The Manchurian Candidate

Tags

1960's, Angela Lansbury, Frank Sinatra, James Gregory, Janet Leigh, John Frankenheimer, Laurence Harvey, The Manchurian Candidate, Thriller

Film Title

The Manchurian Candidate

Director

John Frankenheimer

Starring

• Frank Sinatra as Major Bennett Marco
• Laurence Harvey as Raymond Shaw
• Angela Lansbury as Mrs. Eleanor Iselin
• Janet Leigh as Eugenie Rose Chaney
• James Gregory as Senator John Iselin

A most unusual and highly compelling slice of Cold War paranoia and trickery, The Manchurian Candidate still holds intense power today, for its winding plot, direction and acting. With various switches in tone and much food for thought, it’s a movie that definitely burns into the brain with its intricate plot and terrifying notions.

During the Korean War, a platoon of U.S. soldiers, headed by the distant Raymond Shaw and included Captain Bennett Marco, their group is ambushed. After the war, they return to life in America, but something is amiss. For starters, Raymond is given the Medal of Honor, though we later see that he was a loner in his company and that while the men all say that “Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life”, there is something not right about it. The main person who it impacts is Marco, now a captain, who experiences a recurring nightmare of his dazed platoon being observed by Chinese and Russian agents, as a cold Raymond murders two of their members. Delving deeper, Marco comes to realise that the platoon was brainwashed while in captivity, with particular attention lavished upon Raymond. Yet while he has these parts of what looks like an elaborate Communist conspiracy, it’s getting it into some semblance of reality and reason that proves difficult for him to understand. At first not helped by Army Intelligence, when a fellow member of the squad speaks of the same thing, he receives some backing. Marco isn’t going down without a fight, as he rushes to uncover sinister machinations that continue to grow more complex. Meanwhile, Raymond’s mother Eleanor Iselin begins to use her pernicious influence to further her zealous and easily led husband John Iselin’s campaign. She is linked to something dark, but to explain it would be to spoil it. With memories eventually slotting into place, Marco knows that Raymond is unwittingly being commanded and primed to do something terrible. But can Marco put the pieces together before something truly horrifying can take place?

John Frankenheimer crafts this political thriller with a considerable amount of unusual tension, layering events through a dreamlike haze, yet still making it in the realms of reality when it comes to the underhand tactics of power angle. His off kilter approach to such dynamite material is rapid and complex, trusting the audience to pay attention and follow the labyrinthine plot at play. It’s a daring high wire act keeping all the contradicting parts of irony and terror going, but Frankenheimer is up to the task and does it with intelligence. The Manchurian Candidate is a film filled with political manipulations, dastardly ploys for power and the things people are willing to do to gain a foothold in government. While it’s all shot through the eyes of the Cold War, the atmosphere of it is still very apparent and topical today. This suggests that The Manchurian Candidate was a film ahead of its time in what it depicted and how it visualized it. And talking of visuals, the surreal touches and how it bleeds into reality are strikingly evoked. Repeating motifs of Queen of Hearts playing cards, rhyming phrases and unusual tricks are all in there to tease us. A prime example of the effectiveness of The Manchurian Candidate is the dream/flashback of Marco. In it, the camera starts turning and we witness his troops sitting and listening to what seems to be a lecture on plants given by a posh lady. As the camera continues its journey, it cunningly reveals that it is a brainwashing exercise by Communist agents. Such sly precision and the overlapping cuts between the two extremes are marvellously structured and disquieting. Much can also be said about the unnerving close-ups and deep focus, which in black and white, really stay with you. This is a movie that is genuinely unpredictable from scene to scene with its ever-changing tonality. From surreal to hard-hitting, baffling to cynically up front, The Manchurian Candidate keeps you on your toes with its intricacies and corkscrew plot. Twisting and turning away is the order of the day and with unusual and intentionally mysterious parts that are scattered in there, it is a brain teaser of the highest order. One can definitely say that this is a movie that is rewarding on repeat viewings, as you’re bound to discover something you hadn’t thought of the first time. Certain areas like the unusual scene between Marco and a mysterious woman named Eugenie where they communicate almost in code, are kept ambiguous and esoteric, ensuring your rapt attention and providing the overall feeling of a complex puzzle box that the film greatly projects. If ever there was a movie that provoked thoughts, it was The Manchurian Candidate. As for the music, it has a slowly percolating menace to it that strums away in the background and uses haunting repetition to enhance the feeling of hypnosis.

A simply marvellous cast of actors flesh out this shocking and impactful movie. Frank Sinatra leads the way, projecting a tormented yet determined manner as the crusading Major. Playing against his usual persona of cool and suave, Sinatra finds an exemplary change of pace that shows of his dramatic muscles. Often times, we are perplexed as he is in all this conspiracy and web-spinning, but his unwavering desire and desperation is what truly makes Sinatra ideal in this role. Laurence Harvey’s detached and remote demeanor fit perfectly with his character of Raymond, who is brainwashed into a remorseless killer for sinister purposes. Yet Harvey finds real moments of pathos and sympathy beneath the aloofness, contributing a tragic layer to the character. Yet it’s Angela Lansbury who is the person you remember most for her startling performance as the mother from hell. At first seeming to be just overly smothering, slowly and subtly her power crazed motives and single-minded persistence come through in chilling effect. Mrs. Eleanor Iselin is a master manipulator who pulls the strings of everyone, delivered with gusto and alarming coldness by the great Lansbury. Angela Lansbury formidably plays this woman as a shocking, monstrous and calculating harridan, insistent on getting what she wants and doing everything it takes to get it. For those who mainly think of Lansbury for her motherly and sweet roles, her performance here should make you re-asses that due to its jaw dropping impact and delicious evil. Janet Leigh appears as a most enigmatic lady, who you aren’t sure what to make of. Her scenes with Sinatra have a most unusual and eerie feeling as they raise so many questions, which is part of the beauty of it. James Gregory aces it as the buffoon and bombastic Senator, manipulated like a marionette by his wife for her own gain.

Menacingly suspenseful, darkly cynical and still timely after all these years, The Manchurian Candidate is a classic piece of mounting psychological tension and political satire That triumphs, complete with supreme direction and excellent acting.

Ever After

Tags

1990's, Andy Tennant, Anjelica Huston, Dougray Scott, Drama, Drew Barrymore, Ever After, Historical Drama, Jeanne Moreau, Judy Parfitt, Megan Dodds, Melanie Lynskey, Patrick Godfrey, Romance, Timothy West

Film Title

Ever After

Director

Andy Tennant

Starring

• Drew Barrymore as Danielle de Barbarac
• Anjelica Huston as Baroness Rodmilla de Ghent
• Dougray Scott as Prince Henry
• Megan Dodds as Marguerite
• Melanie Lynskey as Jacqueline
• Timothy West as King Francis
• Judy Parfitt as Queen Marie
• Patrick Godfrey as Leonardo da Vinci
• Jeanne Moreau as Grand Dame

The Cinderella story is given a lively and entertaining retelling, with a fresh historical fiction slant and modern view of the heroine. Ever After boasts heart and good humour, along with some unexpected touches that give the often told story a new coat of shiny paint.

