Casino Royale (1967) - Springtime for Classics

"Seven James Bonds at Casino Royale. They came to save the world and win a gal at Casino Royale. Six of them went to a heavenly spot. The seventh one is going to a place where it's terribly hot."

Directors
John Huston
Ken Hughes
Robert Parrish
Joe McGrath
Val Guest

Cast

David Niven - Sir James Bond, 007

Orson Welles - La Chiffre 

Peter Sellers - Evelyn Tremble/ James Bond
Ursula Andress - Vesper Lynd/ James Bond

Joanna Pettet - Mata Bond/ James Bond

Daliah Lavi - The Detainer/ James Bond

Woody Allen - Jimmy Bond
Deborah Kerr - Lady Fiona McTarry/ Agent Mimi

William Holden - Ransome

Charles Boyer - Legrand

John Huston - 'M'

Barbara Bouchet - Miss. Moneypenny

In the James Bond universe, the 1967 film "Casino Royale" doesn't seem to show up among the 23 other listed 007 movies. Not to be confused with the 2006 James Bond movie of the same name starring Daniel Craig, this "Casino Royale" isn't a part of the Bond canon, as though the other movies are ashamed of it or something. That shame is likely due to the film being a satire of Bond movies. Still, it's loosely based on James Bond author/creator Ian Fleming's novel "Casino Royale." Afterall, the 1983 James Bond movie "Never Say Never Again" with Sean Connery isn't considered canon either. It's basically a retelling of the Bond story/ film "Thunderball," the film version of which was released in 1965. And like "Never Say Never Again," this movie was not produced by Albert Broccoli who produced most of the Bond movies from 1962 up to 1989's "License to Kill." His name is listed as a presenter on the 1995 Bond flick "GoldenEye." 

Yet, "Never Say Never Again" gets to be included in the Bond filmography. That's probably thanks to Connery's presence after a 12-year hiatus since "Diamonds are Forevers" (1971). It's his last portrayal of the famous MI6 spy. 

Not even David Niven, who plays James Bond in "Casino Royale" doesn't seem have a spot on the list of actors who had the honor of playing 007 - Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan, and Craig. Actually, several actors play Bond in this flick, but you won't find any of them on the "who played Bond" list. 

In this movie, Sir James Bond (Niven) has been retired from the British spy business for a good 20 years. He lives in a large mansion and has a bumbling pushover nephew named Jimmy Bond (Woody Allen).

James Bond seems to be enjoying retirement until he's paid a visit by MI6 head "M" (John Huston) along with KGB representative Smernov (Kurt Kasznar), and an executive name Legrand (Charles Boyer) from France's external military intelligence agency. 

This trio from the Cross Spy agency implore Bond to come out of retirement and help them handle SMERSH - an evil agency that has been taking out agents. 

Bond has no desire to come out of retirement. So, 'M' applies a little pressure when he orders agents to fire mortars and destroy Bond's mansion.

M is accidentally killed in the explosion, and his top is blown - literally. 

David Niven as Sir James Bond and
Barbara Bouchet as Moneypenny in "Casino Royale'

So, Bond returns M's toupee to his widow, Lady Fiona McTarry (Deborah Kerr) at their Scottish estate. 

Unbeknownst to Bond (I think), Lady McTarry has been replaced by SMERSH agent Mimi (Deborah Kerr). And the entire estate is inhabited by a respectable amount of gorgeous young girls. Together, they want to tarnish Bond's clean image as a pure gentleman by seducing him. Bond certainly doesn't fall for their hanky-panky. His restraint impresses Mimi so much that she denounces her evil ways and joins a convent. 

Bond finally agrees to be head of MI6. When he takes the gig, he's informed that a lot of British agents have been taken down by the enemy thanks to their inability to resist sexual advances from beautiful women. 

Upon hearing this, he orders that any MI6 agents still around will now be referred to as "James Bond 007." This ought to confuse SMERCH. 

Bond also creates a training program for all the James Bonds to strengthen their will power against attempted seductions and resist sexual urges. 

Bond hires Vesper Lynd (Ursula Andress) who's a former agent now enjoying life as a millionaire. Her job is to recruit Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers), an expert baccarat player, in order to beat SMERSH financial agent Le Chiffre (Orson Welles) who has been embezzling SMERSH money. Le Chiffre is desperately trying to cover up his wrongdoing before he's caught and executed. 

Meanwhile, Bond has it on a clue from Agent Mimi that a foreign aid group calling itself "International Mothers' Help" is actually a SMERSH training facility. So, he gets his estranged daughter, Mata Bond, to head over to West Berlin and check it out. 

While investigating, Mata comes across a plan to distribute compromising naughty pictures of various military leaders from the U.K., United States, China, and the U.S.S.R. through an art auction. 

It's really a money-making scheme set up by Le Chiffre. 

Mata puts the kibosh on these plans, leaving baccarat the only money-making option for La Chiffre. 

Tremble and Lynd makes their way to the Casino Royale to challenge La Chiffre.

Tremble notices that La Chiffre always has sunglasses on during game play. He has Lynd steal them and hand them over to him. 

