Crime/Thriller – The Magnificent 60s

Tuner (2026) **** – Seen at the Cinema

The only problem with going to the movies as much as I do is that you see all the trailers. And if you see all the trailers you know by now that trailers often spill the beans. So I knew before I came to this that the titular piano tuner had two particular sets of skills. Firstly, he had perfect pitch which meant he could unscramble, at first hearing, a tune note by note (apparently Elton John has the same gift so it might not be so rare). The second is that by some bizarre byproduct of his rare condition he can crack safes.

So given he is a safecracking piano tuner who, we guess from the trailer, is embarking on a romance, the question is: how long will it take before both worlds collide and what damage will it do to his relationship? Or, more interestingly, is he a natural-born crook who’s found his way into the safer haven of piano tuning but will jump out of that at any opportunity?

Is he a good guy driven by circumstance into occasionally playing the bad guy, or is he a congenital bad guy who’s managed to keep that part of his personality hidden?

Takes a heck of a long time to come to any conclusion as it wends its way through a smorgasbord of themes – child prodigy, wannabe composer, the Holocaust, romance, old guy losing his grip, crime, and a condition so rare it not only prohibits a person from hearing virtually any sound but confers on him the magical power of being able to obtains safes, courtesy of being able to identify the clicks as the tumblers go round.

Perhaps the rarest element of this – and what sets it aside – is the tone. It’s set in a very low register. The two principals never raise their voices. Angst and all the insecurity that goes with that is virtually absent. Whatever afflicts apprentice tuner Niki (Leo Woodall) isn’t going to kill him so we’re not in the deadly disease meets romance territory. And wannabe composer Ruthie (Havana Rose Liu) finds sufficient emotional outlet in her music not to waste too much on the guy. She’s so restrained you’d have to torture her to conjure up a tear.

The old fella is charming if voluble. The movie skips a few beats that might have helped and I’m not convinced that if a rich guy suddenly found a valuable watch missing from his impregnable safe he’d point the finger at the housekeeper. And it’d take some doing for a prodigy who’s not played the piano in twenty years to play a complicated composition without missing a beat, but then maybe that’s what defines a prodigy.

Apprentice tuner Niki rundles around New York with the older Frank (Dustin Hoffman) fixing pianos and listening to old man’s prattling on. Forgetful Frank can’t remember the code for his safe. The young man takes it home and after watching a YouTube tutorial cracks it open, at the same time as realizing this is an unusual gift. Later, while tuning a piano in the evening he comes across thieves making a racket. Due to his condition, he can’t concentrate with people making a racket so to stop them making a racket he turns to his newfound skill and helps them out. Later, still Frank is seriously ill and can’t pay his bills so Joe undertakes some part-time safecracking to help him out.

Meantime, helped along by matchmaker Frank, before he ended up in hospital, Joe hooks up with Ruthie, a pianist hoping to make it big as a composer.

You know Frank is going to die, hence the need for ready cash should disappear and equally that the crooks ain’t going to let their prize catch disappear. Equally, you reckon that at some point Ruthie is going to find out about his sideline. But these are low key tensions in the main and the chief element of tension is the various safecracking jobs, though, to be honest, one safe is very much like another, the stakes only raised by an occasional unusual locale or when something happens to prevent Niki being able to hear the tumblers tumbling, such as when he gets an airhorn blown in his ear.

At one point, it looks as if Niki might be able to cut and run, given he’s found a way to access a million bucks. But it takes the mother of all coincidences to trigger the good guy-bad guy climax. Joe has given Ruthie a watch he purloined from a safe. Turns out it belonged to the famous composer for whom Ruthie is auditioning for a job. I’m not going to go into the rudiments of how problem is solved but it does lead to the kind of finale that will leave audiences departing the cinema in wonder.

But my feeling is that big reveal came too late, as did Niki spelling out exactly what obstacles he had to overcome to live anything approaching a normal life.

Too much plot, not enough anything else. But the two principal characters are refreshing. Joe clearly has found his condition a drawback to forming relationships while Ruthie is suspicious of anything that might detract from her ambitions. Nothing new there, you might contend, but generally both those aspects are portrayed in a shout-from-the-rooftops manner, an overdose of angst or emotion, rather than moved along in a distinctly low key.

Leo Woodall (One Day TV series, 2024) is in the rising star category and this will enehnace his status as an actor who wants to act the part rather than fall back on a pre-determined screen persona. Havana Rose Liu (Lurker, 2025) is another contender for the big time and brings requisite tension to her part. Veteran Dustin Hoffman (Megalopolis, 2024) has the kind of role that looks like it’s making a bid for another Oscar nomination. But in the scene-stealing department he’d have to fend off Lior Raz (Gladiator II, 2024) as the chief burglar.

Directed by Daniel Roher (Blink, 2024) and written by him and Robert Ramsay (Soul Men, 2008).

I’d have enjoyed it much more if I’d not seen the trailer. But I did enjoy it.

The Offence (1973) ****

Surprised no one figured to put Sean Connery on the stage. I know he did some hoofing in his early days and no doubt lacking the classical training of a Richard Burton, Laurence Olivier or Peter O’Toole, the theater snobs might have objected. We know Connery had a commanding screen presence but generally there was never any need for him to be in long shot. Here, that’s exactly what director Sidney Lumet does, setting the camera out as if the set was a stage and allowing Connery to take charge in a theatrical fashion.

Lumet and Connery had worked before, on The Hill (1965) and The Anderson Tapes (1971), and they would work together again on Murder on the Orient Express (1974) and Family Business (1989), and generally when actors and directors align it’s because the director is looking for some specific quality the actor can supply, and mostly that’s kind of a shorthand, the presence of Denzel Washington, for example, in a Tony Scott picture gives you an idea just what to expect.

