Bandolero!

With 1960's The Alamo -- one of my two favorite movies -- producer-director-star John Wayne built an entire set in Bracketville, Texas, that included the famous Alamo mission and nearby San Antonio. It was a set that was used in many, many films in the years following, even becoming quite the tourist attraction, before closing in the last few years. One of the best and one of my favorites? A 1968 western called Bandolero!

It's 1867 in Val Verde, Texas -- a small border town not far from the Rio Grande -- where noted outlaw Dee Bishop (Dean Martin) and his gang is caught trying to rob a bank, killing two people in the process. Sentenced to hang, the entire gang is rescued on the gallows by Mace Bishop (James Stewart), who is posing as the hangman. Dee and his men escape, riding out of town hell bent for leather trying to reach Mexico ahead of a posse led by the stubborn Val Verde sheriff, July Johnson (George Kennedy). On the trail, the Bishop gang takes a hostage, Maria Stoner (Raquel Welch), a widow of one of the men killed in the robbery, and continue on to Mexico with the posse close behind. Embarrassed in his town, July Johnson has another reason to pursue the gang as far as they go. He's long been in love with Maria. All sides cross into Mexico into what Maria calls 'territorio bandolero.' Translation? Bandit country, bandits who will kill any and all gringos they come across.

This isn't a classic western, but for me, it's always been one that is a lot of fun. It's from director Andrew McLaglen, a director who specialized in pretty straightforward, almost always pretty entertaining guy's guys movies like this, The Wild Geese, McClintock, The Devil's Brigade and many others. He's one of my favorites just because of that, he made movies that were fun, that were entertaining. This is one of his better efforts, a western with a great cast, an interesting premise, and some tweaks and twists and turns in a story that tries to blaze its own trail. Again, not a classic, but damn entertaining and one of my little-known movies I consider a personal favorite.

It starts with two of my favorite actors, Jimmy Stewart and Dean Martin, in lead roles. The character premise is familiar but handled nicely. These are two brothers torn apart by the Civil War, Stewart's Mace fighting for the Union while Martin's Dee fought with the South, specifically Quantrill's Raiders. Now, years later they're brought back together by dumb luck, some coincidence and one brother desperately trying to help the others. These are two good actors, and they carry the dramatic moments. It's especially cool to see Martin in a villain role, albeit a likable villain. The middle portion of the movie is carried by their scenes as they reunite, talk things out, plan for the future, all the while trying to mend their differences. So yeah, they're on the wrong side of the law, but...meh, it's Jimmy Stewart and Dean Martin so you kinda go with it.

As for the Bishop gang, look for Will Geer as the crotchety old man, Pop Chaney, his ill-mannered, probably a little off son, Joe (Tom Heaton), Babe Jenkins (Clint Richie), a deadshot with a rifle and a bit of a ladies man, and Robbie O'Hare (Sean McClory), the hard-living, loving-life Scotsman. An interesting, nasty group to round out the gang.

The rest of the cast ranges from interesting to good to good-looking. Kennedy is underused but very solid as Sheriff Johnson, the peace officer trying to do his job but he's got some ulterior motives for his actions. I also have always liked Andrew Prine as Roscoe Bookbinder, Johnson's loyal deputy. Lonesome Dove author Larry McMurtry was apparently a big fan of this movie and used both character names and general descriptions in that novel. As for Raquel Welch, she's trying, really doing up a Mexican accent. It isn't nearly as bad as some reviews make it out to be -- the script doesn't do her any favors -- but it isn't especially good either. Shallow dude time though, she looks as beautiful as ever. Plenty more familiar faces though including Denver Pyle, Rudy Diaz (the bandit leader), Harry Carey Jr., Perry Lopez, and Dub Taylor.

