Von Ryan's Express

Introduced as a kid to 1963's The Great Escape, I fell hook, line and sinker for the entire prisoner of war genre. Some like 'Escape' and Bridge on the River Kwai are instantly recognizable among movie fans while many others have taken some digging on my part to track them down. How about one of the best? One of my all-time favorites? Oh, yes, one I always enjoy revisiting, 1965's Von Ryan's Express.

As the Germans try to hold off advancing Allied forces in Italy in August 1943, an American Army Air Corp pilot, Colonel Joseph Ryan (Frank Sinatra) is shot down and sent to a prisoner of war camp where he becomes the ranking officer. There he clashes quickly with his second-in-command, a fiery, stubborn British officer, Major Eric Fincham (Trevor Howard). When the camp's Italian guards abandon the camp, Ryan makes a difficult decision, one that ends up backfiring as almost 400 prisoners are rounded up and boarded on a German train heading north. Heading the wrong way away from the advancing Allied forces, it seems hope has run out for Ryan, Fincham and their fellow prisoners. When all seems lost though, Colonel Ryan has one more trick up his sleeve, a daring plan that has the prisoners attempting to take over the train. The closely packed train is headed to Germany, but not if Ryan has his say. Instead? They look to Switzerland, but can their plan hold together?

If there is one major difference between 'Von Ryan's' and other prisoner of war movies, it is this. While all entertaining, movies like The Great Escape, River Kwai, Stalag 17 and others are high drama, often delivering a message. That's not to say Von Ryan's Express isn't high drama, director Mark Robson doing a fine job in this WWII actioner. It's more than that. It's more than just describing it as a prisoner of war movie. I've long thought this is one of the most perfect popcorn flicks ever made, the most entertaining, the most adrenaline-pumping action/dramas I can think of. It clocks in at 116 minutes but with each viewing, it goes by quicker and quicker. There isn't a weak moment. There are no slow portions, no parts where the momentum lets up. It's the rare movie that can accomplish that. From beginning to surprising finale, I love it all, one of my all-time favorites, one film I can watch over and over again.

What's the best thing going here for this 1965 war movie? There's a ton to mention! Just a few weeks ago in my review for 100 Rifles I mentioned how much I loved composer Jerry Goldsmith's score. Well, as good as that score was, I think his score here is one of his bests (and that's saying something considering the breadth of his career). Listen to the main theme HERE. This is the perfect score to back up the action, the heart-pumping moments, the quieter, more inward scenes and everything in between. An underrated score that deserves more of a reputation. Right up there with the musical score as an additional character is the choice to film on location in Italy. The filming locations give an air of authenticity that Hollywood backlots just wouldn't have accomplished. From the hills and streams to the ancient ruins to the weathered towns and train stations, wouldn't you know it? The film actually looks like it takes place in Italy. Go figure, right?!?  These are things that if mishandled wouldn't be a deal-breaker, but when handled correctly.....well, they can lift the movie up a notch or two or 10.     

You know who's cool? Totally caught me off guard, but it's that guy -- maybe you've heard of him -- named Frank Sinatra. By the mid 1960s, Sinatra played variations on tough guy parts that allowed him to more or less, be himself. In other movies, it might seem too familiar, but there's an energy here as Sinatra brings this intriguing character to life. Dubbed 'Von Ryan' by his fellow prisoners for helping the Germans, he's forced to make difficult decisions left and right, often putting lives at risk with each passing decision. There's an easy-going confidence to Sinatra's Ryan, a 90-day wonder as he calls it, a capable leader making some impossible decisions. The best supporting part not surprisingly comes from Trevor Howard as the stubborn, action-driven Fincham. Their Odd Couple-like relationship works, the quiet, cool American and the fiery Brit officer providing some good energy, some good sparks throughout. Their chemistry is evident any time and every time they're on screen together. Two excellent leads.

Lost in the shuffle can be a damn good supporting cast beyond Sinatra and Howard. In the eye candy department, Raffaella Carra plays Gabriella, a beautiful Italian girl who becomes a part of the escape. As for the villains, there's Adolfo Celi as a Fascist Italian officer and commandant of the camp and the very German Wolfgang Preiss as a very German officer in command of the prison train. My favorite supporting parts are Ryan's fellow prisoners, a cool group, an almost oddball crew that includes Bostick (Brad Dexter), one of the few American prisoners, Capt. Oriana (Sergio Fantoni), a well-meaning Italian officer thrust in with the P.O.W.s, Orde (John Leyton, also in Great Escape), Fincham's right-hand man, Father Costanzo (Edward Mulhare), the naive at times but very brave priest, and Stein (Michael Goodliffe), the camp medic. Also look for James Brolin, Michael St. Clair, Richard Bakalyan and James Sikking as other prisoners with smaller parts.  

Based off a novel by David Westheimer, 'Von Ryan' certainly has plenty to offer, including a handful of memorable set pieces. The opening 40 minutes are spent in the camp, the next 15 or so on the road and the last hour is when the prisoners are boarded on the prison train. I loved Ryan's scene with an inquisitive Gestapo agent (supposedly William Berger, I'm not positive) asking about Ryan's American watch. I loved Mulhare's masquerade as a German officer hoping to dupe an inspection. There are all these great moments that embrace this ludicrous possibility of this happening and run with it. We go along because it's so damn fun. This is a thrill a minute flick that's meant to entertain scene in and scene out. Nowhere is that more evident than....

