Kiss Daddy Goodnight (1988)

Kiss Daddy Goodnight
Starring: Uma Thurman, Paul Dillon, Steve Buscemi (in a very small role)
Director: Peter Ily Huemer
Writers: Michael Gabrieli, Peter Ily Huemer
Genre: Thriller
Year: 1988
My rating: 

KISS DADDY GOODNIGHT (1988) is a decent enough thriller – the kind of film you'd sit through on the Lifetime Channel and feel was not a complete waste. It's got enjoyable (if predictable) plot twists and a good central character.

However, I doubt that anyone watching this would do so for those reasons. Many DVD distributors have released this movie in a budget format, all of them making a big deal out of the presence of Uma Thurman and Steve Buscemi. In fact, this is Thurman's first role (according to the Internet Movie Database it was even her first audition -- she was hired immediately) and she stars. 

Thurman was only eighteen when this movie came out, and yet she already displays a certain maturity. A lesser actress would have been swamped out by this role which the script leaves fairly undefined. But even in her youth she carries this off with style.

Now onto the movie itself. I have never seen a film where the opening credits immediately destroys any possible good-feeling or enthusiasm one could have towards a potential viewing experience. Given the plot summary (see below) I was expecting a dark, psychological thriller with (perhaps) some black comedy aspects. I sat myself down hoping for a tense and atmospheric picture.

Then the opening credits actually start and I had to stifle a shudder and a laugh. Making fun of bad 1980s computer-generated credits is a little too easy, but nothing screams "low budget!" louder. It immediately lowers the audience's expectations about the rest of the movie's production values.

That said, given this is an independent film clearly made with very little money, the general production values aren't awful. Of course, the producers accomplish a lot of this by filming with a lot of low lighting (read: in the pitch dark), but it does adequately set the tone the filmmakers were presumably going for.

The plot summary on the DVD box and, indeed, posted in many locations on the Internet suggests that it's about Uma Thurman as a sultry femme fatale who seduces older, dumber men, drugs them and then robs them blind. And, true, this does happen in the movie. The downside is that it really has nothing to do with the rest of the movie.

At least I don't think it does. But it's a little difficult to tell which movie is actually the focus, because there appear to be about three movies squeezed in here. There's the Uma-as-con-woman movie. The Uma-as-victim-of-older-man movie. And Paul Dillon's character seems to be off in some third movie which features him trying to get his band back together, man. I'm sure that at some point during the scriptwriting there was a kind of thematic link between these subplots, but the end result seems more like one movie having cameo roles in other movies.

By the way, the Uma-as-victim movie involves Thurman's relationship with her upstairs neighbor who at first appears to a kindly older man, but who gradually becomes more obsessed and violent. I don't know if it's just me or not, but I'd swear that the actor based his performance on Gore Vidal. He certainly appears to have Vidal's speech patterns and mannerisms. But maybe that's just me.

You'll notice a last name in the cast list. Paul Dillon plays Thurman's loser friend (and he's from Baltimore; Lord help us), but you'll be more familiar with his brother, Matt. Paul does not seem to have had much of an acting career beyond this film. He only has two other credits at IMDB, one of which is "Cop #1" in something called SPIKE OF BENSONHURST (sounds delicious).

Speaking of the cast list, if you buy this movie with the expectation of seeing a lot of Steve Buscemi doing his usual Steve Buscemi schtick, you'll no doubt be slightly disappointed -- he's only in one short scene. He plays the former lead guitarist in Paul Dillon's band and his first line is "Eeeeeh, alright... Eeeeeeh, wanna beer?" This pretty much encapsulates his entire three and a half minute performance (I timed it). Though despite his brief appearance, he is quite entertaining while he's there.

Additionally, I should give credit to the actors playing Thurman's victims who are so slimy and creepy and unpleasant, that I wished she'd have killed them instead of merely rendering them unconscious. (Actually, watching the film the first time I thought she had indeed been leaving a string of dead rich guys in her wake. It was only after reading summaries on-line and rewatching some passages that I realized my mistake.)

There are enough strange touches to keep this film entertaining; whether they were deliberate or not is none of my concern. Every television in the movie (except, for some reason, Buscemi's) only shows old Donald Duck cartoons. There's a very arty flashback to the creepy older man's daughter leaving on a plane.