Now for that Alamo Village portion of our programming. McLaglen uses the Alamo set to good use with two extended set pieces, the opening being Val Verde, the robbery and then the eventual escape. The finale is actually on the Alamo mission set, an abandoned town set among the ruins of the bombed out fort. They try to disguise the recognizable chapel face, but you can't miss it if you're paying attention. It's a great use of the locations, Utah and Arizona also serving as some locations. Also, one more thing. I love composer Jerry Goldsmith, but this is one of his favorites, a score I absolutely love. The use of a mouth harp over the opening credits is an odd choice, but does it ever work. The rest of the score is more action-packed western themes, but it's catchy, memorable and a great support to all the action. Give it a listen HERE.

If there's an issue in this McLaglen western, it's that the script has a great opening set piece and a memorable, blood and guts finale. In the middle....yeah, things drag at times. There's a couple campfire scenes, Maria getting to know Dee, Dee reacquainting himself with Mace, and all the while Johnson's posse tangles with a large gang of bandits. Never boring, but never as exciting as the beginning and end. Now that ending/finale? Yikes, it packs a wallop, packs quite a punch and does so while delivering some genuine surprises. Quite an ending to one of my favorites. A perfectly entertaining little western. Nothing more, nothing less.

Bandolero! (1968): ***/****

Rewrite of February 2010 review

Lust for Gold

As Gordon Gekko profoundly said, 'Greed is good.' One of the all-time great films dealing with one of the seven deadly sins was released in 1948, Treasure of the Sierra Madre, a frightening look at what gold can do to one's minds. It's one of the all-time classics, making 1949's Lust for Gold an odd choice. Was it an effort to build off its success? Whatever the reason, it doesn't work despite some potential.

It's 1948 in Arizona, a treasure-hunter of sorts, Barry Storm (William Prince), is walking through the Superstition Mountains looking for a supposedly long-lost mine, the Lost Dutchman. He's actually following a famous treasure hunter who states he's got the mystery figured out, but Storm is stunned when he hears a gunshot and soon after finds the treasure hunter dead. He walks to the nearest town, still several days away, to report the murder, quickly realizing this isn't some innocent old treasure hunt. Storm is quickly cleared of suspicion, but his interest makes some curious as he claims to be the grandson of the original owner of the Dutchman mine. As the police waits for a break in the case, Storm sits back and listens to the legendary story of how the mine came to be, including how his grandfather, Jacob Walz (Glenn Ford), came to be involved.

This was an interesting movie, not always for the good. From director S. Sylvan Simon (and an uncredited George Marshall), 'Lust' does have its positives and negatives. It plays at times like a pseudo-documentary, a film noir meets a rough and tumble western. Unfortunately, it never really gels as one coherent film. I liked the framing device in the story, a 90-minute story split about 55 (the Glenn Ford part) and 35 (the 1948 part) divvying things up appropriately. It comes with a message from the state of Arizona -- almost like a Welcome Guide, "Come and see Arizona!" -- stating that the mine is still out there somewhere. It is based off a book by the real Barry Storm, called Thunder Gods Gold, and it plays like a pandering effort to sell some copies of the book. Prince's Storm's narration is a little much too, almost an attempt to sound like a James Cagney-esque gangster. "The gold's out there, I tells ya! Don't believe me, eh?!?"

Oddly enough though, I enjoyed the 1948 portion of the story far more than the 1885 portion. Prince is okay as the intrepidly curious Storm, jobless and interested in finding the lost mine that's supposedly filled with literally tons of gold. The film noir in the desert plays well, dead bodies and potshots piling up over the years as treasure hunters supposedly near the location of the lost mine. In addition to Prince, look for Paul Ford as the local sheriff with Will Geer and an uncredited Jay Silverheels (later Tonto on The Lone Ranger) as his two deputies. The mystery builds nicely and when things wrap up back in 1885, we get some solid resolution. The ending was pretty exciting, wrapping things up that the first 20-25 minutes set up.

Surprising for me was how dull the actual 1880 Arizona western was. It starts off well, greed, murder and betrayal introduced early to the point I thought I had stumbled onto a hidden gem from a genre I love. Well, I didn't. The story detours quickly and is never able to recover. Glenn Ford gets a rare turn as a bad guy -- an out and out bad guy -- but it's wasted because after he finds the gold mine by some rather duplicitous means (read = Murder) the story hamstrings the character as it devolves into a forced love triangle with Ida Lupino's Julia and her husband who she fights with constantly and would like to divorce, played to smarmy annoyingness by Gig Young. Wait, she loves her husband, but she doesn't because she loves Jacob but she doesn't love him either. Gag me, the story goes nowhere, turning a potentially really good story about what greed can do to people into a lame, glacially-moving love triangle. A love triangle of sorts. You've gotta be kidding me.