The finale. As strong as the movie is, 'Von Ryan' is at its absolute best over the last 25 minutes, the prison train making a desperate run to the Alps and Switzerland, a German troop train (commanded by John Van Dreelen) hot on their trail. Throw in a trio of Messerschmitt fighters, a bombed out bridge (Spain standing in for Italy), and a stunning backdrop on a mountainside railway trestle....well, you've got a winner. It is in the ending that the film deviates most from Westheimer's novel, but it is a doozy of a finale. In terms of pure excitement, of really getting your blood pumping, I can think of few movies that can the ending here. A race against time, Germans edging ever closer, it has it all. Just a great movie, one I can rewatch over and over and always pick up something new.

Highly recommended. One of my all-time favorites.

Von Ryan's Express (1965): ****/****
Rewrite of October 2009 review

The Offence

From beat cops to detectives, the police see things on a daily basis that must question any faith in humanity they have left. Murder, rape, beatings, they see it all. I'm assuming it would wear on most people, right? You can only see so much of the nastiness before it just takes you down. From director Sidney Lumet, that's 1972's The Offence.

Police are on constant alert in pursuit of a child rapist who has managed to evade their arrest efforts. Among the pursuing officers is Detective Sergeant Johnson (Sean Connery), a 20-year veteran of the police force. As the police continue the search, another crime is called in, the young girl still missing. Combing the area she was last seen, Johnson stumbles upon her in the woods. As the search continues for the rapist, a suspect, a man named Baxter (Ian Bannen) is brought in. Even under intense interrogation, Baxter gives up nothing even though circumstantial evidence seems to point to him being the guilty party. Watching the interrogation produce nothing but frustration, Johnson decides to have a go for himself, but the veteran cop has had enough. He throws policy out the window and goes to work on the suspect.

From director Lumet comes this crime/police drama that is uncomfortable and unsettling to watch from the very start. Everything about it is dark and dreary, but that in itself isn't a bad thing. A movie about the police efforts to arrest a child rapist is obviously going to be insanely, appropriately dark. It isn't quite the movie I thought it would be either, not by a long shot. We even see a huge plot twist in the opening, slow motion heavy intro without actually knowing what it is or what's going on. As it develops though, it becomes too dark for its own good. It becomes so downbeat and uncomfortable that it ceases to be a movie I enjoyed watching. I wasn't expecting a happy-go-lucky police investigation story, but this was so dark it pushed me away in the end.

A year removed from his last official James Bond entry (he'd return with the unofficial Never Say Never Again), Connery picks the perfect part to avoid being typecast as he entered a new phase in his career. This is the perfect anti-007. Too often, people think Connery couldn't act and was solely able to play everyone's favorite secret agent. This part will certainly turn some opinions, or it should. Playing Sgt. Johnson, this is one impressive part that is authentic, intimidating and frightening in its realness. This is a man who's come unhinged from reality. Year after year of horrific crime after horrific crime has worn him down to the point where he can't handle the brutality of the world he's become so (unfortunately) familiar with. A scene with his beleaguered wife (Vivien Merchant) is beyond uncomfortable to watch as he takes his aggressions out on her via one horrific putdown after another. It's one of Connery's greatest performances, unfortunately one that's not remembered as one.

Stylistically, Lumet leaves his personal touch all over this film, for good and bad. At 110 minutes, 'Offence' is both innovative in its style and sluggish. Lumet has some scenes that go on for far too long. A conversation is wrapped up, a character leaves a room, and the camera lingers with no movement. This happens repeatedly and serves no real purpose. The storytelling technique is impressive, showing us what happened, and then retreating back to the background of what's just happened. Ah, but that's not enough. We see what happened -- we think -- and things move on, but there's more to it. In another flashback, we see it again as Connery's Johnson interrogates Bannen's Baxter. It all comes together nicely. A solid montage of Johnson remembering all the horrors he's seen on the job (watch it HERE) sets the stage for his complete deterioration as a police officer, his confrontation with his wife bringing it all to the surface as she asks if she can help him work through his internal struggles.

Among all these pretty solid techniques and acting is a mess of a movie though. Once things get going as we see Johnson's struggles become a reality, it doesn't quite know how to get to the finale. A really cheesy, over the top scene with police superintendent Trevor Howard feels out of place and forced as Connery and Howard scream at each other in trying to find the truth. No doubt about it, this is a smart movie that presents a change of pace story from the usual police drama. It doesn't always deliver though, and in the process, presents a lot of questions and what-ifs that are never dealt with. Much of the movie works, but the parts that don't really flop. Gotta go right down the middle here.

 The Offence (1972): ** 1/2 /****

Around the World in 80 Days (1956)

There are epics, and then there are EPICS. In the age of such immense, gigantically-scaled films of the 1950s and 1960s, studios pulled out all the stops in hopes of impressing moviegoers. Huge all-star casts with thousands of extras, lavish sets and costumes, and in general, a sight to behold on the big screen. Some movies were just made for a viewing that only a full-size movie theater can offer, like 1956's Around the World in 80 Days.

It is the 1870s and new technological advances have made travel to far-off places not only possible but quicker, more efficient, and more entertaining. A prim and proper Englishman, Phileas Fogg (David Niven), even boasts to his fellow members of the Reform Club that he can travel completely travel around the world in just 80 days. The club members laugh at the thought, but Fogg maintains his stance and a bet is born. With a significant amount of money on the line, Fogg and his assistant/valet, Passepartout (Mexican actor Cantinflas), embark on a journey around the world against the clock with no idea of what will be actually thrown their way during their adventurous travels.