It seems to anticipate by a few years the Pulp Fiction style of having two characters sit and talk about unrelated topics purely to demonstrate their personalities. Now, before you hurt yourselves laughing, I will gladly concede that Tarantino did a far far better job that these writers. And yet I couldn't help but be reminded of the dialog from that later film.

There is no mistaking this for a anything but a cheaply-made independent film, created by people with a little more enthusiasm than talent. You can see glimmers, however, of where this could have been a much stronger movie. The script is almost there; it needs another draft or two to allow the screenwriters to figure out exactly where the main focus of events should be. The sound editing is poor in places (noticeable changes in the sound levels during cuts within a scene) and the production in general has a very home-made feel to it. But it's a very interesting film in many ways, and I do recommend it to anyone with an interest in studying independent filmmaking. You see things going right and things going wrong. And, for Uma Thurman fans its absolutely fascinating seeing the birth of her movie career, seemingly already with full possession of her powers.

Dick Tracy Meets Gruesome (1947)

Dick Tracy Meets Gruesome
Starring: Boris Karloff, Ralph Byrd
Director: John Rawlins
Writers: William H. Graffis, Robert E. Kent, Robertson White, Eric Taylor, Chester Gould (characters)
Genre: Crime/Thriller
Year: 1947
My rating: 

In days of old, a B-movie did not arrive with high expectations. It had to not distract from the main feature and be decent enough that the audience not demand their money back. Pretty low goals. 

Now that these films have remained around and available to buy, we still don't expect much. All I hope for is that they won't cost a lot (they don't), and that training my eyes on the television screen while they're playing ends up being more entertaining than if I had shifted my gaze a meter to the left and watched the wall for the ninety minutes instead.

By these admittedly low standards, DICK TRACY MEETS GRUESOME succeeds. But it gains as much value from its ineptitude as it does from its genuinely good points. This is not a problem if all you seek is bare entertainment.

As you may have guessed, given that this is a crime/thriller based on a pulp comic strip, there are a huge number of familiar clichés present. There's tough guys, see? And wise-guys, see? And classy broads, see? And heels who turn their sentences into questions by sticking the word "see" at the end of them, see?

This makes the movie fun on one level, though if you're not in the mood for this, each successive stereotypical touchstone makes the movie that much more tedious. However, you really should be in the mood for this -- or at least expecting this sort of thing -- just by looking at the title.

Let's keep talking about the title, because that allows us to discuss the main characters: Dick Tracy and Gruesome. Dick Tracy is ostensibly the star of the film, but Gruesome gets top billing in the cast list. Understandably, this is because Gruesome is played by Boris Karloff and Dick Tracy is not. I'm no great expert in Dick Tracy lore, but I was slightly disappointed by the character in this movie. Tracy is one of the blandest detectives I've ever seen. He's not a smooth talker; he's doesn't posses a formidable mind. In fact, he doesn't even have any cool gadgets (at least not in this movie).

That said, Gruesome isn't particularly interesting, either. If he wasn't played by Boris Karloff, I'm sure he wouldn't have appeared in the title. He's an ordinary thug, who's a bit more cruel than the other villains in this movie, but nothing compared to classic baddies in other films. (To be fair, there is one thing that distinguishes him. He accidentally dies and then comes back to life early in the movie. But that has nothing to do with his character, and everything to do with the mysterious chemical he ingests. You may think that dying and coming back to life would add a supernatural flavor to the film, but it doesn't. Gruesome dies horribly, is rescued from the afterlife, and then it's never ever mentioned again.)

The story involves Gruesome and a band of very generic bad guys. They use a factory called "Wood Plastics Inc." as their hideout. That name must be nicely inconspicuous, as it should blend in with all the other plastic companies that make their product out of wood. Gruesome and his gang obtain a chemical gas that induces paralysis. Naturally, they use this gas to rob a bank. As an aside, I must point out that this is a seriously powerful chemical. It paralyzes everything! It freezes a man who's about to sneeze, causing him to be stuck with his nose in the air and a pained expression on his face. It freezes gravity and stops the fabric on people's clothes from moving.