These glasses give La Chiffre the ability to see the cards through infrared technology. 

Without these glasses, he has no way of cheating. La Chiffre can only use magic tricks to impress those standing around the baccarat table as he and Tremble play. 

Lynd ends up getting kidnapped outside the casino, followed soon after by Tremble after he beats La Chiffre out of a lot of money. 

Not willing to go down quietly, La Chiffre wants Tremble to return his winnings back to him. So, he tortures Tremble with some hallucinogenic stuff. 

After Lynd attempts to rescue Tremble, SMERSH agents raid La Chiffre's home and kill him. 

Speaking of kidnapping, Mata also gets kidnapped by SMERSH in a big flying saucer and is taken to Casino Royale. Bond goes to rescue her, along with Moneypenny (Barbara Bouchet) - the daughter of the former Moneypenny. However, when he arrives, Bond discovers who's really behind the dastardly SMERSH plans. The casino is built above the headquarters of the evil Dr. Noah, the identity of whom takes Bond by surprise. 

Dr. Noah reveals his plans and... they're not good!

The entire movie carries on like the humor and story were written as the movie carries along. Or, perhaps, they hired a few inexperienced young teens - the kind who think kissing and boobies are hilarious - to brainstorm some ideas as to what a funny James Bond movie ought to include. The flying saucer, among other things, gives that impression. The constant make-out scenes do as well. An entire scene with nothing but Scottish jokes that go on and on feels juvenile. And (spoiler) it all culminates to one big fight at the end. 

Peter Sellers and Ursula Andress.

The humor plays out like a bad joke that overstays its welcome. The risqué humor may receive an uncomfortable laugh at first, but then carries on like the writers were proud of themselves for making someone laugh. So they tell the same jokes again and again, and again. 

That's not to say there's nothing at all funny in the movie. 

I enjoy watching Peter Sellers immensely. He's a rarity in the comedy world who can make me laugh just by staring off with a deadpan look on his face. Bill Cosby couldn't even pull off what Sellers could. His performance is where I got most of my laughs. That, and the name of one of the SMERSH agents - Miss. Goodthighs - made me laugh out loud. It's a play on the coyly seductive type of names Bond girls are usually blessed with. Speaking of Bond girls, Ursula Andress plays Honey Ryder in the first James Bond movie "Dr. No" from 1962.  

"Casino Royale" gets the Bond atmosphere right, with characters pulled out of Fleming's novel along with the gadgetry and such. But if judging by what I watched, everyone involved must have had something different in mind as to what this movie ought to be. There are too many hands in mix. That's no surprise as there are five directors for this one movie. As a result, I had trouble following the story. Aspects in the plot are left unexplained. It's anyone's guess why anything is happening. There's too much happening resulting in a comedic Bond film packed way too heavily with stuff. 

Co-director Ken Hughes later directed the children's film "Chitty, Chitty, Bang, Bang" based on another Ian Fleming story. Co-director and star of this movie, John Huston, previously directed some truly memorable films such as "The Maltese Falcon," "Red Badge of Courage," "The African Queen," and "Moby Dick."

Producer Charles K. Feldman worked with Peter Sellers and Ursula Andress a few years prior in the 1965 movie "What's New Pussycat?" written by Woody Allen, which Feldman also produced. 

"Casino Royale" is very much a product of the 1960s, with one scene paying homage to early German expression films of the silent era. It's garnished with music from Herb Albert and the Tijuana Brass, along with the song "Look of Love" by Dusty Springfield.  

Still, the entire film is a disjointed array of humor, story, and dialogue all boiling down to an ending that's just too juvenile and cheap, even for a James Bond satire. 

A Man for All Seasons (1966) - Springtime for Classics

"I die his Majesty's good servant, but God's first."

Director
Fred Zinnemann

Cast
Paul Scofield - Sir Thomas More
Wendy Hiller - Alice More
Leo McKern - Thomas Cromwell
Orson Welles - Cardinal Wolsey
Robert Shaw - King Henry VIII
Susannah York - Margaret More
Nigel Davenport - the Duke of Norfolk
John Hurt - Richard Rich
Corin Redgrave - William Roper

"A Man for All Seasons," based on Robert Bolt's play of the same name, depicts the final years of St. Thomas More - the Lord High Chancelor of England under King Henry VIII from 1529 to 1535.

I have to say this movie falls into my most absolute top favorite of movies ever made along with other titles like "Amadeus," "The Kid," "The Sting," and "Casablanca." 

The act of watching or listening to a story about a person standing by their convictions and morals amidst pressure for powerful individuals and in the face of injustice, is always relevant. Nothing can be more timeless. 

The story covers a lengthy span of history. The movie opens with Cardinal Wolsey (Orson Welles), Lord Chancellor of England, as he rebukes Thomas More (Paul Scofield) for being the sole member of the King's advisory council to oppose his attempts to put pressure on Pope Clement VII in obtaining an annulment for King Henry VIII's (Robert Shaw) marriage to Catherine of Aragon. 

