All the King's Men

Who decides what is or isn't a classic? Attending a Catholic high school and going through four years of Honors and A.P. English classes and doing the same in college, I read my fair share of "classics." Overall, I was typically able to see something in the book -- its style, the characters, the story, the premise -- that made it a classic. Now in no way does that mean I liked the book. In a lot of ways, I absolutely hated the books. I'm looking at you House of Seven Gables, among others. So who is it that decides a book deserves classic status?

Sitting on my bookcase for the last four-plus years was Robert Penn Warren's Pulitzer Prize winning novel, All the King's Men (<--- link to the novel, not the movie). I put it off, stalling after reading a chapter and wanting to kill myself. Every so often I like to torture myself as a reader though so I put my head down and barreled through it. How'd that go? I hated it. Warren's writing style is one that pisses me off, like he's patting himself on the back. "Oh, look what a good writer I am!" with his pages of description and wordiness that go nowhere. We get it. You're smart. Tell your damn story. The story and its characters -- especially the last 100 pages -- saved the book for me. Naturally, I had to check out the movies, starting with 1948's All the King's Men.  

An up and coming newspaper reporter, Jack Burden (John Ireland) is assigned to write a story about a backwoods politician, Willie Stark (Broderick Crawford), running for office. Jack is instantly drawn to the honest, genuine nature of Willie even when he loses several elections. Years down the road, Willie is nominated to run as a governor mostly as a way to split votes, but a weird thing happens. Willie starts to speak honestly to the voters, inspiring confidence from the get-go. The election for governor is a laugher, Stark taking it easily. Now working as an aide to Stark, Jack starts to see him change. The new governor has noble aspirations for what he wants to do while in office, but at what cost? How does he accomplish the things he wants? Corruption rears its head in the offices, making Jack question if Willie is in the right or going down a path he can't come back from?

I can think of two movies that are as good if not better than the novel/story they're based on.  In other words, the odds aren't with a director to improve on the source of their movie. Warren's book is interesting in that 600-plus pages not much happens while at the same time A LOT is happening. Amidst all his wordy descriptions, seemingly pointless and drifting asides, and passages that go nowhere are characters and a story of politics and its personalities that is very interesting. It just gets lost too much in Warren's "talent." Director Robert Rossen makes a noble effort to condense Warren's novel into a manageable 2-hour movie and succeeds for the most part. Some background and one key twist is dropped for sake of time, but Rossen's movie gets the heart of the story right, Willie Stark's rise to the top and his fight to stay up there.

Reading the novel, I was very aware that Broderick Crawford had played Willie in this first version of the movie. In my head as I read, I was picturing Crawford then, and it is a career best performance.  The burly actor with the deep, dark voice earned the only Oscar of his career for his performance as Willie Stark (somewhat loosely based on Louisiana governor Huey Long). A career character actor, Crawford didn't waste his chance at such a major role. I can't picture anyone else playing the part, and that's always a positive. He brings Willie Stark to life, a well-meaning backwoods guy who has his eyes opened up to the reality of politics, money and greed. His speech just hours after he discovers he's being duped to split votes is a definite high, Stark's rage and frustration at the predicament he's in boiling over. You can watch it HERE at Youtube.

With such a dividing figure at the forefront of the movie, obvious questions arise that people will obviously feel different about on a person-to-person basis. Through bullying, bribes and blackmail courtesy of Burden's notebook with all its dirt, Stark's gubernatorial terms accomplish a laundry list of things. A huge hospital is built to serve the people. Roads are improved, schools popping up all over, and a better way of life is created. There is a certain corruption you just expect with government as power individuals want to get things done and don't care how they get it done. Through all of Stark's corruption and badgering and bullying, there's still the part of me that is on his side just a little bit. He gets the job done and seems, seems to have the public's best interest at heart. Is that the case? Maybe not, but Stark here and in Warren's novel makes it an interesting question.

