The Stepford Wives (1975)

The Stepford Wives (1975)

Director:  Bryan Forbes

Cast:  Katherine Ross, Peter Masterson, Paula Prentiss, Nanette Newman, Patrick O'Neal

Memorable Line(s):  "When you come back, there will be a woman with my name and my face, she'll cook and clean like crazy, but she won't take pictures and SHE WON'T BE ME! "

For some reason I skipped The Stepford Wives from 1970's and never looked back.  Now that I have decided to give it a look, I can same I'm glad I took the time because there's more here than I expected

The Plot of The Stepford Wives

The Eberharts are married with two kids and they just have to get out of the rat race of the city.  Joanna (Ross) is a stay-at-home mom who dabbles in photography and Walter (Masterson) is the guy who brings home the bacon.  Their escape is to the bucolic and suburban Stepford, a community that is nearly perfect, without the congestion and craziness of the city.

The transition goes well and they ease into their new and comfortable suburban lives, but Joanna seems isolated because most of the other woman come at the world in a different way.  Walter integrates well and becomes immediately entrenched with the local and secretive men's club where he spends many evenings meeting and drinking. 

It isn't until Joanna finds a kindred spirit in her new friend Bobbie (Prentiss) that she starts to feel comfortable.  But it also then that some of her subconscious suspicions are confirmed that all may not be right in Stepford.  In trying to shake things up the world of the perfect wives of Stepford, they get more they have bargained for and Joanna starts to find out there is something sinister beneath the surface of Stepford.  And this something just may leave her a changed woman.

The Performances, Writing, and Direction of The Stepford Wives

It takes a while to get used to and settled into The Stepford Wives.  It looks and feels a lot like a many films of the 70's -- sort of natural and gritty too.  While many of today's movies are heavily stylized, it finds it's own way and works for the most part.  

The performances, particularily from Ross and Masterson are solid.  They come across as the harried married couple ready for and embracing change, although Ross doesn't seem to have a complete handle on her character at the beginning of the movie.  Paula Prentiss breathes some life into the movie just as it starts to lose a lag a bit.  She brings a lot of verve to the roll and plays a great foil to Ross's Joanna. 

Patrick O'Neal turns in a nice role as the city patriarch and does a great job of both hiding and revealing his sinister motives.  The rest of the cast is solid, too.  You also get to see Tina Louise of Gilligan's Island fame in a surprising and uncharateristic dramatic role.  As an added bonus, Mary Stuart Masterson debuts as one of the Eberhart children, although the roles of the kids are cardboard thin.

The script does a good job of balancing out the drama, the suspense, and the cultural commentary.  The cultural commentary is particularily handled well with exception of the few times it becomes a little preachy and overstated. 

Summary Judgment on The Stepford Wives

The Stepford Wives drilled itself into the consciousness and zeigist of our culture.  Many times people use the term 'Stepford Wife' and it's immediatelty known what's being communicated and for good reason.  Besides being a bit worn on the edges and maybe a little too blunt in places, this is an effective film with an nice undercurrent of cultural commentary.

[NOTE:  This movie was re-made in 2004 with a totally different and ineffective approach in 2004.  I suggest that you skip the re-make in this instance and check out the original and you'll be rewarded.]

Galipoli

Galipoli (1981)

Director: Peter Weir

Cast: Mel Gibson, Mark Lee, Wallace Hamilton
Memorable Line(s): "How fast are you going to run?" "As fast a leopard."

* Underrated and Overlooked *
Galipoli is one of those unheralded and largely forgotten movies. And it is one that really shouldn't be. It features the hallmarks of Weir's early movies -- an engaging atmosphere and an emotionally engaging plot.

The Plot of Galipoli

Set in Australia in 1915, Galipoli is the story of two very different young men. One is naive and a hopeless romantic while the other is jaded and world-wise. They have one thing in common and that is they both fleet of foot.

Archy (Lee) is an idealistic farmer living in isolated Western Australia. He also happens to be one of the fastest runners in all the country. He is mentored by his uncle who wants him to become a world class athlete, but the young Archy has other ideas. He wants to join Australia army to fight the German a world away.

Frank (Gibson) is living a day-to-day existence, just trying to make a buck, have fun and keeping out of trouble. These two young men's paths cross at a fateful race. Frank is cocky and sure that he will take the prize. Young Archy prevails in the race and Frank is wiped out financially as he bet his whole wad on himself.

From the race on, their paths intesect and over time something about Archy infectious enthusiam for serving his country and seeing the world finally convinces Frank to cast his lot with the army. Archy ends up ion the calvary but because Frank can't ride, they once again are separated, but reunite just in time to head into the real action in Turkey.

It is here where they both face the face of war and all it's brutal realities.