But on their first three pictures together, Lumet draws something different out of Connery every time. This was something of a vanity project for the actor, made for well under a million bucks, and presented the actor in a completely different light. It was a bold, not to say dangerous move, to move so far away from his screen persona.

Fans of Christopher Nolan will find much to admire. There’s a tricky structure, flashbacks and flash forwards intermingle, we begin at the end and work our way back to the beginning. As well as the audience trying to work out what’s going on, the main character, Johnson (Sean Connery), a detective sergeant, is also trying to work out what he’s doing, why he reacts the way he does and what do his actions (and words) mean about himself. So, tricky in an intriguing way.

There are some unusual aspects. For a start, the other cops try to prevent cop Johnson (Sean Connery) from getting too aggressive with suspect Baxter (Ian Bannen), accused of paedophilia – at a time when British cops were just as skillful as their Yank counterparts in getting prisoners to fall down stairs or accidentally bang their heads into doors.

There’s a slightly arthouse feel to Lumet’s direction. We begin with slo-mo, for goodness sake, and there’s a bright light that pops onto the screen every now and then.

Three stories develop in parallel. The first is that Johnson is close to burn-out, fleeting flashbacks fill us in on his memories of victims he may have failed. The second is that he’s so determined to get his man, so convinced of the suspect’s guilt, that he doesn’t stop to consider his innocence and becomes so infuriated at Baxter’s continued assertion of innocence that he turns to violence, the old adage of beating the truth out of the man. But the third and most disturbing element is that Johnson is closer to temptation than you’d think, skirting an uneasy border into fantasies of murder and rape.

You might as well have shuttered the movie. Who was going to believe in Sean Connery as a rapist? Worse, who was going to watch him play one? It’s a wonder this saw the light of day at all even on a miniscule budget.

This rises or falls on Connery’s performance. We’ve got no problem – on past screen performance – on viewing the actor as a tough guy, even one who plays hard and fast with the rules. But it’s much harder for him to convince as a man on the verge of the mental breakdown and someone willing to accept he is harboring malevolent thoughts.

If you don’t believe in Connery it won’t work at all. So it’s entirely down to him that it works so well.

This must be the greatest amount of dialog he has ever spouted, huge monologues, intense arguments, and doesn’t look for a moment as if he’s struggling. His intensity is awesome. But for all that it relies on speechifying, some of the best moments involve no words. Johnson flinches at the touch of another man, even if it’s a gesture of sympathy.

The cast is superb. Ian Bannen (Lock Up Your Daughters, 1969) is superb, especially when the tables are turned and he gets to crow over his assailant’s weakness. The ever-choleric Trevor Howard (Von Ryan’s Express, 1965) is at his best when he doesn’t have to rein it in and he doesn’t here. Vivien Merchant (Alfred the Great, 1969) has a small role as the disillusioned childless wife.

Sidney Lumet has the good sense to give Connery the freedom of movement and expression he needs. Written by John Hopkins (Thunderball, 1965) from his play.

This tends to be overlooked because of the darkness into which the character delves but it’s well worth a look just to see what else Connery has to offer.

The Beekeeper (2024) **** – Seen at the Cinema Three Times

We’ve all felt that frisson, returning to a much-loved movie. Was your initial enthusiasm misplaced? Does what originally felt fresh and vibrant now revealed as tired and cliche? I’ve not seen this for over two years, not added it to my DVD collection, I noticed, so wondered if that in itself was a sign of misgiving. When it turned up last week on a streamer, I was definitely hesistant.

As it turned out, there was no reason for any apprehension. Below is my original review.

A franchise is born. John Wick may or may not rise again, Jason Bourne is dead in the water, so the gap exists. True, the new film certainly riffs on elements of that pair, the retired assassin, bare mention of whom elicits fearful reaction, who belongs to a secret government elite, and is jolted into action by someone stupidly preying on the sole beloved aspect of his lonely life.

Eqaully true, Jason Statham (Meg 2, 2023) is certainly viewed in many quarters as the poor man’s Bruce Willis, but, like Liam Neeson, he is one of the few action actors who you would not want to meet in person, on a dark night; he looks as though he growls in his sleep.

*Not an obvious candidate for Imax but then neither was “John Wick 4” and that was certainly an experience in the hi-hat format.*

But it touches on themes that will strike a chord – the data mining to which we all involuntarily subscribe and which governments and villains alike will employ for their own purposes; the computer nerd multi-millionaire; the politically powerful with overly entitled offspring; and those in control who discover not every annoying person can be easily swatted away.

And the beekeeping part turns out also to have meaning, not too much gobbledegook about hives, which is just as well because most people we encounter haven’t a clue how honey is made, least of all pay attention to the intricate structure of that insect’s lifestyle, or that there could be a Queenslayer (and this doesn’t originate from Game of Thrones) whose purpose is to remove a dis-functioning head bee. And just when that metaphor looks as though it’s going to run dry, it turns out to have a deeper meaning.

Just as well, too, that we’re not expecting much finesse from re-awakened assassins. Like John Wick, Adam Clay (Jason Statham) takes no prisoners, but whereas the former confined his murderous activities to the underworld, the latter downs anyone who gets in his way, though in fairness, many of the supposed righteous are in the involuntarily thrall of the country’s justice departments. It helps, too, that F.B.I. investigators, Agents Parker (Emmy Raver-Lampman) and Wiley (Bobby Naderi), while not incompetent, are certainly slovenly and bicker like billy-o, and that Parker is inclined to set aside civil liberties.