I'm joking, of course. What the gas actually does is to nip outside the film projector and hit the pause button. This allows the criminals to sneak around the paused footage and help themselves to the bank's contents.

Since it's up to Tracy to solve the crime, he turns to the police detective's secret weapon: SCIENCE! These scenes are the most entertaining moments in the film. The screenwriters were obviously aware of this thing we humans call "science", but were a bit confused as to how it actually works. For example, a physicist's job is to create experimental chemicals, presumably just to see what will happen (apparently chemists do not exist in the Dick Tracy universe). When a smart detective is confronted with a new, strange, unknown chemical compound, his initial method of determining its properties is to eat it.

Still, one gets the idea that scientific accuracy was not high on the priorities list. And the writers take the opportunity of inventing appropriately goofy names for the science folks. The physicist is named Dr. A. Tomic and is assisted by the able Professor Learned, who is -- shock -- a girl! (A broad that digs science, see?)

The plot moves in very expected motions. The only thing that makes this movie in any way unpredictable is the fact that pieces of it don't make any sense and therefore defy prediction. I think the best way to enjoy this film is to take it as a series of individual scenes. Don't worry how the current scene will affect the next one and don't worry about how the last scene affects this one. Broken into pieces this way, the movie hangs together fine.

I'm reviewing the Digiview Productions version and the picture/sound quality are surprisingly good. There are no extras, but since they only charge you a buck, the fact that you can use the movie side of the DVD disc as a shaving mirror is more bonus than you should expect.

Although this is the only Dick Tracy movie I've seen, I'm guessing there are better ones out there. That said, this movie will have you laughing at it as often as you laugh with it. And if all you're looking for is a laugh, then you should be at least satisfied with this.

Death Rides a Horse (1968)

Death Rides a Horse
Starring: Lee Van Cleef, John Phillip Law
Director: Giulio Petroni
Writer:Luciano Vincenzoni
Genre: Western
Year: 1968
My rating: 

I'm not the world's biggest connoisseur of spaghetti westerns, but I'm really surprised that I'd never heard of this film before I found it in the local bargain bin. The title, DEATH RIDES A HORSE, automatically catapults it somewhere near the top of best-named westerns (the original Italian title is DA UOMO A UOMO, which Altavista's Babelfish translates as the singularly uninteresting "From Man To Man").

The film stars Lee Van Cleef ("the bad" in THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY) and John Phillip Law (known to Mystery Science Theater 3000 fans for his roles of Kalgan in SPACE MUTINY and of Diabolik in the film of the same name). As a child, Law's character witnesses a gang shooting his father, and raping and killing his mother and sister. During the attack, the child notices a distinct feature on each member of the gang.

Flash forward fifteen years, and Law is an angry young man who has trained himself to be the finest marksman in the West. But his inexperience is his weakness as he begins a journey of revenge against the evil men who took his family from him. (Luckily for him, his targets haven't thought to remove the distinguishing pieces of jewelry and clothing in the intervening decade and a half.)

Cleef has just finished serving a fifteen year term of hard labor and he has his own score to settle with the same gang who killed Law's family. The two protagonists -- while potential allies -- find themselves at odds when their methods of revenge don't exactly turn out to be compatible. Their conflict is what drives the film, as well as providing some of the (very) few laughs.

The acting is what one can usually expect from Spaghetti Westerns -- everything from professional actors right on down to people one assumes were random folks who showed up at the film location with their own rags. Lee Van Cleef, I had only before seen in the two "Man With No Name" movies, but he's as collected, smooth, tough and just plain cool here as he was in those. John Phillip Law is fairly wooden (no surprise there), but his style fits the character he's playing.

Behind the scenes, there are a fistful of connections to the well-known Clint Eastwood and Sergio Leone trilogy. Writer Luciano Vincenzoni had co-written FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE and THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY. Composer Ennio Morricone, who composed for THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY, contributes the score. For my money it's just as good as what he wrote for that better known film. (As an aside, I've read on the Internet Movie Database that Quentin Tarantino used part of this music in his KILL BILL.)

