Reviews

Yes, this review definitely contains some spoilers. But this movie is so inconsequential, there's not much here to even 'spoil'! Made in the wake of Halloween, and covers some of the same territory. Starts out fairly well, with a teenage girl abducted, and her parents seek the help of a retired Marine colonel who happens to have ESP and apparently has assisted police on past cases. Okay, ex-Marine... and perennial "tough guy" Cameron Mitchell... yeah, this could at least have possibilities. Aside from Cameron Mitchell's usual hammy performance, so far so good. Shades of the old 1972 TV series "The Sixth Sense" (which starred Gary Collins as the psychic investigator). Cameron Mitchell goes around the the kidnapped girl's room, touching things, and picking up vibes and visions and so forth. Again, not too bad... yet.

Mitchell senses the girl is dead, but then starts telling the distraught parents that he thinks the killer is a "demon" and spouting malarkey like "He's less than a man... but more than a man"... and this movie starts to sink. What are the parents to think of this nonsense? He provides the vengeance-seeking father with just enough clues for the father to seek out the killer (alone, BTW. Our heroic ESP ex-Marine is nowhere to be found by then). The father is of course killed, himself -- which Cameron Mitchell had warned him of, obviously to no avail. Then in the most pointless scene in the movie, Cameron Mitchell returns to the parents' house, babbling to the mother about "the time of the demon" is now beginning. The mother cuts him off, telling him she thinks he's a phony and a coward (and insinuating maybe he even killed her husband). Then she pulls out a gun and shoots poor Cameron dead! Exit Cameron Mitchell... Exit any coherence in the story-line.

At this point, the plot swings over to two women living together (I think the younger one is the niece of the older one, or something like that), who also work together at the same school. We then get treated to like 45 minutes of them, and their relationships with a couple of guys, which is boring in the extreme. We see a few "menacing" shots of the psycho killer outside the school, and at a store where one of them is shopping. These people are so blah that the audience never feels "engaged" in their lives, and consequently couldn't care less what happens to them. Okay, the producers DO throw in some topless scenes, I guess to try and maintain some interest level with the audience. Man, but talk about your "gratuitous" nudity...

Finally, just as we're getting to "know and care about" these women (lol), the killer strikes. (After nearly falling asleep, all I could think of was: "about damned time!"). First he dispatches the younger one and her boyfriend with ease. Then in typical slasher-movie fashion, this seemingly ultra-competent psycho can't finish off the last intended victim. She runs around the house for 15 minutes, alternately screaming or trying to hide, and always evading him. Meanwhile some old coot of a neighbor hears the ruckus, talks about it for awhile with his sleepy wife, but in the end does nothing about it. (More 'time filler'?). Our "heroine" manages to lay a clever trap for the psycho in the bathroom, spreading slippery shampoo and turning a water hose from the sink onto the floor. The killer breaks in, slips, and goes right onto the scissors she's holding. He falls into the bathtub and expires. The gal runs out of the house as her boyfriend shows up, and the end credits roll.

That's it??? We don't even get the "obligatory" twist ending? So this 'oh-so-menacing' killer was nothing but the standard psycho, and all Cameron Mitchell's talk of demons and the supernatural was just a red herring? As one IMDb reviewer noted, it's almost like they started off in one direction, then half-way thru the film they 'changed gears' entirely, and we end up with a whole different movie. Yet what they ended up with is a total bore-fest. Do yourself a favor and skip this one... it's really not worth an hour and a half of your time.

Okay, I give it a '4' rating strictly for it's camp value. My understanding of the history is that "Madman of Mandoras" was released in 1963, and was definitely "B" material even then. It quickly sank from view and was forgotten, like so many other "Grade-Z" pics of the era. But with growing popularity, local TV stations were running their own movies, usually with a host, and often specialized in schlocky horror and sci-fi from the 1950s & early 60s.

Where I grew up we had "Fright Night" hosted by the immortal Larry "Seymour" Vincent on KHJ-TV Channel 9 (later he moved to KTLA Channel 5). The cheaper and cheesier the movie, the better for the host to make fun of. Seymour wasn't the first by any means (Vampira, Jeepers Creepers, Ghoulita, Shrimpenstein), but he was the absolute master of the comic put-down, paving the way for Elvira and others, and crappy junk-movies were his 'stock in trade'. So lots of old, forgotten movies were being dug out of the vaults and put into syndication packages for these local TV stations. "Madman of Mandoras" was perfect material, in that it was cheap and unintentionally funny... except that it had barely 70 minutes of running time -- not enough to fill the local channel's movie slot, even with commercials (back then, commercial breaks were much shorter affairs... thank goodness!).

So as I understand it, one of the big distributors of old movies took the movie to the UCLA School of Film, and asked them to film some extra scenes that could be melded into the original "Madmen" footage to pad it out so they could include it in their syndication packages. So basically the new footage was film-student written, acted, and produced (and looks it). Also explains why you'll never see these actors in anything else! Most sources give this project's date as 1968, but I strongly believe that to be in error. I have seen several sources that have it as 1973, and from the looks of the "new" footage, it really does appear more "early-to-mid Seventies" than 1968.

I suppose they did about as good as could be expected, plot-wise, with the new footage. They give us a "Doctor Bernard" (long hair) who steals a formula from a safe at the beginning, but his car blows up when he turns the ignition. Then we find out that what Dr. Bernard stole was actually the antidote to the dreaded "G-Gas" (real cleaver name for the stuff, eh?). The Nazis simply wanted it destroyed since they already possess G-Gas. They manage to work in the kidnapping of Dr. Coleman into the new story-line and characters fairly well (though much of it is supposed to take place at night, yet it's obviously filmed in broad daylight!) Unfortunately the film itself is of different quality, so the changes between old and new are obvious -- even without seeing the "mod' hair and clothes styles!

Also, the "new" CID agent Toni is certainly a product of the Women's Liberation Movement, which was in full swing in 1973. The banter between her and fellow agent Vic (long hair and porn-star mustache) is so very "period" -- when women were first struggling to be taken seriously and accepted as equals in a "man's world"; for anyone who lived thru that time, we've seen variations of their mini "battle of the sexes" way too often. Naturally neither Toni or Vic are even remotely akin to real CIA or FBI agents. (Toni tools around in a little putt-putt VW Beetle. Is that standard secret agent issue? Bond had his gadget- & weapon-laden Aston Martin; while Toni's got her Bug that can't outrun anything enemy agents would drive).

But then again, "fellow" CID Agent Phil Day of the old footage doesn't come off as much more believable. He and his wife's story-line practically begins like a "Father Knows Best" episode... her the dutiful housewife ready when he gets off work with martinis and romantic music on the Hi-Fi. I half-expected Ward & June Cleaver to drop by for dinner. And what in the world is Phil's wife tagging along with him to Mandoras in South America, anyways? Okay, we get that her father was the Professor Coleman who was kidnapped, but is that 'standard operating procedure' for CID agents to take their wives along on missions? Then, in the tiny nation of Mandoras, they happen to bump into her sister, of all people, who's unaware that daddy has even been kidnapped! For such a small, off-the-beaten-path little country like Mandoras (where the Nazis can quietly go about their plotting) they sure get a lot of tourists (including the stereotypical loud-mouth Texas oilman. Where's JR Ewing when you need him?).