So, a scammer steals a couple of million from an elderly woman, who has taken a maternal interest in her beekeeping neighbor. Since she is only caretaker of the cash, which belongs to a charity, in shame she commits suicide. Initially, the number one suspect, Clay has dark forces on his side, too, able to access secret information denied both the F.B.I. and the C.I.A.

And he takes route number one to resolving any issues, turning up at the first scammer operation armed with a couple of cans of gas and proceeding to drench any employee not smart enough to scarper. That’s, of course, after he’s disabled any security guards so low down the pecking order they wouldn’t even be aware of the name that should strike fear in their hearts.

Luckily, we’ve got retired C.I.A. chief Westwyld (Jeremy Irons) to explain enough about the government’s secret beekeeping operation to keep us on our toes. But quite why he’s involved with said nerdy multi-millionaire Danforth (Josh Hutcherson) is cleverly kept from us until the twists begin to mount. But as in the High Table, he can call in top-level assassins to rid him of an irritant.

There’s some clever comedy, too, as Danforth’s equally geeky underlings don’t quite realize exactly what they’re up against, even while, like gameboys ramping up to participate in a computer game, they hire muscle. But, most of it is Clay daringly outwitting everyone in his path until he ends up at a Presidential hideaway and the extent of the corruption becomes clear.

There’s nothing desperately new here, there rarely is, and scarcely an ounce of sophistication (and who cares about that). Remember that even John Wick (before it developed into the High Table malarkey) was a bare-bones riff on Bourne. But who needs anything that original, a believable character is all, because there will always be murk that needs cleaned up, and a hero who can take on all-comers. John Wick One, as I recall, was not such a big initial blockbuster, finding a bigger audience on DVD, and it was only when the makers went back to the well, with a bigger budget and expanded the concept, that it really took off.

I can see the same thing happening here. The big surprise of the weekend was not so much the heavily-promoted Mean Girls doing better than expected, but the scarcely-promoted The Beekeeper doing way better than expected, and when it comes to the foreign markets, the latter will blow the former out of the water, because, overseas, action speaks louder than lyrics.

Not entirely sure why this is so heavily pickled with Brits, but as well as Statham, we have Oscar-winner Jeremy Irons (House of Gucci, 2001) with his silky steely tones, Jemma Redgrave (I’ll Be There, 2003) in her biggest movie role in two decades and Minnie Driver (Chevalier, 2002) as a hard-nosed slinkily-dressed top cat. I can see all three returning as the series develops.

I’ve a sneaky feeling the role of Parker, grieving daughter going all kick ass, was edited down as it became apparent Statham was going to kick all the ass any audience would need, but Emmy Raver-Lampman (graduating from the The Umbrella Academy TV series) brings a good dose of authenticity to the part, avoiding the usual glamor and potential romntic subplot.

It’s in very capable hands, director David Ayer bringing a Fury (2014) directness to proceedings rather than being swamped all-ways-up by character overload as in The Suicide Squad (2016). Kurt Zimmer (Salt, 2010) has all the correct experience to layer this with more than eternal action beats.

Let’s hear it for the bee-busters.

The Woman Who Wouldn’t Die/Catacombs (1965) ***

Gordon Hessler (The Oblong Box, 1969) makes his directorial debut with this neat horror thriller. It starts with a twist exceptional for the times. Ellen (Georgina Cookson) is the shrewd and shrewish millionaire businesswoman, her husband Raymond (Gary Merrill), from whom she demands frequent sex, the eye candy, a kept man. “I married a lover, not a businessman,” she retorts when, bored out of his mind, he asks for the opportunity to play a role in her business. In a further twist on the norm of the damsels decorating 1960s movies by displaying cleavage or disporting themselves in bikinis, Raymond is often seen with his chest bared in all its hirsuteness. In a further gender twist her secretary is also male, Dick (Neil MacCallum), a former, unknown to her, jailbird.

Tall, beautiful, dominant and domineering Ellen appears to have occult power, able to read minds, which keeps the larcenous-minded Dick in check, and has command of her own physical frailty – she walks with a stick – and can put herself in a trance to overcome occasional pain from her injured hip.

*Conspiracy of fear: Raymond (Gary Merrill) and Alice (Jane Merrow).*

But when Raymond falls for Ellen’s niece Alice (Jane Merrow), an artist returned from a year in Paris, he puts into action a plan that had clearly only been a pipe-dream, blackmailing Dick into participating. It’s quite clever as murderous plans go. He hires an actress to impersonate Ellen, known to go off to Italy on her own for spa treatments and with a knack for reckless driving, various driving charges over the years. Meanwhile, he strangles Ellen, allows Alice at a distance from an airport viewing terrace, to see her aunt, complete with walking stick, climbing up the steps of a plane. Faked cables and postcards arrive from Italy purportedly showing Ellen enjoying herself, even visiting the famous catacombs. In Italy Dick fakes a car accident to kill the actress.

However, twist number one comes at the reading of the will. Raymond and Alice split the million-pound bounty but while the latter is given custody of the big house the former is condemned to live for life, on pain of forfeiting the inheritance, in the cottage, in whose potting shed Ellen’s body lies. Further twists naturally follow. The maid (Rachel Thomas) doesn’t quite so much smell a rat but adds to the killer’s incipient discomfort by proclaiming that with her hip problem and claustrophobia that Ellen would never descend into the catacombs.

*Entitled “Catacombs” in the U.K. after the novel by Jay Bennett on which it was based, it was retitled*
*“The Woman Who Wouldn’t Die” for the U.S. market.*

And Raymond might have lived happily ever after with Alice except for his guilt. Several creepy incidents, knocking, tapping, door handles turning, shadows, a depression the shape of a body in a bed, cigarettes smoking in ashtrays, lights going on and off indicate to the already nervous Raymond and the visibly frightened Alice that Ellen may not be dead after all. Virtually the entire third act is the pair of them reacting to real or imagined fears. Alice has a good line in looking scared witless. But Raymond, while trying to contain his inner demons, is equally rattled.

