movie review – Page 72 – The Magnificent 60s

The Skull (1965) *****

I have no idea why this masterpiece has not been acclaimed. For virtually half the picture, there is no dialogue, the entire focus on camerawork and reaction. Even Stanley Kubrick in The Shining (1980) gave in to grand guignol and The Exorcist (1973) was filled with over-the-top scenes but here the psychological impact of possession remains confined.

Initially, it appears we are in familiar Hammer territory, a grave-robber detaching a skull from a corpse only to meet an untimely end. There is another flashback to the gothic where the presence of the skull drives an order man to murder. But this is an Amicus production and set in contemporary times where Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing are once again in opposition, but this time only in an auction house bidding for demonic artefacts.

Exposition is straightforward. Dealer Marco (Patrick Wymark) sells Maitland (Peter Cushing) a book about De Sade bound in human skin. Marco may be a con man. He claims to possess the skull of the Marquis de Sade but his attitude towards it, kissing its head, plucking its nose socket, and the fact that he willing to halve his asking price, suggest otherwise. Sir Matthew (Christopher Lee), who once owned the skull, warns Cushing against it.

The rest of the film covers Maitland’s possession of the skull and the skull’s possession of him. There is a notable Kafkaesque sequence where Maitland is arrested, taken before a judge and forced three times to play Russian roulette before ending up in the house of the dealer where he steals the skull. What is less often commented upon is that this nigh-on 15-minute sequence including a 90-second taxi ride is conducted in virtual silence, the camera mostly on Maitland’s face, that silence only broken by the feeding of bullets not the barrel of the gun and the barrel being rolled round. It is not long before Maitland commits his first murder.

There is a famous scene in the Last Tycoon (1976) in which Robert De Niro explains to a truculent word-obsessed British writer why dialogue is redundant in the movies. All you need is camera and reaction. That sets up The Skull’s greatest scene, a 17-minute dialogue-free climax, where Maitland is effectively preyed upon and consumed.

The skull itself appears to have a point-of-view, various shots of Maitland through the skull’s eyes. The actual special effects are limited to what is imminently achievable, the skulls glows, it moves through the air. The impact of its presence is shown on Maitland’s face and by his action. It is just hypnotic.

Various directors have been anointed for the way they move their camera – Antonioni’s 360-degree turn in The Passenger (1975) comes to mind, large chunks of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), the long wait for sunrise in Lawrence of Arabia (1962), the lengthy shots of James Stewart driving a car in Vertigo (1958). But I have never seen anything as innovative as the silent sequences in The Skull which would be a waste of innovation were the sequences not so effective, especially on the small screen. Freddie Francis (Nightmare, 1964) directed from a story by Robert Bloch (Psycho, 1960). Equally innovative is the jarring music by avant-garde composer Elizabeth Lutyens.

In the role of his career, Peter Cushing (Dr Who and the Daleks, 1965) turns on the style, his character virtually turning 360-degrees as he becomes enmeshed in diabolic terror.

A must-see.

Cannon for Cordoba (1970) ***

Why settle for a measly Gatling Gun, as Mapache does in Sam Peckinpah’s gloriously violent The Wild Bunch (1969), when you can just as easily relieve government troops of serious artillery. It’s 1912 and the U.S. has sent General Pershing (John Russell) into Mexico with the titular weaponry in a bid to subdue Mexican rebels led by the titular Cordoba (Raf Vallone) raiding across the border and annoying powerful ranchers like Warner (John Larch).

Over-plotted to within an inch of its life and atmospherically indulgent – the natives are constantly whooping it up – and with star George Peppard trying out cigars for size for future enterprises like The A-Team (American television 1983-1987), this comes up short when compared to similar hard-nosed incursions into enemy territory like The Professionals (1966) and The Dirty Dozen (1967).

It’s a movie of many – too many – parts. First of all, we have rebellious U.S. soldier Capt Douglas (George Peppard), who gives superiors the finger, packed off with a small team to infiltrate the rebel army and find out what they’re up to. Not that that would require any infiltration. It’s pretty obvious with a prize plum like artillery suddenly arrived, the rebels are going to chance their arm and steal it.