No doubt about it, Crawford is the reason to see this movie. The supporting cast varies from average to above average, some of the fault being attributed to 600-plus pages being condensed into a  110-minute movie. Characters aren't going to get the development, motivation or reasoning they did in the book. Ireland received a Best Supporting Actor nomination, but I thought his performance as Jack Burden was somewhat lacking without much in the way of energy. Mercedes McCambridge won the Best Supporting Actress for her role as Sadie Burke, Willie's aide/secretary who's involved with him in more ways than one. Joanne Dru plays Anne Stanton, Jack's girlfriend who's instantly drawn to Willie, John Derek is Tom Stark, Willie's adopted son, Shepperd Strudwick plays Adam Stanton, a respected doctor and Anne's brother who Willie wants to work with, and Raymond Greenleaf as Judge Stanton (Irwin in the novel), an aging but reputable public official suspicious of Willie's motives.

While Rossen's novel to film transition is a smooth one, there is still something missing. He films it in black and white, appropriate for the backwoods, dirt road setting of the story, and the movie feels real in its portrayals of the story and characters. It's interesting but without much in the way of energy.  The ending was also a little disappointing because it ends too abruptly. The novel allowed the ending to breathe, to let characters figure things out as needed. The 1949 film still is a good, interesting watch and does a worthy job of molding Warren's novel into something more easily digested.

All the King's Men <---TCM trailer/clips (1949): ***/****

Night People

From the end of World War II when Berlin was divided into two sections, American and Russians, the movies had a villain basically written for them for the next 50 years; the Russkies, the Red scare, the Pinkos, the Commies.  Whatever you want to call them, it worked. They were the complete opposites of us civil, humane Americans, always up to something shady in hopes of taking the United States and everything it represented down a notch or two or ten.

Made in 1954, Night People uses the Russians as the bad guys, but never puts a face on the villains.  Instead, they are only talked about, leaving the audience to make up their mind about them.  We hear about their tactics, their underhanded way of doing things. They're always up to something, holding a resentment against the Americans and anyone that opposes their way of life.  It is a weird little movie that can be hard to follow at times, but considering it was released in the midst of McCarthyism as Senator Joe McCarthy went on a Communist witch hunt in the U.S., it certainly is an interesting time capsule of the 1950s.

Walking back to the U.S. base in Berlin, an Army corporal is kidnapped and smuggled into the Russian sector in the city. An officer with the Provost Marshal, Colonel Steve Van Dyke (Gregory Peck) is given the case, told to get the corporal back through negotiations with the Russians. The soldier's father, Charles Leatherby (Broderick Crawford), is involved in big business back in the states and travels to Germany to help the effort, claiming he'll put pressure on people who aren't used to being pressured. Van Dyke though is a veteran of these prickly situations while Leatherby has no idea what he's getting into.  The Russians offer a prisoner exchange, the soldier for two private citizens living in Berlin they want to get their hands on.  Nothing comes easy though, and the exchange isn't as simple as it is made out to be.

Some reviews at the IMDB pointed out that director Nunnally Johnson's film doesn't have the same grittiness that similar movies like Carol Reed's The Third Man did. That's a fair criticism to make of Night People because honestly, it isn't as gritty or hard-hitting in its story about a post-WWII city trying to move on.  It was filmed in vivid Technicolor (which even pan-n-scan can't ruin) so the movie is full of color and brightness, gorgeous city locations.  It is too polished at times, too representative of a big studio production as opposed to a darker, seeder film.  I don't know what I'd expect differently though.  It's a movie made in 1954 meant for an audience rooting for the Americans.

Maybe ahead of its time is its handling of government matters concerning two governments who want nothing to do with each other as sworn enemies.  Both the Americans and Russians can't help each other out in the open, resorting to back channels, secret messages, double agents, and under the table agreements to get a job done.  Peck's Col. Van Dyke knows how to work the system for all it's worth to pull off the mission successfully.  We see his interactions with the state department (Max Showalter), his own agents in the field (Anita Bjork and Peter van Eyck), British intelligence (John Horsley), and in this situation, even the father of the kidnapped soldier who assumes he can do the job better than anyone else.  Sometimes difficult to follow, the plot does deliver a solid twist or two late that I didn't see coming.