I won't delve into later absurdities such as laughable plot, stupid dialog, and the Fuhrer-In-A-Pickle-Jar; others have more than adequately covered those! All and all, while the new footage was pretty desperate, it really doesn't 'pull down' the old "Madman of Mandoras" -- simply because that movie was pretty wretched all by itself!

No need to belabor the excellent points brought up by posters who have already rightly panned this poor excuse of a movie (and disgrace to an American legend). Klinton Spilsbury? Not only an untalented actor who's voice was so bad they had to dub over, but his on-set and off-set antics fairly screamed "unprofessional". According to reliable sources, this was his only motion picture credit, though Wikipedia does say he had a few bit roles in soap operas before making "Lone Ranger". Actually the most interesting (an unintentionally humorous) thing in his Wikipedia article was this: "An article about him in The Los Angeles Times in 1989 revealed that he had spent some time in Europe and was working as a model. He had hopes to revive his career as an actor, but admitted in the article that he was not having much luck..." Hmmmm -- "revive his career"? WHAT career? To paraphrase, "One movie not maketh a career".

Of course the thing most people remember about this wretched movie (if they remember it at all) is the injunction against 1950's Lone Ranger actor Clayton Moore from wearing his mask in public. The resulting negative publicity pretty much insured this movie would fail at the box office. In an odd twist, they had the right idea in appealing to Baby Boomers with a Lone Ranger remake, but you don't then jeopardize that same target audience by persecuting the man who WAS the Lone Ranger for a whole generation! A truly GOOD movie might have overcame such a handicap... but this movie simply wasn't good enough to save itself.

As the for legal case -- it was a Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge named Vernon Foster who was the culprit in "unmasking" Clayton Moore with an injunction. The judge's action was highly questionable from a legal standpoint, as Clayton Moore had freely used the mask and term "Lone Ranger" for 22 years without any objection from the copyright holder of "The Lone Ranger(the Wrather Corp. of Beverly Hills). From 1957 when Moore ended his association with the Ranger, all the way up to 1979 when the injunction was sought, Wrather Co. never attempted to challenge or block Clayton Moore in literally hundreds of public appearances -- because his use actually kept up at least SOME interest in their franchise, including television syndication, and brought them profits. Then suddenly in 1979 -- and only when a "major box-office motion picture" was in the works -- did Wrather find his persona of the Lone Ranger "objectionable".

In 1985 a California Court of Appeals finally set aside Judge Foster's injunction as a violation of two basic legal doctrines. The first is of "Laches" which in equity means "a lack of diligence and activity in making a legal claim, or moving forward with legal enforcement of a right." The Appellate court found that 22 years was simply too long for the Wrather Corp. to allow such characterization by Moore without making a legal effort to assert their copyright against him. Moreover, during those years, Moore's defense proved that Wrather Corp had benefited financially from Moore's use of their "copyrighted" name and image (the mask), all while suffering no detriment. The other well-established legal doctrine the appellate court found protected Moore's use was the "Fair Use Doctrine". Fair use is a US legal doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights-holders, in certain circumstances. So finally, after 6 years was "justice served" and Clayton Moore allowed to resume his full persona as The Lone Ranger, upholder of justice in the Old West. Too bad Judge Foster shamed himself by failing to serve justice and throw those Wrather Corp. lawyers out on their butts -- their request for injunction denied.

Ironically, by 1985 "The Legend of the Lone Ranger" had long sunk beneath the waves without a trace... a forgotten failure (like Mr. Spilsbury's so-called "career"). Whether Clayton Moore could run around in a mask or not was pretty much "mooted" (as even the losing Wrather Corp lawyers had to admit after the verdict). But the final irony was that, while "Legend" lost for Universal Studios and it's production company ITC (Sir Lew Grade) millions of dollars, it was the Wrather Corp ONLY that actually made money on the film -- they were paid upfront for selling their "Ranger" copyright to ITC!

Skip this one; it's not even campy enough for laughs. You get a 75 minute bore-fest, followed by 5 minutes of carnage with some of the effects so bad (like Clint Howard having a bad hair day as he hovers on visible wires) you wonder just how minuscule WAS the budget for this cheapie. When I saw "Evilspeak" in the theater in 1981, I hadn't noticed Clint Howard in anything since TV's "Gentle Ben" a decade before, when he was about 5. And (come to think of it) I haven't noticed him in much since, except bit parts in his big bro Ron's movies. Well, since he had to "carry" the entire movie on his limited acting skills, it's no wonder. And as for summoning up a demon on that laughable, stone-age computer... all I can say is "Estevan" must be a real low-grade demon, indeed! Makes even "Pazuzu" of "Exorcist II: The Heretic" look menacing and scary.

I normally enjoy "Judd for the Defense" very much, and my overall rating for the series as a whole is a "10". But this particular episode is a definite oddity, has huge holes in the plot, and gets very tedious for the viewer.

In the pre-credit sequence, we seen Clinton Judd showing up at a woman's apartment, played by Brook Bundy. An odd, disjointed conversation ensues, followed by the police busting in, frisking Clint, and arresting the woman (definitely "the Teaser"!). The rest of the story bounces between real time and flashback. Bundy plays a strange young woman, who is very nice and pleasant, but apparently has an extremely low I.Q. (according to the story) -- she's living in what they refer to as a "borderland". She comes off as what my folks would have termed (in the old days) "simple-minded". She has trouble with basic relationships, difficulty understanding what people tell her, and making herself understood to others, and seems to have big memory problems. I mean, we're definitely talking Lennie Small of Steinbeck's "Of Mice and Men" here!

Anyways, Brooke's been sharing an apartment with her uncle, who basically has been her caretaker, but when he dies, she's left on her own. She apparently can function (just barely) in society, continues to live in the apartment, and goes to work (some menial job in a back-room, packing boxes). A young con man, with a prior for mail-fraud, meets and befriends her, basically so he can have his ill-gotten merchandise ordered from department stores (using other people's credit) delivered and stored there. Poor Brooke Bundy thinks this guy is in love with her, which he readily encourages, and that all these goods being delivered are his "presents" to her. She can't seem to figure anything out on her own, and much of her speech is made up of jargon, vapid slogans and the like -- simple phrases she can remember. While the role is well-played by Brooke Bundy, her character definitely becomes annoying to the viewer REAL fast! At any rate, she's accused, tried, and convicted of murdering the con-man "boyfriend".

The oddest thing about this whole episode is that this poor simpleton is so obviously mentally incompetent, yet no one seems to even pick up on that, or that it's the obvious defense to the murder charge, to which she readily plead guilty to! First, didn't her odd behavior catch the attention of the police who arrested her? Or the D.A. who indicted her? Clinton Judd, who's in the opening "teaser" apparently doesn't stay involved in any way, until called in later by the girl's attorney (???). There's not ever any mention of possible diminished capacity, or any procedures for determining her actual mental capacity. In one scene, the Judge (Jay C. Flippen) even states that he has no choice under the law but to sentence her to life imprisonment, even though she has never offered any reason for killing the boyfriend to anyone, and half the time doesn't seem to even remember the act. I mean, a trial has taken place, and neither the judge or the prosecuting attorney have noticed just how simple-minded this poor girl truly is?

