The Bandit of Zhobe

Late this summer I reviewed 1956's Zarak, a quasi-historical epic that was entertaining for all the wrong reasons. Epically bad choices in casting, lack of story and character development, all lost in a search for that epic scale which was never really there to begin with.  So how do you improve on it? Well, long story short, you don't. Made three years later, 1959's The Bandit of Zhobe is almost scene-for-scene the exact same movie.

A chieftain of an Indian tribe (India, not Native American) on the frontier, Kasim Khan (Victor Mature) has his family and life torn apart from him, his tribe massacred in a brutal massacre led by Azhad Khan (Walter Gotell), a rival chief who leads the attack with his men dressed as British troops. With a small but loyal group of followers, Kasim becomes a bandit, terrorizing British interests in the area. The regional commander, Major Cowley (Norman Wooland), would like nothing more than to get his hands on the bandit, but Kasim avoids him at every turn. Cowley's daughter, Zena (Anne Aubrey), believes Kasim deserves a chance to know the truth, but can she get him to believe what actually happened?

I gave a marginally positive review for 1956's Zarak (read HERE) in July. The TCM website inexplicably listed this quasi-sequel/remake as a western, but it was apparent almost immediately that this was basically the same thing as Zarak.  Check that, it's not basically the same thing. It is the same thing. Mature plays the same character risen from the dead, Wooland the capable British officer trying to arrest him, and Aubrey the oddly out of place possible love interest. Maybe studios thought audiences were stupid enough to forget. Maybe the studios just didn't care, seeing a cheap chance to make some money. Yeah, that second one sounds more appropriate.

For whatever reason and having seen the two movies about four-five months apart, I liked 'Bandit' considerably more than its predecessor.  Go figure because I certainly can't. The same problems are there -- little story, just a running series of battles, no character development -- but I went along with it this time. Hoping to capitalize and make some easy $, the studio reuses countless shots and whole sequences.  Watch them back-to-back and you'll see at least 15-20 minutes of footage pop up in both films.  The battle scenes are ripped from Zarak in their entirety and dropped into this movie. The positive? The Zarak battles scenes were the best thing going for that movie, and not surprisingly they work here too.

Looking like he's phoning it in for a paycheck, Mature says about 18 words the whole movie. Those words are growled and muttered. He is the star of the movie with name recognition only, nothing else. The focus instead turns to his British counterparts.  Anthony Newley plays Cpl. Stokes, the somewhat goofy British soldier placed in charge of watching the major's daughter and not enjoying his duty at all. Some comedy but not too much thankfully.  Aubrey is the innocent one, sure she can figure everything out without anything bad happening, Wooland the veteran officer trying to avoid a full-scale war breaking out.

So this isn't much of a shocker, but for a 1959 British movie generally forgotten and made on the cheap, there isn't much info out there about 'Bandit.' I'd like to say where the movie was filmed, but I honestly have no idea, and I can't find that information anywhere. So what to say? In Italy or Asia or wherever 'Bandit' was filmed, it is a starkly shot but certainly visually interesting film. The TCM print was in pan-n-scan too, and it still looked good. That speaks to something. An average movie for sure, but one I enjoyed. I'd say watch Zarak too, but the pure awesomeness might blow your mind.

The Bandit of Zhobe <---Youtube scene (1959): ** 1/2 /****

The Man Inside

One of Britain's great character actors, Anthony Newley was honored on Turner Classic Movies recently with a day devoted to his films.  A familiar face who often play sidekicks and partners to the star, Newley was always a welcome face when I stumbled upon him in cast listings. While he provides some odd yet still funny comedic timing in 1958's The Man Inside, even Newley and an impressive cast can't save the movie.

Having planned the robbery for 15 years, Englishman Sam Carter (Nigel Patrick) walks into a diamond exchange in New York City and steals a diamond worth over $700,000.  The success comes from the simplicity of the job, and now no one -- including the police -- know where to start looking for Carter or the diamond. Milo March (Jack Palance), a private detective, is called in to see what he can find trying to pick up the crook's trail. March finds himself globe-trotting, following Carter to Lisbon, Madrid, Paris and London, always one step behind him. He keeps running into a mysterious Austrian woman (Anita Ekberg) who similarly has an interest in acquiring the diamond, and that's not all. Some very bad, very hard men don't care who gets hurt as they search for the rare diamond.