For those who slept through history class back in high school, the king wanted an annulment because Catherine had not been able to produce a male heir for Henry VIII. So, he wanted to toss her aside and marry another woman, Anne Boleyn (Vanessa Redgrave), with the hopes she would produce a male heir. 

As Henry is a Catholic married in the Catholic Church. The Church takes vows made before God very seriously. Failing to produce a baby boy is certainly no grounds for declaring no marriage ever took place. That's not how Henry wants it, though. 

The King is hell bent on getting his annulment. The Church is more concerned about protecting the sanctity of the marriage. 

As Wolsey tries to get More to support the King's wish, little do they know that Wolsey's aide, Thomas Cromwell (Leo McKern), is eavesdropping on their conversation. 

Back at More's home in Chelsea, a young acquaintance named Richard Rich (John Hurt) has been trying to convince More to grant him a position in the King's Court. More doesn't think Rich is qualified for a position. Rather he offers him a job as a teacher. Rich declines the offer as he wants a position that will make him known in elite circles. This leaves him frustrated with More.

Also, More's daughter Margaret (Susannah York) is in love with a young lawyer named William Roper (Corin Redgrave). Though More is fond of young Roper, he refuses to allow his daughter to marry him because he's a Lutheran. If he wants to marry Margaret and have More's blessing, Roper must reject his heretical beliefs and return to the Catholic faith. 

After Cardinal Wolsey dies in the walls of a monastery, banished from the King's Court for failing to budge the Pope on the annulment issue, More is given the office of Lord High Chancellor. 

Having accepted the office, the King himself pays his dear friend More and his family an impromptu visit at More's home. He wants to ensure he has More's support in his annulment pursuit. King Henry thinks it should come easy as the two are friends. 

Orson Welles and Paul Scofield as Cardinal Wolsey and
Thomas More in "A Man for All Seasons."

More respectfully stands firm in his moral principles despite the King threats, promises of special favors, and screams. 

When the King departs, Cromwell finds Richard Rich and grants him his coveted position in the King's Court. His use of Rich is something sinister, but Rich doesn't see that. He's impressionable and way too covetous of influence and prestige.

Cromwell ultimately finds use in Rich as a witness to bring down More and get him out of the way of the King's annulment pursuit.

Seeing that the Church won't give him want he wants, King Henry demands parliament and the bishops to break ties with the Church and declare him "Supreme Head of the Church of England." Of course, they agree to these demands. 

More knows he cannot agree to any of these actions. So, he silently resigns as Lord High Chancellor. More is then pressured from all sides to just verbally accept that the King was never married to Catherine. At least, it would make his life easier.

His close friend and Third Duke of Norfolk, Thomas Howard (Nigel Davenport) tries to get More to reveal his true opinions on the situation during a private chat. More, however, knows that speaking openly with anyone, no matter how close they are to him, is a bad idea. 

Cromwell meets with More and says he can get off the hook if he just attends the King's wedding to Anne Boleyn. More, however, doesn't attend. So, he's brought back to Hampton Court for questioning about some trumped-up charges about accepting a bribe while employed as Chancellor.

More is smart and says very little. An angry and frustrated Cromwell tells More that the King views him as a traitor but lets him leave the interrogation regardless.   

Later, Margaret tells her father that a new oath is going around England and all must take it. Refusal to do so will be considered high treason. 

More doesn't initially refuse until he sees how the oath is worded. The oath declares the King as the Supreme Head of the Church. Well, to hell with that! 

More ends up imprisoned in the Tower of London. He will not take the oath, and much to the displeasure of his captures, does not explain why. 

He then encourages his wife Alice (Wendy Hiller), daughter and son-in-law not to defend him. But rather, he asks them to flee England. 

More is brought to trial with all kinds of false testimony thrown at him, even by Richard Rich who claims in court that More told him Parliament doesn't have the power to make the King head of the Church. 

While the outcome of the trial leads to his unjust death, More's success is found in his legacy of courage in the truest meaning of the word, and ultimately in his sainthood. 

There's something ongoing about the true story of More. Hence, the title. This period of his life is an example to be imitated for all seasons.

It's just as relevant in today's sociopolitical climate. Certain ideologies are treated like a religion. These blatantly false and repugnant ideas about individuals have a tight squeeze on our culture. Anyone who dares argue against them will be excommunicated, or cancelled as the kids call it. 

As for More, he could have verbally accepted in for the sake of being left alone regardless of what his conscience dictated. But as apologist G.K. Chesterton observes, tolerance is the attitude of those who do not believe in anything. 

Of course, today, More would likely be shouted at and branded a "hater." Angry mobs would mercilessly throw a label on him that ends in "ist" or "phobe."
Little is as alluring as power and influence. More chose a clean conscience. The rest of us, depicted through the other characters, especially Rich and Cromwell, easily fall under that weight and can easily give up our moral values for the "respect" of others, to meet their preferences, and win their favor and empty praise. When power is offered, weak people can rationalize anything, especially when a seat at the table is at stake. 

Robert Shaw as Henry VIII along with Paul Scofield.

