Crime/Thriller – The Magnificent 60s

Crossplot (1969) ***

Roger Moore – in his first movie in seven years – almost auditioning for James Bond with his lothario instinct, light touch for dialog, a nice side-line in double takes, and enough action to show that even in his early 40s he was still nimble enough. Not in the Charade (1963) or Arabesque (1966) league and over-reliant on the Swinging Sixties and other “Tourist Britain” clichés and a plot that takes far too long to get going, it takes all the actor’s charm to make it watchable.

After one of his staff Warren (Dudley Sutton) switches the photo of a model in his portfolio, ad-man Gary (Roger Moore) finds himself on the trail of Marla (Claudia Lange), a sometime fugitive hiding out on a houseboat. Meet-cute is prompted when she pushes him into the Thames. On leaving he is knocked out and framed on a dope charge and once he manages to get her into the photographic studio Warren attempts to throw her off the roof, the would-be killer himself eliminated by his boss Ruddock (Francis Matthews) who in a marvelous piece of quick-thinking throws his gun to Gary who instinctively catches it, further implicating himself.

After going all round the houses (including a stately home), evading pursuit via an antique car race and a wedding, Gary finally gets to the bottom of why Marla is in such danger – she overheard a conversation between her aunt Joe (Martha Hyer) and Ruddock. Only problem is – she can’t remember it. And it takes even more time for Gary to figure it out, (not realizing, how could he, that the clue is in the title, in fact two clues in a crossword puzzle). You can imagine how it goes from then.

*This poster takes the easy route by trying to sell the picture on the back of “The Saint.”*

On the plus side is mostly Roger Moore. “I come from a long line of hippopotamuses,” isn’t the sort of line you can deliver without some skill. But Moore’s performance lifts what is for the most part a shaggy dog story, and he’s game enough to do all the running and fighting required, even the heavy lifting (of his eyebrows), to keep the story moving. It’s far from as funny as it thinks and not as funny as it needs to be, but there are still some good stabs at humor, a pistol held to Gary’s head discovered to be a toy gun, Gary turning the tables in a shower on Marla, telling the bride that her groom is a bigamist, and a running joke about the Marla being perennially hungry.

The politics barely touches on the conspiracy aspects that Hollywood would have pounced upon and made a better fist of, although the idea that Britain could be undermined by civil strife was not far off the mark for the times. It needed some smarter thinking, though, for that element to work.

*A much better attempt at selling a thriller with scenes from the film,*
*including the toy pistol pointed at Roger Moore’s head.*

The rest of the cast are game enough. Claudie Lang (The Gatling Gun, 1968) is no Sophia Loren or Audrey Hepburn but nobody is pretending she is and she just about gets away with the dumb model approach. Martha Hyer (The Chase, 1966) delivers a glamorous villain and the suave Francis Matthews (Rasputin: The Mad Monk, 1966) her ideal match.

There’s quite a supporting cast: Veronica Carlsen (Dracula Has Risen from the Grave, 1968), Gabrielle Drake (Suburban Wives, 1972), Dave Prowse (Star Wars, 1977), Bernard Lee (You Only Live Twice, 1967), Alexis Tanner (The Ernie Game, 1967), Ursula Howells (BBC’s The Forsyte Saga, 1967) and Dudley Sutton (Rotten to the Core, 1965).

If Alvin Rakoff (The Comedy Man, 1964) is in charge of the material he doesn’t have enough material to work with. He does enough to keep it on course but would have benefitted from a a tighter screenplay from Leigh Vance (The Frightened City, 1961). Both had done better in the past, but it is easy to be seduced by the romantic thriller format, almost a mini-genre in itself, assuming it is easier to pull off than it looks. The likes of Alfred Hitchcock (North by Northwest, 1959) and Stanley Donen (Charade) made it look easy but they had the advantage of big stars in Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn who possessed the ability to make the lightest confection work.

The Island (1980) ***

By common consent one of Michael Caine’s worst films – on a par with The Swarm (1978), The Hand (1981), Jaws, The Revenge (1987), and, for sheer embarrassment, Blame It On Rio (1984) – so naturally I had steered clear of it for four decades. But in the grip of reassessment fever and given how big a fan I am of pirate films, I wondered if I might come to a different conclusion after another vewing.

This was being touted as another blockbuster from the author of Jaws (1975) and The Deep (1977) so it’s entirely possible the actor was not necessarily its biggest drawing card.

The odd thing is that – terrible though it is – it has some aspects very much in its favor. And if it had the courage of its convictions would have taken The Wicker Man route and not permitted journalist Blair Maynard (Michael Caine) to escape from the titular island where he is being held captive by a primitive tribe of pirates. Once he had fulfilled his purpose, which was to impregnate a female pirate, he could as easily have had his throat cut.

There is also some power reversal. He’s raped by said female, Beth (Angela Punch McGregor), and she keeps him chained by the neck, dragging him along behind her like a pet. And there’s an exploration of the gun-love fantasy, expressed by Blair’s 12-year-old son Justin (Jeffrey Frank), given the chance to wield a pistol like his hero Dirty Harry, enjoy the feeling of pulling the trigger, and in an extreme version of early teenage revolt, embracing the opportunity to put one over on his father.