In the past I've poked fun at the hilarious typographical errors present on the Digiview Productions DVD boxes. I've tried to refrain of late, partially because my own typing skills are nothing to write home about, but mostly because it's like shooting fish in a barrel. But I must make note of the phrase written across the bottom of the front cover. The tag line states, "The Lenghts (sic) One Man Will Go to Take His Rewenge (sic)". Rewenge? Who's their copy-editor -- Peter Cook's character in THE PRINCESS BRIDE? ("Rewenge! Rewenge is what bwings us togewah today!")

The sound quality is abysmal. Since the movie was dubbed into English, I'm assuming that the original soundtrack wasn't very clear either, but the version on this DVD seems particularly poor. It's extremely muffled, making the dialog difficult to discern. At times you'll wonder whether the sound is coming out of the TV in front of you, or your next-door neighbor's speakers.

The picture quality is acceptable, although not what anyone could realistically describe as good. The worst problem is that the film is presented in full-screen and it was obviously shot with wide-screen in mind. There are a number of scenes where it's obvious that the audience is missing something because of the inferior aspect ratio.

DEATH has everything that a good western needs. It's got action, revenge, and treachery. The script is peppered with delightfully tough and macho one-liners. It's as stylish as any spaghetti western I've ever seen. The plot moves very quickly and in sometimes surprising directions (although if you don't spot the final twist before it happens, then you were clearly not paying attention). If you're a newbie who wants to try a spaghetti western, then this is a perfect one to start with. And, thanks to its budget DVD release, you can get it for about a buck or so. Though, I should point out that this is a detriment, really, since it means that no studio will bother putting out a cleaned-up (and wide-screen!) version. Which is what this film richly deserves.

Horror Express (1972)

Horror Express
Starring: Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, and... Telly Savalas?
Director: Eugenio Martín
Genre: Horror
Year: 1972
My rating: 

HORROR EXPRESS (1972), also known as PANIC IN THE TRANS-SIBERIAN TRAIN, is an unbelievably hokey film with plot points that are unclear, character motivations that defy sense, and science that would make your sixth-grade biology teacher weep. Yet I really enjoyed the film, because it's genuinely creepy and contains a carefully constructed sense of menace. Yes, a lot of it doesn't make sense upon reflection, but it's fast paced enough that any story issues don't jar the audience out of the film's mood.

Apart from the establishing moments of the film's beginning, the action takes place entirely onboard a trans-Siberian locomotive. Anthropologist Christopher Lee is a passenger with a mysterious crate -- the contents of which have already raised the ire of the film's mad monk who warns that the deadly hand of Satan is nearby. Helping Lee ignore the predictions of doom is Peter Cushing, an English doctor with a morbid and overwhelming curiosity of Lee's business.

The contents of the crate, as revealed in the film's beginning, are the frozen remains of the "missing link" -- a two million-year-old half-man, half-ape creature who would represent a fundamental change in the scientific community (if the term "paradigm shift" has been invented at the time, they would have used it). But if you think that this specimen will simply remain a scientific curiosity or won't, for instance, wake up and begin a killing spree, then you simply don't know horror movies.

As the DVD box tells us, the passengers are now under attack from the awakened and angry ape-thing. I'd never seen a horror movie that used a train as its sole location, but I have seen a number of straightforward thrillers that have pulled off the same trick. And what made those films successful also works well here. The claustrophobic atmosphere is genuinely oppressive. There is no escape from this train (they're traveling through the wastelands of Siberia) and they are completely at the mercy of this horrific monster. The characters are also always important in such closed-set movies like this, and the fellow passengers are very entertaining here too.

Yes, on paper the plot of this movie is goofy as all get out. A two million-year-old ape-monster jumping about on a train (and did I mention that he can remove his victim's memories and thoughts?) and terrorizing a bunch of rich folks sounds wacky. I'm not going to assert that this is a film where you can take everything seriously.

But it is, in fact, seriously creepy. The manner in which the monster kills his victims is rather disturbing. And I don't want to give away any spoilers, but I was fascinated by the -- let's say -- relationship between the monster and its victims. I've seen this before in other genre fiction, yet it seems very fresh here, and it's a very spooky take on the concept.