In one scene, the Duke of Norfolk asks More, "Oh confound all this. I'm not a scholar, I don't know whether the marriage was lawful or not but dammit, Thomas, look at these names! Why can't you do as I did and come with us, for fellowship!"
More replies, "And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?"
"A Man for All Seasons" is a truly respectable film. And though the political situations and murky injustice against More initially seems complex and complicated, the story is told rather simply. It's an easy film to follow. 
More's story is a testimony to what courage really is - a word thrown around much too loosely to the point of nonsense these days. 
"If we lived in a state where virtue was profitable, common sense would make us saintly. But since we see that avarice, anger, pride, and stupidity commonly profit far beyond charity, modesty, justice, and thought, perhaps we must stand fast a little - even at the risk of being heroes," More later tells his daughter. Why does that ring so true in today's society at home and abroad. 
There is one conversation that stands out in film. I often hear it quoted in political discussions or see it printed in articles. 

After Rich unsuccessfully attempts to coax More into voicing his opinion, Alice, Margaret and her husband William voice their concerns about him, suspicious Rich is a spy.

"Father, that man's bad," Margaret says.

"There's no law against that," he replies. 

"There is! God's law!" Roper insists.

"Then God can arrest him," More says. 

His family grows impatient as Rich continues walking away. 

"While you talk, he's gone!" Alice says. 

"And go he should, if he were the Devil himself, until he broke the law."

"So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law," Roper asks.

"Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?"
"Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!" Roper replies.
"Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast. Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"

Rule of law matters, even for those whom one disagrees with. Protecting the rule of law is vital because once laws are set aside whenever some leader or politician thinks the cause is righteous, everyone becomes vulnerable to whoever holds power next. We see this happen a lot these days. "For all Seaons" indeed! 

It's worth mentioning that director Fred Zinnemann has some rather notable film titles under his belt - "High Noon" (1952), "From Here to Eternity" (1953), "Oklahoma!" (1955) and "A Nun's Story" (1959). "A Man for All Seasons" is a gem on his crown donned for his mark in cinema. It's a political story so it's likely going to ignite some political discussion among audiences for all times. 

Days of Wine and Roses (1962) - Springtime for Classics

"They are not long, the days of wine and roses." 

Director

Blake Edwards

Cast

Jack Lemmon - Joe Clay

Lee Remick - Kirsten Arnesen-Clay
Charles Bickford - Ellis Arnesen
Jack Klugman - Jim Hungerford
Debbie Megowan - Debbie Clay
Jack Albertson - Trayner


The crutch of booze is really no crutch at all. It has certainly lead millions to believe otherwise. Certainly, millions of people will attest just how low it will drag a person down. 

This is the premise of the 1962 psychological drama "Days of Wine and Roses," directed by Blake Edwards ("Breakfast at Tiffany's," "The Pink Panther") and staring Jack Lemmon and Lee Remick. 

I mentioned in my review of "A Face in the Crowd," which also stars Remick, that I'm on a sort of "classics kick" this spring. I'm eager to watch and comment on a long list of classic movies. What I didn't mention is that I'm particularly interested in watching classics staring actor and comedian, Jack Lemmon. There'll be a bunch of Lemmon flicks on this platform in the days to come. So, you're welcome!

He's definitely one of my favorite actor and comedians of all time. Lemmon has an impressive and versatile knack for playing a fellow who can loosen up, and maybe be a bit of a pushover as he did in "The Apartment" or a compulsive person as seen in his role in "The Odd Couple." He can play an edgy protagonist like he did in "The Prisoner of Second Avenue." The way he can mouth off into a frustrated tirade, especially when fellow comedian Walter Matthau is at the receiving end, is hilarious. Nobody can toss a tirade like Lemmon. It's the Lemmon touch!

My introduction to Lemmon was the 1968 movie "The Odd Couple" with Walter Matthau. And if you ask me, it's a great introduction. If you don't ask, it's still a great introduction. 

I have never seen him in such a dramatic role like his performance in "Days of Wine and Roses." 

In this movie Lemmon plays a public relations executive in San Francisco named Joe Clay. He happens to meet a cute secretary named Kirsten Arnesen (Lee Remick) who comes across as arrogant. However, she agrees to go out with Joe, who happens to enjoy a drink or two...or three... or four for the sake of having a good time. Why else would anyone drink? 

Kirsten, however, doesn't drink at all. She relies on chocolate as a means to make herself feel good. To her, it tastes better than alcohol.

Joe coaxes her to try drinking socially, introducing her to Brandy Alexander - a chocolate flavored brandy-based dessert cocktail with cognac, crème de cacao, and cream.

After a few Brandy Alexanders, Kirsten admits the drinks make her feel good. 

They go out on a few more dates for some evening cocktails before Kirsten takes Joe to go meet her father, Ellis Arnesen (Charles Bickford). He runs a nursery and landscaping business out in San Mateo. 

Jack Lemmon and Lee Remick in "Days of Wine and Roses."

He's a bit weary of Joe as any father would be towards his daughter's suitor. Just before leaving, Kirsten drops the bomb that she and Joe got married. 