If you were trying to define what an old-school Hollywood epic is to someone who didn't know, this would be a great start. Filming in locations around the world from Japan, the U.S., Thailand, Spain, England, France, Pakistan and China, '80 Days' is a true visual stunner. The screen is filled with incredible locations packed to the gills with the cast and then hundreds and thousands of extras behind them. Director Michael Anderson filmed with a Todd-AO technique, an ultra-widescreen filming process that makes certain shots look like epically wide panoramic shots. I was impressed watching the film on my 32-inch TV. I can only imagine what this film would look like on a movie screen. As well, composer Victor Young's score (which won an Oscar) is light-hearted and fun, keeping the travels moving.

It is hard to criticize this movie on its technical levels. It is far easier to criticize the movie for basically everything else. Oh, didn't see that twist coming, did you? All that epic quality comes at the expense of character, story and any sort of development involving either of those. This is a movie you appreciate, just sit back and enjoy it. The widescreen filming process is a sight to behold, but they become tedious by the 11th or 12th such long shot of a mountain vista, train running down a track, Cantinflas fighting a bull. Yes, I get it. On visuals alone, this is a stunningly beautiful movie. But at almost three-hours long, it feels like nothing more than an extended world travel guide. There never is even the slightest sense of urgency to the 80 day deadline until the final 10 minutes. Instead we get the visual, Niven's Fogg paying someone to right a wrong, then another nature shot.

I'll go into more depth about the supporting cast of thousands in a bit, but let's start with the lead performances. David Niven is one of my favorite actors, but I came away disappointed here. His Fogg is the definition of a prim and proper Englishman. He's even asked 'Why must you be so British?' at one point. At no point though does he actually look interested in bringing the part to life. To me, Niven look bored, and that's tough to say as a fan. Famed Mexican actor Cantinflas sure takes some grief for his part as Passepartout, but I thought he did a fine job with his limited grasp of English. His bit with Red Skelton is a highlight, the duo shoveling food into the others mouth in a very funny routine. Other bigger parts include Shirley MacLaine oddly cast as an Indian princess traveling with Fogg and Passepartout, and Robert Newton as Mr. Fix, a bank investigator trailing Fogg who's convinced the Englishman is an infamous bank robber.

Then there's the cameos, a long list that must put even The Greatest Story Ever Told to shame. Take a deep breath, and here goes. Look out for Finlay Currie, Robert Morley, Noel Coward, Trevor Howard, John Gielgud, Charles Boyer, Gilbert Roland, Cesar Romero, Cedric Hardwicke, Peter Lorre, George Raft, Marlene Dietrich, Frank Sinatra, John Carradine, Buster Keaton, Joe E. Brown, Andy Devine, Victor McLaglen, John Mills and Glynis Johns among others. I include those names because I recognized them in the cast, not because I necessarily saw them in the actual film. They are the 'blink and you'll miss them' type of cameos to the point many don't even register. Sinatra is shown over his shoulder three times and then turns and smiles. Mind you, he doesn't even say anything. He SMILES. That's it. Yes, it's fun seeing all these actors/actresses together but give them something to do.

This is a tough one to review in the end. It's too long, downright dull at times, a visual treat to watch, and a movie experience unlike any other. It's flaws though are crippling. '80 Days' may be three-hour longs but because of its schizo, hyper kinetic energy that bounces all over the place, it feels significantly longer and has not aged well over the years. A movie to be appreciated for its positives for what it does amount to, even if I won't be watching it again anytime soon. Okay, maybe in a movie theater.

Around the World in 80 Days <---trailer (1956): ** 1/2/****         

The Cockleshell Heroes

Writing reviews about World War II, I've watched epics about large-scale battles, personal stories about the home front, behind the scenes stories about government/administration, but my favorite has always been the men-on-a-mission sub-genre, commandos, specialists and secret agents working together to pull off an impossible mission. One of my favorites I recently rewatched for the first time in quite awhile is 1955's The Cockleshell Heroes.

Early in 1942 with WWII's outcome still very much in question, Royal Marines Captain Stringer (Jose Ferrer) has been tasked with an improbable mission. German ships operating out of the French city of Bordeaux have been wreaking havoc on Allied shipping, and Stringer must attempt to reach the harbor city with a small group of commandos, destroying as many ships as possible. The catch? They'll be doing it by paddling up the Garonne River in two-man canoes. With help from a career Marine officer, Captain Thompson (Trevor Howard), Stringer goes about training his team of volunteers for a mission that seems suicidal to everyone involved.

From star and director Ferrer (one of 7 films he directed), 'Heroes' is based on the true story of Operation Frankton which took place in December 1942. I watched it as a kid on the History Channel and have always remembered it fondly. Released in 1955, it is more of a heroic look at the bravery these commandos showed on their mission. It doesn't yet have the darkness, cynicism or reality of so many WWII movies released a few years later in the 1960s. There is still an innocence to the story, a "nice" factor. The commandos are the heroes, their Nazi counterparts stereotypically evil. 'Heroes' is only 98 minutes long and was shot on a smaller scale (some cool English locations providing good background) with the focus on this specific mission. There's no sense of a bigger issue or the state of the war. Instead, it's about 8 commandos and the officers leading them. When handled right, who needs a bigger scale than that?

