Style2

Only Angels Have Wings (1939) Directed by Howard Hawks

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 1:39 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 11 April 2009)

During the late '30's and early '40's a lot of dramatic movies got made, by big name directors, often starring big name actors. Lots of them have grown into becoming classics but of course in a way they are also all sort of the same. "Only Angels Have Wings" is one of the more original ones though, due to its original settings and main concept.

The movie can be called an aeroplane drama, with plenty of adventurous and comedy elements involved. The entire movie is set at a small airport, with dozens of pilots, who do errants by plane for costumers and numerous other reasons. It's an unique original world that isn't handled too often in movies but it's quite intriguing really. It concept and settings provide the movie with plenty of great moments.

It's also a movie that is being made great by its characters and the actors which portray them. Great thing is that this movie has more than just a handful of great characters and big name actors portraying them. With Cary Grant it has a great leading man and with Jean Arthur and Rita Hayworth the movie also has two more than great female actresses. Richard Barthelmess was also really great in this, in one of his talking roles. He is still best known for the work he made during the silent-era, especially the classics movies he did with director D.W. Griffith.

The movie also has a good story, that looks pretty formulaic on the surface but still works out better than usual because it knows how to blend several themes and also genres. The movie is not purely just a drama and not just purely an adventure movie or romantic one. It's a rather pleasant mix of it all that works out on basically all levels. The movie is also more pleasant and perhaps also easier to watch for today's modern audience than most of its other fellow genre movies.

The movie has some great sequences with its planes in it. Especially for its time it must have really been something to watch. The movie has some good stunt flying in it and also at times uses some pretty good looking early special effects. It also received an Oscar nomination for this, as well as for its black & white cinematography by multiple Oscar nominee Joseph Walker.

It's a movie that perhaps is not as well known as Howard Hawks's most other work but it's just as great and well worth watching. Hawks was a director who could handle many different genres just as well and with this movie he proofs and shows this once more, by letting several different genres and themes blend in extremely well with each other.

9/10

Watch trailer

To Have and Have Not (1944) Directed by Howard Hawks

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 12:05 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 21 February 2009)

This is obviously a well made movie, that features some great writing, directing and acting. It however also is a bit of a slow and dragging movie in parts, especially for todays standards of course. With a little bit more of tension, action and a tad bit of humor/entertainment this movie could had really been a "Casablanca 2".

A thing most '40's movies have in common is that they start of slow and quite uninteresting as well but after about the halve way point the movie becomes suddenly so much better and at its peak reaches the level of brilliance. "To Have and Have Not" might perhaps never truly reach the level of brilliance but it is a movie that has touches of greatness to it.

Of course this movie is often being compared to "Casablanca". Not only because the both have Humphrey Bogart in the main lead but also the story and settings most definitely show similarities.

It's not necessarily the story that makes this movie great but more its dialog and handling of it by the director and actors. No it really is not Howard Hawks' best movie but for movie lovers and the fans of the genre and '40's movie-era this movie simply still is a great watch.

The movie is being carried by its main lead Humphrey Bogart who was always perfect in a role such as this one. He also meets his match in Lauren Bacall this time, who perhaps is being even tougher than him in this movie this time. It was the first time the two actors teamed up and it actually was Bacall's movie debut. She and Bogart also married one year later, after meeting during the filming of this movie. They played together in several movies during their marriage, that lasted till Bogart's early death in 1957.

Not the best or most interesting genre movie around but it has more than enough ingredients to still make this a great watch.

8/10

Watch trailer

Sergeant York (1941) Directed by Howard Hawks

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 3:10 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , ,

-->



(Review originally written at 13 October 2008)