In the flashback portion, also look for Edgar Buchanan as a grizzled old trail hand working with Ford's Jacob and uncredited parts for Arthur Hunnicutt and Antonio Moreno as two rivals who may hold the key to the location of the lost gold mine. Even western veteran John Doucette turns up for a quick appearance in a barber shop talking about how much gold may be out there.

There are parts that worked surprisingly well. The explanation of how the gold came to be in the mine is a gem, an Apache war party descending on a heavily-guarded escort in a surprisingly graphic action scene. The same for the intro to the 1880s flashback, Glenn Ford's Jacob straight up murdering folks. How many movies can you say that about? Glenn Ford is a good guy for goodness sake! The ending in the flashback has some potential too, but by then I was so bored with the Ford-Lupino-Young part of the story I just didn't care. A movie that has its moments, but not enough of them unfortunately.

Lust for Gold (1949): **/****

Bright Victory

Some of my favorite war movies focus almost exclusively on the actual combat and fighting in war. Some of the best focus on the post-war lives of the soldiers. What about the soldiers who were wounded and/or traumatized by what they saw and experienced? The most obvious choices include The Best Years of Our Lives, The Men, Born on the 4th of July, but 1951's Bright Victory belongs in that grouping.

Working with a forward artillery unit laying telephone wire in 1943 North Africa, Larry Nevins (Arthur Kennedy) is struck in the side of the head by a German sniper's bullet. His optic nerves are destroyed, and doctors don't believe that surgery will ever restore his sight. Back in the states at a rehab facility, Nevins goes about the slow work of learning how to live as a blind individual. In a weird way, he has to re-learn how to be a regular person, relying on his other senses, using a walking stick. He has help along the way from other wounded vets (similarly blinded) and one girl, Judy (Peggy Dow), who he hits it off with immediately. All the while though Larry is worried about the reaction he'll get back home, especially from fiance, Chris (Julie Adams). 

Released in 1951 from director Mark Robson, 'Bright' is an impressive, well-made movie. Filmed in black and white, it's a meat and potatoes kind of movie. The focus is more on the personal level than any sort of large-scale action. This is Larry's story as he learns how to live as a blind person. We sees his reactions and how he copes; anger, frustration (even attempting suicide once), acceptance and finally a desire to work at it and move on with his life. It was filmed on location at Valley Forge Medical Center -- a nice touch for authenticity -- and detours once or twice to some cool Philadelphia locations. Why focus on the bigger picture when the smaller, more focused picture is more effective?

One of the best things going for 'Bright' comes from its honesty in exploring Larry's plight. He's born and raised in Florida, and living in the deep South, he's developed a racist streak right up his back. However, if you're blind.....Yeah, exactly. Voice inflections aside, how can you tell if someone is black or white? Working through his therapy, Larry strikes up a fast friendship with similarly wounded black soldier, Joe Morgan (James Edwards). Larry doesn't realize it though, one day making a statement about 'n***ers' being moved into the ward. And let the fireworks fly. The developing feeling in Larry is highly effective in its simplicity. It takes a life-altering incident to change his mind, but he starts to realize 'what difference does skin color make?' For a movie in 1951 years ahead of the Civil Rights movement, that's a profound message.

Casting Kennedy as Larry is a match made in heaven. Arthur Kennedy could be a despicable villain like nobody's business. More than that though, he's a great actor, and this is a part that allows him to show off his range. He's more than believable in the part, and when he's going through the life of a blinded veteran, it doesn't feel forced. His relationship with Dow's Judy is interesting without being too cute, and the dilemma he feels about what he said to Joe and also what awaits at home helps develop the character. The racist aspect gives an added dimension to the character too, all for the positive in a great part for Kennedy.