The Judge angrily references an "unsatisfactory" probation report, which he infers is the fault of the defendant for being "uncooperative"? And since SOMEONE in the probation department interviewed her, we're left to believe that this probation department is either totally incompetent, or just plain lazy. Brooke Bundy's female attorney (Geraldine Brooks) stands as the most incompetent lawyer in "TV land" history. She lets it get to the sentencing phase of the trial, and only then thinks to call in Clinton Judd. Could she not think of ANY legal maneuver to try and save Bundy from the threatened life imprisonment charge, like maybe "diminished capacity" (or even innocent by reason of insanity)? It takes Clint Judd to come into court and persuade the judge to give him a few days to work on the case and try to get Bundy to reveal WHY she killed the boyfriend. Of course, in all fairness to the woman attorney, Mr. Judd also seems to miss the legal "basics" of Bundy's condition, as well!

Okay, I know this episode aired in 1969, and there have been some changes in legal matters and court procedures since then. But are you telling me that, by the late 1960s, there was no question of someone's mental capacity to even stand trial? Or to enter a plea? No reports by psychologists, or case workers, or experts in this field??? Did those in the legal profession have no idea of the whole concept of "diminished mental capacity" which this poor girl so evidently displays? Thankfully for her, Clinton Judd and his associate (Stephen Young) heroically stick with the case, and finally manage to get her to remember and vocalize what actually happened in her apartment that led to her killing the boyfriend. (Basically, he made some flippant remark like "you'd have to kill me to..." and she actually took him literally, stabbing him in the chest!). They report this to the judge, who only then seems to "get it" -- and he gives her probation for the killing, instead of the life imprisonment he was going to slap her with! I mean, OMG, how this case even got as far as the D.A. indicting her, let alone going through a trial, I'll never know... EVEN in 1969!

"Tora Tora Tora" is one of the best war movies & historical dramas ever made. It has the ability to create an incredible tension, as events leading up to the attack unfold; which is all the more remarkable for a rather straightforward retelling of a historic event that everyone has at least a passing familiarity with. "Tora" is actually 2 movies in 1. The Japanese side, filmed in Japan using Japanese actors & crew, and the American side. Producer Elmo Williams & director Richard Fleischer then edited them together, showing the unfolding events as seen from both Japanese& American eyes.

Reading the backstory of this production, I found out that 20th Century-Fox's Darryl Zanuck had been interested in this project back to the time he made "The Longest Day", but several issues(including Zanuck's celebrated "Cleopatra" that nearly bankrupted the studio) kept it in "project" stage for years. Also, Japan's premier film director Akira Kurosawa (best known for "The Seven Samurai") was originally engaged in writing & directing the Japanese portion. Considering Kurosawa's immense talent, it's odd that reportedly both Richard Zanuck (who took over running Fox from his father) and Elmo Williams were hugely disappointed with the rushes that were arriving from Japan. According to several credible sources, Kurosawa shot hours of footage, but Fox found they couldn't utilize any of it! Apparently Kurosawa was given large reign over writing the Japanese storyline, and took it off in directions Fox didn't like. Finally Kurosawa was fired, and they brought in a couple of journeymen directors to get the story in the can!

One of the things which made for such realism was the Japanese built 2 life-size ship models/sets - of the carrier "Akagi" & the battleship "Nagato" (respectively, Nagumo's and Yamamoto's flagships) for filming key scenes. I've read where these 2 huge models became big tourist attractions while the Japanese sequences were being filmed. They were built right on a beach so that in the distance the ocean would be seen. I've been unable to find out definitively what happened to these giant sets, but I assume they were broken-up after filming was completed. I recall that in an issue of "Sea Classics" magazine after the movie's release it was reported that some of the large models of U.S. battleships used in the filming (in the 25-30 foot range) were being auctioned off. For the USS Arizona, they actually built a full-scale mock-up of the stern of the battleship, which was placed in "battleship row" not far from the Arizona Memorial.

"Tora" also benefited from being made near enough in time to WWII that many old U.S. aircraft could be used in the film, and many old prop trainers were modified to serve as Japanese types. The special effects still hold up rather well, considering this was pre-CGI. I found many of the attack sequences (esp. those on the airbases) more convincing than the CGI used in 2001's "Pearl Harbor"! And, as far as story goes, there's simply no comparison. "Tora!" is realistic, and yet does manage to briefly show the exploits of the 2 real Army Air Force pilots who managed to get airborne and down some Japanese planes (Lts Welch and Taylor). There's no Ben Affleck & Josh Hartnett dogfighting among the battleships' masts or airfield hangers, or playing "chicken" with each other to lead Japanese planes to crashing into one another!

Special credit must go to the "ensemble" character of the cast. Fox avoided making a "spot the star" picture, such as their own "The Longest Day", and concentrated on character and story. Some quality old actors (such as George Macready, Joseph Cotton, and Leon Ames), "secondary types" such as Martin Balsam, Jason Robards, and James Whitmore; and stalwart character actors like E.G. Marshall, Wesley Addy, Frank Aletter, Richard Erdman, Richard Anderson, Neville Brand, and many more. While many of the actors bear no more than a passing resemblance to their real-life counterparts (such as Balsam to Adm. Kimmel), George Macready is very close to Secretary of State Cordell Hull, as are the Japanese actors who play opposite him as Ambassadors Nomura and Kurusu. One of the best-rendered and powerful scenes is where Hull receives the Japanese ambassadors just after he gets word of the Pearl Harbor attack. He gives them an icy dressing-down, then folds his hands and stares down at his desk as the Japanese depart. Another is the much-remembered scene at the end where Admiral Yamamoto points out to his assembled officers that the attack came 55 minutes BEFORE Japan's declaration was delivered in Washington, and tells them that he "fears all they have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve." The movie ends with a somber restating of the main theme, showing a troubled Yamamoto gazing out over the sea, then dissolves to the flaming, smoking wrecks at Pearl Harbor, as the end credits role.

Composer Jerry Goldsmith, one of the true "greats" of Hollywood, must get much credit, as well. Goldsmith was the master of percussion (such as his unusual but effective "Planet of the Apes" score), and used percussion to create a Japanese-themed score that helps build tension. Such music follows intel officers E.G. Marshall and Wesley Addy as they try to get someone in Washington to believe an attack on Pearl Harbor is imminent. No where is Goldsmith's mastery of setting score to scene better displayed than the final scene before intermission, where Adm. Stark (Edward Andrews) is at his desk in Washington, hesitating about whether to phone Hawaii with warning of the attack or not. We hear his desk clock ticking louder and louder as he looks down at his desk calendar with the iconic "Sunday, December 7, 1941" date, and Goldsmith adds strings, which joins with clock ticks, steadily rising to a crescendo. One of the last chances to warn the Navy in Hawaii is draining away. Dynamite filmmaking and film scoring!