As you might expect there are further excellent twists to come. In fact, they are soon piling up and even at the very end the screen freezes on a final twist.

Georgina Cookson (The Picasso Summer, 1969) steals the show as the imperious businesswoman, with everyone cowering under her glare and not above stating the obvious, “I bought you body and soul,” she reminds Raymond. I’m not sure Gary Merill (The Power, 1968) is quite as good in the second half as he is in the first. Initially, he exudes charm, physical prowess, and, while under his wife’s thumb, still emotes a certain measure of confidence. He doesn’t appear to me to quite frightened enough in the second half as his plans go awry. Jane Merrow (The Lion in Winter, 1968) is excellent as the young woman caught in a mental trap and Neil MacCallum (The Lost Continent, 1968) is surprisingly effective.

But this is a low-budget B-picture that was destined for the lower half of a double bill so there was no particular reason why it should be as good as it is. Except for the Italian sequence, the action takes place on just two sets and for most of the time it’s a three-hander. But Hessler has a keen eye for composition and in a number of critical scenes makes bold choices. For Ellen’s murder, he concentrates on Raymond’s face rather than the victim’s, only showing her feet. There’s one super-shocker with a mirror. But mostly he is content to built up the tension, either by the various noises or by the reactions of Raymond and Alice.

An old-fashioned gem of a picture.

Experiment in Terror / The Grip of Fear (1962) ****

For a modern audience any film that contains mention of “Twin Peaks” and “Tarantino” either shows amazing prescience and/or an indication of what is to come. This classy thriller does not disappoint. Part police procedural, part portrait of a killer, part clever heist and part women in peril, it has you wondering why director Blake Edwards did not stick to the genre. Set in San Francisco in an era when the F.B.I. was generally considered a good thing rather than the paranoia-inducing entity it would become a decade later.

Bank teller Kelly Sherwood (Lee Remick) is terrorized by an unknown assailant into helping him carry out a audacious $100,000 heist. F.B.I. agent Ripley (Glenn Ford), aware of the prospective theft, is drawn into the diabolical web as is Sherwood’s younger sister Toby (Stefanie Powers). The only clue to the thief is his asthmatic voice. Levels of forensic detection set a new bar with the F.B.I. employing telephone, personal and even aerial surveillance, commandeering of television cameras to scan a crowd, and analyzing a telephone conversation to identify the criminal.

Released in Britain as “The Grip of Fear,” exhibitors tried to pull a fast one on the public by using as the support “Operation Mad Ball,” a Jack Lemmon number from 1957, in a bid to convince moviegoers that this program would repeat the successful pairing of Remick and Lemmon in “Days of Wine and Roses.”

There are red herrings aplenty. Tension is racked up so adroitly that any character entering the frame automatically arouses suspicion. Edwards takes a leaf out of the Hitchcock suspense book by finding constant ways to remind Kelly – and the audience – just what is at stake, Ripley promising her a “reign of terror” and not, as you might expect, lying to her about the threat she faces.

As Ripley digs further into the robber’s past, he uncovers not only a catalogue of crime including rape and three murders, but also an unusual personality. Yes, as you might expect, a control freak, but also a guy capable of affection and of lavishing thousands of dollars on those worse off than himself. And, of course, he is exceptionally good at planning crime, outwitting the F.B.I., and picking the kind of vulnerable victim susceptible to intimidation. Every time, the F.B.I. thinks it is closing in, he remains one step ahead. Eventually, the F.B.I. has amassed so many clues, including his identity, a photograph and previous lovers, that you think it’s impossible for him to escape – until he does.

Kelly is so on edge, in following instructions, that she picks up the wrong man in a bar, the police so antsy they mistake a drunk for the assailant. Drenched in atmosphere and rich in subsidiary characters, there’s scarcely a dull moment, from a mannequin repairer (Nancy Ashton) with a roomful of dangling inert bodies, a karate class with (ironically) a woman well able to defend herself, to a small boy desperate to see a G-man’s weapon, an informant (Ned Glass) with a penchant (as did director Edwards) for silent comedies, and a bank manager who promises Kelly a promotion even if she has to steal the money.

On top of this there are some genuine creepy moments that up-end our expectations. What Ripley doesn’t tell Kelly is that she’s also bait and clearly has little concern that she might end up collateral damage – anticipating at the very least she will have a nervous breakdown when it’s over, if, in fact, she survives – in his bid to snare the criminal. A terrified kidnapped Toby strips down to underwear in front a man we know is a rapist. And the movie touches on the woman-who-loves-a-killer motif, a theme very much in the contemporary vein.

Blake Edwards (Breakfast at Tiffany’s, 1961) delivers a directorial tour de force. The criminal is hidden for most the picture, drip-fed to the audience in glimpses, his mouth here, his back there, other times in disguise. Edwards establishes the F.B.I. as such a “very efficient organization” using the most up-to-date methods and involving a vast number of staff plus police that it seems impossible to fail – until it does. And there is an absolutely brilliant six-minute sequence at the outset, milking the best of film noir lighting, when the criminal surprises Kelly in her garage and spells out in detail her vulnerability and the basics of his plan. By keeping the criminal in the shade, and what little available light there is covering her face, Edwards makes the most of Lee Remick’s eyes – every bit as iconic as Audrey Hepburn’s outfits in Breakfast at Tiffany’s – and her acting skill.