In Renaissance France, little Danielle de Barbarac lives with her caring father. She never knew her late mother and has been raised with kindness by her father on his farming estate. Her father marries the Baroness Rodmilla de Ghent, who comes with her two daughters Marguerite and Jacqueline. Tragedy strikes when Danielle’s father dies following a heart attack and the nastiness of the Baroness really emerges. Years later, Danielle has grown into a beautiful young woman who has been reduced to a life of servitude under her stepmother. Jacqueline is nice to Danielle, but often stays quiet as she is frightened of her mother. The estate has fallen into ruin, while most of the servants have been cruelly sold and Rodmilla frequently spends money she hasn’t got trying to afford a life of luxury she thinks she’s entitled too. Though frequently mistreated by her stepmother and spiteful Marguerite , her spirited demeanor and feisty personality provide her with the right temperament to not simply be a doormat for others. Danielle is no ones fool and is a girl who will speak her mind when she’s pushed too far. One day, she encounters a must unexpected visitor; the dashing Prince Henry. He is attempting to evade his Royal protocol of an arranged marriage and tussles with Danielle when he tries to steal her father’s horse. He offers her payment if she remains silent about seeing him. This fleeting meeting doesn’t mean much to either at first, but it sets up that they will soon meet under more different circumstances. Shortly after, using the money he gave her, Danielle attempts to buy back a servant that her stepmother sold. Dressing up in her mother’s prized dress, Danielle once again meets Henry, who slowly becomes more curious about her. Her passionate manner stirs something within Henry and Danielle too develops feelings, even though he believes she is a member of nobility. Meanwhile, Rodmilla is plotting a way back into court and hearing that Prince Henry is expected to find a wife, sees snotty Marguerite as her ticket to prominence again. As Henry and Danielle fall further into love and she wears down his snobby attitude, complications arise with Danielle feeling guilty about having to hide her true identity. Add to this the presence of wise Leonardo da Vinci, who acts as something of a guardian angel, and it’s about to get fun and adventurous.

When doing an adaptation of a well-known story, things can go either way. You can be overly traditional or go down a fresh path. Ever After takes the latter road, though it manages to still reference the original source material. Andy Tennant strikes a nice, sprightly balance with the two throughout Ever After. The magical fantasy of other versions is stripped away to focus on the budding romance and spirit of the heroine. There are still touches of tradition to be found( the masked ball and the glass slipper) but everything else discovers a fresh and vibrant take on the material and is all the better for it. framing device employed here. In it, we witness an old duchess telling the ‘real story’ of Cinderella to The Brothers Grimm. Through this usage, we get an old storybook feeling but one that is more fun and modern than a lot of other versions. The fact that it presents the story as being a legend is also a cause to like Ever After, further placing it as one of the most interesting interpretations of the tale. The romance is heightened in Ever After, finding time to develop Danielle and Henry as gradual lovers with distinct personalities. Their encounters have a charm that reminded me of an old screwball comedy, with them running into one another and not quite knowing what to make of the other in the confusion. Danielle is especially well written and defined, coming across as resourceful, kind and full of spirit. Her primary goal isn’t to discover a prince( though romance obviously does figure into things) but to help those closest to her. It is definitely the most independent and tomboyish version of Cinderella there is and for that, one of my favourites. There are languors in the pacing in patches, but the irreverent and playful events in the film more than compensate in their effectiveness. The visual style is breathtaking; largely consisting of a gilded sheen that ties in with the setting and the content on display. The location work is as sumptuous as the elegant costume design on show. And of course, the film wouldn’t be the same without its wistful and lively score to keep things generously fun and engaging.

Drew Barrymore makes for a beautifully spirited and reliable heroine in the form of Danielle. Far removed from the sometimes passive and needing a man to save her incarnations of the Cinderella, Barrymore deftly translates a feisty toughness and genuine sympathy in the part. Danielle is very much a modern woman in an old-time, a strength that the luminous Barrymore plays to and delivers on with her likable charm and clever wits. Anjelica Huston is delightfully malicious and conniving as the stepmother, who dishes out biting remarks and executes underhand sneakiness like a pro. You really can see that Huston is having a ball being so wicked and even a little seductive to. Such diva like personality and slyness is ideal and splendidly conveyed by the fine Anjelica Huston. Dougray Scott is given more to do than most with the Prince Charming part. Scott plays the snobbish yet searching Henry with just the right amount of charm, restlessness and humour that causes him to spark with Danielle. And the gentle, bristling and growing chemistry between him and Barrymore is a lovely sight to witness. Megan Dodds is a bratty and selfish presence as the quite nasty stepsister, while Melanie Lynskey sweetly plays the kinder sibling. Humour and great support comes courtesy of Timothy West and Judy Parfitt, who star as the king and queen who can’t quite seem to work out their son. And special mention must go to Patrick Godfrey’s work as Leonardo da Vinci, whose inspiring speeches and pushes for romance helps Danielle and Henry get closer. The appearance of Jeanne Moreau as the narrator adds immense class and room to reflect, as her voice is so engaging and full of deep wisdom.

A lovingly rendered and fun take on a classic story, Ever After springs to life with both intelligence and care. It all contributes something strikingly modern film with a great protagonist who is anything but a damsel.

The Beguiled (2017 Film)

Tags

2010's, Angourie Rice, Colin Farrell, Elle Fanning, Kirsten Dunst, Nicole Kidman, Oona Laurence, Psychological Drama, Sofia Coppola, The Beguiled

Film Title

The Beguiled

Director

Sofia Coppola

Starring

• Colin Farrell as Corporal John McBurney
• Nicole Kidman as Miss Martha Farnsworth
• Kirsten Dunst as Edwina Morrow
• Elle Fanning as Alicia
• Oona Laurence as Amy
• Angourie Rice as Jane

Previously filmed in 1971, The Beguiled gets a reworking courtesy of Sofia Coppola and its different approach makes it one memorable movie of mounting tension and burgeoning sensuality.