Also look for Will Geer and Nana Bryant as Larry's parents waiting back home in Florida, Joan Banks and a pre-Mr. Howell Jim Backus as Judy's sister and brother-in-law, and Richard Egan and Murray Hamilton as two blinded vets Larry meets in the rehab ward with John Hudson play Cpl. Flagg, a non-com working with the wounded vets. If you watch early, you can also see Rock Hudson in a bit part as one of Larry's repair crew working in North Africa.

An underrated WWII movie that deserves more of a following. Moments like Egan's soldier meeting his wife and son (who's he never seen/met) are perfection in their honesty. That's the feeling the whole movie gives off. It isn't aggressively shoving a story and message in its face. It's content to be what it is. An effective, well-told and well-acted story with some great performances. You can watch the entire movie HERE at Youtube.

Bright Victory <---Youtube clip (1951): *** 1/2 /****

The Tall Target

Like so many episodes of The Twilight Zone rose above its trippy sci-fi roots to tell some stories that are still around in the pop culture psyche.  One episodes -- "Back There" -- has future Professor from Gilligan's Island time traveling to April 14, 1865, realizing he can try and change history, saving President Abraham Lincoln's life but ultimately failing to do so. It's a great example of 'What if?," a question that can be applied to any and all parts of history -- some better than others. What if Lincoln had lived? What if assassin John Wilkes Booth had missed?

The tragedy of the situation of course is that Booth didn't miss, killing Lincoln with a shot to the head as he watched a play at Ford's Theater just days after the conclusion of the Civil War, the defining moment of his Presidency. Remembered as fondly as he was for helping save the United States from its most bloody conflict, it is easy to forget that Lincoln was not an extremely popular president, even among the Union states, much less the Confederate states who seceded. Were there other attempts on his life that failed? So goes the premise of 1951's The Tall Target.

A sergeant on the New York City Police Department, John Kennedy (Dick Powell) turns in a report explaining his investigation of a coming assassination attempt on the soon to be inaugurated president, Abraham Lincoln. It's 1861, and the country is tearing itself apart, both Northern and Southern opposition wanting nothing of this new Republican president. No one believes him though so he boards a train heading south to Baltimore, finding his partner -- a fellow detective -- murdered on the train. Someone has caught wind of what he is up to and intending to stop.  The train is packed as the passengers head to the inauguration in Baltimore, but can Kennedy find out who's targeting him before the assassination attempt can be made?

As a history buff, I'll watch anything associated with the Civil War, especially a little known story like this one about a failed assassination attempt on Lincoln.  A title card says the story is accurate to history, and attempts like these showed how chaotic and violent the months leading up to the Civil War actually work.  The historical backdrop is just gravy because setting the story on a fast-moving train is always a good jumping off point, especially when we're fully aware the killer is on-board somewhere. Think Murder on the Orient Express mixed with a little Strangers on a Train and a little historical what-if thrown in for good measure.

The guessing game comes from the passengers as Powell's Sgt. John Kennedy (interesting choice of name looking back on the 1951 movie now) goes about his investigation. There are a handful of characters, some obvious choices, others coming as a twist, and others serving as a red herring to the real identity of the plotters.  A mix of Northern and Southern passengers keep you guessing. Paula Raymond and Marshall Thompson play Ginny and Lance Beaufort, Southern brother and sister heading home, Lance a recent graduate of West Point. Ruby Dee is memorable as Rachel, Ginny's slave/maid, who may know something that will help Kennedy out. Adolphe Menjou plays Col. Jeffers, a Union militia officer heading to the inauguration, Florence Bates is Mrs. Alston, a well-known abolitionist writer, and Will Geer is the train conductor who finds his train caught up in a twisting, confusing murder investigation.

Having heard his name several times but never having seen in him anything, I've now seen Dick Powell in two different movies in as many weeks.  For a guy who made a name for himself on musicals and on stage, this is another part for the actor where he seems like a less than ideal choice to play a tough lead character. In Station West, he was a government agent investigating two murders, and here again he plays an officer who no one believes, albeit involved in something much, much bigger. I don't know much more about Powell than what I've been able to take away from these two roles, but I like him. He's got kind of a snobby side to him, but he's still personable and a likable lead (if that makes sense). Song and dance man, maybe, but he's good here.