Remick (Sanctuary, 1961) is superb, trapped by emotion as much as terror, placing her trust in an F.B.I. that lets her down time and again. This is an edgier role for Glenn Ford (Fate Is the Hunter, 1964) as he steps up from the trustworthy guy-next-door to reveal a more ruthless streak. Stefanie Powers (The Warning Shot, 1967) does well in a small role and there is sterling support from Ross Martin (The Ceremony, 1963), Patricia Huston (Synanon, 1965) and Clifton James (Live and Let Die, 1973). Gordon and Mildred Gordon wrote the screenplay based on their novel Operation Terror.

“Twin Peaks” in case you are wondering is the district in which Kelly lives. There’s a sign towards the end for Tarantino’s World-Famous Cocktails.

Whispering Smith Hits London / Whispering Smith vs Scotland Yard (1952) ***

“In a change to the advertised program” is probably the best place to start, since in writing nearly 2,000 reviews I’ve only, from memory, dipped into the pre-1960 era a couple of times. So let me explain. First of all when I was diving through my trove of Pressbooks, deciding what to select for the new movie exhibition in the book shop I run – Abbey Books in Paisley, Scotland – I came across a Pressbook for this. I noted it was produced by Hammer which I had always associated with horror so I was intrigued to see what the company had been up to long before it made its name mainlining on Dracula, Frankenstein and The Mummy.

By coincidence, I spotted the title on the listings for British streamer Talking Pictures so decided to have a look.

The first point of note, I guess, is the cast. It was par for the course in the 1960s for producers to trawl many countries in the world to make films with an international, sometimes all-star, cast, as they had worked out that it was easier to sell a movie outside the U.S. if you could pin your publicity efforts on big names from France, Italy, Scandinavia, Britain and Australia.

Here, Hammer, maybe in the vanguard of that policy, took this to the extreme. Among the three top-billed names, there isn’t a single Brit. We’ve got American Richard Carlson (The Creature from the Black Lagoon, 1954), Norwegian blonde bombshell Greta Gynt (Soldiers Three, 1951) and Czech Herbert Lom (A Shot in the Dark, 1964).

All this might have been grist to the trivia mill had the movie turned out not to be so damned entertaining, well above par for a B-movie. Not only, visually, does it take on aspects of film noir, slats of lights penetrating the darkness, but there are distressing overtones relating to the insanity business, where once an inmate enters a sanatorium unscrupulous staff can do anything they want, make them worse or kill them if that’s on the agenda.

There are plenty twists and a cracker of a climax, but, as importantly, Yank sleuth Whispering Smith (Richard Carlsen) and his client Ann Carter (Rona Anderson), thanks to sparkling repartee, create genuine screen charisma.

When the celebrity cop arrives in London for a vacation he is door-stepped by publisher Ann tasked with investigating the apparent suicide of her American employer’s daughter Sylvia and the mysterious disappearance of her friend Louise. Although initially rejecting the case, he changes his mind when Ann is victim of an attempted hit-and-run.

Interviews with Sylvia’s fiancé Roger Ford (Herbert Lom), a part-time puppeteer, and her lawyer Hector Reith (Alan Wheatley) throw up impressions of the dead girl as wild, strange, jealous and a gambler. The missing Louise turns out to be rather glamorous, not easily fooled, and in the mood for a taste of seduction and with a nice line in put-downs, “I like a working man,” she tells Smith.

However, a creepy sanatorium run by goatee-bearded Dr Talen (Daniel Therry) appears to be a cover for a criminal organization and Smith soon uncovers a blackmail ring. But none of the victims is willing to talk and when they do are bumped off. Smith eludes various traps, including a showdown in a tunnel and a booby-trapped boat. When Sylvia’s corpse turns up it’s unrecognizable after spending too long in the Thames.

Ann and Smith make a great team, especially when she turns snappy. “You can keep your whispering for someone else,” is one of her better retorts. She’s a surprise in other ways, a dab hand at safe-breaking, for example. It’s not clear how far he is seduced by Louise, so the issue of romance remains inconclusive.

Three standout sequences: the chase in the tunnel: Dr Taren’s disquisition on how easy it is to trap the innocent through psychiatric gobbledygook; and a murder scene where the victim is forced to turn up the sound of a succession of wirelesses to disguise the noise of the imminent gunshot.

Whether it’s the introduction of the slick American or the Scandinavian beauty, or the general pacing and twists ladled out, this is a notch above the usual British B-movie.

I should point out the alternative title is misleading, suggesting Smith is some kind of maverick cop besting Scotland Yard when in fact they work in tandem. And, for the record, he doesn’t whisper either. You might catch a glimpse of Stanley Baker (Zulu, 1964) as a reporter.

Veteran director Francis Searle (The Marked One, 1963) makes the most of the cast, the narrative and the ambience. Written by John Gilling (The Pirates of Blood River, 1962) and Steve Fisher (Rogue’s Gallery, 1968) from the bestseller by Frank H. Spearman.

Worth a watch.

Sumuru, Queen of Femina / The Girl from Rio / Mothers of America (1969) ***

Cult fans assemble. Sci fi crime thriller with for the time a fair sprinkling of nudity, and channelling psychedelic turns like Barbarella (1968) and Danger: Diabolik (1968) and one step up from the ultra-confident gals of Deadlier than the Male (1967) and Some Girls Do (1969). It would have helped if there was a decent plot, and not just a barrage of double-crossing halfway in, but you can’t have everything and director Jess Franco seems to believe that the presence of a tribe of women decked out in red capes, white knee-length boots and not necessarily much in between, goes some way to compensate.