Not a hugely well known movie, 'Heroes' doesn't have the same name recognition in its cast so many other war films have. Ferrer is solid but not particularly memorable as Major Stringer, the unlikely, volunteer commander of the mission. He has several strong dialogue scenes with Howard's Thompson as a rivalry develops about how the mission should be handled, but there's little doubt who the star is. Trevor Howard is a scene-stealer, putting a spin on the stiff upper lip British officer. He's prim and proper and interested in the bottom line -- the success of the mission -- more than how the men feel about him. Thompson is the only character given any real background and Howard does not disappoint. The commandos include Victor Maddern as Sgt. Craig, Thompson's right hand man, as well as the Marine volunteers; Anthony Newley as Clarke, the smart-alec, David Lodge as Ruddock, the strongest of the Marines, Peter Arne as Stevens, the capable Corporal, Percy Herbert, Graham Stewart, John Fabian as Cooney, the Irishman, John Van Eyssen, and Robert Desmond (The Great Escape). Newly, Maddern and Lodge stand out from the group as memorable.      

At its heart, this is a men on a mission movie. It just so happens to be based on a true story, the results of the movie mission exaggerated a bit relative to the actual history. Truth or not, 'Heroes' follows a familiar formula. The story is pretty clearly divided in two parts; the training for the mission and then the execution of said-mission. I would have liked some more character background on the commandos, but the training scenes do just enough to differentiate them from each other. There are some original, unique scenes, including Stringer parachuting his commandos into England.....dressed as German soldiers. No money, no identification, they must trek some 300-plus miles back to the base without getting caught. These are some necessary scenes, giving us a rooting interest in these men as they head off to their mission.

Not surprisingly then, the best parts of the movie are the actual mission, dubbed 'Cockleshell,' as Stringer's team is dropped off by a British sub (commanded by Christopher Lee) and must paddle over 70 miles up the Garonne River to their target, ships waiting in the harbor. The final 40 minutes are tense and adrenaline-pumping as they navigate the river. It's here where I started to question. If I didn't know this was in fact a real mission, I'd say it was ridiculous. The bravery exhibited here in insane, commandos in 2-man canoes paddling exposed up a heavily guarded/defended river. HERE is a Google Map showing how far they actually traveled. The ending is downbeat with a sense of success, Howard delivering a very moving final line. Success at what cost though? Listen to some of the main theme HERE, a whistle-worthy score from composer John Addison. The link below is a documentary about the real-life mission. As for the movie, a hidden gem and one I've always enjoyed.

The Cockleshell Heroes <---documentary (1955): ***/****

The Key

As a movie lover, Turner Classic Movies has been invaluable to me over the years. I've been introduced to movie stars, unknown classics, American, English, French, Japanese and many more types of movies. But every so often, their website cracks me up. Take 1958's The Key for example. The plot description aptly and appropriately stated 'The key to a woman's apartment may hold bad luck for her lovers.' All true, but what did it leave out? That whole WWII backdrop thing....if that means anything.

More than just a World War II setting, this Carol Reed-directed story is a unique, different WWII setting. Little background heading into that ever-important plot description. It isn't on the battlefield or even the home front, but somewhere in between. It is early in the war (1940 and 1941) and the North Atlantic is full of ships, the German U-boats wreaking havoc on Allied shipping. Because of these attacks, many ships are unable to sail to port, often severely damaged and desperately needing assistance. Enter the basically defenseless tug boats who's job it is to bring them in, the U-boats waiting to strike again. And on with that plot thing....

An American who volunteered with the Canadian Army, Capt. David Ross (William Holden) has been reassigned and given a command in the British Navy. He will co-command a tugboat that rescues handicapped Allied ships, a dangerous task considering his boat has one ancient gun and no armor. Ross immediately meets Capt. Chris Ford (Trevor Howard), an old friend and commander of another tugboat in the outfit. They hit it off right away, the old friends reuniting. In passing though, Chris hands Ross a key to his flat, telling him that if anything happens to him, he can move into the apartment. The only issue? A young woman named Stella (Sophia Loren) lives there too. The situation strikes Ross as particularly odd. What isn't Chris telling him, if anything?

From the few Reed movies I've seen -- from his classic The Third Man to lesser known films like The Running Man -- it's easy to see the British director is so highly respected. As a filmmaker, he's a step above most other directors. Anyone can point a camera at the action and call it a day. He goes for more than that, and 'Key' is certainly an example of that. As I mentioned before, the WWII backdrop is an essential part of the story, but the TCM description is spot-on too without even mentioning the war. So in the end, this is a WWII story with a quasi-love triangle (and more) where death hovers above the characters waiting for a chance to strike. It refuses to be pigeon holed at any point, seemingly reveling in its different qualities. Hard to compare to anything else, but it's a movie I very much enjoyed.

SPOILERS STOP READING SPOILERS The "twist" of sorts is that Loren's Stella is apparently some sort of angel of death. Her husband was a tugboat captain but was killed at sea. Her apartment was up for grabs then -- exact details and background are fuzzy -- but another sailor/tugboat captain moved in. He was killed....as was the next one, and then Howard's Ford moves in. Can you see where this is going? Reed plays up this angle for all it's worth. Yes, it is a love story set in WWII England, but it is also much more than that. As I watched, I couldn't help but think this was an extended, feature length episode of The Twilight Zone. That was a compliment by the way. I love that show.