When any youth/counterculture "movement" starts getting portrayed in mainstream movies and television, it goes thru the Hollywood "homogenizer" and comes out all safe and pedestrian for the average movie-goer, but about as far from the truth as you can get. Not only was this movie a cheat to the Kerouac novel, but to the Beats as a whole. It's funny to see how Hollywood "suits" chose to portray the counterculture. They're strictly cardboard cutouts, mouthing hip sayings and going thru the motions. George Peppard looks especially uncomfortable thru the whole mess... and what EVER impelled the beautiful and talented Leslie Caron to take the role as his flighty, mentally unbalanced love interest?

Hollywood gave the same treatment to the hippies a few years later, such as British actor Richard Todd portraying a Timothy Leary-type LSD guru (!!!), and James "Book 'Em Danno" MacArthur a radical underground newspaperman in 1967's "The Love-Ins". Check it out if you want some good (unintended) laughs!

Not that "The Subterraneans" is all bad -- there are some terrific jazz performances worth seeing. But this was definitely a movie worthy of parody, which George Peppard himself would provide in the (infinitely superior) 1968 comedy "What's So Bad About Feeling Good?". In that picture, he and Mary Tyler Moore (!!!) are old "Beats" in a Greenwich Village flophouse, wallowing in their own miserable, pointless existences. When they are infected with a "happiness" virus from an imported toucan, they quickly clean up their acts and ditch the "bohemian" lifestyle! Peppard even goes back to his old job as a Madison Avenue advertising executive!

Like "The Subterraneans", "What's So Bad About Feeling Good?" is hard to find, having never been released on VHS or DVD, so about all you can hope for is a grainy bootleg copy off the internet. After seeing "The Subterraneans" again for the first time in decades, I can see it's not likely to be released on DVD any time soon! Can only hope "What's So Bad About Feeling Good?" does get the full restored treatment on DVD sometime. It's a funny 1960's comedy, and George Peppard looks much more at ease in the role!

This was one of the 2nd season shows, produced after the departure of the great Joe Stefano-Leslie Stevens team. As has been related in the book "The Outer Limits Companion", ABC-TV never quite understood the whole premise of "The Outer Limits," and was always pushing for a standard "monster-of-the-week" show. Ben Brady, the network-picked successor to Stefano-Stevens, knew he had to give them what they wanted, and so many of the 2nd Season episodes with promising story-lines got "mucked up" by the unnecessary inclusion of an alien or monster. "The Duplicate Man" is a case in point -- what started out as an interesting psychological and philosophical piece regarding cloning and the moral questions it raises sadly got dragged down by the presence of an alien.

In this case a ridiculous-looking "Megasoid" -- with costume parts left over from the 1st season's Empyrian of the "Second Chance" episode (played by Simon Oakland). This may have been economical, but the Empyrian was not among the great OL aliens to begin with. Not only is the Megasoid rather cheesy, and speaks with a surprisingly weak human voice, but it just doesn't seem very menacing. Hard to see why this Megasoid is worthy of the vast dread it obviously inspires among all the characters. So allegedly "dangerous and menacing" is the beast that Henderson James, who's shown as something of a coward, resorts to cloning himself so his duplicate will go out and kill it.

There are some serious plot holes regarding the first appearance of the Megasoid, as well. We're told that it was James, himself, who illegally imported the thing to earth a couple years before, but no explanation is given as to how it was suddenly able to break out of the room in his garden-house where it's been kept all this time. The iron bars are twisted like spaghetti -- but why didn't the Megasoid do this long before? Our first view of the Megasoid is while it's hiding out in a museum, in the display for a Megasoid, but there's no explanation of why it even went there. The duplicate James shows up at the museum armed with only a pistol (a snub-nosed .38 modified to look "futuristic") and succeeds in wounding it with one shot. Granted, at the end it does take a few more bullets to drop the Megasoid, but is this is the terror that all humanity has come to live in fear of? Aside from entering a "reproductive stage" the Megasoid's motives are murky; at times it seems to be simply sitting back and enjoying the show, telling the duplicate what he is, then watching the resulting melodrama.

The story does touch on some weighty moral issues, such as at what point does a clone become truly "human", and what is the morality of destroying these obviously living, feeling duplicates. Also how it is seemingly okay for the government to create these duplicates, but Henderson James subjects himself to "life imprisonment" for bootlegging one. The plot also highlights how, in turnabout fashion, the duplicate slowly gains emotions and memories of James' life, and it is he whom exhibits much more humanity, while the real James has become totally unfeeling and uncaring. When the duplicate comes home, James' wife notices the difference and correctly guesses the truth, and even seems to desire the duplicate take her real husband's place. The climax of the story is well-handled, with a nice twist woven in, and is photographed so we don't know immediately which of the two Henderson James' has been killed by the Megasoid.

This was definitely a story that, under the previous "Outer Limits" regime, might have dispensed with the alien altogether and concentrated on the moral dilemma of the situation. Many top OL episodes managed to delve into psychological and moral issues without resorting to an overt monster/alien menace (or at least keeping such menace in the background). Even the 2nd season's "I Robot" managed to keep the proceedings on a high philosophical plain, despite the actual presence of a robot as the major protagonist of the story-line. Still, for it's obvious warts, "The Duplicate Man" is an interesting, if not altogether successful, episode. (And worth a look for the famous futuristic "Chemosphere House" in Los Angeles -- the exteriors being filmed on location at the house!)

This movie is so terrible, there's simply not enough space to pan every wretched aspect. This movie was supposed to be a "blockbuster"? I'm happy to report that it was actually a box-office "A-bomb"! Okay, I suppose I can see some "value" in bringing together a bunch of literary characters who have nothing to do with each other, considering the IQ of today's average audience. Purists of the literary arts might cringe, but in today's "let's make a quick buck" off the old, tried-and-true, it's not surprising. But if you're going to take such artistic "license" then at least make it worth-while, with a quality script that pays some attention to the original characters themselves. Don't just steal their names and turn them into Saturday-morning cartoon fodder.

While it would take too much time and space to go thru the sins committed against each character, suffice to say that their treatment of Mr. Hyde really sums the whole mess up. We not only get the most horrible, laughable CGI I've ever seen, but just what the heck were these "movie makers" thinking of, in making Mr. Hyde into an redheaded Incredible Hunk? Can anyone imagine Frederic March or Spencer Tracy being turned into this silly, cartoonish caricature? And poor Robert Louis Stevenson... just glad he never had to see his literary masterpiece so defiled.

Overlooked little gem of a comedy that features Kirk Douglas as a no-nonsense Army major general, who models himself on no less than General George S. Patton, and Susan Hayward as an obnoxious female publisher who sets out to destroy his chances of getting an important appointment. Hayward tries repeatedly to set traps for Douglas to make him look like a buffoon in public, all of which backfire.

The scheme culminates at a nightclub where Hayward fires up the rowdy, drunken audience into demanding that Douglas get up on stage and sing the U.S. Army's Caisson Song ("Over hill, over dale, we will hit the dusty trail, as those caissons go rolling along"), hoping he'll make a fool of himself. Douglas reluctantly agrees, and much to Hayward's surprise, ends up singing several verses -- standing at ramrod attention -- very proper and correct. The crowd loves it, but Hayward begins to regret her actions, and Douglas, having seen through her scheme, angrily stalks out of the nightclub. Definite high-point of the movie, and by the way, Kirk Douglas does a pretty creditable job belting out the tune! In typical Hollywood fashion, Douglas and Hayward end up falling in love while many complications and plot-twists ensue. I first saw this movie as a small kid, and always remembered the Caisson Song scene. Definitely worth a look!