Crook Jeff Sutton (Richard Stapley) holes up in Rio with $10 million in stolen cash, unaware that his presence has already been noted by gang boss Masius (George Sanders) and local ultra-feminist Sununda (Shirley Eaton). After hooking up with manicurist Lesley (Maria Rohm), Sutton is set upon by Masius’ henchmen but escapes in a plane to Femina, “the capital city of the world of women,” a female fortress along the lines of the Bulldog Drummond pictures.

Turns out Sununda is partial to men with piles of cash, kidnapping and torturing them until they hand it over. So she can’t believe her luck when millionaire Jeff walks into her lair. Except Jeff is a bit of a fibber, having made up the story about the ten million, and instead landing at Femina in order to rescue Ulla (Marta Reves).

The plot only really kicks in when he escapes. Masius agrees to help Jeff in return for the pretend-thief helping him hijack Sununda’s vault of gold. In reality, Masius is using Jeff as bait, to tempt Sununda down from the clouds, and then turn him over in exchange for just half her gold. And so it’s back to Femina for all concerned.

There’s no real pretence at the kind of sci-fi that enthralled Barbarella audiences and none of the slick campness of Danger:Diabolik, and most of the ideas seem still-born and occasionally contradictory – in order to enslave men women must first be taught how to be irresistible to them – torture is accomplished either by whispering or kissing, and the ray-guns employed looked like cast-offs from the 1950s, but the regiment of women, with spies infiltrating everywhere, led by the ruthless Sununda, have the makings of a warrior nation.

The movie has far better luck with Masius, a splendidly-drawn character who doodles on restaurant tablecloths, enjoys reading Popeye comic books, and – a bit of drawback for a man in his profession – can’t stand the sight of blood. While his sidekicks are mostly incompetent, they do drive around in hearses that resemble pagodas or dress in unnecessary masks and while his girlfriends appear docile they are in fact spies. And there’s a spot of waterboarding in case you ever wondered where the American secret services got the idea.

The source material was from Sax Rohmer but Sununda lacks the inherent obvious evil of the author’s more successful Fu Manchu series, Shirley Eaton no match for Christopher Lee, the most recent Fu Manchu, nor Richard Shapley on a par with Fu Manchu nemesis Nayland Smith, regardless of whether played by Nigel Green (The Face of Fu Manchu, 1965), Douglas Wilmer (The Brides of Fu Manchu, 1966) or Richard Greene (The Blood of Fu Manchu, 1968, and The Castle of Fu Manchu, 1969).

And anyone attracted to the picture by director Jess (Jesus) Franco is going to be disappointed by the lack of sleaziness he exhibited in pictures like Succubus (1968), 99 Women (1969) and Marquis De Sade’s Justine (1969) and there’s not enough style, though abundant campness, to make up. It’s hard to say quite why it did not have a harder edge, perhaps producer Harry Alan Towers, responsible for 99 Women, felt it should err in the softer direction of Fu Manchu than the overt sex-and-violence of the nascent women-in-prison genre.

Franco and Towers (24 Hours to Kill, 1965, and Bang! Bang! You’re Dead!, 1966) had collaborated on The Blood of Fu Manchu and The Castle of Fu Manchu as well as Venus in Furs (1969) and Marquis De Sade’s Justine so presumably knew how far they could go and decided that here it was better to rein in Franco’s tendencies. Whether a tougher-edged approach would have made much of a difference given the indifferent playing – neither Shirley Eaton (The Scorpio Letters, 1967) nor Richard Stapley (Two Guns and a Coward, 1968) bring much to the leading roles and George Sanders (Warning Shot, 1967) is not in it enough to save it. Maria Rohm, Franco’s wife, appeared in many of his films.

Towers appeared on surer ground in the likes of 24 Hours to Kill (1965), Bang! Bang! You’re Dead! (1966) and Five Golden Dragons (1967) when he could draw on a more interesting cast, better stories and more colourful locations. This was a sequel to The Million Eyes of Sumuru (1967) again with Shirley Eaton and plum role for Klaus kinski.

Despite the film’s potential, the director and George Sanders it does not fit into the so-bad-it’s-good category nor has enough going for it to be labelled a true cult film. But I could be wrong in both those assumptions.

Three Men To Kill! (1980) ****

Every now and then British streamer Talking Pictures TV comes up with an absolute cracker. I’d never heard of this film and don’t think it gained either a British or American release at the time and there doesn’t appear to have been anything in the way of VHS/DVD activity except a belated 2021 DVD.

Alain Delon was that rare beast, flitting between the commercial world and the arthouse with commendable ease. Luchino Visconti had hired him twice for Rocco and His Brothers (1960) and The Leopard (1963) and with his amoral screen persona he was a shoo-in for the best of French noir – Purple Noon (1960), Le Samourai (1967), The Swimming Pool (1967) and The Sicilian Clan (1969). He dipped in and out of Hollywood – Once a Thief (1965), Red Sun (1971), Scorpio (1973) and even top-billed in The Concorde…Airport ’79 (1979).

Unusually, he was in charge of his career, picking up the producer credit on 40 of his pictures, including this one, a late fit into the paranoia/conspiracy cycle as epitomized by Three Days of the Condor (1975), The Conversation (1974) and The Parallax View (1975). Though those films drew the line at car chases, bullets into the eye delivered through a keyhole and drowning people in the sea.

Unlike that trio Michel Gerfault (Alain Delon) is not involved in the espionage, surveillance or investigative business, though, if you have poor opinion of professional gamblers given such activity always seems to take place in smoke-filled rooms, you might consider his profession somewhat on the shady side, especially when he later appears conversant with guns.