Reed builds up those creepier elements, all the little things coming together to work together perfectly. Much of composer Malcolm Arnold's score sounds exactly like his score from The Bridge on the River Kwai, but then he uses a soft, eerie score that will send shivers up your back in certain scenes. Loren plays Stella almost like an apparition, a ghost. She can sense when her lovers' time is up, asking if she can go to the dock to say goodbye to them. Because of the job of the captains and its inherent risk, death is prevalent, but she knows when it's coming. Reed uses his camera here as a mood-setting, tilting it off to one way or another, aggressively zooming in and out at the action and dialogue. They are just little things that don't drastically affect anything about the story, but at the same time, it is subtle in its effectiveness.

From his spot behind the camera, Reed almost always had impressive casts to work with, and 'Key' is no different. This was Holden at the top of his game, and he doesn't disappoint. It isn't smooth, charming William Holden. This is an underrated acting performance for him. He's scared, angry and upset at the futility of what they do, finding a friend in Chris and possibly more in Stella. Howard plays against type to a point, getting a chance to ham it up a bit. It is a dark part (his "None of us will make it out alive" line speaking volumes), but it is a character that intends to take advantage of whatever time he has left. This is also the first Loren part I've seen that didn't glam her up. She's a beautiful woman, but that's not the focus of the part. She is traumatized, depressed and confused with what the world has thrown at her. Loren does a great job with the part, showing off her dramatic ability when given a chance to be only an actress with eye candy possibility.

Also look for Kieron Moore as Kane, Chris' weary second-in-command, Oskar Homolka as Capt. Van Dam, Ross' fellow commander of the tugboat they share, switching off missions back and forth, Bernard Lee as Commander Wadlow, the officer in charge of his unlikely fleet of tugboats, and Bryan Forbes as Weaver, Ross' second-in-command trying to help out in whatever way he can.

I don't want to give the impression that I liked this movie solely because it was different although that certainly helped. It is a genuinely good story and film, aided by Reed's direction and the acting performances from a very talented cast. Different? Yes, but for all the right reasons.

The Key <---TCM trailer/clips (1958): ***/****

The Liquidator

The 1960s was a decade overwhelmed in movie theaters with spy and espionage movies. Everything from the James Bond series to spoofs like the Derek Flint and Matt Helm movies to those in between like the Harry Palmer flicks gave audiences their fair share of spy thrills. But defying being bunched in with any of those above listed is 1965's The Liquidator.

In the closing days of WWII in Paris, American(?) tanker Boysie Oaks (Rod Taylor) stumbles into a possible murder, saving a man (Trevor Howard) from his two would-be murderers. Years pass, and the man, Mostyn, is a higher-up in British intelligence given an unenviable mission. He needs to find an agent who can do one thing and one thing only; kill and kill effectively and discreetly. He tracks down Oaks and offers him the position...with some training. Oaks jumps at the chance to step into a "glamorous" lifestyle only to make a surprising discovery when finally tasked with a mission. He can't do it, just can't kill a man. It might be too late though because enemy agents are very aware of who he is.

This spy flick from director Jack Cardiff is an oddity among the genre that was so popular in the 1960s. It isn't as over the top as the Bond movies. The villains are just enemy agents, not masterminds bent on taking over the world. It isn't a spoof either, even though it does provide some laughs. It's funny, but it isn't trying too hard to be funny. Now there are some odd moments. Shirley Bassey sings the theme song -- The Liquidator <---listen there -- and it does seem like an easy knock-off of her Goldfinger theme, the credits even looking like a quasi-bond movie. Lalo Schifrin's score is appropriately jazzy and 60s. In the blind leap department looking to make a connection, Taylor's co-star Jill St. John would later star in Diamonds Are Forever too. Now whether the comparisons are fair or not is up to you, but however you feel about it, the movie is entertaining, providing a good mix of serious spy drama with just enough dark humor.

Many reviews have pointed to Rod Taylor being miscast in the role of Boysie Oaks. First, I'm a big Taylor fan, and I thought he did a good job with the character. Oaks is based off a character created by author John Gardner, one a whole series would develop around. I will say that Taylor is a different choice, but he makes it work. Regardless the movie, Taylor could manage brawling tough guy and smooth ladies man depending on the scene. He does that pretty effortlessly here, bouncing back and forth. As his stiff upper lip superior, Howard is a scene-stealer as Mostyn (think Bond's M), the veteran spy/agent who's seen and done it all. Their scenes together are highlights, two actors clearly having fun with their characters and the at-times off the wall story.

There are the typical spy features here most fans have come to expect. We get a scenic trip to beautiful Nice in France along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea thrown in with all sorts of hijinks and what not. It's different though. When Oaks realizes he can't kill, he hires an actual killer, Griffen (Eric Sykes), to do his dirty work for him, all expertly handled in a very dark, very funny montage. What kind of super-spy can't kill? Well, Oaks likes the lifestyle he's been introduced to, the cars, the clothes, the women. He definitely hits it off with St. John's Iris, Mostyn's secretary, which of course is frowned upon by company policy. The last hour is the more familiar territory as an enemy plan unfolds, Taylor's Oaks becomes the unknowing dupe to a conspiracy involving an assassination and theft of a new model aircraft. The surprising thing? It's funnier than you'd think.