1967's "Some May Live" (aka "In Saigon, Some May Live") was one of the very few movies about the Vietnam War that was actually filmed in Saigon, during the Vietnam War! It's a dandy espionage thriller about U.S. efforts to find who's leaking vital war information to the Commies from MACV (Military Assistance Command -- Vietnam) Headquarters. Nothing overblown and pretentious like "Platoon" or "Full Metal Jacket", just typically great 1960's filmmaking.

Martha Hyer plays a clerk named Kate Meredith at MACV HQ, who seems to have a normal life, married to a distinguished British journalist (Peter Cushing) who's covering the war, caring for her young son... or does it just seem that way? Joseph Cotton is the U.S. Army colonel Hyer works for, who brings in Capt. Elliott Thomas (played by John Ronane) to investigate. Only problem, Capt. Thomas starts falling in love with Kate, and complications ensue. Though Cushing and Cotton got top-billing, Ronane is the real male lead of this movie. He reminds me something of a John Gavin or Tom Tryon, and plays his role well, an American officer torn between his duty and his heart.

The filmmakers do a good job of conveying the spirit of 1967 Saigon, a city trying to go about everyday business, but always with a sinister, dangerous undercurrent. Hyer and Cushing, in a particularly effective scene, are shown conversing nonchalantly, sipping cocktails in their well appointed apartment, while in the background there's the constant flashes of gunfire and muffled explosions of the War taking place on the outskirts of the city. The opening credits feature many travelogue-type scenes of Saigon circa '67, accompanied by a great (and much overlooked) theme song called "Some May Live", effectively sung by Vince Hill. Don't know if this obscure film will ever make it to DVD, but if you can find it, be sure and watch it. A real "time travel" back to the Vietnam War era.

An all-time favorite! First saw "Here Come the Brides" in 1968, and have loved it ever since. I find HCTB one of the best of that entire era, and has "aged" far better than many more recent shows. I don't think Screen Gems and ABC were ever quite sure what kind of show they had on their hands, an ambiguity that probably worked to the show's favor, since it managed to combine so many elements into one: rollicking fun comedy, action, bittersweet drama, western, and even some serious themes. A terrific, ensemble cast helped, which allowed the varied characters to be alternately featured, yet ultimately participating equally. HCTB is one of the few shows which I can honestly say that I like every major character! Each added their own special ingredient, making the whole a delight to partake in!

The Bolt brothers are well played by Robert Brown, David Soul, and Bobby Sherman, each balancing the others well. Excellent also are Bridget Hanley and Susan Tolsky as brides, veteran actress Joan Blondell as the saloon owner with a heart of gold, and Henry Beckman as a boozy Captain Clancy. Fine support from Mitzi Hoag, Bo Svenson, Hoke Howell, and all the various guest stars.

Mark Lenard, most remembered today for his participation in the "Star Trek" franchise, also lends great support as rival sawmill owner Aaron Stemple. Interesting to watch how the writers slowly changed Stemple's character from an unlikable baddie in the early series to a more complex "good bad-guy" who sometimes supports the Bolts in their efforts to build Seattle.

The writing on HCTB is almost uniformly excellent, especially during the 1st season. The writers don't follow classic TV formula of sticking to comedy or drama, instead they manage to infuse every episode with elements of both, finding a near flawless mix. Some episodes are delightfully fun, such as my personal favorite "The Log Jam," which is a real romp from start to finish. Others take a more serious tone, and even touch upon social issues (prejudice, racism, arson, early conservation), yet they're done subtly and with enough lighthearted moments so that the viewer isn't left feeling "beaten over the head" with the Message.

Since HCTB only lasted 2 seasons, it was never put in syndication, and took 20 years to be aired again nationally. I was delighted in the late 1980's to discover that The Family Channel was including it in their daytime lineup, and even more happy to find that the show was still so fresh and good! Since I worked weekdays, I had to set my VCR to tape the episodes, and eagerly looked forward to watching them every night. The first episode I was able to videotape was #9 "The Stand Off" (featuring "Ox" the lumberman), so it took a couple rotations thru the entire series on The Family Channel before I managed to collect them all, but it was worth it.

I definitely favor the 1st season over the 2nd. For one thing, the wager between the Bolts and Aaron Stemple was up, so a major plot dynamic was lost. The 2nd season also saw a change in emphasis from the brides getting married to more serious subjects (Jeremy kidnapped by a loony ex-soldier, Candy kidnapped by a hostile young gunslinger, a conservationist-minded man sabotaging the Bolts logging operation, etc). But it still was good, with episodes such as where Clancy has to act like he's a rich, polished businessman to impress his brother, a visiting priest (played by Bernard Fox, best known as "Dr Bombay" on "Bewitched"), or where the Bolt's Scottish uncle Duncan shows up in Seattle, bagpipe, kilts and all, to settle down and run their logging business.

Undoubtedly the worst change from seasons 1 to 2 was the inclusion of Candy's recently orphaned little brother and sister. Not only did it put a crimp in the Jeremy-Candy relationship, but the two actors they got to play the kids simply weren't very good, and they came off as both wooden and without charm. The only good thing was that they weren't written as the usual precocious brats, tossing off one-liners, that always seemed to populate sitcoms.

I was delighted when Sony decided to release the 1st season on DVD, so that I could replace my aging VHS episodes with crisp, clear ones.

One interesting thing about the DVD set is that, unlike Family Channel broadcasts, they are COMPLETE! Since commercial breaks in the 60's were shorter, more of the time-slot could be allotted to the show itself. By the 80's, The Family Channel had to edit down each HCTB episode from it's original length (approx 55 minutes) so that it would fit into the same time slot, yet accommodate far more commercials. So, in watching HCTB on DVD, I found many "new" scenes (to me)! True, the TV broadcasts didn't cut any of the essentials from episodes; but that extra 5 minutes DOES lend a little greater character development and plot detail, which is always enjoyable.

One other interesting tidbit, which many Seattle residents might be aware of, is that HCTB is actually based (though VERY loosely) on historic fact. Back in the 1860's an enterprising young Seattle man named Asa Mercer DID travel east to bring back women to the largely male populated Seattle (in fact, he actually made two such expeditions, totaling about 75 women). Many Seattle residents today can trace their lineage back to a "Mercer Girl", and Mercer himself is remembered by downtown's Mercer Street, and Lake Washington's Mercer Island.

After searching off and on for years, I finally located a decent DVD copy of this movie! I hadn't seen it since probably sometime in the Seventies, but it always stuck in my mind as a very classy, cosmopolitan made-for-television movie. Back in the 60's and early 70's there were many good TV movies; and some, like this flick, that could easily have been theatrical releases. The performances are uniformly excellent, the dialog sparkles, and the cat-and-mouse plot twists are terrific!