And you might also go for the islanders, untouched and therefore uncorrupted by civilization, who still negotiate the seas in small sailing craft, and, except for their murderous instincts, could easily come across as innocents, living the same life – the “good life” in the eyes of many these days – as they would have done 300 years ago.

What counts against the movie is, for a start, the set-up. Had Blair been just on a sailing trip with his son and been captured by pirates that would have been fine. Instead, he’s a journalist managing to convince his editor to send him to investigate that hoary old chestnut, the Bermuda Triangle.

While the pirates are a gift to anthropological studies, sometimes they speak in perfect English, sometimes they speak pidgin English, sometimes they’re speaking in some form of Olde English complete with naff ritual and rules. Although they’re desperate to find a way of prolonging their species – which is where Blair comes in – they tend to kill any other males or females who could help them achieve this aim.

And although they steal plenty of modern supplies in the way of food and clothing from the ships they pirate, they still wear scraps and live off scraps.

When Blair attempts his first escape the presence of a giant jellyfish cuts that short. But, miraculously, the next two times he’s in the water, no jellyfish. Not much of this is discreet, but there is one relationship that gets by with looks. A young island boy, jealous of the attention given to Justin by Nau (David Warner), the pirate chief, appears to be helping Blair escape in a tiny craft until, far out at sea, the journalist notices that the boat has been sabotaged and is sinking fast. Even so, it’s a bit complicated. I couldn’t work out the young fellow’s motives. Getting rid of Blair wouldn’t get rid of his rival for the chief’s affections.

The ending is a complete mess. Luckily, we’ve been informed that Blair fought in the Korean War so when he finds a deck-mounted machine gun on the U.S. Coastguard vessel the pirates have just taken over, he can open fire like Rambo and slaughter near enough the entire contingent of his enemies. The only survivors are his son and Nau, so we can have one last hand-to-hand skirmish, and the boy and father can enjoy a sentimental reunion.

So, yes, this is a hidden civilization, a lost tribe, that might be treasured for living the simple life, but Blair, despite being a journalist, is hardly salivating at the prospect of his scoop. Too much time is spent on trying to establish the pirates’ way of life via their rituals and oddities.

But this was certainly a bold move on Caine’s part, to take on a role that was akin to Charlton Heston in Planet of the Apes (1968), to be treated as not just an inferior but only useful for his semen. The reversal of the power balance between himself and Beth, who, as in Planet of the Apes, begins to care for her captive, would certainly chime with the contemporary audience.

There’s very little that’s noble about the savages, all are unkempt and few have a full set of teeth.

But Caine does put in a good acting shift. Angela Punch McGregor (The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith, 1978) is the pick of the rest. David Warner (Morgan!/Morgan, A Suitable Case for Treatment, 1966) excels in this kind of oddball part. Jeffrey Frank didn’t make another movie.

Disappointing choice, though, for director Michael Ritchie, who had built up a solid reputation through Downhill Racer (1969), Prime Cut (1972), The Candidate (1972) and Smile (1975). Written by Peter Benchley.

To be honest, I’m a bit disappointed to find so much to admire in what I had expected to be an ideal candidate for the So Bad It’s Good category.

The Blood of Fu Manchu / Kiss & Kill (1968) **

Three stories in one, except only one tale remotely holds our interest. So what compelled producer Harry Alan Towers and director Jess Franco to sideline the titular character and devote more time to a young explorer Carl Janseon (Gotz George) and bandit Sancho Lopez (Ricardo Palacios). You could probably guess that the physical involvement of Fu Manchu (Christopher Lee) would be in any case limited once you grasped the crux of the narrative which saw ten girls sent out into the big wide world to kill his ten most hated enemies. You’ll probably be surprised to learn that he had only ten major enemies, but since one of them is his old nemesis Nayland Smith (Richard Greene), then you can be sure that that aspect is going to suck up a good deal of what time remains after the subplots concerning the explorer and the bandit.

Which is a shame because neither explorer not bandit employ the kid of evil little grey cells that would allow them to come up with a plot that any of the James Bond villains would be proud of in their bids for global domination. Fu Manchu has located an ancient poison which is transmitted by women in the form of a kiss. It originates in certain snakes and although the women are “kissed” by the snakes, they are apparently impervious to its venom, so the first gender-specific poison in history.

And that’s about it. As usual Towers has rounded up a bevy of young beauties, no doubt sold on the idea that he’s going to turn them into the next big female star, as carriers of the deadly poison. Not all are so keen on the idea, but since he’s got them chained by the neck in a Brazilian cave that passes for his stronghold and with his daughter Lin Tang (Tsai Chin) to threaten them with torture, it’s not surprising they are complicit.

In any case the female assassins are one-trick ponies. The minute they accomplish their deed, they are bumped off. Smith is the first victim (apart from a prisoner selected to demonstrate the efficacy of the poison) but he doesn’t die immediately. Instead he is struck blind, although he is aware he hasn’t got long to live unless an antidote can be found.