The 1950s were the high point of director Anthony Mann's career, but because he had so many successes over a 10-plus year span, some get lost in the shuffle. This is one of them unfortunately which hasn't gotten the credit it deserves. It is a movie that qualifies in my 'different so it's good' category of rating a movie. Mann brings his typical strong hand directing, keeping the mystery going with a hard edge to Kennedy's investigation. Anyone and everyone is a suspect as the bodies start to mount up. A cool, little historical murder mystery....oh, and Lincoln makes it.

The Tall Target <---TCM clips (1951): ***/****

Advise and Consent

Recently in the news, former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich was found guilty on one count of 24 levied against him.  A mistrial is in the works, but the news was nothing new.  Controversies and scandals in politics are as old as well, politics itself.  Are we surprised anymore when a politician, whether it be the President or down through the ranks to Senators, Representatives, Governors, and on and on, does something stupid in the news?  Sex, past indiscretions, corruption, all over the above, nothing seems to faze the American public anymore.

Let's go back almost half a century in more innocent times, I guess, the 1960s weren't exactly innocent.  But the times were certainly different without that 24-hour news cycle that keeps viewers up to date on everything going on.  Politicians could have secrets and that's just what they were, secrets.  The master of adult-themed movies, Otto Preminger explored this concept with 1962's Advise and Consent. When you accept a position in the public eye, you lose your privacy to a certain point.  You open yourself up for criticism on many fronts, but if this Preminger movie teaches us anything, we all have secrets. It's only a matter of time before they're found out.

The President of the United States (Franchot Tone) has chosen a nominee for the vacant position of the Secretary of State. The man is Robert Leffingwell (Henry Fonda) and from the get-go, the nomination divides the Senate who will have to approve or disapprove him. The Senate majority leader (Walter Pidgeon) is all for the choice and knows he can get the necessary number of votes for Leffingwell. Opposing him is a long-time senator from South Carolina (Charles Laughton), who was burned by Leffingwell in the past and still holds a grudge. But before a vote can be counted, the nomination must go through a Senate sub-committee headed by an idealistic young senator (Don Murray) who will decide if Leffingwell is capable of doing the job. But as the committee starts, the dirt comes out and the fight begins.

As he did so often with his movies, Preminger puts together a very impressive ensemble cast to work with.  It's so good from top to bottom that Fonda -- yes, Henry Fonda -- is almost an afterthought as a supporting character.  He doesn't even make an appearance in the last 30 minutes.  Preminger was a perfectionist as a filmmaker, but actors must have liked working with him.  Along with the names mentioned above, there is also Gene Tierney, Peter Lawford, Will Geer, Burgess Meredith, Lew Ayres, and Paul Ford among others. Like any large ensemble, some in the cast get more of a chance to shine than others, but none disappoint however long they're on screen.  Murray, Pidgeon and Laughton are the ones that shine brightest though, including Ayres as a vanilla vice president.

This isn't a movie about camera techniques or in your face effects.  Preminger lets takes and scenes go on uninterrupted without the slightest editing.  Characters hold conversations like they would in real life.  He lets his cast show off their ability, letting the dialogue do all the talking the story needs.  At times, the pace can be infuriatingly slow (it is 140 minutes long) because of that, especially toward the end when the pace should be picking up, but it's all part of the story the movie revels in.  Preminger filmed in countless locations in Washington DC -- shooting in black and white -- giving a real feel for all the backroom deals and shady motives that really go on in the capital.  It doesn't intentionally call attention to itself, but the movie is a treat to watch on a purely visual level.