Along with Taylor, Howard and St. John, the cast isn't full of huge stars, but you will see some recognizable faces. Wilfrid Hyde-White is Chief, the MI6 head who knows what's going on but typically turns a blind eye to his agents. Regular baddie Akim Tamiroff is hilarious as Shereik, the leader of a team of enemy agents who accidentally pick Oaks up. Beautiful Gabriella Licudi plays Corale, the bait in Shereik's plan who plans on seducing Taylor. Also look for David Tomlinson in a great little part as Quadrant, a fellow agent who is only telling Oaks part of what he needs to know. Several great supporting parts to round out the cast behind the bigger names.

A generally forgotten spy thriller with that rare right mix of action and humor. Well worth seeking this one out.

The Liquidator <---TCM trailer/clips (1965): ***/****

Hennessy

Pick any assassination attempt -- successful or not -- in history, and you've got a problem when it comes to turning that attempt into a movie.  If the person being gunned for is even somewhat well known, you know the end of the movie before it starts.  Your average Joe Blow doesn't mean much so a hit attempt can leave you guessing, but what's the point?  Political figures on the other hand are pretty obvious if they're going to survive or not. So goes a major problem with 1975's Hennessy.

Abe Lincoln, Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Robert Kennedy, all major, universally well-known names that have been assassinated over the last 150 years.  Not on that list? Queen Elizabeth of England.  She's the target in this British-made movie detailing the true story of one man's suicidal mission to take out the Queen and as much of Parliament as he can.  Now I'm no genius, but some 30 years later, Queen Elizabeth is still kicking so the attempt must fail at some point.  That's not a sure thing for movie failure, but it's got to be handled the right way, keep you guessing as to HOW he'll fail, but that sense of urgency is missing here, and that ends up derailing the story.

An Irishman with some past IRA connections, Nile Hennessy (Rod Steiger), turns down an offer to join the IRA in a mission, wanting to live his life.  Soon after though, his wife and daughter are accidentally gunned down by British troops, and something inside him snaps.  Nile decides to go on a suicide mission with hopes of killing the Queen and the member of Parliament.  Two groups are working against him.  The police (including Trevor Howard and Richard Johnson) follow the clues, trying to catch up with him, while the IRA -- wary of the political backlash from a possible connection to Hennessy and an assassination attempt -- puts a hit out on him.  The odds are against Hennessy, but with nothing to lose, not much is going to slow him down.

The movie I consistently found myself thinking of while watching Hennessy was the overall much better Day of the Jackal, the story of a possibly true hit attempt on Charles De Gaulle.  You know going in that De Gaulle survives, but it's getting there that makes the movie a classic.  Tension, worry, near panic dominate the movie as it appears that maybe -- just maybe -- the Jackal actually pulls off the job.  In Hennessy, that same fear and worry just isn't there.  Steiger's Hennessy is an easy semi-bad guy to root for, but the character is pretty vanilla after his motivations are presented.  When the attempt does come, it's dullsville.  The chase after the attempt is equally weak and caps off a movie with a workable idea that never quite clicks.

Where some actors play themselves over and over again, Steiger is an actor who always played himself but in a wide variety of ways if that makes any sense.  His characters were always these ultra-intense dudes who looked seconds away from just blowing up at all times.  Hennessy is a man with nothing to lose on a mission that he HOPES and WANTS to end with him dying.  His wife and daughter were callously shot down, and he can only think of one thing; revenge on the biggest scale possible.  He doesn't have political inclinations and he doesn't hope to deliver a message.  He is pissed at the world, and he intends to make the world suffer just as much as he is.  Once Nile gets involved with the assassination, there's no more development late so the pacing can be a little off.

While Steiger is an interesting choice to play a burned Irishman -- the accent isn't as bad as you'd think -- his female co-star is interesting but not in a good way.  Lee Remick plays Kate Brooke, the widowed wife of an old friend of Nile's.  After years without seeing him, she invites him into her house while he copes with the loss of his family.  She knows something is going on but seems to choose not to push the issue.  Bad attempt at an Irish/English accent aside, Remick is given little to do in a pointless supporting part.  She's dispatched when the story requires it with one of the more unceremonious deaths I've seen in awhile. 

As for the police pursuing Hennessy, Johnson joins Steiger as the main reason to catch this movie.  He's a cop who's worked undercover in Ireland and has paid the consequences, both physically and emotionally.  He is a shell of the man he used to be, and like his counterpart, is motivated by a mix of anger and persereverance that won't let him quit, knowing if he fails the repercussions will be epic.  Howard's part is more of a cameo, but it's always cool to see him no matter the size of the part.  The acting is the lone reason to check this one out because otherwise it just doesn't have much going for it.

Hennessy <--- TCM clips (1975): **/****

Operation Crossbow

Most of the war movies I watch are depictions of front-line action or at least the generals/headquarters making the decisions that affect the front-line soldiers.  But what about the Intelligence agencies doing their damnedest to help the war effort through espionage, gaining information and sabotage behind enemy lines.  So goes 1965's Operation Crossbow, a British-Italian production telling the true story of British efforts to slow down Germany's rocket/technological advances as WWII reaches its middle years.

As much as WWII was about one Allied soldier facing one Axis soldier, there was a race at home to be the first country to develop the atom bomb.  On less destructive levels, both sides tried to create weapons technology that could cause more death and destruction than the average grenade or artillery shell.  Obviously, these advances were kept as top secret as possible, but that doesn't mean each side wasn't trying to one-up their enemy by playing a little defense courtesy of the Intelligence community doing a little sabotage.