Lo and behold that’s exactly what Douglas’s gang – which includes Jackson Harness (Don Gordon) quickly embittered because the good captain, in order to maintain his disguise, refuses to save one of his captured team being slowly roasted over a pit – does discover. But they don’t quite manage to get this information back to Pershing before those dashed clever Mexicans are blowing everything to hell and stealing the train containing the guns.

So now Douglas has to put together another team, the aforementioned Harkness augmented by Rice (Pete Duel) and Antonio (Gabriele Tinti), a Mexican who wants Cordoba brought to justice, and a few others, and infiltrate the Mexican stronghold. Along the way, they acquire the assistance of the beautiful Leonora (Giovanni Ralli) who is willing to use her body any which way (not going quite as far as Marianna Hill in El Condor out the same year) to gain revenge for Cordoba slaughtering her family and raping her. That last aspect seems a psychological stretch, but what the hell, how otherwise will the gang get close enough to the rebel leader.

Of course, just to sauce up the story, as if anything more is required, they are captured and need to bust out of jail and what with one thing and another it takes a goodly time before they can get close to achieving their objective. And that’s not to mention the betrayal that simmers in the background, Leonara having her own way of getting close to Cordoba, Warner not quite as right-minded as he appears, and the aforementioned Harkness waiting for the right moment to blow away his leader.

*Not too well received, the movie went out in the supporting role in a double bill*.

Plenty explosions, plenty action, and plenty living it up, scantily-glad women appearing at every turn, firecrackers going off, dancing in the streets, but somehow too much of this scrambles the focus while subsidiary characters take center stage too briefly too often, as with rebel women in the 100 Rifles (1969)-Raquel Welch mold. It gets there in the end of course but you just wish it would hurry up or expend more of its running time on developing the main personnel.

George Peppard (The Groundstar Conspiracy, 1972) is having a ball, but that’s only because every other character is so reined-in and there’s little else character-wise for him to hold onto. It wouldn’t have taken that much for him to command center stage, for competition in the acting stakes he’s only got Raf Vallone (The Cardinal, 1963), in worldly-wise form, and Don Gordon (Bullitt, 1968), stewing away. Giovanni Ralli (Deadfall, 1968) arrives too late in the proceedings to make much impact. Pete Duel (Alias Smith and Jones, 1971-1973) looks cute but has little to do.

Diligently put together by Paul Wendkos (Guns of The Magnificent Seven, 1969) but coming across as trying too hard, from a screenplay by Stephen Kandel (Chamber of Horrors, 1970).

Enjoyable if you enjoy shoot-em-ups, and even more if you’ve been charting the career of George Peppard who here makes the switch from all those uptight characters of the previous few years to letting a whole lot more hang out.

https://amzn.to/49SXTGg

Carry On Nurse (1960) ***

There was no greater divide between audiences and critics in Britain than the long-running comedy “Carry On” series (outside of an occasional satirical bulls-eye like Carry On Up the Khyber, 1968). And a similar gulf existed between the type of audiences the movies attracted in Britain and those in America. In Britain they were vastly popular general releases while in America their usual habitat was the arthouse as if they were seen as the natural successors to the Ealing comedies. And there was a third chasm – between the endearing risqué early comedies and the more lascivious later versions.

Carry On Nurse fell into the endearing camp. The humor was gentle rather than forced, the emphasis on misunderstanding and innuendo and smooth seducers like Leslie Phillips rather than exposed female flesh and the grasping likes of the ever-chortling Sid James. Perhaps you could define this earlier film as pre-nasal Kenneth Williams, his peculiar type of delivery not yet at full throttle. Here there is innocence rather than lust and the males quake in fear not just of the indomitable Hattie Jacques in brusque matron mode but of the other efficient nurses led by Shirley Eaton who have the measure of their rather hapless patients, although student nurse Joan Sims – making her series debut – is an accident-prone soul.

The action is mostly confined to a male ward. There are plenty of gags – alarms rung by mistake, boiling catheters burned to a turn, medication making a patient go wild, patients intoxicated by laughing gas and the famous replacement of a rectal thermometer by a daffodil. Wilfred Hyde-White as a constant complainer and obsessive radio listener Charles Hawtrey provide further ongoing amusement.