As I found out afterward, 'Inside' is not available on VHS or DVD so I was glad to stumble across it on TCM's schedule. It's nothing special and drifts along with its story more than a pointed, driven effort. Still, director John Gilling keeps it interesting if not always hugely entertaining. There are villains, but the type you assume will never successfully hurt a good guy. Said good guys betray each other, but you know they'll end up working together in the end. Part film noir, heist, and European tour guide, 'Inside' never really decides what it is. Drama? Comedy? Never great and never awful, decent enough way to spend 97 minutes.

Newley didn't get a mention in the plot review because like a lot of sidekicks, his part isn't essential to the story. The very British Newley plays the very Italian Ernesto, a taxi driver and guide in Madrid who meets Palance's March and ends up helping him around the city. He plays surprisingly well off the always intense Palance, providing some lighter moments with some running comedic bits that just shouldn't work, but well, they end up working. It's a good supporting part for Mr. Newley who always seems to be having fun no matter the role he plays.

It always feels like a cop-out when I write about this in a review, devoting an entire paragraph to this particular aspect, but as was the case here in 'Inside' it is really good. Yes, here I go again with on-location shooting, Gilling filming much of his movie in Lisbon, Madrid and Paris. Filmed in a very stylish black and white, this very visual movie helped me as a viewer slog through some of the slower portions. And while it sounds obvious, a movie is just better when you see the actors actually in the locations, not a poorly done green screen effect. It's always pretty clear when the actor isn't actually in those glamorous European cities. To some, maybe it's a little thing, but it's a major selling point for me, and 'Inside' doesn't disappoint on that level.

The good and bad here is that the cast assembled is a good one, but they're not always given anything to do. Lots of travel scenes, lots of pointless talking that waste an otherwise talented cast. Palance's March is a step back from his usual psychotic character he perfected over his career. Still intense, but pulled back a notch or two. Human Barbie doll Ekberg is the femme fatale, playing all sides for her own gain. Patrick is the shifty Carter, the diamond thief who we know little about. Some more background would have been nice about the character, his motivations, his reasoning, something. Also look for Donald Pleasance as a Spanish organ grinder, Sid James as March's friend and supervisor Franklin, and Bonar Colleano and Sean Kelly as two hired guns after the diamond.   

All things considered, a pretty forgettable movie. The cast is above average though, and it's a great movie to look at so there's just enough to recommend here. Barely, but still recommending it.

The Man Inside (1958): **/****

Horrible Bosses

For the lucky ones among us, work ain't so bad. It's tolerable and even enjoyable at times. But who at some point in their adult life hasn't had one of those God awful, truly horrific bosses that make you want to rip your own ears off? If you don't qualify there, congratulations to you. Turning that fantasy of killing your boss into a feature length comedy -- this past summer's Horrible Bosses -- has never been so funny.

Friends since high school, Dale (Charlie Day), Nick (Jason Bateman) and Kurt (Jason Sudeikis) are all in some rather difficult situations at work in one way or another. With the economy in the tank though, they can't up and quit their jobs, much less tell their bosses off like they'd rather do. Drinking together one night, the three joke about killing their bosses, solving each others' problem with three nice, little murders. Okay, maybe it isn't a joke as all three decide this is their best alternative. With some help from a streetwise ex-con, Motherf**ker Jones (Jamie Foxx), who provides some "murder advice," the three friends go about planning some murders.

There's no way a comedic Strangers on a Train should work, but wouldn't you know it? It does. Murdering your boss(es) doesn't exactly sound like a bucket of laughs, but director Seth Gordon handles it in the right fashion. It isn't a drama with some comedic moments or even a dark comedy with some sinister laughs. This is down and out stupid funny movie with no pretensions of being anything else. Three long-time friends with no criminal background/experience in any way murdering their bosses? Bumbling their way through some 'recon' and 'intel'? The results are surprisingly hilarious with a very funny script from three different screenwriters (I'm too lazy to type and link all three names. Besides, do you care?)