By the time their daughter, Debbie, is born, Joe and Kirsten have fallen into alcoholism. 

It affects Joe's performance at work resulting in his inability to keep a job. This poor performance on the work front goes on for a few years, losing one job after another. 

And as Kirsten is a stay-at-home mom, she takes up drinking as a means to pass the time. 

While meandering along the sidewalks one afternoon, Joe catches his reflection in a store window and he doesn't like what he sees. 

The sight of himself, drunk and dejected, ignites within him a desire to clean himself up and lay off alcohol. 

He tries to persuade Kirsten that they need to stop drinking, and she reluctantly agrees. 

Together, they go to work at Ellis's nursery with a good start at sobriety. 

One rainy night, Joe sneaks in a bottle of booze into their bedroom (and hides an extra bottle in the greenhouse) so he and Kirsten can have just a little nightcap.

This "little" nightcap turns into an all-out binge. 

After they polish off the first bottle, Joe goes to find the second bottle hidden in a pot inside his father-in-law's greenhouse. 

He becomes frantic when he can't find it, destroying pots and plants until it turns up. 

After passing out on the greenhouse floor, Joe wakes up to find himself in a strait jacket and committed into a sanitarium. 

From then on, he swears to stay sober and joins an Alcoholics Anonymous group thanks to the help of a reliable sponsor, Jim Hungerford (Jack Klugman).

While Joe makes a sincere effort to sober up, Kirsten is unwilling to join AA and doesn't want to stop drinking as she thinks she has it under control. Neither does she think she has the will power like Joe does. Her love for chocolate may have been a sign that she has an addictive nature.

When Kirsten disappears for several days on a drinking binge, Joe finds her checked into a motel, passed out drunk. 

He tries to encourage his wife again to clean herself up for the sake of their marriage and their daughter. But Kirsten refuses. After smelling alcohol on her breath, and seeing all the booze in the room, Joe falls off the wagon and gets drunk. 

So much so that he breaks into a nearby liquor store and attempts to steal a bottle before the owner catches him. 

Back in the sanitarium, Joe realizes, thanks to the painful advice from Jim, that if he is going to conquer alcoholism, he's going to have to avoid all occasions to drinking including Kirsten. It's a painful truth which he brought upon himself.

A year later, as Joe has been sober and taking care of Debbie, Kirsten pays him a visit at his apartment. She hasn't had a drink in two days. Kirsten tries to reconcile with Joe, but he says he can only take her

back if she cleans herself up and quits drinking once and for all. He wants her back more than anything. And Debbie sorely misses her mother. For Kirsten, it's not that easy, not even for her daughter and her marriage. 

"Days of Wine and Roses" is an accurate depiction of human nature, and to the extent a person must sacrifice to conquer vice. 

The film is predictable because alcoholism, or any other attachment and dependence to whatever pulls us from grace, is predictable. 

In this movie, Joe is the one who brought alcohol into Kirsten's life, and together they brought it into their marriage. But redemption is like walking against an escalator. It's slow, tedious and difficult, but not impossible.

There are a few references to Looney Tunes as these cartoons are seen playing on television a few times throughout the movie. When Kirsten gets drunk and ends up accidentally causing a fire in the apartment, she's watching a Looney Tunes cartoon at the time. 

I can guess what this might mean. Both characters treat life and their responsibilities as parents as seriously as a children's cartoon when they drown themselves in booze. They're as irresponsible as children.

Lemmon has a lot of emotions to convey, which he manages to do naturally. He starts off as trying to be charming, then shifts to being a pitiful drunk at rock bottom. His character goes through the turmoil of alcoholism which involves despair, fear, reformation, regret and heartbreak.

He has to play a character who goes through the dilemma of allowing his passions and desires to control his reason. And that's relatable to everyone. It's not easy to watch. 

One thing I did miss is Jack Alberson's role in this movie. Albertson is known for playing "Grandpa Joe" in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" 

"Days of Wine and Roses" is likely a familiar tale for a vast amount of people. It's relatable and real from beginning to end. The subject of alcoholism is treated as bluntly and straightforward as it ought to be. It doesn't end on a particularly happy note as I'm sure alcoholism takes something away from its victims each time, which they may not realize until they sober up. 

Citizen Kane (1941) - Springtime for Classics

“I don’t know how to run a newspaper, Mr. Thatcher. I just try everything I can think of.”

Director

Orson Welles

Cast

Orson Welles - Charles Foster Kane
Joseph Cotten - Jedediah Leland

Ruth Warrick - Emily Monroe Norton Kane

Dorothy Comingore - Susan Alexander Kane

William Alland - Jerry Thompson
Erskine Sanford - Herbert Carter

Ray Collins - Jim W. Gettys

George Coulouris - Walter Parks Thatcher

I feel presumptuous and bold to pass judgement, good or bad, on a film of this caliber. 
Orson Welles's famous drama "Citizen Kane" has been discussed by probably thousands of more well-rounded writers and critics long before me. 

One of my "mortal sins" of being a movie aficionado, and one I am publicly confessing here for all to see, is that this is the first time I have watched it. 