It is 1864, Virginia and the Civil War is in motion. A young girl by the name of Amy from a nearby school for young girls, is out gathering mushrooms for food. She comes across Corporal John McBurney, a badly wounded Union Soldier and deserter. Helping him, Amy brings the unconscious man to her school. Here we meet the stalwart headmistress Miss Martha Farnsworth, vulnerable and melancholy teacher Edwina Morrow, and a few students, including teasing and bored teenager Alicia. There is curiosity among the girls about the man; many thinking it treason to harbor the enemy, but also a pang of sexuality as there hasn’t been a man around the isolated place for a long time. All of the ladies at the school in one way or another find themselves attracted to and curious about the handsome man in their residence. For the protective Martha, he is something that is tempting but troubling to her position of power. To shy Edwina, he is a decent man who seems to treat her with compassion. And to the precocious Alicia, he is something to project her kittenish desires on to. With the other younger girls, particularly Amy, John is something of a mysterious but friendly stranger. McBurney, while convalescing, does nothing to stop fanning the flames he has stoked and proceeds to flirt with the women. Largely, he manages to ingratiate himself into the hearts of the surrounding women, hoping to remain at the school and not return to the battlefield. Yet his trifling with their emotions in such a confined setting, will not be tolerated once fevered feelings finally get aired. The women themselves, particularly Martha, Edwina and Alicia, find themselves vying for his attentions and wrestling with romantic and lustful feelings. Soon events become complex for all the ladies, as the attraction and jealousies give way to irrevocable circumstances that tear the school to pieces in the wake of deception and anguish.

Sofia Coppola is at the helm of this steamy tale of repression and revenge, and goes about it with a finely tuned subtlety that is its chief asset. In comparison with the Don Siegel version that was more lurid and in your face(effectively so too), Coppola’s interpretation is more on the side of suggestion and nuance. Stifled desires and flurries of jealousy are glimpsed in actions and facial expressions, finding an unspoken way to project the inevitable chaos that will ring out soon enough. The tale, under the direction of Sofia Coppola, takes shape from a woman’s point of view, featuring the female gaze as opposed to the male one that so many films favour. John is repeatedly observed and lusted after in a variety of ways, most memorably when Martha sponge baths him and has to stop as her stifled desire is beginning to surface above her ladylike visage. A surprisingly sly wit also courses through the movie’s veins, which is unexpected but most welcome in the end. Themes of isolation and female identity have been explored through Coppola’s filmography already, but The Beguiled finds it in a darker setting. The choice by Coppola to have The Beguiled focus on the women primarily is a beneficial one, that allows expansion of character but also levels of surprising ambiguity. Plus, we aren’t told what to think about these people, rather it lets us make our minds up over their actions and consequences as they slowly become unsheathed. Who is really being beguiled in the film? Both John and the group of ladies exhibit signs of it, but the grey areas are what makes it so much more compelling to watch. Sofia Coppola has focused on isolation and female loneliness in her filmography successfully, here in The Beguiled, it lends itself excellently to this darker story that displays her command over suspense. While The Beguiled is definitely a psychological drama, a thriller element as the temperature rises, emerges under Coppola’s command. She shows she’s got a dab hand at creating tension; starting in the most subtle of ways before layering it with more prominent menace as John’s stay pulls apart the fabric of the female dominated house but comes around to find him in the process. Some of it can feel a tiny bit too gentle for such a tense story, but this is a minor quibble because the overall subtlety and open to interpretation approach lends The Beguiled an immensely watchable and tightly compact air. The evocative cinematography, based on shadowy bronze and occasional smattering of natural light, heightens the intensely claustrophobic cage that is the school, both for the women and John. A lot of it takes place within the aura of candlelight and closed curtains, further reinforcing the Southern Gothic entrapment of John and the tightly wound wheels of passion that are just fit to burst. There is an element of a very dark fairy tale present in the visuals, with the shafts of light through trees both coming off as beautiful and strange. And look out for the final shot of this movie, trust me it’s one that really speaks volumes and is strikingly executed. A sparse but effective score gathers momentum as darkness creeps into the tale.

Colin Farrell has the dashing good looks but also the talent to play the catalyst of The Beguiled. He is definitely someone who is manipulative and insincere in his promises, but an added depth comes out. Farrell brings with him a vulnerability that ultimately brings about his conniving behaviour, effectively he is brought down by his own plans. While Farrell is impressive in his part, the main focus of The Beguiled is the women. And they deliver brilliant work along the way. Nicole Kidman is both steely and motherly as the headmistress, who is not immune to feelings of passion that are stirred by John’s arrival. Through her watchful yet conflicted eyes, Kidman splendidly discovers a tough will and domineering hold over all who she sees; she is both protector and something of a jailer at the same time. For me, Kirsten Dunst, who has long been one of my favourite actresses, is the standout when starring as the wounded and easily lead Edwina. Her face presents a palpable sadness and a sincere hope of something that will take her away from the life she leads, a hope she thinks John will assist in. But Dunst also manages to inhabit something unpredictable in Edwina once betrayed, that rises with the jealousy of the characters around her. It’s an understated but very memorable performance. Elle Fanning, all pouting lips and come hither glances, nicely plays the teasing seductive student whose interest in John is far from wholesome. Young Oona Laurence makes a mark with a wide-eyed portrayal of children’s innocence, while Angourie Rice also stands out as one of the students growing attracted to the man in the school.

A decidedly Gothic and arresting drama of psychological desire and it’s consequences, The Beguiled finds Sofia Coppola stepping our of her comfort zone a little and fashioning something very haunting. Strikingly composed and executed, plus boasting some fine acting from a largely female cast, The Beguiled is very worthy of the praise it has been receiving.

Lost in Translation

Tags

2000's, Bill Murray, Drama, Giovanni Ribisi, Lost in Translation, Scarlett Johansson, Sofia Coppola

Film Title

Lost in Translation

Director

Sofia Coppola

Starring

• Bill Murray as Bob Harris
• Scarlett Johansson as Charlotte
• Giovanni Ribisi as John

A bittersweet and moving drama, etched with comedy and pathos from Sofia Coppola, Lost in Translation makes for a beautifully crafted and thought-provoking movie of alienation and connection. Featuring two beautifully subtle and captivating performances from Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson, Lost in Translation is a movie to treasure for its quiet and engaging impact.

Bob Harris is a middle-aged, washed-up actor who has journeyed to Tokyo, Japan to shoot a whiskey commercial. Completely alienated as he doesn’t understand the language and blue because of his directionless existence( that includes estrangement from his wife and kids), Bob is lost in a sea of uncertainty and slowly drowning. Meanwhile, a young woman named Charlotte, fresh out of Yale and newly married, is also in Tokyo and the same hotel. She too feels ignored and questioning of herself, as her inattentive photographer husband John seems to care more about his career than her. Charlotte is left to her own devices, yet can’t shake the instability and indecision of her life. Both jet lagged and struggling with insomnia, Bob and Charlotte meet one night in the hotel bar. Despite them being different in more ways than one, they begin to forge a friendship that opens their eyes to something more positive and worthwhile. Through their encounters, both of the humorous and heartfelt variety, and the deep bond that they form, Bob and Charlotte are able to face the challenges of life and consider that it actually be something wonderful if they look closer.