But the thrust of the story is romance. Journalist Terence Longdon fancies Shirley Eaton but his initial advances are spurned as she is in love with a doctor. In a role far removed from his later brazen characters, Williams plays a shy intellectual who finally comes round to the charms of Jill Ireland (later wife of Charles Bronson). Although Leslie Phillips is his usual suave self, he makes no designs on the female staff since he has a girlfriend elsewhere and his ailment – a bunion on the bum – makes him an unlikely candidate for a hospital liaison.

Hattie Jacques is in imperious form, Shirley Eaton shows what she is capable of, Kenneth Williams playing against type is a revelation.

British critics hated the “Carry On” films until late in the decade when Carry On Up the Khyber (1968) hit a satirical note. Critics felt the movies pandered to the lowest common denominator and were a poor substitute for the Ealing comedies which had given Britain an unexpected appreciation among American comedy fans.

It was a well-known fact the comedies did not always travel. Apart from Jacques Tati, the more vulgar French comedies featuring the likes of Fernandel were seen as arthouse fare. Unless they featured a sex angle or the promise of nudity, coarse Italians comedies struggled to find an international audience. The “Carry On” films were bawdy by inclination without being visually offensive

Carry On Sergeant (1958), the first in the series, had been a massive success in Britain. Distributor Anglo-Amalgamated was so convinced it would find a similar response in the U.S. that it was opened in New York at a first run arthouse. Although comedies were hardly standard arthouse fare, this was generally the route for low-budget British films. The picture lasted only three weeks and taking that as proof of its dismal prospects other exhibitors ignored it.

The follow-up Carry On Nurse (1959) took an entirely different route when launched in America in 1960. This time New York would be virtually the last leg of its exhibition tour. Instead it opened on March 10 at the 750-seat Crest in Los Angeles. Away from the New York spotlight, the little movie attracted not just good notices but decent audiences.

Instead of being whipped off screens after a few weeks, it developed legs. In Chicago it ran for 16 weeks in first run before transferring to a further 50 theaters. Within a few months of opening it had been released in 48 cities. In Minneapolis it was booked as a “filler” at the World arthouse, expected to run a week and no more. Instead, it remained for six weeks and when it shifted out to the nabes out-grossed Billy Wilder’s big-budget comedy The Apartment (1960) with a stellar cast of Jack Lemmon and Shirley Maclaine.

In its fourth month at the 600-seat Fox Esquire in Denver where it opened in May, it set a new long-run record for a non-roadshow picture. It had been taking in a steady $4,000 a week since opening.

SOURCES: “How To Nurse a Foreign Pic That’s Neither Art nor Nudie: Skip N.Y.,” Variety, Aug 24, 1960, 3; “British Carry On Nurse A Sleeper in Mpls With Long Lopp Run, Nabe Biz,” Variety, Aug 24, 1960, 18;

Note: by and large this blog follows American release dates so although Carry On Nurse was shown in Britain in 1959 it did not reach America until 1960.

https://amzn.to/3G1h1Ei

Flight from Ashiya (1964) ***

A post-WW2 operation to save a handful of Japanese adrift at sea in a storm is endangered when three members of the U.S. Air Force Air Rescue Service confront conflicts from their past. Despite tense rescue action, this is basically a three-hander about guilt and how men deal – or fail to deal – with emotions. Extended flashbacks illuminate the tangled relationships between Sgt Takashima (Yul Brynner), Lt Col Stevenson (Richard Widmark) and Second Lieut Gregg (George Chakiris). Unusually, for the period, tough guys actually emote.

So really it’s like one of those portmanteau films that are occasionally popular – like Trio (1950) made up of Somerset Maugham short stories or similar to something like the Oscar-winning Crash (2004) where characters interconnect after an accident. While each of the episodes stands up in its own right, the thrust of the narrative revolves around actions taken in the past having a direct bearing on the present situation.

Gregg is haunted by causing an avalanche after flying his helicopter too close to a mountain and, as a result, by having to leave behind many of the victims, due to restricted capacity on board, and now he is terrified of flying solo. As a consequence Stevenson has no faith in abilities as a pilot.

Stevenson also has an abiding hatred of Japanese – colleague Takashima of Japanese ancestry also bears his wrath – because his ill wife Caroline (Shirley Knight) and child died in a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp because medical supplies were reserved only for the Japanese. Faced with rescuing Japanese, he is enraged.