It wasn't because of any lack of interest in the film. I simply never watched it until now. Still, it's only a movie. 

I call my lack of viewing this film a cinematic "mortal sin" because "Citizen Kane" is often referred to as "the greatest movie ever made" by different publications from around the world, film enthusiasts, critics, and such. It's certainly sitting high up among the loftiest of cinematic pedestals with other titles such as "Gone with the Wind" and "The Godfather." But "Citizen Kane" seems to have achieved some sort of accomplishment of being the movie of all movies, even greater than those I've mentioned. In other words, it holds the highest standard of films untouched by another other movie ever made before or since. Some have come close though, but I can't think of any other title that may have surpassed "Citizen Kane" as far as production and storytelling perfection go. 

Ever since diving into movie viewing for the sake of this blog, "Citizen Kane" has been a title I felt I needed to see. So, better late than never.

Orson Welles plays media giant, Charles Foster Kane, whose life is portrayed in a series of flashbacks. 

The film begins at the last moment of his life, secluded in his palatial Florida home called Xanadu. The first word we hear him say is his last - "Rosebud." After whispering his final word, he drops a snow globe which shatters on the floor. 

A news reel then broadcasts the life and death of Kane, which reaches eyes and ears around the world. 

While his life is a sensational story, his last word is a sensational mystery. What did he mean? What or who is "Rosebud?" 

Reporter Jerry Thompson (William Alland) investigates its meaning by interviewing those who knew Kane. Friends. Wives. Colleagues. Associates. 

Throughout the film, we see Kane's life told through stories and flashbacks as Thompson investigates what kind of person Kane was, and who or what "Rosebud" is. 

The most notable part of his humble beginning occurs in the 1870s when gold is discovered in a mine that belongs to Kane's mother, Mary (Agnes Moorehead).

She hires banker Walter Parks Thatcher (George Coulouris) to establish a trust providing an education for young Charlie Kane, and to become his legal guardian. 

Kane doesn't initially take to Thatcher and hits him with his sled. 

Years later, Kane eventually gains control of his trust along with the mine's productivity and his legal guardian's investments. This makes him incredibly wealthy.

Immediately, I was completely invested in Charles Foster Kane. A person's life can be interesting for any number of reasons, whether they were the worst of people, the most influential of people, the saintliest of people, or seemingly the most ordinary of people.  

Orson Welles as Charles Foster Kane.

A "No Trespassing" sign opens the film, hanging outside Kane's estate. But the camera passes it to gsin in-depth insight into his public and private life. 

The approach and method in telling this dramatic story is novel for its time. Only the important aspects of his life are played out. Nothing seems superfluous or showy. Though the story spans a lifetime, every part melds into each other all for one purpose. In the end, only the audience is given closure. 

I probably have to watch this movie again as I have a feeling that there's a lot I missed. If only I had watched "Citizen Kane" years before. 

Still, after this initial viewing I can see why it's called the greatest film ever made.

There's so much depth and a fair share of mystery when it comes to the story. It seems that mystery still lingers. 

Its depth comes across strongly through the great composition and juxtaposition of various shots, and the way Kane's life, starting as a sort of eulogy depicted through news reels, is told in flash backs. There's a lot to take in. Something tells me it'll take a while to really grasp the purpose this film as it's intended to be understood. 

Kane is certainly a mysterious character that has been the topic of speculation and intrigue all these years. Perhaps, that's what has kept audiences fixated on "Citizen Kane." 

The story takes inspiration from media giant William Randolph Hearst who owned the largest newspaper chain in America and has had a lasting footprint in American journalism.

Kane is the semi-rare but quintessential rise of personality. And this mark of Kane is permanently burnt into American pop culture. 

So much has been said about this one movie that it's just as overwhelming as writing about it. The movie has been dissected, analyzed. parodied, mocked, and quoted so many times on so many platforms. In fact, I was rather surprised a few months ago when I mentioned the title to someone, and they had never heard of it.

Thanks to its mainstream place in pop culture, I already knew what "rosebud" refers to long before seeing "Citizen Kane."

"Rosebud" is the innocence and safety of this powerful man's life. It's a gem among the corruption wrought by fame and wealth. It's the part of his life he yearns for most despite the wealth and publicity that followed him even after his death. He used it to attack Thatcher when they first met. Since then, it remained his true source of comfort. 

It's Kane's by-gone days that he'll never get back. There are hints dropped along the way as to the significance of "Rosebud," most of which indicate Kane's dislike of wealth.

In one scene, he tells Thatcher, "You know, Mr. Thatcher, if I hadn't been very rich, I might have been a really great man."

Later, Kane states, "I always gagged on that silver spoon."

Some of these comments are a bit tongue-in-cheek, but there's still truth to them.

And in the last scene, as all of Kane's priceless valuables are cataloged and crated up while workers incinerate his excess belongings, the last line spoken is "Throw that junk in." All Kane's grandeur boils down to junk that feeds the flames, only to become ash. 