This was one solid- as well as an enjoyable war movie, made during WW II but about WW I.
The movie is obviously a patriotic one with its themes, and it got made at the time of WW II to support the American war effort and to boost morals of the soldiers. Actor Gary Cooper considered his part in this movie as his contribution to the war cause. But it's not all too bad. Because the story is such a fine one and it got told so nicely in the movie you sort of tend to forget the movie its patriotic motivations. The movie is simply to good for that!
Luckily the movie isn't a too heavy one to watch. The movie never forgets about its entertainment value and the movie even features some real comical moments and characters in it. It doesn't mean that this entire movie is not one to take too seriously but it helps to make the movie are more light and better watchable movie to view.
Especially the first halve of the movie can be seen as entertainment. You can actually wonder if the movie doesn't concentrate too much on Alvin Cullum York's pre-war life and not enough on the actual WW I moments. The war moments toward the end of the movie progress rapidly and it basically only shows York's heroics, for which he got acclaimed so much. For the movie is based on a real life war hero, for which he even received the congressional medal of honor. The movie perhaps, for its understandable reasons, only mainly show the 'good' sides of war and what it means to be a hero to your family and men. You could say that the movie is a bit a pro-war one and is also the reason why this movie sometimes gets criticized by some.
But well, simple fact is that I enjoyed watching this movie, which was thanks to its real great story. No doubt a lot of it differs from the truth but as long as it's done to make a movie and its story work out better I never have any objections to it. After all, if you truly want fact and history you should watch the Discovery Channel, or read a book.
The movie got professionally and effectively directed by Howard Hawks. He always keep the story interesting and going. He picked the right approach for it and provided the movie with a nice pleasant atmosphere, despite its serious subject.
This is the movie that won Gary Cooper his very first Oscar. He plays a good role that is more consistent with Cooper's earlier more light and comical movie roles. Also the supporting cast within this movie was real fine. Joan Leslie was only 16 at the time of this movie but she already plays a young woman very convincingly. No big surprises, since she had also already worked on many big classic movie production before prior to shooting this movie.
The movie got nominated for a total of 11 Oscars, including best director and best picture of the year but it only won in 2 categories. But that's no great shame when you're nominated in the same year as "Citizen Kane" and "The Maltese Falcon" for instance.
A real great- and fine made movie to watch, even after all those years and despite its flaws.
8/10


Watch trailer

His Girl Friday (1940) Directed by Howard Hawks

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 2:28 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , ,

-->



(Review originally written at 1 October 2008)

I know this is considered a classic and all but I couldn't find myself liking it all that much. I don't know but lots of people talking loudly at the same time over each others lines is just not my idea of something funny.
On top of that the movie doesn't really feature any good likable main characters. Despite the fact that I like Cary Grant and he was always able to play a likable scoundrel, his character in this movie just didn't worked out to me. He was more a very selfish character than a funny one really and more annoying than amusing. Same goes for Rosalind Russell, who basically plays the same sort of character as Grant. They really deserved each other.
The movie entirely goes for its screwball comedy elements but it forgets basically everything else. It forgets it has a story with also some romantic as well as dramatic elements in it. Because of this none of the romance and more serious intended moments within the movie just didn't ever worked out.
To be honest, I quite liked the movie in the beginning and in general I'm also fond of these type of movies, especially when they star Cary Grant but about halve way through the movie totally started to loose track and the movie became an huge fast going mess. It's pace becomes incredibly high and lots of character constantly show up and are going away again just as fast as they came. The movie at that point basically becomes more of an annoying one to watch and it doesn't get any more better when it heads toward its ending.
It's not like I hated watching this movie and it certainly does has its moments but for a movie that is considered a true genre classic, it's definitely a disappointing one.
6/10


Watch trailer

Bringing Up Baby (1938) Directed by Howard Hawks

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 7:10 AM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , ,

-->



(Review originally written at 2 September 2008)

This is simply a fine enjoyable movie, despite not making an awful lot of sense to me with its story. I wouldn't quite call this a screwball comedy, even though it is listed basically everywhere as one and the movie is basically one big heap of strange and unusual but funny circumstances.
To be frank, the story and the way it progressed doesn't make much sense to me. Why on earth does Huxley keep seeing Susan, although he obviously doesn't like her too much and all she ever does is getting him in trouble. And why does he ever take all those things Susan says to him and asks of him. She's too wild and uncontrollable for him.
Cary Grant began his career with movies like this but ended up getting later more serious roles, for which he now days is also still best known, though always with a certain comical undertone. Katharine Hepburn is exactly known for her comical talents but she pulls of more than alright in her role. She had a lot of training prior to starting and during the filming of this movie to get her comical timing right, which paid off obviously.
The movie goes from the one strange situation into the other. This is basically all that "Bringing Up Baby" is all about. It doesn't exactly make this the best or most well written comedy but it obviously doesn't prevent the movie from being an enjoyable one. It's a movie that almost constantly entertains and the acting performances also make sure that the movie works out with what it tries to achieve, without ever getting tiresome or lame. It features some moments that will surely make you laugh.

An enjoyable movie from director Howard Hawks.
8/10


Watch trailer

The Prizefighter and the Lady (1933) Directed by Howard Hawks & W.S. Van Dyke

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 12:42 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , , , , ,



(Review originally written at 15 February 2007)

This really is not the most original or enjoyable genre movie to watch. It features a formulaic love-story about a rising boxing star who falls for the girl of a notorious criminal.