A story about an American attempt to negotiate a kidnapped soldier sounds pretty serious to me in terms of a movie's tone and level of seriousness.  Why then does this movie rely on these little comedic bits that seem ripped from another much lighter movie?  Walter Abel's Doctor is constantly bumming cigarettes off anyone who will give him one, later claiming 'these things will kill you. That's why I don't smoke.' Buddy Ebsen's Sgt. McColloch is always slipping away to find a score of a baseball game, talking about all his 'dolls' in every city. Peck's Colonel Van Dyke says 'Holy Moses!' so much it could be a drinking game. The only reasonable explanation I can come up with is an attempt (a weak one at that) to humanize these American characters against the evil monstrosity that is the Russians.  The comedy definitely takes you out of the movie though, a completely unnecessary addition to the movie.

Now onto the cast which is pretty good.  I liked Peck's character the best, a young officer who's been worn down some by the nature of his job.  He knows it is a nasty business that has to be done, but it's always been his job.  When Crawford's Mr. Leatherby shows up, he is forced to show the newcomer how nasty his profession can be.  Peck and Crawford have a great chemistry together right from the start. Also look for Rita Gam as Ricki, Peck's girlfriend/secretary, Jill Esmond as one of the prisoners meant to be exchanged, along with Ebsen, Abel, Showatler, and all the other names previously mentioned.

Night People <---TCM trailer (1954): ** 1/2 /**** 

The Fastest Gun Alive

There is always someone faster than you; an idea that drove a whole subgenre of westerns over the years, the fast draw. From Clint Eastwood to John Wayne to Randolph Scott, westerns have dealt with fast draw artists for as long as movies have been made. And if books, magazines, TV shows, and movies have taught us anything, it's lonely at the top. But unlike the stakes in The Hustler which is just pride on the line, the fast draw in a western is a life and death situation.

So with little work needed, the framework is there for an easy story to be told. Someone always wants to take on the best and prove that they are in fact, THE BEST. The Gregory Peck western The Gunfighter explored this idea in 1950 which was reused more than a few times, including 1956's The Fastest Gun Alive. What starts off as a near classic completely derails in the final scene though in an otherwise above average western.

Riding into a western town with the two members of his gang (John Dehner and Noah Berry Jr), hardened gunfighter Vinnie Harold (Broderick Crawford) walks up to a saloon and calls out for Clint Fallon, a man known as one of the fastest guns in the west. Unprompted with no other reason to see who is quicker, Vinnie guns down Clint and a legend begins to grow. Down the trail in a little town called Cross Creek, a quiet storekeeper, George Temple (Glenn Ford), lives with his pregnant wife (Jeanne Crain) while going day to day hearing the digs and criticisms all of the men in town. George doesn't drink and doesn't wear a gun.

But after four years living in Cross Creek, George has had enough and snaps, strapping on the gunbelt he told his wife he threw away long ago. He puts on a show in the street in front of the whole town, shooting two silver dollars in midair and blasting apart a beer mug before it can hit the ground when dropped. And so George becomes his own sort of legend among the townsfolk. But unknown to George and the town, Vinnie Harold and his gang are riding their way with a posse on their tail. Is there any way George can avoid the showdown with the unhinged Harold?

The script is a strong one that intentionally or not borrows elements from High Noon. One man can either save or destroy a town with one decision. But like in High Noon, the situation can be enfuriating as someone watching the movie. Late in the movie, George is forced to make a decision that could save the town, full of whiney weaklings who won't pick up a gun. There's at least 20 men in town who could carry a gun who are scared of three gunslingers. Team up and take them out for God's sake!

As the title character, Glenn Ford has never been better. I've seen many of Ford's westerns, and I'm going out on a limb to say this is his best career performance. The first 45 minutes or so has Ford's George in a slow burn as his place in life starts to rattle around in his head. He's as good with a gun as just about any man and feels the need to show it after years of people doubting him and laughing at him. A late twist and revelation puts a nice spin on the story. You think it's going one way, and then WHAM!, it takes a different route. This twist sets up the ending which had a chance to be one of the great endings in a western if it wanted to be.

But no, director Russell Rouse and scriptwriters Frank D. Gilroy have to add another twist on the ending. I won't spoil it here, I'll let the ending ruin the movie for you to on first viewing. Heading into this one last shootout, I'm already thinking about the very positive review I would be writing, and even at the end of the shootout, it's still in my head how great, how appropriate that ending is. But in that last scene, a completely unnecessary twist is made just so the movie can end with a happy ending. I was ready to give 'Fastest Gun Alive' a 3, maybe 3.5 stars, but that ending really disappointed me.