Yet, at the same time, Kane knows the extent of his influence and power as great as it is.
Things are tumultuous between Kane and his first wife, Emily Monroe Norton Kane (Ruth Warrick).
As she says to him "Really Charles, people will think...," he cuts her off and says, "...what I tell them to think."
Even though I had only just seen it for the first time, in my head it was among the top films every person should see in their lifetime. 

I've been thinking about it since watching it last week. I'm probably the millionth viewer wondering what it's really about. Or, maybe, I'm reading too much into it.

There's a mystery about it all, but I can't quite put my finger on it. I'm positive I need to watch "Citizen Kane" again, which I will definitely do. 

A Face in the Crowd (1957) - Springtime for Classics

Springtime for Classics (2023)

Spring is upon us though my local weather would suggest otherwise. I certainly have a lot going on this season, including the arrival of a new baby... coming soon. 

In the meantime (while I still have some meantime left) I want to kick back every so often when I'm able to this spring and watch the classic movies. 

By "classic," I mean films that have a timeless quality to them. These are films that came out 40, 50, 60 + years ago and have withstood time. Some of these classics probably couldn't be made today because their stories, portrayals, and depictions make some people's "progressive" tummies hurt. To hell with trigger warnings.

But I'm not watching them for that reason. I'm watching them precisely because they're considered "classics," and rightly so for the most part. 

For me, these classics were filmed prior to 1980. I have to have a cutoff date somewhere though I may break that "rule" once in a while. 

Some are more talked about than others. Some were controversial for their time. Others were just emotional grabbers. Some are loved simply because of an actor or two who just nailed their respective role, and then some. And some simply deserve much more attention, which may have waned as the decades progressed. That happens.

I'm picking these cinematic classics up as I find them. There are titles I have seen before, and I am anxious to comment on. Otherwise, I'm mostly interested in watching those I've never seen before. 

"This whole country's like my flock of sheep."

Director

Elia Kazan

Cast

Andy Griffith - 'Lonesome' Rhodes

Patricia Neal - Marcia Jeffries

Walter Matthau - Mel Miller

Lee Remick - Betty Lou Fleckum

Anthony Franciosa - Joey DePalma
Marshall Neilan - Sen. Worthington Fuller

"A Face in the Crowd" is a title I've heard of but have never seen before. Honestly, I never gave the film any thought until I stumbled upon it at the library. 

It has been praised quite extensively since its release in 1957. Although, at that time, many folks on the right didn't like it as much as audiences on the left. 

The movie is based on Budd Schulberg's short story "Your Arkansas Traveler" found in his collection of works, "Some Faces in the Crowd." Schulberg wrote the screenplay for the film adaptation. 

"A Face in the Crowd" takes place in rural Arkansas during the 1950s. The story begins as radio journalist Marcia Jeffries (Patricia Neal) visits a prison in search of a talented inmate to perform whatever talent they might have on her show. 

She finds a loquacious guitar playing drifter named Larry Rhodes (Andy Griffith) who has a lot of small-town charm, humor and personality. 

He agrees to sing and play his guitar on Jeffries' program. 

Listeners love his performance and down-to-earth philosophy so much that Rhodes gets his very own radio show. 

Jeffries also gives him the nickname "Lonesome." 

With the help of the station's staff writer, Mel Miller (Walter Matthau), Rhodes garners a lot of popularity in the Memphis area. 

His program includes ad-libbed chats mixed with his ribbing of politicians. 

After he makes fun of the mattress company that's sponsoring his show, resulting in their pulling ads, his audience protests by burning mattresses in the streets. 

However, the mattress company sales go up substantially after Rhodes pokes fun at them. 

So, he returns to television and his personality gains an increasing audience. 

Rhodes also begins an affair with Jeffries. The romantic tension between the two begins pretty much the moment they met. 

He ends up starring in a show broadcasting out of New York, sponsored by an energy supplement called Vitajex, all thanks to an eager mattress worker named Joey DePalma (Anthony Franciosa) who helps get him in this successful situation.

With his increasing fame and influence, Rhodes becomes more and more arrogant. 

His influence grows to such an extent that he's called to assist with improving the public image of California Senator Worthington Fuller (Marshall Neilan). 

Meanwhile, as Jeffries proposes to Rhodes since the two are clearly in a relationship, Rhodes ends up marrying a 17-year-old blond-haired, blue-eyed baton twirling drum major named Betty Lou Fleckum (Lee Remick). Fleckum is smitten by him and caught his eye during a rally in his honor. 

The two elope in Mexico much to the heartbreak of Jeffries. 

However, Jeffries and Rhodes enter a profit-sharing agreement as she's the one who discovered him. 

His ego inflates drastically which works against him. Also, Betty Lou ends up cheating on Rhodes with DePalma. 

Jeffries soon realizes that Lonesome has become a sort of Frankenstein creation as far as personality, media and influence goes. And she deems herself responsible. This "monster" got away from her. 

Jeffries' finds herself in an instance where she can stop him for good. And that's what she does.

My Thoughts

 

Andy Griffith as 'Lonesome' Rhodes in "A Face in the Crowd."

Rhodes starts off by gaining the esteem of audiences before they realize he is far from deserving of it. His audience, though, put him on his grand pedestal.