Now onto the bosses, three roles that the actors are clearly having some fun with. The biggest part goes to Kevin Spacey as Harken, Bateman's manipulative tool of a boss with an ego the size of a blimp. Nobody does pretentious and smarmy like Spacey, having a ball playing a ridiculous over the cop comedic part. Jennifer Aniston gets to sex it up as Dale's boss, Dr. Julia, a dentist who takes every opportunity to sexually harass a recently engaged Dale. It doesn't seem so bad as his friends say. Aniston plays against type in a raunchier role than usual, and yeah, she looks phenomenal. Just saying.... And last there's an unrecognizable Colin Farrell as Pellitt, Kurt's cocaine-snorting freak of a boss. He's underused, but what's there is very funny. 

As a long-time fan of FX's It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, I love Charlie Day's work as Charlie Kelly, the illiterate, generally clueless and all-around goof who can't mange to do anything right. Playing Dale here, he's by far the funniest of the three friends. Goofy at times to the point of crazy, Day shows that same talent he has in Sunny, if a little lighter and not as sinister. The same for Sudeikis who seems destined for bigger and better things than Saturday Night Live. The only misfire is Bateman who seems to be sleepwalking at times. He has some funny lines -- his exchange about street racing with a Prius is classic -- but he doesn't look too interested.

Along with Foxx in a scene-stealing part as MotherF'er Jones, the cast features a couple other small but worthwhile parts. Look for Donald Sutherland, Bob Newhart, Julie Bowen, comedian Ron White, and Ioan Gruffudd in small but extremely effective bit parts.

Something is missing from all the zaniness that I can't quite put my finger on. The movie is funny with some great one-liners coming out of a ridiculously preposterous predicament, but is it too goofy at times? They never seem to really take serious what's going on. Eh, maybe they don't need to. It's funny.

Horrible Bosses <---trailer (2011): ***/****

Hearts of the West

Who among us at some point hasn't wanted to be a movie star? Even if it was just for a second, the glamour of the big screen looks awfully inviting. So how about a young country bumpkin getting started in the movies and finding out it isn't quite as glamorous as it looks? In steps 1975's Hearts of the West.

Hoping to become a western novel writer, young Lewis Tater (Jeff Bridges) heads west to what he believes is a writing school only to find it is a correspondence school and a con job at that. Still wanting to pursue his dream, Lewis runs afoul of the con men (Anthony James and Richard B. Shull) and ends up with some of their money. On the run, Lewis stumbles onto the set of a western being filmed in the desert and quickly finds work. He wants to be a writer above all else but starts off as a background player and stuntman, meeting Howard Pike (Andy Griffith) and a handful of other vets of the business. Somewhat naive and a little idealistic though, Lewis finds out everything isn't quite what it's made out to be.

Following your dreams and coming of age stories are pretty familiar story-lines, but that's not a bad thing. Bridges at 26 years old is probably a little old for the Lewis character, but he makes it work. A tad pretentious at times because he's so assured of his writing abilities, Bridges gives Lewis that solid mix of naive youngster and over the top, energetic where you can't help but like him. He meets people both good and bad, finding out that trusting others isn't always the easiest or best thing to do to advance yourself. Bridges is one of my favorites, and his performance here -- while not one of his most well known -- is a very strong role to lead the movie.

What works so well with director Howard Zieff's movie is the portrayal of an ever-growing business, movies. Set in the early 1930s, 'Hearts' is right in that time when studios were still trying to figure out how to make the transition from silent films to sound films, the focus here on the cheap western serials made with a quick turnaround. The good guys were very good, the bad guys very bad, and the stunt guys? Well, they just want to get paid. It is the little scenes and moments that made me laugh. Alan Arkin plays Kessler, a director who can manipulate like nobody's business, "motivating" Lewis by telling him the money they'll lose if a scene doesn't work. Bridges' ridiculously theatrical "death scene" has him twisting and turning, moaning and groaning before finally falling to the ground with a thud. A little window into one of Hollywood's most interesting eras, and a good window at that.