Sofia Coppola strikingly yet subtly directs and writes this wonderful movie, capturing an honesty and heartfelt story of two unlikely soul mates finding solace in each other’s company. Her rendering of their existences as troubled and searching is nicely complimented by a good dose of humour. It straddles the line between comedy and drama, without sacrificing any of the poignant or bittersweet angles of the tale. Coppola displays a quiet confidence and her measured approach with both her directing and script is notably transfixing. Loneliness and a feeling of not belonging are heightened by the culture shock of the Japanese setting and the visuals of large buildings that dwarf Bob and Charlotte. And talking of visuals, they are simply sublime and have real substance in framing the central duo as isolated and fish out of water. The lighting scheme, gold hues and often a certain blue, highlights both the melancholia of their situations and the often nighttime confessions that each shares along the way of their bond. A certain shimmer is found in the cinematography too, hinting at their may be a chance of hope for both the listless souls in Lost in Translation. And the way that Japan is used is gorgeous, utilizing the beauty and scope of the country to its advantage. Crucially and one of the instruments that really made me appreciate Lost in Translation, was that although an emotional feeling is generated between Bob and Charlotte, it doesn’t lead to a love affair. So many Hollywood films go for the obvious and expected when you have a film about two people unintentionally connecting, thankfully Lost in Translation doesn’t fall into that trap. An atmospheric and ambient soundtrack is the ideal companion to the film, soaking it in a layer of hope, escape and pathos.

The acting in Lost in Translation is a definite high point of an already impressive movie. Bill Murray turns in a restrained yet subtly expressive portrayal of tired loneliness and the want to experience something. Moving from deadpan comedy to sensitive depth, Murray is at some of his best as the sympathetic Bob, searching for something hopeful to come along. All it takes is just the slightest movement of his eyes and face, and you know all there is to know about the character, down to the fact that Murray plays him so stunningly. Equally as good is Scarlett Johansson, who despite only being 17 at the time of filming, contributed a mature and exquisitely subtle performance. Finding nuance, humour and melancholy in Charlotte, Johansson holds her own and is mesmerising to watch. What makes their portrayals so beautiful is the little moments of quietly suggesting thoughts and dreams, achieved with the most simple yet meaningful ways. The two boast a believable rapport with each other, discovering a platonic yet still caring need for the companionship to combat the alienation of their respective lives. Giovanni Ribisi, who previously narrated The Virgin Suicides, appears as Charlotte’s busy husband, whose hipster attitude and blatant lack of concern have you seeing why she wants to find something close to connection.

Evocative, soulful and charming, Lost in Translation is a triumph for both Sofia Coppola and main actors, Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. Together, they create a touching film about unexpectedly finding someone to relate too and escaping from the pressures of life while facing up to some of them.

The Fabulous Baker Boys

Tags

1980's, Beau Bridges, Comedy, Drama, Jeff Bridges, Michelle Pfeiffer, Steve Kloves, The Fabulous Baker Boys

Film Title

The Fabulous Baker Boys

Director

Steve Kloves

Starring

• Michelle Pfeiffer as Susie Diamond
• Jeff Bridges as Jack Baker
• Beau Bridges as Frank Baker

An enchanting comedy-drama of music, family and dreams, The Fabulous Baker Boys provides laughs and pathos with a fine trio of central performances by Jeff and Beau Bridges, and especially the lovely Michelle Pfeiffer.

Jack and Frank Baker are the eponymous, travelling musical duo; piano playing brothers who perform regularly and are opposites in almost every way. While older brother Frank is the responsible sibling who is always organised, Jack is a sometimes sullen man who has grown tired of their long running act despite being the more talented one. With business slipping and them having to perform in less than glamorous lounges as a second-rate act, both are feeling the strain of what their careers have become. Frank enjoys his music and does it to support his family, while Jacks feels the emptiness of it all. They have the idea to audition a female singer, to breathe some life into their act and hopefully drum up some business. The first few ladies they get are all pretty bad and it looks like the guys will just have to continue their act just the way it is. That is until former escort Susie Diamond walks in to audition, even though she’s an hour age a half late. Gorgeous, witty and with a take no bull honesty, she wins Jack and Frank over when she starts to sing. Now feeling a bit more rejuvenated, the group begins experiencing success with Susie as the star attraction. But with the success comes doubt and frustration, as Frank becomes concerned that Jack is romantically pursuing Susie. He worries that this will jeopardize all of them if everything gets too personal, and sure enough it does. This throws a spanner in the works and as both of them having to deal with dormant feelings of being failures and still trying to go on. While on the road touring, the dynamics of the brothers change as both, along with Susie, have to contend with disillusionment and the wanting for something more in their lives.

Steve Kloves both writes and directs this beguiling and elegant piece of film. And considering it was the first movie he directed, his inexperience doesn’t show. In fact, the easy confidence and attention to character are spectacularly done, displaying his gift for letting his actors do their thing and not being overly flashy with overt style. Kloves sprinkles an Old Hollywood feeling to the work, that’s mixed with a contemporary sensibility and nuanced depth. Comedic moments abound, with the crackling screenplay firing zingers throughout, while balancing the character’s shaky relationships and desires. Laughs and sadness seem to go hand in hand in The Fabulous Baker Boys, making it a whole experience. The occasional meandering moment can be ignored because of how well-defined and invested the characters are, plus the fact that we do like watching their wishes and dashed dreams unfold. As music is a big part of it, The Fabulous Baker Boys doesn’t disappoint on that score.  And what beautiful music it is! Silky smooth jazz grooves and slinky torch songs, lend both a sexiness and melancholy to the overall picture. And speaking of sexiness, I can’t review The Fabulous Baker Boys and not mention it’s most famous scene. In it, Susie, clad in a figure hugging, red dress, lounges across the piano and sings ‘Makin Whoopee’. Backed by the impressively warm and sultry cinematography that hovers over everything, it’s a sizzling high point of a fantastic movie.

While it is The Fabulous Baker Boys who have the title, the film really is a show for the talents of Michelle Pfeiffer. As the effervescent Susie, she displays a whole multitude of sides and angles that are natural and convincing( plus showcasing some gorgeous vocals). She’s tough yet vulnerable, hardened but dreamy and both nervous and seductive. Pfeiffer completely owns the role with a deft assurance. It’s a plum role for any actress, but Pfeiffer makes it so you can’t imagine anyone else playing it except her. For my money, this is one of the finest hour’s from one of my favourite actresses. Ably complimenting Pfeiffer’s excellence are the eponymous duo, envisioned by real life siblings Jeff and Beau Bridges. The chalk and cheese nature of the characters is nicely observed through the work of them both; Jeff’s charm and quietly seething demeanor as Jack counteracted by the more savvy but fussy personality displayed by Beau as Frank . I really got into their bond that they shared, which while shaky and volatile, still had a depth of heart ever-present. Being real life brothers obviously lends itself excellently to the often volatile relationship of the duo. The chemistry is natural and when the deeper feelings emerge, it’s intriguing to ponder whether it is just acting or something much more personal. Whatever the view, the Bridges Brothers bounce off one another effortlessly, while highlighting a certain weariness and quiet rivalry.