Oh, and I haven't even mentioned Telly Savalas and his big red coat yet. They don't show up until the last twenty minutes or so, but in that time Savalas manages to gobble up all the scenery that he would have chewed had he been in the rest of the picture. He throws his arms around dramatically. He makes grand, loud speeches. He stops just short of twirling in circles and bursting into song and dance. He's supposed to be a Russian military Captain, but he makes no attempt at hiding his New York accent. He is marvelously, marvelously entertaining.

This is a solid, unnerving horror film whose small budget works to its advantage. We aren't overloaded with gory special effects, and the inexpensive tricks used work effectively. There were only a few scenes that I had to turn away from (I absolutely cannot stand to see any foreign object going into an eye, no matter how fake the effect). What the film can't provide in spectacle, it can more than make up for in sheer pizzazz.

And if you're familiar at all with horror films, you'll certainly recognize the names of the two stars: Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. They were more famous for appearing together in Hammer horror movies, but they don't miss a beat in this independent European film. Naturally, they have a lot of on-screen chemistry, which is perfectly understandable given that they had made about ten million pictures together before this one.

I'm reviewing the Digiview Production DVD edition. It's presented in full-screen, and while the picture isn't the greatest, it's a decent enough copy. This isn't really a film for close and careful study, so I didn't find any defects in the presentation to be overly distracting.

As I said, don't pay too much attention to the mechanics of the story (a major plot point from the beginning of the film is made inexplicable by the conclusion). Just enjoy this for some good healthy chills. This is a great movie for late at night when you want to freak yourself out.

Man Against Crime (1949-1954)

Man Against Crime
Starring: Ralph Bellamy
Genre: Crime/Detective
Year: 1949-1954 ?
My rating: 

I'll admit that I'd never heard of this TV series before I saw the DVD sitting in the bargain bin (for a buck; can't beat that with a stick). I decided to take a small risk, and I'm glad that I did, as these three episodes are a hell of a lot of fun.

First, some practical matters. The DVD packaging states that the name of the show is "Man Against Crime". However, the actual opening credits (and the DVD menus) would name the show "Follow That Man".

Whatever the title, this show ran from 1949 to 1954 and starred Ralph Bellamy as detective Mike Barnett. He's ostensively a New York City cop, although he seems to do some freelance detecting during a couple of these episodes, so I'm not exactly sure what his relationship is to the NYPD. He's your typical tough, macho, no nonsense, charismatic character, and I found him one of the more appealing things about this show.

He's a very human character. He doesn't make deductive leaps out of thin air. He doesn't beat the truth out of people. He simply keeps plodding along until he solves the case. It's a simple characteristic, I know, but I couldn't help but like it.

Purists may stop short of placing this show into the film noir genre, but it certainly seems heavily influenced by it. The dialog could have come straight from Raymond Chandler. These are only half-hour episodes, so there isn't time for hugely complicated plot lines, but they're great little nuggets of crime thriller.

The first episode on the disc is "Death Takes a Partner". Barnett helps out a friend who runs international bicycle races. The mob has a large amount of cash riding on the outcome and Barnett wants to make sure the race is fair. There's a nice double-cross in this one, and the plot keeps the episode moving at a brisk pace. I did, however, have to stifle a laugh at Martin Balsam's attempt at a French accent.

The second episode is "Day Man", and is -- to be honest -- just the tiniest bit silly when all is said and done. Houses in a wealthy neighborhood are being robbed, and the only visible connection is that the criminal helps himself to the owner's beer before leaving the scene. The crime isn't particularly interesting, so we have to be satisfied with Bennett's investigation. Thankfully, that part of the story is the episode's strength. But if you don't see the so-called big surprise coming, then you weren't paying attention.

"Doll Bandit" rounds off the three episodes. The doll bandit is so named after a high-profile bank robbery (though they're only sticking up the FIFTH national bank). Three armed men raid a bank, threatening to shoot a mother's baby if anyone tries to stop them. It turns out the "baby" is a doll and the mother is in on the heist. The story revolves more around the criminals turning on each other than it does on the police investigation. I really enjoyed this one. Barnett manages to be clever in a very simple and direct way.

The DVD case of this Digiview productions version has the hilarious typo: "What really made the show unique was that the show were [sic] done live." The show were done live, were it? I'm in no position to mock someone else's typing prowess (as readers of my reviews can attest), but couldn't they have hired a better copyeditor? Digiview seems to have a gaffe like this on every single release. It's only a two sentence summary for crying out loud...