The Performances, Writing, and Direction of Galipoli

Weir showcases a young Mel Gibson in this movie while Gibson was just starting show some of his soon to be world famous charisma. Gibson is paired with a new-comer Mark Lee who plays the young Australian runner. Lee's performance is so raw in places that he comes off as almost to natural.

Weir's decided to take on a defining moment in Australia's history and he does it well by distilling the story down to personal tale of the two runners. Instead of making a huge historical picture, he decides to focus on the friendship of the two runners and places it against the background of this historic background. By doing this, he allows the audience touch points of identification, rather than distance them with grand historical facts and this makes the movie more successful.

The photography is luscious through-out the movie whether it be the vast expanses of Australia or the battlefield. There are moments and images that are breath taking in the movie. The electronic score is quite effective, too, being haunting in places and energizing the movie is other scenes.

Summary Judgment on Galipoli

I've always felt that Galipoli suffered from lack of recognition largely because of the title of the movie. Galipoli is just too obscure a name for most U.S. audiences and Gibson hadn't gained his fame yet. It's too bad because this is a powerful and moving film. Director Weir puts so much of himself into this movie and it shows.

The Serpent and the Rainbow

The Serpent and the Rainbow (1988)
Director: Wes Craven
Cast: Bill Pullman, Paul Winfield, Cathy Tyson, Brent Jennings, Zakaes Mokae, Michael Gough
Memorable Line(s): "Beware, my friend, in Haiti, there are secrets we keep, even from ourselves."

Wes Craven is most famous for the Scream movies and creating Freddy Kruger of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, but Craven takes a dark and arcane tour into the mystic realm of voodoo with this movie. For those looking for the thrill ride of the former movies, they should look elsewhere, but someone wanting a deeper, more thoughtful scare, check out The Serpent and the Rainbow.

The Plot of The Serpent and the Rainbow
Dennis Allen (Pullman) is an anthropologist who looks into bizarre third-world rituals. After the culmination of one of his research trips, a huge drug company asks him to discover if there is truth in the voodoo myth of zombies and the search is on.

A globetrotter, Allen ends up in Haiti in search of a scientific reason behind the world of voodoo and if zombies or fact or fiction. In his search, Allen gets mixed up with a nightclub owner (Winfield) who is plugged into voodoo community and also teams up with a beautiful young psychiatrist (Merritt). Their search leads them behind the dark world of voodoo and during the search, Allen and the young psychiatrist become romantically involved. Throughout their investigation, Allen experiences re-occurring horrific nightmares with disturbing images which are a by-product of one his earlier adventures.

To add to the intrigue and mystery, he also finds that Haiti is falling apart around him as the government deteriorates. A cruel government thug (Mokae) wants to keep Haiti's secrets just that and does everything he can to keep mouths shut.

After the investigation stalls, Allen hooks up with a small-time shaman (Jennings) who promises to deliver a potion which will truly turn a man into a zombie. After testing each other, they finally get down to brass tacks. The questions are what is truth and what measures will people go to protect their ancient secrets?

The bigger question is how far Dr. Allen will go -- into the realm of death and beyond?

The Performances, Writing, and Direction of The Serpent and the Rainbow
This is not an easily accessible movie. The thrills and scares come obliquely at times and then sometimes straight at you, but even then they are not direct. Much of the imagery is flat-out disturbing and also quite effective.

Pullman's career was just getting started and sometimes some of his choices are the most obvious, but this is challenging part and Pullman does deliver. The movie hosts some wonderful character actors including Jennings and Zakaes Mokae who is particularily chilling as the corrupt and sadistic government official.

This movie is a little slower paced than most horror movies, but the most part, the pace serves the purpose of the movie with exception of a few times where the movie gets a little talky. Craven knows how to measure out the scares and the suspense in equal measure, but the ending seems to cop-out somewhat and devolves into more conventional territory which sort of detracts from the over all effect of the movie.

Summary Judgment on The Serpent and the Rainbow
Again, The Serpent and the Rainbow isn't conventional and that's what makes it stand apart. Craven seems to want to break from his traditional mold and for the most part, succeeds. This is a thinking man's horror movie and takes some time to settle in for the viewer. I recommend giving it a chance if you like horror and you will be rewarded.

The Omega Man

The Omega Man (1971)

Director: Boris Sagal

Cast: Charlton Heston, Anthony Zerbe, Rosalind Cash, Paul Koslo
Memorable Line(s): "Sorry the world didn't make it."

You're probably familiar with the phrase that time heals all wounds. It also removes bad memories and smooths out deficiencies in movies. That is until you see the movie again. And that's the case with The Omega Man. It stood up well in the place of memories, but upon a review, not so much.