A slice of life drama and comedy, that has sparkling dialogue and an undercurrent of wistfulness, The Fabulous Baker Boys is sublime entertainment, well performed and nicely crafted.

The Sentinel

Tags

1970's, Arthur Kennedy, Ava Gardner, Beverly D'Angelo, Burgess Meredith, Chris Sarandon, Christopher Walken, Cristina Raines, Deborah Raffin, Eli Wallach, Horror, Jeff Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, John Carradine, José Ferrer, Martin Balsam, Michael Winner, Sylvia Miles, The Sentinel

Film Title

The Sentinel

Director

Michael Winner

Starring

• Cristina Raines as Alison Parker
• Chris Sarandon as Michael Lerman
• John Carradine as Father Halliran
• Burgess Meredith as Charles Chazen
• Ava Gardner as Miss Logan
• Deborah Raffin as Jennifer
• Arthur Kennedy as Monsignor
• Eli Wallach as Detective Gatz
• Christopher Walken as Detective Rizzo
• Martin Balsam as Professor Ruzinsky
• José Ferrer as Robed Figure
• Sylvia Miles as Gerde
• Beverly D’Angelo as Sandra
• Jeff Goldblum as Fashion Photographer
• Jerry Orbach as Director

A 70’s horror with an all-star cast, I was expecting The Sentinel to be a treat. Alas, it was a shoddy mess that descended into ludicrous and incomprehensible places. There are nary any positives in this film, which could have been something special, fur floundered into the abyss of rubbish.

Alison is a young, pretty model living in New York. Though in a relationship with slick lawyer Michael Lerman, she is reluctant to move in with him or consider engagement. She decides to find her own place to live. While seemingly living the high life, Alison has baggage in her memories that still haunt her and refuse to let go. Continuing looking for a place, she is recommended by realtor Miss Logan, a beautiful Brooklyn Heights apartment. She notices a man in the top apartment window. Miss Logan informs her that it is Father Halliran, a blind priest who seems to sit there without ever really moving. Thrilled at the scope of the place and the reasonable amount being asked for, Alison moves in. Shortly after arrival, Alison encounters some of the strange tenants of the building, starting with the peculiar and intrusive Charles Chazen. Gradually, Alison’s nights are disturbed by horrific visions of her troubled past that involved an attempted suicide and is plagued by unnerving noises from another apartment. Frightened yet very curious, Alison is then shocked to learn that only she and Father Halliran reside in the complex, with no one having previously occupied it for three years. Becoming more alarmed by events that may or may not be real, Alison crumbles completely. Somehow, she is linked to a centuries old pattern that the apartment block has which poses a deadly and potentially otherworldly trouble. Can Alison really figure out why these visions appear and what sinister designs are being made for her?

Michael Winner gets some atmosphere going at the start, but his lack of taste and frankly trying direction makes The Sentinel really drag and go into a place of boredom. He plays up the overt sensationalism and outrageous moments to an extent that they aren’t frightening or remotely chilling. The visual style is one positive point( even though it’s sadly only one such instance) finding a certain gloss and at least setting some spooky aura. This however is drowned out by the sheer implausibility and inanity  of it all, that causes The Sentinel to be a major let down. The Sentinel film that could have been something if thought had actually gone into. What we are left with is a confused and histrionic film, that doesn’t generate hardly any terror or resonance. There is one scene that is rightly celebrated for its scare factor, but apart from that, The Sentinel is laughable and deplorable. I mean, I’m game for some campy and melodramatic moments in horror, often they can be quite fun. But the overload, coupled with a dragging, not to mention hard to follow story, was too much for me to take. And there is one thing in The Sentinel that really left a bad taste in my mouth. When all hell breaks loose and the supposed fright of the movie is in swing, one manifestation of evil is depicted as people with prominent deformities. The main thing I took issue with was that the people used were actually deformed themselves. When you put a physical defect or disability on screen, it should be done with respect. Here, it equates the deformities with evil, which really didn’t lie well with me. It felt exploitative and mean-spirited, especially as the implication it made was in very poor taste. The music score is passable with some unusual passages, yet like the rest of The Sentinel, over cooks events to a laughable degree.

As aforementioned, The Sentinel has an unbelievable cast. The sad news is, hardly any of them are given anything to work with and show off their skills. Cristina Raines, in the lead of tormented model, is basically required to look frightened and pretty. She does both things well enough, but there’s nothing really meaty for her else to do. Chris Sarandon at least tries his best with putting some cocky attitude into the role of the lawyer boyfriend. John Carradine, heavily made up to look older, is pretty effective as the largely silent priest whose eerie presence hangs over the building. Burgess Meredith rocks creepy to the hilt as a pesky and very unusual neighbour, who becomes more than just a common nuisance. Ava Gardner is completely wasted as the realtor of the place, only appearing a handful of times and not equipped with much in the way of action to play. Deborah Raffin is pretty bland as Alison’s best friend, while experienced veteran actor Arthur Kennedy at least contributes some mystery as an enigmatic priest. Eli Wallach and a young Christopher Walken are seen in a thread of the story that makes no sense and wastes the obvious talents of two reliable stars. Martin Balsam and José Ferrer, two fine actors, both appear in blink and you’ll miss it roles which is extremely unfortunate. Sylvia Miles and Beverly D’Angelo certainly have the strangeness down in their parts, but not much else because the script restricts them. Bit parts are also handed to Jeff Goldblum and Jerry Orbach. The mix of old and new stars was supposed to be amazing, but they are never given any time to shine or strut their stuff.

A big mess of a movie that showed potential but quickly became farce, The Sentinel is one to avoid in the horror genre.

Burnt Offerings

Tags

1970's, Bette Davis, Burgess Meredith, Burnt Offerings, Dan Curtis, Eileen Heckart, Horror, Karen Black, Lee H. Montgomery, Mystery, Oliver Reed

Film Title

Burnt Offerings

Director

Dan Curtis

Starring

• Oliver Reed as Ben Rolf
• Karen Black as Marian Rolf
• Bette Davis as Aunt Elizabeth
• Lee H. Montgomery as Davey Rolf
• Burgess Meredith as Arnold Allardyce
• Eileen Heckart as Roz Allardyce

A haunted house horror/mystery that uses suggestion and enigmas to raise tension and atmosphere, Burnt Offerings is a seriously underrated chiller. Unease and the raising of hairs on the back of the neck are guaranteed in this effective movie.