As almost every reviewer has asked for this movie to be made available, I will tell you that I got my copy from an individual selling thru the Ioffer.com website (in fact, there were about 3 different folks selling copies now!). Mine was taken from British TV, and while it does briefly show a movie ID card at commercial breaks, there are no commercials. From the running time it looks to be a complete copy, and is of fairly good quality. I've gotten all types of quality from Ioffer sources, ranging from excellent to lousy -- but I'd have to say this is one of the better ones! Definitely very watchable. And ordering couldn't be easier -- all you have to do is visit the Ioffer website, and type in "How I Spent My Summer Vacation", and it will show who's offering it. Then a quick registration, and you can purchase (most Ioffer vendors take secure pymt thru Paypal, or Google Checkout, or the usual check, money order, etc.). ENJOY!

Tough to even compare this "sequel" to 2001, as it's simply a whole different type of movie. Whereas 2001 was a surreal fantasy, who's enduring charm was it's mystery, 2010 is simply another action-adventure film. 2001 was the very definition of "grandeur" in filmmaking, in scope & breadth of story, taking the audience thru man's evolution from ape to "modern man" & beyond. By contrast, seeing 2010 is more like scanning the newspaper, very pedestrian & "safe". While 2001 still largely seems fresh and "timeless", 2010, made 16 years later, looks more dated and less relevant.

Worse, 2010 is simply far too literal for it's own good. It plays like a space age "Dragnet", pouring out all the facts, trying to answer (believable or not) the questions of it's predecessor. By the end everything is neatly wrapped up in a nice package... which makes 2010 about as sterile as a NASA clean room.

Of course 2010 is horribly dated now, with the USSR and Cold War references. But more to the point, it seemed dated even when it came out in 1984! This was set in the future, and judging from the (thankfully) few topical allusions in 2001, the Cold War was long over, replaced by cooperation. Yet in 2010 we get a running subplot about another Cuban missile crisis threatening to bring on World War III, and stereotypical mistrust between Russian and American crewmembers? At the time I recall thinking how out of step this was with the whole concept of 2001. The world crisis of 2010 would have been at home in the 1960's, but not by the 80's era of détente. Odd that in 2010 we're actually thrust back into Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove" territory -- something I doubt Kubrick himself would have done if he'd been involved in this project.

Next, there's an over-abundance of information bombarding the audience throughout 2010... almost like Hyams felt his audience was too stupid to figure anything out for themselves. So we're given a running monologue of events by Dr Floyd, which is monotonous to the point of annoyance. The plot device used are recorded "letters" home to his wife and son (wonder if they found them as tedious as the audience?). This whole thing comes off as a bore, and a cheat -- a truly good screenwriter can convey necessary technical info without having to read it off cue-cards to the audience. Then we get long-winded messages from earth, giving us details of the unraveling world situation... always ending with some homily like "Just hope there's an earth left for you to return to..." YAWN.

Sorry, but I found Dr Chandra's "explanation" for HAL's murderous behavior far-fetched, like he was really "reaching" to excuse away the psychotic HAL's actions with double-talk. Having Chandra overprotective of his surrogate "child" HAL might, I suppose, have made a mildly interesting subplot, had Hyams cared to explore it. And Chandra's blaming the government's lying for HAL's malfunction was not only very self-serving (casting blame away from him, as HAL's creator) but also a bit too "standard" and convenient in the post-Watergate era. Hardly original, to say nothing of believable. What, merely ordering HAL not to reveal the purpose of the mission until they reached Jupiter's orbit would send this super-sophisticated computer into a tailspin of mistakes and miscalculations, culminating in murder? (If Chandra had grafted his own "personality" into his "child" HAL, as the movie suggests, then one must really wonder too about Chandra's mental state). Evidently the death of five people (Poole & the 4 hibernating scientists) didn't much trouble Chandra as he gave the all-too-standard rant against govt "duplicity".

Whereas 2001 was very spare on dialog, and therefore didn't come off as too "pedestrian", in this movie we get altogether too much talk. Not only Floyd's droning on and on in his "letters", but folksy reminiscences about baseball & hot dogs, Kentucky, and his son getting together with a woman cosmonaut's daughter -- IF there's a world left for them... yeah, right (zzzzzzz). Vapid and out of place. Even worse is the running gag of Chernow's Russian buddy getting American sayings all mixed up... "easy as cake" (ha ha ha) "piece of pie" (ho ho ho). Hyams falls back on the Hollywood tradition of throwing in "comic relief"; yet ultimately it cheapens the movie. Can anyone imagine Kubrick including such junk in 2001? Kubrick not only disdained comic touches, but went to pains to show that Bowman & Poole had reached the point, during the 18 month mission, where they barely even talked to each other. Compared to them, HAL was a chatterbox. There was no cloying sentimentality in 2001; in fact Kubrick actually satirized such muck when he showed Poole's birthday message from his folks, and Poole's blasé reaction to it.

2001 actually benefited from the ensemble cast of character-type actors. William Sylvester (Dr. Floyd) & Robert Beatty were little-known outside of England. Keir Dullea & Gary Lockwood were journeyman actors who had not really "made it" by that time (nor would they ever achieve stardom) so they appear fresh. In contrast, everybody's seen Roy Scheider & John Lithgow in too much movies and TV, so it's hard to take them as seriously in these roles.

Can't blame Kubrick for "steering clear" of this mess! Trying to top 2001 would have been difficult under any circumstances; this tepid script certainly wasn't gonna do it. And, to date, no one's filmed Arthur C. Clarke's third book of the "2001 Trilogy": 2061. I can only assume that the public reaction to this film (to say nothing of 2001 aficionados, Kubrick devotees, and sci-fi fans) doomed any such project. Whether you liked or disliked 2001, you certainly couldn't ignore it. It was big, it was different, it was an "Event"! Sadly, 2010 was just another run-of-the mill action movie, a couple hours of mild distraction, then quickly forgotten.

Hard to believe it's been almost 30 years since this show was on. I was working a lot of evenings back then, and had to videotape the nighttime TV shows to watch later. I've discovered I actually still have parts of 3 different episodes of this show on old VHS tapes! Mickey Rooney, in trying to fit in and be "one of the boys" in college, was rather obnoxious and overbearing (in his usual way) and tried to steal every scene. Future comic Nathan Lane threw off most of one-liners in typical sitcom fashion, usually at Rooney's expense. Surprisingly (in retrospect), a very young-looking Dana Carvey ended up playing "straight-man" to Lane & Rooney. He was given the more serious dialog, usually chastising his foolish grandfather for his latest scheme. Unfortunately, even back in 1982 folks had seen it all before, and that, coupled with Mickey Rooney's bombastic persona, killed this show off. Since I'd known Carvey & Lane only from this TV show, I was later so surprised to see them make it big in comedy.

For those who might actually remember (and care), the shows I have portions of involve: 1) Rooney being mistaken for a neighborhood cat burglar; 2) Rooney going on a faddish diet (called the "Bombay Diet") which causes health problems, and 3) Rooney asking landlady Mrs. Greene (who of course had a major crush on him...yuck!) to a local senior citizens dance, then dumping her for a "hot chick".

