very much obvious here, and he gives the equivalent of the performance of his life here. He is charming and has great authority and comic timing and really do disagree that he doesn't have singing ability, he proved in 'Mary Poppins Returns' in my view that he could and he does great in this regard too. Dramatically he is the stuff of legends as is the joy that was Leslie Odom Jr. Daveed Diggs brings tremendous energy in Act 2 especially and Jonathan Groff is absolutely hilarious here. Phillipa Soo and Renee Elise Goldsberry shouldn't be overlooked either, Soo is especially good. Okieriete Onaodowan has great chemistry with Diggs and holds his own against him when they're together, especially as Madison.

Concluding, truly brilliant in my view. It won't be for all tastes but even if one is put off by the first twenty minutes if not knowing what to expect my advice really is to stick with it. It is not worth certainly not bragging about turning it off about 15 minutes or something, that is the equivalent of barely seeing it. One of the easiest 10/10's given recently.