The Rolf family; husband and wife Ben and Marian, their 12-year-old son Davey and elderly but sprightly Aunt Elizabeth, decide to take a summer vacation. They find a large house that is asking for tenants in California’s countryside. The house is marvellous, big in size and area, but a little dilapidated. Still, the reasonably cheap price to stay for the summer is very tempting. After meeting the slightly unusual brother and sister Arnold and Roz Allardyce, who own the house,  Marian becomes insistent on staying there. Ben is not so sure, especially as they ask them to take care of their elderly mother. She never comes out of her living quarters, so they are just required to bring meals to her door. Ben eventually agrees after seeing how much Marian would love it. Upon arrival, have left for some vague reason. Making the place their own for the time that they have, the family settle in nicely . But the house soon reveals that it’s not the most hospitable place for guests and seems to have something evil inside it. Marian is the main person who is influenced in a malevolent manner by the old house, becoming obsessed with it, rejuvenating the old place and behaving alarmingly alienated towards her family. Other strange events unfold like a seemingly possessed Ben nearly drowning Davey in the pool, the greenhouse of dead flowers slowly coming back to life and Marian’s insistence that the house needs her. Everything seems to link to the very house itself, which appears to wield a strange power over all that enter. But just what can it want with the family and in particular Will any of the family truly discover the sinister secrets and shocks of the house? Or will the house itself get them before it is too late?

The creeping thrills and strange mystery are kept to a good level of skill by director Dan Curtis. The set up boats all the usual hallmarks of a haunted house movie, bit the mysterious approach and the fact that we aren’t hit over the head with overt explanations, makes Burnt Offerings a good and under appreciated entry into the genre. Just how and why the house is tormenting them is the main mysterious crux of Burnt Offerings. It is only gradually that the real intentions of the house come into the light. The photography is one if the highlights of Burnt Offerings; enveloping events in a dream like haze that starts out quite nicely and joyfully, then little by little gets to an ominous level of chilling intensity. I also liked how it was different from some haunting movies. In a lot of them,  the haunting is designed to scare the people out, the malevolence actually wants to trap them for its own insidious purpose. To spoil the intention and designs of the house would be a major disservice to the creepy tone and uncomfortable events of Burnt Offerings. I will say that it is something very alarming and disturbing, yet done with degrees of exceptional subtlety and bubbling menace that make it pretty satisfying. The house is pretty much a character itself, though one that you really are t sure of. You know it’s evil because we’re in a horror movie, but the ways that it influences all, particularly Marian, is still pretty unsettling and spooky stuff. The slow burning pace is largely excellent in developing the evil of the house and building up numerous enigmatic angles. One little problem I had was that Burnt Offerings gets a bit leisurely in the middle half of the picture, when it should have some oomph in its engine. Saying that, it is redeemed quickly by what follows and the sensational climax of what is a really compelling horror mystery. Up and down strings and the old classic music box sound are in abundance, making Burnt Offerings suspenseful even when nothing unusual is happening. It’s that hint that something sinister will transpire that the score really works on.

Oliver Reed is his usual intense self as the husband under siege from the house, his dramatic approach lending itself well to the character’s eventual descent into tormented horror. Karen Black makes for a marvellously and genuinely creepy leading lady. Playing Marian, who becomes almost immediately entranced with the house, her unusual tics and mannerisms slowly emerge into something very alarming. It’s a credit to Black’s talent that you buy into how unusually obsessed and spine chilling Marian becomes, as her once genial persona starts to get more peculiar, mercurial and generally unstable as time passes. The great Bette Davis brings her professionalism and grand standing to the part of energetic Aunt Elizabeth, who is really the first to suspect something amiss in the house. It’s a supporting role, but when you have Davis, even in smaller roles she displays her immense talent and steals the scenes she is in. Lee H. Montgomery does the frightened child act well, while the brief but very memorable appearances of Burgess Meredith and Eileen Heckart as the unusual siblings who own the house, makes a deep impression and spooky one at that.

Spooky entertainment and creepy thrills abound in this slow-burning but extremely eerie horror film. If you like some haunted house horror, with mysterious overtones and good cast, Burnt Offerings is probably the flick for you.

Guncrazy

Tags

1990's, Billy Drago, Crime, Drama, Drew Barrymore, Guncrazy, Ione Skye, James LeGros, Joe Dallesandro, Michael Ironside, Tamra Davis

Film Title

Guncrazy

Director

Tamra Davis

Starring

• Drew Barrymore as Anita Minteer
• James LeGros as Howard Hickok
• Billy Drago as Hank Fulton
• Michael Ironside as Kincaid
• Joe Dallesandro as Rooney
• Ione Skye as Joy

A crime drama of two abused souls and lovers gaining what they consider power through automatic weapons in an unfair world, Guncrazy is pretty compelling in how it establishes the doomed love between the two misfits and the tragic consequences of it all. With effective performances from Drew Barrymore and James LeGros, plus some eye-catching direction from Tamra Davis in her debut, Guncrazy is a film worthy of attention.

Anita is a lonely teenager who is constantly bullied and harassed by schoolboys and sexually abused by her absentee mother’s boyfriend Rooney, who she lives with in his trailer. She retains something of a hopeful demeanor, though her way of sleeping with any guy, even if they treat her horribly, makes her an outcast and bad news to many in her desolate town. Her dire existence takes a turn when her geography teacher assigns a project of finding pen pals to converse with. While others write to people from around the world, Anita finds correspondence with Howard Hickok, a convict who is serving term for a manslaughter charge. As soon as she begins receiving his letters, Anita is madly in love as Howard talks to her with a sincerity and kindness that she’s never known. Adopting Howard’s love of guns, Anita gets slimy Rooney to teach her how to shoot. When he sexually abuses her again, she uses her newfound prowess to kill him. Howard becomes available for parole and Anita manages to persuade slightly zany local preacher and part-time mechanic Hank Fulton to give him a job within both capacities and vouch for him. Upon Howard’s arrival, him and Anita completely give themselves to the other. Howard is far from a hardened criminal; instead seeming vulnerable and tragic, and only using a gun when he can’t think of another way to get out of a situation. He feels a gun is making up for the fact that he is impotent, but Anita is actually happy that for once a man doesn’t want to take advantage of her. Meanwhile, stern local parole officer Kincaid doesn’t like the look of Howard and makes this feeling known to him, saying he believes he should never have been let out of jail. The two become besotted with each other, eventually marrying after Hank catches them together and as both of them have used the church to help themselves, but largely because they are infatuated with the presence of the other. Yet while attempting to get through the unfair and cruel life each has experienced, the gun lust that influences both takes over and things spiral. As they stumble into accidental killing that mounts to a body count and forces them to flee, the spectre of tragedy hangs over runaways Anita and Howard, getting closer by the second.