Like other reviews, I watched every show I could (what with postponements!) and I enjoyed it for what it was, a light-hearted treatment of the D & D craze. Erik and Ariel were adequate, but Blackpool and the wizard Vector really stole the show. Vector, played by great character actor Clive Revill, was somewhat dimwitted, and Blackstone had to suffer him as best he could. I also remember the fondness Blackstone showed when speaking of torturing people, especially with his spiked boots! The episode I recall most was when Erik and Ariel were lured into an evil castle where the spirit of a former lord still lurked, and were tormented by shades of people they knew, such as Blackpool, the Queen, and Marco (even an evil version of Erik). At the end, when they finally meet up with the real Marco, he says something like, "I just killed Blackpool, the King, the Queen, and myself....did I do the right thing?" While this was going on, the real Blackpool and Vector were playing some sort of board game and getting drunk. I also remember that for each segment's fadeout for the commercial break, the scene would turn into a comic book drawing (kinda like in Creepshow). Someone mentioned Wizards & Warriors only lasted 8 episodes? Wow. Good luck ever getting released on DVD...best we could hope for is someone with old VHS tapes offering a set on DVD for sale (like on Ioffer or some such site).

"Tennessee Johnson" is a perfect example of how a largely fictional account of history can still succeed as an excellent dramatic motion picture (much in the way "J.F.K." would, decades later). Please don't watch this piece of WWII flag-waving drama with the idea that it's going to give you the "real story" on our 17th President. Still, as a piece of cinema, "Tennessee Johnson" is quite satisfying.

Many reviewers seem very willing to toss off the historical inaccuracies of this film with comments about "the Hollywood treatment" and "dramatic license", and up to a point, this might be true. I won't go thru the list of historic inaccuracies of this movie -- others have done that thoroughly. No, what really sinks "Tennessee Johnson" as history is the completely distorted view it gives us of President Johnson, trying to make him a hero, instead of the real man who deservedly stands as one of the worst (and most out-of-step) Chief Executives in history.

This is not to say that the real Andrew Johnson didn't have some good qualities (or that the real Thaddeus Stevens and the Radical Republicans were lily-pure, themselves). But unfortunately Andrew Johnson was a Southerner and a Democrat, who happened to remain loyal to the Union during the Civil War, and was definitely the wrong person to be in the White House during the critical years of Reconstruction. It is well documented that Johnson was quite racist towards blacks, and showed himself to be completely indifferent to their plight as "Freedmen" who were still virtual slaves in the post-War South. He had no aversion to setting up Southern state governments dominated by former Confederates, leading most Northerners to wonder just who DID win the Civil War. Johnson particularly turned a blind eye to the incredible violence, brutality, and murder of blacks in the southern states. In this he earned the scorn of such Union war heroes as U.S. Grant, William Sherman, and Phil Sheridan, who saw that it was a simple necessity for the national government & army to protect them. The real Johnson could also be very petty and vindictive, obstinate and unreasonable... and by all accounts (and quite contrary to this film's depiction) was considered a heavy drinker, and that in an era when many men imbibed to excess!

While this forum isn't the place for political discussions, I would challenge readers to get a good book on the subject and judge for themselves who the real heroes & villains were in that time period (I might suggest David O. Stewart's 2009 volume "Impeached"). Some of the comments in this forum seem to indicate that only recently has it become fashionable to find fault in Andrew Johnson; like the anti-Johnson view is now "trendy". Actually, Johnson and his presidency have been almost universally held in low regard from the late 1860's onward, and it is really THIS film that attempted to buck the tide and show Johnson as a hero. Very odd, especially for a WWII patriotic biopic, at a time when studios were lionizing those who fought to free people, not keep them in bondage. I certainly question MGM's decision in 1942 to make this film, attempting to reverse what was, by then, 75 years of deservedly "bad press" for our 17th President.

Still, warts and all, MGM did succeed in making a compelling drama, especially the (highly fictionalized) Impeachment Trial itself. It's undeniable that Van Heflin and Lionel Barrymore both give particularly excellent performances. "Tennessee Johnson" is definitely worth seeing -- just take it with a large "grain of salt"!

The first half-hour or so follows the 1937 classic pretty much scene-for-scene, and everything's okay. Then we get to Shangri-La and the movie quickly falls apart. First, there's the time-honored Hollywood tradition of casting non-singers in singing roles, so we get dubbed versions of Peter Finch, Liv Ullman, and Olivia Hussey... none of whom were noted for their work in musicals. Sally Kellerman gets to retain her own singing voice, and while it's okay, she's given junky, utterly forgettable songs to perform. One particularly embarrassing number has her singing to an uncomfortable-looking George Kennedy in a stream. (At least Ross Hunter didn't have Kennedy attempt to flex his vocal pipes!). Kellerman also teams up with Hussey in a silly "show-stopper" that compares the merits of city living and Shangri-La living. The only two good singers in the cast, Bobby Van and James Shigeta, are only given one number apiece. Van is mostly around to supply dubious "comic relief," yet his mediocre comedy talents pale next to the unintended hilarity one finds throughout this picture.

As for the rest of the cast, there's the great French actor Charles Boyer in heavy latex makeup as the 200 year old High Lama (and, no, he doesn't get to sing). John Guilgud as "Chang" and Michael York were the other lucky souls who didn't have to embarrass themselves lip-synching to Bacharach-David tunes.

The songs themselves, by the normally reliable Burt Bacharach and Hal David, make up what's easily the most terrible soundtrack in the history of musicals. One reviewer likened Bacharach's bouncy melodies to baby-food jingles, and David's supposedly "profound" lyrics to a drug-addict's pseudo-intellectual dissertations on the Meaning of Life. Reportedly Bacharach and David were fast approaching a break-up as a song-writing team, and it certainly shows in this wretched score. Add to this the forced "joyousness" of the normally gifted Liv Ullman leading dozens of talentless kiddies as they supposedly "sing and dance their way into our hearts," and it all gets rather sickening.

The costumes are a "groovy" mix of pastel-colored leisure suits and Mao jackets. Shangri-La itself, for a place that's supposedly ancient, looks surprisingly modern -- and very pedestrian. I think Hunter filmed his opus at the Phoenix Holiday Inn. All that's missing is the putting green!

The public's reaction to this sticky-sweet morass of a movie was predictable -- they stayed away in droves, leading Hollywood wags to dub this atrocity "Lost Investment".

Pretty horrid adaptation of what reviewers and public alike regarded as a pretty decent Broadway musical play. Though I was too young to see it on the stage, I certainly heard the LP often enough growing up. My main question is directed to Jack Warner -- why? why? why? did you try and foist this travesty on the public if you couldn't get real singers? Richard Burton, Julie Andrews and Robert Goulet are traded in for Richard Harris, Vanessa Redgrave and Franco Nero? Did we just enter some weird parallel universe? Since when could Vanessa and Franco even sing? (Guess they were married at the time, so it was like some sort of package deal?) Richard Harris at least had a Top 10 hit single to his (dis)service with "MacArthur Park", so I guess he had some pretense as a singer (true, this movie does predate that psycho-babble "classic" about cakes melting in the rain!). Purists might say that Richard Burton was not a real singer either, but listen to the Original Cast recording of "Camelot" and judge for yourself -- I think he pulls it off admirably. Harris could barely handle the vocal chores, and failed miserably with his all-to-typical hammy, overacting self. His heavy makeup and wig make him look like a dirty, down-on-his-luck clown. Sadly, "Camelot" became just another in the long line of wretched musicals made in the wake of 1965's blockbuster "The Sound of Music" (most of which were also box office bombs, as well) -- Dr Doolittle, Man of LaMancha, Darling Lili, Lost Horizon, Thoroughly Modern Millie, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Mame, Star, On a Clear Day, Godspell, Paint Your Wagon, Sweet Charity.... Geez, but no wonder MGM's retro-compilation "That's Entertainment" looked so good when it came out in 1974, after a decade of such garbage.