For his part, Takashima, a paratrooper during the war, inadvertently caused the death of his Algerian girlfriend Leila (Daniele Gaubert). It’s not so much an examination of tough guys under pressure as about their inability to deal with the consequences of action. There’s certainly a sense that the only way men like these have of dealing with trauma is to throw themselves into dangerous action.

Yul Brynner (The Double Man, 1967) gives a more thoughtful performance than you might expect while Richard Widmark (The Secret Ways, 1961), himself dabbling in production elsewhere, was good value. Goerge Chakiris (The Young Girls of Rochefort, 1967) was a weaker link. The presence of Suzy Parker (Circle of Deception, 1960) and especially Daniele Gaubert (The Golden Claws of the Cat Girl, 1968) strengthen the film.

Unusually, at a time when product was in short supply and for a film boasting a strong cast, the picture was shelved for two years after completion. Presumably explained by the demise of Harold Hecht’s production company after he split with Burt Lancaster. Michael Anderson (The Shoes of the Fisherman, 1968) directed from a screenplay by Waldo Salt (Midnight Cowboy, 1969) based on the novel by Elliot Arnold (Kings of the Sun, 1963).

The title’s a bit of a misnomer, suggesting someone is trying to escape from Ashiya when, in fact, that is just the name of the air base where the rescue team are located.

Critics complained it was neither one thing nor the other, but in fact I found it a perfectly satisfactory combination of action and drama, especially as it dealt with rarely-recognized male emotions.

https://amzn.to/47p3xP6

Napoleon (1927) *****

That Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927) dominated the foreign film scene in the silent era was only because Abel Gance’s majestic Napoleon the same year was butchered on release and rarely seen outside its native France. Audiences who might fancy waiting for streaming to view Ridley Scott’s new epic on the grander four-hour scale might prefer to test their stamina against this early masterpiece that broke incredible new cinematic ground.

You could easily get the impression from the vast amount of innovation on display here that one man – and a Frenchman at that – had single-handedly decided to revolutionize the entire medium. Of course, France had been instrumental in the birth of cinema. Alice Guy was key to the development of narrative cinema although the world being male-dominated that singular achievement was erroneously handed over to George Melies.

Here’s the list of Abel Gance’s innovations: split screen (in fact, triple images), underwater shots, tinting, fast cutting, hand-held shots, extensive close-ups, point-of-view shots, superimposition, use of multiple cameras, mosaic shots and multiple exposure. Perhaps even more astonishing was that at the time the bulk of movie cameras were static. Even if the result had been, dramatically speaking, as dull as ditch water, it would have been of historical cinematic importance, possibly on a par with This Is Cinerama (1952) or House of Wax (1953), the first 3D.

And it if had been as visually striking and cinematically interesting as The Robe (1953), Twentieth Century Fox’s first demonstration of Cinemascope, it would have more than passed muster as a cinematic footnote.

Instead, it is just stunning. You couldn’t ask for a bolder storyline, the biopic of one of the most fascinating characters who ever lived, Napoleon Bonaparte, who resurrected France after the Revolution of 1789, conquered most of Europe, and rose from defeat and captivity to rally his troops for one final battle at Waterloo in 1815. Wisely, Abel Gance doesn’t attempt to cover all that territory, only going as far as the invasion of Italy, which marked the Little General’s rise as a battle master.

*Unlike other directors such as Orson Welles who scarcely made another movie after one of his first efforts was butchered on release, Gance kept plugging away despite the debacle of Napoleon.*
*“Venus of Paris” was shown in 1941.*

Which version you see – the most common one comes in at around the four-hour mark but if you have the stamina there’s enough in the longer version to keep you engrossed for another couple of hours – will inform your assessment of the authenticity of the narrative and attest to the compelling nature of the tale.

Beginning with a young Napoleon revealing his military skills just to engage in a snowball fight, it moves with narrative focus and cinematic flair through his difficult time at school to the invasion of Italy. Some of the imagery is haunting, a freed pet eagle returning out of choice to his side, the French flag used as a sail, lightning illuminates hand-to-hand combat (that battle taking place in the kind of driving rain Kurosawa would employ in Seven Samurai, 1954), scenes change color, and the final unfurling of the triptych (three connected screens a la Cinerama) is one of the most visual climaxes in cinema.