In an impressive supporting cast, Arkin and Griffith both stand out for all the right reasons. Arkin's Kessler is a supporting player to the story and not a necessarily important one, but Arkin makes the best of it. He isn't chewing the scenery, but it's close. He gets to ham it up a bit working with his cast, stunt men, script supervisors and film crew. Kessler goes from zero to 60 like nothing, providing some truly funny outbursts. In between The Andy Griffith Show but before Matlock, Griffith gets to show off his range, a fun character who's had years of experience in the business who also has a darker side. Bridges' Lewis clearly looks up to him, something that could come back to bite him. It's a great performance, both of them are, the strong parts that can bring a movie up a notch or two overall.

That's not all though with a very deep cast assembled for this movie-making film. Blythe Danner plays Miss Trout, a script supervisor who Lewis meets on-set. She similarly feels sympathy for him while also liking him and his genuine willingness to make something of himself. Donald Pleasence makes a quick appearance as A.J. Neitz, a movie producer with lots of pull all around Hollywood. Alex Rocco is underused as Earl, one of Arkin's assistants. Matt Clark and Burton Gilliam are two of the stunt crew who work with Lewis and Howard, putting themselves in harm's way for a small payday. Good cast from top to bottom.

Not much else to say here. Just a good movie, funny, sweet and a great look into the movies from behind the camera.

Hearts of the West <---TCM clips (1975): ***/****

The King and Four Queens

Where to start with 1956's The King and Four Queens? You know, other than "I really didn't like it." Billed as a comedy western, it never amounts to anything and had me wondering where all that comedy went. Some interesting casting and a good director, but it is a story that would have benefited from a much darker, more cynical approach. Of course I say that about a lot of movies, but here goes anyways.

Riding into a lonely western town, Dan Kehoe (Clark Gable) has possibly stumbled onto riches more than he ever imagined. A bartender tells him of $100,000 worth of gold but with an interesting backstory. The four McDade brothers pulled off a robbery of the gold, but three were killed and one escaped and has been hiding ever since. The gold is believed to be guarded at Saddle Mound, the McDade ranch run by Ma McDade (Jo Van Fleet), and the four possible widows of the brothers. Dan has $ in his eyes, and he intends to get that gold, even with the protective Ma around, guarding her daughter-in-laws and the gold with her rifle. Let the charming and seduction begin.

This movie has 1950s American western syndrome. It has all the elements of a potentially entertaining, successful western but never finds a way to gel all those elements together. Even late in his career, Gable is a worthy leading man, and director Raoul Walsh was a more than capable hand with a story like this. Shot on location in Utah, the locations are stunningly beautiful, providing a great backdrop for a lackluster story that never goes anywhere. Composer Alex North's score doesn't leave much of an impression, positive or negative.

Like so many 1950s American westerns, 'King' goes more for the psychological edge which sounds weird considering it is a comedic western. At least, it's listed as that. It isn't funny in the slightest, and the story of a saddle tramp -- even one as charming as Clark Gable -- wooing four lonely, attractive and man-happy widows and their controlling, intimidating mother-in-law just isn't funny at its most basic. If you're going to make this a comedy, just commit. Make it ridiculous. Make it stupid, but you have to try and provide some sort of laughs.

This is going to sound ridiculous after I ripped the movie the last two paragraphs, but there were times watching this western where I couldn't help but think of a well-written play, if not Shakespeare along those lines certainly. If Walsh didn't want to commit to a slapstick comedy, then go the other way. Make this western the darkest thing you've ever seen. A saddle tramp charming, seducing and manipulating four attractive young widows to gain the gold they're hiding sounds like a naturally pretty dark scenario, but that's not the case here. Disappointing end result. Maybe there's potential for a Skin-a-max movie with this story. Who knows, it couldn't be much duller than this movie.