On the whole, everything else is nearly perfect, especially Broderick Crawford as the possibly psychotic Vinnie Harold who has a deep-seeded obsession with proving he's the fastest gun in the west. Crawford's presence is always dynamic onscreen, and his deep, booming voice was made for him to be a western villain. The rest of the cast is solid too, including Crain as George's worrying wife, and a great list of character actors including Leif Erickson, Rhys Williams, John Doucette, Russ Tamblyn (even getting an unnecessary, out of place dance sequence), Allyn Joslyn, Virginia Gregg and J.M. Kerrigan.

A good example of how a bad ending can ruin an otherwise nearly great movie, The Fastest Gun Alive could have been a classic in the vein of High Noon. Like I said, I was ready to give it at least 3 stars, minimum, but the ending was a complete disappointment especially when considering how everything has built to a certain conclusion. Too bad because Glenn Ford delivers a career-best performance in this B&W western.

The Fastest Gun Alive <---trailer (1956): **/**** Watch the movie broken down into 10-minute segments starting here (movie starts about 3 minutes in)

Beau Geste

How gutsy does a director have to be to start a movie by showing the ending? I give any director with the cajones to do that points right off the bat. Opening the movie by showing how the story will end up can drive viewers away in some cases, but if handled well can make viewers even more involved with the story. After all, we now know how everything will end up, but getting there can be half the fun.

Director William Wellman pulls this off with his 1939 classic Beau Geste, a story of three brothers who enlist in the French Foreign Legion. The story opens with a relief column nearing Fort Zinderneuf, a far-off post near an oasis that came under siege by Arab tribesmen. But as the relief draws closer, they find the whole garrison massacred to a man, and the commanding officer dead on the parapets with a French bayonet through his heart. With no enemy dead anywhere in sight and no legionnaires to tell the story, the question arises; what happened to these 50 legionnaires?

After the cool opening sequence at the scene of the massacre, the story flashes back to 15 years prior where three brothers, Beau, Digby and John, have been adopted by a rich English woman, Lady Patricia (Heather Thatcher) The three orphans live the life of luxury, playing war games and playing pranks on each other and their 'cousin' Gussie, the heir to quite a family fortune. But the years pass and Lady Patricia receives a note from her long lost husband saying he'll soon return for the Blue Water diamond, the last thing of any value they own. Before he can retrieve it though, the diamond is stolen by someone living in the house. But who was it?

In hopes of removing suspicions from his younger brothers, Beau (Gary Cooper) takes the blame and enlists in the French Foreign Legion to avoid embarrassment for his family. But it's not too soon before brothers Digby (Robert Preston) and John (Ray Milland) join up too with their big brother. It's in the legion they come under the command of sadistic Sergeant Markoff (Brian Donlevy), who was humiliated at his last post and now seeks to redeem himself, no matter the cost even if it is his own men's lives. It is when Markoff finds out the Geste brothers may be diamond thieves that the real conflict arises, the sergeant splitting the trio up, Beau and John to Zinderneuf as replacements and Digby to another fort for mounted infantry training.

The French Foreign Legion is often presented as this glamorous, honorable fighting unit, but in just about every movie I can think of some unlucky company is getting massacred or abandoned at some far out post with no hope of outside help or survival. In Beau Geste, it's no different. The soldiers at Zinderneuf hope to lead a mutiny against Markoff, but that plan gets put on hold when the Arab tribesmen arrive en masse. The battle scenes are exciting from the start even if we know the end result. The desert outside Yuma, Arizona fills in nicely for the Sahara desert, oasis and all, with the set of the fort a perfect setting for the drama to unfold.

As for the cast, it would be hard to ask for a better one. As the title character, Cooper does what he does best, the sort of everyman role who is noble, honorable, and always looking out for those around him, especially his younger brothers. Preston and Milland round out the trio of brothers, Milland getting slightly more screen time and the love interest, and with Cooper provide the heart, the backbone of the movie. Their scenes together ring true whether it be with the comedic introductions or later in the movie when they've enlisted in the Legion. The three actors bring the characters to life, much like the three leads in another 1939 classic with a somewhat similar story, Gunga Din.