But even the shortest version contains the bulk of the innovation, perhaps proving that dialog was the most redundant of all the cinematic developments. The trailer, which you can catch on YouTube (see link below), is almost jukebox cinema, a compilation of many of the greatest scenes. Unless you are familiar with silent cinema style, you might recoil at some of the acting, but, once you get into the swing of it, that seems to jar less.

Much as I am a huge fan of Ridley Scott (the extended version of Kingdom of Heaven, 2005, a long-time fave), I doubt if his version (even the longer one promised for the Netflix screening) will come anywhere close to the almost cinematic perfection of Abel Gance.

Don’t take Stanley Kubrick and martin Scorsese’s word for it, this is a must watch.

https://amzn.to/47HcFyd

Gunn (1967) **

Director Blake Edwards was so confident that he could repeat on the big screen the small screen success of Peter Gunn (1958-1961) that the movie was promoted as the first in a series. He couldn’t have been more wrong.

Although the private eye genre had been given a fillip by Paul Newman’s shamus Harper (1966) the bulk of screen investigation has been subsumed wholesale by spies. And the amount of time that had passed between the demise of the original television series and the movie revival – only six years – was hardly enough for nostalgia to kick in. Nor did star Craig Stevens have any box office appeal – this was his first picture in nearly a decade.

A James-Bond-rip off credit sequence with girls dancing to a psychedelic background sets up a more contemporary picture than the one unveiled which is as old-fashioned as they come and, except for an increased budget, betrays its television origins. A few characters, Gunn’s girlfriend Edie (Helen Traubel), a nightclub singer, Mother (Laura Devon), the owner of the eponymous nightclub, and Lt Jacoby (Edward Asner) are reprised from the series although played by different actors.

The dialogue is sometimes slick (“Call me Samantha” – “Samantha” – “You called”) and sometimes corny as when prior to an explosion that knocks the hero sideways is the line “may God strike me down.”

Gunn is hired by a nightclub owner Mother to find out who killed a gangster who had once saved the detective’s life. Fingers point at another gangster, Nick (Alberto Paulsen), somewhat protected from the law by his corruption, but it soon becomes clear that the obvious may not be correct. Naturally, Gunn gets in the way of Lt Jacoby, while women fall at his feet.

*Somewhat unusually, in this foreign poster the women are covered up*.

Making the biggest impression is Sherry Jackson (The Mini-Skirt Mob, 1968) as the aforementioned Samantha who turns up unannounced in Gunn’s flat. You can catch Edward Asner (The Satan Bug, 1965) in an early role. Plus there’s the Henry Mancini (Breakfast at Tiffany’s, 1961) score, already a big hit. The only element that makes it contemporary is some gender-confusion but otherwise it’s a fairly flat story and relies far too much on its television origins.

Rather than go to the trouble of reinventing the character for more contemporary times, Blake Edwards (The Grip of Fear / Experiment in Terror, 1967), wearing two hats, simply rewrites the small screen’s first episode, adding some violence to attract a cinematic audience.

It might have been better had William Friedkin not turned it down, but given how poorly that director served The Night They Raided Minsky’s / The Night They Invented Striptease (1968) it could well have had the same outcome.

Strictly for fans of nostalgia.

You can catch the original TV series on DVD or check out the movie version for free on YouTube.

https://amzn.to/3G5OlKo

The Fast Lady (1962) ***

Even the biggest stars have to start somewhere. Julie Christie in embryo, however endearing, is a long way from the finished article in Doctor Zhivago (1965). And, to be honest, this is more of a reminder of the scale of the journey undertaken for here she’s really no more than an adornment. Though, possibly, as rich man’s daughter Claire, she’s acting her socks off given her main role is to fall in love with gormless civil servant Murdoch (Stanley Baxter) after imagining him dressed in a kilt spouting Burns.

And at this point in cinematic development, cars were viewed more as sources of comedy than thrills, anyone suggesting that vehicles could be pushed to their limits in the breakneck manner of Bullitt (1968) and The French Connection (1970) would have their heads examined.

*This poster and the one below bear all the hallmarks of a quick reissue*
*to take advantage of Christie’s post-Zhivago fame.*

Cashing in on audience love of the antique auto as demonstrated in Genevieve (1953), and with a surprisingly contemporary nod to the ongoing battle between cyclists and drivers, this mainlines mostly on a long-lost innocent charm even as car salesman Freddie (Leslie “Ding Dong” Phillips) injects as much innuendo (though not on the Carry On level) as possible.