Naturally, that puts him on the track of Fu Manchu and, of course, into sudden danger. The Fu Manchu-Nayland Smith had proved a decent cinematic tug-of-war for three previous episodes beginning with The Face of Fu Manchu (1965), so it was somewhat surprising that tension was diminished by spending so much time playing up explorer and bandit, especially as the latter is determined to play out all the cliches, including laughing like a hyena.

There is some occasional visual humor such as when the bandits go on the rampage and the crew emerge from bandits bearing such prizes as a bishop’s mitre and when a governor, having imprisoned Jansen, suggests they while away their time with a game of chess.

It’s odd that part of the disappointment for certain viewers in this opus is the lack of trademark Jess Franco sleaze. There’s barely any nudity and although the girls are kept in prison (until released to wreak havoc) there’s none of the tawdriness of WIP epics such as his 99 Women (1969) which is replete with brutality and sex.

Despite the cultural appropriation, Christopher Lee (The Devil Rides Out, 1968) is, as ever, solid as Fu Manchu, speaking in clipped tones and towering over everyone else, though his main role appears to be to deliver exposition, explain the foul plot and its consequences and so on. It’s left up to Tsai Chin (You Only Live Twice, 1967) to carry the sadism.

Richard Greene (Sword of Sherwood Forest, 1960) does his best in a role of declining returns. You might spot among the cast Towers’ wife Maria Rohm (Five Golden Dragons, 1967) and Shirley Eaton (The Girl from Rio, 1969).

Of the women expecting a major career break, Loni von Friedl had scores of parts including Doppelganger/Journey to the Far Side of the Sun (1969). But Frances Khan only enjoyed three more roles and or Isaura de Olivera this was the beginning and end of her movie career.

Written as usual by Peter Welbeck (Five Golden Dragons) – aka Harry Alan Towers – and Franco based on the novels of Sax Rohmer.

Promising idea ruined.

Blood and Black Lace (1964) ****

Director Mario Bava channels his inner Douglas Sirk in a rich color palette for this early version of giallo. About as surprisingly rich is the camerawork, which, for a low-budget picture is exceptionally accomplished, tracking, drifting, bobbing between characters. This early in the 1960s, nudity was not so prevalent but setting a movie in a fashion house – ensuring the beauty quotient is remarkably high – provided sufficient opportunity for ladies to be seen (within a work context naturally) in a certain amount of undress and you can be sure the killer leaves them half-naked. And it’s not the usual giallo sex maniac at work either but, despite the volume of murders, a killer driven by a desire to conceal shame.

Blackmail, theft, abortion, cocaine addiction, pregnancy, impotence and illicit affairs are among the secrets the protagonists wish to keep hidden, all risking exposure by a diary kept by the first victim Isabella (Francesco Ungaro). So rather than a whodunit, it’s a whydunit. The killer is particularly creepy, face concealed behind white gauze like an Egyptian mummy. As the Italian title explains, six women are intended for the chop, so that kind of rules out a great deal of tension as you spend your time counting. Are we nearly there yet? And as we run out of obvious potential victims, who the heck is there left to kill? Of course, by that time, we are into twist territory and that element is certainly neatly done.

The main candidates for the murderer are: Franco (Dante DiPaolo), Riccardo (Franco Ressel), Cesare (Luciano Piggozi). Massimo (Cameron Mitchell) and Marco (Massimo Righi). These are the official ones, rounded up by Inspector Silvestri (Thomas Reiner). But that still leaves housekeeper Clarice (Harriet Medin) in her black leather coat. And a fashion house being a festering wound of jealousy, sex, status and privilege you wouldn’t discount any of the models either nor an owner Cristiana (Eva Bartok) who is such a slave-driver she denies her seamstresses time to mourn.

Emotions would be running high in this establishment never mind with a killer on the loose. Relationships are so fraught that even when this is the worst possible time to be alone in a house, certain of the models refuse to offer sanctuary to others and one, Tao-Li (Claude Dantes), just plans to head for the hills (Paris, in other words) and abandon the others. Add to that a high degree of stupidity. When Greta (Lea Lander) discovers the disfigured corpse of Nicole (Arianna Gorini) in the trunk of her car, rather than calling the police, she drags the body into the house and hides it under the stairs while her butler is about to serve tea. Except it’s not out of folly, it’s because Greta, like all the women here, wishes to protect a male, passion reigning supreme to the extent that the thought of losing a lover even if he is a murderer is too much to bear.

The inspector’s task would be made easy if the killer had a distinctive modus operandi. Death occurs through strangulation, suffocation, drowning (though with cut wrists to make it look like suicide), falling from a great height and Nicole’s face thrust into a stove. If victims take a long time to die, it’s not from the killer’s sadism but his/her incompetence. Virtually none are speedily dispatched, murder not as easy as you might imagine, an idea that Hitchcock purloined in Torn Curtain (1966)

For most of the time the way the camera moves you would wouldn’t think you were watching a film about a serial killer (in those days as rare in reality as in fiction) but a dense emotional tale as spun by the likes of Luchino Visconti (The Leopard, 1963) amidst a backdrop of wealth and beauty. Setting aside the murders, there is a feast of intrigue, and a rich seam of characters, though the central theme seems to be (not surprising for the era) that money and beauty are not as fulfilling as love, something that women will commit various crimes (though stopping short of murder) to achieve.