It's midway through 1943, and the Germans have developed a new flying bomb that they plan to unleash on London and other English cities.  The Allies are aware of the new development, and do their best to slow down the advances by consistently bombing German work sites where they believe the bombs to be built and launched.  But as dangerous as the bombs are, the Germans have a new weapon in the late stages of development; the V-2 rocket, that could drastically change the course of the war, including the D-Day invasion.  Facing such a huge game changer, Allied Intelligence is forced to use a desperate plan; send Allied agents into Germany disguised as engineers who will help develop the rockets.

You might have noticed there's not a single actor/actress listed in the plot description.  Basically, it would have taken too long to include them and make that paragraph a behemoth to read.  Like other big budget war movies, 'Crossbow' utilizes an ensemble cast with talent from all over the world taking part.  And in terms of story, the ensemble works better because the plot is very episodic.  The first 30 minutes is almost exclusively from the German perspective, the next 30 the Allied Intelligence, and the last hour mostly with the agents working deep undercover.  Each of these segments could have been expanded for their own movie, but together they work to form a coherent storyline.

The cast listing is an odd one because producer Carlo Ponti listed his wife Sophia Loren as the lead when really she makes a 20-minute or so appearance and is an add-on more than anything else.  That's not being critical of Loren because she's a fine actress, but big picture her part isn't essential to the movie.  Starring as Germans the ensemble includes Paul Henreid and Helmut Dantine as two high-ranking German generals, Barbara Rutting as German aviator Hannah Reitsch, and Anthony Quayle as Bamford, a secret agent/spy.  Allied Intelligence includes Richard Johnson, Trevor Howard, John Mills and Richard Todd as the men trying to halt the German advances.  The agents sent into Germany include George Peppard, Jeremy Kemp and Tom Courtenay, all posing as deceased scientists so they can access the German rocket plants with Lilli Palmer playing a resistance contact.

The whole movie is a good example of a solid WWII ensemble, but the best and most interesting/exciting part is when the story follows these three agents.  They are all forced to become someone else, knowing if they are caught they will be summarily shot on site.  Even getting to that point is difficult as Peppard's Lt. Curtis finds out when the scientist he is posing as is visited by his wife (Loren).  Courtenay's Henshaw is dealt a cruel twist of fate and must decide how much he is willing to sacrifice.  Kemp's Bradley is dropped into Germany as a last-minute resort with little knowledge of the man he's impersonating.  Their scenes as they try to dupe the Germans are tense and difficult to watch, those scenes where you get butterflies hoping everything doesn't hit the fan.

Crossbow's story covers a lot of ground -- almost a year and a half -- but never feels like we're being let out.  Supposedly a much longer finished product was turned in by director Michael Anderson only to have it cut heavily to the movie we see now which clocks in at just under two hours.  You can see where certain segments were cut, especially the German segment to open the movie, and other odd instances like Peppard gaining a bandage on his forehead, but we never see why.  But these are little things, not big disturbances that could ruin the movie.

While the V-2 rocket was actually used by Germany in WWII -- over 3,000 were fired at England -- the movie does have to have some sort of resolution if not necessarily a happy ending.  The finale is a whopper as Peppard and Kemp desperately try to pinpoint their underground location to a passing bomber force.  The huge underground facilities sets look like something out of a James Bond movie and provide quite an ending to a strong story.  Not as well know as some of its 1960s WWII counterparts, but definitely worth a watch or two.

Operation Crossbow <----trailer (1965): ***/**** 

The Third Man

The IMDB Top 250 can provide a funny way of looking at movies. Any big budget new release almost automatically jumps onto the list -- only now is The Dark Knight starting to drop some -- while other above average but not classic movies, like The Shawshank Redemption reside in the No. 1 spot. Make a point some time and cruise through the list which does have it's fair share of classic movies which actually deserve their spots, like 1949's The Third Man which I'm still wavering about.

Before I start, I will say I don't know if there's a way to review this movie without giving away key plot twists and revelations. Sooooooo, if you haven't seen The Third Man and don't want the ending spoiled for you, I'd stop reading pretty soon. It is a tricky movie to review to start off with a lot in the good and a few things in the bad.

It's 1948 post-war Vienna where the city is still feeling the effects of WWII with the city cordoned off into four sections (U.S., French, Russian, British) and piles of rubbles from bombings still dotting the streets. Holly Martins (Joseph Cotten), an American pulp fiction writer with a drinking problem, travels to Vienna to take a job offered by his best friend, Harry Lime, who he has not seen since 1939. Upon arriving, Holly finds out that Harry was killed in a car accident right outside his apartment. Talking to the people involved, including Harry's girlfriend Anna (Alida Valli) and several people who were at the scene, Holly starts to question the story with several inconsistencies arising.

Also involved and seemingly with a lot of information they're not willing to give out are Major Calloway (Trevor Howard) and Sergeant Paine (pre-James Bond Bernard Lee), police officers on the Lime case. Apparently Harry Lime was a low-level racketeer taking part in some shady dealings, but Holly doesn't believe that his best friend could be capable of the things being pegged on him. Could it all be true? The issue off the bat for me is with the cast listing. Orson Welles gets third billing right from the start but doesn't appear in the movie for quite a long time. So the obvious connection, Welles is Harry Lime and this good old boy sure ain't dead. Was it supposed to trick people? Who knows, but the reveal doesn't come as much of a surprise.