After coming off worst in a collision with aforesaid rich fellow Charles (James Robertson Justice), cyclist Murdoch decides to buy an old Bentley Red Label 3-liter (the titular “Fast Lady”) sports car as a means of wooing speed-mad Claire. As you might expect, the path to true love is littered with obstacles, not least the overbearing father’s objections and the small matter of Murdoch not being able to drive. Cue jokes about driving lessons and tests and a mistaken arrest for drunk driving. There’s endless opportunity for protagonists to end up in the mud or the water.

*Legally, in the credits, her name had to be smaller than the top-billed stars. But there was nothing to prevent distributors from making her face the focus of attention.*

Feels miscast somehow, the top-billed Leslie Phillips (Maroc 7, 1967) has misplaced his normal charm, coming across as little more than an upper-class spiv. And you can’t help feeling Norman Wisdom would have been better suited as Murdoch rather than snarky Scottish comedian Stanley Baxter (Father Came Too, 1964) while James Robertson Justice (Mayerling, 1968) never leaves his comfort zone.

On the plus side are too many treats to mention. Apart from Christie and a glimpse of Stanley Baxter before he dominated the British light entertainment television scene, in bits parts are such comedy legends as Dick Emery, Frankie Howerd and Clive Dunn (and singer Kenneth McKellar on television) plus a smattering of racing idols like Graham Hill and John Surtees and a cameo from BBC motoring correspondent Raymond Baxter.

Ken Annakin (Battle of the Bulge, 1965) isn’t much stretched though keeping the script by Jack Davies (Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines, 1965) and Henry Blyth (A Stitch in Time, 1963), based on the book by Keble Howard, on the straight-and-narrow may well have been his most difficult task.

May be heresy but for some viewers Julie Christie will take second place to the array of vehicles.

https://amzn.to/3uk6rpu

The Truth about Spring (1965) ***

Although a truly innocent movie about young love, wrapped up in a sunken treasure scenario, the marketeers then and now could not resist trying to inject elements of sexuality, the poster for the original movie highlighting what would be Hayley Mills’ second screen kiss (following a smacker from Peter McEnery in The Moon-Spinners the year before), the poster for the DVD sticking the star in a bikini that she does not wear in the film.

The film was based on the 1921 novel Satan: A Romance of the Bahamas (filmed as Satan’s Sister in 1925 with Betty Balfour) by Henry de Vere Stacpoole, who had previously dallied with young love in The Blue Lagoon. Despite the title, there was a complete absence of the demonic. In the book, she is sailing with her brother. That character was eliminated in favour of a father.

The 1960s teen movie that could as easily morph into angst (Splendor in the Grass, 1961), blackmail (Kitten with a Whip, 1964) or madness (Lilith, 1964) was generally more at home with innocence. The beach party movies and series like Gidget rarely involved more than a stolen kiss, the characters all clearly virgins, and certainly did not go down the brazen sexuality route that would mark the second half of the decade.

Hayley Mills is on charming form as tomboy Spring Tyler (hence the title) sailing the Caribbean as mate to her conman father Tommy (played by her real-life father John Mills). Their idyllic life is heading for the rocks since the father didn’t “figure on the little girl growing up.” With one eye on providing a suitor for his daughter, the skipper takes on board a Harvard Law School graduate William (James MacArthur) ostensibly to give him experience of fishing.

True love takes its time since the girl has no intention of growing up and prefers a life of independence. Initially, they are sparring partners – she mocks the fact that he wears pyjamas. But once the story kicks off, they find they have more in common.

The sunken treasure element, while slim, is enlivened by some over-the-top acting by Jose (Lionel Jeffries) and Judd (Harry Andrews). The three leads are actually quite good, John Mills (Tunes of Glory, 1960) totally convincing as a effectively a spiv on the high seas with Hayley Mills (The Family Way, 1966) as the independent woman (“I’m me so don’t expect anything else”) and the confident sailor becoming entangled in unexpected emotions.