I would imagine it was just such intricate camerawork that put audiences off the picture on initial release, a big flop in Italy and, if screened anywhere else (as in Britain) the lower part of a double bill. Not quite as intense as Bava’s previous The Whip and the Body (1963) nor so stylistically driven as Danger : Diabolik (1968) and some way short of horror masterpieces like Black Sabbath (1963), this is still an interesting watch, something of a template for future giallo and from a pure directorial perspective glorious to watch.

The number of characters featured and the time spent on the various deaths limit the opportunities for any one star to dominate but Hungarian Eva Bartok (Operation Amsterdam, 1960) leads the line on the female side while American transplant Cameron Mitchell (Minnesota Clay, 1964) and Dante DiPaulo (Sweet Charity, 1969) vie for male acting honors. The screenplay was a joint effort by Marcello Fondato, Giuseppe Barilla and Bava.

YouTube has this for free though be warned it comes with ads and for the sumptuous photography alone you may want in any case to splash out.

The Honey Pot (1967) ***

Shave 20-30 minutes from this and you would have had a taut thriller. You could start with the number of clever dicks who happen to notice that what’s going on bears a close resemblance to a play Volpone by Shakespeare contemporary Ben Johnson, even down to the anglicizing of the names of those fictional characters. And prune the number of detectives, three is two too many especially when there’s an actual genuine detective in the mix. And the shock ending is just…well…mince.

Otherwise, quite fun in a way. Wealthy Cecil Fox (Rex Harrison) hires sometime actor, sometime factotum, law graduate Marty McFly – oops William McFly – to help him pull off an elaborate joke, “people-baiting”, a modern version of “bear-beating” apparently. Fox pretends to be dying in order to bring three former lovers, all he presumes desperate to be named in his will, to his bedside in a grand palazzo in Venice. Upfront reason, some kind of revenge. Hidden reason, something darker obviously.

The trio are Texan Mrs Sheridan (Susan Hayward), movie star Merle (Edie Adams) and Princess Dominique (Capucine). Sheridan is accompanied by a nurse Sarah (Maggie Smith), the “voice of morality.” They all certainly seem to have a sense of humor. Two presenting Fox with gifts of clocks, the princess with an hour-glass filled with gold dust instead of sand, presumably with the notion that he can watch his life ticking away. Needless to say, this is like an reality TV show, Fox not having named an heir in his will, so they are all battling to be the heir, and as he points out, even the rich will succumb because there is no such thing as “enough money.”

Things do not go according to plan when Sheridan unexpectedly dies. Enter Inspector Rizzo (Adolfo Celi). Sarah suspects McFly because he used her as an alibi but disappeared for a time when she (for unexplained reasons) fell asleep in a posh restaurant (and nobody tried to wake her). Turning detective herself, she comes up with “proof positive.” Turns out the two remaining suspects had conspired to also give themselves an alibi, easily demolished by the kindly inspector. McFly, too, has been doing some digging.

But then comes another twist and everything you thought you knew flies out the window. Cue more investigation, more alibis and finally an Agatha Christie pay-off when the two amateur detectives and the real one confront everyone in the drawing room. By which time the twists are coming thick and fast.

Best thing about this is the playing. Although decidedly stagey, very little in the way of visual audacity, that works to the movie’s benefit, and not a bad choice to rely so heavily on the acting given the cast. With the exception of Edie Adams, Capucine and Celi, all were Oscar anointed. Two winners – Rex Harrison for My Fair Lady (1964) and Susan Hayward for I Want to Live (1958) – and between them another five nominations – and two future winners in Cliff Robertson for Charly (1968) and Maggie Smith for The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie (1969). The others were not out of their depth, Edie Adams (Made in Paris, 1966) clocking up Emmy nominations. Adolfo Celi (In Search of Gregory, 1969) a deuce of nominations from the Cannes Film Festival while even Capucine (The 7^th Dawn, 1964) had been nominated for a Golden Globe.

So director Joseph L. Mankiewicz (Cleopatra, 1964) makes the right decision to let his actors get on with. Rex Harrison is at his suave best, but with a malevolent undercurrent, and has most of the best – and zestiest – lines. Robertson, usually the hero, is sly and duplicitous. Susan Hayward was in her comfort zone, forthright and taking no prisoners, Capucine at her cold and haughty best. Smith and Celi were the revelations, the former losing the trademark drawl and the nurse’s mousiness as to some extent she exerts control, and Celi departing from the bombast and delivering a lower-keyed performance.

Doing double duty, Mankiewicz worked up the script from three sources: the original Volpone, the play Mr Fox of Venice by Frederick Knott (Dial M for Murder) and a novel The Evil of the Day by Thomas Sterling. Next time the director went to the stage for inspiration he chose a better source for a mystery – Sleuth (1972).