Working with what they've got in terms of a script, the cast does their best with what's in front of them. Gable is okay as Kehoe, but it isn't the most energetic part or most interesting. Jo Van Fleet has the strongest part as Ma McDade, family matriarch who's seen her family torn apart and is desperately trying to hold on to what's left. The widows include Eleanor Parker as Sabina, smart and crafty and up to something, Jean Willes as the fiery and hot-tempered Ruby, Barbara Nichols as Birdie, the dance hall girl, and Sara Shane as Oralie, the quiet, even meek widow.  Look for Jay C. Flippen as a helpful bartender, Arthur Shields as a priest, and Roy Roberts as a curious sheriff.

Never a good sign when the best thing a movie has going for it is the location shooting. Dull western that wastes a decent cast. Thankfully it's only 84 minutes long. Still.....pass.

The King and Four Queens <---early scene (1956): */****

The Big Caper

Nothing flashy, nothing new to the genre, I still very much liked 1957's The Big Caper. Solid cast, interesting B-movie characters, and some bad guys as part of a heist crew that are just too much to believe. A classic? Nope, but it's pretty good for what it is, an entertaining heist movie that doesn't try to be anything that it isn't.

Several months removed from his last successful job, Frank Harper (Rory Calhoun) has ran out of money and has found a new job, one that he could retire on if it goes through. A poorly guarded bank with minimal security twice a month holds the payroll for the Marine base and Camp Pendleton, and to Frank, the money is begging to be taken. He approaches partner and bankroll, Flood (James Gregory), who agrees to go along with the plan. As a set-up, Frank and Flood's girl, Kay (Mary Costa), move into town, buy a gas station and a house, setting up shop as a young, married couple. Creating an alibi, they live there several months in preparation for the job, and then Flood's crew shows up. Let the trouble begin.

The one twist on the familiar noir-heist thriller was the 'what if?' concept added into the story. Setting up a nice, little life for themselves, Frank and Kay become a part of suburban life. Frank makes a profit at his gas station, Kay creates a home for the "couple" and things are looking all around pretty good for them. Kay wants nothing more than to get away from the menacing Flood while Frank's tortured past and childhood seemingly won't let him appreciate what he has.  Kay tries like crazy to convince him otherwise. We're not talking Shakespeare here, but it was nice to see at least some effort by a movie made to bring something new to the heist flick. The effort is very much appreciated.

A Just Hit Play favorite, Calhoun does what he does best here, the bad guy who maybe isn't so bad. He does the tough guy like nobody's business, treading that fine line between straight villain and flawed hero.  It's good to see him in a non-western too where he got pigeon-holed throughout the 1950s.  There's a definite chemistry with Costa, bringing some heart to their scenes together in idyllic suburban life. For you trivia fans, Costa was the voice of Princess Aurora in Disney's Sleeping Beauty so there you go. Being the more obvious sinister villain that he was born to play, Gregory is a scene-stealer, the crime kingpin who puts everything in motion. He doesn't seem like that bad of a guy until some problems arise pre-heist, and well, things go downhill from there. Not big names leading the way, but all strong performances.

This is a 1957 B-movie noirish heist story, and the bad guys have to be very bad to make Calhoun's Frank be sympathetic. Mission accomplished in that department. Let's start with some of Flood's crew, beginning with Zimmer (Robert H. Harris), an explosives expert who will create several diversions during the robbery. His flaw? He's an alcoholic pyromaniac who can never have too much gin. Next, there's Roy (Corey Allen), a fitness freak with some rapist tendencies, or at least some sexual issues that Flood plays up. There's also Harry (Paul Picerni), a ladies man and all-around dope, and Dutch (Florenz Ames), the safecracker who wants nothing to do with the crew or the take, just a flat rate for his services. Quite a crew to say the least, one of the more eccentric, eclectic heist crews I can think of.

So has any heist in a movie ever gone smoothly, including the getaway? Okay, the Ocean's 11 remake doesn't count. Of course George Clooney and Co. are going to pull off the job. It's pretty clear that this heist won't go smoothly. For starters, it's a supposed "easy" job, and we all know how that goes.  Translation = Epic fail. The heist sequence -- about 20 minutes long -- is solid, ratcheting up the tension, but it is in the aftermath where 'Caper' falls short a bit. Yes, it's Doom and Gloom time. I wanted an epically downer ending, but the story and/or script just doesn't have the guts. It is far from a happy ending, but more could have been done. Still good, but it could have been great.