Surprisingly, James MacArthur, also a graduate from the Disney acting school, though a decade older than Hayley Mills, shows unexpected subtlety, and this would be a springboard to more demanding roles in cold war thriller The Bedford Incident (1965) and WW2 epic Battle of the Bulge (1965). Cocky and rich, he is quickly brought down earth when she proves a faster swimmer and plays tricks on him. But he soon proves his worth.

Director Richard Thorpe’s career was winding down after four decades in the business and this was a far cry from MGM spectaculars Ivanhoe (1952) and Knights of the Round Table (1953) and even Jailhouse Rock (1957) but he keeps a tight rein on the narrative, makes good use of the scenery (Spain doubling for the Caribbean) and walks the delicate line of allowing the adolescents to explore their feelings with tipping over into anything more overt.

He was a better director than the material deserved, but then so was writer James Lee Barrett who the same year would receive screen credit for The Greatest Story Ever Told and western Shenandoah. However, their involvement made it an accomplished little picture and gave audiences a taste of what Hayley Mills could do in a film that did not tether her to child star mode.

The New York Times second-string reviewer Howard Thompson, in tagging the star “this delectable miss, now all of 18” opined (review, June 17, 1965) that the “two young people are the most winning advertisement for young love in a long time.”

https://amzn.to/3SKJ4Q2

A Question of Suspense (1961) ***

Only a streamer could have a film designated as released in 2023 when it was made 60 years earlier. I wonder if that’s one of those deliberate streaming errors where an old movie is classified as a new one just because it’s appearing on a streamer for the first time. You might think someone might have wondered how a director who died in 1996 ctually managed to make a movie in 2023.

The British had another word for the B-film. They called it a “quota quickie.” By law, 20 per cent of the films shown in cinemas in Britain had to be home-grown. Bear in mind that except in London’s West End, movies shown in first run only lasted a week, and small neighborhood houses, requiring to screen double bills, might get through five or six pictures a week. There was no way the British industry could produce that number of quality films.

So movies made on tiny budgets came in to fill the gap – and fulfil the quota. This is one of the better ones. It didn’t last long – barely an hour – and in Britain went out on the Odeon circuit as the supporting feature for John Ford’s Two Rode Together (1961).

*Above and below: the absence of any poster featuring the movie I’m reviewing has forced me to compensate with two others top-billing the star.*

Smarmy rich company owner Jim (Peter Reynolds) expects employee and childhood buddy Frank (Norman Rodway) to go along with a fraud involving £30,000 – equivalent to over £500,000 today. When Frank refuses Jim kills him, burying him close to a childhood haunt. As far as the cops are concerned, Frank has just disappeared, in their eyes hardly surprising when the fraud comes to light.

Turns out, to Jim’s surprise, Frank has a wife, Rose (Noelle Middleton), and partly to keep tabs on her and stop her investigating further, and partly because he was sweet on her when he was a teenager, and partly, I guess, because he’s the type of man who thinks all women should fall at his feet, he starts to romance her. He’s a bit of a swine in the romantic department because it’s quite obvious that he’s being having an affair with his secretary Jean (Yvonne Buckingham).

Rose is suspicious of his ardor and when other clues come to light suspects Frank was actually murdered and she determines to act as bait to catch him.

When I say this film had a tiny budget, it might have well have been shot in a week or ten days. So it’s instructive how French director Max Varnel makes clever use of what must have been very limited location and studio space. Jim drives a Jaguar and lives in a posh house. Everything about him is spacious. His office is very long, the rooms in his house very big, so that instead of the claustrophobia of film noir, you get the opposite. And why would you waste any time on atmospheric lighting when you can create that with quick snips of music. And it’s not one of those Hollywood pictures where villains knock back whisky in quick shots. Jim likes his booze, but mostly he sips it, and from the balloon glasses he uses it looks like brandy.

The cops aren’t from the American tough-guy template either and if a guy disappears having stolen a huge amount of money they are liable to settle for the obvious – that he’s done a runner – rather than assume foul play.

The beauty of this kind of picture is that most of the time you expect the villain to get away with it. He’s so smart, one step ahead, and everyone else is so dumb, and a relatively plain girl like Rose should be delighted he’s paying her any attention at all and showering her with gifts – he rents her a flat and a car, takes her out to expensive restaurants.