The Presidio (1988) ***

Blame the young whelp. Hollywood had form when it came to piggybacking a rising star on the back of an older established star. Go back to Montgomery Clift and John Wayne in Red River (1948) and you can see why it’s such a potent route to success. Young bucks like James Caan in another John Wayne number El Dorado (1967) fared less well. Tom Cruise got the hang of it, riding on the coattails of Paul Newman in The Color of Money (1986) and Dustin Hoffman for Rain Man (1988). Sean Connery was even known to help out – consider his mentoring of the characters played by Kevin Costner in The Untouchables (1987) or Wesley Snipes in Rising Sun (1993).

But sometimes it just doesn’t work. And that’s the main flaw here in an otherwise involving crime drama featuring unwilling partners that has the requisite car chases, a variety of smart moves, and a hefty load of emotional complication. Military cop Lt Col Alan Caldwell (Sean Connery) has daughter issues, daughter Donna (Meg Ryan) has daddy issues and commitment issues, while civilian cop Jay Austin (Mark Harmon) has authority issues.

Caldwell and Austin are forced to work together after a murder on San Francisco military base The Presidio.

Austin is altogether too volatile, too apt to go off at the mouth, and more important (in acting terms) hasn’t learned to rein it in, to reveal all through the eyes and bite off what snappy dialog comes his way rather than throwing stuff around and slamming doors and such. To complicate matters Austin and Caldwell have a past. To complicate matters even more – or to put it another way spice up proceedings – Austin and Donna get it together after a pretty neat meet-cute.

While in some ways Donna is cute, mostly she’s feisty, determined to put both dad and lover in their places. Both Caldwell and Austin have a top-class solo scene – the colonel when he turns the tables on a barroom bully, Harmon when he sweet-talks a secretary into providing vital information. The more experienced Caldwell tends to be one step ahead in terms of figuring out what’s going on. But in terms of the running, jumping and standing still stuff, it’s mostly Harmon who is dumped with the action, Caldwell the altogether cooler cat.

While Connery was coming off an Oscar for The Untouchables, I have to confess I’d never heard of Harmon. Turns out his rising stardom was on the back of a couple of television series – Flamingo Road (1980-1982) and St Elsewhere (1983-1986) plus a turn as Ted Bundy in the mini series The Deliberate Stranger (1986). In terms of movies, he’d been top-billed in the lackluster thriller Let’s Get Harry (1986) and Carl Reiner surprise comedy hit Summer School (1987) which took in $15.7 million in rentals and placed 27^th for the year, ahead of Kevin Costner in No Way Out and Bruce Willis in Blind Date.

Harmon was the replacement for Don Johnson who was on duty in Miami Vice. Whether Johnson would have been capable of taking on Connery is open to question. Harmon clearly struggled and Meg Ryan (Top Gun, 1986) ran away with what Connery left on the acting table.

This was an interesting role for Connery, not just coming to terms with his daughter but also with betrayal, and the climactic scene in a cemetery is a career highlight.

Back to the tale: under-rated director Peter Hyams (Capricorn One, 1978) keeps the action coming and in between ensures emotional tension holds sway. Apart from Harmon, what lets it down is the story – the real story I mean not the various personnel sorting out their private lives. It’s not that the conspiracy the pair uncover isn’t interesting, it’s just not interesting enough and I guessed from the minute he was introduced who the bad guy was.

But the dialog is meaty enough and Meg Ryan shows more promise and of course by this stage Connery is such an assured performer that he’s not going to put a foot wrong. I’m not sure that filming a car chase in the darkness on the city’s steep inclines was a good idea, apart from the white sparks zinging out of the darkness. A later Connery venture The Rock (1996) did it much better. Written by Larry Ferguson (The Highlander, 1986).

If you can ignore Harmon, a good evening’s watch.

NOTE: The movie didn’t do so well at the U.S. box office – just $10 million in rentals, but it took in nearly half as much again in Japan so my guess the Connery name in the global markets helped recouped the cost. But this was the beginning of the famous “long tail” when movies made a lot more after initial release and this was a case in point. Although it only placed 50th on Variety’s annual box office chart, it made the Top Ten for the year on video.

The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (1970) **

The word is that you can’t blame director (and producer and co-writer) Billy Wilder for this disaster because it was taken out of his hands by studio United Artists and drastically re-cut. But when you learn that Wilder’s version ran three hours and counting and even in the shortened version looks a preposterously bad bet, you can see why UA felt the need to take charge.

Wilder had been the poster boy for sexual identity after the frolics of Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon as cross-dressing musicians hankering after Marilyn Monroe in Some Like it Hot (1959). Whether Sherlock Holmes was a closet gay would have been a minor footnote to the author’s massive fanbase, and to put it so upfront looks, especially for a contemporary audience, like a massive misstep.

The first part of the movie largely consists of Dr Watson (Colin Blakely) being accused of over-mythification of Sherlock Holmes (Robert Stephens). Turns out (according to the Wilder version) that Holmes is a couple of inches shorter than Watson (his narrator in the Conan Doyle stories) had claimed and never wore the deerstalker. Blimey, lock that man up. Shock horror! Holmes’s other predilection, a regular injection of cocaine (I’ve no idea what a seven per cent solution would be in today’s money) is no invention, however.