This movie across the board has a lot going for it. Director Robert Stevens keeps things moving with an 84-minute movie that is aided by some California locations and a jazzy score from Albert Glasser that is good in that really obvious way, music blaring to tell you what's coming next. Basically a completely forgotten flick, well worth checking out if you stumble across it.

The Big Caper (1957): ***/****

36 Hours

Though I've written about this before, it's hard to avoid repeating it. Imagine a secret the whole world wants to know in this modern ultra-connected world and keeping that secret for months...successfully. In 1944, Allied forces kept a secret of the coming European invasion, keeping Normandy under wraps as the spot of the attack. How far would the Germans go to discovering that location? In steps 1965's 36 Hours.

It is May 31, 1944 and U.S. Army intelligence officer Major Jefferson Pike (James Garner) is sent to Lisbon to meet with a source who may have info on the German's knowledge of the coming invasion. He is one of the select few among the Allied forces who knows not only the location of the coming invasion but all its intricate details....and the Germans know it. He's drugged and kidnapped. How far will the Germans go to get that knowledge? Using a radical procedure developed by Dr. Walter Gruber (Rod Taylor) for a different result, the Germans intend to trick Pike into thinking it is 1950, and that World War II is long since over. With the invasion looming and working in a small window, can Gruber get the info out of Pike in time?

Intensely unique and original. That's the best description I can think of for director George Seaton's film, but somehow it is not enough, not appropriate enough. It is the execution of the first 75 minutes that make this movie special. In 2011, imagine a secret as big as the Normandy invasion.....exactly, you can't. This is a secret that kept the world captive for months and wasn't revealed. The D-Day invasion of June 6, 1944 was a world changer, an event that altered the course of history. Is the story true? Who knows for sure? It stands to reason though that with a coming event that could change the future of the world, one side would pull out each and every stop to see if they could influence that event.

So how does Dr. Gruber do it? Pike is kidnapped and drugged. His hair is dyed, a chemical is placed on his skin to age it, a solution dropped in his eyes to blur his vision, and he wakes up in a U.S. Army hospital in......1950?!? This is a vast conspiracy to get the information out of the Intelligence officer, Gruber telling him he has retrograde amnesia that cancels the last six years of his life. I won't go into a ton of details or reveals, but the movie and the story -- even resorting to an amnesia ploy -- works. It just works. Could Pike fall for it? Could he reveal Normandy as the location of the coming invasion? Would the German High Command even believe him if he told them? One of the most unique, well-told "gimmicks" (for lack of a better word) I've ever seen in a movie.

Three stars do the heavy lifting here in support of said-unique story. Garner is the unknowing dupe, the target. His performance isn't great because the movie doesn't require him to be great. His Pike doesn't have much to do other than look confused. Garner is still himself though, and his laid back, ultra-cool persona works....until he doesn't have to be laid back or ultra-cool anymore. Then watch out there, Germans, because you're in for it. Eva Marie Saint plays Anna, one of Gruber's "assistants," a nurse posing as Pike's future wife. Anna has been lifted from a concentration camp to help, her life used as a bargaining chip. Her character and its relevance certainly adds some gravity to the film, giving a heart to a WWII thriller.

The best part though is saved for Rod Taylor as Doctor/Major Walter Gruber. The brilliant mind behind the plan, Gruber is an American-born German, returning to Germany with his family when he was 16. His original intention with the plan of future-amnesia hypnosis (best description I can think of) was to "save" German troops returning from the Russian front, and it worked, helping them relax only to find out it's a few days later, not years. He has faith in his plan if not its intentions, and Taylor does a great job there. He balances the deception with a genuine concern for Pike, Anna and Germany as a whole as he feels pressure from the S.S. (including interrogator Werner Peters). He seems to know it but plods on anyways. Gruber is fighting a losing battle because he gets the information, he gets the Normandy location, but no one believes it. A great performance from Taylor with a tragic-tint to it.