And I'm not sure how "done live" the show was. There are a number of on-location scenes, which I'm sure were filmed prior to broadcast. According to the Internet Movie Database, this program stopped going out live in 1952. I can't find a good episode guide on the web, so it's possible that the episodes here came after the show switched to a recorded format.

I have no idea whether these three episodes are typical, but if they are, then this is a show I look forward to seeing more of. Hopefully more episodes will be released on DVD in the future. Until then, these three are certainly worth a view.

Project: Kill (1976)

Project: Kill
Starring: Leslie Nielsen, Gary Lockwood
Director: William Girdler
Genre: Action/Drama
Year: 1976
My rating: 

PROJECT: KILL (1976) has one overriding feature which makes it virtually impossible for a modern-day audience to take the film seriously. And it's something that the filmmakers at the time would have had no control over. Namely, the fact that the star of their movie is Leslie Nielsen as a ninja-like fighting machine.

Remember, this is Leslie Nielsen just before his roles in AIRPLANE and THE NAKED GUN series. He was actually a serious actor at one point in the distant past. But -- for me -- once I've seen him in those unforgettable comedies, I find it very difficult to go back and view his straight work without smirking and giggling. During the fight sequences, I kept expecting cartoon sound effects or extra limbs coming out of nowhere to smack bad guys.

Still, while it's terribly unfair of me to criticize a movie for something that the filmmakers could not possibly have known about (unless they had a crystal ball in which to anticipate Leslie Nielsen's future career), it's something that virtually every member of the modern audience is going to bring to the table. And it does help the movie during slower parts. Every time you feel your attention flagging, just remind yourself that this is a drug-addled super secret agent played by Leslie Nielsen, and you can't help but at least crack a smile.

As the story begins, we're introduced to two agents, played by Leslie Nielsen and Gary Lockwood (the guy who got turned into a god in the second Star Trek pilot). The title of the film refers to a secret US Government training program for its agents. Trainees are pumped full of mind-altering, addictive drugs and forced to watch lots of ninja movies (sounds like an average Friday night for undergrads). This causes the subjects to become super-human fighting machines. They become coiled springs, ready to attack and kill at any moment.

They are so well trained, in fact, that they can easily lose control. Maintaining the advantage over their newfound killer instincts requires the use of even more mind-affecting drugs. Indeed, an innocent tap on Leslie Nielsen's shoulder nearly ends the life of his unfortunate love-interest. And Gary Lockwood's training causes him to repeated punch his opponent forcefully in the groin. I don't want to know what film entered that move into his physical lexicon. (Oh, and in the beginning we learn that trainees are taught how to use anything as a weapon. Even, the movie claims, toenail clippings. I really with we'd seen this in action. Seeing Leslie Nielsen attack some punk armed only with a toenail clipping could have propelled this movie into the AFI's list of top 100 all-time movies.)

Getting back to the plot, Nielsen's character (one of them men in charge of the project) has a crisis of faith, and flees the organization, forcing his underling (Lockwood) to spend the entire movie tracking him down. I found the script a little unclear on what Nielsen is running towards. There's a drug smuggling operation going on somewhere, but I was baffled as to how exactly Nielsen was related to it. And I watched some sequences more than once so it wasn't as if my attention wandered. The script just doesn't seem clear on a lot of points.

I did enjoy this movie for the parts which were genuinely good and for the parts which are delightfully cheesy. This is not a great movie, but it is certainly entertaining. It's a pretty standard action-adventure with the requisite number of fight sequences, criminal bad guys and unlikely romantic partnerships.

Nielsen's performance is fairly good. His character is not only disillusioned with the training organization, but by fleeing he has removed himself from his source of control medication. The portions of the film where he's fighting to keep himself mentally together are very effective.

My copy of this is the unbelievably inexpensive version released by Digiview Productions. It's a very watchable edition, though I found the sound a little too soft in places. This isn't a great transfer, but it isn't a great movie either, so any deficiencies in the DVD itself probably won't greatly affect one's enjoyment. I mean, when a telephone conversation between Lockwood and his superior makes the unseen boss sound like his record is revolving at the wrong RPM, it really doesn't matter if there's a slight hiss in the background.