It are the sport elements that still provide the movie with some good moments. It's interesting to see a boxing movie from the early '30's, when the sport itself was still so much different compared to now days. Especially the end match is a delight to watch. It's well and effectively filmed. A great finale, for an otherwise bit of dragging and formulaic movie.

Not sure what to think about the style. At times it seemed like the movie-makers tried to make the movie a comedy and at others it was more a sport movie, with the usual dramatic moments in it. They even managed to put musical numbers in the movie! Can you just now imaging a boxing champion appearing, singing and dancing on a stage? The movie is really a mixture of styles, that are not too well balanced. The movie too often switches from style, to give the movie an overall consistent atmosphere. Because of that the story also doesn't always work out as effective as it could had.

Not too happy about the acting in this movie either. Casting an athlete as the main character is always a questionable choice. Max Baer is good enough in some sequences but just plain bad in others, especially the ones that require some more emotional acting. Otto Kruger is also a bad choice as a tough gangster leader. He is far from believable in his role. And who ever told Jack Dempsey he could act? They gave him far too many lines, just because he is, well Jack Dempsey. The same goes for many other famous boxing champions of its period, that make a cameo in this movie toward the ending. Yet it also is what makes this movie so special to watch. What other movie does feature so many former boxing celebrities? It in a way still makes this an essential viewing for the boxing fan.

Definitely true that the end fight makes this movie worth watching but by no means this movie is a must-see.

6/10

The Thing from Another World (1951) Directed by Christian Nyby & Howard Hawks

Posted by: Frank Veenstra Posted date: 2:24 PM / comment : 0 , , , , , , ,





(Review originally written at 29 March 2006)

Let's face it, most of the science-fiction movies made in the '50's were utter trash. When you think of '50's science-fiction movies, you think of Ed Wood like movies with laughable special effects, a weak story and below average B-movie stars and persons in rubber-suits. Not really the kind of movie to take very seriously.

But yes, luckily "The Thing from Another World" is a rare exception. OK I'll admit that the story itself is still quite ridicules at times. I mean, the alien is basically explained in the movie as being a large vegetable. It does make the movie a bit too silly and certainly outdated to watch at times. But then again on the other hand, "The Thing from Another World" is still very different from other science-fiction movies from the same period, in a positive way.

The movie is unique and differers from others in multiple ways. It even in some regard was quite ahead of its time and it inspired many other horror/science-fiction movie later to come.

The characters in the movie are all portrayed as strong individual characters with their own thoughts and emotions. It does give the movie a certain sense of realism, even though the story itself is of course far from being realistic. The movie also features a typical scientific- versus military way of thinking. That concept is not unique and is also still often featured in movie made this present day but the way that it is handled in this movie is extremely well and it does provide the movie with some tense and unpredictable moments.

Also the way the 'monster', or in this case rather said the alien is handled is quite unique. The alien itself doesn't actually play such a prominent role in the movie in terms of how often and how long it appears on screen. The alien is never seen in close-up which adds to the suspense and mystery of the movie. Of course the look of the alien is by today's standards terribly outdated but that now has become part of the charm of the movie. The fact that he more often is off the screen rather than on it, provides the movie with some good and tense moments and also the moments that he does pop-up make provides the movie with some good scares (atleast for '50's standards that is.) because you don't really expect it. Kind of like the same way the tension in "Jaws" is build up.

Another thing, which I thought was absolutely great about this movie was the dialog. The dialog fits all of the characters extremely well and helps to add to their own strong individual personality. The actors which portray them are perhaps not the great but thanks to the dialog all of them are extremely believable and fitting in their roles.

The storytelling is slow yet the pace is high. The movie takes its time to build up the story and introduce the characters, which all yet again add to the 'realism' of the movie. The way the story is told makes the movie seem even more mysterious and tenser than the story really is. I also like the way everything in the movie is scientifically explained, something that most often in movies like these never was the case.

"The Thing from Another World" is an unique, influential and in many ways a movie that was ahead of its time in terms of character treatment and storytelling. Therefor this movie is a marvelous one, that will be enjoyed by all but probably especially mainly by the movie-buffs among us. Either way, a highly recommendable movie for all!

10/10

Watch trailer
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Copyright © 2014 Boba_Fett1138's movie reviews
⬆
Top