Welle's star-power aside, the reveal that Harry is alive is one of the coolest character entrances in movie history with Welles delivering that smart-ass smile that only he could deliver. That scene is just one example of the movie's incredible cinematography from Robert Krasker. Director Carol Reed opted to shoot the movie on location in Vienna and using black and white photography creates a shadowy underworld full of dark alleys and eeriely empty streets. Story and characters are one thing, but you could watch The Third Man on mute and still take something away from it. The ending is a highlight especially with SPOILERS Harry being chased through the sewers underneath Vienna, and then the final shot is one that lingers on and on.

Welles makes the most of his part, mostly an extended cameo because he isn't introduced until well over an hour into the story. His scene on a Ferris wheel with Cotten's Martins is one of the better scenes in the movie, full of quick, snappy dialogue that's punctuated with one of my new favorite lines. Cotten is all right as Holly, but his character doesn't come across well and I found myself disliking him more and more as the movie moved along, especially his blooming love with Valli's Anna. Howard and Lee are perfectly cast as the stiff upper lip Englishmen, both aiding and slowing down Martins' investigation.

On to my complaints, starting with the sountrack. No orchestra or band playing, just a zither providing the musical score. Sounding at times like a ukelele, it just doesn't fit in certain scenes and is overused to the point where I'd cringe every time the same tune kept playing over and over again. Here's the main theme that is used in several variations throughout. It just doesn't fit the tone and suspense of the movie, which is incredibly dark with it's subject matter especially for a movie released in 1949. Otherwise, I really enjoyed this movie after some early concerns through the first 45-60 minutes or so. Definitely watch The Third Man, even if it's just for the on-location Vienna B&W shooting.

The Third Man <----trailer (1949): ***/**** Part 1 of 12 on Youtube

Battle of Britain

Heading into May, I had this plan to watch and review a bunch of WWII movies in honor of Memorial Day. Well, Memorial Day is tomorrow so that's not going to happen, but I can still get a couple reviews in at least.

Battle of Britain (1969), directed by Guy Hamilton of James Bond fame, is everything that was good and bad about the epic war movies to come out of the 60s, and really epic movies in general. Growing up in the good old USA, the early parts of WWII were never taught as much as the post-Pearl Harbor years once America got involved in the war so this movie serves as a good introduction to the earlier years of the war. Immediately following the Dunkirk disaster, it appears that Hitler and the Third Reich are one good push away from winning the war. All that's needed for that final push is the invasion of England.

But before a cross-channel invasion can take place, Herman Goring and his illustrious Luftwaffe must knock out the Royal Air Force so an invasion force can go across the channel relatively unmolested. For the RAF though, they're heading into a battle with the odds heavily stacked against them with just 600 pilots to Germany's 2,500. As Laurence Olivier's Air Chief Marshal Dowding so eloquently but effectively states, "Our boys are going to have shoot down their boys at a rate of 4 to 1." So begins the battle of Britain, here's the film's opening, a good sum-up of what's happened and what's to come.

With a movie that focuses exclusively on a key moment in Britain's history, the benefits are obvious. Director Hamilton collects a who's who of British actors to fill out his cast. Olivier and Trevor Howard star as Dowding and Air Vice Marshal Park, the higher-ups in the RAF who oversee the desperate fight in the air. As the pilots, Micheal Caine, Robert Shaw and Christopher Plummer lead the fight with Ian McShane and Edward Fox as two pilots in Shaw's squadron. And then making short appearances are Curd Jurgens, Harry Andrews, Patrick Wymark, Michael Redgrave, Kenneth More, and Ralph Richardson. If that cast doesn't impress you at least a little bit, this might not be your movie.

As I've covered before though, the flaw with such a huge cast is the characterization which suffers. These characters are more outlines of historical figures than flesh and blood people. Plummer stands out mostly because he's given a love interest, the beautiful Susannah York, so we find out something about his squadron leader. You're not hoping Caine's Squadron Leader Canfield makes it, you're hoping Michael Caine makes it. The same with Shaw and Plummer. But that's a minor flaw for me, not something that should stop you from seeing the movie.

And surprise, surprise, what's the actual reason for seeing a movie built around WWII in the air? If you answered 'dogfights' and lots of aerial footage, pat yourself on the back. It's a pre-CGI movie that relies on actual footage being shot of these pilots in action, the British Spitfires tangling with the German Stukas, here's one great scene with Goring asking his officers what they need to win. The film will sink or swim for most viewers on the dogfights, which do eat up most of the movie's 132-minute running time. The best is saved for last appropriately enough as the British throw all their reserves into the battle in one last, desperate ploy to stop the Luftwaffe. It's a 4-minute scene with no dialogue, no sound at all other than Ron Goodwin's score, sampled here, a very British score indeed.

Hamilton's movie then is not so much about the characters as the battle itself. Obviously, without the pilots, WAFs and coast watchers, the battle for Britain could not have happened. But Hamilton goes for the spirit of these people. Maybe we don't know much about them, their personal backgrounds, but they're fighting for what they believe in to stop a power-hungry Adolf Hitler as he swept across Europe. If these pilots hadn't held off the Luftwaffe and ultimately won the battle, who knows how different the world would be right now? It's a frightening thought. And that's why Battle for Britain works, even with its flaws.

Still wavering? Here's a trailer, a long one at that, and a longer preview of the movie as a whole. A WWII movie not as well known as many war movies of the time, but one definitely worth checking out if you've missed it up to now.