But whether Holmes is attracted to the opposite sex forms the focus of the first section of this (even at just over two hours) unwieldy movie. A famous Russian ballerina Madame Petrova (Tamara Toumanova) wants to make him the father of her child. The only way Holmes can get out of this predicament is to pretend to be gay.

Eventually, after exhausting this joke (!), we get the proper mystery. Mysterious Belgian Gabrielle (Genevieve Page), just fished out of the Thames by a passing cab driver, turns up soaking wet at 221B Baker St and (eventually) Holmes is inveigled to find her missing husband.

In other circumstances this would have probably been a relatively straightforward case for the ace detective although there would have been, of necessity, ample opportunity for him to demonstrate his special set of skills. But this being of a more lumbering project, the investigation involves monks, midgets and the Loch Ness Monster. Yes, you heard right.

That should have killed off the project at the start. Like whether Holmes is gay or not, the Loch Ness Monster is another minor footnote. Apart from being a tourist attraction and keeping the conspiracy theorists going and competing with Roswell for public attention, it’s the dumbest of notions, even if, as the audience will expect, that it’s not the real monster (if there is such a thing) but a Macguffin of considerable dimensions.

I might have been happy to go along with a narrative that ran close to spoof except I didn’t take to either of the principal actors. I’ve no idea what made Billy Wilder believe that Robert Stephens (The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie, 1969) would make a good Holmes. I’m not one of those traditionalists who believe a specific actor was the quintessential Holmes, but it’s a part that’s far easier to get wrong than get right. And I think Stephens with his wafting loose style got his characterization spectacularly wrong.

Colin Blakely (Alfred the Great, 1968) is one of those actors who generally knows how important it is to rein it in, because if the ham in him is given an inch he will most certainly take a mile and he’s so over-the-top you think he’s going to disappear over the nearest horizon.

This was a huge flop and no wonder. And Billy Wilder, given he wears the three hats vital to a film’s creativity, must take the blame. It’s a rubbish story badly done. Like any other great director, we tend to remember Wilder’s successes – Hollywood drama Sunset Boulevard (1950), media excoriation Ace in the Hole (1951), POW camp thriller Stalag 17 (1953), comedy The Seven Year Itch (1955), Some Like it Hot and sexual satire The Apartment (1960) – and we tend to forget that he often, especially in the 1960s, fell flat on his face. One Two Three (1961) and Kiss Me Stupid (1964) were colossal miscalculations, the result as much of miscasting as of script.

This stands as even worse than that pair. Wilder had got way too big for his boots and at a point where a studio had to cut him down to size. But even the truncated version isn’t much cop. And the only thing that keeps it from attracting a one-star review is that it’s better than Orgy of the Dead (1965).

Steer clear.

The Walking Target (1960) ***

The Double Cross Olympics. Or the Twist After Twist After Twist World Championships. Either way you’re in for a rattling good time. This is a hard-boiled B-movie the way Hollywood makes them, so there’s virtually no one involved who’s on the side of good.

Nick Harvin (Ron Foster) leaves prison after serving a five-year sentence for stealing $260,000. The money’s never been recovered so, in the words of the warden, he’s a “walking target,” fair game for anyone seeking a share or all of the loot – “they can smell that green round corners.”

Step up blonde girlfriend Sue (Merry Anders) and best buddy Dave Prince (Robert Christopher), whose credentials in the loving and friendship department are in doubt given neither visited him in jail. Also on his tail – the media, hoping to put him back on the front page where he belongs and Detective Max Brodney (Harp Maguire) a pair of cops hoping to put him back inside where he belongs. The cop tells it straight, “You’re a louse, you’re smarter but you’re still a louse.”

Nick envisions a future that’s “fat and rich” while Dave reckons he’ll be able to “coast forever.” Nick drops a bombshell. He’s planning to give a one-third share of the dough to the wife Gail (Joan Evans) of one of his two partners in the heist, both dead. Although there’s another reason he needs Gail. The money was stashed in her car’s undercarriage and she’s long ago left town.

Meanwhile, Dave begins the two-timing game. He’s worse than Sue. She’s only making sweet with Dave behind her lover’s back. But Dave has also stitched up Nick by selling him out to a big time crook Hoffman (Barry Kroeger).

Nick can’t even hide out. Newspapermen have caught up with him and he’s splashed all over the front pages. The cops and the crooks are on his tail. Nick high-tails it to Gold City, where Gail runs a diner. He’s got a soft spot for Gail, she threw him over for her mechanic husband Sam because she reckoned Sam was a safer bet, not realizing he was dumb enough to get snookered into a robbery.

So here’s the real twist. Nick manages to sweet talk Gail. When she turns down his offer of a share of the loot, he tells her he’s going to give it all back. Being the trusting sort, and maybe thinking she would have been better off with someone who wasn’t as dumb as Sam, Gail takes him to her car and watches him pull out the hidden cash.