What was somewhat disappointing as the story develops is that by 2010, nothing really surprised me in terms of government scandals and controversies.  In the last 10 or 20 years, there has been murder, extramarital affairs, corruption, prostitution, kidnappings, and any number of other things I'm probably forgetting.  So when the scandals do pop up, including Fonda's Leffingwell and his past involvement in a different government and Murray's Senator's past coming back to haunt him, they don't have a huge affect on the viewer.  Shocking in 1962, maybe, but not in 2010.  Through no fault of Preminger's then (you can't blame him for making a move when he did), the emotional impact is lessened then just by time and how the world has changed in the almost 50 years since.

As everything does unravel in the end and the twists and secrets come out, the story thankfully picks up some steam.  One twist at the very end was a little too coincidental for me personally, the timing just too perfect, but that's movies for you. It is a movie that is as professionally done as just about any other movie you'll come across, and the cast is hard to top.  If there was a way to watch this in 1962, maybe the impact would have been greater, but in 2010, it's still pretty good.

Advise and Consent <---IMDB trailer (1962): ***/****

Executive Action

Conspiracies theories are everywhere from something as minor as sports and rivalries to stupid like Bigfoot, Area 51, and the Loch Ness monster.  But the conspiracy to top them all is the assassination of John F. Kennedy in Dallas November 22, 1963.  Lee Harvey Oswald is known as the shooter, but for years conspiracy theorists have wondered what actually happened that November day.  Were there other shooters, was Oswald even involved or just a dupe?  

What has driven these theories all these years is that there are too many holes in the explanation provided by the lone shooter theory.  Everything doesn't add up, leading to speculation that it was all an immense conspiracy that killed JFK.  Who was part of it?  Who knows, but answers range from government to big business to right wing to extremists and some who insist Oswald was the lone shooter.  We'll almost certainly never know who killed Kennedy and how it was accomplished, but we can always wonder and theorize what actually happened.  With that idea is 1973's Executive Action.

This is a movie that doesn't wonder if there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy, it's the conspiracy that does kill Kennedy.  A title card explains the background and says 'This is what could have happened.'  In that sense, it's extremely startling.  In the same way United 93 and World Trade Center were uncomfortable to watch because they were made so close to 9/11, Executive Action is difficult to watch because of its subject matter.  We know in the end Kennedy will be shot driving in his motorcade, but that doesn't take away from the surprise of it all.  The assassination planners are talking about killing the president of the United States in an honest, forthright manner.

It's summer 1963 and a group of powerful right-wing activists (including Burt Lancaster, Robert Ryan and Will Geer) meet together at a luxurious mansion.  Their analysts have predicted a future that has a Kennedy (John, Bobby and Ted) in the White House with other Kennedys holding key positions in the Cabinet.  None of these powerful men like the direction the country is taking with JFK in its most powerful position and have begun to put a complicated plot to kill the President.  Two teams go about preparing for the hit (led by Ed Lauter and William Watson) with black ops operatives.  While the plot is formed, the higher-ups begin to set up a plan that will paint Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin.  Everything comes together, and then the date comes along.  November 22, 1963 will be the day.

The special features offer interviews that explain everyone involved in the movie was warned that their careers were probably over if they made the movie.  It's presented as a documentary as if this is how it happened, not just an interpretation of what might have happened.  It is a quick-moving story that never lingers long on one part of the story.  The longest segment is of course the actual assassination as three gunmen set up to shoot JFK, one in the Book Depository, one on the grassy knoll, and a third on a nearby hotel roof.  It's an eerie, spooky scene that is filmed like a scene out of any political thriller, not one where the President is shot.  Like the rest of the movie, it is unsettling to say the least.

Seeing a story like this which deals with such a controversial 'what if?' in history, I was more than a little surprised to see big names like Lancaster and Ryan involved.  The focus is clearly on the assassination conspiracy with characters being completely secondary.  Ryan is the right wing leader of the group, and Lancaster is the mysterious orchestrator of the plan with years of black ops experience working for him.  These are brilliant minds who believe the choice they've made will benefit the United States for years to come.  We're not talking a month or two down the road, but in terms of world affairs, especially U.S. involvement in Vietnam. 