With a story that unique and entertaining, it would be nearly impossible to keep up the momentum, and the last 30 minutes just isn't as good as the first 80 or so. It loses some of the perspective as the smart, well thought out angle heads back to the more traditional chase sequences. Still, the movie is a gem. It is beautifully shot in black and white and composer Dimitri Tiomkin's score won't disappoint. Even look for Hogan's Heroes' Sgt. Schultz, John Banner, in a small but key role late. Looking for something different in a WWII movie? Start here.

36 Hours <---TCM trailer (1965): ***/****

Vera Cruz

When audiences saw 1954's Vera Cruz in theaters, I'm curious what their reaction was. Did they appreciate it, realizing they were seeing something new and different? Was it too much of a departure for western fans who liked their good guys very good and their bad guys very bad? It's easy to look back now and see the impact it made on countless other westerns, even heavily influencing the whole sub-genre of spaghetti westerns.

With the Civil War ended and his Louisiana plantation destroyed, former Confederate officer Ben Trane (Gary Cooper) heads south into Mexico looking to start over. He meets Joe Erin (Burt Lancaster), another American if somewhat younger, looking to prosper from the Franco-Mexican War. Joe has with him a gang of gunfighters, adventurers and saddle tramps so Trane joins them, signing on with the French forces, including Marquis Henri (Cesar Romero). They're hired to escort Countess Marie (Denise Darcel) to the port city of Vera Cruz, but something doesn't seem on the up and up. On the trail Ben and Joe figure out why. The Countess' wagon is loaded with $3 million in gold, and now all bets are off.

The Magnificent Seven, The Wild Bunch, Sergio Leone's Dollars trilogy (For a Few Dollars More specifically), those are just a few of the movies heavily influenced by director Robert Aldrich's 1954 western. Vera Cruz was one of the first westerns to take a heavily cynical look at the west and all its violence and greed. It has a mean streak painted right up its back that few other movies couldn't even think of at different points. Little kids are used as hostages by main characters (supposed good guys), brutal betrayals wait around every corner, and the violence can be a little startling in its execution; not often shown but implied. One character gets lanced through the throat, others are shot point blank in the face, one Mexican revolutionary is cornered and run through by French lancers. Startling and effective, always entertaining.

The reason I mention 'Few Dollars More' is the relationship and uneasy partnership formed between Cooper's Trane and Lancaster's Joe, an obvious influence on Clint Eastwood and Lee Van Cleef in Leone's spaghetti western. Both fast on the draw, they form that partnership out of necessity and a certain respect, but that doesn't mean they have to trust each other. Cooper is the unquestioned hero/good guy, but even he has a darker side. Lancaster is easier to read, his Joe telling you whatever you want to here and going along with it as long as it benefits him. He'd betray you with the snap of a finger. Lancaster's devilish grin says all you need to know about his Joe Erin. They have a great back and forth consistently throughout the movie, two legends playing off each other effortlessly.

Filmed in Mexico -- similar locations to The Wrath of God -- Vera Cruz has a feeling of authenticity, of being right there in 1866 as the Mexican Juaristas fight Maximilian's French forces. Aldrich filmed in Technicolor, and the movie has a distinct look to it, somehow colorful and washed out. There are some great individual shots Aldrich does with the camera, one reveal of a plaza ringed with revolutionaries, the other a possible betrayal showing a line of gunmen waiting to turn. Hugo Friedhofer's score is probably the most mainstream thing going for the movie, a more traditional score, but that's not a bad thing. Little things definitely work here to boost up some cool, even iconic scenes like Ben and Joe showing off their abilities at a ball in Maxmilian's court.

Aldrich specialized in guy's guys movies, and his cast is impressive. Along with Romero is Henry Brandon as Capt. Danette, a smarmy French officer looking down on Erin's gang. Darcel is Lancaster's perfect female counter, a beautiful woman ready to betray anyone for her own good, with Sara Montiel playing Nina, a young Mexican woman hovering around the escort. Joe's gang of ruffians and gunslingers should please most western fans with some future stars involved, including Charles Bronson, Jack Elam and Ernest Borgnine while also including Archie Savage as Ballad, a black former Union soldier, James Seay and James McCallion. All smaller parts, but fun ones still, Bronson even getting to play a harmonica, foreshadowing Leone's Once Upon a Time in the West.

