Reviews

The good news is that this 1966 sequel to "Slå først Frede!" ("Strike First, Freddy!", 1965) is an inoffensive and occasionally funny spy spoof.

The bad news is that it's a letdown after the first film: the funny bits are relatively few and far between, the bad guys are less entertaining, the plot is not as clever and character development is lacking. The pace is very VERY slow by 21st century standards, but that's to be expected in a 1960s adventure/spy movie. There is a fair amount of James Bond-esque eye candy and even a little bit of tastefully done nudity. There is also a lot of talk about sex, which was still a big deal in 1966. Overall it barely rises to the PG-13 level, mostly due to one scene where the characters are smoking something suspicious.

According to "Historical Dictionary of Scandinavian Cinema", the two Frede films and "Martha" (1967) were Erik Balling's and Henning Bahs's early joint efforts which eventually led to the famous "Olsen-banden" ("The Olsen Gang") series. I guess we can chalk up some of the shortcomings to "growing pains".

The actors do the best they can given these constraints and the results are generally watchable if you can accept that things are going to be slow. 5-6/10 overall.

This is a two part documentary, each part runs about 60 minutes. The first part covers DeMille's theater and silent era careers while the second part concentrates on the talkies period. boblipton's comment below is presumably about the second part.

Overall, the documentary is quite good and tries to present all sides of the story, but the blacklisting controversy is left a little vague and hard to understand if you are not familiar with the period. But the good news is that there is a lot of archival footage and some of the interviews with the surviving friends and relatives are quite poignant. Movie historians and big name modern directors are also there to provide occasionally wordy commentary.

Curiously, there was nothing in the documentary about DeMille's last project, "The Buccaneer" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051436/), directed by Anthony Quinn, DeMille's son-in-law. I always figured that DeMille was in no shape to direct the movie himself after his heart attack, but the documentary suggests that he was working on other projects before his death.

First of all, let me comment on a misconception in some other reviews: the "search for the lost treasure of an exotic civilization" plot predates Spielberg's Indiana Jones, Peck/Sharif's Mackenna's Gold, this Belmondo vehicle and even Franz Lang's 1919 Spiders. The creators of That Man from Rio clearly knew what they were doing when they decided to use this hoary plot and make gentle fun of it.

Unfortunately, the execution is not particularly good. Indifferent camera work and a fatal lack of any "dramatic tension" sense make the movie more tedious than entertaining. In addition, Belmondo, who had had his big break four years earlier, isn't as sparkling as he could be just a few years later. You can tell he tries, though.

Having said all that, there are a few good things that need to be said about the movie. The viewers are kept guessing whether A or B is The Bad Guy until the final revelation. A few moments during the obligatory bar brawl scene look fresh. There is a minor but amusing twist at the end of the jungle sequence.

Mostly watchable -- although you may check your watch a few times -- so let's say 5/10.

Since the release of Buster Keaton's talkies on video, we have a more complete picture of his decline in the 1930's. And although you could argue the merits of his work during his first post-silent period (1930-1933), there is little disagreement regarding the virtues, or rather lack thereof, of his later entries. To make matters worse, many of the movies that Keaton starred in (or otherwise contributed to) in the late-30's/mid-40's were cheaply made nonsensical "lowest common denominator"-type C movies like this one.

And yet... and yet once in a painful while, something shines through the buffoonade and you get a glimpse of what might have been. Is it worth your time? Well, if you have seen - and enjoyed - Buster's brilliant silent movies and are looking for more of the same, then by all means stay away from this abomination. On the other hand, if you have also seen all of his 1930-1933 movies, including the stinkers, and are not afraid of the next step down the same downward spiral, then give it a shot. But don't say I didn't warn you!

This documentary account of teenage prostitution among Czech boys after the "velvet revolution" consists almost entirely of interviews with teen (14-20) prostitutes "working" in Prague.

The boys and their accounts are the best thing about the movie: they are very open about their "trade" and their stories are often heart-breaking. The film's composition, such as it is, is moderately effective, but some of the visuals are forced and smack of the old school of East European propaganda.

Not thorough, as recent revelations in European press show, but still a fascinating peek behind the curtain.