In a role he received a Best Supporting Actor nomination for, Donlevy has a great part as Markoff, the sadistic, half crazy sergeant who will drive his men to the breaking point and then keep on pushing. He wants his good name back and all the medals and privileges that come with a promotion, and as he sees it, it's all in grasp if he wins a significant battle, casualties be damned. Unfortunately for Donlevy, 1939 was the year of Gone With the Wind, Stagecoach, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, so he didn't get the win, but it's still one of his best parts. Also in the cast is a very young Susan Hayward as Isobel, the love interest who grew up with the Gestes but starts to fall for the youngest brother, John. Just some of the other legionnaires include J. Carrol Naish, Albert Dekker, Broderick Crawford, and Charles Barton.

Labeled as Hollywood's strongest overall year just for the sheer number of classics that were released, 1939 was quite a year for the movies. The old reliable 'they don't make 'em like that anymore' applies to any number of movies from that year, especially Beau Geste. It is good old-fashioned entertainment with an exciting story, strong and likable characters and some creativity in telling the story. With a DVD released just weeks ago, don't skip this one by. A true classic from start to finish.

The Texican

In the 1960s when your star wasn't as bright as you'd like in Hollywood, where did you go? To Europe to make spaghetti westerns where aging stars and up-and-coming newbies starred in low-budget westerns that audiences ate up. A star in countless B-westerns, WWII hero Audie Murphy only made one spaghetti western, 1966's The Texican, one of those in between movies. Not quite a full-on spaghetti, but darker/dirtier than your typical American western.

Living for over a year south of the border in Mexico after hanging up his gun, gunslinger Jess Carlin (Murphy) finds out his brother, a newspaper editor, has been shot and killed. Jess sees through the explanation because brother Roy never carried a gun, but he was found with another dead man. Taking up the gun again and risking going up bounty hunters looking to cash in on the price on his head, Jess heads north and across the border to the town of Rimrock where he meets the man, Luke Starr (Broderick Crawford), who forced him to run into Mexico.

Murphy was never considered a great actor, but like so many action/adventure stars from the 50s and 60s, he was a physical presence even if he wasn't a big man. As Jess Carlin, Murphy handles all of his own stunts including a variety of fistfights, gunfights and chases on horseback. One fistfight especially stands out with one of Starr's gunmen. It doesn't look forced or fake, but instead feels very realistic, almost like the punches are always landing.

Leading the cast, Murphy and Crawford are good as counterparts. Murphy's character could have been lifted right out of some of the American westerns he starred in. Jess is on the straight and narrow and has some of a hard edge, but nothing like Clint Eastwood in the Dollars trilogy or any number of Franco Nero westerns. Big, brooding, hulking Crawford is an imposing villain, and his deep, raspy voice adds a lot to the character. Spaghetti westerns almost always throw in a female character that serves no real purpose but is easy on the eyes. The Texican amps that up a bit with 4 different ladies, but the two important parts go to the beautiful Diana Lorys as Kit O'Neal, Luke's girlfriend who takes a liking to Jess, and Luz Marquez as Sandy Adams, Roy's ex-fiance who helps Jess out in his hunt.

As for the typical spaghetti touches, The Texican doesn't disappoint. The music is one of the better Ennio Morricone clones from the genre, here's the trailer with a sample of the main theme. The locations around Barcelona, Cataluna, Spain don't look too familiar, but it's clearly Spain and they look as good as some of the more mainstream westerns from the area. And of course, you've got to mention the supporting cast. Easily recognizable Aldo Sambrell has one of his bigger supporting parts as Gil Rio, Luke's right-hand man who tangles with Jess whenever they meet. Joining Sambrell as the evil henchmen are Antonio Molino Rojo and Juan Antonio Peral.

So really, nothing too special here, just an enjoyable spaghetti western with a good cast, good music and enough shooting to keep you involved. Definitely worth a watch for spaghetti western fans, and especially for fans of Audie Murphy even if it's just to see him in an atypical part.