Clocking in at just over 90 minutes, Vera Cruz never really slows down, macho head games, showdowns, chases, ambushes and betrayals around every corner. Definitely stick this one through to the end. A Juarista assault on a French garrison has a ton of action, and the shootout among the gang is a doozy, especially the surprising ending. An above average, exciting and influential western, Vera Cruz is a must-see.

Vera Cruz <---TCM trailer/clips (1954): *** 1/2 /****

The Bedford Incident

The Cold War produced countless worthy movies ranging from the intensely dramatic like the classic Fail Safe to the insanely sardonic and comedic Dr. Strangelove. One that has been criminally forgotten over the years is much more in the vein of Fail Safe and is a semi-classic in its own right, 1965's The Bedford Incident.

Assigned to write a story about navy life aboard a U.S. ship, journalist Ben Munceford (Sidney Poitier) is flown by helicopter to join the U.S.S. Bedford in a patrol somewhere off the Greenland coast. Aboard the destroyer, Ben meets its captain, Eric Finlander (Richard Widmark), a career officer with a long list of accolades. Finlander is after results even though the United States is not officially at war. Ben finds a crew pushed to their limits, ready to split at the seams as they "hunt." Off the Greenland coast, sonar spots a Russian submarine where it shouldn't be. Finlander orders the Bedford to track it, hoping to receive orders to make the sub surface and identify itself. Ben begins to question though. What is the captain really up to, and what does he hopes will happen?

Tension doesn't begin to describe this movie from director James B. Harris, and why it's been forgotten or not remembered with Fail Safe I will never know. Harris films in black and white, the Bedford the one and only location for the length of the movie. It's cramped and claustrophobic, an odd feeling in the immensity of the ocean. But with Finlander's crew, we feel pushed to far too. We're waiting for something to happen, a confrontation we always wait for but never comes. It becomes almost unbearable as the Bedford hunts a Russian sub -- dubbed 'Big Red' -- with Finlander pushing and pushing, but for what? What does he hope to accomplish?

That of course leads to the ending, one of the best final 20 minutes in a movie ever. In terms of its ability to leave you feeling unsettled and even a little queasy, 'Bedford' and its ending are top notch. It rivals Fail Safe for pure shock and surprise value, and in the same way tries to deliver a message about the lunacy of the Cold War, a very timely message for 1965 and one that still rings true now in 2011. I want to discuss the ending in more specific detail, but I don't want to take away the emotional impact it can and should have. Stick with this one through to the end, a sense of doom and tension building until the very last shot.

Having worked together twice previously, Poitier and Widmark show off a chemistry together that actors dream of. Poitier is the intellectual, the journalist trying to understand exactly why and what this destroyer is doing. Nothing adds up for him. Widmark is one of my favorites, but I think this may be his best and by far most impressive character. He's a strong leader but a flawed one, driven to the point of obsession, a patriot but maybe too far. His Finlander will protect America at all costs, no matter the cost. Their interview midway through the movie is a highlight, two very talented actors going toe to toe, Harris filming in a close-up of each man's face the whole time.

The DVD packaging pushes those two lead actors as selling points, but that's just some of a handful of impressive supporting parts. Martin Balsam plays Doctor Chester Potter, the new medical officer who arrives with Munceford, immediately finding that he's out of his element, especially with Capt. Finlander. A young James MacArthur is Ensign Ralston, a young officer who Finlander pushes and pushes, possibly too far. Eric Portman is a scene-stealer as Commodore Schrepke, a former U-boat commander serving as an adviser now to the Navy, an extremely gifted commander who sees Finlander for all his flaws and abilities. Also look for Donald Sutherland, Wally Cox and Michael Kane as members of the crew.

This is a movie that deserves better, or at least more recognition. It deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as both Fail Safe and Dr. Strangelove, featuring strong performances from a deep cast, a unique tension-filled story, and one of the all-time great shocker endings. Definitely one worth catching up with.

The Bedford Incident <---trailer (1965): *** 1/2 /****