Back then, "A Face in the Crowd" was seen as a critique of Capitalism by those who praised the movie. It was critiqued by the right for precisely that reason, as well as for being skeptical of government and media. 

However, those who didn't care for it still praised the director, Elia Kazan, for turning in eight Communists to the House Un-American Activities Committee in 1952. To that, I'll quote Chesterton who said, "There is a thought that stops thought. That is the only thought that ought to be stopped.” 

I have previously seen another of his well-known pictures, "On the Waterfront" (1954) before. And I consider it one of my favorite flicks. That was nearly 20 years ago.

He's directed some other well-known movies such as "East of Eden," "A Streetcar Named Desire," "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn" and "Gentleman's Agreement." 

There's a line in "A Face in the Crowd" that sums up Kazan's kind of storytelling. 

"People are fascinating wherever you find 'em." 

While I'm not too familiar with Kazan nor his work having only seen two movies, one of which was 20-years ago, it seems like he's the Norman Rockwell of movie making. Underneath the good ol' American way of life lies an array of hidden things - thoughts and desires. Some of these things can be truly disquieting.

The cultural tables have certainly turned in modern society. Today, the counterculture is the Conservative. They're the new hippie. Tradition and high standards are the counterculture. Morality and decency are the counterculture. The nuclear family holding society together at the seams is the counterculture.  

At the time of this film, the "beat generation" was the counterculture. "Beatniks." 

They rejected the narrative values of the time. They rejected economic materialism and immersed themselves in psychedelic drugs and sexual "liberation." It morphed into the hippie movement of the 1960s and 1970s. The left was down with the system. The right supported the system. Today, we have the "woke" left. 

I can see Conservatives today, in 2023, loving "A Face in the Crowd" for the reasons Conservatives of the day critiqued it. 

Today, Conservatives are weary of government and especially the mainstream media which has mostly become nothing short of a mouthpiece for left-wing politics. 

"A Face in the Crowd" shows how easily manipulated audiences can be when tuned into the media. 

Again, Conservatives are today's counterculture skeptical of leadership and the left-leaning influence the media has gained over audiences. In our current politically driven society where politics is a god, "A Face in the Crowd" is a film that likely would appeal to a whole different audience today than it did in 1957. 

"Lonesome" is his own man. Initially he says what the "ordinary" folks want to hear, but not what sponsors and producers want them to hear. He quickly becomes, as the movie states, "the voice of grassroots wisdom." It culminates to Rhodes giving political advice in order to transform the California Senator into a sellable product that the masses can only think will benefit themselves. 

"Did you ever hear of anyone buying any product - beer, hair rinse, tissue - because they respect it? You gotta be loved," Rhodes tells Sen. Fuller. 

Rhodes soon becomes part of the system he initially critiques. That is, he becomes part of the establishment that strives to "influence the masses" for their own gain at the cost of the masses. 

"This whole country's like my flock of sheep," he says late in the film. "Those morons out there? Shucks, I could take chicken fertilizer and sell it to them as caviar. I could make them eat dog food and think it was steak. You know what the publics' like? A cage of guinea pigs! Good night you stupid idiots. Good night, you miserable slobs. They're a lot of trained seals. I toss them a dead fish and they'll flap their flippers." 

Walter Matthau, Patricia Neal, and Andy Griffith.

Today, it's called "bigotry of low expectations." And there's one political side that depends on it. 

There's also a subtle but apparent sensuality that manifests throughout Lonesome's gradual rise to fame. 

It's seen when he visit's Jeffries in her hotel room. He leaves his suitcase outside her room. It's seen again when he first sees Betty Lou twirling her baton. Later, when he visits Marcia again, she's wearing into a black négligée.  

This movie is Andy Griffith's film debut and his performance is nothing short of phenomenal. He puts so much energy and emotion into his role that I'm struggling to find a performance to compare his to. And the organic transition his character goes through is superb. Lonesome goes from likeable to dejected and unlikeable. 

It's also actress Lee Remick's film debut as well. She went on to star in some notable films such as "Anatomy of a Murder" (1959), "Days of Wine and Roses" (1962) and "The Omen" (1976). Incidentally, "Days of Wine and Roses" which also stars Jack Lemmon, is on my "to watch" list for spring. 

"A Face in the Crowd," reminds me of the 1979 movie "Being There" which has the same sort of premise as far as "influencers" go, as the kids say nowadays. It also reminds me a little of the 1994 movie "Forrest Gump." Maybe it's that southern aspect used in both films.

Like Kazan calling out, or rather cancelling, those Communists back in the 1950s, so does "A Face in the Crowd" call out the powers that be, the elites, the demagogues who consume public trust and produce an intentional general mindlessness among audiences. They run the risk of failing to see that their American way of life is under constant threat by such elites who have nothing whatsoever in common with them, nor have any concern for their well-being. It's all for their own self-gain. 

It's like what William Gaines, founder of "Mad Magazine," once said.

“Don’t believe in ads. Don’t believe in government. Watch yourself - everybody is trying to screw you!”