Outwardly, there’s nothing amoral here. Michel is taking model girlfriend Bea (Dalila Di Lazzaro), a bouncy character putting you in mind of Goldie Hawn, to see his mother in the seaside town of Trouville, a significant move in those days if marriage was on the horizon.

Unfortunately, Michel has turned Good Samaritan, transporting a car crash victim to hospital, unaware the man, who soon dies, is one of three characters, potential whistle-blowers, on the hit list of arms dealer Emmerich (Pierre Dux). On the assumption that Michel might have been told something incriminating, killers are put on his tail.

The thugs don’t care how they kill him, happy to drown him in full view of holidaymakers splashing around in the sea. When they fail to lure him into a trap, he turns the tables, and it’s full-on pedal-to-the-metal car chases through the streets of Paris and wreckage in abandon.

After a slow start to throw you off the scent, director Jacques Deray (The Swimming Pool) doesn’t waste much time catching up and isn’t going to lose available minutes from a lean running time by sticking in such clichés as kidnapping the girlfriend.

Just how well versed Michel is in the ways of the underworld is shown in how he tracks down Mr Big who tries to pay him off and offer him a job. If Emmerich knew what we knew about Michel he wouldn’t have bothered doing anything, just called off his dogs. All Michel wants is the quiet life of a successful poker player and is not the kind of fellow to go around alerting the authorities to high-level skulduggery.

It’s a surprise ending. Except it turns out not to be the ending and this film has more in common with the conspiracy sub-genre than we imagined. Michel is out strolling in the streets soon after when he is assassinated. Sorry to be such a spoiler but these films depend for their impact on a downbeat ending.

Delon was often compared to Steve McQueen for the rare mixture of toughness and genuine charm and that’s very much to the fore here. It makes a change for him to be neither amoral nor a criminal, but his previous outings in this genre lend the supposition that he might be either. I was unfamiliar with Dallila Di Larrazza but that only meant I hadn’t been paying much attention to Flesh for Frankenstein (1973) where she played the female of the monster species. Here’s, she’s refreshing, neither femme fatale nor weighted down by trauma.

Terrific.

Lady in Cement (1969) ****

Frank Sinatra in cruise control reprises his Tony Rome (1967) private eye in a hugely enjoyable and vastly under-rated murder mystery with man mountain Dan Blocker of Bonanza fame and femme fatale Raquel Welch of pin-up fame. One of the actor’s greatest characterizations, albeit with little in it for the Oscar mob, this is one of the coolest gumshoes to hit the screen. Exhibiting none of the self-consciousness of latter-day Philip Marlowes or Sam Spades, Sinatra embellishes the character with more “business” than ever before, larding his dialogue with quips while he talks his way out of sticky situations and, as a big star, happy to be picked up by Blocker and dumped on a work surface. Can’t see Newman, Redford, McQueen, and Eastwood et al putting up with that kind of treatment.

Tony Rome is almost as much of a bum as he is a detective, betting on anything possible, wasting his time on fruitless quests for sunken treasure, lazing around in his yacht until in one of his deep sea forays comes across the naked titular damsel. Reporting the murder sees Rome co-opted by cop Lt. Santini (Richard Conte) to ID the woman. Sent to the apartment shared by Sandra Lomax and Maria Bareto in search for a potential client, Rome encounters Waldo (Dan Blocker) who hires him to find Lomax.

*The British release paired an action picture with a sex comedy, the idea being to catch different types of audiences rather than putting two action films or two comedies together which would*
later become the prevailing exhibition wisdom. *Although the two films had in common a star in bikini*.
*Note that the double bill went on general release at the same time as the two pictures*
*were, separately, playing at London’s West End.*

That takes Rome to Jilly’s go-go club where his conversation with dancer Maria (Lainie Kazan) is rudely interrupted by owner Danny Yale (Frank Raiter). Next stop is a swimming pool and who should emerge in a wet bikini than millionairess Kit Forrest (Raquel Welch) whose party Sandra attended. But a) she’s an alcoholic with memory issues and b) objects to snoopers so calls in neighbor and former hood Al Mungar (Martin Gabel) who sends Rome packing. When Maria is bumped off, Waldo is the prime suspect.

So we are enveloped in an interesting plot that soon involves blackmail and robbery and a suspect list that extends to Mungar and son Paul (Steve Peck) who has the hots for Kit, Yale and muscular boyfriend Seymour, and of course Waldo (whose reason for finding Sandra is revenge) and Kit. Despite the seeming light touch, inheritance is a theme, and the tale is character-driven, relationships complex, locales somewhat off-beat, a crap game in a mortuary, a nude painter’s studio, strip clubs, massage parlors and go-go dancing establishments abound, but with none of the moralizing that came with the territory. A racetrack is almost prosaic by comparison.

For most of the picture Santini and Rome have an antagonistic relationship until we find out, in a lovely scene, that Rome was the cop’s ex-partner, that the grumpy cop has a loving home life and that Rome is greeted with delight as “Uncle Tony” by Santini’s son. Rome is also very well acquainted with film noir and knows that a woman who appears too good to be true is in fact too good to be true so he’s sensible enough to steer clear of seduction (the bane of any film noir character’s life) unless he’s just pretending in order to glean information.

*Raquel Welch is more sedate in this poster.*

It’s a classic detective story, one lead following another, naturally a few contretemps along the way, some deception, and the laid-back Rome proves not as relaxed as you might expect, possessing a handy right hook and a neat uppercut. Interesting subsidiary characters include Al’s neglected wife, a bumptious beach attendant and a whining nude model.

Director Gordon Douglas – who handled Sinatra in Robin and the Seven Hoods (1964), Tony Rome and The Detective (1968) – brings out the best in the actor, keeps the action zipping along despite multiple complications and prefers a quip to a momentous speech.