Considering it was her directing debut, Tamra Davis did a commendable job with the material and invested it with quite a bit of emotion. She never condones the actions of the protagonists, rather presenting them as two list people getting some feeling of illusory power with something dangerous. Davis doesn’t glamorize gun use, but more examines the reasons why Anita and Howard would become so enamoured with them. The run down and festering setting for a large chunk of Guncrazy points to the isolation and holed up feeling, envisioned by Tamra Davis through an attention to detail that is markedly unvarnished. Guncrazy features quite a lot foreshadowing through various visual imagery and some of the dialogue from Hank, which hints at darkness and turmoil even when someone is trying to gain salvation. Anita and Howard are basically doomed from the get go; stemming from the society around them and the mistreatment by others. By using firearms, they believe they have some control over their lives for once. Howard mainly obsesses over them as he sees them as the solution to problems and probably a symbol of manhood that he feels he lacks. While Anita adopts his love as it gives her what she considers strength to finally stand up for herself, starting with Rooney who pays the price for all the horror he has put Anita through. Some of it over stretches into melodrama and occasionally float into slow-moving, though there are enough touches to make Guncrazy still watchable and different in an offbeat way. A little bit longer on the running time might have benefited it, but the main story and characters invest you in it and paper over this flaw. It might not be Bonnie and Clyde or Badlands, but Guncrazy does a commendable job at delving into the turmoil of the two main characters and their tragic companionship. The largely electronic and rock influenced soundtrack suits the overall mood and angst of the piece.

Drew Barrymore turns in a stellar performance as the girl from the wrong side of the tracks who needs a feeling of belonging and care. The part of Anita is someone who is a misunderstood and mistreated girl, finally discovering at least for a while, a feeling of power and respect in the arms of the only man who has treated her right. Drew Barrymore burrows into Anita’s naivety and sunny, adorable need for love that ultimately is heartbreaking to watch. Anita just wants some acceptance in her bleak and unfortunate life, which Drew Barrymore plays naturally and with skill, ensuring that even when Anita is shooting others and on the run from the law, we feel a sense of sorrow for her. It’s a fascinating portrayal from Drew Barrymore, that really stands out. Equally as good is James LeGros, playing the gun obsessed Howard in a way that is different from what you’d expect. He has a quiet charm, sadness and even polite demeanor, that makes it hard to believe at first that he has ever committed a crime. Yet once a gun is put in his view, his boiling anger comes out with dangerous results and unpredictable outcomes. Both main actors work great together, finding an intense yet reflective understanding of each other, even if they are doomed throughout the whole thing. Billy Drago has always boasted for me a slightly off-kilter and strange vibe, which makes him perfect as the snake-handling preacher who is slightly crazy. His flair for the unusual is ideally utilised in this chief supporting role. Then there is Michael Ironside, who is gruff and disapproving as they come when acting as the skeptical parole officer. Joe Dallesandro is all sweaty and slobbering brutality after Anita, eventually getting what he deserves for his sadistic actions and abhorrent behaviour. Ione Skye is the only real weak link in the cast, partly because she is given hardly anything to do within the whole story.

A largely excellent film that strikingly gets across the alienation and desperation of two youths and their penchant for weaponry, Guncrazy is a memorable crime drama, highlighted by the work of Drew Barrymore in the lead. If you ever had any doubt about her versatility, check this out to see her sterling performance, surrounding by an array of interesting supporting players.

Sorry, Wrong Number

Tags

1940's, Anatole Litvak, Ann Richards, Barbara Stanwyck, Burt Lancaster, Ed Begley, Film Noir, Harold Vermilyea, Sorry Wrong Number, Thriller, Wendell Corey, William Conrad

Film Title

Sorry, Wrong Number

Director

Anatole Litvak

Starring

• Barbara Stanwyck as Leona Stevenson
• Burt Lancaster as Henry Stevenson
• Ann Richards as Sally Hunt Lord
• Wendell Corey as Dr. Alexander
• Harold Vermilyea as Waldo Evans
• Ed Begley as James Cotterell
• William Conrad as Morano

A well paced and inventively structured film noir thriller, Sorry, Wrong Number makes fantastic use of its setting and unfolding of dark mystery to form a tight and tense movie. Expanding on a famous radio play yet keeping a certain flair for drama in a limited setting, plus a fine cast headed by Barbara Stanwyck and Burt Lancaster, Sorry, Wrong Number is recommended viewing for noir and thriller fans who will no doubt find it very satisfying.

Leona Stevenson is a demanding, selfish heiress who is largely bed-ridden and when we meet her, alone in her Manhattan apartment. She gets more than she bargained for when she accidentally overhears a phone conversation(thanks to a telephone glitch) between two men, plotting and arranging a woman’s murder that very night. Leona has been trying to reach her husband Henry, who works for her father’s pharmaceutical chain, but hasn’t been able to locate. Panicking over the horrible plot she overhears, she becomes desperate to stop it happening. The fact that she only caught little bits of the conversation doesn’t help when she calls the police, due to a lack of clear evidence. Calling whoever she can think of for attempted help or news on Henry, through various flashbacks, revealing events and machinations fall into place regarding everyone it covers. We see Sally Hunt Lord, who was once romantically linked with Henry, Leona’s Doctor Alexander who holds important information about her, her controlling father James, a chemist named Waldo Evans, a mysterious gangster Morano and of course Henry himself, who we glimpse as feeling emasculated and weak thanks to his overbearing spouse. An underhand and malevolent scheme is also found here, but just how does it link to Leona and the planned murder? Growing more anxious and distressed as pieces slowly come into fruition but still remain confusing, Leona is left to decipher them before it is too late.

Anatole Litvak dials up the suspense with skill, letting the film play out largely in real-time and lets us discover many alarming things without spoon-feeding them to us. His control over ambience is also evident in how the mystery is gradually evinced and how it turns out differently than one might have wondered. Often times in some movies, flashbacks can often feel more than a bit redundant and overused. The same can’t be said of Sorry, Wrong Number, as the dips into the past are crucial to our understanding of the characters and their reasons for actions that may come back in some dark form. Sorry, Wrong Number provides a great exercise in visual style with panoramic and gliding camera shots that take in important details that tell parts of the story in a teasing but imperative way. The characters have a sense of change in them from the flashbacks to present, further giving a level of both distrust and curiosity. There is a heightened paranoia and isolation as Leona is prone to overreacting but thus time is telling the truth and all alone in her apartment. The home is often somewhere we consider safe which is reversed here. Then again, the nefarious and murky atmosphere of outside as the various facets of the puzzle come together is equally as dark. There is no real place of safety, which plays beautifully into the sinister heart of film noir and allows the film to have the feelings of a pitch-black noir. The twists are complex and unexpected, yet only sometimes confusing, thankfully the shocking nature of it all is intact and on display. Drama and genuine menace can be heard in the fine score by the amazing Franz Waxman, who really knew how to ramp up tension and suspense with his music.