The Plot of The Omega Man

Robert Neville (Heston) is the last man alive. At least the last man that is still human. When you're introduced to him, you don't immediately know his background, but you quickly learn that he prowls the deserted streets of Los Angeles during the day. Initially, there are hints that something sinister is lurking in the background. It is only when the sun goes down that we learn that there are creatures, former humans, who own the night and they are after Neville.

And Neville is after them.

In flashbacks we learn that there was a world altering chemical war that wiped out the majority of the population and transformed most of what is left into something that is less than human.

There is a huge and consequential game of cat and mouse at play each day as Neville tries to ferret out their nests by day and they try to take him out at night. The main group is led by a vengeful Luddite named Mattias (Zerbe) and they call themselves "The Family." They disavow all ways of the past including electricity, guns, and all modern technology.

When Neville discovers that he may not be the last man alive is when things get interesting and the stakes of the movie raise because now the fate of humanity is truly in the balance.

The Performances, Writing, and Direction of The Omega Man

The Omega Man is marred mostly by poor direction. Maybe the budget was low, but it really doesn't matter because the results on the screen are deplorable and poorly handled which is too bad because the source material (I Am Legend by Richard Matheson) is quality stuff. Director Sagal brings a TV sensibility to the production and it shows because TV production was pretty bad in the '70s. Some of the scenes are laughably bad.

As for the performances, the actors make the most of the mediocre script, but at there are limits as to how far they can elevate the material. Heston manages to keep up some standards, but Anthony Zerbe is stuck with some horrific lines to deliver.

The lighting and camera work all look lifted from a episode from a '70's TV show. There's a flatness to all aspects of the production that are just glaringly bad. Even the music score is weak.

Summary Judgment on The Omega Man

Okay, with all of my damning criticism of the movie you'd think I couldn't recommend it. And, for the most part, I wouldn't, but the source material is so good that there is something worth watching here. In fact, the source material is so good that it was used for the movie "I Am Legend," years later starring Will Smith. If you can take the poor direction, there is something entertaining about this movie. So, I recommend it for a Saturday afternoon at home matinee.

Frogs

Frogs (1972)
Director: George McCowan
Cast: Sam Elliot, Ray Milland, Joan Van Ark
Memorable Line(s): "I don't know what's going on around here or if it's happening everywhere else, but we're going to have to get together to fight it."

If scenes of people being terrorized and killed by snakes, lizards and all sorts of creepy-crawlys is your sort of thing, then this is the movie for you. This an old fashion B-monster movie with an environmental under-tone. And the monsters aren't that monstrous.

The Plot of Frogs
The plot is really quite simple. A handsome young photographer (Elliot) gets his canoe capsized and then gets entangled with an aristocratic family who lives on an isolated island. The island is complete with a mansion and servants. The family is a led by an over-bearing, wheel-chair bond patriarch (Milland). The rest of family consists of those members living plush, languid lives addicted to the "old man's" money, plus there's "the help."

The weekend has been dedicated to celebrating the old man's birthday, but waiting to spoil it all is a whole mess of frogs, snakes, lizards, and alligators. There's even a snapping turtle thrown in for good measure.

The photographer uncovers the first death -- that of one of the help, but no one is alarmed. Then one of the sons ends up dead, but it looks like only a strange coincidence -- that is until every one starts noticing the island is being overran by reptiles. Then people start buying it in quick succession and there's no mistaking the intent of the creatures on the island.

The Performances, Writing, and Direction of Frogs
You get what you pay for and this movie shows it's lack of a low-budget under-belly through-out. There are literally dozens and dozens of close-ups of reptiles and that's the movies strength. Still, unlike most movies in this budget range, the acting isn't all that bad. There are a few performances that are histrionic and stiff, but Milland and Elliot are solid and bring some acting chops to their scenes.

The camera work is inventive because it has to be to cover the lack of a special effects budget. Most of the deaths are implied and not too explicit, most likely because they couldn't afford the sophisticated special effects of someone being munched on my a horde or reptiles.

The scriptwriters try to liven up the script, but it's pretty much a one note movie. I mean, how many ways can you have someone killed by reptiles?

Plus, all the dramatic moments are accentuated by a cheesy synth music track. Imagine a reptile attack and with cheesy music stinger.

Summary Judgment on Frogs
While I have knocked this movie pretty hard, I always have a soft spot for low-budget horror and, going in, my expectations standards were set pretty low. Frogs exceeded my expectations, but I wouldn't go on a campaign for people to make a special effort to watch it. I would only recommend watching it on cable if there was nothing else on.

The Manhattan Project

The Manhattan Project (1986)
Director: Marshall Brickman
Cast: John Lithgow, Jill Eikenberry, Paul Collett, Cynthia Nixon, John Mahoney
Memorable Line(s): "I never thought I'd say this to anybody, but I got to go get the atomic bomb out of the car. "

I know I use the phrase "throw-back" in my reviews a lot, but I'm not about to use it with this movie. The Manhattan Project is pure formula - a light thriller with about excitement as a fast food steak.