Like any movie based on a conspiracy or a controversial topic, it's up to the viewer to decide how much they'll believe, or maybe more importantly, how much they'll allow themselves to believe.  Could this have happened as the movie presents it?  Sure.  No matter what you believe though, it's hard not to admit that as presented here, the conspiracy theorists have lots of ammunition to use to prove that it wasn't a lone gunman that killed Kennedy.  Believe it or not (I tend to lean toward the conspiracy side), Executive Action is a fascinating 'what if?'  We'll never know what happened but it is always interesting to wonder what did happen.

Executive Action <----trailer (1973): ***/****

Seconds

Can an ending to a movie save the whole movie? Today I watched 1966's Seconds after taping it last week off of TCM.  The first 80 minutes or so I absolutely hated, bored to tears and hoping the ending would salvage something out of this wreck.  Surprisingly enough, I was rewarded.  How often does that happen?  A movie you're not enjoying actually gets better?  No way.  But still, the build-up was excruciatingly dull at times in an effort to be different.  So did the ending save the movie?

Director John Frankenheimer is one of my favorite directors with his unique visual style and storytelling ability.  His critics use those things against him, saying that his movies often lacked heart.  True to a point but not as a broad, all-covering statement for a director that made his fair share of classics.  His 'Seconds' is a deeply flawed movie and one that certainly qualifies as heavy on style, short on heart (until the end at least).  It tries to be too different, too groundbreaking in delivering an interesting story that would have sufficed on its own.

A middle-aged loan officer at a bank with a wife and kids, Arthur Hamilton (John Randolph) is in a rut.  He's incredibly on edge after he receives several calls in the dead of night from an old friend, Charlie, who Arthur believed was dead.  Charlie delivers an ominous message for Arthur to go to a specified address.  He somewhat suspiciously goes along and discovers a company that offers people a second chance in life.  For a fee, their death is faked and through extensive plastic surgery they are reborn and given a new life.  Arthur agrees and in his new life is Tony Wilson (Rock Hudson), a young painter living in California with absolutely no responsibilities.  But Arthur/Tony quickly realizes maybe his life wasn't so bad in the first place.

The story itself is pretty trippy and appropriately came from a source novel.  Kudos to the author on originality.  But that unique-feeling of the story is slowed down to a snail's pace as it is revealed.  The premise is great, but Frankenheimer spends too long on the reveal.  I won't say he's showing off with the camera, but some shaky-cam and in-your-face shooting is evident in the early segments.  The reveal itself with Jeff Corey playing an executive of the 'Seconds' company is pretty good, if somewhat confusing, but post-surgery the slow pacing comes back.  One really bizarre sequence has Tony and his new girlfriend, Nora (Salome Jens), taking part in some weird hippie wine-making ritual.

It is in his new life that Tony realizes he still has all the same problems he used to have.  He even breaks down and goes and sees his "widow," posing as an old friend of her dead husband.  This is when the movie picks up in terms of storytelling, style and a twist so perfect I wouldn't even think of blowing it here.  The ending twist isn't one that is hinted at other than a throwaway line early in the movie so when it comes, it should hopefully catch you completely off guard.  Credit to Hudson in these final scenes for some of the most emotional, wordless acting I've ever seen.

Other than the obvious physical differences between Randolph and Hudson -- and a 10-year age difference -- that makes the transformation a little too remarkably well done, I have no problem with the acting.  Randolph is a depressed middle-aged man looking for a second chance but at the same time is wary of an offer that seems too good to be true.  Hudson delivers maybe his best performance as Tony, an older man trying to live again as a younger man.  At times a little over the top, his part is still dead-on.  Corey and Will Geer are frighteningly calm as two executives at 'the company' with Richard Anderson as the brilliant surgeon rounding out the unholy trilogy.

So all that said, it's hard to recommend this one.  The first 75 minutes was extremely difficult for me to watch, even with a very visual style that borders on showing off.  Great movie to look at, sure, but in terms of story I wasn't interested.  And that's with an incredibly innovative premise!  However, the ending is a perfect mix of paranoia, fear and realizing your mistakes too late.  Know that the first 3/4 of the movie can be difficult to get through, but the ending makes those struggles worthwhile.

Seconds <----trailer (1966): **/****