Peter Reynolds (Spare the Rod, 1961) is impressive as the cocky villain but in terms of screen charisma Yvonne Buckingham (The Christine Keeler Story, 1963) takes precedence over Noelle Middleton (Bafta nominated for Court Martial, 1954) and the picture suffers when she disappears about one-third of the way in. Max Vernal (Part-Time Wife, 1961) does a good job with limited resources. Roy Vickers (Rebound, 1959) and Lawrence Huntingdon (The Vulture, 1966) dreamed it up.

But, as I said, it’s pretty short (just 63 minutes) so no need to worry about sub-plots or be drowned in self-justification, self-pity or backstory. A bit more fleshing out and some more money spent and it would be pretty good. As it is, it’s way better than two-star but possibly only nudging into the three-star category.

Flareup (1969) ***

I thought I’d be taking one for the team in tracking down this much-maligned Raquel Welch number. Instead, I was pleasantly surprised. Oh, the movie’s nothing to write home about, desultory home invasion thriller that fails to come close to Kitten with a Whip (1964), Wait until Dark (1967) or The Penthouse (1967). But La Welch is something of a revelation.

Forget the Las Vegas go-go dancer come-on, this is more of a gentle romance. While attractive, Welch dispenses with the bra-busting outfits and overt sexiness, settling for a girl-next-door persona. In fact, you could have dumped the entire murder plot and had a more interesting picture, along the lines of Fade In (1969) where the normal hot-to-trot Burt Reynolds plays a gentler character.

*Artistic license taken to an extreme. Raquel Welch is a brunette not a redhead.*

Since, (spoiler alert) in her sole dance number Welch keeps her attributes well-hidden, the producers felt obliged to stick in some topless dancers (quite how Welch is permitted to keep her clothes on in a topless go-go bar is never explained) which gives the picture a sleazy feel that runs counter to the tone of the romance.

So, Michele (Raquel Welch) is on the run from nutjob killer Alan (Luke Askew) who has bumped off his ex- Nikki (Sandra Giles) and her friend Iris (Pat Delaney). But why Michele is in the killer’s sights is never satisfactorily explained, except that she purportedly turned Nikki against him. Michele swaps Las Vegas for Los Angeles, finding work in another go-go bar and romance with Joe (James Stacy) whose interest in bull-fighting might have scared her off. But that’s tempered by his enthusiasm for flying model airplanes (an important plot point it transpires).

Cops are on the killer’s trail but not before he bumps off a guy who gave him a lift. Michele’s not hard to find, a drug addict employee of the Las Vegas operation points him in the right direction. There’s some desultory car chase footage and for no reason at all a chase on foot through an old zoo (presumably a genuine old zoo).

I had half-expected there might have been a lion or snake left behind to ramp up the thrill-quotient, but no such luck. What we do get, however, is a rarity in the chase department – exhaustion. Most people being chased on foot manage to drum up an insane amount of energy. Michele, on the other hand, is on the point of collapse.

But she’s not dumb. She might be rootless, not the questing soul of Easy Rider, but driven away by parental issues and, in gaining independence not keen on surrendering it to any passing male. And come the climax, she’s got a nasty weapon up her sleeve.

Essentially, she’s a sweet gal. Not the kind of character you’d expect La Welch to be playing, and perhaps that’s what attracted her to the script. It gives the actress the opportunity to escape from her sexy persona, and, while the tale is hardly weighty, the chance to prove she can do more than hide behind her particulars. Innocence isn’t something you’d associate with Raquel Welch, but here she exudes more of that than earthiness or sex appeal.

James Stacy (star of Welch’s debut picture A Swingin’ Summer, 1965) is a likeable boyfriend, not the kind trying to hustle her into bed. Luke Askew (The Devil’s Brigade, 1968) doesn’t do much except play mean.

James Neilson (The Moon-Spinners, 1964), while not able to jazz up a rancid plot, allows, as he did with Hayley Mills (an odd comparison indeed), Welch the chance to grow up on screen, defusing her sexuality but allowing her space to create a character so far removed from anything previously seen. But the tempo sags with over-reliance on dancing sequences, the Las Vegas backdrop and too much chasing that goes nowhere. Mark Rodgers (Let’s Kill Uncle, 1966) dreamt this up.

One perhaps for completionists. Lack of sexy scenes might be off-putting but, equally, you might want to see what Welch can do when playing against type.

https://amzn.to/3s0UpRi