The Plot of The Manhattan Project
John Mathewson (Lithgow) is a brilliant research scientist who is on the verge of a ground-breaking discovery in the production of high grade plutonium using lasers. His project gets the interest of the government and lickty-split, he has a secret lab in up-state New York. Bored in the small town, he strikes up the acquaintance of a divorced woman (Eikenberry) and her precocious teenage son, Paul (Collett). In effort to make time with mom, Mathewson buddies up to young Paul and offers him a tour of the secret facility. The kid finds something suspicious and decides he has to get to the bottom of it. Of course.

Paul uses gumption and some chicanery and makes his way into the secret facility to get the bottom of what is going on. The film details, at length, his cleverness as he smuggles some of the "product" out of the lab. Empowered by his feat daring he decides to take the whole escapade up three notches and makes his own nuclear device. The problem is that he really doesn't know what he's working because Dr. Mathewson has distilled the most potent nuclear fuel ever made.

And that's when the stakes get serious.

The Performances, Writing, and Direction of The Manhattan Project
This isn't a bad movie, but Brickman has shown so much more promise as screenwriter with other projects (Manhattan, For the Boys) that you would think he would bring these considerable talents to this movie. Maybe he did, but it doesn't show.

There's nothing really wrong with the performances, but the actors have to try to hard with some tired lines and come across way too earnest. And this is across the board.

Also, from a technical stand-point, there's nothing shoddy or cheap about the movie. The editing and story telling are workman-like and just sort of plod along with no real surprises or verve. Plus, the musical score is just two grades above a generic music library.

Summary Judgment on The Manhattan Project
This movie is almost all gimmick. In fact, prior to watching it, I was almost sure that this was a Matthew Broderick vehicle, but I'm sure he made himself unavailable after reading the script. Yes, there are worst ways to spend 90 minutes, but there are a lot better -- the formula is quite stale and the treatment lack any imagination.

Missing

Missing (1982)
Director: Costa-Gravas
Cast: Sissy Spacek, Jack Lemmon, John Shea, Melanie Mayron, David Clennon, Joe Regalbuto
Memorable Line(s): "If you weren't personally involved in this unfortunate incident, you'd be sitting at home - complacent and more or less oblivious to all of this. This mission is here to protect American interests."

*Underrated and Overlooked*
Missing is a largely forgotten movie, but it really shouldn't be because it is a powerful movie which tells a story that was went quietly ignored by the world as the events of the plot unfolded in reality. It's not a feel good movie, but one that is moving and should be a must see for thinking movie goers.

The Plot of Missing
Charlie Horman (Shea) and his wife, Beth (Spacek) are young and idealistic searching for some truth in Chile during a turbulent time in the countries history. While they think they were making a difference, they are really dilettantes playing in dangerous water way above their heads. Charlie fancies himself a writer and stumbles upon information that he shouldn't know and comes up missing.

The story really gets going when Charlie's father (Lemmon) comes on the scene to find his son and carrying his own blinding sense of idealism. He immediately sees his daughter-in-law as a left-wing reactionary who's meddling caused his sons disappearance. But the more he looks, the more he learns that their our forces at work behind the scenes that must be investigated if he is to find what happened to his son.

We not only get to see the story of the search for a son, but also the unveiling of a country being dismantled and a people disenfranchised from their own rights by a powerful military coup while both father and wife search without much hope.

The Performances, Writing, and Direction of Missing
Both story telling and performances compliment each other perfectly in this movie. Costa-Gravas balances a tenuous beam between giving us a political perspective on oppression and how the U.S. aids and abets these acts in their interest along providing us an emotionally compelling story of the conflict between generations and how they can learn to respect each other against the backdrop of an epic tragedy.

All the performances are spot on including all the supporting characters. Spacek shines in her role, but the real stand-out is Lemmon. He shows the right combination of pride and ignorance when he first appears, but also portrays an man evolving as his eyes are opened. He also is spot on showing us a man's anguish at the disappearance of his only child.

This is a first rate script. We get to know the characters intimately and know their frustrations and struggles. Costa-Gravas' script also uncovers the unwinding of a political mystery without becoming too pedantic or didactic.

The other added element that enhances the story telling is Vangelis' haunting score.

Summary Judgment on Missing
Missing tells a layered story with many angles. One layer is intricately political and is completely compelling on it's own, but the director knows that true hook is the emotional bonds are between father and son and husband and wife. Costa-Gravas walks the tight-wire of telling us both the individual tale of this family along with unveiling a truth that we all should have paid a lot more attention to, but ignored.