Go into this film with the realization that its Leslie Nielsen in a 1970s action-adventure movie with a goofy title, and you should glean some fun from it. There are some gritty sequences where one discovers that the filmmakers were going for a much darker film than one would think. Indeed, on the face of it, this is a very gritty sort of film. It's simply let down by the fact that a lot the actual plot is confusing and poorly explained. But ignore all that and just hope to be entertained. Lower your expectations and try to have some fun.

The Fast and the Furious (1954)

The Fast and the Furious
Starring: John Ireland, Dorothy Malone
Director: John Ireland and Edward Sampson
Genre: Crime/Mystery
Year: 1954
My rating: 
Amazon.com page

(Note this movie shares its title with a more recent film. Apart from the name and the presence of allegedly fast cars, the two films have nothing in common.)

If you like the interaction between the two main characters, then you'll almost certainly like THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS (1954). However, if -- like me -- you find the relationship shallow and unbelievable, then the rest of the movie will probably fail to impress you too. The problem is that there isn't much else to the film outside of that relationship

The plot is overly simple. A man (John Ireland), wrongly accused of murder, is on the run from the authorities. By necessity, he kidnaps a woman (Dorothy Malone) to make use of her car. It turns out that not only is the car a souped up sports car, but the woman is a race car driver on her way to an international car race (starts in California, crosses into Mexico). Ireland's character decides this is the perfect way to escape the US police and plans to enter the race despite never having raced before.

I can certainly appreciate what the film was attempting. It's a character study. Put two dissimilar people in close quarters and see what happens. Unfortunately, while I like the theory, for me, this film lacks in execution. I just didn't think that the characters had as much substance as the movie thought they did. And the way they eventually feel about each other comes across more as contrived than natural.

I don't understand why Connie (the kidnapped woman) begins the film with absolutely no fear of the criminal. She doesn't know he's an innocent man. All she knows is that he's wanted for murder and has escaped from jail. She's seen him beat a man to unconsciousness. He has a gun and threatens to use it on her and their pursuers. I find it unfathomable that she would be so blasé about the situation. Shouldn't she act at least a little scared of this guy?

There are lots of little moments of illogic throughout this film. Why are the cops so mindbogglingly stupid? At one point a spectator comes up to the man and young woman in a Jaguar, tells them how the police are searching for a man and a young woman in a Jaguar and then obliviously heads off with a cheery farewell. Oh, and in another sequence, a rescue of a car crash victim takes place in which the rescuer actually encourages the head of the victim to flop around all over the place. Neck injuries, guys!

As this is a Roger Corman produced film (more on this later), film buffs will know to expect a very low budget. However, apart from some obvious back-screen projection filming during the driving sequences, the production doesn't really suffer from the lack of money. The problems with this movie stem from the script and not from the production values or the acting.

As an aside, along the way, the "innocent" man gets in a scuffle and assaults a rather large truck driver (by the way, I'm not sure it's exactly justifiable to commit loads of other crimes while on the run from a crime of which you're innocent). I couldn't figure out why this man was familiar to me until I consulted the Internet Movie Database. It's Bruno VeSota, who I fondly remember from the mocking that the MST3K guys gave him in THE GIANT LEECHES (another Roger Corman produced film). Small world.

I'm reviewing the Digiview Productions release of this movie, and their lack of packaging care has struck again. The text on the back of the box proudly states, "The Fast and the Furious was the second film directed by legendary director Roger Corman [...]" Leaving aside the "legendary" descriptor, there is a rather obvious blunder in the statement. Namely that Roger Corman is not the director of this film. According to the credits (and confirmed by the Internet Movie Database), the co-directors were Edward Sampson and star John Ireland. Corman produced the film, he suggested the story, but he did not direct it. Apart from that, the description is flawless.

Despite the problems with the Digiview DVD box, the movie itself is in decent condition as far as sound and picture are concerned. It's not great; there are some places where the film skips and drops out. But it's certainly watchable.

THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS is a film I didn't like, though I can concede to understanding how others would. Even ignoring the central relationship, I found the movie too full of people acting stupid just because the plot requires it. You can get this movie cheap if you look in the right places, but I don't think it's particularly worth it.