Barbara Stanwyck impressively heads the cast as the pampered heiress Leona, whose night is turned into waking hours of terror once she hears the murder plot. Stanwyck strongly gets across the various mood swings and changes from past to present of the character, that are very intriguing to watch. Moving from self-absorbed and entitled to terrified and near mental collapse as everything unravels, Stanwyck covers it all with the assurance of the great pro she was. Her biggest achievement is that she telegraphs that Leona is not just some innocent victim in all of this, but a manipulative and petulant woman who we still feel some form of sympathy for in her time of horror. Burt Lancaster plays with his somewhat tough guy image to find something spineless and tired within husband Henry. While there is darkness to him, we aren’t quite sure to what extent it will emerge, mainly due to the excellence of Lancaster in the part. He may just be misunderstood or possibly to easily lead into something fishy , Lancaster suggests a mixture of both. There is a good ensemble of supporting characters played by great actors, who somehow or another slot into this mystery. Ann Richards is quietly convincing as a former flame of Henry’s, while Wendell Corey supplies us with much knowledge as the doctor. Probably the most sympathetic character is the chemist who is somehow sucked into the dark web of dealings, and played with understated gravitas by Harold Vermilyea. Ed Begley and William Conrad flesh out the other two people who have bearing on the complex story.

A tense and efficient noir, Sorry, Wrong Number is just the ticket for when you want some murky thriller of complex motives, nice performances and atmosphere to watch.

The Nun’s Story

Tags

1950's, Audrey Hepburn, Beatrice Straight, Colleen Dewhurst, Dean Jagger, Drama, Edith Evans, Fred Zinnemann, Mildred Dunnock, Peggy Ashcroft, Peter Finch, The Nun's Story

Film Title

The Nun’s Story

Director

Fred Zinnemann

Starring

• Audrey Hepburn as Gabrielle van der Mal / Sister Luke
• Peter Finch as Dr. Fortunati
• Edith Evans as Reverend Mother Emmanuel
• Peggy Ashcroft as Mother Mathilde
• Mildred Dunnock as Sister Margharita
• Beatrice Straight as Mother Christophe
• Dean Jagger as Dr. van der Mal
• Colleen Dewhurst as Archangel Gabriel

A beautifully restrained yet quietly revealing look at the struggles of one nun and the personal battle with her spirited nature, The Nun’s Story is impressively moving and evocative in what it accomplishes. It holds your interest in how it delves into the life of a nun and owing to thoughtful direction from Fred Zinnemann and a simply luminous performance from Audrey Hepburn.

Gabrielle van der Mal is a vivacious young Belgian woman from a middle class family in the 1930’s. Her father is a prominent surgeon and Gabrielle hopes to one day be serving in the Congo. We meet her as she enters a Catholic Convent to become a nun. We witness the various facets of extensive training to be a nun over a couple of months, with each challenging Gabrielle more and more with her personal feelings. Eventually, she is made a nun and given the name Sister Luke. Yet she faces disappointments and disillusionment in many duties, and yearns to fulfill her dream of helping in the Congo. Although she distinguishes herself in the medical field, she is not allowed to feel pride for doing so as it is considered selfish rather than selfless. Despite this and spiritual as well as personal conflict, Sister Luke perseveres. She is briefly assigned to assist in a mental hospital, where she is nearly killed by a violently schizophrenic patient. Eventually she is rewarded with an assignment in the Congo, yet finds that she is treating the European patients rather than the natives. She assists the no-nonsense and atheist Dr. Fortunati in surgery, and they develop an at first strained but eventually respectful friendship. Fortunati can see that she is struggling with her religious turmoil and that he believes she is more cut out to be a nurse, rather than a nun. Yet desperate to prove herself, she excels but works herself too hard, contracting tuberculosis in the process. After getting better, she still has many questions about what her true calling is. But as her internal tribulation escalates and World War II nears, Sister Luke must ultimately decide whether she is really cut our to be a nun or whether she should leave.

Fred Zinnemann subtly yet with observant eyes directs this take of the complexities of oneself and the question of religion. His direction isn’t overly flashy but in keeping with the story, beautifully elegant and probing. That isn’t to say that the film isn’t beautifully shot( in fact, the juxtaposition between the cold confines of the convent and the supposed freedom of the Congo are gorgeously envisioned), but the main focus is on the human soul. It’s a drama but not one of overt and histrionic heights; more one of elegantly composed dilemmas and poignant questions. The Nun’s Story is endlessly fascinating in how it explores a world that is unseen by many and only really hinted at in other material. You feel like a fly on the wall watching as Sister Luke undergoes the tests that prove difficult in order to becoming a nun, with all the rituals and ceremonial acts ( the cutting of ones hair, the long periods of silence and shedding of the past) displayed in great detail for us to view. Many films are centred on nuns, but The Nun’s Story, with clear-eyed and objective execution, really finds both a strangeness and uniqueness in how these women dedicate their whole lives to religious servitude. It functions into how it might prove extremely trying for someone spirited and uncertain, like the major dilemma that Sister Luke finds herself in as she attempts to do good, but is ironically halted by her vows. Some movie fans may just believe that a film like this would be boring of just religious propaganda, but nothing could be further from the truth. If anything, The Nun’s Story offers up much food for thought on issues of personal freedom, obedience and the many factions of religion. It doesn’t take sides and favour one thing over the other, resulting in a rewarding and challenging film. And for a film that runs for two and a half hours, it is largely enthralling to watch. A few minor lulls can be forgotten due to the impactful power and grace of The Nun’s Story. Franz Waxman composes a beautiful score that is driven by emotion and soulfulness, that fits with both the revealing personal side of the film and the spiritual context.

One of the best things that The Nuns Story boasts is a touching performance by Audrey Hepburn. With a passion and desire to do well, we understand why Sister Luke would want to be a nun. But on the flip side, we witness her intense battle with adhering to obedience and the rigid vows she must live by, that is imbued with poise and expressive turmoil by Hepburn. Her performance is often one of quiet and thoughtful moments; but one where you can observe all the hardship, longing and fight of a woman attempting to fathom her way in what she wants to be her calling. Such luminous and subtle emotion come through powerfully from Audrey Hepburn in a moving performance that stands as one of her best. While everyone else is ideally cast in their parts, it is Audrey Hepburn you will remember the most for her emotion and clarity. Peter Finch excellently portrays the talented doctor in the Congo, who lends his thoughts to Sister Luke while gaining a new level of respect for her, despite their wide differences. Fleshing out the main supporting cast are a fine group of actresses as nuns of different authorities and temperaments that Sister Luke encounters. There is Edith Evans as the stern Reverend Mother who isn’t above feelings of care, Peggy Ashcroft as the largely content and experienced guide, Mildred Dunnock as one of the nuns who acts as the first teacher and Beatrice Straight as the kindest and most understanding of religious women. All of these actresses, regardless of how long they are on screen for, contribute nicely nuanced work, showing the different aspects of religious faith and devotion. The same excellence is also present with Dean Jagger as the devastated father who wants his daughter to succeed, but knows that she will find the life of a nun turbulent. And not forgetting Colleen Dewhurst, the embodiment of menace when playing a schizophrenic patient at the sanitarium.

Stirring and subtly powerful, The Nun’s Story is a film to treasure for how it deals with the dilemma of ones calling and for what is to me, one of Audrey Hepburn’s greatest performances.