So, of course, he’s just playing her for a sap. Yeah, maybe he feels guilty about Sam and yeah maybe he does still have a soft spot for Gail, but he’s a thief and what chance is there that he’s going to turn into a good guy and return the stolen money.

Before Gail gets the opportunity to realize he’s playing her for a sap, in burst the crooks, whacking nick around and promising to do worse to Gail unless he hands over the money. In the confusion, Brodney appears, and takes one for the team, but not before the thugs have got their come-uppance.

Yep, there is one last twist, one I certainly wasn’t expecting. Nick is going to go straight after all.

How do you like that? Of all the mean narrative tricks, the bad guy turns into a good guy.

This must have a made a cracking supporting feature. All the characters, including Gail, can squeeze the last bit of juice out of a line. There’s nothing but snap and zing. Plenty temper, car chases, fisticuffs and shoot-outs. And did I mention it was aiming for the gold ring in the double-crossing league.

Great cast of B-movie troopers in Ron Foster (Cage of Evil, 1960), Joan Evans (Roseanna McCoy, 1949), Merry Anders (House of the Damned, 1963) and Harp Maguire (Incident in an Alley, 1962). Directed by Edward L. Cahn (Incident in an Alley) from a script by Stephen Kandel (Chamber of Horrors, 1966).

At a lean 75 minutes it’s story, story, story and belt along at a terrific pace.

Seance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) ****

Highly atmospheric psychological gem that should appeal mightily to the current generation hooked on the new genre of scams – this one coming with a gut-wrenching twist. That it concerns a medium should add to the intrinsic appeal. And it turns on two terrific performances.

I have an unusual connection to this movie – and a whole bundle of others with music by John Barry. I heard the scores of this and the likes of King Rat (1965), The Chase (1966), Deadfall (1968) and The Lion in Winter (1968) long before I caught up with the movies. So I came at them with a kind of aural advance warning. The score John Barry wrote for this not only exemplifies the inherent creepiness but maximizes it.

Even before we get into any notion of criminality, you can see that this unlikely middle-aged marriage between the dominant Myra (Kim Stanley) and the weak Bill (Richard Attenborough) is unhealthy to say the least. She’s the kind of psychic who’s likely to swoon and get lost in ethereal otherworlds while hosting seances. He’s just trying to keep her from toppling over into insanity, driven by her conviction that she is conversing with their dead son.

In the kind of scam you could see someone coming up with today, she decides she’ll thrust herself into public consciousness by becoming the sort of psychic police tent to consult during kidnappings or murders. In this case it’s the kidnapping of Amanda (Judith Donner), daughter of wealthy businessman Mr Clayton (Mark Eden). This might sound like the usual wishful thinking for publicity by an over-earnest psychic, but, in fact, it’s Bill, at his wife’s behest, who’s carried out the kidnapping. To make it look kosher, the couple demand a ransom.

The lass is kept imprisoned in their house, in a room made up to look like a hospital with Myra playing the role of nurse. Mr Clayton is sceptical of the psychic’s claims but his wife (Nanette Newman) is duped.

Given that Bill generally looks impotent, the harried look of the weak hen-pecked husband, it’s quite astonishing how he rises to the occasion to collect the ransom money, dodging the cops on the underground. The plan comes undone, however, when Myra decides the dead Arthur wants a buddy in the afterlife, with Amanda the prime candidate and Bill called upon to step up to the murder plate.

So we’re knee-deep in tension. The key here is that our point-of-view is that of the couple rather than the child or the parents. Amanda is a bit more worldly-wise than Myra expects so she’s kept on her toes keeping the suspicious child in check. So you’ve got what would be a contemporary trope but unusual then of being forced to want the criminals to succeed. Everyone loves a psychic, even more these days after the whopping success of The Conjuring series, and everyone loves the downtrodden husband, so we’re hoping they can outwit the pompous wealthy businessman and fleece him of some dosh, awake the world to the powers of the medium and live happier ever after.

But that’s before Myra changes the plan and you’re wondering if Bill is going to be able to stand up to her. The cops come mighty close to smelling a rat, but the suckered wife appears to help their case.

The beauty of this is less in the plotting – but those twists would work as real zingers today – than in the playing. Critics were reaching for superlatives when two Daniel Day Lewis movies – Room with a View and My Beautiful Launderette – both opened on the same day in New York in 1985 and were astonished by the actor’s range. Richard Attenborough’s diffident mouse of a man in Séance on a Wet Afternoon appeared the same year as his bluff hard-nosed soldier in Guns at Batasi. The British Academy noticed, awarding him the Bafta Best Actor for the achievement.

He’s quite superb here, always on the verge of telling his wife what-for before sinking back into complaisant compliance. When we speak about edgy performances, we generally mean something else entirely, but this is an emotional edge that he’s always about to tip over into one way or the other.

American stage specialist Kim Stanley hardly made a movie, only one more this decade and none for another 16 years, but she carries this intense complicated character smothered by insecurities. Nanette Newman (The Wrong Box, 1966) is a believable mother. Mark Eden (The Pleasure Girls, 1965) crops up, as does Patrick Magee (The Skull, 1965) who tones down his trademark growl.