Sinatra is just so at ease he oozes screen charisma. His shamus is no slick unraveller of truth, but a steady digger, accumulating information. You might think any tentative relationship with Kit stretches the age angle a tad but bear in mind at this stage Sinatra was married to Mia Farrow, 30 years his junior. Raquel Welch (The Biggest Bundle of Them All, 1968) is surprisingly good as a vulnerable mixed-up wealthy alcoholic and, except in her opening scene, manages to steer clear of a bikini for most of the picture.

Richard Conte (Hotel, 1966) is as dependable as ever but Martin Gabel (Divorce American Style, 1967) steals the supporting show as an apoplectic racketeer trying to go straight. You might like to know Lainie Kazan (Dayton’s Devils, 1968) is still working, The Amityville Murders (2018) and Tango Shalom (2021) among her recent output. It’s a shame Dan Blocker did not live long enough (he died in 1972) to build on his idiosyncratic performance.

The lively screenplay was written by Marvin H. Albert (A Twist of Sand, 1968) and Jack Guss (Daniel Boone: Frontier Trail Rider, 1966) based on Albert’s novel. Mention, too, for the jaunty theme tune by Hugo Montenegro (The Undefeated, 1969). You’ll find yourself humming it for days on end, it pops up often enough.

Into the catchphrase hall of fame must go Blocker’s exhortation “Stay loose” just before he unleashes mayhem. And while we’re about it, what is it about the quality of actor or status of a star that permits hoodlum Al’s peeved “I tried to go clean and you dragged me down” to be ignored while a couple of decades later a similar line from The Godfather Part III (1990) uttered by Al Pacino is hailed as a classic. You know the one I mean: “Just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in.” Steven Spielberg is another who should have watched this picture for tips on how to deal with marauding sharks – Rome’s solution: kick them on the snout. By the way did Blocker fall out with imdb? Despite third billing, he’s not listed at all in the main credits and when you scroll down to the extended credits, he’s at the very bottom. Jeez!

Normal (2026) ** or (depending) – Seen at the Cinema

Say hello to the Algorithm Apocalypse. Or as we used to call it – a trainwreck of a movie. This would be a prime candidate for the Inaugural Thrash Memorial Award. Marketed as a “Sky Original” that’s somewhat misleading since it is closer to a Sky Cliché, although admittedly that doesn’t have quite the same ring.

A veritable off-piste cocktail of John Wick, True Romance, Assault on Precinct 13, and a crime version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, trade the Yakuza for the Mafia and all those films where the good cop has a nose for skulduggery.

Somewhat alleviated by a substantial side of quirkiness. We’ve got a moose on the loose, kindly bank robbers, a sheriff’s badge lifted from a corpse, an informal moustache appreciation society, problems telling pink from mauve, price gouging, and a diatribe against banks and billionaires ruining small business and small town main streets.

Cut to the violence, and there’s machine guns, pistols, shotguns and worse – flares and sticks of dynamite – and people are killed by nails, knitting needles and falling signs, and that’s before snowplows get in on the act.

Substitute sheriff Ulysses (Bob Odenkirk) takes on a temporary stint in Normal. Separated from his wife, he’s “dark inside” courtesy of shooting in cold blood a sex abuser. Not sure I quite fall in with his suspicions about the death of the man he replaced, who had the kind of extremely florid complexion you would associate with a heart attack.

Anyways, this is very much a humdrum small town with no crime to speak of and therefore a police force that verges on the acceptably incompetent until bank robbers Lori (Reena Jolley) and Keith (Brendan Fletcher), not realizing the bank doesn’t deal in much actual cash these days, demand to see the vault. Its opening alone is enough for the bank manager to kill himself, which is just as well because most likely he’d have been mown down in a hail of bullets delivered by…wait for it…the cops.

Yep, the town has a terrible secret. It’s the bagman for the Yakuza, gazillions in gold and cash stashed in the bank vault, and the whole town in on the deal, including the old lady who runs the knitting emporium and the middle-aged female barperson being set up for likely romance with the sheriff. But both are gun-toting evil wenches.

It would be one man against the mob except for Ulysses recruiting the bank robbers and the dead sheriff’s suicidal daughter Alex (Jess McLeod). So once we’re done with mystery it’s Anora all over again except with violence replacing sex. Once the Yakuza top brass fly in from Tokyo, it looks like Algorith Apocalypse is going to go nuclear except Ulysses has come up with a clever plan to settle the situation. Except it doesn’t.

I always wondered with the death of VHS and DVD and no television programs picking up the slack, how we’re ever going to find cult items. This will disappear in a year from Sky. Then where will it go? Nowhere. It’ll just vanish. You’ll never see it again. And even people who think this has cult written all over it will never be able to find enough showings of it in the future to stir the pot.

Some interesting pedigrees here – Bob Odenkirk (Nobody, 2021) proves a reliable stand-in for Liam Neeson or Jason Statham without the persona, Henry Winkler (Night Shift, 1982) shines in a supporting role and if you wondered what happened to Lena Headey after Game of Thrones (2011-2019) here’s your answer. John Wick creator Derek Kolstad doubles as writer and producer so I’m reckoning, excepting the rising gore count, there wasn’t much room left for director Ben Wheatley (Meg 2: The Trench, 2023) to put his own particular stamp on proceedings.

This comes over as a collision of two styles – a gentle quirky tale in the Fargo line that probably would have made a better mini-series and an action picture desperate for any narrative port in the storm where it could put in and without much elbow grease find a reason to embark on an orgy of violence.

Best described as the shoot-‘em-up’s shoot-‘em-up with an even higher corpse quotient than Thrash.

Somewhere between awful and highly entertaining.