I will not give a synopsis of this MGM promo film, which is done excellently in another review, but suffice to say that this is a very well done piece of work. Excellent use of music and inter-cutting of film clips, which must have really excited exhibitors of the time with it's wealth of up-coming releases. Some blockbusters (such as "2001"), and many, many other excellent films (along with, yes, a few undeniable duds like "The Extraordinary Seaman" and "Mrs. Brown You've Got a Lovely Daughter"). My personal favorites included in Lion Power are "The Power" (one of the greatest, if most overlooked, films of all time), "Ice Station Zebra" (perhaps the best cold war thriller of them all), "Where Eagles Dare" (terrific slam, bang war picture), "The Biggest Bundle of Them All" and "The Impossible Years" (two very underrated Sixties comedies), "Dark of the Sun" and "The Comedians". It's a shame many of the featured flicks in Lion Power are rarely seen nowadays, such as "Sol Madrid" and "Jack of Diamonds". Lion Power really shows what movie-making was like in Sensational Sixties, and how utterly lousy movie-making is nowadays. One reviewer noted that Lion Power was perhaps a last gasp from Leo the Lion before the virtual demise of MGM in the Seventies, but that situation was hardly unique to MGM -- virtually every major studio backed big-budget flops in that era, and ended up facing hard financial times. Much has been made of television cutting into profits and destroying the old "studio system" back in the Fifties, but it wasn't until the late 60's that the full effect of TV hit the movie industry. At any rate, definitely catch Lion Power next time TCM shows it -- a real nostalgia trip!

"The Power" is the about the best motion picture of the entire 1960's, & certainly plays better than about anything since. I can only rate 1958's "Vertigo" higher. Watching a classic like "The Power" makes one recognize just how tepid and weak are the films churned out since then then. "The Power" is typical Sixties, total Sixties!

Some reviewers invoke the later movie "Scanners", claiming a kinship to "The Power"; but don't be fooled. "Scanners" was a cheapo, 70's style exploitation film complete with such techno "touches" as exploding heads. "The Power" works on much more subtle (and effective) level. It is the epitome of 1960's cool & sophistication. What makes it so compelling is that undefinable Sixties feel -- in everything from the quality of film used, the use of lighting, the cinematography... but also the styles shown -- from clothes to hairstyles, cars to offices & buildings. Also the old time actors used, familiar faces to any movie-goer of the period, and the straightforward, no-nonsense script. It's the same Sixties feel that TV's "The Invaders" has, as well as pics like "Fantastic Voyage".

The sets of "The Power" are uniformly good, especially the offices & labs where the Astrophysics team, lead by Professor Jim Tanner (George Hamilton), work. The team consists of Tanner, Prof Lansing (Suzanne Pleshette), Prof Van Zandt, head of the Astrophysics Dept (Richard Carlson), Prof Hallson (Arthur O'Connell), Prof Melnicker (Nehemiah Persoff), and Prof Scott (Earl Holliman). Sitting in with them is government official Arthur Nordlund (Michael Rennie).

The centrifuge in the basement is both cool and provides an exciting moment in the film, as Tanner and Professor Lansing try vainly to stop it before it kills Hallson. The offices of the scientists are very interesting, in that they appear to be laid out in a cluster, with windows into each others' offices. Thus Tanner can discuss each member of the team, while we see them at work, through the windows.

The scene where Hallson is terrorized by The Power is excellent and chilling -- he's about to leave his office, when suddenly the door he'd entered through a moment before has disappeared! Confused, he goes back to retrieve a chair so he can peer out the high window, but when he turns back even the window is gone & there's only a blank wall! Then he starts feeling The Power crushing his heart...

Another good scene is where George Hamilton is walking around Downtown L.A., passing a novelty store, and sees one of those "drinking bird" novelty devices wink at him, then spit water! Next an army of toy soldiers march into place & shoot at him. Feeling the increasing burden of The Power, he staggers into a funhouse complete with distorted mirrors. Somehow he gets bumped onto a carousel which starts speeding up, imitating the centrifuge at the lab, scenes of which are interspersed with the dizzying carousel.

A true classic set piece is at a downtown hotel where a rowdy convention of salesmen is taking place, and first we see the crowded lobby where Tanner meets obnoxious Grover (Ken Murray). As there's no rooms available, Tanner, Lansing, and Melnicker join Grover at a swinging party in one of the suites, which goes on all night. First a live (hippie) rock band is playing, complete with blaring guitars, as the party-goers wildly dance, then later a hi-fi stereo is put to use. Totally Sixties! Again Tanner feels the weight of The Power bearing down on him, but it is Melnicker who pays the ultimate price of resisting it, suffering a fatal heart attack.

Another terrific scene is when Tanner, while investigating a lead in Hallson's home-town, is stranded in the desert, which turns out to be on an Air Force firing range. So not only is The Power trying to kill him, but missiles from fighter planes! Later in a Santa Monica apartment building he goes down an elevator shaft to rescue Michael Rennie, whom The Power is apparently bearing down on, causing a heart attack. The Power again tries to kill Tanner as he's driving towards L.A. Harbor, and there's a great chase with the unknown assailant after Tanner, which ends at a drawbridge. The movie's climax (or is it?) takes place in an auditorium at the research center, aptly called "The Babble Pit", where Tanner confronts the man he's convinced has The Power -- Prof Scott. Only Scott believes it's Tanner who's the man with The Power!

One highlight of the movie is when Tanner has the final showdown and endures the full might & fury of The Power, in a terrific montage. We see George Hamilton alternately freezing & burning, spinning & becoming a skeleton. That this sequence was done completely without CGI is a testament to the excellent visual effect team, which included Wah Chang of the old "Outer Limits". (In fact, director Byron Haskin has several "Outer Limits" episodes to his credit.) This sequence certainly proves that you don't need fancy computer graphics to make suspenseful & visually exciting special effects.

For the Sixties "The Power" truly had an all-star cast of competent & professional actors, including (aside from those already listed) Yvonne De Carlo, Gary Merrill, Barbara Nichols, Aldo Ray, & as a party-goer -- Miss Beverly Hills! While I've never been a big fan of George Hamilton, he pulls off the central role of Tanner well; he and Suzanne Pleshette make a good and convincing screen couple. "The Power" is easily Hamilton's best role, and probably Pleshette's best role, too (along w/ the 1970 classic TVM "Along Came a Spider").

Kudos to producer George Pal, director Byron Haskin, and of course to composer Miklos Rozsa, who provides a compelling score for the film. In retrospect, "The Power" was one of the "last hurrahs" of old-time cinema, before sleaze and plot ambiguity took over. "The Power" is MUST SEE cinema!