Written and directed by Bryan Forbes (King Rat) from the bestseller by Mark McShane.

The John Barry score not just sets the tone but helps carry the picture.

I understand plans are underway to remake this and I can see why

Dillinger (1973) ****

How to make a cult movie. Well, you can start with an uber-macho gun-loving director in the form of John Milius (instrumental in the making of Apocalypse Now, 1979, for which he wrote the script). Then throw in the kind of actor who would never have been a star except for the chisel-faced likes of Lee Marvin and Charles Bronson changing what audiences appreciated in a leading man, as opposed to a supporting character – step forward Warren Oates (Bring Me The Head of Alfredo Garcia, 1974).

Throw in two of the best supporting actors who ever lived. The first one, Ben Johnson, has by pure chance stepped up from the John Ford Stock Company and by golly snaffled himself an Oscar in The Last Picture Show (1971) and made the unlikely leap, in his mid-50s, to just about top-billed status. The second is Harry Dean Stanton (Cool Hand Luke, 1967), just about everyone’s favorite cult actor.

For good measure chuck in another actor, Cloris Leachman (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, 1969) who had barely had a movie career and now in her mid-1940s it was taking off thanks, oddly enough, also to an Oscar for The Last Picture Show. And a couple of fresh faces in Richard Dreyfuss (Jaws, 1975) and pop singer Michele Philips of The Mamas and the Papas.

That the tale happens to revolve around the second most popular – after Bonnie & Clyde – of the hero bandits of the Great Depression, John Dillinger, and cult is home and dry.

As with the later Michael Mann version, we’re telling two stories at once. Publicity hound John Dillinger (Warren Oates) would have been a social media god these days – you bet he would have filmed every damned bank robbery on his phone, not to mention all the innocent bystanders filming him on theirs. He just loved appearing on the front pages of newspapers and on wanted posters. And he had a set of terrific catch phrases, mostly revolving around thinking people would remember forever being in his presence.

Then we’re following F.B.I. kingpin Melvin Purvis (Ben Johnson) tasked by J. Edgar Hoover to rid the country of these murderous varmints. All of this to the rat-a-tat-tat soundtrack of blazing machine guns mowing down gangsters and cops alike and the equally rat-a-tat-tat tones of a voice-over intent on creating high drama the way they used to on newsreels. The voice-over seemed particularly beloved by makers of gangster movies, though this avoid the biographical excesses of The St Valentine’s Day Massacre (1967).

Purvis and Dillinger are battling it out in more ways than one. Purvis appears equally determined to steal the headlines. He’s the one that goes in and captures single-handedly a bunch of notorious killers armed only with a bulletproof jacket and a cigar and weapon of some sort. He’s delighted when a gangster fashions the moniker “G-Men”, a nickname that seems to elevate the F.B.I. in the eyes of the media which have a tendency, for the sake of easier-to-write headlines, to shorten names.

You wouldn’t have needed an F.B.I. except for a peculiarity. In the U.S. state law meant that you could escape pursuit in one state if you hopped over into the next state where the law wouldn’t bother you one hoot because your crime wasn’t within your jurisdiction. If you were smart enough you could even evade the F.B.I. if you stuck to doing all your robbing in one state and all your hiding-out in another. But should you be dumb enough, as here, to truck a stolen car over the state line, then the F.B.I. could come gunning for you.

Dillinger isn’t likely to let the little matter of jurisdiction get in the way of his aim to become the best bank robber in the world, a claim that could be contested if he limited his sprees to one little state. Although his fame grows momentously when he escapes from a high-security prison that is supposed to be escape-proof.

Then Dillinger formed the gangster equivalent of the rock star Supergroup, bringing together Baby Face Nelson (Richard Dreyfuss) and Pretty Boy Floyd (Steve Kanaly) and others. .

If anyone could improve on the Raymond Chandler adage of when a narrative is in trouble bring in a man with a gun, it’s here. Dozens of men with dozens of machine guns, shotguns and pistols are apt to arrive at any point – every male in any godforsaken town totes a shotgun into the bargain. Dillinger might have been a great robber but he wasn’t much good at hiding out – he was always getting ambushed.

The gun battles are certainly lively and occasionally inventive.

Dillinger is eventually captured because, as one of his crew cautions, he’s a sucker for women. With Billie (Michele Philips) in irons he gallivants around with illegal immigrant Anna (Cloris Leachman) who snitches him out to Purvis leading to the legendary shootout at the Biograph cinema in Chicago.

As now, media (including social media) has their cake and munches it down, giant headlines describe the robbers in detail to sell copies while at the same time hypocritical editorials complain about their exploits to satisfy the more moralistic readers.

Characterization is sketchy to the point of cartoonish, but the characters, including the cop, are so cocky they only need to chuck out a few catchphrases to keep our interest.

Warren Oates and Ben Johnson make a decent stab at stardom, Richard Dreyfuss steals a few scenes, Harry Dean Stanton has some great lines.

Given the derisory budget, this is a great debut by John Milius, who also wrote the script.