Reviews

I'm just about finished watching the second season and the beautiful interplay between Charlie and Nick really seduces the viewer. I absolutely love their relationship and I wish there was more screen time of the boys' budding relationship. The writing is on point - I'm 68 but the story brings me back 40 years ago to my own romance with my partner. There is so much truth here. When the story focuses on other characters I kind of lose interest. One criticism I have is the soundtrack- I really think it's aweful. There was not a single memorable song that bubbled up for me. And there is a lot of music.

I was casually watching this movie today when the action shifted to an emergency surgery performed in a private home. Dr Gillespie was in attendance as was Dr. Kildare. The surgeon has his back to the camera. When he turns around he is black. Gillespie then proceeds to praise the surgeon and the surgeon responds with some thoughtful words. To see a black American treated so thoughtfully and well was simply amazing at this time in Hollywood. I couldn't find the doctor in the list of cast members. And there was no mention of the scene in the trivia section of th IMDB. The scene must have added to the script perhaps by an event that caused the writers to add it , but I'm speculating.

I e been waiting for years to watch this movie after seeing the iconic promotional adds of Wolheim gripping Astor in a tight embrace. Well this precode talkie is a real dud. The story follows two bank robbers (Keith and Astor) posing as missionaries who charter Wolheim's boat to escape the law from the United States. Wolheim initially lusts after Astor and tries to seduce her. After she rejects him he undergoes a metamorphosis and seeks to change his life not knowing that both Keith and Astor are criminals and posing as a religious couple. Hugh Herbert shares writing credit and is his usual unfunny self. Keith is downright nasty. Astor is beautiful but the material clearly is strangling her. Compare her here to the character she plays in Dodsworth five years later. Wolheim died 2 months after this movie was released. He was 51 and died of stomach cancer. He clearly struggled with the material too. Other than a curiosity, I'd pass on this.

Worth watching only as a curiosity. The cast is composed of famous silent comedians who are no longer famous. It's pretty bad but mercifully short.

I watched this movie for the first time last night. I was blown away by the acting of Tracy and Arthur Byron (who plays the warden at Sing Sing). Byron has a commanding voice (he was a famous stage actor) and it is well used here. Director Curtiz obviously liked him because Byron gets a lot of screen time. There are a lot of reaction shots from Byron and Curtiz lets the camera linger on him - his thoughtful face fills the screen. Bette Davis is surprisingly feminine and very sexy. Her characters got edgier later in her career. Here she is very attractive and interesting to watch. The acting from the other supporting actors is not very good and the script is bad. The script simply does not make sense in places. Rockcliffe Fellowes plays Tracy's friend near the end of the picture. Fellowes was the excellent star of 1915's Regeneration (Raoul Walsh dir.)but his career nosedived in talkies. He is worth seeing. If you like pre-Code drama this is definitely worth a look.

I finally watched Coquette tonight. When I finished watching the film I looked over the 1929 review by the New York Times reviewer Mordaunt Hall. It is almost identical to mine except that he liked Pickford's performance overall and I could not bear it - a 37 year old woman playing a 17 year old girl does not work for me on any level. And the shrill voice she employees to suggest a young girl is unbearable. shows bad acting. Pickford gets no support from her supporting cast. John Mack Brown was a lousy actor and his career never thrived. He is horrible here as is Matt Moore (milk toast) and William Janey (excruciatingly annoying).Pickford's father is played by John Sainpolis and he is passable. The script is horrible. Sam Taylor's dialogue is really bad. He shows no talent here for writing. The movie should be watched once because of its' history - Pickford's Oscar performance. The studio moguls undoubtedly were trying to promote the Award. It worked. It shows why Pickford refused the role in Sunset Boulevard.

I love this show as well. I happen to watch an episode a month ago and got instantly hooked. I now have watched several episodes multiple times and have purchased Seasons 1& 2 off of ebay. I find the show compelling because it is a true competition between very creative people where they create before the viewers' eyes. And, notwithstanding how you may feel about the judges, the judges' opinions decide "who is in, and who is out". The editing is excellent. And Heidi Klum is unusually interesting. In one episode, the drama of the judging is heightened when she calls out in German to a model and asks how she feels about the dress she is modeling. The effect on me was electric and the response from the model was heartfelt and you could feel the emotion. That is another point- you can empathize with the designers. No matter how you may respond to them personally, the show draws you in and you empathize with them in the creative moment. Very compelling viewing.

The problem with this film is that it has been so heavily chopped down from its original length, it is difficult to make sense of the story. I watched (and bought) the film to see Alma Rubens. Although Rubens' appearance clearly suffers from the ravages of her years as a heroin addict, she has one substantive scene (where she pretends to be the mother of a dying soldier) that is overwhelmingly moving and proves that she was a powerful actress. Also interesting is a scene in the beginning of the film where Rubens plays a ukulele's and sings. For some reason, Rubens fascinates me, and if there are other die hard silent movie fans similarly smitten, they will find viewing this film an interesting experience.

I watched Leap Year last night on TCM, expecting to see evidence of lost brilliance, since Arbuckle has been touted as a comic genius of the silent years. I was very disappointed. Notwithstanding his status in 1920, his performance in Leap Year simply does not age well. While much has been written about the impact the scandal had on Arbuckle's film career, it may be that his career probably would have died anyway. Let's be honest, jumping up and down and grimacing in front of the camera is about all he did in Leap Year (though he did have some nice acrobatics). Arbuckle is not a peer of Chaplin or Keaton. The scene where he "swims to Japan" is forgettable - there is nothing special there. In fact, the long shots suggest that perhaps he did not do his own diving. For a long time I wondered what was lost when Paramount destroyed "Gasoline Gus" and some of the other features they had in the "can" when the Arbuckle scandal broke. If Leap Year is any indication, I don't think that silent film fans are missing anything.